Jump to content
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

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 Tracker: Picks & Bonuses

Forums

Blogs

Events

Store

Downloads

Gallery

Everything posted by KirbyDome89

  1. KirbyDome89
    Yep, and when I jumped in it was to point out that the tradeoff for the rotation clarity at the deadline very well could be a lost season. That's a particularly bad reason to wait. I'm fine with moving on if the price is high, but pivot to something else. Hell, another Odorizzi trade takes a massive amount of stress off the unproven arms. That of course assumes someone is available. Rolling the current staff out to start the season is the definition of standing pat to me. I get that hope springs eternal this time of year, but I'm so over being sold on it.
  2. KirbyDome89
    This started as a discussion about whether or not waiting until the deadline was the right call. In that case you're still likely paying a premium in addition to rolling the dice on first half performance and availability. Sure, don't double down, but standing pat isn't any sort of declaration either. If this is basically the staff we're watching on opening day, well, yeah....
  3. KirbyDome89
    Rethink the approach to pitching that got you to this point. On a serious note, why are we assuming the cost/reward ratio skews far enough in the Twins' favor that they're comfortable making a deal in July? If it does, and the Twins are willing to pull the trigger, how many other teams will be as well? Is holding out hope that all the pieces fall into place in July really worth potentially losing a season? If there's no real intent to compete this year then this whole sidebar is moot and we're veering toward another discussion entirely.
  4. KirbyDome89
    I'm not advocating for them to empty the cupboards. The ask won't be as high, but I expect the pain to be equivalent if you're only getting .5 years of Manea or 1.5 years of Montas. I'm indifferent regarding which name(s) are added, but the staff needs help. I'm pushing back against waiting to add talent, not the cost to do so.
  5. KirbyDome89
    Or the season could be over by that time due in large part to the pitching, a la last year. Purchasing at the deadline isn't likely to be any less painful.
  6. KirbyDome89
    So he struggles mightily with major league fastballs (a massive red flag,) swings outside the zone a little too often, strikes out a ton, and doesn't walk nearly enough. None of those attributes have anything to do with luck. I guess you could argue we might see a modest uptick in power production based on his batted ball data (even that might be a stretch considering how wide your percentiles are + a limited number of events) but I still think his all around game still falls well short of what you'd want from a corner OFer.
  7. KirbyDome89
    Last season he posted a 33% K rate, a 7% BB rate, and a .688 OPS in 213 PAs. Where's the bad luck? For reference, Sano can be tough to watch, but Rooker struck out at nearly the same clip, walked almost half as often, and slugged nearly .100 points below Miguel.
  8. KirbyDome89
    He'll get his ABs at C and if he hits then fine, but I wouldn't be be making sacrifices (forcing Sano at 1B and Kirilloff in LF) just to get Sanchez's bat some extra run, particularly to start the season. I'm high on Kirilloff too, I don't think whatever Larnach does should affect Kirilloff's presence in the lineup.
  9. KirbyDome89
    The same "flexibility," tanked last season, and has played a massive role in the state of the pitching staff.
  10. 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.
  11. KirbyDome89
    He wasn't particularly good when healthy last year and he was demoted during the shortened season prior to that. I'd stop short of genius. Obviously I never got the signing either. Agreed that the money isn't relevant though, there are much worse ways to spend $2M.
  12. 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.
  13. KirbyDome89
    I agree with everything you said about Shoemaker and Happ, but I do think their long leash had more to do with a refusal to move on, rather than an inability to do so. If we're at the point where we're worried about the FO investing innings into an imploding Pineda at the expense of these prospects they've essentially pinned the future on, well..... I wasn't particularly pro Pineda, I just think there's some value in a semi stable rotation piece.
  14. KirbyDome89
    We're overestimating how many innings these prospects are going to be able to throw in the majors this season. Right now Gray is the only starter they have who's likely to throw 150+ innings, and even that might be a coin flip. With Pineda onboard there is still plenty of opportunity on paper for the prospects, and once you add injury, ineffectiveness, ect into the mix that pool of available innings widens. Really this is Pineda vs. a AAAA/washed vet arm on a minor league deal. I'll take the former, he at least can win a few games and might be worth something at the deadline.
  15. 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.
  16. 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.
  17. 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.
  18. KirbyDome89
    People were complaining about him last year while he was posting a 127 OPS+ too.
  19. 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.
  20. 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.
  21. 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.
  22. KirbyDome89
    It sounds like he isn't signing anywhere that doesn't view him as a fixture at SS. Idk if that stance, or the team's can change a few years into the contract but for the moment he apparently has no interest in switching positions, and maybe he shouldn't.
  23. 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 $$ this year then there's value in the swap. If payroll is slashed and I have to listen to "they've got X amount for down the road..." then yeah.
  24. KirbyDome89
    No doubt, but I think Pineda's injury certainty plays into that need. Bundy threw 90 innings last year, and is far from a lock to make it through the year, be it injury or effectiveness. Ryan and Ober are going to be on their own pitch counts too. Gray is the only current starter they can unleash on Day 1 and not have to babysit.
  25. KirbyDome89
    The current rotation, or lack thereof for that matter. I'll take him, but it's not a move to be celebrated. It's a bare minimum type signing. I think a lot of posters (not lumping you in here) overestimate how many innings a lot of these prospects will be able to throw in the majors this season. If it's Pineda vs. ownership pocketing more $$ and running out an even more washed vet and/or AAAA filler I'll take the former.
×
×
  • Create New...