Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 47

Thread: Terry Ryan's "Thin" SP Market Quote

  1. #1
    The King In The North All-Star Nick Nelson's Avatar
    Posts
    1,623
    Like
    5
    Liked 65 Times in 24 Posts
    Blog Entries
    292

    Terry Ryan's "Thin" SP Market Quote

    Given that Terry Ryan's vague quote in a Jim Souhan column about a "thin" SP market has generated a lot of confusion here and elsewhere, I felt the best idea would be to simply email Souhan for clarification. His response:

    "He was referring to top-of-the-rotation starters. And my interpretation was that he was talking about top-of-the-rotation starters he would be interested in."

    So there ya go. I don't think anyone should be surprised by that.

  2. #2
    Owner MVP Seth Stohs's Avatar
    Posts
    5,916
    Like
    41
    Liked 202 Times in 106 Posts
    Blog Entries
    515
    Nice work, Mr. Nelson!!

  3. #3
    I don't see how anyone could think the top end starting pitching market isn't thin... It starts and ends with Grienke. There are some nice pitchers on the market that could improve this rotation... but Grienke is the only one i see as a #1.

  4. #4
    Senior Member All-Star
    Posts
    1,388
    Like
    50
    Liked 35 Times in 23 Posts
    Thanks Nick!!

  5. #5
    It is thin when put in the perspective Souhan provided, and it's also likely a bargaining maneuver. Every purchasing-GMs has an interest to downplay the strength of the market. I think this is about what you'd hear from most decent negotiators at this point in the process.

  6. #6
    Owner All-Star John Bonnes's Avatar
    Posts
    2,288
    Like
    1
    Liked 107 Times in 58 Posts
    Blog Entries
    231
    Ok, if he means clear ace types thats fine, but it's ALWAYS thin by that definition. Is Jake Peavy not a top of he rotation guy? Ryan Dempster?

  7. #7
    Quote Originally Posted by John Bonnes View Post
    Ok, if he means clear ace types thats fine, but it's ALWAYS thin by that definition. Is Jake Peavy not a top of he rotation guy? Ryan Dempster?
    I'm still not convinced Peavy is top of the rotatoin. #2 for sure... but I don't know if one good season after a couple of bad ones gives him that definition.

    Dempster showed a lot of regression after the trade... I'd categorize him as a #2.

    These two are about to get 2 big contracts... that being said I want nothing to do with them on the Twins. Dempster is getting old and will command a multi-year deal and will be looking to maximize what will likely be his final deal.

    Peavy is looking at a final deal as well... He's likely going to be looking (and getting) way more years than he's worth.

    I really wouldn't invest the cash in any of the top free agent pitchers (Grienke/Dempster/Peavy)... They all have a lot of mileage on their arms (even Grienke who's the youngest of the group at 28). If they sign one (longshot anyway) and they pull a Zito... the Twins would be absolutely ****ed with payroll.

  8. #8
    Senior Member All-Star
    Posts
    1,251
    Like
    0
    Liked 1 Time in 1 Post
    Blog Entries
    1
    Alot of bull.

  9. #9
    Pixel Monkey MVP Brock Beauchamp's Avatar
    Posts
    6,677
    Like
    32
    Liked 743 Times in 415 Posts
    Blog Entries
    6
    I don't know if I would classify anyone in this FA crop of pitchers as an "ace". Lots of really good #2s, mediocre #2s, and borderline #3s but no aces, really. Every pitcher in the class has a significant flaw. Greinke's mental state (and three years of off-and-on mediocrity), Dempster's struggles in the AL, Peavy's injury history, etc.

  10. #10
    Owner Big-Leaguer Parker Hageman's Avatar
    Posts
    995
    Like
    1
    Liked 38 Times in 25 Posts
    Blog Entries
    200
    Nice hustle Nick.
    @OverTheBaggy

  11. #11
    Senior Member All-Star SpiritofVodkaDave's Avatar
    Posts
    3,611
    Like
    32
    Liked 179 Times in 102 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by John Bonnes View Post
    Ok, if he means clear ace types thats fine, but it's ALWAYS thin by that definition. Is Jake Peavy not a top of he rotation guy? Ryan Dempster?
    No way. Peavy has way to many injuries and inconsistencies to be a top of the rotation guy, and Dempster is no where near that as well. I view him as a pretty "meh" #3 in the AL.

  12. #12
    Pixel Monkey MVP Brock Beauchamp's Avatar
    Posts
    6,677
    Like
    32
    Liked 743 Times in 415 Posts
    Blog Entries
    6
    Quote Originally Posted by SpiritofVodkaDave View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by John Bonnes View Post
    Ok, if he means clear ace types thats fine, but it's ALWAYS thin by that definition. Is Jake Peavy not a top of he rotation guy? Ryan Dempster?
    No way. Peavy has way to many injuries and inconsistencies to be a top of the rotation guy, and Dempster is no where near that as well. I view him as a pretty "meh" #3 in the AL.
    Yep. Show me a Cliff Lee or CC Sabathia in this free agent class. There just isn't one. Every pitcher going on the market has question marks surrounding him.

  13. #13
    Junior Member Rookie
    Posts
    29
    Like
    0
    Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
    The team that signs Grienke will have overpaid.

    He's alright, but he isn't even worth the money he is being paid now.

  14. #14
    Pixel Monkey MVP Brock Beauchamp's Avatar
    Posts
    6,677
    Like
    32
    Liked 743 Times in 415 Posts
    Blog Entries
    6
    Quote Originally Posted by Wolfy View Post
    The team that signs Grienke will have overpaid.

    He's alright, but he isn't even worth the money he is being paid now.
    He's been worth the money this season. $13.5m isn't that much money for a guy that is posting a 116 ERA+.

    But I agree that there's a good chance whoever signs him deeply regrets it by 2016 (he should get at least four years, probably five this offseason). With top-shelf (or perceived top-shelf) pitchers, you overpay just to sign the guy. You sign him for an extra year or two as the player inevitably declines. Once you factor in that overpaying and extended length, you're easily looking at a guy who will be 50% more expensive over the short term and crippling over the longterm. I have zero issues with the Twins avoiding "elite" free agent pitching. It's just not a smart move for mid-market teams.

    On the other hand, I will be terribly disappointed if they don't sign a Jackson/Marcum/Sanchez type for three years. Those are the type of contracts that won't kill a mid-market team even if they fail. Sure, the upside is lower but if you're going to compete, you have to do it from the farm. Free agency has to be a complementary piece of the puzzle, not the main piece.

    My blueprint would be to trade Span for a high upside guy in the minors (probably low minors) to build for the long term. Then I'd sign a Jackson/Marcum type for three years. Then I'd sign Baker and cross my fingers. This rotation could compete in the Central if things break well for the Twins and it also gives them hope down the road:

    Jackson/Marcum/Sanchez
    Baker
    Diamond
    Scrub/Gibson later in the season
    Other scrub (Hendriks, probably)
    Sixth man: Deduno, De Vries, etc.

    Minors:
    Span for a low minors starter
    Berrios
    Wimmers (hope hope)
    Etc.

  15. #15
    Senior Member All-Star
    Posts
    1,251
    Like
    0
    Liked 1 Time in 1 Post
    Blog Entries
    1
    Pretty simple, if you want to win you pay or sit in last place and be a cheapskate.

  16. #16
    Senior Member All-Star
    Posts
    2,166
    Like
    97
    Liked 54 Times in 38 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Brock Beauchamp View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Wolfy View Post
    The team that signs Grienke will have overpaid.

    He's alright, but he isn't even worth the money he is being paid now.
    He's been worth the money this season. $13.5m isn't that much money for a guy that is posting a 116 ERA+.

    But I agree that there's a good chance whoever signs him deeply regrets it by 2016 (he should get at least four years, probably five this offseason). With top-shelf (or perceived top-shelf) pitchers, you overpay just to sign the guy. You sign him for an extra year or two as the player inevitably declines. Once you factor in that overpaying and extended length, you're easily looking at a guy who will be 50% more expensive over the short term and crippling over the longterm. I have zero issues with the Twins avoiding "elite" free agent pitching. It's just not a smart move for mid-market teams.

    On the other hand, I will be terribly disappointed if they don't sign a Jackson/Marcum/Sanchez type for three years. Those are the type of contracts that won't kill a mid-market team even if they fail. Sure, the upside is lower but if you're going to compete, you have to do it from the farm. Free agency has to be a complementary piece of the puzzle, not the main piece.

    My blueprint would be to trade Span for a high upside guy in the minors (probably low minors) to build for the long term. Then I'd sign a Jackson/Marcum type for three years. Then I'd sign Baker and cross my fingers. This rotation could compete in the Central if things break well for the Twins and it also gives them hope down the road:

    Jackson/Marcum/Sanchez
    Baker
    Diamond
    Scrub/Gibson later in the season
    Other scrub (Hendriks, probably)
    Sixth man: Deduno, De Vries, etc.

    Minors:
    Span for a low minors starter
    Berrios
    Wimmers (hope hope)
    Etc.
    I like the theory of this, although I think we'd get a 2-3 players for Span. I could also see the Twins moving one of Hicks/Arcia this offseason, too, for more pitching.

  17. #17
    Pixel Monkey MVP Brock Beauchamp's Avatar
    Posts
    6,677
    Like
    32
    Liked 743 Times in 415 Posts
    Blog Entries
    6
    Quote Originally Posted by gunnarthor View Post
    I like the theory of this, although I think we'd get a 2-3 players for Span. I could also see the Twins moving one of Hicks/Arcia this offseason, too, for more pitching.
    I think the chance of them moving Hicks or Arcia is almost nil. They need at least one of those guys in the short-term if they trade Span, who is easily their most valuable and tradable piece. Over the long-term, they need to create a cushion if Revere fails and as Willingham transitions into a more fitting role at DH. The Twins have a lot of OF prospects but with Benson falling on his face in 2012, that list shortened quite a bit and chances are they'll need both Arcia and Hicks in the mid-term to bridge the gap to Buxton.

  18. #18
    Senior Member All-Star Shane Wahl's Avatar
    Posts
    3,776
    Like
    4
    Liked 67 Times in 50 Posts
    Blog Entries
    63
    Quote Originally Posted by Brock Beauchamp View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Wolfy View Post
    The team that signs Grienke will have overpaid.

    He's alright, but he isn't even worth the money he is being paid now.
    He's been worth the money this season. $13.5m isn't that much money for a guy that is posting a 116 ERA+.

    But I agree that there's a good chance whoever signs him deeply regrets it by 2016 (he should get at least four years, probably five this offseason). With top-shelf (or perceived top-shelf) pitchers, you overpay just to sign the guy. You sign him for an extra year or two as the player inevitably declines. Once you factor in that overpaying and extended length, you're easily looking at a guy who will be 50% more expensive over the short term and crippling over the longterm. I have zero issues with the Twins avoiding "elite" free agent pitching. It's just not a smart move for mid-market teams.

    On the other hand, I will be terribly disappointed if they don't sign a Jackson/Marcum/Sanchez type for three years. Those are the type of contracts that won't kill a mid-market team even if they fail. Sure, the upside is lower but if you're going to compete, you have to do it from the farm. Free agency has to be a complementary piece of the puzzle, not the main piece.

    My blueprint would be to trade Span for a high upside guy in the minors (probably low minors) to build for the long term. Then I'd sign a Jackson/Marcum type for three years. Then I'd sign Baker and cross my fingers. This rotation could compete in the Central if things break well for the Twins and it also gives them hope down the road:

    Jackson/Marcum/Sanchez
    Baker
    Diamond
    Scrub/Gibson later in the season
    Other scrub (Hendriks, probably)
    Sixth man: Deduno, De Vries, etc.

    Minors:
    Span for a low minors starter
    Berrios
    Wimmers (hope hope)
    Etc.
    Generally I like this, though I prefer trading Morneau at the moment. The market is thin for real number 1 pitchers, but is pretty deep for 2/3 guys (who would be number 1 pitchers for the Twins!). The most recent Gleeman and the Geek podcast cast doubts on Marcum and other than the injury, I don't see why . . . but they were talking getting Marcum on a one-year deal. I had him earlier in the year on a 4 year/$50 deal. Let's assume that both of these extremes are incorrect, and that a similar contract would work for Jackson (Sanchez is probably more like the 4/$50). So that's 3 years/$25 million or so. Not totally way beyond what they spent on Willingham, so that crowd of doubters can shut up.

    Signing Jackson or Marcum, AND signing a Joe Blanton or Ervin Santana? Probably not. Joe Saunders? Maybe for a Marquisesque contract.

    Anyway, another option for your trade scenario, of course, is for a major league pitcher. I have mentioned a few times that arbitration-eligible pitchers (and there are about a dozen of them worth considering) might be an option in a trade. But basically no one has ever replied to me about that so maybe I am crazy to think that teams trade younger pitchers like that? The list I made before, with FA year:

    Chris Sale, CHW 2017
    Jarrod Parker, OAK, 2018 (?)
    Matt Harrison, TEX, 2015
    Tommy Milone, OAK, 2018
    Jason Hammel, BAL, 2014
    Jeremy Hellickson, TB, 2017

    Jordan Zimmermann, WAS, 2016
    James McDonald, PIT, 2016
    Wade Miley, WAS, 2018
    Lance Lynn, STL, 2018
    Vance Worley, PHI, 2018
    Clayton Richard, SDG, 2015

    The attractiveness here is that they all were good this year, and would be under control for awhile. Would a Span/Morneau, crazy bigfoot freak Swarzak (seriously?), and BJ Hermsen (I have big doubts about him, probably other teams do too, but whatever) be enough for one of these guys?

  19. #19
    Senior Member All-Star
    Posts
    4,605
    Like
    496
    Liked 214 Times in 147 Posts
    Assuming the payroll stays 90 to 110 million where will they spend that money if not on top pitchers?

  20. #20
    Owner MVP Seth Stohs's Avatar
    Posts
    5,916
    Like
    41
    Liked 202 Times in 106 Posts
    Blog Entries
    515
    I agree with Ryan that it's fairly thin at the top, and as people have mentioned each of the top types have question marks...

    That said, anyone that generally everyone considers a #2 is better than anything they have. And, frankly, good #3s are better than anything that the Twins have. So, for the Twins sake, there are quite a few options, but I'm against overpaying for any of them. That said, a few should fall through the cracks into a "makes sense" contract area.
    Last edited by Seth Stohs; 09-21-2012 at 10:41 AM. Reason: added last sentence

Page 1 of 3 123 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.