Jump to content
  • GUESTS

    If You  want access  to member only forums on FM, You will need to Sign-in or  Sign-Up now .

    This box will disappear once you are signed in as a member.

Were the Twins worse in the late 90's or now?


toughguy

Recommended Posts

It's close. They were just as un-watchable now as they were then. No big bats and even worse pitching. I think the current group is worse than the 97-00 group. One of the big differences is they are drawing twice as many fans now as they were then. 2 million vs. 1 million which gives the Pohlads no reason to improve the team. I don't see them turning this around for at least 2 more years - maybe more.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The attendance boggles my mind. I guess if you wanna come watch the other team, i can see it. They do have a young stud, the vargas dude. my only fear is that they will try to teach him something, you know like hit the ball the other way, put the ball in play and etc like they do with all there players. Just leave him alone. Santana, i see still splits time in the outfield. Isnt he your future ss? then play him there. Who cares about this nunez and escobar dudes, but im sure gardy thinks they are good clubhouse guys and wants to be fair to them. Man im getting sick of that redder and redder pumkin head, sent him packin.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Think team had less talent back then but think the current team is more painful to watch because they play so sloppy and continue to make many of the same fundamental mistakes over and over again. Those past teams you compared to were severely lacking talent wise but at least they were solid defensively and seemed to learn from their mistakes; something that has not occurred with the current team. That is what diminishes my optimism for future success (unless of course the red pumpkin head is replaced)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Pretty close. Both are/were pretty pathetic. Lost 97 games in 1999 with guys like Hunter, Mientkiewicz, Koskie, Guzman, Jacque Jones, Radke, Milton, Joe Mays. Went on to be very good with that nucleus 2-3 years later. Not sure I see that with the group that's milling around Target Field now, but you never know. A lot depends on Sano and Buxton obviously but with Vargas, Santana, Arcia the potential is there if they progress like that group from the late 90's did. Or they could just be another Michael Restovich (promising prospect who never did anything). Hunter hit .245 with 9 HR and Mient hit .229 in 1999, for example. Still hurts to see David Ortiz on those rosters and how we let him go for nothing. Not real sure where the pitching will come from though, I don't see a ton of promise there.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.



  • Your Responses - Share & Have Fun :)

    • gimruis
      I hunt in the rifle zone so I don't have a need to use a shotgun to hunt deer, but I would be looking at this if there was ever a need to.   There could be state legislation introduced next summer that eliminates the shotgun zone completely.  It has bipartisan support.  Wisconsin removed theirs years ago and MN is usually later to follow.  They've tried to pass it more than once and it came up just short both times.  Probably just a matter of time.
    • Wanderer
      Oh, h e l l no! 
    • leech~~
      Screw that, here's whatch need!  😆   Power-Shok Rifled Slug 10 Gauge 766 Grain Grain Weight: 766 Shotshell Length: 3-1/2in / 89mm Muzzle Velocity: 1280
    • Wanderer
      20 ga has become a real popular deer round in the last 5 or so years.  The rifled barrels are zinging those sabot slugs with rifle like accuracy out to 100 yards easily.  Some go so far as dialing in for a 200 yard shot but really, by 150 they’re falling off pretty low.   I have a single shot Ultraslug in 20 ga that shoots really well at 100 yards.  Most everyone I know that has bought a slug gun lately has gotten the Savage 220 in 20ga.  Problem can be finding the shells you want.
    • leech~~
      My son always bugs me about getting a nice light over-under 20ga for grouse hunting.  I say Heck no, I'm getting a 3 1/2" 10ga so I can put as much lead in the air that I can!!     So, I'm keeping my 12ga.  
    • 11-87
      That’s almost exactly what I was thinking.  Have slug barrels for both   One for turkey and one for deer.      I have a 20ga mosseberg as well. (Combo came with the scope but never used.   I always liked the 12 better
    • leech~~
      Wanderer is right on the money and covered it well.  I was wondering too if you had a slug barrel for one of your guns?  If so you could make that your slug gun with a scope, and the other your turkey gun with the Red dot.  As you can afford it. 
    • Wanderer
      Kinda depends on if you want magnification or quick target acquisition.   More magnification options and better accuracy with a scope.  You get what you pay for too so get comfortable with a budget for one.  Tasco and Bushnell work but I find they lose their zero easier, have low contrast and don’t gather light well in low light conditions.  That said, I’m still using one I haven’t replaced yet.  Vortex has been the hot brand for the past several years for bang for the buck.  Good products.  Nothing beats Swarovski though.  Huge dough for those.  Burris is another decent option.   There are some specific models for shotgun/slug hunting in the economy brands and bullet drop compensation (BDC) reticles.  Based on experience I’d recommend not falling for that marketing ploy.   Red dots are usually lower magnification and easier to get on target.  Reasonably accurate but don’t do well with definition, like searching the brush for your target.  I put a HAWKE red dot on a .22 for squirrels and it’s been good.  For turkey, that’s probably the route I’d go.     If your slug shots are normally not too far and too brushy, I’d think a red dot could work there too if you’re only buying 1 scope.  You’ll be better off dimming the reticle to the lowest setting you can easily use to not over shine the target and get a finer aim point.   If you don’t have a slug barrel, you might appreciate one of those.  I had a browning with a smoothbore slug barrel that shot Brenneke 2-3/4 inch well.  The 11-87 would well fitted with a cantelever rifled barrel. 
    • 11-87
      Looking for recommendations on scope or red dot    I basically hunt turkey and whitetail, live in southern MN. So it’s all deer/ shotgun    looking to add a scope/ red dot as my eyes don’t work like they used to to with the open sights.    my gun options are 11/87 12. Browning BPS 12    not looking for the most expensive or the cheapest    pros and cons of one over the other
    • SkunkedAgain
      That's good news. I haven't seen any ice in Black Bay yet, but it looks like the small bays should start to freeze up this weekend. Hopefully we make some ice next week.   Below is the forecast for Cook. We should have temps mostly below zero . The bottom section below shows that it should not be windy, and no snow is predicted. All good signs for making ice.  
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.