ShouldaCouldaWoulda

I have been underperforming in life lately, but things haven't fallen apart and have actually been pretty good around me. Most of the Twins players are having subpar seasons, while the team just keeps winning. I take comfort in this:)

Was reading somewhere that they didn't think Gonsalves' stuff would play up very well. Hope that's wrong.

Adding on to the "not really having the feel he's watched the Twins," the opening paragraphs of his article were just odd. I get the funny self-deprecating story, but choosing to alienate all wrestlers as like "Donnie" seems kinda geographically unwise. Being that Minnesota is one of the best wrestling states HS and college, and the participation rate being higher than hockey even here. I'm sure it was a random analogy he chose, but another example of not having his finger on the pulse of MN in general. I'm guessing I wasn't the only wrestler that read this and rolled his eyes. But again, he wasn't really wrong about his analysis of the Twins this far.

It would be one thing if his numbers were just a little worse this year, as that's not a big deal, as long as he's the same pitcher. But, a pitcher isn't the same guy he used to be once he starts losing velocity. He can still be good, but can't be viewed as he was before. Verlander, Sabathia, Lincecum, etc. doesn't matter their handednes or size, once they lose velocity they just can't be viewed as what they once were. You can still be a good pitcher womithout great velocity, but every pitcher tends to be not quite as good with every tick on the clock they lose. It makes their breaking and off speed stuff less tricky too. Jonathon Gray was a beast in college a few years ago. He's lost velocity and had been a shell of what people thought he'd be.

I wouldn't pay too much attention to his previous years numbers. The loss in velocity scares too much for a pick this high. I'm guessing there is an underlying injury there. Unless the velocity comes back before the draft magically, stay away. Take the best bat available, that is a competent fielder.

Yes?

Hunters defensive value will fluctuate and depend on what types and where balls are hit to him. He simply is going to not get to some balls that many other RF's would have gotten to. That might become a two out double with runners on that turns a 0 run inning into a 3 run inning, and Trevor May looking bad instead of good. Or, he could have more not easy to get to balls that fall, that not many others would have gotten either, but he makes a good and smart throw on. If he gets easier to get to balls hit to him, he will look good. Where he hurts us are the balls hit to the track or wall that he misses by a step or two...and those ones can change games. Range matters. The more the Twins use the shift agains left handers, the more this helps Hunter. He can play further back and has more help on the short balls. Not sure what the current data is on how often the Twins are doing this against left handers to date. I do think this is something that would be helpful to the Twins, and not just because certain hitters pull, but because it plays to help Hunters deficiencies.

Let's be honest, statistics are usually overwhelming...even for the most of us on here. Sure, most of us understand the value of the newer simple stats, like OPS+ or DRS, but there are just so many micro-stats that are hard to understand the meaning of in the correct context, and how to add all of those together to find future success in certain areas and for certain players. I do think that, overall, many of us tend to subconsciously see the Twins as "Old School." Part of that is the "Twins Way" type of generalizations over the years. It almost feels like the Twins were ahead of the curve in the past by the "Twins Way" approach, but that has now passed them by. Small things like the Twins seeming to favor scouting and "toolsy" guys in drafts seems to be another area that they are less reliant on statistics or analysis, and sometimes that works out even. Again, the Twins just "feel" like an organization less reliant on statistical analysis. That of course does not mean that it is true by any means. It is the bias that most of us has grown to believe, and we therefore look for confirmations of our biases. I am certainly VERY guilty of this. We might be right even, but we don't know. Comments like TR saying that 5 good SP's give us a better chance to make the playoffs, than do 1 ace and company. He is probably right about that, but that also depends on what he defines what "good" SP is. I still believe that a few stud SP's or at least 1, can be supplemented with fairly good SP's with the same amount of money than it would be to get 5 good SP's. Obviously, combining Nolasco + Santana+ Pelfy money could get us a pretty good SP, and still leave us with options in the minors or cheaper dumpster diving options, which is supposed to be TR's strong suite anyway. But, at least the guy is weighing these things out with some sort of game theory approach that is purposeful, which I can take comfort in. I don't need to agree with it. I do wonder on how much we are using stats, in what areas, and to what degree. Are we digging deep? Is it all done in general by the same people, or is it split up into micro areas by different people? How is this information being translated and explained to the FO and coaching staff and players? How closely and well do the analysts and staff communicate, or analysis and FO? We don't know any of that, and likely won't know it. I sometimes wonder if a baseball team would be ran well if it was put together more like a football coaching staff. With specific specialized coaches for defense, hitting, catching, and pitching. I know we have those coaches, but it usually seems like just some random title that guys get placed into. Instead of defensive gurus, or the like. Then, those coaches should their own specific staff of analysts breaking down their area of specialties. The team manager just needs to be explained the simplified explanation of what they are doing, but just let them do there thing, unless you want to overrule certain things. Then, a whole other set of analysis's working with the FO for what players to aim to get or trade for in the draft, international market, FA's, and trades. Not just some analysts that cover it all, and coaches coaching everything in general. Just my thoughts, but that probably made no sense anyway.

Is it possible that Pinto, and possibly Arcia end up 1B/DH? Seems as though that is where both of those two best would fit defensively. Failed corner OF's and bad catchers move to 1B next, then DH if they can't make it there either.

I don't mind sending Vargas down by the FO, but Boyer and Thompson as a defense is not needed. Both have terrible underlying numbers the geek stat era predictors hate them both so far. Smoke and mirrors and small sample sizes. I like their luck so far, but betting on them both to implode to their true selves soon. Hope not, but it is the likely scenario. Many terrible relievers can have decent era's through good luck in small samples, just like dominant relievers can pitch great with a bad era due to a game or two of bad luck.

I really like Plouffe and have always rooted for him to succeed. However, I agree that he is doubtful to get much better and the Twins would probably be served best to sell high...if he is still playing well at the trade deadline. Even if Sano is not ready yet, I think we should just slide Escobar over to 3rd until he is ready. The only way I think it is worth keeping him is if we decide to put Mauer in the OF, which I wish they would. We have too many other 1B/DH only types that need to be occupying that position now and longterm. Joe's numbers aren't great there and they won't ever look any better. His numbers would look just fine in LF and he'd likely play it better than Arcia. Then Sano, Arcia, Vargas, or Pinto could fight take over at 1B and DH. Keeping Mauer at 1B is not good for the teams development. I'm not saying that I don't think Mauer is good 1B, but it just doesn't make sense with our roster going forward. We might be forced to package some of these wounded moose young sluggers, if we are adamant at keeping Mauer at 1B.

I am pretty excited about just how dominant that Milone has been. It is not just a great era, but absolutely dominant too. I too pause with the first two AAA starts, as it seems that crafty soft tossers minor league numbers can be deceiving. Seems That most soft toss guys numbers don't translate well to the big leagues, whereas guys with stuff/velocity can actually improve their numbers. My first thought was just another Andrew Albers or Scott Diamond- nothing to get excited about. But, its been three starts in a row of beast-mode, and he has my attention. I figured the Twins are eyeing May as the guy to send down, but that would disappoint me a little. As Danchat stated, his FIP is great and if you have watched the games he has passed the eye test....his defense- not so much. He has had some really bad luck that has turned into runs in all of the games that I have watched. He honestly looks like our best pitcher when I watch him this year. Although, Hughes hasn't looked bad and has been unlucky too. I have enjoyed, but not bought into the Gibson and Pelfrey numbers. Maybe they just wait it out for another rotation or two, to see who falters and if Milone can keep it up.

I am a little worried about some offensive numbers "as a whole" amongst our prospects and young MLB guys. I am a little worried about the approach/plate discipline/contact of the guys we are supposed to be counting on down the road. If you K a lot, you had better bb a lot, and you better make contact. For instance, Sano K's a lot, but at least he draws bb's. Guys can mature with mechanics and experience, but usually these things are not flukey and are pretty consistent for the most part. I highlighted in RED the numbers that I am most concerned about in with certain players. There is a better way of doing this I know, but I just thought this might be something to talk about. Young core in MLB current BB%/K%/outside of zone swing rate/Contact rate Santana 1.5 %/26.2 %/43.9%/73.8% Escobar 2.1 %/23.7 %/40.2%/76.9% Arcia 6.2 %/23.1 %/42.3%/66.2% Vargas 6.5%/26.2%/33.2%/70.9% Rosario 0%/37%/51.2%/57.9% AAA guys and numbers BB% and K% only Hicks 12.2%/16.3% Pinto 10.3%/25.9% Rosario 5%/17% AA BB% and K% only Sano 14.1 %/25.9 % Buxton 8.2 %/19.0 % Walker 6.3 %/32.8 % Polanco 5.3 %/16.0 % Kepler 4%/8% A+ Granite 9.5 %/15.9 % A Gordon 5.2 %/17.9 %

Came here to see if anyone has posted this article yet. Glad someone did, and I kinda assumed that most of the people here already felt what was written in it. I'm glad we are winning, but I've never been convinced that that this is currently a good team that can keep this up. However, we might not just go to tank from here on out. The staff hasnt pitched great, but Hughes is bound to pitch better, and May has had some pretty bad luck and poor defense that has extended innings in which he later gave up runs. Then again, Pelfrey and Gibson are certainly not as good as there era's suggest. Gibson isn't "bad," but he isn't this damn good. Nolasco isn't good either, but he's better than his era at least. Keeping with the pitching, there is at least reason for optimism. Milone had been great in AAA, and while crafty dudes can often have higher k/9 in AAA, it's possible he's fixed something. I doubt it, but it's possible. Meyer has the potential to be great, the likelyhood of this coming to fruition is looking more bleak, but he COULD be a lightning rod in the second half conceivably. Berrios has the abiotic to be great in the second half too, but I'm not convinced the Twins realize he could actually succeed in the majors soon- arguably NOW. Oh, and a rested Santana in the second half. If All or two of Hughes, May, and Nalsoco improve slightly, and Gibson and Pelfrey just keep up to 80-90% of their current success...and the minor leaguers start to knock louder on the door, and the 80 game suspension passes we now have options to flip some pieces too. The outfield defense should in theory improve with better athletes out there in Hicks and Rossario, and MAYBE Buxton in the second half. Santana can only improve at ss, as I can't imagine he could be worse. So, I think the defense gets better here on out. I think our bats aren't all that great, but not all that bad either. Some guys can certainly improve their number here on out, since many have underperformed. At least in certain areas. I mean we could hit an away a series with the White Sox this summer when it's really hot and windy, and maybe Joe could hit a homerun even. It seems our plate discipline is horrible as a whole, but hopefully they can address that some moving forward. But, we aren't BAD offensively. So, while I absolutely agree with this article and that the Twins actually have been pretty bad so far, or at least NOT GOOD...I do think we have the ability to improve for the above listed reasons. It might be enough to keep us over .500, and wouldn't be completely crazy to think if many of those above scenarios pan out that we could stay in the wild card race. Or, we could just regress to the mean, face injuries to key players and prospects, have a reluctance to bring up ready players that could help, or play better while having bad luck instead of the current good luck. Either way, I'll watch and cheer.

Anyone know if Meyer's velocity is down? If so, he might be masking an injury or trying to hard to ramp it up, with it not being there. Would be nice to know.

I've been extremely nervous about Buxton the past six months or so. The one 4 bit game didn't really change that. He does seem to be playing a bit better, so hoping this trend sticks. I'm still cautiously skeptical, but hoping for the best. We need you to come through Buxton...no pressure.

Yes, his approach isn't flawless but if it was then he would be a phenomenal prospect. Sure, but I don't think this is just some minor aspect to shrug off. It's a pretty big deal that keeps guys with good bat from ever really being any good at all, and keeps guys with huge potential from being kinda good to streaky. He is not remotely skilled enough with his bat to afford to not be patient hitter. Same goes for Santana and Arcia. When they're streaky (or lucky) their BAIP can make them look great, but only for a matter of time until they're exposed once again. Like Dozier, imagine where he'd be the last year plus if he didn't have a good approach. The approach is the only thing, along with some inside power vs levies, that is keeping him as a good bat. It seems like our system is lacking a good approach and might be why have not seen the success we thought we would have with our prospects by now.

I read in a few places that Nolasco's velocity was up from last year (90) and this year (89), to now being 92-94 in his rehab start. That has to be a flaw in the lower level ball park, right?!? No way he can all of a sudden gain velocity over a week or so, after declining last year, and in the offseason. Or, did they fix something with him; mechanics, a shot, therapy stuff, or other medical fix? This can't be due to just rest, as he wouldn't have been even tired at this point. I'm guessing faulty radar and exaggerated information.

Very nice work. Where did you get such exact debut ages? I would like to compare him to other CF'ers. Maybe last and present, as I just think it's more useful. I read something at Baseball Prospectus that showed that SS and CF were the youngest to come up, while catchers were understandably the oldest. Just think we should be comparing him "like" players in evaluating.

Yes, he's still likely on pace to be up by at least 22, and at worst 23 if things don't go well. But, that isn't anything special really. I still think he'll be really good, just think injuries or not, there is reason for concern.

That is why I compared him to only CF'ers that are up now. Almost all the top 15 from last year were up by 21-22. Athletic positions play up earlier, since the glove matters and often peaks much earlier than the bat. Speed is just there always, where power develops later. You can't compare Buxton to Bryant, or the power bats you mentioned. You compare him with to Betts, Ellsbury, Pompey, and the like. Good CF'era get brought early, since their defense is usually the best while they are young and can be useful on the base paths at least offensively. I don't think he'll be Felix Pie, but he ain't going to be no Trout. I'm thinking he ends up similar to a Dexter Fowler, who I think is pretty damn good and underrated.

Crap, 0-4 again today. Now 2 for 28, since his only muliti-hit game this year. Down to a .180 avg after 50 at bats. But, he did not K today (looking for something positive.) Seriously though, he has to turn this around, right?! Small sample size, he was injured before and now rusty, AA is a tough jump....and all that jazz? Or, is there legit cause for concern? I keep looking for his results each day, and lets just say I have ONE good happy day after looking him up. **and I meant there is 5 OF's that are younger than him that are all outproducing him, just in the Southern League alone.

Hoping this negative post will somehow spark Buxton to go off on a tear. Many rushed to defend him after one 4 hit game against terrible pitching. Since then, he is 2 for 24. His last 200 at bats in the minors and fall league have been aweful. Okay, you say "he was hurt!" Okay, then that's another worry. Maybe that's a legit excuse, but what if he never bounces back? It's possible. He's young. But, there 5 other OF's in the Sourhern Leafue alone that are all producing more than him at the moment. So, age is no longer a huge defense for him. I looked at last years top 10-15 CF's by WAR and all but a few were up by 22, and several before that. Which, he could still easily be on pace for, but not with more setbacks or slowed development. I'm just hoping he's not the next Felix Pie. There, that should do it. Now please prove me wrong Byron and make me feel better about our future, or my in laws might convince my son to be a Cubs or White Sox fan when he's old enough.