Made my first trip of the year to Target Field for last night's game. Of course, everyone knows that the Twins lost (again) to the Blue Jays. Further, the game featured a number of soul-sucking moments: everything from a dropped (or more accurately, unfielded) popup barely 15 feet from home to a number of extra bases being taken on sloppy or inattentive fielding to another 'let's get the suspense over early' spotting of several early runs by the Twins designated starting pitcher.

Nonetheless, I had a great time. Not as great as if the Twins would have won, certainly, but a great time nonetheless.

As I mentioned several times during the evening, what a great place to watch a ballgame! And what a perfect night to do it.

I used to travel for work fairly extensively around the US and when the opportunity arose, I'd try to take in a ballgame at the local yard. I'm sure I haven't seen as many stadiums (stadia?) as some of the dedicated baseball travelers who read and comment on this site. But, I got to a good dozen or so ballparks, including a couple of nice minor league facilities. Often, I had little or no rooting interest in the game. I just wanted to get out and see baseball in the elements - particularly because my favorite team played half of its games in an over-sized plastic living room with a blue tarp in right field and a beige tarp for a roof. We might have defended the old 'Dome against outsiders' complaints, but it was truly 'a face only a lover could mother'.

I recall one particularly lovely evening at Royals Stadium (pre-renovation, pre-renaming - it was truly "Royals Stadium" at that point). I don't even remember who was playing (other than the Royals). It was a perfect night for baseball - warm, cool breeze, shirtsleeve weather - and not a cloud in the sky (SKY!!). I remember that I wished that I could go to see my team play in those kinds of conditions. This was during the 'desert' between Kirby's retirement and the resurgence of recent years. So, the Twins weren't much good then, either.

I finally got my wish last night. Wow.

Yeah, it would have been nice if the hometown team would have won, or looked more competitive, or been higher in the standings, or...

But it was beautiful. And even though we will have to wait for better play on the field - the field on which they played (and the facilities surrounding it) made a night at the ballpark a worthwhile pursuit.

So if you're depressed about the 2012 teams, remember it could be worse. We could have to watch this team play in the Metrodome. (Some of us have.)

TR

So, how's my opening day wish list doing? About as well as yours, I expect.

But, since I don't have yours, I'm going to review mine.

So here are the 'original' wishes/hopes/dreams/fantasies - with comments after one month of harsh reality.

1) Mauer plays well and stays healthy and is in serious contention for a batting title and even MVP consideration.

Well, Joe's been healthy, at least. Even with the foul tip to the knee, he's amassed more plate appearances than everyone else except Span and Carroll - not coincidentally, the two guys who hit ahead of him in the lineup almost every day. He's performed steadily, if unspectacularly - sort of a Mauer trademark. But, no one is going to be seriously touting him for MVP at this point, and while he's eligible for the batting title (thanks to the aforementioned health) he's not in danger of topping the league leaders. A serious streak or two will be necessary to get him into contention. Grade: eh.

2) Dan Barriero is publicly ridiculed and forced to apologize to Joe for constantly bitching about him and mocking his 'commitment'. Maybe a 'Dunk Dan' tank is added at Target Field. I'd pony up $5 for three balls.

I'm making my first trip to Target Field this Thursday. I'll look for the dunk tank - but I'm not holding my breath. Grade: I wish.

3) Morneau stays off the DL for the entire season and has no concussion symptom recurrence. (I said these are 'hopes' right?)

Well this one's shot - mostly. He's riding the DL horse right now (or is that an exercise bike). And the only (small) consolation is that it has nothing to do with concussion symptoms. But wrists are pretty valuable to hitters. If this doesn't heal right, he might be looking at extended time away and limited production when he returns. Not much difference, really. Grade: sigh.

4) Liam Hendriks sticks in the starting rotation and draws (legitimate) comparisons to a young Brad Radke.

So, giving up homers was not the Brad Radke comparison I had in mind. Apart from a couple of mediocre starts at the beginning of the season, Liam has been pretty Lame. And now back in AAA. I'd guess we'll see him again, but the bloom is off the rose. Grade: fail.

5) One of the 'new kids' (Plouffe, Parmelee, Dozier, Benson, etc.) plays above expectations and generates some energy around the next wave of call-ups.

So far, so futile. None of the young-uns who started the season with the big club have done anything to uphold even moderate expectations - at least, not yet. Benson just got demoted, so he's receding from the picture at the moment. Here comes Dozier. Let's see what happens. Grade: don't hold your breath.

6) Willingham makes me happy about as often as Cuddyer did - and makes me frustrated less by not chasing low and away breaking balls for strike three.

Score. Willingham has been as good or better than everyone expected at the plate. Better yet, his strikeouts mostly come from missing good pitches, not getting fooled on out of the zone hacks. We weren't expecting great defense and he hasn't disappointed us there, either. Grade: even a blind pig finds an acorn once in awhile (see earlier post).

7) The Tigers' defense is more offensive than their offense. I look forward to many costly errors by Cabrera in games against the Twins.

Both the Tigers' offense and defense are roughly middle of the pack. Cabrera has a few errors, but Fielder has actually been a little better than average. Delmon's defense and his mouth have both been offensive. Grade: push. One of these two facets will likely deviate from current trends. Or not.

8) Leyland's classic overuse of starting pitchers comes home to roost this year. (I'm not hoping for injuries, just diminished performance due to overuse.)

Scherzer and Porcello are underperforming expectations. Hard to say that's due to overuse at this point. More data is needed. Verlander appears strong. And Smyly is young enough that overuse isn't much of a consideration at this point in his career. Grade: waiting; not that it matters at this point.

9) The White Sox lose 100 games.

Still possible. They're only 5 losses behind the Twins. Grade: hope is still alive.

10) Twins are leading by one going into the 9th - and I'm not dreading to see who's warming up.

A lead? Going into the ninth inning? What's that? I'm not really dreading to see who's warming up, anyway. Mostly because I'm fairly certain the Twins will lose the next couple of games even if they hold onto this one. Grade: defensive indifference.

...and finally:

I hope I have to make time to watch meaningful games (involving the Twins) in September and October.

Grade: looks like I'll have plenty of time to rake leaves.

TR

Opening Day is a time for hope.

So, while the Twins are still undefeated, I thought I'd fire off a list of things I'm hoping will occur in 2012. Some may be more realistic than others, heck I'm willing to admit that some are pure fantasy. But still...

These are ten things I hope to see in 2012:

1) Mauer plays well and stays healthy and is in serious contention for a batting title and even MVP consideration.
2) Dan Barriero is publicly ridiculed and forced to apologize to Joe for constantly bitching about him and mocking his 'commitment'. Maybe a 'Dunk Dan' tank is added at Target Field. I'd pony up $5 for three balls.
3) Morneau stays off the DL for the entire season and has no concussion symptom recurrence. (I said these are 'hopes' right?)
4) Liam Hendriks sticks in the starting rotation and draws (legitimate) comparisons to a young Brad Radke.
5) One of the 'new kids' (Plouffe, Parmelee, Dozier, Benson, etc.) plays above expectations and generates some energy around the next wave of call-ups.
6) Willingham makes me happy about as often as Cuddyer did - and makes me frustrated less by not chasing low and away breaking balls for strike three.
7) The Tigers' defense is more offensive than their offense. I look forward to many costly errors by Cabrera in games against the Twins.
8) Leyland's classic overuse of starting pitchers comes home to roost this year. (I'm not hoping for injuries, just diminished performance due to overuse.)
9) The White Sox lose 100 games.
10) Twins are leading by one going into the 9th - and I'm not dreading to see who's warming up.

...and finally:

I hope I have to make time to watch meaningful games (involving the Twins) in September and October.

TR

Huh.

Just saw the following story pop up on Zite.

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/201...&sct=hp_t11_a2

The primary thesis of which sounds an awful lot like my second point in the prior post - about the move of Houston to the AL leading inevitably to the abolition of the 'non-DH' rule.

I'm not saying Mr. Verducci snuck onto Twins Daily for column ideas. We just happened to be thinking along the same lines.

In case you're curious about how a professional writer addresses the topic - click the link.

This is probably the biggest blog 'scoop' I'll ever have.

I should quit now.

TR

I mean no offense, Allan.

You know the old saw about blind pigs and acorns, right? Proposition: Bud Selig is just such a blind pig. And a pretty lucky blind pig, at that.

I'm not a fan of Mr. Allan H. Selig. I harbor no particular ill will toward him - although he was in cahoots to contract my favorite team. But we have a (fabulous) new stadium now as our home for the foreseeable future. I'm willing to let bygones be bygones.

But Buddy has been a busy boy. He certainly wouldn't be eligible for the title of 'do nothing commissioner'. He has made changes both big and small during his tenure. I won't try to compile a comprehensive catalogue, but Mr. AHS has overseen the following changes to our beloved game:

• Relative stability in labor negotiations (following the strike of '94)
• Interleague play
• Wild card teams
• Divisional realignment
• Drug testing (after years of relative laxity) - for which the players union deserves some co-ownership
• Expansion
• All Star Game winner determines WS home field
• World Baseball Classic
• Revenue sharing

You are free to debate which of these are acorns and which are… well… not acorns. But it seems to me that many of Bud's brainchildren - many of which seemed like a pretty bad idea at the time - have eventually led to an overall improvement.

I speak as a traditionalist - I liked it most when you had to win your division to make the playoffs. Better yet when you had to win your league. This is not right or wrong, this is just my opinion - stated to put the following observations into their proper context.

Bud's latest two maneuvers are, I think good examples of the 'bad idea ultimately leads to good result' formula.

I speak, of course, of the newly added 'extra' wild card teams and the pending realignment resulting in two 15-team leagues.



Extra Wild Cards - subtraction through addition

I was not a fan of bringing wild card teams to baseball, even as it has proven to be a boon for attendance, revenue, interest - and even occasionally for the playoff prospects of my local team. Even with those benefits acknowledged, it still 'diluted' the playoff field and reduced the importance of winning your division. In fact, wild card teams have faired pretty well in the revised playoff format.

There have been 17 years with wild card teams in the playoffs. In only 4 years have both wild card teams lost in the Divisional Series round (about what you'd expect with a coin flip). 10 wild card teams have made it to the World Series (about what you'd expect with a coin flip). 5 wild card teams have won the World Series (about what you'd expect with a coin flip - are you sensing a pattern?). In other words, being a wild card has been no advantage nor disadvantage in terms of a team's likelihood to succeed in the playoffs.

Does this mean that the wild card was a positive innovation because the wild card teams are obviously 'playoff caliber'? Does this mean that the playoff 'tournament' is a crap shoot and any team in the bracket has a roughly equal chance regardless of their incoming record? Does this mean nothing because 17 years and 34 teams is a small sample?

I don't know about any of those, but it does mean that the team that didn't win its division has (thus far) had pretty much the same chance as the other three teams that did. I don't like that.

Enter Bud.

By expanding to two wild cards and by having those two teams face each other in a one-game playoff to earn entry to the playoffs, Bud has fixed this problem. "Subtraction through addition."

By definition, half of the wild card teams each year won't get a chance to play more than one postseason game. Further, the one-and-done nature of the wild card game will encourage each team to play as though their playoff lives depend upon winning -which, of course, they do. They'll pull out every stop to win that one game (use their best starter, stretch their closer, keep starters in a little longer, start a catcher who could use a little rest). Anyone who argues otherwise hasn't watched game 163.

The 'expected' result is that the wild card winner will enter its Divisional Series at a little bit of a disadvantage. It will be interesting to see if that's how it works out. But the point is that it will be interesting. The playoffs just got better and more interesting.

Of course, there's every chance they'll screw it up again. For example, they might expand the wild card playoff to a 'series'. That would be stupid, money grubbing, and a needless extension of playoffs. A one game playoff isn't fair, it's arbitrary and a little bit cruel to the teams involved. As it should be. Want to avoid that fate? Win your damn division. Expanding that playoff to even a 3-game series in the name of 'fairness' takes all the sting out of it. Will they leave it alone? Doubtful. But it will be fun while it lasts.


League Realignment - there goes the 'Non DH' rule

Bud wanted (really wanted) interleague play. I detested the idea. He got his way. It was interesting - for awhile. Now it's just sort of 'there' almost like a mini-exhibition season in the middle of the year. The games never felt like they 'counted' quite as much, even as my favorite team fattened up on NL competition. I think even Bud would admit that the novelty has worn off.

Hence, "let's move Houston to the AL".

Now we will have two 15-team leagues with constant interleague play. Open the season against a team from the other league? Yep - it'll happen every damn year. Interrupt your pennant race with a series in an NL park where your pitchers have to bunt, bat and 'be on'? Yep - count on it. That's just stupid. But, that's what we'll be treated to - starting next year - every year.

But… from such a giant turd a little acorn grows.

This change will lead to the ultimate eradication of the NL, "non-DH" rule.

I'll remind you at this point to scroll back up to the top of this post, where I identify myself as a traditionalist. I grew up watching a lot of NL ball. (Atlanta and Chicago on the 'superstations.') I liked the late inning strategy, the double switch, the 'easy out' at the end of the lineup and the 'good hitting pitcher'. When I became a Twins fan, it was begrudgingly and in spite of the DH-rule. (The Twins made up for it by winning a World Series in the first year I followed them - and then did it again four years later. Thanks guys; made the trip across the league boundary all worthwhile.)

But if you think the DH rule is ever going away, you're fooling yourself.

As far as I know - and I'm sure you'll correct me if I'm wrong - the National League is the only organized league above Legion Ball where the pitcher hits for himself. College ball, summer wood bat leagues, minor leagues, Japan - all of 'em use the DH. But the ultimate reason why the DH will never go away is that the players' union would never allow it. Why would they voluntarily reduce the employment market for 15-20 players (starting DHs and/or pinch hitters with little or no defensive value). There's no way that happens. Ever.

Now, this is NOT a post about whether the DH-rule is evil or the best thing to happen to baseball since readily available amphetamines. You can have that argument on your own time.

What I AM postulating here is that the movement of the Houston Astros to the AL will eventually lead to the introduction of the DH into the NL. Why?

Right now, with interleague play, the idea of AL pitchers hitting for themselves is a 'unique' thing. It's constrained to two specific periods in the season. AL teams can plan for it and work it into their practice routines. And then they can forget about it. Even NL teams will adjust their rosters, calling up a AAA player to back-fill for the bench player who is going to be getting time as a DH during the interleague periods.

Not after this year. All the AL teams will be forced to have their pitchers ready to "hit"pretty much all year. All the NL teams are going to have to plan for a DH-lineup as part of their roster planning. In effect, this step DOES unify the two leagues' DH rule. As of 2013, the DH-rule for both leagues will be "DH and No-DH."

This won't last long. Maybe we'll see a rash of injuries similar to AJ Burnett's tragic bunting accident. Or maybe an AL contender will be forced to leave one of it's offensive weapons on the bench in a crucial series in September. Or maybe managers and GMs will just get tired of trying to plan for two rules at once. I'm not sure what the precipitating event will be, but I’m sure that at some point, "this is stupid" will outweigh "this is tradition". And that will be the end of pitchers in the batters box.

And whatever you think of the DH-rule, the consistency will be a positive thing. You might not like it, but it will be progress.

And we'll have Bud, the blind pig, to thank for it.

I guess.

TR

In laying out my blog manifesto in the previous post, I forgot to include a feature which will appear with more regularity than even I enjoy...

11) Inaccuracy - as proven by the initial post. In item #3 when referring to my brother, the Yankee fan, I also included 'his nephew'. Not correct. It's HIS son. It's MY nephew. Look for more of this kind of brilliant commentary in coming posts. (And I didn't even try to quote any statistics.)

TR

So, blogging...

Huh, so this is what it's like? Seems a lot like typing practice. Well, I guess I shouldn't judge. I've been blogging for 43 seconds now - maybe I should give it a little more time.

Or maybe not, since everyone has already projected the rest of Frankie Liriano's career from his first 17 spring training pitches, I shouldn't worry about projecting my blogging career from the first 17 words.

So what will this blog be like?

1) Intermittent - I have a full-time job and a couple of full-time hobbies besides following the Twins. I fully expect that I'll peter out after the first 4 or 5 posts and you won't see any new content until the All Star break (the NHL All Star break, that is). That's not really a bad thing. I'm not that interesting. And I'm sure I won't have anything interesting to post - so maybe I should quit now while I'm ahead. Nah, gotta finish the manifesto.

2) Infuriating - Check. If you've gotten this far without experiencing this yet - stay tuned.

3) Random - I don't have any particular passion. I like stats but would be hard pressed to define wOBA accurately. I like saying "wOBA" though; "wOBA, wOBA, wOBA". That should count for something. But I don't have a mission statement for this blog. Other much more talented and diligent authors in these pages have those bases covered. I might trot out a (half-baked) description of some stat and why paying attention to it has enhanced my appreciation for the game. Or, I might rant about Gardy's lineup choices (my wife has heard enough of my Nicky Punto rantings - so I'll share them with others - I'm sure you'll be just as impressed as she is). I might wax eloquent about Kramarczuk's sausages. I might taunt my brother and his nephew - they're Yankee fans. More likely I'll just post bitter recriminations.

4) Vocabulary building - I like big words. Sometimes I even use them correctly. You won't like this about me. Many of you will leave in disgust. Mission accomplished.

5) Analytical - Something else not to like about me. I think, I analyze, I over-analyze, I restate my postulates, I theorize, I pontificate and I summarize. This will not be fun.

6) Wordy - This isn't the same thing as #4 or #5. But it probably is a combination of the two. When motivated to expound, I do so at length. Yeah, an intermittent, random blog that tends toward extremely long posts. There's a recipe for success. I should have sponsors lining up by the weekend.

7) Generally intolerant of commenters - Comment as you wish. I'll probably read them, but I probably won't care. Given the blog description thus far, I would expect the vast majority of comments to be negative. If you really get that wound up about what I'm writing here I have two pieces of advice: (a) ignore me, and (b) start your own blog. I could turn comments off, of course, but that wouldn't be nearly as much fun as allowing comments and then mocking those whom I deem deserving. Of course, if you choose to post glowing, flattering paeans (there's one of those big words), I'll take them as a sign of my blogging brilliance and return the effusive praise. It will be a love fest. I don't think this will happen.

8) Overly punctuated - I like punctuation. Sometimes I even use it correctly; though not often. (See?) Comments on my grammar and punctuation choices will be assiduously disregarded. I like (parenthetical asides), "scare quotes" and run-on sentences with dashes - lots of dashes. I write the way I would speak - and I don't care to write <insert pause> all the time. A dash is much more convenient. And hey, this blog is all about me anyway. I don't know why you're still reading.

9) Not funny - I know I'm not as funny as I think I am. You can try to tell me that - but you're too late - I already know it. I may try to be witty at times, but it will just come across as pedantic, arrogant and self-absorbed. Yep. Guilty. By the way, nobody told you to waste time reading this - you really have your own free will. If you've already read everything else on Twins Daily and you just can't go to sleep without reading one last post, I respectfully recommend therapy. Or Scotch. I prefer The Macallan. 18 year old (if you're buying).

10) Disappointing - If you've made it this far, you're in for a real let down. See, a real writer - you know, someone with craft, wit, insight, creativity, someone like Joe Posnanski - they would hit you here at the end with some kind of amazing conclusion that made it all worthwhile. "That's why I kept reading this. Wow. This guy is a master, I never saw that coming." You wouldn't just write "LOL" you'd actually laugh - out loud. You'd post a comment, tell your friends, retweet it (whatever the hell that is) and generally bask in the glow. Good writing is that way. I know this; I have basked. I am not that writer. This blog will not have those kinds of beautiful 'aha' moments. If you somehow show the bad judgment required to make it all the way through any of my posts, you will - as likely as not - think something like "That's it? Really? I wasted the time to read that?!?! What a maroon!" (OK, so you probably won't use the term 'maroon' - but it's one of my favorite Bugs Bunny expressions, so I'd use it. Don't be offended if you thought of something else.) Anyway, if you come to this blog expecting anything more than disappointment, you'll be disappointed. It's all about setting expectations.

So, there you go. Long, rambling, infuriating and ultimately disappointing.

I'm off to a great start, don't you think?

TR