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
    If they retain Kepler, I don't need to look too hard for additional CF depth. If they do trade him, I'd LIKE Martin to be the fall back option, but I suppose they'd be best served to have an Almora type on hand at this time. But in regards to the Kepler situation, I really do like having the back up CF be a guy who's already in the regular lineup. Whether the back up remains Kepler, or in the future it's Martin or Royce Lewis, it's just better for roster construction. I don't want to have to roster a blackhole bat just so the team has a backup centerfielder, I'd rather use that roster spot on someone who can help out offensively.
  2. nicksaviking
    Bowles would interest me if he didn't seem almost exactly like Zimmer. The defensive coaches actually seem more intriguing, but, still, I really think they need an offensive guy.
  3. nicksaviking
    I think that starting pitching ZIPS projection is high if they are expecting Meada to contribute meaningful innings this year.
  4. nicksaviking
    I have no interest in trading for starting pitchers with 1 or 2 years of control left. This team isn't a legit contender next year and I don't want the front office trying to bail themselves out by making a short sighted trade in order to put together a .500 record to save their jobs. They made their bed in free agency, time to sleep in it, they shouldn't be giving up future equity to save face. Any trade that enables this team to carry a payroll under 130M should be grounds for new leadership.
  5. nicksaviking
    I’ll be much less likely to support them if they trade prospects so they could avoid funding a reasonable payroll. They had their shot at quality arms and they did nothing. If they now trade prospects so they can cap payroll at 100-110M and pretend they’re actually trying, yeah, I’ll probably lose it.
  6. nicksaviking
    You're cherry picking; Darvish, Wheeler and Eovaldi; poor starts with their new teams, but they turned it around. But there have hardly been any top flight starting pitchers hit the free agent markets this past decade or so. A few years we've had three or four, but some years guys like Jeremy Hellickson and Dallas Keuchel are at the top of the lists. It's not like we have a huge sample size of starters getting giant contracts as of late. And again, Greinke was NOT good his first year on his new deal, he got better in subsequent years. You need to stop acting like you found some golden equation that proves all starting pitchers on long contacts will bust; you didn't. They might be more likely to bust than they are to do well, but it's not a proven or even predictable outcome. You don't have to want long term deals because they are risky, that's fine and a justifiable stance, but everyone else is allowed to prefer to take that risk and preferring to take that risk doesn't mean everyone else is somehow blind to your wisdom.
  7. nicksaviking
    Darvish, Wheeler and Eovaldi pitched better a year after signing. Lance Lynn was brutal after leaving St. Louis then rebounded later. You mentioned Greinke earlier as a guy who was consistently good, but he wasn't. He did not pitch well when he signed his new contract in 2016, but he was really good for most of the remainder of his deal. This isn't the black and white situation you're making it out to be. There is no clear or obvious equation telling us when, if at all, free agent pitchers will peak with their new contracts.
  8. nicksaviking
    It's a bit out of left field, but I wouldn't be surprised if the White Sox agreed not to give Rodon a QO if he agreed to let them match any free agent offer. He just seemed like a pretty obvious QO move. I only suggest it because they just won the division, have money to spend but so far haven't done much. More importantly, even after two dreadful injury filled seasons by Rodon, the White Sox already brought him back as a free agent last year and were rewarded for their continued relationship with an outstanding season. I could see the non-QO offer as a reciprocation of their affinity and an olive branch since they got him on the cheap and well below arbitration salary last year. That's probably all too conspiratorial, though if he ends up resigning with the White Sox, I'll probably figure out a way to bump this post.
  9. nicksaviking
    Even with a trade, I don't think Rodon + hypothetical traded starter makes for a contending team. And if they end up trading prospects for a starter instead of paying free agency prices, I'm going to be pretty upset. They could have afforded to pay for multiple big arms in free agency. If they trade one top end prospect while sitting at a payroll below 130M, the fans justifiably should have out their pitchforks.
  10. nicksaviking
    I want the young guys to pan out, and I am expecting exactly that. But they shouldn't be counting on ANY of them to be a top of the rotation arm. Knock on wood, one or two are, but the most likely outcome is that they develop some middle of the rotation talent and some guys who can be quality backend/swingmen types. They absolutely should be looking to shore up the front of the rotation with an arm or two on long term deals IN ADDITION to developing their own players.
  11. nicksaviking
    I'd take Rodon, but he's not going to come close to making the team a contender. And if the Twins aren't a contender, then he's probably trade bait come July if he's on a two year deal. Which, is fine. Maybe the team is just good enough to hang on to him for year two, but in either case, it's not doing a lot to get the Twins a championship. This front office has to eventually look the boogeyman in the face and start giving out some long term deals to starting pitchers. They just can't keep dipping into the shallow end of the free agent market and sign three starters EVERY offseason, it's inefficient and takes an awful lot of luck to hit on the right arms every year.
  12. nicksaviking
    It was also ill advised to skip out on the free agent starting pitching market, so I'm not holding my breath that they're planning on making smart decisions. I see very little wiggle room left to spend that money wisely. I mean, from my perspective, they'd basically have to get Story and Rodon. Otherwise, they either will not spend it wisely or they won't spend it at all. Since they skipped out on the starting pitching market, they aren't going to be chasing a World Series next year. And if they aren't chasing a World Series, than they might as well keep trying out the corner OF prospects; they have so dang many, the odds are one of them will pop.
  13. nicksaviking
    I’m not against trading prospects. I am against trading prospects so the Twins can avoid paying free agent prices and field a significantly below budget team.
  14. nicksaviking
    All I can say is that this cements the idea that Pittsburgh has the worst ownership in pro sports.
  15. nicksaviking
    So aside from getting the stink eye from the other owners at the next MLB owners' social function, is there anything stopping a team from signing a big name free agent, who only plans on taking a one year deal anyway, to a uniquely large MiLB contract with an Non Roster Invitation and an opt out clause that coincides with the Opening Day? Is the only thing stopping this the risk to the player, who'd have to trust the organization (that just backstabbed the other 29 organizations), or is there another mechanism from stopping this from happening? I mean, not only would you get the player, but he'd have an extra roster spot until Opening Day.
  16. nicksaviking
    I wanted the Twins to put together the foundation for a strong rotation this year, even if they still needed a season to retool. But if they give up prospects for Gray and Montas when they could have easily afforded to sign free agents of that caliber instead, I'm going to be beyond disappointed in this organization.
  17. nicksaviking
    I'll take Rodon for sure, but I'd like to hear more on why he's a must. Most pundits seem to think Rodon is destined for a one or two year deal, are you of the mind to give him a longer deal? No judgments; honestly asking. I wouldn't completely be against it if there was reason to think he could stay relatively healthy. Because with Ober, Ryan and Bundy listed as the three other starters, I don't think there is a fifth pitcher on the planet to pair with that motley crew to make this team a contender next year. So to me, Rodon on a short deal would seem more like an olive branch to the fans with the team acknowledging that it's going to be a rebuild season but they'll at least give us one proven starter to put in the rotation.
  18. nicksaviking
    Well I've certainly had enough of the quantity approach. I'd rather go quality.
  19. nicksaviking
    Unless the Twins sign Correa or Story, I don't see a logical way they're spending that money. Kershaw and Rodon are the only two pitchers who would eat up enough of the budget to make a dent, Kershaw isn't coming here, and no one thinks Rodon is getting more than one year; maybe an option. So while the Twins could certainly sign him, there is no combination of free agents to go along with Rodon to make this team a contender in 2022.
  20. nicksaviking
    Well Galvis gave Simmons, Iglesias and Villar a nice Christmas present. Less competition for the unattractive SS options will likely lead to higher contracts.
  21. nicksaviking
    The MLBPA is ONLY asking to reduce revenue sharing because overall, clubs are not spending what they should be on player salaries. If the owners get together, agree to be transparent with their books and as a whole work with the MLBPA on what percentage of revenue should be allotted to the players, the MLBPA wouldn’t care how the revenue is shared.
  22. nicksaviking
    If this team isn’t going to get three significantly better starting pitchers, I don’t think it matters who’s at SS. If they are punting this year, I’m not against moving Polanco back to SS as it would really help reinforce to the young pitchers the importance of striking the batters out. That last paragraph was approximately 60% joke.
  23. nicksaviking
    I agree that's probably what this very conservative team will do. But I disagree that's what they should do. Too late to fix now unless they chase Story. Having too many guys who are capable of playing shortstop has yet to ever be a problem for a baseball team.
  24. nicksaviking
    I thought the article might suggest he was secretly signed for the pen, which he might thrive in with that slider. Probably not. Very good analysis and some optimism for a comeback. Seven decent starts in 2020 doesn't a good pitcher make, but I guess baseball has seen stranger pitcher turn-arounds. Bonnes' last bullet point is the biggest problem with the club currently. I'm not sure that can be fixed; overcoming the fear of making a bad decision doesn't seem like a trait some people can get over.
  25. nicksaviking
    I wanted Rodon, but that was assuming the Twins were going to go fairly big in acquiring starting pitching. I'd still take him, but if he's only getting a one year deal or so, it doesn't seem that he'll be part of a contending team.
×
×
  • Create New...