----Did you actually read what Nick wrote? To be clear, I'm not saying that the Twins' medical staff compares well to the rest of the league. They might even be among the worst. But I don't believe we have the evidence to make that assessment. Judging a doctor's performance isn't like judging a pitcher, or hitter, or manager, or GM. Each situation is unique and there are lot more factors in play than some would assume. These comments need not come from a medical expert to be given weight. I read him to be pointing out that the constant railing on the medical staff is coming from people who have neither the knowledge nor expertise to make educated evaluations of their performance, which unlike judging a player, is infinitely more complex than just making conclusions based on outcomes. This sentence is actually pretty incorrect... Medical performance has always been judged based on outcomes, and in probably 2-3 years (some pilots are up and running now - google: ACO), most doctors will be "paid for performance" (where "performance" is mostly outcomes.) As far as the Twins' situation goes, there are a lot of issues, including the doctors; but players and especially management have to take some of the blame for the waiting for Godot to go to the DL... Missdiagnosis, is another story ---Nice try, but what you're raising here is completely irrelevant.. Most of the criticisms of the Twins medical staffs here have been based solely on end results of treatment. That is not how ACO pay-for-performance standards work. At all. They don't say "well, the patient died, so the doctor must have done a crappy job." Medical professionals have never been judged that way, and it would be completely senseless to do so. ACO's are looking at trends in how improved practices can lead to better outcomes. It's about best practices, not end results. Sometimes doctors do all that is humanly possible, but the outcome is not the one everyone was hoping for.