Twins Outright Four Players

[Otto von Ballpark]

  Kwak said:

Last season, Gardenhire lobbied hard (and successfully) to have Hicks as the starting CF. One point was made very clear in the contract extension of Gardenhire--it was Ryan's decision. I'm concluding any lobbying will be more subdued in the future.

 

Interesting take. I theorize that Ryan used to overrule Gardenhire a fair amount in his first tenure. I don't recall anybody of note being moved after being in Gardy's "doghouse".

 

But as soon as Bill Smith took over, note how rumored malcontents Bartlett and Garza were immediately packaged together in a deal, Santana was traded before his walk year so he wouldn't be a distraction, followed later by the frustrating Gomez and eventually the "too slow" JJ Hardy. EDIT TO ADD: Plus the "proven closer" Capps acquisition.

 

Not sure if the power balance changed permanently in TR's absence? I suspect TR is back to overruling Gardy but frankly there aren't enough useful players on this club to tell right now!

[ThePuck]

  ashburyjohn said:

Roenicke's WHIP was bad this year. Might not the explanation be that simple?

 

Seems his WHIP was as bad as it was due to all the walks. 5.2 BB per 9IP is gonna jack up a WHIP. They've made not walking people a pride thing. They've often pointed glowingly at the walk totals, even when the reason walks weren't happening is because batters were beating the snot out of the ball instead...like this year.

[ashbury]

  ThePuck said:

Seems his WHIP was as bad as it was due to all the walks. 5.2 BB per 9IP is gonna jack up a WHIP. They've made not walking people a pride thing. They've often pointed glowingly at the walk totals, even when the reason walks weren't happening is because batters were beating the snot out of the ball instead...like this year.

 

Of course walks contribute to WHIP. What I'm getting at is, if you're going to assume or imply motives and other activities going on between the ears of FO people, alluding to pitch-to-contact or whatever, why not give credit that they saw beyond ERA (which wasn't that hot anyway) and used some more-analytical methods (that go beyond even WHIP?!?!?) to determine whom to demote?

[nicksaviking]

  ThePuck said:

Seems his WHIP was as bad as it was due to all the walks. 5.2 BB per 9IP is gonna jack up a WHIP. They've made not walking people a pride thing. They've often pointed glowingly at the walk totals, even when the reason walks weren't happening is because batters were beating the snot out of the ball instead...like this year.

 

Which is why I'm not a big fan of WHIP. It gives equal weight to walks and hits when hits are clearly more of a detriment. I'd rather my pitcher have an 8.5 H/9 and a 4.0 BB/9 than a 10.5 H/9 and a 2.0 BB/9. My gut tells me the Twins see the 2.0 BB/9 and like that guy best.

[nicksaviking]

  ashburyjohn said:

Of course walks contribute to WHIP. What I'm getting at is, if you're going to assume or imply motives and other activities going on between the ears of FO people, alluding to pitch-to-contact or whatever, why not give credit that they saw beyond ERA (which wasn't that hot anyway) and used some more-analytical methods (that go beyond even WHIP?!?!?) to determine whom to demote?

 

I think what Puck was implying and what I agree with, is that perhaps the biggest motivation for the Roenicke move was his high walk total. I can't speak for him, but my post certainly wasn't an indictment on the front office for not using any kind of advanced metrics to decide on this move. Maybe they did do a more thorough investigation, and if they did, I'd be thrilled, but you don't need any measure inspired by Bill James to tell that Roenicke isn't a very effective pitcher. His high walk total (along with low strikeout total) is good enough to dump him in my book.

[Shane Wahl]

  nicksaviking said:

Are you mad?! You're surely creating anarchists and your intentions to do so in this forum are now quite clear! For shame, FOR SHAME!!

 

Exactly. Exactly. In every way!

[Alex]

  ashburyjohn said:

Of course walks contribute to WHIP. What I'm getting at is, if you're going to assume or imply motives and other activities going on between the ears of FO people, alluding to pitch-to-contact or whatever, why not give credit that they saw beyond ERA (which wasn't that hot anyway) and used some more-analytical methods (that go beyond even WHIP?!?!?) to determine whom to demote?

 

I do hope that is the case, but there are also quotes that seem to go against the grain in terms of any measuring statistic or logical evaluation (like Ryan's quote about the starting pitching).

[Shane Wahl]

Ok, the Roenicke move should give us pause. Not because Roenicke is good and worthy of keeping, but what are the reasons for the decision? It can't be just the walks, right? There are plenty of good reasons.

[Mike Sixel]

Well, it is a start. Plenty more chaff to get rid of. Not sure why they don't just keep going at this point.....

[ThePuck]

  nicksaviking said:

Which is why I'm not a big fan of WHIP. It gives equal weight to walks and hits when hits are clearly more of a detriment. I'd rather my pitcher have an 8.5 H/9 and a 4.0 BB/9 than a 10.5 H/9 and a 2.0 BB/9. My gut tells me the Twins see the 2.0 BB/9 and like that guy best.

 

There are few stats that are perfect. For me, it cracks me up when our announcers talk about how leadoff walks 'almost always' end up scoring. First, that's not true...but if it was, why wouldn't they talk about how leadoff HITS also almost always score? How is a leadoff walk worse than a leadoff hit in terms of potential to score?

[panolo]

  Shane Wahl said:

 

TR's comments about Presley (and I will assume Gardenhire loves him) are just another example of why I have finally come around to wanting these two guys fired. There is no statistical basis for Presley love, esp. starting at the top of the lineup. Isn't that clear? Dude has spent a lot of time in AAA and that has not translated to major league success beyond 4 OF.

 

What else is he going to say? 85% of fans have no idea what Presley has done in AAA. All they know is that he was the reward for one of the most popular Twins players of the last 15 years. He also played decent when he got some time here.

 

Whether you, me, and 90% of the members here believe Presley is nothing more than a 4th or 5th OF TR is going to have to appeal to the masses. We are not the masses.

[snepp]

  ashburyjohn said:

Roenicke's WHIP was bad this year. Might not the explanation be that simple?

 

Fueled in large part to a pretty awful walk rate, lousy enough that his middling strikeout numbers could never hope to overcome it going forward.

 

His saving grace this season was that his miniscule BABIP dodged the regression bullet for 5 months. His .245 mark through August was 15th lowest among the ~135 relievers on the FG's leaderboard.

 

You can't outrun the regression hammer, eventually it will come crashing down.

 

 

(and yes, I'm apparently late to this party)

[Thrylos]

  Alex said:

I don't think Alex Presley is the answer but he's the best option right now, barring a FA signing, to keep the spot warm. .

 

Here is the issue with this statement that I suspect reflects the Twins FO philosophy:

 

Presley's ceiling is a fourth OF, PR (if he gets better on the bases - totally not impressed), late inning defensive replacement.

 

With Presley as their starting CF, the Twins are not fielding a competitive team. I suspect that he is like the 28th best starting CF in the majors. If the Twins are not fielding a competitive team, it make sense to give more reps to the young people who will potentially be the future of this organization (i.e. Hicks.) Even though, like with Presley as a CF, they might not be fielding a competitive team for a season or so with Hicks as a CF.

 

Same arguement can be made for Doumit and/or Willingham vs. Arcia, for example.

 

Going with a guy that might help them win 70 instead of 68 games, instead of having Hicks getting reps against MLB pitchers and not the AAA junkballers so he will develop, makes no sense to me.

[Alex]

  Thrylos said:

Here is the issue with this statement that I suspect reflects the Twins FO philosophy:

 

Presley's ceiling is a fourth OF, PR (if he gets better on the bases - totally not impressed), late inning defensive replacement.

 

With Presley as their starting CF, the Twins are not fielding a competitive team. I suspect that he is like the 28th best starting CF in the majors. If the Twins are not fielding a competitive team, it make sense to give more reps to the young people who will potentially be the future of this organization (i.e. Hicks.) Even though, like with Presley as a CF, they might not be fielding a competitive team for a season or so with Hicks as a CF.

 

Same arguement can be made for Doumit and/or Willingham vs. Arcia, for example.

 

Going with a guy that might help them win 70 instead of 68 games, instead of having Hicks getting reps against MLB pitchers and not the AAA junkballers so he will develop, makes no sense to me.

 

I don't think the same argument can be made for Arcia last season or this upcoming one at all.. I agree Arcia should have been getting ABs instead of either one of those as he was clearly ready for the majors. I hated what they did with him in terms of up and down. Presley might only be starting for half a season depending on Buxton. And, as I mentioned in an ideal world, Mastro gets back to normal and becomes an effective bat against LHP to create a decent platoon.

 

The question of Hicks really depends on whether getting MLB at bats for a player who isn't ready is helpful to their development. I don't think it is.

[ashbury]

  Thrylos said:

With Presley as their starting CF, the Twins are not fielding a competitive team.

 

I'm not going to dig out the quote, but I remember Mastroianni saying something very similar, about *himself*. He was being the good soldier, when faced with the fact of Hicks getting the starting job at the beginning of the season. But, it was still a very "aware" thing to say.

[Shane Wahl]

  Thrylos said:

Here is the issue with this statement that I suspect reflects the Twins FO philosophy:

 

Presley's ceiling is a fourth OF, PR (if he gets better on the bases - totally not impressed), late inning defensive replacement.

 

With Presley as their starting CF, the Twins are not fielding a competitive team. I suspect that he is like the 28th best starting CF in the majors. If the Twins are not fielding a competitive team, it make sense to give more reps to the young people who will potentially be the future of this organization (i.e. Hicks.) Even though, like with Presley as a CF, they might not be fielding a competitive team for a season or so with Hicks as a CF.

 

Same arguement can be made for Doumit and/or Willingham vs. Arcia, for example.

 

Going with a guy that might help them win 70 instead of 68 games, instead of having Hicks getting reps against MLB pitchers and not the AAA junkballers so he will develop, makes no sense to me.

 

This is exactly right.

[Shane Wahl]

  Alex said:

I don't think the same argument can be made for Arcia last season or this upcoming one at all.. I agree Arcia should have been getting ABs instead of either one of those as he was clearly ready for the majors. I hated what they did with him in terms of up and down. Presley might only be starting for half a season depending on Buxton. And, as I mentioned in an ideal world, Mastro gets back to normal and becomes an effective bat against LHP to create a decent platoon.

 

The question of Hicks really depends on whether getting MLB at bats for a player who isn't ready is helpful to their development. I don't think it is.

 

Hicks wasn't ready, yes. But now? I mean his post-April numbers were not terrible at all. They were what one should expect. It is now to the point where the best teaching moments are going to come for Hicks and Arcia in MLB.

[Guest USAFChief]

  snepp said:

Fueled in large part to a pretty awful walk rate, lousy enough that his middling strikeout numbers could never hope to overcome it going forward.

 

His saving grace this season was that his miniscule BABIP dodged the regression bullet for 5 months. His .245 mark through August was 15th lowest among the ~135 relievers on the FG's leaderboard.

 

You can't outrun the regression hammer, eventually it will come crashing down.

 

 

(and yes, I'm apparently late to this party)

I'm confused. Is it the regression bullet we're concerned about, or the regression hammer? Or are they different things?

 

You stat geeks...

[Mike Sixel]

  panolo said:

What else is he going to say? 85% of fans have no idea what Presley has done in AAA. All they know is that he was the reward for one of the most popular Twins players of the last 15 years. He also played decent when he got some time here.

 

Whether you, me, and 90% of the members here believe Presley is nothing more than a 4th or 5th OF TR is going to have to appeal to the masses. We are not the masses.

 

so he should lie to the masses, because they don't know better? I'm not sure what you are saying here.

[Seth Stohs]

  Shane Wahl said:

Maybe not appropriate for this thread, but where do you put Buxton in the lineup?

 

Leadoff, and then eventually #3.

[Otto von Ballpark]

  Seth Stohs said:

Leadoff, and then eventually #3.

 

Ah, following the Brian Dozier model, then?

[matthew0211]

  spycake said:

Ah, following the Brian Dozier model, then?

 

Hopefully it's the Kirby Puckett model.

[TRex]

  Quote

Hicks wasn't ready, yes. But now? I mean his post-April numbers were not terrible at all. They were what one should expect. It is now to the point where the best teaching moments are going to come for Hicks and Arcia in MLB.

 

I am surprised that so many people are distressed by Hicks' not getting a call up (not necessarily you, SW). There was so much hand wringing at the beginning of the year about Hicks' service time, but for all intents and purposes doesn't the August 1st demotion pretty much guarantee that he will not reach the Super Two mark? That means his service time will be 63 days short of the full year (or more than the 2 months we previously discussed).

[Alex]

  Shane Wahl said:

Hicks wasn't ready, yes. But now? I mean his post-April numbers were not terrible at all. They were what one should expect. It is now to the point where the best teaching moments are going to come for Hicks and Arcia in MLB.

 

I think Hicks and Arcia are in different places. Also, I've no looked at Hick's month by month splits to see how much of his overall numbers were buoyed by RH ABs. I think it's incredibly important that he is at least capable of hitting RHP before getting a long term callup. I think it's a bad idea to hand him the starting job again, but that's different than giving up on him, which I'm not doing.

[DAM DC Twins Fans]

  Thrylos said:

Here is the issue with this statement that I suspect reflects the Twins FO philosophy:

 

Presley's ceiling is a fourth OF, PR (if he gets better on the bases - totally not impressed), late inning defensive replacement.

 

With Presley as their starting CF, the Twins are not fielding a competitive team. I suspect that he is like the 28th best starting CF in the majors. If the Twins are not fielding a competitive team, it make sense to give more reps to the young people who will potentially be the future of this organization (i.e. Hicks.) Even though, like with Presley as a CF, they might not be fielding a competitive team for a season or so with Hicks as a CF.

 

Same arguement can be made for Doumit and/or Willingham vs. Arcia, for example.

 

Going with a guy that might help them win 70 instead of 68 games, instead of having Hicks getting reps against MLB pitchers and not the AAA junkballers so he will develop, makes no sense to me.

 

I don't often agree with Thrylos--but here I agree 100%. Presley (like Mastro and Thomas) is an AAAA player. If the Twins go with an OF of him and Willingham and Doumit, Plouffe at 3B, etc. next year and look headed to another 90 loss season, after the AS break--bring up the kids let them learn up here. That means Hicks, Arcia, Buxton, Rosario, Sano, Pinto etc. This is the future--don't worry about service time--allegedly the Twins have the money to sign the ones that work out to contracts that would cover their arbitration years (like the Rays did with Longoria). Having the kids at Rochester next August while the Twins are struggling again makes zero sense.

[Shane Wahl]

  DAM DC Twins Fans said:

I don't often agree with Thrylos--but here I agree 100%. Presley (like Mastro and Thomas) is an AAAA player. If the Twins go with an OF of him and Willingham and Doumit, Plouffe at 3B, etc. next year and look headed to another 90 loss season, after the AS break--bring up the kids let them learn up here. That means Hicks, Arcia, Buxton, Rosario, Sano, Pinto etc. This is the future--don't worry about service time--allegedly the Twins have the money to sign the ones that work out to contracts that would cover their arbitration years (like the Rays did with Longoria). Having the kids at Rochester next August while the Twins are struggling again makes zero sense.

 

It would be cool, at least for dramatic effect, to bring them all up at the same time. Haha. What a big slap in the face to the current roster at the time, but oh well. They are adults.

[Shane Wahl]

  matthew0211 said:

Hopefully it's the Kirby Puckett model.

 

I would think Buxton batting third is the best idea too. There's just too much slugging there, and it would be nice to have that behind Mauer.

 

When the great move is made (say after AS break), Dozier/Hicks, Mauer, Buxton, Sano, Arcia, Rosario, Pinto, Hicks/Dozier, X (however the Dozier-Rosario-Florimon situation works out) is a FUN lineup to watch. We need some fun this year if the team is still looking at 70 wins as a challenge.

 

Also, by that time, it could be Meyer-Gibson-May at the top of the rotation.

[Alex]

  DAM DC Twins Fans said:

I don't often agree with Thrylos--but here I agree 100%. Presley (like Mastro and Thomas) is an AAAA player. If the Twins go with an OF of him and Willingham and Doumit, Plouffe at 3B, etc. next year and look headed to another 90 loss season, after the AS break--bring up the kids let them learn up here. That means Hicks, Arcia, Buxton, Rosario, Sano, Pinto etc. This is the future--don't worry about service time--allegedly the Twins have the money to sign the ones that work out to contracts that would cover their arbitration years (like the Rays did with Longoria). Having the kids at Rochester next August while the Twins are struggling again makes zero sense.

 

People are taking this Presley response too far and completely out of context, extrapolating entire philosophy about who will startin CF from a basic question. The original question (by Labambo) was who would start in CF based on some other waiver suggestions (which is what this thread was about) A couple of us, myself included, responded that Presley is currently the best option on the roster, not that he is "the answer" to CF.

 

That response had nothing to do with whether I supported the Twins overall philosophy but is based on available options and likelihood.

 

I personally hope the Twins in do something about several positions, but because of both Hicks and Buxton, I don't see them signing a FA to fill there (at least that are any different from those already on the roster or played it recently), nor do I think it should be a major priority since they basically need to keep the spot warm for a few months at most hopefully. I'd prefer they go spend money and make acquisitions at other positions of higher possible need (SP, SS, a corner OF). Of course, that's a topic for another thread.

[Seth Stohs]

According to Rhett Bollinger, Doug Bernier has been outrighted to Rochester.

[nicksaviking]

  Seth Stohs said:

According to Rhett Bollinger, Doug Bernier has been outrighted to Rochester.

 

Does he have to go? I mean they're not even playing baseball there anymore this year!