Blog Comments

I believe there should be a "?" at the end of the title, not a million "!"

I also am not in love with the way the "closers" are used in today's game. When did it start? Eckersly? I think it takes away some of the creativity and options from managers, but if I'm being honest, they all do it because it works most of the time.

I agree, it was my outlet at the time, so I used it that way. Adult beverages were definitely the gateway for my rant, I apologize.

I appreciate that this is a blog, but these thoughts would also work well on the drunken rambling thread... agreed though, IMO there are some situations that call for bringing in your best reliever even if it isn't the 9th inning with a lead. For me though many of these instances come in the 8th

I got the data from ESPN Minnesota Twins 2012 Pitching Statistics - ESPN, sort by team/year. I just did the math on my own. Obviously games started, and QS. I was curious the other day remembering watching every game last year on how I would just hope we get through 5, and then this year how much more innings our starters have the potential of throwing. Makes the hope for twins winning much better. I was very surprised doing the math it turned out the way it did, I have to admit I was getting tired, so I only did about half the teams.

I'm really surprised the correlation seems to be this close. Thanks for putting this out there. I'd be very interested in a more extensive study. Is there a site someplace that lists how many quality starts each team had last year and the year before?

I always like to read a article that is positive about the Twins.

Nice article, interesting correlation. I have to say, I am shocked that the best QS% of any team was just 60%. I would have thought it be closer to 80%, but apparently I have not been paying close enough attention.

I couldn't agree more on the "3 days without baseball in April" thing. It was killing me last night. It's bad enough around the All-Star break, but at least you can watch the All-Star game. But to not play that game last night just because it was a little chilly? I'd love to get the inside story about that. I think the Sox were screwing with the Twins (or just really, really desperate to get a few more thousand fans in walkup sales this year.)

Most of this could have gone into the 'Fun With Numbers' thread, but I like it broken out this way.

Fun stuff, well presented. And wierd.

With the exception of the debatable (and debated) choice of Robertson to pitch to Davis, Gardy's had the bench to make moves that put players in a position to succeed, and the moves have worked often enough. Now either the underperformers you named will step up to match the record being achieved, or the record itself is going to drop. Right now I'm not inclined to bet against the former, even if I wasn't forecasting great things before the season started. It's fun being a front-runner sometimes.

I'm fairly optimistic about Dozier this year. I hope this was just a bad day.

With Mastro being limited right now, Hicks stays in the 1 spot for awhile. If he continues to struggle in a week or two, Mastro probably gets a chance.

I was one of the people not happy with Parmelees ab's in Detroit, he was up in big spots and didn't produce. I said it then, and now, I like Parmelee, I was just frustrated at the way he approached the AB's, he hit a big HR vs Baltimore, he had a good game, I myself just need to be patient with the ups and downs of Parm. I would give him the longest leash of anybody. Hendriks is probably going to have the shortest leash due to the fact he had plenty of shots last year, and Deduno and DeVries earned there way to the rotation.

Mauer isn't a #3 hitter. #3 hitters have power. Roenicke is no surprise to me. Parmalee has had the best and most consistently good AB's in the 2 games in Baltimore. I heard a lot of negative comments about his play against Detroit but I'm not hearing any praise for his awesomeness the last 2 games.

Looking at the bigger picture, Mauer is a #3 hitter, assuming someone gets on base before him. It will help him to have those additional pitches to look at. Hicks is a mess. He will need to go down and just work his tail off. Question is...do the Twins promote Benson for the heck of it and start Mastro more often than not. They are giving Hicks a pretty good leash. The Twins could probably do without Carroll if someone would take him...bring up a 3B/UT guy with a bit more bench punch. Now, Butera making $700,000 looks really bad. I also feel for DeVries and Deduno, both who came up lame and may have missed the one big opportunity to shine. Both fell in the pecking order. Of course, Hendriks isn't showing improvement and we have yet to see Hernandez. So, who knows.

Nothing like spring time with the strains of "One Shining Moment" bleeding into "Take me Out to the Ballgame". My brothers and I still sing both to each other.

Great post.

I agree with #5. Why not hope? If the Twins allow 100 less runs ...doable...score 50 more runs I think with Morneau and Parmalee improving.. doable.. then they will be close to 500 and 80 or so wins. The Twins won the Series with 85 wins in 1987. So why not hope? Its much more fun.

I like the fact that you totally disagree for a debatable issue, which I figured a lot of people would be against a trade, but freeing up $23 million a year, you certainly can add more talent, when you have a 3 hole batter hitting 10 HR a year that will eventually be a 3B, or a 1B, you are tremendously overpaying someone, if he is a full time catcher he is worth a lot of money, there is no question in my mind, I am just not seeing that happen. I truly believe with the talent that is coming through with what is going to be smaller $'s to those players we can build a talent bench around that having open money to spend. If we are not going to resign Morneau, after next year you already have another $14 million to work with, and you have Parmalee taking over. Losing Mauer and having $53 million this year, another $14 million next year, we have some really good options to fill a talented team. The $23 million a year we are spending on Mauer is just too much in my opinion. As I said before I think Mauer is a good player, not worth $23 million a year player.

I dsagree entirely. I don't think trading Mauer is a good idea, at all. You are going to struggle to get comparable talent back. There is nothing in the system that can replace what he does, even if he is only catching half the games. Finally, I don't really see that his contract is big obstacle to being competitive. The issues are making good decisions and being healthy. Having more money to spent but having less talent to work with, because you have traded Mauer, isn't likely to make you a better team.