Brewers 3, Twins 2: Rally Runs Short for Minnesota

[stringer bell]

24 minutes ago, USAFChief said:

How does being in the 5th spot "facilitate" missing starts?

Past the first week or so, the 5th spot in the rotation comes around as often as any other and is no more or less likely to come with an extra day of rest. 

And in any case, the Twins don't typically skip starts even when able.

 

With the exception of making adjustments around the All-Star break, that is what they do. Either you're in the rotation or you aren't.

Piggybacking makes for more problems than it solves, which is why it is so seldom done in any kind of long-term setting.

No one in the AL started more than 33 games, so skipping starts for back-end rotation guys to get the #1s and #2s more starts really doesn't happen much. 

[DJL44]

1 hour ago, Aggies7 said:

Lewis 15, Larnach 8, solano 5

Lewis and Larnach are still Twins

[Shaitan]

Well, it took until page 3 to mention Gallo and I only saw one payroll comment, so I guess we at least have new topics.

I have zero concerns about the offense overall at this point. Slumps are gonna happen, but they don't necessarily make a pattern. There are a few players I do have concerns about, but this team has AAA depth to make a swap if needed.

[Beast]

This isn’t looking like a very good baseball team, as expected.

Outside of Buxton, Correa, and maybe Kirilloff, this offense is looking anemic.  I don’t trust any starting pitcher outside of Lopez to not give 3+ HRs in any given start.  The bullpen is fine, even with Duran out….but who cares if we can’t get them the ball with a lead.

Still early, of course, but I feel even less optimistic than I did a couple of weeks ago.  The division is bad enough that they might sneak into the playoffs, but that’s not nearly the given the homers seem to think.  And, if they do pull that off, they are going to get absolutely obliterate by good teams in a series.

And don’t look now, but they’re again down early to the Brewers through 4 while mustering only two singles, while they guy they couldn’t be bothered to sign (that everyone was clamoring for - Rhys Hoskins) is beating their pants off and slugging .688 through the first handful of games while Santana looks like he can barely hang onto a bat anymore (more strikeouts than hits and walks combined coming into today).  Margot offers absolutely nothing.  I can count the number hits Matt Wallner has since about last July on one hand.  

Again, still early.  But, the horrible personnel decisions just keep piling up.  

[AlGoreRythm]

On 4/3/2024 at 7:00 AM, rv78 said:

Yes. I know it is difficult to comprehend for some of you. Bringing in Varland in the 2nd inning of Obers short start and having him pitch 4 innings verses having him pitch 4 innings as a starter 2 days later is a huge difference. 

Yes, a 4 man rotation could have been used the first 2 weeks of the season. There are enough off-days to make that work.

Funny how you left out the final paragraph from my post in your quote.

COULD your proposed plan have worked? Sure.

Was it just a likely they didn't end up needing a long man in the first 2 weeks, Varland ended up getting no work and ends up injuring himself or needing an extra week or two to build back up as a starter? Absolutely. We saw Sands sit on the 26 man roster for weeks without use as a long man last season.

I'm hindsight, maybe what you advocate would've had a marginally better outcome, but you're acting as if your counter-factual argument would've 100% created a better result.

We have past seasons to tell us that there's no way the outcome you pretend would've happened for sure was a sure thing in reality.

Also, your doom and gloom after less than a week of the season is an extreme bummer, and one based on 2.5% of the season.

Unless you're just looking for something to blame on the manager, like usual.

[rv78]

5 hours ago, AlGoreRythm said:

Funny how you left out the final paragraph from my post in your quote.

COULD your proposed plan have worked? Sure.

Was it just a likely they didn't end up needing a long man in the first 2 weeks, Varland ended up getting no work and ends up injuring himself or needing an extra week or two to build back up as a starter? Absolutely. We saw Sands sit on the 26 man roster for weeks without use as a long man last season.

I'm hindsight, maybe what you advocate would've had a marginally better outcome, but you're acting as if your counter-factual argument would've 100% created a better result.

We have past seasons to tell us that there's no way the outcome you pretend would've happened for sure was a sure thing in reality.

Also, your doom and gloom after less than a week of the season is an extreme bummer, and one based on 2.5% of the season.

Unless you're just looking for something to blame on the manager, like usual.

Drink your kool-aid. Not playing your best players as often as you can equals poor management. Rocco does it all the time.