How Can the Twins Be This Unfathomably Bad with the Bases Loaded?

I knew their bases-loaded production was terrible, but I had no idea the numbers were actually this abysmal. I also would have assumed their overall RISP numbers were also awful, but this is eye-opening. 

Thank you for writing this. 👍

Pretty simple:  Lower than ideal baseball IQ and mental fortitude.  That’s been the problem with this team for multiple seasons now. 

My observation from recent situations:  They seem to look hesitant to swing at strikes early in the count.  They get behind, then wildly flail at sliders down and away or fastballs up and out of the zone. 

Once they get behind in the count, it’s over.  There is no battle in any of these guys.  You never see them go from a 1-2 count to a 3-2.  They’re incapable of prolonging the AB by fouling off pitches or spitting on sliders in the dirt or fastballs at their shoulders.

I’m not sure this is a small sample size.  Has this not been going on for multiple years now?  I could be wrong there.  Haven’t looked at the numbers.

Certainly doesn’t help when every borderline ball/strike call goes against them in those situations.  There was an awful strike call on Jeffers again yesterday to put him down 0-1 (I believe).  But, at some point, you have to swing the bat and get the ball in play somewhere.  Nobody in this team can do that.

35 minutes ago, Jocko87 said:

I'm not even concerned with busting games wide open, just produce runs in runs producing situations.  The break outs will come and we will enjoy them thoroughly.

Echoing on a small game thread discussion re: RBIs as an opportunity stat.  Obviously this is true but what I don't understand is why they are discounted as not mattering.  The stat heads (I am one) are missing a huge opportunity here for a success rate stat that can make them matter.  Yes, the raw number is meaningless but the success rate in those situations is huge.  It may be captured somewhat in the runs created stats but it doesn't look like it to me. 

My bottom line is that situational hitting is a measurable ability that can be statistically quantified.  I don't know what the formula would be but the analytics folks have to adjust to observable truths.  I get that over the long run more runs are scored by swinging for the fence but does that actually win more baseball games?  Using the proper analytics in the proper situation is the whole in-game purpose of a manger.

The numbers may tell a different story, but I would rather see a high batting average guy come up to the plate with bases loaded than a guy like Gallo

The numbers are bad, but as a collective group you will see a regression to the mean as time goes on.  It is inevitable.

19 minutes ago, Beast said:

Pretty simple:  Lower than ideal baseball IQ and mental fortitude.  That’s been the problem with this team for multiple seasons now. 

My observation from recent situations:  They seem to look hesitant to swing at strikes early in the count.  They get behind, then wildly flail at sliders down and away or fastballs up and out of the zone. 

Once they get behind in the count, it’s over.  There is no battle in any of these guys.  You never see them go from a 1-2 count to a 3-2.  They’re incapable of prolonging the AB by fouling off pitches or spitting on sliders in the dirt or fastballs at their shoulders.

I’m not sure this is a small sample size.  Has this not been going on for multiple years now?  I could be wrong there.  Haven’t looked at the numbers.

Certainly doesn’t help when every borderline ball/strike call goes against them in those situations.  There was an awful strike call on Jeffers again yesterday to put him down 0-1 (I believe).  But, at some point, you have to swing the bat and get the ball in play somewhere.  Nobody in this team can do that.

No need for me to comment on the original thread. This summed things up perfectly- been echoing your first sentence for a long while now. Can confirm Buxton has been a career liability in: close and late, bases loaded, RISP, etc. Only Arraez, Polanco, and Urshela were good last year with runners on but bases-loaded at bats have been too much for any Twin since....um.

Approach, approach, approach. Instead of trying to put the ball in play and take the SF or single, this team tries to hit the GS and put the game away. This results in a typical inning of a pop-out to an infielder, a K and a dribbler back to the pitcher and 0 runs scored.

AARGGGGHHH!! Soooo frustrating.

"At some point it would stand to reason that positive regression can come from Minnesota."

Isn't positive regression, progression?  Or do you believe the opposite of pro is con. In that case, according to George Carlin, the opposite of progress is congress!!!!  Ain't that the truth.

Arraez and Urshella are gone - both hitting  over. .300.  Everybody else seems to be hitting from their heels.

1 hour ago, PopRiveter said:

I knew their bases-loaded production was terrible, but I had no idea the numbers were actually this abysmal. I also would have assumed their overall RISP numbers were also awful, but this is eye-opening. 

Thank you for writing this. 👍

Well said Pop!

Three intentional walks to start each inning?  (two in overtime).   Strategy.

28 minutes ago, Ted Schwerzler said:

Counterpoint, a high batting average guy could be a better going Miranda where he makes contact because he can and then induces a double play. With the bases loaded, I want someone not afraid of deep counts, taking walks, and the ability to make contact. At its core, the problem is largely related to whiff rates though.

The opposite of a strikeout is putting the ball in play, so if Ks are the problem, putting the ball in play is the solution.  

The Twins have grounded into 30 double plays this year and have 369 hits.  By putting the ball in play the Twins have been 10x more likely to get a hit vs. a GIDP.  (Yes I get that not all of those hits have come with a runner on base.)  They've also struck out 458 times - nearly 8x the outs that GIDPs have resulted in.   

The idea that strikeouts are preferable to making contact because of the potential of double plays needs to be retired.  

If we were making observations about an individual on 43 at bats, we'd say "small sample size." Seems to me that 43 at bats spread over an entire roster, meaning that hardly anyone has more than four or five at bats, makes for a really small sample size. 

It's frustrating (very frustrating!), but it's hard not to see it as being anything but incredibly unlucky.

They say these things even out over time.  I hope that happens in this case because we are going to score a bunch of runs when we get to the part where it evens out.

42 minutes ago, IndianaTwin said:

If we were making observations about an individual on 43 at bats, we'd say "small sample size." Seems to me that 43 at bats spread over an entire roster, meaning that hardly anyone has more than four or five at bats, makes for a really small sample size. 

It's frustrating (very frustrating!), but it's hard not to see it as being anything but incredibly unlucky.

42 minutes ago, IndianaTwin said:

If we were making observations about an individual on 43 at bats, we'd say "small sample size." Seems to me that 43 at bats spread over an entire roster, meaning that hardly anyone has more than four or five at bats, makes for a really small sample size. 

It's frustrating (very frustrating!), but it's hard not to see it as being anything but incredibly unlucky.

You’re not unlucky when you don’t even make contact with the ball……….

Good god replace the hitting coach. As a fan I can not watch one strike out after the next.. the lineups  Rocco sends out there is pathetic. He keeps shuffling players in and out of every game with his analytics.I’m sick of it. How can anyone get in a groove when they get 1 or 2 at bats because the other team sends in a lefty or visa versa. I would love to see Rocco replaced also. 

Rocco on the pregame tonight was asked about this exact topic and just like a politician danced around it and said nothing ... 

Then had the DELUSIONAL statement that he thought that his team was a very good situational hitting team. OMG. 

If he believes this, he REALLY needs to be replaced.  

5 hours ago, Ted Schwerzler said:

To be fair, last year was .716 OPS and 2021 was .573. The latter is truly terrible, and yet we're dealing with sub .300 at this point.

I suspect Arraez, Polanco, and Urshela (and maybe Sanchez early on) were the drivers of the OPS that fell a good bit short but approached league average last year. Betting with confidence Correa, Buxton, and everyone else posted something a few crust layers deep.

A strikeout is never a productive out.  And I agree with the idea that some serious thought needs to be put into our "approach."  We are, and have been a poor situational hitting team for Rocco's entire tenure.  Even in the HR record setting Bomba Squad year of 2019 we were a poor situational hitting team.  307 HR's can cover some of that up but not completely.  On another note:  Has Ted discovered some kind of Back To The Future magic??  He has an article up on Louie Varland with a May 25th date in the headline.  But I could SWEAR it's only May 23rd today.  Must have that Flux Capacitor humming along!!   

16 hours ago, Woof Bronzer said:

The opposite of a strikeout is putting the ball in play, so if Ks are the problem, putting the ball in play is the solution.  

From the numbers above, strikeouts are NOT the problem. They have a 30% K rate with the bases loaded (13/43) which is not out of the ordinary. The unusual things to note in those numbers are a) no extra base hits b) extremely low BABIP. If anything that suggests a team that is swinging at the wrong pitches and settling for weak contact instead of finding a pitch they can drive.

I also agree that it's hard to find a "team-wide" trend in such a small sample and as you slice the numbers into smaller slices you can find all sorts of weird stuff.

I get a kick when several writers say the Twins are "unlucky" when talking about not getting hits with the bases loaded.  "Unlucky" hitters are poor hitters and "unlucky" teams are poor teams.  Until the Twins make some changes they will continue to be unlucky.

After  looking at last years records with bases loaded it appears the trade of Gio has really hurt the Twins production. The Twins gave away a player that could be their starting 3rd baseman with a batting average of .302. One has to wonder how many more games the Twins would have won if that trade had not been made. After the Twins traded away their best hitter for pitching help the trade of Gio should have never been made. 

5 minutes ago, John Belinski said:

 The Twins gave away a player that could be their starting 3rd baseman with a batting average of .302. One has to wonder how many more games the Twins would have won if that trade had not been made. After the Twins traded away their best hitter for pitching help the trade of Gio should have never been made. 

Well, the Gio Urshela trade was made BEFORE trading Arraez, so unless they had a time machine they couldn't reverse that result. They also traded for Farmer after trading away Urshela and Farmer has been playing better than Urshela. Based on the difference in performance between Farmer and Urshela and the 0.1 WAR produced by Urshela and his empty batting average I'm going to guess the Twins win zero more games with Urshela on the roster instead of Farmer.

21 hours ago, Fire Dan Gladden said:

The numbers are bad, but as a collective group you will see a regression to the mean as time goes on.  It is inevitable.

You say that but if I remember correctly two years ago they were horrible when the basses were loaded as well. At this rate a regression to the mean would be getting a base hit every time the bases were loaded all next year .. LOL

I'm really starting to question Rocco's in-game discission making skills. I have no clue what he's doing with how he manages when to pinch hit and who to substitute for and have never liked how he changes the batting order constantly. That, and I think he rides with relievers who are struggling to long. If they don't have command that day change them after 3 batters already. 

I think this is a make or break year for Rocco. If they fold again down the stretch I think he's a goner.

Batting coach should be shown the door.   Last few weeks have been ridiculous....seems like 1/3 of the ab's end in strikeouts.     The fact that Baldelli got a extension thru 2025 is perhaps the biggest joke.  Barely playing .5oo ball in the worst division in all of baseball is nothing and I flippin mean NOTHING to be proud of.  Rocco's head should be on a platter.

22 hours ago, Woof Bronzer said:

The opposite of a strikeout is putting the ball in play, so if Ks are the problem, putting the ball in play is the solution.  

The Twins have grounded into 30 double plays this year and have 369 hits.  By putting the ball in play the Twins have been 10x more likely to get a hit vs. a GIDP.  (Yes I get that not all of those hits have come with a runner on base.)  They've also struck out 458 times - nearly 8x the outs that GIDPs have resulted in.   

The idea that strikeouts are preferable to making contact because of the potential of double plays needs to be retired.  

As you stated: "put the ball in play" especially with the bases loaded. Hit a fly ball if nothing else and score a run.

To have recorded 16 strike outs in 2 of the last 4 games against pitchers with ERA's above 4.85 is pathetic!!