You can view the page at http://www.twinsdaily.com/content.ph...ing-Hellickson
Printable View
You can view the page at http://www.twinsdaily.com/content.ph...ing-Hellickson
Good analysis, I'm glad to hear someone who isn't drooling over Hellickson. He looks to be a very useful pitcher, but I don't trust that K/9 rate to improve enough to be a consistant front of the rotation arm.
The fact that the Rays have suddenly pushed him into the front of the trade line in front of more expensive arms like Sheilds, Price and Davis who are closer to free agency/arbitration tells me that the Rays also see he has a good chance of regression.
It seems similar to when the Rays pushed to move the seemingly higher upside Delmon Young over the cheaper and closer to free agency/arbitration outfielders Carl Crawford and BJ Upton.
Interesting take. I hadn't heard this side of things, although I don't read much about ball outside the Twins. Hellickson, as far I had always known, was very clearly a potential #1.
I think this is also pretty interesting. After all, the Rays aren't known for making dumb trades, are they?Quote:
The fact that the Rays have suddenly pushed him into the front of the trade line in front of more expensive arms like Sheilds, Price and Davis who are closer to free agency/arbitration tells me that the Rays also see he has a good chance of regression.
Not interested. He profiles long term as a good #3 starter, the kind of pitcher to look to draft, develop, and let go when their salary gets over about 7M in arbitation.
Good analysis, but if I'm the Twins, I'm still interested (if the trade price is right).
Though not a #1, he is a HUGE upgrade over anything they have right now
Sam Fuld, Archer and Guyer were a good return for GarzaQuote:
Originally Posted by 70charger
We need at least 3 quality starters next year, he would be one of those. We can't be thinking if it isn't Verlander we don't want him because #1 starters are few and very expensive. 3 Hellickson type guys would go a long way to improving this team, imo.Quote:
Originally Posted by sorney
The numbers said he was a #1 but the scouting reports differed. IIRC one of the knocks was that he made too many mistakes up in the zone that would get hit hard in the majors. There were also some durability concerns.Quote:
Originally Posted by 70charger
The initial look at the sabr stats aren't very good, but one encouraging thing if you look further into the sabermetrics is that he had a solid swinging strike rate so the K rate could go up some. I certainly don't believe that he's a 3.00 ERA pitcher but he could be a really good #3. I prefer Shields but 4 yrs of Hellickson would also be a good start to rebuilding the rotation.
Add one more point to analysis - he's not a long term solution, he's a Boris client looking to cash in.
I think this is an overanalyzed point. he has absolutely no choice for 4 yrs. At best you sign an extension and buy out an extra year or two but after that most players go the FA route or sign for 80-90% of what they would have gotten on the open market.Quote:
Originally Posted by ScottyB
with tampa looking to add a catcher , 3b,(yes they have longoria), 1b of(cf) and a dh why not trade ham and span for shields and hellickson? then offer up a couple of marginal prospects for vernon wells and 38 million , wells is a better fielder then ham and does have some pop we would be giving up 12 million in payroll and adding about 17 million,still leaving enough to add another starter, some pen help and posibly a middle infielder
I doubt Tampa wants to trade 2 pitchers.
Wells is terrible even if someone else is paying.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Winston SmithWe need at least 3 quality starters next year, he would be one of those. We can't be thinking if it isn't Verlander we don't want him because #1 starters are few and very expensive. 3 Hellickson type guys would go a long way to improving this team, imo.Quote:
Originally Posted by sorney
Agreed...that was the point I was trying to make (although I probably should have been a little more straight forward)
The only reason why anyone is drooling is because the Twins don't have any starting pitchers.
I'd take him if he wasn't too expensive. But we can't be cheap, now, can we?
I was very weary of him coming into this season as he led his rookie year in BABIP & I thought he'd drop significantly.....he didnt.
Worried a little that he hasnt had a 200IP yr yet also as well as the numbers showing he's not much of an improvement in terms of Ks.
All said tho, he'd immediately be the teams ace & combined with Kyle Gibson, would be a solid couple youngsters to rebuild with
I agree. THere are concerns, but the Twins could do much worse.Quote:
Originally Posted by greengoblinrulz
Hellickson was a strikeout pitcher in the minors, so maybe there's a chance he'll trend upward.
That said, given the questionable peripherals, I'm not sure I want to see the Twins try to match wits with the Rays on this particular player.
Your Hellickson assestment is a complete and utter head scratcher on many levels. But on the "flip side" they could always, and likely will, identify and aquire another Sam Deduno
I also am suprised to hear this...the Twins should consider him but not for top talent. Span and a mid level prospect might be all I'm willing to do.
Quote:
Originally Posted by johnnydakota
HAHAHA! ...Twins do that deal in a second, problem is this is'nt a video game. Vernon Wells???? really! short of the worst long term contract maybe ever by a baseball team it's a good deal. Maybe football is your sport buddy!