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
    I don't understand. Keuchel and McCullers were drafted and developed. Morton was a low-key FA signing that probably would have been lampooned here had the Twins done it. Fiers was left off the WS roster. Peacock was a tertiary piece in a trade several years ago, which seems to support the idea that you should try to maximize the value you get when making moves, rather than accepting whatever the other team offers. Verlander is an aging pitcher on a large contract with a track record that may get him into the HOF. He was acquired by sending a few solid prospects to Detroit. This is the exact opposite of trading Dozier for JDL. So, I'm having difficulty figuring out your point here. Are you referring to their success hoarding young position players? Because that's what the Twins are already doing.
  2. prouster
    I think the point is that there's no use in controlling a player for several years if he can't stay on the field. Will JDL overcome his injury problems? Maybe, but I wouldn't give up a player of Dozier's caliber to find out.
  3. prouster
    Trading Dozier for JDL straight up would not have been building beyond 2017.
  4. prouster
    I just think this is a myopic view. Teams don't get better by making bad trades. They just don't. Yes, it made sense in theory to trade Dozier. However, from all available accounts, the actual return would not have justified the move. I'm not saying this with the benefit of hindisght (which is a benefit re JDL), because it's what I thought last winter when they decided to keep him. Personally, I don't think trading players is the same as selling an old van--you don't set a price expecting to settle for the best offer that comes your way. Indeed, we can actually say the Twins were the ones who set the market price, but the Dodgers weren't willing to pay it.
  5. prouster
    Exactly. I can't believe people are still harping on this.
  6. prouster
    Got it. The only examples that count are the ones that support your argument. I'll use those going forward. Anyway, I think Cobb would be a nice get. I agree with others who would rather see them allocate FA dollars to the bullpen.
  7. prouster
    My guess is it's probably harder than it sounds. (Also, Santana was rule v, Liriano came in an off season trade, Hughes put up 6 fWAR in the first year of his contract. So yes, they actually have acquired high quality pitching in off season transactions since 1992. You actually don't need to guess about this.)
  8. prouster
    "Get good pitchers," a novel idea that I'm sure no one on the organization has run up the flag pole.
  9. prouster
    Never said I was cool with it, just that the options were Gee etc. + Dozier or Gee etc. - Dozier. Given those choices, I'll take the former ten times out of ten.
  10. prouster
    Personally, I prefer Gee etc. with Dozier on the roster than Gee etc. without Dozier. As others have pointed out, DeLeon provides no value if he's injured, which has been a major and persistent problem throughout his young career. There's no way to say the Twins botched this with a straight face.
  11. prouster
    I don't think the argument is "don't trade prospects." I think that in general it's "the Twins don't have the quality/quantity of prospects needed to land a guy that will move the needle enough to justify gutting the farm." That seems like a pretty big difference to me. I dunno, I'm not sure why anyone would need to shroud their opinions in euphemism.
  12. prouster
    I think the point is that he's young, controllable, has interesting stuff, and wouldn't cost a ton in prospects for the reasons you mention. I doubt it would take even one top 100 guy. And remember, some of the best pitchers alive were virtually unknown as prospects.
  13. prouster
    Because the home stats are part of his body of work.
  14. prouster
    I think it's possible, if only because his FIP rose pretty significantly, as well as the arbitration debacle last year. The Yankees have more than enough bullpen arms to offer him at a bit of a discount.
  15. prouster
    On his chat today, Dave Cameron said that he thinks a Betances trade is the single most likely transaction of the offseason. The walks have been a big issue lately, but he could be a nice buy low candidate.
  16. prouster
    Ideally, they'd lock up all of Berrios, Buxton, Sano, Kepler, and Rosario. Realistically, I think the majority are going to want to test the market. I think the most appealing balance between cost and upside is Buxton. He's had enough struggles so far to give the FO some leverage, though he has performed well enough to certainly justify at least talking about an extension. I don't know, maybe that second fact is enough for him to want to reach free agency as quickly as possible. In any case, I doubt they'll be able to lock up all of them, given the increasing rarity of pre-arb extensions. If it was my choice, I'd prioritize Buxton.
  17. prouster
    Why does his age matter?
  18. prouster
    Right. What I meant was, "more competent than what they had this year." So (relatively) competent would have been more accurate.
  19. prouster
    Congrats to Molitor. Now let's see how he does with a (more) competent pitching staff.
  20. prouster
    This raises an interesting question. Are these numbers meant to be predictive, or are they more, "here are the odds of a team making the playoffs having done what this team has done"? Does that language capture the difference I'm trying to describe?
  21. prouster
    Yeah, they've wet themselves against some good teams. But they also swept Cleveland and Arizona earlier this year. I agree they need pitching. My main point: this is a weird team.
  22. prouster
    It seems to me you all actually kind of agree.
  23. prouster
    I think the issue is that there's simply more to lose with Gonsalves. My guess is that they want to be sure he's ready, which we can't really know from the stat line alone. If they rush him and he fails, then there's probably some serious doubt about how effective he can ultimately be. But if a guy like Melville bombs, they're basically out a spot start or two. Much less is at stake. So, I'm assuming it's a risk-reward thing. Whether this is the proper way of deciding about calling up players is debatable. Personally, I can't find fault with keeping Gonsalves down for the time being. Maybe he gets a cup of coffee in September, maybe not until spring. Either way, he's going to have a role on the team.
  24. prouster
    "Buying" and "selling" aren't mutually exclusive. Acquiring Garcia doesn't prevent them from dealing Santana/Dozier/Kintzler. They also suddenly find themselves with another Major League arm that we know other teams are interested in—there's nothing stopping them from dealing Garcia. I think it's perfectly reasonable to try and improve the immediate roster and try to acquire assets for the future.
  25. prouster
    A different way of looking at the draft in general is that it's a way to build a sustainable pool of talent, rather than a way to complement the existing roster. The assumption that many seem to hold is that the Twins are on the cusp of competitiveness, which apparently won't/can't last long. The underlying argument is that they should inflate the bubble, burst it, and eventually rebuild again. I'd rather they stockpile as many talented youngsters as possible, regardless of position, so they can plug them into a fully functioning lineup as needed.
×
×
  • Create New...