Sssuperdave

Totally agree. He had a horrible start so his numbers have looked bad all year. Here's his Avg and OPS by month: April: .147, .433 May: .254, .701 June: .228, .653 If he'd put up those months in reverse order his OPS for the season would have been between .650 and .700 until about two weeks ago. While those aren't all-star numbers by any stretch they are definitely serviceable for someone with his defense. I'm calling it now - his OPS will be over .700 in 2018.

I think it's a totally valid point - tough to be a seller in a buyer's market and vice versa. I'm just not convinced it will be a buyer's market. That said, right now 13 AL teams are within 3 games of a playoff spot. The NL is more spread out though.

As I was thinking about the awesome season Ervin Santana is having I decided to spend some time exploring his Baseball Reference and Fangraphs pages, and found some results I thought were very interesting. Perhaps those more experienced with these stats could help me interpret them. I was surprised to see that there has been nothing interesting about his K/9, BB/9 and HR/9 (as well as K%, BB%, and HR%). All of these are the same or worse than career averages. In fact, his K/BB rate of 2.00 is the lowest of his career. What did jump though out is his H/9, which at 5.3 is the best in the majors this year, 3.3 hits lower than his career average and 2.8 lower than his previously best season. This is driving his WHIP below 1 for the first time in his career, and his BABIP against to a ridiculously low .171. Going further, his GB and FB%'s aren't all that notable, but his LD% against of 14.7% is well below his career average of 20.1% What do we make of all this? Has be benefitted dramatically by the improved defense? Is he inducing weaker contact somehow? Perhaps his pitches have a bit more break this year, but then why isn't he striking guys out more? Has his approached changed? Dare I ask... has it been mostly luck? The last thing I noticed was that Baseball Reference and Fangraphs give him dramatically different WAR this year. Baseball Reference is at 3.1, where Fangraphs is at a much less impressive 0.9. I think the low Fangraphs number is driven by his FIP and xFIP, which at 4.68 and 4.91 actually aren't all that good, perhaps due to the things like the K/BB and BABIP numbers I mentioned above. So... what do you all think?

Actually, while Liriano was still a rookie in 06, he did throw 23.2 innings in 05 with a 5.70 ERA. Berrios threw 58.1 innings last year. Obviously more than Liriano, but I don't think the difference in experience is as significant as you make it sound. Though I agree that Berrios is probably the real deal.

I think a lot of things go into the buy/sell decision besides W-L Record. For me, one reason the Twins should sell is that when it comes to W-L, right now they are overachieving while many of the other teams you mention are underachieving. In my eyes, the Twins have been lucky so far this year. They are 9-4 in one-run games, which is the best (luckiest?) in the American league, and their run differential is minus 44. Yes, much of that run differential is blowout games, but I can't help but feel that the Twins, even with another piece or two, aren't going to be able to continue this pace. The Yankees are 7-12 in 1 run games and have a +108 run differential, Cleveland is 9-6 in 1 run games and has a +38 run differential, and the Cubs are 10-10 in 1 run games and have a +12 run differential. Add to that the Twins have a lot of individual players over-performing and haven't had many injuries to key players, and this just feels like too much of a mirage to count on. So, even if other team looks at it the same way as the Twins, I don't think there would be 24-26 sellers. I don't think New York, Cleveland, Chicago, or Boston should be sellers even though their records are close to the Twins. I don't know though... perhaps I really am being too pessimistic. It sure is fun to watch my favorite team win, and maybe they will continue to outperform all year?

This Berrios run reminds me so much of Liriano in 2006, when he was 10-1 at the All-Star break. He was dominating even more than Johan Santana, but I don't think anyone considered him an Ace yet. I don't think it's possible to be an Ace after half of one season, though it is obviously possible to pitch like one, which Liriano did and Berrios is doing. Unfortunately the ace-level performance didn't stick with Liriano, but I'm sure hoping it will with Berrios! There are a few key differences between the a Berrios/E Santana comparison and a Liriano/J Santana comparison though... I think Berrios' success is more repeatable since Liriano's success depended upon torking up the Slider to an unhealthy level, which caused TJ surgery.I'm awed by Berrios' "makeup" (work ethic, committment, attitude). This isn't to take anything away from Liriano, but Berrios seems to stand above the rest on this.E Santana certainly isn't the ace that J Santana was, so the bar for Berrios to clear isn't as high as Liriano's was to be the team's best pitcher. So, all that to say I'd still call Santana the Twins best pitcher or ace, but Berrios could change that with a couple more months like he's been having.

In my opinion, the bolded parts show what it has been like to be a Twins fan over the last 20 years. We are so beaten down that we only set our sights as high as winning one of the weakest divisions in baseball. How is the fact that the Astros are a much better team than the Twins not a harbinger of doom? It is exactly a harbinger of doom if the goal is to win the World Series. If I'm Falvey and Levine, my goal is to be a better team than the Astros, not to sneak into a wild card spot and then hope we get lucky. And it's not just the Astros, after you beat the Astros you have to beat a team like the Cubs or Dodgers or Nationals!

Very exciting that the top three prospects are in AA and performing well. Even though the overall farm system isn't as strong as it used to be, the top three could start meaningfully contributing to the Twins as early as next year. When you add Gonsalves, Romero, and Gordon to the already forming young core of Sano, Buxton, Kepler, Rosario, Polanco, and Berrios, you have the makings of a team that could compete for several years. It kind of feels like the early 00s when Mauer, Morneau, Hunter, Cuddyer, and Santana were all breaking in.

I often read the phrase "Once you make the playoffs, anything can happen", but I don't really believe it. I know there have been wild card teams that won the WS, but back in the 00s when the Twins made the playoffs in 6 of 9 years I never felt they had a reasonable shot at winning the World Series, and they only made it out of the LDS once. If everything breaks right this team might make the playoffs, especially considering how weak the Central is, but even if they added another starter I just don't see them beating the Yankees, Nationals, Dodgers, or Cubs in the postseason.

Totally agree, and now that Berrios has had a couple of strong starts it feels like we're finally bearing the fruits of the youth movement we've been waiting so long for. I've been salivating over the idea of a team led by Berrios/Sano/Buxton/Kepler/Polanco/Rosario for about four years now. Of course, I was hoping Kohl Stewart and Oswaldo Arcia would be in the mix too, but you can't win them all.

Saying he's an out 83 But he's not an out 83% of the time any more. From April 3rd through April 20th he was an out 92% (!!!!!!) of the time, and since April 21st he's only been an out 74% of the time. That's a huge difference. Slash line from 4/3 - 4/20: .082/.135/.122/.257 Slash line from 4/21 - 5/14: .265/.357/.388/.745 While that second slash line isn't exactly all-star material, when you couple it with his elite defense he is already a meaningful contributor.

mediocre perhaps?

I couldn't agree more with this. There is nothing wrong with using counting stats to talk about what actually happened. They help tell the story of what happened in a game, a season, etc., and we're all baseball fans so shouldn't we enjoy that? The problem is when a non-predictive stat is used as a defense for who should or should not be signed for next season. Take something like RBIs. They are heavily situation-dependent, aren't always predictive, and don't even do the best job of differentiating a players skill. But, if a guy has 120 RBI in a season it means a lot of exciting stuff happened while he was at bat that year, and I hope I was watching some of it!

You could "use WPA" to measure relief pitchers, but the Goose egg stat helps put some heuristics around when the opportunities for a high WPA will present themselves. Goose eggs inform reliever usage and WPA informs reliever effectiveness.

This is a seriously good article and new statistic.

I keep bouncing back and forth between two ideas, but I think it's possible to agree with both: 1. Opening day rosters really don't matter very much. It will most likely only be a matter of days before the first change is made due to injury, trade, etc. 2. This roster doesn't make any sense. D Santana and Haley over Park? 13 Pitchers with a bunch of early off days? Whaaaaaaat????? I think it's possible to acknowledge that #1 is true but still be frustrated with #2. These roster decisions reek of group-think. It's like there was a committee (perhaps Falvey, Levine, Molitor, and someone else), that talked themselves in circles until they made decisions that don't make any sense unless you were there for the whole conversation.

Souhan absolutely ripped Slowey to shreds back when he was sent to the bullpen and didn't fare well. I obviously have no clue what really went on inside the clubhouse, but in all of the interviews I read or saw with Slowey he seemed very intelligent, kind, and articulate - not at all petulant or a malcontent. My impression, and this is 100% speculation, was that he operated on a different intellectual level and had a different approach to life than most of the other players or coaches, sort of like Robert Smith was with the Vikings, and as a result didn't "fit in" to the "clubhouse culture". I felt like Souhan had some sort of odd personal vendetta against Slowey because of this. I've always thought Souhan was a great writer, but my personal opinion of him went down several notches after the way he treated Slowey.

I think you are over simplifying here Dave. You yourself said that "It is a lot more complicated" when talking about the woman's side. I think Chuck's side is more complicated too. It's way too easy to label someone a coward and brush them aside than actually look at why they behave the way they do. I'm in no way trying to defend Chuck here. He obviously was completely in the wrong here and should be punished. But I don't see what good it does to write him off as a coward. It's an easy way out.

Man, such a sad story. The thing that has always stuck with me the most about Chuck is this quote from a story in the Strib a few years ago: He told his real estate agent to throw away a Gold Glove?????? There has got to be so much pain under the surface. It's really hard not to feel bad for a guy like that, even if he has responded to it with some very destructive (to both himself and others) decisions.

This is where the "Ace" conversation always bothers me. I don't think you need an "Ace" to win the world series, but I do think you need at least one pitcher who has a really really good season, and that pitcher doesn't have to come with an "Ace" label. Scott Erickson had an ace-like season in 91 but I don't think anyone would have ever given him an "Ace" label. Erickson had a higher WAR in 91 than Felix Hernandez has had in 5 out of 8 full seasons, so I'll take Erickson's 91 over 62% of Hernandez' years. There are plenty of candidates currently in the Twins organization to have a year like that - they don't need to have some mysterious "Ace" label.

I would expect that MLB has a hefty D&O insurance policy that would prevent Bud from having to personally contribute very much.

In all seriousness, Drew pitched twice in mop-up relief this week for the Dodgers, the first time retiring the side 1-2-3. He did give up a couple runs in his second outing. According to this article, he touched 94 mph on the gun: http://www.latimes.com/sports/dodgers/dodgersnow/la-sp-dn-dodgers-drew-butera-reliever-20140514-story.html With his career .508 OPS, I would think his ceiling as a hitter is back-up catcher. Couldn't he add a couple ticks to his fastball and develop another pitch with a couple of years in the minors and a good pitching coach? It seems to me like he's got a higher ceiling as a pitcher than as a catcher.

Kepler hasn't played for a few days - does anyone know why?

These lines seem pretty different to me, especially if you focues on strikeouts and # of pitches. If Deduno had been starting all year and had that line after 4 innings you'd expect to get another 2 innings out of him. If he doesn't give up any runs in those two innings you've got a quality start. Pelfrey's line on the other hand just looks awful. Of course assuming another two run-free innings from Deduno is optimistic, but his line doesn't look awful to me, just kinda bad.

I agree. I was at work and refreshing a game log. After the third run scoring wild pitch I figured it had to be a website error. I actually game to the game thread here at Twins Daily to see if it was true.