Jim H

A major league regular, like we hope Plouffe is, will be in the field for about 150 games in a season. Most games will be 27 outs with probably about another 12 baserunners. There will be between maybe 100 and 150 pitches thrown. Largely an infielder, particularly a 3b should be making adjustments to his positioning on nearly every pitch, depending on the hitter, the pitcher, the count, the number of outs, the number of baserunners, which bases they occupy and probably some other things I am forgetting. All fielders are going to be out of position, sometimes. We hope it isn't very often, and when they are, it doesn't hurt the team. Sometimes the coaches will catch it and fix it, sometimes they will notice it too late, sometimes they might not notice it at all. The other thing is here is acknowledging mistakes. I actually have heard Gardy and Kelly before him acknowledging their own mistakes. Sometimes we don't hear all of the press conferences, we certainly don't hear all their interviews. Reporters decide on what to report. It is certainly more interesting if we can construe something a manager said into throwing a player under the bus. It probably isn't an accurate interpretation, but it is more interesting. I suspect that most things a manager or coach says about a player, are said to the player. You don't get a reputation as a player's manager, which Gardy largely has, if the players feel like they can't trust their manager. A manager also has to be honest with his fans, the reporters and management. Personally, if the manager or the coaches come to me the player, and explains what he thinks I have done wrong, and also gives me a chance to explain why I did it--well I wouldn't worry much about what gets in the papers or TV.

I will be the first to admit that I think pitch framing is a minor catcher skill. At best "a skilled pitch framer" is very likely to steal a strike no more than once or twice a game, in my opinion. So I am not going to waste my studying data on this. But, if it is true that the same people are at the top and bottom of the list over a 6 year period regardless of the team they play for and changing pitching staffs, I would consider that a huge red flag concerning the validity of this data. There is no way that pitchers and umpires don't have huge effects on whether borderline pitches are called balls or strikes. If this data consistently gives the same catchers the same positions in the ratings, there is a good chance there is something wrong with how this data is collected. Especially if it is happening from week to week as suggested by the starter of this thread. I get pretty nervous when effort is made to separate out small parts of a team game and credit or discredit one player. In this case you have a pitcher, a catcher, a batter and ultimately an umpire who makes the call. Trying to figure exactly why an umpire missed a call, assuming he actually missed the call and it wasn't just poor camera angles or some other reason for poorly collected data, is going to be damn hard. Since generally, there aren't really as many "umpire misses" as seem to be suggested here, I doubt that pitch framing has much effect on the game. Still if Doumit is always on the bottom, and the same catcher is always on top, every week the data is collected, you better examine how that data is collected. There is really no way that can happen with that small of a sample.

{Parker did a writeup a while back about how Mauer benefited from having a runner on base. Specifically, he had a high BABIP when runners were on base and he pulled balls, the theory being that the defense holding runners on 1st opened a hole on the right side for the ground balls he rolls over on. } QUOTE FROM WILLIHAMMER This is one of the reasons that I prefer Mauer in the 3rd spot in the order, since he will have more batters on base for him in that spot rather than the 2nd spot over the course of the season. Sorry, this has nothing to do with this thread.

I think pitch framing is a misnomer. Where the ball is caught often doesn't really indicate very accurately whether a pitch was a ball or strike. I suspect that how a catcher moves, whether he blocks the umpire's vision, and probably a few other factors can effect an umpire's call more than where and how the pitch is caught. Sometimes when a pitch appears to catch the plate for a strike but the catcher has to move a long way to catch it(ex. fastball on inside corner, catcher sitting outside) the umpire appears to miss those calls. I am not sure how you put that sort of thing on the catcher. Clearly some batters seem to get more of the close calls than other batters. I don't know how you blame the catcher for that. Mauer and Doumit seem to be in some sort of rotation that have them catching the same pitchers most of the time. Are you sure that Mauer just isn't catching the ones with better control, who are perhaps getting the benefit of the doubt on close pitchers from the umpires? I am inclined to agree with Chief here. It looks to me that sabre stat people are trying to measure something that probably isn't really very measurable. Even if it is, I am not sure the tools are there to measure it accurately. It is also very possible they are looking are certain results and assigning the wrong cause to it. More than likely, there are multiple causes since we are dealing with people here. There is actually nothing wrong with the sabre people studying pitch framing, I just think it is pretty premature to call certain catchers "bad" catchers based on these studies.

Plouffe will get his chance to be a full time 3b. He has the skills to be above average at 3rd, it is largely a matter of mastering the fundamentals and keeping his focus. His hitting is more iffy. The power is there, whether he can hit enough to justify a starting job at 3rd is the question. The other reason he gets chances is that there are no other good choices right now. Carroll is a utility infielder who is 38 years old. Escobar would have to hit above 300 to justify using him full time at 3rd, and if he can do that he will probably start at 2nd or Short. Otherwise the next viable 3rd basemen are at A ball, and nobody knows whether Harrison or Sano can be even as good as Plouffe at 3rd. So, Plouffe will get his chances, he just has to take advantage of them. He is the most obvious placeholder till Sano is ready, and it is at least possible that he could "force" Sano to another position. Even when Sano is ready, there are not a lot of other power hitting right handed hitters in the system. Plouffe will have a place if the bat is there.

I am not going to comment on the "coachspeak" but Gardy does like to go with the hot hand. With all 4 middle infielders playing well, and Escobar playing exceptionally well, he is looking for ways to play them all, more often. Escobar will find his way into the lineup pretty often till his bat cools. He may even get a start in centerfield. As for Plouffe, he will keep getting more chances at 3rd. The Twins won't want to play either of Escobar or Carroll there full time, unless they really have no choice. Plouffe is really the only viable 3rd baseman above single A ball and nobody is sure Sano or Harrison can stay at 3rd. Plouffe has the skills for a above average 3rd baseman, it mostly a matter of fundamentals and consistency. He also has the power you look for in a 3rd baseman. Plouffe may not be able to field or hit well enough to be full time 3rd baseman but the Twins will likely give him enough time at 3rd to be sure of that.

I think I would give Florimon more time. He has the best tools/skills. I saw some of the same bonehead plays with Bartlett when he was here. The range and arm really matter at short, if there is some hope that the consistency can happen, as it did with other late maturing shortstops(like Bartlett) then give him some more time. Escobar isn't going anywhere, Gardy isn't burying him on the bench. I doubt that it matters too much right now if Escobar stays at utility man for awhile. If he deserves to start over Florimon, that decision will be made, eventually.

There doesn't seem to be anybody at AAA right now banging on the door with good performances. Henricks and Gibson need to pitch better and deeper into games. Deduno and DeVries aren't pitching at AAA yet. Pelfrey needs to pitch better, but he is probably safe for awhile.

It is indeed too early to draw any conclusions. It is highly unlikely Correia will pitch this well all season, though he doesn't have to pitch this well to be a useful pitcher. One thing I would like to point out though is, it is impossible to win a division in April and May, but you can go a long way to losing one in the first two months. Like the Twins did the last 2 years. Part of Ryan's goal seemed to be have enough useful pitching to cover for the inevitable injuries and poor performance. He seems to have done that, so far. So if/when some of the current starters falter, perhaps DeVries, Deduno, Gibson, Hendriks, Hardin, etc. maybe in a position to cover them. I think it is probably wishful thinking to expect anything from May or Meyer at the major league level this year, but it is good to see some potential high level arms fairly close to the majors in the Twins system. It is also likely true that some of the preferred FA choices will be better than Correia and Pelfrey. But most of them aren't pitching now, which is pretty important for the Twins, since most of the Twins alternate options aren't ready or in some cases, hurt.

I agree with this and Viola, Radke and Santana are all testimony to this statement. Still, developing a great change up is not easy or everybody would do it. I doubt if developing a change up is the key to getting Meyer to the majors, although it would help. I suspect he needs to control his fastball first, and hopefully everything else will follow.

If, as you say Carroll is the best middle infielder, the Twins have a problem. I really hope that one of Dozier, Florimon and Escobar can be better than a career utility infielder who is nearly 40 years old. I actually hope that 2 of them can be respectable starters until somebody emerges from the minors.

I think my problem with a lot of the pitch framing thing and some of the stuff that Parker presented, is that we are assuming the technology being used is more accurate than the umpires. As previously pointed out, I don't believe we can assume that is true. The strike zone is 3 dimensional, and there is no way to know if the cameras are optimally placed or even similarly placed from park to park. There are so many ways that the technology can be giving incorrect readings that I doubt we could list them all. What bothers we some, is that umpires are evaluated by using this technology. What seems to be happpening is that umpires are adjusting their strike zone to the way they are being evaluated. I don't know if they are really calling the strike zone based on the plate and the batter, like they are theorectically supposed to be doing. If they are being evaluated on where the ball is caught, not where it crosses the plate, then indeed pitch framing does become important.

People say this a lot, but I don't agree with it. The average age at Elizabethan is probably older than the average age of a college team. On top of that, at least half the players in the Appalachian League are players drafted from colleges, largely the best college players each year. The rest of the players are high school draftees or international signees who have mostly been playing pro ball for at least a year. The few really young players in the Appalachian League are clearly superior talents. The idea that even a top college conference is even close to the talent level found in the Appalachian League seems unlikely to me. Some of the players will be quite polished, 4 or 5 year college seniors, but most of them won't approach the talent found at Elizabethan. Elizabethan is where the Twins send their college draftees, and since even a very good college team is seldom filled with more than a handful of future pros, I can't see where college ball is better than even High Rookie ball.

I am enjoying watching Correia pitch. I don't remember seeing him pitch before but he seems to know how to pitch and gets the most out of his stuff. Certainly, his ERA will go up but he seems capable of reproducing last night's performance over and over this season. When he doesn't have his stuff or his control, he will get hammered, but that is kind of the way it is for starters like Correia. What is important is that in a vast majority of his starts he can get deep into games with minimal damage. I guess I would rather have a Correia than guys like Liriano who tease you with their great stuff but can't get deep into games and largely are less useful than marginal guys guys like Correia who have a clue about pitching. But that is just me. I certainly understand why many people want starters with "Ace-like stuff".

Rosario didn't get promoted in part because he got hit in the face and missed 2 months of the season. A large part of the reason Sano didn't get promoted is that he hit 230. People have posted similar thoughts to the quote above, but really, neither Sano or Rosario dominated at A ball, so the Twins left them there all season. I really don't know who the Twins should take in the upcoming draft, but often a position player seems to be a safer pick that high. So many pitchers, break down no matter how special they seem. Most "experts" had Prior rated higher than Mauer. He got to the majors quicker too. There just don't seem to be many Verlanders out there. For every Price, Verlander, Greinke taken that high there seem to be 3 or 4 Bonderman's or Prior's. Guys with great arms who break down or don't ever reach their potential. Having said that, I do hope that the Twins find a pitcher they really like at 4. I just think there are greater risks in taking a pitcher.

Back in the 70's and 80's most closer types were used in multiple inning situations, quite frequently. With a few notable exceptions(some of whom ended up in the Hall of Fame) most burned out after a season or 2 of that kind of use. I have no idea if Perkins can handle that kind of use. Most closers are maximum effort type pitchers, often using a lot pitches to get outs. Pitching that way for 2 innings can run you up to or over 50 pitches pretty easily. Plus the extra warmup pitches between innings. Most managers are a little leery of using closers that way. Some won't be able to handle that kind of workload without giving them a couple of days off in between.

Was there a reason you didn't include Johan Santana? Perhaps he was signed too long ago?

I agree with this. I am bit unsure why so many seem to think Florimon can't become more consistent. 26 isn't too old to improve, especially in areas such as consistency. Ryan was quoted as saying that Escobar's best position was 2B. That probably doesn't mean he can't be a very good SS, just that like Punto before him, his tools fit better at 2B. I think Florimon has all the tools to be an excellent SS. He will have to be, because he will have to improve a lot to be useful offensively.

Part of the argument here is based on the traditional reasons for having your best hitter bat 3rd. A manager has little or no control really, how many times his best hitter or hitters come to the plate with runners on base. The 1st inning is really the only exception to that. If you have 2 hitters who get on base at 30% or better, there will be somewhere around 100 runners on base during the course of the season in the first inning for your 3rd place batter. Largely, OBP of each hitter times 162 games, minus home runs, double plays, caught stealings, and if the lead off hitter scores on a hit by the 2nd place hitter. Putting Mauer in the 3rd spot will increase the number of times he will have runners on in front of him. Unless there has been a home run, if the clean up batter bats in the first, he has runners on base for him. There tend to be a lot of variables here, but if you have somebody with a good OBP to bat 2nd, I believe it makes sense to bat Mauer 3rd. You will increase his RBI opportunities and probably Willingham's as well. I think largely if the no. 2 hitter has an OBP in the vicinity of the clean up hitter(currently Willingham) then you will probably be better off with Mauer batting 3rd. If Dozier or Carroll can't get on base that often, then it makes more sense to move Mauer to the 2nd spot. Especially because moving the hitters up gets Morneau into the 4th spot. But, largely what I am saying is that I don't think it is any slam dunk that it is better for the team to have Mauer batting 2nd.

One of the things we all do is state an opinion believing or suggesting it is fact. Often on this site and others, certain opinions often are treated as fact, even though they often aren't even all that well supported by the evidence. The latest opinion to be treated as fact is that it is much better to bat Mauer 2nd than third. It seems to be believed that batting him 2nd instead of Dozier/Carroll will create 1.5 or more wins for the Twins this coming year. Lets look at this for a bit. Moving Mauer up to 2nd spot and Dozier/Carroll down will indeed take approximately 150 PA's from Dozier/Carroll. Mauer will get, maybe 30 of those if he plays in close to 162 games. Assuming Mauer has roughly 100 points more in OBP than Dozier/Carroll, that nets you about 3 additional baserunners for the entire season. The other 120 PA's will go to the rest of the batters who are moved up a spot. Most of these will have better OBP than Dozier/Carroll but the advantage won't be anywhere near that of Mauer. It is even likely that Dozier/Carroll will have a better OBP than at least one of guys batting in front of them. An educated guess would suggest that moving Dozier/Carroll down to the 8th spot might net additional baserunners between 3 and 7. Now, you also get an additional boost because all of these hitters have a better slugging percentage than Dozier/Carroll. So perhaps you get 10 extra baserunners and an additional extra base or 2. I am not sure how you turn a possible extra 10 baserunners scattered throughout the season into 1.5 or more wins. I think that the extra possible 3 or more runs would be statistically insignificant when stretched over an entire season. More, I don't believe it would actually result in any additional runs at all. Batting Mauer 3rd, even with a no. 2 hitter who only gets on base 30% of the time, would mean that Mauer will have roughly 50 extra baserunners on base in front of him in the 1st inning alone(based on 30% times 162 games). Since Mauer is the team's best hitter and best hitter with RISP, it is quite likely that giving Mauer more chances to hit with RISP will make up for the possible loss of baserunners by putting Dozier/Carroll in the 2nd spot. What I am suggesting here, does require that whoever the no. 2 hitter is, he has to manage a decent on base percentage. There is no way to know if Dozier can manage that, at this point. That is likely why Mauer is currently hitting 2nd. What I am really saying is, it is not a slam dunk that the team is "better" by having Mauer hit 2nd. That is an opinion. You can make some strong arguments to support that opinion. Just as I can make at least one argument to support batting him 3rd.

One of the things we all do is state an opinion believing or suggesting it is fact. Often on this site and others, certain opinions often are treated as fact, even though they often aren't even all that well supported by the evidence. The latest opinion to be treated as fact is that it is much better to bat Mauer 2nd than third. It seems to be believed that batting him 2nd instead of Dozier/Carroll will create 1.5 or more wins for the Twins this coming year. Lets look at this for a bit. Moving Mauer up to 2nd spot and Dozier/Carroll down will indeed take approximately 150 PA's from Dozier/Carroll. Mauer will get, maybe 30 of those if he plays in close to 162 games. Assuming Mauer has roughly 100 points more in OBP than Dozier/Carroll, that nets you about 3 additional baserunners for the entire season. The other 120 PA's will go to the rest of the batters who are moved up a spot. Most of these will have better OBP than Dozier/Carroll but the advantage won't be anywhere near that of Mauer. It is even likely that Dozier/Carroll will have a better OBP than at least one of guys batting in front of them. An educated guess would suggest that moving Dozier/Carroll down to the 8th spot might net additional baserunners between 3 and 7. Now, you also get an additional boost because all of these hitters have a better slugging percentage than Dozier/Carroll. So perhaps you get 10 extra baserunners and an additional extra base or 2. I am not sure how you turn a possible extra 10 baserunners scattered throughout the season into 1.5 or more wins. I think that the extra possible 3 or more runs would be statistically insignificant when stretched over an entire season. More, I don't believe it would actually result in any additional runs at all. Batting Mauer 3rd, even with a no. 2 hitter who only gets on base 30% of the time, would mean that Mauer will have roughly 50 extra baserunners on base in front of him in the 1st inning alone(based on 30% times 162 games). Since Mauer is the team's best hitter and best hitter with RISP, it is quite likely that giving Mauer more chances to hit with RISP will make up for the possible loss of baserunners by putting Dozier/Carroll in the 2nd spot. What I am suggesting here, does require that whoever the no. 2 hitter is, he has to manage a decent on base percentage. There is no way to know if Dozier can manage that, at this point. That is likely why Mauer is currently hitting 2nd. What I am really saying is, it is not a slam dunk that the team is "better" by having Mauer hit 2nd. That is an opinion. You can make some strong arguments to support that opinion. Just as I can make at least one argument to support batting him 3rd.

I think he should be batting 3rd. I hope Dozier shows he can hit well enough to hold down the 2nd spot in the lineup. I really think the best hitter on the team, one as good as Mauer with RISP, should be batting 3rd. Just the 50 or so extra base runners in front of Mauer in the first inning alone,(compared to when you bat him 2nd) provided by by even a below average 2nd place hitter, makes it worth batting Mauer 3rd.

I think that the big problem with f/x data and grading umps based on this, is that the plate has depth. Like Perkins said, where umps miss his strikes is when they catch the front part of the plate and the catcher doesn't end up catching the ball behind the plate. I wonder if f/x data really reflects the depth of the plate. I know that the ball/strike stuff that annoucers use doesn't always seem to reflect that. I know that some people here talk about framing pitches, but where the ball is caught doesn't always reflect where the ball was when/or if it crossed the plate. I know umpires are being graded on their ball and strike calls. I hope that the data used isn't based on where the ball is caught.

As CMath sort of suggested, there are good reasons to bat Mauer 1st, 2nd or 3rd. I rather like him in the 3rd spot, because he will get more chances to drive in runs and advance runners. Clearly he is good in the 2nd spot as well because of his ability to get on base. A lot depends on who bats 2nd and how they do there. If Dozier and/or Carroll bat 2nd and get on base at good clip, batting Mauer 3rd makes sense to me. The difference between 2 and 3 in the lineup is what, 30 PA's over the whole season? If you increase the runners on base in front of Mauer in the first inning by 30%, by batting him 3rd, that would 48 more baserunners for him to drive in or advance. I think that the advantage of more baserunners total(by batting Mauer 2nd) is somewhat offset by the advantage of having your best hitter get more RBI opportunities. Actually, it doesn't really matter to me which spot Mauer is in, because I doubt if the total runs scored would really change much.

I don't know that is quite what I meant, but yes I don't think Mauer is a full time catcher anymore. I suspect that if he tries to catch 120 games plus, it will hurt his offense, big time. I also suspect that if you put Doumit behind the plate 60 plus times, you will notice the downgrade defensively. Whether that justifies Butera on the roster, I don't know. There is no doubt that having Butera on the roster hurts the offense and will likely cost Mastroianni and other potential backups playing time. It will keep either a 2nd utility guy or a bench bat or a 12th pitcher off the roster as well. If it were me, I would do what it takes to keep Mauer healthy and productive. I don't know if getting Doumit more AB's is that important or not. I am afraid that if he approaches being a half time catcher it either hurts his offense or puts him on the DL. I could easily be wrong about that.