Jump to content
Twins Daily
  • Create Account

prouster

Verified Member
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    1,050

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    1

 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 prouster

  1. prouster
    Why are people so turned off by Stroman? He’s young with a track record of above average to excellent performance—exactly the kind of player the Twins should be targeting for their rotation. I’m genuinely curious why some people don’t want him.
  2. prouster
    Cave on his own wouldn’t get anyone better than the guys they already have in abundance. Hand would be great, but he would probably cost Kirilloff or Graterol + others. Cleveland gave up Francisco Mejia, who was approximately the number ten overall prospect at the time of the deal. Hand is signed through at least next year. 2021 is a team option. He has one less year of control than when San Diego traded him, but he’s having the best season of his career. I’m not sure I’d send a top prospect to a still-in-it division rival. Vazquez would be great, but more expensive than Hand in terms of prospects. Giles would also be good and possibly a little cheaper, given his previous red flags. I don’t know who they’re gonna trade for. I guess my personal preference would be Giles and/or Smith. I don’t think they’ll get more than one high profile arm, in any case, and maybe not even that. Even so, I think they’ll find some guys who can pitch tough innings.
  3. prouster
    I agree. This is the most reasonable assumption, especially given what’s been reported about the Twins’ offer.
  4. prouster
    You’re right that we can’t assume they don’t want to sign here. But when they go somewhere else, we can’t rule it out unless there’s some reason to. Maybe it’s more prudent to say that Player X didn’t want to come here badly enough to take a worse/comparable offer.
  5. prouster
    Gotta say I love seeing an unapologetic misogynist like Bauer get knocked around.
  6. prouster
    This is ungood content.
  7. prouster
    The new torture rack probably doesn’t help.
  8. prouster
    I’m trying to answer a question that you (apparently?) asked using hypotheticals. They could sign everyone under slot if they wanted to. The slots exist to limit what draft picks can make. You mentioned your “argument” in a different post. I’m not sure who you’re arguing with, because it isn’t me.
  9. prouster
    I think the confusion is coming by conflating draft spending with free agent spending. Teams can spend up to X, but failing to sign a guy means they can spend up to X-Y. What they do with Y is, to my knowledge, more or less unregulated with the exception that they can’t use it on their other draft picks.
  10. prouster
    Think of the draft pools as potential spending. If they don’t sign a guy, they no longer have the potential to spend the amount slotted for that pick.
  11. prouster
    My less-than-totally-informed preference is Langeliers from Baylor. His defense is already more than good enough for MLB, and it seems like his bat has come on very strong since his hand has had some time to heal. That said, I’ll root for whoever they pick to be successful.
  12. prouster
    Sorry for the barrage of replies. I meant to edit my other post responding to yours, but looks like it’s too late. I want to mention that there’s recent precedent for this exact sort of trade happening. Chris Sale comes to mind. Verlander. Gerrit Cole. Heck, Frank Viola if you go back further. These are off the top of my head. I’m sure there are plenty of others.
  13. prouster
    I hope they don’t consider Thorpe untouchable.
  14. prouster
    Basically I’m describing Thor. The Mets are bad. It’s also not unthinkable that the Nationals would unload Scherzer and/or Strasburg if things don’t turn around.
  15. prouster
    There is no good reason whatsoever to trade anyone who has contributed to the big league club this year. Just a couple weeks ago, people wanted Castro to be DFA’d. Then Austudillo and Garver both went down with injuries. Depth is a good thing, and it’s certainly different from having a surplus. Trading Schoop or Adrianza or whoever else—and replacing them with rookies—is asking for trouble. Remember when there wasn’t a centerfielder on the roster for, like, two years? Personally, I think both Lewis and Kirilloff should be on the table if it means a top line starter with multiple years of control. Sell from the minors and try to win the dang World Series.
  16. prouster
    Because of posts like yours.
  17. prouster
    It’s worth noting that as of this morning, Baltimore’s position players have totaled more fWAR than Cleveland’s. The Orioles are one of the worst teams in recent memory, but they’re still Major Leaguers.
  18. prouster
    Maybe you should start a thread to discuss trades from past seasons. It makes the site almost unreadable when people clog every thread with the same discussion.
  19. prouster
    Great, another Pressley thread.
  20. prouster
    This is the rub. At what point to projections turn into self-fulfilling prophecies?
  21. prouster
    I think you and I agree on more things than we disagree on. My main point is that none of these guys are fighting for a roster spot in a vacuum. There’s already a lot of information about every one of them available publicly, and I’d imagine a great deal more that the clubs keep in house. And that’s before they ever sniff the 40 man. I’m not saying that no one ever does something unexpected, or that the projection systems get things right every time (I’m actually pretty skeptical of the way people tend to use projections for these and other reasons). But, I think the odds are a lot better than not that Austin won’t do a whole lot in the majors, simply because there’s a lot of information about him already, and a million other guys like him have flamed out. I don’t think he necessarily needs 1000 at bats for the front office to feel relatively confident about this. As for depth, I agree with others who have said there are a number of guys in the minors we could reasonably expect to replicate Austin’s performance if needed.
  22. prouster
    I think you’re dismissing the role of scouting and projecting way too easily. Kepler, to use your example, is extremely athletic, can play a premium defensive position well, has little mileage relative to other guys his age, and actually showed how flashy his tools can be in real minor league (and now Major League!) games. Austin has shown he can hit the ball a mile, but he has also shown his extreme defensive limitations and an alarming tendency to strike out. In other words, Kepler has proven he can do many things at the highest level; Austin has proven that he can sometimes do one thing at the highest level. Is Austin destined to fail? No. But there’s a much greater chance a guy like him will fail than a guy like Kepler. It’s not all about opportunity.
  23. prouster
    I’m surprised anyone really cares they traded Joe Benson—I mean, Tyler Austin.
  24. prouster
    So then what did today’s game show us?
  25. prouster
    Buxton had a rough game last night. But after four games, he's hitting .308/.357/.538. This adds up to an OPS of .896. His wRC+ is 168 (i.e. 68% above league average). He has added .2 fWAR to the team total. Believe it or not, the season doesn't start over every midnight. Buxton had a rough game, but he's off to the best start of his MLB career.
×
×
  • Create New...