nicksaviking

Why do you think we'll have Dozier for the next two years? This won't be the only opportunity to move him. I think this big build up left many people disappointed, but this is only Act 1 of the Dozier trade saga.

Brooks Baseball lists him with 298 pitches thrown. It also shows 9 swings and misses on his change up, maybe that's what he meant. Either way, I'm happy to hear Klaw's assessment. I also was/am very skeptical that a righty with a 92 MPH FB would get many strikeouts with only a changeup and a reportedly below average slider. I'd think he needs either a better breaking pitch or more velocity to continue his success at the MLB level. Or throw with his left hand.

So you think Dozier would not have gotten significantly more than Forsythe AND the Dodgers were offering three players, not two? How insignificant would two additional pieces be then? And why would we care to have them?

You know though, when that movie came out, and even still now, it never had the tag line, "Stephen King's The Running Man". Back in the 1980's it seemed his movies really used his name to sell them, I don't think they really did with The Running Man. However that might be because it was written under his pseudonym and while it was just coming out that King had been using a pseudonym, it wasn't really public knowledge. And also, they probably figured, we don't need King's name to market this, it's starring The Arnold Schwarzenegger and this is 1987!

Yes this might be it despite the fans disappointment that wholesale changes won't occur. Falvey can't yet choose his own field manager and we might also have to consider that the previous regime was so far behind the times in modernizing evaluation, instruction and development tools that the new guys actually don't know what the players in the system are capable of. As much as I don't like it, perhaps they do feel they need a season to do an in depth analysis of what can be fixed and what has to be replaced. You take your car to a mechanic and tell him the transmission's going out, he's not just going to replace it, he's going to want to check it out first, maybe it can be rebuilt instead. Or maybe it's not actually the transmission. Not that I'm not completely disappointed.

Why would the way one feels about Thorpe have anything to do with how they feel about Stewart? One has had injury issues, the other has had performance issues. And I have yet to see any prospect list with Thorpe ahead of Stewart, much to my personal chagrin.

Yeah those were bad. Charting Heston's Ben Hur and Bogart's Maltese Falcon were remakes though. I kind of liked Francis Ford Coppola's Frankenstein though. It was the only one that realized the horror wasn't in the monster's actions, but in the monster's dawning realization of what he was.

There was/is a The Stand remake in the works. I think at one time Ben Affkecj was going to direct it.

Sorry, I kind of derailed the Star Wars VIII thread. I moved the other content here. http://twinsdaily.com/topic/24746-bad-movies-that-should-be-remade-into-good-movies/

Seems I derailed the Star Wars VIII thread. My mistake. Also, this isn't a remake of Mike's 'Food and other such holidays' thread. This is an homage; big difference.

You mean ). ). ).

I agree with The Running Man and it crossed my mind when I made up my list above but then I figured I'd just end up listing a dozen King stories. There was an add for a Running Man type show on CBS last night after the football games. It looked like a reality show where people tried to be fugitives and were hunted by former Marshalls or something like that. No clue if it was any good. I am Legend has been remade so many times including Omega Man. Any of them probably could have had a shot at being good if they'd just stay true to original ending of the novel. Why can't anyone commit to that, it's basically the whole point of the movie. Agree on the Will Smith bit and the sci-fi stuff. Basically every Issac Asimov and Philip K Dick movie has been wasted. I'm guessing every studio is a sucker for sci-fi action but doesn't want to waste time character building and diving into moral complexities. For every Blade Runner there's 20 I, Robots.

Well I'd never say no to a piece of cake.

Yeah, that should have been the conclusion from the start. If I had dinner with Nick Sabin or Urban Meyer I'd probably leave with my blood in a boil listening to a bunch of self-righteousness and arrogance. HS kids tend to have different taste in everything than the rest of us do, coaches likely are not exempt from that rule.

What the hell is a flourless cake? That sounds sacrilegious. I like pie more than cake, except for the chocolate birthday cake my mom makes for me once a year. My special chocolate B-day cake >>>>>> Pie >>>>> all other cakes.

Yeah, Mike Pelfrey, Kyle Gibson and Brandon Kintzler seem to have the same problem, what could they possibly all have in common...... Pelfrey and Kintzler may have an excuse because they don't have good breaking or off-speed pitches. Gibson does, as does Stewart so it appears.

Pet Semetary was a really bad movie mostly due to terrible acting, but it's a really good story and maybe Stephen King's first real psychological horror story as opposed to physical horror. Basically, if you could bring a loved one back from the dead but they would not be the version of them that you remember, would you do it? 1980's filmmaking tended not to be very good at subtlety and introspective thought. The League of Extraordinary Gentleman was another terrible movie as it tried to be a typical comic book movie from the era it was made. I know it was a comic and I haven't read it, but you could tell that the characters were supposed to have depth and individual storylines. The characters were all ripped from historical fiction, ie Captain Nemo, Tom Sawyer, Dr. Jekyll but none of them seemed to be playing those characters straight, or as they would be from their original source material. It was just mindless action with no depth but it is a clever idea that should have been good. There was a really terrible Adam Sandler move called That's my Boy. He played a guy who as a schoolboy had a relationship with his teacher and they had a kid. The movie made jokes about and showed the impact of the incident to Sandler's character, his parents, his teacher and of course the kid as an adult. It also showed how Sandler's character had been a pseudo celebrity due to the incident. The movie was a terrible, terrible and offensively unfunny comedy. But I think it would make a really good story from a dramatic standpoint, particularly the becoming a 15-minutes-of fame child celebrity due to being the victim of something notorious and horrific that you'd never be able to separate yourself from. That Will Smith movie Hancock was a dumb superhero movie but it was REALLY supposed to be about how terrible a superhero's life would be due to alternating between being a celebrity hero and being reviled because your super powers cause so much destruction. I think having a straight story like that, without antagonists and big battles would have been interesting, though I think the horse has already left the barn on that one since both Marvel and DC have now recently addressed both of those ideas, even if rather sloppily. The movie Hair was also terrible, and while I don't know that it needs a remake (from the play) the timing of that movie is just bizarre. It was made in 1979 which was much too late to be relevant to the counter-culture movement and waaaaaay too early for that time period to be retro and interesting again. And of course The Godfather Part III.

In other words, stop using your sinker as an out pitch? There is a bit of that going around the organization. I think if the new front office feels similar to Klaw, we could be surprised by more than just Kohl Stewart.

The Force Awakens had so few references to Episodes 1-3 that I'm not surprised that the Sith was kind of left out of the film. The term Sith wasn't used at all in the original trilogy, I wouldn't be surprised if they keep everything previous to A New Hope vague at best. In fact, I'm going to go out on a limb and speculate that Disney has at least had discussions about re-making Episodes 1-3 sometime in the future including big plot and character changes which would fix continuity issues. If they want to crank out a new film each year it's an idea that would make sense, even if it's way down the road. On that note, I know it's always about money, but I've always been disappointed that Hollywood remakes good movies so often when what they should be doing is remaking bad movies that were good ideas and had potential but ended up being a mess.

So that title sounds a bit ominous. I guess Jedi is also plural but sounds like a 'last stand at the Alamo' kind of thing. Logan looks like it's going to be a Western, maybe that will be the trend for franchises in 2017.

Also, while it's pretty outside the box, I wouldn't mind giving Dozier some time at 3B if/when Sano is off/DH-ing/injured/in the dog house. If Dozier can play the position adequately (and maybe he can't) Dozier/Escobar/Polanco left-to-right might be the best defensive alignment currently available on the projected 25-man. Plus, a second position on Dozier's resume wouldn't hurt come the trade deadline. Still, fingers crossed Dozier is traded for a haul prior to opening day.

I still hope Dozier is traded, but I'm not going to panic if Polanco has to start at SS. Most people seem OK giving Sano another shot at 3B despite poor results; it seems as though most feel he was put in a terrible spot being moved back there after not playing the position for over a year. Polanco was in the same boat, for some reason Mike Quade wasn't playing him at SS in Rochester. Polanco might not have been Quade's preferred SS but it's beyond inexcusable that the front office didn't dictate that he get reps there. But if Dozier is traded, or Polanco can't play the position, I'm just fine with Escobar getting the job back. Last year was the first in three that he wasn't an offensive asset. I certainly like his chances at a rebound more than any free agent. It looks like Erick Aybar is the best available free agent, and he can't hit.

They had Rich Hill last year. They haven't improved the team, they've only re-signed their old (in every sense) players. That's fine, they have a strong core and if that's how they want to play it, that's great. But we as Twins fans know what it's like to stand pat and count on individual improvement to get over the hump.

The Dodgers were a better team last year too but some how only managed to finish four games up and the Dodgers haven't done anything to improve thus far.

I don't know, I think plenty of church goers can separate the two. I don't actually think that most church goers believe every literal word if the Bible but we know there are some of those people. I would think it would be those folks that are climate change deniers, but that's probably a fairly small group comparatively.