You never know when your pants will come down.

[Riverbrian]

I posted this elsewhere but want the topic. 

You should change your underwear because you never know when you get caught with your pants down. 

If you keep specialists on your roster. What happens when you need them to be much more than what they are? Every. Single. Year. Injuries. Happen. If someone is on your 26 man roster, they can't be hid because injuries are going to bring them into the light and you will NEED THEM. It happens every. single. year. 

Every year... injuries are going to pull your pants down. Change your underwear because the whole world will see that specialist if you don't. 

Gilbert Celestino was a defensive specialist. His hitting wasn't good. We knew his hitting wasn't good and we knew that Buxton wasn't healthy by the trade deadline. You are screwed when you need your defensive specialist to be a hitter because your hitters have gone away. 

Max Kepler is a defensive specialist. His hitting makes him a defensive specialist. He defends but doesn't hit. That makes him a defensive specialist for two years now. Needing Kepler to be a hitter because your other hitters have gone away is too much to ask and too much to expect.  

Kyle Garlick was a specialist that was only allowed to face left handed hitting. You are screwed when you need Garlick to quickly digest right handers after starving him for years, needing to do it in September during a pennant chase is complete lack of prep for the possibility. Placing a player in a short side platoon is not prepping someone for September. 

We knew what Celestino and Garlick were at the trade deadline. The trade deadline is the last day that you can change your underwear. We didn't have a belt. 

[Dave The Dastardly]

'Course not. Didn't have any underwear on either.

[Craig Arko]

The Minnesota Commando’s. 

[Linus]

Celestino is not a specialist. He is not a mlb level player. Perhaps after a full year at AAA 

[Riverbrian]

2 minutes ago, Linus said:

Celestino is not a specialist. He is not a mlb level player. Perhaps after a full year at AAA 

I agree that he should spend significant time at AAA while he has options to do so. 

However, if he is on a MLB roster, the day will come when we will need him to be better that what he has been.   

If his defense is good but his offense is not. He is a specialist. 

If he is occupying a roster spot on August 1 after the trade deadline, it is very likely that you need him because injuries don't stop after the deadline.  

[Number3]

It starts with the crazy notion that Buxton, Sano and the $35mil wonder at SS would be the core of a productive lineup. That is classic off season la la land. Then the season starts and those wascally games that count are played and the whole thing falls apart almost immediately. The existing analytic centric brain trust is unable to cope with any of this and spreadsheets can't play so the lineups that are sent out to compete on a daily basis are a hodge podge of no names and minor leaguers who don't even have cards on the market. No one can name the lineups for the Twins because they don't have a lineup. Possibly the worst team in the league at seasons end. The fact that Buxton is STILL penciled in as a reliable starting center fielder for 2023 says it all. I guess he is supposed to be less injury prone as he gets older.

[wsnydes]

Underwear analogies!  There are definitely some worn-out waistband types on this roster that probably should be swapped out for a fresh pair this offseason.  

[rv78]

When was the last time the Twins produced a legit full-time major league talent that was good on both sides of the ball? Mauer? Morneau? As you say, Buxton can't stay on the field. Sano was a defensive liability from day 1. Kepler can't hit. Polanco wasn't the shortstop they hoped for. Arraez can hit but his defense is suspect wherever he goes. Miranda hasn't played 3rd-base, his main position, enough to know if he's going to be decent there or not and with no 1st-baseman on the roster that may become his position due to default. Gordon looks to be a utility guy with no clear position that he is stellar at either. They say Lewis and Martin, both SS, probably won't be good enough to play there in the majors at least not long-term. It kind of looks like the Twins are drafting specialists all over the board. That's not a recipe for success and shows a real weakness in the Teams scouting department. Even Brooks Lee fell to them due to injury. Another thing they over-look that other teams seem to find important, but not the Twins. It's as if injuries are their door to a talent that they think they can steal. Then when it comes back to bite them it becomes their excuse to losing. It look to me like the FO is wearing their underwear on their heads because at times it looks like they have their head up their a$$.

[chpettit19]

1 hour ago, rv78 said:

When was the last time the Twins produced a legit full-time major league talent that was good on both sides of the ball? Mauer? Morneau? As you say, Buxton can't stay on the field. Sano was a defensive liability from day 1. Kepler can't hit. Polanco wasn't the shortstop they hoped for. Arraez can hit but his defense is suspect wherever he goes. Miranda hasn't played 3rd-base, his main position, enough to know if he's going to be decent there or not and with no 1st-baseman on the roster that may become his position due to default. Gordon looks to be a utility guy with no clear position that he is stellar at either. They say Lewis and Martin, both SS, probably won't be good enough to play there in the majors at least not long-term. It kind of looks like the Twins are drafting specialists all over the board. That's not a recipe for success and shows a real weakness in the Teams scouting department. Even Brooks Lee fell to them due to injury. Another thing they over-look that other teams seem to find important, but not the Twins. It's as if injuries are their door to a talent that they think they can steal. Then when it comes back to bite them it becomes their excuse to losing. It look to me like the FO is wearing their underwear on their heads because at times it looks like they have their head up their a$$.

Quite a bit of goalpost moving all in 1 comment there. If Morneau is someone you think fits the bill as "legit full-time major league talent that was good on both sides of the ball" (and that's how I read you listing him there) then you can't turn around and say Polanco isn't because he's not a SS (he's the answer to the initial question because he's a solid defender at 2B, by the way).

If your question is when the Twins last developed a 2 way star that plays up the middle it's Mauer, and Morneau doesn't even qualify as a guy who played the lowest position on the defensive ladder. You can't poopoo Lewis and Martin because they aren't good enough to be SS (although Lewis looked more than capable this year). If Martin reaches his potential (not saying he will, just if he does) he absolutely can fill the "both sides of the ball" criteria even if he's playing LF or CF. And Lewis can fit the bill at any position on the field.

Brooks Lee didn't fall to them due to injury. Where is that coming from? That's not based in reality in any way, shape, or form. And he's very much a possible gold glove 3B for the next 10 years so he'd fit the criteria of 2 way talent.

[Game7-91]

2 hours ago, wsnydes said:

Underwear analogies!  There are definitely some worn-out waistband types on this roster that probably should be swapped out for a fresh pair this offseason.  

Strong analogy....are the Twins wearing tighty whities or boxers?

Tighty's give you a clearly defined form to fill, any alterations or tire tracks require full-on changeover, while boxers keep options open in case adaptability and fluidity is key, leaving more maneuverability over time. Are the Twins tighty's or boxers, this is the question.

[wsnydes]

26 minutes ago, Game7-91 said:

Strong analogy....are the Twins wearing tighty whities or boxers?

Tighty's give you a clearly defined form to fill, any alterations or tire tracks require full-on changeover, while boxers keep options open in case adaptability and fluidity is key, leaving more maneuverability over time. Are the Twins tighty's or boxers, this is the question.

Yes.

[Richie the Rally Goat]

1 hour ago, Game7-91 said:

Strong analogy....are the Twins wearing tighty whities or boxers?

Tighty's give you a clearly defined form to fill, any alterations or tire tracks require full-on changeover, while boxers keep options open in case adaptability and fluidity is key, leaving more maneuverability over time. Are the Twins tighty's or boxers, this is the question.

How do you fit the cup over a pair of boxers without the bunching in your uniform. That would definitely inhibit my reaction time while I’m continually adjusting my kit.

[wsnydes]

11 minutes ago, Richie the Rally Goat said:

How do you fit the cup over a pair of boxers without the bunching in your uniform. That would definitely inhibit my reaction time while I’m continually adjusting my kit.

Amateur!  It's simple, you work all of the adjusting and such into your signs to your fellow fielders.  No one is the wiser!

[DocBauer]

To be fair, Kepler has pretty much been league average as a hitter until 2021-22. That, combined with his defense, made him a pretty good player and positive WAR producer overall. 

I don't recall what Garlick's OPS was against RH pitching, but thought it was in the .600's somewhere, which is better than the typical, "average" LH vs LH league wide OPS. But yes, Garlick was a mediocre defensive OF who could only smash LHP, which made him a specialist. And Celestino did NOT belong at the ML level after a short AAA audition in which he finished well in a SSS. 

The Twins should have done better. They need to do better. The roster should be built in such a way you have better overall talent than a group of specialists. Now, ONE of Celestino or Garlick can make some sense. But I've been stating for a couple of years now to get a solid, quality, RH OF to play both corners adequately and give guys days off, particularly against LHP. It hasn't happened yet. But it needs to now.

[Craig Arko]

I think baseball uniforms should switch to using kilts with tartan patterns to match the team’s colors. 

[Platoon]

I just spent the last 6 weeks in a straight leg brace after knee surgery. This required me to slide lengthways into the back seat of my wife’s Jeep, sort of like a St. Bernard.  
 

While the sliding causes some compromising situations, the recent cool mornings have made it very easy to tell exactly how far I have been exposed to the elements each time. 
 

When the Twins signed Buxton they exposed themselves severely.  Apparently because it was summer, no one in the FO seemed to notice their butt was showing! 

[Riverbrian]

2 hours ago, DocBauer said:

To be fair, Kepler has pretty much been league average as a hitter until 2021-22. That, combined with his defense, made him a pretty good player and positive WAR producer overall. 

I don't recall what Garlick's OPS was against RH pitching, but thought it was in the .600's somewhere, which is better than the typical, "average" LH vs LH league wide OPS. But yes, Garlick was a mediocre defensive OF who could only smash LHP, which made him a specialist. And Celestino did NOT belong at the ML level after a short AAA audition in which he finished well in a SSS. 

The Twins should have done better. They need to do better. The roster should be built in such a way you have better overall talent than a group of specialists. Now, ONE of Celestino or Garlick can make some sense. But I've been stating for a couple of years now to get a solid, quality, RH OF to play both corners adequately and give guys days off, particularly against LHP. It hasn't happened yet. But it needs to now.

I have often heard mention of "Kepler's Positive WAR".

How much defensive weighting is going on to take his offensive numbers and make his overall game positive. I'm going to say too much... however it is done. ?

 

[Richie the Rally Goat]

2 hours ago, Riverbrian said:

I have often heard mention of "Kepler's Positive WAR".

How much defensive weighting is going on to take his offensive numbers and make his overall game positive. I'm going to say too much... however it is done. ?

 

Defensive portion of WAR weights the same for RF as SS correct? Should it? I think so

Edited October 20, 2022 by Richie the Rally Goat
Auto correct changed so to no, changing the meaning of my sentence

[stringer bell]

57 minutes ago, Richie the Rally Goat said:

Defensive portion of WAR weights the same for RF as SS correct? Should it? I think no 

I don't know if that is true or not, but I think the defensive portion of WAR is suspect. Josh Donaldson comes to the Bronx and suddenly is saving dozens of runs resulting in about a 2.4 WAR despite having a 94 OPS+. Kiner-Falefa also has supposedly nice defensive grades despite his defense being criticized by Yankee fans and getting benched in the playoffs. Until it is proven to me, I'm going to believe that defensive metrics are subjective.

[Richie the Rally Goat]

25 minutes ago, stringer bell said:

I don't know if that is true or not, but I think the defensive portion of WAR is suspect. Josh Donaldson comes to the Bronx and suddenly is saving dozens of runs resulting in about a 2.4 WAR despite having a 94 OPS+. Kiner-Falefa also has supposedly nice defensive grades despite his defense being criticized by Yankee fans and getting benched in the playoffs. Until it is proven to me, I'm going to believe that defensive metrics are subjective.

Agreed, (my auto correct got me) Fielding metrics are pretty soft and squishy. I guess, my feeling is if we’re placing a value metric, no matter how squishy of a metric it is, value should be weighted by importance. Like WPA weights outcomes in pitching, or hitting based on timing and value to winning the game.

fielding value like OAA or def WAR should also weight the position and impact to the game.

 

[Riverbrian]

2 hours ago, Richie the Rally Goat said:

Defensive portion of WAR weights the same for RF as SS correct? Should it? I think so

I drink no. 

[sampleSizeOfOne]

My pants come down whenever i undo my belt buckle (er... draw string) so yes, i do know when they'll come down on occasion.

 

Op's subject disproven by counter-example. Quod erat Demonstrandum.

 

On the other hand, it is important to give some pairs of underwear playing time so that they stretch into pants in their own right. 

 

Still rolling the metaphor round in my head, as well as the underlying subject matter. It does give a new appreciation for taking offense where you find it.... 

[rv78]

21 hours ago, chpettit19 said:

Brooks Lee didn't fall to them due to injury. Where is that coming from? That's not based in reality in any way, shape, or form.

It was widely reported that Lee fell out of the top 5 in the draft due to his significant leg injury he sustained in college. 

[chpettit19]

7 minutes ago, rv78 said:

It was widely reported that Lee fell out of the top 5 in the draft due to his significant leg injury he sustained in college. 

No. It wasn't. His leg injury happened his freshman year of college which was 2020. He played northwoods the summer following his injury, followed that up with his sophomore year college season, a season in the Cape Cod league, and then his junior college season before being drafted by the Twins.

He was one of the "big 7" that everyone thought were pretty locked into the top 7 spots in some order, but the Rangers surprised everyone and went Kumar Rocker 3rd overall which pushed Lee to the 8th spot. He absolutely, 100% did not fall because of his knee injury.

[rv78]

9 hours ago, chpettit19 said:

No. It wasn't. His leg injury happened his freshman year of college which was 2020. He played northwoods the summer following his injury, followed that up with his sophomore year college season, a season in the Cape Cod league, and then his junior college season before being drafted by the Twins.

He was one of the "big 7" that everyone thought were pretty locked into the top 7 spots in some order, but the Rangers surprised everyone and went Kumar Rocker 3rd overall which pushed Lee to the 8th spot. He absolutely, 100% did not fall because of his knee injury.

August 2022 Update
The Twins were the benefactors when Brooks Lee fell out of the Top 5 and into the Twins’ lap at pick #8 in the 2022 draft. Well-regarded out of high school, Lee instead signed to play for his day, Larry, at Cal Poly. His college career got off to a terrible start when he sustained a major leg injury to his knee and hamstring while running. 

His leg injury was the reason a couple of other teams passed on him. If you didn't see it then you missed it. Maybe it wasn't as wide of a report as I thought but it was out there at the time.

[chpettit19]

20 minutes ago, rv78 said:

August 2022 Update
The Twins were the benefactors when Brooks Lee fell out of the Top 5 and into the Twins’ lap at pick #8 in the 2022 draft. Well-regarded out of high school, Lee instead signed to play for his day, Larry, at Cal Poly. His college career got off to a terrible start when he sustained a major leg injury to his knee and hamstring while running. 

His leg injury was the reason a couple of other teams passed on him. If you didn't see it then you missed it. Maybe it wasn't as wide of a report as I thought but it was out there at the time.

No. It wasn't. That's not even a little bit what that quote is saying. The Twins being the benefactors of him falling to #8 and his knee injury are two separate ideas in that quote. They're stating the Twins were lucky to get him at 8. Then they are informing people of how his college career started. None of the top 7 teams passed on him because of an injury that literally took place 3 seasons before he was drafted. That is not what that quote is saying. I don't know what that article is from, but does the next sentence continue on with how he completely dominated both college seasons, a north woods season, and a cape cod season after that injury? I'd bet it does.

I mean the team that shook up the draft was the Rangers. They drafted Kumar Rocker #3 overall after the Mets didn't sign him the season before because of an elbow injury, but your argument is that the other 6 teams in the top 7 passed on Lee because of a knee injury 3 years prior that he showed he not only healed from, but excelled after? You're wrong here, I'm sorry. If that's the best source you have you have no sources since that quote isn't at all saying what you're claiming it's saying.

[shortround81]

Gross 

[wabene]

This thread is just making me want to keep my pants on. 

[ashbury]

On 10/19/2022 at 5:15 PM, Richie the Rally Goat said:

Fielding metrics are pretty soft and squishy.

Fielding is much more of a Small Sample Size topic than either batting or pitching is.  The batting stats that we look at to tell whether the sample size is large enough, e.g. plate appearances, actually are composed of smaller decisions and actions made by the batter to test his skill, in that the average plate appearance is composed of just under 4 pitches, likewise innings pitched for pitchers is magnified by the quality of the many pitches thrown during the inning.  So a season's worth of work is measured in the thousands of micro-decisions and attempts at skill.  By contrast, even the busiest of fielders is tested only several hundred times a season*, and a majority of those opportunities are considered "routine" plays.  Small Sample Size is the crux of the problem, IMO; it's reasonable to mistrust any defensive stat, but it's still measuring something important so sometimes you have to take what you get and make the best of it.

 

* I'm not counting 1Bmen and catchers, who rack up larger numbers of "chances" that are meaningless for purposes of evaluating skill for the most part, because someone is aiming their throws at them with the idea that they'll be caught.

[Riverbrian]

8 hours ago, ashbury said:

Fielding is much more of a Small Sample Size topic than either batting or pitching is.  The batting stats that we look at to tell whether the sample size is large enough, e.g. plate appearances, actually are composed of smaller decisions and actions made by the batter to test his skill, in that the average plate appearance is composed of just under 4 pitches, likewise innings pitched for pitchers is magnified by the quality of the many pitches thrown during the inning.  So a season's worth of work is measured in the thousands of micro-decisions and attempts at skill.  By contrast, even the busiest of fielders is tested only several hundred times a season*, and a majority of those opportunities are considered "routine" plays.  Small Sample Size is the crux of the problem, IMO; it's reasonable to mistrust any defensive stat, but it's still measuring something important so sometimes you have to take what you get and make the best of it.

 

* I'm not counting 1Bmen and catchers, who rack up larger numbers of "chances" that are meaningless for purposes of evaluating skill for the most part, because someone is aiming their throws at them with the idea that they'll be caught.

Agreed

Yet... these defensive metrics are folded into WAR. 

I use a stick of butter when I make my scrambled eggs. There are people who tell me that is too much butter.