Useless Offday Thoughts: The ballpark, and third base
This week saw the Twins set their season high winning streak at five games — by sweeping the lowly Royals and taking the first two from the Orioles, all at home, a truly impressive feat, to be sure — before dropping the final game of the Orioles series because, inexplicably, they couldn’t score any runs against Jeremy Guthrie. That guy was on my fantasy team for a while, and believe me: he sucks. But today is an offday, and on offdays I don’t dwell on the failings of the previous day. Instead, I try to avoid dwelling on how much I hate offdays by thinking about random, useless stuff all day long! So here are your useless offday thoughts to tide you over.
The Ballpark
Time is winding down to the end of the season, and the exodus from the dome. Everyone, of course, is excited about the new stadium. It’s going to be great, they tell us. Real baseball, played really outdoors. The team will have more money, so we can feel really great about the fact that the Pohlad family will be getting larger, sweeter profits* while they don’t actually spend the money on acquiring more players.
* Paid for by our ticket money, and our hot dog money, and our tax money. Well, your tax money. I don’t live there.
Are you as excited as I am?
Shockingly, Rob Neyer is pretty excited about the possibility of the Twins sucking once they don’t have the dome any more. He points to an article by Steve Aschburner that talks about the new stadium, but raises the issue that the Twins have enjoyed a significant home field advantage:
For all its affronts, though, the Metrodome hosted moments that Target Field will be hard-pressed to duplicate. The Twins, through the All-Star break, had gone 1,193-1015 in the monochrome building since it opened, including a 372-243 home mark since manager Ron Gardenhire took over in 2002. They have won six division titles while calling it home, with two AL pennants. Their World Series titles both owed much to the Dome, from its alien feel for St. Louis (1987) and Atlanta (1991) to the deafening crowd noise; the Twins won all eight Series games played in the Dome and lost all six on the road.
I’m pretty sure quite a bit has changed about the dome since the World Series victories decades ago, including the height of the baggy, the ground rules regarding the speakers, the bounciness of the ground, the actual surface of the grass, and probably some other things I’m forgetting. So I wouldn’t bring up anything that happened that long ago. That said, the fact that they’re 178 games over .500 since 1982 and that includes being 130 games over .500 since 2002 says to me that the Twins have had their best, strongest home field advantage during the Gardy Era. So maybe all those changes have helped the Twins.
Maybe the team is just better now than it was during the 90s. Is that possible? Neyer?
Teams that play in freaky ballparks — the Twins, the Rockies, the Red Sox, the Padres — tend to have larger-than-normal differences between their home and road records. This might be a home advantage and a road disadvantage, as was the case for many years for the Rockies. I don’t see why it has to be, though. My guess is that whatever home advantage the Twins lose in their home ballpark, they will not gain by playing better on the road.
Or it’s because the organization tends to model its players and its roster in a particular fashion because of the features of their home park. If you have a really fast infield and rock hard ground, you’re going to want a bunch of slap-hitting speedsters* in your lineup to take advantage of that … and that’s what the Twins have done over the years. Conversely, if you have short fences and long grass and wind that carries the ball you’re going to want a bunch of lumbering sluggers who put the ball in the seats … and that’s what the White Sox have done.
* At least that’s what you might think you want to do. The point is that this is what the Twins have, in fact, done. And that I’m giving them the opportunity to blame the dome for it. We’ll see what they do in the next 2-4 years to reshape the roster to better fit the new environment.
So the Twins will lose their “dome field advantage,” but many teams have an advantage at home (all of them, actually), so is it really that unthinkable that the franchise won’t be crippled by this move?
If that’s the case, they’ll have to play better — fundamentally better — just to stay roughly where they’ve been, record-wise. That’s a tall order, but of course their new ballpark is supposed to bring higher revenues and the related ability to compete financially with their competition.
It’ll depend on the actual environment of the new stadium, of course, but the Twins will have to change their roster to try to match what they’ve got. If the ball travels well, they’re going to want to ditch all their fly ball pitchers for ground ball pitchers and replace the ground ball hitters with fly ball hitters. Of course, Neyer would probably consider this “fundamentally better” baseball, and would say he was right all along. Fine. But it’s just going to be a natural process of fitting your roster to your environment.
In the end, everything probably comes out in the wash. But nobody should pretend the organization won’t lose something when it finally leaves that big old barn of a building.
Hopefully it loses a bunch of enmity from the press, who have always been annoyed that they have to travel to the untamed wilderness of Minnesota in the first place, and positively angered by the Metrodome. Beat writers will probably rave about the new stadium. Of course, Rob Neyer will continue to write bi-weekly screeds about how the Twins have no fucking business being in the major leagues, and should just send all their good players to a real team like the Red Sox.
But what really gets me is that everyone just naturally assumes that Target Field is just going to be a generic cookie cutter stadium plopped out of the same mold of a dozen others, and that the Twins won’t have a new, natural home field advantage. Everyone always gets annoyed when a new stadium has contrived “quirks,” like the crazy ass walls at Citi Field that serve no purpose but to mess with outfielders. Old stadiums had quirks because of limitations and constraints of the plot of land they were dealing with — and in case nobody noticed, Target Field is located on a lot way too small for a stadium, and is nestled between a factory and a river. It has a big ass limestone wall in right field.
Who’s to say that these constraints won’t lend themselves to some actual quirks in the new stadium that the Twins can take advantage of? Nobody knows what’s going to happen with that limestone wall. Will balls hit it and bounce unpredictably, rewarding left handed pull hitters? Imagine if every time Morneau smashed one off the baggy, it careened wildly in an unknown direction. Conversely, what if it bounces straight, and a line drive against it can fly all the way back to the infield? These are unanswered questions, but the fact that they’re there means there very well could be some home field advantage for the Twins next year. Don’t tell Neyer, he might hurt himself trying to figure out another fancy and backhanded way to say “the Twins suck.”
Third base
During the offseason, one of the glaring holes on the team was third base. With Punto “entrenched” as the shortstop, third would be manned by a mostly pathetic Buscher/Harris platoon, which would have been pretty inadequate both offensively and defensively. The main opportunities for upgrade were Casey Blake, Mark Derosa, Ty Wigginton, and Joe Crede.
Blake’s contract demands were way too high, and he went to the Dodgers. Bill Smith claimed the price to trade for Derosa was too high, so we missed on him. It was down to Wigginton vs Crede.
Wigginton was coming off his breakout season, having posted a 128 OPS+ and basically mashing the ball — Crede was coming off back surgery. Before the season, I figured Wigginton could be worth 3.0 wins, and Crede could be worth 1.9 wins (Crede’s worth was pushed down by injury risk, and Wigginton’s was probably buoyed by his strong 2008). So when the Twins claimed Wigginton wanted “Blake money” and decided to stop talking to him, I didn’t have a huge problem with it until he signed with the Orioles for Mike Lamb money. Once again, Smith looks like a liar, or an incompetent boob.
But … we have the benefit of hindsight! How have these two third baseman fared this season, and should the Twins regret this decision?
Wigginton: 91 G, .259/.306/.387, 8 HR, 33 RBI, 28 R, 40 K, 19 BB, -0.5 WAR Crede: 88 G, .229/.293/.421, 15 HR, 48 RBI, 42 R, 52 K, 29 BB, 1.9 WAR
So, yes. They’ve both seen somewhat limited duty, Crede’s due to a state of perpetual almost-injury, and Wigginton’s due to ineffectiveness. Personally, I’d rather my players be ready to play every day, but given the choice between being out because you’re hurt and being out because you suck, I think I’d have to go with hurt. Right? Gleeman’s take* on Crede’s state of “injury” this season:
Despite having to accumulate plate appearances to make money Crede has played in just 88 of 126 games, and the amazing thing is that he’s been out of the lineup 30 percent of the time without spending a second on the disabled list. Instead he’s missed 3-5 games every couple weeks, leaving the Twins to play with a 24-man roster for long stretches while essentially being “day-to-day” for five months.
Anyway, it looks like Crede’s got the advantage everywhere except in making contact and drawing walks. Overall, he’s been worth 2.4 wins more than Wigginton, which is huge, and points to the Twins having made the right decision between these two guys. (I’ll leave out whether it was good to let it get to that, but whatever.)
* By the way, I am amused that Gleeman’s article is titled “Twins getting what they paid for with Crede,” yet he doesn’t mention what they’re paying him or what he’s been worth, and doesn’t address value or cost in any way. Anyway, he’s right. Crede is guaranteed $2.5M with incentives that could push it to a total of $7M. So far this year, he’s produced $8.4M worth of value. Despite the low batting average, the lack of walks, and the nagging injuries, the Twins have actually gotten more than they bargained for when they signed Crede. Plus there was that walkoff grand slam!
Of course, Crede probably won’t be back next season, and we’re going to have to find another 3B option. Hopefully it’s Danny Valencia, and hopefully Valencia actually turns out to be good. Because the Twins have really, really struggled with that position lately.
Not coincidentally the Twins rank 11th in the 14-team league with a measly .695 OPS from third base, which is nothing new for them. Corey Koskie was Minnesota’s third baseman from 1999 to 2004, hitting .280/.373/.463 with 52 extra-base hits per 500 at-bats, but since losing him to free agency five years ago Twins third basemen have ranked 10th, 13th, 14th, 11th, and 11th in OPS among AL teams.
Who would have thought that replacing Corey Koskie would prove to be so impossible?
30 comments30 Comments so far
Leave a reply
What useless piece of shit runs this website? Quit talking shit about my Dad. He is the best manager in the game. One day I will be the Nick Punto of the Minnesota Twins. Will you create a website for me. In all honesty, what kind of website name is this. You bandwagon bastard!!
Isn’t Nick Punto already the “Nick Punto of the Minnesota Twins”?
At the tavern Wed. night a few friends and I got into a pretty heated argument: Can anyone mention a player in the history of the Twins worse than Nick Punto? We went through some of the lean 90s clubs and not sure we came up with a definitive answer. Maybe someone can help. Personally, every time he plays now I get angry, I just can’t understand why he’s out there.
If its at a tavern, its a discussion, not an argument.
I would say there were players worse than Punto (scott stahoviak comes to mind for some reason) but not many who were give the free pass that he gets. Tom Kelly would bench your ass if you sucked and replace you, maybe not with someone better, but with someone who hadn’t been sucking as hard for the past month. That is what pisses me off about Punto, he sucks but still gets to play nearly everyday. That seems to be changing slightly with the strong play of Casilla, but now with Crede out I bet we see a lot of Punto at third.
See my buddy George was adamant about Stahoviak, so I compared stats and Stahoviak’s career numbers and year averages are better almost across the board (including fielding %, and this again flies in the face of the Punto apologists: as a fielder he is AVERAGE AT BEST). Plus with Stahoviak it seemed like he at least understood his shortcomings. Punto somehow believes he is much better than he is, which is why he will swing for the fences and strike out with 1 out and a runner on 3rd or attempt a drag bunt (and always, always fail) when a sacrifice is required. To me there’s a difference to sucking and being completely ignorant to your sucking.
Its hard to compare them defensively since they play different postions, and fielding % is a worthless stat anyway. But you are correct punto (and the powers that be) don’t realize he isn’t a good player. Its also hard to tell how much individual players on those 90s teams sucked since the teams were so bad. Punto stands out because we have had some good teams and sometimes its clear he is the reason we aren’t winning like we should.
I also agree that he is average defensively, and his value is being able to play multiple positions at or slightly above average. So starting him eliminates that value.
Also, the Fangraphs value measurements only go back to 2002, so it’s tough to compare before that.
For what it’s worth, though, since Delmon Young joined the team he’s been worth -1.7 wins. During that same period, Punto has been worth +2.8 wins.
Over the course of his Twins career, Punto has been worth +7.9 wins to the Twins. He’s been worth $30M and been paid $6M (it’ll be $10M after this year).
He’s not great or anything, but he plays average defense at several positions and is at least capable of being an average hitter (he’s done it twice in the last four years).
I like bashing Punto as much as the next guy, but you’re really barking up the wrong tree. Punto can’t possibly be the worst Twin ever, given that there have surely been dozens (hundreds) who provided less than +7.9 wins to the Twins. Some even may have done it over longer careers.
I’m not as statistically sophisticated as you guys – how is the player wins thing calculated? And what does it mean exactly – game winning hits, etc?
And where does the $30M come from?
I’m sure you’re quoting accurate stats, but all stats aside, if you honestly believe Punto is a benefit to this team AND has been underpaid by 33% over his career, well, you and I are watching different games I guess.
Not to beat a dead horse, but there are hundreds of minor league players capable of playing multiple positions adequately. I just can’t accept the “Punto is a defensive asset” argument. So was Luis Rodriguez.
Investigate the bottom of this page for Punto’s value numbers.
His “wins above replacement” are based on his “runs above replacement,” which are in turn based on an amalgamation of his contributions, both offensive and defensive. They have nothing to do with “game winning hits;” instead, context is fully removed. So it’s not that Punto has singlehandedly “won” 8 more games than he’s singlehandedly “lost” or something like that.
Rather, when you combine his almost-average defense with his bouncing-between-replacement-level-and-way-way-below-replacement-level hitting, and consider the positions he plays, he’s been worth 8 wins above a “replacement player” over the last 6 years. That’s still below an average player, of course, but it is valuable.
And the dollar values are calculated based on the cost of a “win” in free agency that year. Lately it’s been around $4.5-$5M. So when we signed Punto to his $4M-per-year contract, we were valuing him at less than one win. He hasn’t been worth that much to us this year, but he may very well have a 2010 that’s a lot like his 2006 or 2008, which would more than make up for it overall.
Ultimately, in real baseball terms, FunBobby is right. Punto is valuable to the team, but only insofar as he’s a utility man. By being deployed as a regular, his value is terribly diminished.
Oh, and also, you’re right. Luis Rodriguez was considerably worse than Punto. In his 3 seasons with the Twins, he was worth +1 win. But if you only include his last 2 seasons with the Twins, it’s -0.3 wins. He is basically a replacement level player.
I should clarify my thesis to say that Punto is (arguably of course) the worst starting position player (or one with significant playing time at least) the Twins have ever had.
Defensive flexibility + hitting ineptitude is basically the definition of a utility player. In Punto’s case it equals unwavering managerial support, consistent playing time and exorbitant raises.
But he’s been averaging +1.3 wins per year in his entire career with the Twins.
If that’s the worst player that’s ever got significant playing time in your franchise’s history, your team is fucking awesome.
If you base your judgment on that single theoretical statistic, sure, Punto’s a valuable guy. More valuable, in fact (using the linked site and the 1.3 wins/yr over the last 3 yrs), than Cuddyer, Kubel, Juan Pierre, Garrett Atkins, Jermaine Dye, Melky Cabrera, Vernon Wells, Chris Young, Jason Kendall, James Loney, etc. If you watch him play, however, you realize that a) the above judgment is batshit insane; and b)maybe that isn’t the best statistic to measure a player’s worth against, because c) Punto is fucking terrible.
But enough about Punto, let’s focus our energies on a win tonight, eh?
Cuddyer: had a couple bad years in there, and isn’t much to write home about in the field at an easily-fielded position.
Kubel: DHs have a tougher time collecting value because it’s the easiest position to field, and this is really his first season of being a regular.
Pierre: Not good at baseball.
Atkins: Numbers inflated (briefly, and three years ago) by Coors Field. Has collapsed at the plate. Has always been crappy defensively at a corner position.
Dye: Has had a couple down offensive years in the last three, and is terrible in right field. That, obviously, hurts his value (much like Cuddyer, actually).
Melky: Can’t hit, doesn’t get regular playing time. Where does he give value?
Wells: Um, he has the single worst contract in baseball, worse than Zito’s, and he’s awful. No shit he has low value.
Chris Young: I assume you mean the position player. Who was batting .194 this year when he was sent to the minor leagues. What?
Kendall: Really?
Loney: Has been somewhat disappointing, and first basemen are supposed to hit more than he has hit.
My point is, yes, Nick Punto has been more valuable, overall, over the last three years than all of these players. It’s easy to forget that because he loves lofting short fly balls to left, he can’t bunt, he dives head first into first base, Gardy likes him just a little too much, and he looks like an annoying little gremlin. But don’t let those subjective feelings blind you to the fact that going out there and playing premium defensive positions — even just adequately — every day builds up quite a bit of value.
You compared him either to guys who hit better but suck at their easy defensive position, or to guys who play premium defensive positions but aren’t even as good at hitting as Punto is.
That comment up top is hilarious! I can’t believe that you guys just kept chugging along!
I think Sirsean is somekind of A.I. with a caustic wit and a penchant for watching baseball. Not sure if it has emotions but it only seems to enjoy watching every game of baseball ever and counting random statistics that no human can understand. Also arguing with random people on the interweb.
Sirsean you’ve got to be kidding. Common sense prevails. Every single one of those players is better than Punto and you know it. Your stats are probably helpful for your Rotisserie league but come on. And your defense really gets lazy. Chris Young batting .194 – Punto’s hitting .200! And your scientific critique of former All Star Jason Kendall was airtight.
Put down the baseball encyclopedia and go to a game for once.
I thought, briefly, that I was going to let that crap fly. But then I realized that I wouldn’t.
Common sense prevails? Why? Because it happens to be your opinion? Do you happen to have any actual arguments to back that up, or is this just a “Nick Punto sucks and I’m not going to listen to anyone who disagrees with me” type of thing. This is baseball, not politics. Leave that style at home. And anyway, I never said Punto was better than any of those players. I said he has had more value to his baseball team over the last three years than any of them. And then I explained why. This is hard.
Also, your assumptions about me are quite amusing. Firstly, I watch between 250 and 300 baseball games per year. How much do you watch? Secondly, I’m terrible at fantasy baseball. Thirdly, these particular statistics do not help at all in fantasy baseball, since fantasy scoring does not value defense in any way. So, basically, you’re right on point right now.
But, of course, at the same time your demands of other people’s arguments remain sky high. Since I agree with you that that’s totally fair, I’ll go ahead and beef up the Young/Kendall arguments. Just so you’re happy. I hope you appreciate it.
Young: He was batting .194/.297/.359, with 95 K and 45 BB in 366 PA. Additionally, his defense in CF had taken a step back (he was around replacement level last year in the field, but is below replacement level this year). Since he remains an athletic and promising young player, the D-Backs were right to send him down to the minors to see if he could drive down those strikeouts. He may do it, because he’s very talented. Last year he was good enough to produce +2.3 wins. But this year he was at -0.3 wins before he was sent down, and there’s simply no argument that someone having that poor a season is more valuable to his team than Nick Punto. Are you capable of understanding yet, or were you not listening?
Kendall: Ooh, he’s a former All Star? Really? That means he can never possibly decline in value for the rest of his career! Call the Hall of Fame, because there’s this guy who got to the All Star game 10 years ago and therefore he’s fucking awesome at everything! Wait. He hasn’t been to the All Star game since 2000. So … let’s look a little more recently, since that what we were fucking talking about in the first place. His line of .242/.332/.292 isn’t even good for a catcher, and reports of his defense peg him pretty low on the catching totem pole. He’s helped out in his value ratings because all catchers are rated the exact same defensively — he is awarded as much value for his defense as Joe Mauer. Unfortunately for Kendall, he is not as good as Mauer, and if (when) the valuations are capable of accurately assessing catcher defense, his value will plummet further. Kendall was a good, and valuable, player as recently as 2006. He had a good career, but he just isn’t good any more and hasn’t been for the last three years.
Was that enough? Is there anything else you’re not quite satisfied with? Or did you just tune out while you tried to come up with something snarky and idiotic to say in response?
Dare I point out that nobody’s actually putting forth arguments against Punto’s value any more? Does that mean you’ve all conceded the fight?
Well I got here late & I was trying to brush up on my multi variable calculus to understand your statistics, but no luck. But you do say above that these stats are removed from context and unfortunately for you baseball is all about context. As in, say, who would you rather have up with 2 outs, bottom ninth, tying run on 2nd, Punto or say Jason Kendall?
And you can’t use a calculator to answer.
Don’t take it personally, you’re just trying really really really hard to defend Punto, basically there’s 1 obscure stat that can do that, which is fine, you’re entitled to your opinion but it’s just strange/funny, that’s all.
In this thread…
sirsean: [Well-thought-out, if caustically presented, arguments backed up by solid statistical analysis]
Everyone else: HURR DURR MATH IS HARD
Maybe some people haven’t “conceded the fight” but just don’t like getting yelled at by an angry, angry internet guy. Guess there’s no room for discussion here, either you agree with sirsean or you’re a complete and absolute idiot and he’ll spent a thousand words telling you so. No thanks.
For those of you interested in intelligent, reasonable discussions regarding the Twins, with a sense of humor involved, try http://mntwins-reeducation-center.blogspot.com/, new but good. Mr. Mcsteele doesn’t always agree but he’s always polite.
It’s funny that you’d accuse me of demanding that you agree with me and accepting no other argument. I mean, given that I’ve been the one actually making arguments that back up a point, and everyone else has just been repeating the old mantra, “I don’t like Nick Punto because he sucks, and anyone who disagrees obviously doesn’t know anything about baseball.”
I do, of course, encourage people to attempt to debate if they want to, but I think it’s pretty clear that I have absolutely no tolerance for that type of idiocy.
But by all means, if you need someone to smile at you while you furrow your brow in a vain attempt to understand, go to the re-education center. It’ll make you feel good and they’ll tell you that you’re trying hard even if you put in no effort to actually understand new things. Just like in junior high! Woo!
So now we’re idiots for enjoying other websites. My deepest apologies sir.
Keep putting words in my mouth. It makes you look great.
Yeah my credibility is really taking a hit here in this anonymous website comment section. How devastating.
If forced to choose between Kendall and Punto I choose death.
Kendall’s probably the better hitter to have out there (awfully close to a wash, though) … but wouldn’t that mean Mauer’s not playing that day? Isn’t that a whole lot worse than whichever you’d have to choose between Punto and Kendall?
Or are we just going by hitting and ignoring defense and position entirely? Because, you know, that’s not what I’ve been doing this whole time. And on a baseball team, defense and positions are pretty important.
I mean, I’d absolutely rather have Jermaine Dye batting with the game on the line than Punto … but Dye doesn’t play shortstop. He plays right field, badly. So while Dye’s value is higher in that plate appearance, Punto’s is higher over the course of the season.
Yeah I mean I understand your point (ha ha Funbobby!) but to me clutch hitting and just hitting in general is what defines a valuable player way more than defense and whatnot. Just my opinion, don’t rip my head off, I don’t have any numbers I’m just speaking as a casual fan.
I think we are seeing a huge shift in opinions on that subject now. While before last year, defense was largely ignored but last year the Rays improved their defense by a lot and went to the world series, this year Seattle got a lot better on defense, and while they won’t make the playoffs, they are a vastly improved team. Sames goes for Texas, except they might make the playoffs. Seattle’s new OF defense is basically the sole reason Jarrod Washburn was so good for the first half. Just like OBP because a popular stat a few years ago with moneyball and what not, I think we are seeing the same thing happen with defense. and once it becomes overvalued like OBP did, we will move on to another obscure stat that some GM thinks is undervalued.
Hitting and, indeed, “clutch hitting” are certainly more visible than defense and from that standpoint is even disconnected from a player’s position. Memories are built on walk off home runs, and big clutch hits to tie the game. I think it’s much tougher for a lasting memory to be built over the course of six months, by appreciating a guy’s defensive contributions and trying to balance that against his obvious failings at the plate.
The way I like to look at it is this: each plate appearance, and each game, by itself, means nothing. All the plate appearances and all the games put together means everything.
The game is a lot larger than that one at bat you always daydreamed about when you were 10, win-or-lose in this moment. And in your dream you always win, and you idolize the players who do it in real life, who win the games at the end, who hit when it “counts.”
But you’re not 10 any more, and it always counts. Do you get hyped up more than ever for every at bat, like it’s football? Or do you relax more than you used to, accepting the games where we lose at the end because someone failed to come up with a hit in the 9th — perhaps realizing that they turned a key double play in the top of the 9th that even got us to the situation where we could win or lose in that particular at bat? Or do you just continue to “ignore” (not the right word, probably) most of the game and focus highly on those win-or-lose moments, staying a casual fan?
It’s each person’s choice. And there’s no wrong answer. But I feel like when you’re talking about who’s the worst player, you’re talking about their “value to the team.” And a player’s value is a whole lot more than a counter of the times they came through in the 9th inning.
FunBobby’s right about the valuation of a stat. Eventually teams will see the success of defense in Texas and Seattle, and start going after defensive wizards at the expense of their offense. The game will change a little bit.
And it will create another arbitrate situation where defense is valued too highly and some GM will realize he can get lumbering power hitters on the cheap all of a sudden. Hard to imagine now, I know, but that appears to be how these cycles work.