30 thoughts on “Game 98: Yankees at Twins”

  1. Either everyone is still discouraged from last night or this game hasn't been very interesting yet. I'm here now, though, so I'll try to find things to comment on.

  2. I'm really not disappointed that the Royals got Cueto. I still feel like the Twins should still be pointing toward the future, rather than trying to go all out for this year. If something can be worked out, fine, but I wouldn't want to do something dumb like, say, trade a top prospect at a key defensive position to get a mediocre relief pitcher.

    1. I wouldn't want to do something dumb like, say, trade a top prospect at a key defensive position to get a mediocre relief pitcher.


  3. Fun fact: Nathan Eovaldi is the only major league player ever whose last name begins with "Eo".

  4. Having a one-run lead is better than not having a lead. We'll see if we can first hold it and the build on it.

  5. Well, I really wasn't expecting Gibson to pitch a shutout. Let's just hold them to one.

  6. Neil Allen pulled a Rick Anderson there--waited too long to get out there and help a struggling pitcher.

  7. Gregorious bunting in that situation should not have caught the Twins by surprise.

  8. I understand the crowd reaction, but I really can't think Eovaldi would be throwing at Dozier here.

  9. Dazzle has said all game that Gibson didn't get calls on close pitches. If they were "close", but weren't actually strikes, then I can't complain about not getting strikes called. I will say, though, that an umpire with a tight strike zone is going to make it a lot harder for Gibson to have a good game.

  10. I would also say that at some point, probably not as far off as most think, we're going to see technology used to call balls and strikes. I don't know how accurate the technology is now--just because they put a picture of a box and a ball on the screen doesn't mean it's accurate--but if it's not good enough now, I suspect it will be soon. And the way life works is that when technology is available, we tend to use it.

    1. I'm of the mind that it should be done in secret, with a little indicator in each ump's shoe or ear that he can override for reasons of balls that cross the strikezone on a bounce and other things hard for a computer to read.
      Then the umps will get better and no one will call for robots to replace them, and we won't have to sacrifice the aesthetic appeal of the game we have come to love in the name of technologically-assured fairness.

      When that happens, framers and nibblers are going to lose a lot of value.

      1. Framers will but not nibblers. The edges will always be there but now they won't be able to con the ump into moving those edges.

  11. I know Eovaldi has a big fastball, but he also has an ERA of 4.43 and a WHIP of 1.51 and we're making him look like Sandy Koufax.

    1. Twins got 8 hits and a number of well-hit balls for outs. He was just keeping everything on the ground, more than usual for him. It happens.

      1. It does, and sometimes it means an ordinary pitcher is having an extraordinary game. Other times, it means the batters are making an ordinary pitcher look extraordinary. Or, it can mean a combination of both. Hard for me to tell on radio.

        1. I tend to lean towards one pitcher having a better than ordinary game than a whole bunch of batters having bad games. Especially the way the Twins have hit at home. If anything, the Twins didn't do a good enough job of taking advantage of a small strike zone.

Comments are closed.