Jump to content
Twins Daily
  • Create Account

TheLeviathan

Old-Timey Member
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    21,582

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    49

 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 TheLeviathan

  1. TheLeviathan
    The problem is that the skepticism doesn't seem to be understood nor appreciated. (A huge problem IMO) With something like this it should ALWAYS be a welcome part of the process. Just look at what it has lead to - a discussion with a lot of moving parts to it and a lot of interesting analyses. All amongst people that put a high emphasis on defense - we should embrace that skepticism, clarification, and exploration. Not automatic, dogmatic acceptance.
  2. TheLeviathan
    I don't know, you should probably check that other thread. I'm not sure you're right about that. As for your conclusion, I think 5 wins is a fairly significant margin that shouldn't be so easily dismissed.
  3. TheLeviathan
    Seems about right, I'd be curious to see if that lined up over multiple seasons as well. There are known issues with single season data and it might become more reliable over the course of more seasons. But I think that split makes sense.
  4. TheLeviathan
    Seems about right, I'd be curious to see if that lined up over multiple seasons as well. There are known issues with single season data and it might become more reliable over the course of more seasons. But I think that split makes sense.
  5. TheLeviathan
    We're questioning the conclusion of the analysis. You know...like is done all the friggin time to all sorts of analyses to make sure they are valid. You've been incapable of understanding that questioning since Chief's first challenge to it. It is a valid and necessary part of this sort of work.
  6. TheLeviathan
    Why so defensive? Why can't a metric just not be as accurate as it's portrayed? Why is questioning the result of that study turned into some kind of blasphemy that you get tarred and feathered for? The idea that defenses saving a bit less than half a run a game versus .75 renders it meaningless is preposterous. It really is. About a half run a game is a very serious impact.
  7. TheLeviathan
    No, my statement has nothing to do with the value of defense and everything with the validity of the stat. I think it's sad that just because something is posted by fangraphs and considered a metric it becomes so indisputable that reasonable questions about it can't be asked without it being boiled down to: "Well....I guess you don't like defense."
  8. TheLeviathan
    I just think there are a host of other factors in RA differentials that get minimized if you think defense accounts for that much. If we round things at 200 runs as the difference between top and bottom and use the 120 from Fangraphs - that means defense alone is accountable for 60% of that differential. I just can't buy that. 30-40%? Seems more reasonable to me.
  9. TheLeviathan
    Those are questions I share and I appreciate your effort in the other thread to mine better data with a more reasonable conclusion. You have to remember where some of this started - a figure (120 runs) that's absurd on the face of it. I think the arguments centering more around 60-70 runs seems much more reasonable. I can get behind that.
  10. TheLeviathan
    Your breakdown is more palatable for sure, fangraphs claimed 120 runs and that defies basic common sense. (And doesn't account for the things i mentioned) A little less than half a run a game seems far more likely and a more "precise" measurement. (Since we are getting silly about terms)
  11. TheLeviathan
    This author was anything but clear, the dude had an exclamation fest to boost the justification for his breakdown. Where the heck was he clear about that? Even if the site has a sobering take elsewhere, this guy sure didn't.
  12. TheLeviathan
    I can't believe defense is extremely important and still doubt that this writer and the stats are way overstating their case? A run a game difference is pretty high, especially considering it takes no account of any of the other factors that differentiate teams. Like talent, ballpark, divisional strength, etc. If these numbers are to be as trusted as the author seems to believe, they eat a pretty unbelievable chunk out of any differential that exists. Once again, the problem isn't the stats or the argument he's making - it's the use and presentation of them. This continues to be an alarming trend in baseball metrics. You don't get to fill an entire paragraph of exclamation point laden "holy craps!" about what these numbers say about defense and then hide behind "people are taking these numbers too literally". That just doesn't work.
  13. TheLeviathan
    For me the AAA stint doesn't have to be for very long. Call him back up in May or early June. But give him a chance to experience consistent success. Only hitting him against lefties is giving up on him. I don't want to give up on him and, for me, the best chance he has to still be a factor is to get his stuff straight in AAA (ala Hunter - here is where he could actually mentor) and come back actually ready. We have thrust this unready kid into the lineup over and over again and putting him into a part-time position in the big leagues is basically declaring him a fourth outfielder. I wouldn't give up just yet, not before I've at least tried to get him right once.
  14. TheLeviathan
    Um, perhaps this paragraph will help you zero in on Chief's issue: That’s a 120-run difference! That’s about 12 wins! Those teams play in the same division! Move 12 wins around and the result is an entirely different season! That's right in the opening paragraph as a way to hype the analysis. This is a great article to highlight my growing frustration with how some metrics are being very lazily presented. Or how the perspective on their accuracy is really overstated.
  15. TheLeviathan
    Here's the thing - he's sunk already. Twice. At rates that are among the worst in the history of baseball for anyone ever starting their career. I know what you're saying, but people continue to talk about this guy like he needs more time to prove things. If Aaron Hicks hasn't already proven - twice over - that he isn't ready to face big league pitching, I'm not sure it's physically possible for him to do so. And when we sent him down he was pretty good against AA pitching but mediocre against AAA in limited at-bats. (Power totally sapped after the promotion) Hicks needs AAA for two reasons: 1) He's working on a new leg kick/step to generate more power from the left side and 2) Twins officials have publicly remarked about his lack of confidence. If confidence is a known issue with him and he's about to embark on a revised approach at the plate....why not give it time to work? Let him be successful with it for awhile in AAA before throwing him against competition we already know is too much for him? The problem here is that we have, for a third consecutive year, given ourselves crappy options that force our hand to play Hicks when his development might be better served to be in the minors.
  16. TheLeviathan
    I can't think of a greater indictment of our CF situation than debating the merits of keeping Shane Robinson and Jordan Schafer as our starting CF combo.
  17. TheLeviathan
    I wouldn't trade Plouffe either, but there is zero reason to move Sano off 3B either. There was a sizable thread bashing the decision not to put him in the outfield yesterday. I think that would be a ridiculous decision at this point.
  18. TheLeviathan
    Not a good choice to celebrate a brilliant story by Alan Moore. Easily one of my favorite graphic novels of all time.
  19. TheLeviathan
    I'm really not sure how anyone can disagree there is a clear philosophical difference in the way this organization promotes hitters vs. pitchers in the last 4-5 years.
  20. TheLeviathan
    I hope not, most of what people don't like about him is wrapped up in his size. The problem is that 6'5 and 240 isn't what it used to be in a good way. Guys are getting bigger and more athletic and we have to be open to letting Sano work and get better. We saw what Plouffe was able to do with regular work and coaching, so just because Sano is big and will have some growing pains is a really, really bad reason to move him to the OF. Let him see if he can stick at a premium position first. And be flexible when he makes mistakes, that's part of every guy's development and not everyone who turns into a solid fielder is a gold glover at Sano's age.
  21. TheLeviathan
    And yet somehow there is nearly universal crying from this forum to move Sano before the kid has had more than a cup of tea in AAA.
  22. TheLeviathan
    Great post nick. I've been banging this drum for over a year now too. Their expectations for a pitcher promotion vs. a hitter promotion are ridiculously different. Hearing them downplay Meyer's readiness while Hicks .180s his way into the lineup every day is mind boggling. It seems so backwards.
  23. TheLeviathan
    Whoa....no reason to overpay like that. We already included Duensing.
  24. TheLeviathan
    More guys better at playing baseball?
  25. TheLeviathan
    These cuts basically bring my "minimal interest" level in watching ST ball down to a healthy "no friggin way am I wasting my time on that"
×
×
  • Create New...