ewen21

What does this have to do with the topic being discussed?

It's baseball! There is no clock so you keep in plugging away because you are supposed to. It is the spirt of the game.

Maybe my reaction was off so I will also apologize. On Murphy and Hicks, I thought that was a decent trade because both teams had a surplus at the respective positions. I figured Murphy would be a good receiver and a guy who can hit about .260-.270 with like 12-15 home runs a year.

I don't have any trouble with you or anyone being optimistic about his future. MY problem lies with people who reconstruct what I say and then try to force me to defend things I never said. Personally I am not optimistic about his future, although I feel it is too soon to "give up" on him.

For whatever reason, he has not hit in the majors this year and he has continued to not hit in Rochester. Making honest observations about is performance isn't allowed when looking at the "big picture"?? I guess if we are attaching excuses they aren't. HOw about this.... It's been a very bad year for Buxton's development and there are valid reasons for concern

The Twins are working with him down there and I have seen at bats with and without the leg kick. If this isn't enough to recognize he has a problem right now I am not sure what it is going to take

What is unclear about what I wrote? I understand perfectly what you wrote and I do not agree with it. I am not going to write off migraines as nothing, nor will I write off what he does when he is on the field. I won't discount the entire season as "well, he was injured" because he was lousy right out of the gate again. His propensity for injuries is a big concern, especially since his game is predicated on speed. He was good enough to run all over the outfield after he returned, but he can't swing a bat or have pitch recognition? Did you see him the first half of last year? What is the true Buxton? I have no idea, but you seem to have the market cornered on this. It is his second half last year! That's wonderful thought and If you want to only consider the postive and hope for the best I won't stop you. Please do not, however, completely mischaracterize what I say.

I understand that a lot of people like to "see the positives" but it should not come at the expense of seeing the whole picture. I have stated and restated that Buxton's second half last year should have no more value than what he has done the first half this year. Please stop intentionally recrafting what I said. It is just silly.

He also seemed to have no trouble bursting into full speed chasing down balls like the one he did in Seattle when Cruz went yard. He can run like that with that toe, but can't swing the bat?

Even after I have clarified you still are going to insist that your cockamammie twist on what I said is my opinion. Again, I am saying Buxton's second half last year has no more value than what has happened during the first half this year. That includes EVERYTHING since the season started in Baltimore.

I love that mindset. Just give guys at bats at major league level even if they don't deserve it because it worked with Kent Hrbek 35 years ago. I am not into giving players an endless leash. A lot of people felt Buxton should simply play everyday in CF this year. Just put him in the lineup no matter what. Well, it got so bad that couldn't happen. When you grant a player that much leeway while other players remain on the tight leash it screws up accountability and this organization has had a lot of problems holding players accountable. If Gordon heats up and has a great second half in Rochester and proves himself worthy then I am all for it. To make out the 2019 roster now is absurd. Too much stuff on the horizon we cannot even begin to be able to predict

Funny how some people in this thread have found a single sentence in a couple of my posts and pit it against other things I stated explicitly in the same post. Why do people intentionally misinterpret points they don't like? Is this an attempt to find a contradiction? I think what I said was quite clear. TO summarize: 1. Buxton and Hicks are not comparable 2. What Hicks has done in NY is irrelevant to how Buxton will proceed in this organization 3. The Twins have done a poor job of developing players as evidenced by the way players succeed after they leave and flop when they are here, or in the way hyped and touted players haven't panned out. 4. What Buxton did in the second half last year is no more important than what he has done this year Anyone disagree with this?

Ummmm. So what is the trouble? HIcks COULD BE helping us as well if he were here and playing as he is now, just like Murphy. Point is, other organizations seemed to know how to coach them up.

I never did expect him to be what a lot of other people imagined. He had a brilliant year of hitting in the low minors in 2013 and that accounted for almost 37% of his minor league at bats. He hit .334 and since then he has been up and down and injury plagued. As far as the expectations go? I always had tempered expectations and never projected him or any other prospect. I generally do not partake in that game. I leave that to the psychics who can use numbers to read the future. I was not the one bestowing over-the-top accolades on him. I thought they were equal parts unfair and ridiculous. I surely hope that the next crop of young players don't get the same amount of responsibility, praise and expectations heaped on them. Let them develop in the minors and let's see what the hell we have. People were way too presumptuous with Sano and Buxton.

Where are you getting this? I was expounding on what could be the reason why was Murphy was good in NY, awful here and now good again. THat is more an indictment of the Twins ability to develop (I've stated this explicity) players than anything. Murphy and Hicks got away from here and have flourished. Any idea why that is? I am sure wondering how this happens

His propensity for injuries, his penchant for crashing into walls and history of migraine headaches are there and a factor on what he's going to accomplish as a major leaguer whether anyone wants to discount it or not. I don't discount entire seasons because IT HAPPENED. Whether it is any fault of his or not.

Lamenting? No, I don't think so. Life goes on for me if Buxton doesn't pan out. The kid needs to tighten up his game in many areas, most specifically the mental part of the game

And what I "literally wrote" was completely misinterpreted by you.

We discount the collisions, the migraines, the time off the field and the horrible composite hitting when healthy? Sorry, no. His ability to stay on the field is part of the equation as well and if he continues on this path where is he going to end up? If he gets injuries next year do we again "discount" and entire season? I am not hearing the "if only he was healthy" garbage. YOu just want to talk about the good things. The second half of last year was a glimpse of what he COULD BE, but is that what he WILL BE? This year is another glimpse of what he could be, as ugly as it may be, it is REALITY.

I think if you are going to interpret what I have said in your own words you really need to be more accurate. I think the first half of this season is as indicative of what he can do as anything else, including last season's second half. What you did was nothing more than an attempt to marginalize what I said and you used a cheap tactic that is all to prevalent of message boards, that is...if you do not like a person's take simply restate or rephrase, intentionally misinterpret, make up a silly claim the other person never made, then pawn it off on them as if that is their opinion. A load of BS. I never said that and my post doesn't in any way suggest a 50 at bat sample is more important than the second half of an entire season. Then again, let me ask you something.... Are you trying to tell me what he has done since this season began needs to be completely discounted in favor of what he did in the second half of last year? If so then you have a bias that isn't allowing you to see the whole picture. Is not what has happened this season (almost 3 1/2 months) indicative of an alarming trend? I am looking at the whole picture.

They were patient enough with Hicks. He was traded for a catcher who could be helping us greatly right now. The problem lies more in the way the Twins develop players. Hicks was horrible here and he probably was not going to be the player he is now with the Yankees here. He was also expendable because a lot of people assumed Buxton would a our perennial all in CF for the next 12 to 15 years. We needed a catcher and John Ryan Murphy was not a bad choice. He actually had a decent track record in NY, but he came here and failed miserably. That is on him, but how can we not wonder what the deal is when suddenly he is now the player he was on track to be when he was a Yankee. Another thing..... Why is this 1,000 or 2,000 at bat benchmark thing so important? We cannot judge or make reasonable comments on a player with 500 or 600 at bats? I think it is fine to do that and I think that Buxton right now is scary. How can he be THIS bad?

Just because you didn't see that doesn't mean it didn't happen If you follow this team and want to be honest about it I can't see how you can't make the distincition between how much Buxton was praised, touted and hyped as compared to Hicks. Another difference between the two is that Hicks hasn't been injury riddled and his game isn't predicated on speed. Another very big difference is that Hicks got into a different organization and for all we know THAT is the main reason why he has blossomed. Buxton (and Sano), to me, is/are an indictment of how poor this organization is at player development. Obviously the purpose of this thread is persuade people to stay hopeful and not be too critical of the guy. I get that, but just because other players have started off poorly and recovered doesn't mean this player will. Raher than make comparisons to other players (been done a lot with this player) how about we simply observe and comment on what we see instead? Right now he is barely hitting .200 in AAA after over 50 at bats and he is striking out about 40% of the time. This is the reality and we have no crystal ball so.....what are we really talking about?

The big difference between Hicks and Buxton is the fact that HIcks was never touted to be some five tool superstar type. He was never ranked the #1 prospect in baseball and was never considered to be a cornerstone player. Hicks was more of a project. I remember reading about him after the draft and he wasn't even sure if he was a pitcher or an outfielder. His dad was bitter toward professional baseball and he was made out to be a guy who could be on the PGA someday. Buxton is an entirely different story. The praise for Buxton was oozing through the monitor anytime I read anything about the guy. He was looked at as a generational talent. To compare him to HIcks ignores so much of the context that it is indeed pointless.

How players play seems not to matter. All this talk earlier in the year about just throwing Buxton out there and giving him at bats because he "isn't going to learn anything at AA" while he hits .150 in the majors was maddening to me. Don't call up players that are not hitting. Period. The problem is, Rochester is a consipiracy of ineptitude offensively

Huh?