Trov

I was thinking about this after watching a video of a minor league team that does all kinds of crazy extra things to entertain. This topic has come up some with recent rule changes coming up to limit shifts, increase base stealing, and generally to increase hits on balls in play as well. Some rules also for pace of play like pitch clocks are being used in minors. These rules create many debates on if they should be imposed or not. Some of those debates are about strategy of defense, or changing the way the game is played. There has been much debate over the years about strike outs up, hits down, home runs, and the three true outcomes. There was an article about Arraez and his ability to get hits and how he is fun to watch, but then we talk about how guys like Buxton who hit barely over .200 with a ton of strike outs, but hits for mainly HR and extra base hits are just as valuable to a line up for winning. Now my question is not exactly an either or, as winning generally can be entertaining, and losing is less so. For example last night I stopped watching around 8th inning, the game was not entertaining. Personally, I watch baseball, and sports generally for entertainment. Of course I want my team to win, but if the game was at least entertaining I am not as upset when we lose, but if the game was boring I am more upset when we lose, and more ehhh when we win. Now, not just in baseball but other sports, the coaches job is to win, and the players jobs are to win, normally because winning brings in fans, at least for the home fans. However, that is not always the case, look at the Rays who win year in and year out, but still do not get full parks. Either way, the coaches and players are generally judged on their ability to win. Some players fans enjoy because they are entertaining, the La Tortuga in years past. However, for each win for one team, means a loss for another, so the solution to getting fans to watch games, no matter the sport, is not just winning games. So I would conclude the point is to entertain, because if fans are not entertained (cue Gladiator Russel Crow) then fans will not watch, even if a team is winning. That being said, are you just entertained by a team winning, or what entertains you about the game? There are concerns from the MLB that viewership is down for several reasons. One, younger fans have too short attention span to sit through a 3.5 hour game where less balls are put in play, and less action in the game, with sometimes over a minute between pitches to a hitter. As the game changes over the years, less innings from starters, less caring about strike outs from hitters, less stolen base attempts or hit and runs, some feel the entertainment has gone down, because it is basically a home run derby every game with a bunch of strike outs in between. Does the teams have an obligation to gives us entertainment? Should managers be expected to leave in starters because we paid to watch a certain player pitch? Should manager be expected to play a guy like Buxton in CF more often for us, or should we be fine with letting him get rested. It is regular players will get rest, but that used to not be the case. In the NBA teams were getting attacked for resting healthy players to allow them to be ready for other games. Fans pay good money to watch certain players in NBA, but is it the same for MLB? Does anyone go to the games to see a certain pitcher or hitter, or does it not matter to you as a fan? I am just looking to see what entertains people and how should we look at it, if we should demand teams play them more.

I personally wish he would just turn it down all together. I do not know his medicals, but if we can get him 5 days of full rest maybe that will help his knee for us. Maybe it will not do much, but why do we rest him 1 out of every 3 games or so, with DH half of the games he seems to play, only to have him take 1 or 2 at bats in a pointless game?

Yes the three team deal would be most likely situation. They are rare, and even more rare at deadline.

It is actually his second stretch of poor games. He had three in a row at end of May beginning of June where he blew 2 saves and picked up 3 losses giving up 8 runs, 7 earned, in 1.2 innings. If you go back to that run of games he has pitched 15.1 innings in 16 games. 7 saves with 4 blown saves, 15 ER 16 total runs, 18K 3BB with 4HBP(not sure if HBP are factored into FIP but they should) 1HR. Prior to his first run of bad games, he gave up 1 Run in 21 innings in 20 games having 17 saves in 17 chances. 22K 4BB and 3HBP and 0 HR. Just like any pen arm you can look at the whole, or in parts. Tyler Duffy similar had about the same amount of bad games, 8 games where he gave up a run. Rodgers has given up runs in 11 games. Duffy has pitched 37 inning in 33 games, and Rodgers has pitched 35.2 innings in 36 games. Duffy lower K rate with about 9 per 9, Rodgers is at 10.3 per 9. Duffy has walked 2.7 per 9, Rodgers 1.8, but Rodgers has hit 7, Duffy has hit none, so the amount of free runners Rodgers has allowed more than Duffy, with 14 in less innings than Duffy. Rodgers may not walk too many, but he hits as many as he walks. The big difference is Duffy has allowed 6 HR, Rodgers just 1. My point is, they are very similar in numbers other than the HR, but just about everyone has lost faith in Duffy, but many of those same people would love to have Rodgers back like he would be the savior. Right now baseball reference has Duffy with a 0.1 WAR and Rodgers as a -0.1 WAR. However, if you look at the WPA Rodgers is at 0.3 and Duffy is -0.3. On thing to also remember, with Rodgers, any loses he takes on the road, most likely he stopped pitching because game was over due to walk off, and his numbers could have been worse, where Duffy either finishes inning or gets pulled as he rarely has been asked to finish games. My main point is Rodgers since end of May has been ehhh but some people on here act like his is the best closer in baseball. Would he be better than some in our pen, yes, is he better than what Pagan has done, hell yes, but he is not lights out all the time.

I did add the results of the wins and losses earlier. In games Pagan pitched we are 21-11 with him getting the win in 3 and loss in 3. Rodgers got loss in 4 of his. Not all the losses are on Pagan, he had terrible run where several were, but some he did his job and others did not, because does not always come in in 9th with lead. I am not saying Pagan is doing well at all, because he is not, but there is no reason to think if we had Rodgers over him much else would be different because Rodgers would have similar stretches with the Twins. The fact that during his poor run in July the team is still getting wins just shows he was in games where team had large leads. Like giving up 2 runs but getting a save. Was it a good outing or bad? He got the save but gave up 2 runs, so job done because as long as he did not give up 3 he did his job. Personally, I do not care how he is giving up runs. I could care less if he is giving up HR and not walking guys if he is giving up runs they all count the same. You argue he is getting "unlucky" because his defense is not making plays, but where the balls hit in areas someone could make the play? I did not see them so I do not know. I find it crazy that just because a pitcher did not give up a HR but gave up a hit it was luck by the hitter. For all we know the deep fly balls were high off the wall and just missed HR by inches, is that luck by hitter or pitcher? What if one of those deep flies would have been a HR in just about every other park and would have resulted in BS, is that luck by hitter or pitcher? Maybe the short ground balls to OF were worm burners, or maybe the hitter saw a hole and drove it through it hitting right where he wanted, is that luck? Without seeing each hit and PA it is hard to say Rodgers is getting unlucky. Maybe he is, but the fact is he is giving up runs right now. The last 3 years his ERA has been more than 1 point higher than his FIP, is that 3 years of bad luck? You do not have 3 years of bad luck, you just have someone that they give up hits that are not HR. Rodgers clearly is an outlier of the ERA to FIP situation, or you can just say he is always unluck that his defenses do not know where to stand.

Very few competing teams will be willing to trade away bullpen arms we will want in return. Unless the team is super deep on bullpen arms no one will make a whole in their pen to have a small upgrade at 3b. Unless there are some AAA or lower on the pecking order for some of these teams that the Twins think will have impact, I doubt any contending team will give up a pen arm. Every team is always looking to upgrade their pen.

I was big on Arcia. In part it goes back to when he was in AA I went to a game he was playing and the ball just sounded different off his bat. He came on the scene and looked like he could be a hitter for years. He just never adjusted to how MLB pitchers would pitch to him. His attitude reflected that as well when he would make comments about he was there to hit HR. I was really big on Stephen Gonsalves. His early low minor numbers were great, but he just never fully developed.

Snell is an interesting piece as his numbers have not been good since leaving Rays, but if his stuff is still the same it makes you wonder what is leading to it? Is SD just that much worse on defense? I mean the park is a pitcher park if I recall correctly. I trust the FO if they think they can bring him back to his TB numbers, but he has not been great in SD. He would very much be buy low guy, and could get really cheap if you want to take on all the money.

I would love to see them trade for Willson Contreras but my guess they will not. I do not know what he would cost as a rental, but many teams will be bidding. Very few contending teams would not be willing to upgrade offense at catcher. Even though the Twins offense is not their biggest issue, if you can make it even better at catcher I would look at it.

Rodgers is like any "closer" which he was not for us really, but they will get the job done a decent amount of the time, but will blow some here and there. His recent run of games is not good, but the team only has lost 5 games he has pitched in, 4 of which he picked up the loss, and won 31 he pitched in, where he got 24 saves. He has blow 5 saves. He is a good relief arm but some act like he was untouchable and with him we would have won like 10 more games or something, which is just not the case. For all we know all the blown saves we have had he would have, or he would have blown some others did not. He is overvalued by many in my opinion. Lets see how he does in the playoffs for SD, where his career numbers are 3.1 innings pitched across 4 games, one outing he got no outs, given up 2 runs. Maybe he closes out games and pushes SD to second round, or maybe he blows a save and SD curses him.

My guess Winder stays starting either here or in AAA. I doubt they move him to relief roll.

If tipping his pitches is accurate that is something players will pick up on and make you pay. Unless you are super elite with your pitches if a hitter knows it is coming they will normally hit it.

Every pitcher runs into issues and needs to make adjustments. The main question is when will the league adjust to his new change up and how will that play out after that? Will the league adjust and light up the change up, or will it keep them off enough to keep him on top? Duffy is the perfect example of why pen pitchers are hard to predict because their bad outings are normally amplified compared to a starter. A starter gives up 2 or 3 runs to first 3 or 4 batters and settles down to pitch 5 or 6 innings we do not say much, but a pen guy gives up 2 or 3 runs to first 3 or 4 guys and the outing was terrible.

Yes, teams would want someone like Max, but they are unlikely to give up MLB players for him, and that is what we are looking for, MLB pitchers. Now, there has been trades in the past by competing teams, namely Cleveland, who have dealt MLB pitching for OF help, but that is rare. I would still hesitate to trade Max as he is one of our better defenders and he is putting up a 2.1 WAR through half the season. He may not be putting up 2019 HR numbers but he is having a solid season and unless Larnach is back healthy Max is hard to replace in my opinion.

Why would Rockies make deal like this? Pagan does have another year of control, but I see no reason Rockies would want a rental starter for their starter and a aging pen arm.

In terms of Santana I am not a fan of trading for a pen arm on a break out season. Unless you can really see where the change was that made the difference and believe it is sustainable. I mean how many times have we seen someone like say Duffy look like they are on the verge of being dominate relief guy only to struggle again. Someone that has long history of poor pitching to suddenly break out I have a huge red flag on and would not give up much for him. I am always willing to take fliers on guys, but giving up much from one is a huge risk. You need to be really certain they will maintain.

It is nice to see the numbers backing up what the eyes see. I will always remember in his rookie year pinch hitting after a 0-2 count when the hitter got hurt swinging. He managed to work a walk. That is just crazy, coming off the bench, with 0 chance of mistake and he works a walk. At that point I was sold on him as an on base guy. This year he seems to be having a little more power. Maybe not HR power, but getting those doubles. He might develop more power as he ages, similar to Altuve, maybe not as much power, but he could still be a double digit HR guy if he grows a little more power.

There may be a team that will be willing to take a flyer on Sano, but unless you pay for the contract and buy out, you are not getting much of value for him. He does have potential upside and maybe a new home could unlock it. He is also one that if hot can carry a team through the playoffs, but could also be an auto strike out as well. You also point out that we have pretty much no where to play him right now, so why would a team be willing to give up much, if there is a chance we DFA him anyways. Unless he looks amazing during his rehab I would not be surprised if we DFA him and any team can pick him up off waivers or sign him after clears and he becomes FA. Unless a team thinks he will be something more than he has, I doubt anyone gives up anything of much value to us at MLB level for him.

What rebuilding team is going to trade for Max? Maybe a team making a push and looking for OF would want him, but they are unlikely to deal their MLB talent, so unless they have major depth in the pen, they are not trading them away. Also, his hitting may not be tops, but his defense is still one of the better in RF. We could part with Max but as you point out he is not elite, he is aging, and nearing end of contract. His market is very limited and will not net much.

Right now Seattle is hot and looking like they may compete for wild card, I doubt they dump a pen arm, unless it is for something they feel they need more to help in their push.

I am all for them seeking some trades, but just as they did in the Capps deal, I do not want them to overpay. I said when they made it was an overpay. I mean you give up a top catching prospect, which are always hard to find, for a rental relief pitcher. I do not care that we had Joe, you knew he may come of catching at one point, and even if not, you could have got so much more in a trade, then a rental pen arm. I do not expect this FO to overpay for a pen arm.

I do not get why you would use xFIP compared to ERA than xERA or something that compares actual balls in play. I do not get why some people think FIP or xFIP is some telling number. I will agree Joe has not pitched well, but just looking at FIP does not tell a tale on how a guy is pitching just by itself. For example, a guy gives up a walk, then induces a weak contact ground ball double play, his FIP does not look good, but I would say he did not get "lucky" by having a weak contact ground ball. Just because someone does not get strike outs at high levels, does not mean they are lucky if they give up weak contact. Now, if you compare additional stats about barrel rates, hard hit rates, and other stats to compare to outcomes, then maybe luck is there. But to just say FIP and ERA are not in line mean just luck is a poor evaluation in my opinion. Ryan is still 70th percentile in exit velo, 64th percentile in hard hit rate. Not amazing, but I would argue, if you are not giving up hard contact, it is not just luck on why your ERA and FIP are not in line with each other. To me luck is if you give up 110 MPH line drive that gets caught because it is hit right to a defender, not when a 80MPH ground ball or pop fly is caught. FIP does not care if you give up nothing but rockets all over the field but everything is off the wall for doubles, but as long as you are not walking guys and getting others to strike out, FIP says you are pitching well and getting unlucky because you do not walk people and keep balls in the park. I am not saying Ryan is pitching well lately, he is not, but I do not understand why people only look at FIP or xFIP to see how a pitcher is doing. It is a single stat that tells no story other than how many walks, strikeouts, and HR you are giving up, or in xFIP should have gave up.

Because the starting pitcher controls how many runs are scored for him, and how the pen does. Game 1 Berrios pitched .1 innings gave up 4 runs, and his team won 10-8. He had nothing to do with the win, other than he was taken out before he gave up even more runs. His second game he left after 5 when he blew a 3 run lead to leave tied, so again he got pulled before he could give up more runs and his team took the lead late. Games 3,4,5 I would say he pitched well and helped his team get the win. Game 6 and 7 he lost, giving up more runs than innings pitched. Game 8 he pitched well earned a win. Game 9 he had quality start. Game 10 they won, but he gave up 6 runs in 2.1 innings, so gain he did little to help that. Game 11 and 12 he pitched well earned the wins. Game 13 was a quality start 3 runs in 7 innings. Then 2 losses where he was bad more runs than innings pitched. His last 2 games he was okay, 2 runs in 5 and 1 in 6. Bundy his first 3 games he pitched very well 1 run in 15 total innings. Then he had 2 poor starts his fault for losses. Then went 3 innings 0 runs, not his fault for loss. Then he went 5 gave up 1 run, left with lead, not his fault pen blew it and offense did not score more, he left in line for win. Then next game he was not good, but left tied. He did not help get a win or loss. Then 2 bad starts, one he left losing, other pen helped blow it, but he pitched bad. Last 3 starts were good, he won one giving up 1 in 8. Then he lost giving up 1 run in 6 losing game 1 nothing, not his fault team got shut out. He gave up 3, 2 earned and left tied. Last game he pitched gave up 1 in five team won. Overall Berrios get 6.2 runs scored in games he pitches. Bundy get 4.9 runs scored for him when he pitches. Neither have been lights out. Both have put up good games, and some clunkers. The difference is Bundy has lost all his clunckers, and some close games, where Berrios team has bailed him out of a couple of clunkers and scored enough in the close games. If you switched them on the teams, I bet the records would flop as well. It is not like Berrios always kept them in the games, or that Bundy has not. Bundy could have a few more wins if pen held lead, or team scored a few more runs, and Berrios would have a few more losses if his team did not score huge amounts of runs in a few of his clunkers.

Where are you playing Arraez? 3rd?

The second HR of Alex Kirilloff was so pretty. Breaking ball low and away, and he just lined it to LC gap for a HR. That is great hitting. He was looking away, got his pitch and drove it. He is looking every bit the hitter we were hoping he would be since he call back. He hits to all fields with power and line drives. I have high hopes for him.