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
    Shaw would be nice. I'd be curious to see what they'd need to offer to land Betances from the Yankees. His recent walk problems, combined with the arbitration fiasco and the number of other dominant arms in the New York bullpen, could mean he's expendable. Maybe a lower pressure environment would allow him to find himself.
  2. prouster
    This actually doesn't seem to be the case: https://www.mlbtraderumors.com/2017/11/rumors-cards-stanton-yelich-rangers-yu-cobb-tribe.html https://www.mlbtraderumors.com/2017/11/quick-hits-yu-rangers-mariners-brantley-d-backs-nats.html It'll be interesting to see how the market plays out for FA starters. With Tanaka choosing not to opt out, there's one less high profile arm available. However, some of the usual big spenders seem like they may be reluctant to add a large contract this offseason, when next year's class is packed with so much more youth and talent. MLBTR predicts Darvish going to the Cubs for 6/160, which amounts to just over 26 million AAV. This seems about right, but I wonder if his market might be somewhat depressed due to his injury history, relatively modest output in 2017, and the fact that there are several enticing options that will certainly cost less. That could open the door to a non-traditional spender (maybe or maybe not the Twins) plunking down some cash. That said, I'd rather see the Twins target a cheaper starter so that they can also fill out their pen with a couple arms and extend Buxton and/or others.
  3. prouster
    The Royals won the AL pennant the year before, so . . . two consecutive fluke years? I hope the decision makers aren't discounting proven methods of roster construction because they're less aesthetically pleasing.
  4. prouster
    Yeah, this is pretty kooky.
  5. prouster
    If Houston is the model you want to use, then ... what? Do you see why some readers may have trouble figuring out the coherence of what you're trying to say? This will be my last post responding to you. I have no more interest in debating a non-move that's almost a year old and, even without the benefit of hindsight, was clearly the proper one. Now the discussion is going every which way to no apparent end.
  6. prouster
    Are you suggesting the Twins close shop for the next five years immediately after earning a wild card spot? Trade everyone for anything? And this doesn't even begin to address any of the counterpoints I offered in my post. What do you think of Houston's methods of acquiring pitching? Because they didn't really trade veterans for prospects. Not that the Twins shouldn't—Houston is just a bad example of the point you're trying to (I think) argue.
  7. 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.
  8. 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.
  9. prouster
    Trading Dozier for JDL straight up would not have been building beyond 2017.
  10. 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.
  11. prouster
    Exactly. I can't believe people are still harping on this.
  12. 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.
  13. 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.)
  14. prouster
    "Get good pitchers," a novel idea that I'm sure no one on the organization has run up the flag pole.
  15. 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.
  16. 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.
  17. 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.
  18. 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.
  19. prouster
    I'm not sure what the right moves are. I trust that Falvey and Levine know better than me. I agree that Quintana and Gray would have been good to target. Maybe Gerrit Cole. Maybe Odorizzi. Maybe someone whose shine has worn off. Verlander's NTC was a problem, though (that's all I'm gonna say about him, because anything else will just go in circles). I think their best option is to sign a decent guy to a shortish contract (Cobb, Lynn, whom ever), then try to uncover value elsewhere, whether through trade, free agency, rule v, or international signings. Some of the best pitchers in the world weren't heralded prospects, nor was the greatest pitcher in franchise history, who happens to be one of the best lefties of the last fifty years. Also, it's possible The Guy is already in the system. This strategy may or may not take longer to pay dividends--maybe Berrios levels off next year, or maybe he puts up 8 wins--but I think it's the most prudent way for them to go.
  20. prouster
    It seems to me that there's a lot of straw-manning going on. I think the general argument against a Verlander-type trade is that the prospect cost outweighs the benefit, and that such a move, while it might have some immediate impact, would actually hurt long term sustainability. No one is arguing that the Twins shouldn't make moves, just that they need to make the right moves, which aren't always the splashy ones. As far as Verlander is specifically concerned, I think there are plenty of reasons why he was never a viable option. Listing those reasons would be redundant.
  21. prouster
    Not saying he'll be as good as either, but Jake Odorizzi might be an interesting trade target. He wasn't good at all this year, but that comes after a couple solid seasons. He was highly regarded as a prospect and may benefit from a change of scenery. What's best, he's under control for two more seasons and wouldn't cost much in prospects compared to other options. I'm definitely not saying he'll blossom into a top of the rotation starter, just that he could be a quality buy-low candidate. If it doesn't work, they won't be crippled for the next half decade.
  22. prouster
    Maybe, but injuries happen. My understanding is that while there are conventions of "clean" deliveries, no one actually knows what mechanically does and doesn't cause injury. By "know how to pitch," I didn't mean "has no room for improvement." More like, "has already proven their ability to get really good hitters out."
  23. prouster
    That's really interesting. Maybe we aren't as advanced as we think. And yeah, my other reply was meant in good fun. Apologies if it rubbed you wrong, as it apparently did someone. And don't worry, I'm not going into law or politics. Something much less consequential.
  24. prouster
    I agree with your last paragraph, although I don't think anyone here has called Bosio one of the best on earth (although it wouldn't be a stretch to make that argument, if we buy the appeal to his authority of being a now former MLB pitching coach). Coaches are fired all the time. It doesn't mean they're incompetent or that there are irreconcilable differences. Of course those reasons are sometimes true, but a given firing could be a matter of scapegoating, hasty/myopic decision making on the executive level, or something else. No idea which applies to Bosio. I think an example could be last night's ALCS game. The Astros threw a ridiculous number of breaking balls, especially after McCullers came in. Their pitching coach said afterwards that the recommendation was made by their analytics people. I think it's a matter of hiring a guy willing to convert analysis into direct strategy rather than teaching pitchers how to pitch. My impression is that while MLB pitching coaches work out kinks in guys' deliveries, they aren't really teaching mechanics. Guys who get to that level already pretty much know how to pitch.
  25. prouster
    Of course, but the tone of the Bosio posts isn't exactly charitable.
×
×
  • Create New...