The Twins' 12 Biggest Offseason Questions (& Their Answers) - Part 2

[John Bonnes]

Yesterday I covered six of the Twins biggest offseason questions - and answers - after consulting Twins' President of Baseball Operations Derek Falvey, manager Rocco Baldelli, and my 1970s era Magic 8-Ball. We got as far as considering potential trade candidates, so that's where we'll start off today.

Question 7: Will the Twins begin next year with Christian Vazquez and Ryan Jeffers at catcher?
Magic 8-Ball: Outlook good
But maybe not in that order? The Twins are really happy with how their catching tandem turned out this year, so don't expect any changes. Yes, Vazquez's existing two-year, $20M contract is overpriced, and trading it away – even if some salary relief is included - might provide some payroll room. Also, they have Jair Camargo, a 24-year-old slugging catching prospect in St. Paul, and he likely would've seen some time with the club if Jeffers or Vazquez had been injured, but neither was. So he's an option, but the default plan sounds like they'll try to run out the same arrangement next year, with Camargo in line for a promotion if the Twins catching tandem is not so lucky with injuries next year.

Question 8: How about Kyle Farmer ? Is he a trade candidate?
Magic 8-Ball: As I see it, yes
Falvey and Baldelli weren't explicitly asked about Farmer. I'm sure they would have praised him endlessly if they had had. But his return presents some challenges. First, he will get an arbitration-fueled raise from his $5.6M salary this year to ... $7M-ish? Second, Willi Castro and Nick Gordon provide some similar (and cheaper) utility roles. Royce Lewis (and maybe Brooks Lee ) provide some backup at shortstop. And finally...

Kyle Farmer would be at or near the top of the available free agent shortstops list, especially if the White Sox don't pick up Tim Anderson's contract option. It's a thin group. So Farmer could face the same situation he faced last year: being traded just before the arbitration deadline to a team that is willing to pay that (reasonable) freight. It's also the same situation the Twins faced last year with Gio Urshela , for whom they received a High-A reliever (who also had a terrible year). Farmer would probably be worth more, but I also thought that about Urshela.

Question 9 & 10: (with eyes welling up a bit) Hold it ... what about Jorge? And Max? They'll be back, won't they?
Magic 8-Ball: Signs point to yes
The Twins have options on both Jorge Polanco ($10.5M)and Max Kepler ($10M) next year; all signs are that they'll exercise those options. The Twins clearly value them and their veteran presence. The question is how hard other teams will come fishing for them in trade talks.

Both are desirable. Kepler had a good year, and his second half suggests the 30-year-old could have an even better one next year. His 121 OPS+ looks attractive compared to other corner outfielders, and his defense is a bonus. Plus, there's the reasonable one-year, $10M commitment. And while the Twins don't have the glut of left-handed corner outfield bats they had last year, they have some options.

Polanco might be even more desirable. He would be the best middle infielder (115 OPS+) on the free agent market, and his ability to get through the year healthy reassured the Twins and, even more importantly, other teams. Plus, the Twins might be motivated to move him, given Julien's breakthrough year.

That said, we've been expecting the Twins to move a veteran bat for four years, and the only big move was Luis Arraez . That's because the Twins have valued their guys more than other teams, and the Twins clearly value these guys. It'll take a significant offer - or payroll reduction - to make the Twins move on from these cornerstones.

Question 11: Will the Twins at least try to reduce the strikeouts?
Magic 8-Ball: My reply is no
After setting a new MLB record for strikeouts this year, both Falvey and Levine were especially dismissive of the strikeout narrative that has been saddled on the Twins. "I really do not think it should be something we focus on," emphasized Baldelli. "Baserunners and hitting balls hard is really what we did. We did a pretty good job of executing and making decisions at the plate, things like that. We can talk, probably later on, maybe not today, about different adjustments we can make, that actually are a topic. Because "not striking out" is just a blanket statement that is not constructive. Not striking out is not going to lead us to more effective run-scoring opportunities."

Falvey agreed, and not just about the regular season. "We weren't trying to strike out more," said Falvey. "But at the same time, we were trying to find ways to get to more power. We've all observed these playoffs to this point. What's mattered most is power, the ability to hit for power. The reality is that striking out less this postseason has not led to more wins. In fact, you're below .500 in that sense. That's a fact, right?"

Both agreed that players need to adjust in certain situations to put the ball in play. But that is something they will work on internally. Don't expect this year to change their team-building philosophy or the type of players they acquire.

Question 12: Then will the Twins add a starting pitcher?
Magic 8-Ball: Outlook good
Even with the departure of Sonny Gray and Kenta Maeda, the Twins already have a rotation that could win the (admittedly weak) AL Central: Pablo Lopez, Joe Ryan, Bailey Ober, Chris Paddack, and Louie Varland, with a few AAA arms that could help in a pinch, like Simeon Woods Richardson, David Festa, and Brent Headrick. However…

"That's a good group to start with, but it doesn't mean we're not going to think about ways to get better," Falvey said when asked about adding pitching. "Can't say that just yet, but I would say we'll see where the process takes us."

The reality is that pitching in baseball is like cigarettes in prison: you can never have enough. This year's starting pitching free-agent market is thin, but the Twins will likely want to add one upper-half of the rotation arm to their mix. History suggests it will likely be via trade, and they'll target players with multiple years of team control.

View full article

[tony&rodney]

The Twins were really lucky to only use two catchers. Vazquez is still decent and signing Camargo for a Garlick-like contract should happen soon. 

The situation with Farmer depends on if the Twins trade away a significant infielder in a package for a starting pitcher. Maybe Miami is interested in Farmer.

The contracts for Polanco and Kepler are too good to just give away for some random relief pitcher. If either or both are part of a big trade it might make sense, but it also makes sense to see who in the Twins system interests other teams. 

The strike outs are primarily a problem when situational hitting calls for bat on ball. A double play with no outs and the bases loaded scores a run at least. The K-BB ratio should be improved. Only Julien managed a 2-1 or better rate. Many Twins have 3-1 or worse K-BB rates.

It should be an interesting offseason for the Twins.

[Dave Borton]

22 minutes ago, tony&rodney said:

The Twins were really lucky to only use two catchers. Vazquez is still decent and signing Camargo for a Garlick-like contract should happen soon.

Just a quick link to Camargo's stats. Only saw him once so that data is impressive offensively and defensively.

https://www.baseball-reference.com/register/player.fcgi?id=camarg000jai&utm_medium=linker&utm_source=twinsdaily.com&utm_campaign=2023-10-15_br

 

[tony&rodney]

20 minutes ago, davidborton said:

Just a quick link to Camargo's stats. Only saw him once so that data is impressive offensively and defensively.

https://www.baseball-reference.com/register/player.fcgi?id=camarg000jai&utm_medium=linker&utm_source=twinsdaily.com&utm_campaign=2023-10-15_br

 

Yes, I have looked him up too. This summer I watched a bunch of his at bats via milb.com. He looks pretty good and catchers are extremely valuable. I'm not sure what it would take to secure him from declaring himself a free agent. When I see what happens when a team loses their catchers, it makes me think the Twins need to get that done before the World Series ends.

[BH67]

After setting a new MLB record for strikeouts this year, both Falvey and Levine were especially dismissive of the strikeout narrative that has been saddled on the Twins. "I really do not think it should be something we focus on," emphasized Baldelli. "Baserunners and hitting balls hard is really what we did. We did a pretty good job of executing and making decisions at the plate, things like that..."

"We weren't trying to strike out more," said Falvey. "But at the same time, we were trying to find ways to get to more power. We've all observed these playoffs to this point. What's mattered most is power, the ability to hit for power. The reality is that striking out less this postseason has not led to more wins..."

So OPS unequivocally is the be-all and end-all on offense for the Twins' leadership. To be a regular playoff contender, that's a good strategy to maintain despite occasional failures. Once the division series arrived, however, the Astros countered the power-first approach brilliantly.

Wholesale changes thus aren't happening, and having John provide this clarity is terrific. It appears that something else needs be ready during a high-stakes game or series.

[tony&rodney]

1 hour ago, BH67 said:

hat something else needs be ready

Pitching.

[jmlease1]

13 hours ago, BH67 said:

So OPS unequivocally is the be-all and end-all on offense for the Twins' leadership. To be a regular playoff contender, that's a good strategy to maintain despite occasional failures. Once the division series arrived, however, the Astros countered the power-first approach brilliantly.

Wholesale changes thus aren't happening, and having John provide this clarity is terrific. It appears that something else needs be ready during a high-stakes game or series.

And now the Astros are getting handled by the Rangers. Astros are getting no production from 2B, SS, C, CF, and RF; have no bench, and now that Valdez has been found out they need Urquidy to dominate again or they're going to be down to one starter they can trust. reality is, the Astros got a massive performance from Alvarez (who continues to destroy everyone) and had a few bursts from other parts of their lineup (Abreu, Altuve, etc) to squeak by the Twins.

Regarding Farmer: it's going to be interesting to see what the Twins do there. He's been a gamer for them, hits lefties well, and can slide into a lot of positions well defensively. Moving him would open up opportunity on the roster, but he was also a solid veteran presence and the preferred backup to Correa. I guess it would really come down to what kind of value you could get for him; I doubt I'd want to move him for an A-ball reliever and that kind of return would suggest a salary dump that would be...disappointing.

The Twins depth in the infield with Correa, Polanco, Julien, Lewis, Castro, Kirilloff, Miranda, Lee, and Martin does give them some room to use Farmer as a trade chip.

[Woof Bronzer]

"I really do not think it should be something we focus on," emphasized Baldelli. "Baserunners and hitting balls hard is really what we did. We did a pretty good job of executing and making decisions at the plate, things like that. We can talk, probably later on, maybe not today, about different adjustments we can make, that actually are a topic. Because "not striking out" is just a blanket statement that is not constructive. Not striking out is not going to lead us to more effective run-scoring opportunities."

And this is why I have little hope for the future as long as this leadership group is in charge.  This is a man who gets paid to know baseball; he does not understand that by definition, not striking out can ONLY lead you to more effective run-scoring opportunities - walking or putting the ball in play are both net-positive outcomes for an at bat.  And here he is, unwilling to question the conventional wisdom he's been told to believe, unwilling to do an honest appraisal of what worked this year and what didn't, unwilling to consider if maybe he doesn't have all the answers, maybe he made some mistakes this year...

What's mattered most is power, the ability to hit for power. The reality is that striking out less this postseason has not led to more wins. In fact, you're below .500 in that sense. That's a fact, right?

Uh, no Derek, it's not.  What is he talking about?  The Twins struck out 52 times to the Stros 37 and lost 3-1.  If you need to lie to support your case, maybe it's time to open yourself up to the possibility that maybe it's not the strongest case to be made.  And the utter arrogance on display here:  "that's a fact, right?"  

Falvey and Baldelli seem to be under the, again, mistaken understanding that you must strike out a ton in order to hit for power.  Have they ever stopped to consider if it's a coincidence that Houston has led the league in k% over the last 7 years, has made the ALCS every one of those years, and still manages to hit for power?  

For guys that like to fashion themselves analytics geniuses, they don't seem to understand the analytics of an at bat.  Your chances of a home run when behind in the count are so low.  Especially 0-2.  Why not adjust with 2 strikes?  It's clear from these comments that this idea, taught to little leaguers, never occurred to anyone on the Twins.  Hitting for power is great; swinging out of your shoes when you're down 0-2 is just stupid and flies in the face of the "analytics" these guys flaunt.  

I just cannot get over the arrogance of these guys coming off a season where they set a MLB record for strikeouts and ended the season with 6 straight Ks.  

[TopGunn#22]

Good points Woof!

It will certainly be another interesting off season for the Twins.  Kepler and Polanco have earned their extensions, but once they are picked up, a trade is still possible.  I could see keeping Kepler, but it would depend on what they could get for Polanco.  Same with Farmer.  He was a solid bench guy but is good enough to start someplace else.  With Correa, Lewis, Julien, and Brooks Lee along with Castro and Gordon, it's possible the Twins make deals that could include Polanco AND Farmer.

I would love to see the Twins trade Vasquez for whatever they can get, promote Camargo and use the money saved on Vasquez for a free agent SP.  If you took the money it would take to bring Sonny Gray back (who I believe will regress next year) and what you saved by dealing Vasquez, you could make a bid for Blake Snell, who is 4 years younger than Gray and the likely National League CY Young winner.  If you're out-bid for Snell (I see the Dodgers going hard for him) make a play for Eduardo Rodriguez.  He will cost much less than Snell but would still be effective.  The Twins NEED a LH starter.  When you have to face teams like the Astros (Alvarez & Tucker) you need a lefty.  Signing Ed. Rod would leave you enough money to add ONE solid bullpen piece.

I think some combination of Castro, Austin Martin and Nick Gordon could cover CF next year.  Anything from Buxton is a bonus.  The injury to Kirilloff is a real bummer and complicates what we do at 1B rather than just saying Kirilloff is there.  I don't think there's much of a future for Miranda with the Twins so I'm all in favor of packaging him in a trade for a SP if we sit on our hands at the outset of free agency and all the decent SP options get signed before Falvey and Levine have had their morning coffee.  Maybe make a play for a Joey Meneses type of guy who could form a solid platoon with Kirilloff and play a bigger role if Kirilloff is slow to come back or suffers additional injuries during the regular season.  I'd move on from Solano.  He will surely regress and at 37 going on 38 should not be part of future Twins rosters.  

Yes, it's going to be a VERY INTERSETING off season for the Twins.  

[Rod Carews Birthday]

36 minutes ago, TopGunn#22 said:

I would love to see the Twins trade Vasquez for whatever they can get, promote Camargo and use the money saved on Vasquez for a free agent SP.  If you took the money it would take to bring Sonny Gray back (who I believe will regress next year) and what you saved by dealing Vasquez, you could make a bid for Blake Snell, who is 4 years younger than Gray and the likely National League CY Young winner.  If you're out-bid for Snell (I see the Dodgers going hard for him) make a play for Eduardo Rodriguez.  He will cost much less than Snell but would still be effective.  The Twins NEED a LH starter.  When you have to face teams like the Astros (Alvarez & Tucker) you need a lefty.  Signing Ed. Rod would leave you enough money to add ONE solid bullpen piece.

I think some combination of Castro, Austin Martin and Nick Gordon could cover CF next year.  Anything from Buxton is a bonus.  The injury to Kirilloff is a real bummer and complicates what we do at 1B rather than just saying Kirilloff is there.  I don't think there's much of a future for Miranda with the Twins so I'm all in favor of packaging him in a trade for a SP if we sit on our hands at the outset of free agency and all the decent SP options get signed before Falvey and Levine have had their morning coffee.  Maybe make a play for a Joey Meneses type of guy who could form a solid platoon with Kirilloff and play a bigger role if Kirilloff is slow to come back or suffers additional injuries during the regular season.  I'd move on from Solano.  He will surely regress and at 37 going on 38 should not be part of future Twins rosters.  

Yes, it's going to be a VERY INTERSETING off season for the Twins.  

I'm less enthusiastic about trading Vasquez.  Camargo looks like he could be an adequate backup, but to think we will make it through another season where two guys catch 162 games is probably a fool's errand.  Because the Twins have Jeffers for so little money, it sort of balances what they are paying Vasquez to make it work.  I know that seems crazy and unfair to the better (at least right now) player, but that's unfortunately how it works.

As to signing a pitcher.  I am very much in favor of this, but signing Blake Snell scares me a lot.  Signing high on a (probable) Cy Young pitcher makes you very vulnerable to some regression, not to mention injury.  Snell hasn't been consistently good for long enough to make me want to pay him 25M+ for 4 or 5 years.  I would rather they look for pitchers (who we can't even name) who seem like they could take another step and become good to great (like Lopez or to a lesser extent, Ryan.  I agree that a lefty would be handy and Ed. Rod could fit that bill for less coin.

I more worried about CF than 1B right now because I think corner infielders that can hit aren't in short supply league wide so filling that later could be OK.  The CF situation has me baffled.  I agree that thinking Buxton is going to play the lion's share of the innings (or even any) in CF isn't very realistic and I would like them to bring back MAT to play again.  He was great in the field and OK enough at the bat to not hurt us. I think that Castro is absolutely fine as a sub for a day or two or even a week or two if necessary, but he's not the full time answer.  I think that Gordon is a roster casualty and Martin isn't an option until mid-season.

Interesting for sure!

[Jocko87]

2 hours ago, Woof Bronzer said:

"I really do not think it should be something we focus on," emphasized Baldelli. "Baserunners and hitting balls hard is really what we did. We did a pretty good job of executing and making decisions at the plate, things like that. We can talk, probably later on, maybe not today, about different adjustments we can make, that actually are a topic. Because "not striking out" is just a blanket statement that is not constructive. Not striking out is not going to lead us to more effective run-scoring opportunities."

And this is why I have little hope for the future as long as this leadership group is in charge.  This is a man who gets paid to know baseball; he does not understand that by definition, not striking out can ONLY lead you to more effective run-scoring opportunities - walking or putting the ball in play are both net-positive outcomes for an at bat.  And here he is, unwilling to question the conventional wisdom he's been told to believe, unwilling to do an honest appraisal of what worked this year and what didn't, unwilling to consider if maybe he doesn't have all the answers, maybe he made some mistakes this year...

What's mattered most is power, the ability to hit for power. The reality is that striking out less this postseason has not led to more wins. In fact, you're below .500 in that sense. That's a fact, right?

Uh, no Derek, it's not.  What is he talking about?  The Twins struck out 52 times to the Stros 37 and lost 3-1.  If you need to lie to support your case, maybe it's time to open yourself up to the possibility that maybe it's not the strongest case to be made.  And the utter arrogance on display here:  "that's a fact, right?"  

Falvey and Baldelli seem to be under the, again, mistaken understanding that you must strike out a ton in order to hit for power.  Have they ever stopped to consider if it's a coincidence that Houston has led the league in k% over the last 7 years, has made the ALCS every one of those years, and still manages to hit for power?  

For guys that like to fashion themselves analytics geniuses, they don't seem to understand the analytics of an at bat.  Your chances of a home run when behind in the count are so low.  Especially 0-2.  Why not adjust with 2 strikes?  It's clear from these comments that this idea, taught to little leaguers, never occurred to anyone on the Twins.  Hitting for power is great; swinging out of your shoes when you're down 0-2 is just stupid and flies in the face of the "analytics" these guys flaunt.  

I just cannot get over the arrogance of these guys coming off a season where they set a MLB record for strikeouts and ended the season with 6 straight Ks.  

 

All they are saying is that the strikeout is the wrong variable to be concerned with and they are completely correct.

“What gets measured gets managed — even when it’s pointless to measure and manage it, and even if it harms the purpose of the organisation to do so”.

In simple terms, managing to the strikeout causes more harm than good.  It reduces power production and doesn't increase run production in any meaningful way.  We all lived through the piranha era and while it was fun, they didn't score more runs than the current approach.  In fact, the 2019 Bomba squad scored more than 100 runs more than the best version of the piranhas despite striking out several hundred more times.

We should all be able to agree that a better quality at bat leads to more run production.  The outcome does not matter.  Take higher quality at bats and the runs will come.

Its a very common error to manage based on results rather than process and I'm glad to hear they are not thinking that way.  The strikeouts we hated this year were very often tied to horrible at bats.  The variable that matters is the horrible at bat, not the strikeout.

[Mike Sixel]

I just wish Bonnes would participate more on the site he owns, well written.

[Riverbrian]

7. I do not want the Twins over paying for a catcher via free agency or via trade. Catcher are nearly always over pays. Therefore... I have no problem with Jeffers and Vazquez back next year. My concern is going to be #3. It was nice that Jeffers and Vazquez were healthy all year but I don't think it's wise to expect that to happen again. We will need a capable #3 down in AAA. Whoever the #3 is... I'll be willing to bet that we will be getting significant work in the majors in 2024 due to injuries. I don't know if Camargo is that #3 but if he is. He needs to be kept. If he's not... I don't have an answer. Teams need to develop backstops. I hope Camargo is that #3 and I hope that #4 whoever he is... arrives soon. 

8. Kyle Farmer... Good question. He was a good player but he wasn't Eureka lets stop looking for something better good. I guess it depends on the comfortableness with others to play the SS position. Someone has to be able to step into the SS position when Correa needs a day off or is hurt. Do the Twins trust Castro to play for a day or two or three if Correa is unavailable. Will the Twins slide Lewis over to SS for a couple of days if necessary? Gordon? If there is a long term injury to Correa... Will Brooks Lee be ready for that call up? If the Twins have comfortableness with others to play in case Correa can't. Farmer can be traded for really young guy with some upside. If they don't... Farmer gets a roster spot and he will be part of the roster next year. Farmer is a good question.  

9 - 10. If it were up to me. Jorge absolutely bring him back... Kepler... Nope. I know that many see a log jam of sorts in the infield and yes I can see it but I don't worry about log jams. If we are 5 deep in the infield... that is a good thing. There are enough AB's and positions to go around. We need to keep our best players and Polanco is one of our best players and I believe that Kepler is not one of our best players. I know many are going to disagree with me on this... Kepler was wonderful to close out the year but there is no way that I am going to look past the 2.5 years of not being close enough to good enough. If the front office brings him back... he will have my support but if it were up to me... he would have been gone in June. 

11. They have to reduce strikeouts. The front office can't have it both ways. They can't develop and acquire strikeout pitchers (They have) and then pretend that strikeouts on offense don't matter (They seem to). I hope for offensive additions to the club mainly at OF or 1B. I hope that we acquire hitters who actually put the bat on the ball at a much higher percentage than some of the others that we are counting on. 

12. You can't pick a starting 5 and call it good. You need 8-9-10 quality starting pitchers to get through the season. If we can't bring Gray back... we need to find someone Gray like. It'll be hard but yeah... they got to find that guy via FA or Trade. No more Bundy types please.  

[Woof Bronzer]

2 hours ago, Jocko87 said:

 

All they are saying is that the strikeout is the wrong variable to be concerned with and they are completely correct.

 

Ok, so then they should get rid of all the velocity guys on their pitching staff, and replace them with cheap pitch to contact guys, because focusing on strikeouts is wrong.  Am I following the logic correctly?

[ashbury]

2 hours ago, Jocko87 said:

All they are saying is that the strikeout is the wrong variable to be concerned with and they are completely correct.

Bingo.

The team with the fewest strikeouts this season, Cleveland, would have led the majors in that stat in 1987.  The game has simply changed.

That's not to say that leading in majors in Ks is a good thing.  But the focus should be elsewhere. Leading the majors in groundouts or flyouts is harmful too, but those stats aren't as easily accessible, for us to bang our drums about.  Outs made on the basepaths are even worse.

Six teams this year averaged 5 or more runs per game.  You know what correlates strongly with run scoring?  Plate appearances.  Only TB somehow managed those 5 runs without being near the top in PA.  So we should just get some more players who are strong at racking up plate appearances, right?  Right?

OK that's a little tongue in cheek, but it leads to an actual insight that I do believe.  The 6 teams that led the majors in OBP also led the majors in run scoring.  That's not a guarantee, but it's strong correlation of success.

If you just replace strikeouts with outs on the ground or in the air, you really aren't accomplishing much.  Washington and Cleveland were at the bottom in striking out, and were nobody's idea of good offenses, and I bet you'd find those missing strikeouts were replaced with easy outs of other types.

One more team.  What do Cleveland, Washington, and Houston have in common?  Houston was the third lowest team in strikeouts.  And yet their run production was among those top-six I mentioned earlier.  How could eliminating strikeouts as your primary goal in 2023 possibly be the right thing when you had a 1 out of 3 chance this year of instead ending up with bad run scoring?  These 3 teams aligned in one particular counting stat but were very different in ways that matter.  That's weak correlation to success.

The correlation of strikeouts to runs is just not that strong.  The correlation of getting on base, and bringing up your buddy for another PA, is.  The Reds struck out a lot, they also had high OBP, and guess what, they scored runs above MLB average.  They were also high in plate appearances. 

Keep the inning going.  Focus on OBP, and the strikeouts will "magically" decline, and the run scoring go up, and the We Hates Strikeouts crowd will tell us that the lower strikeouts were the cure.  The rooster crows, and the sun rises., and the rooster will let you know he caused it.

[Woof Bronzer]

3 minutes ago, ashbury said:

Keep the inning going.  Focus on OBP, and the strikeouts will "magically" decline, and the run scoring go up, and the We Hates Strikeouts crowd will tell us that the lower strikeouts were the cure.  

I agree with you, because OBP is directly correlated to strikeouts.  The surest way to increase your OBP is to reduce strikeouts.  If for some reason it makes you feel better to say "focus on OBP" vs "focus on cutting down on strikeouts", fine, but you are saying the same exact thing.  

[BH67]

12 minutes ago, ashbury said:

Bingo.

The team with the fewest strikeouts this season, Cleveland, would have led the majors in that stat in 1987.  The game has simply changed.

That's not to say that leading in majors in Ks is a good thing.  But the focus should be elsewhere. Leading the majors in groundouts or flyouts is harmful too, but those stats aren't as easily accessible, for us to bang our drums about.  Outs made on the basepaths are even worse. 

Keep the inning going.  Focus on OBP, and the strikeouts will "magically" decline, and the run scoring go up, and the We Hates Strikeouts crowd will tell us that the lower strikeouts were the cure.  The rooster crows, and the sun rises., and the rooster will let you know he caused it.

Jocko87 asserted that poor at-bats were the problem rather than strikeouts themselves. During September, the Twins did well to increase pitch counts on mostly unfamiliar starters and tee off on the bullpen. But the starters flummoxed them in spite of the longer at-bats, and in Game 4 Houston seemed to know the Twins' hitters susceptibilities without the assistance of a trash can. This seems more a team issue than a that of a few hitters. I appreciate and learn from your collective explanations as to what might be causing this.

[ashbury]

16 minutes ago, Woof Bronzer said:

I agree with you, because OBP is directly correlated to strikeouts. 

This is where our opinions diverge, because for example Cleveland struck out the fewest this year and yet their OBP was below average.

Cincy struck out a lot and their OBP was above average.

[Riverbrian]

59 minutes ago, ashbury said:

Bingo.

The team with the fewest strikeouts this season, Cleveland, would have led the majors in that stat in 1987.  The game has simply changed.

That's not to say that leading in majors in Ks is a good thing.  But the focus should be elsewhere. Leading the majors in groundouts or flyouts is harmful too, but those stats aren't as easily accessible, for us to bang our drums about.  Outs made on the basepaths are even worse.

Six teams this year averaged 5 or more runs per game.  You know what correlates strongly with run scoring?  Plate appearances.  Only TB somehow managed those 5 runs without being near the top in PA.  So we should just get some more players who are strong at racking up plate appearances, right?  Right?

OK that's a little tongue in cheek, but it leads to an actual insight that I do believe.  The 6 teams that led the majors in OBP also led the majors in run scoring.  That's not a guarantee, but it's strong correlation of success.

If you just replace strikeouts with outs on the ground or in the air, you really aren't accomplishing much.  Washington and Cleveland were at the bottom in striking out, and were nobody's idea of good offenses, and I bet you'd find those missing strikeouts were replaced with easy outs of other types.

One more team.  What do Cleveland, Washington, and Houston have in common?  Houston was the third lowest team in strikeouts.  And yet their run production was among those top-six I mentioned earlier.  How could eliminating strikeouts as your primary goal in 2023 possibly be the right thing when you had a 1 out of 3 chance this year of instead ending up with bad run scoring?  These 3 teams aligned in one particular counting stat but were very different in ways that matter.  That's weak correlation to success.

The correlation of strikeouts to runs is just not that strong.  The correlation of getting on base, and bringing up your buddy for another PA, is.  The Reds struck out a lot, they also had high OBP, and guess what, they scored runs above MLB average.  They were also high in plate appearances. 

Keep the inning going.  Focus on OBP, and the strikeouts will "magically" decline, and the run scoring go up, and the We Hates Strikeouts crowd will tell us that the lower strikeouts were the cure.  The rooster crows, and the sun rises., and the rooster will let you know he caused it.

Love what you wrote.

I agree that K's are not the be all end all. However in the case of our Twins... nothing wrong with trying to achieve more balance. Too little K's is not the cure but too many K's is a disease that we suffered and that disease is crippling without the OBP medicine that you mention.  

In the small sample size of our current playoffs. We struck out 73 times over 6 games. The Rangers have struck out 69 times over 7 games. That's about an extra strikeout per 9 innings. However... the Rangers also produced 66 hits compared to our 37 over those time frames and the Rangers produced 27 Extra base hits to our 14. Your point stands loud, clear and accurate in my opinion.  

I worry about the strikeout totals of Larnach, Gallo, Buxton and Taylor because they came with an OBP of .311, .301, .294 and .278 and those strikeout totals and low OBP surround each other, hug each other, they become synergistic when they combine into a big blob of togetherness.   

I do not worry about the strikeout totals of Julien and Wallner as much because they came with an OBP of .381 and .370. 

Bottom line... We can all look at every stat in the universe, over focus on one or two or three and a lot of us tend to do that in the name of simplicity. You or I or others can pull out our favorite stat when the mood or context hits us but there is one stat that trumps all stats... One stat that can swing the percentages of success and failure in enormous proportion. 

That stat is... The OUT. We get three of them to play with every single inning. The longer you delay making outs, the better you are offensively... the quicker that you can produce them... the better you are defensively.    

[tony&rodney]

1 hour ago, ashbury said:

The correlation of getting on base, and bringing up your buddy for another PA, is.  The Reds struck out a lot, they also had high OBP, and guess what, they scored runs above MLB average.  They were also high in plate appearances. 

I'm a big fan of OBP, whether that is via hit, walk, HBP, or error - just get on base. Extra base hits are very cool too.

The three players who led the Twins in OBP were: Julien, Lewis, and Wallner. Solano and Jeffers were tied for fourth best on the team. Only five Twins had an OPS above .800: Lewis, Wallner, Jeffers, Julien, and Kepler. Kirilloff and Polanco weren't too far below the mark with Solano the next best at .760. Only two Twins had more than forty extra base hits: Correa (49) and Kepler (48). 

Do we start thoughts of the team going with Julien (DH), Lewis (3B), Wallner (LF), Solano-signed to new contract (1B), Jeffers (C), Kepler (RF), Polanco (2B), Correa (SS), and ??? (CF)?

Personally, I'm patiently waiting for the Twins player who wins a Platinum Glove over several consecutive years while hitting over 80 extra base hits and over 350 total bases. How long until Walker Jenkins arrives?

Actually, the Twins offense could be really good next year. However, there will be quite a bit on the shoulders of the three rookies from this year.

[Mike Sixel]

24 minutes ago, tony&rodney said:

I'm a big fan of OBP, whether that is via hit, walk, HBP, or error - just get on base. Extra base hits are very cool too.

The three players who led the Twins in OBP were: Julien, Lewis, and Wallner. Solano and Jeffers were tied for fourth best on the team. Only five Twins had an OPS above .800: Lewis, Wallner, Jeffers, Julien, and Kepler. Kirilloff and Polanco weren't too far below the mark with Solano the next best at .760. Only two Twins had more than forty extra base hits: Correa (49) and Kepler (48). 

Do we start thoughts of the team going with Julien (DH), Lewis (3B), Wallner (LF), Solano-signed to new contract (1B), Jeffers (C), Kepler (RF), Polanco (2B), Correa (SS), and ??? (CF)?

Personally, I'm patiently waiting for the Twins player who wins a Platinum Glove over several consecutive years while hitting over 80 extra base hits and over 350 total bases. How long until Walker Jenkins arrives?

Actually, the Twins offense could be really good next year. However, there will be quite a bit on the shoulders of the three rookies from this year.

Fairly confident Wallner gets over 50 xbhs if they play him more than 77 games....same with Lewis. 

[FlyingFinn]

3 hours ago, ashbury said:

This is where our opinions diverge, because for example Cleveland struck out the fewest this year and yet their OBP was below average.

Cincy struck out a lot and their OBP was above average.

My problem with strikeouts is they seem to happen so often with a runner at third and less than 2 outs or with a runner on 2nd with nobody out, where we should be putting the bat on the ball in some fashion. Is that not possible with a strikeout team like ours? Don't know if those kinds of stats are out there somewhere to show which high strikeout teams are still capable of doing this.

[darin617]

Question 11: Will the Twins at least try to reduce the strikeouts?

This can easily be fixed if everyone would stop trying to hit a homer every time they come up to bat.

Simple thing is that not everyone has home run potential and the ones with little to none should work on a little small ball. Give the mashers some base runners. I would love to see more bunting and improved baserunning. Those are the 2 biggest things that have been neglected for years throughout the entire league.

[Jocko87]

5 hours ago, Woof Bronzer said:

Ok, so then they should get rid of all the velocity guys on their pitching staff, and replace them with cheap pitch to contact guys, because focusing on strikeouts is wrong.  Am I following the logic correctly?

I thought we were talking about hitting?

Nobody is saying strikeouts are good. They are less bad than we realize and if they occur in the course of taking good at bats we can live with them. Taking good at bats consistently will reduce strikeouts and increase all the other things we want to see.  

Strikeout value for pitchers is a completely different equation. 

[Woof Bronzer]

14 hours ago, Jocko87 said:

Strikeout value for pitchers is a completely different equation. 

You can't say strikeouts are great for pitchers but "less bad" for hitters.  There is no logic in that.

[Woof Bronzer]

18 hours ago, ashbury said:

This is where our opinions diverge, because for example Cleveland struck out the fewest this year and yet their OBP was below average.

OBP is quite literally a measure of how successful hitters are at avoiding strikeouts.  You cannot get on base by striking out. (Technically I suppose you can on a passed ball.)  OBP punishes strikeouts.  

Plate appearances have 3 outcomes:  K, BB, or putting the ball in play.  OBP gives you credit for the latter 2 outcomes.  How do you raise your OBP?  By reducing the Ks (which will in turn increase BBs or balls in play); by having a higher BABIP; I suppose one could increase BBs by not putting pitches outside the zone in play...that's about it. 

This isn't an opinion, it's just what OBP does.  

[ashbury]

18 hours ago, ashbury said:

This is where our opinions diverge, because for example Cleveland struck out the fewest this year and yet their OBP was below average.

Cincy struck out a lot and their OBP was above average.

 

5 minutes ago, Woof Bronzer said:

OBP is quite literally a measure of how successful hitters are at avoiding strikeouts. 

If that's true then explain Cleveland and Cincinnati.  They quite literally had OBP results in direct contradiction of their strikeout rates.

[Woof Bronzer]

4 minutes ago, ashbury said:

 

If that's true then explain Cleveland and Cincinnati.  They quite literally had OBP results in direct contradiction of their strikeout rates.

Do you disagree with the OBP formula?  I am confused what you want me to do about it.  Looks like Cincy had an above average BABIP and Cleveland had a below average BABIP.  And Cincy had above average walk rates and Cleveland had below average walk rates.  So, exactly what I said above.  Again, there are only so many variables that go into OBP.  

[Jocko87]

7 hours ago, Woof Bronzer said:

You can't say strikeouts are great for pitchers but "less bad" for hitters.  There is no logic in that.

That’s why I didn’t say that.

There is logic in this statement you made though, it’s actually true the way you phrased it. Simple example is a strikeout for a hitter is much less bad than GIDP with bases loaded and zero outs.  In that same situation the strikeout for the pitcher is great.  

[Rod Carews Birthday]

On 10/17/2023 at 3:12 PM, ashbury said:

Keep the inning going.  Focus on OBP, and the strikeouts will "magically" decline, and the run scoring go up, and the We Hates Strikeouts crowd will tell us that the lower strikeouts were the cure.  The rooster crows, and the sun rises., and the rooster will let you know he caused it.

And also magically, if the strikeouts are cut dramatically, the We Hates Strikeouts crowd will declare that This Club Strikes Out Too Much - kind of like the starters' innings pitched per game!