Sonny Gray's Criticism of Last Year's Rotation Shows How Far We've Come

[chpettit19]

20 minutes ago, Woof Bronzer said:

Great to be here, thanks!  Yeah I'm not saying Bundy and Archer were good, yeesh.  I don't think it's accurate to say he was terrible when they let him, as the OP showed they didn't let him go longer in several starts where he was cruising.  It's possible that both things can be true - Bundy and Archer aren't good pitchers, and the Twins FO & manager implemented a failed strategy on managing the pitching staff last year.  The funny thing is, even the FO is acknowledging both points - not explicity, of course, this FO isn't one for self-criticism - but not going into a 3rd straight season with Bundy, Archer, Shoemaker, Happ types in the rotation says all you need to know!  Yet some folks just need to defend the indefensible I guess.  Oh well.  Go Twins!

I'm not sure what you're expecting as far as "self-criticism" is concerned. Do you see a lot of other FOs coming out and saying they were terrible? Has anyone over in Chicago come out and had big, public "self-criticism" remarks after their failed season last year? That's just not really something people do. Making changes in plans, strategies, and rosters is the closest I think we should expect to get to "self-criticism." And, for what it's worth, I've actually heard Levine be pretty critical of the FO during season ticket holder events.

I don't think the strategy going into last year was for all those short starts the entire season. Gray, Ryan, and Paddack were getting 6 and 7 inning starts in April. That doesn't look like a "short start" strategy to me. Archer's body just never built up to being able to go longer. Bundy simply was what he was. They also started the year with Winder in a long relief role before he got hurt. As far as the strategy of being able to survive with the Bundy, Archer, Shoemaker, Happ types of the world, I don't even know how they thought that was possible to start. I'm certainly glad they've moved on from that. Even if their reasoning was they were expecting young arms to come up and take spots, it was still a terrible plan to start the seasons with those 4 guys. Just gross. I like what they've done this year much better.

As for Archer specifically, I'd argue the reason any of his stats look even reasonably ok is because of how they managed him. There's some flaws in just looking back at box scores and saying "hey, Archer didn't give up any runs through 4 so they should've let him start the 5th." A large part of winning games in MLB is avoiding blowup innings. It's why 3 run homers are so sought after. The Twins were looking at way more than just the hits and runs on the board after 4. They were tracking spin rates, velo, extension, time between pitches, strike %, and all sorts of things pitch to pitch during his starts. Seeing all those numbers decline as he works through the 3rd and 4th makes it pretty hard to put him back out there for the 5th as the lineup turns over and he's looking at the best hitters on the other team coming up next as his arm is clearly starting to wear out. Not saying they nailed their decisions every time, or even most of the time, but there's a lot more to these decisions than can be gleamed from looking back on old box scores.

[Jocko87]

2 hours ago, JD-TWINS said:

Right - guys that are pitching well - look strong - have command, they keep pitching.

It's even more than the look, I haven't seen them discuss what data they are looking at but I have to assume they are very carefully watching spin rates, velocity, movement etc and know the signs of impending meatballs. 

My memories are that most of the time when they tried to push it they lost the bet.  Bundy had a couple starts where he was dominant into the 4th/5th and exploded. 

It will be very interesting to see some on field adjustments this year.  For this issue, base running and my personal favorite getting the run in from second to win a game Rocco now has much better personnel options to execute better strategies.  They are saying the right things, now show us.

[Woof Bronzer]

46 minutes ago, chpettit19 said:

I'm not sure what you're expecting as far as "self-criticism" is concerned. Do you see a lot of other FOs coming out and saying they were terrible? Has anyone over in Chicago come out and had big, public "self-criticism" remarks after their failed season last year? That's just not really something people do. Making changes in plans, strategies, and rosters is the closest I think we should expect to get to "self-criticism." And, for what it's worth, I've actually heard Levine be pretty critical of the FO during season ticket holder events.

I don't think the strategy going into last year was for all those short starts the entire season. Gray, Ryan, and Paddack were getting 6 and 7 inning starts in April. That doesn't look like a "short start" strategy to me. Archer's body just never built up to being able to go longer. Bundy simply was what he was. They also started the year with Winder in a long relief role before he got hurt. As far as the strategy of being able to survive with the Bundy, Archer, Shoemaker, Happ types of the world, I don't even know how they thought that was possible to start. I'm certainly glad they've moved on from that. Even if their reasoning was they were expecting young arms to come up and take spots, it was still a terrible plan to start the seasons with those 4 guys. Just gross. I like what they've done this year much better.

As for Archer specifically, I'd argue the reason any of his stats look even reasonably ok is because of how they managed him. There's some flaws in just looking back at box scores and saying "hey, Archer didn't give up any runs through 4 so they should've let him start the 5th." A large part of winning games in MLB is avoiding blowup innings. It's why 3 run homers are so sought after. The Twins were looking at way more than just the hits and runs on the board after 4. They were tracking spin rates, velo, extension, time between pitches, strike %, and all sorts of things pitch to pitch during his starts. Seeing all those numbers decline as he works through the 3rd and 4th makes it pretty hard to put him back out there for the 5th as the lineup turns over and he's looking at the best hitters on the other team coming up next as his arm is clearly starting to wear out. Not saying they nailed their decisions every time, or even most of the time, but there's a lot more to these decisions than can be gleamed from looking back on old box scores.

Yeah you're right, few FOs are going to be critical, but I do get a "smartest guys in the room" vibe from this one.  2 straight years of sub-80 wins and the only change is the trainer?  That doesn't sound like a lot of honest self-reflection to me but that's just me and also, the important thing would be to learn from failures and their roster construction this year indicates that they actually do acknowledge some of their mistakes from the last 2 years, just not publicly.   Hey I wouldn't want to talk about my mistakes either!  

Sorry I know this isn't the place to be critical, I'm really not trying to upset you, I promise.  Thanks for the conversation and I'll try to be more uncritical in the future :)

[Richie the Rally Goat]

10 hours ago, Yawn Gardenhose said:

This "Bundy and Archer wrecked the 2022 rotation" narrative has been an interesting development to watch since the end of last season.

Bundy was the only pitcher the Twins allowed to face a lineup three full times through the order (i.e. 27 or more batters). He did this twice last season, in fact. So he gave the team the two lengthiest starts in terms of batters faced last year.

Archer had seven starts last year where he went 4 innings and had given up two or less hits. In six of those seven starts he gave up one or zero runs, and the other he allowed 2 runs. One of those starts he walked 6 and threw 90 pitches (his season high), but in the others he didn't top 80 pitches in any of those outings. One start he threw 63 pitches, another 62. He never faced more than 20 batters in a start and in four of these seven stellar starts he wasn't even allowed to face the lineup two full times through. Archer wasn't the most aesthetically pleasing pitcher to watch, but it's clear they didn't trust him at all, even when he was performing well. Seems like their philosophy of being deathly afraid of having a pitcher face a lineup a third time definitely ruled the day when it came to intentionally limiting his innings pitched. 

Not saying these guys were great or even good, but 1) they weren't awful and 2) the Twins absolutely used quick, needless hooks, particularly with Archer. What wrecked them from a pitching standpoint was a systematic approach of refusing to let starters face a lineup three times through which forced them into over-relying on a bad bullpen. Bundy and Archer were just two cogs in that system. 

I expect the starters to go a *little* deeper because I think they realized their foolishness in being so slavish to the math last year. I hope at least. But I don't expect six inning starts to be the norm for anyone. I think Maeda's closer to being toast than being a workhorse. For all the hype that Ober gets, he's never been allowed to crack 80 pitches a start at any level in this organization. I'll take the under on Lopez hitting 180 innings again. I'd actually bet the under on anyone on the staff qualifying for the ERA title (meaning 162 innings). But hey, I'd love to be wrong. 

Besides the metrics that show Bundy and Archer were two of the worst pitchers in the MLB last year

1) Joe Ryan pitched 147 innings, that was a record for him in his professional career

2) Sonny Gray 119.2 innings last year. He had a 3.08 ERA last year compared to 3.56 career, 4.19 2021. Last year he had 3.4 FIP, compared to 3.67 career, 3.99 2021. He’s pitched 1,192 innings in his 10 year career. Drum roll please….. that’s 119.2 innings per season.

I’d say the Twins managed Gray’s innings pretty well, and stretched Ryan where it made sense. 

[Fire Dan Gladden]

2 hours ago, Nick Nelson said:

Talent-wise they are definitely in a much better place. Whether that translates to results remains to be seen. But on paper this rotation is night-and-day compared to last year at this time. 

Nick,
The Twitter post in your article about Lopez pitching into the 7th inning 11 times feels incomplete.

Miami was absolutely dreadful last year.  How much of Lopez pitching so deep was due to him being good or him just being better than the bullpen alternatives?  Is there any data about how he did later in games relative to earlier and relative to the Miami bullpen?  We know exactly why Twins SP did not go long, I am not sure we can say with conviction the same about Lopez.

[chpettit19]

11 minutes ago, Woof Bronzer said:

Yeah you're right, few FOs are going to be critical, but I do get a "smartest guys in the room" vibe from this one.  2 straight years of sub-80 wins and the only change is the trainer?  That doesn't sound like a lot of honest self-reflection to me but that's just me and also, the important thing would be to learn from failures and their roster construction this year indicates that they actually do acknowledge some of their mistakes from the last 2 years, just not publicly.   Hey I wouldn't want to talk about my mistakes either!  

Sorry I know this isn't the place to be critical, I'm really not trying to upset you, I promise.  Thanks for the conversation and I'll try to be more uncritical in the future :)

I have no problem with you, or anyone, being critical. They deserve it. I'm critical of them on certain things. But, like you said, facts matter. Bring all the criticism, but bring the facts with it. ☺️

[Woof Bronzer]

8 minutes ago, Richie the Rally Goat said:

 

I’d say the Twins managed Gray’s innings pretty well, and stretched Ryan where it made sense. 

Maybe, but you can't say the Twins managed Gray's innings pretty well without a corresponding analysis of the pitchers who the Twins brought in to replace Gray when he got pulled.  If those cumulitive numbers are worse than Gray's I don't think you can say the innings were managed properly.  I'm not smart enough to do this, but I'd be very interested to see the results.  I have a gut feeling, but I'm always open to being wrong :) 

[Schmoeman5]

1 hour ago, wabene said:

It's pretty cynical to say they were BSing. Perhaps they thought they could ramp him up as he was further removed from his worst injury days. The plan failed, obviously, but I don't know what evidence there is they were deceiving us. In hindsight I'm sure they'd have gone after a similar, ageing and injured starter, Johnny Cueto instead if possible. 

I don't think it's cynical at all. Because it sounds eerily similar to their statements about Buxton starting off as dh and maybe as the weather warms up he'll get back to CF 

[Shaitan]

A good manager adapts to the roster, so we'll see what happens this year.

I read Gray's comments as a direct insult to last year's pitchers: not their talent, but their mindset or work ethic.

Which...even if I agree with his point, it feels like he's needlessly throwing some people under the bus. He comes across as a jerk to me, not a leader.

[stringer bell]

2 minutes ago, Shaitan said:

A good manager adapts to the roster, so we'll see what happens this year.

I read Gray's comments as a direct insult to last year's pitchers: not their talent, but their mindset or work ethic.

Which...even if I agree with his point, it feels like he's needlessly throwing some people under the bus. He comes across as a jerk to me, not a leader.

Gray is a vet who speaks his mind. I remember reports of him and the other starters having conversations and competitions. He was and is among the most senior of the starters, so I think his opinions should be respected.

As to his workload, Gray was limited several times by muscle issues (pec and hamstring) and it seemed that he was building to be full strength most of the year, and I think that limited the innings. 

[Cris E]

52 minutes ago, wsnydes said:

There's more to this discussion than "Bundy and Archer killed the rotation".  There were plenty of people around here that were calling for piggybacking one or both of those two, whether with each other or someone like Ober.  IIRC, Archer was signed knowing that they'd keep him around 4 innings an outing.  Injuries played a pretty key role in the discussion as well.  

Grey went on the DL in April (hamstring) and June (pectoral strain) and then a season-ender in September. Each time he was brought back on a short leash to let him build some stamina and avoid further hurt: after the May injury his first two starts back were 4.0 and 4.1 innings, in June were 5.0 and 4.0 innings, and he never returned after September.  He also had some short starts in July, but that's mostly because he wasn't pitching well: 5.0 IP and 3ER, 4.2 IP and 5 ER, 3.2 IP and 6 ER.

But after about July 24 he was both effective and on a short leash. He made ten starts (plus the one bad injury game in Sept) and threw 90+ pitches 4 times and only one game with fewer than 20 batters faced but only two games with more than 22 batters faced. So I can see where the formula was both frustrating and effective: he couldn't stay on the field more than a month at a time before the all-star break, but he took the ball every time afterwards.

But here's what you need to know about Sonny: in his huge 2019 season he made it to 25 BF eight times in 31 starts, and last year he made it 4 times in 23. He had games of 24, 26 and then 20 BF in May and then he went on the DL. When he went to 25 in July his next game 5ER in 4.2IP and 0 K.  He had back-to-back 25 BF games in Sept and the next start he was lost for the year. Even when he was healthy in 2019 only threw 5.6 IP/GS and that wasn't on Rocco, that's managers watching him throw a lot of pitches per inning and often get hurt.

But here's the difference between Joe Ryan and Sonny Grey: Ryan only had 6 starts where he threw fewer than 80 pitches: three where he gave up only 1 run, two where he gave up 3 or more, and opening day where he gave up 2 runs. Joe threw a lot of pitches, often inefficiently, and wasn't really handled with kid gloves. And he only went on the DL once, and it was for Covid.

The other starters were on short leashes because they were either raw rookies or fragile Bundy/Archer reclamation pieces and Rocco was just trying to not push them too hard. If Sonny want to complain about pitcher usage in this context he can talk to Joe Ryan about those 90-100 pitches in five innings outings and then take a hard look in the mirror about how well he can handle more than two dozen batters.

 

[Woof Bronzer]

2 hours ago, Shaitan said:

I read Gray's comments as a direct insult to last year's pitchers: not their talent, but their mindset or work ethic.

 

But aren't all last years ptichers back except for 2?  So he'd be insulting this year's pitchers too.  Plus as Yawn said Bundy had the longest 2 starts last year and Archer was pulled several times when he was cruising with low pitch counts.  I read Gray's comments as a shot at the manager.  Based on Baldelli's response I'd say rocco agrees with my interpretation :)

[Nick Nelson]

4 hours ago, Fire Dan Gladden said:

Nick,
The Twitter post in your article about Lopez pitching into the 7th inning 11 times feels incomplete.

Miami was absolutely dreadful last year.  How much of Lopez pitching so deep was due to him being good or him just being better than the bullpen alternatives?  Is there any data about how he did later in games relative to earlier and relative to the Miami bullpen?  We know exactly why Twins SP did not go long, I am not sure we can say with conviction the same about Lopez.

I'd say it's as simple as this: Lopez pitched deeper into games because he was good enough and physically capable. This combination was rarely in place for Twins starters last year. The idea that Baldelli obsesses over this kind of thing is overblown, IMO. Jose Berrios, as one example, had big workloads under Baldelli because he was good enough and physically capable. 

[Nine of twelve]

I think it's a valid point that Baldelli sometimes pulls the starter too early, but that's the case with every manager. Is that better or worse than pulling the starter too late? It's not possible to perfectly guess the best point to make the change every time.

Some say to let the starter go until he gets into trouble. OK, but a fatiguing pitcher can get into trouble quickly, and into big trouble very quickly, many times more quickly than a reliever can get warm. And the pitch clock will amplify this because pitchers won't be able to stall now. You can't constantly warm a reliever beginning in the 6th inning every game just in case the starter does get in trouble because you'll burn through your bullpen much faster that way.

So what it comes down to is the manager has to take everything into account--including statistics--and make a pitching change if he feels the reliever coming in has a better chance of succeeding than the pitcher currently in the game. Period. And if the pitcher coming out gets in a snit about that he just needs to get over it.

[Richie the Rally Goat]

4 hours ago, Woof Bronzer said:

Maybe, but you can't say the Twins managed Gray's innings pretty well without a corresponding analysis of the pitchers who the Twins brought in to replace Gray when he got pulled.  If those cumulitive numbers are worse than Gray's I don't think you can say the innings were managed properly.  I'm not smart enough to do this, but I'd be very interested to see the results.  I have a gut feeling, but I'm always open to being wrong :) 

 

Name	IP	ERA	FIP
Caleb Thielbar	59.1	3.49	2.42
Jhoan Duran	67.2	1.86	2.52
Griffin Jax	72.1	3.36	3.17
Jovani Moran	40.2	2.21	1.78
Trevor Megill	45.0	4.80	3.29
Emilio Pagan	63.0	4.43	4.21
Tyler Duffey	44.0	4.91	4.79
	331.5	3.58	3.16857142857143

we don’t know how Gray would have pitched if he wasn’t pulled, but…
The Twins had 7 relievers pitch 40 innings last year. The average ERA for those 7 pitchers was 3.58, compared to Gray’s 3.08 ‘22, 3.56 ERA career, 4.19 ‘21. 
the bullpen had on average 3.17 FIP compared to Gray’s 3.4/3.67/3.99.

FIP is the best predictor of ERA (better than ERA) and so I’d still stick with the bullpen was the right choice.

[Shaitan]

1 hour ago, Woof Bronzer said:

But aren't all last years ptichers back except for 2?  So he'd be insulting this year's pitchers too.  Plus as Yawn said Bundy had the longest 2 starts last year and Archer was pulled several times when he was cruising with low pitch counts.  I read Gray's comments as a shot at the manager.  Based on Baldelli's response I'd say rocco agrees with my interpretation :)

Exactly. I read his comment as throwing unnecessary shade at 2 pitchers who aren't there anymore, saying "These guys didn't mind not pitching late in games (which was the manager's call, but they should've whined about it too)." 

And maybe I'm wrong. Whatever. It's just a quote in the sports pages. There will be a new one tomorrow. I generally don't read much into these kinds of things.

[Jocko87]

4 hours ago, chpettit19 said:

I have no problem with you, or anyone, being critical. They deserve it. I'm critical of them on certain things. But, like you said, facts matter. Bring all the criticism, but bring the facts with it. ☺️

Agreed, I’m a bit confused with some of the handling of injuries but I’m willing to be patient as the trainer is a position that takes a lot of time to see an effect of their work. I’ve been wondering if Polancos knee is still under the plan put in place by the old trainer and switching it would have been worse. 

We also have to be comfortable giving credit where it’s due.  This front office made a heck of a lot of moves this past year that are exactly the right choice if they are going all out to win. The dumb WTF cheap moves seem to have dried up. I was very critical in the past. I do think Correa has direct influence on some of this but credit the front office for listening too.  Several other items are coming together for them as well. I’m seeing good decision making and comfortable with the trainer choice as well. Time will tell. 

[dxpavelka]

7 hours ago, Nick Nelson said:

Talent-wise they are definitely in a much better place. Whether that translates to results remains to be seen. But on paper this rotation is night-and-day compared to last year at this time. 

Last I checked, the games aren't played on paper...

[Richie the Rally Goat]

5 hours ago, Woof Bronzer said:

Yeah you're right, few FOs are going to be critical, but I do get a "smartest guys in the room" vibe from this one.  2 straight years of sub-80 wins and the only change is the trainer?  That doesn't sound like a lot of honest self-reflection to me but that's just me and also, the important thing would be to learn from failures and their roster construction this year indicates that they actually do acknowledge some of their mistakes from the last 2 years, just not publicly.   Hey I wouldn't want to talk about my mistakes either!  

Sorry I know this isn't the place to be critical, I'm really not trying to upset you, I promise.  Thanks for the conversation and I'll try to be more uncritical in the future :)

It’s absolutely the place to be critical. Just because I support the manager in his general use of the bullpen doesn’t mean I agree with all of his moves. He started the season handed a bad pitching staff, and the trades backfired with injury (Paddack and Mahle).

For instance. I think Rocco/FO should have played the St Paul shuttle on long relief/piggy backing to not blow out the bullpen. Rocco never really had that as an option, but I don’t really know how the dynamic works and Rocco’s ability to lobby.

[D.C Twins]

9 hours ago, wabene said:

😐

🤪

[wabene]

21 minutes ago, D.C Twins said:

🤪

How's the hairline bro? 

[Richie the Rally Goat]

1 hour ago, wabene said:

How's the hairline bro? 

I’m a goat, I’m covered in hair. Thanks for asking 

[JD-TWINS]

11 hours ago, wabene said:

It's pretty cynical to say they were BSing. Perhaps they thought they could ramp him up as he was further removed from his worst injury days. The plan failed, obviously, but I don't know what evidence there is they were deceiving us. In hindsight I'm sure they'd have gone after a similar, ageing and injured starter, Johnny Cueto instead if possible. 

Archer’s hip was bothering him …..,don’t think FO said they were going to ramp him up slowly and then didn’t - doesn’t serve any positive purpose for them to not pitch him more innings other than they were trying to win games and he sucked after about 75 pitches……,,never really got stronger.

[D.C Twins]

5 hours ago, wabene said:

How's the hairline bro? 

My hairline stress fracture healed up years ago with rest and recovery.

How kind of you to inquire though!

[wabene]

3 hours ago, D.C Twins said:

My hairline stress fracture healed up years ago with rest and recovery.

How kind of you to inquire though!

Ok let's clear this up. Originally I posted my opinion on your quoted post, but then decided not to get involved, it's not my job, but since you can't delete posts I left the expressionless emoji there. After you responded with the emoji, I made a flippant response, which I regret.

Now I'll just give it to you straight, I didn't like you calling Rocco Baldelli, Baldi. I get it if you don't like his management style, or perhaps you just like to complain about management, doesn't matter to me. Just give the man basic respect. I believe that would fall under the rules of this site anyway. 

[Major League Ready]

12 hours ago, dxpavelka said:

Last I checked, the games aren't played on paper...

So we should not care or be pleased that they improved the roster because games are not played on paper?

[dxpavelka]

37 minutes ago, Major League Ready said:

So we should not care or be pleased that they improved the roster because games are not played on paper?

You should absolutely care.  But beware that until you see those improvements actually play out on the field you can only speculate that it APPEARS that they have improved the roster. 

 

[wsnydes]

3 hours ago, wabene said:

Ok let's clear this up. Originally I posted my opinion on your quoted post, but then decided not to get involved, it's not my job, but since you can't delete posts I left the expressionless emoji there. After you responded with the emoji, I made a flippant response, which I regret.

For future reference, you can ask any mod or community leader to delete a post.  Just send one of us a DM and we can take care of it.

[wsnydes]

18 hours ago, Schmoeman5 said:

I don't think it's cynical at all. Because it sounds eerily similar to their statements about Buxton starting off as dh and maybe as the weather warms up he'll get back to CF 

But it is cynical because the plan could actually be to start him out as a DH at the beginning of the season with the plan on working him into CF more and more as the season progresses.  That plan could easily change if his knee, or something else, doesn't allow that plan to come to fruition.  

[Major League Ready]

56 minutes ago, dxpavelka said:

You should absolutely care.  But beware that until you see those improvements actually play out on the field you can only speculate that it APPEARS that they have improved the roster. 

 

You could make the same statement had they signed Correa / Judge / Turner / Verlander and Scherzer.  You could say Houston appears to be a good team based on this logic.  Until they play the games it only "appears" they are better.  This is fan speak rhetoric as I see it.  Injuries happen and players sometimes underperform but that as of this moment it's a better team than last year.