Hump day.
|
|||||
Cup of Coffee: November 28, 2007 This entry was posted by SBG
on Wednesday, November 28th, 2007 at 6:42 am and is filed under Cup of Coffee. It is one of 3094 entries by the author.
We are no longer accepting Letters to the Editor on this post.
45 comments to Cup of Coffee: November 28, 2007 |
Cup of Coffee Wolves give up 79 points in the first half on Tuesday night (a club record), but they tightened the screws in the second half and only gave up 73. I expect another Korean recipe over at Canis Hoopus. Citizens Online16 Users Online WGOM Sign InLog InRetired WGOM Jokes
WGOM Achievements
Race to the Bottom: Highest Loss Totals in T-Wolves History67: 1991-92 Recent Letters to the EditorIn Response to Cup of Coffee: March 17, 2010, sean wrote: she was in the middle of "a really intense deadline" for her new book, Hot X: Algebra Exposed, which hits shelves in August. That would have made math class a whole lot better. cheaptoy wrote: We haven't gotten to the full state smoking ban yet, so for now its just in Madison. But there does seem to still be a rather large number of bars in the area that… cheaptoy wrote: You're far more generous with the term you use for the commenters on an SBNation site that I would have been. bjhess wrote: "I like the authors on Twinke Town, but find many of the commenters inane" Might be perfect, then. :) Thanks again, all! brianS wrote: Winnie is preggers. Reportedly, Kevin had nothing to do with it. brianS wrote: Several factors caused Summit’s growth to slow over the last five years from its healthy double-digit growth to under 10 percent: Minnesota lowered the legal blood alcohol limit from 0.1 percent to 0.08 percent in… brianS wrote: Pinstripes ARE slimming. brianS wrote: "I did make a mistake and I regret that I did it," Yah. Losing your composure in a game, that's "a mistake." Having Joe Mauer bunt a guy over in the third inning, that's "a mistake."… frightwig wrote: I'm more appalled to learn that Jon Heyman has another byline and source of income for his reporting. For shame, SI. For shame! Also, I see that their March 15 cover features Orioles Catcher Matt Wieters… brianS wrote: so, they are working on their rebounding?? In Response to Brought Along, Kicking and Screaming, Into the 21st Century, E-6 wrote: Absolutely gorgeous films--nearly every frame could be a print hung in a gallery. You really should check out The Double Life of Veronique, next. It was the movie he made just prior to the trilogy.… E-6 wrote: That was me. Totally dug that book, though the ending seemed rather abrupt. (Might have been because I was so engrossed with the characters that I didn't want it to end.) You'll note that the… frightwig wrote: I haven't seen Avatar, and don't plan to see it. frightwig wrote: Not a bad movie, but I don't get why the Academy loved it so much. Didn't think it was anything … war has to have its own … war movie(s). Iraq was just due! DK wrote: It's been that way from the start. These characters have always been connected to each other; that's part of the basis of the show. You either buy into that or not. Honestly… sean wrote: I really liked Ender's Shadow. It does get progressively crazier, but not nearly as much as the Ender storyline. meat wrote: Synedoche, New York. I loved that movie. I haven't seen it in quite some time but as I recall phil Hoffman was excellent, as was his female co-star(I can't look it up from my phone). The… Rhubarb_Runner wrote: probably, but no plans to for the time being Milt on Tilt wrote: On my lunch break I saw two individuals dressed up like Na'vi. Their sign said 'Avatars for Peace' so I'm not sure they've seen the movie. In Response to Jackie Wilson - Danny Boy, Klawitter wrote: Glad you posted it - definitely worth watching. And I will check out the Orbison version -- he's got the voice that makes dramatic authentic. E-6 wrote: I played this one as much for the WTF factor as anything. (I love Jackie, too, but this number ain't exactly in his wheelhouse, so to speak.) Roy Orbison does a pretty reading that you… Klawitter wrote: I love soul music and Jackie Wilson is great. That said, Danny Boy is one of those songs that benefits from understated, simple arrangements to undercut the sentimentality (and I think it's a great… E-6 wrote: Erin Go Braugh? More like Error Go Wow! CarterHayes wrote: I'm also a fan of crockpotting the beef, though I have been known to use beer instead of apple juice. I might have to switch things up next year. In Response to Happy Birthday--March 17, CarterHayes wrote: A little late (TwinsCards was down for maintenance most of the day today), but better than never: Popular Recent Posts
WGOM Twitter
Posting tweet... |
||||
|
Copyright © 2004-2010 The WGOM - All Rights Reserved There have been
Powered by WordPress & the Atahualpa Theme by BytesForAll. Discuss on our WP Forum 264 queries. 4.516 seconds. |
|||||
Bill Smith with more hints that the Twins are focusing on peaking in 2010 in the last paragraph of LENIII's column today.
http://www.startribune.com/twins/story/1577419.html
I see Baby SBG is now in the 'wearing cute outfits with hats for pictures' phase of her young life. Is that pic going on the Christmas cards this year?
No, it's not gonna make the Xmas card. I took that one and she, of course(!), had formal Xmas pictures taken. I do, however, write an annual Christmas letter and it might make that. That particular outfit was given to us by my former next-door neighbor. It is a 24-month outfit and it fits our seven month old daughter reasonably well.
that outfit is a killer. +1,000 to your former neighbor.
I basically never read anything Bob Sansevere writes, but this has to be a joke, right? Some kind of comment on the state of the rumors surrounding the Twins these days?
Either way, I guess FJM and Keith Law didn't see it that way.
I saw that. Funny stuff. It's not obviously a joke, so I'd think it was real. On the other hand, it seems impossible to think that something like that could actually get printed. Way to go fact checkers!
Hump day has actually been one of my favorite days this term. I only have one class (which I normally skip) and 2 hours in the Math 10 help room. It's also the only day of the week I don't have to teach.
LENIII: Twins close to trading Garza, Bartlett, and Rincon to Rays for Delmon Young, Brendan Harris, and Jason Pridie.
Really?
The long awaited return of Jason Pridie!
Seriously though, do I want to get on board with Delmon Young? Seems like the second coming of Milton Bradley to me.
DO IT DO IT DO IT DO IT DO IT. (I need a Young jersey).
Delmon YOung for Matt Garza is a no-brainer.
seriously, that easy? Garza sure seems like a strong candidate to be an elite starter. I don't know enough about Young to judge. Is he really an elite player (or likely to be in short order)?
Delmon YOung for Matt Garza is a no-brainer.
I disagree. Garza might be the Twins' best starting pitcher next year (provided Santana is traded) and Delmon Young is a low-OBP corner OF'er who hasn't hit for much power yet. Sure, he advanced quickly, but .318/.362/.518 in the minors isn't blowing me away as a corner OF. ZiPS has Young hitting .292/.323/.424 next year.
The Twins vastly underrate Bartlett's defensive worth and are cheating themselves by trading him for Brendan Harris. Pridie is a 4th OF'er.
Off the top of my head, I would rather have Garza than Young. This doesn't sound good.
Also, isn't Young an RF? Don't the Twins already have that position covered? He certainly isn't a CF option, and if he's to be a DH, then he's arguably not as valuable.
Do the Twins really want to take on a potential headcase? Is Gardentool that eager to get rid of Bartlett?
They might have RF covered, but the Twins don't think that Jason Kubel is a LF. None of the beat writers will say it, and no one from the team is going to go out and make an announcement about it, but the way he's been treated, they don't trust his knees to play the field everyday and he hit better as a DH than as a LF this last year. Therefore, Kubel is a DH, and the Twins are in the market for a LF. Some have speculated that Young might be able to cover CF, but I am skeptical.
As far as the headcase part goes, I don't know how much to make of that. Young obviously had that memorable moment, but I don't think we know how much more of a headcase he is compared to a typical 21-year old ballplayer. Maybe the Twins figure they need someone around to attempt a punch at Morneau, only to hit Punto. I dunno.
Maybe the Twins figure they need someone around to attempt a punch at Morneau, only to hit Punto.
After all, it seems to be what the manager wants....
For the Rays, on the other hand, this seems like a no-brainer to me. Upgrade in the rotation, upgrade at SS, lose a good OF'er but Crawford, Ruggiano, Upton, and Baldelli all project to hit better than Young next year.
what is the attraction of this deal? Garza AND Bartlett??
Harris strikes me as not any better (probably not as good) as Bartlett. He's a year younger and brings, what, one extra year of serfdom?
273/331/418 Harris in 696 PA. Below-average range at SS.
272/341/362 Bartlett in 1208 PA. Above-average range at SS.
Young is 293/319/419 over 681 career PA and 318/362/518 in 1540 minor league PA, including 303/326/463 at AAA over 604 PA in 2005 and 2006. Promising enough numbers for somebody so young. But where do you play him? He's mostly played RF in Tampa. Is he good enough defensively to play CF full-time? Is he going to be at least a sometime-All Star caliber player? He'd need to be that to justify moving Garza, in my view.
Young seems like he has a pretty good shot at becoming a All-Star caliber player. At age 22, he's projected by ZIPS to go .292/.323/.424, which is about right on with his career to date numbers, so I would think he'd be a decent bet to outperform those numbers due to his age. If he can play center, he'd be at least league-average offensively at age 22. Garza is also projected to be about a league-average starter by ZIPS next year, at a somewhat similar age. However, given the pitching/hitting mix the Twins currently have, this seems like a reasonable trade.
Additionally, the Harris/Bartlett trade seems pretty even, with Bartlett having the defensive edge, and Harris the offensive (power at least) edge. Cost and age wise, they are pretty similar, and Bartlett is probably a slightly better player.
The Rincon/Pridie portion of the trade is ok as well, as it saves a few million from the 2008 payroll, Rincon should be replaceable and is declining anyway, and Pridie can be in the running for a replacement level backup outfielder, which the Twins are currently lacking.
In total, I'd say the Twins come out slightly ahead in the Young/Garza portion of the deal, and slightly behind in the other 2 parts, so the overall deal is probably more of a break-even deal talent wise but provides upgrades for each team given their current makeup.
The real question is, if this goes through, how can Smith possibly give up Santana now unless he gets someone who can replace him in the rotation this year.
Can Young play a credible CF? His RZR in RF last year wasn't anything terribly exciting.
Maybe he's going to DH with Kubel and Craig Monroe.
The real question is, if this goes through, how can Smith possibly give up Santana now unless he gets someone who can replace him in the rotation this year.
I think that's the reason the trade talks surrounding Santana all seem to include getting some starting pitching in addition to position players in return. Plus, if you believe that the Twins are focusing on 2010 as their next best chance to make a playoff run, then 2008 and 2009 become on the job training for a very young starting rotation that should be mature and seasoned by 2010.
I think that's the reason the trade talks surrounding Santana all seem to include getting some starting pitching in addition to position players in return.
That's true to some degree, certainly, but I think that another big reason the Santana talks all focus on pitching as well is that it's difficult enough to negotiate a trade where you get full value for a player like Santana, but it's nearly impossible if you start to get too picky about which positions the players in the return package play.
Is there any way Gardenhire can handle this?
You mean without his head exploding?
What I like about this rumor, and the rumors regarding the Twins/Yankees and Twins/Red Sox, is that it shows Mr. Smith is exploring a lot of different options, and that there is definitely interest around the league in dealing with the Twins. Specifics don't worry me much yet. I'm just happy to see that Smith is exploring options and getting a feel for the value of his assets on the trade market. This seems like it could well be the most active offseason for the Twins in several years.
This seems like it could well be the most active offseason for the Twins in several years.
Amen to that. Looking at the team from a salary perspective is quite interesting. Let's say for discussion sake that the Twins will have a $75 million payroll this season. That seems fair and if anything is on the low end.
Let's say Morneau and Cuddyer end up getting about $12.5-$13 million this year (7.5/5.25 split or so), either through a long-term deal or through arbitration.
For a starting lineup (Mauer, Morneau, Punto, Harris, Buscher, Young, Kubel, XX CF, and Cuddyer) + bench (Redmond, Casilla, Tyner) we have a total of about $25 million locked up on the offense, with needs at starting CF and a couple decent backups.
Pitching wise, if we go with starters Santana, Slowey, Baker, Liriano, and Bonser and relievers Nathan, Crain, Neshek, Perkins, Reyes, and Guerrier, we have another $25 million or so locked up in the pitching staff, with no real pressing needs.
This leaves a total of about $25 million for this upcoming season, to be spent on a CF, perhaps a 3B, and 2 other bench players.
If Santana gets traded, assuming no large contracts come back in the deal, this would leave over $35 million left for those positions. If Nathan gets traded, there's an additional $5.5 million to be spent.
Needless to say, the Twins could go in many different directions this offseason, all while remaining relatively competitive.
Needless to say, the Twins could go in many different directions this offseason, all while remaining relatively competitive.
I could also see Pohlad pocketing the savings while his team rebuilds in anticipation of the 2010 Grand Opening.
What a weird feeling it is to actually be involved in major off-season wheeling and dealing. This offseason has already had more Twins action than the last three combined, and that's without any actual confirmed deals. I figured that Bill Smith would be somewhat different than Terry Ryan, but did anybody anticipate this much wheeling and/or dealing?
mmmm. Twins action.... Sounds exciting.
Don't count your chickens, NG. There's only been wheeling, no dealing yet. Just because the talk is bigger than past seasons, so far TR and BS are running neck-and-neck in offseason shenanigans.
That said, I'm warming to the Santana for Hughes+ trade, given we fill in at least one gaping hole in the order (and Garza stays a Twin) and the money savings goes to locking up Morneau, etc.
One other thought. If Harris is really a downgrade defensively, could the Twins move him to 2B and Casilla/Punto back to short? Casilla seems like he could have the range and the arm for it, and Harris's defensive shortcomings would be tempered at 2B.
Keeping Harris at 2b seemed to have been the Rays' plan until Longoria hits the big squad, at which point Iwamura would play second and Harris would either play short or designated Hocking.
I'm not terribly enthused by Punto's defense at SS. I think 2B is his best position. Casilla probably has the tools to play SS, but last year (in AAA and MLB) didn't do much to give me confidence in his hitting.
Why is replacing Bartlett, and particularly with Nick Punto or a kid who was overmatched in the majors last season, any kind of a priority all of a sudden?
He's not a great SS, but his bat is about average for the position, he has good range in the field, and he still doesn't cost much. If the Twins do happen to get a real 2B this winter, or at least someone who could be moved there, as well as a legitimate 3B, why not seize the opportunity to get Punto the hell out of the regular lineup entirely?
Hey, I don't like swapping Bartlett and Harris, either. In addition to the things you mentioned, Bartlett is a very good baserunner.
My guess: the Twins absolutely don't get how to evaluate defense in the infield and way, way overrate the negative impact of Bartlett's errors compared to the positive impact of his range, which is more subtle. This is the same mistake they made with Batista and Castro (and Rivas to a certain extent.) They have never been high on his character (same with Garza) and Bartlett had the nagging neck injury last year.
It's certainly disappointing, but it's not surprising to me that someone else would value Bartlett more than the Twins do.
"not high on his character"
but they are willing to take on Delmon Young????!!!
They probably think that a change of scenery will help him (or something) and that clearly JB is a lost cause. I don't know, but for whatever reason, the Twins never warmed to Bartlett.
Harris last season had a pretty decent line: .286/.343/.434, .267 EqA, which would be a minor upgrade over Bartlett at the plate, all things remaining the same. And Harris is a year younger. So I'd be OK with that swap, even if I feel comfortable with Bartlett and wouldn't consider that kind of trade a priority. But it would be a real shame if the Twins made a deal to upgrade the infield bats and still failed to do something about replacing Punto in the lineup.
all things remaining the same.
All things do not remain the same. UZR has Harris at -10 runs over 55 games from '04 through mid-'07. Over the same time period, Bartlett is +27 runs over 214 games. Even eyeballing some regression to the mean in there, I think that, conservatively, it's fair to say Bartlett is about a +10 runs/150G defender at SS and Harris is a -5 runs/150G defender at SS, according to UZR.
It's worse, actually, if you look at Dave Pinto's PMR for 2007. Bartlett ranked as the 5th-best ratewise defender in all of baseball at SS, and Harris was the third-worst, right next to Derek Jeter. To make that difference more explicit, Bartlett had 444 expected outs last year (according to PMR), but actually made 466 outs. Harris had 253 expected outs last year, but actually made 234 outs. If we want to give Harris the benefit of the doubt that he is an average-fielding SS, we'll say that given an extra 191 expected outs, he would have actually converted an extra 191 expected outs. Over 444 outs, that makes it Bartlett, 466 to Harris, 425, a dropoff of 41 outs. Most analysts agree on the rule of thumb that 2 outs=1 run when it comes to defensive value. So Harris is about a 20 run drop-off from Bartlett on defense according to PMR and giving Harris some benefit of the doubt for his small sample size. (If you don't give Harris any benefit of the doubt, he's a 28-run defensive drop-off from Bartlett.)
Last year, Harris had a VORP of about 25 and Bartlett had a VORP of about 15. When you add in defense, though, you're looking at Harris being about 15-20 runs above replacement and Bartlett being about 20-25 runs above replacement. Maybe it's not a huge difference, but Bartlett is the more valuable player overall. (And personally, if given two mostly equivalent up-the-middle players, I would tend to err on the side of defense rather than on the side of offense.)
Harris also turns up last amongst all second basemen in PMR.
On the bright side, oh wait... nevermind.
On the bright side, Harris could still get better, while Bartlett may have already peaked. How's that?
Meanwhile, I think Harris probably will be an offensive upgrade at SS next year. I'm not sure I can trust UZR/PMR to accurately gauge defensive value to the kind of precision that ubes quotes, but I agree that Bartlett's defense was undervalued by Twins management. We'll see about Harris. As the man said, all things do not remain the same. And defensive performance can fluctuate wildly from year to year.
maybe we get a SS in the Johan or Nathan deals to replace Bartlett