Minnesota Twins News & Rumors Forum
Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 41 to 60 of 68

Thread: Article: Twins Don't Need More Starters

  1. #41
    Senior Member Double-A troyhobbs's Avatar
    Posts
    168
    Like
    0
    Liked 23 Times in 16 Posts
    If the Twins wanted to sign Garza or Ervin Santana I'd be all for it, Saunders and Johan Santana...not so much. Still not terribly optimistic about this staff though, it'll be hard to throw fewer innings than last year's starters but not sure there's enough improvement to correlate to more wins, especially with the projected lineup they'll be running out there.

  2. These 2 users like troyhobbs's post and want to buy him/her a steak dinner:

    jokin (03-05-2014), kab21 (03-07-2014)

  3. #42
    Senior Member MVP
    Posts
    5,716
    Like
    1,159
    Liked 564 Times in 369 Posts
    I don't think looking for the pitchers to lead to more wins is a good way to judget their progress......giving up a lot less runs is. Wins will come if the O ever gets better.....but I agree, I'm not holding my breath this year.
    Lighten up Francis....

  4. #43
    Senior Member All-Star
    Posts
    1,149
    Like
    102
    Liked 273 Times in 197 Posts
    Blog Entries
    5
    Quote Originally Posted by nicksaviking View Post
    [

    I think most of us would be fine with trading Correia, but to do it now, you'll likely have to wait for an injury to a starter on a another team with an undesirable contingency plan. An injury like that is likely to happen, but we can't count on it.
    With hindsight, it is the Pelfrey deal that is the biggest head scratcher. To see Saunders get a minor league deal and Pelfrey get 2/12, that could be worth 2/16 seems very high. I was not a huge fan of the Pelfrey deal at the time.

  5. This user likes tobi0040's post and wants to buy him/her a steak dinner:

    Oxtung (03-05-2014)

  6. #44
    Senior Member All-Star cmathewson's Avatar
    Posts
    2,272
    Like
    241
    Liked 464 Times in 291 Posts
    Blog Entries
    1
    Nobody seems to remember just how bad the staff was last year. The reality was far worse than anyone thought. Here is a list of the starters who had a 5 ERA or worse with their ERA+, starts and innings totals:

    Mike Pelfrey: 78/29/152
    Scott Diamond: 75/24/131
    Pedro Hernandez: 59/12/56
    Kyle Gibson: 62/10/51
    Vance Worley: 56/10/48
    Liam Hndriks: 59/8/47
    PJ Walters: 68/8/39
    Cole DeVries: 38/2/15

    Four of those guys are gone, with their rotation spots replaced by Nolasco and Hughes. We can expect some improvement from Pelfrey and Gibson. We won't need the services of Diamond or Worley unless they're substantially improved.

    The result: This year's rotation should be twice as good as last year's. Not that it means they'll double the wins. But 10 more wins is within reach, methinks.
    "If you'da been thinkin' you wouldn't 'a thought that.."

  7. This user likes cmathewson's post and wants to buy him/her a steak dinner:

    howieramone (03-05-2014)

  8. #45
    Senior Member All-Star
    Posts
    1,149
    Like
    102
    Liked 273 Times in 197 Posts
    Blog Entries
    5
    Quote Originally Posted by cmathewson View Post
    Nobody seems to remember just how bad the staff was last year. The reality was far worse than anyone thought. Here is a list of the starters who had a 5 ERA or worse with their ERA+, starts and innings totals:

    Mike Pelfrey: 78/29/152
    Scott Diamond: 75/24/131
    Pedro Hernandez: 59/12/56
    Kyle Gibson: 62/10/51
    Vance Worley: 56/10/48
    Liam Hndriks: 59/8/47
    PJ Walters: 68/8/39
    Cole DeVries: 38/2/15

    Four of those guys are gone, with their rotation spots replaced by Nolasco and Hughes. We can expect some improvement from Pelfrey and Gibson. We won't need the services of Diamond or Worley unless they're substantially improved.

    The result: This year's rotation should be twice as good as last year's. Not that it means they'll double the wins. But 10 more wins is within reach, methinks.
    I put us at about 6-7 wins due to the rotation. I think you get regression out of Kevin C. and Deduno did pitch 108 innings at 3.83 last year. I don't know that he matches that. Regression from those two could wipe out an improved Pelfrey. I don't think Pelfrey puts up a 5.19 ERA again, but he is a career 4.48 guy that had two good years and several mediocre years.

    Our starters had a 5.25 ERA I believe. If you give Nolasco, Hughes, and Meyer a 4.25 ERA and they pitch 480 IP, that is 53 fewer runs against. That would drop us from 29th to 23rd in MLB based on last years totals.

    To your point, we could see a huge improvement out of three of the rotation spots and still be 23rd. We were very, very, very bad last year.
    Last edited by tobi0040; 03-05-2014 at 02:29 PM.

  9. #46
    Twins News Team All-Star TheLeviathan's Avatar
    Posts
    4,852
    Like
    180
    Liked 668 Times in 377 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by howieramone View Post
    Let me give an exact example. I would put Correia in the you can't ever have too much starting pitching pile and the pile of starting pitchers who can be traded for value when the time comes.
    Correia is the kind of starter you don't mind having around in AAA or your bullpen if you're the Tigers. For this team? He's irrelevant. He's unlikely to have much value at the deadline and he's not part of the future. So you're investing innings in, essentially, wheel-spinning.

    We also have Pelfrey, Hughes, Deduno, Diamond, Worley, Swarzak, Duensing, Gilmartin, Kyle Gibson, Trevor May, Kris Johnson, Ryan Pressley, Alex Meyer, Pat Dean, etc. Are some of these guys relievers? Sure, we also have been told they might be stretched out. Some have no options and none belong in AAA. So you're talking about 14/15 guys for 10 spots.

    Given that finite number of spots these guys can pitch in, adding "more" doesn't mean you get more value. More starters only gives you value if they are clearly better than what you already have.

    If I'm going to watch another 90 loss team, I'd at least like to get some answers about our roster. Not waste time on someone like Correia, Saunders, Santana or anyone else that is done with this team in October regardless of their performance.

  10. These 2 users like TheLeviathan's post and want to buy him/her a steak dinner:

    mike wants wins (03-05-2014), Oxtung (03-05-2014)

  11. #47
    Twins News Team All-Star TheLeviathan's Avatar
    Posts
    4,852
    Like
    180
    Liked 668 Times in 377 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by cmathewson View Post
    Nobody seems to remember just how bad the staff was last year. The reality was far worse than anyone thought. Here is a list of the starters who had a 5 ERA or worse with their ERA+, starts and innings totals:

    Mike Pelfrey: 78/29/152
    Scott Diamond: 75/24/131
    Pedro Hernandez: 59/12/56
    Kyle Gibson: 62/10/51
    Vance Worley: 56/10/48
    Liam Hndriks: 59/8/47
    PJ Walters: 68/8/39
    Cole DeVries: 38/2/15

    Four of those guys are gone, with their rotation spots replaced by Nolasco and Hughes. We can expect some improvement from Pelfrey and Gibson. We won't need the services of Diamond or Worley unless they're substantially improved.

    The result: This year's rotation should be twice as good as last year's. Not that it means they'll double the wins. But 10 more wins is within reach, methinks.
    Um...Hughes was a 5+ ERA too last year. Diamond and Worley can't be "substantially improved" if they don't have innings to pitch in.

    I'm baffled by this notion that "Well, Worley/Diamond/Deduno just need to prove themselves and they will get a chance". Ugh - when exactly are they doing that? Meaningless ST innings? Mop-up innings? Shell-spitting in the dugout?

    You have to have a spot to show you can keep it or meaningful innings to prove it. Otherwise this is really just hot air. Once the rubber meets the road on this kind of analysis it doesn't work.

  12. This user likes TheLeviathan's post and wants to buy him/her a steak dinner:

    mike wants wins (03-05-2014)

  13. #48
    Banned Big-Leaguer
    Posts
    715
    Like
    82
    Liked 40 Times in 29 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by TheLeviathan View Post
    Um...Hughes was a 5+ ERA too last year. Diamond and Worley can't be "substantially improved" if they don't have innings to pitch in.

    I'm baffled by this notion that "Well, Worley/Diamond/Deduno just need to prove themselves and they will get a chance". Ugh - when exactly are they doing that? Meaningless ST innings? Mop-up innings? Shell-spitting in the dugout?

    You have to have a spot to show you can keep it or meaningful innings to prove it. Otherwise this is really just hot air. Once the rubber meets the road on this kind of analysis it doesn't work.
    It's silly to think our favorite team spent 84M just to trot Worley, Diamond, and Deduno right back out there. ST innings may be meaningless to us, but not so to them.

  14. #49
    Senior Member Big-Leaguer
    Posts
    605
    Like
    11
    Liked 23 Times in 17 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Nick Nelson View Post
    Exactly! The Twins don't need more starters they just need better starters to contend. The have a quantity of starters just not much quality to choose from.

  15. #50
    Twins News Team All-Star TheLeviathan's Avatar
    Posts
    4,852
    Like
    180
    Liked 668 Times in 377 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by howieramone View Post
    It's silly to think our favorite team spent 84M just to trot Worley, Diamond, and Deduno right back out there. ST innings may be meaningless to us, but not so to them.
    The 84M was invested in upside. The second year to Correia was not. Nor would redundantly adding to him on the roster with Saunders or anyone else.

  16. #51
    Senior Member All-Star cmathewson's Avatar
    Posts
    2,272
    Like
    241
    Liked 464 Times in 291 Posts
    Blog Entries
    1
    Quote Originally Posted by TheLeviathan View Post
    The 84M was invested in upside. The second year to Correia was not. Nor would redundantly adding to him on the roster with Saunders or anyone else.
    Yeah, we get it. Lack of foresight. Unforgivable decision. Blah, blah, blah. They kept Blackburn in AAA for two years while paying him the exact amount as Correia's contract. I'm pretty sure the field staff will ask for the best pitchers regardless of contract status. The rest will either play their way on the team or off the team. Based on Anderson's comments, I'm pretty sure that includes Gibson making the team on opening day regardless. I'm not worried about it.
    "If you'da been thinkin' you wouldn't 'a thought that.."

  17. #52
    Twins News Team All-Star TheLeviathan's Avatar
    Posts
    4,852
    Like
    180
    Liked 668 Times in 377 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by cmathewson View Post
    I'm pretty sure the field staff will ask for the best pitchers regardless ....The rest will either play their way on the team or off the team.
    Gardy and his staff have passed over talent for "veteran presence" more than once in the past, so I don't share your confidence.

    again, I ask, when exactly are they playing their way in? Meaningless ST starts against split squads? I'm genuinely curious when you envision their opportunity is.

  18. #53
    Senior Member All-Star
    Posts
    1,419
    Like
    66
    Liked 42 Times in 29 Posts
    IMO, the problem wasn't signing (or not) Santana but rather resigning Pelfrey. I truly don't understand what the point of that was (especially for two years). He won't be here when the Twins contend next, he is another below average pitcher with little to no upside and he is taking up a rotation spot that could be used by a pitcher that will be here down the road to either gain experience or show he belongs. To me, if the question is between giving innings to Pelfrey or Gibson/Deduno/Worley/May/Meyer/Darnell/Gilmartin that is an easy choice to make.

    I also think 2 years from now we'll all be saying, "WTF were the Twins thinking signing Hughes to a 3 year contract?!?"

  19. #54
    Twins News Team All-Star TheLeviathan's Avatar
    Posts
    4,852
    Like
    180
    Liked 668 Times in 377 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by cmathewson View Post
    They kept Blackburn in AAA for two years while paying him the exact amount as Correia's contract. t.
    They also gave him 19 starts at a 7+ ERA before that. So forgive me if I find this example FAR from convincing to put it nicely.

  20. #55
    Senior Member All-Star 70charger's Avatar
    Posts
    1,116
    Like
    138
    Liked 198 Times in 97 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Oxtung View Post
    IMO, the problem wasn't signing (or not) Santana but rather resigning Pelfrey. I truly don't understand what the point of that was (especially for two years). He won't be here when the Twins contend next, he is another below average pitcher with little to no upside and he is taking up a rotation spot that could be used by a pitcher that will be here down the road to either gain experience or show he belongs. To me, if the question is between giving innings to Pelfrey or Gibson/Deduno/Worley/May/Meyer/Darnell/Gilmartin that is an easy choice to make.

    I also think 2 years from now we'll all be saying, "WTF were the Twins thinking signing Hughes to a 3 year contract?!?"
    This is literally the exact opposite of the criticisms that were such a common refrain here in the past year or two. (Not necessarily Oxtung, but a huge number of others.)

    The old criticism was "why can't the Twins just go out and get someone who will make the team better now and quit worrying about a bunch of scrubs who wouldn't make the team over the free agent anyway?"

    The new criticism is "why did the Twins go out and get someone who may make the team better now but will block the young guys who may or may not have a major league future?"

    Are we really worried about a $7 million a year contract being ultimately destructive to Logan Darnell's presumed major league career? I don't see it.

  21. This user likes 70charger's post and wants to buy him/her a steak dinner:

    howieramone (03-05-2014)

  22. #56
    Twins News Team MVP
    Posts
    6,757
    Like
    882
    Liked 856 Times in 552 Posts
    Blog Entries
    3
    Quote Originally Posted by 70charger View Post
    This is literally the exact opposite of the criticisms that were such a common refrain here in the past year or two. (Not necessarily Oxtung, but a huge number of others.)

    The old criticism was "why can't the Twins just go out and get someone who will make the team better now and quit worrying about a bunch of scrubs who wouldn't make the team over the free agent anyway?"

    The new criticism is "why did the Twins go out and get someone who may make the team better now but will block the young guys who may or may not have a major league future?"

    Are we really worried about a $7 million a year contract being ultimately destructive to Logan Darnell's presumed major league career? I don't see it.
    Actually, I don't think anyone would presume that Darnell is being blocked at this point, can we just dismiss that strawman? But there are definitely more worthy prospects that are/have been blocked now and in the recent past. And it isn't just the "$7M guys" being so "destructive", it's also the recent huge excess of guys at the level of the likes of DeVries, Vasquez and Walters occupying roster spots on the Twins and at Rochester over guys with more potential that is what's so problematic. By contrast, the Cubs have used the ML-level SP short-term Bandaid approach with some arms with upside and better resale appeal, that they then successfully flipped for more prospects and players- no mediocrity logjam in Wrigley.

    And I think I can sum up the criticism as more along these lines (and it really hasn't been that inconsistent):

    "...Why won't the Twins only acquire SPs who can make the team better now and into the near future, and not acquire any guys on a rebuilding team who are older, speculative reclamation projects or who project at a #5 ceiling....so that we can make a full determination which of our young guys are keepers and which are pretenders in anticipation of the next run?"

  23. These 2 users like jokin's post and want to buy him/her a steak dinner:

    mike wants wins (03-06-2014), Oxtung (03-06-2014)

  24. #57
    Senior Member All-Star
    Posts
    1,245
    Like
    107
    Liked 105 Times in 77 Posts
    Apparently many have forgotten that most of the Twins pitching prospects are years away from the majors. Thus, when most of these contracts have expired that nobody has been "blocked" from advancing to the Twins. With regards to Pelfrey, I don't think that much of him--but I think a lot more of him than the dreck I saw last year that (fortunately) is no longer with the the team.

  25. #58
    Senior Member All-Star cmathewson's Avatar
    Posts
    2,272
    Like
    241
    Liked 464 Times in 291 Posts
    Blog Entries
    1
    Quote Originally Posted by Kwak View Post
    Apparently many have forgotten that most of the Twins pitching prospects are years away from the majors. Thus, when most of these contracts have expired that nobody has been "blocked" from advancing to the Twins. With regards to Pelfrey, I don't think that much of him--but I think a lot more of him than the dreck I saw last year that (fortunately) is no longer with the the team.
    Gibson, Meyer, and May are close. Though Gibson is not technically a prospect because of his time on the team last year, he has yet to receive a full shot. When we talk about prospects, I think we mean those guys primarily.

    The thing I agree with about Pelfrey as a head scratcher is an Antony quote. To paraphrase, they didn't want to just pay for his rehab. They wanted to get more out of that investment with a fully healthy guy. That is an example of the sunk cost fallacy. If he's not as good as, say, Gibson, why sign him?

    I have a bigger problem with the Pelfrey signing this year than the Correia signing last year. Last year they were desperate for an innings eater. A two-year deal was the cost of entry. This year they are not desperate.

    In another thread, Antony was recently interviewed about spring training results. Much of it was devoted to the fifth starter spot. He did mention the possibility of making a trade if necessary. I wouldn't be surprised if something happens towards the end of spring.
    "If you'da been thinkin' you wouldn't 'a thought that.."

  26. These 3 users like cmathewson's post and want to buy him/her a steak dinner:

    jokin (03-05-2014), mike wants wins (03-06-2014), Oxtung (03-06-2014)

  27. #59
    Twins News Team MVP
    Posts
    6,757
    Like
    882
    Liked 856 Times in 552 Posts
    Blog Entries
    3
    Quote Originally Posted by Kwak View Post
    Apparently many have forgotten that most of the Twins pitching prospects are years away from the majors. Thus, when most of these contracts have expired that nobody has been "blocked" from advancing to the Twins. With regards to Pelfrey, I don't think that much of him--but I think a lot more of him than the dreck I saw last year that (fortunately) is no longer with the the team.
    The first steps were made ("fortunately", indeed!) to begin moving out the "pile" in the offseason, but there is much work to be done in that area- hopefully there is a change in philosophy in this regard. Nothing wrong with going "younger" by trading for Gilmartin and acquiring Raley to replace some of the "dreck", who both offer some speculative upside and left-handedness.

    But-

    Gibson was blocked last year from a May promotion.
    Logan Darnell and Trevor May probably should have had more innings at Rochester.
    Todd Redmond was available, for free, twice, on the waiver wire, the Twins somehow thought they had better options?
    Paul Maholm and Scott Feldman were available in the FA market, both proved that they were eminently flippable, for only slightly more $$$ than Correia or Pelfrey.
    Meanwhile, soon-to-be 30-year old Kris Johnson is now being thought of as an important part of the SP depth chart- though Chris Capuano could have been brought in cheaply and had nice potential as a flipping chip.
    Last edited by jokin; 03-05-2014 at 10:31 PM.

  28. #60
    Banned Big-Leaguer
    Posts
    715
    Like
    82
    Liked 40 Times in 29 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by jokin View Post
    Actually, I don't think anyone would presume that Darnell is being blocked at this point, can we just dismiss that strawman? But there are definitely more worthy prospects that are/have been blocked now and in the recent past. And it isn't just the "$7M guys" being so "destructive", it's also the recent huge excess of guys at the level of the likes of DeVries, Vasquez and Walters occupying roster spots on the Twins and at Rochester over guys with more potential that is what's so problematic. By contrast, the Cubs have used the ML-level SP short-term Bandaid approach with some arms with upside and better resale appeal, that they then successfully flipped for more prospects and players- no mediocrity logjam in Wrigley.

    And I think I can sum up the criticism as more along these lines (and it really hasn't been that inconsistent):

    "...Why won't the Twins only acquire SPs who can make the team better now and into the near future, and not acquire any guys on a rebuilding team who are older, speculative reclamation projects or who project at a #5 ceiling....so that we can make a full determination which of our young guys are keepers and which are pretenders in anticipation of the next run?"
    Who specifically projects at a #5 ceiling? How has that approach been working for the Loveable Losers?

Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
©2014 TwinsCentric, LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Interested in advertising with Twins Daily? Click here.