Miles Death

When I was growing up, I thought Dick and Bert were awesome. They had the fun “Circle me Bert” shtick, seemingly great rapport with each other, and good timing on bringing excitement to the game. But, I was young - I didn’t know any better. This season is the first summer I’ve enjoyed diving into statistical truths in baseball. I think the analytical trend in the game has not been kind to our FSN announcing crew. It’s made them both increasingly bitter and more frequently inaccurate. Starting in April, I decided to make a list of falsehoods uttered by FSN contributors. I’ve come up with my top 5 at the midway point in the year, but hope many are added in the comments section below
 
1. Jack Morris claims you can’t measure spin rate.
 
This one was an absolute doozy and I believe almost every Twins Daily writer picked up on it and commented on it on Twitter. Jack claimed during a game that he didn’t think it was possible to accurately calculate the spin rate of either a batted ball or a pitch. This is on par with somebody saying they just don’t “believe” in climate change. Ridiculous.
 
2. Bert Blyleven compares Jake Odorizzi to Brad Radke multiple times
 
This is the one that kicked off this project. I could be mistaken, but I believe it was first in Odorizzi’s second start that Bert mentioned how similar he was to Radke. My immediate reaction was to look up prevalence of free passes in both players’ careers. Odorizzi has a career BB/9 of 3.1 (4.1 in 2018 so far). Now, this isn’t a ridiculously high number, but let’s compare in Radke’s career BB/9 – 1.6. Radke was a master of control; it was beautiful to watch. In 2005, in 200.2 IP, he only had 23 walks. Maybe he meant both pitchers were American and 6 feet, 2 inches tall, but I doubt it.
 
3. Torii Hunter has a strange take on launch angles.
 
This one was admittedly rather hilarious. Parker Hageman and Aaron Gleeman called my attention to it as I missed it live. Here is the quote: “Like I said, the launch angle is good for some people, but I think everybody can’t hit with the launch angle,” said Hunter. “I heard [Toronto Blue Jays third baseman] Josh Donaldson say he launches the ball. If you look at his swing, it really has no launch. It actually goes through the ball, and then it launches actually through the ball. But you can’t go after it with the launch.”
 
This isn’t even Torii’s hottest take in the world of sports. He once said (as a player for the Tigers) “But I can tell you this, I made love to my wife the other night and I caught a cramp in my hamstring. I actually put my leg out and kept performing. So there’s no excuse,” in response to Lebron James suffering cramps in the NBA Finals. Torii Hunter is one of my favorites and I enjoy having him on the broadcast, but seriously?
 
4. Bert Blyleven says Fernando Rodney doesn’t give a lot of free passes.
 
Just this last Monday against the Royals, Rodney was in to save a nice win for the Twins. During Rodney’s appearance (I believe on a 3-0 count), Bert blurted out that Rodney “doesn’t walk a lot of people.” Huh? Even to people who don’t check stats, Rodney has a reputation of making things interesting in save situations by walking batters. In fact, his career BB/9 is 4.4…definitely not a low walk rate.
 
5. Tim Laudner yells at the rulebook.
 
Now, I will admit this isn’t a falsehood. He just has a strong opinion on the rule change dealing with catchers and how they block the plate. The issue came up with Anthony Rizzo sliding and clipping the leg of Pirates’ catcher Austin Hedges. I included this on the list for two reasons: 1) it was hilarious how mad he got and 2) it goes with the theme of ex-players at FSN that can’t seem to progress with the times. It got to the point on Twins Live that Laudner was essentially getting worked up looking at the rule on a piece and paper and saying what a disgrace the change has been. We understand you’re mad, but calm down. The rules aren’t going to go back, so just accept.
Honorable Mention: Tim Laudner says the Twins swept a “very good” Orioles team

I don’t even need to say anything about this, do I?
 
Thus concludes my top 5 falsehood list. I hope you’ve gotten a kick out of our broadcast crew. For all the falsehoods, they are pretty good contributors and I enjoy the comparisons and theories every once in a while. Plus, we always have Cory Provus on play-by-play on the radio, and the occasional appearance of Justin Morneau in the TV booth (the eventual dream team, I hope).
 
What are some of your favorite contributions from our FSN crew? Let me know in the comments below!
 
-Miles

The Minnesota Twins employed the best catcher in baseball up until 2013, and over his tenure behind the plate, Joe Mauer proved to be one of the five or ten best to ever play the position. Since then however, the role has become somewhat of a black hole for the organization. With Jason Castro shelved in 2018 more question marks have surfaced. The biggest unknown going forward is what do Derek Falvey and Thad Levine do now?
 
Castro will return in 2019 on the final year of a three-year, $24.5 million deal. He'll be coming off a knee surgery that allowed him to play in just 19 games this season. At 32 years old he'll have spent 699 games behind the dish, and the likelihood that his best days are behind him remains real.
 
Initially billed as a framing wizard behind the dish, Castro ranked just 15th in baseball per Baseball Prospectus' Framing Runs metric for 2017. While not awful, that's hardly what the Twins had hoped given the hype around that being his best asset. Castro's .720 OPS last season was 29th among major league catchers with at least 130 plate appearances. To summarize, there was plenty to be desired on both sides of the game even before the injury.
 
Fast forward to 2018, and the Twins catchers have combined to post a .607 OPS. That number comes in 6th worst in all of baseball. Bobby Wilson, who has been the main starter behind the plate in Castro's absence, owns the 6th worst OPS among 55 catchers with at least 100 plate appearances (.507). Mitch Garver has been a significantly better bat, and Willians Astudillo profiles as such also, but neither have been trusted with the gear on.
The lack of belief behind the plate really points to the crux of the Twins issues.
 
Regardless of what form Castro is in when he returns, Minnesota has virtually no one else they're willing to turn to. Astudillo has posted strong framing numbers at Triple-A, and held his own throwing out 35% of would be base stealers. In seven games with the Twins (and nearly a month on the roster), he never once drew time behind the plate. Garver has been on the 25 man for the balance of the season, yet has been called upon to start at catcher just 45 times.
 
There's plenty of reason to believe that the Twins should compete immediately in 2019. Projecting another year of virtually everything going wrong seems like a poor bet, and the division should remain plenty open with the only other talented team being the Cleveland Indians. Before they get there however, the Minnesota front office needs to figure out a better blueprint at catcher.
 
Down the stretch, Garver should be prioritized over Wilson. Whether or not he's deemed an acceptable catcher shouldn't matter in a lost season. Figuring out to what degree he can be counted upon is a must. Astudillo seems like a career minor leaguer, and probably isn't the answer either. Should the results point towards a different direction than Garver, the Twins will need to get creative over the winter.
 
Castro could be presumed the starter out of the gate again, but a free agent could be brought in to take away those duties. Potential names on the open market include Yasmani Grandal, Wilson Ramos, and Devin Mesoraco. Should the Twins decide not to supplant Castro, another Chris Gimenez type might make sense in place of Garver.
 
Stepping further away from the situation, the reality is there's a ton of moving pieces and very few certainties for Minnesota. Catcher isn't a position rich in value across the big leagues right now, and while the Twins have two intriguing prospects in Ben Rortvedt and Ryan Jeffers, neither are close enough to make a difference any time soon. The role can't continue to be a revolving door for a team with postseason aspirations however, and driving towards a real answer needs to be a goal sooner rather than later.
 
For more from Off The Baggy, click here. Follow @tlschwerz

When I was growing up, I thought Dick and Bert were awesome. They had the fun “Circle me Bert” shtick, seemingly great rapport with each other, and good timing on bringing excitement to the game. But, I was young - I didn’t know any better. This season is the first summer I’ve enjoyed diving into statistical truths in baseball. I think the analytical trend in the game has not been kind to our FSN announcing crew. It’s made them both increasingly bitter and more frequently inaccurate. Starting in April, I decided to make a list of falsehoods uttered by FSN contributors. I’ve come up with my top 5 at the midway point in the year, but hope many are added in the comments section below
 
1. Jack Morris claims you can’t measure spin rate.
 
This one was an absolute doozy and I believe almost every Twins Daily writer picked up on it and commented on it on Twitter. Jack claimed during a game that he didn’t think it was possible to accurately calculate the spin rate of either a batted ball or a pitch. This is on par with somebody saying they just don’t “believe” in climate change. Ridiculous.
 
2. Bert Blyleven compares Jake Odorizzi to Brad Radke multiple times
 
This is the one that kicked off this project. I could be mistaken, but I believe it was first in Odorizzi’s second start that Bert mentioned how similar he was to Radke. My immediate reaction was to look up prevalence of free passes in both players’ careers. Odorizzi has a career BB/9 of 3.1 (4.1 in 2018 so far). Now, this isn’t a ridiculously high number, but let’s compare in Radke’s career BB/9 – 1.6. Radke was a master of control; it was beautiful to watch. In 2005, in 200.2 IP, he only had 23 walks. Maybe he meant both pitchers were American and 6 feet, 2 inches tall, but I doubt it.
 
3. Torii Hunter has a strange take on launch angles.
 
This one was admittedly rather hilarious. Parker Hageman and Aaron Gleeman called my attention to it as I missed it live. Here is the quote: “Like I said, the launch angle is good for some people, but I think everybody can’t hit with the launch angle,” said Hunter. “I heard [Toronto Blue Jays third baseman] Josh Donaldson say he launches the ball. If you look at his swing, it really has no launch. It actually goes through the ball, and then it launches actually through the ball. But you can’t go after it with the launch.”
 
This isn’t even Torii’s hottest take in the world of sports. He once said (as a player for the Tigers) “But I can tell you this, I made love to my wife the other night and I caught a cramp in my hamstring. I actually put my leg out and kept performing. So there’s no excuse,” in response to Lebron James suffering cramps in the NBA Finals. Torii Hunter is one of my favorites and I enjoy having him on the broadcast, but seriously?
 
4. Bert Blyleven says Fernando Rodney doesn’t give a lot of free passes.
 
Just this last Monday against the Royals, Rodney was in to save a nice win for the Twins. During Rodney’s appearance (I believe on a 3-0 count), Bert blurted out that Rodney “doesn’t walk a lot of people.” Huh? Even to people who don’t check stats, Rodney has a reputation of making things interesting in save situations by walking batters. In fact, his career BB/9 is 4.4…definitely not a low walk rate.
 
5. Tim Laudner yells at the rulebook.
 
Now, I will admit this isn’t a falsehood. He just has a strong opinion on the rule change dealing with catchers and how they block the plate. The issue came up with Anthony Rizzo sliding and clipping the leg of Pirates’ catcher Austin Hedges. I included this on the list for two reasons: 1) it was hilarious how mad he got and 2) it goes with the theme of ex-players at FSN that can’t seem to progress with the times. It got to the point on Twins Live that Laudner was essentially getting worked up looking at the rule on a piece and paper and saying what a disgrace the change has been. We understand you’re mad, but calm down. The rules aren’t going to go back, so just accept.
Honorable Mention: Tim Laudner says the Twins swept a “very good” Orioles team

I don’t even need to say anything about this, do I?
 
Thus concludes my top 5 falsehood list. I hope you’ve gotten a kick out of our broadcast crew. For all the falsehoods, they are pretty good contributors and I enjoy the comparisons and theories every once in a while. Plus, we always have Cory Provus on play-by-play on the radio, and the occasional appearance of Justin Morneau in the TV booth (the eventual dream team, I hope).
 
What are some of your favorite contributions from our FSN crew? Let me know in the comments below!
 
-Miles

When I was growing up, I thought Dick and Bert were awesome. They had the fun “Circle me Bert” shtick, seemingly great rapport with each other, and good timing on bringing excitement to the game. But, I was young - I didn’t know any better. This season is the first summer I’ve enjoyed diving into statistical truths in baseball. I think the analytical trend in the game has not been kind to our FSN announcing crew. It’s made them both increasingly bitter and more frequently inaccurate. Starting in April, I decided to make a list of falsehoods uttered by FSN contributors. I’ve come up with my top 5 at the midway point in the year, but hope many are added in the comments section below
 
1. Jack Morris claims you can’t measure spin rate.
 
This one was an absolute doozy and I believe almost every Twins Daily writer picked up on it and commented on it on Twitter. Jack claimed during a game that he didn’t think it was possible to accurately calculate the spin rate of either a batted ball or a pitch. This is on par with somebody saying they just don’t “believe” in climate change. Ridiculous.
 
2. Bert Blyleven compares Jake Odorizzi to Brad Radke multiple times
 
This is the one that kicked off this project. I could be mistaken, but I believe it was first in Odorizzi’s second start that Bert mentioned how similar he was to Radke. My immediate reaction was to look up prevalence of free passes in both players’ careers. Odorizzi has a career BB/9 of 3.1 (4.1 in 2018 so far). Now, this isn’t a ridiculously high number, but let’s compare in Radke’s career BB/9 – 1.6. Radke was a master of control; it was beautiful to watch. In 2005, in 200.2 IP, he only had 23 walks. Maybe he meant both pitchers were American and 6 feet, 2 inches tall, but I doubt it.
 
3. Torii Hunter has a strange take on launch angles.
 
This one was admittedly rather hilarious. Parker Hageman and Aaron Gleeman called my attention to it as I missed it live. Here is the quote: “Like I said, the launch angle is good for some people, but I think everybody can’t hit with the launch angle,” said Hunter. “I heard [Toronto Blue Jays third baseman] Josh Donaldson say he launches the ball. If you look at his swing, it really has no launch. It actually goes through the ball, and then it launches actually through the ball. But you can’t go after it with the launch.”
 
This isn’t even Torii’s hottest take in the world of sports. He once said (as a player for the Tigers) “But I can tell you this, I made love to my wife the other night and I caught a cramp in my hamstring. I actually put my leg out and kept performing. So there’s no excuse,” in response to Lebron James suffering cramps in the NBA Finals. Torii Hunter is one of my favorites and I enjoy having him on the broadcast, but seriously?
 
4. Bert Blyleven says Fernando Rodney doesn’t give a lot of free passes.
 
Just this last Monday against the Royals, Rodney was in to save a nice win for the Twins. During Rodney’s appearance (I believe on a 3-0 count), Bert blurted out that Rodney “doesn’t walk a lot of people.” Huh? Even to people who don’t check stats, Rodney has a reputation of making things interesting in save situations by walking batters. In fact, his career BB/9 is 4.4…definitely not a low walk rate.
 
5. Tim Laudner yells at the rulebook.
 
Now, I will admit this isn’t a falsehood. He just has a strong opinion on the rule change dealing with catchers and how they block the plate. The issue came up with Anthony Rizzo sliding and clipping the leg of Pirates’ catcher Austin Hedges. I included this on the list for two reasons: 1) it was hilarious how mad he got and 2) it goes with the theme of ex-players at FSN that can’t seem to progress with the times. It got to the point on Twins Live that Laudner was essentially getting worked up looking at the rule on a piece and paper and saying what a disgrace the change has been. We understand you’re mad, but calm down. The rules aren’t going to go back, so just accept.
Honorable Mention: Tim Laudner says the Twins swept a “very good” Orioles team

I don’t even need to say anything about this, do I?
 
Thus concludes my top 5 falsehood list. I hope you’ve gotten a kick out of our broadcast crew. For all the falsehoods, they are pretty good contributors and I enjoy the comparisons and theories every once in a while. Plus, we always have Cory Provus on play-by-play on the radio, and the occasional appearance of Justin Morneau in the TV booth (the eventual dream team, I hope).
 
What are some of your favorite contributions from our FSN crew? Let me know in the comments below!
 
-Miles

When I was growing up, I thought Dick and Bert were awesome. They had the fun “Circle me Bert” shtick, seemingly great rapport with each other, and good timing on bringing excitement to the game. But, I was young - I didn’t know any better. This season is the first summer I’ve enjoyed diving into statistical truths in baseball. I think the analytical trend in the game has not been kind to our FSN announcing crew. It’s made them both increasingly bitter and more frequently inaccurate. Starting in April, I decided to make a list of falsehoods uttered by FSN contributors. I’ve come up with my top 5 at the midway point in the year, but hope many are added in the comments section below
 
1. Jack Morris claims you can’t measure spin rate.
 
This one was an absolute doozy and I believe almost every Twins Daily writer picked up on it and commented on it on Twitter. Jack claimed during a game that he didn’t think it was possible to accurately calculate the spin rate of either a batted ball or a pitch. This is on par with somebody saying they just don’t “believe” in climate change. Ridiculous.
 
2. Bert Blyleven compares Jake Odorizzi to Brad Radke multiple times
 
This is the one that kicked off this project. I could be mistaken, but I believe it was first in Odorizzi’s second start that Bert mentioned how similar he was to Radke. My immediate reaction was to look up prevalence of free passes in both players’ careers. Odorizzi has a career BB/9 of 3.1 (4.1 in 2018 so far). Now, this isn’t a ridiculously high number, but let’s compare in Radke’s career BB/9 – 1.6. Radke was a master of control; it was beautiful to watch. In 2005, in 200.2 IP, he only had 23 walks. Maybe he meant both pitchers were American and 6 feet, 2 inches tall, but I doubt it.
 
3. Torii Hunter has a strange take on launch angles.
 
This one was admittedly rather hilarious. Parker Hageman and Aaron Gleeman called my attention to it as I missed it live. Here is the quote: “Like I said, the launch angle is good for some people, but I think everybody can’t hit with the launch angle,” said Hunter. “I heard [Toronto Blue Jays third baseman] Josh Donaldson say he launches the ball. If you look at his swing, it really has no launch. It actually goes through the ball, and then it launches actually through the ball. But you can’t go after it with the launch.”
 
This isn’t even Torii’s hottest take in the world of sports. He once said (as a player for the Tigers) “But I can tell you this, I made love to my wife the other night and I caught a cramp in my hamstring. I actually put my leg out and kept performing. So there’s no excuse,” in response to Lebron James suffering cramps in the NBA Finals. Torii Hunter is one of my favorites and I enjoy having him on the broadcast, but seriously?
 
4. Bert Blyleven says Fernando Rodney doesn’t give a lot of free passes.
 
Just this last Monday against the Royals, Rodney was in to save a nice win for the Twins. During Rodney’s appearance (I believe on a 3-0 count), Bert blurted out that Rodney “doesn’t walk a lot of people.” Huh? Even to people who don’t check stats, Rodney has a reputation of making things interesting in save situations by walking batters. In fact, his career BB/9 is 4.4…definitely not a low walk rate.
 
5. Tim Laudner yells at the rulebook.
 
Now, I will admit this isn’t a falsehood. He just has a strong opinion on the rule change dealing with catchers and how they block the plate. The issue came up with Anthony Rizzo sliding and clipping the leg of Pirates’ catcher Austin Hedges. I included this on the list for two reasons: 1) it was hilarious how mad he got and 2) it goes with the theme of ex-players at FSN that can’t seem to progress with the times. It got to the point on Twins Live that Laudner was essentially getting worked up looking at the rule on a piece and paper and saying what a disgrace the change has been. We understand you’re mad, but calm down. The rules aren’t going to go back, so just accept.
Honorable Mention: Tim Laudner says the Twins swept a “very good” Orioles team

I don’t even need to say anything about this, do I?
 
Thus concludes my top 5 falsehood list. I hope you’ve gotten a kick out of our broadcast crew. For all the falsehoods, they are pretty good contributors and I enjoy the comparisons and theories every once in a while. Plus, we always have Cory Provus on play-by-play on the radio, and the occasional appearance of Justin Morneau in the TV booth (the eventual dream team, I hope).
 
What are some of your favorite contributions from our FSN crew? Let me know in the comments below!
 
-Miles

When I was growing up, I thought Dick and Bert were awesome. They had the fun “Circle me Bert” shtick, seemingly great rapport with each other, and good timing on bringing excitement to the game. But, I was young - I didn’t know any better. This season is the first summer I’ve enjoyed diving into statistical truths in baseball. I think the analytical trend in the game has not been kind to our FSN announcing crew. It’s made them both increasingly bitter and more frequently inaccurate. Starting in April, I decided to make a list of falsehoods uttered by FSN contributors. I’ve come up with my top 5 at the midway point in the year, but hope many are added in the comments section below
 
1. Jack Morris claims you can’t measure spin rate.
 
This one was an absolute doozy and I believe almost every Twins Daily writer picked up on it and commented on it on Twitter. Jack claimed during a game that he didn’t think it was possible to accurately calculate the spin rate of either a batted ball or a pitch. This is on par with somebody saying they just don’t “believe” in climate change. Ridiculous.
 
2. Bert Blyleven compares Jake Odorizzi to Brad Radke multiple times
 
This is the one that kicked off this project. I could be mistaken, but I believe it was first in Odorizzi’s second start that Bert mentioned how similar he was to Radke. My immediate reaction was to look up prevalence of free passes in both players’ careers. Odorizzi has a career BB/9 of 3.1 (4.1 in 2018 so far). Now, this isn’t a ridiculously high number, but let’s compare in Radke’s career BB/9 – 1.6. Radke was a master of control; it was beautiful to watch. In 2005, in 200.2 IP, he only had 23 walks. Maybe he meant both pitchers were American and 6 feet, 2 inches tall, but I doubt it.
 
3. Torii Hunter has a strange take on launch angles.
 
This one was admittedly rather hilarious. Parker Hageman and Aaron Gleeman called my attention to it as I missed it live. Here is the quote: “Like I said, the launch angle is good for some people, but I think everybody can’t hit with the launch angle,” said Hunter. “I heard [Toronto Blue Jays third baseman] Josh Donaldson say he launches the ball. If you look at his swing, it really has no launch. It actually goes through the ball, and then it launches actually through the ball. But you can’t go after it with the launch.”
 
This isn’t even Torii’s hottest take in the world of sports. He once said (as a player for the Tigers) “But I can tell you this, I made love to my wife the other night and I caught a cramp in my hamstring. I actually put my leg out and kept performing. So there’s no excuse,” in response to Lebron James suffering cramps in the NBA Finals. Torii Hunter is one of my favorites and I enjoy having him on the broadcast, but seriously?
 
4. Bert Blyleven says Fernando Rodney doesn’t give a lot of free passes.
 
Just this last Monday against the Royals, Rodney was in to save a nice win for the Twins. During Rodney’s appearance (I believe on a 3-0 count), Bert blurted out that Rodney “doesn’t walk a lot of people.” Huh? Even to people who don’t check stats, Rodney has a reputation of making things interesting in save situations by walking batters. In fact, his career BB/9 is 4.4…definitely not a low walk rate.
 
5. Tim Laudner yells at the rulebook.
 
Now, I will admit this isn’t a falsehood. He just has a strong opinion on the rule change dealing with catchers and how they block the plate. The issue came up with Anthony Rizzo sliding and clipping the leg of Pirates’ catcher Austin Hedges. I included this on the list for two reasons: 1) it was hilarious how mad he got and 2) it goes with the theme of ex-players at FSN that can’t seem to progress with the times. It got to the point on Twins Live that Laudner was essentially getting worked up looking at the rule on a piece and paper and saying what a disgrace the change has been. We understand you’re mad, but calm down. The rules aren’t going to go back, so just accept.
Honorable Mention: Tim Laudner says the Twins swept a “very good” Orioles team

I don’t even need to say anything about this, do I?
 
Thus concludes my top 5 falsehood list. I hope you’ve gotten a kick out of our broadcast crew. For all the falsehoods, they are pretty good contributors and I enjoy the comparisons and theories every once in a while. Plus, we always have Cory Provus on play-by-play on the radio, and the occasional appearance of Justin Morneau in the TV booth (the eventual dream team, I hope).
 
What are some of your favorite contributions from our FSN crew? Let me know in the comments below!
 
-Miles

When I was growing up, I thought Dick and Bert were awesome. They had the fun “Circle me Bert” shtick, seemingly great rapport with each other, and good timing on bringing excitement to the game. But, I was young - I didn’t know any better. This season is the first summer I’ve enjoyed diving into statistical truths in baseball. I think the analytical trend in the game has not been kind to our FSN announcing crew. It’s made them both increasingly bitter and more frequently inaccurate. Starting in April, I decided to make a list of falsehoods uttered by FSN contributors. I’ve come up with my top 5 at the midway point in the year, but hope many are added in the comments section below
 
1. Jack Morris claims you can’t measure spin rate.
 
This one was an absolute doozy and I believe almost every Twins Daily writer picked up on it and commented on it on Twitter. Jack claimed during a game that he didn’t think it was possible to accurately calculate the spin rate of either a batted ball or a pitch. This is on par with somebody saying they just don’t “believe” in climate change. Ridiculous.
 
2. Bert Blyleven compares Jake Odorizzi to Brad Radke multiple times
 
This is the one that kicked off this project. I could be mistaken, but I believe it was first in Odorizzi’s second start that Bert mentioned how similar he was to Radke. My immediate reaction was to look up prevalence of free passes in both players’ careers. Odorizzi has a career BB/9 of 3.1 (4.1 in 2018 so far). Now, this isn’t a ridiculously high number, but let’s compare in Radke’s career BB/9 – 1.6. Radke was a master of control; it was beautiful to watch. In 2005, in 200.2 IP, he only had 23 walks. Maybe he meant both pitchers were American and 6 feet, 2 inches tall, but I doubt it.
 
3. Torii Hunter has a strange take on launch angles.
 
This one was admittedly rather hilarious. Parker Hageman and Aaron Gleeman called my attention to it as I missed it live. Here is the quote: “Like I said, the launch angle is good for some people, but I think everybody can’t hit with the launch angle,” said Hunter. “I heard [Toronto Blue Jays third baseman] Josh Donaldson say he launches the ball. If you look at his swing, it really has no launch. It actually goes through the ball, and then it launches actually through the ball. But you can’t go after it with the launch.”
 
This isn’t even Torii’s hottest take in the world of sports. He once said (as a player for the Tigers) “But I can tell you this, I made love to my wife the other night and I caught a cramp in my hamstring. I actually put my leg out and kept performing. So there’s no excuse,” in response to Lebron James suffering cramps in the NBA Finals. Torii Hunter is one of my favorites and I enjoy having him on the broadcast, but seriously?
 
4. Bert Blyleven says Fernando Rodney doesn’t give a lot of free passes.
 
Just this last Monday against the Royals, Rodney was in to save a nice win for the Twins. During Rodney’s appearance (I believe on a 3-0 count), Bert blurted out that Rodney “doesn’t walk a lot of people.” Huh? Even to people who don’t check stats, Rodney has a reputation of making things interesting in save situations by walking batters. In fact, his career BB/9 is 4.4…definitely not a low walk rate.
 
5. Tim Laudner yells at the rulebook.
 
Now, I will admit this isn’t a falsehood. He just has a strong opinion on the rule change dealing with catchers and how they block the plate. The issue came up with Anthony Rizzo sliding and clipping the leg of Pirates’ catcher Austin Hedges. I included this on the list for two reasons: 1) it was hilarious how mad he got and 2) it goes with the theme of ex-players at FSN that can’t seem to progress with the times. It got to the point on Twins Live that Laudner was essentially getting worked up looking at the rule on a piece and paper and saying what a disgrace the change has been. We understand you’re mad, but calm down. The rules aren’t going to go back, so just accept.
Honorable Mention: Tim Laudner says the Twins swept a “very good” Orioles team

I don’t even need to say anything about this, do I?
 
Thus concludes my top 5 falsehood list. I hope you’ve gotten a kick out of our broadcast crew. For all the falsehoods, they are pretty good contributors and I enjoy the comparisons and theories every once in a while. Plus, we always have Cory Provus on play-by-play on the radio, and the occasional appearance of Justin Morneau in the TV booth (the eventual dream team, I hope).
 
What are some of your favorite contributions from our FSN crew? Let me know in the comments below!
 
-Miles

When I was growing up, I thought Dick and Bert were awesome. They had the fun “Circle me Bert” shtick, seemingly great rapport with each other, and good timing on bringing excitement to the game. But, I was young - I didn’t know any better. This season is the first summer I’ve enjoyed diving into statistical truths in baseball. I think the analytical trend in the game has not been kind to our FSN announcing crew. It’s made them both increasingly bitter and more frequently inaccurate. Starting in April, I decided to make a list of falsehoods uttered by FSN contributors. I’ve come up with my top 5 at the midway point in the year, but hope many are added in the comments section below
 
1. Jack Morris claims you can’t measure spin rate.
 
This one was an absolute doozy and I believe almost every Twins Daily writer picked up on it and commented on it on Twitter. Jack claimed during a game that he didn’t think it was possible to accurately calculate the spin rate of either a batted ball or a pitch. This is on par with somebody saying they just don’t “believe” in climate change. Ridiculous.
 
2. Bert Blyleven compares Jake Odorizzi to Brad Radke multiple times
 
This is the one that kicked off this project. I could be mistaken, but I believe it was first in Odorizzi’s second start that Bert mentioned how similar he was to Radke. My immediate reaction was to look up prevalence of free passes in both players’ careers. Odorizzi has a career BB/9 of 3.1 (4.1 in 2018 so far). Now, this isn’t a ridiculously high number, but let’s compare in Radke’s career BB/9 – 1.6. Radke was a master of control; it was beautiful to watch. In 2005, in 200.2 IP, he only had 23 walks. Maybe he meant both pitchers were American and 6 feet, 2 inches tall, but I doubt it.
 
3. Torii Hunter has a strange take on launch angles.
 
This one was admittedly rather hilarious. Parker Hageman and Aaron Gleeman called my attention to it as I missed it live. Here is the quote: “Like I said, the launch angle is good for some people, but I think everybody can’t hit with the launch angle,” said Hunter. “I heard [Toronto Blue Jays third baseman] Josh Donaldson say he launches the ball. If you look at his swing, it really has no launch. It actually goes through the ball, and then it launches actually through the ball. But you can’t go after it with the launch.”
 
This isn’t even Torii’s hottest take in the world of sports. He once said (as a player for the Tigers) “But I can tell you this, I made love to my wife the other night and I caught a cramp in my hamstring. I actually put my leg out and kept performing. So there’s no excuse,” in response to Lebron James suffering cramps in the NBA Finals. Torii Hunter is one of my favorites and I enjoy having him on the broadcast, but seriously?
 
4. Bert Blyleven says Fernando Rodney doesn’t give a lot of free passes.
 
Just this last Monday against the Royals, Rodney was in to save a nice win for the Twins. During Rodney’s appearance (I believe on a 3-0 count), Bert blurted out that Rodney “doesn’t walk a lot of people.” Huh? Even to people who don’t check stats, Rodney has a reputation of making things interesting in save situations by walking batters. In fact, his career BB/9 is 4.4…definitely not a low walk rate.
 
5. Tim Laudner yells at the rulebook.
 
Now, I will admit this isn’t a falsehood. He just has a strong opinion on the rule change dealing with catchers and how they block the plate. The issue came up with Anthony Rizzo sliding and clipping the leg of Pirates’ catcher Austin Hedges. I included this on the list for two reasons: 1) it was hilarious how mad he got and 2) it goes with the theme of ex-players at FSN that can’t seem to progress with the times. It got to the point on Twins Live that Laudner was essentially getting worked up looking at the rule on a piece and paper and saying what a disgrace the change has been. We understand you’re mad, but calm down. The rules aren’t going to go back, so just accept.
Honorable Mention: Tim Laudner says the Twins swept a “very good” Orioles team

I don’t even need to say anything about this, do I?
 
Thus concludes my top 5 falsehood list. I hope you’ve gotten a kick out of our broadcast crew. For all the falsehoods, they are pretty good contributors and I enjoy the comparisons and theories every once in a while. Plus, we always have Cory Provus on play-by-play on the radio, and the occasional appearance of Justin Morneau in the TV booth (the eventual dream team, I hope).
 
What are some of your favorite contributions from our FSN crew? Let me know in the comments below!
 
-Miles

*Disclaimer* I wrote this a week or so ago, and it seems Dozier may be heating up. But my attempt at analysis still applies .
 
I know at this point most of you are thinking: who cares why Brian Dozier is struggling? We are moving on from him anyway. While this could be true, I am fascinated by diving into why player results change (positively or negatively) drastically from year to year. So, why did Brian Dozier go from a solid consistent power hitter to struggling this year? It may not be as obvious as you think.
 
“Barreling it Up”
 
When a player’s numbers are down, you expect one of two things: 1) the player is striking out more, or 2) he is making worse contact. In Dozier’s case, it’s the latter. In fact, his strikeout rate is actually down. But we’ll get to that later. Statcast shows Brian’s average exit velocity this year is 86.9 MPH. That is down from an average of 87.5 MPH in both 2017 and 2016. This may not seem like much, but when you look at his “Barrels/Plate Appearance” there is a significant drop this year (2018 – 3.7, 2017 – 5.5, 2016 – 5.8). If you want to learn more about what a “barrel” is and how it’s measured, check out this article. Another key measure here, especially for power hitters, is the average “hard hit” rate. A hard hit is considered to have an exit velocity of over 95 MPH. In 2018, Dozier’s hard hit percentage is 27.8%, compared to 34.5% in 2017, and 36.2% in 2016.
 
Hypothesizing Possible Causes
 
This is the part of the post when I act like James Rowson and take analytical guesses at why a MLB player is struggling at the plate. The most obvious place to start is to determine whether pitchers around the league have started to pitch Dozier differently, thus creating problems for him at the plate. But, when you look at both pitch type and location, I don’t see a major difference. Look at the table below via Fangraphs with pitch type %’s to Dozier over the last few years:
 


 
 
 
As you can see, the only considerable deviation from his career average is he has getting more sliders (SL) in 2018. Sometimes cut fastballs (FC) and sliders merge together in pitch type, so this could account for the adjustment.
 
Next, I looked at whether pitchers are attacking Dozier in different locations than years past. Take the heat maps against Dozier below from 2017 (first) and 2018 (second):
 
 
 




 
 
Again, pitchers are attacking Dozier almost identically as they did in 2017 (down and away, like most hitters). At this point, I turned to Dozier’s actions for the answer.
 
The Approach
 
You could look at some of Dozier’s 2018 numbers and think his hitting is becoming more efficient. For example, his strikeout rate is down to 18.6% this season from 20% the last two summers. Naturally following that, his plate discipline has improved. His chase rate is down to 22.2% in 2018 from 23.4% in 2017, and 29.1% in 2016. But, if you look deeper, you start to realize his overall swing rate is down from the past couple seasons. Look at his swing % heat maps from 2017 (first) and 2018 (second) below:
 




 
My impression of the change is this: Dozier is becoming pickier with his pitch selection. Notice in the 2018 chart the red zones are much more concentrated in the middle part of the zone. In 2017, there is a wider distribution of swing % prevalence. In other words, Dozier was much more aggressive in 2017 with his pitch selection, swinging at more pitches outside the middle.
 
Furthermore, Dozier is seeing more pitches at the plate than in years past. In 2018, he is seeing an average of 4.10 pitchers/plate appearance. Compare that to 4.03 pitches/PA in both 2016 and 2017.
 
I know I miss the days watching Dozier hammer the first heater he sees. Maybe there are other contributing factors that I am missing, but I think an approach adjustment could benefit Brian as much as anything else. It also could be he enjoys hitting first in the lineup to attack the pitcher just trying to establish his fastball. Even though Dozier will most likely be gone after this season, I would still like to see him do well in the second half. He deserves it.

There’s growing concern within the baseball community about the health of the MLB as an organization, and the game overall. Since the mid-2000s, attendance and television ratings have been dropping consistently. According to Baseball Reference, in the past 20 years attendance per game across the entire MLB peaked in 2007 at 32,696 per game. In the ten years since, there has been a steady decline in attendance per game all the way down to 29,908 per game in 2017. That is a decrease of just about 8.5 percent. I’m not including 2018 numbers in this analysis as we are still in season and the spring typically draws a smaller crowd. The commissioner’s office often talks about game length as being a driving factor in this decline, but I believe that is an oversimplification of the trend, and there are bigger factors in play.
 
Game Length and Attendance Trend Lines
 
In 1998, the MLB expanded to include the all current 30 teams. In this analysis, I’m using data from 1998 onward because it most fully represents the league we see now, and expansion often alters attendance for a wide variety of factors that I won’t be addressing in this discussion. Look at Figure 1 below:
 
 


 
 
Figure one, which compares attendance and game length, raises some questions about the validity of the League’s primary argument that game length is affecting financial success of the league. As you can see, these two lines don’t seem to be correlated at all besides a very faint trend. It’s also interesting to note that the total range in game lengths in this 20-year span is only 19 minutes, with the average length per 9 innings being 2 hours and 53 minutes. 13 of the 20 years fall within 5 minutes of the average game length. In other words, we are not seeing egregious volatility in game length in the MLB. At the very least, it’s a stretch to assume game length is the sole cause of the downward trend in attendance.
 
Reducing Game Length
 
I want to be clear in this post: I am not against making minor changes in baseball to speed up the game. I think in 2017 we were at a point in game length that was not sustainable over the long term (3 hours and 5 minutes/9 innings). The corresponding rule changes made for 2018 seem to have had a slight effect. So far in 2018, the game length per 9 innings is down to 2:59.
Something that does drives game time up considerably is pitches per plate appearance, as you can see below in Figure 2.
 


 
I heard suggestions such as lowering the mound once again to reduce the pitcher’s advantage, thus creating less strikeouts and reducing pitcher per plate appearance. In theory, this could work. When the MLB lowered the mound in 1969, run production increased for two years. However, in 1971 & 1972, it suddenly declined, leading to the implementation of the DH in the American League in 1973. If you went to lowering the mound in 2019, you may have a shorter game due to less strikeouts, but run production could spike so much that you would have to make another adjustment, or worse, the games actually got longer due to more runs. Not to mention changing the record books. So, what actions can the MLB take to help raise attendance levels?
 
The Real Reason Attendance is Down
 
The reason people aren’t attending games is because it’s too damn expensive. Since 2006, the average MLB ticket price has gone from $22.21 to $32.44, per Statista.com. That is an increase of 46% over just 12 years. This is an extreme burden on families, and this increase is seriously outpacing inflation or any significant change in the economic environment. ValuePenguin.com had a great article that was written in 2016 about the true cost of attending a Major League Baseball game. They found that when you consider the median household incomes in MLB cities, and account for all associated costs with attending a game (tickets, food, drinks, transportation), on average a fan must work 4.3 hours to offset the cost of a game. You won’t attend many games if you’re being hit with that every time.
 
Conclusion
 
What bothers me about this conversation is that it’s largely led by the commissioner’s office. The commissioner wants financial success for the owners and teams. I don’t consider myself a baseball purist, but I don’t want to see major changes happen to the game in hopes of shortening game length, when a simple solution of lowering ticket prices could increase attendance just the same. All the changes being suggested will have a marginal effect on the time it takes to play a baseball game. As we saw in Figure 1, in the past 20 years, the average game length has only varied by 19 minutes. If you want something drastic to return to the 2:30 games of the mid-20th century, you would have to reduce the count to 2 strikes and 3 balls, or something even more drastic. So, let’s start a conversation on the affordability of the games, get more people (especially kids and families) into parks around the country, and get baseball back on track. Long term, it’s in the owners’ and the League’s best interest.
 
-Miles

There’s growing concern within the baseball community about the health of the MLB as an organization, and the game overall. Since the mid-2000s, attendance and television ratings have been dropping consistently. According to Baseball Reference, in the past 20 years attendance per game across the entire MLB peaked in 2007 at 32,696 per game. In the ten years since, there has been a steady decline in attendance per game all the way down to 29,908 per game in 2017. That is a decrease of just about 8.5 percent. I’m not including 2018 numbers in this analysis as we are still in season and the spring typically draws a smaller crowd. The commissioner’s office often talks about game length as being a driving factor in this decline, but I believe that is an oversimplification of the trend, and there are bigger factors in play.
 
Game Length and Attendance Trend Lines
 
In 1998, the MLB expanded to include the all current 30 teams. In this analysis, I’m using data from 1998 onward because it most fully represents the league we see now, and expansion often alters attendance for a wide variety of factors that I won’t be addressing in this discussion. Look at Figure 1 below:
 
 


 
 
Figure one, which compares attendance and game length, raises some questions about the validity of the League’s primary argument that game length is affecting financial success of the league. As you can see, these two lines don’t seem to be correlated at all besides a very faint trend. It’s also interesting to note that the total range in game lengths in this 20-year span is only 19 minutes, with the average length per 9 innings being 2 hours and 53 minutes. 13 of the 20 years fall within 5 minutes of the average game length. In other words, we are not seeing egregious volatility in game length in the MLB. At the very least, it’s a stretch to assume game length is the sole cause of the downward trend in attendance.
 
Reducing Game Length
 
I want to be clear in this post: I am not against making minor changes in baseball to speed up the game. I think in 2017 we were at a point in game length that was not sustainable over the long term (3 hours and 5 minutes/9 innings). The corresponding rule changes made for 2018 seem to have had a slight effect. So far in 2018, the game length per 9 innings is down to 2:59.
Something that does drives game time up considerably is pitches per plate appearance, as you can see below in Figure 2.
 


 
I heard suggestions such as lowering the mound once again to reduce the pitcher’s advantage, thus creating less strikeouts and reducing pitcher per plate appearance. In theory, this could work. When the MLB lowered the mound in 1969, run production increased for two years. However, in 1971 & 1972, it suddenly declined, leading to the implementation of the DH in the American League in 1973. If you went to lowering the mound in 2019, you may have a shorter game due to less strikeouts, but run production could spike so much that you would have to make another adjustment, or worse, the games actually got longer due to more runs. Not to mention changing the record books. So, what actions can the MLB take to help raise attendance levels?
 
The Real Reason Attendance is Down
 
The reason people aren’t attending games is because it’s too damn expensive. Since 2006, the average MLB ticket price has gone from $22.21 to $32.44, per Statista.com. That is an increase of 46% over just 12 years. This is an extreme burden on families, and this increase is seriously outpacing inflation or any significant change in the economic environment. ValuePenguin.com had a great article that was written in 2016 about the true cost of attending a Major League Baseball game. They found that when you consider the median household incomes in MLB cities, and account for all associated costs with attending a game (tickets, food, drinks, transportation), on average a fan must work 4.3 hours to offset the cost of a game. You won’t attend many games if you’re being hit with that every time.
 
Conclusion
 
What bothers me about this conversation is that it’s largely led by the commissioner’s office. The commissioner wants financial success for the owners and teams. I don’t consider myself a baseball purist, but I don’t want to see major changes happen to the game in hopes of shortening game length, when a simple solution of lowering ticket prices could increase attendance just the same. All the changes being suggested will have a marginal effect on the time it takes to play a baseball game. As we saw in Figure 1, in the past 20 years, the average game length has only varied by 19 minutes. If you want something drastic to return to the 2:30 games of the mid-20th century, you would have to reduce the count to 2 strikes and 3 balls, or something even more drastic. So, let’s start a conversation on the affordability of the games, get more people (especially kids and families) into parks around the country, and get baseball back on track. Long term, it’s in the owners’ and the League’s best interest.
 
-Miles

There’s growing concern within the baseball community about the health of the MLB as an organization, and the game overall. Since the mid-2000s, attendance and television ratings have been dropping consistently. According to Baseball Reference, in the past 20 years attendance per game across the entire MLB peaked in 2007 at 32,696 per game. In the ten years since, there has been a steady decline in attendance per game all the way down to 29,908 per game in 2017. That is a decrease of just about 8.5 percent. I’m not including 2018 numbers in this analysis as we are still in season and the spring typically draws a smaller crowd. The commissioner’s office often talks about game length as being a driving factor in this decline, but I believe that is an oversimplification of the trend, and there are bigger factors in play.
 
Game Length and Attendance Trend Lines
 
In 1998, the MLB expanded to include the all current 30 teams. In this analysis, I’m using data from 1998 onward because it most fully represents the league we see now, and expansion often alters attendance for a wide variety of factors that I won’t be addressing in this discussion. Look at Figure 1 below:
 
 


 
 
Figure one, which compares attendance and game length, raises some questions about the validity of the League’s primary argument that game length is affecting financial success of the league. As you can see, these two lines don’t seem to be correlated at all besides a very faint trend. It’s also interesting to note that the total range in game lengths in this 20-year span is only 19 minutes, with the average length per 9 innings being 2 hours and 53 minutes. 13 of the 20 years fall within 5 minutes of the average game length. In other words, we are not seeing egregious volatility in game length in the MLB. At the very least, it’s a stretch to assume game length is the sole cause of the downward trend in attendance.
 
Reducing Game Length
 
I want to be clear in this post: I am not against making minor changes in baseball to speed up the game. I think in 2017 we were at a point in game length that was not sustainable over the long term (3 hours and 5 minutes/9 innings). The corresponding rule changes made for 2018 seem to have had a slight effect. So far in 2018, the game length per 9 innings is down to 2:59.
Something that does drives game time up considerably is pitches per plate appearance, as you can see below in Figure 2.
 


 
I heard suggestions such as lowering the mound once again to reduce the pitcher’s advantage, thus creating less strikeouts and reducing pitcher per plate appearance. In theory, this could work. When the MLB lowered the mound in 1969, run production increased for two years. However, in 1971 & 1972, it suddenly declined, leading to the implementation of the DH in the American League in 1973. If you went to lowering the mound in 2019, you may have a shorter game due to less strikeouts, but run production could spike so much that you would have to make another adjustment, or worse, the games actually got longer due to more runs. Not to mention changing the record books. So, what actions can the MLB take to help raise attendance levels?
 
The Real Reason Attendance is Down
 
The reason people aren’t attending games is because it’s too damn expensive. Since 2006, the average MLB ticket price has gone from $22.21 to $32.44, per Statista.com. That is an increase of 46% over just 12 years. This is an extreme burden on families, and this increase is seriously outpacing inflation or any significant change in the economic environment. ValuePenguin.com had a great article that was written in 2016 about the true cost of attending a Major League Baseball game. They found that when you consider the median household incomes in MLB cities, and account for all associated costs with attending a game (tickets, food, drinks, transportation), on average a fan must work 4.3 hours to offset the cost of a game. You won’t attend many games if you’re being hit with that every time.
 
Conclusion
 
What bothers me about this conversation is that it’s largely led by the commissioner’s office. The commissioner wants financial success for the owners and teams. I don’t consider myself a baseball purist, but I don’t want to see major changes happen to the game in hopes of shortening game length, when a simple solution of lowering ticket prices could increase attendance just the same. All the changes being suggested will have a marginal effect on the time it takes to play a baseball game. As we saw in Figure 1, in the past 20 years, the average game length has only varied by 19 minutes. If you want something drastic to return to the 2:30 games of the mid-20th century, you would have to reduce the count to 2 strikes and 3 balls, or something even more drastic. So, let’s start a conversation on the affordability of the games, get more people (especially kids and families) into parks around the country, and get baseball back on track. Long term, it’s in the owners’ and the League’s best interest.
 
-Miles

There’s growing concern within the baseball community about the health of the MLB as an organization, and the game overall. Since the mid-2000s, attendance and television ratings have been dropping consistently. According to Baseball Reference, in the past 20 years attendance per game across the entire MLB peaked in 2007 at 32,696 per game. In the ten years since, there has been a steady decline in attendance per game all the way down to 29,908 per game in 2017. That is a decrease of just about 8.5 percent. I’m not including 2018 numbers in this analysis as we are still in season and the spring typically draws a smaller crowd. The commissioner’s office often talks about game length as being a driving factor in this decline, but I believe that is an oversimplification of the trend, and there are bigger factors in play.
 
Game Length and Attendance Trend Lines
 
In 1998, the MLB expanded to include the all current 30 teams. In this analysis, I’m using data from 1998 onward because it most fully represents the league we see now, and expansion often alters attendance for a wide variety of factors that I won’t be addressing in this discussion. Look at Figure 1 below:
 
 


 
 
Figure one, which compares attendance and game length, raises some questions about the validity of the League’s primary argument that game length is affecting financial success of the league. As you can see, these two lines don’t seem to be correlated at all besides a very faint trend. It’s also interesting to note that the total range in game lengths in this 20-year span is only 19 minutes, with the average length per 9 innings being 2 hours and 53 minutes. 13 of the 20 years fall within 5 minutes of the average game length. In other words, we are not seeing egregious volatility in game length in the MLB. At the very least, it’s a stretch to assume game length is the sole cause of the downward trend in attendance.
 
Reducing Game Length
 
I want to be clear in this post: I am not against making minor changes in baseball to speed up the game. I think in 2017 we were at a point in game length that was not sustainable over the long term (3 hours and 5 minutes/9 innings). The corresponding rule changes made for 2018 seem to have had a slight effect. So far in 2018, the game length per 9 innings is down to 2:59.
Something that does drives game time up considerably is pitches per plate appearance, as you can see below in Figure 2.
 


 
I heard suggestions such as lowering the mound once again to reduce the pitcher’s advantage, thus creating less strikeouts and reducing pitcher per plate appearance. In theory, this could work. When the MLB lowered the mound in 1969, run production increased for two years. However, in 1971 & 1972, it suddenly declined, leading to the implementation of the DH in the American League in 1973. If you went to lowering the mound in 2019, you may have a shorter game due to less strikeouts, but run production could spike so much that you would have to make another adjustment, or worse, the games actually got longer due to more runs. Not to mention changing the record books. So, what actions can the MLB take to help raise attendance levels?
 
The Real Reason Attendance is Down
 
The reason people aren’t attending games is because it’s too damn expensive. Since 2006, the average MLB ticket price has gone from $22.21 to $32.44, per Statista.com. That is an increase of 46% over just 12 years. This is an extreme burden on families, and this increase is seriously outpacing inflation or any significant change in the economic environment. ValuePenguin.com had a great article that was written in 2016 about the true cost of attending a Major League Baseball game. They found that when you consider the median household incomes in MLB cities, and account for all associated costs with attending a game (tickets, food, drinks, transportation), on average a fan must work 4.3 hours to offset the cost of a game. You won’t attend many games if you’re being hit with that every time.
 
Conclusion
 
What bothers me about this conversation is that it’s largely led by the commissioner’s office. The commissioner wants financial success for the owners and teams. I don’t consider myself a baseball purist, but I don’t want to see major changes happen to the game in hopes of shortening game length, when a simple solution of lowering ticket prices could increase attendance just the same. All the changes being suggested will have a marginal effect on the time it takes to play a baseball game. As we saw in Figure 1, in the past 20 years, the average game length has only varied by 19 minutes. If you want something drastic to return to the 2:30 games of the mid-20th century, you would have to reduce the count to 2 strikes and 3 balls, or something even more drastic. So, let’s start a conversation on the affordability of the games, get more people (especially kids and families) into parks around the country, and get baseball back on track. Long term, it’s in the owners’ and the League’s best interest.
 
-Miles

There’s growing concern within the baseball community about the health of the MLB as an organization, and the game overall. Since the mid-2000s, attendance and television ratings have been dropping consistently. According to Baseball Reference, in the past 20 years attendance per game across the entire MLB peaked in 2007 at 32,696 per game. In the ten years since, there has been a steady decline in attendance per game all the way down to 29,908 per game in 2017. That is a decrease of just about 8.5 percent. I’m not including 2018 numbers in this analysis as we are still in season and the spring typically draws a smaller crowd. The commissioner’s office often talks about game length as being a driving factor in this decline, but I believe that is an oversimplification of the trend, and there are bigger factors in play.
 
Game Length and Attendance Trend Lines
 
In 1998, the MLB expanded to include the all current 30 teams. In this analysis, I’m using data from 1998 onward because it most fully represents the league we see now, and expansion often alters attendance for a wide variety of factors that I won’t be addressing in this discussion. Look at Figure 1 below:
 
 


 
 
Figure one, which compares attendance and game length, raises some questions about the validity of the League’s primary argument that game length is affecting financial success of the league. As you can see, these two lines don’t seem to be correlated at all besides a very faint trend. It’s also interesting to note that the total range in game lengths in this 20-year span is only 19 minutes, with the average length per 9 innings being 2 hours and 53 minutes. 13 of the 20 years fall within 5 minutes of the average game length. In other words, we are not seeing egregious volatility in game length in the MLB. At the very least, it’s a stretch to assume game length is the sole cause of the downward trend in attendance.
 
Reducing Game Length
 
I want to be clear in this post: I am not against making minor changes in baseball to speed up the game. I think in 2017 we were at a point in game length that was not sustainable over the long term (3 hours and 5 minutes/9 innings). The corresponding rule changes made for 2018 seem to have had a slight effect. So far in 2018, the game length per 9 innings is down to 2:59.
Something that does drives game time up considerably is pitches per plate appearance, as you can see below in Figure 2.
 


 
I heard suggestions such as lowering the mound once again to reduce the pitcher’s advantage, thus creating less strikeouts and reducing pitcher per plate appearance. In theory, this could work. When the MLB lowered the mound in 1969, run production increased for two years. However, in 1971 & 1972, it suddenly declined, leading to the implementation of the DH in the American League in 1973. If you went to lowering the mound in 2019, you may have a shorter game due to less strikeouts, but run production could spike so much that you would have to make another adjustment, or worse, the games actually got longer due to more runs. Not to mention changing the record books. So, what actions can the MLB take to help raise attendance levels?
 
The Real Reason Attendance is Down
 
The reason people aren’t attending games is because it’s too damn expensive. Since 2006, the average MLB ticket price has gone from $22.21 to $32.44, per Statista.com. That is an increase of 46% over just 12 years. This is an extreme burden on families, and this increase is seriously outpacing inflation or any significant change in the economic environment. ValuePenguin.com had a great article that was written in 2016 about the true cost of attending a Major League Baseball game. They found that when you consider the median household incomes in MLB cities, and account for all associated costs with attending a game (tickets, food, drinks, transportation), on average a fan must work 4.3 hours to offset the cost of a game. You won’t attend many games if you’re being hit with that every time.
 
Conclusion
 
What bothers me about this conversation is that it’s largely led by the commissioner’s office. The commissioner wants financial success for the owners and teams. I don’t consider myself a baseball purist, but I don’t want to see major changes happen to the game in hopes of shortening game length, when a simple solution of lowering ticket prices could increase attendance just the same. All the changes being suggested will have a marginal effect on the time it takes to play a baseball game. As we saw in Figure 1, in the past 20 years, the average game length has only varied by 19 minutes. If you want something drastic to return to the 2:30 games of the mid-20th century, you would have to reduce the count to 2 strikes and 3 balls, or something even more drastic. So, let’s start a conversation on the affordability of the games, get more people (especially kids and families) into parks around the country, and get baseball back on track. Long term, it’s in the owners’ and the League’s best interest.
 
-Miles

There’s growing concern within the baseball community about the health of the MLB as an organization, and the game overall. Since the mid-2000s, attendance and television ratings have been dropping consistently. According to Baseball Reference, in the past 20 years attendance per game across the entire MLB peaked in 2007 at 32,696 per game. In the ten years since, there has been a steady decline in attendance per game all the way down to 29,908 per game in 2017. That is a decrease of just about 8.5 percent. I’m not including 2018 numbers in this analysis as we are still in season and the spring typically draws a smaller crowd. The commissioner’s office often talks about game length as being a driving factor in this decline, but I believe that is an oversimplification of the trend, and there are bigger factors in play.
 
Game Length and Attendance Trend Lines
 
In 1998, the MLB expanded to include the all current 30 teams. In this analysis, I’m using data from 1998 onward because it most fully represents the league we see now, and expansion often alters attendance for a wide variety of factors that I won’t be addressing in this discussion. Look at Figure 1 below:
 
 


 
 
Figure one, which compares attendance and game length, raises some questions about the validity of the League’s primary argument that game length is affecting financial success of the league. As you can see, these two lines don’t seem to be correlated at all besides a very faint trend. It’s also interesting to note that the total range in game lengths in this 20-year span is only 19 minutes, with the average length per 9 innings being 2 hours and 53 minutes. 13 of the 20 years fall within 5 minutes of the average game length. In other words, we are not seeing egregious volatility in game length in the MLB. At the very least, it’s a stretch to assume game length is the sole cause of the downward trend in attendance.
 
Reducing Game Length
 
I want to be clear in this post: I am not against making minor changes in baseball to speed up the game. I think in 2017 we were at a point in game length that was not sustainable over the long term (3 hours and 5 minutes/9 innings). The corresponding rule changes made for 2018 seem to have had a slight effect. So far in 2018, the game length per 9 innings is down to 2:59.
Something that does drives game time up considerably is pitches per plate appearance, as you can see below in Figure 2.
 


 
I heard suggestions such as lowering the mound once again to reduce the pitcher’s advantage, thus creating less strikeouts and reducing pitcher per plate appearance. In theory, this could work. When the MLB lowered the mound in 1969, run production increased for two years. However, in 1971 & 1972, it suddenly declined, leading to the implementation of the DH in the American League in 1973. If you went to lowering the mound in 2019, you may have a shorter game due to less strikeouts, but run production could spike so much that you would have to make another adjustment, or worse, the games actually got longer due to more runs. Not to mention changing the record books. So, what actions can the MLB take to help raise attendance levels?
 
The Real Reason Attendance is Down
 
The reason people aren’t attending games is because it’s too damn expensive. Since 2006, the average MLB ticket price has gone from $22.21 to $32.44, per Statista.com. That is an increase of 46% over just 12 years. This is an extreme burden on families, and this increase is seriously outpacing inflation or any significant change in the economic environment. ValuePenguin.com had a great article that was written in 2016 about the true cost of attending a Major League Baseball game. They found that when you consider the median household incomes in MLB cities, and account for all associated costs with attending a game (tickets, food, drinks, transportation), on average a fan must work 4.3 hours to offset the cost of a game. You won’t attend many games if you’re being hit with that every time.
 
Conclusion
 
What bothers me about this conversation is that it’s largely led by the commissioner’s office. The commissioner wants financial success for the owners and teams. I don’t consider myself a baseball purist, but I don’t want to see major changes happen to the game in hopes of shortening game length, when a simple solution of lowering ticket prices could increase attendance just the same. All the changes being suggested will have a marginal effect on the time it takes to play a baseball game. As we saw in Figure 1, in the past 20 years, the average game length has only varied by 19 minutes. If you want something drastic to return to the 2:30 games of the mid-20th century, you would have to reduce the count to 2 strikes and 3 balls, or something even more drastic. So, let’s start a conversation on the affordability of the games, get more people (especially kids and families) into parks around the country, and get baseball back on track. Long term, it’s in the owners’ and the League’s best interest.
 
-Miles

There’s growing concern within the baseball community about the health of the MLB as an organization, and the game overall. Since the mid-2000s, attendance and television ratings have been dropping consistently. According to Baseball Reference, in the past 20 years attendance per game across the entire MLB peaked in 2007 at 32,696 per game. In the ten years since, there has been a steady decline in attendance per game all the way down to 29,908 per game in 2017. That is a decrease of just about 8.5 percent. I’m not including 2018 numbers in this analysis as we are still in season and the spring typically draws a smaller crowd. The commissioner’s office often talks about game length as being a driving factor in this decline, but I believe that is an oversimplification of the trend, and there are bigger factors in play.
 
Game Length and Attendance Trend Lines
 
In 1998, the MLB expanded to include the all current 30 teams. In this analysis, I’m using data from 1998 onward because it most fully represents the league we see now, and expansion often alters attendance for a wide variety of factors that I won’t be addressing in this discussion. Look at Figure 1 below:
 
 


 
 
Figure one, which compares attendance and game length, raises some questions about the validity of the League’s primary argument that game length is affecting financial success of the league. As you can see, these two lines don’t seem to be correlated at all besides a very faint trend. It’s also interesting to note that the total range in game lengths in this 20-year span is only 19 minutes, with the average length per 9 innings being 2 hours and 53 minutes. 13 of the 20 years fall within 5 minutes of the average game length. In other words, we are not seeing egregious volatility in game length in the MLB. At the very least, it’s a stretch to assume game length is the sole cause of the downward trend in attendance.
 
Reducing Game Length
 
I want to be clear in this post: I am not against making minor changes in baseball to speed up the game. I think in 2017 we were at a point in game length that was not sustainable over the long term (3 hours and 5 minutes/9 innings). The corresponding rule changes made for 2018 seem to have had a slight effect. So far in 2018, the game length per 9 innings is down to 2:59.
Something that does drives game time up considerably is pitches per plate appearance, as you can see below in Figure 2.
 


 
I heard suggestions such as lowering the mound once again to reduce the pitcher’s advantage, thus creating less strikeouts and reducing pitcher per plate appearance. In theory, this could work. When the MLB lowered the mound in 1969, run production increased for two years. However, in 1971 & 1972, it suddenly declined, leading to the implementation of the DH in the American League in 1973. If you went to lowering the mound in 2019, you may have a shorter game due to less strikeouts, but run production could spike so much that you would have to make another adjustment, or worse, the games actually got longer due to more runs. Not to mention changing the record books. So, what actions can the MLB take to help raise attendance levels?
 
The Real Reason Attendance is Down
 
The reason people aren’t attending games is because it’s too damn expensive. Since 2006, the average MLB ticket price has gone from $22.21 to $32.44, per Statista.com. That is an increase of 46% over just 12 years. This is an extreme burden on families, and this increase is seriously outpacing inflation or any significant change in the economic environment. ValuePenguin.com had a great article that was written in 2016 about the true cost of attending a Major League Baseball game. They found that when you consider the median household incomes in MLB cities, and account for all associated costs with attending a game (tickets, food, drinks, transportation), on average a fan must work 4.3 hours to offset the cost of a game. You won’t attend many games if you’re being hit with that every time.
 
Conclusion
 
What bothers me about this conversation is that it’s largely led by the commissioner’s office. The commissioner wants financial success for the owners and teams. I don’t consider myself a baseball purist, but I don’t want to see major changes happen to the game in hopes of shortening game length, when a simple solution of lowering ticket prices could increase attendance just the same. All the changes being suggested will have a marginal effect on the time it takes to play a baseball game. As we saw in Figure 1, in the past 20 years, the average game length has only varied by 19 minutes. If you want something drastic to return to the 2:30 games of the mid-20th century, you would have to reduce the count to 2 strikes and 3 balls, or something even more drastic. So, let’s start a conversation on the affordability of the games, get more people (especially kids and families) into parks around the country, and get baseball back on track. Long term, it’s in the owners’ and the League’s best interest.
 
-Miles

By now, most of us have noticed how Matt Magill has been a solid arm in the Twins bullpen this season. He made his first appearance of 2018 in a clunker of a game (which I attended ) on April 29th against the Cincinnati Reds. He threw 2.1 innings that Sunday and gave up just 3 hits and 0 earned runs, adding 2 punch-outs as well. So far this year with the Twins, he’s given up a total of 3 ER over 23.2 IP, for an ERA of 1.14.
Magill was drafted in 2008 in the 31st round to the Los Angeles Dodgers. He had two briefs stints in the majors with both the L.A. Dodgers (2013) and the Cincinnati Reds (2016) before joining the Minnesota Twins (2018). During that time, he had ERA’s of 6.51 and 6.23 respectively. He’s clearly been around for a while; so why the recent success on the bump?
In my mind, there’s two simple reasons:
He’s throwing more strikes:In 2013 as a starting pitcher, Magill gave 28 free passes in 27.2 IP (BB/9 = 9.11 – ouch.)
In 2016 as a relief pitcher, he had a BB/9 of 10.38 in just 4.1 IP
Now, in 2018, he currently holds a BB/9 of 1.3 – and that is fun to watch

[*]His stuff is a lot better:
His fastball velocity has an average of 95.1 MPH so far in 2018, compare that to 93.1 MPH in 2016, and 91.8 MPH in 2013.
He’s getting more movement on both his 4-seam fastball, and his “cutter” or hard slider. Check out the charts from FanGraphs below on the horizontal movement for Magill's pitches (2018 first, 2016 second). For your reference, a positive value on horizontal movement means the ball will be moving away from a right-handed hitter, and therefore a negative value means the ball is tailing in on a righty.



 




 
Clearly, in 2018 he’s getting more movement on that cut fastball (FC), slightly more run in on the righties, and again more velocity with the 4-seamer (FA). This could be a contributing factor to why he's been so effective this season at producing weak contact (.219 BABIP - Nice!).
 
Check out the vertical movement below (2018 first, 2016 second):
 




 
Again, the notable difference is with the cut fastball (FC).
Magill is throwing the ball over the plate, and he has increased his velocity considerably, while getting more movement on his cutter. This is a recipe for continued success and I believe it’s time for Molitor to start utilizing him in higher leverage spots. Can somebody explain to me why he hasn’t gotten this chance yet?
Let me know what you think in the comments!
-Miles

By now, most of us have noticed how Matt Magill has been a solid arm in the Twins bullpen this season. He made his first appearance of 2018 in a clunker of a game (which I attended ) on April 29th against the Cincinnati Reds. He threw 2.1 innings that Sunday and gave up just 3 hits and 0 earned runs, adding 2 punch-outs as well. So far this year with the Twins, he’s given up a total of 3 ER over 23.2 IP, for an ERA of 1.14.
Magill was drafted in 2008 in the 31st round to the Los Angeles Dodgers. He had two briefs stints in the majors with both the L.A. Dodgers (2013) and the Cincinnati Reds (2016) before joining the Minnesota Twins (2018). During that time, he had ERA’s of 6.51 and 6.23 respectively. He’s clearly been around for a while; so why the recent success on the bump?
In my mind, there’s two simple reasons:
He’s throwing more strikes:In 2013 as a starting pitcher, Magill gave 28 free passes in 27.2 IP (BB/9 = 9.11 – ouch.)
In 2016 as a relief pitcher, he had a BB/9 of 10.38 in just 4.1 IP
Now, in 2018, he currently holds a BB/9 of 1.3 – and that is fun to watch

[*]His stuff is a lot better:
His fastball velocity has an average of 95.1 MPH so far in 2018, compare that to 93.1 MPH in 2016, and 91.8 MPH in 2013.
He’s getting more movement on both his 4-seam fastball, and his “cutter” or hard slider. Check out the charts from FanGraphs below on the horizontal movement for Magill's pitches (2018 first, 2016 second). For your reference, a positive value on horizontal movement means the ball will be moving away from a right-handed hitter, and therefore a negative value means the ball is tailing in on a righty.



 




 
Clearly, in 2018 he’s getting more movement on that cut fastball (FC), slightly more run in on the righties, and again more velocity with the 4-seamer (FA). This could be a contributing factor to why he's been so effective this season at producing weak contact (.219 BABIP - Nice!).
 
Check out the vertical movement below (2018 first, 2016 second):
 




 
Again, the notable difference is with the cut fastball (FC).
Magill is throwing the ball over the plate, and he has increased his velocity considerably, while getting more movement on his cutter. This is a recipe for continued success and I believe it’s time for Molitor to start utilizing him in higher leverage spots. Can somebody explain to me why he hasn’t gotten this chance yet?
Let me know what you think in the comments!
-Miles

By now, most of us have noticed how Matt Magill has been a solid arm in the Twins bullpen this season. He made his first appearance of 2018 in a clunker of a game (which I attended ) on April 29th against the Cincinnati Reds. He threw 2.1 innings that Sunday and gave up just 3 hits and 0 earned runs, adding 2 punch-outs as well. So far this year with the Twins, he’s given up a total of 3 ER over 23.2 IP, for an ERA of 1.14.
Magill was drafted in 2008 in the 31st round to the Los Angeles Dodgers. He had two briefs stints in the majors with both the L.A. Dodgers (2013) and the Cincinnati Reds (2016) before joining the Minnesota Twins (2018). During that time, he had ERA’s of 6.51 and 6.23 respectively. He’s clearly been around for a while; so why the recent success on the bump?
In my mind, there’s two simple reasons:
He’s throwing more strikes:In 2013 as a starting pitcher, Magill gave 28 free passes in 27.2 IP (BB/9 = 9.11 – ouch.)
In 2016 as a relief pitcher, he had a BB/9 of 10.38 in just 4.1 IP
Now, in 2018, he currently holds a BB/9 of 1.3 – and that is fun to watch

[*]His stuff is a lot better:
His fastball velocity has an average of 95.1 MPH so far in 2018, compare that to 93.1 MPH in 2016, and 91.8 MPH in 2013.
He’s getting more movement on both his 4-seam fastball, and his “cutter” or hard slider. Check out the charts from FanGraphs below on the horizontal movement for Magill's pitches (2018 first, 2016 second). For your reference, a positive value on horizontal movement means the ball will be moving away from a right-handed hitter, and therefore a negative value means the ball is tailing in on a righty.



 




 
Clearly, in 2018 he’s getting more movement on that cut fastball (FC), slightly more run in on the righties, and again more velocity with the 4-seamer (FA). This could be a contributing factor to why he's been so effective this season at producing weak contact (.219 BABIP - Nice!).
 
Check out the vertical movement below (2018 first, 2016 second):
 




 
Again, the notable difference is with the cut fastball (FC).
Magill is throwing the ball over the plate, and he has increased his velocity considerably, while getting more movement on his cutter. This is a recipe for continued success and I believe it’s time for Molitor to start utilizing him in higher leverage spots. Can somebody explain to me why he hasn’t gotten this chance yet?
Let me know what you think in the comments!
-Miles

By now, most of us have noticed how Matt Magill has been a solid arm in the Twins bullpen this season. He made his first appearance of 2018 in a clunker of a game (which I attended ) on April 29th against the Cincinnati Reds. He threw 2.1 innings that Sunday and gave up just 3 hits and 0 earned runs, adding 2 punch-outs as well. So far this year with the Twins, he’s given up a total of 3 ER over 23.2 IP, for an ERA of 1.14.
Magill was drafted in 2008 in the 31st round to the Los Angeles Dodgers. He had two briefs stints in the majors with both the L.A. Dodgers (2013) and the Cincinnati Reds (2016) before joining the Minnesota Twins (2018). During that time, he had ERA’s of 6.51 and 6.23 respectively. He’s clearly been around for a while; so why the recent success on the bump?
In my mind, there’s two simple reasons:
He’s throwing more strikes:In 2013 as a starting pitcher, Magill gave 28 free passes in 27.2 IP (BB/9 = 9.11 – ouch.)
In 2016 as a relief pitcher, he had a BB/9 of 10.38 in just 4.1 IP
Now, in 2018, he currently holds a BB/9 of 1.3 – and that is fun to watch

[*]His stuff is a lot better:
His fastball velocity has an average of 95.1 MPH so far in 2018, compare that to 93.1 MPH in 2016, and 91.8 MPH in 2013.
He’s getting more movement on both his 4-seam fastball, and his “cutter” or hard slider. Check out the charts from FanGraphs below on the horizontal movement for Magill's pitches (2018 first, 2016 second). For your reference, a positive value on horizontal movement means the ball will be moving away from a right-handed hitter, and therefore a negative value means the ball is tailing in on a righty.



 




 
Clearly, in 2018 he’s getting more movement on that cut fastball (FC), slightly more run in on the righties, and again more velocity with the 4-seamer (FA). This could be a contributing factor to why he's been so effective this season at producing weak contact (.219 BABIP - Nice!).
 
Check out the vertical movement below (2018 first, 2016 second):
 




 
Again, the notable difference is with the cut fastball (FC).
Magill is throwing the ball over the plate, and he has increased his velocity considerably, while getting more movement on his cutter. This is a recipe for continued success and I believe it’s time for Molitor to start utilizing him in higher leverage spots. Can somebody explain to me why he hasn’t gotten this chance yet?
Let me know what you think in the comments!
-Miles

By now, most of us have noticed how Matt Magill has been a solid arm in the Twins bullpen this season. He made his first appearance of 2018 in a clunker of a game (which I attended ) on April 29th against the Cincinnati Reds. He threw 2.1 innings that Sunday and gave up just 3 hits and 0 earned runs, adding 2 punch-outs as well. So far this year with the Twins, he’s given up a total of 3 ER over 23.2 IP, for an ERA of 1.14.
Magill was drafted in 2008 in the 31st round to the Los Angeles Dodgers. He had two briefs stints in the majors with both the L.A. Dodgers (2013) and the Cincinnati Reds (2016) before joining the Minnesota Twins (2018). During that time, he had ERA’s of 6.51 and 6.23 respectively. He’s clearly been around for a while; so why the recent success on the bump?
In my mind, there’s two simple reasons:
He’s throwing more strikes:In 2013 as a starting pitcher, Magill gave 28 free passes in 27.2 IP (BB/9 = 9.11 – ouch.)
In 2016 as a relief pitcher, he had a BB/9 of 10.38 in just 4.1 IP
Now, in 2018, he currently holds a BB/9 of 1.3 – and that is fun to watch

[*]His stuff is a lot better:
His fastball velocity has an average of 95.1 MPH so far in 2018, compare that to 93.1 MPH in 2016, and 91.8 MPH in 2013.
He’s getting more movement on both his 4-seam fastball, and his “cutter” or hard slider. Check out the charts from FanGraphs below on the horizontal movement for Magill's pitches (2018 first, 2016 second). For your reference, a positive value on horizontal movement means the ball will be moving away from a right-handed hitter, and therefore a negative value means the ball is tailing in on a righty.



 




 
Clearly, in 2018 he’s getting more movement on that cut fastball (FC), slightly more run in on the righties, and again more velocity with the 4-seamer (FA). This could be a contributing factor to why he's been so effective this season at producing weak contact (.219 BABIP - Nice!).
 
Check out the vertical movement below (2018 first, 2016 second):
 




 
Again, the notable difference is with the cut fastball (FC).
Magill is throwing the ball over the plate, and he has increased his velocity considerably, while getting more movement on his cutter. This is a recipe for continued success and I believe it’s time for Molitor to start utilizing him in higher leverage spots. Can somebody explain to me why he hasn’t gotten this chance yet?
Let me know what you think in the comments!
-Miles

By now, most of us have noticed how Matt Magill has been a solid arm in the Twins bullpen this season. He made his first appearance of 2018 in a clunker of a game (which I attended ) on April 29th against the Cincinnati Reds. He threw 2.1 innings that Sunday and gave up just 3 hits and 0 earned runs, adding 2 punch-outs as well. So far this year with the Twins, he’s given up a total of 3 ER over 23.2 IP, for an ERA of 1.14.
Magill was drafted in 2008 in the 31st round to the Los Angeles Dodgers. He had two briefs stints in the majors with both the L.A. Dodgers (2013) and the Cincinnati Reds (2016) before joining the Minnesota Twins (2018). During that time, he had ERA’s of 6.51 and 6.23 respectively. He’s clearly been around for a while; so why the recent success on the bump?
In my mind, there’s two simple reasons:
He’s throwing more strikes:In 2013 as a starting pitcher, Magill gave 28 free passes in 27.2 IP (BB/9 = 9.11 – ouch.)
In 2016 as a relief pitcher, he had a BB/9 of 10.38 in just 4.1 IP
Now, in 2018, he currently holds a BB/9 of 1.3 – and that is fun to watch

[*]His stuff is a lot better:
His fastball velocity has an average of 95.1 MPH so far in 2018, compare that to 93.1 MPH in 2016, and 91.8 MPH in 2013.
He’s getting more movement on both his 4-seam fastball, and his “cutter” or hard slider. Check out the charts from FanGraphs below on the horizontal movement for Magill's pitches (2018 first, 2016 second). For your reference, a positive value on horizontal movement means the ball will be moving away from a right-handed hitter, and therefore a negative value means the ball is tailing in on a righty.



 




 
Clearly, in 2018 he’s getting more movement on that cut fastball (FC), slightly more run in on the righties, and again more velocity with the 4-seamer (FA). This could be a contributing factor to why he's been so effective this season at producing weak contact (.219 BABIP - Nice!).
 
Check out the vertical movement below (2018 first, 2016 second):
 




 
Again, the notable difference is with the cut fastball (FC).
Magill is throwing the ball over the plate, and he has increased his velocity considerably, while getting more movement on his cutter. This is a recipe for continued success and I believe it’s time for Molitor to start utilizing him in higher leverage spots. Can somebody explain to me why he hasn’t gotten this chance yet?
Let me know what you think in the comments!
-Miles