old nurse

Statistically wise, Suzuki offers the better chance for winning than Pinto right now. I did not in any way say what you are saying I said. By resigning Suzuki to a contract, Suzuki is the short term future.

Gardenhire is happy to have players who pull for each other. I guess it is my bad to think that implied there were players here who did not and those players were moved out. It might not be just this year's players, but other season's players he was referring to as well as this season's. I don't know if they were players Gardenhire wanted in the system or not. Maybe Kubel and Bartlet were the pull for each other kind of guy Gardenhire wanted. Unfortunately their production determined that you have to pull your own weight as well as pull for the other guy.

No trade scenarios are complete without including a proposal for Swarzak

Just curious, how do you advocate to make people be who they are not? How do you make a player pull for other players? You are saying that Gardenhire should have been able to make someone a team player. I have worked with some real doozies that management tried to change but couldn't. It should be praise that management has moved these people out of the system.

Not playing Pinto in games that matter goes back to trying to win the game. Playing teams that are in playoff contention it is the right thing to do.

Reality is there was only one pitcher signed, Hughes, that contributed. At some point in time the fans will know what happened to Nolasco's elbow. If you can't prevent runs you need to have a record breaking offense to win. When older players also do not contribute as much as they once did, a franchise can slide back.

Do fans really come out or do not come out depending on who the manager is? The novelty of a new manager will wear off quickly with each game under .500, and much quicker for every game with a win percentage under .450. Other than the NFL, the Twin Cities supports winners and stays away when the team loses. Did attendance change when Goryl then Gardner took over? no. The do no nothing claim is accurate only as to how it reflects on the makeup of the roster. They need to sign or trade for a charismatic player to lead the team if one is not readily appearant from the group of up and coming players. They probably need to sign a top of rotation pitcher. That will get fans exited. A team ERA close to league average would lead to the fans being exited. A team staff ERA still at 5.50 or more and a new manager won't do much for the fan where it matters to Twin's officials. That is paying fans in seats in the restraunts and bars in Target Field. If the Royals are a barometer, it is going to take division titles to get back fans in droves. If the view that seasons of players are wasted because there wasn't a world series championship is the prevalent one then the team is close to dead. History is littered with good groups of players on a team that do not make it to win a the World Series. As much as some poeple chant for leadership change with the Twins, I don't think it will happen on the manager level unless Ryan thinks there is someone who can do the job better. Pohlad is not going to fire Ryan and company unless he figures there is someone out there that can do the job better. Changing the GM does not change the trajectory of the franchise quickly except for Dan Duquette. The teams that have risen up in the standings have had the same GM through a lean time

My origional response probably should have been what do you expect to happen with a different manager with this group of players. Silly me thought the reason to change the manager was to improve the team. Improvements generally are reflected in the w/l column with a lot more under the w column than there was before.The position of manager is not an irrelevant one. It is reduced to such when you fire someone as a symbolic gesture. Again, to use the question, if the manager is irrelevant, what do you care if he is there or not. If the manager is relevant then it should show in w/l. Historically, bad teams are bad no matter who manages them. Bad players are bad players. There were teams that improved after firing a manager. They were high caliber teams. Good players have played better with better managers. Do you believe the Twins have a roster full of good players and what is holding them back is Gardenhire? Do you think the S outfield of Shaffer, Santana, and Somebody else is going to carry you to the chase for the playoffs, much less carry you through the playoffs?

1. Please find anywhere in this thread where I said Anderson needs to be retained. 2 They had 1 great pitcher, 1 good. Recent WS loser pitching staffs and 2006 Twins. Which staff do you want in a playoff series? Wainright, Wacha, Lynn Verlander, Sanchez, Scherzer Wilson, Holland, Harrison or Santana, Radke, Bonser Santana had to be near perfect when the bats choked. He couldn't do it by himself. Radke was good, but not great. When the Twins won in Oakland Radke was great. By 2006 there was nothing left.

Terry Ryan is soon to be 61. Not 101. He could be around as GM for a lot more years.

Whatever baseball was played by the Twins from 2002-2010 was totally meaningless then? When you look at playoff winning teams and the starting pitching staffs of the Twins I do not see anything that would match up. The teams appeared to be buiilt to win in the regular season, not short season. Perhaps one of the reasons there has been a trade Duensing theme is the 2 playoff starts, and losses.

Go look at the number of Miracle players in Seth's articles. IIRC many of them are players that were not as highly thought of in the begining of the year as they are now. Something right is going on there

Where did that come from? Fire someone for cause not as a symbolic gestures. Slick Gardner seemed clueless at times. When they hired Ray Miller he was suposed to be the next genius from the line of Earl Weaver. For a lot of reasons that did not work. They promoted Kelly. In the late 90's was Kelly any worse of a manager than from 87-92? 2 managers fired for cause, one was kept as teams lost because he wasn't the problem.

Your examples of managers replaced were managers who proved they could not win. Gardenhire has won when he has had the players, lost when he hasn't

Symbolic gestures are meaningless and empty. Fire somebody for what? Symbolism? Hard to argue that one.

Answer how do you find even middle of the road pitchers? How do you predict injuries? How do you predict development curves for your minor league players? How does changing a manager win more games with the same group of players?

Changing managers without changing the core group of players in any sport rarely makes the team any better. The transition from Kelly to Gardenhire is one of the few examples I can remember where the only major change in the team was the manager and the pitching coach

Elite defense makes very good pitching better in the case of KC.

Yet there would be a few thousand extra fans come because it is cheap beer night.

Ron Washington said he resigned for personal reasons. It has no effect on his future if he was fired or resigned. He does lose money by quitting. I will have take his word for it on why he is quitting and hope for the best foe him.

All in fun,the following players say hi Anybody who pitched other than Hughes, Gibson or Deduno. Also saying hello are Mauer, Plouffe, Parmalee, Fryer, Kubel, Bartlett ..... Many comments for the FO (really Ryan) are not made so much out of loyalty but as a reaction to something that is, for the lack of a better word ,unreasonable or untenable.

Very true, so why the angst over Bernier not Polanco. Advanced baseball skills are not a skill that is learned by watching.. Sanatana should be getting the reps a ss, Hicks in the OF. Seth called it troling, I call it making a mountain out of nothing.

Polanco would more than likely be on a reserve list for a Dominican team thus not eligible for AFL. I fail to see how sitting on the bench behind Santana would help him. Let him have a month off. He will get time to play in the winter league. The Twins would hope at SS rather than 2b.

I gave you an incomplete range. Johan wasn't the lowest, Poson wasn't quit the highest. I also gave you from a list looking at pitchers who threw 1000 inings. If you look at this year at pitcher who threw at least 30 innings, Kevin Slowey was up at .387 Tony Sipp was low at .192 In looking sttas, if your BABIP is high as a pitcher chances are it is not poor luck. Remember Bruce Chen of .370 BABIP? Royals cut him after the Twins used him for batting practice.

My point was pitchers have some control in BABIP. http://www.fangraphs.com/community/proejcting-babip-using-batted-ball-data/ http://www.baseballprospectus.com/article.php?articleid=2617 In terms of more balls in play=worse results, the correlation between runs scored and strikeouts is .50. There are other factors involved beyond the stikeout. For the same k rate in the group o pitchers with a k rate of .1-.2, the graph becomes fairly blob like. Also notice how few pitchers there are at the top of the k/pa line. To answer the OP's question on why hitters are not afraid to strike out. An out is an out. Someone must have done a litle research and found the odds of getting a hit were higher if you swung your normal swing versus shortning up. It could also be hitting for most might be hard enough for one swing that trying to devlop a second might mess with the first. Pure speculation on my part.