Where Can the Twins Improve Defensively in 2022?

I appreciate the overview. I am constantly shocked by Simmons ratings. He just does not meet my eye test but I guess I've learning that I'm not a good judge.

I saw some really good plays by Arraez at third base and maybe that's his best position in the field. The log jam with him Donaldson and Miranda will be an interesting challenge for the team to figure out.

Sano consistently has a bad Fielding Mark whether third base or first base and it appears to me that he is more logical for DH than Rooker.  

The outfield is a real question mark Kepler's bat might not be enough to keep him in right field, Buxton's contract might eliminate him from centerfield and we haven't seen anybody play enough left field. In an era or launch angles and fly balls are much more frequent than ground balls The outfield is an essential defensive area that we need to look at as well. 

My eye test has been seeing Arraez as a solid 3B despite some bad plays here and there. There is nothing great about him defensively anywhere, but I've always believed he's solid wherever he plays. This rating seems to support my eye test. So 3B and 2B are just fine with what we have on hand.

Kirilloff should solidify 1B as the primary there while seeing some time in the OF.

I've maintained I'd be fine with Simmons back at SS if I knew he'd be the OPS producer he was the previous 4-5 years. Otherwise, I think a change has to be made. But there are SS options out there that are solid gloves that have decent bats who could replace him.

Really, other than 1B, the only spot to really improve defensively...can't believe I'm saying that after the first 2 months of 2021....is LF. And until someone steps up and really grabs that spot, it's going to be a mash-up if multiple players and the defense might be questionable at times. For now, I'm OK with whatever platoon makes sense there for improved offense and average-ish defense. 

I'm getting a little off subject but I was wondering why Kepler & Rosario while coming up through the minors weren't switched? Kepler while being a superior fielder wasn't put in LF and Rosario who had the superior arm not put in RF. It more sense to me, Rosario in RF might have stuck around a little longer.

By switching Rosario to RF and Kepler to LF, an advantage would be that each player's glove hand would be TOWARDS their respective field's foul line.  Cleaner fielding opportunities to balls hit down the line as the players would not have to backhand them. 

Signing Starling Marte would improve LF. I know, I know ..... money, etc. Just saying.

Shane Mack played a good LF - I would like to see a solid LF glove out there, thus my wish.

How would the combination of Garver and Jeffers rank? In other words, if Garver had qualified, how would he rank. If JD had qualified at 3B, how would he rank? If Buck had qualified, how would he rank? #1 I hope.

I was one of the ones who was thrilled when the Twins signed Simmons. His fielding was as advertised. I could live with his 2021 offensive lack of production, but I still do not want Simmons to be re-signed. A red flag was when he quit during the season in 2020,  I may be censored for bringing this up, he reportedly refused to be vaccinated against Covid, and put on social media some mess about an "alternate treatment", then he tested positive  for Covid.. I may be wrong about this, and  the censors  may delete this, and if so, so be it. I will still be a loyal TD reader and contributor.   

On 11/13/2021 at 4:53 PM, Seth Stohs said:

 The first time Rosario played for Puerto Rico in the WBC, there were highlights of him throwing someone out at home from right...

Thank you Seth for those tidbits. I can envision Rosario gunning down runners as they try to advance to 3rd as well at home if he had played RF for the Twins. 

This was a very interesting read.  Some of my "assumptions" have been shattered.  I knew that Simmons was going to be an upgrade at SS.  And he was as advertised even though I thought he would be "better' I kept expecting Ozzie Smith type plays nightly.  Honestly, the Twins haven't had a GOOD SS day in and day out since Gagne (Guzman was good, but not nearing as consistent as Greg Gagne).  If I KNEW Simmons would hit closer to the previous 4-5 years I'd abandon my Mondesi pipe dream and sign him for $3 million (that's all Simmons is worth at this point).  

I'm really surprised Arraez was that proficient at 3B.  It makes him more valuable to the Twins and I believe more of a trade chip than I realized.  Kepler and Buxton are Gold Glove caliber.  Sano is a DH, plain and simple and if kept should bat 8th and DH.  Polanco was "solid" at 2B.  LF still remains a weak defensive position, and yes, tony&rodney  you can keep on banging his drum.  He's a GOOD baseball player.  I just think we need so much on our pitching staff that lineup improvements will need to take a back seat.  

Because Jeffers appears to be a "Catcher of the Future" (more than Garver) for a trade partner like Miami (and because I think Rortvedt will be a stud defensively) I make a blockbuster trade to Miami with Jeffers in a package for one or two young pitchers and give Rortvedt a half season or less at St. Paul before I call him up (if he's earned it).  Tomas Tellis can be the backup catcher until that time. Honestly, Kiriloff at 1B.  Buxton and Kepler healthy and playing.  An engaged and desperate to prove he can still play Simmons and Polanco at 2B is a pretty solid foundation.  Throw in a healthy Donaldson (or Arraez if he's not traded) at 3B and the twins are fairly solid defensively.  

Fangraph stats and Baseball reference stats would lead a fan to believe Simmons was bad at defense. SABR likes him.  Which statistical organization is correct? The correct answer is whichever one you need to back your opinion.

Baseball Ref. stats do not show Simmons to be bad a SS, but they do show the only place Arraez had good number was at 2nd Base, not 3rd base.

SDI rankings shouldn't be used with teams that shift a lot.

13 hours ago, Prince William said:

Fangraph stats and Baseball reference stats would lead a fan to believe Simmons was bad at defense. SABR likes him.  Which statistical organization is correct? The correct answer is whichever one you need to back your opinion.

UZR/150 = -1.1 = Average Shortstop

Range Factor / 9 = 4.03 vs. league average 3.81 = Excellent

SDI = 11.8 = Excellent

Range Factor and SDI aren't accurate for modern baseball because they don't account for the shift. Range Factor and SDI are based on how many outs the fielder is making directly or assisting with. The Twins shift a lot meaning Simmons gets more opportunities to field balls so the Range Factor and SDI values are inflated.

6 hours ago, bean5302 said:

SDI rankings shouldn't be used with teams that shift a lot.

UZR/150 = -1.1 = Average Shortstop

Range Factor / 9 = 4.03 vs. league average 3.81 = Excellent

SDI = 11.8 = Excellent

Range Factor and SDI aren't accurate for modern baseball because they don't account for the shift. Range Factor and SDI are based on how many outs the fielder is making directly or assisting with. The Twins shift a lot meaning Simmons gets more opportunities to field balls so the Range Factor and SDI values are inflated.

That is your opinion, or a matter of -- hmm analytics, I will use the ones that fit an opinion.em

Beyond SS, which any one the Twins can afford will be a drop defensively from Simmons; they need a Left Fielder badly that has quick agile feet and a strong accurate arm.

There is no one in the system that fits that bill,  they need a quality veteran.

Interesting. I know Sano is a lousy 1B, but we have no where else to play him if we keep Donaldson. Donaldson needs at least 50-60 games at DH if we want 140 games from him and Sano isn't worth keeping if he's only going to play 80-90 games a year at Dh at a few at 1B. This conundrum plus the need to find a place to give Miranda a chance has me thinking more and more that we should trade one of those two guys. I just think it's really hard to keep both on the team, unless you play Sano at 1B, Donaldson/Arraez/Miranda at 3B/DH and Kirilloff/Arraez in LF.  Perhaps not the best approach. 

The Twins have multiple players at the same positions yet no one at a SS or LF. Trade from your extras to fill those holes. It's not complicated. Who do you trade if you want to improve your defense? Your weakest players defensively. Just remember not to sacrifice offense to he point the defensive upgrades don't help. No point in holding another team to 1 or 2 runs less per game if you lose 2 or 3 runs per game of offense. Not that those are exact numbers but you get my point. Current logjams at 1B and 3B are the problem. If you are going to use the DH spot to give guys an occasional day off in the field then Sano is the guy that has to go. He's the worst defensively and his offense is spotty at best. I don't trade Donaldson because of his big contract that the Twins would have to eat most of in a trade and he still is a viable option at 3B in case Miranda doesn't hit in the bigs like he did in the minors. He's just not a known commodity yet that you can plan on for an entire season. Also, if he does hit it sounds like he can play in the OF so maybe he's your LF guy and you just don't know it yet. Arraez would have to be the 2nd guy to go if you can get a good return for his bat. There again, don't give up offense for defense unless it's a guy that can give you some of both. Don't want to see Simmons back even though I liked the signing at the time, as he turned into a  one dimesional player. 

On 11/15/2021 at 11:29 AM, bean5302 said:

SDI rankings shouldn't be used with teams that shift a lot.

UZR/150 = -1.1 = Average Shortstop

Range Factor / 9 = 4.03 vs. league average 3.81 = Excellent

SDI = 11.8 = Excellent

Range Factor and SDI aren't accurate for modern baseball because they don't account for the shift. Range Factor and SDI are based on how many outs the fielder is making directly or assisting with. The Twins shift a lot meaning Simmons gets more opportunities to field balls so the Range Factor and SDI values are inflated.

As near as I can tell when a player plays defense there job is to catch balls.  When you do not make the play regardless of where you start, the SDI will go down. When you make all the plays it goes up. Hmm, a metric that compares what you do on every play. 

10 hours ago, Prince William said:

As near as I can tell when a player plays defense there job is to catch balls.  When you do not make the play regardless of where you start, the SDI will go down. When you make all the plays it goes up. Hmm, a metric that compares what you do on every play. 

The player doesn't deserve the credit when the team is telling them where to stand so the ball travels directly to them. The shift artificially increases the number of opportunities fielders have to catch balls because it doesn't give you a clear indication on how good the player is.

The shift can impact Range Factor dramatically. The top shifting team last year would have been expected to see a reduction in batting average on ground balls and soft liners by approximately 6% overall. That's a 6% increase in opportunity for an infielder to make a play. Between the top and bottom shifting teams, the difference would have been 4%. How much of a difference does that make? It could easily drop RF/9 by .15 points as a shortstop turning a very good SS into a pedestrian one.

If the Twins were to think Simmons was good because of his Range Factor or SDI, but it was actually due to the Twins' shifting and positional strategy, it would cause the Twins to misjudge Simmons' value. In that case, the Twins could plug a supposedly inferior shortstop from a team which employed a less successful position or shift strategy into the Twins' system and the new player would also perform just as well as Simmons.

It's about properly valuing players.

6 hours ago, bean5302 said:

The player doesn't deserve the credit when the team is telling them where to stand so the ball travels directly to them. The shift artificially increases the number of opportunities fielders have to catch balls because it doesn't give you a clear indication on how good the player is.

The shift can impact Range Factor dramatically. The top shifting team last year would have been expected to see a reduction in batting average on ground balls and soft liners by approximately 6% overall. That's a 6% increase in opportunity for an infielder to make a play. Between the top and bottom shifting teams, the difference would have been 4%. How much of a difference does that make? It could easily drop RF/9 by .15 points as a shortstop turning a very good SS into a pedestrian one.

If the Twins were to think Simmons was good because of his Range Factor or SDI, but it was actually due to the Twins' shifting and positional strategy, it would cause the Twins to misjudge Simmons' value. In that case, the Twins could plug a supposedly inferior shortstop from a team which employed a less successful position or shift strategy into the Twins' system and the new player would also perform just as well as Simmons.

It's about properly valuing players.

They tell outfielder to play in or out a bit. They have infielders play in for a bunt. It is no different then asking them to shift. Find a the proof that shows a good infielder turns into a bad one by shifting, not speculation. 

Shifting did not turn Polonco into a good statistical shortstop

13 hours ago, bean5302 said:

 

It's about properly valuing players.

Every play that a player is in position to make is of equal value. There can be no argument  about that

3 hours ago, Prince William said:

Every play that a player is in position to make is of equal value. There can be no argument  about that

Right. Now is the player in a position to make a play because of the play or because of the strategy? Range Factor and SDI don't isolate the player performance so it's hard to judge how well a player performs.

10 hours ago, Prince William said:

They tell outfielder to play in or out a bit. They have infielders play in for a bunt. It is no different then asking them to shift. Find a the proof that shows a good infielder turns into a bad one by shifting, not speculation. 

Shifting did not turn Polonco into a good statistical shortstop

Polanco is arguably the worst shortstop to play more than a single full season there in the past 20 years. Making Polanco "good" would have required a miracle. Shifting's impact on grounders and soft fly balls is well documented. It's not speculation. RF and SDI don't attempt to count for the shift.

13 hours ago, bean5302 said:

Right. Now is the player in a position to make a play because of the play or because of the strategy? Range Factor and SDI don't isolate the player performance so it's hard to judge how well a player performs.

 

Polanco is arguably the worst shortstop to play more than a single full season there in the past 20 years. Making Polanco "good" would have required a miracle. Shifting's impact on grounders and soft fly balls is well documented. It's not speculation. RF and SDI don't attempt to count for the shift.

There is strategy on every play. It doesn't matter. The players line up where management tells them to, shift or no shift