Red Sox 8, Twins 5: Red Sox Veterans Spoil Ohl's Debut and Lee's Historic Night

[Doctor Gast]

46 minutes ago, karcherd said:

Lewis is just starting to hit and get his legs under him and you want him to sit.  I don't understand that rationale at all.  What good does that do for the team moving forward.

I didn't say I wanted Lewis "to sit," which means to bench him. I'm very big on Lewis & he's fine at 3B. I mean to give him more of a break & bat more DH or even if he's open give him time at 1B. IMO, Lee is better at 3B where he could slide over at least some more of the time.

[USAFChief]

1 hour ago, Riverbrian said:

The 5 man rotation, 1 inning at a time reliever model is in need of an update. 

See, the thing is, the 5 man rotation, 1 inning at a time reliever model IS an update.

They've had 1440 innings to cover for a while now. Somehow Grandpa managed it. 

In fact, he managed it so well I think they might have even had to lower the mound once in response. 

[Parfigliano]

1 hour ago, Whitey333 said:

I agree that you must let players like Lee play every day.  If he goes 0 for 4 don't bench him for days on end.  Young players must play to develop at the major league level.  IMO the insistence of platonic is hurting player development

Keep the team platonic.  Trash can the platoon fetish.

[karcherd]

9 minutes ago, Doctor Gast said:

I didn't say I wanted Lewis "to sit," which means to bench him. I'm very big on Lewis & he's fine at 3B. I mean to give him more of a break & bat more DH or even if he's open give him time at 1B. IMO, Lee is better at 3B where he could slide over at least some more of the time.

They need to figure out where they want the players to play.  Right now Lewis is at 3B and I don't see them moving him.  Lee needs regular reps and AB's at one position, right now that should be 2B.  They keep moving him around, let him get comfortable and see what he can do.  Not every player is a utility guy.

[Riverbrian]

18 minutes ago, USAFChief said:

See, the thing is, the 5 man rotation, 1 inning at a time reliever model IS an update.

They've had 1440 innings to cover for a while now. Somehow Grandpa managed it. 

In fact, he managed it so well I think they might have even had to lower the mound once in response. 

And we need an update from that update.

Yes, Grandpa did manage it... yes he did and so is the current generation. Weather it is still high functioning is open to debate.  

Watching pitch counts and it can't be denied that they all do it today... for whatever reason... weather it helps prevent injury or a reaction to the third time through the order stats... all teams are watching pitch counts and that has caused an increase in bullpen usage. You and I are in complete agreement that you can't hide pitchers in the bullpen because of the increased bullpen usage. 

Does it all still fit in that box of how Grandpa managed it and which Grandpa are we talking about. Grandpa or Great Grandpa?

Dave Goltz threw 249 innings in 1976 and he ranked 25th in baseball. Bill Campbell led the team in saves that year with 20 and he threw 167 innings total.  Randy Jones led baseball with 315 innings that year. Rawley Eastwick was the save leader with 26 and he cranked out 108 innings. 

In 1987... Bert Blyleven threw 267 innings in 1987 that was 4th best in baseball... knuckleballer Charlie Hough was the leader with 285 IP. Viola threw 251 innings. Reardon had 31 saves in 80 innings of work. Steve Bedrosian led baseball with 40 saves and 89 innings. 

Fast Forward to 2024... Logan Gilbert led baseball with 208 innings in 2024. Only 4 pitchers eclipsed the 200 mark. Ryan Helsley led the league in saves with 49 and he threw 66 innings.  

Somewhere in the universe there is a way to get more innings to your best arms and less innings to your worst arms but you are not going to find that way with a 5 starter rotation where a 4.98 ERA starter gets over 150 innings and and lights out closer or set up guy gets 60. 

I'm not sure that the currently model will be alive and well in 2045 so we might as well start working on the new thing. The current data and utilization is creeping out of it's boundaries.   

[USAFChief]

4 minutes ago, Riverbrian said:

And we need an update from that update.

Yes, Grandpa did manage it... yes he did and so is the current generation. Weather it is still high functioning is open to debate.  

Watching pitch counts and it can't be denied that they all do it today... for whatever reason... weather it helps prevent injury or a reaction to the third time through the order stats... all teams are watching pitch counts and that has caused an increase in bullpen usage. You and I are in complete agreement that you can't hide pitchers in the bullpen because of the increased bullpen usage. 

Does it all still fit in that box of how Grandpa managed it and which Grandpa are we talking about. Grandpa or Great Grandpa?

Dave Goltz threw 249 innings in 1976 and he ranked 25th in baseball. Bill Campbell led the team in saves that year with 20 and he threw 167 innings total.  Randy Jones led baseball with 315 innings that year. Rawley Eastwick was the save leader with 26 and he cranked out 108 innings. 

In 1987... Bert Blyleven threw 267 innings in 1987 that was 4th best in baseball... knuckleballer Charlie Hough was the leader with 285 IP. Viola threw 251 innings. Reardon had 31 saves in 80 innings of work. Steve Bedrosian led baseball with 40 saves and 89 innings. 

Fast Forward to 2024... Logan Gilbert led baseball with 208 innings in 2024. Only 4 pitchers eclipsed the 200 mark. Ryan Helsley led the league in saves with 49 and he threw 66 innings.  

Somewhere in the universe there is a way to get more innings to your best arms and less innings to your worst arms but you are not going to find that way with a 5 starter rotation where a 4.98 ERA starter gets over 150 innings and and lights out closer or set up guy gets 60. 

I'm not sure that the currently model will be alive and well in 2045 so we might as well start working on the new thing. The current data and utilization is creeping out of it's boundaries.   

I agree with all of this.

I dont see how the Ohl training methodology (and its not just Ohl) accomplishes anything.

One 3 inning stint a week from Ohl makes things worse, not better.

Lets see if we cant train Bert Blylevens instead.

[Aggies7]

It was definitely a genius move to keep Michael gulf of Tonkin instead of someone like Ronny Henriquez. I thought the FO was supposed to be great at recognizing pitching talent 

[Riverbrian]

Just now, USAFChief said:

I agree with all of this.

I dont see how the Ohl training methodology (and its not just Ohl) accomplishes anything.

One 3 inning stint a week from Ohl makes things worse, not better.

Lets see if we cant train Bert Blylevens instead.

Nearly everyone is touching 98 with their fastballs these days. They are watching pitch counts in order to prevent injuries and injuries are more frequent these days. Not sure if the human arm is supposed to do that sort of thing.  

I'm all for Joe Ryan getting 288 Innings and I'm all for Duran getting 150 innings. I'd like to see Paddack... Guys with the 4.98 ERA get 80 innings instead of simply eating as many as they can and calling it value.  

In my mind... the answer lies outside of the current constraints. That's the redesign I'd like to see. If that means going back to Gene Mauch and his usage of Goltz and Campbell. OK... I'm open to it.     

[USAFChief]

2 minutes ago, Bigfork Twins Guy said:

Time to raise the mound again?  Are hitters getting ahead of pitchers similar to what pitchers did with the higher mound?

Id do the opposite. I want way fewer strikeouts and way more balls in play.

[jkcarew]

Watch…they’ll expand rosters, and make it much worse, not better.

[The Great Hambino]

Grandpa may have trained his starters to go deeper into games, but Grandpa also wasn't facing lineups where everyone was a true threat to go deep, so Grandpa's pitchers had more incentive to pitch to contact.  Grandpa also didn't have a bullpen full of 98 MPH heaters and gyroscopic sliders waiting to be deployed as an alternative to a tiring starter. He had fewer true relief guys and maybe Wednesday's starter still nursing a hangover available in relief.

Also, Grandpa used more pitchers per game at a steadily-increasing rate going back to the dead ball era.  This isn't some new phenomenon.  Grandpa's pitcher usage evolved over time. He used fewer pitchers than Dad, but more pitchers than Great-Grandpa. There wasn't some static way of doing things for 150 years.

[USAFChief]

12 minutes ago, jkcarew said:

Watch…they’ll expand rosters, and make it much worse, not better.

In fairness, how can you possibly expect teams to make it through a season with only 13 active pitchers?

...

 

Plus of course the half dozen up-and-down guys from AAA that they swap out three or four times a month. 

 

I mean, an 18 man staff gets pretty thin, y'know?

[JD-TWINS]

12 hours ago, Dman said:

That was a great first inning by Ohl. You can see the potential with the three K's.  After that it was some pretty hard contact the rest of the way with balls hit hard and traveling deep.  They seemed to easily square up his stuff.

He needs more deception because they didn't fall for many of his out of zone pitches after the first inning.  He had a lot of them at 2 strikes but could not finish them off.   He has that beautiful change, but there is work to be done.  If he can't hack it as a starter there is nice reliever potential there.

The Red Sox look like a good team.  A few pieces away from being a great team.  Looks like there will likely be a power shift in the east if they can find enough pitching.

…….a good team & they traded away Rafael Devers!!

I do see on MLB Network this a.m. that Houston has interest in re-uniting with Carlos Correa 🤞🤞🤞……….not sure why or where he’d play? If TWINS could get $25M of salary relief and a minor league prospect of any kind (even a couple of doughnuts) hopefully, a Catcher, it would be a huge move.

Immediately extend Castro for Utility and take a flier on Lewis - Lee - Keaschall on the dirt with 1B TBD for ‘26. Trade Harrison along with a pitcher for a “real player” & maybe re-sign Bader in off season if desired.

Still leaves $15M for improvements within same budget as ‘25.

[USAFChief]

1 hour ago, The Great Hambino said:

 

Also, Grandpa used more pitchers per game at a steadily-increasing rate going back to the dead ball era.  This isn't some new phenomenon.  Grandpa's pitcher usage evolved over time. He used fewer pitchers than Dad, but more pitchers than Great-Grandpa. There wasn't some static way of doing things for 150 years.

True.

 

[TwinsDr2021]

5 hours ago, Doctor Wu said:

Hey, the young pitchers will take their lumps. Call it growing pains. I was also a big Atlanta Braves fan growing up and recall these two young pitchers they called up one season, two guys named Glavine and Smoltz, and they got clobbered that first year. But then ... good things happened. Not saying that Ohl or someone like Festa will end up being nearly as good, but they should improve with time. We just have to be patient. And these next two months will require a LOT of patience!

Both Ohl and Festa are 25, Ohl will be 26 in just over a month, so literally there is zero chance they will be as good as Glavine and Smoltz. Evening using their names in a comparison is slap in the face to the hall of famers and completely unfair to Ohl and Festa.  There are plenty of legit comps to make with them. I think both could be fine, but it is way different struggling or getting to the majors in your mid 20's then it is in your early 20's.

[TheLeviathan]

3 hours ago, The Great Hambino said:

Grandpa may have trained his starters to go deeper into games, but Grandpa also wasn't facing lineups where everyone was a true threat to go deep, so Grandpa's pitchers had more incentive to pitch to contact.  Grandpa also didn't have a bullpen full of 98 MPH heaters and gyroscopic sliders waiting to be deployed as an alternative to a tiring starter. He had fewer true relief guys and maybe Wednesday's starter still nursing a hangover available in relief.

Also, Grandpa used more pitchers per game at a steadily-increasing rate going back to the dead ball era.  This isn't some new phenomenon.  Grandpa's pitcher usage evolved over time. He used fewer pitchers than Dad, but more pitchers than Great-Grandpa. There wasn't some static way of doing things for 150 years.

This is a fantastic post and more people who struggle with the modern way baseball is played/has changed should read it and really let it sink in.

It's ok to not like the way the game has shifted, but it didn't happen overnight and some of it is forced by the evolution of athletes.  If you try to play like Grandpa and have your starters go 7,8,9 every game....get ready to eat a lot of Ls.

Every sport has evolved.  The goalies Gretzky played against look comically bad if you go back and watch.  Football looks like you put your video speed a x2.5 compared to games in the 70s.  Basketball is barely recognizable in terms of athleticism.  Baseball is no different.

[Edmond Dantes]

2 hours ago, TwinsDr2021 said:

Both Ohl and Festa are 25, Ohl will be 26 in just over a month, so literally there is zero chance they will be as good as Glavine and Smoltz. Evening using their names in a comparison is slap in the face to the hall of famers and completely unfair to Ohl and Festa.  There are plenty of legit comps to make with them. I think both could be fine, but it is way different struggling or getting to the majors in your mid 20's then it is in your early 20's.

This is exactly right. Glavine, Smoltz, and Maddox were dominate when they were 25. None of the 25ish year old Twins pitchers looks like a long term starter. That's not the end of the world, Festa and Matthews could turn out to be dominate long relievers, but it would be nice to see one of their draft picks turn into an even average starter every decade or so.

[TwinsDr2021]

42 minutes ago, TheLeviathan said:

This is a fantastic post and more people who struggle with the modern way baseball is played/has changed should read it and really let it sink in.

It's ok to not like the way the game has shifted, but it didn't happen overnight and some of it is forced by the evolution of athletes.  If you try to play like Grandpa and have your starters go 7,8,9 every game....get ready to eat a lot of Ls.

Every sport has evolved.  The goalies Gretzky played against look comically bad if you go back and watch.  Football looks like you put your video speed a x2.5 compared to games in the 70s.  Basketball is barely recognizable in terms of athleticism.  Baseball is no different.

Most of the changes in the other sports have been or are to make the sport better and more entertaining. Baseball seems to do the opposite. 

[TheLeviathan]

1 minute ago, TwinsDr2021 said:

Most of the changes in the other sports have been or are to make the sport better and more entertaining. Baseball seems to do the opposite. 

I don't necessarily agree.  There are many people that wish football was back to three yards and a cloud of dust.  Lots of hockey fans wish it was 7-5 every night.  NBA fans hate that the mid-range game has dried up.

I think baseball fans just happen to be the most resistant bunch of fans to change.  They always have been.  Half the league held nonsense arguments about "strategy" for decades so they could keep running guys out there who were hitting .090 in the 9 hole.  Baseball fans haven't accepted that your 9 hitter today is putting together much better at-bats, with much more potential for damage than 40 years ago.  That your average 4th starter today is throwing the ball at a velocity, with a spin rate, and a repertoire that would've made them an ace in 1970.  

Baseball doesn't let you "see" the growth in athleticism the way jumping does in the NBA.  Or the agility and ferocity of the NFL.  Or the skating and goalie magic of the NHL.  It's more subtle.  Extra velocity.  More dive on a pitch.  More spin you can't see on your TV.  Arm angles that don't translate on your viewing experience.  

So combine the fact that many baseball fans are more predisposed to resist change with a more subtle (but still wildly impactful) athleticism....and it's a recipe for the complaints.  I get it.  I just wish more fans tried to understand why it's changing rather than just griping about it.

[TwinsDr2021]

7 minutes ago, TheLeviathan said:

So combine the fact that many baseball fans are more predisposed to resist change with a more subtle (but still wildly impactful) athleticism....and it's a recipe for the complaints.  I get it.  I just wish more fans tried to understand why it's changing rather than just griping about it.

 IMO baseball people complain because this baseball is just less entertaining (knowing or liking the reasons for change doesn't really matter) if what you are watching and paying for isn't enjoyable. End of story

You can tell me all the reasons a burger place changed a beef burger to a vegan burger and those reason might make sense but when I bite into it and it isn't as good, I will stop going to that place.

[TheLeviathan]

3 minutes ago, TwinsDr2021 said:

 IMO baseball people complain because this baseball is just less entertaining (knowing or liking the reasons for change doesn't really matter) if what you are watching and paying for isn't enjoyable. End of story

You can tell me all the reasons a burger place changed a beef burger to a vegan burger and those reason might make sense but when I bite into it and it isn't as good, I will stop going to that place.

Ok...well let's use that analogy: why do you then return to that same burger place over and over and over again and expect anything different?  Knowing - and this is the key - with absolute certainty that it's never going back.  It can't go back.  Cows are dead.  We live in a world now where the ingredients of that previous burger literally do not exist on the planet.

Griping....knowing that.....seems really absurd doesn't it?  That's the problem baseball fans have.  The other major sports let their eyeballs work and see the plainly simple truth: there is no going back.  

[JD-TWINS]

1 hour ago, Edmond Dantes said:

This is exactly right. Glavine, Smoltz, and Maddox were dominate when they were 25. None of the 25ish year old Twins pitchers looks like a long term starter. That's not the end of the world, Festa and Matthews could turn out to be dominate long relievers, but it would be nice to see one of their draft picks turn into an even average starter every decade or so.

Maddux was 8-18 in his first 2 seasons ……. Glavine was 9-21 in his first 2 seasons.

Guys of yesteryear were drafted young and brought into Majors as 20 - 21 - 22 year olds…….the guys like Festa, Matthews, & Ohl are being coddled in college and then drafted as 22 year olds so they don’t reach MLB for 3-4 years after guys like Glavine & Maddux did 35 years ago.

[Edmond Dantes]

1 hour ago, TheLeviathan said:

I don't necessarily agree.  There are many people that wish football was back to three yards and a cloud of dust.  Lots of hockey fans wish it was 7-5 every night.  NBA fans hate that the mid-range game has dried up.

I think baseball fans just happen to be the most resistant bunch of fans to change.  They always have been.  Half the league held nonsense arguments about "strategy" for decades so they could keep running guys out there who were hitting .090 in the 9 hole.  Baseball fans haven't accepted that your 9 hitter today is putting together much better at-bats, with much more potential for damage than 40 years ago.  That your average 4th starter today is throwing the ball at a velocity, with a spin rate, and a repertoire that would've made them an ace in 1970.  

Baseball doesn't let you "see" the growth in athleticism the way jumping does in the NBA.  Or the agility and ferocity of the NFL.  Or the skating and goalie magic of the NHL.  It's more subtle.  Extra velocity.  More dive on a pitch.  More spin you can't see on your TV.  Arm angles that don't translate on your viewing experience.  

So combine the fact that many baseball fans are more predisposed to resist change with a more subtle (but still wildly impactful) athleticism....and it's a recipe for the complaints.  I get it.  I just wish more fans tried to understand why it's changing rather than just griping about it.

"There are many people that wish football was back to three yards and a cloud of dust." I don't know a single person who wishes this, nor a single person who doesn't think football gets better every year.                                                                                                                                                                                              I think some people, myself included, miss the post game of the NBA past, but still appreciate today's game.                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                Conversely, I can't think of a single aspect of today's MLB that I prefer over "grandpa's" game. "Grandpa's" game had pitchers who averaged 7 IP/game, batters who found it offensive to hit below .250, players who didn't go on the injury list EVERY year, teams that could manufacture runs rather than wait for a homer. I'll take "grandpa's" ball, you can have the "kiddie" version.

[Mike Sixel]

2 hours ago, TwinsDr2021 said:

 IMO baseball people complain because this baseball is just less entertaining (knowing or liking the reasons for change doesn't really matter) if what you are watching and paying for isn't enjoyable. End of story

You can tell me all the reasons a burger place changed a beef burger to a vegan burger and those reason might make sense but when I bite into it and it isn't as good, I will stop going to that place.

It can be both less fun to watch, and still the right thing to do to win....

[TheLeviathan]

2 minutes ago, Edmond Dantes said:

"There are many people that wish football was back to three yards and a cloud of dust." I don't know a single person who wishes this, nor a single person who doesn't think football gets better every year.                                                                                                                                                                                              I think some people, myself included, miss the post game of the NBA past, but still appreciate today's game.                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                Conversely, I can't think of a single aspect of today's MLB that I prefer over "grandpa's" game. "Grandpa's" game had pitchers who averaged 7 IP/game, batters who found it offensive to hit below .250, players who didn't go on the injury list EVERY year, teams that could manufacture runs rather than wait for a homer. I'll take "grandpa's" ball, you can have the "kiddie" version.

Yeah, definitely have never heard a single NFL fan complain about how offense plays and the difficulty player safety rules have caused defenses......

The cows are dead.  Burgers ain't coming back.

[Edmond Dantes]

1 hour ago, JD-TWINS said:

Maddux was 8-18 in his first 2 seasons ……. Glavine was 9-21 in his first 2 seasons.

Guys of yesteryear were drafted young and brought into Majors as 20 - 21 - 22 year olds…….the guys like Festa, Matthews, & Ohl are being coddled in college and then drafted as 22 year olds so they don’t reach MLB for 3-4 years after guys like Glavine & Maddux did 35 years ago.

What part of the age are you not understanding, fella? It doesn't matter how they pitched their first few seasons, it matters how they pitched at the same age. Again, Maddox and Glavine were dominate at age 25, Festa and Matthews both have ERAs above 5.4 and can't pitch more than five innings because they get destroyed the third time through the order. How are Paul Skenes and Jacob Misiorowski doing at age 23? How are Hunter Brown, Mackenzie Gore, and Bryan Bello doing? This is baseball; it doesn't require a doctorate to throw a ball. If you aren't good by the time you're 25, you probably won't ever be.

[jkcarew]

11 hours ago, USAFChief said:

In fairness, how can you possibly expect teams to make it through a season with only 13 active pitchers?

...

 

Plus of course the half dozen up-and-down guys from AAA that they swap out three or four times a month. 

 

I mean, an 18 man staff gets pretty thin, y'know?

Exactly.

[JD-TWINS]

4 hours ago, Edmond Dantes said:

What part of the age are you not understanding, fella? It doesn't matter how they pitched their first few seasons, it matters how they pitched at the same age. Again, Maddox and Glavine were dominate at age 25, Festa and Matthews both have ERAs above 5.4 and can't pitch more than five innings because they get destroyed the third time through the order. How are Paul Skenes and Jacob Misiorowski doing at age 23? How are Hunter Brown, Mackenzie Gore, and Bryan Bello doing? This is baseball; it doesn't require a doctorate to throw a ball. If you aren't good by the time you're 25, you probably won't ever be.

Hey genius - Skenes was the #1 pick in the draft - he’s started the All-star game his first two years - Z. Matthews was like a 16th round pick. Glavine &  Maddux are in the HOF (top 1%) ……..Festa was sometime after round 10. 

Expecting Twin’s two guys to be on the level of all-time Freaks in the game doesn’t make a hell if a lot of sense.

My point is Glavine and Maddux pitched for 3-5 years in pro ball…….in the Show, by the time they were 25. Nobody is providing the instruction nor competition at bumble f… university for Matthews & Festa to reach their potential by 25.

It’s not just the Twins organization with this reality it’s all of MLB.

Ober and Ryan didn’t show **** until they were 27……..