spinowner

No doubt. But also keep in mind that two teams split each of the top three markets and Houston has only the Astros.

Houston is currently the fourth-largest metropolis in the country, and soon will pass Chicago for third. The networks were totally fine with any of the final four teams.

I'm definitely a left-brainer. I don't do a lot of reading, but when I do read what I enjoy most is non-fiction, especially science. That applies to my outlook on baseball too. If I could re-live my life I'd have learned to work computers and been a baseball statistician. I'd have out-nerded Bill James. That said, this evocative prose captures the moment perfectly. This is exactly how I was sitting in the center field stands during game 7 of the 1987 Series. I kept counting it down, yelling out loud: 9 more outs! 8 more outs! etc.

Well, that's how things should work. I've said before that while the major league pitching coach is not unimportant a higher priority is to get the right people working with our pitchers in the minor leagues so they do pretty much know how to pitch when they get to that level.

It's important to choose the proper target in the first place. If your target was a Twins 2017 World Championship you would have had to use a huge amount of ammo and you would still be very, very unlikely to hit it. I am glad Falvine were not so unwise to try to hit that target.

This is a fair point. But I will leave specific names out of the picture and say that if any player the Twins would have traded for Verlander became a long-term good major leaguer the price would have been too high because he would not have made this team a World Championship team. However, if Houston wins the WS the price they paid for Verlander would not be too high. That's the difference.

I think the Mientkiewicz decision shows that this organization puts other priorities ahead of relationships. It used to be that managers could pretty much select their coaches, but I think Falvine will have a lot of input in this hiring.

There would be symmetry if the Cubs hire Maddux. Then their manager and pitching coach would both have six-letter last names beginning with Madd-- and with the fifth letter commonly misspelled.

Reminds me of the saying: There are old pilots and there are bold pilots. But there are no old bold pilots. Bold moves are what cost the Blue Jays and the A's. During recent years they made bold trades to try to win it all. Now their performances have trended downward with not even a World Series appearance to show for it, much less a World Championship. And those teams were in better positions to make bold moves than the Twins were this year. Perfect situation for the Twins to get Verlander? Far, far from it. Remember the Ramos/Capps trade? Getting Verlander now would have made that trade look good. We would have seen Berrios and Buxton performing as perennial all-stars for someone else in exchange for us winning 2 postseason games this season instead of zero. Reasonable cost? Far, far from it.

Yep. I googled it to confirm that my memory was accurate. Not a good memory.

During the 2002 through 2010 seasons Gardenhire received more weighted Manager of the Year votes than any other AL manager, and I think more than any other manager in either league. Yes, I know there were four more years after that but it's difficult to get MOY votes when one is managing bad teams. The point is that his managing skills were very highly-regarded by those voters.

I'm not disputing that professional athletes make a lot of money. But why do so few people complain about how much money is earned by rock musicians and movie stars? It's really no different. Athletes are entertainers just like musicians and actors are, and they are entitled to whatever someone is willing to pay them.

I'd be less unhappy seeing the Dodgers in the series than seeing the Cubs there. But if the Yankees get in I'll want both teams to lose.

My comment: Why would the Tigers be interested in having Gardenhire manage a team at the bottom of the rebuilding phase? And why would Gardenhire be interested in managing a team at the bottom of a rebuilding phase?

This was posted on the Strib website: Ron Gardenhire reportedly set to become Detroit Tigers' new manager By Mike Nelson OCTOBER 19, 2017 — 6:04PM Former Minnesota Twins manager Ron Gardenhire will be named to the same position with the Detroit Tigers, sources tell the Athletic's Ken Rosenthal. Gardenhire spent this past season as the Arizona Diamondbacks bench coach under manager Torey Lovullo. He was diagnosed with prostate cancer in February and underwent surgery in April. He missed five weeks of the season before returning to the team in May. The 59-year-old replaces Brad Ausmus, whose contract expired at the end of the season and who went 314-332 (.486) over his four-year run. A contract agreement or length of the deal is unknown. It is likely the Tigers and Gardenhire still are negotiating a contract. The decision was made after Gardenhire impressed general manager Al Avila in an interview at Comerica Park on Tuesday. He interviewed with the Boston Red Sox on Wednesday. In 13 years with the Twins, Gardenhire posted a 1,068-1,039 regular-season record (.507 winning percentage) and led the club to six American League Central titles and the 2002 American League Championship Series. During the process, Avila interviewed a number of candidates, including Marlins third base coach Fredi Gonzalez, White Sox third base coach Joe McEwing, Giants hitting coach Hensley Meulens, Astros bench coach Alex Cora and Rockies bench coach Mike Redmond. Internal candidates Omar Vizquel and Dave Clark also interviewed for the position. After announcing Ausmus would not return for the 2018 season, Avila said Major League managerial experience would be preferred. With Gardenhire, the Tigers get plenty of that. The Detroit Free Press contributed to this report.

Central America? Absolutely no way. The only place in Latin America that has any chance whatsoever would be Mexico City, and I think the currency exchange and livability issues would make it difficult to make things work. I know I wouldn't want to play 81 games there.

I think expansion will happen someday, but probably (hopefully) not for at least another 20 years. As several have mentioned, the Rays and A's are barely hanging on. Before expanding, first identify the 30 best markets in North America and put the existing 30 teams in those markets. Expansion should happen only if two conditions are met: One, there are 32 markets capable of satisfactorily supporting a major league team, and, two, there is a talent pool (especially pitching) capable of satisfactorily populating 32 major league rosters. It's kind of fun to think about what expansion might look like if and when that happens but it's essentially pointless until that time. I will say this, however. Instead of creating divisions and then deciding how the postseason would be set up, it should be looked at from the other direction. Decide how the postseason should be set up and then create divisions to facilitate that.

But the revenue has to be split 32 ways instead of 30.

I don't like the idea of limiting catcher's visits. I want the players to be able to strategize.

Maybe the former, but more the latter. I'm not a psychologist, but I'm more likely to remember which two commercials I see in a 60-second break than I am to remember which four commercials I see in a two-minute break. And I'm more likely to leave the room if I know the break is longer. I think the time is worth more if the breaks are shorter.

Because the owners will say my way or the highway. If they want their ads on TV they pay the going rate.

Of course. And I'd be a White Sox fan before being a Cubs fan too.

This brings back the pitch-to-contact discussion. For starters, I think pitch-to-contact is usually a better approach (except for power pitchers as Berrios could hopefully become). For relievers, missing bats is more important.

I hadn't posted my stance on this thread, but I think I did somewhere else along the line. And I'll always revisit my stance, but in this case I'm not changing it. Acquiring Verlander was a move I'd have been in favor of if I were an Astros fan. They have a strong team and because they have a realistic chance of winning the WS this year the time was right to make such a move. In the case of the Twins, acquiring Verlander at an equivalent of the price the Astros paid is a move I would have opposed. Beyond that, beating out the Astros for him would have required paying more than what they did. And beyond that, he would have had to approve the trade which would probably have required contractural incentives. After all that, it would have only slightly improved our minuscule chances of winning a WS this year. I'll also repeat that I want the Twins organization to compete for a WS championship every year for the rest of my life. At this stage of the process I think it would be wrong for Falvine to commit resources to Verlander, especially with the number of young emerging players on our team that I want locked in to long term contracts. And, I won't forget to mention, at this point in the 2017 postseason I'd much rather see Verlander pitching for the Astros than any of the three evil empires they are competing against.

Since this is a baseball forum I meant baseball teams. But people can say whatever they want, even if it means hijacking a thread by going off-topic in only the third reply.