jmlease1

And Saberhagen probably deserved a little more consideration than he got, but Johan is still the superior pitcher. ('87 Saberhagen should have gotten Cy votes, but Clemens won it and deserved it; Viola was arguably better than Saberhagen that year as well) ERA+: Saberhagen had four years over 140, Santana had six. Saberhagen had three years over 150, Santana had five. Outside of Saberhagen's amazing '89 he rarely led the league in much of anything; Santana had a 5 year run where he was leading the league in K's ERA, ERA+, FIP, WHIP, IPs multiple times. Santana had a higher, more consistent peak. Saberhagen was able to come back from equally horrid injury to grind out a few extra seasons. Both great pitchers, but I'd put Santana above Saberhagen. Both are clearly superior to jack Morris, who is more likely to get elected.

I think Johan is a fair choice. He's a little borderline because the career was so short (only 8 seasons as a full-time starter, only 12 seasons total) but the peak was pretty stunning. 2 Cy's that no one questions. Should have won a 3rd, and would have in today's voting. Could have won a 4th and been a perfectly reasonable choice (2008). Finished top 5 five year in a row. in a row! Led the league in ERA 3 times, K's 3 times, IPs twice, WHIP four times...the "black type" splattered across his resume is fantastic. Heck his career ERA+ is actually better than Koufax! Koufax had better post-season success, but also was fortunate that his post-season opportunities primarily came at the same time he peaked as a player. Johan only made three post-season appearances in seasons where he started the full year and had become "Johan": he was great in all of them, so it's not like his post-season record was a mess. Just limited opportunity. I don't think Johan is a slam dunk, but he was so great and he did do it for an extended period: 5 straight years of being the best damn pitcher in baseball that I think he's a fair choice for the Hall. His case is closer to Koufax than Guidry in my mind. Take the top ten seasons from Guidry and Santana and lay them side-by-side from best to worst: Guidry had exactly 2 seasons that would top Johan's. Johan's 6th best season is roughly as good as Guidry's 2nd best; other than Guidry's ridiculous '78 season the others aren't all that close. Koufax is a much closer comp; if he's a no-doubt HoFer, Johan at least deserves very very serious consideration. I think the stretch of greatness was long enough he deserves to get in, even without the handful of additional solid years that would have locked it down.

It might be interesting, but I wouldn't expect it to be informative. Players are notorious for overrating the guys they played with/against.

I wouldn't have given it to Dozier, but at least he's not an awful choice. He did have a very good season out there: made very few mistakes, made a lot of spectacular plays. I don't know there was a slam dunk choice like Buxton was for CF in the AL at 2B this year, so Dozier caught a bit of a break. Buxton was an easy choice. Gosh, he's fabulous to watch. And frankly, he could be better next year. A little more experience at judging balls in MLB parks, a little more work on his routes, a little better recognition on balls off the bat...and hopefully no early season drought at the plate to distract him, either! Seriously: we may not have seen Peak Buxton in the field yet! I'm still disappointed that Mauer didn't win the GG, and leaving him off the finalist list was a crime. Hosmer won on reputation and that's a shame. He's a fine player, but his D wasn't there this season and it felt like the bad old days where 1Bs were winning based on their bat not their glove.

Sigh. I always feel bad crapping on the Jack Morris HoF candidacy, because we was a fine pitcher for a long time and was the most important part of one of the greatest games on baseball history. But you have to really hang a LOT on that one game and the concept that Morris was an "ace" to compensate for what are, quite frankly sub-standard numbers. Career ERA 3.90. That's just not hall-worthy. Tiant & John were both more than half a run better over their careers, and I'm not a proponent of either of them. Morris never had a season with an ERA under 3.00 in his entire career. never. He never won a Cy, and never really deserved one, either. You look down his stats and you don't see any truly dominant seasons. his best work was done in years where he had teams that had enough offense that they could let him keep pitching deep into the game. His greatest skill as a pitcher was eating innings. Make no mistake, that is a valuable skill! But I'd need him to have something else to make him into the Hall. Did you know he averaged less than 1.5 WAR for his last 7 seasons? There was one last really good season in 1991 with the twins, that magical year that everyone remembers him for...but the decline was fast for Morris. The 1992 season with Toronto had a lot of wins, but he wasn't a great pitcher that year. Post-season always comes up for Morris, so let's look at it. he was outstanding in 1984, the prime of his career. he got shelled in 1987. he was outstanding for the twins in 1991, especially in the WS. He was awful in 1992. So a bit of a mixed bag, right? he wasn't a great strikeout pitcher. he never had the elite seasons. he gave up a lot of runs. he didn't win the big hardware. he didn't get a lot of "black type" stats (leading the league) and half the ones he did get are the bad ones. (led the league in Wild Pitches 6 times!) very good pitcher. made a manager's life a lot easier because he pitched a lot of innings and could save your bullpen. not a hall of famer.

Not an impressive list, frankly. Trammell deserves it, I think. He should have won an MVP in '87, probably should have gotten at least one more all-star bid. A lot of great seasons and almost no bad ones. Tiant is a no for me. It wasn't like he was robbed of a Cy or anything. He's a terrific pitcher who's in the Hall of Very Good for me. Had some injuries in his prime years and inconsistency in his 30s. Doubt he makes this list if he's not on those Boston teams from the 70's. ted Simmons is a close call. He was a better defender than his rep and a terrific hitter, especially for a catcher. A terrific player for a long time, he also never had that really high peak where you'd legitimately think of him as an MVP. I'd have him just short, but I wouldn't cry if he went in, partly because there reall aren't a ton of catchers in there. Dave Parker has to be a no. Only one really good season once he turned 29? (The MVP votes he got in '86 were absurd; he was too highly ranked in '85, but at least he had a good year then, his last as a pro) The peak was great, but 5 years is not enough to get into the HoF and he doesn't have anything else to hand his hat on. Dale Murphy has the same problem as Parker: a great peak but then he fall off the face of the earth. probably didn't deserve the first MVP either, although he wasn't a terrible choice or anything; people just cared too much about RBIs back then and ignored Mike Schimdt & Gary Carter that year. I'd say no here too. Jack Morris. I've been down this road many a time. A fine pitcher who could hang with the best of them...he just wasn't actually the best of them. Pitching to the score is BS, and Jack gave up too many runs to get in. Marvin Miller. Eh, it'd be fine. Been better if they'd done it when he was alive. Don Mattingly. No, no, no! Vastly overrated player who piled up a ton of GG he almost certainly didn't deserve entirely because he played in NYC in the era before everyone could be seen often on tv. Won an MVP when he wasn't even the best guy on his own team. Short career, short peak. He's Kent Hrbek with far better press. See anyone clamoring for Hrbie to get in the HoF? Tommy John. Borderline for me here too. long, long career (sometimes I still think he's pitching). Certainly meets the "fame" threshold. Piled up a lot of innings, great at keeping the ball in the park. But got most of his Cy Young steam because he was playing in big markets on pretty good teams. The peak's too low, not enough high levels seasons for me. Something of a compiler because he played so damn long. Steve Garvey. Another No. Mattingly was a better player, and the extra 5 years of decline with the Padres don't do Garvey and favors. His MVP is another bad one; just like Mattingly he wasn't even the best player on his own team that year! Not a chance for this guy. Keith Hernandez is the biggest snub that comes to mind for me. He's substantially better than either Mattingly or Garvey and played the same position. Mex was actually a reasonable choice as MVP the year he won it, and was historically good defensively. There may be other guys that are deserving to be on this ballot, but it's especially galling to have Garvey & Mattingly on the ballot and then to exclude Hernandez. Maybe that's on purpose: if you leave of Hernandez, maybe people won't compare Garvey & Mattingly to him and realize how they really aren't in the same league...

I would like the team to sign a high-leverage reliever. I do not wish for them to pay extra for the "proven closer" tag. as long as "closer" is a term that describes a guy who comes in for the 9th (or occasionally the 10th) with no one on base to start the inning and pitches just 1 inning to rack up the not-terribly-meaningful stat of "saves", I'd rather not pay the extra freight. It would probably be good for this staff to add a veteran reliever, considering a number of the power arms in the system are coming off injuries or are very young and fairly inexperienced. But it seems wasteful to add $4-6M to a guy's contract just to pitch in such a limited role. I want more fireman relievers who can and will come out with guys on base, with the heart of a team's lineup due up in the 7th, or something like that. That's where I'd rather spend the money. Closers come and go.

I think Nick has it right here. The FO looks smart to have held out for an additional piece like Bellinger. If we'd dealt an all-star on a good contract for a pitcher who got hurt and a couple of lottery tickets (A-ball prospects) they would have gotten crushed for it all season. De Leon may turn out to be a fine pitcher, but the injuries were a legit concern then and seem even moreso now. But the more important part for the twins future is the Twins seem to be making smart evaluations on what players are worth and aren't willing to sell low. Clearly, if they were asking for Bellinger, they were asking for the right kind of guy: he's been great. I hope this continues as we work through the off-season, whether it's trades or free agency.

I would do Seth's offer in a heartbeat if I'm the twins. Buying out three of Buxton's FA years would be fantastic. The deal i don't want to see if one where we only buy out the arbitration years and he becomes a FA on schedule. If we can get him for 7 years and anywhere under $90M total value, I'd feel good about it. Is Boras his agent? That's the danger, because Boras LOVES getting his guys into free agency.

I think this deal is fine. It's probably one year longer than Falvine would have preferred, but that's what happens when your manager is in the running for Manager of the Year: he gets a little leverage. Molitor has shown willingness to work with an adapt to the new regime, handles the clubhouse and media well, has useful fanbase connections, is a student of the game (which makes it hard to believe he's going to suddenly start insisting that everyone just do it his way), and has generally been fine as an in-game manager. Coming off a successful season in which young players in the lineup took a step forward, I don't have any great concerns about him running the club next season. The biggest problem on this team is pitching, and they just let Neil Allen go. So either Molly recognizes he needs a better pitching coach or the FO told him he's getting a different pitching coach, and that's ok with me. If it's the first, that's sound recognition. If it's the second it's evidence that guys aren't going to get to free ride because the manager likes them. Regarding bullpen useage: let's see what happens if/when we get a little more stability there. or a little more talent. (same with the rotation) Managerial contracts that are 3 years or less in duration tend to be pretty fungible. If this years turns out to be a total fluke year and next season goes to crap, they can move on without too much difficulty. If they take another step forward, they've got some continuity locked in.

I'm fine with Molitor coming back. He showed willingness to get on-board with the new regime's methods of doing things, which is hugely important. I don't expect him or any manager to simply be a yes-man, but if you're constantly at odds it's not going to work. I don't always love Molitor's in-game strategy or bullpen useage, but I say that about most managers. It's easy to do from the couch, and it's never going to be "perfect". He does fine and seems to handle all of the intangible stuff for the club well. Frankly, he's shown more flexibility than most managers out there with his levels of baseball experience, which I think is a major point in his favor. 2 year deal would be appropriate, 3 year deal would be ok with me. I'd be surprised if Molitor settled for 1, doubt team would go over 3.

He's not a great fit, because he's pretty terrible defensively so it's hard to play him in the OF if Rosario is starting (and the way eddie hit this year, it's hard not to start him). He's an on base machine, but you'd like a guy to be a bit more of a threat if he's your primary DH. and If Sano needs more time at DH next year, it's increasingly hard to carry him. Granite profiles better as your 5th OF right now (until he proves he can be a high average hitter in MLB) but he's a good defensive player you can slot in anywhere. It's not an easy call and may depend on what the free agent market looks like for hitters. Clearly the focus for next year will be pitching. The offense and defense are where we need them to be, the pitching has to improve, especially in the rotation.

1. Big assumption on Santana. No evidence they were looking to move him, only that other teams were asking (which they would have pretty much regardless). 2. This is premised on ol' Dougie getting his "side" of the story out there, whereas the FO has stayed pretty quiet on it. I'm fine with them moving on, and taking a swing at the new FO for not making sure Mienkiewicz's feeling were carefully catered to (and let's be clear: they were cutting him loose, what are the odds he's gonna walk away happy?) seems silly. We're not talking about Kent Hrbek here. 3. Garver has gotten some play. but his PT is on Molitor, not the FO. Or do you really want Falvine tostart dictating to the manager who should play where and when late in the season? Either you trust your manager or you don't. Year one of the new regime has gone pretty well. they're the benefactor of lowered expectations, increased luck (team is relatively lucky this year, were quite unlucky last year) and good player development on some younger players. they've been opportunistic and fairly creative. Bit of an injury bug on our higher end relievers, which hurt (May, Chargois, Burdi...) but otherwise nothing too ridiculous. If they can stabilize/bolster the rotation for next year this could be a contending club. Big if, but that's the whole this team has right now: they need more starting pitching that can compete at the higher levels.

I'm with Nick on this one. Bartolo looks cooked again, and while I'm still not sold on The Tease (Kyle Gibson) I'd rather start a guy that could actually be with this team next year than a guy who definitely won't. Nice to be worrying about such matters! I'm just hoping Sano can come back by the Detroit series and get a few games in to get his timing back. Adding his bat in there really makes this a formidable lineup.

I'm amazed at the difference between fWAR and bWAR (Fangraphs vs Baseball reference). For the top 10 listed above, with the fWAR listed first: Dozier: 3.7 vs 3.4 Buxton: 3.2 vs 5.3 Berrios: 2.6 vs 1.7 Santana: 2.5 vs 4.1 Sano: 2.4 vs 2.6 Rosario: 2.1 vs 1.6 Mauer: 2.0 vs 3.3 Escobar: 1.3 vs 0.9 Polanco: 1.3 vs 1.5 I don't know if this is all just different formulas on defense or what, but it was interesting to me how much better bWAR thinks Buxton, Mauer, and Santana have been this year

Hard to get too excited about Rodriguez; 28 year old 1B in AA? i think I might have downgraded him on the ballot just for that. terrific season for Granite, very much like to see him as the 4th OF on the twins next year and see how he does hitting with more consistent time. Wade is intriguing. How is his defense? because if he's solid out there, you can definitely find room for a high average/high OBP guy on your team.

This. I think there are several hitters on this club that look to bunt for a hit and will do it with a man on base knowing the manager will be ok with it if they don't get on as long as the runner moves over. It can be a weapon, but the Twins may be trying it too often. I love the patience of this team. 7 more walks last night. It's got to be driving dan barreiro crazy, especially since the team keeps winning, which makes him sound even stupider when he whines about it.

This is what I am afraid of. people are going to get overly excited about The Tease, only to have him fail us once again. It's super hard to trust that Kyle Gibson can be a reliable starter over a full season.

They're not great, but they are a good team, i think. the lineup is a good one, especially right now, with players having come into their own or cleared out of slumps. there's not a lot of easy outs there (Kepler is scuffling the most right now, but he's still not a guy any pitcher is going to feel good about grooving a fasball or hanging a curve to) The defense has generally been good all year, with elite play from Buxton and Mauer and the only real hole is Rosario/Grossman...who don't generally play the field at the same time. With Sano back, this is a playoff caliber lineup without question. The pitching is the issue. No one in the rotation scares you, the bullpen is cobbled together...it's a staff that we're trying to mix & match to be "good enough", which doesn't exactly make your socks roll up & down. They're a pretty good team. certainly an entertaining and fun team that's easy to root for. not a great team.

Yeah, this is the one that has me thrown. has Kyle Gibson figured it out or is this another mirage from the pitcher I like to call "The Tease"? He's been a completely different pitcher in the second half of the season, but the track record is so spotty it's hard to feel confident that we've finally got the Kyle Gibson we've been hoping for. Still gives up plenty of hits, but when he keeps the ball in the park, gets just a few extra Ks and a few less walks...he's an asset. but we've seen this before...is it sustainable?!?

I never stopped. The transition away from catcher was a little rough, but the drop off was more about the injuries than anything else. I never blamed him for the contract. It's great to see the bat returning to form and coupled with the Gold Glove defense he's giving us it's been a lot of fun to watch. Still not sold on Gibson, but it is good to see him turn in a strong performance against a better team. He's been much better the second half of the season, but he was brutal in the first half. Even now, he's still only had a game score more than 50 in 7 out of 24 starts. That ain't good.

We won't know if he's turned the corner for good" until we see how he starts next season, I suppose, but the signs are really encouraging. I'm especially pleased that's he's gotten himself into this great run now, before things like roster expansion and you have more teams packing it in for next year. Chris Parmelee fooled me with a September run that he couldn't carry over, but Buxton is raking in July-Aug. That's really good. Everything is on the upswing and it's wonderful to watch. The power we all hoped might be there is coming through good ABs, not him chasing it. He's still bunting for hits to keep the INF tight and how many times have you seen a fielder rush a play because they were worried about his speed beating something out or taking an extra base? I love it. And the defense...oh, my the defense. Absolutely spectacular. here's the best part: it can still get better: with more experience, he's going to get better at making his break on the ball, taking the best possible route, honing his arm and decision-making. This is some of the finest CF play we've ever had in MN, and we've had a lot of really terrific CF D over the years. I'm not ready to call him the best ever defensively in a Twins uniform...yet. but that's the sort of thing we're talking about. Best in the game, potentially one of the best all-time.

Kevin Brown does have a strong case, and I'd vote for him without a problem. Brown is especially interesting since his peak came after he turned 30; he should have won a Cy in 1998, and probably should have won it in 1996 too. (and I think if he does, his case gets a lot easier) Guidry is a little tougher: his peak was shorter than johan's and he actually had a longer career, while compiling a lower bWAR. His 1978 season is amazing, but he never cleared a 7 bWAR season again. Johan was the better pitcher in my mind. But Guidry certainly wouldn't be anywhere near the worst pitcher in the HoF if he ended up there some day.

Yeah, I think this is where Johan gets hurt. While Koufax in the regular season is a good comp, the post-season certainly helps him and tends to be one of those things that pushes the guys with shortened careers over the top. (terell davis anyone?) But I would put Johan in regardless. I would rather have the comet who was brilliant for 6-8 years and only lasted 10-12 than the grinder who compiled it over 18-20 but was never really thought of as the best pitcher in the game. There's been a push from a lot of people to include Jack Morris in the HoF (I'm not one of them no matter how wonderful 1991 was); I'd rather have Johan in there. Johan had more bWAR in less time, has "black type" in good categories splattered all over his resume (half of Jack's "black type" entries are ones you don't want, like Wild Pitches), and Johan's career ERA+ is better than any single season from Jack. The post-season issue is an area I can give Johan a pass: it's not his fault that when he hit his prime the teams only made the post-season twice, and as a starter he did just fine when he had the opportunity. One bad outing in his first playoff start, followed by 3 excellent playoff starts...and never got another chance. His other appearances were in relief in the really early days. That's bad luck, not a lack of ability to pitch in the post-season.

Meh, just another Gibby tease start. The 4A pitcher always looks good against a crap team that's already cooked for the season in august. Doesn't mean he can be a credible part of a contending rotation. I guess I'd be ok with the bunt if Polanco was bunting for a hit and not just doing it to sacrifice? I dislike the 8-man bullpen tremendously. Maybe it's what we need to mix and match our way to something resembling pitching success, but it doesn't seem warranted based on workload.