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
    What do you bet Rocco got called into the office and was told to shut the door for allowing a pitcher to see a batter for a 4th time. He then convinced them it was the AZ heat that made him light headed and he lost track of time. They bought it and told him to sit next to a fan tomorrow. Stay tuned..........
  2. Mark G
    Well, if you have one that is better than the All Star team, I will stand corrected, because I don't know of one.
  3. Mark G
    I understand everything you are saying, and I actually agree with more than I might be coming across. My sole argument is, has been, and always will be, is that if you are too fragile to go a starter's distance, then you are not a starter and shouldn't be put in that role. If you are deemed healthy enough to return to a starter's role, then you are able to go a certain distance (that includes a 3rd time, or more, through the lineup) unless you are just not on that day and need to be relieved. Then, as you point out, the lower end of the bullpen comes in until you are back in the game, if ever, at which point the upper end comes in. When starters become 4 inning pitchers, or just two times through the lineup, then the bullpen has to pitch too many innings, requiring several pitchers to be on their game each and every game to have a winning chance. When one is already on that day, especially your starter, you ride that horse until it slows down. When simply pitching injures a pitcher he may simply not be a starter and shouldn't be used as one. Use the skills he has in the shorter situations that bring out his best. Wasn't that the reason they kept increasing the pitching staff to a dozen and a half guys (including the shuttle bus to and from AAA)? Managers might not be robots just reading their computers, but ours (and our FO) are so afraid of someone getting hurt they don't allow them to build up the strength to not get hurt. For all the worry about players who are coming off of injuries any time in the last 3 years, they still fill their IL's month after month and year after year, so maybe they should listen to me. (TD doesn't have to listen to me, though)
  4. Mark G
    Um........the All Star Game IS that recognition.........isn't it?
  5. Mark G
    As my post above, and many others like it, was trying to convey, that is the whole point. You never know which one you are going to get on a particular day. If you have had an injury of any kind in the last 3 years you are on a leash. If not, you are free to not only throw more pitches, but give up runs almost every inning before finally getting pulled. Ryan, Bundy, and Smeltzer are allowed to give up 4 or 5 runs in 4.1 - 5 innings, but Archer, Gray, and others get pulled at a certain point no matter how well they are doing? Is that the pattern I just haven't seen? Is that the strategy everyone is on board with and thinks is a winning plan? I go to my Dr. and say "Doc, it hurts when I do this" his reply would be "don't do that". If you get injured pitching more than others, pitch less than others. They used to call that a relief pitcher. A starter used to.........oh, what's the point? Just as an aside, we have used 7 pitchers that have only started, no relief appearances. 5 of the 7 are averaging less than 5 innings a start. When do past injuries become nothing more than paranoia, and when do they signal the pitcher just shouldn't be a starter? Or maybe, just maybe, be a hint that we should be stretching out our starters long before mid June? Before you yell at me too loud, I should point out that I may be of an age where it could be construed as elder abuse.
  6. Mark G
    Not to me.
  7. Mark G
    Agreed. What you deserve and what you get sometimes live on different planets. So many people view him as a utility player, it is hard to garner enough votes from fans to be named starter. But if he is not chosen as a reserve, and brought into the game for more than one pinch hitting AB, someone needs to go to baseball purgatory.
  8. Mark G
    Agreed. My amateur sleuthing shows we have scored 3 runs or less in just over half.......HALF.......of our 66 games. That has worked up until now against quite a bit of sub .500 competition, but we need to start scoring runs. That means manufacturing some now and then Rocco. A well timed bunt, an occasional hit and run, being more aggressive on the bases, etc. I didn't actually see the game, but according to this recap we had a single followed by a double and stayed at third and a double followed by a single and stayed at third. We led off the game with a solo HR and after that scored one run the rest of the way despite 5 doubles. No runs on SF's, ground outs, etc. If we don't get a HR or 3 or more hits in an inning..........you have to use the runners you have better, and that begins and ends with the manager/coaches.
  9. Mark G
    It seems like every other game we have to question the pitching decisions. Archer and Gray are doing great and get pulled what some would consider early. Smeltzer doesn't have it, gives up 6 runs in 4 innings and has an elevated pitch count, and is right back out there for the 5th. If this was the first time (or 2nd, or 3rd..........) this question has come up, no one would be concerned, just a little curious. But this pattern, or lack of it(?), happens so often it makes you shake your head quite a bit of the time. If anyone can understand this mind set, and explain it in plain English, I sure would curious. I have been watching this team since '65 and I just do not understand this manager's thought process game in and game out. Win, lose, or draw, playoffs, or last place, at least I understood the process. Smarter folks than I will have to help me out here.
  10. Mark G
    I have this vision of his first day back playing first (is that being redundant?) and the pitcher fields a bunt. He throws to first right up the baseline and AK reaches awkwardly across the baseline for the catch and is blown over by the runner, bouncing him up the 1st base line into right field. He picks himself up, walks 3 strides and falls on his face and has to be revived. He recovers in time for spring training.
  11. Mark G
    Whitey333 can correct me if I am mistaken, but I don't think he (or am I) is talking about the success or failure of one game in particular. We are commenting on the plan, and whether it is the correct plan 100% (all 162 games) of the time, and generally speaking, if it is enjoyable to watch all season every season. You are right; it is the way the team is being run right now. And it is working a good share of the time against sub .500 competition. The jury is out on how it will work once the competition in October becomes tough every single game, but I digress. It is simply not an enjoyable version of the game, and us older folks sometimes remember when players didn't get hurt just running the bases or throwing more than 60 pitches. Baseball musical chairs might be the wave right now, but time will tell if it stands the test of eras. Counting the express from St. Paul to Mpls. we work with 16-18 man pitching staffs each year now. On what planet are there a dozen and a half true major league pitchers to throw out there because the chart tells you to? Again, I digress. The point is this way of managing games works at times and not others, primarily based on the quality of the competition. And it is not much fun to watch anymore. But thanks for listening and sharing. I, for one, always appreciate the give and take.
  12. Mark G
    I am glad you enjoy this type of game; I wish I could share in your enjoyment. No, I don't believe he was pulled when he was because of the injuries recently, because the pattern is the same with every pitcher. If it was the next guy up, why is it always at the end of an inning they are pulled? If it was performance in the moment, the moment would change game to game, not exactly when the 3rd time through the lineup was in front of him. If it was in-game strategy it would vary throughout the game, by inning and where in the inning, but it doesn't. It is entirely the times through the lineup and the bullpen usage chart you refer to, and I reiterate my point about it simply not being fun to watch game after game all season. I will tip my hat if it works deep into October, but it still won't be as enjoyable as it is for you. And I am not alone.
  13. Mark G
    If I believed for a New York minute that that was the reason, I wouldn't have written what I did. Archer hasn't missed a start this year and he is averaging 4 innings a start, even though he has pitched pretty well overall. The other day...........4 innings, even though he was going great. The argument there, as well, is he was injured in the past. When does that become just an excuse? How many starts this year from our rotation have ended exactly where last night's did, regardless of score and pitch count? It is simply a 3rd or 4th (very seldom 4th) time through the order that determines changes. They have been very up front about that being a strategy, so it is hard to then say it is because we are afraid of injuries if we push them too hard. It can't be both ways; our stats say they don't do well 3rd and 4th times through, but it is only because we are protecting them from injury that we limit their innings, especially when the innings just happen to coincide with where they are in the batting order. It makes your head spin. And my overall point was it is just not fun to watch that 162 times a year. I just hope the guys we have can make it work for them; it doesn't work for a lot of the rest of us.
  14. Mark G
    I guess I will be the lone voice crying out in the wilderness again, but a 3 hit shutout with only 65 pitches might, just might, make one want to ride the horse they are leading with rather than change horses in the middle of the stream, so to speak, and hope all 5 come through without a stumble. This whole belief that I cannot allow you to pitch to a batter for a 3rd time no matter how well you have done the first 2 times through is nothing more than stubborness. Plan A is plan A, and I will not change it. We had 2 pitchers this week on fire, and BETWEEN THEM they pitched 9 innings. I can only hope that they keep on winning to a level that gets them into the playoffs, but I have to say they are the most frustrating Twins team I have watched since I began in 1965. Rocco's analytics may pan out more often than not, but I can say for a fact I am not the only one who just doesn't want to watch this brand of baseball. I know so many people who don't watch at all anymore, and that is not a good sign for the game. I want my team to do well, but I find myself losing the passion for this game as it is being managed. When I was my son's age I went to 8-10 games a year. Now, between the 3 of us, we have gone to a total of 2 games total in the last 5 years. And it is entirely because we have no idea of who we are paying to see on any given day except the starter, and even then he will be gone in 4 or 5 innings. No thanks. As I said, I may be the lone voice on this site, but not outside of it. Hey, Jim, you might want to look at your attendance figures and ask yourself why. We are averaging 5-6 thousand a game less than '17 and '18, and only ahead of last year (when we started the season with 25% capacity limits) by about 3 thousand. It is not the product or the quality of the roster. Think about it, Jim. Let's hope they can beat Cleveland. It will go a long way to a title.
  15. Mark G
    Couldn't agree more on Urshella.
  16. Mark G
    Miguel who?
  17. Mark G
    I will not argue with any of their contributions, but I am wondering: is Arraez one of those players who is so obvious it simply goes without mentioning, or is he another overlooked guy? I ask because I don't know anyone who has been overlooking Correa, and he is in the trio.
  18. Mark G
    It seems odd that nowhere in the article can I find who was in charge of this draft. Correct me if I am wrong, but didn't the smartest guys in the room come along in 2017? I am pretty sure that this was a Ryan FO draft; is he going to get any of the credit for it? I think he may deserve some.
  19. Mark G
    It is hard to know how to feel about this game. The win is nice, and the stats look good for us, but................Seattle threw 5 pithers (out of 6) totaling 8 innings with ERA's ranging from 4.30 to 6.57 and a batting order that had 6 out of 9 batting between ,172 and ,234. We were up 2-zip before an out had been recorded on either side and we barely won 3-2. Again, it is good to get the win, but I sure was nervous the entire 27 outs. It took 7 pitchers to put down a weak lineup (save for 2 guys) and we got a total of 3 runs against some pretty so so pitchers. Once again, it was nice to get the win. I just hope they don't all get that nerve wracking.
  20. Mark G
    Are you suggesting that Rocco would BS us? I am shocked. SHOCKED! I have said this before (and before, and before..........), that we have to remember: the plan is the plan; individual games do not change the plan. Wins and losses do not change the plan. Injuries do not change the plan. But most importantly, the plan is on a need to know basis. And guess who doesn't need to know?
  21. Mark G
    Sorry, as much as I like the guys, Gray has pitched 7 games. Simply not enough to warrant. And Buck, while he has the home runs, has nothing else either in average or RBI's (yes, that still counts). 17 HR is right up there, and worthy of being looked at, but he has 30 RBI's on 17 HR and 8 doubles. It is, and will always be with his hitting approach, an all or nothing swing. I guess I come from an era where you need more than the 30-40 times a year when you connect (see Sano). Maybe he can be considered on his defense. I think Arraez is a no thought process, and Ryan definitely deserves it. Duran is iffy, but would love to see him go. And I noticed you left out the best SS in the league, who happens to have decent stats as the year goes along. Anyway, great article and I am glad you started the discussion.
  22. Mark G
    Agreed. It proves, once again, that there are no throw away positions in baseball.
  23. Mark G
    I think Jim Kaat put the hex on Cortes when he nick named him Nestor the molester.
  24. Mark G
    Probably because they have pitched against the rest of the Central Division.
  25. Mark G
    It reminds me so much of last year when he tore up the league in April, then got hurt and went on the IL for a stretch. Came back and immediately got hurt by getting hit with the pitch on the hand and went back on the IL. Came back late in the season and played the rest of the way. Now, last year he was over .400 when he went on the IL. When he came back late in the season he was not the same hitter and ended the season at .306, meaning he hit a fair amount under .300 down the stretch. Now this is not a compliment, and it is not a criticism; it is purely an observation. Again this year he was tearing up the league in April, got hurt, and has slipped a pretty fair amount. The difference is he went on the IL last year and did not this year. So, in my extremely humble opinion, the question becomes does the IL do any good other than to create a roster spot for someone else? Or, do you let him play and manage his workload and therapy? I hear people saying we want him healthy for the 2nd half when the games mean the most, but if we don't win in May and June the games in the 2nd half don't have the chance to be meaningful. Is he helping us win? Go from there.
×
×
  • Create New...