jkcarew

If you look at how the series played out, the only ‘one guy’ scenario would be a right-handed batter in game seven...it’s the only game the Twins lost that was really within range of winning with a reasonable one-man performance...unless you want to assume that a pitcher throws a shutout or near shutout at Dodger stadium. Joe Nossek batted second in game 7. Earl Battey batted 5th, behind Killebrew, who reached base twice against Koufax. I’d go with Donaldson or Garver or Sano batting behind Killebrew and coming up with a dinger and a double...that could have done it. If they had DH’s in 1965, the answer to this question would have been Cruz.

67, 69, 70...take your pick. Oliva, Killebrew, Carew, Tovar, Allison, Perry, Kaat, Boswell, Chance, Perranoski...Graig Nettles and Rick Dempsey can’t find at-bats...Blyleven breaks onto the seen.

“Behind Giolito, the Sox are relying on post-prime Keuchel and Gonzalez along with Reynaldo Lopez...” Michael Kopech is alive and quite well.

Using 2019 WAR will provide a bias for the AL teams and against the NL, and result in ranking the Twins and Cleveland higher than what might be warranted. Remember that the AL central teams last year got to play Detroit and Kansas City...two historically bad teams that weren’t even pretending to try to win...nearly 40 times...include an extremely inexperienced White Sox club, and you’re at nearly 60 games. Based on win pct outside the division, the 2019 AL central last year was easily the worse division in baseball, and one of the weakest divisions that MLB has seen in decades. St Louis, Milwaukee, and the Cubs all had better records against winning teams last year than did the Twins (or Cleveland). Maybe the 2020 additions put the Twins at the top of this list, but it’s much, much, more questionable than this article suggests.

But, if we're talking the 60's only...the comparison would/should be Aaron/Mathews vs Killebrew/Oliva. Oliva did more in the 60's than Carew did. Then it becomes Aaron vs Killebrew and Mathews vs Oliva. And for the 60's (but only for the 60's), that comparison actually could go the Twins way. I'll but Mincher at 1B Killebrew at 3B Or...you could put Rollins at 3B, Mincher at 1B, Killebrew at DH, Tovar in CF.

I remember all these seasons. 1969 was actually the year Carew became my favorite player. He was 'cooler' than Killebrew (which was hugely important)...and 1969 was his first batting title. All three (with Carew's 1977) of these seasons were special...they weren't 'normal' MVP seasons...they were historical. I could easily go along with putting Mauer's season on par with Carew's 1977 based on Carew was playing 1B. But, not Killebrew's 1969. It's a good talker for sure. My point with WAR...the defensive component inconsistencies/flaws warp apples-to-apples WAR comparisons. Does his playing catcher in 2009 (and playing it well) add to Mauer's value (relative to Killebrew in 1969)? Well...yes. But how and how much is the issues when we're doing the comparison. In 2009, Mauer started 105 games at catcher. In 57 games someone else was the starting catcher for the Twins in 2009. Mauer played 109 games total in the field. In 1969 Killebrew started all 162 games in the field (mostly at 3rd base). He was on the field for over 93 percent of all defensive inning across the entire season. He had decent hands limited range, accurate arm. He committed 22 errors (in an era when errors were awarded). It's not like Killebrew was costing the Twins games. Meanwhile, Killebrew's offensive 1969 was better than Mauer's 2009. Yet, Mauer's bWAR comes out 26% higher than Killebrew's. I don't buy that. At all.

I think most of these arguments are over-stated. I don't see season RBI as being a record that is particularly 'impossible' to break going forward. The arguments that hold the most water to me are... -Players sitting too many games -OBP's going too low But big seasonal RBI numbers have often been simply a product of small-sample statistical anomalies experienced by good (and great) players. The player has a season where their BARISP, HR/FB, percentage of at-bats with runners in scoring positions, etc....all deviate from mean in a positive way. A little 'perfect storm' of RBI. No reason that won't still happen from time to time. In 1994, Kirby Puckett would have needed 28 RBI in the final 49 games to break Killebrew's record. Problem was...those games weren't played due to the player's strike. Puckett had 112 RBI in the Twins first 113 games. On pace for 160 RBI. Can some Twin come along and do 21 RBI less than that? I wouldn't say never. I do like the chances better for you younger guys out there .

I won't go by WAR...because Killebrew is robbed blind by WAR's defensive component. And WAR's defensive components are flawed...significantly, IMO. 1.Killebrew (offensively, that 1969 season is way better than Carew and Mauer's year. Way superior. It just is.) 2/3. Carew (his 1977 was better than Mauer's 2009 offensively...especialy when you consider Carew played nearly 20 more games that Joe that year.) 3/2. Mauer (the only reason WAR puts Mauer's 2009 up/over Killebrew's 1969 and/or Carew's 1977 is because of the positions they played; Still, I'm ok with Mauer's 2009 being with or ahead of Carew's 1977 based on the 105 games Joe played catcher that year. But not Killebrew. Killebrew's season was just too much better offensively.) 4. Morneau (he deserved that MVP) 5. Versalles (he deserved that MVP)

Taking up Chief's challenge. And yes, I'm struck by how much the game has changed...in 1973 Blyleven averaged over 8 innings per start, across 40 starts. But, I'm struck even more by how much Blyleven was underappreciated, especially relative to his HoF contemporaries. I do remember that being the case real-time. But, it's worse than you think... Blyleven's first six full seasons (1971-1976...'76 season being when he was traded to Texas)... Lead all major league pitchers in WAR (either flavor). Seaver was the only guy very close. Guys behind him that pitched all six years and were healthy all six years include: Seaver, Gaylord Perry, Sutton, Jenkins, Carlton, Blue, Ryan, Palmer, Lolich, Phil Niekro, Hunter. So, you don't like WAR that much (maybe especially for pitchers)? Can't blame you. So,... of the 11 above names...names that ranged from really, REALLY good, to legendary... Four had better ERA's than Blyleven over that stretch. One had a better FIP (Seaver) and two had better K/9. Seven had better WIP (Blyleven had the highest BABiP). Three had more innings pitched, four had more complete games, one had more shutouts (Palmer). None had better +WPA or WPA. Back to WAR (fwiw), but looking at career... Blyleven has the most career WAR of anyone to ever play for the Twins. Period. (Carew not all that close, Steve Carlton the closest). Blyleven ranks 7th all-time among pitchers in fWAR. All time. 5th all-time among pitchers whose career began after 1907: Roger Clemens, Greg Maddux, Randy Johnson, and Nolan Ryan. Not bad for a guy named to exactly TWO all-star games (were we really that stupid back then?)...a guy that was never seriously considered for a Cy Young award until he'd already accumulated about 75 career WAR (were the writers really that stupid back then?). Not to mention...a guy that's mocked and ridiculed on a fairly regular basis by several in our TD community because he's not their cup-of-tea as a color analyst. Gregory H. Wolf, SABR - Blyleven demanded that the Twins double his salary in 1974, leading to tensions with club owner Calvin Griffith, who was notoriously tight-fisted and the last major-league owner who derived his income solely from the team. Though he received a substantial raise to a reported $55,000, Blyleven’s relationship with the front office was in a free-fall. Playing through occasional lower back pain, Blyleven split his 34 decisions, finished a distant second once again to Ryan in strikeouts (249 to 367) and posted a stellar 2.66 ERA, but few saw him as the Twins finished last in attendance. Griffith rejected Kansas City’s offer to buy the hurler for a million dollars, but Blyleven’s days with the Twins nonetheless seemed numbered. By 1972, the Twins were irrelevant. Think 20-teen Twins without regional TV and playing in a cheap football stadium out in the suburbs. It seemed the local and national baseball conscious had room for one Twin...barely. And that was Carew.

I like total bases, as well. Having said that, it's a stat that isn't kind to Killebrew. Poor Harmon had too many PA each season where the pitcher simply refused to throw the ball over the plate. Got me to thinking... In 1969, Killebrew had 324 total bases. But, his 145 BB that year give him 469 TB+BB. Killebrew had several years where his TB+BB were over 400. Oliva has the one year over 400...the year you reference (his rookie year!)...when he had 374 TB + 34 BB for 408. (Carew's 1977 was 351 + 69 = 420; Pucket's 1986 was 365 + 34 = 399 and his 1988 was 358 + 23 = 381; Dozier's 2016 was 336 + 61 = 397 and his 2017 was 307 + 78 = 385; Morneau's 2008 was 387 and his 2006 was 384; Mauer's 2009 was 383)

Bert Blyleven's 1973 season: fWAR: 10.8...bWAR: 9.7 Let that sink in for a minute. That would be the most valuable player in baseball in 2019. By about a half-mile. 1973 also the year Calvin Griffith release Jim Kaat. Released him. To have him win over 100 more major-league games after the release (including 57 in the next 3+ seasons). Released him. Patrick Lethert, SABR - ...the 1973 Twins were a .500 team, finishing 81-81. After his outstanding season in 1972, Kaat had used his leverage to push penny-pinching owner Calvin Griffith to raise his salary back to its previous high of $60,000. The negotiations were drawn out and acrimonious but eventually the pitcher prevailed. In early August the Twins lost seven straight games and fell to 10 games behind the AL West-leading Royals. Griffith took the opportunity to get the last word and placed Kaat on waivers. Claimed by the White Sox, Kaat went 4-1 for Chicago to finish 15-13 and avoid his second losing season since 1961. Adjusting for inflation, $60K in 1973 would be about $344K now. See why I don't complain about the Pohlands?

This is why I cringe when authors throw out an extremely aggressive comp...and then go with "I'm not saying it's a great comp, BUT..." Much better to stick with your first instinct that it's not a good comp. Because it's not...and then it distracts from the point of the article, IMO. (Although, it probably creates extra 'clicks'...so, there is that. ) I do think Santana's career will look better over time. The bar for staring pitchers to make the HoF in terms of counting stats and longevity will lower over time, as innings pitched (and probably even seasons pitched) continue to decline. So, it's unfortunate that Santana didn't get the opportunity to stick around in the voting for a while.

Context, please. The LA Coliseum was, literally, the smallest stadium in the history of major league baseball. Way further from the mean on the hitter's side than Dodgers stadium ever was on the pitcher's side...especially for left-handed pitchers. 250 feet down the left field line. 320 to to the left-center power alley. (300 feet down the right field line.) Stadiums had nothing to do with Koufax's emergence. It was his control. He went from 1.88 K/BB ratio in 1959 (with a 10.2 K/9 rate) to 5.38 K/BB rate in 1965 with the same exact 10.2 K/9. Did Dodgers stadium make his great numbers even greater? Probably. But, it's not like he was anything close to 'average' on the road in his prime years. It's amusing to me when historians wrangle numbers around 50 years after the fact to make a point without providing any context for what contemporaries had to say (although, James is normally decent at providing that context). Everyone...EVERYONE who saw Koufax pitch in his prime said he was one of the 1, 2, 3 best pitchers to ever pitch. He dominated and demolished the Twins in 1965 (at Met Stadium: 15 IP, 1 ER, 9 hits (0 HR), 19K, 4BB). I'm 100% sure if you asked any of the surviving '65 Twins that have remained close to the game (Oliva, Kaat...) they'd say he was better than all but a very small handful that they've seen since.

Also, Versalles wasn't as much of a "one-hit wonder" as comes across in some of our comments (or as much as he's perceived that way, in general). He got MVP votes in '62. He won a GG and was an all-star (in an era where it was DIFFICULT to make the all-star game) in '63. In the five seasons culminating with his MVP ('61-'65), MLB SS leaders for fWAR... Jim Fregosi - 18.9 Maury Wills - 18.0 Ron Hansen - 16.7 Dick Groat - 15.8 Zoilo Versalles - 15.1 Luis Aparicio - 14.1 These were Aparicio's age 27 to 31 seasons, and he was widely considered to be the best short-stops in the majors. (Soon to be overtaken by Fregosi; Wills was a bat-first guy who was already starting to dabble in a bit of 3rd-base.) Anyway, the thing that created the 'one-hit wonder' legend with Versalles was the fact that he didn't do much AFTER the MVP in '65. But, he did plenty before it.

Shortstops were significantly MORE important in Versalles day than they are today. What do I mean?... Versalles fielded 774 chances for the Twins in 1965. That didn't lead the league. That was an average year for Versalles. In 1962, he fielded 862 chances. For context, only 4 short-stops in the majors last year had over 600 chances. Jorge Polanco was 6th in the AL with 506. Major league batters used to put balls in play. This explains the need for defense at 'all cost' at the position in that era. Several of the 'great' offensive shortstops of today, wouldn't qualify to play that position in Versalles era. (Polanco, for example.) Still, there's about a 99% chance that if a modern shortstop lead his league in runs, doubles, triples, and total bases...that player would be elected MVP. Versalles really wasn't a controversial choice. Then or now.

“In addition, Versalles led the Majors in strikeouts with 308, 244 more strikeouts than his teammate Oliva.” Huh?? Also kinda silly to highlight Oliva as having more RBI than the leadoff batter (who batted behind the pitcher)... but not the leadoff batter having more runs scored. Obviously, Oliva proved to be the much better hitter and better player over time, but Versalles was the MVP in ‘65.

Fun. Two issues... 1. Many folks in the community...especially folks that were adults when Kirby played...don't have Twitter. (I'd vote Kirby, but I can't.) 2. Your 'World Series Region'.... There's a minuscule list of players that were starters on both the '87 and the '91 team: Hrbek, Gagne, Gladden, Puckett. You can't call one of the regions the 'World Series' region and NOT have Dan Gladden one of the eight entrants. Go back and look at what he did in both post-seasons. That's an egregious omission.

Protects the hoards of current 18-20 year-olds in the rookie and instructional leagues. They won't be immediately crowded out of professional baseball without having ever gotten a full chance. This year's crop (most of them), will have to wait another year. I think the biggest victim will be the marginal college senior (most of the blue-chippers having been drafted relatively high as juniors last year). The player that sticks around for his senior year...a lot of those guys are drafted later...and now they may miss their opportunity altogether.

I think if you had stuck with the apparent approach taken for the historical years, 2019 would have been either "?" or would have remained Berrios (who, depending upon the WAR number you use, was 'about' as good as Cruz in 2019). Maybe Cruz is going to be a one-hit wonder like Zoilo Versalles...or maybe he ends up being a Paul Molitor to Jorge Polanco's Chuck Knoblauch (as an example). I like the approach. But it is tough on players that played in the era of the long-term dominant guys....guys like Bob Allison, Jim Kaat, Gaetti, Viola, Morneau....all were very, very good for extended periods, and, at least arguably, had a year or two where they were better than the reigning king. Bert Blyleven has the 4th or 5th most Twins WAR all-time, but doesn't make the list. Oliva, in similar situation. Pretty easy to argue Oliva was better then Killebrew (definitely WAR-wise) for multiple years during Killebrew's reign...even multiple consecutive years within that time period. There's a reason why Oliva has a statue at Target field...while more than half the names on this list will never reach that status.

Also, OBP probably needs to be a factor or a threshold, as well, right?...lest we consider guys like Alexi Casilla, Ben Revere, and Carlos Gomez (or Buxton) here...all almost certainly "faster" than Knoblauch, but not accomplished hitters (yet), as was Knoblauch. Actually, a good argument could be made for Knoblauch as the honorable mention for 'Intelligence'. During his Twins career, his OBP and BB% were basically identical to Mauer's career numbers (Mauer's peak years were better)...and Knoblauch's SO% was lower. The player that some might remember with the Yankees wasn't anything near the player the Twins had from '91 - '97.

I'm on-board with Knoblauch being the 'speed' guy. He wasn't necessarily an absolute burner, but the combination of his superior on-base skills, his instincts, and his plus speed made him probably the most productive guy on the based the Twins have ever had.

You're right in that Mack became a free agent at the exact wrong time....and I should have mentioned that. It's entirely possible that Mack simply decided he couldn't wait for the strike to end (couldn't take the chance it would carry through the following year)...and signed with a Japanese team.

To me, under-rated is a guy who is better (more valuable) than his numbers indicate...particularly the offensive numbers. Guys who had qualities not necessarily captured in many of the numbers...particularly the 'averages'. Qualities like defensive flexibility, good/smart on the bases, ability to perform in big moments, great durability/availability, defensive quality/consistency. This list comes off more like popularity vs numbers. Mauer and Koskie are not those guys for me...to me, they're better examples of players that were exactly as good as their numbers would indicate. Tovar, Gladden, Pierzynski...I'd probably go with Gagne as an all-timer. And while Mack certainly served a useful role with the Twins in the early 90s, it's easy IMO to argue that he was actually NOT as good as his numbers would indicate. His numbers are based on a relatively small period of time where he demolished left-handed pitching. Not the most valuable skill for a guy that played primarily a corner outfield spot. He actually platooned for a significant period with the Twins. In the outfield, he had a legendarily weak arm (early career injury contributed). At age 30, he OPS'd .966 in the major leagues. The Twins let him go...and the highest bidder was the Giants. The Yomiuri Giants.

To say that All-Star game came as the Twins were riding a wave of popularity and excitement would be an understatement. In the final game before the break, Killebrew had walked-off the Yankees to open up a 5-game lead (over Baltimore). Then, Killebrew hit a 2-run HR in the bottom of the 5th to tie the All-Star game. (Killebrew had the highest WPA on either side in that game.) The 1965 all-star game was a huge deal in out-state Minnesota...everyone was watching the game, the Minnesota team being the talk of baseball for the first time ever...and to see one of the first nationally-televised games in Minnesota. It's one of the first baseball games I can remember seeing on TV (having grown up in northern Minnesota). Fwiw...the outfield reserves for the AL included Tony Oliva, Carl Yastrzemski, Mickey Mantle, Al Kaline. However, I think there were some injuries involved there. Btw...that game is available in it's entirely on YouTube. Jack Buck and Joe Garagiola on the call. It's really poor video quality, but still pretty cool. (Go to 1:11:30 for the Killebrew blast, full at-bat. I get the over-all improvement over 50 years in terms of training and development. But...honestly...how far would Killebrew have hit 2019 baseballs? Just unbelievable power at just under 6 feet and maybe 200-210 in his prime.)

IMO, easy to make an argument that Hrbek was the Twins all-timer at first base (if defense is a part of the evaluation). Obviously, a case can be made for others. FWIW, I think a huge portion of current observers don't remember that Killebrew really wasn't a "first-baseman" in his prime. A high percentage of his games at first occurred after age and injuries had taken their toll, and he was playing out his career. Killebrew played more than 80 games at first for exactly 3 of his 'prime' Twins seasons...'61, '67, and '71. And through 1971 (his last good season), he had played more 3B than 1B for the Twins. Many memories (and the numbers) don't do justice to the fact that, in his prime, Killebrew was a decently athletic guy that could play third and first and that was at least average when playing first base. Games started at 1B for Twins through age 34 season... Killebrew - 557 Hrbek - 1566 Games started at 1B for Twins after age 34 season... Killebrew - 298 (more than a third of the games he ever started at 1B for the Twins) Hrbek - 0 Meanwhile, Hrbek was better than good defensively. Historically underrated there, IMO. Really good feet, really good hands. One of the best I've ever seen at going back on pop fouls. All while providing that value at a 140 games per season clip for a long time.