Alex
-
Posts
1,032 -
Joined
-
Last visited
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 Alex
-
Some players are slow to develop because they aren't going to develop, so stating one player struggled doesn't mean all struggling players are destined for greatness, which is what this kind of stance purports. BTW, did you take a look at Morneau when comparing him to Hicks? They're development has been nothing alike except when they made their debut. Morneau destroyed the minors and didn't have a down year there. When called up he did struggle for 115 ABs, but that's it. He was then an above average hitter except for 2005 when he was slightly below average. All that said, I wouldn't trade Hicks unless he does bring back starting pitching, which I don't think he will by himself. This should be true of almost any player in the organization except maybe Sano or Buxton. Of course, that's why we're in this predicament, we don't have enough players that could bring that back.
-
I think Morneau is highly unlikely to end up on a playoff team considering his recent seasons. He's far more likely to get an opportunity on a team that is coming off a losing season or rebuilding, who can take a risk because they don't have anything better waiting in the wings.
-
Just like they dealt Shields, I think they'll deal them as long as they can get more for value for them than they would get from a qualifying offer. For Shields, they got a near major league ready player with all six years of team control, much better than a supplemental pick and the risk involved in developing the player.
-
The prevailing argument on this site (from those that argue against free agents) and from "the man" himself is that free agents are "short cuts" and we don't need them. We accept our suffering and the suffering of the fans as necessary. Signing free agents would be counter to and might actually mitigate said suffering.
-
If by Arcia "falling apart completely in the second half" you actually mean increasing his OPS by 20 points, then yes, he fell apart. His OBP and AVG did leave something to be desired, but then, wasn't he hurt as well? As for the rest, I won't disagree with you completely on Cola or Parmelee, but I don't think that Pressley or Mastro are really in the same category and shouldn't be considered fill ins because they can play any outfield position and should be 4th OF anyway. As for this point, if we're talking about better than his career numbers, you're right. However, I was referring to a better hitter than he was last season (and better than I think he'll be next season). Not to mention that if we're just looking for a DH, it really wouldn't cost that much. "Younger hitters" is a pretty big group.
-
It may have been missed, but I'm not for trading Willingham outright. I'm for trading him provided a suitable replacement bat and more flexible player (someone who isn't ideally suited to just DH) would be placed in his spot I think it's a bit much to say there is "no" downside but I definitely see more upside keeping him over Doumit.
-
Thanks, this was going to be my next point. It's not just that there's concern over whether he has declined but that if he doesn't hit well, he doesn't have much else he can do.
-
Please note my use of the words "dramatically "and "hope." Saying someone is the second best hitter on this team is like saying, well, someone is the best pitcher on this team -- ie not much. I'd argue that Arcia will probably fit that bill next year, but again, that's hope. But, more to the point, Willingham had one good month in 2013, one. I realize he was hurt some of the season and hopefully he comes back to some kind of form, but I think an .800 OPS is a questionable hope. Until he shows that last year was a fluke and not a sign of decline (not unusual in a 34 year-old power hitter -- 35 next season), I don't know how the notion that he improves the lineup "dramatically" or is the "2nd best hitter on the team" isn't debatable.
-
The problem is the lineup doesn't get dramatically better with Doumit and Willingham in there. I mean, we all hope it does, but.... I do think that part of the assumption in trading them (at least my hope) is they bring in a younger, better hitter.
-
But part of the problem with "the system" (or the theory of this one) is that it requires multiple areas to work in cohesion. If all of your pitchers are contact pitchers, you must have a lot of good fielders. This limits the kinds of players that you can pursue in free agency, and even the draft, too. For example, I think this played out in the fact that the Twins tend to struggle to develop middle infielders that can hit and cut players like Cabrera and Hardy loose while keeping Florimon as the answer at SS. When you have more variables that rely on and affect each other, the loss or weakening of that one variable decreases the final result dramatically.
-
I'd add that innings are also a hard constraint. You have a finite amount of innings to accumulate WAR so if you're counting by WAR you need good pitchers in those innings.
-
Livian Hernandez had a 5.58 ERA, an ERA+ of 77, and threw 140 IP. He won 10 games solely because of offensive support and he shouldn't be the kind of guy that supports any pitching theory. He would have fit perfectly on the 2013 Twins, and his record would have been much worse. It also seems that using pitcher wins to justify aggregate ERA theory is a kind of contradiction. If anything, his signing explains the flaw in the rules, that flaw in the theory. Finally, I'll say that while I find your theories interesting and good for generating discussion, the tone of the posts comes across as if they are some kind of indisputable facts.
-
While this may certainly be true to some extent, there will always be value to be found on the dollar as money shifts and something else becomes over/underpaid. Probably not to the extent that teams were able to find hidden gems in the past, but there's only so much money to go around. That said, because I don't think the Twins are set up to be innovative right now, I don't have confidence in them finding that value any more.
-
IIRC the Twins OF defense was the worst in the league by a lot of metrics. Even if you don't buy into those, it should be obvious more range in the outfield is the difference not just between outs and hits but also singles and extra base hits. With. a team that has the worst strikeout rate in the league, you need good defense everywhere, not just up the middle. Not sure if you watched Boston in their series but the number of balls these OF we're able to cut off and get to was notable. i also think that Hammer's defense is a big reason he has so little value, both by metrics and the fact that he's still here, even with that 2012 season. Just something worth considering.
-
It's so tiring to hear the point-of-view that argues against spending, as if those who argue for it think it's possible to build a rotation only through spending and that we could care less about the farm system. That just isn't the case, as others have mentioned, the Twins have left themselves little choice at this point. We'd all love if the Twins had shown themselves capable of drafting and developing a full rotation. Right now, the only capable pitcher -- brought through the Twins system -- anywhere near the bigs looks like Gibson and he's hasn't pitched like a top 1 or 2 (or even 3 or 4 so far).
-
Absolutely, or it's just not looked at as such an egregious offense because they're not "wrecking baseball" with gaudy numbers.
-
This one tends to get hard to debate because we tend to think "our guys" (whoever they are) aren't doing it.
-
I think this is spot on, though I'm slightly more forgiving of it at that time since the situation was far different. I don't consider them a fraud, if only because they did pretty well with the resources they had, even if there were mistakes. However, I think that some people hold up those years higher than they should be.
-
With both Willingham and Doumit's ideal position being DH and both of them being horrible in the field, I am definitely concerned about what keeping them both means for roster flexibility next season, especially the way Gardy uses veterans (though I appreciated that he benched Willingham in favor of Pinto, maybe its a sign of things to come?). If DH is their best position and they don't hit better than last season, well.... The roster crunch comes in for two reasons. They currently prevent the team from upgrading a poor hitting and poor defensive outfield via FA or trade (unless they are involved) and by midseason we could see Rosario OF, possibly Hicks, and --longshot-- Buxton. That said, they do have time to move one or either of them before that happens, but I'm at the point where I'd like to see them sign an OF that has a better track record defensively and offensively. But yeah, they don't necessarily need to move one of them yet.
-
For whatever reason you have the impression I think everything was fixable, but I don't. You seem to think I have the impression that the team could be competing for the division this year but that isn't it at all. I'm frustrated that people are giving Ryan a complete pass and making excuses on where the major league team was this season as natural or unavoidable. I'm not looking for a quick fix, even if by "fix" we mean an above .500 team. I'm looking at least for decisions that improve the team. I appreciate and understand where he started, but so little was done that we're exactly where we were at this time last offseason. I don't think the expectation of that is too much to ask and I'm certainly not willing to make the excuses you are for him about this season's team: His ability to acquire serviceable starting pitching and starting Aaron Hicks were fully within his responsibility. At this point I'm going to leave it here because we either disagree on key points, or the the focus keeps changing.
-
If you think rebuilding requires losing horribly, that's fine. I don't think it does. Now, maybe for the Twins, because of their clear struggles to evaluate and develop late first round talent in the recent years it is easier, but that's another problem. As for your litany of reasons why the Twins crashed, I don't think poor decisions and development from previous management excuse current management from the same, or at least for doing very little. The fact that I think you can both field at least a mildly competitive team and rebuild at the same time, is one of my frustrations with the last two years. Nothing was done to improve key holes in the organization on the major league team while new holes were actually created, and it sure doesn't seem like much will be done next year. I'm willing to give a pass on 2011 and some aspects of 2012, but I think 2013 was a complete mishandling and don't look forward to 2014, but I hope I'm wrong. If the Twins turn it around by 2015/16, it won't be because they lost 96 plus games three or four seasons in a row. In fact, it will have very little to do with that. It will be mostly because they had success with international talent signed prior to those years, trades, and any free agent signings. Buxton looks like he will play a role but it's hard to say with the other top picks in that timeframe.
-
Again, though the Reds didn't bottom out like the Twins have. Fair point on San Fran. I was going based off a comparison, perhaps in another thread or article that someone else made of teams that we should emulate. All I was attempting was to show that the seasons the Twins have gone through are not necessary to rebuild, and I think that's pretty clear that they don't. Sure, some teams do, and some teams are just poorly run organizations, but I'd argue that the almost complete inaction of the front office is why the Twins are where they are and not some sort of magical baseball cycle.
-
To be fair, I was referring to your use of "three years" which I thought referred to the opening three years of Target Field, and the year I was talking about should be clear based on the free agents. Regardless, he had an immediate impact on the 2012 roster, so arguing the roster was out of his control just isn't quite true.
-
Well, if you think the Twins are still suffering lingering effects from being a low-market team, that's fair. I was making a point to those who accept that the Twins are a mid-market team but also saying their struggles are "normal" for mid-market teams. If you want to say Twins are worse off than the Cardinals and Giants because they're still "in recovery" that's a different discussion, one I'd disagree with off hand, but a different one nonetheless.
-
Sorry, but the third year he had the reins for the offseason (at Target Field) and was making decisions (or not) that affected the roster. Some good, some bad, and some good then but bad now: Willingham, Doumit, Bourton, Carrol, re-signing Capps (which, btw, cost us an opportunity for a draft pick), and promoting Dozier are just off the top of my head. Heck he signed the biggest FA contract ever for the organization!