Who will hurt us more?

[elgonzo4sox]

It worked for them last year, didn't it? Crede wasn't a huge factor for them, but they certainly don't regret signing him.

 

I occasionally scan a few Twins boards (e.g. TwinkieTown), and most of the views on Crede that I saw indicated disappointment, because he injured his back again, couldn't play anywhere close to 162 games (sound familiar?), and didn't solve the Twins ongoing multiyear 3B problem, which has been like CF (before Rios, hopefully) for us - a complete revolving door.

 

By the way, the Twins STILL have a 3B problem. But now they have two LH DHs (Kubel and Thome).

[Quin]

I occasionally scan a few Twins boards (e.g. TwinkieTown), and most of the views on Crede that I saw indicated disappointment, because he injured his back again, couldn't play anywhere close to 162 games (sound familiar?), and didn't solve the Twins ongoing multiyear 3B problem, which has been like CF (before Rios, hopefully) for us - a complete revolving door.

 

By the way, the Twins STILL have a 3B problem. But now they have two LH DHs (Kubel and Thome).

 

Dayan or Morel plus Flowers for Mauer. Solves there 3B hole, and gives them a catcher of the future.

[elgonzo4sox]

Dayan or Morel plus Flowers for Mauer. Solves there 3B hole, and gives them a catcher of the future.

 

Interesting idea. But I think we're fine with AJ (yes, he's not Mauer, but he batted .300 and threw out more runners last year, once our pitchers started holding them on first better - plus AJ comes with many intangible benefits), I'd rather keep our prospects, and I don't want to solve the Twins 3B problem ;-)

 

Mauer, being Mr. Twin Cities, is either staying there his whole career, or is going to join the Yankees to become a billionaire, at the cost of becoming public enemy #1 in Minnesota. No way he'd come here.

[SoxAce]

Interesting idea. But I think we're fine with AJ (yes, he's not Mauer, but he batted .300 and threw out more runners last year, once our pitchers started holding them on first better - plus AJ comes with many intangible benefits), I'd rather keep our prospects, and I don't want to solve the Twins 3B problem ;-)

 

Green means sarcasm. And your utterly insane if you would not give ONLY that for Joe Mauer. Hell I would gladly take Victor Martinez over A.J. right now and it's not even close. If Flowers shows something in ST or in AAA this year (especially with his discipline) then he will be exciting to watch. Reminds me alot of Mike Napoli if he puts it together.

[elgonzo4sox]

Green means sarcasm.

 

Thanks for the tip.

 

Mauer still ain't going nowhere but Minny or NYY.

[SoxAce]

Mauer still ain't going nowhere but Minny or NYY.

 

Ya I was saying hypothetically of course.

[Felix]

Thome is the Twins' Andruw Jones - a cheap pickup, perhaps driven more by memories of time past than on today's realities.

Except Jim Thome had a .847 OPS overall last year and a .881 OPS against RHP, and I assume the Twins will be marginally intelligent and not let him face lefties. Meanwhile, Andruw Jones had a .782 OPS and .706 OPS outside of hitter friendly Texas.

 

But yes, other than the fact that one is a far better hitter than the other, they're essentially the same thing.

Edited February 21, 2010 by Felix

[Ozzie Ball]

Why is Ozzie not an option?

 

This would be my vote.

 

But since he's not an option I'll go with Damon because he'll be playing every day.

[Springfield Soxfan]

This would be my vote.

 

But since he's not an option I'll go with Damon because he'll be playing every day.

Damon hands down, KW seemed pretty pissed that spring training in Florida seemed to be one of his demands.......

[greg775]

Thome.

Damon can't hurt us any more than Grandy did or tried to do.

Thome can hit some 3 run bombs that can KILL us.

 

I wish we'd sign some ex Twin that would want to kill the Twins like Jimmy is going to want to kill the Sox.

Edited February 22, 2010 by greg775

[westsidesoxfan]

I hope Thome does really really well on a bad team and he joins the 600 club. I hope Damon's midget arm falls off throwing to his cut off man.

[shago]

Alex Rios

 

http://www.talk-sports.net/mlb/sucks.aspx/Alex_Rios

 

Edited February 22, 2010 by La Marr Hoyt HOF

[southsider2k5]

Alex Rios

 

http://www.talk-sports.net/mlb/sucks.aspx/Alex_Rios

 

Why would you post by yourself over and over about Rios? That is just pathetic.

[MattZakrowski]

Alex Rios

 

http://www.talk-sports.net/mlb/sucks.aspx/Alex_Rios

 

That link was full of legitimate baseball analysis. Thanks for that.

[shago]

Why would you post by yourself over and over about Rios? That is just pathetic.

If they hussle and suck, no problem. If they take $60m, dont care/hussle, and suck, I have a real big problem... No need to be calling anyone 'pathetic' -- with 64k posts on a website, you clearly have a lot of free time on your hands.

[Kyyle23]

If they hussle and suck, no problem. If they take $60m, dont care/hussle, and suck, I have a real big problem... No need to be calling anyone 'pathetic' -- with 64k posts on a website, you clearly have a lot of free time on your hands.

 

Almost as much free time as someone has to bombard a website about Alex Rios.

 

Your opinion on Rios has been noted multiple times. Its done, its tired, and it had no place in this thread, especially along with that lame link.

[ThunderBolt]

Alex Rios

 

http://www.talk-sports.net/mlb/sucks.aspx/Alex_Rios

That’s some pretty profound, analytical baseball discussion. You must love the comments sections for Youtube videos.

[southsider2k5]

If they hussle and suck, no problem. If they take $60m, dont care/hussle, and suck, I have a real big problem... No need to be calling anyone 'pathetic' -- with 64k posts on a website, you clearly have a lot of free time on your hands.

 

Well using your standards, I am going to judge you by your last three posts, and since they suck, I have a real big problem with you. I think I will start another message board dedicated exclusively to your suckiness.

[elgonzo4sox]

Except Jim Thome had a .847 OPS overall last year and a .881 OPS against RHP, and I assume the Twins will be marginally intelligent and not let him face lefties. Meanwhile, Andruw Jones had a .782 OPS and .706 OPS outside of hitter friendly Texas.

 

But yes, other than the fact that one is a far better hitter than the other, they're essentially the same thing.

 

I didn't mean to compare Thome and Jones quantitatively, but more qualitatively: they are relatively cheap pickups (read: they can be cut if they don't pan out) where the bet is that they can resurrect some amount of their prior performance. Jones was actually a smaller/cheaper bet ($500K for Jones vs. $1.5M for Thome) with a lower probability of payoff (based on your statistical comparison) but perhaps arguably a greater potential upside if it does pay off, since Jones is younger and can still hopefully play in the field.

 

But my main argument is that I can't see how Thome is going to positively impact the Twins all that much with Kubel as a superior LH DH. Kubel's OPS was .907 last year, 11th in the AL - so why bench Kubel in favor of Thome? Kubel also has trouble hitting lefties - his profile on the Twins web site states:

 

The Twins DH still struggles against left-handers (.243 average in '09) and posted a lofty .327 BABIP last season, which suggests he'll have a hard time sustaining an overall .300 mark.

 

Thome struggled a lot at LA when he didn't get consistent (or all that many) at bats. He takes up a valuable non-pitcher roster spot. And if Kubel plays in the field to get Thome some more DH time, you have a weak outfielder (Kubel) and potentially four power-hitting lefties in a row: Morneau, Mauer, Kubel, Thome. The Twins may try this against a righty starter (Peavy, Floyd, Garcia), but late in the game this can be shut down by Matt Thornton.

 

I just don't think Thome is going to have all that major or positive an impact on the Twins, and that they were thinking more with their hearts (and their memories) than with their brains when they signed him.

[joeynach]

Anyone else think its funny we are talking about being scared of two end of their career declining ballplayers. Not that they are not good players, but they are defiantly no where near the they were years ago. At this point they are minimal impact players, shadows of their former selves, what will their impacts really be this year? Heck Thome is resigned to a bench role. And there is no way Damon hits anywhere near 24 HR's out of that RF bandbox at Yankee Stadium. Accams Razor: simply put, aging declining players will play....like their aging and declining. Im not that worried.

[ThunderBolt]

Anyone else think its funny we are talking about being scared of two end of their career declining ballplayers. Not that they are not good players, but they are defiantly no where near the they were years ago. At this point they are minimal impact players, shadows of their former selves, what will their impacts really be this year? Heck Thome is resigned to a bench role. And there is no way Damon hits anywhere near 24 HR's out of that RF bandbox at Yankee Stadium. Accams Razor: simply put, aging declining players will play....like their aging and declining. Im not that worried.

The difference is that Jones and Kotsay aren't declining. They've declined, they're shells of the players they once were. Any theory about Thome and Damon declining is conjecture and projection. Their's no daming empirical evidence that points to them being inadequate this year. Meanwhile, we have ample reason and empirical support to the belief that Kotsay and Jones aren't going to cut it.

[Kyyle23]

The difference is that Jones and Kotsay aren't declining. They've declined, they're shells of the players they once were. Any theory about Thome and Damon declining is conjecture and projection. Their's no daming empirical evidence that points to them being inadequate this year. Meanwhile, we have ample reason and empirical support to the belief that Kotsay and Jones aren't going to cut it.

 

do you have a mandate that suggexts you need to put "empirical" in all of your posts now?

[ThunderBolt]

do you have a mandate that suggexts you need to put "empirical" in all of your posts now?

Empirically, speaking? No. But i do have a quota.

Edited February 22, 2010 by Thunderbolt

[joeynach]

The difference is that Jones and Kotsay aren't declining. They've declined, they're shells of the players they once were. Any theory about Thome and Damon declining is conjecture and projection. Their's no daming empirical evidence that points to them being inadequate this year. Meanwhile, we have ample reason and empirical support to the belief that Kotsay and Jones aren't going to cut it.

 

I agree Jones and Kotsay are done for the most part. But when we are talking about getting beat by our division opponents usually no one mentions a 36 year old OF who couldnt find a job until late February and a 40 year old aging slugger who has been resigned to a backup/bench role, only soxtalk.

[elgonzo4sox]

The difference is that Jones and Kotsay aren't declining. They've declined, they're shells of the players they once were. Any theory about Thome and Damon declining is conjecture and projection. Their's no daming empirical evidence that points to them being inadequate this year. Meanwhile, we have ample reason and empirical support to the belief that Kotsay and Jones aren't going to cut it.

 

Thome over the past 4 years:

 

OPS: 1.014 > .973 > .865 > .847

 

HR: 42 > 35 > 34 > 23

 

I think his decline will continue, especially with limited at bats.