Jump to content
Our top free agent ranking is up to 75 names; click here to check it out! ×
Twins Daily
  • Create Account

KirbyDome89

Old-Timey Member
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    4,622

  • 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 KirbyDome89

  1. KirbyDome89
    In regards to the reaction, no, I wouldn't feel any differently. My quarrel has always been with s***storm that followed the twitter post. The MAGA hat just happens to be what's propping up the rationalization of that reaction in this instance. I don't believe that espousing a political viewpoint entitles those who disagree to threaten physical harm or death. In your analogy I absolutely agree. The issue is that everybody agrees on the rules of a swingers party. That isn't the case with what's considered "malicious." If the argument is that wearing the hat invites political discourse then I'm right there with you.
  2. KirbyDome89
    I wasn't aware St. Peter was part of the local crew clapping back at fans for having the audacity to criticize an embarrassingly low payroll. We've been "putting up with," ownership that has failed to properly support star players, and zero playoff success over the last 15 seasons. Just sayin' Dave....
  3. KirbyDome89
    Hop down from the soapbox and calm yourself. It isn't a comparison of the left to rapists. Your response perfectly highlights what I was talking about. The hats are certainly demonstrative, but not necessarily in support of all the pejoratives you listed above. For some reason though, we can just shrug and claim "they knew what they were getting themselves into when they put them on," as if that somehow justifies the response. That's no different than the way in which those attacking marginalized groups rationalize their actions. Seriously... Try aiming that disgust at those for whom nuance doesn't exist.
  4. KirbyDome89
    Are they racists, or is it just easier to attack an identity rather than an individual? Isn't this paragraph the type of thinking that's routinely admonished on the left? Replace MAGA hat with "short skirt," and racist with "asking for it." There's some serious disconnect here.
  5. KirbyDome89
    Instead of tethering themselves to expensive, inescapable commitments for players on the higher tiers (which, as we've learned time and time again, carry no assurances) the front office is making deals on its own terms. Apart from the Britton deal and potentially Kimbrel's would any of the relief contracts handed out this offseason damage future spending in any significant way? Honestly, there were a ton of short term deals this club could've struck with far superior talent. Also, what assurances do these bargain bin acquisitions provide? These aren't your garden-variety bargain bin signings. There's a deeper methodology in place, and I'm sure I'm only scratching its surface. The silver lining to this resource preservation is that it will give them extreme flexibility leading up to the trade deadline. Flexibility was the spin last offseason, I vote for something new this year... The goalposts keep moving in regards to when we can expect this organization to act as though they're invested in fielding a truly competitive team, and also when we should hold the FO accountable for the product on the field.
  6. KirbyDome89
    Twitter made this mess for themselves when they started picking and choosing who could and couldn't use their platform. They also tend to lean hard in one direction when it comes to what is deemed "tolerable." This banning bucks that trend a bit. I'm not a fan of censorship at all, so in a sense I agree that the banning is ridiculous, albeit for entirely different reasons. If we're upset about how Twitter handled this firestorm I think we need to be a little more honest about what was going on. There were prominent social figures, individuals with blue checks, calling for violence directed towards a 16 year old kid. That's INSANE. It's embarrassing for myself, who leans left in a lot of ways, to witness the cognitive dissonance present within the coverage and subsequent reactions. It's apparently impossible to withhold any judgement until the dust settles, because the faux moral high ground holds so much power. Rather than admit any sort of mistake, or lapse in judgement regarding the handling of the event, we're treated to media outlets attempting to rationalize the extreme positions taken by racing to find out "who started it," as if that absolves anything, or as in most cases, complete silence and removal of any potentially damning social media content.
  7. KirbyDome89
    Thats totally reasonable, I'm just much less confident that a big move is coming. Admittedly I'm a little more jaded after witnessing what was supposed to be an even better class struggle to take hold. I haven't given up on Buxton, Sano, or Kepler by any means, but there will always be another wave of talent coming. Saying we need to wait for its arrival is just a distraction from a mediocre at best on field product. In a vacuum all three signings are justifiable. In reality this team needs more. It's certainly beaten to death, but there's an effort right now to find any reason other than stinginess to explain the current situation. We can agree that it's tiring, but we also don't need to rationalize the lack of spending as patience or a savvy long term play, not that you're advocating strongly for either.
  8. KirbyDome89
    I'm failing to see how Parker and Perez are better fits than their more talented counterparts the Twins watched sign short term deals elsewhere. If those signings are financially motivated we're looking at a much larger issue within this organization... I really hope they aren't satisfied with how they've been filling gaps on this roster. IMO they've done little to nothing over the last 3 off-seasons to add meaningful talent. I'm sure the Pohlads love that the wallet is full but as was mentioned earlier, that money doesn't roll over. They aren't "saving," $30M this season and spending it on top of the supposed goal of allocating 50% of revenue to payroll next year.
  9. KirbyDome89
    Honestly, I'd rather watch this team burn through the pile of back end pitchers they have and then scour the waiver wire, than witness Perez be given every opportunity to fail. That feels like a copy/paste of a comment from a 2014 thread.... Are we at all confident this FO will move on quickly from one of their own signings, or that they'll give the other arms Perez just jumped a legitimate audition? I'm not.....
  10. KirbyDome89
    "Smart price," sounds like a very nice way of saying bargain shopping. NOBODY is interested in earning that over multiple seasons. If you're limiting yourself to "value," signings then in essence you're committing to only short term deals. It's hard for a team to fill three holes in an offseason, the odds become even less favorable as that number grows. I don't think you can truly separate contract length from talent level, or the effect that performance has. For the sake of argument lets say Gibson, Pineda, and Odorizzi all hit their ceilings. IMO they're unlikely to sign any sort of team friendly extension. The Twins haven't even been able to lock down some of the younger guys so how confident are you they'd be able to/or desire to do so with any of the above? How about paying market value to bring all of them, or any starter for that matter, back in FA? We've watched the FO successfully trade for a back end starter so there's that I guess. I'm on the Romero bandwagon but if he's the best hope they have leading in 20' I'd be disappointed barring an absolute breakout this season. All those options you presented are valid, I just don't know how much stock we should put into THIS organization exhausting all of them, and therein lies much of the angst with procrastinating adding long term talent.
  11. KirbyDome89
    I get the whole "no such thing as a bad one year deal," mantra, but it doesn't necessarily mean they're always the better option right? Couldn't we flip the above and say name a contract they've handed out that looks great due to performance and not because they could cut bait quickly? Of course we're all happy that the team could move on from Lynn and Morrison, but there's a reason those guys were fielding one year offers, and it wasn't just because the market was down. High end talent isn't signing short term deals. I wanted Darvish last offseason, and while I still think it was a bargain at the time I can fully admit that it might've been for the best that the Twins bowed out. That said, this club needs help in that high end talent department, and the whole "spend small fail small," thing doesn't particularly move the needle there. Backend starters and bullpen pieces have their place, but they aren't pushing this team towards playoff contention. I understand the patience aspect of handing out the long term deals, but honestly if they won't do it now, especially while offers are reportedly ridiculously low, then why should be bank on it happening down the line? There's plenty of room in the payroll for a Machado ect. even if the narrative is they need to "wait," on Buxton and Sano. If either of those guys falters then it's essentially another couple years of tear down anyway, at which point premium talent can be traded.
  12. KirbyDome89
    This organization loves "value," and short term deals; it's a match made in heaven. Plus when he rejects the offer we can all shrug and say "they tried, what more could they do...."
  13. KirbyDome89
    With a few of them sure, but it's been an exodus of young arms over the last couple seasons. Every team will bleed talent from time to time, but it's usually because established players are blocking younger guys. Just looking at the list of also rans who received innings, coupled with the time this team had to audition players last season it's hard to say it would've been impossible to get a better look at internal options before cutting bait.
  14. KirbyDome89
    Sometimes the process is equally important as the results. I said as much in a different thread but the level of bullpen arms this FO has brought in isn't exactly stellar. The young unknowns aren't being forced out by guys who are clearly more talented or have proven track records. Belisle, Drake, Magill, Kinley, Haley, Turley, Wilk, Rucinski, Melville, Gee, Hughes, Hale, and maybe a few more all spent time on the active roster and saw game action. A few of them were serviceable at times but if you operate on a ridiculously low self imposed budget as the Twins do, I don't understand why you wouldn't want to be certain about the players you're letting go, especially if you're going to be bringing in question marks and castoffs from other organizations.
  15. KirbyDome89
    I was hoping for moves like this, but in the opposite direction. I thought this FO would be going after hard throwing young guys with minor league success that might be a tweak or two away from being solid, controllable bullpen pieces. The Parker signing is fine in a vacuum but I don't understand: 1. Why Curtiss needed to be the roster casualty. 2. Why this FO seems to loathe any young arm they didn't acquire. Kinley and Haley were literally forced onto the active roster via the Rule V for a month each and we had the misfortune of watching Belisle try to pitch for four months last season. Did/does the leash for certain in house options need to be so short?
  16. KirbyDome89
    It'd be one thing if they were being jettisoned for established higher tier relief arms, but a lot of the guys being added to the pen have been projects or question marks themselves.
  17. KirbyDome89
    Absolutely, but all arms don't share an equal chance, some are more prone to injury than others. I agree that longterm Slegers was the right choice to remove, I just don't think it's particularly helpful for this season. IMO if they're going to rely on inexperienced arms to carry the back 1-2 spots in the rotation having another option, albeit limited talent wise, isn't an awful thing to have. SP depth might not be the biggest issue but I don't think they're out of the weeds when it comes to fielding a competent rotation, at least not for playoff contention.
  18. KirbyDome89
    Idc whether its FA or trade at this point. Personally I'd rather the team eat some money on a bad contract than give up young talent and have a player go bust, but we know too well how ownership feels about payroll to let that pipe dream live. Right now it seems unlikely that the rotation is addressed in any meaningful way. While I agree that it's not as pressing a matter as the bullpen, I still think it's an opportunity missed and I'd rather not watch a list of guys try to get their bearings straight at the major league level while this team is supposed to be "competing."
  19. KirbyDome89
    That seems a bit extreme. Ideally they'd address the front end and improve the back via others sliding down the ladder but that seems unlikely at this point. There were, and are, moves they could make which would solidify the back end. They certainly wouldn't be sexy, and I'm not exactly pounding the table for the addition of another 4-5 type pitcher because the hope is Gonsalves or Littell might become just that., However it'd be an improvement over crossing your fingers that either of them turn things around after looking uninspiring in limited appearances last season, especially if the team is serious about putting Romero in the pen to start the year. As for Pineda, the stuff might still be wholly intact but his durability is a real concern. Whether it's ability or availability, to be relied upon he has to stay on the field, and there are serious concerns about whether he'll be able to do that for a significant part of the season. If I'm the Twins there's no way I'm comfortable banking on him making 25+ starts, which enhances my concern about the "depth," in the rotation.
  20. KirbyDome89
    If I were betting on which direction Berrios moves my money would be on up. I think the second half of last season is more who Rosario is rather than the first half, which is still a valuable player. Escobar leaving hurts. Cave likely won't continue 19' the way he started 18'. I've been a staunch Gibson critic; I don't think we see the first half of 17' version again, but it certainly wouldn't shock me if he was less than what we saw to start last season either. You'd think Buxton and Sano couldn't contribute less than they did last season, but we're also banking on Schoop turning things around and Cron being his 18' version rather than his 17' self. Who knows what'll happen with the bullpen, or even how it'll look beginning the season. IMO for as many places as we can point to say there should be improvement or at least consistent production, there's an equal number of spots for things to go south.
  21. KirbyDome89
    Agreed 100% with the first part. I'm not knocking the loss of Slegers by any means. What I don't see, at least currently, is enough of a gap between Slegers and a lot of the guys on that list to feel comfortable to start 19'. Pineda is penciled in as the #4 starter right now and his durability is more than questionable. Maybe he stays healthy and maybe a few of the younger arms step up, but I'm sticking to my notion that reliability is part of "depth," and I'm not sure the Twins have a whole lot of that in the starting rotation.
  22. KirbyDome89
    Isn't expecting improvement from players based on age, or expecting everything that went right for some guys in 18' to continue to go right in 19' a fallacy in the same way that expecting other negative trends (win-loss record in one run games, Buxton, Sano, ect...) to continue this season as well? It's a nit pick, but I think we see areas of easy improvement much more clearly than areas of regression. I'd probably take the over just based on how bad KC, Detroit, and (hopefully) the Sox will be, but it's far from a slam dunk.
  23. KirbyDome89
    Completely agree that he's a lower ceiling, but ceiling doesn't help the Twins much at the Major League level. Gonsalves and LIttell didn't look particularly good last season. Thorpe, Wells, and Graterol have yet to throw a pitch for the Twins. Depth is great, but you have to be able to actually rely on some of those guys. IMO the gap between Slegers and a lot of the pitchers listed, in terms of reliability in the majors, isn't very large right now.
  24. KirbyDome89
    I'm not shedding any tears over Slegers being DFA'd. I don't think many ever saw him as a guy who would stick in MLB. That said I'm not sure the gap between him and some of the other "depth," being listed above him is all that significant.
  25. KirbyDome89
    Ohtani, Tanaka, Maeda, and Darvish..... Those are only current Japanese pitchers in MLB. I think some just want to the Twins to add talent.
×
×
  • Create New...