PDA

View Full Version : The Twins need to sign Liriano to a 2-3 year contract ASAP



SpiritofVodkaDave
07-18-2012, 11:06 PM
He is the only one in the system who even has the ability to come close to posting 25k's in his last two starts.

I'd prefer 2/18 with a 10 mil team option, but would be totally fine with up to a 3/30 which is more or less what the Twins gave Pavano.

The upside is to high to just trade him away for a C+/B- prospect at this point.

glunn
07-18-2012, 11:20 PM
This has been debated at great length on other threads. Almost everyone agrees that Liriano is an extremely risky bet. His upside is very high, but the more likely outcome is that he repeats his history and has long periods of terrible pitching.

I think that there are strong arguments to sign him now, and strong arguments to trade him now. With 25 strikeouts in 2 games, his stock is soaring, so both his trade value and the amount that he might accept for a multi-year contract are also soaring.

This is a tough call, but I agree with you that some offer should be made now, before the price goes up even more. My sense is that Liriano may be getting more mature as he grows older, and he may finally be getting his act together. On the other hand, based on Liriano's track record, I am probably wrong.

jctwins
07-18-2012, 11:22 PM
Disagree. Another flash in the pan. Sell high and avoid making the mistake of hanging on too long and spending the cash that could be employed elsewhere.

SpiritofVodkaDave
07-18-2012, 11:25 PM
Disagree. Another flash in the pan. Sell high and avoid making the mistake of hanging on too long and spending the cash that could be employed elsewhere.

Where exactly would that money be spent though?

snepp
07-18-2012, 11:35 PM
Where exactly would that money be spent though?

Joe Saunders baby, veteran presence.

Esoteric Ball Guy
07-18-2012, 11:57 PM
Why would Liriano sign any extension for a losing team when he's 2 months from FA? Unless the Twins drastically overpay (think Oliver Perez and his 3/36 to resign with the Mets) there is no chance that Frankie will stay when all he has to do is have a decent last few months and cash in with whatever team he wants.

If you can trade him for a B/B+ prospect do it. If not, offer him the $12M qualifier and hope he turns it down. If he accepts, pray the good Frankie is around long enough to do this same dance next year.

USAFChief
07-18-2012, 11:57 PM
Joe Saunders baby, veteran presence.


You call THAT veteren presence?

We should totally toss Carl Pavano another $16.5m and I bet Ryan Dempster would listen if a 4 yr deal with an option were mentioned.

We can't be locking up lefties in their late 20's with swing-and-miss stuff.

greengoblinrulz
07-19-2012, 12:12 AM
Liriano isnt gonna take a 3/30 deal right now. this is his best negotiating ploy now....to not sign & go to FA

Top Gun
07-19-2012, 12:14 AM
If you can't sign your only best pitcher, what are you trying to do?

greengoblinrulz
07-19-2012, 12:18 AM
Amazed that everyone has forgotten the Liriano of last yr & of April/May this yr.
Ive been on record that he HAS to be dealt but if they want to resign him this offseason, so be it....but he has to go now.

Shane Wahl
07-19-2012, 12:20 AM
No. Offer the amount needed to get the two picks back if he declines the offer. He will likely decline. Draft college pitchers with those two picks. Laugh as he never goes below a 4.00 ERA for a season again.

James Richter
07-19-2012, 02:11 AM
No. Offer the amount needed to get the two picks back if he declines the offer. He will likely decline. Draft college pitchers with those two picks. Laugh as he never goes below a 4.00 ERA for a season again.
I had this misconception as well, but MLB Trade Rumors cleared it up the other day (http://www.mlbtraderumors.com/2012/07/the-new-draft-pick-compensation-system.html). The Twins would only get one pick back for Liriano, and it would be the sandwich pick. So if somebody offers a prospect who's as good or better than a 30-something overall selection, that's all it should take to pull the trigger on a trade.

Having said that, it probably couldn't hurt to offer him a 2-year extension at $10M/season or less right now. If he turns it down, oh well. If he accepts, check one pitcher off the shopping list. I know we'll all go crazy if he forgets how to throw strikes again, but any of the other FA SPs could break down and turn out to be a waste of money, too. Should we prefer the devil we know?

spideyo
07-19-2012, 02:18 AM
If you are going to re-sign him based on his turnaround this year, then you need to be prepared to hand a roster spot to Butera as well. He has pitched extremely well with Butera behind the plate, but was absolute ****e with Mauer and Doumit. Coincidence? Maybe. But then again, it's always seemed that Frankie's problems are more mental than anything, and when you've got a guy who bounces between "potential HOF Ace-type production" and "would get fired from the Saints", would you be willing to risk changing ANYTHING from his routine?

Now, I'm personally ok with keeping Butera as his personal catcher, with Doumit and Mauer platooning catcher and DH the other 4 starts. I know most people are not.

Top Gun
07-19-2012, 02:56 AM
Butera might have to pitch the other days.

DPJ
07-19-2012, 06:03 AM
Another classic overreaction by Dave when it comes to Liriano, hell you wanted to sign him to a new contract after 20 meaningless spring training innings.

But then he throws a couple clunkers and you're the first one making "F*CK LIRIANO" threads.

twinswon1991
07-19-2012, 06:51 AM
Why would Liriano sign any extension for a losing team when he's 2 months from FA? Unless the Twins drastically overpay (think Oliver Perez and his 3/36 to resign with the Mets) there is no chance that Frankie will stay when all he has to do is have a decent last few months and cash in with whatever team he wants.

If you can trade him for a B/B+ prospect do it. If not, offer him the $12M qualifier and hope he turns it down. If he accepts, pray the good Frankie is around long enough to do this same dance next year.

Agree 100%. There is no way his agent lets him resign with a rebuilding team unless there is a huge overpay. Frankie would be better served taking a year deal with an NL club than coming back to a last place team.

IdahoPilgrim
07-19-2012, 07:47 AM
I understand the allure of wanting to resign Liriano, being as starved for pitching as we are.

If this happens, though, just be warned of the potential of 2/3/4 years (however long his extension is) of "I told you so" if he tanks again. We will be merciless.:)

Yoshii
07-19-2012, 07:57 AM
Clearly Liriano needs a Joe Mauer contract with his recent performances.

Badsmerf
07-19-2012, 08:11 AM
The Twins are in a good situation here. With Grienke struggling and Hamels close(?) to signing with Philly, he is the best arm available. Plus, he has a 12m option for next year so he's not going to go straight into FA. What team other than the Twins would give him a long-term contract? He'd be better off accepting the 12m and putting together a great season next year. Then he's still on the right side of 30 and can try to get a 3 or 4 year deal. If the Twins don't get a good offer, just keep him. Maybe work with his agent and see if they are going to accept the 12m and if not throw out a little more on a 1 year deal. They have to understand Liriano has to prove he's worth a long-term commitment.

tpb8
07-19-2012, 08:13 AM
Every year the Twins count on Liriano and every year he lets them down. He had an awful 1st half of this season but he pitches well for 2 months and we want to extend him? He gets paid for a full season each year. Tell me, when was the last time he put together 1 full season of above average numbers? This is a guy you want to invest in long-term? Hopefully Terry Ryan is smarter than you are. Trade him, or offer him the 12 million and hope he turns it down.

For those of you clamoring for the Twins to make an offer to him now......nobody signs a deal 2 months from FA. Certainly not a team-friendly deal.

mike wants wins
07-19-2012, 08:16 AM
Why would he sign for 10 million per year? That is at least 2-5 million under what he will get in fa. I would trade him, and then if you believe in him try to sign him in the offseason.

minn55441
07-19-2012, 08:31 AM
The Twins are in a good situation here. With Grienke struggling and Hamels close(?) to signing with Philly, he is the best arm available. Plus, he has a 12m option for next year so he's not going to go straight into FA. What team other than the Twins would give him a long-term contract? He'd be better off accepting the 12m and putting together a great season next year. Then he's still on the right side of 30 and can try to get a 3 or 4 year deal. If the Twins don't get a good offer, just keep him. Maybe work with his agent and see if they are going to accept the 12m and if not throw out a little more on a 1 year deal. They have to understand Liriano has to prove he's worth a long-term commitment.

No doubt in my mind that now is the time to deal Frankie. His value on the market will not get higher than it is right now. We should get some value in return in a trade at this point. As smerf pointed out, he may be the best pitching option available this season as we approach the deadline.

With his track record, I would be really hesitant to offer him a deal longer than one year. I know he has upside, but he also has a lot of downside and we have seen it all to often. How tied to Rick Anderson and the Twins organization do you think Frankie is? He seems like a pretty quiet and humble guy. Do you think that he would make his free agent decision based more on his comfort level rather than the dollars on the table?

Top Gun
07-19-2012, 08:37 AM
No way in hell will you be able to sign him in the offseason!

IdahoPilgrim
07-19-2012, 08:48 AM
The Twins are in a good situation here. With Grienke struggling and Hamels close(?) to signing with Philly, he is the best arm available. Plus, he has a 12m option for next year so he's not going to go straight into FA. What team other than the Twins would give him a long-term contract? He'd be better off accepting the 12m and putting together a great season next year. Then he's still on the right side of 30 and can try to get a 3 or 4 year deal. If the Twins don't get a good offer, just keep him. Maybe work with his agent and see if they are going to accept the 12m and if not throw out a little more on a 1 year deal. They have to understand Liriano has to prove he's worth a long-term commitment.

No, he doesn't. He's a straight free agent after this year. The $12M number some people are floating around is what would be required to be offered to him in arbitration in order for the Twins to get a draft pick as compensation if he declines, under the new CBA.

We trade him now, or we probably end up with nothing for him when he signs with someone else in the offseason.

Jim Crikket
07-19-2012, 09:02 AM
No, he doesn't. He's a straight free agent after this year. The $12M number some people are floating around is what would be required to be offered to him in arbitration in order for the Twins to get a draft pick as compensation if he declines, under the new CBA.

We trade him now, or we probably end up with nothing for him when he signs with someone else in the offseason.

Exactly. His new team won't have the option of offering a "qualifying" arbitration figure and getting that sandwich pick if he turns it down.

Also, he doesn't have to "prove" he deserves a long term contract. Heading in to FA, all he has to do is prove that he throws left handed, can strike people out at a high rate at times and can pass a physical. With those criteria met, someone will overpay for him. It probably shouldn't be the Twins.

On the other hand, if Liriano were on another team and hitting free agency this year, he's probably exactly the kind of pitcher a lot of Twins fans would be urging Terry Ryan to roll the dice and take a chance on. The fact that we've all lived through the low-lights of his career up close and personal makes many of us less likely to want to continue doing so.

I also don't see why his agent would listen to an extension offer right now. Then again, I don't know why Cole Hamels' agent would either and it looks like that may happen. Of course it also looks like the Phillies may overpay to get that extension done.

mike wants wins
07-19-2012, 09:07 AM
Everyone keeps saying "overpay", but that's what the market keeps doing. Big money, and 3-7 years is what it takes to sign a big time, legit, free agent pitcher. It's not overpaying, it's paying the market rate.

nokomismod
07-19-2012, 10:15 AM
I hope that Liriano just pitched his last game as a Twin. As much as this team needs starting pitching, he is not worthy of a long term or another 1 year deal. Even when things were going well, we never heard from Liriano or his agent, that he wants to stay. Am I wrong in remembering that about 3 years ago his agent tried to speed up his "free agent eligibility"?

diehardtwinsfan
07-19-2012, 10:17 AM
First off, I highly doubt Liriano is going to sign an extension right now unless the Twins are going to overpay by a lot. Liriano is 2 months away from free agency and things have suddenly clicked for him. Unless Grienke implodes, Liriano is going to be in demand, even with the question marks.

Second, given his inconsistency, I'd be willing to go low base/high incentives with him. I doubt he and his agent would take it.

Third, Liriano has been kind enough of late to drive up his value. The Twins should be able to get something decent, and if they do not, they can make a qualifying arb offer and get a pick when he says no to arb. Not bad. I'd much rather flip that to a desparate team looking for pitching help and get a front line starter potential guy who is scuffling a bit in AA.

I'll be honest that I'm a bit skeptical of a long term contract for Liriano. I think he needs a change of scenery personally, and I wouldn't be surprised at all if he becomes "the one that got away." But given the headache and the frustration he's caused, I'd much rather sell while there is some value there.

MidwestMeat
07-19-2012, 10:22 AM
Trading him will be the safest bet....

It's very unlikely we will get the appropriate amount of value from a sandwich pick if we let him turn down the qualifier unless we take a risk on a high upside/low likelihood guy that works through our system and finds top of the rotation stuff (keyword RISK)

If we sign him to an extension we are counting on the bubblegum and his new best friend butera fixing him for good and being the guy we always hoped. Unfortunately we all know how frankie is, and after 2 more years of incredible disappointments and brief flashes of brilliance his value will be shot and we will get nothing in return for his departure but the fantastic(?) memories (holy RISK)

We may not get A talent from trading him, but at least we will get some bodies that will most likely spend some time in Minneapolis.

johnnydakota
07-19-2012, 10:38 AM
Disagree. Another flash in the pan. Sell high and avoid making the mistake of hanging on too long and spending the cash that could be employed elsewhere.

with our ownership?spend and money, the best we can hope for is jaime moyer....or the return of pavano and marquis....

when asked what jim pohlad likes to do in his free time , he responded with"i like to walk barefoot and see the free sites"
when asked why bare foot he answered "shoes cost money, skin grows back free"

kab21
07-19-2012, 10:54 AM
If the Twins wanted to sign Liriano then they shouldn't have been running his name through the mud the last couple of years in the press. I pretty much don't see any chance of Liriano resigning with the Twins unless they are by far the largest bidder.

I also think that Liriano could be one of the biggest values of the offseason. He'll probably sign for about the same as Brandon McCarthy. Now there is a guy that looks like a prototypical Twins pitcher. Low K's and BB's. Get ready for him on a 3/30 deal.

Fire Dan Gladden
07-19-2012, 11:09 AM
The Twins should proceed as follows:

1) Offer him a 2 yr/$14 mil contract. The Twins know what they have, the inconsistencies translate to 4-5th starter money. His ability to run a great string of innings probably boosts his value a little. When he declines that:
2) Look to trade him for anything of greater value than the sandwich pick. If that doesn't happen:
3) Make him the 1 yr qualifying offer. If he takes it, the Twins are only on the hook for one year. One year deals (even $12 mil ones) don't hamstring you. If he declines, the Twins get the pick.

It's that simple.

On a related note, does anybody know if there is a limit to the number of times a team can "offer" a player? For example, if the Twins offer Liriano the $12 mil qualifying offer, and he accepts, can they do it again next year? Is there a limit to the number of times they can do that?

USAFChief
07-19-2012, 12:06 PM
Sadly, it might already be too late to get Liriano inked to a reasonable 3 yr deal. If it had been done last winter, or even a month ago, 3/24 was very doable, and one spot in the rotation for the next three years would be filled with a guy capable of what we've seen for short stretches at the least, and much much more at best.

Instead, we're left with hoping Walters/Deduno/Devries types, supplemented by the next Marques level free agents, can form the backbone of a good rotation.

James Richter
07-19-2012, 12:54 PM
The Twins should proceed as follows:

1) Offer him a 2 yr/$14 mil contract. The Twins know what they have, the inconsistencies translate to 4-5th starter money. His ability to run a great string of innings probably boosts his value a little. When he declines that:
2) Look to trade him for anything of greater value than the sandwich pick. If that doesn't happen:
3) Make him the 1 yr qualifying offer. If he takes it, the Twins are only on the hook for one year. One year deals (even $12 mil ones) don't hamstring you. If he declines, the Twins get the pick.

It's that simple.

On a related note, does anybody know if there is a limit to the number of times a team can "offer" a player? For example, if the Twins offer Liriano the $12 mil qualifying offer, and he accepts, can they do it again next year? Is there a limit to the number of times they can do that?
$14M might be a shade too lowball, but this is essentially exactly what the Twins' approach should be. And I haven't seen anything to suggest that a team couldn't make qualifying offers indefinitely.

70charger
07-19-2012, 12:59 PM
I don't think the Twins should be that active in the free agent market. Long term, the smart money is in building the farm. Everyone has referenced "overpaying," and one person has countered that that's the market rate. I say that that's the market rate FOR FREE AGENTS, and that still may mean overpaying by comparison to talent coming up from the minor leagues.

Liriano is not going to singlehandedly get us into the playoffs in 2013. Flip him, get prospects, and plan for the future. Long-term deal silliness aside, even signing him to a one-year deal is a very expensive way of trying to catch lightning in a bottle. A cheaper way of trying to catch lightning in a bottle would be letting Liriano go and giving a set rotation spot to someone like Liam Hendriks and letting him take his lumps. Worst case, he's no worse than a bad Liriano. Best case, he's another Scott Diamond circa 2012.

mike wants wins
07-19-2012, 01:20 PM
Could not disagree more that they should ignore free agency.

70charger
07-19-2012, 01:24 PM
Could not disagree more that they should ignore free agency.


Straw man. I said they should not be that active, not that they should ignore it (that's just dumb). Pick up a couple of starting pitchers in the $5-8 million range, and call it a day. The Twins cannot go blowing their wad on a $100 million contract for Greinke, etc. They need focus on the farm or we'll go from the worst team in 2012 to a third place team in 2013 to the worst team in 2014-2017. This short term focus is ridiculous.

tpb8
07-19-2012, 01:30 PM
Sadly, it might already be too late to get Liriano inked to a reasonable 3 yr deal. If it had been done last winter, or even a month ago, 3/24 was very doable, and one spot in the rotation for the next three years would be filled with a guy capable of what we've seen for short stretches at the least, and much much more at best.

Instead, we're left with hoping Walters/Deduno/Devries types, supplemented by the next Marques level free agents, can form the backbone of a good rotation.

If they had signed him to that deal in the off-season the uproar over his 1st half would have been massive. He's been a flop for most of the season. When the season still mattered, when we were just a team with hope like all the other teams, he was awful. The season has been over for quite some time, and suddenly he's pitching well and everyone is ready to hand over big money to this head case? I'm sorry, but that's called being a sucker.

USAFChief
07-19-2012, 01:32 PM
Straw man. I said they should not be that active, not that they should ignore it (that's just dumb). Pick up a couple of starting pitchers in the $5-8 million range, and call it a day. The Twins cannot go blowing their wad on a $100 million contract for Greinke, etc. They need focus on the farm or we'll go from the worst team in 2012 to a third place team in 2013 to the worst team in 2014-2017. This short term focus is ridiculous.

Please name the "couple of starting pitchers in the $5-8 million range" who are going to sign one year deals and/or be worth long term deals at that money.

SpiritofVodkaDave
07-19-2012, 01:39 PM
I'm pretty confident if the Twins offered him 3/30 he would accept immediately.

It should also be noted he had the lowest FIP in the AL in 2010, so its not like these last 10 starts have come out of no where.

How to fix the rotation:
Give Liriano 3/24mm-30mm contract with a 4th year team option.
Give Baker a 1 year 2 mil base contract, up to 5 mil with IP (1 Mil for every milestone 100 IP, 120, 140,160, 180)
or sign some veteran dude for 3-4 million.
I also wouldn't mind taking a run at Josh Johnson who shouldn't break the bank.

Liriano
Baker
Diamond
Gibson
Hendriks

In the wings (Walters, DeVries, Wimmers?, Blackburn)

stringer bell
07-19-2012, 01:46 PM
IIRC, it isn't arbitration that is offered. It is a dollar offer that is high enough to qualify for a sandwich pick. Arbitration would indicate that an arbitrator would select from between a team offer and the player offer.

mike wants wins
07-19-2012, 01:52 PM
Fair enough, I misread your comment. I'm not a big fan of signing mediocre players, that's how you end up bad in 2014-2017. Either sign great players, or low cost bench players, but not mediocre players. I also don't agree with your implication that you cannot sign legit, big time FAs, and fix the minors both. Perhaps I am again misreading your post, but that seems to be the implication. Signing Greinke (or some other super expensive guy) does not effect how you draft and develop players.

USAFChief
07-19-2012, 01:53 PM
IIRC, it isn't arbitration that is offered. It is a dollar offer that is high enough to qualify for a sandwich pick. Arbitration would indicate that an arbitrator would select from between a team offer and the player offer.
Correct. If he declines, one sandwich pick in return.

Qualifying offer shud be in the $12.5m range.

Siehbiscuit
07-19-2012, 01:57 PM
The Twins starting rotation in 2013 will be atrocious without a Willingham or Span trade that nets us a elite pitching prospect that will be able to make the rotation next year. The Twins do not hand out large FA contracts! The largest FA contract ever offered in the Twins history was this last off-season for Willingham @ 3years and 21 million. The offense is good, not great. This team needs Willingham's RH bat more than we need Span. There are a few mid-to high minor guys that could make the leap next year.

As far a Liriano goes, the Twins will not go after a BIG fish in FA. A "sandwich" pick is probably less likely to make an impact (ever) as it is that Liriano can prove to be a solid pitcher for the rotation. The Twins will not be good in 2013, but they do need want to be competitive. Rolling the dice on Liriano needs to be done and by rolling the dice I mean offering a 3 yeart deal at $8-10 million a year. If he retains the present form, Liriano will be will worth the investment. If he reverts to a Jekyll and Hyde pitcher he will only be worth about half of that. His last two months alone has driven his trade value up considerably and unless one team falls in love with his potential and is willing to overpay with a soon-to-be ready pitching prospect, the Twins need to keep Liriano. I know thats not popular, but teams do see potential and as fans we see and hold on to the "warts" much more than the businessmen that are making these decisions.

snepp
07-19-2012, 01:59 PM
Qualifying offer shud be in the $12.5m range.

For shame Chief.

USAFChief
07-19-2012, 02:09 PM
For shame Chief.

Hey, I text. LOL. BTW I LMAO @ ur last. TY.

snepp
07-19-2012, 02:10 PM
Hey, I text. LOL. BTW I LMAO @ ur last. TY.

Get off my lawn.

Vervehound
07-19-2012, 04:02 PM
Get off my lawn.

heh heh

old nurse
07-19-2012, 04:34 PM
Last year Buerhle got 4 years and 58 million. I don't recall there being another good left-hander out there. The arbitration number is way too high for Liriano given Buerhle's contract. Wit a plan of offering the 12 million contract he Twins could get Liriano for a year, overpaying, and have a little more time to sort out which pitcher he really is or risk losing him. The question is which is more valuable. A sandwich pick or a decent prospect and a middling one.

TheLeviathan
07-19-2012, 04:53 PM
It should also be noted he had the lowest FIP in the AL in 2010, so its not like these last 10 starts have come out of no where.

He was BRILLIANT in 2010. Made a believer out of me and had me going into 2011 excited that we had our Frankie back. Then 2011 happened. There is nothing but speculation to the idea that Frankie would accept a team friendly deal. And while some like to throw around "prove the negative" fallacies to answer that charge, it's nevertheless true. There is virtually no reason for Frankie to take a discounted deal at this point.

And, to me, anything more than an incentive laden deal with minimal guaranteed money is a bad investment. Just because you have money doesn't mean you have to feel compelled to spend it on high risk bets.

notoriousgod71
07-19-2012, 07:23 PM
Liriano is better than anyone we would acquire via trade or FA. Even if we only get "half a season" out of him it's still half a season more than any of our other starters.

I would rather spend twice as much on him than I would to sign two Marquis/Hernandez/Ortiz/Ponson's. You can't open up a season with Diamond, Walters, Blackburn, Devries, whatever ****ty FA we sign. You just can't.

jctwins
07-20-2012, 08:56 AM
Liriano is better than anyone we would acquire via trade or FA (about 25% of the time, and when he's not having mental issues). Even if we only get "half a season" out of him it's still half a season more than any of our other starters.

I would rather spend twice as much on him than I would to sign two Marquis/Hernandez/Ortiz/Ponson's. You can't open up a season with Diamond, Walters, Blackburn, Devries, whatever ****ty FA we sign. You just can't.

Fixed

StormJH1
07-20-2012, 10:50 AM
Liriano is better than anyone we would acquire via trade or FA. Even if we only get "half a season" out of him it's still half a season more than any of our other starters.

I would rather spend twice as much on him than I would to sign two Marquis/Hernandez/Ortiz/Ponson's. You can't open up a season with Diamond, Walters, Blackburn, Devries, whatever ****ty FA we sign. You just can't.

First, lets not use "our other starters" as the measuring bar for successful starting pitching. Haha.

Second, I agree with the general premise that it's far more likely we sign Liriano and get success out of him than enticing a FA pitcher to come to our loser team and getting 1st or 2nd starter success out of him. But that doesn't necessarily mean we should do it if it requires a $12M/yr commitment, which may end up being like 65% of the money we have to spend next year. That money needs to fill about 3 rotation spots, as well as a middle infielder and other needs.

Plus, Liriano may not even want to be here. Put yourself in Liriano's shoes...he was an absolute phenom in 2006 for a few months, but never got paid before needed TJ surgery. His salary has gone up during his arbitration years, but did you ever get the sense he was really happy here? It's not like there's a huge Latin presence on this team (since departure of Santana, Luis Castillo, etc.) or the coaching staff. Gardy threw him under the bus on numerous occasions publicly, even subtly blaming him for some of Mauer's injuries early in 2011. I think he can get paid more somewhere else, and he may be ready to do that.

And also (not to be a Liriano downer), but I'll say it again: When has Liriano ever pitched well in situations when it really mattered? He's sucked in September even in his "good" years, either because of durability or composure. As good as he's been lately, his numbers are inflated by starts like the two against OAK (or his no-hitter against CWS last year) where he completely dominates, then gets annihilated a few starts later. Heading into a contract year, his ERA is still at 4.81, with a 1.40 WHIP.

Oxtung
07-21-2012, 01:53 AM
For those of you who are on the "Resign Liriano NOW!!!" bus why is this year any different than previous seasons? Here is a chart showing the best stretches for the given year as well as his end of season ERA.



Year

GS

ERA

WHIP

BB/9

K/9

Season ERA



'09
8
3.85
1.33
3.9
7.2
5.80


'11
7
2.20
0.98
3.8
8.0
5.09


'12
10
2.86
1.05
4.0
10.9
4.82



Each year he had an above average to great stretch. Each year, over the course of the whole year, he has been a below average to terrible pitcher. While Liriano has been very good over the last couple of months we have seen similar periods in each of his bad years. So what has changed for Liriano that this time his dominance is here to stay?

Top Gun
07-21-2012, 08:08 AM
Why would you let your best pitcher walk? Just plain stupid!

stringer bell
07-21-2012, 08:21 AM
Why would you let your best pitcher walk? Just plain stupid!I hope baseball scouts think Frankie is as good as his numbers because I don't think he is. Yes, he can make hitters look silly and he will have periods where he is as tough as they come, but 1) he is an injury waiting to happen 2) his mindset is too fragile to be an ace 3) he will cost a lot of money to keep and 4) since he is a free agent at the end of the season, he is no sure bet to return to Minnesota even if the Twins want him to return. Add to this that Liriano has brought his value back from near nothing to substantial it is wise to trade him and get what they can.

TheLeviathan
07-21-2012, 08:39 AM
For those of you who are on the "Resign Liriano NOW!!!" bus why is this year any different than previous seasons? Here is a chart showing the best stretches for the given year as well as his end of season ERA.

Stats make the Kool-Aid taste funny.....

Top Gun
07-21-2012, 09:34 AM
ESPN's Jim Bowden reports the Phillies and Cole Hamels are working on a long-term extension "which could end up" in the range of six years and $142-144 million.

This is considerably higher than the six-year, $130 million contract that was reported earlier this week. The Phillies have intensified their efforts to sign Hamels, though it's not yet clear if this would be enough to get it done. The reported offer would pay Hamels significantly more than the $127.5 million extension the Giants gave Matt Cain earlier this season.


Source: Jim Bowden on Twitter (https://twitter.com/JimBowdenESPNxm/status/226538279263141888)

John Bonnes
07-21-2012, 10:06 AM
ESPN's Jim Bowden reports the Phillies and Cole Hamels are working on a long-term extension "which could end up" in the range of six years and $142-144 million.

This is considerably higher than the six-year, $130 million contract that was reported earlier this week. The Phillies have intensified their efforts to sign Hamels, though it's not yet clear if this would be enough to get it done. The reported offer would pay Hamels significantly more than the $127.5 million extension the Giants gave Matt Cain earlier this season.


Source: Jim Bowden on Twitter (https://twitter.com/JimBowdenESPNxm/status/226538279263141888)

Wow. That's $24M/year. Holy cow.

SpiritofVodkaDave
07-21-2012, 10:19 AM
For those of you who are on the "Resign Liriano NOW!!!" bus why is this year any different than previous seasons? Here is a chart showing the best stretches for the given year as well as his end of season ERA.



Year

GS

ERA

WHIP

BB/9

K/9

Season ERA



'09
8
3.85
1.33
3.9
7.2
5.80


'11
7
2.20
0.98
3.8
8.0
5.09


'12
10
2.86
1.05
4.0
10.9
4.82



Each year he had an above average to great stretch. Each year, over the course of the whole year, he has been a below average to terrible pitcher. While Liriano has been very good over the last couple of months we have seen similar periods in each of his bad years. So what has changed for Liriano that this time his dominance is here to stay?

That's cute that you completely left 2010 off.

Also his k/9 rate of 10.9 is the big difference...................

Seth Stohs
07-21-2012, 10:23 AM
Wow. That's $24M/year. Holy cow.

not a bad deal for a quality #2 starter!!

Top Gun
07-21-2012, 10:42 AM
Twins can't even make a attempt to offer Liriano half that. Maybe they should just sign Moyer!

BrentMpls
07-21-2012, 11:42 AM
I wouldn't be totally against a 2 year deal at 10-12 a year, but I really hope they unload him (for as good as a return as possible), he is just too inconsistent. And if they do sign him, that eats up the majority of next seasons dough that the Twins have to play with, which leaves little hope to acquire a solid #2/3 guy for next year.

Oxtung
07-21-2012, 01:02 PM
That's cute that you completely left 2010 off.
I did some work digging through stats and brought some actual data to this discussion. I am trying to have a real dialogue and had a very logical question; why is this year different. You come back at me with sarcasm. Either you don't understand why 2010 was left off, which is makes me sad because I thought I was being very clear in my point, or you think you are being witty and your sarcasm is an attempt to quell any future discussion on the subject. If the later is the case why did you even start the thread? If the former is the case go back and re-read my post. If you still don't understand why 2010 was left off then ask why.


Also his k/9 rate of 10.9 is the big difference...................

This makes me think you didn't understand the point of my previous post. Yes, you can see that by looking at the chart but do you really think because Liriano is striking out a few more batters every game he won't return back to his April/May self?

SpiritofVodkaDave
07-21-2012, 01:15 PM
do you really think because Liriano is striking out a few more batters every game he won't return back to his April/May self?

If Liriano continues to strike out 10.9 batters per nine inning(assuming his bb/9 rate stays the same) he will not return to his April/May self, he will be pitching like a top of the rotation type guy.

It's disingenuous to not inlcude 2010 in any discussion of Liriano's talents, I know what you were trying to do (claiming that Liriano is only good a for a stretch each year and terrible the rest) if you would have included the 2010 stretch it would have shown that Liriano posted a 9.4 k/9 rate throughout the full season, in 2006 Lirianos best year he had a k rate of 10.7

This year he has a 9.9 overall and 10.9 in his past 10 starts, its pretty easy to surmise that Liriano is a damn fine pitcher when he is striking out a lot of folks, when he isn't he is somewhere between medicore and bad. The real question is: Do we think Liriano can keep up his current k rate? And from watching his starts over the past couple months I don't see any reason why he can't.

I know it's super against the grain here to give Anderson or any coach credit for anything, but perhaps he is the reason why Liriano is dominant again? They put him in the pen, Anderson had more time to work with him and he comes back up and starts to dominate.

Make no mistake about it, the Twins won't have another starting pitcher who even approachs 9k per nine for at least 2-3 years if they dump Liriano for some C+ prospect.

BrentMpls
07-21-2012, 02:06 PM
Make no mistake about it, the Twins won't have another starting pitcher who even approachs 9k per nine for at least 2-3 years if they dump Liriano for some C+ prospect.

Should that be the goal, even if that is the case?

Having a reliable starter who can get you through 7 innings without a home run derby occurring is worth a lot more than Liriano. Bert recently defined a "quality" start as 5 innings with giving up 3 or less runs. I'm assuming that is what this organization is realistically looking for - someone who can produce a 'quality start' on a regular basis.

Liriano has been solid the last two some months, for the most part. But can you really trust that to stay pace for the next 2 years? I sure can't. 2 months on, 2 months off isn't worth having, even if he is the only guy who can throw strikes more oft than not when on.

I think the Twins, for better or worse, would much rather have 5 guys that can do what Blackburn did last night on a regular basis, than a "filthy" strikeout guy that you can't count on.

USAFChief
07-21-2012, 09:28 PM
Should that be the goal, even if that is the case?

Having a reliable starter who can get you through 7 innings without a home run derby occurring is worth a lot more than Liriano. Bert recently defined a "quality" start as 5 innings with giving up 3 or less runs. I'm assuming that is what this organization is realistically looking for - someone who can produce a 'quality start' on a regular basis.

Liriano has been solid the last two some months, for the most part. But can you really trust that to stay pace for the next 2 years? I sure can't. 2 months on, 2 months off isn't worth having, even if he is the only guy who can throw strikes more oft than not when on.

I think the Twins, for better or worse, would much rather have 5 guys that can do what Blackburn did last night on a regular basis, than a "filthy" strikeout guy that you can't count on.

New to baseball?

notoriousgod71
07-21-2012, 09:49 PM
Should that be the goal, even if that is the case?

Having a reliable starter who can get you through 7 innings without a home run derby occurring is worth a lot more than Liriano. Bert recently defined a "quality" start as 5 innings with giving up 3 or less runs. I'm assuming that is what this organization is realistically looking for - someone who can produce a 'quality start' on a regular basis.

Liriano has been solid the last two some months, for the most part. But can you really trust that to stay pace for the next 2 years? I sure can't. 2 months on, 2 months off isn't worth having, even if he is the only guy who can throw strikes more oft than not when on.

I think the Twins, for better or worse, would much rather have 5 guys that can do what Blackburn did last night on a regular basis, than a "filthy" strikeout guy that you can't count on.

Liriano's HR/9 is fine. He's top 30 in MLB at .8/9. That's not a home run derby.

I would much rather have what Blackburn did last night too, but unfortunately we don't have anyone who can do that on a regular basis so Liriano is still better.

Come next year when we have a rotation of Blackburn, DeVries, Diamond, Walters, and Gibson/Baker/whoever we are all going to be bitching about not having a strikeout pitcher and how we should have kept Liriano.

BrentMpls
07-21-2012, 11:38 PM
Liriano's HR/9 is fine. He's top 30 in MLB at .8/9. That's not a home run derby.

I would much rather have what Blackburn did last night too, but unfortunately we don't have anyone who can do that on a regular basis so Liriano is still better.

Come next year when we have a rotation of Blackburn, DeVries, Diamond, Walters, and Gibson/Baker/whoever we are all going to be bitching about not having a strikeout pitcher and how we should have kept Liriano.

Or bitching about having a guy who occasionally shows glimmers of talent, but not enough to count on.

It's a tough call either way - my hope is Ryan finds a trade that gets us something of decent value, failing that a 2 year 20-24 mil deal would be acceptable to see what happens.

Oxtung
07-22-2012, 01:56 AM
If Liriano continues to strike out 10.9 batters per nine inning(assuming his bb/9 rate stays the same) he will not return to his April/May self, he will be pitching like a top of the rotation type guy.

It's disingenuous to not inlcude 2010 in any discussion of Liriano's talents, I know what you were trying to do (claiming that Liriano is only good a for a stretch each year and terrible the rest) if you would have included the 2010 stretch it would have shown that Liriano posted a 9.4 k/9 rate throughout the full season, in 2006 Lirianos best year he had a k rate of 10.7

This year he has a 9.9 overall and 10.9 in his past 10 starts, its pretty easy to surmise that Liriano is a damn fine pitcher when he is striking out a lot of folks, when he isn't he is somewhere between medicore and bad. The real question is: Do we think Liriano can keep up his current k rate? And from watching his starts over the past couple months I don't see any reason why he can't.

I know it's super against the grain here to give Anderson or any coach credit for anything, but perhaps he is the reason why Liriano is dominant again? They put him in the pen, Anderson had more time to work with him and he comes back up and starts to dominate.

Make no mistake about it, the Twins won't have another starting pitcher who even approachs 9k per nine for at least 2-3 years if they dump Liriano for some C+ prospect.

First, I didn't include Liriano's 2010 because it had no bearing on my point which you still don't seem to haven't answered. Nobody is arguing whether Liriano has great stuff. Nobody is denying that if Liriano is on he is a good pitcher. Everybody knows Liriano's 2010 was a good year.

Secondly, I am not sure that I agree Liriano's resurgence is only because his k/9 is up. That seems a very simplistic answer. I'll have to go back and do some number crunching.

Third, and this is my real point of contention with the "this time Liriano is going to stay good and we should sign him now, crowd", what has changed? Let's say for the moment that Liriano's resurgence is tied to his k/9. What separates 2012 from 2009 and 2011? He regressed back to bad in each of those years. So what is different this year that suddenly his k/9 is going to stay at ~11k/9?

USAFChief
07-22-2012, 01:26 PM
First, I didn't include Liriano's 2010 because it had no bearing on my point which you still don't seem to haven't answered. Nobody is arguing whether Liriano has great stuff. Nobody is denying that if Liriano is on he is a good pitcher. Everybody knows Liriano's 2010 was a good year.

Secondly, I am not sure that I agree Liriano's resurgence is only because his k/9 is up. That seems a very simplistic answer. I'll have to go back and do some number crunching.

Third, and this is my real point of contention with the "this time Liriano is going to stay good and we should sign him now, crowd", what has changed? Let's say for the moment that Liriano's resurgence is tied to his k/9. What separates 2012 from 2009 and 2011? He regressed back to bad in each of those years. So what is different this year that suddenly his k/9 is going to stay at ~11k/9?

I don't think there is a "this time Liriano is going to stay good" crowd.

There is a "Liriano has better stuff than anything we have" crowd. A "has a good chance of being better than any other gamble they're likely to take crowd.". A "how in the hell do you dump his talent when starting pitching pitching is in such short supply throughout the org" crowd.

Anyone trying to convince us they KNOW he will, or won't be, worth a **** going forward is lying.

SpiritofVodkaDave
07-22-2012, 01:54 PM
Should that be the goal, even if that is the case?

Having a reliable starter who can get you through 7 innings without a home run derby occurring is worth a lot more than Liriano. Bert recently defined a "quality" start as 5 innings with giving up 3 or less runs. I'm assuming that is what this organization is realistically looking for - someone who can produce a 'quality start' on a regular basis.

Liriano has been solid the last two some months, for the most part. But can you really trust that to stay pace for the next 2 years? I sure can't. 2 months on, 2 months off isn't worth having, even if he is the only guy who can throw strikes more oft than not when on.

I think the Twins, for better or worse, would much rather have 5 guys that can do what Blackburn did last night on a regular basis, than a "filthy" strikeout guy that you can't count on.

Bert's 5 IP 3 ER quality start stat is complete Rubbish and doesn't even warrant a response. Giving up 3 ER in 5 Innings is quite terrible IMO. Give me a starter that goes 7-8 IP and gives up 4 ER any day of the week. The problem with "what Blackburn did last night on a regular basis" is that through 100+ years of baseball statistics it is near impossible for a guy like Blackburn (not great stuff, doesn't strike anyone out) to throw gems on a regular basis.

Is it to much of a stretch to say Liriano has the highest upside of anyone in the Twins system? If that is the case or he is close to that then you have to keep him around.

SpiritofVodkaDave
07-22-2012, 01:59 PM
Third, and this is my real point of contention with the "this time Liriano is going to stay good and we should sign him now, crowd", what has changed? Let's say for the moment that Liriano's resurgence is tied to his k/9. What separates 2012 from 2009 and 2011? He regressed back to bad in each of those years. So what is different this year that suddenly his k/9 is going to stay at ~11k/9?

He is posting the 2nd highest k/9 rate of his career, that is what has changed thus far, if he can manage to keep it around the 9.9 rate he has now, while keeping his bb and hr rates constant he should be able to stay an effective starter and possibly even an "ace" type guy. Is there a chance that he falls off a cliff again? Of course there is, if there wasn't that good chance we'd be talking about a much much much larger contract then a 2/20 or 3/30 deal.

I'd rather pay that money to the risk that is Liriano over the next Carl Pavano who is going to give you pretty standard #3/#4 numbers. Every year fans bash the front office for signing guys like Marquis, Hernandez etc over high risk/high reward guyes like Harden, Bedard, etc, at this point we have a guy who has a solid track record, has been on fire since he was sent down to the pen (adjustments?) and according to that latest Star Tribune article enjoys his time with Minnesota and wants to stay a Twin.

TheLeviathan
07-22-2012, 02:06 PM
He is posting the 2nd highest k/9 rate of his career, that is what has changed thus far,

Why though? Is it a fluke? Did he change his delivery? Start throwing a pitch more often? Tossing 30M guaranteed at a fluke is a bad bet. What if this change is due to a return to his violent, injury-inducing delivery? You're dismissing a valid question with a lot of hot air.

Also, is there not a third choice beyond these: A) Pay Liriano and keep him B) Pay some other scrub and complain we let Liriano go? Because I see plenty of other options despite the way the argument is being construed.

SpiritofVodkaDave
07-22-2012, 02:26 PM
Why though? Is it a fluke? Did he change his delivery? Start throwing a pitch more often? Tossing 30M guaranteed at a fluke is a bad bet. What if this change is due to a return to his violent, injury-inducing delivery? You're dismissing a valid question with a lot of hot air.

Also, is there not a third choice beyond these: A) Pay Liriano and keep him B) Pay some other scrub and complain we let Liriano go? Because I see plenty of other options despite the way the argument is being construed.
He is throwing the slider quite a bit more recently then he was in the early year and in 2011. His current slider usage percentage is basically even with his 2010 year, in 2008/09 his slider % were pretty low as well. So maybe that is one explanation?

His fast ball velocity has averaged 93.2 MPH his year, in 2011 it was 91.8, in 2008/2009 it was 90.00 and 91.5
In 2010 his Fast ball averaged 94.2

In Liriano's last start before his demotion to the pen he averaged 90.4 MPH on his fastball (topped out at 91.7) in his latest start he averaged 93.7 MPH on his fastball (topped out at 94.1). Clearly something has changed for him.

Also his 2012 stats still show his ERA is over a run higher then his xFIP and FIP (this includes his horrific start as well), his LOB% is a little lower then normal as well so it can be said that Liriano has actually been somewhat unlucky this year.

TheLeviathan
07-22-2012, 02:29 PM
All of that is great....but then why did 2011 happened? What has changed? I was excited as anyone after 2010 and I thought this year was going to be a return to 2010 for him because I felt the issue in 2011 was his lazy ass basically saying "screw it" to his offseason program. If that wasn't the issue, what is it? I don't know either, but I would need to know what it is to feel comfortable offering him 30M. Paying 10% of our payroll for another Liriano 2011 version would be awful and the track record shows we are more likely to get that than the 2010 version.

I worry we are seeing his delivery get more violent again and the team is looking the other way knowing this is the last we'll have to deal with him. Which means an injury could be very likely.

SpiritofVodkaDave
07-22-2012, 02:34 PM
All of that is great....but then why did 2011 happened? What has changed? I was excited as anyone after 2010 and I thought this year was going to be a return to 2010 for him because I felt the issue in 2011 was his lazy ass basically saying "screw it" to his offseason program. If that wasn't the issue, what is it? I don't know either, but I would need to know what it is to feel comfortable offering him 30M. Paying 10% of our payroll for another Liriano 2011 version would be awful and the track record shows we are more likely to get that than the 2010 version.

I worry we are seeing his delivery get more violent again and the team is looking the other way knowing this is the last we'll have to deal with him. Which means an injury could be very likely.
Over his last ten starts he is basically mimicking his 2010 performance with: Speed, # of pitches thrown,% of breaking stuff thrown. He hasn't had any real injury issues since coming back from Tommy John surgery, if he gave us 191.2 IP in 2010 without any arm issues, and hasn't hard any arm issues this year there isn't some reason to assume he will suddenly develop arm issues again.

Of course the risk is still there as it is with every other pitcher, but I don't see him as some "high injury risk" just because he is throwing hard again like he did in 2010. Also I added an edit to my previous post which shows his velocity has kicked up about 3MPH from his last start before demotion to currently, obviously something was tweaked, I am not a pitching coach nor do I pretend to be an expert in mechanics, I would be interested to see someone do a thorough analysis on it to see what/if anything was changed.

From my purely "eyes" only approach it seems apparent to me the staff found something, worked with Liriano and fixed it thus leading him to pitching more effectively.

TheLeviathan
07-22-2012, 02:39 PM
I am not a pitching coach nor do I pretend to be an expert in mechanics, I would be interested to see someone do a thorough analysis on it to see what/if anything was changed

Same. But what I keep pointing out to you is that as great as he was in 2010 - he followed it with 2011 and several starts into 2012. As great as these last 10 starts have been....how can we not anticipate the same pattern? Someone would have to give me a detailed reason for why we shouldn't expect him to be awful again following this stretch, it's been his pattern.

Talk about "stuff" and "frontline" and "only non-Blackburn"" we have is irrelevant. At some point, as Jonathan Sanchez can attest, stuff isn't enough. And it's damn sure not enough to invest 30M. If he's changed something, ala Plouffe, then we could expect different results. If he hasn't changed anything, then we have no reason to anticipate anything but Liriano reverting again soon. The definition of crazy, as someone posted awhile ago on this subject, seems to apply.

SpiritofVodkaDave
07-22-2012, 02:46 PM
Same. But what I keep pointing out to you is that as great as he was in 2010 - he followed it with 2011 and several starts into 2012. As great as these last 10 starts have been....how can we not anticipate the same pattern? Someone would have to give me a detailed reason for why we shouldn't expect him to be awful again following this stretch, it's been his pattern.

Talk about "stuff" and "frontline" and "only non-Blackburn"" we have is irrelevant. At some point, as Jonathan Sanchez can attest, stuff isn't enough. And it's damn sure not enough to invest 30M. If he's changed something, ala Plouffe, then we could expect different results. If he hasn't changed anything, then we have no reason to anticipate anything but Liriano reverting again soon. The definition of crazy, as someone posted awhile ago on this subject, seems to apply.
His fastball is up 3 MPH, and he is now throwing his slider 30-50% more than he was prior to demotion (example: he threw 39 and 28 in his last two games vs 20, 18 and 22 in his 3 starts leading up to the demotion) Those two things alone seem like "proof" that he has changed something. Whether that is mechinical, mental or coaching is is TBD.

IdahoPilgrim
07-22-2012, 03:43 PM
His fastball is up 3 MPH, and he is now throwing his slider 30-50% more than he was prior to demotion (example: he threw 39 and 28 in his last two games vs 20, 18 and 22 in his 3 starts leading up to the demotion) Those two things alone seem like "proof" that he has changed something. Whether that is mechinical, mental or coaching is is TBD.

Let's say for the moment you are right, and he's found something that will let him continue to be effective.

How much do you think we should pay him, then? For me, that's a big part of the equation. Given his track record, should he be willing to sign a team friendly contract for a couple of years, to show that this time is for real? What if he holds out and decides to test free agency? Do we try to compete with other teams out there? Liriano may be high reward, but he is also high risk. How much should we risk in a guaranteed contract offer?

TheLeviathan
07-22-2012, 04:12 PM
I could be wrong but wasnt one reason they had him throw less sliders was because of the increased risk of injury?

Brock Beauchamp
07-22-2012, 04:14 PM
I could be wrong but wasnt one reason they had him throw less sliders was because of the increased risk of injury?

Yes, but that was when they thought he could be effective throwing less sliders. That hasn't been the case, though I don't understand why he's also throwing his fastball harder again. I think this success has more than one element to it (as is often the case).

70charger
07-22-2012, 04:17 PM
Bert's 5 IP 3 ER quality start stat is complete Rubbish and doesn't even warrant a response. Giving up 3 ER in 5 Innings is quite terrible IMO. Give me a starter that goes 7-8 IP and gives up 4 ER any day of the week. The problem with "what Blackburn did last night on a regular basis" is that through 100+ years of baseball statistics it is near impossible for a guy like Blackburn (not great stuff, doesn't strike anyone out) to throw gems on a regular basis.

Is it to much of a stretch to say Liriano has the highest upside of anyone in the Twins system? If that is the case or he is close to that then you have to keep him around.

1) A quality start is at least 6 innings (not 5), and 3 earned runs or fewer.
2) Bert Blyleven didn't just make it up, it's actually a baseball stat. Blows my mind that you haven't heard of it...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quality_start

SpiritofVodkaDave
07-22-2012, 04:27 PM
1) A quality start is at least 6 innings (not 5), and 3 earned runs or fewer.
2) Bert Blyleven didn't just make it up, it's actually a baseball stat. Blows my mind that you haven't heard of it...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quality_start

I am well aware of the Quality start stat, champ. It blows my mind that people use Wikipedia for sports information....
Also if you would read the orginal message it's pretty obvious I'm not the one who said it was 5 innings/3ER, I was quoting someone else who said it. That user wrote that Bert said 5 IP/3ER.

Regarless the Quality Start is not the end all/be all in determining a pitcher's effectiveness. It is much better then wins/losses though.

SpiritofVodkaDave
07-22-2012, 04:32 PM
Let's say for the moment you are right, and he's found something that will let him continue to be effective.

How much do you think we should pay him, then? For me, that's a big part of the equation. Given his track record, should he be willing to sign a team friendly contract for a couple of years, to show that this time is for real? What if he holds out and decides to test free agency? Do we try to compete with other teams out there? Liriano may be high reward, but he is also high risk. How much should we risk in a guaranteed contract offer?

I have mentioned a few times that I would prefer a 2/20-22 type contract with a team option but would be willing to goto 3/30-3/33.
Would he take it? Who knows, but if they offer it now I think there is a chance he takes it. He and his agent know his track record as well.

They also had that article recently that said Liriano wants to stay in Minnesota and likes playing for the Twins, so that has to count for something? Prior to that I believe Kobs and Kab both had said there was no way Liriano would ever want to stay with the Twins.

IdahoPilgrim
07-22-2012, 04:46 PM
I have mentioned a few times that I would prefer a 2/20-22 type contract with a team option but would be willing to goto 3/30-3/33.
Would he take it? Who knows, but if they offer it now I think there is a chance he takes it. He and his agent know his track record as well.

They also had that article recently that said Liriano wants to stay in Minnesota and likes playing for the Twins, so that has to count for something? Prior to that I believe Kobs and Kab both had said there was no way Liriano would ever want to stay with the Twins.

Offering that much would be a gutsy call for Ryan, I think, and if it doesn't work out expect him to be tar and feathered on websites like this.

I could maybe go $20M for 2 years (plus a team option) but I couldn't justify 3 guaranteed years. For me the amount we pay him is less important than the length of the contract. If he really wants to stay here, that is a more than fair offer given the track record. My guess is he would opt to test the free agent market. He could of course re-sign here after he sees what other teams are offering, but my guess is some team will be desperate enough to offer him a foolish contract and he'll accept.

SpiritofVodkaDave
07-22-2012, 04:51 PM
Offering that much would be a gutsy call for Ryan, I think, and if it doesn't work out expect him to be tar and feathered on websites like this.

I could maybe go $20M for 2 years (plus a team option) but I couldn't justify 3 guaranteed years. For me the amount we pay him is less important than the length of the contract. If he really wants to stay here, that is a more than fair offer given the track record. My guess is he would opt to test the free agent market. He could of course re-sign here after he sees what other teams are offering, but my guess is some team will be desperate enough to offer him a foolish contract and he'll accept.

I'd rather the Twins take a risk on a guy who can be a great pitcher rather then spread out that $30 million on a splattering of mediocre arms like Pavano (who they have given 24 million over the past 3 years), Marquis, Hernandez, Capps, etc

IdahoPilgrim
07-22-2012, 05:10 PM
So if we're talking about Liriano and the $10M+/year range, then how does that affect a decision on Baker's option next year, for about $9M. Yes, he's recovering from TJ surgery, and the first year back can be rough. But after that year, many players now bounce back completely (look at Joe Nathan). He's 30 right now, but he could have several good, solid years left. I guess my question is, which is really the higher risk - re-signing Liriano or keeping Baker?

mike wants wins
07-22-2012, 05:18 PM
Baker will barely pitch next year, so you are paying him that just to keep on him on the roster and hope he recovers and hope he'll re-sign with you after that. That is a much, much bigger risk.

IdahoPilgrim
07-22-2012, 05:47 PM
Baker will barely pitch next year, so you are paying him that just to keep on him on the roster and hope he recovers and hope he'll re-sign with you after that. That is a much, much bigger risk.

I disagree - not because I think Baker is not a risk, but I still think signing Liriano to a multi-year extension is an even bigger risk.

Why do I say this? Because I think June and July are fool's gold. Look at Liriano's career splits:

Month BA OPS ERA WHIP
Apr .278 .798 6.27 1.639
May .260 .738 4.32 1.432
Jun .212 .583 3.21 1.078
Jul .217 .629 3.24 1.197
Aug .256 .710 4.01 1.436
Sep .267 .800 5.24 1.334

SpiritofVodkaDave
07-22-2012, 06:16 PM
There is 0 chance the Twins pick up Bakers 9 mil option, I wouldn't be opposed to bringing him back on a heavy incentive based deal, but the Twins shouldn't count on him being an answer to the rotation for the full season.

TheLeviathan
07-22-2012, 06:17 PM
Expecting Liriano to take a team friendly number of years AND team friendly guaranteed money is a pipedream. Realistically dealing him is the best.

70charger
07-22-2012, 06:27 PM
I am well aware of the Quality start stat, champ. It blows my mind that people use Wikipedia for sports information....
Also if you would read the orginal message it's pretty obvious I'm not the one who said it was 5 innings/3ER, I was quoting someone else who said it. That user wrote that Bert said 5 IP/3ER.

Regarless the Quality Start is not the end all/be all in determining a pitcher's effectiveness. It is much better then wins/losses though.

Isn't it ironic that you assume that I'd go to wikipedia to look this up (I didn't, I was citing it for your reference) when you relied on a thirdhand source for your definition?

SpiritofVodkaDave
07-22-2012, 06:36 PM
Isn't it ironic that you assume that I'd go to wikipedia to look this up (I didn't, I was citing it for your reference) when you relied on a thirdhand source for your definition?

I knew, and know exactly what a quality start is. It was the poster before me who was trying to make a point of what Bert said (or didn't say?) He said "Bert says 5 IP and 3ER is what he (bert) considers a quality start"

Anyways, what exactly is your point again? Are you contributing to this thread at all or just wanting to argue semantics of another post that has little to do with the subject?

Also FWIW you were the one posting links to wikipedia, not I. All I did was respond to another poster and my thought that I'd rather have a pitcher that gives you 7/8 IP and 4 ER rather than 5 and 3 ER. Hell give me the 8 IP 4 ER over the 6 IP 3 ER guy 8 days a week.

SpiritofVodkaDave
07-22-2012, 06:39 PM
Expecting Liriano to take a team friendly number of years AND team friendly guaranteed money is a pipedream. Realistically dealing him is the best.

Is 3/30 really that team friendly? Do you think teams are going to be offering him 4+ years and more than 10-12 million a year in free agency?

TheLeviathan
07-22-2012, 07:47 PM
Is 3/30 really that team friendly? Do you think teams are going to be offering him 4+ years and more than 10-12 million a year in free agency?

Pavano got 2 years and 17M. I would say your proposal of 2/20 seems mighty team friendly.

Top Gun
07-22-2012, 08:13 PM
I would go 2/30 with a team option.

SpiritofVodkaDave
07-22-2012, 08:17 PM
Pavano got 2 years and 17M. I would say your proposal of 2/20 seems mighty team friendly.

I said I would prefer 2/20 (of course I would!) But threw out 3/30 and asked if that is to friendly? 3/33? I'd be fine with that as well. I just can't see a team giving him much more than 3/36 on the FA market. and if the Twins offer 3/30 now maybe he takes it due to the whole security thing/not risk FA market or a potential injury/regression etc etc?

Also he mentioned he likes it here and wants to stay here, so that has to at least help a tiny bit?

I can't imagine him succeeding in a large market to be honest, you think fans are tough on him in Minnesota? Just wait until he has one bad start in NY or BOS.

TheLeviathan
07-22-2012, 08:22 PM
I do think he'd sign here for the right price - but what reason does he have to take less money? Part of the argument people are floating out is that 3/30 is team friendly and therefore below market. I don't know what the market would yield for him, but I know I wouldn't guarantee him anywhere close to 30M.

And, on top of that, you can't use reasoning like his success in a large market to justify your contract speculation. Liriano doesn't have to think that and probably won't. He also doesn't have to acknowledge he has sucked for 2 of the last three years. He doesn't have to recognize his ERA+ is still 85. He doesn't have to think anything that we as fans include in the topic.

BrentMpls
07-23-2012, 12:30 AM
I was quoting someone else who said it. That user wrote that Bert said 5 IP/3ER.



Correct - he said that on air just before his most recent break, I don't remember the exact game, it was within the last few weeks. He said it with some disdain, as if he didn't agree fully phrasing it something like "How a quality start is defined in today's game is 5 innings and 3 runs or less". And he did say 5 and 3, not 6.

YourHouseIsMyHouse
07-23-2012, 04:17 AM
Liriano loves it in Minnesota. http://www.twincities.com/twins/ci_21129086/charley-walters-twins-francisco-liriano-loves-it-minnesota?source=most_viewed

I think the Twins have a very good chance to extend or re-sign Liriano to a new contract. It's really the front office's decision, not Frankie.

diehardtwinsfan
07-23-2012, 07:41 AM
Liriano loves it in Minnesota. http://www.twincities.com/twins/ci_21129086/charley-walters-twins-francisco-liriano-loves-it-minnesota?source=most_viewed

I think the Twins have a very good chance to extend or re-sign Liriano to a new contract. It's really the front office's decision, not Frankie.


which is exactly what he should say, whether it's true or not... I'd imagine that the Twins have already had the long term contract extension with him and as soon as actual numbers were passed around, the conversation ended.

Oxtung
07-23-2012, 05:54 PM
I was having a very OT discussion on the Sano thread and so am moving that discussion here where it is relevant.


Advanced metrics tell a different story. Also Morneau is 6/80, a far cry from 3/30.
You mean that Morneau has been payed $30 million over the last 2 years to post a -1 WAR? Any time you sign a player to a long term contract you are taking a risk. The more money and more years the larger the risk. As much as you want to deny it signing a below average pitcher, which Liriano has been, to a long term contract for ~10% of your team salary is a big risk.


Of the players you listed before, all would command 3/30 or more with no chance of putting together seasons comparable to liriano circa 2006 or 2010. Yes, Liriano is inconsistent but at 3/30 it would not be an albatross and could easily return a surplus value, where as a deal for Hamels / Greinke who would command something like 5 / 140 or more and very quickly turn into an albatross.
I'm not even sure how to respond to this...you just said that Greinke, who has a Cy Young award, couldn't match Liriano's 2010 season? I would have to look into it but I would guess that atleast 5 players on that list have at least 1 year that is equal to Liriano's 2010. On top of that everyone of those players hasn't been Liriano circa 2009, 2011, 2012. If you don't think 3/30 can turn into an albatross you must love Blackburn.

Willihammer
07-23-2012, 07:16 PM
You mean that Morneau has been payed $30 million over the last 2 years to post a -1 WAR? Any time you sign a player to a long term contract you are taking a risk. The more money and more years the larger the risk. As much as you want to deny it signing a below average pitcher, which Liriano has been, to a long term contract for ~10% of your team salary is a big risk. How can you in one breath mention Hamels, Greinke, , et al and in the next talk about Liriano salary risk? Are we not agreed that 3/30 is expectacted for Liriano, or not? Such price pales in comparison to risk involved with extensions the other group will get (with exceptions - see Sano thread reply# 38).
I'm not even sure how to respond to this...you just said that Greinke, who has a Cy Young award, couldn't match Liriano's 2010 season? I would have to look into it but I would guess that atleast 5 players on that list have at least 1 year that is equal to Liriano's 2010. On top of that everyone of those players hasn't been Liriano circa 2009, 2011, 2012. If you don't think 3/30 can turn into an albatross you must love Blackburn. I was speaking in terms of win-return/$ but wasn't clear. At 3/30 Liriano presents a higher possible win return on the dollar compared to Greinke or Hamels who because of consistent track records will net lucrative contract/extensions and therefore return a lower value, somewhere between $9.33 and 4.66 / win, whereas Liriano at 3/30 can expect a floor of about $5m/win at 2 wins/season (fangraphs WAR) and a ceiling of $2m/win (5 wins/season).

Ah, I am using fangraphs WAR and you are using bb-ref WAR. That is a separate depate. Suffice, you extricate the stat suiting your argument and I for mine. In such case the "albatross" risk defaults to the higher gross investment. Blackburn is a disappointment, not an albatross. If to sign and albatross Greinke or Hamels now, then the the SP+Mauer handcuffs the Twins when Sano reaches MLb and all is for naught.

Final thought: Velocity has a negative correlation with paycheck. In other words, peak velocity occurs before free agency. With peak velocity comes peak strikeouts - around age 28. Another argument in the corner of Hernandez/Price.

Willihammer
07-23-2012, 07:31 PM
Liriano loves it in Minnesota. http://www.twincities.com/twins/ci_21129086/charley-walters-twins-francisco-liriano-loves-it-minnesota?source=most_viewed I think the Twins have a very good chance to extend or re-sign Liriano to a new contract. It's really the front office's decision, not Frankie. This is good news.

1. The Twins need pitching anyway. Home discount would be welcome.
2. Other clubs are showing hesitant to pull the trade trigger - forecasting a down free agency market on him.
3. Heavy reliance on the slider, instead of fastball = greater success in post-peak years. Slightly less vulnerability to declining fastball velocity that is inevitable with age.

No proof that other lucrative FAs are even open to a MN offer, esp. NL FA's. If they are open -minded, some probability they will only sign here at a premium. No premium with Liriano as he likes to stay here.

notoriousgod71
07-23-2012, 08:23 PM
Liriano's HR/9 is fine. He's top 30 in MLB at .8/9. That's not a home run derby.

I would much rather have what Blackburn did last night too, but unfortunately we don't have anyone who can do that on a regular basis so Liriano is still better.

Come next year when we have a rotation of Blackburn, DeVries, Diamond, Walters, and Gibson/Baker/whoever we are all going to be bitching about not having a strikeout pitcher and how we should have kept Liriano.

Well, that was predictable...


I STAND BY MY COMMENTS!

IdahoPilgrim
07-23-2012, 09:05 PM
This is good news.

1. The Twins need pitching anyway. Home discount would be welcome.
2. Other clubs are showing hesitant to pull the trade trigger - forecasting a down free agency market on him.
3. Heavy reliance on the slider, instead of fastball = greater success in post-peak years. Slightly less vulnerability to declining fastball velocity that is inevitable with age.

No proof that other lucrative FAs are even open to a MN offer, esp. NL FA's. If they are open -minded, some probability they will only sign here at a premium. No premium with Liriano as he likes to stay here.

Not necessarily. They might be put off by the new CBA and the fact that he is eligible for free agency this year. Why give up anything for him and chance he signs with someone else and end up losing a prospect and not even getting a draft pick in return when you can wait yourself and try to sign him as a FA during the off-season? The only people who might consider a trade are those in contention. After the season, anybody can make a play for him for no cost.

SpiritofVodkaDave
07-23-2012, 10:33 PM
Son of a bitch.

Oxtung
07-23-2012, 10:37 PM
How can you in one breath mention Hamels, Greinke, , et al and in the next talk about Liriano salary risk? Are we not agreed that 3/30 is expectacted for Liriano, or not? Such price pales in comparison to risk involved with extensions the other group will get (with exceptions - see Sano thread reply# 38). I was speaking in terms of win-return/$ but wasn't clear. At 3/30 Liriano presents a higher possible win return on the dollar compared to Greinke or Hamels who because of consistent track records will net lucrative contract/extensions and therefore return a lower value, somewhere between $9.33 and 4.66 / win, whereas Liriano at 3/30 can expect a floor of about $5m/win at 2 wins/season (fangraphs WAR) and a ceiling of $2m/win (5 wins/season).

Ah, I am using fangraphs WAR and you are using bb-ref WAR. That is a separate depate. Suffice, you extricate the stat suiting your argument and I for mine. In such case the "albatross" risk defaults to the higher gross investment. Blackburn is a disappointment, not an albatross. If to sign and albatross Greinke or Hamels now, then the the SP+Mauer handcuffs the Twins when Sano reaches MLb and all is for naught.

Final thought: Velocity has a negative correlation with paycheck. In other words, peak velocity occurs before free agency. With peak velocity comes peak strikeouts - around age 28. Another argument in the corner of Hernandez/Price.

You have misunderstood my posts or made assumptions about my opinions. Let me try to recap what was said and why I responded the way I did.

You started by saying there weren't many FA SP's this year. To which I responded with a list of ~10 pitchers who are FA's and have been better pitchers than Liriano.

You next claimed 3years/$30M contract for Liriano was low risk. I said that anytime you commit ~10% of your salary to one player that is not low risk. When that player is a below average player that becomes a high risk contract.

You finally claimed that even if Liriano was bad the 3/30 contract would not be an albatross to which I said you must like the Blackburn deal then. You also said that the Liriano contract would be a safer bet than a Hamels or Greinke contract.

Now let me try and clarify my position because I think you've made some bad assumptions. I don't favor a long term high $$ contract for Greinke or Hamels. I agree this would handcuff the Twins long term. I only included them in the list because you said there weren't good pitchers out there. I DO think signing 1-2 pitchers in the second tier for 3-4 years for $30-60M each, depending on the particulars, is the way to proceed. I don't think the Twins should resign Liriano because he hasn't been even an average pitcher unless he comes very cheap or it's a 1 year deal. You have to mitigate his risk. 3/30 for Liriano is high risk.

I don't care if you use BBRef or Fangraphs for WAR. The only reason I brought up Morneau was to show that any long term contract is a risk.

Willihammer
07-23-2012, 10:47 PM
Not necessarily. They might be put off by the new CBA and the fact that he is eligible for free agency this year. Why give up anything for him and chance he signs with someone else and end up losing a prospect and not even getting a draft pick in return when you can wait yourself and try to sign him as a FA during the off-season? The only people who might consider a trade are those in contention. After the season, anybody can make a play for him for no cost. As I understand it, the only team to lose a draft pick would be a signer who takes him and isn't in line for a protected pick (ie. top 15). The Twins should not lose a 1st round pick in any scenario, as I understand it.

stringer bell
07-23-2012, 10:49 PM
Liriano has great stuff, but he has a very difficult time staying mechanically sound. On the topic at hand, he needs to go, not because of tonight, but because he has too many nights like this. I hope the Twins find a trade partner that makes sense.

Willihammer
07-23-2012, 11:03 PM
You have misunderstood my posts or made assumptions about my opinions. You're framing this in an interesting way, but only interesting to me since I think all previously interested parties have long since wandered on.

I have always spoken in terms of value added per dollar spent. If I had spoken of gross value then I wouldn't have stipulated Sano as trade bait in the first place, obviously. See "Trade Sano" Post# 1. As a stipulation, if the Twin retain Liriano, then they are virtually encumbered therewith to sign a free agent as per their de facto all-in posturing for 2013. Owing to the fact that (presumable SP free agents you mentioned) are all or 1 of: 1. old and declining and 2. overpriced relative to Price/Hernandez (and to a lesser extent, Buehrle and Lee), 3. unproven in the AL, 4. injurious history, then a better move may be to take the better, younger pitcher under 2+ years of control at the lower immediate price of a A level prospect (albeit a top level prospect).

You, sir, retorted by cherry picking statistics from 2008, all of which are validated by fangraphs WAR, and none of which are validated by rWAR (bb-ref), thus I assumed bb-ref. But I am done quibbling. The fact is, if we can't even agree on a common formula for Wins then there is little to quibble about anyway. BB-ref and Fangraphs tell very different strories about Liriano. I assume you are familiar with both, and can understand my conclusion here. If not, then please reference fangraphs.com and search for WAR. Pitcher WAR is more heavily dependent on FIP and less dependent on park factor (obviously park factor is less meaningful in a park that is not even 3 years old).

skraft33
07-23-2012, 11:04 PM
As I understand it, the only team to lose a draft pick would be a signer who takes him and isn't in line for a protected pick (ie. top 15). The Twins should not lose a 1st round pick in any scenario, as I understand it.
I believe the rule was amended in the previous CBA so that only picks in the top-10 are protected

Willihammer
07-23-2012, 11:04 PM
I believe the rule was amended in the previous CBA so that only picks in the top-10 are protected It is the top 15 for the 2013 draft, I belive.

TheLeviathan
07-23-2012, 11:08 PM
As a stipulation, if the Twin retain Liriano, then they are virtually encumbered therewith to sign a free agent as per their de facto all-in posturing for 2013.

You realize just about half of this sentence is pure, unnecessary gibberish right?

Oxtung
07-23-2012, 11:32 PM
You're framing this in an interesting way, but only interesting to me since I think all previously interested parties have long since wandered on.

I have always spoken in terms of value added per dollar spent. If I had spoken of gross value then I wouldn't have stipulated Sano as trade bait in the first place, obviously. See "Trade Sano" Post# 1. As a stipulation, if the Twin retain Liriano, then they are virtually encumbered therewith to sign a free agent as per their de facto all-in posturing for 2013. Owing to the fact that (presumable SP free agents you mentioned) are all or 1 of: 1. old and declining and 2. overpriced relative to Price/Hernandez (and to a lesser extent, Buehrle and Lee), 3. unproven in the AL, 4. injurious history, then a better move may be to take the better, younger pitcher under 2+ years of control at the lower immediate price of a A level prospect (albeit a top level prospect).

You, sir, retorted by cherry picking statistics from 2008, all of which are validated by fangraphs WAR, and none of which are validated by rWAR (bb-ref), thus I assumed bb-ref. But I am done quibbling. The fact is, if we can't even agree on a common formula for Wins then there is little to quibble about anyway. BB-ref and Fangraphs tell very different strories about Liriano. I assume you are familiar with both, and can understand my conclusion here. If not, then please reference fangraphs.com and search for WAR. Pitcher WAR is more heavily dependent on FIP and less dependent on park factor (obviously park factor is less meaningful in a park that is not even 3 years old).

Now you just seem to be making things up. The only statistic I mentioned in this discussion was in reference to Morneau and it was tangentially related to my main point. So there is no way I cherry picked anything. I am ready to be done with this discussion. I'll reiterate my points one last time in the vain hope that you understand.

1) There are many good free agent starting pitchers available this year.

2) Resigning Liriano to any contract longer than 1 year is a risk. The longer and more money involved the riskier it is. Liriano has been a below average pitcher. 3/30 is a risky contract for Liriano.

Those have been the points of my posts. Nothing else.

Willihammer
07-24-2012, 12:55 AM
1) There are many good free agent starting pitchers available this year. In absolute terms, ther are few FAs better th an Liriano. Even fewer, in relative terms.
2) Resigning Liriano to any contract longer than 1 year is a risk. The longer and more money involved the riskier it is. Liriano has been a below average pitcher. 3/30 is a risky contract for Liriano. Those have been the points of my posts. Nothing else. Then why previously did you mention Marcum, Jackson, &Sanchez? Nevermind, get back to me after the deadline. Like K. Williams, I think instead of you wanting to rebuild or reload you'd waffle as the ChiSox cca 2011-2012.

Oxtung
07-24-2012, 01:02 AM
Then why previously did you mention Marcum, Jackson, &Sanchez? Nevermind, get back to me after the deadline. Like K. Williams, I think instead of you wanting to rebuild or reload you'd waffle as the ChiSox cca 2011-2012.

Do you even read my posts? Am I a fish on the line? Are you just trolling? Somebody save me here. Anybody have a needle nosed pliers?

IdahoPilgrim
07-24-2012, 05:44 AM
As I understand it, the only team to lose a draft pick would be a signer who takes him and isn't in line for a protected pick (ie. top 15). The Twins should not lose a 1st round pick in any scenario, as I understand it.

Correct. My point was that, if somebody was to trade for him and then he didn't sign an extension and went to a third team in free agency, the team who traded for him would not get a draft pick in compensation (as in the previous CBA) and would have effectively given away a prospect for a two month rental. Only a contender would do that, whereas after the season is up, anybody can throw their hat in the ring.

Willihammer
07-24-2012, 10:22 AM
Correct. My point was that, if somebody was to trade for him and then he didn't sign an extension and went to a third team in free agency, the team who traded for him would not get a draft pick in compensation (as in the previous CBA) and would have effectively given away a prospect for a two month rental. Only a contender would do that, whereas after the season is up, anybody can throw their hat in the ring.

Maybe the better move, if the Twins are heck bent on dumping Liriano, is to sign and then shop, so as to provoke a bidding war amongst teams with unprotected picks ie. contenders.