Jump to content
Twins Daily
  • Create Account

chpettit19

Community Moderator
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    8,226

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    168

 Content Type 

Profiles

News

Minnesota Twins Videos

2026 Minnesota Twins Top Prospects Ranking

2022 Minnesota Twins Draft Picks

Minnesota Twins Free Agent & Trade Rumors, Notes, & Tidbits

Guides & Resources

2023 Minnesota Twins Draft Picks

The Minnesota Twins Players Project

2024 Minnesota Twins Draft Picks

2025 Minnesota Twins Draft Pick Tracker

2026 Minnesota Twins Draft Pick Tracker

Forums

Blogs

Events

Store

Downloads

Gallery

Everything posted by chpettit19

  1. chpettit19
    I haven't implied that Varland is worse than Keuchel I have stated over and over again that he was beaten out by Dallas Keuchel last year. I don't know how else to say that more clearly than this. Last year the Twins needed a starting pitcher while they were in the heart of a division battle in early August and they chose Dallas Keuchel over Louie Varland. They didn't think Louie Varland was good enough to start games that mattered for them over Dallas Keuchel. That isn't an opinion. That is what happened. My point isn't that Varland is going to bust. My point is that he was slated for AAA because he hasn't yet shown he was good enough to be in the majors. My point is that they brought in an injured MLB pitcher with the plans of putting him in their rotation over Varland because they didn't think Varland was proven yet and because he was cheaper to acquire and that plan has now blown up. Carlos Santana is set to bat everyday against righties. It simply isn't true that Polanco would take ABs from young players. He's a 1 for 1 replacement for Carlos Santana who is set to start everyday for the 2024 Minnesota Twins. I haven't said I don't expect the Twins to win the division. I'm not being blindly pessimistic. I'm not being pessimistic at all, actually. The fact that you're taking me questioning a completely unproven starting pitcher who couldn't beat out Dallas Keuchel last year as blind pessimism says all I need to know. I expect the Twins to win 85-87 games and likely win the division. I don't think it'll be a cake walk as I expect at least 2 other teams to finish at or above .500. If that's blind pessimism I guess I'm just a super negative person.
  2. chpettit19
    They're paying DeSclafani 4 million. Polanco is being paid 10.5. How much of the extra 6.5 were the Twins not prepared to pay? Those are miniscule numbers.
  3. chpettit19
    They still need another starting pitcher, that's the point of my disagreement with this article. Relievers are cheap, fungible assets as I already pointed out. And Polanco, Kirilloff, Farmer, and Julien could all play 1B. I would've been quite happy to trade more than Polanco for a real starting pitcher. I'd have traded anyone not named Jenkins from the system. But we're way off topic now. My fault, but we need to get back to the topic of the thread.
  4. chpettit19
    Carlos Santana. There are 9 spots in a starting lineup. A whole bunch of you just seem to be unable to accept this fact. Jorge Polanco would easily be one of the Twins 9 best hitters and he'd start everyday because there's a DH spot so many of you seem to forget about. Carlos Santana hasn't hit righties in 3 years and he's about to start against them everyday. The idea that Jorge Polanco wouldn't start for this team is nonsense. I'm not going to have the same "less revenue team building strategy" talk with you. We have different goals. Accept that fact. A whole bunch of reporters disagreed with your stance on the Twins spending, but that's not going to stop you from telling us all how wrong they are.
  5. chpettit19
    It certainly didn't make it easy, that's for sure. But choosing to pay Santana and DeSclafani instead of Polanco wasn't necessary to still cut payroll. That was a choice they made and I don't think it was a good one. There were other ways to cut payroll that I don't think would've hurt the talent level as much. But I'm aware I'm amongst the minority when it comes to my view on Polanco and what he would provide to the lineup. To tie this all back to the topic of this article, I would've been far happier with a Polanco trade that returned them an actual MLB starting pitcher. Even if it meant a lesser return in the rest of the package. I think trading for another injured starter was a massive mistake for the 2024 Twins. And I really hope they quit targeting injured starters.
  6. chpettit19
    Again, never said people are actually saying that (other than a few posts here and there), what I am saying is that people are acting like it's ridiculous to question things because this team is so loaded. You are currently calling me "full-blown ridiculous" for questioning Louie Varland's ability to be a major league starter yet you can't comprehend how I could suggest people are acting like this team is super loaded? Cool. Show me the articles early in the summer where they were discussing Louie coming out of the bullpen in the playoffs. The Twins decided Keuchel was better. I'm sorry if you disagree with that, but the Twins were trying to win baseball games last year and they chose Keuchel. Yes, Varland was a rookie, but that doesn't mean he's automatically going to be better this year. Last year the Twins decided he wasn't good enough to make starts for the team while they tried to win the division. Last year they decided he wasn't as good as Dallas Keuchel. I don't know how you can argue with that when it's literally what happened. He doesn't automatically become good enough this year because he was a rookie last year. Plenty of rookies get sent back down and never get better. In fact, the vast majority of them work out that way. You can say he's a rookie as many times as you'd like, it doesn't change the fact that last year he wasn't good enough to be a starter over Dallas Keuchel and he doesn't automatically become better by not being a rookie this year. Polanco would DH like Kirilloff is going to do now. Or Julien would. Who's going down when Lee is called up that's going to allow Santana to platoon? And why couldn't Polanco have done the same platooning as Santana in that situation? Give me your starting lineups against righties and lefties where Polanco is taking ABs from guys. You think a Twins team winning somewhere in the mid-80s worth of games is going to walk to the division. Cool. I disagree. We'll see. I have no idea what "you are layin" means, but we disagree. Nothing wrong with that. I hope Louie is great. I hope the lineup doesn't need Polanco. I hope they win 100 games. I hope they walk away with the division with 87 wins. I'm sorry if I don't have blind optimism that those things are going to happen. We don't seem to be making any progress in our discussion so I don't see the value in continuing it.
  7. chpettit19
    Jay Jackson signed for 1.3. Everyone loves Brock Stewart and he was signed on a minor league deal. Last year they let Hoffman walk out of a minor league deal and he was just as good as Topa, too. So we're just going to have to agree to disagree that 3 years of Topa had to cost Jorge Polanco. You're more than welcome to like that trade. In terms of pure value I think they did nicely. I don't care about pure value when trading your 2 hole hitter from an ALDS team when the vast majority of that value comes from a prospect. I understand the idea of not letting guys go for nothing, especially on teams that don't spend, but that trade, in my opinion, made the 2024 Twins a less talented team. And I'm not interested in taking steps back from an ALDS team. I want steps forward. I don't believe that trade helped the 2024 Twins and I have a problem with that at this point of their team building cycle.
  8. chpettit19
    I'm not putting words in anyone's mouth. There have been hundreds of posts on this site stating that Jorge Polanco was no longer a starter in MN. There's actually one on this very thread. That's not me putting words in people's mouths, people are literally saying Jorge Polanco wouldn't be in this lineup. He would play everyday for the Twins (assuming health, like you have to do with Lewis and Correa and Buxton and Kirilloff). And people are acting like this is a 100 win team. I didn't say they're saying that (although there have been a few posts here and there that do say that), but they are acting like there's no concerns and this team is loaded. Full-blown ridiculous? Am I wrong? Was Louis Varland not passed up by Dallas Keuchel last year? Louis Varland was already down in AAA with Dallas Keuchel, and had been there since June. The Twins needed a starting pitcher on August 6th (2 months after Louis got demoted) when they had a 4 game lead in the division with 2 months to go in the season and they chose Dallas Keuchel over Louis Varland. Louis Varland was deemed not good enough to be a starting pitcher on a team fighting for the division. Going into September they knew they didn't fully trust either Bailey Ober or Joe Ryan and they still didn't give Louis Varland starts. Those are the facts of the situation. That was what the Twins decided. Louis Varland was deemed a lesser option than Dallas Keuchel to make starts for a team that still hadn't locked up an historically bad division. Which young player would Jorge take ABs from? Carlos Santana? Because that's who's taking the ABs from young guys now, and who replaced him in the lineup. Do you think they're just going to drop Santana for a young guy to give them ABs? Is it shaping up to be a cake walk? The Tigers jumped 12 wins last year. If they do it again they win 90 games. They only need to improve 7 games to be right in the Twins win area. They've got some awfully big name young players expected to be really good, too. Twins aren't the only ones. You sure Cleveland's rotation is going to be as hurt as it was last year? Also a team loaded with young talent that is expected to be good. They were supposed to walk away with the cake walk central in 2023. Maybe the central isn't just a given for a team that is likely to not top 87 wins. I'm not searching for pure negativity I'm laying out the realities of the situation. Jorge Polanco did hit 2 hole for the Twins in the playoffs when the only lineup regular who was out was Byron Buxton. Louis Varland was passed up by Dallas Keuchel when the Twins needed a major league starter last year. That's not searching for negativity it's pointing out the facts.
  9. chpettit19
    Jorge Polanco is about to hit 3 hole for a playoff contender. He hit 2 hole in the playoffs for this very team last season. If that's not a "heart of the order hitter" I don't know what the definition of "heart of the order hitter" is. If the Twins have no place for him in their lineup this is going to be an incredibly fun season and we should be talking about them as a 100 win team, not somewhere in the mid-80s. Is Louis Varland an MLB quality starter? Because he got passed up by 35 year old Dallas Keuchel last year. I'm pretty sure that wasn't to keep an MLB quality starter in AAA as depth. We hope Varland is an MLB quality starter, but he hasn't proven to be yet. That's not doom and gloom it's reality. And top 100 prospects with no plate discipline fail constantly. That's just reality. And I'm not interested in top 100 prospects for the 2 hole hitter in a lineup coming off an ALDS trip. It's not doom and gloom to point out that a team in an awful division predicted to win 85-87 games has some legitimate questions. People around here are acting like this is a 100 win team. The reality is that this is likely a solid team who should make the playoffs, but has real question marks, and wouldn't have a 30 for 30 made about the great collapse of the juggernaut 2024 Twins if they lose the division. If you're predicting 100 wins, sure, my post was doom and gloom. If you're like all the projection systems and betting lines and are looking at last year's results and predicting mid-80s for wins then you have questions, too. Not sure why me pointing out 2 of them is doom and gloom.
  10. chpettit19
    Pineda was signed, not traded for. He didn't cost anything in trade capital while also being signed to a deal with the full knowledge that he wouldn't be pitching the first year. Paddack was traded for with the hope that he'd be a rotation piece in 2022 and moving forward. Yes, after their bet blew up on them they signed him to a cheap extension to gain another year, but that wasn't the plan. Those aren't the same thing. Sonny Gray didn't have an active, known injury concern. There's a reason he wasn't listed on the article that you're now commenting on. You're trying to move the goalposts of this discussion. The players named in the article about "injured pitchers," not pitchers who had been injured before, are guys who had active, known raised injury concerns at the time of the trade. Sonny doesn't fit that bill no matter how many times you want to bring him up. You're the one actively changing the rules of somebody else's article because they aren't convenient for your argument. Mahle had a shoulder problem and that's what put him down in 2022 just after he came back. He had an active, known injury concern and these pages were full of people complaining about trading for him (I actually liked the trade at the time, but have since seen that taking on injury risk is their strategy and am now against it as that strategy hasn't paid any dividends yet while costing legitimate MLB talent) because he had that active, known injury concern. And it almost immediately sprang up and ended his season. I agree I would've signed that Mahle deal, but I don't think the Twins liked his communication about his arm and he was done here no matter what. Paddack, DeSclafani, and Stewart were the injury dice rolls, right? Am I missing someone else? Paddack is going to be counted on. DeSclafani has already failed. And I'm going to need to see more than 27 successful innings out of Stewart before I deem him as fruitful. And Stewart was signed to a minor league deal so he required no real investment so still doesn't meet the criteria of this article about trading for injured pitchers. We do seem to disagree some, but are also discussing different things. You seem to be standing on the staff as a whole while I'm discussing the trades for actively injured pitchers that this article is about. I think they've done a nice enough job of building their staff, but the trades for actively injured pitchers haven't been successful outside of Maeda. The rest have been horrible trades that made the team worse. We'll see if Paddack can finally put together a full season this year and maybe make up a little ground 2 years after he was acquired.
  11. chpettit19
    The trades for injured pitchers isn't what lead to the top 5 staffs. The injured pitchers didn't provide any value. You're still not discussing the topic at hand. Mahle didn't help. Paddack didn't help. DeSclafani isn't going to help this year. You're talking about different things. The strategy of trading for pitchers with active injury concerns hasn't worked. There's no argument that it has. And Brock Stewart was a minor league signing before 2022. Again, that is simply not the same thing as trading for an injured pitcher. You're moving the goalposts on this article. The article is about "trading for injured pitchers."
  12. chpettit19
    The Twins haven't avoided risky investments, that's literally the point. The Twins have actively searched out risky investments because they're cheaper than ones with less risk. The least risky Carlos Correa cost 13 years and 350 million dollars. A slightly less risky Correa cost 12 years and 315 million. The Twins invested in the riskiest Correa at 6 years and 200 million. The Twins got Carlos Correa because he was a risky investment. A pitcher who is fully healthy at the time of acquisition with no current, known health concerns costs more than a pitcher with known health concerns. The Twins have chosen to avoid "good risk management" in the name of cheap asset management. The names listed in this article are Anthony DeSclafani, Sam Dyson, Chris Paddack, Tyler Mahle, and Kenta Maeda. You, and others, are trying to add Sonny and Pablo and whoever else to the discussion, but it's not what the article and discussion is about. The Twins have chosen to take on extra risk because it's a cheaper investment. And it hasn't worked. When they chose to invest in the less risky Pablo it cost them more and it turned out quite well. They've chosen to deploy the significantly less successful strategy significantly more. It's a bad strategy.
  13. chpettit19
    Insane? So if you're not the absolute worst then it's ok? Not trading Jorge Polanco isn't a "going all in" move. Doing a pretty good job of what? Cuz it's not sustaining winning. They won an historically bad division last year with 87 wins. They lost a nearly as bad division the 2 previous seasons. Most projection systems, or betting lines, have them in the mid-80s for wins again. If not even being able to get to 90 wins in a division where none of your competition even breaks .500 is what they're going for I'm not impressed. 100% disagree with that simple explanation. It's what's available for them on the cheap. Or hoped for cheap when it comes to trade costs. Dylan Cease was available instead of DeSclafani. Michael Lorenzen just signed for 500k more than DeSclafani and they wouldn't have had to trade anything at all for him. He was available. Corbin Burnes was available. Glasnow was available. Castillo was available when they traded for Mahle. There's far more guys available than just guys with current injury concerns. But those guys take more of an investment. So I think your simple explanation is missing the most important piece, cheapness. They go after these guys because they believe it won't cost as much and they hope it'll turn into a nice, cheap value move. Instead they've turned into bad, expensive loss moves. Pablo Lopez threw 180 innings in 2022. People need to stop comparing guys who've been hurt to guys who are hurt. It's not the same thing. His Tommy John surgery was in 2014. That's far more insane of a statement than anything I've said on here. There is a difference between "pitchers are damaged goods, almost by definition" and "Chris Paddack as an actually torn UCL and we're trading for him anyways." There are different levels of injury risks. The Twins have very clearly decided that they're going to try to save by taking on extra injury risk. Their highest paid player failed physicals with 2 other teams for goodness sake.
  14. chpettit19
    Expensive? Jorge Polanco cost 4 million more than Kyle freaking Farmer and 5 million more than 38 year Carlos Santana. If all they were trying to do was cut payroll there were far easier ways to do it without trading him. Farmer and Santana make more together than Polanco does. How about they just don't tender Farmer or sign Santana and they can find a cheap reliever and pitching depth for the same cost of Topa and DeSclafani's deals. I agree cutting salary was the top priority for the offseason and in that trade, but even taking that into account it wasn't a good deal. If they paid 4 million for DeSclafani as a throw in they should've just given it to Michael Lorenzen as the extra 500k he's going to make this year is probably well spent since he's likely to actually throw a pitch.
  15. chpettit19
    Then they need to quit saying they're trying to win this year. If they're trading a heart of the order hitter for a reliever and bad pitching depth because they're hoping a no glove, no discipline A ball hitter figures it out in 2 or 3 years they aren't trying to win. And who says Varland is better? People hope he's better but the reason he was slated for AAA is because he wasn't good enough to be a big league starter last year. The Twins needed real major league pitching this offseason, not depth. They've said as much themselves. Even if the only thing they were going for was depth he's still a bad target as an injured pitcher isn't actually depth at all.
  16. chpettit19
    Again, there is a difference between having an injury history and having just been hurt, or even being actively hurt at the time. Paddack had a known UCL tear, comparing that to general IL trip 3 seasons before isn't the same thing. Mahle had shoulder issues less than a month before they traded for him. DeSclafani ended the season with elbow and forearm problems. You can list all the random IL stints you want, but it simply isn't the same as trading for guys with active injury problems. It just isn't. And the strategy of trading for guys with known, current injury problems wasn't what lead them to succeed last year. In fact, the 2 guys they did that with (Mahle and Paddack) had virtually 0 impact on their season at all. Trading for guys with known, current injury problems has provided 0 value, but has cost multiple, legitimate MLB players for no return. It's a bad strategy.
  17. chpettit19
    Doubling his WAR isn't how he actually played. It's adding extra production that he didn't have. That's not how WAR works, and I'm quite positive you know that. Use his batting stats like everyone else. Use his wRC+ or his OPS+. Don't double a counting stat that way to claim he was the 2nd best LFer in all of baseball.
  18. chpettit19
    The alternative, to me, is that they feel a market inefficiency is to take on extra injury risk to save money and possibly trade capital, and have been wrong. It hasn't worked at all to this point as they have spent significant trade capital and haven't gotten any results from the injured players. Do you not question the idea of a team preaching deep playoff run aspirations dedicating a rotation spot to a "throw in?" I'd argue suggesting DeSclafani is a throw in is suggesting the Twins front office is "stupid." But maybe others think throw in rotation spots are how championship teams are built.
  19. chpettit19
    Eddie Rosario is out there as well, I believe.
  20. chpettit19
    You claimed that he was the 2nd best LFer in the game. I agree that it doesn't make sense that people are claiming he wasn't good last year, but claiming he was "literally the second best LFer in all of baseball" by just doubling his WAR isn't any better of a take.
  21. chpettit19
    You just had a post on another thread about Wallner being a question mark as a hitter going into this year. Well Spencer Steer is the Reds starting LFer this year. Feels like he'd be a nice piece to have there. The Twins are going to be starting Carlos Santana against righties despite the fact that he hasn't hit righties in 3 years. CES as the DH feels like it'd be a nice piece (with Kirilloff at 1B vs righties). They miscalculated their value. Yes, the strategy of trading from excess to bring in value is totally fine. Pitchers with known recent injury problems are not value. That's my point. The Twins have traded value from perceived excess and gotten none in return when it comes to these trades for injured pitchers. That strategy isn't fine. Sonny Gray was not on the IL just before they traded for him. There is a very real difference between the idea that all pitchers are injury risks and trading for Mahle who'd just been on the IL (for the record I actually supported the trade at the time) and DeSclafani who ended the year on the IL with a notoriously problematic injury. Pineda was signed to a multi-year deal with the knowledge that he was going to not play that first year. He didn't cost any prospects and wasn't being counted on. Mahle was traded for to boost their playoff run in 2022 and DeSclafani was traded for to be a rotation piece for 1 year. Those are not the same thing. What history did Maeda have of breaking down as a starter? That isn't the history I'm aware of. He was moved to the pen for the playoffs with the Dodgers because they had loaded rotations and he was an effective reliever for them. Maeda went on the IL on 3 occasions with the Dodgers, none of which had anything to do with his arm. If Paddack pitches poorly this year will you come back and say it wasn't smart? Again, I don't buy the DeSclafani was a throw in idea. And if that's the case then I'm even more upset because teams hoping to make noise in the playoffs don't treat rotation spots as throw ins while trying to acquire a 32 year old reliever with 1 good MLB season for a heart of the order hitter. The Twins did walk away from Shoemaker, and didn't give up any prospect value to get either one of those guys. Pitchers are all injury risks, but not all their risks are equal. The Twins have very clearly been willing to take on higher risks in the name of trying to get cheaper assets. Well they haven't come cheap in these trades and they haven't provided value. It's a bad strategy that hasn't worked out at all.
  22. chpettit19
    What if that doubling of games would've lead to him cratering and actually losing WAR? You know you can't just double WAR like that and claim he would've been the 2nd best LFer in baseball if he'd played a full year. Claiming he was the 2nd best LFer in baseball this way is just as bad as claiming he wasn't that good last year. He was very good in a small sample size. Now the real test begins.
  23. chpettit19
    The other poster did, in fact, suggest that Lee could play OF and used Castro's lack of OF time prior to 2023 as an example as to why he could possibly play outfield. Your suggestion is not the same as the other poster who was suggesting Brooks Lee take Castro or Farmer's spot on the roster, including playing OF like Castro. Yes, the OF situation could affect Lee. I'd bet Larnach gets the look before Lee if the need is early in the year, but there are a number of ways guys could be moved around. Lee not being on the 40-man also plays a role here. How willing are they going to be to risk pitching depth early in the year to add Lee to the 40-man and call him up over Larnach if Wallner struggles or there's an injury to another OFer? Maybe that concern is fixed with a DeSclafani 60-day trip or maybe they're willing to drop Sands or Staumont early. Just saying there's more factors at play (I know people don't like it, but managing the roster isn't as straight forward as "who are our 13 best hitters"). I have no problem with them calling Lee up when he's ready. I was refuting statements about him playing the OF, or people needing to get fired if he isn't up early in 2024. When he's ready and there's an opening on the 26-man and reasonable 40-man move to be made they should call him up. I think his draft position and prospect rankings are doing a lot of work for him right now, though. This isn't a Kris Bryant situation where he's absolutely destroyed the minor leagues and isn't being called up. There's plenty of question marks in his play still that they don't need to force him past anyone until he's really shown he's ready for an everyday MLB job. I don't think he's done it yet. But he does look close and like he should be an option at some point in 2024.
  24. chpettit19
    Steer, CES, and Polanco would look awfully nice in this lineup right now. The idea that they aren't paying much for these pitchers seems false to me. Those are 3 legitimate MLB bats that were traded for what may end up being 9 total starts from the starting arms they got back. I know they got more for Polanco, but I don't buy that DeSclafani was just some throw in on the deal. And even if he was, you shouldn't treat a rotation spot as a "throw in" on a deal. So either way I don't like it. If the strategy worked out more often I'd be more willing to buy it as a smart strategy. But it hasn't worked out at all. At some point you need to look at the results and adjust your strategy.
  25. chpettit19
    Imagine if they had a slap hitter now who tried to come up through the minors as a high BA, low walk, "sprinkler" type sprayer of baseballs around the field. That guy could even have a fun nickname like "La Regadera." They'd definitely force him not to hit that way. No way he'd ever be called up and win a batting title or anything because they're just so single-minded in their approach that they only produce 1 kind of hitter. (If you didn't pick up on it this was sarcasm because they didn't "screw up" Luis Arraez at all)
×
×
  • Create New...