Jump to content
Twins Daily
  • Create Account
  • Twins News & Analysis

    Astros 2, Twins 1: Offense Absent Again, Houston Rallies Late to Sweep Series

    The Twins held a lead late, but the Astros were able to storm back and take advantage of an inept Twins lineup to sweep the series in Houston.

    Hans Birkeland
    Image courtesy of © Erik Williams-Imagn Images

    Twins Video

    Box Score:
    Starting Pitcher:
    Simeon Woods Richardson: 5 IP, 1 H, 0 ER, 1 BB, 4 K (53 Pitches, 38 Strikes, 71.7%)
    Home Runs: Brooks Lee (7)
    Bottom 3 WPA: Jhoan Duran (-.309), Christian Vázquez (-.203), Cole Sands (-.194)
    Win Probability Chart (Via Fangraphs):
    image.png.9fb546986ff64027919217a0dc7884ff.png

    You would be well within your rights to avoid watching Sunday's game in favor of celebrating Father's Day, watching the US Open, or drinking yourself into oblivion—maybe even all three! Nevertheless, there was a game to play, despite the Twins losing Pablo López, Zebby Matthews, Royce Lewis and (maybe) Byron Buxton in the past two weeks to injury, while losing games at an accelerating pace. Today was definitely a game to avoid, but the Twins themselves didn't have that privilege.

    To try and salvage a win from this series against the Houston Astros, the Twins turned to Houston native Simeon Woods Richardson, who was obliterated his last time out, returning from the minor leagues to allow seven runs to the Texas Rangers—until then, a struggling offense.

    Woods Richardson either made some adjustments, or was pitching angry, as his velocity was up and both his breaking balls looked sharp. He breezed through the first four innings on 31 pitches, without allowing a baserunner. If you've watched him at all, you know he tends to struggle to end at-bats and can be inefficient, even on a good day, so this was a welcome change of pace.

    Meanwhile, the Twins were up against journeyman lefty Brandon Walter, making his third career start. Walter moved around his cutter pretty well with good command, but the Twins made pretty good contact against him. Brooks Lee extended his hitting streak to 15 games by smacking a hanging cutter into the Crawford Boxes for the game's first run in the third. 

    Lee then began the fifth inning with a sharp single to center field. After Ryan Jeffers was hit by a pitch and Carlos Correa advanced the runners, Willi Castro (already with two hits on the day) came up with two outs and ran the count full—before taking a sinker right down the middle to end the inning.

    The Astros finally got a baserunner in the fifth, as Jake Meyers hit a one-out grounder up the middle that deflected off Correa's glove. Woods Richardson then ran the count full against Saturday's walkoff hero, Cam Smith. All of a sudden, the game seemed to be in the balance, as this would not be the first time Woods Richardson looked great over the first three or four innings before giving it all up in the fifth. Smith did walk, which brought up the recently recalled Cooper Hummel for his fourth at-bat of the year. The Twins starter won that matchup, though, with a nasty changeup (allegedly a new split-change) darting away that got Hummel swinging. Mauricio Dubón did make decent contact with a Woods RIchardson fastball, but lined out to Harrison Bader in center to end the threat.

    With the bullpen fairly fresh and Woods Richardson in need of some confidence, Brock Stewart was summoned to begin the sixth inning. This, despite the starter being at just 53 pitches and not through the lineup a second time. Perhaps if the Twins had extended the lead in the fifth or sixth, instead of going down 1-2-3 in quick fashion, Rocco Baldelli may have given his young righty more leash.

    Conversely, Walter was allowed to begin the seventh inning. He allowed a one-out hit to Lee (his third), and was lifted after striking out Christian Vázquez for the second out. Credit to Walter: he showed some gumption, and has now delivered the injury-ravaged Astros rotation three solid starts. Whether he is actually part of the solution for Houston, or whether his good day was just a product of the Twins' offensive struggles, is hard to ascertain.

    The bottom half of the inning began ominously, as Louis Varland hit Jose Altuve with a pitch on his right forearm. However, Victor Caratini immediately grounded to Lee at second, who began a fairly easy double play before Jake Meyers grounded out to end the inning, the lead still intact.

    Varland was asked to start the eighth inning, as well, and he was greeted with a laser off the bat of Smith that nearly tied to game. It was hit so hard that Smith couldn't advance to second, however, as Castro made a nice play on the ball. A questionable sacrifice bunt call and two groundouts later, Varland escaped unscathed yet again.

    Jhoan Duran was summoned to close out the game, after throwing 20 pitches and taking the loss on Saturday. He was tasked with the top of the Houston lineup and began Jeremy Peña with four straight balls. He recovered to strike out Yainer Diaz on a devastating splinker, but Peña stole second on the first pitch to Altuve the following at-bat. After running the count full, Altuve reached out (on ball four) and tapped a ground ball to Correa, who was playing back and wasn't able to retire Altuve, 

    Altuve not taking the walk proved costly, as Caratini swung at the first pitch from Duran and lifted a sacrifice fly to tie the game at 1-1.

    Extra innings ensued, and the Twins executed their half of the inning about as poorly as humanly possible. The first hitter was Vázquez, who failed to advance the runners and popped out. Jeffers then struck out, and Correa popped out.

    Cole Sands did his part, not allowing the advance on the first hitter, as Smith tapped out to the left side and Hummel struck out swinging. Dubón then lifted a fly ball to deep left-center that Castro appeared to get a glove on, but the ball dropped, allowing Houston to win and sweep the series.

    Stray  Observations:

    -Lee isn't just producing, but it looks somewhat sustainable, as he appears to be swinging less and waiting for the pitcher to come to him before making better contact; he's not getting popped up as often. His OPS has eclipsed the .700 mark for the first time in quite a while.

    -Castro picked up two more hits batting right-handed, moving his OPS from that side of the plate over .800, a far cry from the hopeless at-bats Castro took against lefties the second half of 2024.

    -Jonah Bride looks cooked, missing hittable pitches and running his hitless streak to 24 at-bats. There's a good hitter somewhere in there, but the Twins could use his roster spot a lot more efficiently right now. The combination of Edouard Julien and Jose Miranda being ineffective with Lewis and Luke Keaschall getting hurt have all conspired to keep Bride's spot on the team.

    What’s Next: David Festa (1-1, 4.76 ERA) takes on the Reds and Andrew Abbott (6-1, 1.87 ERA) in the bandbox known as Great American Ballpark. The Reds have been playing well lately and Abbott is trying to strengthen his case for his first All-Star appearance. By the way, Abbott is a lefty. Festa looked great his last time out against the Rangers, pitching deep (for him) into the game in the one win they had in that Texas series. Festa establishing himself as a reliable starter every fifth day would go a long ways towards the Twins surviving the next 90 days without Lopez.

    Postgame Interviews:

     

    Bullpen Usage Chart:

      WED THU FRI SAT SUN TOT
    Durán 13 0 0 20 21 54
    Wentz 0 38 0 0 0 38
    Varland 16 0 0 0 22 38
    Sands 0 26 0 0 12 38
    Jax 0 0 17 13 0 30
    Stewart 13 0 0 0 10 23
    Coulombe 0 1 19 0 0 20
    Topa 0 0 16 0 0 16

     

    Follow Twins Daily For Minnesota Twins News & Analysis

    Recent Twins Articles

    Recent Twins Videos

    Twins Top Prospects

    Riley Quick

    Fort Myers Mighty Mussels - A, RHP
    In his second professional outing, Quick went three innings. He gave up no runs and no hits. He walked three and had five strikeouts.

    User Feedback

    Recommended Comments



    Featured Comments

    2 hours ago, karcherd said:

    You missed my point, Altuve was looking to put the ball in play where you have an opportunity for something good to happen.  Castro and Correa were looking to drive a pitch and ended up looking at strike 3.  Change the approach and put the ball in play and give yourself an opportunity.

    Putting the ball in play is not the TC way

    1 hour ago, Mark G said:

     Or was it aggressive baseball, which sometimes goes your way just for that reason?  😏

    Also yes.  

    It was bad baseball. That pitch was a foot off the plate. More times than not he swings and misses and strikes out instead of taking ball 4. You can call it whatever you want. It did end up going his way that time, but far more often than not it turns out the other way and Houston fans would be upset.

    I'd be willing to bet you've complained on more than 1 occasion about a Twins hitter swinging and missing at a slider a foot off the plate in a full count. You weren't calling it "aggressive baseball" you were calling it bad baseball. But since this one worked out for Altuve you want to call it "aggressive baseball" and act like it was some sort of smart swing. It was bad baseball that happened to work out for him. He wasn't protecting the runner because he swung and missed at the same pitch 2 pitches earlier when the runner wasn't going. He got fooled and it just happened to work out. The Twins have the same thing happen to them every now and then.

    Swinging at pitches a foot off the plate is not a good strategy. If it was a close pitch and he was fighting it off you'd have an argument. No coach would ever advocate for swinging at that pitch. Ever. It was bad baseball and there's not a poster on these boards that would have said otherwise after the first time he swung and missed at the same pitch nor have they ever said it about a Twins hitter swinging and missing at that pitch in the same situation. Shoot, Miguel Sano is still bashed on these boards for swinging at that pitch. He was just playing "aggressive baseball, which sometimes goes your way just for that reason," right? Bring back Sano!

    17 hours ago, Parfigliano said:

    Putting the ball in play is not the TC way

    Even with the spate of strikeouts in the last week, the Twins are right in the middle of K rate and total strikeouts. They aren’t the same team as 2019 or 2023. In 2019 they were the most prodigious home run hitting club in their history and in 2023 they set the all-time K record, but still managed to be above average in run production. 

    1 hour ago, Mark G said:

    I keep reading this, and I just can't agree.  I said it as I saw him coming in, and I am still saying it; Duran should not have been plan A at any point.  We had a starter pitching the best game of his career, maybe, and 3 or 4 horses in the pen that had more than enough rest to get us through without having to go the route we did.  Duran had thrown 20 pitches the day before, most of them stressful pitches, and he did not look all that sharp.  Extra innings, sure, they would all have to be on deck depending on how many, but plan A being the 9th no matter what?  Shouldn't have been.  But that is just me, I guess.    

    100% of major league managers would have used their closer in the 9th yesterday. 100%. If you can't use your closer because he threw 20 pitches the day before after not having thrown in 3 days before that then you need a new closer. There isn't a manager in the game that wouldn't have gone to their closer there. That was the easiest and most obvious decision Rocco made all game.

    When you’re going good, you get hits like Altuve’s in crucial situations. Provus has been banging the BA w/ RISP drum for a month, but during this tough stretch, they’re awful. That’s baseball and Rocco isn’t any smarter or stupider than when they won 13 in a row. It may seem like it, but things even out. I fear a continuation of this brutal and luckless baseball will cause a selloff at the trade deadline. I don’t really like accumulating lottery tickets, but that’s the likely scenario. 

    48 minutes ago, KirbyDome89 said:

    "Processes that yield solid results," applies to all facets of baseball, not just whatever analytical category you're railing against in this post. What you're arguing against is fundamentally sound baseball. 

    I guess .500 ball or less is solid to you, and fudamentally sound. All the fans love it. Pack stadiums for it. Championships are overrated. By all means, live in the box with the game on the line. All game. Everygame. 

    1 hour ago, KirbyDome89 said:

    What was the wild cut on the previous pitch when Pena wasn't running? Extra protection?

    Yes, it was a bad AB with a positive result. Altuve swung at ball 4 and ball 5. He put ball 5 into play and gave the Twins a chance to record an out. I can't say for certain that Pena swipes 3B safely, but on the broadcast it sounded like he got a good jump, he runs well, and the Twins don't defend the bases so do with that what you will. 

    Altuve got a single on the AB in question. 

    That's bad?

    53 minutes ago, KirbyDome89 said:

    "Processes that yield solid results," applies to all facets of baseball, not just whatever analytical category you're railing against in this post. What you're arguing against is fundamentally sound baseball. 

    Surely youre not going to posit the Twins play "fundamentally sound baseball."

    17 minutes ago, h2oface said:

    I guess .500 ball or less is solid to you. 

    Do you hate it when defensive players are in proper position, field a ball cleanly, and make a good throw to record an out? That's a "process that yields solid results." Do you hate it when hitters have a plan at the plate instead of hacking wildly? That's also a "process that yields solid results." Teams/players have been optimizing forever and that's true all the way down to the most basic aspects of the game. 

    Before the game started yesterday, if I told you that every Twins hitter was going to swing at ball 4 (multiple times) and chop a roller to SS rather than take a walk would you have been happy? The ball is in play, anything can happen right? I mean c'mon. Here we are, glorifying an objectively poor AB and holding it up as the epitome of everything wrong with the Twins. 

    Go ahead and hate the warts this club has, I do too, but I'm not going to pretend that Altuve AB yesterday was some sort of big brain approach or a knowledge/execution gap between the two squads. 

    35 minutes ago, USAFChief said:

    Altuve got a single on the AB in question. 

    That's bad?

    You don't believe it's possible to arrive at a positive outcome despite a poor process and vice versa? 

    32 minutes ago, USAFChief said:

    Surely youre not going to posit the Twins play "fundamentally sound baseball."

    Where the Twins fall on the scale of fundamentally sound (No I don't think they play particularly solid ball) is irrelevant to the point I was making. The phrase "process that yields solid results," seems to be rustling some jimmies. Fundamentally sound baseball is, inherently, a "process that yields solid results."  

    7 hours ago, KirbyDome89 said:

    I mean c'mon. Here we are, glorifying an objectively poor AB and holding it up as the epitome of everything wrong with the Twins. 

    Sorry. I haven't been talking about that at bat at all. Others have. I am talking in general, playing baseball, and be present in the moment to make moves outside the "process", moves that win games because a team doesn't always stay in the box no matter what. 

    Speaking of the shift you bring up, I hate it more when the shift creates hits because the defense wasn't there because they bet on the extreme shift to beat the odds. I enjoy a game where the pitchers field their position and cover the middle better (I guess that is over, eh?). NBA lotteries are set up so the worst team(s) still have the best chance to win the precious first pic. Fundamentally sound, by the percentages. Except, like the game of baseball, especially in the very small sample sizes that the games are on the line, staying with the precious "process" isn't winning the games in the moments games are won, and the worst team(s) in the lotteries with the best "odds" are getting worse than the precious first pick way more often (probably a bad comparison). Even the .300 hitter has better odds to fail that succeed. By over twice as much. Special moments involve different approaches to make better/best teams.

    Hey, you love the box. Good for you. I am happy for you. 

    7 minutes ago, KirbyDome89 said:

    You don't believe it's possible to arrive at a positive outcome despite a poor process and vice versa? 

    Where the Twins fall on the scale of fundamentally sound (No I don't think they play particularly solid ball) is irrelevant to the point I was making. The phrase "process that yields solid results," seems to be rustling some jimmies. Fundamentally sound baseball is, inherently, a "process that yields solid results."  

    I guess we have somewhat different descriptions of "process that yields solid results"

    The Astros process was to take that free base to start the inning, then use speed and a ball put in play to advance an important runner, and then a fundamentally sound AB where the hitter ignored hitting for power to lift a fly ball the opposite way, deep enough to score that important run.

     

    Altuve didn't care about getting a hit. His job was to protect that runner, and he did it. He takes the walk, there's a chance that runner gets thrown out at third (he was running.) Well....i guess there's a theoretical chance, because we all know the Twins ignore baserunners.

    This gets back to the idea that "process" is always more important than impact. That "Sac bunting is bad" so NEVER do it. That K's are just like any other out. That we make decisions in January and then stick with them, no matter the game, the score, the inning. 

    This is a fundamental weakness of this organization under this manager. 

     

     

     

    1 minute ago, USAFChief said:

    I guess we have somewhat different descriptions of "process that yields solid results"

    The Astros process was to take that free base to start the inning, then use speed and a ball put in play to advance an important runner, and then a fundamentally sound AB where the hitter ignored hitting for power to lift a fly ball the opposite way, deep enough to score that important run.

     

    Altuve didn't care about getting a hit. His job was to protect that runner, and he did it. He takes the walk, there's a chance that runner gets thrown out at third (he was running.) Well....i guess there's a theoretical chance, because we all know the Twins ignore baserunners.

    This gets back to the idea that "process" is always more important than impact. That "Sac bunting is bad" so NEVER do it. That K's are just like any other out. That we make decisions in January and then stick with them, no matter the game, the score, the inning. 

    This is a fundamental weakness of this organization under this manager. 

     

     

     

    Was Altuve protecting the runner 2 pitches earlier when he swung at the same exact pitch and the runner wasn't running? He wasn't protecting any runner. He got fooled and it just so happened to work out.

     

    16 hours ago, KirbyDome89 said:

    You don't believe it's possible to arrive at a positive outcome despite a poor process and vice versa? 

    Where the Twins fall on the scale of fundamentally sound (No I don't think they play particularly solid ball) is irrelevant to the point I was making. The phrase "process that yields solid results," seems to be rustling some jimmies. Fundamentally sound baseball is, inherently, a "process that yields solid results."  

    At one point this season (probably during or just after the big winning streak) the Twins ranked above average in base running (runs above average) and defense (defensive runs saved). I’d venture a guess that isn’t true now, but it is an illustration that the Twins “don’t care” about defense or base running. In these two categories running speed is a key component and the Twins managed to be above the mean with a major lack of team spee

    I imagine 20-25 major league fan bases are convinced their team plays horrible defense and is full of bad base runners. We Twins fans see the flaws in the players we follow and not the opponents. I’ll say it over and over, the lack of foot speed and range is real and makes it very hard to be good at defense and base running. Having good running speed is no guarantee (Austin Martin last year) but not having average speed lowers the ceiling dramatically.

    It’s about margin of error and slow runnners with usually with limited range have a smaller margin of error on defense and on the bases. Some are better at reaching that ceiling (Carlos Santana last year, Ty France this year) but their best isn’t the what someone with better athletic gifts can attain.

    Since Nelson Cruz the Twins haven’t had a basher who took away team deficiencies by slugging and with a comparative popgun attack, the margins are smaller and the flaws look worse. I’d love to see 2-4 additional players who can consistently win games with their legs, gloves and bats added to Buxton snd Correa and that Emma isn’t here and Jenkins has wasted a third of his season and Keaschall broke his arm makes me feel like the organization is snakebit. Every time somebody rises above they seem to get knocked down (Royce Lewis). 

    Okay, everyone, I apologize for opening my big mouth.  😉

    I was commenting on the game I saw yesterday, and you all were commenting on the game you saw yesterday; although I do wonder at times if we were watching the same game.  🧐

    The 3 points that appear to be the main points of contention, and there is nothing wrong with contention, it makes me think, are the decision to pull SWR so early, using Doran in the 9th, and the Altuve at bat.  It is my contention that riding SWR longer would have saved us from having to use Doran after pitching yesterday and he didn't appear sharp.  Others think I am full of it.  That's okay.  As for the Altuve at bat, yes he looked like a busher swinging at strike 2; he definitely got fooled and looked bad,  But the last pitch he didn't get fooled at all.  He saw the runner take off, and he followed the pitch all the way.  He knew it was outside and he could have taken it for ball 4, or he could try to protect the runner.  He chose the latter and it happened to work out for him.  That is the game I saw.  Apparently there was another game on the same channel, one that I did not see.  And that's okay, too.  

    I don't believe that plan A being 3-5 pitchers going 150 games a year (or more in extra innings), with the occasional game of only 2-3, is a good plan, not with this team.  Ipso facto, I believe we should have rode SWR longer and gone with the guys in the pen who were fresh.  Others think Plan A should always be plan A, or so it appears to me.  And one or two games will never prove which is the better philosophy.  That's why the debate exists, and that is okay too.    

    25 minutes ago, Mark G said:

    Okay, everyone, I apologize for opening my big mouth.  😉

    I was commenting on the game I saw yesterday, and you all were commenting on the game you saw yesterday; although I do wonder at times if we were watching the same game.  🧐

    The 3 points that appear to be the main points of contention, and there is nothing wrong with contention, it makes me think, are the decision to pull SWR so early, using Doran in the 9th, and the Altuve at bat.  It is my contention that riding SWR longer would have saved us from having to use Doran after pitching yesterday and he didn't appear sharp.  Others think I am full of it.  That's okay.  As for the Altuve at bat, yes he looked like a busher swinging at strike 2; he definitely got fooled and looked bad,  But the last pitch he didn't get fooled at all.  He saw the runner take off, and he followed the pitch all the way.  He knew it was outside and he could have taken it for ball 4, or he could try to protect the runner.  He chose the latter and it happened to work out for him.  That is the game I saw.  Apparently there was another game on the same channel, one that I did not see.  And that's okay, too.  

    I don't believe that plan A being 3-5 pitchers going 150 games a year (or more in extra innings), with the occasional game of only 2-3, is a good plan, not with this team.  Ipso facto, I believe we should have rode SWR longer and gone with the guys in the pen who were fresh.  Others think Plan A should always be plan A, or so it appears to me.  And one or two games will never prove which is the better philosophy.  That's why the debate exists, and that is okay too.    

    On the Durán question, I forgot the Twins had a day off today which makes the pulling of SWR and use of Varland and Stewart more of a good call IMHO and no one including Durán would be unavailable in Cincy.

    I’m much more inclined to agree that pulling starters after 5 innings and using four relievers is a gamble because a clunker from any can lose the game.

    Altuve is probably going to the Hall of Fame. He looked bad on earlier at bats, but made contact in the ninth inning that sparked a win. Good on him. I actually was hoping he’d walk to set up the DP with less than great hitters behind him. Maybe the Twins were trying to make Altuve hit their pitch. If it was the plan it didn’t work out. 

    56 minutes ago, chpettit19 said:

    Was Altuve protecting the runner 2 pitches earlier when he swung at the same exact pitch and the runner wasn't running? He wasn't protecting any runner. He got fooled and it just so happened to work out.

     

    You seem to have missed thr point, while answering your own question.  The runner wasnt moving on strike 2.

    Managers are allowed to change strategies, depending on the situation. 

    I realize the above statement goes against the very fiber of many beliefs here, but its true.

    They can adapt to change, to failure, to success.

    Players too! Something like "Im not going to take a big swing at that breaking ball again. Im gonna get my bat on it, if I possibly can."

     

     

    4 minutes ago, USAFChief said:

    You seem to have missed thr point, while answering your own question.  The runner wasnt moving 

    Managers are allowed to change strategies, depending on the situation. 

    I realize the above statement goes against the very fiber of many beliefs here, but its true.

    They can adapt to change, to failure, to success.

    Players too! Something like "Im not going to take a big swing at that breaking ball again. Im gonna get my bat on it, if I possibly can."

     

     

    You seem to be the one who missed the point. The point was Altuve didn't have some grand plan there. He got fooled just like he had 2 pitches earlier. 

    Chasing ball 4 a foot off the plate was not Altuve protecting the runner. It was him doing the same thing he did 2 pitches earlier and chasing ball 4 in a fundamentally awful AB that happened to work out. A strike'em out, throw'em out to end the game isn't a great strategy. A soft flair to an infielder for a game ending double play isn't a great strategy. 

    Altuve wasn't protecting the runner, he got fooled. And chasing ball 4 for the 2nd time that AB is a bad strategy to follow and you guys defending it as some brilliant plan the Twins should follow is crazy. 

    Oh, and make sure you don't look up the Twins K numbers or power numbers or anything like that this year. Just stick to your beliefs from January like Falvey and Rocco do. Wouldn't want the reality of their performance this season to get in the way of your rant.

    1 hour ago, chpettit19 said:

    You seem to be the one who missed the point. The point was Altuve didn't have some grand plan there. He got fooled just like he had 2 pitches earlier. 

    Chasing ball 4 a foot off the plate was not Altuve protecting the runner. It was him doing the same thing he did 2 pitches earlier and chasing ball 4 in a fundamentally awful AB that happened to work out. A strike'em out, throw'em out to end the game isn't a great strategy. A soft flair to an infielder for a game ending double play isn't a great strategy. 

    Altuve wasn't protecting the runner, he got fooled. And chasing ball 4 for the 2nd time that AB is a bad strategy to follow and you guys defending it as some brilliant plan the Twins should follow is crazy. 

    Oh, and make sure you don't look up the Twins K numbers or power numbers or anything like that this year. Just stick to your beliefs from January like Falvey and Rocco do. Wouldn't want the reality of their performance this season to get in the way of your rant.

    You're just wrong.

    Go back somehow and watch video of the two swings. They're nothing alike. HE CHANGED HIS SWING. 

    A big swing with 1 strike, designed to do damage. A swing and a miss. 

    Then...

    A nearly one handed, almost non-swing with 2 strikes, and the runner in motion. He did not get "fooled" He abandoned any plan of getting a hit and PUT THE BALL IN PLAY. AT ALL COSTS. 

    This shouldn't even be controversial. Its plain as day.

    He changed his goals, AND HIS SWING, to better align to his reading of the situation. 

    Which is anti-stathead, I get that. Might add ammo to those of us who think Rocco is bad at his job, I get that. You might PREFER the Twins theories and methods, I get that. 

    But you cant deny it happened. Holy cow. 

    1 hour ago, USAFChief said:

    You're just wrong.

    Go back somehow and watch video of the two swings. They're nothing alike. HE CHANGED HIS SWING. 

    A big swing with 1 strike, designed to do damage. A swing and a miss. 

    Then...

    A nearly one handed, almost non-swing with 2 strikes, and the runner in motion. He did not get "fooled" He abandoned any plan of getting a hit and PUT THE BALL IN PLAY. AT ALL COSTS. 

    This shouldn't even be controversial. Its plain as day.

    He changed his goals, AND HIS SWING, to better align to his reading of the situation. 

    Which is anti-stathead, I get that. Might add ammo to those of us who think Rocco is bad at his job, I get that. You might PREFER the Twins theories and methods, I get that. 

    But you cant deny it happened. Holy cow. 

    I have watched the swings. Yes, he switched to a 2 strike swing on the previous swing when he fouled off a high and away slider. When, again, the runner wasn't in motion. That's when the change happened, not the last swing. He changed to a 2 strike approach like he has for his whole career. He got fooled on the ball he put in play. And if you actually went back and watched the swings you'd see the same thing. He didn't swing as hard his last 2 swings, but he was just as fooled as he was on that first slider down and away (when he reacted frustrated because he had been fooled). But since he was in a 2 strike swing he was able to reach out a little further and hit it.

    But he wasn't protecting the runner because just putting the ball in play isn't protecting the runner. Because if he hits that ball in the air on the same line the game is over because Correa catches it and walks to 2nd for a game ending double play. Just putting the ball in play wasn't an automatically good outcome. Which is why swinging at a pitch a foot outside was a fundamentally bad approach. But he was doing what he's done his entire freaking career and that is chase pitches but be an incredible hitter so manage to make contact at an incredible rate so managed to put it in play. And it was the same mode he went into on the previous swing.

    I agree, it shouldn't be controversial. But here we are. You're arguing that the guy who's been chasing pitches at one of the highest rates in baseball for over a decade likely wasn't doing what he's been doing his whole career. Him having a two strike approach and incredible contact skills is why he's in the 80th percentile for K% despite being in the 5th percentile for chase%. 

    And a 2 strike swing isn't "anti-stathead" nor is it ammo against Rocco. Again, go look at their actual stats (you don't even have to look far for some as they've been provided in this very thread for your learning pleasure) instead of just parroting the same tired complaints that don't actually match reality anymore. Holy cow.

    19 minutes ago, chpettit19 said:

    I have watched the swings. Yes, he switched to a 2 strike swing on the previous swing when he fouled off a high and away slider. When, again, the runner wasn't in motion. That's when the change happened, not the last swing. He changed to a 2 strike approach like he has for his whole career. He got fooled on the ball he put in play. And if you actually went back and watched the swings you'd see the same thing. He didn't swing as hard his last 2 swings, but he was just as fooled as he was on that first slider down and away (when he reacted frustrated because he had been fooled). But since he was in a 2 strike swing he was able to reach out a little further and hit it.

    But he wasn't protecting the runner because just putting the ball in play isn't protecting the runner. Because if he hits that ball in the air on the same line the game is over because Correa catches it and walks to 2nd for a game ending double play. Just putting the ball in play wasn't an automatically good outcome. Which is why swinging at a pitch a foot outside was a fundamentally bad approach. But he was doing what he's done his entire freaking career and that is chase pitches but be an incredible hitter so manage to make contact at an incredible rate so managed to put it in play. And it was the same mode he went into on the previous swing.

    I agree, it shouldn't be controversial. But here we are. You're arguing that the guy who's been chasing pitches at one of the highest rates in baseball for over a decade likely wasn't doing what he's been doing his whole career. Him having a two strike approach and incredible contact skills is why he's in the 80th percentile for K% despite being in the 5th percentile for chase%. 

    And a 2 strike swing isn't "anti-stathead" nor is it ammo against Rocco. Again, go look at their actual stats (you don't even have to look far for some as they've been provided in this very thread for your learning pleasure) instead of just parroting the same tired complaints that don't actually match reality anymore. Holy cow.

    Youre irrational on this one. 

    Ok. Agree to disagree.

    3 minutes ago, USAFChief said:

    Youre irrational on this one. 

    Ok. Agree to disagree.

    https://www.mlb.com/video/jason-motte-swinging-strike-to-jose-altuve?q=BatterId %3D [514888] AND PitchResult %3D ["swinging_strike"] AND GameDayPitchZone %3D [14] Order By ExitVelocity ASC&cp=MIXED&p=0

    No runner in motion here. Which swing did this look like? Sorry, that one isn't with 2 strikes.

    https://www.mlb.com/video/jose-altuve-strikes-out-swinging-5Dl9yT?q=BatterId %3D [514888] AND PitchResult %3D ["swinging_strike"] AND GameDayPitchZone %3D [14] Order By ExitVelocity ASC&cp=MIXED&p=0

    Here, this one has 2 strikes and no runner in motion. Which swing did this look like?

    I can keep going if you want. 390 results for swinging strikes on Altuve in that zone. Yet I'm the irrational one for suggesting Altuve has been doing this his entire career. Sure.

    https://www.mlb.com/video/james-mcarthur-in-play-no-out-to-jose-altuve?q=BatterId %3D [514888] AND GameDayPitchZone %3D [14] AND HitResult %3D ["Single"] Order By ExitVelocity ASC&cp=MIXED&p=0

    And there's one where he got a hit while the runner on 2nd, in the bottom of the 8th with the Astros down 2 wasn't moving, Altuve with 2 strikes on him and he cut down his swing and just hit a tapper in play.

    He's. Been. Doing. This. His. Whole. Career. Holy cow.

    1 hour ago, chpettit19 said:

     

    He's. Been. Doing. This. His. Whole. Career. Holy cow.

    You keep making my point. 

    He adjusts his swing, when possible, to best match the situation.

    He wasn't "fooled" Sunday. He got the ball into fair territory by adjusting. 

    It was intentional.

    And, by the way, enormously successful. 

    8 hours ago, USAFChief said:

    You keep making my point. 

    He adjusts his swing, when possible, to best match the situation.

    He wasn't "fooled" Sunday. He got the ball into fair territory by adjusting. 

    It was intentional.

    And, by the way, enormously successful. 

    It was bad baseball. Adjusting to a contact oriented swing is good baseball, but swinging at absolutely anything is not.

    You are the irrational one on this one. You're ignoring that 2 of those previous swings are him missing despite more cut down swings. He doesn't have a "there's no way I miss on this swing" swing. That's a nonsense argument. He got fooled. He didn't start his swing expecting to be swinging at a pitch a foot off the plate but he was able to get to it that time.

    There were 390 videos of him swinging and missing on pitches down and away and 126 of him putting it in play. Some of those were bunts. It was bad baseball that happened to work out. Twins hitters swinging at that pitch is not a good strategy. Ever. Arguing that it is is irrational.

    He wasn't protecting the runner. Which was your actual argument and I have disproven but you just don't want to admit. He is just an undisciplined hitter with a bad eye but hall of fame contact skills. Don't change your story now. You know I'm not going to fall for that. You've been arguing the entire time he was protecting the runner. He very obviously wasn't. He very obviously was doing what he's always done. Chasing a pitch because he got fooled. But it worked out so good for him this time. More often than not it doesn't. And then all he's doing is turning a walk into a K and Vazquez is still getting a throw off to third. 

    Because it was bad baseball. 

    20 hours ago, Vanimal46 said:

    You know that SWR got rocked in his last start before this right? Focusing on the SWR decision is like being mad about a few flower pedals left in your pool while ignoring the crack in the wall that’s leaking water. 

    Its impressive that you know what I'm focused on.

    20 hours ago, stringer bell said:

    You can certainly question the manager for pulling SWR, but the closer was going to pitch the ninth whether Woods Richardson went six, seven or eight innings. The closer failed and Stewart and Varland got the ball to him with a lead. 

    I agree.  Doesn't mean I agree with pulling SWR so early.

    4 hours ago, chpettit19 said:

     

    Because it was bad baseball. 

    A very important run, very late in a game, advanced safely to 3rd. As a bonus, Altuve got an infield single, putting the game winning run on 1st.

    For the record, it ended up working out pretty well for Houston in the end. 

    You have an odd definition of bad baseball. To each his own.

    Me personally, I'd sure like the Twins to play some of that bad baseball when called for.

     

     

    1 minute ago, USAFChief said:

    A very important run, very late in a game, advanced safely to 3rd. As a bonus, Altuve got an infield single, putting the game winning run on 1st.

    You have an odd definition of bad baseball.

     

    Wonderful place to stop as we've come full circle to where it started with "bad process that produced a good result." Enjoy your day, Chief. I'm excited for all the Twins swinging at sliders a foot off the plate in full counts that you're going to be on here telling us how smart it was because that's the fundamentally sound baseball decision. You definitely won't tell us how it was a bad swing and they need to cut down their Ks. That is definitely, definitely, definitely not how that'll turn out.

    3 minutes ago, chpettit19 said:

    Wonderful place to stop as we've come full circle to where it started with "bad process that produced a good result." Enjoy your day, Chief. I'm excited for all the Twins swinging at sliders a foot off the plate in full counts that you're going to be on here telling us how smart it was because that's the fundamentally sound baseball decision. You definitely won't tell us how it was a bad swing and they need to cut down their Ks. That is definitely, definitely, definitely not how that'll turn out.

    See, that's the thing. 

    Altuve didn't K. He changed his swing. Changed his goals. Guessed where and what pitch was coming...correctly. 

    Nice strawman though. 




    Create an account or sign in to comment

    You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

    Create an account

    Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

    Register a new account

    Sign in

    Already have an account? Sign in here.

    Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...