CHW 3, MIN 1: Twins Leave 15 Runners On Base

[Aggies7]

there's a team in NY that's starting to heat up...whatever the twins have to do to avoid playing that team is what I want to see them do. division winner or not

[DocBauer]

I'm with Chief and others on the RBI discussion. I fully understand RBI doesn't work as a tell all in regard to hitting ability. And opportunity...such as being put in a 3-5 spot in the order for a good team...only goes so far as an excuse for debate. Actually GETTING RBI is still clutch, still a moment, still a skill to actually come through when it matters.

 

We had nobody do that last night. That stinks and is unexpected just with the volume of opportunity. But I'm not blaming Cruz just because he had a bad game.

 

I love Rocco, but nights like last night do make me wonder why the Twins don't play just a little small ball. If you truly have a feel for the pulse of your team, which I think Rocco does, he should have felt it was an off night. Especially with so many guys out. It's would have been a good night, here and there, to try to manufacture a run or two, IMO.

 

Still just ONE game.

[Linus]

Angel Hernandez didn’t cost us the game. However he is a horrible umpire and everyone knows it.

 

Berrios throws more non competitive pitches than any other good pitcher I’ve seen. Last night there had to be 15-20 pitches that had no chance so you end up with 100 pitches to get 5 innings. I keep holding out hope that something will click and he find command but I think this is it. His stuff is so good he still pitched a good game.

 

Wade Jr needs to be the 4th outfielder next year. Better yet find a right handed version of him. Don’t need to see Cave anymore.

[VivaBomboRivera!]

I was home! What happened? What the hell happened?

 

[AceWrigley]

Wow, what a difficult game to watch. Chicago tried to give us the game, but we didn't take it. Putting out an APB for the real Taylor Rogers.

[AceWrigley]

 

I was home! What happened? What the hell happened?

 

that was White Sox home field gamesmanship that the umpires let them get away with.

[twinbythebay]

 

Berrios needs the coaches to work with him on his approach to big games.  He came away with a good line, but his work was so erratic and it seems to get that way when he his hyped up about a game.

 

Do not rest your players in a key series.  Do not experiment with Rogers in a key game when he has not shown any ability to get it done in the last month.  I hate to see a player have such a difficult year, but the manager has to prevent the issue from being a team issue.  If Rocco wants to experiment, let's see what Alcala does in a tough situation because he might become out closer.

The key series are coming in about two weeks. The Twins are in a very good position to secure home field advantage, and they should be using every game from now until the playoffs to get as many players right as possible.

[Shaitan]

 

Lol you guys are hilarious. Twins are on a 100 win pace even with all the injuries and you guys are in here whining and talking **** about the guy who won the Manager of the Year award last year and is in his 2nd season. Talk about overreactions. 

 

I didn't watch, but it's clear to me from this thread that the Twins would be a much better team if they got rid of Cruz, Berrios, and Rogers.

[wsnydes]

 

Some thoughts:

 

Angel Hernandez had very little to do with the outcome of tonight's ball game. That's just lazy excuse making, IYAM. He might have missed a vew close pitches, if you believe in the little box on the TV, but missed for both sides, and didn't seriously affect any ABs.

 

I agree, Chief. It's not as though Hernandez wasn't also behind the plate when the Sox were in the field. I'm certainly not going to argue that he's a good umpire, but this line of logic has the stench of losers lament. Both teams had to deal with it.

[bird]

That was easily the most painful game to watch for me in two years. My main issue with this lineup has been the paucity of "tough out" guys, which is why Arraez was such a breath of fresh air last year. I hope Falvey has a longer-term goal of building an everyday lineup that has smart OBP guys interspersed. The failure of one batter after another to even make contact in RISP situations drives me nuts. It's OK for Cruz to be Cruz, just give me two more Arraez types in the lineup each night instead of the Caves and the Rosarios one after another.

 

Another reason this was a hard game to see given away: if I was given the decision and was offered one win in the next three games to walk away, I'd take it, no hesitation at all. Hope I'm wrong of course.

[denarded]

 

This should do the trick. From Baseball Savant.

 

Scroll down and click on "Jose Berrios", just below "Search Results".

Thanks. Never been to site before. There is A LOT going on there. He did have a lot of consecutive strikes, but didn't have a swinging strike/called strike back to back. Lots of fouls and balls hit into play. So the stats don't back up my thoughts which are always true

[Otto von Ballpark]

Obviously a tough result, but I thought this was a fun game! Maybe a little long/slow (I mostly listened on radio, which helps), but close, tense, meaningful -- one of the more entertaining Twins/White Sox matchups in years.

 

Hopefully games 2-4 keep it up (with improved results).

[Otto von Ballpark]

 

Thanks. Never been to site before. There is A LOT going on there. He did have a lot of consecutive strikes, but didn't have a swinging strike/called strike back to back. Lots of fouls and balls hit into play. So the stats don't back up my thoughts which are always true

Robert had a called strike and swinging strike consecutively in the 3rd inning. Mazara in the 4th. You can click on the counts in the play-by-play here:

https://www.baseball-reference.com/boxes/CHA/CHA202009140.shtml

[rdehring]

 

That was easily the most painful game to watch for me in two years. My main issue with this lineup has been the paucity of "tough out" guys, which is why Arraez was such a breath of fresh air last year. I hope Falvey has a longer-term goal of building an everyday lineup that has smart OBP guys interspersed. The failure of one batter after another to even make contact in RISP situations drives me nuts. It's OK for Cruz to be Cruz, just give me two more Arraez types in the lineup each night instead of the Caves and the Rosarios one after another.

 

Another reason this was a hard game to see given away: if I was given the decision and was offered one win in the next three games to walk away, I'd take it, no hesitation at all. Hope I'm wrong of course.

I was thinking the same thing the past few days. Could you see a lineup with Arraez and Wade batting one after another somewhere in the order? Would drive pitchers nuts...and shorten the number of innings they could pitch.

 

By the way, I haven't been a huge Wade fan over the past few years. But I'll tell ya, he is growing on me. And he does such a nice job at first base having not played it much in the minors. Does anyone know how much he played there? Or was it back in college at Maryland?

[mnfireman]

I agree wit the statement that the Sox tried to give the game away. But the Twins DID give the game away. The Sox have destroyed left handed pitching this year, so a close game with the team your fighting for first place with is not a good time to try to fix your left handed bullpen ace. The bats have been coming awake lately, but last night was tough. Who had odds on all 9 Twins batters struggling? Should be an anomaly, but who knows, this is 2020!! Go get 'em tonight boys.

[denarded]

 

Robert had a called strike and swinging strike consecutively in the 3rd inning. Mazara in the 4th. You can click on the counts in the play-by-play here:

https://www.baseball-reference.com/boxes/CHA/CHA202009140.shtml

You're right. I should have looked closer. Like I said, my thoughts as the game went on did not jive with the stats. I don't know wether I still have too high expectations for Berrios or need to accept him for what he is. How can I be mad with 1 run in 5ip

[USAFChief]

 

 

Berrios throws more non competitive pitches than any other good pitcher I’ve seen. Last night there had to be 15-20 pitches that had no chance so you end up with 100 pitches to get 5 innings. I keep holding out hope that something will click and he find command but I think this is it. His stuff is so good he still pitched a good game.

 

 

great post. The lack of command also means too many pitches end up middle middle.

[Twodogs]

It's amazing that the White Sox took the lead with small ball. Adam Engal didn't really hit the ball through a shifted infield, he hit a slash bunt, because Engal tried to drop down a bunt in the first pitch and then he squared around, Donaldson charged and Polanco was wheeling over to cover 3rd and then Engal slashed and put the ball right where Polanco vacated. Nice example of small ball working. The Twins didn't really have a lot of chances for small ball yesterday. I mean Kepler came up with a guy on 2nd and he hit a grounder to the right side and moved the runner anyway. About the only time I think they should have bunted was with Astudillo up to bat with Cave on 2nd. Had Astudillo successfully bunted there Cave gets to 3rd and probably scores to put the Twins up 2 - 1. Who knows what happens from there? All of the sudden Cruz might hit his 17th bomb because bases wouldn't be loaded and the pitcher might pitch differently? Who knows.

 

Also I don't think Rogers was brought in to close. Rocco brought him in to face the bottom of the lineup in the 8th. I'm almost thinking that Rocco was planning on using Alcala to close it out had they taken the lead? JMO?

 

It was interesting on the mlb channel yesterday. Leiter, Pedro and the other guys were discussing the best playoff rotations. The Twins were brought up and Pedro said no way, he said that the Twins are a good example of having a guy who could win the Cy Young, (Maeda) but Pedro said he would not have him in his (playoff) starting rotation. Then someone brought up Berrios. Leiter then said that Berrios is also good, but to be a top playoff pitcher you have to go longer than 5 innings. Not saying that I completely agree or disagree. But these are the opinions of a hall of famer and a guy who pitched big games in the playoffs. Interesting take.

[big dog]

With respect to "tough guy" outs- I'm really tired of the Astudillo circus. Bases loaded, guys getting walked everywhere, so why not hack at the first pitch, six inches inside?  Oops, inning over. He popped up on a terrible first pitch later in the game, too. Next time he's going to have to jump across the plate to swing at the first pitch, and he probably will.

 

There's a pretty thick line between aggressive and ridiculous. He's crossed way over it.

[Cap'n Piranha]

 

I often read that RBI are not a good measure of offensive contribution. I do not agree, and offer tonight as exhibit 1 million. OBP is worthless without someone bringing those runners home.

 

But putting a ball in play (barring the very rare case of an inside the park HR) with no one on base is also, by that standard, worthless.  The problem with RBI as a stat is not that it's worthless--it's that it's completely devoid of context.

 

Let's say Eddie Rosario hits a routine ground ball to the second baseman with less than two outs.  If Byron Buxton is on third, there's a good chance Rosario gets an RBI.  If Nelson Cruz is on third, it's essentially a 0% chance Rosario gets an RBI.  Exact same batted ball by Rosario, diametrically opposite RBI outcomes.  The reason for that is because often a large part of the run being scored has absolutely nothing to do with the batter who gets credit for the RBI.  Thus, absent an accompanying, context-providing stat, RBI is at best a crude metric, and at worst, a downright misleading one.

[FritzDahmus]

That wasn't a ground rule double. That was theft of a run by the White Sox Left Fielder.

 

The stupidest call ever [whether it was the right call or not].

 

The umpiring may have contributed just as much as the players....to the Twins loss.

[Twodogs]

But putting a ball in play (barring the very rare case of an inside the park HR) with no one on base is also, by that standard, worthless. The problem with RBI as a stat is not that it's worthless--it's that it's completely devoid of context.

 

Let's say Eddie Rosario hits a routine ground ball to the second baseman with less than two outs. If Byron Buxton is on third, there's a good chance Rosario gets an RBI. If Nelson Cruz is on third, it's essentially a 0% chance Rosario gets an RBI. Exact same batted ball by Rosario, diametrically opposite RBI outcomes. The reason for that is because often a large part of the run being scored has absolutely nothing to do with the batter who gets credit for the RBI. Thus, absent an accompanying, context-providing stat, RBI is at best a crude metric, and at worst, a downright misleading one.

You can make that argument about home runs also. Hitting a ball out in San Diego or Anaheim is a lot different than Yankee stadium where if you can clear the infield it has a good shot at going out. Just ask Mo Vaughn. So you can make those kinds of arguments about almost anything. Racking up stolen bases off of Astudillo is a lot different than getting that many SB's vs Molina. Everything in baseball is dependent on who you are facing. I mean we look at pitchers and their swing and miss stuff, but how would those guys swing and miss stuff percentages play out if they were facing guys like Carew, Gwynn, Boggs, Brett, and guys who played in that era? It would be a lot different. So just like with Buxton or Cruz on 3rd is dependent on whether someone gets an RBI so is every other stat in baseball.

[Cap'n Piranha]

 

You can make that argument about home runs also. Hitting a ball out in San Diego or Anaheim is a lot different than Yankee stadium where if you can clear the infield it has a good shot at going out. Just ask Mo Vaughn. So you can make those kinds of arguments about almost anything. Racking up stolen bases off of Astudillo is a lot different than getting that many SB's vs Molina. Everything in baseball is dependent on who you are facing. I mean we look at pitchers and their swing and miss stuff, but how would those guys swing and miss stuff percentages play out if they were facing guys like Carew, Gwynn, Boggs, Brett, and guys who played in that era? It would be a lot different. So just like with Buxton or Cruz on 3rd is dependent on whether someone gets an RBI so is every other stat in baseball.

 

But not to the degree that RBI's are.  With the bases empty, you cannot get an RBI unless you hit a HR.  RBI's are way more contextually driven than almost anything else, because that context comes within the game from other players.  If you have two identically hit balls in the same stadium, if one is a homer, so is the other.  That's not true of the situation I outlined.  Stealing bases off Astudillo is different than Molina, but everyone in that game gets to steal off the same guy--the situation is constant, and therefore is not the determinant of outcome.

[Twodogs]

But not to the degree that RBI's are. With the bases empty, you cannot get an RBI unless you hit a HR. RBI's are way more contextually driven than almost anything else, because that context comes within the game from other players. If you have two identically hit balls in the same stadium, if one is a homer, so is the other. That's not true of the situation I outlined. Stealing bases off Astudillo is different than Molina, but everyone in that game gets to steal off the same guy--the situation is constant, and therefore is not the determinant of outcome.

I agree that everyone in the game gets to steal off of Astudillo in that instant, but when you look at numbers you look at them over a course of time. Nobody narrows down how many RBI's you got on August 12th. Or how many home runs you got on June 15th. It's always over the course of a definite period of time. Usually a long period of time such as the whole season. But even then, even if you are in the same game stealing off of Astudillo when one pitchers is on the mound is different than when another pitcher takes the mound, even with the same catcher baseball stats are dependent. Even with the same swing same launch angle same everything will have a different result when you barrel up a Chapman 100mph fastball as opposed to a Greinke 50mph ephus pitch. Same swing, same hit, same ballpark, still will create a different result. Stats are dependent on outside factors no matter what.

[Trov]

Terrible, not fun game to watch.  I blame the terrible home plate ump, I have not like Angel Hernadez for years.  The man's zone is all over the place, with all the walks you would think it was tiny, but he was not consistent at all.  Sure, he did not hit into the inning ending double plays, but when both pitcher and hitter are guessing on what will be called it is hard to have an approach up there.  

[jmlease1]

 

You can make that argument about home runs also. Hitting a ball out in San Diego or Anaheim is a lot different than Yankee stadium where if you can clear the infield it has a good shot at going out. Just ask Mo Vaughn. So you can make those kinds of arguments about almost anything. Racking up stolen bases off of Astudillo is a lot different than getting that many SB's vs Molina. Everything in baseball is dependent on who you are facing. I mean we look at pitchers and their swing and miss stuff, but how would those guys swing and miss stuff percentages play out if they were facing guys like Carew, Gwynn, Boggs, Brett, and guys who played in that era? It would be a lot different. So just like with Buxton or Cruz on 3rd is dependent on whether someone gets an RBI so is every other stat in baseball.

 

Except it's simply not true regarding HRs. For home runs, the stat still represents fairly what the actions of the hitter were: they hit the ball over the fence. With RBIs it's not the same; arguably the most important information you get from RBIs is that the hitter had a lot of ABs with runners on base. What the context is for home runs isn't as important as the fact that someone actually hit the ball out.

[Twodogs]

But even hitting home runs is dependent. Petco park is not very home run friendly, Yankee stadium is a band box. So one player could be a pretty good hitter in Yankee stadium, and another player could hit every ball exactly the same as the first player but due to air pressure and park nuances they can be not such a great hitter.

 

I mean if you are saying that a ball hit out of the park is a ball hit out of the park regardless of outside factors then someone could argue that all of the colorado rockies hitters from the 90's should be in the hall of fame, I mean they hit the ball out of the park

[Otto von Ballpark]

 

I've been following only one scenario religiously since the first week of last season: HITS with 2+ OB (minus HR's). Stringing base hits together, especially with multiple base runners is virtually impossible with this lineup. The Twins have performed like thee bottom-tier team in this aspect game after game.

What's your source for following this scenario?

 

I just added up all the 2+ runner on base splits for the 2020 season at B-Ref:

https://www.baseball-reference.com/leagues/split.cgi?t=b&lg=MLB&year=2020#bases::none

 

Looking at hits minus HR, divided by AB minus HR, with 2+ runners on base, the Twins rank 11th in MLB this year. Ranking behind us include playoff-bound teams like TBR, NYY, CHW, LAD, and OAK.

 

Keep in mind, MLB batting average overall is at its lowest point since 1972, and isolated power is higher in 2019-2020 than it has ever been in Twins franchise history (since 1961) -- so everybody is getting fewer non-HR base hits than before, in all situations:

https://www.fangraphs.com/leaders.aspx?pos=all&stats=bat&lg=all&qual=0&type=8&season=2020&month=0&season1=1961&ind=0&team=0,ss&rost=0&age=0&filter=&players=0&startdate=1961-01-01&enddate=2020-12-31&sort=12,a

[Cap'n Piranha]

 

But even hitting home runs is dependent. Petco park is not very home run friendly, Yankee stadium is a band box. So one player could be a pretty good hitter in Yankee stadium, and another player could hit every ball exactly the same as the first player but due to air pressure and park nuances they can be not such a great hitter.

I mean if you are saying that a ball hit out of the park is a ball hit out of the park regardless of outside factors then someone could argue that all of the colorado rockies hitters from the 90's should be in the hall of fame, I mean they hit the ball out of the park

 

Which is why there are park factors.  People who understand that concept get that 30 homers in Petco is more impressive than 30 homers in Yankee stadium, and will value those players accordingly.  What I'm saying is there needs to be a "park factor" for RBI, to help us understand if the RBI came from a solo home run, or the fast runner on third scoring on a routine grounder.  Those are vastly different processes to get to the same outcome, and unlike homeruns, I'm not aware of a readily available stat that can speak to that.

[Cap'n Piranha]

 

I agree that everyone in the game gets to steal off of Astudillo in that instant, but when you look at numbers you look at them over a course of time. Nobody narrows down how many RBI's you got on August 12th. Or how many home runs you got on June 15th. It's always over the course of a definite period of time. Usually a long period of time such as the whole season. But even then, even if you are in the same game stealing off of Astudillo when one pitchers is on the mound is different than when another pitcher takes the mound, even with the same catcher baseball stats are dependent. Even with the same swing same launch angle same everything will have a different result when you barrel up a Chapman 100mph fastball as opposed to a Greinke 50mph ephus pitch. Same swing, same hit, same ballpark, still will create a different result. Stats are dependent on outside factors no matter what.

 

My whole point with the swing is if the inputs are the same (launch angle, exit velocity, atmospheric conditions, etc), the hits will be identical--same distance, same elevation, same landing spot.  The process of the batter hitting the ball, if identical, will produce identical results.  The entire point I was making about RBI's is that the process of the batter hitting the ball can be identical, and yet yield non-identical results, vis-a-vis RBI.  This demonstrates that RBI's are not completely controllable by the batter, and as such, in order to truly quantify batter performance via RBI, we need additional data.