Fire Dan Gladden

Over the last few weeks, many people have posted about the Twins lack of wins. The poor record last year, along with the slow start this year has people calling for everything from blowing up the team, to firing the manager and front office, to increasing the payroll 20% in an effort to bring in more talent. I suppose a strong amount of emotion helps to show the strength of the fan base. Over the offseason, the Twins did not blowup the team. Rather they patched up holes with some established, relatively low cost veterans, and invested a great amount into the hope that the injuries from last year would rectify themselves this year, and the Mauer, Morneau, Span, Baker, etc. would all return to previous levels of production. I would classify this as hedging their bets. If the team is in the hunt come July, then everything worked according to plan and they can make moves for improement. If they are faltering, they can claim that the moves and recoveries did not go as expected. Essentially giving them something to tell the fan base regardless of the record. We all hope that it works, and the team returns to it's winning ways. But if it doesn't in the short term, what comes next? As a fan, what do you want the team to do? I think your wants comes down to what type of fan are you: Do you enjoy the ride or the glory. If you enjoy the ride, then you have enjoyed the last 10 years of Twins baseball. Watching a team that was always good, but rarely great (2006, what a shame). Knowing that the Twins would never trade any prospects, never trade for big name rentals or big dollar contracts. Rather they would be content knowing that they had a shot to win it all within their constrants, but understanding their chances of winning it all were relatively low. If you enjoy the glory, these last 10 years must have driven you out your mind. Knowing that the team was "this close" to winning it all, but unwilling to pull the trigger to bring in 1-2 high dollar free-agents or trade away the future for today. Enjoying the glory means you are willing to accept the wild cycles of wins and loses, knowing that you may have to accept 5-7 years of horrible baseball for a 2 year window where you may be the best team in baseball. After the 2 year window, you dump all of your good, close-to-free-agent players for a new cache of prospects, and the cycle starts again. It's really tough to have it both ways. Personally, I enjoy the ride. Give me competitive baseball year in and year out any time. But that's me. What about you, the ride or the glory?

Why not bring in that kid from "Little Big League"? He seemed to have a good grasp of the Twins way in that movie...

Out of our price range. Nice to dream though.

Well, I feel bad when somebody believes thay have a better handle on the situation than management. As the Twins have shown time and time again, many of their decisions are not solely based on on-the-field potential/performance. We don't know about the intangibles that played into this decision as well. Comparing him to Uggla is reckless. There is no reason to believe he would suddenly blossom after all this time. Have you seen the pitching staff lately? Putting Hughes over a pitching slot also does not compute. Working through replacement level pitchers is more important right now than replacement level players. I wish Hughes the best of luck, but I have zero concern that tis will come back to bite us.

In response to Nick Nelson's post: http://twinsdaily.com/content.php?391-Access-and-Accountability I'm not a journalist. Journalism was not my college major. Heck, I barely read my high school paper. I am just a Twins fan that reads too many articles and posts trying to learn as much about my team as possible. I will read ESPN and FOX, to the Strib, to blogs, even comments. I am interested to see what the news is on my team and what the general perception is on that news. While the media has typically unfettered access to the teams they cover, they are bound by that access and the responsibilities that come with it. Media writers will temper their responses in order to keep the players talking to them or to stay in the good graces of the team. It's not always a complete sell out, but it does come with the territory. Bloggers, on the other hand, are not usually bound by these constrictions. The write and say exactly what they want, bound by very little. But the truth is that a majority of your more popular sports bloggers are journalists. They have the degrees and most have actual team coverage experience. While they do not have these same constraints as the media, they will typically write using the same ethical standards as your main stream writers. I believe this is a major reason why they do become popular. They can evoke trust in their readers Nick is partially right. Many sports bloggers do write from a fan's point of view. But they are generally not perceived that way. Sports bloggers are half-fan, half-media. I have been reading Gleeman and Strohs for a long time. They both bring insight that your average, every-day fan will not have. They maintain their readership by providing information that is in-depth and accurate, with well formed opinions. They also throw out information that could be considered "inside information" along the way. I also have no problem with this, as I enjoy different points of views and like to see how these items are discussed outside of television, radio, or the newspaper. But to classify them as "just" fans is not entirely accurate. I continue to be amazed at how the mainstream media attempts to knock down the bloggers. An analogy: Do I believe that the best 500+ players in the world play in the NBA? No. I believe I could field a team of non-NBA guys that could easily hold their own in the NBA. Multiple teams actually. Guys make it to the NBA due to skill, politics, and luck. Some in the NBA do not belong there. Many that don't make it to the NBA can be as good or better, but are not in for any number of reasons. Does that mean they stop playing? Heck no. They play 5-6 times per week. Don't believe me, go watch a Summer League game downtown sometime. Can you guess who is who? Mainstream media only has to fear the bloggers if they themselves are not performing their job. If the Strib is worried about losing readership, hire better writers and churn out better content. Same with ESPN. People will follow the stories and personalities that they like. If newspapers and other mainstream outlets are truly doomed, I would advise the Mackey's and Reusse's of world to lay off the bloggers because blogging will be the only only option left to them. Keep up the good work guys.

In response to Nick Nelson's post: http://twinsdaily.com/content.php?391-Access-and-Accountability I'm not a journalist. Journalism was not my college major. Heck, I barely read my high school paper. I am just a Twins fan that reads too many articles and posts trying to learn as much about my team as possible. I will read ESPN and FOX, to the Strib, to blogs, even comments. I am interested to see what the news is on my team and what the general perception is on that news. While the media has typically unfettered access to the teams they cover, they are bound by that access and the responsibilities that come with it. Media writers will temper their responses in order to keep the players talking to them or to stay in the good graces of the team. It's not always a complete sell out, but it does come with the territory. Bloggers, on the other hand, are not usually bound by these constrictions. The write and say exactly what they want, bound by very little. But the truth is that a majority of your more popular sports bloggers are journalists. They have the degrees and most have actual team coverage experience. While they do not have these same constraints as the media, they will typically write using the same ethical standards as your main stream writers. I believe this is a major reason why they do become popular. They can evoke trust in their readers Nick is partially right. Many sports bloggers do write from a fan's point of view. But they are generally not perceived that way. Sports bloggers are half-fan, half-media. I have been reading Gleeman and Strohs for a long time. They both bring insight that your average, every-day fan will not have. They maintain their readership by providing information that is in-depth and accurate, with well formed opinions. They also throw out information that could be considered "inside information" along the way. I also have no problem with this, as I enjoy different points of views and like to see how these items are discussed outside of television, radio, or the newspaper. But to classify them as "just" fans is not entirely accurate. I continue to be amazed at how the mainstream media attempts to knock down the bloggers. An analogy: Do I believe that the best 500+ players in the world play in the NBA? No. I believe I could field a team of non-NBA guys that could easily hold their own in the NBA. Multiple teams actually. Guys make it to the NBA due to skill, politics, and luck. Some in the NBA do not belong there. Many that don't make it to the NBA can be as good or better, but are not in for any number of reasons. Does that mean they stop playing? Heck no. They play 5-6 times per week. Don't believe me, go watch a Summer League game downtown sometime. Can you guess who is who? Mainstream media only has to fear the bloggers if they themselves are not performing their job. If the Strib is worried about losing readership, hire better writers and churn out better content. Same with ESPN. People will follow the stories and personalities that they like. If newspapers and other mainstream outlets are truly doomed, I would advise the Mackey's and Reusse's of world to lay off the bloggers because blogging will be the only only option left to them. Keep up the good work guys.

The difference between this year's bench and previous years is pretty easy to define. In previous years, we had veterans who hit .220 and below, so we knew the bench was terrible. This year we have young guys who, through all the positive double talk, were average to below averagein the minors, were below average in short stints with the majors, but have shown promise. This means we don't know for sure if they are terrible, giving us a reason to be somewhat optimistic. I do believe that the bench will be better offensively than last years bench (kind of hard not to be). But to expect any drastic improvements for any of these guys is wishful thinking.

Twins Fan, I think you got your IP and SO backwards, because that would be virtually identical to his 2010 numbers. No way Liriano throws 215, 210, or even 200 innings in any year. In 2010 he threw 191 innings and it took him 31 starts to do that. 25 to 30 starts is more realistic, which would put him in the 150-170 range. A 3.40 ERA is possible, so is a 9+ SO/9IP ratio. If he does put up numbers close to his 2010 year, I think he would be a prime candidate to get the 1 year qualifying offer. If he signs a longer term deal elsewhere, the Twins get the pick. If he signs the tender and stinks next year, he will go off the books. With all of his inconsistencies, there is no way the Twins invest anything long term into this guy.

The context of Hunter's memory would also be in question. Assuming for a minute someone did decline, what were the circumstances? Illness? Injury? Was there another legitimate issue that was part of the discussion? These kind of half-stories crack me up. It's like they want to bash the Twins, but don't want any accountability either from the person giving the quote or the person the quote is about. But of course we are talking about Torii "Mouth Runs Like A River" Hunter...

With all due respect, this is what I am talking about.The select few that do not hate Gladden provide excuses for him: It's my fault for not listening, he is learning the ropes and is getting better, people like Minnesota bumpkinism... I really wouldn't have a problem if he stuck to the color, but when he does PBP I have to turn the radio off. He has not improved in this area in all the time he has been here, yet they give him 3+ innings per game. It's a travesty.

As you can tell from my handle, I do not have a great amount of respect for the radio work of a certain Mr. Dan Gladden. Over the last few years, my circle of friends and I have had countless discussions over what he does/doesn't bring to the broadcasts, and why on Earth the Twins continue to keep him in the booth. Quite frankly, I do not know why he is still there. Anybody who listens to the games hears the same things I do: - Going off on tangents while there is action going on. Somehow it will go from 1-1 count, 0 outs, nobody on, to 0-2 count with a runner on first and one out while he is talking about the chicken he had at the restaurant last night. - Poor descriptions of the plays. Example: Revere hits a fly ball to right field, the centerfielder Smith runs over to make the play, and Revere will end up at third base with a triple. Ugh. - Extended moments.....................................................................of...............................................dead air. I understand that the Twins want a well-known ex-player handling their color commentary. It is a common practice among many teams designed to bring an "insiders" point-of-view to the broadcast that others could not give. The problem is that the also let him handle the play-by-play which he is unquestionably unqualified to do. Some PBP guys are Homers (Paul Allen), obnoxious (Hawk Harrelson) or legends nationally (Vin Scully) or locally (Bob Uecker). Dan Gladden is just not very good. Having Dan Gladden handle play-by-play is a poor representation of the Twins the excellence they work so hard to project on the field. Everyone talks about the "Twins Way" and the focus on the right way to do things: fundamentals, execution, error-free baseball. It's egregious that they can't hold their radio booth to the same standards.

As you can tell from my handle, I do not have a great amount of respect for the radio work of a certain Mr. Dan Gladden. Over the last few years, my circle of friends and I have had countless discussions over what he does/doesn't bring to the broadcasts, and why on Earth the Twins continue to keep him in the booth. Quite frankly, I do not know why he is still there. Anybody who listens to the games hears the same things I do: - Going off on tangents while there is action going on. Somehow it will go from 1-1 count, 0 outs, nobody on, to 0-2 count with a runner on first and one out while he is talking about the chicken he had at the restaurant last night. - Poor descriptions of the plays. Example: Revere hits a fly ball to right field, the centerfielder Smith runs over to make the play, and Revere will end up at third base with a triple. Ugh. - Extended moments.....................................................................of...............................................dead air. I understand that the Twins want a well-known ex-player handling their color commentary. It is a common practice among many teams designed to bring an "insiders" point-of-view to the broadcast that others could not give. The problem is that the also let him handle the play-by-play which he is unquestionably unqualified to do. Some PBP guys are Homers (Paul Allen), obnoxious (Hawk Harrelson) or legends nationally (Vin Scully) or locally (Bob Uecker). Dan Gladden is just not very good. Having Dan Gladden handle play-by-play is a poor representation of the Twins the excellence they work so hard to project on the field. Everyone talks about the "Twins Way" and the focus on the right way to do things: fundamentals, execution, error-free baseball. It's egregious that they can't hold their radio booth to the same standards.