Jump to content

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

The Store


Photo

Larry Corrigan Returns to the Twins

  • Please log in to reply
112 replies to this topic

#1 Seth Stohs

Seth Stohs

    Owner

  • Administrators
  • 7,484 posts

Posted 28 October 2013 - 12:36 PM

According to Angels beat reporter Mike DiGiovanna, Jerry Dipoto's Assistant GM, Larry Corrigan, has left the Angels and will return to the Twins organization.

https://twitter.com/...892640539262976

Will be interesting to see what his role might be, maybe similar to Wayne Krivsky?

#2 JB_Iowa

JB_Iowa

    Cynical Oldie

  • Members
  • 3,781 posts
  • LocationNorthwest Iowa

Posted 28 October 2013 - 01:01 PM

I am not saying anything bad about Larry Corrigan here -- he is probably a fine scout.

But I do question Ryan's constant "back to the future" moves:


http://www.examiner....-dipoto-s-staff
November 1, 2011

For anyone who didn't believe what Jerry DiPoto said about balancing the modern schools of sabermetrics with traditional scouting, the new Angels GM just backed that up by hiring Larry Corrigan on Tuesday as his special assistant.

Corrigan, who has spent the past three years as the special assistant to Pitttsburgh Pirates GM Neal Huntington, is as old school as they get. The former scout and college head coach is widely credited with the discovery of current Angels outfielder Torii Hunter back during his days as the Twins' director of scouting.


I realize that Corrigan is near the tail end of his career and probably will have a role somewhat like Krivsky. I'd just like to see someone "new school" brought in at the same level of prominence.

Edited by JB_Iowa, 28 October 2013 - 01:04 PM.


#3 mike wants wins

mike wants wins

    Would Like to be More Positive

  • Members
  • 6,132 posts

Posted 28 October 2013 - 01:17 PM

Back to the Future was my first thought also, but only from a humor perspective. I have no idea what his role is, or if he's fit for it.

We've beaten the other topic to death, and Ryan has made it clear in his interview(s?) that he's not interested in bringing in people from other orgs. He's just going to copy them, somehow.
Lighten up Francis....

#4 gunnarthor

gunnarthor

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 2,778 posts

Posted 28 October 2013 - 01:31 PM

Not sure there's much to get angry about here. Corrigan is a long time scout who happened to previously work here and is very good at his job.

Special-assignment scouts Larry Corrigan and Tim Schmidt crucial to Angels' success | angels.com: News

I have no idea what his job will be here but it almost certainly will be involved in scouting. A few years ago the Twins decided they weren't scouting the southwest well enough so they put former GM Ryan in charge of that area and hired longtime scout Jack Powell who had just left the Rays. That led to Goodrum and Buxton fairly quickly. Don't think it makes much sense to say that we can't have someone work here if he used to work here. There's nothing that suggests he's bad at his job and he has proven capable of working with the current FO. Those are usually positive attributes when hiring someone.

#5 JB_Iowa

JB_Iowa

    Cynical Oldie

  • Members
  • 3,781 posts
  • LocationNorthwest Iowa

Posted 28 October 2013 - 01:42 PM

Not angry, just weary.

#6 Badsmerf

Badsmerf

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 1,666 posts

Posted 28 October 2013 - 03:15 PM

Because the Angels organization is one the Twins should be stealing people from...
Do or do not. There is no try.

#7 old nurse

old nurse

    Member

  • Members
  • 1,726 posts

Posted 28 October 2013 - 03:25 PM

Maybe I have a different opinion because I work in a field that is ever changing, and also practice is evidenced based. Does a single one of you have any idea on how Corrigan assess talent? There is no way you can say what school he is. When you want to be successful you look for all means to do so. The GM who brought the idea of sabermetrics to a front office is now 65. He was A GM starting in 83. The difference between that person and the Twins FO is he talks about how he does what he does.

#8 mike wants wins

mike wants wins

    Would Like to be More Positive

  • Members
  • 6,132 posts

Posted 28 October 2013 - 03:27 PM

The assistant GM did not know what FIP was last year, this isn't just "not talking about". I get that they might be more into it than we know, but let's not pretend they are on the cutting edge here. Is that fair?
Lighten up Francis....

#9 old nurse

old nurse

    Member

  • Members
  • 1,726 posts

Posted 28 October 2013 - 03:51 PM

The assistant GM did not know what FIP was last year, this isn't just "not talking about". I get that they might be more into it than we know, but let's not pretend they are on the cutting edge here. Is that fair?

Was the assistant GM asked if they rank pitching performances on a ratio based on home runs and walks given up as well as how many strikeouts the pitcher has? An assistant GM has no reason to go to fangraphs or any other internet statistics site. The more important issue than is how do they assess pitching. They aren't going to tell the fans what measures they use. I really doubt it is just w/l. Somewhere research had to have been done to come up with the philosophy of not walking hitters and be ahead in the count ( G.D. someone forgot to tell them about strike three ((silly icon here))). Can't remember where I saw it, but Wacha said that getting ahead of the hitters and not walking batters was the Cardinal way of pitching. Someone did some some research as the Twins are favoring taller pitchers.

Edited by old nurse, 28 October 2013 - 03:54 PM.


#10 gunnarthor

gunnarthor

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 2,778 posts

Posted 28 October 2013 - 05:22 PM

The assistant GM did not know what FIP was last year, this isn't just "not talking about". I get that they might be more into it than we know, but let's not pretend they are on the cutting edge here. Is that fair?


I think part of this might just be polarization by what fans hear. We don't have insights into any FO so we just generally go along with the sources we do have - BA, Fangraphs, ESPN etc. So at draft time, someone invariably will say that Team X reached to grab Player A with the #35 pick b/c BA had him ranked #49.

The Twins for years used to harp about defense and were pretty consistently mocked about it. Tom Kelly was ripped for suggesting that Todd Walker's defense was negating his offensive contributions. Eventually, outside sources started to agree that defense was pretty important (and agreed that Walker's defense really hurt his overall value). The Twins, in that example, clearly knew some way of judging player's value that wasn't available to us and ended up being proven right. So I'm not sure I'd care if the Assistant GM didn't know what a fangraphs created stat was (or even if the Assistant GM has input on scouting and free agency or if his job is market based or contracts or vendors).

#11 gunnarthor

gunnarthor

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 2,778 posts

Posted 28 October 2013 - 05:25 PM

Was the assistant GM asked if they rank pitching performances on a ratio based on home run Someone did some some research as the Twins are favoring taller pitchers.


Yeah, that was based on former pitching coach/roving instructor Rick Knapp. He thought taller pitchers would have an easier time with creating "plane at the plate" stuff that Blyleven is always harping on about. .

#12 old nurse

old nurse

    Member

  • Members
  • 1,726 posts

Posted 28 October 2013 - 08:53 PM

The assistant GM did not know what FIP was last year, this isn't just "not talking about". I get that they might be more into it than we know, but let's not pretend they are on the cutting edge here. Is that fair?

FIP and the like are mostly macro type stats. There is a ton of data available to teams on exactly what pitchers throw and outcomes. There is data on what pitches hitters hit and outcomes. From all of that there should be a norm on what is to be expected based on what any player is capable of doing. That is the level from which they start punching numbers. Fans get interested in the macro numbers as their way of judging talent. I think the FO judge individual skills and project results from that.

#13 Guest_USAFChief_*

Guest_USAFChief_*
  • Guests

Posted 28 October 2013 - 09:20 PM

FIP and the like are mostly macro type stats. There is a ton of data available to teams on exactly what pitchers throw and outcomes. There is data on what pitches hitters hit and outcomes. From all of that there should be a norm on what is to be expected based on what any player is capable of doing. That is the level from which they start punching numbers. Fans get interested in the macro numbers as their way of judging talent. I think the FO judge individual skills and project results from that.

How would a front office know something like FIP isn't useful to them if they don't know what it is?

#14 Frozented9

Frozented9

    Junior Member

  • Members
  • 17 posts

Posted 28 October 2013 - 09:33 PM

How would a front office know something like FIP isn't useful to them if they don't know what it is?


They just know, they are all wise and all knowing because they have been around the game their whole life. [/sarcasm]

#15 drivlikejehu

drivlikejehu

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 528 posts

Posted 29 October 2013 - 05:50 AM

It's interesting logic, to say the least, that Twins management doesn't know what FIP is because they are too advanced. I mean, if that's the best you can do, don't bother.

#16 Joe A. Preusser

Joe A. Preusser

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 723 posts

Posted 29 October 2013 - 06:11 AM

... they might be more into it than we know, but let's not pretend they are on the cutting edge here. Is that fair?


To me the entire argument can be summed up in this phrase. The ORG is most certainly aware of any possible statistic out there and could/would use those stats if it suited them. But no, their use is probably not cutting edge as a whole.

#17 big dog

big dog

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 1,350 posts

Posted 29 October 2013 - 07:20 AM

Because the Angels organization is one the Twins should be stealing people from...


Corrigan was only with the Angels for two years. He spent the previous four years working for the Pirates.
Minnesota Twinsights: Top scout Larry Corrigan reportedly returning to Twins » Twins Now

#18 Seth Stohs

Seth Stohs

    Owner

  • Administrators
  • 7,484 posts

Posted 29 October 2013 - 07:49 AM

I think people make far too big of a deal about this stats stuff. Obviously they know what it is, and they know how to use it. It isn't Terry Ryan's or Rob Antony's job to dive headlong into the numbers, they just need to understand them, and they are getting that information. And yes, it is just one piece to the decision-making matrix, but it's not a piece that is overlooked. Scouting and Stats both matter.

I just think people worry too much about what is said publicly when we know that they know and are doing much more internally (and keeping it internal) than we know. What benefit is it for them to start spouting off about what stats they like and dislike and what specifics go into it. Yes, I want to know as a fan, but I wouldn't want that information out if I was the GM!

#19 mike wants wins

mike wants wins

    Would Like to be More Positive

  • Members
  • 6,132 posts

Posted 29 October 2013 - 08:06 AM

It's interesting logic, to say the least, that Twins management doesn't know what FIP is because they are too advanced. I mean, if that's the best you can do, don't bother.


Rob Antony was interviewed, and admitted he did not know what it was. I don't just make stuff up. Here is Rob Neyer's thoughts on the subject from back then. Looks like I was off by a year or so....:

Twins thrive without sabermetrics - SweetSpot Blog - ESPN
Lighten up Francis....

#20 gunnarthor

gunnarthor

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 2,778 posts

Posted 29 October 2013 - 08:26 AM

One other point, which I've mentioned before, is that the Twins are insanely tight lipped. We never get leaks from them - we got a few more in the Smith years but Ryan simply doesn't let stuff leak. Last year, for example, mlbtraderumors reported that Denard Span might be traded based on "speculation" by Ken Rosenthal but no Twins sources were used. The first time mlbtraderumors linked to a Twins source that Span might be traded was Nov 28, when Wolfson quoted someone in the Twins FO saying that the winter meetings could be active and then Wolfson made the connection to Span ("There's a belief that Span could be traded"). Span was traded the next day.

Same with Revere - on Dec 3, mlbtraderumors noted that teams had "approached" the Twins about Revere. On Dec 5, Paul Morosi tweeted that Revere's name had surfaced as a possible trade chip but he didn't have any information from the Twins - he guessed that they'd want a CFer in return. He was traded the next day.

I'm not sure if being this tight lipped is useful (I don't think it hurts them) but clearly Ryan does. He turned down the chance to be the subject of a book.

#21 gunnarthor

gunnarthor

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 2,778 posts

Posted 29 October 2013 - 08:29 AM

Rob Antony was interviewed, and admitted he did not know what it was. I don't just make stuff up. Here is Rob Neyer's thoughts on the subject from back then. Looks like I was off by a year or so....:

Twins thrive without sabermetrics - SweetSpot Blog - ESPN


I love that you linked to a story written by a stat guy that finished with this: "And also because Ron Gardenhire is one damn fine manager."

#22 drivlikejehu

drivlikejehu

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 528 posts

Posted 29 October 2013 - 08:33 AM

Rob Antony was interviewed, and admitted he did not know what it was. I don't just make stuff up. Here is Rob Neyer's thoughts on the subject from back then. Looks like I was off by a year or so....:

Twins thrive without sabermetrics - SweetSpot Blog - ESPN


I think you misread my post - I wasn't being literal.

#23 mike wants wins

mike wants wins

    Would Like to be More Positive

  • Members
  • 6,132 posts

Posted 29 October 2013 - 08:43 AM

I love that you linked to a story written by a stat guy that finished with this: "And also because Ron Gardenhire is one damn fine manager."


Lots of people think he's a fine manager, good manager, great manager. Even "stats guys".
Lighten up Francis....

#24 nicksaviking

nicksaviking

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 3,713 posts

Posted 29 October 2013 - 08:48 AM

Rob Antony was interviewed, and admitted he did not know what it was. I don't just make stuff up. Here is Rob Neyer's thoughts on the subject from back then. Looks like I was off by a year or so....:

Twins thrive without sabermetrics - SweetSpot Blog - ESPN


You'll probably get hammered because it's a couple years old but good link. At the end Neyer predicted the Twins would win the division yet his analysis (of the lack of analysis) may have instead predicted the Twins collapse.

#25 TheLeviathan

TheLeviathan

    Twins News Team

  • Twins News Team
  • 5,081 posts

Posted 29 October 2013 - 10:28 AM

I think people make far too big of a deal about this stats stuff. Obviously they know what it is, and they know how to use it.


I don't think that's remotely obvious at all. Especially without any evidence or trends in their player acquisitions to indicate they are using these stats behind the scenes. This isn't just that these things aren't being said publicly, it's that the Twins are still doing things the same as they were 15-20 years ago when these stats were less common. Neither the action nor the rhetoric reflects these things are taken seriously, used, or even understood.

#26 gunnarthor

gunnarthor

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 2,778 posts

Posted 29 October 2013 - 12:01 PM

I don't think that's remotely obvious at all. Especially without any evidence or trends in their player acquisitions to indicate they are using these stats behind the scenes. This isn't just that these things aren't being said publicly, it's that the Twins are still doing things the same as they were 15-20 years ago when these stats were less common. Neither the action nor the rhetoric reflects these things are taken seriously, used, or even understood.


What moves has Ryan done that you think show he doesn't know what he's doing? What moves should he have done? Shouldn't that be the barometer instead of him using language you like?

I mean, the main gripe with him seems to be not spending big on free agents. We had entire threads about the pitchers we didn't get and it looked like Ryan ended up pretty good in that regard. Are we concerned that he's being outfoxed in trades? Are the Twins promoting prospects too slowly? Has he made good waiver claims or rule v picks?

#27 Nick Nelson

Nick Nelson

    Owner

  • Administrators
  • 2,068 posts

Posted 29 October 2013 - 12:17 PM

I mean, the main gripe with him seems to be not spending big on free agents.

I don't think this is necessarily accurate. I think it's more that he constantly pursues the wrong free agents. If you're not going to spend big, go for risk/reward guys with upside, not proven mediocrities who fall into the same pitch-to-contact category as what you already have. There were plenty of guys who signed for a similar amount (or less) to Correia/Pelfrey last year that would've made a lot more sense.

#28 gunnarthor

gunnarthor

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 2,778 posts

Posted 29 October 2013 - 12:33 PM

I don't think this is necessarily accurate. I think it's more that he constantly pursues the wrong free agents. If you're not going to spend big, go for risk/reward guys with upside, not proven mediocrities who fall into the same pitch-to-contact category as what you already have. There were plenty of guys who signed for a similar amount (or less) to Correia/Pelfrey last year that would've made a lot more sense.


OK, here are most of the pitchers that were in that group. I might have missed one or two. John Lannan? Anyhow, other than Feldman and Correia, not a lot was gotten in that price range. I think the Cubs signed Villanueva to a similar deal but he spent most of the time in the bullpen (although I know some Twins fans talked him up). Anyhow, which high risk/reward guys was I missing? I guess Liriano?

Scott Feldman - Cubs - 1/6m, 12-12 105 ERA+, 181.2ip, 1.6 WAR
Kevin Correia 2/10m 9-13, 97 ERA+, 185.1ip, 1.6 WAR
Brandon McCarthy - DBacks - 2/15.5m - 5-11 84 ERA+, 135ip -0.2 WAR
Dan Haren - Nats - 1/13m - 10-14 81 ERA+, 169.2ip -0.1 WAR
Ryan Dempster - Bos -2/26.5m 8-9 89 ERA+, 171.1ip, -0.2 WAR
Joe Saunders - Seattle - 1/6.5m - 11-16, 70 ERA+, 183ip -0.3 WAR
Mike Pelfrey 1/4m 5-13, 78 ERA+, 152.2ip, -0.3 WAR
Shawn Marcum - Mets - 1/4m - 1-10 67 ERA+, 78.1ip -1.0 WAR
Joe Blanton Angels - 2/15m - 2-14 62 ERA+, 132.2ip -2.0 WAR
Scott Baker - Cubs - 1/5.5m 3 starts, 15ip. Missed most season w/injury

(This is bWAR but fWAR can be very different - according to them, Pelfrey was a 2 WAR pitcher this year).

#29 nicksaviking

nicksaviking

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 3,713 posts

Posted 29 October 2013 - 12:44 PM

OK, here are most of the pitchers that were in that group. I might have missed one or two. John Lannan? Anyhow, other than Feldman and Correia, not a lot was gotten in that price range. I think the Cubs signed Villanueva to a similar deal but he spent most of the time in the bullpen (although I know some Twins fans talked him up). Anyhow, which high risk/reward guys was I missing? I guess Liriano?

Scott Feldman - Cubs - 1/6m, 12-12 105 ERA+, 181.2ip, 1.6 WAR
Kevin Correia 2/10m 9-13, 97 ERA+, 185.1ip, 1.6 WAR
Brandon McCarthy - DBacks - 2/15.5m - 5-11 84 ERA+, 135ip -0.2 WAR
Dan Haren - Nats - 1/13m - 10-14 81 ERA+, 169.2ip -0.1 WAR
Ryan Dempster - Bos -2/26.5m 8-9 89 ERA+, 171.1ip, -0.2 WAR
Joe Saunders - Seattle - 1/6.5m - 11-16, 70 ERA+, 183ip -0.3 WAR
Mike Pelfrey 1/4m 5-13, 78 ERA+, 152.2ip, -0.3 WAR
Shawn Marcum - Mets - 1/4m - 1-10 67 ERA+, 78.1ip -1.0 WAR
Joe Blanton Angels - 2/15m - 2-14 62 ERA+, 132.2ip -2.0 WAR
Scott Baker - Cubs - 1/5.5m 3 starts, 15ip. Missed most season w/injury

(This is bWAR but fWAR can be very different - according to them, Pelfrey was a 2 WAR pitcher this year).


But this is not the debate, it is not about the results of these pitchers, it is about whether Ryan was targeting pitchers that statistical analysis favors. He did not appear to. Ryan's method may or may not have gotten good results from his free agents, but that is not what was at question.

Good results would be a check mark in favor of his "Old School/Scouting" approach, but it does not prove that he has embraced statistical analysis.

#30 spycake

spycake

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 1,910 posts

Posted 29 October 2013 - 12:51 PM

I mean, the main gripe with him seems to be not spending big on free agents. We had entire threads about the pitchers we didn't get and it looked like Ryan ended up pretty good in that regard. Are we concerned that he's being outfoxed in trades? Are the Twins promoting prospects too slowly? Has he made good waiver claims or rule v picks?


For me, it's that TR has thus far refused to bid on good talent, anytime, anywhere. The only acquisitions he ever makes are either explicitly capped in spending, or involve modest interest at best (Correia, Pelfrey, etc.).

Sometimes that's a good play, when you don't think the talent or value is there, but as a hard and fast rule? At the top level of a sport where talent is scarce? Even if you're really good at all of the other aspects of your job, it almost guarantees a slow rebuild (5-6 seasons?) at best, and quite possibly an unsuccessful rebuild if a particular player or draft doesn't pan out as expected.

Fortunately for TR, the draft and most international signings are explicitly capped now -- one could argue that's the only reason we have Buxton and a few other of our top prospects. But I would love to see TR and his team put their baseball and scouting acumen to work on the domestic and Cuban/Asian free agent markets -- not necessarily to sign mega-contracts or get into bidding wars, but to target good investments and occasionally snag one. Right now they essentially sit those markets out, on principle.

EDIT: Sorry I drifted away from the stats debate...

Edited by spycake, 29 October 2013 - 12:58 PM.