The_Phantom

Homer bailey’s last 5 seasons. 22-39 5.56 ERA 79 ERA+ 4.71 FIP 1.532 WHIP 10.6 H/9 1.4 HR/9 7.3 K/9 And that’s INCLUDING his decent second half of last year, which you have to take with a grain of salt because virtually everyone pitches well in Oakland with that mammoth foul territory to catch pop ups

Then use the Red Sox. They went all in to acquire Chris Sale. And won a World Series in his second year. Then he was bad in his third year and now they are handcuffed possibly facing 4th place, trying to free up some payroll. Yes they have the resources to recover faster, but who cares. They got the job done and got to fly another banner

I enjoyed the seasons that we were losing 100 games more than I've enjoyed feeling lied to this off season. "We will step on their throats when the window is wide open" or whatever the exact quote was. Win 101 games, still not willing to take the risk to make the signing. Yes. You absolutely sign someone like Ryu to a 5 year contract and try to actually make it past the first round of the playoffs, and maybe even win the entire thing. If you make a legit run and even win the whole thing, it's worth it when, at the end of that contract you're back to struggling a little bit. Ryu's fifth year likely won't even be any worse than whatever our current #5 option is anyway. But this is legitimately the biggest opportunity we've had to make noise in a long time. Maybe the best team since the 06 team at full health. It's beyond a little frustrating that the FO couldn't pony up and actually take a chance at giving the fans a postseason to remember.

This is just being fairly dishonest, TBH. I am sure there have been some free agents with geographic preferences, but most of the time we hear that we weren't willing to offer that 5th year that the other club met, or our AAV was 5 million less. We can't expect free agents to think Minnesota is a lovely place to live and therefore take a lesser contract offer. It's as simple as the Twins aren't putting up the biggest offers so they're not getting the biggest free agents, despite the cash being there.

“Rocco was vastly superior to Byron numerical at this stage in their careers.” “He then got in less than 40 games in 2007 and 2008 due to an undiagnosed medical condition.” “It was the mitochondrial channelopathy that would also abruptly end his career as a 28-year-old in 2010.” “Minnesota’s front office was cutthroat, and the player was within his rights to feel like it sucked.” Typos, grammatical errors, unnecessary thesaurus use, and awkward informality all within about 1.5 paragraphs. Man, this was a brutally bad read. Anyway, Buxton has been a fan exercise in frustration. He definitely still has the time and raw ability, but he has a long way to go. And there’s no point in denying that his beyond atrocious 2018 was one of the 3 or 4 main reasons the twins underperformed (Sano and Molitor being two of the equally obvious ones). Buxton pulled off an Amazing feat to have a negative wRC+. I really want to feel like if he doesn’t turn the corner this year, it’s time to move on. But the twins lack of major offseason activity definitely doesn’t indicate that they are in any kind of “win now” mentality so I’m sure we’ll see him continue to be given all the time he needs to adjust. Hopefully he eventually will

This is a complete 180 from the type of thing I was reading yesterday. How can the information be so grossly misrepresented... everything I read yesterday was saying things like "Sano was told to stop but instead ran over a cop". Hence all the calls for cutting him from the team. Reporting standards (not referring to here, just in general) need to be better.

As far as arms getting blown out by the end of the year, some of that falls on the manager and making sure guys aren’t getting overused

More substantiated proof. Also, a second strike.

Hawk Harrelson is saying Molitor is a great baseball guy so Levine and Falvey are idiots for firing him. And "if they were so smart they'd be on wall street". As far as I'm concerned, if there was any doubt whether that was the right move (there wasn't any) Harrelson getting up in arms about it is the final seal of approval that it was right. That guy's baseball knowledge is a vortex of nothingness.

Hey good work on that research. I don't think those numbers are terribly important though. Straight up "record in close games" is probably a better tool, but really even that is not perfect. When you massively overtax your bullpen and always take your starter out at 100 pitches no matter what, even when the pen is taxed... and so your pen gives up 6 runs. That ruins "close games" AND it affects the pyth. W/L calculation. Pyth is pretty much just if you are scoring more runs than your opponent overall. It's an interesting thought. Because a W/L better than your Pyth could very well mean that you are winning all your close games and only losing when you get blown out. But that's one of those things that in practice probably just isn't as clean cut as that.

But Betts is the best of that group, and he was left in to face him to get to 100.

Big shock, the batter that berrios crosses the magic number is his last. Lol we could just put a buzzer in an earpiece and when the 100th pitch is thrown the player can just walk out. No reason for a mound visit. Autopilot manager.

It's hard for me to agree that he's got a high baseball IQ when every game, no matter what the situation, he goes on auto-pilot and pulls the starter at 100 pitches. There's no thinking to it. If a pitcher gets to 100 pitches during an AB (or 99), that's it for their day. If he's got a high baseball IQ, he really needs to learn how to use it. Because it comes across as daft and not knowing how baseball actually works to always pull a pitcher out based on a magic number. Additionally, remember when he completely butchered a double switch... Also, the time that he let Odorizzi hit. And then pulled him before the next inning started...

This isn’t a complicated issue at all. Molitor strictly adheres to the magic 100 pitch count notion, even if a starter is at something like 5.2 IP and only allowed one run. He very, very rarely stretches the starters beyond that. Whatever batter faces the 100th pitch, that’s the last batter the starter sees. So our bullpen, especially Reed, is horrendously overtaxed.

Dozier will be in boston

Yeah, the Gomez for Hardy trade wasn't a bad trade. The trade that we made to get RID of hardy, however...

list of good times to bunt on the road: Literally never.

That's because Molitor has NO clue what he is doing. Simple as that. 8 walkoffs isn't a fluke, its poor in game management. Bunting at the wrong time, changing pitchers at the wrong time, etc

The thing is, it IS overhyped but you still can’t have a useless player in there. Rodney giving up a bunch of runs in the 8th would have been awful too. Have a good bullpen and there’s not a reason to pay a premium for which inning they pitch in. Rodney isn’t a good reliever, closer or otherwise

Molitor, Lomo, and Rodney should all wake up to pink slips in the morning. This is 2016 all over again in the sense that they are going to dig themselves into a big enough hole that they cant climb out. Toronto always kills us too.

I expect him to be better this year. Baseball players seem to always go through peaks and valleys, slumps and hotstreaks. If he can keep his cold streaks in April, that makes me happier than in September and October when every game is crucial. But even a decent start is better than what he has been doing. He hasn't just been rough in April, he's been downright awful. He will (hopefully) always bring a lot of defensive value to the team, but the Twins will definitely need his bat to contribute too, mostly so the Indians have less of a chance of running away with the division like they did last year.

Yeah. He's making a fantastic showing in spring training. But so did Park and he ended up back in Korea after a poor year in the minors. It's nice to have optimism that he's turned the corner, but we also need to keep expectations in check, especially with that absurdly high Babip.

And that is a completely fair response. I agree with you that I would be mad in that situation. I think in a case like that, it's certainly acceptable and a reasonable concession of posters for you to be able to change an offending word in the post. So I would agree that it is better for you to have the ability to edit out select words/maybe even partial sentences without having to remove an entire post. It's only when it is enough removal that it risks changing the meaning or intention of the post that it is an issue, at least for me. If I had a surefire solution, I'd offer it.

Well, in fairness the suggestion you quoted actually included suspending/temporarily removing the post while it's "under review". And as to the rest, I don't think anyone is actually trying to downplay the difficulty of a moderator role on a forum, especially a forum that clearly has more stringent rules than the average forum. Which, appears to be paying off. I think the biggest issue is the ability to edit. As stated above, I think a lot of us are in agreement that we'd rather you remove the post altogether than to take a (sorry if this is offensive) dictatorial approach that you can edit whatever you want without any warning to the poster, besides it being stated in the "comment policy" thread. There appears to be an entire team of moderators, which can be a great thing. But that means that your responsibility goes beyond just editing whatever you want to edit. Part of the role of editing should be every post that gets edited is accompanied at the very least by a private message explanation. Certainly, at least, to a first time "offender". Otherwise it very much comes across as the moderators simply not agreeing with what you had to say and cleansing it to a more "acceptable" (in their eyes) post. You ask us to understand that you're people too and that your job is difficult. I think it's fair to ask the same in reverse. That we are also people posting our thoughts on this message board, often thought out and edited a few times before hitting the "post" button and it's only fair to think about our message before a post is instantly "cleaned up" to fit what you think is acceptable. Either way, I know you've already acknowledged that it's a deeper issue than was previously stated and I don't expect an immediate response to this. Thank you for acknowledging that some things may need to be discussed and I look forward to hearing what you guys have to say.

I am not really assuming anything, because earlier today I had a post edit that made no swipes at any posters and had an entire paragraph removed with no explanation whatsoever. The paragraph was, in my opinion, a pretty important part of my point and its removal changed the tone of the post completely. It was a two paragraph post. The theme of the first one was to point out that no one besides Betsy and Miguel know what actually happened, and everything else is pretty much hearsay, and if anyone had actually seen anything then they would have been interviewed as part of the MLB investigation. Then that flowed into the next point that MLB likely exhausted their resources to the best of their ability and didn't find anything so we need to move on the best we can and not point fingers. Apparently that second paragraph met the code of conduct, but not the first. There was no personal attack there, no foul language, nothing directed at any one person, really just (When tied into the second paragraph) tying into the thought that people need to be careful how hard they point their fingers in either direction. As edited, it was more just about that the investigation did its job.