Jump to content
  • Create Account

Cap'n Piranha

Verified Member
  • Posts

    3,350
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    7

Cap'n Piranha last won the day on May 19

Cap'n Piranha had the most liked content!

About Cap'n Piranha

  • Birthday 04/06/1983

Recent Profile Visitors

3,761 profile views

Cap'n Piranha's Achievements

  1. I would go even more radical on the batter side of this--every batter must stay in the box for the entirety of the bat, and can only ask for one timeout. The timeout is for 15 seconds, and he can step out of the box, but he must have both feet back in the box when the timeout is over, or it's a strike. To give a batter the opportunity to reset, the pitcher must wait until the 10 second mark to start his motion. 6 pitch PA's would therefore take, at most, about 2:15, meaning 18 pitch half-innings should complete in 8-9 minutes. 12 pitch half-innings could be accomplished in as little as 4-5. I also think you can keep the clock when a runner is on base, you just change it to 15 seconds to either throw the pitch, or attempt the pickoff--a step-off does not count. Failure to do so is an automatic ball, and failure to do it twice in a single plate appearance is a walk where all baserunners advance one base.
  2. 115 ERA- in 2014. He was 15% worse than the average MLB starter. xFIP- of 105--he was 5% worse than the average pitcher. There were 88 qualified pitchers in 2014, and Gibson was 73rd by ERA-, and tied for 56th by xFIP-. If you expand the sample to pitchers who threw 120 innings, you get 128 guys--Gibson was tied for 98th in ERA- and 75th in xFIP-. Not for nothing, but in 2014, Gibson had a worse xFIP than Ricky Nolasco. I think you are missing the fact that the current era is harsher on pitchers than the past was. In 2014, the entire league's starters put up a cumulative 3.82 ERA, 3.81 FIP, and 3.78 xFIP. For 2021, those numbers are 4.32, 4.28, and 4.22. A 3.99 xFIP is pretty nice in 2021, but pretty bad in 2014.
  3. Not to mention SWR, Winder, Canterino, and Varland. The Twins have 8 pitchers 26 or under at A+ who profile as potential #3 starters or better (Ober, Ryan, Duran, Balazovic, Winder, SWR, Canterino, Varland). If none of those guys hit, Falvine should probably be shown the door. If 1-2 of those guys hit, we're in ok shape. If 3-4 hit, we're in fantastic shape.
  4. By decent, you mean a 100 and a 97 FIP-, in his age 26 and 27 seasons? You're right, he was not fringe, but no one is saying he was fringe. What I and others are saying is that Gibson was not a particularly attractive piece for future rotations, other than his ability eat innings while providing league average results. He was not young enough (he turned 29 at the end of the 2016 season) to be seriously seen as an upside candidate, and his performance (league average) was not good enough to make him a nice piece. That said, you're right--Kyle Gibson's 88 ERA+ exiting the 2016 season, given that it covered far more innings than Dobnak's 88 ERA+ is more meaningful. Post-2016 Gibson had done much more to prove that he was a below average MLB pitcher than Dobnak has.
  5. They were, but they were also rapidly approaching the end of their career (Santana), and were statistically worse than the average MLB pitcher (Gibson). The Twins entered 2017 with a #2 who could fall of a cliff at any moment, a #4 who was about to turn 29, and a 22 year old who everyone hoped would be an ace, but had just finished a season where he pitched like a AAAA guy. The 2022 Twins will have a 26 year old #4 (Ober), a 25 year old who has pitched like a #2/#3 for his entire professional career (Ryan), 3-5 highly-regarded starters at AA or above (Duran, Winder, Balazovic, SWR, Strotman), and $30-$50M to spend in FA to procure pitching. That's better.
  6. Brock hit a lot of points here (specifically, fortune 500 companies won't pay as much to advertise teams with fewer fans--there is nothing that prevents Target from sponsoring the Yankees, or United Health Care the Dodgers), but your idea that attendance is all fans is good for is just wrong. Fans also buy the cable packages that provide a huge chunk of team revenue. The more fans watching, the more the team can extract from cable channels for rights. Fangraphs estimates (in 2020) that the Twins would make $43M from their cable package--they peg Atlanta at literally twice that. Are the Braves just that much better at negotiating rights fees than the Twins, or is it because there are more fans in Atlanta (due to having 70% more people in their metro area) who will buy the cable package, and therefore see the ads? Attendance is also a giant chunk of revenue. If the Twins average 20k fans a game, who each spend $30 on average (almost assuredly low when you consider ticket, concessions, and merch) for 81 games, that's just shy of $50M. Clearly, having more fans to attend your games is a big deal, and if you look at the 2021 attendance numbers, you'll understand how big a deal having people, more so than corporations in your market is. https://blogs.fangraphs.com/lets-update-the-estimated-local-tv-revenue-for-mlb-teams/ https://www.espn.com/mlb/attendance
  7. Celestino was bad this year. He was also a 22 year old with 24 total games above High A being told to play center field in the majors. Look at what he's done in AAA since he's been there (where he should be at this point in his career)--.909 OPS, 144 wRC+. For what it's worth, that's not too far off of Jose Miranda, who is the no-doubt MiLB player of the year for the Twins. Larnach, despite all his struggles, still put up an 89 wRC+ in the bigs as a 24 year old who hadn't played ball in 18 months. His wRC+ has been above 139 at every stop in the minors before this year, which is better than Nelson Cruz' career wRC+. His slump is concerning, but to write off either of these guys, much less both, as career bad 4th outfielders before they turn 25, and after a combined 360 MLB PAs is just ridiculous.
  8. The smarmy meme that was on something like page 2 of this thread, and hasn't featured in our conversation for at least 5 or 6 posts now? Move on friend. If one picture is enough to annoy you for multiple days, you either need to learn to relax, or get off the internet. Also, I had no idea that's what was annoying you. None at all. Because I generally don't assume that adults get upset over harmless pictures on the internet. If that picture is the most annoying thing that's happened to you lately, you have a blessed life. If it's not, perhaps engage in some perspective. It's a picture, man. As Leviathan has pointed out, no one is accusing you of saying TR should have been kept. I'm simply trying to say that it is not cut and dry that the post-16 pitching staff is superior to the current one. In many ways, it's not. I doubt that after 2016, when the Twins had the clear-cut worst pitching staff in major league baseball, a consistent trend for basically the last 6 years at that point, no one thought there were good pieces on the staff. So no, given the loss of an entire year of MiLB development, and the run of injuries to the current staff, I don't think Falvine has a worse staff right now than the one they inherited. Does the staff need improvement? Absolutely. But there is more reason for optimism now than there was in November 2016. Cosy Stashak is under control by the Twins, and therefore is a potential future piece in the bullpen. Seems like a germane point in a conversation about if the current future pieces are better than the 2016 future pieces. None of the three I listed might be on the roster next year, but that's not the point I was making. All three of them are performing better this year than any of the three best bullpen options you had on your list of the 2016 pitching staff. I'm not sure why that's so hard for you to admit. Here's the key quotation from the post that has driven this entire thread--it's from Gunnarthor, and is literally the second post in the thread; "they [Falvine] were given a team with a nucleus of Buxton, Sano, Kepler, Polanco, Berrios, Rosario along with solid vets in Santana, Gibson, Escobar, Dozier and a few up-and-coming prospects who, while not core quality, were good in May, Rogers, Duffey and Garver. The team was a year removed from nearly making the playoffs. They were also gifted a solid farm system and the first pick in the draft as well as a supplemental first rounder. That core was going to win, no matter what" (emphasis added) That doesn't sound like someone saying coaching and analytics doesn't matter. I'm also not cherry-picking by pointing out that some pitchers markedly improved after an analytical front office which focused on player development, particularly on the pitching side took over. Unless you expect me to list every failure anytime I want to highlight a success, which is not feasible. Has Falvine had some misses? Of course. But by your definition, since you haven't highlighted any successes, I suppose I could assert that you're simply cherry-picking failures. What are you basing your assertion that Pineda's decline is non-injury related on? You've given no explanation, so I categorically reject it--that which is asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence. If you don't understand that Thorpe and Smeltzer were options 7 and 8 for starting this year, and not having them is a big part of why the rotation right now is Ober, Gant, Ryan, Barnes, Albers, etc. than I guess read about the importance of depth? Devin Smeltzer has a career FIP- of 97, meaning he is better than league average--that wouldn't be helpful? Especially considering it's better than any mark Kyle Gibson put up in his Twins career, save 2019? The Kyle Gibson that was supposedly a nice piece for the future in 2016? Also, the plan wasn't to have Duran/Winder/Balazovic throw innings down the stretch--but one of them could have, like Liriano in 2006. What if 6 weeks ago all three of them were performing, and had been healthy the whole year--maybe one of them comes up and has a Joe Ryan like impact. The Twins lost 8-9 of their top 12ish starters to injury at some point this year; perhaps that has had an impact on the terrible pitching?
  9. Bro. You got annoyed that I responded directly to an assertion you made, saying I was trying to create an argument. Don't try to shift the goalposts when someone refutes what you say on a message board for crying out loud--that's losing the internet. If we can't agree that the staff Falvine rolled out in 2017 was the staff left them by TR (which is kind of the point you've been making--that Falvine inherited at least the makings of a good staff), then we're approaching the sequentiality of time in completely different ways--I guess you're Billy Pilgrim, and therefore see beyond the linear connection between TR fielding terrible staffs from 2011-2016, with only one decent year in 2015 and 2016 being the worst of all, as somehow not related to the staff Falvine fielded in 2017. You are the one making the assertion that the staff entering 2017 was better than the one we have right now--you then listed a bunch of members of that staff--I'm supposed to somehow infer which ones you see as positives, and which as negatives? You listed Santiago and Colon on your list. No one else brought them up. If their presence in non-consequential or at odds with the point you're trying to make, why include them? The 3 good-not-great bullpen options were not better (at least in 2016) than what we have right now--did you bother to read my post, where I explicitly spoke to that? If so, at least try and make some kind of informed response, not just a re-statement of what you've already said. Thielbar has a 2021 FIP- equal to or better than Pressly, and Kintzler in 2016. Rogers, Gant, Coulombe, and Farrell all have better FIP- this year than all three did in 2016. Duffey and Stashak are better in FIP- than Pressly. You're looking largely at what Pressly and Rogers became when you say they're better, not what they were when 2017 started, which was young, anonymous, potentially good pieces for the bullpen. The fact that Pressly and Rogers have been 2 of the 10 best relievers by FIP- for the last 5 years is because this FO helped them reach their potential. You know, the EXACT point I've been trying to make? Posters on this board have absolutely made the assertion that the players left to Falvine would have become good players no matter what--it's what has fueled the vast majority of the conversation in this thread. This is based on a ridiculous assumption that players are in no way impacted by coaching or analytics, which is akin to saying we shouldn't force people to go to med school to become doctors, since if they're going to be good doctors, that will happen whether they're taught or not. Falvine has, for every year of their tenure, had superior staffs to the entire 2011-2016 regime--as bad as this year's staff is (and it is quite bad) it is still better than what BS/TR ran out there for SIX. STRAIGHT. YEARS. The fact that they were able to fix that in 2-3 offseasons is remarkable. This season has surely been bad on the pitching front, and while some of that is definitely on Falvine, not all of it is (Maeda pitching hurt the entire year then getting mid-season TJ, Pineda injuring himself multiple times, Dobnak hurting his finger, Rogers hurting his finger, Thorpe not able to stay healthy, Smeltzer not able to stay healthy, Duran and Winder both hurting themselves, Balazovic not starting the year healthy, Canterino being constantly injured). That's 10 guys who all could've figured prominently in making this staff better. If Falvine can't show real improvement on the pitching side next year, then I'm willing to believe that 2019/2020 were just good fortune, and we need someone else.
  10. I think he is healthy now (after he missed two months), but he is also not getting consistent playing time (66 PA's since his return on July 25 in 45 games). It's hard to get a rhythm when you're essentially a pinch hitter, or you only play once every 3 days. Before this is construed as a defense of Cave, I agree that he should not be on this team next year. Kiriloff, Larnach, and Celestino should all be ahead of him in the pecking order, to say nothing of Buxton, Arraez moonlighting in left, or Lewis (if he has to get moved to the outfield). My initial post simply was musing about a potential reason that an above average player in 2018/2019 would all of the sudden become a useless one.
  11. Cave has done himself no favors this year by trying to play hurt (if indeed that has been the issue--given the vast difference between his stats in 2019/2020 and this year, I am inclined to believe that). When healthy, I think Jake Cave is a very good 4th outfielder. That said, I don't think 4th outfielders are something a team should have to resort to trades in order to acquire, and they certainly shouldn't give up pitching prospects to do it.
  12. As far as I'm aware, the Twins have transacted two trades with SF--one sent Davis, Berroa, and Teng for Dyson. While Dyson was a disaster, that was injury related, and none of the players the Twins sent have amounted to much. Davis has a 32 wRC+ in parts of 3 seasons with the Giants, and is 27--we have a better, younger option in Brent Rooker. Berros is 21 in Low A, and has a nice 3.28 ERA, and has struck out 133 in 96 innings--but has also walked 48. Teng is 22 in High A, and has a pedestrian 4.57 ERA, and while he's struck out 130 in 88 innings, he's walked 52. Neither of them look like more than organizational filler at this point (that could obviously change). Hardly a fleecing. The Anderson for Wade trade is clearly a bad one--that happens to even the best FO's (witness the Twins nabbing Odorizzi from the Rays for Palacios). That said--Wade is already 27, there's already some potential erosion in his contact rates. He still only has 300ish PA's on the season because he's completely unusable against lefties (.376 OPS, 32.4% k rate, NINE wRC+--he's been so bad SF has only given him 37 PA's all year against lefties). So essentially you're saying SF fleeced us by getting a 27 year old platoon corner outfielder (he has 13 innings in center this year, with a -117 UZR/150--SSS), at a position group where the Twins should have better options in Kiriloff, Larnach, Celestino, Lewis (maybe), Arraez, and Buxton (hopefully) for the next 3-5 years? The issue isn't that we traded Wade, it's that we didn't identify the right player to get in return.
  13. At the end of the day, you need people to come to your games/watch them on TV. The Minneapolis metro area is 3.5M--here are some others; Chicago--9.5M (call it 4.75M per team) New York--20.3M (call it 10.1M per team) Los Angeles--12.5M (call it 6.2M per team) Boston--4.9M Philadelphia--5.7M Atlanta--5.9M DC--5.4M Houston--7.1M Toronto--6.3M Phoenix--4.6M Dallas--6.4M That's 14 teams that have at least 1M more fans in their metro areas than the Twins--9 have at least 2M more. The Twins payroll and budget like a mid-market squad because they are one.
  14. Wow, lots of angst here--you said the current pitching staff is in worse shape than in 2017 when Falvine took over. That's not an argument I'm attempting to make, those are your own words. The 2021 Twins pitching has been, relative to the league, better in 2021 than for the entirety of the SIX YEAR 2011-2016 timeframe, and better than all but one of those individual seasons. You can argue that the future pitching staff for 2017 was better than the future pitching staff is for 2021, but I also think that's off. Santana--was 34 in 2017, and had just put up a FIP- only 10% better than 32 year old "nearly cooked" Pineda has this year. In 2017, his FIP- was 101, and he spent 3 years not pitching/awful before somehow rebounding this year. That last part is hindsight, but it demonstrates the point--34 year old good-not-great starters should not be counted on for more than the next season--not a great future asset. Gibson--was 29 in 2017, and had 3 straight years of 25-30 starts, only once below 100 on FIP-, and that was at 97. Not a great future asset, and in fact, he didn't start to look good until 2018 (read--after Falvine had been able to work with him) Berrios--turned 23 in 2017, and had just finished a season where he put up a FIP- of 144 (for what it's worth, Shoemaker's FIP- this year was 153). Obviously there was still plenty of promise there given his age and lack of experience, but he also struck out only 7.5/9 in 2016, while walking 5.4/9. An uncertain future asset at that point, and given his immediate improvement in both k and bb rate once Falvine came on board, are we really so sure they shouldn't get some credit for helping Jose take the next step? Mejia--had 2 IP in MLB in 2016. Nice track record in the minors, and reason for hope, but let's not pretend he was locked in as a quality starting option. If you're going to include Mejia as a positive for 2017, then you have to include Duran, Balazovic, Winder, SWR, and Strotman for 2021 as well. Santiago--had a 125 FIP- in 2016; J.A. Happ in 2021 is at 126. Are you saying a 29 year old who essentially replicated J.A. Happ's 2021 season was a quality piece moving forward? Colon--was added halfway through 2017, by Falvine. Duffey--was still a full-time starter, and had a 110 FIP-. As such, he was not a potential good piece for the bullpen, any more than any generic starting pitcher is a potential good piece for a bullpen. Pressly, Rogers, and Kintzler--all three were good not great (87, 82, and 83 FIP-. 2021 Caleb Thielbar has an 82 FIP-). Rogers didn't become what he is until 2018 (read--after Falvine had been able to work with him). Belisle--was signed in free agency prior to the 2017 season, by Falvine. So of the 11 pitchers you mentioned, 2 were actually acquired by Falvine, 1 was a completely unproven minor leaguer, 3 were young starters who hadn't established themselves yet, 1 was a thoroughly mediocre vet, 1 was a solid but old vet, and 3 were good-not-great bullpen options. This idea that Falvine was handed the makings of a championship staff is ludicrous--the staff improved because Falvine helped them improve. We're also not worse off now than in 2017, given the $40m-$60M available to spend this offseason, the passel of starters coming up through the system at AA or above, and the collection of potential relief options under team control for next year (Rogers, Gant, Farrell, and Coulombe all have FIP- better than the PRK trio in 2016, with Thielbar, Duffey, and Stashak better than Pressly).
×
×
  • Create New...