PseudoSABR

So a pitcher like Saunders is the difference between a C (or a perhaps a D, as you suggest) and an A for you, RP? I still think you're* making mountains out of molehills in terms of TR's offseason mistakes. *like so many are

GM Speak: We're gonna suck, and I hope to get good value on some assets, but we'll see.

The reason you don't trade Willingham is he was built for Target Field (well, given last year, er), he's cheap, and he could be your future DH. TR is responding to a direct question about media response to his moves, I seriously doubt he'd trade fan response for future value.

In my view, such notions still fall under the umbrella of punting; but to extend your point further, I think the Twins wanted to see what they had in their veterans too; Deduno, Walters, De Vries, the bullpen guys, Morneau, Willingham--the idea isn't just to establish trade value, but their might be value here worth keeping around. The young guys: Hicks, Arcia and Gibson benefit from reps, but guys like Florimon, Escobar, Parmelee, Plouffe, Diamond are given chances to prove their worth, where the Twins could have benefited--in the short term--from FA replacements, but really diminish their evaluation of their future assets. The evaluation of the GM is pretty complex, and really, that our minor league system (and it's deep, too) is perhaps the best in baseball is being underplayed throughout this thread. That's not an accident, guys.

This. Though, I'd hold onto Perkins unless we're blown away with an offer, every other bullpen arm should be available for anything that might have future value. The FO has demonstrated a consistent skill in identify arms to fill out the bullpen, but elite end of the game arms (like Perkins and Nathan) should be coveted.

My point is it's difficult to judge his job, because his work has not come to fruition, punting the season might be part of that process, we'll see. It's too bad Willingham, Morneau, etc, haven't established more trade value. Honestly, if the Twins were any better they'd be in the almost competitive nexus of blunder, that leads the Twins to doing nothing.

If the Twins are willing to take some risks, there's some interesting names out there like Lincecum, Nolasco, Josh Johnson, Volquez. Adding one or two of these guys for incentive laden, short term contracts could be smart, and the kind of risk I hope they take. Nolasco will probably get Edwin Jackson money, though.

Right. Dempster or Saunders (who the Twins were supposedly in on) would be valuable assets (though I'm not sure why Dempster would want to play here, with how poorly we've played and his age even if we did overpay him). But Ryan and his staff simply took different risks, some of them worked out (KC), many have not (Harden, Pelfry, Worley). Largely, TR punted this season from the beginning, and I really hope that this coming offseason, with the emergence of Sano, Rosario, Buxton, Meyers looming, we'll see the Twins spend more boldly in the offseason. I'll be pissed if the Twins flounder again next offseaon, I just can't get too worked up about this past offseason, with all the young talent TR (and BS) have acquired over the past several years.

Sounds good in theory, but when we started dropping actual names, things get a bit hazy. Everyone's a great arm-chair GM in the abstract.

I don't think it makes a lot sense to divide the grades for majors and minors, as with the Revere and Span trades diminish one to improve the other. Judging this past offseason, I think is tricky. I don't think there was much (beyond signing Sanchez or Grienke) that would have really improved the club. I'm curious what TR could have done to earn an A?

Letting your best players dog-it probably doesn't do much to help you win.

My bad, quick and dirty. The actual statutes are here, if anyone wants to wade through them. I don't think that's clear at all. We'll see what the jury thinks.

I dispute the notion that Zimmerman was getting his ass kicked; I think there was scuffle and confrontation where Martin ended up on top. Zimmerman had time and self-awareness to aim at Martin and shoot him in the heart; instead of, say, pistol whipping him. Where I'm seeing intent is that Zimmerman had the thinnest of thresholds to use deadly force. And I think your distinction between manslaughter and second degree murder isn't quite correct. This is copied from wikipedia. Second degree murder is a murder that is not premeditated or planned in advance.[6] Voluntary manslaughter (often referred to as third degree murder) sometimes called a "Heat of Passion" murder, is any intentional killing that involved no prior intent to kill, and which was committed under such circumstances that would "cause a reasonable person to become emotionally or mentally disturbed." Both this and second degree murder are committed on the spot, but the two differ in the magnitude of the circumstances surrounding the crime. For example, a bar fight that results in death would ordinarily constitute second degree murder. If that same bar fight stemmed from a discovery of infidelity, however, it may be mitigated to voluntary manslaughter.[7]

Levi, I don't really take dispute with your version of what may have happened, for me though, Zimmerman was eager to kill someone whom he thought was a criminal, and he was seeking to put himself in a situation where such actions would be justified, knowing that we have to be cynical about the notion of 'self defense' and have a much higher threshold for it. Maybe that's not he letter of the law, but it provides context for me that make it murder and not an accidental death. Zimmerman didn't simply get in over his head, he was seeking danger and he himself was dangerous aprori to his encounter with Martin.

We're both biased and we're both being rational. I'm not at all suggesting that Zimmerman orchestrated his injuries, but I do think the order of events, when the screams of help happened, when Zimmerman's head struck whatever (no signs of that on the concrete by the way), when Martin was punching Zimmerman, who started the physical engagement are all open for interpretation. There was some kind of struggle but I'm not at all convinced that Zimmerman was ever in danger enough to warrant deadly force--if I'm on the jury, i'd have to look at the letter of the law to see what kind of 'danger' actually legitimizes self defense. But as a citizen, living among other armed citizens, I'm not going to have a pretty threshold for what I consider legitimate self-defense warranting deadly force. Part of why I'm stickler on this notion of self defense, is that it empowers those with delusional paranoia--which is what led to Martin's death in teh first place. It's was delusional paranoia that led Zimmerman to follow Martin around, and it was delusional paranoia that caused Zimmerman to shoot Martin instead choosing a myriad of other options. The prosecution right now is making some these arguments better than I can, right now.

If you've been following the trial, Zimmerman's wounds (doctor called them insignificant) don't seem to justify 'legit' self-defense. Zimmerman's own exaggeration about how many times his head was slammed (he said 20 to 30 times, doctor said once) demonstrate the tall-tale-ness of the self-defense angle. It won't look good for Zimmerman, if the prosecution can prove that it was Martin's voice yelling for help, and that it might have been Zimmerman who instigated the physical altercation. Zimmerman's attempt to manipulate how the police handle the case is just another piece in the second degree murder charge. I don't know whether the jury will agree, but the prosecution is going to try to show that Zimmerman had motive to deal out justice by death. It's the notion of vigilante "justice" that can demonstrate a will to kill. From the state's perspective, you can't let things like this go, you can't have dudes walking around armed thinking that they can police their neighborhood with deadly force. I know it prickles some of our libertarian sensibilities, but I think it's an important case symbolically, especially in a place like Florida where there's laws that empower vigilante "justice." Again, I don't know if the prosecution can prove the case, but there's plenty of Zimmerman's lack of remorse, preparation to deal out justice (ignoring recommendations to discontinue pursuit, knowing what to say to cops, wanting to be a cop, being armed, neighborhood watch, etc.), and the actual forensic evidence of the case (witnesses, no blood on Martin's hands, 'insignificant' injuries, 911 calls, recorded pleas for help)--the case is provable. It looks like murder to me, and Zimmerman's own paranoia and lunacy (believing his life was in danger, that Martin was a criminal at all) don't at all mitigate his crime.

If I remember correctly, Zimmerman wasn't charged immediately--not until the prosecutor's office took notice of national/local outcry--it really shouldn't be a surprise that the lead investigator would initially believe Zimmerman. The Prosecution's case is that Zimmerman knew how to manipulate the investigation by telling the police precisely what they wanted to hear. This is arm chair psychology/legalese, so forgive it's sloppiness: I'm not sure that this will come out in trial, but there's an undercurrent behind the notion of Zimmerman's presumed innocence--an ugly one. That, while Martin wasn't a criminal that day, it seems at least in Zimmerman's mind, Travon was going to become one, and that Zimmerman was really doing everyone a favor (the investigators could have been instinctual persuaded by this, what with their initial assessment that Zimmerman may have been the victim). If I'm prosecution, I try to use Zimmerman's assumption of Martin's guilt against him--Zimmerman wanted to go out and kill a criminal, that it turned out to be some seventeen year old relatively harmless punk, doesn't really change Zimmerman's desire to do justice by blood if in his mind it came to that.

I think the prosecution is trying to demonstrate how calculated Zimmerman was in his version of his story and how well (or oddly) it fit within self-defense guidelines. Since Zimmerman won't take the stand, so they need to establish his point of view even through favorable accounts--in order to demonstrate how much a calculated liar he might be. They showed his interview with Hannity in court yesterday, and I thought it was pretty damning for Zimmerman, but Zimmerman himself watched the video like he just done so very well. There was question at the end where Hannity asked him if he had any remorse or wished he could change anything, Zimmerman coldly answered, it was all part of gods plan and who I am to question that.

Dude got fat. Wow

You haven't checked Span's hitting line this year, have you?

It's not as if the Astros would simply surrender those picks, if they had drafted Buxton. As gunnarthor points out, that including the Twins picks of Berrios and Walker, the Twins haul is clearly better. It's a false choice.

Buxton 3 for 3 with a double and a stolen base.

I think it's also important to acknowledge that Sano and Buxton are/were more highly ranked as younger, more inexperienced players than Hosmer and Moustakas--Sano's and Buxton's tools are just that loud. Buxton and Sano are producing better numbers at younger ages than Hosmer and Moustakas--the latter two having some monster AA/AAA seasons. And honestly, I'm hoping that Sano and Buxton don't even have the chance to match their upper level production (they'll be with the big club...). Though the whole exercise is worth while, but I think this says more about the Royals capacity to scout and develop than it does any generalization about the wariness of top ten prospects.

Sano OPSing a cool .983 at AA....

It's always been Saturday as far as I know.