Jump to content
Twins Daily
  • Create Account

jimmer

Verified Member
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    10,027

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    32

 Content Type 

Profiles

Minnesota Twins News, Rumors & Analysis

Minnesota Twins Videos

2026 Minnesota Twins Top Prospect Rankings

2022 Minnesota Twins Draft Picks & Signing Bonuses

Minnesota Twins Trade & Free Agent Rumors

Minnesota Twins Fan Guides & Resources

2023 Minnesota Twins Draft Picks & Signing Bonuses

The Minnesota Twins Players Project

2024 Minnesota Twins Draft Picks & Signing Bonuses

2025 Minnesota Twins Draft Picks & Signing Bonuses

2026 Minnesota Twins Draft Picks & Signing Bonuses

Forums

Blogs

Events

Store

Downloads

Gallery

Everything posted by jimmer

  1. jimmer
    I agree
  2. jimmer
    Again, I don't think his point was that Reusse didn't see we'd lose 100+ games, it was about him looking at this roster and thinking it was good, a winning roster. It's about him saying 'what's not to like' about the roster and that our biggest hurdle is the strength of the AL Central (as opposed to, say, our pitching, or our defense, or our average offense). A lot of us predicted us to have a worse record than last year. No one figured we'd lose as many as we did, but a lot of us found LOTS of things to 'not like' about roster construction. A lot of us mentioned how poorly the roster was constructed quite often.
  3. jimmer
    I was partial to: This wasn’t a baseball game that would win people over. It wouldn’t win the support of people on the fence, and among those already lacking any interest, they might say this game was “so baseball” like an insult. There wasn’t a sequence of flashy plays. There were home runs, but they weren’t memorable home runs, and the game didn’t conclude with a walk-off. I don’t think there are clips from this game that are going to go viral. This wasn’t a game you could just enjoy if you didn’t know the details. So much about baseball is in the details. It’s in the context. You can sit down for any hockey game and enjoy some of the hits and the highlights. At its best, baseball asks you to think. It’s a demand, which makes it a burden, and for many it’s a turn-off. It’s their loss. To baseball fans who’ve heard the good word, Game 5 was an instant classic.
  4. jimmer
    Did you read this? http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/the-mlb-playoffs-just-played-to-their-base/ That was a great article
  5. jimmer
    IMO, Mr. Reusse just likes to push old school baseball agenda. When I read his stuff, it reminds me of what I used to read in the papers almost 40 years ago. That appeals to a good chunk of baseball fans and there's nothing wrong with that. Everyone should be able to enjoy the game the way they want to. But the whole 'back in the good old days' or 'back in my day' kind of writing doesn't do much for me.
  6. jimmer
    A lot of us predicted us to have a worse record than last year. No one figured we'd lose as many as we did, but a lot of us found LOTS of things to 'not like' about roster construction.
  7. jimmer
    Yeah, the bolded part is just an opinion, I'm not sure is based on actual fact. You like him, that's good, but there's no way to know if that's true (especially since all of us have different levels of baseball knowledge). Just because he writes about it, doesn't mean he's some baseball jedi.
  8. jimmer
    I think I've made it clear that taking into account gender when deciding who to pick is the part that bothers me. It should be clear that also includes voting for Trump because he's a man. And I think I've pointed that out in subsequent posts as well.
  9. jimmer
    The bright side is that if Reusse focuses on hockey, maybe he'll give up baseball completely and he can stop writing his nonsense :-) BTW, he pretty much backhanded slapped hockey in that article, which is also a great sport. I prefer THIS take on the long game, myself: http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/the-mlb-playoffs-just-played-to-their-base/ I LOVED that game, myself, and this postseason season has me enthralled.
  10. jimmer
    I doubt that.
  11. jimmer
    -I don't think for a second this is a fair and balanced world. For example, if the Republicans had a viable male candidate instead of the joke they are running now, I know Mrs. Clinton would have almost no chance. It disgusts me knowing that the country would actually disqualify her because she's a woman. Women have had no problem leading other countries, don't see why some would think a woman leading ours would be such a problem. -I don't have outrage, I'm just talking about something that I find a bit annoying. I find it annoying that she should be voted for due to her gender, and that's in both ways. I find it annoying people would vote for her because she's a woman and I find it annoying people WOULDN'T vote for her because she's a woman. -In this discussion, the best candidate is the best for the country. To me those go hand in hand.
  12. jimmer
    'And I know of one person who will never vote for another white male in her lifetime if there is a viable, qualified alternative.' You just said you will make sure you never vote for a while male again if there's another viable, qualified option. Not a better option, just another viable option. So the white male, for you, is already running for President with demerits because he's a white male. Did I misunderstand that, or were you talking about someone else? Why not just take race and gender out off the equation?
  13. jimmer
    That's not my point. My point is, if it's okay to vote for someone because she's a woman, if THAT is the reason instead of her qualifications, then it should also be okay to not vote for someone because she's a woman. It just shouldn't be a factor, period. Just like it should never be the reason to vote for, or not vote for, a man, though apparently it's okay for some to say they'd never vote for a white man (which, IMO, is just as disgusting as saying they'd never vote for a white woman or a black man or black woman). We should ask ourselves who is the best American to lead the country, period. Between Trump and Mrs. Clinton, it's Mrs. Clinton. She gets my vote, not because of her gender, but because she's better than Trump. Someone shouldn't get bonus points due to race or gender, should just be the best candidate, period.
  14. jimmer
    I'll just continue to vote for whomever is the better choice regardless of gender or race. I won't even take gender or race into account. I certainly won't say 'well, this one candidate is better, but the other candidate is almost as good and the gender or race I prefer so they will get my vote not the better candidate.' IMO, it should always be about whomever is the best candidate. Whomever would make the best President.
  15. jimmer
    There's no way I can vote for Trump. Never going to happen. I'm not thrilled about Mrs. Clinton either, but unfortunately this election is about who is the lesser of two horrible options and IMO, that's Mrs. Clinton. What bothers me a little is how some seem fine with saying they want to vote for Mrs. Clinton because it's about time a woman had the office. In other words, a lot of people seem okay with people voting for her because she's a woman, but then get offended by people who bring up gender as a reason to not vote for her. Seems hypocritical to me. If you're voting for her because she's a woman and see no problem with that being the main reason why, then it should be equally fine for someone to not vote for her because she is a woman. What would be ideal is if gender and race were taken completely out of the equation when voting and we just look at whomever the best PERSON is for the office (and between Mrs. Clinton and Trump, it's Mrs. Clinton). Elections shouldn't be about making history. Our vote shouldn't be about making a social statement. The office is too important.
  16. jimmer
    Rogue One looks like it will be utterly amazing!
  17. jimmer
    I want the Cubs to win it all and I prefer Cleveland over Toronto, though wont mind Toronto getting there either.
  18. jimmer
    I look forward to seeing what Parmel, er, Vargas will do with a full season.
  19. jimmer
    Last in AL Bullpen ERA in 2016 (12th in FIP and WAR), 10th in AL ERA in 2015 (10th in FIP, 9th in WAR)..
  20. jimmer
    Daredevil got hurt a lot in his series...almost died a few times in season one.
  21. jimmer
    Span has a double and triple tonight (and his triple was legitimate, not someone misplaying it or bumbling it).
  22. jimmer
    I had today off and was home alone. I should have finished it.
  23. jimmer
    That rotation makes me cry. As of now, I have zero faith in any of them, even May (who I had faith in until Ryan decided to ruin him).
  24. jimmer
    I seem to remember reading a lot of comments towards the end of the 2015 season, and early in that offseason, that Ryan's rebuild was done and it was now time for the parades to start in 2016 and beyond. Now you say we need to commit to a rebuild? I'm so confused ;-)
  25. jimmer
    Like I said two months ago, it's going to be a total destruction.
×
×
  • Create New...