IdahoPilgrim

One of the topics being ardently discussed by the Twins fanbase these days is the status of Kyle Gibson and his recovery from Tommy John surgery. As a part of that discussion much has been made of the 130-inning limit to which Gibson is being held – indeed, it has become for some the focus of the discussion. If Gibson has only so many innings before he is shut down this year, then doesn’t it make sense to have him “spend” those innings with the parent club, getting MLB experience in preparation for next year? Indeed, there are few topics which evoke such passion right now than how the front office is handling Gibson’s recovery. The problem is, I’m not sure that that limit exists. I’m going to buck the trend here and challenge the conventional wisdom and say that it probably does not, at least not in the way most are using the term. Oh, I have no doubt that there is an internal target number that the organization is looking at, beyond which they will treat Gibson with kid gloves, shutting him down at the first sign of arm weakness or fatigue. Indeed, I would be disappointed if they did not. But I believe he will be allowed to pitch until that moment comes, regardless of his inning total. I choose to take Terry Ryan at his word when he said in March that such a hard inning limit does not exist. Minnesota Twins send Kyle Gibson down, can't wait to bring him back - TwinCities.com So where did this idea of the 130-inning limit come from? I think it starts last year and the Stephen Strasburg situation in Washington. In his case there was a firm limit, which was announced very publicly early in the season, preparing the fanbase for why Strasburg, their ace, might not be available to pitch in the playoffs. That put the whole question of inning limits after TJ surgery center stage in the eyes of the public. Add to that Kyle Gibson’s recovery from TJ surgery and it was natural for Twins fans to raise the same question regarding our young pitcher. The next piece is from an article on 1500espn.com that Phil Mackey published last November. In that article Mackey indicated that Ryan had told him earlier in the off-season that Gibson would be on a 130-140 inning limit, similar to Atlanta’s Kris Medlin who pitched 138 innings in his first full season back. Mackey: How does a 'healthy' Kyle Gibson fit into Twins' 2013 plans? | 1500 ESPN Twin Cities ? Minnesota Sports News & Opinion (Twins, Vikings, Wolves, Wild, Gophers) | Sportswire: Minnesota Twins From that point, the 130-140 inning limit became standard fodder, being picked up by bloggers and others and passed on regularly. Preseason analysis from the likes of Rhett Bollinger and others also perpetuated the idea, although they did call it an expectation rather than hard information from management. Soon it was the standard on which all forum threads on Gibson were based. And so here we are today. I of course could be wrong – there may indeed be an arbitrary number beyond which Gibson will not be allowed to go, one that has not been made public because that is just not the Twins way. But what if I’m not? What if my supposition is correct, and Ryan wasn’t just trying to fool us all in March? What if Gibson pitches for the rest of the season, although probably with extra days of rest? What does that say about how we handle information in the internet age? One thing it would remind us is how easy supposition can become “fact” just through the process of repetition. That’s something that is not limited to this case, of course. It’s become common in life in general, particularly in politics. The hard-cores on both the left and the right have become adept in repeating the same item of misinformation so often that it has become factual in the minds of many who listen to them. Think Barack Obama and the furor over his birth certificate. The challenge, then, is to always make sure of our sources before we take as definitive something we’ve read in a blog or forum (or a newspaper or magazine article too, for that matter). It also should remind us that wisdom comes not from always following the crowd, but from recognizing that wisdom is often something that has to be pieced together from multiple sources, never clearly revealed in any one source but only truly seen in composite. Kind of like a jigsaw puzzle – all the pieces have to be properly placed before the true picture emerges. Thus the challenge is to have the patience to truly investigate a question from all sides, and only when we have all the pieces can we truly put the puzzle together. And yes, that means listening to people with whom we disagree, recognizing that even from their words we can learn and grow even if we can not adopt their views and positions wholeheartedly. Finally, it reminds us nothing is carved in stone and the ability to adapt is a hallmark of the human condition. The two articles I linked above seem to be contradictory. Until you remember that one was published in November and the other in March. I have no difficulty believing both are accurate. Any change in stance comes from being willing to reassess the situation as more data comes in, in this case as they watch Gibson during spring training. That’s something every organization and every individual needs to be able to do, to always be willing to be flexible and change our views when new information merits it. It is only when we become so hard and fast in our positions that we stop looking for new information, that we stop being willing to test our beliefs, that we become in danger of ossifying and becoming irrelevant, and of having a fast-changing world pass us by.

One of the topics being ardently discussed by the Twins fanbase these days is the status of Kyle Gibson and his recovery from Tommy John surgery. As a part of that discussion much has been made of the 130-inning limit to which Gibson is being held – indeed, it has become for some the focus of the discussion. If Gibson has only so many innings before he is shut down this year, then doesn’t it make sense to have him “spend” those innings with the parent club, getting MLB experience in preparation for next year? Indeed, there are few topics which evoke such passion right now than how the front office is handling Gibson’s recovery. The problem is, I’m not sure that that limit exists. I’m going to buck the trend here and challenge the conventional wisdom and say that it probably does not, at least not in the way most are using the term. Oh, I have no doubt that there is an internal target number that the organization is looking at, beyond which they will treat Gibson with kid gloves, shutting him down at the first sign of arm weakness or fatigue. Indeed, I would be disappointed if they did not. But I believe he will be allowed to pitch until that moment comes, regardless of his inning total. I choose to take Terry Ryan at his word when he said in March that such a hard inning limit does not exist. Minnesota Twins send Kyle Gibson down, can't wait to bring him back - TwinCities.com So where did this idea of the 130-inning limit come from? I think it starts last year and the Stephen Strasburg situation in Washington. In his case there was a firm limit, which was announced very publicly early in the season, preparing the fanbase for why Strasburg, their ace, might not be available to pitch in the playoffs. That put the whole question of inning limits after TJ surgery center stage in the eyes of the public. Add to that Kyle Gibson’s recovery from TJ surgery and it was natural for Twins fans to raise the same question regarding our young pitcher. The next piece is from an article on 1500espn.com that Phil Mackey published last November. In that article Mackey indicated that Ryan had told him earlier in the off-season that Gibson would be on a 130-140 inning limit, similar to Atlanta’s Kris Medlin who pitched 138 innings in his first full season back. Mackey: How does a 'healthy' Kyle Gibson fit into Twins' 2013 plans? | 1500 ESPN Twin Cities ? Minnesota Sports News & Opinion (Twins, Vikings, Wolves, Wild, Gophers) | Sportswire: Minnesota Twins From that point, the 130-140 inning limit became standard fodder, being picked up by bloggers and others and passed on regularly. Preseason analysis from the likes of Rhett Bollinger and others also perpetuated the idea, although they did call it an expectation rather than hard information from management. Soon it was the standard on which all forum threads on Gibson were based. And so here we are today. I of course could be wrong – there may indeed be an arbitrary number beyond which Gibson will not be allowed to go, one that has not been made public because that is just not the Twins way. But what if I’m not? What if my supposition is correct, and Ryan wasn’t just trying to fool us all in March? What if Gibson pitches for the rest of the season, although probably with extra days of rest? What does that say about how we handle information in the internet age? One thing it would remind us is how easy supposition can become “fact” just through the process of repetition. That’s something that is not limited to this case, of course. It’s become common in life in general, particularly in politics. The hard-cores on both the left and the right have become adept in repeating the same item of misinformation so often that it has become factual in the minds of many who listen to them. Think Barack Obama and the furor over his birth certificate. The challenge, then, is to always make sure of our sources before we take as definitive something we’ve read in a blog or forum (or a newspaper or magazine article too, for that matter). It also should remind us that wisdom comes not from always following the crowd, but from recognizing that wisdom is often something that has to be pieced together from multiple sources, never clearly revealed in any one source but only truly seen in composite. Kind of like a jigsaw puzzle – all the pieces have to be properly placed before the true picture emerges. Thus the challenge is to have the patience to truly investigate a question from all sides, and only when we have all the pieces can we truly put the puzzle together. And yes, that means listening to people with whom we disagree, recognizing that even from their words we can learn and grow even if we can not adopt their views and positions wholeheartedly. Finally, it reminds us nothing is carved in stone and the ability to adapt is a hallmark of the human condition. The two articles I linked above seem to be contradictory. Until you remember that one was published in November and the other in March. I have no difficulty believing both are accurate. Any change in stance comes from being willing to reassess the situation as more data comes in, in this case as they watch Gibson during spring training. That’s something every organization and every individual needs to be able to do, to always be willing to be flexible and change our views when new information merits it. It is only when we become so hard and fast in our positions that we stop looking for new information, that we stop being willing to test our beliefs, that we become in danger of ossifying and becoming irrelevant, and of having a fast-changing world pass us by.

I dare you to say that with a straight face.

I've got it. I'll sell it to the highest bidder. And to anybody who matches that price. Or comes within 10%. Seriously, no clue, but am curious about it myself now.

I'll even add this to the mix: a quote from Terry Ryan in March denying there is a firm limit. "It's not a firm number," Ryan said. "He's different from (Francisco) Liriano. He's different from Joe Nathan. ... We're going to make sure that we take care of him, but we're also going to give him an opportunity to develop." Minnesota Twins send Kyle Gibson down, can't wait to bring him back - TwinCities.com

All of this is true. And none of it changes the fact that, aside from one second-hand comment made in the off-season, there is nothing that indicates Gibson has an innings limit. If someone has a direct quote from Ryan, or Gardenhire, or anybody in the front office, I would love to see it. Honestly. Not speculation from a blogger or columnist, not a post in a chat room or forum thread. An actual quote.

I'm not going to build this off a quote, to avoid being misinterpreted, and this is not a response to anyone in particular, but it seems to me that the whole job of the general manager is to find those hidden values that haven't been recognized yet, i.e. finding those players who actually are better than their numbers and can help the club - which does describe Correia, at least so far this season. So, I give Ryan great credit for pulling the trigger on this one. And there is nothing wrong with relying on your people's judgment if you have come to trust that judgment based on past experience. Since we don't know to whom Ryan is referring, and what that person's past track record is, I'm going to assume that Ryan had reason to trust this person's judgment and act on it. Again, that's not a failure but a sign of organizational strength. Indeed, if Ryan has people whose judgment he doesn't trust there should be serious questions about whether that person is in the right position or even belongs with the organization.

Oh, my, you should know better than that. Game threads have little if any serious discussion taking place - it's more like the banter that goes back and forth between fans in the stands as they watch the action on the field. It's all for fun, not analysis.

Sorry, Chief, this wasn't all aimed at you - actually none of it was. It was just a convenient post on which to springboard what I wanted to say. I was in a hurry this morning before I headed out to the gym, so I didn't spend the time to word this correctly. I have seen that argument made regarding payroll at Target Field vs Dome, if not in this thread than in similar ones - same way with the Dodgers/Yankees linking, and how it feeds into the "payroll equals success" meme I've seen elsewhere. Actually, I've gotten tired of that whole debate.

Oh, come on, I'll take this season over the last two any time. Sure, there are things I don't like and I wish were different, but there have actually been some pretty fun games. Last year I would have preferred getting my teeth drilled to what on saw on the screen sometimes. And while I understand the intent, I guess I'm just not wired to hope a Twins player fails - just as I can't hope for a bad season in order to get a better draft pick. Just the way I am.

No, not directly, which is why all this 130-inning limit talk is iffy at best. Mackay did report this winter that he was told there would be a 130-140 inning limit, but since then there has been nothing - certainly nothing like we heard last year about Strasberg in Washington, where it was said continuously and very publicly that this is the limit. My guess is they'll let him pitch as long as he is effective and is showing no signs of wear, and once they get past 140 they'll just be extra sensitive to shutting him down if it looks like he's fading.

Whichever set of numbers you use, I think his point is that payroll in Target Field is still well above payroll in the dome - whether taken as an average or compared year-to-year. For myself, the fact that they bumped up payroll in 2011 when they (incorrectly) believed they'd be chasing the title shows they'll spend the money when they think it's warranted. It will never be enough to satisfy the critics, though. Forget the stadium issues - until we match Yankees and Dodgers TV revenues, we will never even begin to approach their payroll numbers.

He'll get it from me. When we started having this discussion about Gibson at the start of May he clearly wasn't ready - good start alternating with bad start. The Twins were right to keep him in Rochester. Now he's ready, and so is Albers. I'd welcome them both in the rotation in place of Diamond and Pelfrey.

Yes, this is about what I expected, perhaps a touch better. I never thought that Vegas W/L was realistic.

And with that, I'll see ya all later...opening day for the Idaho Falls Chukars tonight.

ZERO! SWEEP, SWEEP, SWEEP! (exhausted and near death, the runner crosses the line, having finished the race unharmed)

*scanning the skies, looking for impending doom...**scanning the bullpen...looking for Perkins*

One!

Two!

Here we go...Burton...*gulp*

Three.

Four.

Whenever we play the White Sox and are ahead going into the last innings, I always feel like a marathon runner, approaching the end of the race, hoping that a piece of space junk doesn't fall out of the sky and take me out at the last moment before I cross the finish line.

http://fish.dnr.cornell.edu/nyfish/Osmeridae/SMELT3.jpg

http://image.shutterstock.com/display_pic_with_logo/832891/125268320/stock-photo-portrait-of-pathetic-goofy-guy-with-knitted-hat-in-his-hands-apologizing-or-requesting-125268320.jpg