mikelink45

Thank you Mike. That's fun stuff.
I know one man who played against barnstorming teams. He told me about the time the other team featured Bob Feller as their pitcher.
I got all excited and asked him how many pitches he saw from Feller. He looked at me like I was slow and said, "Three".

Jim Mudcat Grant had a nightclub act and was a singer. I read where he worked in the Cleveland ticket office and for their community relations team when he played for the Indians.

Very cool article Mike. Thanks for sharing with us!

I really don't think with HD and the improvement in radios that the "static" is that harsh. And yes, XM does alleviate the issue for those who wish to subscribe. I did during the time I traveled the country. I loved it. But I also loved sitting on the bike in the parking lot of the Super 8 in Gillette Wyoming finishing a close game on 'CCO. And since it's the MINNESOTA Twins, not the Twin City Twins, statewide coverage is nice, for two reasons. It's not always easy to find the game when away from your local area. And in my area one of the stations that would take me west, skips a lot of games or innings for news and recipe shows. Lol

Well, I have lived in small towns in Minnesota over the years and have family that still do live in small towns, so I know of what you speak.  It doesn't "matter" to me, I was just stating my opinion, and going to WCCO is a downgrade for the majority of people. 

With all your options why would it matter to you?  We all find a way to connect and I grew up in Minneapolis and I know how hard it is to realize that life is different in the rest of the state where I now live.
 

This is a very good point. Well said.

Nice article.

Nice response.  I am quite biased because Warren Spahn was my hero and I got to watch him pitch = in person - four years in a row in the 1050s.  When his turn came we expected to win.  No relief pitcher was going to blow it.  

I don't totally discount wins because whatever the conditions, whether it be weather, home field, good defense  good offense, the starter generally has the most impact on the outcome of a game and to get a win you need to do better than the other guy with all of his challenges that particular day.     Lets just say I give it weight but not a whole lot.      I think game outcome W-L record is just as meaningful but I still like the quality start stats and I still like ERA as a stat.     I always thought it a little incongruous that a win requires 5 innings pitched but a quality start needs 6 innings.

I am definitely in favor of #2 and #3 which is why #1 is third on my list.  Let a manager designate 4 pitchers for a 9 inning game.  That's it.  If it goes beyond 9 they can do what they want.  But think of the strategy.  Do you use all three relief pitchers in the 7th inning or do you have to wait and hold one in reserve?  Get the relievers in a rotation and teach them to throw more than 1 inning.  Get rid of the one LOOGY and other specialists who throw more warm-ups than pitches.  
The real issue is on the mound and these three address that.  No one wants to watch a parade to the mound of catchers, pitching coaches and managers.  Limit mound visits to 1 per inning, signal changes from the dugout.  Left for intentional walk, right for I want a new pitcher!  

Nicely done.  I hope you did not tear a rotator cuff typing this. 

Nicely done.  I hope you did not tear a rotator cuff typing this. 

But what does Curt Schilling think, and can he borrow some money from you, Mr. President? He promises to pay you back.

Very optimistic.  I would find fault with your number one because a lot of players look great before they begin their careers and I prefer to see them establish a track record before being listed as a number 1 or does this mean that the rest of the potential players aren't good enough to be a number 1?
 
From your description I question Diaz too.  Another 1B/DH and you liken him to Vargas. Once again my debate is on potential.  I have seen too many potentials go down the tube and for the top five I prefer to see players who have worked their way up. 
I would love to see the two pitchers really blossom and then see the Twins cut the chaff and get rid of Hughes, Santana, Santiago, Gibson and start working on the real rotation of the future with these two in the mix.
Thanks for the work.  My criticism is not for your listing, but just my personal preferences.

This is an interesting list because I would like to see four of them spend a majority of the year with the Twins.  Gimenez is not going to do anything and Garver at 26 is entering his peak seasons if we wait until Castro ends his contract he will be 29-30 and for most players that is the beginning of the downward trend that is in the chart here - see http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/catcher-aging-is-a-curve-not-a-cliff/
 
That is why my personal desire is to see players in the bigs in their age 25 - 26 years if not before if we think that they are really going to be major leaguers. 

This is an interesting list because I would like to see four of them spend a majority of the year with the Twins.  Gimenez is not going to do anything and Garver at 26 is entering his peak seasons if we wait until Castro ends his contract he will be 29-30 and for most players that is the beginning of the downward trend that is in the chart here - see http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/catcher-aging-is-a-curve-not-a-cliff/
 
That is why my personal desire is to see players in the bigs in their age 25 - 26 years if not before if we think that they are really going to be major leaguers. 

This is an interesting list because I would like to see four of them spend a majority of the year with the Twins.  Gimenez is not going to do anything and Garver at 26 is entering his peak seasons if we wait until Castro ends his contract he will be 29-30 and for most players that is the beginning of the downward trend that is in the chart here - see http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/catcher-aging-is-a-curve-not-a-cliff/
 
That is why my personal desire is to see players in the bigs in their age 25 - 26 years if not before if we think that they are really going to be major leaguers. 

You could even add Tyler Duffey or Michael Tonkin or Byung-Ho Park or Eduardo Escobar or Hector Santiago or even Adam Walker to the list, not to mention one or two of the guys who topped out at Ft. Myers. Oh, and Alex Wimmers and Ryan O'Rourke aren't necessarily givens. Jeez...we are looking at half the roster as expandables! The question is when is the absolute best time to start non-tendering players. The day before rosters need to be set in November, or right after the World Series, or even now? Note that a lot of teams seems to be making additions to their 40-man rosters right now with some prospects as September callups and jettisoning some bodies.
 
I was doing some rough estimating and the Twins will need 6-8 spots to protect anyone that really needs protection, although I'm probably wrong on a few of the names. Hurlburt will have an opportunity to be a minor league free agent, There's no other organization names that will be missed if they depart in this fashion (maybe Van Steensel at the worst). I believe. Names like Garver, Baxendale, Granite, Gonsalves, Jorge, Palka, Steward, Jones and Wheeler all come to mind. I don't see other organizations grabbing Turner, Goodrum, Busenitz, Westphal, Slegers, Peterson, Ortiz, Michael, Harrison, Eades, Hicks or even Thorpe.
 
But this is where it all gets difficult. You need to move out guys if you aren't seeing their potential to impact the major league level at some point, as this year's Twins have shown you can always fill in holes from the scrap heap if need be, with an occasional gem.
 
But five guys on the current 40-man who weren't a Twins prospect and basically picked up during the year and off-season on the waiver wire seem to be waaaay too much, unless, of course, you do need bodies to jettison before you do a real 40-man again.
 
Plus look at the names above. 3/4 of them would probably happily resign with the Twins as minor league depth (although it does cost the Twins more money to pay minor league free agents with experience than prospects still on a learning curve).
 
And you also need a couple of stray bodies in case you sign a free agent, something about 40-man adds in November have to stay put thru spring training.
 
If they do keep Plouffe and Santiago, then there really won't be much of a payroll difference between the Twins at the beginning of 2016 and the beginning of the 2017 season.
 
But who knows what a new president of baseball operations and his general manager and staff will do once that time comes. But the off-season has basically begun and one the World Series is done, it does move pretty darn fast.

To waste Polanco's options with little to no playing time, and to refuse him playing his natural SS position at AAA this season...especially considering its unsettled at the ML level...goes beyond misguided. It's just plain stupid.
 
We don't know yet if he can be a starting ML SS or not, or at least a decent fill in, but he's looked pretty good so far. A testament to his experience and natural ability. And all the more damping evidence to his mishandling.
 
Here's hoping he can at least be a temp solution until someone like Gordon is ready.

I would rather see the Twins gamble on Chargolis, Reed and Melotakis as the season progresses than, say, Burnett, Boshers and the continued Kintzler (plus Abad). I would rather go and trade the vet minor league guys and see what we drafted and their potential. I mean, the Twins really can't climb that high this season, can they? And if we continue to drag, let's do it with the future, not the scrap heap. If the future isn;t there, than we do have a true system failure starting with the scouting department, the draft, and the training these guys get in the minors.

Agreed. The list of poorly handled prospects is long. Tonkin and Polanco are the most recent. Tonkin has been given the opportunities (and succeeded) this year, which only makes last year worse. Arcia maybe wasn't going to right the ship, but Minnesota never allowed him to find out.
 
Polanco could be headed down a similar path a year from now if Nunez, Escobar, and Dozier all remain rostered.

I think a part of the Arcia problem is the lingering hangover of David Ortiz.  They don't play him nearly enough because they're afraid of Ks and poor defense.  But they don't trade or release him because they're afraid of giving up the next Big Papi for nothing.  
 
There have been injuries and bad roster decisions that have necessitated some moves, but in light of that, Molly has seen fit to sit the guy for weeks at a time, and not even PH him in situations that just scream for a lefty with potential pop- heck, he wasn't even getting garbage time for long stretches.  
 
One of the silver linings of a lost season like this is the opportunity to see what you've got in the youngsters; let 'em take their lumps and learn, while being evaluated.  Good for the team to get a look, good for the fans, to keep them interested.  But Molly has mis-managed so many of the young guys both last year, and especially this one, (Sano to the OF, fer cryin' out loud), and Arcia is maybe the biggest casualty of all.

Completely agree that in-house prospects and trades are the best choices.

Sorry, but there is no place to misplace a concern on the team at this point.