Riverbrian

I have no idea what Royce Lewis is like defensively. However... if he can play SS, 3B and CF. By all means let him play all 3 positions. There is extreme value in that ability. Trying to shove him into one spot is a mistake. Once Royce establishes himself as ready and becomes the top call up option. When Royce gets called up, it will be due to an issue on the 25 man (injury or performance related). We don’t know where that injury or performance related issue will spring up. Could be OF, could be 3B, could be SS. His ability to play all of those positions opens up more doors for him to come through. Leave him at one position like SS. He is waiting for one specific door to open and Polanco may not get hurt. It then forces Lewis back to the minors if when Polanco returns. If the injury happens in CF. This forces the club to call up a lesser player because Lewis is a SS only. Let him play all 3 positions and we will see him sooner. Leave him at one position and it will take a specific set of circumstances to get him up to the majors.

Great Job Patrick, IMO... I'm not sure everyone sees the importance of watching the other organizations. Actually, I'm pretty sure most are not watching other organizations. However, I am happy that our front office seems to be watching the other organizations. All 3 of these articles are must reads.

Spot on There is way too much focus on the trades part of the equation. If you want to guarantee that you will win the majority of the trades you make. Find the flaws of the players you acquire and fix them. If you want to guarantee that you will come out on the losing end of the deals you make. Let the chips fall where they may. If you want to give the impression that you are drafting well... Develop them. If you want to give the impression that you haven't drafted well. Fail in development. This is how Houston is winning. This is why the Twins are behind the Astros.

This is it exactly. And this is what the crux of this article is about. The Astros are extremely successful getting players to fly correctly. From unheralded prospects Dallas Kuechel and Jose Altuve to trade acquisitions coming off down years like Justin Verlander and Garrit Cole. The Twins need to be able to do this for long term success. And they need to start right now. Tomorrow is here.

Age won't be the time issue... It'll be the won/loss record that tolls the bell. Do they enter into 2020 with a short term aggressiveness or a long term plan. If they pour more money into it, patience will not granted. If they do as Ben suggests below and clear out contracts at available opportunities without adding new ones that need to be cleared later, perpetuating the bad cycle they have been in. Maddon will have less immediate pressure. As Ben accurately lists (in a positive light), this won't be tomorrow (I post that in a negative light) and when tomorrow comes, you will have youth growing pains because we all know that prospects don't always pan out if they commit to this direction and some take a little time. They have to do what they haven't tried to do for years. Develop a young core of players that the free agent dollars can enhance. You can't develop a young core if Cozart is in the way. Teams need 600K talent to manage the budget. All teams have budgets. How do you find players with helium if your infield is Cozart, Simmons, La Stella and Pujols all over the age of 30 on the downward slope taking all of the playing time. Maddon will figure out how to get players like Rengifo playing time but he hasn't walked into a roster as choked as this one before. Is Cozart going to play some OF? If they let Calhoun walk (They Should) do they just replace him with Yasiel Puig and continue down the same path that got them here. If they spend on Puig (for example). Do they also continue to spend on starting pitching which was bone dry this year? How high does the payroll get while they are trying to dig out from the old payroll. Does it become a new problem in the future. The answer to your question is: It depends on what direction they take this off season. If they spend again... He doesn't have time. Nobody does. San Diego has already been through the process the Angels need to go through. Maddon would have been perfect for them.

You mean Justin or Melvin Bush don't ya?

First impressions as the original innovator along with a consistent winning record year after year will do the trick. BTW... I still love Robert Plant at age 71. No one has out done him yet.

Lavine has mentioned in the past and eludes to it here. They were aware of Pressly’s capability but struggled with execution. No way of knowing what that meant exactly but I have noticed a new pitching coach and manager since the Presley trade. Perhaps to improve execution?

I was just listening to the reported rumors and actually praying that it wouldn't happen.

Trust me Mike... I'm paying attention. It's been perhaps my sole focus and that is why I've become a one-note poster lately on roster fundamentals based on what I'm seeing from the other 29 teams plus the Twins. Billy Eppler was the assistent GM with the Yankees before getting the Angels gig. His reputation was strong when it comes to analytics so I am absolutely sure that the Angels are making adjustments internally and I think it is a strong bet that Eppler and Maddon talked about what they need to do to move forward. However... Those adjustments will be out of the public view. From what is observable to me: He has done a nice job rebuilding the farm system which was bone dry during the time of Dipoto. . Meanwhile at the major league level, they have barely scratched the surface of fixing what ails them as they seem stuck. Much like the Twins were stuck at a lower budget. Calhoun, Upton, Pujols, LuCroy, Bour, Cozart, Cahill, Harvey are more expensive versions of the Twin signing Kevin Correia and Ricky Nolasco. They blow the budget, under perform and play every day when healthy, killing the team in the process. I have noticed the appearance of players like David Fletcher and Luis Rengifo. Brian Goodwin was given opportunity. I've noticed Ty Buttrey and Griffin Canning. A couple of decent acquisitions and a couple of farm call ups... but... I'm also seeing the Harvey, Cahill and La Stella (That one really worked out) acquisitions simultaneously. Which is just more of the same failed strategy and adds to the clogging of the system and a snails pace turnaround. The Hiring of Brad Ausmus was a huge neon sign to me that they are still stuck in no man's land. All the other organizations were raiding the modern organizations. The Angels went to the old. I'm seeing the Trout extension which suggests that they are not going to rebuild, they are going to ride through these bad contracts and perhaps add more to the pile to try and win with Trout and Ohtani. The Angels may be shifting a new direction with the hiring of Maddon... I'm a Maddon fan... Maddon is the guy if you want to go a new direction... But... If you got an improving farm club ready to hit the big stage... you gotta clear some space for those guys to rise into. This team can't go out and get Garrit Cole and think that he will fix Cozart and Pujols. Because now you got Trout and Cole money wasting away while the Pujols (and others) money negates it. I'm not saying Eppler is bad at his job or anything like that, I'm sure he is making changes. I'm saying he walked into a nightmare and this will take some time and this is what Joe signed up for when he took the job and I'm letting you know that I am paying attention. The Padres were already built to Maddon specs. Perfect Match in my opinion.

There are times when waiting for others to break through walls makes sense but once they do... you are behind. Personally, I have no ability to judge what went on inside the walls. I have never been in the room and have no right to make accusations. They are unfounded at best. However... By all reports the Twins went decades with one analyst and that was Jack Goin. I'm sure Jack was very talented but the amount of data that was being filtered through by other clubs requires a larger department. Intentional? Unintentional? Who knows but it does suggest "Blinders" were on as they trudged the same path they had always traveled.

One by one... the old school operations are falling by the wayside. But here’s the thing. It’ll be a short window for the Twins who were somewhat late to the party but not as late as others. We will enjoy the fruits of these efforts for a little while as the dinosaurs die off. Eventually everybody will be in the same place in the future and a new thing will have to arrive to separate a brand new future new breed from the pack. The Orioles new GM is from the Astros and they will follow the Astros path. The Giants have hired from the Dodgers.

I was mostly joking in my scenario. We are talking about tie-breakers mostly. Money is the biggest filter and you got to get to the ball park to get to a tie-breakers. The Yankees will probably be chosen in my scenario because a free agent will believe that the Yankees success is sustainable. Nobody wants to sign a 6 year contract with a team that ends up picking first in the amateur draft. The Twins still got some proving to do in that department. The hometown discount or liking Dallas better than Seattle is another tie-breaker. Yes... Baseball needs a cap. What baseball needs more than anything, right after younger demographics and #2 on the list is: Hope in Pittsburgh. When Pittsburgh, Cleveland, Kansas City and the smaller markets feel like they have hope... all of the numbers that baseball needs to survive go up.

No... I mean the team that doesn't produce young players because bloated contracts get all the playing time so they spend more money on more bloated contracts to fix it. I mean the team that typically takes farm system talent and trades it. If I'm the GM of the Angels, I'm happy that I have a top ten farm system, the lack of production from the minor leagues is killing the franchise and forced them into a rabbit hole that they have to dig out of. Now, If you are going to change and actually try to produce younger talent. Joe Maddon is the manager I want. But if I'm Madden... The Angels are not going to turn around quickly while the Padres are knocking on the door and are already loaded to Maddon style specs. If the Padres didn't pursue Maddon, well they didn't. I think that would be a mistake. The two rumored candidates have Ranger ties, and of course Preller came from the Rangers. A little familiar comfort in a world full of strangers I guess. Same reason Lavine signs Martin Perez and trades for Dyson I assume.

I understand Joe has a lengthy history with the organization. I understand the value of that. I'm sure Maddon and Eppler had conversations about the future and how to fix the deep rooted woes with the roster. However, this is a team that is absolutely blocked up and pouring more money into it, isn't going to fix it and could make it even worse. Maddon took the worst job in my opinion for his style. That Padres job would have been perfect for his style. However, it's done. Maddon is back in the AL.

If I had to guess... I don't have to... but I will. It's probably always a case by case basis of course... but I do think you are right in this sense, this is their first chance to control their destiny. If you grew up in Northern Texas and grew up a die hard Rangers fan and dreamed of playing for the Ranges but were drafted by the Mariners and your rights were held by the Mariners until now... This would be your chance to finally make a decision on your own behalf. However, I think the "Money" is the first filter they have to go through and after going through that money filter... There are probably not a lot of choices left. Market forces will pretty much dictate that. The player probably sits down with his agent, they get a price in mind and I'd imagine that they would ask for more than most teams are comfortable paying to see if they can get it. This alone will limit your choices to just a couple of teams. The player will then have to choose between the Twins and the Yankees, who are the teams willing to play in the neighborhood created by the player and agent unless he lowers his ask to include more teams and choices. If the Rangers ain't paying... Now you are taking a serious haircut to play in a preferred location and then it just becomes case by case. The Twins will do 6 years/180 Million, The Yankees will do 6 Years/170 Million. The Angels will do 4 Years/130 Million. If his wife says... I'd really like Southern California. The agent may try to leverage the Yankees and Twins and try get the Angels up to 6 years r at least 5 years but if the Angels don't... The wife will probably then tell her husband to sign with Minnesota because they should be competitive for the length of the contract, while the Yankees will be going down in flames in the future, leaving him in the middle of losing misery. It is obviously case by case based on what is most important to the player but "Money" has to be the first filter and the hardest filter. When it is all said and done. Most players won't really be choosing from 30 teams, they will have a couple of choices... a handful if they are lucky.

In my opinion... they need volume and I think you are light. Free Agents, trades, tripping over arms in a pumpkin patch. They need to collect them this off season as seriously as any organization has ever searched for them. If they can't sign or trade for 4 quality starters (I think that is tall order). They need to scrap the 5 starter rotation model, borrow from the Rays and increase the size of the bullpen to compensate for what may be too hard to do in the traditional rotation model. Whatever, direction they go... they need quality and quantity. It's going to be an interesting off season... at least it better be.

There are moments in baseball games where you simply need to make a play. And moments where not making a play opens a door way way too wide. Game One clearly turned when Arraez didn't catch that ball. Was it the injury? Was it Nerves? Was it inexperience? I don't know but a major league ball player needs to make that catch. Maybe he lost a step due to injury, I really don't know but what I do know is that he made enough steps to be in position to make the catch. Did he make the catch harder because he lost a step? Maybe but a major league ball player based on where he was. Hard Yes... but not Major League talent prohibitive. Arraez has probably made that catch a hundred times. After the catch isn't made... Berrios needs to cover for it and make some pitches... he couldn't spot his breaking pitches... the pitch count continued to rise, the bases got loaded and Cron dropped a double play that would have saved everyone. Cron probably makes that catch 99 times out of a hundred. It doesn't mean that Arraez or Cron were bad defensive choices... it means they didn't make plays that they usually make and the Yankees were making plays while we gave them extra chances to make them. This forced Berrios out earlier than planned, which led to Littell folding under the bright lights, which led to bringing in Duffey earlier than planned, which led to Stashak being used, which led to Gibson being used. And with each subsequent moves, the Yankees continued to make plays, hit, field, and pitch. Not making plays!!! This is what this is and why the Twins are watching the rest of the action on TV. The Twins need to target impact pitching because we have a 162 games to navigate to get to the playoffs and once we reach the playoffs... we have to make plays!!! The Nats are making plays, getting clutch hits, making good pitches, enjoying some lucky breaks and fielding their positions like professionals. If the Cards are going to come back and win. They will have to do it themselves, because the Nats don't look like they are going to give the Cards any unforced bonuses at the moment. Just like the Yankees gave us nothing. If the Cards lose... will it be their fault? Or do the Nats get credit? Probably somewhere in between lies the answer.

The Nationals didn’t play this way for 162 games prior. They had stretches of it and are having a stretch right now it appears.

Agreed

We absolutely didn’t play good on any level and we are golfing now. The Yankees apart from a dropped pop up by DJ played very well. Clutch hits, diving catches, the long ball and effective pitching when needed. Was it the Twins playing bad or the Yankees playing great or somewhere in between? Take the Cards for example... you could say they played well against the Braves and are not showing up against the Nats. But That’s way too easy because two teams contribute to the dynamic. The Braves have good starting pitching. Supposedly better than Sanchez. Does Cron get all the blame for swinging at that ball in the dirt or does Paxton get all credit for setting him up and then executing. Watching Sanchez, Scherzer and Strusburg shut down the Cards and saying it “shows what starting pitching can do in the postseason can do is way too simple”. Are the Cards helping that starting pitching right now? My guess is yes. Did Kershaw suck or did the Nats Bats have a hand in Kershaw sucking. In the aftermath. I believe the Yankees played really well and the Twins helped them play well by not playing well. Tomorrow could be different but we don’t get a tomorrow now. Next time I guess. It’s all I got to hold on to. I always take issue with any thing that places blame solely on the Twins and refuses to credit the other team and I take issue with any thing that credits the Nats starting pitching for example without consideration of the opposing team and what they are doing.

It’s much more complicated than that. What did the Nats elite starting pitching prove in years past? Is Anibel Sanchez now “elite”? Yes you want pitchers to grab the ball and get outs. You want hitters who hit and fielders who field. The Nationals are playing good ball on several levels. As are the Yankees.

It was near midnight... The numbers listed are examples out of my head and not pertaining to any player, but I have seen players with such swings and have always dismissed the numbers (and stat) due to sample size. You are not going to get decent reliable UZR numbers anywhere from Marwin when he plays: 326 Innings at RF 291 Innings at 3B 160 Innings at 1B 129 Innings at LF 18 Innings at 2B 9 Innings at SS 2 Innings at CF This is the equivalent of full time part time play at each position. Yet, the sum of these small samples will end up in the WAR calculation. I pass on UZR and WAR as a result. If you are looking for a player example. Mike Trout is a pretty unstable defensive player from year to year according to the range stats. You are on the same page as me... Well Kinda. My point is - as you say "defensive metrics are much MUCH shakier than their offensive and pitching counterparts" and for the exact reason you list. There is much more data pouring into the hitting and pitching stats to stabilize it. If we have a disagreement, it is that you are more confident in the defensive metrics than I am. The data isn't enough and the data you do get is overwhelmingly routine. You don't have to think very hard to realize that if 80% of the data you use is routine data that goes into everyone's data pile (I'm making up numbers again). It means that a small percentage of the data will provide the variance and if such a small sample can provide a large variance and it does. It's over-weighted. Take that already over weighted small sample, now remove the obvious shifts that disqualify the play from inclusion in the data. The Dodgers shift 50% of the time. Factor in players who play multiple position and like you said... you got yourself a shaky stat and it's a shaky stat that makes WAR shaky by it's inclusion.

I don’t know... I don’t pay much attention to them. Is there a defensive metric that cuts through the routine-ness that comprises typical defense and provides a repeatable, stable result without wild swings? Point it out and I promise that I’ll open eyes and give it a fair shake. UZR... I’m not going to pay much attention to a stat that tells me a certain player is 7.0 in LF and -1.5 in RF. Or a stat that produces a 4.0 in 2017 followed by a -1.5 in 2018 and then 4.0 in 2019 for the same player at the same position. The discrepancy is sample size related and a full season doesn’t seem to provide a stable enough sample based on the wild swings from year to year and position to position.

UZR ignores all plays determined affected by a shift. Determined by a stringer but will include plays not determined to have been affected even if a shift is employed. (The stat itself, is attempting to ignore shifting in order to keep the zones and data of the past valid). His range will only be measured if he stands here. The Twins shift 36% of the time. The more you shift, the less data used, the less data used, the increased weight of individual plays. Weighting is already insanely high due to the routine-ness of most plays and the total chances each player gets over the course of the season. Arraez for example: Missed a month before being called up, He had 40% of his playing time somewhere besides 2B. the Twins shift 36% of the time. And... most plays are simply ground balls hit within easy reach of where he is standing... even more so because of the shift. So... how reliable is his 2B UZR rating that you quote? Just one play not made in a zone where a play is usually made is weighted HEAVILY and will take a lot of time to stabilize., if you don't play a lot of time at that position, or if you the data doesn't count because of the shift and your team shifts alot... the less chances to stabilize it. UZR is half baked.