Brock Beauchamp

Welcome to Twins Daily!

Well said John. Know your truth and live it. It takes a ton of conviction to truly lead.

Yep. Analytics are great in a vacuum, as they’re improving the chance of a team to win in any given season. But MLB has been woefully inept in stopping analytics from deteriorating the fan experience.
And that’s what needs to change. Analytics aren’t the problem, MLB’s lack of response is the problem. 

100% agree, and it won't stop at teams looking at 97% as the cutoff. They'll keep pushing and pushing.

Top of the 8th inning, chances the visitor wins the game:
1 run lead = 75%
2 run lead = 87%
3 run lead = 94%
4 run lead = 97%
5 run lead = 98%

top of the 9th visitor leading
1 run lead = 85%
2 run lead = 93%
3 run lead = 97%
4 run lead = 99%
5 run lead = 99%
It gets even worse from a likelihood things turn around if the home team is winning, and visiting teams have no significant reason to care if the home town crowd is entertained.

bottom of the 7th - home team lead
1 run lead = 82%
2 run lead = 91%
3 run lead = 96%
4 run lead = 98%
5 run lead = 99%

bottom of the 8th - home team lead
1 run lead = 89%
2 run lead = 96%
3 run lead = 98%
4 run lead = 99%
5 run lead = 100%

Statistically, if the bullpen has been significantly depleted up on the visiting team over the past few days, slapping a position player onto the mound starting with the bottom of the 7th down by 3+ runs is reasonable. Those games happen all the time and analytics will start driving the decision more and more, especially with the forced reduction in bullpens.
 

Yep, this. Statistical analysis has led to the current use of positional players pitching. A five run deficit is a loss 97%+ of the time so why try?
And analytics aren’t wrong here for thinking that. Those are the numbers.
But this is a spectator sport driven by the money of people being interested in the product. Analytics being right about game probability doesn’t mean they should be allowed to further deteriorate the spectator experience. 

I’m not sure position players will hurt their arms when they’re throwing 45 MPH floaters to home plate. I would love to see a team decide to bat around and score 20 runs because a position player is in there. Because the way things are trending, it’s making a mockery of the game.
We’re better off having a concede/forfeit rule in place than continue seeing position players pitch every week. 

Yeah, that's the takeaway to make here. The reality is that based on batted ball profiles, Jeffers had one kinda bad year in 2021. He was good in shortened 2020 and his batted ball profile is once again pretty good in 2022 (adjusting for catchers). He's still 25 with less than a full MLB season played in total. I'm not writing him off yet just because his BABIP is under .250.
At the core of it, you're just not giving Jeffers' defense a fair shake. His pop time is almost smack-dab in the middle of MLB catchers at 47th percentile. His framing - the most important aspect of the game today - is borderline elite at 75th percentile. He's not exceptional in either direction with passed balls. He's average at a bunch of stuff and really good at the thing that matters most.

You're too harsh on Jeffers. While his conventional stats are slightly ugly (but remember that while his 74 wRC+ looks terrible, league catchers only have an 87 wRC+), his advanced stats tell a different story. His wOBA is .269 while his xwOBA is .340. His barrel rate is 93rd percentile. His xSLG is 77th percentile.
Given Jeffers' defense, even if he only climbs up to a league average 87 wRC+ (and his batted ball stats look like he's better than that), he's a valuable starting catcher.

I mean, one doesn't have to look far to see the last paragraph in action: Griffin Jax. A marginal third round pick taken because the Twins liked his slider. Sure, he didn't work out as a starter because he couldn't develop much past that slider but now he looks like he'll be a multi-year contributor at the very least (barring injury).
That's not an accident. Sure, the Twins may have taken a different third rounder the year before that fell on their face, that's baseball for you. But they intentionally targeted something about Jax that made them think he will be an MLB contributor and he's now contributing to the MLB team based on that single skill they targeted and refined.

Well, the 2018 draft is still very much a work in progress and Jeffers was a college draft pick so it's not really surprising he's leading the second round pack in June of 2022.
But it should also be noted that Larnach (though also a college pick so keep that in mind) is around fifth in overall WAR from the first round but was only the 20th pick of the round.
This grading scale seems impossibly difficult, where one must draft an All-Star or better to receive a decent grade. The reality of the draft is that if you get a competent regular from the first round every year, your baseball team will be very good. If you get more than one competent regular from any single draft, you had a very good draft.
And I simply do not buy into the statement that anything after the third round is a crapshoot. That's where coaching and development comes into play; yes, the later rounds are more random but that's where good franchises pick the flawed players they like and try to coach them into being an MLB player. Dismissing those rounds out of hand ignores a big reason why the Tampa Bay Rays are perennially excellent while other franchises can't win after a half decade of top picks.

You're too harsh on Jeffers. While his conventional stats are slightly ugly (but remember that while his 74 wRC+ looks terrible, league catchers only have an 87 wRC+), his advanced stats tell a different story. His wOBA is .269 while his xwOBA is .340. His barrel rate is 93rd percentile. His xSLG is 77th percentile.
Given Jeffers' defense, even if he only climbs up to a league average 87 wRC+ (and his batted ball stats look like he's better than that), he's a valuable starting catcher.

Yeah, that's the takeaway to make here. The reality is that based on batted ball profiles, Jeffers had one kinda bad year in 2021. He was good in shortened 2020 and his batted ball profile is once again pretty good in 2022 (adjusting for catchers). He's still 25 with less than a full MLB season played in total. I'm not writing him off yet just because his BABIP is under .250.
At the core of it, you're just not giving Jeffers' defense a fair shake. His pop time is almost smack-dab in the middle of MLB catchers at 47th percentile. His framing - the most important aspect of the game today - is borderline elite at 75th percentile. He's not exceptional in either direction with passed balls. He's average at a bunch of stuff and really good at the thing that matters most.

I tend to agree.  Scouts are still looking for specific traits in players that they think they can build on.  They are looking for players with untapped potential.  You could argue that it is those players in those rounds where the scouts earn their money.  Everyone knows who the top 100 players are even the fans.  We don't know which guys are going to work out but for the most part the top 200 players are set except for the order they will be picked.  Not sure it takes much scouting acumen to determine those players.  Players that look like sure things in the top 100 are not all going to work out. We see it every year no matter how good the organization.  Some consensus top 10 picks are not going to work out and that is pretty much the entire industry scouting players that come up with these rankings.  So scouting and top 100 lists are never perfect predictors of success at the MLB level even when the entire industry agrees.
I agree and it is pretty much proven that the further out you get the less likely a player makes it but any players that do make it from those rounds is essentially found money and the team wasn't just throwing darts at the board on who they decided to pick.  They picked guys with specific tools and skillsets they felt they might be able to develop.  Sure most of them are not going to work but I still think you have to give credit to the organization for recognizing talent that was more deeply hidden and or had the ability to be developed.  Finding players that can play at the MLB level not even All-Star caliber players but even just a dominant relief arm has significant value to the organization so those lower picks matter IMO. 

Well, the 2018 draft is still very much a work in progress and Jeffers was a college draft pick so it's not really surprising he's leading the second round pack in June of 2022.
But it should also be noted that Larnach (though also a college pick so keep that in mind) is around fifth in overall WAR from the first round but was only the 20th pick of the round.
This grading scale seems impossibly difficult, where one must draft an All-Star or better to receive a decent grade. The reality of the draft is that if you get a competent regular from the first round every year, your baseball team will be very good. If you get more than one competent regular from any single draft, you had a very good draft.
And I simply do not buy into the statement that anything after the third round is a crapshoot. That's where coaching and development comes into play; yes, the later rounds are more random but that's where good franchises pick the flawed players they like and try to coach them into being an MLB player. Dismissing those rounds out of hand ignores a big reason why the Tampa Bay Rays are perennially excellent while other franchises can't win after a half decade of top picks.

Thanks, I’ll get that sorted!

Looks like this is working correctly now. Thanks for the quick fix!

That's so great to hear and thank you for sharing. I've been reluctant to implement dark mode because it's a ton of work and I don't like dark mode. I don't want to use it and it creates 50% more work whenever I have to make a change.
Hearing comments like this reinforces not only my commitment to keeping this feature but also that I should have done it quite some time ago.
Again, thank you.

Interesting. Thanks, I'll get it fixed.

Again, thank you for sharing. We’re all about community here and you are now a more involved part of this community. If that’s the only thing this new feature brings, I consider it a success!

I appreciate the kind words!
It sucks that it takes so much effort to implement something that is seemingly so simple, and I definitely don't expect to be pandered to because of my eyes so these kind of responses are always meaningful to me. I have always been able to tolerate it up to a point, and now I look forward to being able to consume even more TD content!
All this does is reaffirms that this is the community for me!

That's so great to hear and thank you for sharing. I've been reluctant to implement dark mode because it's a ton of work and I don't like dark mode. I don't want to use it and it creates 50% more work whenever I have to make a change.
Hearing comments like this reinforces not only my commitment to keeping this feature but also that I should have done it quite some time ago.
Again, thank you.

Big fan. Thanks!

Awesome Brock! TD just keeps getting better and better!

My first experience using the Dark Web has been less life-changing than I expected.