jorgenswest

I am not sure there would be significant difference had I used Bill James, Marcel, Oliver, or Steamer. I decided to choose one before I looked at the data. Otherwise, I might pick the one that happens to have Dozier lower and some of the others higher to better attain the results I expected. Dozier's OPS projections range from 646 to 672. ZIPS had him at 649. Willingham's were 816 to 833. ZIPS had him at 822. ZIPS was least favorable to Doumit and Morneau. I don't think the results would be significantly different had I chosen different projections. The projections seem low, but three of those players are in the decline phase of their careers with some injury history.

Roenicke had 8 wild pitches last year. Only Diamond on the Twins had more at 10 while facing many more batters. By rate, Gray had a similar rate of 1 wild pitch per 47-48 batters. Gray is probably a good comp for Roenicke. Where was Burton? Roenicke is the last guy you want in the game with runners on base.

I tried to study the impact of the batting order change using ZIPS projections. I was a little disappointed in the results. I used the average plate appearances by batting order position in the AL last year. The second spot had 103 more plate appearances on average than the 8th spot. That made sense as it is close to 6x18. I then compared a Dozier with 735 plate appearances to a Dozier with 632 plate appearances. (Yes... I know he is not going to play 162 games and neither are any of the others but this should give me the extreme.) I added to Dozier's 632 plate appearances all of the increases of the other 6 players using yesterday's batting order to compare with Dozier in the 2 hole. Using ZIPS Dozier batting 2nd 247/349/300 Dozier 8th (plus others) 249/359/305 This difference over that many plate appearances amounts to about 5 runs. Darn! I expected more. Why was the change so small? The batting average hardly changes because six of the guys getting more at bats (Willingham, Plouffe, Doumit and Parmelee) are projected to have about the same average as Dozier. Mauer's extra 18 plate appearances helps some but not much in the context of 735 plate appearances. I know the study has flaws - If Dozier isn't hitting second, a few less outs will be made in that spot and overall the team should have a few more plate appearances on the season. That can't account for a significant change. - I used ZIPS. 2013 ZiPS Projections ? Minnesota Twins | FanGraphs Baseball Maybe ZIPS does not project the Twins hitters well or over projects Dozier. - It isn't realistic that the best hitters will play 162 games. They will be replaced by guys that are not much different than Dozier and reduce the impact of the extra at bats. I am disappointed. I thought I would see a difference of over 20 runs and then scale it back due to playing time. It didn't happen. There are many studies written about optimizing a batting order. A well optimized lineup is shown to be better than a poorly optimized order. Moving just one guy in the context on this team and their ZIPS projections didn't make difference I expected. I will take the 5 or so runs though.

I tried to study the impact of the batting order change using ZIPS projections. I was a little disappointed in the results. I used the average plate appearances by batting order position in the AL last year. The second spot had 103 more plate appearances on average than the 8th spot. That made sense as it is close to 6x18. I then compared a Dozier with 735 plate appearances to a Dozier with 632 plate appearances. (Yes... I know he is not going to play 162 games and neither are any of the others but this should give me the extreme.) I added to Dozier's 632 plate appearances all of the increases of the other 6 players using yesterday's batting order to compare with Dozier in the 2 hole. Using ZIPS Dozier batting 2nd 247/349/300 Dozier 8th (plus others) 249/359/305 This difference over that many plate appearances amounts to about 5 runs. Darn! I expected more. Why was the change so small? The batting average hardly changes because six of the guys getting more at bats (Willingham, Plouffe, Doumit and Parmelee) are projected to have about the same average as Dozier. Mauer's extra 18 plate appearances helps some but not much in the context of 735 plate appearances. I know the study has flaws - If Dozier isn't hitting second, a few less outs will be made in that spot and overall the team should have a few more plate appearances on the season. That can't account for a significant change. - I used ZIPS. 2013 ZiPS Projections ? Minnesota Twins | FanGraphs Baseball Maybe ZIPS does not project the Twins hitters well or over projects Dozier. - It isn't realistic that the best hitters will play 162 games. They will be replaced by guys that are not much different than Dozier and reduce the impact of the extra at bats. I am disappointed. I thought I would see a difference of over 20 runs and then scale it back due to playing time. It didn't happen. There are many studies written about optimizing a batting order. A well optimized lineup is shown to be better than a poorly optimized order. Moving just one guy in the context on this team and their ZIPS projections didn't make difference I expected. I will take the 5 or so runs though.

There may be a positive side effect. Players must resent when teams mess with their service time and play the three week game. Maybe it gets noticed by guys that will be drafted into the organization. Maybe they are more likely to take a reasonable contract when the Twins don't have a track record of messing around on the other end by playing with service time.

I recall being excited about both Banks and Parks. Two high school first rounders that didn't meet expectations. Pitchers and catchers are probably the most difficult to project as high school seniors into the major leagues.

How did we go from platooning to send down to Rochester? If Ramirez starts against lefties in RF, Parmelee will still see time at 1B or DH in some of those games. He will also start the majority if games in right. Not because he earned it, not because of a scholarship, but because the Twins assess that he is the best option. I can't disagree. Based on the whole of his performance over the last two years, there is a reasonable chance he can provide league average play for a RF or 1B for the next several years. Why platoon? His OPS in AA and AAA over the last two years is more than 200 points lower against lefties.

Thanks again for a very detailed report. Ramirez would be useful on the bench though scouting reports on the 3B turned corner OF have never been good about his defense. He has the speed and maybe over time improved the instincts. He can't be worse than Willingham or Parmelee. I would like to see him in the bench. Though his platoon splits in the minors have been neutral, would you platoon him with Parmelee?

Thanks for the report. Do you think Hicks, Span or Revere get to any of those balls? Was it a bad day or is his range in centerfield more limited then we have seen from Span, Revere or Hicks?

Starting pitching is so difficult to find. The Twins should be interested.

If the topic interests you, there have been several studies on the topic. Why do teams exceed their win expectancy? Is it luck? The following suggested that leverage (bullpen plays a significant part of leverage), a balanced lineup and an experienced manager can partially explain why a team exceeds its win expectancy. Pondering Pythagoras This more recent study looks only at managers. Manager Wins Above Expectancy - Beyond the Box Score If it isn't entirely luck, teams would be wise to figure out what factors help a team get those extra wins. Every win purchased in free agency is very expensive. This may be a more efficient route.

I would be surprised if he brought a top 100 prospect. How much more value does he bring than a Soriano who the Yankees could get for much less than a top 100 prospect? On the other hand, he is at peak value now and the Twins should seriously listen to an offer. They can't expect to be blown away. He is a DH with a history of injuries.

Within the last year the Astros have hired Mike Fast and Kevin Goldstein. After trying to retool for years, they are all in on the rebuild. In that year the farm system has gone from 27th to 4th in Keith Law's rankings. They will be awful this year and likely next. They may also go from awful to good in 2015 skipping mediocre entirely.

Lots of position battles this year.

Just a few questions in my mind as I read... By performance, weren't many of the teams of the last decade better than the 1987 team? The 1987 team had the great fortune of home field advantage though they didn't earn it. It rotated in that era. Once in the playoffs, the small sample of games makes it very difficult to assess the quality of the team. An extra home game was huge for the Twins. That assessment is best done by the in season performance. Why trade Garza and Bartlett for a known troubled player in Delmon Young? How does that fit with concerns about Twins way or ethnicity? More questions come to mind... The frequent appearances of Carew and Oliva, choosing Buxton over Appel, winning the monetary battle to sign Sano... Are they consistent with the thoughts in the article?

Nice study. My original thought was that since strikeouts are on the rise, defensive chances decline. Relievers tend to have higher strikeout rates and lower ground ball rates. That quick thought doesn't do the work justice. I am not sure that strikeouts completely explain the shift. Worthy of more thought. Too bad we don't have pitch fx data to compare eras.

It will be interesting to watch three teams as they try to pull themselves out of the basement. The Twins, Cubs and and Astros all have set out different path towards success. They also represent the three very different markets and revenue streams. The Cubs have purged salaries in trades and then are putting money back in for next year. They will probably not match last year's payroll, but they will spend the most of the three. They also have the most revenue. Will the additions be enough or will they be more like the Mets of the last 4 years? The Astros are all in the rebuild process. They have two players over 30 (Pena and Veras). In 2012, they hired Mike Fast and Kevin Goldstein. Their farm system had been one of the weakest for years. Keith Law has said that their farm system took a hug leap forward, the largest 6 month jump of any team. They go into this season without hope of approaching 90 wins, but they have set a clear direction. Will they be able to rebuild the team through the farm system? Like the Astros, the Twins have rebuilt their farm system in the last year. The draft class combined with the recent trades puts them in a much stronger position. Like the Cubs, they have more decline phase players on the roster. The Twins may have more over 30 players on their opening day roster than the Cubs. In order to help rebuild the system, the Twins traded off younger assets rather than older. That was out of necessity. The Twins have spent budget on decline phase players hoping to compete in the weak central. Can the Twins be successful at doing both? Three different markets. Three different paths. Which leads to sustained success?

It will be interesting to watch three teams as they try to pull themselves out of the basement. The Twins, Cubs and and Astros all have set out different path towards success. They also represent the three very different markets and revenue streams. The Cubs have purged salaries in trades and then are putting money back in for next year. They will probably not match last year's payroll, but they will spend the most of the three. They also have the most revenue. Will the additions be enough or will they be more like the Mets of the last 4 years? The Astros are all in the rebuild process. They have two players over 30 (Pena and Veras). In 2012, they hired Mike Fast and Kevin Goldstein. Their farm system had been one of the weakest for years. Keith Law has said that their farm system took a hug leap forward, the largest 6 month jump of any team. They go into this season without hope of approaching 90 wins, but they have set a clear direction. Will they be able to rebuild the team through the farm system? Like the Astros, the Twins have rebuilt their farm system in the last year. The draft class combined with the recent trades puts them in a much stronger position. Like the Cubs, they have more decline phase players on the roster. The Twins may have more over 30 players on their opening day roster than the Cubs. In order to help rebuild the system, the Twins traded off younger assets rather than older. That was out of necessity. The Twins have spent budget on decline phase players hoping to compete in the weak central. Can the Twins be successful at doing both? Three different markets. Three different paths. Which leads to sustained success?

Jim, I think the Twins management agree with you on defense and stats. They are going to let everyone else go ahead on this curve and hope it is the wrong direction. Even looking at the numbers, Carroll at best measured in the middle of qualifying shortstops. He did not have the innings to join that group. His defensive runs saved and UZR are ordinary. The numbers show that he has below average range and does not make a lot of errors. I think our eyes can see that. However, I do think the Twins should be paying attention to the defensive metrics. Maybe they are, but their roster decisions over the last two years indicate otherwise. Certainly, the decisions they have made indicate that they do not think defense has a significant impact on wins.

Good assessment at this point. It shows the Twins still have some work to do. I hope that Florimon doesn't make the team. If he does, it will be a starting SS. He gives the team nothing off the bench. The 25th spot on the team will be fluid due to injuries and whether it is a 12 or 13 man pitching staff. They should not add a player to,the 40 man to fill this temporary role like they did with Burroughs last year. I like the pitching, but I don't think Swarzak has any trade value. There are going to be several Swarzak type players who will be DFA'd as the season starts. No need to trade for one. They can not go into the season with that outfield. Mastro is only useful as a 4th OF. There has been a lot of discussion of June (or even June 1) with regards to Hicks and Arcia. That super two date is not a fixed target. The new CBA upped the number from 17% to 22%. It won't be until winter 2015 until teams get a sense of where the 22% lands. The Twins could be conservative and wait until later in June or maybe even the all star break. It will really depend on whether other teams will be as patient. Small market teams need to do this. I think it is too long to wait. The Twins are not a small market team. They can afford to pay arbitration a year earlier. Hicks and Arcia will struggle when we see them this year. They will also progress more quickly. I would plan now to have them in the opening day lineup with Matroianni as the 4th OF. They need to trade Morneau and move Parmelee to 1B. Alternatively, if they can't trade Morneau, they can DH Willingham.

As for the NL comment... I don't think any NL dependent numbers were quoted for the new players. WAR is context, league and year neutral. Players can be compared across teams, leagues and seasons. As for using WAR... It may not be te best measure. Debating whether someone is a #3 or #4 starter is not a measure at all. Choose another neutral measure to compare pitchers across leagues and seasons.

In the current era of baseball it doesn't make sense to quantify pitchers as #X starter. It used to be that #1 or #2 starters would get more starts because they would skip over guys at the back end of the rotation. I think Verlander and the Tigers are the only team that did that with any consistency. Virtually all teams roll their starters so that all slots get about the same number of starts. Even when the opportunity at the all star break comes to skip some starts at the back end, those opportunities aren't often taken. Last year the Twins took the opportunity to give Diamond a longer rest at the all star break taking away a start rather than getting an extra. It is more important to look at the staff's overall contribution in terms of WAR as a whole. Instead of a #4 starter, it would be better to quantify a starter as a 2 WAR starter or a 1 WAR starter. The #4 no longer has any value. The pitcher is not going to get their starts skipped. Note: Top starters in the playoffs often do get an extra start and rotations are dropped to 4 pitchers. There were 2268 starts last year in the AL. The ERA for those starts was 4.40. That included 95 pitches in 5.9 innings. Looking at AL pitchers who pitched the full season and had that profile you will find the league average pitcher contributes just less than 2 WAR over a full season. If the Twins can get 5 guys to give them 2 WAR they will far exceed the total of 3 WAR the starters earned last year. Let's look at the Twins recent acquisitions. According to fangraphs, from 2008-2011 Mike Pelfrey had 8.1 WAR over 4 seasons. If he can do 2 WAR for the Twins he will be well worth the contract. Vance Worley had 4.3 WAR over the last two seasons. It seems reasonable to project 2 WAR from him. Kevin Correia was worth 0.9 WAR last year and that was his best season in the last three. At his age, it doesn't seem likely he will produce more than 1 WAR. If he does achieve 1 WAR, he will be worth about the level of his contract. Of the returning staff, only Scott Diamond had more than 2 WAR (2.6) as a starter. Instead of debating pitcher number, the Twins should be striving towards putting together a league average pitching staff that contributes about 10 WAR. That alone is a 7 game improvement. I used fangraphs WAR calculation for this article.

In the current era of baseball it doesn't make sense to quantify pitchers as #X starter. It used to be that #1 or #2 starters would get more starts because they would skip over guys at the back end of the rotation. I think Verlander and the Tigers are the only team that did that with any consistency. Virtually all teams roll their starters so that all slots get about the same number of starts. Even when the opportunity at the all star break comes to skip some starts at the back end, those opportunities aren't often taken. Last year the Twins took the opportunity to give Diamond a longer rest at the all star break taking away a start rather than getting an extra. It is more important to look at the staff's overall contribution in terms of WAR as a whole. Instead of a #4 starter, it would be better to quantify a starter as a 2 WAR starter or a 1 WAR starter. The #4 no longer has any value. The pitcher is not going to get their starts skipped. Note: Top starters in the playoffs often do get an extra start and rotations are dropped to 4 pitchers. There were 2268 starts last year in the AL. The ERA for those starts was 4.40. That included 95 pitches in 5.9 innings. Looking at AL pitchers who pitched the full season and had that profile you will find the league average pitcher contributes just less than 2 WAR over a full season. If the Twins can get 5 guys to give them 2 WAR they will far exceed the total of 3 WAR the starters earned last year. Let's look at the Twins recent acquisitions. According to fangraphs, from 2008-2011 Mike Pelfrey had 8.1 WAR over 4 seasons. If he can do 2 WAR for the Twins he will be well worth the contract. Vance Worley had 4.3 WAR over the last two seasons. It seems reasonable to project 2 WAR from him. Kevin Correia was worth 0.9 WAR last year and that was his best season in the last three. At his age, it doesn't seem likely he will produce more than 1 WAR. If he does achieve 1 WAR, he will be worth about the level of his contract. Of the returning staff, only Scott Diamond had more than 2 WAR (2.6) as a starter. Instead of debating pitcher number, the Twins should be striving towards putting together a league average pitching staff that contributes about 10 WAR. That alone is a 7 game improvement. I used fangraphs WAR calculation for this article.

The Twins need to find the next generation Nick Punto. If that guy is in the organization now it is Escobar. Through at 23, Escobar is at least as accomplished as Punto at 23 with the glove and limited bat. if he is not in the organization, they would be better off trying to find him.