Jump to content
Twins Daily
  • Create Account

Oxtung

Verified Member
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    2,027

  • Joined

  • Last visited

 Content Type 

Profiles

Minnesota Twins News, Rumors & Analysis

Minnesota Twins Videos

2026 Minnesota Twins Top Prospect Rankings

2022 Minnesota Twins Draft Picks & Signing Bonuses

Minnesota Twins Trade & Free Agent Rumors

Minnesota Twins Fan Guides & Resources

2023 Minnesota Twins Draft Picks & Signing Bonuses

The Minnesota Twins Players Project

2024 Minnesota Twins Draft Picks & Signing Bonuses

2025 Minnesota Twins Draft Picks & Signing Bonuses

2026 Minnesota Twins Draft Picks & Signing Bonuses

Forums

Blogs

Events

Store

Downloads

Gallery

Everything posted by Oxtung

  1. Oxtung
    Since the pitcher on the mound any given night isn't some freakizoid conglomeration of body parts encompassing every pitcher on your staff, yes it matters. The only way to know if strike outs correlate to less runs is to look at it from an individual pitcher perspective.
  2. Oxtung
    Yeah, my bad. I was looking at Pence's 2011 trade from the Astros to the Phillies. I agree with you that Morneau would not bring back as much since he isn't under several years of team control. As for the Victorino trade, Ethan Martin is ranked the #75 prospect and is #2 prospect of the Phillies this season by Jonathan Mayo on mlb.com. So there are at least some who like him. That's why I said borderline. To be clear I never thought we would get back a top 100 prospect, unless Morneau or Willingham start mashing and raise their profiles significantly, but I think a 100-200 type prospect is within reason. Probably a throw in as well. As I said earlier I would be intrigued by a player in A ball with some upside.
  3. Oxtung
    Just to be clear, I don't know if the numbers would change just looking at individual pitchers rather than team numbers. My argument was more a logic based one. Looking at a sum of numbers tells you nothing about the individual parts that constitute that sum. For example if you have 5+5 you know the resulting sum is 10. However, if all you have is the sum, in this case 10, you know nothing about the terms that were used to derive the sum. It could be 5+5, 3+3+3+1, 2+8, 1+7+2, etc...
  4. Oxtung
    If Justin Morneau is putting up anywhere near those numbers at the deadline he'll bring back a nice prospect in the 100-200 range. Those kinds of numbers equate to an OPS somewhere between .825-.850. For comparison RF Hunter Pence (29 when traded last year) had an OPS of .743 at the trade deadline and a history of .800+ OPS's. He brought back two top 50 prospects plus a throw in. Pence was under control for 2013 as well and a couple of years younger than Morneau. Shane Victorino OPS'ing .724 before the deadline last year brought back a borderline top 100 prospect, a decent relief pitcher and a throw in. If Morneau just flirts with .800 I think he'll be worth a 100-200 type prospect. I would love it if the Twins got a young guy in A ball with some upside a la Polanco or Kepler in the Twins system.
  5. Oxtung
    Morneau is such an enigma right now with many variables currently. I agree that it makes him hard to know what to do with him. I will say that if the Twins are not contending when the trade deadline rolls around they should be looking to move him for whatever they can get, even if that means Escobar or Hernandez.
  6. Oxtung
    Worley has a 7 something ERA because he is getting crushed and people are worried about the number of pitches he is throwing? I think a better goal is don't get crushed. When he can consistently make it to the 5th without being down big then let's worry about how many pitches he is throwing.
  7. Oxtung
    Or the Twins pick up a significant portion of his contract in exchange for better prospects. I highly doubt that would ever happen but that would be how you maximize the probability of long term success.
  8. Oxtung
    So you're saying that Terry Ryan is just working within the predefined parameters set forth by the Pohlads? I would probably agree with that.
  9. Oxtung
    According to my wife, who is a research scientist, she is judged, and paid, based on whether her theory is sound and if it will return significant new results that will help move the field forward. She isn't paid based on results of those experiments. Results and the theory are two separate processes and are judged as such. If you're theory is sound you get paid. If your results are interesting, doesn't matter whether they agree or conflict with your theory, you get published. Two separate process with two separate results.
  10. Oxtung
    Got this "Fun Fact" from ESPN: Ryan Dempster has induced misses on 55 percent of the swings taken against his splitter this year, the best rate in the league. The Twins have missed on 50 percent of the swings they have taken against splitters this year, tied for second worst in MLB. RUH ROH!
  11. Oxtung
    Yup, that's the way the world works. It's not always fair or pretty. Even if someone doesn't like the outcome doesn't change the fact that logically 2013 results have no bearing on decisions made in 2012. They are two independent events. That's just not true. The talk was not about Correia in Parker's article and there was nothing about making the pitch better. Here is alink if you wish to brush up on it. Twins Daily - Where are the Twins at with statistical analysis? You're right. When you make things up I'm going to call you on it. Just like in this post.
  12. Oxtung
    Even in that example you say, "...worked out better than anyone had the right to expect...". So even here you are using the pre-signing expectations as your baseline.
  13. Oxtung
    Can you give me an example? I can't come up with an instance where I have felt a signing was bad because of the results. I'm always disappointed because those results were predictable and the GM should have known before a player signed.
  14. Oxtung
    But doesn't all of that "art" come before the decision is made to sign a player? Isn't that the important part? If you sign a player who has all those intangibles a GM is looking for and the player develops schizophrenia does that mean the GM made a bad decision? Of course not, there was no way he could know. What matters is what he did and should have known before an offer was extended. My point isn't about stats vs. intangibles. My point is that the future can't affect the past. 2013 results, whether they're statistics or intangibles, have no bearing on 2012 signings.
  15. Oxtung
    No, the point of the article was to use 2013 stats to justify the 2012 signings. Which is a logical fallacy. There is nothing about what Ryan knew in the article. There is no, "We saw that Correia's breaking ball was pretty decent and if he just changes his grip slightly he will increase it's break by 3 inches." Results should have no impact on whether a signing was a good decision. Look at this way, the future can never affect the past as we understand the concept of time today.
  16. Oxtung
    I don't think you and I are disagreeing at all here. Injuries are things a GM would know about before he signs a pitcher (unless obviously the injury occurs after signing). If a GM knows of an injury then it is fair game to judge him based on that knowledge. But again...it is the fact that he knew about the injury prior to signing the pitcher that is the important part. You also talk about using scouting. Well scouting is something that a GM is going to know about before the player signs. If a GM signs an elite player that the scouts love, the doctors clear and has a history of pitching well and then that pitcher has a terrible year is that on the GM? No, sometimes players just have bad years. On the other hand if a GM signs a guy with many red flags and that player performs poorly is that on the GM? Of course. So both pitchers perform poorly but in one case the GM is forgiven. What's the difference? The knowledge before the pitchers signed. That is what matters.
  17. Oxtung
    I'm not sure what you're disagreeing with since you just made the same argument I did.... Foreseeable predicting the future what a GM does with the information All of these terms are about the knowledge he had before he signed the contracts. Jason Marquis wasn't a bad signing because he had a bad season. Any pitcher can have a bad season. Jason Marquis was a bad signing because he had huge flaws that Ryan knew about before Marquis signed here and yet Ryan signed him anyways.
  18. Oxtung
    Yes. Given TR aversion to FA, the success rate of prospects and the fact that we still have holes in our farm system we need all the good prospects we can get. The more good minor leaguers you have the more good major leaguers you'll end up with. If, god forbid, we end up with "too many" we can always look to trade them later for either more prospects or established players to supplement our "core".
  19. Oxtung
    How a FA pitches after he has signed is irrelevant to passing judgement on the signing. The signing and the subsequent season are two distinct and separate events and must be judged as such. All that matters is what Ryan knew and believed before he signed Correia and Pelfrey. Here is a hypothetical to help illustrate my point. A GM signs a FA pitcher. After the signing the pitcher is in a car crash and can never play baseball again. Did the GM make a bad decision by signing said pitcher? Of course not, unless you think the GM should have forseen the car accident before he signed the pitcher. If you want a slightly less abstract version think about the extension just given to the Blue Jays JA Happ. Does the GM deserve flak because Happ took a line drive to the head and may never be the same pitcher? Pelfrey is an example of the opposite. Ryan knew that Pelfrey was coming off of TJ surgery, knew that no one had ever come back that quickly let alone be good. On top of that Pelfrey has been a below average pitcher for his career. These are all things that were known to Ryan before Pelfrey signed. Obviously things have not worked out well for Pelfrey so far this season. So, it's not about what a pitcher does after the signing. It is about what the GM knewbefore the pitcher was signed that is important.
  20. Oxtung
    I think it is important to note that there is still a correlation between team strikeouts and team runs allowed. It might not be the only important piece of this puzzle but it is still a piece. In general if you strike out more batters you will be more successful.
  21. Oxtung
    Bah the whole premise of this article is illogical. You can't use future results to judge a past event unless those results are knowable before the event occurs. All that mattered is what Ryan knew before he signed Correia and Pelfrey. Anything that has happened since then is irrelevant.
  22. Oxtung
    Very interesting. However this does not in itself tell us anything about individual pitchers. This only tells us about team strike out rates. It is entirely possible that higher strike out rate pitchers correlate to less runs scored but once they get mixed in with the inevitable back end starters their numbers are being obscured; or not.
  23. Oxtung
    Interesting...Here are some more stats then to just round out the analysis. Over the last three years combined he has been: ERA-33rd xFIP - 21st IP - 30th In my mind those WAR numbers don't match up with his overall production levels. I think he is a #2 starter. Not that there is anything wrong with that. I would still have like him!
  24. Oxtung
    Just like with the free agent starting pitcher market then! We're making progress.
  25. Oxtung
    Well let's hit for the cycle. He could be worth more than his contract in 3 years. There now we have all the possibilities accounted for.
×
×
  • Create New...