Jump to content

Providing independent coverage of the Minnesota Twins.

The same great Twins Daily coverage, now for the Vikings.

The Store


Photo

Neal on Bronson Arroyo

  • Please log in to reply
20 replies to this topic

#1 Twins Daily Admin

Twins Daily Admin

    Administrator

  • Administrators
  • 202 posts

Posted 19 November 2013 - 06:54 AM

La Velle E Neal has lots of notes from Bronson Arroyo's interview on MLB Network Radio on Monday.

"Yeah, it’s definitely in the early stages,'' [Arroyo] said. "Nobody’s really put a dollar bill in front of me, but I have, I think, the Phillies, the Dodgers, the Angels, the Giants, the Twins, maybe even the Orioles, I think all those teams have called, you know, just to say that they are interested. I’m not really sure how interested, you know? I think the Giants called back a couple of times and so did the Twins. But nobody really wants to put any money down on the table yet.''


Neal also says that the Twins have also made calls on Kazmir, Johnson, Nolasco, Santana, Vargas and Santana, at least, though he doesn't read much into that.

#2 gil4

gil4

    Irrational Optimist

  • Members
  • 632 posts

Posted 19 November 2013 - 08:15 AM

Hudson got $23M/2 years. I'd say a good starting point for Arroyo is less than that - I saw 2 yrs/$19M somewhere and thought it sounded reasonable.

#3 panolo

panolo

    Member

  • Members
  • 52 posts

Posted 19 November 2013 - 09:02 AM

Hudson got $23M/2 years. I'd say a good starting point for Arroyo is less than that - I saw 2 yrs/$19M somewhere and thought it sounded reasonable.


I don't see that. He's two years younger than Hudson and he is durable, having pitched less than 200 innings only once in the last nine years(and it was 199 innings). If I had to guess I would think that he gets somewhere in the neighborhood of 3/$33-$39 mil.

IMO he is undervalued and certain metrics don't calculate his value properly.

Edited by panolo, 19 November 2013 - 09:03 AM.
dumb


#4 nicksaviking

nicksaviking

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 3,739 posts

Posted 19 November 2013 - 09:49 AM

Hudson got $23M/2 years. I'd say a good starting point for Arroyo is less than that - I saw 2 yrs/$19M somewhere and thought it sounded reasonable.


Most people were saying that the Giants got a bargain though. I don't think his contract will be percieved as the measuring stick if that's the case.

#5 Chance

Chance

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 535 posts

Posted 19 November 2013 - 10:28 AM

3 years at 13/year. Get it done.

#6 Brock Beauchamp

Brock Beauchamp

    Owner

  • Administrators
  • 8,836 posts

Posted 19 November 2013 - 10:33 AM

For some reason, I'm just not that high on Arroyo. It's probably his age.

Maybe it's just me but for similar money, I'd rather take a flyer on Hughes.

#7 Shane Wahl

Shane Wahl

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 4,104 posts

Posted 19 November 2013 - 10:45 AM

I bet Arroyo gets basically the same years and money as Hudson. I would have thought 2/20 max, but not anymore.

#8 JB_Iowa

JB_Iowa

    Cynical Oldie

  • Members
  • 3,879 posts
  • LocationNorthwest Iowa

Posted 19 November 2013 - 10:52 AM

I'm okay w/2 years and a team option even if the buyout has to be a little more hefty than the Twins usually prefer (up to $4m or $5m if necessary) . But I'm really leary of committing for the third year.

#9 Siehbiscuit

Siehbiscuit

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 309 posts

Posted 19 November 2013 - 11:02 AM

$13M a year for Arroyo seems like a big number.

#10 SpiritofVodkaDave

SpiritofVodkaDave

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 4,137 posts

Posted 19 November 2013 - 11:07 AM

2 years, 18 mil for Arroyo only if they manage to sign Garza or another high upside pitcher as well.

If not, let Arroyo walk and simply sign Nolasco, who will cost a bit more but has more upside and is younger then Arroyo.

#11 beckmt

beckmt

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 838 posts

Posted 19 November 2013 - 11:13 AM

I would rather have Josh Johnson and Kazmir. Arroyo is like a third or fourth choice for me, money is high and risk is very high by the third year. Do not want anything to do with Hughes, take a pass unless the money is low. This is a year to buy at most pitchers for 3 years, you do not want aged pitchers blocking prospects because of money. Other by low candidates, Niemann, Acieves, Johan(1 year with an option). Time to buy major pieces is next year when the Twins are ready to compete at the next level. (Also the talent level is higher)

#12 Kwak

Kwak

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 1,335 posts

Posted 19 November 2013 - 11:14 AM

I would target the highest priority pitcher first and foremost and defer signing a second choice--unless the Twins truly have budgeted for two quality starters.

#13 Shane Wahl

Shane Wahl

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 4,104 posts

Posted 19 November 2013 - 11:33 AM

2 years, 18 mil for Arroyo only if they manage to sign Garza or another high upside pitcher as well.

If not, let Arroyo walk and simply sign Nolasco, who will cost a bit more but has more upside and is younger then Arroyo.


Nolasco could cost twice as much for twice the number of years and is not a better pitcher than Arroyo.

#14 SpiritofVodkaDave

SpiritofVodkaDave

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 4,137 posts

Posted 19 November 2013 - 12:09 PM

Nolasco could cost twice as much for twice the number of years and is not a better pitcher than Arroyo.


While it is possible Nolasco COULD be for twice as many years, it should be noted that he is looking for 4 and Arroyo is looking for 3. There is nothing that says Nolasco can't be brought in for 3 years.

Also, he is a much better better pitcher then Arroyo. His FIP and xFIP are significantly better than Arroyo over the past 4-5 years. Arroyo had a total WAR of 5.0 over the last 5 years while Nolasco has a 13 WAR over the past 5 years and had better season over season WAR then Arroyo in 4 of the 5 years.

Additionally, Nolasco is 7 years younger than Arroyo, and at age 37 Arroyo is a very good candidate for significant regression (this coming off a season where his WAR was a paltry 0.8) Nolasco is still in his prime at age 30 and coming off 3.1, 2.5 and 3.0 WAR years the last 3.

Also, Nolasco also strikes out a decent number of batters, and the Twins DESPERATELY need someone like that on the staff, Arroyo is nothing more than a slightly better version of Correia.

So yeah, Noalsco would cost more money, but that is because he is a significantly better pitcher.

#15 Hartzy34

Hartzy34

    Junior Member

  • Members
  • 6 posts

Posted 19 November 2013 - 12:15 PM

Arroyo is very much a 'Twins Way' kind of pitcher, I'd guess Ryan has high hopes of getting this deal done. I'd prefer we step out of the mold and go after more of a power pitcher like Ervin Santana. In a perfect world we'd get both...:P

#16 Shane Wahl

Shane Wahl

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 4,104 posts

Posted 19 November 2013 - 12:26 PM

While it is possible Nolasco COULD be for twice as many years, it should be noted that he is looking for 4 and Arroyo is looking for 3. There is nothing that says Nolasco can't be brought in for 3 years.

Also, he is a much better better pitcher then Arroyo. His FIP and xFIP are significantly better than Arroyo over the past 4-5 years. Arroyo had a total WAR of 5.0 over the last 5 years while Nolasco has a 13 WAR over the past 5 years and had better season over season WAR then Arroyo in 4 of the 5 years.

Additionally, Nolasco is 7 years younger than Arroyo, and at age 37 Arroyo is a very good candidate for significant regression (this coming off a season where his WAR was a paltry 0.8) Nolasco is still in his prime at age 30 and coming off 3.1, 2.5 and 3.0 WAR years the last 3.

Also, Nolasco also strikes out a decent number of batters, and the Twins DESPERATELY need someone like that on the staff, Arroyo is nothing more than a slightly better version of Correia.

So yeah, Noalsco would cost more money, but that is because he is a significantly better pitcher.


I take it that you must be using Fangraphs WAR and not BR's. It's almost exactly the other way around on BR!!! Thanks WAR! What the hell?

BR has Arroyo's 2012 WAR at 3.6, and 2013 WAR at 2.5. Nolasco? 1.8 and 1.4, respectively.

#17 SpiritofVodkaDave

SpiritofVodkaDave

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 4,137 posts

Posted 19 November 2013 - 12:30 PM

I take it that you must be using Fangraphs WAR and not BR's. It's almost exactly the other way around on BR!!! Thanks WAR! What the hell?

BR has Arroyo's 2012 WAR at 3.6, and 2013 WAR at 2.5. Nolasco? 1.8 and 1.4, respectively.


http://www.fangraphs...nces-fwar-rwar/

Beyond WAR though, Nolasco has the heavy advantage in: k/9, FIP, xFIP and age. The only thing Arroyo really has is ERA (which is basically what the b-ref WAR is based on)

Basically what it comes down to is that Arroyo basically looks like Pavano (not a bad thing), but just more of the same that the Twins currently posses (low strike out pitchers), again, if they can add a front of the rotation guy like Garza then by all means bring in Arroyo to be your #4.

With Nolasco I at least see a guy who pitched well after a change of scenary who has the potential to be a solid #3, or if things come in line with his xFIP/FIP a decent #2.

In a perfect world I would sign Garza and Nolasco. (Make no mistake, the Twins have plenty of money to do this as it would cost about 30 mil a year)

Garza
Nolasco
Meyer
Gibson
Deduno/Correia/etc

Looks like a pretty solid rotation to me over the next few years.

Edited by SpiritofVodkaDave, 19 November 2013 - 12:35 PM.


#18 notoriousgod71

notoriousgod71

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 1,022 posts

Posted 19 November 2013 - 02:20 PM

The issue with long term contracts (pitching in particular) is that they always look like overpays when they're signed but by the time the contract expires (barring major injury or falling off the table like Kevin Brown) they're in line with what lesser pitchers are signing for. The rise in salaries is just astonishing but shows no signs of ever slowing down.

I say bring back the reserve clause and collusion all in one! That will put the Twins on an even playing field.

#19 SpiritofVodkaDave

SpiritofVodkaDave

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 4,137 posts

Posted 19 November 2013 - 02:23 PM

(barring major injury)


Which happens a lot with pitchers on long term deals. Also, I just think giving a guy a contract through his 39 and 40 year old years is a mistake. There is a huge % chance that he will regress a good amount.

#20 notoriousgod71

notoriousgod71

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 1,022 posts

Posted 19 November 2013 - 02:32 PM

Which happens a lot with pitchers on long term deals. Also, I just think giving a guy a contract through his 39 and 40 year old years is a mistake. There is a huge % chance that he will regress a good amount.


This is true. But you can have a major injury on a one year contract too and then you don't get anything out of him.

This is probably the wrong thread for the post because I wasn't specifically talking about Arroyo.

#21 Jdosen

Jdosen

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 119 posts

Posted 19 November 2013 - 05:13 PM

I personally don't have a lot of interest in Arroyo if it goes 3 years. 2/26 is as high as I hope the Twins go on him, and I sincerely hope he isn't the big free agent splash.

I do think there is potential for a bounce back year from him here, as he posted a 14.0% HR/FB rate in Cincinnati last year, nearly 3 points higher than his career 10.9% rate. I think Target Field certainly would help suppress that as well.

Signing him would be a risk, because every workhorse is a workhorse until he isn't, but it would be a good coup for the right contract.

I certainly hope he isn't the best guy the Twins sign this offseason. Color me skeptical, however.
I just started the blog Troy Williamson's Hands which is about MN sports and whatever else I want to write--you can find it at http://troywilliamso...s.blogspot.com/
twitter: @dose17