Jump to content
Twins Daily
  • Create Account

jorgenswest

Verified Member
  • Posts

    5,317
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    7

jorgenswest last won the day on February 29 2020

jorgenswest had the most liked content!

1 Follower

About jorgenswest

  • Birthday 06/19/1953

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

jorgenswest's Achievements

  1. I am all for age based free agency/rule 5/options. Teams get control through age 28. Players need to be on the 40 by age 25 or subject to rule 5. I would eliminate options but you if you are on the 40 at all during season you get major league minimum for the season or portion once on 40. There will need to be some sort of arbitration or performance scaling for those exceptional players that hit the majors at young ages. I want small market teams to be competitive for their own free agents particularly now that it hits at a younger age for most. Part of the revenue sharing or payroll tax funds would be used to help smaller market teams keep their own free agents. It might look like the league reimbursing a percentage of the contract or extension into free agent years. That percent can be scaled depending on market with maybe a ceiling of 20%.
  2. There is value when the back half of the bullpen has options. All teams run into a stretch where they need to call up arms and option out others. With the Twins rotation they may face more of these stretches. I think they need to add to the bullpen but I would be hesitant to add anyone without options that is not a late inning option. Are these the best high leverage relievers remaining? If so, sign the best of the three. If not I want to sign the better reliever and leave the the back half to players with options.
  3. When Donaldson is healthy I think playing Arraez at 2B and Polanco at SS will give the Twins the best chance to win. Even when Donaldson is injured I would slot Miranda at 3B and keep Polanco and Arraez up the middle. They won a lot of games with the pair up the middle in spite of their defensive short comings. If they can trade Arraez for a better fit like a starting shortstop or number three starter with control than by all means make that trade, I would have to be blown away to trade him for players projected to debut 2023 or later.
  4. I think there will be plenty of innings for young pitchers even with Greinke. I wouldn’t want them to add multiple one year stop gap solutions and I certainly don't want one year guys at the back end. Sign Greinke. If the rest of the young staff really steps up and they are competitive then he can lead. If the young pitchers stumble and they are not competitive Greinke can be moved at the deadline.
  5. The Twins need to identify guys like Freeland and Weaver and then up their game. I couldn’t possibly know whether either of these two has untapped potential and wish I had more confidence in the Twins ability to make that assessment. I do think these are the kinds of moves small to mid market teams need to make and win on, The Twins certainly can afford to trade from their prospect depth to acquire either or both. Odorizzi had two good seasons with the Twins and should certainly be considered for a marginal minor leaguer that will soon be a 40 man roster decision. The contract is not prohibitive. A Pineda signing would be a similar move,
  6. The Mariners might be a landing point for Arraez but the Twins don’t need quality rather than quantity. They need to add one or two of their prospects and get back the Mariners top pitching prospect in Kirby. Would a trade straight up for J.P. Crawford fit? The Mariners best prospect is a SS but he is a year away. Crawford and Arraez have the same projected steamer WAR. They have similar control though currently Arraez has an extra year. That may change with the new deal. They have similar BTV. Crawford is certainly a better fit for the Twins needs at SS.
  7. I don’t find the rebuild debate helpful. Of course they are in a rebuild. They are rebuilding an entire rotation from the one they began with in 2021. The debate is really how they use their resources to rebuild that staff. Do they trade 2023 assets to improve the 2022 rotation? Do they devote a significant portion of the 23-25 budgets to sign a starter who will likely have their best season with them in 2022? I would be 2023 focused with every use of assets.
  8. What might an incentive look like to encourage smaller market teams to re-sign their own free agents? If there had been a financial incentive for the Twins to extend Berrios into his free agency years would the Twins have had a better chance of signing him? That incentive could go directly to player or team effectively increasing the offer from the home team.
  9. Yes. That is my plan for this off season. Make moves that will make the 2023 team better. In this case it makes the 2022 team better also.
  10. I don’t go by what they say or even read it. I can see the roster. My filter became 2023 in late August when Maeda was lost for 2022. At the trade deadline Maeda had finished a very strong July with 5 starts and an ERA OF 2.15. It was plausible to add a number 2 pitcher and build the rest of the rotation for 2022. As soon as they lost Maeda I would advocate the Twins devote resources to assets that they control through at least 2023. It is my suggested filter not the Twins. I don’t know their plans and can only offer my thoughts. I am sure many disagree,
  11. You are pretty convincing. My filter is 2023. Does this make trade make the team better in 2023? I think it does and Montas would be a needed piece of any 2023 playoff rotation. I suppose the Twins could wait until next season to make this kind of deal and try to get someone with 23-24 control. I just wonder if starting pitching will be available next off-season as they appear to be this year from the Reds and A’s.
  12. I didn’t look it up before but Montas (39.6) for Martin and Woods-Richardson (total 40.4) make a pretty good match according to BTV. Bassist would add 17 to the deal. If the Twins don’t believe in Montas then maybe someone like Tyler Mahle who also has two years of control and similar enough WAR. The cost of acquiring Berrios level starting pitching through trade is vast. I would make that Montas deal but I get why the Twins might be wiser to believe more in the future of Martin.
  13. Would it makes sense for the Twins to trade Martin and Woods-Richardson for Montas? Would it seem like they don’t have a plan by trading for prospects and then turning around and trading for a pitcher? It would be like trading Berrios for Montas. How does flipping one starter for another help? It helps because they traded the last two months of Berrios 2021 for the Montas 2023. They weren’t going anywhere in 2021. Why not trade him while his value is high and bank the prospect capital? Why not use that capital for much needed starting pitching? The Twins need starting pitching. If they can trade Martin for a Berrios like return with control in 2023 they absolutely should do it. Note: I chose Montas because I was looking for a pitcher that was a close match for Berrios in WAR last year (both 4.1) with 2023 control. There might be a better candidate. Let’s try not to derail a discussion about trading Martin with a debate about Berrios v Montas.
  14. Good work and insight. I don’t disagree with the grade but I find hope in Celestino’s AAA performance at age 22. Given more consistent play he showed a little pop, good speed and a good walk rate. Given his age and athleticism he may have the most upside on your debut list.
  15. Is that so surprising? Teams change. Look to 2019 and compare the Rays that contributed more than one WAR to that team against the Twins that contributed more than one WAR. The Twins have retained more of those contributors to 2019. Is there any significance one way or another? Not that I can see.
×
×
  • Create New...