Thread: Law: "The White Sox got a steal in Liriano"

Originally Posted by greengoblinrulz

For me, its the Escobar part of the deal.
A marginal defensive minded SS when we already have a AAA version of that in Pedro Florimon.
If they woulda recieved 2 pitchers back, I woulda been better. I just didnt want a Nick Punto type back

Exactly. I've been saying this since the trade.

Traded Liriano to the White Sox, with Chicago coming to town.

Traded Valencia to the Red Sox, while in Boston.

Obviously, Ryan didn't care about the return, he was only interested in saving air fare.







I kid, I kid...

Originally Posted by USAFChief

Traded Liriano to the White Sox, with Chicago coming to town.

Traded Valencia to the Red Sox, while in Boston.

Obviously, Ryan didn't care about the return, he was only interested in saving air fare.







I kid, I kid...

Not sure who the Twins might want from Cleveland but I'll be thrilled if TR can pry away some pitching when TB comes to town.

We should just buy a buffet for the Indian's clubhouse tonight and hope Capps finds his way there. Then get the hell out of town.

I'm pretty sure that would qualify as an official waiver claim.

Valencia brought back comparable value to Liriano (since I think Escobar is a never-will in terms of amounting to anything)!!!

Originally Posted by SpiritofVodkaDave

Of course it is a good trade for the White Sox, they didn't give up any premium prospects and in return got a guy who could bolster their rotation.

Just like the Rangers trade, they got a guy who helps the rotation without giving up anyone they will miss. Though the Cubs didn't "lose" the trade since they got a couple decent prospects back.

That doesn't mean Ryan got fleeced or anything, it just means that the White Sox made a nice trade for themselves. You think the Indians are crying years later about the Pavano trade? Do we really think we "fleeced" them good when we gave up Pino for Pavano?

There are two things about Liriano that I think Twins fans failed to see when talking about his trade value:

(1) Show me a year where Liriano was able to pitch into September and pitched WELL in those high-pressure games. You can't. In '08 and '09 he had August/Sept. ERA's higher than 4.50, and those were years where ended up in a Game 163. 2010 was his only post-Tommy John full season where he had an ERA under 5.00, yet he was terrible in September. And he was generally terrible in 2011, and killed us the first half of 2012. Yet the ONLY value in a trade for Liriano is his rental value down the stretch. And he's never been a big game pitcher.

(2) Liriano's season numbers for the Twins in 2012: 22 games, 17 starts, 3-10 record, 5.31 ERA, 1.44 WHIP. Yes, the K rate was excellent, but his K/BB was only 1.98, because his control sucks. If you never saw Liriano pitch, and had to evaluate picking up a guy at the deadline based on THOSE numbers, what are you expecting to get in return, ESPECIALLY for a rental?

I feel the same way about this as I did with Delmon. It sucks we couldn't flip him for real value, but at the end of the day, losing him is not the worst case scenario. The worst thing would've been for him to pitch well enough down the stretch for us to sign him, and then we exhaust our budget on a pitcher who won't make us any better next year.

Originally Posted by TheLeviathan

We should just buy a buffet for the Indian's clubhouse tonight and hope Capps finds his way there. Then get the hell out of town.

I'm pretty sure that would qualify as an official waiver claim.

I lulz'd.

Originally Posted by 70charger

I lulz'd.

Me too.

Originally Posted by StormJH1

(1) Show me a year where Liriano was able to pitch into September and pitched WELL in those high-pressure games. You can't. In '08 and '09 he had August/Sept. ERA's higher than 4.50, and those were years where ended up in a Game 163. 2010 was his only post-Tommy John full season where he had an ERA under 5.00, yet he was terrible in September. And he was generally terrible in 2011, and killed us the first half of 2012. Yet the ONLY value in a trade for Liriano is his rental value down the stretch. And he's never been a big game pitcher.

I don't see what the hell this has to do with anything? I don't know what the **** a "big game pitcher" is but that's the least important thing/stat you could mention with Liriano.

Hey maybe some team wants Big Game Blackburn cause he pitched well in game 163 all those years ago.

Originally Posted by StormJH1

1) Show me a year where Liriano was able to pitch into September and pitched WELL in those high-pressure games. You can't. In '08 and '09 he had August/Sept. ERA's higher than 4.50, and those were years where ended up in a Game 163. 2010 was his only post-Tommy John full season where he had an ERA under 5.00, yet he was terrible in September. And he was generally terrible in 2011, and killed us the first half of 2012. Yet the ONLY value in a trade for Liriano is his rental value down the stretch. And he's never been a big game pitcher.

Hey maybe some team wants Big Game Blackburn cause he pitched well in that game 163 all those years ago.

Big game...bunch of ESPN driven sh*t!!

Originally Posted by Monkeypaws

Me too.

Yes. Because he's fat.

Originally Posted by DPJ

Hey maybe some team wants Big Game Blackburn cause he pitched well in that game 163 all those years ago.

Big game...bunch of ESPN driven sh*t!!

You missed the point more than Michael Bay missed the point when he made "Pearl Harbor"

...and that's an awful lot, girl.

What better offer for Liriano did Ryan not take? Seriously - I'd like to know ....

Pre-injury, Liriano was a world beater, someone who had "future Cy Young candidate" written all over him.

Post injury?

#1, He's not one of those pitchers who "got better" after TJ surgery. Velocity down, not nearly as dominating stuff.

#2, Wildly inconsistent. Sometimes good, sometimes "barf bag" bad. And there's really been no way of knowing which one you'd see.

#3, too often, emotionally fragile. Dominate for an inning, then unravels & couldn't get near the plate with a grenade.

The Twins were not going to invest the kind of money that would be required to get him to give up exploring free agency. There's no way, based on past performance, that they could justify that.

Which meant he was going to explore the free agent market. Where the Twins could not afford to risk spending that kind of money on him & have it turn out badly. Which means Liriano was gone at the end of this year, no matter what.

So the only real issue was "trade him for something" or "keep him around to play out the string for a team which (a) isn't going anywhere this year; and (b) won't have him on its roster next year."

When you're not in contention, trading a guy who doesn't figure in your plans for the future makes sense. If nothing else, it forces you to put someone else out there in his place ... you get to judge what you have going forward based on more than what they've done in the minors, etc.

I wish Francisco had pitched so well last year that the FO would've felt comfortable extending him. I wish he'd pitched so well this year that we'd either extend him or get a haul for him at the deadline.

Bottom line - neither of those things happened. No one was beating down our door trying to get him - perhaps in part because we had no good reason to keep him.

Ok we have to bring up the good with the bad.

3.1 innings, 7 hits, 6 earned runs on 3 walks and 5 K's.

I guess he pitches the same regardless of the uniform.

Originally Posted by minn55441

Ok we have to bring up the good with the bad.

3.1 innings, 7 hits, 6 earned runs on 3 walks and 5 K's.

I guess he pitches the same regardless of the uniform.

Pedro Hernandez tonight
6IP 7h 2er 3k
We fleeced em!!!!

Well, it's a year later and Mackey has an article up on this trade: Mackey: The Twins have already won the Francisco Liriano trade | 1500 ESPN Twin Cities ? Minnesota Sports News & Opinion (Twins, Vikings, Wolves, Wild, Gophers) | Sportswire: Minnesota Twins

He suggests that Ryan won this trade. Ryan was more diplomatic but Mackey points out that the Twins have added a strong UI type in Escobar and Hernandez has been serviceable. Seems like we got two decent pieces for Liriano. Not a bad trade.

You can get players of that quality off waivers. Happens all the time. It was still a good move by the White Sox to take the chance, and it was a low-stakes trade in any case.

Originally Posted by drivlikejehu

You can get players of that quality off waivers.

Name some?

I don't have a ton of faith in Escobar as a starter, but as a cheap UI guy he certainly has value (and saves you from spending money on a veteran)

Hernandez is pretty meh, but at least he has proven to be a decent mop up man/spot starter, which alone is better than what Liriano gave us the last couple years it seems.

Originally Posted by SpiritofVodkaDave

Name some?

Florimon?

Who cares about who we got? What did we give up? A guy who cost the Sux some games down the stretch. Big deal. That alone was a win for us. Anybody who thinks the Sox won this trade, after the fact, is just looking for justifications for their pre-existing beliefs.

Just look at all the teams racing to sign Liriano once he hit free agency. The Pirates are probably already sorry.