2wins87

If the first batter was out, then the third out would have come on the sac fly which scored the first run... so yeah. I do sort of feel that if a batter reaches base after the third out would have been recorded, and then still comes around to score that those should start to count again, and there were a couple of those. Bottom line is that there are 3 or 4 stats to look at before ERA. It also doesn't seem like Stewart pitched terribly overall. It was pretty much one ground ball through the infield after the next, but it does seem like he came a bit unglued after the damage started.

Blankenhorn's overall minor league production is very Plouffe-esque. So it's certainly possible that he turns into a good major leaguer, but I'm not sure we want to see the scenario where he gets a long enough leash in the majors to do so...

I'm not someone who feels strongly on Rortvedt one way or another, but this does bring up an interesting question. How much of a consideration should minor league framing be? And when should it start to be important? I'm pretty curious to see how Garver's numbers look this year after a month or two. He was worth -10 runs last year according to Fangraphs' new numbers, but we've heard several times that framing was a specific offseason focus for him. If he's average or better this year then I think we'd have to give pretty heavy consideration to the hypothesis that all it really takes to be a good framer is the willingness to work on it and amount of effort put into it (there already is evidence that as teams have become more aware of framing everyone has clustered closer to the average). Basically it seems like the approach is mostly just to lower the stance and get a bunch of better calls on low strikes. Maybe it won't be that simple, but we'll have to see. It seems possible that it might be the kind of thing that players don't really need to focus on until AA or AAA once they have all the fundamentals down, then they put in a some time with their catching coaches and voila, average mlb framer.

Looks like a better team this year. Looking for bounce-backs from Gordon and Wade. Decent mix of young guys with potential (more than last year) and some older AAAA types. The roster should also probably be less affected by guys being shuttled back and forth between the majors this year.

He was signed from the Netherlands in 2017. Played youth baseball there at a high level for quite a while so he was scouted from a pretty young age. He pitched quite well in the GCL last year though stats there are pretty variable. I think he's low 90's fastball, good changeup, maybe with some room for projection. He's in the book, and I'm sure Seth and the other writers could tell you more.

In a move that that was inevitable but a long time coming, Fangraphs has now added catcher framing. They have multiple articles discussing the methodolgy and impact: https://blogs.fangraphs.com/war-update-catcher-framing/ https://blogs.fangraphs.com/fangraphs-pitch-framing/ Similar data was already available elsewhere, but if you like data it is nice to have it at Fangraphs where it is rolled into valuation metrics, and easily sortable and whatnot. The data does only start in 2008 with the advent of PITCHf/x, so it adds another big difference to pre and post 2008 data, but Fangraphs has always been about quantifying the best available current data, not necessarily being a long historical repository of data. Anyway, I have a few thoughts after digging around a little bit: 1a. Garver was quite poor at framing last year and it really cuts into his fangraphs WAR, making him only slightly above replacement. It'll be interesting to watch if the work he put in this offseason turns things around this year. 1b. In a smaller sample, Astudillo's framing was about average, which might help the case that he can at least be a part-time catcher. 2. Ryan Doumit was even worse than we probably remember 3a. There was a debate about Mauer and Yadier Molina and the HOF a little wile ago, both are positive pitch framers over the portions of their careers for which there is data. Mauer is only slightly positive, getting 13.6 framing runs (about 1-1.5 WAR) from 2008-2013. Just extrapolating backwards you could probably add another 1 WAR for the seasons for which there is no data. So it probably doesn't much help his case but it doesn't hurt. Molina on the other hand, is helped immensely (by around 20 framing runs per year in the first year in which data is available), which puts his career fWAR at 53, actually slightly ahead of Mauer, and you could pretty reasonably extrapolate 5 or 6 more WAR for the seasons without data. 3b. Some of the early framing numbers seem really extreme. The methodology didn't change, and the idea of a catcher framing a pitch is much older than the data itself, but it still seems to have taken a little while for teams and coaches to realize that framing was something to focus on to really gain a significant edge. Anecdotally, there seems to be a change around 2013. Guys like Molina and McCann who put up huge early framing numbers drop down to just solidly above average. How much of the early numbers are just going to guys who happen to have benefitted from their size, stances, or whatnot without any conscious effort? If we care about things like this for the hall of fame do we want to discount the early years somewhat? Jeff Sulivan also had a piece about the decrease in the variance and year-to-year correlation of framing stats as working on framing becomes more mainstream around baseball. Is the outsized value of pitch framing going to just be a blip? 4. Mauer's 2009 MVP season now looks even better at 8.2 fWAR (to Jeter's 6.7 fWAR), though I doubt this would change any Yankees' fans minds that Jeter was somehow robbed. This is now the 3rd best catcher season by fWAR since 2008, beat by McCann's 2008 and Posey's 2012. Both of these are aided much more by framing value, though Posey's and Mauer's seasons are very close without framing value and McCann's would be pedestrian without it. 5. Good catcher framing is also taken out of pitcher value while poor framing is added to pitcher value. Is it right to put framing entirely on catchers? Do pitchers have some control due to where they are throwing their pitches in which counts? I already have some philosophical issues with fWAR for pitchers which are a topic for a different discussion, but I wonder if the perceived effect on pitchers is correct. They do acknowledge that deciding how to treat framing for pitchers was the main reason it took as long as it did for pitch framing to come to Fangraphs, but there are probably still a lot of debates to come.

HOF debates get tiresome pretty fast but I'll make a couple of points. First, the idea that the Hall has gotten easier to get into is nonsense. Harold Baines was a bad inductee, but there have been inductees like him for the Hall's entire existence. Name any positiion and it's probably pretty easy to find a Hall of Famer that makes no sense, and most of them were voted in long ago. Jesse Haines? Lloyd Waner? Bill Mazeroski? Not to mention the fact that for the first half of baseball history black players weren't even allowed in the MLB and the overall level of play wasn't very impressive. I think for the most part the standards have gotten higher, though the Veteran's committee is still odd and the writers are super inconsistent and petty. Second, I don't think the voters have ever really appreciated how difficult being a high level catcher is. We've only recently started measuring pitch framing and finding that it can actually provide a lot of value to a team, and I'm not aware of much work on the effects of catcher game calling/working with pitchers. I imagine you can probably point to some evidence that Molina has been valuable to his team in ways that haven't always been measured, though this kind of evidence is obviously hard to quantify. But most basically, there aren't a lot of catchers that have made it to the Hall, most catchers don't have particularly long and productive careers, so we should probably grade on a curve for all catchers. I think Mauer should really be a no doubt case (you can leave him off the first ballot if that kind of thing matters to you). I actually think he'll do pretty well in the voting also, uniting some of the younger and older voters. The new school guys can point to his very impressive peak at catcher and the amount of WAR he managed to rack up. He's the only catcher to win 3 batting titles, which is kind of meaningless but is the kind of thing that traditionalists like. He was the face of the Twins franchise for many years and one of the best pure hitters of his era. He was actually pretty "clutch" at the plate. The arguments for Molina have to be a little more squishy. He was never the face of his franchise, but he does have a stellar defensive reputation, and he's had a long and pretty good career at catcher which is a feat in of itself. I wouldn't really argue against him if you can make the case that he was one of the most important players for the Cardinals over his career.

The ball doesn't leave the arm faster without the arm itself moving faster. Gonsalves adjustments reportedly were lower and mid body adjustments if you read the article, getting better rotation with his hips. So if he has increased velocity (based on what Markos posted maybe it's not so clear yet) he will be putting a little more stress on his arm joints. Most pitching injuries occur at the joints, so for these it doesn't really matter which muscle groups are doing the bulk of the work to generate the velocity, it only matters how the stresses from acceleration get distributed on the ligaments in the shoulder and elbow. Pitchers can strain muscles from high effort but these are generally not the most serious injuries that happen to pitchers.

Not if the average salary decreases for the second year in a row, as it looks likely to at this point.

Although the average salary actually decreased slightly last year and looks likely to decrease again this year even with Harper's and Machado's pay raises. Obviously this won't continue for 13 years but I'd expect $22 million to still be the equivalent something like $17 million for the last 3 years, so a qualifying offer essentially.

It was more than just the MLB innings. He also took a step back in AAA issuing 5 BB/9 (about 13% BB per PA). I was getting a little worried about him before he ever hit the majors. And if his velocity had also dipped into the upper 80's there you'd have had to be concerned about how he'd get MLB hitters out. We still need to see him clean up his control. The same mechanical adjustments that increased his velocity might help, but we'll need to see him pitch more innings before we know. I think it would be reasonable to move him up a bit just based on his velocity increase, but he sprouted a bunch of question marks last year. Also, when Gonsalves was rated #2 in the org there was no Lewis, Kirilloff was just a promising high school draftee, and Graterol was an unknown guy in the low minors who had signed for only $150M. So theres some context around the strength of the system to think about too.

I think at the most basic level higher pitch velocity = faster arm speed = more stress. Obviously poor mechanics can focus the stresses in certain areas leading to higher chances of injury. It sounds like the adjustments made were focussed on his core movements, so presumably his arm movement hasn't changed much aside from the velocity. So I would think that all things equal, increasing velocity generally increases the chance of injury. But were talking about a 5% increase in velocity, so it's not much of an increase in injury risk, and Gonsalves has always managed to stay pretty healthy.

https://www.mlb.com/twins/news/stephen-gonsalves-increases-velocity This is good news. Apparently he worked with Wes Johnson on making some mechanical adjustments in the offseason. Hopefully it has a positive effect on his control also. A low 90's fastball will pair much better with his plus changeup than the upper 80s fastball he was throwing last year.

I've been thinking the same thing. A possible perk of picking 13th in an extremely position player heavy draft is that they might get a shot at their favorite pitcher in the draft. Of course if they end up getting a position player they like then that will be good too.

I'm looking forward to the articles that try to project his performance 13 years forward

I like to keep track of the grades in the other systems to have a better feel for how I should feel about the Twins prospects, and twelve 50 grades is pretty good. A 50 grade in theory means that the median outcome will be an average mlb player and there is more variation about that outcome for some guys. So far only Texas, Cleveland, and the Dodgers have more, and none of them have anyone rated better than a 55 grade. I think at least 3 of the top 6 teams will also beat that mark though I'm not sure that Toronto, Houston, or the White Sox will, so the Twins will have among the most 50 grades in the league. The Twins are also tied with the Reds with the most guys that rate 45 or above, though that will change with a few of the top teams. As far as being ranked 8th, it's kind of meaningless but fair. I don't really understand why the Dodgers are ranked 7th without any higher impact prospects. Both the Twins and the Reds have better guys at the top and seem to have a similar amount of depth looking at the 50 and 45 grades. I'm not that familiar with all of the other teams' farm systems but the Padres are probably an easy #1, the Rays are crazy deep (with good high end guys too), the Braves are also very deep (with fewer high end guys), Toronto has Vlad and a few other very good prospects at the top which makes their system, the White Sox have a few really good prospects about to the majors, and Houston has a similar 1-2 punch as the Twins with a few more 55 grade guys, though they probably have a bit thinner depth than they used to.

Man, I don't want to get excited over spring training stats, but hitting two HRs, a double, and two singles in his first 5 spring training ABs can't be a bad sign.

Prospect gurus Eric and Kiley of Fangraphs have some scouting notes on a couple of college arms who will be moving into the 20's on their draft board and could be firmly range for the Twins 1st round pick if they keep it up throughout the season. Check it out here: https://blogs.fangraphs.com/our-week-1-college-scouting-notes/

Looking at the strengths of the farm system overall, the top two is obviously among the best in baseball. It'd be easy to take Vladito and Bichette over Lewis and Kirilloff just on the strength of Vlad, but after that they can go toe-to-toe with any other team's top two. The rest of the top 5 still match up well against the rest of the league. It'd be fair to be underwhelmed with the back half of the top 10 though. There are a lot of question marks or guys that are still looking to break out. Looking just at 6-10 they'd probably be below average. However, outside the top 10 the depth is better than I can remember from any year since I've really been following closely (2011 or 2012). I think the 11-25ish slots are nearly interchangeable and they all are just a good season away from looking like a solid top-10 prospect or being a contributing piece in the majors. There are plenty of guys even outside the top 25 that seem like we'd be talking about more in other years with a weaker system. Case in point: Luke Raley, who's numbers in AA really don't look all that different from Rooker's. Most years he'd probably have to be somewhere in the top 20 based on the fact that he seems to be able to hit even if his athleticism is questioned and he doesn't have a defensive home. This year there are enough exciting athletes in the system that he's kind of an afterthought in the 25-30 range for most. I don't have a very good handle on the depth of other teams' systems, I know the Padres and Rays have crazy depth all the way down their systems, but beyond that I have to think the Twins' depth is probably only exceeded by a couple other teams. Which along with Lewis and Kirilloff make it a pretty exciting farm system.

I wonder if they give him some reps in center this year just to give him a little flexibility. It seems like positional flexibility is starting to come back into vogue a bit these days. Having a guy that can play multiple up the middle positions would be exciting. And it could help him get in the lineup regularly when he comes up, even if he sticks at short long term.

Certainly seems possible to me. All of the guys ahead of them on MLB.com's list are likely to exceed their rookie limits this year. Probably not all of them will but each would be expected to individually. So if they both perform, yeah maybe.

Looking into stats and projections, I think Polanco's contract would have been pretty close to Kepler's had he not been suspended for half the season last year. Assuming he had the same rate stats for the full year he probably would have been worth about 2.5 WAR last year, about the same as Kepler, and they both project to be about 2.5-3 WAR players this year (according to Steamer). Kepler had a bit more consistency in his first couple of seasons, but overall they would have been in a very similar spot without the suspension. So the PED use and suspension might have cost Polanco a little less than $10 million in earnings. I'm generally not that into discussing the morality behind PED use, but it's interesting to see what the penalties of the league policy are now. I think for a more established player, the penalty wouldn't be much more than the lost earnings during the suspension, and it's hard to say how it might affect a younger player that gets busted before really getting established in the major leagues.

Also, I don't get the negativity on this deal. If it is around 5 mil per year and Polanco is just a 1 WAR per year it'd probably still be tradeable to a team that needs a stopgap SS or utility infielder. I think it's extremely unlikely that Polanco is worse than that and pretty likely he'll be more like a 2-3 WAR player.

Why would the Twins want to backload it that much (or Polanco for that matter)? They have payroll flexibility this year, and front-loading more would increase their future flexibility. So I'm thinking it'll be closer to 5 mil per year for the first 5 and the team options are probably significant raises, probably getting into the 10 million range.

Larnach snuck into the top 100 at Fangraphs. They've consistently been a bit higher on him than most others. Here's what they have to say: