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
    The perfect execution I was talking about was 2nd and 3rd, no out, and no force anywhere. At that point he was going to see the top of the order no matter what, and a force at every base would be simply more advantageous than no force anywhere. That doesn't change no matter how many times a guy strikes out, or how many strike outs a pitcher has. That is not my opinion, it it the opinion of almost every manager in the game for over a century. The computers apparently say different. Oh well. A question: if the batter was Buxton in either of the at bats I was referring to, do you pitch to him or walk him? He strikes out just as often as the others, and is only hitting .220. That would mean you pitch to him, as you describe it. But I will bet they walk him. I am asking a macro question, not a micro one, when I ask about the strategies used in todays game. If there are 10 time more IBB's in extra innings than in any other inning, why have we only issues 4 all year? And only received 5, not all of which were in extra innings? It is just another example of things that don't happen much anymore. Strike outs and home runs appear to be all anyone cares about. I have wondered why for a while, now, and I appear to be a loner there. Again, oh well.
  2. Mark G
    Not to kick a dead horse here, but I wasn't talking about walking both. You walk Cave, setting up a force at all 3 bases. You pitch to Beckham, and (assuming he doesn't end the game) Contreras hoping to get the ground ball. The walk to Beckham was only after what happened with Cave and his taking 2nd. Rather than have 2nd and third with no out, I would walk Beckham to get a force everywhere. Once you lost Cave, you were going to face Arraez anyway, unless it ends before that. So, while I might be able to get the no walk at all thought, once it got to 2nd and 3rd no out, it ends any doubt about walking Beckham. But there would only be one IBB in either scenario. Overall, I wonder why the strategy is considered taboo; heck, I can't even convince anyone on this site it is still sound. The strategy I described would have been normal for a century. What happened recently to change that? It's almost like when they decided not to actually throw the 4 balls outside before he took his base, they all said what's the use?
  3. Mark G
    See this year and say ditto.
  4. Mark G
    As I mentioned, 1st and 3rd, instead of 2nd and third. The double play comes back into play, they hold the runner this time, and the infield only has to come in slightly, because the speed of the runner at 3rd is less. It worked, because they threw low and the catcher couldn't hang on, but the strategy is what I would question. Anyone know what the analytics would say one way or another on this?
  5. Mark G
    I see an awful lot of expectations that Lewis is pretty much a sure thing to come back, and just as strong or stronger than before. I am lost as to the confidence; not the hope, but the confidence. At 23 he has blown out his knee (big time) twice, and there is never a guarantee someone will be the same after that, especially at the SS position. Look at Buck, for example. Fragile would be a kind description of his career and, at 28, has what even the team acknowledges as "chronic" knee issues which keep him playing part time, at least for the near future. What is it about Lewis that makes everyone so confident this will change in his career? We have to plan on him not being the long term SS of the future, and if he is, God bless him. Great. But don't plan on it, especially if you can get a player of Correa's caliber. A bird in the hand is better than 2 in the bush, as my grandpa was fond of reminding me (the bush being the minor leagues today, no matter how promising one or 2 may look). Do what you can to keep Carlos.
  6. Mark G
    Okay, guys, you can stop piling on now. I understand what you are saying, but no one has convinced me the strategy overall, as a part of in game managing, should be dead and gone from the game. As I said, in 106 games our team and all other teams we have played combined has issues 9 IBB's in our 106 games. That is more than individual circumstances, it must be what the analytics are saying overall. And, frankly, I don't get it. Take last night. Someone mentioned the players due up and why one would want to pitch to them. It is precisely that, the 7,8, and 9 hitters, weak hitters on paper, that you would set up the force all around because, as I said, their run doesn't mean anything. Pitching to hitters with no force possible, and already in scoring position, no outs........virtually anything bad can happen when the ball is put in play. You are playing for the strike out, period. Anything other than perfect execution all across the board, and you get..........well, last night. Far wiser people than I have asked the same question on TV multiple times since the inception of the ghost runner on 2nd in extra innings. And none of the former player color commentators have had an answer (at least in the games I have seen) as to why not, because they played in a period when it would have been next to automatic. Bringing the infield in and having no where to go but tag plays everywhere but first is asking for........well, again, last night. That is not to say it works every time it is used, but to never use it? I am curious as to why the computer rejects it out of hand. Same as the sacrifice bunt, maybe? Just seems odd to me, but then I am getting used to being a lone voice in the wilderness on these type of things.
  7. Mark G
    Couldn't agree more, but we have to remember there are certain fundamentals that the computer doesn't believe in, therefore we do not use them or drill them into our team. Bunting runners along, stealing bases, hit and run usage, and taking extra bases in certain situations go against the analytics, so we don't see them much anymore. Actually, the play we scored the run on was not a wise move at all, and if Toronto makes a simple defensive play that all teams make every day, and twice on Sunday, we are out and left with 1st and 3rd instead of 2nd and third. It was obvious the contact play was on, but it was not a play most teams use in that situation, being no outs. You would use it with one out, but not usually with none. As you said, basic fundamentals. We do not have them because we do not use them, and we do not use them because we do not believe they produce desired results. But the lack of them really shows at times.
  8. Mark G
    I remember thinking to myself in the bottom of the 10th, why don't they intentionally walk Cave? His run means nothing, and it sets up a force at every base but home. Then, later, with 2nd and 3rd, why not intentionally walk Beckham to set up a force at every base including home? But they never even considered it, from the looks of it. I have never understood that lack of strategy. So I looked at our stats for the year, and as an entire team we have only been issued 5 intentional walks all season so far. And our pitching staff has only issued 4 ourselves. Seems strange that a strategy so simple is almost gone from the game. Makes me wonder if that is another of the analytics in play.
  9. Mark G
    "The Twins scored 3 runs. That's not going to get you a lot of wins, regardless of how much rage we want to direct at the relievers." Precisely. At the risk of breaking my arm (patting myself on the back), I have been saying since last year we have way too many games with the 3 runs or less stat. Forget any other team scoring or batting numbers; this is the one that counts the most, by far. If we score 10 runs one game, and 2 the next, we are averaging 6 runs a game and are probably 1-1. After tonight we have scored 3 runs or less just over 46% of our games this year. 5 over .500 is probably all we can expect with that level of consistency (inconsistency?). We can definitely tell how much Arraez means to us when he goes into a slump. We have been spoiled by him until now. I hope he gets going again.
  10. Mark G
    Oh, I don't know. We got 3 pitchers and a back up catcher on deadline day. Basically, we are improved by the 3 pitchers, not the back up catcher, so it is natural to speculate how someone like Rocco, who is becoming notorious for his management of pitchers, will handle the new ones, and the only way one can do that is to review how he has handled others. You could argue that is a part of this thread, at least a little, as anything else; not that I ever argue, mind you.
  11. Mark G
    If a starter cannot go through a lineup AT LEAST a 3rd time, we won't talk yet about a 4th, then he is nothing more than a long reliever. Period. When a BP pitches over 40% of the innings pitched in a season, it wears out; those stats don't lie, either. And when you go into a game knowing you are going to use 4 or 5 pitchers each and every game, every one of them has to be on that day to succeed. Tuesday's game should be a shining example of that. It only took one guy having a bad inning to lose the game, solely on that bad inning. Our offense scores 3 runs or less 40 plus percent of the games this year; we simply do not have the margin for error to have one reliever having a bad outing on any given game. Ryan was doing fine, and has proven he has the stamina to go deeper. If even one of the guys coming in after him had a bad day, well, see Tuesday. 18 at bats and take a shower is not a starting pitcher. If the philosophy is piggy back a couple of long relievers and bring in the late inning guys, then go with that, but it means stretching out a lot more of our pen guys to go 3 or so innings. And how many innings in a season can they do, having never done it before? Otherwise, you have what we saw the last two days. 5 pitchers all having to be on every game. Could it possibly, just possibly, be that is a major reason we are only 6 games over .500 in a weak division? Our leading starter has barely over 90 innings pitched......in the first week in August! And the BP has been a major reason we are where we are, wearing out as the season goes. I don't need to see any other analytics than that to see a pretty real problem.
  12. Mark G
    I wasn't expecting much to begin with this year, so I have to say I am pleasantly surprised. I like the BP additions, I am optimistic about Mahle, and any catcher is better than no catcher, although when another team's AAA catcher is better than our AAA catcher, we should be looking long term at the catching situation in this organization. We literally had no one we felt could be brought up from any level (which means we still don't). That needs to be addressed. Otherwise, I like the control we got with a couple of the pitchers, and the BP is looking a lot more competitive today than it did Tuesday morning. I do agree with the sentiment that Mahle needs to be allowed to do what he does best, which is eat innings; that will be interesting to see. It will only be worth getting an innings eater if we allow him to eat the innings. A real test of Rocco and his philosophy. Overall, they did a lot more than I thought they would, and got some arms that just might be the difference. We will know in 58 games, I guess, but it appears (at least on paper) that we are a better team overall today than we were 2 days ago.
  13. Mark G
    I think Cleveland gave him to us because we have 8 games left with them this year and he is the closest thing to a sure out they could find to put in our lineup.
  14. Mark G
    "Can we just stop with the 'Correa fell in our laps' stuff? It just isn't true. The Twins used the Yankee interest in our new shortstop to dump Josh Donaldson's salary AND vacate the SS position precisely to jump into the top of the free agent SS market. Yep, they were targeting Story, but the ONLY reason Boras contacted the Twins is they had already done the work to make a deal with Carlos feasible. Without that work, Boras does not call, and if he did the Twins wouldn't have been able to afford him, and Correa is playing elsewhere." Hmmmmm.......interesting take, but I seem to remember Falvine openly admitting that Boras contacted them, saying he had a proposition he believed they would be interested in. Hence the belief that he "fell into our laps". Now, we were actively trying to dump JD's contract, and we found a way to do it with NY, but the concept we were doing all of that so we could get Story or Correa, specifically targeting one of them, is,,,,,,,well,.......an interesting take. Without freeing up JD's contract Boras doesn't call.......hmmmmm........not sure I can buy that one. But it is an interesting take.
  15. Mark G
    That is the 64,000 dollar question. I seem to remember when this group came here they talked about their future vision and pitching was #1 on the list. They were going to trade for prospects and draft power pitchers, moving away from the pitch to contact previous folks here were developing. Well, the power pitchers are here, littered through the entire system, and the injuries are littered throughout the entire system as well. Coincidence? Bad luck? Or are young arms not developed enough to produce that much stress with every pitch? And since we do not stretch out our young players and develop that strength as they mature physically, is it really any wonder they have the injuries they do? Pitch counts and innings limits are designed to keep the young guys from getting injured from over taxing their arms. The results appear to speak for themselves, considering we are 5 years in. All babying our guys has done is turn high school, college, and low pro ball starters into short relievers blowing their arms off on every pitch. How is that working out for us?
  16. Mark G
    I know this is the cynic in me, and I expect a pretty fair amount of flak for the speculation, but I am starting to wonder how this team handles the IL. Guys come and go from it like they use options to shuffle guys back and forth from St. Paul, or juggle the 40 man roster. Sano was healthy until the last rehab game when he tweaked the knee (the same knee) sliding into 2nd? He tells no one, comes up and flops, and now we hear it is his knee again? And right back on the IL, bringing someone else up instead and still giving us time to decide what to do with him. We go from day to day to the IL and back with almost everyone on the 40 man roster, or at least it feels like that. Are we truly getting injured at the rate we are, or are we just looking at minor dings and dongs, things players used to play through during a season, differently than ever before and not allowing a player to play with an owie he used to play with. We have way, WAY too many trips to the different IL's, even to the point of the national TV guys commenting on the exorbitant number of injuries to this team. As someone who remembers the Cal Ripkins of the game, I wonder sometimes if it is the players just not being in the condition they once were, or are teams being allowed to use the IL's as extra options on players to keep them moving around at will. Set me straight if you think I am out of bounds, here, or am I really?
  17. Mark G
    You're right, it is confusing. The BP had 5 days off, played 2 games, had a day off, played 2 games, and had another day off. So why make Ryan take one for the team, so to speak, only to put Gordon in in the 8th to save the BP another inning? This guy gets curiouser and curiouser every year I watch him.
  18. Mark G
    All 7 at once, or a smorgasbord where they could pick what they want?
  19. Mark G
    That maybe, maybe pressure from the family to be home more, maybe the money was too much to pass up, maybe a combination of all of the above.......it is a head scratcher. I can see where one might think something went wrong, though, because I have never read anywhere (maybe someone else has?) that the Twins tried to match or beat the offer.
  20. Mark G
    I read he got the pitching coach job at LSU, which is really close to home for him, and he wants to be with his family because his kids are at that age. I also read he got a raise for doing so, as the school really wanted him.
  21. Mark G
    I agree with most everything, except for possibly one item. I hear lots of folks here and elsewhere talk about '23 and beyond, and how that may be our window realistically rather than the here and now. What is it that leads to that conclusion? The left side of our infield may very well be gone, our outfield won't be any better than it is now, the catching situation isn't playoff contending caliber as of now, or next year. And the pitching staff is counting on young, unproven guys to step up and seize the day up and down the staff, not to mention (but we always have to on this team) trying to stay off the IL. There will be things that are better, and things that are good now but gone soon. Overall, how are we contenders in the coming couple of years where we aren't now? I guess why I am not feeling the love is because I hear all about the guys coming up through the system that are going to step up and step into the areas we need. And in the same conversation I hear we haven't got enough high end prospects to put into trades to help us now and still have something left to bring up when the needs come in the next couple of years. Which is it? Are we good in the system with good up and coming players, or are the cupboards bare to the point that we can't compete in trade talks? Because if what we see is what we get in the immediate future I would like to take the kind of shot Seattle just did. Or at the very least, if we are not going to compete on that level, make the FO be up front and honest about it. Not that there is much chance of this pair being honest about anything, but at least put the pressure on.
  22. Mark G
    If, in the hour and 15 minutes since this "story"(?) was posted, we made a trade with anyone, for anyone, please update the story. And continue to update it every hour on the hour so I am not the last to hear of something. Thank you. THE END.
  23. Mark G
    Correct me if I'm wrong, but the Twins got Ryan for Cruz on July 22nd, how many days before the trade deadline? Not only can it be done with the right offer, it has been recently. We simply need to make the right offer. Personally, I think we are waiting for the BIG offers to be snapped up so we can pick up the left overs at the deadline without having to give up much. Stay tuned.
  24. Mark G
    I only have two questions: can he throw 100 pitches without needing TJ surgery 3 days later? And has he ever pitched a 3rd time through the lineup and lived to pitch another day? If he is 2 for 2 pay what you have to for him and tell Rocco to pay attention to how it is done.
  25. Mark G
    This is just for fun, too, but the answer is entirely who we would have received in return. Should we dream, or be realistic and just accept it would be 3 "prospects" and we would already be talking about '23?
×
×
  • Create New...