Joe Saunders

Based on actual results of what the pitchers have actually done at the ML level, if we signed Saunders, he'd likely be our best starter this year...better than Pelfrey, better than Correia, likely better than Worley, likely better than Diamond.

-Diamond has ONE year under his belt, posted an ERA over 4.00 in the 2nd half. He and Worley are the only ones who MIGHT be better than Saunders, but they are unknowns. No real history.
-Pelfrey is coming off TJ surgery, and in two of his last three years he posted ERA+ of 78 and 81.
-Worley has never pitched even 135 innings in a major league season one year, didn't pitch well last year, and was then hurt. We don't know what we have there.
-Do I even really need to explain Correia, Deduno, DeVries or Blackburn?

As far as Meyer and May, they won't be here.

As far as Gibson he hasn't throw a major league inning yet.

Now, it's not like Saunders is a stud, but he's got a track record of being pretty decent, slightly above average while pitching a good amount of innings. Who else can we say that about in our long list of candidates? None of them

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ThePuck

-Worley has never pitched even 135 innings in a major league season one year, didn't pitch well last year, and was then hurt.

---

Worley had a 3.07 ERA and good peripherals when he made his first trip to the DL in mid-May. Despite the DL stint, at the All Star break he was still on pace for about 170 IP and 150 K's, with a 3.54 ERA. His 2011 ERA+ was 127, a threshold Saunders has exceeded (or even really come close to) only once, in 2008 when he was 27 instead of 32.

If Worley is healthy, it seems pretty reasonable to expect him to be a better pitcher than Saunders. The only question is how big the 'if' is. Given the Twins' recent history, he may be equally likely to be either the staff ace or TJ patient.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by LaBombo

Worley had a 3.07 ERA and good peripherals when he made his first trip to the DL in mid-May. Despite the DL stint, at the All Star break he was still on pace for about 170 IP and 150 K's, with a 3.54 ERA. His 2011 ERA+ was 127, a threshold Saunders has exceeded (or even really come close to) only once, in 2008 when he was 27 instead of 32.

If Worley is healthy, it seems pretty reasonable to expect him to be a better pitcher than Saunders. The only question is how big the 'if' is. Given the Twins' recent history, he may be equally likely to be either the staff ace or TJ patient.

---

On pace...we still don't know what he can do in a full year,,,cause he's never had one. His ERA+ 127 was in like 130 innings. It's gotta be taken with a grain of salt, IMO. I like Worley, I think he has the potential, but Saunders, based on history, will give likely give us a lot of innings and an ERA+ over 100.

And Saunders is still only 31 :-)

If we can get him for 2 years and a mutual option, or 3 years, it's a no brainer to do it...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ThePuck

On pace...we still don't know what he can do in a full year,,,cause he's never had one. His ERA+ 127 was in like 130 innings. It's gotta be taken with a grain of salt, IMO. I like Worley, I think he has the potential, but Saunders, based on history, will give likely give us a lot of innings and an ERA+ over 100.

And Saunders is still only 31 :-)

---

I agree that Saunders is more likely to pitch 200 or even 175 innings than Worley. I just think too many people aren't recognizing that he has a higher ceiling than the guys he's typically being lumped in with.

And Saunders will be 32 in June, making it his age 32 season ;~ )

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by LaBombo

I agree that Saunders is more likely to pitch 200 or even 175 innings than Worley. I just think too many people aren't recognizing that he has a higher ceiling than the guys he's typically being lumped in with.

And Saunders will be 32 in June, making it his age 32 season ;~ )

---

I have high hopes for Worley...I really do. He could end up being his 2011 self. That'd be great. I guess I'm just trying to say, it doesn't make sense to say we don't need a Saunders because we have so many pitchers.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ThePuck

I have high hopes for Worley...I really do. He could end up being his 2011 self. That'd be great. I guess I'm just trying to say, it doesn't make sense to say we don't need a Saunders because we have so many pitchers.

---

While I'm still wary of Saunders, I agree that we have almost nothing but question marks of varying degrees as rotation options right now.

If the Saunders deal had a team or even mutual option like you suggested for '15, it would be ok with me as long as there would be zero chance that we'd miss out on a better FA starter in 2014 because of what they paid Saunders. Given the Twins' resolve not to bring in high-end free agent pitchers on multi-year deals, I'd say the odds of that happening are sadly quite small.

And the age thing is only partly tongue in cheek, since starters tend to steadily lose ability after 30. Another reason to hate the Correia deal.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by LaBombo

If the Saunders deal had a team or even mutual option like you suggested for '15, it would be ok with me as long as there would be zero chance that we'd miss out on a better FA starter in 2014 because of what they paid Saunders.

---

If you look at what the Twins currently have committed for 2014, you'll see that they could add commit $10 million to Saunders and still have enough room to add Zack Greinke's salary before getting back to $100 million. AND they're getting a huge revenue boost from the TV deal next year. That's why I don't understand this reluctance to hand out multi-year deals at all.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Nick Nelson

If you look at what the Twins currently have committed for 2014, you'll see that they could add commit $10 million to Saunders and still have enough room to add Zack Greinke's salary before getting back to $100 million. AND they're getting a huge revenue boost from the TV deal next year. That's why I don't understand this reluctance to hand out multi-year deals at all.

---

Maybe because the guys they're actually serious about possibly signing to deals of more than one year have a serious possibility of blowing up in their faces? Think of the current Correia deal, think even more about past catastrophes- Blackburn, Pavano and Baker.

Are you seriously asking that the Twins commit to Saunder's level of innings-eating mediocity for multi-years at $10M/yr.??? Joe Blanton is the same age, with significantly better peripherals, and he got 2 years @$7M/yr. The only significant difference for Saunders is innings per season- over the last 5 years, Blanton is averaging 159/yr, Saunders is averaging 194.2 per season. Their 5 year WAR totals are indentical @ 9.1. That's an absurd premium to pay for 35 extra innings, plus, possibly being on the hook for the extra year.

There is a huge difference between a Sp pitching 150ip and one pitching 200 ip. If you got 5 sp in your rotation that can't pitch more than 150 ip, you are in a big world of hurt, no matter how many are waiting in the wings and it kills the pen too.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by LaBombo

While I'm still wary of Saunders, I agree that we have almost nothing but question marks of varying degrees as rotation options right now.

If the Saunders deal had a team or even mutual option like you suggested for '15, it would be ok with me as long as there would be zero chance that we'd miss out on a better FA starter in 2014 because of what they paid Saunders. Given the Twins' resolve not to bring in high-end free agent pitchers on multi-year deals, I'd say the odds of that happening are sadly quite small.

And the age thing is only partly tongue in cheek, since starters tend to steadily lose ability after 30. Another reason to hate the Correia deal.

---

I am extremely wary of Saunders at the quoted cost and potential years committed to a deal. They already screwed up on Correia; if Saunders starts breaking down in the out year of his contract, do they really want to potentially saddle themselves with possibly 2 Blackburn-like dead-weights in 2014 and/or 2015 when better FA SPs may become available in the next 2 years?

If a lefty starter is such a prize get in this FA market, why have the Twins dawdled when there were other cheaper and possibly nearly as good or better options available? John Lannan, as mediocre as he is, is 4 years younger at only 28, and counting his minor league innings, he has averaged 187 innings per year over the last 5 years, vs. Saunders 194.2 innings. Their 5 year stats are somewhat surprisingly, and remarkably, close-

Lannan 4.53FIP/4.81K*9/12.3K%/1.42WHIP ....... Saunders 4.60FIP/4.97K*9/13.1K%/1.35WHIP.

Lannan was signed for one year @ $2.5M. Jeff Francis is the same age as Saunders and here's his 5-year line:

4.29FIP/5.43K*9/13.8K%/1.44WHIP- he signed 1 year @ $1.5M.

Paul Maholm has signifcantly better numbers than any of the above and could have been acquired on the cheap one year ago, and is currently only making $6.5M- he doesn't miss a start and has averaged 187.2 innings over the last 5 years with a 12.2 WAR.

Eric Bedard has the best 5 year numbers of any of these lefties:

3.88FIP/8.7K*9/22.6K%/1.33 WHIP.

Bedard may very well be available on a make-good or minor league deal.

The bottom line is- how much will the Twins be willing to overpay for a very mediocre innings eater?

Why don't they just go all-in and actually put the money to good use and get Marcum for a 2-year deal (and offer Bedard on the cheap to get their lefty)?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jokin

Maybe because the guys they're actually serious about possibly signing to deals of more than one year have a serious possibility of blowing up in their faces? Think of the current Correia deal, think even more about past catastrophes- Blackburn, Pavano and Baker.

---

You know what decreases the likelihood of these contracts "blowing up in their faces"? Signing better pitchers. Just because the Twins almost never get much value out of a contract for a free agent pitcher doesn't mean it never happens. Perhaps they just need to change their approach (i.e. spend some money).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jokin

Are you seriously asking that the Twins commit to Saunder's level of innings-eating mediocity for multi-years at $10M/yr.???

---

No. I'm pointing out that they could spend that much and still be in fine shape. On him or Marcum or whoever. At this point people need to stop acting flabbergasted about the notion of overspending for a free agent pitcher.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Nick Nelson

You know what decreases the likelihood of these contracts "blowing up in their faces"? Signing better pitchers. Just because the Twins almost never get much value out of a contract for a free agent pitcher doesn't mean it never happens. Perhaps they just need to change their approach (i.e. spend some money).


No. I'm pointing out that they could spend that much and still be in fine shape. On him or Marcum or whoever. At this point people need to stop acting flabbergasted about the notion of overspending for a free agent pitcher.

---

On point one, we are in firm agreement, in FAgency, like the stock market, there are speculations and investments, with their own risk/reward ratios. Correia and Saunders don't qualify for either category, just money poorly utilized, particularly at the theoretical number you threw out there for Saunders.

On point 2, Marcum actually represents a decent investment of their money, a higher level of quality with a more predictable potential for positive return and retained trade value. The "flabbergast" that many of us are venting about, is throwing 2 years at Correia and then possibly seeing the Twins going into panic mode and committing even more good money after bad for a guy with way worse peripherals than Correia. If the likes of Bedard and Jurrjens still have a pulse, sign them for virtually nothing along with a quality arm that won't break the bank in Marcum and then you have more than enough depth options to get you through the lost season that will be 2013. This can all set up quite nicely with a flyer or two strking gold or silver-and an additional quality FA SP next year with the coming payroll relief- to build for the future with your group of the young nucleus of guys knocking at the door- between 2013-2015.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jokin

On point one, we are in firm agreement, in FAgency, like the stock market, there are speculations and investments, with their own risk/reward ratios. Correia and Saunders don't qualify for either category, just money poorly utilized, particularly at the theoretical number you threw out there for Saunders.

On point 2, Marcum actually represents a decent investment of their money, a higher level of quality with a more predictable potential for positive return and retained trade value. The "flabbergast" that many of us are venting about, is throwing 2 years at Correia and then possibly seeing the Twins going into panic mode and committing even more good money after bad for a guy with way worse peripherals than Correia. If the likes of Bedard and Jurrjens still have a pulse, sign them for virtually nothing along with a quality arm that won't break the bank in Marcum and then you have more than enough depth options to get you through the lost season that will be 2013. This can all set up quite nicely with a flyer or two strking gold or silver-and an additional quality FA SP next year with the coming payroll relief- to build for the future with your group of the young nucleus of guys knocking at the door- between 2013-2015.

---

At least with Saunders you get the benefit of the doubt wih durability on his side. Marcum still has the whole injury concern thing going for him.

Saunders missed a month last summer due to a strain on his surgically repaired shoulder

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by edavis0308

At least with Saunders you get the benefit of the doubt wih durability on his side. Marcum still has the whole injury concern thing going for him.

---

I'll take upside over durability every time. This club is so afraid of risk, but it often seems when it comes to pitchers, the only risk they recognize is injury. For some reason, they don't seem to consider poor production as a risk as evidenced by the low ceiling pitchers they like to snag.

If they're actually considering giving a hefty multi-year deal to Saunders, why the hell didn't they trade a bag of peanuts for the right to pay Dan Haren $13.5 million in 2013?

They could have taken a shot on Saunders and Marcum if they hadn't prematurely blown their load on Correia.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by nicksaviking

I'll take upside over durability every time. This club is so afraid of risk, but it often seems when it comes to pitchers, the only risk they recognize is injury. For some reason, they don't seem to consider poor production as a risk as evidenced by the low ceiling pitchers they like to snag.

If they're actually considering giving a hefty multi-year deal to Saunders, why the hell didn't they trade a bag of peanuts for the right to pay Dan Haren $13.5 million in 2013?

---

I would also rather have Marcum but if it was an option of one or the other I don't think you could kill them for taking Saunders (also not assuming equal contracts of course).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by snepp

They could have taken a shot on Saunders and Marcum if they hadn't prematurely blown their load on Correia.

---

I had an Arrested Development quote flashback there for a minute.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by snepp

They could have taken a shot on Saunders and Marcum if they hadn't prematurely blown their load on Correia.

---

So many poorly chosen words in this sentence.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by edavis0308

I had an Arrested Development quote flashback there for a minute.

---

Ahhh, hadn't seen your reply.