Jump to content
Twins Daily
  • Create Account

Brock Beauchamp

Site Manager
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    32,669

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    328

 Content Type 

Profiles

Minnesota Twins News, Rumors & Analysis

Minnesota Twins Videos

2026 Minnesota Twins Top Prospect Rankings

2022 Minnesota Twins Draft Picks & Signing Bonuses

Minnesota Twins Trade & Free Agent Rumors

Minnesota Twins Fan Guides & Resources

2023 Minnesota Twins Draft Picks & Signing Bonuses

The Minnesota Twins Players Project

2024 Minnesota Twins Draft Picks & Signing Bonuses

2025 Minnesota Twins Draft Picks & Signing Bonuses

2026 Minnesota Twins Draft Picks & Signing Bonuses

Forums

Blogs

Events

Store

Downloads

Gallery

Everything posted by Brock Beauchamp

  1. Brock Beauchamp
    We shouldn't because FIP actually works for Archer. He had one kinda weird FIP/ERA year but his overall career numbers are close enough to make it irrelevant.
  2. Brock Beauchamp
    You're confusing your analogies. The coin coming up heads nine times in a row is the equivalent of a single season. It's a statistical aberration but not unreasonably so (1 in 512 chance). The coin coming up heads 70 times out of 100 is the equivalent of a career (1 in 43,000-something chance). There's a huge statistical difference there. The more data points, the more the odds of unusual performance plummet. When you apply that to a real world person who plays for multiple teams, in multiple leagues, in multiple divisions, over the course of a 12 year career, and it happens almost every year, the odds are so low they're not worth mentioning.
  3. Brock Beauchamp
    The problem here is that diehard is talking career FIP/ERA (or at least several consecutive seasons) while you're talking about FIP on a yearly basis. There's no explanation for Ricky Nolasco's career FIP discrepancy that doesn't involve the statement "FIP is missing something here". Nolasco has played for three teams in two leagues in front of a variety of defenses, both good and bad. Yet he has underperformed his FIP in ten seasons and overperformed it just twice and never by more than .18 runs (well within a reasonable margin of error). His career FIP/ERA difference is nearly six-tenths of a run. FIP is a very good stat. It's not a perfect stat and doesn't seem to accurately judge the talent level of a few pitchers. I've never seen a good explanation why that is the case.
  4. Brock Beauchamp
    I don’t find a 0.18 difference very compelling. But I think you’re right that some pitchers seem to pitch outside the parameters recorded by FIP, I’m just not sure Archer is one of them.
  5. Brock Beauchamp
    No. The 90s Rangers didn't win many championships, did they? And any money spent on a long-term hitting contract is money that cannot be spent on the equivalent pitching contract. As much as we wish it wasn't true, payroll is a zero sum game.
  6. Brock Beauchamp
    Is your home run rate adjusting for league-wide tendencies? Because MLB total home runs rose just shy of 50% (!!!!!) from 2014-2017.
  7. Brock Beauchamp
    Yay, a front-loaded contract! It’s about damned time.
  8. Brock Beauchamp
    Chris Archer and Ricky Nolasco are nothing alike. Nolasco ERA: 4.56 Nolasco FIP: 3.97 Difference: -0.59 Archer ERA: 3.63 Archer FIP: 3.45 Difference: -0.18 You're focusing on Archer's 2017 ERA/FIP difference, the largest of his career... But that's the point of FIP. Given enough innings, ERA and FIP should become interchangeable with one another in most pitchers (outliers like Nolasco being the exceptions) because ERA stabilizes in front of different defenses, free agency/trade player movement, and the removal of SSS luck. But in smaller sample sizes, FIP exists for the very reason of pointing out expected performance versus "real" performance, which can be influenced by all those things listed above. And if you look at Archer's past four seasons, which year jumps out at you as being the aberration? Year: ERA / FIP 2014: 3.33 / 3.39 2015: 3.23 / 2.90 2016: 4.02 / 3.81 2017: 4.07 / 3.40
  9. Brock Beauchamp
    Right, I forgot that Romero barely touched 125 IP last season. Good point.
  10. Brock Beauchamp
    Considering how many pitchers have AAA experience in front of him, I don't see why the Twins would even consider promoting him. Fernando Romero is a good, not great, prospect who has several capable pitchers (of varying degrees) in front of him in the organization. Why would you leapfrog that guy to the majors before he pitches a single inning of AAA ball?
  11. Brock Beauchamp
    Never mind that calling up a legitimate prospect for Opening Day is kind of a bad idea. In that situation, you're secretly hoping the player will struggle and force a demotion so you get back that extra year of control. So where's the upside? If you give that player a month or two in AAA, get a better read on his ability, then you can promote him, let him struggle through issues, and gain an additional year of control. I don't give a rat's ass about Super Two status but that extra year of control is important, especially if the downside is losing three weeks at the front of that player's career.
  12. Brock Beauchamp
    Oh, sure, and that's why I see your point. But there's no risk that the Cadillac behind door 3 will turn into a rusted 73 Pinto when you roll it into the lot. That's my point. A twice-Cy winning Darvish has more expected value in the short-term, which stings, but he's also letting you off the hook through his age 34-37 seasons, which removes a boatload of risk from any long-term deal. My point isn't that I'd offer opt-outs to every long term contract, it's that I wouldn't be too worried about it when considering a 30-something player, especially a 30-something pitcher. It's rare that you *want* to lose a good player but in this situation, getting two years of a very good Darvish and then letting him go elsewhere isn't the worst thing in the world because it removes a ton of risk from the second half of the contract. There's upside along with that downside.
  13. Brock Beauchamp
    Yeah, I was being generous and overly simplistic. In the case of a six year deal, this is what I’d expect: Years 1-2: underpay Years 3-4: fair pay Years 5-6: overpay, sometimes vastly overpay
  14. Brock Beauchamp
    I see your point but your comparison doesn’t really work because prizes are static. Aging pitchers are not. A very good 34 year old Darvish could easily turn into a 36 year old train wreck Darvish. On top of that, contracts generally pay the player fairly in the first half and then overpay in the second half. If the player wants to reset that contract risk with another team as he ages into his mid-30s and you already got a few seasons of solid value from the player, so be it. Take your modest victory and move on to the next guy. “Past performance does not guarantee future results” and all that.
  15. Brock Beauchamp
    Someone drank a gallon of optimism coffee this morning.
  16. Brock Beauchamp
    One thing I don't understand is the apparent unwillingness to give Darvish an opt-out. If I'm signing a 25 year old Clayton Kershaw to a seven year deal, I drag my feet on an opt-out. If I'm signing a 32 year old Yu Darvish to a five/six year deal, I happily give him that opt-out. So what if you get two seasons at and the guy is so good that he leaves? Doesn't that mean you won? It's not as if he's going to get better as he crosses into his mid-30s.
  17. Brock Beauchamp
    Clayton Kershaw or GTFO.
  18. Brock Beauchamp
    They clearly won a trade against Smith when Friedman was running Tampa. Both are gone. The Jepsen trade was pretty meh. The Twins got one very good half season out of him and a very bad season that didn't matter because the entire team was terrible.
  19. Brock Beauchamp
    The free market had a good run. Now it's time to start talking about what comes next because in 50 years, most of our jobs will be obsolete. In 20 years, a large percentage of blue collar jobs will be gone. So what do we do next?
  20. Brock Beauchamp
    Yeah, it does. Kepler wasn't very good last season. The rest of the offense was quite good and also very young. Many of them posted good half seasons, which lends some weight to them posting good full seasons in 2018. I love Kepler but if he brings back Archer, I won't even hold up a lighter for him, much less a candlelight vigil. Max had a 1.2 fWAR and a 2.1 rWAR last season. That's easily replaceable.
  21. Brock Beauchamp
    I thought about getting back into the market after this happened - I have about $15k to play with right now - but decided I'm going to wait this out. I don't think things are going to improve over the next few years. We've been bullish for 8-9 years now, things have to retract at some point. People simply do not have the money to keep feeding this economy. Maybe I'm wrong and in 2-3 years, I look like an ass as the Dow crushes 32,000... but I just don't see how that will happen.
  22. Brock Beauchamp
    I'm not bashing Darvish - I thought the Twins should have beat Chicago's offer and signed him (provided he wanted to sign here at all) - but a variety of pitches does not negate aging. Good pitches are good pitches; bad pitches are bad pitches. If Darvish loses 2-3 mph on his fastball, he'll likely lose 2-3 mph on the rest of his pitches as well, along with some movement. He wouldn't only lose a good fastball, it's likely that he'd also lose a few other good pitches as well. Again, not arguing whether the Twins should have offered more, only arguing that Darvish's arsenal will prevent him from getting old, just like everybody else. The pitchers who succeed as they age either maintain velocity, gain more command, or make an adjustment and change their approach. As far as I know, there's no way to predict any of those things happening to any specific pitcher.
  23. Brock Beauchamp
    Seriously, man, I know you're old but you're not going to die tomorrow. Asking for a team to add two good starting pitchers, revamp an entire bullpen, and add a RH bat in the same offseason is like asking for Trump to delete the Twitter app.
  24. Brock Beauchamp
    If I was Falvey, I'd be lobbying hard to take on Span to decrease the prospect haul required to get Archer. Given Tampa's apparent (perpetual) payroll woes, that might get the deal done.
  25. Brock Beauchamp
    The Twins would be getting a better pitcher for four years but I'm not sure they'd be getting the better pitcher right now. I'm not bashing Archer, just saying that Darvish is kinda underrated by some folks here. He's also going on 32 and will decline so getting Archer improves the team for longer in all likelihood.
×
×
  • Create New...