Article: Making Sense Of The Final Roster Decisions

[Mike Sixel]

 

I get the thinking but I just can't see how Sano at third and Player X in right is going to be appreciably different, much less better, than Plouffe at third and Sano in right.

 

Plouffe is a pretty valuable player. He had a 3.9 WAR in 2014 and a 2.5 WAR in 2015. While that's not spectacular, it's not easy to replace, either. Those aren't plug and play numbers where you just plop a guy in and achieve net zero gains/losses.

 

I don't like Sano in right and I was hoping Plouffe would be traded but once the market bombed out on third basemen, this move seemed the most logical.

 

Giving away a player who averaged 3-something WAR over the past two seasons just for the hell of it seems like terrible asset management to me. I would have been really irritated had the Twins given away Plouffe for a C level relief prospect in A ball.

 

In a perfect world, the Twins get value from Plouffe and Sano takes the hot corner. It didn't happen. I think it's time to move on and accept they made the best out of an awkward situation (one they helped put themselves into but an awkward situation none-the-less).

 

I wasn't arguing that either way........was merely pointing out why some people wanted Plouffe moved. I like Plouffe, but I understand both sides of the argument. 

[Brock Beauchamp]

 

I'm talking over the entire season, not merely April.  I think Plouffe's bat is redundant in this lineup, low obp, some HR power, right handed.  I think Kepler would be more than capable of being a top 2-3 obp guy this season.  

I think Kepler might be able to do that as well... But that's not a risk I'm going to take until I see him take some hacks at AAA pitching to see if his dominant 2015 carries over to a new league with craftier, experienced pitchers.

 

If Kepler had more than one season where he showed the kind of contact, patience, and power he put on display in 2015, it'd be a different situation... But as of right now, he's a one-year breakout player. He needs to show more before he gets a starting position in Minnesota.

[Brock Beauchamp]

 

I wasn't arguing that either way........was merely pointing out why some people wanted Plouffe moved. I like Plouffe, but I understand both sides of the argument. 

I understand both sides as well, I just think people are getting a little too prospect-happy at the expense of an experienced vet who produces at an acceptable level.

 

I hope the Twins can trade Plouffe and everyone shifts around the diamond to their natural positions... But I'm not going to give away Plouffe just to make that happen. Trevor is worth MLB wins and I'm not giving away MLB wins just because the defensive alignment isn't optimal in the short-term.

 

On top of all of this Plouffe/Sano/Kepler argument, all it takes is one injury to Mauer, Park, Plouffe, or Sano and this goes away.

 

Depth is good. One of those guys will get injured and/or struggle this season. Instead of scrambling and having the privilege of watching a Beresford-type player spot-start, we'll get to see Kepler.

[alarp33]

 

I think Kepler might be able to do that as well... But that's not a risk I'm going to take until I see him take some hacks at AAA pitching to see if his dominant 2015 carries over to a new league with craftier, experienced pitchers.

 

If Kepler had more than one season where he showed the kind of contact, patience, and power he put on display in 2015, it'd be a different situation... But as of right now, he's a one-year breakout player. He needs to show more before he gets a starting position in Minnesota.

 

Certainly a fair opinion, I don't think either of us are clearly right or wrong.  I'm not upset Kepler isn't on the Opening Day roster or anything, I get it.  

 

I just think the lineup is awfully right handed, and worry about who is going to get on base.  I also don't value Plouffe to the point where he's someone I have to keep unless they get top value in return. 

[Brock Beauchamp]

 

Certainly a fair opinion, I don't think either of us are clearly right or wrong.  I'm not upset Kepler isn't on the Opening Day roster or anything, I get it.  

 

I just think the lineup is awfully right handed, and worry about who is going to get on base.  I also don't value Plouffe to the point where he's someone I have to keep unless they get top value in return. 

I agree the lineup is too right-handed but as I mentioned in the previous post, all it takes is one injury and/or struggles from:

 

Mauer

Park

Sano

Plouffe

 

And Kepler is in the lineup every day. I think that's the correct course of action and it gives the team depth through a 162 game schedule. If you start with Kepler and a guy gets injured or struggles, you fall back to... Junk, probably. A Mastroianni-type player.

 

One of those guys will get injured or struggle at some point in the season. Max will get his shot.

 

And this isn't even mentioning what happens if Rosario falls on his face, which I think has a high probability of happening.

[alarp33]

 

I agree the lineup is too right-handed but as I mentioned in the previous post, all it takes is one injury and/or struggles from:

 

Mauer

Park

Sano

Plouffe

 

And Kepler is in the lineup every day. I think that's the correct course of action and it gives the team depth through a 162 game schedule. If you start with Kepler and a guy gets injured or struggles, you fall back to... Junk, probably. A Mastroianni-type player.

 

One of those guys will get injured or struggle at some point in the season. Max will get his shot.

 

And this isn't even mentioning what happens if Rosario falls on his face, which I think has a high probability of happening.

 

Agree, I think Kepler will get 400+ plate appearances this year, I think many may come at the expense of a guy you didn't have on your list; Rosario.  

 

I was more responding to the post about having to get something for Plouffe.  I think theoretically they could be a better lineup without him (because of the whole Sano rf issue)

[Brock Beauchamp]

 

Agree, I think Kepler will get 400+ plate appearances this year, I think many may come at the expense of a guy you didn't have on your list; Rosario.  

 

I was more responding to the post about having to get something for Plouffe.  I think theoretically they could be a better lineup without him (because of the whole Sano rf issue)

Hehehe, I edited my post to include Rosario. Must have got it in right before you hit Reply.

[Otto von Ballpark]

 

The other thing to remember is that the Opening Day roster is the Twins roster for a fairly small sample size of the season. Consider last year, their Opening Day roster didn't even last until Opening Day. The Twins depth is what will sustain them over the course of the season, hopefully. 

Well, of our 2015 opening day 25 man roster roster, only two players from it were actually out of the organization before season's end (Stauffer and Schafer), and both involved epically bad performances and injuries (and both were relative newcomers to the organization too, probably shortening their leash).

Not counting Ervin Santana's "replacement" Aaron Thompson, only 5 guys from the 2015 opening roster even got optioned out during the season, and 3 of those guys are back with no options left, and 1 more was just the backup catcher.

 

And if not for Santana's suspension, our 25 man roster at the beginning of the season would have been responsible for starting all but 10, or 94%, of our games.

 

Depth is nice and can be useful, of course, but let's not overstate its importance compared to the talent of, and (perhaps more importantly) the club's expectations for, the initial "top 25."

Edited March 31, 2016 by spycake

[Seth Stohs]

 

Well, of our 2015 opening day 25 man roster roster, only two players from it were actually out of the organization before season's end (Stauffer and Schafer), and both involved epically bad performances and injuries (and both were relative newcomers to the organization too, probably shortening their leash).

 

I guess I don't as a bad thing. I'm OK with that. I would expect a similar number this year, Probably 2-4 again this year. 

 

Nolasco and Tonkin are possibilities, via trade or release.

Milone potentially via trade. 

Arcia potentially via trade. 

 

If the is a trade, it'd likely  be for a key contributor at this point which would take prospects rather than necessarily Opening Day guys.

 

 

And if not for Santana's suspension, our 25 man roster at the beginning of the season would have been responsible for starting all but 10, or 94%, of our games.

 

Generally speaking, this is a good thing. Obviously with Berrios and Duffey at AAA, and they both will pitch significant innings for the Twins this year, there will be moves. There's no question about that. (unless something unforeseen happens with them)

[DaveW]

I think Rosario ends up being an enticing trade piece when it's all said and done.

 

He can play an above average CF and will hit quite well for that position as well.

 

If Kepler emerges then suddenly Rosario becomes pretty expendable IMO even more so if Arcia gets back on track.

 

Rosario could bring back a nice high upside Sp potentially as well (or a good catcher)

[Otto von Ballpark]

 

Generally speaking, this is a good thing. Obviously with Berrios and Duffey at AAA, and they both will pitch significant innings for the Twins this year, there will be moves.

I'm not quite sure that is so obvious.  Guess we'll see.

[h2oface]

 

I don't understand the willingness to let Tonkin go.  He averages 94mph, has a 3.35 career MLB ERA, a 2.65 AAA ERA, gets a lot of GB's and hasn't actually given up a lot of hits.  

 

To me, the most important stat that is compiled about a reliever is inherited runners scored. It always amazes me that even though it is in every box score, it is hard to find it in a lot of the sites' individual stats. Tonkin's good at letting inherited runners score. That fast ball is so straight, it doesn't matter what speed it is thrown at. We will see. He gets another chance.

[Brock Beauchamp]

 

To me, the most important stat that is compiled about a reliever is inherited runners scored. It always amazes me that even though it is in every box score, it is hard to find it in a lot of the sites' individual stats. Tonkin's good at letting inherited runners score. That fast ball is so straight, it doesn't matter what speed it is thrown at. We will see. He gets another chance.

Eh, inherited runners isn't a great stat, either... A runner on third base with no outs is treated the same as a runner on first with two outs. The guy on third with no outs is almost a given to score... The runner on first with two outs should rarely, if ever, score.

 

For relievers, FIP/xFIP and other advanced metrics are a much better indicator of skill because, while they're still flawed, they try to remove things the pitcher cannot control.

[Mike Sixel]

I just hope that if the guys in MN are struggling, and the guys in AAA are dominating, that they make moves quicker, rather than slower.

[TheLeviathan]

Where's that Nolasco riot thread when ya need it?

[Richie the Rally Goat]

I would personally rather get rid of Fien then Tonkin.

im really disappointed there aren't better options for both of them.

[FormerMinnasotan]

Other numbers aside, Nolasco did win five games in eight starts last season. So, if the bats produce, he can win.

 

The chances of someone grabbing Tonkin were slim to none, because of the spring performance. But, yes, the Twins would've lost Arcia and.or Santana.

 

 

Ad barring injury, both Pat Dean and Tyler Duffey are the first on the list of rotation callups, unless the Twins switch May back into the rotation and bring up Strong, O'Rourke or Rogers.

 

Being on the 40-man ahs advantages. Not being on the 40-man (Berrios) means it cane be a long minor league summer. The Twins don't really have a lot of wiggle room in adding players to their 40-man this season.

I don't understand why the Twins didn't simply make room for Berrios in the 40 man roster. I can see why Duffey is ahead of him, but Berrios right now is a better starting pitcher than Pat Dean. Plus if it is so hard to put Berrios on the roster early as a non 40 man roster player, why does the Twins FO blow smoke and proclaim "if Berrios does well in the minors he will get his chances with the big league club"? We all know based on last year's performance Berrios and Duffey will dominate AAA, and while Duffey will easily move up when it's time it seems the Twins will screw with Berrios even if he completely dominated AAA.

[alarp33]

I don't understand why the Twins didn't simply make room for Berrios in the 40 man roster. I can see why Duffey is ahead of him, but Berrios right now is a better starting pitcher than Pat Dean. Plus if it is so hard to put Berrios on the roster early as a non 40 man roster player, why does the Twins FO blow smoke and proclaim "if Berrios does well in the minors he will get his chances with the big league club"? We all know based on last year's performance Berrios and Duffey will dominate AAA, and while Duffey will easily move up when it's time it seems the Twins will screw with Berrios even if he completely dominated AAA.

There is no need to put him on the 40 man until he is going to be on the 25. Not being on the 40 man will in no way effect when he makes the 25. The only thing keeping him off both right now is the health of veterans with big contracts. He'll be up soon

[FormerMinnasotan]

There is no need to put him on the 40 man until he is going to be on the 25. Not being on the 40 man will in no way effect when he makes the 25. The only thing keeping him off both right now is the health of veterans with big contracts. He'll be up soon

Thanks for correcting me. I guess I didn't know the entire process. And I'll admit I am antsy to see Berrios pitch as scouts on a national level seem to love Berrios as much as our local media does.

[tobi0040]

I think Sano has 7-8 WAR potential at 3b, assuming he is not a complete hack defensively (although I have to think he has to be better with the glove at 3b than RF).

 

Plouffe puts up a 720 to 740 OPS but by shifting Sano to LF, Plouffe's offense should be judged against a corner OF. He comes sort of expendable in that scenario and as the market dictated this winter, 3b were not in demand. I think instead of stubborn approach about value, you make moves to maximize wins. The move should have been Plouffe for a good reliever. I mean look at how little we gave up for Jepsen. Then you keep May in the rotation.

 

I think we would be better at 3b, the rotations and pen.

[DocBauer]

Right. Personally I think its a better team with Sano at 3B and Kepler in RF.  I hope Plouffe surprises me since he obviously is not going anywhere.

 

Eventually, yes. Whether that means this year or next is hard to say.

 

Now, if Mauer happen so to struggle again this season, the complexion could definitely change.

[h2oface]

 

Eh, inherited runners isn't a great stat, either... A runner on third base with no outs is treated the same as a runner on first with two outs. The guy on third with no outs is almost a given to score... The runner on first with two outs should rarely, if ever, score.

 

For relievers, FIP/xFIP and other advanced metrics are a much better indicator of skill because, while they're still flawed, they try to remove things the pitcher cannot control.

 

Inherited runners scored means a lot to me! It is not relief if the pitcher comes in and lets the runners on base score. If he needs a strikeout and a double play to get out of a bases loaded with no outs jam, that is relief. If the pitcher comes in and there is two outs and the bases loaded, and he gives up a bases clearing double and then gets a strikeout, his line looks pretty good while he lays three runs on the teammate he was supposed to offer relief to. I get FIP/xFIP, but inherited runners scored tells me a lot more about a pitchers moxy and guts and whether he can do his job as a relief pitcher, and that job is to shut the other team down, no matter what it takes. That is why they call it relief.

Edited April 1, 2016 by h2oface

[Platoon]

 

 

I don't want to pee on anyone's parade here, but I posted on another link a quote in SI from a rival scout and as I remember it went something like this:
 
"If Nolasco is in the Twins rotation, then their rotation stinks"

 
That's pretty brutal.
 
It's also interesting that I see people wanting Plouffe traded and Sano moved to 3rd.  I get that, but the market for 3rd basemen wasn't high to begin with this offseason and Plouffe is not viewed outside of the Twins organization the way he is viewed by the Twins." >>>>>>>> It also says something about your lineup if Plouffe is your cleanup hitter. "Trevor Plouffe hitting cleanup on a playoff baseball team" is not a statement I ever imagined, nor still do!

[Brock Beauchamp]

 

Inherited runners scored means a lot to me! It is not relief if the pitcher comes in and lets the runners on base score. If he needs a strikeout and a double play to get out of a bases loaded with no outs jam, that is relief. If the pitcher comes in and there is two outs and the bases loaded, and he gives up a bases clearing double and then gets a strikeout, his line looks pretty good while he lays three runs on the teammate he was supposed to offer relief to. I get FIP/xFIP, but inherited runners scored tells me a lot more about a pitchers moxy and guts and whether he can do his job as a relief pitcher, and that job is to shut the other team down, no matter what it takes. That is why they call it relief.

Sure, if a reliever consistently has a low run scored percentage, he's probably a good reliever... But there are a half dozen stats that better tell us he's a good reliever long before inherited runners gets enough data points to become relevant.

 

Again, the problem with inherited runners are many fold:

1. Reliever use: it's not in the pitcher's control. Some relievers just don't come in very often with runners on base (eg. your average closer).

 

2. Game situation: is the game 4-3 or 9-2? Does it matter whether the reliever allows one run to score in a bases loaded situation or is it kind of irrelevant?

 

3. Runner situation: if a manager leans on a reliever abnormally often in "really bad" situations (ie. bases loaded, no outs) versus another manager leaning on a reliever infrequently (ie. runner on first, two outs), that's going to wildly skew the results, especially in the relatively small sample size a reliever sees over the course of one season (anywhere between 50-70 innings).

 

Inherited runners are a lot like pitcher wins. If a pitcher is really bad or really good at preventing/allowing runs, that's an indication of pitcher quality... But everything in between is noise.

 

Any stat that treats the following two situations the same:

 

1. No outs, Escobar on third, Buxton on second, Dozier at the plate and the Twins are up by seven runs

 

and

 

2. Two outs, Sano on second, Plouffe on first, Arcia at the plate against a left-handed pitcher and the Twins are down by one run

 

Is so broken as to be almost entirely useless.

[Otto von Ballpark]

Raw inherited runner numbers are pretty suspect.  But you can adjust each opportunity based on a run expectancy matrix.  I think Baseball Prospectus used to publish this, and Fangraphs has RE24 which is sort of similar, but they might be more trouble than they are worth -- there generally exist much better indicators of reliever effectiveness.

 

In Tonkin's case, he allowed 8 of 22 inherited runners to score last year, basically 1 more than team or league average.  For his career, he's exactly at league average - 30% - the same as Kevin Jepsen's career mark.  Maybe a dissection like I described above would add some separation, but it's still not going to mean a whole lot.  I'm more interested in Tonkin's 5.02 FIP last season, especially considering he was working in low-leverage situations.

[jorgenswest]

I don't think there are any numbers from 23 innings of use that anyone should be interested in.

 

FIP is based in home run, strike out, walk and hit by pitch rates. Home run rates need a tremendous sample to stabilize. The number is nonsense at 23 innings or even a full season of innings from a reliever.

 

Tonkin's three years of time in the majors is enough sample to consider stake out rate (19.3%), walk rate(7.7%) and ground ball rate (48.8%). His xFIP(3.96) which is based on strike outs, walks and fly balls could be interesting in his three year sample.

[Otto von Ballpark]

 

I don't think there are any numbers from 23 innings of use that anyone should be interested in.

I didn't mean those are the only numbers we should be interested in, or that it should trump qualitative evaluation.  Only that it was more informative than his inherited runner numbers from the same sample, which was the context of my post.

[h2oface]

I respect the advanced stat trend and trying to make an argument about them, and I do not discount them. And I applaud the arguments. I still like inherited runners scored, and think it is very telling about the pitcher, and it tells me a lot. So do other things that have been brought up to convince one to disregard it. This originally started with me saying that I like it (and I still do and will) and the curiosity that it is hard to find it, if at all, on many sources pitchers' stats. As far as small samples, one can only take what they can get - ever. I see that according to spycake, Tonkin was at 36% last year, and 6% over the team and league average. Since I am never really happy with a league average player anyway (sure, it could be worse, but still not "happy"), that only solidifies my lack of love (in fact I cringe) for seeing Tonkin come into the game, and watching that "Crain in his worst year" straight fastball get crushed and empty the bases, and lose the game, and give a loss to the pitcher he was supposed to provide relief for, and that probably could have done better than Tonkin if he had been given the chance.

 

I wish inherited runners scored was easier to find, and found a home in all pitchers' stat lines from all sources. I don't ever see a stat as "broken". It is only ever a record of what happened.

Edited April 1, 2016 by h2oface

[Brock Beauchamp]

 

I respect the advanced stat trend and trying to make an argument about them, and I do not discount them. And I applaud the arguments. I still like inherited runners scored, and think it is very telling about the pitcher, and it tells me a lot. So do other things that have been brought up to convince one to disregard it. This originally started with me saying that I like it (and I still do and will) and the curiosity that it is hard to find it, if at all, on many sources pitchers' stats. As far as small samples, one can only take what they can get - ever. I see that according to spycake, Tonkin was at 36% last year, and 6% over the team and league average. Since I am never really happy with a league average player anyway (sure, it could be worse, but still not "happy"), that only solidifies my lack of love (in fact I cringe) for seeing Tonkin come into the game, and watching that "Crain in his worst year" straight fastball get crushed and empty the bases, and lose the game, and give a loss to the pitcher he was supposed to provide relief for, and that probably could have done better than Tonkin if he had been given the chance.

 

I wish inherited runners scored was easier to find, and found a home in all pitchers' stat lines from all sources. I don't ever see a stat as "broken". It is only ever a record of what happened.

Well, you're kinda proving my point for me. The human memory is selective and often irrational.

 

In the case of Jesse Crain and his "straight fastball" that led to losses, he was 33-21 with Minnesota (I loathe using wins but you brought it up) and had an ERA+ of 128 during his time here.

 

He wasn't a flashy pitcher (until his last couple of seasons with the Twins, anyway) but he got the job done year in and year out. His peripherals were pretty good. He didn't give up an inordinate number of hits, his HR/9 ratio was very good, he struck out a middling number of batters, and he didn't walk an inordinate number of batters.

 

Stats like inherited runners contribute to more bias confirmation... It doesn't really tell you what happened. If a guy is routinely thrown out into a bad situation in the middle of an inning, his inherited runners percentage is going to reflect that... and it's not an indictment of the pitcher because almost any pitcher will give up runs in certain situations unless he's dealt a very lucky hand (eg. runner on third base, no outs with the heart of the lineup heading to the plate).

 

Feel free to continue using the stat but you should also realize it doesn't really tell you anything unless the numbers are at either edge of the bell curve.

[h2oface]

"Crain in his worst year" means his career to you? (I believe I never brought up the reliever's won-lost record, either, but referred to the pitcher that was pulled that took a loss. I did enjoy the aside summary take on Crain's Twins' career, though.) I agree, the human memory is selective and often irrational. Thanks for your permission.

Edited April 1, 2016 by h2oface