Article: Contemplating the Royals... and the Twins

[Hosken Bombo Disco]

Okay, I'll do it: the '87 World Series was a crapshoot where the Twins prevailed! They had no business beating the Tigers whatsoever, and yet they kicked their ass. Doyle Alexander had been lights-out for 2 straight months and then lost 2 straight playoff games. Kinda like Kershaw this year. The Twins only had 2 good starting pitchers, but that's all you really need in a short series.

 

As for the WS, they won the first 2 games on the strength of 2 bat-around innings which included key non-outs from Tim Laudner (.191/.252/.389) and Steve Lombardozzi (.238/.298/.352). They survived game 6 thanks to Don Baylor's only HR in a Twins uniform and Hrbek hitting a ball 439 feet off a lefty reliever who had been dominating him all series. Game 7 had a bunch of weird calls that instant replay probably would have overturned, though they may have evened out between benefitting and hurting the Twins. Also, the Twins had the good luck of facing a Cardinals team whose 2 best hitters were injured (Jack Clark and Terry Pendleton) and combined for something like 1 Sac bunt in the series. Plus, the short series with the Tigers enabled the Twins to setup Viola and Blyleven to pitch 5 of the 7 games, while the 7-game NLCS the Cards went through forced them to start a rookie in Game 1 & 7.

 

Crap. Shoot.

I mostly agree - I knowingly set the 87 team on a tee for you.

 

But nothing about the 91 season was a crapshoot until the end of Game 6, so don't even try.

[Hosken Bombo Disco]

Another point that can be added to Seth's summary is that every player on KC has their role, and accepts it. It might be fun to see Willingham bat more, but he is nothing more than a pinch hitter, or an extra-inning DH if Butler has been pinch run for.

 

In fact, Kansas City has used exactly one lineup since the postseason started. Think about that.

 

Most managers would be tempted to "work other guys in" (especially Gardy) and fiddle with the lineup a bit, but not KC. Give them credit. Their bench guys have roles -- Dyson pinch runs for Aoki or Butler and then comes in as a CF replacement. Cain moves from CF to RF. Terrance Gore also pinch runs and that guy is fast. The bullpen arms know their assignments. No match ups, no splits, no platooning, no shuffling. No over analyzing. This is what is working. Although we will see some different looks as the series moves to the NL park. I doubt anyone is expecting KC to suddenly take a dive though. They are playing too well.

[James Richter]

I wouldn't dream of classifying '91 as a crapshoot. Both teams worthy of being there, and incredibly evenly matched.

 

However - what if the Braves had had home field advantage that year? That was essentially a coin flip.

[Otto von Ballpark]

If the Twins and Royals had swapped rotations before the season, KC would be just as likely to be in the World Series right now.

I know the Twins OF defense could use improvement, definitely, but I think this WAY overstates it.

 

Primarily, the distribution of talent on the Twins starting staff was not as even as that of the Royals.  Hughes was a huge outlier in low walk rate, and he and Gibson in HR rate.  Meanwhile, basically all of the Royals starters were much closer to their team average rates (HR/9, K/9, BB/9).  Not to mention health and experience advantages.

 

Plus, while xFIP is useful, it's also important to remember it almost always undershoots lousy pitching, sort of defaulting to "it can't be that bad."  Although the 2012-2013 Twins attest, it CAN be that bad.

[mbents]

The bullpen arms know their assignments. No match ups, no splits, no platooning, no shuffling. No over analyzing. This is what is working. 

 

The bullpen having their inning-specific roles nearly cost the Royals their season, too. In the wild card game when Shields got in trouble in the top of the 6th, Yost brought in Ventura, a rookie starting pitcher, who promptly gave up a 3-run HR. It probably would have made more sense to try to get 4 innings out of Herrera, Davis and Holland. It's easy to second guess, though, and it's a moot point anyway since the Royals ended up winning, but I think they're winning in spite of Ned Yost and not because of him.

[TheLeviathan]

I'm fine with viewing playoffs as a crapshoot, but at the same time I wouldn't want to discourage someone from trying to identify characteristics that make for a World Series winner, even if it remains somewhat probabilistic.

 

I am 100% on board with this.  I hope teams are looking for ways to give themselves an advantage even if it is only slight.

 

However, most people I hear argue against the crapshoot playoffs tell a narrative and then make the facts suit their narrative, rather than letting the facts guide the discussion.  This year KC is being successful so of course it's all about bullpen, defense, and solid pitching.  When the Yankees are winning in the 2000s all we heard is that the vaunted Braves rotation wasn't good enough because offense wins in October.  When it's Philly or San Fran it's all about shortening a series with ace pitchers.  When it's the 1991 Twins it's about homefield advantage.  

 

I'd be open to someone breaking down the successful tendencies of teams that win the WS to see if there is a pattern, but that's not what happens.  Instead people find a way to paint whoever the winning team ends up being as the "right model" when those models often look VERY different from each other.  (And, often, very different from what they did for 162 games in the regular season.  See the now power hitting 2014 Royals)

Edited October 16, 2014 by TheLeviathan

[Beezer07]

I am 100% on board with this.  I hope teams are looking for ways to give themselves an advantage even if it is only slight.

 

However, most people I hear argue against the crapshoot playoffs tell a narrative and then make the facts suit their narrative, rather than letting the facts guide the discussion.  This year KC is being successful so of course it's all about bullpen, defense, and solid pitching.  When the Yankees are winning in the 2000s all we heard is that the vaunted Braves rotation wasn't good enough because offense wins in October.  When it's Philly or San Fran it's all about shortening a series with ace pitchers.  When it's the 1991 Twins it's about homefield advantage.  

 

I'd be open to someone breaking down the successful tendencies of teams that win the WS to see if there is a pattern, but that's not what happens.  Instead people find a way to paint whoever the winning team ends up being as the "right model" when those models often look VERY different from each other.  (And, often, very different from what they did for 162 games in the regular season.  See the now power hitting 2014 Royals)

 

Forget where I've read the discussion (I think Schoenfeld on ESPN has brought it up) but there has been a lot of discussion about how "working the count" and drawing a lot of walks isn't how you win anymore, because the Royals and others this season made a lot of contact or something. He then points out that the Red Sox won the WS last year and were like 2nd or 4th in pitches per plate appearance.

[Hosken Bombo Disco]

I always write and talk about how important it is for the Twins to develop their core and then supplement it with free agents or through trades to find final pieces.

 

Agree completely. This is how the Twins have done it, and will continue to do it, like it or not. Mostly this is how KC has done it, with the fortuitous trade for Shields. Even as teams like Oakland are undervaluing their prospects, I still have no problem keeping and developing our own prospects.

 

The problem I had is that recently we started seeing situations like 30+ year old Ryan Doumit taking playing time from guys like Chris Herrmann. The declining veteran at the expense of young player with talent - that was how I saw it, though we can debate the level of talent in some of those earlier guys (Renee Tosoni and guys like that. Maybe even Herrmann in that group but we'll never know). By 2014 the Twins had lost their way with repeated decisions that didn't work out on the field.

 

The good news is the Twins core that won the World Series in 1987 made a strong pennant run three years earlier, in 1984, before they were old enough to know better. So even if a serious playoff run for this group is still several years away, good baseball from young homegrown players could come sooner than we think. The frustration with payroll will evaporate if the team can start winning.

[Willihammer]

Actually, by WAR, KC has more production from trade acquisitions than Rule 4 draftees

[Hosken Bombo Disco]

Actually, by WAR, KC has more production from trade acquisitions than Rule 4 draftees

Fine, but splitting hairs perhaps. If and when the day comes, I might be tempted to count guys like Meyer and Vargas as "homegrown" and not as trade acquisition and free agent signing.

[Linus]

The Twins are not that far away.  Their offense solidified itself and their roster has turned over substantially.  We are no longer counting on older, veteran players.  They need a good starter and an outfielder that can play center of left credibly.

 

They can patch together a bullpen between the returning guys and some of the younger flamethrowers.  It they do these simple things, I like their chances to be a lot better next year.

[naobermiller]

Something to bear in mind as you look at those draft picks - those high first round draft picks of the Royals and those critical international signings took place something between six and nine years ago. If you apply the same timeline to the Twins' situation, you'd be looking at about another five years before the Twins' group of Sano, Polanco, Buxton, Berrios, et al, would be "scheduled" to have the kind of success that the Royals are having this year.

 

 

Yes, Buxton will at best be 3 years past his draft at the earliest he'll likely come out (late 2015), but the Twins have a young enough core in Dozier, Plouffe, Santana, Arcia and Gibson, throw in veterans like Mauer, Hughes, Perkins and hopefully a free agent signing or two this off season.  Mix in the very real possibility of Reed, Burdi, and maybe Meyer filling out your bullpen at some point in 2015, and the makings are there for contention in 2015. 

 

Playoffs, and a world series run, are obviously asking a lot (and in the case of the WS, way too much IMO), but a foundation of pieces are there.  I think it's pretty safe to say that we have a lot more ability to go out and add free agents than Kansas City has had.  Doing so effectively, is obviously the key though....

[naobermiller]

I have stated this before, I don't agree with this at all. The Royals are built for the postseason. They have good starting pitchers, good defense, and a shut-down bullpen. They've been winning games because of it. 

 

The crapshoot argument has been around for 10 years to justify the terrible play of the Twins in the postseason. Watch the Royals. They have a plan, they position correctly, they make very few mistakes. That is preparation, none of which the Twins showed under Gardy. 

 

They Royals know who they are and are playing to their strengths. This is a good team that underachieved in the regular season IMO. 

 

The crapshoot argument actually has nothing to do with the Twins:

 

http://fivethirtyeight.com/datalab/youre-right-to-complain-about-the-chaos-of-mlbs-one-game-playoffs/

 

I'm not saying that the Royals don't have a formula that works well in the small samples of MLB playoffs, but the fact is that baseball's playoff system is far more chaotic than any other sports.  A seven game series is not enough to accurately depict who the "best" team is (I belive there's even maths out there that suggest 162 games isn't enough, and that it needs to be in the range of 400-600, but I'm not 100% sure on the numbers).

[brvama]

You can call going to the WS a crap shoot or whatever, but it is very simple. The Royals are 'hot.' That is the point of post-season play, it is not the team on paper that is important - it is the team that is playing good baseball, or should I say better baseball than their opponent. Maybe the Royals are probably playing a bit over their head, but they are playing excellent baseball. Maybe the baseball gods are in line this year. Any given tournament usually finds an some team that hits a hot streak. Should we be surprised?

[Linus]

Yes, Buxton will at best be 3 years past his draft at the earliest he'll likely come out (late 2015), but the Twins have a young enough core in Dozier, Plouffe, Santana, Arcia and Gibson, throw in veterans like Mauer, Hughes, Perkins and hopefully a free agent signing or two this off season.  Mix in the very real possibility of Reed, Burdi, and maybe Meyer filling out your bullpen at some point in 2015, and the makings are there for contention in 2015. 

 

Playoffs, and a world series run, are obviously asking a lot (and in the case of the WS, way too much IMO), but a foundation of pieces are there.  I think it's pretty safe to say that we have a lot more ability to go out and add free agents than Kansas City has had.  Doing so effectively, is obviously the key though....

This.  Everyone is fixated on Sano and Buxton getting to the bigs which I get.  My point is that their offense was really good this year without these two guys.  By adding a good starter and a decent free agent outfielder they can really turn this around and we don't have to wait until Sano and Buxton are studs.  All of this can be done without blocking anybody or entering into crippling contracts. 

[TheLeviathan]

This.  Everyone is fixated on Sano and Buxton getting to the bigs which I get.  My point is that their offense was really good this year without these two guys.  By adding a good starter and a decent free agent outfielder they can really turn this around and we don't have to wait until Sano and Buxton are studs.  All of this can be done without blocking anybody or entering into crippling contracts. 

 

There are many, many regression candidates on this offense.  I wouldn't be so confident in them replicating last year.

[USAFChief]

The crapshoot argument actually has nothing to do with the Twins:

 

http://fivethirtyeight.com/datalab/youre-right-to-complain-about-the-chaos-of-mlbs-one-game-playoffs/

 

I'm not saying that the Royals don't have a formula that works well in the small samples of MLB playoffs, but the fact is that baseball's playoff system is far more chaotic than any other sports.  A seven game series is not enough to accurately depict who the "best" team is (I belive there's even maths out there that suggest 162 games isn't enough, and that it needs to be in the range of 400-600, but I'm not 100% sure on the numbers).

I'm not sure how a seven game series is inherently more chaotic than the one game series used by the NFL. Or for that matter the 5 and 7 game postseason series used in the other major US pro sports.

 

I get the crapshoot argument, and there's certainly merit to it.

 

But I also think post season baseball isn't played like the regular season. Depth is important in the regular season, much less so in the post season. Your stars aren't getting days off, the bottom of your rotation and bottom of your bench are virtual non factors. The bottom of your bullpen might not even see the field. I think I read the three headed monster out of KC's pen pitched 40 percent of the innings in the ALCS...forty percent. That doesn't happen in the regular season...not even close.

 

So my opinion is...something of a crapshoot? Sure. Completely random? Possibly not. KC doesn't need to mtch up with Baltimore's 25 man roster. They only need to match up with the top of it. That's a huge difference, IMO, compared to a 162 game grind.

[Linus]

There are many, many regression candidates on this offense.  I wouldn't be so confident in them replicating last year.

I understand that.  But for every regression candidate, there is one just as likely to progress.  They were 6th in run scored; all they have to do is hold their own.

[TheLeviathan]

I understand that.  But for every regression candidate, there is one just as likely to progress.  They were 6th in run scored; all they have to do is hold their own.

 

Regression candidates: Santana, Escobar, Plouffe, Vargas, Suzuki

 

Positive Regression:  Mauer and Arcia

 

It really isn't 1:1.  Now we might see some positive regression to the mean from our starting pitchers, but the offense was largely a bunch of seasons that are dubious to count on maintaining.

[Linus]

Regression candidates: Santana, Escobar, Plouffe, Vargas, Suzuki

 

Positive Regression:  Mauer and Arcia

 

It really isn't 1:1.  Now we might see some positive regression to the mean from our starting pitchers, but the offense was largely a bunch of seasons that are dubious to count on maintaining.

Disagree with Plouffe and Vargas.  Plus Mauer and Arcia could be substantially better along with anybody we sign as a free agent for left field.  We'll see but I don't see offense as the hurdle to contention.  I guess that is my main point; and that the other major definciencies can be addressed pretty easily.

[TheLeviathan]

Disagree with Plouffe and Vargas.  Plus Mauer and Arcia could be substantially better along with anybody we sign as a free agent for left field.  We'll see but I don't see offense as the hurdle to contention.  I guess that is my main point; and that the other major definciencies can be addressed pretty easily.

 

Vargas is likely to go through the same adjustment period Arcia went through last year - I'm a really strong advocate for people being realistic about how long it takes prospects to find success in the big leagues.  Trouts are the exception, not the rule.

 

Many of these players may maintain their offensive success, but the odds are heavily stacked against it.

[Secondary User]

I'm not sure how a seven game series is inherently more chaotic than the one game series used by the

NFL. Or for that matter the 5 and 7 game postseason series used in the other major US pro sports.

Because of the amount of observed variance in the game over the years.  Football games more often than not are won by the more talented team, while baseball games have a much lower percentage.  Part of the issue is determining the most talented team, and there are a lot of studies on almost every sport about the subject of the efficacy of each sport's playoff, and I believe that the fivethirtyeight article links some.

 

 

But I also think post season baseball isn't played like the regular season. Depth is important in the regular season, much less so in the post season. Your stars aren't getting days off, the bottom of your rotation and bottom of your bench are virtual non factors. The bottom of your bullpen might not even see the field. I think I read the three headed monster out of KC's pen pitched 40 percent of the innings in the ALCS...forty percent. That doesn't happen in the regular season...not even close.

 

And I believe somewhere in this post someone made a comment similar to what I'm about to make (though it may have also been on another site).  If your sport is using a playoff, then it isn't really determining who the best team is, but rather who performed best in the playoffs.  The fact that strategy changes significantly in the playoffs (starters going on short rest for example) is indicative that a team that is the best through the regular season doesn't have the best set up to win the playoffs is indicative that they are two completely different systems, and thus, the results have to be interpreted.

 

Statistically, if you want to truly determine who the best team is, you have balanced schedules, and you have as many contests as possible (realistically) to let luck and variance balance themselves out.  If you're using a playoff system, It becomes more about entertainment, drama, ratings and profits than it does about a true competition to determine who the best team is.  That is fine, but something that has to be considered.

[lightfoot789]

We are built more like the Orioles than the Royals moving forward.  Gold Glove type centerfielder with some decent dudes around him and Lots of Smash and Bash in the line up.

 

2015 will show more signs and 2016 will be our KC Royal type year.

 

Detroit in 2012 (good every year, but getting old fast.

Cleveland in 2013 (surprise team)

Royals in 2014 (surprise team)

Twins in 2015 (surprise team and every year thereafter - Young Suds under contract )

[TNTwinsFan]

Is it bad that I don't even consider Mauer in my thought process when evaluating even the near future of this team? Mauer seems to be an afterthought, someone who is almost irritating specifically BECAUSE he's on the periphery. Positive regression aside...I just feel like saying, "Damnit! Lead, follow, or get out of the way!"

[ashbury]

There are many, many regression candidates on this offense.  I wouldn't be so confident in them replicating last year.

In addition to the other responses to this, it seemed to me that the offense was more feast-and-famine.  Anecdotally, they could score runs against starters who didn't have it that day, or once the bullpen was reached.  What is needed is not just the mean (runs/game) but the standard deviation, which would be easy to calculate if anyone (me included) took the time; I don't know what the league average for this would be but it wouldn't surprise me if ours was high, due to the total runs being padded in several laughers.  Of course every team has laughers, which is why I wish a number was handy.

 

Our offense scored some runs, better than I expected back in March, but still overall seemed soft to me, and it wouldn't take much to have a dropoff.  It could also solidify in 2015, or even improve, as the youngsters have a chance to improve.  I don't feel confident predicting which way things go.  We're near some kind of turning point but things right now are in a big state of flux.

[DocBauer]

Something to bear in mind as you look at those draft picks - those high first round draft picks of the Royals and those critical international signings took place something between six and nine years ago. If you apply the same timeline to the Twins' situation, you'd be looking at about another five years before the Twins' group of Sano, Polanco, Buxton, Berrios, et al, would be "scheduled" to have the kind of success that the Royals are having this year.

 

Everyone talks as if this next group of Twins prospects are arriving and it means they will be competitive by 2016, but that would assume that all of these new arrivals become productive MLB ballplayers almost immediately upon setting foot on Target Field's grass. But it's far more likely to take a few years more and I'm not sure the fan base, in general, will have that kind of patience at this point.

 

Great and fun article to read! Thanks Seth.

 

(Very busy, sorry if someone stated this previously.)

 

Some very interesting points SD. And I am assuming you posted them simply for perspective and conversation sake.

 

All well and good to propose perspective and comparison for their own sake. It's interesting for sure. But TWICE the Twins went from last to first with a quality core of talent augmented by some smart moves. And since 1985, when last the Royals were in the post season, the Twins have enjoyed 13 winning seasons vs the Royals 8. The Twins have also reached the post season as many times as the Royals have enjoyed a winning season, 8. (6 by Gardy if that matters) And the Twins even managed to win TWO WS since the Royals made the playoffs last.

 

Just saying, every team, situation and timeline are different. So before some bite fingernails past the quick, develop ulcers, pull the rest of their hair out....the comparisons between the teams is interesting...but that doesn't mean it's direct parallel.

[ashbury]

Our offense... still overall seemed soft to me

I rambled.  Let me say it again this way.  I would not like to take the offense we had in 2014 in to the post-season, had we been so lucky.  It would have gotten shut down by the caliber of pitching seen in October, to a greater degree than the offenses we do see competing now.  Game 162, a shutout against Price, sealed that emerging opinion for me.

[mbents]

I don't want to divert the conversation in any way, but I think this is important to discuss: does anyone else think it looks like Hosmer's head is photoshopped in that picture? It's probably just forced perspective since Moustakas is right there and just a bit behind him, but it looks like Hosmer's head is slightly too big for its body.

[Mike Sixel]

Ash, you raise a good question.......that I don't know the answer to. Were the Twins consistently scoring 4-5 runs a game, or was the deviation big?

 

I have looked for those numbers before, but never found them. 

 

I've also wondered that about individual players......what's more valuable, hitting consistently (though not as often) in games, or having the occasional explosive game with bad games?

 

Also, with pitchers, the reason I actually kind of like the quality start stat is that it indicates the number of games the pitcher gave his team a chance to win.....as opposed to ERA which assumes all innings are equal. These are humans, and somedays, they just don't have it.

[bird]

Actually, by WAR, KC has more production from trade acquisitions than Rule 4 draftees

In assessing how KC became WS capable, it's important to note that those players you're referring to were acquired by trading drafted assets such as Greinke and Will Myers. KC  put themselves over the top with a good trade as the final step in their rebuild, and I expect the Twins will attempt to do the same thing at the same point in time.  But I don't think we should lose sight of the fact that, when KC finally settled on their strategy (15 years or so into the "rebuild") and began to execute it, it was through the draft, period. They stopped with the Betancourt/Guillen stopgap stuff, took their lumps, and held on to their young big leaguers (Greinke excepted) AND their prospects UNTIL they got to a point where they finally had some surplus of talent to use in trades. Note the absence of free agency as a key piece of their rebuild. 

 

This spring, Dayton Moore was still being called an idiot and a dinosaur. KC's strategy was still often ridiculed despite the evidence of the 2013 season. 

 

What's interesting to me is the similarities among a number of teams regarding rebuilding. I recall reading an article by Mark Gonzalez of the Chicago Tribune from last March, I think. He convinced me that the strategy of the Royals, Cubs, Twins, and the Cards even, for that matter, were almost identical. The differences were simply due to the stage in the cycle for each team, and execution. And the most important elements in the strategy? Use free agency only as a last resort,  focus resources on the draft and international markets, and trade from surplus to supplement.