Jump to content
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
    To be clear, since I had quoted your previous post, I tried to make it obvious that that's NOT what I was saying at the start of my post. Yours happened to be the one I reacted too, but I don't think my disagreement makes you or anyone else a bandwagon jumper. I don't agree with the notion, but that's why there are discussions and stuff...people have different ideas. And not to speak for others, but I think some of the more feisty posts on the contrary to the "hot seat" side were in reply to someone else's posts.
  2. CDog
    Fair enough (although I'd say nine...'02 to '10 is nine). But I was going with the sentiment expressed in the quote that I quoted. Or something like that.
  3. CDog
    I used this quote because it's in this thread...but I see this sentiment a fair amount. And I just don't get it. Specifically the "they had a good 10-year run BUT" part. I don't understand how a ten-year run gets dismissed after ONE bad year. They won the division in 2010...handily. That was one full season ago. They were decimated by injuries (and yes, other things went wrong too, before people go nuts) and had an awful year last year. I just don't understand the mentality that's so quick to seemingly brush aside ten years because of one.
  4. CDog
    I realize this is way after the fact and being in a game thread may not get read...but my understanding is that he has at least one option, but because he has five years of major league time that he has to agree to being sent down. I'm not 100% that's true, but that's what "I've heard."
  5. CDog
    He (still) has a lower 1st pitch strike % than average...by a pretty fair margin. This year he's at a career high and still just at league average. And it's been plummeting as the sample size becomes meaningful. Perception is often a personal thing. I've noticed how often this year he's been getting started with breaking pitches, for instance. But to answer your final question: almost certainly.
  6. CDog
    The Twins leading or not leading the league in double plays "EVERY year" is not an opinion.
  7. CDog
    You used correlated, so I responded to that. As for OBP vs guys on base, we're agreeing there. My point in saying I wasn't speaking technically of OBP is that I was making a more general point in the post in question. I wasn't trying to make a statistical point. Once we "went there," then I was. And I am glad we both know what shill means, but I don't see how it applies to me just because we disagree.
  8. CDog
    Thanks for the tip on paying attention to my own quotes...although I don't really know what it means. The post you quoted had two points. One is that TwinsFanLV decided to try to make a point by telling a lie. The Twins don't lead the league in double plays every year. Your list confirms that. I also didn't really say OBP precisely. But fine, I'll play along. Since you went and grabbed those numbers and made a claim about correlation, I'm sure you checked that out. But for those that haven't, yes in fact there is positive correlation between OBP and GDP. There's also positive correlation between GDP and runs and wins. Clearly the Twins could use this to start TRYING to hit into double plays and be division champs for sure. Right? You know that being correlated doesn't mean they rank order exactly the same, of course. One just TENDS to correspond to the other. As for the accusatory "shill for the Twins" line, it seems unnecessary and out of place. I don't think the first part of the sentence is true (it's not clear at all), and none of the facts shown have even really helped clear that up. You've observed something that I have not. Saying it's clear doesn't make it so. My post that you quoted simply said in general that GDP's happen. And they often happen correlated with good things (hitting the ball hard, having a runner on with less than two out). It's not a "clutch" issue or whatever people make it out to be. And that has nothing to do with the Twins, it has to do with the truth. Maybe you meant I was a "shill for the Truth."
  9. CDog
    That was a Grand Canyon sized reach. Very nice.
  10. CDog
    To paraphrase Margie in Fargo...Can't say I agree with ya 100% on your calendar counting there, ltwedt! Haha. Although I guess techincally that is still BY May 1st. Ahhh, probably just reaching for an excuse to think about Fargo.
  11. CDog
    Why does "everyone" hate the topic of this thread!?!?!? Haha. Guess it was hard to top the original post's "dinger in first at-bat" moment. Although the wrong airport gate was a forgotten gem.
  12. CDog
    Not to step on Mark Twain's toes, but I'd say it would be better to use statistics than lies. Twins were 14th in GDP last year. 1st the year before that and did not lead the league before that until 2005. Of course...there's the other issue that the teams that do hit into a lot are teams that put a lot of people on base (amazing, right!?!?), so if they did lead the league every year, it wouldn't mean what you think it means. Or pretend to think it means.
  13. CDog
    Baker was put on the 60-day nearly a week ago. (I think to make room for Thomas.)
  14. CDog
    OR...you could jump to incorrect conclusions.
  15. CDog
    fangraphs does these as well. When I found them, I was immediately a little addicted. They're great viewing, especially, I think, to use them to learn about how certain things affect the game more or less than you would have thought.
  16. CDog
    You really can't see the difference in those two situations?
  17. CDog
    From just before the second opinion (in the papers)... Asked if the team is frustrated with Baker, Ryan said, "No. It's legitimate; he just doesn't feel right." Ryan said the Twins are trying to get Baker some peace of mind. "He's trying. He works hard. What are you going to do? He just doesn't feel right," Ryan said. Is Terry Ryan the worst ever at calling someone out or did you maybe try to make something out of it that wasn't there? People just like to make trouble.
  18. CDog
    Lots of doctors on this site. Good to know.
  19. CDog

    Delmon

    CDog replied to Shane Wahl's topic in Other Baseball

    Took me nearly a week before I gave in to temptation and opened this thread. The main reason I didn't was because I didn't really want to read nonsense and lies. Took until the tenth reply to get some of both.
  20. CDog
    Snide would definitely be better. Not because I agree or disagree, but because it's a fantastic word that should be used at any opportunity! But no need to dig up examples. I was just curious because I've never noticed the same thing. I will confess that while I watch nearly every game on FSN, often I will be playing guitar or conversing and not giving full attention to the game-call. And if I come to a game late and am watching off the dvr, I'll even sometimes fast-forward some dead time between pitches or especially at-bats. This basically takes any flow of the talk on air away, so I barely notice what they're saying while I hear it. It becomes just sound. As for last night's discussion you mention, I don't know if I thought it "whiney," but I did find it odd and disjointed. Neither of them seemed to have a full-fledged point and what I think I managed to decipher WAS their point didn't really make sense. Despite comments above about not always focusing on the chatter, that certainly was "out there" enough that it caught my attention! I still do agree with the point of the original article that it's HARD to go through even one game, let alone 150+, while talking in anything resembling an entertaining or even lucid way.
  21. CDog
    My general feelings about payroll conversations are a bit ambivalent. Often it seems like a waste of time to worry so much about something one has zero control over. But at the same time, it can be fun to think about how to try to maximize value within contraints and "play along" so to speak. It seems strange to me, though, when people start wanting or expecting or in their minds directing "their" team to expand those constraints. There is some discrepancy about how much is available, so I get that. But when people start presuming to tell other people how to spend their own private money, it always feels a little...icky. So I always bristle at, "They're rich, so they should do 'x' with their money."
  22. CDog
    Some logical people can hold more than one thought in their head at once. Some can understand that injuries to your best two offensive players and possibly top three and almost certainly four of your top five would have a huge effect...without also believing that it's the only reason. Some might understand that there are actually other teams in the leauge that get better and worse around the team they follow closest and so a contending team one year could be a middle of the pack team the next without having changed all that much. Claiming things are not logical simply because they are not how you see them seems fairly egocentric and small-minded.
  23. CDog
    I'm curious about that part. I don't know that I've ever thought or noticed Bremer say anything even particularly negative about either team and certainly don't think I'd classify anything as "vicious." Maybe we're defining that word differently? But that seemed out of place with my experience so it caught my eye.
  24. CDog
    I think roger is right...what I read said it was Marquis and Nishioka that were off the number in USA Today. But now I'm wondering why Baker would be included if those two were not. Anyone?
  25. CDog
    When/where?
×
×
  • Create New...