Current pitching philosophy

[glunn]

This article has lots of information about what the front office is targeting, including a possible reunion with Brandon Kintzler.

 

http://www.twincities.com/2017/10/13/next-twins-pitching-coach-must-find-ways-to-miss-bats/

 

"The Twins’ primary closers in 2017, traded all-star Brandon Kintzler and fellow right-hander Matt Belisle, have career swinging-strike rates around 8 percent while league average for relievers is 11.6 percent. The Twins have interest in signing both as free agents this winter, but they also figure to target personnel with a penchant for missing bats."

 

Comments?

[glunn]

I would add that the article also talks about an added focus on pitchers who generate more strikeouts.

[jimmer]

Twins were 29th in the majors in strikeouts.  The were 29th in K/9.  They were 29th in K%.

 

It's a prevailing theme with this team.

 

Hoping the new FO really does target pitchers who can miss bats and new philosophies are taught in the minors.

[Richie the Rally Goat]

This article has lots of information about what the front office is targeting, including a possible reunion with Brandon Kintzler.

 

"The Twins’ primary closers in 2017, traded all-star Brandon Kintzler and fellow right-hander Matt Belisle, have career swinging-strike rates around 8 percent while league average for relievers is 11.6 percent. The Twins have interest in signing both as free agents this winter, but they also figure to target personnel with a penchant for missing bats."

 

Comments?

is there a link I am missing?

[glunn]

 

is there a link I am missing?

Sorry, I forgot the link and have now added it.

[spinowner]

This brings back the pitch-to-contact discussion. For starters, I think pitch-to-contact is usually a better approach (except for power pitchers as Berrios could hopefully become). For relievers, missing bats is more important.

[jimmer]

Pitch to contact only works when your stuff is good enough.  Most pitchers aren't good enough to get away with that and that's been clear with this team for many years.

[HrbekRules]

I like the fact that they are talking about continuous learning. The guidance shouldn't stop once you're up in the majors, and the front office is last saying that, along with hiring people who are capable of teaching, much like the Rowson hire. This is encouraging, but since I'm skeptical by nature, I'll wait for results.

[ashbury]

If the previous front office thought that a low swinging-strike rate was a market inefficiency, they have been proved incorrect.

[kab21]

 

If the previous front office thought that a low swinging-strike rate was a market inefficiency, they have been proved incorrect.

The previous FO did correct their course by targeting hard throwing pitchers (RP and SP) that were expected to be K pitchers in their later drafts. Unfortunately, this didn't yield many results either.

Targeting pitchers in FA is a mixed bag as far as a review of who they were targeting. Strikeouts = $$$ typically just like HR's do even if the overall results don't always back it up.

[jimmer]

 

The previous FO did correct their course by targeting hard throwing pitchers (RP and SP) that were expected to be K pitchers in their later drafts. Unfortunately, this didn't yield many results either.

 

Didn't they picked quite a few hard throwing RPs with the plan to convert them to SP. I remember Ryan saying in a press conference with some disgust that those were the type they would be targeting, then they went after RPs.

[kab21]

 

Didn't they picked quite a few hard throwing RPs with the plan to convert them to SP. I remember Ryan saying in a press conference with some disgust that those were the type they would be targeting, then they went after RPs.

Some of them were RP (to be converted) but there were some starters (not all pure power pitchers) in there. And we are talking about overall pitching philosophy. 

[jimmer]

 

Some of them were RP (to be converted) but there were some starters (not all pure power pitchers) in there. And we are talking about overall pitching philosophy. 

I was just wondering if I remembered correctly. Thanks for the info.

 

So you believe the former FO went about changing the pitch to contact philosophy?

[gunnarthor]

The Twins for years had to get soft tossing pitchers because they couldn't afford the strike out guys. The draft slot system wasn't in existence until 2012. But they could afford control pitchers and that worked. After Radcliff/Ryan left, Johnson and Smith made more effort to get flamethrowers with questionable results. Since 2012, we've seen the Twins draft more high strikeout types but it'll take a while to see how it plays out.

[jimmer]

 

 

The Twins for years had to get soft tossing pitchers because they couldn't afford the strike out guys. The draft slot system wasn't in existence until 2012. But they could afford control pitchers and that worked. After Radcliff/Ryan left, Johnson and Smith made more effort to get flamethrowers with questionable results. Since 2012, we've seen the Twins draft more high strikeout types but it'll take a while to see how it plays out.

I agree that the Twins had to target PTC pitchers for financial reasons.  I've been saying that for years.  Like you said, they are cheaper.

[kab21]

 

I was just wondering if I remembered correctly. Thanks for the info.

 

So you believe the former FO went about changing the pitch to contact philosophy?

I think there was a change in philosophy although I don't think they ever went all in on pure power pitchers. Pure power isn't exactly the opposite of pitch to contact but they have a fair amount of correlation.

Money was one factor but the FO definitely targeted pitch to contact and even tried to change pitchers to be more contact oriented. I would consider the FO in the last 3-5 years to be more neutral in that regard at least but as I said above I don't think they have ever fully went after power/K's. 

[gunnarthor]

 

I think there was a change in philosophy although I don't think they ever went all in on pure power pitchers. Pure power isn't exactly the opposite of pitch to contact but they have a fair amount of correlation.

Money was one factor but the FO definitely targeted pitch to contact and even tried to change pitchers to be more contact oriented. I would consider the FO in the last 3-5 years to be more neutral in that regard at least but as I said above I don't think they have ever fully went after power/K's. 

I think if you look at the first few of Johnson's drafts, it was pretty much all-in on power pitchers. The problem with all of them (Bashore, Bullock, Guttierez, Hunt, Tootle) was the control issue. Now, obviously, it's not fair to say that Johnson only picked one type of pitcher since he also grabbed a high floor/low ceiling guy like Wimmers and an injury risk with Gibson but he was very much on flame throwers. And it's not fair to say that the Twins ignored power pitchers even when they were stock piling soft tossers. Garza, Adam Johnson and Durbin were all profiled as power pitchers, for example. But I think if you wanted to say that Radcliff's tendencies were 180 degrees different from Johnson's, I'd agree.

[kab21]

 

I think if you look at the first few of Johnson's drafts, it was pretty much all-in on power pitchers. The problem with all of them (Bashore, Bullock, Guttierez, Hunt, Tootle) was the control issue. Now, obviously, it's not fair to say that Johnson only picked one type of pitcher since he also grabbed a high floor/low ceiling guy like Wimmers and an injury risk with Gibson but he was very much on flame throwers. And it's not fair to say that the Twins ignored power pitchers even when they were stock piling soft tossers. Garza, Adam Johnson and Durbin were all profiled as power pitchers, for example. But I think if you wanted to say that Radcliff's tendencies were 180 degrees different from Johnson's, I'd agree.

I think we agree that Ratcliff definitely erred on the side of contact types even if he did select a power pitcher from time to time and Johnson certainly took a huge step towards power (and K's) pitching.

 

I would disagree that Gutierrez or Hunt were power pitchers though. Gutierrez was a power sinker pitcher that would have gotten a lot of ground balls and some K's. Hunt was a blend of both.

 

I would definitely agree that Johnson has gone all in on power RP's although many of us were skeptical of using high picks on them and they really haven't panned out. I know at a minimum that I defended them (middle of the road-ish defend) by saying that they at least drafted live arms in places (2nd-5th rd) where all selections have big question marks.

 

But the draft is only one area and is the only real sign of a philosophy change. Their big FA signings (Hughes - Ervin - Nolasco) were avg at best at K's. The trades mostly targeted below avg K pitchers (Capps, Pavano, Diamond) although Hoey and Jepsen (K's plummetted as a Twin) would classify as power pitchers. Their bargain signings have mostly been way below avg for K's especially Correia and Pelfrey.

 

And it could still be argued that they coached pitching to contact throughout the system even if they started drafting power pitching arms.

[mickeymental]

where do top teams like the cubs find effective relievers like this guy duensing? how come the twins can’t come up with bullpen guys like that?

[beckmt]

Relief pitchers tend to vary wildly from year to year(except the very top ones).  Twins have a number of flamethrowers coming, but they still have to hit their spots.  That has been more of the issue with Twins relievers.  Tonkin, Curtiss and several others throw hard,  Tonkin just cannot hit his spots, or maybe a bigger issue, be able to spot his breaking ball.  

[Winston Smith]

 

I would add that the article also talks about an added focus on pitchers who generate more strikeouts.

Then why would they want to bring Kintzler and/or Belisle back? Does that make sense?

[gman]

When Falvey left Cleveland, I believe he had an agreement not to hire any personnel from that organization for a year. Following the World Series that year will be up. After a year of review, I think chances are we could be start seeing people come over Cleveland. I would suspect people he probably targeted a year ago. This is certainly a major opportunity to bring in people that could change the pitching rut the Twins have been in for the past 30 years.

[diehardtwinsfan]

I wouldn't be against bringing Kintzler back on a 1 year deal (assuming that's all he can get) to be the closer assuming they targeted a shut down type to go with Hildy, Busenitz,and Duffey. I would be against Belisle return, as I just wasn't impressed with him.

 

I'd also be very disappointed if that was the only FA RP signing.

[gunnarthor]

Well, if you look at the Twins playoff run years - 02-2010 - they certainly had quite a number of big strike out arms in the bullpens for awhile there. Only the White Sox and Angels had better k% for those years in the AL.

[drjim]

 

Well, if you look at the Twins playoff run years - 02-2010 - they certainly had quite a number of big strike out arms in the bullpens for awhile there. Only the White Sox and Angels had better k% for those years in the AL.

 

I do think that is more the model than strictly high k rate throughout the staff (though high k starters would be nice). Solid starters backed by a high k bullpen with a deep lineup (with power) can win a championship.

 

The lineup is here, about half the staff is in place. They should add a FA starter, but they also need to add a reliever or two and hope that some of the young guys emerge (including Romero). Could give them a nice window of contention over the next 3-4 years.

[Mike Sixel]

 

I do think that is more the model than strictly high k rate throughout the staff (though high k starters would be nice). Solid starters backed by a high k bullpen with a deep lineup (with power) can win a championship.

 

The lineup is here, about half the staff is in place. They should add a FA starter, but they also need to add a reliever or two and hope that some of the young guys emerge (including Romero). Could give them a nice window of contention over the next 3-4 years.

 

Well, ESan is 34 and only signed for 1 more year? Or is there an option? Also, are you counting Gibson as "in place"?

 

I'd say they have one guy that is probably a starter past next year on the roster, Berrios. All the others are much bigger question marks, imo, either due to ability or age or contract status. There is a lot of work to do, imo.

 

As for the philosophy, I don't think we really know much at all about this FO and their philosophy. Their one actual move was signing two defensive catchers (and, I guess, cheap RPs). Hopefully that's not their philosophy...

[drjim]

 

Well, ESan is 34 and only signed for 1 more year? Or is there an option? Also, are you counting Gibson as "in place"?

 

I'd say they have one guy that is probably a starter past next year on the roster, Berrios. All the others are much bigger question marks, imo, either due to ability or age or contract status. There is a lot of work to do, imo.

 

As for the philosophy, I don't think we really know much at all about this FO and their philosophy. Their one actual move was signing two defensive catchers (and, I guess, cheap RPs). Hopefully that's not their philosophy...

 

That's why I would sign a starter this offseason. Berrios is set barring injury, and both Santana and Gibson can be retained in 19 if they earn it. Combine with May/Gonsalves/Mejia/a few others, perhaps one or two of that group can be counted on for 19. They can re-visit adding another free agent next offseason if necessary. I think if they add a starter this offseason they are in OK shape for the next couple of years - then they would be in a position to plow some resources into the pen, and/or hope some young guys emerge.