Who could have imagined that we would be able to say that
the Twins are 20 games over .500 and in first place?

There are still a lot of road games ahead, but the Twins are
definitely a contender this season...and how great is that?

Really enjoying the ride, no matter what.

Also enjoying a glimpse of the Twins future with guys like Span,
Gomez, Liriano, Blackburn, Young, etc.

Go Twins!!!



- Scott Smith: scott.smith@iphouse.com
MySpace: http://www.myspace.com/choppersmith

Scott Smith wrote:
> Who could have imagined that we would be able to say that
> the Twins are 20 games over .500 and in first place?

Yeah, I have to admit... the first place I could've seen a few months ago
because the division was so lousy... but I'd never have imagined 20 over
..500 possible. This season had the look of an 85-win team winning the
Central. Now it seems 92 might not get it done.

brink

> On Aug 23, 12:37�pm, Scott Smith <scott.sm...@iphouse.com> wrote:

> Who could have imagined that we would be able to say that
> the Twins are 20 games over .500 and in first place?

Not me. I figured they would be around .500 and this is when the slide
from .500 would have started.


> There are still a lot of road games ahead, but the Twins are
> definitely a contender this season...and how great is that?

Sublime.


> Really enjoying the ride, no matter what.
>
> Also enjoying a glimpse of the Twins future with guys like Span,
> Gomez, Liriano, Blackburn, Young, etc.

Gomez is toast. Young will improve. You forgot Slowey and Buscher.

On Sat, 23 Aug 2008 11:05:06 -0700 (PDT), powrwrap <powrwrap@aol.com> wrote:

>> On Aug 23, 12:37?pm, Scott Smith <scott.sm...@iphouse.com> wrote:
>
>> Who could have imagined that we would be able to say that
>> the Twins are 20 games over .500 and in first place?
>
>Not me. I figured they would be around .500 and this is when the slide
>from .500 would have started.

Yes, I meant to say who could have imagined that we would be
able to say 20 games over .500 and in first place in late August?

Well, the Twins have proven that their second half spurt is
a tradition they mean to continue!

>> There are still a lot of road games ahead, but the Twins are
>> definitely a contender this season...and how great is that?
>
>Sublime.

Absolutely.

>> Really enjoying the ride, no matter what.
>>
>> Also enjoying a glimpse of the Twins future with guys like Span,
>> Gomez, Liriano, Blackburn, Young, etc.
>
>Gomez is toast. Young will improve. You forgot Slowey and Buscher.

I still think Gomez can work on his patience and eye at the plate. I have
not given up hope on him yet. He's still an exciting fielder to watch, and
is also exciting once he gets on base. Getting on base is another story.

And yes, I did forget Slowey and Buscher...but not intentionally. They
have been pleasant surprises as well.

It always amazes me how well the Twins do with so little. I don't know
how they continue to do it...I'm just glad they do.



- Scott Smith: scott.smith@iphouse.com
MySpace: http://www.myspace.com/choppersmith

On Aug 23, 1:25 pm, Scott Smith <scott.sm...@iphouse.com> wrote:
>
> I still think Gomez can work on his patience and eye at the plate.

Agreed. He's too young and too physically gifted to give up on him. He
does need to get a much better mental approach, though. No doubt about
it.

Matt

> On Aug 23, 4:24 pm, Matt <AcesWi...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Aug 23, 1:25 pm, Scott Smith <scott.sm...@iphouse.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> > I still think Gomez can work on his patience and eye at the plate.
>
> Agreed. He's too young and too physically gifted to give up on him. He
> does need to get a much better mental approach, though. No doubt about
> it.


He gave the Angels a nice gift by lolly-gagging on a fly ball on
Saturday night, dropping it, which allowed two runners to score. You
call it "needing a better mental approach". The guy flat out does not
know how to play the game. The time to learn how to play the game
should have occurred years ago. If he can learn (and that's a big IF
at his age) he shouldn't be learning it in the major leagues.

He's not a good hitter, he's not a good bunter, he's not that good of
a base runner, he's a pretty good fielder, his arm is strong but not
accurate and he throws to the wrong guy all the time. He's the easiest
guy to strike out in the American League. But if you ask him, he's the
Greatest since Ali. How can you fix his "mental approach" if the
doesn't think he's doing anything wrong?

> On Aug 23, 1:25 pm, Scott Smith <scott.sm...@iphouse.com> wrote:

> I still think Gomez can work on his patience and eye at the plate.

Yeah, and I still think Bush is going to do something about global
warming.

powrwrap wrote:
>> On Aug 23, 4:24 pm, Matt <AcesWi...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Aug 23, 1:25 pm, Scott Smith <scott.sm...@iphouse.com> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>> I still think Gomez can work on his patience and eye at the plate.
>>
>> Agreed. He's too young and too physically gifted to give up on him.
>> He does need to get a much better mental approach, though. No doubt
>> about it.
>
>
> He gave the Angels a nice gift by lolly-gagging on a fly ball on
> Saturday night, dropping it, which allowed two runners to score.

I think he mis-judged that one. Vlad hit it straight at him which anyone
will tell you is the hardest to judge... should it have been an error?
Absolutely -- it's his job to catch that ball -- I know it's tough but the
reason I'm behind him still being up with the team is his plus defense in
CF. When he stops making those plays, he has no business being up.

You
> call it "needing a better mental approach". The guy flat out does not
> know how to play the game. The time to learn how to play the game
> should have occurred years ago. If he can learn (and that's a big IF
> at his age) he shouldn't be learning it in the major leagues.

This is a good point. He lucked out into a MLB job this year and because of
key injuries and the fact that Hunter's departure left a gaping hole -- and,
let's face it, I think everyone thought this was a rebuilding year -- he
hasn't been shipped to Rochester. We're a week away from callups so I think
it's safe to say he's going to spend a full year with the big team.

> He's not a good hitter, he's not a good bunter,

He seems to be a pretty good bunter to me...

he's not that good of
> a base runner, he's a pretty good fielder, his arm is strong but not
> accurate and he throws to the wrong guy all the time.

A CFers job is mainly tracking down balls. Throwing is part of the equation
but it pales in comparison to catching. This is also why Span >>>> Cuddyer
in RF. It's also why I'd call Gomez a fantastic CFer and exactly what this
flyball-inducing starting staff needs.

He's the easiest
> guy to strike out in the American League. But if you ask him, he's the
> Greatest since Ali. How can you fix his "mental approach" if the
> doesn't think he's doing anything wrong?

When did he say he's the greatest?

brink

On Aug 25, 10:08�am, "brink" <brinknos...@hotmail.com> wrote:

> > He's not a good hitter, he's not a good bunter,

> He seems to be a pretty good bunter to me...

He has 19 successful bunt attempts and 15 bunt attempts for outs, a
55.8% success rate. (This does not take into account fouled off bunt
attempts) In other words, when he puts the bunt in play it's about a
50/50 proposition. I wouldn't call that pretty good, esp. when you
consider his speed. Of those bunt attempts four were successful
leading off a game, seven were outs leading off a game. Go-Go has
started a game by bunting himself out-out 7 times. Ugh.

For reference I looked up Brett Butler, a pretty good bunter in his
day, for the year 1988. He had a 65.2% success rate.


> he's not that good of
> > a base runner, he's a pretty good fielder, his arm is strong but not
> > accurate and he throws to the wrong guy all the time.


> A CFers job is mainly tracking down balls. �Throwing is part of the equation
> but it pales in comparison to catching. �This is also why Span >>>> Cuddyer
> in RF. �It's also why I'd call Gomez a fantastic CFer and exactlywhat this
> flyball-inducing starting staff needs.


He does get to a lot of balls but his defense does not make up for his
horrific offense.


> When did he say he's the greatest?

He didn't actually say he was the "greatest", but last March he did
say he was ready to play in the majors, that he envisions himself as a
#3 hitter, that he's a force on the basepaths, etc.

>"powrwrap" <powrwrap@aol.com> wrote in message
>news:4a0eb731-a0c8-4c73-8502-19f65c30865a@f63g2000hsf.googlegroups.com...
> >On Aug 25, 10:08?am, "brink" <brinknos...@hotmail.com> wrote:

> > > He's not a good hitter, he's not a good bunter,

> > He seems to be a pretty good bunter to me...

> He has 19 successful bunt attempts and 15 bunt attempts for outs, a
> 55.8% success rate. (This does not take into account fouled off bunt
It is actually 27 and leads the league.
He has more "bunt singles" than the team ranked second.

gomez:powrwrap::tigers:scott

> On Aug 25, 12:59 pm, "infield homerun" <nos...@nospam.com> wrote:
>
> It is actually 27 and leads the league.
> He has more "bunt singles" than the team ranked second.

Where did you get your information?

Do you know how many bunts were unsuccessful?

>"powrwrap" <powrwrap@aol.com> wrote in message
>news:3fcc8611-4cd2-4370-b382-569910d42594@p25g2000hsf.googlegroups.com...
> > On Aug 25, 12:59 pm, "infield homerun" <nos...@nospam.com> wrote:
> >
> >It is actually 27 and leads the league.
> >He has more "bunt singles" than the team ranked second.
>
> Where did you get your information?fangraph.com
>
> Do you know how many bunts were unsuccessful?
51.2.
Only 4 players have double digit "bunt singles". Blanco of the Braves
has a >50% success among them (53.1% with 17 bunts)
Willy Taveras has 24. (He has led the league in this category
the last 3 years). Jacoby Ellsbury has 9 bunts at 56.3%.
Buntman is apt for Gomez.

Everyday Eddie is back.

> On Aug 25, 3:28 pm, "infield homerun" <nos...@nospam.com> wrote:

> > Do you know how many bunts were unsuccessful?
>
> 51.2.

According to the site, fangraphs.com, he's got 27 bunt hits in 56 bunt
attempts, a success rate of 48.2%. Note that this does not record the
number of times he unsuccessfully bunts the ball foul and then makes
an out or reaches base via a result other than bunting.

Interesting site. I see that Delmon Young is third and K-K Gomez is
fifth in percent of pitches swung at that are outside the strike zone
(O-Swing%).

The site's main metric is WPA, or win probability added (the
difference in the win expectancy before and after the play) Gomez is
8th worst in the majors in adding to a teams win expectancy, with
-2.34. Brink, ask yourself--is his defense that much better than an
average CFer to put up with his offense? Or put another way--would an
OF of Young/Span/Cuddyer be significantly worse defensively than Young/
Gomez/Span?


> Buntman is apt for Gomez.

I like K-K Gomez. He's got 118 strikeouts in 122 games; he should
surpass the Twins franchise record of 145 SO's set by Bobby Darwin in
1972 (145 games). A strikeout per game.

powrwrap wrote:
>> On Aug 25, 3:28 pm, "infield homerun" <nos...@nospam.com> wrote:
>
>>> Do you know how many bunts were unsuccessful?
>>
>> 51.2.
>
> According to the site, fangraphs.com, he's got 27 bunt hits in 56 bunt
> attempts, a success rate of 48.2%. Note that this does not record the
> number of times he unsuccessfully bunts the ball foul and then makes
> an out or reaches base via a result other than bunting.
>
> Interesting site. I see that Delmon Young is third and K-K Gomez is
> fifth in percent of pitches swung at that are outside the strike zone
> (O-Swing%).
>
> The site's main metric is WPA, or win probability added (the
> difference in the win expectancy before and after the play) Gomez is
> 8th worst in the majors in adding to a teams win expectancy, with
> -2.34. Brink, ask yourself--is his defense that much better than an
> average CFer to put up with his offense?

Like capitalism, he's the worst option at our disposal... except for all
the other ones. IMO, the other possible configurations, most of which
involve moving Span to CF (which is fine) and leaving _elmon Young in LF
while plugging in Kubel in RF... that leaves this flyball-heavy pitching
staff exposed.

I've heard a lot of talk about Pridie and believe me, I'm all for plugging
in a minor leaguer who's ready to do so -- is Pridie ready for prime time?
It's a serious question -- is he? How does he look at Rochester? How's his
defense?

I'll say it til I'm blue in the face: the Twins' offense is fine. Their
defense is not. I'd like to see them addressing the obvious areas of
weakness (bullpen -- Guardado, check... defense -- Punto, check) rather
than sacrificing those areas in order to bolster a strength.

Or put another way--would an
> OF of Young/Span/Cuddyer be significantly worse defensively than
> Young/ Gomez/Span?

Ummm.... let me think about that... YES.

brink

On Mon, 25 Aug 2008, brink wrote:

> I've heard a lot of talk about Pridie and believe me, I'm all for plugging in
> a minor leaguer who's ready to do so -- is Pridie ready for prime time? It's
> a serious question -- is he? How does he look at Rochester? How's his
> defense?

With an OPS under .750 in AAA, and a strikeout per game, I guess you
can ask for an in-person scouting report but it's doubtful the prognosis
will be good, for this year at least. He'd be no improvement against
major league pitching over Gomez. The Twins have already brought up
the only guy hitting with authority, Ruiz.

--
John Gregory ashbury at skypoint.com http://www.skypoint.com/ tilde ashbury
Thought for the moment:
The sky already fell. Now what?

>"powrwrap" <powrwrap@aol.com> wrote in message
>news:9c03a90f-bacf-4cac-a1b6-b86cce5dd2fe@z66g2000hsc.googlegroups.com...
>> On Aug 25, 3:28 pm, "infield homerun" <nos...@nospam.com> wrote:

> >> Do you know how many bunts were unsuccessful?
>>
>> 51.2.
sorry meant to say 51.8 as you did ask for unsuccessful bunts.
>
>>According to the site, fangraphs.com, he's got 27 bunt hits in 56 bunt
>attempts, a success rate of 48.2%. Note that this does not record the
>number of times he unsuccessfully bunts the ball foul and then makes
>an out or reaches base via a result other than bunting.
isn't that how these are supposed to work?
this started as a bunt question, now you are moving the goal-post.
anyways we have the M&M boys for WPA.

>> Buntman is apt for Gomez.

>I like K-K Gomez. He's got 118 strikeouts in 122 games; he should
BTW, Ryan Howard has 172 SOs in 131 games(of course he has 34 homers
to go with).
overall I am happy with Gomez in CF. the bat production will come

> On Aug 26, 8:29 am, "infield homerun" <nos...@nospam.com> wrote:
>
> isn't that how these are supposed to work?
> this started as a bunt question, now you are moving the goal-post.

How is mentioning that the stats don't take into account missed bunt
opportunities moving the goal posts on the question of whether or not
he's a good bunter?


> overall I am happy with Gomez in CF. the bat production will come

You people that keep on saying that Gomez will eventually develop into
a good hitter--at what point will you throw in the towel? Supposing he
continues to bat .260/.300/.425 (or thereabouts) through 2009? 2010?
When will you give up on him?

On Tue, 26 Aug 2008, powrwrap wrote:

> You people that keep on saying that Gomez will eventually develop into
> a good hitter--at what point will you throw in the towel? Supposing he
> continues to bat .260/.300/.425 (or thereabouts) through 2009? 2010?
> When will you give up on him?

I doubt if "we the people" speak with one voice about him. :)
Here's my take, though. Unless he is one of those guys with a
questionable birth certificate, he is age 22 this season. Seems
that most hitters reach a peak around 25 or a little after.
A very rough rule of thumb I picked up somewhere (don't recall
where) is for a very good hitter to gain .100 of OPS every season,
while every higher level of league is .100 harder. I took a look
at K-K's seasons, and he fits this pattern pretty well (one OPS
marked with asterisk is a rough average spread between two teams):

Age Level OPS
18 Rk .700*
19 A .707
20 AA .773
21 AAA .777
Maj .592
22 Maj .638

He backslid a bit last year and didn't make it up this year.
Worrisome. Still, just a bit too young, and with a history
of steady improvement, for me to write him off just yet. No,
I don't expect he'll develop into a hitting star like M&M boys
are. But solid outfielders are worth having, and an area where
the Twins haven't succeeded in developing enough - *if* he
improves to that level, he'll be an asset.

If he had been acquired in a minor exchange, instead of as the
key player in the Santana deal, we'd probably have more patience
with exactly the same production.

--
John Gregory ashbury at skypoint.com http://www.skypoint.com/ tilde ashbury
Thought for the moment:
You will never hit your finger if you hold the hammer with both hands.

> On Aug 26, 10:13 am, John Gregory <ashb...@skypoint.com> wrote:

> I doubt if "we the people" speak with one voice about him. :)
> Here's my take, though.  Unless he is one of those guys with a
> questionable birth certificate, he is age 22 this season.  Seems
> that most hitters reach a peak around 25 or a little after.
> A very rough rule of thumb I picked up somewhere (don't recall
> where) is for a very good hitter to gain .100 of OPS every season,
> while every higher level of league is .100 harder.

That's a neat way of quantifying it. Here's Torii Hunter's numbers:

Age OPS
19 A .660
20 A/AA .708
21 AA .639
22 AA/AAA .792

23 MLB .689
24 .726
24 AAA 1.12 (209 AB's)
25 MLB .785
26 .858


OPS is a good benchmark but doesn't take into account Gomez's
propensity to throw to the wrong base, make base running mistakes,
etc.


> I took a look
> at K-K's seasons, and he fits this pattern pretty well (one OPS
> marked with asterisk is a rough average spread between two teams):
>
>    Age  Level   OPS
>     18    Rk   .700*
>     19    A    .707
>     20    AA   .773
>     21    AAA  .777
>           Maj  .592
>     22    Maj  .638
>
> He backslid a bit last year and didn't make it up this year.
> Worrisome.  Still, just a bit too young, and with a history
> of steady improvement, for me to write him off just yet.  

> If he had been acquired in a minor exchange, instead of as the
> key player in the Santana deal, we'd probably have more patience
> with exactly the same production.

Maybe only slightly more patience. You can't ignore an OBA of .291
after 600 ML AB's for too long. His OBA was .288 in 2007 and .291 in
2008. While his OPS has improved from .592 to .638, it's totally due
to the occasional double now and again. So he's not exhibiting any
more plate discipline but is occasionally putting a few more balls
into the outfield.

>"powrwrap" <powrwrap@aol.com> wrote in message
>news:92502ce6-a56c-4386-b95c-4e017ec68e28@r15g2000prh.googlegroups.com...
>> On Aug 26, 8:29 am, "infield homerun" <nos...@nospam.com> wrote:
>>
>> isn't that how these are supposed to work?
>> this started as a bunt question, now you are moving the goal-post.
>
>How is mentioning that the stats don't take into account missed bunt
>opportunities moving the goal posts on the question of whether or not
>he's a good bunter?
the goal-post was in reference to other things that I snipped like swings
outside strike zone, wpa, defense, so... you mentioned that had nothing
to do with bunting.

>
>
>> overall I am happy with Gomez in CF. the bat production will come
>
>You people that keep on saying that Gomez will eventually develop into
what John Gregory said

>a good hitter--at what point will you throw in the towel? Supposing he
>continues to bat .260/.300/.425 (or thereabouts) through 2009? 2010?
>When will you give up on him?
he is not yet 23, why should the twins give up on him so soon.
he leads all CFs in total chances, putouts, double plays,range factor
and zone rating (and yeah errors also) and that makes him a very good
center fielder and with Denard Span they form a perfect dynamic dou -
a la "Buntman and RobEm" team.

BTW, the prev. twins CF stats (first 4 years only)
..255/.309/.380
..280/.318/.408
..261/.306/.469
..289/.334/.524

you seem to show as much patience with Gomez as you accuse him
of at his plate appearances.

On Tue, 26 Aug 2008, powrwrap wrote:

>> On Aug 26, 10:13 am, John Gregory <ashb...@skypoint.com> wrote:
>
>> I doubt if "we the people" speak with one voice about him. :)
>> Here's my take, though.  Unless he is one of those guys with a
>> questionable birth certificate, he is age 22 this season.  Seems
>> that most hitters reach a peak around 25 or a little after.
>> A very rough rule of thumb I picked up somewhere (don't recall
>> where) is for a very good hitter to gain .100 of OPS every season,
>> while every higher level of league is .100 harder.
>
> That's a neat way of quantifying it.

Maybe. I'm not sure I had any reason to have gotten so specific,
lacking either research of my own or someone else's to point to
(I know Bill James and others have studied it, I'm just winging
it from memory); better if I had said "maintaining the same OPS
as one goes up the organizational chain must be evidence of
learning and progress." Progress eventually ends, but I'd sure
rather see a track record with it than without it.

> Here's Torii Hunter's numbers:

I think we had a discussion earlier this year about how Torii
is some kind of outlier - his breakthrough year at age 26, the
regression for a few years, followed by recovery at age 30, isn't
really the norm. His minor league record you compiled shows a
few years out of whack with the others too.

Probably *any* hitter will have a year or two that doesn't fit -
the learning curve won't always be steady. Maybe Gomez is the
remarkable one (until lately) - like I said, I haven't attempted
a study.

For fun, I just looked at Punto's minor league numbers. When he
came up at age 25, you'd have projected him as about a .650 OPS
guy, based on AAA numbers trending toward .700-.750. Which, more
or less, is what he has turned out to be.

And I looked up Ruiz. Playing in single-A at age 26? "Nice" OPS
there of .842, but geez, you'd say "no prospect". I wonder how he
kept a job. Assistant coach, perhaps. Or maybe some teams feel
that .842 at single-A is .842, whether the player is 19 or 26.

> OPS is a good benchmark but doesn't take into account Gomez's
> propensity to throw to the wrong base, make base running mistakes,
> etc.

You brought up only the hitting so I left it at that. Fielding
is still hard to quantify usefully, but at least when it comes
to counting errors and outs recorded, I think there is a trend for
players to get better into their mid 20s if not longer. Still
looking at Punto's page, his fielding percentage gradually got better
and his range factor likewise. Gomez too. Of course those are raw
numbers and it may be that playing conditions change as you move up
(better groundskeepers, fewer teammates giving up rockets up the
middle, better first basemen to catch what you throw, I don't know
what else).

The sins Gomez commits don't always show up in stats available on
teh Interwebs, but one can hope that learning occurs on those too.

>> If he had been acquired in a minor exchange, instead of as the
>> key player in the Santana deal, we'd probably have more patience
>> with exactly the same production.
>
> Maybe only slightly more patience. You can't ignore an OBA of .291
> after 600 ML AB's for too long. His OBA was .288 in 2007 and .291 in
> 2008. While his OPS has improved from .592 to .638, it's totally due
> to the occasional double now and again. So he's not exhibiting any
> more plate discipline but is occasionally putting a few more balls
> into the outfield.

The problem here is essentially the same one when we were discussing
Lewwww Ford; it would be a non-issue if the team had anyone else
decent who was ready to step in. Here we have what may be a useful
center fielder, in the majors two years too soon. There is no debate
that .291 OBA is pathetic.

--
John Gregory ashbury at skypoint.com http://www.skypoint.com/ tilde ashbury
Thought for the moment:
"Who are you, and how did you get in?" "I'm a locksmith, and, I'm a locksmith."

> On Aug 26, 12:51 pm, "infield homerun" <nos...@nospam.com> wrote:

> he is not yet 23, why should the twins give up on him so soon.

Get him out of the lineup, the Twins are in a pennant race. They can't
afford his offensive liability. Let him learn and develop in AAA.


> you seem to show as much patience with Gomez as you accuse him
> of at his plate appearances.

Zing! Good one.

On Aug 25, 10:01 am, powrwrap <powrw...@aol.com> wrote:
> > On Aug 23, 1:25 pm, Scott Smith <scott.sm...@iphouse.com> wrote:
> > I still think Gomez can work on his patience and eye at the plate.
>
> Yeah, and I still think Bush is going to do something about global
> warming.

I am frustrated with both Bush and Gomez. Bush I have given up on.
Gomez? Not yet. I swear his biggest problem is between his ears. He
is a head-case if ever there were one. I don't see him coming around
at the pace it should be happening. But the guy has some skills that
could make him more than servicable in the future, if he could get his
head out.

Really, with the way the Twins try to hammer on fundamentals, I think
he is in the best place to see if I am right. I am not yet ready to
give up. I have very much enjoyed the way that the addition of speed
has changed this team. Casilla, Punto, Gomez, and really, Span too,
have changed the team's way of doing business, and it can be fun (or
frustrating) to watch. So I am not giving up yet, but don't forget:
I am the guy who never wanted to give up on Luis Rivas. So there you
have it.

By the way, what ever happened to him? Rivas, that is.

On Tue, 26 Aug 2008, powrwrap wrote:

>> On Aug 26, 12:51 pm, "infield homerun" <nos...@nospam.com> wrote:
>
>> he is not yet 23, why should the twins give up on him so soon.
>
> Get him out of the lineup, the Twins are in a pennant race.

I believe the umpires might declare a forfeit if a lineup card
with only eight batters is turned in and not corrected.

Phrased a different way, who is it you are proposing to replace
Gomez with? Cuddyer on crutches? Shannon Stewart on skates?
Barry Bonds on a blacklist? (Realistically, the Twins can not
be expected to violate the gentlemen's agreement regarding Bonds.)

AAA looks unable to answer the emergency jumpstart call, yet again.
So we'd be talking about a trade. Even before the deadline, who was
significantly better, that wouldn't cost one of the young pitchers?
Suppose the Padres demanded Perkins (supposing you view him as the
most expendable young starter) plus a younger stud prospect (i.e.
non-Hamburger) plus the valueless Gomez for Brian Giles, would you
do that trade? How about trying to pry Lastings Milledge away from
the Nats, probably for a similar package? Think the Reds would part
with Jay Bruce for any conceivable offering?

It's fair to say the offseason decision, that Gomez would be up to
the challenge, was mistaken. But when you call for action now,
there needs to be a plausible alternative. I know you well enough
by now to suspect you may have one in mind.

--
John Gregory ashbury at skypoint.com http://www.skypoint.com/ tilde ashbury
Thought for the moment:
Being subjected to mediocrity is what a life in hell means. -- Ken Tucker

> On Aug 26, 5:49�pm, John Gregory <ashb...@skypoint.com> wrote:
>
> It's fair to say the offseason decision, that Gomez would be up to
> the challenge, was mistaken. �But when you call for action now,
> there needs to be a plausible alternative. �I know you well enough
> by now to suspect you may have one in mind.

It will be a moot point by Sept. 1st but I would have sent Gomez down
and brought up Bobby Kielty from AAA. Then I would have platooned
Kubel and Kielty in RF, with Span in CF, Young in LF. Ruiz is your
everyday DH.

After Sept. 1st Gomez would be a pinch runner or a defensive
replacement for Kielty/Kubel.

On Tue, 26 Aug 2008, powrwrap wrote:

> It will be a moot point by Sept. 1st but I would have sent Gomez down
> and brought up Bobby Kielty from AAA.

*shrug* Kielty I view more as insurance than as upgrade, even over
Gomez. Not really a move that will change the course of a pennant
race. Has Bobby been healthy? I didn't realize he was back in the
Twins' system, and he has really few at bats, scattered at various
minor leagues levels suggesting rehab stints before Boston let him
go. Hasn't hit well at AAA, though in small numbers of plate
appearances, and last year was bad at the major league level.

> After Sept. 1st Gomez would be a pinch runner or a defensive
> replacement for Kielty/Kubel.

There is common ground for discussion if it's agreed that Gomez
is a defensive upgrade over at least some major leaguers. :)
He tracks down a lot of flyballs, then he pulls some real rocks
when getting rid of the ball, but overall the pluses and minuses
outweigh those of the two lumbering guys, IYO?

Unless you project Kielty as an .800 OPS guy (he achieved that
only in the 2002 season), the (small?) defensive downgrade matched
with only a small offensive upgrade marks this move as basically a
wash. Which means, of course, that I'd probably be fine with it
if they had done it, because it would do no harm either. And if
a visit to AAA were to turn out to be the key for Gomez, and he
came back up in September as a run producing monster, then it
would be better than just a wash.

--
John Gregory ashbury at skypoint.com http://www.skypoint.com/ tilde ashbury
Thought for the moment:
Don't marry for money; you can borrow it cheaper. -- Scottish Proverb

powrwrap wrote:
>> On Aug 26, 8:29 am, "infield homerun" <nos...@nospam.com> wrote:
>>
>> isn't that how these are supposed to work?
>> this started as a bunt question, now you are moving the goal-post.
>
> How is mentioning that the stats don't take into account missed bunt
> opportunities moving the goal posts on the question of whether or not
> he's a good bunter?
>
>
>> overall I am happy with Gomez in CF. the bat production will come
>
> You people that keep on saying that Gomez will eventually develop into
> a good hitter--at what point will you throw in the towel? Supposing he
> continues to bat .260/.300/.425 (or thereabouts) through 2009? 2010?
> When will you give up on him?

Most players peak around 26-29 so I wouldn't "give up" on him til then.
More salient question is, how long can the Twins afford to keep him on the
MLB team if he plays like this? I'll say it again: he's the best option I
can see right now. He's also very, very young and I think it's reasonable
to hope for improvement.

brink

On Aug 26, 7:14 pm, powrwrap <powrw...@aol.com> wrote:
> > On Aug 26, 5:49 pm, John Gregory <ashb...@skypoint.com> wrote:
>
> > It's fair to say the offseason decision, that Gomez would be up to
> > the challenge, was mistaken. But when you call for action now,
> > there needs to be a plausible alternative. I know you well enough
> > by now to suspect you may have one in mind.
>
> It will be a moot point by Sept. 1st but I would have sent Gomez down
> and brought up Bobby Kielty from AAA. Then I would have platooned
> Kubel and Kielty in RF, with Span in CF, Young in LF. Ruiz is your
> everyday DH.
>
> After Sept. 1st Gomez would be a pinch runner or a defensive
> replacement for Kielty/Kubel.

Bobby Kielty is at AAA? In the Twins' system?

brianj

> On Aug 26, 7:45 pm, John Gregory <ashb...@skypoint.com> wrote:
> On Tue, 26 Aug 2008, powrwrap wrote:
> > It will be a moot point by Sept. 1st but I would have sent Gomez down
> > and brought up Bobby Kielty from AAA.
>
> *shrug*  Kielty I view more as insurance than as upgrade, even over
> Gomez.  Not really a move that will change the course of a pennant
> race.  Has Bobby been healthy?  I didn't realize he was back in the
> Twins' system, and he has really few at bats, scattered at various
> minor leagues levels suggesting rehab stints before Boston let him
> go.  Hasn't hit well at AAA, though in small numbers of plate
> appearances, and last year was bad at the major league level.

He been playing in AAA for about 2 weeks now. He's got a low average, .
200, but his OBA is .417 vs. lefties. His lifetime MLB splits againsts
lefties is .296/.379/.503. Kubel's splits vs. righties is .
276/.328/.462. That would be a nice platoon.



> > After Sept. 1st Gomez would be a pinch runner or a defensive
> > replacement for Kielty/Kubel.
>
> There is common ground for discussion if it's agreed that Gomez
> is a defensive upgrade over at least some major leaguers. :)
> He tracks down a lot of flyballs, then he pulls some real rocks
> when getting rid of the ball, but overall the pluses and minuses
> outweigh those of the two lumbering guys, IYO?

Gomez is an excellent defender, racing all over the place to get
balls. Also, he's closely backing up the corner outfielders, another
benefit of his speed. He does have a rocket arm but it's not quite as
accurate as it needs to be. He frequently bypasses the cut-off man
trying to gun down a runner which allows the batter to move up another
base. He's got to learn to hit the cut-off guy.

I think the offensive benefits of Kubel/Kielty outweigh the dropoff in
defense in RF that would result from the platoon. Putting Span in CF
is not a dropoff from having Gomez there. Playing RF in the Dome
doesn't require much range, just need to know how to play the baggie,
and Kielty would be comfortable out there.

The Twins have scored 2, 9, 5, 3, 2, 2 runs on the road trip. Suddenly
they are having trouble scoring runs against the likes of Miguel
Bautista and Ryan Rowland-Smith. I'd take my chances in RF in order to
get some more runners on base.

> Unless you project Kielty as an .800 OPS guy (he achieved that
> only in the 2002 season), the (small?) defensive downgrade matched
> with only a small offensive upgrade marks this move as basically a
> wash.  Which means, of course, that I'd probably be fine with it
> if they had done it, because it would do no harm either.  And if
> a visit to AAA were to turn out to be the key for Gomez, and he
> came back up in September as a run producing monster, then it
> would be better than just a wash.

Kielty will get on base vs. lefties. Considering the Twins are in a
run of games where they are facing 6 lefties in a row it would have
been a worthwhile manuever to have made starting the road trip.
Sending Gomez to AAA if only for 10 days would have been a good
message to send to him. Throw a scare into him and jolt his ego.

On Aug 26, 8:07 pm, "brink" <brinknos...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> powrwrap wrote:
> >> On Aug 26, 8:29 am, "infield homerun" <nos...@nospam.com> wrote:
>
> >> isn't that how these are supposed to work?
> >> this started as a bunt question, now you are moving the goal-post.
>
> > How is mentioning that the stats don't take into account missed bunt
> > opportunities moving the goal posts on the question of whether or not
> > he's a good bunter?
>
> >> overall I am happy with Gomez in CF. the bat production will come
>
> > You people that keep on saying that Gomez will eventually develop into
> > a good hitter--at what point will you throw in the towel? Supposing he
> > continues to bat .260/.300/.425 (or thereabouts) through 2009? 2010?
> > When will you give up on him?
>
> Most players peak around 26-29 so I wouldn't "give up" on him til then.

Whoa! You'd endure a .300 OBA for at least four more years and
possibly seven??!!

> More salient question is, how long can the Twins afford to keep him on the
> MLB team if he plays like this?  

Yes, that is the question. I believe they've cut him way too much
slack. If the Twins were 10 games out of first I'd let him play in the
majors. But they're in a pennant race and it's stupid to keep playing
him.

> I'll say it again: he's the best option I can see right now.  He's alsovery, very young and I think it's reasonable to hope for improvement.

He had another one of those swings last night where he swung with his
right knee on the ground reaching for an outside curve ball. Totally
unacceptable. That's insane. He's still doing that in spite of years
of professional coaching to break him of the habit. Makes me wonder if
he's teachable. That would be an automatic benching if I were
Gardenhire. I'd pull him out of the game right then and there. Maybe
pull a move like the Rays' Joe Maddon did with B.J. Upton. Upton
failed to hustle on the basepaths (again) so Maddon allowed him to
take his position in CF *then* made his substitution, pulling Upton
for another player.

On Aug 26, 5:49 pm, John Gregory <ashb...@skypoint.com> wrote:
>
> I believe the umpires might declare a forfeit if a lineup card
> with only eight batters is turned in and not corrected.

Bah. Get Span in center, Young and Kubel in the corners, and let
Buscher or Harris or Ruiz Remond DH. It's not hard at all to write
Gomez out.

Matt

On Aug 27, 10:29 am, powrwrap <powrw...@aol.com> wrote:
> > On Aug 26, 7:45 pm, John Gregory <ashb...@skypoint.com> wrote:
> > On Tue, 26 Aug 2008, powrwrap wrote:
> > > It will be a moot point by Sept. 1st but I would have sent Gomez down
> > > and brought up Bobby Kielty from AAA.
>
> > *shrug*  Kielty I view more as insurance than as upgrade, even over
> > Gomez.  Not really a move that will change the course of a pennant
> > race.  Has Bobby been healthy?  I didn't realize he was back in the
> > Twins' system, and he has really few at bats, scattered at various
> > minor leagues levels suggesting rehab stints before Boston let him
> > go.  Hasn't hit well at AAA, though in small numbers of plate
> > appearances, and last year was bad at the major league level.
>
> He been playing in AAA for about 2 weeks now. He's got a low average, .
> 200, but his OBA is .417 vs. lefties. His lifetime MLB splits againsts
> lefties is .296/.379/.503. Kubel's splits vs. righties is .
> 276/.328/.462. That would be a nice platoon.
>
> > > After Sept. 1st Gomez would be a pinch runner or a defensive
> > > replacement for Kielty/Kubel.
>
> > There is common ground for discussion if it's agreed that Gomez
> > is a defensive upgrade over at least some major leaguers. :)
> > He tracks down a lot of flyballs, then he pulls some real rocks
> > when getting rid of the ball, but overall the pluses and minuses
> > outweigh those of the two lumbering guys, IYO?
>
> Gomez is an excellent defender, racing all over the place to get
> balls. Also, he's closely backing up the corner outfielders, another
> benefit of his speed. He does have a rocket arm but it's not quite as
> accurate as it needs to be. He frequently bypasses the cut-off man
> trying to gun down a runner which allows the batter to move up another
> base. He's got to learn to hit the cut-off guy.
>
> I think the offensive benefits of Kubel/Kielty outweigh the dropoff in
> defense in RF that would result from the platoon. Putting Span in CF
> is not a dropoff from having Gomez there. Playing RF in the Dome
> doesn't require much range, just need to know how to play the baggie,
> and Kielty would be comfortable out there.
>
> The Twins have scored 2, 9, 5, 3, 2, 2 runs on the road trip. Suddenly
> they are having trouble scoring runs against the likes of Miguel
> Bautista and Ryan Rowland-Smith. I'd take my chances in RF in order to
> get some more runners on base.
>
> > Unless you project Kielty as an .800 OPS guy (he achieved that
> > only in the 2002 season), the (small?) defensive downgrade matched
> > with only a small offensive upgrade marks this move as basically a
> > wash.  Which means, of course, that I'd probably be fine with it
> > if they had done it, because it would do no harm either.  And if
> > a visit to AAA were to turn out to be the key for Gomez, and he
> > came back up in September as a run producing monster, then it
> > would be better than just a wash.
>
> Kielty will get on base vs. lefties. Considering the Twins are in a
> run of games where they are facing 6 lefties in a row it would have
> been a worthwhile manuever to have made starting the road trip.
> Sending Gomez to AAA if only for 10 days would have been a good
> message to send to him. Throw a scare into him and jolt his ego.

I'm not saying you're wrong, Alan, but if his BA doesn't jolt his ego,
then I'm not sure we have a cure for what ails him.

brianj

On Aug 27, 1:52 pm, Matt <AcesWi...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Aug 26, 5:49 pm, John Gregory <ashb...@skypoint.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> > I believe the umpires might declare a forfeit if a lineup card
> > with only eight batters is turned in and not corrected.
>
> Bah. Get Span in center, Young and Kubel in the corners, and let
> Buscher or Harris or Ruiz Remond DH. It's not hard at all to write
> Gomez out.
>
> Matt

Yes, and then we can get on to having this same discussion (or one
sort of like it) about Delmon Young.

brianj

On Aug 27, 10:29 am, powrwrap <powrw...@aol.com> wrote:
> > On Aug 26, 7:45 pm, John Gregory <ashb...@skypoint.com> wrote:
> > On Tue, 26 Aug 2008, powrwrap wrote:
> > > It will be a moot point by Sept. 1st but I would have sent Gomez down
> > > and brought up Bobby Kielty from AAA.
>
> > *shrug*  Kielty I view more as insurance than as upgrade, even over
> > Gomez.  Not really a move that will change the course of a pennant
> > race.  Has Bobby been healthy?  I didn't realize he was back in the
> > Twins' system, and he has really few at bats, scattered at various
> > minor leagues levels suggesting rehab stints before Boston let him
> > go.  Hasn't hit well at AAA, though in small numbers of plate
> > appearances, and last year was bad at the major league level.
>
> He been playing in AAA for about 2 weeks now. He's got a low average, .
> 200, but his OBA is .417 vs. lefties. His lifetime MLB splits againsts
> lefties is .296/.379/.503. Kubel's splits vs. righties is .
> 276/.328/.462. That would be a nice platoon.
>
> > > After Sept. 1st Gomez would be a pinch runner or a defensive
> > > replacement for Kielty/Kubel.
>
> > There is common ground for discussion if it's agreed that Gomez
> > is a defensive upgrade over at least some major leaguers. :)
> > He tracks down a lot of flyballs, then he pulls some real rocks
> > when getting rid of the ball, but overall the pluses and minuses
> > outweigh those of the two lumbering guys, IYO?
>
> Gomez is an excellent defender, racing all over the place to get
> balls. Also, he's closely backing up the corner outfielders, another
> benefit of his speed. He does have a rocket arm but it's not quite as
> accurate as it needs to be. He frequently bypasses the cut-off man
> trying to gun down a runner which allows the batter to move up another
> base. He's got to learn to hit the cut-off guy.
>
> I think the offensive benefits of Kubel/Kielty outweigh the dropoff in
> defense in RF that would result from the platoon. Putting Span in CF
> is not a dropoff from having Gomez there. Playing RF in the Dome
> doesn't require much range, just need to know how to play the baggie,
> and Kielty would be comfortable out there.
>
> The Twins have scored 2, 9, 5, 3, 2, 2 runs on the road trip. Suddenly
> they are having trouble scoring runs against the likes of Miguel
> Bautista and Ryan Rowland-Smith. I'd take my chances in RF in order to
> get some more runners on base.
>
> > Unless you project Kielty as an .800 OPS guy (he achieved that
> > only in the 2002 season), the (small?) defensive downgrade matched
> > with only a small offensive upgrade marks this move as basically a
> > wash.  Which means, of course, that I'd probably be fine with it
> > if they had done it, because it would do no harm either.  And if
> > a visit to AAA were to turn out to be the key for Gomez, and he
> > came back up in September as a run producing monster, then it
> > would be better than just a wash.
>
> Kielty will get on base vs. lefties. Considering the Twins are in a
> run of games where they are facing 6 lefties in a row it would have
> been a worthwhile manuever to have made starting the road trip.
> Sending Gomez to AAA if only for 10 days would have been a good
> message to send to him. Throw a scare into him and jolt his ego.

I am kind of starting to think you might be right. I like good
denense as much as anybody (I have been a Punto defender when I should
not have been). But who has played the worst defense this week?
Buscher? Probably. And as frustrating as that is, it is not as bad
as having a guy at 3B who can't hit.

So, maybe I am wavering. Maybe.

brianj

On Sat, 23 Aug 2008 12:37:50 -0500, Scott Smith
<scott.smith@iphouse.com> wrote:

>Who could have imagined that we would be able to say that
>the Twins are 20 games over .500 and in first place?

Damn, I think I jinxed them. :-/




- Scott Smith: scott.smith@iphouse.com
MySpace: http://www.myspace.com/choppersmith

brianj wrote:
Yes, and then we can get on to having this same discussion (or one sort
of like it) about Delmon Young.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
After the season, I'd trade Young for bullpen help and somehow, some way
get Raul Ibanez to play LF. I know Ibanez bats lefthanded and the Twins
need righthanded bats .... this guy has a good glove, good arm, great
bat and known as a great teammate and clubhouse guy. He'd fit in great
with the Twins. The Twins could afford him. Just take the $10 millon
they will spend in the off-season on a washed-up starting pitcher (like
Ponson, Hernandez) and washed-up infielder (like Batista, Lamb) and use
it on Ibanez.

As for Young, I can't stand to watch him play. Nothing against the guy
pesonally ... he is brutal to watch in the field and is so undisciplined
at the plate. At least Gomez can play defense.

Matt wrote:
> On Aug 26, 5:49 pm, John Gregory <ashb...@skypoint.com> wrote:
>>
>> I believe the umpires might declare a forfeit if a lineup card
>> with only eight batters is turned in and not corrected.
>
> Bah. Get Span in center, Young and Kubel in the corners, and let
> Buscher or Harris or Ruiz Remond DH. It's not hard at all to write
> Gomez out.

I just don't get this... it seems practically every game we get ample
evidence as to why putting Young and Kubel at the corner OF spots just isn't
a good idea with this team. Does anyone think Kubel makes that throw to
nail the tying run at the plate in the 9th tonight?

It's easy to write Gomez out if we're talking about 1-way baseball. It's
just like it's easy to write Wally Szerzvxybiak into your starting lineup if
you ignore defense.

brink

> On Aug 27, 9:11 pm, "brink" <brinknos...@hotmail.com> wrote:

> I just don't get this...  it seems practically every game we get ample
> evidence as to why putting Young and Kubel at the corner OF spots just isn't
> a good idea with this team.  Does anyone think Kubel makes that throw to
> nail the tying run at the plate in the 9th tonight?

No, Kubel doesn't make that throw. But does Gomez go 2 for 4 like
Kubel did? No.

The point is that Gomez was used exactly as he should have been
yesterday. Pinch runner and late inning defensive replacement. He
scored a run then he made a fine running catch in left center (Span
would have gotten to it too, but not many other CFers). Gomez wasn't
given the opportunity to bat. Perfect. Note that Gardenhire started
Kubel in RF even with a lefty pitching for Seattle. Maybe he's finally
getting fed up with Gomez's offensive ineptitude.

powrwrap wrote:
>> On Aug 27, 9:11 pm, "brink" <brinknos...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>> I just don't get this... it seems practically every game we get ample
>> evidence as to why putting Young and Kubel at the corner OF spots
>> just isn't a good idea with this team. Does anyone think Kubel makes
>> that throw to nail the tying run at the plate in the 9th tonight?
>
> No, Kubel doesn't make that throw. But does Gomez go 2 for 4 like
> Kubel did? No.
>
> The point is that Gomez was used exactly as he should have been
> yesterday. Pinch runner and late inning defensive replacement. He
> scored a run then he made a fine running catch in left center (Span
> would have gotten to it too, but not many other CFers). Gomez wasn't
> given the opportunity to bat. Perfect. Note that Gardenhire started
> Kubel in RF even with a lefty pitching for Seattle. Maybe he's finally
> getting fed up with Gomez's offensive ineptitude.

Hey, it's not like I think you're dead wrong or anything. You make good
points and I can live with that (until the next outfield defensive disaster
I guess). I'm just trying to balance out all the people who think that the
obvious move is to banish Gomez to AAA. I think it is much less cut-and-dry
than that... and for the most part I think Gardy's done a brilliant job
with his position players this year. He's never had to mix and match so
much and yet they're scoring more runs than ever and the defense is holding
together (barely).

brink

On Aug 27, 9:11 pm, "brink" <brinknos...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> I just don't get this...  it seems practically every game we get ample
> evidence as to why putting Young and Kubel at the corner OF spots just isn't
> a good idea with this team.  Does anyone think Kubel makes that throw to
> nail the tying run at the plate in the 9th tonight?

No, but he hits a 2-run double eariler in the game to make the point
moot.

Matt