nytwinsfan

.227/.289/.313 (.601) against RHP. http://www.fangraphs.com/statsplits.aspx?playerid=5297&position=OF&season=2015 These stats are the basis on which I wrote the original post. Interestingly, Hicks has a worse K rate against LHP. He just has a much better BABIP and ISO against LHP. But I don't think that is a fluke/SSS. He has done this his entire career, although not always as drastically.

Yeah, I disagree. It is true that Hunter is not great, but he's done better than expected. Fangraph's RngR, Range runs above average rates him as having saved 4.8 runs, which is admittedly surprising to the point of being a little suspect, especially having a -18.4 for this stat last year. In any event, he hasn't been a disaster. Compare that with Arcia who has had -11.5, -4.4, and -2.7 in 2013, 2014, and 2015, respectively, in obviously very limited play. Now compare that to Rosario, who has 0.0 this year just in right field and 1.7 positive in CF and LF. That's a lot of runs difference. And it is backed up by the eye test. Obviously if Arcia is a monster at the plate, it might still make sense for him to be a corner outfielder, at least against RHP, but that is still a work in progress. I'd rather DH Arcia if Plouffe is traded, or just trade Arcia and get some value back (as part of a deal for a catcher or solid reliever). The one difficulty with the latter option is that his current perceived value is likely below his actual expected value, so it would be good to get him more playing time to reestablish his value. If this season continues to head down the toilet I would be fine with him playing some outfield the remainder of the year to do that. http://www.fangraphs.com/statss.aspx?playerid=731&position=OF

Arcia's arm is fine, but I don't think his range is. What evidence do you have for that? Yeah, obviously there are always injury risks, especially with Buxton and Kepler, who both have a history of them. If you can show me that Arcia has decent range, I might agree with you.

THIS.

Guys, Arcia is not going to be an outfielder. This pitching staff needs all the help it can get, and an outfield of Buxton, Hicks, Rosario, and Kepler is a great group offensively and defensively for the next 6 years. If Arcia is going to play for the Twins it is going to be primarily at DH. That is the only position he is fit to play. Obviously that would require the Twins trading Plouffe and moving Sano to 3B, which may or may not happen. Otherwise, with Mauer at 1B, there is no room for Arcia. I'm open to divergent views, but please please do not make the following tired arguments: (1) Mauer should move to catcher or retire. Come on. It isn't going to happen. Mauer is the 1B until he is badly injured, Terry Ryan is fired and replaced by Billy Beane, or yes, if he retires. But the last two are not going to happen, and I won't root for the first one out of human decency and respect for Mauer's career, which I know some of you don't share. (2) Plouffe, Arcia, or Sano should play in the outfield. This makes no sense. You have four very good outfield prospects who can both hit and play great defense. Those are much harder to come by than good but not great hitters (Sano may end up being a great hitter, but I doubt that about Plouffe or Arcia) that have limited speed in the outfield. Trade one of Plouffe or Arcia, preferably at the height of their value (which is probably now for Plouffe but not now for Arcia). Sano and Plouffe are good athletes and relatively quick FOR THEIR SIZE. They are not quality outfield defenders. They can play outfield in a pinch. Otherwise they are 3B, 1B, or DH. Obviously 3B is where the most value is for both of them, which is why I think we should trade one or the other (probably Plouffe). But I don't know if Terry Ryan shares that view. (3) Arcia can be a bench LH bat. Look, this makes some sense on the surface, but the reality is that managers want their extra position players on the roster to have at least some positional flexibility. But Arcia has, as I noted, none. A potentially better option is to have Arcia play DH, Sano 3B, and Plouffe be the bench bat, pinch hitting and occasionally playing 3B, DH, 1B, and corner outfield. That might make sense but I don't think Plouffe would accept it, and would rightly ask for a trade first. Guys, the outfield of the next six years is going to be Buxton, Rosario, Hicks, and probably Kepler mixed in as well (as much as I am bullish on Kepler, he still has the least track record). Get used to it.

Yes, but how many times do I have to say this. Hicks is hitting with a .600 OPS against RHP. POINT SIX ZERO ZERO. Your previous argument that Arcia should be the one called instead up was reasonable and debatable (although I disagree for the reasons I pointed out). But the idea that Kepler wouldn't hit better than Hicks against RHP is really hard to buy. You would have to assume he loses .330-.350 in OPS against righties. Impossible? No, but I'll take that bet for sure.

But even if his BABIP drops 70 points he'd still be much better against RHP than Hicks. That is the point.

Well, your gut feeling is wrong. That's why I wrote this post with stats and analysis. Kepler is very little like Hicks. Hicks is a switch hitter whose strong side is from the right against LHP. He has (as you said) often taken time to dominate a level, has great BB%, but unlike Kepler has mediocre K%. He has also had troubles with passivity at the plate and frequently has retooled his swing. He has also had trouble focusing and mentally adjusting. Kepler is a pure lefty, with both good BB% and low K% rates. His problem has been injuries which have hampered his ability to adjust in 2013 and 2014. While Hicks hit an impressive .286/.384/.460 (.840) in AA as a 22-yo, Kepler, also a 22-yo is hitting an outrageous 330/.412/.540 (.952). By all accounts Kepler has great makeup and has never had problems focusing, feeling confident, or giving 100% on every play (not knocking Hicks personally -- that happens for some people, but it is an issue Hicks has had to work through). But even if they were similar players in terms of stat profile, comparing them to argue Kepler should not be promoted would be a bad idea. A anecdotal sample size of 1 is a horrible horrible basis to make a decision like this one. Many prospects with Hicks and many prospects with Kepler's profile come up and succeed, and others do not. There are no sure things. But my belief that Kepler would hit better than a .600 OPS against RHP is much more likely than that Hicks will all of a sudden improve his OPS against RHP by 100 points or more.

I'd be for a change from Terry Ryan (assuming it is for the better-- it could be worse), but the decisions that concern me are not failing to go big at the trade deadline in a year when statistically the Twins were playing way over their heads, but rather the signing of Nolasco, moving May rather than Pelfrey or Milone to the pen, continuing to play a lost Santana when Escobar is perfectly decent, the extension of Suzuki, the management of the bullpen by TR. And Ryan's obvious thinking that Stauffer and Jepsen were anything more than very marginal improvements.

I just don't understand what you base this on. A 22 year-old obliterating AA pitching with average to above average corner outfield defense is not something that happens all the time. And unlike certain other prospects who have struggled at the major league level after killing AA and AAA (Arcia, Santana, Vargas), Kepler has always had great BB and K rates. He is not going to come up and strike out 30% of the time for two months. Might he struggle a little at the beginning? Of course, that happens with a lot of prospects. But he also might excel right away from the beginning. But the point is that right now Hicks is not hitting well at all against RHP. He just isn't. In fact, his numbers are miserable against RHP. Kepler is a clear upgrade. And unlike Arcia (who would also be much better against RHP than Hicks), Kepler isn't a liability on defense. Yeah, but Hicks and Rosario are CF, and by all accounts Kepler can handle CF in a pinch just fine. You really don't think Kepler would outperform Robinson on offense? Are you serious? Sure, you can never be "sure" as in 100% sure of anything. But based on his performance and K/BB rates the last 600 PAs, it seems exceedingly likely.

If the game is about runs scored in the way that you mean it, then why care about ERA? Why not care about Run Average instead of Earned Run Average? If poor defensive range counts against a pitcher (as it does under ERA), why shouldn't errors too?

http://www.sportsonearth.com/article/141302732/minnesota-twins-wild-card-races Here is more fuel for this fire!!!

Yup, agree with this article completely. Thanks for hitting the nail on the head. Is this satire?

My understanding is that his hit tool is really weak.

Well, implicit in that is a catcher who can hit well. Obviously.

Totally agree with you. I wonder if Ryan will pull the trigger though. He (understandably) likes Plouffe, who has been huge for this team the last few years. The heart says to keep Plouffe, but the head says it makes sense to trade him. Hope Ryan will do it. As for who to target, the Giants don't need a 3B anymore, so as much as I'd love to get Susac, not sure that is in the cards. But I definitely agree a good catchre with at least a few years of control should be a top offseason priority.

Not upset at all. It would have been great to get a better reliever than Jepsen, but not if it meant giving up Polanco or Kepler for 1 and 1/2 years of control of a slightly upgraded reliever.

I'm not too worried. The BB are likely attributable to nerves, and even with those BBs, his BABIP is .433 and his FIP is 2.82. The strikeouts are there. No need to worry at all.

Is Palacios really 145 pounds? That must be an old listing for a guy hitting with his power, no? If not, that is ridiculous.

If DH were open, I would completely agree about Arcia, and honestly, if Kepler is off limits, then I would be for bringing up Arcia. He is a good option against righties. It is just that his defense is atrocious. He's also in the midst of a slump, and while that is a small sample size, Arcia has shown that when he gets into a funk it affects his mental game. I'd wait for him to start raking against at AAA before calling him up. And Kepler doesn't have to hit well right away to be an upgrade. He just has to hit above .600 OPS or so against righties. Do i think he can do that right now? Yes, and probably more than a bit more.

Really? I had no idea. I understand splits, platooning, and OPS, but it had never occurred to me that the pitching in AAA might be a tad less skilled than that in the majors. Snark aside, I try to assume that everyone on this site has at least a minimal understanding of how baseball works and don't feel the need to remind everyone of obvious assumptions that go into my analysis. Readers can make their own adjustments for the move from AA to the majors, and obviously if they think a bigger expected adjustment is warranted, that might lead them to a different conclusion. But I certainly don't think it is unreasonable to think that it is likely someone with a .926 OPS against RHP for 350 PA in AA will do better against RHP than someone with a .599 OPS in the majors. Is it a sure thing? Of course not. But a .327 OPS difference is a really really big one.

Arcia is hitting .139/.262/.194 (.456) over the last 10 games. Kepler is hitting .300/.370/.675 (1.045) over his last 10. Yes, a relatively small sample size, but a bigger sample size than the one "promising, but marginal, prospect[] straight from AA" that you are referring to (i.e., Hicks.). Unless there is someone else you had in mind.

Again, I completely agree, I just would go with Kepler over Arcia in the first instance. If for some reason that is out of the question, I'd agree with calling up Arcia instead.

I know, but if you are choosing between Kepler and Arcia, the fact that Kepler has had better splits against lefties (lately at least) than Arcia is another factor in his favor, because inevitably whichever one you call up is going to have at least some at bats against lefties. But for me the biggest reasons to take Kepler over Arcia are Arcia's recent struggles and Kepler's superior defense and defensive flexibility.

What about 3/4 of the days? Is that really such a hit to his development that it isn't worth a lot more production out of the outfield against RHP? And as I said, they are going to be calling him up in Sept. probably anyway. So basically 5 or 6 days he otherwise would have started he'd be on the bench available as a pinch hitter. That's not going to make or break his development. Plus there are developmental advantages to being on the major league team, such as Brunansky, mentoring from Hunter (if you believe in that), etc.