Riverbrian

Kirilloff went to RF which shifted Margot to LF. This means that Wallner will pinch hit for Margot this inning.

We still kept our shag carpeting in the garage and bathtub. Otherwise I agree with you.

I told my wife that carpeting in the kitchen was a bad idea but... I couldn't convince her.

I would have bet money before the game started that Okert or Funderburk was coming in to face Ohtani and Freeman in that exact spot. I'll also bet that our left handed hitters will start entering the game when Paxton exits. I'll also bet that when I drop my toast tomorrow. The peanut butter and jelly side will hit the floor.

It's April 8th and Manuel Margot leads the Twins in Home Runs.

It's a Martin Margot Marring

Sweet Revenge against his old team that he never ever played for.

MARGOT!!!

Of course Animals will do this in the wild to make themselves appear bigger.

When batters extend their arms in their stance like Ohtani does. They just look scary.

It's the code for international direct dial to South Korea.

Hopefully someone will be providing Ober ERA updates as we go along. I don't want to do the math myself.

Outman is a great name for a pitcher. Also a great name for a Bouncer.

Margot getting a hit against his old team that he never ever played for.

That's exactly what James Paxton said to Bernie Leadon about the Cheese.

Yes he was attacked by Bernie Leadon at the Mall of America today. There was an argument over Cheese.

Well Now You've jinxed him.

All left handed hitters are out of the lineup against Paxton. The lineup is right handed from 1 through 9. Kirilloff, Julien, Wallner, Kepler along with the switch hitting Castro who is stronger against right handed pitching according to his splits are out. Nobody should be surprised about this. Rocco is loyal to the left/right split. However... If anyone is interested. Check out the splits on James Paxton. He is actually consistently tougher on right handers. Yet... this is the matchup that we take Kepler out and just go all right handers. Oh Well... Let's see what happens.

BINGO

It's really simple. Unfinished: Your research is unfinished until you use the same approach on the unsuccessful teams as well so you can show the difference between success and failure. What if the unsuccessful teams have similar percentages that you claim are the key to success? You need to be able to compare and contrast to find a correlation to establish FACT. Until you do that. You are half baked no matter how many times you type FACT. Oh... BTW... Define which teams qualify? The Dodgers don't, The Rays do. What other teams don't or do qualify for your research. I've said this before. If small market teams typically don't play in the high end of Free Agency and we all agree that they typically don't. How will that category produce significant WAR? If bargain basement shopping in free agency doesn't produce significant WAR. The other Avenues of player acquisition will have to rise to compensate since you are accounting for 100% of the WAR? Not Applicable: This discussion is about Jorge Polanco. He is a home grown product. Home grown products occupy a very high percentage of the WAR in your successful team research. What category in your research does he belong in? Elementary: Chia Pet and myself have always known that teams will trade players before they reach free agency. Not just the small markets... even the large markets do it. It's a viable strategy executed by almost all 30 teams. Acting like we are clueless in this regard is incredibly insulting. We understand that there are times when you shed expiring contracts and times when you acquire them and every thing in between. Small Market Mid Market or Large Market team. You recognize this because you just stated "However, I certainly never suggested that those teams had taken the opportunity to trade for prospects in every instance". But, we were hammered with your FACT research if we strayed outside of these lines. That is incredibly insulting, disingenuous at best and hypocritical at worst. And I'll say it again. I've said this to you before. Acquiring players in trades requires giving something (WAR) back. Do you want me to go down the list of young talent (WAR) that the Rays traded away? Can we subtract the WAR that the Rays gave up. Do you want me to go down the list of young talent that Cleveland traded away. Can we subtract the WAR that Cleveland gave up? BTW... The Royals did not acquire 45 to 55% of their WAR with players acquired Pre 1.5 WAR. Should we discuss James Shields, Wade Davis, Johnny Cueto and Ben Zobrist? Should we discuss Wil Myers, Jake Odorizzi and Sean Manaea? If the answer is that we should discuss these things. Create a new topic on your research so we can get back to the discussion of trading Jorge Polanco this off-season.

I have been on this site for over a decade. I've never seen anything like your behavior on this topic. You've done nothing but misrepresent my position in order to twist my thoughts into your ham handed segue of your unfinished elementary not applicable research. You have been doing the same to Chia Pet. He is not insisting a particular strategy was key to building a dominant team. You are stating that he is and then insisting a particular strategy is key to building a dominant team. You may have never suggested that those teams had taken the opportunity to trade for prospects in every instance but you certainly never expressed that those teams have done other things when dismissing others that dare to suggest that they consider other things. You didn't allow other people to have this wiggle room that you are now seemingly allowing for yourself.

I can't speak for everyone but I really appreciate your post. It's a nice attempt to get the conversation centered. Not sure it will work but I appreciate the effort. While I don't doubt weather the research being presented is fact. It isn't really hard to realize that his research isn't germane to the conversation because Polanco DOESN'T BELONG in his 9% Edison Volquez expensive free agent category. Polanco belongs in his IFA designation. I'm not sure why he has IFA separate from drafted players since they are both typically developed players but that's ok because they are easily added together. This places our modern day Polanco scenario in the group that accounted for 47% of WAR that the Royals produced in 2015. The other what should be obvious problem with using his research IN THIS DISCUSSION... I'll say again that I don't doubt the research is factual. He has to account for 100% of the WAR making it a zero sum game. If 9% of your team WAR was acquired in the free agent market. The other 91% has to be divided amongst the other two methods of player acquisition which are trades and development. If you divide 91% by 2... You get 45.5% so in that case... 47% coming from development isn't that far off the mark and let me repeat that Polanco belongs in the 47% column since he was home grown. And perhaps the most important point to illustrate that the research doesn't apply to this conversation. Everybody knows... or at least everybody should know by now that the small market teams do not typically or naturally play in the HIGH END of the Free Agent Market because they are lower revenue. Small market teams typically sign lower end free agents like... I don't know... for example... a 38 year old Carlos Santana in the free agent market because that is what they can afford... because that is what is left over after the big market squads get done shopping and therefore typically... naturally... consistently end up with low percentages of WAR coming from the free agent market... you get what you pay for... which of course means... since 100% of War must be accounted for. Low percentage out of free agency means that the Development and Trade buckets will have to be higher to accommodate and therefore account for all 100%. In a nutshell... By constantly hammering us with this research... he doesn't seem to realize that it doesn't apply to Jorge Polanco at all but his research which I don't dispute as factual could be used as justification for not signing Carlos Santana. His research should probably have it's own thread for intelligent discussion amongst those inclined. Just not here. Anyway... Mr. Chia pet... I appreciate your attempt to get the train back on the rails. Good Luck.

It's good thing we traded Polanco so Lewis can play tomorrow night.

Two outs bases empty at the time of this pinch hit. The Twins were behind 4 to 1 at the time. The odds of Margot starting a two out bottom the order rally would be low. On the other hand... in what was a welcome surprise to me. Julien and Kirilloff were allowed to face this same lefty that knocked Wallner out of the game. Cleveland has one left hander in the bullpen. Wallner's spot in the order along with Julien and Kirilloff came around again in the 8th and 9th innings. A right hander was guaranteed to be on the mound. I was also curious on why Vogt opted to turn around Santana when Tim Herrin entered the game. Bibee threw 91 pitches. He surely had one more batter in him.

Could you imagine if that sausage would have injured Buxton. Think of it on two different levels. 1. The ways that Buxton has gotten hurt over his career. 2. His endorsements of Sheboygan sausage.