Jump to content
Twins Daily
  • Create Account

nicksaviking

Community Moderator
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    18,707

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    85

 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 nicksaviking

  1. nicksaviking
    I'd be open to seeing any kind of stats that show otherwise, but statistically and visually, to me it looks like guys are peaking very, very early these days. Even look at last year's All-Star game, something that used to be loaded with veterans getting in based on their past reputations; it is now loaded with kids. Just look at last year's Twins, from the rotation to the lineup, it was almost exclusively carried by the younger guys. I don't disagree that there are still plenty of good contributors over 30, most are solid role players, but why on earth would anyone give a role player more than a two year deal? Guys on 1-2 year deals can be traded if the season goes in the toilet or a young player emerges. Guys on 1-2 year deals can be sent to the bench or DFA'd if they stink, we continue to see the Twins in awkward positions now because they have given too many guys 4-year deals. It hasn't worked, they need to stop digging themselves into a deeper hole. I'd be fine taking a chance on a couple long term deals to vets, but it's got to be quality over quantity. From my perspective, two guys on a 4-year/80M deal are better than four guys on a 4-year/40M deal.
  2. nicksaviking
    I can't see a free agent ace coming here unless it's unexpected, such as the Cardinals turning around Chris Carpenter or when RA Dickey came out of nowhere for the Mets. I'd certainly be willing to trade for a young one though, say Matt Harvey. I'd even be OK chasing a big money free agent starter, just not until Santana, Hughes and Nolasco are no longer guaranteed roster spots.
  3. nicksaviking
    I don't want to say about the time PEDs became passe, but only two of the top 20 offensive players in WAR started the year over at an age over 30, and only three of the top 20 pitchers. Of all pitchers and batters in the top 20, only Curtis Granderson was over the age of 32. It sucks, but it's been headed this way for several years and I'm betting there are several GMs who are already planning to take advantage this.
  4. nicksaviking
    There are plenty of low risk free agents, they come on 1-2 year deals. Those are the only kinds of free agents I'm supportive of at this time as the team already has Mauer, Santana, Hughes and Nolasco guaranteed to take up four of only 25 available roster spots because of their long term contracts. The roster just can't be filled with untradable, unmovable veteran contracts or they'll end up like the Tigers, but with a lower quality group of veterans mucking up the works and fewer division titles to show for the moves.
  5. nicksaviking
    Yeah but giving a four year deal to a CF wouldn't kill your roster if his defense or offense tanked, a team carries four or five anyway. You should only have two catchers, and there's nowhere to put this guy if the wheels fall off. When Mauer's deal is up, this would make more sense. Four years just isn't a good move for free agents over 30. Two years? Sure, I'll get on board.
  6. nicksaviking
    It's a tough spot for Gardy, he has a rep as an manager from a bygone era. As mentioned a guy can change, but at the same time, it's also not fair to chastise a GM take for not taking that leap of faith. I think Gardy really liked the "old school" rep he had with the Twins, plenty of people wear that like a badge of pride. However that's not what most people who do the hiring want to see these days. Gardy had ample opportunities to change his rep with the Twins. No one was stopping him from shifting or platooning. No one was forcing him to bunt. Perhaps he was better with numbers than everyone thought, but all I can remember is when he sarcastically called them "cybermetrics". I would really like to see Gardy get another shot, but he had to know long ago that a revolution was taking place in baseball. I like the guy a lot, but I have to say, Gardy probably should have considered the idea that the Twins might not be his retirement gig. He really should have done more to put down the league-wide idea that he was resistant to new ideas, especially if he really wasn't.
  7. nicksaviking
    No illusions here. There's one good well-rounded catcher in the league and the Giants aren't selling. The difference between the rest isn't that big and becomes nearly negligible once you get past the top five or so. Not everyone gets a stud catcher, it sucks. The other 29 teams will have to figure out other ways to win.
  8. nicksaviking
    Well for one thing, healthy seasons on the wrong side of 30 aren't a given, and four in a row are going to take some luck. My main point was that his defense could be replicated or even better, which seemed to be your sole argument for signing him instead of Pierzynski. My underlying point was that his offense wasn't so far above average that other free agent catchers will have no chance at matching it.
  9. nicksaviking
    Dioner Navarro is better defensively and Geovany Soto is comparable. Odds are that he'd be better than both offensively, but it's not even close to a sure thing, they've both had seasons as good or better than Wieters offensively. I sure don't think he's 4 years, 60 million and a draft pick better than them.
  10. nicksaviking
    Wieters has been fine offensively, but not better than Pierzynski and his career offensively is pretty similar to Chris Iannetta. Defensively Dioner Navarro is in the same ballpark and Geovany Soto isn't much of a step back. No argument that Wieters is the best all around catcher available, but there's no way he's 60M and 4 years better than any of the other options. And it's really that 4+ years that most concerns me. And the pick.
  11. nicksaviking
    I'm OK with that. I'm not typically risk adverse, but the Twins just have too many terrible contracts at the moment. If they can't pawn them off on other teams, they really need to wait until they expire to start handing out more questionable long term deals to vets. I want a good catcher too, but it's not worth hamstringing the future over; offensive catchers are not a necessity.
  12. nicksaviking
    Even if it was a good move for the Twins, and I don't think it is, is it a good move for Morneau? Both he and Kubel were critical of Target Field for left-handed hitters. Only 20 of his 58 HR during the Target Field years came at home. Whether recent statistics show this as a fluke or not probably isn't relevant if Morneau thinks that high RF wall is a detriment to his line-drive swing.
  13. nicksaviking
    I'm not doubting Jay can be converted to a starter, I just wonder what kind of starter he could be. If he doesn't miss bets due to reduced velocity, he'll just be another guy. He wasn't the guy I would have picked, but no one in the draft excited me much, even the top 3 SS.
  14. nicksaviking
    I am a sentimental guy. Still no. Seeing the veteran Hunter on the roster last July and knowing he couldn't be moved was troubling. As much as I like seeing favorites from the past, the smart business decision is to sign free agents that can get you something back if the season goes in the crapper or you're unexpectedly overloaded at a position. No more legacy signings, as much as I might enjoy seeing them again.
  15. nicksaviking
    Coming into the draft Stewart was touted as having a Texas strong upper 90's fastball. I thought I was hearing this year it was 93-95, but this sounds like it's not even that high.
  16. nicksaviking
    Slightly off topic, but I wanted to see where Zuke ranked in terms of games caught and not surprisingly he played in 131 games, which ranked him 7th out of all the catchers. Only 8 of those games did he come in as a substitute as well. Yet somehow he only managed 479 PA (471 as a starter) which is still 23 PA from being a qualified batter.
  17. nicksaviking
    Surely height could be an advantage and just like most athletes who don't ride horses for a living, the rule of thumb is the bigger the better. I can't imagine height could ever trump velocity, movement and control though. I'd have to think that there are plenty of things a shorter pitcher can do to regain the slight disadvantage of losing out on height, like having a longer stride causing a release closer to the plate, having the ability to change arm slots or throwing the ball from an angle that takes longer for the batter to pick up out of the pitchers hand.
  18. nicksaviking
    I also think the "downward plane" need is overblown. If it was so devastatingly important, would anyone throw from the pretty standard 3/4 delivery? Heck, what about a side-armer.
  19. nicksaviking
    Awful, they've drafted and developed two in the organization's entire run in Minnesota. It still needs to happen though. To be clear, I'm not against supplementing the homegrown talent with difference makers from the outside, in 1987 they brought back Blyleven and in 1991 they got Morris. However the Twins already did this with this club with Nolasco, Hughes and Santana, unfortunately it doesn't look like it was enough. Can't keep doubling down on these bad contracts, at some point they have to try a different approach.
  20. nicksaviking
    I'm not saying it's a quick fix, but I can't believe creating your own ace(s) organically is only based on luck. I don't think buying one is easy though either. Forget about the ramifications of sticking a fourth 30+ year old pitcher in the rotation, how could the Twins convince Greinke to pass up the Dodgers, Yankees, Angels, Red Sox or Cubs and come to Minnesota? The Twins would have to pay a lot more money, or worse, more years. Teams not in big markets have to make their own, otherwise they'll have to be satisfied with calling middle of the road starters like Nolasco, Hughes or Santana an ace and live with it. I'd consider a trade however if the Mets could be convinced to part with one of their aces.
  21. nicksaviking
    I think you need an ace or five, but I don't think you chase them. The team simply has to start making their own. If they continually fail at this task that most other teams have not failed at nearly as often, wholesale changes need to be made. Developing strikeout generating horses is one of the biggest keys to this whole game. I also think we're getting awfully close to trying to buy our way out of a rebuild, which is going to really hurt a sustained run of success.
  22. nicksaviking
    I think he's taking lessons from 6' 10" Chris Young.
  23. nicksaviking
    I think Michael is almost certainly going to make the big leagues even if only because of the fact that he was a 1st round pick. Only three college players drafted ahead of him have yet to hit the majors and two of those almost certainly would have by now if not for injury. As a utility infielder with good on-base skills and the pedigree of a 1st round pick, there's a pretty good chance he'll get picked in the Rule V. If the Twins protect him and put him on the 40-man, they almost certainly will give him a call at some point.
  24. nicksaviking
    I wish I knew more about mechanics, most of my knowledge is anecdotal and rehashing what I have heard smarter people say. But if it is something the Twins are doing, I'd have to think it's the reduced stride to the plate; the typical Twins stride certainly appears to be pretty minimal. IF (still just speculation) the Twins coach the stride out of pitchers I wonder what the reason is. Is it believed to improve control? Do they believe it keeps pitchers healthier? Or is it simply a more effective way of limiting the leads of base runners? And again, I don't think a reduced velocity or strikeout rate is the intention of the club, if there is a causation related to a Twins philosophy, it is almost surely just a side effect not the actual objective.
  25. nicksaviking
    I agree they did, but I'm not holding it against them anymore as I think they changed, at least when it comes to the draft. But I am curious, Ryan has said many times that Deron Johnson and the scouts are really the ones who run the draft, and lately they have been getting harder throwing guys (the results can be a different topic of discussion) yet in free agency, the Twins still seem to favor the control guys. It also seems that many guys who were drafted with high 90's heat or projections for high 90's heat have now fallen to low to mid-90's guys. I don't think this is entirely unique to the Twins, and some of that could be due to age, as pitchers seem to lose velocity pretty early into their careers these days, but I wonder if there is any kind of disconnect between what the scouting department covets in a pitcher and what those that develop them ultimately want to see from them. To clarify, I don't mean to ask if those who are developing pitchers want to get rid of strikeouts for PTC because I don't think they do, I more wonder if a strong focus on mechanics or asking guys not to throw max effort may impact college or projected velocity compared to what we see in the minors. Or maybe I'm just mus-remembering pre-draft velocity reports entirely.
×
×
  • Create New...