Cameron: this team isn’t actually all that good

[Willihammer]

Fangraphs article describing the gap between the Twins wins and their BaseRuns

 

http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/the-traps-that-the-twins-need-to-avoid/

 

WARNING: negative/critical content

[Hosken Bombo Disco]

WARNING: negative/critical content

LOL thank you I almost opened the link

 

I might summon the courage if the rest the afternoon goes well.

[Willihammer]

NSFO!

[spinowner]

I didn't read the article but have to agree: I don't think this team is all that good either. There's no good explanation for why we have the best record in the league. It's befuddling.

[Otto von Ballpark]

He offer some historical (2002-present) perspective on BaseRuns:

 

 

 

We have BaseRuns data going back to 2002, and in the 13 full seasons that we’ve tracked BaseRuns data for, no team has ever exceeded their BaseRuns expected winning percentage by more than 70 points; the 2008 Angels had a .617 Win% versus a .544 BaseRuns Win%, which translated out to 12 wins above their expected record; the 2005 Diamondbacks and 2004 Yankees matched that total, so three times out of 390 team-seasons a team has managed to steal a dozen extra wins by stacking their events in the most optimal way possible.

The Twins are currently beating their BaseRuns winning percentage by 188 points, which translates to 30 extra wins over a 162 game season.

 

I noted that those three teams similarly over-performed their Pythag.  I left some comments there -- it would be interesting to see what teams had the biggest BaseRun/Pythag discrepancies too.

[70charger]

 

I didn't read the article but have to agree: I don't think this team is all that good either. There's no good explanation for why we have the best record in the league. It's befuddling.

 

That's why they play the games. Sometimes it's better to be lucky than good, and I'm okay with being lucky as long as it shows up in the W column.

[Craig Arko]

After all, it was less than a year ago that I wrote a piece entitled “It’s Time for the Royals to Trade James Shields“; they ignored me and went to the World Series instead."

 

I can live with that.

 

I'm sure the 1987 team would have looked pretty dismal too.

[Brock Beauchamp]

I was expecting a lot worse in that article. Cameron tempered himself quite a bit and made some valid points, particularly about the deadline.

[SwainZag]

As critical as it is, it's completely historical numbers based.  It's hard to hate on it much as it's not just a simple opinion.   I thought the last paragraph in the article was actually spot on though.

 

 

There are ditches on both sides of this road, and the Twins front office is going to navigate away from both going too strongly and too weakly after their new-found chance at a 2015 playoff spot. Stay the course, make some minor upgrades if they don’t cost much, and maybe this turns into a great story. Just don’t get tricked into thinking that their record is reflective of the fact that this is a team that’s ready to win. Smoke and mirrors don’t last, and it’s up to the front office to realize that they’re better off building a team that doesn’t need them.

 

[drjim]

I would say that the Twins/Terry Ryan going too much "all in" this year is probably the least of my worries.

[Otto von Ballpark]

 

I'm sure the 1987 team would have looked pretty dismal too.

The 1987 Twins *were* pretty dismal.  85 wins, actually got outscored during the regular season (79-83 Pythag record).  Although I'll take that level of "dismal" team with those stars on offense and that great playoff 1-2 in the rotation over most of the other teams we've assembled in Twins history!

[Otto von Ballpark]

 

I would say that the Twins/Terry Ryan going too much "all in" this year is probably the least of my worries.

Or any year.

 

But yeah, I'm not worried about TR giving up good prospects to try to win this year.  He could keep some good prospects down too long, though, and muddy the waters going into the offseason and 2016.

[gunnarthor]

I don't think the article was that bad.  I don't think anyone here thinks the Twins are the best team in the AL (let alone baseball). 

 

The thrust of his piece is that the Twins FO shouldn't make a "win-now" trade this year.  He's ok with them going after a guy like Harang or other "low hanging fruit" but not to make a trade involving a guy like Sano or Berrios.  With Ryan, I really don't think that would happen anyway.

 

He did say that the Twins wins and baseruns won't stay that far apart. But that doesn't mean that the Twins have to finish sub-.500, for instance. In just a few weeks, the Twins have improved enough for the baserun model to change from a .380 team to a .424 team.  Considering we're only a third of the way through the season and (hopefully) the Twins worst stretch is behind them (being outscored by 30 runs in 7 games should be the nadir), the gulf between real wins and base wins will continue to shorten. 

[bluechipper]

 

I was expecting a lot worse in that article. Cameron tempered himself quite a bit and made some valid points, particularly about the deadline.

He threw out the names of Aaron Harang and Marlon Byrd as types of players the Twins may want to target, which basically makes no sense to me because he never mentioned the return of Oswaldo Arcia or getting Ervin Santana, who are probably better than either one of them.

[Blake]

The article ignores the return of Ervin Santana. Pretty much the equivalent of a trade at the deadline without actually trading someone.

 

Also, there are some very good bats and arms at Rochester.

 

Plus, the longer the Twins continue to win, the closer they come to a point where .500 ball the rest of the season translates into a playoff appearance.

[MileHighTwinsFan]

I thought it was very interesting and think he makes a reasonable case that the Twins will return to earth eventually.  He also makes the case that the Twins should not sell the farm to add players that may be part of the Twins roster for some that probably won't.

 

What this tells me is that the Twins would be more likely to trade for pieces that can help today and into the future.  Players who may still be under team control, are due a payday and are on a team that may be willing to part with in exchange for value.   

 

If the minor league system is as strong and as deep as everyone says - I have to believe this is a real possibility.   I definitely would not be in favor of trading top prospects, but there are some very talented middle level prospects that might be worth dealing for the right player. 

[Kirby_waved_at_me]

There's a perverse enjoyment in seeing that the White Sox are 2nd on this list after the Twins... So, the White Sox should be 5 games WORSE than they are right now? Goodness.

 

I'm curious to see how the team fares once they add back Arcia and Ervin Santana.... will either move break the spell the Twins have been under?

[Linus]

I'm not sure who they would trade for at this point.  They could use a bullpen arm but nothing in the infield and adding a low cost corner outfielder isnt going to really be an upgrade over the young guys they already have.  Maybe a DH but hopefully Arcia or Vargas makes that a moot point.

 

They could even address the bullpen internally with Pelfrey going there or even May if Milone and Santana are added to the mix.

 

I think parts of the end product are already here - they may be shuffled around a little bit.

[drjim]

 

He did say that the Twins wins and baseruns won't stay that far apart. But that doesn't mean that the Twins have to finish sub-.500, for instance. In just a few weeks, the Twins have improved enough for the baserun model to change from a .380 team to a .424 team.  Considering we're only a third of the way through the season and (hopefully) the Twins worst stretch is behind them (being outscored by 30 runs in 7 games should be the nadir), the gulf between real wins and base wins will continue to shorten. 

 

I think this is a key point that can be overlooked in an analysis like this. There is no reason that the BaseRun underperformance will remain static for the rest of the year, it improved in May over April and could keep creeping up throughout the year. Add to that talent that can be added internally and I don't buy that the regression will be quite as bad as this stat would indicate.

[Craig Arko]

Just don't make that trade for Herschel Walker, Terry!

[Kirby_waved_at_me]

That first week might have some effect on the BaseRun data... I'm not sure if it does or not. They had a run differential of -30, but since then it has swung hard the other direction. I have to believe that more games played will help make the numbers normalize.

 

The Twins may not have been playing well enough to justify the record they have now, but they did actually win those games, and that will keep them in the conversation much longer than anyone thought reasonable in March (or April)....

[Otto von Ballpark]

 

The article ignores the return of Ervin Santana. Pretty much the equivalent of a trade at the deadline without actually trading someone.

 

Also, there are some very good bats and arms at Rochester.

 

Plus, the longer the Twins continue to win, the closer they come to a point where .500 ball the rest of the season translates into a playoff appearance.

Yeah, it would probably take 3 SP injuries before they should even consider someone like Aaron Harang.  Probably three OF/DH injuries before considering Marlon Byrd too.

 

That said, there really aren't many "very good" players at Rochester (yet).  Milone is one of the few guys down there that currently profiles as helping this team win this year.  Not that others can't contribute, they just don't look too likely.  The best are still another hop away, in AA.

 

And the article and projection already takes into account your point #3.  Even with a fairly poor projection going forward, we are still projected to finish .500 with a ~25% or whatever of postseason play.

[twinsnorth49]

As mentioned in other threads, equally as big a question as how long the Twins can continue to win by under performing statistically is how long can the Twins go under performing statistically to the degree they are?

The most encouraging part to me is the potential to make this team better exists in house, most obviously with Santana and Arcia, but fortunately they are not the only options and that's a good thing.

[Otto von Ballpark]

 

I think this is a key point that can be overlooked in an analysis like this. There is no reason that the BaseRun underperformance will remain static for the rest of the year, it improved in May over April and could keep creeping up throughout the year. Add to that talent that can be added internally and I don't buy that the regression will be quite as bad as this stat would indicate.

Yeah, it's one reason I'd like to see historical comps over a partial season sample.  Did, say, the 2008 Angels have a big stretch of BaseRun over-performance, but still settle in as a good team?

 

On that train of thought -- what key clubhouse component do the 2008 Angels and the 2015 Twins have in common?  

[gocgo]

I found the article both interesting and humorous at the same time.  Look, I'm a numbers guy as much as anyone.  I love to analyze them into the ground.

 

I've also played on bad teams with good chemistry and good teams bad chemistry.  Which do you think won more games?  The Twins have great chemistry right now.  They believe in each other and they have some swagger.  The Royals had it last year and still have it.

 

There is no statistical analysis that can take chemistry and swagger into account.  These guys play 162 games in a year.  It drags.  It gets old.  The travel stinks....but teams with chemistry look forward to coming to the ball park and having fun together.  They play with a unity and purpose that teams with more talent don't.  Throw Arod into our locker room and see what happens.

 

Sure the Twins might come back down to earth...but what if they don't?

[diehardtwinsfan]

I really do think that at some point there will be a WAR for managers.  I wouldn't be surprised at all if Molitor is contributing in a way that the stats cannot see.  Is this team really the best in the AL?  No, but they aren't bad, and if they keep this up for much longer, it's going to be real hard for there not to be a post season with the Twins in it.   I think we also forget just how bad they were in the first week.  I know it's wrong to toss out those stats, they happened, but this is a different team since then.  In the end, I still think this is more of a 2001 Minnesota Twins type team, but until then, I'm enjoying it.

[Otto von Ballpark]

 

That first week might have some effect on the BaseRun data... I'm not sure if it does or not. They had a run differential of -30, but since then it has swung hard the other direction. I have to believe that more games played will help make the numbers normalize.

It would be interesting to see more BaseRun breakdowns, but I think that's more Pythag effect.  At least, I don't think we were particularly unlucky on our hit distributions that first week, we just scored little and gave up a ton.

[Blake]

 

As mentioned in other threads, equally as big a question as how long the Twins can continue to win by under performing statistically is how long can the Twins go under performing statistically to the degree they are?

The most encouraging part to me is the potential to make this team better exists in house, most obviously with Santana and Arcia, but fortunately they are not the only options and that's a good thing.

Hmm, seems to me that in order for the numbers to normalize, players who are currently under-performing would have to over-perform for a while. 

[Otto von Ballpark]

 

I really do think that at some point there will be a WAR for managers.  I wouldn't be surprised at all if Molitor is contributing in a way that the stats cannot see.  Is this team really the best in the AL?  No, but they aren't bad, and if they keep this up for much longer, it's going to be real hard for there not to be a post season with the Twins in it.   I think we also forget just how bad they were in the first week.  I know it's wrong to toss out those stats, they happened, but this is a different team since then.  In the end, I still think this is more of a 2001 Minnesota Twins type team, but until then, I'm enjoying it.

Yeah, that 2001 Twins team in a reminder how quickly you can go from postseason lock to not.  Even 4-5 games up on both the wild card and the division lead at the all-star break wasn't safe -- in under 2 weeks, both of those leads were gone.

[Otto von Ballpark]

 

Hmm, seems to me that in order for the numbers to normalize, players who are currently under-performing would have to over-perform for a while. 

If we're still talking BaseRuns, it's not really about players over- or under-performing.  It's just overall team event distribution.  The idea is, we're not going to keep getting so many of our hits with RISP (and not giving up hits in the same situations), etc.