IdahoPilgrim

And I have no problem with that if you are projecting to finish middle of the pack or on the fringe of contention. But if you are expecting to make a run at the world series, you don't get rid of your best pieces just before the start of the campaign. In hindsight, they weren't in contention, and I know there were those who were very skeptical going into 2011, but they were very clearly in the minority. I wasn't participating on this site then (and indeed it didn't exist) but I remember the anticipation prior to 2011. It wasn't all just promotional hype; many ordinary and average fans (and I assume many within the organization) expected 2011 to be better than 2010. At some point you have to stop selling and try to make a run; you can't be in perpetual rebuild mode. In hindsight they (seriously) miscalculated, but I can't fault their decision during that offseason. The past two offseasons, of course, are a different matter.

I don't think you can include Liriano in that - to sell him at the high you would have had to make a deal after 2010, when he was 26 and just put up the best season of his career. Can you imagine the outcry there would have been, on this board and elsewhere, if they had traded him then? After that time, the gig was up. Everybody knew he was erratic at best and there was no market for him. I give Ryan credit for getting Escobar in return. Also, if I remember, everybody was hoping that 2011 we would be in contention. You don't sell your top players in the offseason when you're hoping to make a postseason run the next year.

He can't be claimed, even if he wasn't injured. He's not on the 40-man, so he wouldn't be optioned. He's a non-roster invitee; he can just be moved to the minor league camp whenever the Twins want.

You don't have to be a criminal to be disdained. In this case the disdain I have is for his comments. I find it somewhat hypocritical that he is complaining about competitive balance when his role in the system makes it difficult for smaller market teams to attract/retain talent. He's not doing anything wrong; his job is to get the best deal possible for his clients. But I have no sympathy for him when, as in this case, that is limited somewhat by the CBA.

My sources tell me that the same press release will also confirm that water is wet and that Christmas will be scheduled this year for December 25th.

Why does this remind me of the guy who points a gun at your head and says, "If you don't do what I tell you I'll blow your head off, and it'll be YOUR FAULT!"? If one of Boras's clients isn't getting the payday his agent promised him, then obviously the fault must be with the system, right? Are you listening, Appel?

Is it really that odd an idea? I've never umpired, so I am speaking from complete ignorance and hoping I'm not being naive, but just from watching games on TV, which has the same view as you would have from behind the pitcher, it still looks like you could call a decent game.

I'm going with those who think it unlikely that this year will be as bad or worse than last year. The goal of this staff is not to win games by themselves - the goal is to not get blown out in the first three innings and give the offense a chance to score some runs. We don't need aces so much as middle-of-the-road performances. I think (and I know many disagree with me) that there is as much chance of that happening as there is a meltdown happening.

I'm guessing the article is a bit imprecise. Most pensions have some benefits which are vested and some which are not vested, usually determined by time in plan. Benefits which are vested would be guaranteed, by the government (funded by pension providers) if not by the company, and the employee would not lose any pension credits already earned. MLB could, however, stop issuing new credits to those already in the plan, i.e. they wouldn't lose the pension they have but the amount of the benefit would not increase any further from this point on, no matter how much longer they worked.

I still think we should bring Blyleven back out of retirement - even at 61, he's gotta be better than...

I understand the change that is going on in the workplace concerning retirement savings/security, and the reasons for the shift from defined-benefit to defined-contribution plans. The danger is that too many Americans don't have a good enough understanding about personal finance to know how to save for retirement, and too many don't make enough to be able to save for retirement. Even managing the asset allocation of a 401k is a skill that many in this country don't have - such as not keeping all your assets in company stock (think Enron). We are heading to a time when retirement will become a thing of the past - people will work until they are no longer able to work, and then they'll have to depend on the grace of friends and family to survive - that's the system we had before the social safety net was created. And, of course, people being forced to work longer and postpone (or cancel) retirement creates more pressure on the job market, pushing up unemployment, particularly for younger workers trying to make a start. At least there is Twins baseball to take our mind off this bleak picture!

I will throw in one last comment and then exit this topic. When I was a new member last year, I posted on the forums frequently, and as I didn't have a background in playing the game, my comments were sometimes naive and just plain wrong. That should be expected from a new poster. There were a few times I got slammed and denigrated personally because of my ignorance of the game (and to honest, a few times I slammed back - I try to moderate that impulse now). The net result, though, was I'm now much more careful about what I post in the forums, and am always conscious of what reception it might receive. You can all decide whether that's a good thing or a bad thing.

I believe you are correct in that it is the existence of corporations that makes unions necessary. Classical capitalism never conceived of corporations - most suppliers and producers were small and interchangeable, so workers could move from one to another in response to work conditions. When corporations changed the employment environment, giving fewer options and less mobility, there needed to be a counterbalance, which is what unions provided. In a capitalistic system, what's wrong with an organization that seeks the best interests of it's members? That's what capitalism is all about - seeking to advance yourselves. That's Adam Smith's invisible hand - the idea that when all participants put their own best interests first, it works for the betterment of all society.

For what it's worth, I hope you continue to keep the forums. While I also sometimes get turned off by some of the nastier comments, I do find things there that help me grow in my own understanding of the games and the Twins. I do support a more active moderation; I hope this never becomes the Strib comment section.

And thus reality is setting in - on the same day I changed the license plates on my car to Idaho and I have driven home that I won't be going to any Twins games this year.

I'm not that surprised that he's doing well. He showed some electric stuff last year. It just wasn't consistent. If he has managed to tighten up his control a little bit, he could be very effective. He could the be the "Diamond-type" surprise of 2013.

Welcome to the 21st century.

I don't know if we should sign him or not, or even if he would take league minimum. But if not, let's make sure it's for the right reasons. If we pass on him, let it be because we want to use the spot to develop younger talent or because we don't think he's a significant enough upgrade to what we have. Let's not fall prey to making personnel decisions based on what bulletin board posters are saying or because of PR fears or because of lingering resentment over a bad deal made two years ago.

Would he really be that much worse than some of the others who will come in from the bullpen this year? Granted, I wouldn't give him the closer role, but he wasn't the worst reliever we've had the past couple of years. My guess is he gets another chance somewhere this year after injuries start to mount up.

I was going to say, it's more like "Let's Make a Deal." Do you trade the money you know is in the envelope for what's behind door number two? If the money in the envelope is good enough, sometimes it's better to say no.

This is why I'm so glad that the Twins don't take huge gambles with pitchers coming off arm injuries... oh, wait.

It's a chance for those who are going to gripe about management to add something new to their arsenal. Give it a couple of months and we'll be back to complaining about this or that pitcher who hasn't been given a fair shot or about Gardy's batting order or some off--season signing (or lack of signing).

As I write this I am reading that the United States has crashed out of the World Baseball Classic (again) and will end up officially in 6th place – just below Cuba. I find myself of two minds about this. On the one hand, I share the understandable disappointment in the results. On the other, I find myself wondering if I should even care. After all, if MLB and the MLBPA don’t take this tournament seriously, why should I? Let me back up a bit and explain why I make that admittedly unfair statement (that MLB & MLBPA don’t care). Yes, the game has indeed gone international, and MLB-caliber players are now found in many different countries. Yes, a tournament of this nature is often decided by who is hottest and not who is best. Yes, it takes place in the spring before the US players are back in prime playing shape. Yet I still feel we should be doing better – after three tournaments, the US has never finished higher than fourth. For me, the answer is simple – we’re not playing our best team. Granted, the team is much improved compared to previous iterations, and participants such as Joe Mauer and Ryan Braun show that interest is picking up, but the US roster is still notable more for who is not present than who is. It reminds me of Olympic basketball. For years, we dominated internationally one of the games we created. Then we stopped getting the results because the quality of play internationally improved to the point where our collegiate athletes could no longer be competitive. It wasn’t until the Bird-Jordan-Johnson dream team that we regained our dominance. That’s where I think we are in the World Baseball Classic. If we’re going to take this tournament seriously, than it’s time to send out our A-team and not just those willing to play. MLB & MLBPA have said they want this to become like the soccer World Cup. That will never happen until every country puts out their best players, and not just the best players who choose to participate. In soccer, FIFA regulations require clubs to make players available for international duty. As a result, the top players virtually all participate in their quadrennial classic, and hence the interest around the world. Now, I recognize that the structure of baseball is different than the structure of association football. I know that players can not be compelled to play, nor do I think MLB & MLBPA should try. But unless more efforts are made to encourage/cajole/entice a higher level of participation from our best players, this tournament will never fulfill the dream it’s creators have for it. And until that happens, I just have to keep asking myself the question – should I even care?

As I write this I am reading that the United States has crashed out of the World Baseball Classic (again) and will end up officially in 6th place – just below Cuba. I find myself of two minds about this. On the one hand, I share the understandable disappointment in the results. On the other, I find myself wondering if I should even care. After all, if MLB and the MLBPA don’t take this tournament seriously, why should I? Let me back up a bit and explain why I make that admittedly unfair statement (that MLB & MLBPA don’t care). Yes, the game has indeed gone international, and MLB-caliber players are now found in many different countries. Yes, a tournament of this nature is often decided by who is hottest and not who is best. Yes, it takes place in the spring before the US players are back in prime playing shape. Yet I still feel we should be doing better – after three tournaments, the US has never finished higher than fourth. For me, the answer is simple – we’re not playing our best team. Granted, the team is much improved compared to previous iterations, and participants such as Joe Mauer and Ryan Braun show that interest is picking up, but the US roster is still notable more for who is not present than who is. It reminds me of Olympic basketball. For years, we dominated internationally one of the games we created. Then we stopped getting the results because the quality of play internationally improved to the point where our collegiate athletes could no longer be competitive. It wasn’t until the Bird-Jordan-Johnson dream team that we regained our dominance. That’s where I think we are in the World Baseball Classic. If we’re going to take this tournament seriously, than it’s time to send out our A-team and not just those willing to play. MLB & MLBPA have said they want this to become like the soccer World Cup. That will never happen until every country puts out their best players, and not just the best players who choose to participate. In soccer, FIFA regulations require clubs to make players available for international duty. As a result, the top players virtually all participate in their quadrennial classic, and hence the interest around the world. Now, I recognize that the structure of baseball is different than the structure of association football. I know that players can not be compelled to play, nor do I think MLB & MLBPA should try. But unless more efforts are made to encourage/cajole/entice a higher level of participation from our best players, this tournament will never fulfill the dream it’s creators have for it. And until that happens, I just have to keep asking myself the question – should I even care?

Let's all not forget Butera's true value - he can also come out of the bullpen and pitch when the Twins are getting shellacked and Gardy doesn't want to waste a reliever. (I'll let you all decide whether I'm being serious or speaking tongue-in-cheek).