Dman

I am not a big Pelfrey fan and I like Santana better than Pelfrey but for the money and optimism I might take Pelfrey . My pessimism for Santana has little factual basis as has been previously pointed out on this board Santana might end up being better than any pitcher we have. It is more looking back at him he seems very up and down year to year and with his arm issue he just feels like more of a risk.

I am with you on the irrational affection for Deduno. I like that he can miss bats and when he was healthy he was right up there with the big boys. I do have to agree with the nay-sayers that he cannot seem to stay healthy and that is a problem. My problem is despite the nice stats I just don't trust Santana to stay healthy and pitch as well as he did last year. I don't like the idea of losing a draft pick and possibly DFAing another pitcher to find room for him until they decide what they want to do with the big C. I am torn on this one.

Yeah the money and years have to be lower than he would like. However if he has a bad year or blows his arm out on a 1 Year deal then he will lose that gamble. That is why it seems players almost always take the deal with the most years even if it is less money per year. If I had to guess I would say Santana feels like he is a better pitcher than Nolasco and Ricky got 4 years at 12 million per year with an option on a 5th year. My guess is it takes a deal similar to that to get him. I think there is too much past inconsistency and potential injury concerns to go there though. Personally I like the Twins offer and I think it is fair to both sides as he does come with risk over the three years. If I were him I would take the years but it would say something for him to go out on a limb bet on himself and come out better financially next year. Unless of course he doesn't pitch well or gets injured and he comes back on a Pelfrey type deal. Then he loses big time. I don't think the Twins will be the only team to offer him multiple years but I don't think he will reach Nolasco's numbers.

I kind of thought Keplers spring numbers would more like Buxtons and vice versa so he definitely surprised me. It will be very interesting to keep an eye on several guys in the minors this year. I hope Kepler starts to move faster.

Call me a sap but there is something special about Collabello. To me I feel like he is sold out on making this team. If he just wanted to make money or security he could have went to that Korean league. If he was afraid he couldn't make it in the Majors he could have run. Instead he seems more focused than ever on realizing his dream. He is not giving up on himself and in my mind he is digging in. Motivated, fearless, talented, I think he could be special. It just feels like he has what it takes to make it to me.

Sure I get that. There is no guarantee he makes the transition to the majors, but I don't think you give up on a guy like that until you know for sure.

I like Escobar as well but I see several people disagree with that especially when it comes to defense and I guess I can see that. I like Florimon but I just have this gut feeling that Escobar can hit 260 or 270 and I don't get that feeling with Florimon. I would at least like to see Escobar get a longer shot to see what he can do. I could be wrong as I often am but I think he deserves a shot. So I am with you on the free Escobar campaign. I am fine trading a pitcher but considering what we have gotten from the Phillies I am not inclined to go there again.

We have Hicks and Buxton for center fielders and I think in the end they both are as good or significantly better than De Aza. They could use him this year but would have to hope to buy low and then sell high to make this work. I don't see that happening. I have to believe Chicago would want something significant to pull the trigger and I don't know why we would give them anything significant unless we really think the guy is ready to take off or something. We also have tons of options for players in left and right field. I doubt this happens.

It is always a tough to figure out what the FO is thinking. Do they want to try and build trade value with bounce back years from veterans? Are they concerned about service time for younger players? When service time is used up do you want to give players away for nothing? If players have struggled at the MLB level do you give them more time in the minor's? There are a lot of moving parts to any decision you make. Like most I am itching to see what the young guys can do and would like to see the clog of pitchers cleared up so that we have a chance to check out Gibson and Meyer at the MLB level. At the same time I am concerned about getting nothing for the players that are out of options and worry that they might perform reasonably well for another team. Several of them have done well for periods of time just not consistently. So I waffle back and forth on the best course of action. I really hope the Twins get the younger guys some playing time by June especially if we are going to lose 90 games again anyway. At some point the talent from below has to push out the players that are not performing well. You can't keep them all.

While I agree with you that being a good person does not necessarily translate to helping the Twins there are some things we need to be mindful of when talking about CC. Chris was the MVP of his AAA league last year. He had an amazing season. If CC is as bad as you claim then what does that say about the rest of players in AAA? They must really be bad? I understand that CC's age makes him a tough sell especially for a team looking to the future but I don't think you can just ignore his talent and potential either.

That is a really nice article. Your take on this resonates with my own. I do think the players are right to some extent a lot of what happens is mental, but you are also correct that training and talent come in to play because the better those things are the better they are able to have success and improve their confidence. I think you are dead on in your analysis but that is just my opinion I am sure others will have a different take.

I really thought Kubel and Bartlett would come out of the gates strong. As usual I was wrong. I thought they had a lot at stake, a lot of MLB experience and high motivation to succeed. Maybe age is a larger factor than I realized. Anyway if they don't get it together fairly soon I am in the camp that wants the younger guys to get the playing time. Let those two aging veterans play somewhere else and give some of the young guys a chance. I know it is early but Diamond really let the air out of my sails last night as well. I really thought he would be a different pitcher this year but it looks like nothing has really changed. Again it is very early but I was very disappointed with what I saw from him last night.

So once they struck gold with Hardy they went back for more I guess.

Yeah I agree with that. I think that is more what this thread should be about. I think people are looking at passion and leadership and confusing them with the mental game that goes on in each players head. Most athletes agree that confidence plays a key role in success. When you believe you are going to hit a home run it is more likely that you are going to hit a home run. If you believe you are going to hit a home run and strike out the next 10 times your confidence is going to go down and create doubt about hitting a home run the next time. The next time up you might not be aggressive at the plate. You might be afraid to strike out and just want to make contact. you might be afraid to swing at certain pitches. You might swing frantically at any pitch in an effort to just get a hit. The psychology of a hitter is tough. You are considered successful if you make an out two thirds of the time (66%). You are considered marginally successful when you make an out 75% of the time. You are considered worthy of replacement when you make an out 80% of the time or more. There is 10% window you have to fit in to make it. Not much room for slumps in there. If I had to guess the problem with many guys batting in the 200 range is that they are thinking too hard when they are up there instead of just reacting. They have lost confidence in their ability. No amount of leadership or passion can save them from themselves as they lose confidence and become their own worst enemy. You can work on mechanics and try to remove the demons but each player has to find there way to what works for them. What works for one guy doesn't for another. I think that is why managers are always saying we need to have fun out there etc. Always trying to keep players loose so that don't think too much. I think that is why managers continue to put guys out there that are struggling to try and help them re-gain their confidence. The mental game of baseball is very interesting.

Yeah I don't really understand the unwritten rules either. If someone could enlighten me that would be awesome.

Sure anything that brings a team closer together is a good thing. It could be something in the heat of battle or a knitting session. Doesn't really matter what it is if it brings the guys closer together. Passion isn't always bad but that is not my point. My point is that Talent and skill far outweigh any cumbaya moment you might have with your team. I know a bunch of washed up minor leaguers who have have tons of passion and fire but they never made it to the big leagues. Why? because they didn't have the talent to make it. Thinking passion is this immovable force that will make us winners just doesn't hold water. Players will simply have to perform better than the other team to win. No matter what emotion they are feeling it isn't going to change what they can or cannot do. Otherwise every time someone got angry they would hit a home run. It doesn't happen. It just doesn't work that way. Getting angry you are more likely to strike out than anything else. Yes eventually you will hit a home run but my point is the same. Stay focused, develop your talent and don;'t worry about passion. Once they start winning every one will agree they have the right amount of leadership and passion.

I am probably being a bit harsh as those things certainly have some influence but I think it is minor compared to talent and ability. It isn't completely sanitary or a perfect science as has been noted and many strange things happen in a season. Baseball is a grind and guys get hurt and young guys come up and do better or worse than expected. Sometimes the best pitcher loses to the worst batter there is plenty of mystery and intrigue on any given day in baseball. When it comes to assessing value though it is back to statistics.

That sounds great as there certainly is some truth to that, but how much leadership is needed for self motivated, highly competitive, and talented athletes? Who know their jobs inside and out and have played this same game most of there lives. Who have position coaches and hitting coaches and structure just like your Girl Scouts. All teams have these things and all the players know the rules how to play their positions and the game. How much more leadership do they need and what kind of leadership is needed? There is a point where either you perform as a player or you do not. Does the twins coaching staff get to take credit for Joe Mauers swing and his talent or do they take the blame for Pedro Florimons swing and lack of batting prowess? They come from the same organization with the same coaching and leadership. So tell me who is to blame? The player or the organization?

I agree with you on that but there isn't much room for a cavalier attitude for a professional sports star because they will be out of a job. I just don't understand the large difference between your two attitudes here. Everyone at this level is constantly trying to get better or they are out of a job. I don't know how much more motivation there is than that. You play well or you are done, there is no tomorrow. I don't see guys not giving 100% all the time unless they are injured. They might not be as good as other players but I don't believe it is because they are too lazy or don't have competitive fire. They wouldn't have made it to the bigs without being highly competitive, self motivated and talented. That is the standard that it takes to get to MLB. It takes just as much if not more to stay there.

Yeah but here's the rub. Nobody likes to lose and they aren't going to just lay down. Regardless of your perception it just doesn't happen. Also if players fail to perform they will lose their jobs and they don't want that to happen and that is why they practice every day and even over the off season to get better. Those that do not are likely to be gone. Now the fact that said players might not be as good as other teams seems a more likely scenario and I think if you look at the stats you will see that. I can't think of a time I stepped onto a field ready to lose or not caring about winning the game. You play games to win. Whether you have the talent to so that is another story. If the two teams are as equal as you say they should come close to 50\50 split. Show me a player or team that likes to lose and I will accept your premise but I don;t think it exists.

Sure but did you admire him for that? Is the trash talk what made him better than his peers? Because that is the correlation so many on here want to make. He had drive he had talent a rare talent at that. But he could have been humble about it and been looked at in a better light than he is. His talent wouldn't have changed he would just be a better human being.

The problem is then why poor over stats? Why give stats such importance when it is leadership that matters so much. Stop talking about WAR, OPS etc because if they don;t have passion they just aren't worth it. I don't think you can have it both ways. As long as someone isn't disruptive to the club house how much influence do they have? Games come down to performance. Stats define performance and that is why players are measured by them and not their leadership qualities.

I guess I don't completely understand what you mean. A home run show boated is worth more than one that is not? Or excellence is only acknowledged when show boating? I am not sure I follow.

The Red Sox did have personality and a family feel to the club with the Beards. It was interesting to see them rally around that. Although the beards were cool and all, there turn around doesn't happen with out great pitching and that was the largest difference to me in that team. They had horrible pitching the year before and they stunk. Excellent pitching last year and they won a world series. Maybe the beards helped but I highly doubt that personality put them over the hump as it was talent and good fortune that did that. What if every team grew beards and hired baseball rats? 29 teams are still going to lose, why? Because of the talent level on each team. I like the new guys coming up and it will be exiting to see what they can do. I think youth will bring enthusiasm to this team as you stated but their talent will decide how long people stay exited. I love your comments on this board.