Jump to content
Twins Daily
  • Create Account

jkcarew

Verified Member
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    2,624

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    2

 Content Type 

Profiles

News

Tutorials & Help

Videos

2023 Twins Top Prospects Ranking

2022 Minnesota Twins Draft Picks

Free Agent & Trade Rumors

Guides & Resources

Minnesota Twins Players Project

Forums

Blogs

Events

Store

Downloads

Gallery

Everything posted by jkcarew

  1. jkcarew
    Yeah...I don't think they're saying that clubs are going to simply start taking their 4th and 5th best starters and automatically plug them into the late-inning role. Instead, I took the comment to mean that clubs are starting to feel or starting to find that the ability to command one great pitch is more rare than the ability to command 2-3 average pitches. At the same time, 4th and 5th guys get skipped so much, don't have a post-season role, etc., etc. I'm oversimplifying, but this is how I interpret the FG comment.
  2. jkcarew
    IMO it's easy to see what some see in Rortverdt...he's an extremely athletic catcher, with very high defensive upside, and a chance to hit half-way decently. The key words in all that being the word 'catcher' and 'defensive'. And, while I'm not much of a "he was young for his level" guy when it comes to prospects we are speculating might have actual value in the majors some day....he was REALLY young/inexperienced for his level last year. I also think he will at least start in CR, with the hope that he will settle in early and earn a promotion relatively early during the season.
  3. jkcarew
    I see the NFL challenges as political (player health, perceptions of player conduct, etc.), I see MLB's as more fundamental to their economic structure. But your point is well taken. I worry too much. The national debt has bothered me for about a quarter century now...and the current yield on a 10-year treasury bond is 3%.
  4. jkcarew
    This is true, but I see it as a bubble forming...because it really doesn't seem to make sense to me. Viewership is declining and attendance is dropping. The popularity of MLB is not on a positive trend. How long can the revenue model hold? It seems something's got to give. Admittedly, bubbles can last a long time...and sometime they don't end in ugliness because changes happen that relieve the pressure before things get too dire. Maybe we're starting to see that here. But I can't say I'm optimistic at all.
  5. jkcarew
    Nice list, Seth! By the time you're to #15, I would have been good with Morneau, Pascual, Gaetti, Gladden, Gagne, Perry...in no particular order.
  6. jkcarew
    Me too. Sign of things to come? Or just the calm before the (2019) storm?
  7. jkcarew
    Lots of good ideas posted so far, I think. Some may not be terribly viable, but I think the point is that MLB needs to get serious about this. It seems reasonable to assume that the length of game issue would be a significant factor in the slip in popularity polls that baseball has been on for a few years now. Along with considering things like pitch clock and strike zones, MLB needs to consider more radical changes like restricting the number of pitchers 'active' for each game. Or limiting the number of in-inning pitching changes available to the manager each game. The way the use of rosters has evolved along with the way managers have used pitchers has really killed the pace of play and the flow of games. Need to consider anything and everything to create disincentive for the relentless discussions on the mound and in-inning pitching changes. Unfortunately, I think MLB will get serious about fixing this only when the sponsor bubble finally bursts and the money starts shrinking. Not a second earlier. I think that day is coming, though.
  8. jkcarew
    Is there an argument for Santana in the Hall? Yes. But it's silly to compare him to Kirby Puckett (or Sandy Koufax). Postseason and championships matter...and they should. Especially when you are the undisputed star/leader of the championship team...more than once. As the very first poster mentions, the much more realistic (non-pitcher) comparison would be Tony Oliva. Would I put Santana in? No.
  9. jkcarew
    My glass is half-full today. While I feel that Gordon earned a slip down the rankings, pretty much everyone's top 10 makes me feel a little better than where we were a year ago. I feel that if Gordon isn't a short-stop, I'd rank Luis Arraez ahead of him. But we'll see. Maybe he is a short-stop. If a list is slanted toward up-side, I'm mildly surprised Akil Baddoo doesn't crack the top 10. Regardless, I'm mildly optimistic that I can think of other names that are not even on this list that I feel have a very good chance of being useful down the road as either trade material or for the major league club. Jermaine Palacios is another name that comes to mind in that regard.
  10. jkcarew
    "market deal" will be north of 6-yrs / $200M, right? Greinke got more than that two years ago heading into his 32-yo season. He got 6/206+. And that was to a mid-market club. Seems there are sufficient players in the market to at least realize that. My guess (regardless of where anyone might fall on a technical Greinke/Darvish comparison) is that this is where Darvish's agents put the floor. I see very little change of this happening for the Twins, and at that cost, I'm not sure I'd be upset if it doesn't.
  11. jkcarew
    I understand the idea behind the decision to leave the roster spots open and expose the likes or Bard and Burdi. But not to use the spots for Rodney and Kinley. Sigh. I actually would have been more encouraged if the Twins had not signed Rodney today and not taken anyone in the Rule 5.
  12. jkcarew
    I refuse to be critical of what amounts to a one-year $8 million deal...simply because I wanted the team to make bigger deals for better pitchers. I honestly don't think this deal will limit in any way what the Twins may want to consider later...including later today. Nor will it make them less likely to pull the trigger on anything. If/when they pass on the $100-$200 million pitcher, it won't be because of the $8 they've spent on Pineda. So, for what this deal is...I like it. Decent chance of representing at least a marginal improvement to the rotation or (if we end up doing better later), a huge improvement to the bullpen. And in a year where we should be in a position for it to matter. I think both sides showed creativity in this deal.
  13. jkcarew
    Yeah. I would really not want to see Lewis go based on the ceiling as it stands so early. But I think 'untouchable' is a strong word, one I think management has to avoid as much as possible. Basically, the term/concept of 'untouchable' only has meaning to me within the context of a specific offer. For instance, I am willing to go only THIS FAR for player A; meanwhile, I'll go THIS FAR for player B.
  14. jkcarew
    Yikes. Not me. To me you don't trade the number 1 overall pick, when that pick is a position player, and especially when that pick is going to be a middle-of-the-field defender, to obtain any pitcher. At least not until that number 1 pick has had a chance to show you some cracks that will limit that ceiling. That day may come for Lewis (I sincerely hope it doesn't)...but I don't think we're there at this point. Too soon. Now when I say "any" pitcher.....well, let's just say Archer would not be an exception to the rule.
  15. jkcarew
    To me the only thing worth quibbling about in a hypothetical Gordon-Jay-Granite for Cole trade would be how to factor in the issue of only getting 2 years of control. If you were confident that you could solve for that problem, I don't see why the names would bother a Twins fan. Gordon did not seem 'almost ready' for the entire 2nd half of last year. While he's been younger than his competition all along the way, based on what he's shown offensively so far, it seems a great deal of his value will be dependent upon playing a position that nobody seems convinced he can play on an every-day basis at the major league level. Granite...as a left-handed hitter (without power), has exactly zero offensive value for the twins. He's injury insurance. If you think you can significantly improve your rotation, you're going to be ok worrying about injury insurance on another day. Tyler Jay at this point is a 24 year old high-risk, high-upside, lottery ticket. Based on organizational depth, risk, fit with current roster...these guys would be at the very top of the list of prospects (that actually have value) I would be willing to move if I were Twins management.
  16. jkcarew
    Very similar to his 2013 year in Rochester, expect larger sample size since he spent so much of 2013 in the majors. A lot of love here for Wade. Think he'd be interesting if he developed some power, but he really isn't trending that way. Slugging actually trending the other way. The right-handed hitting 4th outfielder discussed in the thread could turn out to be the primary subject of this article, could it not? The 14 games they stuck Garver in the OF this year in Rochester tells me that the organization was at least dreaming that he might have that capability. (That and pretty overt reluctance to start him behind the plate, even when Castro was on the shelf.) Meanwhile, Grossman's OBP as a right-handed batter continues to be elite. If you're healthy, the 4th outfielder doesn't have to field like Paul Blair. Defense becomes more of an issue if, based on splits, you are forced to platoon Rosario or Kepler. Admittedly, Molitor appears close to that with Kepler right now.
  17. jkcarew
    This...especially if you replace 'much more' with more. Not sure we can have one of the core 4 be a platoon player. And have always been mystified by the opinion that Kepler 'clearly' has more upside than Rosario. Mejia has to do WAY more. I'm not there with Polanco. He's had an encouraging year, to be sure...but I'm not convinced he will be a better value at shortstop (and/or second) than a number of guys that will be pushing him in 2 years. I don't think any of the other position guys have anyone pushing them any time soon. So, they better be 'core'.
  18. jkcarew
    Not really DH'ing THAT much...just not playing. Injuries and days off. Again, when we get to the HOF arguments...it won't matter why...the questing will simply be "will evaluators consider his career to have been a catching career?". But every year like this year that 'slows the bleeding' on his career averages, (while giving the totals a bit of a boost, as well)...can't hurt.
  19. jkcarew
    As you might guess by my moniker, I LIKE this! I love expressing my opinion that Carew was better than Killebrew. I usually don't stick around long to argue it, though. . Anyway, they were so different in style...couldn't get more different. And yet had a ton of respect for each other.
  20. jkcarew
    I'll agree with this assessment. The problem is that he didn't catch a ton, even during the years you site. Even in contemporary terms. During Joe's 10 seasons of catching, A.J. Pierzynski for instance, caught about 350 games more than Joe. You cite 8 seasons of elite rate stats elsewhere in your post, but Joe only had 6 seasons where he caught even half of the Twins games...and that's counting one where he caught about 90. To have the full 'extra' value of providing the averages he provided (both offensively and defensively) from the catcher position...you have to actually be playing the position in games. And it doesn't matter why you weren't playing or why your peak included a relatively small number of games. Just ask Tony Oliva. But that is really a Cooperstown discussion (or will be in the not to distant future), so I'm off topic in that regard. With regard to all-time great Twins, he's top 5 in my mind. And you can make a reasonable argument that 2009 was the greatest season ever by a Twin. (FWIW, I saw Killebrew's 1969 and Carew's 1977. Sigh.)
  21. jkcarew
    The hard thing about evaluating Mauer in history is that he has had two careers...and in two very different ball parks. His career as a catcher was at the very top of HOF standards offensively...no question. On the other hand, while he was at least average defensively...probably above average...he caught fewer games per season (and for way fewer season's obviously) than the all-time greats. This, even before his concussion. He was always mixing in games at DH and then there were his seasons of various pre-concussion injuries. As a first-baseman, due to a number of factors probably, he hasn't been anywhere near HOF worthy. Including this season, by the way. His current .810 OPS/117 OPS+ was bested by Kent Hrbek in about 10 different seasons. So, Mauer the catcher is top 5 Twin all time. I would agree with that. However, his legacy will always suffer from the production at first base in the second half of his career...and from the relatively few games and seasons, the shortness, of his catching career.
  22. jkcarew
    Assuming Dozier will want his big pay day (more than 2 years), there will be one more potential window to get something for him. Next season's trade deadline...only if the Twins happen to be out of it, obviously. Other than that scenario, we're probably looking at a compensation pick. Can't trade him this off-season now. You're expected to compete in 2018, and you're likely to not only get worse at 2nd base if you trade him, you're likely to get way worse. So, you'd have to be blown away with a trade offer at this point. And that doesn't seem likely. On a related note, Nick Gordon in 248 plate appearances since July 1 is slashing .219/.278/.313 with 60 strike outs. Gulp. SSS, young for his level, and still a very nice prospect etc., etc....but not exactly beating down the door for a middle infield spot quite yet.
  23. jkcarew
    I think it's much more realistic to consider that this year has not HURT Joe's chances. This year arrests the rate at which his career numbers were diminishing in stature. The only way it HELPS is if the voters don't notice he was a first baseman in 2017. An .810 OPS/117 OPS+ does not contribute to a hall-of-fame case for a first baseman. At all. For example, Kent Hrbek had about 10 years that were better than that. And no, Joe is not better defensively than Hrbek was at that position. If Joe makes it, it will be on the basis of what he did at catcher for 8 seasons from 2006 to 2103. Was it long enough? It hurts that even that 8 year stretch included 3 seasons where he didn't complete the year. The voters don't get into the business of projecting what your career would have been without the injuries. (See Oliva, Tony)
  24. jkcarew
    Fair enough. It was an anecdotal comment based on my perceptions having listened to most of Chattanooga's games on the internet. I went back and looked at Romero's game logs and it wasn't AS bad as I thought it would be. Some short outings with bad-to-very bad pitch counts; some short outings with pitch counts that really weren't horrible. All in all, not efficient, but not really out of line with what you see from many prospects. This year he's been averaging about 16.6 pitches per inning and his strike percentage is about 65%. The trend is not our friend, though. Last year, just about every number was significantly better than this year. Last year Romero dominated, and maybe it's just me, but it seems like a lot of posters have the perception that that he's dominating again this year. He's hasn't. He's had dominant or borderline-dominant starts here and there, mixed in with a whole bunch of mediocre, ok starts and a handful of clunkers. The AA level has challenged him. Happily, the one number that's held up is his strike out rate (although, it's taken a bit of a hit lately to 8.6 per 9). So, here's to hoping that this is a temporary plateau on his otherwise rapid ascent to the big club. But I'm not sure that, at this particular point in time, the Twins see him as 'almost' ready. We'll see.
  25. jkcarew
    I don't see it as the local columnist's job to recruit future free agents to stay. Also, whenever I see/hear the Harmon Killebrew 'start of career' comparisons, I cringe. The rules at the time created a situation where Killebrew was forced to remain with the major league club from the moment he signed at 17 years of age. His first 110 games or so, he was nothing more than a bench player, frequently appearing only to pinch-hit, and averaging no more than 2-3 plate appearances per game overall. And again, he was 18,19,20 years old at the time and should have been developing somewhere on a minor league field. Sano...I'm torn on Sano. I love him. I love his demeanor on the field and what we can see in the dug-out. Seems to almost always have positive body language and displays a ton of energy. Also seems truly engaged and the first to congratulate teammates when they do well...even when he is struggling. I think that is NOT that common and I think it's huge. I also happen to believe that Sano is a better athlete and more agile than the average fan (even the average TD poster) can even imagine. He's just a huge athlete. I believe that if he had grown up in the US he'd probably have ended up having to make a decision between D1 offensive/defensive lineman or baseball. (I think one of Howie Long's kids got drafted by MLB and ended up making the football lineman choice...but when you're from the DR, you don't end up with that option.) On the other hand, I do think it's a part of being (or becoming) a professional that you develop disciplines than enhance your craft. In Sano's case, if he is to reach true greatness...MVP/HoF-type greatness...he'll need to do two things. He'll need to obtain and maintain a leaner body and he will need to adjust to off-sped pitches away. When you're as talented as Sano, you can be good...you can be an all-star...without the sacrifices and improvements. But how good does he want to be? It's up to him. For now, I'll enjoy him for what he is. But eventually, the bar will be raised. It always is for the best players. Sano is not the first to face this.
×
×
  • Create New...