Jump to content

Providing independent coverage of the Minnesota Twins.

Subscribe to Twins Daily Email

Photo

When Will the Twins Retire Radke's Number?

  • Please log in to reply
57 replies to this topic

#21 MinnesotaMike

MinnesotaMike

    Junior Member

  • Members
  • 10 posts

Posted 20 October 2013 - 12:13 PM

Radke makes me think of my high school football team. We had some ok players that helped us win but we're not good enough to be even all conference, but that didn't diminish that they were decent players. I guess longevity and mediocrity for me does not earn someone a great honor like retiring his number.

#22 Rosterman

Rosterman

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 1,331 posts

Posted 20 October 2013 - 12:16 PM

A good argument...especially over the likes of Perry, Pascual, Santana and even guys like Reardon and Aggie. But that's what the Hall of Fame is for. Rettiring a number is for the utra special player in franchise history.....
Joel Thingvall
www.thingvall.com
rosterman at www.twinscards.com

#23 ThePuck

ThePuck

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 3,232 posts

Posted 20 October 2013 - 12:25 PM

Radke was a great player over his career. He won 20 games in a single year...for the Twins. Santana won the Cy Young in a year he won only 16 games. Take a moment to digest that one.


There's nothing to digest there cause it's not true.

In any event, the win/loss stat is a horrible way to judge pitchers...as evidence by the fact Santana finished 3rd in 2005 while Colon won...likely finishing 3rd because he only won 16 games. He had an ERA of 2.87, over 230 IP, while leading the league in ERA+, Ks, WHIP, H/9, K/9. The only thing Colon had him beat in was the win-loss record.

Radke finshed 3rd in the year he won 20 and an argument could be made he shouldn't have finished that high, but he definitely shouldn't have finished higher.

Edited by ThePuck, 20 October 2013 - 12:40 PM.

Just remember: You put the lime IN the coconut. Only THEN, can you drink it all up.

#24 matthew0211

matthew0211

    Member

  • Members
  • 53 posts

Posted 20 October 2013 - 12:45 PM

I'm probably in the minority, but retiring numbers should be reserved for upper-echelon Hall-of-Famers only. Now, "upper-echelon" is definitely subjective and I don't have any specific criteria for what that would be, but my overall theory is the more numbers that are retired, the less meaning it has, and that honor should be reserved for the truly greats of the game.

In my humble opinion, the only Twin that should have his number retired is Harmon. I could probably be talked into Carew. But that's it.

#25 raindog

raindog

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 310 posts

Posted 20 October 2013 - 01:28 PM

I think just about any HoF player should have his number retired, especially on a team without a lot of those. I couldn't imagine Bert's number not being retired. And the other Twins numbers retired are pretty reasonable. Maybe not Hrbek, but the hometown thing is special.

Going back to Radke, he probably shouldn't have his number retired. I just think people should appreciate how good he was. I probably overstated it earlier, but he was so solid. And he pitched a lot in a offense heavy era.

#26 YourHouseIsMyHouse

YourHouseIsMyHouse

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 1,235 posts

Posted 20 October 2013 - 01:28 PM

I'm not quite sure what we are supposed to be "digesting"?
Wins are a team stat, and not something that a pitcher has much control over.


Radke won 20 games on a 68-94 TEAM. What argument are you trying to make? That the Twins actually won those games for him? This isn't a CC Sabathia case where the pitcher gets wins even when he has a bad performance. It's more of a case that the Twins didn't LOSE those for him. "Not something a pitcher has much control over" is a false statement. Who has more control of a game than the starting pitcher(s)? You allow 6 runs and there's a good chance you don't get the win. You allow 1 run there's a good chance you do win. Quite a bit of control there, but obviously not complete control.

I think averaging 204.5IP per season for 12 years is remarkable in itself. A 4.22 career ERA when you pitch that much is pretty great and also consider his career occurred during the the emergence of the steroid era. Kaat only produced 26-27 WAR in Minnesota. Ditto for Viola who only spent 1/2 his career as a Twin. Radke nearly doubles that with 45.6. Santana only pitched 8 years in Minnesota and gave us 6 great ones. I don't think that's enough even with him being the best pitcher in baseball at the time. Furthermore, I don't understand why you all are alluding to him getting more consideration than Radke after the trade debacle. Radke is the best Twins pitcher of all time in terms of value provided besides Bert Blyleven.

Edited by YourHouseIsMyHouse, 20 October 2013 - 01:40 PM.


#27 twinsnorth49

twinsnorth49

    Moderately Moderate

  • Twins Mods
  • 4,471 posts

Posted 20 October 2013 - 01:38 PM

Radke was a great player over his career. He won 20 games in a single year...for the Twins. Santana won the Cy Young in a year he won only 16 games. Take a moment to digest that one. Radke deserves to be inducted into the Twins HOF. Not the MLB HOF, but the Twins HOF? YES!


I'm not quite sure what we are supposed to be "digesting"?
Wins are a team stat, and not something that a pitcher has much control over.


If nothing else, this post illustrates how silly wins are as a valid metric for a pitcher's peformance.

Edited by twinsnorth49, 20 October 2013 - 01:40 PM.


#28 ThePuck

ThePuck

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 3,232 posts

Posted 20 October 2013 - 01:42 PM

Radke won 20 games on a 68-94 TEAM. What argument are you trying to make? That the Twins actually won those games for him? This isn't a CC Sabathia case where the pitcher gets wins even when he has a bad performance. It's more of a case that the Twins didn't LOSE those for him. "Not something a pitcher has much control over" is a false statement. Who has more control of a game than the starting pitcher(s)? You allow 6 runs and there's a good chance you don't get the win. You allow 1 run there's a good chance you do win. Quite a bit of control there, but obviously not complete control.

I think averaging 204.5IP per season for 12 years is remarkable in itself. A 4.22 career ERA when you pitch that much is pretty great. Kaat only produced 26-27 WAR in Minnesota. Ditto for Viola who only spent 1/2 his career as a Twin. Santana only pitched 8 years in Minnesota. Furthermore, I don't understand why you all are alluding to him getting more consideration than Radke after the trade debacle. Radke is the best Twins pitcher of all time in terms of value provided besides Bert Blyleven.


The games Radke started that year when we won the Twins scored at least least 11 runs 5 times, at least 8 runs 13 times, at least 6 runs 16 times. As far as his wins specifically, 16 times at least 5 runs scored.

Compare that to someone like King Felix who went 13-12 one season, while having 30 quality starts out of his 34 start. His team only scored more than 6 runs 3 times. In his 13 wins specifically, they only scored at least 5 runs 4 times.

Edited by ThePuck, 20 October 2013 - 01:56 PM.

Just remember: You put the lime IN the coconut. Only THEN, can you drink it all up.

#29 ThePuck

ThePuck

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 3,232 posts

Posted 20 October 2013 - 01:51 PM

If nothing else, this post illustrates how silly wins are as a valid metric for a pitcher's peformance.


Santana never won the CY Young while having only 16 wins.
Just remember: You put the lime IN the coconut. Only THEN, can you drink it all up.

#30 YourHouseIsMyHouse

YourHouseIsMyHouse

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 1,235 posts

Posted 20 October 2013 - 01:51 PM

The games Radke started that year when we won that year the Twins scored at least least 11 runs 5 times, at least 8 runs 13 times, at least 6 runs 16 times.

Compare that to someone like King Felix who went 13-12 one season, while having 30 quality starts out of his 34 start. His team only scored more than 6 runs 3 times.


The Twins also lost 10 games where Radke provided Quality Starts. Only 2 of those being the bare minimum 6IP, 3 ER. Actually that's 2004, forgive me.

Edited by YourHouseIsMyHouse, 20 October 2013 - 01:54 PM.


#31 benchwarmerjim

benchwarmerjim

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 143 posts

Posted 20 October 2013 - 01:52 PM

Radke won 20 games on a 68-94 TEAM. What argument are you trying to make? That the Twins actually won those games for him? This isn't a CC Sabathia case where the pitcher gets wins even when he has a bad performance. It's more of a case that the Twins didn't LOSE those for him. "Not something a pitcher has much control over" is a false statement. Who has more control of a game than the starting pitcher(s)? You allow 6 runs and there's a good chance you don't get the win. You allow 1 run there's a good chance you do win. Quite a bit of control there, but obviously not complete control.


what about the years he went 12-14, 11-6 etc with essentially the same bad talent on the mid to late 90s?

Radke was good. Very good. He is in the Twins HoF. He wont be forgotten by those who followed the team from the doldrums to the playoffs. He just doesnt have enough (no Cy Youngs, no leading the team to a World Series, etc) to reach 'retire number' status.

#32 YourHouseIsMyHouse

YourHouseIsMyHouse

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 1,235 posts

Posted 20 October 2013 - 01:59 PM

The games Radke started that year when we won the Twins scored at least least 11 runs 5 times, at least 8 runs 13 times, at least 6 runs 16 times. As far as his wins specifically, 16 times at least 5 runs scored.

Compare that to someone like King Felix who went 13-12 one season, while having 30 quality starts out of his 34 start. His team only scored more than 6 runs 3 times. In his 13 wins specifically, they only scored at least 5 runs 4 times.


Radke's numbers in games he won
1.97 ERA, .923 WHIP, 4.35 K/BB, 4 CG

#33 ThePuck

ThePuck

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 3,232 posts

Posted 20 October 2013 - 02:03 PM

The Twins also lost 10 games where Radke provided Quality Starts. Only 2 of those being the bare minimum 6IP, 3 ER. Actually that's 2004, forgive me.


No one is saying he didn't pitch very well that year...what we're saying is win/losses is a bad barometer to judge pitching. Wins should just be a team stat.
Just remember: You put the lime IN the coconut. Only THEN, can you drink it all up.

#34 ThePuck

ThePuck

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 3,232 posts

Posted 20 October 2013 - 02:04 PM

Radke's numbers in games he won
1.97 ERA, .923 WHIP, 4.35 K/BB, 4 CG



and he would have won those games anyway with ALL the run support he got. Again, no one is saying he didn't pitch well, but he got huge run support.

Now, pointing to the stats you're pointing to NOW, in this post, those are some numbers to sink your teeth into.

Edited by ThePuck, 20 October 2013 - 02:06 PM.

Just remember: You put the lime IN the coconut. Only THEN, can you drink it all up.

#35 YourHouseIsMyHouse

YourHouseIsMyHouse

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 1,235 posts

Posted 20 October 2013 - 02:06 PM

Random tidbit since we're talking about him. Bronson Arroyo is basically a poor man's Brad Radke. And he makes 10 million+ a year. Sure contracts aren't a good metric, but it's something to consider. Especially because Arroyo earns that money.

#36 YourHouseIsMyHouse

YourHouseIsMyHouse

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 1,235 posts

Posted 20 October 2013 - 02:07 PM

and he would have won those games anyway with ALL the run support he got. Again, no one is saying he didn't pitch well, but he got huge run support.

Now, pointing to the stats you're pointing to NOW, in this post, those are some numbers to sink your teeth into.


Like right now? ;)

#37 ThePuck

ThePuck

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 3,232 posts

Posted 20 October 2013 - 02:09 PM

Like right now? ;)


I'm not sure I get what you're saying here...so, maybe :-)
Just remember: You put the lime IN the coconut. Only THEN, can you drink it all up.

#38 YourHouseIsMyHouse

YourHouseIsMyHouse

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 1,235 posts

Posted 20 October 2013 - 02:10 PM

No one is saying he didn't pitch very well that year...what we're saying is win/losses is a bad barometer to judge pitching. Wins should just be a team stat.


I agree with that and I hardly put any value on them either unless they stick out like that season. Wins aren't an impressive stat, but when you get wins in nearly 1/3 of your teams' games, that is impressive.

#39 ThePuck

ThePuck

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 3,232 posts

Posted 20 October 2013 - 02:18 PM

I agree with that and I hardly put any value on them either unless they stick out like that season. Wins aren't an impressive stat, but when you get wins in nearly 1/3 of your teams' games, that is impressive.


No one is saying it isn't...or at least I'm not, but with the run support he got in those games, he was gonna win a huge chunk anyway. He did his part, for sure, in 18 of those wins. In 2005, Santana had 10 no decision. 8 of those were quality starts. The other two, he gave up 4. With run support like Radke got when he won 20, Santana very likely gets at least 20 instead of being stuck at 16.
Just remember: You put the lime IN the coconut. Only THEN, can you drink it all up.

#40 twinsnorth49

twinsnorth49

    Moderately Moderate

  • Twins Mods
  • 4,471 posts

Posted 20 October 2013 - 02:34 PM

Santana never won the CY Young while having only 16 wins.

Yes I know, it' silly regardless...wins, not the poster.