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

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 prouster

  1. prouster
    I haven't read every post in this thread, so apologies if this has already come up. To me, the trouble with WAR exists in its basic concept: it's an attempt to isolate individual performances in a team sport, wherein individual performances are dependent on team performance and other externalities. I don't think it's possible to separate the individual from his context, because his actions *make* some of the context in which he exists. This is why the problem of including some lucky elements while excluding others comes up in the first place--the outcome of one event is always related to the outcomes of other events. I suggest revising how we think of individual performance. A player is always responsible for some things, but that player and his actions are nodes in a larger network of people and events. WAR as it currently exists doesn't really allow for that version of reality.
  2. prouster
    I generally agree. To me, the big issue with sabermetrics is that we often treat it as a set of objective accounts of What Happened, when it's actually a way of narrating events. People commonly talk about narrative and statistics as if they're different things, when they are really just different modes of description. Sabermetrics, to me, suddenly works a lot better after acknowledging that it's slippery and subjective and indeed serves a narrative function.
  3. prouster
    What a bunch of clowns.
  4. prouster
    Ok, but those parameters would prevent them from making any serious offers to top tier free agents. At any rate, there's plenty of money to go around if they want to spend $25 million per year on one player and extend several others. They have literally almost no money committed after 2019.
  5. prouster
    In this day and age, that seems reasonable for a front of the rotation arm, in my opinion. He's no Kershaw, of course, but Kershaw might bring in $40 million annually with his next contract.
  6. prouster
    https://www.sbnation.com/2017/11/30/16719954/yu-darvish-free-agent-rumors-twins-yankees-cubs-brewers In this article, Grant Brisbee predicts that Yu Darvish will sign with the Twins for pretty reasonable terms.
  7. prouster
    I get your point, and I don't think it's wrong. That said, I think a better explanation is probably that there was no reason to spend big coming off such a terrible season, as a few others have alluded to. Alternatively, maybe they saw some untapped upside on the roster that didn't pan out as hoped (some MiLB relievers, Gibson, etc.).
  8. prouster
    That's a good point on what American-born means. Nishioka has literally nothing to do with Otani or Darvish.
  9. prouster
    Every year amateur American players get multi million dollar signing bonuses, many of whom never play in the majors. My point is that national origin has nothing to do with a player's success. Plenty of Japanese players have had fine MLB careers (Nomo, Ichiro, Matsui, a bunch of relief pitchers). Plenty have also busted. Are you skeptical when the Twins draft Caucasian players from the U.S. because Adam Johnson busted?
  10. prouster
    Park is from Korea, and Otani is from Japan. They're separate countries who have historically hated one another. Do you apply this standard to American-born players? Plenty of them have busted much worse than Park.
  11. prouster
    How do you feel about Stewart? It's definitely not a perfect comparison, but their MiLB track records aren't all that different.
  12. prouster
    This is a great approach for the post season, but I don't think it would be sustainable over a 162 game schedule.
  13. prouster
    I don't think they will. That's why I think whoever gets Stanton will get a slight discount in prospects.
  14. prouster
    So the Marlins should expect the same return whether they dump the whole contract on a team or pay it themselves? Alright, then.
  15. prouster
    I don't think any team will approach negotiations ready to offer the same package with or without taking on that contract. He was worth a lot in 2017, and though he's been good for most of his career so far, he has had a couple seasons dramatically affected by injuries. He's definitely not a lock to put up 7 WAR again. A high quality ball player for sure, but there will be a discount for a team who takes on salary. That's just kind of how it works.
  16. prouster
    I doubt they'll go after Stanton, and I don't think they should. For the sake of the hypothetical, I don't think they'd have to give up that much if they ate most of or all his contract. Stanton For: Gordon Jay Salary Relief ???
  17. prouster
    The danger with letting him play in the outfield is that he'll almost certainly have to make some max effort throws on his days off from pitching.
  18. prouster
    I think you're right. Although everything being equal, it's nice to have more money than 27 other teams.
  19. prouster
    https://www.mlbtraderumors.com/2017/11/latest-on-shohei-otani-4.html Apologies if this isn't the appropriate thread, but MLB Trade Rumors mentions in the linked article that the Twins are one of six teams that could offer Shohei Otani a seven figure contract. They have about $3.25 million in their international bonus pool, virtually the same amount as the Yankees. Texas is the only team that could offer more. It's possible the Twins could jockey for position via trades for additional pool money (the article doesn't say this, just my two cents).
  20. prouster
    I agree that he's bounced back strongly, and I don't feel all that passionately that the TJ surgery is that much of a red flag given his performance since. Still, it is a red flag, and given his age I think it would be foolish to ignore it entirely. I think your second paragraph may be responding to somebody else.
  21. prouster
    Why do you say this?
  22. prouster
    One pretty big injury.
  23. prouster
    Hughes in his current state absolutely couldn't match up, but in the first year of his contract he finished fifth among all MLB pitchers in fWAR, ahead of Jon Lester, Chris Sale, Max Scherzer, Stephen Strasburg, Madison Bumgarner, and a whole bunch of others. That's a legit top of the rotation arm. Too bad he got hurt. Otherwise, I agree with pretty much everything you say here. I'm on the Cobb bandwagon, though, because I think he offers the best balance between upside and what the team is likely willing to spend. Otherwise, I think they should focus their resources on the bullpen and signing core players to extensions.
  24. prouster
    Peak Hughes put up a 6 fWAR season, which is better than Darvish has ever done by almost a win and a half. We wouldn't be having this conversation right now if the Twins had a 6 win pitcher in their rotation. It's only one example, of course, but we're able to talk about who the Twins should sign largely because Hughes wasn't the kind of guy you'd give a 7 year deal at 25 million or more AAV. I say spend, but do it wisely.
  25. prouster
    Hughes pitched like a no. 1 in the first year of his contract, and Santana has already exceeded the value of his contract. So there are two examples. The argument isn't, "they shouldn't spend"; it's more like, "spending big might not work as well as we hope, and it actually might hurt in the long run."
×
×
  • Create New...