Minnesota Twins News & Rumors Forum
  • Twins To Sign RHP Kevin Correia

    Kevin Correia Is Joining The Minnesota TwinsAccording to sources, the Twins have agreed to terms with right-handed pitcher Kevin Correia. ESPN's Jerry Crasnick is saying that the deal is a two-year deal and $10 million. The 32-year-old right-hander has gone 12-11 the last two seasons with the Pittsburgh Pirates. His ERA in 2011 was 4.79, and it was 4.21 in 2012.

    He was originally a 4th round pick by the San Francisco Giants. He has spent time with the Giants, Padres and Pirates. In 10 big league seasons, he is a combined 60-65 with a 4.54 ERA and a 1.41 WHIP. His career strikeout rate is 6.0. However, the last two seasons, his K/9 has been 4.5 and 4.7. He made his first, and only, All Star appearance in 2011 with the Pirates.

    The past two seasons, he has thrown 154 and 171 innings. His career high innings were 198 with the Padres in 2009.

    Correia comes in as the veteran of a pitching staff that includes Scott Diamond and Vance Worley. Of those three, he's clearly the third best. Best case scenario, he can find a way to be just about league average in 2013 and the Twins can trade him for a C-level prospect in July. If nothing else, I do like this deal much better than the 1 year, $6 million deal that Scott Feldman got from the Cubs.
    This article was originally published in blog: Twins to sign RHP Kevin Correia started by Seth Stohs
    Comments 188 Comments
    1. Riverbrian's Avatar
      Riverbrian -
      Quote Originally Posted by YourHouseIsMyHouse View Post
      Quote Originally Posted by Riverbrian View Post
      Quote Originally Posted by YourHouseIsMyHouse View Post
      Quote Originally Posted by Riverbrian View Post
      Quote Originally Posted by Brock Beauchamp View Post
      Is Kevin Correia actually Jason Marquis? I'm looking through their stat lines and they're basically the exact same guy.

      What on earth is Ryan thinking?
      Blackburn gave up 81 runs in 2012... Correia gave up 80 and Marquis gave up 74 in 127.2 innings between Minnesota and San Diego.

      Blackburn pitched 98.2 innings and Correia threw 171 innings. If posters want to cry Blackburn with this signing... Please don't ignore the 72.1 innings of shutout ball in comparison between the two... In Comparison... Thats quite the difference.
      Good for Correia that he wasn't capable of the other worldly and historically colossal decrepitude that Nick Blackburn is. For a metaphorical visual of that comparison, a 4 looks a lot sexier when standing next to a 1....and yet it's still a 4.
      Yeah... That's kinda my point... But we have posters here who are calling this signing Blackburn esque. I was pointing out that... that is embellishment at a fairly large degree.
      Fair enough. But I see their point in a way. Even Blackburn might have been a 4 prior to 2012 where he gained a lot of weight and refused to wear any makeup. It's possible that Correia falls apart in that way he and Marquis did at Target Field.
      Yes it's possible... I wouldn't place a bet on it either way.
    1. whydidnt's Avatar
      whydidnt -
      To see how other players are projected go to www.baseball-reference.com and then search for the pitcher in question. Click on the "more stats" tab above their pitching stats. Then after the page repaints, scroll down until you see the neutralized pitching stats. You can pick the year, league and team there, so if you want to see how Pavano would have played out in the Metrodome circa 1983, you can. There are links near the stats that explain the calculation, it basically applies adjustments based upon the league, era, park, etc.
    1. Willihammer's Avatar
      Willihammer -
      whydidn't i think I found what you found.

      In memory of the old Coors Field - Baseball Nation

      This toy is a great way to waste hours.

      Kevin Correia, 2012
      Stats with Pirates: 4.21 ERA, 171 IP, 20 HR
      Projected stats with 2000 Rockies: 7.66 ERA, 148 IP, 25 HR
      But it's also kind of instructive. Correia just got a two-year deal. Do you think he would have got anything but a spring invite with those Colorado stats? I'm not going to argue the neutralizing tool is infallible, but it probably gets you in the neighborhood. You don't have to play around with Coors, either. Correia's season was the equivalent to a 5.75 ERA if he pitched for the 2007 Diamondbacks. GMs might look at Correia's 4.21 ERA and think, "Not bad." But it kind of is bad. It's so easy to forget the league context after years and years of thinking a four-something ERA is solid innings-eating territory.
    1. Brock Beauchamp's Avatar
      Brock Beauchamp -
      Quote Originally Posted by Riverbrian View Post
      Game score is a good way to separate a good performance from a lights out one in a single game but 50 is also arbitrary and I always see it expressed in AGS... Which is an average of the good and bad starts throughout the year and AGS is superfluous in that sense. My Opinion... And in no way a declaration.
      The key difference being that Game Score only starts with 50 to be more visually pleasing to the audience. It prevents most scores from going into the negative and has no real effect on the statistic itself. They could start with 100, they could start with zero. It all ends up at the same place because it's a comparative statistic.

      Whereas Quality Start chooses an arbitrary number and then bases its boolean award (1 or 0) on that arbitrary number. HUGE difference.
    1. Riverbrian's Avatar
      Riverbrian -
      Quote Originally Posted by Brock Beauchamp View Post
      Quote Originally Posted by Riverbrian View Post
      Game score is a good way to separate a good performance from a lights out one in a single game but 50 is also arbitrary and I always see it expressed in AGS... Which is an average of the good and bad starts throughout the year and AGS is superfluous in that sense. My Opinion... And in no way a declaration.
      The key difference being that Game Score only starts with 50 to be more visually pleasing to the audience. It prevents most scores from going into the negative and has no real effect on the statistic itself. They could start with 100, they could start with zero. It all ends up at the same place because it's a comparative statistic.

      Whereas Quality Start chooses an arbitrary number and then bases its boolean award (1 or 0) on that arbitrary number. HUGE difference.
      I know... And I agree 100 percent... In the end... We are looking for different conclusions out of our stats.
    1. notoriousgod71's Avatar
      notoriousgod71 -
      Quote Originally Posted by whydidnt View Post
      To see how other players are projected go to www.baseball-reference.com and then search for the pitcher in question. Click on the "more stats" tab above their pitching stats. Then after the page repaints, scroll down until you see the neutralized pitching stats. You can pick the year, league and team there, so if you want to see how Pavano would have played out in the Metrodome circa 1983, you can. There are links near the stats that explain the calculation, it basically applies adjustments based upon the league, era, park, etc.

      Nice! Blackie pitches to an ERA over 10 twice in 2000 Coors Field!
    1. mike wants wins's Avatar
      mike wants wins -
      But you get wins in 30 game increments, Brock. Some days a player or team is just off. Mashing all innings together in one number ignores that games are discrete events. I would rather a guy give up 3 runs every start, than 2 some starts, and 4 some starts. Era does not take that into account. QS is not perfect, but it is informative, imo.
    1. LaBombo's Avatar
      LaBombo -
      Whatever metrics you look at, it seems clear that at the end of the day, A) Kevin Correia is a steaming pile of mediocrity, and B) that the Twins put themselves in a position where they had at least one employment opportunity for said pile. Welcome to 2013.
    1. LaBombo's Avatar
      LaBombo -
      Quote Originally Posted by notoriousgod71 View Post
      Nice! Blackie pitches to an ERA over 10 twice in 2000 Coors Field!
      Sweet, merciful crap. You'd have to at least imagine the possibility that the league would've intervened. That, or the Colorado National Guard.
    1. ashburyjohn's Avatar
      ashburyjohn -
      Quote Originally Posted by LaBombo View Post
      Quote Originally Posted by notoriousgod71 View Post
      Nice! Blackie pitches to an ERA over 10 twice in 2000 Coors Field!
      Sweet, merciful crap. You'd have to at least imagine the possibility that the league would've intervened. That, or the Colorado National Guard.
      I prefer the 1968 Dodgers link. Voila! Blackburn = instant Claude Osteen. (Give or take.)
    1. Brock Beauchamp's Avatar
      Brock Beauchamp -
      Quote Originally Posted by mike wants wins View Post
      But you get wins in 30 game increments, Brock. Some days a player or team is just off. Mashing all innings together in one number ignores that games are discrete events. I would rather a guy give up 3 runs every start, than 2 some starts, and 4 some starts. Era does not take that into account. QS is not perfect, but it is informative, imo.
      Wins are also a useless stat, in my opinion. While I understand the desire to break down game logs, Quality Start is not a good way to do it.

      A much better (but still imperfect) solution is to pick a number in Game Score and award Quality Starts via that methodology. At least Game Score scales properly and isn't broken. Game Score takes into account far more variables and gives you a better idea of a pitcher's worth. An even better solution is to break down starts into Horrific, Acceptable, Quality, and Outstanding using Game Score.
    1. LaBombo's Avatar
      LaBombo -
      Quote Originally Posted by ashburyjohn View Post
      I prefer the 1968 Dodgers link. Voila! Blackburn = instant Claude Osteen. (Give or take.)
      Gomer! Gotta love it.
    1. snepp's Avatar
      snepp -
      Quote Originally Posted by Riverbrian View Post
      You would have to stay away from almost every single season stat. Something that I actually agree with to a point because things fluctuate.
      You're really, really stretching to defend what was a pretty lousy position to begin with. You've headed way off the reservation at this point.
    1. snepp's Avatar
      snepp -
      Quote Originally Posted by Brock Beauchamp View Post
      Wins are also a useless stat, in my opinion. While I understand the desire to break down game logs, Quality Start is not a good way to do it.

      A much better (but still imperfect) solution is to pick a number in Game Score and award Quality Starts via that methodology. At least Game Score scales properly and isn't broken. Game Score takes into account far more variables and gives you a better idea of a pitcher's worth. An even better solution is to break down starts into Horrific, Acceptable, Quality, and Outstanding using Game Score.
      Or you could make use of WPA, which would completely blow the usage of the QS out of the water.

      Something like this.

      http://www.insidethebook.com/ee/inde...rts_wpa_style/
    1. ashburyjohn's Avatar
      ashburyjohn -
      Quote Originally Posted by YourHouseIsMyHouse View Post
      Fair enough. But I see their point in a way. Even Blackburn might have been a 4 prior to 2012 where he gained a lot of weight and refused to wear any makeup. It's possible that Correia falls apart in that way he and Marquis did at Target Field.
      Then I guess the idea is to wait and see, after bringing Correia home right at closing time, what quality of sammich he makes me the next day, before passing judgement.
    1. nokomismod's Avatar
      nokomismod -
      Oh man. I like overspending on good rather than below average.
    1. Brock Beauchamp's Avatar
      Brock Beauchamp -
      Quote Originally Posted by snepp View Post
      Quote Originally Posted by Brock Beauchamp View Post
      Wins are also a useless stat, in my opinion. While I understand the desire to break down game logs, Quality Start is not a good way to do it.

      A much better (but still imperfect) solution is to pick a number in Game Score and award Quality Starts via that methodology. At least Game Score scales properly and isn't broken. Game Score takes into account far more variables and gives you a better idea of a pitcher's worth. An even better solution is to break down starts into Horrific, Acceptable, Quality, and Outstanding using Game Score.
      Or you could make use of WPA, which would completely blow the usage of the QS out of the water.

      Something like this.

      http://www.insidethebook.com/ee/inde...rts_wpa_style/
      True. That is another way to go and not entirely dissimilar to what I was saying about Game Scores.
    1. LoganJones's Avatar
      LoganJones -
      Quote Originally Posted by whydidnt View Post
      I didn't, but not sure what difference it makes. This points to the divide among those that think it's an ok or good signing vs. those of us that don't like it. If the Twins lose 5-4 instead of 6-4 it's still a loss as far as I'm concerned. They should be trying to find guys that are going to help them win, not just help them lose by less. Correia is simply going to be a guy that might help them lose by less than what they have the last few years. Not satisfying to me. You can't build a quality rotation around guys that are 4-th 5th starters around the rest of the league and this points to trying to do that.
      Here's what the 'normalized' stats for Correia do. We keep the 3 Most effective starters we had last year. AKA the ones who kept a decent ERA, Diamond, DeVries and Deduno. We leave their innings intact. We then input Correia's adjusted numbers. This leaves us with 379 1/3 innings to fill. If we keep it averaged, aka we got 380 innings of 6.36 (the ERA of the rest of the guys who trotted out there) the rotation surrenders 502 runs. That's 26 runs less than the original total. AKA 2.6 Wins. This is calculated at fangraphs to be worth roughly 13 million on the open market. Unless we're arguing that Fangraphs WAR value is inaccurate, Correia last year was worth more than he's reportedly contracted for 2013-14 to the Twins.
    1. Riverbrian's Avatar
      Riverbrian -
      Quote Originally Posted by snepp View Post
      Quote Originally Posted by Riverbrian View Post
      You would have to stay away from almost every single season stat. Something that I actually agree with to a point because things fluctuate.
      You're really, really stretching to defend what was a pretty lousy position to begin with. You've headed way off the reservation at this point.
      Ok... Uncle... Then Stretching I am... I like QS in its basic form. If that's a lousy position... OK... I'm not expecting anymore out of the stat. Because I'm hoping for a Pitcher that can be competitive. That's all. I'm just a countin. That's it. 6IP... 3ER or less... That's one. Do it again... that's two. I don't need or expect QS to tell me anything else.

      Off the reservation... No doubt... That's mainly because I listed QS% as one form of support of 2012 not being a bad year and Correiera gets compared to Blackburn on one side and Quality Stat gets attacked on the other and it ends up being my day.

      If Correia can deliver 2012 numbers. It would be wonderful... If he delivers 2010 numbers in 2013... That wouldn't be as nice.

      If you have numbers that will tear him apart... Have at it. An army will be right behind you.
    1. whydidnt's Avatar
      whydidnt -
      Quote Originally Posted by LoganJones View Post
      Here's what the 'normalized' stats for Correia do. We keep the 3 Most effective starters we had last year. AKA the ones who kept a decent ERA, Diamond, DeVries and Deduno. We leave their innings intact. We then input Correia's adjusted numbers. This leaves us with 379 1/3 innings to fill. If we keep it averaged, aka we got 380 innings of 6.36 (the ERA of the rest of the guys who trotted out there) the rotation surrenders 502 runs. That's 26 runs less than the original total. AKA 2.6 Wins. This is calculated at fangraphs to be worth roughly 13 million on the open market. Unless we're arguing that Fangraphs WAR value is inaccurate, Correia last year was worth more than he's reportedly contracted for 2013-14 to the Twins.
      Putting aside the fact that even Fangraphs thinks that WAR for pitchers has problems, I don't for a minute think 2.6 wins is meaningful to a team that lost 95 games. Let's not forget that last year was Correia's best in the last 3, if he regresses further that 2.6wins might turn into 1 or zero wins. I don't see the point in spending the 5 million for a guy who is going to be negligibly better than any old guy in the system. If the Twins had 4good starters already and were just looking a #5, it might be a different story.
©2014 TwinsCentric, LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Interested in advertising with Twins Daily? Click here.