markominne

OK. The off-season is now officially too long....

Are we feeling a little defensive these days? I don’t believe I said - or implied - that everyone on the board held any particular opinion, my first point was about the net improvement in the Twins lineup represented by the Cruz signing, and just merely an observation about the trend (which I find humorous) for some people to negatively react against nearly any move made by this, or the prior, FO. There were 4 points about the Twins in that post, the substance of all of which you ignored to nitpick about an opinion that you disagreed with.

1) This board cracks me up! All year we’ve had people criticizing management for building for the future with young guys; they sign Cruz and now they’re overspending on a proven veteran! There is no question that this strengthens the lineup; a lineup that inarguably under-achieved last year. 2) The Tyler Austin/CJ Cron decision doesn’t bother me at all - with the depth in the minor leagues, I could see either one being a one-year (or partial year) hole-filler. 3) I would argue that starting pitching is not a priority: could it be improved? Yes, but what team’s rotation couldn’t? I’d say Falvine should be aware for opportunities, but shouldn’t go overboard. 4) Finally, if I were in charge of spending the Pohlad’s money, I’d go after David Robertson for the bullpen, and ping the Marlins on JT Realmuto now that the catching market seems to be settling down.

I realize that our “group think” on this has gravitated to the whole “The Twins are just being cheap”, and “They can’t compete without signing Darvish/Cobb/Lynn/whomever”. However, I’m thinking that Falvey & co. have taken a broader, holistic view of the pitching staff, that is there is one pitching staff, not two (starters and relievers). While the addition of Odorizzi and Sanchez to the potential starting staff rotation may not excite us, when combined with returning starters (Santana, Berrios, Gibson, Mejia), guys returning from injuries (May, Hughes), and prospects (Gonsalves, Romero, others), I cannot think of a time when there were as many legitimate candidates. Not top-5 starters in MLB, granted, but just as important, when combined with a bullpen bolstered by the addition of Rodney, Duke and Reed, combined with Hildenberger, Rogers and several high-potential prospects (Busenitz, Chargois, Curtiss, etc), along with some of the people who don’t make the rotation, appear to me to hold the promise of a MUCH improved pitching staff. Just a contrarian view, I guess.

For those of us out of range of the Twins broadcasts, take a look at the MLB AtBat app for your smart phone - for $21 for the season, you can access the audio for any game, and you get to choose between the home and visitor broadcast, plus often the Espanol version!

Good discussion. Heezy1323, though, may be establishing a disturbing precedent here, offering up professional experience instead of amateur speculation! ;-)

Trading Ervin makes no sense if the Twins think they will contend next year (they should). Trading Suzuki is problematic; after watching Centeno play hacky-sack with pitches in the dirt the last few days, and with the dearth of catching in the minors, unless Mitch Garver can make the jump they really need Suzuki, not only this year, but perhaps next year, as well. Moving Plouffe has to happen, but in August will likely depend upon a third baseman on a contending team going down; he's too inconsistent to be valuable just as an extra bat. Kintzler, Milone, Boshers, Park and Grossman should all be available should any other team come calling. All are replaceable with people on the roster or in the system, imho.

I'd have to say you run the risk of widespread ridicule for proposing a real, practical step towards resolving this mess. Unlike many here, I'm not inclined to write off every member of the staff and every player on the team. However, this is the season the Twins have been building towards, and by the beginning of May they have played themselves out of any hope of contending this year. With the draft a month away, they cannot just fire everyone, but clearly the direction of the franchise over the past 6 to 8 years has resulted in a team without clutch hitting (and don't tell me that it doesn't really exist!), heavy in strikeouts (except for the pitching staff), no catching, and poor fielding. The pitchers can't hold on runners, the catchers can't throw them out, and on the other side of the ball, the Twins have no apparent clue as to how to run the bases. Shuffling in and out over-the-hill or never-were veterans to attempt a short term fix makes no sense - the idea of bringing in a president of baseball operations over the team makes perfect sense.

Thanks, John. Interesting article, with real implications for Twins and others. While using statistical correlation can yield misleading (and sometimes hilarious) positive correlations, an extremely low coefficient (and .07 is VERY low) is pretty much unassailable, if the population is large enough. Here the population is small, but the subjective evidence (the 2012 Giants and Yankees, the 2011 Cardinals, the 2001 Mariners ... and the '87 Twins, to name a few that come quickly to mind) certainly would reinforce the idea that just getting to the playoffs is far more important than how a team gets there, and that running away from the field provides no advantage. I'd always suspected that running away from the pack in winning a division was a disadvantage relative to the team's chances of success in the postseason. This correlation indicates that that is a falacy, as well. It's not an advantage, or a disadvantage; it's statistically irrelevant. I'm guessing the article won't be popular with the "Tear down the Twins and start over" crowd, but those kinds of arguments are what the postseason is for, right?