What's new
By:
USCHO Fan Forum

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

  • The USCHO Fan Forum has migrated to a new plaform, xenForo. Most of the function of the forum should work in familiar ways. Please note that you can switch between light and dark modes by clicking on the gear icon in the upper right of the main menu bar. We are hoping that this new platform will prove to be faster and more reliable. Please feel free to explore its features.

2009 MN Twins Part 4: I Was Told There Would Be No Math

Re: 2009 MN Twins Part 4: I Was Told There Would Be No Math

JF_Gophers said:
I'm not sure why a guy with more saves than Rivera since he became a full-time closer is considered overrated. Does he need to do better in the postseason? yes. But he gets the job done otherwise.
Click to expand...
Rivera's not the all-time saves leader. He's regarded as one of the best (if not THE best) closer of all time because his post-season stats are simply other-worldly. 79 games, 121.0 IP, 76 hits, 12 walks, 100 K's (when your K/on base ratio is greater than 1, uh, you're good), 0.74 ERA, .769 WHIP (when your era is lower than your WHIP... uh, yeah.) With just his regular season stats he'd be regarded as great, but it's his postseason numbers that really blow you out of the water.

Either way, a closer still isn't worth paying a significant % of your team's payroll on, having a good one is a luxury, having an average one shouldn't cost much more than other half-way decent relievers.
 
Re: 2009 MN Twins Part 4: I Was Told There Would Be No Math

one_to7 said:
Rivera's not the all-time saves leader. He's regarded as one of the best (if not THE best) closer of all time because his post-season stats are simply other-worldly. 79 games, 121.0 IP, 76 hits, 12 walks, 100 K's (when your K/on base ratio is greater than 1, uh, you're good), 0.74 ERA, .769 WHIP (when your era is lower than your WHIP... uh, yeah.) With just his regular season stats he'd be regarded as great, but it's his postseason numbers that really blow you out of the water.

Either way, a closer still isn't worth paying a significant % of your team's payroll on, having a good one is a luxury, having an average one shouldn't cost much more than other half-way decent relievers.
Click to expand...

To be clear I wasn't talking about all-time. Just the last 5 years. Where he is 2 behind Nathan in saves. But they are the top 2.
 
Re: 2009 MN Twins Part 4: I Was Told There Would Be No Math

Well I'm late to the party but Polonco is available if you don't like Punto and also gives quality at bats. Won't be cheaper though.As far as closers, Rodney's contract is up and he may be available. I don't like Nathan at all because I don't think he is good in the clutch. He tried to give the game to Detroit, and just failed unfortunately for us. I'm sure you could sign Dontrelle if you want.
Of course you could be Colorado and have Street give the game away with a two run lead and two outs. Or Philly with the so called closer they have, Or Boston. Hmmm kind of a trend here.
 
Re: 2009 MN Twins Part 4: I Was Told There Would Be No Math

johnnypohlfan said:
I don't get it. We should have patience with Young because he's 23 and needs more time, but Gomez, also 23 I might add, will never reach Young's supposed improved production 2, 3, 4 years down the line? How do you figure?

Regarding the trade with Tampa, have you ever heard of the concept of sunk costs? Where companies (or people) eventually go broke because they implemented an expensive but horrible idea and refused to let it go because they had "too much" invested in it already.

Comparing Young to Hunter is only slightly valid. Offensively, their numbers through the same point in their careers are comparable, but defensively and on the clubhouse level, there's no comparison. Hunter was a favorite right away, and was great in the field from the get-go. Young makes an abortion out of anything hit his way, and in the off chance that he does make a nice catch, it won't matter because he'll likely end up throwing to the wrong base or missing the cutoff man allowing a run to score or runners to advance. He's had 4 years in the majors, that nonsense should have been eliminated by now. He also doesn't seem to be a great clubhouse guy either, just based on what I've seen on TV and several comments made by Gardy through the past two years.
Click to expand...

The difference between GoGo and Young is GoGo will never have any sort of power and even at his best is nowhere near as good at the plate average-wise. He has speed, that is it. Hell Young's stretch at the end of the year was better than GoGo's entire season. Plus GoGo is supposed to be a leadoff man and he has a worse swing AND the same terrible impatience at the plate. He may have been rushed but even when he was sent down to work on it it didnt help. His defense doesn't excuse his offense. In truth I don't want either of them around but I think you get more with Young than you do with GoGo.

And I am not comparing Young to Hunter defensively that is a strawman argument. It is all offensive. I never mentioned defense just how Hunter had the same issue where he swung at everything and his numbers suffered because of it. We all get it Young stinks in the field, but what exactly does that have to do with his skills at the plate?

And you bring up sunk costs, but what exactly do you think you are going to get for Young? If he is as terrible as you say and as uncoachable as you say why would anyone give us anything for him? Of course Garza was uncoachable too...funny how that worked.

And if I hear one more person talk about how someone is "great in the lockerroom" I am going to puke. Mike Redmon is great in the lockerroom too that doesn't mean anything. Plus I don't put much stock in what people say about players in the lockerroom and I am certainly not going to disqualify someone because reports are he may not play pattycake the right way.
 
Last edited:
Re: 2009 MN Twins Part 4: I Was Told There Would Be No Math

Handyman said:
The difference between GoGo and Young is GoGo will never have any sort of power and even at his best is nowhere near as good at the plate average-wise. He has speed, that is it. Hell Young's stretch at the end of the year was better than GoGo's entire season. Plus GoGo is supposed to be a leadoff man and he has a worse swing AND the same terrible impatience at the plate. He may have been rushed but even when he was sent down to work on it it didnt help. His defense doesn't excuse his offense. In truth I don't want either of them around but I think you get more with Young than you do with GoGo.

And I am not comparing Young to Hunter defensively that is a strawman argument. It is all offensive. I never mentioned defense just how Hunter had the same issue where he swung at everything and his numbers suffered because of it. We all get it Young stinks in the field, but what exactly does that have to do with his skills at the plate?

And you bring up sunk costs, but what exactly do you think you are going to get for Young? If he is as terrible as you say and as uncoachable as you say why would anyone give us anything for him? Of course Garza was uncoachable too...funny how that worked.

And if I hear one more person talk about how someone is "great in the lockerroom" I am going to puke. Mike Redmon is great in the lockerroom too that doesn't mean anything. Plus I don't put much stock in what people say about players in the lockerroom and I am certainly not going to disqualify someone because reports are he may not play pattycake the right way.
Click to expand...
They're both not good, but gomez's #'s are atrocious. His on base % is below .300. That's baaaaaad.

Plate discipline, working counts, taking pitches, and getting walks are also things that generally can't be taught. It's either part of the way the player approaches the game or it isn't. Oakland's emphasized patience for years, and even though encouragment and coaching is given from the time they're drafted till they reach the big leagues, their #'s still aren't as good as guys who've just happened to approach the game like that their whole lives and do it naturally.

So don't exactly expect either to suddenly start taking 4+ pitches per at bat and looking to walk. And even if they do somehow turn into .300 hitters, they'll be prone to huge slumps where they basically contribute nothing, since they won't be walking at all during them, and their OBP will still relatively stink, since almost all of it will come from their batting average. (330 obp is bad, 350 is around league average, and once you start getting over 400, you're looking at very good/valuable players. below 300 should not be getting major league at bats, let alone 500 of them.)

edit: any time a batter goes up to the plate (except for some rare situations late in a game when you'd do anything for just one run), the most valuable thing they can do is not make an out. Doesn't matter how, just get on base without making any outs.

You probably really don't want to know who led the American League the last 3 years in making outs, but if you do, click here:

http://www.baseball-reference.com/leaders/outs_made_leagues.shtml
 
Last edited:
Re: 2009 MN Twins Part 4: I Was Told There Would Be No Math

one_to7 said:
You probably really don't want to know who led the American League the last 3 years in making outs, but if you do, click here:

http://www.baseball-reference.com/leaders/outs_made_leagues.shtml
Click to expand...
Looks like there are a lot of All-Stars and HoFers on that list. Why? Because to lead the league in total anything, you need to play a lot and bat near the top of the lineup. Also, the "don't make outs" idea is not as cut and dried as you make it. If a batter comes up in the first inning after the lead-off man doubles and grounds a single through the shortstop hole, he probably got lucky, whereas a batter who hits a 3-hopper to 2nd did his job.
 
Re: 2009 MN Twins Part 4: I Was Told There Would Be No Math

one_to7 said:
An average pitcher can save probably 75-80% of save situations. A good closer can save probably 85-95% of those situations. Is that difference really worth giving a flyer on a guy for 1 mill vs. paying someone 11 mill a year?
Click to expand...
Teams that pay big bucks for top notch closers are basically paying $1 million or so per extra win that the closer is worth per year. If you're a big payroll team like the Yanks or Red Sox in a difficult division, I'd say it's a wise investment to do that because not doing that could very well cost you a playoff berth.

Given the fact MN is a small market team in a crappy division, they could probably get more bang for their buck by not wasting so much money on a closer and spending it on another starting pitcher to anchor their rotation or a decent infielder that can hit. Fortunately, they might be able to address one of those two needs and come out neutral (maybe even ahead) on payroll by trading Nathan.
 
Re: 2009 MN Twins Part 4: I Was Told There Would Be No Math

If you want to trade an out for 1 base in the first inning, as the opposing team I'll take that every single time.

Like I said, unless you're happy getting one run and onl one run (like late in a tied or one run game), the most valuable thing a batter can do is not make an out. I'd much MUCH rather have my batter take a walk than a first pitch groundout in the scenario you brought up, for instance.
 
Re: 2009 MN Twins Part 4: I Was Told There Would Be No Math

one_to7 said:
I'd much MUCH rather have my batter take a walk than a first pitch groundout in the scenario you brought up, for instance.
Click to expand...
Yes. But what are the odds of a batter walking after an 0-1 count? OBA drops once a hitter falls behind. So while it is a great idea for a leadoff guy to work the count and maybe even take a .50/.50 pitch on 3-2, most managers are fine with hitting the ball the other way early in the specified situation rather than risking a 2-strike count where the pitcher can dictate.

Admittedly because we were talking about Gomez and Young, it really doesn't matter. Young will pop to 2nd on the first pitch, while Gomez will K on 3 pitches. Hard to find an advantage there (Gomez gives more opportunities for a wild pitch, while the infielder could lose Young's pop in the roof.)
 
Re: 2009 MN Twins Part 4: I Was Told There Would Be No Math

one_to7 said:
If you want to trade an out for 1 base in the first inning, as the opposing team I'll take that every single time.

Like I said, unless you're happy getting one run and onl one run (like late in a tied or one run game), the most valuable thing a batter can do is not make an out. I'd much MUCH rather have my batter take a walk than a first pitch groundout in the scenario you brought up, for instance.
Click to expand...

I don't think you quite understand the concept he was trying to explain.

More At Bats is going to translate into more outs, even for a great hitter. There's a reason those guys are getting a good number of AB's each season.

Delmon Young being the exception. :)
 
Re: 2009 MN Twins Part 4: I Was Told There Would Be No Math

MoFan said:
Looks like the Twins aren't going to keep 34 Kirby Puckett Place as their headquarter address. What does everyone think about this? I think that what he did for the franchise stands on its own merit and survives the test of time, aside from any personal failures or other issues.

http://sports.yahoo.com/mlb/news;_ylt=ArWk4Ek8kcJYkwwW0gHQ0sARvLYF?slug=ap-twinsmoving&prov=ap&type=lgns
Click to expand...

Yes, his accomplishments stand on their own.

They don't need a street address.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top