FiveThirtyEight Article on the Twins

[glunn]

Interesting article on FiveThirtyEight -- https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/al-central-preview-the-twins-are-looking-for-a-bounce-back/

Here is an excerpt -- 

The Twins are in a really interesting spot heading into 2022 because they were really good in both 2019 and 2020 — with an average winning percentage of .612 (which equates to 99.1 wins per 162 games) across those seasons — yet they were also really bad in 2021. Suffering a stunning collapse in both pitching and defense, Minnesota won just 73 games and finished dead last in the AL Central, behind even the Detroit Tigers and Kansas City Royals. So looking ahead, we now get a fun experiment in projecting which version of the Twins was more “real,” in the sense of having greater predictive validity for 2022.

Lot's of interesting analysis here.

[Richie the Rally Goat]

Thanks for sharing! Great article. I guess none of us really know what to do with the Twins this year

¯\_(ツ)_/¯

[Squirrel]

12 minutes ago, Sconnie said:

Thanks for sharing! Great article. I guess none of us really know what to do with the Twins this year

¯\_(ツ)_/¯

Yeah, lol … the last line ‘the range of outcomes could be limitless’  … guess I’ll stick with my ‘Hope for the best, prepare for the worst’ philosophy 

[terrydactyls]

Reading that article was like playing Strato-matic baseball.  Lots of numbers but pretty meaningless when you add in the human factor.  I guess that's why so many people use the phrase "that's why we play the game."

[LastOnePicked]

13 hours ago, glunn said:

The Twins are in a really interesting spot heading into 2022 because they were really good in both 2019 and 2020 — with an average winning percentage of .612 (which equates to 99.1 wins per 162 games) across those seasons — yet they were also really bad in 2021.

I see this kind of statement often, and find it a bit odd, since rosters change year to year and this Twins roster is significantly different. Who's even left from the 2019 team at this point: Sano, Buxton, Polanco, Kepler, Rogers and Duffy?

And yet, there are some ballclubs where you almost seem to be able to project a competitive team by the way the organization has been recently run. The Giants, Cardinals and Rays come to mind.

My guess is that 2019 and 2020 were more about the emergence of Berrios, the arrival of the names mentioned above (along with Garver) and the presence of Cruz than anything specifically internal with an organizational approach for winning. But I could be wrong, and I like that 2022 will put this to the test. If Ober, Ryan, Winder and other young pitchers take their place between competent veteran starters/relievers, and if the new crop of OF/INF prospects elevate their game, then I'll be happy to see 2021 be relegated to "fluke" status.

[21bdp21]

https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/al-central-preview-the-twins-are-looking-for-a-bounce-back/

It is a part of series they are doing.

Form 538:
"In honor of the 2022 Major League Baseball season, which starts April 7 — and is actually a thing! — FiveThirtyEight will be focusing our attention on the most intriguing team in each division. Today we take a look at the American League Central, which had a new champ last season but whose old champ isn’t quite ready to give up the crown for good."

 

 

[ashbury]

I'm as big an advocate for analytics as most, but this article by the analytically-inclined just goes to show that real predictive power without doing any fundamental scouting is still out of pretty much everyone's grasp.  "They could be good, they could be bad" is a forecast that probably could have been made 100 years ago using a slide rule.

[wsnydes]

3 minutes ago, ashbury said:

I'm as big an advocate for analytics as most, but this article by the analytically-inclined just goes to show that real predictive power without doing any fundamental scouting is still out of pretty much everyone's grasp.  "They could be good, they could be bad" is a forecast that probably could have been made 100 years ago.

The Ghost of Nostradamus should write sports predictions on the internet!  

[Trov]

42 minutes ago, ashbury said:

I'm as big an advocate for analytics as most, but this article by the analytically-inclined just goes to show that real predictive power without doing any fundamental scouting is still out of pretty much everyone's grasp.  "They could be good, they could be bad" is a forecast that probably could have been made 100 years ago.

I am not anti-analytics, but I feel some take it to an extreme and that it is predictive of future performance.  Many times I read due to this stat we expect something to change for this stat in the future, either better overall numbers or worse and use the term luck a lot.  I will agree, the stats will show when there is outliers that it is unlikely things will remain the same, but it does not mean what will change, or it is actually will change.

For example, years ago the Twins at the break were out winning their run differential and everyone said they will start losing game because of that, but very few address that the run differential could improve and only assumed the run differential would stay the same.  Similar, for years I would read articles about Kepler and his hard hit rate was not in line with his BABIP, and we would expect his BABIP would improve.  However, his numbers have basically remained the same his whole career.  How many years will analytics people say he will increase his BABIP because not in line with hard hit rate? 

My point is, analytics is nothing more than a piece of data to look at and see if maybe luck played a role in the other numbers, but it does not predict future results.  Even when you look at old school numbers we still never know if a player will be the same, worse, or better than what they have done, we only can take educated guess. 

[MMMordabito]

I'll take the under on the 83.8 wins that are mentioned.

[Doctor Gast]

Interesting indeed Glunn. IMO Twins have for years lacked depth at key positions  SS & CF and also a strong long relief corp. We suffered greatly when Buxton was down, poor INF and a colapse of both SP and BP.

2019 we greatly benifitted from the "juiced ball" together w/ a very good rotation & BP in the 1st half but the pitching limped acrossed the finish line. Many players were playing hurt at the end (Rosario, Buxton, Polanco and Garver) going into the post games.

2020 our pitchers especially Maeda were greatly benifitted by the shortened seasoned but our hitters except Cruz, Donaldson & Buxton when he was healthy were any good and we squeeked out a division title..

2021 All our weaknesses were in plain view w/o anything to aid the outcome. SS we greatly improved but CF depth and long relief practically non existing, it didn't take long for the our weak SP (except Berrios) and failing BP to crumble. Our 3rd & 4th OFers were a shambles, when Buxton wasn't in CF it was at times ridiculous.

2022 we won't have a "juiced ball" to aid our powerful line up or a shortened season to aid our pitchers. We are w/o Berrios, Cruz, Garver and Donaldson, so are we able win this division this season? I say yes if we finally address our weaknesses. 

I'm encouraged with this "piggy-back" system. It's a system that greatly depends a lot on a rotating strong long relief corp. Eventually Gray could be depended on to pitch 5 quality innings but the rest we can't. The rest consists of a weak arm (Bundy), a recouperating arm (Archer) and the young inexperienced pitchers and prospects. A strong large long relief will take off the burden from the SP and BP to keep them healthy and rested coming PS.

SS, if Correa stays healthy and get good support from Gordon and Lewis steps up, we'll be in great shape. That leaves CF and catching, we still lack depth at CF, I'd still like Celestino & Martin more time in AAA we still need a MLB CFer to back up Buxton. Catching we need Jeffers, Sanchez and Godoy to all step up.

If we finally shore up our weaknesses (which are no big deal), we can most definitely compete for the division. Another front line SP wouldn't hurt either.