The_Phantom

If that were remotely true, literally 100% of sexual assault cases would result in a conviction. The alleged victim's testimony is never evidence.

I obviously can't speak for everyone, but I'd much rather it be well known that the site (IMO) overreached and changed my wording than for something that is not actually my own words to have my name by it. As is you're literally making our posts say whatever you decide they can say and having our signature beside them. That's not right.

I don't believe that to be the case. I believe MLB's policies are likely far less stringent than a court of law where someone is, legally, innocent until proven guilty. Considering that another player was just suspended for apparently having a yelling match with his wife, it sounds like MLB found nothing to hang a case on. Which, again, doesn't mean nothing happened, it just means that they didn't even have enough to have reasonable suspicion that it did happen as she said. Perhaps more briefly, in a court of law reasonable doubt is enough to acquit. In a case like this, reasonable suspicion is surely enough to suspend.

I agree with this thread 1000%. Moderators should not have the ability to arbitrarily edit a post made by another member. As stated above, it truly can change the meaning of the post - or at least the intended emphasis on which point was supposed to be getting across. It's hardly fair to have some sort of authoritative hand that can erase, cleanse, purge, add, do whatever they like to someone else's post. The idea of a bold headline "this comment has been edited by moderators" is a fairly decent compromise offer, although I really dislike the ability for that to happen at all UNLESS it is an actually offensive or profanity filled post. Not just because a moderator doesn't agree or like how someone worded their point.

Probably because it was a cesspool of Mauer bashing and nothing else. But let's keep this thread on topic.

It still is circular because there is a laundry list of reasons the MVP voting hasn't always been reliable. I mean the notion that "you can't be MVP if your team doesn't make the playoffs" is just now dying. I could probably say even more recently than this, but with absolute certainty I will say that if 2016's stats happened in 2006, Mike Trout wouldn't be a 2x MVP. Mookie Betts would have, without question, won the MVP instead. Baseball writers also sometimes vote for their home team guy even if it doesn't make a lick of sense (though off the topic of my head i don't know any specific examples where that one has actually changed the outcome of a vote). To determine elite status i'd really rather look at how often they led the league or were at least top 10 in their league, rather than what flawed voters of the past had to say. But anyone with 3,000 strikeouts, let alone nearly 4,000 strikeouts, gets in my hall. Which i know you argued with longevity but I don't see any reason longevity is a negative. And honestly a good chunk of the guys in the 3000 strikeout club have a lower k/9 rate anyway.

I have issues in getting behind the idea of basing HOF vote off of Cy Young and MVP vote totals. You're effectively saying "you don't deserve votes now because you didn't get votes then". It's kind of a circular argument. I especially have issues with it right now, when most of the players that are up for vote are really being judged with different criteria than they were in their playing days. Up until a few years ago the best way to get cy young votes was to get to 20 wins. Now, most writers barely look at the win column because we've realized how team dependent it is. So since you're looking at two different sets of data/criteria, it doesn't make much sense to me to judge it based on how they were voted for previously. That same argument can somewhat apply to all-star selections. There's also the fact that he was a much better second-half player. Which All-star game tallies aren't going to account for. Career 3.12 ERA in the second half is very very good. The strikeout/9 point is a very interesting one but like you pointed out there is a lot to be gained for longevity. PS not trying to derail the thread away from santana, just wanted to point out that I thought blyleven was snubbed for years.

I didn't realize Levi MIchael had been switched to Center Field this year.

Personally I don't get why people think Blyleven is borderline at all. He's top 40 bWAR of all time, including position players. He's also top 20 (16th) in starting pitcher JAWS, 11 points higher than the average hall of famer. His strikeout totals are insane. The only traditional knock against him was that he came up 13 wins shy of 300, but pitching wins are now widely considered an outdated stat as far as overall importance. I think he was getting snubbed for years.

Here's a non-twins question for you: In the Dodgers' game last night, Hill lost a perfect game in the 9th on a Forsythe error. The ball was hit sort of right at him, but took a terrible hop at the last second and hit him in the upper chest and popped up into the air and far enough away that a play was impossible. How often is that scored a hit vs an error? Seemed borderline to me, but they're obviously going to give a guy with a no hitter going the benefit of the doubt

107 games .298/.360/.646 (1.006 OPS) 41 home runs 86 RBI 13 stolen bases 25 Doubles According to Baseball-Reference those are his combined "Second-Half" (which I believe is post all star break) numbers for last year and this year. I wish he would produce like that in the first half too, but if you extend those numbers out from the 107 games to the 162 games, you have a guy with 62 home runs, 130 RBI, 20 stolen bases, and a 1.006 OPS. Buxton is improving fast and Berrios is showing signs of his potential. I don't know that trading Dozier is the best bet at this point. I would be on it if the return was big, but I would rather us add a couple pitchers this off season while KEEPING dozier. If Dozier is what it takes to get the best pitching prospects it might be worth it to move him, but that's a lot of second half offense to give up.

This is apparently still a huge problem with Sano's game. He was up in the 9th with the bases loaded last night and flailed at two straight garbage pitches low and outside. Obviously we needed those insurance runs. He could be such an elite hitter if he'd figure this out

Where did he rank in that last week out of curiosity? Missing on the same pitch repeatedly for the last 6-7 games is nothing to be ignored.

Agreed. His clearly have gotten around right now. Just hoping he makes some adjustments quickly.

I haven't heard much talk of this year, but I have lost track of how many times in the last week and a half or so that Sano has struck out on the exact same pitch. Put a curve ball just off the plate away just below the knees and Sano will go for it every single time. Sano is a big part of our team this year and pitchers have figured him out. He needs a steady diet of curveballs in BP until he can recognize that pitch, I'm a bit worried about how long that is going to go on

I don't think I said anything about Spring Training? But even if I did, Vargas regular season numbers haven't exactly lit up the scoreboard either.

Well, perhaps. But that certainly wasn't the case the last time I saw it come up here. I am pretty new so i haven't figured out how to search out old posts I want to find. But one post was talking about Babip (and I don't remember if it was Buxton or Rosario or even someone else) but the post commented that their Babip was down in the low 100s and the league average was around .270 so it HAD to come up. And that's just not the way it works.

It's seemingly being used as a blanket "bad luck" stat. This thread said Rosario had an unsustainably bad Babip but now it's getting higher. Not all Balls put in play are equal. If a guy is popping up all the time or if he's doing a lot of bunting, or in Rosario's case, hitting a lot of soft ground balls, that is not "bad luck" that the defense is getting to the ball. It's just one of those stats that you can't look at one number and apply it as if it is a tell all. Buxton and Rosario are both struggling to hit the ball with authority. Rosario has 6 line drives, Buxton has 4. The low Babip is a byproduct of weak fly balls and soft grounders (As in just missing the ball). It's being applied as though the struggles are BECAUSE they are putting the ball in play and it just happens that a lot of the times that it's being put in play they are still getting out. Of course they are getting out when its lazy flies and dribblers.

I think there's a slight misunderstanding of Babip happening on this forum.

I do believe that Park is better than Vargas, yes. Enough to change the 40 man situation? Well, I believe so. But point is taken that at least Vargas should be on the roster.

Oh I agree. In the long run. But right now the swinging out of his shoes approach is just leading to strikeout after strikeout after strikeout after strikeout. So *for now* he needs to be a little more like Ichiro. And once he can actually register MLB pitching and get a firm grip on what he is going to be seeing, then in the right situations try to knock one out of the park.

Yeah the idea that Buxton getting earned criticism is fans *wanting* him to be a miserable failure is asinine. Those of us that are being critical of him (I am more than happy to lead that charge, I think he's overdue for a demotion, mostly to be actually taught about situational baseball) actually very much want him to succeed. I bought into the hype that he was going to be the next big thing not only for the Twins but for the league. But 15 games into the season and his K/AB ratio is still about twice as high as his OPS... there's some writing on the wall. The biggest problem isn't that he's in a slump. The problem is he's trying to just power his way out of his slump. A few days ago the two guys in front of him both struck out on 3 pitches. A good hitter would think "this guy has nasty stuff" and shorten up to make contact. Buxton took 3 huge uppercut swings. He had an interview during the game the other day about how much fun september was and how he enjoys playing the game like a kid where he can just dive around the outfield and "See how far he can hit the ball". The last few days he's done things a little bit differently. I don't know if he was told to do this, but he came up with two outs and men on first and second and he decided to try to bunt. The problem was he just bunted right back up the middle to the pitcher for an easy out. While i was glad to see him not swinging for the fences, a weak bunt wasn't really the right choice in that situation either. It's not just a slump. He has issues mentally in the game right now.

i think the Twins are crazy for not having Park on the team, honestly.

Exactly. Buxton is doing a terrible job of trying to make contact right now. He is up there swinging as hard as he can on most pitches. It's crazy. He's skinny. Yes, he has enough power to get it over the fence, but nothing about his body type says that that should be his primary focus, but mentally it is. He is incredibly fast. He needs to sit in a room and watch Ichiro's career for a while. There are times that, once (if) he becomes a proficient hitter at recognizing MLB quality pitching, he should be trying to lace the ball as hard as he can. But right now his ONLY asset on offense is his speed. So he needs to do whatever it takes to utilize it. Take as many pitches as humanly possible to draw walks and steal bases. Bunt. Slap the ball through the hole the other way when a runner is on first. Small Ball. He looks like he thinks he can be Barry Bonds but he's not.

Yes and honestly I spent Sano's entire AB wondering why they weren't giving him an IBB to load the bases for Mauer