Doomtints

It makes some sense to "ease in" pitchers. Molitor likes to call them up the same day they pitch. This hasn't worked well. It makes zero sense to "ease in" position players. Molitor calls them up and sits them on the bench and plays them out of position, then sends them back to the minors without having gotten a look at them. Trying to figure out what Molitor is thinking is an exercise in futility. His decisions are bizarre.

You ask this knowing that Molitor is the manager?

During the offseason, they largely did what I would have done (albeit slower). At the trade deadline they largely did what I would have done (but not exactly). The biggest problems are the decisions not around those two events. The issues: 1 - It's rare for a communication problem to be so bad in an organization that it's visible to outsiders. 2 - Whether you agree that Molitor knows the fundamentals of managing or not, it should be obvious the Twins won't win a championship with him. 3 - The Twins bullpen was not good at the start of the year and they managed to fix it ... but they didn't realize they fixed it so they kept tinkering and made it worse. There wasn't much they could do about the injuries and suspensions but both showcase how thin the team's talent is.

Yes, those are the theories. I haven't seen any data to back up the theories. Whatever data exists may or may not be compelling. I suspect it isn't, because if it were you can bet more people would be throwing the data out there. To me, this looks like nothing more than a way to pad the W stat for your "starters" by not having them actually start. Why? A "starter" would no longer need to go 5 innings to get the win, they could pitch for 1 inning and get the win. Managers can pull the starter at any moment and not feel the pressure to keep them in for 5 innings -- potentially padding other stats and not just the W stat. This increases the market value of your starters should you wish to trade them for better starters later on. This concept is a trick to raise the market value of your team, not to win more baseball games. Using relief assets when you need them rather than to start a game is a solid approach and will ultimately continue to be the status quo. The starter concept tries to solve a problem on the baseball field that doesn't exist. Sorry, Twins, but you misunderstood why the Rays are doing this. Using a fresh arm when the starter runs out of gas is infinitely the approach more likely to win a baseball game, not trying to delay the inevitable by having the starter come in later.

Sure, but what made this game embarrassing was Belisle and the fact that the Twins weren't plating runs. We always knew Odorizzi isn't an ace. He's performing like a #3/#4 pitcher, which is exactly what he is. The Twins have to hit much better if they want to win games not pitched by Cy Young. If you can't score 4-5 runs, you're going to lose most games.

Don't forget, once a pitcher is out of a game he is out for good. A team has painted itself in a corner if a game goes long and they blew through a pitcher in the first inning.

Smoke and mirrors won't dazzle opposing hitters. They don't care who is pitching. The Twins are overthinking this. Better players on the field will beat "the opener" concept every day of the week.

Stewart would have his first win if he had started the game.

Yes. "Gosh, I guess we didn't talk to Buxton much this year. What a shame, it seems like he really coulda used that. We'll try again next year." "Yes, I'm here at the Winter Meetings to represent the Twins. I still haven't spoken to my new bosses yet. I think I'm being traded so I'm not sure why I'm here." "I heard I was being fired as a minor league manager via phone call from a middle manager in the org. While I was doing yard work." What the heck is this?

T.W.I.N.S. Twins: Winning Is Not Satisfying

Seems like bull*** games don't mask your lack of pitching talent, it simply exacerbates it. But hey, if it's going to be either 4 runs in the 5th or 4 runs in the 1st, if it's in the 1st I am free to go off and do something else.

I'm not concerned at all about losing him. I pointed out the following: 1) If he is good, the Twins want that extra year so they won't have to pay him. Then he leaves because they will claim they can't afford him. 2) If he is bad, they can cut him without having to pay him. I made the (rather clear, if you read everything I wrote instead of reacting to a snippet), that the Twins argument is bunk because the result is the same either way. Buxton won't be a career Twin. Since the Twins don't want to pay him, the only thing they gain by sending him home is slowing down his development, and thus slowing down the Twins playoff chances. Basing a decision now on a money issue that won't actually exist in five years is daft.

Who said otherwise?

Wha? He's getting the league minimum for as long as the Twins will want him in either case. If he has an MVP year, he walks.

Morality is how you treat the non-super star. Yes, it matters how they treat Buxton regardless of his future fame. And if he pulls off that MVP year, that extra year of "control" means having to pay more to keep him. Salaries in the MLB go up drastically each and every year. Unless they don't want to keep him regardless of how well he performs?

1) The Twins want the best players NOW, not just in 5 years. Good organizations manage to have both. 2) In 5 years, the Twins will also want the best players AT THAT MOMENT, not just in another 5 years. Good organizations manage to have both. 3) In 10 years, the Twins will also want the...

Right. He was playing well. The end of the season is the best time to get reps for someone like Buxton, and he's on the 40-man so he wouldn't be taking anyone's place. Even if they rarely play him, he should be with the team.

You just described exactly how he would win a grievance. If he is being sent home to play with his X-Box because he has to "heal" the Twins have to prove he is injured. The rules of baseball dictate getting three doctors to sign off on it. The player is allowed to bring in doctors as well, and the MLB will follow up with even more doctors after the Twins submit this to the league. Nothing would change (he would still sit out the rest of the year because this would all take a long time), but none of this would work out well for the Twins. The Twins would lose the coveted "extra year of control" at a minimum. If the Twins want to keep him away for service time concerns, they should NOT imply he is injured at any point in time to anyone. Doing so will not work out for them.

I suspect that announcing to the opposition that you are going to do a bull*** game defeats the purpose of doing a bull*** game. The Twins have announced they are doing three more bull*** games in the immediate future.

Not really. He needs his reps to get better. If the Twins blew the relationship, we can point to this as a reason why ... yet another mismanaged move by this organization. The facts we know: 1) Buxton was playing well in AAA. 2) Twins brass admitted this decision was going to taint their relationship with him. 3) Twins brass admitted this decision had nothing to do with how well he was playing. 4) Twins brass suggested this might set him back even more, and they will have to work hard to keep him happy in the future (also suggesting they weren't working on the relationship at all before). The non-facts / opinions / predictions / inhumane takes: 1) Buxton might always suck anyway, so none of this matters. 2) The Twins can just trade him, because players picked second in the draft grow on trees or something. 3) Buxton has no choice but to play well if he wants a job, so who cares how the Twins treat him. 4) Another year of Buxton at below market rates ("One more year of control") is somehow best for everyone involved. (It's only best for Mr. Pohlad. For everyone else, including the fans and including the future playoff hopes of this team, it is worse). I like it better when baseball fans stick to the facts instead of going with their opinions, because incredibly bad takes like the above are what always comes out on the opinion side.

The Bull**** game didn't seem to work out well. In fact, this is embarrassing ... as bad as the 2003 Tigers.

Shutting down Buxton is a decision that reminds me of some of the decisions under Bill Smith. It's nonsense and everyone can see it as such except for the front office.

For old time's sake, every once in a while they let Terry Ryan take control of the steering wheel.

Cool. Let me know what you find. Here's a link which might help. https://www.baseball-reference.com/players/split.fcgi?id=schwaky01&year=2018&t=b I'll be extra helpful. Here's an image.

OK, then let's go this way. 1) Kyle Schwarber only lead off once this year, he typically bats 5th or 6th. 2) Kris Bryant does indeed bat 2nd often (though usually he bats 3rd). I have no problem with that with his high OBP. Don't use secondary sources, look at the data. Schwarber isn't the leadoff hitter for the Cubs.