Fifty Years, Two Styles

It’s sacrilege to admit such a thing, but I’m not much of a baseball book reader. To be totally honest, I’m not much of a book reader, period. Even in a household with kids just entering their second decade of life, I’m quite sure I’m the least proficient reader in the household, and probably by an order of magnitude.

So it is always with some guilt that I receive books to review. I know I’m not likely to read them all, and without a vacation or long flight coming up, I’m just as likely to not read them at all. But I didn’t let those misgivings stop me from requesting a copy of the StarTribune’s Minnesota Twins: The Complete Illustrated History by Dennis Brackin and Patrick Reusse or We’re Gonna Win Twins: 50 Years of Minnesota’s Hometown Team by Doug Grow. I’m glad I didn’t. They’re both excellent, and while they cover the same topic, they’re very different books, and that’s by design.

The Strib’s effort is trying to be an illustrated history that can be displayed on a coffee table or used as a reference book, and it succeeds. It’s big, it’s got lots of pictures from the Strib’s massive archives, and lots of fun lists like the Top 50 Twins that are distributed throughout it as sidebars. It is by far the more thorough of the two books when it comes to what happened on the field each season.

It should go without saying that both books are well-written in a concise, informative and accurate manner. Brackin, Reusse and Grow should need no introductions due to their tenure as journalists in the area, and I’m not likely to do them justice in trying to recap their careers.

That writing style is especially important in the Strib’s book. It is as extensive and informative as a textbook, and could have easily become a dry as one. Instead, it’s clean, and that neatness allows generous doses of Reusse’s pepper to spice it up. Thus it does double-duty as both something you can show off and actually enjoy reading.

By comparison, Grow’s book is smaller, plainer and with a significantly different goal. It has photos, but they are black and white, and a couple per chapter as opposed to the full scale graphics that the Strib’s book sports. Each year is a chapter, but each chapter might have only a couple of sentences recapping the Twins year, and the rest might be a story or a player that Grow wants to talk about.

And that’s the different goal - to tell a story. Grow’s is the book that I kept finding myself picking up, almost compulsively, the way one picks up a good novel. The chapters build on each other, foreshadow each other, drive one to keep reading. That’s a remarkable achievement considering that most of the readers know how this particular story proceeds.

He gets away with this by mostly ignoring those seasons begging to be ignored. 1985 is almost completely about Andy McPhail. 1986 is almost entirely about Tom Kelly. 2000 is about bobbleheads and I was shocked to find that 2005 was about blogs, including a somewhat bitter Twins Geek.

That’s why I didn’t like one feature that I suspect will be universally mentioned (and more than likely admired) by other reviews. At the start of each chapter there is a short paragraph of what on in each of the following: the world, the nation, the state, pop culture and the season. It’s somewhat interesting, but that belonged in the more structured Strib’s book. In this page-turner, it just got in the way. Get me back to the stories, dammit.

Neither book is cheap (the Strib’s is $30 and Grow’s is $25) but I’ve become a fan of paying for content that I like and is rare. Still, if I had to pick just one to buy…

I’d probably pick both. The Strib’s is probably the more essential guide, one that I’ll pull off the bookshelf when I want to research something. But to me, Grow’s was more fun, and the one that is going to have a longer life on my nightstand.

***

If you want to hear more about Doug Grow’s book, stop by the Townball Tavern in Target Field on Saturday afternoon from 2:00 to 4:00. He’s having a talk and book signing with Clyde Doepner, the curator for the Twins. It says that you’ll need to enter at the 5th street gate entrance, which I think is Gate 3 (or else Gate 6) near the LRT. That sounds exactly like the kind of event I would love, but I’m afraid I’ll be out of town that weekend, so I’ll need to get him to sign my book some other time.

***

I had the volume down on the broadcast during the ninth inning last night so I need someone to tell me – did Bert grouch about Francisco Liriano not pitching the ninth inning?

For the record, I wouldn’t have had any problem with sending Liriano out there after throwing 102 pitches. A common misperception is that there is this large body of evidence that teams are taking risks with their pitchers’ health at anything over 100 pitches. But the truth is that there is really only a small body of evidence (just one study that I know of) that suggests any kind of effect - and that’s mostly an effect in performance, and it starts at 120 pitches. So if Gardenhire felt like the bullpen could use the break or that getting the shutout would’ve helped Liriano’s confidence, I say go for it.

Not that I had any problem with throwing Crain out there either. He needed the work.

****

Thanks to MLB.com’s At-Bat iPhone App, I’ve been listening pretty regularly to opposing team’s radio announcers. Last night’s Cleveland announcers, by the bottom of the second inning, had awarded the 2010 AL Central title to the Twins. Good times.

***

For more good times, you might want to follow me on Twitter this weekend. It could be especially interesting/embarrassing/non-existent as I’ll spend some time in Vegas. You’ve been warned.

Back-of-the-Napkin Analysis: Have Bullpens Become Better?

Sometimes it’s what you don’t see that’s important.

Monday night I was in my first live chat session, hosted by Phil Mackey of ESPN 1500. Semi-predictably, I settleD into the role of elderly curmudgeon, ala Patrick Reusse, except without the charm. That became especially apparent when the topic of bullpen usage came up.

In 1985, Bill James tackled the changing role of relievers in Bill James Historical Baseball Abstract. He noted the changing roleS and predicted further changes. And he was right, as roles became more defined and we saw the rise of the one-inning closer by the 90s. No longer did we see the best relief pitcher enter the game at a critical time early in the game. Their new role was to protect a lead in the ninth inning.

It’s become a hotly debated topic, especially when a game is lost, and I find myself on the opposite side of it than many of my peers. I have no problem with stricter roles in a bullpen, even if that means "saving" the closer for the end of the game. I suspect there are long-term benefits that equal the short-term gain in using them in a more flexible manner:

TwinsGeek: But Mackey, managing a bullpen could be similar to managing any other group of people - they perform best when expectations are set.

Aaron Gleeman: Plenty of setup men seem to do just fine being thrown into all kinds of spots without knowing exactly when and where.

Phil Mackey: Right TwinsGeek, but they'd get used to it.

But Monday night was the first time I really asked myself the question:

TwinsGeek: So do we thing that bullpen's blow MORE games now than they did before 1985? Do we have any evidence of this?

Aaron Gleeman: John, bullpens now also have 3-4 extra pitchers and specialized roles. So you'd expect them to be better, in general.

So let’s do a little back-of-the-napkin analysis today around this. I’m hoping to get a sense whether:

1. Have teams become better at winning games with close scores, and did this happen at about the same time as the rise of the closer?
2. Is it possible that while saving the "closer" for late innings helps the team preserve late leads that it has had a similar negative impact on leads earlier?

I’m going to start by using this Win Expectancy Finder to record, year-by-year, what percentage of the time the home team was able to preserve a one-run lead in the ninth inning between 1977 and 2006. Then I’ll do the same for the seventh and eighth innings. And then I’ll chart it and see if I see any trends.

(On caveat – I’m going to skip two years. I’m going to skip 1999 because the site that I’m using doesn’t have any data for 1999. And I’m going to skip 1994 because it was the strike-shortened year. Because of that, I'm not comfortable with the sample data size, because I'm seeing some goofy results. For instance, in 1994 fewer teams could hold a one-run lead going into the eighth than could hold a one-run lead going into the seventh. Think about that for a minute.)

So, how does it look? For year to year comparisons, it’s a little bit of a mess:


Yikes, that's like my EKG during Game 163. It’s hard to see any trends here because the data jumps around a lot. So let’s smooth it a bit by taking the average for every five-year period instead…..



That’s odd. During the late 70s and 80s, bullpens didn’t change very much in protecting a ninth inning lead – that green line is pretty level at first. However, teams got about 5% better at preserving a win in the seventh or eighth inning between 1982 and 1990. That’s a very strange result if, as the theory goes, the best relievers were being moved to work strictly the ninth inning. I’d expect exactly the opposite – a slight uptick for that green line and declines in the red and blue lines.

I’d also feel a lot more comfortable if those lines evened off a bit in the 90s, but instead they decline slightly back to previous levels, except for the eighth inning guy who had a couple of very good years in 2001 and 2002. So there are obvious plenty of other factors impacting these lines. It might be that the previous increase in middle-relief effectiveness had nothing at all to do with the change in usage.

But I think one thing that I don’t see here is relevant. I don’t see any evidence that at any macro-level, the change in bullpen usage that swept through the 80s hurt team’s ability to hold onto one-run leads. We can claim that utilizing a team’s best relievers in this new modern way isn’t particularly smart, but it sure doesn’t look like it spectacularly stupid, either.

A Second Chance for Twins Fans

For today's post, please click over to the Downtown Journal, where I wrote about the impact the Twins last new stadium had on the Twins.

Also, tonight I'll be taking part in a live chat at 8:00 Central over at the http://1500espn.com/ with Seth Stohs, Parker Hageman, Phil Mackey and Aaron Gleeman. I've never done one of these before, and am interested to see just how much trouble I can get into. I hope to talk to you there.

Three Final Points about Race Biases in Baseball

Is Jermaine Dye a decent example of a player that might have been affected by race biases in baseball? I think so, and especially so this year.

I would characterize Dye as an aging, defensively challenged corner outfielder who can still mash. This year, there were three other players on the market who have that same skill set: Bobby Abreu, Hideki Matsui, and Vladimir Guerrero. Let’s just quickly draw up the most relevant facts about each:

Dye – 35 years old, 793 OPS in 2009 & UZR was -20,
Abreu – 35 year old, 825 OPS in 2009 & UZR was -11 (signed for $19M/2 years)
Matsui – 35 years old, 876 OPS in 2009 & he really only played DH (signed for $6M/1 year)
Guerrero – 34 years old, 794 OPS in 2009 & her really only played DH (signed for $6.5M/1 year)

Dye has two characteristic that I thought made him more like Abreu than Matsui and Guerrero: he’s stayed healthy and he’s stayed in the outfield. The two are related, by the way. Both Matsui and Guerrero were just as shaky in the outfield as Dye, but what really moved them to DH is that they couldn’t stay healthy out there. Dye remains an option in the outfield, or at least he and his agent thought so.

But there aren’t huge differences between these guys, and I can understand and respect others opinions. I suspect it is the same in GM offices. They look at these four guys, and if they need that type of player, they give the offer to whichever one their gut tells them they like best.

Of course, that’s where an unconscious bias might play a role. “I’ve always like Guerrero’s makeup”, one assistant GM will say, and everyone else will nod. And for some reason, he didn’t say “I’ve always liked Dye’s makeup.” Not because he disliked Dye, but just because he never thought of him quite the same way as he thought of Guerrero, for whatever reason.

On the other hand, if you’re a GM, and any of those guys look good, maybe you’re willing to sign the guy that says “yes” at the price you want. There is ample evidence that guy repeatedly wasn’t Dye, so maybe he and his agent are the victims of their own bad driving. We can’t tell, but I’m personally puzzled why Dye was ultimately valued lower in the market than these other guys. And I don't think it's crazy to think an unconscious race bias could have been a subtle contributing factor.

~~~~

And while we’re taking a look at the free agency market, anyone want to guess who was the top free agent second baseman in our Offseason GM Handbook? Yep. It was Orlando Hudson. But he certainly wasn’t the guy that signed the best contract. Think that might be in the back of his mind?

Orlando Hudson is a couple years younger than Placido Polanco, who signed a 3-year/ $18 million contract (compared to Hudson’s $5M/1 year deal). Of course, Polanco was able to sign that deal in part because he was moving to third base.

Mark DeRosa signed a 2-year/ $12 million deal with the Giants. He’s three years older than Hudson, had a lower OPS, doesn’t have a gold glove and was hurt a good chunk of last year. Of course, he’s also switching positions away from second base, moving to left field. So maybe in both of those cases it’s their arm strength that made them worth the extra years and millions.

The Giants also made a commitment to Freddy Sanchez, who they paid $12 million over two years to not be a free agent. He is Hudson’s age, and spent the end of last year not playing because of knee problems.

Hudson didn’t necessarily get a raw deal this year. And there was plenty of rumors that indicated that he and his agent needed to adjust their market expectations, which Dye apparently needed to do too. But I find it interesting that Hudson himself might be looking at the free agent market from last year and wonder how MLB teams were evaluating him lower than some other players. And what might have caused it.

~~~~

OK, follow my math here…

According to Major League Baseball, 73% of all major leaguers are American born. And it's my understanding that 12% of the US population is black. So 12% of that 73% should be black if African-Americans are to be fairly represented by major league baseball players. 12% of 73% is 8.8%.

But according to the stories I read yesterday, 10% of major league rosters are black players. So doesn’t this mean that black are overrepresented on major league baseball rosters? Is this really a problem?

Maybe Hudson Got It Right

"We both know what it is. You’ll get it right. You’ll figure it out. I’m not gonna say it because then I’ll be in [trouble].”

- Orlando Hudson

Give the media some credit. We got it right. We figured it out. And whether Orlando Hudson said the word "racism" or not, he's in trouble. But not for the reason he should be.

The problem is not that he raised this issue. When Orlando Hudson hinted that Jermaine Dye and Gary Sheffield couldn’t get a job in part because of the color of their skin, he couldn’t have timed his comment much better. This week, and today of all days, the issue should be raised. Today Major League Baseball celebrates Jackie Robinson Day, the day that Jackie Robinson first broke the color barrier. This is exactly the day and the week that we SHOULD cut some slack to those willing to take on the risks inherent in talking about race biases.

No, the problem is that Hudson didn't talk enough. By only hinting at the argument, he left it for us to interpret his thoughts. It also allowed us to construct straw dogs, easily torn to pieces. Do we really need media heads to bravely declare that there isn't some conspiracy in the higher offices in major league baseball? Is that what we really think was being suggested?

I'll give the nine-year veteran a little more credit than that.

One doesn't need a conspiracy to be affected by racism, and we have ample proof of that. The most recent sports-related proof is a study three years ago which was wildly misrepresented because of when it was reported. In 2007, Joseph Price of Cornell University & Justin Wolfers from University of Pennsylvania conducted a study on racial discrimination among NBA referees. Using game data they examined statistically whether teams of referees who were predominantly one race called more fouls on players of the opposing race. They did.

“Against these baselines, we find systematic evidence of an own-race bias. Players earn up to 4 percent fewer fouls or score up to 2½ percent more points when they are the recipients of a positive own-race bias, rather than a negative opposite-race effect.” (link)

The study was publicized during the same time period as the Tim Donaghy scandal, and so the coverage generally followed the same tack as the headline from this CBS News story: Study On Race Calls Foul On NBA Referees. The NBA scrambled to do damage control and there was lots of debate, but the main point was missed. The point of the study wasn't to prove that NBA refs were racist. It was to demonstrate that we all have our own race biases in hidden ways.

NBA referees were studied precisely because it is so ludicrous to suggest that their group is racist. They work in a highly integrated environment with differing races working together every day. They are constantly scrutinized in public, making even the slightest tendency obvious. They are rewarded and penalized based on their fairness and objectivity. You would be hard-pressed to find another group of people who could be held as a higher example of NOT having a same-race bias.

It would be almost impossible to show anecdotally that NBA referees have any race bias. But it was unquestionable when done statistically. In the split-second in which a referee must make a decision about whether a foul was committed, they are slightly more likely to make a call against a player of an opposing race.

(By the way, the study did not differentiate between the races. The abstract clearly states “Our results do not distinguish whether the bias stems from the actions of white or black referees.”)

What is important about this study isn't that the NBA refs have a race bias. What is important is that they display a same-race bias that isn't – and really couldn’t be - conscious. It doesn't affect all fouls - just the marginal ones. It can’t be proven anecdotally, only statistically. It’s there, it’s real, and it’s almost impossible to put your finger on.

Does something similar exist in the major league baseball free agency market that only affects fairly marginal players, like Dye? I can’t find any study that says so, but there has been a similar study done for the NBA and was referenced in the Price and Wolfers’ study. It was conducted by Lawrence Kahn of Cornell and Malav Shah of Emory University. (link) The abstract notes:

“We study race and pay in the NBA for 2001-2002. For players who were neither free agents nor on rookie scale contracts, there were large, statistically significant ceteris paribus nonwhite shortfalls in salary, total compensation, and contract duration. But for players under the rookie salary scale (first-round draft picks) and free agents, race effects were small and insignificant. These results suggest discrimination against marginal nonwhite players.”

The Price and Wolfers study is a good place for the MLB free agency discussion to begin. We know that same-race biases exist in sports and we know that they are not easily erased, even given the best efforts of leagues. Would it really surprise us if a similar problem existed within the highly charged free agent market? If it did, would a couple of aging, defensively challenged ballplayers of African-American heritage like Dye and Sheffield be adversely affected? (Especially, if like Dye, the player reportedly erred in turning down some fairly substantial contract offers a few months ago?)

It’s legitimate to debate the degree which race bias might play when predominantly white front offices evaluate free agents like Dye and Sheffield. It may be significant, or maybe it isn’t. But before that conversation takes place, we need to welcome people, ballplayers included, that raise the issue. We need to recognize that biases exist, and not construct straw dogs that can be easily torn down. We may not get to the truth, but we’ll at least raise some awareness, and on this day, sports fans should be all about awareness.

That’s how we figure it out. That’s how we get it right.

Peeking Ahead

Q: What is the most exciting part about the Twins fast start?
A: That it could be have just as easily gone exactly the other way.

Start with a west coast road trip to the 97-win Los Angeles Angels, followed by road games at the division rival's ballpark. Add in a brutal travel schedule that included flights from Florida to Minnesota to Los Angeles to Chicago and back to Minneapolis. It also didn't include a getaway day prior to Chicago, and then there was no break before the home opener.

It's conceivable that the Twins could've taken just one game in Anaheim and one game in Chicago, then laid an egg in the emotional and distracted home opener. That would have been a 2-6 start, and it still would've been hard to be too critical, given the other challenges. Instead they're 6-2 with two games coming up against the Red Sox and then....

Well, then is when it gets interesting, because the Twins play their next 18 games versus their division. KC and Cleveland come to the new ballpark, then the Twins travel to Kansas City, Detroit and Cleveland, before coming back to face Detroit, Baltimore and finally a pair of game versus the White Sox. Unless you have a high opinion of the Tigers (and I don't) that stretch looks mighty inviting.

Things get tough again in mid-May. The Twins travel to Yankee Stadium, to Toronto, and then to Boston. They come home to face the Brewers and then then Yankees again. So by May 27th, the Twins are completely done with the Yankees and Red Sox and only have three games left against the Angels, and those are at home.

Not that there aren't other challenges. The interleague schedule includes a visit to Philadelphia and Milwaukee, as well as a home series against the Braves and Rockies. The Twins also have eight games against that other AL East team, the Tampa Bay Devil Rays. And if the Mariners and Rangers fufill the promise that many see in them, the Twins will need to navigate through 20 games with those two teams.

But still, by the end of May, the Twins will be almost done with last year's American League playoff teams. They'll have had a chance to put some distance between themselves and most of the rest of the division. And now, because of a hot start, they get to start that stretch already near the top of the division.

Phoning It In: Twins Geek's Official Stadium Position

On February 2nd, 2002, TwinsGeek.com drafted our official position on public funding of an outdoor stadium. Here (link) it was:

I CAN state that I want a new outdoor stadium. I understand the arguments against it, and philosophically I generally side against it. But philosophically, I side against anyone paying close to $2000 to have a 51" HDTV-compatible big screen TV when they could spend it on educational opportunities for their kids - and then I sit in front of my Panasonic PT-51HX41 and thank god I didn't let some stupid philosophy get in the way of buying that TV.

I want an outdoor stadium because going to a baseball game in the summer in Minnesota outside ROCKS. And because going to a baseball game in the summer in Minnesota inside SUCKS. And I want that 'ROCKS' thing to happen about a dozen times every summer for my family, my friends and for ME.

And in a similar vein, it is WAY too nice to be writing tonight. Minnesota in spring ROCKS and sitting inside SUCKS, and I want that "ROCKS" thing to happen tonight so TVOR and I are heading somewhere to eat outside now.

Tomorrow, we'll be enjoying the stadium, and I would encourage you all to have a beer and celebrate the day with us. I hope to be tweeting regularly about the day, and if it is as great as I hope, there is almost no chance for a proper writeup. So, please follow the tweets and we'll most likely talk to you again on Wednesday.

Angels Series Notes

Bigger Than It Seems
They are your first place Minnesota Twins.

Winning their first series of the year is exactly what you would expect from a team that is expected to challenge for the divisional crown. Because of the expectations heaped on the Twins, a triumphant first series might not seem especially important.

So let's rephrase this week's success. The Twins went into a 97-win team's stadium and took three out of four games, tallying 22 runs to the Angels' 12. And while the Angels lost John Lackey and Vladamir Guerrero from last year's AL runner-up, they also gained Joel Pineiro and Hideki Matsui to replace them, and now they have a healthy Ervin Santana. The Angels aren't just any team.

Our Twins get another very good litmus test this weekend, when they visit Chicago. We get to see if Francisco Liriano is ready for prime time. They face their likely division challengers on the road in a park where they've had little success over the last two years. And due to some messed up scheduling, the Twins should be tired as hell for today's game - usually the schedule makers would have allowed yesterday's game to be an afternoon start.

I'll be honest - I'll also be a little giddy. If they come out of this series with two wins, I'm be planning the parade before the home opener.

The Sacrifice Bunt
Lost in last night eventual 10-1 route was a somewhat controversial decision in the 7th inning which ended up being the wrong one. What we don't know is if there was a right one. With runners on 1st and 2nd base and no outs, and with the score only 3-1, Denard Span bunted to move the runners and gave himself up at first.

There are generally some pretty strong feelings on both sides of this decision. The first is semi-old-school: this is a great play, in part because it is automatically smart and sacrifices an at-bat for the good of the team. The second is more sabremetric, which teaches that most of the time bunting is stupid and costs a team runs.

In this case, neither is right. The baseline for this decision can also be evaluated two ways: which strategy is likely to score the most run vs. which strategy is most likely to result in a win. And in both cases, the answer is essentially a push. There is almost no difference is how many runs an average team playing against an average team will score if they bunt those runners over as opposed to swing away. And there is almost no change in the likelihood of winning the game.

But the key to that last paragraph was the italicized word "average". That is nothing more than a baseline evaluation. What really needs to be evaluated is how these teams differ from an average team.

The batter who was up at the plate, is decidedly above average, especially when it comes to getting on base. Above all, Span wants to avoid the double play, and with his speed, he's in a pretty good position to do so. On the other hand, he was 0-3 with three groundouts to the pitcher and second baseman last night. He was also involved in an injury break the previous night that required icing. He could very well be suffering a short-term decline in performance from it, and his manager (or Span) might have noticed that.

The batter following Span is Orlando Hudson, the team's #2 hitter, who is also an above average hitter. If Span bunts, it's his job to get a run home via a fly ball or smoked ground ball. In this case, he grounded out to a drawn in infield, and the runner from third could not score.

Finally, the sacrifice virtually ensured that Joe Mauer would come to bat. Mauer is obviously WAY above the average player, exactly who any manager would want to have up with two outs and a runner in scoring position. Again, it didn't work out, as he grounded out to third base and the Twins ended up with zero runs.

Obviously, that's just half the equation. We could also talk about the Angels pitcher, and to what extent he induced groundballs or strikeouts. Or evaluate their infield, which looked pretty strong in three of the four spots yesterday.

If the Twins have a weak hitter up in that position, followed by two strong hitters following, bunting is likely a winner, no question. If they have good hitter, followed by two weaker hitters, it's likely a mistake. In this case, they had three good hitters, which makes it less clear. I'm swayed a bit by Span's earlier at-bats that maybe he wasn't totally healthy last night. On the other hand, Hudson didn't impress offensively or defensively this series, though I expect him to be better over the season.

Whatever the smart decision was, this one didn't score any runs, so I think we can safely say it was the wrong one. What we don't know is if Span swinging away would have turned out any better. There may not have been a right decision here.

Community
I don't know why we feel like we need to wait for a pennant race to come together as a community and get excited about this team. For all we know, this weekend might BE the pennant race. If the Twins sweep the Sox and take a 4.5 game lead over them in the first week....

OK, I'm being giddy again. But you can experience that giddiness and that sense of community with me tomorrow at Major's in Blaine for our Twins Viewing Party. It's a day game, so it starts at 12:05, though I would suggest getting there a little earlier for seats. $2 pints, two-for-one appetizer, a raffle for Twins tix, and lots and lots of Twins talk. I hope you can make it.

On Imaginary Stats and Real Games

It didn’t take long for a flawed imaginary stat to impact a real game - negatively.

It happened in the fifth inning of the season opener, when Scott Baker was trying to preserve a 3-3 tie. He was at his pitch limit, he had two runners on base and a dangerous left-handed hitter was coming up. What’s more, he looked gassed, and relief was ready. The next move was obvious: pull him.

But he stayed in the game for three more pitches: a strike looking, a foul ball, and then a mistake. A fastball drifted towards the middle of the zone, Angles batter Hideki Matsui singled, and the lead was lost. Baker was pulled for reliever Jesse Crain. But the Twins would never make up that run.

Why did Baker pitch to Matsui? Because of the “Win” statistic, a sloppy short-hand stat which unfortunately is usually the first one mentioned when evaluating a starting pitcher. He was 11-7 last year with a 3.48 ERA. A starting pitcher earns a win when they pitch at least five innings and when they were the last guy on the mound when their team took the lead for good.

Baker wasn’t going to be pitching in the sixth inning in any case. But if Baker would have been able to get Matsui out, and then the Twins would have scored in the top of the sixth (and held that lead for the remainder of the game), Baker would have got the “W.” Manager Ron Gardenhire was giving his Opening Day starting pitcher a chance to get the win. Once Baker blew that chance, he was pulled.

If you pay attention, you will see similar decisions made by Gardenhire the rest of this year. There is no question that he would have rather had Crain facing Matsui in that situation. He’ll even manage differently late in the season when there is no room for error. We’ve seen as much the last two Septembers.

However, most managers feel that leaving Baker in to face that last batter has long-term positive effects that offset the short-term risk of an unfavorable matchup. For instance, it gives Baker an opportunity to stretch his skills a bit. But mostly, it shows Baker that Gardenhire is on his side.

Because imaginary statistics like wins and saves motivate ballplayers. Just like hitters want to claim they hit 20 home runs or hit .300 last year, pitchers want to be known as a 15-game winner or a guy who saved 30 games. There are plenty of reasons why: personal, communal, and financial. And for a manager of any team, let alone a team of kids pulling down a minimum of $400,000/year, having a motivational tool is really valuable.

It’s about this time that someone out there is saying that those ballplayers should have all the motivation they need because of the money and fame that goes with the position. After all, don’t we all work as hard as we can each and every day in the office?

The difference is that for most of us, our job doesn’t stretch out abilities to their absolute limit. Baseball players’ jobs do. You’re talking about a game played by millions and millions of people all over the world. And from that set, the top 350 who can throw really well compete daily against the top 350 that can hit really well. It’s different that way than most other jobs.

Let’s compare it to a job I’m personally familiar with and which is often used as a straw dog in these sort of arguments: a teacher. I was a good math teacher, but let’s say I could REALLY teach and even be one of the top 350 teachers in the world. In a normal teaching job, I look brilliant, the same way that these guys did in high school or college ball.

But I’ve gradually been given tougher and tougher assignment, and now on a daily basis, I face one of the top 350 toughest teaching assignments in the world. So I’m in a under funded school in a ghetto, teaching Algebra II to underprivileged or at-risk kids with enormously overfilled classrooms. What does my day look like?

I need to be prepared long before I get into the classroom. I need to handle distractions outside my work. I need to show up early, stay late, make calls to parents and take care of myself. And when I’m in those classrooms, I need to be fully engaged and on my game – taking risks, teaching in different ways, reaching kids who don’t trust anyone’s reach. Sometimes, when I have a good day or a bad day, I don’t even know why, so I adopt silly superstitions. That’s how stretched I am – beyond any sort of reason.

Even if I was paid really well, even if I loved my work, the chances of me slipping are high. Any motivation I find, no matter how silly it might be, that drives me to stretch a little further is welcome.

And it’s especially welcomed by my boss, who is judged by my results.

This is how wins and saves have become a management tool in today’s game. It was silly and counterproductive to leave Baker in to face Matsui on Monday if a team must win that game. But the team didn’t need to win that game. It does need a dedicated and motivated starting pitching staff, all of whom want those imaginary stats, and all of whom are watching to see if the manager is willing to stick his neck out to get them some.

Wins and saves are sloppy statistics that are questionable for player evaluation. But for managers looking for motivational techniques, they serve a deeper purpose. And that’s how flawed imaginary statistics can impact a real season - positively.

---

Think the teaching analogy was a bit of a stretch? Let me hear about it in the comments below. Or, better yet...

Let me hear about it in person while we dissect Baker's next start. That will be Saturday, and we'll be watching at the Twins Viewing Party at Major's in Blaine starting at 12:00 along with Sooz, the TwinsCentric guys and host of other writers. We'll also be sipping $2 pints, wolfing down two-for-one appetizers, raffling off goodies (including two row 6 Twins tickets) and watching the Twins dominate the hated White Sox. Last months we had 60+ people show up, so get there by 11:30 if you want a good seat.

---

- Wondering who is in AAA that might help the Twins this year? Check out Seth's Rochester Red Wings preview.

- If someone wants to teach me how to waltz, I'm game.

- Want to know why Baker struggled Monday? Parker points out that Baker lost confidence in his off-speed pitches and relied purely on his fastball towards the end of the game.

Twins Tickets Available for Opening Day/Series

It looks like the Twins have released some tickets for Opening Day. From a press release...

Twins Announce Ticket Updates for the Inaugural Season at Target Field

Twins season ticket cap opens single-game inventory for high demand games – Good News for Twins Fans

MINNEAPOLIS-ST. PAUL, Minn. – The Minnesota Twins today announced ticketing updates for the Inaugural Season at Target Field. Due to the capping of season ticket sales at 24,500 tickets, inventory has been released for single game purchase for several games, including games of the opening home stand at Target Field.

As of now, tickets have become available for the following games during the Twins Inaugural Home stand at Target Field:

· Monday, April 12 vs. Boston Red Sox at 3:10 p.m. - 500 tickets

· Wednesday, April 14 vs. Boston Red Sox at 12:10 p.m. – 1,000 tickets

· Thursday, April 15 vs. Boston Red Sox at 12:10 p.m. – 1,100 tickets

· Friday, April 16 vs. Kansas City Royals at 7:10 p.m. – 1,900 tickets

· Saturday, April 17 vs. Kansas City Royals at 12:10 p.m. – 1,600 tickets

· Sunday, April 18 vs. Kansas City Royals at 1:10 p.m. – 1,500 tickets

· Tuesday, April 20 vs. Cleveland Indians at 7:10 p.m. – 3,000 tickets

· Wednesday, April 21 vs. Cleveland Indians at 7:10 p.m. – 3,000 tickets

· Thursday, April 22 vs. Cleveland Indians at 12:10 p.m. – 3,000 tickets

To date, the Twins have sold more than 2.6 million tickets for the 2010 season. In comparison, the Twins sold 2.4 million tickets during the entire 2009 season.

“Capping season tickets at 24,500 has allowed us to open up some inventory for single-game ticket sales,” said Paul Froehle, senior director of ticket operations for the Twins. “In addition, visiting clubs have returned some inventory they won’t be using. Fans are encouraged to check back often as seats may have opened up for some very desirable games.”

Limited season ticket inventory remains in the Champions Club and Delta SKY360 Legends Club.

Single-game tickets for the Inaugural Season at Target Field are available at www.twinsbaseball.com, by calling 612-33-TWINS or 800-33-TWINS, at the Target Field box office and at Twins Pro Shop locations in Apple Valley, Minnetonka and Roseville.

A Sigh of Relief

For several weeks I've maintained that the Twins likely do need to trade for a reliever, or do something drastic like move Francisco Liriano to that role, because thi in-house candidates have good enough "stuff" to handle the jib themselves. But what I haven't done is check out their strikeout rates. Let's remedy that.

K/9 is a pretty good back-of-the-napkin measurement of dominance. As a benchmark, a 6 is average and a 9 is great. Joe Nathan, for instance, had a k/9 rate last year of 11.7. Here are the rest of the guys.

Matt Guerrier - 5.5
Jesse Crain - 7.5
Jose Mijares - 8.0
Jon Rauch - 8.0 (with Twins)
Pat Neshek - 9.5 (back in 2007)

And the new guy, Alex Burnett? Well, it was only AA, but he posted an 8.5.

These aren't great, but they're good enough. The Twins will fond someone who can do the job.



-- Posted From My iPhone

Twins Feast

I’m not going to lie – it’s been a dark couple of months. Back in late-January, while speaking with new Target Field Executive Chef Pastor Jiminez, he told me the awful truth about Target Field's new Murray’s Steak Sandwich. I recalled it in this blog post the next day....

Speaking of bad driving, we talked with the folks at the Target Field display about their food options. It started as a very pleasant conversation. I'm excited about the options there, and they were receptive to our lobbying for Surly to be included in the available beers. Of course, we also pointedly argued that they couldn't claim to have Minnesota food fare and not have anything with Spam.

OK, we likely didn't help our credibility much with that last point.

But the really disappointing part of that conversation was the revelation that the Murray's Steak Sandwiches that are going to be served at Target Field are not the same as the ones they currently serve in the bar at Murray's. They're coming up with something new, instead. In fact, they haven't even determined what it is going to be.

(These sandwiches, as you know, if you know me, are ambrosia. Char-grilled, oh-so-tender, pink-fibered ambrosia, cut into tiny chunks and covered with cheese and bacon. I would walk over hot coals for that thing. They only serve it at lunch and they only serve it in the bar. There. Now you have lunch plans today.)

Worse, once they create this new...this new... I'm going to go with "monstrosity"..., they're going to replace the sandwich they currently have with it. It's the worst possible situation.

And later in the post….

Please, gawd, don't let them shave the steak for those sandwiches. It HAS to be bite-sized chunks of beef. If they try to create a Philly Cheesesteak, which they will inevitably butcher, and ALSO screw up my steak sandwich, I'm going to be inconsolable.

And then…

If you want to sell something from Murray's, how about the garlic toast they have in the bar? Offer me a sleeve of those things for $5 and the popcorn guy will go out of business.

And I finished it with….

It's hopeless, isn't it? It's going to go the way of my lamb sirloin with that tasty dipping sauce they had at Palomino in the 90's. I hate change.

And thus began the self-pity spiral, and I’m not going to apologize for it. One of the top five foodstuffs in this world was going away, never to be heard from again, and I was powerless to stop it.

Well, somewhere, someone heard my plea. Actually, I can pretty much tell you who at least one of those someones was – Matt Hansen at the forward-thinking firm Beehive PR, who was kind enough to invite me and a few other bloggers to Twins Feast yesterday.

(No, “Twins Feast” wasn’t the official name. It was dubbed such by an exceedingly jealous and gratifyingly bitter Voice of Reason. Giggle.)

Tell me that THIS doesn’t sound like heaven: you get invited into Target Field, ushered around from booth to booth by an assortment of chefs, and handed free food while you interview and take photos. Doesn’t that sound nice?

Well, it IS nice. And I tweeted the whole thing. Since some of you folks might want to gnosh a little at the two exhibition games this weekend, I thought I’d give you a few impressions:

Hrbek's

The afternoon started at Hrbek's, the bar on the first level pretty much directly behind home plate. And there we learned that I'm a pretty terrible photographer, because that food on the left is much, much better than it looks in thie picture. The onion ring is the size of a baseball, and the T-Rex burger is stuffed with cheese and carmelized onions and anything else that looks good in a burger. Plus, they had some ice cream sundae things that go on a cookie that were instantly nominated as "Food Most Likely to Put John Into a Diabetic Shock."

Which is a shame, because I'm almost sure I'm not going to spend much time in Hrbek's, despite liking it very much. We'll get to why later.

Oh, and I'll apologize in advance - I didn't have the Vincent Burger. Sorry. I have no excuse. It was just bad driving. I'll remedy that on Opening Day.

Kramarczuk's Sausages

It's nice to have Kramarczuk's in Target Field just so I can eventually master the spelling and pronunciation of their name. I still remember that warm glow I felt the first time I didn't need to look up "Pierzynski" and the chest bump after mastering "Mientkiewicz." I felt a little robbed last year when the Grundzielanek experiment ended a little early. It's nice to have a new mountain to climb.

And it looks like I'm going to need to learn it because I'm going to be talking about these sausages. Somewhere during my time at the Metrodome I switched from being a bratwurst guy to a hot dog guy. That's going to change. The bratwurst I had was outstanding, and the polish sausage that followed it was even better. Plus, I'm going to want to hang out around that stand just for the smells. I might consider moving my seats. It's that good.

My only concern about these is how long the line will be. I expect it will be Chipotle-in-the-mid-90s kinda long.

Schwiegert Hot Dogs

Another reason that I'm pretty sure I'm going to end up eating so many Kramarczuks' sausages is because I have some concerns about the hot dog situation. Twice I've been at Target Field, and twice the only dogs I've found are the $5.25 "Big Dogs," which is the new equivalent of the Dome Dogs. I was never a dome dog guy - they're expensive, they're too big, and I don't want the chips. And I feel the same way about the Big Dogs, except that they also have a bun that's too bready.

According to the North Delaware representative, they are selling original dogs in the park all over the place. They would be the equivalent of the dollar dogs they had at the Metrodome, and they're supposed to be the same recipe they had at The Met. And they absolutely have both yellow and brown mustard. No sign of sauerkraut, which is obviously a concern, but I'm going to assume they have that covered.

Tony O's Cuban Sandwiches Stand

Yep, that's Tony Oliva, who together with top Twins and Deleware North brass introduced his Cuban Sandwich stand. There's going to be a lot of competition for the food dollar in Target Field, but I think these are going to stand out. It's comfort food. It looked like ham, pork, swiss cheese, thinly sliced pickle and mustard inside a flaky role. If you like grilled cheese or pot roast sandwiches, I think you're going to like this plenty.

Asian Noodles

I'm embarassed to say I don't know the name of the stand that served us Asian Noodles, but it was just to the left of Hrbek's yesterday. That's not generally considered ballpark food, but I found it to be a nice option. In particular, I was impressed that they weren't afraid to make it a little spicy. I won't be surprised if I find myself back there soon. Keep it in the back of your mind.

Ribs, Chili and State Fair Fare

I absolutely love ribs, so even though I was getting full I was pretty excited to go after a few of them from the State Fair booth out in left field. Unfortunately, they were simply, um, fair. Maybe they would have been better received if I had them earlier in the day. My impression of them, along with the chili and the walleye-on-a-stick, was that none of them were going to rise to the top of my list at the park.

Townball Tavern

One thing that WILL be at the top of my list is the bar on the second level down the third base line: the Townball Tavern. The featured item on the tour was the non-alchoholic feature on the left: a two-person root beer float made with Killebrew Root Beer, ice cream, whipped cream and a root beer cookie stick. It is enormous. Possibly the greatest shared dessert date item ever.

But the reason I'm likely going to spend my time here instead of Hrbek's is because of the balcony. Out the back of the tavern is a small shady balcony with a half a dozen tables on it that just beg for hours of lounging before or after a game. It's such a great feature that it makes me almost angry that it isn't everywhere, stretched across the entire south and east sides of the stadium. I can hardly wait to take advantage of it.

And what will I be drinking at the Tavern? For the most part, Target Field looks to be a Budweiser ballpark, or at least that's the domestic mass-produced beer that is most prevalent. Summit is also on tap, listed as a premium beer, which means it costs $7.50. I'm almost sure I saw Grain Belt Premium that last time I was there. I've heard Surly is available in cans somewhere, but I didn't find it. I'll do a more exhaustive survey on Opening Day.

The Murray's Steak Sandwich

And so finally, we get to the main event.

I'm relieved - very, very, VERY relieved - to say they mostly got it right. The key is the bite size steak chunks. This isn't a shaved steak sandwich, and the chunks were really tender, meaining it wasn't a chore to chew. It's covered with provolone cheese and served on ciabatta bread which holds up nicely. Unlike the old version, there isn't any bacon, but I was almost giddy to find that each one is served with an authentic piece of Murray's Garlic Toast, just like they have in the bar.

It runs $10.50, which is a lot for ballpark food but about the same price I've paid for it in the bar. If they can continue to make sure the steak bites are tender, it's going to become a staple. If not, I'll need to get the original one at Murray's before the game. Either way, it sounds like there are going to be plenty of options.

Ramos and $23 Million

The most hotly debated roster spot in Twins camp was resolved yesterday when we found out that catcher Wilson Ramos will be sent to AAA-Rochester to start the season, which awards Drew Butera the role of backup catcher. It was a hot topic because the better player will not be on the Twins roster.

Ramos is only 22 years old, relatively strong defensively, and hit the cover off the ball this spring, showing the power that makes him a top prospect. Butera, who is four years older, showed he was strong defensively but hit the way you would expect a career .214 batting average minor leaguer might hit. And to be honest, he wasn’t even that good.

However, Ramos isn’t on the roster for two reasons. The more cynical reason is service time. When Ramos is on the 25-man roster he starts earning service time, and that tenure eventually raises his salary and leads to free agency. That’s hard to justify for a top player when he’s only playing a couple times per week. The second reason is playing time. As a top prospect, it would probably serve Ramos better to play full time in AA or AAA than only a couple of times per week in the majors.

On the other hand, you have the impact Ramos could have in the majors. He would probably get about six starts per month so long as Joe Mauer stays healthy. He would also give manager Ron Gardenhire a right-handed bench option with some power beyond Brendan Harris.

For me, at least, it’s an easy decision. Ramos has only 54 games at AA. He likely needs more time in the minors, no matter how well he hit this spring. The short-term pain is worth the long-term gain and he should be sent down.

(And just for clarity, it’s worth noting that this future star slugger currently has just 31 home runs in his entire four-year minor league career. His career OPS in the minors? 790. His career slugging percentage? .447. He’s been young for his competition, and he had a monster winter and monster spring, but let’s be a little careful about the expectations we heap on this kid just yet.)

All the Ramos hype and excitement took me someplace I didn’t want to go. But I’m helpless. I’m a Twins fan, I’m a geek, it’s kind of sad, really….

If the Twins have a catcher who is so close to being an impact player at the major league level (and who cost just $400,000 per year), should they have given such an expensive contract to Mauer? Because while it’s nice to talk about how the Twins aren’t a small market team or how this is such a good signing for baseball, the reality is that the Twins could have spent $23 million per year in a lot of ways.

Mauer’s contract doesn’t begin until next year, and we don’t know exactly how much free agents will cost then, but you can get a pretty good idea by looking at what was available this year.

You can start with the most highly sought (and paid) free agent on the market, Matt Holliday, who hit .313 with 24 HR and 109 RBI in 2009. He could replace Delmon Young in left field. Since Holliday only costs $17 million this year, the Twins could add a third baseman, like Placido Polanco ($6M). So you have Holliday, Polanco and Ramos in the lineup instead of Mauer, Delmon and Punto. Would you make that trade?

Or maybe you would like some insurance in case Ramos struggles. Well, you could bring in Ivan Rodriguez, who signed for $3 million per year, to mentor Ramos. Then you could bring in Jason Bay (.267, 36 HR, 119 RBI) for $15M to play left field, add Mark DeRosa to play third base ($6M). (That totals $24 million, but you can save a few million by getting rid of Young.) So Pudge, Bay, DeRosa and Ramos - or Mauer.

You want a closer instead? There weren’t any who signed for more than $7 million per year, so go ahead and sign three of them. Another starting pitcher? Other than John Lackey and Andy Pettitte, you could get any of them for $10 million apiece. Take two and grab Pudge to fill out the battery. Or mix and match. If you want to see all the salaries, check out ESPN’s free agent tracker.

Between this post, some of my KFAN appearances and my post a few weeks ago, I’m sure I’m going to be labeled as someone who hates Joe Mauer. Nothing could be further from the truth, as I remain convinced we’ll see him joust with the .400 barrier some August before this contract is over. I don’t even hate the contract. But I don’t love it, and I find the juxtaposition between the excitement about Ramos and the necessity to sign Mauer fascinating.

Remember back when supporting a new ballpark meant that you hated kids? Well, now you have your chance to love both. If you’re looking for some cool Target Field Collectibles and like supporting Make-A-Wish Foundation of Minnesota, check out this commemorative baseball or this commemorative plaque. You can find more details about it here.

Speaking of Target Field, Dean Carlson provides a nice tribute to Shane Nackerud of Greet Machine. Back in the day, Shane was my go-to guy on all stadium news and we put together a fun board game in GameDay that illustrated the road the bill needed to take. He really was instrumental in publicly tracking legislators stands on the stadium.

Target Field Collectible and Make-a-Wish

Bob Ibach, a friend of mine who raises money for Make-a-Wish, forwarded this along to those of you that might be interested. I gotta say - the plaque sounds pretty cool. I've gone out an located the items on the site listed below. You can buy the ball here and the plaque here .

Oh, and check back later tonight for my first post following a week long vacation.

--------------------------

For Immediate Release
Contacts: Bob Ibach (847-922-6686 or 941-312-4588)
Make-A-Wish Foundation of Minnesota: Jean Carlson (612-767-2764)

Only 5,000 Inaugural Season Baseballs to Be Produced

First Game at Twins New Ballpark
Signals New Era of Outdoor Baseball in Minnesota
Make-A-Wish Foundation® of Minnesota Will Also Benefit

Minneapolis – Finally a ballpark to call their very own.

When the Twins christen Target Field on Monday, April 12, against the visiting Boston Red Sox, it will mark the first time that the home team will be playing in a facility built ONLY for them. The Twins first home years ago, Metropolitan Stadium, was originally a minor league ballpark and the Hubert H. Humphrey Metrodome the past 28 seasons also served as a football stadium.

This is the sixth ballpark in franchise history since its start as the Washington Senators and the 39,504 seat open-air ballpark in the Warehouse District north of downtown Minneapolis between 5th and 7th Streets promises to be one of the best parks in all of baseball. The park was built by the same group that constructed Oriole Park at Camden Yards, PNC Park in Pittsburgh and AT&T Park in San Francisco—all considered among the elite sites in major league baseball.

To celebrate this great moment in Minnesota sports history, and to also raise awareness and money for the Make-A-Wish Foundation® of Minnesota, which grants wishes to children with life-threatening medical conditions, Nikco Sports announced a program that will allow Twins fans to own a unique piece of history.

A limited edition baseball featuring a stunning color photo of the new Target Field on one of the panels, and important historic information printed on the other panels, along with the official Inaugural Season logo is being produced to commemorate the first game at the new ballpark on April 12. Only 5,000 baseballs will be made, priced at $39.95, and each comes with a handsome acrylic display case. From each sale, $4 will go to the Make-A-Wish Foundation of Minnesota.

In addition, a limited edition framed photo plaque that features a picture of the new Target Field, along with a special inset photo of Twins All-Star catcher and fan favorite Joe Mauer and a piece of actual dirt from the ballpark’s new infield will also be made available to fans. Only 2,010 double matted photos will be produced, and each comes with an engraved nameplate. It is priced at $89.95. Fans can order either commemorative at 1-800-345-2868 or by visiting www.nikcosports.com.

In recent years, Nikco Sports has raised more than $1.7 million for children’s charities, including several projects in Minnesota.

One panel on the Inaugural Season Target Field baseball will feature a colorful panoramic shot of the new facility that captures the essence of the outdoor playing field. The official Inaugural Season stadium logo is positioned on another panel. A third panel lists the championship history of the franchise, including the three World Series titles won in 1991, 1987 and 1924 when the team was in Washington. It also lists the six American League pennants (1991, 1987, 1965, 1933, 1925 and 1924) along with Central Division/Western Division crowns.

A separate panel contains information on the new ballpark, including capacity, (39,504), the date of groundbreaking (2007), the April 12 first game date against Boston, and the field dimensions to left, center and right.

The framed and double matted photo plaque measures 15 x 17 inches and will feature a colorful stadium shot in the center. Along the bottom left of the presentation is an action shot of Joe Mauer and to the right is an engraved nameplate and a small capsule of dirt that is authenticated and taken from the Target Field infield under MLB supervision.

“Twins fans have eagerly waited for this historic ballpark opening for quite some time, and this is something every Twins fan will want to celebrate and remember,” noted Nikco Sports CEO and president Craig Bidner. We hope this will be a moment for Twins fans to remember for years to come, and also advance the funds for the Make-A-Wish Foundation® of Minnesota as they continue to help youngsters who have life-threatening medical conditions.”

Many of Nikco Sports’ projects have honored amateur and professional teams (Super Bowl, World Series, NBA, NHL, NASCAR and NCAA) and have recognized some of the greatest athletes such as (baseball) Ozzie Smith, Kirby Puckett, Ryne Sandberg, Randy Johnson, Ichiro, Paul Molitor, Pedro Martinez, Greg Maddux, Cal Ripken, Jr., Jim Thome, Adam Dunne, Nolan Ryan, Ken Griffey, Jr. and Edgar Martinez; (football) Peyton Manning, John Elway, Dan Marino, Troy Aikman, Jim Kelly, Jerome Bettis, Ben Roethlisberger, Carson Palmer, Steve Young, Brett Favre, Emmitt Smith and Kurt Warner; (basketball) Magic Johnson, LeBron James, John Stockton, David Robinson, Michael Jordan and Isiah Thomas; (motor sports) Jeff Gordon, Tony Stewart, Dale Earnhardt and Dale Earnhardt, Jr.; (hockey) Brett Hull; (golf) Tiger Woods.

About the Make-A-Wish Foundation
The Make-A-Wish Foundation® grants wishes to children with life-threatening medical conditions to enrich the human experience with hope, strength and joy. First started in 1980 when a group of caring individuals helped a young boy fulfill his dream of becoming a police officer, the Foundation is now the largest wish-granting charity in the world, with 65 chapters in the U.S. and its territories. With the help of generous donors and nearly 25,000 volunteers, the Make-A-Wish Foundation grants more than 12,600 wishes a year and has granted more than 168,000 wishes in the U.S. since inception.

The 7th Bullpen Spot

I can't make it to spring training this year, which is KILLING me. Instead I'm left taking a look at box scores, occasionally listening to games and reviewing rosters to try and figure out what it going on from 1718 miles away.

I'm missing some drama this year. The 7th bullpen spot had become interesting in sort of a car crash kind of way. The top six spots seem to be pretty well taken....

RH Middle Relievers - Matt Guerrier, Jesse Crain, Jon Rauch and Pat Neshek
LH Middle Reliever - Jose Mijares
Mop Up Guy - Clay Condrey

Condrey has had a miserable spring, giving up another three hits in an inning yesterday, which is a cause for concern. The fact that he's out of options virtually guarantees him a roster spot, especially because there don't seem to be any candidates to replace him. In fact, there don't even seem to be any candidates to JOIN him, let alone replace him, which brings us back to that seventh spot.

I think the top guy on the wish list was Brian Duensing, mostly because he was left-handed, but partly because he really should be rewarded for being one of the best starting pitchers over the last couple months last year. But he's given up 12 hits in seven innings, including four more in three innings on Sunday. If he's healthy, he'll probably get another chance tomorrow, but there aren't a lot of chances left.

Glen Perkins is also left-handed, and was also in camp to supposedly compete for a spot. But his ERA is 9.00 and that's because he's given up 14 hits in seven innings. And now he's hurt with a back strain from working out. That's funny because I think I just read that an important deadline just passed. The reason the Twins sent Danny Valencia out of camp this weekend was because any player on the 40-man roster who is injured in Spring Training and still injured on Opening Day must be put on the DL.

Perkins is on the 40-man roster too. And if he goes on the DL, he gains service time. Coincidentally, Perkins missed being arbitration eligible (and thus probably an extra million dollars in salary) by about three days of service time last year, and was pissed enough about it to file a case against the Twins. And now he has a back injury that could be worth a dozen or so days of service time. Huh. Isn't that a happy little coincidence?

There are a bunch of other former right-handed starters that could have taken this place too, like Anthony Swarzak and Jeff Manship, but they also have had terrible springs. Which brings us to the final candidates:

The one everyone is talking about it Anthony Slama, because we've followed him so long. It doesn't hurt that he has put up such filthy numbers in the lower levels of the minors and has struck out nine guys in five innings this spring. But he's right-handed, and hasn't seen much in the way of major league batters yet.

The guy that nobody seems to be talking about is Mike Maroth, who is left-handed, a veteran, and has a 3.38 ERA this spring. Of course, he's also trying to restart a major league career and has struck out just on guy the entire spring. But he did precede Slama in yesterday's game and get through a scoreless inning. Maroth and Slama look like the two top candidates to me.

(Ron Mahay, the left-handed reliever who the Twins signed yesterday, is not. But he might be ready by the end of April as an insurance policy.)

The name that won't go away is Francisco Liriano, who has been silly good this spring, striking out 16 and walking just one in 10 innings pitched. It sounds like manager Ron Gardenhire keeps bringing up his name as a closer option and I wonder if we aren't seen a little stand-off between him and GM Bill Smith.

Gardenhire wants a closer, and wants Smith to get him one. The talk about Liriano closing might be nothing more than a vague threat in case Gardy doesn't get his way. He may not get to choose exactly who is on his 25-man roster, but he sure as hell gets to decide what to do with them when they're there. And if he needs to lose an ace starter to prove his point about wanting a closer, he just might be that crazy....

I don't think he is that crazy, and I think he has plenty of other options. Liriano will stay in the rotation even though Bill Smith stands pat. Duensing will get the last spot if he finds himself on Friday or next Wednesday. In the meantime, Slama and Maroth will be pitted in a competition to take the spot if Duensing can't pull it together.

Or at least that's how things look from 1718 miles away.

Catchers and MVPs

I've just been doing a little research on historically great catchers, and I've got to tell you, I'm a little blown away by what I'm finding. We sort of generally refer to Joe Mauer as having a chance to be one of the best catchers ever. And he could be, but there are sure some remarkable catchers in baseball history.

Take MVP awards for instance, which is an area where Mauer should already compare favorably. After all, he's only 26 and has already won once and finished in the top six in voting three times. But look at the top seven guys that Bill James identifies as the best major league catchers in his Historical Baseball Abstract:

• Bill Dickey, who played for the Babe Ruth/Lou Gehrig Yankees (and batted in the middle of that lineup) never won an MVP but finished in the top ten five times. And he finished in the top 20 ten times.
• Carleton Fisk (Red Sox in 70s, White Sox in 80s) also never won but finished in the top 4 four times.
• Mike Piazza never won, but finished in the top ten seven times. And finished 13th and 14th two other times.

Those guys are good, but now we get to the heavy hitters:

• Mickey Cochrane, who led the Athletics to two World Series titles and then led Detroit to their first championship ever (as a player/manager in 1935) won two MVPs. He also finished 4th, 7th, 9th, 10th, 14th and 18th in other years.
• The Brooklyn Dodgers Roy Campanella only played for ten years due to the color barrier and an auto accident that left him paralyzed. But during those ten years he won three MVPs and got votes three other times.
• Johnny Bench of the 70s Big Red Machine won two MVP awards before he was 25 years old. In all he received votes during ten seasons.
• And not only did Yogi Berra win three MVP awards, but for eight straight years he never finished lower than fourth. He received votes in fifteen consecutive years. His Yankees teams of the late 40s and 50s also appeared in 14 World Series, and he won ten of them.
  

So keep at it Joe. There's still plenty of mountains to climb.

Joe's Contract & the Twins' Future

The Twins announced on Sunday that they had reached an agreement with Joe Mauer on an eight-year extension for $184 million, which Joe Christensen is reporting will be paid at $23 million per year. We'll get more details at 6:00 on Monday when a press conference is scheduled, but let’s tackle some questions that are popping up from Twins fans.

Woo-HOO!

Well, that’s more of an exclamation than a question, but I totally concur. Woo-hoo indeed.

One of the things that baseball analysts struggle with is what a truly elite player is worth. Can you make up for their value with other, cheaper combinations of players and still be a championship-caliber team? I don’t know the answer, and I don’t care. Here’s what I care about: watching an elite player, maybe even historically elite, for the next nine years. Again, woo-hoo!

Why nine years? I thought it was an eight-year contract?

It’s an eight-year contract extension, not an eight-year contract. Mauer had a contract through this year and the contract extension was announced to go through the 2018 season, at which point Mauer will be 35 years old.

So we have him locked up for nine years?

Maybe, maybe not. We’ll hopefully find out tomorrow if there is an opt-out clause for Mauer at some point during the contract. That’s happened in some recent contracts, like last year’s deal for C.C. Sabathia. Sabathia can opt out of his seven-year deal with the Yankees next year, when it’s only three years old.

This kind of a clause is usually justified as protection for the player if salaries skyrocket. If Mauer and his agent think they already gave a hometown discount, they might regard that as important protection. Plus, with Mauer only being 26 years old, an opt-out clause after four years might allow him to be on the market when he’s 30, which is young enough to justify another longer deal. Like I said, hopefully this will be answered in tomorrow’s press conference.

Did Mauer give a hometown discount?

If so, it doesn’t appear to be a very big one, just like his last two deals with the Twins. The biggest recent contract for a hitter came a year ago, when first baseman Mark Teixeira signed an eight-year deal with the Yankees that paid him an average of $22.5 million per year. Mauer’s deal is just a little richer than that. One could argue that if he became a free agent, Mauer would have exceeded that contract since he’s both younger and a catcher. On the other hand, Teixera has averaged 35 HR and 114 RBI over his seven-year career, numbers Mauer has never
reached in any season.

Would a bidding war between the Yankees, Red Sox or Mets have driven up the number higher than that? Maybe. Of course, Mauer would have had to wait another year, staying healthy and putting up huge numbers again to find out. Instead, he’s guaranteed the money either way now.

What if he gets hurt or can’t stay at catcher?

The money is guaranteed, so he’ll get it one way or the other. The Twins could take out insurance on it to help protect themselves, but that insurance costs money too, so it likely won’t be for the full amount. And if Mauer can play at a position other than catcher, the insurance wouldn’t help.

A lot of the money Mauer is attached to him playing catcher. This offseason, the next biggest contract was signed by Matt Holliday, who returned to the St. Louis Cardinals. He signed a (much criticized) seven-year, $120 million deal, which averages out to about $17 million per year.

Holliday puts up about 25-30 homer runs per year and has a career batting average of .318. Mauer showed similar power last year and has a career batting average of .327. Holliday isn’t quite the hitter that Mauer is, but he’s close. However, as a left-fielder, Holliday is making about $6 million less per year.

So if Mauer needs to move out from behind the dish, but he still continues to hit, the Twins will be stuck paying about $4-5 million too much for him every year. That’s not terrible, provided he’s still producing offensively.

Does this mean the Twins won’t have any money to spend on other players this year?

Again, Mauer had a contract through this year for $12.5 million and it sounds like that stays intact, so this deal probably doesn’t affect this year’s money much. If there was a signing bonus, then it would affect this year’s money. However, the last deal Mauer signed did not have a signing bonus, and it’s pretty unlikely he needs the money right away.

This could be significant, because the Twins also announced yesterday that Joe Nathan will undergo Tommy John surgery as soon as he can. It was reported last week that over half of Nathan’s salary this year could be insured, meaning the Twins might have $6 million to spend that they didn’t think they would have. That could come in handy when looking for a closer or at the trade deadline.

Is any of the $184 million deferred, like Sid Hartman suggested?

We don’t know. Initial indications are that it’s not. I’ll say this – if Mauer wants to make sure he’s paid market rate AND make the Twins as competitive as he can over the next eight years, it would makes sense for him to demand that a big chunk of that money be deferred.

If you’ll indulge me in some over-the-top speculation, what if Mauer asked that $10 million of each year’s salary be deferred? The Twins would have $10 million more to spend on their team those years. Mauer gets his money, but he also benefits from playing on a team with an artificially higher payroll.

Of course, the fiscally conservative Twins might not be crazy about penalizing the 2020 team to subsidize the 2012 team. And they could be really worried that other stars like Justin Morneau would see this as a viable alternative for their own future negotiations. Again, I hope we’ll find out more about this on Monday.

Is $23 million per year too much? Will it cripple the Twins?

The one question I never heard anyone answer throughout this contract negotiation was “How much is too much?” I’d like to be critical of that, but I don’t have an answer either.

So let’s see what this is going to do to payroll for the Twins the next couple of years, assuming that the breakdown is $23 million per year as Joe Christensen reported. So on the right are some back-of-the-napkin figures for 2011….

That’s tight. The Twins would have a payroll of about $94 million with spots to fill in their rotation, at second base, and in their bullpen. Payroll next year would probably be close to $100 million, so that leaves about $6 million to spend. They would need to fill most spots with youngsters and possibly spend on one lower-tier free agent. (Or, sigh, Nick Punto.)

I’d like to show you 2012, but things get really fuzzy by then. Jason Kubel, Michael Cuddyer and JJ Hardy could all be free agents. Francisco Liriano and Delmon Young could either be very expensive or gone. Nathan’s salary comes off the books. I compute a payroll of just $58 million or so, but we also have a tremendous number of open positions. The bottom line is that it’s just too far away to do any realistic analysis on it.

What’s clear is that the Twins will need to rely on their farm system to provide help to cover contracts like this. Fortunately, that’s not just an economic reality; it’s a philosophical tenet of the organization. It’s what the organization has believed and done for the last ten years.

So no, I don’t think it cripples the Twins. But it does likely mean that spending on free agents in the next decade could look an awful lot like it did last decade. This was a great offseason for the Twins and their fans. I hope you are enjoying it, because we likely won’t see another like it for another nine years.

(Image courtesy of Keith Allison)

Rewriting History

A Review of The End of Baseball by Peter Schilling Jr.

By Chrissie Bonnes

(Editor's note: This was originally run a couple of years ago when Peter's book came out in hardback. I'm rerunning it because this week the book is being re-released in paperback. It deserves every sale it gets, and Twins Geek's readers deserve to know about it.)

I’m a rabid baseball fan only when one of my two favorite teams is playing, so I wondered if I was the best candidate to review Peter Schilling, Jr.’s historical baseball novel The End of Baseball. Luckily, Mr. Schilling worked himself into a hitter’s count by basing most of the action in the hometown of one of my two favorite teams, Philadelphia. He then proceeded to hit one out of the park.

The premise, according to the author, is based in fact. Bill Veeck, freshly wounded in World War II, had the brainstorm of buying a big league team and, to turn a profit, integrating baseball all at once rather than one player at a time. Schilling has Veeck take that action, buying the Philadelphia A’s and fielding a team composed solely of the best players from the Negro Leagues.

The fact that I am not the target market for this novel became clear early on during an action-movie-esque chapter describing a scouting expedition to a less than democratic island nation. Though it may be too early to discuss movie rights, it seems the role of the scout was written for Harrison Ford at his Indiana Jones best. Though the scout was slightly less dashing than Harrison Ford, it’ll be a few years before the movie version comes out, and Han Solo isn’t getting any younger.

My early reservations about plowing through a baseball book written by a man for male readers were quickly set aside. The detail paid to each character, making each unique, and making many both hero and villain, will mesmerize any reader. So often, an author is unable to separate his own voice from that of his characters’, resulting in a homogenous cast, providing pleasant enough company on the ride and trading clever barbs. Here, each character has a unique voice, his own character traits, and his own view of every situation.

For instance, we see a player walk the streets of Detroit with a cousin who witnessed the city’s race riots. As the events that shaped the player’s past and contributed to his determination become clear, he becomes so much more than one of the pitchers in the A’s rotation. This player has his own “Invincible” moment, when he “ran into himself,” in the form of a stickball game, Detroit versus Philadelphia. As if it wasn’t already obvious, the reader sees that the player knows this is bigger than him. And though this novel is not at all bogged down by stats, their importance to some players is vividly depicted: “His brain housed a twenty-story accounting firm of little Satchels, all of whom scribbled ledger after ledger of his statistics, feats, and – tucked in a black folder and filed away – his mistakes.”

Not that clever one-liners are absent. The sometimes tense, sometimes deathly serious moments are balanced by genuine humor. On baseball’s first ever Fan Appreciation Night, one of the A’s faithful is about to become the lucky recipient of myriad prizes bestowed upon him by a pair of bathing beauties. “There were cases of Ballantine Ale and Moxie soda pop, six giant cans of Hershey’s chocolate syrup, a box of Phillies blunt cigars, five robust hams, a midget bearing a gift certificate for forty gallons of gas, an Underwood typewriter...and, topping this all off, pushed in a wheelbarrow by a circus strongman, a pile of five hundred silver dollars, which rolled up between the leggy women.” Despite the eye-popping array of luxuries and beauty, all the fan can think is “…look at all that ham.”

But don’t worry; this is far from chick lit. The action keeps coming, and Schilling throws plenty of curves. Some twists in plot are subtly foreshadowed. Some, like the barstool that inexplicably appears in a street brawl, come out of left field (if you’ll pardon one more baseball pun). Some are introduced quickly and are either resolved just as quickly, or become a recurring theme. Some seem almost like an aside, or a cameo, emerging later as integral to the plot. Some are nothing more than red herring, leaving this reader scratching her head. The result is an unexpected, thoroughly enjoyable ride with a wholly satisfying but not predictable conclusion.

The title The End of Baseball is, of course, a common refrain from baseball purists. Interleague play? A wild card? It’s the end of baseball! While baseball may no longer be “America’s Pastime,” it has survived many changes and challenges. When a sportswriter puts forth the theory that “war years were somehow recorded differently, in a separate ledger perhaps, records marked with an asterisk to separate them from the legitimate numbers of the hallowed greats,” readers will recall asterisk posters in the stands during the San Francisco Giants’ games last season (not to mention the earlier asterisk after the number 61). Similarly, when a sportswriter in the novel “called on Congress” to mediate an injustice, perceived or actual, readers will be reminded of current subpoenas and testimony on Capitol Hill. The fan can only hope that fears of “The End of Baseball” are again unfounded.

Though baseball fans will certainly love this book, particularly for the edge-of-seat, heart-pounding descriptions of on-field action, non-baseball fans will love the vivid imagery, the rich character depictions, and the reactions of those characters watching and listening to those same pitches and innings.

Chrissie Bonnes, aka The Voice of Reason, usually works more in the GameDay background, cooking for and cleaning up after the esteemed Editor and his children. But this one was right in her sweet spot. (Sorry. One more baseball pun.)