Jump to content
Twins Daily
  • Create Account

Parker Hageman

Owner
  • Posts

    3,983
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    6

Reputation Activity

  1. Thanks
    Parker Hageman got a reaction from Hosken Bombo Disco in Let Them Swing How They Want   
    There hasn't been a publicly provide update on the attack angle (or other swing data) since 2017 so it is difficult to say if there has been a significant league-wide shift on that. It's possible it is a factor in combination with the trend of higher velo, higher located fastballs. 
    In regards to Max Kepler, in 2017 Kepler had one of the lowest attack angles in baseball at 4 degrees.  The "optimal" attack angle for fastballs was around 8-10 degrees. By comparison, Joe Mauer was 11 degrees and Nelson Cruz was 12. It makes sense about Kepler considering coaches said that they felt he was too steep into the swing zone and that resulted on him getting on top of balls (grounders into the shift).
    I can't say how much he has or hasn't changed in terms of attack angle. He has acknowledged that in 2019, he tried to chase launch angle -- and he both increased that, his exit velo and pulled the ball more.  I don't know how much of that is from the coaching side either. 
    Another factor is VERTICAL BAT ANGLE. This is another measurement of the degree at which the barrel of the bat is compared to the knob of the bat at contact. There is a good thread on this concept here but, simply, a flat vertical bat angle produces more in-play mi****s (infield field balls and weak grounders) while a steeper vertical bat angle will typically produce more mi****s out of play (foul balls) and squarely hit balls. If you look at the picture in this 2017 article, you can see an example of Kepler's flat vertical bat angle. It's possible that Kepler still has a very flat swing (attack angle-wise) which is resulting in that high rate of infield flies and ground balls. 
    As far as backspin goes, research by Dr. Alan Nathan shows that the best and most consistent way to hit balls with backspin is by (1) hitting them square and (2) slightly south of the ball's equator. If your attack angle is steep, like Kepler's in 2017, you have to have nearly perfect timing to get to that spot. With an optimal attack angle closer to 8-10 degrees, you have more room for error. 
    Adding to this, high backspin, as shown in some research, isn't optimal either. A recent Fangraphs' study showed that players who have high backspin underperform compared to those in the square contact group. High backspin adds flight carry but does not necessarily get as many hits. While it is good to have a backspinning ball flight, exit velocity is a superior indicator of hit potential. This is to say, hitters shouldn't focus on backspin contact. 
    I don't know if this has answered anything but it certainly killed some time.
  2. Like
    Parker Hageman reacted to Hosken Bombo Disco in Let Them Swing How They Want   
    I wonder if increased strikeouts are a byproduct of optimizing Attack Angle for power. I bet (hypothesize) it is and I bet there’s been some swing coaching on the Twins lineup that has been counterproductive.
    I would like to see Kepler’s data, in particular. I remember that nice flat swing from earlier years somehow generating all that backspin. “Let Kep swing how he wants, how he did when he first came up.” Thanks @Parker Hageman. I will have to get on Substack. 
  3. Like
    Parker Hageman reacted to Hosken Bombo Disco in What I'm Reading   
    Always love seeing people preach the Brad Radke gospel.
  4. Like
    Parker Hageman got a reaction from Squirrel in What I'm Reading   
    Ain't that the truth.
     
    My nap time consists of eating too much and just lying down as I lose consciousness. 
     
    Other than that, we're basically the same people.
  5. Like
    Parker Hageman reacted to Squirrel in What I'm Reading   
    Never thought Nelson Cruz and I would have the same routine ... 'Nap time can vary, but it's daily'. Although, his nap time is intentional and timed. My nap time is daily when I nod off, unintentionally, because I'm getting to that age.
  6. Like
    Parker Hageman got a reaction from Channing1964 in Minnie and Paul Changing for Twins?   
    Why is requesting a "subtle yet very significant update that honors and reflects the team’s players and its fans from different backgrounds" a false sense of need?
     
    Inclusion is a very real need. As I read Crutchfield's statements, he is using that as an opportunity for a discussion on what that looks like, not a condemnation on the existing logo. 
     
     
    Nobody said that the logo was offensive.
     
    Crutchfield never mentioned being offended about the logo or the logo itself being offensive. In fact, he said that he has "always loved Ray Barton’s original ‘Minnie and Paul’ logo design" in his statement. 
     
    He provided updated version of the logo he provided on his Facebook page. In addition to being a seamless transition, the Black person on the St. Paul side not only provides a level of diversity to the logo, but it could also serve to honor Roy Campanella who became the first African-American to play in the American Association when he joined the Saints in 1948. 
     
     
    There is certainly room for both in this game.
     
    The sport honors Jackie Robinson one day a year by having every player wearing 42 or black and white jerseys. Some teams choose to use Negro League uniforms on turn-back-the-clock days.
     
    This is imagery. 
     
    You can have both discussions about how images are perceived AND work toward actionable changes. 
     
     
    Again, no one said the logo was offensive. 
     
    Still, we know that former owner Calvin Griffith said 'I'll tell you why we came to Minnesota. It was when I found out you only had 15,000 blacks here. Black people don't go to ball games" and while he was making that decision, he was likely deciding on logos and branding. The 1961 designed logo could have been a reflection of that mindset -- or it could have just been an misguided reflection of the state's demographics at that time. 
     
    Either way, it does not take much for an organization to reflect on that past and that future. 
     
    Baseball's audience is overwhelmingly white. According to Bloomberg in 2019, only 9% of the television-viewing audience is black. I cite James Clear's Atomic Habits a lot because of the main points he makes in his book is that small changes can have significant impacts later on. If making small change to the logo could help improve the perception of the organization to more people, it would be foolish not to take it into consideration. There is A LOT more that needs to be done to grow the game in that regard, to be sure, but making small strides when possible should be on the table. 
     
    It may seem like a minor thing to us, but the impact could be felt down the road.
     
    Finally, just to reiterate, there are many reasons to consider making changes to a logo but let's be clear here and understand that no one is outright offended by this logo. That is not a part of the conversation.
  7. Like
    Parker Hageman got a reaction from nicksaviking in Minnie and Paul Changing for Twins?   
    Why is requesting a "subtle yet very significant update that honors and reflects the team’s players and its fans from different backgrounds" a false sense of need?
     
    Inclusion is a very real need. As I read Crutchfield's statements, he is using that as an opportunity for a discussion on what that looks like, not a condemnation on the existing logo. 
     
     
    Nobody said that the logo was offensive.
     
    Crutchfield never mentioned being offended about the logo or the logo itself being offensive. In fact, he said that he has "always loved Ray Barton’s original ‘Minnie and Paul’ logo design" in his statement. 
     
    He provided updated version of the logo he provided on his Facebook page. In addition to being a seamless transition, the Black person on the St. Paul side not only provides a level of diversity to the logo, but it could also serve to honor Roy Campanella who became the first African-American to play in the American Association when he joined the Saints in 1948. 
     
     
    There is certainly room for both in this game.
     
    The sport honors Jackie Robinson one day a year by having every player wearing 42 or black and white jerseys. Some teams choose to use Negro League uniforms on turn-back-the-clock days.
     
    This is imagery. 
     
    You can have both discussions about how images are perceived AND work toward actionable changes. 
     
     
    Again, no one said the logo was offensive. 
     
    Still, we know that former owner Calvin Griffith said 'I'll tell you why we came to Minnesota. It was when I found out you only had 15,000 blacks here. Black people don't go to ball games" and while he was making that decision, he was likely deciding on logos and branding. The 1961 designed logo could have been a reflection of that mindset -- or it could have just been an misguided reflection of the state's demographics at that time. 
     
    Either way, it does not take much for an organization to reflect on that past and that future. 
     
    Baseball's audience is overwhelmingly white. According to Bloomberg in 2019, only 9% of the television-viewing audience is black. I cite James Clear's Atomic Habits a lot because of the main points he makes in his book is that small changes can have significant impacts later on. If making small change to the logo could help improve the perception of the organization to more people, it would be foolish not to take it into consideration. There is A LOT more that needs to be done to grow the game in that regard, to be sure, but making small strides when possible should be on the table. 
     
    It may seem like a minor thing to us, but the impact could be felt down the road.
     
    Finally, just to reiterate, there are many reasons to consider making changes to a logo but let's be clear here and understand that no one is outright offended by this logo. That is not a part of the conversation.
  8. Like
    Parker Hageman got a reaction from Squirrel in Minnie and Paul Changing for Twins?   
    Why is requesting a "subtle yet very significant update that honors and reflects the team’s players and its fans from different backgrounds" a false sense of need?
     
    Inclusion is a very real need. As I read Crutchfield's statements, he is using that as an opportunity for a discussion on what that looks like, not a condemnation on the existing logo. 
     
     
    Nobody said that the logo was offensive.
     
    Crutchfield never mentioned being offended about the logo or the logo itself being offensive. In fact, he said that he has "always loved Ray Barton’s original ‘Minnie and Paul’ logo design" in his statement. 
     
    He provided updated version of the logo he provided on his Facebook page. In addition to being a seamless transition, the Black person on the St. Paul side not only provides a level of diversity to the logo, but it could also serve to honor Roy Campanella who became the first African-American to play in the American Association when he joined the Saints in 1948. 
     
     
    There is certainly room for both in this game.
     
    The sport honors Jackie Robinson one day a year by having every player wearing 42 or black and white jerseys. Some teams choose to use Negro League uniforms on turn-back-the-clock days.
     
    This is imagery. 
     
    You can have both discussions about how images are perceived AND work toward actionable changes. 
     
     
    Again, no one said the logo was offensive. 
     
    Still, we know that former owner Calvin Griffith said 'I'll tell you why we came to Minnesota. It was when I found out you only had 15,000 blacks here. Black people don't go to ball games" and while he was making that decision, he was likely deciding on logos and branding. The 1961 designed logo could have been a reflection of that mindset -- or it could have just been an misguided reflection of the state's demographics at that time. 
     
    Either way, it does not take much for an organization to reflect on that past and that future. 
     
    Baseball's audience is overwhelmingly white. According to Bloomberg in 2019, only 9% of the television-viewing audience is black. I cite James Clear's Atomic Habits a lot because of the main points he makes in his book is that small changes can have significant impacts later on. If making small change to the logo could help improve the perception of the organization to more people, it would be foolish not to take it into consideration. There is A LOT more that needs to be done to grow the game in that regard, to be sure, but making small strides when possible should be on the table. 
     
    It may seem like a minor thing to us, but the impact could be felt down the road.
     
    Finally, just to reiterate, there are many reasons to consider making changes to a logo but let's be clear here and understand that no one is outright offended by this logo. That is not a part of the conversation.
  9. Like
    Parker Hageman got a reaction from bighat in Minnie and Paul Changing for Twins?   
    Why is requesting a "subtle yet very significant update that honors and reflects the team’s players and its fans from different backgrounds" a false sense of need?
     
    Inclusion is a very real need. As I read Crutchfield's statements, he is using that as an opportunity for a discussion on what that looks like, not a condemnation on the existing logo. 
     
     
    Nobody said that the logo was offensive.
     
    Crutchfield never mentioned being offended about the logo or the logo itself being offensive. In fact, he said that he has "always loved Ray Barton’s original ‘Minnie and Paul’ logo design" in his statement. 
     
    He provided updated version of the logo he provided on his Facebook page. In addition to being a seamless transition, the Black person on the St. Paul side not only provides a level of diversity to the logo, but it could also serve to honor Roy Campanella who became the first African-American to play in the American Association when he joined the Saints in 1948. 
     
     
    There is certainly room for both in this game.
     
    The sport honors Jackie Robinson one day a year by having every player wearing 42 or black and white jerseys. Some teams choose to use Negro League uniforms on turn-back-the-clock days.
     
    This is imagery. 
     
    You can have both discussions about how images are perceived AND work toward actionable changes. 
     
     
    Again, no one said the logo was offensive. 
     
    Still, we know that former owner Calvin Griffith said 'I'll tell you why we came to Minnesota. It was when I found out you only had 15,000 blacks here. Black people don't go to ball games" and while he was making that decision, he was likely deciding on logos and branding. The 1961 designed logo could have been a reflection of that mindset -- or it could have just been an misguided reflection of the state's demographics at that time. 
     
    Either way, it does not take much for an organization to reflect on that past and that future. 
     
    Baseball's audience is overwhelmingly white. According to Bloomberg in 2019, only 9% of the television-viewing audience is black. I cite James Clear's Atomic Habits a lot because of the main points he makes in his book is that small changes can have significant impacts later on. If making small change to the logo could help improve the perception of the organization to more people, it would be foolish not to take it into consideration. There is A LOT more that needs to be done to grow the game in that regard, to be sure, but making small strides when possible should be on the table. 
     
    It may seem like a minor thing to us, but the impact could be felt down the road.
     
    Finally, just to reiterate, there are many reasons to consider making changes to a logo but let's be clear here and understand that no one is outright offended by this logo. That is not a part of the conversation.
  10. Like
    Parker Hageman reacted to tarheeltwinsfan in What Are We Going To Do About This Hand Twin Thing?   
    I am sorry for your loss. Thank you for reminding all of us how precious life is and how important our friends are. As for the regrets, we all have them at times like you are experiencing. It is normal. Don't be hard on yourself. Use these feelings to embrace those   who are, and were, important in your life and tell them you love them. And now, because of your very real and very touching article, I think I'll go call my army buddy in Canton, Ohio   who is battling Agent Orange related cancer. Thank you, Parker, for sharing.
  11. Like
    Parker Hageman reacted to wombat28 in What Are We Going To Do About This Hand Twin Thing?   
    Thank you, beautifully written. Friendship and baseball = love.
  12. Like
    Parker Hageman reacted to theBOMisthebomb in What Are We Going To Do About This Hand Twin Thing?   
    I am sorry to hear about your friend. I lost one of my best friends from my youth when we were in our late 30s. It is a bummer as you can't get that time back.
  13. Like
    Parker Hageman reacted to Doctor Gast in What Are We Going To Do About This Hand Twin Thing?   
    My Condolences, Sorry for your loss. Friendship is a precious thing, we don`t know how much until we are w/o it. Some of my best memories are in baseball & MN. I took some culinary classes in college as an elective, proved to be very valuable 
  14. Like
    Parker Hageman reacted to stringer bell in What Are We Going To Do About This Hand Twin Thing?   
    An eloquent eulogy and also a reminder of what is important in life and relationships. As someone about a generation advanced from you, I've experienced losing loved ones and the sudden passing of friends and it is never easy. We always look back and think how we could be a better friend or loved one and hopefully modify our ways to keep in contact with those who aren't in our immediate circle.
  15. Like
    Parker Hageman reacted to Platoon in Baseball Is Back. So Am I.   
    The rumors of your demise were greatly exaggerated! Or so it seems? Btw, I learned more about the music licensing business in your OP than I ever did. 
  16. Like
    Parker Hageman reacted to Squirrel in Baseball Is Back. So Am I.   
    The morass that is the copyright laws. Being in the music industry, all I can say is 'Ugh!' and 'I feel for you!' It's all about who they think they can get away with punishing, fining and extracting money out of. Well, okay, I do think artists are entitled to make money from their own music, and they deserve the protection of misuse and free shares, but some of them lose their own copyrights to those with more money. So, even if you could beg forgiveness and permission from the band, they may not even have control over their own copyrights anymore. Too bad you don't have a direct connection to them to ask, but it would still end up being a licensing mess because someone somewhere would make it so. In the end, I think posting to YouTube is an easier process. (I could be wrong about this, but have some kind of vague recollection about a conference session I attended 4 years ago that discussed streaming options and various platforms.)
     
    Anyway ... glad you are back.
  17. Like
    Parker Hageman got a reaction from bird in Introducing Twinternationals!   
    Great idea and I am really looking forward to seeing how this grows!
  18. Like
    Parker Hageman got a reaction from IndianaTwin in Introducing Twinternationals!   
    Great idea and I am really looking forward to seeing how this grows!
  19. Like
    Parker Hageman got a reaction from Doctor Gast in Introducing Twinternationals!   
    Great idea and I am really looking forward to seeing how this grows!
  20. Like
    Parker Hageman got a reaction from Twinternationals in Introducing Twinternationals!   
    Great idea and I am really looking forward to seeing how this grows!
  21. Like
    Parker Hageman got a reaction from dbminn in High Spin Rate Pitching   
    Spin rate can't necessarily be taught but it can be enhanced. 
     
    I wrote about developing fastballs with our high school program this past summer (you can read about it here). There's a consensus among the industry that you can't really teach it, you have it or you don't. Driveline says if you want a significant jump in spin rate, you add tack (rosin, bullfrog, pine tar, etc). This is another thing that the Astros have been accused of practicing, by the way. 
     
    Legally, let's say you have a guy who is throwing a sub-optimal four-seam fastball -- he's cutting or turning his hand at release and reducing the spin. You can train that player to release the ball better and gain some spin (but more spin efficiency, which won't change the spin rate but a better spin efficiency will result in more carry, which keeps the pitch on that high plane like Odorizzi, rather than cutting or diving). 
     
    This is where Rapsodo and Edgertronic cameras become so valuable to teams.
     
  22. Like
    Parker Hageman got a reaction from Doctor Gast in High Spin Rate Pitching   
    Spin rate can't necessarily be taught but it can be enhanced. 
     
    I wrote about developing fastballs with our high school program this past summer (you can read about it here). There's a consensus among the industry that you can't really teach it, you have it or you don't. Driveline says if you want a significant jump in spin rate, you add tack (rosin, bullfrog, pine tar, etc). This is another thing that the Astros have been accused of practicing, by the way. 
     
    Legally, let's say you have a guy who is throwing a sub-optimal four-seam fastball -- he's cutting or turning his hand at release and reducing the spin. You can train that player to release the ball better and gain some spin (but more spin efficiency, which won't change the spin rate but a better spin efficiency will result in more carry, which keeps the pitch on that high plane like Odorizzi, rather than cutting or diving). 
     
    This is where Rapsodo and Edgertronic cameras become so valuable to teams.
     
  23. Like
    Parker Hageman got a reaction from Miles Death in Game Length Isn't the Reason for the Decline in Attendance   
    This is a false narrative I've seen pushed by people who claim baseball has lost action because of shifts, home runs, etc. In 2010, there was an average of 18 minutes of "action" (pitches being thrown, balls in play, runners running, etc). In the 1957 World Series, there was 13 total minutes of the same type of action. This notion that there is less action is not entirely accurate. There has been more time stretched between pitches and between innings (commercials) but the time of moving parts on the field has not.
     
    I agree with Miles' conclusion that there are probably more families staying home than previously and that has some affect on the attendance. As a family of five, we now go to one game each year as a group. Likewise, with the shift in action happening between the pitcher and the batter, I find watching the game more enjoyable at home where I can see all of that activity. I would assume more people choose to watch at their homes as well (local ratings have been doing just fine). 
  24. Like
    Parker Hageman got a reaction from Platoon in MUST SEE: Brian Dozier Shares Hitting Insight   
    I mean, he's still pull happy -- his pull rate is the 12th highest in baseball -- but that's a good thing. As he told me, the shortest distance out of the park is to left field.
     
    But what did change for him is that he isn't trying to pull the ball on the outer-half (which he did more of in the previous years, inevitably rolling over to short). He drives that pitch occasionally the other way. 
  25. Like
    Parker Hageman reacted to Rhino and Compass in Why Do We Care About Launch Angle?   
    I, for one, don't believe Jose Altuve has any choice but to hit the bottom of the ball. He would have to jump to get on top of one to hit it on the ground anywhere. 
×
×
  • Create New...