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
    Rasmussen was acquired midseason, and Collin McHugh made a handful of starts for them as well. When you break it down nearly 50% of the Rays' starts last season were made by pitchers that spent no time in their minor league system. This whole thing went off the rails when the risk of signing a high value FA was equated to running out a rotation of Bundy + prospects. There's no coming back from that.
  2. KirbyDome89
    No, listing a couple starters having a down year in SD doesn't invalidate my talking points anymore so than me rattling off successful FA signings/trade acquisitions proves I'm correct. I could easily ask you to list examples of teams that started with a rotation equivalent to Bundy + prospects, refused to spend in FA or acquire talent via trades, and was competing within 2 years, but that's an exercise in futility, particularly with you. Oh, you mean the number of teams willing to pay via FA or trade to acquire top end talent is small? You literally cannot acquire something another team doesn't have, i.e. you can't trade for a player until that individual has been drafted by/signed to another team, so of course the "total impact," of the collective is greater. You're not actually arguing anything by pointing that out. Mike just posted an interesting FG article about managing prospect expectations and they touch on the team building aspect at the end. Check it out.
  3. KirbyDome89
    I haven't see the argument that the prospects can flame out and this team will still be fine, but I skim. The math doesn't exactly work in a way where 12 of X is better than 1 of Y. I'm pessimistic about the FO signing a trade acquisition as well, but I've grown exhausted by the notion that their self imposed handicaps, which played an integral role in the disaster that was last season, are now vital parts of a plan to getting the team back on track. The angst over certainty seems to be hyper focused on one side here.
  4. KirbyDome89
    You're arguing semantics. Teams are paying for a track record of MLB success, even if it's a limited one. I don't have solid numbers off the top of my head, but I'd imagine that as far as volatility goes, prospects are very likely the higher risk commodity. Boiling it down to "nothing is a sure thing," and equating SD's rotation to the current state of MN's is a stretch to say the least.
  5. KirbyDome89
    I'm not making a case for Montas specifically, but in your scenario he's a known commodity in the sense that if the Twins were to deal for him, they're expecting 2ish production based on a track record, albeit limited. They're giving up a set of players with zero major league success who themselves have minor league warts. Nobody is arguing a Cy Young finalist is coming back. Using a farm system to graduate players incrementally and supplement an existing framework is, of course, utilized by every organization. Throwing 5-7 arms (including Ober and Ryan) into a rotation that's Dylan Bundy and nobody else isn't remotely the same thing.
  6. KirbyDome89
    Sure, and for every one of them there are 100x as many guys taken at, or above, their draft positions that wash out without making any sort of impact.
  7. KirbyDome89
    You're also receiving a known commodity of equivalent value. My point was that they can audition plenty of guys while adding a stable rotation arm; the two aren't mutually exclusive. Sure, FA was an abject failure, but that shouldn't be a rationale for them to eschew other means of acquiring talent. In other words, the prospects are the fulcrum on which the FO will pivot towards either a full on rebuild or actually committing to supplementing the roster. I think that's more of a stall/half measure than an actual plan.
  8. KirbyDome89
    There's nothing stopping the Twins from "finding out what they have," while simultaneously adding proven talent. If they end up with 2 frontline guys that's more than lucky; none of this group profiles as such. Rather than holding them accountable, we're giving the FO a pass to waste a season while waffling about which direction to go.
  9. KirbyDome89
    So because the Twins chose to sit out FA, and trading for one frontline starter doesn't solve all their issues, the answer is to cross fingers and do nothing? Waiting for the stars to align is a great way to ensure it never occurs. If the plan all along (a rather convenient shift of the goalposts/distraction from recent failures) was to graduate prospects then it'd make more sense, not less, to have some sort of stability around which these prospects could be integrated. I doubt the Twins make a move for anything close to a frontline SP, but that shouldn't be spun into some kind of positive about preserving the future.
  10. KirbyDome89
    Do I see them as options (Gordon only in another totally lost season?) Yes. Do I believe the Twins do? No. What's the controversy? Please, Gordon couldn't get reps at SS despite the season being over and Simmons being the worst offensive player in the league. I hope Polanco is, and if/when Lewis debuts at SS I'm right there with you cheering him. His only decent offensive output in the last 4 years was the season he juiced. I really don't care about early careers numbers. We aren't going to agree here. Why are we fixated on a washed vet signing a minor league deal? I have no doubt the Twins start someone else at SS opening day, but that was never my point right? Precisely why I bolded the part about perspective. I've said my peace on depth vs. bodies. Maybe you're right and Beckham is plan D,E, or Z. I hope so....
  11. KirbyDome89
    I think I've been pretty clear that I don't feel it's likely the Twins plug any of those options in at SS. Martin, Lewis, and Gordon seem like pipe dreams and I don't believe the team wants to move Polanco off 2B. Beckham hasn't even played in the majors the last 2 years, he juiced in '19, and he wasn't close to an average hitter in '18. Maybe we have different definitions of league average. They gambled on a Cave bounce back and lost last year. He was solid in '18 and '19. Right now, yeah, he's bad depth. Beckham's had a longer career, at least at the major league level, but I'd stop short of calling it better. If he was coming off a run of three year run (2018-2020) like Cave was last year then maybe this would be a different conversation, but you've already acknowledged his defensive issues and the I guess we'll agree to disagree on his offensive prowess. What do I want out of depth players? Be part of the team's plans moving forward, or have some sort of plus quality that aids the team in the present. I don't see Beckham doing either. Yeah, I don't see them signing a starting SS and a utility player capable of covering the position, at least with Gordon and Arraez on the roster. Do you? Honestly, are you convinced they'll move Polanco or reverse course on the prospects? They still need to spend on at least 2-3 rotation arms plus the bullpen. I don't know why the scope for a backup SS needs to be narrowed to the discard bin. Other avenues exist. I gave you options on this team that would be better in one way or another. I'm not digging through 29 other rosters + farm systems to compile a list of replacement level SS, or arguing what FA IFers are available/willing to play part time. If the validity of anything I've argued is predicated on said list than you win.
  12. KirbyDome89
    Whoever they sign or trade for, Polanco, Martin, Lewis, hell even rotating Gordon through if we're going full tank mode. That's 4-5 names on the team that do more for the Twins present/future than Beckham. It certainly could be. Of course, that's why you find a utility option, or ideally turn to someone in house. Sure, Refsnyder cratered in the 2nd half after returning from injury, and maybe he's a bad example, but he was also option D behind Buxton, Cave, and Kepler. If that's Beckham's role, option D, then fine, it's already a dumpster fire by that point. Nothing the Twins have done or said suggests any of the prospect options are in play, we can hope they're willing to consider moving Polanco. That leaves us with an option B who has been a below average defender at the position the previous 5 or so years. The last time he was on a major league field (2 years ago) he was getting popped for PEDs, and the season prior to his usage was on par with the Refsnyder career OPS you dislike.
  13. KirbyDome89
    Again, the issue is the role. If the Twins are willing to plug in Martin/Lewis at SS, or move Polanco it's a different story, but those options seem unlikely. As it stands, Beckham is a tweaked hamstring in April away from being the starting SS. If he's in AAA all year and truly just minor league filler then it doesn't matter. Your Plan B, particularly at SS, should be actual depth, not just a warm body.
  14. KirbyDome89
    He's a negative defender in both corners, and you can't K 33% of the time and rock a sub .700 OPS if that's the case.
  15. KirbyDome89
    Depth isn't just a body to plug and go. Rob Refsnyder was depth, he could step in and hold water. Dobnak or Thorpe, that supposed first line of defense for the rotation, weren't depth, they were just bad. All depth isn't good depth right? There's fat that can be trimmed from the 40 man if the Twins choose to do so, but more likely injuries will allow to them to avoid making any such decision. Seeing as how the Twins opted to bring Cave back, despite how bad he was, I'd argue he probably does have more of an inside track. To be clear, I'm not claiming the Beckham move impacts who starts opening day at SS. If a guy like Beckham is supposed to be a last resort ("depth") but the only thing standing between him and the starting SS position is another low ceiling potential bust then he's not really a last resort. We saw this with the pitching staff last year; guys were put in position(s) where the team needed them to punch above their weight and when they couldn't it was a disaster. Has anything this franchise done during the offseason struck you as a move that a team determined to compete in '22 would make? I'm not arguing that former major leaguers have no place in the Twins' system. I am saying that low ceiling/rock bottom floor guys with clear paths to playing time do nothing for the present or the future.
  16. KirbyDome89
    The primary source of consternation at the time of the Cave deal still exists today; he has an inside track to getting innings as the 4th OFer. Rooker doesn't look MLB caliber with the bat or glove, Larnach needs to show some sort of ability to handle off-speed pitches plus his corner D, at least in LF, is suspect, and Celestino was nowhere close to ready last year. The Twins showed no interest in signing a RH 4th OFer during the pre lockout FA. That doesn't mean they won't, they've got plenty of money, but time and options aren't on their side. Barring a major splash at SS, Beckham's only roadblock (if he isn't awful in STP - big "if,") to getting innings at the major league level is a middling journeyman SS a la Simmons. It's highly unlikely we see Lewis in the majors this year, let alone at SS, and Martin seems destined to find a defensive home elsewhere. In isolation, if the signings are about bringing in JAG to be minor league depth then sure, whatever. The issue is that they're seemingly a realistic step or two away from "filling," a couple glaring holes on the major league roster, at least currently.
  17. KirbyDome89
    He was rather polished college bat when the Twins took him in '18. I know '20 was a wash but I don't think getting him ABs last season was rushing things. Ideally, "older," players should move more quickly through the minors. His debut was great, and then he wasn't able to make necessary adjustments. That's not uncommon, especially for young players.
  18. KirbyDome89
    It took intervention on the part of ownership and a willingness from Buxton to sign a team friendly deal for the organization keep him. The FO was ready to move him at the deadline. I'm not sure his contract is indicative of anything. The Twins aren't getting a return for Donaldson, they'll literally have to pay another team to take him. As it stands, he's a solid stop gap until there's some clarity with Arraez/Miranda/Martin. 2022 has been labeled a "retool," "developmental year," "reset," ect. but that's with the caveat that they see massive returns from the prospect basket they've placed all their eggs in. Have they committed to a full blown rebuild? No. Have they set themselves up to do so? Yes.
  19. KirbyDome89
    "It's clear the club doesn't want to enter a long rebuilding phase." Is it?
  20. KirbyDome89
    I'd take almost any option over Simmons or someone of that ilk. I think theres a correlation vs. causation argument to be made in regard to Polanco's health/production post position swap, but I don't have a strong opinion on which side of 2B he plays. I agree, acquiring a legit SS should still be in play, especially given the lack of clarity in minors, but I think the most likely scenario is we see some retread like Simmons and we're sold the notion that they'll be out of the picture when Martin or possibly even Lewis show they're ready. Positional fit of prospects aside, this team wouldn't sit the worst offensive player in baseball to get Nick Gordon some run in a season that'd been over for months, hence my "anything but a washed up vet," stance.
  21. KirbyDome89
    Just a refresher; Addison Reed and Trevor Hildenberger were at or near the top of IPs for that bullpen in '18. The Twins moved one of their best relievers, a position of obvious need, and that player went on to be decidedly better with his new team almost immediately. In no world is that selling high. Sure, 1.5 years of control is worth more than .5 years, but if the team had no intention to bring him back as you suggest, that was a gross misevaluation of what they had. You can't "sell high," if you're severely undervaluing what you're moving. I'm using your logic here, i.e. Santana was a Rule V pick so moving him, even for minimal value, is the correct move as long as whatever they get in return trumps the incredibly low bar they cleared to acquire him. They could've moved him at any point and as long as whatever they received in return was more valuable than a mere Rule V pick, that would've been "selling high." FWIW Santana posted more WAR during his first season in NY than the Twins received from all four prospects combined during their entire MN tenure.
  22. KirbyDome89
    So we're giving the team credit for either not understanding what they had, or being unable to unlock what Pressly had? He has been markedly better (when healthy) the last 3+ seasons, how is that selling high? His performance post Twins is absolutely relevant because it's ultimately how this move will be judged. Do you view the Santana trade as a roaring success? He was a Rule V selection as well.
  23. KirbyDome89
    I'm not denying in any way that they've had success. I'm saying that emulating that success goes beyond surface level transactions, i.e. "making similar moves." Defending the Pressly trade as "something TB would do," is only relevant if TB is the team moving him. We know the Twins aren't on par operationally. That much has been clear the last 5+ seasons.
  24. KirbyDome89
    The Pressly becoming Rivera comparison does not remotely make sense. Precisely my point, and rather applicable to the Perkins/Alcala comp no? Saying something can happen regardless of how likely it is to occur isn't really an argument. Because those are 3 games out of the 165 that they played? Do you not believe Pressly on the Twins has an impact for both MN and Houston that season? Chanting "be the Rays," ad nauseam isn't a strategy. If it was as simple as making similar moves every team would do it. Can the trade work out? Sure, but what TB and Oak would do have no bearing on that.
  25. KirbyDome89
    Who's to say Pressly can't become Mariano Rivera? I doubt you view that as a valid argument, but it's essentially the one you're making. Alcala hasn't started games since AA 3 years ago, and it went poorly, so we can probably close the book on him converting back to a SP and being effective in the majors. He was great for 20ish innings to close last season, which is encouraging, but the 40 or so innings prior to that were disappointing to say the least. Maybe he truly turned a corner or maybe it's recency bias and a pitching starved fanbase holding out hope. You're correct, there's no guarantee this version of Pressly is what the Twins would've/could've retained. I don't necessarily see that as a checkmark in the "pro," category when assessing the trade. We can't expect the Twins to help Pressly take that next step but development towards domination from Alcala is on the table? While TB and Oakland have found success with similar moves, MN hasn't. The offensive performance against NY in three games that postseason is a strawman when judging the Pressly trade.
×
×
  • Create New...