PseudoSABR

I'll pick the wildcard, Kubel.

That's totally bunk. Rookies begin typically begin 23-25, with Twins being the most conservative, so add an extra year of development. As this article shows the prime age for baseball players is anywhere between 27 and 31. Add in the context of injury and a college player, well, Gibson is hardly in his "prime." As you say, the data is out there. Are you actually doing the research? Or just looking for what confirms your assumptions? I don't mean to be harsh, but as far as digging through the numbers, you're not exactly proving your diligence.

Bingo's at five, everyone.

Maybe, maybe not. Miller doesn't have much of track record yet. And if his defense isn't elite, I don't understand why we'd bother.

I think those are great targets. Let's hope Willingham explodes this year, and the Dbacks are hungry for some RHed pop at the deadline.

Not sure what kind of interview. Lots of how did you handle difficult situations and failures type of stuff. It seemed pretty standard fare.

More, I don't think the Twins should settle for anything less than a first-class defender at SS.

Over at baseball reference, Florimon actually had the higher WAR. Go figure. I just don't see either as a significant upgrade. We'd have to give up someone like Hicks (if his value didn't suck now). Who would you be willing to give up?

Let's hope he doesn't follow Parmalee's path...different players, but similar kind of hope after break out AA/AAA and enormous September.

Neither player would give us a large enough upgrade to be worth what the Ms are asking. If they trade Miller, I doubt they go with Franklin at SS, more likely they think they can get Drew.

That's the reason I shared it!

I can fly in my dreams, guys. Sorry your bed life is so boring. It's mutual insurance, so it's owned by the policy holders, which are also the employees, so the testing does make some sense.

Well, I think I killed it, thanks for all your help. So I'll share and maybe it will be helpful to someone else. I came really prepared and organized, even though I was working with a short time frame. I wanted to show them I was serious. I bought a leather bound three ring binder, and some plastic sheets to hold the handouts without hole punching them, made four copies of everything (I was told there would only be two people here), and tabbed dividers to stay organized. I had handouts that evidenced my past experience (lesson plans, assignments, student evaluations etc.) that lent itself to the corporate world. I made mock documents anticipating the kind the materials they would need (in my case, on 'first class customer service' 'pitfalls of trainings' 'successful mentoring'). I also had my personal statement for law school, to show that I intended to leave academia, which also told my story and showed my ability to write in prose. I was overdressed, but quickly asked to take my jacket off, and tried to set tempo; I volunteered handouts only as it seemed organic to our conversation. I basically led the conversation for the first 20 to 25 minutes. I was lucky both interviewers were very friendly. They asked the standard questions about pitfalls and stresses and mistakes. I had answers vaguely prepared, but I found myself moving in different directions. One question I thought I killed was a cheesy, 'what superpower would i pick': I said this, "I don't want to sound glib, but I wouldn't want a superpower. Superheros are ostracized, cast off to bat caves and the north pole. I want to be part of community, I want to belong. I don't need any special feature to rise above the rest." I had been collecting questions to ask them for over a week, but a few in particular they had never heard before and left them impressed. 1) What is the most prevalent factor in why people fail in your company? 2) What is one thing you could change about the culture of your company? 3) Tell me about an employee who has moved on from this company to greater horizons or about someone who worked themselves up from a low responsibility job? It was about an hour and half affair, and they were both earnest, friendly people. I still have some hurdles, and as I left, they gave me the standard "We're still reviewing other applicants, so we'll be in touch," but it felt like lip service. I hadn't actually filled out an application, so they told me that was the next step, which also includes a background and drug test waiver (ugh?).

Thanks everyone, off I go. I feel prepared and not nervous, but I didn't sleep well at all. Up at 5am, oi. So it goes.

So you're waiving Worley and Deduno? How do you see that playing out?

I think you're reading far, far too much into it. If Gardy was inclined to put Barty in the doghouse before ST, he wouldn't have accepted the invite, nor would the Twins have signed him.

How cool that he actually addressed the inquiry. Cool.

Will you be making Spring Reports this year? My memory is tricky guy, but I recall you doing such for DTFC back in the day; and your reports were always more meaty than anything the media attempted.

Well, if there was incentive for the Twins to bite on Drew, they just got it.

Thanks for the advice guys. Keep it coming if others have anything to offer.

The funny thing is that Academia asked me to sell out my principles more than any other job I've had. And I just couldn't do it, because well, my art (writing) was too important. It's a culture of crank-turning and nepotism. It took me a long time to realize it, but we're all sellouts. There are few if any way to make money without compromising your principles and participating in an oppressive, inequitable economy. My plan of course, is to gain experience, than work at a corporation that sells something I find ethically okay.

If Willingham's health and production are that of 2012, the Twins should absolutely extend him. I imagine the designated hitter role will really help Josh's health this season, or so I hope.

Der. I don't know why I thought it was out. I guess I was thinking of their Twins Top 10.

These things usually work themselves out, as it's hard to imagine on the pitchers that are out of options and those guaranteed a roster spot will stay healthy.

I have a interview for an Insurance company tomorrow, and I wonder if anyone has advice for me. I've been Academics for a decade, but I've decided to leave (for a variety of complex reasons). I've been applying to Law Schools, and in the meantime, I adjunct and wait tables. Last week a Human Resources VP sat at one of my tables and invited me to take a look at an opening for a Training Specialist. After a couple emails and a phone conversation (that I guess was really an interview), I'm going to their facilities tomorrow. I've never been had an interview in a corporate culture, and I'm trying to solicit as much advice I can. What should I wear? What are some pitfalls?