Jump to content

Providing independent coverage of the Minnesota Twins.
Subscribe to Twins Daily Email

The Forums

Article: What To Do With Byron Buxton?

Minnesota Twins Talk Today, 12:33 PM
On Tuesday, the Minnesota Twins activated Byron Buxton from his fourth separate stint on the disabled list this season. It's been a night...

Game Thread—8/15/18 Pirates vs. Twins 12:10 PM

Minnesota Twins Talk Today, 12:21 PM
Game starts in a little over half an hour. Archer vs. Berrios. Should be a nice day for a game. If someone can post lineups, it would be...

Article: Twins Daily Roundtable: Prospect Promotions

Twins Minor League Talk Today, 11:45 AM
Twins Daily Roundtable is a weekly series. As part of this series, a question will be posed to the site’s writers and they will respond i...

Article: Twins Prospect Pulse: Trade Deadline Brings New...

Twins Minor League Talk Today, 11:30 AM
Welcome to another edition of the Twins Prospect Pulse. Over the past month the system got a big boost from additions made around the tra...

Article: Looking Back: Twins Take Four Prep Hitters Atop...

Twins Minor League Talk Today, 11:30 AM
In 2015, first-year manager Paul Molitor led the Minnesota Twins to an 83-79 win, the team’s first .500 season since 2010. Because of tha...


Jim Kaat makes sense

Posted by mikelink45 , 12 May 2018 · 749 views

length of games new rules changing game
Jim Kaat makes sense I just finished reading Jim Kaat's essay on ESPN - http://www.espn.com/...-improve-sport and I really liked it. I think it is well thought out and he strengthens it with some notes about how the game has already changed so drastically over the years. This is a good change and I would love to see it, but won't because it will be resisted by the union, the league, the traditionalists.

​But what is tradition? Is it a pitcher throwing half the games and winning 50? Is it one pitcher winning 511 games? Is it an era of 400 hitters? Is it the murderers row and the sluggers who followed (sluggers who could also get hits and not strike out all the time)? Is it the war years when a 15 year old starts for Cincinnati? Can we say it is when Jackie Robinson integrated baseball and changed the rosters and stars? Is it the Bronx Bombers who dominated the 50's? Maybe it is the expansion era when lots of new records were set and we went from 154 to 162 games but kept all the same records? Is it PEDs? Is it the era of Latin ballplayers? Perhaps we can say it is the era of wildcard teams. Is it the demise of starters and rosters of all relief pitchers? Is it the era of big Ks and lots of HRs? There is no true tradition. Each season stands alone.

That's why we can argue about eras and great players without winning or losing. Its why the HOF is merely an annual pissing contest of my era was better than your era and your stats don't count because now we do not care about BA and ERA and Wins.

The very discussion that games are too long is a reasonable topic and a serious one. Change is not going to come by the little things that have been done. Shaving 3 minutes off the game is not the answer. Go Jim. I hope someone else is listening. And by the way - I would put you in the HOF!

  • Craig Arko, Platoon, nclahammer and 1 other like this

We morphed to the DH and 154 games to 162. Both of these moves changed the game and the record books. I could live with 7 innings easily. Plus I loved his take on SO's and the Home Run Derby. Somehow baseball has to shorten it's game length. Kaat was easily the best color guy I ever listened to. Period.
    • mikelink45, VOMG and sloopjont like this
Not counting today’s extra inning game, here’s the time of game for the last 8 Yankees games:


And 4 of the last 7 twins games were over 3:00 and 20 out of 30 non extra inning games were that long. Simply absurd that games should take that long. Going back to 1988, the twins played 38 non extra inning games over 3:00 for the entire season.
    • mikelink45 likes this

I get tired blaming the length of game all on the players you have to look at ownership and Tv for length of game the time between team changes have added at least 50 minutes a game because of commercials. If they really wanted to speed up the game shorten the number of commercials on team changes.

    • mikelink45, bizaff, D.C Twins and 1 other like this
Just thought about this. Shaving 2 innings off every game means 162 less innings for each team to sell food and merchandise. Thats the equivalent of 18 games. If the owners wouldn’t want to trim down the schedule by 4 home games, they’d never go along with 7 innings.
    • D.C Twins likes this
May 14 2018 08:45 PM

Final beer sales first time through the lineup?

Sorry Mike... I am a "Traditionalist" and simply cannot agree with you. You make a lucid and thought provoking argument, but this, like the automated strike zone heresy (also a horrible idea) is a sin against the game.


Just thought about this. Shaving 2 innings off every game means 162 less innings for each team to sell food and merchandise. Thats the equivalent of 18 games. If the owners wouldn’t want to trim down the schedule by 4 home games, they’d never go along with 7 innings.

I am sure they would not, but on the other hand we have no idea what the sales are in the last two innings.However, just think of how creative they could be for after game parties and events.The real question is how to change the game so I am not really ready to comment on sales of food.