Riverbrian

Great... More responsibility.

If given the choice between Comics and Wikipedia for accuracy. I always choose the comics.

It would be wonderful for us if the Twins could simply name their terms and the player had no leverage. It would be real exciting next year when we bring in Bryce Harper and Manny Machado on risk free deals.

What are you talking about? http://kingfeatures.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/07/pr_hagar.gif

I agree 99.9% I don't want anybody touching the Viking Horns. Best Helmet in all levels of Football.

I'm gonna be petty and say no to Napoli since he turned down more money from us last year to sign with a team that didn't make the playoffs. That's kind of insulting. He clearly has bad judgement and we don't need that in the clubhouse.

I'd be OK with this and I'd take a step further. Don't tell anyone that this is happening. Don't tell the owners, the managers, the players or the fans. Just implement quietly and let the umpires roll their eyes when Bryce Harper throws his helmet and has a cow.

If there are bugs... Fix Em and implement tomorrow. Will all due respect... I stand firm in my belief that wanting umpires to continue making calls is equal to wanting the grounds crew to leave the really big rocks in the infield because you like the crazy hops.

I've been living in Grand Forks since 1990. I've been handling the Public Address for the UND football team since around that time. Maybe 10 years plus of P.A. work with the UND basketball team and a couple of seasons with the hockey team. It was pretty close to two decades of screaming "Here Come Your Fighting Sioux" into the microphone for me. To me... It was simply the name of the team that I was proud of. Any hint of disrespect never entered my mind nor would I ever want it entering my mind. It was simply the name of the team. It was the debate that made me think about the possibility of respect or disrespect and the controversy made life miserable at times. Personally... I found the whole debate heartbreaking. The complications that arose were overbearing! From the two tribes themselves being split on the subject. The Spirit Lake Tribe voted to keep the name, the Standing Rock Tribal council refused to let a vote take place. The other complications, that beautiful arena being built, the NCAA pressure of sanctions, the lawsuits, the injunctions, the settlements, the donor base threats, the logo, the protests, the petitions and perhaps the most amazing thing of all... The North Dakota Senate passing a LAW that was subsequently signed by the Governor of North Dakota that the University be forced to keep the nickname despite the NCAA threatening to not allow home playoff games. While all of this was happening... Fine upstanding people who I respect were acting like losing the nickname was the end of the world. Fine upstanding people who I respect were acting like keeping the nickname was effecting the very future of the oppressed. Both sides of the discussion were embellishing the impact to express themselves at overly emotional levels. There were times when I felt like the only sensible person in a 100 mile radius. Why was I sensible (debatable I know). I did my best to keep perspective. It was simply the name of the team that I cheered for. Nothing more... Nothing Less. I loved the nickname and was OK letting it go because it was the only way for the controversy to end and the controversy was turning good upstanding people completely upside down. Whenever someone tried to suck me into the debate and they tried... I responded the same way every time. "50 years from now... nobody is going to care". Fighting Sioux will be a futurepedia entry that our great great grandchildren might find an interesting conversation starter at parties. "Did you know that UND used to be called the Fighting Sioux?". Chief Wahoo? 50 Years from Now... Nobody will care. Life Goes On.

Twins choices are: 1. Waiting for the clock to run out and hope that Dodgers or Yankees fail in their attempt to move salary while also hoping the Rangers don't jump in or hoping that the Cubs don't add extra years or dollars. 2. Overpay to the point that Darvish can't refuse even if the Dodgers clear money off the books. 3. Execute a Plan B, GIve Darvish a hard quick deadline and leave Darvish holding the bag... instead of us holding the bag. 4. Hold the Bag and enter 2018 as is. I'm making phone calls to every GM in the league to keep an ear to the ground for #1 and getting ready to go with #3 soon. (If they have a plan B... I hope they have a plan .

Rumors are Rumors... but... this makes sense to me. Darvish is clearly waiting for someone if not something. I assumed it was the Rangers he was waiting on. But... Yeah... I can see the Dodgers. Darvish's agent is probably being strung along by Friedman and Zaidi. "We want Yu... We will make an offer but we got to move some contracts first." The next day "Hang in there... Still working on it". The next day "Got a couple of teams kicking the tires... I think we can get something done". The next day "Nothing yet" The Next Day "Those deals fell through but we will pick them back up at the end of the month. Do me a favor and hang in there". End of the Month "We are getting lots of phone calls... should be able to give you some good news before the week is up".

Just the one little piggy bank in the back of the shelf that says Minnesota Twins on it.

I think the hard part is making the playoffs. Once you make the playoffs... anything can happen. If anyone is trying to figure out how to beat the Astros... keep in mind that the Astros can beat themselves. We have the minor league depth necessary to compete. Calling up the Minor League Depth removes that big advantage. IMO... What we need is an arm to slot at the top. 1. Yu Darvish (he only costs money... he doesn't cost us prospects) 2. ------------ (Yu Darvish is so #1 and that I am leaving option #2 Blank. 3. ------------ (see option #2) 4. Zach Greinke (Only if they will take Phil Hughes in return) 5. Chris Archer (only if Option #1 and #4 don't work... I dread the prospect cost). 6. Lance Lynn (I've always kind of liked the guy but he is a step below what I'm looking for).

I sincerely don't know that.

Personally... I'm not so sure. Speaking on Paper obviously but I've never been much of a paper guy. I think the Twins can match up close enough with the Indians 1 through 9 and the remaining bench. Where Cleveland has their advantage is that starting rotation and Darvish closes that gap so it isn't quite so gulfish. Cleveland lost 3 good arms out of that killer bullpen and I think the Twins have much better depth nearly ready on the farm. I'd probably give the nod to the Indians but I will hand them nothing.

I'm not an expert in Gerontology by any means. However... there seems to be concern about Darvish and the aging process. I admit that there seems to be conclusive evidence that performance level lowers as you age past the peak year of 29. (Peak Year used to be 27). However... That drop is more like the backside of a bell curve, the data is large sample size averages compiled from all major league baseball players including Ty Cobb and the peak year seems to be moving older because... make your own assumption... better training... stronger generations... PED's... More Wives inspiring Players to be their best... Too much drinking and carrying-on in the roaring 20's... I don't know. The measured statistical drop in performance is not a cliff. That is an important distinction.

I've decided to not hide your post. I should hide it but I will let it stand with the hope that it can be somehow constructive. I've separated your two sentences. (Mod Note)The purpose of your first sentence is to belittle and dismiss anybody who does not have the "requisite credentials". I assume that close to "None of Us" have the requisite credentials. If you are really as smart as you present yourself, you would realize, that if you disqualify us all... there would remain very little reason for the forums. Start your post with a sentence like this and you are going to get a defensive response and things go immediately off the rails. You have a history of this type of post, this isn't a moderator over reaction to a first mistake. You have been PM'd in the past... you have been disciplined in the past. You choose to either not understand or not care. Consider this a final warning and this final warning is being done publicly by my choice. Do it again and I (or one of the other moderators) will give you a long vacation. (Mod Note) Your second sentence is actual discussion. I'm sure you are able to recognize the difference.

Thats usually why I wait to see em in the bigs and form my own opinion.

I think your explanation of the slowness could indeed be a reflection of teams looking at similar spreadsheets and coming up with similar conclusions and attempting to execute some kind of metric principle. However... In the end... it's going to come down to: How many choices the player has and how many choices the team has. Once that is established. Cost will be determined and it probably won't match up with the algorithm.

They are not hoping for 3 good years... They are hoping for 6 amazing years. They are prepared for the possibility of zero good years. Also... If that is an example of folly. Then you also have to consider the folly on the other side. The Angels got 3 years of Mike Trout for a total of 1.4 Million.

Is your overall viewpoint on the Darvish signing or large free agent pitching contracts either based or influenced by this "Fan's perspective".

Mike... what you want is going to clash with the current CBA. Edit: I see you've already answered the question that I originally asked so I have edited this post.

I bolded and increased the font size of this sentence because it's the best sentence of the off-season thus far.

I've done what you have asked and it makes me feel good about Ervin Santana... Thank you for that. I'm asking myself again if this Darvish contract makes sense and my answer is: Yes... Perfect Sense. Put the algorithms away. This is free agency. The price of a player isn't determined by stats alone. It is determined by how much someone is willing to pay. Santana cost 4 years and 55 million. That contract will most likely not bring Darvish in the door this year. The Twins wanted Santana and they paid the price tag. If the Twins want Darvish they must pay the price tag. Trying to use Santana's 4 Years and 55 million as some sort of barometer will close the free agent door tight. It comes down to one simple question. Do you want the player?

I have been perfectly OK with the club not plunking down big dollars while the team core was very suspect. And the team core was very suspect. However... I justified being OK with the club not plunking down big dollars while the team core was very suspect with the strong feeling that if the team core started to show something... they would then plunk down some big dollars to support the rising youth. Ladies and Gentlemen... If the Twins can't spend right now... They may never spend. I've given them the benefit the doubt and I still do... but... there will be circumstances where I eventually withdraw that doubt benefit.