chpettit19

I promise you Keirsey Jr would much rather have had his experience with the MLB team this year than have spent that entire time in AAA. Every player would. And not just for the significantly higher paychecks and improved lifestyle. He got his shot. He got to call himself a big leaguer. You think Ryan Fitzgerald isn't over the moon right now getting the chance to prove himself to not just the Twins but all 30 MLB teams for next season even if the risk is "regular season humiliating frustration?" This is what they've all spent their life working towards. Spring training means nothing. That's not when they get their shot. The regular season is. Real games are. This is their shot. This is exactly when every one of these guys are hoping for the chance to humiliate themselves if that's what happens. That's all any of them ask for. "Give me a chance. Let me prove myself in real games and let me play on the field determine whether or not I'm a big leaguer." You're advocating for the opposite of what every player in the minor leagues is begging for.

I can understand the argument that he will be, but he's not there yet. 118 and 116 wRC+, 119 and 117 OPS+. He doesn't at all have the bat that Buxton has yet. If you want to make the injury argument, that's fine. To each their own. Buxton is unquestionably the better player right now and it isn't even all that close. Can certainly understand an argument for moving forward, though.

I mean I'd take Buxton over anyone on their position player roster, yes. And if we're talking moving forward and not just this year, I'd take Keaschall over Turang at 2B or Vaughn at 1B or Collins in LF. And Lewis over Durbin at 3B (I'll take my chances on the upside). Wallner vs Yelich at DH moving forward is interesting. I'd probably lean Wallner.

I don't think it's possible the Twins are moving before the end of their Target Field lease (the article appears to be agreeing with that), and trying to predict further than that feels like a fools errand. Will the Pohlads even own the Twins still at that point? That's a long ways away still. Like, really far. The landscape of major league baseball will be completely different by then. Media deals, market sizes, the CBA, team building strategies, everything will be different. I have no idea if the PR nightmare #4183 in the last 22 months is a step closer to the Twins being relocated. I don't know that we can make any kind of educated guesses about that right now. We don't even know who these minority owners are. But I will say that I don't think it's outrageous to think that the more damage the Pohlads do to fan relations and the longer they own it the more realistic relocation becomes. If they completely scorch the earth of the Twin Cities market for this franchise and tank its value, eventually they'll just find whoever they can to buy it for whatever they can get and then all bets are off with what that person will do when they're able to do it.

That's why it says "indirectly." The Brewers traded Hader to get Ruiz who they then traded to get Contreras.

I agree with the idea that the Twins need to be more willing and able to make roster moves/changes more frequently like Milwaukee does and move guys on expiring deals, but until the Brewers make any noise at all in the playoffs they're neither mighty nor do I care for the Twins to follow them as some sort of great road map of success. They're on fire this year and I hope they win the World Series, but until they actually do something in the playoffs the Brewers aren't a team I'm eager for the Twins to emulate.

The surprise twist is that I'm actually Joe Pohlad so I'm not a minority owner, but I am going to take over at POBO. The right size for my business now is to do it all myself.

I don't think I've ever described any of the Twins lefties as having angst from not being allowed to face lefties. I've absolutely described them as having been denied the opportunity to work on that skill and having it erode away as a result and have likely said they're probably annoyed by it, but those are not conclusions I reached by attempting to read body language or teammate interactions from 5 second clips during games. And there are actual quotes from Edouard Julien about not being allowed to face lefties after his rookie season. There's many articles, reports, and quotes about him spending the entire offseason working on specifically hitting lefties and feeling he actually messed up his approach against righties because of it. So, we don't have to guess on his feelings about not being allowed to face lefties from quick video clips. I understand the original poster "noticed Julien looks tuned out." The poster you replied to pointed out that the original poster missed an entirely different interaction Julien had with his teammates after the walk off homerun. Which was actually my first thought when reading the original post. "Why are we talking about a dugout interaction after a walk-off homerun? The celebration happened at the plate." Julien celebrated with his teammates but a fan caught a different clip after that celebration was done where Julien was heading to the clubhouse, and likely wasn't the only player and decided Julien is "tuned out." That's what I'm disagreeing with. I agree that a scout in the stands looks at that stuff and would draw conclusions. That isn't my disagreement. My disagreement is that we can or should draw conclusions from 5 second clips from the TV that have no context. This is a great example because this particular situation is a fan drawing conclusions from a clip that happened after the real celebration was over. Julien was at the front of the group welcoming Keaschall to the plate. Was he "tuned out" then? Or is he only "tuned out" because he wasn't at the after party?

Development is the key to every team's success. 100% of the them. Including the Yankees and Dodgers and Mets. Correa's deal never hurt the Twins. Just like Mauer's deal didn't. What's hurt the Twins is, like you say, the Julien, Miranda, Larnach, Lees of the world failing to develop/be developed. If you can develop players you can pay a Correa because the players you develop get paid the league minimum. People are excited that they traded Correa and can now move on and start over and start playing these young guys and "rebuild" for 2027 with Culpepper, Gonzalez, Keaschall, and Jenkins. Well, those 4 will combine to make less than $4 million in 2027. Correa wasn't hurting that process. The 1991 MN Twins had Kirby Puckett at 3.16 million and Jack Morris at 3.7 million. The highest paid player in baseball in 1991 was Darryl Strawberry at 3.8 million (according to baseball reference). The '91 Twins weren't exactly avoiding spending big for stars. I heard those Puckett and Morris fellas were pretty important to that '91 team. Something about a homerun and 10 innings pitched, maybe? Morris was only with the Twins in 1991 because the Twins went out and signed him as a free agent to superstar money that previous offseason. Went worst to first by paying a star star money. What worked in 1991 was paying a star.

I don't get why people are excited to go back to the old way of doing things. "Can't spend that much on 1 player!" Why? Because spreading the money out over lesser players goes so well for the Twins? Or any mid- or small-market team? Yeah, things were going so well when they had all that "financial flexibility" before. The league is shaking in their boots now that the Twins are back to not spending on elite level talent anymore.

The Saints schedule goes for 2 weeks longer than the Kernals schedule. I'd like to see Culpepper and Jenkins get at least that many games with the Saints to end the season. No reason not to get them some exposure to a higher level.

I don't think Prielipp needs a 4th pitch. The only concern about him when it comes to starter vs reliever is whether or not his arm can hold up. If they think his arm can hold up I'd be pretty disappointed if they switched him to reliever at this point. He should get every opportunity to fight for a rotation spot next year. Chris Sale doesn't really even throw a 3rd pitch. Technically he throws 4, but when 2 of your pitches are thrown 6 and 4 percent of the time you really only throw 2 pitches. I agree the expectation should be for him to start in AAA next year, but he should go into spring as part of the group fighting for a rotation spot.

It doesn't happen in any revenue team. Any fan expecting that isn't being remotely realistic. But that wasn't what you were representing in that other post. You said those teams got sold and didn't spend more. That is factually incorrect. I mean, you claimed the Orioles didn't add new payroll after being sold last year when the truth is their payroll increased by over 50%. You tried to claim the Nats are "not big spenders" after their sale 19 years ago because they aren't spending now despite the fact that they've been one of the biggest spenders in the sport under their current owner. I said I agreed with your general premise that fans shouldn't expect new owners to mean the Twins are suddenly going to go spending crazy. But you did not present anywhere close to accurate information in trying to make that point. No, fans should not expect the new owners to lose money annually on the Twins. That isn't at all realistic. It's not going to happen. And I think the number of fans who ask for that is a very small percentage of fans. Most of us who complain about the Pohlad's spending habits complain that they are more than happy to slice spending on the down cycles and make tons of money, but they aren't willing to truly invest during the up cycles and attempt to win. Instead they "right-size their business" because their goal is to still make tons of money, not win. That's my ask, at least. Make your money during the rebuild years. Slice the payroll. Have at it. But don't cheap out when it comes time to win. That's when it's your turn to invest. Because MN fans will show up. We do it for every team in the state. If you're winning and showing you're doing your part, we'll pay and we'll fill the stadium. If the new owner runs their business better (not a high bar) and doesn't completely alienate their customer base they can make more revenue and thus spend more money. Not crazy amounts more, but incrementally more. And if they show they care about winning when the time comes they'll make even more money because the fans will embrace them and the team. That's what most of us are asking for. Not $200 million payrolls year after year and annual losses on their books. Just invest in winning when the time is right. Like many of the teams in your previous post that you claimed didn't spend after their sales but actually did.

The Orioles payroll went up over $50 million this year. Not sure what you mean by "no new spending." Their payroll went from just over 100 mil to over 160. I'd call that new spending. Or, if you go by Cot's, it went up over 60 mil. Either way. There was definitely "new spending" from ownership. The Nationals sold in 2006 and were absolutely big spenders when they were winning. They aren't spending big during their rebuild, but they were massive spenders when they won the world series. Like top 5 in baseball spenders. And top 10 in baseball for nearly a decade. The Reds have touched the top 10 in spending during the Castellini ownership. Getting as high as 11th in 2014. KC never touched the top 10, but got up to 15th during their WS years, which was big spending for them considering they're typically in the bottom 10. Yes, the Rays, Marlins, A's, and Brewers are always at the bottom (outside of Miami's 2012 blip at #10). But there's a lot of missing context or simply wrong information in here. I agree with the general premise that people shouldn't expect a sale to mean the Twins are suddenly going to be big spenders, but at least provide accurate information.

That doesn't sound bad to me. I was unaware of the wife's money. That's a nice little secondary purse to be able to reach into when needed.

The MLB scout in the stands is getting more than 5 second long clips of player interactions that they can't control because they're being fed them by TV producer choices. That scout was there before the game watching that player interact with their teammates on the field during warmups. He can watch them during the game. Could've watched them during the whole celebration instead of just two short segments fed by TV cameras. And teams have other sources that have likely interacted with that player along the way, or know people who have, that they can rely on for more information. Comparing what fans get in 5 second clips and what scouts get is a pretty big leap.

I agree. I think it'll take some time to figure out if our situation as fans has improved, stayed the same, or worsened. But a little birdy told me we may want to start figuring out our feelings on Mr Leipold. I don't follow the Wild closely so don't have really know what he's been like as the owner of that club.

Getting this thing back on topic a little bit...what would people think about Craig Leipold owning the Twins?

Lee can't field SS well enough to be a no bat SS either. Lee is running out of roles that he can fill on an MLB roster if he doesn't show significant improvement with the bat.

His ability to play SS wasn't all that highly regarded. And if Fitzgerald can fill the role of utility infielder for the next 3 years on a league minimum deal, that's a valuable part of the future, too. Completely ignoring him isn't smart either. Find out if you can rely on him and save yourself the $4 million Kyle Farmer deal.

Why does Kaelen Culpepper specifically need more time in the minors? Just because? Or is there something specific you've seen, or at least heard from Twins personnel, about his game that leads you to that conclusion? Jackson Chourio, Jackson Merrill, Nolan Shanuel, Zach Neto, Michael Harris, the already mentioned Mr Keaschall. I'm pretty sure I'm missing some just from the last few years. Sure, people need to settle down and Culpepper doesn't need to be called up just to be called up, but we also need to stop acting like there's some set number of minor league games guys need to play and its crazy to suggest guys can be called up and succeed quickly while completely or essentially skipping AAA.

BBTV isn't a stat. Just like prospect rankings aren't a stat. And the BBTV value of prospects is based on things like prospect rankings. Fans treating it like an actual stat is part of the problem. It's a projection. A prediction. Preseason projections of stats aren't stats either, they are projections. Predictions. Not stats. You are not describing a stat. A stat, by nature, is unbiased. It is a number that is dictated by mathematics and data. Statistic: noun, a fact or piece of data from a study of a large quantity of numerical data. A player's OPS, BA, HR total, etc. isn't biased (many of the defensive numbers are biased as they are based on human judgements so should be looked at differently). At all. It's based on hard data. That is "real life." Attempting to judge intangibles and underlying conditions is where bias comes in because that isn't based on hard data, it's based on human judgement. And humans are, by nature, biased. Your eye test is biased. Your judgement is biased. All of ours are. The argument that stats can't measure everything is a good argument. The argument that stats are biased is not. But BBTV isn't really a stat. BBTV is one group of people's projection of players future production compared to their future cost. That's it. It is nothing but bias because it is all human subjectivity. They tweak the numbers based on their own personal estimations of things because, for example, there is no statistical way to project the MLB production of a 16-year-old DSL pitcher, but yet here we are with people saying the Twins could've done better than the separate Bader and Duran trades that included exactly that because BBTV will give them a trade value for such a kid. There's no way to objectively evaluate the trade value of any player for all 30 teams. Because, as you point out, "needs should also be involved." Willi Castro was worth more to the Cubs than he was to the White Sox at the trade deadline. There is no binary trade value number for any player. BBTV is not real life and it is not an overly useful site, because there is no way for it to take into consideration the needs, budgets, and goals of all 30 teams and adjust accordingly. Beyond the very basic fact that it's simply a guess by the people who run the site.

This is a perfect example of the problem with BBTV. It isn't real life. The other team has a say in things, too. Dave Dombrowski is a pretty smart dude. He doesn't look at player value in binary terms like BBTV and just add up "value points," He wasn't going to go from Hendry Mendez and a 16-year-old complete lottery ticket to a top 100 prospect because they combined the trades. That isn't realistic. And just switching out Tait or Abel for Crawford and saying its a big win is assuming Crawford is a significantly better prospect than either of those other 2. I don't see any reason to believe that. Which is a great example of the problem with top 100 rankings. The Difference between the #25 prospect and the #100 prospect is miniscule. Especially because if you look at a different list most of the prospects are all over the place on the different lists. It's a matter of taste and what each person prefers when ranking the players. But they're all the same type of prospects in terms of future outlook, unless you're talking about the top 10 overall type guys. You also fail to address the fact that Miller had 2 more years of control than Duran. Miller had more value than Duran. If the Twins wanted De Vries they were going to have to give up more than SWR and Duran. Is that really what you wanted them to do? For 1 prospect? Man, that kid better not miss.

This article appears to have JP Sears going the wrong direction in the trade. "Oakland landed Leo De Vries, a consensus top five prospect in all of baseball and the type of player teams dream of building around. They also got big league starter JP Sears, who can give a club innings in the rotation, along with Braden Nett, the Padres’ number three prospect, plus Henry Báez and Eduarniel Nuñez, ranked thirteenth and seventeenth in the system." (Formerly) Oakland didn't get JP Sears, they traded away JP Sears. It's part of why they got more in return than the Twins did. That's a pretty big mistake in an article about why the A's got more in return for Miller than the Twins got for Duran. They got more because Miller has twice the team control left that Duran does, and the A's included a Paddack level starter. So, one of those prospects can be tied directly to Sears and the rest of the difference is easily accounted for by San Diego getting 2 more years of control on Miller. The return for Miller suggests the Twins got everything they could for Duran.

Let's let him get established and have him get so expensive the Twins can't afford him so they have to trade him in 4 or 5 years or lose him for a comp pick in 6. What could go wrong? Yes, there is absolutely risk in extending guys so early. It's not a strategy that should be used constantly, but buying out a couple years of free agency and having Keaschall for 8 years instead of 6 years has it's rewards, too. The more established he gets the more expensive he gets sooner. And we all know that means the sooner he leaves. There's risk in signing him this early and there's risk in waiting to sign him. There's risk either way. His deal should be 50 to 60 mil over 8 years. That's 6.25 to 7.5 mil per year. With where they're at in team building they can spread that out evenly over the course of the deal and have no individual season breaking the bank and hurting them seriously financially if he does completely flop. And if he turns into a star you have 8 years of a star for about 7 million. That's some pretty nice reward.