ESPN- The Great Analytics Rankings... The Twins are not so Great

[nicksaviking]

Here are his actual comments, then the UZR data.  I see a clear disconnect between Terry's comments and Torii's UZR ratings.   "More than adequete" does not equal dead last in the league to me.  And taking the worst RF and putting him in center and saying "You would not miss much" strikes me as a stretch.  Imagine Arcia in center.   Then he goes out of his way to say that he "shakes his head" most of the time regarding defensive metrics.

 

I think his decision and comments suggest he places way more emphasis on watching people than metrics.  I think this is a fair statement.

 

http://blogs.twincities.com/twins/2014/12/04/twinsights-terry-ryan-defensive-metrics-twins-ignore/

 

I agree he clearly prefers scouting to stats and I wish that would change, however I really don't fault him for discounting UZR when the measurement says Hunter was worse than Arcia in the field last year.  Common sense says something doesn't add up.  It's quite possible Ryan checked with Jack Goin who was using other measurements of evaluation.

 

It seems we often assume that a team isn't using advanced statistics if the players they use don't look good on Fangraphs or any other similar site.  But why would a team need to hire a statistical analysis team if all they really need is a Fangraphs translator? 

 

I find it very likely that Jack Goin and other statisticians are using numbers that are not readily accessible to the general public; likely coming up with analysis of their own design.  Perhaps Jack does use the scouts input, which would basically be similar to the other commonly used crowd sourced defensive data, only this would exlusively be using experienced professionals.   Why else would a team need these guys?

[Brock Beauchamp]

It seems we often assume that a team isn't using advanced statistics if the players they use don't look good on Fangraphs or any other similar site.  But why would a team need to hire a statistical analysis team if all they really need is a Fangraphs translator? 

Ding ding ding!

 

Remember that just last year, the Twins were looking for a developer to manage SQL data with an emphasis on data sorting.

 

They're not using FanGraphs data. Whatever they're using, it's not from a publicly-available source or they wouldn't need a full-time developer to create new sorting systems for them. They're taking raw data and analyzing it and only they know what that data is telling them.

 

Ryan could be ignoring that data or he could be using data that tells them Hunter is an average fielder. We simply do not know because we don't know how they evaluate in the first place, much less what data they're using.

[tobi0040]

I agree he clearly prefers scouting to stats and I wish that would change, however I really don't fault him for discounting UZR when the measurement says Hunter was worse than Arcia in the field last year.  Common sense says something doesn't add up.  It's quite possible Ryan checked with Jack Goin who was using other measurements of evaluation.

 

It seems we often assume that a team isn't using advanced statistics if the players they use don't look good on Fangraphs or any other similar site.  But why would a team need to hire a statistical analysis team if all they really need is a Fangraphs translator? 

 

I find it very likely that Jack Goin and other statisticians are using numbers that are not readily accessible to the general public; likely coming up with analysis of their own design.  Perhaps Jack does use the scouts input, which would basically be similar to the other commonly used crowd sourced defensive data, only this would exlusively be using experienced professionals.   Why else would a team need these guys?

 

There could be some truth to the Hunter vs. Arcia portion.  However I would argue a ton of space exists between better than Arcia and "more than adequete".   If Hunter is in fact better than Arcia I would say he likely occupies the "less than adequate" portion of that spectrum.  Especially for the likes of Nolasco, Hughes, and May.

[jokin]

Now you're changing the conversation to centerfield defense. Fine. Even as far as that's concerned, I think their plan A, Aaron Hicks, is pretty good as far as defense goes. When he didn't hit, they got caught short a fielder, but I just don't see how that has to do with belief in math.

 

Again, I'm fully willing to leave open the possibility that the Twins lag the rest of the world in stats. What I'm attempting to do is ask whether the measurements taken by this particular study are useful in proving that point.

 

I'm not changing the conversation at all, in point of fact, it was a key point that I brought up in my opening post to begin this discussion.   Like with pitchers in the past, Ryan's defense of his projected OF was an embarrassment.

 

Plan A has failed spectacularly two years in a row.   And it's not limited to the offensive production.   When it comes to CF defense, Santana, a complete newbie in CF, and close to the same number of innings in CF, had virtually the same DEF, UZR and UZR/150.   Santana actually had 0 DRS, while HIcks was -3.   Santana had a defensive WAR ranking of 0.4, while HIcks graded out at -0.2.

 

Regarding the proof that the OF defense was a major sore spot, I think we've been fleshing it out all offseason through the 2014 statistics, there was definitely some cause and effect between runs allowed and pretty all-around lousy OF defense.  This hasn't been adequately addressed by Terry Ryan.

[tobi0040]

I'm not changing the conversation at all, in point of fact, it was a key point that I brought up in my opening post to begin this discussion.   Like with pitchers in the past, Ryan's defense of his projected OF was an embarrassment.

 

Plan A has failed spectacularly two years in a row.   And it's not limited to the offensive production.   When it comes to CF defense, Santana, a complete newbie in CF, and close to the same number of innings in CF, had virtually the same DEF, UZR and UZR/150.   Santana actually had 0 DRS, while HIcks was -3.   Santana had a defensive WAR ranking of 0.4, while HIcks graded out at -0.2.

 

Regarding the proof that the OF defense was a major sore spot, I think we've been fleshing it out all offseason through the 2014 statistics, there was definitely some cause and effect between runs allowed and pretty all-around lousy OF defense.  This hasn't been adequately addressed by Terry Ryan.

 

Exhibit A (below). 

 

Phil Hughes is the only starter with some innings last year with a lower FIP than ERA.

 

Hughes   3.52 ERA      2.65 FIP

May         7.88 ERA     4.77 FIP

Gibson     4.47 ERA    3.80 FIP

Nolasco    5.38 ERA    4.30 FIP

Pelfrey      7.99 ERA    7.57 FIP

KC            4.94 ERA     4.35 FIP

Deduno     4.60 ERA    4.46 FIP

[Mike Sixel]

The guy that did the MLB rankings for ESPN worked in a front office, and knows/has talked to most of the teams about this*

 

*according to information on a chat on espn

[jimmer]

The guy that did the MLB rankings for ESPN worked in a front office, and knows/has talked to most of the teams about this*

 

*according to information on a chat on espn

and according to Dave Cameron's chat today on Fangraphs.  

[jokin]

Exhibit A (below). 

 

Phil Hughes is the only starter with some innings last year with a lower FIP than ERA.

 

Hughes   3.52 ERA      2.65 FIP

May         7.88 ERA     4.77 FIP

Gibson     4.47 ERA    3.80 FIP

Nolasco    5.38 ERA    4.30 FIP

Pelfrey      7.99 ERA    7.57 FIP

KC            4.94 ERA     4.35 FIP

Deduno     4.60 ERA    4.46 FIP

 

Team BABIP  .315  (highest in baseball)

Team FB%     36.8% (5th highest)

 

Not a healthy combination going forward

[Otto von Ballpark]

Don't take this as an attack, but this kind of argument presumes the sufficiency of the statement that the Twins are skeptics. I.e., as long as a team is skeptical, there will be something that they're catching up at.

 

But what if the perception of skepticism is incorrect? What if the Twins have changed over the last several years? My point is that it will take much, much longer for that to show up on the field than it would in pretty much any other sport. Which is to say, looking at the Twins' roster right now doesn't tell you as much as you'd think about the Twins right now. It tells you about the Twins of five-ish years ago.

 

That statement does, by the way, leave open the possibility that the Twins haven't changed. But we can't properly argue from the conclusion.

You make a good point on trailing statistical indicators, but I am not sure if it has to take THAT long to see statistical evidence.  This is the 4th offseason in a row where the Twins have made significant additions to the MLB starting rotation -- I think it's entirely reasonable to suggest that if the Twins front office fully committed to a changed analytical approach a few years ago, they would have caught up more by now in this regard.  (Changing only their draft strategy, but not the MLB strategy, would be a sign of partial commitment and some continued skepticism, IMO.)

[jokin]

Team BABIP  .315  (highest in baseball)

Team FB%     36.8% (5th highest)

 

Not a healthy combination going forward

 

Twins OF Range Runs    -36.3  (29th place)

Twins OF Def Runs Svd   -50   (Last place)

[JB_Iowa]

With the Twins, change is incremental.

 

Paul Molitor seems more receptive to statistical analysis than Gardenhire.  If so, that's a big step.  I also don't think TR will interfere with Molitor's game management.

 

I don't think we'll see much change in the player selection side until TR is gone.

[tobi0040]

Agreed JB about Molly helping. However his hands are tied to an extent. He has Arcia, hunter, and Vargas on the roster. And 1b locked up. Two of those three have to be in the field.

[jokin]

Agreed JB about Molly helping. However his hands are tied to an extent. He has Arcia, hunter, and Vargas on the roster. And 1b locked up. Two of those three have to be in the field.

 

Is first still locked up for certain?

 

I still think my Mauer-to-the-OF possibility is in play at some point this season w/ Hunter getting "days off" in the OF but still DHing- and especially so if Torii proves that he can no longer cut it in the field.full-time.   Provided that Torii can still swing the bat, it could prove interesting, as this would come down to a sabre-based-decision on the parts of Molly and executive management, (with Mauer signing off), on ultimately doing what's best for the team.

[jimmer]

 especially so if Torii proves that he can no longer cut it in the field.full-time.   Provided that Torii can still swing the bat, it could prove interesting, as this would come down to a sabre-based-decision on the parts of Molly and executive management, (with Mauer signing off), on ultimately doing what's best for the team.

I believe Hunter has already proven that (by metrics and eye test of some) and they decided to discard what the metrics said.  If the SABR numbers the last two years, and especially last year, didn't convince them the soon to be 40 year old was no longer a positive force on defense, not sure they'll figure that out this year by SABR ways.  It will come down to their eyes if they make that call just like the eyes that decided he's a still good RF and that the OF defense wasn't bad last year and wasn't any significant factor in the pitching results.

[bird]

Not only did Terry say Torii defense was fine and he could play CF for a few days and not miss much, he also said he didn't think our OF defense was that bad last year.

C'mon, jimmer, cut the man a little slack and remember these were off the cuff and clearly defensive (pun here) responses at a presser. Do you really in your heart of hearts think Ryan believes the OF defense was fine last year? Or that Hunter is suited to play CF this year?

 

Of course he doesn't believe those things, and I wouldn't expect my boss to throw me under a bus at a public event either, so good for Terry for glossing over how crappy Arcia was, or Hunter was, last year at that presser.

 

If you heard him this morning with Mackey, you heard a succinct and unadulterated appraisal of the inadequacies of both players' defense, and a sound explanation as to why he thinks both will perform better.

 

Ryan has seen Arcia play outfield throughout his minor league career. He says Arcia played poorly last year and is capable of playing better based on his past. SO please forgive me for trusting Ryan's judgment on the subject rather than relying on a year's worth of questionable stats as both the gospel and as a projection of what to expect going forward.

[Kwak]

It should be clear that the decision to sign Hunter was not based on metrics.  The Twins are looking for "something" that can't be measured.  An October statement (sorry no link, but it has been on TD) concerning $85MM budget "is about right"--only to be replaced by ~$21MM in additional FA spending should be more than enough evidence that "a different metric was used" for Hunter (and Santana).  2015 undoubtably planned to be "a bridge season" between "the wretched past" and the (hoped for) glorious future.  Advanced metrics (whichever ones you like) aren't all that meaningful in this situation--Hunter isn't planned for long-term use!

[tobi0040]

Decent point kwak. And willingham played a role in the terrible ranking from 2014

 

As early as June we could have buxton and Rosario in the of. Assuming torii is moved and even if Arcia is the other guy. From a range perspective we could go from bottom three to top half IMO.

[jokin]

Decent point kwak. And willingham played a role in the terrible ranking from 2014

 

As early as June we could have buxton and Rosario in the of. Assuming torii is moved and even if Arcia is the other guy. From a range perspective we could go from bottom three to top half IMO.

 

This scenario is easy to envision, but with Torii becoming the DH (and presumably continuing his "leadership and mentoring role" for Buxton, Rosario and possibly still Hicks as the 4th OF), and Vargas moved down to Rochester.  Ryan seems to have a lot invested in Hunter sticking around in some capacity as his career ebbs.

 

I guess it all comes down to this-

at what point in the season do Molitor and Goin win the argument (with or without data) and convince Ryan that the OF defense is disastrous enough to be blown up and replaced with more defensively talented, but untested prospects?

[Brock Beauchamp]

I guess it all comes down to this-

at what point in the season do Molitor and Goin win the argument (with or without data) and convince Ryan that the OF defense is disastrous enough to be blown up and replaced with more defensively talented, but untested prospects?

I don't think that argument will need to be won at all. Ryan saw the fruits of good outfield defense in the early 2000s. While I'm not a big fan of the Hunter signing, it's a stop-gap signing to patch together an outfield until Buxton and/or Rosario arrives. If one of those players is ready, I don't think Ryan will drag his feet because Torii Hunter is in right field.

 

I'm sure he's as eager as anybody to start seeing some of these prospects graduate, especially the top 2-3 guys.

[tobi0040]

I don't think that argument will need to be won at all. Ryan saw the fruits of good outfield defense in the early 2000s. While I'm not a big fan of the Hunter signing, it's a stop-gap signing to patch together an outfield until Buxton and/or Rosario arrives. If one of those players is ready, I don't think Ryan will drag his feet because Torii Hunter is in right field.

 

I'm sure he's as eager as anybody to start seeing some of these prospects graduate, especially the top 2-3 guys.

 

Yeah, I think this is a year in which we want to evaluate guys and get young guys around Hunter so he can mentor them.  I think that piece is over-rated but I think that is the Twins thinking.  In the meantime, this year the Twins OF will likely be bad again, but I forecast a much better OF defense next year.  Buxton-Rosario or Buxton-Hicks most likely in two of the three spots. That could come as early as June/July if we trade Hunter.

 

Here are some things the Twins hope to evaluate this year, while focusing primarily on the April to June timeframe:

 

Can Rosario force his way on this team and hit enough for a corner OF spot?

 

Can Hicks finally step up and be the guy the Twins thought?

 

Can Arcia play adequete corner OF defense?  If no, can he hit lefties better to become a potential DH and/or have trade value to other teams as a DH/1B?

 

Is Vargas for real?  If not, maybe Arcia slides to DH

 

Can Buxton stay healthy?

 

Taking a step back, these guys are all young and I am glad the Twins aren't giving up on any of them and giving them the reps we need in order to make an informed decision.  We don't want to give up on guys too early, we have done that too much.  I think the Hunter signing does not help this effort but the Twins feel his mentorship outweighs the reps for younger guys.

[jokin]

I don't think that argument will need to be won at all. Ryan saw the fruits of good outfield defense in the early 2000s. While I'm not a big fan of the Hunter signing, it's a stop-gap signing to patch together an outfield until Buxton and/or Rosario arrives. If one of those players is ready, I don't think Ryan will drag his feet because Torii Hunter is in right field.

 

I'm sure he's as eager as anybody to start seeing some of these prospects graduate, especially the top 2-3 guys.

 

Wow. So are you saying that Ryan weaved that whole story about Hunter being much better than the defensive numbers indicate, the numbers that Ryan holds little respect towards?  As they completely ignored the obvious warning signs about Suzuki's defense and signed him to a two-year extension, apparently for his "leadership" qualities, Hunter's 2014 red flags were completely glossed over by Ryan, who apparently was in search of even more "leadership."  How eager is he really, to throw $10.5M down a hole?  

 

I'm pretty sure that Molitor will be pushing for the transition away from Hunter as the regular starting RFer (and/or Arcia) before Ryan is himself ready to pull that trigger.  But it's all interconnected into the great question mark that is CF, which necessarily will have to be addressed first.

 

Who can forget Mr Eye Test, his general dismissal of much significant importance of metrics, and his personal testimonial for Hunter, back at the time of the signing.... (kind of cringeworthy- he says "you should use both", but then offers no metric data to indicate why starting Hunter in RF is a good idea, or for that matter, why moving Arcia to LF won't be a disaster):

 

 

 

“I saw him, I think, maybe seven games or so (in 2014),” Twins general manager Terry Ryan said Wednesday. “His defense for me was more than adequate. He’s not the type of guy that you’re going to say, ‘Oh, he can go over there and play center for a length of time,’ but I would guarantee you he could go out and play center field for a couple days and you wouldn’t really miss too much.”

Hunter will play right field next season. According to defensive runs saved (minus-28), the nine-time Gold Glove award winner ranked dead last among 51 right fielders with 500 or more innings the past two seasons.

So, how does Ryan explain the vast gulf between Hunter’s metrics at age 39 — he’ll turn 40 next July — and what the eyes of Ryan and his fellow scouts tell him?

“Just like I do all the time: As soon as you get somebody to explain (advanced metrics) …” said Ryan, who has Jack Goin on his staff for just that purpose. “When you look at the rankings of the defensive side of the game, you shake your head many times. I’m not saying a lot of them aren’t accurate, because some of them are, but a lot of them aren’t accurate either.

“You can use the metrics or you can use the eye, and you should use both. In this instance, I think we’ve seen (Hunter) play probably 30-35 games as an evaluation process this year, and for the most part the lowest grade we had on him was average range. That’s pretty good.”                                                                                                                  " But we had some issues as far as range. I think that was apparent. (Josh) Willingham and Arcia on the corners, yeah, that’s not ideal.”    

[jokin]

Yeah, I think this is a year in which we want to evaluate guys and get young guys around Hunter so he can mentor them.  I think that piece is over-rated but I think that is the Twins thinking.  In the meantime, this year the Twins OF will likely be bad again, but I forecast a much better OF defense next year.  Buxton-Rosario or Buxton-Hicks most likely in two of the three spots. That could come as early as June/July if we trade Hunter.

 

 

 

Given Ryan's track record, and his commitment to Torii, it doesn't seem likely that Hunter would be traded until July 31 at the earliest-  a lot of Twins favorites weren't even moved until the end of August.

[Brock Beauchamp]

Wow. So are you saying that Ryan weaved that whole story about Hunter being much better than the defensive numbers indicate, the numbers that Ryan holds little respect towards?  As they completely ignored the obvious warning signs about Suzuki's defense and signed him to a two-year extension, apparently for his "leadership" qualities, Hunter's 2014 red flags were completely glossed over by Ryan, who apparently was in search of even more "leadership."  How eager is he really, to throw $10.5M down a hole?

 

Who can forget Mr Eye Test, his general dismissal of much significant importance of metrics, and his personal testimonial for Hunter, back at the time of the signing.... (kind of cringeworthy- he says "you should use both", but then offers no metric data to indicate why starting Hunter in RF is a good idea, or for that matter, why moving Arcia to LF won't be a disaster):

Terry Ryan rarely offers insight into how he evaluates players. Are you honestly surprised that he didn't say "Yeah, Hunter is pretty awful in right field. Why did I sign him again? I can't remember."

 

Maybe Ryan ignores the data. Maybe he has data that says Hunter isn't a horrible right fielder. Maybe he looks at the data, sees Hunter is a horrible right fielder, but signed him anyway because the data tells him that Hunter's bat is likely to make up for any defensive liability. Or maybe he signed Hunter because he was the best one-year option out there and Ryan didn't want to cloud the path for Buxton and Rosario.

 

There are so many ways that this situation can be analyzed but you're focusing on one of them without having any information about why the decision was made in the first place. We simply do not know how the Twins analyze players because they're one of the most tight-lipped teams in baseball. We see them make moves that look good from a data analysis standpoint (the data we can access, mind you, not necessarily the data the Twins have) in Hughes and to a lesser extent, Nolasco. Then we see them make moves that baffle us from a data analysis standpoint (again, the data we have on hand) in Hunter.

 

So do they use data? Yeah, probably. What data do they use and how much does it influence their decision? We have no idea.

 

As for Suzuki, well, it's apparent the Twins buy into some of the data because just the other day, it was reported that Suzuki was working specifically on pitch framing.

 

I get it, the Twins are frustrating to follow because Ryan and the organization is tight-lipped but that doesn't mean they're incompetent, out of touch, and archaic. It just means they're tight-lipped. I'm not a fan of the Hunter signing but it's a one year contract. Sometimes, a not-perfect player is signed because he fits in with bigger, more important plans coming in the near future (ie. the entire outfield getting a makeover within 6-12 months).

[jokin]

Terry Ryan rarely offers insight into how he evaluates players. Are you honestly surprised that he didn't say "Yeah, Hunter is pretty awful in right field. Why did I sign him again? I can't remember."

 

Maybe Ryan ignores the data. Maybe he has data that says Hunter isn't a horrible right fielder. Maybe he looks at the data, sees Hunter is a horrible right fielder, but signed him anyway because the data tells him that Hunter's bat is likely to make up for any defensive liability.

 

There are so many ways that this situation can be analyzed but you're focusing on one of them without having any information about why the decision was made in the first place. We simply do not know how the Twins analyze players because they're one of the most tight-lipped teams in baseball. We see them make moves that look good from a data analysis standpoint (the data we can access, mind you, not necessarily the data the Twins have) in Hughes and to a lesser extent, Nolasco. Then we see them make moves that baffle us from a data analysis standpoint (again, the data we have on hand) in Hunter.*

 

So do they use data? Yeah, probably. What data do they use and how much does it influence their decision? We have no idea.***

 

* And Suzuki.  And Correia.  And Stauffer.... (insert NL pitcher of your choice here)

 

*** Ryan was no doubt in active-defending-his-decision mode in the wake of the Hunter signing.  Don't you think if he actually had metric data to help further defend his decision, even expressed in vague terms to keep the company secrets, he would have used it to quell the mob?  Ryan said the Twins "had some issues, as far as range", from the corner OFers in 2014.  The unbiased measurement for range showed Hunter by far the worst RFer in the game last year- much worse than Arcia, who Ryan acknowledged was "not ideal."  Ryan's biased answer was, by his own eye test, Hunter graded out average.

[JB_Iowa]

*** Ryan was no doubt in active-defending-his-decision mode in the wake of the Hunter signing.  Don't you think if he actually had metric data to help further defend his decision, even expressed in vague terms to keep the company secrets, he would have used it to quell the mob?  

 

No.  I don't think TR worries much about the mob.  Jim Pohlad and Dave St. Peter probably worry about the mob.

 

I think TR is comfortable living with his decisions.

[Brock Beauchamp]

* And Suzuki.  And Correia.  And Stauffer.... (insert NL pitcher of your choice here)

 

*** Ryan was no doubt in active-defending-his-decision mode in the wake of the Hunter signing.  Don't you think if he actually had metric data to help further defend his decision, even expressed in vague terms to keep the company secrets, he would have used it to quell the mob?  Ryan said the Twins "had some issues, as far as range", from the corner OFers in 2014.  The unbiased measurement for range showed Hunter by far the worst RFer in the game last year- much worse than Arcia, who Ryan acknowledged was "not ideal."  Ryan's biased answer was, by his own eye test, Hunter graded out average.

Ryan has never shown that he cares one bit what "the mob" thinks and he rarely defends acquisitions with real insight into how the Twins make a decision. He throws out platitudes and generalities most of the time.

 

The unbiased measurement for range showed Hunter by far the worst RFer in the game last year- much worse than Arcia, who Ryan acknowledged was "not ideal."

 

Again, you're basing that on the data we have on hand, which is incredibly flawed and pretty much every sabr-head admits that fact. If the Twins don't have better data on hand than what FanGraphs can provide - and given their recent job postings I suspect they do - then that'd be far more damning than signing a RF who grades poorly using data gleaned from a public website.

[bird]

* And Suzuki.  And Correia.  And Stauffer.... (insert NL pitcher of your choice here)

 

*** Ryan was no doubt in active-defending-his-decision mode in the wake of the Hunter signing.  Don't you think if he actually had metric data to help further defend his decision, even expressed in vague terms to keep the company secrets, he would have used it to quell the mob?  Ryan said the Twins "had some issues, as far as range", from the corner OFers in 2014.  The unbiased measurement for range showed Hunter by far the worst RFer in the game last year- much worse than Arcia, who Ryan acknowledged was "not ideal."  Ryan's biased answer was, by his own eye test, Hunter graded out average.

 

Ryan and company knew exactly what they were getting with Suzuki, Correia, Stauffer, and Hunter, a thousand times better than any of us armed with our spreadsheets.

 

There was no mob to quell, only a handful of commenters who can't be quelled, so why would he care more about appeasing those unappeasable people than making supportive (and defensive) comments about his players? The motive behind his comments aren't difficult to understand here. It takes a lot more effort to read so much into them in my view, and you're reading things into them that just aren't there, my friend.

[jokin]

Ryan has never shown that he cares one bit what "the mob" thinks and he rarely defends acquisitions with real insight into how the Twins make a decision. He throws out platitudes and generalities most of the time.

 

 

 

 

 

 

There was no mob to quell, only a handful of commenters who can't be quelled, so why would he care more about appeasing those unappeasable people than making supportive (and defensive) comments about his players? The motive behind his comments aren't difficult to understand here. It takes a lot more effort to read so much into them in my view, and you're reading things into them that just aren't there, my friend.

 

Yes there was, and is, a "mob" to quell... And by mob, I'm referring to the professional media who peppered him with questions at the Hunter presser, and those who followed up with analysis of the Twins' offseason moves.  And yeah, whether he cares about them or not, he has to provide answers to the guys who provide the team with daily PR.  Which goes right to the point of the article produced by ESPN, this has nothing to do with appeasement, and everything to do with a glimpse into how each of the professional sports teams from the four major sports operate- and asks the question,

 

"are they running their operation, by leaning more 20th Century or 21st Century?"  

 

The ESPN analysts have, I think correctly, identified the Twins as one of the teams behind the curve on cutting edge statistical analysis.  Terry Ryan's quotes from the Hunter presser bear that out, even if ESPN didn't use it as part of their examples in labeling Ryan and the Twins "skeptics", there was nothing to "read into", just to quote him.

[Kwak]

Terry Ryan rarely offers insight into how he evaluates players. Are you honestly surprised that he didn't say "Yeah, Hunter is pretty awful in right field. Why did I sign him again? I can't remember."

 

Maybe Ryan ignores the data. Maybe he has data that says Hunter isn't a horrible right fielder. Maybe he looks at the data, sees Hunter is a horrible right fielder, but signed him anyway because the data tells him that Hunter's bat is likely to make up for any defensive liability. Or maybe he signed Hunter because he was the best one-year option out there and Ryan didn't want to cloud the path for Buxton and Rosario.

 

There are so many ways that this situation can be analyzed but you're focusing on one of them without having any information about why the decision was made in the first place. We simply do not know how the Twins analyze players because they're one of the most tight-lipped teams in baseball. We see them make moves that look good from a data analysis standpoint (the data we can access, mind you, not necessarily the data the Twins have) in Hughes and to a lesser extent, Nolasco. Then we see them make moves that baffle us from a data analysis standpoint (again, the data we have on hand) in Hunter.

 

So do they use data? Yeah, probably. What data do they use and how much does it influence their decision? We have no idea.

 

As for Suzuki, well, it's apparent the Twins buy into some of the data because just the other day, it was reported that Suzuki was working specifically on pitch framing.

 

I get it, the Twins are frustrating to follow because Ryan and the organization is tight-lipped but that doesn't mean they're incompetent, out of touch, and archaic. It just means they're tight-lipped. I'm not a fan of the Hunter signing but it's a one year contract. Sometimes, a not-perfect player is signed because he fits in with bigger, more important plans coming in the near future (ie. the entire outfield getting a makeover within 6-12 months).

Hunter was signed to mollify the fan base.  It is hoped he will sell more tickets (especially season tickets), another batch of "HUNTER" jerseys, and concessions to game attendees.  It is also hoped he can be used to "refocus" the players, as well as the local media, "to the brand".  Defensive metrics aren't needed to make this decision, however if they actually supported the decision to sign Hunter, I am confident said metrics would have been cited.  Since said metrics didn't support this decision, Ryan stated "the eye test".

[Brock Beauchamp]

Hunter was signed to mollify the fan base.  It is hoped he will sell more tickets (especially season tickets), another batch of "HUNTER" jerseys, and concessions to game attendees.  It is also hoped he can be used to "refocus" the players, as well as the local media, "to the brand".  Defensive metrics aren't needed to make this decision, however if they actually supported the decision to sign Hunter, I am confident said metrics would have been cited.  Since said metrics didn't support this decision, Ryan stated "the eye test".

I'd like to see an example when Ryan actually cited metrics after the acquisition of a player. I'm not saying that quote doesn't exist but I can't remember ever hearing "we signed Player X because he underperformed his xFIP/metric/whatever".