Jump to content
Twins Daily
  • Create Account

Otto von Ballpark

Old-Timey Member
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    20,662

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    74

 Content Type 

Profiles

News

Minnesota Twins Videos

2026 Minnesota Twins Top Prospects Ranking

2022 Minnesota Twins Draft Picks

Minnesota Twins Free Agent & Trade Rumors, Notes, & Tidbits

Guides & Resources

2023 Minnesota Twins Draft Picks

The Minnesota Twins Players Project

2024 Minnesota Twins Draft Picks

2025 Minnesota Twins Draft Pick Tracker

Forums

Blogs

Events

Store

Downloads

Gallery

Everything posted by Otto von Ballpark

  1. Otto von Ballpark
    Technically, Hicks wasn't traded until after 2015, after Buxton already started accumulating service time (and he didn't get 2 full service time years for 2015-2016 -- more like 1 and 1/3 year). And the absence of Hicks wasn't the only reason Buxton was getting a chance in MLB in 2016 -- here's what Buxton did in the upper minors those two seasons: 2015: .305/.367/.500, .867 OPS in 327 PA 2016: .305/.359/.568, .927 OPS in 209 PA He was by no means a finished product, but it was probably enough to earn the MLB roster time that he received at the time. Also, batting average is misleading -- while Buxton was hardly a world-beater in 2016, he paired that low average with enough power to manage a 90 OPS+ -- pretty close to league average offense overall, before factoring in his defense and baserunning.
  2. Otto von Ballpark
    That is weird -- the 10% projection pegs him at a .349 BABIP, which is way better than the league's usual non-pitcher BABIP of ~.300, and way better than his other confidence level BABIPs (.328 at 50% confidence level, for example). Also, that 10% projection pegs him at a 23.5% K rate, which is almost exactly league average (23.4% in 2020, admittedly up from 22.4% in 2019).
  3. Otto von Ballpark
    This is a bit misleading, on a couple of counts: - Despite the dingers and MVP votes, 2019 is actually considered Rosario's worst at the plate, overall and relative to league, over the last 4 seasons - Kirilloff's projected 2021 ZiPS WAR doesn't really top Rosario's 2019 fWAR due to offense (they are roughly equal performances offensively), but rather due to defense which you did not mention at all -- Rosario's 2019 was his worst defensively by Fangraphs metrics, pulling down his fWAR I still makes all the sense in the world for the Twins to prefer Kirilloff to Rosario right now, of course, but besting Rosario's worst season of the last 4, primarily on defense, is not a particularly meaningful barometer!
  4. Otto von Ballpark
    I think the 13-pitcher limit was announced before 2020 spring training, but it was dropped by the time the season actually began in July.
  5. Otto von Ballpark
    It doesn't, if he genuinely needs the experience. It does take away the Twins ability to do that (or use it to justify delaying his clock) in the first two weeks of April.
  6. Otto von Ballpark
    That sounds about right -- there were some early mocks that had Turner as high as #3, but his stock seemed to slip a little bit during the college season. I remember him coming up in discussions here for the Twins at #5, for sure.
  7. Otto von Ballpark
    A number of folks had Turner in their top 10, although generally not as high as Gordon. For example, here's a composite 2014 mock draft that placed Turner at #9: https://www.sbnation.com/mlb/2014/5/29/5759878/updated-consensus-2014-mlb-mock-draft
  8. Otto von Ballpark
    Let's not forget the crazy power spike in the 2019 International League. Gordon's .801 OPS translated to a 101 wRC+ -- basically exactly league average. For comparison, in 2018 Buxton posted a .787 OPS in Rochester, lower than Gordon's 2019 OPS, but it translated to a 122 wRC+ because the league average offensive baseline was so much lower. Gordon's 2019 wasn't bad, and was way better than his 2018 numbers at the same level, but not particularly impressive in terms of projecting his future offensive value.
  9. Otto von Ballpark
    Yes. I wasn't referring to Kirilloff specifically, just service time manipulation in general. Kirilloff would be less blatant than the Kris Bryant situation -- pretty much every 2021 prospect has a better case for being sent down than Bryant did, since there was no 2020 minor league season. And it's a fairly easy calculation for any team to trade a few weeks for an extra year of a position player under the current set-up. (Although as these cases add up, plus comments like those from the Seattle FO, the league may pay for it eventually, in the form of new CBA rules and/or labor strife!)
  10. Otto von Ballpark
    Actually it's a lot more complicated than that. The teams that engage in service time manipulation are getting close to violating actual legal principles of contract law. Here's a paper from the Boston College Law Review that lays it out pretty well starting on page 23: https://lawdigitalcommons.bc.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=3528&context=bclr Cases like Kris Bryant have just enough grey area for teams to avoid punishment in front of an arbitrator, but it's still a real legal question. Not really comparable to feelings about a free agent player signing with a new organization -- there's nothing to legally arbitrate there. It's why teams don't option good players when they fall out of contention, even though they technically could within the CBA rules -- they would almost certainly lose those cases in front of an arbitrator, as a violation of the implied obligation of good faith in their contract.
  11. Otto von Ballpark
    FWIW, a 321 inning sample of a defensive metric is going to be highly unreliable as to determining the degree of any defensive shortcomings. Note that Lux has a +26 Rdrs/yr in that same sample! Lux is a very interesting guy -- I remembered him as a decent prospect a couple years ago, but I had overlooked how he skyrocketed to elite status after 2019 (70 FV at Fangraphs! and top 5 in every list). 28.5% K rate isn't that bad either in a league with a 23.4% K rate overall (especially in a guy's first 150 MLB PA), although I am sure the Dodgers expect him to improve. I don't know if the Dodgers would align Lux at SS right now, but he's definitely worth keeping in the lineup to see what develops. Especially for the Dodgers, who have the luxury of a great roster around him and an almost guarantee of making the postseason regardless of how Lux performs.
  12. Otto von Ballpark
    Thanks, I understand better now. The phrasing just made it sound like their overall depth was worse than it was. Not quite -- Taylor doesn't have an everyday spot right now except as a roving "10th man". So if he and Seager were both hurt, it still only leaves SS as the open spot, although the remaining 7 projected starters may have to start more often. (If they decided to shift Muncy to 2B, they also have Edwin Rios to insert at 1B too -- the Pollock/Bellinger/Betts starting outfield could remain unchanged.)
  13. Otto von Ballpark
    I don't think fans need to take a side in "owners vs. players" to endorse the general idea of service-time reform. We should simply want to see the best players on the field, and remove artificial barriers to that.
  14. Otto von Ballpark
    Not that I'm criticizing the current rotation, but I'd be curious about your criteria for this determination. By fWAR, the 2019 starting staff was better than any in recent memory, including 1991 and 1992: https://www.fangraphs.com/leaders.aspx?pos=all&stats=sta&lg=all&qual=0&type=8&season=2020&month=0&season1=1980&ind=1&team=8,ts&rost=0&age=0&filter=&players=0&startdate=1980-01-01&enddate=2020-12-31&sort=1,d&page=1_50 But by RA9-WAR (which is like Fangraphs' version of bWAR, using actual runs scored and not FIP), 2004 is the best, with 2005 and 1991 close behind. https://www.fangraphs.com/leaders.aspx?pos=all&stats=sta&lg=all&qual=0&type=6&season=2020&month=0&season1=1980&ind=1&team=8,ts&rost=0&age=0&filter=&players=0&startdate=1980-01-01&enddate=2020-12-31&sort=1,d&page=1_50 Prorating 2020's fWAR and RA9-WAR to a full season would indeed top both of those figures, although that's not advisable due to the hyper-unbalanced 2020 schedule!
  15. Otto von Ballpark
    First of all, I don't think Jeremy's plan results in fewer years of team control, even if you adjust it for college players. In some cases, it might (late bloomers?), but for a lot of guys, teams would gain more control. I mentioned above that Jeremy's plan would still have Machado under Baltimore's control in 2021, 3 seasons after they lost control of him under the current system. And barring a long-term deal, that team control would be in the form of 1-year arbitration deals through a player's prime years, which most teams in MLB can and should be willing to handle, even the low-revenue ones. Like we said last winter, most teams could afford Betts' arbitration contract of 1 year at $27 mil -- they just can't afford him on a long-term FA contract. So that would be a way to naturally increase spending from the lower-revenue teams, without forcing them to satisfy a salary floor on the FA market.
  16. Otto von Ballpark
    Yes, that actually changed from 17% to 22% back in 2011, good catch.
  17. Otto von Ballpark
    I think generally the arbitration process would have to be refined too, because right now players are compared to others in the same service time group. But with Jeremy's requirement that 1 day on the roster counts as a season toward arbitration eligibility, you'd have arbitration qualifiers like Bryant with 3 full years, in the same arbitration cohort as Jorge Polanco, who only played 78 games through his first 3 seasons. I'd suggest that while 1 day on the roster in a season would count toward eligibility, the actual arbitration award would still be based on service days / the amount you play (and the quality of your play, of course). So it wouldn't really hurt teams to call a guy up for a few weeks to get his feet wet -- he'd become arb eligible a season earlier, but wouldn't accumulate any time/stats that would balloon his future arb award. To that effect, maybe arbitration could be expanded -- make current pre-arb seasons 2 & 3 subject to arbitration, just on a lower scale. Basically replacing the sometimes contentions pre-arb contract renewals we see now, but keep the modest salary structure. The more that salaries steadily climb through a player's career, as opposed to jumping suddenly in year 4 like they do now, there is less incentive for teams to manipulate usage of that player.
  18. Otto von Ballpark
    I agree with you that the Twins SS depth is fine compared to the rest of the league, even without Lewis. But I will caution that this Dodgers note is misleading since the Dodgers backup SS has been a supersub (Taylor) on a very position-flexible roster. Just because he is technically listed as an outfielder on their 40-man doesn't reduce his SS ability or the team's depth there -- I'm sure Miguel Sano was once technically listed as an outfielder on our 40-man too, it doesn't mean anything. (Plus the Dodgers 3rd-string SS may more accurately be Kenosha, Wisconsin's own Gavin Lux, who was a top 5 prospect before last season and primarily a SS in the minors, while McKinstry was not. Lux is still an unproven commodity himself, of course!)
  19. Otto von Ballpark
    I'm not sure I understand. Under Jeremy's proposal, the Royals would have controlled Beltran through age 29 instead of age 27 -- two additional seasons. And the Orioles would *still* have control over Machado for 2021, 3 seasons beyond when they lost control of him under the current system.
  20. Otto von Ballpark
    I think this is the source of some confusion. Nick wasn't arguing that Maeda was the #2 pitcher in the AL, just that he was possibly the second-best #1 SP among AL contenders (in response to a post that said we needed an ace to go toe-to-toe with competitor's aces to break the 0-18 streak). Presumably Nick is eliminating Bieber, as Cleveland seems committed to leaving contention (although there's more parity in the AL than the NL -- the 2nd best Fangraphs projected team win total in the AL right now is only 88). Fangraphs projections would put Giolito behind Cole in such a ranking, and Ryu would edge Maeda too. A few others might be close. But yeah, while aces are always nice to have, I don't think lack of an "ace" better than Maeda is a big issue. Unfortunately, the 0-18 thing isn't so easily explained by any one factor!
  21. Otto von Ballpark
    That's fair. I joined the discussion late and it appears the stronger statements about Maeda were from others originally.
  22. Otto von Ballpark
    Looks like Fangraphs projections are clustered right around 3 WAR for Maeda in 2021. And by bWAR in 2020, taking opponent offense quality into account to some degree, Maeda would have been a ~4.5 bWAR pitcher over 33 starts. So maybe 3-4 bWAR is a good range to expect in 2021?
  23. Otto von Ballpark
    None of those stats/metrics/measurements account for the extreme unbalanced schedule of 2020, though. The central division teams exclusively played each other, and featured many of the worst hitting clubs in the game. Check out RA9opp (Opponents' Runs Scored Per 9 Innings) at B-Ref. For the two central divisions, it was 4.38. For the rest of MLB, it was 5.13. And I don't think the central division pitchers were *that* much better than their east and west counterparts to explain that huge gap! That's not to say Bauer, Maeda, Bieber, Darvish, etc. are bad pitchers, of course, or that they're no better than Keuchel or Kwang Hyun Kim (central division starters with 1.99 and 1.62 ERAs in 2020, respectively), or that they didn't make real improvements in 2020. But I think we have to take their 2020 performances with a healthy grain of salt right now.
  24. Otto von Ballpark
    I'm not so sure. Beltran and Machado are going to be much more valuable at age 23-24 under this proposed system, than they are at age 25-27 under the current system. Hence, low-revenue teams will have less incentive to trade them, and/or the ability to demand greater trade returns.
  25. Otto von Ballpark
    Agreed that there would have to be give-and-take, but Service Time Manipulation primarily just affects a small subset of players, with Bryant being the poster boy. I think any proposal that pushes free agency way back for members of that high-profile subgroup is probably a non-starter.
×
×
  • Create New...