Jump to content
Twins Daily
  • Create Account

Squirrel

Community Moderator
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    34,841

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    167

 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 Squirrel

  1. Squirrel
    Yep ... there was premeditation in all of this. There always is in a lockout. And perhaps the teams who made the biggest splashes are the ones leading the charge? I do wonder. I mean, could it be baseball's moment of 'insider trading'? Although, we have known that a lockout was going to happen for some time, but you don't really know for sure until it's for sure.
  2. Squirrel
    Yeah ... that's basically what I thought and was in agreement with ... a stoppage will hurt, no matter who stopped it. But, a lockout is ownership's/management's version of a strike. And it can last however long they want it to. It's up to them to end it, and only them. And put it this way ... and maybe this is my 'jaded' viewpoint ... they have less reason to really care. They have their money, they've shown they don't really care about the sport except for what they can make from it, so ... they have no incentive to end it. They hold the cards, so to speak, and they will hold them until they bleed. So they can reap more rewards because they know the players will want to play. They will keep the lockout in tact until the players acquiesce. I'm not even sure what a compromise would look like in this instance, but, in any negotiation (if a true negotiation resumes), for it to be a true compromise, neither side will completely like it or hate it, but they will be happy to be back to work. (In my experience as a union person who has been through several contract negotiations in my lifetime.)
  3. Squirrel
    I'm sort of confused by some of this. Over all, I agree ... a work stoppage isn't going to help anyone. But the players aren't striking, nor will they strike, because they have been locked out. These are two separate things, a lockout vs a strike, not at all the same or for the same reasons. In 1994 it was the players who struck which resulted in a work stoppage. This time, it's the owners who have ... well ... 'struck' ... by instituting a lockout. In this instance, it's the owners saying 'Do it our way or no way, so we're done here' and ended negotiations. And the statement they released was pretty dishonest, imo. I hope, though, that it doesn't come to an actual stoppage of baseball in a few months from now, but it could. It's up to the owners to end the lockout and come back to the bargaining table. It sounds like there may be some communication happening? I could tell for sure. But mostly, this is the owners' attempt at grandstanding. If they do end the lockout, could the players still strike? I suppose? But basically it's the owners who have done so this time. Depending on the resolution ... will the owners be allowed to continue to ruin the sport or not? ... I'm probably done spending any money on the team. I'll watch what I can from out of market, which isn't much, but I won't buy a subscription to watch MLB games, I won't be spending money on going to games or at games, I won't be buying their products online. I'm done supporting owners amassing wealth at everyone's expense.
  4. Squirrel
    I will probably watch way less because I don't think i will get an MLB subscription next year (I'm out of market), nor go to many (if any) games live. I just can't continue to support the MLB and the owners with my hard-earned money while they do their best to ruin the product on the field. But ... that still depends on what results come of this. Lockouts are pettiness of those in power. They are very different from strikes. Very.
  5. Squirrel
    Wow! We just got that in under the wire! Whooh.
  6. Squirrel
    If you see what I wrote earlier I said that I didn’t think this was the right target for a trade involving Arraez
  7. Squirrel
    Unless they sign someone else, which I doubt, it looks like what gman said above ... Gordon for a spot start here and there to give Buxton a day off. Even Kep could do that less often. If Gordon hits the IL, Celestino will be called up
  8. Squirrel
    Well ... okay, we are getting off topic here ... we have different ideas, and that's good, but this thread is about a potential trade involving Arraez. We need a legit SS and we need pitching. Since we have failed in free agency, will we trade for what we need? We aren't going to get anyone good if we don't trade someone good. Who is expendable for a trade, who has good value, who could be part of a package to get someone good in return? Someone will likely get traded and it's not going to be someone who is on the downside of their career with a big contract. It is going to be someone young with value. Who on the team would you trade then, if not Arraez, to get a quality SS or pitcher in return? I don't agree with the OP's suggestion, but I do agree that Arraez could be a good piece in a trade and should be used if there is an opportunity to do so. Let's hope the FO creates a good opportunity for a good trade. I liked and hated the Graterol for Maeda trade but I still think it was a good trade ... we gave up someone good for what we needed. So, I ask again, if not Arraez, who do you package in a trade to fill what we need? If we are quibbling about who plays where and how it could work to squeeze everyone in, there is opportunity to create room for a trade.
  9. Squirrel
    I think Celestino will be ready to take over the role sooner than 2023. He really came on strong at the end of 2021. A little more AAA seasoning and I think he will be ready to fill that role mid-season. For half a season I don't think Gordon and Kepler are that stinky.
  10. Squirrel
    I’m not but it’s silly to carry someone who never plays. He’s not a SS, he’s a utility fielder. I would bet Garver is not behind the plate 5 days/week
  11. Squirrel
    Gordon, Kepler until Celestino is ready mid-season
  12. Squirrel
    Garver will also get time at 1st and DH. And Gordon only playing 1/week? Hmm ... not sure this will happen
  13. Squirrel
    Forgot Garver ... but I edited my comment about Kiriloff. Yup.
  14. Squirrel
    No, it doesn't. Neither Miranda nor Arraez is a starting 3B. Both are good bats but are not as good defensively as Donaldson. And Miranda has yet to hit major league pitching. Getting rid of Donaldson too soon solves nothing and makes the team worse.
  15. Squirrel
    Even when we get a SS? Has Arraez ever played at 1st? Miranda can play the 3 positions. And then Gordon? Don't forget to get him into the lineup from time to time, too. I thought that Sano would be DH/1B, with Kiriloff there, too, as well as LF ... Either someone in the infield is traded or Miranda starts the year in AAA.
  16. Squirrel
    I don't think it's wrong to use Arraez as a trade chip, although I'd rather he be used to acquire pitching, but I think it's more the issue of the target in this case. I get that we need a legit SS, just not sure L-K is the one. But I also don't know who, in a trade. But I do agree, Miranda and Arraez on the same team ... at bats will be an issue. And unless Arraez is moved, I think Miranda is in AAA and gets the first call up when someone is injured.
  17. Squirrel
    How soon for Celestino to be considered the backup? If at all? Another season of ... seasoning?
  18. Squirrel
    This thread quickly aged to moldiness
  19. Squirrel
    Obviously no one ...
  20. Squirrel
    I said this elsewhere but it seems that some teams (Rangers, Mets) have no strategy and are just buying to buy, while other teams have no strategy and are just sitting and watching ... ?‍♂️ And I'm sure teams have their strategies, but from my pov, it just is weird.
  21. Squirrel
    Horrible. The administrator resigned, but he should have been fired on the spot.
  22. Squirrel
    Further ... I get that we don't need to have a rotation of aces, we could do fine with 2's and 3's ... but we don't even have that. Some of our rookies, who have yet to even see time in the majors, *may* turn out to have that potential (Balazovic), but to count on that for this year??? Ugh. Cmon. Yeah, I'm grumpy right now. Really grumpy. With a massive, almost-migraine-like headache.
  23. Squirrel
    Have to say, while glad the FO got the Buxton deal done, our biggest need, pitching ... so far it's a massive fail ... I mean, yeah, I'll wait to see how it all plays out, but ... sigh ... I hate this game of waiting, waiting, waiting ... until ... 'Oh, so and so's left! yah!' Especially when it seems DOABLE!
  24. Squirrel
    That's a different topic for a different thread, which you are welcome to start. But I don't want to drag down this transaction/news thread with this exploration that will take it off the rails. Thanks.
  25. Squirrel
    Yep. As I said in another thread, this contract is the compromise between Superstar Buxton and Oft-Injured Buxton. If he were just the former, he’d get double that, and still a no-injury guarantee. He could stay healthy (probably not), but he could. This is a happy median contract, imo. Very smartly done.
×
×
  • Create New...