Dave The Dastardly

We eat healthy at home and "sin" on the road. Still got clogged arteries from our last MacDonald's stop, a mortal sin committed back when Ryan was still in knickers. Went down in the Big Book as a mortal sin. The Road To Hell is paved with Big Macs.

The wife and I once dined at a TGI Fridays on a Saturday. Turned out we were a day late and a dollar short.

Desperate Twins fans clutching at straws. What's next, junior high pitchers from Kalamazoo?

As stated in the above title, I have undertaken this semi-scientific study for two reasons; both inadequate. Number One: as an experiment on publishing a chart on TD without losing the format I painstakingly created, and Number Two - no, not that number two, although a comparison could be made - as yet another way to kick around a few numbers, calculations, and problematic propositions in order to stave off complete insanity as the plunging thermometer frosts all windows, bars all doors and somehow mysteriously drains all liquor cabinets. Unless of course one had the perspicacity to adequately prepare for the end of the world. Justification... uh, justified, allow me to explain my line of thought, or as we like to say in the middle of January, catch my drift. A little winter humor there. Runs, you see, (no, not the runs that often originate from over imbibing, but the runs scored, or not, on the baseball diamond) determine winners and losers. You score more runs than the other guys you win. It therefore behooves (always like to use that word - sounds kind of... horsey) a manager to construct his lineup so as to maximize run-scoring opportunities. Now in the old days, I know, that's so last century, you constructed your lineup so batters that had a knack for getting on base batted before guys who had a knack for driving in said on-base guys. Sounds like your Aunt Helen; simple, but in truth (which if you can believe my wife, I often tend to stray from; "Yes dear, this is only my second drink") it is not as simple as it sounds. At least until I undertook this analysis. I have therefore attached a chart depicting the Twins top-ten RBI generators from the 2022 Fade Away Season. You will probably astutely note that the Top Ten RBI Chart only lists seven players. That is a deliberate "mistake". Since three of those Top Ten RBI guys from '22, like our chances of making the playoffs last year, have faded away and therefore are of little value in contriving 2023 batting line-ups, I have excluded them. The chart ranks the players by RBI; mostest on the topest, leastest on the bottomest, the latter not to be confused with bottomless, as in the depths Minnesota sports teams have plummeted. Column headings, I believe, should be self-explanatory except for the last; "RBI/ManOB%". I'm sure there's a stat somewhere that better categorizes this but basically it shows the percentage of RBI's delivered with runners on base without hitting a homerun. I debated naming it "Clutch Hit" but that would've been too easy. I know, I know, there's all sorts of factors that could go into these calculations but I'll leave that to the stat guys who either have more or less time to waste than I do and can better define it. Suffice it to say, according to my chart Miranda is "Mr. Clutch" as he is most likely to drive in a run with men on base. Polanco comes in 2nd and Gordon is 3rd "clutchiest". Surprisingly, Buxton comes in dead last. Though I would suspect that batting 1st or 2nd in the lineup, nobody on, and hitting a homerun accounts for that. But Jeffers coming in higher than Kepler and Correa? Holy Balls, Batman! Anyway, looking at the chart, how would you organize these seven in a lineup to maximize scoring opportunities? Quiz on Friday

TD Posters aren't reknown for their perspicacity. Just as all other sports prognosticators, TD Posters' opinions run the gamut from right on to somewhere out in left field, which is were I'd put Gordon as my starter. I think he's earned it. But then there's Rocco, whose predilections have managed to mystify all, as the joker in the deck. So if a majority of TD Posters leave Gordon out of the mix for lead-off, it only makes sense then that Gordon will be the manager's choice. Odd that I would then be on the same wavelength as Rocco... well, maybe the same wave length but at a slightly different frequency. Errrrk! That's me, turning the dial.

Rocco's going to go with Gordon.

Stick around. You will be amazed.

The fact that a pair of Charmin toilet paper rolls from the Front Office's Covid stash come free with a purchase of 3 of those 14-year old Dome Dogs wasn't mentioned. No toilet paper for a two-bagger as statistics say a spreadsheet and a bottle of Pepto-Dismal will suffice. The guys who go for four dogs take it in the shorts.

This well-written article makes a case for keeping Buxton packed in cotton for the first half of the season and not let him on the field until after the All-Popular game. That way he might still be around to help clinch a play-off spot on the road over the final months of the season. Or maybe give him Rocco Rest Days for all home games throughout the season and only play Buxton when the team is on the road, the hell with what Dorothy claimed. It's either one of those options or send a bodyguard out on the field with him if we want Buxton available for the play-offs. Just thinking out of the Box (one of my favorite taverns).

Interesting. I also shied away from those with fewer innings. Otherwise I might have scored Ryan higher. But I agree with your premise, we don't need more of the same quality.

Quick guess: 2,3,1,4,5,6 I'm into WHIPs, (don't get the wrong idea there) SO9 and ERA, not in any sort of priority.

The "bad knees" argument doesn't hold water. The Twins were just ecstatic about signing a "bad ankle" guy to a six-year contract for $260 million. Potential injuries are therefore not a factor. And given that the supply of "top of the rotation" pitchers out there doesn't meet demand I don't think we're going to have trade partners lining up at the door, unless some team has a "top of the rotation" pitcher with a bad shoulder or a tweaking elbow. We are very familiar with those sorts of acquisitions. Even if we could make a trade for a top pitcher, we'll soon be whining about not scoring runs and the "trade" fanatics will be arguing we need to trade one of our starting pitchers for somebody who can bat .300. I agree with MABB1959. Constant rebuild doesn't "build" a team. We've got a supposed minor league "pipeline". Use it. And I don't mean for trading away our best prospects.

Thanks for the link, but the article sounds more like a salary negotiation ploy by Padre ownership; take what we offer or we'll trade you. My question was whether or not Padre fans ever pushed for trading Gwynn because he had "trade value". I think probably not for several reasons, one being there was no social media to foster screwball ideas at the time and two, I don't think anybody had invented "Trade Value" yet. The Game was just about the game.

And did Padres fans ever consider trading Tony Gwynn because he had "Trade Value"?

Versalles and Gagne are numbers one and two in my book. Saw both of them play shortstop and they were cat-like vacuum cleaners. Made difficult plays look easy, bringing fans to their feet and smiles to the faces of Twins pitchers. Correa will have a tough time changing my mind but more power to him if he can.

And the love-in begins.

Amazing how some are quick to sell short the players (i.e. Gordon, Arraez, Polanco) who most often come through on the field and then offer trading them in return for the mythical "Ace". As if there's any pitcher out there with "Ace" status dying to sign with the Twins. No way you get into the Hall throwing 4 innings a night. So forget the Ace dream. The only way an Ace is going to sign with the Twins is if they're anticipating surgery. Besides, you don't "build" a contending team by trading your better players. You build around them.

Let's face it, Buxton is fragile. The man could tear an ACL pulling on his pants, herniate a disk with a sneeze, tear the ol' latissimus dorsi just picking up a baseball bat. That means the only way to prevent him from becoming injured is to not play him. Which defeats the purpose of having him on the roster in the first place. Best we can hope for, in my semi-lucid opinion, is that unless the Twins pack Buxton in cotton and don't allow him to move is maybe 30 games in full health, 30 games at 3/4 health and 20 games of tough-it-out gutsy DHing. And since Baldelli can't schedule in health (sorry Rocco, no spreadsheet for that), let Buxton play when he's healthy without forcing him to take "pre-planned rest days", stick the talented centerfielder on the IL as soon as he gets injured (don't have him riding the pine for a couple of weeks first), and plan on having a half-time centerfielder not named Lewis on the roster.

Pagan's a non-starter... heh, heh, heh

Someday in the not too-distant-future games will no longer be played. Stats will be compiled from past seasons, projections will be made, W-2s added and "game" winners will be announced on the Big Screen to a lethargic stadium crowd more concerned with sampling new stadium foods while texting their friends and occasionally watching "players" model new uniforms on the field.

Does MLB have its own group insurance plan? What's the players deductible?

It's a Pavlovian response.

X-rays or metal detector? Got a brother with three screws and a plate in his fibula. Can't be in the kitchen when his wife fires up the microwave. Jumps around like a Blyleven hot foot otherwise.

Yeah. Too bad we'd already snatched Gallo.

So if the Twinkies are still interested in re-signing Correa they're going to discount his deal as well? That's all this team needs; two hobbled super stars. Add 'em together and maybe we'll get a total of 160 games out of them. Then subtract scheduled Rocco Rest Days... Nope. Ain't seeing a trip to the play-offs in the cards.