TheLeviathan
-
Posts
21,580 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
49
Content Type
Profiles
Minnesota Twins News, Rumors & Analysis
Minnesota Twins Videos
2026 Minnesota Twins Top Prospect Rankings
2022 Minnesota Twins Draft Picks & Signing Bonuses
Minnesota Twins Trade & Free Agent Rumors
Minnesota Twins Fan Guides & Resources
2023 Minnesota Twins Draft Picks & Signing Bonuses
The Minnesota Twins Players Project
2024 Minnesota Twins Draft Picks & Signing Bonuses
2025 Minnesota Twins Draft Picks & Signing Bonuses
2026 Minnesota Twins Draft Picks & Signing Bonuses
Forums
Blogs
Events
Store
Downloads
Gallery
Everything posted by TheLeviathan
-
Seems unlikely it would be May right? Not if he's on a pitch count as strict as he appears to be on.
-
Game Thread: Indians@Twins 7/21 7:10PM
TheLeviathan replied to Riverbrian's topic in Archived Game Threads
A defensive shift? Did I turn on the right channel? -
Ive still seen them frequently today.
-
Game Thread: Indians@Twins 7/21 7:10PM
TheLeviathan replied to Riverbrian's topic in Archived Game Threads
Well played. -
Game Thread: Indians@Twins 7/21 7:10PM
TheLeviathan replied to Riverbrian's topic in Archived Game Threads
Well now you've done it. Now I have to go eat the rest of the Pistachio cake in the fridge. Stupid peer pressure. -
Weird, especially with it being such a swing for these particular players. Baseball is goofy.
-
Who has said this? Everyone you are responding to has said he's partly responsible. Why the scarecrow? Also, your last sentence betrays the rest of your point. You don't assign any responsibility when you spread it among everyone. That's not how any organization has effectively worked ever.
-
Yes, because a 100 game improvement is a reasonable hypothetical. My hypotheticals were asking you to explain how you could objectively decide between performance differentials and the truth is you can't. The ground erodes a bit more and here we are again. I don't blame Gardenhire for the record. I blame him, IN PART, for the record. A distinction I've made repeatedly that you have repeatedly misconstrued. A better manager might have been able to win an extra 20 or so games (Which amounts to 4-5 wins different per season) with shifts, more aggressive baserunning, better lineups, platooning, etc. Basically utilizing modern managerial strategies. It's subjective, which I fully admit. The awful record - that's an objective fact. One I believe he shares some responsibility for. If you want to talk merits I'd still like you to explain the following: The Twins have been adding talent (Hughes, Willingham, Suzuki, Nolasco, etc.), Gardenhire has apparently been progressing the majority of the young talent, and yet we've been in a four year cycle of non-improvement. How is that possible?
-
Took the words out of my mouth. Man I feel for him.
-
Only if Kluwe is signed to a one day contract for the event.
-
As JB said, when everyone is responsible for everything - no one is responsible for anything. You don't care....but then proceed to post one of your own? Huh? In any case, the hypotheticals hopefully showed you how objective data stops being objective when you interpret and purposefully apply it subjectively. So that high ground isn't there in your argument. As for your hypothetical, you're once again conveniently propping your argument with the ridiculous flip of expectations. It'd be nice if we could just talk about the merits of what you're proposing rather than constantly repeating arguments that are pristine examples of using confirmation bias. Or hiding from the consequences of what you propose.
-
So the FO is 100% responsible for this? Let's try some hypotheticals: Player A - goes from batting .325 to .285 but raises his OBP from .340 to .350. He regressed in BA but progressed in OBP - which matters more, did he progress? Player B - Raises his OPS from .742 to .755 but goes from passable defense to horrific defense - did he progress? I could come up with dozens of these and none of them can solely be tied to the work of the manager or the field staff. The might be facts insofar as "these happened" but they are not facts insofar as "these happened because of Ron Gardenhire". For example, if Hicks comes back and hits .300 all of September in the big leagues...does Gardy get credit for that? The problem is that you believe interpreting facts is objective, when what you are describing is most definitely subjective. It's in the very nature of how you lay out your criteria and define "progressing". And most certainly it comes about in how you determine who is credited.
-
I would take some issue with Escobar and maybe Santana as well and muddle those numbers. But you did just demonstrate how totally subjective the concept of grading player progression is, so I appreciate that.
-
I specifically said "I'm trying to figure out your argument". I'm not sure how much more clear I can be. Right now - both spent significant time in the major leagues. One unable to progress defensively and the other one of the worst trainwrecks to start a career in recent memory. Again this feels like a convenient way to wiggle out of the consequences of your own argument. You can't quantify what you're arguing. How exactly are you gleaning facts to prove he's progressing players? How do you know it's not just the player making adjustments? How is it even possible to factualize such an abstract concept as "player progression"? You're not arguing anything objective here I'm sorry to say. You want something objective? 239-342. Which, if he truly was getting players to play better over time, would be improving steadily the last four years....right? Or is the team somehow adding talent, Gardy is progressing it well, and we're still losing almost 100 games? I find that hard to fathom.
-
I never claimed you did. I took your argument and asked relevant hypotheticals. I agree, if he can't help young players flourish, he should be in trouble. But when you made that argument you conveniently left out Hicks, Arcia, Florimon, Pinto, and Deduno - at least two of which are some of our most critical players. So it certainly seemed like you were stacking the deck for your own argument. I want to know what other functions there are. Your original claim was that there was "no basis" to fire him. I think on-field results (which should reflect player progression by the way) should matter a lot. We're moving into four years of wheel spinning ineptitude. Even if a large share isnt his fault, some certainly is. I think the biggest difference you have from many others is you insist he has to be proven to be THE problem. When most of us feels he's PART of the problem.
-
First off, Kluwe's buddy and star witness (the long snapper) said it was intended as a joke to get their attention and both of them (Kluwe too) laughed at it. It's a dumb joke...but so is any joke about child rape. And let's not brush over that - actual children were raped, traumatized, and had their lives turned upside down by Sandusky and that is something you think is ok to joke about? But a stupid, hateful hypothetical means we should grab our torches and pitchforks? I can't even imagine such messed up priorities. What Preifer said were ugly, meaningless words about something that has never happened and will never happen. What Kluwe joked about was actual violence inflicted on other human beings. Since when do freaking words matter as much as violent acts? No offense Dave, but to call that nothing more than "Un-PC" is flabbergasting. And we haven't even talked about using potential underage sexual misconduct as flame bait. Kluwe no longer can keep priorities straight. (He said much the same in spousal abuse and drunk driving being equal to what Preifer said) He's basically the troll many of us worried he might be.
-
So Gardenhire isn't responsible at all for the veteran talent? If he had a team with no rookies, is it your contention we'd have no way of judging his managerial work that year? Or that if we continually traded away youth for veterans he could have a job for life or, maybe even more crazy, wouldn't be necessary at all? (Since, apparently, progressing young players is his sole function worth considering) I'm trying to figure out how this narrowly tailored definition of a manager's role actually works in evaluation of performance.
-
Yeah, when even drones over at ESPN vote like that it should send a pretty clear message about how absurd this whole system is. Players can't even keep the web of stupidity straight anymore.
-
Johnson: Nick Burdi throws hard
TheLeviathan replied to Seth Stohs's topic in Twins Minor League Talk
Man those strikeout numbers are sexy. -
Berrios' second start a lot better
TheLeviathan replied to gunnarthor's topic in Twins Minor League Talk
Good for him, I'm not hanging on his start by start, but it's always nice to see a kid have some success early. -
I didnt realize it was nitpicking to point out an argument changing as the ground beneath it erodes.
-
hat Preifer said was reprehensible and disgusting and he is lucky to have a job. That said...he made a comment about something that never happened wheras there was actual trauma and harm caused by what Kluwe joked about. The lame excuse about mocking the system only irritates me more.
-
I totally agree - this was a profoundly stupid incident.
-
This doesn't mesh: Now apparently the "people he directs" is a very limited subset you have created by ever narrowing criteria to fit your argument.
-
This is a debacle that deserves criticism, but we're still talking about an organization that ranked in the top 5 for their farm by just about everybody. Someone from Houston prone to defending their club against all comers would probably take a tone you're familiar with to this post. The bigger test of this organization (much like the Twins) will be how much of this talent graduates into impact roles. But this entire post seems like an effort to tear down someone else to prop someone else up. Every team has their blunders and successes. (Even acknowledging this was a major blunder)
