Article: Rundown: Target Field Security, Offseason Expectations and More

[Brandon]

Unless I misunderstand what you are trying to advocate, you would only have 10 roster spots for pitchers, not to mention pretty suspect defense.

9 starters and 4 bench and 12 pitchers. I listed Garver and Platoon 1B twice as the second have of the starters and on the bench since they will be on the bench.

[Twins33]

Since Mauer's paycheck was mentioned in the OP, I figured I should post this.

 

Mauer’s retirement leaves the Twins without a $23 million salary commitment for next season. But that doesn’t necessarily mean an extra $23 million for free agency, club owner Jim Pohlad said.

 

“It’s not like ‘OK, we’ve got this money now, and we didn’t have it before, so we can do so much more,’ ” Pohlad said. “I don’t feel that way.”

 

The Twins last winter spent $53 million on free agents Logan Morrison, Lance Lynn, Fernando Rodney, Addison Reed, Michael Pineda, Zach Duke and Matt Magill.

 

“It didn’t turn out that well,” Pohlad said.

https://www.twincities.com/2018/11/17/charley-walters-vikings-need-back-to-back-north-conquests/

 

It's not too surprising as I didn't expect them to spend 50-60M in FA, but it's still sad to pretty much have it confirmed that payroll won't be near last year. I'm just hoping they spend at least 30M.

Edited November 18, 2018 by Twins33

[old nurse]

 

This post comes bound up with innumerable unexamined assumptions, not the least of which is the ridiculous idea that this pseudo security would ever stop an incident from happening.

It was a simple yes/no question.  Nothing more until you made it so.

[70charger]

It was a simple yes/no question.  Nothing more until you made it so.

And my response showed why the question was moot...

[nclahammer]

I  hope MLB does not go to the clear bag NFL policy, I like being able to shove in a extra jacket in my bag, snacks, or baseballs if I'm looking for autographs.  In moving the large glove commemorating Minnesota Twins gold glove winners 100 feet back toward downtown, they are taking away the significance of the spot where it was originally laid.   520 feet from home plate at Target Field.  It was placed in that very spot to commorate the longest homerun hit in Minnesota Twins history by Harmon Killebrew on June 3, 1967.  Oh' well.

[Doomtints]

 

I think it’s you who needs to look it up on Wikipedia. The one speculative benefit you mention (complete with a “citation needed”) is absolutely overwhelmed by the listed downsides.

But hey, go read it for yourself if you need to: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Security_theater

 

I know about the negatives, but thanks for your politeness.

[Nine of twelve]

 

I  hope MLB does not go to the clear bag NFL policy, I like being able to shove in a extra jacket in my bag, snacks, or baseballs if I'm looking for autographs.  In moving the large glove commemorating Minnesota Twins gold glove winners 100 feet back toward downtown, they are taking away the significance of the spot where it was originally laid.   520 feet from home plate at Target Field.  It was placed in that very spot to commorate the longest homerun hit in Minnesota Twins history by Harmon Killebrew on June 3, 1967.  Oh' well.

I didn't know that. It would have been nice if it could have stayed there but it seems like the team is doing what is best.

[old nurse]

 

And my response showed why the question was moot...

Yoor response showed that you make a simple question a hard one.

[nclahammer]

 

I didn't know that. It would have been nice if it could have stayed there but it seems like the team is doing what is best.

I am excited to see the new renovations and so glad the Twins don't just stand pat when they see a way to improve something at Target Field.  I'm secretly hoping they post "something" at Harmon's 520 foot blast, it shattered  seats when it landed.   Here's a link from featuring Minnesota Twins team curator Clyde Doepner talking about the homerun.  

 

[BobAzar]

The clear bag policy makes me angry for a few reasons

1. I have 2 kids, 4 and 1 (during the 2019 season), and I need snacks and toys and books for the 4 year old to occupy him in between TC pregame and the mascot race and the "baseball song". And I need diapers, bottles, etc for the 1 year old. hard to fit all that in arbitrarily small bag. 

2. As someone mentioned, sometimes you need to bring hats, gloves, blankets for games.

3. MNUFC has the clear bag policy, and THEY STILL GO THROUGH THE BAGS with their little wooden dowel, so it doesn't speed anything up. (at least MNUFC had the sense to give their STH a bag with their tickets, so it wasnt seen as another profit opportunity.)

4. Like many others said, this is discriminatory against a large number of people. 

5. I dont believe the "This is the world we live in now" argument. All I'll say about that is, there are other ways to protect the populace that don't involve clear PVC bags. 

[Mr. Brooks]

A policy that affects one group more than others, by itself, is not discriminatory. There has to be prejudice as a motive. There isn't here.

Women are more likely to carry a bag, but that is by choice.

People who bring 1 year olds to a baseball game are more likely to carry a bag, but again, their choice.

[Jim Hahn]

The policy may not be discriminatory but unless it provides clear benefit(safety in this case) which it seems it probably doesn't, why are they going out of their way to upset an important part of their their customer base?

[nicksaviking]

 

This is a time when ranked-choice voting would be interesting. It could be that Austin wouldn't be the leader after the multiple rounds of re-allocating votes.

 

My city just voted to enact Approval Voting. It's not ranking the candidates, just voting for as many candidates as you'd approve for the gig. We're going to save Democracy!

 

Then I saw this poll. Might be some blank ballots.

[70charger]

 

Yoor response showed that you make a simple question a hard one.

 

You don't understand the difference between simple and simplistic.

[Jacksson]

New Sit Down Food Source: The Bald Deli !!

[Mike Sixel]

my expectation is that they continue to not add anything to the MLB roster that is beyond a year or two deal, and once again the team does not much that makes any meaningful difference. 

[Mr. Brooks]

The policy may not be discriminatory but unless it provides clear benefit(safety in this case) which it seems it probably doesn't, why are they going out of their way to upset an important part of their their customer base?

I think you answered your own question.

Why would they go out of their way to upset a significant part of their fan base, unless they thought they were improving safety? Clearly they must think they are.

[old nurse]

 

You don't understand the difference between simple and simplistic.

Simple is like yes/no

Simplistic Security inside a stadium will not make it safer.

[USAFChief]

Simple is like yes/no

Simplistic Security inside a stadium will not make it safer.

Of course it will.

 

Any security is better than none. How much better is debatable, but whether there is SOME level of increase is not.

 

And for the record, checking customers for weapons at the door is not “simplistic,” nor ineffective. It’s not perfect, but it provides a much safer environment at any venue than not checking. Including Target Field.

[Jim Hahn]

I think you answered your own question.

Why would they go out of their way to upset a significant part of their fan base, unless they thought they were improving safety? Clearly they must think they are.

That might be an optimistic answer. They may well be instituting a policy that looks like it addresses safety issues rather than doing the research, work, training and expense of coming up with something that will provide actual safety.

[Mr. Brooks]

That might be an optimistic answer. They may well be instituting a policy that looks like it addresses safety issues rather than doing the research, work, training and expense of coming up with something that will provide actual safety.

So they aren't willing to go out of their way to upset a significant portion of the fanbase to improve safety. But they are willing to go out of their way to upset a significant portion of the fanbase to PRETEND like they are trying to improve safety.

Sorry, not buying that.

Perhaps it's not innovative enough to prevent a modern attack, but I don't believe for a second that they are too lazy to try.

[yarnivek1972]

Blame an overly paranoid culture for intrusive security. When it’s your time, it’s your time and no amount of time and money spent in the name of security is going to stop it from being your time.

[Mr. Brooks]

Blame an overly paranoid culture for intrusive security. When it’s your time, it’s your time and no amount of time and money spent in the name of security is going to stop it from being your time.

Correct me if I'm misunderstanding, but this reads to me that you're saying we are all predestined to die at an exact time and manner.

Thankfully most don't agree, or we'd have no laws or safety standards.

Why have safety codes and standards? Why not let everyone drive home hammered? Why have EMT's and ER surgeons? Why even call 911 in the first place, it's either your time to go, or it isn't, right?

[70charger]

 

Correct me if I'm misunderstanding, but this reads to me that you're saying we are all predestined to die at an exact time and manner.
Thankfully most don't agree, or we'd have no laws or safety standards.
Why have safety codes and standards? Why not let everyone drive home hammered? Why have EMT's and ER surgeons? Why even call 911 in the first place, it's either your time to go, or it isn't, right?

 

It's hard to tell if you're being sarcastic, or whether you've really accepted that his point was about predestination. (This is why we can't have intelligent conversations about what is and isn't security.)

 

It's about acceptance of risk. You could die while crossing a suburban street, and yet we don't stump for TSA checkpoints at every crosswalk. Is it possible that something bad happens to you at a baseball game? Sure. Will your security theater do anything to prevent it? Of course not. 

 

Still, we accept the risk. A risk, by the way, that has resulted in exactly zero shootings or terrorist attacks in more than a century of open-gates baseball.

Edited November 24, 2018 by 70charger

[old nurse]

 

It's hard to tell if you're being sarcastic, or whether you've really accepted that his point was about predestination. (This is why we can't have intelligent conversations about what is and isn't security.)

 

It's about acceptance of risk. You could die while crossing a suburban street, and yet we don't stump for TSA checkpoints at every crosswalk. Is it possible that something bad happens to you at a baseball game? Sure. Will your security theater do anything to prevent it? Of course not. 

 

Still, we accept the risk. A risk, by the way, that has resulted in exactly zero shootings or terrorist attacks in more than a century of open-gates baseball.

It is hard to have an intelligent conversation with that sort of hyperbole like the TSA bit. I do not know what security has prevented or stopped. I don't see much publicity on that.  You do hear about incidents with loss of life. Knowing only a little is not terribly useful for making broad judgements.

[Mr. Brooks]

It's hard to tell if you're being sarcastic, or whether you've really accepted that his point was about predestination. (This is why we can't have intelligent conversations about what is and isn't security.)

 

It's about acceptance of risk. You could die while crossing a suburban street, and yet we don't stump for TSA checkpoints at every crosswalk. Is it possible that something bad happens to you at a baseball game? Sure. Will your security theater do anything to prevent it? Of course not.

 

Still, we accept the risk. A risk, by the way, that has resulted in exactly zero shootings or terrorist attacks in more than a century of open-gates baseball.

That's not what he said though. How about we discuss what he actually said instead of trying to project what we think he might have meant.

He literally said if it's your time, it's your time, can't change it.

[USAFChief]

It's hard to tell if you're being sarcastic, or whether you've really accepted that his point was about predestination. (This is why we can't have intelligent conversations about what is and isn't security.)

 

It's about acceptance of risk. You could die while crossing a suburban street, and yet we don't stump for TSA checkpoints at every crosswalk. Is it possible that something bad happens to you at a baseball game? Sure. Will your security theater do anything to prevent it? Of course not.

 

Still, we accept the risk. A risk, by the way, that has resulted in exactly zero shootings or terrorist attacks in more than a century of open-gates baseball.

We dont have TSA security at a crosswalk, but we have lines, stop lights, pedestrian right of way laws, and we teach our children to look for traffic before crossing.

 

Is that also "Security theater"? People still get hit by cars, right?

 

I guess I dont understand your position...you want MORE security? You dont believe in ANY security?

 

Surely you cant be arguing that checking for weapons at the door has ZERO effect, can you?

[TheLeviathan]

 

It's hard to tell if you're being sarcastic, or whether you've really accepted that his point was about predestination. (This is why we can't have intelligent conversations about what is and isn't security.)

 

It's about acceptance of risk. You could die while crossing a suburban street, and yet we don't stump for TSA checkpoints at every crosswalk. Is it possible that something bad happens to you at a baseball game? Sure. Will your security theater do anything to prevent it? Of course not. 

 

Still, we accept the risk. A risk, by the way, that has resulted in exactly zero shootings or terrorist attacks in more than a century of open-gates baseball.

 

Counterfactuals man.  You are neck deep in them and I'm not sure you understand that.

[Jim Hahn]

 

 

So they aren't willing to go out of their way to upset a significant portion of the fanbase to improve safety. But they are willing to go out of their way to upset a significant portion of the fanbase to PRETEND like they are trying to improve safety.
Sorry, not buying that.
Perhaps it's not innovative enough to prevent a modern attack, but I don't believe for a second that they are too lazy to try.

The problem with the corporate culture is often they don't talk to the people who have to implement a policy or the people/customers it affects. In this particular case there are almost certainly ways to make people safer, keep the lines moving, and still be cost effective. One of the ways to do that is to that is to talk to the people that have will have to implement that plan. Maybe that is happened in this case, but the people making policy seldom have to deal with the people it affects. It isn't that they don't care, but when you are sitting in an office making policy you often don't foresee the possible fallouts and potential difficulties that people on site are going to deal with.

[Whammy]

Hold on. Hold on. Hold on.

 

The original poster said Donaldson, Murphy, Eovaldi WOULDN’T be a blockbuster offseason?