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
    How he said it was just fine. You and twinsajsf chose to read into it. Players can get to a point where they have reached their potential AND ALSO maintain that level. If he wanted to say he was expecting them to collapse (which he never came close to suggesting) or heavily regress (again, didn't come close to saying that either), he would have said that like he did about Santana in the same sentence. The fact that he chose not to say that at the same time he pointed out Santana's likely regression should tell you something. Even if he expects some negative regression by Plouffe and Dozier, by not saying saying it, he may just feel it would be very slight so as not to even warrant mentioning. And since Dozier and Plouffe took a 2 and 3 WAR jump respectively, they would have to do what they did last year for a few years to say they have plateaued. Peak is likely the better word. As in 'they finally got to their peak and now, hopefully, they maintain it to create a plateau of performance'. You can't be said to have plateaued after having one big jump in performance which had never occurred before. And did you say he didn't mention Mauer as a potential in improvement for Mauer because there was a whole paragraph about Mauer. On top of that, he only has so much room to discuss a team. He isn't going to write a 20 page dissertation on each team, nor should he have to. You want him to break down everybody on the probable 25 man roster and all potential callups for each team?
  2. jimmer
    Read rule 6.02. Might answer that question. I'd copy and paste but it's blocked.
  3. jimmer
    I only remembered the one time, the Betancourt game. Like you, I never thought it was widely enforced.
  4. jimmer
    not me. I'm excited to see what the Cubs do this year :-)
  5. jimmer
    RULE 8.04 'When the bases are unoccupied, the pitcher shall deliver the ball to the batter within 12 seconds after he receives the ball. Each time the pitcher delays the game by violating this rule, the umpire shall call “Ball.' 'The 12-second timing starts when the pitcher is in possession of the ball and the batter is in the box, alert to the pitcher. The timing stops when the pitcher releases the ball. The intent of this rule is to avoid unnecessary delays. The umpire shall insist that the catcher return the ball promptly to the pitcher, and that the pitcher take his position on the rubber promptly. Obvious delay by the pitcher should instantly be penalized by the umpire.' According to the article provided, it's been enforced rarely in the modern day. Gives a couple examples. haven't seen an example when a batter was charged a strike. http://www.baseballprospectus.com/article.php?articleid=23669 Might help if they enforced rule 6.02.
  6. jimmer
    24 year old Scherzer had a 3.0 WAR his first, and only, full year starting in Arizona. During his brief time in Arizona, he sported a 3.73 FIP and a 3.86 ERA and more Ks than IP. I don't think it was a stretch to think he might be extremely good. I don't think he was over-hyped.
  7. jimmer
    I've watched Hunter play a lot over the last two years, he's a mess out there. My eyes and the metrics agree. And, you know, at almost 40, one would expect that.
  8. jimmer
    Pitching that was affected a lot of defense, which is still a problem. Defense played by position players, including one of the worst framers in the game. Our rotation was 18th in WAR, but our defense, oh my.
  9. jimmer
    'But the Twins do have a solid roster right now, which is why they were 7th in all baseball in runs.' Do we assume the offense will just stay that good because it was that good last year? And what about defense, or do we not look at that when talking about how solid our roster is? Isn't that part of player evaluation? Anyway, with such a clearly solid club, we should be division contenders. How did we do so poorly last year? I look forward to seeing that happen.
  10. jimmer
    'For the record, I didn't actually disagree with either of those points. Rather, my point was that simply noting Santana's likely regression and that Plouffe/Dozier will likely stay the same and not improve enough to offset Santana, constitutes insufficient evidence (i.e. lazy anaylisis) that the Twins will be worse offensively.' I don't think he said we'd be worse offensively. He said, 'There is potential here on offense, which ranked fifth in the league in runs. But I don't see any improvement coming there'. That just says he doesn't see improvement, and I don't think he should get slammed for saying they won't improve on being 5th in the AL runs scored.
  11. jimmer
    I don't think that's true, but okay. I think most teams have some weaknesses, but I don't think it changes anything in regards to our team though. We won 70 games and went out and got a #3 starter and a soon to be 40 year old as our major additions. A few teams in our divisions seemed to have gotten better and/or were already/still better and we seem to be playing a tougher schedule. The young guys aren't established yet, or up yet. Our defense is very bad (and wasn't addressed in the offseason as of yet), making or not very good pitching staff look even worse. Anyway, projections haven't looked good for us so far, and I don't think that means they are lazy or just blind. Let's see who projects/predicts us to do better than 20th in win-loss record.
  12. jimmer
    It's going to be a well constructed team, hopefully, in the future (if a good chunk of our prospect turn out), but it's not as of 2015. Having statues in the corners, possibly starting an IF in CF, having likely the worst defensive catcher, not having a proven shortstop, and not having much of a bench at all as far as quality or experience is not a well constructed team.
  13. jimmer
    Yes, but only if we figure we'll get exactly the same performance we did last year from everyone and that replacement level remains the same. Unfortunately, some will do better, so will do worse. Can't just say we got this last year and only have to add X amount. And I know you aren't necessarily saying that, it's just that some will make that error.
  14. jimmer
    when I wrote: 'Fangraphs projects us to be 27th' I meant ZIPs, which can be found on Fangraphs, but isn't done by Fangraphs.
  15. jimmer
    Most fantasy sites value pitcher stats that aren't necessarily great indicators of pitcher's performance, like Wins and ERA. And another stat that they value strikeouts, we aren't exactly great at. So it's not surprising our fantasy SP rankings would be lower than the actual skill of the pitchers themselves.
  16. jimmer
    I think our OF defense could very well be worse based on adding a soon to be 40 year old RF who has rated as the worst defensive RF and Arcia changing corners. I don't think it's lazy to expect Plouffe and Dozier to not improve. I think it'd be surprising if they did improve considering the jump they took and their age. Not that they are old, but that at their age players don't normally turn in yet another big jump of a season. Hunter was a below average RF, considering overall game, and as he turns 40, I don't expect much, if any, bounceback. I don't see how adding a 40 year old poor defender, with average offense for the position, as being big addition. I think there are many who don't like what people are saying about our chances this year so they are doing everything they can to nitpick the analysis to make them discredit the predictions and feel better about our chances. Fangraphs projects us to be 27th, the writer of this one predicts 27th, and I doubt we're going to get anyone who says he are better than 20th. If we do better, so be it, but I doubt everyone who does predictions are just going through the motions when it comes to our team. That's too convenient. We are a bad team as currently constructed. But hope is on the horizon and we'll hopefully see more of that this season. Gonna take time though.
  17. jimmer
    Except he didn't say he expects Dozier OR Plouffe to collapse or even regress. He expects they've peaked.
  18. jimmer
    Where does he say Plouffe and Dozier are due to collapse? He doesn't. come close to saying that. Here's what he says. 'There is potential here on offense, which ranked fifth in the league in runs. But I don't see any improvement coming there as players such as Brian Dozier and Trevor Plouffe have likely peaked and Santana regresses.' All he said was that they peaked (and that Santana is likely to regress). Meaning he doesn't expect improvement from Dozier and Plouffe. Certainly nothing about collapsing or huge regression from either of them. He didn't even put them in the 'due for a worse year' part of the article. They have likely peaked as well. They are at that age where you don't expect much more, if any, improvement. Dozier's WAR jumped almost 2 whole wins and Plouffe jumped 3 wins.
  19. jimmer
    I don't know about bigger than ever, but it's certainly being called bigger than it has been for awhile. And there are lots of articles and studies showing just that. Easy to find, just need to google it.
  20. jimmer
    it's not always about results, especially in the low ball leagues. they work on things, mostly.
  21. jimmer
    Do you like Meyer's results better than Berrios'?
  22. jimmer
    how will Suzuki do that?
  23. jimmer
    I personally have it Berrios, Stewart, Meyer. But I can't tell you with any authority that you are wrong, just saying I see it playing out that way.
  24. jimmer
    I really like Dozier and the way he plays the game. I've been a fan of his for a long time. He's a quality MLB starter material and will be for awhile. These kids we think MAY be good enough to play 2B EVENTUALLY, well, they aren't close to guaranteed to do so. I'm not comfortable with that assumption.
  25. jimmer
    Derek Jeter retiring may fix this problem altogether :-)
×
×
  • Create New...