Hudson and the Twins
When people talk about teams that have had good off-seasons, the usual names that come up are the Seattle Mariners, the Boston Red Sox, and people that hate the New York Mets. For all of them, this has been a productive winter full of good news. But there’s a new contender in the mix for best off-season in baseball: the Minnesota Twins.
They were able to retain Carl Pavano on a one-year deal, solidifying their starting rotation. They picked up J.J. Hardy on the cheap to solve their shortstop problem. They added Jim Thome as a bat off the bench and to provide depth at DH and, by extension, the corner outfield spots. And they’re reportedly on the verge of signing Joe Mauer to a long-term contract that will keep him in Minnesota for the rest of his career – or most of it, anyway.
They capped their winter yesterday by signing Orlando Hudson to play second base, getting him for the bargain rate of just $5 million. His abilities with the bat, as a switch-hitter no less, make him a perfect fit for what the Twins needed. He’ll slide in between Denard Span and Joe Mauer, breaking up the string of lefties and giving their line-up depth that it did not have before.
With Hudson, Hardy, and Thome, the Twins have improved their offense significantly. By retaining Pavano and watching Francisco Liriano return to form in winter ball, their pitching rotation has the chance to be among the best in baseball. Their bullpen is still good, anchored by a relief ace and some quality arms in front of him.
It’s hard to imagine the Twins could have had a better winter. They used this off-season to upgrade the team, and while the roster isn’t perfect, they are clearly the class of the AL Central at this point. Adding Hudson is just the cherry on top of what was already a very good winter.
Couldn’t agree more. I sit next to a die hard twins fan, who is not sabermetrically inclined. besides him hating pavano, I have watched with extra interest their off season and every move seems reasonable. The biggest challenge for them will be cutting bait for Delmon Young if/when he stinks the new stadium up out of the joint.
The stadium could have some random effect of -2 games on their record, but it still feels like a 88 win team, which should be enough for the postseason.
Why would the stadium have a -2 game effect on THEIR record, and not the visitors?
Because they play half their games there?
They play half their games there….. but SO DO THE VISITORS! This doesn’t make any sense. They Rays don’t get to play in Florida when they are playing the Twins (unless, of course, it’s a home game).
Maybe it has something to do with being in a new park. They don’t have quite the home-field advantage, since they don’t know the park as well as most teams know their home park.
do you want a math based reason or non math-based reason?
Lets start for the easier ones, for the admittedly non sabermetric reason that other teams hated playing there, between the weird sight-lines, awkward field dimensions, the crowd (loud at times), the turf, etc etc. That adds up whether you want to realize it or not. You get used to those conditions in the outfield or infield, play someone that might see 9 games at most there a year, you have an edge
Since that wont satisfy you (and it shouldnt), I took the liberty of looking at the last 10 seasons of twins baseball.
On average they won 47.6 games at home each season, versus only 38.7 on the road.
Thats a NINE game difference. Why is it that one team is 11%(!) more likely to win at home versus the road?
(note, ran some quick math, in 2009 the average gap was 9% at home, didn’t do the math for the entire decade but someone can probably run it, in either case we are looking at data for 2400 games for the 2009 only sample and ~=1600 games for the decade sample, so the 2% number isnt decisive but feels significant, one standard deviation over 1600 games is about 10 games, so if the true standard is really a 54.5-45.5 split, then the twins are something like a 2.8 sigma event.
So the home field probably helped. But not by more than 2 games. Why the home park helped is anyone’s guess, and im sure someone with more time could flesh out my numbers better, but this was a pretty easy one to defend, and i think even to the naked relatively untrained eye it also makes sense.
LeeTro: exactly, you made the point i made just below you in alot fewer words. I explained reasons why the twins might have an advantage being used to a relatively unique (albeit ugly) park that plays differently from other parks.
Their new park will have two factors against it
1) the twins will take some time to acclimate to it
2) the risk of being generic and having no distinguishing features that make it significantly harder than other parks.
I am guessing they will probably be on average 8 percentage points better at home than on the road this season, and it could go back to the 9-10 range.
Hence the two win dropoff for park effects.
Yeah, but you’re comparing how well they’ve played at home, to how well they’ll potentially play at home in the future. We’re talking about how they project for next season, which doesn’t take into account how they played at home in the past. (I realize it does slightly, since some of the players may have gotten a “boost” from this extra homefield advantage). But only some of the players have played their whole careers in Minnesota, and projections are also based on other things, such as minor leagues, etc.
The Twins have been notorious for beating their projected win total in years past, and this extra homefield advantage may have something to do with it. So, if anything, the Twins should have gotten a 2 game boost to their projected win total in years past, and this year they should project at exactly what the numbers say.
steve lets take this further.
how long does it take to acclimate to your home park before you have an advantage vis-a-vis other parks?
what percentage of home field advantage is things that are player independent (the crowd, the effects of sleeping in a random hotel and travel and all that it entails),
and what percentage of home field is things that a player can adapt to and legitimately get better at over time? (ie: how long did it take Nick Punto to figure out exactly where to stand against a left handed spray hitter who hit alot of line drives and ground balls?
I am not smart enough to even figure out the best way to figure out the answer to these questions, as i would run into correlation-causation errors.
But we can both agree that the twins were playing 2 games better than projections the last few years, almost to the point where people should have pencilled them in to do slightly better, in spite of wanting to hate Ron Gardenhire.
So then the question is do you take those two wins out of the question (assuming you have the park built in), or do you assume that the overachievement was because people werent factoring in the park, in which case you stick with your projection. I have goine with choice one, someone could go choice 2, but i dont think anyone can dispute that the Dome was a meaningful advantage for the Twins, that cannot be assumed to continue to be a factor for target field.
Hometown crowd size, noise, energy and excitement are certainly factors. And the Twins will have that added edge in their new park during April and May; larger and more enthusiastic crowds than they would normally have had at the Metrodome during the initial months of a season. I
‘d guess this “artificial” playoff-like atmosphere at beginning of the season will be worth at least a 4 game bump.
One could check, I imagine, the overall changes in records of the last ten teams to move into new stadiums. That is, victories in the last season in their old stadium compared to victories in the first season of their new stadium.
“how long does it take to acclimate to your home park before you have an advantage vis-a-vis other parks?”
Acclimation aside, it takes exactly until the other team boards a plane, tries to sleep on it, and then shows up at the new stadium to play you that you have an advantage.
I wonder what was the HFA difference between 2008 and 2009 for the Yankess and Mets? Or when Cardinals opened the new Busch? Or Philly when they opened Citizens?
Man. That’s a lot of explanation. I thought it was a joke about the stink of Delmon Young rubbing off on the park.
AJ, this result surprised me, and has me challenge my thesis slightly.
I looked at the most 12 recent stadium openings (anything opened after 2000).
in the last season before those 12 teams shut down their old stadiums (NYY NYM WAS STL PHL SDP CIN MIL PIT HOU DET and SF)
those 12 teams won 524 games at home and 449 on the road
The first season of their new stadium they only won 511 games at home (which is worse you see), but the did even relatively worse on the road, winning 424 games. (Note i wasnt looking at winning percentage, just raw wins for the regular season since i amd oing this mid-conference call).
so in short, there was a gap of 6.25 wins between home and away record in the last year of the old stadium, but 7.25 wins between home and away records in the new stadium.
Is that extra win significant? Maybe. Does it put a major dagger in the theory that the twins might do worse in their new park vis-a-vis their old one? Probably.
Incidentally, the #’s were just about dead even until the 3 recent stadium openings of the most recent stadiums. None of those old stadiums really had a home field advantage (like the Vet Did!), but that might be using narrative where it’s unwarranted.
Individualy alot of this is noise, but the new stadiums most benefited Pittsburgh, St Louis (a gorgeous stadium if you’ve ever been), and NYY.
The teams that benefitted the least from their move were the Phillies, the Padres and the Brewers.
I can’t easily post my data set from here but its kind of interesting.
lets see if this dataset posts…
Old H Win Old A Win Gap new H win new A win Gap Team
48 41 7 57 46 11 NYY
48 41 7 41 29 12 NYM
40 33 7 34 25 9 WAS
50 50 0 49 34 15 STL
49 37 12 42 44 -2 PHL
35 29 6 42 45 -3 SDP
38 40 -2 35 34 1 CIN
42 31 11 36 32 4 MIL
37 32 5 38 24 14 PIT
50 47 3 39 33 6 HOU
38 31 7 43 36 7 DET
49 37 12 55 42 13 SF
524 449 75 511 424 87 TOTAL
“Is that extra win significant?”
Be wary of small samples. That’s only 12 stadium openings. In this case we are looking at group level outcomes (team wins in new vs. old stadium). Even though many individual games were played over those years, only 24 seasons were involved.
i dont know who this steven ellingson guy thinks he is but he sure has a funny name
Let’s not get carried away with Pavano and Liriano making their rotation “among the best in baseball.”
I agree they’ve had an uncharacteristically good offseason. Hardy and Hudson are a BIG improvement given the suckholes they’ve had at three spots of their infield for YEARS. But those are the only two real improvements over last year. The Twins are always in playoff contention thanks to their weak division, but unless Delmon and Liriano really break through, this team will continue making early exits against the actually good teams.
Nicely omitted the “has a chance”…I’m sure that is mostly banking on Liriano as well.
Suppose Liriano pitches like Johan Santana. Are they even then among the best in baseball? Nope.
Kevin Slowey (if healthy) and Scott Baker are both three-win pitchers. So, yeah, if Liriano pitches like Johan (or even close) that makes the Twins’ rotation pretty beastly.
pretty sure every rotation “has a chance”, too
Yeah, this rotation has some serious upside. Slowey looks to be a 3 win pitcher, and could be better than that, based on his ridiculous minor league numbers. Liriano could certainly be a 4 win pitcher (he also could be a long reliever, we don’t really know at this point). Baker and Pavano were about 3.5 wins last year, with Blackburn 3. 18 WAR from your starting 5 has to be among the best in baseball, right? (This isn’t a rhetorical question, I’m too lazy to look it up).
I realize that we’re banking on a healthy and effective Liriano, Slowey, and Pavano, but we’re talking about if this rotation “has a chance” to be among the best in baseball, not if it projects to be.
Not Milwaukee.
I nominate the Braves.
Fans Projections:
Hanson: 4.6 WAR
Jurrjens: 4.1 WAR
Lowe: 4.0 WAR
Hudson: 3.4 WAR
Kawakami: 2.3 WAR
Scary even without Vazquez.
Larry,
I would say by “has a chance” he means a realistic chance. The Twins need quite a few things to go right, but each thing is reasonable. It’s just a small chance that they all break right for them.
With a team like the Padres, there is no realistic things that could break right for them to have a very good rotation.
Another thing to keep in mind, is that you can’t really just look at the top 5 when looking at a rotation. Even the most healthy rotations need a 6th pitcher. The Twins 6th pitcher, Brian Duensing, had a FIP of 4.13 last year. Glen Perkins and Anthony Swarzak aren’t bad options either.
Liriano and two 3-win pitchers is not “beastly.”
How does the MIN rotation’s projected WAR compare to all the other teams? Where do they rank? Seems simple enough to find out.
A lot of this talk of “what if’s”, which essentially equates to “if they all pitch better than they are projected to” is the type of stuff you often hear from Cub fans (sorry Cub fans, but ya gotta admit …).
Also, what does “among the best in baseball” mean? Top 5? Top 10? Top 15?
Again, I’m surprised no one that is making the assertive statements has provided statistical data to support it, as in “compared to the combined WAR of the 29 other starting rotations, MIN is ranked XX”. This site is based on statistical analysis and comparison, correct?
Well, I think the only projections for pitchers right now are the fan projections, and somebody would have to go through and manually add all the WAR projections for the top five pitchers on each team.
Then again, I have time on my hands. Back in a jiffy.
Okay, went through and filled out a rotation for the top five starters by WAR for most teams (some teams didn’t have five starters projected by the fans). The Twins’ top five was Baker 3.7, Slowey 3.5, Pavano 2.8, Blackburn 2.6, Liriano 2, good for a total of 15 WAR. That ties them for eleventh with the As and the White Sox. Good, but not great. aj’s claim was “suppose Liriano pitches like Johan Santana. Are they even then among the best in baseball? Nope.” And that’s just untrue. I assume he’s referring to Johan’s time with the Twins, since that’s what makes the comparison logical. In Santana’s four full seasons starting for Minnesota, he averaged 6.8 WAR. Give Liriano that instead of 2.0, and the Twins have the best projected rotation WAR in all of baseball at 19.8, ahead of San Francisco (19.6) and New York (19.3)
This line popped out when I read it, too (“their pitching rotation has the chance to be among the best in baseball”). They could possibly crack the upper third, but otherwise they look middling/adequate as opposed to top-tier.
Here’s the rotational WAR projections for a few teams…
Twins:
Baker: 3.7 WAR
Liriano: 2.0
Slowey: 3.5
Pavano: 2.8
Blackburn: 2.6
Total: 14.6
Yankees:
Sabatha: 5.6
Burnett: 3.2
Vazquez: 4.8
Pettitte: 2.9
Chamberlain: 2.5
Total: 19
Red Sox:
Lester: 5.6
Beckett: 4.7
Lackey: 3.8
Buchholz: 2.5
Matsuzaka: 2.0
Total: 18.6
Rays:
Shields: 4.0
Niemann: 2.8
Garza: 3.7
Price: 2.9
Davis: 3.2
Total: 16.6
Royals:
Grienke: 6.8
Meche: 2.6
Bannister: 2.9
Hochevar: 2.6
Tejeda: 1.7
Total: 16.6
White Sox:
Peavy: 3.9
Buehrle: 3.2
Floyd: 3.0
Danks: 3.0
Garcia: 1.6
Total: 14.7
Mariners:
Hernandez: 6.0
Lee: 6.0
Rowland-Smith: 2.7
Snell: 1.7
Fister: 1.0
Total: 17.4
A’s
Sheets: 2.8
Cahill: 1.9
Anderson: 4.4
Duchscherer: 2.7
Braden: 2.7
Total: 14.5
You’d be hard pressed to argue that the Twins are even close to the likes of the Red Sox or Yankees, and they’d have to have things break their way to match the likes of the Mariners, Royals and Rays. And that’s just the American League!
Throw in the Phillies, Mets, Marlins, Cardinals, Cubs, Dodgers, Diamondbacks and Giants, and we’re talking about the Twins having a chance to have one of the top ten best rotations in baseball. Dave’s exaggerating just a little bit.
Sure, if things break the right way for the Twins, they could have a strong rotation, but you can make the same argument for about 20 teams.
Whoops. That should be the Braves not the Mets.
I appreciate the effort.
When deciding whether to look it up and compile the data, I evaluated …
[1] How much interest I had in the issue.
[2] How much time I had to invest.
[3] Whether the data would make a difference or whether people would just to continue to believe whatever they believe, regardless of what the data suggested.
I ended up with “No” as an answer.
I think the data you posted shows that “No” the Twins do not have a rotation that would be described as “among the best in baseball”.
Looking at the situation with the mindset of each guy “possibly over-performing” is not a reasonable and appropriate way of looking at the situation, IMO.
Regardless, I appreciate the effort. As time provides, I “owe” the community some “leg work” in a future discussion where assertive comments are made without data-based support.
Sometimes it seems people do not like data when it runs counter to their current opinion. I’m the same way, and generally resist, or want to see “more data” or make sure it is being evaluated accurately. But as more and more data is displayed, I either have to understand that my opinion is not data-supported or I need to change my opinion.
That’s probably true, but I’ll say it again. You can’t just look at the top 5 pitchers when looking at a rotation. Even the best, healthiest rotations need a good 20 starts outside of their top 5. I’m not saying this puts the twins in the top 5 pitching staffs in baseball, but it’s not something to ignore.
The pitching doesn’t strike much fear, but considering how poorly the White Sox have spent the offseason they are pretty much the front-runners for the AL Central.
Twins rotation among the best in baseball. That’s pretty funny Dave!
There wasn’t any mention of the $30M added to the payroll. Any team is probably going to have a good offseason when they are able to add 50% to their payroll. About the rotation, I’d say the back-end will be one of the strongest, but there’s no true ace.
The added payroll was mostly arbitration raises, etc. The reason that this was a good offseason, is that they turned 18 million dollars and Carlos Gomez into Hardy, Pavano, Hudson, and Thome. They managed to pay under 3 mil per win, when wins are worth the most on the playoff probability curve.
The Twins in the past five years have handed millions of dollars to Rondell White, Tony Batista, Sidney Ponson, Ramon Ortiz, Craig Monroe, and Mike Lamb. It’s not the adding of payroll.
But in years past, the Twins only shelled out less than $10 million or so per year to free agents. If you include the arbitration money from the new guys from 2009 (Pavano and Rauch) with who they signed this year, the Twins have spent $22.3 million this offseason, and that’s not even including their own arbitration-eligible players.
Carl Pavano: $7 million
Jon Rauch: $2.9 million
J.J. Hardy: $5.1 million
Jim Thome: $1.5 million
Orlando Hudson: $5 million
Clay Condrey: $800,000
This isn’t like the previous offseasons where the only signings were two players for a combined $6 million.
Besides the moves mentioned, the Twins also bolstered their farm system by adding Miguel Angel Sano, Max Kepler, Kyle Gibson, and more. They have a ton of talent in the lower levels, which is perfect for a team that doesn’t need much help right now.
Not that I should take too much pity on a guy that has made $16 million before age 32, but I feel kinda bad for the O-Dog; seems like he couldn’t have had worse luck in when he became a free agent. The last two years he’s had to sign one-year deals at rates below what you’d ostensibly expect from a WAR perspective. Free agents used to only take discounted rates for long term deals in exchange for long term security. If you look at the last couple years, it doesn’t seem outrageous to have expected at 2 win season out of Hudson. Considering the going rate for wins last year, $8-9 million wouldn’t on its face have seemed like an outrageous salary heading into the 2009 season. And considering the going rate for wins this year $7-$8 million wouldn’t have seemed crazy. But instead of making $15-17 million, he pulled in $7 million last year and will make $5 million this year.
Evidence about good-but-not-superstars being squeezed in the market the last couple years abounds. Unlike the Johnny Damon and Bobby Abreus of the world, though, poor old O-Dog never got at least one big money deal. I mean, Luis Castillo got a 4 year, $25 million deal.
Sure, Hudson’s made a boatload by normal person standards. Maybe he’s turned down, foolishly or otherwise, offers I don’t know about. But comparatively, I guess I feel kind of bad for the guy. He’s a hired gun, bouncing around year to year with out the big money or security of a guaranteed, long-term deal. To paraphrase of of the rogue Marines in “The Rock,” don’t mercenaries normally get paid?
http://www.insidethebook.com/ee/index.php/site/comments/mlbpa_throws_orlando_hudson_to_the_wolves/
His UZR/150 is way down over 5-6 years ago.
Yeah, but he’s league average at worst, and is only 32. 5 mil is way less than he would have gotten a couple years ago.
I give Bill Smith very high marks this winter! I never really believed the team would start spending just because of a new stadium, but he proved me wrong. Aside from the major moves, even the little things like Clay Condrey replacing Bobby Keppel were smart moves.
I’m not a huge Blackburn fan, but if the rotation is Baker, Slowey, Liriano, Pavano, Blackburn, that’s among the deepest in baseball. I still have concerns about the playoffs and not having that dominant 1-2 combo like Boston and Seattle.
The range of opinion amongst Twins fans on who the #1, #2… starters are is funny. I think if you polled 100 fans, you’d get at least 10 votes for each guy. at least 10 would like Baker (who probably starts the opener), 10 would like the veteran Pavano, 10 would like the K/BB ratio of Slowey, 10 would buy into Liriano returning to form, and 10 would like Blackburn as the Twins most productive starter over the last 2 years (in terms of ERA and innings).
That’s exactly right. A lot of good, not a lot of great. And I don’t think any Twins fan is too worried about a starter or two going down, as the 6th, 7th, 8th starters aren’t really a big dropoff.
You can make an argument for any of them, but the case for Blackburn is very weak.
The rotation isn’t going to be among the best in baseball, probably, but it doesn’t need to be. The question is whether its good enough to give up less runs than the offense puts up, most of the time. And I think it will be good enough to do that. The Twins scored a lot of runs last year (3rd or 4th in the league I believe?) and with the addition of Hardy, Hudson, and Thome, they are going to score quite a few more this year.
That’s probably a fair way to look at it. I agree they are likely “good enough to get the job done” … at least during the regular season …. and in the ALC.
You folks are getting excited about Pavano? ERA over 5. He hasn’t had a decent season in years. Hardy’s gotten progressively worse over the last 3 years and batted under .230. Hudson was so bad in the second half Torre benched him and Thome is done. Sheesh. Must be togh living in Minnesota if this is what get’s you excited. Seattle DID have a great off-season and shouldn’t even be mentioned in the same article as the Twins!
Everything you say here is wrong. Literally everything, with the exception of “Seattle DID have a great off-season.”
- Pavano was unlucky last year. He had a 4.00 FIP. He’s at least a solid mid-rotation starter.
- Hardy hasn’t gotten progressively worse over the last three years. He had a bad year in 2009. The best year of his career was 2008. Second-best was 2007.
- Hudson was benched because Torre went temporarily insane (see here: http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/index.php/torre-makes-his-team-worse ), not because he was bad. Hudson had one bad month with the stick last year, and it came in June.
White Sox fan, right?
Just to temper the Hardy expectations a little bit. He is an excellent defensive shortstop…no doubt one of the best. But a few notes:
-He’s has a BABIP over .300 once in his career and it was .306 coming in his career year of 2008. Other than that, he’s got a career .280 BABIP which really isn’t that far off his .264 of last year.
-His LD% last year was 13.9%, the worst of his career, while his GB% and FB% were right in like with what he’s done for his career. Not a particularly good sign.
-He killed fastballs in 2008 for 10.6 runs above average. Every other year he’s been negative, showing positives success only hitting a curveball for his career.
-He’s going from the NL to the AL.
He’ll surely walk into a few more home runs than Nick Punto, and no doubt play better shortstop than anyone else the Twins could’ve had, the trend with his bat definitely didn’t go up last year.
Pavano may have been somewhat unlucky last year, but CHONE still projects him to be about 1/2 a season worth of ball.
CHONE projects Hardy to have a wOBA of .312. And he has nice UZR’s, but doesn’t that compare him to the rest of the league? And this year he will be in a league with some nice shortstops UZR wise. Andrus. Wilson. Aybar. Izturis. Everett. Just a thought. I agree that is a good signing most likely.
Hudson is a good deal. But pointing to dave’s article is also a bit of an appeal to authority. Hudson’s stats didn’t suffer much in his reduced role, but he did seem to wear down and his fielding was suffering. I think a bit much was made of that whole Belliard/Hudson thing, and not to favor results over process or anything, but Belliard did indeed play pretty well. Aside from that, Hudson likely was overused by Torre early, and as long as he is given some rest now and then I think another good signing.
Overall this was a good group of signings. But given what they were running out there at short and second, not that hard to improve somewhat.
I agree with all of that (although Pavano’s health would worry me a bit) and I’m a White Sox fan. See, we’re not all idiots.
UZR compares players against the MLB positional average, not individual leagues.
Kevin S., thanks for correcting me on that.
Seriously?
Seriously?
Wow – you are at the wrong website buddy…
These signings weren’t about adding stars, they were about filling holes. Massive, gaping holes. I expect most of the signees to be average, competent major leaguers, which will be a big improvement over the Casilla, Punto, Tolbert, Harris, Young sub-replacement parade we had last year. (note: the parade isn’t completely ending this year, but it will be significantly shorter).
John – you are a moron. Seriously, you are posting on fangraphs website and you are using “ERA”, “batting average” and “Joe Torre” to predict how well players will do going forward? I could understand if you were posting this comment at mlb.com, but come on, this is fangraphs.com – a sabermetrics website. I am not even going to waste time writing down how wrong you are. Someone else can do that.
With ambassadors like this, it’s a wonder sabermetrics haven’t gained more mainstream acceptance.
Even with there being more accurate metrics available, I think one could state in general terms that …
[1] a high ERA is not good.
[2] A low BA for a non-power hitter is not good.
One would need to dig deeper obviously, but there is also a knee-jerk reaction to anything including the acronyms of ERA, RBI, BA, etc.
Those traditional stats are just one piece of evaluating a player’s performance. They are not the complete picture, but neither are they meaningless.
Pitcher’s generally have a FIP that is reasonably close to their ERA, with Nolasco’s 2009 being a rare occurrence. Likewise, guys that get on base a lot generally do not have really low BA’s.
There’s no need to jump down someone’s throat for using basic metrics, when an opportunity to teach them about advanced metrics goes wasted. Very few of us are really contributing to the metric’s community in a highly intellectual way. Most of us are just using another’s work (i.e., advanced metrics) to evaluate players using the same methodology everyone else uses (look at the the metric, compare it to another player or league average). The difference is in the selection of the metric that one understands better or is more familiar with. We don’t want people to ignore the message because of the messenger.
ALL of us used ERA and BA as some of our primary evaluation tools before someone else introduced us to a more accurate metric.
Yes, I agree.
To add on, there is nothing fundamentally different about ERA and FIP. Both are simply run estimators. ERA gives credit to everything that happens while the pitcher is on the mound (except, weirdly, for errors), while FIP gives credit to everything except for performance on BIP and timing.
It turns out that pitchers have less control over timing and performance on BIP than they do other stats, but it’s definitely not the 0% to 100% number that FIP does.
http://www.hardballtimes.com/main/article/working-title
FIP is simply an approximation of how a pitcher would have pitched if luck was taken out of the equation, it’s certainly not the final word. Pavano’s FIP suggests that he pitched at a 4.00 ERA level, however, his ERA suggests that he pitched much worse. FIP is more predictive than ERA in a small sample size; however, it’s not unequivocally better. The fact that his ERA is a 5.10 suggests that he pitched worse than FIP estimates, and we should weigh each of them when evaluating his season.
Besides, that’s only one seasons worth of data. Pavano’s 34 and hasn’t pitched a full season since 2004. We should expect some regression, as well as significant risk of injury.
The MIN rotation is good not because of the front end, but because there’s not a noticeable back end. If you aren’t giving away starts once a week you can win a lot more games than a team with a typical bad #5. And that’s how you can get excited about Pavano. He is kind of exciting if you compare him to the rest of the #5 starters in the league. Honestly there’s a good chance that he ends up as the 4 or 5 in MIN, and in that company you can’t hate him at all.
Not to mention, the #7 starter, Brian Duensing, has got to be about the best in the league. Before you say something about #7 starter, look up how many teams in the last decade have used only 6 starting pitchers.
There is always a “pro” and “con” to the situation.
I agree that a strength of the rotation is that it is balanced. Particularly if one pitcher gets injured, his “clone” can step in.
However, a 5-man rotation of 3/3/3/3/3 (WAR) nets a 15 WAR performance. Likewise, a 5/4/3/2/1 (WAR) rotation also nets a 15 WAR performance.
The pro is depth, the con is that in the playoffs the rotation is trimmed to a “3-man” rotation with the Ace and #2 getting more starts, so the “top heavy” rotation has the advantage in the playoffs. Given who the Twins will likely face in the playoffs, that seems like a realistic description of the possible scenario.
The Twins do the best they can with what they have, and I have a lot of respect for how the Twins go about it.
As far as nominations go for best rotation:
5.6 WAR
4.8 WAR
3.8 WAR
2.5 WAR
2.0 WAR
are the projections for the Red Sox rotation and that’s only giving Daiusuke credit for 2.0 when his first two years were both over 3.2.
5.6 WAR
4.8 WAR
3.2 WAR
2.9 WAR
2.5 WAR
And if we’re going to make notes on why people are undershooting somebody, CC’s beaten his projection handily in each of the past three years.
Just sayin’.
Is it not impossible to think that the new stadium will help some on the road? They’ll be playing on the surface all year long now rather than keep switching back and forth.
Good point. Party on Dudes!
Have to figure the wear and tear on the players from playing at the Metrodome might be easier now in August and September for the Twins.
Same surface*
AJ says: “But those are the only two real improvements over last year.”
Oh?
Does the return of injured players count as “improvements?” I think so. If you agree, consider:
–Justin Morneau was shut down for the last month of the regular season plus the playoffs with back issues that are now healed.
–Kevin Slowey was superb before being shut down in mid-summer with a wrist ailment that is now healed.
–Pat Neshek, who was a lights-out setup man two years ago, is back and close to 100% after arm surgery.
Good point about Neshek. I loved watching that guy, despite the fact that he always shuts my team down. I hope he returns to form.
Guy has an awesome delivery too.
And with that perfert arm motion, there is obviously no chance Neshek’s injury woes return!
People are forgetting about the month that mauer missed at the beginning of last season.
As far as Neshek staying healthy? well, it’s a risk, but between Nathan, Rauch, Crain, Mijares and Guerrier, there’s a pretty solid bullpen there.
Go on Dave, you can say his name. Thome provides DH depth, and by extension, at the corner outfield slots, because Jason Kubel is already on the Twins.
Gosh, good point, Kubel is a good player. A lot better than, say–just to pull a name out a hat–Eric Hinske, for example. A sensible, sensible signing for the Twins Kubel was. But of course, we all knew that at the time.
This is the toughest Twins offense we’ve seen in a while. Especially if they come to their good senses and release Delmon Young (sunk cost, I know you miss Garza and Bartlett, but it’s time to move on) and just let Kubel play LF and Thome DH. The way Liriano is looking in winter ball is pretty exciting.
And we’ve neglected to mention the best part of their offseason…Target Field! No more watching games played at the Metrodome!!
Nope, Delmon can play against lefties.
Agreed. Platooning Delmon and Kubel would be a pretty good idea.
I’m sure part of the hope for the rotation is that it will see some improvement from the addition of both Hardy and OHud up the middle. There have been a lot of statistics showing that Hudson’s range is declining, but he is still has a solid glove and is good at turning the double play. Hardy is a stellar defender. Not only should they make more plays, but it should be a confidence boost for the pitching staff. For as much payroll as the Twins added, getting both Hardy and Hudson on the cheap would be more cost effective (in players and money)than spending 2 to 3 times as much on a true #1 starter. Will the pitching staff improve overall enough to make up for a lack of an ace? I guess we’ll see, but at least both Hardy and Hudson are projected to be better offensively than their predecessors.
I am really excited for the twins this year. Hardy and Hudson are both major upgrades. Last year I think twins players playing second base hit .201?
Why does everyone hate on Delmon so much? He is an average player. It’s not his fault everyone over hypes him. Delmon is better than Gomez was. But you folks will disagree wont you? Since Gomez was a 2 WAR player a couple years ago. I’ll just keep scratching my head as WAR overvalues defense.
No, he’s not an average player. He’s not even an average hitter. He plays a corner outfield position, and plays it abysmally. Even if you think WAR overvalues defense, he’s still below-average in every facet of the game.
Yes, Delmon is perfectly average at being a terrible baseball player.
He’s 6’3″! If that isn’t league average or above, then I don’t know what is. The problem is that people were expecting him to be the next Richie Sexson, and he’s fallen about 5 inches short.
The Twins might have a good rotation, but a lot of teams can say that if everything falls their way. Pavano, Liriano and Slowey are all large injury risks. One could make the argument that they will likely have the 3rd best starting rotation in that division. The Sox and Tigers both have a better collection of top 3 starters (and the Sox have a legit top 4) and the back of the rotation is mostly a crap shoot for any team.
Actually, if Meche can bounce back, the Royals could also have a decent rotation. Greinke, Meche and Bannister is a decent place to start and then they need Hochevar to realize some of his potential.
Why would anyone just look at the top 3 starters? See the post from above, you usually need more then 5 starters. That is why the rotation looks so good, because they have debth.
So, what you’re telling me, essentially, is that Napoleon was a short, dead dude.
Every team could argue to have depth as the back of the rotation is mostly a crap shoot for every team. A lot of teams have guys like Perkins, Duensing and Swarzak as their extra starters waiting in the minors. All 3 of those guys had xFIP’s typical of back of the rotation starters last year, and only Duensing is projected by CHONE to have a FIP below 5. There depth is being exaggerated.
Verlander
Porello
Scherzer
Bonderman (who from all reports is looking great, has regained his velocity and is already throwing in FLA)
And then the 5th slot for Willis/Gallaraga/Robertson/Coke/Bonine/Figaro
If we are going off “what could be” the Tigers COULD have one of the best rotaions in baseball…
Sorry Woody, I just don’t see how Slowey and Liriano are “large” injury risks. Slowey had one injury, and has been mostly healthy throughout his career. Liriano has pitched 2 straight full years after coming back from surgery.
Pavano is probably close to a “large” injury risk, but I think I’d put him on this side of Sheets and Harden, given he threw almost 200 innings without a hiccup last year.
The WS rotation is anchored by an injury prone guy in Peavy, and ends with a guy who’s thrown just over 100 innings in the last 3 seasons. And, unlike the Twins, and the top candidate for 6th starter, Daniel Hudson, has only thrown 18 major league innings.
I’m not saying the Twins will have the best rotation in the Division, but despite the lack of a “true ace” (and I’d argue the White Sox don’t have one either) they have a rotation that is both deep(Perkins if he’s still around, Duensing, Swarzak) , and has upside (Liriano, Slowey), and may just end up with the lowest ERA/FIP/tRA/whatever you want to use in the division. I don’t think as many things would need to break right as you think.
Liriano has not pitched 2 straight full years. He pitched 136 innings last year and 76 innings in 2008. Pavano is absolutely an injury risk given his past, and Slowey has never thrown more than 160 innings in a season.
You can’t use the fact that Dan Hudson has only pitched 18 innings in MLB as an argument and then ignore that 3 of your starters haven’t put together back to back 180+ inning seasons like Buerhle, Floyd and Danks have done. Their rotation is a better bet going forward, given their collective past durability and quality.
And, Hudson is a pretty good prospect. The fact that he could be their #5 starter is an argument in favor of the Sox and not the Twins.
That should read that Liriano has not pitched 2 straight full years in the majors as he did pitch quite a few innings in the minors in 2008. But, by no means, did he pitch a full season last year.
They are not all injury risks. Slowey was hit by a line drive and broke a bone in his wrist, Liriano had surgery two years ago (his problem was in the hat, not the sleeve) and Pavano is #5 with decent alternatives for the spot (Perkins, Duensing.)
Top 3 guys are a playoff edge, but you gotta get there for it to matter. DET has to replace a lot of offense and bullpen production, and CHW will have serious issues scoring runs this year. Their 1968 model may work, but I have a feeling the great RA won’t cover the anemic RS over a whole summer.
Consider this. The twins have one of the best defenses up the middle in all of baseball. The double play combination of Hardy and Hudson is gonna be so solid and incredibly fun to watch. Couple this with Denard Span in center and hitting up the middle and the subsequent range from left to right will make the interior solid if not spectacular! Gardenhire now has both stability and flexibility and that is something that bodes well for a true contender. Did the Twins have a great offseason?? YES. No question about it. If this team better offensively and defensively going into 2010 than it was going into 2009?? ABSOLUTELY!! Regarding the home-field issue, they will have a home-field advantage. Why? Every team in baseball has yet to play at Target Field. Twins get to play here more than any other team they will play against and the great FANS OF MINNESOTA will be right on top of that team cheering and screaming their Twins onto victory! I have no doubts about this one single bit! GO TWINS!!
Without this article I wouldn’t have known how good the Twins have “performed” (if I can say that) this offseason. I was sincerely going to pencil in the White Sox (my team) in for the Central this year, now I have to hope for injuries so there’s less of a competition?
Amazing what happens when your eyes are opened.
Another solid move by the Twins. I agree that they have had a great offseason and it has been rather quiet. Most of the talk during the offseason has been how well the M’s have done(and rightfully so), the Yankees moves, and the Halladay trade but the Twins have quietly had a really productive offseason. I think they are clearly the team to beat in the Central but I wouldn’t rule out the White Sox or Tigers though.
Great site. I can see how pitching wins games . With that in mind it would be interesting to see , the number crunching of the hitting effect , the off season trades will make . Hudson batting before M&M and Kubel Or Thome should IMO create alot more RBI opportunities. How many games did the Twins lose by one or two runs. ? Hardy should have a bounce back year & Young if he picks up where he left off , should hit better with more at bats. IMO the Twins pitchers ERA will be better with this new batting lineup.In addition the bullpen is made better with Raush , Neshak , Condray