kab21

It is basically a no win. There should be a minimum wage but I disagree that it should be high enough to provide everything you need to live. If someone can make 15+/hr doing a menial job then why should they work hard, get training and/or risk themselves for a better job that pays about the same. For example teachers, police officers and firefighters start at about 30K/yr (about 15/hr for 40 hours). You can't raise then the minimum until you have raised the rest. You have created a disincentive to work hard or get trained. In addition to that companies would find way to reduce the number of workers if they have to pay them more and now you have people that can't even find a min wage job.

I'm not sure if you aren't understanding this or not but I am not debating specific economic/foreign policies. I want the GOP to spend 80% of the time debating/discussing specific economic/foreign policies and <20% (or really none) on increasingly unpopular social issues. The reality is that we hear a lot about 80% on social issues and the remaining time is spent blasting the abuse of food stamps, welfare and how horrible the economy is. I hear very little true substance about how to fix the economy (sometimes this) or bring people out of poverty (never this unless it's the blanket trickle down economics theory). FWIW - I am against a high minimum wage. It is counterproductive since unemployment goes up. I am for better job training so that workers actually have skills to move up from minimum wage positions. It sounds like the Democrats in general support free (or really low cost) vocational/community colleges and an attempt to make state schools (4 yr) affordable again. Not sure on the specifics so I am not certain that I really agree with it but it is a start. I have heard zilch from the GOP on this topic.

Watching this board explode when Hunter is resigned this winter will be massively entertaining. GET READY! Popcorn and booze will be on standby all winter. Signing Hunter this year did make sense and it has paid off extremely well. The Twins had nobody at any of the 3 OF position (and not really DH) that could be counted on. Hunter has done quite well compared to some of the crap that the Twins have repeatedly run out there over the years. I also would not dismiss his benefit on the younger players. Next year there isn't a lot of baseball sense to him back. I would actually like Hunter back in a 60-80 game backup role but the problem is that he will be a starter if he is back. That is the BIG problem. There is also no reason that Buxton has to be in MN right now. He has missed a lot of time (this year and last). I hope he is up in Sept (can't see why not) though. Ozzie Arcia has completely fallen apart since the AS break. He has 10 hits in 22 games and almost 30 K's. I have no idea what happened to him but he is probably finished in MN. He will get a chance to make the team next year though. There is no guarantee that he can do anything next year. It is probably unlikely that he does anything. My ideal situation next year would be to have a truly open competition in the OF next year between Hicks, Rosario, Kepler and Buxton (Arcia also but...) for the 3 starting spots with one of them going to AAA (depth is good). Hunter can be the 4th OF'er. I really have no problem with this other than it won't happen like this.

If he maintains this performance then there will be no reason to consider it ever. It has to be a situation where attempting to fulfill the contract (rehab and play) is incredibly painful (but not impossible). He is the Twins version of Todd Helton. This will have to run its course.

Therein lies the problem. They spend so much time focused on social issues that policy is a distant second on the agenda and the conservative base won't listen to anyone regardless of their economic/foreign policy if they aren't very conservative on social issues. The GOP is fighting their political battles (and losing) on the social issues and are not focusing on real issues.

Players have either walked away (Gil meche) or negotiated down (Russ Ortiz) before. It is much rarer than other sports but it has happened. There isn't any reason for either side to consider it at this point. He isn't great but he is still a contributing player. If he had just spent 120 games on the DL for 2 straight seasons and was in chronic pain by attempting to come back then perhaps this could happen.

The only problem with this is that Rosario isn't actually a better 2/3 hitter than Mauer. Mauer isn't great right now but I would be hesitant to disrupt things to make a trivial swap like this.

prospect for prospect trades are really rare. They can happen but it is rare. It's more likely that the trade would be like Buxton for Hamels (not on the market anymore) if it were to happen.

This is also what I have seen. Someone in the party with moderate views gets blasted by the conservative base. It has nothing to do with not finding someone because they are 55+ but more to do with the conservative base blasting them if they state their moderate views.

I wait to make sure that we actually have too many OF'ers. There is a chance of injury and/or someone massively disappointing next season and then we are shuffling a utility IF'er or Shane Robinson through the OF.

Hicks, May, and several 28 yr olds that aren't going to fall off of a cliff immediately. This thread is incredibly frustrating. It sounds like some believe that unless a team has 21-26 yr olds at every position they should just keep rebuilding. If we are waiting for that then we will always be waiting. He has done this for the last 4 years. Why do you expect a .700-.750 OPS hitter (trending up but not lucky) to regress? I am all for pulling off another AJ trade that you guys are theorizing but not even Josh Donaldson (MVP caliber) landed the type of package you are suggesting for Dozier.

This team does not only have 4-5 guys that have a shot of hitting their prime together. I don't even know where to begin with how wrong this is. This team arguably has 4-5 OF'ers that have a shot of hitting their prime together.

In 2008 40% of Americans supported gay marriage and in 2014 it was 55%. It is all in the link. The country is changing and unfortunately only the Democrats are paying attention. The GOP seems to be in denial of these changes that are happening.

This would make an argument for continual rebuilding for eternity and it has zero correlation to the current situation. The Twins have some decent to good young veterans and a lot of talent on the brink getting added to that. The 90's Twins didn't have nearly this much talent (MLB and MiLB) and they had holes everywhere. Trading Dozier and Plouffe are a poor strategy unless some team is offering something ridiculous for them. Stop making more holes on the team. It's easy to say that Polanco will be a good second basemen but he is a fringe top 100 prospect. These guys are coin flips to have solid careers (solid includes below average) and I like to hope that Polanco could be a stop gap (coin flip chance) at SS and fill another hole that the team has. We need to fill holes - not create more holes filled with potential (prospects) to flop.

Do you understand that a trend is not an absolute 100%? 18-29 yr olds support gay marriage (78%) 30-49 = 54% What those numbers don't tell you - those are 25-35 pt shifts in just two decades. That is a massive shift. http://www.gallup.com/poll/169640/sex-marriage-support-reaches-new-high.aspx

The first step to building a contender is not trading away the above average players that you do have.

I don't understand why this had to devolve into this nonsense. Abortion is but one social issue but it is actually the others that have been shifting significantly in the last couple of decades. The republicans are not only taking the unfavorable side but they are also making it one of the major talking points. This not good for the party as the country continues to shift to a more liberal stance on these topics. If they don't adapt then they are going to get hammered in presidential elections. Taking a stronger stance that appeals to the far right won't help them. They already have those voters.

What exactly does he do well if he lacks in pitch blocking and pitch framing? Aside from the running game what else is there? I am also hesitant to use fangraphs defensive catcher stats using 4 months of data.

No, to Norris. He is one of the worst defensive catchers in baseball. I have no problem with Shields. It isn't my money and I can't think of a better way to spend 30-40M.

Actually it isn't. It is common for rebuilding teams to trade veterans and replace them with prospects. It is common for low payroll teams to trade veterans and replace them with prospects. It is also common for contending teams to trade prospects to upgrade the MLB roster. I really, really hope that the Twins are in the 3rd category and not the first two any longer. But you were missing the bigger picture. Why do the Twins have to trade all of the depth that they have? Good teams like the Cardinals suffer an injury and they are able to call up a decent prospect or shift the roster around to play a decent replacement. If the Twins trade Plouffe and/or Kepler then they are one step away from playing Eduardo Nunez or Wilkin Ramirez because the depth was traded away. The same thing goes for SP. The team shouldn't be trading anyone to open a spot for Berrios if we are going to be calling up a Kris Johnson or Yohan Pino type if one pitcher gets injured or struggles. Depth is good and it is what winning teams have. I also think that we are prematurely considering which prospects have succeeded. Is Hicks really an MLB starter after 1.5 hot months where he still can't hit RHP? Rosario has had a nice season but the team better have plan B ready (like Kepler) next year. Buxton is great but again he hasn't proven anything most all the ability to stay healthy. Depth is good. I would not be concerned about Kepler getting a chance when he has 3 question marks ahead of him. Trading Dozier is preposterous. Especially when the goal is to replace him with Polanco because the gap wouldn't be that big the first year and by 2018 Polanco will probably be better. Perhaps these people haven't seen Hicks, Vargas, Arcia, Santana and any other prospect that dreadfully failed their 1st or 2nd time around. Why are we trading a legit All Star for a question mark? Can we stop rebuilding at some point?

You think that demographic is voting republican? They might not like Hilary but they still won't vote republican. But you missed the bigger picture. Republicans are set up to get crushed in almost every demographic other than white male. It will be very difficult now and in the future to win w/o making inroads outside of that demographic.

I am not sure what this fascination is with trading away very good MLB starters (Dozier and Plouffe) because the Twins have some top 100ish prospects (Kepler, Polanco, etc...) that might be blocked or might play elsewhere. This kind of depth is a good thing to have for a winning ballclub.

I'm not sure how moving farther from the shifting center and strengthening the far right core is a good strategy. This isn't appealing to a wide range of voters. I say this as an extremely frustrated conservative that wants nothing to do with the far right. The way I see it is that they have a lost many like Levi and myself while not gaining anyone. And this doesn't even begin to take into account the growing Hispanic population that is being alienated. The women vote that is being alienated. Definitely the black vote that is voting in larger numbers.

This is so shortsighted on their planning side. Of course not everyone voted but the democrats probably had far more that stayed home. They are losing all of the moderate and independent vote and that is who they need to win. Here is the bigger problem: the rest of the western world is more socially liberal than the US and the democrats are just catching up to this shift. Things are going to get worse and worse for republicans and not even gerrymandering will save them in congress.

Paul was a big disappointment. He picked fights and even if he had won a fight he would have been covered in so much fecal matter from his fecal matter slinging that he had truly lost. Trump was awful. He was pressed for answers and frequently tried to evade the question and talk about what he wanted to talk about. And he further alienated parts of his non-base voters. I can't understand why people think we can/could win. Bush simply looked like his brother. That was the problem. He didn't do a bad job but he did nothing to show that he was different. Kasich did the best but I can't see how he comes close to the nomination. He was a very good public speaker but far too moderate and boring to gain appeal. Rubio also did quite well and could see a big move up in the polls. Cruz is easily the least likeable candidate. He also kept evading questions and pumped out his 'this is an outrage' soundbytes to appeal to his base. Walker is next but at least he was a good public speaker even if the message was garbage. The 17 candidate field/debacle is actually amusing except for the conservative part of me that is disappointed that the republicans continue moving further and further to the right and choosing to fight unwinnable battles on social issues. At least nobody defended the confederate flag up there.