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
    In this extremely humble observer's opinion, there are 3 different ways you can take what would be considered risks. You can risk money, you can risk capital, or you can risk reputation. Correa and Buxton, for example, were financial risks. If they don't come through, all you are out is money. Paddock, Mahle, Lopez, etc., are risks of capital. We had to give up potential future players for today's players. If they don't come through, we are out future potential. And if we do nothing, stand pat, so to speak, we risk our reputation as a competitive organization, and our potential fan base may turn their backs and not support us. Three different types of risks, each with it's own reward or loss. We need to evaluate each risk separately, and learn from both success and failure. We appear to be willing to spend money on every day players; not so much on pitchers. We risk capital on trades for pitchers more than every day players, and look for players with control, accepting the injuries that might go with them. And we go slowly with each risk, evaluating our fan base and their willingness to stay the course, or want something now to excite them and renew their attention. We do not refuse to take risks, but are slow and leery every step of the way. There are times for boldness, and times for standing pat. We just don't seem to have mastered either one.
  2. Mark G
    Well said.
  3. Mark G
    "Lay off Rocco. He is only following the instructions from the FO. If you do not like the way he is pulling starters and using relief pitchers be mad at Falvine." While Rocco can only play the hand he is dealt, and Falvine dealt him a crappy hand in that pen, how he uses them literally game by game, inning by inning, is his decision. He decides if they only face the 3 man minimum or go 3 innings, or anywhere in between. Using Thielbar 3 nights in a row was his choice, not the FO's. And so on, and so on. Rocco follows the overall philosophy of pitch counts and times through the order, but the pecking order of BP arms coming in and out is more his call than the FO's, or we wouldn't see the 3 nights in a row or multiple innings, etc. It would be predictable, game in and game out throughout the season. This has been a cluster @#$% for so long now, I stopped trying to even guess who will be on the pen list that day. Falvine needs to put together a pen that matches their overall pitching staff philosophy, but Rocco needs to play his cards much better than he has. Any guesses on who will be in each of the games today/tonight?
  4. Mark G
    Not 7 or 8 innings, just more than 70 pitches. And not because I want him to, but because the team needs him to, as they need all of their starters to. Now to me, that is logic and/or a fact, but others would say that is only my opinion.
  5. Mark G
    "Opinion: a view or judgment formed about something, not necessarily based on fact or knowledge." An opinion, by definition, can't be wrong; it is based on a viewpoint. It is how someone views something. A viewpoint can't be proven or disproven; it is an opinion. If all of our opinions had to be proven...........how many of us would be left?
  6. Mark G
    Now I know I will get a lecture on why I am too simplistic in my thinking, , but let me see if I have the correlation right here. We are right at or near the top with a bunch of our guys in the spin rate of many of their pitches, and.......let's see........we are pretty much at or near the bottom in length of starts out of our starters. Now I don't know much about these things, but it would appear to the uneducated that one might go with the other. I will wait to hear from folks far smarter than I.
  7. Mark G
    I will get hollered at too, but I couldn't agree more. One of the hardest sites to read that I go on. It is hard to stay away, because the folks here are great, but it is a frustrating site.
  8. Mark G
    The back end of the bullpen might have lost the game, but every one that pitched tonight pitched last night as well, with Thielbar having pitched Wednesday too. Your starter going the 3rd time through the order, or your reliever going for the 3rd night in a row. Not a hard choice, and to this extremely humble observer, Rocco makes the wrong one far too often. Looking at the bullpen spread sheet, how many of our back end guys are available tomorrow at all, much less for both games? If you push them tomorrow, who comes in Sunday? We have been saying for months that the starters have to pitch deeper into games, or the pen burns out. I am hoping for a sweep of the next 4 games, but with our pen being spent, injuries are the least of our problems. Short starts are problem #1, and it is a self induced problem.
  9. Mark G
    Good news: Arraez does not appear to be seriously hurt, and can go this weekend (hopefully). Correa continues to hit and looks sharp going into Cleveland. The team hasn't quit, and Chicago beat Cleveland, closing the gap before the weekend. Bad news: I don't like how many of our top bullpen guys worked going into Cleveland. And KC will very likely be the same team the rest of the year, and Cleveland gets them the last 6 games of the season.
  10. Mark G
    Agreed. But I suspect the disagreement is far more than one pitcher being pulled after a certain number of pitches, losing the only chance, just maybe, for the gold ring of pitching. It is about the overall use of pitchers, and the belief one way or the other that starters can be far more capable than today's generation gives them credit for. It takes conditioning and stretching out, as it was done for a century, but today's pitchers want to tork all out on every pitch. And, apparently, management (and a lot of the folks here) want them to as well. So, we will have to agree to disagree on why that is a good thing. I know I am a little old school, and am in the minority today (today meaning this era, not today as in Wednesday ), but no one yet has convinced me how torking it on every pitch and living with 5 inning starts is good for the players or the game. It causes injuries far more than 130 pitches ever has, but, again, let's just agree to disagree. But I do believe it is a debate not only for TD, but for the game. And I also believe I will lose the debate, At least on Wednesday.
  11. Mark G
    Somewhere in that sentence I believe was my point.
  12. Mark G
    I did consider the other viewpoint; I simply don't agree with it. And that is not the final word, either. I don't even get the final word at home. I'm sorry if it doesn't always come across the way I intended it to. I do feel pretty strongly about the dogged belief most managers and/or front offices have about babying pitchers. I happen to believe that it plays a role, maybe a big role, in the increase in injuries I have seen in my lifetime. No one is stretched out to the most of their ability anymore, and even when someone shows the ability to be a workhorse they pull in the reins. They play it so safe that the pitchers are never really safe. They believe more in their bullpens than they do in the starters they have developed over the course of many years. And I am on my soap box again, so I better get off before I get told to stay on topic. Topic: Ryan gets pulled with 6 outs to go in a no hitter because of a dogged belief in pitch counts. This extremely humble observer believes he should have been allowed to at least try. And that, and 8 bucks will get me a cup of coffee at Caribou.
  13. Mark G
    I wonder how many of the 316 recognized no hitters in the history of the game required more than 106 pitches. And more than that, I wonder how many of them survived the night after throwing so many pitches. Did any of them pitch again that season? It would be interesting to do that research, but it looks like I won't need to, because AG has given me the only history lesson I need. All of that was somewhat tongue in cheek, but it does kind of give a hint to what I think of the mindset that a 26 year old, in the prime of his athletic life, is going to ruin his arm by throwing 20 or 30 more pitches on a perfect September night. If he somehow gives up a hit anywhere along the line he is gone. He knows it and the fans know it. But to never know if he could have done it is a shame. There are 22 games left. He will start maybe 4 of them, and you can baby him then as much as you please. If it were any month but September, I think a lot more of us would understand. But if AG says the above isn't reasonable, then I guess this extremely humble observer must cede the floor.
  14. Mark G
    We can lament all we want about the missed opportunity, the reality is there will never be a no hitter on this team as long as this management is in charge. Rocco is following the FO philosophy and/or plan, and he believes it himself. Pitch counts and times through the order are here to stay. We have only had 2 complete games since Rocco got here, and that pitcher is in Toronto. Do not expect to see another, no no or not. I feel bad for the kid, but he has been groomed from both systems he has been in that this is the way, so he accepts it all the way. I don't think he is surprised, or even disappointed in being pulled. He probably even expected it. So, again, I feel bad for the kid, but I feel even worse knowing we will never see another Jack Morris who would tell Rocco you will take this ball out of my cold dead hand.
  15. Mark G
    As would I. Now, my memory has been known to have its slips now and then, but if memory serves me well today, I remember at the beginning of the season there was a general sense that '19 and '20 went well, and that '21 was the anomaly, not the predictor of what was to come. There was a lot of forgiving the FO and manager for '21, resting on the memory of past wins. As this season has worn on, the mood has been increasingly more realistic, seeing a trend of roster issues as well as in game management issues. What started as a majority of folks believing in the abilities of above mentioned folks, has slowly turned toward a belief that maybe changes are needed because we are in a rut; a rut of our own making. That has become a majority view, possibly, and if we all are feeling that way, the rest of the Twins fans are probably feeling that way as well. And judging from the attendance, 20th in MLB, JP might want to sit up and take notice as well. Change doesn't always mean firing. Most of the time it means adjustments to the plan, both in the off season and during the season. The combination of this FO and field management appears to believe if we could just get the right roster to operate the plan, the plan will work; they do not appear to be willing to look at the plan itself. Something has to change, be it the people or the plan. But, as I have said before, JP has stopped taking my calls, so I hope he is reading TD.
  16. Mark G
    From one old timer to another, well said!
  17. Mark G
    I guess my main concern is that out of the 16 players listed, 9 of them are pitchers. And this is not the first year we have had the same problem, maybe not the same number, but the same problem. The FO was brought here because of their past history of producing a pitching pipe line in their previous places, or so I have read, and yet the only pipe line we have seen is a line waiting to get into the trainers room. It has been on going for a while now, going all the way down the organizational line. The worst part, in the opinion of this humble observer, is how many of the injuries have come simply from playing. injuring yourself simply by throwing a pitch, or running the bases, or sliding into bases, etc. We are not being beaned, or are crashing into walls every other game, or even having weird accidents like you read about now and then. We are getting injured just playing. Especially our pitchers. Why? With all the pitch count and innings limits we impose on our prospects, why can't we stay healthy? And we all know about the pitchers we have picked up from without and the injuries with them. What is it about this organization that ends up with this kind of a list way too often? Is it really just bad luck? Really? Or do we need to take a step back and review our approach? I don't have those answers, but we need to find someone who does. And soon, like yesterday.
  18. Mark G
    Ah, yes, we are so much smarter now. And everything we did then is out of date, and who would ever think about "old school" baseball? Would I want pitchers to stop throwing pitches that clearly are blowing their arms out? Let me see............YES! Would I rather have pitchers throwing 240, 260, or, just maybe, 300 innings a year, vs. 140, 160, or, just maybe, 200 innings? Let me see.......YES! And I would rather have guys moving runners along, meaning into scoring position, if the situation calls for it. And, yes, the situation doesn't always call for it. But waiting for hits, or home runs, has gotten us where? Scoring 3 runs or less 45 plus percent of the time. That is a statistical fact. Maybe a little small ball would be appropriate now and then, new reality or not. And defense in your infield..........wow, what a concept. Might just be that it is worth at least a little bit. Teams still look for it. Please don't take all of this as an insult. ,or a pure assessment that you, or anyone who thinks alike, is totally wrong. It is just an assessment that "old school" is not totally wrong either. A mixture of both just might be the mix we need to get more out of the roster we have.
  19. Mark G
    "And nobody bunts anymore. You're going to have to give up on that dream. There are very few situations where bunting makes sense." If it was a dream, it was a recurring dream for 100 years. And every team in baseball was having that dream. Somehow it made sense for 100 years, but not now. Did the game change, or did the players? Kind of like when the NBA went to the 3 point shot, nobody thought practicing free throws was worth it anymore. And yet, when a guy hits the other way to advance a runner, or hits a fly ball that does the same, it is referred to as "a productive out", and everyone high fives him. Hmmmmm........a productive out, and a bunt.........let me ponder that.
  20. Mark G
    No I wasn't, but I am staring at the box score as I write this, and I see a pretty talented batting order compared to the rest of our division, which is what I said we had enough talent to compete against. The top 7, and Sanchez at the bottom for a spell, can compete in this division; we are not devoid of talent in that clubhouse. Same can be said for the pitchers we sent out there. None of them are slugs, even if Lopez had a bad day. I know what everyone is saying about the injuries, but I also know what they all have been saying about the young guys coming up to fill in. Miranda, Gordon, Garlick, Celestino, and some of the pitchers have done fine in replacing guys who are down, not to mention Arraez, Correa, and Urshela. For all the reasons we have talked about here all season they have not put it together as we had hoped, but it is not for lack of ability.
  21. Mark G
    Not hardly!
  22. Mark G
    This team has enough talent to compete in this division. The talent isn't being used to the best of their ability. Until that changes, what you see is what you get. Enough said.
  23. Mark G
    Thanks for the clarification, I was just in the AL in the stats. And I do not begrudge you that thought process, and you may be right in the long term, macro vs. micro sort of thing, but I still discount '20 for the very reason I outlined. Fast starts do not make a team. I could look at both NY teams this year; one has already lost its big lead, and the other is on the verge if it doesn't turn this around quick. Atlanta started slow, and look at them now; see Tampa as well. 60 games can be counted as numbers in a total data collection covering several years, but each season lives or dies on it own sometimes, as well. That is why I look at each individual season, as well as overall, like I said when I combined the last two. Trends are both short term and long term. Long term our trend seems to be that we have an organizational approach, regardless of the year to year roster. That will win when the players have career years, like '19, but not when all things even out or there are injuries (see the last two seasons). When that happens good organizations, and good game managers, alter their strategy. I just constantly wonder why we don't seem willing or able to to that, other than we believe in it so strongly we are willing to take the losses until we get back to the wins. I prefer adapting to the players we have. Just a very long winded explanation of some of my posts. Thanks for the give and take. I always learn from it.
  24. Mark G
    You are right. The Yankees finished one behind us in home runs, if I remember correctly, then cleaned our clocks in 3 straight in the playoffs. I do seem to remember it boiled down to pitching in those games, considering they outscored us 23-7. Same ball then, too. (I say all of this tongue in cheek, not to argue with you). Good pitching will beat good hitting pretty much all the time. We just didn't run into that much in our division, hence the big home run total. It may have masked some underlying problems we have now seen the last couple of seasons. Like no small ball. Anyway, you get my drift. Thanks for the give and take, it is always a pleasure. I learn a lot from it.
  25. Mark G
    It is in my extremely humble opinion. I don't count 60 game seasons, I only count full 162 game seasons, and for a reason; we started out this year 27-16 (a .628 percentage), and are 42-52 since (.447). That is why I disregard '20. And we have had 3 (almost) full seasons to get a sample from, so it is a fair thought process. With the record number of home runs, we had a .623 winning percentage. Since then, again, in full seasons (almost this one), we have a .475 winning percentage. (Just as an aside, where do you get the #12 from for this year? My stat reference has them 7th in the AL in home runs with 159. Not that it matters, I guess, but I am curious as to what I am missing, if anything.) When we hit home runs we win, when we don't, well...........we don't. A valid point in MEHO. Anyway, the entire point of my long winded post was that we waited for the home run at first, and, at first, it came. Since then, it has not come nearly as often and we haven't won as often. Time to change plan A, both on offense and in the pitching philosophy. And it appears, at least to this extremely humble observer, that the man simply will not do that. The question begs: why? A fair question that never seems to have an actual answer, other than he still believes, and always will, that plan A is the right plan, regardless of the roster he is given. Very bright people can be stubborn at times, or simply believe in the plan, or philosophy, so strongly they stay the course believing it will come around in the end. I am leaning toward the latter, but I wouldn't doubt the former, either. If I am wrong, I will take my crow medium rare, thank you.
×
×
  • Create New...