Article: Recency Bias

[Nick Nelson]

There has been some hand-wringing, here and elsewhere, about an offseason that's leaving many feeling unfulfilled. We're less than two weeks from pitchers and catchers reporting to Ft. Myers, and the roster has barely been touched.

 

It's easy to feel like we're headed toward another 100-loss slog. It's easy because we are cognitively wired to do so. But don't give in to recency bias. There is more here than meets the eye.No one can deny that 2016 was a disastrous season for the Minnesota Twins. Never before in this franchise's history have things gone so awry. But thankfully, last year is in the past. When the team congregates in Florida they will be doing so with a fresh outlook. Much can change in three months, especially when you're dealing with numerous maturing young players and a completely overhauled baseball operations unit.

 

Last week, Tom Froemming outlined a realistic, though pessimistic, scenario in which the Twins once against lose 100 games. It could happen. But let's keep in mind that last year's team accomplished an historical feat of ineptitude. Making it happen took multiple major injuries to key players, immense struggles from youngsters, inexplicable personnel decisions and plain old bad luck (Pythagorean W/L tells us they should have won seven more games).

 

What has been does not dictate what will be. Especially when you view the state of this Twins roster in context.

 

They've clearly got the makings of an above-average offense. The lineup shined in the latter portion of 2016. As things stand, the only changes are Jason Castro replacing Kurt Suzuki and a designated hitter – probably Byung Ho Park or Kennys Vargas – replacing Trevor Plouffe. I think we can call those swaps a wash, at worst.

 

Then there's the pitching staff. It was cover-your-eyes ugly last year, but this is where the recency bias sets in. For basically every starter except Ervin Santana, 2016 was a complete catastrophe. Kyle Gibson endured his worst season. Ditto Hector Santiago. Phil Hughes had his shoulder crap out. Things couldn't have gone much worse for Tyler Duffey and Jose Berrios. It was, essentially, a series of worst-case scenarios. And the thing about those kinds of lows is that there's nowhere to go but up.

 

I'm not saying these guys are all going to turn around and be world-beaters, but several of them will improve. And with new decision-makers place, we can hope to see players put in better positions to succeed. With most of the organization's top pitching prospects approaching Triple-A, if not already there, contingencies will be on hand to prevent someone like Duffey or Hughes from being sent out start after start with no ability to get outs.

 

After the 2015 season, the Twins themselves fell victim to recency bias. There were underlying signs that their 83-win total was inflated, but still they operated as if they intended to springboard into contention from it. It's hard to blame them, when you consider what a breath of fresh air the competitive baseball was for everyone.

 

But even amid the horrendous results of 2016, the organization did manage to check several important boxes in their rebuilding process. Byron Buxton and Miguel Sano got more experience, stayed mostly healthy, and probably learned some hard lessons. Max Kepler successfully transitioned to the big leagues. Jose Berrios transitioned not-so-successfully but he got those all-important first licks out of the way. Several prospects took steps forward and another key one entered the mix when Eduardo Nunez was traded for Adalberto Mejia at the deadline.

 

And most importantly the Twins picked up the No. 1 pick in the draft, which will give them their choice of any amateur player in the nation this June.

 

If complacency was an issue heading into 2016, it sure won't be this time around. And if poor planning, ill-advised decision-making, or clouded judgment were exacerbating factors, it is fair to be cautiously optimistic that a revamped front office structure will avoid making the same mistakes.

 

Realistically, Minnesota probably will not compete for a playoff spot. Many teams won't. But the Twins will take a step forward. The question is how big it will be.

 

Quiet offseason and all (and I don't think they're quite done), I'm excited to find out.

 

Click here to view the article

[DaveW]

Counterpoint: Complacency certainly seems like an issue "this time around"
The Twins haven't improved the 2017, or more importantly the 2018,2019 or 2020 team in any meaningful way whatsoever this off-season.

This would be one thing if they were already a realistic 80+ win team, but this is a whole nother thing when you are talking about the worst team by far in the MLB last year, to do absolutely nothing besides a couple minor league FA signed and a 0.5-1.0 WAR upgrade at Catcher is dumbfounding.

Yeah, losing only 90-95 games this year would be an improvement, but is it worth wasting another year of Dozier and other assets that you could have traded at some point earlier?

[bluechipper]

Basically only 2 players met or exceeded expectations last year. I don't expect that to happen this year, and I'm looking forward to the young position players taking the next step.

[twins_89]

The free agent and trade moves by the Twins this off-season have made at best a minimal improvement to a 103 loss team. Even if the development of the young players goes well and the starting pitchers are less awful than last year I'm not all that confident that it will result in enough wins to get the Twins out of last place in MLB. If the records of other poor teams are similar to last year it would take an improvement of 10 wins to be able to say the Twins aren't the worst team in baseball (9 additional wins last season would have tied the Twins for the worst record). 

[Nick Nelson]

The bottom line is that any moves this offseason we're going to make a marginal impact, in isolation. Meaningful improvement needs to be driven by the likes of Buxton, Sano, Berrios, etc. If that doesn't happen, they've got bigger problems.

[DaveW]

 

The bottom line is that any moves this offseason we're going to make a marginal impact, in isolation. Meaningful improvement needs to be driven by the likes of Buxton, Sano, Berrios, etc. If that doesn't happen, they've got bigger problems.

True, but they could at least have improved themselves for the future by trading Dozier for a package of Alvarez+JDL+AAAA type instead of insisting on Alvarez+JDL+Calhoun (or very close to Calhoun) type.

Again my issue is they haven't improved the current team, and much more importantly the future team this off-season. 

I get the stance of "let's see what happens the rest of the season" but any sort of "positive" spin on this off-season is a joke! At best it's been an "incomplete" grade more realistically it's a D or F thus far.

[Taildragger8791]

 

Basically only 2 players met or exceeded expectations last year. I don't expect that to happen this year, and I'm looking forward to the young position players taking the next step.

 

Or it means expectations were too high on some players and they should be adjusted down going forward.

 

Personally, I think 7 players met or exceeded expectations: Dozier, Ervin Santana, Eduardo Nunez, Suzuki, Polanco, Kepler, and Rosario. Sano was a little disappointing but he wasn't that far off the mark offensively, and he was set up to fail defensively by mismanagement. You could probably even throw Kintzler and Pressley in that list.

 

Yes, some of those players had lower expectations, but that's the roster we had and are bringing back (sans Nunez, and I consider Suzuki/Castro almost a wash). Suzuki and Rosario didn't underperform, they mostly played like they should have been expected to (and played a lot).

 

Naturally, I'd anticipate most of the really young players to continue to grow and do better this year. But I also think it's fair to set low expectations on everyone 25 or older except Chargois, Dozier and E. Santana (and even he worries me with his every-other-year pattern). Unfortunately, most of those players are on the mound or occupying key spots in the lineup (1B/DH). So a bottom-3 finish shouldn't be a surprise without changes or drastic improvement from multiple unexpected players.

[Platoon]

I really have no problem blaming the FO for treating 2015 as a springboard! None at all. Anyone who watched 2015 could see that sequencing (dumb a*^ luck) was responsible for that out of the box year. But those guys are gone, sort of. As for this year, I think the offense will be a little bit better, but that was not the problem last year was it? We still will trot out a long list of mediocre SP. which will be most likely mediocre. Backed up by what could be a very decent OF, a very bad left side of the IF, and a slightly above average (if Mauer is at 1B) right side of the IF. As for what could have happened in the off season, I ask this question. Would this team be better as it is now constructed? Or would it be better with the acquisition of a fairly top SP prospect, Polanco at second, and a very defensive oriented SS?

[Boom Boom]

I think it's fair to expect improvement from the younger players.

 

I think it's also fair to expect significant regression from Dozier and E. Santana.

[KirbyDome89]

"They'll be better because they have to be...." So tired of this defense for what was a poor offseason. Apparently at this point only losing 90-95 games is a step forward. A team that loses 103 games has more problems than just bad luck but if we wish hard enough and sign a couple guys to minor league deals it'll all just go away I guess....

[Mr. Brooks]

The bottom line is that any moves this offseason we're going to make a marginal impact, in isolation. Meaningful improvement needs to be driven by the likes of Buxton, Sano, Berrios, etc. If that doesn't happen, they've got bigger problems.

If everything but the progression of the guys already on the team (aka do nothing and hope we get better) is marginal, then why even fire Terry Ryan?

[mazeville]

This is a 103-loss team until it isn't. The new regime did little to change the roster beyond jettisoning Plouffe and signing Castro. Nothing to build for the future. No other major free agent signings. Nothing to bolster the league's worst pitching staff. 

 

I get that they can improve. I wouldn't be surprised if this team won 80 games this year based on all of the things you said. But keep in mind that this is a team that had an all-world second baseman and a surprisingly strong season from Ervin Santana and still lost 100 games. It'll take an awful lot to win those 80 games given the roster.

 

[diehardtwinsfan]

The problem as I see it was that there was little to do on the position player side. Catcher was the only place where there was a clear need where FA had a clear upgrade. Everywhere else is manned by people that need repetition. Like it or not, that's what it is. On the SP side, where the need was clearest, there were no clear upgrades in FA.  Again, that's what it is... these guys have to take some steps forward. I don't like the odds, but Nick is right that a ton of things went wrong last year.  You cannot discount that.

[DaveW]

The problem as I see it was that there was little to do on the position player side. Catcher was the only place where there was a clear need where FA had a clear upgrade. Everywhere else is manned by people that need repetition. Like it or not, that's what it is. On the SP side, where the need was clearest, there were no clear upgrades in FA. Again, that's what it is... these guys have to take some steps forward. I don't like the odds, but Nick is right that a ton of things went wrong last year. You cannot discount that.

Could have improved OF pretty easily as well.

 

Twins are by far the worst team in baseball over the last 5-6 years, sorry if I'm not really up for the "well shucks a lot of things went wrong last year" excuses.

 

Fool me once

Fool me 26 times etc

Edited February 1, 2017 by DaveW

[Taildragger8791]

 

I don't like the odds, but Nick is right that a ton of things went wrong last year.  You cannot discount that.

 

I keep hearing this statement but I don't really buy it. It's not like we had a disproportionate amount of injuries. Other than Plouffe, Hughes, and Perkins we were overall pretty healthy, and neither Plouffe nor Perkins would have done anything to stem the bleeding last year. Every team loses a few players, but they don't go on to lose 100+ games because of it.

 

And it's not like we got random bad years from a bunch of established good players either. The players that struggled were either super young (expected) or just flat out aren't that good to begin with (also should have been expected). The young ones can improve, but can they improve enough to carry all the dead weight of the has-beens and never-will-bes?

[DocBauer]

For various reasons, including it really can't get any worse, this team will be better in 2017. The question remains how much better, and that is a complete unknown at this time. I get the frustration over no Dozier deal, and Santana to a lesser degree. But 2017 still remains a season of back office and organizational changes from the top on down. Doesn't matter if we are talking the stats department, or scouting, coaching staffs, roving instructors, Ft Myers meetings for everyone to get on the same page, or even how the various milb players stretch and work out. Plus, the new regime has an entire milb system, talent wise, to thoroughly watch and inspect.

 

On the field, no question better health is a huge point. But above all else, the Twins fortunes in 2017 and beyond are tied immediately to Rosario, Buxton, Kepler, Sano, Polanco, Berrios, May, Chargois and others as to their continued development. (Plus a few guys at AAA and AA who should see promotions)

 

Dozier and Santana could yet be traded firing the season or before next for additional talent. (Not debating the issue of immediate returns vs future value-just pointing out a fact) And financially, this team is in a position over the next two seasons to actually go out and make some sort of splash on the FA market. (Or a bundled trade package deal) There could still be a useful signing or two over the next couple of weeks to shore up the roster a bit for 2017. But at the end of the day, this season is still about implementation of organizational changes and the development of the young players on the roster.

[gunnarthor]

Yeah, my guess is they are in the 75 win range this season.  How the youngsters play will have a lot of impact on how the 2018 season projects.  I do want to see some improvement in the bullpen though.  Right now, Pressly is basically the only arm in there I actually like.  

[killertwinfan]

Not much of a rebuttal to Mr. Froemming's article. Simple math tells us the Twins should have only lost 96 games in 2016?  Things can't go that bad again? Personnel changes should net out and our young guys will get better.  Man am I excited for this season.  #wemaynotlose100games.

[Nick Nelson]

Man. People are grumpy this morning!

 

 

So tired of this defense for what was a poor offseason. Apparently at this point only losing 90-95 games is a step forward. 

Not apparently. It is, objectively. And losing 95 games would require basically the same performance as last year (again, they should have lost 96 based on RS/RA). So that would be a tiny step forward. I expect a larger one.

 

 

If everything but the progression of the guys already on the team (aka do nothing and hope we get better) is marginal, then why even fire Terry Ryan?

Because they didn't hire these guys to completely turn the team around in one offseason?

 

 

True, but they could at least have improved themselves for the future by trading Dozier for a package of Alvarez+JDL+AAAA type instead of insisting on Alvarez+JDL+Calhoun (or very close to Calhoun) type.

Well unfortunately Alvarez was never on the table. So let's stop playing make believe and hold this discussion based on reality. 

[dbminn]

I predict I'll enjoy watching the Twins as much as I'm enjoying the Timberwolves this season. Except more, because baseball is my favorite sport.

 

The Twins lack depth and there will be bouts of inconsistency. There are holes in the roster. But there is a lot of young talent that I expect, on the whole, will take a big step forward this year. That will make them worth my time.

 

[wavedog]

I have tried my hardest to forget about last season but to the best of my memory - we earned every one of those 103 losses with a combination of bad managing, bad starting pitching, bad relief pitching, bad defense etc...If I put on my rose-colored glass for this season as hope springs eternal - we will be better this season because (1) Buxton, Sano, Rosario, Kepler, Berrios will be improved on both Offense and Defense with help from the old vets we brought in Hunter, Cuddyer and Hawkins (2) Castro will provide better pitch-framing and game calling? giving our pitchers more confidence and Murphy/Garver will help more as backups (3) May and Hughes come back to the rotation to give more stability (4) we find a SS that can give us average defense  (4) Jepsen is not in our bullpen this year  (5) Someone will help Molitor with managing decisions/he will have learned from experience  (6) Santana and Dozier performance does not fall off the face of the earth  (7) Other teams in our division will be taking a step back like Chi, KC and Det

 

My hope for this seaon - I would like to break the 70 win mark and for the team to show continued improvement this year - looking forward to the season.   

 

[Vanimal46]

 

I keep hearing this statement but I don't really buy it. It's not like we had a disproportionate amount of injuries. Other than Plouffe, Hughes, and Perkins we were overall pretty healthy, and neither Plouffe nor Perkins would have done anything to stem the bleeding last year. Every team loses a few players, but they don't go on to lose 100+ games because of it.

 

And it's not like we got random bad years from a bunch of established good players either. The players that struggled were either super young (expected) or just flat out aren't that good to begin with (also should have been expected). The young ones can improve, but can they improve enough to carry all the dead weight of the has-beens and never-will-bes?

Yep. 2016 was not like 2011 where Mauer, Morneau, Span, and others went down with injury during the season. 

Since we're diving into psychology 101 on this article, Nick's "framing effect" is sure showing an "optimism bias" heading into spring training..... After we got over our "endowment effect" with Dozier, and choosing "status quo bias" instead, "negativity bias" is settling in with some of us. As much as I want to jump on the "bandwagon effect" I can't do it yet.... I guess that's the "curse of knowledge"....

[drivlikejehu]

I think it's strange how much more hostility there is to the new leadership, in comparison to what it was with the old leadership that ran the organization into the ground. The old leadership was defended vigorously after each incompetent, incomprehensible move . . . the new leadership is criticized for non-moves that are either fictional or marginal in relevance. I find the dichotomy puzzling.

[Vanimal46]

 

I think it's strange how much more hostility there is to the new leadership, in comparison to what it was with the old leadership that ran the organization into the ground. The old leadership was defended vigorously after each incompetent, incomprehensible move . . . the new leadership is criticized for non-moves that are either fictional or marginal in relevance. I find the dichotomy puzzling.

You can see why there would be some hostility, whether or not you believe or show it... Not too many 100+ loss teams go into the following season with the essentially the same roster. They set expectations from the get go "Don't get attached to your favorite Twins players" and then nothing happens. 

[drivlikejehu]

 

You can see why there would be some hostility, whether or not you believe or show it... Not too many 100+ loss teams go into the following season with the essentially the same roster. They set expectations from the get go "Don't get attached to your favorite Twins players" and then nothing happens. 

 

They inherited a roster with few trade pieces. The market for Dozier was limited at best and trading Santana was arguably counter-productive given the pitching situation.

 

I understand wanting significant roster change in the abstract, but in reality it's clear that there were significant constraints. 

 

They also inherited an organization in need of rebuilding top-to-bottom, not just from a player personnel standpoint. Those things are less visible but very important. 

 

In effect though, Falvey & Levine are being blamed for the mess Ryan left them. Lots of roster change happens during the MLB season, making it very premature to pass judgment.

[Cory Engelhardt]

Thank you for this article. I appreciated it. I try to stay grounded in my rooting interest for the Twins, but in the moment (not trading Dozier, for example) I was bummed that move didn't happen. But that said, I think there are more than a few reasons to be optimistic about this year's team...

1) Castro is going to help the pitching staff and the runs allowed more than we know. The jump from Suzuki to him is immense.

2) The pitching staff we have isn't necessarily the garbage it is made out to be, if it has help from a legit catcher. Gibson and Hughes aren't far removed from above average seasons, when healthy. Santana could still be good, but assuming he will be AS good as last year may be optimistic. Overall, I think adding Castro and Murphy (or Garver) will be an enormous upgrade on defense and pitch calling compared to Suzuki and Centeno.

3) Buxton and Sano and Kepler and Polanco. They will take step forwards, some (Buxton especially) I am ready to take an enormous step forward. That will be exciting to watch.

4) The bullpen was good last year, right up until they were overworked. This will be something to watch, if the starters can give a typical number of innings (at least 5-6 per start) I think the bullpen will be better off this year too.

5) Outfield defense; Buxton and Kepler and Rosario all year is a good defense. I still wish they had a real 4th of, but Grossman can't be as bad as he was last year, can he?

6) Mauer, he is a good 1st baseman. Not a hall of famer at the level of production he gives at 1st base, but he will get on base and play good defense. I do think pairing him with Vargas (who mashes lefties) will make 1st base a better than league average position.

7) Dozier, he is a stud, and he will probably bring a good trade at the deadline. Ervin and most of the bullpen too.

8) I think the DH spot is a great spot to platoon, and hopefully the team will see that. Vargas and Grossman both murder lefties. I had hoped for a Brandon Moss or Luis Valbuena to take care of the righties, but Park may be good as the full time DH. I suppose there is still time to take a chance on Napoli or Chris Carter.

9) I don't have a lot of hope for Rosario or Eduardo Escobar any longer. They have both shown flashes in past seasons recently, but Rosario, with his inability to get on base, and Escobar, with his season last year and the lack of defense he provided (I wonder if he was healthy last year?) I think these two will be the biggest question marks on offense.

10) Sano's defense will be fine, at least good enough where he can stay at 3rd with the offense he provides.

11) Polanco's arm, I don't know. I think he will be a better 2nd baseman too. Hopefully having him at short for 3-4 months (until Dozier is probably traded) gives us a real answer if we have a SS in Polanco or not.

 

 

Do I think it is all roses and sunshine and puppies? No. I am fully expecting 74 wins this year, which is a pretty big jump from last year. But I do think there are positives to be had, and if more than a few things go right, specifically in the starting rotation while also bringing up some guys (Gonsalves, Mejia, Berrios) 2018 could start to look pretty positive.

[gunnarthor]

I think the new FO has made some pretty important changes but they are not on the playing field.  Pickler in the dugout might be able to help Molitor.  Molitor is a smart baseball mind but not a good player's manager.  Maybe Pickler makes him keep starting May over Duffey or keeping D. Santana on the bench, though.  They put Sean Johnson in charge of the draft. They gave Goins added resources. They've indicated that they'll platoon more.

 

On the field there really wasn't that much they could do. Outside of catcher, the offense is more or less set and they got (arguably) the best defensive catcher for this staff that they could. They need Kepler and Buxton and Rosario to play.  Rosario might be a fourth outfielder but it's too early to give up on him. The rotation is a mess but there isn't much in FA to fix it.  Apparently they did try to trade Dozier but couldn't find a trade they liked.  They should add some bullpen pieces before ST though.  The rotation is what it is.  They couldn't upgrade it much so we're stuck with it.  Hopefully Berrios takes a step forward and Gibson pitches more like 2014-2015 Gibson.  Longterm, I don't doubt that they know it's an issue but I'm not sure what else they could do about it.  

[Mike Sixel]

 

The bottom line is that any moves this offseason we're going to make a marginal impact, in isolation. Meaningful improvement needs to be driven by the likes of Buxton, Sano, Berrios, etc. If that doesn't happen, they've got bigger problems.

 

No one disagrees with this. That does not, however, mean that standing pat is the correct answer for the rest of the organization, does it? This is a classic logical fallacy....

 

as for the number 1 pick, I'm confused, I thought this was about this year, not the future?

[Mike Sixel]

 

Man. People are grumpy this morning!

 

 

Not apparently. It is, objectively. And losing 95 games would require basically the same performance as last year (again, they should have lost 96 based on RS/RA). So that would be a tiny step forward. I expect a larger one.

 

 

Because they didn't hire these guys to completely turn the team around in one offseason?

 

 

Well unfortunately Alvarez was never on the table. So let's stop playing make believe and hold this discussion based on reality. 

 

who here is arguing "completely turn the team around in one season"....anywhere on this entire board? Another straw man...

[Mike Sixel]

 

They inherited a roster with few trade pieces. The market for Dozier was limited at best and trading Santana was arguably counter-productive given the pitching situation.

 

I understand wanting significant roster change in the abstract, but in reality it's clear that there were significant constraints. 

 

They also inherited an organization in need of rebuilding top-to-bottom, not just from a player personnel standpoint. Those things are less visible but very important. 

 

In effect though, Falvey & Levine are being blamed for the mess Ryan left them. Lots of roster change happens during the MLB season, making it very premature to pass judgment.

 

They changed 1 player so far. 1 player. 2 if you count Plouffe, I guess, but he didn't play much last year.

 

If they can't change more than 1 player, while also working on the back office things if that is your argument, that's an issue.