Jump to content

Providing independent coverage of the Minnesota Twins.

The Store

Subscribe to Twins Daily Email

Photo

Waldrop recalled; Manship optioned

  • Please log in to reply
35 replies to this topic

#1 IdahoPilgrim

IdahoPilgrim

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 2,424 posts

Posted 27 June 2012 - 04:11 PM

Just saw on the MiLB website that Waldrop has been recalled from Rochester and Manship optioned.

#2 old nurse

old nurse

    Member

  • Members
  • 1,811 posts

Posted 27 June 2012 - 04:27 PM

Waldrop looks like by the numbers to be pitching better. We will see if it continues up here. For sure he get another shot at major league hitters on July 1 unless the Twins find a proven pitcher..

#3 glennhl

glennhl

    Junior Member

  • Members
  • 21 posts

Posted 27 June 2012 - 04:27 PM

I think this will be good for Manship. I think he's going back to Rochester to be a starter. He'll be better as a starter and I fully expect him to be back with the big club in the future. He is a very talented young man.

#4 PseudoSABR

PseudoSABR

    Twins News Team

  • Twins News Team
  • 1,985 posts

Posted 27 June 2012 - 04:34 PM

He is a very talented young man.

What makes you say that?

#5 Nick Nelson

Nick Nelson

    Owner

  • Administrators
  • 2,145 posts

Posted 27 June 2012 - 04:42 PM

Waldrop had struck out five of 58 batters in Rochester. Here's hoping he can get a lot of ground balls.

#6 Guest_USAFChief_*

Guest_USAFChief_*
  • Guests

Posted 27 June 2012 - 04:44 PM

Captain, we're in waters trecherous with icebergs, what's your plan for the Titanic? "Shuffle the deck chairs, meboy, shuffle the deck chairs."

#7 Brock Beauchamp

Brock Beauchamp

    Owner

  • Administrators
  • 9,161 posts

Posted 27 June 2012 - 04:46 PM

Waldrop had struck out five of 58 batters in Rochester. Here's hoping he can get a lot of ground balls.


Bert told me today that getting the right sink is all about the arm angle. Hopefully Waldrop has lots of arm angle.

#8 stringer bell

stringer bell

    Front office apologist

  • Twins News Team
  • 4,544 posts
  • LocationZumbrota MN

Posted 27 June 2012 - 04:59 PM

Not a Manship fan. Unless the starting staff goes to seed, he really isn't right for a role in the Twins' bullpen. They have a long man (Swarzak) and Manship wasn't a fit to pitch in high leverage late innings. Waldrop will be a middle to setup guy and hopefully will get enough ground balls to make up for his lack of ability to miss bats. I have pictured Waldrop as a Guerrier type and his comeback from adversity is a good story.

#9 Thrylos

Thrylos

    Yes

  • Members
  • 4,500 posts
  • LocationLehigh Valley, PA, USA
  • Twitter: thrylos98

Posted 27 June 2012 - 05:16 PM

Manship has been ineffective in the majors in 4 seasons. (And the last time he was an above average pitcher was in Fort Myers in 2008.) Will be out of options next season, which means happy trails. I wonder if he is the guy going to the Pirates. Not much of a loss for the Twins.
-----
Blogging Twins since 2007 at The Tenth Inning Stretch
http://tenthinningst...h.blogspot.com/
twitter: @thrylos98

#10 glennhl

glennhl

    Junior Member

  • Members
  • 21 posts

Posted 27 June 2012 - 05:26 PM

What makes you say that?


Pitched well in some spot starts a few years ago. Got a critical win at the end of the season to keep the Twins in the playoffs. Was hurt most of the year last year but still was part of the no-hitter at Rochester. Good numbers in Spring Training, good numbers in AAA, and good numbers when he was first pulled up. I think he just needs a little more work to get back the way he was a couple of years ago.

Edited by glennhl, 27 June 2012 - 05:30 PM.


#11 Cody Christie

Cody Christie

    Twins Contributor

  • Twins Contributors
  • 851 posts

Posted 27 June 2012 - 05:41 PM

I was waiting for this move to happen at some point. I think Manship would have been gone earlier if Slama and Oliveros were healthy

#12 darin617

darin617

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 614 posts

Posted 27 June 2012 - 05:41 PM

Manship has been ineffective in the majors in 4 seasons. (And the last time he was an above average pitcher was in Fort Myers in 2008.) Will be out of options next season, which means happy trails. I wonder if he is the guy going to the Pirates. Not much of a loss for the Twins.


I was hoping that the PTBNL would be Nick Blackburn. Is there any chance a team would take him if the Twins chipped in 3/4 of his salary for this season and next year?

#13 DJSim22

DJSim22

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 137 posts

Posted 27 June 2012 - 06:51 PM

Hopefully thats the last we see of Manship. I just think he's a AAAA player.

#14 old nurse

old nurse

    Member

  • Members
  • 1,811 posts

Posted 27 June 2012 - 08:20 PM

I was hoping that the PTBNL would be Nick Blackburn. Is there any chance a team would take him if the Twins chipped in 3/4 of his salary for this season and next year?


But how will the team know if they have a good long reliever without Blackburn?

#15 70charger

70charger

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 1,180 posts

Posted 27 June 2012 - 08:58 PM

But how will the team know if they have a good long reliever without Blackburn?


I chuckled.

#16 greengoblinrulz

greengoblinrulz

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 1,759 posts

Posted 27 June 2012 - 09:58 PM

He's done in the organization. Waldrop is still part of the future....if he can get guys out.

#17 SpiritofVodkaDave

SpiritofVodkaDave

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 4,184 posts

Posted 27 June 2012 - 10:14 PM

Hopefully thats the last we see of Manship. I just think he's a AAAA player.


If he truly is a AAAA player then he def has a spot on this current Twins team unfortunately :/

#18 Shane Wahl

Shane Wahl

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 4,137 posts

Posted 27 June 2012 - 11:51 PM

Manship, Gray, and Swarzak need to be out of the organization. This is clear.

#19 Shane Wahl

Shane Wahl

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 4,137 posts

Posted 27 June 2012 - 11:52 PM

Manship, Gray, and Swarzak need to be out of the organization. This is clear.


I pointed this out in the offseason, but whatever.

#20 Nick Nelson

Nick Nelson

    Owner

  • Administrators
  • 2,145 posts

Posted 27 June 2012 - 11:54 PM

Manship, Gray, and Swarzak need to be out of the organization. This is clear.


What's your beef with Swarzak? He's perfectly suitable in his current role.

#21 jokin

jokin

    Twins News Team

  • Twins News Team
  • 7,571 posts

Posted 28 June 2012 - 12:00 AM

What's your beef with Swarzak? He's perfectly suitable in his current role.


Yes, he does appear to have a lot of upcoming opportunites to break out the 4th inning-or-so-mop-up duties during the frequent 10-2 thrashings.

#22 Guest_USAFChief_*

Guest_USAFChief_*
  • Guests

Posted 28 June 2012 - 12:02 AM

He's perfectly suitable in his current role.


Cromulent, even.

#23 Nick Nelson

Nick Nelson

    Owner

  • Administrators
  • 2,145 posts

Posted 28 June 2012 - 12:10 AM

Yes, he does appear to have a lot of upcoming opportunites to break out the 4th inning-or-so-mop-up duties during the frequent 10-2 thrashings.


All I'm saying is, the Twins need a guy who can come in and pitch a few innings out of the bullpen, especially considering the current state of their rotation. Swarzak can usually do that without giving up a bunch of runs and letting things spin out of control. I can understand the desire to be rid of Manship – who hasn't been able to do that – or Gray – who, in addition to not being very good, isn't really a long reliever – but I have a hard time understanding why anyone would be fed up with Anthony Swarzak, of all people on this roster.

#24 Shane Wahl

Shane Wahl

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 4,137 posts

Posted 28 June 2012 - 12:12 AM

What's your beef with Swarzak? He's perfectly suitable in his current role.


What's the beef? Besides the fact that he isn't good? What else are you looking for here? That 33/12 K/BB ratio in 55 innings isn't an abomination. Except that it is. He wasn't good since 2007 in the minors.

Again, another person poo-pooing a minor adjustment of some x number of wins (even .x . . . ) in order to defend the status quo. Swarzak is NOT a major league pitcher and it is rather alarming that people think he is.

#25 Shane Wahl

Shane Wahl

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 4,137 posts

Posted 28 June 2012 - 12:21 AM

Let's add 'em up here (and it is clear that this doesn't belong in this thread): 1. Swarzak, Gray, and now Manship kept beyond serviceability. 2. Chris Parmelee wasted on the MLB bench for some completely absurd reason. 3. Ben Revere not on the 25 man roster from the beginning (perhaps his AAA time helped him?). 4. Drew Butera vs. any other AAAA catchers. 5. Matt Carson instead of Mastro. 6. Slama--not injured if called up 7. Morneau not facing lefties. ETC. These things add up. This isn't addressing the SP issue, which everyone focuses on. Ignoring other wins available is not a good idea though. But maybe I am just crazy.

#26 Nick Nelson

Nick Nelson

    Owner

  • Administrators
  • 2,145 posts

Posted 28 June 2012 - 12:23 AM

What's the beef? Besides the fact that he isn't good? What else are you looking for here? That 33/12 K/BB ratio in 55 innings isn't an abomination. Except that it is. He wasn't good since 2007 in the minors.

I disagree. Swarzak had a 3.99 ERA as a reliever last year; this year it is 2.95. K/BB ratio doesn't measure results. Results measure results, and up to this point your condemnation simply isn't supported by reality. He shouldn't ever be starting a ballgame, but he's been solid when used properly.

He's a second-round pick with reasonable success in the minors, he's only 26, and he's making the league minimum. Wasting energy on the argument that he should be released seems misguided considering how many players on this team have actually been terrible in their roles. Not all 12 pitchers on the staff have to be great.

#27 Shane Wahl

Shane Wahl

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 4,137 posts

Posted 28 June 2012 - 12:35 AM

Ok, so continue to trot him out there in situations where not being terrible would be helpful. It is HILARIOUS that a Twins fan claims that "not all 12 pitchers on the staff have to be great." Does one prefer good or average over great? How about below average over great? Again, another claim that it is "all OK" in the bullpen so that 0.5 win isn't relevant.

#28 Nick Nelson

Nick Nelson

    Owner

  • Administrators
  • 2,145 posts

Posted 28 June 2012 - 09:18 AM

Ok, so continue to trot him out there in situations where not being terrible would be helpful. It is HILARIOUS that a Twins fan claims that "not all 12 pitchers on the staff have to be great." Does one prefer good or average over great? How about below average over great? Again, another claim that it is "all OK" in the bullpen so that 0.5 win isn't relevant.

I never said it is "all OK" in the bullpen. I said Swarzak has not been part of the problem, and that's demonstrably true. You're basically complaining for no reason.

#29 Seth Stohs

Seth Stohs

    Owner

  • Administrators
  • 7,968 posts

Posted 28 June 2012 - 09:26 AM

If I were to make a list of the Twins Top 25 roster issues, Anthony Swarzak would be wayyyy down the list. He's been solid in his multiple roles the last couple of years.

#30 Brock Beauchamp

Brock Beauchamp

    Owner

  • Administrators
  • 9,161 posts

Posted 28 June 2012 - 09:28 AM

If I were to make a list of the Twins Top 25 roster issues, Anthony Swarzak would be wayyyy down the list. He's been solid in his multiple roles the last couple of years.


*in best Captain Edward Smith voice*

Screw that iceberg! Get those deck chairs in order, seaman!