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
    My question is (and I apologize if it has already been brought up and I just missed it) are they truly good at recognizing potential in low end starters and turning them into high end relievers, or are they just bad at developing top end starters and trying to salvage something by putting them in a relief role and just getting lucky once in a while? As bad as their track record has been at bringing in established relievers, one has to wonder; at least this one does.
  2. Mark G
    I really tend to agree. I don't discount any opinion on this page, as all have the teams best interest in mind. But the majority of the posts here tend to just move the same guys around the diamond, trying to find the best fit for everyone. In my extremely humble opinion it isn't the position each guy on the roster is playing, or should play, it is the roster itself. Just moving the same 26 guys around, giving them different roles or different positions, doesn't change the roster that finished 4th in '24. I am not going to pretend to give advice on what free agents to target or what players to trade and for what return, but we can't go into April with the same roster, no matter where you play each of them. We need a full time first baseman, someone who plays the position well and isn't a liability at the plate. If not Santana, then trade for one; the current roster does not have one and this organization can't seem to develop one. And we need a full time left fielder to take the roster spot Kepler had. Buy one, or trade for one; again, he isn't on the current roster (it wouldn't hurt if he has a little experience covering center in a pinch, but not mandatory). We can figure out 2nd and 3rd base from within; there is more than enough infield competition to fill those two spots; it may turn into a game of musical chairs, with one or more guys left without a chair at the end, but that is what healthy competition is. Castro (if they are smart enough to sign him) can back up Correa if it all hits the fan again, and everywhere else as usual. We have enough trade capital to get the two components I laid out above if the exiting ownership gives them the resources, and it will fill two holes that just can't be filled from within at this stage (again, assuming we don't resign Santana). As for center......good luck as long as Buck is the main man. Hope for health. But it doesn't do any good to change coaches if you just give the newbies the same old same old. As for the pitching staff.........not tonight, it gives me a headache. 🥴
  3. Mark G
    A very well written article, a very informative article, and.........a very scary article. Outside of Castro, who can actually be counted on position by position? And our strength, 3 good starters, are possibly our best path to improving the rest of the roster, but only by moving one of them. A core group of relievers, who can only pitch so many innings in 162 games, is far from comforting unless they get a decent supporting cast, which includes starters who can at least occasionally go deep into games (and we may move one of them?). Hmmm.....where does that leave us? It leaves us with an unsure ownership status, an unsure payroll, and a far from sure roster. Thanks very much for the info, Nick, and thanks a bunch for scaring me. 🫠
  4. Mark G
    As much as I know that this is a family business, in every family of this structure there is a Patriarch. Carl was that figure for a long time before passing the torch, so to speak, to Jim. And while Jim may think the time is right for Joe to take on a greater role, as he may be the future, the Patriarch doesn't hand over the keys to the Porsche and say "just don't kill yourself" and never give it another thought. Jim is in the background, and this may be a realization that he is thinking the kid may not be ready yet. As for the sale, the rest of the family does have a say and they may be thinking that they don't want Joe learning on the job with their shares. What I am curious about is what if the sale just doesn't happen? Does Jim leave Joe in the chair? Will there be a continued investment in the team? Or are we left in baseball purgatory until a buyer is finally found? Maybe this off season will provide an answer. I, for one, am hoping for a sale; preferably in my lifetime. Buy Joe a chain of hardware stores, or something equally harmless, and have him run that. Give us a baseball owner.
  5. Mark G
    I concur. Do we want to become the next Miami? They trade Lopez for Arraez, then 1/3 of the way through Louis' 2nd season they trade him to San Diego for the always coveted "prospects". Now they don't have to deal with the payroll, but they also don't have either Lopez or Arraez. Why is that the model we want to emulate? But if we do decide to trade Lopez, I would like to see them ask San Diego if they would take Lopez for Arraez. A good way to go out, don't you think? 🤭
  6. Mark G
    To me this feels like a live version of Who's on First with the in house prospects. Should we move an inconsistent 3rd baseman to first, an even more inconsistent 2nd baseman, or a perennially injured corner outfielder? But wait......we could always sign a 39 year old or a 37 year old past their prime and hope for one more good year, right? Where have you gone Joe DiMaggio? Our........oh, you know the rest. 😉
  7. Mark G
    Good catch! I missed that one. But I still don't think proven major leaguers for prospects makes us better in '25. As Linus said, that is a move you make in a rebuild.
  8. Mark G
    I just want to make sure I have this. We give up what is arguably our best bullpen option and arguably our best defensive catcher for...........well, their 13th and 27th best prospects in their farm system. And this is going to make us better.......how?
  9. Mark G
    What I take away from this article the most is that there isn't anything on Matthew's stat sheets that aren't on Rocco's. At the end of the day, the players do the best they can do. Obviously, there are times that isn't enough, as we saw in September. But also, at the end of the same proverbial day, Rocco is the one writing the line up card. If the under performers are in the top half of the line up, maybe, just maybe, we might want to look at the line up as a factor. As has been said above, maybe we take a look at the platoon plan and take defense into account just as much as right handed vs left handed, seeing as the pitchers are going to change throughout the game. I will never blame the manager for the under performance of the players. I will also never blame the players for being put in a situation they struggle to perform in. At the end of my never ending day, the job of the manager is to get the most out of the players he has on any given never ending day. Neither part of this equation did their job well. If all we do is change players, that is only half the equation. If all we do is change the manager..........that is still only half the equation. We need to take a hard look not just at the players, and not just the manager (or coaches), but the way the two parts work as one, because as much as anything else, that was a big part of the collapse.
  10. Mark G
    Joe strikes me as being very young and inexperienced; he hasn't learned the art of whipping up a really good word salad that makes you feel good but tells you nothing. He just needs to spend a little time around Falvey until he picks up enough pointers to hold his own press conferences again. 😉 As for the business side of things, between him and Dave I am surprised the business is still standing. Doling out 3 major contracts tying up between 70 and 80 mil a year, then crying poverty the minute the team needs one more push to get them to the top; will the real Joe Pohlad please stand up?
  11. Mark G
    Interesting. If true, the bottom half of the FO goes and the bottom half of the coaching staff goes, but the decision maker in the FO and the decision maker in the dugout stay. On other planets they replace the decision makers, not the subordinates. Time to beam me up Scottie.
  12. Mark G
    My daddy used to say the more hands you put into a cookie jar, the more cookies you are going to break. 😉
  13. Mark G
    Exactly. The whole philosophy of keeping Rocco, despite his part in all of this, was that it wouldn't make any difference. The FO wants a Rocco to carry out their organizational philosophy; if they were to fire Rocco, they would just hire someone just like him so why not just keep him. So why should we expect anything different with coaches? This is the equivalent of DFAing your worst RP and believing you have fixed the bullpen.
  14. Mark G
    Also 50+ years ago, and for me it was Sand lake just outside of Cumberland WI. The only thing I could get in was 'CCO and one other country station. I lived for the ballgames during those weekends and Herb Carneal made it all worthwhile. 'CCO has been a comfort zone for most of my life when it comes to finding the Twins. Leave it there.
  15. Mark G
    Exactly. You want something better? Then it is going to have to be something different. Cause if you do what you've always done, you're going to get what you've always got.
  16. Mark G
    I concur completely that it was not a matter of quitting, although I do wonder a little about self proclaimed slump proof Royce, who "ran out of gas" and whined about having to play 2nd base. Otherwise, I think the effort was there, just no grasp of certain basics of the game. I mentioned this elsewhere, but this manager simply does not believe in certain fundamentals. As a team.......as a TEAM, we had 10 sacrifices all year. As a team we only had 65 stolen bases all year. Two of the most basic fundamentals you learn as a kid, bunting and base running, are not used to advance runners. So when a player, any player, is called upon to bunt, how can we expect them to execute? And base running, for this team, is advancing on a hit; we don't do well on anything else. As for fielding, players are being asked to play multiple positions, not only throughout the year, but game by game. We can't expect them to do every position well. We only intentionally walked a batter for strategic purposes 14 times all year as well; none, by the way, by our top 6 starters (Varland had one but it doesn't show if it was as a starter or a reliever). Not once, not ONCE did a starter run into a situation where setting up a double play or a force at every base would be advantageous? Really? Or does Rocco not believe in that aspect of the game as well? Strike people out and hit for power; get your launch angle right. That is our game plan game in and game out. So when we need to execute the basics, and we can't, I have a hard time blaming the players.
  17. Mark G
    You know what gives me hope? We are almost on page 4 of this article, solely because there are enough of us that care about this team to even bother to keep saying so. Personally, I am crushed right now, and will lobby to change the leadership of this team from now until March, but come March I will peek back in and see if any of the lobbying did any good and hope the team is better. I am guessing I am not alone. It is going to be a long and sad winter; baseball is my sport, and I can't wait for March. Hey, Joe, get it right this year!!! We deserve better!!! Take care, everyone. 😌
  18. Mark G
    I hear that, too.
  19. Mark G
    I hear you. I always tell my boss at work "I'm not complaining, I'm just venting". 😉 Glad you are on the thread.
  20. Mark G
    I hope you all will bear with me for this short story. 🥴. This game did seem like a perfect example of the things I shake my head at. Even with our stars healthy and in the lineup Rocco felt the need to put both our .223 and .224 hitting catchers in the lineup (neither one has an OBP of even .300). Needless to say, though I will anyway, they went a combined 0-6 with a walk. If there is no one better on the roster we are toast, I guess, but that does seem to be how he works. And with the season on the line, and the bullpen having all hands on deck, he picks Thielbar and Funderburk to come in to a close game we HAVE to win. Of course, that was one game. The season overall mirrored that, I guess, and leaves me still shaking my head. You know a team is not in good shape when your super utility player has played in 157 of 160 games and leads the team in plate appearances, doubles, triples, and stolen bases (although his overall line was .247/.331/.386, so it was sheer number of plate appearances that led to the stats) and the other leader, HRs and RBIs was your 38 year old first baseman, which many are predicting will not be your 39 year old first baseman. No one else has more than 461 plate appearances, much less at bats. That is partly injuries, but also Rocco's philosophy of everyone plays. Our BP continues to pitch approx. 40% of our innings (our top 2 stud starters even average less than 6 innings a start, much less the other ones). Rocco has taken 2 elements of the game, sacrifices and stolen bases, almost out of his book altogether. We have a TEAM total of 10 sacrifices and 65 stolen bases in 160 games. When you won't manufacture runs, and your team average with runners in scoring position is sub par..........well, I guess you finish 4th in a division with the White Sox as the 5th team (actually, take away the 12-1 record against the Sox and we are 70-77 against the rest of the schedule). This changes next year if.......well, we stay healthy. We get a couple of reliable relievers. We make a well placed trade or two. And we get an on field staff, beginning with the manager, who know how to get the most out of a roster possible; this manager is a very good baseball man, and a good clubhouse manager in the sense that he treats the players well, but a very poor game manager and that is what this roster needs. Will this FO give that autonomy to any field staff? I doubt it, so maybe they should be relieved as well, but I seriously Joe is going to go that route so I guess we better get used to this being Twins baseball. But hope does spring eternal, so here's to 2025! Be well Carlos and Buck; we need you. Just as an aside, I was impressed with Carlos saying put the blame on him for not being available to his team for so long. I just thought it was a glimpse of class we hope for in our stars.
  21. Mark G
    Which would make them 320-325 since the covid season. 🥴
  22. Mark G
    They don't? 😳
  23. Mark G
    Be careful what you wish for; the Angels just got swept by the White Sox. 😉
  24. Mark G
    You are right; the buck has to stop at the office of the manager. His job is to get the most possible out of the players he is given, and, for the most part, he gets to pick his coaching staff to assist in this job. That is why the manager is fired before the players are, and before the FO is (usually). As for the chain of command (someone correct me if I go off the rails here), ownership chooses the operations people we call the FO. The FO chooses the manager, who chooses his coaching staff. The on field people are charged with getting the most out of the players they are given. The operations people are charged with giving the on field people the best possible players to work with. And ownership is, at least in theory, responsible for giving the operations people the amount of resources necessary to put together the best team they can. Can any of us say that any of them have lived up to the task they were charged with? Ownership didn't give the amount of resources we wanted, but the FO could have done better in putting together the roster. Once the on field people had the roster, they definitely failed to get the utmost out of them possible. As such, the on field people need to be replaced to see if it is just that failure, or if the next group can't do any better, which would mean the FO needs to be replaced. Ownership needs to give the proper resources, but if they are not going to, at least put in place operations people who know how to do more with less than the current group. And begin the process NOW.
  25. Mark G
    I don't know. The fat lady is in her dressing room and getting ready, but I haven't heard her actually sing yet. If the Twin sweep Baltimore, and Atlanta sweeps KC...........🤔 (I would add if Chicago sweeps Detroit, but I don't want to completely insult your intelligence 🤭)
×
×
  • Create New...