Jump to content
Twins Daily
  • Create Account

Otto von Ballpark

Old-Timey Member
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    20,669

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    74

 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 Otto von Ballpark

  1. Otto von Ballpark
    Comparing to football is apples and oranges. It's a whole different experience. Within the context of baseball, there is no "activity" between pitches with no one on base that can't easily fit within 20 seconds.
  2. Otto von Ballpark
    With no runners on base, I wouldn't allow them to do this. With runners on, I think I'd require a pickoff throw.
  3. Otto von Ballpark
    That's already pretty easy for most fans of the Twins (and other teams on Fox regional networks). Sling includes Fox Sports North for $25 a month. That's only $150 for the whole season, with no contract -- so fans can sign up late or drop early and save even more money if they like. Sling is available on most devices, but you can also use your Sling credentials to log in to the Fox Sports Go app on virtually every platform. Yes, it would be easier if they simply charged $270 for MLB.TV with no blackouts. But most Twins fans can achieve the equivalent of that already with Sling (or save $120 if they don't need the out-of-market games). A problem is still around the edges of "Twins Territory" like in Iowa. Sling and other streaming services don't always deliver the user's preferred Fox affiliate in those areas. Would be nice to clean that up.
  4. Otto von Ballpark
    But there is a clock in baseball -- we just don't see it. The game could go on forever, but batters, pitchers, and coaches have never been allowed to take infinite time to perform their tasks within the game. This clock is technically already in the rule book, but it's left to umpire discretion -- which has proven to be extremely ineffective. And I don't blame umpires -- the pace of the players has been slowing gradually, and umpires have enough on their plate without suddenly having to hassle every player between every pitch too. If it was up to me, I'd put a clock on each dugout rail, visible to pitcher, batter, catcher, and umpire, but out of view from TV cameras and most fans. A ball or strike would be automatically assessed for a clock violation, and players will soon be trained to perform within the normal pace of the game, as defined by the first 100+ years of MLB history and every other level of competition in the sport -- minors, college, high school, etc. There's nothing natural or traditional about the pace of players in modern MLB.
  5. Otto von Ballpark
    Pace isn't just a problem of game length. It's also about too frequent periods of inaction. Baseball has always been a languid summer's pastime, but it hasn't always had every pitcher and batter milking 30+ seconds between every pitch all season long. It can still be the languid summer pastime even if we curb players of that excess. That time between pitches can add up to a lot more than 5 minutes per game. I know I've linked this a few times already, but seriously it should be required reading on the subject: https://www.sbnation.com/a/mlb-2017-season-preview/game-length And it's not just about appealing to fans who find the current game boring. I love baseball -- but I would absolutely go to more games, and watch more games on TV, if games were a half hour shorter on average but packed in the same amount of action. (And even more time than that could be shaved off postseason games.) If you're wondering why, note that I like to bring along my small kids when I go to a game, and I'm more likely to do that if it's easier to keep them engaged in what's happening on the field, and I'm less likely to egregiously break their bedtime. Similar concerns when I try to watch games on TV with some elderly relatives. Also for postseason viewing parties -- it's a bit hard to convince guests to come to my house for 4+ hours on a weeknight, when they don't even have to do that for football games.
  6. Otto von Ballpark
    It works as straight math. Assume Kepler's 2018 components remain constant in 2019 (BB%, K%, ISO), except for BABIP -- assume that corrects +.025 or so, around his career mark. That's basically just taking his exact 2018 batting performance, but exchanging 10 outs for 10 singles. Definitionally, that means he will improve on his 2018 OPS (and also 2016 and 2017 OPS, which were similar to 2018). With just that modest BABIP improvement, his AVG will improve by about .018, and his OPS will improve by double that (since AVG goes into both OBP and SLG). So he'd have a career high OPS, and thus OPS+. Not by a huge amount, but it would be close to a 110 OPS+ or so. You may disagree with the assumption that his 2018 BB% and K% will hold steady into 2019 -- obviously if those drop to 2016-2017 levels, his OPS will likely be at 2016-2017 levels too. But the theory is that K% and BB% stabilize more quickly than other stats -- so his 2018 may represent a real improvement in BB% and K%, and only a random blip in BABIP.
  7. Otto von Ballpark
    While it might seem that way, it's not so. Pitching changes are not responsible for the bulk of slowdowns or increased game length. It's simply extra idle time between pitches that is adding up: https://www.sbnation.com/a/mlb-2017-season-preview/game-length Edit to add: one can still be opposed to pitching changes and modern SP/RP usage, of course, on aesthetic grounds. But it's not really a primary driver of pace or game length issues.
  8. Otto von Ballpark
    I wouldn't generalize too much, but I'd guess that people get up during an inning more often when they expect the game to run 3+ hours, as compared to a game they expect could run only 2+ hours. Put another way: shorter games, with a quicker pace of play, would incentivize more fans to sit and watch the action. Not everyone, of course.
  9. Otto von Ballpark
    Problem is, virtually every NFL game is right around 3 hours, even postseason. In baseball, 3 hours is just the average -- there's a lot more variation, and you wind up with quite a few 3:30+ games too. And even that average balloons in the postseason -- I recall there was maybe 1 game this past postseason that was below 3 hours. Perhaps more importantly, the vast majority of baseball games are played in the evening (weekday evenings, no less). While the vast majority of football games are played on weekend afternoons. Add in the daily baseball vs the weekly football, and it's clear that 3 hours isn't equivalent in those contexts. Basketball games are only ~2 hours, so while they can drag at the end if they're close, they've got some wiggle room to do that. And I'm not a NBA fan, but I believe they made some rule changes in recent years to keep those situations under control a bit better. While MLB, to date, has done virtually nothing (no, the zero-pitch intentional walk didn't help). You're right that increasing the roster could slow things down further, which would make it even more important to make some real pace of play / game length changes.
  10. Otto von Ballpark
    Time between innings isn't really a "pace of play" issue -- that would be game length. Although even there, studies have shown the game length is more influenced by the extra idle time between pitches (the real "pace of play" problem): https://www.sbnation.com/a/mlb-2017-season-preview/game-length
  11. Otto von Ballpark
    Graterol is just outside of Law's top 100. There's not really an appreciable difference between being ranked 90 and 108. Could just be a few extra prospects he likes more around the league, could be that Graterol has already undergone Tommy John and Berrios hadn't, etc.
  12. Otto von Ballpark
    He was probably juicing. It should be 286* (with an asterisk)
  13. Otto von Ballpark
    There's a bit of a quality/upside difference between Odorizzi and Cole. By fWAR, remember Cole hit 5.5 fWAR in 2015 and was considered one of the best aces in the game; Odorizzi has yet to eclipse 3 fWAR in a season. Cole had twice topped 200 IP in a season too, even without the DH, compared to Odorizzi topping out at 187, his only season eclipsing 170. I don't think anyone would argue the Twins can't emulate the Odorizzi trade from time to time -- TR's acquisition of Luis Castillo fit that mold, Bill Smith basically did it when he acquired Pavano, Rauch, and Cabrera, etc.
  14. Otto von Ballpark
    I think they were lower value than the Astros guys a year ago, sure. The Astros gave up 3 guys who were very much MLB ready, plus another guy. Musgrove was a roughly league average MLB SP in 2018 when healthy (19 starts); Moran could be viewed as roughly average MLB regular too, depending on how your view his defense (metrics didn't like it). I'm not sure if Gordon or Gonsalves are even MLB ready at that level today, a year later. And I don't think Pittsburgh was trying to rebuild with this trade, but rather reload. There's more to value than MLB readiness, of course, but it's not like Gonsalves and Gordon had notably higher ceilings than Musgrove and Moran either, even if the Pirates were thinking rebuild at the time.
  15. Otto von Ballpark
    FWIW, Reed also had a ~.450 BABIP in the minors last year.
  16. Otto von Ballpark
    I read it as, if the pitching depth is bad enough to justify adding Perez, it's probably bad enough to justify doing something more than simply adding Perez.
  17. Otto von Ballpark
    You are incorrect. Cave is not out of options. 2018 was his first option year, so he has two option years remaining. Granite has 1 option year remaining. Reed is out of options (as is Austin).
  18. Otto von Ballpark
    Baltimore wasn't a bad team for most of Machado's tenure. 3 playoff appearances from 2012-2016, in a very competitive division. And it was only rated as a very mild hitter's park -- never exceeding a park factor of 103 at B-Ref. Target Field was at 102 last year. And Baltimore rated as a slight pitcher's park last year, as did Dodger Stadium, and Machado acquitted himself pretty well.
  19. Otto von Ballpark
    Wilin Rosario was considered a poor defensive catcher, and that was 5 years ago. Looks like the Rockies basically quit using him at catcher in his final MLB season (2015), and I am guessing he hasn't played it much since. This seems like strictly a Rochester 1B/DH reinforcement, kind of like Jeff Clement a few years ago.
  20. Otto von Ballpark
    So, they're not even going to look at Machado, Harper, Corbin, Keuchel, Robertson, etc. this winter. But a year from now, after another .500-ish season, we'll spend whatever it takes to land Arenado, Cole, etc.? (Nevermind those targets may not even reach FA.)
  21. Otto von Ballpark
    Agreed that the merchandise at the team store still isn't a good deal with that discount. But apparently the same discount applies to concessions, which is a little more interesting. While concessions are obviously overpriced too, they are cheaper than merchandise, and more practical, and 15% off could add up. Get your Dollar Dogs for 85 cents each! Or $1.50 off of the $10 Tony O's Cuban Sandwich, etc. Not a huge incentive on its own, but could be a way to save a few more bucks on top of the MLB.TV offer.
  22. Otto von Ballpark
    If that could be confirmed, it could be significant. The full MLB.TV package was $116 last year (will probably go up a couple bucks this year). The cheapest "Flex Plan" is only $460. If you were planning to pay for MLB.TV anyway, that's basically a 25% discount. If a "Pick 10" plan qualifies (and the Twins web site says it "includes all of the benefits of a Twins Season Ticket Holder"), that would be even better -- those plans start at only $220: https://www.mlb.com/twins/tickets/season-tickets/pick-10-plan So deducting the cost of MLB.TV, you'd get 10 games of tickets for ~$100, plus the concession discount coupon. Although it's also worth noting that MLB.TV is also free to T-Mobile customers, discounted for students and military, and discounted quite a bit during the season too -- so a lot of folks don't normally have to pay full price for it either.
  23. Otto von Ballpark
    Agreed that this team should be adding near the top of the rotation, rather than likely at the bottom. But I am glad that they're not penciling in any of those AA/AAA pitchers for the opening day rotation. Really only Romero and Mejia interest me right now, and Romero is apparently ticketed for the pen and Mejia's 2018 season ended rather ominously with concerns around his elbow...
  24. Otto von Ballpark
    Agreed. I'd say there's a few clubs each year who are definitely not in any kind of window (of success). The Twins shortly after TR took over (either time) would qualify. If those clubs want to say "not us, not now" to big moves, I'm not going to argue (too much ). But the rest? Some clubs are definitely in better positions than others, but I think all of the remaining clubs are sort of bunched together as simply trying to be as successful as they can, for this and the next couple seasons. I guess if you narrow the big-move criteria down to, "what clubs should trade an elite prospect for a rental?" -- then yeah, you'd going to want to be in the window of present-day World Series contention before you do that. But that's such a narrow definition as to be almost useless -- there are plenty of less extreme "big moves" which can be made to improve your club, which includes significant FA outlays, trading non-elite prospects for help, and even trading top prospects for mid- to long-term assets (like the Brewers did with Yelich, etc.). A .500-ish team can't put a bunch of preconditions on actively pursuing moves like that.
  25. Otto von Ballpark
    Yes (for the waiver period, rather than the season) -- but it resets once you actually outright them (remove them from the roster). If you add them back again and later want to remove them again, they have to go through waivers again too, even if you are still in the same waiver period. I think waiver periods are about timing waiver requests for guys you anticipate outrighting in the future -- not a free pass to add and remove a guy from the roster a bunch of times.
×
×
  • Create New...