Jump to content
Twins Daily
  • Create Account

chpettit19

Community Moderator
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    8,606

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    169

 Content Type 

Profiles

Minnesota Twins News, Rumors & Analysis

Minnesota Twins Videos

2026 Minnesota Twins Top Prospect Rankings

2022 Minnesota Twins Draft Picks & Signing Bonuses

Minnesota Twins Trade & Free Agent Rumors

Minnesota Twins Fan Guides & Resources

2023 Minnesota Twins Draft Picks & Signing Bonuses

2024 Minnesota Twins Draft Picks & Signing Bonuses

2025 Minnesota Twins Draft Picks & Signing Bonuses

2026 Minnesota Twins Draft Picks & Signing Bonuses

Forums

Blogs

Events

Store

Downloads

Gallery

Everything posted by chpettit19

  1. 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.
  2. 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.
  3. 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)
  4. chpettit19
    They will. They have a separate union now. The MLB CBA doesn't involve them anymore.
  5. 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.
  6. 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.
  7. 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.
  8. 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.
  9. 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."
  10. 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.
  11. 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.
  12. 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?"
  13. 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.
  14. chpettit19
    Yikes.
  15. 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.
  16. 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.
  17. chpettit19
    I'll just leave it at "With this move, day-to-day leadership of the Twins will pass to a third generation of Pohlads." You literally provided a source saying Joe ran things day to day. This is a silly discussion. Everything thats ever been reported about the Joe Pohlad era was that he was running things. You literally provided the source stating as much. I'm very confused.
  18. chpettit19
    Joe Pohlad was the executive chair of the Minnesota Twins. They may have changed the title, but I think you're reaching pretty far to think Joe wasn't running things. Their press release even states that Tom replaced Joe. Tom's statement included a statement about how Joe "lead the organization." Tom's title has more to do with now having minority owners than it does anything about their 2 roles. I think you'd find it hard to find anyone involved in or close to the org that would say Joe wasn't running things. And, yes, he was and is an owner.
  19. chpettit19
    I didn't. I don't think Kremer helps this year let alone next year. I didn't know I needed to explain that I wanted good players with control, not just guys with control. The Twins already have bad players with control. I assumed we were all on the same page of the point of buying was to get good players. But I guess it's my bad for not specifying.
  20. chpettit19
    A guy with about 50/50 odds he's non-tendered isn't really added control. I'm on the record as not wanting to trade any future ceiling for guys who aren't likely to part of 2027 and beyond. That beyond is a big part of it. Detmers, Soriano, and Hancock are the 3 people I remember discussing as controllable assets. I'm sorry if I didn't specify specifically that I want guys worthy of being retained. If you want to call this a "gotcha moment," I'm not going to stop you. I don't like this deal. A guy who was on pace to not even finish the year on his current team's roster isn't somebody who's extra control I care about. But you're welcome to have whatever feelings you'd like about it.
  21. chpettit19
    There is nothing Tom Pohlad can prove in 1 season. He certainly hopes he can, and I'm sure he can to some fans. But taking on 5 mil at the deadline when the payroll is miles below where it should be doesn't prove a gosh darn thing. Baby bro Pohlad got the payroll up over 150 mil, did that prove he was different and would spend? Tom needs to do things for years before he proves anything.
  22. chpettit19
    Not a fan of this one. Feels very Falvey-esque in targeting someone with an extra year of control, but isn't this whole "buying" thing supposed to be about helping getting the 2026 Twins over the proverbial hump? This feels much more middle ground in hoping he doesn't kill you this year and then he's an option next year. And my stance remains the same in that I hate giving up ceiling for this team. Reyes has real ceiling. His loss is certainly nothing crazy at this point, but if I'm giving up a guy with his ceiling, its for more than a guy getting his brain bashed in this season.
  23. chpettit19
    Clark would have to hit at a Barry Bonds level the rest of the year and lead Detroit to a division title to have any shot at the draft pick compensation this year. If they send him back down, or he gets injured, before he hits 45 days of service time (IL time doesn't count against rookie eligibility, to my knowledge) he'll still be eligible for the extra pick next year. Another factor is finishing in the top 3 for MVP before he hits arbitration. I know you can get an extra pick that way (if the guy is eligible for the PPI pick), but I'm not sure if it can also get the player a retroactive full year of service time. Skenes, as an example, got a full year of service for winning ROY and not being up in time, but also won the Cy Young his 2nd season, which I'm not sure if that'd have triggered the full year of service or not.
  24. chpettit19
    Not really concerned with moving either piece, but I'd guess Bruin has the better chance of coming back to haunt us to any degree down the road. Amick just doesn't make enough contact to give himself much of a chance to have the bat carry him to any significant career, in my opinion. Maybe an up and down, use all his option years type thing like CES. Nothing I'm really worried about moving.
  25. chpettit19
    Talent. I don't know that people (well, not all people, at least) hoping to see Jenkins think he'll be a "savior." But I think it's reasonable to think his talent will play better than at least a handful of guys currently on the major league roster. Luke Keaschall was a 93 wRC+ bat in AAA. But he's talented. Not Jenkins talented, but more talented than most of our other options. So, he was able to perform well in the majors last year just based on pure swing decision and contact talent. Jenkins has more of that talent than Keaschall. Numbers don't translate level to level. In either direction (good or bad). I don't know what Jenkins will do in his first taste of the bigs, but I'm quite confident in watching his PAs that he won't be overwhelmed. He'll take good at bats and put the bat on the ball. That's more than at least a few current Twins players can do.
×
×
  • Create New...