John Bonnes

There is no doubt that the internet changes how we consume sports, both positively and negatively. But does it also change the way we think? In the October 2013 issue of Wired, Clive Thompson examines the benefits of blogging and online posting for the writers, the readers and the world. Essentially, he argues that the deluge of information to which we are exposed everyday is changing how we think for the better. And it is a deluge:[PRBREAK][/PRBREAK] Thompson isn’t delusional about the quality of most of that content: Thompson’s first point is that focusing only on the content is a mistake. The more important effect is that people are writing, instead of just reading. And writing changes how we learn and think, usually for the better. Because when you write about something, especially publicly, you pay a lot more attention. He cites studies where students change the way they learn when they know they must present their knowledge to an audience, even if the audience is small. Thompson’s second point is that the impact is further multiplied when it is exposed to a community who can take the ideas and run with them. Leaps forward in knowledge often happen simultaneously and independently. This implies that those breakthroughs aren’t just due to the individuals. They’re building on previous work; the time is ripe for a breakthrough. That’s why there are scientific research journals and standards for citing each others work. They were attempts at a global network before there was the internet. The internet drives that collaboration to a whole new level. As an example, Thompson tells the story of Ory Okolloh, a blogger who wrote about Kenya during the 2007 upheaval over elections. Trying to track all the incidents was overwhelming. She openly asked for a way readers could submit them directly to Google maps. One of her readers took that request to a friend who was a developer and they quickly cobbled a tool. When Okolloh started her blog about Kenyan politics, she wasn’t trying to develop an indispensable worldwide aid tool. She just wanted to study Kenyan politics. But her interest turned into a blog which turned into community which turned into a network. Big things can happen, both internally and externally, when one graduates from reader to writer. ~~~ If you would like to contribute to some of the discussions on TwinsDaily, you might want to start by registering. You’ll then be able to post comments to our stories, or discuss the latest Twins rumors in our forums. You even get your own Twins blog. If you want to learn more about this topic, follow the link to the Wired story at the top of this article. You can also check out Clive Thompson’s new book Smarter Than You Think, a study on how technology is making us smarter. The Wired story is an excerpt from this book.

In his Sunday notes column, Boston Globe sportswriter Nick Cafardo mentioned that the Minnesota Twins continue to be pursuing catchers to replace Joe Mauer. And not just any catcher - the top remaining free agent catcher: As mentioned above, Saltalamacchia is a 28-year-old switch-hitting catcher who has hit 55 home run over the last three years with the Red Sox (which explains why this report is coming from a Boston newspaper). His OPS over those 3 years is .763, which would've been second on the Twins last year. Overall, those numbers about match what Ryan Doumit did back in 2012, which is very solid. This surprises me. I'm not surprised the Twins would try to sign a catcher, but it surprises me they would commit that kind of time and dollars to a catcher with Josmil Pinto, who was called up in September and thrived, on the verge of the major leagues. I guess I see a couple possibilities: 1) The Twins liked the "half-time" arrangement they had the last couple years with Ryan Doumit and Mauer, and would like to do the same with Pinto and Saltalamacchia. It would keep both well-rested and both can hit enough to be the designated hitter when they're not catching. I think you could say the same about AJ Pierzynski, to whom the Twins have also been linked. It would also allow Saltalamacchia and Doumit (if he can catch) to split time this year, giving Pinto some time in AAA, and then Pinto takes Doumit's spot on the roster when his contract ends at the end of this year. 2) I wonder if they would sign Saltalamacchia and then make Pinto available in a trade for young pitching? For whatever reason, the Twins have never seemed to be very high on Pinto. They could view now as a "sell high" opportunity. They might be right and it's interesting to think about just what kind of return they could get for him. With catcher Brian McCann being signed yesterday by the Yankees for $85 million over five years, Saltalamacchia is the best remaining catcher on the free agent market. In the Offseason Handbook, we estimated he would sign for 3 years and $24 million, and there was a lot of internal debate about that number. It'll be interesting to see if the Twins will be willing to pay what the market will bear. I'd love to see it, and not just because it isn't my money. To me, signing Saltalamacchia would represent a proactive instead of reactive move, giving the Twins some flexibility and time, as well as improving the offense. I'd still rather they go after pitching, but it's rare to nab a guy who is just 28 years old in free agency, especially one with Saltalamacchia's performance record. If this doesn't get in the way of adding another pitcher (and I don't think it does), it's a savvy move.

In the heat of the chase, it's easy to lose your head. Auctioneers know the trick is to just get people in the door. Once that happens, the investment, the competition, the excitement and above all the urgency, take care of the price all by themselves. And free agency is an auction. And Twins fans are feeling the urgency. And so, apparently, are the Twins. In his latest story on the Twins offseason, Mike Berardino reports that the Twins have showed a willingness to at least consider offering a 3-year contract to 36-year-old right-hander Bronson Arroyo. [PRBREAK][/PRBREAK]If you’re an American League snob like me, you might remember Arroyo from his tumultuous years with the Red Sox through 2005 (or possibly from Bill Simmons' description of the “Bronson Arroyo face”). He left for the National League, specifically Cincinnati, and has averaged 210 innings with a 4.05 ERA in the eight years since. It ain’t because of his stuff. For the last five years, he's averaged just 5.3 K/9, which (cheap shot alert) undoubtedly is what makes him irresistible to the Twins. He succeeds by keeping the ball on the ground and indeed his ERA has been closely linked to how many home runs he gives up each year. That bodes well for playing in Target Field, which is far friendlier to pitchers than the Reds’ Great American Ballpark. It doesn’t bode as well for a return to the American League. Arroyo and his agent are fishing for a 3-year deal, and the team that offers it is likely to win his services, provided you define “win” as guaranteeing 36+ million dollars to a 37-year-old pitch-to-contact starter. Is that wise? Of course not – but free agency rarely is. That’s the thing that can be so repulsive about signing a free agent: by definition the winning team is overpaying. When 29 teams won’t pay the price the winning team is willing to pay, the odds are stacked against them from the start. So let’s ask another question – is Arroyo likely to be productive through his 39year old season? Historically, no. First, there is the type: low strikeout pitchers far too often end up like Carlos Silva, Joe Mays or more recently, Scott Diamond. When their stuff dips just a bit, or their control slips a little, or the ground balls turn to fly balls, or the fly balls turn to home runs, things can go south in a hurry. Strikeouts are a safety net they don't have. Second, there is just the issue of health. Pitchers get hurt, especially when they've been used a lot. 36-year-olds get hurt too. And 36-year-old pitchers who have been used a lot? You know the answer to that, don’t you Joe Nathan? Finally, looking at Arroyo's closest comparable pitchers from baseball-reference.com, you find a lot of guys whose careers ended right about now. His top 5 are John Burkett, Todd Stottlemyre, Tim Belcher, Esteban Loaiza and John Lieber. None of them had success past his age. Twins fans know numbers six and seven on that list: Kevin Tapani and Scott Erickson. Tap had a 4.49 ERA when he was 37 and then his career was over. Erickson pitched only 66 more innings over two years after he turned 37, and had a 6.35 ERA. But to be fair, all of these guys showed serious signs of decline well before this point, unlike Arroyo. Regardless, Arroyo is not a good bet to age well - but he hasn’t been a good bet to age well for five years running. And the Twins can certainly afford to overpay right now – but they might wish they had that money for a more reliable starter in 2016. Ultimately, I can’t believe Arroyo is so much of an outlier from historical precedence. I wouldn’t totally rule out the third year. Perhaps, like Berardino says of the Twins, I might give “indications they might be willing to go that far.” But I think we're getting caught up in the heat of the auction, and there are still lots of items on which to bid. I’d look long and hard at the other pitchers first, opting to pay that 2016 money up front to someone who is a little safer bet.