Given the level of competition, no I don't think it is terribly impressive. Better than Gibson has been? Sure. The pattern for Gibson the last two years has been get in trouble and then it unravels. In the last two starts, it didn't. Is that a change in his approach or luck? By their nature, sinker ballers are dependent on luck. Luck is a ground ball finding an infielders glove instead of the outfield. Even luckier would be turning such a groundball into a double play. Yes, Gibson recorded an unusually high number of Ks last couple times. Again, facing last place, playing out the string teams. I was among those who felt Gibson should have been non-tendered last November. So, perhaps in that way I am biased. I don't consider one month of acceptable performance to be enough to forget two full years of poor performance. Way too little, way too late IMO. Given all the injuries and subpar performances, would not having Gibson around all year have been difficult? Perhaps. Although, perhaps in his abscence the FO makes a move in the previous offseason to upgrade. Perhaps, Jose Berrios doesn't needlessly spend April and almost half of May in Rochester. Perhaps an earlier opportunity is given to Aaron Slegers. Perhaps, Stephen Gonsalves is promoted to AAA a little sooner and perhaps he is in the MLB rotation now. Would all those "perhaps" have been a net gain over Gibson? We'll never know. But I am finished with Gibson. IMO, he's played this game of putting together a couple good starts in a row to show that he is worthy of a spot on the team for far too long. The body of work is what it is. He's terrible. One of the worst starting pitchers in Twins history. That isn't going to change even if he does post 5 more decent starts this season.