Jump to content
Twins Daily
  • Create Account

jay

Provisional Member
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    1,544

  • Joined

  • Last visited

 Content Type 

Profiles

News

Minnesota Twins Videos

2026 Minnesota Twins Top Prospects Ranking

2022 Minnesota Twins Draft Picks

Minnesota Twins Free Agent & Trade Rumors, Notes, & Tidbits

Guides & Resources

2023 Minnesota Twins Draft Picks

The Minnesota Twins Players Project

2024 Minnesota Twins Draft Picks

2025 Minnesota Twins Draft Pick Tracker

Forums

Blogs

Events

Store

Downloads

Gallery

Everything posted by jay

  1. jay
    If you're Joe Maddon and the Cubs are offering $5M/year (likely more, actually), how much do the Twins have to offer to convince you otherwise?
  2. jay
    I find it interesting that so many people recognize he has a choice and that choice might very well not be the Twins for any number of reasons despite a limited number of suitors. I wish that rational line of thought would extend to free agent players a bit more often and not just free agent managers.
  3. jay
    I'm in on both Pelfrey and Meyer in the bullpen to start the year. Makes sense for both.
  4. jay
    I get your point, but is the odds of that hypothetical low level prospect even making it to MLB at all worth more than the odds of a guy already at MLB figuring it out to some degree?
  5. jay
    When did you guys start agreeing on so much? I don't even need popcorn to read through this love fest... The World Series hasn't started yet and it seems like our TD spectrum is as closely aligned on how this offseason is going to play out as any topic out there. Maybe Terry's comments accomplished something after all...
  6. jay
    Joe Mauer?
  7. jay
    TR in that same Q&A session on Sano making the club out of ST: “He’s not going to be ready to make this team out of spring training. He’s going to have to re-establish himself,” Ryan said of the 21-year-old Dominican. “We’ll give him a good look in spring training, but to put that out there, that he’s got a chance to make this club out of spring, I think that would be the wrong approach. He’s barely got any at-bats at Double-A.” TR echoing my belief that no one moves an established vet for an unproven rook: “So if we had a problem at third and you had too much talent over there, which is a good problem to have, you certainly could consider the young kid going to the outfield and learning his craft out there. A lot of them do — there are a lot of young players who come up and change positions in a hurry if they’re blocked [by] an established veteran.”
  8. jay
    Here's TR saying that Sano could head to the outfield if he's not ready for 3B or if there's an established veteran at the spot: http://m.startribune.com/sports/twins/278610501.html?section=/sports
  9. jay
    Was Vargas proven? Was Arcia proven? Was Danny Santana proven? Was Hicks proven? Was any prospect that has ever been called up proven?
  10. jay
    What's your plan for Plouffe?
  11. jay
    Sounds like a pretty loud "NO" for April. How loud will these forums get by June (2 months later) demanding for their call ups?
  12. jay
    I'd love to say stick Sano on the MLB squad to start the year. However, I don't see how you can force one of your MLB regulars who has been solid and improved defensively off his position for an unproven rookie with defensive questions who just missed an entire year. I don't think you'd find a precedent for that in ANY organization. The only way I can see Sano in MLB to start the year is in an OF corner. However, you then end up with Sano and Arcia in the corners and certainly haven't addressed OF defense.
  13. jay
    Sano landed at #2 on Fangraphs' list of projected WAR in 2015 for prospects. Buxton didn't make the top 10. https://twitter.com/fangraphs/status/519585235172728833
  14. jay
    It is. It's roughly the difference between the best and worst. They've factored in many more variables than the earlier models. One of the biggest adjustments they've made was accounting for the influence of the pitcher -- for example, Yadi "gave back" half his runs due to the staffs he's had in StL. Sure, it could still be wrong. Most people at least accept that framing is a real thing. If it's a real thing that is turning balls into strikes, that has to have a value. The hard part there is turning that value into the equivalent of runs. It's an imaginary world where you can never know what the outcome would have been otherwise, so they have to use "expected runs" based off an incredible amount of data. It's hard to fathom the number of opportunities to influence a pitched ball in just one season (like 10,000) and the size of that impact. 40 runs passes the smell test for me, but 20 runs or even just 10 runs is significant.
  15. jay
    You? Skeptical? The latest BP model already scales back the run impact significantly as they've improved on assigning the value. It could very well change more. If 2 strikes a game seems possible... humor me if you don't mind, what's that worth on average over the course of a season? Some of those 320 strikes inevitably directly lead to the end of an at bat. Most don't, but we know there's some sort of value in being ahead 1-2 instead of behind 2-1. Include whatever that's worth to you also (the model does).
  16. jay
    Why does it have to? Or, prove that it isn't. Like I mentioned before, skeptics can raise a million potential variables. I don't see how something with an impact greater than zero doesn't change an outcome eventually. When you consider there are 4,860 games in every season... it could be quite often.
  17. jay
    Anyone have a link to the interview where Dougie talks about his tactics? I can't find it.
  18. jay
    That's simply not true. It was true in some of the early framing models, but it's not any more. If you read the BP article linked above, it explains how they account for and remove the effect of the count in the AB, the umpire, the pitcher, plus plenty more. You completely avoided my question. Lucroy compared to Suzuki+Pinto is an almost identical number of chances and an excellent comparison between "good" and "bad" framers for a team. Here are some 2014 numbers from the BP stats page linked above: Lucroy = 10379 chances, +185 strikes Suzuki = 8174 chances, -106 strikes Pinto = 2146 chances, -52 strikes Suzuki+Pinto = 10320 chances, -158 strikes That's a difference of 343 strikes over the course of the 2014 season. Full-time catcher is a pretty vague description, but let's call it more than 7500 chances (only 20 qualify). Top 3 (Lucroy, Zunino, Martin) = 27489 chances, +502 strikes (average of +167 strikes) Bottom 3 (Salty, Navarro, Suzuki) = 24098 chances, -353 strikes (average of -118 strikes) That's a difference of 285 strikes between the averages over the course of the 2014 season. It's close to 2 strikes a game. That seems reasonable. So, I'll ask again, what's that worth over the course of a season? It's gotta be more than zero... ?
  19. jay
    Skeptics could say you have to account for the inning, the exact plate appearance taking place, the exact speed of the runners on base, the profile of a batter based on the time of day, the angle of the pitcher's arm.... you could go on and on. There's a reasonable sample size far before that where those effects are extremely minimal. Do you believe the best framers could get 2 more strikes a game than the worst framers? If so, what's that worth in runs over the course of 162 games?
  20. jay
    If you don't like the run values assigned to framing, place your own value on the difference of an extra 340 strikes over the course of this season between Lucroy and the combo of Suzuki+Pinto. Their statistical model to calculate the "predicted strikes" accounts for just about every variable you can think of, as outlined in the article I linked earlier. http://www.baseballprospectus.com/sortable/index.php?cid=1667331 Does it seem crazy to think the best framer could get an extra 2 strikes a game compared to some of the worst? It doesn't to me. Their numbers call that difference 40 runs over the season. That's saving one run every four games based on getting 2 extra strikes in every game. How many times would one more strike in a key spot prevent a huge inning? It doesn't seem all that crazy either...
  21. jay
    If the 10 for 25 is what convinces you this is inaccurate, I get the perception there isn't much of a chance you'd believe anything different regardless of the immense amount of statistical research with far more significance than 10 for 25.
  22. jay
    Most catcher framing models already do take into account the variation in expected strike rates based on the count. Baseball Prospectus is commonly referenced for pitch framing. Here's their article where they talk about how their model factors in the count of the at-bat and how they've also accounted for pitch type, batter height, batter handedness and the guy pitching (all commonly used to say the numbers are bunk). http://www.baseballprospectus.com/article.php?articleid=22934
  23. jay
    1. Mientkiewicz 2. Martinez 3. Molitor I'd be happy with any of them. I do hope Bruno and Molitor stay on the staff regardless.
  24. jay
    I didn't quite understand from the framing video whether you were trying to say this shows it isn't possible to frame a 100-mph pitch or just that it is really hard. Based on this video and similar results, I'm thinking it is just really hard for normal humans to do anything with a baseball moving at 100-mph.
  25. jay
    A .404 BABIP seems pretty reasonable considering the 46% LD rate with runners on.
×
×
  • Create New...