spinowner

Two key points I want to address in one post. One, with an odd number of teams in each league there will always be at least one interleague series happening. I think the two leagues should have an equal number of teams, so this is the unavoidable consequence. As far as the rule differences, one suggestion I've heard that I like is to use the DH in the NL parks and have the pitcher bat in the AL parks. That gives the home fans a chance to see the other league's game. To make the rule difference less unfair one possibility is something similar to the rule about adding a 26th player for the second game of a doubleheader. One of the inequities of interleague play is that AL teams build their rosters with the DH in mind and NL teams build their rosters with no DH in mind. To compensate for that the visiting team could be allowed to make one totally unrestricted roster move for interleague play. Unrestricted means exactly that; they can sign a free agent to a 3-day contract or call up a minor leaguer without using an option or anything else they wish, as long as the player is not suspended or something like that. Two, the overly unbalanced schedule. My proposal, FWIW, is to have 14 games against each division opponent, 9 games against the other 10 teams in the same league and 16 interleague games. Against one of the other two same-league divisions there would be 4 home games and 5 road games and against the other division it would be the opposite. This would alternate every year. The interleague games would all be against the teams from one division. Two teams would visit you for 3 games, you would visit two teams for 3 games and the fifth team would be 4 games split two at home and two away. The division match-up would rotate so you'd play against every team over a 3 year period. This is mathematically balanced but that doesn't necessarily make it fair. It means teams from the Eastern time zone and the Pacific time zone would play more games against each other than they do now, and that does give a small but real advantage to teams in the Central and Mountain time zones. So I doubt we'll see any change in that anytime soon.

One triple down, 30 more to go this year.

Jinxed.

Hicks makes that catch.

Yikes.

I soooo want to comment on this but I think I'd better not.

The wind began to switch, the house to pitch. And suddenly the hinges started to unhitch...

I guess I stand corrected. I thought Mauch did that.

And before both of them, Gene Mauch.

If I were a moderator I'd consider issuing a warning to anyone who proposes that. The only circumstances that would put him back behind the plate would be if Suzuki, Herrmann, Escobar, Nunez, Plouffe, Dozier, Graham, Fien, Pressly and Buxton were all injured during the course of a game.

I think the original post was saying that catcher is the position that is least important in terms of producing offense. And I agree, with shortstop being next least important.

It took 4 years (repeating for emphasis, 4 years!) for Justin Morneau to be Justin Morneau again. Every brain injury is different, but I think the correlation between Mauer's injury and the drop-off in his performance is too strong to be dismissed. We all hope that better times lie ahead.

I can tell the difference between Single-A talent and MLB talent. Beyond that I don't know what I should say in the way of a game report. Maybe these guys would know. I'm not sure who they are but they all had clipboards and radar guns and stopwatches and computers. http://i.imgur.com/ktnaHPe.jpg

Who? Seriously, I'm very interested to see the young man play. I don't think this move was made for the purpose of trying to get the Twins to the postseason this year; I think it's just to see what he can do.

Oops. Aaron Slegers is the starter tonight according to the Miracle web site. I thought it would be Gonsalves based on looking at the last 5 box scores. They may be on a 6-man rotation.

Unless there's big rain I'll be at tonight's Miracle game. I had hoped to see Hu or Stewart but my third choice, Gonsalves, goes tonight. Tanner Vavra had last night off so I expect he'll be starting as well. Sidelight: tonight is Latino Heritage Night at Hammond Stadium and as part of that Tony Oliva will be making a pre-game appearance. As what's-his-name on this site sometimes says: Winnah!

Thanks for the response. On Gibson's last start, I think it's also worth noting that the three HR's came early in the game, which is when the too-strong effect would have been most pronounced. His performance improved as the game went on. Regarding velocity, my guess (and it's only a guess) is that the too-strong effect is the result of less spin on the ball, meaning the pitches flatten out. A good sinker at 90 is more effective than a straight fastball at 95.

I don't know the pitching mechanics behind this but I've heard the too strong reason (not excuse) several times before from several sources, all much more baseball-savvy than I am. If you know enough about pitching at the major league level to explain why you feel it's not a valid explanation I'd be very interested to read your analysis.

Gibson pitched on long rest last week against the Brewers and pitched poorly. Bert mentioned that sinkerballers tend to throw flat pitches when they are too strong. A 6-man rotation would probably be contraindicated for a rotation that includes Gibson.

If Baltimore would throw in a bag of used baseballs we'd come out ahead in that deal.

I think it's best to avoid using the word dumb, so I won't use it to respond to this post. I disagree with this post, because Santana is the furthest-advanced shortstop prospect in the organization and almost everyone feels he has more potential than Escobar. I think making Santana the starting shortstop out of spring training was the best option the team had coming out of spring training.

Nor is it likely he'll get a concussion. I'm saying it's more likely that he'll hit 40 than it is that he will get a concussion. And if the two players were not on your list to be considered for a trade I'm confused about why you would mention them on the post of yours that I quoted.

What's much more likely in 3 years is Buxton could be hitting .340 and Sano could be hitting 40 dingers. While the future is never certain I'll choose to plan on those two and others currently in the minors doing well for the big club in the future rather than giving that up to improve this year's team.

I agree that trading Pelfrey will probably not help this year's team but having a good record on June first should be viewed as a pleasant surprise, not as a sign that we should make an all-out effort to win the WS this year. (IMHO, of course.) Current success notwithstanding, I think building for next season and beyond should still be the organization's primary focus. Trading a good starter who is in the last year of his contract and who is unlikely to be with the team next season makes sense from that point of view, especially if we can find a team willing to buy high, like last year's Oakland A's. Edited to add: if we feel Pelfrey is a pitcher we should keep then start talking extension.

Depends on the return. Almost any player is worth trading if the other team is willing to overpay. Buy low, sell high.