Article: Liriano's Success Is Tough To Stomach

[Brock Beauchamp]

I'll try. ERA+ under Anderson 94 ERA+under Duncan 101.

 

Close enough to be irrelevant.

[Hosken Bombo Disco]

Dickey is a poor example as well, a number of teams tried him before the Twins and also failed, the success he enjoyed wasn't something that anyone was predicting. I remember no great outcry among the fanbase when the Twins let him go.

 

The Dickey example is legit - a knuckleballer who the Twins used as a situational reliever. On top of that, Gardenhire started out by telling him not to throw his knuckleball in critical situations so that Joe wouldnt have to chase any passed balls. The Mets needed innings (like the Twins did) they signed a rubber arm like Dickey, let him start, and got several good years from him.

 

Another example, one you will never see anywhere, is Phil Humber. In 2008-2009 Patrick Reusse called him the very worst pitcher on a major league roster. But in 2011 Don Cooper somehow got almost an entire good season out of him, 9-9, 3.75 ERA. Yeah Humber regressed, but so does every pitcher on the Twins roster if they hang around long enough -- the "blame the players" philosophy that the Twins more and more resort to is unfortunate I think we can all agree.

[Brock Beauchamp]

The Dickey example is legit - a knuckleballer who the Twins used as a situational reliever. On top of that, Gardenhire started out by telling him not to throw his knuckleball in critical situations so that Joe wouldnt have to chase any passed balls. The Mets needed innings (like the Twins did) they signed a rubber arm like Dickey, let him start, and got several good years from him.

 

It's not an insane request to ask a knuckleball reliever not to throw the pitch in critical situations. The chance of a passed ball/wild pitch is too high.

 

Of course, this also limits the effectiveness of said knuckleballer, which begs the question "why was he relieving at all?"

 

Even the Mets expected little or nothing from Dickey. This is as clear-cut of a case of a guy coming out of nowhere as I've seen in baseball. I fail to see the point in laying blame for the Twins failing to stick with a guy who had been passed over by every front office in baseball multiple times. It sure is easy to predict the future when looking through the rearview mirror.

 

There are some legit points in questioning the Liriano move. There are legit questions in asking why the Twins let Lohse go to the Reds for a bag of balls because even the most pedestrian of starting pitchers hold a lot of value. What I don't see is a benefit from second-guessing a move that 95% of us agreed with at the time as the collective Twins fanbase yawned and/or said "meh" when Dickey was released.

[Mike Sixel]

I had no issue letting Dickey and Lohse go.....if they were afraid of the knuckleball, then they had to let him go.

 

but I'm still waiting for evidence that starting pitchers get better with more coaching from this staff. Heck, given their sloppy baserunning and fielding, I'm waiting for evidence anyone is benefiting from any of the MLB coaching right now.

[Brock Beauchamp]

but I'm still waiting for evidence that starting pitchers get better with more coaching from this staff. Heck, given their sloppy baserunning and fielding, I'm waiting for evidence anyone is benefiting from any of the MLB coaching right now.

 

It has been my opinion that the baserunning and fielding has been in a general decline since TK left in 2001. I have absolutely no stats to back that up, though.

 

As for pitching, Anderson has gotten some really good performances from many relievers over the years, relievers that didn't continue to pitch effectively after leaving the team or failed to pitch effectively before joining the Twins. A good example of the latest is Jared Burton.

 

Starters are a little more difficult to quantify because honestly, the FA starters the Twins have acquired over the years have been several shades of awful. But Eric Milton fell apart after leaving the team. Carl Pavano was nothing special before joining the Twins, where he had a decent partial season, one very good season, and another decent season before collapsing from old age.

 

Don't get me wrong, I'm not giving Anderson all the credit for those pitchers... I believe most of a player's success is from the player. But the pendulum swings in both directions and it's not hard to find examples, both good and bad.

[JB_Iowa]

First and foremost, I am incredibly happy for Frankie and I'm glad that he is pitching well for a team that may well be headed for the playoffs in a tough division.

 

Second, I don't know how good/bad a pitching coach Anderson is. I suspect that he is better with certain pitchers than with others.

 

I DO know that over the last 10 or so years, the Twins' philosophy throughout the organization has been "pitch to contact" and that that Anderson has been one of its primary proponents. I also know that it has worked to some extent. For a number of years, the Twins had a pitching staff of decent but not great pitchers who were able to provide enough starting pitching that the team was in the playoffs.

 

But, other than Santana, it doesn't seem like the Twins were willing to allow power arms be power arms (and frankly intense personalities to be intense personalities).

 

To some extent I believe that was organizational but I also believe that Anderson was a large part of that. Even if the organization's philosophy has changed somewhat; what, if anything, is there to say that Anderson can comfortably fit into a different philosophy? I've always had the impression that, while not wholly responsible for the organization's pitch to contact obsession, Gardenhire and Anderson led the charge on it.

[gil4]

First and foremost, I am incredibly happy for Frankie and I'm glad that he is pitching well for a team that may well be headed for the playoffs in a tough division.

 

That definitely ain't first and foremost for me.

 

Sure, I'm happy for him and I'm glad I can wear my Liriano jersey in public, but first and foremost I'm annoyed that the Twins gave up on a high upside talent and signed losers like Correia and Pelfrey instead.

[terencemann]

I had no issue letting Dickey and Lohse go.....if they were afraid of the knuckleball, then they had to let him go.

 

but I'm still waiting for evidence that starting pitchers get better with more coaching from this staff. Heck, given their sloppy baserunning and fielding, I'm waiting for evidence anyone is benefiting from any of the MLB coaching right now.

 

I have the same concern about the coaches. There's not a lot of evidence behind it, but how many guys have recently joined the Twins from other teams and then suddenly taken a big step forward?

[diehardtwinsfan]

That definitely ain't first and foremost for me.

 

Sure, I'm happy for him and I'm glad I can wear my Liriano jersey in public, but first and foremost I'm annoyed that the Twins gave up on a high upside talent and signed losers like Correia and Pelfrey instead.

They gave him an offer. He turned them down.

[launchingthrees]

Anyone here want to take a swing at that argument?

 

His best 4 years(fip) are with a team other than the twins. This includes 2 seasons with Duncan. His average Fip is significantly lower away from the twins. You can say his results were identical but that doesn't make it true.

[Brock Beauchamp]

His best 4 years(fip) are with a team other than the twins. This includes 2 seasons with Duncan. His average Fip is significantly lower away from the twins. You can say his results were identical but that doesn't make it true.

 

And I'm sure that moving to the National League had nothing to do with the decrease in FIP.

 

But I'm positive that someone making snotty responses would fully take that into account before responding to my post.

 

If you had bothered to use FIP-, a stat that actually adjusts for league, Lohse's five best Anderson/Duncan seasons go like this:

 

Duncan, Anderson, Duncan, Anderson, Anderson.

 

He was a mediocre pitcher under Anderson. He continued to be a mediocre pitcher under Duncan. No matter how you shake down the stats, they tell you the same thing if you're trying to look at it objectively.

[launchingthrees]

 

If you had bothered to use FIP-, a stat that actually adjusts for league, Lohse's five best Anderson/Duncan seasons go like this:

 

Duncan, Anderson, Duncan, Anderson, Anderson.

 

Nope. At least not according to fangraphs.

His best 5 seasons

1. 2008 cardinals 92 fip-

2. 2012 cardinals 93 fip-

3. 2006 twins/reds *96 fip-(very generous to count this season as he was in the bullpen for the twins)

4. 2003 twins. 96 fip-

5 2007 reds/phil 98 fip-

 

He was a mediocre pitcher under Anderson. He continued to be a mediocre pitcher under Duncan. No matter how you shake down the stats, they tell you the same thing if you're trying to look at it objectively.

 

It depends on what you mean by mediocre. But he has been better since leaving the Twins based on your own metrics. It's obvious to anyone looking at the seasons that he didn't have identical production under Anderson and Duncan. I don't get what's in it for you to claim otherwise?

[Hosken Bombo Disco]

And I'm sure that moving to the National League had nothing to do with the decrease in FIP.

 

But I'm positive that someone making snotty responses would fully take that into account before responding to my post.

 

If you had bothered to use FIP-, a stat that actually adjusts for league, Lohse's five best Anderson/Duncan seasons go like this:

 

Duncan, Anderson, Duncan, Anderson, Anderson.

 

He was a mediocre pitcher under Anderson. He continued to be a mediocre pitcher under Duncan. No matter how you shake down the stats, they tell you the same thing if you're trying to look at it objectively.

 

I will agree that Lohse doesn't impress me as being a great example of a cudgel to pound over Rick Anderson's head. The capable seasons you mentioned, plus he's just been gone a long time now (oh, and just another ex-Twin with a World Series ring - yawn - so there's good reason why people point to Lohse a lot.

 

But to my mind "Andy's" record still does not look good, Liriano included.

[Hosken Bombo Disco]

Nope. At least not according to fangraphs.

His best 5 seasons

1. 2008 cardinals 92 fip-

2. 2012 cardinals 93 fip-

3. 2006 twins/reds *96 fip-(very generous to count this season as he was in the bullpen for the twins)

4. 2003 twins. 96 fip-

5 2007 reds/phil 98 fip-

 

 

For me, I just think Lohse's been gone so long and isn't the Radke type of guy to begin with, who you'd see making a long career with the one team who brought him up. I'd throw Garza in that group too - Garza wouldn't still be a Twin at this point.

[Brock Beauchamp]

Nope. At least not according to fangraphs.

His best 5 seasons

1. 2008 cardinals 92 fip-

2. 2012 cardinals 93 fip-

3. 2006 twins/reds *96 fip-(very generous to count this season as he was in the bullpen for the twins)

4. 2003 twins. 96 fip-

5 2007 reds/phil 98 fip-

 

1. Dave Duncan was not the pitching coach in 2012. That's my point. Lohse magically improved after Duncan left, hence my "if you're arguing that Anderson is a failure, then don't you have to argue the same for Duncan?"

 

2. Why are you including Reds and Phillies seasons? My statement clearly said "Lohse's best Duncan/Anderson seasons". And my list was accurate and I didn't include Lohse's split Twins/Reds season.

 

It depends on what you mean by mediocre. But he has been better since leaving the Twins based on your own metrics. It's obvious to anyone looking at the seasons that he didn't have identical production under Anderson and Duncan. I don't get what's in it for you to claim otherwise?

 

Care to revise this statement now?

 

My point is that Lohse remained a marginal pitcher for many years after leaving the Twins, despite spending several of those years under who was, at the time, probably the most widely-regarded pitching coach in MLB.

 

FIP and FIP- are hardly perfect stats. The difference between 95 and 105 is marginal and that's what mediocre pitchers do over time. They don't pitch 100 FIP- and ERA+ year in and year out. They bounce around a little and the difference is little more than white noise over the course of a career. Lohse had up and down seasons (but overall, still mediocre) seasons with Anderson. He did the same with Duncan. Including split seasons is relying too much on SSS to even bother with them, as they are influenced by ballpark changes, division changes, facing new hitters, and a host of things that require believing FIP and FIP- are 100% accurate, which is more than I'm willing to give either statistic. Arguing that Lohse was better under Duncan is like arguing the difference between a 2.2 and 2.5 WAR. Waaaaaay too far within the margin of error to prove anything (and if we want to go down the WAR rabbit hole, Lohse's 3.4 WAR under Anderson in 2003 is better than any season he posted under Duncan).

[snepp]

The WARbit hole, I'm holding on to that one.

[launchingthrees]

1. Dave Duncan was not the pitching coach in 2012. That's my point. Lohse magically improved after Duncan left, hence my "if you're arguing that Anderson is a failure, then don't you have to argue the same for Duncan?"

 

2. Why are you including Reds and Phillies seasons? My statement clearly said "Lohse's best Duncan/Anderson seasons". And my list was accurate and I didn't include Lohse's split Twins/Reds season.

 

 

You: his stats were identical under Anderson and Duncan

someone: no they weren't. They were better under Duncan

you: yeah well a 101/94 era+ isn't significantly significant(lol confidence intervals)

me: well he was also worse in terms of FIP with the twins

you:You need to use FIP- to adjust for league/ballpark

me: he was also better under Duncan in terms of FIP-

you: well those stats aren't 100% accurate

 

 

 

Pitchers on average get worse when they come to the Twins and better when they leave. This is demonstrably true. Being a diehard is fun but it also causes you to take awfully poor positions in the hopes of defending your team. Do you remember when you said Hicks will get votes for rookie of the year? This was a lot like that.

[Brock Beauchamp]

You: his stats were identical under Anderson and Duncan

someone: no they weren't. They were better under Duncan

you: yeah well a 101/94 era+ isn't significantly significant(lol confidence intervals)

me: well he was also worse in terms of FIP with the twins

you:You need to use FIP- to adjust for league/ballpark

me: he was also better under Duncan in terms of FIP-

you: well those stats aren't 100% accurate

 

 

 

Pitchers on average get worse when they come to the Twins and better when they leave. This is demonstrably true. Being a diehard is fun but it also causes you to take awfully poor positions in the hopes of defending your team. Do you remember when you said Hicks will get votes for rookie of the year? This was a lot like that.

 

Are you kidding me? First, I said "nearly identical", not "identical". Second, I pointed out that some stats show that Anderson got arguably "better" results, like WAR.

 

First you come into the conversation using FIP to "prove" your point, which doesn't even adjust for league. You may as well have entered this conversation using ERA and wins. Then you tried to use Lohse's 2012 season because you didn't even realize Duncan wasn't the pitching coach that season.

 

If you want to argue the difference between a FIP- of 96 and 102 in different leagues and different seasons, have at it. You're not going to find many experienced statheads to take that bait because it's pointless and well within the boundaries of "mediocre" and "don't care". If WAR is telling you a guy had marginally better seasons under Anderson and FIP- is telling you that guy was marginally better under Duncan, guess what? The guy was pretty much the same under both coaches. It doesn't matter and arguing otherwise is an exercise in futility because advanced metrics are not perfect and they are not exact. After all, no one can even decide how WAR is calculated. Hell, FanGraphs even says on their site that FIP should be used as a predictive tool. But I'm sure you knew that and read this on the FG site:

 

FIP does a better job of predicting the future than measuring the present, as there can be a lot of fluctuation in small samples. It is less effective in describing a pitcher’s single game performance and is more appropriate in a season’s worth of innings.

 

As for Hicks, don't grossly misrepresent my point. I said "if Hicks keeps hitting, he will get votes based on his counting stats". You know damned well that's what I said.

 

Guess what Hicks stopped doing? Hitting.

 

I'm done with this conversation. If you want to keep arguing something so entirely pointless and in such an ill-informed manner, you can say it to empty space. I have better things to do.