IdahoPilgrim

Maybe I missed something in the news about this, but have the Twins or Fort Myers announced an extension to their PDC with the Fort Myers Miracle that expires this year? I know everybody assumes that they will, given that the stadium is in the same complex as the Twins' ST home, but...just to throw out a wild theory... What if the Twins have declined to extend it so far as a form of pressure on Lee County to not back out of their deal? Is it really that essential to the Twins to be linked with the Miracle? It won't affect their use of the stadium for ST if they are not, and while it is convenient to have the high-A affiliate right there where the player facilities are, it is not essential. All of the teams in the FSL are within a few hours drive. And by going with a new high-A affiliate (still in the FSL) they send the message that nothing should be taken for granted, including the Twins presence for ST. OK, admittedly this is a reach, but...the absence of news also has been interesting.

I doubt that will affect who ends up paired with Beloit. It helps them preserve their place in the system, but at the end of the day they'll still probably be stuck with whoever is left over - last one picked:o

So basically they just used the appeal process to postpone the suspension's effective date to the point where 40-man callups could negate its impact on the rotation/roster.

i have no problem picking him but have the twins ever picked a boras client in the draft? That is the other reason I wouldn't touch him.

I wouldn't touch Appel with a ten foot pole. I'd pick somebody who I knew was going to sign.

As I watched the game on TV last night (trying to put comparative images of The Towering Inferno out of my mind) I found myself wondering why I even loved this game so much. I even tried watching some basketball instead, but inevitably my finger kept moving toward the “last” button on the remote to check back on the game. Why? What is it about baseball that has me so ensnared, even when my home team is the Minnesota Twins? After reflection, here are five reasons I still love the game – even this year. There’s no clock. One of my pet peeves is sports that play games with the clock for competitive advantage. The final two minutes of a basketball game can take fifteen minutes to play. After the two-minute warning football changes its stripes completely and becomes a whole new animal. Hockey is better as you can’t stop the clock in the middle of the action with a time-out, but stalling tactics are still common. But in baseball, you can’t just run out the clock when you have a lead. You have to make that final play, get that last out, before the game can end. I remember watching last year’s World Series. Twice in game six Texas was one pitch away from winning it all. But they couldn’t get that last pitch, and St. Louis ended up winning the series. In baseball you have to finish what you started; there are no shortcuts. The relaxed pace of play. I know the trend these days is for more extreme games, with more speed, more contact, more “rad.” I guess I’m showing my age here, because I like the more deliberate gameplay of baseball. Do the dead times between pitches sometimes get heavy? To be sure. I do prefer a pitcher who cuts that down to a minimum and doesn’t dilly around before getting set up for the next pitch. But I like that you don’t have to keep your eye on the screen every second of every minute for fear of missing the action. It’s easier to pay attention and I prefer the more relaxed atmosphere. I love the sense of history that goes with the game. More than any other of the professional sports, baseball is tied to the history of America. The professional game has roots from before the Civil War and the current league system came into being in the waning days of Reconstruction. Since then baseball has been a part of the American scene. This was something that was driven home to me afresh when I visited Cooperstown this summer. It truly is the national pastime, even if football has usurped it in popularity in recent years. The gap between the “rich” and the “poor” is smaller than the other sports. No, I’m not talking economics here (and certainly not politics). I’m talking about the chances of a home fan seeing a win, regardless of who the home team is. Even the top teams in baseball struggle to win more than 60% of their games, and even the worst teams can usually manage to win 35-40% (Houston excepted, of course). Yes, you have stars, and some teams are perennially better than others, but even a Twins fan like myself can go to the ballpark with a reasonable hope of seeing a win. Hockey is also better in that way (which is part of why I like hockey too, and also because I played it), but in basketball and football if you have a bad team there just isn’t much incentive to go watch the team play. You can go for the atmosphere, for the whole game-day experience, but you don’t go for the game, which you know in advance will probably suck. More than any other sport, a baseball fan of even a bad team can enter the stadium with hope. There’s always tomorrow. I used to love watching football; my family had Vikings season tickets back when they were going to Super Bowls. Now, my interest is almost nonexistant. Why? Because I got tired, whenever the Vikings or Gophers lost, of being depressed for a whole freaking week. Life is too short for that. In baseball, even if you lose, there is always the (decent) chance that tomorrow will be different – you don’t have to wallow in it. Even in a bad season, you can look forward to the next day when maybe they’ll win and you’ll go to bed feeling satisfied rather than depressed. As a person of faith, I like hope. I prefer looking ahead to the good days to come than obsessing over past losses. In baseball I can do that more than the other spectator sports. That’s why I love baseball.

As I watched the game on TV last night (trying to put comparative images of The Towering Inferno out of my mind) I found myself wondering why I even loved this game so much. I even tried watching some basketball instead, but inevitably my finger kept moving toward the “last” button on the remote to check back on the game. Why? What is it about baseball that has me so ensnared, even when my home team is the Minnesota Twins? After reflection, here are five reasons I still love the game – even this year. There’s no clock. One of my pet peeves is sports that play games with the clock for competitive advantage. The final two minutes of a basketball game can take fifteen minutes to play. After the two-minute warning football changes its stripes completely and becomes a whole new animal. Hockey is better as you can’t stop the clock in the middle of the action with a time-out, but stalling tactics are still common. But in baseball, you can’t just run out the clock when you have a lead. You have to make that final play, get that last out, before the game can end. I remember watching last year’s World Series. Twice in game six Texas was one pitch away from winning it all. But they couldn’t get that last pitch, and St. Louis ended up winning the series. In baseball you have to finish what you started; there are no shortcuts. The relaxed pace of play. I know the trend these days is for more extreme games, with more speed, more contact, more “rad.” I guess I’m showing my age here, because I like the more deliberate gameplay of baseball. Do the dead times between pitches sometimes get heavy? To be sure. I do prefer a pitcher who cuts that down to a minimum and doesn’t dilly around before getting set up for the next pitch. But I like that you don’t have to keep your eye on the screen every second of every minute for fear of missing the action. It’s easier to pay attention and I prefer the more relaxed atmosphere. I love the sense of history that goes with the game. More than any other of the professional sports, baseball is tied to the history of America. The professional game has roots from before the Civil War and the current league system came into being in the waning days of Reconstruction. Since then baseball has been a part of the American scene. This was something that was driven home to me afresh when I visited Cooperstown this summer. It truly is the national pastime, even if football has usurped it in popularity in recent years. The gap between the “rich” and the “poor” is smaller than the other sports. No, I’m not talking economics here (and certainly not politics). I’m talking about the chances of a home fan seeing a win, regardless of who the home team is. Even the top teams in baseball struggle to win more than 60% of their games, and even the worst teams can usually manage to win 35-40% (Houston excepted, of course). Yes, you have stars, and some teams are perennially better than others, but even a Twins fan like myself can go to the ballpark with a reasonable hope of seeing a win. Hockey is also better in that way (which is part of why I like hockey too, and also because I played it), but in basketball and football if you have a bad team there just isn’t much incentive to go watch the team play. You can go for the atmosphere, for the whole game-day experience, but you don’t go for the game, which you know in advance will probably suck. More than any other sport, a baseball fan of even a bad team can enter the stadium with hope. There’s always tomorrow. I used to love watching football; my family had Vikings season tickets back when they were going to Super Bowls. Now, my interest is almost nonexistant. Why? Because I got tired, whenever the Vikings or Gophers lost, of being depressed for a whole freaking week. Life is too short for that. In baseball, even if you lose, there is always the (decent) chance that tomorrow will be different – you don’t have to wallow in it. Even in a bad season, you can look forward to the next day when maybe they’ll win and you’ll go to bed feeling satisfied rather than depressed. As a person of faith, I like hope. I prefer looking ahead to the good days to come than obsessing over past losses. In baseball I can do that more than the other spectator sports. That’s why I love baseball.

I read the interview in the Star-Tribune too, and to be fair to him that's not what he said. He is all too aware the pitching staff needs improvement, and he specifically said that trades, FA, and internal development will all have to be part of the picture. He is not ruling out resigning Pavano and Baker, but he is not ruling out much else either, with the exception of going after an "elite FA" because of contract concerns, and personally I agree with him on that.

Do you have some sort of objective evidence for this? I have yet to see any, one way or another.

I wonder if this all comes down to clubhouse chemistry. Who is the clubhouse leader? Who is the one who is going to say, "C'mon, boys, climb on my back and I'll carry you" and inspire the rest of the team.

Except that we've had stretches like this earlier in the season too. I agree that, in August when you are this far out, it's easy to lose the intensity, and the Twins have a tendency to do that, but it also feels like we are an engine running on bad gas - sometimes it runs smooth, and sometimes it sputters all too much.

Well, so much for that. The Lynx won in OT. Now I'm stuck back with this.

I did something I rarely do - I changed the channel. Normally I suffer in silence the whole nine innings, but right now I'm watching the Lynx on NBA-TV. And I don't really like basketball.

Why are we worried about playing time? The minor league season will be over. Even if they only play a handful of games and spend most of the time sitting on the bench, isn't that better than sitting on the couch at home? I don't know if the Twins will do this, but they could work them into the lineup to make it worthwhile - maybe 2-3 slots in the lineup per game. I wouldn't play more than that - most of the people in the stands are paying to see Mauer, Morneau & Span, not Parmelee, Escobar & Colabello, but they would still get some major league at-bats.

Nice summary. I guess the one question I really have is, if there is a genuine interest in moving a Single-A team to St. Paul, which one would it be? You have to have a willing seller, so if Beloit wants they can keep their club and have a guaranteed affiliation with somebody as long as they want. That's of course if their facilities are considered suitable enough for the Midwest League. Is that standard changing? Are Beloit's facilities so under par that organized basebal would let they team be ejected from the Midwest league and a new franchise awarded? And are there any other franchises for sale that could be moved? Any thoughts?

And Diamond really didn't mean to throw at Hamilton...

So what kind of fan am I? When I was in Fort Myers that was one of the season-long advertising gimmicks they were touting – the varied nature of those who attend ballgames. Yesterday, attending my first Twins game since my minor league trip (I love watching a pitching duel!), I found myself thinking back to the various minor league parks I was at and comparing them to the relative cathedral that is Target Field. I also found myself thinking about who had attended those games, and who I saw around me last night. I have never been a big fan of “there are two types of people...” mantras, but in this case it seems appropriate. On the one hand there are those for whom the game itself actually matters, whose primary purpose in attending is to watch and follow a game of baseball. There are various subgroups they divide into, which I will touch on later, but for them the game itself is the center of the experience. Then there is the other segment for which the game may be interesting but they are there more for the whole package, on-field and off-field. This includes the family outings with kids (most of whom have lost interest in the game by the fourth inning but still enjoy going to the park); it includes those who focus as much or more on the culinary options than upon the construction of the lineup; it includes those who are there for special events or group outings, or who are attending their first game with a group of their friends. Personally I tend to fall into the first group – when I go to a baseball game, I want to focus on the baseball (which is part of why I like keeping score so much – it keeps me focused on the action on the field). I suspect, however, that I am in the minority on most nights. Even in that first group I see some differentiation, however. There are those who are schooled in the game, most of whom have played the game itself. These are they who know the nuances of how the game is played, who recognize the variations in where the fielders station themselves based on situation, who can tell a “good at-bat” from a “bad at-bat,” and who avidly watch, not just the pitch, but the pitch location and type, watching a gameplan unfold for each hitter. For the rest of us (and I include myself in this) we simply watch to see what happens, much as we watch the Vikings, enjoying the action but not really seeing the defensive shifts and offensive strategies or recognizing the meaning of the substitutions. One of my fellow participants on this site has a signature line “Baseball is like church; many attend but few understand.” Being in the “church business” myself I recognize how true this is in reference to religion, and I accept that in baseball I am one of the multitudes who attends but doesn’t truly see what it is I am seeing. Some days I think it would be neat to learn what it is I am missing, to become a true student; other days I am happy where I am at, just watching the action unfold. There is also another differentiation among those who attend for the game itself, or among those who are fans in any sense. There are those for whom the driving goal is to win championships, to “win silverware” as they say overseas. For this group, everything should be done with this in mind. If that means gutting a team for young prospects to increase the odds of success three years down the line, then the question is “why haven’t we done that yet?” Another group, and I put myself in this category, doesn’t go to the ballpark with hopes and dreams for 2015; we want to see a good game tonight. Competitiveness, even in a down year, is something we value. That’s not to say I don’t dream of another World Series win as much as the next; I would love to see it happen. But what is more important to me is that, going to the ballpark, I have a reasonable chance of watching a Twins win, and that it be a well-played game regardless. So where is all of this going? Just with the realization that all of these various types of fans have to be part of the equation. No one fan type is more or less worthy; no one group is right, and no one group is wrong. The job of the Twins (and any organization that plays a spectator sport) is to find ways to speak to all of the above. It’s important to put a quality product on the field; it is also important to pay attention to the rest of the game-day experience (that’s why I’m not as cynical as some when the Twins spend promotional effort highlighting a new culinary option). Certainly any organization wants to win championship, but at the same time there have to be players on the field who can excite the crowd today, not just three years from now. Is this going to create tension among the fanbase? Inevitably. Do you trade Morneau for prospects or keep a crowd favorite even if he is on the wrong-side of the career bell curve? Do you spend your money fixing the rotation or sprucing up the ballpark? The challenge is to do both, to find the right balance, to find a way to simultaneously appeal to both the purists and to those who just want to have a fun night at the ballpark. Because both matter.

So what kind of fan am I? When I was in Fort Myers that was one of the season-long advertising gimmicks they were touting – the varied nature of those who attend ballgames. Yesterday, attending my first Twins game since my minor league trip (I love watching a pitching duel!), I found myself thinking back to the various minor league parks I was at and comparing them to the relative cathedral that is Target Field. I also found myself thinking about who had attended those games, and who I saw around me last night. I have never been a big fan of “there are two types of people...” mantras, but in this case it seems appropriate. On the one hand there are those for whom the game itself actually matters, whose primary purpose in attending is to watch and follow a game of baseball. There are various subgroups they divide into, which I will touch on later, but for them the game itself is the center of the experience. Then there is the other segment for which the game may be interesting but they are there more for the whole package, on-field and off-field. This includes the family outings with kids (most of whom have lost interest in the game by the fourth inning but still enjoy going to the park); it includes those who focus as much or more on the culinary options than upon the construction of the lineup; it includes those who are there for special events or group outings, or who are attending their first game with a group of their friends. Personally I tend to fall into the first group – when I go to a baseball game, I want to focus on the baseball (which is part of why I like keeping score so much – it keeps me focused on the action on the field). I suspect, however, that I am in the minority on most nights. Even in that first group I see some differentiation, however. There are those who are schooled in the game, most of whom have played the game itself. These are they who know the nuances of how the game is played, who recognize the variations in where the fielders station themselves based on situation, who can tell a “good at-bat” from a “bad at-bat,” and who avidly watch, not just the pitch, but the pitch location and type, watching a gameplan unfold for each hitter. For the rest of us (and I include myself in this) we simply watch to see what happens, much as we watch the Vikings, enjoying the action but not really seeing the defensive shifts and offensive strategies or recognizing the meaning of the substitutions. One of my fellow participants on this site has a signature line “Baseball is like church; many attend but few understand.” Being in the “church business” myself I recognize how true this is in reference to religion, and I accept that in baseball I am one of the multitudes who attends but doesn’t truly see what it is I am seeing. Some days I think it would be neat to learn what it is I am missing, to become a true student; other days I am happy where I am at, just watching the action unfold. There is also another differentiation among those who attend for the game itself, or among those who are fans in any sense. There are those for whom the driving goal is to win championships, to “win silverware” as they say overseas. For this group, everything should be done with this in mind. If that means gutting a team for young prospects to increase the odds of success three years down the line, then the question is “why haven’t we done that yet?” Another group, and I put myself in this category, doesn’t go to the ballpark with hopes and dreams for 2015; we want to see a good game tonight. Competitiveness, even in a down year, is something we value. That’s not to say I don’t dream of another World Series win as much as the next; I would love to see it happen. But what is more important to me is that, going to the ballpark, I have a reasonable chance of watching a Twins win, and that it be a well-played game regardless. So where is all of this going? Just with the realization that all of these various types of fans have to be part of the equation. No one fan type is more or less worthy; no one group is right, and no one group is wrong. The job of the Twins (and any organization that plays a spectator sport) is to find ways to speak to all of the above. It’s important to put a quality product on the field; it is also important to pay attention to the rest of the game-day experience (that’s why I’m not as cynical as some when the Twins spend promotional effort highlighting a new culinary option). Certainly any organization wants to win championship, but at the same time there have to be players on the field who can excite the crowd today, not just three years from now. Is this going to create tension among the fanbase? Inevitably. Do you trade Morneau for prospects or keep a crowd favorite even if he is on the wrong-side of the career bell curve? Do you spend your money fixing the rotation or sprucing up the ballpark? The challenge is to do both, to find the right balance, to find a way to simultaneously appeal to both the purists and to those who just want to have a fun night at the ballpark. Because both matter.

You know, it would be worth it to call him up just to end this freaking debate once and for all. I am skeptical of AAA numbers (think Hendriks, Parmelee) and probably trust the organization's ability to evaluate talent more than most on this site, but this has been a topic of discussion for over three months now. The squeaky wheel gets the grease. If he does well, great! If he sucks, this time release him. Either way the debate is over (unless he is marginally competent, in which case we can do this again next year). I do disagree, though, with the final thought expressed in the article. I don't buy the idea that the Twins are afraid they'll be proven wrong. My guess is that they genuinely don't believe Slama has the stuff to transition from Triple-A to MLB. They may be wrong in that assertion, but I don't buy the idea that they're just trying to avoid embarassment.

Anderlin Mejia has been moved from GCL to Fort Myers Miracle, although to date he hasn't played yet.

This is basically the whole moneyball argument again - what should we trust more, raw statistics or evaluation by those who (theoretically) have the experience and knowledge of the game to "separate the wheat from the chaff." Perhaps neither is infallible, and both have to be involved. I fully admit that sometimes raw numbers can force us to face unpleasant truths about ourselves or our abilities (I am made woefully aware of this every time I step on the bathroom scale:)), but statistics themselves also can be deceptive, and I would never make a decision solely on them.

Wait! Is that a break in the clouds? A ray of light shines down, with the promise of better times to come. Suddenly the world feels a little better.

Did you get that from the Department of Redundancy Department?

I'm not opposed to giving him a chance - at this point, why not? I do believe, though, that statistics can be misleading. Hendriks has great stats in AAA and has not been able to perform in MLB. Parmelee has great stats in AAA, but let's not forget he started the season with the big club and was sent down for non-performance. I believe both will be back, but it does show that there is a gap between AAA performance and MLB performance. Somehow that has to be evaluated, and some will bridge that gap and some won't, and I'll leave it to others better trained than I to evalute which camp each players falls into.

Are you deducting points for base-running mistakes? I've seen him make several this year.