Jump to content

Providing independent coverage of the Minnesota Twins.
The same great Twins Daily coverage, now for the Vikings.

The Store


Photo

Article: Consistency Earned Kyle Gibson the Fifth Starter Job

  • Please log in to reply
27 replies to this topic

#1 Parker Hageman

Parker Hageman

    Owner

  • Administrators
  • 1,355 posts

Posted 28 March 2014 - 02:57 PM

You can view the page at http://twinsdaily.co...fth-Starter-Job

#2 CRArko

CRArko

    Oddball

  • Members
  • 1,418 posts
  • LocationOn my Sherman
  • Twitter: crarko

Posted 28 March 2014 - 03:11 PM

Good. That's exactly what Ryan said they wanted to see, and rewarded him for it Go Kyle!

Hope Alex Meyer does the same thing.

#3 blindeke

blindeke

    Member

  • Members
  • 95 posts

Posted 28 March 2014 - 03:45 PM

Gibson and Hicks having good seasons after last year would make me quite happy.

#4 Willihammer

Willihammer

    ice cream correspondent

  • Members
  • 2,927 posts
  • LocationSaint Paul

Posted 28 March 2014 - 04:51 PM

[COLOR=#000000][FONT=Arial]“I don’t put too much stock in that,” Suzuki said. “Don’t get me wrong, I think that has a lot to do with it but at the same time, what a pitcher does has a lot to do with it. If he’s all over the place, he’s obviously not going to get those borderline calls, not matter how good you make it look. If you are around the plate consistently, you are going to get those calls.”[/FONT][/COLOR]


Has anyone tested this axiom using Commandf/x data yet?

#5 DocBauer

DocBauer

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 583 posts

Posted 28 March 2014 - 05:01 PM

Hicks, Arcia, Dozier, Pinto and Gibson just might be the top 5 reasons to watch and follow the Twins this season. With a little luck, before September, we'll have a few more options such as Meyer and .......?

#6 jimbo92107

jimbo92107

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 554 posts

Posted 28 March 2014 - 05:06 PM

Gibson's got the stuff to dominate. He's got the build to last into late innings. Make a whinny, ya big stud horse!

#7 cmathewson

cmathewson

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 2,273 posts

Posted 28 March 2014 - 05:55 PM

Good stuff, especially the part about not getting strikes low in the zone. With Mauer or Doumit's helmet in the way, umps would call the pitch where it's caught. With the sinker, it was consistently caught below the strike zone even though it crossed the front of the zone above the knees. I look forward to better calls this year, whether from more consistency, a lower target, or a lack of rookie stigma.

#8 jokin

jokin

    Twins News Team

  • Twins News Team
  • 7,010 posts

Posted 28 March 2014 - 06:13 PM

Good stuff, especially the part about not getting strikes low in the zone. With Mauer or Doumit's helmet in the way, umps would call the pitch where it's caught. With the sinker, it was consistently caught below the strike zone even though it crossed the front of the zone above the knees. I look forward to better calls this year, whether from more consistency, a lower target, or a lack of rookie stigma.


How about scheduling more of his starts against more home plate umps like the one who did the game today (Thomas Newsom)? Both Deduno (5Ks out of 6 outs) and Doubront figured out that not only were they getting all the borderline, over the plate, at-the-knee strikes, they also got the at-the-shin ones, as well. Apparently, no one told Hughes what was up (er, down).

I'm sure there are ump charts out there, right?

#9 SD Buhr

SD Buhr

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 661 posts

Posted 28 March 2014 - 08:48 PM

What none of the pitch potting technology will tell you is where the catcher was set up for each pitch. If, as Gardenhire and Gibson both seem to indicate, he was consistently "yanking" pitches toward the outside and missing the catcher's mitt when it was set up inside, he wasn't likely to get the outside corner call even if the pitch did catch the corner. Until we replace umpires with technology on ball/strike calls, that's probably not going to change.

Gibson being able to consistently put the ball where he wants it, combined with having catchers who get lower in the crouch, could be huge for Gibson's success.

#10 highlander

highlander

    Member

  • Members
  • 36 posts

Posted 28 March 2014 - 08:54 PM

Options should be irrelevant to making the big club!! The best players need to go north. GO GO Gibson, way to earn your spot.

#11 TwinVike61

TwinVike61

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 164 posts

Posted 28 March 2014 - 09:06 PM

Again Parker, thanks for this excellent analysis and article.

[COLOR=#000000][FONT=Arial]“Hopefully this year, if I am able to pound the zone and go back to those same pitches, then I might get more of those calls. But you've got to get ahead and earn the fact that you can hit that spot and I just wasn’t doing that.”

This statement seems to sum it up.
[/FONT][/COLOR]

#12 Tibs

Tibs

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 785 posts

Posted 28 March 2014 - 10:30 PM

Has anyone tested this axiom using Commandf/x data yet?


I have been umpiring a good five or six years now. It's very much true that the more you are around the plate the more likely you are to get the call when it comes to close pitches on the corners. I see this happen a lot when I do little league games.
I couldn't be a player because of bad eyesight, so I decided to be an umpire instead.

#13 Tibs

Tibs

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 785 posts

Posted 28 March 2014 - 10:31 PM

Hicks, Arcia, Dozier, Pinto and Gibson just might be the top 5 reasons to watch and follow the Twins this season. With a little luck, before September, we'll have a few more options such as Meyer and .......?


Joe Mauer?
I couldn't be a player because of bad eyesight, so I decided to be an umpire instead.

#14 Miraclemat

Miraclemat

    Junior Member

  • Members
  • 16 posts

Posted 29 March 2014 - 04:49 AM

Hicks, Arcia, Dozier, Pinto and Gibson just might be the top 5 reasons to watch and follow the Twins this season. With a little luck, before September, we'll have a few more options such as Meyer and .......?


That is saddest thing I have read in a long time!

#15 Miraclemat

Miraclemat

    Junior Member

  • Members
  • 16 posts

Posted 29 March 2014 - 04:53 AM

That is saddest thing I have read in a long time!


I stand corrected. This might be the saddest!

Jason Bartlett will make the Twins as a reserve infielder and center field option, tweets Phil Miller of the Minneapolis Star Tribune. The 34-year-old had previously agreed to bump back his opt-out date. Though he has played exactly one MLB game at a position other than shortstop (a single 2004 appearance at second), Bartlett will apparently see some time in the outfield. He finds himself in position to break camp after taking just 98 professional plate appearances over the last two seasons.

#16 jimbo92107

jimbo92107

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 554 posts

Posted 29 March 2014 - 07:35 AM

Good stuff, especially the part about not getting strikes low in the zone. With Mauer or Doumit's helmet in the way, umps would call the pitch where it's caught. With the sinker, it was consistently caught below the strike zone even though it crossed the front of the zone above the knees. I look forward to better calls this year, whether from more consistency, a lower target, or a lack of rookie stigma.


First legitimate use of Google Glass: Project a strike zone rectangle for umpires to train their eye.

#17 Willihammer

Willihammer

    ice cream correspondent

  • Members
  • 2,927 posts
  • LocationSaint Paul

Posted 29 March 2014 - 07:39 AM

I have been umpiring a good five or six years now. It's very much true that the more you are around the plate the more likely you are to get the call when it comes to close pitches on the corners. I see this happen a lot when I do little league games.


I am familiar with the saying, and I wouldn't be surprised if there is some truth to it.

I just think its funny that whenever a ballplayer scores lousy in a newish metric (catcher framing, in this case), he will, without fail, say he "doesn't put much stock in it" or repeat some cliche like this that we've all heard a hundred times so that he doesn't have to explain himself.

Anyway, Commandf/x has been capturing catcher mitt placement data since 2010, according to Sportvision's website. Unfortunately MLBAM hasnt released it to the public.

Edited by Willihammer, 29 March 2014 - 07:43 AM.


#18 cmathewson

cmathewson

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 2,273 posts

Posted 29 March 2014 - 07:44 AM

What none of the pitch potting technology will tell you is where the catcher was set up for each pitch. If, as Gardenhire and Gibson both seem to indicate, he was consistently "yanking" pitches toward the outside and missing the catcher's mitt when it was set up inside, he wasn't likely to get the outside corner call even if the pitch did catch the corner. Until we replace umpires with technology on ball/strike calls, that's probably not going to change.

Gibson being able to consistently put the ball where he wants it, combined with having catchers who get lower in the crouch, could be huge for Gibson's success.


Yeah. I wonder how much of that was arm fatigue from TJ. He was hitting his spots more consistently in Rochester. But he would just lose it for innings with the Twins. It will be interesting to see what he can do with a full healthy season.
"If you'da been thinkin' you wouldn't 'a thought that.."

#19 Jim H

Jim H

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 439 posts

Posted 29 March 2014 - 10:27 AM

First legitimate use of Google Glass: Project a strike zone rectangle for umpires to train their eye.


But the strike zone isn't a rectangle, it is more like a box. The plate has 16 inches of depth and ball can enter the strike zone from the top or the side. Also the strike zone is not one standard size like pitch f/x but varies from batter to batter(according to the rule book anyway) based on the where the batter's knees and "letters" are.

The idea that pitch f/x always is right is just "wrong". It can't be right all the time, it doesn't have the capacity to be right all the time. Sometimes, the umpire is going to be right and pitch f/x will be wrong. Sometimes they will be both wrong, especially if you are going to train the umpires to call pitches based on pitch f/x.

#20 big dog

big dog

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 1,307 posts

Posted 29 March 2014 - 10:33 AM

That is saddest thing I have read in a long time!


You must have missed the various stories about Sano and Rosario.

#21 CRArko

CRArko

    Oddball

  • Members
  • 1,418 posts
  • LocationOn my Sherman
  • Twitter: crarko

Posted 29 March 2014 - 10:36 AM

You must have missed the various stories about Sano and Rosario.


Or MH370.

#22 cmathewson

cmathewson

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 2,273 posts

Posted 29 March 2014 - 10:47 AM

The idea that pitch f/x always is right is just "wrong". It can't be right all the time, it doesn't have the capacity to be right all the time. Sometimes, the umpire is going to be right and pitch f/x will be wrong. Sometimes they will be both wrong, especially if you are going to train the umpires to call pitches based on pitch f/x.


Right, so these things tend to cancel each other out. Given a large enough sample size, a 73% similarity between Pitch F/X and the actual calls is significant, especially when the average is 81%.
"If you'da been thinkin' you wouldn't 'a thought that.."

#23 lee_the_twins_fan

lee_the_twins_fan

    Member

  • Members
  • 87 posts

Posted 29 March 2014 - 11:02 AM

For those Twins Fans who still complain that the Twins operate under a scholarship program, consider this. The Twins entered spring training with eight players being out of options: Trevor Plouffe, Anthony Swarzak, Scott Diamond, Sam Deduno, Vance Worley,Eduardo Escobar, Alex Presley, Chris Parmelee

Four of them were put on waivers – Presley was claimed by the Astros; Worley was traded to the Pirates and Diamond and Parmelee cleared waivers and were sent down to AAA. Plouffe, Swarzak, Deduno and Escobar are all with the team.

So much for entitlement. Even when it's at the expense of having Jason Bartlett and Jason Kubel on the squad. Will the two Jasons excel as they did three years ago – or will they revert to their near-disastrous 2012 campaigns?

Let's hope the other "Js" on the team – Joe, Josh, Josmil and Jared – also excel this year. If they do, it could be an exciting season.

#24 jokin

jokin

    Twins News Team

  • Twins News Team
  • 7,010 posts

Posted 29 March 2014 - 11:04 PM

For those Twins Fans who still complain that the Twins operate under a scholarship program, consider this. The Twins entered spring training with eight players being out of options: Trevor Plouffe, Anthony Swarzak, Scott Diamond, Sam Deduno, Vance Worley,Eduardo Escobar, Alex Presley, Chris Parmelee

Four of them were put on waivers – Presley was claimed by the Astros; Worley was traded to the Pirates and Diamond and Parmelee cleared waivers and were sent down to AAA. Plouffe, Swarzak, Deduno and Escobar are all with the team.

So much for entitlement. Even when it's at the expense of having Jason Bartlett and Jason Kubel on the squad.

Will the two Jasons excel as they did three years ago – or will they revert to their near-disastrous 2012 campaigns?

Let's hope the other "Js" on the team – Joe, Josh, Josmil and Jared – also excel this year. If they do, it could be an exciting season.


Pretty good points with which I can respect, if not fully concur. However, it's important to point out the above-bolded area's inaccuracte characterizations and why the decision on Bartlett in particular is so questionable.

In Bartlett's case, it was 2011 that was actually "near-disastrous" (WAR of -0.1/dWAR of -0.2) and 2012 which was calamitously awful enough to put an end to his career- in effect, you have a guy 2 years out of baseball and 4 years away from when he was an acceptable major league infielder. Kubel was acceptable in 2011 and 2012 with disturbing decrease in contact rate (career high 151 Ks in 2012) and the wheels came off the cart for him completely in 2013, causing his benching in Arizona. They made the team this spring strictly on the Twins slim hope that their chances of returning to major league form are higher than those they replaced of ever reaching major league form.

Edited by jokin, 29 March 2014 - 11:06 PM.


#25 cmathewson

cmathewson

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 2,273 posts

Posted 30 March 2014 - 09:34 AM

I would tend to discount Bartlett's 2012. He only played less than a month, and some of that time, he was trying to play injured. At the very least, you have to cite small samples. If he happened to be slumping and injured during that month, you would expect awful results.

Can he return to 2010 levels? Probably not. He's a 40/60 shot to return to 2011 levels, if I had to lay odds on it, given that he's healthy for the first time in three years. If he can, that's probably good enough for a futility guy.

Then again, he will not be called upon to hit all that much. His job is to fill in defensively when guys get pinch hit for late in games. He might start a game here or there, but his bat will not hurt that much. He isn't even second in line for shortstop, that's Escobar. I expect Esco to get twice the ABs and games than Bartlett.

The Twins are taking a big risk here. If he succeeds, they'll look like geniuses. If he doesn't, ..., they'll look dumb. Either way, it won't affect much of the outcome of this season.

#26 Halsey Hall

Halsey Hall

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 770 posts

Posted 30 March 2014 - 09:48 PM

Gibson pitched today, going against Alex Meyer. Today Meyer came out on top. Kyle breezed thru the Rochester order the first 3 innings but got belted around in the 4th, giving up 5 runs. He did settle down for the 5th and 6th innings. It was a strange game that went 12 innings as more pitchers needed work. And now they'll all be gone from here but the Miracle and GCL.

#27 jokin

jokin

    Twins News Team

  • Twins News Team
  • 7,010 posts

Posted 30 March 2014 - 11:39 PM

I would tend to discount Bartlett's 2012. He only played less than a month, and some of that time, he was trying to play injured. At the very least, you have to cite small samples. If he happened to be slumping and injured during that month, you would expect awful results.

Can he return to 2010 levels? Probably not. He's a 40/60 shot to return to 2011 levels, if I had to lay odds on it, given that he's healthy for the first time in three years. If he can, that's probably good enough for a futility guy.

Then again, he will not be called upon to hit all that much. His job is to fill in defensively when guys get pinch hit for late in games. He might start a game here or there, but his bat will not hurt that much. He isn't even second in line for shortstop, that's Escobar. I expect Esco to get twice the ABs and games than Bartlett.

The Twins are taking a big risk here. If he succeeds, they'll look like geniuses. If he doesn't, ..., they'll look dumb. Either way, it won't affect much of the outcome of this season.


It was a severe enough injury as to cause major calamity to Bartlett- to end his 2012 season soon after it started- and then to seemingly end his career in 2013 (that's how it was related by Bartlett himself)..

He supposedly is healthy now, but, and this was the point of my original post, his career was already in decline by 2011, and there is little evidence he can even return to 2011 levels of play. And having Bartlett on the team instead of someone who might challenge for a starting position or offer more in the way of affecting outcomes of games through speed, hitting ability or outfield defensive ability, let alone being completely irrelevant to the future, just makes no sense, and yes the move is risky as well as head-scratching- since there were multiple other ways to proceed. The chances for Bartlett to miraculously resurrect his career to pre-2011 are extremely remote, regardless, this whole thing could never in any way be construed as a genius move- remember, at this moment, the team is trying to sell the idea of using the 25th spot as a washed up chemistry coach who is going to help guys through all the tough times ahead.

Edited by jokin, 30 March 2014 - 11:47 PM.


#28 cmathewson

cmathewson

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 2,273 posts

Posted 31 March 2014 - 05:30 AM

It was a severe enough injury as to cause major calamity to Bartlett- to end his 2012 season soon after it started- and then to seemingly end his career in 2013 (that's how it was related by Bartlett himself)..

He supposedly is healthy now, but, and this was the point of my original post, his career was already in decline by 2011, and there is little evidence he can even return to 2011 levels of play. And having Bartlett on the team instead of someone who might challenge for a starting position or offer more in the way of affecting outcomes of games through speed, hitting ability or outfield defensive ability, let alone being completely irrelevant to the future, just makes no sense, and yes the move is risky as well as head-scratching- since there were multiple other ways to proceed. The chances for Bartlett to miraculously resurrect his career to pre-2011 are extremely remote, regardless, this whole thing could never in any way be construed as a genius move- remember, at this moment, the team is trying to sell the idea of using the 25th spot as a washed up chemistry coach who is going to help guys through all the tough times ahead.


I agree with the bolded part, assuming there was someone like that available, either internally or externally. The field staff didn't think Presley was that guy. I was shocked when they made that decision, because I thought he had a decent September. Not that he would challenge Hicks in any real way, but he would provide depth at a thinning position. This thing happened just as Buxton's wrist injury appeared more serious and the same week they released Mitchell on the minor league side. If something happened to Hicks, it's Mastroianni and really nobody else. That's the thing that doesn't make sense to me.

But I have higher hopes that he can resurrect his career. He spent most of 2012 and half of last year rehabbing. By the time he was healthy, he couldn't find any takers. Like I said, it's a long shot. And I don't put much stock in the chemistry thing. That's Gardy speak. If he doesn't perform, he'll be gone and they'll call up Mastro. This is either a two month experiment with a bench guy or an unlikely success story.
"If you'da been thinkin' you wouldn't 'a thought that.."