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
    Moving a pitcher like Berrios isn't a W, almost by definition. The Happ and Robles moves were unexpected but also very unlikely to yield anything. There isn't really any excuse for holding onto Pineda, the "respectability," angle for Auguest & September is laughable. The return for Cruz was impressive.
  2. KirbyDome89
    I understand the reduced value, but you're also likely punting on more than just one season by vacating his spot in the rotation. That cost of losing him needs to be acknowledged here as well. C'mon, we both know that moving him now is the Twins saying "we don't ever intend to pay you market value." What's the plan to supplement Maeda + 4 question marks and be competitive beyond 2022? Woods doesn't profile near Berrios and there isn't an internal option that does either. Do we cross our fingers and hope somebody smashes through their ceiling? I don't see any way Woods headlines a trade that brings back a pitcher at or above the caliber of Berrios, unless it's an extremely short rental, in which case what's the point? If these added assets are used to bring back a pitcher that outperforms Berrios, then sure, the '22 team is better, but I have serious doubts that we suddenly see a rash of high end prospects moved this winter for arms. To an extent I hope it happens, because the pitching situation is dire, but that doesn't exactly jive with what we've seen the last 5 years.
  3. KirbyDome89
    Ok, but I also said in my OP that moving him today wasn't their only option. It didn't stop this FO from supposedly making a serious bid for Darvish in '17. The alternative to that being a 4th roster spot that now has to be filled and committing to, at minimum, one more poor season. Look, I said in my OP that this might've been the best move to salvage the situation, but this isn't a W for the Twins, and it shouldn't be framed that way. That's the overarching criticism.
  4. KirbyDome89
    So then address trading him at the next deadline, or make an effort and actually sign him as a FA?
  5. KirbyDome89
    So buy out his last year and offer him market value? Hold onto him and trade him next year if he refuses to even entertain signing in MN?
  6. KirbyDome89
    Not sure why we're talking about a 1 year deal here.
  7. KirbyDome89
    Wouldn't signing a very good, and very durable 27 year old pitcher also be a taking a big swing, or making progress in regard to assembling a pitching staff? I think the fact that trading Berrios today wasn't the Twins only option is being incredibly overlooked. Maybe this is the best the FO could do to salvage the situation, but that's not the same as a win, and that reality should be acknowledged, not celebrated as a haul. We should know better than most how fickle prospect development can be. I get the allure, I really do, but we're selling a reliable/known talent for hope. Fingers crossed that they hit that HR you mentioned.
  8. KirbyDome89
    Recurring calf injuries as a result of baseball movements just aren't the same as breaking your hand on a HBP or fracturing your toe on a foul ball. I think we view Donaldson's injury history with the Twins differently if last season had been a normal one. He was set for a second extended absence due to another calf injury, it just so happened that it occurred a game or two before postseason play started. Buxton's youth isn't a negative. All things equal, any MLB team would rather sign a 27 year old. If you're signing Buxton, you're paying for what you think he'll become. When MN signed Donaldson it was with the hope he'd maintain a level somewhere near what he'd recently been. I don't think I've ever once dismissed the risk; I feel that up to a point he's worth it, especially to this team. Do you expect Buxton to play C, take a foul ball off the head, and suffer concussion issues for the rest of his career? I mean, I don't know what you expect me to do with that comp. There isn't a Buxton replacement on the horizon. The Twins are going to have to pay an average FA CF between 10-14M for at least the next two years, probably 3. MN isn't saving significant money to allocate elsewhere by letting Buxton go. "Yes--it is not impossible that Buxton struggles to accumulate 400 PA's for the rest of his career, and puts up 2-3 WAR while doing so." -- That's the quote I responded to. I agree, they do, but those steps don't often occur all at once. Money not spent in down years isn't bankrolled and available at a later date.
  9. KirbyDome89
    I'd be surprised if that's his base on a long term deal. Is he worth it? According to the value he brings to his team, he's been worth it the last three seasons prorating 2020. I'm not going to argue that WAR isn't overvalued on the open market, but that's FA. Buxton is set to become a FA after next year, and I'd be shocked if he wasn't negotiating from that point. Torii didn't move to RF full time until he was 35 years old. Buxton is 27. It's certainly possible Buxton remains in CF, even for the life of a 7 year deal if that's what he ultimately signs.
  10. KirbyDome89
    If you read the post to which I was responding then you understand that what I pushed back against was the notion that signing talented players is a waste if the team doesn't project to be good. If you aren't willing to commit financial resources to getting better, I don't know how you expect to suddenly go from 90+ losses to 90+ wins. If the argument is you focus on the acquisition and development of young players until you're at 80ish wins before making commitments, you're destined to be the Pirates of the 2000s, i.e. a feeder organization. Development isn't linear, or even necessarily reliable. Choosing to handicap your franchise makes absolutely no sense. Would the Phillies be better without Wheeler or Harper? How about the Angels, would they be a better team if Trout wasn't extended? This is silly. There's nothing to suggest the Twins are capable of developing arms the way a team like TB or Cleveland has. "Be the [insert team here]," has been beaten to death in other threads, go back and revive them if that's the argument you want to make.
  11. KirbyDome89
    Yeesh, the point was that Buxton opting not to leak details about the Twins offer is as meaningless as his silence on his own counter offer. Ok so.....I'm NOT comparing Buxton's injury history to Donaldson's. Donaldson was NOT signed because of the WAR he accumulated during his MVP stretch in the mid 2010s. I AM saying that his recent recurring injuries on top of his age made handing him $92M risky. I AM saying that despite Buxton's serious injury concerns, his relative youth and incredible upside make signing him a risk worth taking. I AM saying there is a comparison to be made between the risks associated with each signing. C'mon, he'd have to completely wash out of baseball in the next couple years for that scenario to play out. I'll take the over on your PA number. Teams get better by making steps, not massive leaps. Refusing to pay talented players is a good way to ensure you never make it to that 90+ win threshold.
  12. KirbyDome89
    You tossed out the $20M number, my point was that he doesn't need to hit like Mike Trout to be worth that amount. If the cost of a win on the FA market is roughly $9M then we can look at his WAR and do the math. Again, you can't just completely ignore his defense. I don't understand why you're trying to measure his value to the Twins using a stat that only encompasses offensive performance.
  13. KirbyDome89
    Well no, I'm not assuming Buxton needs to be the best hitter in baseball like he was in April. That was your addition. No, he doesn't need to rival Mike Trout offensively to be worth $20M. You can't just ignore the defensive value a player like Buxton brings. Where is this foot/second info coming from? https://blogs.fangraphs.com/the-cost-of-a-win-in-free-agency-in-2020/
  14. KirbyDome89
    Buxton's camp also didn't disclose their own counter. Their silence doesn't mean anything right now. Donaldson was 7 years older than Buxton and coming off two seasons where he missed 49 and 100+ games due to a lingering injury. There was serious concern, and rightfully so, about his ability to stay on the field at his age when he signed that deal, and we've already seen those concerns become reality. Again, the comp is the risk/financial commitment, not the career profile. The way to get from 90 losses to 85 is by having better players. There is no internal replacement for Buxton.
  15. KirbyDome89
    Nope, that wasn't my assumption and I don't think anybody is making Trout comps. Spot on, he's an incredibly valuable player with the "when healthy," caveat. Big yikes if that's an actual argument you're making with those four names.
  16. KirbyDome89
    If the escalators are easily attainable and he can reach $20M+ that's a slam dunk. I think we'd all agree he isn't getting 7 years $140M+ in FA. What's your basis for these numbers? So I prefaced the comp by saying it wasn't perfect and Donaldson's past success far outweighs Buxton's. The Josh Donaldson from '13 to '16 wasn't who the Twins were signing. The committed $21M annually to a 34 year old that had one healthy season in the last 3 due to nagging calf injuries. I have no issue with the signing, and Donaldson was and still is a talent. The point was the risk the Twins were willing to take. Whether it's a final piece or a premium position with no internal replacement (CF) I don't think it really matters.
  17. KirbyDome89
    I've seen it, and you won't get any argument from me that it's anything but brutal. I agree, I just don't see him falling off a cliff during his age 27-30 or 31 seasons.
  18. KirbyDome89
    Different injuries, none of which having been nagging like Donaldson's calves. He's also seven years younger than Donaldson. If MN is willing to go $21M annually I'm inclined to believe Buxton can reach something near that AAV, even if it's a short (3-4 year) deal. Perhaps injured, and that's the gamble on either side. I'd be much less concerned about a decline in his 20s.
  19. KirbyDome89
    Doesn't Buxton's displeasure with the back end protection kinda signal that the escalators in this offer might not be that great, or at the very least relatively attainable? That's a tough sell if you're already starting from a very low base. We just watched the Twins of all teams sign Josh Donaldson to a $92M deal at age 34, following his first healthy season in three years. It's not a perfect comp, and obviously Donaldson had an earlier run of success that Buxton hasn't touched, but he was, and still is, a significant injury risk. I don't think it's a stretch to say in 3-4 years Buxton could earn what the Twins are offering in 7.
  20. KirbyDome89
    Ted is spot on. Signing one or both of Buxton/Berrios isn't the financial albatross we've been conditioned to believe it is. Also, consider this an official petition to ban the "they don't want to sign here (MN)," narrative. Until the Twins actually submit the highest offer, and are subsequently turned down that argument has zero merit. Find an alternative way to cope.
  21. KirbyDome89
    Pay market value to retain home grown talent at premier positions which lack internal options?
  22. KirbyDome89
    Maybe you missed the point? TB's success is attributable to their ability to replace holes, not create them. You'll have to show me why I'm wrong for suggesting the Twins aren't on par with TB when it comes to the three attributes I previously listed.
  23. KirbyDome89
    If you're trading Berrios, how are you solidifying 4 rotation spots in a 2 year window and avoiding a rebuild? "Be the Rays," sounds great until you realize the Twins need to instantly become elite at talent identification, acquisition, and development, because that's how TB has remained competitive, not because they move stars before they hit FA.
  24. KirbyDome89
    He lost me when he starting talking about outlawing protective gear and pine tar for hitters while simultaneously advocating for pitchers to "back guys off the plate more often."
  25. KirbyDome89
    I don't have a foot firmly in either camp right now. I'm certain any cost savings will be spun as $$ to throw at Berrios or Buxton, but I'm doubtful the Twins would pay the actual cost to retain either, regardless of Donaldson's status. If we're talking about taking $10-$15M annually in savings (chosen with no basis) and splitting it between 2 more back end fliers for the rotation, or trying to cobble together a 3B Platoon (Arraez + ?) and a low end SS is the team really better off? I think if you're moving Donaldson the return, whether $$ or talent, needs to solidify a position of need for multiple years. I'm concerned the FO is willing and able to do that. I understand the injury stance. He does feel like a bit of a time bomb in that regard. His history will certainly weigh into the decision but this all boils down to what direction they plan to go after the move.
×
×
  • Create New...