chpettit19

It's not all about just yesterday. I would've had no problem with him going another inning. But pretending that there's no future effects of him doubling his inning total is simply ignoring the realities of the human body. Did that 1 inning save his career? Of course not. But their plan, believe it or not, isn't just about that 1 inning. I don't know what the right amount of innings for him is, but they've already gone above and beyond what most teams would do. That's not necessarily right or wrong, but it is interesting. To me at least. And Rocco stated before that game even started that they were going to start giving Ober extra rest here and there including pulling him earlier in games. So, yeah, listen to Rocco.

There's some pretty solid data showing that large increases in innings pitched lead to injuries and significant decrease in performance. I don't know the right answer. And I'm not suggesting they shut him down or anything. But pretending that there's no future effect from him throwing 100 more innings this year is ignoring the realities of the human body. To me it's a question of weighing the now vs the future. Whether that's an inning a game here and there vs his playoff performance or his 2023 innings vs his 2024 performance. These are things organizations need to consider so I'm just interested to see what people think.

I think that's a pretty accurate description for a number of people. It's fascinating to watch the dynamics of fans who have the luxury of being emotional about/breaking down 1 game, 1 AB, 1 pitch sample sizes vs the team making decisions based off 162 games + postseason. Now I'm no Rocco lover. I'm not a hater either. I'm just neutral on him and the FO (I'd fire them all, but am not going to rant and rave about it yet). But I'm really interested in hearing the thoughts of the masses when it comes to Ober and what they'd do with a guy who threw 72.2 innings all of last year and has nearly doubled that already with 6 or 7 starts to go. He's already blown past where I thought they'd let him get to so I'm already intrigued by how they'll handle things. I most definitely am not advocating they shut him down like the Nats did with Strasburg back in the day, but he's in uncharted territory. Despite what many believe, the human body does breakdown when you throw too many baseballs in a set amount of time, and performance will suffer (yes, I know Nolan Ryan did crazy things, save me that speech, please). Just an interesting view into the minds of fans.

That's a good question. I think it's pretty self-evident that bringing the IF in is the best way to cut the run off at the plate, but it would be interesting to see how often you get out of that inning without allowing the run after you bring the IF in. But, to be fair, that Turang "blooper" should have been a double play even with the infield in. That ball hit Correa right in the glove. You and I could've caught that ball.

I get that watching Ober get pulled from that game with 78 pitches is frustrating, but, legitimate question, is there an inning limit total that people around here would put on Ober? For reference, the most innings he'd ever thrown in 1 season before this year was 108.1 in 2021. He threw 106.2 in college in 2014 when he was 18. He's never thrown more than 100 innings in a season in his life outside of those 2 instances. He's at 136.1 so far this year. So I'm legitimately curious if there's any limit fans around here would put on him, or would you all just let him throw an unlimited amount of innings?

You seemed to care about the Rays and Dodgers.

There's talk of the Brewers threatening to leave Milwaukee as well. Can't imagine either of those teams uprooting, though. I think it's the Rays figuring their stuff out and then 2 expansion teams. Teams just like to threaten the government to get more money.

I do think the organization as a whole is overly reliant on their process/expectations, but I don't agree at all that Rocco depends totally on analytics and no "gut feelings." I do think he relies too much on the pre-game plan, but those plans aren't just built on numbers, but also his conversations with players, coaches, trainers, etc. before the game. He doesn't just look at a spreadsheet and plug guys in. That's a vast oversimplification of the process before, and during, the game. Manager "gut feelings" can be better quantified now, too. When many people talk about "gut feelings" they talk about pitcher usage and knowing when a guy is tired or has more in them. That used to be done solely by the eye test and a manager using his experience to know when a certain guy is tired. Now they have spin rates, velo, extension, arm slot, and a whole bunch of proprietary stuff outsiders don't even know about that they can look at. They're judging the same thing, but they have actual data to go on now instead of just their eye test of "he looks like he's not getting on top of the ball as well so he must be tired." It's the same process, just more educated. This is a bit of a difficult idea to unwrap. I don't disagree that individual player performance game to game can't be predicted, but the idea behind most of the stats used in baseball today is that over a large enough sample size things will balance out to a certain mark for each player. The Twins aren't trying to predict individual game performance as much as they're trying to put guys in the situations they feel they perform best in as often as possible so that by the end of the season they've maximized their performance. This leads to a lot of decisions that I'm not a big fan of as I think their plan ignores some other factors. I don't like the extreme use of pinch hitters nearly every game because pinch hitters as a whole perform worse than guys who started in the lineup. But the Twins weigh platoon advantages higher in their model. They have a lot of smart people in their FO so I'm sure it's a very educated decision, but their pinch hitters (outside of Solano) have performed miserably this year so it's all the more frustrating to me. And I agree with the idea of letting the hot hand roll. That's where I think they are overly reliant on their process. But, if you're going to build your team on platoon advantages and interchangeable parts I do think there is logic in playing it out over the length of the season as that's where the advantage really plays. But then they need to be able to change that plan in the postseason as the sample size shrinks significantly, and those advantages go away since it really does become more of a game to game performance prediction. That's where you really need to just let your best players do their thing.

My understanding is that administrative leave is an official move under the domestic abuse, etc. agreement so the MLBPA or Franco can appeal it. Usually that means the league feels it can defend itself to some degree in their decision to place a player on leave. Generally not a good sign for the player, but we'll see what details come out as the investigation continues.

Is there any word on Jenkins and/or Winokur being guys that get a little extra run in A ball? I'd think maybe Jenkins DHing up until yesterday was them saving his legs a little to extend his season a couple more weeks at the next level up. Would like to see him get challenged in A ball so he knows what to really focus on in instructs and over the winter.

Don't stop there. What about the Braves and Astros? They've won a couple times recently, do they use analytics? Or is it just the Twins, Rays, and Dodgers? The well known least analytical team in baseball is the Rockies. Should we be more like them?

And what a few of us have pointed out is that the thing that changed is when pitchers are removed from games. The opener is the change, not the pinch hitting. That's why it's important to know what pitchers are available for the other team. I already broke down Pits options on Sunday. And Rocco didn't take out all his righties he took out 1, his platoon bat. He knew they only had 1 other lefty available and with his lefties spread throughout his lineup he forced the pirates to decide between using that lefty vs Julien (his best bat) where he could pinch hit Farmer if he wanted, or use the lefty vs Wallner and Gallo (his lesser bats). So my response to your hypothetical situation is that the strategy would depend on what I know about the other team's staff that day. What you described wasn't what the Twins were facing, and they knew that. But I agree that if you know they're going bullpen day and have multiple lefties capable of throwing multiple innings I wouldn't like wholesale changes. But the Pirates didn't have that setup, Rocco started his 2 lefties down in the order to get them away from the opener as best possible, and only replaced 1 guy.

There's nothing "all-knowing" about this. This isn't new baseball strategy. You know that, too. The strategy of starting righties against a lefty and then pinch hitting for some of those righties with lefties when a righty is brought in to pitch isn't new. I don't get why it's crazy that this is pointed out as a fact instead of opinion. It's not my opinion that that used to happen it's a provable fact. Suggesting Rocco should leave his platoon bats in when the pitcher changes is actually the idea that goes against decades of baseball norms.

And as has been pointed out over and over the opener is the difference. The strategy has not changed. The time when the platoon advantage is taken advantage of has changed because the time when pitchers are pulled has changed. It did happen in the starting lineup yesterday. Rocco went "heavy on right handed hitters against a left handed starter." Then the other team went to their "bullpen" so a pinch hitter was used for one of those righties to take back the platoon advantage in a close game. That isn't a new strategy. The point is wrong. Not to mention you left out the part where the other part of the point I was referring to included comparing Jordan Luplow to Hall of Famers. That's not an opinion. Actually, none of this is opinion. The strategy hasn't changed. Pinch hitting for Jordan Luplow isn't the same as pinch hitting for Harmon Killebrew. Those aren't opinions they're facts. The only thing that has changed is the time during a game that pitchers are changed. And that's been happening for years now. So I will stick with the point being wrong. Since it's easily proved that it's wrong. There's a difference between someone liking the strategy and the strategy having changed. One of those is opinion the other is fact. The strategy hasn't changed. The point is wrong.

Or you just don't understand the strategy. And you've been proven wrong about it being "new wave" by multiple posters now. But you clearly don't care about the explanations of the strategy or the proof that your stance on this being new is wrong so I'm just going to see myself out of this convo.

I don't miss the point. The point is wrong. Who the hitter is absolutely matters. Rocco wouldn't pinch hit for a HoFer in the 3rd. That is a very, very, very important piece of the equation. It's not the same principal. At all. The hitter matters in the situation. They never did what? Pinch hit a lefty for a righty? I can absolutely tell you they did that back in the 60s, 70s, 80s, and 90s. As 2 others have pointed out, it's the opener that is different. Not any kind of analytics or lineup management changes. Platoons and pinch hitting has been around forever. The thing that has changed is pitcher usage so the timing of the pinch hitting has changed. The Pirates have 3 lefties on their roster. 1 of them is a starter so Rocco could be pretty confident that guy isn't going to come into the game at any point. One of them started the game, but Rocco knows he's a reliever so is only going through the lineup once max. That left Jose Hernandez as the only other lefty pitcher possible for the Pirates yesterday. He hadn't pitched in a while so Rocco knew he'd likely throw at some point. But he had his lefties spread out in the lineup with Gallo (who he knew would come in for the "bulk guy") in the 1 hole, Julien in the 5 hole, and Wallner in the 8 hole. Julien is his best lefty hitter, but Wallner and Gallo could be attacked by 1 lefty pitcher without having to go through a bunch of righties. So Rocco put the Pirate manager in a spot to have to decide if he wanted to attack Wallner and Gallo or Julien with his lefty. It's not hard to see the strategy there. Your argument isn't with the strategy it's with Gallo. Which is a completely different argument that I don't think you'd find much pushback on at all around here. Shouldn't be on the roster. But the strategy was pretty sound this time given who the options available were.

I don't have any idea why Ohtani changes the number of other pitchers you need. I mean every team goes into every season knowing they need 8-10 starters to get through the year, that doesn't change with Ohtani. If Ohtani goes down you just go to a 5 man rotation. If one of the other guys goes down you do what you already would've been doing and fill his spot with a AAA starter. The Twins already have their other "ace" in Lopez. They have Ryan, Ober, and Varland on pre-arb deals. They have Paddack. They have 5 other starters ready to go into next year. Then, like every other team, it's up to the minor leagues to provide the backfill. That's how it works for everybody. I don't see anywhere in there that explains why they "are likely throwing out more subar players into the rotation." The rest of their rotation literally isn't changing from what it's already set to be. You're still looking to fill 5 other rotation spots that you'd be looking to fill anyways. It's not like the Twins plans for filling those 5 other spots were to go out and pay a whole bunch of money to someone else. They're already building the rotation on the cheap. Having a 6 man rotation with Ohtani wouldn't change that. The Angels are fighting for the "worst run organization in baseball" crown. Blaming their struggles on Ohtani feels awfully far fetched to me. The "money issue" is the only issue. You build the rest of the staff the exact same way you already would. You're not changing anything about how you'd build the rest of the staff. Going from 7-8 pitchers to 9 is completed by adding Ohtani. The money is obviously a concern for teams that choose not to spend money. But the rest of the staff is built the exact same way as it would've been before. So, it isn't more difficult than what I said. You need to be able to produce pitching prospects to backfill for any injuries, and to fill the rotation moving forward. But that isn't any different than what the situation was before adding Ohtani. Every team is always building with the idea of needing to produce in-house, cheap talent on a continuous basis. Adding the best player in the history of the sport doesn't change that. It just gives you the best player in the history of the sport.

It's all good. There's no comeback to "I don't care about any if the stats."

https://www.fangraphs.com/leaders/major-league?stats=bat&lg=al&type=8&season=2023&month=0&season1=2023&ind=0&pos=c&qual=200&sortcol=17&sortdir=desc&pagenum=1 Nope, not using BA, but I guess I could. Not even all that close in wRC+. But, sure, you can take all those other guys. Rogers is a bold name to add to that list, by the way. But, no, the Twins aren't screwing up by giving Jeffers less than half the PAs as Adley. He'd be way too tired if they increased his playing time. I see the argument.

Best hitting catcher in the AL this year, but I guess you could try to argue that's not true if you want.

And this team has just been running away with this brutal division, right? Those said playoffs have just been an absolute certainty while this team struggled to score 3 runs most nights and continually played a guy with a 61 OPS+ over a guy with a 137 OPS+? The playoffs are meaningless if you're not in them. It's why teams play their best players.

No, I named 5 in the last 2 years. Good try, though. The guys I left out are the bad hitting catchers. The point is that the great hitting catchers play way more than Jeffers is and it's not even debatable.

Yeah, I wouldn't go out of my way to get him a ton of extra starts the rest of the way assuming they maintain their division lead. I would give him a number of stints where he's starting 4 games in 6 days, though, to help him get a feel for a playoff series. Things have gotten a little confusing in this thread as there's a couple different things being discussed as there's talk about the rest of this year, catching in general, and Twins catchers usage this year as a whole. I'm not sure I've followed that other poster's thoughts clearly so I'm not sure when they're discussing the rest of this year vs this year as a whole vs games caught in general. The rest of the year is all about maintaining the division lead and then preparing for the playoffs as they get closer to locking that spot up. But I will complain as they get into the Texas and Cleveland series coming up and continue the 50/50 split for those games. Those are huge for finishing this division off early enough to set your rotation and rest guys for the playoffs and need to be treated like it.

I'm sorry if I'm just missing your stance, but after I said I didn't think an extra game or 2 a week was going to crush him you responded with: "Catching 4-5 games over 6-7 day series is a piece of cake for Jeffers ………..no argument………for a couple weeks……i.e. Playoffs. The debate was about physical/mental fatigue doing it throughout 162 games. The game is a grind for left fielders in August let alone a catcher playing the bulk of the time." I read that and: "Guys like Molina are the typical “catcher” profile and theoretically is what organizations are trying to guard against. Lost power & can’t run at all after 9-10 years. See Vazquez. I get they weren’t burners to start but they appear really beat up.' to mean you're worried about much more than just him catching an extra game or 2 a week for the rest of the year. But it wouldn't be the first time I've misunderstood someone. But we just disagree on the impact of him catching and extra game or 2 a week. And even if he goes from being a 137 OPS+ bat the rest of the way to a 115 OPS+ bat the rest of the way because of an extra game or 2 I'll still take it over Vazquez's 61 OPS+ bat. Simply calling it "diminishing returns" and saying it's automatically a bad idea is ignoring all the context of how far he'd have to drop as a hitter for it to actually be diminishing returns for the team overall. I find it very hard to believe he's going to lose 76 OPS+ points from catching a couple extra games here and there.

I don't think Lee is going to LF. Prato would go there before Lee would. Is this just for right now? I ask because Kirilloff isn't getting replaced by Williams, and Buxton will be in there somewhere. And if it is right now, Kepler isn't getting replaced by anyone right now.