Jump to content

Providing independent coverage of the Minnesota Twins.
The same great Twins Daily coverage, now for the Vikings.

The Store


Photo

Mason previews the Twins starting rotation

  • Please log in to reply
24 replies to this topic

#1 John Bonnes

John Bonnes

    Owner

  • Administrators
  • 4,954 posts

Posted 09 February 2013 - 09:58 PM

Tyler Mason previews the Twins starting rotation and will preview the other aspects of the team through the rest of the week. Gardenhire doesn't sound especially excited about the future....

MANAGER RON GARDENHIRE SAYS: "We lost good players, but the only way to get good pitching is you're going to have to move some players to get it. Moving (Denard) Span and Revere was kind of a shocker for a lot of people. That's two pretty good center fielders, one that's established and one that was getting there. But you move them and get pitching, which we desperately needed. We did that, but we also made some free-agent signings and some people that know how to pitch. All we ask is that you get us deep into the game. We've got guys that can hit. We can score runs. We just needed to stay in the games a little bit longer. Hopefully that's what we've accomplished. We'll see."


Twins' rotation has changed, but is it better?

#2 mnfanforlife

mnfanforlife

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 492 posts

Posted 11 February 2013 - 12:35 AM

Nope. Not better than last year. Somehow, this post from last November is still how I feel about our pitching staff. Marooned in some frozen wasteland (like the financial assets of the Pohlads).

#3 Guest_USAFChief_*

Guest_USAFChief_*
  • Guests

Posted 11 February 2013 - 12:58 AM

"Moving Span and Revere was kind of a shocker for a lot of people." Sounds like maybe Ron wasn't exactly a fan of losing both his CFers.

#4 Nick Nelson

Nick Nelson

    Owner

  • Administrators
  • 2,062 posts

Posted 11 February 2013 - 02:03 AM

"Moving Span and Revere was kind of a shocker for a lot of people." Sounds like maybe Ron wasn't exactly a fan of losing both his CFers.

I remember at one point during the Winter Meetings, after the Span trade and before the Revere trade, Gardy came out of a meeting with execs and grumbled to reporters about how they were "trading his whole damn team away." That naturally led some folks to wonder whether another player-for-prospect trade was coming (in fact, I think Parker predicted the Revere trade shortly after that quote).

Seemed clear Gardenhire wasn't happy about it. And why would he be? Trading established players for prospects doesn't exactly help a lame duck manager.

#5 glunn

glunn

    Head Moderator

  • Twins Mods
  • 5,213 posts
  • LocationBeverly Hills, CA

Posted 11 February 2013 - 02:21 AM

Interesting article.

If Diamond does not regress very much and Worley is healthy, that gives the Twins two solid starters. Then we can hope for two or three of the eight other candidates to step up -- Correia, Gibson, Hendriks, Blackburn, De Vries, Walters, Deduno, and Pelfrey.

I like the fact that the Twins have 10 guys who might be solid starters this year. If only 40% of them are solid, then we could move up relative to other teams. Yes, it is very unlikely that the Twins starters will be near the top of the AL, but I feel that there is reason to hope that they can move up to the middle of the pack.

#6 FrodaddyG

FrodaddyG

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 536 posts

Posted 11 February 2013 - 02:49 AM

Seemed clear Gardenhire wasn't happy about it. And why would he be? Trading established players for prospects doesn't exactly help a lame duck manager.

I doesn't help, but he also can't point to the results he was getting from the last two years and demand that they stand pat on the roster.

#7 beckmt

beckmt

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 827 posts

Posted 11 February 2013 - 07:48 AM

Interesting that Harden was not mentioned in this thread. We can always hope they will be better, but gave a fair amount of offense to get there, slight plus in my mind, but unless some offensive players step up, scoring runs could now be a issue.

#8 Brandon

Brandon

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 791 posts

Posted 11 February 2013 - 07:49 AM

Looks like April is shaping up to be an extended tryout for the rotation. With Diamond missing a few weeks in April. Everyone is saying Pelfry will be ready to go in April. Swarzak being out will give someone else like Dedunno or Walters another shot too. So as spring training is set to begin the rotation appears to be.

Worely (assuming he is ready to go after his surgury)
Pelfry
Corriea
Hendriks
Devries (IMO) with Gibson starting out in the pen or extended spring training where its warmer. Gibson is kind of a wild card in that i can see the Twins doing those things to protect him but i can also see him starting the season in the rotation too depending on how who pitches like what during spring training.

If Pelfry or Worely need a few weeks as well to start the season then the rotation will get real interesting. Hopefully Deunsing stays in the pen this year if someone else falls out i can see him being added back into the mix.

Edited by Brandon, 11 February 2013 - 07:55 AM.


#9 FrodaddyG

FrodaddyG

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 536 posts

Posted 11 February 2013 - 08:41 AM

Interesting that Harden was not mentioned in this thread.

Maybe they wanted to focus on pitchers that have been useful more recently than Obama's first inauguration year?

#10 LaBombo

LaBombo

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 2,991 posts

Posted 11 February 2013 - 09:31 AM

Seemed clear Gardenhire wasn't happy about it. And why would he be? Trading established players for prospects doesn't exactly help a lame duck manager.


Are you sure? Yes, Gardy not having an extension in place beyond 2013 is superficially ominous (for him, anyway), but reconsider the other factors in play.

Nobody, least of all the Twins front office, expects the Twins to win in 2013. The word 'rebuilding' is bad for ticket sales, but we all knew that's what it is when Span was traded. Gardenhire was (rightly) not held significantly accountable for lousy 2011 and 2012 seasons that were less clearly rebuild years, so why would 96 losses in a 2013 season that definitely is a rebuilder get him fired?

So you can take it as a positive about his character that upon hearing of the loss of Revere, he's more upset about losing more games in 2013 than he is relieved that his job may be more secure due to low win expectations. Or you can take it as a negative that he's not sharp enough to see, at the moment of the comment at least, that he won't be held accountable for another bad season.

My guess is that he knows his paycheck, if not his role, is secure as a soldier in the Pohlad family. He really likes managing but won't be crushed if he gets moved to a new 'job'. He doesn't like losing, but he was even more upset at the prospect of watching either a lesser veteran than Span, or a rookie, toil in center all year. And I think he hates bad defense and poor fundamentals even more than he dislikes losing.

That, and I think he dislikes umpires more than losing, too.

#11 diehardtwinsfan

diehardtwinsfan

    Twins Moderator

  • Twins Mods
  • 4,625 posts

Posted 11 February 2013 - 10:43 AM

If he hates bad defense and poor fundamentals, he'd have benched almost the entire team at one point last year. The problem is that Gardy doesn't see things like range, he simply sees misques... That's how a guy like Jason Bartlett toils away at AAA while Juan Castro and his reputation remain at the ML level.

#12 roger

roger

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 322 posts

Posted 11 February 2013 - 11:36 AM

Good morning John, and thanks for the message last fall. I didn't see it until several weeks ago, then wasn't able to return a message for whatever reason. I am back to nearly 100%, relaxing out here in the California desert.

I don't know if we should read anything into Gardy's comments. I certainly didn't get the same feeling you did. As for the rotation, although I understand I am in a tiny minority I think Mr. Ryan did a nice job this offseason. Worley, Diamond and Pelfrey all should be solid once healthy and pitching. Correia is an innings eater who should be able to compete in the 4th starter slot. And unlike last year, we have a lot of young kids ready to step in with most now having some major league experience.

It looks to me that we will need three of them on opening day as reports indicate Diamond won't be ready and it certainly is a question whether or not Pelfrey will be ready. Assuming Hendriks, DeVries and Deduno (with opening day April 1 at Target Field, I see Gibson staying in EST/Fort Meyers for a few weeks before a few weeks in Rochester) are in the opening day rotation, my question is what happens when the three projected starters are ready if say two of the kids get off to a great start?

I haven't said this anywhere, but I think Pelfrey and Harden were great signings. If Harden has a nice comeback year and Pelfrey pitches like he is capable of by say June, Mr. Ryan has some attractive options. With a lot of salary available, he could certainly offer either or both a nice two or three year extension. Should they not accept and want to again test free agency (most likely with Pelfrey considering who his agent is), Mr. Ryan certainly has the salary available in 2014 to offer arbitration. Should either accept, he has a nice starter in 2014 on a one year contract coming off a good year. If they don't accept, he will get the draft pick in what many say will be a better draft than this year.

Edited by roger, 11 February 2013 - 11:38 AM.


#13 ashburyjohn

ashburyjohn

    Twins Moderator

  • Twins Mods
  • 4,734 posts
  • LocationLake Tahoe, Nevada

Posted 11 February 2013 - 12:08 PM

but the only way to get good pitching is you're going to have to move some players to get it.


Well, there's the draft, but that's not an issue at the moment and doesn't normally provide instant relief anyway. But I guess Gardy is really a dyed-in-the-wool Twin if he also overlooks the potential of ever getting "good pitching" via this new-fangled mechanism called Free Agency. (Is he tacitly agreeing that Kevin C is *not* "good pitching"?)

#14 Nick Nelson

Nick Nelson

    Owner

  • Administrators
  • 2,062 posts

Posted 11 February 2013 - 01:00 PM

Are you sure? Yes, Gardy not having an extension in place beyond 2013 is superficially ominous (for him, anyway), but reconsider the other factors in play.

Nobody, least of all the Twins front office, expects the Twins to win in 2013. The word 'rebuilding' is bad for ticket sales, but we all knew that's what it is when Span was traded. Gardenhire was (rightly) not held significantly accountable for lousy 2011 and 2012 seasons that were less clearly rebuild years, so why would 96 losses in a 2013 season that definitely is a rebuilder get him fired?

I feel pretty confident that if the Twins lose another 96 games, or fall into another huge early hole, Gardy is gone. The front office might not expect a postseason run but they expect improvement, as well they should. I'm not saying that's all on Gardenhire's shoulders but he's next in line for scapegoating after the rest of his staff was gouged this year.

#15 FrodaddyG

FrodaddyG

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 536 posts

Posted 11 February 2013 - 01:03 PM

I feel pretty confident that if the Twins lose another 96 games, or fall into another huge early hole, Gardy is gone. The front office might not expect a postseason run but they expect improvement, as well they should. I'm not saying that's all on Gardenhire's shoulders but he's next in line for scapegoating after the rest of his staff was gouged this year.

I'll wait and reserve judgement until I see how the first base and bullpen coaching play out. The guys who really impact the results on the field.

#16 ThePuck

ThePuck

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 3,232 posts

Posted 11 February 2013 - 01:56 PM

I'll wait and reserve judgement until I see how the first base and bullpen coaching play out. The guys who really impact the results on the field.


That was very funny!

#17 spycake

spycake

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 1,873 posts

Posted 11 February 2013 - 03:32 PM

I like the fact that the Twins have 10 guys who might be solid starters this year.

If "might be" = "greater than zero" this is true, but:

Walters has a near-zero percent chance at being a solid major league starter for a full season. Deduno and De Vries are only marginally better. Gibson and Hendricks are better, but perhaps not in 2013 due to their age and experience, and Blackburn and Pelfrey are still very big question marks for 2013 due to recent injury and/or ineffectiveness. And Correia is Correia. Not to mention that there are still serious questions about Diamond and Worley too.

I wonder what are the cumulative odds that the Twins rotation is league-average or better this year, in terms of run prevention? I don't think I'd go any higher than 25% in my most optimistic take.

#18 Nick Nelson

Nick Nelson

    Owner

  • Administrators
  • 2,062 posts

Posted 11 February 2013 - 04:43 PM

I wonder what are the cumulative odds that the Twins rotation is league-average or better this year, in terms of run prevention? I don't think I'd go any higher than 25% in my most optimistic take.

Even that's probably generous, but it's a lot higher than zero, which is a truth that many sulkers seem to overlook or ignore.

#19 FrodaddyG

FrodaddyG

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 536 posts

Posted 11 February 2013 - 05:35 PM

Even that's probably generous, but it's a lot higher than zero, which is a truth that many sulkers seem to overlook or ignore.

Because a (by your account) less than 1 in 4 chance of the rotation not being terrible is something to get excited about?

#20 70charger

70charger

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 1,145 posts

Posted 11 February 2013 - 05:56 PM

Because a (by your account) less than 1 in 4 chance of the rotation not being terrible is something to get excited about?


It's more something not-to-be-fatalist about. Yeah, we certainly could suck - but you can't say we certainly will suck.

#21 mnfanforlife

mnfanforlife

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 492 posts

Posted 12 February 2013 - 02:52 AM

Interesting article.

If Diamond does not regress very much and Worley is healthy, that gives the Twins two solid starters. Then we can hope for two or three of the eight other candidates to step up -- Correia, Gibson, Hendriks, Blackburn, De Vries, Walters, Deduno, and Pelfrey.

I like the fact that the Twins have 10 guys who might be solid starters this year. If only 40% of them are solid, then we could move up relative to other teams. Yes, it is very unlikely that the Twins starters will be near the top of the AL, but I feel that there is reason to hope that they can move up to the middle of the pack.


Whoa...I thought I was optimistic. We have 10 guys that could be "solid"?? No way. Unless we have a very different definition of "solid."

If you replace "solid" with "average", then I could see your point of view. But no way do we have any potential for an above average rotation. No chance.

"Solid" means productive, when referring to a ball player. We have 10 very "below average" candidates for our "Ace" role. haha

Edited by mnfanforlife, 12 February 2013 - 02:55 AM.


#22 mnfanforlife

mnfanforlife

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 492 posts

Posted 12 February 2013 - 02:57 AM

It's more something not-to-be-fatalist about. Yeah, we certainly could suck - but you can't say we certainly will suck.


We certainly will suck in 2013. And there is a 1 in 4 chance of error on that statement.

#23 SpiritofVodkaDave

SpiritofVodkaDave

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 4,126 posts

Posted 12 February 2013 - 03:43 AM

Whoa...I thought I was optimistic. We have 10 guys that could be "solid"?? No way. Unless we have a very different definition of "solid."

If you replace "solid" with "average", then I could see your point of view. But no way do we have any potential for an above average rotation. No chance.

"Solid" means productive, when referring to a ball player. We have 10 very "below average" candidates for our "Ace" role. haha


Yeah unfortunately out of that group Gibson is the only guy who best case scenario could project higher then a #3 (I still think his ceiling is as a good #2, which is at least a start). At this point you sorta hope that Diamond and Worley can both be legit #3 type guys and Hendriks and Pelfrey can be #4 guys. Nobody else really interests me other then Harden and he is a long shot anyways, the rest of the guys IMO will be up and down throughout the year, maybe one will stick as a#5 guy, Correia? But I'm not holding my breath to be honest.

At least we have some arms this year, now they just gotta stay healthy.

#24 SpiritofVodkaDave

SpiritofVodkaDave

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 4,126 posts

Posted 12 February 2013 - 03:46 AM

Because a (by your account) less than 1 in 4 chance of the rotation not being terrible is something to get excited about?


Meh, I mean its hope, gotta roll with something to get us through the first couple weeks of the season, after that the crushing reality may very well set in, but it would be nice to get off to a bit of a nice start to keep the delusional homers like my self appeased.

#25 beckmt

beckmt

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 827 posts

Posted 12 February 2013 - 06:10 AM

I do not think this rotation will be average. We can hope for a collective ERA of about 4.50 That would be better than last year, now if we can score enough runs to make us competetive with that starting ERA. For that we would need at least a couple of the question marks to come through(CF, RF, SS,2B,3B). Make that at least 3 to 4 of the question marks.