IndianaTwin

I get it. Trade Dozier while his value is high. Get several prospects and watch them take off. The question is, does it work? I only spent a few minutes doing this, but when I looked through the Indians and Cubs post-season rosters, I found the following: Drafted by the Indians or Cubs: 11.Free agent signings: 8 Signed as minor league free agents: 4Acquired in mid-season trades: 21Rule 5 draft: 1Waiver claim: 1Received in a trade prior to any major league experience: 3.When I looked at the top 10 in WAR in each league and how they got to their current team, I found the following: Acquired in draft: 13Free agent signing: 2Signed as minor league free agent: 2Traded as a major leaguer: 1Received in a trade prior to any major league experience: 2 (one of which was Kluber, also listed above).I didn't go cherry-picking -- I just went for accessible lists of how two good teams were created and for a list of productive players. And what I see in those lists is that teams hang on to good players they've drafted. And I think Dozier is good enough to still be a serviceable part on a competitive team, even 2-3 years from now. And good teams a) hang on to the players who have developed into good players after they have been drafted (or signed as international free agents) and then fill in the holes by signing free agents and trading for guys who already have some major league experience. Think of two of our best known trades -- Garza for the prospect Delmon and Pierznynski for several young guys. Delmon didn't pan out, and the best part of the A.J. was getting Nathan, already in the majors but underutilized. Boof who? Sure, we could trade Dozier for highly regarded prospects, but it seems like for every John Smoltz, there are a dozen Danny Goodwins. We can say that Dozier would be blocking prospects in the next two years, but what if he's just blocking the next Wilson Betemit? So yeah, listen to offers, but unless you're blown away with a deal that includes some talent that already has a year or two in the majors, I'm inclined to hang on. Quite frankly, we may be able to get a better haul in July of this year or next year when some team is really desparate. In the meantime, we've gotten more of a chance to find out how legit Sano, Buxton, Kepler, Park, Berrios, etc. are, and we have a better sense of what our major league needs really are.

I'll take Sanchez. To sorta paraphrase Ty Cobb, I don't think either Ruth or Dimaggio could hit over .220 in today's game. Of course, it would help if they weren't six feet under.

Being 400 miles away from Target Field, and stuck with the White Sox on our cable channel, this site has been so helpful in following the team I've been blessed/cursed with supporting for more than 40 years. Thanks to the moderators and all who contribute. And speaking of contributors, a huge shout-out to the rest of you as well. I often read insightful columns on some other news or fan site (whether sports, politics, or faith -- all important to me). But typically by the time I get five or so posts deep in the comments section, I am reminded of the dark side of Interweb conversation, and I and remember again what a gift it is that both the moderators and posters at TwinsDaily are committed to civility. Sure, every once in a while the edges get pushed, but all-in-all the discourse here is a welcome gift in the middle of the crud that gets posted below the "Add Comments" line on other sites. Thank you, thank you, thank you. And thank you.

Suzuki: Gone. And good riddance, as I understand it. Centeno: Gone. And good riddance, as I understand it. In 2015 AL, the top catcher on each team averaged 87.2 starts. The No. 2 guy averaged 44.8 starts and the No. 3 guy 21.8. The No. 4 and beyond guys averaged 8.2 starts. I don't know if those are typical breakdowns, but they seem typical. Only KC used just two catchers, but Salvador Perezes don't come along very often. So, you need three catchers. Meaning that unless we are satisfied with 132 starts out of Murphy and Garver and 30 more out of people even further down the depth chart, we need another body. In that context, Castro seems the best of what's available.

Best I can tell, the Twins have been mathematically eliminated from this year’s World Series chase. But I’ve been feeling in a nostalgic mood. First, my son is 23, and it’s amazing what we’ll do for our kids. I’ve always resisted joining the Cubs bandwagon because of all the people I know that seem to come out of the woodwork each time they sniff the playoffs. I once wrote a newspaper column saying that I wouldn’t accept someone as a Die-Hard Cubs Fan unless they remember Carmen Fanzone, a light-hitting utility infielder of the early ’70s that I recalled from a baseball card. However, Tony has legitimately earned the title of a Die-Hard Cubs Fan for extended loyalty in his young life. He remembers Bartman, sure, but he also remembers Kevin Orie, Augie Ojeda, and Jose Nieves. He’s legit as a DHCF. And I also remember what it was like to be a young adult, finally cheering for a winner, for I was 23 smack-dab in between the 1987 and 1991 World Series. I remember how fired up I was those years after suffering through the late ’70s and early ’80s as a kid. Those memories have returned as we've had a great time watching games together this fall. For his sake, I’ve climbed aboard this year. Second, this week’s Sports Illustrated has a great Steve Rushin article on the 1991 Series, and I realized that 25 years ago THIS WEEK is still the best week I’ve ever had as a baseball fan (other than perhaps the stretch when same son and I traveled to four Halls of Fame and MLB games in seven different cities in eight days, but that’s another story). So, since we don’t have Twins Game Threads to follow this week, let me propose an alternative. How about if we have a 1991 Retrospective Game Thread, with those of us old enough to do so sharing the memories we have of the magical week 25 years ago? I should have started this thread on Thursday, since that was the day of Game 1. But Oct. 21, 1991, was a travel day, so I’ll summarize what happened in Games 1 and 2, drawing from the Wikipedia article at: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1991_World_Series#Game_1. Jack Morris started Game 1, going against Charlie Liebrandt (more on him in a few days). The Twins opened the scoring in the third, when Dan Gladden singled, stole second, and scored on Chuck Knoblauch’s single, with Knoblauch getting caught in a rundown between 1st and 2nd while Gladden scored. They scored again on a three-run homer by Greg Gagne in the fifth. Atlanta answered with a run on the sixth when Ron Gant singled on a two-out single that Gladden misplayed, leaving runners on second and third. Morris got out of the jam by striking out Sid Bream. Kent Hrbek answered with a homer in the bottom of the sixth for a 5-1 lead. The Braves wrapped up the scoring in the eighth when Morris walked the first two batters. In relief, Mark Guthrie got a double play and then walked a batter to put runners on first and third. Rick Aguilera came in and gave up a single to Gant that closed the margin to 5-2, but Aggy then got Bream to fly out and retired all three he faced in the ninth for the save. The Twins jumped out early in Game 2, scoring unearned runs in the first on a two-out, two-run homer by Chili Davis. Leading off, Gladden had reached second on an error by David Justice when Justice and Mark Lemke collided in short right. Knoblauch walked, but Kirby Puckett grounded into a 5-3 double play. The Braves answered in the second when Justice singled, went to third on Bream’s double, and scored on Greg Olson’s sacrifice fly. Then came Hrbek's T-Rex Moment in the top of third. With Lonnie Smith on first and two outs, Gant singled to left. Smith tried for third, reaching when Gladden’s throw got away. But Kevin Tapani, alertly backing up third, caught Gant too far off first. Tapani threw to Hrbek, and Hrbek “lost his balance” as Gant returned standing up, with Gant coming off the bag and getting called out. Hrbek would get a death threat when the series moved to Atlanta, and the Twins honored the incident with a bobblehead in 1991. The Braves tied the game in the fifth when Olson doubled and later scored on a sac fly by Rafael Belliard. They threatened again in the eighth when Belliard led off with a bunt single and was sacrificed to second. Pendleton reached on an infield single, but starting pitcher Kevin Tapani ended the threat with a Gant popup and a Justice fly ball. Scott Leius answered for the Twins in the bottom of the eighth, stroking the first pitch of the inning off starter and loser Tom Glavine into the left field stands, making the score the final 3-2 count. Aguilera struck out the side in the ninth around a one-out single to pick up his second save in two nights. The Series headed to Atlanta with the Twins up 2-0 with the Twins having won the first of what would be five one-run games in the series, with the winning team scoring in its final inning all five times. So, what are your memories from those nights (or the regular season or ALCS)? And if people enjoy this, could someone offer to write up at least Game 3 tomorrow, Game 4 on Sunday, and Game 5 on Monday? I’ll be on the road, so I probably won’t have time to write, though I might have time to comment. Doesn't have to be the same person each day, and the Wikipedia articles and baseball-reference.com can serve as your prompts.

Cool -- I wasn't the only who thought of Lenny. Are they related? Can't be that many Faedos (Faedoes?) (okay, guys named Faedo) out there.

#18: Because the alternative is watching the White Sox.

JHam, I was among the softball players yelling at the screen when he uncorked it, but you've convinced me. I'd even highlight a point you hinted at. Dyson is an 86 percent career stealer. You can argue that the throw only cost the Twins a base for one pitch. And the KC batter is not going to swing at the first pitch. Could one even suggest that a good OF is saying, "If I have any chance at all, I'm going home because a single is the same as a double with Dyson as the batter/runner"?

Glen Campbell is a better fit for guys traded to the Diamondbacks -- By the time I get to Phoenix.

I think they should bring him up by June 19. No logical reason, but I'm from Indiana and am getting tickets.

1-Agreed after watching -- this seems like something Molitor would have done as a player and been applauded for. According to http://www.nssl.noaa.gov/users/brooks/public_html/feda/datasets/expectedruns.html, it was worth .15 runs. 2-If we're concerned about boneheaded, take a look at Plouffe's slide on the previous play at the same video. http://m.mlb.com/video/v710633683/51816-condensed-game-mindet/?game_pk=447467. Why do guys slide beside the base and reach out with their hand to tag the base? They are giving up four feet or so. As a result, he made a play sorta close that wouldn't have even garnered a tag if he slid straight to the plate. And that doesn't even take into account the possibility of getting your hand stepped on. I'm not picking on Plouffe -- it seems like an epidemic these days. Has anyone else seen this and been bugged by it?

I didn't see this anywhere, but maybe I missed it -- not that I'm looking forward to the winter of 20whatever, but was Berrios kept in the minors long enough to get the extra year of team control?

Really? I thought they all turned into "Nolasco stinks." Did I miss the memo? In seriousness, I am willing to be an optimistic in thinking that Ricky could still be a serviceable part. I know it was against minor leaguers yesterday, but for those who have seen him on several occasions, has he done enough to pass the eye test of being at a different point than the past couple seasons?

I generally agree, with one exception. I consider this sentence acceptable: "Those who use the word 'impact' as a verb should be impacted by a bus."

1) There would be several. We still have the ticket stub from my son's first minor league game, a 1996 contest of the Fort Wayne Wizards starring (don't throw anything at me) A.J. Pierzynski. When the same son was 11, we did a seven-games-and-four-Halls-of-Fame-in-eight-days trip. Afterward, we sent gobs of photographs to players and a large number of them autographed and returned. It's a great keepsake photo album. On said trip, we were standing along the foul line at Comerica Park with a ball my son had gotten. We politely waited until a player finished his conversation, not quite sure who it was. Given his size and the several references to Notre Dame, I deciphered an ID and instructed my son to say, "May I have your autograph, Mr. (Craig) Counsel?" The guy looked a little perplexed, which made sense when he signed his name "Andy Green." Turns out that Counsel had gotten traded from the Diamondbacks that winter and was no longer with the team, but it makes for a good story in our family.

Thanks. I knew it was there somewhere!

Don't know if my "Old Twins Cap" is older than yours, but someone made a helpful comparison to the 1980s and I wonder if it fits. I went to college for the first time in 1984, with the Twins still in first when I went out the driveway. Hrbek, Puckett, Brunansky were on board and I was pumped. They were probably a 76-78 win team, but they found a way to go 81-81. There was reason for hope in 1985, but they fell backward in the standings. They only won 77 games with a lineup that was young and had potential. Then in 1986, they fell even further to 71 wins and it's like "what the heck is this garbage? I thought these guys were good." But then in 1987, about the time I'd started to give up on them, they took off and I was waking the neighbors as I watched Darrell Evans get picked off third and Kent Hrbek hitting grand slams. With the way we overperformed last year, my hope is that we don't have to go through the 77 and 71 win seasons to get to where we could be, but if we do, I also hope that we can still see improvement in the process, which gets to a few of the "we might be more talented, but we might not win any more games." I generally agree with those, by the way. There's perhaps parallels with the Royals here. I think there's was more consensus on their future potential in say 2012 than there may have been in 2014 when they put it together.

And that's the explanation of finishing above .500. I live in northern Indiana. If we're going to beat up on two teams, there's not a better pair!

a - A much more concise way of getting through the offense, but my boss would tell you that it's not first time someone's been more concise than me! You folks have now observed this. But our conclusion seems similar. b - Of course we can talk about our pitching -- we've got no games to watch and nothing else to do! But to sort of paraphrase Doc and Marty McFly, I do like that the number of starter options we have does give us some "flux capacity," if you will. Groan. c - Always tough to deal with this. I like that we haven't done knee-jerk reactions to say that "we need x because the Tigers did y and the Indians did z." (I try not to talk about the White Sox in .) But I agree that none of those teams can be counted out because of their underperformance last year that likely will lead to bounceback. I especially am concerned about the Tigers, though I think they could also go flop.

Encouraging words on Plouffe, and I'm with you on the analysis of Sano.

Off-topic. But clearly deserving a "like" and a thoughtful response. An "answering machine" was this contraption that actually recorded your phone calls on something called a "tape." It was typically connected to another box by a long thing "wire" (sometimes known as a "cord" or "cable"). The second box had a round thing on top with holes. You'd stick your finger in one of the holes and spin it around from seven to 10 times to call someone. These devices are typically found in one of two places -- museums and my parents' basement.

We're three-for-three in having the same questions. What I like about the Park signing is that it's relatively low risk and that we should find out the result early, as you mention. Your summary of the bullpen is why I'm generally on board with May in the bullpen in the early season. I'm not ready to give up on him as a starter, but he's one of the closer things to a sure thing that we have down there. As for Hunter's leadership, I don't see an obvious candidate either, but it's hard to see those things from a distance. I wonder about Dozier, too. One also hopes that the cumulative effect of a year's maturity across the board from guys also helps incrementally. I think it also helps that some of them have already played together in the minors, since they may already have a sense of who they look to for that stuff. It also can't come from staff, but I've been encouraged by what people seem to say about the coaching staff compared to past ragging about them.

That's the tricky part, and the stats you list are the puzzling part of last year. Later posters talk about the human factor. I think of it this way. Every team has some sort of base and then plays within +/- some margin of that. So you might say that last year's team was a 78-win team that somehow found a way to win five more games. I'm not suggesting that the talent is 10 games better than last year by any means, so I could also easily see a scenario where we essentially have an 83-win team that finds a way to five fewer games and ends up at 78. That happens too, but the former is more fun!

I'm with you that not all the combos are going to turn out well. That's the odds working. But the encouraging sign to me is that there seems to be very few guaranteed declines. And in a greater number of places than not, we seem to be playing with dice loaded in our favor. That beats the alternative.

But "mix" is also reality. I think there were less than four guys per team on average throughout MLB that got 500+ ABs. What I like is that there are generally options. The standard answer around the diamond isn't usually "Starter + Punto."