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
    And always will, because we are the smartest guys in the room.
  2. Mark G
    I really don't want this to sound snarky, so bear with me please, but you are saying (I think) that MLB teams don't want injuries, but are willing to live with them to get as many good innings out of them before they get hurt as they can get. I just don't see how that is what is best for the players, especially borderline players who will be left behind when they can no longer meet expectations, which they can no longer meet due to constant injuries, which they might not have had if...............does any of this even make any sense? When a starter throws everything they have into every pitch to get a batter out, yes, they will burn out faster than in the past; both in the number of pitches thrown and the number of innings pitched. Then the pen will come in and use 2, 3, 4, dare I say 5 relievers each and every game. And they will burn out, and............where does it end? 30 man rosters with 17 man pitching staffs? With MLB mandated pitch and innings limits? Anyone wonder why old schoolers question today's geniuses?
  3. Mark G
    His point might be, or if not his, mine, is that in today's game players have the finest conditioning, diet, trainers, facilities, etc. etc. on the planet. They work out in the off season just like other professional athletes. Pitchers, especially starters, should be on a throwing regimen year round to keep their arm in shape and "stretched out". If a player/pitcher needs several weeks of gearing up before they can complete a single game, how do they survive a 162 game season? Well, I guess they don't, at least not anymore, because they baby themselves more than any other era in sports. And the teams apparently believe they have to as well. Players/pitchers today have more injuries just playing the game than any other cause. Baseball is a tough game due to the nature of a 162 game schedule, but April shouldn't be the toughest month of all. Spring training wasn't THAT short; the players knew the score and should have been in shape from the get go. Just one man's extremely humble opinion.
  4. Mark G
    Thank you! For a long time now, I have thought I was a minority of one. At least now I know there are two of us.
  5. Mark G
    I agree completely; it would be nice to have a 1,2,3 inning at least once in a while. Another quick count on my part: so far, through 11 games, the starters have only pitched 50 innings, with the pen pitching just under half. To be fair, that includes Gray's short start the other day, but it is still worrysome that only one start has gone over 5 innings. This pen may have promise in areas, but is not good enough to pitch almost half the innings this season. And with Rocco's history of short starts and using the pen multiple times a game, that may very well turn out to be the case. One stat that backs this up: going back to 2020, we have played 233 games through tonight, and not one complete game. We have used the pen every single game going back at least that far, and who knows how much further. When plan A is a short start and 2, 3, or even 4 relievers a game you better have a damn good pen, and I question if this pen is that good. It is time to trust the starters to take you deeper instead of 4 or 5 pitchers a game having to be on to win.
  6. Mark G
    I have said this before, both last year and this year, only one number matters in the end - number of runs scored in the game. Yeah, I know how corny and simplistic that sounds, but they have done stats on teams records when they score 3 runs or less in a game and when they score 4 or more, and it is a pretty accurate assessment of how a team will fare. Last year we scored 3 or less slightly over 35% of our games and we won 73, and that was a team that was 2nd in the league in home runs. So far this year (counting Monday night) we have scored 3 or less 7 times and 4 or more 4 times. Not a coincidence our record is 4-7. Slugging will only get you so far, unless you hit 307 home runs again; there has to be a consistent hitting approach that will manufacture runs. Bunting for hits, sacrificing runners, taking the extra base, making contact instead of the almighty launch angle looking for a home run. The analytics numbers are nothing more than moral victories for teams (and players individually) that don't score enough runs to win enough games. In school they teach all the new discoveries and methods to students, but they teach history as well, because there are lessons to learn from the past too. Old school baseball still has a lot to teach the smartest kids on the block. Just one man's extremely humble opinion.
  7. Mark G
    It seems funny that not too long ago we were having the discussion whether or not Arraez should DH, not having a permanent position and wanting his bat in the line up. Now it is Buxton, who not only has a position, is the best in the league at it. Or should it be Sano, who has played both corners and is lacking at both? Or should it be Sanchez, who the Yankees couldn't get rid of fast enough, because we don't want him to catch any more than necessary? Buck is as fragile as they come, Arraez has questionable knees, Sano and Sanchez lack great defense and strike out too often, so they DH for their power. If I had the answer to this conundrum I would be in the FO myself. Maybe someone up there should come up with an answer.
  8. Mark G
    Someone please correct me if I am wrong here, but Sano played 3rd in 2019 with Cron at 1st. It was never a question of either/or unless it was about the money and they weren't willing to pay both. Which is somewhat ironic, seeing they turned around and spent what they did on Donaldson. So, in a way, by moving Sano to 1st, cutting loose Cron, and signing Donaldson, wasn't it more a case of choosing between Cron and Donaldson? In hindsight, that is.
  9. Mark G
    Here I go again, the lone voice crying out in the wilderness, but I am not impressed with the development of our pitchers, from the time they are drafted (or traded for) to the time they are on the major league club. We baby them from day one to the day they leave as a free agent. I hear the argument all the time about that is just the way the game is played today, etc., etc., but if you look at the truly good pitchers even today, they pitch. They don't get pulled after 4 or 5 innings because they are too afraid of the 3rd time through the line up and all that; they have stretched out and adapt as the game goes along. I don't trust any FO that doesn't trust their pitchers. And I get that makes me a minority of one sometimes, but with the training, nutrition, facilities, and the fact they are in the prime of their lives, there is no reason they cannot be allowed to pitch. If a pitcher like Ryan or Ober is at risk of injury just because they go over a pitch limit, then do we really have top flight pitchers? Right now, I would say no. Time to develop that kind of pitcher.
  10. Mark G
    And they might have been 186-300 without him, we have no way of knowing. As for the game, it hasn't changed one iota, only how it is managed has changed and some people (me) don't see that as a good thing. Between the pitch counts, innings limits, launch angles on swings, and 30-40% strike out rates, a little bit of Paul Molitor (or Luis Arraez) is exactly what the game needs to remind us of the good the game can produce.
  11. Mark G
    Amen.
  12. Mark G
    Ray went 7 on opening day, short spring or not. Why are our guys held to a lower standard of building up to it? None of these guys pitched more than 4 innings in spring training for the very reason I am railing against. The organization simply doesn't believe in the traditional starter/reliever roles. And I know I am the lone (or close to it) voice crying out in the wilderness over this, so I should probably just shut up and accept the new generation of baseball gods, but I can't help it.
  13. Mark G
    I would respectfully disagree. Last year Berrios was the only pitcher on the roster who pitched more than 110 innings which would suggest that the innings will not exceed anything near what we would hope for. This organization simply does not believe in the traditional starter/reliever role (see bullpen games). Even in spring training pitchers are allowed to stretch out as the spring goes along so they are ready for the big time. This team has suggested they might even go with a 6 man rotation for the first few times around; how does that suggest the innings will increase? 63 pitches is a later spring training start, not a first regular season start regardless of how long spring training is. I know I am beating my head against a brick wall here; I am a minority in the belief that starters have a role, and that role is to own his game unless he gets bombed or until he runs out of gas, and if he runs out of gas at 63 pitches..........beam me up, Scotty.
  14. Mark G
    What "dampened Archer's debut" was the fact he was only allowed to go 4 innings and 63 pitches on a cool night when he was throwing fine. I know this is only 5 games so far, but the starters have pitched 22.2 innings and the BP has pitched 22.1. The starters have thrown 4 pretty fine games out of the 5 and should have been allowed to own their game. When plan A is using 4-6 pitchers (or more) every time out we should not expect every pitcher to be on their game every time out. When a starter is on theirs let them pitch!! I have a feeling that with the slightly squeezed season and fewer days off teams will be playing in the rain a lot more than usual trying to get the games in. We may have to get used to nights like last night.
  15. Mark G
    I could see him as a full time DH, power not withstanding. Molitor spent the last 3 years of his career with us as a DH exclusively, and had a total of 23 HR's in the 3 years combined. Arraez strikes me as the left handed version of PM and I would take that any day of the week. Without a position of his own, and with our best players coming up being infielders, I would put him at DH tomorrow, with occasional times relieving 2nd and 3rd. Although I have a feeling I may get some push back taking the DH away from guys like Sanchez when he is not in the field. If Miranda and Lewis come up anytime soon, it may mean Sano is the odd man out, which would put him at DH, leaving Arraez as the odd man out. Urshela, Correa, Polanco, Sano, Kirilloff when he plays 1st, Miranda and Lewis coming up soon..............who said that outfield was our strong suit? To keep Arraez we may HAVE to put him at DH. Either that, or trade someone. Just might be a good problem to have down the line.
  16. Mark G
    Or........not......... Not really sure what the point of this was?
  17. Mark G
    Great assessment! I have been saying since '19 that home runs are great, and when they come we win. But when they don't......... I have been paying attention to our stats for some years now, and the one thing that stands out year in and year out all over baseball is this: the percentage of wins a team has when scoring 3 runs or less and the percentage when they score 4 or more. This series we have averaged 4 1/2, as you say, but scored 3 or less 2 of the three and we are 1 and 2. Last year we scored 3 or less in slightly over 35% of our games and we all know what our record was. Yet we finished 2nd in home runs and 5th in slugging percentage. None of that matters when you finish 8th and 9th in OBP and BA, because no one is on when you slug. We will not bunt, we will not hit and run, we run the bases occasionally, but not consistently. We put no added pressure on the defense, only on the pitcher to keep the ball in the park. You are dead on about the walk to strike out ratio, and home runs being our sole offense. As much as we all love Buxton, look at him as well. 3 for 12. All 3 hits home runs. In his own words he looks to drive the ball when he is at the plate. He uses none of his other skills to get on base and manufacture runs. And he will never be asked to, any more than Kepler will be told to bunt the shift away or Sano will stop striking out looking for the home run. I know it is only 3 games, and I am hoping as much as anyone. But I couldn't agree with you more about your offense assessment. It goes back a lot farther than opening day. And I sure hope the pitching turns around as well; starters have gone 13.2 innings and relievers 13.1. Not a good ratio and not a sustainable one once the rosters get reduced. Still lots of issues we need to look at and solve. Let's hope the solutions come fast.
  18. Mark G
    I guess to me it sounds like a recipe for keeping 16 pitchers and only having a 3 man bench. After Arraez, who was there left to pinch hit any better than the Kirilloff match up? Celestino? Or one of the other 11 pitchers? I wish I could say I understand the argument for short starts and 8-12 man bullpens, if you count the shuttle bus between Target Field and St. Paul, but I am struggling in that area. We just don't have 16 major league caliber pitchers; do we not have any major league ready players either? I think we just might, and if the starters were allowed to be starters, maybe we could bring a couple of them up and see. If a starter is going to be inured by throwing more than 70 pitches................I guess that debate will be ongoing.
  19. Mark G
    I was going to post that I WOULDN'T let Rocco coach my kid's little league team, but I don't want to bore anyone, so I won't. But if I were to post that, it would come from a lot more than one game, and even more than one year. He has been doing it since he rolled into town, and he doesn't believe in any other way, so that is where the sentiment comes from. I know he has his fans, and that is fine; some people just don't cotton to that kind of managing. Nothing wrong with that either. If we all agreed on everything, this site wouldn't be any fun.
  20. Mark G
    "Another core value of the Falvine era, the Twins simply don’t value relief pitchers highly. And to be honest, they probably shouldn’t. Relievers often burn bright for a few years before fading away. We see it year after year whether it’s Alex Colomé just stinking it up out of nowhere or Trevor Rosenthal succumbing to injury. Pitchers as a whole are always risky, but historically speaking relievers are particularly fickle." While I agree with this assessment, I seem to remember this FO picking up free agents and waiver claims well into their 30's quite often, hoping they can have one more good season. How is 31 old, then? I don't believe for a New York minute that it had anything to do with age, but more likely dollars and control. To get the control, we would have to cough up the dollars, and we weren't going to, so the trade was inevitable.
  21. Mark G
    I say this somewhat tongue in cheek, but you are assuming Rocco is managing this team; a case could be made that the computer algorithm is. Remember the days when the manager would stand on the top step of the dugout and watch intently every pitch and every play? Me too. Remember the days when the manager would sit in the dugout behind a protective screen and play with his computer printouts before making a call? Yea, me neither. Again, I say it somewhat tongue in cheek, but only somewhat; I miss those days.
  22. Mark G
    Call me old school (or something just as nice), but I come from a generation where a 4 inning start would not be considered a good start, opening day or not. And please don't compare it to Ray's start. 70 pitches and 4 innings isn't anywhere close to 96 pitches and 7 innings, but it was also as predictable as the weather forecast. Go back a few days to the game Ober pitched in ST. 4 innings and less than 60 pitches compared to Boston's starter who went 6 and 82 or so pitches in his final tune up. This is a manager and/or team that will never change its philosophy on babying pitchers, so the entire season is going to rest on the BP, and that scares me with Rogers gone now. We are likely, and I emphasize likely, going to have more better days at the plate than this, but fewer days like this from the BP. When the bats catch up to the pitching the entire league over we won't be throwing up too many 5 inning shutout days from the pen over a long and shortened season. I know I am consistently a minority voice on this subject, but the starters HAVE to start stepping up, especially when they are sharp. Enough of the pitch count crap; let the guys own their game instead of being a glorified long reliever. Joe should have been allowed to continue.
  23. Mark G
    The one prediction that kind of made my eyebrows perk up was the Kepler prediction. I was a little confused by the belief that "outfield depth is one of Minnesota's strengths", but I can only assume that depth is a relative concept. A team that cannot name a starting left fielder or decide on a 4th outfielder doesn't strike me as a team deep in outfield depth, but that is just me. Larnach is in AAA along with Celestino, Rooker was traded rather than join them in St. Paul, and Kirilloff grades out better at 1st base than outfield, and that may be his future here. After Buck and Kepler, I don't see major league ready players, and right now that means Garlick, so we may have depth in quantity, but how about quality? And we want to trade a very good defensive right fielder that is under team control through '24? I guess Cody has more long term faith in our depth than maybe I give them credit for. Let's hope he is right, because we are going to need them.
  24. Mark G
    I read quite a bit about Garlick vs. Rooker. Neither can play D all that well, and neither has impressed at the plate, or we wouldn't have this much discussion. If I have to have a 4th outfielder who can't hit much, I would at least like to have one that can play all three positions in a pinch and not embarrass himself. I know this is going to go over like a fart in church, but I am more and more starting to long for the Caveman (yes, it hurt to say that). As for a 3rd catcher, c'mon folks, that would mean not keeping 16 pitchers to lighten the load on our overworked starters (and it didn't hurt to say that). Yes, I would rather keep a Cisco over a 16th AAA pitcher (or 15th, or 14th oh, you know what I mean). If nothing else, it would mean we could pinch hit or DH Sanchez or Jeffers in any game without having to lose sleep over it. And just an aside: we talk about Sanchez and a 3rd catcher, can they hit, who is better defensively, etc. What has Jeffers done at the plate so far in the majors to believe he is any better? Career .211, and .143 so far this spring. What if his stick goes south? It has happened. I guess I would just say stay tuned.
  25. Mark G
    Last I heard on TV was the belief that we would carry 16 pitchers and 12 position players through the 1st of May while the rosters are expanded. And knowing this management they will use all 16 at one time or another during the month. On what planet does this organization have 16 major league pitchers? 15? 14? Bottom line is we have too many minor leaguers trotting out there trying to get major league hitters out. Sure, we will sort out who can and who can't eventually, but keeping minor leaguers solely to keep your major leaguers from having to throw too many pitches or pitch too many innings certainly gives me pause. Example: The game Monday. Boston lets there guy go 6 innings and 82 pitches. We pull Ober after 4 innings and between 55 and 60 pitches. Who is going to be the most ready come their first start? When plan A is 4-5 innings and the pen does the rest, yea, I can see where you need to keep more arms, major league or not. It is the not that scares me. Let's hope for the best.
×
×
  • Create New...