Analytics has hurt the Twins

[chpettit19]

9 hours ago, dxpavelka said:

Haven't really won anything since "analytics" became a thing.  Now Tampa Bay, that's a team that lives and dies by analytics and they've won--oops, nothing.  But wait. The Dodgers.  HUGE on the analytics deal.  More money to spend on payroll than God.  One (Covid tainted?) World Series win.  A wise man once said that advanced analytics are an excellent means of predicting the past.

Don't stop there. What about the Braves and Astros? They've won a couple times recently, do they use analytics? Or is it just the Twins, Rays, and Dodgers?

The well known least analytical team in baseball is the Rockies. Should we be more like them?

[Bodie]

On 8/21/2023 at 6:29 AM, NotAboutWinning said:

Poor application of analytics has hurt the Twins!

Over reliance on analytics has hurt the Twins (and all of baseball)!

fixed that for you 😉 

[nicksaviking]

10 hours ago, dxpavelka said:

Yep.  Analytics that anyone can calculate.  None of this MIT b#@!%#@.

Right, don't use any tools that the average joe has no interest in learning.

We wouldn't have airplanes, satellites or the internet, heck, we'd all still be living in caves and eating raw meat, but at least average joe wouldn't feel insecure.

[Richie the Rally Goat]

18 minutes ago, Bodie said:

Over reliance on analytics has hurt the Twins (and all of baseball)!

fixed that for you 😉 

I think the trends of modern baseball emphasizing strikeouts by pitchers and three true outcomes by hitters has hurt the fans of baseball.

teams with better analytical modeling make decisions more frequently on average, that result in winnning more games, but those same decisions make the sport less watchable by the fans. When winning the game doesn’t translate to winning the fans.

it’s why I like the Manfred rules. They have thus far encouraged decisions and outcomes that make the game more fun to watch.

it’s not the tool that’s causing the decision and the outcome. It’s the people in charge.

it’s not the bat’s fault that Joey Gallo strikes out 50% of the time. It’s Joey Gallo’s fault.

[Mike Sixel]

23 minutes ago, nicksaviking said:

Right, don't use any tools that the average joe has no interest in learning.

We wouldn't have airplanes, satellites or the internet, heck, we'd all still be living in caves and eating raw meat, but at least average joe wouldn't feel insecure.

The irony of people posting these thoughts from the powerful devices our phones have become is not lost on me...

 

[Squirrel]

46 minutes ago, Richie the Rally Goat said:

I think the trends of modern baseball emphasizing strikeouts by pitchers and three true outcomes by hitters has hurt the fans of baseball.

teams with better analytical modeling make decisions more frequently on average, that result in winnning more games, but those same decisions make the sport less watchable by the fans. When winning the game doesn’t translate to winning the fans.

it’s why I like the Manfred rules. They have thus far encouraged decisions and outcomes that make the game more fun to watch.

it’s not the tool that’s causing the decision and the outcome. It’s the people in charge.

it’s not the bat’s fault that Joey Gallo strikes out 50% of the time. It’s Joey Gallo’s fault.

I posted this in the Other Baseball forum, but I think it fits here. I don’t think this is ‘Twins only’ discussion as what most are saying is pretty much everywhere in baseball, some good, some bad. And Richie’s post kind of summarized this article. Hopefully it’s not behind a paywall and you can read one article for free. While it emphasizes the pitch clock, it’s really about more than that. It’s why the need for it and what led us there.

I think if this discussion had been framed in a question form .., ‘Have analytics hurt baseball? How? What’s the solution?’ … we’d get to the heart of it. I’d go so far as saying it’s not analytics, but it’s how some numbers have been applied … would that be a fair question?

https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2023/07/baseball-mlb-rule-changes-2023-pitch-clock/674291/?utm_source=copy-link&utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=share

[Riverbrian]

1 hour ago, Richie the Rally Goat said:

I think the trends of modern baseball emphasizing strikeouts by pitchers and three true outcomes by hitters has hurt the fans of baseball.

 

The emphasis of Strikeouts by pitchers and the de-emphasis of strikeouts by hitters... always leaves me scratching my head. 😎

[Mike Sixel]

1 minute ago, Riverbrian said:

The emphasis of Strikeouts by pitchers and the de-emphasis of strikeouts by hitters... always leaves me scratching my head. 😎

Agreed

[MABB1959]

On 8/20/2023 at 1:11 PM, Richie the Rally Goat said:

Can you point to the analytics that causes the decision you disagree with? What’s the proof that it’s analytics promoting the decision and not Rocco seeing a soothsayer or Maki getting his palm read?

Every decision anyone has ever made involves collection of information, dissemination and decision making. Why does the tool matter?

Personally, I think the record is because the bullpen sucks, and Buck and Correa have vastly underperformed.

The only reason I disagree is because a player or certain line-up shouldn't be changed if they are on a roll.  You cannot predict how a hitter would do or we would not have 90% of our lineup striking out.

[Riverbrian]

1 minute ago, Mike Sixel said:

Agreed

It's like they want Joey Gallo to provide his style of offense for the team while at the same time, they would like the pitching staff to turn every hitter they face into a Joey Gallo. 😎

 

[MABB1959]

2 hours ago, chpettit19 said:

Don't stop there. What about the Braves and Astros? They've won a couple times recently, do they use analytics? Or is it just the Twins, Rays, and Dodgers?

The well known least analytical team in baseball is the Rockies. Should we be more like them?

There has to be a happy median.  I think Rocco depends totally on analytics and not his gut feelings.

[Rod Carews Birthday]

14 hours ago, Richie the Rally Goat said:

Analytics has held a place in the game since the very first box score was published in a newspaper which was October 24, 1845 according to SABR

This is what people forget.  Just because it wasn't a computer telling managers (and players) what the exact numbers were, doesn't mean that analytics didn't exist.  Batters and pitchers most certainly studied each other's tendencies and managers used every tidbit of knowledge they could to exploit them. 

[Rod Carews Birthday]

5 minutes ago, MABB1959 said:

There has to be a happy median.  I think Rocco depends totally on analytics and not his gut feelings.

Gut feelings are based on . . . . analytics, only with potentially less accuracy involved.  It's OK to not like the word, but when a manager "uses his gut" to make a decision, it's based on what he has seen work before and thinks might work again, and that's analytics.  These are not stupid people.  They're not saying, "Hey!  Maybe the pitcher should pitch underhanded.  That will work." or "Let's try batting with the your hands in the opposite position on the bat".  We know those won't work because of the information we gather -- even if we "just know".

[chpettit19]

20 minutes ago, MABB1959 said:

There has to be a happy median.  I think Rocco depends totally on analytics and not his gut feelings.

I do think the organization as a whole is overly reliant on their process/expectations, but I don't agree at all that Rocco depends totally on analytics and no "gut feelings." I do think he relies too much on the pre-game plan, but those plans aren't just built on numbers, but also his conversations with players, coaches, trainers, etc. before the game. He doesn't just look at a spreadsheet and plug guys in. That's a vast oversimplification of the process before, and during, the game.

Manager "gut feelings" can be better quantified now, too. When many people talk about "gut feelings" they talk about pitcher usage and knowing when a guy is tired or has more in them. That used to be done solely by the eye test and a manager using his experience to know when a certain guy is tired. Now they have spin rates, velo, extension, arm slot, and a whole bunch of proprietary stuff outsiders don't even know about that they can look at. They're judging the same thing, but they have actual data to go on now instead of just their eye test of "he looks like he's not getting on top of the ball as well so he must be tired." It's the same process, just more educated.

22 minutes ago, MABB1959 said:

The only reason I disagree is because a player or certain line-up shouldn't be changed if they are on a roll.  You cannot predict how a hitter would do or we would not have 90% of our lineup striking out.

This is a bit of a difficult idea to unwrap. I don't disagree that individual player performance game to game can't be predicted, but the idea behind most of the stats used in baseball today is that over a large enough sample size things will balance out to a certain mark for each player. The Twins aren't trying to predict individual game performance as much as they're trying to put guys in the situations they feel they perform best in as often as possible so that by the end of the season they've maximized their performance.

This leads to a lot of decisions that I'm not a big fan of as I think their plan ignores some other factors. I don't like the extreme use of pinch hitters nearly every game because pinch hitters as a whole perform worse than guys who started in the lineup. But the Twins weigh platoon advantages higher in their model. They have a lot of smart people in their FO so I'm sure it's a very educated decision, but their pinch hitters (outside of Solano) have performed miserably this year so it's all the more frustrating to me. And I agree with the idea of letting the hot hand roll. That's where I think they are overly reliant on their process. But, if you're going to build your team on platoon advantages and interchangeable parts I do think there is logic in playing it out over the length of the season as that's where the advantage really plays. But then they need to be able to change that plan in the postseason as the sample size shrinks significantly, and those advantages go away since it really does become more of a game to game performance prediction. That's where you really need to just let your best players do their thing.

[nicksaviking]

2 hours ago, Richie the Rally Goat said:

I think the trends of modern baseball emphasizing strikeouts by pitchers and three true outcomes by hitters has hurt the fans of baseball.

Yeah, baseball seems pretty unique in that obviously being as efficient as you can is the best way to win games. Yet being efficient in baseball means less non-stop action, which is a turn off.

Still, I'd rather my team win boring, than lose exciting. 

[gman]

16 hours ago, Richie the Rally Goat said:

Analytics has held a place in the game since the very first box score was published in a newspaper which was October 24, 1845 according to SABR

I remember that game

[Riverbrian]

I don't know near enough about the variety of metrics that clubs use.  

What I do assume quite confidently:

1. Metrics are valuable - I don't care what industry you are in... you better know your numbers. 

2. Your competition is using metrics which will disguise that value. The value of metrics is more noticeable when you stop using them compared to your peers who are using them. When they are all using them the playing field is level.   

3. The more metrics you pour into the equation the more homogenized the results become because the total value of Player Bob is going to reside closer to the middle of everyone after the metrics tell you he is good at this and not good at this.

4. You always need a good sample size.  

 

[Squirrel]

1 hour ago, gman said:

I remember that game

Did you and @USAFChief go together?

[USAFChief]

23 minutes ago, Squirrel said:

Did you and @USAFChief go together?

I watched on TV. Cable. None of this streaming ****.

[big dog]

3 hours ago, MABB1959 said:

The only reason I disagree is because a player or certain line-up shouldn't be changed if they are on a roll.  You cannot predict how a hitter would do or we would not have 90% of our lineup striking out.

OK, so...how do you determine when a player is "on a roll"? Do you have a particular definition of recent performance over a specific period, or is it when they have a jaunty step and a confident look in their eyes? Either way, isn't that a type of analytic?

Does anyone know- when we talk about doing something "by our gut", is that an archaic reference to the practice of haruspicy? This was an ancient tradition of using the position of the organs in a slaughtered animal to determine the will of the gods. It is more commonly known as "reading the entrails". I don't think the similarity between this and using your gut is likely to be a coincidence.

 

[big dog]

Just now, big dog said:

OK, so...how do you determine when a player is "on a roll"? Do you have a particular definition of recent performance over a specific period, or is it when they have a jaunty step and a confident look in their eyes? Either way, isn't that a type of analytic?

Does anyone know- when we talk about doing something "by our gut", is that an archaic reference to the practice of haruspicy? This was an ancient tradition of using the position of the organs in a slaughtered animal to determine the will of the gods. It is more commonly known as "reading the entrails". I don't think the similarity between this and using your gut is likely to be a coincidence.

 

And with respect to both of those questions, I bet Joe Madden would have something interesting to say on the topic.

[dxpavelka]

14 hours ago, chpettit19 said:

Don't stop there. What about the Braves and Astros? They've won a couple times recently, do they use analytics? Or is it just the Twins, Rays, and Dodgers?

The well known least analytical team in baseball is the Rockies. Should we be more like them?

hasn't done much for us.  should I care about others?

 

[MABB1959]

9 hours ago, big dog said:

OK, so...how do you determine when a player is "on a roll"? Do you have a particular definition of recent performance over a specific period, or is it when they have a jaunty step and a confident look in their eyes? Either way, isn't that a type of analytic?

Does anyone know- when we talk about doing something "by our gut", is that an archaic reference to the practice of haruspicy? This was an ancient tradition of using the position of the organs in a slaughtered animal to determine the will of the gods. It is more commonly known as "reading the entrails". I don't think the similarity between this and using your gut is likely to be a coincidence.

 

5+ game hitting streak. After the player only meeting win streak why would you change the lineup. The last few games we had to shake our heads wondering the reason for pinch hitting. Just today Farmer was 2/3 and lifted him for Kepler who promptly struck out.?

[dxpavelka]

14 hours ago, nicksaviking said:

Right, don't use any tools that the average joe has no interest in learning.

We wouldn't have airplanes, satellites or the internet, heck, we'd all still be living in caves and eating raw meat, but at least average joe wouldn't feel insecure.

Use whatever you want.  But the old school stuff is important too.

[Richie the Rally Goat]

7 hours ago, MABB1959 said:

5+ game hitting streak. After the player only meeting win streak why would you change the lineup. The last few games we had to shake our heads wondering the reason for pinch hitting. Just today Farmer was 2/3 and lifted him for Kepler who promptly struck out.?

That sounds suspiciously like math to me

[chpettit19]

8 hours ago, dxpavelka said:

hasn't done much for us.  should I care about others?

 

You seemed to care about the Rays and Dodgers.

[Major League Ready]

10 hours ago, dxpavelka said:

hasn't done much for us.  should I care about others?

 

Do you want to know if analytics are effective or if the twins have been effective with analytics?   If you want to know if analytics are effective, you should want to look at the most complete array of information available.  How could you tell from only looking at the twins if analytics are helpful?  You would have to assume the Twins relative degree of success or lack thereof is caused solely by their use of analytics.  I don't know why you want to use such a limited perspective in assessing anything.  It's a good way to insure a very limited understanding by default.  

BTW .... The Dodgers have had the highest winning percentage in all of baseball for the last 15 years and the rays have had more success than any team in the bottom half of revenue.  

[nicksaviking]

10 hours ago, dxpavelka said:

hasn't done much for us.  should I care about others?

 

 

10 hours ago, dxpavelka said:

Use whatever you want.  But the old school stuff is important too.

Right, refusing to use math is why Terry Ryan and Ron Gardenhire won so many championships.

[Battle ur tail off]

On 8/22/2023 at 7:50 AM, davidborton said:

Tough challenge to think this one through. Some excellent responses, thx.

I dove into Baseball Reference to look at some pitching stats. Revealing

• Quality starts, 1st, 50%, league avg 35%
• Run support for starters 15th
• Bequeathed runners scoring, 25th (ducks on the pond is killing them)
• BP avg ERA, 16th
• BP is surrendering runners on base as well as giving up runs
• Inn pitched avg start, 5th -- 5.6 inn (severe compression in data as everyone is pulling the starter)
  
  I guess I am not believing STATs are ruining the Twins pitching decisions. Seems offensive support is marginal (no surprise).
  
  We can discuss lineup and choice of pinch inserts, batting philosophy, individual performance (Buxton/Correa) and BP. I believe an over reliance on stats does impact offensive efforts.
   
• So, I have a half criticism of Baldelli/FO, not a full criticism.

Hitting, obviously has hurt this team. More than anything IMO. Bullpen, has hurt this team, alot. Both of those show up in the stats you've shown. 

I would argue also that when the bullpen stats are as bad as they are, and starter's stats as good as they are, decisions like Rocco made last night SPIT in the face of what this team really is, whether there is some advanced stat that says he should pull them etc. 

I will give him some credit. For the most part, he has let his starters go deeper into game this year. But there are still too many times when he tries to get 4 innings out of them, when they are good for 2 possibly 3 that day. THAT loses us games also and should be taken into acccount. 

[Battle ur tail off]

1 hour ago, nicksaviking said:

 

Right, refusing to use math is why Terry Ryan and Ron Gardenhire won so many championships.

Rosters with better payroll, pitching staffs like this one has and not as many holes in the lineup(Jason Tyner DH anyone), Gardy would have won more than he did. They ALWAYS had good bullpens. Don't care what folks say, old Terry could build bullpens and I didn't like the guy very much.

Here you have a real contrast, both TR and Gardy were "baseball guys" and didn't use analytics much at all, while the couple we have now, are computer, analytics, spreadsheet guys and don't rely on gut/feel very much at all. Both have had about the same success when it comes down to it.