arby58

The percentage of OBP that is hits versus walks varies from player to player. Last year, Juan Soto had 135 walks. His batting average was .242, and his OBP was .401. Do the math, walks were a lot more than 20 percent of his OBP. Same with Aaron Judge and some other players.

I'll guarantee it will be an improvement over Sano's last season, and it won't be that hard to get above his second to last season either.

So refute it - use numbers and baseball logic. I have provided enough of that to make a prima facia case - have a crack at it rather than just posting a hitting your head against a rectangle meme.

Their careers have some similarity - about the same number of at bats (Sano 2502, Gallo 2455), HRs (Sano 162, Gallo 186), and OPS (Sano .808, Gallo .799). There is one big difference - Gallo's WAR is 15.5 and Sano is 7.6. That is probably largely due to Gallo's far superior defensive ability. Of course, Sano isn't employed by a MLB team, and I'm certain that Minnesota is happy to have Gallo - even with a low batting average, his 91 ABs with 9 HR and 21 RBIs would translate over a full season to something like 45 HRs and 100+ RBIs. I understand that will probably not be the outcome, but it will be far better than the last couple of years of Sano.

Sure, but getting on base isn't the ultimate desired outcome, it is scoring runs. I remember Bert Blyleven pointing out that a walk or a single with two outs is generally not going to produce a run, and he (and other commentators) discussed the importance in those situations of hitting the ball hard somewhere, which makes it much more likely you might score a run. That, of course, is the whole point of slugging percentage as an offensive statistic.

Actually it is on base percentage and slugging percentage, not batting average, that make up OPS. Theoretically, one could have a super high on base percentage and a meh batting average.

That's not an offensive statistic. That said, missing bats is fielder independent, so it does reflect on the pitcher's ability to control an offense.

Headlines are meant to get a reader to read it. If you would prefer 'less useful than OPS or WAR' statistic, that's fine with me. The beauty of OPS is it gives hitters like Arraez credit for what they do (via OBP), but it also recognizes that a walk or single is less impactful than extra base hits. The Gallo example is a stark reflection of that. As I noted in another post, Gallo went 1 for 5 yesterday, but the 1 was a HR, so he had a run scored and a run batted in - but his batting average went down. Arraez was 2 for 4, but neither hit led to him scoring a run or batting one in. His batting average went up. Who had the better game?

This is a bit over-simplified. A strikeout is not always worse than putting the ball in play (balls put in play that result in a double or triple play, or, in the case of a strikeout, the runner safe via a wild pitch or passed ball), and putting the ball in play is often far better than a walk (any double, triple or home run). OBP still gives the same credit to a walk or single as a double, triple, or home run, which is a weakness. That is why OPS, which combines OBP and slugging percentage, is a better measure.

Baseball is a game replete with statistics. I would note we are now more than 1/4 through the season, so the statistics are starting to gain more traction. Yesterday, Joey Gallo went 1 for 5, but the one hit was a two-run home run. So he generated his own run and drove in two runs. His batting average went down. Yesterday, Luis Arraez went 2 for 4; he didn't score or drive in any runs. His batting average went up. This is an example of why batting average is a poor primary indicator of offensive performance.

I would point out that those enamored with Arraez' offensive output have posted continuous updates on his batting average since back in April. At least the talk of him hitting .400 for the season has died down a bit now that he's at .382.

Runs and RBIs do tell a useful story. So, if you compare them, in 91 at bats, Gallo has scored 17 runs and driven in 21; in 136 at bats, Arraez has scored 14 runs and driven in 14 runs.

As a kid, I remember looking at batting average as the key to the value of a player. OK, not every player, as I was a Harmon Killebrew fan, and he never really hit for average. That should have alerted me to the fact that not all base hits are created equal - and those that sail over the fences are far more valuable than a single to center field. There are a lot of people who complain about trading away last year's AL batting champion, Louis Arreaz. That said, while he hits for a very high average, just how impactful is he? I would argue not that impactful. Let's compare two players so far this year - and they are night and day difference makers. Introducing Joey Gallo. Gallo is an all or nothing player offensively. He strikes out a lot, but when he gets hit, he hits the ball hard. Many of those get out of the ballpark or at least produce extra base hits. Arraez is the oppposite - he doesn't really hit the ball hard, but he gets a lot of base hits. Through tonight, his batting average is a gaudy .379. By contrast, Gallo is at .209. So who is more effective? I would argue it is about a wash, and, given the many more at bats for Arraez, Gallo is more impactful In 132 at bats, Arraez has scored just 14 runs. That is largely because it takes a lot to score a run when you just hit a single or walk, and that is what Arraez mostly does. With 132 at bats, Arraez' 50 hits are mostly singles (7 doubles, 1 triple, 1 home run), so his OPS is.905. That's pretty good, but remember the runs scored thing. In just 86 at bats, Gallo has scored 16 runs, and has a similar .903 OPS. The difference is he drives the ball - he has 18 hits, and nearly all are extra base hits (5 doubles, 1 triple, and 8 home runs). So Gallo is hitting .209, and Arraez is hitting .379 - but the impact factors in baseball suggest Gallo has been more valuable offensively.

'Trading prospect value' is marginally useful at best. The best return on trading a prospect was for Gray - and none of the players we gave up in the Mahle trade had that value. We got a bunch of prospects for Santana, and Gomez didn't blossom until we unloaded him. We got a bunch of prospects for Dozier - pretty much nada. We got two prospects for Pressley - not working out so far. The best 'before this front office' trade was probably unloading Knoblauch - but we got back major league players, and they did pretty well. Ergo, the Mahle trade was still worth the risk - and hindsight is always 20-20.

The Mahle trade is only 'the worst' if the players actually do much more than WAR at the MLB level - I'd say the jury is still out. Besides, you can't keep all your prospects - some will have to 'age out' because of the 40 player limit. I'd say the worst was the Pressley trade. He is an elite closer, and there was evidence that that might be the case.

It's exciting to think about the Twins having these two at the top of the rotation for several years. That's how you win in the play-offs. Arraez and a couple of months of Nelson Cruz for two top of the rotation starting pitchers was a bargain.

I don't disagree with your general conclusion, but some trades are just more impactful than others. This front office made one 'hit it out of the ballpark' trade, getting Joe Ryan for a couple of months of Nelson Cruz. I would argue the Ryan Pressley trade was pretty bad as well. Everything else sort of washes a bit either way. That said, I think trades for established players and giving up prospects (when you have a decent pipeline) often gets undervalued. I think the Sonny Gray trade was a really good trade, for example, because there is so much risk with kids right out of high school. Regardless of how well he does, we've gotten two solid years (and this year maybe more so) from Gray.

Of the talent that they 'bled' who would be playing for them right now, and who would be expected to get in front of their current crop of 'almost ready for prime time' players? Many of the rankings suggest the Twins have a pretty good crop 'down on the farm.' The thing that gets lost in these discussions about prospects is you can't keep them all - eventually there are only 40 keepers, and 26 of them go to the players already on the MLB roster. Some of the prospects given up were getting close to 'the clock is ticking' decision time when the Twins could lose them without any return.

I understand that - I'm interested to see how that plays out for the Twins.

It will be interesting to see how the Chris Paddack situation plays out, given its similarity.

I agree it was worth the risk at the time, when the Twins were competing to make the play-offs in 2022. As Kirkegaard said, life can only be understood backward but must be lived forward. Those who constantly look backward with the benefit of time are missing that point. If the Twins team this year has provided us anything in terms of a glimpse to winning - good pitching beats good hitting most times. Last year's rotation was a house of cards that would inevitably fall down. This year looks much more stable.

Lopez is an excellent starting pitcher with a real chance to be a legitimate ace - and those are the pitchers you need to win in the play-offs. Even the best hitters fail around 6 to 7 per 10 times at bat, so the 'play every day' thing isn't nearly as material as it suggests. Arraez is really great at getting on base - usually just first base. It still takes a lot to drive in a runner on first base. That might be why, even though he leads MLB in batting average, he has only scored 12 runs. Byron Buxton, with a batting average about half of Arraez' has scored 21 runs. It helps when you can hit HRs, doubles and triples - a lot easier to generate runs. That's what ultimately matters, not just BA. Besides just hitting the ball, there is also the defensive side, and that is not Arraez' strong suit (nor is speed on the basepaths). I think the trade was just fine, and the Twins will start hitting a bit better (Correa in particular). Let's judge this trade a bit further down the line and keep in mind the Twins also got at least one pretty good prospect in the deal.

Miranda has hit at every level and had his moments last year - I wouldn't give up on him yet. Ultimately, either he or Julien could end up being primarily a DH, as their defense is suspect.

The current batting average for all baseball is .247. There are more useful statistics, particularly OPS. Gallo has a low batting average but hits a lot of extra base hits. He is far above the league average OPS. The Twins, like it or not, are, at the moment, a home run hitting team, so batting average isn't the best measure for them. That said, I'm in full agreement about bringing up Alex and sending down Trevor - which they did earlier today. Trevor is not driving the ball (hence the significant drop of late in his OPS).

yeah, it takes two to make a trade. Kepler's meh last couple of years have hollowed out his trade value, and Larnach's lack of power is also a problem for trade value of a corner outfielder.