Jump to content
Twins Daily
  • Create Account

chpettit19

Community Moderator
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    8,094

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    167

 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

Forums

Blogs

Events

Store

Downloads

Gallery

Everything posted by chpettit19

  1. chpettit19
    I think they said 109 off the bat on the broadcast. He's a big boy and there's definitely power potential in there. And I don't think the homers need to come now. A bit like Manny Machado who hit a ton of doubles early in his MLB career and they just naturally progressed into HRs as his career went along. If he just keeps squaring the ball up and making adjustments he's going to be just fine.
  2. chpettit19
    Oh, I have no faith in their ability to actually pull off good trades, but that doesn't mean I think they should trade all that for 1 guy with 70 MLB games under his belt. I will say that they have gone after better athletes recently in both the draft and trades. I mean Outman and Roden are far better athletes/defenders than Larnach and Wallner. But, no, I don't trust them to trade all those guys separately for great returns. My only hope at this point is that the sale happens and it's a new front office running the offseason. But I'm not holding my breath.
  3. chpettit19
    Oh, fully agree about the motivation to watch and cheer for the Miranda, Julien, Gasper, Outman team. But that shouldn't be the team's motivation for calling up the young guys an extra month early. I don't think waiting an extra month pushes off the rebuild. Not meaningfully, at least. And, I don't think there is a "rebuild." I think they're going to try to win next year. It's why Outman is here in the first place. And maybe Miranda or Julien actually look good (I'm not betting on it or making an argument that they're likely to, just saying it's technically possible) for the rest of the year in the majors. Then maybe you can get a rookie ball pitcher with a 4.50 ERA this offseason instead of just DFAing them. Never hurts to add an asset. Outman is here next year. I have to assume. Why else trade for him? Just get fan favorite "cash considerations" if you're just going to cut him immediately. So may as well get him up here to impress us all from the jump! And Gasper may be our Vazquez replacement next year. So may as well throw him behind the dish now and see what you have (I've watched him in AAA and despise that idea, but I'm just some random guy on the internet). From a fan perspective I'm totally with you. No desire to watch the team they're likely to run out there and will be watching far more minor league games the rest of the year than Twins games. But I don't want them to compound what I already feel are bad roster decisions with more bad roster decisions. But, like I said, I think they're trying to win next year so I don't expect to see any of those young guys up early next year anyways so it's really all moot anyways. I hate my Twins fan life right now.
  4. chpettit19
    Always happy to help!
  5. chpettit19
    Oh, he's been an absolute monster, no doubt. But it's 70 games. Joe Ryan should bring back 2 near MLB ready top 100 type guys, plus more. Kyle Teel has 32 games of a 117 OPS+ and the White Sox got 3 other guys on top of that. Ober should bring back at least 1 near MLB ready top 100 guy, plus more. If Wallner gets his s*** together the rest of the year he would bring back another one. I mean, you're talking about giving yourself 4 swings at the next Kurtz. You just have to pick the right guys. Trading 2 established playoff quality starting pitchers (plus more) for 1 player sounds like something that's probably never happened in the history of baseball.
  6. chpettit19
    The extra month of ABs for guys like Jenkins, Culpepper, and Gonzalez aren't going to make or break their careers. They aren't going to win more games than Miranda, Julien, and Gasper in August with those 3 youngsters. Playing those 3 AA guys in the majors starting today would take them all well past their rookie eligibility without giving you any real added bonus. If any of them have monster years next year that would've won them the rookie of the year award all you did was cost yourself an extra draft pick. What is the point of that? Calling them up today provides no real added benefit. Give Miranda, Julien, and Gasper types their last month to see if they can save their careers. Then drop whoever isn't going to be here next year to call up Jenkins, Culpepper, Gonzalez, etc. and give them every AB in September. They get their MLB experience while maintaining rookie eligibility. Why wouldn't you want to give them MLB experience and also keep your chance to gain an extra late first round pick?
  7. chpettit19
    Yeah, that comment was a follow-up after the other poster responded to my first comment disagreeing with the premise of this article. I don't think the Twins picked a lane. I don't think they're rebuilding. I think they're trying to win "now" (not this year, obviously) and in the future. I think the article is 100% wrong. I think the Twins are trying to have their cake and eat it, too. The idea behind trading all 3 of them was that if they were truly rebuilding, as the article argues, then that's what they'd do. But they aren't. So, I don't think they will. I fully agree with your assessment of what they did to the team yesterday and I also see them working hard to remain competitive while they remake the team. It's what I hate about yesterday. I hate Outman being here. I hate that return. It's awful and pointless (unless you trade Larnach and/or Wallner). I hate getting returns ranging from 16 to 28 years old. That's not picking a lane. I wish they would've picked a lane. I wish they'd pick one this offseason. But they didn't, and I don't think they will. And I think it's going to lead to more mediocre at best teams. I do think there's risk in not trading all 3 of the starters this offseason, though. You keep the wrong guy and he blows an elbow and you're getting nothing for him (a comp pick, maybe). 2026 is lost. I mean, there's surprise teams every year and maybe it's the Twins next year, but the Twins are all about the numbers and the odds, and the odds are they're not winning next year. So, then you're playing for a 1-year window with whichever starter(s) you kept. If you're doing ok (.500ish ball, 1 game back of the wild card at the deadline let's say) that year are you trading them and blowing up fan relations AGAIN? Are you ok with just getting a comp pick for them instead of the multiple top 100 prospects you can get for them this offseason? That's the decision. What's the realistic outlook for this team in 2026 and 2027 and what are you willing to lose each of those 3 guys for? Either way, I think this article is 100% wrong. I think it couldn't be more wrong if it tried. They didn't pick a lane at all. They're still trying to win now and later. We'll see how it turns out.
  8. chpettit19
    That is a whole lot to give up for 1 guy. I actually think the A's would accept that and turn around and flip Ryan and Ober for other pieces. Or at least think about it. Or I would if I ran them. I'd call all my people in and have a meeting about it for sure.
  9. chpettit19
    The "wild swings" are what I've been tracking with KC. I still see a few ABs here and there where he clearly just kind of loses himself at the end and chases things he has no business swinging at, but totally agree those are few and far between and getting fewer and fewer as we go. Love to see it and would love to see him up in AAA for August. Jenkins looks like he's going into more ABs ready to let it rip earlier in counts. He has a little more Mauer in him at this stage than I'd prefer (I mean, I'll take a HOF career) in that his natural approach appears to me to be to take his singles or doubles to left center and be good with it. But lately it's felt (I don't watch enough to have anything more than hunches and feelings and guesses at this stuff) like he's gone up there looking to do more damage, especially early. His swing looks more violent, but still in a controlled way. In that HR AB yesterday he even swung hard enough on a couple swings that he lost his balance a little which I thought was weird for him and then he went yard.
  10. chpettit19
    I'd actually argue they should go with that second group of players until September. Don't use up rookie eligibility on the other group this year. Get them up in September to get their feet wet, but keep them eligible for the extra draft pick if any of them go nuts in 2026 and can snag rookie of the year.
  11. chpettit19
    They don't HAVE to trade any of them. But if this is truly a rebuild why wouldn't they trade all 3? Their value isn't going to ever be higher. Assuming Ober comes back and pitches like his usual self the rest of the year and Lopez comes back and proves he's healthy at the end of the year. 2 years of control will be far more valuable than 1.3, 1, or .3. No, they don't HAVE to trade those guys, but if, as the article suggests, the Twins truly picked a lane and they're going full rebuild then the absolute right choice is to blow it up and trade those 3 this offseason to get the maximum return. They're the 3 that can really get a rebuild jump started. What's the point of holding them if you're truly doing a rebuild? There is no point. None at all. Their value won't grow and they're all going to be 30 next year so it's not like they'd be part of the rebuilt team anyways. Don't risk any of them blowing an elbow. If you're rebuilding you trade them all. But that's my point in the other post. I don't think they're rebuilding. I think they're trying to win now and later. And I think it's going to be a disaster.
  12. chpettit19
    I disagree that they picked a lane. You don't bring James Outman back if you've fully picked the rebuild lane. You don't. It's not even an option. You pick any random prospect over James freaking Outman. A 28-year-old failed prospect. That is not picking the rebuild lane. The Twins blew up their pen. The one part of the team we already know they won't invest in and believe they can build overnight from any castoff or failed starter. They didn't touch any controllable starting pitching or position player that didn't save them $70 million. I think they very much remained in both lanes and it's why I absolutely hated yesterday. The return in the trades matters in this discussion. They got 28- and 25-year-old players and 16- and 18-year-old players. That isn't picking a lane. That isn't picking a target window for contention, that's trying to win now and later. Maybe they truly pick a lane this offseason by trading Lopez, Ryan, and Ober, but they didn't pick that lane yesterday. Blowing up the most fungible part of your roster that you never invest in anyways isn't tearing down your roster or rebuilding. It's not picking a lane. They held their most valuable pieces that would truly jumpstart a rebuild. The Nats didn't hold Juan Soto when they started their rebuild. The Twins held Joe Ryan. Until they trade their starting pitching they haven't picked a lane.
  13. chpettit19
    I'd argue it wasn't a "complete tear-down and re-build" at all. They didn't trade their most valuable piece. Well, their 3 most valuable pieces, but 2 are hurt. If they trade their 3 top starters this offseason, THAT will be a complete tear-down. And bringing back 28 year old James Outman is not a re-build move, it's a re-tool move. And it most certainly wasn't "everybody on TD." I don't know if it was most or not, but it certainly wasn't "everybody." I didn't want a complete tear-down. I do now, though. I want them to trade Ryan, Jeffers, Lopez, Ober, and Larnach at a minimum this offseason. No reason to keep those guys now. If today changed Buxton's mind about being a 1-jersey player, trade him, too. But today wasn't a "complete tear-down and re-build." It was a half tear-down and combo re-build/re-tool. And that's why I hated it. They didn't pick a lane. They tried to have their cake and eat it, too. And it's why they'll continue to struggle. If they'd just have done a complete tear-down and re-build I would've been just as shocked as I was today, but wouldn't have hated it. But at least they would've picked a lane. Getting a 28-year-old OFer, 25-year-old OFer, 16-year-old, 18-year-old, and everything in between is trying to win everything and it's why they won't win anything. Falvey always says they don't care about anything but getting value. They don't care if it's present day or future, they just want to get value. Well, at least he's honest because they sure embraced that this week. But just following their value chart and having no apparent plan for when they're making a true effort to compete just makes it all a muddied mess. I'll leave the door open for the chance that they turn around and make follow-up moves during the offseason that consolidate things more, but I'm not holding my breath. If they do I will apologize for my rants today and say I was wrong and they had more of a plan than I gave them credit for. But as of right now the only semblance of a plan I see is them half-way trying to compete now and half-way trying to compete around 2029. And that's no plan at all.
  14. chpettit19
    Which one does Buck platoon with? 🤣
  15. chpettit19
    I don't see a plan here. Not one that makes sense to me at least. At this point I'm hoping for Ryan, Ober, Lopez, Jeffers, and Larnach deals this offseason. No reason to keep those guys. Buxton, too, if he wants out. This Stewart for Outman deal just doesn't make any sense to me.
  16. chpettit19
    Were you? I think there's still a good chance they're trying to be "good" next year. Otherwise, why get Roden and Outman? Those are win now returns. I think there's a solid chance they think they can rebuild their pen on the fly and be back "competing" next year. I think they're trying to play both sides of the fence. And it's why they're going to continue to struggle. (Good and competing get quotes because I've realized my definition and their definition are simply different. They think a solid floor, mid-80s win, compete for a central title and take your chances team is the definition. I don't)
  17. chpettit19
    Wait, they got James Outman in this deal? For what purpose? What purpose does he serve in this organization? What is the plan here? What is this team trying to be? Are they trying to win next year without Correa? This better be one heck of an offseason.
  18. chpettit19
    Who the pitchers are will be interesting. May actually make the Duran deal look much better. De Vries is the best prospect dealt, by far, but JP Sears is also going to the Padres so at least 1 of those pitchers can be attributed to him. And Mason Miller has 2 more years of control than Duran does. So, who are those 3 pitchers? Will be really interesting to see.
  19. chpettit19
    Gleeman posted on X that the Twins are assigning Abel to AAA, not the majors, fyi.
  20. chpettit19
    Surprised this deal got done. This is what relievers go for so, in that sense, it's a fair deal. But I thought the Twins would actually stick to the "2 top 100 prospects" thing as they've actually been quite good at that. They set a price and don't really move off it. It's why Kepler was never traded. But these aren't 2 top 100 prospects anymore. I think Fangraphs took them both off. Assuming MLB adds at least 8 draft picks to their list, Abel is coming off theirs. As others have pointed out, Duran didn't need to be traded. I was all for trading him if they could actually get what would have been an overpay in getting 2 clear top 100 prospects and hopefully more. I do think the deadline is actually the better time to trade relievers, but this is a disappointing return. Abel is going the wrong direction in rankings and even if Tait is still in a bunch, he's (nearly) 19 and a billion miles from the bigs. Some fella named Diego Cartaya was crushing homers in the low minors as a teenager with a rocket arm a few years back, too. While I think it's fair value, and thus we'll see a bunch of B or B+ type grades on it from the different sites that grade such things, I'm not a huge fan. Part of it also has to do with holding out hope that there's new blood from the owner's suite on down by the time this trade had to be made and thinking Duran has essentially the same value a year from now. And I don't think this signals any massive fire sale (doesn't mean there won't be one, but 1 non-expiring trade isn't a fire sale). If you can't replace 1 reliever, even one as good as Duran, and still compete you probably should have a fire sale, though.
  21. chpettit19
    You're not even arguing against what I'm arguing so this will be my last response to you. Trading Dobnak at all is the choice I'm talking about. Choosing to trade him instead of choosing to demand another flyer prospect is what I'm talking about. My complaint is the Twins bringing up Dobnak at all. That is purely a money saving move. If the Tigers were willing to give more to make the deal work ("but if you take Dobnak we will take your offer") I would have preferred the Twins demand another rookie level prospect. Or DSL level prospect. Or any random lottery ticket prospect that the Tigers felt was the equivalent of taking on Dobnak.
  22. chpettit19
    I don't care if this return is better, worse, or the same as any of our expectations for a Paddack trade. To me the simplistic view is that Detroit thought that if they traded Jimenez for Paddack straight up they were getting the better end of the deal. There's no way to argue that. Detroit took on a negative asset outside of that 2 player swap and MN didn't get anything else. It's the only logical answer. Detroit thought Jimenez for Paddack was in their favor to some degree. From there MN chose money over more talent in return. Value that however you want. As I've now said 4, 5, 6 times? Whether we expected more doesn't matter, the Twins could've gotten more. That's indisputable. Detroit took on a negative asset in order to make the trade work so by definition the Twins did get more than just Jimenez. You can be ok with the Twins choosing the money over more talent. Whether that would've/could've/should've been a different prospect than Jimenez or another lottery ticket in addition to Jimenez. I would've preferred more talent than saving the Pohlads money on the way out the door. 1 mil for next year's payroll isn't moving the needle. DSL/Rookie ball Luis Gil for Jake Cave might. I'm much more positive about the FO, Baldelli, and the Twins in general than the average poster. I'm not just some negative poster out to trash everything the Twins do. The Tigers took on a negative asset. They didn't do it out of the goodness of their hearts. That means Chris Paddack was worth more to them than Enrique Jimenez alone. The Twins chose to save a couple bucks that will most likely be meaningless when it comes to winning baseball games instead of taking a shot on more talent. I disagree with that. Not everyone does, and from the beginning I've said it's up to everyone to value choosing the money instead how they want. Chris Paddack was worth more than Enrique Jimenez alone whether any of us thought so before the trade or not.
  23. chpettit19
    Ok, fine, you're not willing to even take a stand you just want to tell other people they're wrong without making your own stance. Good for you, I guess? But I also said (multiple times even) it's their prerogative to choose the money over the prospect capital. I just said it isn't the choice I'd prefer. And I've also said multiple times it's up to others how they want to value choosing the money. You clearly like it. Cool. None of that changes where this entire conversation started in that it was a choice the Twins made and Dobnak wasn't just added for nothing. They picked the money over the prospect capital. I'd argue the fact that prospects are low chance lottery tickets is exactly why you get as many of them as you can. And, actually, major league teams would, too. It's a numbers game. You need to give yourself as many swings at it as possible. It's why they don't trade what so many around here call "redundant" prospects. Because there's no such thing. Because so many fail. So, no, it's not "the principle of things." Not even a little. It's about giving this team the best chance to be good. I want the Twins to win baseball games. Now and in the future. This season is lost. But the future isn't. The Twins need more talent in their system. So, passing on talent in order to hand owners who won't even be here (supposedly) next year a couple million annoys me. Because that decision doesn't help the Twins win baseball games. And that's what I care about.
  24. chpettit19
    That's why I brought up that the Pohlads and the commissioner of Major League Baseball himself are doing everything they can to convince us all that the Pohlads are on the doorstep of completing a nearly $2 billion deal. The Pohlads supposedly won't own the Twins much longer anyways so they aren't responsible for making the financial picture work. If the Twins needed to trade Randy Dobnak to cut checks next week the Pohlads are in quite the predicament. But I'm pretty sure "the financial picture" at this "given point in time" is ok. Yes, it is easier to play with other people's money. And despite what you think, it's what you're doing too, you're just on the other side of the game. My play with their money is to spend it on talent so they can improve their chances at stopping the performance fall off. Your play with their money is to put it in their pocket. Like I said in that other post, you can value them choosing money over talent however you want. You say in this post that part of their need for money now is that their performance is dipping. Know what helps with performance falling off? Getting more talent in your organization. I will always choose adding talent, no matter how much of a lottery ticket it's perceived to be over adding money to the owner's pocket. And I fully understand baseball is a business. My point from the beginning has been that people arguing that Dobnak was added for nothing in return is nonsense. The Twins made a choice. They chose money over prospect capital. And, again, you can value that however you want. I don't care if the billionaires lose a couple million because they were foolish enough (again) to think they hadn't alienated fans and their revenue was going down. You cost yourself talent (again). I want the Twins to win. And for that they need more talent. I don't think a dime of this money is going back into the Twins organization in a way that increases their on field talent. Which I don't like. So, I think they did well in the trade in general, but I also dislike them choosing money over talent in even the slightest way. Because I couldn't care less about the Pohlad's bank account. And that's all this changes.
  25. chpettit19
    It absolutely could've gone down that way. But instead of their response being "take Dobnak off our hands" their response could've been "prospect K added to prospect J." And if they reject that then prospect L, M, N, O, P, Q, R....you get the idea. They chose money over prospect capital. There was a cost to getting Dobnak off their books. They chose to save money instead of getting player value. You can value that however you want. If you choose to believe that the Pohlads truly are going to get this team sold before next season like they and now the commissioner both want you to believe, I don't know how you can view that decision as anything other than the Pohlads just pocketing a few million bucks. Unless you think they're about to reinvest that money in the next 28.75ish hours, of course. I'm skeptical of that.
×
×
  • Create New...