High Comedy
Posted by SBG on Tuesday, May 23rd, 2006 at 10:20 am
You have to read the article today on Tony Batista by Joe Christenson in the Strib entitled "Whatever Works" detailing Batista's unorthodox batting stance. Apparently, a couple of dingers in Milwaukee have quelled the "is Batista about to be cut" rumors. The money quotes:
"Everybody doesn't like the way I hit," said Batista, a .251 career hitter in the majors with a meager on-base percentage of .298. "But everybody likes the results."
Ha!
"This year in spring training, it was a big test," he said. "Everybody was thinking wrong about me. I think they're still thinking a little bit wrong: 'Tony can't put up the numbers again. He went to Japan.'
"But God was testing me during spring training. I was struggling. But the longer I was struggling, the longer I was praying to God.
"He's the one who brought me here to the Minnesota Twins, so I'm not going to change anything. I know he's going to bless me. I've just gotta wait."
It's almost enough to make you lose your faith. Just what did Batista do in spring training to earn a job? Nothing. He sucked. Come to think of it, maybe he's right. Maybe it took Divine Intervention to get him to stick. Or perhaps the Devil made Terry Ryan do it. Think of it. God brought him to Minnesota, so because of that, he won't consider changing his batting stance. What else won't he do because God brought him to Minnesota? You absolutely cannot argue with logic like that. You also can't win with players like this in the lineup.
Throughout his career, Batista has sacrificed plate discipline for power. In Japan, he struck out five times more than he walked.
The Twins figured they could accept the large number of outs Batista produced, if he could continue his power production. So with five home runs, the results have been disappointing.
His numbers are almost exactly what people predicted that they would be in terms of OBP and SLG. Is doing exactly what was predicted disappointing? He hasn't disappointed in my mind at all. He's just as crappy as I thought he'd be. For a good antidote to this story, I refer to Gleeman today, who quoted the Gordon Wittenmeyer article from the PiP:
Koskie, 32, still lives in the Twin Cities and said at one point he would have welcomed a trade back to the Twins, once the Blue Jays said they intended to deal him.
And J.P. Ricciardi called the Twins first once he completed the trade for all-star third baseman Troy Glaus and decided to aggressively shop Koskie to break his infield logjam. But despite the Jays' willingness to pick up two-thirds of Koskie's salary over the next two seasons (leaving a $2 million-a-year cost), Ryan declined.
The Twins GM already had the $1.25 million Batista on the rolls and said afterward the decision to turn down the Blue Jays was based largely on the same baseball decision the team made a year earlier when Koskie left as a free agent.
In other words, a declining number of games for four consecutive years, because of injury, made Koskie a risk the team didn't want to take.
Koskie and Bartlett could have been had for the same money as Batista and Castro. Wittenmeyer fails to note that Batista wasn't "on the rolls" yet, because his contract was not guaranteed. Of course, we were stuck with Castro at $1.05 million. But, consider this. Don't offer Punto arbitration. That saves $700,000. We could have had Bartlett and Koskie with Castro as their backup for about the same money.
Friends, it isn't always about what team has the most amount of money.
Loading ...
He does have pretty much the most infuriating batting stance I have ever seen. Well, outside of Craig Counsell. At least there appears to be some reasoning (though faulty) behind Batista's stance. Counsell, however, abandons the stupid crane thing as soon as the pitcher starts his dlivery... so I'm guessing he just wants people to look at him? And point and laugh?
And I don't care how much Batista closes up on an outside pitch, he can't touch them. Why anyone ever throws him anything inside is beyond me.
That first quote is directly out of the "you can't make it up" file. I think it is a bad thing that my first thought when Batista hit his two HR this weekend was "crap, that just bought him through July."
I still can't believe this team went into Spring Training with ZERO real options behind Batista. Then again this is the same team that gave up on Cuddyer despite having no real options behind him last year.
I do like that Christensen threw in his "meager" OBP number in there. There was quite a debate over at AG.COM a while ago about how much editorializing a reporter should do when quoting a ball player (or, say, a president). I think pointing out that his OBP sucks and that he is an out machine is about the right tone. However, I still don't get why this was written at all. I guess I'd maybe write about how Cuddy has made the most of his chance about now. But, no. We get a story on one of Terry Ryan's biggest brain farts.
It is a bizarre article. The guy hits two HR in a weekend and we are subjected to an article about how Batista thinks everyone likes his results, has an odd batting stance, won't change it, believes in God, has a meager OBP, and the coaching staff thinks he can get as hot as anyone.
Castro hit a triple over the weekend, why not write about him developing extra-base power? Or about his error?
Why not write about the last time through the rotation and how two of the three rookies gave starts as good as anyone not named Santana? What about Kubel coming up?
Enough questions. The article is dumb and the quotes are even dumber.
I still don't buy Koskie as winding up being a great addition to this year's Twins team. Exhibit A: Koskie's 2006 home/road splits:
Home: .358/.419/.687 (In Miller Park, on grass)
Away: .207/.292/.362
Now, in all honesty, the sheer massive size of that split is not likely to hold up going forward. However, it is true that his numbers have been helped, at least to some degree, by playing in Miller Park, which has played as a hitter's park in the past, to the best of my recollection. And, right now, Koskie's overall line is .288/.360/.536, bettering his 90th percentile PECOTA projection of .274/.380/.481. That, combined with the huge home/road splits, screams unsustainable performance to me.
Exhibit B: The turf in the Metrodome. You see, if the Twins also played on grass, I could buy that healthy Koskie would be around and putting up productive numbers, but the Twins don't play on grass. The Twins play on turf, and Koskie has had wicked back problems in the past. In fact, if I was in charge of the Brewers, I would seriously consider DH'ing Koskie or sitting him for most of the series against the Twins in the Dome, in spite of the fact that a lot of Koskie's value comes from his defense.
Exhibit C: $6.25M in 2008 for a 36-year old third baseman. Koskie's option for 2008 will vest if he amasses 1200 plate appearances from 2005-2007. He already has 530 plate appearances over that period of time, and he spent a significant amount of time on the DL last year, and we're only 50 or so games through this season. That incentive is very makeable.
If you could argue that the Twins had a very good chance to win it all this year, and Koskie was the piece that put you over the edge, then I could see the injury risk and the option risk as good and worthwhile risks. But the Twins didn't have a very good chance to win it all this year, and SBG, I think you were down on the Twins just about as much as anyone else in the blogosphere. Batista wasn't the answer, but there were still reasons not to get Koskie.
And regarding Batista, I was wrong about him, though the Twins shouldn't have been. I felt in the offseason that even if Batista was hitting as he has been (which, like you said, is about what everyone expected) that he would be a useful player because there was evidence that in the past, despite having a somewhat limited range, he was a solid defensive player representing an upgrade on Cuddyer's defense.
I stand by my position that in the past, Batista was a solid defensive third baseman. For instance, his BP Fielding Rate2 at 3B, even including this year's abysmal performance, is 106, representing defense 6 runs better than average every 100 games. And in 2004, his most recent MLB season, he put up a 110 Rate2.
However, where Batista's bat hasn't changed, he has clearly regressed in the field. His Rate2 this year so far is 84(!?!), costing the Twins 16 runs on defense every 100 games. For comparison, last year, Cuddyer put up a 91 Rate2, which is pretty bad.
This type of defensive dropoff should've been easy for the Twins to see if they are good at evaluating defense at all. Batista's big selling point would've been as an upgrade on Cuddyer defensively, but if they would've watched him at all last year, it should've been apparent that he wouldn't be an upgrade on defense. I can make the excuse that I didn't have any Japanese fielding data and I didn't see Batista play at all in Japan, but the Twins should've had that information. And even if they didn't, they should've been able to tell in spring training that Batista's defense had worsened, because they ought to be better scouts than I am.
If the Twins didn't scout him in Japan before signing him, someone should be fired. I'm as big of a numbers guy that you'll find, but it would be inexcusable for THIS TEAM to sign a guy without one of their own scouts.
"well, he put up some good RBI numbers in 2004..."
It's true that I was as down on the Twins in the off-season as anyone. Even still, I forecasted that the Twins would finish third in the division and win 87 games, even after the Batista signing. So, I might have been more pessimistic than most, but my "pessimism" was a little too optimistic, it seems. My expectations prior to the off-season acquisitions were that with the right moves to bring this offense more in line with the rest of the league (and with a pitching staff that didn't crumble), this team could win 95 games. That's why I was so flippin' angry about the Batista move and offering Kyle Lohse arbitration. That's why I was angry when the Twins didn't go after Koskie at a discount. Because, despite my sometimes caustic tone, I'm a diehard fan and I had some pretty big hopes for this team prior to the off-season moves that were made.
I guess my question is this, then: do you feel that Koskie have been the difference between making the playoffs and not making the playoffs? Or, if you're more ambitious, what would the Twins' chances of making the playoffs have been with and without Koskie? (Keep in mind, as you have been all along, that this is before the season started.)
“well, he put up some good RBI numbers in 2004…”
And managed to have the second-worst 100 RBI season ever according to the Baseball Prospectus guys. At least he wasn't as bad as one of Joe Carter's.
If the Twins didn’t scout him in Japan before signing him, someone should be fired.
I don't know about fired, but at least re-assigned. I'm kind of skeptical that the Twins didn't scout him in Japan, but I thought I heard from at least one media outlet or another at the time that they didn't scout him in Japan. Also, I don't know if the Twins have a scouting operation at all in Japan. They have a limited scouting budget, and seem to focus it mostly on Venezuela, other parts of Central and South America, and Australia. It kind of makes sense that they wouldn't invest much money in scouting Japanese players because they don't become free agents until they are 28 or 29 and most all really quality Japanese players wind up being really expensive to acquire before they are free agents because of how the teams there control rights to players.
Before the season started as in April 1? No, I didn't think so. Not at that point.
Then I think you don't go get Koskie. The risk of Koskie's option vesting is worth it if you think he's going to earn you extra money (and goodwill) as the result of a postseason berth. Otherwise, Matt Moses looks to be on track, and what the Twins needed was a 2-year stopgap, not someone to turn into Shannon Stewart, 2006, part 2.
It's pretty clear the Twins thought they were in the race for the playoffs, in which case it is perfectly legitimate to say that taking Batista over Koskie was a dipshit move. Or in another light, it is perfectly legitimate to say not getting Koskie was part of a series of dipshit moves that led to a team one couldn't expect to contend.
And of course, if Koskie does get frequently injured on turf, his option probably wouldn't vest. And if he ends up not being injured, he would probably play pretty well. Unless you're arguing he would just get nagging injuries that degraded his performance, but kept him on track to vest his option.
I wouldn't blame anyone just for signing Batista without a scout watching him in Japan, because he was, after all, signed to a non-guaranteed deal. In most situations, it should've been understood that Batista still needed to prove himself when he came to camp. The contract gave the Twins all of March to get an eyeful and make a call on him.
Terry Ryan deserves full blame for what happened. The contract had an out, but not only did he fail to take it, he announced to the press even before spring training began that he felt obligated to give Batista a starting job without any competition for it. It's inexcusable, and I wish the local press would quit repeating the lie that the club was "committed" to Batista when Koskie became available. I have yet to see a single reporter even try to pin down TR on that point.
I think TR could have opened up his possible options at 3B if he'd made a point of cutting fat from the payroll in either of the last two winters. But, given the circumstances of this past off-season, I think taking back Koskie on the cheap would have been acceptable as long as the club was committed to moving Cuddyer to RF. If you don't want Koskie back, OK, but then you have to give Cuddyer another season to settle in at 3B and see if he improves. You can't reject the Koskie option because he's old/fragile and wouldn't put the Twins over the top, and then turn around and bring in a guy like Batista to bump Cuddyer to the OF. You're either committed to developing the younger player, or you're not--in which case you should sign the best oldster available, and that was Koskie.
There was never any good reason to bring in Batista. The theories about his HR/RBI production and supposed fielding upgrade... come on. I still can't believe how people were willing to give a break to an old guy who was out of the majors last year, but had written off Cuddyer after watching him at 3B for a season. Unfortunately, the men in charge of the club had the same mindset.
Two more points, and I'll sign off:
1) Many players have given testimonials about how much softer the FieldTurf is in comparison to the old rug, and how it's quite comparable to sod. Torii Hunter is one who said that he doesn't have the same old pains in his back and legs in the middle of a homestand anymore. In the next few years, I think we might dial down our concerns about how certain veterans might hold up on "the turf." It's not the same old surface anymore.
2) New policy: before signing any player to a contract, let's find a legal way of asking, "If you're in a slump or having a bad game, do you feel like it's the Lord's way of testing you?" Anybody who will just wait for Jesus to give back his home runs, rather than work to improve his game, doesn't get on the team. Good?
I'm with you fw.
fw, you ranted better than I could.
I want to hear what it takes for Batista to get released. L-Rod will be a horribly underpowered 3B but I think his patience and fielding will make up for the "power" we get from Batista. He's a better option right now yet the team is, for some reason other than God's Will, committed to putting Batista at 3B nightly.
I just don't get how Batista fits into the Twins "play the right way" system perpetuated by the media. He can't field, can't make contact, etc. He stinks. He might be a great, deeply religious man. But he sure as hell shouldn't be lining up at 3B for a team that hopes to compete for a playoff spot.
Maybe the Twins were hoping the God-juice would give Batista a Barry-like late career stats bump?
Speaking of Cuddy, wow did he have a horrendous at bat at the end of regulation. 8th I believe?
But what a nice hit in the 10th!
Nice game. That was genius leaving a straight fastball pitcher in to serve one up to Morneau. Wow.
Torii Hunter is one who said that he doesn’t have the same old pains in his back and legs in the middle of a homestand anymore. In the next few years, I think we might dial down our concerns about how certain veterans might hold up on “the turf.” It’s not the same old surface anymore.
Hunter's never actually missed any time because of his back, though. Koskie has. The turf might be better now, but it might just be better enough to keep Koskie playing with nagging injuries, like Stewart has been. At any rate, Koskie won't keep up his current production, and by the end of the season, it won't look as bad as it does now.
The point that the Twins thought they were in it was a good one, though. If they thought they were in it, they needed to roll the dice on Koskie and not on Batista. And I still think that if you bring in '04 Batista, he'd be better than '05 Cuddyer at fielding 3rd base. I am really glad that Cuddyer finally found his hitting shoes again. That he doesn't hit the ball into the ground 2 of every 3 balls-in-play helps his cause these days.
When's the last time Two-eye drew three walks in a game, do you reckon?
I have yet to see a single reporter even try to pin down TR on that point.
Yep. They won't cut off their "meal ticket", by pissing off the GM. Even though it's the 'right' thing to do. Nah... rather just talk about Batista's great power and RBI "skills".
It's all fluffy bunnies, and sunny skies from here on out.
ubelmann, I don't know whether Hunter has missed any time due to an aching back, but do you remember his hip flexor problem?
Stewart's plantar fascia injury tends to be a chronic, lingering problem for anyone who has it. I don't see how it's relevant to the FieldTurf. I think he'd be going through the same problems if the Twins played their home games on grass, already.
When’s the last time Two-eye drew three walks in a game, do you reckon?
It was a career-high, but I don't know if it was a first.
It was a career-high, but I don’t know if it was a first.
Torii thinks it was. From the team notes today: