Jump to content
Twins Daily
  • Create Account

KirbyDome89

Verified Member
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    4,562

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    1

 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 KirbyDome89

  1. KirbyDome89
    Do you see enough of the prospects getting sufficient major league time in 3.5 months that the Twins are comfortable making a decision that at the moment they might not be? Do you think the FO is willing to reverse course and pay a premium in July for an even shorter rental?
  2. KirbyDome89
    The same "flexibility," tanked last season, and has played a massive role in the state of the pitching staff.
  3. KirbyDome89
    Short term commitments and a payroll that hovers middle of the pack to lower third. The Correa signing falls in line with everything this FO values; brief tenure and "low risk." It's a great move for this year. Celebrate it for what it is, but let's not pretend this is some crazy venture into the unknown. I'd hold off on dishing up crow considering the current starting rotation + bullpen, or the "necessary," potential downgrades they made to pay Correa. I too hope the gamble pays off.
  4. KirbyDome89
    Did a double take when I saw the headline. It doesn't matter if Correa is using the Twins to reset his value, it's a great deal for at least this season. I hate the opt outs, but he was never committing to a deal of this length without them.
  5. KirbyDome89
    I'm not assigning fault, I'm adjusting the frame. It's going to be years before this "debate," is remotely close to settled.
  6. KirbyDome89
    I'll start with saying that I don't give a **** about rehashing whether or not Berrios should have been moved. The longest FA pitching contract in 6 seasons at the helm for this FO is 2 years. Their two largest trade acquisitions to date, Odorizzi and Gray, each had/have 2 years remaining. Rather than extend the best pitcher this franchise has had in nearly two decades (an admittedly low bar to clear) they opted to trade him with 1.5 years remaining. They completely sat out FA this offseason despite desperately needing arms. There's a ton of evidence/activity or lack thereof, that suggests this FO won't commit years or money to pitchers. That shouldn't be debatable at this point.
  7. KirbyDome89
    As much as I'd love "won't spend above X," to be a universally acknowledged truth on TD, it isn't, and arguments where contract amounts/length are at the center veer into bad faith territory (not accusing you of doing this) because of it. You're right, it's a dead horse, but we also need to acknowledge that removing an option from the table isn't the same thing as never having that option to begin with.
  8. KirbyDome89
    People were complaining about him last year while he was posting a 127 OPS+ too.
  9. KirbyDome89
    Donaldson's contract wasn't a hindrance; we need to move past that notion. Even after acquiring Gray the Twins were still roughly $40M short of payroll for Opening Day last season.
  10. KirbyDome89
    My fear is that it won't be utilized. I can absolutely see a scenario where 15M is spent and spun as necessary for whatever transpires, but payroll trends in the wrong direction. I don't view the NY trade as necessary for whatever hypothetical signing occurs at SS.
  11. KirbyDome89
    Sure, if he falls apart early this season it looks smart. If he posts another high OPS+ and slows down next year, eh it's probably at a wash, assuming Urshela's 2021 is an aberration. I guess I'm just less certain this is the year Donaldson stops mashing baseballs. All Twins fans should feel this way.
  12. KirbyDome89
    Sanchez's road splits were pretty bad offensively last year to match his atrocious D. He's an obvious downgrade. They don't really lose defensively at 3B, but Donaldson has been basically an automatic 125 OPS+ or better since becoming a regular. That's absolute peak Urshela and he has to find his way there again. You're right, if they absolutely max out all the $$ this year then there's value in the swap. If payroll is slashed and I have to listen to "they've got X amount for down the road..." then yeah.
  13. KirbyDome89
    No doubt, but I think Pineda's injury certainty plays into that need. Bundy threw 90 innings last year, and is far from a lock to make it through the year, be it injury or effectiveness. Ryan and Ober are going to be on their own pitch counts too. Gray is the only current starter they can unleash on Day 1 and not have to babysit.
  14. KirbyDome89
    The current rotation, or lack thereof for that matter. I'll take him, but it's not a move to be celebrated. It's a bare minimum type signing. I think a lot of posters (not lumping you in here) overestimate how many innings a lot of these prospects will be able to throw in the majors this season. If it's Pineda vs. ownership pocketing more $$ and running out an even more washed vet and/or AAAA filler I'll take the former.
  15. KirbyDome89
    Idk why we need to imply he'd be a malcontent to justify the move. What is this culture?
  16. KirbyDome89
    This is where I'm at. Story can be had for money, which they had plenty of prior to dumping Donaldson's salary. The Twins are now worse at C and 3B in addition to a hole at SS. If Story, or another big move happens, the NY swap will certainly be spun as the Twins "needing," to clear space, but the $40M+ gap between current day and payroll the previous season says otherwise.
  17. KirbyDome89
    Yeah Idk Mike, my post was in reference to the framing. I'm staying away from the rest of it.
  18. KirbyDome89
    They wouldn't shell out for front end guys but they'll pay mediocre vets $20M? Yikes.
  19. KirbyDome89
    They don't have to be, and nobody is arguing they should be. They're $40M+ short of last season's payroll right now. There's room to spend and it's painfully obvious they won't be tossing all that cash at the rotation. Did you watch Garver and his .875 OPS last season? You want to plug a .670 OPS into the 5 hole? That GG came at 3B, in a 60 game season; he was a league average defender at SS last year.
  20. KirbyDome89
    100% agree, I think it was a long shot regardless, but that ship sailed the moment they decided to sit out the initial FA wave. To me this move doesn't make them better in the interim, it's not setting them up at the position for the future, and it seems like floor is being prioritized over ceiling, which doesn't make sense if you aren't going to be competitive. I can't speak for Chief, but that's how I read the "losing move," comment. Technically it wouldn't have to be 2 WAR right? They gave up an equivalent amount to bring in IKF. It's really the Jeffers/Rortvedt platoon, which was probably a tick below replacement level last season, vs. whatever hypothetical they could've slotted in at SS.
  21. KirbyDome89
    They traded Mitch Garver for a guy who's average defensively at SS and below average offensively. Rortvedt struggled mightily last year, and Jeffers wasn't great with the bat, even by catching standards. I wasn't sure there was a worse option than Simmons returning but this has me rethinking that stance...
  22. KirbyDome89
    Conversely I think it could also de-incentivize mediocre teams. Why spend money in FA or prospect capital in trades to add proven talent when you can sell hope, shoot for 84 wins, and back into the postseason?
  23. KirbyDome89
    Oh but I did. Remember that part about the collective always being greater than any slice you wish to cut from it? Again, that's not even an actual counter-argument. It's also why I didn't take the bait on going down the WAR rabbit hole.
  24. KirbyDome89
    This tends to be lost anytime the topic comes up. The mere mention of trading for a single player ruffles feathers to such a degree that any such transaction becomes "selling the farm," "mortgaging the future," or is characterized as a stupid baseball decision, despite the fact that even the best rotations in the game rely on help outside of the organization. I'm not tied to Montas either, and I've said as much, but if the FO truly believes that a few members of this prospect group will lift the team back to WS contention, then I see a ton of value, both presently and in the future, in acquiring a stable rotation piece around which to integrate the upcoming arms. Obviously you'd want that stability for more than just 2 years.
  25. KirbyDome89
    This entire thread is a debate about whether or not the Twins should be spending in FA and/or trades to improve the rotation. The Rays were brought up as an example of why the Twins should cling to every arm they have, and when it was pointed out that TBs rotation relied rather heavily on FA signings and trade acquisitions you shifted the goalposts. Love it. WAR for Wacha and Hill isn't relevant to the point that was made; it's a purposeful distraction.
×
×
  • Create New...