Sam Morley

In the realm of political rhetoric, I really don't like the "tough on crime" mentality either. I admit that in recent years, my feelings toward crime and criminals have grown less tolerant. Still, I am fighting hard to hold onto my liberal/leftist principles. I think we would both agree that some crimes warrant "tough" reactions, and some do not. I think we would both agree that it is good for everyone that as a society we seek out evidence-based best practices when it comes to reacting to crime, and to stopping and rehabilitating those who commit crimes. I think that in the case of Miguel Sano and what he so far has been accused of, our reaction, as a society probably should contain a measure of both toughness and understanding. I'm not sure what exactly that should look like- though I don't think it should have much to do with him being a baseball player for the time being. Maybe you have ideas about it. I guess, if I were to consider the reported incidents with Sano in a vacuum, I might agree with you that what I've suggested, as far as an indefinite removal from MLB, is more severe a repercussion than not (though I say this with some hesitation). But the reality is that as a society/culture we are finally beginning to confront the magnitude of the problem of sexual harassment/violence as well as our historic unwillingness/inability to deal with it. I agree that aggressive, blind, emotional vilification of those accused of these actions is not helpful. I try to take stock of my own emotions before I voice my thoughts. I think in cases of sexual harassment/violence and other violence toward women, at this time in history, should be confronted with some measure of assertive toughness. I think to not do so, is to underestimate the severity and the magnitude of the problem in general. Deciding to be tough on Sano is also about deciding to be tough on our own misunderstandings, as a society/culture and as individuals, about violence and, in particular, violence against women. It's about reshaping our ideas about an aspect of our cultural psychology so that when we recognize instances (subtle or otherwise) of it in ourselves we can correct it. I think our primary disagreement, and one we may not be able to reconcile, is that you think that Sano not being allowed to be in MLB is too severe a consequence, and I don't think it is at all. I would say that at fall from greatness to averageness is not so bad as a fall from averageness to destitution. He can still have a luxurious life surrounded by his loved ones outside of baseball, he just won't get to be a children's hero anymore. One more thing, aside our disagreements, I have to say that for me this is not just about my desire to see justice, or about my concern for how Sano should be responded to. It's also about me not wanting to have to watch a sexual harasser/assaulter play baseball. I will feel like every time I watch the Twins and Sano for the Twins, I am effectively saying, "well, it bothers me what he did and who he is and the implications it carries about our culture, but it doesn't bother me enough to make me stop watching baseball." I don't want to feel like that, so I won't watch. Maybe other people don't feel that way. That makes me think I need to keep squawking until they do.

I meant to say, "redemption isn't in the ballpark, yet." but I got distracted by the double entendre and forgot to type "yet". I think the indefinite aspect of the proposed consequence, for me, is less about being angry and heavy handed, and more about saying, "well, the duration of the suspension/expulsion is relative at a minimum to the duration of the rehabilitation." Maybe he's suspended for a year, but needs to be cleared by a psychologist before he can begin serving his suspension. And also, besides the consequential/punitive reasons for removing him, the other reason is to prevent future incidents/protect/not subject women in and around the organization to behavior that is dangerous/threatening to them. As long as he is with the Twins/MLB how do you assure the women who work for and around the Twins/MLB that they are going to be safe and free of harassment?

As to your first point, that's a good clarification. Still, in your analogy, would a player have to sexually assault/harass a teammate or opposing player for the crime to be directly related? Aren't the female ushers at the Nooga stadium the same as other players in this regard? Ms. Bissen is either like a co-worker or a customer/client or both. I don't know, the fed-ex analogy is not working for me. It's not that it doesn't make sense, it's just a little distracting. For instance, I want to ask: if fed-ex fires you for assaulting a customer (let's say, while delivering a package to their front door) can ups hire you? Should they? I'd say they should not. I'd say if there was a league of postal/delivery organizations, it would behoove them to disallow you from membership in their league indefinitely. Ah, I feel like this analogy is having a trivializing effect. If the Twins fire him, should the Red Sox hire him? I don't think they should. I think probably the league should relieve them from having to decide. I think that my most important point here is that whether or not Sano has the chance to redeem himself and whether or not he is allowed to continue his career in MLB are two separate scenarios. If Sano can redeem himself (and I can imagine- but highly doubt- scenarios in which he does) he can do so outside of MLB. I also think that by saying that Sano needs to redeem himself as a baseball player, you're acknowledging that his transgressions were committed in his capacity as a baseball player. And in this case, you may be right. Maybe in order for Sano to achieve full redemption, he would have to do it as a baseball player, and he would have to be allowed that opportunity. Maybe he doesn't achieve full redemption. I don't think he is entitled to it. I don't think we owe him the opportunity to achieve it. It sounds to me, according to the accusations, that it is him who owes; he owes his victims, he owes his fans, and he owes society. He owes remorse, extraordinary effort, and extraordinary (and rare) change. After that is accomplished (not that it's ever done) can you even consider the notion of redemption. It is here that it's worth pointing out that so far his sole statement has been one of denial and in a totally obnoxious and tone-deaf style. You want him to be granted the chance to redeem himself, but he's not even giving us the chance to give him that chance. God, I wasn't going to keep going, but... doesn't that end the talk of redemption right there? He's forced everyone to take a side. He's calling his a accuser a liar. He's not saying, "I was confused, or she's confused", or some other BS, he's saying it never happened. As the public, we don't even get the chance to hope that this was some misunderstanding. You either believe her that it happened, or you believe him that it didn't. And his statement about having the "utmost respect for women", jeez. Now he went from denying an allegation (which will probably never be proven either true or false) to telling a bald lie (according to a whole bunch of people who IMMEDIATELY testified otherwise) which totally discredits his denial. So he's behaved like a jerk, committed a dangerous criminal act (suggestive of an even worse intended criminal act) and now he's lied about it. Redemption isn't in the ballpark.

What this thread and others like it are about is individuals (and twins daily members collectively) reacting to the news of allegations against Miguel Sano. We are not responsible for his due process. I am allowed to pass whatever judgement I want in my own mind against any other person or organization. I will allow the legal and civil processes to play out; I can do nothing to disallow them. What of the electoral process? What of advertising dollars? So they are. I will respond to this news in a way that I can. I will say what I think. I will direct my attention, appreciation, and money where I choose. I will even dare to suggest what I think it might be best for other individuals or organizations to do. I am both capable of and limited to these types of actions. Legal, civil, electoral, and advertising actions are beyond my control. It is within my control to add my voice to those who might pressure bodies who are more directly influential. In this case, that would be the Twins and MLB. I would add that because of how serious this case is and because of the Twins and MLB's precedence for responding inappropriately to similar incidents, it is especially important for those of us who care to voice our opinion as strongly as we are, if not even more strongly. Why do you trust the Twins to handle this appropriately? Hosken Bombo Disco quoted from an article linked to by another user which lays a pretty good case against the Twins ability to handle the present situation appropriately without pressure from fans/consumers.

Firstly, his actions are related to his profession. They took place while he was in his professional capacity. His behavior in Chattanooga is alleged to have occurred during games while he was in the dugout. The assault occurred while/after he was at an autograph signing session, and whether or not that is understood to be an act in representation of the Twins/MLB, the assault was against someone whose relationship to him was professional and occurred only because of his being a Twins player. I see all of the actions he is so far being accused as being directly related to his profession. I don't see how it can be disputed. Also, I don't necessarily think him being disallowed from league membership has to be permanent. I just think it has to be indefinite, and I don't really think its appropriate- at this point- to speculate about what genuine rehabilitation would look like. Further, I don't really think it's punitive. I think it's consequential, and I think it's best for the prevention of future acts of violence/harassment against women who work for and are associated with the Twins/MLB. If Sano worked for company-x, he would be terminated for violation of a whole bunch policies; or company-x would be guilty of brushing *%&! under the rug. You can't sexually harass your co-workers and you can't sexually assault your customers.

I don't think I've read anywhere here someone saying Sano should be exiled from society. I haven't said that. I think he should be indefinitely disallowed from MLB. I think the people who know him and care about him should do the best the can as they see fit to support/help him/whatever. Not being allowed to play in MLB is not the same as going to jail or being exiled from society or shunned. I hope he stops harassing and assaulting women. I hope he learns how to be a good, genuinely respectful person. I hope he finds redemption. Whether he does or not, the place to see about it should not be in MLB as a superstar for the Twins. I say this for two reasons. One: in the case he does not, the Twins and MLB have subjected more women to his dangerous behavior. Two: he just doesn't deserve it. Does he deserve another chance in society? Probably. Does he deserve another chance in MLB? No. And for me, while there is emotion in my reaction to this situation, it's measured with reason. While I am angry and disappointed, I don't think anything I've suggested is extreme or unreasonable. Post Script: while we may hold out hope for the rehabilitation of domestic abusers and child abusers, our hope is almost always misplaced.

It seems to me, that if you are a player in MLB, you can be described as both an employee of an employer and as a member of a club or league. I think that while we do have rights/entitlements/protections as employees against wrongful or arbitrary termination or even exclusion, I don't think that these same or even similar rights/entitlements/protections are extended to members/prospective members of clubs/leagues. When, as in professional sports leagues, there is what appears to be a mixture of employeehood and memberhood, maybe things get more complicated. I don't think there are rights/entitlements/protections to prevent a club/league from excommunicating a member whenever it wants for whatever reasons it wants. It seems like in pro sports leagues, the only real counterbalance to this is the players unions. Aside from the little jockeying they do around the semi regular collective bargaining agreement negotiations, it seems like the only real leverage the unions have is to threaten work stoppage. Do they ever raise this club in defense of a player punished for bad behavior? Not that I can think of. The most they ever do is appeal a punishment decision. The NFLPA can't do diddly for Kaepernick who's been blackballed for speaking his mind. They couldn't do diddly for Josh Gordon who smoked weed. They didn't do anything for Ray Rice or Greg Hardy either. My point is that if a league wants you out, you're out. I would concede though that you are technically correct in that if a MLB player was disallowed membership, he could always go to a local park and hit BP and if somebody wanted to pay him to do it, he would have the right to gaining that employment. But I don't think that he is entitled to membership in MLB. I've always been interested in theories of social psychology. Cognitive dissonance theory I find especially compelling and notice its influence constantly. Introducing social psychology and cognitive dissonance theory certainly advances this thread into post-modern/existential territory and very quickly makes it difficult for anyone to stand in harsh judgement against anyone else. Nice job.

If you're going to be this sensational, you'd better pack a whole lot more substance to back it up than what he does (even if you read the whole article) if you want to be taken seriously. That being said, I agree with him.

regarding the posts about false allegations: I suspect that if we were to see the overall number of sexual assaults go down, that both the overall number and % of falsely reported sexual assaults would go down. If this were to be the case, then for those especially concerned about this high % of false reports, the best way to reduce false allegations is to reduce truthful allegations/actual incidents (as opposed to heavily scrutinizing all reports in case they might be false). The best ways to reduce incidents of sexual assault are to teach our children well; and to stop active perpetrators, hold them accountable, and prevent them from reoffending. In order to stop active perpetrators, hold them accountable, and prevent them from reoffending, more and more women will have to continue to fight back, report incidents, and stand up for themselves against the odds and in the face of negative blowback. Society, individuals, and institutions will have to increasingly believe them, support them, and pursue justice on their behalf. I think that unfortunate though it may be, a side effect of the increase in accountability for perpetrators of sexual assault is going to be that occasionally some false allegations will be temporarily embarrassing and/or damaging for the men accused- and very rarely, seriously damaging. (One thing amidst the statistics about false allegations that hasn't been mentioned is the % of false allegations that result in a conviction. Or even better put, the % of incidents of sexual assault that result in a falsely convicted man.) I think we will have to live with that in the short term if we want to see larger progress and justice in the long term.

I'm about to disagree with some aspects of your post, but I want to start by saying that it's hard to find fault with any call for empathy for another person. I think the concept of being a true fan is weird. I think it must have something to do with history, experience, loyalty, and commitment. I think for me, as you suggest, it must also have to do with an appreciation of the players as actual human beings. Along those lines, and probably also without ever having considered it before, for most of my life if someone had asked me if I were a true fan of the Twins, I would have said yes without hesitation. I am one who has declared cessation of fanhood for Sano (so to speak) and have said that I am willing to go as far no longer watching the Twins if they continue to employ him. If this changes my status as a true fan, I guess I am okay with that. I don't think it's important to be a true fan, and maybe I think, even, that there might be something wrong with it. I have the impression in general, that usually when calls for empathy for players are made, it is when they have done something pretty wrong and/or criminal and there is some semblance of their career being in jeopardy. Now, I'm going to drag the NFL into this. I do because in the NFL, there seems to be more instances of bad/criminal behavior by players than in the MLB but also because there is far more instances of peoples lives being ruined by their participation in the NFL than in the MLB. When Ben Rothlisberger and Joe Mixon have the empathy/patience/understanding of the NFL and its fans (and empathy is tangible here: it functionally manifests as being allowed make millions of $ playing ball in the NFL) but what seems like countless league alumni are suffering with dementia and prescription drug addiction without empathy/appreciation/compassion (empathy is tangible here also: it would functionally manifest as compensation, treatment, and policy for the well being of current players) the "empathy" for the criminal boys seems less like empathy and more like something... else. I don't really want to start a tangent about the NFL on this thread, it is just a more poignant example than the MLB of my suggestion that probably the vast majority of sports fans don't care about the players as individual human beings at all, and only evoke concepts of empathy and forgiveness and second chances when they somehow feel that something is at stake for themselves as fans (or fantasy sports players/gamblers). This feels pretty slimey to me. Jham, I don't want to lump you in with those types of fans, and I didn't get that feeling from your post. It just reminded me of it. I continue. The idea that what Sano is accused of doing can be (and often is in other similar and much worse circumstances) described as a mistake is bothersome to me. I would say that it is wrong. I think I know what a mistake is. I have made many mistakes in my life. For example, many times in my career as a carpenter I have pulled my tape measure from right to left, read the wrong side of the number due to the tape being upside down and resultantly cut the piece an inch short. This is a mistake. What Sano is accused of is a willful commission of an illegal, malicious, and dangerous action against another person. That is not a mistake or an error in judgement, and paired with the account from Chattanooga, it is a revelation of core character. I am glad that my former employers and current customers didn't/don't give up on me when I succumbed to the "old inch trick". Nevertheless, I feel totally comfortable "giving up" on Sano in these circumstances. "Treat people like criminals and you'll get criminal behavior." - I appreciate this sentiment. Still, I play devil's advocate: "behave criminally, get criminal treatment." I think people who do what Sano is accused of doing should not be allowed to play in professional sports leagues. I would describe this as a consequence rather than a punishment. A suspension would be punishment, and I believe it implies tolerance. A consequence is a natural result of an action, and I think the natural result of Sano's actions and actions like it should be disallowal of participation. If you commit sexual assault, you don't get to be a MLB ball player anymore. The justice system may or may not be able to hold you accountable. If they are not, you will just have to be a regular guy with a regular job (like me- except I don't commit crimes) instead of being a professional athlete. I guess it seems severe because being a professional athlete is such a desirable thing to be, and if all of a sudden you just have to be regular that seems like a big fall. But really, being regular is just fine, and probably way better in lots of ways. Further, I think if you choose to punish someone, you are effectively (and often intentionally) shielding them from the natural consequences and the pain that accompanies them. I don't think that adults should ever be shielded from consequences (I would say that the punishments delivered by the justice system have more to do with reparation for victims and safety of the public and very very little to do with rehabilitation of the convicted). I think if someone is to learn and change, they need to suffer the painful effects of the consequences of their actions. If you care about Sano and Sano becoming a better person in regards to how he treats women, he needs to suffer the consequences of his actions. He will not change without it, he may not even change with it. I also want to contend that while I would describe Sano's reported behavior in Chattanooga as "disrespectful" the far more serious allegations of assault are not appropriately described as "disrespectful." "Disrespectful" is a gross understatement as a characterization of a sexual assault. Is it important to teach respect? Yes, very. The priority (in this instance and instances like it, collectively) is to control and stop malicious/dangerous behavior. Jham, you described two different "messages of respect" and described them as being mutually exclusive. I would say that they are not mutually exclusive. I would say that you can say both messages, one after another: "respect women because they are worthy of respect" (or even better: respect women because it is right and good) and also "respect women or you'll be kicked out of the league" (or more accurately: whether or not you respect women, if you harass or assault them you will be disallowed from league participation). No one is entitled to be a professional athlete. I don't think I would go as far as to say that it is a privilege. You have to be talented, which is chance, and you have to work extremely hard. You have to earn it. Professional athletes have society's admiration for both, but said admiration doesn't entitle them to anything. Lastly, we are not demanding that men change. We are demanding that men not commit acts of violence and harassment against women- for many, this probably happens to be a change; for many more, it is not a change. The change we are demanding is that when men do commit acts of violence against women that they are stopped and held accountable and prevented from doing it again- held accountable by the law, by their employers/organizations, and by the public, by us. Specifically, I would like to demand a change in how professional sports leagues and their member organizations respond when one of these acts is committed by an individual man in their league. I don't know if I've read this in any of the threads yet, but it seems to me that because the behavior Sano is accused of occurred while he was performing his duties as a member of the Twins organization and MLB/MiLB (obviously in Chattanooga, and maybe at that autograph session) it has to be grounds for termination and dissolution of his contract- whether or not there are ever any legal proceedings. Jham, I appreciated your post, though I obviously disagreed with some aspects of it. It spurred me to voice some ideas in this whole thing I've been thinking hard about and wanted to get into this thread.

Someone yelling "show me your XXXXXX" is sexual harassment.

Are we being semantic? I can compose a list of synonyms. To be clear, in this case, "reprehensible" is specifically in reference to sexual assault and sexual harassment. Still, you are correct. To some (Miguel Sano apparently among them) sexual assault and sexual harassment are not reprehensible. I think many people (myself among them) are saying that a line should be drawn at sexual harassment and sexual assault. Okay, I'm done being defensive. Even though I think your response to my post is a bit nitpicky, I do think you raise an interesting and complicated problem about what specific behavior we are willing to tolerate. On one level, there is the law which is clear about a lot of behavior that is intolerable. Most businesses and organizations are also clear about what behavior is intolerable to them. As individuals- in this case, individual sports fans- we obviously get to decide our own opinions for ourselves. I think one aspect of this conversation is finding out if there is some level of consensus amongst us sports fans collectively. I think we are capable of identifying certain specific behaviors that are intolerable to us without being in danger of sliding down any slippery slopes. I propose that in the case of Miguel Sano, the behavior he has been accused of is intolerable.

It's not. "Unless you stay consistent and boycott all teams that have guys that do terrible things, including corporations and businesses etc.. you would be shopping at very few stores and have very limited entertainment options." Yes. "Now, if the Twins somehow totally botch the response when that time comes there might be an argument for dropping them. Anyway, if this incident pushes you over the edge I understand that is your right to feel that way. I think you also have to look at response of MLB and the Twins in the upcoming months and go from there." I await their response(s) If, in protest, I end up not following the Twins for an indefinite duration, I will miss it a lot. I will always love the Twins.

I know what you mean. I don't know where I stand on whether or not I think that the league, team, or any organization is responsible for the conduct of its members. When a member of a league/team commits a reprehensible act (or has a history of reprehensible behavior) and the league/team takes no action, or insists it has no course of action to take, toward disallowing that member's continued participation in the league/on the team, I think that they are effectively allowing that member's behavior. I don't know if I would go as far as to say that makes the league/team responsible, but I would say it does make them complicit. The leagues and teams are mostly, if not entirely motivated by greed. I believe they are indifferent toward "badness" so long as that badness isn't detrimental to their gain. In and of itself this is offensive to me, though I generally choose to accept it. Here, for me, is where the offense becomes unbearable: because their gain is tied directly to the demand for and consumption of their product, they are transferring the responsibility to the consumer- they are saying, to me the consumer, "well, if our behavior or the behavior of our members bothered you, you would stop consuming our product" or even worse "we know that our behavior or the behavior of our members bothers you, but you are so addicted to our product that we don't have to do anything about it." When the league/team chooses not to carry out appropriate consequences (in this case and in all others like it, immediate disallowal of participation) it forces its consumers to choose between their personal values and something that brings them enjoyment. We should be able to watch the Twins without having to be complicit in the reprehensible behavior of its members. As for the Vikes, the NFL, and AP (given that this is a baseball site, maybe I shouldn't even indulge this thought, but...) when I was a kid, I loved the Vikings, I loved football, I loved watching it and I loved playing it. But the league is a travesty. It is a total ethical and moral disaster. If there is a future in which our society is a history, the NFL will be regarded as a great embarrassment. There is a novel's worth of reasons to abstain, though it's ubiquitous tentacles make it next to impossible for a sports fan. I haven't watched a game in two years. I don't really miss it. There's other stuff to do. ***Moderators- if you want me to delete the bit about football, let me know. I will.

Yes, that was a good article. Thanks for sharing it. I believe Ms. Bissen and I believe the account from Chattanooga. They speak for themselves. They are plausible, believable, and truly disgusting. As a fan of the Twins, and as a fan of Miguel Sano, it is devastating news. Like many Twins Daily readers, I followed Sano's career from his signing to the present with excitement and enthusiasm, more so than any other individual player maybe ever. There is a childish part of my character that wants very much to not believe what has been reported and to defend Sano. I think it is the same part of me that wants to believe that players play for the love of the game and not just for money. It amounts to: I don't want to believe it, because I don't want it to be true. And just as childish, if I am to believe it I then want there to be a way for it to be fixed, and I don't mean for humility and redemption- I mean for a time machine- something impossible. Even if Sano were to humble himself, admit his wrong doing, and repent, the place for him to seek redemption is not on a baseball field. This is especially true considering that his wrongdoings were committed while in the act of being a baseball player and as a representative of his baseball organization, not to mention in relationship to other professionals associated with the game. Of course, whether or not Sano is repentant, he will almost certainly be in uniform for the Twins this summer. As fans, we will be forced to choose between the compromising of our values and the giving up of something we so much enjoy. Further, so far as we know, Sano is not repentant but, rather, defiant. For the Twins to continue to employ him would be to continue to subject members of the organization and associated organizations to his inappropriate and despicable behavior. Likely, the Twins will condemn his behavior with lip service while all but condoning it in action. So long as Miguel Sano is employed by the Twins, I will not be watching them.

"19-year-old... got engaged to his long-time girlfriend." Sheesh.

Yeah, and in my opinion, what is costly about this is not the money anyway, it's the roster spot. To say that there is no downside to this signing because it was inexpensive is wrong. If you say, "there isn't downside to this deal, because if he fails, he wasn't expensive," I think you fail to see that in addition to the huge downside of the failure itself, the occupation of the roster spot (as opposed to either a better established reliever or a young reliever with potential) is also a downside. If Rodney is the Twins closer, we will all be tearing our hair out every single time he takes the mound. He will blow saves. Might he get us through the season? Sure, but I don't think he is the guy to lead the Twins bullpen through the playoffs. There are closers available in free agency who could. Are there relievers on our current roster ready to break through into that role? Maybe, but this signing is going to delay finding out.

Aside from an established lockdown closer, I don't think free agency is the right place to acquire bullpen help. As others have said, relief pitchers are unpredictable. I would add to that, that there are too many other less expensive (though no more predictable) ways of trying to improve the bullpen. I think the best way to try to improve the bullpen is to turn middling or failing starters already on your roster into relievers. You can make those middling or failing starters available for conversion to the bullpen by replacing them in free agency or via trade (hopefully with reliable, expensive, top-quality starters) or with prospects in your own system. Over the course of the first half of the season, evaluate the successes and failings of your bullpen and make trades. You can see who is having active success for teams that are sellers. I think this is so much better than over-paying for Brandon Kintzler and his ilk in free agency.

PLUS Rafael Palmiero's comeback! How could I leave that out?!

This is one bizare offseason. The Ohtani sweepstakes, and now Derek Jeter sended Stanton to join Judge and the Yankees. My god. Gehrig and Ruth, Mantle and Marris, Stanton and Judge, unbelievable.

As a pitcher, he might be the #1 free agent (based solely on his age and tool ratings/ceiling) but to say "by far" you're putting an enormous premium on his youth- and I don't really have a problem with that. In my opinion, his value is dramatically affected by how he pursues his career in regards to the two way player non-sense. If he buckles down and puts all of his mental and physical energy and talent into being a starting pitcher, with his tools, it sound like he can be extremely valuable, and that your assertion of him as the #1 free agent will be validated. If he insists on being handed an opportunity to both pitch and hit (leveraging his ceiling as a pitcher in order to get the opportunity) then rather than potentially becoming great, he will become a fleeting side show for whatever desperate organization is foolish enough (the Mariners) to let him try. And that might work out fine for the Mariners. They don't really have anything to lose by letting him try for a month or two, and then when it doesn't work hope that they can convince him to focus on pitching, and then he'll be great and it was worth it. I don't think a team that plans on contending for a playoff birth, such as the Twins, can afford the experiment. So if Ohtani is insistent about pitching and hitting to the extent that he is making it a requirement of whatever team signs him, I'm glad the Twins missed on him. I don't mean to disparage Ohtani- he should pursue his goals with all of his resources. And, I think if he leverages his abilities in combination with the bidding nature of free agency into an immediate place on an MLB active roster in which he gets to both pitch and hit, it will be to his own detriment (as well as to the detriment of the team that signs him). I think whether or not he focuses solely on pitching or decides to pursue his dream of being a pitcher and hitter, it would benefit his long term success to begin in the minor leagues, probably at double A. Success (especially as a hitter) in the Japanese and Korean pro leagues is just not a reliable predictor of success in MLB. As Twins fans, we've obviously seen this first hand with Nishioka and Park. Both of these player were very talented and they were both very foolishly given immediate spots on the active roster and even placed in immediate starting roles. They both failed spectacularly, but I don't think anybody thinks, especially in Park's case, that it was due to lack of talent. Even the best Cuban players who come over to MLB play first in the minors, and they have a far better track record for success in MLB than players from the Asian pro leagues.

Yeah, I was hoping somebody would call me out on undervaluing Babe Ruth as a pitcher, seeing as I really have no idea how good he was outside of looking at some stats for about 30 seconds. In my defense, I did say that he was one of the best pitchers in the league while he was a pitcher only. I knew about Johnson and Alexander and I thought there might have been a couple others- I had to double check on Mathewson- he was pretty much done when Ruth came on the scene though. Eddie Cicotte was pitching at the same time as Ruth too. I agree that Ruth's stats as a pitcher projected over a full career assure him a spot in the hall (which is the definition of greatness) and I don't have any problem assuming he would have delivered on those projections. I sure am glad that the Yankees took the gamble and that today we're talking about the Sultan of Swat rather than not talking about Babe Ruth the Hall of Fame pitcher.

I wasn't really responding to any one post in particular, and I didn't really interpret your reference of Babe Ruth as being a sincere comp to Ohtani. There really hasn't been a lot of Babe Ruth talk on Twins Daily; most of it has been in the mainstream. On Twins Daily, there has been an absurdly optimistic view of the possibility of Ohtani (or McKay or Green) being a two way player in MLB and very little skepticism.

Citing Babe Ruth as a comparison for Ohtani (or McKay or Green) as a desperate grasp for precedence of a two way player in MLB history is not only absurd but it doesn't even make sense. When Babe Ruth was a pitcher only, he was pretty good by the standards of the era (maybe one of the best in the league- but I doubt if he was great) and he was productive with his limited PAs. He was really only a true two way player for two seasons (1918 and 1919), where he played in the outfield on days he wasnt starting. His performance on the mound declined, while his performance at the plate showed signs of his coming greatness. When he went to New York and gave up pitching, he became the greatest legend in sports history. You can't cite Babe Ruth without alluding to his greatness. When you say, "well, maybe somebody in the modern era of MLB can be a two player because Babe Ruth did it a century ago", it's like youre citing his greatness along with the fact that he did it (briefly- a century ago). One of the many problems with this is that Babe Ruth didn't become great until he gave up pitching. If he had stayed playing both ways, no one but baseball historians would even have heard of him. So if you're saying 'maybe this guy can be like Babe Ruth', in refernece to being a two way player, what you're saying is 'maybe this guy can be a decent pitcher and reasonably productive on offense'. As a fan of whatever team signs him, or if I'm a GM or a manager, I believe I would value greatness at one position over decency at two. I look at it like this: 1. Can Ohtani be great as a SP? Maybe 2. Can he be good as a SP? Sounds like it 3. Can he be great as an OF/hitter? Very unlikely. 4. Can he be good as an OF/hitter? Maybe 5. Can he be great as a SP and great as a hitter? Impossible 6. Can he be great as a SP and good as a hitter? Impossible 7. Can he be great as a SP and better than the worst hitter on any MLB team as a DH? Impossible 8. Can he be good as a SP and good as a hitter? Impossible 9. Can he be good as a SP and better than the worst hitter on any MLB team as a DH? Very unlikely 10. Can he be decent as a SP and better than the worst hitter on any MLB team as a DH? Maybe It seems to me like you're weighing the 'maybe' of number 1 along with the likelihood of number 2 against the 'maybe' of number 10.

I have a series of questions here: 1. Does Ohtani really believe he can be a starting pitcher and hitter in MLB? All of the reporting seems to think does. 2. If he does, then what does he think that might look like? Everyone has been suggesting an American League team where he can be a starting pitching in a five man rotation and also be a DH on some days in between his starts. I have seen few to none suggest that he could be a starting pitcher and then also play in the outfield and hit in between starts, which he could do in theory for either an AL or NL team. 3. Where does Ohtani's desire to pitch and hit fall on his list of priorities when choosing a team? It looks to me like he is prioritizing geography over the opportunity to play both ways. Five of the seven teams he's meeting with are on the west coast, and only two of those five are American League teams. 4. Of the seven teams, which are willing to give him the opportunity to pitch and hit? 5. Of those teams, which are willing to give him that opportunity in MLB vs which would want him to demonstrate success in the minor leagues first? Here's what I think: If Ohtani believes he can do it and wants to do it, good for him. As an athlete you should believe you can do whatever you want and you should do everything in your power to achieve it. But what is possible? A) Ohtani signs with an NL team and achieves success as a starting pitcher in MLB and he collects his 2-3 plate appearances per start with which he has better than average success relative to other starting pitchers in the NL (possibly the most success relative to other starting pitchers in the NL). This seems very possible. He signs with an AL team and achieves success as a starting pitcher and never has a plate appearance against an AL opponent. This seems very possible. C) He signs with an NL team and he achieves success as a starting pitcher and also achieves success as an outfielder and hitter on days in between starts. This, in my opinion, is 100% impossible. I don't think any of the teams listed would be foolish enough to even let him attempt this at double A. Definitely not the Giants, Dodgers, or Cubs. It would have to take an organization with a history and present of futility to gamble on something so insane. Maybe the Padres fit that description. D) He signs with an AL team and achieves success as a starting pitcher and also as an outfielder/DH in between starts. Again, 100% impossible on the OF front, and 99.9% impossible on the DH front. E) He signs AL and achieves success as an SP. He also is given the opportunity to DH, but fails to have success. This scenario still seem unlikely to me, but I wouldn't be totally shocked to see this from the Angels, though I would from the Rangers. The team that seems the most likely to enable this scenario is the Mariners. Of all of these teams, the Mariners are the team with the history of the most incompetence and futility. They make crazy choices and bad signings all the time. They seem to have the most proclivity for making big expensive splashes with least amount of relative success. In combination with what seems to be an evident west coast preference, Ohtani's presumed insistence on being given the chance to be a hitter, it seems to me that the Mariners are the most likely team to sign him. In which case it will be interesting to watch in a 'it doesn't really matter because its the Mariners' kind of way. As it all relates to the Twins, it would be interesting to know what pitch they gave him. Were Falvine pitching him the idea that he could come right to the active roster and pitch and DH? Were they telling him he could come right to the team if he was willing to give up hitting, but would give him the chance to prove he could do both if he'd accept a double A assignment to start? Were they willing to give him the chance to hit because they valued his arm so much and viewed letting him try to hit for a short time as a worthy sacrifice for having his arm long term? And what does Molitor think about it all? It's really hard to imagine an all time great hitter like Paul Molitor being open to letting a pitcher also DH. Would Falvine have promised Ohtani the chance to do both knowing that Molitor would never do it? It sounds like he could be great on the mound, and that would definitely help the Twins in a way that would be hard not to get excited about, but a part of me is also glad that we're not going to be a part of what I think is shaping up to be a silly $#!& show, especially in a season where the team should be intensely focused on taking a step forward. While the ceiling may be very high for Ohtani as a SP, it seems like there's also an extremely high risk for a big ugly mess with the front office and the manager, and even if the financial risk isn't significant, I'm content to have avoided it. Here's a one other scenarios just because: F) Regardless where he signs, he either fails as an SP or gets injured forcing him to give up pitching in MLB, which case he either returns to Japan, or refocuses on hitting only. This scenario is mainly about asking whether or not Ohtani would be a success in MLB as a position player/hitter only. I would say that there really isn't enough evidence to say one way or another. The best you can say is maybe. His sample size of success at the plate in Japan is so small and the tool ratings as a pos player/hitter just seem far less assured than as a pitcher. I think teams and evaluaters have a much better handle on evaluating the pitchers from the Asian leagues than they do hitters. There are just so few examples of successful transitions for hitters compared to pitchers. Off the top of my head, I can count them on one hand. Ichiro, Matsui, and Choo- you could add Kenji Jojima, Nori Aoki, and maybe a couple others to that list if you want to talk about guys who can be said to have had a career in the MLB, but Ichiro, Matsui, and Choo are the impact guys- that might be stretching it for Choo. And as amazing of a career as Ichiro has had, he's kind of a novelty at the plate. No one else in the league has used his approach/style of hitting for decades, maybe since Rod Carew. He's like a knuckleballer of hitters. So, really, maybe the list is a list of one: Matsui, and Matsui is arguably the best hitter from Japan ever.