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
    He has been very injured. I'm not smart enough to guess at the right answer for him and his health. I trust that the Twins have highly paid medical professionals who are going to provide him with information and he'll make a determination with the team on what is best for him. I don't think it's crazy at all to just put him in the pen and hope the fewer innings helps him stay healthy. I'm less risk averse than most. I want big swings even if I know they come with an increased risk. Especially when the team has built as good of a floor as the Twins appear to have. I want some shots at ceiling raisers, and Canterino as a starter can raise the ceiling way more than he could as a reliever. Certainly not telling anyone they shouldn't believe putting him in the pen is a good option. Just not what I'd do, assuming the medical pros are telling them he can throw 125 innings.
  2. chpettit19
    Yeah, neither of those trades have any chance of happening. But I'd love Devers, Teel, and Salas in general!
  3. chpettit19
    Him developing and working his way towards being a major league starter isn't "wasting" innings to me. They're not going to put him in the pen to start the year and then try to transition him to starter in the middle of the year once they decide if they want to use him in the major league pen or not. That's not a good development plan at all. He's building up to be a starter now. Asking his arm/body to build up and get used to throwing more pitches every 5th or 6th day then switching it to being able to handle throwing fewer pitches at higher effort every 2 or 3 days and then switching back to the original more pitches every 5th or 6th day isn't how you save his arm. They're only going to make that transition to the pen once during the year. And it won't be at the start of the year. They can get him 15-20 starts in the minors without being overly concerned about his inning total and still use him in the pen later in the year. If the pen is as good as advertised they may not need him anyways.
  4. chpettit19
    He'll still be under contract at 33 so he'll have to perform then, too!
  5. chpettit19
    That's what I suggested. Build him up and let him be a starter in the minors for the first half of the year and put him in the pen in the second half to limit his innings. They aren't going to drop any of their recently signed pen arms for him early in the year anyways. So build him up as a starter and test out all the pen arms to find out who's good this year and fit him in as needed later in the year.
  6. chpettit19
    I have no idea what they'll actually do, but him as a starter is worth significantly more than him as a reliever. I'm no Dr or trainer or anything, but neither are Rocco or Falvey. I'd hope they've hired medical professionals they trust and would look to follow their lead when making these decisions and not go off anything else. It sounds like a big jump to me, too, but the team Drs don't keep their jobs if they keep getting guys hurt and they have way more knowledge than we do on him and his situation. If they give him the all clear for 125 I'd try to get him there. Cuz that means he can do 150+ in 2025 and if he reaches his ceiling they have the co-ace they're looking for. Giving him 50 innings this year means he's still got the training wheels on in 2025 and I don't like that idea. Give him AA and AAA starts for the first half of the year and then move him to the pen if he's succeeding. If the pen is really as good as people seem to expect it to be there's no reason to banish him to the pen to start the year. They supposedly have a great pen without him so he brings the most benefit by stretching out and being a starter in the minors until it's shown he's needed in the bigs.
  7. chpettit19
    He said the medical people told him 125 innings so if that's what he's cleared for that's what I'd be targeting.
  8. chpettit19
    https://www.mlb.com/video/lewis-on-being-on-top-100-list?q=royce lewis&cp=CMS_FIRST&qt=FREETEXT&p=0 Greg Amsinger: "And defensive clarity has to help, right?...Knowing you're manning the hot corner...that has to ease your mind a bit, right?" Royce Lewis: "I still don't think it's full clarity." Maybe it's not just people posting here who think he may eventually move if that's what's best for the team. You seem to be more certain about it than he himself is. Amsinger didn't ask a question about him moving positions, he stated it as a fact like you are now that he isn't moving, and Royce volunteered the info himself that he doesn't even have full clarity yet.
  9. chpettit19
    That most certainly may be where he ends up, and I'd bet it's where he debuts in 2024, but he's got the most upside of any arm in their system so I think it's worth building him up as a starter to begin the season before moving him to the pen to limit his innings later in the year. They're starving for a homegrown ace, and he's the closest guy to the bigs with any sort of chance to be that.
  10. chpettit19
    Twins need to cut about 3% off their K rate while not losing much, if anything, in the slug and OBP categories, and they'll be sitting super pretty.
  11. chpettit19
    I'm going to start by saying I like Vazquez and Farmer in general, and am not mad to have them on the team. So don't get too mad at what I'm about to say. But the Twins are spending 25.5 mil on Vazquez, Farmer, Santana, and DeSclafani. That's too much to pay for a #5 starter with injury concerns, and 3 guys who should be limited to part-time roles, 2 of which should see mostly just short-side of platoon ABs. Give me Maldonado for 4.5 (he got 4.25 from the non-contender White Sox so 4.5 is probably more than it'd have cost) and 20+ mil to spend on a far superior player to any of the 4 listed while filling the rest of the roster with league minimum guys with options. Shoot, add Margot to it and you're at 24+ mil in spending money. Correa at 33 needs to perform for sure, but all these 5-12 mil limited veterans don't help their payroll situation at all either. Amed Rosario and Maldonado for the combined salary of Farmer alone. Or Maldonado and Hampson for the same 6-6.5 mil range would give them another 10 mi to spend to improve upon the roster (mostly the Santana or DeSclafani or Margot spots). Obviously a lot of other factors that play into how you could actually have constructed the roster while moving those 2, but 16+ mil for them is a lot of money on a team with limited spending power. They're both very solid veteran guys who all reports suggest are wonderful clubhouse guys. But when your spending is limited filling 4 or 5 roster spots that are going to what should be limited roles with guys making the money these guys are hurts your team building options.
  12. chpettit19
    Brad Keller on a minor league deal simply because he's still "young" and he's shown he's a talented kid. I don't know anything about his arm problems so that'd be another factor. Thor on a minor league deal to transition to the pen and see if they can get his velo back up in short stints. Lorenzen is intriguing as a swing man. Lorenzen vs DeSclafani is actually an interesting debate, but I'd assume he gets more than the Twins are willing to pay and they can't move DeSclafani at this point even though he's very cheap at this point with 2 other teams paying most of his deal.
  13. chpettit19
    I think "risking" 1 guy you're not sure can hold up to starting is enough in a season, and this year that guy is Canterino to me. I'm also not sold on a lot of the bullpen arms (just the nature of relievers) and taking Duran out of the pen at this point would put a question mark (both health and performance) in the rotation while also making the pen a giant question mark. I'm generally in for taking big swings because they're needed to win a title, but that would be too big of a swing for me. Adds question marks without really having any sure thing answer. If I knew for sure he could hold up and dominate I'd be all for it, but there's too many questions for me when it comes to him as a starter and what the pen would be like without him.
  14. chpettit19
    I think if you're going to make that transition you have to start it in spring training. Waiting until halfway through the year to start trying to stretch him out would be far more complicated I think. And how do you decide if it's working well enough to actually let him be a full go postseason #2 starter? The mid-season transition just feels way too complicated to pull off.
  15. chpettit19
    If Niko Goodrum spends any real time in Minneapolis this season things have likely gone very poorly for a number of players (either health or performance). Helman and Prato are really nice 3rd or 4th options to have stashed at AAA not on the 40-man at a number of positions. Chances are they aren't good enough to come up and play major innings without the team performance being effected, but they're really solid options to have around. Would be great to see them tear up St Paul and make teams regret not taking them in the Rule 5.
  16. chpettit19
    Ownership: F. Whether the payroll decrease was the right business decision or not, the messaging was terrible, and the timing was even worse. They continue to show how much they don't understand their fanbase. Front office: C. They have a Polanco sized hole in their lineup that they replaced with an injury red flag at the back of their rotation, a bunch of 30 something pen arms with very little track record of success, and a 38 year old short-side of a platoon (even though he'll start plenty against righties) 1B/DH. I think the team is basically the same talent level as the one that came up short in the playoffs so they get a C. I do like their depth, but they continue to be more focused on floor (depth) than ceiling (talent) than I'd like. Overall: D. Team got no better while they completely face planted the PR stuff. Team should be the favorites for the central, but that's not saying much, and having the rest of your division be horrible doesn't earn you a better grade. All that said, these offseason grades don't matter, and lots of wins early will make their PR mistakes go away quickly.
  17. chpettit19
    I have a tank I'm considering gifting you so I just want to clear up whether you're unencumbered because you don't have one or because you already have a perfect spot to park said tank.
  18. chpettit19
    Spring Training is not the time to bunt runners over. They need to work on their hitting far more than they need to work on sac bunting. The most sac bunts of any team in baseball last year was Arizona with 36. No other team had 30, but 6 other teams had at least 20 sac bunts. I think you're significantly overestimating the use of sacrifice bunts by any team. The best offense in baseball (Braves) had 2. There were 9 teams with fewer than 10 sacrifice bunts. That's more than teams with over 20. League average was 14 sacrifice bunts. Twins had 12.
  19. chpettit19
    The defensive metrics on baseball reference that you reference come from a room of poorly paid interns on computers clicking the spot they judge the fielder to have started then clicking the point where they judge the ball to have gone while also starting and stopping a clock to judge how quick the ball got there. Then those interns use the eye test to decide if it was an extraordinary play or just an ordinary play to either add a multiplier to it or not. If you want to compare player's actual ability to field the eye test is a better tool than using counting metrics based on what I described above. Those metrics aren't telling you which guy can make a certain play and which one can't. It's why they fluctuate so much season to season. Defensive metrics are still very much questionable metrics. That's no shot at the interns, either. Those people do incredible work and it's not an easy job. But the metrics shouldn't be used as debate enders.
  20. chpettit19
    @RpR I don't generally question your "disagrees," but I'm curious in what you disagree with on my post about defensive metrics. Do you disagree that OAA is a counting metric? Do you disagree about how certain metrics are calculated? If you have differing info I'd love to hear what was wrong about my comment.
  21. chpettit19
    Part of the severe swings is opportunity based. If 2 players are both slightly below average defenders, but 1 gets the ball hit their direction more often he's going to show as a terrible defender depending on what metric you're looking at while the other guy just shows as slightly bad. OAA is a volume metric. It's not just judging how good you are in a general sense, it's counting the number of outs it believes you saved or cost. If you and I were to make all the exact same plays, but you made twice as many of them then you'd have twice as much OAA than me. Doesn't mean you're twice as good of a fielder, though. Polanco and Arraez could've been the same quality of fielder, but Arraez had 615 chances last year while Polanco had 236. Arraez had more chances to screw up so his OAA was significantly lower. Defensive metrics have a long ways to go, and it's super important that people know what each metric is actually trying to tell you. OAA isn't great for just comparing generally what quality of fielder 2 players are because it's a chance driven metric. But most of the other ones are very limited in how they're judging defense. Defensive metrics need to be taken with a mountain of salt. They have a long ways to go. It's one part of the game that the eye test should still be the leading "metric."
  22. chpettit19
    You didn't provide the OAA numbers. OAA numbers from last year: Julien Polanco Arraez Which defensive numbers are correct? Your go to BBref numbers or the Baseball Savant numbers? Cuz Julien was the best according to Baseball Savant.
  23. chpettit19
    It doesn't have to mean that, no, but the comment I was replying to was someone comparing the 2 and suggesting Kirilloff wasn't that much better than Santana. If you're happy with a 1B or DH with a 98 OPS+ against 3/4s of the pitchers in the league that's cool. You're more than welcome to be happy with Santana. I don't believe he'll OPS .700 against them this year, and even if he's a 100 OPS+ against righties this year (really crushing father time at 38 years old), I don't want my primary 1B or DH to be a league average hitter. I fully expect Santana to get a whole lot of 1B and DH ABs against righties. And I think it's a mistake. Those are bat first positions and your best hope is that he's a league average hitter. And that's assuming the 38 year old doesn't fall back to his 35 and 36 year old seasons when his OPS+ against them was 86 and 78. Sorry, I'm not impressed with that from a 1B/DH. When it comes to the positions he plays he should not hit against right handed pitching.
  24. chpettit19
    I'm setting my expectations very low so as to limit my disappointment! I agree with everything you said. I fully expect Santana to be an everyday player at mostly 1B with some DH mixed in. And I don't like it. Even if Santana isn't as extremely platooned as Farmer and Margot likely are I still consider them to have 21.5 mil stuffed into the short side. Just because he's going to be out there a bunch against righties doesn't mean he isn't still a short-side bat. Bring back Polanco!
  25. chpettit19
    Yep, I agree with all of that. And it's why I still don't like the Polanco trade. Or their obsession with platooning. They can't possibly imagine Santana is suddenly going to be a worthy 1B/DH bat against righties, or that Farmer, Margot, or Vazquez are going to be worth everyday ABs against them. Are they planning on throwing Castro into a legitimate everyday role? I'd bet Santana everyday is their plan, and I'm not excited about it. I never understood the need for a right handed hitting OFer. I understood the desire to have Buxton insurance, but never understood the idea that they needed to add a 3rd short-side guy to the roster when they were still short a long-side guy. They will platoon and sub like crazy again. Often times using the entire position player group. I understand that strategy when you're forced into it, but I don't agree with it being the main strategy if you have other options. I think the offense will be very good, but I don't like their obsession with forcing multiple guys who can't hit righties onto the roster.
×
×
  • Create New...