KirbyDome89

An offline shot that banks in? A deflected ball bounces into a defenders hands? We can sit here all day and comb over scenarios where luck factors in. Of course you won't see that kind of record, but a large part of that is because they play 162 games in a baseball season. A sample size that large should be an equalizer. Shouldn't we expect the curve for baseball to be steeper? More teams from either side should be gravitating towards the midline. With a 16 game season it shouldn't be surprising that the curve is more flat. Extremes are more likely to be seen given the small sample. The Twins just came off a 3-12 stretch and they're missing a handful of important players. That can easily torpedo a 16 game season. Baseball, more so than other sports, has the luxury of buffering against injury, poor performance, ect. I'm not saying luck isn't involved in any way, but I do think it's attributed too liberally in some cases. We're in agreement about the "anybody can win," mantra. The only part of it I support is the statistical fact than any team has a chance. The issue is that the difference in likelihood of either team winning is too often downplayed to the point where games become a "crapshoot." I strongly disagree with that.

That's exactly what they did last season. I'm in the same boat with Cleveland as I was with the Twins last season; I'll believe it when I see it. Until the Indians are actually eliminated from realistically winning the division I'm going to consider them the favorite.

I don't think the WC is as luck dependent as you, but I do hate the fact it's only one game, especially in a 162 game season where every matchup is a series. I buy the "any team can advance," theory because statistically any team can beat any other, and a one game series certainly favors the lesser club. That said, the Twins would have been significant underdogs against any AL playoff team last season. I would have a very difficult time attributing a Twins loss to any of those teams as "unlucky." Are we talking about doing away with the postseason, playing a balanced schedule, and then crowning a champ based on record? I'm not sure we can ask for more than a 7 game series, and I'm also unsure why luck is a larger factor in baseball than other sports.

Are we talking about a 7 game series or a 1 game WC here?

Fair enough, I'm certain that Reusse is being fed some of this story from inside the organization. IMO the columns are more sensationalist than reasonable or logical. I don't doubt that Ruesse and others truly believe Sano's weight is the root of all the evil that plagues him, and I believe people should be allowed to question it. What I disagree with is the utter lack of objectivity in both Reusse's writing and some comments, coupled with character assessments, which I do consider to be pure conjecture. It's unfortunate that his bad stretch of games coincided with the first month of the season, and the pitching staff going up in flames. We agree, it would be nice if he didn't hit rough patches, and it's on him to avoid those, but at the same time I'm not going to get too worked up over 10 subpar games, especially early in the season. Isn't calling him out based on his perceived fitness a form of questioning his work ethic, attitude, and lifestyle choices?

If you're referring to the "This is how we baseball," article that was linked earlier then yes, I read it, and I touched on it at length. If there's a more recent article then I'm unaware of it. The problem is that the weight isn't discussed as "whether," it's affecting Sano, it's asserted that it is. Again, optimal is relative and the contention that Reusse or anybody else knows where that threshold lies is pure conjecture. He's played 20 games this season. In half of those he didn't suck.

I'm not sure we're setting the bar very high there. I'm not defending how he played the last half of April, but I'm also not going to pretend like I know how much weight Sano should or should not carry. Reusse apparently knows, and he's also sure that the weight is affecting his play. I'm questioning the certainty of both assertions.

Optimal is relative. You and I haven no idea what constitutes a healthy weight for Sano.

What are you basing that on other than Reusse articles? That very unlikely to ever be the case. Realistic expectations are important if we're going to criticize him.

What actions? Is anybody, Reusse included, monitoring offseason workout programs? Honestly, what info is anybody using to diagnose this weight problem? The weight is an issue when he's on the DL, or not swinging the bat well, or coming into ST, yet it's crickets when he's hitting at even a modest level by his standards. Where was this thread a month ago when Sano hit 3 HRs in 5 games?

So because he's been beating this drum for two years now he's correct? That article you linked is nothing but a summary of how miserable the start of the year has been. It's a surface level observation of everything we as fans have already know. The only time he attempts to dig a little deeper than that is when he goes after Sano for his "rumored weight." Where is the article about why the Twins decided to DFA Chargois and not option him? Where is the article about why the Twins didn't feel the need to add a 4th OFer and instead spent $$ on a LH 1B/DH when they already had a LH 1B/DH? Where is the article about why the bullpen has been such a dumpster fire this season? Where is the article about why Tyler Kinley ever made the active roster? Reusse has no issue opining about Sano's psyche or his work ethic. There's no hesitation to link Sano's weight to either of those two, and subsequently point to it as the reason for poor performance. There's plenty of tangible evidence, something these Sano articles sorely lack, to write a column about any of the above, and we know he has no problem filling in the blanks with his opinion, yet we don't see any such columns.

Nobody is talking about his weight if he's hitting like he did through the first ten games. Sano has played 20 games this year, and if others want to get on him for performing poorly in games 11-20 then have it, but it'd be nice if the weight wasn't used as a scapegoat. We gave Morrison an entire month of being ****; a couple rough weeks for Sano doesn't warrant an article like this.

What a crazy coincidence that Sano went on the DL just before Reusse's latest gem.... If Reusse was half as interested in holding the Twins accountable, as he is with tracking Sano's weight we might actually get some articles that answer questions about the bullpen being a dumpster fire, Phil Hughes getting early starts, why Tyler Kinley ever made the active roster, what the rationale was for letting Chargois go, why no 4th OFer was brought in, or what's going on with the bullpen usage. But then again, his "sources who know Sano much better than the media," might not be as willing to use him as a mouthpiece if those articles came out.....

Too real....

It's nice to see a pitcher working himself out of tough situations i.e. getting Ks with RISP. Maybe it's because Romero doesn't have the stink on him that the rest of the team does, but it's looked and felt different watching him pitch. From what I've watched he has been in control of the game on the mound. That's huge.

I'll settle for them just going back to the pinstriped uniforms from 06'

I honestly couldn't believe that Toronto pulled that off, and with Morales running no less. You're spot on, high level high school teams can defend that play. IMO that was the low point.

It would have been nice to see Curtiss get some work in lower leverage innings before being booted.

So now a rookie making his first start is the only thing standing between the Twins and being swept in 3 out of the last 4 series....wow

Honestly I just feel bad for Curtiss. I'm hoping he stays up.

Wow...I'll take it I can't believe Gibbons stayed in the dugout...

death....taxes....and Rodney allowing baserunners....

Those aren't 8 separate stretches of 24 games each, that would be over a full season of games. They're double dipping. Just looking at the top two "streaks," the first lasted 7/6 - 8/5 and the second was from 7/8 - 8/7. That's essentially the same streak with a difference of only a game or two on either end. Six of those eight "streaks," cover basically that same time period. There's one stretch from late June to late July, but even that is including a lot of the same games as the July - August "streaks," above. There's only one other distinct stretch and that was from late May to mid June. It's really more like two periods of really bad baseball. I guess the silver lining is that the Twins haven't hit the same level of bad as that late June - early August stretch last year, at least in terms of games lost. I think we could make an argument they've hit that low in regards to performance. The season certainly isn't lost, but Twins aren't the kind of team I'd bet on to dig themselves out of big holes. This is a team that should be around .500 a few months and pushing over .500 for the rest to build to 85-86 wins. Finishing a month over .500 is a big deal for this team, and now barring a crazy winning streak, they need to do that for multiple months just to break even. Like I said, this isn't a time to panic, but I do think the work that's required for the Twins to dig themselves out is being a bit understated.

He also went 6 innings, 0 ERs, 8 Ks against a good Milwaukee team his last time out. Reality is that the Twins decided not to make a serious offer and instead opted to spend that money on a handful of lesser players. Those two decisions are linked whether or not people want to acknowledge it. At this point Romero and Gonsalves can't be worse than Hughes and Lynn.

1. I griped about MN passing on Darvish and going the quantity route over quality. You're right that it's too early to bury some of these guys but Rodney, Lynn, Duke, and Odorizzi all had serious question marks when they were signed or traded for, and so far only Odorizzi has performed as expected. There's a reason Lynn was still hanging around unsigned during ST. There's also a reason he eventually sold his services for only 1 yr/12M. Duke was coming off major surgery and threw less than 20 innings the previous season. Everybody knew the dangers of Rodney, and if they didn't they're well acquainted now. I thought Morrison, while a decent gamble, was redundant and an overpay for the type of production the Twins were likely to get. These guys certainly added depth to the roster, that isn't really debatable. Odorizzi, Berrios, Gibson, Lynn, ? is a better opening rotation than Berrios, Gibson, Hughes, Mejia, ? In the same way, adding Rodney and Duke to the bullpen shouldn't have hurt. The question at the time the FAs were signed though, was whether their contribution would be greater than the opportunity cost of not making a serious offer to Darvish. It wouldn't shock me to see Rodney improve and not be as terrible as he has been. I have no idea what to think of Duke. The guy records outs but I don't think even he knows where the ball is going half the time. It isn't a stretch to think he could be effective for the rest of the season. I think Lynn resembling anything close to his good years in St. Louis is a pipe dream. I can see Morrison hitting 5-6 homers in a single month, but I was very skeptical of him reaching 25+ to start the year, and given his start that number might realistically be closer to the mid to low teens. Kudos to the FO for snagging Reed, he was a great signing. Even if he was tanking like the rest of the FA group, I couldn't get down on bringing him in. If the Twins have a chance to bring in a proven talent like him on a team friendly deal they should do so every time. The FO certainly didn't sit back and do nothing like last offseason, but they made the conscious effort to bring in a handful of small parts rather than one big piece. When you add some of the other questionable roster decisions I think it's fair to say they share a portion of the blame for the rough start. 2. Obviously I want to see this team make the postseason, and I'll be as excited as anyone to watch the WC game. That said, what does it really say if the Twins play under .500 for April, .500 the rest of the way against non-divisional opponents, and then beat the hell out of bad divisional teams to sneak in? I'm not sure if that really shows any improvement from last year.