84 thoughts on “October 14, 2011: Flyover Playoffs”

  1. 'Community' was fantastic/mind blowing last night. Every other show I watched was so boring compared to 'Community'
    It will be a sad day when that show gets cancelled because of low ratings.

    1. I look forward to buying the Community dvds after the show is canceled and then complain about how it was unfairly canceled even though I didn't watch it in the first place.

      1. I look forward to buying the Community dvds after the show is canceled and then complain about how it was unfairly canceled even though I didn't watch it in the first place.

        Im doing that with 'Arrested Development'

    2. One of my favorites as well. I haven't watched last night's episode yet, though, so I apparently have something really good to look forward to!

  2. Even the fans bring the intensity in the playoffs:

    the beer-drinking intensifies in October. Fans consume 19.8 ounces of beer per person during the postseason at Busch Stadium, 75 percent more than during a regular-season game, according to Delaware North. Fans in Milwaukee have been drinking 20 percent more in this postseason than in the regular season, Delaware North said.

    Beer sales typically rise during the playoffs regardless of the city. Fans are in a more festive mood and often stay until the last out.

    1. Hey, I did my part by drinking the Scaredy Cat Oatmeal Stout while watching the Cards/Brewers tilt at Vintage Brewing Company after a meeting last night.

    2. That's so weird. The only time I drank more than a single beer at (or around) a game was tailgating at Miller Park, and I hated it. It's so tough to score a game when you're buzzed. I'd think that if you were paying out a ton of money to see a post-season game, you'd want to be aware for it.

      1. I have been to hundreds of MLB games (granted the vast majority were before I turned 21) and have never had a beer at a game. I do keep a pretty extensive scorebook, but to me there's just too many interesting things to watch happening on the field to need to get a buzz.

        1. I went to tons in college, and always ended up soused. That was me in college, though. Even now I like the stuff too much, but I don't partake nearly as often, or nearly as much per night.

          One morning I woke up at home in Mankato and couldn't remember the drive (I wasn't driving) home, or even the end of the game. I figured that was bad. It was actually worse: I'd spent half the drive crying over a fight I had with my girlfriend, who was sitting next to me. I never cry sober (unless I'm desperately happy). I felt like such a wang.

          1. I like to have one or maybe two beers at a baseball game. My days of keeping score are in the rear view mirror. I like to sit at the game, relax and enjoy the fact that I'm there.

        2. Next time I run into you at a game, I am buying you a beer. Unless it's after the 7th inning.
          I kept score for the first time this year, it was a lot of fun, made me pay more attention. I had no problem also drinking two beers when I wasn't there with kids.

    3. I wonder if this isn't related to ticket prices in some way. Fans willing to pay the premium for playoff tickets might be more willing to pay the premium for stadium beer.

      1. Counter-arguments: white sox fan drunks, cubs fan drunks, red sox fan drunks, A's fan drunks, etc.

        I was going to offer the same hypothesis, but I M thinking that alcohol consumption at sporting events, as in life, is inversely correlated with SES.

        1. When the heck do those teams play in the playoffs?
          Given that 85% of the playoff games in the past decade have had the Yankees involved, and how dang much their tickets are supposed to cost, I think Ubes is on to something.

  3. 100th anniversary of homecoming this weekend at Mizzou. Back a century ago, the Mizzou athletic director wrote to alumni urging them to return to the campus to cheer on the football team, beginning what is (disputedly) regarded as the very first homecoming game, with U of I and Baylor claiming older. Good luck finding a hotel room in Columbia this weekend.

  4. One of my rotten cousins just sent me a long, rambling white power email forward. I just do not get that one branch of my family. These things she sends always contain the phrase "This is not a racist message!", which apparently absolves it of the disgustingly racist things it's about to say. Yeah, cuz, that phrase means a lot from someone who once said to me "I think I'm starting to hate black people."

    At the end it said "If you agree pass it on! If not, disown me as a friend!"

    Would that I could, but I never liked you in the first place.

  5. I agree with JoePos today. Verlander hasn't been that good in the postseason and Mark Kotsay's sacrifice wasn't as big of a deal that the TV announcers were making of it.

    1. I always argued early in his career that Verlander wasn't all that impressive. (Through 2008, Baker was basically as good as Verlander on an xFIP basis.) In 2009, he turned some kind of corner, but the 250 innings he pitched in the regular season do seem to be catching up to him in the postseason. He was in an awfully sticky situation yesterday, having to go a fourth time through the Rangers' order.

      I think part of the thing with Kotsay's ground-out is that baseball analysts feel the need to justify themselves all the time. So they will take the smallest things and blow them out of proportion to show how they know so much about the game. I do think there's something to hitting behind the runner in that situation, but there's even more to getting a hit behind the runner in that situation.

      1. Interesting comparison, ubes.

        2005-08, Verlander averaged 3.28 BB/9. 2009-11, he has averaged 2.40 BB/9, a drop of almost 27 percent in his walk rate. At the same time, his K rate went from 7.16 K/9 to 9.28 K/9, an increase of almost 30 percent.

        In contrast, Baker's K/BB ratio has held pretty even over the years (his K rate has trended up somewhat over his career while his BB rate barely trends up).

        So, basically, Verlander is missing a lot more bats and handing out a lot fewer free passes than was true in his first 3+ seasons (plus his 2005 cuppa).

        If Fangraphs' pitch values are to be believed, the major changes in outcomes seem to be on his changeup and slider. His changeup went from an "average" pitch early in his career to an above-average one, and his slider went from a well below-average pitch to an above-average one (although he used it rarely early in his career).

      1. I don't understand any of those three re-signings, particularly Hollimon. Are they just roster fillers? I would assume so. Guys who are 27, 28, and 29, respectively, with less-than-spectacular minor league track records don't exactly inspire confidence in the future.

        My favorite comment on the mlb.com item about the outrightings:

        i guess we are keeping cuddyer and hoping mauer and butera are back to normal next year... fingers crossed

        and butera???!!!! what exactly would "back to normal" be for him?

        1. Hollimon did do better after a horrendous start, but yeah, I assume they're roster filler, too.

          I don't understand the Bates signing from Bates' perspective. He had as good a year last year as he's ever likely to have, the Twins' first base position was in a state of flux all season, and he still never got a shot. That seems to make it pretty clear that the only way he'll get a chance in Minnesota is if so many guys get hurt that they don't have any other options. Not that I think Bates is anything great, but from his perspective, I don't see why he didn't see if he could get a shot somewhere else.

        2. Giving the commenter a benefit of the doubt, he could've meant "back to normal" for Butera in the sense of only catching about once a week.

        1. Even if his elbow was fine, I'm totally unconvinced he'd have been a good relief pitcher. I think there were plenty of non-scouting knocks on him: never young for his level, it's easier to make your numbers look good as a reliever, walk rate fairly high. Add to that, the Twins weren't convinced on his stuff, and even though they clearly don't value him all that highly, no one from another team offered enough to take him from us. (Like, say, the Rays did with Eduardo Morlan.)

          The blog consensus last offseason seemed to be that losing Delaney would be a huge blow, but his strikeout rate's been way down this year and he didn't stick in Tampa when they got an up close and personal look at him.

          I feel like I've been hearing about Slama and Delaney forever at this point.

          1. I so, so wish there was a historical MiLB database to compare Slama and Delaney against. SABR has one, but refuses to publicly release it until it's been sufficiently reviewed. I think they're doing a disservice by not releasing at least a few good seasons.

            1. I eagerly look forward to that database's release. IMO, most comparisons to minor-league numbers suffer from selection bias because we wind up (almost of necessity) always looking at the minor league numbers of players who made the major leagues.

          2. He might not be good, but "possibly not very good" is better than what we used all year. At this point, relievers firmly below replacement level still have a place on this roster.

            1. At this point in the year, they have the best opportunity to sign replacement-level players because they aren't tied up in minor league deals. And it's not so much that I'm arguing he's "possibly not very good" as I'm arguing there is little evidence that he would cut it.

              For the last two seasons, Slama's had about a 10 K/9 and a 4 BB/9. I can't find a full leaderboard at bb-ref, but taking the top 100 pitchers in the IL last year, sorted by innings pitched, I get an average of 3.3 BB/9 and 8.7 K/9 for pitchers with no starts. So Slama's a little above average at getting strikeouts but below average at throwing strikes. Compared to his peers in AAA, he's nothing special. My perception of the situation is that some bloggers have seized on his strikeout rate while ignoring all of the factors which mitigate that strikeout rate, while at the same time screaming bloody murder that the Twins must be blind for ignoring the wonderkid who will save the bullpen. Yeah, the bullpen sucked this year, but Slama wasn't going to be the solution, he would have just been a different name to take in vain.

              1. I know there's a ton of time to fill holes...I just question the merits of letting go of a fallback option, since the Twins aren't sure yet if they'll need a fallback option.

                For now, I suppose I can be optimistic and assume this release means the Twins are immediately committed to finding a better bullpen without using their last resorts.

                1. You just happened to catch me on one of my hot-button issues. 🙂 Just in general, I feel like there's so much reaction to little player moves like this for a guy who could be replaced by a hundred different pitchers. All fans, myself included, tend to get a little too attached to the names we recognize.

                  1. All fans... tend to get a little too attached to the names we recognize.
                    CJ and I don't know what you're talking about. Since he was DFA'd by the Twins, he needed a place to stay so I offered him my couch. But he found my bed much comfier, and since his body is his paycheck, it's more important that he have the better sleeping arrangements. I sleep fine on the bed, but I wish I knew why my wife doesn't seem to care to change her sleeping arrangement.

                2. I think it is telling as well that the Twins were willing to go fishing for the likes of Hoey, Dusty F. Hughes, Scott Diamond, and, forgive me AMR, Chuck James, even though they had Slama (and Delaney) available.

                  Is it telling that the Twins' braintrust doesn't know what it is doing, or that maybe they agreed (correctly?) that Slama wasn't what the big club needed?

              2. I would like you to point to some of the places where someone has "scream[ed] bloody murder" about "ignoring the wonderkid". I don't pay much attention to most of the blogs out there any more, but my perception of what people such as Gleeman have said regarding Slama is more of a shrugging "he's probably nothing special as a bullpen major leaguer, but it's weird and/or a shame he never got more of a shot". Considering some of the other guys they've run out there the past couple years, I agree that it's kind of a shame. For instance, Alex Burnett, while younger, has had a walk rate as a minor league reliever that's no better than the average rate you cite, while his strikeout rate has been below that rate; yet he's gotten almost a hundred major league innings the past two seasons, while Slama got seven. Or Phil Dumatrait, who, while he is a lefthander, is still Phil Dumatrait.

                1. I was hyperbolizing about the attitudes towards him, I'll give you that. I guess that most of the attitude seems a bit like this, though:

                  His velocity will never match those great minor-league stats, but Slama is far from a soft-tosser and plenty of big-league relievers have had long, successful careers with similar raw stuff. His window of opportunity will be limited due to his age and the Twins' lack of faith, but hopefully four years of dominating in the minors earns Slama more than four innings to prove himself in the majors. He deserves a legitimate chance to sink or swim, and I still think he can float.

                  The implication, in my eyes, being that Slama "deserves" a chance and the Twins are wrong to not give him the chance. I just feel like I hear his name thrown around all the time whenever the bullpen struggles, like for instance this exchange, and there are always way more comments about the minor league guy being denied a shot by the Twins than there are comments about how the Twins were right to ignore that guy because he never amounted to much. Of course we're going to have a negative opinion of how the Twins handle minor league players if we're always casting them as prospect-blockers and never as appropriately having appropriately passed on a guy because they (correctly) figured he wouldn't work out.

                  So it's not any one individual case that I'm reacting to, so much as every time the Twins get rid of a minor league pitching semi-prospect, there seems to be all kinds of hand-wringing. Just last off-season it was Neshek (who proved ineffective), Bullock (still can't throw strikes), and Delaney (big drop in K/9 at AAA) that exited the org and each had his defenders. When "the one that got away" is Craig "0.4 fWAR/year" Breslow, I guess it seems like the Twins ought to get at least some benefit of the doubt when they are getting rid of someone they are more familiar with than anyone else.

                  1. I can't speak for others, so I'll just speak for myself. I'm not saying I think Slama would have been the great savior of the bullpen. I'm saying he was at least as worthy of a chance as people like Jim Hoey, Dusty Hughes, and Phil Dumatrait, all of whom the Twins have given much more of a chance than they ever gave Slama.

                    The Twins clearly decided that Slama cannot succeed in the majors, and are not going to give him the chance to prove them wrong. My problem with that is that, once you decide that someone won't succeed, you can always find reasons to justify that decision. Everyone has something they need to work on. Everyone has something they could improve at.

                    It's true that, most of the time, when someone does well in the minors but does not get a chance in the majors, there's a good reason why. Sometimes, though, major league organizations get it wrong. That's why, as I've said before, I believe in a simple program. When someone succeeds at one level, he should get a chance at the next level. The Twins have chosen not to give Slama that chance. As I wrote in my minor league wrap-up, his time may have passed, but I still hope someone gives him the chance to prove people wrong about him.

                    1. I agree with this. If Slama didn't "deserve" a chance, according to ubelmann, why did Burnett, or Hoey, or Dumatrait, or Hughes, "deserve" all the chances they got?

                    2. And to expound further (this is more adding onto myself, not replying to Jeff), it's fine to have the attitude that who is in the bullpen generally doesn't matter because they all add so little value individually, so why does anyone ever talk about it, but making mistakes in personnel decisions in the aggregate is still going to add up and hurt you overall eventually. The Twins' best bullpen lefthanders since they dumped Breslow, for instance, other than August 2010 trade acquisition Brian Fuentes, have been mediocre starters that they've stuck in the bullpen initially because they didn't have another place for them (Duensing, Perkins). Meanwhile, while Breslow has been consistently pretty good, the other Twins specialist lefthanders have not been as good as him the last two years (Mijares, Mahay, Flores, Dumatrait, Hughes, etc.). Again, it's fine to say "Hey, that doesn't matter, Breslow only gives you 0.4 fWAR anyway", but it's tough for me to give them the benefit of the doubt, even when the moves are marginal, when the choices they're making are clearly making the team worse.

                    3. But (sorry that I keep thinking of things to say) if there's an argument that Breslow himself, for instance, hanging around year after year isn't worth the increasing cost because of the interchangability of his role, I'd definitely buy into that. It doesn't have to be about keeping or not keeping Breslow himself, but they haven't found someone else to fill his role as effectively as he did, and has done since. If those guys are out there and easy to find, it's, again, tough for me to give them the benefit of the doubt when the best they're doing is Hughes or Dumatrait.

          3. I think he might have been an effective relief pitcher if he'd gotten a shot in 2010, and I still don't think it's out of the question. He might not be, too, of course, but he's done well enough in AAA to deserve a chance. It's clear he's never going to get that chance with the Twins, though, so I hope he'll get it somewhere else.

            1. I guess I just don't think that a guy with average AAA numbers is very likely to be effective in the majors, especially if his own scouts don't like his stuff very much.

              1. I know these are "old school" stats, but it's hard for me to see a guy with a 2.59 ERA and a 1.14 WHIP as having average AAA numbers.

                Really, though, I'm not so much saying that I think he'd be a good pitcher as much as I'm saying he's done well enough to deserve a shot. There are guys who've done a lot less in AAA who've gotten a lot more of a chance in the majors than Slama has.

                1. fwiw, Statcorner mostly agrees with you on more "advanced" stats too.

                  here are his tRA+ figures by year and level. tRA+ reads like ERA+ but takes into account more information about plate events.

                  Year Level Innings tRA+
                  2007 A 23.3 169
                  2008 A+ 66.3 173
                  2009 AA 65.3 124
                  2009 AAA 15.7 131
                  2010 AAA 65.3 121
                  2011 AAA 37.0 103

                  His "regressed tRA" scores were less impressive (right around league averages for 2007-09, although quite a bit better than league averages for AAA in 2010 and 2011), but I'm unclear how meaningful these are for players changing levels.

                  for comparison, Alex Burnett had minor league tRA+ scores of 157 (22.7 innings, A+, 2009), 131 (55.3 innings, AA, 2009), and 101 (19.7 innings, AAA, 2010), after two mediocre years as a starter in 2007 and 2008. It is hard to understand from the numbers exactly what the brain trust saw in Burnett that they didn't see (or didn't like) in Slama, other than a somewhat lower walk rate (and lower K rate).

                    1. which is important when you are comparing low-A or high-A performance. Not so much when comparing AA and AAA performances.

                    2. But I also did just read the first half of Rany Jazayerli's Baseball Prospectus article about draft age of high-schoolers, so I'm seeing age in everything. Well, age and paranoia, but that's a different topic.
                      #CdL

                    3. Burnett also throws harder. He's more impressive to scouts. The Twins have been focusing on "power arms" for the bullpen, but to them that has just mean guys who throw hard, but they don't look at strikeout rates (see Capps, Hoey, Ontiveros).

                  1. Statcorner is comparing to league average for pitchers as a whole, not relief pitchers. It's like comparing speeds in the 100M dash to the average speed of all runners at the Olympics. Of course the runners in the 100M dash have above average speed, but that doesn't mean they are all above average at the 100M dash.

                    1. but it provides a standard yardstick with which to evaluate him. Put in other relievers/reliever prospects of your choice and compare. I chose Burnett because I thought he was a relevant comparison point. Slama's minor league performance by this standard was quite comparable to, if not significantly better than Burnett's.

                      also, note that Statcorner provides separate stats for pitchers-as-starters and pitchers-as-relievers. So I'm not sure you are correct (you may be -- I haven't investigated the technical notes -- but the separate stats for different roles implies otherwise)

                    2. checking the mouseover information on statcorner, lgtRA is "based on role", which strongly implies that the tRA+ figures are relative to average-within-role, not average-against-all.

    1. They're still part of the team though, just not on the 40-man roster. They could opt for "free agency" though.

  6. Well today got out of hand on me. My wife is a nanny, and the family she works for had a second child 2 weeks before we did, so when my wife goes back to work she'll need to fit three car seats. That wasn't happening in a Corolla. As much as we both loved that car, it was just no longer practical. We started looking a couple weeks ago. Today, we ended up buying a 2005 Chrysler Pacifica. We're cutting our miles in half, but I still feel like adult life is once again smacking me in the face when I least expect it to.

    1. As the proud owner of a 2004 Pacifica, I hope for your sake that yours doesn't have the mechanical gremlins plaguing it that mine has. Oh, and I hope your wife doesn't drive over a large chunk of metal in the road and blow out a two-week old, $280 tire and bend the strut when the rim scrapes off the curb. Good times.

      1. Mechanical gremlins are why I'm glad we found an '05. I don't generally trust the first model year of vehicles, since they probably hadn't worked all the bugs out.

        After two years of having two small cars, the Pacifica looks pretty funny parked in the garage next to my 2-door Golf.

  7. I'm pretty sure I saw Souhan at the concert tonight (I assume not for the HHT, but for Robert Randolph, the headliner, who was well into his set by that time).

    I saw him standing towards the back right (when facing the stage), in front of the cash machine. At first he was alone, and then some younger men and a younger woman came over and talked to him. She started dancing with him a little, but nothing scandalous if he's married to another woman. He was under the edge of the balcony, and at one point someone spilled a bit of beer (or other beverage) on him. He kept looking up at where it came from trying to figure out if it was intentional or not.

    I thought, do I ask him if he's Souhan? And if so, what do I say? "I hate your column!"? "Don't be so harsh on Mauer!"?
    I found myself staring at him, so I walked over to the left side.
    Even if I think he's a horrible sports writer with horrible opinions that are ruining the team, he's still a private citizen and doesn't deserve to be bothered like that.

      1. Dilemma: to see your flames of Shecky, I'd have to follow him on Twitter, too.
        Not really a dilemma, I'm not going to do that. I read enough of his blogs last night just checking if he was not on assignment, and the guy is full of hate for the Twins. I'm sure he's found he's getting milage out of his anti-Twins stance, and he's just driving it into the ground.

Comments are closed.