spinowner

Hmmm. They're not walking the dangerous Chris Herrmann

That's what sinkerballers are supposed to do!

The cell is the last of the uncool stadiums. The next stadium to be built was Camden Yards.

Today's vantage point. And we're under an overhang in case of rain.

By July 2016 Sano as well.

I've said it before and I'll say it again: The Twins should trade no prospects this season. None. No matter what. In another year or two after we see how our top prospects are developing, maybe. But not now.

You mean people in the media start self-serving rumors? Just in an attempt to get people interested in the coverage they provide? Say it ain't so!

It can not be stated any better

This is essentially what I wrote. I had assumed someone else must have investigated it. I only briefly scanned the article and I'm sure there must be more research and analysis that has been done, is being done and will be done. I hope to see the day when this stat is fine tuned and reliable enough to give us the best measure of the quality of a player's plate appearances, and that this would be the primary stat cited by fans, media and sabermetricians.

Go to ashburyjohn's link. I haven't investigated it at all so I'm not the one to whom these questions should be addressed. It was just an idea I had.

OK, this is a proposed statistic for the stat-heads on this site to consider. The purpose of playing a baseball game is to win it. My proposal is to quantify how much the outcome of a batter's plate appearance affects his team's chance of winning the game. That is the most important measure of a batter's performance. Batting average, OPS, all else, is secondary. I am aware that win probabilities have been researched although I don't have the time, ability or resources to investigate that myself. For those reading this who aren't aware of win probability, or WinProb as I think it's often called, it's the likelihood of a team winning a game starting from a particular point in the game. The parameters taken into account are the inning and number of outs, number and position of baserunners, run differential and whether the team is visiting or home. The win probability is calculated from the percentage of times a major league team that was at that particular point has gone on to win a game. (As you can imagine, collecting these data is an extremely tedious and time-intensive process.) I'd call this proposed stat ∆WinProb. (Delta is the symbol used in statistics for "change in". It can be positive or negative). For example, in the bottom of the ninth inning with two outs, the bases empty and the score tied a base on balls has a much lower ∆WinProb than a home run. In the bottom of the ninth with two outs, the bases loaded and the score tied a base on balls is equal in value to a home run. There are at least two variations of this to consider. One is the cumulative ∆WinProb, and another is ∆WinProb per plate appearance. There are many other factors to consider. One example: how should a batter be credited when an error occurs? I think the batter should receive some sort of partial credit for putting the ball in play but probably not as much as for a base hit. I'd enjoy very much reading comments about and criticisms of this idea.

While the general rule is that more HR's is better than fewer HR's the name of the game is scoring runs by whatever means when it's most important to score them. If you had Wade Boggs at his peak batting in every spot in the lineup you wouldn't have many dingers but you'd win a lot of games.

Didn't see either game but caught most of both on the radio. The White Sox guys commented that he took good routes on both his highlight-reel catches. I continue to hope that his offensive production (by whatever measure) is enough to justify his presence on the team. And I think to say that there's a point where his offense is good enough for a CF but not good enough for a corner OF is probably overanalyzing. If he's the best RF in the organization after Buxton comes up then put him there and hope for the best.

Nor does any other team, because pitching staffs have never been assembled and managed that way. It goes back to the same thing that was discussed recently in another thread about how bullpens are managed. Different pitchers thrive in different roles. The idea here would be to assemble a staff of good middle relievers plus two or three good closers and see what happens. When I think about it, it would be a lot like managing a pitching staff in the ASG.

It would be interesting if one of you stat-heads could investigate examples of players being shifted to a less-demanding position. I would think that an average SS (like, say, Alex Rodriguez) should be an above-average 3B, especially playing next to a good SS (like, say, Derek Jeter). Similarly, an average CF (like, say, Aaron Hicks) should be an above-average RF or an outstanding LF, especially playing next to a good CF (like, say, Byron Buxton).

And they wound up winning the WS a few years later.

Don't get me started. Actually, I'll start just a little. The only good way to speed up the game that I can think of would be to make the strike zone larger at the TOP of the zone, not the bottom. And to counteract that advantage for the pitcher the mound should be lowered by an inch or two. A larger zone means fewer pitches taken and fewer walks. Don't mess with any other rules, and especially don't institute a pitch clock. This is baseball, not basketball.

Aaah, time to unwind after a long drive to the cold and windy city. But dang it, 4-pitch walks are bad news. Hope we can scratch one out in the 9th

I've had this thought too, and obviously I'm not the first. With a 12-man staff using 4 pitchers per game each pitcher would have one game on and two games off. This equates to 54 appearances per year, which is very common for a reliever. It seems there are always a lot of relievers with ERA's in the 2's, and if you had enough of those types on your staff it would seem very do-able to have a team ERA under 3, even in the AL. It would have to be a very unselfish group of players because the first pitcher of the game would never get a W.

OK, so let's try again with another track analogy. Look at a relay team. 4 runners, each one running the same distance. Yet if you ask any track coach you'll hear that having the right runner in place for each leg makes a difference. Likewise, some pitchers pitch better in middle innings and some pitchers pitch better as closers. It doesn't mean that middle relievers can't close and it doesn't mean closers can't pitch middle relief. It's just that you want pitchers to pitch in situations that will maximize their performances.

OK then. In track there's the 100, the 200, the 400, the 800, the 1500, etc.etc.etc. In the same way that some runners do better in one event and some do better in another, some pitchers do better in one relief role, some do better in another. Like LaTroy Hawkins. The Twins bullpen seems to have had fairly good success, other than a couple blowouts where it didn't seem to matter who pitched. I don't see any reason for Molitor to change what he's been doing.

I respectfully disagree. That's a bit like saying running is running. Sprinters are not marathoners and marathoners are not sprinters. Some pitchers are best suited to a particular role, and the major leagues are replete with pitchers who struggled in one role only to excel in another, our current all-star closer being a prime example. Another great example in Twins history is LaTroy Hawkins. His long career is proof that he's a very good pitcher, but he struggled as a starter and then struggled as a closer. It was in 2002 when Gardenhire and Anderson put him in a setup role that he thrived. He tried closing again after leaving the Twins and again had little success. That doesn't mean slavishly doing things only one way, and a manager has to be aware of who is ready and feeling good at a given point in time. It's like one of TK's mantras: put your players in a position in which they are most likely to succeed. If your bullpen is having success doing things a certain way then don't change. If it's not broken don't break it.

Nice!!!

Good thing PM saved Perkins for the save, eh?