IndianaTwin

"Integral" is in the eyes of the beholder. I think they see him more as "bonus" than "integral." With Duran, Jax and Sands, he's at best No. 4 on the pecking order. With Varland, Alcala, Coulombe and Topa, he could be as low as No. 8 when all is said and done. Getting 34.1 innings at 2023 performance level from your No. 8 during the time he is active would be solid. If he does more than that, it's bigger bonus. If he does less, well, they were solid last year pretty much without him and have reason to think they are already improved elsewhere in the pen.

I said this in a different thread, but with Blewett not on the 40-man, I could see them rolling for a couple days with a seven-man bullpen, particularly if Gasper indeed avoids the IL. They have off days on days 2 and 9, with days 5-7 being games with the White Sox. I'd consider keeping Blewett off the 40-day for a few days and keep all three of Gasper, Martin and Kiersey around. After you've had a couple back-to-back games where you've the bullpen a full four innings, go ahead and send one of them, but for 3-5 days, maybe longer, you've got an extra pinch runner hanging around. EDIT: To add... https://www.mlb.com/twins/news/mickey-gasper-dashawn-keirsey-jr-make-twins-opening-day-roster "The Twins all but set the position-player side of their season-opening roster on Monday, notifying infielder-catcher Mickey Gasper and outfielder DaShawn Keirsey Jr. that they will make the club and optioning infielder Austin Martin." Meaning, they don't appear to be taking my advice. Oh, well, they haven't the last eleventy-seven times either. Maybe I've been using the wrong email address.

You obviously don't think they are going to ask me to come out of retirement and play one of those. 😀

The article hints at going outside to fill the 8th spot in the bullpen. With off days on Day 2 and Day 9, I could see them trying to sneak a few days with an extra bench player available until the bullpen usage backs up a smidge. Plus, you can't say this in the paper, but Days 5-7 are against the White Sox, so it's not unlikely that starters could go long on those days and keep the bullpen fresh. EDIT: To add... https://www.mlb.com/twins/news/mickey-gasper-dashawn-keirsey-jr-make-twins-opening-day-roster "The Twins all but set the position-player side of their season-opening roster on Monday, notifying infielder-catcher Mickey Gasper and outfielder DaShawn Keirsey Jr. that they will make the club and optioning infielder Austin Martin." Meaning, they don't appear to be taking my advice. Oh, well, they haven't the last eleventy-seven times either. Maybe I've been using the wrong email address.

I remember reading that about him when he was still playing, but a stat like that sticks with a person. If I recall, they blew out their opponents in the game where he had four.

Last year, Correa didn’t take days off very often at all. He took weeks off on a couple of occasion, but when he was active, he played almost every day. Games 1-11: Played 11 of 11 Games 12-27: IL stint Games 28-94: Played 63 of 67 Games 95-147: IL stint Games 148-160: On-off-on-off-on-off in what would have been a rehab stint if not in a pennant race, then played 7 straight. Each year is different, but if last year is the pattern, while it’s fair to name the concern of Correa having two IL stints (one very long), the idea of Rocco giving a healthy Correa lots of days off needs to go away.

Mickey Hatcher, Mickey Gasper. Mere coincidence to have such similar names? (Favorite Mickey Hatcher stat. In the 21 basketball games of his senior year in high school, he had 104 fouls. Do the math.)

Wait -- do you know something about my sons that I don't know? Mine have the exact same ages and similar dispositions. 😀 I was skeptical about the "quality start" at first, but have come to feel less so. As long as I define "quality start" as "kept my team in the game" as opposed to "Cy Young worthy," I think it means something. Not everything, by any means, but one of those quick-and-dirty stats that lets you look at a guy and say, "Yeah, he gave our team a chance to win." Most any time a starter gets through six and gives up only three runs (not distinguishing between earned and unearned runs), I've got some chance of winning. If my offense has scored no runs or only one, I'm generally sunk, period. If they've scored even two, I'm a solo run from tying. And as we've seen above, six innings also means that he's gone longer than average. The list of last year's leaders correlates pretty well with successful seasons. QS also has a way of softening the effect of outlier games in a pitcher's ERA when the manager leaves him in after getting shelled because the bullpen is depleted, etc. Ober had 18 quality starts out of 31, which is pretty good, for example, but his ERA was only 3.98 thanks to having given up 17 of his 79 earned runs in two starts. Without those, two starts, he's a spiffy 3.18. I found Jose Quintana as a guy who had a virtually identical ERA+ (105 compared to Ober's 104) in a similar number of innings (170.1 to 178.2). But Quintana only had 12 out of 31 QS compared to Ober's 18 of 31. That suggests Ober kept his team in the game in a bigger percentage of his starts. I'd rather have Ober's season on my team than Quintana's. An argument I've heard against the QS start is that it's only a 4.50 ERA, which it is for that individual game. But to keep using Ober as the example, only two of his 18 QS were exactly that figure. Every other combination in a QS, even three earned runs in 6.1 innings, lowers the ERA. I didn't do the math, but Ober's ERA in his 18 QS is likely well below the 3.18 referenced above. I'm not advocating for this, but I do wonder if, given that starts are getting shorter, someone will start advocating for a QS starting to include two runs in five innings or more.

That would be awesome, and they will sometimes. Lopez did eight times, Ober seven, Ryan five, Paddack twice and SWR once. So almost a quarter of the time with the top three and then a couple more. There were also a dozen or so other times when the starter was given a shot, but didn’t get through the seventh. Realistically, however, I don’t see them getting past an average of 5.5-5.7 in today’s game, but that would be well above average.

You never know. Rollie Fingers first grew the handlebar to get $300 from Charlie Finley and it seemed to work pretty well for him.

What is your definition of "go deeper"? The Twins have already gone deeper than other teams. The MLB average was 5.2 innings last year. Take out the two games started by Openers and the Twins averaged 5.4. Digging deeper, Ryan averaged 5.9 innings per start last year and Lopez and Ober 5.8 innings each. Paddack averaged 5.2 innings and odds would suggest he'll go longer in a second year removed from TJS. The rookies averaged less than 5 innings, in part because of load management, particularly after they fell out of the race. It's logical to think that they will go longer this year as well. Only four teams averaged more than 5.5 innings last year but it seems very feasible the Twins will be above that. It wouldn't be out of line to add a paragraph to the "The Good" section of the OP noting that the strength of the Twins rotation means their bullpen shouldn't be as stressed as others.

From the OP: Young starters may find themselves put to the test for the Twins this year, and that's always a risky proposition. We saw this play out in the late stage of 2024 after Ryan went down. The dependability of the rotation was greatly diminished as Woods Richardson posted a 5.23 second-half ERA, Matthews took his lumps, and starters generally struggled to get through five innings on a regular basis, increasing the bullpen's burden. Post All-Star Break, starters made it through five innings in 42 of 68 games. That's 62 percent of the time, closer to two-thirds of the time than half, which is what "generally" implies.

And for what it's worth, MLB Network's "experts" who were measuring the same thing listed Correa 42nd, Buxton 68th and Royce Lewis 82nd. The inconsistency makes me think that what it's worth is... "not much."

Nor are there 13 shortstops better.

But it really throws off a hitter's timing.

Exactly. Keep him. Use him in the lowest leverage situations at the beginning of the year. By the time you run into a couple of these scenarios, you well may have reached the point where a) he's been good enough to move a notch or two up the ladder or b) he's demonstrated under a truer test that he's not worth stashing for the whole year. It's not like the decision can only be made before March 26 or after October 1. (And to anticipate a comment that's likely to come, I agree that you can't have a "low-leverage reliever." But there are always low-leverage situations that need to be covered by someone and it's logical to use the lowEST-leverage reliever there.)

You mean like Lugo's 4.97, Ragan's 5.79, Greene's 5.63, Wheeler's 5.00 or Cease's 4.61? Established starters are notorious for using spring training to work on specific things.

The perception among White Sox fans was that Grifol was horrible, so replacing him should help. But overall, the MLB version of the team actually looks worse than it did last year, particularly if Robert is traded.

Yep. I'm ready for Opening Day as well.

Typo. Ober is a hair under 23. Ryan's average is affected by the last start, when he was pulled after two innings because of injury. Take out that start and he's just over 24 batters per start. Another way to frame the difference between them and SWR, for example, is to say that those three were given the chance to work through the 3-4-5-6 part of the order more often than SWR, which makes sense. It's not so much saying that the Big Three can't extend to go through the bottom of the order -- any pitcher should be able to do that -- but that they can extend to go through the middle more often than a weaker starter. (And since we on TD should never miss out on a chance to pile on Paddack (/sarcasm emoji), we should also look at him. Oops, take out the start when he was pulled because of injury and he averages 23.2 batters, which means he's between Ryan and Ober. Maybe we shouldn't be so quick to discount him as an option for length? 😀)

Thanks. Is this the number of plate appearances for the starters? If so, that's going to be skewed, since bottom of the order guys tend to get pinch hit for more often. Best to look at total plate appearances from each spot in the lineup. Or, is the third numerical column the average number of at bats from each spot in the lineup. If you look at the next column over, you'll see that it's roughly .11 at bats more per spot in the lineup going up and down from the 5th spot in the order. And since .11 is essentially 1/9, that makes sense. And as noted in my previous comment, it does skew a bit to larger differences at the bottom (about .12 per spot). There's rounding involved, as demonstrated by the fifth batter averaging 4.24 compared to the average 4.22, but showing only 0.01 as its difference.

Each of 162 games has to have a last batter, so if you divide them evenly, it works out to 18 PAs per spot. In actuality, it should skew a little to have slightly fewer games end with a batter at the top of the order than at the bottom, since a top of the order is less likely to make an out. I'm not sure how much difference that makes in actuality, so I think people have just used the 18. I like the Wallner-Correa-Buxton-Larnach top of the order that sounds like it's been used several times during spring training, at least against right handers. Amongst Wallner, Correa, Buxton, another reason to have Wallner bat first is that he strikes out the most. If both Wallner and Correa make outs 61 percent of the time, but Wallner strikes out significantly more often, better to have him first. Said another way, Correa is more likely to move Wallner along the basepaths with a ball-in-play out than Wallner is to move Correa along. Additionally, if Wallner is a little faster than Correa, he's more likely to take an extra base on a hit than Correa is. (I realize there's more to baserunning than speed -- maybe Correa is actually better at taking the extra base.)

Last year, “pushing Lopez through the fifth” probably wouldn’t have been that great of an idea, given that the six times he didn’t make it through the fifth he had given up 6, 5, 3, 7, 5 and 7 runs. Lopez is pretty much the definition of refuting “Rocco doesn’t let pitchers face a lineup a third time.” He pitched to an average of 24.2 batters in his starts, which means on average he pitched to the Nos. 1-6 a third time. And further, Ober faced an average of 22.9 hitters, so basically one less. Take out the game in which he got hurt and Ryan was just over 24 batters per game. More accurate seems to be, “Rocco doesn’t let his weaker starters face a lineup a third time.” I don’t have a problem with that.

I think they should eat most of his salary and trade him for Lewis. 😀

If they've sent Funderburk down and haven't yet returned Castellano, it seems a lock that he's made the team. If Topa does start the season on the IL, Castellano is all that's remaining, right? (I don't mean that disparagingly -- I hope they keep Castellano, even if it means optioning someone else for the brief time that is needed until the first injury occurs.)