Dantes929

Bases loaded, 2 outs in the bottom of the 9th tied or behind one. Do you want Sano or Arraez? I will take Arraez 100 out of 100 times and 100% because of batting average.

Low tide or high tide doesn't really mean squat for the playoffs. You can't come in higher than we did in 2006 or 2009. Came in well last year and averaged 2 runs a game. We limped in to the 1987 playoffs. There is anecdotal evidence to the skies for success in the playoffs after slumping at the end and for coming in hot only to get swept and everything in between. There is nothing realistic about predicting results based on how they come into the playoffs, good or bad. . I have been a fan over 6 decades as well and don't know how getting swept 15 years ago affects any of these guys that were around 10 years old at the time. Realistic is knowing the odds are the Twins win 2 of 3 followed closely by the odds of the Astros winning 2 of 3 followed by the Twins winning both followed by the Astros winning both. Realistic says its baseball and any of those things can happen. Realistically optimistic would be focusing on the path for success while acknowledging the possibility of failure. Realistically pessimistic would be the opposite. One isn't more realistic than the other. If you want reality for historical viewpoint you can point out that the Twins are the only team that lost 16 playoff games in a row or you can take heart from the fact that no team in history has lost 17 playoff games in a row.

Baseball is a game of cycles. White Sox have been terrible but maybe they are due to get hot. Who knows what sparks a team. I have always only wanted meaningful games in September. Playoffs are a bonus. I have always said the Twins had a decent shot in playoffs past and losing a record in a row does nothing to diminish that. The fact that they lost all those games does not mean that they could not have won them. Heck, we had the 2nd best reliever in baseball with the lead in a couple of those games. That said, I can live with losing the series to the Astros but getting swept would be a hard pill to swallow. Maeda our best shot for sure. Can we all just agree now that if the Twins win it all, it counts but if the Yankees or White Sox win it all, it is just exhibition?

I'm hoping they get swept by DET and PIT and then sweep CHW.

I agree with everything you said but I still laughed and will remember it, and I don't even particularly like Donaldson. Entertainment..

Last 28 days Buxton's is higher and Kepler is trending down. Add in Buxton's OPS of 1.051 vs Kepler at .554 and I know who I want to get more at bats. Small sample size I know but I would flip it around and say I don't know if Buxton should be leading off, but not Kepler. The very obvious guy to have at lead off always is Arraez. Without him we really don't have an ideal guy.

If you look at stats for different counts you will see being ahead in counts vs behind in counts seriously affects at bats. Having someone to bring runners home is worthless without actually having runners on. I offer exhibit every RBI in history that is not a home run. Just being snarky. I do believe RBI are one of the good measures of offensive contribution.

"The Twins also battled Angel Hernandez behind home plate just as much as they battled the White Sox all night long" I didn't see much of the game but bad 1st strike pitch calls to Turtle and Cruz with bases loaded were pretty crucial. Its not just the difference between an 0-1 count vs a 1-0 count which is huge its also enough to make the batter wonder what the strike zone is. Again, I didn't watch more than a couple innings but I noticed Berrios wasn't getting the same calls..

I don't know what it means but find it interesting the White Sox are 18-2 against KC and Detroit. Means they are 12-14 against everyone else . Twins didn't do so well against those teams but have winning records against the White Sox, Cleveland and St. Louis.

Headline is a little misleading. Romo got a big out so I think he got the better of Lindor. Regardless, I really can't imagine anything that could be said that would get Romo that heated. Lindor smiles and says "I can't believe you get anyone out with that bleep". Romo smiles back and says "you were lucky to even touch that pitch" No reason for heat on either side.unless its one of those stupid unwritten rules that no one agrees on.

It is very true but he is also probably pretty high on the list of scoring runs unexpectedly.. On balance I would prefer he be a little more cautious. Just a little.

Guy didn't look toward home which may or may not have been his teammates yelling to take the more likely out at third. I didn't see Rodario slowing up into 2nd. At that point he was probably watching to see if Rooker was going to try for home and it is still reasonable for him to think there might be a play at the plate. In this isolated case there may very likely have been no value in drawing the throw. If Eddie thought there was a chance of a play at the plate then it is defensible. He just guessed wrong.

Yep, but Eddie can't hear Dick say that and with the play behind him he can't gauge how close the play at the plate would have been. Again, if he wasn't hustling from the get go then there is no defense for him but if he was hustling I think it was reasonable for him to believe Rooker would have been no more than 10 feet closer to home than Eddie was to third and that either he was going to draw the throw guaranteeing the run or would make third easily if there was a play at the plate. If you believe there would be a close play at the plate then drawing the throw to third has run value. I don't know how to assign the value but it moves it toward a decent decision and away from a stupid mistake. In no way does it belong in the realm of yesterday's gaffe.

Replay doesn't show how easily Rooker scored. I think it was ok for Eddie to think a double would not easily score an average speed at best guy from 1st and that there would either be a play at the plate or he might draw the throw and eliminate the possibility of a play at the plate. T Your stats don't consider the possibility of Rooker being thrown out at the plate if Rosario didnt draw the relay throw. Unless Rosario was dogging it I would expect that Rooker wouldn't be all that closer to home than Rosario was to third. Very reasonable for Eddie to think the throw would be to home and that it would be close. Drawing the throw for the run to score has to be part of the equation.

I think most people, even old school would take the double play in that situation. The sabermetrics analyze averages but only to a certain degree. Its based on historical data compiled by every kind of team including great offenses, weak offenses, great relievers, and weak relievers on both sides. No team is exactly average. Even that doesn't go far enough. What are the percentages for Cave or the guy following him performing against the relievers the Tigers bring in? To illustrate my point sabermetrics would say in a tie game with two outs and a guy on third in the bottom of the 9th a routine ground ball to shortstop would be a wonderful thing for the visiting team.

Well, to be honest, I think we could do without that pederast Hanrahan in accounting.

“You're never as good as everyone tells you when you win, and you're never as bad as they say when you lose." This one is even better "If you can meet with Triumph and Disaster And treat those two impostors just the same." All I ever want out of the Twins is to have meaningful games in September and then let the chips fall where they may. Hopefully that results in the playoffs. Well, these games mean something. When we were 20-10 everyone was gaga over how good a team we had. Now somehow, everyone is horrible and will never be anything but horrible. They are just a spark away from being good again. Will they find that spark? That's up to the players. That's baseball.

He never was or would be living under a bridge. Do you really think he was doing it selfishly? He had the president of the USA calling him a thug along with half of social media calling him every other name and he continued. He had no idea of a lawsuit at the time and knew it could hurt his chance of resigning yet he continued. He may have come out of it financially fine but at the time it took the courage and knowledge of consequences that you were calling for as a prerequisite to be taken seriously. Why do I have the feeling if someone brought up MLK you would say he did it for the PAC money. I get your point about virtue signalling. To me those that only started holding their hats over their hearts during the Anthem after Koepernick were virtue signalling that they were true patriots. Now it takes no courage to kneel during the Anthem because everyone is doing it. Its virtue signalling if you are only doing it because everyone else is doing it. It actually takes courage at times not to kneel and to show respect for the military or the country. That's not right either. Protesting against injustice should not automatically come with sacrifice. That right was gained by those before us sacrificing for that right. If anything the cost and sacrifice should be placed upon those that have benefited from or perpetuated the injustice. In essence that is what is happening now. On an individual basis there is still the responsibility for ones actions and there should be consequences for violence and destruction brought upon those committing it.. On a collective basis though if a significant portion of the population feels marginalized and then ignored for so long its going to boil over eventually and you will get what you get.

I don't think there was any thought at all to Duffey pitching the 6th. I am sure the plan was for Alcala to pitch 2 innings, Poppen one and Duffey to close.. The idea that our bullpen has been taxed because of bullpen games just feels wrong. May, Romo and Rogers pitched two days in a row because we won games 5-4 and 3-2. If we had starters go 6 innings both days that is still probably what would have happened.

This.. I said before the game that it seemed like the Twins were sacrificing this one in order to increase their odds for tomorrow's game. On the road against arguably the best pitcher this year. Even at that we had a pretty fair shot at beating them. Looking at that reliever chart it doesn't seem like we are in such bad shape.

Alcala has been great. Just had a bad night. Poppen had a great night. "Proven veterans" give up runs also. Its not like Lindor hasn't taken a lot of our guys deep before. We have too many quality relievers that need innings to stay sharp. Nothing has been trashed.

Alcala has had several days and there are a few guys that pitched on Sunday and should be just fine. I also believe Maeda can go more innings but probably makes sense to raise that gradually. He was averaging 84 pitches a start and then jumped up to 115 his last start as Jlease mentioned. That is a pretty big jump and in this case I am fine with erring on the cautious side. The design of this bullpen is to be very deep and it is always a balancing act when you have a lot of guys to pitch them enough to be sharp without being overworked. If Hill gives us 5 quality innings I will be happy. Feels like sacrificing a gimme win to the Indians and Bieber tonight to focus on the series win but you never know.

What's that all about?

Maybe Berrios found the right catcher. Nice win.

I would take the under as well. The problem with your unwritten rules are rules comment is this. Compare your first example to the link I am sharing. It was a perfect game in the 8th inning and down by two so already farther away from your examples. So it is absolutely arbitrary and I absolutely differ on the good sportsmanship. Its not good sportsmanship towards your teammates to consider your opponents feelings when it reduces your chances. In this example it was the 8th inning, down by 2 in a perfect game and might I add a point in the season where they were only down by one game in the standings. So in that case you have an opposing pitcher and manager that to this day rip on a guy for bunting and violating baseball's unwritten rules. I remember at the time Tony Gwynn countering that his guy did nothing wrong and vaguely remember another all star at the time saying something like "If he was my teammate and thought his best chance of getting on base was to bunt but didn't bunt because someone on the other team thought it was violating an unwritten rule I wouldn't want him on my team." How can you have unwritten rules when no one knows what the unwritten rules are? https://www.mlb.com/news/tbt-bunt-spoils-curt-schilling-s-perfecto-c180341170