Damning article in the Washington Post re: Pressly / Analytics

[Craig Arko]

Hahaha. And if all other methods fail, cheat.

 

https://www.12up.com/posts/6198413-report-astros-accused-of-cheating-throughout-playoffs-after-being-spotted-during-first-game-of-alcs/partners/44350

[Brandon Warne]

 

Well, to give concrete examples, the Twins snagged Kalk away from the Rays just ten months ago.

And they approached Presley correctly, telling him to change his selection. That likely had Kalk’s fingerprints all over it.

But still, ten months. I’m not sure what people are expecting. The Astros probably look back at their 2012 analytics staff and chuckle about it, too.

 

The ones that told them to offer Robbie Grossman a five-year extension? (haha)

[Brandon Warne]

 

Did they start with a Buxton, Sano, Kepler, Polanco, and Berrios in the minors? Plus Garver. Two top ten prospects? Plus three more in the top 100?

 

They drafted Carlos Correa that year. He inherited George Springer (drafted the year before), Jarred Cosart (top-50 prospect) and Jon Singleton (top-75 prospect), traded for Robbie Grossman (at the time a top-80 prospect) and built up from there.

 

What have the Twins guys done? Inherited Alex Kirilloff and drafted Royce Lewis, a consensus top-10 prospect in the game. 

 

To this point, I think their 2017 draft looks pretty solid. As does 2018, as much as it can be judged four months after the fact.

 

Methinks thou doth protest too much. 

[KirbyDome89]

 

I feel like what he said was "Not as good" and I think the distinction matters.  The Astros are the best, the Twins are in the company of 28 other teams on that front.

 

The problem is the gap, but none of us have much context for where the Twins stand on that.  The only thing we do know is that they were functionally at the bottom of the 30 team pile.  Now they've improved.  How much....I have no idea?  If I have to put a timetable on it - it's on the development and progress of young players they drafted and developed.  

 

I feel like we've seen good signs: Gibson, Pressley, Berrios, etc.  But it's hard to know for sure until the talent they've brought in starts to arrive.  And at key moments like this offseason.  I'll be ready to make some pretty sweeping claims come February, depending on what they do/do not do.

You're absolutely right, we have no idea what the gap is. I agree that being better than Houston at this point isn't realistic. I'm less concerned with being the top analytical team than I am with showing proficiency and turning what was/is an obvious weakness into a strength. 

 

We're two years in at this point, and tangible results are hard to come by. IMO that's a legitimate source of frustration. We all knew improving the on field product wouldn't be an immediate fix when this FO took over, but an infusion of analytical talent and a positive yield as a result of the revamping was expected in a shorter time frame. When Falvey came over forward-thinking was touted as his strong suit. I don't think it's unreasonable to be disappointed with the results after two years.

 

Maybe the Twins have made significant steps forward, and maybe the results we're all hoping for are about to show up, but as of this moment I have a foot in the "underwhelmed," camp in regards to what we've seen. 

[TheLeviathan]

 

 

Maybe the Twins have made significant steps forward, and maybe the results we're all hoping for are about to show up, but as of this moment I have a foot in the "underwhelmed," camp in regards to what we've seen. 

 

I think it's ok to be a skeptic.  I'd put myself in that boat too.  

 

But I think there is a lot of hubris in thinking we have any real ability to judge what is or is not going well in the operations of our favorite team.  We can judge their moves on the surface, but the real work that will make a difference is beyond our ability to see.

 

I know it won't stop us, we're fans.  But when you start stomping your feet about timelines and hard evidence and measurable progress....well, you've sorta forgot how ignorant we all really are.

[Number3]

 

Without even thinking about it for more than two seconds, Kevin Youkilis, the guy who was literally mentioned about 500 times in Moneyball.

 

That was easy.

I said great. He had a very modest career and hit .213 at age 33 in his final year. Didn't come close to playing a full season. If he is the poster child for analytics then my point is made.

[Brock Beauchamp]

I said great. He had a very modest career and hit .213 at age 33 in his final year. Didn't come close to playing a full season. If he is the poster child for analytics then my point is made.

Over 30 career WAR and not that different than Kent Hrbek in overall value.

 

And that’s one example that, again, literally took me two seconds to think of.

[Number3]

My response to the general replies to "get the geeks out of baseball" is do they also have analytics for high school and college players? Do the Epsteins and the like sit in rooms full of computers all day until they see the right statistical information or do they simply negotiate for the known good players using ownership's deep pockets to get the players they need? Then you have the "on the field"analytics that uses all of the shifts, matchups with relief pitchers and outfielders with the cards in their pockets that is comical to see. Where is the analytic that shows the real benefit to all of this and how it actually effects wins and losses? Probably no where to be found. Lies, dam lies and analytics.

[yarnivek1972]

I think one thing that might be getting lost in the era of analytics is that executives need to remember that ultimately they are competing for the entertainment dollars of the American (and Canadian) people. Right now, they are losing that battle. Attendance is dropping. TV ratings for the World Series and All Star games are dropping. So far, MLB has avoided a drop in revenue by reaching out to other sources. But, if the sport’s popularity continues to dwindle the money will start to decrease as well.

 

Sorry to drift off topic, but IMO MLB had better start to recognize that it is in very serious trouble and it had better start to get serious in trying to fix it’s problems. On a personal note, I haven’t watched a single minute of the postseason, which is extremely unusual for me even without the Twins being involved. Granted, I’ve been very busy. But still.

[Brock Beauchamp]

 

My response to the general replies to "get the geeks out of baseball" is do they also have analytics for high school and college players? Do the Epsteins and the like sit in rooms full of computers all day until they see the right statistical information or do they simply negotiate for the known good players using ownership's deep pockets to get the players they need? Then you have the "on the field"analytics that uses all of the shifts, matchups with relief pitchers and outfielders with the cards in their pockets that is comical to see. Where is the analytic that shows the real benefit to all of this and how it actually effects wins and losses? Probably no where to be found. Lies, dam lies and analytics.

What about Houston? They didn't build a winner through deep pockets. What about Tampa? They certainly didn't build a winner through deep pockets, yet they consistently compete in the most brutal division of baseball.

 

And it's not as if the use of analytics prevents use of scouting. They are complementary pieces and no team relies solely on analytics. That's where your argument is badly flawed. You're stuck on the notion that analytics-heavy teams only use analytics. That's not the case because of course it's not the case. Analytics is just one more tool used by front offices to build a baseball team.

[Mike Sixel]

 

I think one thing that might be getting lost in the era of analytics is that executives need to remember that ultimately they are competing for the entertainment dollars of the American (and Canadian) people. Right now, they are losing that battle. Attendance is dropping. TV ratings for the World Series and All Star games are dropping. So far, MLB has avoided a drop in revenue by reaching out to other sources. But, if the sport’s popularity continues to dwindle the money will start to decrease as well.

Sorry to drift off topic, but IMO MLB had better start to recognize that it is in very serious trouble and it had better start to get serious in trying to fix it’s problems. On a personal note, I haven’t watched a single minute of the postseason, which is extremely unusual for me even without the Twins being involved. Granted, I’ve been very busy. But still.

 

Agreed.....but to pass on things that work because they are less entertaining is not going to work either. So, it is up to MLB, not the teams, to make changes.

[USAFChief]

 

Hahaha. And if all other methods fail, cheat.

https://www.12up.com/posts/6198413-report-astros-accused-of-cheating-throughout-playoffs-after-being-spotted-during-first-game-of-alcs/partners/44350

It's ok, they were only cheating to prevent others from cheating.

 

https://sports.yahoo.com/far-many-questions-remain-mlb-giving-astros-free-pass-dugout-surveillance-052243047.html

[laloesch]

 

I think one thing that might be getting lost in the era of analytics is that executives need to remember that ultimately they are competing for the entertainment dollars of the American (and Canadian) people. Right now, they are losing that battle. Attendance is dropping. TV ratings for the World Series and All Star games are dropping. So far, MLB has avoided a drop in revenue by reaching out to other sources. But, if the sport’s popularity continues to dwindle the money will start to decrease as well.

Sorry to drift off topic, but IMO MLB had better start to recognize that it is in very serious trouble and it had better start to get serious in trying to fix it’s problems. On a personal note, I haven’t watched a single minute of the postseason, which is extremely unusual for me even without the Twins being involved. Granted, I’ve been very busy. But still.

 

Baseball's problems could all be solved in a heartbeat.  There is absolutely NO REASON to make people suffer through 3-3 1/2 hour games during the regular season.  A good deal of this is directly tied to TV coverage and commercials which makes the sport agonizingly slow.  To a lesser extent it's also being driven by multiple pitching changes in each inning, a pitcher stepping off the mound multiple times in each at-bat and the batter calling time or stepping out of the box multiple times each at-bat, etc.  These issues could EASILY be solved by rule changes but the union is resisting rule changes to try and speed things up.  

[yarnivek1972]

Baseball's problems could all be solved in a heartbeat. There is absolutely NO REASON to make people suffer through 3-3 1/2 hour games during the regular season. A good deal of this is directly tied to TV coverage and commercials which makes the sport agonizingly slow. To a lesser extent it's also being driven by multiple pitching changes in each inning, a pitcher stepping off the mound multiple times in each at-bat and the batter calling time or stepping out of the box multiple times each at-bat, etc. These issues could EASILY be solved by rule changes but the union is resisting rule changes to try and speed things up.

Rule changes aren’t going to change a philosophical strategy change that was built around contact and speed as late as the mid 1980s and has gradually been shifting to get on base and wait for the three run homerun. People have said it’s less about length and more about pace. All the things that are valued by analytics make the pace crawl (patience, fly balls, 3 true outcomes).

[diehardtwinsfan]

 

You're absolutely right, we have no idea what the gap is. I agree that being better than Houston at this point isn't realistic. I'm less concerned with being the top analytical team than I am with showing proficiency and turning what was/is an obvious weakness into a strength. 

 

We're two years in at this point, and tangible results are hard to come by. IMO that's a legitimate source of frustration. We all knew improving the on field product wouldn't be an immediate fix when this FO took over, but an infusion of analytical talent and a positive yield as a result of the revamping was expected in a shorter time frame. When Falvey came over forward-thinking was touted as his strong suit. I don't think it's unreasonable to be disappointed with the results after two years.

 

Maybe the Twins have made significant steps forward, and maybe the results we're all hoping for are about to show up, but as of this moment I have a foot in the "underwhelmed," camp in regards to what we've seen. 

Perhaps the question that should be asked is what qualifies as tangible results...

 

Just spitballing here, but I get the impression we don't agree. My two cents:

 

• Development of Gibson.
• Development of Pressley. No question he took some pretty big steps forward under the new admin.
• Development of Berrios.
• Kohl Stewart going from written off to a possible component.
• 2017/2018 drafts (probably more 18 than 17 given how little time the analytics team had, but both so far look pretty good).
• Decisive moves at the deadline, with an approach that clearly had analytics in mind.

The downside is a bit harder to quantify, perhaps b/c I'm giving them too much benefit of the doubt. I suspect analytics works well in targeting players to draft. I also tend to think analytics will work better in fixing pitchers than hitters. It's easy to show a pitcher a chart and say "throw this pitch in this situation" vs. a hitter who is standing up there being asked to lay off pitches outside of the zone... they just need to learn that. Analytics can certainly tell a hitter what they are and aren't doing well and where to adjust, but it's going to take a coach/practice to help fix those. Perhaps analytics can tell the hitter than in xyz situation, you're likely to see this pitch, but still, the hitter needs to learn to hit (or lay off of) it. 

 

Just my two cents. I think we've already seen some measurable improvements that I doubt we would have seen under Ryan. For that reason alone, I don't think we should be getting the pitch forks out. 

[Richie the Rally Goat]

Perhaps the question that should be asked is what qualifies as tangible results...

 

Just spitballing here, but I get the impression we don't agree. My two cents:

 

• Development of Gibson.
• Development of Pressley. No question he took some pretty big steps forward under the new admin.
• Development of Berrios.
• Kohl Stewart going from written off to a possible component.
• 2017/2018 drafts (probably more 18 than 17 given how little time the analytics team had, but both so far look pretty good).
• Decisive moves at the deadline, with an approach that clearly had analytics in mind.

The downside is a bit harder to quantify, perhaps b/c I'm giving them too much benefit of the doubt. I suspect analytics works well in targeting players to draft. I also tend to think analytics will work better in fixing pitchers than hitters. It's easy to show a pitcher a chart and say "throw this pitch in this situation" vs. a hitter who is standing up there being asked to lay off pitches outside of the zone... they just need to learn that. Analytics can certainly tell a hitter what they are and aren't doing well and where to adjust, but it's going to take a coach/practice to help fix those. Perhaps analytics can tell the hitter than in xyz situation, you're likely to see this pitch, but still, the hitter needs to learn to hit (or lay off of) it.

 

Just my two cents. I think we've already seen some measurable improvements that I doubt we would have seen under Ryan. For that reason alone, I don't think we should be getting the pitch forks out.

in a more general way, analytics lead to the optimal launch angle concept which has been a driver in swing mechanics adjustments and pitch selection for countless teams and players. It predates this FO, but Dozier/Brunanski are prime examples of success here.

[KirbyDome89]

 

Perhaps the question that should be asked is what qualifies as tangible results...

 

Just spitballing here, but I get the impression we don't agree. My two cents:

 

• Development of Gibson.
• Development of Pressley. No question he took some pretty big steps forward under the new admin.
• Development of Berrios.
• Kohl Stewart going from written off to a possible component.
• 2017/2018 drafts (probably more 18 than 17 given how little time the analytics team had, but both so far look pretty good).
• Decisive moves at the deadline, with an approach that clearly had analytics in mind.

The downside is a bit harder to quantify, perhaps b/c I'm giving them too much benefit of the doubt. I suspect analytics works well in targeting players to draft. I also tend to think analytics will work better in fixing pitchers than hitters. It's easy to show a pitcher a chart and say "throw this pitch in this situation" vs. a hitter who is standing up there being asked to lay off pitches outside of the zone... they just need to learn that. Analytics can certainly tell a hitter what they are and aren't doing well and where to adjust, but it's going to take a coach/practice to help fix those. Perhaps analytics can tell the hitter than in xyz situation, you're likely to see this pitch, but still, the hitter needs to learn to hit (or lay off of) it. 

 

Just my two cents. I think we've already seen some measurable improvements that I doubt we would have seen under Ryan. For that reason alone, I don't think we should be getting the pitch forks out. 

Fair question, I'm not sure there's a rock solid answer.

 

Gibson probably is a good example. Cave is likely another one, but you've already touched on the issue with holding up specific examples of player development. For every Pressley or Gibson there's a Morrison, Lynn, Sano, ect. I'm sure it's already been mentioned in this thread but what are we supposed to think about about Kepler essentially being the same player for 3 seasons now, or Buxton (discounting injuries) continuing to struggle at the plate? Why was the first foray into FA by this FO a failure for the most part? Pitching continues to be an issue for this team and arms like Randy Rosario and Dereck Rodriguez been let go but Tyler Kinely, Justin Haley, David Hale, ect all needed roster spots? Analytics are involved in all those decisions as well. 

 

The draft moves and deadline deals are all unknowns. I agreed with the decision to sell this season, and even if they weren't able to mine any MLB talent from the acquisitions I'm on board with the process, but I can't pat them on the back for those moves right now either. 

 

We agree, the Twins have likely improved, but I don't think that's the point. The question is how much, and based on the mixed bag of decision making we've seen it's hard to tell. IMO that's the source of frustration after 2 years.