PDA

View Full Version : Article: Orioles Provide Hope for the Hopeless



Nick Nelson
09-11-2012, 11:02 PM
You can view the page at http://www.twinsdaily.com/content.php?1030-Orioles-Provide-Hope-for-the-Hopeless

frightwig
09-11-2012, 11:58 PM
Do the Twins really figure to have much money to spend this winter? I had the opposite impression, given that the club already owes $68M to 9 players (including 2, Blackburn and Nishioka, who may not be on the 2013 roster), before Terry Ryan even settles any arbitration cases and accounts for the serfs in the organization. If the payroll budget drops again, as many expect, he might have enough money to buy or trade for a mid-price starting pitcher. He'll probably take a flyer on another budget-line veteran to fill a rotation spot, too. Maybe he'll flip Span for one or two young arms.... But I'll be kind of surprised if he does much more than that.

DPJ
09-12-2012, 07:45 AM
The O's are where they are cause of blind luck. Are they a better team now then they were a year ago...yes. But to make it seem like the O's have build some type of blueprint for succees is just wrong.

They have a horseshoe up their ass that has little to no chance of continuing into 2013 and beyond.

mnjon
09-12-2012, 07:54 AM
The O's are where they are cause of blind luck. Are they a better team now then they were a year ago...yes. But to make it seem like the O's have build some type of blueprint for succees is just wrong.

They have a horseshoe up their ass that has little to no chance of continuing into 2013 and beyond.

I'm pretty sure a lot of people would have said the same thing about the '87 and even the '91 Twins. Not saying that the Orioles are going to win the World Series, but if they do, it doesn't take away any of the meaning just because they aren't contending the next year.

DPJ
09-12-2012, 07:59 AM
I'm pretty sure a lot of people would have said the same thing about the '87 and even the '91 Twins. Not saying that the Orioles are going to win the World Series, but if they do, it doesn't take away any of the meaning just because they aren't contending the next year.

What in the helll does that have to do with what I just said?

Nick laid out this post that the O's have given bad teams hope for a quick turnaround and that's not true. The O's are winning games with pixie dust and a horseshoe up Showalter's ass. Hell the ****ing Red Sox have a better run differential then the mighty O's. If the O's win the World Series this season, well god bless em and good for them. But what the O's have going right now isn't a formula for succees over the longterm, it's nothing but smoke and mirrors.

old nurse
09-12-2012, 08:58 AM
There is no such thing as sustained luck. The 87 Twins had a negative run differential. They found ways to win when they needed to. What the Orioles are doing now as a formula for success is not for the long term. Nowhere in the article does it say it is for the long term. Right now I really doubt that many Twins fans are concerned about the long term success as much as they are avoiding another decade of failure. Small and mid sized market teams need to have continued player development and not have their stars signed to long term contracts have issues.

mnjon
09-12-2012, 09:14 AM
I'm pretty sure a lot of people would have said the same thing about the '87 and even the '91 Twins. Not saying that the Orioles are going to win the World Series, but if they do, it doesn't take away any of the meaning just because they aren't contending the next year.

What in the helll does that have to do with what I just said?

Nick laid out this post that the O's have given bad teams hope for a quick turnaround and that's not true. The O's are winning games with pixie dust and a horseshoe up Showalter's ass. Hell the ****ing Red Sox have a better run differential then the mighty O's. If the O's win the World Series this season, well god bless em and good for them. But what the O's have going right now isn't a formula for succees over the longterm, it's nothing but smoke and mirrors.

Just like you so eloquently put, "They have a horseshoe up their ass that has little to no chance of continuing into 2013 and beyond." Nick's isn't saying they have a blueprint for success for years to come. He never says this is sustainable. He's merely saying that you don't need to have the Dodgers or Angels money and statistical talent to have a great season. The Orioles may be so good/lucky that they can win the World Series. He doesn't say one way or another if they will continue to thrive. He's just saying they have a chance, and although they have the negative run differential, I'd say a decent chance at getting to the World Series. I'd gladly take that. Based on your argument, I'm guessing that you're more content with the decade of playoffs without even one AL Pennant. That's fine if that's what you are content with, but a large portion of the fan base would probably rather have another Championship than years of nothing more than playoff contention. They may not care if it's sustainable. I'm happy with the way the Twins performed between '02 and '10 but I wouldn't want that to be our peak long term. It's not like I want the Twins to end up like the Cubs or anything. :-P

mike wants wins
09-12-2012, 09:16 AM
Hope is not a strategy. Sure there is hope, but you can always hope. I want an actual strategy to be executed.

DPJ
09-12-2012, 09:31 AM
He's just saying they have a chance, and although they have the negative run differential, I'd say a decent chance at getting to the World Series. I'd gladly take that. Based on your argument, I'm guessing that you're more content with the decade of playoffs without even one AL Pennant. That's fine if that's what you are content with, but a large portion of the fan base would probably rather have another Championship than years of nothing more than playoff contention. They may not care if it's sustainable. I'm happy with the way the Twins performed between '02 and '10 but I wouldn't want that to be our peak long term. It's not like I want the Twins to end up like the Cubs or anything. :-P

They have a chance based off nothing more then blind ass backwards luck. Would Nick have written this same article if the O's were 68-73 as there pythagorean says they should be...ofcourse not. He wrote cause the O's went from one of the worst teams in the league to contending. The only problem is they're contending off nothing but luck. "Be like the O's" how the hell is a team suppose like a team that's winning based off nothing but luck?

As for the Twins failures in the postseason, ask anyone on BYTO how I felt about those losses.

THE DFC
09-12-2012, 10:31 AM
I appreciate a lot of the local sentiment that wants to grasp at straws to continue to roll forward with the Mauer/Morneau/Span/Willingham grouping, but the truth of the matter is that magically putting together a rotation that will make us competitive next season is like banking on hitting your number in one spin in roulette.

We have a very intriguing wave of young players on its way. A far smarter model to follow would be the Nationals and the Rays who are building around young talent. If we can trade Span, Morneau, Willingham, etc. to fill in the gaps of this young talent, I'm all for it versus trying to roll a Yahtzee next season and running the risk of any of the aforementioned 3's value going in the toilet via injury.

Play the odds and play the long-term game. It makes far more sense.

Nick Nelson
09-12-2012, 11:12 AM
The only problem is they're contending off nothing but luck.

The central point of this article, which apparently whizzed right over your head, is that the Orioles were able to make substantial enough improvements on their formerly league-worst pitching staff to hold their own in the tough AL East, and without expending a whole lot of money or resources in the process.

You're correct that the Twins probably couldn't compete in the AL East next year. Good job.

DPJ
09-12-2012, 11:33 AM
The central point of this article, which apparently whizzed right over your head, is that the Orioles were able to make substantial enough improvements on their formerly league-worst pitching staff to hold their own in the tough AL East, and without expending a whole lot of money or resources in the process.

You're correct that the Twins probably couldn't compete in the AL East next year. Good job.


And if you read my posts you'll see that I said the O's are better then they were a year ago. They made some good moves that made them a better team. But you devoted the first chunk of your article to the O's contending and being in the think of the AL East race, but if they were 68-73 (as they should be) you don't write this article.

If you wouldn't have mentioned contending and quick turn arounds then I wouldn't have a problem with it.

Nick Nelson
09-12-2012, 11:49 AM
And if you read my posts you'll see that I said the O's are better then they were a year ago. They made some good moves that made them a better team. But you devoted the first chunk of your article to the O's contending and being in the think of the AL East race, but if they were 68-73 (as they should be) you don't write this article.

If you wouldn't have mentioned contending and quick turn arounds then I wouldn't have a problem with it.

Do you deny that the Twins would have a chance to turn around and contend if they have a league-average pitching staff next year? If not, why are you even arguing? They don't need the same amount of luck that the O's have experienced to compete in the AL Central.

DPJ
09-12-2012, 11:57 AM
Do you deny that the Twins would have a chance to turn around and contend if they have a league-average pitching staff next year? If not, why are you even arguing? They don't need the same amount of luck that the O's have experienced to compete in the AL Central.

No I don't think the Twins would contend for the division with a league average pitching staff.

Brock Beauchamp
09-12-2012, 12:00 PM
Do you deny that the Twins would have a chance to turn around and contend if they have a league-average pitching staff next year? If not, why are you even arguing? They don't need the same amount of luck that the O's have experienced to compete in the AL Central.

No I don't think the Twins would contend for the division with a league average pitching staff.

The Sox and Tigers are doing just that...

Pitching ERA: Tigers 4th, Sox 9th, Twins 13th.

Hitting...

Runs Scored: Sox 5th, Twins 6th, Tigers 8th.

And it's not as if the Sox and Tigers are going to get any better next season. Neither one has a young roster, much of a farm, or money left to spend.

Nick Nelson
09-12-2012, 12:12 PM
No I don't think the Twins would contend for the division with a league average pitching staff.
Well they've done it multiple times before so, basically, you're wrong.

In 2009, the Twins won the AL Central with a 4.50 ERA that ranked 11th in the AL.

In 2008, they came one game short of winning the division with a 4.16 ERA that ranked 7th in the AL.

In 2003, they won the division handily with a 4.41 ERA that ranked 7th in the AL.

Three average (or worse) pitching staffs, three contending teams. And that's just in the last ten years. There are plenty of examples outside of the Twins, too.

DPJ
09-12-2012, 12:17 PM
No I don't think the Twins would contend for the division with a league average pitching staff.
Well they've done it multiple times before so, basically, you're wrong.

In 2009, the Twins won the AL Central with a 4.50 ERA that ranked 11th in the AL.

In 2008, they came one game short of winning the division with a 4.16 ERA that ranked 7th in the AL.

In 2003, they won the division handily with a 4.41 ERA that ranked 7th in the AL.

Three average (or worse) pitching staffs, three contending teams. And that's just in the last ten years. There are plenty of examples outside of the Twins, too.

Well that's fantastic Nick, what the hell does that have to do with a 2013 season that none of us know about yet? What's the Tigers & Sox rosters gonna look like. Who's injuries will play huge factor into the division, can Willingham, Mauer, Morneau, Span and others stay healthy? Who and where are these league average pitchers coming from?

That's great that it happened in 2009 and 2003...but what the **** does that have to do with the 2013 season?

Brock Beauchamp
09-12-2012, 12:27 PM
Well that's fantastic Nick, what the hell does that have to do with a 2013 season that none of us know about yet? What's the Tigers & Sox rosters gonna look like. Who's injuries will play huge factor into the division, can Willingham, Mauer, Morneau, Span and others stay healthy? Who and where are these league average pitchers coming from?

That's great that it happened in 2009 and 2003...but what the **** does that have to do with the 2013 season?

I pointed out that the Sox and Tigers are competing with pretty mediocre overall stats. Offensively, the Twins are in the thick of things with other AL Central teams. Their pitching staff has been a complete letdown and is at fault for their 4th/5th place finish.

Do you really think the Sox and Tigers are going to get significantly better next season? Neither one has much in the minors and IIRC, neither will have much money to spend, either.

Injuries can't be predicted but on paper, the Twins can easily compete if they shore up the rotation.

It's a tough thing to do but if it's possible, there is no reason the Twins can't compete in 2013.

DPJ
09-12-2012, 12:33 PM
Do you really think the Sox and Tigers are going to get significantly better next season? Neither one has much in the minors and IIRC, neither will have much money to spend, either.

Injuries can't be predicted but on paper, the Twins can easily compete if they shore up the rotation.

It's a tough thing to do but if it's possible, there is no reason the Twins can't compete in 2013.

Neither of us know what's gonna happen with either teams roster. Maybe Mike Ilitch loses his mind again and signs everyone, who knows what to expect outta the Sox and Kenny WIlliams.

The point is I don't see how bringing up 2003, 2009 seasons or current stats has to do with this. Do I think it's impossible...no, but do I see it happen...**** no!!

JB_Iowa
09-12-2012, 12:34 PM
The Orioles made a change in 2010 that is ignored in this article.

Before the Orioles changed managers, they were 32-73 (.302). Showalter immediately turned that around and the O's went 34-23 (.596) for the remainder of the season.

True, they couldn't sustain it in 2011 but they did improve to 69-93 (.426) overall.

It's true that they went from .426 last year to .560 this year and a good part of that is probably due to the pitching changes -- and LUCK -- that are discussed above.

But I think they are also benefiting from the shake-up they made in 2010. They improved from 2010 to last year and again from 2011 to this year.

Do you think pitching changes ALONE will allow the Twins to make that kind of improvement?

I think some changes in leadership are also necessary.

nokomismod
09-12-2012, 12:58 PM
Do you deny that the Twins would have a chance to turn around and contend if they have a league-average pitching staff next year? If not, why are you even arguing? They don't need the same amount of luck that the O's have experienced to compete in the AL Central.

No I don't think the Twins would contend for the division with a league average pitching staff.

The Sox and Tigers are doing just that...

Pitching ERA: Tigers 4th, Sox 9th, Twins 13th.

Hitting...

Runs Scored: Sox 5th, Twins 6th, Tigers 8th.

And it's not as if the Sox and Tigers are going to get any better next season. Neither one has a young roster, much of a farm, or money left to spend.




No I don't think the Twins would contend for the division with a league average pitching staff.
Well they've done it multiple times before so, basically, you're wrong.

In 2009, the Twins won the AL Central with a 4.50 ERA that ranked 11th in the AL.

In 2008, they came one game short of winning the division with a 4.16 ERA that ranked 7th in the AL.

In 2003, they won the division handily with a 4.41 ERA that ranked 7th in the AL.

Three average (or worse) pitching staffs, three contending teams. And that's just in the last ten years. There are plenty of examples outside of the Twins, too.



Well that's fantastic Nick, what the hell does that have to do with a 2013 season that none of us know about yet? What's the Tigers & Sox rosters gonna look like. Who's injuries will play huge factor into the division, can Willingham, Mauer, Morneau, Span and others stay healthy? Who and where are these league average pitchers coming from?

That's great that it happened in 2009 and 2003...but what the **** does that have to do with the 2013 season?

I pointed out that the Sox and Tigers are competing with pretty mediocre overall stats. Offensively, the Twins are in the thick of things with other AL Central teams. Their pitching staff has been a complete letdown and is at fault for their 4th/5th place finish.

Do you really think the Sox and Tigers are going to get significantly better next season? Neither one has much in the minors and IIRC, neither will have much money to spend, either.

Injuries can't be predicted but on paper, the Twins can easily compete if they shore up the rotation.

It's a tough thing to do but if it's possible, there is no reason the Twins can't compete in 2013.

If we are trying to base our arguments on statistics, these are both solid examples of how the Twins could compete with a middle of the road rotation next year. TR has some work to do!

old nurse
09-12-2012, 01:02 PM
Do you really think the Sox and Tigers are going to get significantly better next season? Neither one has much in the minors and IIRC, neither will have much money to spend, either.

Injuries can't be predicted but on paper, the Twins can easily compete if they shore up the rotation.

It's a tough thing to do but if it's possible, there is no reason the Twins can't compete in 2013.

Neither of us know what's gonna happen with either teams roster. Maybe Mike Ilitch loses his mind again and signs everyone, who knows what to expect outta the Sox and Kenny WIlliams.

The point is I don't see how bringing up 2003, 2009 seasons or current stats has to do with this. Do I think it's impossible...no, but do I see it happen...**** no!!

If I read your logic correctly I would assume the following. Nothing that anybody does before makes any difference going forward. Don't pay any attention whatsoever to what was done before because you can't replicate those conditions. Past performance and history makes no difference for the future. It is not a well managed team of mediocre talent playing well, it is blind luck that the Orioles will win about 20 more games than last year.
For the Twins going forward then it would not pay for them to sign a stopgap free agent like Willingham to bridge until the next wave of outfielders come up, nor would it have made sense to sign a Floriman or a Deduno to a contract. I don't think a team you would run would be very successful

Blackjack
09-12-2012, 01:16 PM
Tough crowd here. Nick writes a generally positive article giving us hope, showing us an example of a team that went from very poor to contending, and he gets a bunch of negative comments.

Just like any forum, you start getting recognized for the quality, or lack of, in your posts. Time to start ignoring the constant bitchers and moaners.

DPJ
09-12-2012, 01:23 PM
If I read your logic correctly I would assume the following. Nothing that anybody does before makes any difference going forward. Don't pay any attention whatsoever to what was done before because you can't replicate those conditions. Past performance and history makes no difference for the future. It is not a well managed team of mediocre talent playing well, it is blind luck that the Orioles will win about 20 more games than last year.
For the Twins going forward then it would not pay for them to sign a stopgap free agent like Willingham to bridge until the next wave of outfielders come up, nor would it have made sense to sign a Floriman or a Deduno to a contract. I don't think a team you would run would be very successful


What in the hell are you talking about?

Bringing up a few random seasons from the past have no bearing on what's gonna happen in 2013. We don't know what the rosters will look like, the strength of the division, injuries, trades, signings...hell everything. I even said it could happen, but I think it has little to no chance of happening.


Tough crowd here. Nick writes a generally positive article giving us hope, showing us an example of a team that went from very poor to contending, and he gets a bunch of negative comments.

Who's being negative? If he never would have mentioned the word contend, I would have no problem with the article. If he just would have made an article that said "here's how the O's improved there pitching staff" I wouldn't have said a thing.

greengoblinrulz
09-12-2012, 01:27 PM
Dont believe the teams can be compared as BALT operates differently.
They actually have their #3 hitter (Markakis) hitting leadoff since its the best baseball move.....MN wont even hit Mauer 2nd.
They will call up hotshot 20 yr old prospects if it helps them win games.....not shot that Rosario/Sano will see any action next yr (bein saved for Futures Gm @ Target Fld)
Understand that you need quality players in middle infield is something MN has never grasped.
Balt takes its star C & actually plays him at his most optimum position where he's won a Gold Glove....MN knows Mauer cant do it anymore.
Balt went out & acquired MLB starters....MN will stay inhouse with Deduno, DeVries, Pavano

mnjon
09-12-2012, 01:49 PM
Bringing up a few random seasons from the past have no bearing on what's gonna happen in 2013. We don't know what the rosters will look like, the strength of the division, injuries, trades, signings...hell everything. I even said it could happen, but I think it has little to no chance of happening.

So you're saying that basically every team will


have a chance based off nothing more then blind ass backwards luck.

DPJ
09-12-2012, 01:59 PM
Bringing up a few random seasons from the past have no bearing on what's gonna happen in 2013. We don't know what the rosters will look like, the strength of the division, injuries, trades, signings...hell everything. I even said it could happen, but I think it has little to no chance of happening.

So you're saying that basically every team will


have a chance based off nothing more then blind ass backwards luck.

No, not at all.

There's a certain amount of luck that goes into every sport, a fluke play winning a big game etc. Being outscored by 20+ runs and somehow being tied with a team that's outscored its opponents by 92 runs. Well that's the very definition of blind-ass luck

old nurse
09-12-2012, 02:09 PM
@DPJ



Your flawed thinking is what I am talking about. You do not seem able to observe that history repeats itself. Teams have won in the past with less than perfect teams. Baltimore this year, the 1987, 2003, and 2009 Twins are examples of that. Baltimore patchedworked a staff this year that allows them the chance to win, just as the Twins have done in those years. In terms of what the other teams do, it is a variable you can't control. They could add like Detroit did last year. It is not working, Did Chicago find stability finally? Don't know. Just as you don't know if the Twins make astute additions that they can't contend. Short term fix while they figure out how to rebuild a pitching pipeline.

a potential 20 plus improvement in games won is a little more than luck.

mnjon
09-12-2012, 02:11 PM
No, not at all.

There's a certain amount of luck that goes into every sport, a fluke play winning a big game etc. Being outscored by 20+ runs and somehow being tied with a team that's outscored its opponents by 92 runs. Well that's the very definition of blind-ass luck

That makes literally no sense.

DPJ
09-12-2012, 02:15 PM
No, not at all.

There's a certain amount of luck that goes into every sport, a fluke play winning a big game etc. Being outscored by 20+ runs and somehow being tied with a team that's outscored its opponents by 92 runs. Well that's the very definition of blind-ass luck

That makes literally no sense.

Then you're literally a moron.


@DPJ



Your flawed thinking is what I am talking about. You do not seem able to observe that history repeats itself. Teams have won in the past with less than perfect teams. Baltimore this year, the 1987, 2003, and 2009 Twins are examples of that. Baltimore patchedworked a staff this year that allows them the chance to win, just as the Twins have done in those years. In terms of what the other teams do, it is a variable you can't control. They could add like Detroit did last year. It is not working, Did Chicago find stability finally? Don't know. Just as you don't know if the Twins make astute additions that they can't contend. Short term fix while they figure out how to rebuild a pitching pipeline.

What the hell is going on here. I don't care if the O's win the World Series or history repeating it'self. This is a simple thing...the O's are contending with luck. They're a better team then a year ago, but in way should a team that's been outscored by 20 runs being contending for a division. If they win it all, good for them, but they're gonna do it on the heels on one of the luckiest teams ever.

JB_Iowa
09-12-2012, 02:30 PM
Teams have won in the past with less than perfect teams. The question is whether you rely on that?

Plan for the worst, hope for the best.

JP3700
09-12-2012, 02:33 PM
I thought this was a great article. I had mentioned in another thread that I would take the Orioles blueprint and use it for 2013 because I felt it was the closest route to possible contention. Obviously there is some luck involved but I think the Orioles have a sound blueprint. They do two things very well. They shorten games with their bullpen and they hit the ball out of the park. The reason they have a negative run differential is because they have an inconsistent rotation which causes them to get blown out, Like we did to them 19-7 earlier this year. They will obviously also try to improve their rotation this offseason.

Couple stats I wanted to bring up. The 4 division leaders (with the Orioles and Yankees being tied) are 1st, 2nd, 3rd and 5th in the AL in home runs. They are 5th, 6th, 8th and 9th in team ERA in the AL. 4 of the 5 worst records in the AL (Twins, Royals, Indians and Mariners) have hit the least home runs in the AL (significant margin).

I think our bullpen is pretty close but we need to have more power in the lineup. The fact that 4-5 spots in the lineup for most of the season showed zero to little power hurt the team almost as much as the pitching did.

mnjon
09-12-2012, 02:44 PM
DPJ - You're clearly very good at conveying your thoughts and you are very understanding of others opinions. Good job not being negative.
You can't say that luck is a one-time event that can only happen under specific circumstances and then apply that same logic to 140+ games on a team with 25+ players. It's not just luck. Say what you want to convince yourself otherwise but not everyone on the Orioles is having a career year and winning all games by the slimmest of margins.

DPJ
09-12-2012, 02:54 PM
DPJ - You're clearly very good at conveying your thoughts and you are very understanding of others opinions. Good job not being negative.
You can't say that luck is a one-time event that can only happen under specific circumstances and then apply that same logic to 140+ games on a team with 25+ players. It's not just luck. Say what you want to convince yourself otherwise but not everyone on the Orioles is having a career year and winning all games by the slimmest of margins.

You really don't get this do you? You understand that being outscored by your opponents is bad, being outscored by your opponents over 140 games is very bad. If you are somehow winning or contending for a division with that bad a run differential...that means your team is very very lucky.It's not about career years or whatever garbage you're spewing.

Riverbrian
09-12-2012, 02:58 PM
You lose on Monday 12 to 1 and you win Tuesday and Wednesday 3 to 2 both nights. You are Negative 10 in run differential and 2 and 1.


If anyone is looking at run differential and saying that proves luck. I'd say it proves nothing. To me it says that they got pounded every once in awhile.

A win is a win and a loss is a loss. Luck is a factor for teams like the Orioles and luck is a factor for Teams like the Yankees. Both teams also contend with elements of bad luck from time to time.

I agree with Nick 100 Percent... The Orioles do indeed give me hope and so do the Pirates. The 2011 D-Backs give me hope. The 2010 Padres give me hope. The 2009 Rockies give me hope. The 2008 Astros Give me Hope. The 2007 Indians give me hope... I Could keep going... But it's safe to say... That no one is going to take that hope from me because I watched every one of those teams defy the odds.

We all like to play the game on Paper but it is always played on the field. We have access to the dollar figures and we have access to the metrics and we all like to try and add the pieces together but the game is always played on the field. You can take your WAR and try to make it all make sense but every once in awhile, a guy hitting .196 ropes one into the Gap and clears the bases with two outs in the 9th.

That's the beauty of baseball.

In the end... The Difference between Ben Revere .304 Average and Trevor Plouffe .234 Average is 50 hits over 100 games.

One hit every two games and that's the thesis that makes teams looks good "on paper". An extra hit every two games and that thesis is blown out the window.

It's the freeking little things and the timing of when you make that play (hit, catch, throw) that determines if you are a contending baseball team.

If you are good enough to make a major league roster... You are good enough to help your team win and contend. This includes Taylor Teagarden... Everyone has a chance and teams like the Orioles should inspire all of us. Writing it off as luck is just bad form.

You make your own luck sometimes. The harder you work... The Luckier you Get...

Sidenote... On Paper... I would feel luckier if we improved our pitching!!!

Nick Nelson
09-12-2012, 03:18 PM
You really don't get this do you?
I think you're the one that doesn't get it. Your diatribes are tiring and completely off-topic.

Getting outscored by your opponents is not a great recipe for fielding a winning team. We got it. Thank you for that spectacular piece of baseball wisdom. No one is suggesting that to be the case. Contrary to what you believe, the Orioles have done some good things to improve their club, things that the Twins should take note of moving forward.

If the Twins can move to the middle of the pack in pitching while maintaining a productive lineup, they'll have a chance to contend next year. Countless teams have made the playoffs or come close despite lacking upper-echelon offenses & pitching staffs. Getting caught up in the Orioles' run differential is pointless, and derailing the potential for a quality discussion.

JP3700
09-12-2012, 03:19 PM
You really don't get this do you? You understand that being outscored by your opponents is bad, being outscored by your opponents over 140 games is very bad. If you are somehow winning or contending for a division with that bad a run differential...that means your team is very very lucky.It's not about career years or whatever garbage you're spewing.

As I mentioned above, there is a reason for their run differential, but I'll add to it. They had inconsistent starting pitching for much of the year when they had Arrietta, Hunter and Matusz in the rotation. That's why they called up Gonzalez, Britton, and Tillman as the article mentioned. Their blueprint makes perfect sense, they win close games due to their ability to shorten the game or keep it close and hit timely home runs. They win close games and lose blow outs and that makes their run differential look bad.

Let me give you an easy example of why run differential can be deceiving. Last night in a 4-0 game we put in Perdomo and Burnett. This caused the game to end 9-1, an additional -4 to our run differential. If Gardy put in Burton and Perkins instead or even Fien and Duensing, wouldn't the game have ended more likely in the 4-1 or 5-1 range?

Instead of just looking at numbers and saying it's luck why not actually understand why it's happening.

mike wants wins
09-12-2012, 03:27 PM
There us a pretty good correlation between run differential and win loss record.....putting that aside, the twins should not plan for luck. Their strategy should be about getting 2 good to very good pitchers by trade or free agency. The twins minor league and major league pitchers are not likely to get them to the middle of the pack at this point.

DAM DC Twins Fans
09-12-2012, 03:46 PM
I just joined the thread--skimmed the 30plus comments--looking for 3 names that I never saw. I live in MD (closer to Nats than Os). Os improvement is more than luck. It is built around middle of the diamond nucleus that will be around for years. The three names are Adam Jones (stolen from Seattle--if memory is correct for Bedard) who is the Os Morneau of a couple of years ago, JJ Hardy (who the Twins should have kept) and their Mauer (Wieters) who finally developed. Jones is a better OF than anybody the Twins have, Wieters may or may not stay healthy enough to be a star C for the next 10 years. throw in Markakis who I rate highly mainly cause I was at the game he hit three taters vs the Twins...its a fairly young nucleus who could (and would in the AL Central) contend for the next few years.

Paul
09-12-2012, 03:57 PM
I think that comparing the O's and Twins potentialwise is very logical on the surface. But if you look closer you will notice a major impediment to the Twins following the O's tracks. The Orioles had a field staff overhaul a couple yrs ago. I'm a huge Gardenhire fan. My opinion, based on results and reports from the players, is he is every bit as good, if not better than, Showwalter. But there needs to be either a field staff overhaul or a player roster overhaul. For various reasons it's infinitely easier to replace the coaching staff.

Here's my logic on why personnel has to change. History shows us that payroll matters. But it also shows us it's not the only, or even the most important, factor. There needs to be a synergy for a BB team to rise to the top. Without that synergy the warts really show. In 2010 the 94 win Twins had that synergy. In 2011 the 99 loss Twins didn't. It seemed to me that the team had a much greater mercenary attitude in 2011 than 2010. It stands to reason that the firing of Hardy coupled with the hiring of Nishioka most likely invoked player comments and questions. I think Gardenhire was a good enough people person to placate the players. But Smith was not, and probably retorted something along the lines of "This is a business, you do your job and I'll do mine." I think the clubhouse was too far gone by the time they showed Smith the door. And I think it's too far gone to be repairable with the status quo.

Nick Nelson
09-12-2012, 04:30 PM
I tend to think there's a cause-and-effect dynamic at play. Did the 2011 Twins lose because they lacked synergy, or did they lack synergy because they lost?

SweetOne69
09-12-2012, 04:30 PM
While I agree that there is a correlation between run differential and won loss record, the reason that Baltimore is performing much better with a -22 RD is because they are 25-7 in 1 run games. They win the close games.

mike wants wins
09-12-2012, 04:50 PM
winning close game is not a repeatable skill. There are studies on the interwebs that show that. Again, I am not saying there is no hope, I am saying you cannot base your company's strategy on hope.

Brock Beauchamp
09-12-2012, 05:28 PM
winning close game is not a repeatable skill. There are studies on the interwebs that show that. Again, I am not saying there is no hope, I am saying you cannot base your company's strategy on hope.

I don't think it even needs to be hope. If the Twins can somehow magically pull a league average rotation and keep their offense, they'll be in the "thick" of the AL Central, as meager as that can be. Look at Detroit and Chicago. They're both pretty mediocre overall but one of them is going to the playoffs. The Twins can join that club rather easily with one smart FA pickup, one scrapheap guy, and one smart trade this offseason. With a little bit of luck, that rounds out this rotation enough to be "competitive" in the short term.

Paul
09-12-2012, 05:51 PM
I tend to think there's a cause-and-effect dynamic at play. Did the 2011 Twins lose because they lacked synergy, or did they lack synergy because they lost?

I agree wholeheartedly there's a snowball effect. And that it does work in both directions. But my logic trail seems sound to me. And the assumptions I make are all quite likely. Do you find fault?

TheLeviathan
09-12-2012, 05:54 PM
One thing I haven't seen noted is that while the Orioles "plan" may appear to be luck, they were building around a set of prospects. It's just many of their pitching specs have underwhelmed so far.

I still think this team's best bet is to build around it's largest collection of controlled talent and not to chase phantoms. Baltimore was doing exactly that and it has worked out, but for different reasons.

diehardtwinsfan
09-12-2012, 05:58 PM
winning close game is not a repeatable skill. There are studies on the interwebs that show that. Again, I am not saying there is no hope, I am saying you cannot base your company's strategy on hope.

this is true, but let's not forget that the WhiteSox repeated it for a year and even got a ring out of it...

snepp
09-12-2012, 06:04 PM
this is true, but let's not forget that the WhiteSox repeated it for a year and even got a ring out of it...

The White Sox team that had a pythag record of 91-71 and had a fantastic rotation?

frightwig
09-13-2012, 01:07 AM
The O's success this year has depended a lot on luck (which Nick acknowledged in his post), but Nick is right that the Twins would stand a puncher's chance next year if the pitching improves to a league-average level, which probably means eliminating 125-150 runs allowed. (Easier said than done, right?)

So what did the O's do in the past year to fix their team? To recap Nick...

They signed an inexpensive Asian SP (Chen costs $3.2M this year) who has been a bit better than league-average, unlike Terry Ryan's bargain flyer for the Twins rotation last spring.

They swapped league-average-ish SP's with Colorado (and got a good reliever, Matt Lindstrom, in the deal who was later traded for Joe Saunders, another dependably average SP). Freed from Coors Field, Jason Hammel has had a breakout season. (Btw, although Jeremy Guthrie fell apart in Colorado, he's also been very good through 10 starts with Kansas City this season.)

They found Miguel Gonzalez, a 28 year-old minor league free agent released by the Red Sox last winter (because he had a 6.17 ERA, 1.59 WHIP in 46.2 IP at AA last season), who has, incredibly, posted a 3.62 ERA, 1.23 WHIP in 79.2 IP (including 11 starts) for Baltimore.

One young pitcher, Chris Tillman, who struggled in 3 prior partial-seasons with the O's, suddenly has been very good in 11 starts this year. The other young pitcher Nick mentioned, Zach Britton, has been lit up a number of times this season, but recently he had a string of 4 very nice starts, too.

Finally, the bullpen has been very good. Whereas the Baltimore bullpen had a 4.18 ERA last year, it rates 4th in the AL with a 3.15 ERA this season. A few key relievers (Luis Ayala, Darren O'Day, Steve Johnson, Lindstrom) were not part of the team last year.

So, those things. Not to mention acquiring Wilson Betemit and Nate McLouth, who have been solid additions to the lineup, and Chris Davis having a minor breakout year at 26, after the O's got him from Texas for Koji Uehara last summer. And of course the lineup core (Jones, Markakis, Wieters, Hardy, Reynolds, all under 30 years old) are all playing well this season.

It's true that none of these moves cost a lot of money, or essential talent from the organization. But, at the same time, you'd have to admit that it is quite a few bargain-hunting moves (about 10, plus Tillman making the leap) that have worked out all at once for the O's. Tommy Hunter hasn't panned out, and a few of their pitching prospects besides Tillman have continued to scuffle, but a really high percentage of these bargain deals have paid off for them this year. You might even say that the O's front office has been as lucky as the team on the field. (I mean, Miguel Gonzalez! Come on!)

But a reason for Twins fans to hope? OK, sure. If Terry Ryan can pull off 8-10 inexpensive moves that work out, particularly if a few of them fill holes in the rotation, maybe Twins fans will get to enjoy such luck next year, too.

SpiritofVodkaDave
09-13-2012, 11:33 AM
Posting in a DPJ thread!

chuchadoro
09-13-2012, 12:38 PM
The cynic in me sees this article as pre-emptive rationalization for the Twins continuing to cut payroll and sign players players off the scrap heap. The Orioles are giving the Twins org a perfect excuse to stand pat or make minor changes on the periphery. I can't wait for the offseason.
"The lineup is great blah blah blah...Bruce Chen really solidifies the starting rotation... Diamond and Deduno are aces blah blah...are you guys as excited as me about (minor league FA no one has heard of)? He's the next Deduno...Just a tweak here and there and the Twins are blah blah blah..."
Here's to one more year of the Pohlads pissing on your leg and telling you it's raining!

scottz
09-13-2012, 01:20 PM
If anyone is looking at run differential and saying that proves luck. I'd say it proves nothing. To me it says that they got pounded every once in awhile.
...
I agree with Nick 100 Percent... The Orioles do indeed give me hope and so do the Pirates. The 2011 D-Backs give me hope. The 2010 Padres give me hope. The 2009 Rockies give me hope. The 2008 Astros Give me Hope. The 2007 Indians give me hope... I Could keep going... But it's safe to say... That no one is going to take that hope from me because I watched every one of those teams defy the odds.
...
Sidenote... On Paper... I would feel luckier if we improved our pitching!!!

I do think run differential is important to look at for determining whether a team's record is over or underperforming. Obviously, it isn't the only thing, but go to ESPN or any other site that lists the run differential along with the standings and scroll back historically and it is plainly clear that *in general*, teams with large positive differentials are better, year in and year out. That's not to say that a team with a near-zero or negative differential can't compete, but it is the exception. DPJ chooses to call it luck and that's as accurate as a terminology as any. Call it magic or lightning in a bottle or chemistry or whatever...but it's the exception, and as mike wants win states, he doesn't want hope to be the plan going forward. That said, Nick clearly didn't mean to suggest hope was the path to take, if not in his original post then at least in his follow up responses.

Interesting teams you mentioned there as many have strong similarities: most changed managers shortly before their hope-cited seasons.
Team, New Manager, Year Manager took over
2012 Orioles, Showalter, 2011
2012 Pirates, Hurdle, 2011
2011 DBacks, Gibson, Mid-Year 2010
2010 Padres, Black, 2007
2009 Rockies, Tracy, Mid-Year 2009 after 46 games (18-28)
2008 Astros, Cooper, Mid-Year 2007
2007 Indians, Wedge, 2002

So of the 7 teams cited - and I'm presuming those were off the top of your head, 5 of them replaced their manager either in the season of hope or in the year before. Sometimes, a new voice can get players to perform better than the old voice. That's not saying that the managers they replaced weren't good. New 2009 Rockies voice Jim Tracy, for example, replaced old voice Clint Hurdle - who later became the new voice for the Pirates. I'm not suggesting that a change at manager absolutely turns the team around; just saying that when teams turn around after struggles, sometimes it is easier to do with a different leader.

Finally, I totally agree. I'd feel much luckier with improved pitching. Diamond is not a #1 guy in 2012, nor Deduno, nor DeVries, nor Hendricks, and none of them figure to be in 2013. Pavano is not a #1 guy. A healthy Baker is not a #1 guy. If league average pitching is what is needed, the team needs a #1 and a #2 to go with the #3 (maybe Diamond), #4s, and #5s (the rest) that we have.

Riverbrian
09-13-2012, 06:31 PM
If anyone is looking at run differential and saying that proves luck. I'd say it proves nothing. To me it says that they got pounded every once in awhile.
...
I agree with Nick 100 Percent... The Orioles do indeed give me hope and so do the Pirates. The 2011 D-Backs give me hope. The 2010 Padres give me hope. The 2009 Rockies give me hope. The 2008 Astros Give me Hope. The 2007 Indians give me hope... I Could keep going... But it's safe to say... That no one is going to take that hope from me because I watched every one of those teams defy the odds.
...
Sidenote... On Paper... I would feel luckier if we improved our pitching!!!

I do think run differential is important to look at for determining whether a team's record is over or underperforming. Obviously, it isn't the only thing, but go to ESPN or any other site that lists the run differential along with the standings and scroll back historically and it is plainly clear that *in general*, teams with large positive differentials are better, year in and year out. That's not to say that a team with a near-zero or negative differential can't compete, but it is the exception. DPJ chooses to call it luck and that's as accurate as a terminology as any. Call it magic or lightning in a bottle or chemistry or whatever...but it's the exception, and as mike wants win states, he doesn't want hope to be the plan going forward. That said, Nick clearly didn't mean to suggest hope was the path to take, if not in his original post then at least in his follow up responses.

Interesting teams you mentioned there as many have strong similarities: most changed managers shortly before their hope-cited seasons.
Team, New Manager, Year Manager took over
2012 Orioles, Showalter, 2011
2012 Pirates, Hurdle, 2011
2011 DBacks, Gibson, Mid-Year 2010
2010 Padres, Black, 2007
2009 Rockies, Tracy, Mid-Year 2009 after 46 games (18-28)
2008 Astros, Cooper, Mid-Year 2007
2007 Indians, Wedge, 2002

So of the 7 teams cited - and I'm presuming those were off the top of your head, 5 of them replaced their manager either in the season of hope or in the year before. Sometimes, a new voice can get players to perform better than the old voice. That's not saying that the managers they replaced weren't good. New 2009 Rockies voice Jim Tracy, for example, replaced old voice Clint Hurdle - who later became the new voice for the Pirates. I'm not suggesting that a change at manager absolutely turns the team around; just saying that when teams turn around after struggles, sometimes it is easier to do with a different leader.

Finally, I totally agree. I'd feel much luckier with improved pitching. Diamond is not a #1 guy in 2012, nor Deduno, nor DeVries, nor Hendricks, and none of them figure to be in 2013. Pavano is not a #1 guy. A healthy Baker is not a #1 guy. If league average pitching is what is needed, the team needs a #1 and a #2 to go with the #3 (maybe Diamond), #4s, and #5s (the rest) that we have.

Good post...I agree with your point about run differential but only because it's stands to reason.

If you are winning more than you are losing it stands to reason that you are scoring more runs than you are giving up. It wouldn't be surprising if teams with the better records have better run differential... It should be expected. I expect to see that in side by side comparisons.

However... A negative run differential and a winning record doesn't mean a team is lucky. It simply suggests that they have lost big on occasion and won a bunch of close games. If I see a team winning a bunch of close games. I see a team playing baseball. If I was an Oriole and someone was writing me off as lucky with the good vibe they have going. I'd have Jim Thome pick up Brian Roberts by the ankles and strike you with him.

They did it again today. 3 to 2 in extra innings over Tampa. Tip your cap to them. Don't diminish it with the comment of luck. Key hits, moving runners over, Big pitches, bullpen picking up the starters, Big catches, exgressive base running, smart plays in the field isnt luck. Its baseball being played the right way. They don't deserve being called lucky. Calling them lucky is bad form.

As for changing managers. I like Gardy and think he's a good manager. I'd help build a statue in front of Target field but I do think a change in leadership would be a good thing. Good for Gardy and good for the Twins. Gardy can take over the Blue Jays next year and do great things. (They have lots of catchers in the Jays organization). The Twins could have a fresh voice because I believe inspiration is important even if it primarily comes from the players themselves. At least I believe it's the job of the players to inspire each other.

Speaking of inspiration. I believe that is correct word to use. The Orioles are inspired right now. Not lucky... Inspired!!! If you are inspired... You work hard... If you work hard... You create some luck.

Your list of managers is interesting. I hadn't really thought about that. One explanation is that teams change managers frequently. There are only a couple of managers who have stayed with the same club for a long long time.

For a team to come out of nowhere they had to be nowhere. Not many managers survive nowhere. Gardy could be the exception.

Decent pitching is the the great equalizer. Pitching can keep you in games and when you are in a game... The guy hitting .180 can drop a game winner in... Please Terry Ryan... Whatever it takes... Brings us some arms next year and defense to support that pitching. At gunpoint if you have to.