Platoon

Access is very much a two edged sword! For both the reporter and the reader. There is a fine line between the reporter being coerced by access, and abusing it. It's a dance I would not want to do everyday. IMHO a reporter maintains a professional, yet agreeable distance between himself and his subject matter. If he writes what he considers a disruptive piece about the subject, he must be sure that his report has some basis. If it doesn't he will end up like me, sitting in a chair writing on a thread to TD. If he writes nothing but fawning accolades, his access will last much longer, but his readership will dribble to the choir. It's likely a far more difficult task to remain employed at that position for that many years, as Souhan, Ruesse, and their ilk has, than we would care to admit. At the point of that sword is the reader. We should be responsible enough to decipher and appreciate the nuances and the differences of the zillions of words and opinions spewed out daily by the press, bloggers, and some guy sitting in his chair. For if we decide about the validity of a story, simply based on who wrote it, or what the subject was, or with a bias towards the publication or media, then we waste time reading it, and even more time commenting on it. Whether one likes Souhan or not his article on Sanos weight was not disrespectful or insulting, and Sanos weight is certainly a concern. The lashing he took for it was probably overwrought, as was his blog response. I don't think his core premise that Access = Accuracy was wrong. But he could have left us decide which reporter/blogger uses their level of Access to the utmost Accuracy.

As one poster so generously said due to the rotations of the earth I also cannot remember the exact wording of the article. But I don't remember the word "fat" in it. While I didn't agree with some of John's post, his comments following the post have been respectful and well versed. Some others have taken, shall we say, a more personal approach. When I read Souhans column I never found anything in there worth any sort of emotion, certainly not enough to call for his head. The column seemed factual and it mentioned the fact that a lot of it was based on discussion with Twins "insiders". I don't remember anything racist, or fat shaming about it. There is considerable history which indicates carrying too much weight is not conducive to success or health for baseball players. There is also considerable history that anytime Souhan or Ruesse write a non fawning column about one of our heroes all hell breaks loose. This is what caused the follow up blog, not column. Souhan is correct about Access. John is correct about being able to write about the team intelligently without Souhans level of Access. But in that same vein, there are things Johns more limited Access will not reveal. It's a sliding scale. What is true is that there is room for both, and one can read both TD, and the local fish wrap, and get something or nothing depending on the day, from either one.

>>>>>>>" So allow me to share my philosophy, which simplifies the choices considerably. You can either read people who reward your trust in them with thought-provoking, entertaining coverage of the Twins. Or you can rely on those who feel justified in regularly breaking that trust with incendiary garbage due to some fictitious self-important exclusivity."<<<<< Or you can do both, and decide what is most plausible. There is no doubt that Access is not a synonym for accuracy. But it does allow a closer look, and this becomes the genesis of many an opinion column. I had no problem with Souhans original column. Nor do I have any doubt that his comments on Sanos weight were accurate. He has looked "bigger". Even his frame can't carry 285-290 over the long haul. Yes he can do it for a year or two, but its not a long term plan. There was nothing wrong, or insulting about the column. The oddity is that there are pages and pages of digital ink on this site and others, about homerism in the local media. They don't "tell it like it is". But when someone does they get blasted for issuing an opinion adverse to one of our sacred cows. Souhan has a point. Access is information. That does not mean that everyone who has access will use it in the same way, or with the same goals, or with the same effectiveness. But it gives them a step up on the rest. There are certainly things I am more familiar with, and have access to more resources to than does either Souhan or Ruesse. That's simple fact. For any of us to deny that out of petty jealousy is basically childish.

How long did that take?

You are pretty patient, but two things made me in this case more so. One is the historical 1500 or so AB's it seems to take to make an analysis of a players likely career, and more importantly Buxtons persistent and consistent struggles whenever moved up the ladder. This one may have lasted longer, but it was not surprising given his history. As for his swing, I think it can be tinkered with. Everyones can. But the bottom line is you can either hit a baseball or you can't! There are a thousand different swings out there. If one was factually better than the other, everyone would use it. Hitting s baseball is a hand eye coordination talent that few possess at the MLB level. And he is one of them.

Being the second best pitcher on the Twins is sort of like me being the second best golfer in my twosome! It's almost unavoidable. Btw, given the facts of Berrios age and experience, or lack thereof, Gibby isn't even the second best Twins starter.

I thought you said it wasn't about the money? :). When I watch him I see two things. While its from the outside looking in, he looks timid when he pitches, and he looks rattled, even angry by mistakes behind him. Whatever the case, he certainly has had enough of a tenure here to allow an educated opinion of his future performance.

There is of course the remote possibility that the lack of patience by Twins fans is more likely the cause of Buxtons "problems" than was Buxton himself.

This! The Twins are a .500 ish team. They will struggle with the better teams, and beat the poorer ones, and split with their ilk. And their schedule has set them up with the latter two groups. This will someday be a nice team, all things being equal. Kudos for the FO taking the long view, getting some pitching, and understanding that a poor chance at a one and done wasn't worth missing out on something that resembles MLB pitching prospects. Btw, I really have a hard time with the "we are all mad as hell and are gonna show the FO how they screwed up". Baseball isn't really a sport where increasing physical intensity does you a whole lot of good. It's a team game, played individually. You're not a power forward in the NBA muscling up a rebound! It does make excellent copy though.

Slightly lost int the shuffle here is the fact that if the Twins had played any defense at all late in the game, they might have won. The pop up could have been caught by either of Vargas or Dozier. It looked like Doier thought Mauer was playing 1B. The throw on the steal was lousy, and Dozier overran it. And Garver has a long way to go blocking balls. I noticed earlier in the game, he backhanded a low outside pitch with a guy on third? You won't stay behind the plate long that way. I have always heard that his bat is ahead of his defense. Turner was supposedly the opposite. In typical a Twins fashion the bat won out.

As your post shows perception can be illusionary. As can batting orders. Mauer has suffered? from being miscast as a 3 or 4 hitter. Of course I have also heard that the was adamant in his desire to hit 3, but is this true, or urban legend? For years I thought he would have made a wonderful leadoff hitter. He didn't have classic speed, but ran well enough not to clog the bases, and was a fairly astute baserunner.

I am in the "there isn't a clutch" camp. There aren't really clutch players, if that was the case you could just will yourself to higher levels regularly. But there is the unclutch player. Either due to nerves, or the attempt to do more than you can, you don't do anything.

A lot of Mauers success as a hitter, for average, has been waiting on the ball. His hands always seem ahead of the bat so to speak. Classic inside out swing. I think the poster has a point, it's a mechanical issue, when he tries to pull the ball he rolls over it. The same thing that made him a line drive gap machine, keeps him from being a power pull hitter. And just because he does not pull the ball into the seats, does not change the fact that he is definitely in the upper percentile of players who have ever played the game. Possibly his biggest drawback is he suffers from Rod Carew Syndrome. Everything looks so easy, he appears not to be trying.

I doubt there is a metric for this, but when an infielder knows he can cut loose with out fear of an errant throw automatically hitting a cameraman, he throws with more confidence, and quicker. And probably with more accuracy.

This, and also This to Brian's. When you get sent down after his July last year, there is no reason not to think how little your performance matters. And in Vargas case I think that is very likely. He has Mauer blocking him, nothing Mauer or Vargas does will change that. Nothing. He has options, and admittedly limited field flexibility. Easy pickings. This year he was a victim of RG playing out of his, well you know, for several months. Grossmans offensive surge proved to be a fluke. As for defense? RG in RF with that arm? Or Vargas at 1B? At best a toss up.

It will be interesting to see what the new administration does with this opportunity. I am pretty sure the old one would have been very satisfied with being labeled "contenders". It would have mattered little to them that with the addition of the second WC slot the term has lost much of its descriptive value. I had no problem with the decisions made this year to not go all in on acquiring help by Aug. 1. But as they go forward and sort out players, and hopefully managers, I would like them to become agressive and innovative. There's holes to fill, and it may take the loss of a sacred cow to do so, but it's doable. Will be fun to see if they make the moves to complete the roster, or rest on the laurels of 85 win seasons.

it seems Busenitz has some ability and promise. He might have a little less control than some would like, but he seems to have a very live arm.

BD is a high fastball hitter. Pitchers pitch to both players and situations. Leadoff hitters, whether game or inning tend to get "get em over FB". No one wants to walk the leadoff hitter. So Dozier seems to get an inordinate amount of FB in those spots. When he comes up with men on base he isn't likely to see such a feast. He might see more low curveballs with a guy on first, looking for a DP. With a guy on third and less than two outs most pitchers don't throw sac fly elevated FB if they can help it. They try and stay low for a GB. Which is not Doziers forte. While he has definitely improved going the other way, he is still basically a high FB hitter. I don't think his solo HR rate is a statistical fluke. I think it's a product of his pitch preference and situational pitching. Btw, I do have a question. What does one do with the other middle infield guys coming up. Trade them? Leave them ferment in Rochester? It's part and parcel of the overall Dozier discussion.

I understand the theory. But will he be responsible for enough wins to make up for losing out on some trade piece for the future. I keep thinking about a team with a terrible pitching deficit. Somehow they have to solve that problem, and Dozier is one of the likely parts of that solution. And when I talk pitching I am not talking someone to take us to the second WC, one and done. Pitching that would give a legitimate shot at a run deep into the playoffs.

He is starting to at least attempt to protect the outside of the plate more. A plus, but also is an extremely streaky hitter. Remember when considering extending him this fact. If he isn't tradeable for any kind of a pitcher of value, then he must be more easily replaced than we imagine. Plus he isn't a "pure" power hitter. I imagine when that number crashes it will be sudden. And that leaves Polanco at SS. . I would really hate to see one of the younger middle guys traded, without any better return than Dozier, to keep someone who will be 33-34 at the end of an extension! Ugh

Buxton is an example of the taking long view on this roster. Kepler will be another. Hopefully some young pitcher(s) will follow suit. But for now this will have to do. This is what offensive based baseball looks like. Win big, lose big. But it's just so much more difficult to operate consistently at a high offensive level than a defensive one.

Once Molitor pulled Busenitz, which he should not have, he was on a roll with no one on base, then he was committed to another change if Buddy Bombed! He made two pitching decisions in 10 minutes, using two completely different principles. Unless of course he actually stuck to his core principle: Always use a mediocre vet, over a talented younger player.

If as some suggest managers have such little impact on the game, then almost all managerial changes, and salaries, are without justification. This also means that myself, or heaven forbid anyone else on TD would have virtually the same success with a roster in the AL Central as Molitor has? With the exception of myself, I doubt that is true! :). I have never thought managers make players better. That's not that easy, and the extent is limited by the players ability, nature, and work ethic. I don't think a manager can cause a team to perform way over its head. If that was so, hot streaks would remain hot, since the manager was a constant. They don't. I think a managers best quality is allowing players to be their best. To put them in positions that their talents are best suited for, and get out of the way. Talent usually wins, but an over thinking and impulsive manager can negate that fact. And so does playing the "hot hand". What you may gain by that philosophy is lost during the regression to the mean, and the ill will of the player who lost his spot to someone less talented on a fluky streak.

The defense has improved. But it took forever for someone to figure out the obvious. That Kepler, Buxton, and Rosario were the best OF options. That Sano was a 3B. That Kurt Suzuki was not a defensive catcher. They still have not figured out that SS is a defensive position. A lot of this falls on Molitor. The question is how much. The Sano to RF and the Buxton to the 3 hole would be alone enough to question his capabilities. Last but certainly not least, the fact that the team is "competitive" in a lousy division is not really a legitimate benchmark for analysis. Instead of being close to mediocre we should finally strive to be close to the best!

There is so much we don't know about what goes on behind the scenes. We don't even really know how much influence Molitor has over roster decisions. He uses the word "I" often, but is it real or being a good soldier. So we are left with observations. His dart board lineups have been a constant since he arrived, so are they now driven by the use of analytical metrics, or just the same dart board? He does not seem to relish the youth movement. His preference for mediocre veterans over promising youth seems obvious. His in game decision on pitchers compounds an already poor pitching staff. He does not seem to "think well on his feet", in game time situations. A lot of these are subjective views. But the fact remains, a few years ago this team was considered on a path with the Cubs, and Astros. We aren't anymore. A lot of that falls on Pohlad and Ryan. Ryans gone, Pohlad ain't going anywhere. If Falvine is going to clean house, and change the dynamics of this orginisation, then a logical step is a new face in the dugout. And I would be all for that.