ashbury

Depending on what you mean by "offset," Twins fan-favorite Joey Gallo made a career of that - an OBP that was around league-average on a sub-.200 BA. platform Of course, he could draw the walks because of his HR power. Kyle Schwarber has had a similar profile at times. Jesse Winker, Tommy Pham, and Mark Canha are less-powerful batters who have at times achieved very good OBP with below-average BA. But maybe those aren't quite the "poor" BA you have in mind. Your overall point is sound, but baseball is a very large tent and words like "anyone" are likely to turn up funny cases.

Concur, even if we we can't predict precisely how it all plays out. If there is a stoppage, it might get settled in July or earlier, leaving time for a brief "spring training" and at least as long a season as was in 2020, leading to a relatively normal post-season which is a great deal of the value assigned to acquiring talent at the trade deadline.

Surprised this narrative keeps popping up because it's wrong, and it was documented. Gray not only was open to returning, he even pushed for it a little. Sonny Gray told the Minneapolis Star Tribune’s Bobby Nightengale that the Twins didn’t make much of a push to re-sign him when the veteran righty entered free agency last winter. “They were very transparent from the get-go, saying, ’Listen, we do not have the resources to give you a contract, as much as we would like to.’ So, I kind of knew that,” Gray said. “Even though we did come back a couple of times and try to work on some things, I kind of knew early on that it wasn’t [happening].”

I don't disagree, but I also feel as if the quick hire reflects an explicit message to the ones they'd like to retain, "we've eliminated the uncertainty and hope you'll stay."

Is Maki under contract? Perhaps he has his feelers out for a new situation.

Exactly. There are fallacies with going after free-agents and other established players, but the fallacy with relying on youth is the idea that you get "6 years" when you develop from within or trade for MLB-ready players. You laid out why you lose a couple years at either end. Add to that the fiction, when Target Field was being sought by ownership, that a brand spanking new ballyard would allow them to sign their own stars - just a little public funding, please..

I'm going to have to go through my collection and see whether I have any Hank Allen cards. Was it just his 1967 card that is valuable, or is every year of his worth soliciting bids on?

If a veteran is worth $1-3M ... he probably isn't worth it. 😄

Rojas? Best utility infielder in the game IMO.

Taking the hittable curveball for 0-2 was the key moment for Kirk. I thought he was gonna hammer it.

Son Cashbury and I were calling it semi-intentional. With Kirk coming up, almost mandatory.

Well, this is deflating.

OK Jays, one more chance to show us what you've got. This could be epic.

It was certainly setting up like an ending for the ages.

Twin Daily: come for the baseball, stay for the old-timey 17th century disses. 😄

The official rule is a bit lengthy because it covers many cases, but is written pretty unambiguously: Rule 5.05(a)(7): Any fair ball which ... sticks in a fence or scoreboard ... the batter and the runners shall be entitled to two bases Your interpretation of "stuck" is more like "inextricable," and that isn't a common sense interpretation of the words in the rule. The centerfielder and the umpires were on the same page right away regarding the rule. The ball didn't bounce when it hit the wall like it usually does - it stuck to it.

What I remember: catharsis.

We're back to echoing Terry Ryan's old lament: sometimes you just can't get free agents to take your money. AKA the Small Market Blues.

It would be cool if the site administrators would take the word "BREAKING" off of the subject line after a day, so that I don't keep thinking something interesting just happened each morning. 😄

I figured there had to be an official rule covering the case but couldn't find it quickly last night, and assumed it was some sort of ground rule. I looked again this morning and found Rule 5.05(a)(7). Among the cases it covers is "...or which sticks in a fence" in which case 2 bases are awarded. The rule doesn't say it has to be un-dislodge-able, and by ordinary use of the word "sticks" I'd say the replay confirms that that's what happened. The ball didn't bounce like one normally does - it stuck to the bottom of the outfield wall. (Maybe the rules should be rewritten to get rid of the quaint term "fence.") One might wonder why the case last night is different than the ball taking a "bad bounce" that similarly defeats a good defender's positioning, but I can't think of a way to reword the rule that wouldn't lead to hair-splitting in the heat of the moment. A ball hit to that spot, landing either six inches further or six inches shorter, would be a run-scoring double with ordinary defense. The rule recognizes that but shortchanges the lead runner by probably one base. Toronto fans are left in the position of pleading for a fluke outcome akin to a bad bounce that didn't actually happen, in order to score the tying run in addition. And allowing that first runner to score (by a slightly changed rule) would not have changed the situation when the game-ending play happened - Barger would have had the same incentive to be exactly as aggressive, and would have been burned. Good straightforward call by the umps, I say now.

Absolutely. But I still feel bad for him - he had multiple things on his mind since he wanted to score the tying run any way possible. Resulted in being the goat.

Whale of an entertaining WS!

We know what's going to happen as soon as we see the first frame but the video still delivers. They say an out-loud laugh is good for one's health. Thank you for helping preserve mine.

They're gonna pay someone ~$800K next year. Why not you and me both?

Under Toronto team control another year.