Jump to content
  • Create Account

Game Recap: Yankees 9, Twins 6


2 hours ago, rv78 said:

Nothng will change until they start signing players like Bauer and Hendricks. Yes they are monster contracts but you get what you pay for and right now the Twins are paying for crap.

So you're upset that Donaldson's big deal isn't working out how you'd like and you think the answer to that is signing Trevor Bauer, fresh off a career year where he was clearly cheating, to a 3 year $102m deal? That's how you save the Twins? Sign a guy for 40m this year? And Liam Hendriks on top of that? You want a starter and a closer for over 50m a year and you think that saves this Twins team? Even if they just added those 2 guys on top of these team and pushed their payroll to almost 200m you'd still be looking at a losing team. That ignores the fact that it's not realistic for the Twins to have a 200m payroll so they'd have to get rid of a number of guys and you're looking at your 2 mammoth contracts and a bunch of AAA players.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

39 minutes ago, Dodecahedron said:

If Rocco knew about this and still put Dobnak out there, yeah this is another Baldelli mistake.

Dobnak lost a fingernail in his last start. He's had an acrylic nail since then. Happens a number of times a year. Sounds more like Dobnak making excuses for getting shelled.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The next Buxton could be in Baltimore. Cedric Mullins made a Buxton-highlight reel diving catch by covering half the state of Maryland! He is turning heads with his glove and he is in the top 3 leaders in hits in the AL. It wasn't that long ago he was going so poorly, the O's demoted him directly to AA and not AAA. He has been relatively healthy too. Watch for this guy.

Polanco seems to have found his bat finally. Gordon needs to be in there. simmons isn't going to be a Twin very long. Lets see what Gordon can bring.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Aichiman said:

I'm finished with this team.  I've followed them loyally since 1982, when I moved to Minneapolis.  And I left Minneapolis 23 years ago, but I still followed the Twins.  But I'm done; it's over.  This team will do nothing until ownership changes.  And I'm not willing to wait. I'm going back to my roots.  "Let's Go Mets!" will be my new/old mantra.  I'll use Trevor May to ease the transition.   I could say best of luck; but it'd be an empty gesture.  Instead, I invite you to follow my lead and dump this sorry franchise.

Have you seen the Mets record over their lifetime?  They are not the Yankees.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, FanFromPhilly said:

I'm frustrated by this team but I don't understand these comments.  The Twins have won Word Series in 87 and 91 and the Mets have won in 69 and 86.  Why are the Twins the sorry franchise?

I don't get these either, sure this team is absolutely frustrating but was nobody watching from 2011-2016? Those years with few good players and no quality prospects in the minors close enough to make any positive impact. I saw Yohan Pino pitch a game in person and thankfully we haven't hit that low yet. Be frustrated with this team, and feel free to criticize the many criticizable aspects, but let's be rational as well.

17 minutes ago, MMMordabito said:

Fire Rocco.

Stop this, it's not going to happen, nor should it. What team would fire a manager coming off two straight division titles after a few admittedly bad months? An incompetently run team, that's who. I swear we're starting to sound like the Strib comments section on this site.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Some teams have a certain swagger -- the Rays, the Red Sox, the Astros, the As. They have it even when they don't have stars. The Twins don't but it is something to aspire to. The Rays are the best example. They do not have stars comparable to Stanton, Judge, Cole, et al, yet they go into Yankee Stadium and kick butt. It's a mysterious thing but it can be done.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, spycake said:

You misremembered a bit. Dobnak was pulled in his playoff start with *nobody out* and the bases loaded in the third. “Hit a ball hard” or not (I don’t recall that part, but there was a leadoff double in the 1st), Dobnak’s line was 2 IP (so 6 outs), 6 hits, and 2 BB, and no strikeouts. I didn’t like the decision to bring in Duffey again so soon after the Yankees saw him in game 1, but Dobnak’s performance was not particularly effective either, even if it was better than last night.

I also misremembered no balls being hit hard. The double in the first was ripped come to think of it. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Aerodeliria said:

I also misremembered no balls being hit hard. The double in the first was ripped come to think of it. 

You're not incorrect in that there was some controversy about taking Dobnak out so early in that game. I may have allowed him to try getting another DP grounder, or gone right to someone like Rogers.

Just found a recap video -- the 3 hits they show off Dobnak (double and single in the first, and a single in the third that chased him) were all hit pretty hard. Although nothing compared to what Duffey allowed! Baseball Savant should have the exit velocities too but I don't want to bum anybody out futher. :)

https://cuts.diamond.mlb.com/FORGE/2019/2019-10/05/b7e1eb02-3f25953f-0b387047-csvm-diamondx64-asset_1280x720_59_4000K.mp4

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, terrydactyls said:

All you need to do is find a local businessman with a net worth with three commas (that's billions for those who are wondering), a passion for baseball, and a willingness to let others do all the "baseball stuff." There should be a bunch of them in the Twin Cities to pick from, right?

A "businessman" that has amassed a billion dollar net worth is not going to operate at a loss which is what the post you responded to is hoping to find.  The constant complaining about spending is misguided.  The appropriate thing to complain about would be that the Twins have half the revenue of the Yankees/Dodgers and a lot less than than several others.  To complain they don't spend money they don't have is the equivalent of calling a guy cheap who makes $50K/yr because he does not drive a $100K vehicle.

Small/mid market teams never operate this way. Are they all incompetent.  Tampa has consistently been successful trading for players before they are established.  Tatis Jr. was acquired for James Shields who was bad to horrible after the trade.  Chicago's team was bolstered considerably because they traded away very good established players.  Boston with an enormous budget compared to the Twins let Betts go.  Where are they now?  The Angels spent a fortune and and stink even after hitting the draft jackpot in Pujlos.  How have they been doing.  The Phillies signed Harper / Degrom and traded for Realmuto.  How did that go for them?

The bottom line is that we don't have the revenue to sign the "Bauers".  Therfore, we can complain they don't spend money they don't have or we can embrace the need to draft / trade and develop.  People with average incomes don't drive a Ferrari.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In the beginning the Twins had a perfect set up. They brought in Simmons to complement Dobnak high GB rate that should turn into low run production by opponents which translates into wins. The problem is that Dobnak found his new strike out pitch in his new slider. The FO went crazy, they wanted to push his slider and transform him into a SO pitcher. The result was and is to develop his slider, not to capitalize on his efficient sinker in crucial game winning spots.

They have him throwing that slider far too much and the opposition is whacking it. They need to allow Dobnak to go back to his efficient sinker and go to his slider only in key situations. Why can't they see that?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As I mentioned earlier, I went on to other things after Stanton's first homer, so talk about a ripped fingernail is news to me. Looking at Dobnak's numbers, he is no better than Shoemaker or Happ and has never had the sustained success that those guys have had. I fear Randy is a one-pitch pitcher (moving sinker) and that doesn't cut it either in the rotation or the bullpen. I really want to know what happened to the slider that was one of the big topics in spring training.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, stringer bell said:

I really want to know what happened to the slider that was one of the big topics in spring training.  

Well, a couple that he threw to Stanton are lodged in the bleachers at Target Field. Does that help??

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, chpettit19 said:

Yes, Jax has been a starter in the minors. That's why they used him yesterday to get through multiple innings. Earned himself another look and may get a spot start or 2. I'm guessing he's sent back to the minors today, though, so they can add a usable arm to the pen. Welcome to the life of a borderline prospect.

They used him on back to back days, which is the issue. According to the radio broadcast, hes never pitched back to back in his professional career.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, roger said:

If you want to learn more about the fingernail problem Dobber has, read today's Strib.  Good explanation of the problem and why he couldn't put pressure on some pitches like normal because of the one finger.

And those of you who like to blame the Pohlads, should also read the Strib where they talk about Stashak going on the IL.  He had been optioned to the Saints and was set to be placed on their AAA IL, where he would be paid a couple thousand a week.  Rather than do that, they jumped through whatever hoops and returned him to the Twins and placed him on the Twins IL, where he makes $ 3,050 a game...or about ten times more.  In my opinion that is an employer who cares about their employees and puts the dollars behind it, regardless of how big their loss was last year and will likely be again this year.

Being ‘kind’ or ‘fair’ or respectful with how you treat those in your organization has nothing to do with commitment to winning and willingness to take on significant financial risk in pursuit of championships. They’re two completely different things. The overwhelming majority of criticism of ownership found on this site is in relation to the latter. We can all agree that it’s good to root for an organization that will make a move like they did for Stashak. At the same time, let’s not pretend that even a dozen such moves would amount to even a decimal point on the financial statements.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Major League Ready said:

A "businessman" that has amassed a billion dollar net worth is not going to operate at a loss which is what the post you responded to is hoping to find. ......

I disagree. Some businessmen will. Some won't. Most won't. Nobody owns a MLB franchise as their first source of income (or at least, they shouldn't). It is a glorified hobby. Sure, some, and even most, businessmen owners will treat it solely as a business. But the best owners, and the most human owners, know it is a side gig, and one to treat the players well and even lose a bit of the unneeded millions and billions of excess money and enjoy life and spend the rewards that they acheived while they are alive, and HAVE SOME FUN. Life is not always about not operating at a net loss. Money changes everything, though, and to some, it just makes them more greedy. I have known some very unhappy very ultra-rich people. Pohlads could be having a lot more fun than they are having with the Twins, and it wouldn't hurt a soul, including them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, chpettit19 said:

Yes, Jax has been a starter in the minors. That's why they used him yesterday to get through multiple innings. Earned himself another look and may get a spot start or 2. I'm guessing he's sent back to the minors today, though, so they can add a usable arm to the pen. Welcome to the life of a borderline prospect.

Back to back games in relief? I don't mind them bringing him in yesterday for multiple innings. But yesterday? and back to back days. Just irresponsible in my opinion.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, chpettit19 said:

So you're upset that Donaldson's big deal isn't working out how you'd like and you think the answer to that is signing Trevor Bauer, fresh off a career year where he was clearly cheating, to a 3 year $102m deal? That's how you save the Twins? Sign a guy for 40m this year? And Liam Hendriks on top of that? You want a starter and a closer for over 50m a year and you think that saves this Twins team? Even if they just added those 2 guys on top of these team and pushed their payroll to almost 200m you'd still be looking at a losing team. That ignores the fact that it's not realistic for the Twins to have a 200m payroll so they'd have to get rid of a number of guys and you're looking at your 2 mammoth contracts and a bunch of AAA players.

I listed Bauer and Hendricks simply as examples. Why do the Twins always sign players that had excellent careers when they are at the END of their careers like Donaldson and Cruz. 

If you read my next post you'd understand that paying for crap will get you crap. Maybe they should try a different approach like trying to sign Free Agents in the prime of their careers when they are top performers, not when they are washed up, along with the other players that won't/don't make a difference.  Example: Gerrit Cole 7-3, Randy Dobnak 1-6.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, h2oface said:

I disagree. Some businessmen will. Some won't. Most won't. Nobody owns a MLB franchise as their first source of income (or at least, they shouldn't). It is a glorified hobby. Sure, some, and even most, businessmen owners will treat it solely as a business. But the best owners, and the most human owners, know it is a side gig, and one to treat the players well and even lose a bit of the unneeded millions and billions of excess money and enjoy life and spend the rewards that they acheived while they are alive, and HAVE SOME FUN. Life is not always about not operating at a net loss. Money changes everything, though, and to some, it just makes them more greedy. I have known some very unhappy very ultra-rich people. Pohlads could be having a lot more fun than they are having with the Twins, and it wouldn't hurt a soul, including them.

That theory is popular with fans who don't think a little thing like a significant revenue disadvantage should stop them from spending like a large market team.  I guess the theory is the big markets would make a good profit and the small market owners should take a loss.  Not too many guys signing up to buy mid/small market teams under that premise. 

  I would like to have an owner that was indifferent about financial concerns but it's certainly don't expect someone to spend 10 of millions/year to entertain me.  There is also the fact that their actions (spending) are quite consistent with revenue across all the MLB teams.  They consistently make a solid profit except when the team rapidly declines while they have a high payroll.  In those cases, that problem is rectified quickly which speaks to their financial focus / goals.  The Twins spending is relatively consistent with other teams of equal revenue.  They all operate to make a profit.  We should also keep in mind that the value of the team is completely predicated it's ability to produce a profit.  These guys are not going to spend a billion plus to lose money annually as well as reduce the asset value.

Perhaps more to the point, if they were willing to basically donate 10s of millions to a cause, I certainly hope they would donate to a better cause than a couple more wins for their baseball team.  It is mind boggling to me to suggest they spend (donate) 20 or 30+ million a year to get 3 or 4 more wins in a given year when that money could be allocated to MUCH more worthy causes.

I would add, if the theory is owning is fun therefore they should be willing to forgo a profit, why do we so readily accept the players focus on getting every dollar they can as they did during Covid?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Major League Ready said:

That theory is popular with fans who don't think a little thing like a significant revenue disadvantage should stop them from spending like a large market team.  I guess the theory is the big markets would make a good profit and the small market owners should take a loss.  Not too many guys signing up to buy mid/small market teams under that premise. 

  I would like to have an owner that was indifferent about financial concerns but it's certainly don't expect someone to spend 10 of millions/year to entertain me.  There is also the fact that their actions (spending) are quite consistent with revenue across all the MLB teams.  They consistently make a solid profit except when the team rapidly declines while they have a high payroll.  In those cases, that problem is rectified quickly which speaks to their financial focus / goals.  The Twins spending is relatively consistent with other teams of equal revenue.  They all operate to make a profit.  We should also keep in mind that the value of the team is completely predicated it's ability to produce a profit.  These guys are not going to spend a billion plus to lose money annually as well as reduce the asset value.

Perhaps more to the point, if they were willing to basically donate 10s of millions to a cause, I certainly hope they would donate to a better cause than a couple more wins for their baseball team.  It is mind boggling to me to suggest they spend (donate) 20 or 30+ million a year to get 3 or 4 more wins in a given year when that money could be allocated to MUCH more worthy causes.

I would add, if the theory is owning is fun therefore they should be willing to forgo a profit, why do we so readily accept the players focus on getting every dollar they can as they did during Covid?

Yup. As I expected. $$ You would side with the "most". $$ Pohlad's were the wealthiest owner, maybe they still are. $$ They are free to make whatever choices they want, and they are familiar ones.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, stringer bell said:

As I mentioned earlier, I went on to other things after Stanton's first homer, so talk about a ripped fingernail is news to me. Looking at Dobnak's numbers, he is no better than Shoemaker or Happ and has never had the sustained success that those guys have had. I fear Randy is a one-pitch pitcher (moving sinker) and that doesn't cut it either in the rotation or the bullpen. I really want to know what happened to the slider that was one of the big topics in spring training.  

Quoting myself. Who has an ego? Anyway, I was getting a little tired of hearing how Dobnak's numbers were skewed by his use as a relief pitcher. Except for ERA (both splits terrible BTW) every major stat has been worse with Dobnak as a starter this year. 

It reminds me of Bremer over and over saying that Mauer and Morneau were great hitters against left handed pitching. Morneau had a lifetime .710 OPS against lefties versus .886 against right handers. Mauer was .740 against southpaws and .868 against righties.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, h2oface said:

Yup. As I expected. $$ You would side with the "most". $$ Pohlad's were the wealthiest owner, maybe they still are. $$ They are free to make whatever choices they want, and they are familiar ones.

I am not siding with anyone.  I am stating fact in that teams spend according to revenue and that's the way the world works.  If suggesting that expecting spending to align with revenue is siding … you are welcome to that opinion.  What you are asking is that we find an owner who unlike all the other owners is willing to forgo profit or even take a loss.  That would be great but it but it’s a fanatical expectation IMO.   

If it's such a good idea, why haven't other mid market teams signed the top FAs?  There has literally been one signing of the kind of FA (Bauer) by a mid market team in the last 20 years.  That was Grienke and The Dbacks had just signed a $1B TV contract.  That signing did not bring them success. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, Aichiman said:

I'm finished with this team.  I've followed them loyally since 1982, when I moved to Minneapolis.  And I left Minneapolis 23 years ago, but I still followed the Twins.  But I'm done; it's over.  This team will do nothing until ownership changes.  And I'm not willing to wait. I'm going back to my roots.  "Let's Go Mets!" will be my new/old mantra.  I'll use Trevor May to ease the transition.   I could say best of luck; but it'd be an empty gesture.  Instead, I invite you to follow my lead and dump this sorry franchise.

I’m in New York and not ready to say that, but it’s not just Trevor May:  there’s an inordinately large number of Twins who have been Mets (and vice versa) over the years.  It makes for a great trivia question.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, rv78 said:

I listed Bauer and Hendricks simply as examples. Why do the Twins always sign players that had excellent careers when they are at the END of their careers like Donaldson and Cruz. 

If you read my next post you'd understand that paying for crap will get you crap. Maybe they should try a different approach like trying to sign Free Agents in the prime of their careers when they are top performers, not when they are washed up, along with the other players that won't/don't make a difference.  Example: Gerrit Cole 7-3, Randy Dobnak 1-6.

Not many players make it to free agency in their prime. Teams control them for a looooooooong time. Might be the thing I hate most about MLB. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It doesn't matter if not many players make it to free agency in their prime. You still have a choice to go after them or not. Get the best ones instead of the leftovers, which they have been doing for years. Hasn't worked has it?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 hours ago, rv78 said:

I listed Bauer and Hendricks simply as examples. Why do the Twins always sign players that had excellent careers when they are at the END of their careers like Donaldson and Cruz. 

If you read my next post you'd understand that paying for crap will get you crap. Maybe they should try a different approach like trying to sign Free Agents in the prime of their careers when they are top performers, not when they are washed up, along with the other players that won't/don't make a difference.  Example: Gerrit Cole 7-3, Randy Dobnak 1-6.

Hendricks is at the end of his career so weird choice to use there. Cruz has been an MVP level hitter since the Twins signed him so another weird choice to use. Donaldson has been an above average hitter for the Twins. And you realize most players hit the FA market in their early 30s, right? Like Hendricks who is 32. Cole is making 36m a year. So, again, it comes back to how big of a payroll the Twins can have. It'd be great if they could have a Yankee style 200m payroll, but that isn't realistic. So you can have Cole for 36m making up 24% of a 150m payroll (I think the Twins could manage a payroll that size) and try to build a roster around him that can compete (hint: going to have to hit on a whole lot of the prospects you call up) or you can have Maeda at 3-10m depending on what incentives he hits, Berrios at 6, and Pineda at 10 and still be 10m less than Cole by himself. 

Not to mention the absurdity of comparing Gerrit Cole and Randy Dobnak. Dobnak wasn't even in the opening day rotation. Comparing a top 5 pitcher in the game to our 6th pitcher isn't a useful exercise. When the Yankees have Cole as their 6th guy then you can make that complaint. Jameson Taillon brings up the back end of the Yankees rotation for 2.25m and has an ERA of 5.09 and a 1-4 record. Yankees get what they pay for! So cheap out there. How could they expect to be competitive with the likes of Taillon on their team?

Would you like me to go into examples of big contracts that didn't turn out to disprove your idea of you get what you pay for? The Angels would love to speak with you about that. Oh, so would the Phillies. And the Mets. Cubs were 3rd in payroll and Red Sox were 4th last year, how'd that turn out? You don't get what you pay for. That's not how this works. Or the standings would simply reflect payroll size and the Rays wouldn't have a chance to ever compete. 

Simply put you need to deal with the Twins (and almost every team in the league) never signing Cole or Bauer style contracts. It's not a good use of resources.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 hours ago, h2oface said:

Back to back games in relief? I don't mind them bringing him in yesterday for multiple innings. But yesterday? and back to back days. Just irresponsible in my opinion.

I can see the complaint, but just don't see it as that big of a deal to do once. If he hits the IL today or something you'll definitely be proven right, but those guys throw everyday anyways. I think he threw about 25 pitches the day before. Basically a bullpen session. Certainly wouldn't make a habit of it, but I think as a 1 off thing, that saved the pen and helped get a W last night, it's probably alright.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...