ashbury

I find it completely believable. ... that a columnist said such a thing.

The story on Radke, maybe embellished at the time, was that he had decided to retire after that season anyway, and in consultation with doctors decided to just go ahead and pitch through it toward the playoffs.

For whatever little it's worth, I notice that in the video of Gordon, one of his feet inadvertently collides with the defender's planted foot, looking like a risk of a sprain. While the wrist is exposed and vulnerable in the headfirst slide, it's under a little more control. Beautiful choices of video.

Approves: http://www.baseball-almanac.com/players/pics/coot_veal_autograph.jpg

Gagne was a very underrated part of those championship teams, so it's flattering to most players to even be mentioned in the same breath, and it appeals to me, no doubt. A point in favor of Escobar, one that I don't think I ever heard with regard to the Flori-monster. (A nickname that was applied hopefully at one point, but now is just emblematic of a sad era.) I think Esco's 102 was built on an abnormally high BABIP, and he also hasn't yet been thrown into the fire as an everyday player, where I worry that he will both wear down and no longer benefit from any possible cherry-picking of opportunity by his manager.1 As for his defense, I'll admit to a certain bit of sample bias, because in one of the few games I've ever watched him in person, he had a terrible night and messed up I think it was 4 plays (not all charged as errors, obviously) where an out wasn't registered that should have. I'm not on-board with him being a Steady Eddie type, quite yet. If he gets the chance to be a regular, and reaches a truly Gagne-esque level of production, it would be a great thing. It's possible he has that ceiling, though I still doubt it. And he might not get that chance, if TPTB decide he doesn't have the capability to do it, which will have some circularity and be unfair to the young man - but that's baseball. 1 Maybe there's none of that picking-of-his-spots happening. I'd have to go back and see whether in his part-time play he was the guy held out against the tough pitchers or if he was the guy thrown to the wolves, or just luck of the draw. That's one problem with assessing part-timers, it's just not quite the same as going out there every day, and of course you don't know until you try it with him.

We're pretty close. I like him. I was on the bandwagon to give him PA over Florimon a year ago. I just see him a half-grade lower. (C instead of C+, or whatever.)

Buy him a dinner now just to be safe. If you're still alive in 20 years, he can pay you back.

More like this: Maddon: "Hey Terry. You hired anyone yet for me to replace? No? Well, get back to me after you do."

Agreed. 2014 was supposed to be a year of figuring some things out. For some reason, time was invested in figuring out whether Santana could be a good CF. So now in 2015 we have Escobar versus Santana questions. I continue to see Escobar as a utility player (with a ceiling of "very good") on a contending team, and a starter only on a cellar-dweller.

Bud Black too? I think it's not all that rare. What is rare is a guy Molitor's age getting his first big-league managing job, regardless of experience. It just doesn't happen. I'd like to ask someone like Terry Ryan off the record for his thoughts about this. / and then I'd come here on TD and post them.

Ryan is currently listed as executive advisor to the Astros. I doubt there is any chance he would be looking for a random pitching coach position in the majors. It can't hurt to "gauge his interest" I suppose, but I wouldn't invest effort doing so. If I were TR and I wanted to go this route, and I bumped into Nolan at the winter meetings, I might say something leading and specific, phrased as a joke, and see if he perked up at all. Anything else could be almost an insult. He was previously CEO. "Seriously, Terry? But if you're interested, I probably could find a spot for you as a bullpen coach for the 'Stros."

Since I don't see Danny Santana in your Final Roster, I assume he's an inadvertent omission from your list of AAA moves? Also, adding Vargas at DH to the Final Roster, and counting the bench, I see 15 position players going along with 13 pitchers. Am I misunderstanding, or do 3 of these need to be dealt with somehow? (I recognize Escobar is in limbo in your plans, but if Santana replaces him at SS then there is still the same numbers problem.)

Ashburyjohn: What would you like to have seen from this dialogue?

Except when the process is kept fair, and the front runner wins because whatever qualities that caused him to be the front runner end up being why he is picked. I agree the decision maker needs to be on guard to keep the process fair.

His quote might be the most tepid, of those offered.

It was actually a UFO abduction. I don't know how the shoulder thing keeps coming up; I fully expect to see it in his scouting reports for the rest of his career.

"The Chicago Cubs will announce the hiring of former Tampa Bay Rays skipper Joe Maddon as the 54th manager in franchise history on Monday, the team announced in a release." I wish they had announced that this announcement was coming, first.

The video game has that list explicitly and at hand, and it can be a bit silly. But don't you think most teams have such a list implicitly, in the sense of "I'd rather give up this guy than that guy, if trying to swing a deal"? To an outsider like me it doesn't seem so crazy, thinking in terms of such a list, as a way of making sense of how trades happen. "If I pick up the phone first, I might end up having to offer a better player than if I wait for the phone to ring" still seems like a way to think of things, and a list reflects that. It's fine if that list has great numbers of players ranked equivalently, instead of with decimal point gradations.

... when facing him and that one other guy, apparently.

It seems Rosario is impressing everyone who sees him in person in Arizona this fall.

It would bother me if my team based its lineup planning too much around how to man the DH position. I'd rather either the DH position be manned by some stud for whom the answer is to just write his name in every day, or else the DH position be just about the last consideration when all the other roster roles have been filled. When juggling the DH is a high priority, it means your roster is filled with slow bad defenders.

I thought it was Rogers's forearm, not the shoulder, that got dinged up earlier this month.

Like I said, "d'oh".

I've never done a journalistic interview, and when I saw my question come up to lead off I kind of gave myself a dopeslap, because it was clear it wouldn't accomplish what I hoped. I should have taken the time to craft the question in a way that a) he might still answer, and b ) would prove more informative. My draft was too wordy, so I can see why it was cut down. With hindsight, I'd have tried something like this: Fans hear lots of financial numbers. Forbes Magazine has published estimates putting the Twins revenue most recently around $220M. Club officials mention a 50-52%-of-revenue target for payroll. ESPN places the Twins 2012-4 major league payroll ranging $75-95M. The math doesn't work out, using these numbers. Can you clarify which (maybe all?) of these are misconceptions so that fans can understand better? Basically offering to outline his PR for him.

We're wasting him as a reliever.