chpettit19

If you take out those 5 games, while leaving in their top scoring games (so the opposite of what the other poster did) their average runs per game goes from 4.66 (219 runs in 47 games) to 5.17 (217 runs in 42 games). That puts them over 5 runs a game, and, as already discussed on this thread, scoring over 5 runs a game means you win a whole lot of games. A couple of us were showing that simply taking out their 5 top scoring games is obviously going to swing things dramatically, just like simple taking out their 5 lowest scoring games.

I thought there was less of a chance of my letters getting lost in the shuffle!

I've been writing Falvey 1 letter a day for years explaining how smart I am, and that if he'd just do what I say 100% of the time they'd never lose a game. I haven't gotten a reply yet...

If Lewis can't replace an 82 OPS+, or 83 wRC+, bat he's not the player we think he is, and we really shouldn't be worrying about where he plays. He definitely shouldn't be replacing anyone at 3B if he's 20% worse than league average with the bat.

That's fine, but all the more reason to not put Headricks in the pen without a concern on keeping him stretched out. My point was you can't take your top 2 depth starters and transition them both to fulltime pen roles. Leaving a struggling SWR, and the Aaron Sanchez's of the world, as your only rotation depth before the end of May would be a disastrous move.

I think it's pretty extreme to suggest not worrying about keeping your next starting pitcher stretched out while also suggesting they move Maeda to the pen. Do you believe the current starting 5 will make it through the rest of the year injury free? I get the bullpen is in the midst of falling on it's face, but to fix that by blowing up all rotation depth seems like you're not really solving the problem of maximizing season wins. They've got 115 games left. Let's pace ourselves a little when it comes to rotation depth. They're going to need it.

Prioritizing the long view isn't automatically what a smart front office does. It's absolutely a part of things, and, as I've said many times on these boards, the FO doesn't have the luxury to live in just the now. But there's a balance between the long view, and the short view. A FO that puts too much weight on the long view gets themselves fired just as much as the FO that prioritizes the short view. TR and his crew got themselves fired, in part, because they put too much emphasis on the long view, and let the short view go to crap for too long. This FO seems willing to take calculated risks on the short view without doing too much damage to the long view (like trading Steer and CES when they're full of corner, bat first prospects in the high minors and needed a starter).

So with my quick math, there have been 1406 team games played. 603 of those have scored 3 runs or fewer. That's roughly 43% of team games where teams score 3 or fewer runs. The Twins (based on your next post) are at 21 of 47 games, or 44.6%. So Twins are worse than average, but not significantly so. But I don't want them to just be average so they definitely need to pick that up. I'd think the teams that have top notch pitching staffs see a boost in their winning% at 4 runs per game compared to normal. The Twins starting rotation is definitely giving them a chance to see a boost there. But the bullpen has not been helping lately. Overall, I'm surprised they're as close as they are to average in terms of scoring 3 runs or fewer, and the problems for this team are what many of us thought they'd be. They're short a big, middle of the order bat, and the bullpen has stretches where it's simply not good enough. I expect there to be some dip in the starting rotation performance, but nothing drastic. Their best internal option for added offense is Lewis, and he should be here soon (although, this article tempering expectations has me worried they're going to be dumb about things), but the bullpen is really going to need some guys to step up. I believe in Duran and Lopez. But the rest make me nervous right now. It's not easy to find external improvements in May. They need Stewart to be for real, Thielbar to come back in top form, and Jax to make a tweak or 2 and be a real asset again.

What happens to their numbers if you take out their 5 lowest scoring games? What does "scoring consistently" look like in MLB? Honest questions. The numbers sound terrible when looking at them scoring 3 or fewer runs, and "scoring consistently" sounds great, but what are other teams doing? When you look at the best offenses for a year what percentage of games do they score 3 or fewer runs? What percentage do they score between 4 and 6 (or however you define "scoring consistently")? What percentage do they score 7 or more? I have no idea, and have never looked it up. How far off the MLB norm is this offense for consistency?

I'll start by saying that I disagree with the notion that the FO is paying much attention at all to the "fan hivemind." I think that's a false narrative with next to no evidence at all. Would the fans have had Buxton DHing all year? Would they have Pagan on the roster? Would they have traded Arraez? I don't think the FO cares at all about the fans opinions. As they shouldn't. Well maybe a little, but they certainly don't care anymore than they should. That being said, put Royce Lewis in CF (or 3B if you really think Farmer on the bench is smarter than Taylor/Castro), and the leadoff spot, the second he's eligible (May 29th I believe). The last time he was both good, and healthy, was last season when he destroyed AAA, and more than held his own in the majors. He's currently destroying AAA now. If he does it for this next series in St Paul there's no reason he shouldn't be called up a week from today. A torn ACL is an acute injury, not a chronic one. He wasn't playing injured last year (like Buxton apparently at all times), he got injured. Royce isn't injured now. He's healed. As @mikelink45 suggested, the odds of him getting hurt at Target Field aren't any greater than him playing at CHS Field. He's performed not only in AAA, but the Majors. Suggesting he hasn't been good in 5 years is ignoring a whole lot. Royce is ready. He's shown he's ready. Put him in the majors.

Correa's ankle and how it holds up for 6 years was the concern this offseason. At this point the far bigger concern is Buxton's knees and if he can make it to the end of his contract as even a DH. If he can't make through 2 months as a DH only at this point without having his knees bark at him its hard to imagine he's got 6 years left in him.

I've been tracking him, and he's, unfortunately, coming back to earth pretty hard in May. Most definitely still a respectable hitter this month, but nothing like his MVP worthy April. Slugging down to .410 this month, but still taking his walks and keeping his OPS up in the .750 range. I hope he's found something and becomes a nice big leaguer, though. Seems like a hard worker, and a good kid.

I don't think Balazovic is ready, but I agree with your general point. I'm not at all arguing for Pagan to be on the team. I've been wanting him cut since last year. I have no idea why they tenured him a contract to fill that role, or any role, other than they maybe thought they could work him into a high leverage role as the season progressed. And I have no idea why they seem to think that.

For sure. And sometimes Billy Hamilton comes up in game winning situations in extra innings. It doesn't mean Billy Hamilton is in some sort of high leverage role for the White Sox where he's consistently relied upon to win games with his bat. The argument against "low leverage" roles mostly just feels like saying "well technically they'll have to do it at some point." Of course every player on the roster is expected to play baseball. And they'll be put in big spots from time to time. But there's 8 guys in everyone's bullpen now. I'm just saying let's not act like you can't shield your 7th and 8th relievers from high leverage spots for much of the season pretty darn well. If you're frequently finding yourself being forced to use your worst players in the biggest spots you've got much bigger problems than the last guys in your pen, or on your bench.

Ok? If there's such thing as a "higher leverage role," then, by definition, there has to be such a thing as a "lower leverage role." I don't know if you're disagreeing with me or what. You're basically just saying what I did in the post chief quoted. You need Pagan types to fill low leverage roles throughout a 162 game season. He's been fine at that this year. But you have to move those guys out as the season progresses to get to at least 6 guys you can trust in playoff games. That's what my first post said. Chief argued there's no such thing as a low leverage role, and I provided some numbers to explain why I think he's wrong. Now I'm not sure if you're trying to disagree with me as you "liking" his comment suggests, or if you're agreeing with me as your explanation follows my stance from the comment he quoted. The Twins should be working towards having 5 aces, and 8 closers. If people think that's actually attainable, good for them. I'm a little more realistic, and would say no team has, or ever will, achieve that. If anyone believes there's teams out there without guys they don't want to use in high leverage situations in their pen I'll just agree to disagree with them. That doesn't mean I want Pagan on the team, it just means there are absolutely low leverage roles in modern day pens.

Do you feel there are a large number of teams in major league baseball that have no bullpen arms that are used almost entirely in low leverage spots? How many do you think there are? Almost every team carries 13 arms. That's 5 starters, and 8 pen arms. How many of those teams do you think have 8 guys they are happy to use in high leverage spots regularly? There's a difference between having to throw a high leverage inning here and there, and being a high leverage reliever. I'd venture to say that every single bullpen in major league baseball has at least 1 guy who they only want to throw in low leverage spots. Will the situation call for them to be used in high leverage spots here and there? For sure. Emilio Pagan has pitched in 2 truly high leverage spots this year. May 4th against Chicago when he got the win in the 11th, and last night. 2 out of 16 appearances through 44 team games being high leverage sure feels like it's a pretty low leverage role. He's on pace for a whopping 8 high leverage appearances this year. Of course they'll all be forced into a tight game here or there, and I said I don't want him on the team. But the idea that you can't hide a guy or 2 pretty darn well from high leverage spots seems like just arguing "well technically they'll all throw at least 1 high leverage inning." Yes, every team will lose a handful of games because they get into a stretch of games where their top guys are used too much and they have to lean on their mid and low leverage guys too much. But nobody is cycling through 8 high leverage arms and pretending they don't have guys they only use in low leverage spots until they're forced not to.

It'd be better for our collective heart health if they moved on from him, even if the new guys are worse.

I'm far more worried about losing Povich than Cano at this point. Povich is looking incredibly good, and he's got a chance to debut for the O's this year as a starter. That'd be a much bigger loss than Cano. The O's do seem to be putting themselves up there with the Rays, Guardians, Dodgers, and Astros in terms of pitcher development now, though. Let's not trade them anymore arms. Unless we get Adley or Matt's kid in return.

Don't disagree at all. The pen overall needs a lot of improvement. But if we're just looking at Pagan we have to acknowledge that he's filled his role well this year. It's not his fault (or Rocco's for that matter) that the FO have also planted numerous other guys in the pen that shouldn't be asked to do more than the role he's in. The pen is bad. They went in with 4 guys they "trusted" for high leverage work, and are hoping those 4 stay effective and healthy while they find 2 to 4 other guys who can be "trusted." So far 1 of their 4 is hurt, and another is having a weird season (Jax) where he hasn't pitched terribly, but also hasn't been effective, and they haven't found anyone else to step into a high leverage role. It's bad bullpen planning, even with the acknowledgement that relievers are fickle beings who are very hard to predict. I'm not suggesting they wait til the deadline to address Pagan, or the pen in general. But they're limited at this point of the season outside of cycling through AAA guys, which they're already doing. They can call the Royals about Chapman, but there aren't a lot of teams willing to make trades in May when it's really hard to build up a bidding war. At this point their main option is to keep throwing Stewart, etc. out there and see if any of them grab a job. I don't have super high hopes, but this is the bed they made. There was a reason almost all of us were confused by their stance all offseason of not needing to upgrade the pen.

Nobody has ever said you should never, ever use small ball tactics. Don't claim selective reading on my part when you're putting words in my mouth. Fast guys should steal! Actually, anyone who can do it at better than an 80% success rate should. You should surprise someone with a bunt every now and then, as long as your guy can bunt, and your base runners are heads up. But you shouldn't build a team around that, or use them frequently. Because if you're not meeting a certain threshold of success you're hurting yourself and costing your team runs in the name of "action." Playing to let guys go sit on base and wait for someone to homer inning after inning is terribly boring baseball. I get that you were told growing up that "small ball" and "manufacturing runs" was the "right way" to play the game. But it's not the smart way if it's a bigger part of your strategy than hitting for power. Hit and runs are not easy to find stats on so they're not included here. But I combined SB, sac bunts, and sac flies together to create your desired small ball totals. Here's the top 10 scoring teams and where they rank in HRs hit vs small ball totals: Rays- HRs- 1st, Small Ball- 4th Rangers- 8th, 7th Red Sox- 10th, 19th Dodgers- 3rd, 15th Braves- 2nd, 23rd DBacks- 16th, 6th Angels- 9th, 24th Orioles- 13th, 2nd Cards- 7th, 18th Twins- 6th, 30th Of top 10 run scoring teams the average rank for HRs is 7.5, and only 2 aren't in the top 10. For small ball moves the average rank is 14.8, and only 4 are in the top 10. The top 10 slugging teams rank 1, 5, 3, 4, 2, 6, 9, 11, 8, and 23rd in runs scored. Average rank of 7.2, 8 in top 10. The top 10 stolen base teams rank 21, 1, 29, 25, 8, 11, 12, 28, and 6th in runs scored. Average rank of 14.1, 3 in top 10. The top 10 teams in sac bunts, steals, and sac flies combined rank 21, 8, 29, 1, 25, 6, 2, 11, 19, and 12th in runs scored. Average rank of 13.4, 4 in the top 10. This isn't hard. Nobody is saying to completely take tools out of your tool box. But some tools are better than others. And it's not close. Power is by far the best tool for an offense when it comes to scoring runs. Extra movement on the base paths may make you feel like they're doing things, and improving their run scoring, but it isn't. Small ball is significantly less effective at scoring runs no matter how you feel about it. It's not an opinion, it's a provable fact.

Playing catch/long-toss, but not on a mound yet last I saw. If I remember correctly he's planning to get on a mound this weekend.

Pagan has only given up an earned run in 4 of 16 appearances this year. That's not bad. We have to separate last year from this year a little bit. He hasn't been blowing lead after lead this year. He's only blown 1. But that's because he hasn't been given leads to hold. This is not a "save Pagan!" post, but I want to be realistic about who he's been this year, and who he's most likely to be moving forward. Pagan is perfectly fine as a low-leverage, only used when trailing, or crushing, in games reliever (and you need those guys for a 162 game season). He's absolutely not someone the team should ever trust in a high-leverage situation, and should only be used there in emergencies. I can understand why they went with him only needing to get 1 out last night, and not wanting to use Lopez or Duran for 1 out, then a down and up for a second inning after they'd both thrown rather significant amounts recently. Yesterday was a perfect storm of an overused pen mixed with the offense going completely dead with the bases loaded again mixed with Sonny being incredibly wild and inefficient. That lead to them needing to use DeLeon (who I thought actually looked nasty and he may be an interesting guy to give a shot to as a lightning in a bottle reliever for 2023) more than they'd like to have, and Pagan at all. All this being said, Pagan absolutely can't be on a playoff roster. There's some blowouts in the playoffs, and you really don't want to use your studs in those games, but you can't waste a roster spot on a guy you'd absolutely never want to put into a close playoff game. I'm not going to freak out if they don't DFA Pagan today (and I've been calling for them to DFA him since last season), but as they approach the ASB, and trade deadline, they absolutely need to fill his spot with someone better. I'm ok with Pagan holding down his multi-inning, mop up role for another month or 2 as long as he continues to be successful in those situations. They need to be using that time to find 6-8 other guys they'd trust in a playoff game, though. They need to be working to improve upon him, and be looking for his replacement. The 2nd half of the season needs to be played without Pagan, or anyone, on the roster (outside of injury needs) that they wouldn't play in a 1 run playoff game. The next 2 months is all about finding your best 26 guys, maintaining reasonable depth behind them, and making sure those 26 guys are playoff worthy. Pagan doesn't have to go today, but he has to go before August.

I wouldn't think they have a very solid plan at all at this point. Buxton's future in CF, Polanco's future with the team, who of the young guys perform, and how long Correa can stick at SS all play differing roles in what 3B ends of looking like. Could go a lot of different ways. Just nice to finally have a few decent options on how to mix and match if multiple of the kids work out.

4/24-4/30- 7 games vs NYY and KC - 43 total runs scored - 13 HRs, 3 SBs 5/2-5/7- 6 games against CHW and CLE - 18 total runs scored - 7 HRs, 5 SBs 5/9-5/16- 8 games against SD, CHC, and LAD- 52 total runs scored - 13 HRs, 6 SBs See any pattern in there between when they were averaging 3 runs a game vs when they were averaging 6+? I don't disagree that base hits, steals, etc. is more exciting. I've never said anything different. In fact I just made a post yesterday in a thread about batting average as a stat that guys who get hits are more entertaining, but power scores more runs. I prefer the Twins score, and, most importantly, win games over having more movement on the field. Power scores. It sucks it's not as entertaining since there's less frequent action. But hitting HRs remains the way this team is breaking out of funks. And, as for the "we're not fast enough/don't have that kind of personnel" stuff goes I'd suggest you take a look at who's stealing bases for the Twins. MAT (6), Buxton (4), Castro (4), and Polanco (1). It's almost like it's our fast guys stealing bases like many of us have said was the only way to do it. They're not just blindly stealing everyone. I'm glad you're enjoying the games lately. I'm sure you enjoyed those Chicago and Cleveland games the most since that's when they were stealing the most bases per game.

In what inning? What's the game situation? Are you down by 2 in the bottom of the 9th? Who's the hitter on deck? There's way too much context in a baseball game for that to mean anything. Tie game, bottom 9? Absolutely. Down 4 in the 6th? I'm not sure playing for 1 run is the way to go. Way too much context missing.