28 thoughts on “November 6, 2019: QOs”

  1. My answer depends a bit on the player, but in general, I think the Twins have entered the phase of contention where their first priority should be pursuing top, MLB-ready talent to elevate this roster, both at its ceiling and floor.

    1. It also depends on the revenue sharing status of the Twins. From last year's QO summary.

      A team that exceeded the luxury tax in the preceding season...


      A team that neither exceeded the luxury-tax threshold in the preceding season nor receives revenue sharing will lose its second-highest selection in the following year's Draft, as well as $500,000 from its international bonus pool for the upcoming signing period.
      Teams in this group: Angels, Astros, Blue Jays, Cardinals, Cubs, Dodgers, Giants, Mets, Phillies, Rangers, White Sox and Yankees.

      Payroll was down from last year so unlikely to be in this group.

      A team that receives revenue-sharing money will lose its third-highest selection in the following year's Draft. If it signs two such players, it will also forfeit its fourth-highest remaining pick.
      Teams in this group: A's, Braves, Brewers, D-backs, Indians, Mariners, Marlins, Orioles, Padres, Pirates, Rays, Reds, Rockies, Royals, Tigers and Twins.

      So the highest pick the team can lose is the third round pick. Going for two, as MLBTR predicted, means third and fourth round picks are forfeited.

      1. Yup. Pineda was the other potential recipient, given the pro-rating of his salary to account for his suspension. If the Twins thought he’d pitch as well as he did last year, $14 million is a pretty reasonable commitment. We obviously don’t know, but I wonder if there’s a desire to move on given how he torpedo’d the playoff rotation.

        1. That's one I might have given a QO for. Yeah, it sucks how it went down, but if he signs somewhere, okay, and if he takes it, I'm guessing he's pitching with something to prove for the next year. Guess they didn't want to deal with him anymore.

  2. The only Twin I could find who played in winter ball yesterday was Brandon Barnes. He went 0-for-4 as his Mexicali team lost to Guasave 2-1. He is batting .200/.226/.233 in 30 at-bats.

    I assume the Twins must have let Alejandro De Aza go, as he no longer appears in the list of Twins in winter ball.

  3. I have a good example of why we have the "no politics" rule here.

    My wife joined a Bible study group this year. Some of the women have decided to start sharing political (propaganda) emails and telling people how to vote on local elections. My wife responded by sharing a Star Tribune article that refutes the "facts" from the shared email. She hasn't heard back from anyone in the group and I'd questioning whether or not she is welcome there.

    I should also add that my wife used to have a consulting role dealing with school financing so saw through many of the lies that were shared.

    It really sucks for her that she's put on that position to agree with their politics to participate in a Bible study. Why are people leaving the church, again?

    1. Sorry to hear that. I have a firm rule that I will not discuss politics from the pulpit, I will not post anything political on the book of faces, and I won't discuss politics in conversation unless someone asks me a direct question. And even then, I won't argue about it. It's basically, "Well, you asked what I thought, so I told you. I never said you have to agree with me to be a Christian."

      It's interesting to me, though, how many people are sure they know what my politics are, even though I never discuss them.

      1. I appreciate that

        We've all but left this church due to all the politics. (The boy is in 8th grade so we'll cut all ties this summer.)

        1. My wife's about in the same place with her church. We only go for occasions now, and even then it's iffy.

          1. Without getting preachy, I do encourage both of you to try to find another church if you don't think you can stay in the one you currently attend. There are a lot of them out there, and they don't all preach politics.

            1. My wife's issue isn't with the specific parish, but the worldwide church. I have no church at all, though I encourage her. I've suggested lightly looking into something that aligns more closely with her beliefs, but I don't think she's done much on that front (understandably, that's a huge change)

              1. In my experience in a worldwide church (Catholic), the politics sometimes get expressed as universal because the faith part is. But those two things are not the same. Both the most politically conservative and most politically liberal churches I ever attended are less than a mile and a half from each other (and both have names that start with "Our Lady..."). I find that kind of hilarious.

            2. I have to say, I love pretty much everything about Reform Judaism (at least at Temple Israel). I'm never going to convert, but it's very welcoming and basically preaches two main things: (1) treat everyone well, and (2) question everything. Plus, there is the same faith tradition as I had growing up (minus the last 300 or so pages).

              The clergy at our temple can be occasionally political (but again, mainly about those two rules above, so for example, they were in support of same sex marriage because of rule #1), but they are very welcoming and open to various ideas (see rule #2).

              I'm at services now at least monthly (and I took a class there last year to learn how to read Hebrew) compared to visiting a church about twice a year (Christmas Eve and Easter with my family). It's great to still have a little bit of spirituality in my life, but I'm able to basically go my own path.

              1. Is Rabbi Cytron there? I took an ethics class from him back in the day. I loved all the questioning.

                1. Nope, he's not at Temple Israel (although I did have the pleasure of his acquaintance when we both worked at Macalester College years ago).

      1. They basically just responded with repeating more of the propaganda that was initially put out there.

        If they wanted a dialog, fine. They didn't. They just wanted to make sure everyone had the same opinion. It's a pretty shitty thing to do to someone under the guise of a Bible study.

        1. They just wanted to make sure everyone had the same opinion. It's a pretty shitty thing to do to someone under the guise of a Bible study.

          I was tempted to drop a "FTFY and cross off everything after "...thing to do". But given the context, it's even worse than that.

    2. Sorry to hear that Algonad. I will tread lightly here, but my wife and I come from different churches. When we met, it was not much of a struggle for us in terms of which church to raise our kids. We attend a church in which the few times our pastor waxes politically, it fully aligns with our beliefs. Our pastor supported our school levy(which passed yesterday) on social media recently. Most of the congregation are of similar political and social beliefs. We do not align much with my wife's former church. Several other family members switched to a different church as well. Unfortunately, the tribalism of our society is woven into our religions. My son is currently struggling with which church he should attend at the U of M. My advice to him (and others) is to attend a church that matches your world view. I just had a long faith talk with my son on the way back from the wake tonight. Basically I told him that if you believe in God and you believe Christ died for our sins, well then you have a myriad of churches to pick from . I strayed from Christ for 15 years because of a similar situation and it took the miracle of my son being born for me to find my way back.

Comments are closed.