Jimv

Maybe, but if you are a fly on the wall at the owners meetings, I'll bet you'd conclude that the performance they most want to maximize is revenues minus expenditures. And that correlates with spectating experience.

Not a big deal in the scheme of things, but it sure seemed unjust to me to hang the loss on Thielbar. He faced 4 batters and got them all. A "perfect performance". How can that be a losing effort? It's not his fault that the rules put a runner on second to start the inning. In this situation, it seems to me that the pitcher who allows the runner to score should be responsible, since there was no pitcher that put the runner on base. I'm sure he's not losing any sleep over it, though.

Sox score 4 runs with two outs, helped by 4 wild pitches.

White sox losing big to the cubs right now. Still early, but if that holds, this is simplified. If the Twins lose and Oakland wins, then the twins are 3rd seed and play Houston. All the prior analysis was based on the assumption that every team has a 50-50 chance to win any given game, so based on that, there's a 25% chance we play Houston. Then there's a 75% chance we play the 7th seed, and since the Sox losing is the basis for this analysis, I think Cleveland is 7th if they lose and Sox are 7th if Cleveland wins. So, if I haven't made a mistake, we have the following: 37.5 % chance of playing the Sox 37.5% chance of playing Cleveland 25% chance of playing Houston.

"I totaled up all the performances and combined them. Assuming that my excel muscles haven’t atrophied to zero, here’s the math. This selected group of 8 aces combined for a 2.57 ERA in 500 innings, with a 30.8% strikeout rate and a 6.2% walk rate. Sounds ace-like to me. Here’s how the Twins impacted them. Against Minnesota, these top starters had a 4.11 ERA, and against the rest of the world, it was a 2.30 ERA. The A.L. average for starters this year is 4.49, so basically what this is saying is that the Twins took these good starters and dragged them closer to the median. The Twins also drew more walks (7.9% vs. 5.9%), struck out less often (28.1% vs. 31.3%) and homered at a better clip against these aces (1.17 HR/9 vs. 0.89) than the rest of the league managed as a group." That's really interesting, creative analysis, Derek. Thanks.

It doesn't matter if he noticed. It's the act of defiance that counts. I was at home on 9/11, with the radio turned on. They were talking about the hitchhiked airplanes, when live on the radio, they reported the first airplane to hit the Twin Towers. At that point, I was clear about what was happening, and I immediately hung my American flag outside. I knew the odds of a terrorist seeing it, or even caring about what was happening in Minneapolis, was incredibly slim, but it didn't matter. It was the only way I knew to publically give them a middle finger. I don't mean to equate terrorism and baseball competition in any way. But in matters large and small, sometimes you just have to plant your flag and make your position public.

1.) Where are you from? Lived all over the country and Europe growing up, but moved to Mpls right after college and haven't left. 2.) Age Range? early retirement eligible 3.) What brought you to Twins Daily? Seth Speaks. 4.) Highest level of baseball/softball played? Legion Ball: Plus plus speed, plus hitting, mediocre glove, no power, and the worst arm you've ever seen. 5.) Favorite Twins Player, OLIVA and favorite underappreciated Twins player--so many to choose from. Kitty Kaat, maybe? 6.) Favorite non-Twins Daily site/authors? Michener, Barbara Tuchman, John Irving, Follett. Between here and the newspaper, I don't need much more sports to read. 7.) Favorite Twitter follows? I'd follow Abraham Lincoln but I doubt he'll be tweeting anytime soon. 8.) Other interests outside of baseball. Foodie/oenology, travel, classical (and some non-classical) music. Trying to learn more about art but starting with the handicap of having no artistic ability. 9.) Favorite part of Twins Daily...Incomparable source of minor league info 10.) Tell us what we can do better. What features or other topics would you like to see in-season or out of season? This is a really well-run/moderated site. The mods do a great job of keeping personal attacks and name-calling toward other posters out of here, but I wish the same level of courtesy was extended to players/mgmt. Nothing wrong with criticizing/disagreeing with actions/decisions, but that can be done without being personal. Obviously not everyone agrees with me, 11.) Have you been to any of the Twins Daily "events?" No

I think I disagree. Humor me for a minute, and assume that the chance of scoring with no runner is 10% and the chance of scoring with a runner 25%. The odds that a game goes to the 11th is one minus the odds that the away team scores and the home team doesn't (.1X.9=.09) or the away team doesn't and the home team does (also .09.) So the odds of going to another inning is 1-.09-.09 or 82%. Under the new format, the odds of the away team scoring and the home team not is (.25x.75=.1875), and the odds that the away team does not and the home team does is the same. So the odds of going to another inning is 1-.1875-.1875 or 62.5%. I've simplified to ignore the effect of multiple run innings, but I don't think it changes the qualitative result. The runner does speed up the game. That doesn't mean it's a good change in rules. You could speed up the game even more by flipping a coin at the end of nine, and that's a horrible idea.

The Twins played 7 games on the road against two teams that are leading their dividsions, and both of whom had a better record prior to the games than did the Twins. I would have been very happy to come out over .500 against that schedule, and to me, being one game worse than happy doesn't constitute ugly.

Wholeheartedly agree. How are you doing in Portland? (Apologies if this has already been asked and answered.)

Thanks. That's certainly a comprehensive response!

I think your points are good and would love to see data broken down that well, but nonetheless, I thought the data in the article was illuminating and appreciated the analysis.

If "outcomes" means win or loss, even that isn't always a good measure. The absolute "right" measure is your second sentence. For example, consider the guy who comes in for the bottom of the ninth with his team up by 8 runs and trying to get to the airport. His job is to get his team off the field as fast as possible (without coming close to losing the lead.) Nibbling at the corners, giving up a hit, and walking 2 guys but striking out 3 may look good in stats, but even though that's a win, that's an inferior performance to the guy that attacked hitters, gave up two solo home runs, and got his team off the field in 12 pitches with 3 ground outs. The problem is it's hard to statistically quantify intended performance. It takes eye tests to do that.

So let's say you have a pitcher who hits the target 100% of the time--when the ball makes it past the batter. Unfortunately, Batters are hitting .400 against him. And a second pitcher who hits the target 50% of the time, but batters are hitting .100 against him--what would be called "effectively wild". The second pitcher is probably more effective. Obviously it's a bit of a silly example; my only point is that command, which is measured by hitting the target, isn't the same as effectiveness. However I do believe, as I suspect you do too, that the two are pretty well correlated, despite my silly example.

I noticed when I posted a long comment that the software eliminates any more than one space after periods. I know that some style manuals are now preferring one space rather than two, but to me, maybe it's the font, but I think that's much harder to read here. Any option on that? Thanks.