PDA

View Full Version : Article: Free Agent Pitcher Profile: Phil Hughes



Nick Nelson
10-22-2013, 11:29 PM
You can view the page at http://twinsdaily.com/content.php?r=2425-Free-Agent-Pitcher-Profile-Phil-Hughes

clutterheart
10-22-2013, 11:51 PM
Wow
Those home/away splits are amazing....It looks like you missed his last start. MLB.com says his "home" ERA is 6.32 with 17 HR. His last home start was a bad one!
Interesting that Kuroda & Nova both pitched much better at home but Hughes Fly Balls must have really carried in Yankee stadium.

Hughes would be an OK pitcher, better than most other options the team has. But..if he is the only FA signing, that would be annoying

Nick Nelson
10-23-2013, 01:07 AM
He had one relief appearance, in which he gave up 4 ER and recorded one out. I didn't include that because I was looking at him as a starter, but, yeah, bad.

Don't Feed the Greed Guy
10-23-2013, 06:47 AM
If free agency is a crap shoot, this is where I'd roll the dice.

A sidebar comment: The "Don't Feed the Greed" moniker is really about management and labor reaching a mutual understanding. It's where both sides agree not to screw a good thing up, and penalize the fans--and the game--just because one side gets greedy.

At some point the Twins management has to show up, and let Mauer & Company (aka: labor) know that they want to win, too. That also means showing the folks that buy $10 beers that saving payroll isn't the Pohlad's only dream. Hughes appears to be step 1. Hughes is the right kind of gamble, IMHO. Not the only gamble, but a step in the right direction.

My only red flag is the innings issue. It would be nice to sign a 200+ innings eater. That may be step 2.

TheMind07
10-23-2013, 07:52 AM
I think Hughes is definitely the one to go after for the Twins. He won't be too expensive is still young and fits in with the next "wave." Even if you have to overpay for Hughes I for one think he's the one worth doing so for. I think a change of scenery would do him good, I think a good comparison might be AJ Burnett going from NY to Pittsburgh.

USAFChief
10-23-2013, 08:29 AM
I'm not a Hughes fan at all. I'm pretty confident he'll be a disappointment to whoever ends up signing him.

I'm always skeptical of guys who's primary attraction seems to be "he just needs to face less talented competition," and/or "pitch in easier conditions."

I'd rather take chances on guys who should be able to perform against the best, but for some reason haven't, instead of guys who might look better because circumstances got more forgiving.

Winston Smith
10-23-2013, 08:37 AM
His career numbers are a lot better than Correia and he pitched in the AL East. That's the bright side, however, he has been a mediocre pitcher over his career at best.

I think I'd try a make good contract with both him and Josh Johnson 7-8 mill base with a bunch of incentives they could reach if they pitch well. Neither has shown a longer term contract would be wise and Ryan is rather conservative when spending money. I just can't see Ryan doing a 10+m multiy year deal, it just isn't in his nature.

pierre75275
10-23-2013, 08:43 AM
I would much rather the twins target somebody like Hughes as opposed to Johnson and Haren.

Brock Beauchamp
10-23-2013, 08:54 AM
More than anyone else, I think this is the guy the Twins should be targeting.

1. He's an extreme flyball pitcher, a la Scott Baker. A guy like that can do well in Target Field.

2. Flyball pitcher + Target Field + Byron Buxton + Aaron Hicks = Yay!

3. Any time a guy gets to leave the AL East, it's probably going to help him a bit.

4. Down season, young age, reasonable price.

Hughes isn't an ace. He's probably not even a good #2 pitcher. But on a roster full of #4/5 starters, I'll take a young guy who could be a very good #3 all day. Add in another mediocre season by Correia, maturation by Gibson, and Phil Hughes and you're looking at the foundation of a decent, though entirely unspectacular, rotation.

jay
10-23-2013, 09:18 AM
I'm pretty confident he'll be a disappointment to whoever ends up signing him.

You could probably say that about the vast majority of free agent pitchers, but here we are.


I'm always skeptical of guys who's primary attraction seems to be "he just needs to face less talented competition," and/or "pitch in easier conditions."

I'd rather take chances on guys who should be able to perform against the best, but for some reason haven't, instead of guys who might look better because circumstances got more forgiving.

You can spin it that way, but really it's about fitting skills and talents to the best environment. The "moving out of the AL East" bit would be said about most anyone moving out of that league and certainly isn't specific to Phil Hughes. His flyball tendency on the other hand is something that isn't a great fit for the physical layout of Yankee Stadium (not an indiction of his skill) and fits your narrative perfectly of someone "who should be able to perform against the best, but for some reason haven't".

If not Hughes, who?

Siehbiscuit
10-23-2013, 09:27 AM
I agree with Brock 100%. Point 5 being very important, if the price is right. Normally, all on the board would be clamoring about this being a buy-low candidate if it was a trade, but unfortunately he will likely get $8-10 per with his potential being his best selling point. Considering the current staff, Hughes' age and the prospects rising through the minors, Hughes could be very important for this team in 2015-2016 and maybe beyond. Sign him while he's still young and has upside. He's worth the risk.

DAM DC Twins Fans
10-23-2013, 09:29 AM
As opposed to Lincecom and Haren--I would prefer a flyer on Hughes (max. 3 years 40 million). Good point on getting away from the House that Ruth (George??) built and the AL East. I am not sure how much better than Correia he would be but worth a flyer more so than Haren or Lincecom.

twinkiesfan11
10-23-2013, 09:39 AM
I'd be thrilled to see the Twins take a chance on Hughes over yet another ground ball specialist. As a fan I just can't stomach another year of watching that garbage. He's demonstrated the ability to pile up some K's which would be pretty valuable in this rotation. If 3 years at $10 million a year would get it done they'd be adding a reasonably priced #4 starter to bridge the gap to and maybe even contribute to the next competitive wave.

twinsfan34
10-23-2013, 09:44 AM
Some great comments and analysis.

I do like Phil Hughes too. Better than Lincecum. I'd be willing to give Tanaka a 6yr $60M deal and his Japanese team the $60M posting bid. Maybe (likely) a bit rich for the Twins. He's likely to fall somewhere between Matsuaka (Red Sox) and Darvish (Rangers), with the needle falling closer to the Darvish side.

The fly ball thing. It's sorta frustrating, but maybe a strength?

"Target Field: where fly balls go to die" - is that what it will be known as?

Much like the Dome or "Homer-dome" or the fast turf of the Piranhas, maybe the Twins need to find players who play to the strengths of Target field. Assuming it's given up it's colors as to what type of players thrive there. Btw, I'd love to hear assessments on this. Righties? Lefties? Pull/opposite field hitters? speed of the grass? Fly ball pitchers? How ground balls do at Target field versus the rest of the stadiums?

If Target Field is indeed the place where fly balls die. It would seem that high strikeout and fly ball pitchers would be the way to go? It seems the Twins are going after power arms since 2012 (Terry Ryan).

If I'm not mistaken, I think the Twins were interested or almost acquired Phil Hughes in the Santana trade a few years back. Must have liked him? I can't recall. I know the Red Sox were offering Jon Lester, but we wanted Clay Buchholz and/or Ellsbury.

I'm for a 3yr $21M incentive laiden contract. ERA under 3.80 gets him $3M a year. IP over 200 gets him another $3M per year. Possible $13M Phil Hughes, whattaya say?

Brock Beauchamp
10-23-2013, 09:48 AM
I'm for a 3yr $21M incentive laiden contract. ERA under 3.80 gets him $3M a year. IP over 200 gets him another $3M per year. Possible $13M Phil Hughes, whattaya say?

I'm almost positive that won't get Hughes to even return your phone call.

We argued a bit over Hughes in the creation of the handbook. I think he's going to get more than many expect... Three years, $35m is a good starting point. I don't see him getting less than $10m a season.

amjgt
10-23-2013, 10:08 AM
Given the parallels with 2006 (new TV contract = GMs spending tons of money) i would be shocked to see Hughes get anything less than 4/50.

If I was going to go on record with a guess.... 4/54 with a team option in year 5. I realize that's an insane price tag for a pitcher with Hughes numbers, but I'm sticking to that guess. (Gil Meche is a decent comp and he got 5/55 in 2006)

That number probably comes down a little bit if the Yanks do a Qualifying Offer. If you are the Yankees and you think Hughes' free agent market value is anywhere north of $40M, why wouldn't you make the Q.O.? He has to turn it down, right?

Thankfully, they will need to make the Q.O. before it becomes obvious that the F.A. market is going to be flush with money.

Brock Beauchamp
10-23-2013, 10:32 AM
I don't see Hughes getting more than Edwin Jackson money (4/$52m). Jackson was just a year older and had more consistent numbers.

Also, the Meche contract shouldn't be used as a baseline for anything. Most of us doubled over in laughter when we heard those contract numbers. Meche was young and decent (and had one very good year for the Royals) but the amount he received was not in line with anyone else on the market.

markos
10-23-2013, 10:40 AM
2. Flyball pitcher + Target Field + Byron Buxton + Aaron Hicks = Yay!

3. Any time a guy gets to leave the AL East, it's probably going to help him a bit.


2. Flyball pitcher + Target Field + Josh Willingham + Alex Presley + Oswaldo Arcia = Cover your eyes! Hide the children!!!

3. Due to scheduling quirks, Hughes only had 1 starts against Boston, the best offensive team in the AL East. In contrast, he had 7 starts against Toronto (8th) and Tampa Bay (9th), both who were around league average offenses. Further, 3 of his worst starts came against San Diego (12th), Seattle (12th) and Kansas City (11th) - not exactly offensive powerhouses. Overall, his average opponent Runs per game was 4.40, which is only slightly more than the league average of 4.33.

amjgt
10-23-2013, 10:43 AM
I don't see Hughes getting more than Edwin Jackson money (4/$52m). Jackson was just a year older and had more consistent numbers.

Also, the Meche contract shouldn't be used as a baseline for anything. Most of us doubled over in laughter when we heard those contract numbers. Meche was young and decent (and had one very good year for the Royals) but the amount he received was not in line with anyone else on the market.

Jackson didn't have draft pick compensation tied to him, right?
Regardless... Agree to disagree.

I think we are going to be doubled over with laughter a lot this offseason (See: Lincecum, Tim)

twinkiesfan11
10-23-2013, 10:46 AM
If I'm not mistaken, I think the Twins were interested or almost acquired Phil Hughes in the Santana trade a few years back. Must have liked him? I can't recall. I know the Red Sox were offering Jon Lester, but we wanted Clay Buchholz and/or Ellsbury.

I'm 99% positive I remember reading during the Santana tradefest that the Twins were very high on Hughes and even intended to draft him in the Waldrop slot in the 04' draft but were beat to it by the Yankees. Not sure that's relevant anymore but an interesting tidbit.

Winston Smith
10-23-2013, 11:24 AM
I'm afraid that even borderline mediocre pitching is going to be really expensive this year, at least in relation to how much Ryan is willing to spend.
Hughes and Jackson compare fairly well stat wise, would Terry do a 4/52m? I can't see it.

twinsfan34
10-23-2013, 11:46 AM
I'm almost positive that won't get Hughes to even return your phone call.

We argued a bit over Hughes in the creation of the handbook. I think he's going to get more than many expect... Three years, $35m is a good starting point. I don't see him getting less than $10m a season.


Welp. You're probably right. If Lincecum, Pence, and the contracts signed so far are any indicator of the Free Agency season...it's best not to get caught up in a few bad contracts for mediocre pitching.

Maybe Ryan Dempster is a better indicator than the other names mentioned...then factor in a few years younger.

I can't see the Yankees offering him a QO and him not taking it. It would likely handcuff a team thinking of signing him. Add to the fact the A's and the Cardinals and Nationals have been getting #1, #2, and #3 level production from top draft picks the past few years - giving up a 1st or 2nd to sign Hughes (not a #1, #2, or #3 production) might not be as palatable as in years' past.

Marta Shearing
10-23-2013, 12:01 PM
I'm not a Hughes fan at all. I'm pretty confident he'll be a disappointment to whoever ends up signing him.

I'm always skeptical of guys who's primary attraction seems to be "he just needs to face less talented competition," and/or "pitch in easier conditions."

I'd rather take chances on guys who should be able to perform against the best, but for some reason haven't, instead of guys who might look better because circumstances got more forgiving.

Could not agree more. The entire 2000's they economically constructed teams just strong enough to win the crummy Central, but too flawed for playoff success. Signing Phil Hughes is just going in the same direction. Can we aspire for more?

TheLeviathan
10-23-2013, 12:42 PM
I don't think the right way to spin this is that we're getting a guy who needs things to be easier to be successful, the point is that if we sign a guy and put him in a better position to pitch better - we'll receive a better bang for our buck.

I think Hughes and Johnson represent the best chances for that scenario.

Brock Beauchamp
10-23-2013, 12:46 PM
I don't think the right way to spin this is that we're getting a guy who needs things to be easier to be successful, the point is that if we sign a guy and put him in a better position to pitch better - we'll receive a better bang for our buck.

This. You go after guys that have underperformed in other locations for any number of reasons: home stadium, division, playing time, style of play, etc. You don't hold it against a guy because his last spot was a bad fit; you exploit the situation when the market is down on a player because his last spot was a bad fit.

mike wants wins
10-23-2013, 12:51 PM
It will take 4/50 or so, imo. I'd do that. What else are they spending the money on? My sig is a dream, imo.

edit: 4/60 is my new prediction, 2 minutes later

Wookiee of the Year
10-23-2013, 01:00 PM
I'm 99% positive I remember reading during the Santana tradefest that the Twins were very high on Hughes and even intended to draft him in the Waldrop slot in the 04' draft but were beat to it by the Yankees. Not sure that's relevant anymore but an interesting tidbit.
You never know--I remember hearing last offseason that the Twins didn't like Edwin Jackson because when they scouted him as a high schooler, they thought his motion made him injury prone. So it could still be relevant to them.

nicksaviking
10-23-2013, 01:05 PM
I'm not high on Hughes, but I'd be fine if they signed him. It would indicate that A) they are finally taking free agency seriously and B) the intentional but unfortunate idea that this team has to target only groundball pitchers is over.

Question though, if Hughes is the ace (gag), does he still get to pitch the Wild Card game hosted at Yankee Stadium? He may get away from a heavy dose of AL East moving to the AL Cental in the regular season, he still has to beat them in the playoffs which should be the goal.

amjgt
10-23-2013, 01:23 PM
Circling back on 2006...

Because of the glut of money being tossed around in 2006, the following 2 years had relatively few signings more than $10,000,000 (total contract).

I'm certainly not in the "hold your nose until 2015/16" camp, but it could be that our money is more wisely spent those years, when a) there might be some relative bargains, and b) we are closer to competing.

I'd like to think that agents saw all of this coming and targeted their clients contracts to end this season, but I often give people too much credit, and this year certainly doesn't seem very strong for the quality of free agents out there.

What is all of that pointing to?...... TANAKA!!!!!

Break the bank, Terry.

Brock Beauchamp
10-23-2013, 01:23 PM
Question though, if Hughes is the ace (gag), does he still get to pitch the Wild Card game hosted at Yankee Stadium? He may get away from a heavy dose of AL East moving to the AL Cental in the regular season, he still has to beat them in the playoffs which should be the goal.

It should only be the goal if you believe Hughes is the best pitcher you're going to field in the next 2-3 years.

Let's hope that's not the case.

Marta Shearing
10-23-2013, 02:13 PM
I'd rather overpay for Garza.

Thrylos
10-23-2013, 03:14 PM
Hughes would be a great signing. Got to mention that his BABIP in 2013 was .324 too...

In 2013, a down season, Hughes had 7.5 K/9 and his FB averaged 92.4 mph. Since pitch F/X came out (2006) the Twins did not have any RHP who matched this combination. In his down season. The closest was Garza (2007, 7.3 K/9 and 94.2 mph FB). Only Santana 3 times (2004-6) and Liriano twice (2006, 2010) matched or exceeded those numbers for the Twins.

Just another perspective...

Shane Wahl
10-23-2013, 03:49 PM
The Lincecum prediction was 4 years and $64 million. It ended up being 2 years and $35 million.

I guess I don't understand quite the discrepancy in the those two predictions (Hughes and Lincecum), but I certainly understand the discrepancy between the prediction and the actual.

The Hughes prediction is 3 years and $30 million. I cannot imagine much less, certainly, unless Hughes is willing to go 2 years and $24 million or so. He might be willing to do that given his age, hoping for a bigger payday when he is still under 30 (but wanting more stability and money than just a one-year deal).

I do like incentive-laden deals. Maybe a 2/24 base with $2 million incentives (X innings with under 4 ERA) each year. Or 3/33 and the same to max at 3/39.

Shane Wahl
10-23-2013, 03:53 PM
The extra TV money is much more likely to drive up yearly salary, not the number of years. See Lincecum.

raindog
10-23-2013, 05:25 PM
I wish there were better options out there, but Hughes is really one of the best targets this year. Love the way Leviathan put it; you'd be giving him a better chance to succeed.

I looked at his average fastball velocity while he's been in the majors, no decline there. So he probably hasn't lost his "stuff". Just needs to figure something out, I suppose.
Fangraphs Pitch F/X (http://www.fangraphs.com/pitchfx.aspx?playerid=7450&position=P&pitch=FA)

ND-Fan
10-23-2013, 06:34 PM
I think he worth shot at signing he still 27 years old and still has potential improvement and his style of pitching would fit well into Target Field. He would fill number 3 starter for sure for Twins and if he had some improvement maybe number 2 starter. Add him to rotation we would have number 5 starter in Correia , Number 4 starter in Gibson, and him at number 3 Starter. We also would have Diamond coming back that could be another 3 or 4 starter if he could return to 2012 performance. Then if the Twins would go after top line pitcher addition to Hughes in free agency the Twins would have starting pitching staff. With likes of Worley, Hendricks, Deduno, and May still prospect category with some possible upside to fill in spot if one above has trouble performing. Aslo we would have myer, wimmers, and several other prospects coming up in next year we could develop fair starting pitching rotation. The Twins need to sign one quality starter like Hughes and one top of the line starter. The Twins can easily sign couple of players like this not significant effect on payroll now or in the future. The Twins are going to be stocked on players from minors for next 3 to 4 years so salary is not going to be a problem with young players filling in number of starting positions. Aslo Twins have no significant long term contracts other than Mauers for next 4 years so there should be room add other players if needed to become a competitive team. What I am afraid is going to happen instead the Twins will try to trade for quality starter instead of using free agency because their afraid of free agency and commitment in doing so. Ryan doesn't want to take risks of spending money on free agency in case the player bombs or is hurt ending his career. The Twins are going to have break there traditional way of rebuilding if they want the revenue and attendance continue in near future .

USAFChief
10-23-2013, 07:41 PM
This. You go after guys that have underperformed in other locations for any number of reasons: home stadium, division, playing time, style of play, etc. You don't hold it against a guy because his last spot was a bad fit; you exploit the situation when the market is down on a player because his last spot was a bad fit.
Playing time, I agree. Style of play maybe. Injury obviously. Conflict with coaches maybe. There are certainly reasons players might struggle in one situation and thrive in another.

Home stadium? Questionable IMO. Division? No.

Brock Beauchamp
10-23-2013, 08:33 PM
Playing time, I agree. Style of play maybe. Injury obviously. Conflict with coaches maybe. There are certainly reasons players might struggle in one situation and thrive in another.

Home stadium? Questionable IMO. Division? No.

The division argument is debatable but I don't see how the home stadium is debatable at all.

Over the course of his career, here is the home/road ERA of Hughes:

4.96 / 4.10

That's 735 innings of work. That's a huge discrepancy, especially when you factor in that the vast majority of pitchers have better numbers at home, not away from it. Their defenders are more comfortable, they're (usually) more comfortable, and the opposing hitters are uncomfortable.

I don't understand how home stadium wouldn't be important. If you're a flyball pitcher, do you want to pitch in Dodger Stadium or Minute Maid Park? If you're a groundball pitcher, do you want to pitch in Wrigley or the Astrodome? Home stadiums have enormous impacts on pitchers.

The Wise One
10-23-2013, 08:38 PM
Whatever Lincecum signed has no bearing on the rest of the world. 2 years ago he turned down a 4 year extension because he didn't want that kind of commitment. Lincecum does what he wants because that is what he wants to do. If he passes his physical that will push his career earnings to 99 million. There is no pressure on him to do anything but what he wants to do. As a medium tier pitcher and young Hughes should get a 4 year contract. A perfect fit for the Twins as he has the prerequisite plays poorly in Yankee stadium bit down pat.
Side bit here. Can one of you stats guys tell me the wisdom of compiling xfip as a home versus away stat?
era home vs away 4.94 4.10
xfip 4.28 4.35
fiip 4.80 3.78
sorry, I wasn't going to find a different site that had all of the rest of the era predictors. The baseball prospectus article on the predictor stuff showed reliability for all of the predictors was the same with a large enough sample size. 700+ innings was more than a large sample size IIRC.

kab21
10-23-2013, 09:11 PM
I'm all for signing Hughes. He's a risk but he is a guy that could substantially improve. It's likely that he is at least a solid starter and it doesn't sound like he will get unreasonable money.

And getting out of Yankee Stadium should help a lot especially since it seems hard to hit a HR to RF in Target Field. HR/FB% at home is 13% and 7% on the road.

jay
10-23-2013, 09:34 PM
I don't see Hughes getting more than Edwin Jackson money (4/$52m). Jackson was just a year older and had more consistent numbers.

Inflation is a b.

Brock Beauchamp
10-23-2013, 09:44 PM
Whatever Lincecum signed has no bearing on the rest of the world. 2 years ago he turned down a 4 year extension because he didn't want that kind of commitment. Lincecum does what he wants because that is what he wants to do. If he passes his physical that will push his career earnings to 99 million. There is no pressure on him to do anything but what he wants to do. As a medium tier pitcher and young Hughes should get a 4 year contract. A perfect fit for the Twins as he has the prerequisite plays poorly in Yankee stadium bit down pat.
Side bit here. Can one of you stats guys tell me the wisdom of compiling xfip as a home versus away stat?
era home vs away 4.94 4.10
xfip 4.28 4.35
fiip 4.80 3.78
sorry, I wasn't going to find a different site that had all of the rest of the era predictors. The baseball prospectus article on the predictor stuff showed reliability for all of the predictors was the same with a large enough sample size. 700+ innings was more than a large sample size IIRC.

In this case, xFIP isnt a good metric. It removes home runs allowed and replaces it with "expected home runs". Well, Hughes' problem is that he gives up a ton of flyballs in a stadium that punishes fly ball pitchers. Normalizing that number is ignoring reality.

Shane Wahl
10-23-2013, 09:58 PM
The Lincecum prediction of 4/64 and his signing at 2/35 is informative. Sorry. Maybe that prediction was exaggerated, but still. Lincecum was definitely right below the Tanaka-Garza-E. Santana-Jimenez line. Hughes is with Arroyo and others just below that.

I would not necessarily count on Phil Hughes wanting a 4-year deal. I would expect that he might prefer a 2-year deal because he could see it as a make good contract and still be 29 (as opposed to 31). So he would take more money per year for two years, yet still less than Lincy. Think about it. A one-year deal could make it all the worse if he has another semi-par year. A two-year deal gives him more assurance and gives him a second year to improve. A four-year deal right now for $50 million (at most) could preclude him from a good contract as a 31-year old.

The Wise One
10-23-2013, 10:11 PM
In this case, xFIP isnt a good metric. It removes home runs allowed and replaces it with "expected home runs". Well, Hughes' problem is that he gives up a ton of flyballs in a stadium that punishes fly ball pitchers. Normalizing that number is ignoring reality.
That becomes the problem with a lot of these metrics. There are cases they do not work. fip biases against a pitcher with good control and a hard but not impossible to hit pitcher

notoriousgod71
10-23-2013, 10:12 PM
If he's the only signing- no thanks.

If he's a precursor to multiple signings- yes.

Major Leauge Ready
10-23-2013, 10:39 PM
The division argument is debatable but I don't see how the home stadium is debatable at all.

Over the course of his career, here is the home/road ERA of Hughes:

4.96 / 4.10

That's 735 innings of work. That's a huge discrepancy, especially when you factor in that the vast majority of pitchers have better numbers at home, not away from it. Their defenders are more comfortable, they're (usually) more comfortable, and the opposing hitters are uncomfortable.

This is the most compelling argument I have seen in this particular debate. That is a very large sample size. If he can put up a 4.10 era on the road, it would not be unreasonable to expect him to match or better that mark at Target field.

The bad news is that a bunch of other teams are looking at that split and probably coming to a similar conclusion. He is going to get paid. There is no need for him to take a shorter term deal. He is the guy it makes the most sense to me to take a chance on because the term of this contract will during the players prime. This is the guy I expect them to go after the hardest.

Riverbrian
10-23-2013, 10:40 PM
Just using my eyeball... I've never been a Hughes Fan. I've seen him pitch a handful of times and he has never impressed me and this includes starts away from Yankees Stadium in pitchers parks.

He Wilts... from what I've seen. Some pitchers will dig in when they need to dig. Hughes doesn't in my opinion.

With that said... No matter what my eyeball says... I'll take him... He would still be an improvement over some of our current guys. I'll take improvement no matter how marginal.

Shane Wahl
10-24-2013, 12:59 AM
Ultimately some strange concerns. It reminds me of . . . the Vikings cycling through bad QBs . . . three bad ones ain't enough!

Buy Jimenez or Santana and Hughes. Stop complaining about sucking.

raindog
10-24-2013, 10:57 AM
I would not necessarily count on Phil Hughes wanting a 4-year deal. I would expect that he might prefer a 2-year deal because he could see it as a make good contract and still be 29 (as opposed to 31).
This is what I would expect. I'd almost be concerned if he wanted a 4 year deal, because he might think he's peaked. That's probably overanalyzing, though.

The Twins should overpay him for 2 years and hope for the best.

kab21
10-24-2013, 11:14 AM
This is what I would expect. I'd almost be concerned if he wanted a 4 year deal, because he might think he's peaked. That's probably overanalyzing, though.

The Twins should overpay him for 2 years and hope for the best.

I wouldn't be concerned if he wanted a 4 yr deal. 4-5 year deals are the standard for pitchers. Typically pitchers want the most guaranteed money although sometimes a pitcher wants a ONE year deal so he can get a longer deal the following offseason.

Shane Wahl
10-24-2013, 11:35 AM
I wouldn't be concerned if he wanted a 4 yr deal. 4-5 year deals are the standard for pitchers. Typically pitchers want the most guaranteed money although sometimes a pitcher wants a ONE year deal so he can get a longer deal the following offseason.

4-5 year deals are not the standard for pitchers.

kab21
10-24-2013, 11:41 AM
4-5 year deals are not the standard for pitchers.

For good ones they are. Hughes has a mixed track record but he will be in demand this offseason and if he can get 4-5 yrs then he will absolutely go for it. It is not a reason to be concerned that he thinks he has already peaked.

spycake
10-24-2013, 01:15 PM
Am I alone in thinking that Hughes will want only a 1 or 2 year deal? He was pretty bad last year. How many free agent starters have ever signed 3+ year deals after a season that bad? That would keep his AAV down, guaranteed.

Hughes' record the last 4 years is a lot more like Francisco Liriano's than Edwin Jackson's. Liriano accepted a two year deal, and even Edwin Jackson basically took two offseasons to get his desired contract.

I predict Hughes takes a one-year deal from someone. Even a crazy Gil Meche offer seems unlikely for Hughes at this point (Meche was actually average in the preceding season).

Shane Wahl
10-24-2013, 01:22 PM
Am I alone in thinking that Hughes will want only a 1 or 2 year deal? He was pretty bad last year. How many free agent starters have ever signed 3+ year deals after a season that bad? That would keep his AAV down, guaranteed.

Hughes' record the last 4 years is a lot more like Francisco Liriano's than Edwin Jackson's. Liriano accepted a two year deal, and even Edwin Jackson basically took two offseasons to get his desired contract.

I predict Hughes takes a one-year deal from someone. Even a crazy Gil Meche offer seems unlikely for Hughes at this point (Meche was actually average in the preceding season).

Your reasoning is exactly why I think he would want a two-year deal, since he will still be under 30 when that contract would be gone and he the two years just means more guaranteed money.

The Twins shouldn't look at one-year deals at all unless there is a true reclamation project like Johnson.

kab21
10-24-2013, 08:25 PM
Your reasoning is exactly why I think he would want a two-year deal, since he will still be under 30 when that contract would be gone and he the two years just means more guaranteed money.

The Twins shouldn't look at one-year deals at all unless there is a true reclamation project like Johnson.

Let's step back a little bit. If Hughes is offered a 4/40-4/50M deal he will certainly take it over a 2 year deal regardless of when he becomes a FA again. He also will be a lot of more interested in a one year deal so he can re-enter FA again next season. Someone like the National's would give it to him.

spycake
10-24-2013, 09:10 PM
Let's step back a little bit. If Hughes is offered a 4/40-4/50M deal he will certainly take it over a 2 year deal regardless of when he becomes a FA again.

No doubt, but who would offer it right now? Is there any precedent for a 78 ERA+ starter averaging under 5 IP per start signing anything more than a 1 or 2 year contract?

I don't think Hughes' potential equals, for example, Edwin Jackson's pre-2013 track record.

jorgenswest
10-24-2013, 10:00 PM
Like Lincecom, Hughes is young for a free agent and probably doesn't see this as a last contract. Signing for two years in a situation where he can thrive will lead to a bigger contract in two years. Will he see Minnesota as the place where he can thrive? Would he have confidence in the park, pitching coach, catching situation and overall defense to believe this is the place?

DJL44
10-25-2013, 12:05 PM
Why Phil Hughes? Because AJ Burnett. Not only is Yankee Stadium generous giving up the HR but their defense is also not good.

spycake
10-25-2013, 02:12 PM
Burnett: now that would have been a good pickup for the Twins. The Pirates essentially got him for 2/13 from the Yanks for a couple middling low minors guys. (Burnett had a partial no-trade, not sure if he would have blocked the Twins.) Bill Smith might have made that move, it's similar to some of his deadline deals.

Shane Wahl
10-25-2013, 05:47 PM
Like Lincecom, Hughes is young for a free agent and probably doesn't see this as a last contract. Signing for two years in a situation where he can thrive will lead to a bigger contract in two years. Will he see Minnesota as the place where he can thrive? Would he have confidence in the park, pitching coach, catching situation and overall defense to believe this is the place?

Exactly. And I think he could be quite interested in TF, yes.

snepp
10-25-2013, 09:28 PM
Not only is Yankee Stadium generous giving up the HR but their defense is also not good.

Statistically they were middle of the pack, a whole lot better than where the Twins ended up grading out.

amjgt
11-04-2013, 09:49 PM
No Q.O. for Hughes (I think that's a mistake)

New York Yankees extend qualifying offers to Robinson Cano, Curtis Granderson, Hiroki Kuroda - ESPN New York (http://espn.go.com/new-york/mlb/story/_/id/9927018/new-york-yankees-extend-qualifying-offers-robinson-cano-curtis-granderson-hiroki-kuroda)

Major Leauge Ready
11-05-2013, 06:42 AM
He would have taken a qualifying offer and they have better places to put $14M. Even the Yankees have spending limits and they need the salary room to retain Cano or go after Tanaka.

This is going to be interesting to watch. The A-Rod deal is a shining example of how bad these monster deals can be in the final years. The Sabathia extension looks like it is going to be a big mistake too. So, I don't see them signing Cano unless other teams refuse to go 8 or more years or they are able to get out of A-Rod's contract. However, this is the Yankees we are talking about so they might sign him regardless and still go hard after Tanaka given the posting fee does not count against the Luxury tax.

Willihammer
11-05-2013, 09:11 AM
Well the Yanks have 21 consecutive winning seasons and counting so I will believe spending big in free agency spoils organizations when it actually happens.