Jump to content
Twins Daily
  • Create Account

nicksaviking

Community Moderator
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    25,019

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    126

 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 nicksaviking

  1. nicksaviking
    I don't know, a trade and a free agent signing are basically using two different resources, one uses prospects and one uses money, it's not like these two dis-similar moves are going to double down and deplete either of those resources extensively. I guess my view is that if the Twins were to sign a big time free agent (Darvish is the only one I see as big time this year) you'd think it would indicate that the team thinks their window of opportunity is open now. Wouldn't you want to give yourself the best chance to win now? Why waste 2018 and only next year move to shore up the remaining rotation holes? Especially when there is a trend this year where the bottom feeders are open for business. I don't recall a year where this many quality arms are available for trade. The aggressive teams aren't just making one move, they are making them in bunches and for the most part they are working in tandem.
  2. nicksaviking
    I actually think the front office miscalculated the pace of free agency. There doesn't seem to be much reason to leave four open 40-man spots unless they intended to start signing free agents or making trades prior to the draft. Ohtani slowed down all the big ticket free agents and the relievers nearly all waited until the winter meetings to start moving. I'd also guess that there would be a better chance of exposing players to the Rule V and keeping them than adding them to the 40-man and being forced to remove them later exposing them to waivers.
  3. nicksaviking
    Ugh, but it's been stuck on "Ask again later" for nearly 30 years.
  4. nicksaviking
    I haven't seen either of them approach 100 MPH as Kinley has reported to hit.
  5. nicksaviking
    They don't have enough in this year's pool to sign Severino, at this time they'll have to dip into next year's funds to do so.
  6. nicksaviking
    I actually would have liked Cishek in a vacuum, but that rumor didn't make sense to me. I always figured that half of the effectiveness of side-armed relievers was that they forced the batter into a new perspective from their previous at bat. Perhaps I'm wrong but adding Cishek or Neshak seems like it might negate some of Hildenberger's effectiveness or vice versa. At the very least you wouldn't want to use them to face the same batters in the same game would you?
  7. nicksaviking
    I think it's rare that a young reliever is a needle mover coming up through the system though. It seems to be the position where they're not exciting until actually do something on the big stage to make the fans take notice.
  8. nicksaviking
    ******Mod Note******** Let's keep this article thread on the topic of Kinley and the Rule V situation. For the unrelated Fernando Rodney signing let's use this one: http://twinsdaily.com/topic/28181-article-twins-sign-closer-rodney-to-one-year-deal/page-4?do=findComment&comment=701332
  9. nicksaviking
    Right but one aspect does not necessitate the other. I don't care for Rodney or similar signings; if this team is going to get bullpen pieces I'd like to see players of a higher caliber. However I am eager and excited to see more of Hildenberger, Busenitz, Moya, Rogers, Curtis, Reed, Chargois and company. And unlike every year that preceded this one, we already know most will be in the pen seeing as that's where most ended the season.
  10. nicksaviking
    Aren't signing old guys and relying on the guys they have two different approaches? I agree, signing old guys isn't a great idea, but last year once the dumped the old guys, the young guys they already had pitched pretty well.
  11. nicksaviking
    I haven't heard anyone make that arguement. One was a move for next year, one was a move for this year. No one is compelled to like both or dislike both. Personally I'm in the camp of liking the Pineda deal and being underwhelmed by the Rodney deal.
  12. nicksaviking
    I'm all for getting some big bad bullpen pieces, but once this team finally dumped Haley and Breslow and started relying on Hildnberger, Busenitz and Rogers, the pen was pretty solid. Heck yeah, lets improve it, but this team's Achilles heel is clearly the rotation.
  13. nicksaviking
    This signing would (?will?) be more agreeable to me if he was (?is?) part of a back-of-the-rotation package that was (?is?) being brought in, like what the Rockies did with Shaw, McGee and perhaps Holland, the Phillies did with Neshek and Hunter or what the Cubs did with Cishek and Morrow. I don't know that I like Rodney solo; without being part of a package of excellent veteran relief arms, I'm going to be concerned that he's going to get way too long of a leash when it comes to the highest of leverage situations. I would not trust Molitor to pull the plug early on a veteran closer in favor of an inexperienced one.
  14. nicksaviking
    But plenty of players were traded and signed as free agents during that window and they are added to the acquiring team's 40 man, it's just that unlike the guys who were originally on the 40-man, the new guys being added can't be removed until spring.
  15. nicksaviking
    I'd think it would be the opposite. On the off chance the Twins DID end up making a deal for Cole, people will be pointing out that Pittsburgh obviously had interest in Burdi and the Twins wasted an asset that could have been used to make the deal happen.
  16. nicksaviking
    OK, you have me interested. I don't like losing Burdi and Bard, and they had the roster spots for all three, but I'm happy to see an actual flame thrower in the Twins bullpen. Since he's a Rule V pick, the team is actually going to be forced to put him on the MLB roster instead of bidding their time with him in the minors until he proves to be too injured or too ineffective as has been tradition with this club.
  17. nicksaviking
    I would think that he would have to be placed on the 40-man but just like any other 40-man additions after the rosters were set, he'd have to remain on it until spring training, which shouldn't be an issue considering that's the same position he is in now.
  18. nicksaviking
    So Philadelphia traded Burdi to Pittsburgh for international cap space? Why didn't the Twins do that last week? I don't see what would have prevented them from doing so.
  19. nicksaviking
    I thought Kintzler's wife was passive aggressively nixing his return to Minnesota. Though she wanted him to go to AZ so who knows what to make of this. I had very little interest in a Kintzler reunion myself, I think this team needs to beef up it's strikeout numbers not lessen them. Also, I'd prefer not to revisit the days of "we're putting the band back together". In terms of the Twins, my aversion to sentimentality is very strong these days, I'd go out of my way to avoid it. Not that I'm not getting quite anxious about all the quality bullpen arms that are going elsewhere, I'm disappointed; just not disappointed in this one.
  20. nicksaviking
    I'm actually more disappointed in losing Bard. He was finally healthy, putting up big strikeout numbers in the high minors and could have been a contributor right away had he pitched like he did last year. Luckily both Philly and the Angels have been making fairly aggressive noise this offseason, hopefully they both are competitive this year and can't afford to waste a 25-man spot if either struggle. This Kinley signing looks completely bizarre. His numbers look so pedestrian and his lack of success above A ball is clear. He looks like such an unnatural selection that I can make no other conclusions other than someone in the front office has some deep dive knowledge about this guy or they just picked a name out of a hat.
  21. nicksaviking
    The league's best relievers are starting to look like they're forming an NBA team. The best ones seem to be joining up on one team to form a super duo or trio. As a team that doesn't even have a solo, it's a little discouraging. Maybe the Twins DO have to make one or two of their own to attract others.
  22. nicksaviking
    I guess I would just say to those concerned about Pineda and the 2019 payroll: if the Twins actually get to a point where his $8 is actually a hinderance, it almost certainly means they've been filling out lots of new contracts, in which case I'm almost certainly going to be happy anyway.
  23. nicksaviking
    It's $8M in 2019 a year in which the Twins currently have a total of $21M committed to the books. I can think of quite a few scenarios where this signing could be a boon to the club. The only one I can think of that is a detriment is if the Twins had been planning on signing Manny Machado and Clayton Kershaw in 2019.
  24. nicksaviking
    I would like to think so, but it seems that is starting to become a bit of an antiquated philosophy. The elite teams are starting to amass two to three guys for the back of their pen whom five years ago would have all been considered closer material. These guys seem to understand that they're going to be more recognizable on a big market winning club than they will racking up saves for a loser in the sticks. Not that the Twins are a loser, just that promising a guy save opportunities doesn't appear to carry the same value as it used to.
  25. nicksaviking
    I like the move a lot. FB with plus velocity a slider and a change. No CB but otherwise he looks like the kind of starter that Cleveland has had success showing patience with as of late.
×
×
  • Create New...