Was the Bomba Squad Overrated?

[Parfigliano]

4 hours ago, sun said:

The Twins Bomba Squad beat the Bronx Bombers head to head in a season competition to set the new bomba record. Setting the new record despite having a larger home ballpark was a much more noteworthy accomplishment than winning the playoff round.

Setting the new bomba record clearly offsets the playoff loss since the Yankees did not go on to win the world series or even play in it because they lost to the Astros in 6 games. 

Future generations will long remember the record breaking bomba season as the year that the Twins bested the Yankees and not the other way around.

Sometimes losing enough playoff games to the Yankees has its just rewards.

I just remember beating them in HR's.  Easier on the blood pressure.

[dxpavelka]

Scoring runs and winning ball games is never overrated.  And I would say not winning post season games changed what the team did moving forward more than what happened in the regular season did.  We've moved on from a lot of guys from the 2019 & 2020 teams.  The results have not thus far translated to on-field success.  Prove me wrong.

[JD-TWINS]

The Bomba Squad deserves respect! Every other team was hitting a juiced baseball in ‘19.

Vs historical teams, because of the enhanced ball, they are somewhat over rated.

Fun to watch with what I recall was a roster of 7-8 guys with 20 HR…….4 guys with 30 HR.

Don’t think 1 year signings are detrimental. You use them to plug holes as needed.

Twins are good shape this year with depth!

However, if Gallo plays to his top end, & we want to, we can sign him for another year………….short term may cost up to $16 million but the year to year is worthwhile in this case. Signing Gray to a one year extension with some mutual options for ‘25 isn’t a bad thought. Same with Maeda! Again, shorter term deals may cost more per year but we aren’t signing anchors if we sign guys a year at a time.

[Cris E]

Eh, over-rated is a weak analysis point. "Some people said good things but we smart people know better" is just a lame topic. Talk about rentals vs long-term roster construction if you will ( almost none of those guys are back only four years later) but insisting that years of control amounts to a goal in itself makes no sense if your prospects aren't good. And if you like a player you can buy years of control by signing a longer term contract. Control is not a useful measure.

You know the last time we had such an outlier offense in a ridiculously high offensive environment? 1987 was eerily similar in both the spike in league-wide power and the Twins' crazy exploitation of it. It was fun to watch the batters slug and the pitchers hang on, and, in the big difference from 2019, they lucked out in the playoffs. You can still see the pennant hanging out in center field.

[Brock Beauchamp]

The team wasn’t overrated, they just didn’t have any good healthy players left by the time they reached the postseason. 

[cHawk]

6 hours ago, HoskenPowell said:

Fun to watch , but you knew it wasn't gonna work in the playoffs.

How come? If we were playing Houston I would agree with you but the Yankees’ pitching staff was nothing special in 2019. Scoring 2.3 runs/game against that pitching staff wasn’t something any of us expected.

[mikelink45]

7 hours ago, D.C Twins said:

Fair, but the juiced ball year definitely lowers the impact of their 'Team Home Run Record.' 

Best measure of Team Home Run Record would be the difference between Team Home Runs and the median team home runs hit in the league that season (or divide Team Home Runs by the Median Team Home Runs in the league for a ratio) to adjust for the conditions of that year. Those results could then be compared year over year. 

Given that metric, I doubt they would be the best ever. 

Still a fun season with wild success, but overrated historically. 

How about doing the math?  I would like to know what the results are.  "There were 1.39 home runs hit per team game in 2019, a whopping 11 percent more than the previous record, and 20 percent more than any other season in major league history."  SBNation "In all, half the teams in the entire league set franchise records for home runs in 2019, led by the Twins beating their previous team mark by 36 percent."

Now take us further with your thoughts.

[DocBauer]

1 hour ago, Brock Beauchamp said:

The team wasn’t overrated, they just didn’t have any good healthy players left by the time they reached the postseason. 

This.

With all due respect intended, the only thing that keeps this from being "click bait" is the use of the word "WAS" in the headline.

First of all, isn't EVERY SINGLE SEASON a microcosm unto itself? The Twins were a very good team that won 101 games! They were wildly entertaining and fun while setting a HR record. And didn't EVERYONE use the juiced ball that season?

SECONDLY, you DON'T win more games than you lose, even with a juiced ball, unless you score more than the opposition. The Twins had a really solid pitching staff in 2019 that allowed that to happen. Chpettit19 laid out the exact parameters of the Twins pitching that season. 

THIRDLY, why does having a couple "rental" players diminish the production and winning of games? If that were remotely true, then we'd better examine every playoff team that DIDN'T WIN a WS and admonish their results and dismiss their accomplishments in those years due to "rental" players being involved. Isn't it the job of the FO to add ballplayers to make the best team they can that year? Don't all teams add 1yr rentals at some point? 

FOURTH. in EVERY sport, only ONE TEAM wins it all. And when that happens, they take home trophies and hang banners. And the regular season fades in to memory, and that's true. But not every 96-102 regular season winning team actually finished on top, regardless of the franchise. So to say those teams, or the 2019 Twins, would qualify as "overated" is not only a misnomer, but the opposite would have to be true as well, wouldn't it? The '87 Twins should then be guilty of being "overated". Same with many other WS winning teams including the Royals and Braves in recent history.

IF we want to continue the arguement of overated and talk about sustainability, it's a slightly different arguement. Despite some roster turnover, the 2020 Twins were on another 100 win pace...based on a full season...and ended on something around a 96 or 98 win pace. (I object to playing a select schedule because you simply can't extrapolate that for everyone and an entire league). And if we're going to do that, we'll then, we need to start talking about some Doger, Yankees, Giants, and a whole bunch of teams that didn't win it all, and thus, should be considered overated. 

Again, every season should be evaluated as to whether it was good or bad, not whether you were the team to come out on top. 

Three playoff teams, a couple back to back, in 6yrs for the current FO, with some stinkers mixed in, including 2022, where the team was in 1st place in the ALC from May to early August before a rash of injuries where even MASH 4077 couldn't have put the team back together again. There's a lot of mid and lower market teams that would call that successful, and might argue they've had sustainable success. Do I want more and think/expect our FO and ownership expects/wants more? Absolutely. But there is no rapid plunge to mediocrity going on here in 6yrs, despite disappointment. 

Rentals, and Cruz, and Rosario from the Bomba Squad SHOULD have been replaced by Correa, Kirilloff, Larnach, etc, even Donaldson. It didn't work out. The staff, right now, looks like one of the best and deepest we've had in some time. Injuries have played a huge part in sustainability, as they did for the finish to 2019 where the Twins were limping in to the playoffs that year. Rookie Randy Dobnack starting a playoff game against the Yankees? 

How far down the rabbit hole of disappontment or "overated" and sustainability do we want to go?

Sustainability is an ongoing arguement, despite the current 6yr stretch. But 2019 was NOT an overated team. They were HISTORIC. They were FUN. They were DAMN GOOD. They also ran out of steam and didn't win it all. But they are NOT overated. 

[tarheeltwinsfan]

It's OK to rank the 2019 Twins team as one of the best Twins teams ever. Only one  other Twins team has won more games, ever. No major league team has hit as many home runs, ever.  Here's an interesting question: Which  Twins team do you rank higher:  1) The 1987 Twins World Champs, which won  the fewest  (85) regular season games  by a World Series Champion, at that time , since MLB expanded to 162 games  in 1961,  and were outscored by their opponents during the regular season  806 runs to 786 runs  or 2) the Bomba squad which won 101 games and set the all time major league record for most home runs in a season by a team? It all depends on whether your emphasis is on the 6 month regular season or the  1/2 month post season. If the 2019 Twins had only won 85 games, there would have been no post season participation by the Twins in 2019. 

[Craig Arko]

Overrated by who? And why should it matter; we all get to cherish our own memories, after all.

[PatPfund]

I've read stuff from this writer that I liked, but this seems a hot mess. Were the 2019 Twins over-rated? By whom? What was this over-rating? The team won 101 games. 101 games. They beat up on their division, but to win 101 you also have to beat other good teams, and they did. Like many other good teams they faltered in the playoffs (and like many who falter they didn't have great pitching and stopped hitting in the clutch).

Then there is the weird 'sustained' tangent, which frankly makes no sense to the argument of rating a specific season's team. (Also very little sense in context of baseball history; the '91 Twins followed a last place team, won it all, then quickly devolved into a lost decade. Does that make the '91 team over-rated?) It also has almost zero internal logic since as pointed out, many of the part-timers were not even contributing in the end, and frankly were tangential to the whole Bomba thing anyway. Of all of the 'one year' players, only Cruz (who wasn't actually a one-year player since he had a team option) hit over 30 HR. The other four who hit 30+ were all young Twins' regulars (Sanó, Rosario, Garver, Kepler). That is "sustainable" by any stretch of the imagination unless the young players all regressed (which, sadly, they did, though Rosario had his Series moments winning a title elsewhere).

The problem here isn't fans being blinded by nostalgia, but a writer using hindsight to tell us a talented team (with inadequate pitching) didn't win the title, and didn't last. I'm pretty sure we all knew that before reading this. But regardless of the article, the 2019 Twins WERE one of the most serious contending teams of recent history, and one of the best regular season teams in the franchise's history with the strongest of all stats to back it up. Wins. 101 of them.

[USAFChief]

7 hours ago, sun said:

 Setting the new record despite having a larger home ballpark was a much more noteworthy accomplishment than winning the playoff round.

 

Nonconcur. 

 

Non.

Concur.

 

Nonconcurnonconcurnonconcurnomconcur.

 

Strongly.

Sheesh.

[RonCoomersOPS]

I don't think overrated is the right word for that team. There's no question that that team could rake, and I think they fully deserved the 101 wins they recorded that year.

I think "unbalanced" is a better word. The 2019 team had a bunch of really, really good hitters that got to benefit from the juiced ball and an organizational shift toward hard contact for XBH over slap singles and using speed; on the pitching side, though, it was still basically Berrios, Odorizzi, and pray for rain.

[old nurse]

Was 2019 so long ago that the blogger forgot how the pitching went south? Did they forget the seasons that were mostly career years for the younger Twins players? 

[Longdistancetwins]

Maybe it is just a matter of taste:  I happen to prefer a team that plays great defense and is able to play small ball when needed.  The Bomba squad had good chemistry and was fun, but it isn’t what I will cherish most in my 50 plus years of being a Twins fan.  

[Nine of twelve]

11 hours ago, Blyleven2011 said:

 though alot of  those homeruns they hit were solo Homer's ( over 50 percent ) , not a game changer 3 run homer  ...

Found a stat that in 2019 56.9% of MLB home runs were solo shots.

https://tbonesbaseball.com/why-solo-home-runs-are-on-the-rise-in-major-league-baseball/

You don't give a number but it sounds like the Twins were about average, maybe even a bit better than average, at hitting multi-run homers that season.

[Jeff D.]

It was fun! It did not lead to the ultimate prize in baseball! Leave it at the fun part.

It has been downhill fun since.

Jettison Professor Baldelli, and let the young guys catch, hit and run. Oh, and let a pitcher get into the sixth unless getting shellacked. 

GO TWINS! Twins Geezer....out!

[tarheeltwinsfan]

10 hours ago, Longdistancetwins said:

Maybe it is just a matter of taste:  I happen to prefer a team that plays great defense and is able to play small ball when needed.  The Bomba squad had good chemistry and was fun, but it isn’t what I will cherish most in my 50 plus years of being a Twins fan.  

I agree and I've been a Senators/Twins fan for longer than anyone who reads this post.  Since 1954. But that doesn't make me right...just "wise" and stuck in my ways.

[chpettit19]

14 hours ago, RonCoomersOPS said:

I don't think overrated is the right word for that team. There's no question that that team could rake, and I think they fully deserved the 101 wins they recorded that year.

I think "unbalanced" is a better word. The 2019 team had a bunch of really, really good hitters that got to benefit from the juiced ball and an organizational shift toward hard contact for XBH over slap singles and using speed; on the pitching side, though, it was still basically Berrios, Odorizzi, and pray for rain.

By the time they got to the playoffs, yes, but Pineda and Gibson were both 2.6 fWAR pitchers in 2019. That put them in the top 50 in baseball. Along with Berrios and Odo they had 4 pitchers in the top 50 of fWAR that year. Pineda getting suspended, and Gibson getting sick, really changed that team at the end of the year.

[D.C Twins]

21 hours ago, chpettit19 said:

As opposed to James Paxton, Masahiro Tanaka (and his 4.45 ERA), and Luis Severino who threw 12 regular season innings that year? Cuz those are the games 1, 2, and 3 starters for the Yankees in that series. Not exactly striking fear in any opposing line ups with that trio either.

As long as we are cherry picking from that year, let's compare the Twins (even healthy) SP to Houston's and Washington's SP that year (the next two opponents if we miraculously got through NY and yes, I definitely would have taken NY SP over ours in the playoffs). 

Having a bunch of reliable #3-esque SP is wonderful for the regular season and will result in a lot of wins. In the playoffs.... not so much. (I don't even think this is really a 'hot take')

In addition, HR or bust is a difficult horse to ride through long series against elite competition because it is not consistent. And really we lost the NY series more because we got 'bust' and not 'HR' from the Bomba squad more than pitching

[D.C Twins]

17 hours ago, tarheeltwinsfan said:

It's OK to rank the 2019 Twins team as one of the best Twins teams ever. Only one  other Twins team has won more games, ever. No major league team has hit as many home runs, ever.  Here's an interesting question: Which  Twins team do you rank higher:  1) The 1987 Twins World Champs, which won  the fewest  (85) regular season games  by a World Series Champion, at that time , since MLB expanded to 162 games  in 1961,  and were outscored by their opponents during the regular season  806 runs to 786 runs  or 2) the Bomba squad which won 101 games and set the all time major league record for most home runs in a season by a team? It all depends on whether your emphasis is on the 6 month regular season or the  1/2 month post season. If the 2019 Twins had only won 85 games, there would have been no post season participation by the Twins in 2019. 

'87 vs 2019 is one of the best comparisons of 'regular season' SP vs. 'playoff SP'

2019 had no Frank Viola (or even close really) and Bert (though not at his prime in his mid-30 still had the potential to flash billiance in big games... and after them..... um.... Les Straker anyone?  anyone?!?) But, you are right, they barely MADE the playoffs

[chpettit19]

1 hour ago, D.C Twins said:

As long as we are cherry picking from that year, let's compare the Twins (even healthy) SP to Houston's and Washington's SP that year (the next two opponents if we miraculously got through NY and yes, I definitely would have taken NY SP over ours in the playoffs). 

Having a bunch of reliable #3-esque SP is wonderful for the regular season and will result in a lot of wins. In the playoffs.... not so much. (I don't even think this is really a 'hot take')

In addition, HR or bust is a difficult horse to ride through long series against elite competition because it is not consistent. And really we lost the NY series more because we got 'bust' and not 'HR' from the Bomba squad more than pitching

"Cherry picking from that year?" We're literally talking about that year. It's not cherry picking by using the stats from the year you're talking about. What a weird thing to say.

It would've been very hard to beat those teams, yes. That's kind of how the postseason is designed. But winning that Yankees series changes a whole lot of narratives, doesn't it? We're not talking about an 18 game playoff losing streak. We're not talking about a FO and manager who've never won a playoff game. It'd change a lot. The Braves won the 2021 World Series with a rotation worse than the Twins 2019 rotation. Charlie Morton and Max Fried were their only 2 pitchers to get to even 2 fWAR that year.

It may not be a "hot take," but it's not all that great of a take either.  How about you go ask the Dodgers how having all their aces has worked out. Yeah, Washington won that WS with an insane rotation. They completely collapsed with that rotation moving forward. Go look at how Houston's rotation performed in the 2021 post season. People think Rocco has a quick hook? That Astros' rotation averaged less than 4 IP per start on their way to a WS loss. Atlanta wasn't much better. Less than 5 IP per start on their way to a WS title. How's the best starter (Kershaw) of this generation done in the postseason? The Phillies rotation last year was 2 studs (kinda like Berrios and Odo in 2019) followed by a whole bunch of guys who were worse than Pineda and Gibson in 2019.

HR's are the "stickiest" playoff offensive stat, actually. So you're provably wrong there. HRs are the best way to score in any baseball game. Even against great pitchers. And it's the stat that caries over the closest from regular season to postseason. You're throwing out all these ideas that people constantly suggest because that's how it "feels" when they watch the postseason. But in reality they're not correct. HRs don't drop in the postseason, BA does. The postseason isn't full of aces blowing through 7, 8, or 9 innings, it's full of staffs of 10 or so guys that can all get playoff guys out. And, mostly, it's just about which team has an Eddie Rosario or 2 that play out of their minds for the month of October. Jeremy Pena being the guy last year (go check his regular season vs postseason stats, it's insane). The postseason is nowhere near as predictable as people like to act. Otherwise the Dodgers would have way more championships than just the 2020 short season title.

[LastOnePicked]

2019 was fun and unexpected and unsustainable, but here's the price the organization paid for 2019 - it made an unaccomplished rookie manager seem much better than he really was. Rocco's performance has gotten steadily worse every year since. Last year was one of the most poorly-managed Twins seasons I've ever seen, culminating in a total season collapse from solidly in first in late summer to third-place-but-closer-to-last by fall.

2019 gave everyone in the organization a halo effect, giving some job security they really shouldn't have. 

[D.C Twins]

9 hours ago, chpettit19 said:

"Cherry picking from that year?" We're literally talking about that year. It's not cherry picking by using the stats from the year you're talking about. What a weird thing to say.

It would've been very hard to beat those teams, yes. That's kind of how the postseason is designed. But winning that Yankees series changes a whole lot of narratives, doesn't it? We're not talking about an 18 game playoff losing streak. We're not talking about a FO and manager who've never won a playoff game. It'd change a lot. The Braves won the 2021 World Series with a rotation worse than the Twins 2019 rotation. Charlie Morton and Max Fried were their only 2 pitchers to get to even 2 fWAR that year.

It may not be a "hot take," but it's not all that great of a take either.  How about you go ask the Dodgers how having all their aces has worked out. Yeah, Washington won that WS with an insane rotation. They completely collapsed with that rotation moving forward. Go look at how Houston's rotation performed in the 2021 post season. People think Rocco has a quick hook? That Astros' rotation averaged less than 4 IP per start on their way to a WS loss. Atlanta wasn't much better. Less than 5 IP per start on their way to a WS title. How's the best starter (Kershaw) of this generation done in the postseason? The Phillies rotation last year was 2 studs (kinda like Berrios and Odo in 2019) followed by a whole bunch of guys who were worse than Pineda and Gibson in 2019.

HR's are the "stickiest" playoff offensive stat, actually. So you're provably wrong there. HRs are the best way to score in any baseball game. Even against great pitchers. And it's the stat that caries over the closest from regular season to postseason. You're throwing out all these ideas that people constantly suggest because that's how it "feels" when they watch the postseason. But in reality they're not correct. HRs don't drop in the postseason, BA does. The postseason isn't full of aces blowing through 7, 8, or 9 innings, it's full of staffs of 10 or so guys that can all get playoff guys out. And, mostly, it's just about which team has an Eddie Rosario or 2 that play out of their minds for the month of October. Jeremy Pena being the guy last year (go check his regular season vs postseason stats, it's insane). The postseason is nowhere near as predictable as people like to act. Otherwise the Dodgers would have way more championships than just the 2020 short season title.

So, boiling it down to the basics, you believe that with Gibson, Pineda, and Dyson present and healthy, we would have made a deep post season run in 2019 competing with not only NY, but also Houston and Washington that year (I was inferring that you were cherry picking one post season team's starting rotation, not the actual NY stats presented)  ...got it.

We'll have to agree to disagree on that one (and hopefully the front office does too if we hope to challenge for a WS at any time in the future)

 

[chpettit19]

8 hours ago, D.C Twins said:

So, boiling it down to the basics, you believe that with Gibson, Pineda, and Dyson present and healthy, we would have made a deep post season run in 2019 competing with not only NY, but also Houston and Washington that year (I was inferring that you were cherry picking one post season team's starting rotation, not the actual NY stats presented)  ...got it.

We'll have to agree to disagree on that one (and hopefully the front office does too if we hope to challenge for a WS at any time in the future)

 

Well the article is about 1 season, and you and I were talking about 1 series, so yeah, I "cherry picked" that rotation. Since it was literally what we were talking about.

But I also then pointed out that the Dodgers have been full of aces in the playoffs for years and come up short every year outside of the shortened 2020 season. I pointed out that both 2021 rotations were so lacking in top arms that they averaged less than 5 and less than 4 innings per start for the postseason. I pointed to the Phillies rotation last year that was 2 really good pitchers (like the Twins had in the season we're talking about, and you even pointed out in the '87 season) and a bunch of nothing. I didn't point out that their offense was very HR dependant, but could've done that, too. The Brewers have been running multiple top starters out in the postseason for years, backed by an elite back end of their bullpen, but never make deep runs. How could that be? The Dodgers and Brewers each have ace filled rotations, and you've made it very clear that's what wins in the playoffs. Why haven't I been tagging along with my Milwaukee friends to NLCS games against the Dodgers every year? It's almost like the postseason is nowhere near as "aces and BA win" as you're suggesting. 

So, yes, I believe the Twins COULD have made a deep run with a healthy team in 2019. But I'm also crazy enough to believe that the postseason is incredibly random, and "the best team" with the most aces and least HR dependant lineup doesn't win most of the time. But, hey, you're able to "cherry pick" the Nationals from 1 season with a rotation that fits your narrative so at least there's that. 

There's no rhyme or reason to the postseason. Get in and do your best to get hot for that month. I don't know how many more studies people smarter than us have to do with postseason stats to get people to believe that, but clearly it'll take at least 1 more to convince many Twins fans that the team simply isn't too dumb to ever accomplish that ultimate goal. I mean, shoot, the Phillies hit a high K, high power, low BA guy leadoff last year and thought they could win. Those idiots don't know you can't win without a no power, slap hitter at the top? That's baseball 101, obviously!

[RonCoomersOPS]

On 2/12/2023 at 9:28 AM, chpettit19 said:

By the time they got to the playoffs, yes, but Pineda and Gibson were both 2.6 fWAR pitchers in 2019. That put them in the top 50 in baseball. Along with Berrios and Odo they had 4 pitchers in the top 50 of fWAR that year. Pineda getting suspended, and Gibson getting sick, really changed that team at the end of the year.

That's true, but once Pineda and Gibson went down we found ourselves putting Randy Dobnak on the bump in game two. I love Dobnak and think his is a great story, but the odds of him holding up under the bright lights of a October baseball in New York were never good and the odds of him having sustained success were worse still. And then there's the whole Devin Smeltzer, Kohl Stewart, and Lewis Thorpe experiments that had to break just right to get us into the playoffs in the first place...

 

[chpettit19]

6 hours ago, RonCoomersOPS said:

That's true, but once Pineda and Gibson went down we found ourselves putting Randy Dobnak on the bump in game two. I love Dobnak and think his is a great story, but the odds of him holding up under the bright lights of a October baseball in New York were never good and the odds of him having sustained success were worse still. And then there's the whole Devin Smeltzer, Kohl Stewart, and Lewis Thorpe experiments that had to break just right to get us into the playoffs in the first place...

 

Oh, the overall depth was not good at all. It's what doomed them, and now has people acting like they won every game 11-10 because of all the HRs. My ultimate point is simply that they pitched very well that year, and were a complete team when healthy. But their lack of depth made a couple injuries, and a suspension, absolutely devastating at the absolutely worst time of year.