Spring Training
Now that the Twins actually went and did something halfway exciting, I thought we could start talking about the upcoming season. We have to be a fairly solid favorite to contend for the division at this point, given that we return the exact same that lost a one game playoff for the division to the White Sox last year except that we added the White Sox's third baseman.
While we're talking about it, I thought I'd pass along this post highlighting Aaron Gleeman's ranking of our top prospects. http://www.aarongleeman.com/2009_02_15_baseballblog_archive.html#826707874657922259
Couple things of note here: 1. That guy we were deriding a couple years ago, Ben Revere (you know, the light-hitting centerfielder out of Kentucky?) appears to be developing pretty well and could become a serviceable prototype leadoff guy who fields well in center someday. And 2. One of our top pitching prospects is named Shooter Hunt. That's just outstanding. I can't wait to hear Dick Bremer say "And Shooter gives way to Boof for the sixth inning."
By the way, is there any talk about the fact that the Twins now have a higher guys named Joe : guys not named Joe ratio than any team post 1975? Is this some weird conspiracy or something? What is it with the Joes? No one named their kids Joe in the early '80s. I assume there's a promo in the works somewhere with Gardy ordering a cup of coffee at Perkins and a miniature Mauer, Nathan and Crede come tumbling out of his mug.
3 Comments:
MCA - I thought the same thing on the addition of another "Joe" to the roster. I'm thinking we call the 2009 Twins "The Lunch Pail Gang" - feel like your average Joe is a lunch pail kind of guy and they just go to the ballpark everyday and go to work.
It is a huge hole that we filled in the infield, Gleeman didn't seem too excited overall (seemed to think his bat was overrated) but how much better do you feel about the depth we now have?
As for the lineup, here is what Souhan had in his column on Crede:
1. Span,
2. Casilla,
3. Mauer,
4. Cuddyer,
5. Morneau,
6. Crede,
7. Kubel,
8. Punto
9. Gomez.
Or insert Delmon Young for any of the starting outfielders.
Is it bad that I am totally over Cuddy? I think he is probably a great influence in the clubhouse and that D-Young hasn't proven anything yet but . . .
Me likey.
February 23, 2009 at 6:45 PM
I was actually surprised at how positive Gleeman sounded; I figured he's have 500 words on why this is a guaranteed complete wash from the platoon system and there's no rational reason to think Crede will post better than .240/.300/.450. I guess he likes the incentives-based structuring.
I don't really care if he hits .250 as long as we see 22 homers from the six or seven spot or wherever he sits (I've rethought the lineup and his low on-base percentage probably isn't best for the 5th spot). Based on what I saw of him in Chicago, I think he'll be a great fit for the clubhouse and feel that his hitting a couple bombs here and there will have an benefit beyond the numbers - maybe Delmon will say "hunh, I can hit it farther if I pull the ball every now and then? And people will cheer louder? Who knew?" Perhaps he can even become the vocal leader we've been needing. He does have a ring, afterall.
I've seen a couple people linking Casilla with the 2nd spot in the lineup. I just don't get it. If you want him to be a leadoff hitter, tell him to be a leadoff hitter and have him lead off. Otherwise he just doesn't strike me as a top of the order batter in any respect. If Span's going to lead off, I'd rather had Young bat second, actually.
So, maybe here's my desire: Span, Young, Mauer, Morneau, Kubel (those are, coincidentally, your best five hitters last year), Crede, and whatever order Gomez, Punto and Casilla show up at the ballpark.
jan, I was thinking of t-shirts that say "Joementum?" with an x'ed out picture of Lieberman on the front, and then "No, JOEMENTUM!" with assorted Twins on the back.
I'm with you on Cuddyer - I feel kind of badly about it, but he's had one above average for a right fielder year at the plate in his career, basically, has been perpetually unhealthy the last couple years. That said, he's only 29, and I think I've been viewing him as totally through his prime years, so that's a little hyperbolic. If we can platoon him to hit against lefties, fine. Otherwise, I really think we would do well to trade one of our 5 solid outfielders, and he's the best option, I think.
I'm not as down on Young as most people; he's coming off .290 with close to 30 doubles when most guys his age are playing high minors or for Cal State Fullerton. That proves something, at least.
February 23, 2009 at 7:55 PM
Guys, very excited about everything going on. I have been very busy here at work. I may not be posting but I am definitely reading what you are writing.
February 25, 2009 at 7:30 AM
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home