Mr. Brooks

I'll have to check out Battlestar Galactica, I've never seen it.

I understand the FO's and other posters reasons. I just don't agree with them. Difference of opinion. Great thing about sports is we get to find out if they were right or wrong.

The Tigers are -6 in run differential, and have only scored 33 runs in 13 games. They're awful.

I have no idea, but I'm interested to see. There are countless examples of young players in all sports who just seem to get hurt all the time, then they figure out how to stay healthy. Of course, there are countless who don't figure it out, and are never the same.

Started rewatching from episode 1 a couple weeks ago. Four episodes into season 3 so far (I can't do the whole wait a week between episodes bit, so trying to time it to catch up a day or two before the finale). After nearly two years of not watching it, I had forgotten just how good it is. And, there are so many characters and storylines and call backs, that it is just as interesting during an encore viewing. I usually can't decide between GOT and Breaking Bad for my top spot all time, but upon a refresher, I think it's definitely GOT. 1) GOT 2) Breaking Bad 3) The Americans 4) Sopranos 5) The Wire 6) The Shield 7) Oz 8) Fargo 9) Columbo 10) Shameless 11) Peaky Blinders 12) Deadwood Notes: Doesn't include sitcoms, or shows I consider miniseries, like Band of Brothers and Sherlock. Dexter just missed, it ran too long, would have been high on the list through 4 seasons. Better Call Saul should probably be there somewhere, probably will be before it's done, such a great show. Firefly, Freaks and Geeks, and Twin Peaks are excellent shows that would have been in there somewhere if not for idiot networks not realizing what they had. True Detective just missed, season 2 was just too awful, it had to be punished. Season 2 also hurts Fargo, not awful like True Detective, but would have been higher with just seasons 1 and 3. Homeland seasons 1 and 2 were almost good enough to make up for the rest... almost. Mr. Robot probably just missed. Really good, smart show. But, sometimes tries to be too smart, gets bogged down at times. Westworld is the most overrated thing I've ever seen, wouldn't make it if I went to 100. Black Mirror absolutely should be on there, not sure how I missed it, go ahead and slot it around 8-11 range somewhere. Narcos probably just missed, maybe. Pre Pablo death it was great. The story really needed to end there, IMO. House of Cards would have been there, if not for Spacey getting tossed and ruining any ending they had planned. Rome and West Wing are two shows that could have made it with a little tighter writing and editing. Both were great shows, but sometimes I found myself checking my watch during slower episodes. Let me know if I missed any.

So many people want the Twins to sign him now, but can you imagine the vitriol there would be towards that contract later? That's only 3 million per year less than Mauer, and he'd overwhelmingly likely be much less productive than Joe was during the latter years of his deal.

It's only 8 innings, so those numbers don't mean a ton. But, I wish they would have kept him. I was always a supporter of his potential and rostering, even against an avalanche of disagreement.

They could have, they chose not to. Big difference.

I didn't say every time, I said this time. It's not very often that this high leverage of a spot will come up this early in a game. It might not happen again all season. I also never implied that Vasquez should never see a high leverage situation. How about not his very first appearance though. These are not robots, they are humans, this was a tough first assignment of the year for a young guy with all of 5 career innings.

I think with a guy like Gonzalez, who can back up both infield and corner outfield, and two starting corner outfielders both capable of backing up centerfield, that the Twins could have carried Austin this year.

There isn't a business that's ever existed that would voluntarily pay an employee more than they thought they had to in order to retain his/her services. I don't know why we are specifically ripping the Braves for doing what a business is supposed to do. If we don't like it, we should be ripping the players union for allowing teams such significant leverage.

Arcia was given 1000 PA's to see if he could turn the corner. He didn't. Maybe Austin wouldn't have either, we'll see.

If I'm building a roster, no I'm not trying to carry an extra 1B/DH. But once that's the case, yes I am finding a way not to throw away an asset for essentially nothing. Maybe Austin will never make any improvements and I'll be wrong. That's fine, I don't shy away from being wrong. Sometimes when you hear a guy speak about his craft though, you just get a gut feeling that he has what it takes to make those improvements. That's where I'm at with Austin. What's done is done now though, we'll just have to kick back and see who Austin becomes.

Well I would absolutely use Rogers. Third inning, fifth inning, seventeen inning, I don't care. The highest leverage outs can come anytime. I'm not a fan of hard and fast rules regarding which innings each reliever can pitch. I hope that's the next tradition to die. But, if Vasquez really was called up to pitch high leverage spots, then yeah that's on the FO. I'm really disappointed if the FO brought up a rookie with mediocre stuff to pitch high leverage spots though.

Again, I don't want catchers and third basemen playing first base. Fundamental disagreement. That's fine, but no point banging our heads against a wall.

You warm him up instead of Vasquez. And yes, that may mean you have to warm him up again later. Unless a guy is coming off an injury, I don't think you can make it a policy that they never warm up more than once.

And my concern is that Cron gets injured (or ineffective) before one of those guys is ready. Now who plays 1B? Someone whose bat doesn't really play there. Which is interesting considering how you felt about Mauer's bat playing there.

Probably back loaded it.

We most likely will be fine without him. I just don't like dumping assets until/unless you absolutely have to. The FO and many posters obviously disagree with me, either by thinking he's not an asset, or that they had no other choice. I don't agree on either count. I think he is an asset, one that could have either given value or netted a real return later. And I think they could have found a way to keep him. Those are just my opinions though. Doesn't mean they are right, and ultimately, of course, the FO's opinion trumps mine.

You keep listing outfielders and catchers as reasons they don't need Austin. That's literally planning for his replacement with an outfielder.

4/64 extension for Thielen.

Polanco would have been the #1 prospect in all of baseball if nothing less than a .900 OPS, even once in his prime, was expected. How many SS's do that? EDIT: Derek Jeter did it twice in 20 years, in a more offensive era, playing half his games in Yankee Stadium. And one of those two was exactly .900.

Sure, I'm not saying it's possible to play 162 games with every player maximized perfectly. For me though, my plan would be that Kiriloff is an outfielder, and if circumstances dictate that I MUST play him at 1B to get him in the lineup, then I will. I won't plan for Kiriloff (one example, could be Raley,etc) to be a 1B though. When Mike says dump Austin because Kiriloff can play 1B, that to me is planning for Kiriloff to play 1B. It's the same argument I have for Astudillo and Garver. I'd rather have them at 1B or DH than on the bench, but I'd really rather have them at 3B or C, where their bat actually gives you an edge over the league.

That's my entire argument against dumping Austin right now.

Duffey.