All Things 2021 Minnesota Twins In-Season Thread

Donate To GopherHole
From the Parkinglot said:
They are smarter than everyone in the room and think all other people are morons.
Click to expand...
I have been off the Falvey band wagon since the 2019 trade deadline but last off-season was a train-wreck. They have zero benefit of the doubt left. Nick Vincent and Andrew Albers over 35 pitchers still on the 40 man. How they are not the first two released is beyond me (with Divin' Jake Cave right behind them).
 
Last edited:

Ope3 said:
WIN the Division. Problem solved.
Click to expand...
Ok

And the only teams in the playoffs should be the ones who win the division, right?
 
Last edited:

Ope3 said:
The Best Team in the NL West, the Giants don't have to worry about the Best of 1. The Loser Dodgers do. Tough.
Click to expand...
The dodgers season was based on five starting pitchers. It's now based on one pitcher.

80% of those starters don't matter now. I'd say the regular season matters little when it comes down to 1 pitcher in the playoffs.

What a f------g joke.

Dodgers win 106 and have a one game playoff. The Braves win 88 and get to play a full series.

Gawd, what a joke!
 
Last edited:

kg21 said:
The dodgers season was based on five starting pitchers. It's now based on one pitcher.

80% of those starters don't matter now. I'd say the regular season matters little when it comes down to 1 pitcher in the playoffs.

What a f------g joke.

Dodgers win 106 and have a one game playoff. The Braves win 88 and get to play a full series.

Gawd, what a joke!
Click to expand...
The biggest issue I have is that the giants reward for winning 107 games is a series with the dodgers who won 106 games if the dodgers win tonight. The fact the other series is a couple of teams with 95 and 88 wins respectively.
If you are gonna add this wild card position it should be based on overall record not division winners. Divisions in baseball need to be gotten rid of since going to all these inter league games.
 

kg21 said:
Ok

And the only teams in the playoffs should be the ones who win the division, right?
Click to expand...
Ideally, yes. I hate the Wild Card in general, but if they are going to have it give incentive for winning the Division.
kg21 said:
The dodgers season was based on five starting pitchers. It's now based on one pitcher.

80% of those starters don't matter now. I'd say the regular season matters little when it comes down to 1 pitcher in the playoffs.

What a f------g joke.

Dodgers win 106 and have a one game playoff. The Braves win 88 and get to play a full series.

Gawd, what a joke!
Click to expand...
Tough. Should have beat the Giants once more.

They are free to use all 5 starting pitchers if they want tonight.
 


Ope3 said:
Ideally, yes. I hate the Wild Card in general, but if they are going to have it give incentive for winning the Division.

Tough. Should have beat the Giants once more.

They are free to use all 5 starting pitchers if they want tonight.
Click to expand...
The baseball season is based on using 5 starters. It's now based on one pitcher.

All the other sports are based on the exact same way the regular season is played.

A one game baseball playoff is equivalent to the Chiefs making the playoffs, and Mahoomes gets to play 10 minutes of the game.

What a flipping joke. The playoffs in baseball should be best of 7, with one day off, so the pitchers 1-5 will possibly need to start. Of course, that is too simplistic as it would make it just like the 162 game schedule.
 

kg21 said:
The baseball season is based on using 5 starters. It's now based on one pitcher.

All the other sports are based on the exact same way the regular season is played.
Click to expand...
Again, Win the Division and it's not an issue.

NBA actually is using a similar model for the 7th and 8th seeds. It works as there is now incentive to finish at least 6th, giving more value to their 82 game schedule.

The viewing public doesn't have the appetite for a full 4th round of MLB playoffs anyway, ratings get trounced by NFL on Thur, Sun & Mon nights and NCAA on Saturday.

Tonight is Exhibit A in how great the theater is for 1 and done.
 

Ope3 said:
Again, Win the Division and it's not an issue.

NBA actually is using a similar model for the 7th and 8th seeds. It works as there is now incentive to finish at least 6th, giving more value to their 82 game schedule.

The viewing public doesn't have the appetite for a full 4th round of MLB playoffs anyway, ratings get trounced by NFL on Thur, Sun & Mon nights and NCAA on Saturday.

Tonight is Exhibit A in how great the theater is for 1 and done.
Click to expand...
So you are saying the NBA and NHL do it wrong by going with best of 5's and best of 7's. Many of them didn't win their division.

I just don't know what to say.

Why not make the whole baseball playoffs a 1 game playoff. It's great theatre.

You are right, they don't have an appetite for a full fourth round. So get rid of it and go back to 4 teams.

By the way, let's to go to 7 teams, then you could have 2, one game playoffs, they then play and you have another 1 game playoff. Think of the great theater. It's coming sooner rather than later.
 

kg21 said:
So you are saying the NBA and NHL do it wrong by going with best of 5's and best of 7's. Many of them didn't win their division.

I just don't know what to say.

Why not make the whole baseball playoffs a 1 game playoff. It's great theatre.

You are right, they don't have an appetite for a full fourth round. So get rid of it and go back to 4 teams.

By the way, let's to go to 7 teams, then you could have 2, one game playoffs, they then play and you have another 1 game playoff. Think of the great theater. It's coming sooner rather than later.
Click to expand...
Well, first off neither the NBA nor NHL have Best of 5s, and haven't for approaching 20 yrs. Only exception was the NHL Bubble Play-ins in 2020 due to the unforeseen shortened regular season.

Aside from that, NHL & NBA, I do think their the formats greatly cheapen the 82 game seasons. Nothing more than a prelude to April - June.

As I said, the NBA is actually copying MLB for the 7th & 8th seeds. I would totally be in favor of the NHL and NBA reducing the Playoff Series prior to the Conference Championships from 7 to 5. Way more sense of urgency, even in Game 1. Plus fewer games for me to ignore. Can't say I really pay attention to any series that doesn't involve a Minnesota team, until it gets to an elimination game, so moot point at best for me.

As for more 1 gamers in MLB? Naw, I'm good with 2 (1 each AL & NL). Wrapping it up by Wed night is best. Tomorrow for example, most everyone will be focused on Rams/Seahawks.
 
Last edited:



Last edited:


GophersInIowa said:
Say what?
Click to expand...

He needs to prove it at the plate for more than one year. He's been a bad hitter most of his career, including just last year. This year is an anomaly. Maybe he's turned the corner, or maybe he'll regress again next season.
 

GopherWeatherGuy said:
He needs to prove it at the plate for more than one year. He's been a bad hitter most of his career, including just last year. This year is an anomaly. Maybe he's turned the corner, or maybe he'll regress again next season.
Click to expand...
Even if his bat takes a little bit of a step back, his defense and speed make up for it. Getting him at 5 years, $110M would be a great deal for the Twins if he's able to play 120+ games a year. That still wouldn't even put him in the top 30 of annual salaries.
 



GophersInIowa said:
Even if his bat takes a little bit of a step back, his defense and speed make up for it. Getting him at 5 years, $110M would be a great deal for the Twins if he's able to play 120+ games a year. That still wouldn't even put him in the top 30 of annual salaries.
Click to expand...

He hasn't proven he can stay healthy nor has he proven his bat long term. Defense alone doesn't make him worth that amount of money.
 

GopherWeatherGuy said:
He hasn't proven he can stay healthy nor has he proven his bat long term. Defense alone doesn't make him worth that amount of money.
Click to expand...
Who do you want them to spend $ on instead? They will get pitching either way, but probably only one big contract. There are no other long-term extensions looming in the short-term and Donaldson comes off the books after 2023 or sooner if they trade him. Sano comes off after 2022.

What outside FA are they going to sign that's better than Buxton for the same $? I feel like this goes down the same path as the Mauer arguments. Yes if he doesn't stay healthy he will be overpaid. But there's no door B player the Twins were ever going to give that contract to. It was a price of getting Target Field. If you're not a Pohlad heir, you shouldn't care if he was over-paid a bit. This isn't quite the same situation, but it's close. It's not a choice of Buxton or Mookie Bets. It's a choice of Buxton and a $140 million payroll or no Buxton and a $125 million payroll.
 

GopherWeatherGuy said:
He hasn't proven he can stay healthy nor has he proven his bat long term. Defense alone doesn't make him worth that amount of money.
Click to expand...

I bet his pitching staff disagrees. I think he saves at least .5 runs per game.
 

howeda7 said:
Who do you want them to spend $ on instead? They will get pitching either way, but probably only one big contract. There are no other long-term extensions looming in the short-term and Donaldson comes off the books after 2023 or sooner if they trade him. Sano comes off after 2022.

What outside FA are they going to sign that's better than Buxton for the same $? I feel like this goes down the same path as the Mauer arguments. Yes if he doesn't stay healthy he will be overpaid. But there's no door B player the Twins were ever going to give that contract to. It was a price of getting Target Field. If you're not a Pohlad heir, you shouldn't care if he was over-paid a bit. This isn't quite the same situation, but it's close. It's not a choice of Buxton or Mookie Bets. It's a choice of Buxton and a $140 million payroll or no Buxton and a $125 million payroll.
Click to expand...

There are quality starters that can be had on shorter deals. I rather see the Twins trade for more prospects and develop from within, and pay the players that prove they can stay healthy and productive.

I don't see it as a Mauer situation at all. Mauer stayed healthy early in his career and always hit for average and a high OBP, in addition to being very good defensively. Buxton has proven far less. Plus Royce Lewis could still end up being a CF long term.

Speaking of Betts, a proven superstar, didn't the Red Sox trade him away just two years ago? Aren't they in the playoffs now?
 

GopherWeatherGuy said:
He hasn't proven he can stay healthy nor has he proven his bat long term. Defense alone doesn't make him worth that amount of money.
Click to expand...
I didn't mean the defense alone makes him worth that much. I'm saying even if his bat takes a bit of a step back, he still probably would be. I don't expect him to hover around a 1.000 OPS like he did this year but if he can maintain around the low to mid .800 level or better while remaining healthy, he would be well worth that contract when you throw in his defense.

I don't think we can wait anyways. If he isn't extended this offseason, there's a very little chance he resigns next offseason. There's really 3 options: extend him now, trade him now or next season, or try resigning him next year (very unlikely IMO). I think we have to take a chance. If he can stay healthy, he has a legitimate chance of being one of the best players in baseball.
 

GophersInIowa said:
I didn't mean the defense alone makes him worth that much. I'm saying even if his bat takes a bit of a step back, he still probably would be. I don't expect him to hover around a 1.000 OPS like he did this year but if he can maintain around the low to mid .800 level or better while remaining healthy, he would be well worth that contract when you throw in his defense.

I don't think we can wait anyways. If he isn't extended this offseason, there's a very little chance he resigns next offseason. There's really 3 options: extend him now, trade him now or next season, or try resigning him next year (very unlikely IMO). I think we have to take a chance. If he can stay healthy, he has a legitimate chance of being one of the best players in baseball.
Click to expand...

A lot of the arguments from you and others are, IF he does this, and IF he does that, with little track record of actually doing those things. There are too many if's to give him that much money.

Maybe you and others will be right, but it's far more likely you won't be based on a 7 year track record.
 

According to Aaron Gleeman from the Athletic:

Since the beginning of 2019, the #MNTwins have played at a 99-win pace when Byron Buxton is in their starting lineup and an 81-win pace when he isn't. 100-64 record with Buxton. 106-106 record without Buxton. During that time, he's slugged .557 and rated +27 runs defensively.
 

short ornery norwegian said:
According to Aaron Gleeman from the Athletic:

Since the beginning of 2019, the #MNTwins have played at a 99-win pace when Byron Buxton is in their starting lineup and an 81-win pace when he isn't. 100-64 record with Buxton. 106-106 record without Buxton. During that time, he's slugged .557 and rated +27 runs defensively.
Click to expand...
Well short of my .5 runs/game guesstimate, but seems impressive.
 

GopherWeatherGuy said:
There are quality starters that can be had on shorter deals. I rather see the Twins trade for more prospects and develop from within, and pay the players that prove they can stay healthy and productive.
Click to expand...
I don't see how keeping Buxton contradicts doing that. They already have a good farm system. Trading Buxton makes it 10% better but takes away their best player. That's not a net positive.
GopherWeatherGuy said:
I don't see it as a Mauer situation at all. Mauer stayed healthy early in his career and always hit for average and a high OBP, in addition to being very good defensively. Buxton has proven far less. Plus Royce Lewis could still end up being a CF long term.
Click to expand...
Mauer did not always stay healthy early in his career. He missed almost his entire rookie season in 2004 with a knee injury. He only played 109 games in 2007 due to various injuries. He missed the first month of 2009 with a knee injury (and then still won the MVP).

They knew he would not be able to catch for the full duration of the contract. It ended up being 1-2 years less than they hoped though.

There's no doubt Mauer was a more proven star when he signed his contract. But we're not talking about giving Buxton that contract, factoring in it's 11 years later.
GopherWeatherGuy said:
Speaking of Betts, a proven superstar, didn't the Red Sox trade him away just two years ago? Aren't they in the playoffs now?
Click to expand...
The Twins are not the Rays. They're also not the Red Sox.
 
Last edited:

howeda7 said:
I don't see how keeping Buxton contradicts doing that. They already have a good farm system. Trading Buxton makes it 10% better but takes away their best player. That's not a net positive.

Mauer did not always stay healthy early in his career. He missed almost his entire rookie season in 2004 with a knee injury. He only played 109 games in 2007 due to various injuries. He missed the first month of 2009 with a knee injury (and then still won the MVP).

They knew he would not be able to catch for the full duration of the contract. It ended up being 1-2 years less than they hoped though.

There's no doubt Mauer was a more proven star when he signed his contract. But we're not talking about giving Buxton that contract, factoring in it's 11 years later.

The Twins are not the Rays. They're also not the Red Sox.
Click to expand...

You're right, they're the Twins. They have a long history of signing the wrong players and not trading players when they should have.

Buxton isn't their best player, Polanco is.
 


TruthSeeker said:
That would be 81 runs for 162 games. Not even close to that.
Click to expand...
Thanks, already acknowledged in post 1551. It's more like 0.16.

"It was my understanding, there would be no math." - Chevy Chase
 
Last edited:

howeda7 said:
I'm afraid it's going to go the other way. There will be 7-8 per league next year. Manfred only sees post-season $$ and doesn't care that it devalues the regular season.

If he wants more play-off games, make the Wild Card round 3 games and the Divisional 7 and leave well enough alone.
Click to expand...

I think the biggest argument against the 3 game Wild Card is that they aren't that lucrative for TV. Last year those 3 gamers the ratings were awful, as the 2nd day there were 8 games going on splitting audiences and also played in the afternoon.

Contrast that to this year, 1 stand alone game each on Tuesday and Wednesday. No competition with the NFL and in Prime Time. Ratings gold.

I watched or listened to over 2/3rds of each Wild Card game. Compare that to Day 1 of the ALDS yesterday. I did not see a pitch of White Sox/Astros as it was during the day. Saw some of Rays/Red Sox, but also was flipping to Rams/Seahawks.
 

Ope3 said:
I think the biggest argument against the 3 game Wild Card is that they aren't that lucrative for TV. Last year those 3 gamers the ratings were awful, as the 2nd day there were 8 games going on splitting audiences and also played in the afternoon.

Contrast that to this year, 1 stand alone game each on Tuesday and Wednesday. No competition with the NFL and in Prime Time. Ratings gold.

I watched or listened to over 2/3rds of each Wild Card game. Compare that to Day 1 of the ALDS yesterday. I did not see a pitch of White Sox/Astros as it was during the day. Saw some of Rays/Red Sox, but also was flipping to Rams/Seahawks.
Click to expand...
Probably a good point. Last year was weird and the scheduling/channels were all over the place. But I read that ESPN's ratings for Yankees/Red Sox was the highest for an MLB game on ESPN in 25 years. That probably doesn't happen with 3 games. But I'm also not sure it happens if there's 3 wild card games in each league like Manfred seems to want.

Either way, they need to stop having weekday play-off games. They're on different networks anyway, play everything in prime time.
 

You must log in or register to reply here.



Top Bottom