Jump to content
Twins Daily
  • Create Account

Mark G

Verified Member
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    1,153

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    3

 Content Type 

Profiles

News

Minnesota Twins Videos

2026 Minnesota Twins Top Prospects Ranking

2022 Minnesota Twins Draft Picks

Minnesota Twins Free Agent & Trade Rumors, Notes, & Tidbits

Guides & Resources

2023 Minnesota Twins Draft Picks

The Minnesota Twins Players Project

2024 Minnesota Twins Draft Picks

2025 Minnesota Twins Draft Pick Tracker

Forums

Blogs

Events

Store

Downloads

Gallery

Everything posted by Mark G

  1. Mark G
    I would too, if either one was a better long term option than whoever it is on the 40 man that has to go to make it work. I would have to make that decision before I sign anyone else to a MLB contract. As much as I want to upgrade this year if at all possible, I am just not sure who to risk on our current 40 man. But it is worth pondering, I guess.
  2. Mark G
    I have no idea if any of our AAA guys are better, necessarily, than some of the names mentioned, but I concur 100% that if we sign someone to a major league contract someone has to go from the 40. And that would be a decision we might not want to make (I sure don't) at this point in time. Not for the caliber we are looking at from the outside.
  3. Mark G
    Pitching is a commodity a team cannot do without. And the economic fact of life in MLB is that the better the pitching, the more the cost; it is in direct correlation. If the team does not want to spend more money, then it will have to roll the dice with what they have right now. They appear to be willing to go into the season with reduced spending, as this division will not take much to win. October, on the other hand? We will see when the trade deadline comes, it looks like, as to how serious they are. As for now, it looks like we dance with the date we brought, which is our in home depth. Here is hoping they come through.
  4. Mark G

    So What Now?

    Mark G commented on Doctor Gast's blog entry in Doctor Gast's Blog

    Well I, for one, am looking forward to the next post! And trust me........I know what it is like to be in the minority here sometimes........:)
  5. Mark G

    So What Now?

    Mark G commented on Doctor Gast's blog entry in Doctor Gast's Blog

    I know I am late to this particular party, so to speak, but I agree with your assessment completely. And I sure would hate to see this be your last blog.
  6. Mark G
    My thought is that an elite first baseman is the player who saves others an error more often than not, not how many errors he is charged with himself. Errors are assigned by the official scorer, and it is purely subjective at times. I want the guy who the other players trust with their errors. My question is how is Santana in that area?
  7. Mark G
    Do we know (I don't) just how good Santana's glove is? The one thing Mauer proved, not that long ago, is that having a first baseman that can eat up errant throws like a vacuum cleaner is something we take for granted when we have it, and blame the other fielders when we don't. I have said for a while now that we need a bona fide first baseman, and not use the position as a rotation to get a bat into the lineup on certain occasions. We clearly haven't developed one in the minors recently; the position is as important as any on the field, and we would be wise to make it a priority in our system.
  8. Mark G
    I guess I am confused a little; if they give him days off or pull him early to limit innings, that is stopping him at a number of innings. I am not saying they know the number going into spring training necessarily, but they will have the reigns ready to pull any time they get nervous. Maybe we are getting caught up on the word hard when it comes to the cap. Hard is hard (pardon the pun) for an outsider to read what is their thought process. I just know that we have limited pitchers from the bottom of the minors to the major league staff for a long time now; not everyone, but most of the young guys and guys recovering from injuries. I will bend to the definition of the word hard, and just say they have a pre determined plan as to how far they will let him go. And I will be stunned if he goes 160 innings (though pleased).
  9. Mark G
    You may very well be right, but to me the key word was "we". That is why I used the term this organization instead of an individual. The FO has quite a bit of say in how these things are handled. Just my extremely humble opinion.
  10. Mark G
    "We never have hard limits really on almost anyone" Baldelli answered when asked about a potential innings cap........ I laughed out loud when I read that part of the article. This organization has shut down pitchers toward the end of the season coming up through the minors, set pitch count limits on pitchers depending on the circumstances, etc., etc, etc. They have admitted it in the past; why suddenly are they defensive about questions about Paddack? They have a plan going into spring training about bringing him along, as well as what they will allow him to do during the season, and if they are going to deny that........I hope very much to stand corrected; I would love to see Paddack come back stronger than ever and become a number 2 starter on this team. But please, Rocco, no hard limits? That just isn't believable for this organization, or any other organization for that matter with someone coming back from their 2nd TJ surgery. Just level with us - we can handle the truth. By the way, good article Lou!
  11. Mark G
    I may be wrong here, but I got the sense that Joe was behind the signing of CC to the long term deal. If so, why the hesitancy now to take the next step (free agent wise)? Why not put the pedal to the metal? Is there something in the background we don't know about, or does he/they feel that confident in the young guys coming up? Standing pat usually means one of two things; either they are that sure of what they have put together already, or they are saving their money for something else. I am intrigued about the next move.........or lack of it. 😏
  12. Mark G
    I am not sure I would call any of them lies, I think I would label it more like spin. The Twins FO giving us spin instead of just leveling with us........I wish you all could see my shocked face. 😵
  13. Mark G
    Point well taken. 👌
  14. Mark G
    Not to argue with the stats you present, they are compelling, but I have seen quiet a few of his starts in the last two years as well (although not 50+) and I have a particular memory of them as a whole. He had quite a few starts the last two years combined against Detroit and KC, and owned both teams. His stats against those two teams were to the point of awesome. Against the teams that are able to lay off his high fast ball, which Detroit and KC were not able to, he was not as awesome, making his overall stats what they were. Is it just possible this is more the reason for two years worth of stats than one particular shorter term injury? JR is a very worthy 2/3 starter on a pretty good pitching staff; wouldn't want to lose him right now. But I do think he is what he is, and he will always do well against teams who can't lay off the high fastball and not as well against teams that make him bring his pitches down. Just one person's thought.
  15. Mark G
    More deserving than Jim Kaat? More deserving than Jim Kaat?? 283 wins, 16 gold gloves, and a .185 lifetime batting average? Yeah, pitchers had to hit once upon a time. I will never tell anyone they are not entitled to their opinions, but..........sorry, can't see this one. Really can't see this one. One thing to say that Johan is deserving, and I wouldn't criticize the thought, but more deserving than.......wow, I just don't know how to go there. But then, that is just me. Take care.
  16. Mark G
    I am going to duck as soon as I hit submit comment, because I have a feeling I know the arrows that are going to come my way, but if I were being truly honest, I wouldn't have voted for him either if I was one of the voters. Some of us have been sending out this warning for a lot of years now about the dangers of taking the games out of the hands of the starters and putting it into an 8 man bullpen. Very few starters are going to be given the opportunity to put up the numbers necessary to make the hall; the vast majority of pitchers going in in the future are going to be the ones with the most saves, a category voters seem to like these days. Johan was one of the best while he was healthy, but 139 wins just isn't enough for the hall. It just isn't. All the new analytics that try to make players/pitchers better than their stats say they are/were do not appear to impress the people that count - the ones with the votes. I get it, today's game is what it is. When Sonny Gray can finish 2nd in the Cy Young voting with an 8-8 record, I can see where fans begin to think wins and losses have no real bearing anymore, but they do to more people than we think. It is not the pitchers fault they were not given the opportunity to build the resume they need for the hall, but being dominant for 5-7 innings 30-32 games a year just isn't enough for some of us when it comes to the hall. The hall still requires, at least to some degree, more than just longevity of years, but longevity in each game, because as much as we all love the strikeouts, burning yourself out in 5-6 innings and 12 years to get them isn't the path to the hall. We should be listening to the Sonny Gray's of the game when they ask to be able to pitch their games, instead of listening to the analytics guys when their chances have come and gone and they can't get the votes because they don't have the numbers that still matter. The pitchers who got guys out the 4th time through the lineup are in the hall, not the ones who never saw the 4th time. I miss you, Johan, and I sure loved watching you pitch, but I understand the vote.
  17. Mark G
    I can't argue with any of the scenarios you listed, but to use the game show analogy you get to see what is behind door number 1 and door number 2. You are then offered the choice of taking one of those 2, or gambling on what might be behind door number 3. In this case the 2 suggestions I made would be known scenarios/outcomes. Any of the things you listed behind door number 3 are all very possible, but unknown; we have to wait and see. My thought process was if we don't think what we see (or saw last year) is what we will get in the future, move him while someone else still sees a value for him. If we think what we see is what we will get some more of, extend him now before he prices himself out of our range and the best we can hope for is a comp round pick (which, to me, is no better than a class A prospect from another organization; both are crap shoots). I wouldn't pretend to advise which one of those scenarios to take, but I hate the wait and see scenario; I would rather be proactive than reactive in cases like this.
  18. Mark G
    Sorry, those last numbers were supposed to be a 32-36 mil 2 year deal; not sure how I got 24 and 34 in there. :)
  19. Mark G
    It appears that the Twins have morphed into a team that values power over contact, and OPS and slugging percentage over average and RBI's; not to mention above average defense. How does Max not fit that bill? And at 31 (I prefer to look at it as only 31), what would be the downside of a 3 year 45 mil contract with offensive number bonuses if he produces (maybe Buxton esc type incentives)? Or, if he would go for it, a two year 24-34 mil contract with team options for a year or two out from there? I just sense that Max is not finished and has a few good years left in him; I would wonder why they weren't spent here if they just let him play out the year and go somewhere else. Either trade him while he has value, which is now, or extend him before he increases his bargaining power as I suspect he might. Whatever lies behind door number 3 doesn't look as enticing, at least to me.
  20. Mark G
    Call me a cynic (or worse), but I can't help but think they will stand pat for the most part because they believe they can win an extremely weak division with the team they have and take their chances in October. They will sign a bargain free agent or 3, trade a player or two for prospects, and sign at least one starting pitcher to round out the rotation; otherwise they will rely on their 40 man roster to fill whatever holes come up. They had a winning season and broke the post season losing streak, and will now rest on their laurels until the pressure builds again. This is an organization that strives to be competitive, but will not do what it takes to be elite. We have been to 2 World Series since the Pohlad's took ownership (40 years), and 3 overall since '61; we won the 2 under the Pohlad's. Not an elite record by any means, but we have been competitive much of the time, and have been content. We are who we are, and we know it; at least most do. I am a believer in the old adage "I tolerate the things I cannot change, but that does not mean I accept them." So, every year I prod the team to do the things they know they can do to be elite, or at least improve, and every year I tolerate them not doing it. But the vast majority of the fans have long ago accepted it, so what we see is what we will get. Just my extremely humble observation. Wake me up in February, so I can catch the latest updates and watch a few spring training games. 😴
  21. Mark G
    To say Corey Provus is a better radio play by play guy than Herb Carneal really puzzles me, but we are all entitled, as they say, to our opinions. I grew up on Herb, and I have had Corey for a long time as I get older, and they are not even close. Not that Corey is not good, he is. But he is not Herb. Dick, to me, is the Herb Carneal of television, and I, for one, will find it hard to watch a Twins game for a long time. Why do I have the feeling that Dick is out at the same time Jim P. is stepping down and Joe P. is stepping in? Any connection?
  22. Mark G
    I have to go with Mike on this one. Lee is still learning his craft, and it would be best to learn the position he will play the most in the big leagues. The concept that he could play any of the 4 positions if needed, doesn't mean he should; I would submit that is what our utility players are for, and I do not want to cast him as a utility player. It is better served for the big club, and Lee himself, to find the position he is best suited for and play him there. He is still a little ways away from the majors, and time will tell if anyone currently in his way will still be when he is ready. I don't want to stray too far from the subject, but growing up, and learning the game, I learned there were regulars, platoon players, and utility players. Unless that has changed dramatically (I hope not, and don't think so), I don't see Lee as anything but a regular when his time comes. Figure out his position and let him rip!
  23. Mark G
    I am somewhat lost by the argument presented here. Baldelli himself has said over and over he believes in his platoon system, and Ted here on TD wrote an article just last Monday on the platoon system that has been used for some time. The catchers are the only true platoon guys? Not hardly, especially considering they are both right handed hitters. They play a position that beats them up a lot, so they split the time to stay as healthy as possible; that is not a true platoon at all. Right vs left match ups is a platoon system and Baldelli plays it, for better or worse. That is why we have one guy over 500 plate appearances, not injuries. As for the starters, we had so much confidence in them that we started our number 3 starter twice, and the two of them pitched 5 innings combined. Baldelli even told us that his plan for game 4 of the Houston series was to pitch Ryan one time through the lineup and then start the train of relievers; in other words, a bullpen game. Hard to argue that we were more than 2 deep in post season starting pitching, I would submit, if Baldelli himself had so little faith in his 3rd and 4th starters he pulled them that quickly. You were right when you said it is wrong to assume we were forced to use our bullpen as much as we did; it was by choice from the very beginning. And you appear to agree with the choice. Cool. You may very well be right. But that only strengthens the argument that we were only 2 deep in quality starters in the post season, which to me suggests we are not on the cusp of a WS anytime soon. I happen to believe we need at least one more top line starter, not more bullpen games, and we need to put our best players on the field, both offensively and defensively, and let them carry the club. Who knows, I could be wrong; I have been wrong before. As a matter of fact, I can still remember the time I was. 😎 Just my extremely humble opinion/observations. 😌
  24. Mark G
    Unfortunately, I must agree. We were built this year for a 2 out of 3 series against comparable competition. Guess what? We got it. After that.........well, not so much. We showed when we have to go 3 deep with starters it fades, and the pen has to come in too many times; sooner or later one or two will be off (see Thielbar), and that is the ballgame. (by the way, I love Thielbar) Our bugaboo the whole first half was not scoring (3 runs or less in close to half the games in the first half), and 4 of the 6 playoff games was just that. Winning the division is doable for the foreseeable future, but October? I just don't know. Just an observation: look at the 100 plus win teams this year (and bear with me here). It was a lot more than just pitching. Atlanta had 8 players with over 500 plate appearances. The Dodgers had 5 with over 550 plate appearances, and 3 more in the low to high 400's/ Baltimore had 4 over 560, and 3 more over 450. (Tampa, as well, for that matter). The twins had Correa with 580 and no one else in the 500 or more range. They put their best players on the field and let them carry the club. We have the philosophy that everyone needs to play equally, and everyone gets at bats regardless of position (which is why we have so many utility players). That plays well in the AL Central, but not in October. World Series? I don't see it with this FO and coaching staff, and who are we kidding? They are one in the same. I hope I am wrong, and I hope we are playing on this date in '24, but I won't place any bets just yet.
  25. Mark G
    Knowing I am a majority of one in this area, allow me to ask one more question: with all the money bet on pro sports today, is knowingly conceding a game ethical on any level? Regardless of standings, etc. Did any money change hands Sunday because of that loss? Or will we ever know since we could have lost the old fashioned way? Personally, I believe in competing to the best of your ability until the final gun goes off (so to speak) so no one can ever question the integrity of the game itself, or the team/players/coach/manager competing. Extra innings come with the territory. Never give up an at bat, and never give up a hitter if you are a pitcher; the integrity of the game depends on competing every pitch/batter/inning, etc. I am sad we didn't do that, that's all, strategy or not. There wasn't one pitcher to put in that would not be in our plans for game 1 or 2? I will bet there was. For an old school guy it was not a good way to end a season. Sorry, folks, for the rant. Let's play ball!
×
×
  • Create New...