jorgenswest

It is no more possible to measure leadership with the data available to us as it is to use the data in the small sample of a partial relief season in any meaningful way. The data is a partial AAA relief season has less meaning. It simply isn't useful in projecting how a relief pitcher is going to perform the remainder of the season. Changing catchers and bringing in veteran leadership seemed to be the two roster priorities for the new front office. I don't have any meaningful tools to argue against it. That Falvey and Levine continue to roster them is more convincing to me that they bring value than any partial season relief stats used to support their removal. I strongly believe that the eyes seeing them pitch and seeing them in the clubhouse are more meaningful than the numbers. It comes down to having confidence in those eyes. If those are eyes are poorly skilled, the Twins have much bigger problems than low leverage relievers and a back up catcher.

If we are judging by Belisle's data, there isn't enough sample to suggest he is a less skilled pitcher from his previous few seasons. His velocity hasn't dropped and strike out rates are not significantly different. The sample is too small to look at other batted ball results or innings based results to suggest he has changed his skill level. He could just as likely perform similar to last year's numbers the rest of the way as repeat this year's numbers. We really rely on the eyes of the staff that sees him every day as well as trust in those who have pitch level data beyond our access to make the best decision about Belisle. Breslow hasn't been effective in a while and is used almost exclusively in low leverage situations. I can't measure the value of his leadership in the clubhouse to know if it is worth the low leverage level load he has been given. It is hard to imagine the value he brings, but I am not in the clubhouse or bullpen. Without that experience, I realize I am pretty limited in my ability to support his removal.

The front office was very clear in November and again in spring training that they thought the Twins had a void in veteran leadership. They sought veterans that they felt had brought those leadership skills that were missing. They landed on Belisle, Breslow and Gimenez. Being a veteran doesn't equate to being a leader. It is a talent. Two quotes from Berardino's culture club article this spring http://www.twincities.com/2017/03/18/minnesota-twins-build-culture-club-with-five-low-cost-veterans/ “You can have leadership in the front office, you can have leadership in the coaching staff, but if you don’t have leadership in the clubhouse I think it’s a real challenge to navigate 162 games, especially with the amount of youth we’ve had on this team.” “You may see a signing where you may scratch your head and say, ‘Why did these guys spend this kind of money on that player at this stage of his career?’ ” Levine told those Twins fans. “I assure you it’s probably because this guy, in our opinion, has a chance to be a leader in the clubhouse.” Does the FO like old guys? Not particularly. They do value those that have the talent and skill of leadership. Perhaps that leadership helped the team navigate through a sweep by Cleveland and not carry that disappointment into the next series.

There are almost no meaningful in season metrics for relief pitchers. There just isn't enough sample. At this point, you could look to changes in ground ball rate and strike out rate from career or last three season norms. It is still too early to point to a change in walk rates for any of the Twin relievers. The pitch level data would tell more. Has there been a drop in velocity? Has there been a change in spin rate?... Compared to the last three years, Belisle's ground ball rate is the lowest it has been and his strike out rate is better than his year with the Rockies but lower than his seasons with the Cardinals and Nationals. He did face more pitchers in the NL increasing those NL strike out rates. His velocity is in line with that of the last three years. There is little else on his fangraphs page useful to support an argument that he brings a different level of skill from the previous three seasons. The front office would be wise to ignore most of the batted ball data and standard statistics at this point. The skilled eyes of a trained staff are vital in this assessment. Breslow is a different case. He hadn't been effective for the last three years. The question coming into camp was whether some changes he made in the offseason would lead to better results. He also is best used as a situational pitcher. Data in his sample against only left handed batters is very small and virtually useless in this partial season sample. Comparing the last 4 seasons to when he was more effective, there is a drop in velocity that continues this year. Is he their most effective option to get out a single left handed hitter? The eyes of the staff can best make that decision. Given that 114 of 131 batters faced have come in low leverage situations, I think we know what the eyes of the staff think. There is a lot of low leverage work in the Twins bullpen, perhaps Breslow brings value in the bullpen while not pitching that is worth giving him a good share of the low leverage load.

Relievers go from effective to ineffective very quickly. One injury at 33 and a downtick in velocity might be all it takes. Any multiyear extension seems like a bad idea. If he will take it, overpay on a one year extension. If 3/21 is the market, would 1/10 be enough?

Agree. Though I do believe if they find a better closer he is still useful coming in with men on base earlier in the game. With someone on first, he might be the best option to get a double play. Not sure he is my choice with runners on second and third and a strike out is needed. I need Andrew Miller for that case.

I think we disagree in how we value experience in AA and AAA. Given that he has no AAA time, I don't think he is likely to be successful in the majors in August. Once he has shown sustained success in AAA, it will be time for him to struggle in the majors. This is a pitcher who just passed 100 innings in AA. I think there is a lot to learn with 15 to 20 starts in AAA. I think a midseason move to AAA is best for his development. Moving to the majors without the development time in AAA could slow his development. With adequate development, I think he can help in his first year. I don't think you speed up that process by skipping significant time in AAA and going to the majors.

Absolutely. Good point. Though I don't expect he will be helpful this year. I also don't expect a waiver claim to be helpful. Pavano and Rauch far outperformed the first 3/4 of their seasons after joining the Twins. Gonsalves seems almost as likely to surprise with a good 6 weeks. Pitching will be very expensive in July and though the Twins did find inexpensive pitching as suggested the wise one, I wanted to add that those deals took place after the trade deadline.

The Twins can wait until August as they did with Pavano and Rauch and get a cheap waiver deal on a veteran having a bad season. Should they wait to see which leftover veterans can pass through waivers after the trade deadline? They certainly will have more leverage at that time.

By what measure? I tried wOBA, RC+ and neither was that bad. I am thinking it must be WAR but WAR has a significant problem comparing across positions and doesn't in any way project future value. Playing LF he will get significant positional adjustment that he wouldn't get as a CF. The reality is the sum of the CF WAR is almost twice the sum of all LF WAR and left fielders as a group have the lowest combined WAR mostly due to positional adjustment.

If they felt Randy Rosario was ready, it would have good to have had patience with him. Busenitz will turn 27 this year. Given the long term of his minor league performance, he is more likely a 13th/14th pitcher that shuttles back and forth rather than a guy you invest a few years into. When Hughes and Santiago return, he will likely move back to Rochester. I would prefer him over Breslow and Hughes but acknowledge they need some guys with options that can be rotated through. As long as they don't DFA him, we will see him again. At his age, he is going to need to perform when he gets the chance.

Is the best no power OF example Ben Revere? Can Granite match his speed and defense? If triples are a measure, Granite isn't in Gordon's class when comparing minor league numbers. The Twins need to be patient with Wade and keep developing him as a hitter. He needs to be more aggressive on pitches he can drive at the risk of taking fewer walks. Suggesting he needs more time to develop does not equate to a lost cause. Seeing Rosario as a better investment in at bats right now as compared to Granite does not equate Granite to a lost cause. Comparing him to Mastroianni does not either. Can a better match be found?

Granite's career OBP/SLG in the minors closely matches Darin Mastroianni with a .01 difference in OBP and .08 difference in SLG. They match similarly in the scouting reports of their defense. They both had outstanding age 24 seasons though Matroianni's was at AA and a Granite is in the midst. Mastroianni's ability to get on base did not translate to the majors leagues. Major league pitchers have no trouble attacking hitters that aren't a threat to go deep. The same might be said about LaMonte Wade. He really needs to work on driving the ball in AA this year before he is advanced. I don't see either as a threat to Rosario or an option to start without developing some power. Wade has a chance but he has work to do.

A few notes on Rosario and 1000 plate appearances. 1) He hasn't been good. 2) Comparisons like this are not parallel. I don't think Rosario is being compared to the first 1000 plate appearances of others. He is being compared to their record at the end of their career. Joe Rudi, for example, was not very good in his first 1000 plate appearances and should have been below Rosario. 3) Frank Delahanty and George Barclay have lower career OBPs. They played over 100 years ago though. Six other players are under .300. Four of 6 played this year. Their careers aren't finished yet. My apologies if the search was comparing all players in their first 1000 plate appearances. That would be a more interesting comparison. I wonder how many other Joe Rudi's would be in the group to offer some hope in Rosario.

I would be concerned about Wade's ability to hit with hard contact as shown by his ISO. As compared to Grossman's time in AA it is much lower. The Twins have much better data to look at for barrels and hard contact. Maybe most of his hard contact is directly at fielders and his low ISO is a poor indicator. He won't walk in the majors if he doesn't hit the ball with some authority. Major league pitchers will pitch to his weaker contact and his walk rate will drop considerably. While he is in AA, he needs to be more aggressive attacking pitches that he can drive. Without recognition of pitches that he can drive, it will be hard to be successful in the majors.

Over his last 8 starts, he has performed close to his projections coming into the season. He has thrown 54 innings with a ERA of 4.00. Those almost 7 innings a game at 4.00 are pretty useful to a team. I think it is reasonably close to what the Twins (or any team considering a trade) should expect for the remainder of the season.

I have no clue which direction they should go. I do trust their process as shared on inside twins though.

Another honest question for a mid market team. If you sign a college guy, wouldn't you likely have them through age 29-30 and a good portion of their prime. Sign a high school guy who might come up at 20-21 and you have them until 27-28 losing a few years of their prime. Is it a consideration?

I would take the player with the highest upside. I don't know who that would be but the only way the mid market Twins acquire a superstar is the draft them or sign them internationally. They shouldn't go with the safe pick. Is there consensus on the player with the best upside?

Watched and wrote about his start in the draft thread. 122 pitches. Two bad innings. Manager should never have allowed him to pitch disastrous 7th inning. He was nearing 100 pitches and velocity was down a tick in the 6th. If a single performance could hurt his draft stock, this was it.

Absolutely. It has been lack of command and not lack of third pitch that has held him back.

From 2008-2013 Ervin lived on fastball and slider throwing that combo more than 90% of the time. Command is far more important than a third pitch and last night Ervin had tremendous command.

The "can't be a starter if they have two pitches" thing is a myth. Plenty of starting pitchers have been successful using two pitches 90% of the time. It is far more important to have command of both rather than have an adequate third pitch.

I am not looking at the data but my impression from watching Gibson is that he is getting strike one much more often than earlier in the season. If he gets the first strike, the curve ball has a chance to be more effective. Batter's can't let it go and sit on the fastball like they can when they are ahead in the count. So I wonder... Is he getting the first strike more often? Is he getting ahead with the fastball? Has his curve ball been more effective? I am hoping that someone can point to a pitch sequencing change since his return. If that is the case, there might be reason to hope that he can be a useful number 4/5 starter.

I wondered the same thing. No. http://www.truebluela.com/2017/6/2/15734048/dodgers-obtain-jason-wheeler-twins-cash-considerations-rob-segedin