mikelink45

Time to respond to my own blog - remember all the stat heads that came down on Suzuki as Minnesota catcher. Now he has signed with the Nationals - two year contract after being the starting catcher for Atlanta. So what is the stathead evaluation for this and why does everyone else want him?

We all hope it works! Even when we are skeptical.

So the computer guys told us this would be smart, we see the trend and we jump on it. Use relievers every day! Let's look at a couple simple stats that are within my grasp. 162 games - average reliever use per game now 3 - put in an opener and it might be 4, but lets not worry about those games where Giminez came in or other extended innings. Just 162 games times three - 486 relief appearances. So we carry 13 pitchers, 5 are starters. 8 relief pitchers divided into 486 means 60 relief appearances per pitcher - forget those who are so valuable that they are out more often. Check out historical use on Baseball Reference - https://www.baseball-reference.com/bullpen/Pitcher#Historical_Usage and you can see the various trends in pitching from the every other game starters of the 1800s to the four man rotation and lots of complete games to five man rotation and a growing requirement for relief pitchers. The more pitchers the less they are used and the more relief we need. Tommy John surgery increases, pitchers are using pitch counts but no one knows whether it is the pitch count or the frequency of pitching that matters. How did Warren Spahn and Juan Marichal and all those great pitchers survive? Must be some stat there that can answer. Trends have always made us smarter. Remember when Coca Cola came out with New Coke and soon the non-stat drinkers rejected it as well as Crystal Pepsi and its clear cola. Or maybe your family had an Edsel - talk about a car of the future! Or more recently we had Netflix divide into Netflix and Quikster - don't remember - understandable. The streaming only branch was flushed down the stream. There was the Apple Newton that was an instant success followed by an instant failure, it just did not deliver, kind of like the sixth man in your bullpen rotation. Then there is that weight reducing fat - Olestra - that Lays used to produce Wow chips! In one year the FDA called a halt, of course the customers did too when they learned that the way that they lost weight was because it induced diarrhea. Kind of like changing pitchers 3 times in an inning induces a coma. Two giants sat down with their marketing stat heads and combined to produce a soda bottle product called Mazagran - coffee tasting soda - within the year the stats called sales numbers forced this Starbuck/Pepsi product off the market. And it would have been an excellent opener to start your day. I will not even comment on the attempt by Colgate - the toothpaste company - to put out a line of frozen foods. Did they clean your teeth when you were done? We will never know. But more recent and perhaps more important to this audience - Playboy decided to drop nudity - where are those geniuses. Did they really believe people bought it for the articles? Well they don't now - those geniuses are back in the minor leagues and nudity is on the rise again. So now we have a trend that created a trend - fifth starters were not much better - if at all - than the bullpen guys so suddenly we evolved to bullpenning. The term does not mean anything, but it is a trend, just like launch angle and increased strikeouts. Does that mean anything to the game? Well strikeout require more pitches which means the pitch count is reached earlier so we must pull the starter and bring in the reliever. More pitches, more game delays, more time before the game ends, longer games and the commissioner wants to figure out how to change this. Good luck. Check out various trends with this excellent set of graphs - https://michaelbein.com/baseball.html then look at the graph on this site for length of games and runs scored - https://www.beyondtheboxscore.com/2015/1/29/7921283/baseball-game-length-visual-analysis and then we ask the question - do people want longer games with less runs scored? Do people want to see more pitchers and less runners on base? As an old guy I love Mike Trout - “The two biggest stats to me are runs scored and RBI,’’ says two-time MVP Mike Trout of the Los Angeles Angels, the game’s greatest player in the midst of his finest season. “I mean, that’s how you win games right, scoring the most runs?’’ Bob Nightengale has an interesting article - https://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/mlb/columnist/bob-nightengale/2018/06/20/mlb-bad-baseball-attendance-strikeouts/718162002/ - that looks at trends and solutions. So, if the trends are hurting baseball, baseball might want to buck the trends, limit relief pitcher use, reduce the innings, move back the fences, reduce the innings. I do not know the answer, but as a former tax accountant I can tell you that numbers can prove many things, but they cannot make the game more enjoyable, unless you are just into APBA, Rotisserie, Fantasy, X-box, etc; nor can they change the human body. Use stats, but don't go too far I really want to see a baseball game - not relays from the bullpen.

As a college instructor I can applaud taking men from the collegiate ranks. They are teachers and this young group of players needs some teaching. Those skills might work because the players are young. I would not try this with a veteran group. But, while I find this interesting, I am not sure that I expect our current roster to become significantly better. Of course, that means, I am not sure that Buxton can get his concentration on the ball and get basehits, that Sano can rein in that big swing and miss, or that Polanco can get his concentration on every ball hit to him. I do not know if Kepler has gotten comfortable with the plateau he is on - he shouldn't be. I am not an advocate of openers - I loved seeing those starting pitchers go deep in the playoffs, and I am especially cynical if we are using mediocre pitchers from a lousy bull pen to be the openers. Openers did not shine in the playoffs. Having a big bullpen of failed starters and not quite sterling relievers does not want me to throw out the bench and fill the rosters with questionable arms. Nor does it make me excited to see these relief pitchers come in every 2 - 3 games. Ten years from now I expect to read how this generation of stat geeks blew out the arms of the bullpen throwers and that the league is desperately seeking the new wave of relievers. You can take stats and make them tell you what you want, but you cannot take the human body and plug it in to a computer.

I believe it is time for the FO to start thinking about the players these men will coach.

I cannot approve or disapprove. I have no idea how good any of these picks are and will not know for at least a year. I would really like to see the job description and expectations for each of them.

So far this has not been inspiring. As one of the old guys I am not thrilled by what I have seen, but more than these pitching geniuses I am confused with the rehire of the batting gurus. Our pitching staff started to round out except in the bullpen, but our stud prospects continue to flail at the dust left behind by the fastballs they miss, yet we throw out the pitching coaches and keep the batting coaches. This FO has bewildered me since they first came on.

Great posting - do not get your tongue stuck in your cheek!

Coaches are always a mystery - who they are, how good they are at teaching and counseling - so I do not have much to add on most individuals. As a purely result angle the coach I thought most likely to go would have been Rowson, but I must have missed some key result. The World Series strategy I hope that can translate to the Twins was the Red Sox approach - two strike hitting, speed and aggressiveness on the bases, reduced strike outs. Forget the "new" pitching ideas - getting on base and scoring is still the name of the game.

With our new manager comes a lot of new stories and expectations, but his arrival actually got me thinking about Italian heritage and the game of baseball. Like the earlier essay regarding the American Indian and another essay looking at the black pioneers who crossed that large barrier of prejudice I know that other ethnic groups also had a lot of challenges. To discover more I found a superb book – Beyond Dimaggio by Lawrence Baldassaro to guide my search. In our age where we see so much racism raising its very ugly head again and so much angst about immigration, it might be hard to remember that these stories are not new and that the Italians were the focus of such issues and sentiments at one time. From 1881 – 1890 307,000 Italians (approximately) came to America, in the next two decades the numbers went to 625,000 and then 2,136,000. To the many of the already existing Americans they posed a threat that was both economic and moral – threats to their jobs and their families. They had darker skin, were Catholic, spoke a different language and brought their customs and beliefs with them. They were judged guilty of being poor, uneducated, and certainly brought crime with them. The press said they were criminals and radicals and hatred exploded into incidents like New Orleans – 1891- lynching of 11 Italians after they had been acquitted. Is it any secret why Italians lived, worked, and socialized in their own neighborhoods? Or is it any secret why one of the first three Italians to become Professional baseball players would choose to go by the name – Ping Bodie – instead of Francesco Pezzolo? It took time for the Italian to be established in MLB – the first was – Ed Abbatichhio who played with Honus Wagner, and made it through 9 seasons as an average ball player. The fact that he was first was significant. The fact that Ping Bodie would follow, then Babe Pinelli would complete the triumvirate as the only Italians in MLB until Tony Lazzeri in 1926. Pinelli was essential for taking on one of the biggest generalizations – Italians are hot heads! Actually he was, but he learned to control his emotion and went on to two decades as an umpire after leaving the bat and glove behind. It was Tony Lazzeri who led the way in the 1920’s filling a role that the Yankees were searching for – an Italian who could bring in the fans from the large Italian boroughs. He did that and more as a member of the murderer’s row and eventually was elected a hall of fame 2B. But even his effectiveness in drawing fans did not stop the press from calling him a WOP – in the headlines. He was soon joined by Frank Crosetti – SS, who went on to hold the position until he groomed his replacement – Phil Rizzuto. In fact, he was so good at grooming he became a coach and his last stint was with the Minnesota Twins in 1970 – 71! And all of this without talking about DiMaggio – all three brothers, Lombardi, Berra, Rizzuto, and all the other great Hall of Fame contributors to our favorite game. The first Italian Manager would be Oscar “Spinach” Melillo in a short stint with the Browns, but that would change. Phil Cavarretta in 1951 was the first Italian to manage a full season. The Twins would have Sabath Anthony “Sam” Mele, Billy Martin, Frank Quilici, and Cookie Lavagetto who came with the Senators to the Twin Cities. Now we move into the new age of analytics, player/manager relations, and hopes and I welcome Rocco from our long list of Italian baseball legends.

I'm always glad when we start looking at the support coaches and what they are all supposed to be doing. A manager puts two people in position to do what needs to be done but it's up to them to fulfill their own role

Nice job. You save me from having to look up the same statistics.

Like all managers he has one problem he cannot control - the roster that the FO gives him. If he gets better than Molitor had he will do better. He can call on all the relievers he wants - if they cannot pitch he cannot win. He can platoon all he wants, but if they cannot hit or field he cannot win. Good lucky Rocco - but the ball is still in the FO court.

This is probably too late since we have now hired our new manager, but the reality is - I want a manager who can take the crap the FO gives him and make it look like a championship team.

The Dodgers may win. The Red Sox could see their magic disappear - this is baseball after all, but there are some story lines that I have really liked and wanted to point out. One of which is that talent - not analytics wins games. Sorry Aaron Gleeman, but when we retire APBA and other games and get to the teams and games that count there is much more than probability. So what are my take-aways so far? Relief pitchers can't match great starters. Milwaukee was a fun experiment in defying the tradition of starters and relievers, but in fact their relievers wore out. This over emphasis on Bullpen arms has a draw back because no one can pitch 162 games - sorry Mike Marshall I know you tried. And by the end of the year the accumulated games wear the pitchers down. Did anyone see the same Jeffress in the play-offs that succeeded in the regular season? The key games for the Brewers were when Chacin and Miley started and took care of some innings to take pressure off the pen. The Red Sox Bullpen has been lights out - but Price and Sales took some innings off the board first. The Dodgers got too smart with all its match ups and not only called on Madsen one too many times but shut down Baez when he had the momentum to stop the Sox. Strikeouts do matter. Look at the Red Sox. Down two strikes they do not give in, they do not go for the big whiff, they put the ball in play and then something happens. Of course it does not work every time, but a strike out is an out - every time. Red Sox players are not without power, but they are also not without speed and excitement. This is a team exuding what the great Rickey Henderson once had. They upset the other team, the pitchers, the catchers, the managers. The Dodgers have shown in the first two games that you should throw out the book sometimes. They put their good hitters on the bench for match ups that have lesser results. Their formula looks old, although home cooking could fix that. I really do think that the best teams from each league are playing each other and that is great. While I rooted for the A's and the Brewers, their styles were fun and unconventional, I am still pleased to see the teams with the best stars and the best organizations playing for the championship. My last note for the Twins - forget the Kershaw sweepstakes. He is aging and will still want a long term contract that in the end will look like the Pujols deal.

I have no opinion on this - like most, I lack any real information beyond this article to make a judgment. The thing I am happy about is that Shelton did not get the job or any of the others already on this team. I see collective guilt for the team and if Molitor had to take the fall his right hand man, bench coach, should be seen as part of the same problem or why was he there? I do not like Shelton and he might be great somewhere, but it would not have been the right hire here.

There have been some terrific posts in this conversation and I wish I could be the one who comes up with the really smart answer, but the fact is - no one knows the managers' duties any more. It has not been defined. The most constant reply is leadership - yet, how do we define a leader - it is very different from manager to teammate. I think what we are looking for is a psychologist. Someone to balance the personalities. Then we have to figure out what all these other coaches are for and what their powers and responsibilities should be. Yup, the more I think about it, the happier I am that I withdrew my application before they threw it out.

Not trolling I read the entire article like I do all the articles and as usual I enjoy reading them. Sometimes I enjoy seeing what reactions a comment gets. I am interested in how many homeruns and in what situations they are hit, but you are right, the distance does not interest me any more.

Do you get more runs for longer home runs? If not, who cares.

No doubt about it. Gibson was a fun story, but there is only one Twin Pitcher you would want on the mound when you really needed a win.

I envision Kepler improving as he moves forward. He is nearing the age of peak performances and I hope he shows a learning curve to go along with it. If he is a difference maker in a trade that really improves us, I would be fine, but for now Rosario/Cave/Kepler are our outfielders until Buxton proves he can be a MLB batter as well as fielder. Grossman is still currently number 4 and I wonder how much the FO likes Wade since they gave him no time in September.

Maybe we need to look at why he had so many scoops and correct that.

As the article says - they can probably get anyone to play 1B. I like Cave's bat better than Austin.

The decision on Mauer should not be with Mauer at this point. The FO is supposed to take charge of the team. If they want him back he will be back, if they do not want him back the decision should be out of Mauer's hands. At this point I would put Cave and Austin on 1B with Cave also as the fourth OF and if needed he moves in to regular OF rotation. Then as the season progresses it is up to Rooker to make the move, but I do worry that Austin and Rooker create another strikeout hole in the lineup.

Yes - at this point Garver is on a projection upward while Sano is floating in limbo. I will rely on Garver next year and hope Sano gets straightened out. But Sano has not achieved enough in the last seasor or two to be a core player for me.