Minnesota Twins and statistical analysis (or lack thereof)

Just came across this interview with Minnesota's assistant GM Rob Antony. Apparently, the Twins are one of the last teams to bring someone in to solely focus on statistical analysis. It contains quite a few peculiar comments ... such as:

"With Blackburn we looked at him and his body of work over two seasons. He averaged 200 innings, been a .500 pitcher both years and his ERA has been 4.02 or 4.05 or something like that. You look at him and then say okay, if he does that for the next three or four years, what would he make each year? Now it becomes a business decision of if you go year-to-year, what would he stand to make in arbitration next year and if he backed that up where would he go the next year? You start putting down the numbers and all the comps that he has and you base it off of if he just does what he has done. You don’t project that he is getting better – although we believe there is more in there. Instead of being an 11-11 guy, we believe he could easily be a 15-9 guy."

Now I hate the Twins even more.

about 2 years ago JP_Frost 16 comments 0 recs |

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

I just came across this one:

TC: Star Tribune columnist Patrick Reusse says that FIP stands for "Fudge I’m Pathetic". Do you know what FIP really stands for?

I just saw this one the other day…might have been in a Reusse column. Is it “First-Strike in Inning Pitched”?

Maybe I’m overreacting, but I just don’t understand that these type of guys still have a job in a MLB front office, let alone as an assistant GM.

by JP_Frost on Apr 1, 2010 4:45 PM EDT reply actions

“Hi, I’m at the top of my field. I hold one of 30 positions in existence. Everyone wants a shot at my job, and I make a ridiculous amount of money. Of course, I have no interest in learning of research advancements excruciatingly specific to my field of work that were introduced likely before I even got this job.”

Steel Nick

by nickjs21 on Apr 1, 2010 5:02 PM EDT up reply actions

I mean, is there any indication to believe that guys in sports FO’s have a lot of brains/talent at all? Woolner is an earth-shattering MIT grad; at many Cleveland engineering firms, a degree from MIT is commonplace.

by joeee on Apr 1, 2010 6:27 PM EDT up reply actions

I had a chance to hear an MLB arbitrator speak in January. He’s been doing it for years—he told a story about Brett Butler’s arbitration hearing. Anywho, did you know the average age of an MLB arbitrator is somewhere in the 60s? These old white men know nothing about FIP and DIPS and range factor and UZR. They recognize only the stats that were in the box scores they read in the newspaper as teenagers.

That fact puts in context the Minnesota executive’s comment about using ERA and wins to determine value in an arbitration setting – it still very much is the reality.

by xrickx on Apr 1, 2010 6:48 PM EDT reply actions

Also, I think it points out the dichotomy between how a team evaluates player performance versus how a team compensates the player. Sometimes, the system blurs the line between the two. But even if front office’s have this knowledge, explain Barry Zito and Alfonso Soriano and, hell, Gary Matthews.

Most paydays have a context. The Giants needed a franchise icon to replace Bonds. The Cubs wanted to attract major free agents to put butts in the stands and raise the franchise’s value in order to maximize the sales price the Tribune Co. could extract. The Angels…were drunk. And arbitration, based on the panel of arbitrators, has its own messed up ways.

by xrickx on Apr 1, 2010 6:53 PM EDT up reply actions

This reminds me of the smart A-student in high school who brags that he never studies. Yousonofabitch.

by Toxicadam on Apr 2, 2010 9:24 AM EDT reply actions

I would think it would be more equivalent to the guy who gets straight As by guessing C on every mutiple choice test. Answer C in this case is a small scrappy groundball hitter.

by supermarioelia on Apr 2, 2010 10:18 AM EDT up reply actions

look, i HATE the twins, but i can’t agree with you here at all. you can’t look at all the quality players their farm system has produced over the past decade and insist that somehow they aren’t deserving of the success they’ve had. if we’d been able to develop just half the number of quality pitchers they’ve put out, we probably wouldn’t be looking at a potential 90-loss season right now.

i guess it’s just human psychology, but just like we’re probably too quick to chalk up the indians’ failures to bad luck, it seems like we always want to pretend the twins’ (admittedly modest) successes are largely the result of good luck. they are doing something right over there, because it really isn’t easy to develop MLB-caliber starting pitching the way they have.

If you don't respect Aaron Laffey, I will fight you.

by Cap'n Snegiryov on Apr 2, 2010 11:36 AM EDT up reply actions

The Karma Train is long past due to pull into the Twins’ station. And the Steelers’ for that matter, but that’s a discussion for another board.

"...maybe this year, there's no gorilla" - YoDaddyWags

by woodsmeister on Apr 2, 2010 12:24 PM EDT up reply actions

They’ve done a great job generally with pitchers.

They deserve credit for the Nathan deal but undeniably got lucky there, not unlike the Colon deal for us.

They get zero credit, none, for Joe Mauer.

by Jay on Apr 2, 2010 7:56 PM EDT up reply actions

They get zero credit, none, for Joe Mauer.

What? Is this said in some form of jest, or is there some argument I’m missing?

by Voltaire on Apr 6, 2010 12:06 PM EDT up reply actions

They had the first pick in the draft. Prior and Mauer were the no-doubt first and second picks. Prior’s family stated publicly and unequivocally that he would not sign with the Twins if they drafted him. Mauer said nothing of the kind and in fact was born and raised in St. Paul, Minnesota.

So you tell me, which part do the Twins get credit for? Getting the #1 overall pick by having the worst record in baseball the year before? Declining to pick a player who had promised that he would never sign with them if they did? Drafting the unarguable best talent in the draft other than that first guy? Drafting the hometown kid who obviously would sign?

Do we give them credit for actually signing a kid who grew up as a Twins fan once they’d drafted him? For “developing” a kid who opened up with a 982 OPS in short-season ball, then had a .300+ average and .393+ OBP at every subsequent level?

You tell me which part to be impressed by, and I’ll be impressed.

by Jay on Apr 6, 2010 4:14 PM EDT up reply actions