Jump to content
Join us for draft day two conversation, click here! ×
Twins Daily
  • Create Account

chpettit19

Community Moderator
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    8,226

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    168

 Content Type 

Profiles

News

Minnesota Twins Videos

2026 Minnesota Twins Top Prospects Ranking

2022 Minnesota Twins Draft Picks

Minnesota Twins Free Agent & Trade Rumors, Notes, & Tidbits

Guides & Resources

2023 Minnesota Twins Draft Picks

The Minnesota Twins Players Project

2024 Minnesota Twins Draft Picks

2025 Minnesota Twins Draft Pick Tracker

2026 Minnesota Twins Draft Pick Tracker

Forums

Blogs

Events

Store

Downloads

Gallery

Everything posted by chpettit19

  1. chpettit19
    MLB Network. I've never spoken on Levine because I never had a good read on how his exit played out or what he wanted when he left. If you want to take other teams calling on the head guys at the Twins to mean something other than the Twins FO being respected, be my guest. I don't understand that take, but to each their own. The other poster didn't think the Twins were getting calls from other teams and they were wrong. The Twins are voted amongst the top 10-15 front offices in baseball in anonymous polls of front office execs annually. Falvey and Levine have both received either actual interviews or interview requests. The idea that they aren't respected around the league seems to be pretty easily refuted by actual information from actual baseball front offices.
  2. chpettit19
    Boston came calling for Falvey less than 2 years ago. Edit: sorry, should've read more comments as others have already pointed that out.
  3. chpettit19
    Trading any of them not named Correa doesn't save much money, but if they think going young may actually put butts in seats they may like that idea. Hayes' article is not a Twins announcement of a Rocco extension. Hayes got some sources to confirm they picked up his option for next year, but Falvey wouldn't even confirm it on the record. The Twins didn't announce anything. It was reported. That's neither here nor there, just a little technicality talk. I bring it up because I think one could argue it shows the Pohlads trust in Falvey. They aren't going to dictate any moves to him. I mean, they've handed their entire franchise over to him at this point. Could I see the Pohlads telling him to explore a Correa trade to get out from that longer term money? For sure. But he has some say in that (no trade clauses are waived all the time so it's not an impossible hurdle). I don't know that I buy them being too hands on about trying to clear out the relatively low amount those other guys will have left on their deals come deadline time. Not huge savings there in terms of billionaire's pockets. But I never put anything past the Pohlads.
  4. chpettit19
    I agree with the premise and have suggested essentially the same thing in recent days. But it's a weird situation because the front office shouldn't be allowed to run the rebuild/retool/re-whatever you want to call it. Assuming there's no more double-digit win streaks and they're roughly around or below .500 at the deadline, my hope is they sell guys in the last year of team control. Get what you can for Castro, France, Bader, and Paddack. But save anyone with more control than that for the offseason for a new regime. That's my hope, not my prediction. My prediction is they don't do anything of note at the deadline. There isn't a new regime after the season unless there's new ownership. And the run of our best hope being slightly above mediocre continues.
  5. chpettit19
    Don't misquote me on different boards days after the fact. You could admit you were wrong instead of misquoting people. But here we are. You're not worth my time, Chief. Enjoy your day. The fact that you're still thinking about that discussion days later just makes me feel bad for you.
  6. chpettit19
    You don't know what quotes are used for do you? I never said it was a failed AB. I said that he was fooled and chased a pitch he shouldn't have swung at. It was a bad process that lead to a good result. I'm sorry you believe that "good result" equals "failed AB." Reading comprehension isn't your strong suit in your old age. You read what you want to read and you argue against the points you want people to be arguing. You're not worth my time. Whatever makes you feel better, champ.
  7. chpettit19
    An injury (multiple injuries?) or August 1st are the things that are needed to make it a situation where McCusker is going to get real ABs with the Twins. And that's best for him. Coming up to be a short side platoon bat as he tries to establish that he can hit MLB pitching is the worst case scenario for any rookie hitter. Having him sit on the bench of get 6 random PAs over a week is not what you want. Either an outfielder or 2 goes down and he comes up to be an everyday guy and actually get real ABs so he can make real adjustments and have a real shot at succeeding or the team continues to play this Jekyll and Hyde baseball and the front office finally gets real that this team can't compete as presently constructed and they make numerous trades on, or before, July 31st and he gets his shot starting August 1. But calling him up now to sit around and rarely ever play sure doesn't sound like a great idea to me. Honestly, I wouldn't make any non-injury moves between now and the deadline other than activating Keaschall when he's ready. This is the team you thought could win. It's not actually decimated by injuries like some like to pretend it is. Let the team you thought could win try to win. Then be real with yourself in a month and do what the Tigers did last year. Trade every short-term vet you can and turn it over to guys with a possible future here. Trade Castro, France, Bader, Larnach if you're not going to pay his arb numbers, DFA Bride and Clemens if he's back to being his historical self as he seems to be coming back to. Bring back Julien and Miranda for their last chance. Give McCusker and whoever else their first chances. Running this squad back again for 2026 can't be an option. It absolutely can't be. And having another season where you miss the playoffs and don't get any info or give "young" players any experience because you're refusing to accept the reality of your roster failures would be a gigantic waste. Rattle off another 13 game winning streak? Guess the clubhouse saved itself. Hit the deadline around the .500 mark or worse? Get real and blow this offense up.
  8. chpettit19
    Don't need "bogus" reasons to trash CERA. It's super logical why you can't compare catcher ERAs across teams. Not complicated. You didn't want to take a shot at explaining why the obviously superior defensive catcher who has had nearly exactly evenly split time behind the plate, including with the best pitchers, has been behind the plate while the Twins give up consistently more runs for 2+ years? You're so confident he's the clearly better catcher but don't want to explain why that'd be? Be careful before posting a screenshot of defensive stats here. Make sure they aren't using a "bogus" stat like pitch framing. That'd put you in a weird spot. (Hint: you've already used those stats multiple times on these boards which is really weird since you don't believe in what they're based on)
  9. chpettit19
    You're missing the context here. League wide. That's the context. You can't compare CERA from players on the Tigers vs the Mariners vs the Phillies vs the Dodgers vs the Mets vs the Cubs vs the Twins. That's why CERA isn't used. And it shouldn't be. Nobody here is doing that. But the Twins split and alternate their catchers. There's still some imbalance in things, but there's imbalance in every stat. Not every hitter faces the same pitchers in the same conditions. Should we get rid of batting average? This is a different situation and the type of situation where comparison makes sense. If you can't use runs allowed to discuss catcher defense for catchers on the same team catching the same pitchers the same amount, what is the point of catcher defense? What is Vazquez doing that's making up for his complete lack of help scoring runs if it isn't helping prevent runs? The Twins provide the near perfect situation to actually use CERA. The very real reasons not to use it league wide don't apply here. Can't hide behind that when it comes to Vazquez vs Jeffers. Vazquez has unquestionably been a worse overall catcher than Jeffers. Since the day Vazquez arrived, the Twins have scored fewer and allowed more runs when he plays. Please feel free to explain how that makes him the better catcher. Oh, and, do you believe in pitch framing now? Or is that only when you're trying to use AI to explain away the fact that Vazquez doesn't actually reduce the runs allowed by the Twins with his great defense?
  10. chpettit19
    The Twins alternate their catchers so they get a pretty balanced diet of the rotation. For example, last year Ryan Jeffers caught Lopez, Ryan, and Ober for 254 innings. Vazquez caught them for 245 innings. Exactly 1 game difference over the course of the season. Not a large difference in innings caught by any means when it comes to the 3 main rotation arms. Those 3 gave up 210 hits with Jeffers behind the plate compared to 216 with Vazquez. 98 earned runs with Jeffers behind the plate compared to 119 with Vazquez. 38 HRs with Jeffers behind the plate compared to 34 with Vazquez. Had 269 Ks with Jeffers behind the plate compared to 267 with Vazquez. And gave up 45 walks with Jeffers behind the plate compared to 62 with Vazquez. So, last year, with 9 innings caught difference, Jeffers ERA with those 3 was 3.47. Vazquez was 4.37. The pitchers gave up .83 hits per inning and .18 BBs per inning with Jeffers for a WHIP of 1.01. They gave up .88 hits and .25 BBs per inning with Vazquez for a WHIP of 1.13. They gave up .15 HRs per inning with Jeffers and .14 HRs per inning with Vazquez. K'd 1.06 per inning with Jeffers and 1.09 per inning with Vazquez. The season before was more tilted in Vazquez's favor with those 3 as he had 264 innings with them compared to 236 for Jeffers. Those 3 gave up 205 hits with Jeffers catching compared to 251 with Vazquez. 82 earned runs compared to 132 with Vazquez. 29 HRs with Jeffers compared to 49 with Vazquez. Racked up 258 Ks with Jeffers compared to 319 with Vazquez. And gave up 51 walks with Jeffers compared to 60 with Vazquez. That's an ERA of 3.13 for Jeffers and 4.50 for Vazquez. .87 hits and .22 walks for a 1.09 WHIP for Jeffers. .95 hits and .23 BBs for a 1.18 WHIP for Vazquez. .12 HRs per inning with Jeffers. .19 HRs per inning for Vazquez. 1.1 Ks per inning with Jeffers. 1.2 Ks per inning with Vazquez. Do what you will with this info. I don't have time to do the whole staff, but Vazquez has had more time behind the plate with the Twins 3 best starters and by far 3 leading innings pitched guys since he's been here. And those guys have combined to be significantly better with Jeffers behind the plate during that time.
  11. chpettit19
    At this point of the season it's pretty easily explained by small sample size. A couple blowup games can skew those numbers pretty significantly. How do you explain the pitchers having better ERAs with Jeffers than Vazquez each of the last 2 years?
  12. chpettit19
    Walker JenkinsLuke KeaschallKaelen CulpepperConnor PrielippCharlee SotoDasan HillEmmanuel RodriguezBrandon WinokurKyle DeBargeAndrew MorrisMarco RayaBilly AmickCJ CulpepperPayton EelesCarson McCuskerGabriel GonzalezCory LewisEduardo BeltreKhadim DiawRicardo Olivar
  13. chpettit19
    Wonderful place to stop as we've come full circle to where it started with "bad process that produced a good result." Enjoy your day, Chief. I'm excited for all the Twins swinging at sliders a foot off the plate in full counts that you're going to be on here telling us how smart it was because that's the fundamentally sound baseball decision. You definitely won't tell us how it was a bad swing and they need to cut down their Ks. That is definitely, definitely, definitely not how that'll turn out.
  14. chpettit19
    Bryan may be comparable to one of his brothers. Just not the one we all wish he was comparable to.
  15. chpettit19
    It was bad baseball. Adjusting to a contact oriented swing is good baseball, but swinging at absolutely anything is not. You are the irrational one on this one. You're ignoring that 2 of those previous swings are him missing despite more cut down swings. He doesn't have a "there's no way I miss on this swing" swing. That's a nonsense argument. He got fooled. He didn't start his swing expecting to be swinging at a pitch a foot off the plate but he was able to get to it that time. There were 390 videos of him swinging and missing on pitches down and away and 126 of him putting it in play. Some of those were bunts. It was bad baseball that happened to work out. Twins hitters swinging at that pitch is not a good strategy. Ever. Arguing that it is is irrational. He wasn't protecting the runner. Which was your actual argument and I have disproven but you just don't want to admit. He is just an undisciplined hitter with a bad eye but hall of fame contact skills. Don't change your story now. You know I'm not going to fall for that. You've been arguing the entire time he was protecting the runner. He very obviously wasn't. He very obviously was doing what he's always done. Chasing a pitch because he got fooled. But it worked out so good for him this time. More often than not it doesn't. And then all he's doing is turning a walk into a K and Vazquez is still getting a throw off to third. Because it was bad baseball.
  16. chpettit19
    https://www.mlb.com/video/jason-motte-swinging-strike-to-jose-altuve?q=BatterId %3D [514888] AND PitchResult %3D ["swinging_strike"] AND GameDayPitchZone %3D [14] Order By ExitVelocity ASC&cp=MIXED&p=0 No runner in motion here. Which swing did this look like? Sorry, that one isn't with 2 strikes. https://www.mlb.com/video/jose-altuve-strikes-out-swinging-5Dl9yT?q=BatterId %3D [514888] AND PitchResult %3D ["swinging_strike"] AND GameDayPitchZone %3D [14] Order By ExitVelocity ASC&cp=MIXED&p=0 Here, this one has 2 strikes and no runner in motion. Which swing did this look like? I can keep going if you want. 390 results for swinging strikes on Altuve in that zone. Yet I'm the irrational one for suggesting Altuve has been doing this his entire career. Sure. https://www.mlb.com/video/james-mcarthur-in-play-no-out-to-jose-altuve?q=BatterId %3D [514888] AND GameDayPitchZone %3D [14] AND HitResult %3D ["Single"] Order By ExitVelocity ASC&cp=MIXED&p=0 And there's one where he got a hit while the runner on 2nd, in the bottom of the 8th with the Astros down 2 wasn't moving, Altuve with 2 strikes on him and he cut down his swing and just hit a tapper in play. He's. Been. Doing. This. His. Whole. Career. Holy cow.
  17. chpettit19
    I have watched the swings. Yes, he switched to a 2 strike swing on the previous swing when he fouled off a high and away slider. When, again, the runner wasn't in motion. That's when the change happened, not the last swing. He changed to a 2 strike approach like he has for his whole career. He got fooled on the ball he put in play. And if you actually went back and watched the swings you'd see the same thing. He didn't swing as hard his last 2 swings, but he was just as fooled as he was on that first slider down and away (when he reacted frustrated because he had been fooled). But since he was in a 2 strike swing he was able to reach out a little further and hit it. But he wasn't protecting the runner because just putting the ball in play isn't protecting the runner. Because if he hits that ball in the air on the same line the game is over because Correa catches it and walks to 2nd for a game ending double play. Just putting the ball in play wasn't an automatically good outcome. Which is why swinging at a pitch a foot outside was a fundamentally bad approach. But he was doing what he's done his entire freaking career and that is chase pitches but be an incredible hitter so manage to make contact at an incredible rate so managed to put it in play. And it was the same mode he went into on the previous swing. I agree, it shouldn't be controversial. But here we are. You're arguing that the guy who's been chasing pitches at one of the highest rates in baseball for over a decade likely wasn't doing what he's been doing his whole career. Him having a two strike approach and incredible contact skills is why he's in the 80th percentile for K% despite being in the 5th percentile for chase%. And a 2 strike swing isn't "anti-stathead" nor is it ammo against Rocco. Again, go look at their actual stats (you don't even have to look far for some as they've been provided in this very thread for your learning pleasure) instead of just parroting the same tired complaints that don't actually match reality anymore. Holy cow.
  18. chpettit19
    You seem to be the one who missed the point. The point was Altuve didn't have some grand plan there. He got fooled just like he had 2 pitches earlier. Chasing ball 4 a foot off the plate was not Altuve protecting the runner. It was him doing the same thing he did 2 pitches earlier and chasing ball 4 in a fundamentally awful AB that happened to work out. A strike'em out, throw'em out to end the game isn't a great strategy. A soft flair to an infielder for a game ending double play isn't a great strategy. Altuve wasn't protecting the runner, he got fooled. And chasing ball 4 for the 2nd time that AB is a bad strategy to follow and you guys defending it as some brilliant plan the Twins should follow is crazy. Oh, and make sure you don't look up the Twins K numbers or power numbers or anything like that this year. Just stick to your beliefs from January like Falvey and Rocco do. Wouldn't want the reality of their performance this season to get in the way of your rant.
  19. chpettit19
    Was Altuve protecting the runner 2 pitches earlier when he swung at the same exact pitch and the runner wasn't running? He wasn't protecting any runner. He got fooled and it just so happened to work out.
  20. chpettit19
    100% of major league managers would have used their closer in the 9th yesterday. 100%. If you can't use your closer because he threw 20 pitches the day before after not having thrown in 3 days before that then you need a new closer. There isn't a manager in the game that wouldn't have gone to their closer there. That was the easiest and most obvious decision Rocco made all game.
  21. chpettit19
    It was bad baseball. That pitch was a foot off the plate. More times than not he swings and misses and strikes out instead of taking ball 4. You can call it whatever you want. It did end up going his way that time, but far more often than not it turns out the other way and Houston fans would be upset. I'd be willing to bet you've complained on more than 1 occasion about a Twins hitter swinging and missing at a slider a foot off the plate in a full count. You weren't calling it "aggressive baseball" you were calling it bad baseball. But since this one worked out for Altuve you want to call it "aggressive baseball" and act like it was some sort of smart swing. It was bad baseball that happened to work out for him. He wasn't protecting the runner because he swung and missed at the same pitch 2 pitches earlier when the runner wasn't going. He got fooled and it just happened to work out. The Twins have the same thing happen to them every now and then. Swinging at pitches a foot off the plate is not a good strategy. If it was a close pitch and he was fighting it off you'd have an argument. No coach would ever advocate for swinging at that pitch. Ever. It was bad baseball and there's not a poster on these boards that would have said otherwise after the first time he swung and missed at the same pitch nor have they ever said it about a Twins hitter swinging and missing at that pitch in the same situation. Shoot, Miguel Sano is still bashed on these boards for swinging at that pitch. He was just playing "aggressive baseball, which sometimes goes your way just for that reason," right? Bring back Sano!
  22. chpettit19
    I mean, it's actually impossible to answer the question. Because it's based on a false statement. SWR is not "constantly being pulled in winning situations with pitch counts between 50-70." He's constantly being pulled with pitch counts between 80-100. He's pulled in the 5th a lot because he's incredibly inefficient with his pitches because he can't put hitters away. He's averaging over 17 pitches an inning on the year. Were you guys super upset when they demoted him? Didn't think he deserved that? His ERA touching 6 coming into the game yesterday wasn't a concern to you? Is it possible that he's pulled early because he simply isn't that good of a major league pitcher? The only other game this year he's been pulled with fewer than 70 pitches thrown as presented in this question was on 5/7 against Baltimore. The Twins were up 3-1 going into the 5th. SWR got 2 outs to start the inning before giving up a double and back to back singles to make it a 1 run game with the tying run on 3rd and the go ahead run on first and Cedric Mullins coming up. Rocco brought in Coulombe who still had a 0.00 ERA at that point to face the lefty and stop the implosion before Baltimore took the lead. He struck him out. The Twins won that game, by the way. In case that matters to you. Baltimore didn't score another run the rest of the game. And those are the only 2 games SWR has been pulled in the situation described in the question. And if you're thinking of arguing that Rocco's been doing it to him his whole career, SWR had 3 of 28 starts last year that fit this statement. Was 0 for 0 the year before (although he did throw 97 pitches in his one 4.2 inning appearance that year). And 0 for 1 the year before that. So, he's 5 for 38 on his career. I'd say that's far from "constantly" being pulled with 50-70 pitches thrown.
  23. chpettit19
    Glad to see that it's still bad bullpen management that costs the Twins games when the offense scores 1 run in 10 innings. Oh, and it was the closer that would've been used anyways that blew that whopping 1 run lead. I know, I know, the guy who nobody had a problem with getting demoted a couple weeks ago and had an ERA touching 6 coming into the game was definitely going to throw a complete game shutout if Rocco wasn't such a fool so Duran wasn't actually going to be used. Never change TD.
  24. chpettit19
    This stat is about SWR. And he's had more than 1 crummy start. And has had 0 IL stints this season. The Civale ERA was given earlier in the article.
  25. chpettit19
    I've always thought of pitching staffs as finding out how many outs each guy can get most of the time and then piecing it all together. It sounds like the Twins are adding another option to the list. How they'd implement it in the majors would be interesting. This doesn't have to be a change in the definition of a starter. At least it shouldn't be. It could (I'd argue should) be a forced "long reliever." You'd never want to force a Pablo, Ryan, or Ober to be a once through the order/3 or 4 inning pitcher. Or a Skubal if you want to talk about the best of the best types. That'd be a complete waste and take away that team's advantage. It'd be interesting to see what they'd do when this type of pitcher's 4th day lands on Skubal's day. Skubal goes 7 or 8. Do you still use this guy or do you push him back a day? I have no idea, just asking the question. I like this idea. I think it's smart. I think having somebody who automatically gives the rest of the pen an off day every 4th day would be huge. But it comes with challenges when they have a blowup day and can't get through 1. But you adjust and figure it out and everybody picks each other up. It'll be interesting to see how they implement this at the major league level. Is a manager willing to let their starter go 5 and then 1 guy go the rest of the game and not turn to multiple guys throwing 100? I'd think so, but 1 or 2 losses and they may start getting itchy trigger fingers.
×
×
  • Create New...