Brock Beauchamp

Measuring a ball's location in 3D space is easy. That's not the problem. As I said in my OP, the problem is the vague nature of the strike zone in the first place. Will some of that be negated over large numbers? Sure, and I believe it is... Which is why I believe in using pitch framing numbers but don't believe they're exactly accurate. Much like defensive metrics, they should be used in tandem with the eyeball test and over large periods of time. Even a single season can be tainted by a single pitching staff. If you have 2-3 starters who throw in a particular style that influence the outcome, a single catcher could have up to 50% of their innings influenced by the pitcher. At that point, the metric is on very shaky ground.

I think the biggest problem with "accurately" measuring the strikezone is its ambiguous nature in the first place. What is "the hollow beneath the knee"? Where does it stop and where does it start? What if the player's pants are bunched up and slightly obscure the underlying physiology that is used for the basis of the zone? What happens if the batter loads his stance upon pitch delivery, moving both of his knees? Does the strikezone stay static pre-load or adjust with the body after load? I'm all for Pitch f/x and generally, I think it's pretty good. But given the fact that it's trying to measure something in motion and generally vague in the first place, I'm incredibly skeptical of it being accurate within tenths of an inch.

Huh. I don't use RSS but I'll try to take a look at it this weekend and see what's causing the issue.

I thought he should have stayed in and then started the first two innings of the following game. Let 'em play, Gardy!

TS Eliot. *hangs up phone*

Truncated for brevity. I agree... And disagree. Honestly, I think the best thing for Sano might be a short trip to AAA to let him face more wily AAAA guys. Sure, AA has talent, but AAA is littered with guys who are older, have played on an MLB roster, and are craftier. If Sano can continue posting an OPS over .900 against those guys, I don't care about the strikeouts. The BA doesn't matter one lick for the reasons Jokin posted... Miguel is simply getting unlucky. It happens. The only concern should be whether he will swing and miss too many balls against MLB pitchers and the best way to figure that out is to let him taste AAA pitching for a few weeks. On the other hand, I have no problems with him starting 2014 in AAA to extend his service time, either. I'm a patient man. He'll be here soon enough.

No, the Twins aren't much like the Rays or A's but during the 2000s, the teams shared similar success stories. There is more than one way to skin a cat and Ryan proved he can compile a winning team on the cheap. Now the trick is to find someone to beat him over the head until he understands that the Twins no longer need to be cheap.

Yes, because past failure should absolutely weigh into whether a front office should stick with what looks to be a solid gameplan for longterm viability in favor of being impatient and "winning right now", even if they forget to accomplish the "winning" part of that statement.

And if the Royals didn't give up the #4 prospect in baseball, a prospect they badly need on their team this season (and beyond), I might agree. I'm not against the idea behind this move. I'm against what it required to get Shields, when it was done, and the current state of the Royals when it happened.

Maybe I'm missing something but I don't see how this response has anything to do with my post.

I had issues with this trade from day one and those issues were for a myriad of reasons, not only based around timing. 1. The Royals offense wasn't very good in 2012 and Myers was the #4 prospect in baseball, ready to help the MLB club 2. The Royals were 72-90 last season and required a 20 game swing to compete 3. The Royals play in a division that looks to weaken, not strengthen in the next 2-3 seasons 4. The Royals are a small market franchise with limited ability to compete on an open market, making prospects even more valuable to them than most other teams My argument has never been limited to one point, though timing is certainly a consideration. There are a host of reasons why I was against this trade the moment it happened and the season has played out pretty much how I envisioned it happening, albeit with a few twists. Santana has over-performed while the Royals offense has managed to be even worse than they were last season... But the end result is pretty much the same. The Royals are a fringe contender and without a small miracle, will probably be worse in 2014 because they won't be able to afford Santana (who has been as good, if not better, than Shields). And then they lose Shields next season. Arguing "what if the Royals have no prospects to trade in two years" is a moot point. If they have no prospects to trade, they're not going to be any good no matter what Moore does or doesn't do but that doesn't validate walking out on a very shaky limb to accelerate the process in 2013. Blindly firing bullets into the trees won't make you a good hunter, even if you get lucky and occasionally hit something. Moore spent over half a decade prepping the Royals to be a contender. What was the bloody rush to make it happen in 2013?

Yep. The Twins won a blowout and Albers had a magnificent MLB debut. Past that, who cares? 8 1/3 innings, 9 innings... It doesn't matter.

It's not really fair to pin this on Gardy. He was so shocked to get to the ninth without getting a chance to do some managin' that he panicked. We should consider ourselves lucky that he didn't double-switch out the entire infield and eat the lineup card.

Is that the way you want a GM to run a franchise? With retaining his job as a priority over the longterm health of the team? I consider it a massive failure on everyone's part if it wasn't made clear by both parties (ownership and front office) that Moore was going to be given a long enough leash to see this through to completion without fear of losing his job. It took him years to get to this point and he should have been assured that he'd be given a little leash to see it through to the end.

On the other hand, they have a legit MLB superstar on the roster... Something Kansas City hasn't had since George Brett. It's not the exact same situation, but they're comparable. The point is that if you can't even clear Kansas City has sucked for almost 30 years. What's the rush? Why not wait one more season if it gives you a window of 4-5 years instead of 1-2?

No, the argument is that you don't try to hammer a 72-90 team into contention because you're impatient. That's a 20 game swing to contention. That's a bloody difficult feat. You don't have to wait until the stars align perfectly but you should wait until you have a solid core, not hopes and prayers. The Twins might finish with a 72-90 record this season. How would you feel about Ryan offloading Buxton for a two year rental of a pitcher? Seems a bit premature, doesn't it?

This pretty much sums up my point. There was no need to force things now and I only expect this division to weaken, not improve. KC's window looked perfect in 2014-2016... Detroit should begin to falter, Minnesota won't quite be there, Chicago is hopeless... That leaves Cleveland to worry about and they're not exactly the most imposing team in the league.

Except that the scenario played out by the Royals involves trading Buxton after Sano, Rosario, Arcia, and Hicks all scuffle. Would you really want to see that after a 72-90 finish to a season? And this is purely anecdotal but I found it mildly amusing. 2013 FG WAR: Shields: 2.4 Myers: 1.7 after being called up mid-season to extend service time

They were one of the worst offensive teams in the AL last season. What are they "augmenting"? Most of KC's bats were really bad last season. What gave anyone the impression that they were going to jump to league average, much less above average? This wasn't an 82-80 team looking to push themselves over the top. This was a 72-90 team with one of the worst offenses in the AL. A 72-90 team that traded one of the best prospects in baseball for two years of an ace. First, I don't know if I'd EVER trade a hitter like Myers unless it brought back a similar pitching prospect (a reverse of the Garza/Young deal, for example). Second, I sure as hell wouldn't advocate betting the farm (literally) on a 72-90 team with a pretty bad offense. I think too many Twins fans are so tired of seeing a risk-averse front office that they've started to believe any risk is a good one... Well, that simply isn't the case. Moore forced "contention" upon a Royals team that isn't ready. Sure, they have an outside shot at the playoffs... But it's little more than a Hail Mary at this point. They're 8.5 games out of first right now and have to pass a handful of pretty good teams to cinch a WC berth and we're closing in on mid-August. And after this season, they lose Ervin Santana, which will make contention in 2014 even more difficult than it was this season. I cannot fathom how anyone think it was a good idea to trade the #4 prospect away from a 72-90, 12th ranked OPS+ offense for two years of James Shields.

The Royals have to pass more teams to win the WC than they do to win the division.

The Royals are in third place and eight games out of first. It'd take a small miracle for them to pass Detroit.

So what you're saying is that their hitters looked legit because two guys posted an OPS over .800 last season? The Royals finished 2012 ranked 12th in the AL in OPS+. And I don't really care what Moore thought... He was obviously wrong. I argued this same point last offseason and from the outside, it didn't take much foresight to see that Moore was stepping out on a very shaky limb with these moves.

Shields is not under control for several years, he's under control for two. And the Royals have wasted 50% of that time already. If you have the goods, you can rent a very good pitcher. He may not be James Shields but he'll be well above average.

It's not that hard to find a mediocre team willing to part with a very good starter when you're offering a young stud with 4+ years of control. What do you think the Phillies would say if the Twins offered Arcia for Lee, much less Sano or Buxton for Lee? And if the Royals don't have a young stud to trade, isn't this a moot point?

Aces are certainly harder to find than outfielders but there was absolutely nothing stopping Moore from doing this kind of deal two years from now when he knows what he actually needs instead of making a deal and then hoping and praying that guys take a step forward. That's my issue with it.