Series Preview: Minnesota Twins @ Seattle Mariners
by Matthew on Aug 4, 2008 9:29 AM PDT
in Seattle Mariners Previews
Email
PrintSeattle: 42-69
Twins: 62-49
GAMES
Game 1: Miguel Batista vs Glen Perkins*
Game 2: R.A. Dickey vs Scott Baker
Game 3: Jarrod Washburn* vs Nick Blackburn
Glen Perkins is one of Minnesota's many young pitchers. He made some appearances in relief the past two years but stepped into the rotation full time this season and has performed at a back end level. He doesn't miss many bats or get many strikeouts, but like all Minnesota pitchers, he throws strikes. If he kept the ball on the ground a bit more he'd approach league average, but as it stands, his tRA sits at 5.09.
Scott Baker is in his third year in the Twins rotation and has seen some improvement and regression from 2007. He has been steadily missing more bats each year and his strikeout rate reflects that, now up to a very healthy 21.4% and he continues to pound the zone, offering up strikes on nearly 70% of his pitches and keeping his walk rate around 5%. His problem has been with the long ball. Never one to keep the ball on hte ground, Baker has been bit this year with more of those many fly balls landing over the fence. Nevertheless, his tRA is settling in the 4.4 range.
Like Perkins above, this is Nick Blackburn's first year in the rotation but he's taken to it better. Again, he throws strikes, 68.6%, and misses around an average number of bats, 7.3%. But Blackburn also has a an average groundball rate, something not usually seen in Minnesota. The whole package comes in at a touch worse than Scott Baker above, but he's more than quality at a 4.43 tRA and at the low cost of basically nothing. The Twins just have a clone farm for these guys.
Likely Starters:
C Joe Mauer*
1 Justin Morneau*
2 Nick Punto
3 Brendan Harris/Brian Buscher*
S Adam Everett
L Delmon Young
C Carlos Gomez
R Denard Span*
D Jason Kubel*
Surprisingly, it's not the pitching driving the Twins success, but their hitting. The Twins pitching staff checks in right around league average and their defense, while below average, is only a touch so. However, the Twins are scoring 4.92 runs a game against a league average of 4.68 despite below average OBP and SLG.
CONTEXT
I'm not sure how long the Mariners are going to wait to put Jarrod Washburn on waivers. The closer it gets to September, the more likely teams are going to find other solutions. I have a sinking feeling that the Ms are going to try and wait until the winter to deal off Washburn in the hope that if he continues pitching like he did over that 11 start stretch they'll actually be able to unload him and get a meaningful prospect back. Which may be true, but is pretty moot since there's no way he continues to pitch that way as we already started seeing. Release us from this prison already. Please.
In all the full years that Carlos Silva has spent in the rotation he has never thrown fewer strikes, garnered fewer groundballs or allowed more line drives than he is doing now. Wheeeeeeeeeeeeeee! Thanks Bill.
THIS SERIES BROUGHT TO YOU BY:
The Maharaja Imperial India Pale Ale
Avery Brewing Company. Boulder, CO
It earns its imperial title checking it around 10% ABV which is quite strong for a hop-heavy beer.
66 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Not really that similar.
2006 Silva had an insanely high HR rate. 2008 Silva just plain sucks.
They are fairly similar.
2006: LD: 22.2%, GB: 43.6%, FB 34.2%
2008: LD: 21.8%, GB: 44%, FB 34.2%
WHIP the same, WPA the same, and decently similar on a lot of the other core stats. Virtually identical on ERA. 2006 Silva gave up a shit ton of home runs, but otherwise they seem like roughly the same player.
Though, whatever. He sucks.
...and now I'm here
I read this as 'spitter'.
And my mirth was increased exponentially. And I’m sorry for lowering the quality of this conversation to the gutter. Now I’m off to do some metric homework before the game starts, these stats you reference are no longer Greek to me, but not by much.
And even when you adjust for the HR/FB%
He was still really bad in 2006. Not as bad as he appeared but still bad, and better than he is now but not by all that much.
His babip is quite high this year which pretty much offsets the bad luck he had with homeruns in 2006 anyways. Adjusting his babip to league average this year would probably yield similar numbers to his HR adjusted 2006. His LD/GB/FB are nearly identical, his BB rate is identical, his K rate is actually a little bit higher this year….same pitcher really, just bad luck in a different way (or bad defense).
Aren't most pictures just one-sided?
I fucking hate you Mariners
After the near misses of Pavano, Schmidt, and Zito
we were bound to eventually get bit.
It's fun to look at the list of terrible pitching investments over the last few years and check off how many of them we tried to make
by Jeff Sullivan on Aug 4, 2008 11:05 AM PDT up reply actions
Seattle rotation:
1. Felix
2. Barry Zito
3. Jason Schmidt
4. Carl Pavano
5. Kei Igawa
At least we’d be closer to SAS.
Go Nova
You know...
... the Twins are proof positive that you don’t HAVE to be part of the Billy Beane School of General Managing to be successful. Nor do you have to write huge checks, You just have to avoid being a dumbass and overpaying for marginal talent on the FA market, and the Twins do a good job of that, plus they are excellent at the scouting end of things.
I’d be pretty happy if our next GM could demonstrate this ability and transmit it to the rest of the front office staff.
by eponymous_coward on Aug 4, 2008 11:39 AM PDT reply actions
Well there's no reason why you HAVE to follow the Moneyball model to be successful -
the main theme of the book wasn’t “value sabr” and “OBP OBP OBP!!!!!” as much as was simply “think outside the box and try to find inefficiencies in the way the market works.” The Twins do it by scouting extremely well and not putting any black holes on the field, whereas the A’s come to the same end result through much more analytical means.
Also, no Liriano =(. I want to watch him destroy us AND it would help in the Race for Strasburg.
The Jose Lopez Watch - 134 H, 16 BB, 51 G Left
by seattlebruin on Aug 4, 2008 11:56 AM PDT up reply actions
Well, to wit, like Oakland they don't have much of a choice
They play in a bad-fit dome stadium (though they’re getting a new park soon) and have only so much money to spend. They don’t throw money at expensive veterans because they don’t have the money.
But those two teams have kind of proven that it's better to not spend money at all then to spend it stupidly
unless you are the Yankees and have unlimited money
The Jose Lopez Watch - 134 H, 16 BB, 51 G Left
by seattlebruin on Aug 4, 2008 12:09 PM PDT up reply actions
So, basically, the M's are rich and stupid?
This explains some things.
by eponymous_coward on Aug 4, 2008 12:20 PM PDT up reply actions
Could be worse - they could be poor and stupid
The Jose Lopez Watch - 134 H, 16 BB, 51 G Left
by seattlebruin on Aug 4, 2008 12:21 PM PDT up reply actions
A fool and his money are soon parted.
Go Fo Broke!
Isn't Carl Pohlad still the richest owner in baseball?
by G_ on Aug 4, 2008 1:07 PM PDT up reply actions
Richest != spends most on team
The Jose Lopez Watch - 134 H, 16 BB, 51 G Left
Uh...
The Twins are spending 5 million on a one year deal for their Fat Manatee. We’re spending 48 million over 4 for ours. Oh, and theirs is pitching better. Advantage: Twins.
by eponymous_coward on Aug 4, 2008 5:49 PM PDT up reply actions
I still can't tell if the Twins success is based more in scouting or player development
the two are related, but still quite distinct.
I’ll give their scouts credit for Ben Revere, their 1st rounder in ‘07 that was roundly panned. He’s done amazingly well.
But they seem to do better in taking guys with meh stuff and getting them to the majors – Perkins, Slowey, Blackburn… Everyone talked about Santana and Liriano (who scouts must have seen in other orgs), but I just find it amazing that they’re actually able to get value from their so-so SP prospects. Do THAT and you get to skip the bidding wars for crappy mid-rotation slop, and you can actually succeed despite a small payroll.
Anyway, I’d love to read a book on the Twins philosophy in the draft or their player devel. system. It’s great to talk about ‘market inefficiencies’ or ‘think outside the box’ or what have you. I keep thinking the real money to be made is in doing obvious things better – 1: pitcher attrition and 2: player development. Those aren’t ‘outside the box’ – they’re core activities. And it would seem that half of baseball sucks at them. THAT’S the inefficiency.
But it's the same general idea though - figure out what is being done poorly, and do it better than everyone else
it’s not as if no one thought of analysis before the A’s – they just do it much better than anyone else
The Jose Lopez Watch - 134 H, 16 BB, 51 G Left
I'm not convinced that the A's do it better than anyone else
And, at least to me, it’s a totally different idea. The idea that poor teams have to ‘discover’ a commodity or skill that’s undervalued… no, they don’t. That’s ONE way to do it, and the A’s do some facets of that quite well. It’s just not the only path to success, even for small market teams. Indeed, the twins seem to succeed using the exact opposite template/strategy. I’d like to hear about how they implement that.
I’d also say that ‘Moneyball’ was certainly trying to come up with something more profound, or more specific, than ‘Figure out what’s being done poorly, and do it better.’
I disagree - I've always felt like Moneyball was encouraging you to think for yourself
rather than promote a specific strategy, if that makes sense. I think my opinion of that book is influenced by the rest of Lewis’ work though, like this fascinating piece on the Texas Tech coach Mike Leach (well, if you’re into football offenses at all I found it fascinating)
The Jose Lopez Watch - 134 H, 16 BB, 51 G Left
I love Mike Leach
But again, the premise or take-away from Moneyball gets more amorphous every month.
Now we’re down to ‘do things better’ or ‘think for yourself?’ Can I get a ‘believe in yourself’ or perhaps an ‘aim high?’
I think the other side caricutures the book as ‘draft fat dudes’ or something equally ridiculous, but it’s equally odd to claim that the ONLY thing the book was trying to say is that you should do good things.
The A’s way of doing things was couched as being diametrically opposed to the way the Twins (seem to) do things. Maybe that’s not true, but in any event, I’d love to hear about what the Twins look for or how they develop players.
Basically, the overall point is that much of what the Twins seem to do with regards to the draft seems like the exact sorts of things that Moneyball argued were overvalued and out-of-step.
You can argue that Moneyball wasn’t actually advocating any form of analysis, or philosophy or strategy, but that obviously guts it. I would still argue that if you want to replicate the success of the A’s then their model offers you better odds. But I like that the Twins offer a counterexample, even if it’s still shrouded in mystery.
Yeah, I totally agree about the Twins - I just prefer to think that Lewis is advocating something simpler
beyond just statistical analysis as a potential path to success in baseball
The Jose Lopez Watch - 134 H, 16 BB, 51 G Left
Perhaps, but I still feel that this weakens the book
The A’s did things because they believed that they could uncover undervalued talent. I think the book took a lot of time explaining WHY statistical analysis can get you to undervalued players – that is, they weren’t making a claim that the result is all that matters, and that the A’s could’ve drafted players based on what day of the week they were born and arrived at the same place. Lewis, or perhaps the A’s org, made specific claims about what kinds of processes were more likely to be successful, and specific claims about data-poor activities like scouting.
He was advocating the use of data. Maybe not OBP specifically, but using measurement to guide you to the truth. This isn’t to say that the Twins do not have computers or calculators, but they seem to trust other, less data-intensive processes. Or maybe they don’t, I don’t really know. I’d like to know.
"If everybody is thinking the same, then somebody isn't thinking." Patton.
Was how I encapsulated the A’s strategy. And metrics was their template for a team strategy that allowed them to wash through players, and grab the nuggets that other teams just didn’t value. A niche market that fit their budget . Now I’m seeing other teams trying to emulate this, without understanding the concept, and making a mess. But this is the opinion of somebody that has the slightest grasp of metrics, and is viewing the whole situation from far away. Did I mention I have trouble balancing my checkbook?
The quote?
My take is that if everybody is competing, or functioning, in generally the same way, then it’s just monkey see monkey do. That’s the way it’s been done around here, that’s the way were going to keep doing it so don’t ask questions. Then somebody steps out of the box, and sets the system on its ear. In hindsight those moments often look simple, at the time they happen they can be huge. Like Alexander the Great, or Elvis. And I probably think I’m being insightful when I’m actually being a complete moron. I’m not talking again until I finish a couple beers and regain my confidence.
Think of Strasburg, be more joyful.
The Jose Lopez Watch - 134 H, 16 BB, 51 G Left
There's a joyful pic in that series somewhere.
I just don’t think we see it often.
I would do cartwheels over my name written in sand
by Kirsten Schlewitz on Aug 4, 2008 2:22 PM PDT up reply actions
It has occurred to me that there is a possibility the Oakland A's
might end up with a worse win/loss record than the Mariners by the end of the season. They have been on a hell of a losing streak lately.
I'm not a stats person but it seems extremely, extremely unlikely.
I would do cartwheels over my name written in sand
by Kirsten Schlewitz on Aug 4, 2008 2:33 PM PDT up reply actions
That would be very weird
but it’s really not gonna happen – the M’s would have to finish somewhere near .500 probably and that ain’t happenin
The Jose Lopez Watch - 134 H, 16 BB, 51 G Left
Uh, no
The Jose Lopez Watch - 134 H, 16 BB, 51 G Left
Nobody on earth predicted the Mariners to have the season they have been having either.
But it happened. it could happen to the A’s.
They're 11.5 games ahead of us with 50-ish left to play
There’s no way. We would have to go on one hell of an uncharacteristic winning streak for it to even be possible.
No, they'd just need to stay in the tank
They overachieved for the first half of the season, and then they traded Blanton and Harden. It’s not totally crazy.
A little bit crazy, sure, but there’s a possibility. There’s probably a 2% chance the A’s go 14-38, but if they do, the M’s only need to go 25-26 to overtake ‘em. Yeah, OK, that’s still a bit crazy…
I thought they underachieved for the first half
Their record was well below their pythag for a while there and still is despite the losing streak. Trading Harden and Blanton made them worse but not bad enough to go 14-38…
True.
The As have played like a roughly .516 team but are under .500 in reality. They likely will not keep up a .516 talent pace but the loss of Harden and Blanton do not make them even close to a .400 talent team.
But *how* have they played like a .516 team?
Their pitching staff has given up nearly 100 runs fewer than league average. Two of their better starters are now gone, and three remaining starters are all in line for some regression.
They’re not a .400 true-talent team, but they’re probably closer to that right now than they are to .516.
We’ll see what their record ends up at post-Blanton trade.
I thought true talent level was already regressed
Because their run differential says they’ve played like a .527 team while their true record is a .482 team.
So assuming that the .516 figure is already regressed, that’s an 84 win team. For them to drop to .400 they would have to be a 65 win team post-Harden/Blanton, that’s -19 wins. That’s a lot of wins above replacement level for two guys, as good as they are, I don’t think it’s anywhere close to that.
IMO they’re probably around a .500 team now.
They also added Sean Gallagher
who’s at least equivalent to Joe Blanton and perhaps better than him.
That's fair.
But Greg Smith and Duchscherer seem like they’re in for some serious regression. Eveland to a degree.
I’m still not sure you can look at the staff as it stands and say that they’re a true talent 3.9 R/G team – I’m struggling to think of them as 4.5.
And yes, yes, defense matters. But right now, Jack Cust is middle-of-the-pack in RZR as a LF. He’s also made more OOZ plays per inning than Matt Holliday (but not as many as Carlos Lee… buhh?). They’re good, but I still don’t think Billy Beane could’ve reasonably expected run prevention like they’ve put up.
Chance that the As finish in last?
.0003%.
Finally, some recognition.
by Kirsten Schlewitz on Aug 5, 2008 6:28 AM PDT up reply actions
Thanks, I was curious what you all thought of this.
I appreciate your responses. Seems to me the Mariners are doing a little better getting some wins against tough teams while the A’s have traded away their team and seem to be headed down the slippery slope.
This was definitely worthy of a front page headline
Giambi shaves his moustache
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recommended FanPosts
Recent FanPosts
In Association With
Big League Stew - MLB - Yahoo! Sports
- Will Bryce Harper start the season with the Nationals?
- Mitch Mustain puts football behind him, signs reported rookie deal with White Sox
- Robinson Cano and Denzel Washington face off in Jay Leno’s Yankees trivia contest
- Shane Victorino lands role on ‘Hawaii Five-0′
- Have you criticized Hanley Ramirez on Twitter? Your name may be on his bat!
Certain photos copyright © 2012 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
