chpettit19

Since June 1 (date you suggested he's been bad since) Byron Buxton has hit 17 HRs (tied for 9th in all of baseball in that time frame), and had a triple slash of .236/.323/.552 which is good for a 149 wRC+. If being 49% better than the average major league hitter is not just a "little slump," but something much worse than that, as you suggest, I can't even imagine how good he is when he isn't in a massive slump.

1. Buxton is now on the 10 day IL so your wishes have come true. Hip strain. 2. Why do we assume the team, and, more importantly, Byron himself, haven't been doing what is medically right for him this entire season? Do we think Byron, and the team, are being told he needs to shut it down or he's risking his career? Or do we think they're being told playing on it is purely about pain tolerance and the only risk for long-term damage is the same as the risk everyone else faces because of the type of injury he's dealing with? I'd assume the Twins want Byron around for the entirety of his contract, and I'd assume Byron wants to continue playing major league baseball for the entirety of his contract. Why do we think they're ignoring things and pushing him harder than doctors who've actually seen his medical reports say they should push him? Why can't we just accept that everyone involved want what's best for Byron to perform at a high level for the next 6 years and they're doing what they should be doing? They've told us time and again that shutting him down won't fix his knee, but playing on it won't hurt it more. Why can't we just let that be the answer for this season?

Do you look at Buxton and see someone who isn't following a good conditioning plan? There's a number of articles out there that you can find about his running routine during the offseason to keep his speed and stay in shape. Buxton works his tail off. Somebody doesn't have to have failed at something for them to be injury prone. Sometimes their bodies just weren't meant to do the things professional athletes do with their bodies. Sucks, but it happens. There's no reason to believe Buxton's injuries have anything to do with lack of effort on his part.

Really poorly, obviously. What's your point? They're not hitting with runners in scoring position either so how is the "manufacturing runs" working out for them? When you're simply bad at hitting you're simply bad at hitting. And right now they're simply bad at hitting.

I gave the laugh reaction even though inside it made me feel the sad reaction. Amazing how many emotions that 1 sentence created.

You're comparing 2 different things here, though. The "Statcast-type data" to justify the pitching is the same type of data that is used to justify not stealing bases, bunting, etc. as frequently as before. But at the end of the day the execution of the pitching strategies and hitting strategies have each been lacking at different parts of the season. Talking about strategy and execution are 2 different things. The "modern" data is about the strategy (pulling starters earlier, not bunting, etc.) which is different than saying the Twins simply aren't getting enough guys out and aren't scoring enough runs.

If getting their butts kicked by the Dodgers caused the players to quit trying hard it isn't a Rocco problem it's a players problem. If they only have 2 competitors on the team (Arraez and Miranda according to you), and they're only competitors because Arraez wants a batting title and Miranda wants to stay in the bigs (I assume that's what you mean by "a future") the team is screwed anyways. It's an incredibly huge leap to suggest the players have just quit because they lost a couple games to the best team in baseball. Even if Correa doesn't care about winning with the Twins, he certainly cares about getting hundreds of millions of dollars after the year so I'd be awfully surprised if losing to the Dodgers made him just quit caring about performing well. As for the players as a whole not liking or agreeing with Rocco's strategy, all I've seen is the 1 Gray clip that people attribute to him being mad at Rocco and not at the way the game is played now or not himself for not performing better. Maybe that was him being mad at Rocco. But I've seen far more praise of Rocco from players like Buxton and Correa than I have seen of guys complaining. This mostly seems to be fan projection of their own dislike of modern baseball strategy than anything else. The Twins aren't doing anything extreme with the pitching or hitting strategies they employ. Most times when a team scores 3+ runs in an inning they win the game. What's the easiest way to score 3+ runs in an inning? It's not with hit and runs and stolen bases, it's with big flies. And that's why teams pay for power and not stolen bases. The year they set the HR record they weren't lightyears ahead of the competition, they beat the Yankees by 1 homerun. The 4 highest single season HR totals for a team all came in 2019. The leader board for total team HRs in a season is riddled with modern teams because it's what the math says is the best way to win. 17 of the top 50 team HR totals ever have come in 2019 or 2021. And NYY and ATL are likely to join the top 50 this season as well. So 19 of 50 in 3 years. This is modern baseball strategy. Starting pitcher inning totals have cratered leaguewide in recent years. This isn't just a Rocco or Twins thing, it's a baseball thing. In 2012 Verlander lead the league with 238.1 IP. There were 31 guys who threw at least 200 innings. In 2019 (used pre-2020 so can't blame it on shortened season usage changes) Verlander lead with 223 IP. There were 15 guys who threw 200+ innings (including Jose Berrios, because the Twins aren't doing anything extreme!). In 7 years the number of guys throwing 200 innings a season was cut in half. This is modern baseball strategy. If the players on the Twins are quitting on the Twins because they don't like or agree with the strategies being used they may as well retire.

That's the point, though. The Twins are letting him pitch as deep into a game as reasonable based on today's standards. I think the vast majority of us here dislike today's standards so I think we're mostly all in agreement that we wish what was a reasonable starters length was longer. But it isn't. I also fully agree there are some starts that I'd have liked to see him go longer. The start that got this thread going wasn't one of those starts, though. He goes longer in some starts than others and he's pretty well established over the last handful of years that those will balance out to just over 5 innings a start for the year. I think the average baseball fan wants to see starters go longer. What some of us push back on is the idea that Rocco is terrible and the Twins are doing something extreme in their handling of the pitching staff. This is just unfortunately how pitchers are handled now.

And I point to the game between the Orioles and Blue Jays that you yourself pointed to to prove that other teams wouldn't do the same thing and say the Blue Jays took Ross Stripling out after 6.1 innings pitched, 1 hit, 72 pitches, and 20 hitters faced and say "YES OTHER TEAMS DO THIS!" It's why I'm saying you pointing to random games isn't proving your point. In that exact same game Baltimore pulled Austin Voth after 6 innings, 86 pitches, 21 batters faced and 2 hits allowed. OTHER TEAMS DO THIS!!!!!!!!!!!!!! It's why we look at aggregate data and don't pick and choose random games.

I'll play. Original goalpost - Starters have a major decline on their TTO. Status? Proven False. As already shown, starters go from a .690 OPS allowed to a .772 OPS allowed throughout their starts. If that's not a major decline I don't know what is. Especially when you add on that the reliever that comes in beats the starter AT THAT POINT IN THE GAME in every measurable pitching stat. But going from much better than a reliever to worse than a reliever isn't a something we should take into account when discussing the starters decline, right? Next goalpost - Almost nobody in baseball pitches 6+ innings. Status? Proven False. 34 pitchers in all of baseball at your arbitrary 70 inning cutoff. So 1 a team. Yeah, the league is just full of guys going 6+. It's overwhelming really. I mean if you jump to just 100 innings as a new random cutoff it's down to 26. Qualified pitchers? 23. So less than 1 per team. Man, they're just falling off trees! Next goalpost - The Twins would allow a pitcher who is pitching well to pitch deep. Status? Proven False. Jose Berrios was on pace for 200 innings last year. Is your argument that they'd drastically changed their pitching philosophy? Joe Ryan went at least 6 innings in 3 of his first 4 starts this year. When he was, you know, good. Dylan Bundy has an 8 inning start. He actually went out for the 6th inning in 8 starts this year. Dylan Bundy and his 4.76 ERA has gone into the 6th inning 40% of his starts, but they clearly won't let guys go past 5 innings. I see your point. Next goalpost - The Twins would allow a front line starter to pitch deep. Status? Proven False. See above. Like you're just writing "Proven False" for fun now. Next goalpost - Well, Sonny Gray isn't a front line starter because he's hasn't been pitching well lately. Status? Proven False. Sonny Gray averaged 5.19 innings per start last year. 5.09 the year before. Take out his 1.2 inning injury start and he's at 5.17 this year. Has made 30 starts a season 1 time since 2015. Can we stop acting like he's Max Scherzer and that he isn't being treated the same way he has been his entire career on 3 other teams? But, fine, he's a front line starter who's super inefficient with his pitches and hasn't been a workhorse in 7 years. Free Sonny Gray! Next goalpost - Well, only elite pitchers are allowed to pitch 6+ innings. Status? Proven False. The average ERA for a guy averaging 6+ innings? 2.88. Your precious xFIP? 3.44. Yeah, those guys are terrible. Definitely not the numbers of the elite pitchers in Major League Baseball. I see your point. And, no, the original topic of this thread was the way the Twins use Sonny Gray. I mean his name is literally in the title. And, as has been proven every which way, the Twins are using him exactly how he's been used for the last 7 years.

As I said earlier, Sonny Gray is being used exactly how he has been for years. I mean he's .02 innings per start off. Sonny Gray and Joe Ryan were going 6 innings a start when they were good and healthy. That's my problem with the "Twins don't treat their starters right" narrative. When those 2 were good and healthy they were going 6 or 7 innings. Now they've both had IL stints and haven't been as good so they aren't going as long. That's how it works. Jose Berrios was throwing 200 innings a year when he was here. Including being on pace for 200 innings last year before he was traded. Kenta Maeda was above league average in innings per start when he was good in 2020 and the start of 2021. That's why the bigger problem is that they keep bringing in the Bundy, Archer, Happ, Shoemaker types. That's what people need to be mad about. They treat their good pitchers the way the other teams treat theirs. They just have had too many non-good pitchers lately.

Many of us have provided numerous stats on everything you're asking for and all you do is bring up random games of pitcher X facing Y number of hitters and say it proves the rest of the league isn't doing something extremely similar to what the Twins are doing. The average MLB starter faces 22.02 batters per start. The Twins starters face 20.18. That is less than 2 batters per start. I've already pointed this out yet you keep suggesting I haven't. If you think less than 2 batters a game (not outs, batters mind you) is "extreme" there's nothing I can say. I have proven it over, and over, and over with multiple stats in multiple ways. I don't know how else to prove it beyond they're literally less than 2 batters less than what the league as a whole is doing. They're 3.5 batters off the league leading Astros. Less than 2 off average and 3.5 off the league leader. You think that's extreme. I think its not. There we go. Jose Berrios is averaging far less innings per start this year than he did with the Twins. What point are you even trying to make? He was throwing 200 innings a year for the Twins because he was good and they let their pitchers go when they're good. Now he's bad so another team isn't letting him go. Sonny Gray is .02 innings off his per start number from last year. If me using aggregate data is misleading because you pull out individual examples then we have a very different understanding of what misleading stats are. Dylan Bundy had an 8 inning start this year so I guess I win because I could point to a random game? Joe Ryan has 7 starts over the MLB average so I win? Getting through the 6th without having to face the 9 hole hitter shouldn't be viewed as a bad thing. But you're so obsessed with these random batter per game totals even though 2 of us have now explained to you that facing more hitters doesn't automatically mean a good thing. You love batters faced so I'll finish with, once again, the Twins are less than 2 off the league norm and 3.5 off the league leaders. If you think those averages are garbage after 120 games per team I can't help you. If any teams were doing things "extremely" different like you claim they are those averages wouldn't be that close. The Twins aren't doing anything extreme and I've run out of ways to prove it. I'm sorry you think 2 batters a game is a extreme. Not outs, mind you. Batters.

Gray hasn't been a work horse since his 3rd year in the bigs. His rookie year he made 10 starts and 12 appearances. 2014 he then made 33 starts. 2015 he made 31. Since then he's made 22, 27, 16, 11, 23, 31, 11 (2020), 26, and he's at 18 this year. Last year he averaged 5.19 innings per start. This year he's at 5.17 if you take out his 1.2 inning injury game. This is who Sonny Gray is and who he's been for a long, long time now.

Why is it so hard for people to admit that the average starter the third time through the order is worse than the average reliever in batted ball data, counting stats, run prevention stats, literally every kind of stat you can think of and that's why every team is doing some very similar version of what the Twins are doing? Fine, they're more extreme by less than 2 hitters and less than an inning a game. That's what we're upset about? That's "extreme?" The Twins have a ton of Dunnings and signed Perez in 2019. What are you even complaining about at this point? The Twins are doing what is provably the smart thing to do and you're mad over 2 hitters and 2 outs a game? You're mad the Twins don't have more Dane Dunnings or "career year at the age of 31 when nobody would give him anything more than Dylan Bundy" Martin Perez? You're mad the Twins aren't the 48-72 Royals or 53-65 Rangers? You're mad the Twins have a team ERA of 3.97 and not 4.09 like the Rangers or 4.70 like the Royals? When Gray and Ryan were healthy and pitching well they were getting 6 or 7 innings a start. How much context are you going to ignore? Joe Ryan has been terrible more than he's been good lately. His ERA has jumped an entire run in August alone. Joe Ryan pitched into the 6th in 5 of his first 8 starts before going on the IL. Since then he hasn't been all that good so he's only managed to do it 5 of his last 11. Sonny Gray hasn't averaged 6 innings a start since 2017 and has had an IL stint every year. He's made 30 starts in a season 1 time since 2015. So we're mad that he's pitching the same amount as he has for the last 5 years? He was at 5.09 innings/start in 2020. 5.19 in 2021. And is at basically exactly 5 this year even with a game he left early due to injury. Like the 1.2 inning start. He's at 5.17 if you take that 1 injury game out. Again, what is extreme about this? He's down from 5.19 last year to 5.17 this year and this is what we're mad about? This is what's extreme? .02 fewer innings per start? Come on.

Imagine being a Sox fan then...

While I haven't been overly happy with their recent play, it's hard to complain about meaningful games in September.

I'd sign him to 10/100 right now. He's not a complete shock as a player. He was a 2nd round pick. It took him some time to start making better swing decisions, but he's always had great bat to ball skills. I don't understand why more teams don't do what Atlanta has done with Acuna, Albies, Harris, and slightly later Riley. I think it's absolutely worth it to pay a premium during Miranda's pre-arb years to get him at an absolute steal for his later arb and free agency years. If they're not at least seeing what it'd take to buy out some free agency they're not doing their jobs.

Keller and Lynch lost their games. They're playing for a team that traded their best players and called up all their top prospects (which is what most of us were mad the Twins didn't do last year) to get them ready for next season. You're ignoring a whole lot of context there. The Twins and Royals have very different goals right now. Martin Perez is 13th amongst qualified starters in all of baseball in ERA this season. So I guess he became a #1 type this season when he was an All Star. Not to mention he's also pitching on a team that's not exactly in the playoff fight right now. Dane Dunning had an 8-2 lead going into the 7th when he was pulled with fewer than 100 pitches thrown. Ignoring a whole lot of context there, too. His start before that he threw 4.1 innings. Got to go 7 the start before that when he again had a big lead (8-0). His 20(!) starts before that he'd eclipsed 91 pitches 5 times. And one of those was 93 pitches. Dylan Bundy has eclipsed 91 pitches in 3 of 20 starts for reference.

Here's some more fun data: Relievers as a whole (so including Duffey and Pagan types) vs TTO as a whole. The relievers win in HR/9, K%, K-BB%, AVG, WHIP, BABIP, LOB%, ERA, FIP, xFIP, GB/FB, LD%, GB%, FB%, IFFB%, HR/FB, Pull%, Cent%, Oppo%, Soft%, and Hard%. So counting stats are better. Batted ball data is better. Overall results are better. Gosh, I really just can't figure out why teams would want to use the average reliever over the average starter a 3rd time. The logic is clearly garbage. I mean most teams use 30 pitchers a year so there's no way they'd have enough arms to survive such a thing. I mean I guess the best pitching staff in baseball has only used 28 pitchers so it's really not quite 30.

"The FTO/STO/TTO (first time through the order, second time through the order, third time through the order) logic is garbage." I'm sorry you chose to ignore the rest of the logic and just point to ERA and FIP. I decided maybe you needed to look at more of the logic beyond your 1 hypothetical that sets up the story you want while ignoring the fact that the entirety of the logic doesn't point to starters giving up a "bad call ball 4" and a "bloop hit." Your argument against 12 stats is 1 stat. I'm sorry the baseball industry hasn't tied their wagon to xFIP at the expense of 12 other pitching stats that say you're wrong.

I'm with you 100%.

They generally aren't facing hitters 1-4 in the 5th. Maybe that's the disconnect here. They're usually facing the bottom of the order. 8-9-1 most typically. 3 hole hitters have 1565 PAs in the 5th inning this year vs 1792 in the 6th for example. The heart of the order comes up in the 6th far more often than the 5th. You combine that with team's desires to bring guys into a clean inning instead of having to try to clean up a mess and you get a lot of pitching changes after the 5th. Again, batters faced is not a good stat to be going off. The 2 games in a row that a pitcher did that against the Twins they lost the game. Outs matter, not batters faced.

I think you're misunderstanding what @kenbuddha was saying. The Twins starters are 29th in baseball in hitters faced. That does mean they are facing fewer batters. But as an entire staff they are 25th in batters faced. Your whole thing about fewer batters faced means fewer innings pitched isn't actually correct. If I face 10 guys and get 3 out I pitched 1 inning. If I face 3 guys and get all 3 out I pitched 1 inning. So is it better that my manager let me face 10 batters just so he can say he let me face more batters? I didn't go any deeper in the game by facing that many hitters. It's why hitters faced isn't an ideal stat. Draw what conclusions you want from this, but here's the Twins rankings in batters faced per inning (lower obviously being better): Starters: 10th fewest batters faced per inning (4.18) Relievers: 16th fewest batters faced per inning (4.21) Staff: 12th fewest batters faced per inning (4.19)

Are you asking the pitcher to get 1 out in the 6th or 7th or are you asking them to navigate a lineup in the 6th or 7th to be able to get through the entire inning? That's the logic. I'm not just trying to get Rodgers or Murphy out 1 time, I'm trying to get a combination of hitters out. Thus I compare it to a combination of hitters. And it's not just Twins starters. It's the average major league starter. So you're failing to understand how the entire baseball industry decides to do what they do. As has been shown time and time again, the Twins are treating their starters the same way basically every team treats starters of this talent level. So maybe its not me or the Twins not grasping the numbers since it's the baseball industry as a whole who decides they mean a certain thing. I mean MLB is literally putting rules in place to get teams to use starters longer. Feels odd that anyone thinks MLB cares so much about starter length when it's just the Twins doing this...

Everyone, or darn close to it, is treating similarly tiered pitchers the same as the Twins. The Twins don't have many, if any, above average pitchers right now. Gray and Ryan had stretches where they were above average and they were going 6 or 7 innings. Since then they haven't been so they aren't.