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
    Normally you have to be a certain number of runs ahead or behind to use position players, but the rule allows it in extra innings regardless of score. Personally, I don't see a whole lot of difference between conceding the game the way we did yesterday and saying no mas and just leaving the field. Knowingly losing a game, regardless of when or why, leaves a bad taste in my mouth, but apparently that is just me.
  2. Mark G
    Normally you have to be a certain number of runs ahead or behind to use position players, but the rule allows it in extra innings regardless of score. Personally, I don't see a whole lot of difference between conceding the game the way we did yesterday and saying no mas and just leaving the field. Knowingly losing a game, regardless of when or why, leaves a bad taste in my mouth, but apparently that is just me.
  3. Mark G
    I like the sentiment, but the level of competition means everything. 12 of the 15 games were against teams that lost over 100 games; how does that play in October, when we play teams equal or better than us? I like our chances because of the format of the first series and only needing our best 8 or 9 pitchers or so, but get into a best of seven later on against top competition and I wonder how good we really are. We won't be seeing many RP's with an ERA of 4 or higher to pile on late in games. Again, I think we have a decent chance this year; I am just a little cautious in thinking we are better than maybe we really are. Bring it on.
  4. Mark G
    All very true to a large degree. Where you get your 87 wins over the course of a long season doesn't matter in the grand scheme of things, but we spent the last few weeks beating up on bad teams' bad bullpens; I simply wonder how good we really are going into the arena of equal or better teams in the playoffs. Our overall record is almost identical to Toronto's, but we all know who we played 52 games against and who they played 52 games against within each division. As I said above, I think we will win the series 2-1, but I can't help but continue to wonder how good are we, really? Let the test begin.
  5. Mark G
    Good wrap up. And it ought to be an interesting 3 days ( I believe we will win the series 2-1). But I do wonder if we are as good as we think we are. After the All Star break we had a pretty soft schedule, including, what was it, 19 games against teams that lost over 100 games? Are we as good as our 87 wins would suggest? Or are we better, now that we have our pitchers back? I, for one, will stay tuned to find out. Now, I don't know if I will get in trouble for making this comment on this article, it is a little off topic, but I was more than a little disappointed in using Luplow in the 11th inning of the game yesterday. Ends the season on a weird note, to me, just conceding the game and going home. I know I am old school, but it just feels wrong. Am I?
  6. Mark G
    Aw, that was what I was going to post. 🤭
  7. Mark G
    If this has been said already, forgive me, but why don't we just stop using 1st base as an extra DH spot and target the position in free agency, landing a starting caliber guy who actually knows the position? Rotating outfielders and utility players in and out of the position works while someone is recovering from an injury, but we have been doing this for way too long now. When you have to teach your catcher to play 1st base, it should tell you something; like you need to find an actual first baseman! The minor league system hasn't produced any, leaving the major league club to teach on the fly. Spend a little money on the position and settle it. Don't risk one of your two catchers to possible injury playing a position he doesn't know, just to get a right handed bat in the lineup.
  8. Mark G
    Bullpen looks a little beat (up?). Let's hope Kenta can go deep into the game. 😬
  9. Mark G
    "What was our record after the all-star break last year? Not good. Do we expect a repeat?" Good post. As for the first question, it might not be. We open up after the break with 23 out of the next 26 games against teams at approx. .500 on down......all the way down to Oakland. A decent record in those games should give us a little breathing room. And I read somewhere we have the 3rd easiest schedule in the league (or was that in all of MLB) from this point on, based on won loss records of the opponents. With our starters going the way they are we will sneak out the Division. but where do we go from there. As I have said here before we appear very comfortable competing in the division year in and year out, but not much else. Time will tell us what Joe will do now that he is making the decisions. Stay tuned.............
  10. Mark G
    Good points, one and all. Can't argue. But I do wonder how so many players who excelled in amateur ball, minor league ball, and in a lot of cases (CC?) major league ball, all of a sudden digress. Buck is the perfect example of a phenom who changed his swing and became a Sano with much better defense. Not saying the hitting coach is ruining anyone. But there has to be a doubt that he is helping anyone, either. The theory is that it is an organizational approach, as this is not the first hitting coach this management team has brought in. As for Arraez, is it just the National League that has him hitting 70 points higher than he hit here? Why is CC down? Gallo not improved? Kepler? And, by your own argument, no one who has come here, or come up through our minor league system, has improved measurably. Just asking the question: is it an organizational approach, or is it something else? Why all the golf swings over the last handful of years? Launch angle?? They all seem to fall into it. or is it just me (and a ton of others)? Last year just over 48% of our games we scored 3 runs or less. This year well over 1/3 of our games are TWO runs or less. Some people wonder why, especially with the roster turnover year after year. Can't all be the players, or we would eventually land players who think like Arraez and Lewis. Count me as one of the ones who is wondering..........
  11. Mark G
    The other night FS1 had the Marlins game on and I got the joy of watching Arraez go 3-5 with the best bat control in baseball. Carew esq, and it was almost effortless. You are right; it is clearly an organizational approach, and has been for years. Golf swings......er.......launch angles may get you the occasional solo home run, but level swings and line drives will generate a sustainable offense far more often. As we say in my field: do you want something better? Then it is going to have to be something different. Because if you do what you've always done, you're going to get what you've always got. In this case, different means a different approach. And you are not going to get a different approach with the same people. The FO is in its 7th year; the manager and his staff are in their 5th. Time to stop living off the laurels of 307 home runs and adjust to your personnel. Or let someone else. I am available. And I have been told more than once I am different. You know where to find me JP.😎
  12. Mark G
    Duran has been looking pretty human lately, and it is making me nervous. He has had a couple of extremely good defensive plays behind him to limit damage in the recent past, and has still given up a few his last few times out. Maybe he is not the 2 inning closer we want to think he is?? Maybe the pitch count for a guy like him gets a little high?? And when we do use him extra, he is very likely unavailable the next day. Is the risk/reward coming out ahead overall?? Just wondering.........
  13. Mark G
    We may have to just accept the fact that Royce is another Buck; an extremely talented player who may never be able to stay healthy. Getting hurt enough to require the IL simply by running out a ground ball is Buck esq if anything ever was. No crashing into walls, sliding into bases, running into another player going for a ball, or any other type of contact. Running the bases. Let's hope this is a one and done, and he can stay on the field.
  14. Mark G
    To quote a good post "I don't disagree with really anything you said." 😉 I am just speculating as to what it would have taken to complete the trade with Miami without having to part with LA; if that would have even been possible. Was it really LA or bust? Or was there another door that might have been opened? Again, I will never know, but it does make me wonder. On the other hand, you may be spot on and there was never really a door number 2 or door number 3.
  15. Mark G
    Again, I can't prove a negative, so all I can do is speculate, which is pointless, but fun. 🤭 It all boils down, to me at least, age vs the combination of cost and team control. LA is in his arbitration years, with the next 2 being his last before free agency. And they will be expensive years, as he is already at the 6 mil point and that will rise. He is also 26, with his nagging calling card supposedly troublesome knees. Now Miami has never been a team to explode its payroll, so the combination of all of the above may have been a slow down if we had put together the right package of players either pretty much major league ready and/or pretty close to being ready. Cheap, more years of team control, and more players total may have moved the needle. Age alone would not have killed a deal with a team heavy in pitching and low on bats. Again, more speculation on my part, but I think we chose to move LA because he had the most value at that moment, and we had no place to put both him and the infielders coming up through the system. And with the financial commitments we were making to CC and BB we might have thought the expense that was coming down the pike with LA might not be doable to keep all 3. I still believe that cost is why we let Urshella walk away when he was still a very skilled player, and the hope that Miranda was ready to take his place; Miranda, who was much cheaper and had team control. Keeping in mind, also, that the trade for Lopez only became worth it when we extended him. At a cost, to be sure. So money, years of team control, the number of players and the positions they play, all may have played a role in a variety of trade scenarios between the two clubs. I, personally, wish we had kept LA, but the FO stopped taking my calls some time back, so they never got the message. Oh well, their loss. 😉
  16. Mark G
    As much as I agree with all of the above, there is also a major factor in trades I do not see above: number of years of control. A Julien or Wallner would have many years of team control, as well as a huge potential. We can't prove a negative, so we will probably never know what sort of package Miami might have been willing to take, but never underestimate the draw of young players with a large upside AND a lot of years of control. By the way, that includes cost control, as the young players are playing for the minimum, or close to it. Just another factor to consider. Good post; many truths.
  17. Mark G
    That's all anyone can ask for. Thanks.
  18. Mark G
    "what would happen if the Twins went without a hitting coach for a couple weeks?" Crap, I thought we already were. 😵 With all the talk from Rocco about letting the players choose their own routines when it comes to things like batting practice, pre game routines, etc., I thought the inmates.....er.......the players were already running the asylum......er.......the dugout. Crap, they even run their own meetings. Who needs the coaches? 😏 You tell 'em, Royce!!
  19. Mark G
    Have no fear; I am misunderstood every day. It is what has made me so eloquent. 😌 As for a Buxton, hard contact really means nothing if the metrics tells the opposition where to play the hitter. You can knock the stuffing out of the ball if they are playing where you hit it. If you play the whole field, and use the speed you have (if any) you can get by with virtually any contact and it will fall or roll where someone isn't enough of the time to succeed. Yes, that will not give you the power stats you might want, but it is better than what we are seeing out of some of these guys. As for pitching, the same could be said. Why does a pitcher try so hard for strike outs? Because when the ball is put in play it may be put where there isn't someone there to catch it. Or they will flub it. Or throw it away, etc. Contact, hard or soft, is a possible hit, or at least base runner. Now, if the defense is playing the batters correctly, contact should also be right at them, or close enough. So contact, in and of itself, is not bad; it is only bad in the pitcher's mind. The speed off of the bat means absolutely nothing to me. Using the whole field, and making the defense work harder than striking out a third of the time is the most important aspect of hitting. And pitchers should embrace contact. If they put the pitch where they want it, the batter will more than likely hit it where they want it. And someone will be there, or close enough. Strike outs pile on pitch counts, and when teams are married to pitch counts it limits the innings a starter can go, and taxes the bullpens. I hope any of that made sense. 🥴
  20. Mark G
    In today's game........Okay, let me use our Buck as an example. Correct me if my eyes are deceiving me, but his swing has changed over the course of his career. He has adapted a virtual golf swing.......er, "launch angle" swing, to maximize his power on the occasions he actually squares up. And his strike out rate shows it; as does his home run totals. He will swing and miss more, and also have soft contact on the occasions he does make contact, but not square up. But when he does, good things happen, as we have seen. Now change that around to the pitcher's side. A lot of swings and misses and soft contact, but throughout the game, and the season overall, when they do square up bad things happen, and runs - earned runs -, are on the board. If it works for hitters, all of the power stats, etc., even though the BA is lower, then it has to be the same for the pitchers as well. They go hand in hand.........or not? Lots of strike outs on both sides, pitcher and hitter, and soft contact in between, but runs scoring when they finally square up. Or not? I trust your knowledge a crap ton more than mine, so I will leave that question with you. 😉
  21. Mark G
    I know I am old school; I get reminded of that every time I post something like this. 😉 The only thing that would make me think someone is better than his ERA is if there is a stat that shows how many inherited runners the bullpen allows in after you are taken out. I might even understand if you had an official scorer who continuously calls clear errors hits, or if an umpire is walking batters on clear strikes. But how often does that happen over the course of a season? Earned runs - runs scored due to batters hitting your pitches - are, always have been, and always will be the best indicator of a pitcher's performance. And all of the advanced metrics that numbers can provide isn't going to change that. And, for me, that is larger than just Lopez; it is pitching in the major leagues period. I love you, Ted; no, seriously, I love your articles. I just don't believe all these advanced analytic metrics are worth the paper they are written on unless they match up with time proven stats. Lopez gets a lot of swings and misses, and a lot of soft contact - all adding up to 4 1/2 runs a game (averaged over 9 innings, of course). It just is what it is. And I am in the minority; I get it. But that doesn't make me wrong. 🤭 Or does it? 😵
  22. Mark G
    As of today, you are spot on, As for the long summer, after the All Star break we play 23 out of 26 games against sub par, or very sub par teams. That will determine our season. What are the odds we will be ready? Stay tuned............
  23. Mark G
    Along with 242 complete games, and 287 wins. And he couldn't make the HOF until, what, his last year of eligibility? How can anyone make the HOF again if that standard is marginal? JR will never reach those numbers, but he is blossoming into a staff ace.
  24. Mark G
    A complete game. Only 5 K's by the offense. In the same game!! Has anyone done a temperature check in hell recently? 🫣
  25. Mark G
    Agreed! And I get roasted every time I ask this question, but I will ask again: who exactly is "we", Rocco? Are you the manager, or not? If not, when can "we" expect one? Because the FO can't manage from the penthouse, and you don't seem able to manage without their permission. A manager I used to work for once said "we need a plan; we have got to have a plan. I don't even care if it's a GOOD plan! Just give me a plan!" Does this team really have a plan? If what we are seeing day in and day out is a plan, give me a new one. I don't even care if it's a good one. I can't be any worse. 🤕
×
×
  • Create New...