Jump to content

Providing independent coverage of the Minnesota Twins.
Subscribe to Twins Daily Email
Photo

Article: Three-Bagger: Heroic Hildy, Golden Buck & Molitor's Last Stand

trevor hildenberger byron buxton paul molitor
  • Please log in to reply
80 replies to this topic

#41 Tom Froemming

Tom Froemming

    Chattanooga Lookouts

  • Members
  • 647 posts

Posted 11 September 2017 - 01:40 PM

 

Got a link for this assertion?

All the way back in July of 2016, Jim Pohlad was already insisting that Molitor would be the manager this year. Here's a link to a Chip Scoggins piece about it. It includes this quote:

 

"They can do that (hire a manager of their choice) in the future if they want,” Pohlad said. “But for 2017, Paul will be our manager.”

  • howieramone2 and Government Mule like this

#42 spycake

spycake

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 11,776 posts

Posted 11 September 2017 - 01:51 PM

 

All the way back in July of 2016, Jim Pohlad was already insisting that Molitor would be the manager this year. Here's a link to a Chip Scoggins piece about it. It includes this quote:

 

"They can do that (hire a manager of their choice) in the future if they want,” Pohlad said. “But for 2017, Paul will be our manager.”

That's about firing Molitor, though.  Not a prohibition of "all Molitor discussions" as the poster said (or having "a long sit-down with him during the offseason to go over run-scoring matrixes, statistical probabilities and sacrifice bunting" as Nick said in the article).

  • USAFChief, Blake, Craig Arko and 1 other like this

#43 Craig Arko

Craig Arko

    Cassini-Huygens

  • Members
  • 7,800 posts
  • LocationSaturn's atmosphere and on Titan

Posted 11 September 2017 - 01:53 PM

 

That's about firing Molitor, though.  Not a prohibition of "all Molitor discussions" as the poster said (or having "a long sit-down with him during the offseason to go over run-scoring matrixes, statistical probabilities and sacrifice bunting" as Nick said in the article).

I do get this image of 'you may only communicate by post-it notes delivered in whisky bottles' after reading all the speculation.

  • Mike Sixel and 70charger like this

"Insanity is relative. It depends on who has who locked in what cage." - Ray Bradbury


#44 Tom Froemming

Tom Froemming

    Chattanooga Lookouts

  • Members
  • 647 posts

Posted 11 September 2017 - 01:58 PM

 

That's about firing Molitor, though.  Not a prohibition of "all Molitor discussions" as the poster said (or having "a long sit-down with him during the offseason to go over run-scoring matrixes, statistical probabilities and sacrifice bunting" as Nick said in the article).

Oh, I see. Well, no, there aren't any quotes anyone's going to be able to dig up about that, but committing to Molitor in that way really sent a message.

 

It's entirely possible that the new regime requested that Molitor update his strategy and he simply replied "no thanks." Either way, if Falvey/Levine have any issues with the way Molitor is managing, I'm sure they have communicated that to him. Now whether he needs to listen is another story. Molitor has ownership on his side, so he can do whatever he sees fit as long as that's the case.


#45 old nurse

old nurse

    Member

  • Members
  • 2,988 posts

Posted 11 September 2017 - 02:07 PM

 

I'm assuming they have conversations with him all during the year......and that he likes to bunt no matter what the math says. Some people just believe things, no matter what science/math say....

Some people put a general equation to a specific situation and think they are being scientific. Some people make a generalization based out of dislikes. Over the three year period that Molitor has been manager he has sacrificed 80 times.American League average over that time is 70.No great departure there. The Indians lead with101.Falvey worked for the Indians. It might be well possible the Indians did a little more in depth research on that aspect of the game than whatever it is the posters here have done.

  • Mike Sixel, howieramone2 and Original Whizzinator like this

#46 Mike Sixel

Mike Sixel

    Now living in Oregon

  • Members
  • 22,817 posts

Posted 11 September 2017 - 02:11 PM

 

Some people put a general equation to a specific situation and think they are being scientific. Some people make a generalization based out of dislikes. Over the three year period that Molitor has been manager he has sacrificed 80 times.American League average over that time is 70.No great departure there. The Indians lead with101.Falvey worked for the Indians. It might be well possible the Indians did a little more in depth research on that aspect of the game than whatever it is the posters here have done.

 

Interesting. I had read it was a lot more than that, compared to the AL average. Thanks for the info. Still hate it. The fact that the Clevelands are that far out front does suggest that perhaps this FO likes it more than the public would think. 

 

Kind of gets to my other point, I'm not sure many managers do all that much all that differently, over 162 games....

I don't know, it is a site to discuss sports, not airline safety.....maybe we should take it less seriously?


#47 markos

markos

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 1,125 posts

Posted 11 September 2017 - 02:21 PM

 

Some people put a general equation to a specific situation and think they are being scientific. Some people make a generalization based out of dislikes. Over the three year period that Molitor has been manager he has sacrificed 80 times.American League average over that time is 70.No great departure there. The Indians lead with101.Falvey worked for the Indians. It might be well possible the Indians did a little more in depth research on that aspect of the game than whatever it is the posters here have done.

That is only counting successful sacrifices that get marked in the box score as such. There isn't anyone (to my knowledge) tracking sacrifice attempts - successful or not. A manager that calls for a lot of sacrifice bunts with a team that is very bad at bunting may not end up leading the league in the sacrifice bunt category but still wasted a lot of opportunities.

  • Mike Sixel and rghrbek like this

#48 old nurse

old nurse

    Member

  • Members
  • 2,988 posts

Posted 11 September 2017 - 02:28 PM

 



If the team re-ups with Molitor, I do hope that Falvey and Levine have a long sit-down with him during the offseason to go over run-scoring matrixes, statistical probabilities and sacrifice bunting.

Click here to view the article

 

Perhaps as a future article you can go over the different matrices for playing for one run, two runs and scoring in bunches. 


#49 Tom Froemming

Tom Froemming

    Chattanooga Lookouts

  • Members
  • 647 posts

Posted 11 September 2017 - 02:29 PM

 

That is only counting successful sacrifices that get marked in the box score as such. There isn't anyone (to my knowledge) tracking sacrifice attempts - successful or not. A manager that calls for a lot of sacrifice bunts with a team that is very bad at bunting may not end up leading the league in the sacrifice bunt category but still wasted a lot of opportunities.

B-Ref tracks sac bunt attempts, though I don't know what their methodology is. Sometimes it can be tough to tell whether a player is bunting on their own/trying to bunt for a hit or if he was asked to lay down a sac bunt. 

 

Either way, according to their data the Twins lead the AL in sac bunt attempts over the past three seasons with 159. Cleveland is second with 151, followed by the White Sox at 143. But the average for AL teams over the last three years is 113. A few teams almost never bunt. Oakland (65), Boston (77) and Baltimore (78) all have bunted less than half as much as the Twins have.

  • Blake, Mike Sixel, markos and 1 other like this

#50 Tom Froemming

Tom Froemming

    Chattanooga Lookouts

  • Members
  • 647 posts

Posted 11 September 2017 - 02:33 PM

And despite all their practice, the Twins have been bad at bunting. They're 26th in sac bunt success rate this year at 49%. That's an improvement from the previous two seasons when they ranked 29th both years (49% again in 2016 and 53% in 2015).

  • Don Walcott likes this

#51 Mike Sixel

Mike Sixel

    Now living in Oregon

  • Members
  • 22,817 posts

Posted 11 September 2017 - 02:36 PM

they try more often, and they fail more than they succeed. That seems like a bad formula. But then, I was never a math major. 

  • Jerr, Don Walcott and Tom Froemming like this

I don't know, it is a site to discuss sports, not airline safety.....maybe we should take it less seriously?


#52 Craig Arko

Craig Arko

    Cassini-Huygens

  • Members
  • 7,800 posts
  • LocationSaturn's atmosphere and on Titan

Posted 11 September 2017 - 02:38 PM

 

they try more often, and they fail more than they succeed. That seems like a bad formula. But then, I was never a math major. 

Not too many .500 hitters around, either.

 

I was a Math major. :)

  • Jerr and Mike Sixel like this

"Insanity is relative. It depends on who has who locked in what cage." - Ray Bradbury


#53 old nurse

old nurse

    Member

  • Members
  • 2,988 posts

Posted 11 September 2017 - 02:39 PM

When Falvey and Molitor have their rumored season ending conversation the first words Molitor should say is starting pitchers.He has 2. Cleveland have 4 performing well, and a couple not doing poorly

 


#54 nytwinsfan

nytwinsfan

    Junior Member

  • Members
  • 1,567 posts

Posted 11 September 2017 - 02:43 PM

 

that was a general statement on averages, not on Molitor in specific. Like, the average temperature in a hospital being 98 degrees doesn't tell me much.....

 

I don't understand, but fine. Molitor has made a number of bad decisions in important games, and by "bad" I mean ex ante, without the benefit of hindsight. You can argue those are not bad decisions for some reason, or that other alternatives for manager would make just as many or more mistakes, or you can argue that his player management makes up for his strategic mismanagement.I don't buy any of those three. Not sure what other arguments you can make.


#55 old nurse

old nurse

    Member

  • Members
  • 2,988 posts

Posted 11 September 2017 - 02:53 PM

 

That is only counting successful sacrifices that get marked in the box score as such. There isn't anyone (to my knowledge) tracking sacrifice attempts - successful or not. A manager that calls for a lot of sacrifice bunts with a team that is very bad at bunting may not end up leading the league in the sacrifice bunt category but still wasted a lot of opportunities.

About 5 years ago the success rate stated in an article was 80% for sacrifices. No idea how the current data would be at.Since it looks like you are implying they are bad at it, and do it a lot, perhaps you would like to find the statistics that back it?


#56 old nurse

old nurse

    Member

  • Members
  • 2,988 posts

Posted 11 September 2017 - 02:56 PM

 

Interesting. I had read it was a lot more than that, compared to the AL average. Thanks for the info. Still hate it. The fact that the Clevelands are that far out front does suggest that perhaps this FO likes it more than the public would think. 

 

Kind of gets to my other point, I'm not sure many managers do all that much all that differently, over 162 games....

Some of the teams that are low in sacrifice bunts are higher in GIDP, ie 2 outs instead of 1.Tricky business this is

  • Original Whizzinator likes this

#57 Tom Froemming

Tom Froemming

    Chattanooga Lookouts

  • Members
  • 647 posts

Posted 11 September 2017 - 02:57 PM

 

Not too many .500 hitters around, either.

 

I was a Math major. :)

We were talking about successful sac bunt attempts. If you want success rate at bunting for a hit, Fangraphs has that. The Twins have a 31.7 bunt hit percentage over the past three seasons. That's fifth-best in baseball over that stretch.

 

Not too many .317 hitters out there, either. But, those are all singles so it's a very empty .317 batting average.

  • Original Whizzinator likes this

#58 Mike Sixel

Mike Sixel

    Now living in Oregon

  • Members
  • 22,817 posts

Posted 11 September 2017 - 03:10 PM

 

Not too many .500 hitters around, either.

 

I was a Math major. :)

 

well, 49% success at sac bunts, not at hitting for a hit. Not sure what you mean, actually.

I don't know, it is a site to discuss sports, not airline safety.....maybe we should take it less seriously?


#59 USAFChief

USAFChief

    Anyone got a smoke?

  • Twins Mods
  • 18,667 posts
  • LocationTucson

Posted 11 September 2017 - 03:11 PM

Not too many .500 hitters around, either.

I was a Math major. :)

We're not talking about successful hit attempts.

The data suggests the Twins can't successfully make an intentional OUT at a .500 rate. Which is pretty astounding.
  • Jerr, Don Walcott and bighat like this

I am not the paranoid you're looking for.


#60 Tom Froemming

Tom Froemming

    Chattanooga Lookouts

  • Members
  • 647 posts

Posted 11 September 2017 - 03:25 PM

 

Some of the teams that are low in sacrifice bunts are higher in GIDP, ie 2 outs instead of 1.Tricky business this is

Fair point. The Twins are among the lowest teams in GIDP%, per b-ref, but there aren't huge differences. The Twins are at 9%. They've had a runner at first and less than two outs 1,047 times and have hit into 94 double plays.

 

The Royals have the worst rate at 13.5%. League average is 11%.




Also tagged with one or more of these keywords: trevor hildenberger, byron buxton, paul molitor