Cap'n Piranha

I don't think I would characterize a .335 OBP as "strong", seeing as how the league average for AAA East was .332. For a guy playing in the same position group as Buxton, Kepler, Celestino, Larnach, Kiriloff, and potentially Lewis and Martin, I'm not super convinced he ever gets more than some bench duty when someone else is hurt.

The Pads feel apart at the end of last year, in part because of their SP depth (or more accurately, lack thereof). When you're San Diego, and you're spending over $200M on payroll, you kind of are obligated to go for it. In addition, when 3 of your top 6 are old/decline candidates (Darvish--36 in August, less WAR in 2021 than 2020), constantly injured (Snell--more than 130 IP only once), and coming back from TJ (Clevinger), adding another arm makes a lot of sense.

Fangraphs has been doing position rankings, and for what it's worth, they pegged the Twins bullpen as 8th best (you are right however, that barring improvement from 2-3 others, this is a Rogers-reliant bullpen--a point that Fangraphs also makes). I don't have a problem with signing established relievers to 1 year deals, so long as Falvine is willing to cut bait on that contract more quickly than last year. Every pitcher is allowed a bad outing here or there, but if it starts becoming a bad outing more than every 4th or 5th time out, then drop 'em and move on. If indeed they are not willing to do that, than I also agree--I don't want veteran signings, I'd rather just cycle through 15 rookie-scale/AAA/waiver wire arms until I find the 3-5 that work.

Including, apparently, the A's.

There's some additional risk to this move, with the news that Crochet probably needs TJ--all of the sudden, the Sox bullpen which looked like a terrifying group has some cracks. Hendriks should still be great at worst, but there were some cracks last year (jump in HR rate, huge jump in strand rate, career low bb%, jump in hard hit rate)--when combined with an almost 2 MPH increase in FB velo, despite being 32, and there's some real downside risk. Both Graveman and Bummer profile more as good/great options rather than elite ones. Don't get me wrong, I'd still take any of those 3 ahead of any Twins reliever not named Rogers, but a slide in production from one guy, and an injury to another, and all of the sudden the Sox have only 2 proven options in the pen.

It does reduce the impact of his speed, to a degree. It certainly reduces the impact of his speed when a guy behind him hits an XBH. I don't know if there is any data around it, but I bet 99% of runners on second score on an XBH, if not more. I don't know where you're getting the idea that I'm arguing Buxton batting lower because of Correa and Polanco's XBH ability. Literally never said that--I said I want Buxton lower in the order so he has more PAs with runners on. If he bats leadoff, 20-25% of his PAs are with the bases empty. If 2 out of Jeffers/Urshela/Sanchez bat 8 and 9, there is a further 49% chance neither of those guys get on base, as opposed to hitting behind Arraez and Polanco, where it's only a 41% chance. A further point of mine around this is that Buxton, because of his speed, does not need as much help to score as a slower player does. Slower players are less likely to steal a base, take an extra base, or move up on outs--as such, they are more reliant on hitters moving them along in order to score. As such, taking your guy who needs the least help from other hitters to score, and giving him the most help from other hitters to score is completely backwards As a result of that, I don't care that much about getting Buxton on second for a Polanco/Correa single, because that is also a pretty rare occurrence (assume Buxton lands on second in 7.5% of his PAs, and Polanco/Correa hit a single in 17% of their PAs--equivalent of 1 single every 6 PAs--that means in only 1.3% of PAs would the hitter behind Buxton hit a single). Add in the 1.7% of the time Buxton is on first and either Polanco or Correa hits a double, then in only 4% of Polanco/Correa PA's does Buxton's speed actually potentially matter (what if Buxton slips rounding a base? What if he has to hold up to see if the ball is caught? What if he gets gunned down at the plate? What if the 3B coach holds him up because there are no outs in the inning? What if the fielder is not in a position to get an out/throw out the runner at second, but is in position to throw out Buxton at home?) Your statement about maximizing the 150+ times he reaches base without a homer over maximizing his HRs is just silly to me--if Buxton on first gets a double from one of the two guys behind him 1.7% when those guys hit doubles at a 5% rate (30/yr), even reducing that to 20/yr for the two guys behind him drops that to only 1%--the result is one extra instance every 140 PAs, so 4-5x a year. If you also reduce the incidence of single from one every 6 PAs to one every 7, the chances of a single from either of the two players behind Buxton when he's on second is 1.8% instead of 2.3%, so one extra instance every 200 PAs, or 3-4x a year. What you're saying is you want to reduce the runner on base rate for Buxton's 40 HRs from 59% to 51% (two guys with .300 OBP will result in both on 9% of the time, one but not both on 42% of the time, and neither on 49%. a guy with a .375 OBP--Arraez--and one with a .350 OBP--Polanco--will get both on 13% of the time, one but not both 46% of the time, and neither 41% of the time); apply that to HRs, and Buxton's HRs are worth 5 more runs. So we're comparing 5 more runs, just from HRs, to the potential of 7-8 more runs from Buxton having a better hitter behind him when he's on first and a double is hit, or second and a single is hit. This also ignores that at least 15% of those instances will have a slow runner on first in front of Buxton (whether Urshela/Jeffers/Sanchez), so in reality it's 6-7 more instances a year, and even if Buxton capitalizes on those 2 out 3 times, that's 4 runs.

That was not at all my argument when I brought up Hamilton. My argument was that Byron is an MVP level player due to his combination of speed and power. Not all MVP level players have that same combo--some are much more power based, none are much more speed based. Power is more valuable than speed--that is the only point I was attempting to make. And if power is more valuable than speed, why would we seek to reduce the impact of Buxton's power in pursuit of increasing the value of a less valuable skill?

That's too bad. Had the bases been empty, Byron could have hit a single and then used his speed to manufacture a run. Opportunity wasted.

Arraez will definitely be on first more than Jeffers--and you're saying that's bad? You would rather the best hitter on the team get fewer PAs with runners on? Interesting strategy Cotton. I'm not ignoring your Buxton, Correa, Polanco XBH breakdown--I'm not addressing it because it's largely irrelevant. As I've pointed out, XBH are most valuable when baserunners are slow rather than fast. It doesn't matter who the baserunner is, they will always score on a HR or 3B. Therefore, the only value is having Correa and Polanco hitting 2Bs behind Buxton is if Buxton is on first (Buxton is the Twin least likely to end a PA on first as opposed to second, third, or hitting a HR)--most players score from second on 2B, not all the time, but it's pretty rare for a runner on second to not score on a 2B. As such, if we assume that both Correa and Polanco get 30 2Bs, which is about 5% of their PAs, and give Buxton a 20% occurrence of being on first, it means that only 1% of the time will either Polanco or Correa hit a double when Buxton is on first--that's literally once a month. If we then carry through to the next batter, and assume that 35% of the time Buxton will no longer being first (meaning that we retain the 5% chance of a double from Polanco/Correa, but now only a 13% chance Buxton is on first), that's an additional 0.7% of the time a double is hit while Buxton is on first. That of course also doesn't include instances of the inning ending before both Polanco and Correa hit, or Buxton advancing to second on a SB or groundout, so in reality the number is lower by just a little bit. So having Polanco and Correa hitting XBH behind Buxton provides an opportunity to take advantage of his speed at most 2x a month (there's no guarantee a double moves Buxton from first to home--if it's a bloop hit to left field with a fielder shaded to center, a hustling Correa/Polanco might get to second, since the fielder is moving away from the base when getting the ball, but would be moving towards home to throw out Buxton). I agree with you that I want to maximize the lineup for the whole team, not just Buxton. That means that we don't try and maximize Buxton's unique skills unless they actually provide a lift to the offense. Since the maximization of Buxton's speed skill requires a reduction in the impact of his instances of hitting with men on base, there is clearly a trade-off. I contend that power is more valuable than speed, therefore I want to maximize power over speed when I can't do both.

Ichiro won MVP in 2001 with a .457 SLG, which was almost 10% higher than the MLB average of .427. He also should not have won MVP, in reality--he was 5th amongst hitters in WAR at 6, behind Giambi, A-Rod, Boone, and Alomar. Giambi absolutely should have won with his 9.2 WAR, 193 wRC+, and 1.137 OPS (which is 50 points better than anything Mike Trout has done in a non-injured season)--Ichiro was at 6.0, 124, and .838. Ichiro won MVP because he was a bit of a novelty that played the game the writers who voted at the time (many if not most of whom were probably born before 1960) liked the game to be played. Saying he got MVP votes in 2010 is a bit disingenuous--he got 3 votes out of 1,652 votes, which is literally 0.1%. For the purposes of this aspect of the conversation, i.e. is speed more important than power, defense is wholly irrelevant. That eliminates Kiermaier from the conversation, who got the votes based on his historically great defensive season (he also got 10 votes out of 1,770 (0.5%). And not for nothing, but he also had a higher SLG at .420 than league average at .415. Also, look at some of the names who got more MVP votes that year--JD Martinez, Chris Davis, and Price Fielder. The award was won by Josh Donaldson--do you think speed played a part there at all? In 2018, Altuve had a .451 SLG, 10%ish better than the league average of .415. He also only got 9 votes out of 1,770 (0.5%), some of which were undoubtedly in response to his prior two seasons where he finished 3rd and 1st in MVP voting, while slugging .531 and .547 (league average was .423 and .429 in those years) Simmons did not get MVP votes because of his speed--after all, in 2018 he had a sprint speed of 27.1 ft/sec, which is only 0.3 ft/sec faster than Luis Arraez, the guy you adamantly don't want clogging bases in front of Buxton. He got those votes because he had possibly the greatest defensive season in history for a SS. Also, as you mentioned, he was 15th--that means he got 7 votes out 1,770 (0.4%). Also, for what it's worth, he had a SLG of .417, which is essentially identical to the league average SLG. Merrifield had 6 votes, and as I mentioned in a different post, exceeded the league average SLG ( he was at .438). Leaving aside the chaos that was 2020, and the fact that you are technically wrong (you said David Fletcher received MVP votes--he actually received MVP vote; singular), Fletcher still had a higher SLG than league average (.425 vs .414) Correa's .485 last year was almost 18% better than league average (.415), and was still in the Top 30 for SLG in the AL, and his 163 votes were 9.2% of the total votes. The point I was making, which seems lost on you, is that no guy who's only offensive tool is speed will ever be anywhere near the top of an MVP list--of all the guys you listed above who got MVP votes with no/low power literally all of them had a better SLG than league average (with the exception of Ichiro in 2010). Guys with no offensive skill other than power can show up on MVP leaderboards, and good offenses can be built around power. Guys with no offensive skill other than speed will not show up on MVP leaderboards (or if they do, it's built off defense, which is irrelevant in a discussion of whether speed or power is more valuable to an offense), and a good offense cannot be built around speed.

I don't think anyone is being disrespectful. Lewis Thorpe has not performed to the level necessary to secure an MLB roster spot--that's not just the Twins opinion, it's the opinion of literally every team in MLB. That doesn't make him a bad person, but it also is not incumbent upon the Twins to not attempt to improve their roster, just so Thorpe's dream can live. Thousands of people deal with situations much worse than Lewis Thorpe every single day, and the vast majority of them don't act in the petulant way he did. If he legitimately needs counseling, then by all means I hope he gets it. If he's simply being an immature brat (which is, you know, not impossible), then I hope this experience will be educational to him in figuring out the rest of his (hopefully lengthy) life.

I brought up Billy Hamilton to demonstrate that speed is not as important as power. Seems germane, and therefore not a strawman, in a discussion about whether we should be attempting to maximize Buxton's speed at the expense of power, or vice versa, no? Your argument about me being hypocritical for not wanting Buxton to bat with the bases empty, but being ok with a lot of solo HRs from a 9 Joey Gallo lineup is a strawman, because it ignores the foundational thrust of the conversation--specifically, what is the optimal lineup construction to maximize Byron Buxton's ability? In a 9 Joey Gallo lineup, lineup construction is irrelevant and moot--there is no way to alter the lineup to maximize OBP in front of Joey Gallo. As such, your comparison is invalid, and therefore, a strawman.

If you don't want Buxton hitting with the bases empty, then wouldn't you want guys who are more likely to get on base hitting in front of him? Jeffers is actually not likely to be on second--last year 68% of the time he got on base he was at first (that number may go up or down if fangraphs tracked how often he was on first as the result of a fielder's choice or error, or on second as the result of an error). That said, I'm sure there weren't so many two base errors in Jeffer's PAs that he ended up on 2B, 3B or with a HR as often as a 1B, BB, or HBP. So when you say you're good with Jeffers in front of Buxton, what you're saying is you want a guy even slower than Arraez (26.8 ft/sec, which may get better if he gets to DH more and therefore rests his knees) in Jeffers (25.8ft/sec, which may get worse as he gets more innings catching) hitting in front of Buxton, slowing him down even more, so that he can get more PAs (which are the least valuable kind) with no one on base? I don't care if Buxton is behind slower runners. That means he had a runner(s) on base for his PA, which is what we want. Imagine this scenario--Byron Buxton is coming up to bat; do you want him to have someone on base, or do you want the bases to be empty? The benefit of runners scoring on Buxton's XBHs (which he gets more of than anyone else on the roster) outweighs the benefit of Buxton potentially being able to advance further than a different runner on someone else's hit. Saying you don't want a singles/OBP machine on in front of Buxton, but are fine with an even slower guy who will still be on first almost 70% of the time simply means you want fewer men on base for Buxton.

Having only 1 guy out of 9 with speed, as compared to 8 of 9 with power doesn't all the sudden make the speed more valuable. Having 9 Porsches is better than 8 Porsches and 1 Ford F-150 if the goal is to create the most valuable car collection. The point is that even after you picked your speed guy option, the power guys were still better, and the more your speed guy became a speed only player, the less valuable he became. 9 Gallos hitting solo HRs is not germane to my desire to have Buxton hit with runners on base, and as such is a Strawman argument. I don't want Buxton hitting with the bases empty because PAs are more likely to result in runs if there are men on base. I don't know how this is debatable; it's obvious from a logical standpoint, and it's borne out by years of baseball research. As such, I want runners on base when my best hitter, who by definition is the most likely to create run-producing outcomes, comes to the plate; I would prefer the lineup be constructed to reflect that. A hypothetical world where Joey Gallo and 8 identical clones fill out a batting order gives no wiggle room for lineup construction--it doesn't matter who bats in front of Joey Gallo; the answer is Joey Gallo.

Joey Gallo has a career 114 career wRC+ and Merrifield is at 105, so yes, I think 9 Gallos is better than 9 Merrifields. Also, for what it's worth, Merrifield was above league average in SLG every year of his career except 2016 (his first year when he only played half a season) except for 2021, when his wRC+ collapsed to 91. It's almost like power is more impactful in modern baseball than speed.

Ah. Confusion on my part

I'm guessing, if given the choice of which lineup would generate more offense, 9 Joey Gallos or Miguel Sanos would dramatically outperform 9 Billy Hamiltons or Terrance Gores.

The KAT comparison was perhaps poorly worded on my part, but the point is valid--if the Wolves insist KAT spend more time in the paint, even if he's not ultimately taking a shot, they are undeniably maximizing the post-up skills of their best post-up player. But they are simultaneously not maximizing the skill of their best 3 point shooter. It's the same with wanting Buxton to hit with the bases empty more often in order to maximize his on-base speed; you are not maximizing his power, which is detrimental--XBH are the best way to move runners around the bases, and taking the guy who is best at creating XBH, and putting him in a situation where his XBH are less likely to come with runners on base reduces the value of those XBH? After all, which is better--a homer with no one on, a triple with 1 man on, or a double with 2 men on? The number of PAs does not reduce that drastically from hitting 1st to hitting 3rd--last year for the Twins it was 745 for 1st, 727 for 2nd, and 713 for 3rd. So yes, Buxton batting 3rd bats less often than Buxton batting 1st--but the value of the PA is higher, given that at least 162 of those 745 PAs had no one on base. If you put your lowest OBP guys at the bottom of your order, the 1st spot also becomes more likely to start an inning, as it follows the guys most likely to make outs, as opposed to the high OBP guys at the top, who are the least likely to make outs. I would rather have Buxton get 400 PAs, all with a runner on, than 500 PAs, none with a runner on. You're right that Buxton's speed doesn't go away in the weeks where he goes 3 for 24 with 2bb and 12k--but given that he's not really getting on base that much in that week, his speed doesn't play up so much--it doesn't matter how fast you run if you're sitting on the bench. You left out triples for Trout, as well as his injury history--if you add triples, he exceeded the 75 number in 2013 and 2014, and was on pace to do it in 2017, 2019, and 2020. I want Buxton to hit lower because he has the most XBH, and the more bases a hit is worth, the less important the speed of the players on the bases is (that is, speed of runners is irrelevant on triples and homers, minorly relevant on doubles--the incidence of runners on 2nd or 3rd not scoring on a double is vanishingly rare--and majorly relevant on singles). Buxton's speed is actually most relatively useful when the guy behind him hits singles (1st to third, scoring from second, scoring from third on balls that drop in front of an outfielder), so yes, I want Buxton's doubles pushing slower guys around the bases, since Buxton is less dependent than any other hitter the Twins have on needing an XBH to get around the bases. I value his power over his speed, and his power is at it's most effective when there are runners on base. If indeed we want Buxton to have clear bases in front of him so as to maximize his speed, does that mean that we would want any runner on first when Buxton comes up to automatically attempt to steal second, and not particularly care if he gets thrown out, as it still accomplishes the goal of having any runner at least 180 feet ahead of Buxton?

Why would we think Buxton would lose power this year--was last year a fluke? Even if he doesn't lead the league, he should still be near the top, right? Last year 188 guys had 400 or more PAs, so if Buxton is in the top 10 in SLG, he's essentially top 5% of SLG guys in baseball. Why are we giving so much priority to Buxton's speed as opposed to his power? The best offensive players in baseball history have always been the ones that hit for power--given that Buxton can do that, why are we trying to reduce that tool in favor of his speed? Yes, part of his SLG comes from turning singles into doubles, but how often does that actually happen? Is there any data around that? I know for sure that he hit almost as many HR as 2B last year, and that had nothing to do with his speed. You're right that this team has more ability to SLG than run, but why does that mean we need to go out of the way to ensure the guys with speed use it? That's like saying the Timberwolves have lots of guys who can shoot 3 pointers, but no one other than KAT who can play in the post, so let's reduce the amount of 3s KAT takes so he can shoot 2s in the paint (even though he's the best 3P shooter on the team). Maybe Buxton scores from 1st on a double, but maybe he doesn't. I am sure there are instances in the past where Buxton was on first, a guy hit a double, and Buxton ended up at third. It's interesting to me that you're good with 5 PAs with clear bases for Buxton a month is worth it if it creates one run, while ignoring that keeping the bases clear also guarantees his HRs are solo--by definition that costs the Twins a run (at least). There are certainly worse things than having Buxton on first with second and third empty, but I would gladly trade that for Buxton at the plate with runners on base every single time.

Not even close to true. Archer topped out at 96 on his fastball in 2015, but was never below 94 until 2021. 5 of his 9 seasons in the majors saw his fastball velocity above 95. Even last year, when he was just coming back from TOS and had myriad other health issues, he still was at 92.4, a far cry from your claim of 86. His slider has also held up pretty well, sitting at 87.5 last year (his career high was 89), which is harder than he threw it in 2012-2014. Given that his slider and changeup have been historically his best pitches, and he throws them more than 50% of the time, fastball velocity is not as important--indeed, his fastball has been a negative pitch for him every year since 2016, which includes two years when it was over 95, and two more over 94. I imagine the Twins will have him throwing changes and sliders 60-70% of the time, and using the fastball as an ambush or get-me-over pitch.

Buxton's ability to use his speed to score without needing a big hit to knock him in does not maximize his ability; it maximizes his speed. But the reason Buxton has a ceiling of MVP is not just because he's fast--if it was Billy Hamilton would have been one of the best players of the last 8 years. If Buxton is competing for MVP it's because he's hitting for power, and that aspect of Byron's game is not maximized if he's hitting leadoff behind our worst OBP guys, as opposed to after our best OBP guys.

I get what you're driving at here, I just think it's putting way too much emphasis on Buxton's speed as the tool we want to take advantage of. Of hitters with 200+ PAs last year, Buxton led the league in SLG by .032 --Bryce Harper is second was closer in SLG to Frank Schwindel in 8th than to Buxton in 1st. Buxton was 2nd in ISO (behind Zunino by .002, despite having a BA .080 points higher), so his SLG was built on XBH, not getting a lot of singles. I like the idea of Buxton running wild on the bases, but I like the idea of Buxton driving in runs more. I'd rather slow him down and give him more chances to drive guys in as the best hitter on the team, as opposed to limit his ability to drive guys in so he can steal a couple more bases, go first to third here and there, and score from second on singles. This is also accentuated by the fact that even if the guy batting ninth only has a .300 OBP, that means 20ish% of the non-1st inning PAs for Buxton if he hits leadoff have a guy on first in front of him anyways, and assuming it will be Jeffers, Urshela, or Sanchez, a guy who is a full ft/sec slower than Arraez. Even if we assume a .375 OBP for Buxton (which is higher than he's ever done), a .200 OBP on first (i.e. take out HR, 3B, and 2B) for the Jeffers/Sanchez/Urshela group, and a .350 OBP on first for Arraez, the delta between Buxton behind Arraez on first v one of the other three on first is about 5.5 out of every 100 PAs. We want to dramatically reduce Buxton's opportunity to hit with runner(s) on base, all so he can have clear bases in front of him an extra 5 times a month?

I just don't get the angst about banning the shift, when almost everyone I've talked to agrees banning it won't do much. It would be like the NFL in 2022 banning the wildcat--does it really change anything? Even if the shift is banned, wouldn't teams just position their SS one inch away from second, and their 2B one inch off the outfield grass, and have both of them immediately go into motion as soon as the pitcher begins his motion? If you say they can't move until the hitter makes contact, that opens new issues, as Trov pointed out--would that mean 1B and 3B would not be allowed to charge in on a hitter squaring around to bunt? It should be clear to everyone that what we're actually bemoaning here is not that the teams have become more sophisticated in their defense, to the point that they are now quite able to place defenders in the most effective spots, but that too few PAs result in non-outs/non-HRs. The fix for this comes from changing the value ratio between hitting a HR vis a vis not hitting a HR, and banning the shift does not accomplish that.

Other than Buxton last year was on first barely more often than second/third/rounding the bases. Of Buxton's 91 times on base, 49 were via single, walk, or HBP (I'm not sure how many times he landed on first as part of a fielder's choice), and 42 via 2B or HR--he interestingly had no 3B last year. And that to me is where the idea of wanting to keep the bases clear for Byron, while still something I would like to do, is losing some of it's allure--this isn't early career Buxton that slugs in the low .400s--he's increased his SLG for 3 straight seasons, and I see no reason right now to assume he won't continue to hit for good power. As such, keeping the bases clear for him has reduced in value, while having men on base for him has increased in value. As I said, I don't hate a Buxton-Arraez-Polanco-Correa-Kiriloff top 5--that's really freakin' good. But I also think there is some merit to an Arraez-Polanco-Buxton-Correa-Kiriloff top 5 as well.

I'm not so sure if this is the best way to go. Ideally, I would like Buxton to be able to hit behind someone so his XBH drive in some runs, but we don't really have anyone that fits the mold I'd be looking for (good OBP + good speed). As such, I agree that Buxton batting leadoff is an acceptable idea, but since the #9 hitter therefore needs to have good speed to avoid clogging bases in front of Buxton, who bats ninth? It can't be Urshela, Jeffers, or Sanchez (all of whom are bottom quartile in sprint speed--for what it's worth, Arraez was more than a ft/sec faster than any of those 3 last year). So are we then dropping Kiriloff, Sano, or Kepler to #9? I'm ok with Arraez behind Buxton in the sense that Arraez' ability to put the ball in play is a good thing when you have Buxton's speed on the bases, but I'm not sure if that's worth the tradeoff of having your best power hitter by SLG getting a guaranteed 20-25% of his PA's with no one on, and the others behind the worst OBP guys on the team.