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

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

The Minnesota Twins Players Project

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 jimmer

  1. jimmer
    Or Slowey, or Perkins, or Lohse... and no joking, like I was doing, was going on when THAT stuff was being said. But, in any event, thank goodness he's gone.
  2. jimmer
    yeah, it was just a joke, hence the smiley face. no need to believe everything is meant maliciously. P.S. What is the interenet? ;-)
  3. jimmer
    everyone will be available with the possible exception of Arrieta.
  4. jimmer
    I've written that in here a bunch of times :-)
  5. jimmer
    Nah. Can't be.
  6. jimmer
    Ah, come on, a degree in physical education from University of Wisconsin-Madison is nothing to sneeze at :-)
  7. jimmer
    my bad
  8. jimmer
    and they knew he wasn't when he showed up to spring training, but they decided to play him in the OF anyway ;-) BTW, are we even taking into account how bad he actually was and the fact that they decided to never put him back out there again? If it was such a good idea (and a success), why not put him back?
  9. jimmer
    Um, no, scorekeepers were much harder on fielders in the old days. They expected major leaguers to make major league plays until like 20 years ago (or around when money started getting ridiculous and players regularly called the scoring booths all ticked off that scorers dared give them an error.). Now I think the standard is high school level defense when it comes to scorers. For example, an OF is running full speed (for him) and a ball goes in and out of the glove. Guy didn't dive, ball just bounced right off hiss open face glove. The batter gets an inside the park HR, no error. Yeah, that happens. We got an inside the park HR that way this year. I also doubt Ozzie EVER gets 20 error in a season if he played today.
  10. jimmer
    In the 70s, how good were 3Bs at catching pop-ups in the IF? :-)
  11. jimmer
    you are looking at one years worth of data. Additionally, isnt the point to trade him to a team where we woukd get the most value in return? That happens when we trade Dozier to a team that needs a 2B.
  12. jimmer
    doziers value stems from him being a power 2B who plays okay defense.
  13. jimmer
    no it isnt. DRS is adjusted by play (the number will move up and down through the season)and Sanos DRS stopped at -8 when he stopped playing RF. If he had kept playing, it likely ends up in the -20s. Unlike UZRs extrapolated number, UZR/150, there is no DRS/150
  14. jimmer
    and -8 DRS in only 313 innings in RF, which if extrapolated to, say, 950 innings or so would have had him dead last for qualifying RFs. Even without extrapolating, only two qualifing RFs had a DRS worse than -3. Bruce at #16 of 17 qualifying RFs had -11 DRS, of course, he played almost 4 times as many innings out there. 42 players had 300 or more innings in RF this year, 3 had a worse DRS. I already mentioned Bruce as one, another was Trumbo who had -9, and more than twice as many innings out there.
  15. jimmer
    http://www.dailyherald.com/article/20160717/sports/160719177/ "He's probably gone from a 45 to a 55 defender over the past year. Maybe even a 60 defender. He's really gotten that good," Maddon said. "He's an above-average right fielder, left fielder, third baseman.' http://www.cubsrelated.com/2016/05/kris-bryant-20-now-featuring-elite.html 'Now we're into 2016 and Cubs fans are loving what they've seen from the new evolution of Kris Bryant, a versatile multi-positional athlete who runs hard and fast, bashes baseballs, takes walks... ...and plays truly elite defense? Yeah' http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/kris-bryant-might-be-the-best-all-around-player-in-the-nl/ 'Bryant’s unlikely to be as valuable defensively going forward as his current UZR suggests, but with 2,300 innings of very positive data and a lot of other markers that suggest Bryant utilizes his athleticism in exceptional ways, it seems likely that he’s at least an above average defender.' http://thecomeback.com/theoutsidecorner/2016-articles/kris-bryant-becoming-elite-defender.html 'In Bryant’s case, though, it’s becoming evident that we’re seeing enough to declare this guy a very good, if not potentially elite (someday), defensive player.'
  16. jimmer
    Exactly. Santana was arguably their best offensive weapon during the season, but he is a DH. Their choice was sit him for a couple games, or have him play OF and take their chances. Thats different than Francona saying at the beginning of the season 'lets make Santana our permanent LF.' when the DH option is there.
  17. jimmer
    i have watched him play a lot AND by looking at his advanced metrics, they match what my eyes have seen. I see A very good defender having a poor defensive offseason (of which i have watched every game), which many of my friends who are cubs fans, including one of my best friends, also say. Bte, sano is horrible with DRS and is negative at UZR. The eyes say the same as the metrics.
  18. jimmer
    Kris Bryant has been a quality defender everywhere they have put him. He is an example of an athletic person whose athleticism actually shows up in the field, as opposed to a person who has his athleticism raved about but cant play defense.
  19. jimmer
    adding a horrible pitcher sweetens the deal? Dozier and Gibson don't come close to getting a potential ace, much less also a catcher.
  20. jimmer
    So the sample size of RusseIl is ok to use if it it's shown as a positive comparison for Gordon, but not when it makes it look negative for Gordon by comparison? Interesting. I never said the wRC+ suggestion for Gordon was scientific. Then again, I wasn't the one who brought up Russell as a comparison to begin with. And I wouldn't have made the comparison, considering Russell was much better at A+ level (not to mention a much higher regarded prospect overall), but you did, so I went with it. I doubt a couple scouts saying Gordon will be great defensively (or overall) is very scientific either. Um, Seager's actual UZR this season was over 10 and his UZR/150 was over 11. Both of those are well above average, not a little above average. In fact, it's classified as 'Great' http://www.fangraphs.com/library/defense/uzr/ Then again, I never said Seager was a great defensive shortstop, just a great overall shortstop. Likely the unanimous NL ROY this year and likely top 3 in MVP voting.
  21. jimmer
    If you say so. I disagree. There are some worse MLB TV broadcast teams, for sure, but not many.
  22. jimmer
    Since you meant just defense, scouts have said things about his defense from 'Will stick at shortstop' to 'will be great' And some comments in between those two descriptions. Let's hope for great, I'm all for it. He definitely has the arm strength for the position.
  23. jimmer
    Yeah, when I read it, I had no idea defense was all you were talking about, which I think was obvious as I continued the debate. If I had know you were only talking defense, the whole conversation is different. In any event, I can't argue with the idea that whenever he reaches the majors, he'll be great defensively. If people believe that, cool. Hope it happens. Also hope we see him some time in 2018.
  24. jimmer
    Here is the quote I was originally responding to. 'They can always get Zack Cozart for 2017. Nick Gordon will be great 2018 and beyond!' When I see someone say a player will be a great shortstop I think overall game. Curious how many times I have to talk about offense AND defense to make that clear, or perhaps you are being deliberately obtuse. Or perhaps you just think only defense matters for greatness? Simmons is one of the best fielding shortstops ever, but even his defense can't make him a great overall player at the position.Not in today's game. You want to say Seager (who, BTW, has a very nice UZR, though a zero DRS) isn't a great overall shortstop? Or Bogaerts? When we mention a shortstop as great or not are we only supposed to be talking defensively or can we include their whole game? In fact, are players only great because of defense? Is that how we define great? If so, should we re-evaluate Sano's chances of greatness? And when I say Gordon won't be great in 2018, I'm not saying he won't be great eventually. I doubt he plays enough to be great for the Twins in 2018. Am I saying he has no chance eventually? No, I'm not saying that Is Dan's scouting saying he'll be great in 2018? As far as the 60+ wRC+, all I was doing was looking at his ISO, his BABIP, and comparing those numbers to Russell at the same level (since that was the shortstop you mentioned). Then I looked at how those numbers translated for Russell at the major league level. Seemed fairly obvious what I was doing when comparing their A+ level numbers then mentioning where Russell was at offensively in the majors, but I'm happy to spell it out for you again.
  25. jimmer
    I get that, but that's less of a thing than it used to be now that there are five playoff spots per league. More teams are in the playoff hunt for a longer amount of time and, therefore, less likely to put out spring training type lineups down the stretch.
×
×
  • Create New...