Did Brent Rooker finally learn how to play at MLB level?

[Trov]

We love to look at how former prospects are doing for other teams, mainly to see if we got it right or wrong on letting them go.  One could argue it would be did we get it right or wrong to originally draft them as well.  One of the stories on past Twins that are doing well this year is Brent Rooker.  He was touted in our ranking as a guy that would hit, not much of fielder but we were hoping would be a middle of line up bat for many years.  

He debuted in 2020 getting 7 games in the short year, but injury took him out for much of it.  He did well in the 7 games so hopes were still high.  2021 he got a much longer run that did not go well.  His AAA numbers were good, not great, and there was worries about the K rate, but the power was there.  At MLB level it was nothing short of terrible. With a slugging under .400 in over 200 PA, striking out 70 times only walking 15.  There was still hope he would figure it out, but we shipped him out last year, as a throw in the trade to SD. 

He only played 2 MLB games for SD, but his AAA numbers again were good.  Eventually he went to KC and AAA numbers were good there too, but short stint at MLB level was not good again.  Looking like he was going to settle in as a AAAA player, the good to great in AAA but subpar in MLB.  He found his way to Oakland this year, a team that appears to have been adopting a real Major League plan of being so bad the fan base packs the bags for them to move to Vegas.  Oakland might be the worst team to be assembled.

However, they have 1 really bright spot on offense, that Brent Rooker.  He is getting regular at bats, splitting DH and corner OF.  He is off to a blazing start.  Not only has he hit 7 HR, but more important for him, he has only struck out 13 times in 72 PA, with 12 walks.  Unlike every other time where he struck out at over 33% rate he is at a much lower 18% rate, with nearly 1 to 1 k to walk ratio, where every other stint was significantly worse.  

The question is, has he figured something out in Oakland, just got recent chance for a team appearing to actively trying to lose, and he is doing his best Pedro Serrano impersonation after telling off Jobu?  Is it just a SSS and he will come back to earth after teams adjust to him?  I hope for him it is the former and he will continue to hit well, never wish any player ill will, unless they chose to go to Yankees.  

I bet A's will look to flip him midseason for a team looking for a RH bat, like the Twins might be at deadline.  I mean we keep giving Garlick runs with the team for that exact reason.  Rooker is hitting RHP better than LHP, but still doing well against both, hard not too when you have an OPS of 1.112 with OPS+ of 215.  Similar to Gallo, I do not expect this to last all year, but good for Rooker to start off hot and hopefully for him will get to stay up at MLB level all year.  I mean only reason Oakland will send him down is because he helps them win too many games. 

[Hosken Bombo Disco]

What kind of pitches is he getting to hit? 

[tony&rodney]

Hitting a baseball is really hard and being successful in MLB with a bat requires skill, confidence, luck, and the ability to focus on each at bat. Failure is so common that any thought of correcting or fixing past problems allows doubt to seep into your mind, which is then a problem for the current at bat. Perhaps Rooker has found the ability to treat each at bat totally in a positive light.

I hope he continues his success all year, except against the Twins.

[chpettit19]

It looks like he's making much better swing decisions, and getting the ball in the air more. He's chasing only 22.1% of the time, compared to his career norms in the 30% range, and league average of 28.4%. Still a lot of swing and miss in his game as he's whiffing a career high 35.4 percent of the time (league average 24.7%). And his GB% is down at 30.2% after being in the upper 30s for his first 3 shots in the majors. Better swing decisions are certainly a sustainable change, and this may be him figuring it out. I hope it is. Good for him. His challenge will probably be to not start pressing when he runs into struggles and fall back into his chase heavy ways. But if he can keep doing damage when he connects there'll be a spot for him on an MLB roster.

Another red flag that he's likely to come back to earth is that his barrel rate is 23.3%. League average is 6.8%. Ohtani is 14.7. Judge was 26.5 last year, and 22.0 this year. Trout has never had a season over 20%. So, unless you think Rooker is now amongst the elite of the elite sluggers, he's likely to come back to earth. His previous seasons (SSS) were 14.3, 12.6, and 4.8%. I don't see him maintaining Judge-esque barrel rates all season, but I hope he does. I enjoy a good "late bloomer" story.

On another note, I'll say there's a ton of variables outside of a former Twins prospect becoming successful later when you're talking about if the Twins made the right decision about letting them go in one fashion or another. It's definitely not just a "well he succeeded later so the Twins should've kept him" sort of equation. 40-man roster decisions, what the other player they'd have had to give up in a trade would've been, how long after they left, and how many other teams were they on, before they succeeded, did the players who replaced them on the Twins 40-, and 26-man, rosters play better while someone like Rooker was still struggling elsewhere are all questions that factor into "grading" these kinds of decisions. 

[nicksaviking]

I had wanted Rooker as a draft target and then the Twins actually picked him, which never happens.

Hope he does well, and I won't be surprised if he does. The reason I liked him pre-draft was because I read an article about how he was constantly evaluating and adjusting his mechanics to improve his swing as pitching and fielding approaches had been changing. At the time, I wasn't thrilled that certain Twins refused to change their approach at the plate despite these new trends.

Knowing he was always working on his swing, I'll not be surprised if something finally fell into place.

[Dman]

14 minutes ago, chpettit19 said:

On another note, I'll say there's a ton of variables outside of a former Twins prospect becoming successful later when you're talking about if the Twins made the right decision about letting them go in one fashion or another. It's definitely not just a "well he succeeded later so the Twins should've kept him" sort of equation. 40-man roster decisions, what the other player they'd have had to give up in a trade would've been, how long after they left, and how many other teams were they on, before they succeeded, did the players who replaced them on the Twins 40-, and 26-man, rosters play better while someone like Rooker was still struggling elsewhere are all questions that factor into "grading" these kinds of decisions. 

Yeah I agree.  The Twins traded him as part of the Pagan, Paddack package so they got something out of him.  Still he didn't produce for the Padres and they traded him to KC.  He didn't produce there and KC tired to sneak him off the 40 man only to have the A's pick him up.  So not just the Twins who had issues finding 40 man space for him.  He is not a plus defender anywhere either so he needs to hit like he is right now to be valuable.

Even with the hot start I am not convinced after watching his swing with the Twins.  I would just throw him breaking stuff and I doubt he will square much of that stuff up.  He was always more of a fastball\mistake hitter IMO as he really struggled to make contact  with high K rates all through the minor's.  Maybe he has turned a corner and maybe he will keep this up and if does good for him.  Making it as a MLB hitter is really hard.

[2wins87]

15 minutes ago, chpettit19 said:

It looks like he's making much better swing decisions, and getting the ball in the air more. He's chasing only 22.1% of the time, compared to his career norms in the 30% range, and league average of 28.4%. Still a lot of swing and miss in his game as he's whiffing a career high 35.4 percent of the time (league average 24.7%). And his GB% is down at 30.2% after being in the upper 30s for his first 3 shots in the majors. Better swing decisions are certainly a sustainable change, and this may be him figuring it out. I hope it is. Good for him. His challenge will probably be to not start pressing when he runs into struggles and fall back into his chase heavy ways. But if he can keep doing damage when he connects there'll be a spot for him on an MLB roster.

Another red flag that he's likely to come back to earth is that his barrel rate is 23.3%. League average is 6.8%. Ohtani is 14.7. Judge was 26.5 last year, and 22.0 this year. Trout has never had a season over 20%. So, unless you think Rooker is now amongst the elite of the elite sluggers, he's likely to come back to earth. His previous seasons (SSS) were 14.3, 12.6, and 4.8%. I don't see him maintaining Judge-esque barrel rates all season, but I hope he does. I enjoy a good "late bloomer" story.

On another note, I'll say there's a ton of variables outside of a former Twins prospect becoming successful later when you're talking about if the Twins made the right decision about letting them go in one fashion or another. It's definitely not just a "well he succeeded later so the Twins should've kept him" sort of equation. 40-man roster decisions, what the other player they'd have had to give up in a trade would've been, how long after they left, and how many other teams were they on, before they succeeded, did the players who replaced them on the Twins 40-, and 26-man, rosters play better while someone like Rooker was still struggling elsewhere are all questions that factor into "grading" these kinds of decisions. 

Nice summary.

The first thing that jumped out to me were the K-BB numbers too, which also led me right to the plate discipline numbers.  He did seem to make a smaller improvement in that regard last year too, so it seems like it might be sustainable.  I have a feeling the discipline numbers won't be quite so good at the end of the year, but he does seem improved.

He's on his third org after the Twins so I would hope that no one is complaining that they made the wrong decision letting him go, though I wouldn't be surprised, probably from the same people saying they need to cut whomever 4 weeks into the season.

[Hosken Bombo Disco]

My first take would be similar to yours Dman. With Oakland being so bad, my hypothesis is that opposing pitchers are just attacking all Oakland hitters, and Rooker is benefitting from seeing a ton of good pitches. 

I am neutral on Rooker but hope he does well for himself!

[TouchEmAllGuy]

Happy for Rooker! I was high on him during his prospect era here but was severely let down after actually watching him. Hope his success continues!

[saviking]

2 hours ago, Hosken Bombo Disco said:

What kind of pitches is he getting to hit? 

Fat ones

[Jocko87]

3 hours ago, Hosken Bombo Disco said:

My first take would be similar to yours Dman. With Oakland being so bad, my hypothesis is that opposing pitchers are just attacking all Oakland hitters, and Rooker is benefitting from seeing a ton of good pitches. 

I am neutral on Rooker but hope he does well for himself!

I believe this to be the case as well.  Love to see him have some success and hopefully make some money from a hot run but its unsustainable at this level.  I would expect him to have a decent year just batting in the heart of this order.  Always liked him and heard good things so I've been following as well.  He's got a great sense of humor judging from his twitter.

He is on pace to have more home runs than A's wins and I plan to continue tracking it in the run with numbers thread. 

[Trov]

4 hours ago, chpettit19 said:

On another note, I'll say there's a ton of variables outside of a former Twins prospect becoming successful later when you're talking about if the Twins made the right decision about letting them go in one fashion or another. It's definitely not just a "well he succeeded later so the Twins should've kept him" sort of equation. 40-man roster decisions, what the other player they'd have had to give up in a trade would've been, how long after they left, and how many other teams were they on, before they succeeded, did the players who replaced them on the Twins 40-, and 26-man, rosters play better while someone like Rooker was still struggling elsewhere are all questions that factor into "grading" these kinds of decisions. 

I mention this exact point every time I read people on here complaining about how we lost some player.  It was brought up a ton when Baddoo was let go in rule 5.  Some times fans forget we cannot keep every player, and at some point we need to decide who to pick.  I will also point out, we never know if a player would have had similar development path with Twins or after Twins.  I brought up this fact with some of the players we dealt to Reds last year.  Many were saying Steer and ECS will be good, and maybe they will, but we had so many that were of similar roll all ranked higher than them in our prospect rankings. 

So you always have to look at not only who we let go, and who filled the spaces the same player would have.  I also agree in Rookers case we would not have kept him on 40 man last year most likely either.  I still wish him well, but do not expect his hot start to carry all year, but it should be something he can show he has value for someone.   

[tony&rodney]

Good for Rooker. 

Thing is, let's say he could put up identical numbers for the Twins this year .... does he push Buxton to the bench? There simply was no use for Rooker on the Twins roster last year and he still doesn't fit. Rooker is looking good for the Athletics though.