Analyze This: Jose Abreu Is the Bat Minnesota Needs

[Nick Nelson]

11 hours ago, dxpavelka said:

Kind of funny.  You, and many others, describe RBIs as a stat of opportunity and then decry the Twins lack of taking advantage of opportunity.  RBI is the first thing I look for when it comes to player production.  Yeah, you gotta have opportunities to get them but you also have to take advantage of those opportunities.  I'll take the big RBI boppers every time.  I'll go to war with a lineup of Judge, Alonzo, Ramirez, Goldschmidt, Tucker, Alvarez, Lindor, Turner & Realmuto any day of the week and you can pick whichever one you want using whatever metric you want.  I'll bet on mine to beat yours.

 

I agree that those are all great players, but it's not because of RBIs. Realmuto?? He's never even had 85 RBIs in a season!

Elite hitters in good lineups are going to have high RBI totals, inevitably. That's the point. 

[Trov]

2 hours ago, Karbo said:

I agree that RBI is still a very important stat. You looked a lot at runner on 3rd  but I would like to see stats with runner on 2nd and how effective guys are. 

I personally like Abreu but don't think I would spend a huge contract on him, due mainly to his age and lack of defense, & position he plays.

For runners on 2nd overall, Joe has the edge, in similar PA, difference of 6, Joe had 170 RBI, to Puckett 143.  If you look at just runner on first, Joe was way behind, in part Puckett had many more HR. Puckett had about 50 more RBI, with 22 more HR, which being you get 2 per those types of HR, that almost makes the difference.  

If you look at 2 outs and runner on 2nd, Joe has edge even more over Puckett. Overall as I said, they had very similar chances to drive in runs, and Puckett had the edge, in part because he took less walks in those cases.  I would have to do much more of a deep dive as to how that may have affected the inning. My main point I was making is some guys will more reliable overall to drive in runs over a career and not just up to opportunities.  

[Mike Sixel]

12 hours ago, dxpavelka said:

Kind of funny.  You, and many others, describe RBIs as a stat of opportunity and then decry the Twins lack of taking advantage of opportunity.  RBI is the first thing I look for when it comes to player production.  Yeah, you gotta have opportunities to get them but you also have to take advantage of those opportunities.  I'll take the big RBI boppers every time.  I'll go to war with a lineup of Judge, Alonzo, Ramirez, Goldschmidt, Tucker, Alvarez, Lindor, Turner & Realmuto any day of the week and you can pick whichever one you want using whatever metric you want.  I'll bet on mine to beat yours.

 

 

To be clear, you'll go with a lineup of all stars and the best hitters in the game?  I'm not sure how this is an argument for RBI. 

[Bigfork Twins Guy]

I would say no on him at this point in his career, and at this point where the Twins have several younger guys that need at-bats.

[USAFChief]

Funny how RBI aren't important until nobody has any.

 

Abreu would be a fantastic addition to this lineup. Fantastic. The guy drives in runs.

[chpettit19]

Abreu to Houston sounds like it's all but done.

[AceWrigley]

Astros read your article and grabbed him.

[Mike Sixel]

36 minutes ago, USAFChief said:

Funny how RBI aren't important until nobody has any.

 

Abreu would be a fantastic addition to this lineup. Fantastic. The guy drives in runs.

Zero people say this, yet you keep arguing against it. 

I would be good with signing him, he's a good RH hitter. Which they really need when Buxton gets hurt.

[Mike Sixel]

1 minute ago, AceWrigley said:

Astros read your article and grabbed him.

Well then. Guess MN isn't getting him. Hopefully they find a RH that is good in free agency or trade....

[USAFChief]

2 minutes ago, Mike Sixel said:

Zero people say this, yet you keep arguing against it. 

I would be good with signing him, he's a good RH hitter. Which they really need when Buxton gets hurt.

Zero people?

 

You can't be serious. "RBI are meaningless" is orthodox stathead-ology.

[Mike Sixel]

2 minutes ago, USAFChief said:

Zero people?

 

You can't be serious. "RBI are meaningless" is orthodox stathead-ology.

Zero people say RBI aren't important. Zero. And no, despite your thought, it is not part of the orthodoxy that they aren't important. Not even close. Not even remotely close. 

[chpettit19]

16 minutes ago, Mike Sixel said:

Zero people say RBI aren't important. Zero. And no, despite your thought, it is not part of the orthodoxy that they aren't important. Not even close. Not even remotely close. 

I don't know if @USAFChief is right that it's "orthodox stathead-ology" (I know a handful of stat guys who like RBI still), but there are certainly more than zero people who say "RBI are meaningless." Cuz I say RBI are meaningless. It's a little bit semantics here, but RBI are important while the stat is meaningless. You need to drive in runs to win. So it's important. But the RBI stat isn't measuring what people who like it claim it is. It's not at all hard to find BA with RISP stats. Or % of runners driven in stats. Or any number of combinations of outs, bases occupied, game situation, etc. stats that show who the actual clutch hitters are while RBI does nothing of the sort. 

For example: In 2022 Jose Abreu drove in 75 runs while Jose Miranda drove in 66. However, Abreu had 679 PAs to Miranda's 483. Miranda drove in 16.1% of the baserunners he had on during his 483 PAs. Abreu drove in 13.8% of his. Guy on 3rd, less than 2 outs? Abreu drove in 39.4% of his runners, Miranda drove in 47.2% of his. 

So, yes, RBI are important because runs are how you win and you need to drive them in. But, no, RBI is not a meaningful stat. Would you rather have had Abreu or Miranda up with runners on last year? RBI says Abreu, but doing even the slightest bit of digging shows Miranda was the far superior hitter when it came to driving in runners last year.

[CRF]

Looks like he's going to the Stros. 

[Major League Ready]

40 minutes ago, chpettit19 said:

I don't know if @USAFChief is right that it's "orthodox stathead-ology" (I know a handful of stat guys who like RBI still), but there are certainly more than zero people who say "RBI are meaningless." Cuz I say RBI are meaningless. It's a little bit semantics here, but RBI are important while the stat is meaningless. You need to drive in runs to win. So it's important. But the RBI stat isn't measuring what people who like it claim it is. It's not at all hard to find BA with RISP stats. Or % of runners driven in stats. Or any number of combinations of outs, bases occupied, game situation, etc. stats that show who the actual clutch hitters are while RBI does nothing of the sort. 

For example: In 2022 Jose Abreu drove in 75 runs while Jose Miranda drove in 66. However, Abreu had 679 PAs to Miranda's 483. Miranda drove in 16.1% of the baserunners he had on during his 483 PAs. Abreu drove in 13.8% of his. Guy on 3rd, less than 2 outs? Abreu drove in 39.4% of his runners, Miranda drove in 47.2% of his. 

So, yes, RBI are important because runs are how you win and you need to drive them in. But, no, RBI is not a meaningful stat. Would you rather have had Abreu or Miranda up with runners on last year? RBI says Abreu, but doing even the slightest bit of digging shows Miranda was the far superior hitter when it came to driving in runners last year.

Great post!  There are obviously stats that are much better measures of effectiveness driving in runs.  Apparently, this is not lost on most "stat heads".

[MABB1959]

Already gone.  The Astros have more depth and money if he doesn't work out.  But going to a team like that he will probably perform better.  They don't accept anything but the best.  Don't think the Twins can work like that since they have no PROVEN depth at all.

[jkcarew]

To me, good RBI guys are real and important. They are innately good hitters that are AGGRESSIVE with pitches in the zone (and predictable/hittable pitches slightly outside the zone) when in RISP situations…especially in 2-out RISP situations. And they aren’t ‘easy’ to K. It’s not necessarily demonstrated by any single-season stat…(opportunity and SSS).

Over 2-3 seasons, I’d take Abreu over Miranda. But that’s moot now. I do think Miranda has the aggressive gene, and I think it will come with a reasonable contact rate as he settles in.

[Major League Ready]

59 minutes ago, jkcarew said:

To me, good RBI guys are real and important. They are innately good hitters that are AGGRESSIVE with pitches in the zone (and predictable/hittable pitches slightly outside the zone) when in RISP situations…especially in 2-out RISP situations. And they aren’t ‘easy’ to K. It’s not necessarily demonstrated by any single-season stat…(opportunity and SSS).

Over 2-3 seasons, I’d take Abreu over Miranda. But that’s moot now. I do think Miranda has the aggressive gene, and I think it will come with a reasonable contact rate as he settles in.

Over 2-3 seasons, I will take Miranda and the nearly $19M per year in salary to be invested elsewhere.  The difference is they can sign Rodon vs a retread.  Miranda plus Rodon >>>>> Abreau and retread.  For those that would prefer a couple high leverage RPs ... That works too.

[Vanimal46]

Jose Abreu appears to be off the market now, but the main point of the article is still valid. The Twins need a big bopper in the lineup. We didn’t have enough firepower on offense… Not even the first half of the year when we had Correa plus red hot Buxton and Arraez. 

As things stand on 11/28, we have lost 140 OPS+ Correa and have 90 OPS+ Kyle Farmer as a depth stand in. If that isn’t resolved, the drop from Correa to Farmer will be felt and seen by the fans on a daily basis in the regular season. 

[garn from vancouver]

houston. we have a problem.

[dxpavelka]

7 hours ago, jmlease1 said:

So, you're happy to go to war with a lineup featuring (in order) the reigning AL MVP, a former RoY and 2-time all-star, a 4-time all-star and cleveland's best hitter, the reigning NL MVP, a 25 year-old all-star & GG winner, a former RoY current all-star & silver slugger (who is 25), a 4-time all-star and 2-time GG winner, a 3-time all-star (I'm assuming you're talking trea Turner?), and a 3-time all-star and 2 time GG winner. Yeah, i think I'd be pretty happy with that lineup too, and it has basically nothing to do with RBIs: you've simply picked a lineup of 9 of the best players in baseball. (BTW, the payroll for the starting lineup would be at least $180M in 2023; if you can spend $20M per spot in the lineup, your team should be pretty effin' good) You didn't just pick a bunch of Abreus: you took MVPs and gold glove winners. You took some of the most complete players in all of baseball.

Abreu is an interesting fit for the twins: there's opportunity at 1B & DH for him in the lineup and he provides serious hitting ability from the right side, which would help balance the lineup. He's been very consistent and healthy, which could mitigate the risk of signing an older player. But my interest in him has little to do with his RBI totals and more in what he could do as a hitter overall: good average, very good OBP, slugging that varies from good to elite...there's a lot in Abreu to like as a RH hitter who nukes lefties and is still very very good against righties. He has no defensive value and can only play 1B or DH, but the Twins have room there, even if we might prefer to get a guy who could give some time in the OF. But he also has the advantage of taking away a great hitter from a division rival.

Actually my lineup is the the top 6 RBI guys in baseball plus Lindor (top RBI SS) Realmuto (top RBI C).  I put Turner at 2B but wouldn't miss a beat if I put Cronenworth there instead.  You made my point for me.  The most complete players in the game are also the top RBI guys.  Abreu would almost certainly, (unless possibly we found a week to keep Correa) slot in as our best RBI guy AND best overall offensive player, barring a HUGE leap from Miranda and I'd be just fine any of  those things.  We scored less than 700 runs last year.  If that number ain't over 800 all the debates on this site about pitching become meaningless.

[dxpavelka]

6 hours ago, Nick Nelson said:

I agree that those are all great players, but it's not because of RBIs. Realmuto?? He's never even had 85 RBIs in a season!

Elite hitters in good lineups are going to have high RBI totals, inevitably. That's the point. 

Realmuto is the best RBI producing catcher in the game.  Gotta have a catcher.  The point is not that elite hitters have high RBI totals, the point is the we need to have elite hitters.  Abreu would help that.

[dxpavelka]

5 hours ago, Mike Sixel said:

To be clear, you'll go with a lineup of all stars and the best hitters in the game?  I'm not sure how this is an argument for RBI. 

Not a lineup of all stars and best hitters in the game.  Lineup of the best RBI guys in the game.  Which is what makes them all-stars and best hitters.  If Judge had 70 RBIs instead of 134 he wouldn't be an all-star OR one of the best hitters in the game.

[Mike Sixel]

5 hours ago, chpettit19 said:

I don't know if @USAFChief is right that it's "orthodox stathead-ology" (I know a handful of stat guys who like RBI still), but there are certainly more than zero people who say "RBI are meaningless." Cuz I say RBI are meaningless. It's a little bit semantics here, but RBI are important while the stat is meaningless. You need to drive in runs to win. So it's important. But the RBI stat isn't measuring what people who like it claim it is. It's not at all hard to find BA with RISP stats. Or % of runners driven in stats. Or any number of combinations of outs, bases occupied, game situation, etc. stats that show who the actual clutch hitters are while RBI does nothing of the sort. 

For example: In 2022 Jose Abreu drove in 75 runs while Jose Miranda drove in 66. However, Abreu had 679 PAs to Miranda's 483. Miranda drove in 16.1% of the baserunners he had on during his 483 PAs. Abreu drove in 13.8% of his. Guy on 3rd, less than 2 outs? Abreu drove in 39.4% of his runners, Miranda drove in 47.2% of his. 

So, yes, RBI are important because runs are how you win and you need to drive them in. But, no, RBI is not a meaningful stat. Would you rather have had Abreu or Miranda up with runners on last year? RBI says Abreu, but doing even the slightest bit of digging shows Miranda was the far superior hitter when it came to driving in runners last year.

Your ability to state what everyone who is a "stathead" states is lost on those that say people say RBI aren't important. The distinction between RBI and whether RBI is a good predictor / indicator of who hits better when it matters is lost on some people, no matter how many times you type it. That was my point. 

[mikelink45]

Those darn Astros - must be cheating again.  I think they put Abreu in a garbage can and hid him from the Twins!

[DocBauer]

An interesting topic, to be sure. The "problem" to me is both sides are correct. And the truth lies in between both sides are correct in their arguement. And it's the same in regard to WINS for a pitcher.

If a team never had a single 90 RBI hitter in their lineup, but had 6-7guys all knock in 75-85, you'd probably have one of the highest scoring teams in all of MLB. What you'd have is a team with solid team AVG and OB and solid hitters throughout the lineup. Once upon a time, you tried to build a team with a couple table setters and a couple 2-3 power hitters to knock guys in and settled for whatever you could get from the bottom half.

Pitchers with high WIN totals are similar. Some pitchers have high win totals with mediocre peripherals but played for a team with a great offense and soid bullpen. And then you have a few years past where King Felix of the Mariners was barely over .500 on a poor team but who's peripherals were so fantastic he won the Cy Young, IIRC. 

Being an RBI producer is important. It means you are a good hitter, with power, and opportunity, and that's great. But you could be the same hitter with fewer opportunities and no threat behind you, and get pitched around, and have a lower RBI. That doesn't make for a bad hitter or poor producer. 

RBI, WINS, and even SAVES, are important. They aren't to be dismissed. But context is important. A d thus, really, both sides of the RBI arguement are correct.

The KEY is a deep and balanced lineup. 

The Twins have a lineup, if you put it on paper, that looks pretty good. It looks a hell of a lot better with 2 quality bats added. The Twins, right or wrong, were never IN on Abreu because they didn't see a fit. He is a 1B/DH they think is covered with what is on hand. They want one of the top 4 SS for defense and top of the order offense. And they're "in" on Haniger for a similar bat to Abreu, maybe better, because he's an OF. Might they be in on Myers as a second choice? 

And if they strikeout at SS, might they pivot more to the OF, Bell as maybe a better version of Abreu at 1B/DH, and end up grabbing Rodon and a couple bullpen arms instead? It's so easy to look at Miranda, Larnach, Wallner, Buxton,  Polanco, and Arraez and just feel good with another solid catcher added. But this team still needs a couple good to great bats to add to feel GOOD about the lineup.

With talent on hand, including guys like Lewis, Lee, and Julien coming up to contribute, and Martin, wherever he ends up playing, the Twins aren't devoid of talent. Personally, I believe Celestino still might be a good 4th OF, but he's been rushed TWICED now. 

The entire SS situation is a precipice for the Twins offseason. SOMETHING has to happen over the next 3-4 weeks. If they can't make SS work, they need to look to pivot elsewhere and add where they can. Adding QUALITY ballplayers ANYWHERE is a good thing. The worst thing they could do is wait to long to do anything. 

No top SS? Then add a couple top bats and add to pitching as best you can and "settle" at SS for now.

[mike8791]

I still contend that the Twins lack dependable middle-of-the-order bats who have a strong clutch gene, evidenced by their RBI production.  The Twins are sorely lacking that and would continue to be even if they sign CC(note: look at last year's run production).  Abreu was the perfect fit as a 1B/DH and cleanup hitter.   But for a 3 year/$20MM/yr contract, I can see why the Twins would pass.  Time will tell who's right here, but without a significant bump in the budget to $160-$180MM(are you listening Joe?) too many holes would be left unfilled.

Yet the need still exists for an offensive upgrade.  Two( and preferably 3) of the following should be hard targets for the FO:  Contreras, Haninger, Bell, e.g.  The Twins should make very competitive offers for at least 2 of these guys, trade Kepler in a package for a proven starter(Lopez would work nicely) and have money left over for a couple of proven arms for late inning relief.  And if Joe really wants a playoff team, he should up the budget to be able to sign one of the top 4 SSs.  Now that would be a wonderful Xmas present for all us suffering Twins fans!!

[se7799]

On 11/28/2022 at 3:34 PM, Major League Ready said:

Great post!  There are obviously stats that are much better measures of effectiveness driving in runs.  Apparently, this is not lost on most "stat heads".

How is it possible to have a better stat to show the effectiveness of driving in runs....other than the one stat that actually counts the number of runs driven in? ? 

[Major League Ready]

14 hours ago, se7799 said:

How is it possible to have a better stat to show the effectiveness of driving in runs....other than the one stat that actually counts the number of runs driven in? ? 

Did you read the explanation Chpettit gave?  Rather than double quote I just inserted it below.

“But the RBI stat isn't measuring what people who like it claim it is. It's not at all hard to find BA with RISP stats. Or % of runners driven in stats. Or any number of combinations of outs, bases occupied, game situation, etc. stats that show who the actual clutch hitters are while RBI does nothing of the sort. 
For example: In 2022 Jose Abreu drove in 75 runs while Jose Miranda drove in 66. However, Abreu had 679 PAs to Miranda's 483. Miranda drove in 16.1% of the baserunners he had on during his 483 PAs. Abreu drove in 13.8% of his. Guy on 3rd, less than 2 outs? Abreu drove in 39.4% of his runners, Miranda drove in 47.2% of his. 

If I catch 200 walleyes over the course of a summer and you catch 150 am I the better fisherman.  Well, if you fished 15 days and I fished 20 days, I would say no.  I just had more opportunity to fish.

What are we really looking for?  We want a player to convert opportunities, right?  Two players can drive in the exact same number of runs where one has 50% more opportunity.  Those players are not equally adept at driving in runs because they both drove in the same number of runs.  Measuring the percentage of conversions as Chepettit19 has explained here is a far better measure of productivity than simply using total RBI.  

Put a different way, using the one stat that actually counts runs does not provide any measure of effectiveness unless it's pair with the number of opportunities to drive in those runs.  

[se7799]

4 hours ago, Major League Ready said:

Did you read the explanation Chpettit gave?  Rather than double quote I just inserted it below.

“But the RBI stat isn't measuring what people who like it claim it is. It's not at all hard to find BA with RISP stats. Or % of runners driven in stats. Or any number of combinations of outs, bases occupied, game situation, etc. stats that show who the actual clutch hitters are while RBI does nothing of the sort. 
For example: In 2022 Jose Abreu drove in 75 runs while Jose Miranda drove in 66. However, Abreu had 679 PAs to Miranda's 483. Miranda drove in 16.1% of the baserunners he had on during his 483 PAs. Abreu drove in 13.8% of his. Guy on 3rd, less than 2 outs? Abreu drove in 39.4% of his runners, Miranda drove in 47.2% of his. 

If I catch 200 walleyes over the course of a summer and you catch 150 am I the better fisherman.  Well, if you fished 15 days and I fished 20 days, I would say no.  I just had more opportunity to fish.

What are we really looking for?  We want a player to convert opportunities, right?  Two players can drive in the exact same number of runs where one has 50% more opportunity.  Those players are not equally adept at driving in runs because they both drove in the same number of runs.  Measuring the percentage of conversions as Chepettit19 has explained here is a far better measure of productivity than simply using total RBI.  

Put a different way, using the one stat that actually counts runs does not provide any measure of effectiveness unless it's pair with the number of opportunities to drive in those runs.  

I appreciate you taking the time to respond.  I completely agree there are more than a few ways to looks at numbers.  Love the fishing analogy, however I'd still rather have the guy who catches more fish.  Same with rbi.  If player A have 130 rbi vs player B has 80 in less chances both out of the number 4 spot in the lineup.  I choose player A.  Player A probably was healthier and had more opportunities...but he also delivered with these opportunities.  I also watch alot of games.  So in the Miranda/Abrue example.  I already knew Miranda delivered at a higher percentage of opportunities...no need to look into it.  I love anylitcs but I also love counting stats.  There are numerous examples of how both tell the story.  As somebody mentioned above a team made of the top rbi producers beats a team of top percentage of runs driven in players everytime.

[h2oface]

Well, looks like we didn't even have time to get to high noon to draw. ?ZZZZZZZzzzzzzz?