Brad Swanson

Originally posted at Kevin Slowey was Framed! Not all bad teams are created equal. Some teams are bad for just one injury-plagued season. Some teams are bad for a few seasons and then good for a few seasons. Some teams are just chronically bad. Bad teams need to be changed. Bad teams have the benefit of receiving good draft picks, but other than that, they don't really gain any sort of advantage from being bad. Teams do not want to be bad. Bad teams can struggle to attract fans and free agents, while also struggling to keep their own home-grown players. Good franchises can field bad teams. Most teams go through rough patches. The Boston Red Sox might have been the most successful franchise of the 2000s, but finished in last place in 2012. Going with the local angle, the Twins were successful during that same decade, but has suffered through 2 consecutive last place seasons. As hard as it may be to swallow, the Twins need to rebuild. Some fans cringe at that word, some scoff, but the reality is that any given last place team needs to rebuild in some manner. That being said, not all rebuilds are the same. Let's look at the 5 worst teams from 2012 and try to better understand their method for rebuilding. Note: I created some charts for my own purposes. I took the 5 best players on each of these five teams, over the past three seasons. I used fWAR to determine the best 5 players. I just wanted to see if this data indicated anything. I think it does, you might disagree, but I'll include the charts as I think they are pretty interesting. The chart shows the player name, their fWAR that season, and what team this player is with right now. I used NOWHERE for players without a team, because I am a drama queen. Houston Astros - Blow Up the Outside World [TABLE=class: grid, width: 500] 2010 - 76-86 [/TD] Michael Bourn 5.8 Indians Brett Myers 4.7 Indians Hunter Pence 2.8 Giants Roy Oswalt 2.5 NOWHERE Wandy Rodriguez 2.3 Pirates 2011 - 56-106 Carlos Lee 3.7 NOWHERE Hunter Pence 3.2 Giants Clint Barmes 2.9 Pirates Wandy Rodriguez 2.3 Pirates Michael Bourn 2.1 Indians 2012 - 55-107 Lucas Harrell 2.8 Astros Justin Maxwell 2.3 Astros Wilton Lopez 2.2 Rockies Jed Lowrie 2.1 A's Jose Altuve 1.3 Astros [/TABLE] The Astros seems to be employing the fantasy baseball "full rebuild." They have basically taken each and every valuable player and traded them for younger pieces. They will hang on to young, cheap players, but anyone else is being used to rebuild their farm system. They will likely have a payroll around 25 million this season, which is comically low. When you look at their chart, you can see that nearly every valuable player has been moved. The three remaining players are all pre-arbitration. Only Bud Norris and Carlos Pena will make more than 2 million dollars in 2013, and both seem very unlikely to finish their seasons in Houston. The present in Houston is terribly bleak. The future is getting brighter. Their farm system is much improved. Going into 2012, the Astros had a terrible team and a terrible farm system. Only one of those statements is true today, due to their trades. It also doesn't hurt to get the first pick in the draft, which they used to draft a very promising shortstop named Carlos Correa. The farm system is nice, but everyone knows that prospects aren't sure bets. My biggest issue with this form of rebuild is that teams eventually run out of good players to trade. Right now, Houston might be able to get something for Norris, Lucas Harrell and Jose Altuve. Do they really want to trade those guys? Each is relatively young, each is relatively productive and each is under team control for the foreseeable future. At some point, these atom bomb rebuilds have to start showing MLB results. Correa won't be ready for years. They have the first pick this June as well, but who knows when that player will be ready? This rebuild could take 5 more years, for all we know. It's a risky endeavor, that is for sure. Chicago Cubs - Mrs Dash [TABLE=class: grid, width: 500] 2010 - 75-87 Marlon Byrd 3.5 Mets Geovany Soto 3.1 Rangers Carlos Marmol 2.6 Cubs Randy Wells 2.6 Rangers Carlos Zambrano 2.5 NOWHERE 2011 - 71-91 Starlin Castro 3 Cubs Aramis Ramirez 2.5 Brewers Matt Garza 2.5 Cubs Sean Marshall 2.4 Reds Carlos Pena 2.3 Astros 2012 - 61-101 Darwin Barney 4.6 Cubs Starlin Castro 3.5 Cubs Ryan Dempster 3.3 Red Sox Anthony Rizzo 2.2 Cubs Alfonso Soriano 1.8 Cubs [/TABLE] The Cubs are one of those franchises that seems to sprinkle good seasons around their general misery. It makes me sad. I like the Cubs and I hope they turn things around. It looks like my hopes might be coming to fruition. The Cubs do not seem to want to sit around, blow things up and wait to see if their talented prospects pan out. Instead, they are seasoning in some good players here and there, making smart decisions and trying to build the ship as they sail, so to speak. They certainly do not have the payroll of a rebuilding team. They'll likely settle in right around $100 million, but that isn't a crazy figure when you consider their market and fan-base. Their roster is better going into 2013 and they have some pieces that they could move if the team struggles, but who can also contribute if the team experiences some success. They have a nice young core of players, including Starlin Castro, Anthony Rizzo, Jeff Samardija and yes, Darwin Barney. They have some elite prospects in their system and they will pick 2nd in the June draft. It seems that the Cubs are willing to move anyone outside of their young core and farm system. They added depth to their starting staff, and signed guys who can be moved if the 2013 season isn't going well. They went upside with Scott Baker, Scott Feldman and Carlos Villanueva. If one guy hits, they could have a long-term contributor in their rotation. If all three hit, well, that would be nice for the Cub fans. There is obvious risk in this strategy as well. The market for injured pitchers isn't great, and the Cubs exploited that, but they will have to rely on that same market if they decide to try to move those pitchers. Colorado Rockies - Hide under coats; hope it all works out [TABLE=class: grid, width: 500] 2010 - 83-79 Ubaldo Jimenez 7.3 Indians Troy Tulowitzki 6.5 Rockies Carlos Gonzalez 5.8 Rockies Jhoulys Chacin 2.4 Rockies Miguel Olivo 2.3 Reds 2011 - 73-89 Troy Tulowitzki 5.9 Rockies Carlos Gonzalez 4.2 Rockies Jhoulys Chacin 3.6 Rockies Chris Iannetta 3.1 Angels Dexter Fowler 2.5 Rockies 2012 - 64-98 Rafael Betancourt 2.6 Rockies Dexter Fowler 2.5 Rockies Matt Belisle 2.3 Rockies Jhoulys Chacin 2 Rockies Josh Roenicke 2 Twins [/TABLE] The Rockies confuse me. They have had two consecutive bad seasons. They have a couple of superstar players, but both miss a decent chunk of seemingly each season (Troy Tulowitzki and Carlos Gonzalez). They did next to nothing this off-season, other than signing Jeff Francis, and trading for Reid Brignac and Wilton Lopez. These aren't moves that help rebuild a team. They also did not trade anyone for any sort of young player or prospect. Their strategy seems to hinge on healthy seasons from their stars and development from their young pitchers. Their farm system is pretty poor, so there isn't a lot of help coming from that part of the organization. They have good players (I love Dexter Fowler), but they also have old players. Gonzalez is 27 and Tulowitzki is 28. Both are signed forever, so that is good, but there isn't much around them. Michael Cuddyer is overrated, Todd Helton is a billion and I can't think of a third thing. I think that is a bad sign. I can't assess any risk because I have no idea what they are even doing. Minnesota Twins - Some sort of Cobra-Squirrel hybrid [TABLE=class: grid, width: 500] 2010 - 94-68 Joe Mauer 5.5 Twins Justin Morneau 4.6 Twins Jim Thome 3.4 NOWHERE Orlando Hudson 2.6 NOWHERE Brian Duensing 2.4 Twins 2011 - 63-99 Scott Baker 4.2 Cubs Denard Span 2.3 Nationals Glen Perkins 2 Twins Carl Pavano 1.8 NOWHERE Michael Cuddyer 1.7 Rockies 2012 - 66-96 Denard Span 4.8 Nationals Joe Mauer 4.1 Twins Jamey Carroll 3.2 Twins Josh Willingham 2.9 Twins Ben Revere 2.4 Phillies [/TABLE] The Twins have certainly struck like a cobra in a few instances this off-season. They added three young pitchers (Vance Worley, Alex Meyer, and Trevor May) in two excellent trades. At the same time, they have been hesitant to trade off other valuable players like Josh Willingham and Justin Morneau. They may simply be lying in wait, looking for the best deal. It is also possible that the market for these two players isn't very good right now. Each has question marks, and each could address them in 2013, raising their trade value. The Twins never really seem committed to a full rebuild, but they have done a nice job of picking their spots and addressing their needs. It is still a work-in-progress though. Much like the Astros, the Twins could run out of good players to trade. Really, other than Willingham and Morneau, the only realistic trade pieces are Ryan Doumit, Glen Perkins and Jared Burton. Each of those guys might also be worth keeping around. Unlike the Astros, the Twins have more near-ready prospect talent. Aaron Hicks, Oswaldo Arcia, Alex Meyer, Kyle Gibson and Trevor May are all top ten prospects who likely will be playing in Minnesota before the end of the 2014 season. The Twins also have some payroll flexibility, and could use the 2013 off-season to truly improve their MLB team, around these young, promising players. Some are starting to say that 2013 is not a rebuilding year. I don't agree with that sentiment, but I do think the Twins are going to relevant as soon as 2014. I see strong parallels between 2014 and that 2001 season that started their AL Central mini-dynasty. There was uproar about the free agent starting pitchers that were signed this off-season, but the reality is that the Twins likely did not want to sign anyone who would block the young arms who are getting closer to Minnesota each day. There is risk here, and the middle infield is still an issue, but the Twins are amassing resources and making shrewd moves when given the opportunity. Cleveland Indians - Protein Powder [TABLE=class: grid, width: 500] 2010 - 69-93 Shin-Soo Choo 5.6 Reds Roberto Hernandez 2.5 Rays Chris Perez 2.5 Indians Travis Hafner 2.1 Yankees Carlos Santana 1.8 Indians 2011 - 80-82 Asdrubal Cabrera 4.6 Indians Justin Masterson 3.6 Indians Carlos Santana 3.4 Indians Jack Hannahan 2.2 Reds Joe Smith 2.2 Indians 2012 - 68-94 [TD] Jason Kipnis 3.7 Indians Carlos Santana 3.7 Indians Shin-Soo Choo 3.1 Reds Asdrubal Cabrera 3 Indians Michael Brantley 2.9 Indians [/TABLE] The Indians seem to be employing a strategy similar to the Cubs. They likely had a better MLB team to begin with, but definitely do not have a comparable farm system. The Indians seem to be targeting their weaknesses and dealing from their strengths. This isn't a unique strategy, but that doesn't make it any easier to implement. The Indians needed to bolster their young pitching, and used Shin-Soo Choo, a great player, to get Trevor Bauer. Bauer has his flaws, but he also has crazy upside. The Indians also signed some good players in free agency, including Nick Swisher, Michael Bourn and yes, Mark Reynolds. They have their core of good players: Jason Kipnis, Carlos Santana, Asdrubal Cabrera, Michael Brantley, Bourn and Swisher. They have interesting arms in Bauer, Justin Masterson, Carlos Carrasco, and Ubaldo Jimenez. They also have two great bullpen arms in Vinnie Pestano and Chris Perez. You could make the argument that the Indians have been rebuilt. They might not be a World Series team, but who knows? A lot of people want to find the next 2012 Orioles or 2012 A's. Likely, there won't be one, but the Indians might be as good a bet as any other team. So, not all rebuilds are the same. Each of these teams had major flaws, and that is why they were the five worst teams in 2012. However, each is employing a different method in their quest to return to relevance. Which strategies will work? Only time will tell.

i didn't even think of Gardy, but yeah, he might have the most on the line.

I like Rosario a lot. He feels like a classic overachiever; someone who always exceeds expectations and puts up better numbers than many are anticipating.

I have been given good feedback (read: 2-3 kind comments) about the wackier things I have been writing. Here is something I wrote about other Minnesota Athletes playing baseball. It's odd. Thank you to anyone who has given me nice feedback, it really does mean a lot. Here is something more serious: Originally posted at Kevin Slowey was Framed! The 2013 Minnesota Twins are in a unique position. Their present doesn't seem all that promising, but their future looks pretty bright. The future is near as well. It is entirely possible that this team starts their turnaround as early as next season. Some might argue that the turnaround started in June of 2012 at the draft, with a new commitment to power pitching. This commitment was renewed during the off-season when fan-favorites Denard Span and Ben Revere were traded for young, power arms. The Twins are building something here. I can feel it. Who will be a part of that something? For many players, the 2013 season is an audition to be a part of the next good Twins team. These are young players who need to prove that they can contribute to a contending team. If they can't, the Twins have the money and resources to replace them in the near future. I feel the Twins are going to be much more likely to make major moves, once they know where their foundation lies. Who has the most to prove this season? Something to prove in 2013 Brian Dozier Brian Dozier needs to show that he can replicate the plate discipline that he showed in 2011. He needs to show that he can handle second base as well. He was not a good player in 2012. He may have been rushed to Minnesota, but he didn't show a whole lot in AAA either. Dozier will be 26 this season. In order to be looked at as more than a stopgap or a utility player, he needs to show something this season. If he posts another sub .300 OBP in 2013, there is no reason to think that he should be a part of the Twins' future plans. Joe Benson Joe Benson is probably getting his last real chance with the Twins. He doesn't necessarily have to win the center field job outright, but he needs to show that he can make contact against major league pitching. He has a good glove and a good arm. He has power and speed. It all comes down to contact. If he can't make contact, there is no reason to keep giving him chances. All that being said, he could still carve out a niche as a fourth outfielder, even if he can't overcome the contact issues. Chris Parmelee Chris Parmelee needs to hit. Odds are, he will never be an above-average defender. In fact, he could be pretty bad in the outfield. However, he can't help that the Twins chose that position for him. All he can do is go out and play right field as best he can. His real value should come from his bat. I won't be expecting huge home run power, but a .275/.350/.450 line is what he will need to provide to overcome his defensive limitations. Those aren't huge numbers, but very valuable from a young, cheap player. If he doesn't hit, then he might get relegated to the bench. Trevor Plouffe Is Trevor Plouffe a steady, powerful third baseman, or a shaky, low-contact third baseman? Plouffe's thumb injury makes it hard to properly evaluate his 2012 season (which, was a make-or-break season in itself). Even with his early struggles and late swoon, he still slugged over .450. If he can provide steady defense and 25 home run power, he can be a very useful player going forward. If his June/July power surge was a fluke, his future might be as a super utility player, capable of playing infield and outfield. Brian Duensing It looks like Brian Duensing will get to show what he can produce as a full-time reliever in 2013. Over the past two seasons, Duensing has been a terrible starter and a productive reliever. His platoon splits are fairly massive, and it is very clear that his role should be that of a lefty specialist. The team has needed him to start games due to injuries, but should have enough depth to avoid this going forward. The question about Duensing is just how effective he can be. Is he a set-up man, or a middle reliever? We should learn the answer to that question this season. Something, but less to prove in 2013 Scott Diamond Scott Diamond will be a part of the Twins' plans, regardless of how 2013 goes. However, we will get answers about whether Scott Diamond can be as effective in the future as he was in 2012. I broke his 2012 season down in detail, and I think it was real production that can be replicated. However, he has a very small margin of error. I'm excited to watch him try to duplicate his 2012 success. Liam Hendriks Liam Hendriks was not impressive as a Twin last season. However, he was very good for Rochester. As a Twin, Hendriks gave up a lot of home runs. In Rochester, he limited home runs, and posted a 2.93 K:BB ratio. While 2013 will be an important season for Hendriks, he should not be given up on if he struggles. He is only 24 and has a good minor league track record. It will be very interesting to see how he adjusts to major league hitters this season. Kyle Gibson Kyle Gibson is coming off of a serious injury. His innings will be limited and he may not get to pitch in Minnesota very much, if at all. He is still relatively young. He was never known for his stuff. His command and control make him a good prospect. If he needs another season to get his feel back, it would be worth giving it to him. I feel that he should be ready to contribute full-time in 2014. Aaron Hicks If Aaron Hicks looks awful in Spring Training and loses the center field job, that should change nothing about how we view his future. If he then goes to AAA and struggles, that should still change nothing about how we view his future. Hicks has typically adjusted to new levels slowly, and the same could happen this season. He is only 23. Defensively, he is ready to go. He'll likely need time to adjust to new pitchers. This could take a full season or more. However, he has the skills and he seems to have the aptitude to eventually adjust. I still hope he comes out like a freight train and wins the 2013 Rookie of the Year award though. All of the Prospects Any player that is considered a legitimate prospect should not be given up on during this season. If Oswaldo Arcia fails to get to Minnesota, that doesn't change his long-term future. If Miguel Sano hits 15 home runs, if Byron Buxton and Jose Berrios struggle, if Alex Meyer is a little wild, if Eddie Rosario boots a bunch of ground balls, if... You get the point. We kind of collectively gave up on Aaron Hicks last year, and look, he might be the 2013 Rookie of the Year. Right? The Twins aren't a good enough team to give up on prospects. At least not yet. Who did I miss? Who else has something to prove in 2013? Also, who am I wrong about? Let's chat. A/S/L please.

I have been given good feedback (read: 2-3 kind comments) about the wackier things I have been writing. Here is something I wrote about other Minnesota Athletes playing baseball. It's odd. Thank you to anyone who has given me nice feedback, it really does mean a lot. Here is something more serious: Originally posted at Kevin Slowey was Framed! The 2013 Minnesota Twins are in a unique position. Their present doesn't seem all that promising, but their future looks pretty bright. The future is near as well. It is entirely possible that this team starts their turnaround as early as next season. Some might argue that the turnaround started in June of 2012 at the draft, with a new commitment to power pitching. This commitment was renewed during the off-season when fan-favorites Denard Span and Ben Revere were traded for young, power arms. The Twins are building something here. I can feel it. Who will be a part of that something? For many players, the 2013 season is an audition to be a part of the next good Twins team. These are young players who need to prove that they can contribute to a contending team. If they can't, the Twins have the money and resources to replace them in the near future. I feel the Twins are going to be much more likely to make major moves, once they know where their foundation lies. Who has the most to prove this season? Something to prove in 2013 Brian Dozier Brian Dozier needs to show that he can replicate the plate discipline that he showed in 2011. He needs to show that he can handle second base as well. He was not a good player in 2012. He may have been rushed to Minnesota, but he didn't show a whole lot in AAA either. Dozier will be 26 this season. In order to be looked at as more than a stopgap or a utility player, he needs to show something this season. If he posts another sub .300 OBP in 2013, there is no reason to think that he should be a part of the Twins' future plans. Joe Benson Joe Benson is probably getting his last real chance with the Twins. He doesn't necessarily have to win the center field job outright, but he needs to show that he can make contact against major league pitching. He has a good glove and a good arm. He has power and speed. It all comes down to contact. If he can't make contact, there is no reason to keep giving him chances. All that being said, he could still carve out a niche as a fourth outfielder, even if he can't overcome the contact issues. Chris Parmelee Chris Parmelee needs to hit. Odds are, he will never be an above-average defender. In fact, he could be pretty bad in the outfield. However, he can't help that the Twins chose that position for him. All he can do is go out and play right field as best he can. His real value should come from his bat. I won't be expecting huge home run power, but a .275/.350/.450 line is what he will need to provide to overcome his defensive limitations. Those aren't huge numbers, but very valuable from a young, cheap player. If he doesn't hit, then he might get relegated to the bench. Trevor Plouffe Is Trevor Plouffe a steady, powerful third baseman, or a shaky, low-contact third baseman? Plouffe's thumb injury makes it hard to properly evaluate his 2012 season (which, was a make-or-break season in itself). Even with his early struggles and late swoon, he still slugged over .450. If he can provide steady defense and 25 home run power, he can be a very useful player going forward. If his June/July power surge was a fluke, his future might be as a super utility player, capable of playing infield and outfield. Brian Duensing It looks like Brian Duensing will get to show what he can produce as a full-time reliever in 2013. Over the past two seasons, Duensing has been a terrible starter and a productive reliever. His platoon splits are fairly massive, and it is very clear that his role should be that of a lefty specialist. The team has needed him to start games due to injuries, but should have enough depth to avoid this going forward. The question about Duensing is just how effective he can be. Is he a set-up man, or a middle reliever? We should learn the answer to that question this season. Something, but less to prove in 2013 Scott Diamond Scott Diamond will be a part of the Twins' plans, regardless of how 2013 goes. However, we will get answers about whether Scott Diamond can be as effective in the future as he was in 2012. I broke his 2012 season down in detail, and I think it was real production that can be replicated. However, he has a very small margin of error. I'm excited to watch him try to duplicate his 2012 success. Liam Hendriks Liam Hendriks was not impressive as a Twin last season. However, he was very good for Rochester. As a Twin, Hendriks gave up a lot of home runs. In Rochester, he limited home runs, and posted a 2.93 K:BB ratio. While 2013 will be an important season for Hendriks, he should not be given up on if he struggles. He is only 24 and has a good minor league track record. It will be very interesting to see how he adjusts to major league hitters this season. Kyle Gibson Kyle Gibson is coming off of a serious injury. His innings will be limited and he may not get to pitch in Minnesota very much, if at all. He is still relatively young. He was never known for his stuff. His command and control make him a good prospect. If he needs another season to get his feel back, it would be worth giving it to him. I feel that he should be ready to contribute full-time in 2014. Aaron Hicks If Aaron Hicks looks awful in Spring Training and loses the center field job, that should change nothing about how we view his future. If he then goes to AAA and struggles, that should still change nothing about how we view his future. Hicks has typically adjusted to new levels slowly, and the same could happen this season. He is only 23. Defensively, he is ready to go. He'll likely need time to adjust to new pitchers. This could take a full season or more. However, he has the skills and he seems to have the aptitude to eventually adjust. I still hope he comes out like a freight train and wins the 2013 Rookie of the Year award though. All of the Prospects Any player that is considered a legitimate prospect should not be given up on during this season. If Oswaldo Arcia fails to get to Minnesota, that doesn't change his long-term future. If Miguel Sano hits 15 home runs, if Byron Buxton and Jose Berrios struggle, if Alex Meyer is a little wild, if Eddie Rosario boots a bunch of ground balls, if... You get the point. We kind of collectively gave up on Aaron Hicks last year, and look, he might be the 2013 Rookie of the Year. Right? The Twins aren't a good enough team to give up on prospects. At least not yet. Who did I miss? Who else has something to prove in 2013? Also, who am I wrong about? Let's chat. A/S/L please.

Originally Posted at Kevin Slowey was Framed! Warning: Stats ahead! If you prefer to learn about Scott Diamond's unique place in baseball history, you can read it here. 2012 was a completely lost season for the Minnesota Twins. I don't need to rehash all the details, as we all lived it together. One of the few bright spots was a 26-year-old former Rule 5 draft pick in Scott Diamond. Diamond shined brightly for the Twins in 2012. He won 12 games, posted a 3.54 ERA and dazzled hitters and fans alike with his pinpoint control. Diamond will go into the 2013 season as the only certainty and likely would have been the Opening Day starter, had he been healthy. As it stands, the expectations for Diamond are high. Should we expect to see a repeat of 2012, or will he revert to pre-2012 Scott Diamond? Let's use any and everything FanGraphs.com has to offer to find out. The very first thing I see when I look at Diamond's stats is his below-average strikeout rate. Diamond posted a 12.6% strikeout rate in 2012, where league average was around 19%. This stat alone means only one thing - Scott Diamond doesn't strike out a lot of batters. Not exactly breaking news. However, the rate is so far below the league average, that it bears a closer inspection. Here is a list of "successful" pitchers with a career K rate of 13% or lower (from 1993-2012). I used an ERA- of 100 or less as the gauge for success, but within that number there is much fluctuation. A 100 ERA- is considered league average. I used ERA- instead of FIP- because I wanted to reflect actual performance and not peripheral skill. I only looked at pitchers who were considered starters through the majority of their career. Note: ERA- is a stat that standardizes ERA for park factors and era. It is a great way to compare ERA from players in multiple seasons and eras. A smaller number is better and 100 is always the average, much like IQ. [TABLE=width: 163] Aaron Cook Chien-Ming Wang Mark Gubicza John Lannan Jon Garland Paul Byrd Dennis Martinez Tomo Ohka Butch Henry [/TABLE] 9 names and no one that really jumps off the page. We can add players who posted a 13 to 14% K rate and then these names appear: Mark Buehrle, Kenny Rogers, Orel Hershiser, Ken Hill, and Jarrod Washburn. The names are a bit more impressive, but we are also talking about a 10% increase in K rate. It is possible to have success with such a low strikeout rate, but it is pretty rare. However, K rate is just one part of the puzzle. What else should we look at? Diamond's walk rate was 4.3% last season, almost half of the league average of 8.1%. How rare is a walk rate that low? Looking at the same sample as before, here is a list of pitchers who posted a walk rate as low as Diamond's 4.3%? [TABLE=width: 163] Bret Saberhagen Bob Tewksbury Kevin Slowey Greg Maddux Scott Sanderson Josh Towers Brad Radke [/TABLE] 7 names, and all but Towers and Slowey won at least 100 career games. Sanderson doesn't really fit, as the sample was from the tail end of his career. Towers and Slowey couldn't keep balls in the park, something Diamond did at roughly the league average. Maddux, Saberhagen and Radke are the class of this group. Each had a significantly higher K rate than Diamond. However, it is clear that Diamond had elite control last season. If he can maintain that control, he should remain effective. Limiting walks as Diamond does really keeps runners off of the bases. The low walk rate masks his low strikeout rate a bit. His 2.9 K/BB ratio last year was well above league average. in our 1993-2012 sample, only 75 pitchers had a K/BB ratio higher than 2.9. Of those 75 pitchers, only 6 posted an ERA- over 100: Kevin Slowey, Ricky Nolasco, Bob Tewksbury, Josh Towers, Scott Sanderson and Steve Woodard. We discussed Slowey, Towers and Sanderson in the prior paragraph. What is the deal with the other three? Let's talk a bit about LOB% or left on-base percentage. This is basically the percentage of batters that pitchers put on-base, but then strand. Low strikeout pitchers often have troubles with LOB% because they can't just rear back and get a strikeout when they need it. This seems to be why Tewksbury was only league average. He had a 11.6% career K rate, even lower than Diamond. Nolasco and Woodard have low LOB% as well, but did not have the same issues with strikeouts, as each approached league average. Their low career LOB% could indicate that they pitch worse out of the stretch, or perhaps they just pitch poorly with runners on base. Whatever the reason, this seems to be hurting their overall performance. Scott Diamond has a LOB% above league average. Now, that could regress a bit, but if he can maintain that rate, he could continue to succeed as a low-strikeout pitcher. Another reason for Diamond's success was a significantly improved ground ball rate of 53.4%. Only 58 pitchers in my 1993-2012 sample posted a rate that high. High ground ball rates mean fewer line drives and fly balls, therefore leading to fewer extra-base hits. Here is a list of pitchers from my sample who posted a ground ball rate comparable to Diamond's with a walk rate in his neighborhood: Roy Halladay, Kevin Brown and the oft-injured but always effective Brett Anderson. Not bad. Each of these pitchers gets more strikeouts, but no one limited walks like Diamond did in 2012. So, why was Diamond more effective in 2012? Why did he get more ground balls? Why did his walk rate dip? Let's look through some PitchF/x data and see if we can figure it all out. A couple factors jump out at me. Diamond has a great curve ball. He gets far more swinging strikes on that pitch than is considered normal. Batters swing at roughly half of his curve balls outside the strike zone (30% is about average), but only make contact on those half the time (68% is about average). This is pretty impressive. His fastball doesn't generate many swings and misses at all, but the fastballs that are put in play against him are mostly ground balls. This improved ground ball rate on fastballs pretty much explains his overall increase in ground ball rate. Is this something he is doing differently with his fastball? The heat charts are not perfect because the sample was much smaller in 2011, but it seems that he is working away from left-handed batters more and working in on right-handed batters a bit more. It also seems that there is a trend toward him working lower in the zone, which certainly could explain the extra ground balls. There are a couple other items I learned looking at his PitchF/x data. First, he almost exclusively uses his change-up against right handed batters. He keeps it low and away and works that pitch mostly out of the strike zone. He induces mostly weak contact with that pitch, making it an out pitch of sorts. He likes to put his curve ball down and away from left-handed batters and down an in on right-handed batters. This indicates a match in approach with his fastball. Consistently keeping the ball down is a great way to get ground balls. Looking at two specific games shows the two sides of Scott Diamond. On June 24, against the Cincinnati Reds, Diamond was efficient. He went 8 innings, struck out 7 and walked just one. PitchF/x shows that he worked the outer parts of the strike zone, kept his curve ball down, but not too far down, and ran his fastball in on righties. He kept the ball away from lefties as well. On September 16, the White Sox tagged him for six runs in 5.1 innings. Against righties, His curve ball was all over the place and his fastball was out over the middle of the plate. Against lefties, the ball was up more over the middle of the plate. A few other items. Diamond didn't have much of a platoon split in 2012, showing relatively equal effectiveness against lefties and righties. Lefties actually made better contact, but Diamond gets more strikeouts and walks against lefties as well. Home/road splits don't vary much either, although he did get hit a bit more on the road. Diamond's walk rate increased and his ground ball rate decreased as the year went on. This would help to explain his ever increasing ERA. Diamond's FIP (fielding-independent pitching, which measures peripheral skill) was pretty comparable to his final ERA. His extra-base hit rate was in line with league average, as was his home run to fly ball ratio. His BABIP was around league average as well. Basically, when Diamond was effective, he wasn't lucky, he was good. 2012 Scott Diamond started hot and cooled off as the year went on. He gets a lot of ground balls with his fastball and he has a really good curve ball. He doesn't get a lot of strikeouts, but his curve ball generates a lot of swings and misses. He has truly elite control.. He can overcome the lack of strikeouts when he keeps his pitches down. He is an efficient pitcher who can go deep into games. If 2012 Scott Diamond is the real Scott Diamond, the Twins have found a uniquely effective pitcher who can defy a lot of widely-held notions about starting pitchers.

Originally Posted at Kevin Slowey was Framed! Warning: Stats ahead! If you prefer to learn about Scott Diamond's unique place in baseball history, you can read it here. 2012 was a completely lost season for the Minnesota Twins. I don't need to rehash all the details, as we all lived it together. One of the few bright spots was a 26-year-old former Rule 5 draft pick in Scott Diamond. Diamond shined brightly for the Twins in 2012. He won 12 games, posted a 3.54 ERA and dazzled hitters and fans alike with his pinpoint control. Diamond will go into the 2013 season as the only certainty and likely would have been the Opening Day starter, had he been healthy. As it stands, the expectations for Diamond are high. Should we expect to see a repeat of 2012, or will he revert to pre-2012 Scott Diamond? Let's use any and everything FanGraphs.com has to offer to find out. The very first thing I see when I look at Diamond's stats is his below-average strikeout rate. Diamond posted a 12.6% strikeout rate in 2012, where league average was around 19%. This stat alone means only one thing - Scott Diamond doesn't strike out a lot of batters. Not exactly breaking news. However, the rate is so far below the league average, that it bears a closer inspection. Here is a list of "successful" pitchers with a career K rate of 13% or lower (from 1993-2012). I used an ERA- of 100 or less as the gauge for success, but within that number there is much fluctuation. A 100 ERA- is considered league average. I used ERA- instead of FIP- because I wanted to reflect actual performance and not peripheral skill. I only looked at pitchers who were considered starters through the majority of their career. Note: ERA- is a stat that standardizes ERA for park factors and era. It is a great way to compare ERA from players in multiple seasons and eras. A smaller number is better and 100 is always the average, much like IQ. [TABLE=width: 163] Aaron Cook Chien-Ming Wang Mark Gubicza John Lannan Jon Garland Paul Byrd Dennis Martinez Tomo Ohka Butch Henry [/TABLE] 9 names and no one that really jumps off the page. We can add players who posted a 13 to 14% K rate and then these names appear: Mark Buehrle, Kenny Rogers, Orel Hershiser, Ken Hill, and Jarrod Washburn. The names are a bit more impressive, but we are also talking about a 10% increase in K rate. It is possible to have success with such a low strikeout rate, but it is pretty rare. However, K rate is just one part of the puzzle. What else should we look at? Diamond's walk rate was 4.3% last season, almost half of the league average of 8.1%. How rare is a walk rate that low? Looking at the same sample as before, here is a list of pitchers who posted a walk rate as low as Diamond's 4.3%? [TABLE=width: 163] Bret Saberhagen Bob Tewksbury Kevin Slowey Greg Maddux Scott Sanderson Josh Towers Brad Radke [/TABLE] 7 names, and all but Towers and Slowey won at least 100 career games. Sanderson doesn't really fit, as the sample was from the tail end of his career. Towers and Slowey couldn't keep balls in the park, something Diamond did at roughly the league average. Maddux, Saberhagen and Radke are the class of this group. Each had a significantly higher K rate than Diamond. However, it is clear that Diamond had elite control last season. If he can maintain that control, he should remain effective. Limiting walks as Diamond does really keeps runners off of the bases. The low walk rate masks his low strikeout rate a bit. His 2.9 K/BB ratio last year was well above league average. in our 1993-2012 sample, only 75 pitchers had a K/BB ratio higher than 2.9. Of those 75 pitchers, only 6 posted an ERA- over 100: Kevin Slowey, Ricky Nolasco, Bob Tewksbury, Josh Towers, Scott Sanderson and Steve Woodard. We discussed Slowey, Towers and Sanderson in the prior paragraph. What is the deal with the other three? Let's talk a bit about LOB% or left on-base percentage. This is basically the percentage of batters that pitchers put on-base, but then strand. Low strikeout pitchers often have troubles with LOB% because they can't just rear back and get a strikeout when they need it. This seems to be why Tewksbury was only league average. He had a 11.6% career K rate, even lower than Diamond. Nolasco and Woodard have low LOB% as well, but did not have the same issues with strikeouts, as each approached league average. Their low career LOB% could indicate that they pitch worse out of the stretch, or perhaps they just pitch poorly with runners on base. Whatever the reason, this seems to be hurting their overall performance. Scott Diamond has a LOB% above league average. Now, that could regress a bit, but if he can maintain that rate, he could continue to succeed as a low-strikeout pitcher. Another reason for Diamond's success was a significantly improved ground ball rate of 53.4%. Only 58 pitchers in my 1993-2012 sample posted a rate that high. High ground ball rates mean fewer line drives and fly balls, therefore leading to fewer extra-base hits. Here is a list of pitchers from my sample who posted a ground ball rate comparable to Diamond's with a walk rate in his neighborhood: Roy Halladay, Kevin Brown and the oft-injured but always effective Brett Anderson. Not bad. Each of these pitchers gets more strikeouts, but no one limited walks like Diamond did in 2012. So, why was Diamond more effective in 2012? Why did he get more ground balls? Why did his walk rate dip? Let's look through some PitchF/x data and see if we can figure it all out. A couple factors jump out at me. Diamond has a great curve ball. He gets far more swinging strikes on that pitch than is considered normal. Batters swing at roughly half of his curve balls outside the strike zone (30% is about average), but only make contact on those half the time (68% is about average). This is pretty impressive. His fastball doesn't generate many swings and misses at all, but the fastballs that are put in play against him are mostly ground balls. This improved ground ball rate on fastballs pretty much explains his overall increase in ground ball rate. Is this something he is doing differently with his fastball? The heat charts are not perfect because the sample was much smaller in 2011, but it seems that he is working away from left-handed batters more and working in on right-handed batters a bit more. It also seems that there is a trend toward him working lower in the zone, which certainly could explain the extra ground balls. There are a couple other items I learned looking at his PitchF/x data. First, he almost exclusively uses his change-up against right handed batters. He keeps it low and away and works that pitch mostly out of the strike zone. He induces mostly weak contact with that pitch, making it an out pitch of sorts. He likes to put his curve ball down and away from left-handed batters and down an in on right-handed batters. This indicates a match in approach with his fastball. Consistently keeping the ball down is a great way to get ground balls. Looking at two specific games shows the two sides of Scott Diamond. On June 24, against the Cincinnati Reds, Diamond was efficient. He went 8 innings, struck out 7 and walked just one. PitchF/x shows that he worked the outer parts of the strike zone, kept his curve ball down, but not too far down, and ran his fastball in on righties. He kept the ball away from lefties as well. On September 16, the White Sox tagged him for six runs in 5.1 innings. Against righties, His curve ball was all over the place and his fastball was out over the middle of the plate. Against lefties, the ball was up more over the middle of the plate. A few other items. Diamond didn't have much of a platoon split in 2012, showing relatively equal effectiveness against lefties and righties. Lefties actually made better contact, but Diamond gets more strikeouts and walks against lefties as well. Home/road splits don't vary much either, although he did get hit a bit more on the road. Diamond's walk rate increased and his ground ball rate decreased as the year went on. This would help to explain his ever increasing ERA. Diamond's FIP (fielding-independent pitching, which measures peripheral skill) was pretty comparable to his final ERA. His extra-base hit rate was in line with league average, as was his home run to fly ball ratio. His BABIP was around league average as well. Basically, when Diamond was effective, he wasn't lucky, he was good. 2012 Scott Diamond started hot and cooled off as the year went on. He gets a lot of ground balls with his fastball and he has a really good curve ball. He doesn't get a lot of strikeouts, but his curve ball generates a lot of swings and misses. He has truly elite control.. He can overcome the lack of strikeouts when he keeps his pitches down. He is an efficient pitcher who can go deep into games. If 2012 Scott Diamond is the real Scott Diamond, the Twins have found a uniquely effective pitcher who can defy a lot of widely-held notions about starting pitchers.

You are very welcome; I'm glad you enjoyed it!

All content was originally published at Kevin Slowey was Framed! I figured out how the Twins could win a baseball championship. However, I don't want to waste anyone's time, so this theory falls quite a bit short of reality. If you want realistic baseball analysis, I have been writing about some Twins-related players in the last couple weeks, and you can read about them here: Joe Saunders signs with the Mariners Matt Capps signs with the Indians Kevin Slowey signs with the Marlins Delmon Young signs with the Phillies There. However, if your interests in baseball expand beyond reality, I invite you to join me. If nothing else, it will give you insight into what I think about on a day-to-day basis. Not long ago, I woke up in the middle of the night, laughing to myself about the thought of 9 sets of Twins playing each position on a baseball field. I'm not sure why this idea was in my head or why it woke me up, but I spent roughly the next hour lying awake trying to figure out it any team filled with the actual embodiment of their own team's nicknames would be able to defeat the Twins in a baseball game. I figured, I could go grab my laptop and start typing away. This would have certainly ended with me explaining to my pregnant wife what I was doing and the ensuing legal fees that come with a divorce. Instead, I decided to trust my brain to come up with this idea once more, only when awake, away from my wife and with time to write about it. This is that epic time! Let's do this! Before we investigate, I figure every good exercise requires rules. Essentially, rules are what separate humans from animals. I can't think of any other differences. Before you start, I am fully aware that humans are animals, Bill Nye. I have created rules that I am legally obligated to follow. Please read these rules in reverse order. Rule #1 - Take this very seriously. Rule #2 - Be as literal as possible. The Rockies will be mountains, the Red Sox will be socks, the Reds will be the color red, lying flat on the ground. Rule #3 - Abandon rule #2 for humor. Or, at the very least, attempted humor. Rule #4 - Don't address any social issues. This isn't Grantland. Rule #5 - Real life MLB Playoff style with 6 division winners, 4 wild-cards, 2 play-in games, and the World Series at the end. Rule #6 - Ignore all rules. Did you read these in the wrong order? If so, you wasted so much time reading fake rules. Just kidding, rule #6 is "have fun." Time to start! AL Central Controversy right off the bat. Are "Indians" good at baseball? Please refer to Rule #4 before commenting. In all walks of life and within all groups of people, there are people who are good at things and people who are bad at things. Within the population of Native Americans there would likely be some excellent players. If we go by all-star team rules, The Indians would have a great team. Same goes for the Royals. One would assume that being wealthy Monarchs, these Royals could pay for the best hitting and pitching coaches, plus have ample time to train. However, there is an ever shrinking number of true Monarchs, so the player pool is not huge. All in all, I bet the Royals could field a pretty good team. The Tigers would be intimidating, but show me a tiger that can hold a bat. All it would take is one brave player on the other team to go out, throw balls over the plate, and run for his life while recording enough outs to win. Plus, I think we overlook how sleepy and adorable your average tiger is. The other team could simply wait for all the Tigers to fall asleep in a heap and then just go out and pump fastballs. The White Sox stand no chance. Pairs of socks would ultimately fair very poorly against Tigers. In addition, most of the people on other teams would be wearing socks, removing any possible advantage that socks have within baseball. Ultimately, the Twins would be the heavy favorites. Think about it, if there were 9 sets of Twins on the field, the defense would be insane. Plus, there exists a great chance for pitching trickery. A set of twins with differing handedness would eliminate any platoon advantage that a right-handed Tiger, White Sock, Royal or Indian would have. I'm not sure how hitting would work, but I don't think it is reasonable to expect both Twins to hold the same bat or anything. If they could work out a way to turn into a giant wheel while running, as in cartoons, they could really break up some double plays. Projected Division Finish: Twins Indians* Royals Tigers White Sox *Wild Card winner AL West We've all seen Angels in the Outfield. We all know that Angels can turn a broken-down Tony Danza into Justin Verlander. But, can Angels play as well without human bodies to manipulate? A team composed of Angel-assisted players would be excellent, but I feel that an all Angel team might be paper champs. I feel like they would struggle with stronger teams and possibly have to forfeit games to take care of much more important things. However, if the Angels were former MLB players, things could get really interesting. A team filled with deceased former Angel baseball players would be impressive, but still might have the same issues as a team filled with Angels who were not Angels. The Astros are new to this division. Astros seems to be short for Astronauts, so lots of science dorks here. If I have learned anything from the Twins' clubhouse it's that dorks need not apply. I still think they would struggle in this division filled with manly men and Angels. Though, some dorks are manly, which I think is probably the most important take away from this exercise. This would be a great opportunity for the smart folk to get back at the jocks. Speaking of jocks... The Athletics would be a team filled with athletes. That sounds pretty promising. However, take time to think of those athlete prospects that never pan out because they don't have baseball skills. They just sprint around, jumping and hurdling, but they can't make good contact. I'm not falling for it. I say these athletes would struggle against big-league Angel or Twin pitching. They would lead the league in eye-popping plays though. This division really comes down to whether you think fishermen or cowboys are better at baseball. The Mariners would have the advantage on the water, but Rangers are land mammals. Subscribing to my theory about samples of people, I am guessing both teams would be stacked. I give the slight edge to the Rangers, due to baseball being played on land. Projected Division Finish: Rangers Mariners * Angels Astros Athletics *Wild Card winner AL East Quite possibly the weakest and most bird-laden division of them all. Blue Jays and Orioles are vastly different birds. Blue Jays are a type of bird (there are 4 subspecies) and Orioles are an entire family of birds. That means the Orioles have an much larger bird pool to pull from. If the two teams played each other, my money would be on the Orioles. Although, Blue Jays are much prettier. The Rays would be terrible. A ray of sunlight is powerful. Powerful enough to power a building if working in tandem with its fellow rays. However, rays can't play baseball. Well, can't is the wrong word. There isn't a rule against it or any sort of discrimination, but they wouldn't be good at baseball. Occasionally the Rays would get in the eyes of the people and birds they are playing against, but I am guessing the Rays would have an equally difficult time holding a bat or glove. They might burn a hole through them too, which would just be a waste. I'd personally vote to contract the Rays. For my analysis of the Red Sox please copy and paste my thoughts on the White Sox into Word. Hit ctrl+F, then click the Replace tab. From there, choose to replace the word White with Red and the word Tigers with any divisional bird of your choosing. The Yankees would absolutely run away with this division. They are the only humans in the division, which would be a huge advantage in the areas of size, strength and brains. Sunglasses could be worn to combat the Rays, as there is no specific rule against it. Now it is true that the Yankees would only consist of Northerners, which would limit the pool of players, but not enough to lower their talent level to that of birds or socks. Plus, Randy Johnson has already proven that when it comes to baseball. Projected Division Finish: Yankees Orioles Blue Jays Rays Red Sox NL Central Pirates have scurvy. It seems important to point that out. Scurvy results from a vitamin C deficiency. It is easy to treat; just add vitamin C. However, Pirates are notoriously stubborn and constantly plundering. Adding all these factors together, I don't expect the Pirates to be very consistent. This will likely be a very tough adjustment for Pittsburgh fans, who have come to expect a very consistent baseball team. Brewers make beer. I know it is shocking that the Wisconsin team would be beer-related, but my sources indicate this is true. Brewers worry me because they could consume their product and then try to play baseball impaired. However, anyone with good business sense knows that you do not embezzle, even beer. Therefore, I am not concerned with impairment. The Brewers would be scurvy-free human beings, which is huge in this division. Cubs are bears, but smaller. In fact, they are child bears. Now, full-sized bears would be nearly unstoppable. I am nearly certain we could train them to hold bats (or tape bats to them) and bears are freaking strong so there would be mass dingers. Cubs are smaller and more docile. They are strong, but not as strong. Plus, they are still developing. I think a team of beer makers or treasure seekers could outwit young bears. This diagram might help (remember, the alligator eats the larger thing): Bears > Humans > Baby Bears (Cubs) Cardinals are birds. We covered birds earlier. Cardinals are a family of birds, much like Orioles. So, if we had just a three-team bird baseball league, I would say the Cardinals would be heavy favorites to make the playoffs, along with the Orioles. However, trying to determine which bird team would win in a game between the two is something science is simply not ready to address. Luckily, we don't have to worry about it. Remember Randy Johnson. Get it tattooed on your hand. Now, Red is a color. Reds are a color? Under the guise of rule #3, I have decided that the Reds will be Communists. We all know that Fidel Castro was a noted baseball-playing communist. I haven't heard of others like him and most of the former Soviet countries are not known for baseball. Therefore, I think this would be a rather weak team. They are humans though, and thus would be better than birds and baby bears by this corollary: Bears > Humans > Baby Bears (Cubs). Projected Division finish: Brewers Reds Pirates Cubs Cardinals NL West Giants are huge. By definition, this is a fact. Is simply being huge enough to win a baseball game? I'm not sure it is, but it certainly does not hurt. The reality is that while Giants are notoriously slow, their steps are notoriously large. Base-stealing will be nearly a cinch, as the Giants would simply take a step and be at the next base. One flaw for Giants: Giant strike-zones. Think of how easy it would be to get a fastball by them. A ruling would need to be made on whether or not their bats would be proportional to their size or if they would be forced to use comically small human-sized bats. Dodgers would be good at base stealing. See, the Dodgers were named after the people of Brooklyn, who were referred to as Trolley Dodgers, due to the network of Trolleys in Brooklyn around late 1890s. Teams were poorly named in those days. Since they are good at dodging Trolleys, I guess they'd be fast. Or something. At least they would be humans. Humans seem to have a distinct advantage in this league, especially when facing birds or socks. Diamondbacks are terrifying. They are rattlesnakes, for the non-snake peeps. Rattlesnakes are terrifying. They are poisonous too. However, if the other team had any of those long, thin, curved rods that can hold a snake head up, they would probably have a huge advantage. If the snakes could guard the bases, they might be able to deter other teams from running the bases. However, baseball players wear cleats and run fast. There would be many dead snakes and that is just not cool. Rockies are mountains. Mountains don't move very fast. In addition, they are prone to erosion. While a mountain may be able to get on base, I don't think they would ever score. In fact, I bet they'd get picked off a lot. However, I bet they would have a lot of range! HAHAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHA! I would think the Padres would be very nice. The name comes from the Spanish friars that founded the city of San Diego. Anyone who takes the time to found a whole city is pretty cool. However, they passed away long ago. Now we're getting into whether ghosts should be allowed to play baseball. Personally, I don't discriminate. However, I'm not sure if ghosts can hold things, and holding stuff is important in baseball. Projected Division finish: Giants Dodgers* Padres Diamondbacks Rockies *Wild card winner NL East The Braves. We addressed this earlier. According to Wikipedia, a Brave is a Native American Warrior. I think warriors would be great at baseball. They have to be fast, strong, brave and smart. This particular division is swimming with humans, so it will be harder to win. Warriors are impressive humans though. We may be on to something. Nationals are peoples of a nation. Since this nation is the United States, that means that every baseball player in the United States would be eligible to play for the Nationals. This team would be loaded. It would be an all-star team. Some might think they would be unstoppable. We'll see, I suppose. Mets are city-folk. They are metropolitan. They go to museums, theatre and then eat fancy foods. They walk places. They take public transportation. They rent bikes. All the metropolitan folk could make up a great baseball team. However, anyone who is a metropolitan in the U.S. would also be able to play for the Nationals. This could end up being the biggest decision they ever make! Phillies are people from Philly, not horses. You are thinking of fillies. Horses would have no chance, but people from Philly might be ok. Mark Gubicza and Roy Campanella are from Philly and they were good. It stands to reason that the Phillies could field a decent team. However, Philly is also a Metro area. It is also in the U.S. This segmenting is just too much for my tastes. Until the Phillies branch out, they will struggle to compete in this division. So, logically: People of the US > Native Americans in the US > People just in U.S. Metro Areas > People from Philly (the alligator simply eats the larger sample size, this is not a commentary on these people) Marlins are fish. All types of people catch fish and then eat them. This does not bode well for the Marlins' chances. If they could somehow harness their sliminess, they might have something. I'm not sure it would be enough. They do have that giant, sharp horn thing and some are bigger than some humans. Their biggest weakness might be their complete lack of arms. Arms hold stuff, and if we can learn nothing else from this exercise, it would be that holding stuff wins baseball games. Projected Division finish: Nationals Braves* Mets Phillies Marlins *Wild card winner In the near future, we will play out these playoffs and determine a champion. Or, we won't. I don't think anyone will be losing sleep over it. Except me.

All content was originally published at Kevin Slowey was Framed! I figured out how the Twins could win a baseball championship. However, I don't want to waste anyone's time, so this theory falls quite a bit short of reality. If you want realistic baseball analysis, I have been writing about some Twins-related players in the last couple weeks, and you can read about them here: Joe Saunders signs with the Mariners Matt Capps signs with the Indians Kevin Slowey signs with the Marlins Delmon Young signs with the Phillies There. However, if your interests in baseball expand beyond reality, I invite you to join me. If nothing else, it will give you insight into what I think about on a day-to-day basis. Not long ago, I woke up in the middle of the night, laughing to myself about the thought of 9 sets of Twins playing each position on a baseball field. I'm not sure why this idea was in my head or why it woke me up, but I spent roughly the next hour lying awake trying to figure out it any team filled with the actual embodiment of their own team's nicknames would be able to defeat the Twins in a baseball game. I figured, I could go grab my laptop and start typing away. This would have certainly ended with me explaining to my pregnant wife what I was doing and the ensuing legal fees that come with a divorce. Instead, I decided to trust my brain to come up with this idea once more, only when awake, away from my wife and with time to write about it. This is that epic time! Let's do this! Before we investigate, I figure every good exercise requires rules. Essentially, rules are what separate humans from animals. I can't think of any other differences. Before you start, I am fully aware that humans are animals, Bill Nye. I have created rules that I am legally obligated to follow. Please read these rules in reverse order. Rule #1 - Take this very seriously. Rule #2 - Be as literal as possible. The Rockies will be mountains, the Red Sox will be socks, the Reds will be the color red, lying flat on the ground. Rule #3 - Abandon rule #2 for humor. Or, at the very least, attempted humor. Rule #4 - Don't address any social issues. This isn't Grantland. Rule #5 - Real life MLB Playoff style with 6 division winners, 4 wild-cards, 2 play-in games, and the World Series at the end. Rule #6 - Ignore all rules. Did you read these in the wrong order? If so, you wasted so much time reading fake rules. Just kidding, rule #6 is "have fun." Time to start! AL Central Controversy right off the bat. Are "Indians" good at baseball? Please refer to Rule #4 before commenting. In all walks of life and within all groups of people, there are people who are good at things and people who are bad at things. Within the population of Native Americans there would likely be some excellent players. If we go by all-star team rules, The Indians would have a great team. Same goes for the Royals. One would assume that being wealthy Monarchs, these Royals could pay for the best hitting and pitching coaches, plus have ample time to train. However, there is an ever shrinking number of true Monarchs, so the player pool is not huge. All in all, I bet the Royals could field a pretty good team. The Tigers would be intimidating, but show me a tiger that can hold a bat. All it would take is one brave player on the other team to go out, throw balls over the plate, and run for his life while recording enough outs to win. Plus, I think we overlook how sleepy and adorable your average tiger is. The other team could simply wait for all the Tigers to fall asleep in a heap and then just go out and pump fastballs. The White Sox stand no chance. Pairs of socks would ultimately fair very poorly against Tigers. In addition, most of the people on other teams would be wearing socks, removing any possible advantage that socks have within baseball. Ultimately, the Twins would be the heavy favorites. Think about it, if there were 9 sets of Twins on the field, the defense would be insane. Plus, there exists a great chance for pitching trickery. A set of twins with differing handedness would eliminate any platoon advantage that a right-handed Tiger, White Sock, Royal or Indian would have. I'm not sure how hitting would work, but I don't think it is reasonable to expect both Twins to hold the same bat or anything. If they could work out a way to turn into a giant wheel while running, as in cartoons, they could really break up some double plays. Projected Division Finish: Twins Indians* Royals Tigers White Sox *Wild Card winner AL West We've all seen Angels in the Outfield. We all know that Angels can turn a broken-down Tony Danza into Justin Verlander. But, can Angels play as well without human bodies to manipulate? A team composed of Angel-assisted players would be excellent, but I feel that an all Angel team might be paper champs. I feel like they would struggle with stronger teams and possibly have to forfeit games to take care of much more important things. However, if the Angels were former MLB players, things could get really interesting. A team filled with deceased former Angel baseball players would be impressive, but still might have the same issues as a team filled with Angels who were not Angels. The Astros are new to this division. Astros seems to be short for Astronauts, so lots of science dorks here. If I have learned anything from the Twins' clubhouse it's that dorks need not apply. I still think they would struggle in this division filled with manly men and Angels. Though, some dorks are manly, which I think is probably the most important take away from this exercise. This would be a great opportunity for the smart folk to get back at the jocks. Speaking of jocks... The Athletics would be a team filled with athletes. That sounds pretty promising. However, take time to think of those athlete prospects that never pan out because they don't have baseball skills. They just sprint around, jumping and hurdling, but they can't make good contact. I'm not falling for it. I say these athletes would struggle against big-league Angel or Twin pitching. They would lead the league in eye-popping plays though. This division really comes down to whether you think fishermen or cowboys are better at baseball. The Mariners would have the advantage on the water, but Rangers are land mammals. Subscribing to my theory about samples of people, I am guessing both teams would be stacked. I give the slight edge to the Rangers, due to baseball being played on land. Projected Division Finish: Rangers Mariners * Angels Astros Athletics *Wild Card winner AL East Quite possibly the weakest and most bird-laden division of them all. Blue Jays and Orioles are vastly different birds. Blue Jays are a type of bird (there are 4 subspecies) and Orioles are an entire family of birds. That means the Orioles have an much larger bird pool to pull from. If the two teams played each other, my money would be on the Orioles. Although, Blue Jays are much prettier. The Rays would be terrible. A ray of sunlight is powerful. Powerful enough to power a building if working in tandem with its fellow rays. However, rays can't play baseball. Well, can't is the wrong word. There isn't a rule against it or any sort of discrimination, but they wouldn't be good at baseball. Occasionally the Rays would get in the eyes of the people and birds they are playing against, but I am guessing the Rays would have an equally difficult time holding a bat or glove. They might burn a hole through them too, which would just be a waste. I'd personally vote to contract the Rays. For my analysis of the Red Sox please copy and paste my thoughts on the White Sox into Word. Hit ctrl+F, then click the Replace tab. From there, choose to replace the word White with Red and the word Tigers with any divisional bird of your choosing. The Yankees would absolutely run away with this division. They are the only humans in the division, which would be a huge advantage in the areas of size, strength and brains. Sunglasses could be worn to combat the Rays, as there is no specific rule against it. Now it is true that the Yankees would only consist of Northerners, which would limit the pool of players, but not enough to lower their talent level to that of birds or socks. Plus, Randy Johnson has already proven that when it comes to baseball. Projected Division Finish: Yankees Orioles Blue Jays Rays Red Sox NL Central Pirates have scurvy. It seems important to point that out. Scurvy results from a vitamin C deficiency. It is easy to treat; just add vitamin C. However, Pirates are notoriously stubborn and constantly plundering. Adding all these factors together, I don't expect the Pirates to be very consistent. This will likely be a very tough adjustment for Pittsburgh fans, who have come to expect a very consistent baseball team. Brewers make beer. I know it is shocking that the Wisconsin team would be beer-related, but my sources indicate this is true. Brewers worry me because they could consume their product and then try to play baseball impaired. However, anyone with good business sense knows that you do not embezzle, even beer. Therefore, I am not concerned with impairment. The Brewers would be scurvy-free human beings, which is huge in this division. Cubs are bears, but smaller. In fact, they are child bears. Now, full-sized bears would be nearly unstoppable. I am nearly certain we could train them to hold bats (or tape bats to them) and bears are freaking strong so there would be mass dingers. Cubs are smaller and more docile. They are strong, but not as strong. Plus, they are still developing. I think a team of beer makers or treasure seekers could outwit young bears. This diagram might help (remember, the alligator eats the larger thing): Bears > Humans > Baby Bears (Cubs) Cardinals are birds. We covered birds earlier. Cardinals are a family of birds, much like Orioles. So, if we had just a three-team bird baseball league, I would say the Cardinals would be heavy favorites to make the playoffs, along with the Orioles. However, trying to determine which bird team would win in a game between the two is something science is simply not ready to address. Luckily, we don't have to worry about it. Remember Randy Johnson. Get it tattooed on your hand. Now, Red is a color. Reds are a color? Under the guise of rule #3, I have decided that the Reds will be Communists. We all know that Fidel Castro was a noted baseball-playing communist. I haven't heard of others like him and most of the former Soviet countries are not known for baseball. Therefore, I think this would be a rather weak team. They are humans though, and thus would be better than birds and baby bears by this corollary: Bears > Humans > Baby Bears (Cubs). Projected Division finish: Brewers Reds Pirates Cubs Cardinals NL West Giants are huge. By definition, this is a fact. Is simply being huge enough to win a baseball game? I'm not sure it is, but it certainly does not hurt. The reality is that while Giants are notoriously slow, their steps are notoriously large. Base-stealing will be nearly a cinch, as the Giants would simply take a step and be at the next base. One flaw for Giants: Giant strike-zones. Think of how easy it would be to get a fastball by them. A ruling would need to be made on whether or not their bats would be proportional to their size or if they would be forced to use comically small human-sized bats. Dodgers would be good at base stealing. See, the Dodgers were named after the people of Brooklyn, who were referred to as Trolley Dodgers, due to the network of Trolleys in Brooklyn around late 1890s. Teams were poorly named in those days. Since they are good at dodging Trolleys, I guess they'd be fast. Or something. At least they would be humans. Humans seem to have a distinct advantage in this league, especially when facing birds or socks. Diamondbacks are terrifying. They are rattlesnakes, for the non-snake peeps. Rattlesnakes are terrifying. They are poisonous too. However, if the other team had any of those long, thin, curved rods that can hold a snake head up, they would probably have a huge advantage. If the snakes could guard the bases, they might be able to deter other teams from running the bases. However, baseball players wear cleats and run fast. There would be many dead snakes and that is just not cool. Rockies are mountains. Mountains don't move very fast. In addition, they are prone to erosion. While a mountain may be able to get on base, I don't think they would ever score. In fact, I bet they'd get picked off a lot. However, I bet they would have a lot of range! HAHAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHA! I would think the Padres would be very nice. The name comes from the Spanish friars that founded the city of San Diego. Anyone who takes the time to found a whole city is pretty cool. However, they passed away long ago. Now we're getting into whether ghosts should be allowed to play baseball. Personally, I don't discriminate. However, I'm not sure if ghosts can hold things, and holding stuff is important in baseball. Projected Division finish: Giants Dodgers* Padres Diamondbacks Rockies *Wild card winner NL East The Braves. We addressed this earlier. According to Wikipedia, a Brave is a Native American Warrior. I think warriors would be great at baseball. They have to be fast, strong, brave and smart. This particular division is swimming with humans, so it will be harder to win. Warriors are impressive humans though. We may be on to something. Nationals are peoples of a nation. Since this nation is the United States, that means that every baseball player in the United States would be eligible to play for the Nationals. This team would be loaded. It would be an all-star team. Some might think they would be unstoppable. We'll see, I suppose. Mets are city-folk. They are metropolitan. They go to museums, theatre and then eat fancy foods. They walk places. They take public transportation. They rent bikes. All the metropolitan folk could make up a great baseball team. However, anyone who is a metropolitan in the U.S. would also be able to play for the Nationals. This could end up being the biggest decision they ever make! Phillies are people from Philly, not horses. You are thinking of fillies. Horses would have no chance, but people from Philly might be ok. Mark Gubicza and Roy Campanella are from Philly and they were good. It stands to reason that the Phillies could field a decent team. However, Philly is also a Metro area. It is also in the U.S. This segmenting is just too much for my tastes. Until the Phillies branch out, they will struggle to compete in this division. So, logically: People of the US > Native Americans in the US > People just in U.S. Metro Areas > People from Philly (the alligator simply eats the larger sample size, this is not a commentary on these people) Marlins are fish. All types of people catch fish and then eat them. This does not bode well for the Marlins' chances. If they could somehow harness their sliminess, they might have something. I'm not sure it would be enough. They do have that giant, sharp horn thing and some are bigger than some humans. Their biggest weakness might be their complete lack of arms. Arms hold stuff, and if we can learn nothing else from this exercise, it would be that holding stuff wins baseball games. Projected Division finish: Nationals Braves* Mets Phillies Marlins *Wild card winner In the near future, we will play out these playoffs and determine a champion. Or, we won't. I don't think anyone will be losing sleep over it. Except me.

Hey everyone! I took a look at what each of the 4 other teams in the AL Central were up to this off-season. Once completed, the 4 previews consisted of a lot of words. Really, too many words. Therefore, I split each one up and posted them individually at my blog, Kevin Slowey was Framed!. I thought I would just provide links to each of the 4 previews here, for any who are interested. I swear this was not a ploy to get more pageviews, it was a simple ploy to continue to be lazy even though it is just copy and pasting. I really want to go take a nap. Anyway, here they are, in order of how I think they will finish. I'm leaving the Twins out due to sadness. Please don't be turned off by the first sentence in each preview. I don't really talk like that. K, brahs? Thx. Detroit Tigers Kansas City Royals Chicago White Sox Cleveland Indians

Hey everyone! I took a look at what each of the 4 other teams in the AL Central were up to this off-season. Once completed, the 4 previews consisted of a lot of words. Really, too many words. Therefore, I split each one up and posted them individually at my blog, Kevin Slowey was Framed!. I thought I would just provide links to each of the 4 previews here, for any who are interested. I swear this was not a ploy to get more pageviews, it was a simple ploy to continue to be lazy even though it is just copy and pasting. I really want to go take a nap. Anyway, here they are, in order of how I think they will finish. I'm leaving the Twins out due to sadness. Please don't be turned off by the first sentence in each preview. I don't really talk like that. K, brahs? Thx. Detroit Tigers Kansas City Royals Chicago White Sox Cleveland Indians

You're welcome. I'm glad you enjoyed it!

Thanks, I really appreciate that!

Hello Twins Daily! I haven't posted here in a long time, and I'll be honest, I miss it here. Also, I am not at TwinsFest today like seemingly everyone else, so I started to feel sad and nostalgic. I decided to create a top 10 favorite Twins list. But, that seemed kind of boring, so I added a little twist. (originally published at Kevin Slowey was Framed!) I have received two complaints in my entire life. 1. You don't illustrate enough. 2. You haven't made your 10 favorite Twins of all time clear enough. I plan to take care of both of those complaints in one fell swoop. I have drawn representative images of each of my 10 favorite Twins, using Paint. Each image portrays the player as I remember them. Some are portraits, some are scenes and some are more conceptual. I'll analyze the image and discuss the player as we count down from 10 to 1. I have only been a fan since about 1986, due to my inability to have been born and then form memories prior to that. Blame science if your favorite player is not on my list. 10. Jacque Jones [ATTACH=CONFIG]3131[/ATTACH] The image is a bit unsettling to me for some reason. My favorite Jacque Jones quirk happened only every so often, but it was great when it happened. He would get a ball in the outfield, rear back and then just rifle the ball straight into the ground. This is my artist's representation of that phenomenon. I always hoped the ball would burrow into the ground, but it usually just bounced off the Metrodome turf. This is probably one of the best images you are going to see in the series, so get settled in. Jones was miscast as a lead-off hitter, but certainly had his moments. Whenever he would hit a home run Torii Hunter would seem to come up and swing out of his shoes trying to hit one too. Jones never walked much, but hit for high averages during his early years. He had a really great 2002, posting a 3.7 rWAR and helping the Twins make the playoffs for the first time in over a decade. I always liked him because he was smaller, he played hard and he seemed to enjoy himself. That is really all it takes for me. 9. Brad Radke [ATTACH=CONFIG]3132[/ATTACH] Oh dear, there is a lot to discuss here. This is a strike zone chart, I guess. I am trying to illustrate Radke's pinpoint control. See, the joke is that he only threw two balls his whole career! He did paint the corners, much as I did in this image. Now, Radke did not pitch only to strange alien-like creatures with extremely tiny arms and faces that look like they are being blown in a hurricane-strength wind. In fact, most of the hitters he faced did not have thinning hair. If he had, he may have been even better. As it were, Radke was an underrated pitcher during a hitters' heyday. His career ERA+ was 113, so he was statistically above-average. His final game was pitched on my 24th birthday. I celebrated the one-year anniversary of that event by renting a car. There are 8 more players and 8 more truly terrible drawings. To see the rest of the list, please visit me at Kevin Slowey was Framed! It's a link, I promise it will be a short visit.

I'd like to see what Escobar could do with some consistent playing time. He likely won't set the world on fire, but his defense could help a lot if the Twins go with their usual pitching philosophy.

Not unless you are looking at different ZIPS projections than I am. Carroll - .261/.331/.318 Revere - .285/.325/.332 Florimon - .237/.291/.331 Dozier - No projection Plouffe - .241/.300/.422 Those all look reasonable to me. Carroll is old. Revere's on base is completely dependent on his BA. Florimon and Dozier are unproved and have no minor league track record. Plouffe should have power. These projections are mid-point projections though. There is upside, but I agree that the offense could regress and probably is more likely to regress than improve.

Good stuff here! I want to play for the Twins; I'll beg? Should they give me a contract? Teams can't make decisions based on factors like that. They have to field the best possible team they can. Morneau isn't what he used to be. It's sad, but it's the reality. Span is different because he is younger and in his prime. He might be worth keeping, but Willingham, Morneau, Doumit and the like are only worth keeping around if the team thinks they can content next year.