Article: The Age Of Analytics Arrives In Minnesota

[Brock Beauchamp]

I view Danny Santana as a placeholder for someone else, whoever replaces the guy who fails the hardest and fastest. 

 

It's one of the ways I keep myself sane.

[ashbury]

You are correct.  I have made mistake.  I was working on fangraphs this morning (2015 and 2016 data) and I have no idea how I made that mistake. I am no longer able to edit the my post from this morning.  If one of the moderators would like to remove the sentence about the Twins being second in runs scored that would OK with me.

But then I would also need to remove my post, and your gracious response to it. More of the latter is always good.

[drjim]

I support keeping Danny Santana. Good move.

[Mike Sixel]

 

I support keeping Danny Santana. Good move.

 

Can't. Tell. If. Serious.

 

If so, why? Based on what, in the last two years?

[drjim]

 

Can't. Tell. If. Serious.

 

If so, why? Based on what, in the last two years?

 

It's not like there's been a shortage of Santana conversation in the past couple of months and my answer hasn't changed.

 

I'm not going to defend his performance the last two years, it's bad, and I know the defensive metrics hate him. But he makes the minimum, can backfill at a couple of positions, has a couple of really good tools, (briefly) flashed some skills, and can ultimately be cut for little cost. I don't mind giving him one more shot at the roster, he's not exactly blocking anyone worthwhile.

 

If there was a player on another team like him that got cut, I would be ok if the Twins to pick him up and gave him a look. If the coaches want another crack at him, bully on them.

[bird]

 

Use of analytics is not the only thing that needs to be improved. Also needed is improving the willingness to look at things differently, admit when mistakes have been made, and grow from that experience. The last several years seemed like an extended Groundhog Day, with repeated bad results followed by a "I'd do the same thing again" mentality. Bill James used to hate being associated with statistics, because he thought his key insight was to try to look at things from different angles. Use or misuse of analytics is a symptom, but was not the core problem of the previous regime. Time will tell if Falvey and Levine can change the culture to one of mental flexibility and improvement.

 

This is an insightful and well-articulated summary. I'd add two additional things that I see evidence of with Falvey that I thought were woefully lacking under St. Peter/Ryan. One is being more strategic, as opposed to tactical, about virtually every aspect of organizing and operating the baseball operations. The second is greater competence when it comes to qualitative analysis. The evidence I'm seeing of this most notably comes from Falvey's comments about interpersonal stuff, about culture, things like that. So I'm very much heartened that it appears we're not dealing with some smug nerd who's developed a love affair with all the new technology that captures useable information. Falvey has an executive's strategic perspective about taking advantage of information resources to drive improvements. That he values qualitative judgments probably as much or more than quantitative analysis is a huge plus for me.

[Nick Nelson]

 

It's not like there's been a shortage of Santana conversation in the past couple of months and my answer hasn't changed.

 

I'm not going to defend his performance the last two years, it's bad, and I know the defensive metrics hate him. But he makes the minimum, can backfill at a couple of positions, has a couple of really good tools, (briefly) flashed some skills, and can ultimately be cut for little cost. I don't mind giving him one more shot at the roster, he's not exactly blocking anyone worthwhile.

 

If there was a player on another team like him that got cut, I would be ok if the Twins to pick him up and gave him a look. If the coaches want another crack at him, bully on them.

I'm about as low on Santana as possible, but this is a reasonable and well articulated defense of keeping him around, for the time being, 

[Otto von Ballpark]

 

It's not like there's been a shortage of Santana conversation in the past couple of months and my answer hasn't changed.

 

I'm not going to defend his performance the last two years, it's bad, and I know the defensive metrics hate him. But he makes the minimum, can backfill at a couple of positions, has a couple of really good tools, (briefly) flashed some skills, and can ultimately be cut for little cost. I don't mind giving him one more shot at the roster, he's not exactly blocking anyone worthwhile.

 

If there was a player on another team like him that got cut, I would be ok if the Twins to pick him up and gave him a look. If the coaches want another crack at him, bully on them.

 

In other words: Danny Santana is kind of the position player equivalent of Tonkin at the moment, no?

[drjim]

 

In other words: Danny Santana is kind of the position player equivalent of Tonkin at the moment, no?

 

Sounds about right. Guys with no options left given another chance because they might have some upside and there isn't a clear better alternative.

 

Also a really good chance neither is on the roster by the end of the year.

[USAFChief]

Sounds about right. Guys with no options left given another chance because they might have some upside and there isn't a clear better alternative.

 

Also a really good chance neither is on the roster by the end of the year.

If there's a really good chance they won't be on the roster by the end of the year, there's no good reason for them to be there now. That they are is an indication the front office failed to replace them with someone who is an asset, and likely WILL be there come September. "Eh, he's cheap and easy to replace" isn't the front office I want.

 

I don't actually think Tonkin is the same as Santana, by the way. I don't see the "tools" you mentioned above for Santana, while Tonkin at least throws hard and gets K's. Thats upside.

[Riverbrian]

I've read quite a few comments stating that Falvey/Lavine look a lot like Terry Ryan based on the off season moves.

 

I read these comments and thnk to myself... Of course they do.

 

All those people employed by the Twins have jobs and they do something. They sit in the meetings and they speak up. They are a huge part of the process that produces the final product. A GM or POBO don't sit in a room isolated with a laptop and build rosters like you and I put together our fantasy baseball teams. I'm not aware of a house cleaning so basically... The same people that were the machine that produced what we Were... Are the same people that are the machine that is producing what we are doing now.

 

Imagine yourself walking in as the head of an existing operation in 4th quarter. Meeting your new staff for the first time. Do you start by just tossing them all out and have an entire new staff by 1st quarter before you can evaluate them individually? Probably not because there may be some babies in that bath water. If you don't toss them out... Do you simply ignore them? Probably not because that isn't a very smart way to build what will need to be important relationships with the babies in the bath water in the future.

 

So what do you do? You start by listening to them and taking them seriously while starting by changing the structure. You give them the direction and the new tools that will be different under your leadership. Things they need to make better decisions and provide better advocacy and counsel and then you evaluate them after you see how they do under the new system. If they can't adapt... A replacement will be searched for and found but this is going to take a little time and I'm guessing that is what 2017 is going to be.

 

You don't like Tonkin or Santana. There are people in the room who obviously do like them and those people probably liked them last year and they are still here.

 

Increased analytics is part of this process... Jason Castro is part of this process.

 

It's not time to blame Falvey/Lavine yet. 2017 needs to be the year that they start the evaluations and start to clean things up one individual at a time in the offices and on the field when the data starts rolling in. I'm not disappointed by who begins the year... My disappointment will begin when I see who remains if the ship goes down again.

[drjim]

If there's a really good chance they won't be on the roster by the end of the year, there's no good reason for them to be there now. That they are is an indication the front office failed to replace them with someone who is an asset, and likely WILL be there come September. "Eh, he's cheap and easy to replace" isn't the front office I want.

 

I don't actually think Tonkin is the same as Santana, by the way. I don't see the "tools" you mentioned above for Santana, while Tonkin at least throws hard and gets K's. Thats upside.

I think you undersell Santana a little relative to Tonkin here (but who cares really), but otherwise I'm with you on this. Shouldn't have been too hard to add players in the offseason that would have been an upgrade. I don't have much good to say about the offseason with this as the end result. The Twins could unexpectedly over perform in the lineup and rotation and still have the bullpen sink any chance.

[kenbuddha]

 

So what do you do? You start by listening to them and taking them seriously while starting by changing the structure. You give them the direction and the new tools that will be different under your leadership. Things they need to make better decisions and provide better advocacy and counsel and then you evaluate them after you see how they do under the new system. If they can't adapt... A replacement will be searched for and found but this is going to take a little time and I'm guessing that is what 2017 is going to be.

[...]

It's not time to blame Falvey/Lavine yet. 2017 needs to be the year that they start the evaluations and start to clean things up one individual at a time in the offices and on the field when the data starts rolling in. I'm not disappointed by who begins the year... My disappointment will begin when I see who remains if the ship goes down again.

 

Exactly. 2017 is a year of evaluating what is here. The players are probably known quantities so what Falvey/Levine are evaluating are the non-players. Front office, coaching staff, managers at all levels of the organization. If there are individuals already here willing and able to go in a new organizational direction there's a good chance they'll be retained.
 

For instance, they don't want to be the bad guys that got rid of Molitor. If Molitor can adapt his style to theirs I'm sure that works in his favor and will be taken into account for 2018.