jay

Where did Antony say that Colabello is under consideration for a call-up?

He's already been on the DL for the entire season, so he's already filled up most of the 60 days. I don't see much harm in move if they need a roster spot. The only downside would be the need to get him back on the 40-man to call him up.

Assuming Appel and Grey are gone of course.

We still lost by 4 runs. Hard to say it would have played out the exact same, but those runs would have scored either way with how the top-9th went. Five total hits plus striking out twice in the bottom of the 9th with 2 guys on and in the 8th with them loaded is both how we lost and more excruciating.

I was jotting on a post-in note this morning and had the exact same scenarios. Interesting that Thielbar beat them all, but maybe we'll see a chain of events once the short NL trip is over.

Would it be unreasonable for the Twins to bring Gibson up for Hernandez's next start and if things go well, option him back to AAA when he hits his inning cap for the season? Maybe mid August?

I think he could be an option if Mastro were healthy and could be the backup CF / pinch runner. Ramirez could go along with the 2nd Util IF to have Mastro and Colabello on the active roster. Given Parmelee's lack of PT lately, I can't help but wonder if some other option might be in the works. Something has to give there with Hammer, Hicks, and Arcia playing most days.

I think we're all on the same page with you here. The odds of him becoming even an average regular are nothing short of long, but we can hope... [add extra dramaticism] and if we have hope, we have a chance. As pointed out in today's minor league report...

I'm not sure. We can see a strong relationship between K% and ERA here, but you can make the same case for GB% and presumably BB%, XBH%, HR%, etc as well. So, in regards to your earlier question, maybe those are some other stats we can look at. I do agree with John's premise that K (/9, %, whichever) gets valued disproportionally higher in many cases. At the end of the day, you can find many ways to skin the cat. Right or wrong, the Twins seem to prefer GB% and BB% over the others. However, while the Twins have found pitchers good at GB% and BB%, they are really bad at K% and arguably not good at XBH% (although more defense dependent). It seems logical that you have to be at least marginally capable in all of those areas to be better than marginally effective. It's far beyond my skill level, but is it possible to find some sort of exponential equation to value a pitcher based on being good at some or several of these that also de-values being really bad at some? Park and defense factors would be a challenge, but ie - (GB% + or - from league average)^exponent + (K% + or - from league average)^exponent + ...

I completely agree on all points, but his recent playing time would seem to indicate we're inching towards it. Something at the MLB level has to give. If Hicks, Arcia, and Willingham are going to play, I'd rather see Parm in AAA with Colabello as a bench option. Maybe Parm comes back for good if/when a mid-season trade takes place. Ramirez has been okay, but I wouldn't mind seeing Colabello replace him outright now.

Ah, I see. When you look at a stat like FIP, it's solely based on those three you pointed out -- K, HR, BB. They also all have the strongest correlations here among the single outcome pitching stats. So, without going into multi outcome stats, I think you answered your own original question. However, I think John's point here is not to discount K's entirely, but that people single out K's too often and the signficance placed on them is a good bit greater than their actual value... especially among the fans in our base who have been rather starved of such value.

Might it be the young OF/1B who has only started 3 of the last 8 games?

In our legal system, a new ruling does in fact invalidate the precedent. However, I wouldn't make the blanket statement that all previous decisions were defective because our morality, as supported by the laws of our elected government, continues to evolve and we certainly still have much more evolving to do. We rarely make decisions that weren't defective in the prism of the past based on the many things we don't know or understand at the time.

Future MLB All-Star or not, at least he's definitively better than both of them!

Nice points, Alex. You're absolutely right, but I don't see using multi-outcome stats to evaluate a player as a bad thing. I don't necessarily care how the contributions came about whether it was a single, walk, double, or homer -- I only care how that player contributes to the team winning over the long run. We win on offense by scoring runs, so the stat that best tells me how a player is contributing to scoring runs is by all means how I want to compare him to others. Same argument for WHIP. Both OPS and WHIP are extremely easy to understand and come from basic stats that fans are familiar with. They remove the specifics of "how" and focus on the result. They also both tend to be strongly predictive of future performance. These stats are better evaluators than any signle outcome statistic which, frankly, I don't think we should use much at all.

This is on point. If you have two pitchers with the exact same stats/results but one guy gets more strikeouts, that guy is going to make more money. You almost hate to say it, but I have to believe this is at least a part of the rationale behind the Twins' strategy.

I was pondering something yesterday... Can you think of any changes in law to social issues that were based on equal rights that we came to regret? Plenty of laws have been faulty, but those seem to have been focused on outcomes rather than simply rights. It seems to me that the preponderance of them are at most minor inconveniences to those who value the previous traditions and tend to be things we look back on to say "we really used to do/forbid/think that?" I prefer the government weren't involved at all, but they sure seem to have had a few things right in that Constitution of ours.

Nice write-up on some lesser known draft prospects. I can't say I have any personal cheeseballs, but you sure did give me a hankerin' for some fluffy, crunchy, and delicious cheeseballs.

Chris had a monster game last night! 3 for 4, with 2 HRs, a double, and 5 RBIs. He hasn't had any problems adapting to AAA just yet and continues to mash. On the season, he's in the top 5 of the Int'l League in AVG, SLG, OPS, H, 2B, HR, and RBI. His 10 HRs have him tied for 2nd with some guy named Danny Valencia. .340 / .395 / .621 (1.016) !!

His BRef page shows he's only dabbled a little in the OF. A total of 11 games over his career (including the Indy Leagues). It certainly wouldn't hurt his chances of making it up to MLB, but it doesn't look like a concerted effort at this point.

Brock, I think you've nailed the Republican party's biggest problem. However, I think that disconnect is more prevalent in the far-right religious conservatives than the Tea Party... which is actually an even more striking hypocrisy. The TP just gets all the media attention.

Which was better... this catch or the robbery that Hicks put on Dunn?

Assuming continued health, the starting pitching looks like the key question. Shocker, I know. The staff needs to get about a run better in ERA just to be in the middle of the AL. If that were to magically happen, we'd definitely be above .500.

Definitely a fan of loading up on more pitching in this draft. Maybe they can focus on MI on the Int'l market?