38 wins or around a .500 record. That is providing either Nolasco or Milone is gone before August and Berrios is brought back and given a more proper audition into the rotation. I believe Berrios will thrive, provided the Twins coaching staff can coach up Berrios and help guide him through this season.

Poll response by combat.

Trial by ordeal.

Once Molly can figure out a line-up which hopefully won't have Mauer batting second or third, the Twins can stabilize the DH role, and the rotation has someone other than Milone and Nolasco throwing pitches...they will till win 35 games, playing roughly .500 ball for the second half, but still getting the 2nd or 3rd pick in next year's draft!. Of course, management will see that as light on the horizon and keep everyone in the front office and the field staff intact.

Edited July 11, 201610 yr by Rosterman

Trial by ordeal.

Order by midnight.

These last 30 days have made our team look pretty legit. They actually have a positive run differential.

 

169 runs scored (second in baseball)

143 runs allowed (19th in baseball)

 

In that time, we've had the 5th best offense in the AL (114 wRC+)

6th in the AL in HR (41)

2nd in AL in SB (22)

4th in bb/k at .48

 

I don't think it's a blip. I think it's our team finally hitting like they're supposed to. So I'm saying 41

 

These last 30 days have made our team look pretty legit. They actually have a positive run differential.

 

169 runs scored (second in baseball)

143 runs allowed (19th in baseball)

 

In that time, we've had the 5th best offense in the AL (114 wRC+)

6th in the AL in HR (41)

2nd in AL in SB (22)

4th in bb/k at .48

 

I don't think it's a blip. I think it's our team finally hitting like they're supposed to. So I'm saying 41

 

41? Wow. Say hi to Carolyn....

Edited July 11, 201610 yr by Mike Sixel

For the expansion era (since 1961):

 

Started exactly 32-56:

19 teams

1 finished with 70+ wins (1986 Oakland at 76 wins)

Average finish: 62-100

 

Started 32-56 or worse:

73 teams

3 finished with 70+ wins (1986 Oakland again, 2000 Houston at 72, 1973 Cleveland at 71)

Average finish: 59-103

 

Started 33-55 or worse:

95 teams

4 finished with 70+ wins (the aforementioned 3, plus 1969 Angels at 71 wins)

Average finish: 60-102

 

Started 34-54 or worse:

114 teams

6 finished with 70+ wins (the previously mentioned 4, plus 2012 Padres at 76 wins, and 1971 Expos at 71 wins)

Average finish: 61-101

 

Started 35-53 or worse:

140 teams

15 finished with 70+ wins (none reached .500)

Average finish: 62-100

 

Started 36-52 or worse:

Average finish: 64-98

 

For the expansion era (since 1961):

 

Started exactly 32-56:

19 teams

1 finished with 70+ wins (1986 Oakland at 76 wins)

Average finish: 62-100

 

Started 32-56 or worse:

73 teams

3 finished with 70+ wins (1986 Oakland again, 2000 Houston at 72, 1973 Cleveland at 71)

Average finish: 59-103

 

Started 33-55 or worse:

95 teams

4 finished with 70+ wins (the aforementioned 3, plus 1969 Angels at 71 wins)

Average finish: 60-102

 

Started 34-54 or worse:

114 teams

6 finished with 70+ wins (the previously mentioned 4, plus 2012 Padres at 76 wins, and 1971 Expos at 71 wins)

Average finish: 61-101

 

Started 35-53 or worse:

140 teams

15 finished with 70+ wins (none reached .500)

Average finish: 62-100

 

Started 36-52 or worse:

Average finish: 64-98

 

So, take the under?

Why is 75 wins not an option? Us homers need to be represented!

35 wins. Call up Berrios and let him get his feet underneath him at the MLB level. At this point - he's made 26 starts in AAA, time for him to take the next step.

 

I would move May back into the rotation, but he just came off a pretty bad back injury, so I might wait until next season for that.

 

 

 

So, take the under?

Not sure.  I'd probably shy away from Brock's 38+ options (meaning, finishing with 70+ wins), seems like it would be fairly rare historically to do that.  Avoiding 100 losses seems like a more realistic/attainable goal than 70 wins.  Especially considering it's already taken a nice 7-2 run just to improve our record to this point.

 

I honestly haven't even thought about record too much lately, it's going to be the performances of Kepler, Sano, Buxton, Berrios, Chargois, and Murphy that give meaning to our second half.

Edited July 11, 201610 yr by spycake

 

These last 30 days have made our team look pretty legit. They actually have a positive run differential.

 

169 runs scored (second in baseball)

143 runs allowed (19th in baseball)

 

In that time, we've had the 5th best offense in the AL (114 wRC+)

6th in the AL in HR (41)

2nd in AL in SB (22)

4th in bb/k at .48

 

I don't think it's a blip. I think it's our team finally hitting like they're supposed to. So I'm saying 41

I think part of it is we have a bunch of .240-.280 hitters that were hitting .200.    They were all slumping and pressing at the same time.   While I believe hitting is contagious and success begets success I think everyone just slumped at the same time and now are on a hitting streak at the same time.     Its why the AS break came at a really bad time.   It often acts as a reset, imo and this year it would have been best if it had occurred around April 6th.

 

41? Wow. Say hi to Carolyn....

Done