Doomtints

I'm happy with 7-6. I would also be happy with 6-7 or 5-8. The team is playing well but we know they are not going to the playoffs. What I have seen is impressive and good things are on the horizon.

I agree. It's not just a valid discussion but an essential discussion and it will be an extremely interesting one. But I think it's still too early, people are still too passionate about it, ballplayers and teams are still unwilling to talk about it. At some point someone will write a great, comprehensive book about what happened.

So you give up the top waiver spot just to dump Santana? Why not dump Santana for someone in the minors and keep your waiver position?

- You're completely making it up that Hicks can hit 20 HR. The most he ever hit in a season was 14 -- and that was in AA. - It doesn't matter if he can steal if he can't get on base. - His defense was the best the Twins had available for a couple of years. Note this is a different statement from him being an outstanding defender. His numbers actually look close to Rosario's numbers, and there are a lot of people who complain about Rosario's defense. - Hicks's switch hitting is a joke. He can't hit *righties*. How he has been able to survive in the league even this long with this flaw is amazing. - He is nearing 28. It's time to stop talking about his potential and start talking about who he is. The decline for most players starts at 28, you know.

That was my argument during the offseason, that there was no way the return could be better than what Santana will offer. The holes were just too big. But as time goes on and people move through the pipeline and as Santana's contract gets closer to the end, it starts to make sense to move him.

They made this mistake a couple of years ago. The Twins still have a thin pitching staff with not much in the pipeline. Unless they want to buy, they have to sell. They can't just hold pat. Do you think they will be buyers if they are around .500?

League average hovers around .300. It's a decent way to predict the "luck" of pitchers, but it's not as good at predicting "luck" of hitters because some hitters can hit directionally very well. That being said, new data is showing that "good" pitchers are "good" at inducing weak infield grounders which would boost BABIP even on a defensively challenged team. If you watched the World Series last year you know this story well (and know how dull it is to watch as a baseball fan). But no, he's not likely to have 1-hitters the rest of the way through 2017 unless he is shooting for the MVP. Buxton, et al,, have done a lot for Santana this year.

ResistBot - Text Resist to 50409. Faxes your texts to your representatives in Congress. https://resistbot.io/

Yep. I love Santana but if his stock remains high it's time for the trade. With only 1 year left on his deal there will be suitors this time, the risk of him falling off a cliff and being stuck with him is lower.

Rincon was legit for a while. So was Romero. The two of them were key assets on some very successful Twins teams. I crossed it out for a different reason, because it's not proper.

Plus, 1200+ OPS is *always* a fluke.

I apologize for my part in this redonkedonk conversation. I saw the bait but still could not resist. See you in the other threads!

He was out of options, I believe. As to who he was blocking, way to be selective with your names. Let's review the OF talent last year. - Sano - he was blocked by Plouffe at 3rd. - Max Kepler - out of options. Do you lose Kepler to keep Hicks? Puh-lease! - Rosario. Better than Hicks. - Buxton. At his worst, he's the same as Hicks. That's a full outfield and you're not even getting into Grossman and Santana yet.

What's surprising is that this is surprising. Most pitchers who had no hitters are "legit." Most pitchers who stick around as long as Santana has are "legit." Most pitchers who juice are "legit." To me, this proves that a lot of Twins fans get stuck looking at stats that are less relevant. When I looked at Santana I always saw a rising star, provided he remained healthy. So while many of you looked at FIP and claimed Nolasco was a great pick up, I looked at other things and predicted Santana was a great pick up (and called Nolasco a stupid move from the get-go). Ya'll gotta look deeper at these things.

Bringing up Hicks having a good week is trolling. Not the epic trolling that the imminent Dozier trade thread was, but trolling nonetheless. I give this one a D-, since this one has been done so many times before. What sucks in my view is that fans claim Buxton has turned the corner every time he has a good week, just like what was done to Hicks. They both look equally lost at the plate. With Buxton's ceiling I'm all for "giving him time" but we gotta stop claiming guys are fixed after a couple of weeks. Twins pundits did not learn the lesson that Hicks gift wrapped for them. Adjusting to the majors is a process, not an event. No young player is 100% after one good week or even one good month. Hicks (and Buxton, for that matter), proved to me that the "tools" conversation is a bit daft. Hitting is the essential tool, if that "tool" is failing miserably the other tools do not matter. In his era, Michael Jordan was considered to be the best athlete in all of sports. He certainly was very "toolsy." How did his MLB career pan out? It might be a good time to review the threads just a couple of weeks ago about how Buxton was about to be a power hitter. You'll find the same crazy stuff in old Hicks threads I'm sure. After that, try to resist throwing your computer out the window.

Not understanding the suggestions to platoon the team's best hitter. Keep him in the lineup until he regresses, if he ever does.

The only thing serious about SDI is that it is seriously flawed, but that's a discussion we probably should not get into again. Dozier is below average in some defensive categories but he's not as bad as SDI claims (because SDI counts each trait multiple times with the result being an inverted bell curve). To answer the question "How much can the defense improve" -- quite a bit. It's a young team that was at or near the worst in the league. There are two options -- stay the same (not likely given their age) or get better. There will be some clown defense at 3B which we will just have to accept, otherwise I think this team will start showing itself to be very good defensively.

Nice points that would fit wonderfully into a completely different conversation. But for this conversation what you are saying is 100% irrelevant. If you collectively increase a group of pitchers from 0.00 ERA to 2.00 ERA, the net result is 2 more runs per game. Tyler Duffey's personal ERA is a completely different topic and utterly irrelevant to the point. Everyone gets it that Duffey isn't pitching 9 innings. And he doesn't have to because we are talking about THE TEAM'S ERA.

I always considered him to be underrated. Not surprised at all. We got lucky in that him being underrated allowed him to fall to the notoriously cheap Twins.

I was expecting someone to say that. But you are wrong. If the 6 Twins relievers who currently have a 0.00 ERA had a 2.00 ERA instead, what would that mean?

What the starters did is only half the story. 6 of the 8 relievers have a 0.00 ERA. What happens if everybody has a 2.00 ERA instead -- still an outstanding achievement? The 2 extra runs per game makes the end result look very different: Game 1 - W still goes to Santana Game 2 - Still a W, but the W could go to a reliever (depending on when the 2 runs are scored) Game 3 - Game would be tied going into the bottom of the 9th. Different pitcher gets the W or its a L. Game 4 - Game tied at end of the 9th. Game goes to extra innings. Different pitcher gets the W or its a L. Game 5 - Still a L. Game 6 - Still a W, but a reliever could get the W. If the relievers allowed just 2 more runs per game, for an outstanding collective 2.00 ERA, the starting staff would be looking at as few as 1 wins so far and the team could have dropped 2 more games.

You could argue all of the wins are due to the relievers. They have been stellar. All I can say is the 1.61 ERA they have right now is unsustainable unless they now have the best bullpen in baseball history. If it turns out they have merely a "good" bullpen, their ERA will more than double over the course of the year. That's still good (great by last year's standards) and will mean the Twins will get a lot of wins based on their bullpen performance. They won't keep winning at an .833 clip, however. Likely the bullpen will get over-used as the season rolls on, as the starting staff is still suspect.

Duffey can finally be the dominant bullpen arm he was meant to be. I have zero worries about him.

True. Most of the players in the league are already past the 'learning curve" and simply need to get loosened up and into a groove. They will be dangerous earlier than the Twins.

Thanks because I definitely did not know that. Back to the point. Hitting won't solve a pitching problem. As the Twins hitters get better, so will the hitters on the other teams. Let that idea simmer a bit.