Trov

Personally, I do not care DH or no DH, but now that interleague play will never go away, we need one rule to play by. As pointed out the DH allows some great hitters to keep playing later in their life as a DH. One thing I would point out, is until Astros came to AL to even leagues at 15 each, there was only 14 AL teams for years so even less teams that did DH. I agree that with the change in way game is played DH will happen I think in both leagues. This does not mean when you get a pitcher that can hit they cannot be allowed to DH on games they do not pitch. Look at Otani. McKay from Rays is being used in duel roles at times. Funny how there is now a rule that position player cannot pitch, unless extra innings or a huge gap late in game, but yet pitchers can play other positions and hit. The DH is not an easy spot to fill, it seems like it would be, but look at many long time greats that would DH and play positions over a year. Many would hit better when they were in the field than when they DH. Not all of course, but many have talked about it is a mind game you need to work through. I know when I play I hate sitting on the bench, even between innings of fielding I will walk around and never sit, could only imagine what it would be like to sit and watch for innings except for the short amount of time you are hitting.

I wrote a comment on this the other day. If interleague play is increased, and under this plan it would be, we would be without one of our best offense weapons for a larger percent of games. In a 162 game schedule you play about 9 games at NL parks, under this plan it would be 82 game scheduled with about 15 to 20 at NL parks. That is huge when you plan to have a DH for 153 games of your 162 games, versus 65 of your 82. This one means you are paying a player to do less, but also you did not plan for this. The NL teams would be at no disadvantage because they just get to have more games with DH, and their pitchers have hit for years, some AL pitchers have not hit for a very long time and spend no time really working on it all.

The fact that the players do not want to be in a city they would need to rent a place. That was one of the major things I read players did not like about the AZ FL plans. They would be away from their homes and family for months with little to no chance to see them. Sure they could try to bring family with them, but that means uprooting their family as well. I know I would not be happy to have to be away from my family for 4-6 months I was not expecting. Also, the additional cost of having to have a second home in the short term home area. Travel is not an issue of safety, as they charter planes anyways so only team and team officials would be on plane, but an issue of time. With having less off days, this would be less travel days, so reducing the distance on the plane helps. I mean you can have 9 game road trip and between the travel sites never get on plane if you do Milwaukee, Chicago, Chicago trip. Fly to one, that takes an hour, then bus between Milwaukee and Chicago takes like an hour to two. Also, I wrote in another comment in the past that the home place is not just about fans, it is about the team set up for the park. Our team is set up to allow fly balls, but we are in a park that tends to be little in favor of that, not like some but much better than others. Imagine if we had to play all our games at Yankee stadium, not that it would be likely, just using as example. HR fly out of right field like none other. There are many other HR friendly parks that would not serve well for our pitchers. May be better for our hitters, but you build your team with fact that 81 games should be played in your park.

Baseball has always had "shifts." Now they just get more note as there is more exaggerated with moving players to areas they traditionally did not play. For decades corner infielders would play in, drop back, play on line, play off line. These are all shifting of defenses to take away certain type of potential hits, depending on situation. Middle infielders would go to "double play" depth, or move deeper in hole or more up the middle, now they just swing even further. Outfield would move closer to gaps or certain sides of field, play more in, play more out. The concept of shifting defenses around depending on hitter, and situation is not a novel one. Now teams are taking a more extreme approach based on percentages. I forget who made the quote, but I remember hearing "hit it where they aint" as a quote for successful hitting. Now the players are just moving to different places, so you can still hit it where they aint. I cannot stand the people that want to input some rule to stop "shifting" I mean will there be a rule that players must stand in a designed circle on the field before the pitch is thrown? Will there be a requirement of all infielders stand on the dirt, or in front of a line drawn on field for astro turf fields? What happens when the old 5 man infield would some times come into play, can you get an exception? What is the outcome of a violation? I remember a story of Satchel Paige once telling his defenders to lay down, would that be allowed? Could a corner infielder come in to take a bunt away? Could a corner infielder guard the line? Does the manger have to ask the umpire if his defenders can move because of where the runners are on base and outs in the game? Do you need a waiver to try and get a sneak pick off? I have racked my brain thinking of a workable rule and nothing comes to mind. So lets just let defenders play where they want when they want. Let the hitters hit the ball, if they want to try and beat the shift great. I mean we never called it beating the standard defense if you got a hit before. Remember when hit and runs happened, players that could hit behind the runner in the vacated infield were regarded. Should the defender not have gone to the base, should he have stayed in his non-shifted place? If teams start to care more about OBP again over slugging, players will start to hit against the shift. I remember when teams started to move the SS much more up the middle and the 3rd bases man off the line against Joe. Then his hits he got early in his career were taken away. Should we ban the defenders from standing in the exact spot that a hitter is most likely to hit the ball? Gone is the lets try to cover the most ground, to lets make sure we cover the ground the ball is most likely to be. If only 10% of the time the ball is hit on the left side of the field, why would you use 2 defenders to guard that area? 90 percent it is up the middle or pulled, so use 75% of your infield defense to guard there, and the other 25% to defend the less likely area. Of course, as those numbers of hit percentage change the defense should too.

Most HS players that would not be drafted in top 5 rounds normally know that and already have a college plan. Even those that are have college plan. If they did not have a college plan, then most likely they would sign the 20K. I was mainly referring to those players that have a college plan already that they are less likely to sign. For some, they choose the pros because they do not want to go to school, they know there is no way they will be making majors for several years, but would rather spend full time on baseball. However, if you are hoping to maximize your earnings going to community college or returning to college for year to hope to fall in top 10 the next time around would be advisable over a 20K bonus if you were thinking you were a round 6 to 10 player.

From the proposal submitted by MLB I do not expect players to agree today. I think they will come to an agreement, but as the players union president stated, the 50/50 split is a salary cap, something that has been sneaking into baseball with luxury tax, but players have been against since FA started. So they will not just say yes. However, if the alternative is no money, that is hard to swallow for players. Sure many would be able to survive for a year without getting paid, if they planned ahead. Not many people expecting to get paid plan to not too though. For the people that just want the owners to pay full prorated contracts and most likely lose millions of upon millions of dollars, because they can afford to, you most likely have never owned a successful business. The owners do not own teams because they are willing to lose money. Sure, some owners make so much money with other business and willing to just break even for wins, but those are also when owned by single owners. Most teams are owned by groups with a main owner. Many of the minority owners will not say, hey it is fine if I lose millions this year. Business do not live long if being operated in red for extended periods. I think both the players and owners should think about the "regular employees" that need the paycheck and what a full no season would like for them. Already, many employees are not working and won't work even if a season does start with no fans. Many teams have agreed to pay these people for now, but for how long? If owners need to pay players more that may make employees get laid off. Overall, the owners always hold all the power. They can just say no season no one gets paid go find a day job, to the non-superstars that have already been paid. It always comes down to the owners on if baseball happens. They do it for money, not charity. They do it get our money to put in their pockets. They need the players to have a product, but this day in age, this is not the owners main source of income, but a side job. Players have grabbed a lot of power for themselves with having no salary cap, but the owners could shut it down completely if they wanted to. I am not saying either side is right or wrong to want what they want. I am just point out who has the real power, but as these two side fight over money, it affects many people that need their paychecks. Owners want to make money, so do the players. For that to happen they need each other.

I expect very few players to sign the 20k. The only players that would are players that do not want to be in college and are not expected to be in top 10 next year, or if they expect a similar draft next year. That really is the issue what will next years drafts look like? If I was advising a player, if they are drafted out of college, sign for sure because no clue what future will look like. If they are not drafted and are out of high school, if they have any interest in college go, at minimum go to community college to start, one of the good baseball ones. If they are in college now and go undrafted if they have graduated college and do not want to return, as NCAA has given all players extra year of eligibility then sign, but only if they do not expect to be a top 10 next year, or if they believe in themselves so much they believe they will rise quickly. So much to think about. 20K is not much money for someone who will be getting paid less than a living wage in the minors. You got to love the game to go that route.

What I mean is if you increase the amount of teams into the playoffs you increase the likelihood of lessor teams advancing in the playoffs. Of course you will not always have the "best" team win the WS, but if you knock out better teams by pure chance by a lessor team, it will make the later rounds potentially less entertaining. That was more the point. Also, if you expand to allow in more teams the regular season becomes more pointless. Some argue, that by expanding playoffs more teams figure they are "in it" later into season and continue to draw interest. However, I feel if you expand too much then you make the regular season a joke and there is little interest in it. Right now the typical bench mark is about 90 wins to make playoffs. If you made an 8 team per league playoff look at last 5 years, you would average 2 teams at or below .500. Only 1 of those would have been at .500 Personally, I do not want teams that were below .500 making playoffs, but to each their own. Additionally, if you expand playoffs you would either need to reduce regular season, which I doubt will happen, or take playoffs into November, which then would either require neutral site games, or having games played in snow, which already is possible but would increase if you play into mid-november.

Since minor league baseball is unlikely to happen, or at least like we expect. I bet teams will seek to have their players come to spring training facilities and work out there with inter team scrimmages to stay sharp and work on things. One thought I just had to get full games in and would test the full depth of a team's system. You play double headers almost every day, but allow for 60 man roster where players can be interchanged regularly, and no 15 day list, only 60 day to get someone on 60 man roster. You pick 22 guys per game to be on active roster, the 4 less is for the starting pitchers that would normally not be available, but if a game goes into extra innings you can bring in 2 additional pitchers. This would allow teams to get the games in, but not overwork the players. If you wanted you could even have an A team and a B team, but would not have too. How do you social distance, you only have those 22 guys at the field any given game, and have the potential extra pitcher near by in club house or hotel room ready to run over should he be needed. Would lead to some interesting resting and subbing decisions for teams. It would really test the depth of a system as well.

For the three changes, the only one I am on board with is the universal DH, or no DH rule. If you are going to have interleague play, you need one set of rules for all teams, not two different ones. This season, you will need to increase interleague play it would seem, so this makes it even more important. Expanded playoffs would be terrible idea. Baseball is a difficult game to always have the best team win, even in a series. To expand playoffs would weaken the regular season and weaken the playoffs as a whole. Right now it is 10 teams, 5 in each league. That is enough. If you expanded to even 12, former NFL layout with top two teams getting a bye, having a three game series for for remaining teams and move on that would weaken the playoffs. We have seen seasons were teams get super hot and fly through playoffs getting to WS then cool off after lay off and get crushed. By giving a bye this would lead to teams risking that. If you went to 14 or 16 it would get even worse with poor teams getting to playoffs and get lucky knocking out good teams in a best of 5 or 7 series. Neutral site WS is even worse idea than expanded playoffs. Teams have constantly built teams to fit their ball park, or ball park to fit their teams. Imgaine a team built on good OF defense with fly ball pitchers in good pitcher park having to now play all their games in a hitter friendly park that routine fly balls in their home park now are HR. You can do neutral site when the dimesions of the playing area are the same, like other major sports. Baseball has always had home field advantage not just by rules, but by design of fields. Also, unlike football where fans will flock to super bowl because it is the super bowl, fans will not flock to neutral site WS games. Maybe in a game 7 only, but not in the rest. Of course this year may be the exception with no fans so you take fans out of it. Also, if WS needs to be in November neutral site may be need for this year alone, but never moving forward when a season can be back to some what normal, even if fans cannot be there, but timing can be.

I would not put Nathan at top, only because he never got it done when it matter in the post season. He would be my number 2. Aggie would be my 1, but remember he did spend 1 year as a starter after he came back to Twins, maybe not full year but part of a year at least. Aggie got it done in playoffs. Nathan sure could dominate at times, but he had some blown saves in post season and that hurts.

I agree the Atlanta in Central and not Pittsburgh makes little sense. Even more so, when Rays are in the East and have to fly past Atlanta to get to most games. Also, Pittsburgh and Cleveland are closer to each other than Pittsburgh and any of the other east teams. However, there will always be some teams that have to travel further. Personally, I think the most viable option is the the Spring training homes would be best for play, but players have biggest push back. The travel is the least, can be done via bus, you can use the minor league fields for the simulated games for minor league players for replacement due to injury and the like. However, players and their families would not want this right now. I am wondering how the DH rules will be. Will they go like normal interleague play where home team rules apply, and of course have significantly more interleague games? This really puts the Twins at a disadvantage when we would be relying on so much from our DH in the offense. Now, half the road games would be played without DH, that is much more than the about 9 road games it was. So then Cruz would be sitting 40 games just because pitchers would have to hit. This would greatly affect his contribution to the team. Additionally, depending on schedule he could have long stints of not playing at all, I bet if there was a 9 plus game NL road trip Mr. Cruz might have a sore ankle that lands him on the DL for 15 days.

Two ways you can answer your question. One, what is his net WAR at SS compared to all other SS options WAR. That is a straight math question, with some speculation of course because unless they play there no way to know their actual WAR. However, it looks like this. In 2019, despite his negative DRS, according to baseball reference he has positive DWAR, kind of odd since many metrics has Polonco as worse starter around defense wise. However his total WAR was 4.8. So, unless we have someone that can put up a bigger WAR, then math says Polonco stays at SS. Of course, much of that WAR is from offense, so you could move him to a different position, which then the math just converts to total team war with plugging in each player at the position. We assume the most likely spot polonco would go would be 2nd base, since throwing is his main issue. So does the replacement at SS have higher WAR than Arrez does? Really, you need to keep dragging this out to so many defense options, but they got people to do this. Option 2, is decide how much the DRS is needed compared to others that could do better. Most of the time, top defenders are not top hitters and vise versa. Much as you stated Jeter by metrics was terrible defense for years, but he was the captain and many believed he was better at defense than he really was. Really, Polonco can stay as long as Twins want him to be there. There is no bar that one must be above to play a position. If the Twins feel him there is best for team they will play him there. Hard to replace his offense. If he drops in production then he will get moved sooner than later. If there is a shift to ground ball hitting again, he may get moved sooner than later. If someone pushes him out because they hit like him but field like Ozzie, he will get moved.

Now if only he can be more efficient with his pitch count and get an extra inning on average per start, he could become ace level pitcher. I know we have transition to using the pen much more, which I have no issue with, but getting only 5 innings per start from a guy that is supposed to be top 2 pitcher on team just still does not seem to sit well with me. What is interesting about the spin rate, is of course it is something that always played a factor, it just was never quantified until recently.

Why not scrap the draft all together and go with a roulette type thing. Each team picks one player they would like to draft each round, no duplicates allowed. Then you put those names on a giant wheel and each team gets one spin. After each team spins you get the player you landed on, unless another team did as well. Then of course there would be a player or players not picked, so what do we do? Simple you take the duped players and non spun players onto a second wheel with again only the teams remaining to spin. You continued to do this until each team gets a player. You do this for however many rounds you want to do for drafting. How do we figure out bonus pools you ask? Greedy players and their agents always wanting to make sure they get the money they deserve. Well I have that figured out too. The first player named in each round gets that round slot bonus value. Then instead of a draft number attached the player will have slot value attached. For example, say the number one overall gets 5 million, and number two gets 4.5 million, and joe bob gets named first for the wheel, no matter what team gets job bob his value for bonus pool is 5 million, and you can sign him for whatever value you want but normal rules apply. Imagine the trades that would happen after the "wheel of fate of future ball players" event. Just a thought.

This article showed the serious problem the Twins had in drafting and why they failed for so long. When you have 2 whole draft classes with 1 MLB player in it, that is poor very poor. Yeah some years will be lean and some will be huge, but when you had picks as high as they did for years and get crap from them. Ugh hopefully those years are behind us.

I doubt you will find too many of these anymore, except for players that drop because of signing issues. Yeah, there will be a few that slip through cracks, always will be, but with high school show cases all over now players will get on radar much ealier and with so much digital video passing around less likely someone gets missed on. Think Hrbek growing up in 70's in cold Minnesota, not a hot bed for talent, despite three HOF players coming out of Twin Cities during that time, Molitor, Morris and Winfield. All three of them went to college to better show case their skills. I doubt many scouts ever saw Hrbek growing up. Not a Twin, but to me the biggest draft find of them all is Mike Piazza draft in 62 round as a favor. 1389 players picked before him.

First, as pointed out the Twins were in a very different position in 2012 than they are now. They were not on the verge of winning, but clearly the cubbord was bare, thanks to Smith win now moves. We had talent in low levels but still a couple years away, and hardly any pitching at any level. So the trades made, although not really paid off and better ones could have been made, were not all that bad under the situation. The writing was on the wall and the Twins needed to reload the system, and as pointed out Span would be wasted, so why not get value for him than let him toil away losing value, because it would have got us maybe an extra couple wins? Revere was who he was, a good defender overall, with no arm and good contact hitter but no power. He never really grew beyond that and much like Span would not have added much during those years. Now, if Twins just trade a guy because others have promise would be ill advised, I would agree. However, past trades should never affect how one makes decisions in the future. If you believe in your prospects and believe they are the better player, trade the MLB player for something of need and play the prospect. If you are not sold on them and the MLB player will add more wins to the total keep them, it is that simple. The line "The Twins should stay put with their outfield and wait for Kirilloff and/or Larnach to prove themselves at the major league level before handing them playing time." is a logical contradiction. The only way either can prove themselves at the MLB level is if you do not stay put with who you have. Unless you assume injury, but that is still not staying put. So assume no injury then only way someone gets playing time is if you do not give it to who you have now, which would mean they will never get to prove themselves because you will never give them the chance because you will be staying put until they can prove themselves, which can never be done. Ugh my mind hurts thinking the circles of arguments that drives this. However, the point to just trade someone because you believe you have an unproven replacement when you are in win now mode does hold water. However, to compare the Twins now to back in 2012 is also flawed as they were not in win now mode.

First guy that came to mind was Joey batts. He owned the Twins at Target field no matter how poorly he was hitting he always crushed Twins, and having Donaldson hitting just before or after I hated watching Toronto games. This made me think of Ellis Burks for Cleveland in early 2000's. He also would crush Twins. Specifically, he would crush Rick Reed. Thome was on those teams too and it was just as bad trip through line up as Bautista and Donaldson. For whatever reason players seem to have teams they love to play against. Right now Kepler loves hitting against Cleveland, maybe less so with no Bauer pitching against him. I remember Luis Revas, not a great career but he hit like half his HR against the Royals.

I was thinking the same thing. To me what points out to Didi is the last year he did not performed well against too many people, but still killed the Twins. Made me think of who else killed Twins but struggled against other teams.

I think Heywood is the better manager, he is forward thinking and was ready to embrace the new shift in baseball strategy. He also would think more than "what the book says" type approach. He would let Lou swing away thinking about how having him bunt would crush the middle of the order. Heywood is willing to pull of trick plays, however, he may get distracted with the duel roll of owner and manager, those two hats may be difficult to switch between. Lou on other hand makes his hitters do push ups if they hit the ball in the air. However, I much more loved the don't give a crap attitude of Lou Brown. You want to manage Cleveland this year? "Hold on, I got a guy on the other line about some white walls." How about pissing on the contract of Dorn.

I cannot speak to what sign stealing Worthington found to be cheating, but unless it involved using non-human methods, I would not find that cheating. If players can see in and see the signs and figure out what pitch is coming and can signal the hitter, to me that is not cheating. However, what the Astros, and other teams were doing went way beyond that. Using closed circuit camera feeds, a computer algorithm, and from the dug out banging on a trash can is crazy. I mean, for years catchers would use multiple signs when runner on second, sometimes even when runner was on first, but never with no one on base, until this. As long as the game has been around there has been teams trying to gain an edge, and as long as it is a skill of the person, that is not cheating. Just like in Blackjack, counting cards is not cheating, it is using a practiced skill to help gain an edge. Why do players cover their mouths with gloves when they are on the mound, fear of a lip reader on the team learning what they talking about, should anyone have that skill. That would not be cheating, but a hidden mic in the pitching rubber hearing everything would be. I personally do not even think using video of past games to try and figure out signs from 3rd base coaches is cheating, if you want to take the time to crack the code and the opposing team takes no steps to change it.

To me, not all injuries can be prevented no matter how you prepare. Buxton shoulder was not because Twins did not do their best to keep him healthy, it was because he slammed it doing what he does trying to make great catches. Sano cut his heal doing non baseball things in off season. These are not team medical problems. The fact that no pitcher had any major issues is a big thing, and if that can continue year in and year out that is something to emulate. Injuries from work load, or bad mechanics that are not corrected are a system issue. Injuries from broken bones or non baseball actives are not a system issue. So the longest injury that to me is from system issue, was Astudillo, but is it really system or player? I like Astudillo overall, most likely because I am chubby myself and imagine I could do similar things when he runs the bases, but that chubbiness will lead to longer muscle issues most likely.

Say what you want about Eddie, and maybe the numbers do not back up what I am about to say, but there is almost no one else I would want up in high leverage situation than him. He thrives on "clutch" situations. He seems to excel at them to, or maybe he just gets more chances not sure. I know teams are always willing to pitch to him, assuming they can throw anything up there and he will chase, but he seems to come through. Again, no numbers to back this up, just my perception. That being said, I would welcome bringing in Kiroloff. I expect big things from that kid. From moment they drafted him I thought he would be a great hitter. He has done nothing to make me doubt that.

I really hope our farm system starts to produce MLB pitchers like Cleveland has been. That is what was promised when we got new GM, he was the pitching guru of finding talent and setting up development. I have always be of belief having good pitching prospects are better than position players. For one, 12 and 13 man pitching staffs now lead to more of a need, and teams always seem to be seeking upgrades at pitching. Where some position players will get blocked by others, so then their value drops in possible trades. Pitching though, you never hear a team say we cannot upgrade at pitching, so every team always willing to deal for pitching, and also with pitchers facing full season injuries or more than other position players need to replace them and have quality in the wings is also very important.