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

[wabene]

9 hours ago, D.C Twins said:

I hope Gray continues to hold Baldi accountable throughout the year. 

Not all pitchers are the same and not all starts by each pitcher are the same. 

You can't use one algorithm. Some days pitchers will have more stamina and easy/sustained velo while feeling goooood.

Let them roll through the 3rd and (GASP) 4th time through the order when that occurs.

I hope to see a little more situational awareness in game by Baldi this year with accountability provided by players and management if he cannot or will not improve in this area. 

 

😐

[JD-TWINS]

8 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. 

League average per start is around 5.4 innings - not going to look it up but that’s close. Our TEAM average last year was around 5.1 innings (close). So about 1 out short of the league average per game. Correct me if I’m considerably off.

1 out per game under the league average is 162 total outs/27 outs per game = 6 games worth of innings over the season the Pen has to carry. Actually, much more significant than I would have thought!

[Muppet]

Last year their rotation was mostly terrible. If you're the manager and your starting pitchers stink, it would seem you'd enact a strategy to limit their innings. It didn't work, but it almost did. Remember the Twins were in 1st place for 100 (or so) days? They didn't have to be great. They only had to be better than the Guardians. They were obviously not built to go deep into the playoffs, but they worked with what they had and almost made it there. 

This year they have a similar problem. They have great pitching and defense (on paper) but their offense stinks. There's not much they can do about it now but work to their strengths. I'm excited to see how it goes. 

[AlGoreRythm]

1 hour ago, BsuNemo said:

even though they won't admit their mistakes from last year, management has learned from them.

I agree they've learned from the issues experienced last year, but I'm not sure you're right that they've not admitted it.

I'd say they're moves including trading for Malhe at least year's deadline equate to a tacit admission of those mistakes, even if not explicitly stated to the media.

Rocco isn't going to throw the front office under the bus, not should he.

Beyond showing through their actions that mistakes were made, I'm not sure what more one could reasonably ask for...

You're not going to find many people in any industry that come out and say, "We completely screwed the pooch last year and we're sorry."

Not saying it wouldn't be nice or cathartic for the fans, but also seems like a good way to undermine trust, regardless of the organization or industry.

[JD-TWINS]

1 hour ago, Trov said:

I think last year was a combo of things, that hopefully will not be as extreme this year.  Twins seemed to pull starters much sooner than other teams, but it is not like a crazy amount sooner.  However, if we can get just 1 more inning per start it will help a ton.  First, early on I know team was trying to hold starters back because of short spring.  Then guys were hurt from time to time and would get shorter starts due to that.  Archer was always going to get short starts.  The team has adopted the try to limit 3rd trips through line up.  However, that is in part based on the situation of the game.  If we have large leads the team will let them go a 3rd time.  

The team also wants pen guys to start innings and not come into a mess of an inning if they can avoid it.  So they would rather pull a guy after 5 if he is in the 3rd time through, around 90 pitches, and a close game.  Mainly because they figure no way will they finish the 6th so they would rather have pen guy start 6th.  Also, the team does not want to warm a guy up and not bring them in too often either. 

Like it or not, we will continue to have shorter starts, but hopefully we can get more 6 inning starts as at least a norm. 

The League norm is just under 5.5 innings. There’s a reasonable chance we can get 6 innings per outing 3 of 4 outings from each of our guys, except maybe Maeda? An outing of 4 innings due to troubles every 4th start is probably reasonable. That’s 22 innings over 4 starts which = 5.5 innings per start. Probably a reasonable Staff goal.

[Whitey333]

Your comment that the Twins starting staff in 2022 was somehow plagued by their short term status does ring true.  But who put that staff together last year?  Our Front Office of course.  You knew going in last year that our starting staff was very sub par plus the FO didn't see the need to upgrade the bullpen in 2022.  If you are going to only use starters for 5 or even 6 innings you better have a shut down bullpen.  Not sure what to expect this year.  The bullpen seems average to maybe slightly above average.  There is definitely a couple there that shouldn't be on the team.  But their "stuff is good" even if the results aren't.  Remember many times this FO has said it's about the process and not the results.  If their goal is to stick with the plan, win ing be damned, then I'm afraid we are in for another season of disappointment.  Why isn't this front office held accountable?

[Fire Dan Gladden]

44 minutes ago, terrydactyls said:

The baseball season is over six months long.  That's about 190 days.  If a starter can't pitch the equivalent of one inning a day, then something is terribly wrong with baseball.  A seven inning start should be the goal for every starting pitcher and also for their manager.

Baseball isn't baseball unless you pitch a complete game every third day... sorry 1920

Baseball isn't baseball unless you pitch a complete game every 4th day... sorry 1950

Baseball isn't baseball unless you pitch a complete game every 5th day... sorry 1990

Baseball isn't baseball unless your starter goes 7 innings... sorry 2010

The game changes and evolves.  The goal for every manger should be to win.  The goal for every pitcher is to do what they tell you to do in an effort to win.  If that means you go 5 innings, you go 5 innings.

SP pitchers want to pitch more innings because SP that pitch a lot of innings get paid more.

[Nick Nelson]

10 hours ago, dxpavelka said:

No, it shows how far we HOPE we've come.  HOPE is not a strategy.  The coming months will show how far we've come. 

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. 

[Mike Sixel]

2 hours ago, BsuNemo said:

This absolutely hits it on the head. Bundy and Archer weren't terrible. They just weren't trusted. On their good days they should've been. What I don't think our statistically stuck management realized was sometimes making a change to what is perceived to be weakness (ie third time through) even though it's been done that way for over 100 years, causes a weakness to another... Ie our relief corp being decimated late in the year from being over used. Hopefully, even though they won't admit their mistakes from last year, management has learned from them. The side story is... If they haven't will any pitchers want to come here... 

They were objectively terrible. Sort starting pitching rankings, then go to near the last page.... That's where you'll find them. 

[Schmoeman5]

41 minutes ago, Muppet said:

Last year their rotation was mostly terrible. If you're the manager and your starting pitchers stink, it would seem you'd enact a strategy to limit their innings. It didn't work, but it almost did. Remember the Twins were in 1st place for 100 (or so) days? They didn't have to be great. They only had to be better than the Guardians. They were obviously not built to go deep into the playoffs, but they worked with what they had and almost made it there. 

This year they have a similar problem. They have great pitching and defense (on paper) but their offense stinks. There's not much they can do about it now but work to their strengths. I'm excited to see how it goes. 

"great pitching and defense (on paper) but their offense stinks." The only part of the offense that has changed from last year is Arreaz is gone and Polanco is injured. Miranda was added after the season started to replace Kiriloff, so the optimists are saying Kiriloff and Polanco should return soon. Can't replace Arreaz. Agreed.  But I'm still more worried about the starting pitching. Lopez, Gray, and Ryan and pray for rain. Because I think Mahle and Maeda are going to be clones of Bundy and Archer

[Mike Sixel]

2 minutes ago, Schmoeman5 said:

"great pitching and defense (on paper) but their offense stinks." The only part of the offense that has changed from last year is Arreaz is gone and Polanco is injured. Miranda was added after the season started to replace Kiriloff, so the optimists are saying Kiriloff and Polanco should return soon. Can't replace Arreaz. Agreed.  But I'm still more worried about the starting pitching. Lopez, Gray, and Ryan and pray for rain. Because I think Mahle and Maeda are going to be clones of Bundy and Archer

Based on Mahle being better then Bundy nearly every year lately? Or do you think he's hurt?

[Woof Bronzer]

9 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. 

This is absolutely brilliant and shocking to me becasue it runs counter to all the spin I hear.  So I predict this will just be ignored by all the stat guys and true believers here because it doesn't fit the preferred narrative,  But facts matter!  Thanks for not accepting the conventional wisdom and daring to actually do research and come to your own conclusions.

[Woof Bronzer]

12 minutes ago, Mike Sixel said:

They were objectively terrible. Sort starting pitching rankings, then go to near the last page.... That's where you'll find them. 

You should read the OP's comment.  Plenty of data and stats cited.  Sorry if they don't fit your narrative.

[Mike Sixel]

3 minutes ago, Woof Bronzer said:

This is absolutely brilliant and shocking to me becasue it runs counter to all the spin I hear.  So I predict this will just be ignored by all the stat guys and true believers here because it doesn't fit the preferred narrative,  But facts matter!  Thanks for not accepting the conventional wisdom and daring to actually do research and come to your own conclusions.

Which objective truth are stat people ignoring for narrative? 

[Mike Sixel]

1 minute ago, Woof Bronzer said:

You should read the OP's comment.  Plenty of data and stats cited.  Sorry if they don't fit your narrative.

I can read, I can also look at stats. They were terrible relative to the league. You only have to go to leaderboards and sort. 

[Mike Sixel]

124 pitchers pitched 100 innings or more. Bundy was 109th in fwar, and Archer was worse. How is that anything other than terrible?

[Schmoeman5]

25 minutes ago, Fire Dan Gladden said:

Baseball isn't baseball unless you pitch a complete game every third day... sorry 1920

Baseball isn't baseball unless you pitch a complete game every 4th day... sorry 1950

Baseball isn't baseball unless you pitch a complete game every 5th day... sorry 1990

Baseball isn't baseball unless your starter goes 7 innings... sorry 2010

The game changes and evolves.  The goal for every manger should be to win.  The goal for every pitcher is to do what they tell you to do in an effort to win.  If that means you go 5 innings, you go 5 innings.

SP pitchers want to pitch more innings because SP that pitch a lot of innings get paid more.

SP pitchers want to pitch more innings because SP that pitch a lot of  innings get paid more.  Ding ding ding, we have a winner. But what you forgot to mention is that managers decisions are not his decisions they're made by the FO. Every decision,  roster moves, lineups are based on dollars saved for most clubs. Not all. YET . Base ball has changed more in the last 20 years than it did in the first 100 years, and not necessarily for the better. Cars and phones have too.

[Mike Sixel]

Of those 124 pitchers, Bundy had the 20th worst ERA, and Archer 26th, if you prefer ERA. 

[Schmoeman5]

12 minutes ago, Mike Sixel said:

Based on Mahle being better then Bundy nearly every year lately? Or do you think he's hurt?

I mentioned Mahle not because I think he's hurt, but because he went down last year and has been so-so this spring. I agree he's nice better than Bundy.

[chpettit19]

10 minutes ago, Woof Bronzer said:

This is absolutely brilliant and shocking to me becasue it runs counter to all the spin I hear.  So I predict this will just be ignored by all the stat guys and true believers here because it doesn't fit the preferred narrative,  But facts matter!  Thanks for not accepting the conventional wisdom and daring to actually do research and come to your own conclusions.

Welcome to Twins Daily!

I will note that many of us who speak on Bundy and Archer's short starts have done research and drawn our own conclusions on facts. Like the facts of Archer's performance in the 5th inning last year. He went into the 5th in 40% of his starts last year and had an ERA over 11 in the 5th. Gave up an OPS against over .850. He was terrible when they let him try to do it so they limited how often they let him do it.

[wsnydes]

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.  

[Mike Sixel]

Just now, 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.  

Truth. Paddock getting hurt was a blow. Not piggy backing was a weird choice, imo. 

[Schmoeman5]

4 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.  

Go back to last ST and read what Falvey or Baldelli said about Archer. He was getting older, and with a shorter ST due to the lockout they were going to start him off slowly and ramp up his workload as time went by and he got stronger. So the were bs ing us all along because that never happened.  And reading what Gray had to say in this article, thats pretty much what Archer expected every outing.

[Squirrel]

14 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.  

Right. And I think Winder was initially going to follow Archer’s starts, piggybacking. Then injuries. And Winder moved to the rotation. And, then more injuries, and then …

[Squirrel]

13 minutes ago, Mike Sixel said:

Truth. Paddock getting hurt was a blow. Not piggy backing was a weird choice, imo. 

I think it was their plan, but so many injuries to starters moved the piggy backers to the rotation then they were left with what they had …

[Thebigalguy]

My hope is that the Bald Man is more experienced now and won't rely completely on stats when he sees a starter performing strong right in front of his eyes. It's clearly a better starting staff. Maeda, if he performs, will get the hook early, of course, since he's returning from major surgery. The others should be rendered unto Caesar what Caesar deserves on a start-by-start basis. If they pitch rich, let them go six. Or seven. If they lose the tune, send them into the back room for a shower or a cold bath. Or something to get them back into tune. We also have young whippersnappers waiting in the wings with the Saints. I like what I see. Of course, right now, we're 0-0, so what's not to like?

[wabene]

8 minutes ago, Schmoeman5 said:

Go back to last ST and read what Falvey or Baldelli said about Archer. He was getting older, and with a shorter ST due to the lockout they were going to start him off slowly and ramp up his workload as time went by and he got stronger. So the were bs ing us all along because that never happened.  And reading what Gray had to say in this article, thats pretty much what Archer expected every outing.

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. 

[big dog]

1 hour 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. 

It's also night and day to any Twins pitching staff for at least the last 45 years.

[big dog]

1 hour ago, AlGoreRythm said:

I

You're not going to find many people in any industry that come out and say, "We completely screwed the pooch last year and we're sorry."

 

I believe there are laws that protect the identity of the pooch under these circumstances, and in any case I'd rather that discussions of this kind of behavior be kept out of press conferences as much as possible.

[Woof Bronzer]

31 minutes ago, chpettit19 said:

Welcome to Twins Daily!

I will note that many of us who speak on Bundy and Archer's short starts have done research and drawn our own conclusions on facts. Like the facts of Archer's performance in the 5th inning last year. He went into the 5th in 40% of his starts last year and had an ERA over 11 in the 5th. Gave up an OPS against over .850. He was terrible when they let him try to do it so they limited how often they let him do it.

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!