Jump to content
Twins Daily
  • Create Account

ToddlerHarmon

Verified Member
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    461

  • 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

Forums

Blogs

Events

Store

Downloads

Gallery

Everything posted by ToddlerHarmon

  1. ToddlerHarmon
    And Sanchez or Urshela
  2. ToddlerHarmon
    Not the only lineups for sure, but two possible lineups with this roster: vs RHP: CF Buxton 3B Arraez SS Correa 2B Polanco DH Sano 1B Kirilloff LF Larnach C Jeffers RF Kepler vs LHP: CF Buxton 2B Polanco SS Correa DH Sanchez 1B Sano RF Kirilloff LF Rooker C Jeffers 3B Urshela Nice lineups, but the roster has too many 3B (Miranda is in St Paul in this projection), too few LF (Rooker really should only see the field at 1B)
  3. ToddlerHarmon
    An excellent viewpoint, and I agree that it isn't discussed enough - in order to have the occasional championship, a team with less resources has to approach risk differently. I am glad that this FO doesn't immediately conclude "risk bad" (looking at you, Terry Ryan), because hitting a few longshots is the only way to beat overwhelming resources. Which is why I'm also very happy about the Buxton contract as well. And I would accept throwing a top-pedigree prospect into the rotation, or a trade of middling prospects for a front-line starter
  4. ToddlerHarmon
    Another "oh yeah, he can play second" is Urshela. Given the need to have Arraez in the lineup and Urshela's stronger defense, is Arraez your everyday third baseman and Urshela your utility infielder? This would also serve to keep Gordon's plate appearances to a minimum, which is probably for the best.
  5. ToddlerHarmon
    Agreed. Larnach or even Cave make a better fit
  6. ToddlerHarmon
    Correction: the Twins now have *two* Best In Baseball, and at shortstop and center field, no less
  7. ToddlerHarmon
    Based purely on results, I wonder where Eduoard Julien ranks for a hit tool. Or is he all pitch selection?
  8. ToddlerHarmon
    May you be a fan of an interesting team
  9. ToddlerHarmon
    A thought I haven't seen shared: this gives them room to move Donaldson, since Arraez, Miranda, and Martin can all hit and play third competently. That would leave them with the following age classes of position players: Sano/Kepler/Polanco Buxton/IKF Jeffers/Arraez/Gordon Kirilloff/Larnach/Rortvedt/Miranda/Martin/Lewis So, yeah, look for Donaldson to move to a contender for a young starter
  10. ToddlerHarmon
    I want to create a thousand accounts and like this comment with each of them
  11. ToddlerHarmon
    Whether or not Manfred is being truthful, he is definitely throwing out a red herring. If baseball teams are not making an adequate amount of money for the owners' tastes, then it is not at all obvious that is the players' fault. I've heard reported that MLB player compensation is 48% of league revenue, less than the portion of revenue earned by NBA players, for example, and less than the owners themselves offered in a previous CBA negotiation
  12. ToddlerHarmon
    Congrats on the anniversary! A fun look back. Howeva, about the Correia signing: "Say what you will about the current front office, but they don't make moves like this" No, they signed both Happ and Shoemaker to one year deals instead
  13. ToddlerHarmon
    Arcia had so much potential. He had every ability to avoid those strikeout rates, but he was so aggressive.
  14. ToddlerHarmon
    Since we're ignoring how the FO feels about this idea, and the defensive limitations, let's close our eyes and daydream about the best-case lineup this creates: Sano Garver Kirilloff Arraez Donaldson Polanco Larnach Buxton Kepler That's why the idea can't be ignored.
  15. ToddlerHarmon
    Now let's remove the guys who have NOT proven they are MLB hitters yet: C Depth - Garver, Jeffers, 1B Depth - Kirilloff, Sano, Donaldson, Garver 2B Depth - Polanco, Arraez 3B Depth - Donaldson, Arraez SS Depth - ?, Arraez LF Depth - CF Depth - Buxton RF Depth - Kepler DH Depth - Sano, Garver, Donaldson So, if Larnach hits, you need Arraez less. But proven depth? No.
  16. ToddlerHarmon
    I remember being at a game against the Yankees, must have been April or May 2006. The Twins took a tiny lead, then things started to fall apart. The Yankees tied it up, had men on base, and the top of the order up. Liriano came in and looked unhittable against an historically great lineup. He shut things down, then kept the door shut as the Twins took it into extra innings and won on a Morneau squibber into right. Anyone who has ever seen a Twins-Yankees playoff collapse can just imagine what could have been if Liriano had kept that form for a few more years with the Twins.
  17. ToddlerHarmon
    I think you're right, but interesting that that leaves Donaldson, Maeda, Sano, and Rogers off the list
  18. ToddlerHarmon
    Excellent premise, and well done. You even left shortstop open for us to argue about. Since you put a lot of weight on clubhouse presence and fighting spirit, my vote goes to Tanner of the Bad News Bears, who probably was the model for the real life AJ Pierzynski.
  19. ToddlerHarmon
    This I think is the real story. They are taking their shot with the young pitchers. A pitching pipeline requires doing so. Doing so for five rotation spots is not how you write it up, but 2020 made it impossible to evaluate all the young pitchers on actual MiLB performance, so now they have to hold MLB level auditions or turn their back on half of their pipeline without enough information. I may not agree, but they seem to have concluded this is the right path. I will admit that there is NO affordable strategy that is likely to fill out an entire rotation from scratch and get you to the World Series. So auditions may be the least bad path for 2022
  20. ToddlerHarmon
    I'm ok that Falvey and Levine and Pohlad are trying to find new and efficient ways to build a roster. BUT, if that work isn't even *trying* to build a *championship* roster, then count me out.
  21. ToddlerHarmon
    No The Twins don't have a DH (especially if Kirilloff is needed in the outfield, which looks likely) Besides Arraez, the Twins only have Donaldson who can regularly get on base at over a 350 clip The better defenders in his positions are older and more expensive. And some stats were tracking him as better than Donaldson at 3B now. At his age, he is one of the new, cheap crop to keep until pitching arrives. The rest of the established core will be on the wrong side of 30 very soon Donaldson needs to be kept fresh if he can't be traded, and will bring a bigger haul if he can be And finally, the bat to ball skills aren't merely entertaining. They are the unteachable offensive skill. And the Twins have darn few others in the organization who can match Arraez on that, and no youngsters who have proven it in MLB
  22. ToddlerHarmon
    So, we have a lineup, but no rotation, and holes in the bullpen Circumstances dictated that we trade Berrios, and we did the best we could by getting prospects We have a handful of young starters that need MLB experience to both see who develops and to become competitive If we sign Buxton, our lineup will remain intact for a couple more years, with the exceptions of Sano and probably Donaldson. And, we WILL overpay if we outbid anyone for starting pitching (not to mention that if teams like the Yankees decide to win any bidding war, it's out of our hands) I hate to say it, but to me, this adds up to focusing on auditions, not wins, in 2022. Don't sign any FA, extend Buxton, and find out which youngsters can start (x5), close, and play shortstop. Then fill in the holes before 2023.
  23. ToddlerHarmon
    I have to admit ignorance of this part of the calculation. The idea of a replacement player is below average: your standard AAAA player - someone that can be obtained from waivers or a minor-league contract for the cost of nothing more than a roster spot. But that doesn't give me a number to hold on to. I've heard that a team of replacement players (0 WAR) would be expected to win about 48 games (again, with Runs -> Wins), but I don't know how that baseline gets set, either. Polanco being credited with 4.8 WAR isn't at all a slight. It means a lineup of 9 2021-version-Polancos, saddled with the Saints rotation, bullpen, and bench, (think 5 ERA pitching and a bunch of .200-hitting benchwarmers) would grab 91 wins and a Wild Card berth, if not a division championship. The usual benchmarks for hitters are 8 WAR is an MVP season, 5 WAR is an All Star season, 2 WAR is an average everyday hitter (for their position). I'm sure you've heard it before, but the runs-produced stats are obviously dependent on other players' performance, and end up with clear outliers. A famous example: 1985 Mattingly, a fine hitter, looks like Gehrig with 253 R+RBI, when in truth it was Rickey Henderson's INSANE production in front of him that made it all possible, but he "only" had 218 R+RBI, (which also doesn't credit the fact that Henderson played a much harder defensive position). WAR, which gives Mattingly all-star kudos at 6.5, and Henderson ALL-TIME recognition at 9.9 WAR, paints a more accurate picture.
  24. ToddlerHarmon
    To answer the specific question of whether on-base percentage is weighed correctly versus slugging when coming up with WAR, the answer is: there was an attempt. WAR uses Runs Created (RC) as its basis for offensive production, which gives more weight to getting on base than OPS does. It also gives more weight to singles versus walks (because walks don't drive in runners from 2nd), credits steals, etc. So, WAR tries to fairly account for the different offensive skill sets. Now, whether it does so accurately is another issue. The WAR calculation assumes a "normal" offensive environment, so a lineup with extreme power and poor on base skills might struggle more than WAR accounts for, and so might a lineup with good on-base skills and little power. The other thing WAR does is assume that runs make wins. Which equates consistent production with streaky production, which is probably not accurate. A team that averages 4.5 runs a game by having a week of 1, 2, 2, 3, 8, and 10 runs probably went 2-4, but a team that scores 2, 3, 4, 5, 5, and 7 runs probably went 3-3 or 4-2. So, IMO, WAR undervalues on-base skills, because something that happens 35% of the time (getting on base) is more consistent than something that happens 10% of the time (extra-base-hits).
  25. ToddlerHarmon
    This sounds like a great best case for the post-Donaldson future. Assuming this gives you Sano, Garver, Kirilloff, Polanco, MIranda, Lewis, Larnach, Buxton, Kepler, Jeffers, Arraez, and Martin. So, you do have room for Gordon, Palacios, or some other Adrianza-esque SS backup. But leaves Rooker or any other bench slugger out of the picture.
×
×
  • Create New...