Please fire the entire coaching staff, except Pete Maki!!

[chpettit19]

23 minutes ago, Schmoeman5 said:

Castro Solano and Farmer were brought in as role players. The fact that they're playing just about everyday speaks volumes. And not due to injuries. And they have been the most consistent hitters. Farmer may have the highest pull rate in his career. I've seen him dump a lot of balls onto right field when he's in protect mode. Same for Solano. 

Yes, they were. What does that have to do with whether or not Popkins has been of any help to them? Way too many guys are playing poorly. Absolutely. No doubt about it. Yes, Farmer has dumped balls into right field. So has Castro. Solano has literally made a career of it. But so have Correa, and Buxton, and Kirilloff, and Lewis, and Jeffers, and all the other guys who were here last year.

Castro and Jeffers are hitting better than I think anyone would've expected.

MAT, Farmer, Solano, Gallo, Julien, Kirilloff, Lewis, and Kepler are performing pretty much exactly how I think most people would've expected.

Correa, Buxton, Vazquez, and Miranda have performed well below what I think most people expected.

Do you disagree with any of that? The guys in the middle category aren't all hitting well, but did we really expect Gallo, Kepler, MAT, etc. to be better than this? I'd argue MAT and Farmer, maybe even Solano, have been slightly better than expected. But none of those guys in that category are at an extreme compared to their expected performance. Unless the expectation was that Popkins was going to suddenly transform the type of hitter these guys have been for many, many years why are we mad at him, and not the FO for having a lineup full of guys who they should've known weren't very good hitters?

I have no idea how good Popkins is as a hitting coach. But you don't get to take away the success of some guys while dropping the failures of others on Popkins. That's not how it works. You don't get to claim that he's only working with the players you're disappointed in while having nothing to do with the guys who are succeeding.

[Squirrel]

2 hours ago, Woof Bronzer said:

I generally agree with the first part here, but who determines the "realistic expectations"?  And are preseason expectations really the main thing clubs should be judged against?  I'd also add that winning 85-88 games in a competitive division is a vastly different proposition than winning the same number of games against this historically bad division - it may literally be the worst division in the history of baseball.  I don't think this was anticipated in the preseason predictions. 

Not to mention the eye test - just watch this club play.  Does anyone think this is working? 

While I’m not an advocate for or against firing anyone, except maybe the FO at the end of the season, why shouldn’t they be judged against pre- season expectations? I predicted 80-85 wins, because I think that’s where they’ll be. After a good stretch I upped that a little, but I’m back to where I was before the season began. Because that’s the team we have, imo. I think there is potential to be better and think they are underperforming in a couple of areas, but … <shrug> … I just don’t think firing anyone now makes a huge difference. The fans will be happy, I suppose … but only IF the team turns it around. I think they could still turn it around either way. I’m kind of … non plussed… about the whole thing. I just want to watch better baseball. I don’t know if I’ll get that by firing a bunch of people mid-season.

[dxpavelka]

9 hours ago, TwinsDr2021 said:

You didn't really just compare Cashman to our FO office did you? And then move the goal posts to championships?

Nobody is talking about the Twins FO has to win a championships to keep their jobs, most are talking about winning a fricken playoff game, just 1, and playing watchable baseball.

And just in case you didn't know since 2017 the Yanks have been to 3 American League championship series and haven't missed the playoffs, and also don't play in the Central Division.

 

 

Trust me, the NY fan base is going ten times more brutal on Cashman than ours is on the current (or any) regime.

[dxpavelka]

7 hours ago, howeda7 said:

Falvey is Brian Cashman now? Come on. 

Changing anything or everything or some combination in between guarantees nothing except gives folks new folks to bitch about.

 

[dxpavelka]

5 hours ago, BiggestRoccoFan said:

Rocco has plenty of talent dude!

TALENT doesn't hit .230

TALENT doesn't project to score fewer than 700 runs in a season.  Again.

TALENT isn't a roster with ONE OPS over .800

TALENT doesn't strike out 30% of the time.

But you go ahead and keep believing what you believe if it helps you sleep at night.

[Woof Bronzer]

1 hour ago, Squirrel said:

 why shouldn’t they be judged against pre- season expectations?

Because a) preseason expectations are opinion, not fact, and different people have different predictions.  If you thought they would win 90 games this year, they are significantly underachieving.  Conversely if you thought they would win 75 games they are actually overachieving.  Do you think they are overachieving? b) preseason predictions don't factor in injuries, minor league call ups, trades, etc.  They are an opinion based on a roster snapshot in time.  IMO they're worthless come opening day.  c) a simple record does not tell the whole story.  As evidence, I cite the 2023 MN Twins.  They are losing tons of winnable games due to record-pace hitting futility, poor fundamentals, poor bullpen management, poor roster construction, lack of effort/caring, etc.  If they were scrappy and losing tight games due to a lot of bad breaks, different story, but if we only judge them against the preseason predications we'd say all of those failures/flaws are acceptable because they are on pace to meet someone's preseason prediction.   d) and perhaps most importantly, it lets the team off the hook.  Instead of owning the 2023 failure the club and its defenders can say, "hey this is who we thought they were, nothing to see here" which basically guarantees 2024 will be just like 2023, 2022, and 2021.  

So I guess I'll ask: given that the club is right on track toward your prediction, do you think this has been a successful season so far?

[howeda7]

57 minutes ago, dxpavelka said:

Changing anything or everything or some combination in between guarantees nothing except gives folks new folks to bitch about.

 

Blindly doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results is the definition of insanity.

We are not asking for "anything" or "everything". We are asking for new clubhouse management to try and at least shake this team up enough to win its pathetic division and maybe a play-off game.

Failing that, we're asking for this failed Falvey regime to be dismissed. This is not a rash or rushed decision. The current regime has had seven years. Seven. And they have failed. It's time for someone else to take a crack at it.

[Mike Sixel]

1 hour ago, Squirrel said:

While I’m not an advocate for or against firing anyone, except maybe the FO at the end of the season, why shouldn’t they be judged against pre- season expectations? I predicted 80-85 wins, because I think that’s where they’ll be. After a good stretch I upped that a little, but I’m back to where I was before the season began. Because that’s the team we have, imo. I think there is potential to be better and think they are underperforming in a couple of areas, but … <shrug> … I just don’t think firing anyone now makes a huge difference. The fans will be happy, I suppose … but only IF the team turns it around. I think they could still turn it around either way. I’m kind of … non plussed… about the whole thing. I just want to watch better baseball. I don’t know if I’ll get that by firing a bunch of people mid-season.

I'll bite....because by this far into the regime, our expectations should be higher. Meeting mediocre expectations just means the coaches likely aren't the issue, but those supplying them players are....

[Squirrel]

44 minutes ago, Mike Sixel said:

I'll bite....because by this far into the regime, our expectations should be higher. Meeting mediocre expectations just means the coaches likely aren't the issue, but those supplying them players are....

I don’t disagree with that. I’m not saying mediocrity is good here. The FO needs to build a better team. That’s my issue. Firing manager and coaches mid-season doesn’t change what the team is, a roster the FO put together. Coaches and managers still have to work with what they are given and I don’t think this group of coaches or managers are going to perform miracles. And I don’t think new coaches and managers will make a difference. So, firing them all mid-season does one thing. Makes some fans happy but I don’t think changes the outcome. That’s why I’m non-plussed by the idea. I don’t think it changes anything. What I want changed is the FO and I don’t think that will happen until the off-season 

[Woof Bronzer]

55 minutes ago, Squirrel said:

I don’t disagree with that. I’m not saying mediocrity is good here. The FO needs to build a better team. That’s my issue. Firing manager and coaches mid-season doesn’t change what the team is, a roster the FO put together. Coaches and managers still have to work with what they are given and I don’t think this group of coaches or managers are going to perform miracles. And I don’t think new coaches and managers will make a difference. So, firing them all mid-season does one thing. Makes some fans happy but I don’t think changes the outcome. That’s why I’m non-plussed by the idea. I don’t think it changes anything. What I want changed is the FO and I don’t think that will happen until the off-season 

I should have clarified, I'm not advocating for any firings right now.  In fact it appears we are in the exact same spot: firing Rocco won't matter because Falvine will just replace him with a clone.  And as much as I want Falvine gone it just aint happening mid season.  

[dxpavelka]

4 hours ago, Woof Bronzer said:

Because a) preseason expectations are opinion, not fact, and different people have different predictions.  If you thought they would win 90 games this year, they are significantly underachieving.  Conversely if you thought they would win 75 games they are actually overachieving.  Do you think they are overachieving? b) preseason predictions don't factor in injuries, minor league call ups, trades, etc.  They are an opinion based on a roster snapshot in time.  IMO they're worthless come opening day.  c) a simple record does not tell the whole story.  As evidence, I cite the 2023 MN Twins.  They are losing tons of winnable games due to record-pace hitting futility, poor fundamentals, poor bullpen management, poor roster construction, lack of effort/caring, etc.  If they were scrappy and losing tight games due to a lot of bad breaks, different story, but if we only judge them against the preseason predications we'd say all of those failures/flaws are acceptable because they are on pace to meet someone's preseason prediction.   d) and perhaps most importantly, it lets the team off the hook.  Instead of owning the 2023 failure the club and its defenders can say, "hey this is who we thought they were, nothing to see here" which basically guarantees 2024 will be just like 2023, 2022, and 2021.  

So I guess I'll ask: given that the club is right on track toward your prediction, do you think this has been a successful season so far?

I had them pegged at 83 wins but don't judge seasons in June.

[dxpavelka]

4 hours ago, howeda7 said:

Blindly doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results is the definition of insanity.

We are not asking for "anything" or "everything". We are asking for new clubhouse management to try and at least shake this team up enough to win its pathetic division and maybe a play-off game.

Failing that, we're asking for this failed Falvey regime to be dismissed. This is not a rash or rushed decision. The current regime has had seven years. Seven. And they have failed. It's time for someone else to take a crack at it.

An oft-quoted bon mot (frequently attributed to Albert Einstein, Benjamin Franklin, or a number of other people who probably never said it) is that insanity may be defined as “doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results.” While the job of lexicographers might be easier if they were allowed to use witty sayings instead of precise definitions, such belletristic labors are not within their purview. The straight facts about insanity are these: it has been in use in English since the late 16th century, for the first two hundred years or so carrying only the literal meaning “the condition of being mentally deranged.” In the 19th century it began to take on a looser sense, “extreme folly or unreasonableness.” In modern usage, insanity may be found in both senses: you may tell your brother that trying to skateboard while holding onto a car is "insanity" (in which case you mean that it is extremely foolish) or encounter the stricter original meaning in such contexts as insanity plea.

[dxpavelka]

3 hours ago, Squirrel said:

I don’t disagree with that. I’m not saying mediocrity is good here. The FO needs to build a better team. That’s my issue. Firing manager and coaches mid-season doesn’t change what the team is, a roster the FO put together. Coaches and managers still have to work with what they are given and I don’t think this group of coaches or managers are going to perform miracles. And I don’t think new coaches and managers will make a difference. So, firing them all mid-season does one thing. Makes some fans happy but I don’t think changes the outcome. That’s why I’m non-plussed by the idea. I don’t think it changes anything. What I want changed is the FO and I don’t think that will happen until the off-season 

And unless they COMPLETELY face plant it's highly unlikely to happen in the off-season either. 

[KirbyDome89]

8 hours ago, Squirrel said:

why shouldn’t they be judged against pre- season expectations?

If I told you on March 29th that the rest of the division was going to be so awful even a 36-38 record on June 20th would've been good enough for 1st place I'm guessing the expectations for where the Twins would be right now would've shifted dramatically. 

[KirbyDome89]

16 hours ago, wabene said:

If we don't see some major in-season adjustments and turn this hard to watch thing around I'm finally ready for a change with this staff, including Falvey, Levine and Baldelli. For one they just have to win this division. If they do and then got swept out extending the embarrassing streak, they probably still gotta go. It might depend on how that played out, but man the fan base would be in an absolute frenzy.

On the one hand these major changes should happen after the season. On the other, with the baseball draft in July, with a #5 pick, if the Twins are totally in the tank then do you want these guys making that pick? Tough situation. I would be in favor of major shakeup moves now including doing something with J Lopez (done), bidding farewell to Mr Popkins, sadly DFAing long time Twins Max Kepler and just over all making quick adjustments to the plan that reflect the importance of each and every game. DO F#&%ING SOMETHING!! 

I'm not a fan of the FO's employment being contingent on postseason or division results. We've seen enough after 7 years; winning an awful division, breaking the 18 game losing streak, or even winning a 3 game series shouldn't be a life raft that saves their jobs. 

[wabene]

2 hours ago, KirbyDome89 said:

I'm not a fan of the FO's employment being contingent on postseason or division results. We've seen enough after 7 years; winning an awful division, breaking the 18 game losing streak, or even winning a 3 game series shouldn't be a life raft that saves their jobs. 

That doesn't make any sense, aren't results what a results based business is all about? Sounds more like an emotional response. If they did win the division, break the streak and win a playoff series they will have turned this thing around and wouldn't resemble this mess we are subjected to right now. You would be surrounded by very happy Twins fans.

And who is we? The opinions on this board are so varied it's clear to me two different people can see completely different things while watching the same event.

However one thing we can all agree with is they are unwatchable right now. 

[Squirrel]

7 hours ago, dxpavelka said:

And unless they COMPLETELY face plant it's highly unlikely to happen in the off-season either. 

Probably so. But doesn’t mean I don’t still want that change. 

[dxpavelka]

27 minutes ago, Squirrel said:

Probably so. But doesn’t mean I don’t still want that change. 

WANT in one hand.....

[Twins_Fan_in_NJ]

Something else to consider with Maki. When you're a pitcher with a razor thin margin for error - think, giving up 3 runs and you're likely looking at a loss - it definitely impacts how you pitch. This team's starting pitchers take the mound knowing they need a quality start - at the minimum - to even keep the Twins in a game.

[LA Vikes Fan]

I actually think the FO had been doing a good job until this year. They inherited a poor team with no pitching to speak of and not a lot of good prospects. The Twins are now competitive until the last stretch and the starting pitching is a strength. 

I think things went south at the trade deadline last year when we decided we were only a player or two away from being a real contender. We weren't. the Mahle trade has turned out poorly, and Jorge Lopez has not performed while the guys we traded look pretty good. The FO compounded  this fallacy by adding Joey Gallo and not trading away Max Kepler.  All of these moves made sense at the time -hell, I was in favor of all of them - IF we had a solid foundation and these add-ons could take us to the next level. It's turned out neither of these things are true - we didn't have a solid foundation and the add-ons have flopped for the most part, Brock Stewart excluded. We're left with a team that can't score runs because they can't hit consistently enough and  can't hit situationally, with a bullpen that was thin and now is becoming more and more unreliable because of injury and poor performance,  and a rotation under so much pressure because we can't score that it is now starting to break down. 

I don't know the solution. It seems to me that Kepler and Gallo should be gone, replaced by Wallner and Larnach (or maybe Stevenson instead of Larnach). No platooning Kirilloff, and play Lewis and Julien every day to see what you have. If that means fewer ABs for Farmer and Solano that's what it means. If Rocco isn't on board with that, trade the players away so he can't play them. I'm not sure what else they can do now. I think it's the apparent lack of recognition of where the team really stands as evidenced by the lack of change that is the most frustrating. This team is 19-26 since the end of April.  It isn't likely to get any better if we keep doing the same things over and over again.     

 

[KirbyDome89]

9 hours ago, wabene said:

That doesn't make any sense, aren't results what a results based business is all about? Sounds more like an emotional response. If they did win the division, break the streak and win a playoff series they will have turned this thing around and wouldn't resemble this mess we are subjected to right now. You would be surrounded by very happy Twins fans.

And who is we? The opinions on this board are so varied it's clear to me two different people can see completely different things while watching the same event.

However one thing we can all agree with is they are unwatchable right now. 

It makes perfect sense if you care at all about the context in which those results are achieved. I'd argue the exact opposite, that putting so much stock in a hollow division title or winning a 3 game series in October is the emotional response. 

[chpettit19]

10 hours ago, wabene said:

That doesn't make any sense, aren't results what a results based business is all about? Sounds more like an emotional response. If they did win the division, break the streak and win a playoff series they will have turned this thing around and wouldn't resemble this mess we are subjected to right now. You would be surrounded by very happy Twins fans.

And who is we? The opinions on this board are so varied it's clear to me two different people can see completely different things while watching the same event.

However one thing we can all agree with is they are unwatchable right now. 

 

21 minutes ago, KirbyDome89 said:

It makes perfect sense if you care at all about the context in which those results are achieved. I'd argue the exact opposite, that putting so much stock in a hollow division title or winning a 3 game series in October is the emotional response. 

I'll split the difference...winning this division gets them no points with me (unless they go 64-24 the rest of the way and win 100 games), but if they win a playoff series they get points. Enough to change me from "fire" to "don't fire?" That will depend on how the rest of the year plays out. But I think winning a playoff series is worthy of some praise, and not an "emotional response."

[KirbyDome89]

23 minutes ago, LA VIkes Fan said:

I actually think the FO had been doing a good job until this year. They inherited a poor team with no pitching to speak of and not a lot of good prospects. The Twins are now competitive until the last stretch and the starting pitching is a strength.  

I'm not going to take the time to look up where the farm system was ranked at the time of takeover, but guys like Buxton, Sano, Kepler, Polanco, ect were all breaking in with the Twins right around that period. The FO definitely wasn't inheriting an organization devoid of talent.  

[KirbyDome89]

5 minutes ago, chpettit19 said:

 

I'll split the difference...winning this division gets them no points with me (unless they go 64-24 the rest of the way and win 100 games), but if they win a playoff series they get points. Enough to change me from "fire" to "don't fire?" That will depend on how the rest of the year plays out. But I think winning a playoff series is worthy of some praise, and not an "emotional response."

The last 2.5 years have been pretty bad. We'll see how the next 3 months go. If sweeping changes are made, and they start rolling in the 2nd half, maybe it'll be time to readdress things. We spend the entire 162 game regular season preaching patience and not getting too wrapped up in single game(s) results, that shouldn't change because the calendar flips to October. 

[chpettit19]

1 minute ago, KirbyDome89 said:

I'm not going to take the time to look up where the farm system was ranked at the time of takeover, but guys like Buxton, Sano, Kepler, Polanco, ect were all breaking in with the Twins right around that period. The FO definitely wasn't inheriting an organization devoid of talent.  

They weren't "devoid of talent," but they weren't exactly overflowing with it, either. Guys in the system, or on the 2016 Twins that I think anyone would've really expected to be any good moving forward:

Position players:
Buxton
Sano
Kepler
Polanco
Rosario
Dozier
Escobar (had been basically league average for 2 years)
5 of those guys were 22, 23, or 24 (Rosario), and either started the year rookie eligible, or had just graduated in 2015. Was there hope with them? For sure. Is it reasonable to expect to hit on 100% of any prospect wave? Absolutely not. So you have 29 year old Dozier established, 27 year old Escobar showing he's an average player, and 5 guys you're hoping to get 3 or 4 everyday guys out of. So 5 or 6 position players. Not great, but pretty solid if you can hit on most of those prospects.

Pitchers:
Berrios
Duffey? (still a starter at that point at age 25)
Pressly
That's not an impressive list of MLB ready arms. Berrios, Jay, Gonzalves, Stewart, and Burdi were their top 5 pitching prospects entering 2016 (according to MLB.com which is just easiest for me to search right now). Entering 2017 it was Gonsalves, Romero, Jay, Stewart, and Mejia. Rebuilding their pitching was going to be a massive undertaking with no question about it.

That's 2 established players (Dozier and Pressly), 2 guys who'd debuted and showed a little success early (Rosario and Duffey), 1 guy who was showing he could hold his own (Escobar), and 5 prospects (not realistic to think you're hitting on all 5). Out of a 25 man roster that's nothing to write home about.

 

[chpettit19]

13 minutes ago, KirbyDome89 said:

The last 2.5 years have been pretty bad. We'll see how the next 3 months go. If sweeping changes are made, and they start rolling in the 2nd half, maybe it'll be time to readdress things. We spend the entire 162 game regular season preaching patience and not getting too wrapped up in single game(s) results, that shouldn't change because the calendar flips to October. 

It's all about October, though, isn't it? If they're winning 95+ games every year, and getting swept out of the playoffs every year, would most of us be preaching patience, and not getting too wrapped up in single game(s) results? There's some playoff losing streak I've heard about a time or 2 that makes me think things change when the calendar flips to October.

[KirbyDome89]

12 minutes ago, chpettit19 said:

It's all about October, though, isn't it? If they're winning 95+ games every year, and getting swept out of the playoffs every year, would most of us be preaching patience, and not getting too wrapped up in single game(s) results? There's some playoff losing streak I've heard about a time or 2 that makes me think things change when the calendar flips to October.

If they're winning 95+ games consistently are we actually talking about firing this FO? I really doubt it. Conversely, if we're at the point of seriously entertaining the idea of letting them go, winning a truly awful division and then taking 2 of 3 games in an October series shouldn't flip that discussion on its head. Again, if this team plays markedly better baseball over the next 80ish games I'm happy to reconsider. 

[chpettit19]

2 minutes ago, KirbyDome89 said:

If they're winning 95+ games consistently are we actually talking about firing this FO? I really doubt it. Conversely, if we're at the point of seriously entertaining the idea of letting them go, winning a truly awful division and then taking 2 of 3 games in an October series shouldn't flip that discussion on its head. Again, if this team plays markedly better baseball over the next 80ish games I'm happy to reconsider. 

That's what I said. If they win a playoff series it gets them points with me. Whether or not that flips me from "fire" to "not fire" depends on how it all plays out. But I don't think we should pretend that October doesn't mean significantly more than the regular season. And, if they're going to win the division (even this terrible one), and a playoff series, they're going to have to play markedly better baseball. They're not doing either of those things playing this way. So it's kind of implied in the idea of accomplishing those goals that they improve their play. It's a requirement, really. The question is then how much they improve, and if that changes minds on the FO.

[KirbyDome89]

20 minutes ago, chpettit19 said:

They weren't "devoid of talent," but they weren't exactly overflowing with it, either. Guys in the system, or on the 2016 Twins that I think anyone would've really expected to be any good moving forward:

Position players:
Buxton
Sano
Kepler
Polanco
Rosario
Dozier
Escobar (had been basically league average for 2 years)
5 of those guys were 22, 23, or 24 (Rosario), and either started the year rookie eligible, or had just graduated in 2015. Was there hope with them? For sure. Is it reasonable to expect to hit on 100% of any prospect wave? Absolutely not. So you have 29 year old Dozier established, 27 year old Escobar showing he's an average player, and 5 guys you're hoping to get 3 or 4 everyday guys out of. So 5 or 6 position players. Not great, but pretty solid if you can hit on most of those prospects.

Pitchers:
Berrios
Duffey? (still a starter at that point at age 25)
Pressly
That's not an impressive list of MLB ready arms. Berrios, Jay, Gonzalves, Stewart, and Burdi were their top 5 pitching prospects entering 2016 (according to MLB.com which is just easiest for me to search right now). Entering 2017 it was Gonsalves, Romero, Jay, Stewart, and Mejia. Rebuilding their pitching was going to be a massive undertaking with no question about it.

That's 2 established players (Dozier and Pressly), 2 guys who'd debuted and showed a little success early (Rosario and Duffey), 1 guy who was showing he could hold his own (Escobar), and 5 prospects (not realistic to think you're hitting on all 5). Out of a 25 man roster that's nothing to write home about.

 

Buxton and Sano were two of the top prospects in baseball. They've probably each underperformed to some extent while Kepler (maybe?) and Polanco have provided more than expected. Rosario kinda was what everybody thought he'd be. It was a really nice, young position group to inherit, obviously, because most of the success this FO has had is tied directly to that group. 

No doubt the pitching was an issue, I mean that's specifically why Falvey was brought over from Cleveland. I'd add Rogers to your list and even though May was rough to start he was also a big part of that 2019 pen. 

[KirbyDome89]

5 minutes ago, chpettit19 said:

That's what I said. If they win a playoff series it gets them points with me. Whether or not that flips me from "fire" to "not fire" depends on how it all plays out. But I don't think we should pretend that October doesn't mean significantly more than the regular season. And, if they're going to win the division (even this terrible one), and a playoff series, they're going to have to play markedly better baseball. They're not doing either of those things playing this way. So it's kind of implied in the idea of accomplishing those goals that they improve their play. It's a requirement, really. The question is then how much they improve, and if that changes minds on the FO.

Yeah I just don't think it does, at least not one series. Even the current version of the Twins is capable of beating a WC team in a 3 game series; look at what they did in Toronto. That doesn't change who or what this team has been. 

I don't think they have to play markedly better. Honestly. There's nothing about Cleveland that makes me think they're capable of putting together even 4 weeks of solidly above average baseball. Chicago, Detroit, and KC aren't threats. The Twins can ride the .500 rollercoaster all the way to a division title.