Jump to content
Twins Daily
  • Create Account

jimmer

Verified Member
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    10,027

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    32

 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 jimmer

  1. jimmer
    Brock is open minded and actually thinks about opposing ideas as opposed to worrying more about winning an argument. That's what good debaters do. It's about the truth. He may not think it's a good idea still, but seems he is at least thinking it may not be so bad. That's a good thing.
  2. jimmer
    And then the Mets pitched him to the tune of having the most innings pitched in the league the first year they got him. How he was used by them might have contributed to his demise.
  3. jimmer
    FOR the record, I was never in the camp that said we should walk away from such a deal :-) And obviously I disagree about the money. I've seen Tulo trade scenarios at Fangraphs and other sites during chats that had Rockies getting similar deals and eating some money. MLB Network has said similar things. Berrios is Sporting News #17 prospect in all of baseball as of last month and they need pitchers like him. I wish I could say we'll see, but we aren't getting Tulo anyway.
  4. jimmer
    Berrios is a high quality MLB ready prospect . Polanco is a MLB prospect. They would be getting 18+ year+ cost controlled years while giving up a guy owed 98M over the next 5 years. They are going to have to have to eat some cash in practically any trade where they get quality prospects
  5. jimmer
    If we gave up Berrios (and I'm with you 100% on Berrios), I'd prefer to give up Walker as well. In fact, I'd prefer to give up Walker anyway. If we lost Berrios instead of Gibson, though, I believe the Rockies would eat more of Tulo's contract. Any way you look at it, it's gonna hurt some to get Tulo. You don't get a guy like Tulo for nobody you'd mind losing.
  6. jimmer
    and you know what, the Rockies may actually prefer Berrios in your trade scenario. I know if I was the Rockies I would. Higher potential, much younger, more cost control. And if we switched out Gibson for Berrios in your trade offer for Tulo, I'd still do it in a heartbeat (and I love Berrios).
  7. jimmer
    Right now, Gibson is sporting a 1.3 WAR. I read earlier that one poster believes Gibson is better than Radke ever was. I think same are over-valuing what we have in Gibson. I get your argument Brock and hope you are right about him continuing improvement, but I think at this point, his absolute ceiling is a 2.5-3.0 WAR pitcher.
  8. jimmer
    Rockies don't need Rosario like they need a pitcher. They have OFs and 2B. When you trade for a guy like Tulo, you expect it to hurt a bit. Some think losing Gibson would hurt. Hopefully, the Rockies view him the way many of you do.
  9. jimmer
    There it is. Best idea yet. Well thought out. And I think the Rockies DO consider that depending on how much of Tulo's contract they have to eat (which has rarely been brought up when talking about how Tulo won't be worth it down the line at cane carrying ages of, 34, 35.) This helps us in the short and long term. Nice job, Brock
  10. jimmer
    and the Indians...
  11. jimmer
    Let's hope those Ks continue as well as the other peripherals trending so well the last select months.
  12. jimmer
    Except it wasn't one month where his ERA wasn't stellar it was two. Two out of four. But hey, I'm not the one who even likes to point to ERA as an kind of telling stat anyway. At least not on a year to year basis. I wasn't the one who pointed it out as a stat to consider to begin with. But if you are going to look at monthly ERAs and include or exclude as a basis of performance, look at them all individually. That would require looking at June's 4.70 ERA too. And if we want to say April was an outlier for his ERA this year and discard it as more or less meaningless in regards to his current ability, why isn't the May ERA too? Because that was amazingly awesome, no? But we have no problem including that in his actual performance evaluation? We think an ERA of 1.36 is closer to his true ERA, with those peripherals?
  13. jimmer
    except one of the three stats you JUST used to say he was above average was ERA. (while I used FIP, K/9 and WAR). So we don;t use ERA on a month to month basis to evaluate? We toss out two months worth of ERA that drag him down and include the two months of ERA that don't and use the overall as a stat to point to as him being above average by a decent margin?
  14. jimmer
    If we are dissecting his months...His God awful April? With his ERA of 4.84? Are we ignoring his June? ERA of 4.70? Half his months this season, he's been at 4.70 ERA or higher. Did his April and June drag him down or did his very good May and July pull him up?
  15. jimmer
    Dozier's WAR his first year as a full time starter (2013) was a 2.6, then 4.8 and he's on pace for another high 4 WAR this year. I'm not sure Gibson and Dozier equate. But I agree the last three years are the most prevalent for any player, assuming he has played that long. What have we seen in that time frame from Gibson?
  16. jimmer
    He's above average by a decent margin based on what? Being tied for 57th out of 94 qualifying SPs in WAR? Being 59th out of 94 in FIP? 76th out of 94 in K/9?
  17. jimmer
    I am cautiously optimistic that Gibson has turned a corner, I certainly want that to be the case, but that doesn't mean based on everything I've written, that I feel compelled to discard any info in Gibson due to having so little to use to begin with. What do we do with his last start?
  18. jimmer
    I am not faulting him, Brock. This isn't attack Gibson time. This is evaluating the player we have. He has 60 career starts. Yes he is 27, turns 28 this calendar year, so his next full season he will be? Most pitchers are who they are at his age. He has 60 career starts, an ERA of 4.33, a FIP of 4.03. He has 3.3 WAR. He Ks less than 6 per 9. There is nothing that screams this guy will be any more than average. I don't like saying that. I want all of our guys to be studs, but it's not happening with him.
  19. jimmer
    Age (and experience) IS actually relevant here. If he had more history of being a stud, I'd shake that month off. He doesn't. Most pitchers are who they are at his age. If he was in his early 20's I would agree with the development part, but he's not. How much more do MOST pitchers develop at 28? You really believe he's a stud in the making?
  20. jimmer
    You know, this is the third time in the last two days you've decided to put a label on my argument to try and discredit it. Gets a little old... So, I can't use Gibson's age against him, but you can use Tulo's age against him. Seems disingenuous. I guess goose and gander don't apply here. Age (and experience) IS actually relevant here. Most pitchers are who they are at his age. There's nothing disingenuous about the point I'm making. He doesn't have the history in the majors to put aside any stats yet, or at least give him the same benefit of the doubt you give to a player who has close to a decade of info to look at. Anyone who does statistical analysis will tell you that and will also tell you you can't apply the same benefit of the doubt to a player who has been a stud for almost a decade to a pitcher who hasn't even had two full seasons in the majors yet and has NEVER been a stud.
  21. jimmer
    No, not really. The goose and gander in the scenario couldn't be more far apart in regards to proven talent over a long period of time. Gibson hasn't played enough in the majors to give him the benefit of the doubt. If he had even two, three season in the majors as being a stud and then a bad start this season followed by a recovery, maybe. That's not the case. He has never even had one season where he's been close to being a stud and he's almost 28 already. Benefits of the doubt can't be applied evenly across the board. Some have earned it, some haven't. Tulo has, Gibson hasn't.
  22. jimmer
    Sure, as soon as Gibson has been a stud for a decade like Tulo has we can consider that. Here's hoping that happens even one season in his career. Remember, he's only got two full seasons (2016 and 2017) before he's over the hill (30) so he's running out of time. BTW, Tulo easily has the best OPS of any shortstop in baseball...even with May (which I didn't forget I just said I don't put much weight in it considering a ton of history and what he's done the other months). Does Gibson have that same track record in the majors where we can really put aside a month and say that's not him? Yeah, no...
  23. jimmer
    Tulo's OPS in 2013: .931 Tulo's OPS in 2014: 1.035 This year: Tulo's OPS in Mar/Apr: .847 Tulo's OPS in June: .965 Tulo's OPS in July: .948 Tulo's May OPS in May .677 I'm not concerned about that one month. I don't think it's indicative of his talent.
  24. jimmer
    Just last year, the two shortstops with the most WAR were Peralta and Tulo. They each had 5.3 WAR. Took Tulo 91 games to get that. Took Peralta 157 :-) And I nominate the following for the 'WTF stat of the day': the Twins had the highest WAR from the shortstop position last year. (Rockies sub shortstops, absolutely pathetic last year)
  25. jimmer
    He was the one I wanted over Gordon if we were going to draft a shortstop.
×
×
  • Create New...