OF Defense. Thoughts and community Poll ?

[Brandon]

I keep reading that our OF defense is soooo bad that they will not catch anything in the OF and we will loose many games because the other teams will figure if they can hit it to the OF we have no chance to catch the ball and make a play so we will be beaten into submission because we are sooooo helpless out there.  If only we had Manny Ramirez in LF and Jose Canseco bouncing balls over the fence off of his head we would be a much better defensive team out there. 

 

So my question is this.  How many runs will the OF defense cost us?  can you break that down by player?  and how many wins will that cost us in the end?

 

also how many runs will the OF create?  and how many wins does that give us back? 

 

While we don't have elite defense and I do believe there will be times that will cost us runs and probably a few games next year.  I do think our improved rotation and offense will more than make up for it and we end up an 85 win team.  I want to understand how bad our OF defense truly as I doubt it doesn't cost us more than 3 games next year.  And I do believe we will contend. 

[TheLeviathan]

The outfield defense is atrocious and that is assuming Hicks is the starting CFer. With a heavy fly ball staff that gives up a lot of contact....that likely cost us more games than can be adequately measured. There are several studies that have shown just how impactful the KC outfield was last year and that was with a pitching staff that struck batters out with much more frequency.

 

Frankly, until the defense out there improves I don't see this team contending.

[The Wise One]

I do not think the math manipulators know the answer to your question. Fangraphs lists Kansas City as having the best defense. It should stand to reason that if your defense is the best they should be getting to more balls than the other teams do. BABIP then should be somewhat effected by defense as it is a measurement of what happens when the pitched ball hits neither the catcher's nor a fan's mitt. KC's was league average. Their LD% was league average.  LD being usually the hardest ball to catch, KC had no more nor less than the opponents. Their BABIP was league average for their pitchers. If superior defense led to less hits, BABIP should be lower.  There is FIP. fielding independent pitiching. ERA would then be fielding dependent, KC's had a better ERA than FIP as would be expected. Their differetnial though was only 9th best.

 

A good defense is better than a bad defense. The teams that had better ERAs than FIPS  were generally the better teams. The Tigers were an exception.   How many runs will it cost to have a bad OF defense. There are theories. Not sure if you can prove how it had an effect on the outcome

[Platoon]

As bad as the pitching was last year, the overall D was worse, and will be no better to start the year. You compound Hunter by moving an unsure Arcia move to LF. The jury is out on Santana at SS, but it will by default improve the CF glove work. I think there was a rating on here the other day of Twins defenders by position, and it was not a pretty sight. So far the only improvement will be probably in CF. There is an old saying, "throw it and duck"! It might have to be changed to "throw it and don't trun around and watch"!

[Richie the Rally Goat]

http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/examining-the-projected-team-defenses/

 

Total team defense is projected to cost 26 runs including a good infield. If the twins score 714 runs again that's good for a .500 record. If they score closer to average of 2014 - 650 runs that would be a cost of 6 games (approx 75 wins).

[nytwinsfan]

This Fangraphs article, which is obviously not gospel, but is one educated take, suggests that the difference between the Twins (the worst outfield defense) and the Royals (the best) was 96 runs, or 9.5 wins last year. http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/the-twins-may-have-weakened-a-weakness/

 

If I am reading it right, it says the difference between the Twins and an average outfield defense was 50 runs, or about 5 wins. That is quite a lot.

[Kwak]

Defense has another effect on the game--psychology.  The positive effect when a player makes a really difficult play (by ML standards) or fails to make a play (especially in a crucial situation).    Emotion is part of the game.  A missed play in the field (the "extra" out) can result in several extra runs for the opponents--not just those that scored on that specific play.  A close game can result in a blow-out. 

[TheLeviathan]

I do not think the math manipulators know the answer to your question. Fangraphs lists Kansas City as having the best defense. It should stand to reason that if your defense is the best they should be getting to more balls than the other teams do. BABIP then should be somewhat effected by defense as it is a measurement of what happens when the pitched ball hits neither the catcher's nor a fan's mitt. KC's was league average. Their LD% was league average.  LD being usually the hardest ball to catch, KC had no more nor less than the opponents. Their BABIP was league average for their pitchers. If superior defense led to less hits, BABIP should be lower.  There is FIP. fielding independent pitiching. ERA would then be fielding dependent, KC's had a better ERA than FIP as would be expected. Their differetnial though was only 9th best.

 

There are a number of errors or partially demonstrated ideas here:

 

Team BABIP:  KC was .292 and MIN was .315

 

FIP: KC had only a slight edge, but you failed to mention Minnesota was - .61.  So over a half run worse per game

 

LD% - the Twins and Royals were almost identical, yet there was a significant difference in BABIP

 

The Twins appear, by contrast to the Royals, to have had similar pitching numbers but gave up many more runs.  What, other than bad defense, would explain that?

[Otwins]

Besides psychology also strategy. Last year when the Royals could maintain a lead to the 7th inning the game was over. Their bullpen was that good. But if the game is tied they went to a different part of the bullpen with much different results. 

[The Wise One]

There are a number of errors or partially demonstrated ideas here:

 

Team BABIP: KC was .292 and MIN was .315

 

FIP: KC had only a slight edge, but you failed to mention Minnesota was - .61. So over a half run worse per game

 

LD% - the Twins and Royals were almost identical, yet there was a significant difference in BABIP

 

The Twins appear, by contrast to the Royals, to have had similar pitching numbers but gave up many more runs. What, other than bad defense, would explain that?

I was not comparing Minnesota to KC.

Kansas City is touted as having the best defense . When tou look at numbers it does not add up to runs saved. With a superior defense their BABIP should be better, than league average. I don't care what it is in relatiuon to the Twins. Better defense should lead to less hits than average on hte balls that are out there. There LD% was about league average. If it were higher than league average then the excuse for the average BABIP would be that the pitchers were giving up more balls that could more easily be hits. What they do in relation to the Twins is meaninglesds to the argument. That is why I NEVER mentioned any Twins statistics in my point, There was no error made because I never was comparing Twins to Royals as an explanation of how things might work.

 

I did not address the Twins. Hopefully this year there will not be the 500 ininngs of pitching done by pitchers who will not be members of the Twins. Hopefully Nolasco will not be the pitcher he was last season. Hopefully whatever pitcher was needed turns in better performances than what they got from their AAA callups. That alone could be the biggest difference in outcomes forthe pitching numbers.

[TheLeviathan]

comparing KC to some league average or something is probably not a very effective way of going about a point.

 

It seems better to compare KC to a team that does things in a similar regard (which the Twins do, many of the peripherals are similar from LD%, to GB%, etc.) to see if there is a difference in defensive execution.

[The Wise One]

comparing KC to some league average or something is probably not a very effective way of going about a point.

 

It seems better to compare KC to a team that does things in a similar regard (which the Twins do, many of the peripherals are similar from LD%, to GB%, etc.) to see if there is a difference in defensive execution.

The question in part is about defense saving runs. Kansasa City was considered a best defense. Once again, I am not comparing Kansas City to the Twins. The best defense by metrics did not save the most runs by metrics so it is impossible to say if an improved defense will save you runs. What is probable is that Ervin Santana is going to be a better pitcher for 200 innings than Kevin Correia and Sam DeDuno.. In the event he is injured one would hope that Alex Meyer or by pitching history Milone would be better than Yohan Pino and the rest.

 

2 statistics to compare in relation to the Twins and KC WHIP for the clubs were 1.35 vs 1.31 LOB % 68.9 vs 73.9 Kansas City did a better job of leaving the same number of base runners on base. Twins pitching up the big innings would seem to indicate that could be as much a cause for the disparity.

 

I can't find anywhere where some has correlated any of the team defensive metrics to ERA, They theorize, but no analytic proof.

[TheLeviathan]

You're not using the metrics correctly if you take one random team and then randomly compare stats to league averages. The Twins and Royals compare favorably in many ways and they happen to be on opposite sides of the defensive spectrum.

The Indians are another that appear negatively affected that you could swap in. In any case I'm not sure why anyone would disagree bad defenders hurt your pitching staff significantly.  If you want to see another analysis of how impactful it can be, here is a link:

 

http://grantland.com/the-triangle/2014-mlb-playoffs-exploiting-kansas-city-royals-ultimate-outfield-jarrod-dyson-alex-gordon-lorenzo-cain/

[Thrylos]

There is another way of measuring this.   Yes the Twins OF defense was atrocious last season, because the manager insisted in playing DHs, SSs, Cs, and 1B at the outfield.  Even as horrible as Hunter was last season, he will be better than most of the players the Twins trotted out there last season.

[Thrylos]

This Fangraphs article, which is obviously not gospel, but is one educated take, suggests that the difference between the Twins (the worst outfield defense) and the Royals (the best) was 96 runs, or 9.5 wins last year. http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/the-twins-may-have-weakened-a-weakness/

 

If I am reading it right, it says the difference between the Twins and an average outfield defense was 50 runs, or about 5 wins. That is quite a lot.

 

 

Based on plus minus stats, the Twins' "OF" cost them 57 runs last season.  Individual numbers here

 

Subtract those 57 runs for an average OF and, if the Twins had indeed an average OF, their run differential would have been 715-720, which projects to a Pythagorean 80-82 record.  (Thanks Gardy)

[Richie the Rally Goat]

You're not using the metrics correctly if you take one random team and then randomly compare stats to league averages. The Twins and Royals compare favorably in many ways and they happen to be on opposite sides of the defensive spectrum.

The Indians are another that appear negatively affected that you could swap in. In any case I'm not sure why anyone would disagree bad defenders hurt your pitching staff significantly.  If you want to see another analysis of how impactful it can be, here is a link:

 

http://grantland.com/the-triangle/2014-mlb-playoffs-exploiting-kansas-city-royals-ultimate-outfield-jarrod-dyson-alex-gordon-lorenzo-cain/

good article, those gaps are tiny!

[Richie the Rally Goat]

There is another way of measuring this.   Yes the Twins OF defense was atrocious last season, because the manager insisted in playing DHs, SSs, Cs, and 1B at the outfield.  Even as horrible as Hunter was last season, he will be better than most of the players the Twins trotted out there last season.

unless he plays CF like TR hinted at

[stringer bell]

I agree with Thrylos' premise, but Gardenhire was hamstrung for most of the season by a roster that had few alternatives to what he put out there defensively.  I would categorize several of the infielders as outfielders as poor or worse, and of course Parmelee, Kubel and Willingham share one trait, poor speed, which despite their experience as outfielders makes them below average.  I think that Schafer was and will be OK as a center fielder and probably a plus as a corner guy.  Given the current roster construction, I can see Nuñez on the corners on occasion, and I don't think his numbers look bad (although my own "eye test" said that he didn't look great out there).  Finally, there is Danny Santana--his numbers weren't bad considering where he started.  If the Twins need him in center (and I wouldn't be a surprised if they did), I think he would be above average as soon as 2015.

 

Adding Hunter and moving Arcia to left hurts the defense.  Subtracting Kubel, Willingham, Parmelee, and Colabello probably helps more than the addition of Hunter hurts.  Not having to play the likes of Escobar and Bartlett also helps the "runs prevented" bottom line.  Waiting in the wings are Rosario and Buxton with Daniel Ortiz also a possibility.  All three of them profile as at least satisfactory and, of course, Buxton is regarded as special in all categories. 

[stringer bell]

P.S.--I forgot about Herrmann, but checked on several of the other suspects who played outfield last year.  From what I saw, the Twins used Kubel, Willingham, Parmelee, Colabello, Bartlett, and Escobar the equivalent of 146 full games.  That is a lot of innings from guys who won't play an inning out there for them in 2015.  Adding in Herrmann, that is more than 162 games of pretty brutal outfield defense.  Of course, Herrmann is still on the 40-man and might get some reps on the corners. 

[TheLeviathan]

I do think it's a good thing all these awful defenders and non-OFs will no longer be in the OF.  That is a plus for the team's defense.  We also know from Gardy and others that Arcia is just not comfortable in LF - so we added an aging RF and moved a bad RF to a spot he feels even less comfortable.

 

There is a chance we don't see as much improvement from that positive as we hope simply for that reason.  I still think adding a rangy CF would dramatically reduce this problem, even if the guy can't hit worth a lick.

[bird]

There is another way of measuring this.   Yes the Twins OF defense was atrocious last season, because the manager insisted in playing DHs, SSs, Cs, and 1B at the outfield.  Even as horrible as Hunter was last season, he will be better than most of the players the Twins trotted out there last season.

Had Molitor been the manager, who would he have trotted out there? It wasn't so much the manager as it was the available options, which we all know sucked.

[bird]

I do think it's a good thing all these awful defenders and non-OFs will no longer be in the OF.  That is a plus for the team's defense.  We also know from Gardy and others that Arcia is just not comfortable in LF - so we added an aging RF and moved a bad RF to a spot he feels even less comfortable.

 

There is a chance we don't see as much improvement from that positive as we hope simply for that reason.  I still think adding a rangy CF would dramatically reduce this problem, even if the guy can't hit worth a lick.

I predict your wish will be granted by about mid-July in the form of Buxton, sans the hitting problem.

[USAFChief]

Had Molitor been the manager, who would he have trotted out there? It wasn't so much the manager as it was the available options, which we all know sucked.

True, at least to the extent we can't be sure how much influence the manager had on roster construction.

[TheLeviathan]

I predict your wish will be granted by about mid-July in the form of Buxton, sans the hitting problem.

 

I hope so, but as a caution we heard Aaron Hicks was god's gift to CF defense too and how has that turned out?

 

Minor leaguer defense is easily the least trustable part of their scouting profile.  Guys seem them a few times a year max - in that time you can analyze swings and contact and pitch velocity and all that stuff.  But the difference between an ok defender and a great one isn't usually seen in 2 or 3 games.  I have to see Buxton first before I bank on anything about his defense.

[USAFChief]

I hope so, but as a caution we heard Aaron Hicks was god's gift to CF defense too and how has that turned out?

 

Minor leaguer defense is easily the least trustable part of their scouting profile. Guys seem them a few times a year max - in that time you can analyze swings and contact and pitch velocity and all that stuff. But the difference between an ok defender and a great one isn't usually seen in 2 or 3 games. I have to see Buxton first before I bank on anything about his defense.

Concur.

 

It's not the same thing of course, but having seen Buxton this fall, I can swear to one thing...Buxton is FAST. Watching him go first to third on a single was breathtaking. And I don't use that word lightly or often.

 

So I'm here to say he has the wheels to play CF if nothing else.

[JB_Iowa]

They get up to the bigs and the sight lines and backgrounds in the bigger stadiums seem to impact them.  I'm sure crowd noise and different lights also impact them, 

 

I'm looking forward to seeing the prospects make their way to the Twins but I'm not counting on anything until we see them have success,

[TheLeviathan]

Concur.

 

It's not the same thing of course, but having seen Buxton this fall, I can swear to one thing...Buxton is FAST. Watching him go first to third on a single was breathtaking. And I don't use that word lightly or often.

 

So I'm here to say he has the wheels to play CF if nothing else.

 

Everything about the type of player Buxton sounds like he's going to be has me excited.  I genuinely hope that athleticism comes with the instincts Hicks seems to lack.

[stringer bell]

I would estimate Buxton's ETA at September 1.  I would like to remind everyone that Buxton is not on the same plane as Hicks as a prospect.  Even after a year of near-total inactivity, he is in everyone's top five.  More specifically, Buxton is the fastest player that the organization has had since Ryan was the GM.  Hicks' speed was rated only as "above average", certainly not game-changing. 

 

I'm sure that Buxton isn't a finished product defensively, but he has gold-glove tools.  Let's hope that injury doesn't derail the best prospect the Twins have had since Joe Mauer or maybe longer.

[Thrylos]

 Gardenhire was hamstrung for most of the season by a roster that had few alternatives to what he put out there defensively.

 

Unless Gardenhire had zero to do with bringing up Bartlett, Colabello and Kubel up North right of Spring Training (and DFAing Presley, and subsequently Mastroianni)  Playing Colabello and Parmelee at RF (and Parmelee at CF as well) keeping his best OF at AA and AAA (to spite his face) along with 3-4 serviceable OFs who could hit as well as the aforementioned immovable objects, he has lots and lots of blame.

[Thrylos]

I would estimate Buxton's ETA at September 1. 

 

2016? 2017?

 

Buxton hit .234/.307/.395 last season in high A (and a game in AA) and .263/.311/.298 in the AFL (on the heels of a .212/.288/.404 AFL performance).   That is subbuterrean territory.   Potential a ton, but he's got to realize it a tad, hopefully at AA, before he gets called up...