Jump to content
Twins Daily
  • Create Account

TheLeviathan

Old-Timey Member
  • Posts

    18,575
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    46

 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 TheLeviathan

  1. May has consistently said he struggles with the prep of being a reliever and has experienced multiple injuries since the move. For the love of god let the kid try and be a starter. I can't believe we're sitting here debating this when the only reason he got moved out of the rotation was the team deferring to Mike freaking Pelfrey. Using him out of the bullpen has led to injuries, ineffectiveness, and stripped us of a desperately needed, competent starter. We already fixed the Plouffe mistake a year late, let's fix the May one too.
  2. I really don't see Garver being a factor to consider until late 2017, probably 2018. Seems like plenty of time to have a capable defensive stud back there helping out pitchers in the meantime.
  3. I wish the FA market offered more attractive homes to flip. Everything on the market is rubble. But where there are options are with guys like Gomez and the bullpen guys. Target that.
  4. I like this offseason plan, nice work Seth. I like Hernandez as an option. I think I'd still pony up for Storen or someone like that in hopes of a July trade. We have room for Storen and hernandez.
  5. Is it confirmed to be a reaction to last night?
  6. I believe we're still in full blown rebuild, but having a catcher that is actually good at catching will actually help our young pitchers. And if he's really good and a young guy develops, we can always trad.e
  7. Not encouraging unless you think about role-players in those situations. I have no problem swapping out Danny Santana, Robbie Grossman, or Centeno with grizzled vets. As long as those grizzled vets aren't stealing playing time away from the players that need it.
  8. I think Santana can net a really solid AA player that is in the 40-70 range for Top 100 prospects. Something like that. His contract and performance in this offseason should make him a very attractive asset. I think Dozier can land you a near ready or ready young arm and 1-2 other pieces in the lower levels with upside.
  9. Thanks for doing these, I'd love to do one (I did last season) but with so much hinging on trades that need to happen I don't even know where to begin. Trade speculation is fun, but it's also incredibly difficult to pin down. Plouffe, Santana, and Dozier need to be traded. Two of those three can net good to great value IMO. The other just needs to be gone.
  10. Please don't hold them to that. Walking into this free agency class like a drunken sailor is a disaster waiting to happen. I like to think they'll realize that.
  11. Id take a scholarship and play QB for the gophers if I get all these excuses too. I will be crappy at it too.
  12. I don't think we need to have Rizzo to justify reducing Mauer's playing time. And it's going to be hard to see what kind of replacement we have until they can actually play. Mauer's not going back to what he was and what he is isn't worth holding on to any more. Time to see if we can catch some lightening.
  13. I think you can defend as "not illogical" everything Maddon did. And yet also say his team definitely overcame some bad decisions on his part to win this series. I'm sure he was a difference maker over 162 games, but in these 7 games he was a detriment.
  14. Here's something.....would you trade Ervin Santana for Holland and Profar? Maybe with another prospect from Texas in it?
  15. And it likely would've cost Carlos Santana too. Much like it did to Sano's confidence and Schwarber's knee.
  16. Westworld is what my wife and I are using as our bridge to Thrones. We're sorting of doing that with the Walking Dead, but that show is losing me. I think it already lost my wife. She's hate watching now.
  17. It's a fair point, but we know now how many practices that were done in baseball were demonstrably poor ideas. From the frequency of bunting, to the downplaying of walks, to a host of other things. We can show mathematically how those ideas led to less of what they were trying to accomplish (run scoring), not more. Also, simply citing decades of practice isn't a sufficient argument. It suggests frequency of occurrence over time is sufficient for determining whether the practice is a good one. That's fallacious reasoning. "That's the way it's always been done" just won't cut it for me. It's not that I think I'm more of an expert, but I'd definitely say my argument is stronger on the face of it. I'm following more objective standards for good practice than simply falling in lock step with tradition.
×
×
  • Create New...