JB_Iowa

Check #1 off from your list.

I thought that on last night's Detroit-KC game they said something about Detroit will host 1st round. I wasn't sure at the time how that was true but I believe it is what was said. So I'm confused.

I'm sure it was "the sun". But I wasn't sure of what was happening it the little contretemps between him and Washington in the dugout. 3 more innings to hold on to a 3 run lead for Oakland. Pulling for them.

MVP isn't all about batting stats. In fact, it isn't all about Stats altogether. If it were, it would be determined by computers not voters. One of the subjective factors that will probably play into votes (and I think should play into votes) is the question of sustained excellence. Sort of a mini lifetime achievement award. Cabrera has an OPS above 1.000 for 3 consecutive years -- sort of a "triple crown" of another sort. I know, that's still offense but, combined with his willingness to move back to 3rd base, I think the voters will reward Cabrera for sustained leadership -- and that's the essence of "most valuable".

I understand the arguments about RBIs. It is part of the equation and Cabrera clearly leads in that category but I think you can ignore it when you look at the rest. Unless the person who answered me the other day was incorrect, NO ONE has led in Home Runs and Batting Average since 1967. 45 years and not one single player has accomplished that 2/3 segment of the TC -- the parts that don't rely on teammates being on base. That, in itself, proves to me that the Cabrera's accomplishment is incredibly rare and historic. The cool kids can denigrate the Triple Crown and Miggy's accomplishment. I'm just very happy to see another Triple Crown winner in my lifetime.

95 losses would only be easy for me to swallow if I felt like they were genuinely overhauling this organization -- or at a minumum, genuinely evaluating every underpinning of this organization (philosophy, policy, procedure and personnel). I'll wait and see what they say on Friday but if it doesn't appear that there will be some genuine shake-up and review in this organization then 95 losses this year aren't any easier to swallow than 99 last year. It's just the same old, same old.

I think my problem with this whole discussion is that it doesn't really address the fundamentals of why the Twins had so little playoff success despite winning the division fairly regularly. PLEASE don't just say "its a small sample size". It isn't really that small a sample size when you are talking about SOME success (not necessarily winning the WS but winning a game or a series). The real issue, I think, is whether some of the philosophical underpinnings of this organization just don't work when it comes to post-season success (or when it comes to success against the best teams in the league even in the regular season). Does their pitching philosophy work? Not just "pitch to contact" (I'll agree that is a variant in most organizations) but a lack of power pitching. Strict pitch counts. Regimented use of the bullpen. Slap hitting. Injury diagnosis & treatment and training methods. Strict adherence to a small percentage range when it comes to the amount spent on salaries. Gardenhire's long-term view of the season (battle your tail off and there's another game tomorrow). There's a lot more that I'm sure some of you who are more immersed in this can add. (I wish I could add relying on fundamental defense but it's hard to believe that after what we've seen for 2 years). At least for me, and I think for some others who see the glass as half-empty (if that), that's what it comes down to. i want some visible proof that the Twins understand that my discontent is not just about the last 2 years. That merely returning to relevance in the Central isn't good enough. I'm sure it would be good enough for the Twins organization because it would undoubtedly put butts in the seat and guarantee their profit margin. But I want more than that. I want ownership and management to do things that will convince me that they care not just about their profit margin but that they care about competing with the best -- including in the post-season. That doesn't meant that they have to blow up the team or that they can't be competitive next year. But when you never see anything really change, it's hard to believe that they really care about winning against the best.

In a way, I enjoy the playoffs a lot more whem the Twins aren't in them. It gives me an opportunity to enjoy the beauty of the game without enduring another crushing exit. I'll be cheering for the Tigers because I want to see Mike Ilitch rewarded for the long-term risk he took (and, since I don't have any intradivisional hatred, I always root for the A.L. Central team just like I always root for the Big Ten in the bowls). But I would also be happy to see wins by the Orioles or A's. The Rangers less so and the Yankees not at all. I don't have particularly strong feelings about the National League but Cincinnati and St. Louis (if they are in). Would also be happy to see the Braves win. Less so the Giants and Nationals. Dodgers not at all.

The Twins first goal is to put a winning team on the field. Regular season wins has shown to increase attendance. More attendance= revenue. Their first goal was a competitive team, building for the future second. NO, their primary goal is to make as large a profit as they can. As for the rest of your post, I'm not going to bother to argue. It is pretty apparent that we view this team and this organization very differently. I'm not going to bother to argue across a great divide. I

Thanks for the great chuckle ... now I'll have those pseudo-song titles running through my head all day -- especially "d-d-d-dickey & the Mets" and "Goodbye Justin Morneau". I can actually hear Elton on those two.

Doesn't matter if the glass is half-full or half-empty if the milk is sour.

Okay, as I see it, they not only went out and got a bunch of veterans, they also got a new manager. And I strongly believe that staffing changes (field staff and front office) are necessary to inject some vitality back into this organization (an entire re-evaluation of their system would be good). Because I don't want them to merely return to their "winning ways" of 2002-2010. I want them to become genuinely competitive vis a vis the best teams in the league. And as we all know, that means that they have to have significantly better starting pitching. Not just better than 2011 and 2012 but better than many of their division championship teams. You can stop-gap some of the bleeding over the next year or two so it isn't quite so ugly (the money is there to do so) but somehow, somewhere you've got to get pitching. And I don't see how you do that without trading some of your assets. I agree with one-eyed-jack that you can do both (or at least some of both) but if push comes to shove, I want it to come down on the organizational strength side.

Meanwhile, Tigers clinch. Didn't look fabulous doing so (Benoit is a disaster right now) but they managed to pull it out.

Well, 4 for 5 with a solo HR will do wonders for Miggy. Mauer's 1 for 5, not so much.

Have to think that Cabrera is going to want to play. Thanks for the stats. It's going to be so much fun to see how these last few games play out. I'll be switching back and forth between the Twins/Blue Jays and Tigers/Royals.

FYI, I said this already in the fall of 2010 so this was NOT hindsight for me. There had always been some commenters on the Strib and other places who were saying that the Twins couldn't win in the post-season but I chose to keep the faith UNTIL 2010. Then, the debacle that was the end of the 2010 season struck me and I realized that they were absolutely right. The Twins COULDN'T win in the post-season without making some significant changes (starting pitching mostly but other organizational changes as well.) Not everyone is looking at this with hindsight. There HAVE been people around since 2010 and earlier who have been calling for major changes in this organization. You probably discounted them as well. It depends on what you want. I knew in October 2010 that the Twins couldn't win without changes. The only thing they chose to do was replace J. J. Hardy with Nishioka. That didn't bother me because at least they were doing something (although I thought they were smart enough to do something with better results). But I -- and a whole lot of other people -- knew that they needed to do SOMETHING besides bring back Carl Pavano. And It didn't happen. Well, 2 years later, here we are with a whole lot more improvement to make -- and having wasted 2 years when changes could have been made.

I've gotten to the point where I don't care -- as long as they take steps to ensure it doesn't happen again. There will always be mistakes in scouting. Those mistakes should not be compounded by emphasizing non-baseball factors. A good PR department can "make hay" with any player regardless of personality (okay if they turn out to be a mass-murderer that may not work although sensationalism does sell). But the same is not true. A PR department can't turn a bad player into a good one (and for the most part, can't produce a sleight of hand to convince the public that the player is good). Make the baseball decisions first then worry about marketing. It should work better that way.

I think they should be looking outside the organization for some new blood for both the coaching staff and the front office. The "Twins Way" needs some significant updating.

No, it DIDN'T work for 10 years. It worked if you were happy with them being competitive in the A.L. Central and winning the division with some regularity. It DIDN'T work if you had a desire for them to be competitive in the post-season. It's pretty clear if you look at the Twins won-loss record against various teams that in the last 6 years or so, the A. L. East got substantially stronger while the Twins stagnated in the A. L. Central. Some of that was money. Some of that was draft postion. BUT some portion of that was organizational philosophy. I'm not putting all of that on Gardenhire and his coaches. A large part also falls on the front office. But we never see any turnover there either (I do not consider Ryan replacing Smith as any kind of significant change. It is the same philosophy with a familiar face at the helm). After 2010, I was fully prepared to endure several (and that means more than 2) horrific seasons like the last 2 -- as long as I could see a plan emerging that would take the Twin to competitiveness with the entire league not just the Central Division. But I haven't seen that -- all I've seen other than the Willingham signing (which was really just a replacement for Cuddyer) was a little tinkering around the edges. Everybody knew at the end of 2010 that the Twins' starting pitching wasn't good enough to win in the playoffs. Other than a bit in this year's draft, have we seen any moves to toward improvement? NO -- not through free agent signings and not through trades. I feel like the pain of the last 2 years has been utterly wasted. The Twins had an opportunity to start re-tooling after 2010 to try to rise to a higher level of competitiveness. They played it safe -- because their mantra is simply to stay competitive enough to put butts in the stands without taking any major risks in improving the team. Well guess what? Even their "play it safe' strategy failed. And now I'm even more depressed because I don't see them ever taking enough risk to become competitive with the big dogs in the league. This organization is stuck in a pretty deep rut. So yes, now change IS necessary and not just with the field staff. There is also a stench from the stagnation in the front office.

And to think that the Mets didn't want him to climb Kilimanjaro. Guess that didn't hurt his legs any. Hats off to you, Mr. Dickey.

I see this as a good deal for both sides -- and I see it as the logical move by both sides. I don't think it says ANYTHING about anybody's honor or classiness. It just makes cold business sense for both sides.

Fascinating article by Mackey. And to his conclustion: But after 11 years and now two 90-loss seasons, the Twins are trying to decide if it's time to shake things up, I can only say "AMEN". For me, this isn't about being "bad" at your job (although arguments can be made long those lines), it is more a corollary to "Familiarity breeds contempt" or rather, too much familiarity leads to complacency and bad habits. I honestly believe that part of the Twins' problems stem from too much stability. Since they didn't "bleed in" much new field staff or front office staff in the last 11 years, they now need an infusion of new energy, personalities, ideas and talent.

Trying to figure out if this is encouraging: There have been talks about moving him to third but all of those decisions haven't been run past Mauer. His arm action would need some work at third but it looks like the perfect move. It's always up to the player for approval before we do anything and he loves to catch. We get that he likes to catch but given the Twins long-time problems at 3rd (and the iffiness of Plouffe and long-term iffiness of Sano at 3rd), wouldn't you think they'd at least be TALKING with Mauer about 3B if it looks like the PERFECT move?

Thanks for the link. Posnanski is such a good writer. I don't always agree with his thinking but he always pens an interesting column plus his columns are always thought-provoking. And he does seem to love the Twins.

I won't have concerns about the outfield -- they'll figure that out. We can only pray that they continue to develop an excess of outfielders that they can somehow flip for pitching and middle infielders.