Article: The Blizzard of Oz

[kab21]

Continue to cling to the player development exception instead of the norm.

 

And again Torii Hunter isn't a .300 hitter because he did it (almost did it) twice in a 15 yr career. Players have lucky seasons all the time and Hunter had a .389 BAPIP (really lucky) last year. Do you also consider Kubel a .300 hitter?

[mnfanforlife]

Continue to cling to the player development exception instead of the norm.

 

And again Torii Hunter isn't a .300 hitter because he did it (almost did it) twice in a 15 yr career. Players have lucky seasons all the time and Hunter had a .389 BAPIP (really lucky) last year. Do you also consider Kubel a .300 hitter?

 

You mean a "career-.300-hitter" right?...and No. Kubel nor Hunter qualify for that since both are under .280 for their respective MLB careers. But Hicks could have a said "lucky" season in MLB where he finishes the year over .290...pretty reasonable statement as I think the original was taken out of context. My bad for not clarifying.

 

I will probably cling to the hope that Hicks will resemble Hunter statistically until I am proven wrong. This year in AAA will be very telling. I honestly wouldn't be shocked if Hicks duplicated his numbers from AA. Would you be? If Hicks accomplishes this, what would you project his career-year stat-line to look like? (which is what my Hicks projection was intended to be)

[kab21]

I don't even bother trying to predict lucky or unlucky seasons. Pretty much every hitter in the MLB aside butera, Dunn, Uggla and similar is capable of hitting .290. I see Hicks as a .260's hitter and would allow for a +/- 30-40 pt swing in peak lucky/unlucky BA's making it possible for him to hit anywhere from .230-.300 in any given season. Because that huge range I dislike bothering with peak projections. I'm significantly more interested in what a hitter is going to do each season.

[mnfanforlife]

I don't even bother trying to predict lucky or unlucky seasons. Pretty much every hitter in the MLB aside butera, Dunn, Uggla and similar is capable of hitting .290. I see Hicks as a .260's hitter and would allow for a +/- 30-40 pt swing in peak lucky/unlucky BA's making it possible for him to hit anywhere from .230-.300 in any given season. Because that huge range I dislike bothering with peak projections. I'm significantly more interested in what a hitter is going to do each season.

 

So, you're more interested in what their "average" season may look like? I am more interested in what their "best" season may look like. Nothing wrong with either interest, is there?

[CDog]

Huh? Again, you went after kab's very rational, factually-backed approach to a poorly articulated, overzealous projection. And then backpeddled to state you had no idea what he meant. As is clear from this thread, the poster in question cannot be interpreted rationally. kab gave his argument far more credit than it deserves. As I'm doing to your "thoughts" now.

 

I'm curious how many times you'll be willing to reply to my posts in this thread with a self-righteous tone while being completely wrong. We're up to three now. I gotta say, it takes some balls to continue to get high-handed even after you've been proven unequivacolly wrong. Good for you.

 

As long as I'm here, my pointing out how embarrassed you should be about just how wrong you were wasn't my biggest moment. Sometimes softballs right down the middle are too tempting to pass up. I apologize for that, especially given the multiple threads recently about improving the tone. Those threads led to my attempt at a light, concilliatory response to your first post. I won't make that mistake again, but I was probably a little (or a lot) too gleeful and snarky when things took the predictable turn they did. Again, my apologies to the forum.

[TheLeviathan]

Congrats, you are making less sense than the guy with the Hicks-Rodman comp.

[mnfanforlife]

Congrats, you are making less sense than the guy with the Hicks-Rodman comp.

 

It takes a nimble mind to wrap your head around that one! But if you read the entire post, it makes perfect sense. The other comp was Torii Hunter....Did you even catch that? Or was your "reading" too selective?

What problems do you have with comparing Hunter to Hicks?

[John Bonnes]

I'm sorry I didn't check in on this thread before today.

 

The Twins Daily community prides itself on the respectful way it treats fellow members of the community. Starting on the second page of this thread, a few condescending comments violated that statndard of behavior, and it's led to increasingly personal attacks. I suspect some of these comment are meant to help police the site, but you can't attack other members, even if it's not vulgar.

 

We can't have the board operate like that. It only leads to additional attacks, both by the attacked and by others who view it as the way the board works. If, instead, you want to flag the initial post for the moderators, please do so.

 

If you can't trust yourself to comment in that way, then please remove yourself from the conversation. (There are plenty of other threads and topics which you can enjoy.) I've already sent out a few warnings, and bans are next. Thank you for your understanding.

[FrodaddyG]

I'm sorry I didn't check in on this thread before today.

 

The Twins Daily community prides itself on the respectful way it treats fellow members of the community. Starting on the second page of this thread, a few condescending comments violated that statndard of behavior, and it's led to increasingly personal attacks. I suspect some of these comment are meant to help police the site, but you can't attack other members, even if it's not vulgar.

 

We can't have the board operate like that. It only leads to additional attacks, both by the attacked and by others who view it as the way the board works. If, instead, you want to flag the initial post for the moderators, please do so.

 

If you can't trust yourself to comment in that way, then please remove yourself from the conversation. (There are plenty of other threads and topics which you can enjoy.) I've already sent out a few warnings, and bans are next. Thank you for your understanding.

If you want to tailor the site rules to exclusively the lowest common denominator, guess what you'll be left with.

[kab21]

So, you're more interested in what their "average" season may look like? I am more interested in what their "best" season may look like. Nothing wrong with either interest, is there?

 

I clearly stated this in response to CDog on page 2 and yet you continued to argue.

 

I now understand your comment. Ceiling doesn't equal Best season. Ceiling is what kind of player the prospect becomes for his career (or at least his 5 yr peak).

[mnfanforlife]

If you want to tailor the site rules to exclusively the lowest common denominator, guess what you'll be left with.

 

hundreds of decent people?

[mnfanforlife]

I clearly stated this in response to CDog on page 2 and yet you continued to argue.

 

Yeah I believe I missed that comment entirely, my fault.

[Badsmerf]

I'm sorry I didn't check in on this thread before today.

 

The Twins Daily community prides itself on the respectful way it treats fellow members of the community. Starting on the second page of this thread, a few condescending comments violated that statndard of behavior, and it's led to increasingly personal attacks. I suspect some of these comment are meant to help police the site, but you can't attack other members, even if it's not vulgar.

 

We can't have the board operate like that. It only leads to additional attacks, both by the attacked and by others who view it as the way the board works. If, instead, you want to flag the initial post for the moderators, please do so.

 

If you can't trust yourself to comment in that way, then please remove yourself from the conversation. (There are plenty of other threads and topics which you can enjoy.) I've already sent out a few warnings, and bans are next. Thank you for your understanding.

With regards to this thread, I think it has been pretty civil. With as large as TD is, there is going to be quarrels. As long as it doesn't get too messy why interject? Discussions like this are how people learn the intricacies of this sport. I don't think anyone has purposefully tried to attack another with no tact. I realize that this site was not set-up to be rube-chat, but at the same time it is an internet forum and must be policed carefully.

[TheLeviathan]

Well, I'm glad I'm not the only one utterly confused by that.

[mnfanforlife]

TheLeviathan, could I please start a gentlemanly discussion with you?

 

Do you believe the Hicks - Hunter comp to be valid? Why or why not?

[glunn]

If you want to tailor the site rules to exclusively the lowest common denominator, guess what you'll be left with.

 

It takes intelligence and wisdom to utterly destroy a person's position without attacking the person.

 

There are plenty of boards out there where people can engage in personal attacks. If someone likes reading such attacks or feuding, there are other places to do this. Here is a link to one of such sites.

TD was conceived as a place where you can argue as passionately as you wish. You are perfectly free to tell someone that you believe that they are "absolutely wrong" then explain why you think that. But nothing good will ever come from characterizing someone's positions as "idiotic", "ridiculous", "stupid", or "clownish". This only leads to feuds. Again, there are other sites to go to for feuding and personal insults. In my opinion, those other sites are closer to a lowest common denominator than TD.

 

Frodaddy, you are clearly a very intelligent person. I urge you to give some thought to the benefit of having a place where we can disagree as much as we want, but we fight using logic instead of personal attacks. I have noticed a positive change in your posts and the posts of some other members, so I remain hopeful that you will gradually come to see the policy in a more positive light.

 

If it seems like I am lecturing, I apologize. But it seems important to make it as clear as possible why we are trying to reduce the personal attacks.

[TheLeviathan]

But nothing good will ever come from characterizing someone's positions as "idiotic", "ridiculous", "stupid", or "clownish".

 

How about "makes no sense"? I'm now under the impression that such a reference is also not acceptable.

 

As for "clownish" - it was intended as "not to be taken seriously" - a bit more harsh than that, no disagreement. But I didn't refer to the individual at all - I was clearly referencing the projection. And I made that clear multiple times. This entire post by you is lost in the fact that what is being accused of being poor discourse was in no way a personal attack.

[mnfanforlife]

It takes intelligence and wisdom to utterly destroy a person's position with attacking the person.

 

Change the "with" to "without" and I could not agree more. I love debating about prospects, and I have been guilty of posting instigating comments in the past. I promise to debate respectfully with anyone from now forward.

[glunn]

Change the "with" to "without" and I could not agree more. I love debating about prospects, and I promise to do so respectfully with anyone on this site.

 

Thanks for calling my attention to that grievous typo -- I have now fixed it.

[mnfanforlife]

What? No one is knocking down your door to take your rights. We're explaining why your projection isn't very realistic. Like if I predict 2013 will be a 50 homerun season for Mauer. COULD it happen? Sure, but it's so unrealistic that it's clownish. If you wish to project clownish numbers, no one is taking that right from you. It's just going to be pointed out that it's clownish.

 

Now, if we see some changes in his approach (ala Hunter) then we can start to alter projections. But it's going to be some major changes to reach your projection. And the thing is, he could be a DAMN good player at significantly less than your projection.

 

I completely agree with the second paragraph. But my projection was not nearly as wild as your example projection.

How can my projection not be viewed as a probable career-year for Hicks in MLB? (.290 with 25 HR's and 35 Sb's)

I am very sorry if I did not clarify the context of my projection better. But now you know.

It is perfectly realistic, and I require that you explain why I should not hope for this....

[glunn]

How about "makes no sense"? I'm now under the impression that such a reference is also not acceptable.

 

As for "clownish" - it was intended as "not to be taken seriously" - a bit more harsh than that, no disagreement. But I didn't refer to the individual at all - I was clearly referencing the projection. And I made that clear multiple times. This entire post by you is lost in the fact that what is being accused of being poor discourse was in no way a personal attack.

 

It seems to me that telling someone that what he's saying "makes no sense" is an invitation to feud. But telling someone that what he's saying "makes no sense to me" is an invitation to engage in further discussion. And if the response is not persuasive, then you can completely disagree and explain why you still believe that they are totally wrong.

 

You are clearly very articulate. I have no doubt that you can adjust enough to say all that you want to say without violating the policy. Indeed, I think that you may eventually come to love the challenge of totally destroying an idiotic position while showing the greatest possible respect for your fellow Twins fans who you believe are mistaken.

[TheLeviathan]

So, I can say "makes no sense to me" but not "makes no sense" without a threat to be banned? Yeah, wow.

 

In any case, I'll just repeat it again: There was never a personal attack in here for this to start with. I'm deeply troubled by this seemingly new standard that is required. I went out of my way, three times, to clarify there was no personal attack. If the test is "not to start a feud" - I'm baffled.

 

It's one thing to avoid personal attacks, totally understandable. This, whatever this garbled mess you're passing off as a standard, is not. So guess I'll just expect random threats for references to poor arguments that are...too mean? Not sensitive enough? I'm not sure how to refer to it.

[mnfanforlife]

I'm deeply troubled by this seemingly new standard that is required.

 

It's one thing to avoid personal attacks, totally understandable. This, whatever this garbled mess you're passing off as a standard, is not. So guess I'll just expect random threats for references to poor arguments that are...too mean? Not sensitive enough? I'm not sure how to refer to it.

 

Maybe you never intended to attack me personally, but I would understand either way and promise to respect you moving forward, but I have to ask....

 

Deeply troubled? By the rules of a baseball fan forum?

 

What is so incomprehensible about a "standard of respect" for others?

[kab21]

It seems to me that telling someone that what he's saying "makes no sense" is an invitation to feud. But telling someone that what he's saying "makes no sense to me" is an invitation to engage in further discussion. And if the response is not persuasive, then you can completely disagree and explain why you still believe that they are totally wrong.

 

You are clearly very articulate. I have no doubt that you can adjust enough to say all that you want to say without violating the policy. Indeed, I think that you may eventually come to love the challenge of totally destroying an idiotic position while showing the greatest possible respect for your fellow Twins fans who you believe are mistaken.

 

The problem is that this nonsense from him has popped up regarding nearly every prospect this winter. Berrios should absolutely be in Ft Myers this year. Rosario is MLB ready offensively right now. I can't remember all of his exact quotes but these are just a few of the other examples. Not only allowing him to post this crap but allowing him to write articles is sinking the credibility of this site. That sucks because this is becoming a very popular site.

 

I also believe that I only attacked the analysis and never made a personal comment while showing substantial research and facts regarding how poor the analysis was. The thread did turn a little ugly but mnfanforlife has been dishing out just as much crap as anyone else in this thread and he acts innocent. This is completely uncalled for by someone complaining about people attacking him.

 

Originally Posted by FrodaddyG

 

If you want to tailor the site rules to exclusively the lowest common denominator, guess what you'll be left with.

hundreds of decent people?

[mnfanforlife]

The problem is that this nonsense from him has popped up regarding nearly every prospect this winter. Berrios should absolutely be in Ft Myers this year. Rosario is MLB ready offensively right now. I can't remember all of his exact quotes but these are just a few of the other examples. Not only allowing him to post this crap but allowing him to write articles is sinking the credibility of this site. That sucks because this is becoming a very popular site.

 

I also believe that I only attacked the analysis and never made a personal comment while showing substantial research and facts regarding how poor the analysis was. The thread did turn a little ugly but mnfanforlife has been dishing out just as much crap as anyone else in this thread and he acts innocent. This is completely uncalled for by someone complaining about people attacking him.

 

Just to be fair, I have to present this from my Berrios article you "quoted" :

 

"So the real question now is this: Will the organization fast-track this kid in 2013, and allow him to move multiple levels? I am sure his performance will determine this, but the guy will only be 19. So, perhaps the organization will play it safe and limit his innings and appearances? Berrios has been described as physically mature beyond his age (whatever that means), so maybe he gets a heavier workload than someone else his age."

Is this "way off base"? Is this "crap" as you have suggested? No where in the entire article are the words "Berrios should absolutely be in Ft Myers this year" as you suggested.

[mnfanforlife]

I stand by my opinion that Rosario is an advanced hitter capable of moving multiple levels in 2013. He has no shot of playing in MN this year, but I stand by my opinion that I would be more entertained by his rookie-struggles than by the usual suspects.

[PseudoSABR]

...

Hey, glunn, delete some PMs in your inbox, because I can't reply to the PM you sent me!

[Badsmerf]

TheLeviathan, could I please start a gentlemanly discussion with you?

 

Do you believe the Hicks - Hunter comp to be valid? Why or why not?

Invalid. These are two completely different players other than the ability to play elite CF. Offensively, they are nothing alike. Torii has and always will be a free swinger. Hicks has much better plate discipline and SB potential. While Hunter developed into a pretty good basestealer, it is more a reflection of his baseball IQ and personality as a no-holds-barred type of player. I'm really not convinced about Hicks's power potential. Torii developed his as he grew into his frame, its yet to be seen if Hicks will do the same. I'm not convinced about Hicks hitting in the least. He is terrible against RHP and strikes out too much. Hunter wasn't a sure thing either, but he also reached the majors at 22 and didn't post his best numbers until he was 33 in Anaheim. Also, he OPS'd 1.130 in 209 AB's as a 24 yo in AAA. You can't predict or expect a player to develop from a career .751 OPS in the minors to a career .801 OPS in the majors. It just doesn't happen very often which is why Torii is so special. Hicks currently has a career .801 OPS in the minors (helped by his lucky 2012 season and BABIP of .379 which is waaaay high). If you'd like I'm sure people can throw out much more reasonable comparisons... except they will be ones that struggled to hit and OPS as well as they did in the minors. I am much more skeptical of Hicks than most, so I've found this thread fun to read.

[glunn]

Hey, glunn, delete some PMs in your inbox, because I can't reply to the PM you sent me!

 

Sorry about that -- I have now freed up some space.

[mnfanforlife]

If you'd like I'm sure people can throw out much more reasonable comparisons... (for Hicks)

 

Please do. I am all eyes.