Jump to content
  • Create Account

South Dakota Tom

Verified Member
  • Posts

    177
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Reputation Activity

  1. Like
    South Dakota Tom reacted to Trov in Should we trade or shouldn't we?   
    A few comments I have.  First, to simply look at WAR and say we won or lost a trade is a pretty simple way of looking at things.  It is one way, but it takes out the dynamics of the team at the time of the trade and what they were thinking, or needed.  Also, your list does not include the small trades that get done over the years.  You bring up Ortiz, and confused on why Kelly is responsible for his departure, but Ortiz came to Twins in a trade for Dave Hollins.  Johan came to Twins in a trade, technically.  Did we win those trades?  What about Brian Buchanan, of the Knoblcoch trade, that got Jason Bartlett, did we win that trade?  How about the Eric Milton for Carlos Silva and Nick Punto trade?  How about the Lirinano for Escobar trade? These were all younger players that could have had longer careers or did, but you fail to mention them.  I would put most if not all into wins for the Twins.  Bert was traded back in 86, not sure for who and he went on to pitch a few more years after.  
     
    Every team will have Trades they win and trades they lose.  In hopes both teams get what they wanted out of it.  To point to some failed trades, by past GM's to suggest not trading in future is something to do is crazy.  Bill Smith made terrible trades in his history, not sure he "won" a single one, part of why he is no longer around.
     
    What your trades also do not point out is what may have led to them.  Knobloch was forcing the trade.  Sure, Twins could have kept him, but they knew they were going to be terrible for a few years so bring in young talent for aging 2nd baseman is not a bad deal.  Some of that talent got moved for more talent.  The Matt Capps trade was terrible all the way around, but at the time, the belief was Mauer would catch for several more years, blocking Ramos.  It did not work out that way, and we most likely could have got more for Ramos, but that was Bill Smith for ya. 
     
    Johan, was going to walk so get something, we got Gomez, which at the time were criticized for because another OF was ranked higher, who never did much.  Yeah, Bill sent him for JJ hardy, which was a fine trade until he compounded for the terrible follow up trade.  Again Bill Smith here.  
     
    Carew said he was not playing again anyways, so again why not get something for him, but when your hands are tied value may not be there in trades.
     
    You bring up the recent relief pitcher trades of Presley and Anderson.  Anderson was 29 and yet to make the majors, never a top prospect and may fizzle out as quick as he rose up.  Presley did well for Houston and maybe he could have helped a tiny bit last year, but we may get more out of the players we brought over, you never know.  Hendricks left in 2013, he did not rise to his level until 2019 where was top level closer, so it is not like the second he left he blew up, that is a lot of years replacement level relief pitching.  
     
    You bring up the CF trades.  The Hicks trade was terrible, but he was not doing much with Twins at time of trade.  Possible the sand box that is Yankee stadium helped him and new coaching who knows, but yeah it was a loss.  Span and Revere may not have worked out as planned but they were traded to make room for Hicks.  Only so man positions on the field and sometimes players get traded because no room for them.  Some times players get traded because you will not resign them and something better than nothing.  Sometimes your team is terrible and you give up a good player now in hopes the prospects work out later.  Sometimes you give up a prospect for a short term fix vet.  
     
    To really evaluate the trades in history you need the full context of them.  Sometimes it was just a blunder, sometimes it was a huge find, or sometimes you get what you wanted at the time but regret it later on. It does not mean trades should fully stop, or they should happen more often.  They are what they are.
  2. Like
    South Dakota Tom got a reaction from Tomj14 in Thorpe Thrusting into the Rotation   
    Ted, a lot of these projections can differ widely depending on whether the author is talking about what "will" happen versus what the author predicts, or would like to see.    This is a perfect case in point.    I, too, like Thorpe's projectability, and feel he will show himself to be a strong rotation candidate.
     
    OTOH, it sure appears that a rotation of Berrios, Odorizzi, Bailey, and Maeda is going to be hard to dislodge, barring injury.    I would also suggest that, given the roster opening(s), Chacin would be easy for management to slot into the remaining spot.    That would leave Thorpe, Smeltzer, and Dobnak (all with options) as 1-3, with Duran and Balazovic in the wings, as well as the return of Pineda and Hill at some point in the season.
     
    I know you are putting no timeline on any of this (nor am I); I'm just suggesting that Thorpe's opportunity arises primarily with an injury during spring training to one of the guys above him, occurring before Pineda's return.    My fear is that the leash on Chacin (even to exploit him as a showcase candidate for trade value) will be long enough that he alone will bridge the gap until 40 games in.    If TSD (Thorpe, Smeltzer, Dobnak) doesn't crack the top 5 in the first month, it is going to be increasingly difficult for them to find a place when Pineda and Hill push them to the 8-10 slots, with Balazovic and Duran behind.    Once Balazovic and Duran have half a season more under their respective belts at AA or higher, I would put them on an even playing field with TSD - those 5 will fight for their own pecking order in spots 8-12.
     
    For the 2020 season, however, my guess is that Thorpe is #8 on that list based on in-season performance.    Just not sure he will be so much better than 5-7, quickly enough, for it to matter.
  3. Like
    South Dakota Tom got a reaction from mikelink45 in Thorpe Thrusting into the Rotation   
    Ted, a lot of these projections can differ widely depending on whether the author is talking about what "will" happen versus what the author predicts, or would like to see.    This is a perfect case in point.    I, too, like Thorpe's projectability, and feel he will show himself to be a strong rotation candidate.
     
    OTOH, it sure appears that a rotation of Berrios, Odorizzi, Bailey, and Maeda is going to be hard to dislodge, barring injury.    I would also suggest that, given the roster opening(s), Chacin would be easy for management to slot into the remaining spot.    That would leave Thorpe, Smeltzer, and Dobnak (all with options) as 1-3, with Duran and Balazovic in the wings, as well as the return of Pineda and Hill at some point in the season.
     
    I know you are putting no timeline on any of this (nor am I); I'm just suggesting that Thorpe's opportunity arises primarily with an injury during spring training to one of the guys above him, occurring before Pineda's return.    My fear is that the leash on Chacin (even to exploit him as a showcase candidate for trade value) will be long enough that he alone will bridge the gap until 40 games in.    If TSD (Thorpe, Smeltzer, Dobnak) doesn't crack the top 5 in the first month, it is going to be increasingly difficult for them to find a place when Pineda and Hill push them to the 8-10 slots, with Balazovic and Duran behind.    Once Balazovic and Duran have half a season more under their respective belts at AA or higher, I would put them on an even playing field with TSD - those 5 will fight for their own pecking order in spots 8-12.
     
    For the 2020 season, however, my guess is that Thorpe is #8 on that list based on in-season performance.    Just not sure he will be so much better than 5-7, quickly enough, for it to matter.
  4. Like
    South Dakota Tom got a reaction from jtkoupal in MLB Realignment Doesn't Have to Wait   
    And if contracting the season is met with too much resistance, could play 18 games versus the other 4 teams in our division, making pretty much everything a 3-game series, and coordinating days off around the league so make-up games could be slotted in more easily.  But with 15, could do 2 home, 3 road series in odd-years, 2 road 3 home the next year to keep a balance (maintaining 30 home games and 30 road games within the division each year).
     
  5. Like
    South Dakota Tom got a reaction from birdwatcher in Don’t Look Now but the Twins Bullpen is Pretty Good   
    Many suggest adding two relief arms, and I'm here to suggest that is not the best plan.  The team absolutely needs to gear up for a long season, and if we added a Will Smith and another stalwart, it would make it difficult if not impossible to utilize the last spots of the pen as an open gate between AAA and the major league club.
     
    One of two things could happen - all 7/8 of the relief corps could perform admirably and we'd not need to dip into the pool of also-rans.  On the other hand, adding two non-optionable arms to the bullpen could result in a minor leaguer being shut out from helping the team (should one or more minor-league arms start throwing lights out), or it could result in wearing out the bullpen if we hit 2 or 3 short starts within the rotation of 5.  We play so many consecutive games for the next month, it scares me to count on long starts to ensure that the pen doesn't get over-utilized. 
     
    I know it sounds counter-productive to denigrate a major-league caliber bullpen 1-8 but the value in having a couple of moving parts who can pitch a few innings and then go back down to AAA and be replaced by fresh arms strikes me as even more valuable.
  6. Like
    South Dakota Tom got a reaction from Platoon in Bullpen Options should start with Rochester not free agents   
    It is difficult to distinguish this issue from the "we have money to spend" issue.    I think that Mejia and Romero are the most-likely 5th starters right now, leaving the other of them to join the bullpen as a long man (or in some sort of opener role that has been discussed).  If the top 4 of the o.p.'s post are likely bullpen locks, and you add Mejia/Romero to it, we are still 2-3 arms short.
     
    Moya and Vasquez, Stewart and Gonsalves, Curtiss, Magill and Duffy (not to mention Jay or Littrell or Jake Reed or DeJong) are all possibilities for those spots.   I would feel comfortable suggesting there are 2-3 out of the first four listed above, at least to roll with early on (knowing that the list doesn't end there).
     
    Again, dollars aside, I think (somewhere, to varying degrees of dependability) there are 2-3 capable bullpen arms in that list, and if there are not, many of the above names would need to be jettisoned to make room for the outside help that would fill those spots.  We are just not in a position to demand outside help and also have a reasonable tryout for young arms trying to move up.    I am not optimistic that spring training would even shake this out in a fair and level competition given the number of names, muddied further if other names are added.
     
    It strikes me, however, that the team is going to get at least one additional bullpen arm this offseason, and the above group is going to compete for the 7th and 8th spots in the pen.   I wish we would have seen more of this competition in a lost September, (and believe that we are more likely to find lightning in a bottle among that group than fishing in the free agent marketplace).   It seems the front office strategy is to wait this out and supplement the core in any area of weakness, depending solely on how far the position players, starting staff, and existing bullpen options can keep us competitive.  
     
    If we don't have the core, as has often been suggested, there isn't any one or two bullpen arms that is going to move the needle sufficiently to take us from mediocre (or worse) to competitive.
  7. Like
    South Dakota Tom got a reaction from Winston Smith in Outlining the Offseason: Names to Consider   
    And please don't tell me we have to put Logan Forsythe on the radar; he was BABIP lucky for a month, but hardly a piece of the team we need to be.
  8. Like
    South Dakota Tom reacted to Ted Schwerzler in Nick Gordon and the Tea Leaves   
    While I don't think Gordon sticks at 2B, you're also reading too much into it IMO. Polanco is the MLB starting SS right now and will remain so for the immediate future. You aren't going to play him out of position for a non-roster invitee
  9. Like
    South Dakota Tom got a reaction from nytwinsfan in Breaking Down Where The Twins And Dodgers Broke Down   
    Can't agree with this. Because Dozier didn't go to the Dodgers, the Twins now have an obligation to support him up and down the lineup? They abandon all plans to rebuild for the future because they couldn't pull off one trade for their best player? There is way too much gap between "rebuild" and "support your best player in the lineup with a solid lineup 1-9" for that to be an either/or proposition.
  10. Like
    South Dakota Tom got a reaction from Lee-The-Twins-Fan in What Are The Twins Waiting For On Santana?   
    OTB, I think the arguments against moving Santana as aggressively are two-fold:
     
    1.  With Dozier, we have another second baseman (Polanco) who could slide into that spot.  Perhaps that represents a decline in production (and from a 40 HR guy, how could it not?), but it does unplug a situation where Polanco is playing out of position at SS and we still want his bat in the lineup while playing someone at SS who would be an improvement over Polanco defensively.
     
    With Santana, we don't have an abundance of pitchers who could move into that position without a fairly gigantic loss of production. 
     
    2.  The second argument dovetails into the first, but essentially, we are looking to move Dozier in order to improve our pitching by getting 2+ pitchers who are almost MLB ready to steady the rotation.  It is clear that finding two new starters will help this club far more than the drop-off in production from Dozier to Polanco.
     
    With moving Santana, the opposite is true.  Even if we get pitching back for him (which would be wise, targeting another AA/AAA pitcher with upside to coincide with the arrival of others), we can't argue that we've improved the team for 2017.  There is a very, very determined effort by the front office not to state publicly that we are giving up on 2017 (though a great number of posts all over this site talk about "the Twins are not going to compete in 2017/2018").
     
    Should the team receive two or more players who can slot into starting roles in the near future for Dozier makes sense to the average fan.  Getting a AA starter with upside to replace our best pitcher is a much harder sell to fans who just want to see their team be good this year.  Seems clear to me that they can't sell that notion to the fans, so won't be able to move Santana until the team is out of it.  Let's just hope that he's playing well and still brings back a pitcher with upside and an eta of 2017/2018 in return.
  11. Like
    South Dakota Tom got a reaction from Platoon in What Breaks The Twins In Florida?   
    The worst-case-scenario for the Twins is to have a combination of underperformance from several rookies and sophomores, and reasonable to good performances from Ryan Sweeney, Carlos Quentin, and Ricky Nolasco....and then making long-term or irrevocable roster decisions based on that.
       It would keep us on the path of least-development, and put in place a huge piece of the team that is, as they say, not part of the future.  Now, if Ricky pitches well enough to be traded, that's a different kettle.
  12. Like
    South Dakota Tom got a reaction from beckmt in The Twins Crossroads At Second   
    I've been wrong year over year on many players, but this is clearly a huge year for Polanco.    If the team swims in mediocrity, I can see a scenario where BD is traded and JP becomes the regular at 2nd.   This makes sense on two fronts:
     
    1) Return for Dozier is relatively high as a power-hitting middle infielder cost-controlled for a few more seasons (as noted, through age 32)
     
    2) Jorge Polanco represents a skill set different from the lion's share of the present lineup.  We have multiple home-run, low-average guys (Sano, Park, Plouffe, Arcia, ABW,  Vargas, even Escobar and Rosario are double-digit homer candidates).  We have OBP without substantial power (Mauer, Kepler); we have guys who won't do either (catcher).  We have exactly one potential OBP/speed threat (Buxton).   Teams need speed in the lineup.  
     
    I may be pushing things a bit, but I like Polanco in the 2-hole, behind Buxton and ahead of the mashers.  This team lacks serious table-setters with speed.    If Dozier can fetch a nice return, I don't see the trade-off between Dozier's future and Polanco's future being so great as to cast JP aside for nothing because the only spot he fits is already filled.
  13. Like
    South Dakota Tom got a reaction from wsnydes in Should Be More Scrutiny Over Twins Playing Time, Not Payroll   
    Three things I believe.  1.  We will see a better Ricky Nolasco this season.   
     
    2.  The Twins will release or put him in the BP him if he isn't good.   
     
    3.  Mauer is the hub of the wheel for this team, offensively, and I don't mean that he propels them.   If he is hitting, he's the 1B, and everything revolves around that (Plouffe, Sano, Park, Arcia, the Hicks trade, Kepler, ABW).  If he isn't, he has to move down in the order; he has to move away from 1B, letting Sano play there (or Park with Sano at DH), and opening up the OF for the three best two-way players (probably Buxton, Rosario, and Kepler).   
     
     
    It doesn't leave any room for Joe.  But I completely agree that you can't just plug him in to that spot in the order and in the defense with the current (and future) alignment of the team.
  14. Like
    South Dakota Tom got a reaction from Tom Froemming in Should Be More Scrutiny Over Twins Playing Time, Not Payroll   
    Three things I believe.  1.  We will see a better Ricky Nolasco this season.   
     
    2.  The Twins will release or put him in the BP him if he isn't good.   
     
    3.  Mauer is the hub of the wheel for this team, offensively, and I don't mean that he propels them.   If he is hitting, he's the 1B, and everything revolves around that (Plouffe, Sano, Park, Arcia, the Hicks trade, Kepler, ABW).  If he isn't, he has to move down in the order; he has to move away from 1B, letting Sano play there (or Park with Sano at DH), and opening up the OF for the three best two-way players (probably Buxton, Rosario, and Kepler).   
     
     
    It doesn't leave any room for Joe.  But I completely agree that you can't just plug him in to that spot in the order and in the defense with the current (and future) alignment of the team.
  15. Like
    South Dakota Tom got a reaction from Dr. Evil in So is this the 2016 lineup?   
    I had the same starting 9 (right now) but like your idea of Benson over Nunez, and adding Arcia to the bench.  However, given the question you posed, I say the answer is no.  I believe there is one more move in which players are traded for pitching, though it could come from prospects being traded instead of regulars.  I also flip your lineup and put Buxton on top (probably not from day one) followed by Mauer, Dozier, Sano, Park, Plouffe, Rosario, Murphy, and Escobar (or Escobar then Murphy).  I do like that lineup - starting to feel like the FO enjoys writing it down over and over again as well.....
  16. Like
    South Dakota Tom reacted to jorgenswest in 40 Man Issues   
    I took a stab a month ago
     
    http://twinsdaily.com/blog/36/entry-6647-looking-at-the-40-man-roster/
×
×
  • Create New...