PseudoSABR

Fair. 'Went' to the media, was the wrong verb. That Doug M. revealed how he felt with such disregard to his past employer's reputation and his own prospects of future employment nonetheless shows significant liability, no? The point is even had Doug M. had significant grievance, he played his hand poorly (though clearly he gained some traction with some Twins fans).

Maybe it's just me, but I would preferred to be fired by a person whom I had an actual relationship with, not some figure head whom I've maybe spoke once or twice. Unfortunately, I see a lot of confirmation bias in this thread: those who are cynical of the new regime will find fault in the decision not to inform Dougie M. personally; those who grant the new regime some leeway see appropriate behavior. One of the nice things about a message board is we have a record of everyone's stances--it's no surprise who has an ax to grind. That Dougie M. went to the media so quickly and egregiously speaks to his liability and potential for insubordination. I understand that he was upset, but as professional, he should realize that he's auditioning for his next job in the same moment as he's criticizing his former employer. I imagine Heyman's article/quotes arise from such a realization. Frankly, it's not hard for me to imagine that Dougie M. would stray often from protocol and run with his own take on things. That's just unacceptable, whatever his supposed success. (Let's face it, many of the position players have had to make significant adjustments to succeed at the ML level; in spite of how much they may like him, his job is not to win games but to develop players.) One more thing, how much did he mean to the organization. He really wasn't that great of player (two whole years at over .800 OPS , and wasn't that long tenured--his personality, and his willingness to bring the spotlight to his family (or their willingness to seek it) always seem self-serving and allowed for the narrative that he was this all-time player deserving of special treatment.

Weird. 3.5 game lead with 8 to go. Twins will make the playoffs (er, one game wild card thingy), baring the very unlikely. Who'd a thought?

Let's not talk about Castro, because he's not the problem, and in fact, he's part of the solution to the problem, which is pitching. The Twins obviously can live with a .700 OPS catcher who provides value to the pitching the staff. (An aside: evidently ESPN has their own WAR metric, because they have Castro at 2.3 good for 11th in all baseball).

I don't know that we should be giving Trump or his administration credit for the Hurricane response. FEMA is an agency with I believe only two political appointments (the head confirmed in June, and the Deputy was confirmed on Sept. 14th), who probably didn't have time to gut the agency (or use its funding to take a private jet tour). As far as optics, I thought Trump and FLOTUS pretty much flubbed the Texas visit. Just because a government response to a given phenomenon wasn't a complete and utter disaster does not mean that Trump is somehow worthy of praise. Sadly, that seems to be the new standard, relative to the general competence of Trump's government.

Because Twins

Another reason to avoid DHing Sano.

Your cynicism is fair. But if the facts add up to treason, I don't think ignorance/news-fatigue will overcome the majority.

I think the leaks are intentional. The only real way to remove the president is by impeachment which is a political mechanism requiring the will of the people (and you touch on this). The slow drip keeps the Russia story in the news, and helps ensure public will when the time does come.

I checked it out. I enjoyed it more than I thought I would; made me laugh, but isn't so silly that the premise/world broke down.

what if mikecgrimes has been satirical this entire time http://s2.quickmeme.com/img/33/33f5057b7903f753e1ee3bd7b5c558184825ca678b9f12f4f1f0688de530147e.jpg

Here's Sullivan's sentence: "I don't know what the Twins have done to him, but it's not great." That sentence makes the Twins the subject of "doing" something "not great" to "him." Your post reminds me of the old defense lawyer trick, which claims "the victim was shot" rather than "someone (the defendant?) shot the victim." Passive voice tends to write agency right out of the English language. Bad things were done, but by whom, who can say. I just don't think that's a typo or word omission. Maybe he was joking, or being hasty with his reasoning, but what he wrote says what it says. I really like Jeff Sullivan's writing and analysis, but I think--like a lot of analytical writers--shaking the (deserved) Twins-bias caused by the Terry Ryan Front Office is difficult despite the regime-change, and probably manifests in things like these chats.

Poorly phrased. I'm suggesting that the runners should be allowed outside the basepaths, if the defense can position itself where it wants. Not directly analogous, but it seems hamfisted to place arbitrary limitations on runners that helps the defense, and placing no limitation on where defenders may position themselves.

If the defense can position anywhere it wants, why not allow the runners the same kind of latitude?

It's speculative--and hence an opinion--that it's due to some level of incompetence and hence should affect how you judge them going forward // how much leeway you're willing to give. Again, I don't like they didn't acquire anyone, but I'm going to assume it's for legitimate reasons, and not incompetence, until presented with some positive fact that suggests otherwise. Also if making-moves is proof-positive of competence, the Mariners should have all the wins....

I don't know how what I'm saying is opinion and what you're saying is fact. We actually don't know to what extent they inquired about Verlander. We actually don't know to what extent they pursued other players. I just don't think the basis of judging the new FO should be: well that's not what I would have done at the deadline. I, too, wish they would have acquired help, but I'm willing to wager it was due to legitimate reasons* and not mere incompetence. I'll need some actual proof of incompetence before I put the new FO in a hole, and take away the benefit of the doubt. *Perhaps among those legitimate reasons, could be: the FO believes Meija and other rostered players are better bets to contribute, esp. given the cost; the FO believes the players requested in trades are too valuable for furture seasons when the FO believes the team will have an even better chance of succeeding; the FO tried in earnest to acquire Verlander (among others) but were simply outbid; etc. Yes, that's speculative. But that the Twins didn't acquire Verlander (or their weren't media reports of their pursuit) is the fact that you are hanging your hat on, pardon me if I believe your sombrero will fall to the ground. (Also pardon the cheeky tone, it's because I know and love you Chief!)

Coming after that run differential. I like it.

I guess if you limit your evaluation to making marque trades regardless of what was actually obtainable and ignore that they did acquire Garcia (before trading him shortly after), I guess that's a big hole. But again, you're ignoring quite a bit that the new FO has a hand in: the team is winning, they rebuilt a coaching staff that has made huge strides with a number of players, they drafted well, promoted those players aggressively, seem to have a plan in general with all of the prospects, have overhauled the analytical department, and seemingly have been applying analytics in-game and through coaching. But they didn't go out and get Verlander, so no more benefit of the doubt. Talk about near-unreachable expectations. (And I was all about trying to get Verlander, I believe it wasn't possible, and that the other available players aren't probably any better than Meija or Santiago down the stretch).

Maybe re-title the thread "Television" or something not so dated....

I'm not sure it's really anything new, if we can equate the government delegitimatizing with banning the freepress, and using state-run press to spread propaganda. It's textbook fascism, no? In any case, I think Foxnews and Clear Channel radio, etc., certainly paved the way for Trump et al.'s message.

With Verlander nixing the deal the Astros, hard to imagine he would have come to the Twins. But this is exactly the kind of move the Twins should be looking to make. I wish the Diamondbacks weren't competitive, because I'm sure Grienke could be had with them eating quite a bit of salary. Rumored deal: Edit: deal went through....for the above haul So much for Verlander having no trade value....

I thought the blue fire knocking down the wall was a bit CGI-cheesy (CGIeesy?), it made the prior episode to capture the wight all the more stupid. That said, I found the rest of the plot satisfying. And was very glad of the outcome in Winterfell, as I was having trouble buying Stark-sister-battle. I do think the writes wrote Littlefinger's plot into a corner a bit, and while it was great to see him go down, he really didn't seem to be climbing that chaos ladder all that successfully. I still think the actor/Balish makes an appearance next season via our favorite faceless man. I do agree, that show has diverted from George RR Martin's willingness to off the favorite characters. Minor heroes have died, and only the major character is Balish (who seemed less consequential as the show went on). Really proud of Jaime for turning his back on Cersi--I thought he was goner for a few clicks. If this was Martin's story, I think Jaime may have met with the Mountain's blade in that scene. This was a fine season, a lot of fan-service, but I do worry how they'll pull off the finale, now three seasons divorced from the books/Martin's guiding hand.

Because that would never be the outcome of trade-waiver claim. Trade-waivers are revocable. A team would who claimed Verlander would still need to negotiate with the Tigers to ensure they would not pull Verlander back. Putting a claim on Verlander is risky because there's no market at work, and the Tigers can be steadfast in their unreasonableness and the possibility of retaining Verlander is simply lost. Both the Tigers and teams pursuing Verlander probably believe they would have more leverage if Verlander were to clear trade-waivers. Tigers can create a bidding war as the deadline approaches; teams pursuing hope the Tigers will eat more and more money. ( I think there's even more strategy at play here, but I'm not sure of the precise rules, which may limit the number of claims a team can make, and hence make the timing of putting a player on waivers a tactic the Tigers could exploit. Can someone smarter/better-informed shed light?)

The second half growth of Polanco, Buxton and even Rosario are especially encouraging. Really glad to see they can win without Sano in the lineup.

Really rewarding to see that offensive outburst from our young core, especially at home. I was stuck with the Diamondback's broadcast, and the announcers were really impressed by our young hitters.