John Bonnes

1 Free agent starting pitchers from the TwinsCentric 2013 Offseason Handbook that have signed with a new team. It’s just Scott Baker so far. That’s it. I count five other are already off the market, but all of them re-signed with their old team (or had their option picked up and were traded): Jake Peavy, Hideki Kuroda, Hisahi Iwakuma, Ervin Santana and Jeremy Guthrie. The bad news here is that a lot of those guys are the middle market - a level just below the big names where bargains might have been found. But that might be why they were already targeted and re-signed. 24 Free agent starting pitchers from the TwinsCentric Offseason Handbook that are still available. That doesn’t mean there are 25 of them that are desirable, just available. But that doesn’t include those that we thought would retire or get minor league deals, and it doesn’t include guys who are available via trade, like several of the Rays or Braves arms. I can’t emphasize this enough – the free agent market hasn’t really started yet. It likely won’t for a few more weeks. According to ESPN’s free agent tracker, a total of 12 guys have signed major league deals so far. Last year 106 did. Cool it. 483 Twins minor league signing stories broken by MLB.com’s Twins beat reporter Rhett Bollinger in the past month. (Roughly) Is it possible that the greatest culprit for the Twins slow offseason is Bollinger? By continually reporting minor league signings – which were often overlooked in previous years – we are reminded that none of the big moves have been made yet. 29 The age of Jeff Clement, who the Twins signed to minor league deal yesterday. If that name sounds familiar, it is because he was a “B” catching prospect who ranked #33/#62/#42 on Baseball America’s top 100 list from 2006 through 2008. He had 20 home run power, hit left-handed and was “good enough” defensively. Turns out, he wasn’t, or if he was, recurring elbow and knee injuries drove him away from that spot. He’s now a first baseman and designated hitter and hasn’t upped the power (and oddly has struggled against right-handers). That makes a guy a 29-year-old minor leaguer instead of a possible All-Star. There is good news and bad news in this signing for Twins fans, and neither has anything to do with all the studly free agent starting pitchers they didn’t sign: Good news: the Twins are signing recognizable names with a little upside as minor league free agents. They should. A 60+ win team should mean lots of opportunities for minor league veterans to gain some service time and be in The Show. It should be a team that agents target. But it’s good that the Twins are taking advantage of that status. The Twins picked up a couple of useful players that way last year and will likely need to so again this year. Bad news: Clement’s status emphasizes, once again, just how big the difference in value is for a guy who can play catcher and a guy who can’t. Think about that the next time someone tries to convince you that the Twins would be better if Joe Mauer would get out from behind the plate.

1 Free agent starting pitchers from the TwinsCentric 2013 Offseason Handbook that have signed with a new team. It’s just Scott Baker so far. That’s it. I count five other are already off the market, but all of them re-signed with their old team (or had their option picked up and were traded): Jake Peavy, Hideki Kuroda, Hisahi Iwakuma, Ervin Santana and Jeremy Guthrie. The bad news here is that a lot of those guys are the middle market - a level just below the big names where bargains might have been found. But that might be why they were already targeted and re-signed. 24 Free agent starting pitchers from the TwinsCentric Offseason Handbook that are still available. That doesn’t mean there are 25 of them that are desirable, just available. But that doesn’t include those that we thought would retire or get minor league deals, and it doesn’t include guys who are available via trade, like several of the Rays or Braves arms. I can’t emphasize this enough – the free agent market hasn’t really started yet. It likely won’t for a few more weeks. According to ESPN’s free agent tracker, a total of 12 guys have signed major league deals so far. Last year 106 did. Cool it. 483 Twins minor league signing stories broken by MLB.com’s Twins beat reporter Rhett Bollinger in the past month. (Roughly) Is it possible that the greatest culprit for the Twins slow offseason is Bollinger? By continually reporting minor league signings – which were often overlooked in previous years – we are reminded that none of the big moves have been made yet. 29 The age of Jeff Clement, who the Twins signed to minor league deal yesterday. If that name sounds familiar, it is because he was a “B” catching prospect who ranked #33/#62/#42 on Baseball America’s top 100 list from 2006 through 2008. He had 20 home run power, hit left-handed and was “good enough” defensively. Turns out, he wasn’t, or if he was, recurring elbow and knee injuries drove him away from that spot. He’s now a first baseman and designated hitter and hasn’t upped the power (and oddly has struggled against right-handers). That makes a guy a 29-year-old minor leaguer instead of a possible All-Star. There is good news and bad news in this signing for Twins fans, and neither has anything to do with all the studly free agent starting pitchers they didn’t sign: Good news: the Twins are signing recognizable names with a little upside as minor league free agents. They should. A 60+ win team should mean lots of opportunities for minor league veterans to gain some service time and be in The Show. It should be a team that agents target. But it’s good that the Twins are taking advantage of that status. The Twins picked up a couple of useful players that way last year and will likely need to so again this year. Bad news: Clement’s status emphasizes, once again, just how big the difference in value is for a guy who can play catcher and a guy who can’t. Think about that the next time someone tries to convince you that the Twins would be better if Joe Mauer would get out from behind the plate.

Aaron and John talk about the Twins' lack of activity compared to last offseason, Denard Span and Josh Willingham trade scenarios, 40-man roster additions, prospect lists and the men who love them, Tsuyoshi Nishioka getting a raise back in Japan, Brett Myers rumors, avoiding Jeremy Guthrie, and the joys of Thanksgiving.

Aaron and John talk about the Twins' lack of activity compared to last offseason, Denard Span and Josh Willingham trade scenarios, 40-man roster additions, prospect lists and the men who love them, Tsuyoshi Nishioka getting a raise back in Japan, Brett Myers rumors, avoiding Jeremy Guthrie, and the joys of Thanksgiving.

[video=youtube;DD132ReLx9s] To hear the actual podcast, go to http://gleemanandthegeek.com/ After recording the 68th episode of their "Gleeman and The Geek" podcast Aaron Gleeman and John Bonnes are joined by documentary filmmaker Nathan Fisher for a "Cribs"-like tour of Gleemanor.

[video=youtube;DD132ReLx9s] To hear the actual podcast, go to http://gleemanandthegeek.com/ After recording the 68th episode of their "Gleeman and The Geek" podcast Aaron Gleeman and John Bonnes are joined by documentary filmmaker Nathan Fisher for a "Cribs"-like tour of Gleemanor.

Coupla things... 1) To me, Oswalt has limited value as a reliever for the Twins. I'm not opposed to him, but I'm also happy enough going dumpster diving for relievers and hope for some finds. That's funny for me to admit, because last year I was very critical of signing Joel Zumaya because I felt like they needed to fill that role with someone they could count on. This year, I'd be happy with a Zumaya signing. 2) Where did you get this data? It's kind of cool. 3) I wonder if .8 mph (if I'm reading the data right) is really much of a difference for a pitcher that is moved to the bullpen. It seems every pitcher would show some jump, and without any data I would think a couple of MPH might be fairly average. For instance, as a reliever, he never threw more than 20 pitchers. It wouldn't be shocked if, even as a starter, his first 20 pitches had more mph than his next 20. (Though, it also wouldn't surprise me if the mph increased as he "warmed up". ) I guess my question is how that increase compares to other pitchers who did a split role like Oswalt did. I think Perkins, for instance, added 3-5 mph to his fastball as a reliever, though I could be remembering that wrong.

Torii Hunter had 12 or 13 teams chasing after him?!? And signed for two years and $26M? Then how much must Josh Willingham, who hit twice as many home runs as Hunter last year and makes half as much, be worth? I thought of this question on Sunday as I was podcasting with Aaron Gleeman. A quick look at the top free agent outfielders made me even more interested. Below are the top five free agent outfielders. Let’s go through them as a general manager who is looking for right-handed power in an outfielder. We’ll bold the ones that fit that description…. Josh Hamilton – Left-handed AND ridiculously expensive Curtis Granderson – Not available. BJ Upton – Perfect – If you’re willing to pay 6 years and $90M. Michael Bourn – Great centerfielder, but no power. Nick Swisher – Switch-hitter, quite a bit of power who will likely need a four-year deal. (He also hits better as a left-hander.) Those are the guys that I thought would make more than Hunter this offseason. Compared to them, Willingham – who hit more home runs than Upton or Swisher – looks like a effective but much more affordable and risk-adverse solution. Unfortunately, just below that level are a few names that a general manager could turn to if they miss out on the big names… Cody Ross – Right-handed and hit 22 home runs last year, albeit in Fenway. Shane Victorino – No power. Angel Pagan – Not enough power. Ichiro Suzuki – Not enough power any more. Melky Cabrera – Signed. Ryan Ludwick – Right-handed and hit 26 home runs last year, albeit in Great American Ballpark. Delmon Young – Right-handed and hit 18 home runs last year in Comerica Park. Even though he hit quite a few more home runs in a tougher ballpark, Willingham is not viewed as significantly different than Ross, Ludwick and Young. And all three of those guys will get contracts similar or less than Willingham’s. The Twins took advantage of that perception last offseason when they Twins were able to sign Willingham to his affordable deal. Also, Willingham's defense looks pretty bad, though it isn’t terrible according to metrics like UZR, which says he cost the Twins just 8 runs over the average left fielder. Still, that perception could limit National League teams interest. The bottom line is that if a GM is looking to add some right-handed pop to his lineup, there are some other options. While they might not be as good, they also aren’t going to cost a blue chip prospect and they aren’t going to break the bank. If Twins fans want to see a big return for Willingham, this offseason probably isn’t the best time to trade him, despite the interest there was in Hunter.

Torii Hunter had 12 or 13 teams chasing after him?!? And signed for two years and $26M? Then how much must Josh Willingham, who hit twice as many home runs as Hunter last year and makes half as much, be worth? I thought of this question on Sunday as I was podcasting with Aaron Gleeman. A quick look at the top free agent outfielders made me even more interested. Below are the top five free agent outfielders. Let’s go through them as a general manager who is looking for right-handed power in an outfielder. We’ll bold the ones that fit that description…. Josh Hamilton – Left-handed AND ridiculously expensive Curtis Granderson – Not available. BJ Upton – Perfect – If you’re willing to pay 6 years and $90M. Michael Bourn – Great centerfielder, but no power. Nick Swisher – Switch-hitter, quite a bit of power who will likely need a four-year deal. (He also hits better as a left-hander.) Those are the guys that I thought would make more than Hunter this offseason. Compared to them, Willingham – who hit more home runs than Upton or Swisher – looks like a effective but much more affordable and risk-adverse solution. Unfortunately, just below that level are a few names that a general manager could turn to if they miss out on the big names… Cody Ross – Right-handed and hit 22 home runs last year, albeit in Fenway. Shane Victorino – No power. Angel Pagan – Not enough power. Ichiro Suzuki – Not enough power any more. Melky Cabrera – Signed. Ryan Ludwick – Right-handed and hit 26 home runs last year, albeit in Great American Ballpark. Delmon Young – Right-handed and hit 18 home runs last year in Comerica Park. Even though he hit quite a few more home runs in a tougher ballpark, Willingham is not viewed as significantly different than Ross, Ludwick and Young. And all three of those guys will get contracts similar or less than Willingham’s. The Twins took advantage of that perception last offseason when they Twins were able to sign Willingham to his affordable deal. Also, Willingham's defense looks pretty bad, though it isn’t terrible according to metrics like UZR, which says he cost the Twins just 8 runs over the average left fielder. Still, that perception could limit National League teams interest. The bottom line is that if a GM is looking to add some right-handed pop to his lineup, there are some other options. While they might not be as good, they also aren’t going to cost a blue chip prospect and they aren’t going to break the bank. If Twins fans want to see a big return for Willingham, this offseason probably isn’t the best time to trade him, despite the interest there was in Hunter.

[ATTACH=CONFIG]2710[/ATTACH]Aaron and John are at GleeManor being filmed for a documentary and talk about Scott Baker signing with the Cubs, Torii Hunter's post-Twins career and return to the AL Central, poor Mike Redmond, how the local media has and hasn't changed in their decade of blogging, why the Tigers and Blue Jays seem more willing to make big moves than the Twins, and their planned trip to see Hannibal Buress. Here are: the podcasts the rss feed if you want to subscribe and the podcast on iTunes.

Hmmm.... that's an interesting thought. Things would need to deteriorate quickly with the Marlins for that to happen - or else the Twins would need to pay a ransom for him, I suppose.

In the latest Gleeman and the Geek podcast, Aaron Gleeman and I argued, as we are apt to do. Among the questions raised was one that stuck with me: what is the goal of baseball’s regular season? Certainly, it is to make the playoffs, but beyond that, is there an advantage to posting a high win total? The answer to that question influences the path one thinks the Twins should travel this offseason. The AL Central champion had only 88 wins last year, the lowest amount for any division. It is not unlikely that could happen again next year. It is not unreasonable to suggest that even coming off of a 66 win season, by piecing together even a mediocre rotation, the Twins could improve to a mid-80s win team. But is that good enough? Or does a team need to win 90+ games to be taken seriously as a champion? To be honest, I have no idea. Aaron and I have gone back and forth on it throughout the year and again on Sunday night. On the one hand, it makes sense that a better team (one with more wins) would be favored versus a worse team. (Vegas certainly thinks so.) Furthermore, over several games, that advantage would could be more pronounced. On the other hand, it’s often said that playoffs are random. There are certainly enough counterexamples of underdogs who have held parades at the end of October, including this year. It occurred to me today that this is something we can test, and it may provide a pretty definitive answer. Best of all, it isn’t that difficult to do. Here’s how…. (Warning: high level stats discussion coming.) One sabrmetric tool used a LOT is called a correlation test. A correlation test compares two sequenced sets of data and sees what kind of relationships the two sets of data have. It is by using correlation tests that sabremetrics can definitively say that OBP or SLG is more important than BA, because it more closely correlates with the runs a team score. It is also by a correlation test the we know that xFIP is a slightly better predictor of future ERA than ERA is. We’re going to use it to compare wins in the regular season to series wins in the playoffs. I’ll link to the data once our web master posts it on our server. It’ll consist of all the playoff teams from 1996 through 2012, along with their playoff series wins and also their regular season wins.* We’ll run a correlation test on those two sets of numbers, and the test will return a value somewhere between -1 and 1: The closer to 1, the more regular season wins translates to playoffs success. For instance, comparing temperatures in Celsius to temperatures in Fahrenheit would have a correlation of 1. Not only does one go up when one goes down, but it goes up or down proportionally the same. The closer to -1, then regular season wins would have a negative correlation to playoff series wins. For instance, comparing how much I cumulatively spend to my checking balance would have a correlation of -1. The higher the amount I spend, the more my checking balance goes down. The closer to 0, the more regular season wins and playoff series wins just aren’t related. If I were to compare the total wins of a team to the numbers of migratory monarch butterflies for each city, I would expect the number to be close to 0. The two sets of data mean nothing to each other. So what do you think it will be? Take your guess, before I do the work. I’m guessing a fairly small correlation, somewhere around .25, which would be similar to the correlation that SABR folks use to conclude that pitchers can’t control if balls in play are hits. (Off to enter data and do the math….) Wow. The answer is actually quite a bit lower than that. The answer is just .07. Winning more games - being a 95 game winner versus an 85 game winner – affords a team almost no advantage in terms of advancing in the playoffs. If I wanted to drive home just how random this is (and I had a little more patience) I could compare the series wins to other ridiculous pieces of data for each team and find one that had a higher correlation. I’d venture to bet that one of these four items would have a higher correlation: team batting average, team errors, average height, or total letters in the names of all the players on 25-man roster. That’s how ridiculously low this correlation is. To me, that means that success in MLB isn’t qualitative - it’s binary. Either a team makes the playoffs, and thus has a pretty even chance to win a championship, or it doesn’t. To give extra credit for wins is akin to giving extra credit for something like team batting average or how many ex-Twins they have – you might find it interesting, but that doesn’t mean it is important. It also suggests that if you think the Twins can win the AL Central next year, then a complete overhaul might not be in order. A team does not need to be razed and rebuilt and win 95 games to position themselves to be a champion. Indeed, it earns them almost nothing at all. They just need to be good enough to get into the postseason, even if it’s in a poor division. ~~~ *(Three geek notes about the data I used. First, I did all the teams since the wild card began. Second, I skipped 1995 because they didn’t play 162 games, and since I was using win total instead of win percentage, that would have produced skewed data. And finally, for 2012, I only used the two wild card teams who won their playoff wild card game.)

In the latest Gleeman and the Geek podcast, Aaron Gleeman and I argued, as we are apt to do. Among the questions raised was one that stuck with me: what is the goal of baseball’s regular season? Certainly, it is to make the playoffs, but beyond that, is there an advantage to posting a high win total? The answer to that question influences the path one thinks the Twins should travel this offseason. The AL Central champion had only 88 wins last year, the lowest amount for any division. It is not unlikely that could happen again next year. It is not unreasonable to suggest that even coming off of a 66 win season, by piecing together even a mediocre rotation, the Twins could improve to a mid-80s win team. But is that good enough? Or does a team need to win 90+ games to be taken seriously as a champion? To be honest, I have no idea. Aaron and I have gone back and forth on it throughout the year and again on Sunday night. On the one hand, it makes sense that a better team (one with more wins) would be favored versus a worse team. (Vegas certainly thinks so.) Furthermore, over several games, that advantage would could be more pronounced. On the other hand, it’s often said that playoffs are random. There are certainly enough counterexamples of underdogs who have held parades at the end of October, including this year. It occurred to me today that this is something we can test, and it may provide a pretty definitive answer. Best of all, it isn’t that difficult to do. Here’s how…. (Warning: high level stats discussion coming.) One sabrmetric tool used a LOT is called a correlation test. A correlation test compares two sequenced sets of data and sees what kind of relationships the two sets of data have. It is by using correlation tests that sabremetrics can definitively say that OBP or SLG is more important than BA, because it more closely correlates with the runs a team score. It is also by a correlation test the we know that xFIP is a slightly better predictor of future ERA than ERA is. We’re going to use it to compare wins in the regular season to series wins in the playoffs. I’ll link to the data once our web master posts it on our server. It’ll consist of all the playoff teams from 1996 through 2012, along with their playoff series wins and also their regular season wins.* We’ll run a correlation test on those two sets of numbers, and the test will return a value somewhere between -1 and 1: The closer to 1, the more regular season wins translates to playoffs success. For instance, comparing temperatures in Celsius to temperatures in Fahrenheit would have a correlation of 1. Not only does one go up when one goes down, but it goes up or down proportionally the same. The closer to -1, then regular season wins would have a negative correlation to playoff series wins. For instance, comparing how much I cumulatively spend to my checking balance would have a correlation of -1. The higher the amount I spend, the more my checking balance goes down. The closer to 0, the more regular season wins and playoff series wins just aren’t related. If I were to compare the total wins of a team to the numbers of migratory monarch butterflies for each city, I would expect the number to be close to 0. The two sets of data mean nothing to each other. So what do you think it will be? Take your guess, before I do the work. I’m guessing a fairly small correlation, somewhere around .25, which would be similar to the correlation that SABR folks use to conclude that pitchers can’t control if balls in play are hits. (Off to enter data and do the math….) Wow. The answer is actually quite a bit lower than that. The answer is just .07. Winning more games - being a 95 game winner versus an 85 game winner – affords a team almost no advantage in terms of advancing in the playoffs. If I wanted to drive home just how random this is (and I had a little more patience) I could compare the series wins to other ridiculous pieces of data for each team and find one that had a higher correlation. I’d venture to bet that one of these four items would have a higher correlation: team batting average, team errors, average height, or total letters in the names of all the players on 25-man roster. That’s how ridiculously low this correlation is. To me, that means that success in MLB isn’t qualitative - it’s binary. Either a team makes the playoffs, and thus has a pretty even chance to win a championship, or it doesn’t. To give extra credit for wins is akin to giving extra credit for something like team batting average or how many ex-Twins they have – you might find it interesting, but that doesn’t mean it is important. It also suggests that if you think the Twins can win the AL Central next year, then a complete overhaul might not be in order. A team does not need to be razed and rebuilt and win 95 games to position themselves to be a champion. Indeed, it earns them almost nothing at all. They just need to be good enough to get into the postseason, even if it’s in a poor division. ~~~ *(Three geek notes about the data I used. First, I did all the teams since the wild card began. Second, I skipped 1995 because they didn’t play 162 games, and since I was using win total instead of win percentage, that would have produced skewed data. And finally, for 2012, I only used the two wild card teams who won their playoff wild card game.)

Aaron and John talk about trade rumors, last week's aftermath and "the older gentleman" not paying his bar tab, terrible facial hair, local media moves, which starting pitchers Twins fans should dream about, having a Joe Maddon fetish, Claire Forlani and effective advertising, Denard Span versus James Shields, targeting Braves and Rays, and where to hide the dead prostitutes before next week's episode. Here are: the podcasts the rss feed if you want to subscribe and the podcast on iTunes.

Aaron and John talk about trade rumors, last week's aftermath and "the older gentleman" not paying his bar tab, terrible facial hair, local media moves, which starting pitchers Twins fans should dream about, having a Joe Maddon fetish, Claire Forlani and effective advertising, Denard Span versus James Shields, targeting Braves and Rays, and where to hide the dead prostitutes before next week's episode. Here are: the podcasts the rss feed if you want to subscribe and the podcast on iTunes.