Contemplating the Royals... and the Twins

The bullpen arms know their assignments. No match ups, no splits, no platooning, no shuffling. No over analyzing. This is what is working. 

The bullpen having their inning-specific roles nearly cost the Royals their season, too. In the wild card game when Shields got in trouble in the top of the 6th, Yost brought in Ventura, a rookie starting pitcher, who promptly gave up a 3-run HR. It probably would have made more sense to try to get 4 innings out of Herrera, Davis and Holland. It's easy to second guess, though, and it's a moot point anyway since the Royals ended up winning, but I think they're winning in spite of Ned Yost and not because of him.

The Twins are not that far away.  Their offense solidified itself and their roster has turned over substantially.  We are no longer counting on older, veteran players.  They need a good starter and an outfielder that can play center of left credibly.

They can patch together a bullpen between the returning guys and some of the younger flamethrowers.  It they do these simple things, I like their chances to be a lot better next year.

Something to bear in mind as you look at those draft picks - those high first round draft picks of the Royals and those critical international signings took place something between six and nine years ago. If you apply the same timeline to the Twins' situation, you'd be looking at about another five years before the Twins' group of Sano, Polanco, Buxton, Berrios, et al, would be "scheduled" to have the kind of success that the Royals are having this year.

 

Yes, Buxton will at best be 3 years past his draft at the earliest he'll likely come out (late 2015), but the Twins have a young enough core in Dozier, Plouffe, Santana, Arcia and Gibson, throw in veterans like Mauer, Hughes, Perkins and hopefully a free agent signing or two this off season.  Mix in the very real possibility of Reed, Burdi, and maybe Meyer filling out your bullpen at some point in 2015, and the makings are there for contention in 2015. 

Playoffs, and a world series run, are obviously asking a lot (and in the case of the WS, way too much IMO), but a foundation of pieces are there.  I think it's pretty safe to say that we have a lot more ability to go out and add free agents than Kansas City has had.  Doing so effectively, is obviously the key though....

I have stated this before, I don't agree with this at all. The Royals are built for the postseason. They have good starting pitchers, good defense, and a shut-down bullpen. They've been winning games because of it. 

 

The crapshoot argument has been around for 10 years to justify the terrible play of the Twins in the postseason. Watch the Royals. They have a plan, they position correctly, they make very few mistakes. That is preparation, none of which the Twins showed under Gardy. 

 

They Royals know who they are and are playing to their strengths. This is a good team that underachieved in the regular season IMO. 

The crapshoot argument actually has nothing to do with the Twins:

http://fivethirtyeight.com/datalab/youre-right-to-complain-about-the-chaos-of-mlbs-one-game-playoffs/

I'm not saying that the Royals don't have a formula that works well in the small samples of MLB playoffs, but the fact is that baseball's playoff system is far more chaotic than any other sports.  A seven game series is not enough to accurately depict who the "best" team is (I belive there's even maths out there that suggest 162 games isn't enough, and that it needs to be in the range of 400-600, but I'm not 100% sure on the numbers).

Yes, Buxton will at best be 3 years past his draft at the earliest he'll likely come out (late 2015), but the Twins have a young enough core in Dozier, Plouffe, Santana, Arcia and Gibson, throw in veterans like Mauer, Hughes, Perkins and hopefully a free agent signing or two this off season.  Mix in the very real possibility of Reed, Burdi, and maybe Meyer filling out your bullpen at some point in 2015, and the makings are there for contention in 2015. 

 

Playoffs, and a world series run, are obviously asking a lot (and in the case of the WS, way too much IMO), but a foundation of pieces are there.  I think it's pretty safe to say that we have a lot more ability to go out and add free agents than Kansas City has had.  Doing so effectively, is obviously the key though....

This.  Everyone is fixated on Sano and Buxton getting to the bigs which I get.  My point is that their offense was really good this year without these two guys.  By adding a good starter and a decent free agent outfielder they can really turn this around and we don't have to wait until Sano and Buxton are studs.  All of this can be done without blocking anybody or entering into crippling contracts. 

There are many, many regression candidates on this offense.  I wouldn't be so confident in them replicating last year.

I understand that.  But for every regression candidate, there is one just as likely to progress.  They were 6th in run scored; all they have to do is hold their own.

Regression candidates: Santana, Escobar, Plouffe, Vargas, Suzuki

 

Positive Regression:  Mauer and Arcia

 

It really isn't 1:1.  Now we might see some positive regression to the mean from our starting pitchers, but the offense was largely a bunch of seasons that are dubious to count on maintaining.

Disagree with Plouffe and Vargas.  Plus Mauer and Arcia could be substantially better along with anybody we sign as a free agent for left field.  We'll see but I don't see offense as the hurdle to contention.  I guess that is my main point; and that the other major definciencies can be addressed pretty easily.

I'm not sure how a seven game series is inherently more chaotic than the one game series used by the

NFL. Or for that matter the 5 and 7 game postseason series used in the other major US pro sports.

Because of the amount of observed variance in the game over the years.  Football games more often than not are won by the more talented team, while baseball games have a much lower percentage.  Part of the issue is determining the most talented team, and there are a lot of studies on almost every sport about the subject of the efficacy of each sport's playoff, and I believe that the fivethirtyeight article links some.

 

But I also think post season baseball isn't played like the regular season. Depth is important in the regular season, much less so in the post season. Your stars aren't getting days off, the bottom of your rotation and bottom of your bench are virtual non factors. The bottom of your bullpen might not even see the field. I think I read the three headed monster out of KC's pen pitched 40 percent of the innings in the ALCS...forty percent. That doesn't happen in the regular season...not even close.

And I believe somewhere in this post someone made a comment similar to what I'm about to make (though it may have also been on another site).  If your sport is using a playoff, then it isn't really determining who the best team is, but rather who performed best in the playoffs.  The fact that strategy changes significantly in the playoffs (starters going on short rest for example) is indicative that a team that is the best through the regular season doesn't have the best set up to win the playoffs is indicative that they are two completely different systems, and thus, the results have to be interpreted.

Statistically, if you want to truly determine who the best team is, you have balanced schedules, and you have as many contests as possible (realistically) to let luck and variance balance themselves out.  If you're using a playoff system, It becomes more about entertainment, drama, ratings and profits than it does about a true competition to determine who the best team is.  That is fine, but something that has to be considered.

We are built more like the Orioles than the Royals moving forward.  Gold Glove type centerfielder with some decent dudes around him and Lots of Smash and Bash in the line up.

2015 will show more signs and 2016 will be our KC Royal type year.

Detroit in 2012 (good every year, but getting old fast.

Cleveland in 2013 (surprise team)

Royals in 2014 (surprise team)

Twins in 2015 (surprise team and every year thereafter - Young Suds under contract )

Is it bad that I don't even consider Mauer in my thought process when evaluating even the near future of this team? Mauer seems to be an afterthought, someone who is almost irritating specifically BECAUSE he's on the periphery. Positive regression aside...I just feel like saying, "Damnit! Lead, follow, or get out of the way!"

Something to bear in mind as you look at those draft picks - those high first round draft picks of the Royals and those critical international signings took place something between six and nine years ago. If you apply the same timeline to the Twins' situation, you'd be looking at about another five years before the Twins' group of Sano, Polanco, Buxton, Berrios, et al, would be "scheduled" to have the kind of success that the Royals are having this year.

 

Everyone talks as if this next group of Twins prospects are arriving and it means they will be competitive by 2016, but that would assume that all of these new arrivals become productive MLB ballplayers almost immediately upon setting foot on Target Field's grass. But it's far more likely to take a few years more and I'm not sure the fan base, in general, will have that kind of patience at this point.

Great and fun article to read! Thanks Seth.

(Very busy, sorry if someone stated this previously.)

Some very interesting points SD. And I am assuming you posted them simply for perspective and conversation sake.

All well and good to propose perspective and comparison for their own sake. It's interesting for sure. But TWICE the Twins went from last to first with a quality core of talent augmented by some smart moves. And since 1985, when last the Royals were in the post season, the Twins have enjoyed 13 winning seasons vs the Royals 8. The Twins have also reached the post season as many times as the Royals have enjoyed a winning season, 8. (6 by Gardy if that matters) And the Twins even managed to win TWO WS since the Royals made the playoffs last.

Just saying, every team, situation and timeline are different. So before some bite fingernails past the quick, develop ulcers, pull the rest of their hair out....the comparisons between the teams is interesting...but that doesn't mean it's direct parallel.

I don't want to divert the conversation in any way, but I think this is important to discuss: does anyone else think it looks like Hosmer's head is photoshopped in that picture? It's probably just forced perspective since Moustakas is right there and just a bit behind him, but it looks like Hosmer's head is slightly too big for its body.

Actually, by WAR, KC has more production from trade acquisitions than Rule 4 draftees

In assessing how KC became WS capable, it's important to note that those players you're referring to were acquired by trading drafted assets such as Greinke and Will Myers. KC  put themselves over the top with a good trade as the final step in their rebuild, and I expect the Twins will attempt to do the same thing at the same point in time.  But I don't think we should lose sight of the fact that, when KC finally settled on their strategy (15 years or so into the "rebuild") and began to execute it, it was through the draft, period. They stopped with the Betancourt/Guillen stopgap stuff, took their lumps, and held on to their young big leaguers (Greinke excepted) AND their prospects UNTIL they got to a point where they finally had some surplus of talent to use in trades. Note the absence of free agency as a key piece of their rebuild. 

This spring, Dayton Moore was still being called an idiot and a dinosaur. KC's strategy was still often ridiculed despite the evidence of the 2013 season. 

What's interesting to me is the similarities among a number of teams regarding rebuilding. I recall reading an article by Mark Gonzalez of the Chicago Tribune from last March, I think. He convinced me that the strategy of the Royals, Cubs, Twins, and the Cards even, for that matter, were almost identical. The differences were simply due to the stage in the cycle for each team, and execution. And the most important elements in the strategy? Use free agency only as a last resort,  focus resources on the draft and international markets, and trade from surplus to supplement.