CDog

Careful there! Exactly how many teams would be left if we contracted those with a whiny fan base and short-term memory?

This obviously is off topic from the original topic of the thread, although that topic seems to have dried up. And you or anyone else could probably care less what I think on the topic. But hey, welcome to the internet!! Haha. The point you bring up is a bit close to my nerve center, which is why I figured I would respond. I think there are two different types you've lumped into one group. But there is a HUGE difference between the two types, and they don't deserve to be put together. In one group are those that look at and occasionally (or often) present facts to others, and based on those facts come to a conclusion that is often (or even nearly always) fairly negative or pessimistic. While I may often (or nearly always) disagree with the conclusion, it is theirs to make. I think anyone (including he) would agree that 'mike wants wins' falls into a pessimisitc group, but it seems from his reply and others in this thread that he is basing that pessimism in fact. (I should mention I'm going on what was said in this thread. I would have to look back to find out if that's true.) On the other hand, there are people who are more what, I think, you are describing and lamenting. Those that not only have nothing but complaints, but that either provide no justification or, even worse, "back up" their rants with exaggerations, fabrications, misinterpretations, and flat out lies. These are the people that I would say are closer to "killing this board." Let us not confuse and mix up the pessimist with the troll. It's not fair to either of them. I will also add that I think the overwhelming presence of reasonable pessimists and optimists both are more than a match for those in the second group and the death of the board is not likely to be achieved because of their nonsense.

List of ballparks that hold Casilla's 5th inning triple: Target Field and....any others? Honest question.

Got jammed on a pitch.

Having the intellect and wisdom to know the inner thoughts and feelings of thousands and thousands of strangers is pretty impressive. To quote Fletch: "God I admire you."

Do I remember correctly that he hit only 3 HR's in his final high school season? Obvious conclusion: GCL is easier than high school baseball.

Does it just become second nature at some point to exaggerate, stretch, or lie when the actual facts don't quite support what you're selling? Or is it a conscious choice each time?

Agreed. Not only was it a 1-year deal, but it wasn't for all that much in the current landscape. I think a lot of people saying the deal was a disaster are referring only to the actual performance, but $-wise and length-wise, it didn't hurt much.

Big time. I've said it before, and I'll repeat it now--how much and when Gibson comes back is a HUGE variable for next year's success (and even beyone that) that is a complete mystery at this point.

I tend to agree with a lot of that, in principle. The fact that Santana had basically said trade-me-or-else AND that there were only two or three posible destinations likely drastically reduced what they could get for him. My sense at the time was that it was almost a game of reverse chicken where the Mets, Sox, and Yankees would make an offer trying to get one of the others to offer more, but not really mean it with their offer anyway. I doubt anyone here knows what was actually available in that trade. I'd like to think even with what they got that it was better than what they would have been able to draft with the compensation picks if they didn't work anything out. Would it look better if Hardy (via Gomez) had been kept and played out similar to his first Baltimore year? Hmmm.

That's at least the second time I've seen you make that claim and fairly sure others have as well. It's utter nonsense at best. Mauer was much better than Young on the year AND for the final two months. Cuddyer had a big July that got overshadowed by the enormous ones by Young and Mauer (although he rightfully got it pumped a bit at the same time for filling in at 1B when nobody else was available). Thome was absolutely filthy good with a 4-digit OPS (OBP over .400 and SLG over .600...just wow), and was better the second half than the first. Liriano was one of the better pitchers in baseball that year, and Pavano was very good, too. The bullpen was awesome. Young had a very good year, largely on the basis of one off-the-charts-good month (and was downright awful in August).

What paper? My memory of last season was "they'll share closer duties" as spring training was wrapping up with Nathan being first choice, and Capps filling in when Nathan couldn't go multiple days as he worked back from injury. I also have as vague memory of Capps saying essentially that he understood Nathan had been there longer and deserved a chance to have the top role, so maybe that led to the change. But that's a fuzzy memory, so may be an invention.

Off topic of thread alert! Can you explain why? From the first time I heard about it and every time since, it makes my skin crawl. To the extent that I have no real good idea why it should be so off-putting, even for myself.

But what we all love about Liriano is that he could do both of those things in the same game! Then what?!?!

I keep thinking that, too, but haven't really found the right place to mention it. (For the record, the "that" mentioned in the post quoted was the notion that the "we know" the Twins won't spend any/enough/lots of money this off-season.) But you're right, there really isn't any history to give a guide here. Comparing to Metrodome years is obviously silly since the overall payroll has vastly increased. I also don't know that we've got much knowledge on how and when and in what ways the new Pohlad may be different than Carl. As for New Ballpark History, the first off-season in Target Field is not even close to a good comparison because the first season was a division winner. And last off-season was much, much different in that four expected starting pitchers were already under contract and coming back. So yes, I'd say this is uncharted territory.

Then my reply to that post x 2, too!!! Haha.

I included their last three 2nd half records in the "Time for a change" thread when the same garbage was spouted there. I will say it amuses me when someone makes something up out of thin air that is completely contrary to fact and it gets an enthusiastic agreement from someone else. That's good times.

You COULD actually read what I've posted in this very thread. You could. I'm almost sure of it.

That was one of my favorite delicate phrasings I've read in a while. Good times.

Always fun when someone jumps into the deep end without a clue. Go ahead and read the thread. Don't be afraid. Maybe won't be as fun as the deep end, but also won't make you look so foolish.

I agree it could be worse, although oddly enough I felt that more strongly earlier in the year when things actually were going worse. Weird. But I don't think they've been lucky, and I'd differntly weight how far above or below expectations some of the things on your list are. Mauer IS having an outstanding year, but it's almost exactly average for him. Doumit is really close to his career averages also. Revere has improved from last year, but is now more in line with what you'd expect of him given his track record. Perkins has been very good, but not all that different than he was last year. Morneau has been available and semi-capable, as you say, but he's still having his worst full-season since his first back in 2005. Compare that with the downsides. Baker out from before the year even started, and your next two best starters from an expectation standpoint giving very little (Pavano/Liriano), your other two starters (from pre-season plans) both going WELL below career norms to the point of being demoted or released, and Capps being gone has had the domino effect of having every bullpen role being moved a rung up the ladder. Now that both the positives and the negatives of the year have me depressed, I'll move along... EDIT: The one downer you may have forgotten that I did too...Valencia crapping the bed. Granted, it allowed in part for Plouffe's breakout, but he was bad while here, and his demotion moved Dozier into the lineup who hasn't been all that effective yet.

I would say it indicates he doesn't fit into their long-term plans due to salary as much as someone who is younger and cheaper does because they're not in contention THIS year (Liriano's last under contract) and they would like to be in the future.

I would imagine the % of fans doing what you call defending is higher than 10%. By a lot. And should be. There are lots of people and fans that are actually capable of rational, constructive thoughts on the topic, as has been shown in this thread alone.

Apologies if that was unclear in my post.