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
    Porthos: 'Rortvedt. Isn't that a smelly kind of cheese?'
  2. jimmer
    ugh
  3. jimmer
    Well, I did say 4 OR MORE. Also possible he doesn't want to stay there since he wants to be a SS and they keep putting him at 3B. Who knows.
  4. jimmer
    It would be awesome. Big time hoping! It would be out biggest FA signing by far.
  5. jimmer
    IF they could figure out a way to extend him before the trade was finalized? Cause 4 or more years of Machado, I'd take that for those two pitchers.
  6. jimmer
    I doubt it, but we would get one year of Machado.
  7. jimmer
    Exactly this. And not to mention, though Longoria doesn't have a MONSTER contract, that has to be included when talking about value (an average of 17M a year if you count the buyout for 2023) So it's 32 year old Longoria (owed 17M a year over the next 5 years) + Archer (and his 8.5M a year over 4 years) for Sano (who isn't arbitration eligible yet) + Gonzalves who still has 6 years of control.
  8. jimmer
    its funny cause the person who asked the question was asking Erica if you were the Twins would you take it? and Eric answered in the POV of the Pirates.
  9. jimmer
    thats assuming he would take that and I wouldnt make that assumption. Hes going to get a big raise in arbitration this year and likely next. Then he will have just turned 29 as a FA.That extension suggestion is way below what he would get between arbitration and FA. That is my major concern. Is we get him and he is gone after two years.
  10. jimmer
    yeah, only having him for 2 years is the big reason I would balk at this. If I was sure the team would extend him right away, that would change things, but dont see Cole doing that.
  11. jimmer
    Not sure how I feel. I know I have never been high on Gordon (I hated it when we drafted him as high as we did and nothing has changed my mind) and it seems everytime I express my doubts about him, I am getting told I am wrong. But now we are okay with giving up 6 years of a guy thats been spouted to be an above average shortstop (a position of need for years and, if he is that, provides immense value) and Jay (another guy I didnt like from the beginning based on how high we drafted him and another guy I was knocked often for not liking) for two years of Cole? Id want someone who we would have for longer than two years, especially if Jay and Gordon are going to be as good as so many said.
  12. jimmer
    For only 2 years of Gerrtt Cole? I understand the dire need for pitching we have, but it would be Cole for two years and then he's gone. Two questions: Do we really think we have a window now? What do we think we have in Gordon?
  13. jimmer
    I really like Yelich, who comes with 5 years of control.
  14. jimmer
    it was,monetarily, not a big FA signing.
  15. jimmer
    Wait, Castro was a big signing? Anyway, when I say the big dogs eat first, I meant when it comes to the quality of players. I cant imagine we get a player like Darvish. It never even occured to me we would get Ohtani. We shop in the Cobb/Lynn type bins. They arent exactly top notch guys, but those guys we can afford to overpay to get while still not being too big of a contract by todays standards.
  16. jimmer
    We are going to get scraps. That's what we do. The big dogs eat first.
  17. jimmer
    Why are we bringing up Ryan in this? This is about the new front office. Ryan is gone. No need to slam Ryan OR preemptively defend him either.
  18. jimmer
    Nick says he didn't mean it the way it came off to at least some of us, and I believe him. And, honestly, I like a lot of what this FO has done. For me, it's a welcome change in FO ways. So I wasn't really offended. I just worry those kind of statements hurt overall conversation (which, again, I don't think Nick intended after he made his clarifying post) which is why I pointed it out.
  19. jimmer
    Yeah, I don't agree. Our team didn't play well enough in the first four months to consider too many teams a cakewalk. We were 9th in the AL in scoring and last in pitching. But hey, people have different opinions. It's fun.
  20. jimmer
    The fact that the they were surprised the team ended up going on that run after playing sub.500 ball over the previous two months, doesn't mean that, at the deadline, they made the wrong call (or that they themselves even think they did).
  21. jimmer
    Yeah, I didn't want them buying at the deadline. I thought they should have clearly been in sell mode. Just cause they ended up going on a really good run while teams ahead of them ended up crashing doesn't change that opinion. At the deadline, with like a 5% chance of making the playoffs, buying would have been a mistake. Also, no one knows if getting help would have made things better or worse. They made the moves they did and we ended up bucking the odds and getting in.
  22. jimmer
    Yes, I like that they are willing to do that as well. Overall, they have a new way of doing things and seem to be in touch with a more modern approach. I'm glad to see the change.
  23. jimmer
    I, personally, have actually been mostly happy with what the new FO has done. IMO, they have certainly made steps in the right direction. Keeping Molitor, for another example.
  24. jimmer
    Well, we only had 3 SPs who threw in triple digit innings for us last year, one of them had an FIP of 4.85 (ERA over 5.00 for the people who call that the results). We only had 5 SPs who threw more than 70 innings for us, one of them being a 44 year old pitcher who gave us a FIP of 5.31 and an ERA of 5.13. Of the 16 SPs who started for us, 11 had FIPs over 5.30. Of the five who were below a 5.30 FIP, three of them were above 4.45. http://www.fangraphs.com/leaders.aspx?pos=all&stats=sta&lg=all&qual=0&type=8&season=2017&month=0&season1=2017&ind=0&team=8&rost=0&age=0&filter=&players=0&sort=16,d
  25. jimmer
    I love all the depth we have at the 5th spot in the rotation. Three guys on the MLB roster all deserving of the title with lots of depth in the minors that can fill the same spot. :-) Lest we forget the multiple pitchers that the excuse, 'Well for a #5 guy he's not bad'(or variations of the same theme) was used. That excuse SHOULD only be able to be used on one guy in a rotation at a time, but our depth makes it possible to use that excuse for bad performance by multiple pitchers. For years.
×
×
  • Create New...