Jump to content
Our free agent ranking is up to 100 names, and now you can filter by player position! Click here to check it out! ×
Twins Daily
  • Create Account

CDog

Provisional Member
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    869

  • Joined

  • Last visited

 Content Type 

Profiles

Minnesota Twins News, Rumors & Analysis

Minnesota Twins Videos

2026 Minnesota Twins Top Prospect Rankings

2022 Minnesota Twins Draft Picks & Signing Bonuses

Minnesota Twins Trade & Free Agent Rumors

Minnesota Twins Fan Guides & Resources

2023 Minnesota Twins Draft Picks & Signing Bonuses

The Minnesota Twins Players Project

2024 Minnesota Twins Draft Picks & Signing Bonuses

2025 Minnesota Twins Draft Picks & Signing Bonuses

2026 Minnesota Twins Draft Picks & Signing Bonuses

Forums

Blogs

Events

Store

Downloads

Gallery

Everything posted by CDog

  1. CDog
    How filthy ridiculous is it that he hit that for an entire season!?! Without checking, the thing that strikes me about the last few weeks is that Mauer's gotten back to something I've mentioned elsewhere on this site. What I've always been amazed by and enjoyed watching over the years is that almost every single at-bat results in a ball hit squarely. Outs or hits or fly-balls or grounders or line drives, he would work the pitcher until he scaled one somewhere. That had been much less the case last year when he was clearly not healthy and still not quite like the days up through 2010 at the start of this year. Lately it feels like (yes, I hate that phrase usually, too) he's gotten back closer to that. Work, work, work, work, SMACK the ball somewhere.
  2. CDog
    His LD% has been at (and even just slightly--probably not significantly differently--above) his career level all year (and also his "glory" years). The change has been the increased GB% at the expense of the FB% coming down. As pointed out (sorta), over the last 4 full seasons (this year he has only 3 ABs in the 2-slot) his OPS in the second spot is higher than his overall. Although he only has about a third of a season's worth of work there.
  3. CDog
    So Baker repeatedly came out and threw 10 mph (or so) slower than he normally does, repeatedly said he was fine and the velocity would come and he wasn't worried about it, and Gardenhire and Ryan saying that if he was fine he would start throwing with "fine" velocity is your definition of "****"ing on Baker or "ripping him apart?" I smell something (again)...
  4. CDog
    When did Smith ever bash a player publicly?
  5. CDog
    I don't think we even mentioned your/you're yet. Sigh. And all of this is going to have to wait until I take care of more important things like getting people to put the silverware at the end of a buffet line instead of the beginning. There's a lot on my plate (pun quite intended).
  6. CDog
    Completely missed that when I read it. Oops.
  7. CDog
    What about if he had gotten hit by lightning? Neither likely happened, so...
  8. CDog
    Likely doesn't change the point, but didn't they get two playoff games at Target Field in 2010?
  9. CDog
    You say "will" sign him to a one-year deal. Is that based on some knowledge? Did you mean they'll try? I've been of the opinion that if they decline the option, he'll likely not sign anything here, just because it seems like that's how it's gone with others in the past. But that "seems" is pretty sketchy in my mind. Anyone know how common it is for a player to sign after the team declines their option?
  10. CDog
    Could be, I didn't actually see that one. I watch most games and even if I miss them I'll often record and go back to see "special" plays, but that one I didn't (not sure I wanted to, either...ugh). I'm sure it's been done, but I'm also fairly sure it's pretty rare.
  11. CDog
    Oh. I don't think they really did, did they? Other than making the batter's eye a batter's eye, which I don't feel like was trying to tailor the park to anyone other than to make a true batter's eye for everyone. They didn't move or alter any fences. And from what I remember, as stated in a previous thread, that movement picked up momentum from comments and reactions from home and opposing players alike.
  12. CDog
    Ummm....perhaps you forgot a little thing called the 1991 World Series???? Yeah.
  13. CDog
    Yes. That's as close as I can tell so far...that one of those is probably true. It's weird.
  14. CDog
    Could be the other way around. The bulk of Rice's work came after Teddy shot off that gem.
  15. CDog
    Oh. I see.
  16. CDog
    I said that?
  17. CDog
    My hope is that the new wave of ballparks will stand the test of time much better than the cookie-cutters and shared-use arenas of the previous wave. Camden is close to 25 years old, and I don't think anyone's even dreaming of replacing it. The Jake is approaching 20. I hope to goodness PNC isn't replaced in my lifetime, and certainly not in the next ten or fifteen years. I may not get my wish, but that's my hope. I wouldn't bet a paycheck or anything, but I would bet something that if you asked Mauer, Kubel, Morneau, Cuddyer, and really anyone else that's called it their home park in the last three years, they'd almost all say that they love Target Field overall, despite anything in this thread (fact or not).
  18. CDog
    As long as I'm on a roll...1) I'd say that when you build a park to be used for 20 years minimum, and hopefully more than 50 (and hopefully way more than 50), building it for current team could be viewed as short-sighted instead. I hope we have MVP hitters from the both sides and Cy Young pitchers not even born yet that come through the same park that can benefit from things that current players don't. 2) As has been pointed out early and late in this thread, the dimensions aren't all that ridiculous for the lefties (although the extended high wall could be considered extreme) or righties. I think the home-run scarcity is more of a, "We find out how it plays after it's built and it gets used" in most cases. And also no reason it can't or hasn't been a doubles/triples/singles park while playing big for homers.
  19. CDog
    I try...I really do. Was the third time in one day seeing the a/effect one come up, so I pointed it out without quote and not as part of any argument for that very reason. I know we're going round and round...but I just don't see why there's a difference. Two quotes say, "it took me a while, but I adjusted" (paraphrasing). Way to man up, right? I did one thing, it didn't work, I tried something else. Tough. Manly. Or should they not have adjusted or admitted to the frailty of not being perfect right away? Another acknowledged not being a pull-hitter and maybe trying to be to a fault. Admit some mistakes, working on trying to be better, trying to be the best player he can be. Good on him. Some balls get knocked down by wind or whatever, but I just do my best. Rugged. I just can't see getting upset or annoyed or even slightly miffed at different wording for the same thing.
  20. CDog
    Then we're in a semantics debate. You have more than once given a detailed list of things that are "your proof" of one thing. RP has given, several times, a detailed list of things that are "his proof" of another thing. Nobody is discounting the facts presented by either, simply their meaning and interpretation. And yet different conclusions are reached. That's because you both BELIEVE something different is that causation and there can really be no facts that convince the other because it's your belief. Faith-based. Maybe a poor choice of terms because it conjures up notions of fairy-tales and make-believe. That's not how I meant it.
  21. CDog
    I guess I don't see or understand how it is used as a crutch. I'm not trying to be difficult; I really don't see what you mean by that.
  22. CDog
    Isn't this pondering essentially what one of the papers (I forget which, but I think it was the Minneapolis side) did some limited research on before this season started (and naturally, people got all up in arms about the players whining because the newspaper did such a project...which makes perfect sense...or something...but I digress)? I don't rememember their exact conclusions, but it might be worth a peek back if you're interested.
  23. CDog
    The thing that makes me feel like nobody really knows what's going on (includnig the player, possibly) is that you could likely have made that same statement right now even if he hadn't had any health concerns or basically missed a season and a half without getting major league at bats. He's 31. Obviously that's not an age where players are always done or even close, but it's likely past prime. And with how much he absolutely raked in '10 (and to lesser extent the several years prior), it's almost a given that he never would have touched that from this point on even without the other setbacks.
  24. CDog
    For the record, I haven't dismissed anything on basis of context in any of those quotes. I have said, and still do, that considering the exact quotes listed to be whining or crying or anything in that vein is simply looking fairly hard for something to complain about. And I've even mentioned some reasons that I think that happens somewhere in the not-too-distant past. And while I'm here, "affect" and "effect" are not the same word.
  25. CDog
    Not to stick my nose in (haha...obviously not entirely true), but hey it's a public forum right?.... But the reason for the circular conversation (I think) is that you're almost saying the same thing. Clearly teams/players that have had success in short series (like baseball and basketball and other sports playoff systems) tend to have players perform above their expected level. That's WHY they have success. One of you is saying that those increases from expectation are part of the natural variation of things. One of you believes that it's something innate that has caused the increase. That becomes more of a faith-based area when you're talking about the causation of the increase from the mean, so there really isn't going to be any convincing of anyone. Probably.
×
×
  • Create New...