TheMix

I live in Woodbury... It's a jacuz, not a hot tub.

I was there for the hot dog night. It was a perfect storm for something like that to happen. I was even in the sections that were doing it (though I thought it was pretty ridiculous). Not only was it Dollar a Dog Night, it was also student night. Tickets were like $3-5...so, throw in a plentiful bounty of ammo, the fact that Knoblauch made a not so liked exit to the much hated Yankees, and a ton of blitzed college students....and you have Tom Kelly jogging to the outfield to give everybody the calm down single. I really hated that move by Knoblauch at the time, but even I was fully disgraced by what was happening around me.

Apparently neither do you, or you wouldn't have posted that.....it makes no sense, in multiple ways

This team has lost almost 200 games the last 2 seasons. There shouldn't be a massive anything even if Ryan were to trade the entire roster. This roster needs to be completely rebuilt. There isn't one guy on the major league roster right now any other team would choose to build around as a core guy. They have a few nice pieces like Revere, Perkins, Plouffe, Willingham, and maybe Burton & Parmalee but no guys you are definitely building a nucleus around. Those guys are still a few years away. I would trade Mauer, Morneau, and Willingham and just get as much young talent as you can. It would allow you to play Plouffe, Parmalee, Florimon, and even Mastroiani everyday and see what you had. They could also end this dumb act that they are honestly pursuing free agent pitching. They aren't looking at anything but roster filler. You want to take anything to the bank bet your friends that Jason Marquis will have a better year than any of the dregs Ryan is going to sign to fill the rotation. Its easy money. Woah woah woah woah......seriously? I can understand wanting to play Ploufe and Parmalee, but Florimon and Mastoiani?! You've gone out of your gourd man. You want to blow the whole team up? Fine. Don't trade the one centerpiece of the team that's under contract through the years in which we'd see the new centerpieces of the team come up though, and leave us with Mastroiani and Florimon. We KNOW what we have with those two, and it aint good.

Mazatlan....a vacation and extra playing time. Nice!

How? You're already following the team.... You aren't making any sense. Let's say Gausman makes it to the majors. He's not Verlander, he's not a threat to throw a no-hitter every time out. And he's not a major-league ready starter right now. So what you wanted was a guy that helps one out of every five days that won't make the team all that much more exciting, that you says will make the team worth following, when you're obviously already following them, even after a 99 loss season, that looks to be about the same this season.....when we might have just the same options of drafting (if not better) the next draft. Again, your argument makes absolutely zero sense.

You seriously completely disregarded my whole point.....and just made the point for me in the same post. So if we get a close to major league ready (#2) pitcher at #2, what exactly does it do for us when most of our talent is in the low minors? Nothing. A #2 pitcher doesn't suddenly drag us out of the cellar. Simple. Done. End of argument. I understand your point, but the logic is completely faulty.

I disagree vehemently with that last assessment. You take the best player available generally, and especially in this case, with a guy that has that steep an upside. We do need pitching, but no one pitcher, be it Appel, Gausman, etc. is A) going to help right away be a lock to help your team or C) help a team that was one loss away from a 100 loss season so drastically that he completely alters your look in the division....hell, even Strasburg couldn't do that, and he was the pitching pick of my generation. That's just terribly shortsighted....especially in a draft that was light on talent to begin with. From everything I've read, Appel/Gausman probably wouldn't have gone top 5 last year....and projected as #2 starters. We got a projected #2 starter with the 32nd pick with a little more risk involved. This team wasn't going to be solved with one college pitching prospect (that also are never locks) so why be angry when they took the guy that had perhaps the highest upside in the draft? 38 SB in 39 tries, throws 97 off the mound, batted .500, and will hopefully develop power. How is that not just as good as a player that plays 1 of 5 games and can't propel a team single-handedly to the division title either? We got pitching today, and we'll get more tomorrow, and we'll almost assuredly get just as good, if not better pitching next year when we'll still be up near the top, and with a better draft class (according to Kevin Goldstein). "The Twins Way" has come up against some rather hard knocks lately due to bad luck....you wanted them to draft pitching, well they did with Gibson and Wimmers (both looked to be solid locks for #2's or at worst #3 just like Appel and Gausman), and both of them went down (unfortunately). That's not "the Twins Way"'s fault. That's bad luck. This was a not so great draft class with a guy like Appel that looked to be not so signable (especially now), knowing full well that no one pitcher is going to save this team (not now, not in the next year or two) and they took a guy that has ridiculously high upside. That's not poor management, that's discerning and very intelligent management.

As much as I love Harper's talent, and think he's gotten better as a person, he's kind of played like a little bit of a douche. I'm COMPLETELY surprised he didn't get plunked after that nice little helmet shrugging run on his first hit. I thought to myself "great hustle, but what the hell do you think you're doing?" His teammates have said that he's gotten better in the clubhouse, and I believe it, but he's not really proving it on the field. There are baseball players I hate but also love (Mariano Rivera, Verlander, etc.), but then there's players I love to hate because they just have a sense of arrogance about them. And some people like that, but I don't. It permeates more into football than in baseball, but I'd rather it stay that way. I'd hope that Harper grows not just as a baseball player but also as a person.

Not only did he not say that...you're apparently forgetting that he said "But there’s nothing to take away from his no-hitter."

Gotcha. My apologies for the confusion.

I haven't been to a game down here yet (only been here 2 months), but I would assume they're tolerant. There's a quasi-Minnesota-nice vibe down here, which means they're nice about almost everything, except gay people and not going to church I think almost every fans are tolerant. I've been to Fenway, and they gave me some crap for about 5 innings, then realized I could take it and invited me out for beers down in South-E. And I didn't even get murdered, so I think that's an accomplishment. When I do go to a game down here (which I think will be in August) I will most proudly don my Twins apparel, just as I have in the other visitors' stadiums I've been to. Btw, anyone that hasn't been to PNC Park, go....now.

I don't specifically remember anyone here saying that (certainly not large swathes). People liked him mostly because he was a valuable kind of utility player. I don't remember people clamoring for him to take Carrol's or Valencia's spot. I just think people thought he was a valuable guy to have on the roster in case a guy like Plouffe was unavailable.

I still think they were wrong, but those a valid points for sure.

I don't know that I'd qualify Inge as a "superior" option. Hughes did badly in a small sample size, but let's be honest, they don't have any hope of contending this season. With Inge there's no intrinsic value. He may be a tiny bit better defensively in that he may not commit as many errors as Hughes, but Hughes has much higher upside in that he's not 35, can hit with decent pop now and again, and is a perfectly serviceable righty off the bench in the future if your team actually does contend in a year or two. Inge almost certainly won't be there when they do contend, but if he were, I'd be shaking my head and sighing if I were an Oakland fan seeing his name on the line-up card, or coming off the bench in a high leverage situation. At least with Hughes there'd be the idea of something good happening.

Dang, I really love the way this thread has panned out for the most part. So delightful to see the reminiscent posts. I follow a certain blog's facebook account on twitter...this is someone I don't think I've seen post here at all, but it's really troublesome to see their posts. It almost seems like they revel in loathing the team that they claim to be fans of. They get so cynical that it's almost enough to prompt some existential crisis of faith. What's the point? I mean if that's what drives you, to be unrelentingly cynical, then I guess that's your right, but why? They ask for changes nearly every day, regardless of wins or losses, and I get the sense that even if changes WERE to be made, they'd find a way to hate them. They called for the firing of Bill Smith, that happened, and they got angry of the re-hiring of Terry Ryan, despite the fact that he presided over one of the most productive times in Twins history, and made one of the best trades (and, to be fair, one of the more poor) in Twins history. So it confuses me as to why these people still watch, or read, or care at all. If you're going to hate, win or lose, what's the point? That said, there is nothing in the scope of what is truly imaginable to make me think of losing my Twins allegiance at this point. What I can say about myself is that I'm a fan that's currently dawning a Twins cap, working for a very meager wage at Minnesota-born franchise in the city of Austin, TX. Yet I still retain an MLB.tv subscription so that I may watch bits of nearly every single game while on smoke breaks (yes, I'm that guy) or while slicing up deli meats at work, despite the fact that they nearly lost 100 games last year. I shelled out $50 on a whim to go see game 162 last year and cheered every second of that game while shouting vehemently at the guy behind me that chose to spend the bulk of the game shouting obscenities at Danny Valencia (who actually did decent defensively that game). I was at Metrodome in a large suite with Jack Morris and other fans for the Game 162 when the entire stadium waited with the team to see the result of a different game to find out that they had won the division. I was there when Chuck Knoblauch made his not so triumphant return to the Metrodome when my rowdy college cohorts in the home run porch deemed it appropriate to sling any and all pieces of litter at him, and TK had to come out and calm them down. I took full advantage of dollar dog nights, consuming, at my peak, 7 1/2 hot dogs in one sitting. And I once went to a game where a belligerent fan took it upon himself to taunt Coco Crisp by shouting "You got nothin Crips! (he really did say "Crips") Face on a cereal box, Crips!" With all those memories cemented in my mind, not even counting the WS wins, there is nothing that could conceivably tear my mind away from them. I live in Texas now, so with our team waning, it does give me the opportunity to also root for my new hometown team, the Rangers and their Twin associated coach. But, rest assured, when they play each other, I'm pulling for the Twins no matter what. And I see other ways in which to be optimistic. A week and a half ago I was calling up a friend in Minnesota at 2 am (he's the manager of the Happy Gnome, so he was still up) to tell him that Miguel Sano had a stratospheric 1.200+ OPS. We may not be doing well right now, but barring some very bad sequence of events in the next 3 years (just knocked on wood), we will still have a catcher that's nearly certain to have an average over .300 that hits gaps fairly efficiently, and hopefully a third baseman that's tearing the snot out of the ball, a shortstop or second baseman that's also doing the same, an outfield that will cover a ton of ground, whatever this year's #2 pick is, and presuming this year is going where it looks to be going, another top 5 pick coming up through the system. Even if I can't watch this team win every night, I can look toward the future with a fair amount of optimism.

Yes, exactly, that's the heart of the conversation that I wish John would've picked up on more. A) That can be really awkward to talk about hypotheticals (especially talking where they would be if they were in a different division) in baseball, and Winning a division is what it is. Don't call it anything else. I know I felt great every single time it happened. I didn't immediately think "Ya, but we're a 90-win team, we have no shot". That's both terribly depressing and cynical, but it's also completely untrue.

While I'm not going to say that they weren't a worse team when compared to many of their opponents in the playoffs, I definitely don't think their division titles were smoke and mirrors. They were who they were, in the division they were in, and they won 6 division titles. I think it's highly incorrect to say they were smoke and mirrors, because you're dealing in complete hypotheticals. Gleeman's point in saying essentially what you called smoke and mirrors, was that they were in the worst division in baseball....put them in the AL East and they're the Blue Jays. Well, yes, but they weren't in the AL East....that's a completely different situation. Who knows how the Twins would have handled their organization if they were in the East, and frankly, who cares? They're in the Central, and what I know is that for 5 of the 6 seasons we won the division, we were a low-payroll team in a crappy stadium that still managed to make the playoffs, regardless of the division. That's pretty darn good in my mind. Regardless of the outcome of the playoffs, it gave us a chance, maybe not a great one, but like I said, even if you're coming from one of the worst divisions in baseball, or have a record perhaps undeserving (?) of a World Series title, over half the time in the last 24 years, that's exactly what we've seen. So I'm not ready to call anything smoke and mirrors. The Cardinals won 83 games in 2006 in a not especially good division and trounced the Tigers in the Series. Just call it what it is, the Twins failing to perform in the playoffs. Don't try to quasi-invalidate their division titles by saying they were in the worst division in baseball. Who the hell cares? They won, and got a chance to prove themselves. They failed in that aspect, but that doesn't take away their titles. Gleeman was right in saying that these teams weren't great teams, that's true, but neither have been 13 of the last 24 World Series champions by his standards. So honestly, what's the point in saying they were a sub-great team? We got 6 division titles out of it and a chance to compete. Unless you're in New York or Boston I think it's very hard to ask for more than that as a fan.

Just wanted to say that I thought/think your argument for the absurdity of the validity of hypotheticals was spot on, and so was at least the idea of the playoffs being at least somewhat of a craps shoot. First, the idea of the Twins being run the same way in the AL East is fairly shortsighted. I normally am inclined to agree with Gleeman's insight, but I think the idea that they would be the same kind of team they are in the East as they are the Central is lunacy. Personally, I think, were they in that sort of division, they would be run more like the Rays, with a bit larger payroll. But for Gleeman to assert that Division championships don't mean all that much because it doesn't translate to playoff success (even if you're in the worst division in baseball) seems undeniably incorrect. Including the first year the Twins won the World Series, there have been 15 teams (I believe) with a 95-win or less season (13 of them being 92 or less) on the books that have won the World Series. Therefor, I think it's absolutely valid to say that there are 2 steps to winning the World Series...the first, and most important being making the playoffs. So I think you were absolutely right in what you were hinting at.....that 6 Division titles in 10 years is no laughing matter. Regardless of the outcome or what division we're coming from. Playoff history is literally filled with history of teams that had very unfavorable matchups that still managed. Now perhaps that says something about the Twins' coaching staff, or even just small sample size, but for the first time in quite awhile I find myself disagreeing vehemently with your cohort. Perhaps their playoff performance is a sad thing, but the fact that they got into the playoffs 6 times in 10 years should be looked upon as a very serious accomplishment that very much furthered their chances of another World Series title. Thank you for making that point.

I agree. He's so soft spoken that sometimes it can be a bit daunting, but it makes you focus more on what he's saying, and generally, that's a good thing. I think he just sees the field a little better than Bert does.

My apologies. Normally I'm not quite so non-observant. I will have to re-calculate my pick.

I know this was discussed, but I think the guy took Angel Mata. May I take the future #2 pick from this year's draft?

I think that's a fairly myopic view. Perkins has worked out great. Other recent departees were great (see Gurrier & Crain). Baker was great before getting hurt last year. I think Anderson's trying to make the best of bad situations....especially with Liriano. There's only so much a pitching coach can do to get a guy out of his own head. And overall, I think over the course of Anderson's career as Twins Pitching Coach, for every bad example of a pitching failure, there's a great pitcher that just either got injured or left the team. And the Twins do NOT have a higher investment in Liriano. I have a hard time believing that even if he put up monster numbers from here until the trade deadline, that they'd get anything really good. He's just been too unstable throughout his career. We'd have a very hard time selling high with him. So he ends up being just one guy whom you can maybe get a mid-level prospect for unless somebody's ridiculously desperate. That is NOT a higher investment than your pitching coach. Especially considering Liriano is almost surely gone after this year (or at the deadline).

Also, I should mention that Baker does have an option after this season, and unless he totally breaks down, it'd be hard to see them not picking up that option.

The thing I've always liked about this group of bloggers is that their "bitching" comes from a well reasoned perspective. There's logic behind it. There's bloggers out there that act like they're preaching the sermon from the mount, when all they're doing is venting anger. For an example, start following thebaseballblog.net on Facebook. With these guys, their analysis of the team isn't overwrought with emotion. Rather it's as an objective as possible view. Which is more than I can say for the majority of bloggers out there