TheLeviathan

Eh, I just think that term is loaded with meaning for people. And it just doesn't apply to Gonzalez. The ceiling/floor argument doesn't do much for me. I want Kimbrel signed, but I'm not sure he's going to radically increase our ceiling either. Not for wins any way.

Granlund for Fiala. Wild save 6M, get younger, and get a goal scorer. But they give up a streaky, but talented playmaker. Not sure how I feel yet about it.

I think the shift on the left to be less scared of the word taxes is a good thing. I also think it might take a little while, and some good salesmanship, to make it effective. MMT? I don't have a great grip on it, but it's easy to see how the boogeyman of that theory would be almost too easy for Republicans to weaponize.

Right, it feeds into the false narrative the Republicans have already spun. Liberals want to spend your money and they don't care about being responsible about it. It doesn't have to be true, to be an effective attack. And, with MMT, it has the double whammy of being partially true. Plus...the downside if they're wrong? Scary.

Paul Krugman just invited himself to be called a Republican huh? I'm wary of any theory that suggests you can just print money and not worry about spending or revenue collection. Go ahead and try that with a nation's economy....just not here please. I'd rather watch from a distance, I don't think it would end well. Also, is anyone on the left concerned this model of financial thought is precisely the kind of caricature that is successfully lobbed at them? As far as the optics I mean?

I see you've just met our resident DocBauer....

I'm a little shocked Iglesias could only get a minor league deal.

I don't consider Nick Gordon any better a player than Austidillo at this point. Or Adrianza, hence why Schoop would immediately come to mind. And if Sano is being move to 1B....the guy getting benched is Cron, not Sano. You're trying to put the spotlight on Sano, but I'm trying to show you the insurance is more evenly spread out than that. In fact, if I had to order it....2B, 1B, CF (by way of RF), 3B would be the top four with quite a drop off after that. I think this is ride or die time for Sano and the organization will give him that chance. Cron and Schoop? They don't have any equity to struggle.

Why are a random sample of 300 ABs by Sano reason to put him above Schoop or Cron? Especially given the organizational investment and upside? There's just no good reason to put Sano above those two.

Perhaps it isn't the act of criticism but the manner of it? You know, like using "timid" ad an adjective off the bat.

The only thing that stopped me from being 100% right was too much faith in humanity.

Not even in the race yet! Damn...my preemptive strike got preempted.

By all means share the error. Realistic is not timid.

Utility player is an unfair term. He is average to above at every position he plays by wRC+

If "replacing a starter" is your new hill I don't see how Sano is higher on that list than Cron or Schoop.

A popular, affable centrist. Much like the man who he joined on the ticket as Vice-Pres. He's going to get the same treatment Klobuchar is getting, you can write that down right now.

Wouldn't you say most of them are left-based so far? I feel like the right is focusing more on Bernie, AOC, and Harris.

There is no benching required. You get huffy when people take something you didn't say and run with it and you just did that. None of these players have to be benched for Gonzalez to help the team. Any one of a number of very plausible scenarios happens and he's a great guy to have around. Here are just a few, very possible scenarios: Rosario has another several month plunge into poor play that Gonzalez can help spell and maybe give Rosario a chance to reset. He allows us to play Kepler in CF if Cave proves to be less reliable than hoped in the (all too common) event that Buxton is hurt or struggling. If Schoop is the .682 version that Milwaukee benched in favor of playing two dudes at 2B who had no experience - he helps cushion that. If Cron fails and Sano takes over 1B....we have him to help at 3B. If Polanco gets hurt we have an option. Or, in the almost certain event we have a significant injury, he becomes the starter rather than a guy in AAA. Yes it's Sano, but it's much more than that.

They have varying question marks. Our SS is a drug test away from being done. Schoop had a sub-.600 OPS the second half of last year. Rosario struggled mightily as well. Buxton is no sure thing with injuries or production. Ditto Sano. Cron might have been a flash in the pan. I don't know how someone looks at the Twins starting 9 and says "Yup...we know what we're getting from these guys!" *Vanimal sniped me!

The starting 9 the Twins are currently penciling in are hardly a reliable bunch. It's not just Sano that is wise to insure on this team.

I still prefer to use Cave's options and go with Austidillo, Gonzalez, Adrianza, and Garver as the bench from the start. I know it probably won't happen, but I guess I can dream.

Well, sure, but I'm not sure you're really hearing what is being said here. Though I appreciate your approach to the conversation so far. Here's the thing, we share the same goals - to kick Republicans out of office and steer the country away from their vision. I can't imagine a better way to celebrate 2020 than watching that orange turd whine about losing. I really think you need to hear out what's being said here. Most of the posters responding to you share your goals, but there is a major difference. We feel strongly about the policies, but we're not wed to them by ideology. I don't want universal health care because, dammit!, liberalism needs to win out! I want universal health care because our system is so broken it's beyond repair. But it has to be fixed because it's crushing people. I want college funding fixed, but not because, dammit, liberalism is the best! I want it because debt is crushing people. I feel like since I'm not trying to get political wins for some side of the right/left spectrum, I'm more focused on the long-term success of what I support rather than spiritual victories like saying "socialism" out loud or having some goofy named bill of aspirations. Those don't pay my student loans or fix my co-pays. And, honestly, celebrating those things over actual victories probably does more harm than good. I'll say it again - let's focus on ways to build a coalition and beat them. Then we can hash out how to move the ball forward. And we can do it aggressively, I'm game to push once we get there. But eating Amy Klobuchar or Joe Biden alive because they aren't Bernie-enough right now is doing Republican work for them. Let's play out the process and see what excites people and nominate the person that can reverse 2016. Talk with aspiration, but in a way that builds your coalition. That's the number one goal.

You are trying to make this about platoons but you've been making the argument about projections from the get go. In fact, the platoon issue came up in response to you using projections about this year to argue he's worse than anyone in the starting nine. Your entire framing on this doesn't make much sense.

Using projections is a big part of the problem. It's a flimsy place to start. Plus, you framed it as "not particularly strong". No one was claiming Gonzalez was Bryce Harper, but a 104 wRC+ with that versatility is a strong asset. Unless you are using strong in some outlandish sense no one was implying, an average to above average player with versatility is exactly the opposite of "not particularly strong" And while no one has claimed he is Harper, there are people in this thread calling him a utility player and using your posts to justify that. Perhaps you're arguing your point more forcefully than you should.

The right has any number of good examples. Look at how successfully they have chipped away at Roe v Wade. I know the Court is the grand prize, but they've seriously hurt women across the country in little ways. The incremental domination of conservative media across all platforms that was light years ahead of the left. Destruction of labor unions. Tax breaks for billionaires. Voting rights and the drawing of lines. Criminal justice. I could go on. Meanwhile the left screams at their own about how left their policies, the right slowly chips away at what it cares about. And then the left wonders why, over time, the right is winning out. And in response to this reality, they yell even louder about the very thing that stuck them there in the first place. Yes, people are shifting towards universal health care, but that momentum is largely based on hypotheticals. Once the nuts and bolts are truly flushed out, I think a lot of that support will wane. But over time you can eliminate that by moving the ball forward as you've suggested. It's like getting a kid to take their medicine. If you try and force it all in they will throw that stuff up. Incrementally is your only shot.