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
    Machado wasn't far from the bag, so maybe fake a bunt on the first pitch, get the third baseman to charge in a bit, and let Buxton steal it more easily behind him? That wouldn't be bad -- but yeah, that's not what Dozier did at all. Both team's announcers called it as a beautiful bunt when Dozier laid it down, but both the pitcher and third baseman were in position to field it and throw him out without too much trouble. That tells me it was clearly a bad time to try bunting for a hit, he didn't catch anybody unaware. It seems pretty clear Dozier overrated his chances of a hit and/or overrated the importance of a sacrifice there, either case being worth some criticism.
  2. Otto von Ballpark
    It seems that when an administrator promotes/re-posts someone else's blog post (not sure the exact process, I am not an admin ), the correct original author is shown on the front page and article page, but in the forum view, it credits only the administrator and not the original author. See for example Seth's recent promotion of a Jesse Lund piece. Article view, correctly credited to Jesse Lund: http://twinsdaily.com/articles.html/_/minnesota-twins-news/minnesota-twins-minor-leagues/a-study-on-organizational-minor-league-rankings-r4587 Forum view, incorrectly credited to Seth with no mention of Jesse (until someone thanks him in the comments): http://twinsdaily.com/topic/21941-article-a-study-on-organizational-minor-league-rankings/ Not sure if this can be fixed, but it is very confusing for folks like me who access the site directly through the forums, I am never quite sure who the original author is.
  3. Otto von Ballpark
    Not only that, but judging from history I'd expect Dozier to try to play through most injuries first anyway, further reducing the need for his potential injury replacement to be on the 25-man roster at all times.
  4. Otto von Ballpark
    Wow, I heard they had a bad start, but wow. Not only a .120 batting average, but a slash line of .120/.138/.130, .269 OPS. 10 singles, 1 double, and 2 walks in 94 plate appearances. I think they are at "full strength" too (at least, no hitters on the DL right now).
  5. Otto von Ballpark
    He's a leadoff hitter. He has lots of chances to show bunt that don't involve our fastest runner already in scoring position.
  6. Otto von Ballpark
    If Dozier wants the right to calculate his odds of a bunt hit and go for it, fine. But like Chief, I suspect part of Dozier's calculation was advancing the runner as a worst case scenario, which is a bad calculation that he probably shouldn't be making on the fly. It was the first pitch, Machado wasn't playing far back (he was on the infield grass already when they cut to the wide camera shot) and he's a great defensive third baseman. And Gallardo made the play, I don't know about his defensive chops but he looked great here. Is Dozier even a good bunter? Bremer said it was a beautiful bunt, but Dozier was pretty easily out at first. And as I previously mentioned, Buxton didn't need that kind of help to advance to third base. Oh, and Buxton had just lined a double to left. Oh, and with Sano due up 2 batters later, a Dozier out guaranteed that there would be an open base to put Sano regardless of what Mauer did. Seriously, a bad time to try getting a sneak bunt hit.
  7. Otto von Ballpark
    I was responding to your post where you said: "the idea that at worst, it advances a runner" THAT is the idea. Quit saying that I oppose bunting for a hit, it was my bread and butter play in little league. (Although mine were "swinging" bunts, if you will. )
  8. Otto von Ballpark
    Not even complain about Dozier's decision? I mean, Buxton is our fastest runner, he's already in scoring position, and Dozier is one of our better hitters. And I'm not sure he's a particularly good or experienced bunter. There was a very good chance that he wouldn't get a hit and that Buxton's advancement on the play would be mostly meaningless (he could have advanced on a lot of different balls hit in play, or even stolen or advanced on the mildest of passed balls in a longer at-bat).
  9. Otto von Ballpark
    And that "idea" is a bad one, and one that is ultimately up to the manager to squash. Particularly when it comes with our fastest baserunner in scoring position and one of our better hitters at the plate.
  10. Otto von Ballpark
    Maybe the better way to look at it this early is K%. Twins at 31.5%: http://www.fangraphs.com/leaders.aspx?pos=all&stats=bat&lg=all&qual=0&type=8&season=2016&month=0&season1=2016&ind=0&team=0,ts&rost=0&age=0&filter=&players=0&sort=9,d MLB average for non-pitchers so far is 22.6%: http://www.fangraphs.com/leaders.aspx?pos=np&stats=bat&lg=all&qual=0&type=8&season=2016&month=0&season1=2016&ind=0&team=0,ss&rost=0&age=0&filter=&players=0 Last year, that average was 19.9%, and the Twins were at 21.0%.
  11. Otto von Ballpark
    I have no problem with occasional bunt hit attempts either, and I didn't mean to imply otherwise (or imply that the manager should ban bunts completely). But it is still up to the manager to tell his players not to do it, if it is not a good situation for it, especially if he suspects the player may be including the sac bunt "benefits" in his calculation to attempt it, which could have been the case with Dozier. With the speedy Buxton on second base, and nobody out, there is zero "sacrifice" benefit from a failed bunt hit attempt -- and it's on Molitor to make sure his players know that.
  12. Otto von Ballpark
    I agree with that, and really if that is the goal, this is the minimum rule that they had to establish. Players will always push boundaries, and if you allow players to slide well out of the way and past the base to contact the fielder, you're basically only one degree of separation from an Utley slide and players will still attempt them, with the hope that their butt hits the ground early enough or whatever other criteria specified by the alternate rule is met. To really reduce the Utley incidents, you want the rule to ban activities with a couple degrees of separation from such incidents. And banning slides that wind up nowhere near the base is a logical place to achieve that.
  13. Otto von Ballpark
    I argued no such thing, you are taking that comment of mine out of context. I merely was trying to point out that the new rule doesn't ban contact per se -- it bans poor slides (i.e. ones that take you very far and well past the base).
  14. Otto von Ballpark
    Barry Bonds tried to help this effort in his playing days, introducing a substance known as "the clear" which I can only assume was a vanishing cream that could be applied to baserunners once put out.
  15. Otto von Ballpark
    Even if he bunted on his own, that wouldn't absolve the manager of any responsibility. It is likely that he gave the player permission to bunt on his own, and did nothing to tell the player otherwise in that situation.
  16. Otto von Ballpark
    I think there needs to be some physical interference with the fielder or the ball to rule interference. At that point, it becomes a judgement call. But I don't think the umpires can say that the mere presence of Correa legally running on the grass "psyched out" the fielder or something like that. Just like the mere act of sliding into second base won't be enough to rule interference there under the new rule. What we've seen is runners going beyond that (literally well beyond second base) in violation of the rule. Hopefully that removes enough ambiguity that an Utley/Coghlan style take out slide will never even be attempted again. I think you are mistaken if you think a more modest rule change would have had the same effect at permanently eliminating such slides.
  17. Otto von Ballpark
    The umps only "thought so" in so much as they didn't immediately call interference on the field, knowing that replay could correct them. Just like with a "trap rule" -- it's easiest to let the play continue on the field and correct it later, rather than end the play immediately and try to undo it. These two runners didn't slide primarily into the bag -- they slid well past the bag. If a runner stealing second base did that, I'm not sure they could argue "I slid primarily into the bag" after they were tagged out...
  18. Otto von Ballpark
    Apparently we're on MLB Network Thursday night, not tonight: http://mlb.mlb.com/mlb/official_info/broadcasts/national.jsp
  19. Otto von Ballpark
    Similarly, a runner not attempting to advance (i.e. sliding way past second base) isn't allowed to obstruct a fielder.
  20. Otto von Ballpark
    Yup. They would need to change the rule to "no running on the grass, period" in order for that play to be called interference, as it played out. Which might be a fine suggestion -- but has no real relationship with replay complaints or the takeout slide at second rule.
  21. Otto von Ballpark
    Just had a chance to look at the Correa play. The issue there was the actions of the pitcher. It's not against the rules to run on the grass, but I think it can only be interference if the throw hits the runner. If the runner is on the grass, the pitcher just has to peg the runner with the throw if he wants that call. In that sense, Correa running on the grass there would have been the equivalent of Bautista sliding hard but staying on second base. Both aggressive baseball moves, fully within the rules, that would probably have benefited their teams, given how the other teams reacted.
  22. Otto von Ballpark
    So what would your rule be? Context, my friend. If he was less blatant about the grab, it probably wouldn't have mattered since he slid way past the base, hence the other condition listed in my post.
  23. Otto von Ballpark
    I'm not a wiz with frame capture, but here's a look at the play at first: This is after the throw has already bounced once and the first baseman has gone into full lean to try stopping it from going wild. And the runner's foot still isn't quite on the bag. The runner might have beaten a throw that reached first on the fly, but it's hardly clear enough to absolve Bautista (setting aside the fact that this kind of discretion isn't part of the rule, of course).
  24. Otto von Ballpark
    I'll give the ump a break here. It was pretty clear on replay but I could see not being confident in calling this interference in real-time, especially if you know replay can help.
  25. Otto von Ballpark
    What exactly is a "hard slide"? If you mean one that carries the runner well past second base, yeah, that's the rule.
×
×
  • Create New...