bean5302

I'm not sure what to make of the signing and reasons behind it. It's clear there was huge pressure on the Twins to make this happen, but I don't think it happens if the trade market for him was hot with teams willing to offer the Twins elite prospects. Those MVP bonuses could be huge, but Buxton has never finished above 16th in MVP voting in his career. Still, $15MM/yr for a 3 fWAR player isn't going to kill the team. There's always the outside chance Buxton becomes healthy and the contact becomes a real steal.

So the pitchers get absolutely no credit for putting up zeroes? Got it.

Maybe, but it didn't help better players than Hunter like Fred McGriff.

I don't think it benefits hitters or pitchers a whole lot. Consistency is what both hitters and pitchers would like to see. Pitch framing becomes less important, but pop time, and arm strength along with blocking pitches become a greater focus for catchers. That means the catcher may take a very different stance. Maybe one leg behind them where the ump would normally be standing for more throwing velocity.

Hunter's not even close in my book. He had a very long career, but was steady "good" rather than great. 5x All Star in 19 seasons just doesn't get it done. Hunter's very best season is the average season for the 7 year peak of an average hall of famer. https://www.baseball-reference.com/players/h/hunteto01.shtml Hall of Fame Statistics Gray Ink Batting - 29 (1020), Average HOFer ≈ 144 Hall of Fame Monitor Batting - 58 (371), Likely HOFer ≈ 100 Hall of Fame Standards Batting - 34 (249), Average HOFer ≈ 50 JAWS Center Field (36th): 50.6 career WAR | 30.8 7yr-peak WAR | 40.7 JAWS | 3.5 WAR/162 Average HOF CF (out of 19): 71.9 career WAR | 44.8 7yr-peak WAR | 58.3 JAWS | 5.4 WAR/162

Milwaukee's lineup scored an average of 4.56 vs. Atlanta's 4.88 runs during the season. That's what the hitters are expected to produce. Great hitting would suggest scores should have been higher than expected. Great pitching would suggest scores should have been lower than expected. Pitching > Hitting.

Right. Now is the player in a position to make a play because of the play or because of the strategy? Range Factor and SDI don't isolate the player performance so it's hard to judge how well a player performs. Polanco is arguably the worst shortstop to play more than a single full season there in the past 20 years. Making Polanco "good" would have required a miracle. Shifting's impact on grounders and soft fly balls is well documented. It's not speculation. RF and SDI don't attempt to count for the shift.

Atlanta's top 3 starters during the season had an average FIP of 3.48, which is still very good. Their wRC+ was 98. Milwaukee's top 3 starters durig the season had an average FIP of 2.61 which is fantastic. Their wRC+ was 91. Milwaukee Scores: Game 1 = W 2-1. Starter went 6.0 IP 0 R Game 2 = L 3-0. Starter went 6.0 IP 3 R Game 3 = L 3-0. Starter went 2.0 IP 0 R Game 4 = L 5-4. Starter went 3.2 IP 2 R *Went with 4th starter facing elimination. Not one loss was tied to a Milwaukee starter. If you don't score at least 3 runs in a game, there's like an 80% chance you'll lose it. The Brewers vs. Braves series was clearly not the result of "hitting" it was the result of pitching performances.

I think DebaterA was more pursuasive; however, I still believe pitching is what's important. What wasn't talked about in specific is how the positional players and hitting remains the same in the playoffs while the pitching staff largely transforms. A bunch of mediocre pitchers can get you to the playoffs and then immediately get you bounced because often only the best pitchers are used in the playoffs. The Texas Rangers focused on elite hitting with mediocre pitching. It got them to the playoffs most of the time around the late 2000s to mid 2010s, but it only got them one World Series during a year where the Rangers got an excellent performance from CJ Wilson, 1 of only 2 good years from Matt Harrison, 1 of 3 good years from Derek Holland and it allowed them to take a Alexi Ogando and convert him to a reliever despite being an excellent starter that season. Surprisingly good starting pitching was the key.

The player doesn't deserve the credit when the team is telling them where to stand so the ball travels directly to them. The shift artificially increases the number of opportunities fielders have to catch balls because it doesn't give you a clear indication on how good the player is. The shift can impact Range Factor dramatically. The top shifting team last year would have been expected to see a reduction in batting average on ground balls and soft liners by approximately 6% overall. That's a 6% increase in opportunity for an infielder to make a play. Between the top and bottom shifting teams, the difference would have been 4%. How much of a difference does that make? It could easily drop RF/9 by .15 points as a shortstop turning a very good SS into a pedestrian one. If the Twins were to think Simmons was good because of his Range Factor or SDI, but it was actually due to the Twins' shifting and positional strategy, it would cause the Twins to misjudge Simmons' value. In that case, the Twins could plug a supposedly inferior shortstop from a team which employed a less successful position or shift strategy into the Twins' system and the new player would also perform just as well as Simmons. It's about properly valuing players.

Umpires may make mistakes, but they're probably better at calling balls and strikes based on what the human players think they see than robots. What looks like a strike to a pitcher and a hitter might actually be a ball, though consistency will be higher. I think consistency is the best reason for the switch. I agree catchers will just change their stances and strategies to focus on pop-up speed and throwing if robot called balls/strikes are implemented.

The rank above includes both wild pitches and passed balls.

Jeffers had a grand total of 6 passed balls last year. You can see how they stack up vs. all catchers in MLB with 300+ innings last year. In terms of innings caught between passed balls, Jeffers (111.7) and Garver (112.8) were slightly below median average (121.2). Both Jeffers (27.9) and Garver (28.2) were slightly above median average (26.0) in terms of innings caught between wild pitches. Overall, the combination puts them both slightly above average, ranked 24th and 22nd out of 60, respectively. So if there were metrics for the balls that got away from Twins catchers, they would likely be positive overall. Catcher Team Innings Passed Balls Inn/PB Rank Wild Pitches Inn/WP Rank Inn/Combo Rank Buster Posey SFG 892 2 446.0 6 18 49.6 2 44.6 1 Manny Pina MIL 452.1 3 150.7 23 8 56.5 1 41.1 2 Yan Gomes - - - 771.1 3 257.0 12 18 42.8 3 36.7 3 Cam Gallagher KCR 308.2 1 308.2 10 8 38.5 5 34.2 4 Danny Jansen TOR 481.1 0 Inf 3 15 32.1 12 32.1 5 J.T. Realmuto PHI 973 6 162.2 21 25 38.9 4 31.4 6 Austin Hedges CLE 743.2 2 371.6 8 24 31.0 13 28.6 7 Roberto Perez CLE 364 3 121.3 30 10 36.4 7 28.0 8 Travis d'Arnaud ATL 470.2 3 156.7 22 14 33.6 11 27.7 9 Sandy Leon MIA 437.1 4 109.3 38 12 36.4 8 27.3 10 Sean Murphy OAK 923.1 1 923.1 5 34 27.2 24 26.4 11 Jacob Stallings PIT 892 0 Inf 1 35 25.5 29 25.5 12 Carson Kelly ARI 706.2 8 88.3 49 20 35.3 9 25.2 13 Max Stassi LAA 703 8 87.9 50 20 35.2 10 25.1 14 Tucker Barnhart CIN 846 3 282.0 11 31 27.3 23 24.9 15 Reese McGuire TOR 523 4 130.8 28 17 30.8 14 24.9 16 Victor Caratini SDP 787.1 6 131.2 27 26 30.3 15 24.6 17 Cal Raleigh SEA 333 5 66.6 58 9 37.0 6 23.8 18 Michael Perez PIT 488.1 2 244.1 13 19 25.7 28 23.2 19 Austin Wynns BAL 342.1 0 Inf 2 15 22.8 34 22.8 20 Will Smith LAD 1004.2 9 111.6 36 35 28.7 18 22.8 21 Mitch Garver MIN 451.2 4 112.8 33 16 28.2 19 22.6 22 Willson Contreras CHC 935.2 3 311.7 9 39 24.0 32 22.3 23 Ryan Jeffers MIN 670.2 6 111.7 35 24 27.9 20 22.3 24 Austin Barnes LAD 442.1 3 147.4 24 17 26.0 25 22.1 25 Christian Vazquez BOS 1051.1 10 105.1 40 38 27.7 21 21.9 26 Stephen Vogt - - - 496 5 99.2 45 18 27.6 22 21.6 27 Kyle Higashioka NYY 519.1 6 86.5 51 18 28.8 17 21.6 28 Tomas Nido NYM 365.2 2 182.6 15 15 24.3 30 21.5 29 Tom Murphy SEA 727.2 6 121.2 31 28 26.0 26 21.4 30 Daulton Varsho ARI 319 4 79.8 55 11 29.0 16 21.3 31 Francisco Mejia TBR 582.2 4 145.6 25 24 24.3 31 20.8 32 James McCann NYM 826.1 8 103.3 43 32 25.8 27 20.7 33 Yadier Molina STL 1001.1 6 166.9 20 44 22.8 35 20.0 34 Jose Trevino TEX 713 4 178.3 16 33 21.6 39 19.3 35 Alex Jackson - - - 324.2 3 108.1 39 14 23.2 33 19.1 36 Curt Casali SFG 509.1 4 127.3 29 23 22.1 36 18.9 37 Andrew Knizner STL 406.2 1 406.2 7 21 19.3 47 18.5 38 Martin Maldonado HOU 1010.2 7 144.3 26 48 21.0 40 18.4 39 Jonah Heim TEX 641 3 213.7 14 33 19.4 45 17.8 40 Mike Zunino TBR 860.1 10 86.0 52 39 22.1 37 17.6 41 Dom Nunez COL 622 6 103.7 41 30 20.7 43 17.3 42 Austin Nola SDP 399 4 99.8 44 19 21.0 41 17.3 43 Elias Diaz COL 775 8 96.9 46 37 20.9 42 17.2 44 Eric Haase DET 543.1 7 77.6 57 25 21.7 38 17.0 45 Alejandro Kirk TOR 338 2 169.0 18 18 18.8 50 16.9 46 Omar Narvaez MIL 886.1 5 177.2 17 49 18.1 51 16.4 47 Yasmani Grandal CHW 627.1 7 89.6 47 32 19.6 44 16.1 48 Andrew Knapp PHI 330.2 4 82.6 54 17 19.4 46 15.7 49 Tyler Stephenson CIN 588.1 7 84.0 53 31 19.0 48 15.5 50 Jason Castro HOU 355.1 3 118.4 32 20 17.8 53 15.4 51 Jake Rogers DET 310.2 3 103.4 42 18 17.2 55 14.8 52 Kurt Suzuki LAA 557 7 79.6 56 31 18.0 52 14.7 53 Salvador Perez KCR 1002.2 1 1002.2 4 69 14.5 57 14.3 54 William Contreras ATL 415.2 7 59.3 59 24 17.3 54 13.4 55 Gary Sanchez NYY 879.1 8 109.9 37 60 14.7 56 12.9 56 Zack Collins CHW 506.1 3 168.7 19 37 13.7 59 12.7 57 Kevin Plawecki BOS 336.2 3 112.1 34 24 14.0 58 12.5 58 Jorge Alfaro MIA 476 13 36.6 60 25 19.0 49 12.5 59 Pedro Severino BAL 883 10 88.3 48 66 13.4 60 11.6 60 Framing is not some whimsical made up concept. MLB teams have paid millions of dollars to coach their catchers on how to frame better, and the concept has been around for many decades, but the PitchF/X system allowed real data on how framing was working in 2008. More solid data = more attention by front offices in the post-Moneyball era. "References to pitch-framing date back to at least the 1950s, and probably before. An organizational instruction manual prepared by the Brewers in 1982 advised catchers to catch possible strikes with “a minimum of body movement” and “very smooth hand action,” noting that “good framing technique will usually get you more marginal pitches.” And in his 1989 book The Diamond Appraised, trailblazing sabermetrician Craig R. Wright wrote that “the mark of the master is the illusion whereby balls become called strikes,” arguing that “learning to catch the ball so it looks like a strike may do more toward preventing runs than throwing out the extra base runner once a week that is the difference between the best- and worst-throwing catchers.” https://www.theringer.com/mlb/2018/9/21/17885820/pitch-framing-strike-zone-jorge-alfaro-tyler-flowers

https://www.baseball-reference.com/awards/hof_2021.shtml Looking at the 2021 voting, I wouldn't be surprised if Clemens (61.6%, 3rd most valuable pitcher of all time), Bonds (61.8%, 2nd most valuable hitter of all time) and Schilling (71.1%) were all elected in their 10th and final year. If voters have been holding out for the last time on the ballot for some of those names, it could wind up costing weaker candidates like Nathan.

Since we're so bullish on moving shortstops to center field, maybe we should move Buxton to shortstop? Keep him from running into walls and all that?

I would really love Baseball Reference or another major data site to create a "PED re-profile" tool which would re-curve performance based on expected exit velocity changes. It would be totally unfair because you don't know who was using, but I think it would be helpful all around. If 10% of OPS improvement was PEDs, if you re-curve the players who've been tainted, maybe it would help the fringe guys get more recognition and separate the HoF regardless of PED use guys from the guys who might not have made it. Sheffield, Ramirez, Sosa probably don't have the numbers to get in with that adjustment.

Sure. The popular opinion on this board is Buxton is an MVP level talent. A guy who could put together an 8-10 WAR season if he was healthy. He's played 140 games twice (2016 split between MLB/AAA and 2017). 70% of Byron Buxton, based on popular opinon here is 5.6-7.0 WAR or so over a full season. So like, Mookie Betts or Bryce Harper. Those guys are a little spendy and the Twins are not going to do it. I think you could probably move Marcus Semien to center field. It sounds like he's going to get over $200MM any day now. The Twins hear $100MM or more and they panic.

Listen, if you're unwilling to accept Jake Cave is a potential Hall of Famer, late bloomer... ?

Bonds is the figurehead for the steroid era. The proof that steroids create legendary career performance (even if it doesn't actually do anything remotely close to that). It's not fair Bonds has been so ostracized, but his extreme success actually works against him. Bonds was so good that people hated his success; they were jealous, and his surly public persona made it even worse. People actively wanted Bonds to fail. That's my opinion.

There are some key differences. Canseco named Sosa and Canseco's got some credibility. Sosa was also named in an affidavit by Jeffrey Novitzky, an IRS agent who led the BALCO investigation, though it seems it was only specific to amphetamines. Sosa also played virtually his entire career in the steroid era. There's a lot more than a maybe/maybe not positive test for Sosa. That said, the outrage over steroid and PED use in 2009 was far greater than today. Do keep in mind, BALCO was literally 20 years ago.

I really like Joe Nathan, but the gap between Nathan and Rivera is cavernous. A quick glance down the bWAR lists: Dennis Eckersly (HoF) = 62.2 Mariano Rivera (HoF) = 56.3 Rich Gossage (HoF) = 41.6 Lee Smith (HoF) = 29.3 Trevor Hoffman (HoF) = 28.1 Billy Wagner = 27.8 (2019. 16.7%, 31.7%, 46.4%) Joe Nathan = 26.7 (2022) Francisco Rodriguez = 24.1 (2023) John Franco = 23.6 Jonathan Papelbon = 23.3 (2022) Craig Kimbrel = 21.9 (still active) Rick Aguilera = 20.7 Jeff Reardon = 19.0 Troy Percival = 17.0 I think Nathan has an outside shot at the Hall of Fame. He wasn't good in the post season, blowing a couple games with an 8.10 ERA in just 10 appearances with 10.0 innings pitched. I don't think that's going to be working well for him. He was definitely right there with Mariano Rivera as #1A and #1B from 2004-2009 and I think Nathan gets in if he didn't go down with TJ in 2010. Now, he's really pushing the limits. There are a lot of closers who are around him in saves and WAR who fell off the list fast.

I'd imagine there's a pretty huge overhead to start the season. Spring Training, getting stadiums up and running, getting staff hired, contracts in place for vendors, etc. If the players strike early in the season, the owners have no revenue to offset those expenditures. They'd also have to refund tickets already purchased, etc. If the owners lock the players out, they have more control over the expenditures and financial situation.

Patrick Arnold (creator of "The Clear THG) "...Yes, people back then did test positive because of supplements, and occasionally it was for nandrolone, which I think (Ortiz) is alluding to, but not verbatim," Arnold told the Daily News yesterday. "If he could say it was nandrolone, I'd say, 'OK, you may have a case.'... https://www.nydailynews.com/sports/baseball/balco-chemist-david-ortiz-supplement-tale-feasible-article-1.395677 Ortiz does not appear in the Mitchell Report. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Major_League_Baseball_players_named_in_the_Mitchell_Report Anonomous drug testing in 2003 contained inconclusives, not just positives. "Ortiz claims he did not know his result came back positive. As one of the 13 or more inconclusive results, that makes sense because Ortiz’ name does not appear in The Mitchell Report. As Schmidt wrote yesterday, “All players who tested positive in 2003 were told that their tests had been seized by the government, according to the report presented to Major League Baseball by George J. Mitchell ….” The report never cites Sosa, Ramirez, or Ortiz “ maybe because they didn’t test positive. At any rate, that’s as plausible as Schmidt’s vague sources." https://cantstopthebleeding.com/no-smearing-in-the-press-box-iii-big-papi-vindicates-cstb-blowhard-michael-s-schmidt-commences-damage-control Just because you don't like facts or something doesn't align with your opinion does not make it satire.

Ortiz hasn't talked about it much at all. He said he believes he may have tested postitive due to an over the counter supplement. The chemist who created the THG (The Clear) is on record saying it's feasible an over the counter supplement could have triggered a positive. In addition, the Mitchell Report also may have contained names of players who may have tested inconclusive. Ortiz didn't show any changes to his body type or decline in production with the implementation of testing. So you don't know for sure he tested positive or what substance it may have been that caused the inconclusive or positive result. Aside from that, Ortiz played his entire meaningful career in Boston and never tested positive there. You have a very strong opinion despite having almost no information to back it up.

From a chat with Steve Adams on MLBTradeRumors.com https://www.jotcast.com/chat/chat-with-mlbtrs-steve-adams-11-23-21-11913.html "Falvine 2:41 Mid level SPs are dropping like flies. Is Michael Pineda realistically our top FA SP acquisition? Steve Adams 2:41 Even if the Twins don't want to spend heavily on a multi-year deal for a free agent SP, the trade market will offer plenty of names. John Means, Sonny Gray, Sean Manaea, Chris Bassitt, several Marlins options ... lots of ways to fill out a rotation. 2:42 That said, no, I don't think Pineda is the top SP Minnesota will consider.