IndianaTwin

Thanks for these links. Good reading. Here’s an interesting one as well: https://www.cooperstowncred.com/will-ted-simmons-ever-make-hall-fame/ It makes a pretty convincing case for Ted Simmons being deserving, yet the Jaws link you cite clearly show Mauer above Simmons. Simmons fell off the writer’s ballot after one year in what the author claims was the most-stacked ballot in 30-some years. He’s been within one vote of making it from the Veterans Committee. Which points to a significant part — guys are affected by the quality of the rest of the ballot. Fortunately, as I look at the upcoming list, my sense is that the ballot will be not be particularly loaded. Lots of Hall of Very Good guys, but after you take out the first-ballot guys like Jeter and Rivera, I think he stacks up pretty well. https://baseballhall.org/hall-of-famers/future-eligibles#2019-eligibles

I generally like what we have, with a couple ideas... 1. Given that both Gibson and Pineda are free agents after 2019, I’d try extending Gibson a bit, perhaps with a three-year offer with opt-out after two. 2. I’d also like to have a bit more experience. While a Corbin would be nice, I’d rather not go that high on a starter. I’m thinking a 2/$24MM offer for J.A. Happ. As a 36-year-old in a few weeks, I don’t see him getting a three-year deal in this environment. Starting spring training with Berrios, Gibson, Happ, Odo, Pineda/Mejia as the plan and the rookies ready to step in feels better. (Then, a couple of Reed/Rodney/Duke-type contracts for the bullpen and try to improve the lineup for the Mannysota Twins.)

On the bright side, after today the Twins can't have any more walk-off losses this season!

"Status quo" is not a term that I think of with this group. I don't necessarily think of them with lots of flashy moves, but I think they will be active. Their modus operandi seems to be to make lots of moves and hope that more improve them incrementally than hurt them.

Hope they decide soon, because I’ve got a Lookouts cap on my Christmas list, and there’s only 94 more shopping days. I might need to update that.

Gibson, Berrios, Odorizzi seem like givens. Mejia, Pineda, Romero, Gonsalves feel like the next tier -- potential with each, but none have yet demonstrated being able to last a full season (or in Pineda's case, still coming back from TJS). With Romero getting up to 146 innings, I think the most likely scenario may be to start in Rochester for a handful of starts and get a Mayish callup. Teams don't tend to play the service-time game as frequently with pitchers, but he has around 55 days this year, so it would take holding off until around late-May/early-June to keep him under a full season at year end.

What came to mind last night was that it felt like it could be more than just a routine curtain call.

When the view hits your eye Like a zig and zagging dye-- That’s a moiré.

He's also totaled an amazing 20 RBIs on those five ABs, with a 5.000 OPS.

Per radio guys, all five of Mauer's grand slams have come with two strikes. Don't know if that's significant or anything, but it sounds kinda interesting. Also, three were on full counts.

We're playing soccer rules, right? Two-game aggregate score?

MAUER POWER! (Is that all the bigger I can make the type?)

Looks interesting.

Oh yeah, forgot that one. I change my answer.

Good seats still available, I see.

Late, but... 1. Applebee's. 2. (No answer -- fell asleep). 3. (No answer -- fell asleep). 4. Jay Buhner. 5. Fake.

It feels like most of these threads have been going in circles, so I don't know whether to post this in the Buxton thread, the grading Molitor thread, or the grading the front office thread. So I'll do it here. I was concerned too with the "no people skills" comment, particularly after reading the response from Seth, who seems to be basing it on real conversations rather than on what we read and speculate on. In grading Molitor, however, I do wonder if "people skills" is one of the positive things he brings to the table, and that's something that is going to be really tough for us as fans to judge. I don't get to see games, only listen on the radio and read the esteemed words of TD posters. But my sense is that Molitor does seem to relate to the players. His excellent pedigree is going to get him off to a good start, but that will wear off soon. As I posted elsewhere, however, he doesn't seem to throw his players under the bus, and in his interviews, he always seem to have their backs as a person, even when he acknowledges their misplays or poor choices. As Exhibit A, I'll use this example from Sunday's game talking about DeJong: “He asked about going back out for the fifth,” Molitor said. “Rightfully so. I had no problem with that. He was in the right frame of mind in terms of him saying he felt great and wanted to keep going. But no, we decided to set it up the way we did and went with it. And [Zack] Littell did a nice job coming in.”As Exhibit B, I'll note that it would have been easy to let the wheels spin off when they were 22-30 and on pace for 69 wins, but he was able to right the ship enough to go 39-36 in the next stretch and get within sniffing distance of .500. Unfortunately, they've gone 4-12 with a trade-depleted September roster playing against a lot of playoff teams since then, so low-to-mid 70s seems like the most-likely ending point. But still, after the lousy start, there were a few of us at least thinking that there was a chance of closing on the Indians. We also complain that Molitor doesn't change, but as Exhibit C, I'll note the change in bunting patterns. Anecdotally, it's seemed like he's bunted less this year, and the stats bear it out. At present, the Twins are on pace for about 19 non-pitcher sacrifice bunts after averaging 27 the last three years. To me, that at least hints at him being told to knock it off by the Analytics Folks and generally following instructions. Those sound like "grading Molitor" comments, but I'm posting them here because so many of the "getting it wrong" comments have focused on Molitor's still being here. Others have focused on a perception of their mishandling the Buxton callup situation. In another thread, I said: I think Levine was a straight shooter with his comments. I paraphrase his message as, "We made a tough decision, and Byron and his agent have their right to be disappointed. We would be disappointed if he didn't want to come up to the majors. We still believe Byron can help us, so we are going to do our part to make it a good relationship going forward." And I applaud them for not trying to force such a conversation right now -- those chats rarely go well when they happen in the heat of the moment.I haven't seen anyone reference this article -- if they have, I apologize for the repetition. But this article seems to suggest that they have been doing due diligence in reaching out to Buxton. http://www.startribune.com/twins-try-to-clear-the-air-with-byron-buxton/492822311/. We haven't heard Buxton's side, but that may be okay. If I'm the Twins in this situation, if the conversation has indeed gone well, my suggestion to Byron would be to say, "Look, we've made good progress in this conversation. Let's agree to keep working at it, and let's agree to keep our conversations to ourselves -- we don't want either of us to get burned by being misinterpreted by the media. When can we talk next?" That's a mature response on the Twins side, and if Byron is on board with that, his "not able to be reached for comment" response is a good one. All that to say that I'm in the "glass five-eighths full" category. After this season, I'm not quite as far as the person above who said it was three-fourths full, but I still think the trajectory is heading in the right direction. This doesn't seem like a front office that's going to make the big splash. Rather, they seem like a group that is going to make lots of moves with the hopes of improving themselves incrementally and winning more than they lose. As Exhibits D and E, how many other teams signed six free agents last winter or traded seven guys since mid-August?

Something seemed weird as I typed his name! (And I guess we don’t control him, do we? :-) ) Go with Moya there instead.

I know it’s bad form to comment on your own posts, but this just came to me. As an additional perk besides the x number of trips on the Pohlad’s private jet, can we also promise to put “Mannysota” on the FRONT of our jerseys during next year’s Players Weekend as a negotiating tactic?

GIven that he started the third, I’d assume they were trying to use Gonsalves as a typical starter. But say they’d followed him with a five-inning, not-quite-quality, 3 runs in 5 innings “start” from Odorizzi (I know, the rotation didn’t line up, but I’m just using this as an example), it might have made for something like a 9-3 lead after seven. If it works like that, I’m all on board for the opener approach. And since I’ve gone off on a tangent now, I’ll continue. It seems to me that if a team lined up their rotation 1-4-2-3-5, they could get by with using one Opener to lead off the games for both the 4 and 5 guy. If he goes two innings in 40 percent of the games, that’s only about 130 innings for the season. WIthout any off days, his pattern would be to alternate one and two days off, but with off days scattered, some of the one-day-offs would become two and some of the twos would become threes. If he has too many one-day-offs in close proximity, they could shorten an occasional outing to one inning rather than two. If Berrios and Gibson go 6 or 7 most days as the Nos. 1 and 2, and Gonsalves-Odo and Gonsalves-Mejia/Romero combine for 7 most days as the Nos. 4 and 5, and Pineda comes back as the No. 3, that seems like a pretty solid rotation that would protect a bullpen of May, Busenitz, Hildy, Rogers, Reed, Duke (do we control him?) and Magill and allow a four-man bench. As depth/injury coverage, that still leaves Thorpe, Stewart, Moya, Curtiss, DeJong, Drake, Duffey, Littell, and Vazquez. Shuffle the parts if you will, but I’m generally comfortable with that mix as a pitching, particularly if there’s willingness to go after a rental mid-year (starter, reliever, or both) if they are indeed in the race. Think of how much money that would leave for the Mannysota Twins to use on the hitting side!

Are the strawberries fresh with the shortcake? With whipped cream? ’Cause, yeah!

Tom, is the bullpen usage chart a single Excel file? I'd be interested in seeing it in it's entirety for the season, just to get a sense of what things look like in a long-term sort of way.

1. I think the Profar comparison is interesting, and helpful. I hope Buxton has a similar response. There's no reason Profar needs to do this, but I think it would a classy move for him to reach out to Buxton and say, "I've been there -- go prove them wrong." https://www.twincities.com/2018/09/02/byron-buxton-decision-becomes-sensitive-topic-for-twins-players/ 2. I think Molitor's quotes make sense: “I’m going to have a nice conversation with him and share my perspective,” Molitor said Sunday in Arlington, Texas. “We’ll try to get to where the understanding and the respect remains. I don’t think it’s going to be a problem between Byron and (me).” and “Sometimes I think time is a really good ally for everybody involved. Ultimately it’s still going to be about him and his career and his performance and his health, all those things moving forward.” We can bellyache about Molitor decisions, but one thing I think he does pretty well is remain under control, not throwing guys under the bus, and dealing with people one-on-one. I suspect there will be a hear-to-heart conversation between the two of them that we won't even hear about, and that's probably a good thing. 3. I think Levine was a straight shooter with his comments. I paraphrase his message as, "We made a tough decision, and Byron and his agent have their right to be disappointed. We would be disappointed if he didn't want to come up to the majors. We still believe Byron can help us, so we are going to do our part to make it a good relationship going forward." And I applaud them for not trying to force such a conversation right now -- those chats rarely go well when they happen in the heat of the moment.

Actually, my wife is one person who is not aware of this, though I've said it often enough myself that she may be starting to get the picture. My mother-in-law doesn't even know who Odorizzi is, however. :-) But you point to one of the inherent challenges. As I read on TwinsDaily, two of the most common complaints about Molitor's in-game managing are that 1) he stays with the starter too long; and 2) that he overworks his bullpen. Short of a 15-man pitching staff with Chris Gimenez as your bench player, what's a guy to do? I'm guessing the response is, "Don't use the same bullpen guys over and over." But as I look at long-term usage patterns and try to balance them with in-game situations, I actually think he walks that tightrope pretty well. For example, we worry about overuse with Rogers because of him being on pace for 74 games. But look at his game logs and you'll see that he's only gone back-to-back on 15 occasions. On all but one of them, he threw 12 pitches or fewer in one game or other other (or both, on several occasions). The one exception was a time when his first game was 14 pitches, but came on the heels of four days off, so he was still rested. On the two occasions when he went back-to-back-to-back, in the middle games he threw 8 and 3 pitches. The first series was 15-8-17 pitches, but it came on the heels of two days off and was followed by three days off. The second stretch had a total of 20 pitches in three days. I don't know how to compare that to other managers, but to me, his long-term usage pattern for one of his most effective pitchers has been pretty good. I didn't take the time to look at others as closely, but a cursory eyeballing of Hildy, for example, show's a similar long-term pattern. I think it would be interesting to see Tom's game summary pitch count chart as an entire season to see what it looks like.

(Warning: Math Ahead!) Minnesota Twins: 100 Lakes per Win.