Jump to content
Twins-Giants game thread is live — talk the game with us! ×
Twins Daily
  • Create Account

chpettit19

Community Moderator
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    8,590

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    169

 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 Tracker: Picks & Bonuses

Forums

Blogs

Events

Store

Downloads

Gallery

Everything posted by chpettit19

  1. chpettit19
    Who are these quality options you speak of? That's kind of my point. You want to get rid of Jackson, Roden, Gray, etc. do you really have quality options to replace them all? Martin isn't a quality option. Wallner isn't a quality option. Jenkins and Culpepper are at least exciting. No, everybody doesn't have to play 7 days a week, but Wallner in the outfield a couple days a week isn't a "quality option," in my opinion. That's no different than Jackson or Caratini being squeezed into 1B a couple days a week. I don't think the Twins have 13 "quality options." They have varying degrees of "everyday" players and bad options. You just don't like this particular bad option because it says C next to his name. Even though he has cOF and 1B time on his resume. He's the same as the other guys. Only difference is that you have to completely lose him, unlike the other bad options that you can send up and down.
  2. chpettit19
    Who? That's my question. What is the roster and lineup makeups you'd like to see? Who's the defensive replacement type? Who's the pinch runner type? It's easy to say Jackson isn't providing any help, but what is the change you'd like to see. This article suggests Wallner for Jackson. That doesn't do it for me. I'm not losing one of our 2 catchers for 2027 to get Matt Wallner back. And that's as somebody who has defended Wallner more than the vast majority of people on this site even coming into the season. Martin? Jackson is just as fast as him and Martin isn't a defensive sub type. Roden? Aren't we dropping him to get Jenkins up because Roden doesn't provide any value? Gray is obviously out. Mendez? Awful defender. How many games you going to start him at DH? Worth it instead of playing daily for St Paul? Fedko? I guess he'd be your defensive replacement type, but I personally wouldn't want him on the bench the rest of 2026 at the cost of Jackson for 2027. Gonzalez? Similar to Mendez. Better defender, but certainly no defensive replacement type. Not a pinch runner type. Not hitting great in AAA so not really a bat type. I don't see what 13th guy they have that makes any sort of meaningful difference over Jackson right now. But I'd like to see what people think the roster makeup should be and who would be playing when.
  3. chpettit19
    I apologize profusely!
  4. chpettit19
    Does this mean you're hoping and praying for these moves today? The Saints are playing as we speak and Culpepper and Jenkins are both playing. These moves aren't happening today.
  5. chpettit19
    What is Jackson actually blocking? What are the lineups and bench situations you'd like to see, and when is everybody playing? There aren't catchers available right now. It's why Ben Rordvedt returned an arm with MLB time under his belt already. If they were going to lose Jackson, they needed to trade him. Losing him for nothing 2 days later is awful roster management. But my real question is, what is he actually blocking? I assume you aren't hoping Jenkins or Culpepper are platooned, so they're everyday guys. What is the bench role that Jackson is blocking?
  6. chpettit19
    When is Martin playing in this scenario? Assuming you aren't platooning Jenkins, Bell DHs for Larnach against lefties and Kreidler plays 2B for Clemens. Pinch running is a thought, but the sprint speed for Martin is 27.8 f/s (60th percentile) while the sprint speed for Jackson is 27.7 f/s (58th percentile). Martin would never be a defensive replacement. Are you ready to lose Jackson for .1 f/s sprint speed? I just don't think Jackson is actually blocking anything meaningful.
  7. chpettit19
    What bench function are they missing by having him? 3 catchers are absolutely not ideal, but what could the Twins be doing differently with a different bench piece? To stick to the moves suggested here, are these reasonable lineups? Vs RHP Larnach- LF Jeffers- C Bell- DH Clemens- 2B Lewis- 1B Lee- 3B Keaschall- RF Jenkins- CF Culpepper- SS Bench- Wallner, Martin, Caratini, Kreidler Vs LHP Martin- LF Jeffers- C Lewis- 1B Bell- DH Clemens- 2B Keaschall- RF Lee- 3B Jenkins- CF Culpepper- SS Bench- Wallner, Larnach, Caratini, Kreidler Those are their current most used lineups against righties and lefties with Jenkins and Culpepper added. What regular moves are they making with that team instead of having Jackson for Wallner? How often are you benching Bell, Jenkins, Larnach, or Keaschall for Wallner? When is Wallner playing? This assumes you don't plan on having Jenkins be a platoon player. But, even if you did, Wallner isn't playing against lefties, Kreidler is. What is Jackson really stopping them from doing? Again, 3 catchers is not at all ideal. But what is he stopping that is so bad they should just DFA him and essentially guarantee he's claimed?
  8. chpettit19
    The last one apparently understood it in 2023, right? This family has been in charge of this franchise for longer than I've been alive. At 1 point in time or another, every head owner guy has said something very closely resembling this line. They got the city (taxpayers) to build them a brand-new stadium by saying this stuff. Hasn't been true yet.
  9. chpettit19
    I won't be upset if they call them up. I don't think they're any sort of saviors at this point. I'd give Jenkins the better odds there than Culpepper. He hasn't looked great in the couple games I've watched him since he's returned (granted, super small sample size). I'm on the 8/15 train. All for calling them both up that day. Especially because I don't expect Kreidler or Roden to suddenly pick it up. Buxton is the X factor here. If he's back and Bell is hitting a little, they aren't going to put Jenkins in the OF to move Bell, Larnach, or Keaschall to the bench. Culpepper replacing Kreidler is a much more straight forward move. Or Jenkins replacing Roden if Buxton isn't back. But I don't expect either to be some sort of savior from the jump. And them providing a spark or boost in energy is a nice thought, but that's what the additions at the deadline were supposed to be. Hoffman was supposed to walk in and the guys were all supposed to go "we're in it now, boys! Strap in tight because we're going for a ride!" Didn't exactly have that effect yesterday. If they need rookies to provide a secondary boost 2 days after the deadline, I'm not sure I really buy this boost or spark hypothesis.
  10. chpettit19
    I know we're going to analyze everything the new Pohlad says every time he says something, but we really shouldn't. I'm a weak man so I'll participate. But we shouldn't care about 1 word he says ever and shouldn't judge any change in ownership until 2031. Give him 5 years. They were different in 2023, right? Look how high that payroll got! We were shooting for the moon! We had a payroll big enough to support real free agent signings. We were ready to play with the big boys. We even had Scott Boras singing the Twins' praises! We finally did it! We got the Pohlads to spend! Wrong. Tom has the easiest PR situation ever right now. He can say "we're going to invest!" and spend a whopping $8 million at the deadline and fans start eating it up. "They've changed! They've changed! Tom really cares and gets it!" The fans are starved for any sign of improvement. Their payroll is at 2015 levels and fans are already jumping back on the Pohlad bandwagon. How about we give him 5 years to actually show they're going to invest. When the sales pitch is a little harder than "look, we spent anything at all at the deadline. I told you we cared." All this to say I think it's all just an attempt to boost the price when they sell the team after the CBA is finished.
  11. chpettit19
    Oh, fully agree that this is at least 95% "look we're not terrible owners and really care about winning" driven. But I don't know that following these 3 suggested moves follows that strategy. You just sold the fans the story that this team is good enough to compete. Turning around and adding 2 rookies and a K machine to the roster 2 days later doesn't exactly follow that storyline. I'd chase the RoY pick compensation if I were in charge. If Culpepper gets back to looking like himself for the next 10 days, and Jenkins is looking normal, then I'm calling them up in 10 days. Save their eligibility for the extra pick and get their feet wet for 2027. But, again, that's not the story they're trying to sell. And I wouldn't have sold that story in the first place. So, my plans and there's certainly don't match up.
  12. chpettit19
    I think the risks are severely overblown. I don't think any team should consider any CBA situation at all when making decisions for their team. Trying to guess at what the negotiations will produce in terms of rules or how long the lockout will last is a fools errand. Play by the rules you have in front of you and adjust when needed. And, while I didn't agree with the deadline strategy, it'd be a pretty poor strategy to act as a contender on 8/3 and switch to worrying about future years on 8/5. The Twins are certainly capable of poor strategies, but they've set their sights on "competing" in 2026. Do what is best for the 2026 team until it gets beyond where you think competing is possible anymore. If these 3 moves are that (I don't think they are) then do them. CBA/lockout/2027 team be damned. You've picked your path. Now follow it. (Even if it's not the path I'd have chosen)
  13. chpettit19
    They will. They have a separate union now. The MLB CBA doesn't involve them anymore.
  14. chpettit19
    Losing Jackson feels like a shortsighted move. Does anyone think there's any chance he makes it through waivers? Carrying 3 catchers is certainly not ideal, but I just don't think this team is good enough to sacrifice his place on the 2027 team to hope Wallner is good. Culpepper isn't looking like he's fully back. Not in a rush to use his service time to watch him put up Kreidler numbers. If he goes on a 2 week heater, or 1 week heater, would change my thoughts. But he doesn't look like a savior of any sort right now. Larnach and Keaschall aren't getting pushed aside for Jenkins. When is Buxton actually going to be back? I'm not in a rush to call Jenkins up if Buxton is back soon. He wouldn't have a place to play.
  15. chpettit19
    I don't believe there is anymore "working the phones" on DFA'd players after the deadline. I believe they did away with that rule. There's no getting something for Jackson anymore this season.
  16. chpettit19
    It hasn't. You're playing mathematical games to try to make it look like it's some drastic change. All the piece is arguing is @The Great Hambino's fun fact: decreasing the denominator can help improve a ratio as much as or more than raising the numerator.
  17. chpettit19
    And that's why PR people tell guys like Tom to use those kinds of phrases. This isn't what I'd have done at the deadline, but I have no real problem with it. I think the Kremer deal is questionable in terms of value, but it's not outrageous by any means. I wouldn't have had any disagreement with an article along the lines of both of your responses to me. I don't know why the author felt the need to claim Tom proved anything about the "half measure" and "go big" quotes. It changes the context of the article and discussion. Tom didn't face plant in his first deadline in charge, but he hasn't shown anything drastically different than any other Pohlad. He couldn't have. In any realistic world, Tom had no shot at doing anything to show he's meaningfully different than Joe or Jim or Carl. It's why I questioned the article a few days ago about him proving himself and why I question this one. He couldn't prove anything unless he did something drastic which would've proved incompetence. It's going to take him years to show he's any different than the rest. Joe was getting praised a few years ago for being different when he spiked the payroll. That took an awfully quick turn. This article should've just been a nice tip of the cap to the Twins at the deadline. Just stick to discussing the trades, how defensible they are, and where the Twins can go from here. Making it into a praise piece on Tom confirming he's a "go big" guy was a poor decision.
  18. chpettit19
    1000% agree. This team didn't deserve going big. Which is what makes it weird to me they'd publish multiple articles in the last week about Pohlad "proving himself." I don't have any real complaints about what the Twins have done. It's not what I would've done, but I think it's all defensible. But Tom didn't show he wasn't "a half measure guy."
  19. chpettit19
    What are we doing here? I have never felt like TD is openly being a mouthpiece for the Pohlads, but the thought is starting to cross my mind now. 1 article about Pohlad proving he's a "go big" guy because they got Nance, Minter, Kremer, and Hoffman followed by an article about "historical" spending at the deadline? The payroll is embarrassingly low. Embarrassingly. The number you should be looking at is the total payroll number. The fact that the only season on your list that was below this year's was 2017 is all anyone needs to know. You want to give Tom credit because he was able to squeak above the 2017 payroll?! My goodness. When your payroll is barely above what it was 9 freaking years ago, you don't get any credit for weird percentage numbers.
  20. chpettit19
    I think the disconnect here is the difference between doing very defensible things at the deadline and "going big" at the deadline. The article isn't about whether or not the trades are defensible, they got fair value, or they were buyers. The article is about Tom Pohlad proving he wasn't a "half measures" guy and that he "went big." He didn't. He didn't go big. He went half measure. Which makes sense. It's the type of investment this team deserved. What I (and I believe others, but won't speak for them) am disagreeing with is the premise that the Twins "went big." They didn't. By any measure. This deadline was absolutely a "half measure." The article claims it wasn't. That's what I disagree with. Tom Pohlad didn't at all prove he'd "go big" over the last couple weeks.
  21. chpettit19
    An article I would find interesting in assessing the "go big-ness" of Tom Pohlad/the Twins this deadline is comparing them to the teams they're fighting against for the division and wild card spots. I'd argue Boston (maybe they shouldn't be included with how hot they've been?), Chicago, Cleveland, and Seattle improved their teams more than the Twins did. Texas and Houston did about the same as the Twins. Is it really "going big" when 2/3 of your competition (including the 2 teams above you in the division) went "bigger?"
  22. chpettit19
    I'm going to stick with my answer from the last article about Pohlad proving himself, he can't prove himself in anything in a year. Isn't the idea supposed to be that there was some drastic change in how the Twins will be run now that Tom is in the big chair? 1 deadline can't prove that. The Mahle/Lopez deadline was a bigger "go big" deadline than this. They've done a stand-alone "go big" deadline before. The question isn't whether or not Pohlad will "go big" for a deadline, it's whether or not he'll go big year after year after year when it makes sense. Hoffman, Kremer, Minter, and Nance sets a pretty low bar for "going big," so, if this is what will impress fans, he has a great opportunity to "go big" for many years. Assuming they aren't just setting themselves up to sell the team after the new CBA. And 1 last note on the money thing. Well, 2 last notes. 1. The payroll is still at an embarrassingly low number. Again, if this is what impresses fans, good for him. 2. They still gave up more in prospects (likely Hill instead of a lower arm) to get money back. So, even his "go big" included getting money back. So, one last time, if this is what impresses fans, he's in a great spot to impress them for a while because the bar has not been set high.
  23. chpettit19
    Yikes.
  24. chpettit19
    Hope can swing it, but I'm very confused by all the love for Ryan. He's 27. He has to be good right now or he'll be in decline before he hits arbitration. Never heard of the other guy. Fully agree with @tony&rodney, if somebody like the Brewers wanted Skubal, they could've beat this package, in my opinion. But the industry seems to love River. I just don't get it for a 27 year old who's always hurt.
  25. chpettit19
    Your source literally says he ran the day to day while you're arguing he didn't. Its a pretty bold stance to take. But, whatever, you're right. Joe Pohlad, the worst public speaker in sports ownership history was only a mouthpiece and was widely reported to have been very upset with being replaced in his position by his big brother even though he was just the public whipping boy and laughing stock even though he wasn't actually running things even though your provided source literally said he was running things. What a weird argument. I'm all good. My stance stands. Nothing Tom, or any other Pohlad says or does this year proves anything.
×
×
  • Create New...