Jump to content
Game 2 against the Reds! Come join our game thread! ×
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
    A rhetorical question: is he making the roster because he has proved himself, or is he there because we couldn't find a buyer, and are still waiting to?
  2. Mark G
    I think what unnerves me more than Brooks individually is that Nick, who I think has forgotten more about baseball than most people will ever know (except TD, of course), thinks we have "several suspect players" we may have to rely on as the season progresses. A tough thought to ponder as opening day approaches. 😳 Good article, Nick.
  3. Mark G
    Isn't it neat watching two brothers, so totally different from each other, spend time with family and blend right in as though they were twins? 🫠
  4. Mark G
    I have two sons that are polar opposites in a lot of ways. The 31 year old is a sports nut across the board, and we kick stuff around all the time for hours. The 29 year old is not into sports much at all except for the NCAA tournament (he is loving this month). Last year he heard me and his brother talking and actually asked what a complete game was. I explained it to him and told him if he lives to be the same age as me or older he might live to see one someday. 😉 I believe the stats you listed for the 5 guys. And I have to think that 23 times out of 162 games is not enough to keep a pen from overworking, and that is only 7 innings. I still remember Bert talking on TV about the "quality start" stat when it first started to be a stat. One got the impression he hated it, and he certainly made fun of it. 6 innings or more and 3 earned runs or less; and that is earned runs. You can have all the unearned runs that come across. Now 6 innings of any kind is considered a great start. I might have to tell my son that if he lives long enough he will have to explain to his son someday what a "starting pitcher" used to be back in the day. 🙃
  5. Mark G
    As I see it, we have the elite, the elite when they can stay healthy, the potentially elite, and the........hmmm.........the depth? In other words the shuttle bus guys. If the top 8 on your list stay healthy and live up to their potential, yes, we may have the best bullpen, at least one of the top 2 or 3. If anyone goes down, or if two go down, or just plain don't pitch well, then the top 4 better have rubber arms, because I fear the depth may not be that deep. Let's go with glass half full this time; the top 8 are going to see us through. Please. 😳
  6. Mark G
    Definitely gives new definition to the term air quality measurement. 😳
  7. Mark G
    I have this debate with my son every year or two whether we need to or not. 🫠 Middle infielder vs corner infielder. Regular position vs utility infielder. Right side infielder or left side infielder. Each has its own needs and skill sets; very few fit perfectly into all of the above. We agree on Correa, after that.........well, after that I put my foot down, say I'm the dad, and what I say goes. 🤭 And what I say is leave Brooks in the middle of the field, at 2nd when CC is good and at short when CC isn't in. If his bat isn't quite ready yet, let him figure it out in St. Paul until he is ready, but I believe we need him in the middle more than either corner (my son thinks I am full of........) 😉
  8. Mark G
    "Rich people do not like uncertainty." Trust me, us poor folks like it even less. 😉
  9. Mark G
    Again, it brings to mind the old adage when everyone is in charge of something, no one is. DH by committee defeats the entire purpose of the DH. Oh, never mind, I can't win this debate, so I will leave it to you all to decide, but if we can't find someone in all of MLB to bring on as a hitter.........just rotate it as Rocco always does, that way we can keep giving everyone their at bats. After all, that is what matters, right? Everyone plays? Everyone gets their at bats? Sorry, folks, just my rant for the day. You can give me the thumbs down now. 😌
  10. Mark G
    Personally, I would rather have a 5th outfielder than a 7th infielder, but the FO has stopped taking my calls, so I lost my say in the matter. 😏
  11. Mark G
    Oh contraire, my well intentioned friend, I am "confusing" nothing. I am differentiating "high leverage" pitchers in general, from "low leverage" pitchers. And, yes, there is a difference, regardless of the situations they may find themselves in as the season goes along. Your TWELFTH man, from AAA, might find themselves on a MLB mound in an extra inning game where there is really no one else to turn to......does that make him anything other than a "low leverage" reliever? Again, if there is no such thing as a "low leverage" reliever, then they are ALL high or mid level. And that is just not reality. I am not debating the fact that all relievers come into games in all types of situations, I am simply agreeing that there are differences in levels of ability which separates "low level relievers" from the better ones. If that is a distinction of debate, then.........I guess I better not debate it. I guess it is, again, just a matter of opinion. And, a quick aside, yes the 5th best starter will pitch almost as many games as your best starter, but how many innings in each start will each pitcher pitch? A quick check of innings pitched in the season stats will probably be the answer. Again, just one mans opinion. No better or worse than yours. 😌 I always appreciate the give and take.
  12. Mark G
    I know this is not your typical black and white debate with no middle ground, it is entirely each persons opinion, but I have to go with Bean5302 on this one. To say there is no such thing as a "low leverage reliever" is to say every one of them is a high to mid level reliever, and there simply aren't 240 pitchers on the planet that have that ability, hence the 30 shuttle busses to and from AAA using options on the border line 8th through 11th or 12th guys in your system. The same goes for starters; there simply are not 150 guys around that you would call #1 through 3 starters. Your 4th and 5th starters are not on the same level as the top 3. Nor are your 6th, 7th, and 8th pen guys. High leverage and low leverage are just slang terms for level of ability, but there are both levels on every team. Sure, with extra inning games and games that are tied or very tight throughout the entire game, each reliever is going to see a tense inning now and then throughout the year. But when 45% of your games are decided by 4 runs or more, win or lose, your bottom end of the pen eats those innings predominately, not your top end guys, again, using the shuttle busses along the way. It may be just a matter of semantics, but there are high leverage and low leverage, top end and bottom end, etc., relievers; just because they all see the same situations at some point is only a matter of necessity, not a matter of ability. It is a great debate. Somehow I have a hunch I didn't change your mind, though, did I? 😉
  13. Mark G
    If what Nick says is accurate, and there is no reason for me to doubt him, Lee is the best defensive player we have in the infield as a whole, not including CC of course. He will sub out CC and Lewis, and need days off himself the article says. Then why not let Willi begin the season at 2nd, filling in in the outfield when needed as well, and give Julien and Lee time to get their feet under them again and see if one of them grabs the job and runs with it. Willi can handle the moving around the whole field and Lee can handle moving around just the infield. That is, of course, Lee makes the roster at all. If not.........I'll get back to you. 😉
  14. Mark G
    I would say the 2023 team meant more to me than the 2019 team; the latter did have the 3 players you mentioned with 30+ HRs, but also had Cruz, Garver, Cron, and Schoop combining for 120 as well, and how long did that group stay together? The 2023 group got it done when it counted most; they gave us at least a moment of joy we had been waiting a long time for. Since 2019 we traded Berrios because we didn't want to pay him, let Rosario go for cost savings, traded Garver, cut Sano, etc. Recently we have traded FOR Lopez (and extended him) and Ryan, signed CC and Buck long term, and even over paid a good defensive catcher for stability. I wish I could say they have done the right things all the time, but the changes they made in 4 years gave us that sense of hope that makes one keep watching. They are still a little too Jekyll/Hyde for me (a little too much Hyde), but hope does spring eternal, as they say. 2019 was nice, but 2020 was a wash out for the league in general, and 2021 and 2022 we were 16 and 6 games under .500. Let's see if the 2023 season is for real or the 2024 collapse is before I cement in my mind my choice. 👌
  15. Mark G
    I say give him an 8 year extension and trade everybody else who plays 2nd base.😉 Okay, seriously, maybe it is just me, but I am thinking Julien has a good chance to be a good major league player, but maybe not in this organization. We have enough infielders to be able to give him a chance where he will be more comfortable; give it to him while he still has value. Not to say I want to give up on him, but we just don't seem to be the right place at the right time for him. If we do keep him, give him a chance to earn the job; he just might prove me wrong.
  16. Mark G
    And I suppose I better clarify, yes I did get the reference to "today's" 7-8-9 hitters. I am generalizing when I say bottom of the order; no one will ever be there permanently. Seeing that they were all infielders he was talking about, I commented on the infield as a whole. 🫠
  17. Mark G
    All the different articles are starting to make my head spin. We have a non guaranteed contract last minute pick up being talked up as our "likely" starting first baseman, we are holding a try out camp for 2nd base, Royce "don't even think about putting me at 2nd base" Lewis only wants to play 3rd, but makes too many throwing errors (more, likely, with no gold glove at 1st to catch him).........I don't know, maybe it is just me, but the bottom of the batting order isn't exactly on my mind at this stage of ST. And if CC or Buck goes down for ANY length of time we better really have the best bullpen in baseball or........🤕 On the other hand, if Miranda matures, takes 1st, and holds on to it, Lee starts to hit the ball and can hold down 2nd, Lewis tightens up his defense, and Willi just keeps on being the Willi we know and love.......October baseball? 😎 Now, bring on the articles about the outfield; that's the real 7, 8, and 9 of baseball. 😉
  18. Mark G
    Agreed. Even with the OBP we have to remember that, depending on how many of the games Vasquez catches, Wallner would be hitting behind Vasquez (assuming he hits 9th) 40+ percent of the time. The first at bat of the game would not be the only one where his power would be wasted if he was hitting behind the 8th and 9th guys in the order. Then again, Rocco never writes the same line up twice in a row, so are we just spitting into the wind on this subject? 🤭
  19. Mark G
    If you are convinced that Wallner is one of the best bats the team has, why not slot him into the #3 spot and give your truly best hitter, CC, in the leadoff and give him as many at bats as possible (you are not going to switch him out as opponents change pitchers)? I know, it goes against the cardinal rule of your best hitter batting 3rd, but Rocko only has two cardinal rules anyway: rule #1 is, the computer is always right. Rule #2 is, when the computer is wrong, see rule #1. I know I am going to hear from smarter folks than me, but I wouldn't rule out CC batting leadoff.
  20. Mark G
    It brings to mind the old adage when everyone is in charge of something no one is. If everyone (almost) is a possibility at 2nd, is any ONE a true 2nd baseman? Right now the entire right side of the infield is such a crap shoot; how did we get into this mess? 😬
  21. Mark G
    Crap......I should have known that......😵
  22. Mark G
    Are we getting catcher first because it is #1 on the diamond? Are we going in numerical order? 🤭 Actually, I do have to admit I am surprised Vasquez is still here, but not disappointed. He has been good with the pitchers, and I feel like he has made Jeffers better as well. I can live with his offense (lack of?) as long as he continues to make everyone around him better, which I think he does. Let's hope I am right. 🤔
  23. Mark G
    I do worry a little bit about SWR. Are we sure the difference between the 3.27 ERA and the 5.91 ERA was just being gassed? Or is it possible that the film caught up with him and the league figured him out? ST is a great time to prove himself, and I hope he does.
  24. Mark G
    What I noticed the most in recent years about Buck is that not only has he been a good man in the clubhouse, etc., but he formed a bond with CC when he first came, showing the younger guys how to build relationships. He could have been cool to the superstar who waltzed in and took over the image as being the best player on the team, but he embraced CC and between them they have been a really positive influence all around. Shows a lot of class and professionalism, and I salute him for it.
  25. Mark G
    😵
×
×
  • Create New...