glunn

Welcome back old friend. I have missed you.

It's 75 degrees and sunny here today, but I want the win as much as you do.

I deleted the post because of the personal attack at the end, and the inflammatory tone throughout, but will leave the quote here as a caution to those who might post in this manner.

Another excellent report. Thanks, Seth.

That is an interesting analysis. I wonder if the statistical difference is similar with respect to the other young pitchers.

I agree with the sentiment, but not the invective. Obviously this was not intended to increase profits -- $900 per game would be a "rounding error" compared with other revenue streams. I genuinely believe that at least someone in the front office intended it as a nice opportunity for some hard core fans to have a special experience. But then a questionable decision was made to recover $900 per game to cover the extra security. With all due respect Levi, my friend, I don't think that any contempt was intended. On the other hand, if I were making the decision, I would place a huge value on cultivating fans who are the type of people who will come to the ballpark early enough to watch BP. These are your hardcore fans, and I suspect that many of them would be kids. Kids eventually grow up and become potential season ticket holders. Those golden memories of BP would translate into more revenues for decades. For $900 per home games times 81 home games per year -- $72,900 per year, the Twins could easily see a return exceeding 100% per year cumulative after those kids grow up. That said, if they give this away for no charge, then how can they ration it so that the limit is 60 fans per game? That does not seem workable. I would suggest that for adults the charge should be in the range of $10-15, but for children under age 18, the charge should be $5, but they should each get a free baseball signed by at least on Twins player. That baseball may cost $5, but the chances of having a future season ticket buyer (or TV viewer and merchandise buyer) will be increased. The Twins used to have a program where fans could donate $1 and get a tax deduction, and each $1 would result in a ticket for a child who might not otherwise be able to afford to go to a game. I liked that program, both because of its charitable nature and because it helped get kids to see the beauty of baseball. I would like to see more of that this year, while there are plenty of seats available. So I would respectfully ask the front office to give this some additional analysis.

Welcome to TD, pioneer. As the season progresses, it will be interesting to hear your insights about the Kernels. And since you saw Trout coming up, it may be very interesting to hear your comparisons of Trout to Buxton.

I hope not.

That hurt.

Tying run at the plate thanks to the Esconator.

You found an avatar that is the EXACT opposite of the earlier one. That took thought.

If Twins win that will have to be your avatar until they lose again.

Good timing. I just got home and am hoping for a rally.

I like the way you think almost as much as your new and delightful avatar.

None of which was revealed until after we were married.

SWMBO = she who must be obeyed.

I have been married for more than 30 years and still cringe when SWMBO reaches for the remote.

I wish that someone would invent a remote that only works if the user has male DNA.

I was thinking about going home early to watch this game, but not now.

That would jinks Mauer and greatly reduce your newfound popularity.

For all of our sakes, Mauer needs to go 4 for 4. What do we get if he goes 5 for 5?

Me too. Plus she looks frolicky.

I like this avatar more than any of your previous avatars. She looks quite happy and frolicky.

The debate about team needs versus best player available is starting early this year. I would note that last year the proponents of best player available seemed to win the debate, but this is a new year.

Lots of good posts in this thread. It seems to me that no one is disputing the fact that there is no prospect knocking on the door, so why not give Dozier a chance. Even if Dave is correct that Dozier will be mediocre at best, why not give him a chance to show what he can do. As Cmathewson has suggested, Dozier may be a late bloomer. And looking at the stats posted above as to Dozier and Plouffe, it seems to me that patience might pay off. Also, as many has observed, he has been hustling his tail off to provide good defense. Finally, Dave himself said that he is hoping that he is wrong about Dozier, and there has to be a first time for everything.