Jump to content
Twins Daily
  • Create Account

Fangraphs (and other national publications) on the Twins

Mike Sixel

By Mike Sixel
in Minnesota Twins Talk

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 2.8k
  • Created
  • Last Reply
jkcarew GCL Twins

jkcarew

Verified Member
Posted
Posted

 

KG
10:26 Do you see Addison Reed taking over the closer role from Rodney?


Jeff Sullivan
10:26 It would be the obvious move, but I think Rodney ends up with a long leash

No offense...but I don't 'like' this :).

 

Among 26 relievers that were asked to close (saves) as many as 55 times in the last three years

(using Brandon Kintzler's 55 save opps as the cutoff for reference)...

 

Average Save Pct:  86.7  (Zach Britton 94.2)

Rodney Save Pct:   83.3 (19th of 26)

Brandon Kintzler:    83.6

 

I'm not saying this means we have an impending disaster on our hands.  It just that, given recent performance for a 41 year-old could be reasonably expected to be a ceiling, I'm not understanding what warrant's a long leash, unless it's the perceived absence of alternatives.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Thrylos St Paul Saints

Thrylos

Old-Timey Member
Posted
Posted

 

 

 

Among 26 relievers that were asked to close (saves) as many as 55 times in the last three years

(using Brandon Kintzler's 55 save opps as the cutoff for reference)...

 

Average Save Pct:  86.7  (Zach Britton 94.2)

Rodney Save Pct:   83.3 (19th of 26)

Brandon Kintzler:    83.6

 

lemme see: are you trying to say that a deviation of 0.034 (or 3.4%) is significant when n=55?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
jkcarew GCL Twins

jkcarew

Verified Member
Posted
Posted

 

lemme see: are you trying to say that a deviation of 0.034 (or 3.4%) is significant when n=55?

I don't know.  Are you saying that a closer that has had at least 19 guys perform better than him...and is 41 years old besides, should have a long leash?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Thrylos St Paul Saints

Thrylos

Old-Timey Member
Posted
Posted

 

I don't know.  Are you saying that a closer that has had at least 19 guys perform better than him...and is 41 years old besides, should have a long leash?

 

Nope.  I am not.  I am doubting that S and BS (and W and L) matter as indicators of performance.

 

If Rodney did not induce that double play with the Twins' 5-men infield, Hildenberger and not him would had "lost" the game.

 

FWIW Glen Perkins had a career 81.7% save conversion with the Twins.  Much worse than Rodney had last season and there are plenty of Twins' fans who loved Perkins as a closer.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
old nurse GCL Twins

old nurse

Verified Member
Posted
Posted

 

I don't know.  Are you saying that a closer that has had at least 19 guys perform better than him...and is 41 years old besides, should have a long leash?

Given the very small sample size that you are calling  on for your measurement the difference between number 10 and 20 might not be statistically significant, The ievents that affect the outcome (RP in a save situation)  are more than just the pitcher.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
jkcarew GCL Twins

jkcarew

Verified Member
Posted
Posted

 

Nope.  I am not.  I am doubting that S and BS (and W and L) matter as indicators of performance.

 

If Rodney did not induce that double play with the Twins' 5-men infield, Hildenberger and not him would had "lost" the game.

 

FWIW Glen Perkins had a career 81.7% save conversion with the Twins.  Much worse than Rodney had last season and there are plenty of Twins' fans who loved Perkins as a closer.

You're arguing with someone else.  I never said that Rodney's performance in the opener means he shouldn't close any more games, nor that Hildenberger would be better.  Only that Rodney should not have a long leash...based on who he is, not based on the opener.  Even said that I don't know that he will fail.  To be fair, we probably don't have anyone on the roster (sigh) that would warrant a long leash in that role.

 

Fwiw...Save Pct is a fine way of evaluating relievers if you are looking at pitchers used exclusively as closers and across big enough time-frames (more than one year).  After all, converting the opportunity is all that matters.  The 'type' of save normalizes pretty quickly in the data...especially in an era when almost every save opportunity represents 3 outs.  Believe me, if you look at the top of that list over a 2 or 3-season span, all the guys at the top will be the same guys that are at the top if you use any other method....same for the bottom.  (Britton, Davis, Jansen, Kimbrel, Melancon, Chapman 1-6 last 3 years)

 

Baseball Ref shows Perkins career save pct at 85%.  Meanwhile, Joe Nathan is at 89%.  Again, I think this is fairly reflective of how good they were relative to each other.  (Acknowledging that Nathan also sustained his performance for a significantly longer time.)

Link to comment
Share on other sites
yarnivek1972 Ft Myers Mighty Mussels

yarnivek1972

Verified Member
Posted
Posted

You're arguing with someone else. I never said that Rodney's performance in the opener means he shouldn't close any more games, nor that Hildenberger would be better. Only that Rodney should not have a long leash...based on who he is, not based on the opener. Even said that I don't know that he will fail. To be fair, we probably don't have anyone on the roster (sigh) that would warrant a long leash in that role.

 

Fwiw...Save Pct is a fine way of evaluating relievers if you are looking at pitchers used exclusively as closers and across big enough time-frames (more than one year). After all, converting the opportunity is all that matters. The 'type' of save normalizes pretty quickly in the data...especially in an era when almost every save opportunity represents 3 outs. Believe me, if you look at the top of that list over a 2 or 3-season span, all the guys at the top will be the same guys that are at the top if you use any other method....same for the bottom. (Britton, Davis, Jansen, Kimbrel, Melancon, Chapman 1-6 last 3 years)

 

Baseball Ref shows Perkins career save pct at 85%. Meanwhile, Joe Nathan is at 89%. Again, I think this is fairly reflective of how good they were relative to each other. (Acknowledging that Nathan also sustained his performance for a significantly longer time.)

Perkins was Nathan’s set up man for 2-3 years before being a full time closer. Nathan was only in middle relief for one year with the Giants.

 

It’s relevant because “blown holds” count as blown saves and as such make a guy who was a set up man appear to have a lower career save pct. Rodney was a set up man for many years in Detroit and at some of the other stops in his career.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Brock Beauchamp GOAT

Brock Beauchamp

Administrator
Posted
Posted

 

Perkins was Nathan’s set up man for 2-3 years before being a full time closer. Nathan was only in middle relief for one year with the Giants.

It’s relevant because “blown holds” count as blown saves and as such make a guy who was a set up man appear to have a lower career save pct. Rodney was a set up man for many years in Detroit and at some of the other stops in his career.

Yeah... Both Nathan and Perkins were elite closers (Nathan may have been the best closer of his era).

 

For a full decade (2004-2013), Nathan had an ERA of 2.14, a FIP of 2.55, and 340 (!) saves. Oh, and he gave up all of 43 homers in roughly 600 innings pitched. Given his approximate rate of one inning per appearance, that's roughly one home run every 12-13 appearances.

 

Tacking on later years only undermines how elite he was for a full decade.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mike Sixel Cooperstown

Mike Sixel

Old-Timey Member
Posted
  • Author
Posted

TJ McShannigans
12:21 Berrios -are we looking at the beginning of a special season. He was so effective -no one could square up on him, that curve balls spins

Travis Sawchik
12:22 I don't think he's winning a Cy Young Award this year, but I love the pitcher. He could be a top-15 AL starter. Three plus pitches and command
He's one reason -- and 57 games against Tiger/Royals/W.Sox -- that I have the Twins as the No. 2 wild card

 

https://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/travis-sawchik-fangraphs-chat-55/

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
jkcarew GCL Twins

jkcarew

Verified Member
Posted
Posted

 

Thanks much for sharing.  Encouraging.  Was "we think he's found something with his curve" part of the story when the Twins acquired him?  I can't remember.  I'd be interested to know if this is driven by him having a bread-through with the pitch...or if it's the same old curve, but we're seeing a change of philosophy (Twins-influenced) with his pitch selection.  Seems like it would have a more lasting/sustainable effect if it's an improved/'different' pitch...not that pitch selection doesn't matter.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
yarnivek1972 Ft Myers Mighty Mussels

yarnivek1972

Verified Member
Posted
Posted

Yeah... Both Nathan and Perkins were elite closers (Nathan may have been the best closer of his era).

 

For a full decade (2004-2013), Nathan had an ERA of 2.14, a FIP of 2.55, and 340 (!) saves. Oh, and he gave up all of 43 homers in roughly 600 innings pitched. Given his approximate rate of one inning per appearance, that's roughly one home run every 12-13 appearances.

 

Tacking on later years only undermines how elite he was for a full decade.

Mariano Rivera says “hi”.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
gunnarthor All-Star

gunnarthor

Old-Timey Member
Posted
Posted

 

Thanks much for sharing.  Encouraging.  Was "we think he's found something with his curve" part of the story when the Twins acquired him?  I can't remember.  I'd be interested to know if this is driven by him having a bread-through with the pitch...or if it's the same old curve, but we're seeing a change of philosophy (Twins-influenced) with his pitch selection.  Seems like it would have a more lasting/sustainable effect if it's an improved/'different' pitch...not that pitch selection doesn't matter.

Yeah, I don't remember any stories about him changing his approach or going to his curve more, either. Perhaps it was just one of those days when Castrol saw it was working and went with it. But it's certainly a good sign and worth keeping an eye on in his next starts, as well.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
70charger Ft Myers Mighty Mussels

70charger

Verified Member
Posted
Posted

It's in Spanish, but the Mexican edition of ESPN just posted an article about baseball's unwritten rules, featuring our own Brian Dozier. I figured that might be a hot topic round these parts.

 

http://www.espn.com.mx/beisbol/nota/_/id/4158320/la-queja-de-brian-dozier-sobre-un-toque-es-para-ganar-ventaja

 

Some choice quotes (all ****ty translations are my own):

 

 

So, let's talk about the star of the Minnesota Twins, Brian Dozier, who brought the "Book of Stupid Unwritten Rules" to a new level last weekend. Dozier was, in his words, 'getting hammered [by critics]', for his complaint against the Baltimore Orioles...

...

But that's the wrong way to look at these unwritten rules. The unwritten rules are a fiction that players use against their opponents to deceive them into acting against their own interest. Of course these rules are stupid, but more than that, they're brilliant, on multiple levels, and they even seem to work. And since I realized this, I feel less annoyed. ...

Dozier's goal is not, in my opinion, to get [the rookie] Chance Sisco to respect the game. It's so that Sisco - and the Twins' other opponents - don't give maximum effort while playing against the Twins. It's so that they don't give maximum effort when they're already down by seven runs. It's so that they don't force Dozier and his teammates to run harder than they have to. It's to make them afraid of offending, embarrassing, or cheating the Twins. (Or, on the other hand, it may be to make them afraid of offending, embarrassing, or cheating veterans - like Dozier - who use their influence and age to push young players toward certain types of behavior that isn't threatening to them.) It's to weaken their rivals, or at least to get their rivals to weaken themselves, which may be more complicated, but is consistent with any other strategy in baseball.

...

Here's why this is so amazing: shouting "unwritten rules!" in bad faith is exactly the type of annoying, but effective, behavior that the unwritten rules pretend to prohibit. It's taking advantage of the vague limits of the rulebook to gain a small advantage, and it's pursuing victory at the cost of honor and decorum. Dozier claimed to be annoyed with Sisco, but Sisco was only trying to win. Meanwhile, everyone is annoyed with Dozier right now, but he doesn't care because he's only trying to win. ... Everyone else was playing baseball; Dozier was playing baseball players.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
70charger Ft Myers Mighty Mussels

70charger

Verified Member
Posted
Posted

 

That same article was on the ESPN main page a day or two ago in English and I posted many of the same quotes and provided the link

Your translations were pretty good

 

I looked through the thread and didn't see it. Was it in another thread?

 

Anyway, good to know my translations weren't off the wall, at least.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
jimmer Wichita Wind Surge

jimmer

Verified Member
Posted
Posted

I looked through the thread and didn't see it. Was it in another thread?

 

Anyway, good to know my translations weren't off the wall, at least.

I'm using my phone so I'd have to look later to where exactly I posted it. Probably in the thread that directly discussed Doziers comments and the reactions of them.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
Go to topic listing
The Twins Daily Caretaker Fund
The Twins Daily Caretaker Fund

You all care about this site. The next step is caring for it. We’re asking you to caretake this site so it can remain the premier Twins community on the internet.

Become a Caretaker
×
×
  • Create New...