BD57

We've been swinging at a LOT of pitches out of the zone tonight. Of course, this ump has been calling a lot of strikes for Boston out of the zone tonight.

Red Sox pitchers don't have to throw strikes with this plate ump ....

12 AB's is the textbook definition of "small sample size" - on steroids. Things are looking very good, let's be excited for the kid . . . and let's send him back to the Red Wings with instructions to play every day, keep raking and we'll get him up here for good soon.

Twitter is the debil .....

How much of Perez being wild was Plate Umpire squeezing the strike zone? Granted, the Zone Cam on the broadcast isn't official, but it sure seemed like a lot of strikes weren't being called as such today.

Despise the "3 batter rule" - clearly intended to suck more strategy out of the game. Will they pair it with "no pinch hitting"? Of course not - but why not? If the defense can't change pitchers for "match ups," why should the offense be allowed to? Bottom line, "management" thinks they need more offense, so they're trying to make defense more difficult.

Using a TrackMan radar system to help umpires call balls and strikes Umpire's union will fight it. Think something along these lines is coming, as tech improves. Extending the distance between the pitching rubber from 60 feet, 6 inches to 62 feet, 6 inches in the second half of the season. So they're going to tear down mounds and move pitchers back during the second half, when their arms are already getting tired? Expect offense to increase - does baseball really think it has a "too little offense" issue? Mandating that two infielders are on each side of the second-base bag when a pitch is released, with the penalty being a ball Meh . . . they're punishing knowledge and strategy. I thought baseball was about that. A three-batter minimum for pitchers -- a rule MLB and the MLB Players Association are considering for the 2020 season as they near an agreement on a smaller set of changes This one really sucks. Are they going to pair it with "no pinch hitters for those three hitters" too? If the defense can't engage in "situational matchups," why should the offense be allowed to? No mound visits, other than for pitching changes or injuries That's just a "move the game along" thing. Meh. Increasing the size of first, second and third base from 15 inches to 18 inches Might be a good idea for safety reasons. Reducing the time between innings and pitching changes from 2 minutes, 5 seconds to 1 minute, 45 seconds Yeah, like TV/Radio is going to give up a commercial ....

We've retired the throwbacks? The Oliva / Killebrew era home uniforms? Dumbass move. They're classic; they should ALWAYS be in the rotation.

are you going to pair "No pinch-hitting" with "3 batter minimum"?

"Why mess with his service time?" If the Twins call him up, shorten the time he's under team control, and he turns into a superstar and goes "bye bye" the first moment he can, the same people criticizing the Twins for "messing with Buxton's service time" would be criticizing the Twins for losing a superstar yet again. Because "consistency" isn't important, griping is. You take "service time" into consideration because you know darn well it's unlikely the player will give you any consideration for not doing so when "Free Agency time" comes ... it'd be "Thanks, Sucker ... see ya around." If Buck becomes a superstar, one of two things will happen: The Twins will offer him enough money that their "playing with service time" won't matter; orThe Twins won't . . . .It'll be about "How much money you offerin'?" when that time comes - and the Twins usually lose those bidding wars. Look, there's really only one formula which is realistic for the Twins: Draft & develop well, such that players they've found themselves form the core of a champion;Add a few "Not significantly expensive" free agents who perform above their price tag at the most opportune moment. That's what it's taken in the past, that's what it will take in the future. If Buck becomes a superstar, it's unlikely he'll be here when he become eligible for free agency.

Mauer wasn't working for the current GM, etc. when those things happened, so the "Double Standard" claim doesn't make a lick of sense . . . except for someone who wants to insinuate that Joe "dogged it" and the Twins let him. Which is just a variant of "Let's Gripe about What Mauer Was Paid" Bitch Fest . . . . . Twins fans can be so much fun . . . they gripe about the team refusing to pay for talent, and then they gripe about what the Twins fans paid for talent . . . . Or they just gripe ....

Happy for Joe and his family, happy I got to see him play @ Target these past few years. Could not have asked for a better send off than he received - God blessed us with Joe, and blessed Joe. May He continue to do so.

Joe Mauer belongs. Catchers in this era don't win multiple batting titles, and they don't bat over .300 for a career. But for the concussions, Joe would've caught for at least 3 or 4 more years - he might still be taking some turns behind the plate, where his defense was "All-Star" caliber.

Great discussion, thank you. Joe's the best catcher we've had - which is a easy call. He's absolutely a "Top 5 Twins Player of All Time." He should be HOF - winning multiple batting titles while catching? That's insanely good. Anyone paying attention could see the concussions took a toll on him, just as they did on Justin & Corey But Joe found a way to keep playing, and to contribute. He put up professional at bats, hit well with runners on base, and became one of the best defensive first basemen in the game (and never got his due - really - for any of it from the children who envied him getting paid what he was worth). I'm glad I've seen Joe play. Whatever he decides to do, God Bless him & his family.

Started in the "bring him up, don't sew the seeds of ill-will" camp. Then started reading the comments .... and I've changed my mind. Send him home and get him healthy. Preserve the potential leverage of another year of team control. That's all it is at this point - "potential leverage." If Buxton doesn't improve his offensive numbers, having another year of "team control" isn't going to be all that valuable, and if he does, then we can at least have a conversation with him, at the time, about how we're going to deal with it all going forward. Because, after all, one of the options we'd have is to give him a contract "then" which compensates him well, regardless of the "team control." The FO has no obligation to "give away" any leverage it might have under the CBA, no more than any individual player has an obligation to give away any leverage the CBA grants him.

Geez ... can anyone here pitch?

Heck of a slow pitch softball game we have going on here tonight .....

Disappointing for Hughes, after all he's been through, but he simply is not someone who should be given the ball every 5th day. Don't see a role for him in the Pen either, beyond "Mop up" . . . . too many BP quality pitches.

He looks wider with his stance and "lower" as a result. Looks "taller" in his stance in the "last year" shot. Last year's stride looks more like a "pick up the foot, put the foot down" stride so weight can shift. Yes, he strides toward the pitcher a bit, but it's not a huge, long stride. Everything just looks more exaggerated in the video of this year.

Doesn't some of it depend on Joe Mauer? If Mauer were inclined to retire (rather than leave Minnesota), then Sano could be moved to 1st base, potentially opening a spot for Dozier at 3B (not commenting on whether he has the arm for it - I have no idea). If that were to occur, wouldn't Mauer's contract coming off the books provide a significant amount of money to pay Dozier (if it's thought that Dozier could provide production similar to the past couple/three years for another three years) without breaking the bank & depriving the Twins of resources for other needs? If this past off season offers any hints about the future, it's that the Twins are not presently in the "top ranked FA pitchers" sights as a "destination" for their next club - so it would SEEM holding back money for the possibility of signing one of those guys is going to leave you with money in your pocket, more often than not (which adds nothing to the strength of the pitching staff). If Mauer's back in '19, then there's a really good chance Dozier won't be here - Mauer's still going to get a good deal (it's unlikely the Twins are completely hard-nosed in dealing with Joe - especially if he's productive, like he was in '17). But if Joe decides to go, then, IMO, it becomes a different animal because (a) the "Mauer Money" won't be getting spent; and ( the Twins FO isn't going to want to see both of them leave . . . . and especially isn't going to want to be seen as pushing them both out. End of the day . . . . this is all speculation. What happens is going to be affected by "what happens," and we don't know "what" that is yet.

I wasn't that surprised about Mejia being pulled, pitch count notwithstanding - from where I was sitting, the Yankees started making much more solid contact the second time through, and I wouldn't have wanted to risk letting too many of them having a third look at him.

I've not read anything which suggests Duffey's two pitches are good enough for him to start effectively, or that he's developed a third pitch which can augment the two he has to bring that about, in which case . . . . what, really, is his value? Based on what you've laid out, though - Breslow. If you need a 12 man staff, that is ..... didn't teams used to go with 10?

I want outs from the pitching staff ... consistent outs. I don't care where we get them, or who delivers them. If Santana can help, great; if he can't, then that's a shame.

Dozier is far & away the most valuable commodity. He's also the only player we presently have who would belong in a "pennant contender" lineup - - - - if he's traded, we darn well better get back "pennant contender quality" pitching.

It would be wonderful if politics stayed out of here - especially knowing that anything critical written about certain politicians of a different political persuasion would yield howls of protest, etc. .... BEYOND ALL THAT ... I don't like trading someone who a contender would be happy to have in its lineup / rotation in the hope that someone you get back might develop into a a player a contender would be happy to have in its lineup / rotation - not when your current roster is otherwise devoid of such types. I know, that's a "duh" for most folks. That still holds true in the case of "hope you get 2 back" trades - it just seems that, more often than not, you take a step back . . . . . you lose the guy who you know is "contender quality" and, more often than not, do no better than 'break even.' A team like the Twins, which isn't prepared to out-bid others for the "A-List" free agents, has to identify & develop talent internally. IMO.