John Bonnes

Pavano would certainly count. How about Denys Reyes? One could put Matt Guerrier in that list, too.

I blame myself. I do. Heading to the middle of the eighth inning, I’m forced to leave my seat to pick up my kid at 10:00. By the time I walk through the stadium, I’ve heard the roar and see Jamey Carroll standing on third base with no outs and the third through fifth batters coming up. If I didn’t have to pick up my kid in 10 minutes, I SWEAR I would’ve stuck around. I mean – you know me by now. Is there anyone MORE superstitious? Four blocks away from Target Field I say to The Voice of Reason™, “Have you heard a roar yet? I haven’t.” “Nope.” Me: (Heavy sigh.) “Yep.” One can frame this game a lot of ways. I’m sure the Boston papers will frame it as a Cody Ross redemption game. And if the Twins third and fourth hitters would have managed to do anything remotely similar to what one expects from the eighth and ninth hitters, it would have been a different game, and a different column. But they didn’t. And it isn’t. Check that – SO it isn’t. I can’t talk too much about those criticat at-bats. I didn’t see them live. I saw replays of the swings. Apparently, Josh Willingham hit the ball hard but lined out to the third baseman. Joe Mauer swung weekly at an off-speed pitch and grounded out to first base. The at-bat looks worse because of how poor a hit it was – a dribbling play up the first base line. Of course, it was an off-speed pitch. On a full count, one might expect a pitcher to challenge a hitter, but with two bases open, why would he? He threw a 75-mph-pitch that Mauer had not yet seen and that was it. I want to come down on Mauer – I want to come down on everyone after this loss – but I can see what happened. A few more notes about the game… Capping Off A Loss Hey, at least Matt Capps hasn’t blown a Save (capital S) yet - just a game. Is that a cheap shot? Sure, but I don’t mean it to Capps. I mean it to the Twins, who seem to think that once a randome team sprinkles a guy with Magic Closer Dust (capital MCD), they’re forever a different guy. Capps now has four strikeouts in seven innings, which is under the league average, especially for relievers, but about average for him. To his credit, he hasn’t walked a guy. But he’s given up seven hits, which is about average for both him and your average major league pitcher. And, worse of all for a closer, he’s given up two home runs, which is about three times the average rate for a pitcher. Hey, it’s small sample size. It doesn’t mean much. Except that home runs were Capps’ soft spot last year and have been every year he’s struggled. He basically matched his career averages in all categories last season – except he gave up a couple of extra home runs. Which is what turned him from a below average closer into a really terrible closer. Which one MIGHT have anticipated, if he wasn’t all glittery with that MCD. Oooh, sparkly. The Other Story Minus that eighth inning debacle and a ninth inning home run, here’s what the game story would have included… Gardenhire took a risk I didn’t anticipate with the lineup tonight. Faced with wanting to get Chris Parmelee in the lineup instead of Clete Thomas (for which there should be wild applause), he didn’t take the safe route. Instead, he gave Willingham a rest at designated hitter and gave Parmelee a start in left field. From what I saw, Parmelee didn’t embarrass himself out there, which is REALLY nice to see. I was really happy to see this. But it didn’t pay off. Justin Morneau, who played first base, didn’t get a hit, and neither did Willingham. In fact, according to WPA, they impacted the game the most negatively of any of the Twins. Finally, Parmelee’s only hit came in the ninth, and was too little, too late. Danny Valencia should have been the hero of this game. Taking a 1-2 pitch with 2 outs to deep center? Really? I really hope this is a sign of things to come. Soon. The 6-4-3 double play that saved a run got the whole stadium excited. One can’t say enough about Carroll on that play, but it’s worth noting that the pivot was carried out by Trevor Plouffe. It’s exciting to see him make just a mediocre throw. That was phenomenal. Is manager Ron Gardenhire pulling his starters too late this year? It’s late, so I’ll let someone else crunch the numbers, but Marquis gave up that home run when he was after 100 pitches. It seems like the last week or so, I feel like the starter is having a decent outing, but by the time they’re done, they’ve given up enough runs in their last inning to inflate their ERA. It certainly happened tonight. Of course, part of that might be not having a lot of faith in the bullpen. Capps certainly furthered that concern, but did anyone else note that Glen Perkins didn’t make an appearance in the eighth again tonight? Perkins pitched yesterday, and was apparently unavailable, and that’s looking like a pattern. The thing is, he pitched yesterday when the Twins were already behind. (And then he gave up a run, so the team was further behind.) Just so we’re clear on where Perkins is so far this year: he hasn’t been particularly good, he hasn’t been available on back-to-back days, he has been hurt, and he just got a long-term deal. Everyone got all that? Good.

I blame myself. I do. Heading to the middle of the eighth inning, I’m forced to leave my seat to pick up my kid at 10:00. By the time I walk through the stadium, I’ve heard the roar and see Jamey Carroll standing on third base with no outs and the third through fifth batters coming up. If I didn’t have to pick up my kid in 10 minutes, I SWEAR I would’ve stuck around. I mean – you know me by now. Is there anyone MORE superstitious? Four blocks away from Target Field I say to The Voice of Reason™, “Have you heard a roar yet? I haven’t.” “Nope.” Me: (Heavy sigh.) “Yep.” One can frame this game a lot of ways. I’m sure the Boston papers will frame it as a Cody Ross redemption game. And if the Twins third and fourth hitters would have managed to do anything remotely similar to what one expects from the eighth and ninth hitters, it would have been a different game, and a different column. But they didn’t. And it isn’t. Check that – SO it isn’t. I can’t talk too much about those criticat at-bats. I didn’t see them live. I saw replays of the swings. Apparently, Josh Willingham hit the ball hard but lined out to the third baseman. Joe Mauer swung weekly at an off-speed pitch and grounded out to first base. The at-bat looks worse because of how poor a hit it was – a dribbling play up the first base line. Of course, it was an off-speed pitch. On a full count, one might expect a pitcher to challenge a hitter, but with two bases open, why would he? He threw a 75-mph-pitch that Mauer had not yet seen and that was it. I want to come down on Mauer – I want to come down on everyone after this loss – but I can see what happened. A few more notes about the game… Capping Off A Loss Hey, at least Matt Capps hasn’t blown a Save (capital S) yet - just a game. Is that a cheap shot? Sure, but I don’t mean it to Capps. I mean it to the Twins, who seem to think that once a randome team sprinkles a guy with Magic Closer Dust (capital MCD), they’re forever a different guy. Capps now has four strikeouts in seven innings, which is under the league average, especially for relievers, but about average for him. To his credit, he hasn’t walked a guy. But he’s given up seven hits, which is about average for both him and your average major league pitcher. And, worse of all for a closer, he’s given up two home runs, which is about three times the average rate for a pitcher. Hey, it’s small sample size. It doesn’t mean much. Except that home runs were Capps’ soft spot last year and have been every year he’s struggled. He basically matched his career averages in all categories last season – except he gave up a couple of extra home runs. Which is what turned him from a below average closer into a really terrible closer. Which one MIGHT have anticipated, if he wasn’t all glittery with that MCD. Oooh, sparkly. The Other Story Minus that eighth inning debacle and a ninth inning home run, here’s what the game story would have included… Gardenhire took a risk I didn’t anticipate with the lineup tonight. Faced with wanting to get Chris Parmelee in the lineup instead of Clete Thomas (for which there should be wild applause), he didn’t take the safe route. Instead, he gave Willingham a rest at designated hitter and gave Parmelee a start in left field. From what I saw, Parmelee didn’t embarrass himself out there, which is REALLY nice to see. I was really happy to see this. But it didn’t pay off. Justin Morneau, who played first base, didn’t get a hit, and neither did Willingham. In fact, according to WPA, they impacted the game the most negatively of any of the Twins. Finally, Parmelee’s only hit came in the ninth, and was too little, too late. Danny Valencia should have been the hero of this game. Taking a 1-2 pitch with 2 outs to deep center? Really? I really hope this is a sign of things to come. Soon. The 6-4-3 double play that saved a run got the whole stadium excited. One can’t say enough about Carroll on that play, but it’s worth noting that the pivot was carried out by Trevor Plouffe. It’s exciting to see him make just a mediocre throw. That was phenomenal. Is manager Ron Gardenhire pulling his starters too late this year? It’s late, so I’ll let someone else crunch the numbers, but Marquis gave up that home run when he was after 100 pitches. It seems like the last week or so, I feel like the starter is having a decent outing, but by the time they’re done, they’ve given up enough runs in their last inning to inflate their ERA. It certainly happened tonight. Of course, part of that might be not having a lot of faith in the bullpen. Capps certainly furthered that concern, but did anyone else note that Glen Perkins didn’t make an appearance in the eighth again tonight? Perkins pitched yesterday, and was apparently unavailable, and that’s looking like a pattern. The thing is, he pitched yesterday when the Twins were already behind. (And then he gave up a run, so the team was further behind.) Just so we’re clear on where Perkins is so far this year: he hasn’t been particularly good, he hasn’t been available on back-to-back days, he has been hurt, and he just got a long-term deal. Everyone got all that? Good.

This is the worst time of the year to look for pitching. Frankly, the Twins already have better options in AAA than anything that is likely to be available on the waiver wire. Or are you proposing the Twins pay big money to Roy Oswalt (probably against his will)?

I'd love to see this as a forum topic.

I'd like to see Parmelee in RF over Thomas, that's for sure. Maybe they're trying to "protect" him so he isn't worried about his defense?

Swap Mauer and Benson. Mauer seems more like a RF guy, and Benson can cover left a lot more. Otherwise, I'm optimistic.

Aaron and John talk about Francisco Liriano's latest ugly start, Luke Hughes leaving via the waiver wire, the clock ticking on Alexi Casilla and Danny Valencia, phone calls from listeners, why the bullpen has been better than expected, and why getting old stinks. Here are: the podcasts the rss feed if you want to subscribe and the podcast on iTunes (where you

Aaron and John talk about Francisco Liriano's latest ugly start, Luke Hughes leaving via the waiver wire, the clock ticking on Alexi Casilla and Danny Valencia, phone calls from listeners, why the bullpen has been better than expected, and why getting old stinks. Here are: the podcasts the rss feed if you want to subscribe and the podcast on iTunes (where you

This is a really nice story. Thank you for contributing it. I'd love to have you post a few of these topics in the forum. Literally, #1 could be a topic. #2 could be a great topic. #3 could be a topic and have a Twins slant to it. I don't want to steal them from you, so if you have a chance, please, throw those out there.

I gotta agree with 1EJ, I think you're anti-Gardenhire view is blinding you to some stuff here. I will agree with one thing - it is frustrating to often see a smear campaign against Twins players after some of these moves. I don't know if it's the Twins, or the media, or if it's justified or not. I'll also note that it isn't always consistent - for instance, we didn't hear anything like this about Revere earlier in the week, and that was at least as unpopular a move as Hughes. The assumption seems to be that if we don't hear it, it's because it's one of Gardy's guys and if we do hear it it's because it isn't. But that's only the conclusion if you start out with it as the assumption. It could be the media likes some guys attitude more than others. It could be team leaders (or media-friendly players) conclusions. Or it could be (believe it or not) that the perceptions are accurate.

I'll give five counter reasons (and saying this, let me say, I like Luke Hughes): 1) He didn't hit well enough to be a corner fielder - Last year in 330+ PA, he hit .223 2) He didn't field well enough to be a middle infielder - He can't play SS and he can't pivot the DP at 2B. 3) Danny Valencia - Another RHed third baseman, which is Hughes best position, is in the organization. And Valencia has (unfortuately for Hughes) stayed very healthy, giving Hughes few opportunities. 4) He had trouble staying healthy - Which is how Valencia passed him in the organizational depth chart. Do I remember correctly that it made him lose some playing time in the majors, too? 5) He may fall into an organizational blind spot, which is a lot of what I think you're saying with a lot of the stuff above. I wrote passionately back in 2002 about calling up a guy who reminds me a lot of Hughes, but the Twins didn't, and Casey Blake ended up doing pretty well for himself. Perhaps this organization feels like middle infielders have to have very quick feet or something. BTW, I could add another reason that I think might surprise you: 6) Bill Smith is no longer GM - I think you and Smith actually have something in common here. I always got the sense that Smith thought highly of Hughes, especially in an interview I did with him a couple of years ago. He went out of his way to point to Hughes as an option at third base when I was talking about Valencia.

It will be interesting to see how the Twins handle the lack of starter this team faces, both this year and in the future.

But you're right - what coulda been INDEED.

I wouldn't have been shocked if those names came up in talks, but if I remember correctly, the real problem was Santana - he made it clear the only acceptable cities were Boston and New York. There were rumors of another team, too (was it Texas?) but once Santana told the Twins he would only bargain with those three teams, other talks were worthless.

I was wondering the same thing. I'd love to see you start this as a topic in the forum.

Thryloss, I love that cap, too.

I wrote this in 2003, but somehow haven't revisited it for a while. Give the recent stadium kerfuffle, it seems like a good story to revisit, especially because it reflects a core tenet of this site: sports ARE important, and we don't shouldn't apologize for thinking so. ~~~~ Reject the fundamental assumption. After that, the arguments start answering themselves. This Sunday morning I was awakened by our 3-year-old son, at the customary time of 0-dark:30. "Dad. Is it mording?" "Do you want some breakfast?" "Yeah. Ana muffin. Ann milk." "What do you say?" "Pwease?" Without waiting for a response, he speed toddles to the kitchen while I went to get the Sunday paper. Big mistake. Because by the time I was putting the lid on his sippy cup, I was already seething over the editorial by Jay Weiner on the front page of the Op Ed section of the Star-Tribune. "When the sports furor dies down" is more rhetoric about how sports plays too big a role in our society. In particular, it points out that while the Twin Cities have been absorbed by the Timberwolves and Wild, the real world is still there, and it has real problems that we should start paying attention to. This argument is so common it's become a cliche: "It's just a game." What kills me is that sports fans, athletes and sportswriters simply nod in agreement, shrug their soldiers, and grunt something like "Yeah, I guess we're Neanderthals". It's funny that I never see editorials like this about other distractions from the real world. I've never seen a column talking about how people need to quit visiting art museums so they can concentrate on the spread of SARS. Or that we need to collectively take a step back from listening to composers so we focus more on CNN's coverage of the War in Iraq. And the reason we don't see columns like this is because the thought it ridiculous. We go to Orchestra Hall and the Walker precisely because they provide an escape from our everyday lives. They challenge us. They show us new ways to look at the world. They provide us glimpses of truths by reflecting them in a dance or a painting or a movement. Are sports so different? People who tuned into Game 7 between the Wild and Avalanche weren't doing so out of civic duty. They did so because it was a hell of a story. A hockey crazed state finally regains a professional franchise. Within three years, they assemble a collection of dependable but mediocre veterans and young talent, and somehow make the playoffs. Which lines them up to face the hottest (and one of the more expensive) veteran teams in the playoffs. Their fate seems sealed when they are a single loss from elimination, but they win a couple of high drama games and advance to face their division rivals. Are you kidding me? Take your pick of truths to reflect upon: Self-sacrifice? Complacency? Youth? Hunger? Patience? Hard work? Confidence? Trust? Each of us takes away the feeling and glimpse that sticks with us. And we won't know which one it will be, in part because this isn't some trite drama where we know the ending. It unfolds for the actors at the exact same moment as it does for the masses. But it's the existence of those masses that provides the real distinction between sports and the arts. One never sees columns like this about the arts because the arts don't attract as much attention. Sports is damned precisely because the masses do get caught up in the drama, and they will pay a lot of money to be a small part of it. And that's the fundamental assumption that makes me fume, moreso since I started watching out for this little fella providing the morning wake up call. The fundamental assumption is that if the public is paying attention to it, it must be crap. The fundamental argument is one of elitism, and once it is questioned, the rest of the argument falls apart. Why is watching sports so popular, both in terms of ratings and revenue? We've already covered that it provides compelling drama. It's also instantaneous, spontaneous and unpredictable. In addition, it's accessible, since most people have a passing familiarity with the skills involved for various games. That familiarity leads to discussion and feelings of community. Sports also translates well via mass media, such as print, radio and television. There are a multitude of other reasons as well, all of which only start to become apparent when you reject the basic assumption that the public is a bunch of morons. But that assumption is rarely questioned. We assume it is correct. Ergo, sports is, at best, a guilty pleasure. Ergo, we are dupes. This is precisely the hidden point of this sort of rhetoric, that the writer sits in judgement of where we provide our attention, or of the values we embrace. When I became a parent, I started becoming sensitized to this sort of game, to help my kids avoid the little traps that clever people play. As I watched the boy disperse muffin crumbs all over the kitchen floor, I wondered about the level of insecurity that would lead a person to attempt to convince folks that enjoying a baseball game with their family is irresponsible. And I seethed some more. Does this call for a letter to the editor? An email? I took a deep breath and decided instead that I needed something to reaffirm my faith in humanity. Maybe I'll see if I can get four tickets to the next Twins homestand.

I wrote this in 2003, but somehow haven't revisited it for a while. Give the recent stadium kerfuffle, it seems like a good story to revisit, especially because it reflects a core tenet of this site: sports ARE important, and we don't shouldn't apologize for thinking so. ~~~~ Reject the fundamental assumption. After that, the arguments start answering themselves. This Sunday morning I was awakened by our 3-year-old son, at the customary time of 0-dark:30. "Dad. Is it mording?" "Do you want some breakfast?" "Yeah. Ana muffin. Ann milk." "What do you say?" "Pwease?" Without waiting for a response, he speed toddles to the kitchen while I went to get the Sunday paper. Big mistake. Because by the time I was putting the lid on his sippy cup, I was already seething over the editorial by Jay Weiner on the front page of the Op Ed section of the Star-Tribune. "When the sports furor dies down" is more rhetoric about how sports plays too big a role in our society. In particular, it points out that while the Twin Cities have been absorbed by the Timberwolves and Wild, the real world is still there, and it has real problems that we should start paying attention to. This argument is so common it's become a cliche: "It's just a game." What kills me is that sports fans, athletes and sportswriters simply nod in agreement, shrug their soldiers, and grunt something like "Yeah, I guess we're Neanderthals". It's funny that I never see editorials like this about other distractions from the real world. I've never seen a column talking about how people need to quit visiting art museums so they can concentrate on the spread of SARS. Or that we need to collectively take a step back from listening to composers so we focus more on CNN's coverage of the War in Iraq. And the reason we don't see columns like this is because the thought it ridiculous. We go to Orchestra Hall and the Walker precisely because they provide an escape from our everyday lives. They challenge us. They show us new ways to look at the world. They provide us glimpses of truths by reflecting them in a dance or a painting or a movement. Are sports so different? People who tuned into Game 7 between the Wild and Avalanche weren't doing so out of civic duty. They did so because it was a hell of a story. A hockey crazed state finally regains a professional franchise. Within three years, they assemble a collection of dependable but mediocre veterans and young talent, and somehow make the playoffs. Which lines them up to face the hottest (and one of the more expensive) veteran teams in the playoffs. Their fate seems sealed when they are a single loss from elimination, but they win a couple of high drama games and advance to face their division rivals. Are you kidding me? Take your pick of truths to reflect upon: Self-sacrifice? Complacency? Youth? Hunger? Patience? Hard work? Confidence? Trust? Each of us takes away the feeling and glimpse that sticks with us. And we won't know which one it will be, in part because this isn't some trite drama where we know the ending. It unfolds for the actors at the exact same moment as it does for the masses. But it's the existence of those masses that provides the real distinction between sports and the arts. One never sees columns like this about the arts because the arts don't attract as much attention. Sports is damned precisely because the masses do get caught up in the drama, and they will pay a lot of money to be a small part of it. And that's the fundamental assumption that makes me fume, moreso since I started watching out for this little fella providing the morning wake up call. The fundamental assumption is that if the public is paying attention to it, it must be crap. The fundamental argument is one of elitism, and once it is questioned, the rest of the argument falls apart. Why is watching sports so popular, both in terms of ratings and revenue? We've already covered that it provides compelling drama. It's also instantaneous, spontaneous and unpredictable. In addition, it's accessible, since most people have a passing familiarity with the skills involved for various games. That familiarity leads to discussion and feelings of community. Sports also translates well via mass media, such as print, radio and television. There are a multitude of other reasons as well, all of which only start to become apparent when you reject the basic assumption that the public is a bunch of morons. But that assumption is rarely questioned. We assume it is correct. Ergo, sports is, at best, a guilty pleasure. Ergo, we are dupes. This is precisely the hidden point of this sort of rhetoric, that the writer sits in judgement of where we provide our attention, or of the values we embrace. When I became a parent, I started becoming sensitized to this sort of game, to help my kids avoid the little traps that clever people play. As I watched the boy disperse muffin crumbs all over the kitchen floor, I wondered about the level of insecurity that would lead a person to attempt to convince folks that enjoying a baseball game with their family is irresponsible. And I seethed some more. Does this call for a letter to the editor? An email? I took a deep breath and decided instead that I needed something to reaffirm my faith in humanity. Maybe I'll see if I can get four tickets to the next Twins homestand.