Jump to content
Twins Daily
  • Create Account

d-mac

Verified Member
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    1,352

  • Joined

  • Last visited

 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

2026 Minnesota Twins Draft Pick Tracker

Forums

Blogs

Events

Store

Downloads

Gallery

Everything posted by d-mac

  1. d-mac
    Plus a catcher that could you know, not cost him strikes behind the plate.
  2. d-mac
    Fister. Heh.
  3. d-mac
    Well Forsythe has one more year of control plus an option year. Plus his batted profile is much more low risk than Dozier. Someone posted this early in the thread: http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/dodgers-trade-for-brian-dozier-basically/
  4. d-mac
    Well Steamer has him projected to pitch to a xFIP of 3.83 next year. Most pitching prospects don't have 32/33% K rates in the minors with a 5.55 K/BB ratio in the PACIFIC COAST LEAGUE. If health wasn't a factor and I had to bet on a pitching prospect to make a successful transition to the majors I'd pick De Leon.
  5. d-mac
    I don't know if AZ's problem was being taken advantage of. They just weren't making intelligent decisions.
  6. d-mac
    There's also a chance De Leon stays healthy and develops a quality breaking pitch. Adding that third pitch basically means that becomes a top of the rotation guy. Basically, the only risk to De Leon is his shoulder. If he stays healthy he's got a really high floor even without that third pitch. There's also zero chance of Dozier helping us solve our pitching problem if we don't trade him.
  7. d-mac
    Mike dropping logic bombs.
  8. d-mac
    Bingo. Even if we assume that De Leon was the only thing offered to the Twins (I doubt it) and we peg him as only having #3 starter upside (I view him as a future #2) trading Dozier may have been the best move. Yes, you don't want to sell low on your prized asset, but at the same time you can only take what the market will give you. Price or value is determined by what the purchaser willing to pay (sorry Karl Marx, but I'm dropping economic truth bombs up in here). Dozier will not help solve our run prevention problem. He alone cannot return us to contention. But we have a ready replacement for him and getting back a young, cost controlled, #3 starter will go along way to getting us there. It's hard to imagine that anything better will be offered at the deadline or next offseason. The next course of action in this case should be to extend Dozier and trade Polanco. But that proposition is risky for a rebuilding club based on Dozier's age and inconsistency. So I expect the Twins to take the "do nothing and pray for season ending injuries of other team's secondbasemen."
  9. d-mac
    Fangraphs has us pegged for 4.61 runs scored per game (9th in AL) and 5.01 runs allowed per game (dead last in the AL) in 2017.
  10. d-mac
    Same logic applies to the stupid and by stupid I mean completely moronic extension of Suzuki in the midst of a career year.
  11. d-mac
    It is certainly possible that what necessitated the surgery was affecting him back in 2015. That to me seems the most likely explanation for his decreased velocity. However, if it is not like Brock mentioned, then he is toast. I too would stick him in the pen to start the year.
  12. d-mac
    Ditto. I wouldn't have thought twice about going. But alas, I had not heard about this.
  13. d-mac
    Which is why I don't buy the "cheaper to make argument." Doesn't make sense from a basic economics standpoint. Why set up multiple processes to make multiple ball types? Streamlined production of one ball should be cheaper.
  14. d-mac
    Akbar? I hope it's not a trap.
  15. d-mac
    I hope the new regime is able to see what we have in players before they run out of options.
  16. d-mac
    I think Seth's analysis shows that the Twins were average when compared to other teams over the the entirety of 10 year sample. HOWEVER, most of their successful players were drafted in the '03-'05 years. The '06-'11 drafts were just horrendous as a whole and the argument could be made that is a major, if not the leading factor, in much of the Twins' recent run of futility. Let's look at the notable players drafted AND signed by the Twins from '06-'11 (5+ bWAR or solid chance to reach 5 bWAR in career): Danny Valencia ('06) 5.0 bWAR- only 0.8 was with the Twins.Ben Revere ('07) 6.1 bWAR- had his best season as a Twin- 2.6 WARKyle Gibson ('09) 5.0 bWARBrian Dozier ('09) 18.4 bWAR- only impact player over this periodEddie Rosario ('10) 3.3 bWAR- pretty good chance he reaches 5 WAR for his careerIn addition to this lack of success, it is entirely possible not a single player drafted and signed by the Twins will reach the majors from 2011. It's likely Jason Wheeler will reach the majors, but it's incredible that there is even the possibility of having not one cup of coffee from that draft at this point. Especially when considering that 60% of the first and supp. rounds, 50% of round 2, and 35% of round 3 from 2011 have already appeared in at least one major league game. That's 51.2% (62/121). The Twins had 5 picks in the first 3 rounds of that draft. A monkey could literally done a better job by pulling names from Baseball America's top 250 draft eligible players out of hat.
  17. d-mac
    Great! I can bring this back:
  18. d-mac
    This is awful. Thoughts and prayers to his family.
  19. d-mac
    I think that's what they're thinking with the spin rate. It's better to be at the forefront of a trend for once, instead of trying to play catch-up with previous trends a la chasing pure velocity. Besides, adding pitchers with plus spin rates is probably a better way to achieve the goal of missing bats than pure velocity. If my degree in economics and years of working in the finance industry has taught me anything, it's that being a late adopter to a trend is always a losing proposition. In other words, teams are placing a premium on velocity- no good is going to come from playing catch up and having to pay a premium, why not look for other areas in which we can gain an advantage? Otherwise we're buying high and selling low. Buy low, sell high. Always.
  20. d-mac
    Haven't you heard, velocity is so passe? But seriously, one of the big takeaways from Pitch F/x is that "effective velocity", spin rate, and command matter much more than the reading on the radar gun.
  21. d-mac
    That Eaton trade is straight high-way robbery. One of my coworkers is a WSux fan. She's pretty excited with these trades.
  22. d-mac
    Doesn't mean they believe in those metrics. All of their outfielders are well regarded defenders by traditional scouting methods of defense.
  23. d-mac
    The previous regime hated drafting college position players for some reason. Hopefully that is not something the new regime avoids.
  24. d-mac
    Exactly, so the you'd imagine the return would be high. It has to be a sellers' market for starting pitching.
  25. d-mac
    Having lived outside of MN for a number of years and then moving back, and a brother that lives in Boston, I'd say most Minnesota sports fans are generally casual and very bandwaggon-y compared to fans even across the border in WI or in Chicago. Furthermore, they don't seem to understand what it takes to make championship winning teams, are impatient, yet don't like change- which is a very difficult environment for any front office to try to navigate.
×
×
  • Create New...