This game wasn’t as close as the score indicated

 

Four home runs, and at least four near-misses, including the first two batters of the game. Keep this up and Target Field will be rockin this summer!

 

  Keep this up and Target Field will be rockin this summer!

https://www.songkick.com/concerts/32547224-def-leppard-at-target-field

 

Indeed.

 

Did anyone catch that moonshot Buxton hit that went just foul? 5th deck.

 

 

 

Yes! Wow he has some sneaky pop in the bat. I am expecting a bunch of HRs later in the year.

Polanco now leading the league in AVG, Total Bases, Offensive WAR, and Situational WPA ... Be sure to stuff those ballot boxes, so we can get him in there for All-Star Election Day!  It will be tough going against Mondesi, Bogaerts, Correa, and Lindor.

It looks like the Jays are going to be one of the 100 loss teams when this year is in the books. No hitting, no pitching. They are hitting rock bottom with a loud thud.

 

...and they are still drawing more fans at home than the Twins.

Edited May 9, 20197 yr by Doomtints

 

And why did we need four pitchers to get through an 8-run win? Gibson had 88 pitches through 6 and was coasting along. Now it's "we need to get the bullpen work," where early in the year it's "we need to rest guys who pitched 1/3 of an inning in back-to-back games." I hope the analytics nerds will someday put the proper weight back on the starters; all we hear now is of how bad pitchers are when they face the order the third time, yada yada...The more bullpens are relied on, the less starters are used (look at the playoffs). Seems to me the best way to rest your bullpen, and hence maximize the utility of your bullpen, is to have your starters pitch deep into games. When you're up 8 runs and your starter has thrown 88 pitches, I don't know, have Gibson go out another inning or two. It strikes me as the perfect situation to stretch out a starter.

 

I realize this makes me sound like a fuddy-dud/Jack Morris type, so let me have it, but it just bugs me. 

 

If we'd had a game where the bullpen had been used hard, Gibson would have gone out for the 7th I'm sure. But we're carrying 13 freakin' pitchers right now and 2 of the guys who went out there hadn't pitched in a while and the game was out of reach. It's very appropriate bullpen management...when you carry too many pitchers. I'm still an advocate for getting back down to 12 when Sano comes back.

 

The Polanco extension just looks better all the time, huh?

 

I'm feeling better about Gibson with every start. It looks like he's gotten his stamina back up after that awful e.Coli issue (that was a LOT of weight loss in a short time; I'm glad he's ok and worked his way back). He's a really important pitcher for us; last year he was almost as valuable as Berrios.

From a Jay's blog ("BlueBirdBanter") in discussing the Twin's 7 runs in the first three innings:

 

"Suffice to say that y=2^x-1 (where y is the other team’s runs and x is the innings) is not a winning formula, even if it it’s it doesn’t extend to the fourth inning."

 

I guess math isn't banned on their site!

I'm cautiously optimistic that Odorizzi, Perez, and Gibson are all going to be good options going forward.  That being said, they probably are not all going to spend the rest of the year pitching like all-stars.

 

For me, the bullpen issue is less about Gibson "only" throwing 88 pitches and 6 innings (keeping starters rested is a good idea too), but rather the use of 3 pitchers to do the final 3 innings in an 8 run game.  I'd rather in situations like that Baldelli only use 1-2 pitchers, and keep more of the pen rested.  It's very easy to have a guy who "needs work" throw a bullpen session before or after a game.  For me, the rule of bullpens is always assume you'll need them in the future.  After all, it only takes an early injury to a starter, and a bit of ineffectiveness for this bullpen to go from well-rested to in need of rest.

I told myself Gibson would have his best game of the year so far. He's pitched well against the Jays in the past, but it was sure nice to see. Of course the hitters made it a lot easier.

 

I was happy to see Cron awake from his slump.

 

I'll be sorry to see Cave shuttled back Rochester, but he's not getting many ABs. (I won't comment on the other player, but will say that it will be great to have La Tortuga back again.)

Like bighat, I did see Byron Buxton's titanic foul ball to the 5th deck.

Is the gravity slightly weaker in Canada?

Was there an updraft from a nearby mountain? 

Consider that at some point, this man is going to straighten one of those out. Betcha that'll be on the highlight shows...

Watching the game last nite, it hit me that the Jays are looking like the Twins team we suffered through watching last year. Had expectations that never really got off the ground. What a difference it is to watch a team that is winning and having fun. Whod - a - thunkit!

 

Keep it rolling Guys!

 

It looks like the Jays are going to be one of the 100 loss teams when this year is in the books. No hitting, no pitching. They are hitting rock bottom with a loud thud.

 

...and they are still drawing more fans at home than the Twins.

Not after you factor in the exchange rate.

 

https://www.songkick.com/concerts/32547224-def-leppard-at-target-field

 

Indeed.

 

 

Good Gawd. Gimme a choice between a Matt Belisle relief appearance, a triple root canal and a Cheap Trick concert and I'm catching an Uber to the dentist. Cheap Trick comes in third.

 

Good Gawd. Gimme a choice between a Matt Belisle relief appearance, a triple root canal and a Cheap Trick concert and I'm catching an Uber to the dentist. Cheap Trick comes in third.

Ain't that a shame.

 

Ain't that a shame.

 

 

I will concede that Cheap Trick was good but not great at the same time Roger Erickson was good but not great. In 1977. 42 years ago.

 

I will concede that Cheap Trick was good but not great at the same time Roger Erickson was good but not great. In 1977. 42 years ago.

OK, but what if we stipulate the triple root canal is without novocaine?

 

That'd make you think long and hard about your choice, I wager.

 

I love your starter rant - I am in complete agreement.  This year the articles have been about how the bullpens have a poorer performance across MLB.  Of course - whether BP or SP you can only throw so many times and it is frequency of use, not length of use that I see as an issue.  Bring back Jack Morris rant any time - I will enjoy them.

I agree on the starter rant. Somebody said if the game was closer or we had used more relief pitchers recently Gibson would have went out for the 7th. To me we are asking our starters to give us between 80 - 90 pitches. So my logic says when they send them out there after that they are not going to be as good because they haven't been given the chance.

Plus at the end of the year when the decision to sign Gibson comes up, the could look at innings pitched and say we can't give that much money to a pitcher that averages X innings or pitched Y innings, or ERA is Z when he might not have been given a chance to increase/decrease those numbers.

 

 

Plus at the end of the year when the decision to sign Gibson comes up, the could look at innings pitched and say we can't give that much money to a pitcher that averages X innings or pitched Y innings, or ERA is Z when he might not have been given a chance to increase/decrease those numbers.

 

I absolutely think that money is a big reason for lessening starter workload. The "opener" is a way to game the arbitration system - it should be no surprise that the Rays introduced the opener, that the A's used one in the playoffs, and that the Twins were one of the teams that used the opener most prominently last September; they're all teams that have historically pinched pennies. I read an article about the Rays' pitcher (Yarbrough I think) who vultured a bunch of wins due to the fortune of being the ostensible "long man" after the opener, and he had an arbitration battle over the winter because his stat line was all goofy - a lot of wins, but very few starts and not enough innings to qualify as a starter. 

 

It's frustrating how seriously it's being taken as a strategy. It's less of an analytics innovation than it is a way to keep your payroll down. The more 5 innings (two trips through the lineup) becomes the norm for starters, the more likely that a full season for a starter will approach closer to 150 innings (under the qualifying threshold), thus muddying the arbitration game and ultimately keeping salaries down. And we wonder why Kuechel is still sitting at home? Why pay $18M for one year when you can just have three bullpen pitchers combine for his workload for a tenth of that contract? And as a bonus, by doing so you can be viewed as "smart" and "innovative" by the spreadsheet crowd? Cal Griffith was just born too early.

 

 

OK, but what if we stipulate the triple root canal is without novocaine?

 

That'd make you think long and hard about your choice, I wager.

 

 

Belisle it is.

 

Belisle it is.

 

Surrender!

 

Belisle it is.

Post Of The Year.

Ain't that a shame.

I believe that was Fats Domino, not Cheap Trick.

 

Meeting rooms during staff meetings work just fine for me.

Wait, those are meetings and not nap time? 

 

Wow, did I have that one wrong.