Jump to content

Providing independent coverage of the Minnesota Twins.

The Store

Subscribe to Twins Daily Email

Photo

Twins offered Garza 3 year deal

  • Please log in to reply
46 replies to this topic

#31 cmathewson

cmathewson

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 2,273 posts

Posted 25 February 2014 - 10:47 AM

Good info, thanks.

I'm comfortable with what the Twins did based on the posts above. I might feel differently if I thought they could have signed him for a guaranteed 4/$56 early (before Nolasco/Hughes) but it seems like he was going to wait until after Tanaka signed. Given the deals already in place by the time he did sign, I have no problem with the Twins limiting the length. I do think that 4th year is more of a flyer on Garza than on Nolasco (but i guess we'll see).


Garza's elbow is a ticking time bomb.
"If you'da been thinkin' you wouldn't 'a thought that.."

#32 howieramone1406390264

howieramone1406390264

    Banned

  • Banned
  • 715 posts

Posted 25 February 2014 - 01:53 PM

I like your optimism, but Nolasco has been a 3 exactly twice in 7 seasons, Hughes has thus far peaked as a 3 and was a 5 last year (and has been a 5 for 2 of 4 seasons since starting full-time), and the likely starter you left out (Pelfrey) has been a 5 starter in 3 of his 6 full seasons, and was also a 5 last year. So you're basically hoping for roughly peak seasons, that have thus far been 50% likely or worse, from 2 of 3 veterans.

And given that record for the proven MLB vets, even if the guys both successfully transition to MLB (still a big "if"), what are the odds that both post 2-3 type seasons in the same year in 2015? When one has 10 MLB starts of sub-5 quality, and the other has yet to pitch above AA?

Not to mention you seem to be banking on going 4 of 5 in SP health. What are the actual odds of all of this happening for 2015?

And given our modest offense, all that good fortune gets the wonderful descriptor of "should be good enough to contend".

What happened to "you can never have too much pitching"? Ervin Santana has a better rate of 3rd starter seasons (5 of 8 full seasons), a higher and more recent peak (127 ERA+ last year) than anyone on our current staff, more durability (both in-season and across seasons) than anyone on our current staff... and he appears to be available for roughly the same commitment (4/50) as the guy you list as our hopeful #3 starter in 2015.

Not saying he'd be an ace, but the 2015 (and beyond) rotation results you are hoping for would appear to be much more likely by adding Ervin Santana to the mix.


I really have no idea what you're talking about but let's start here. When a starter is assigned a #, it's based on stuff, make up, and stats. It can be quite subjective. Many on this board believe we will contend in 2015. I'm surprised you are unaware of this. We both agree Santana is not one of the 10-15 best pitchers in baseball.

Edited by howieramone, 25 February 2014 - 02:02 PM.


#33 Guest_USAFChief_*

Guest_USAFChief_*
  • Guests

Posted 25 February 2014 - 03:42 PM

. When a starter is assigned a #...it can be quite subjective.

Concur.

#34 spycake

spycake

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 2,646 posts

Posted 25 February 2014 - 04:25 PM

[quote name='howieramone']I really have no idea what you're talking about but let's start here. When a starter is assigned a #, it's based on stuff, make up, and stats. It can be quite subjective.[/QUOTE]

I thought we were talking levels of performance. I am not really interested in what numbers or roles are assigned a player unless they can actually perform. Remember when Rondell White was assigned to be our cleanup hitter? Or Worley/Diamond were assigned to be our opening day starter?

What's more important to team's record: a pitcher's run prevention ranking ~30-45 in the league (i.e. #3 starter performance), or you or even Gardy calling him "our #3"?

[quote name='howieramone'] Many on this board believe we will contend in 2015. I'm surprised you are unaware of this.[/QUOTE]

I have no idea what this means. I get that you are optimistic, yes. I was presenting a subjective interpretation otherwise, and presented past performance as evidence. I'm optimistic too, but I hope our 2015 contention hopes don't really too much on "stuff" and "make up".

[quote name='howieramone']We both agree Santana is not one of the 10-15 best pitchers in baseball.[/QUOTE]

There are plenty of pitchers outside of the top 10-15 that could improve this ballclub, even in our glorious projected future of 2015.

Besides, the 10-15 best pitchers in baseball are based on stuff, make up, and stats. It can be quite subjective. I'm surprised you are unaware of this. :)

Edited by spycake, 25 February 2014 - 04:28 PM.


#35 kab21

kab21

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 2,641 posts

Posted 25 February 2014 - 07:08 PM

We won't be going to the play-offs this season. In 2015, I have Nolasco as a 3, Hughes as a 3-4, Gibson as a 3, Meyer as a 2. That should be good enough to contend.


Hughes has 4.5 career ERA and two of those are prospects. Maybe they turn out but you are very optimistic that they will hit their upside by 2015. Santana wouldn't be an ace but he would be the best pitcher on the Twins (Nolasco could be near him) for the foreseeable future. The loss is a draft pick that probably has a 10-20% of being an average player in 2018. I can handle the loss of that draft pick if it means adding a pitcher better than anyone that we currently have.

#36 glunn

glunn

    Head Moderator

  • Twins Mods
  • 5,512 posts
  • LocationBeverly Hills, CA

Posted 25 February 2014 - 07:09 PM

I thought we were talking levels of performance. I am not really interested in what numbers or roles are assigned a player unless they can actually perform. Remember when Rondell White was assigned to be our cleanup hitter? Or Worley/Diamond were assigned to be our opening day starter?

What's more important to team's record: a pitcher's run prevention ranking ~30-45 in the league (i.e. #3 starter performance), or you or even Gardy calling him "our #3"?



I have no idea what this means. I get that you are optimistic, yes. I was presenting a subjective interpretation otherwise, and presented past performance as evidence. I'm optimistic too, but I hope our 2015 contention hopes don't really too much on "stuff" and "make up".



There are plenty of pitchers outside of the top 10-15 that could improve this ballclub, even in our glorious projected future of 2015.

Besides, the 10-15 best pitchers in baseball are based on stuff, make up, and stats. It can be quite subjective. I'm surprised you are unaware of this. :)


Moderator note -- let's please tone down the sarcasm.

#37 howieramone1406390264

howieramone1406390264

    Banned

  • Banned
  • 715 posts

Posted 25 February 2014 - 08:08 PM

Hughes has 4.5 career ERA and two of those are prospects. Maybe they turn out but you are very optimistic that they will hit their upside by 2015. Santana wouldn't be an ace but he would be the best pitcher on the Twins (Nolasco could be near him) for the foreseeable future. The loss is a draft pick that probably has a 10-20% of being an average player in 2018. I can handle the loss of that draft pick if it means adding a pitcher better than anyone that we currently have.


I agree I am optimistic, but they are not a pile of 4's and 5's. Hughes, Gibson, and Meyer have all been highly rated in the not so distant past. To me Nolasco is roughly equal to Santana and I never felt the 2nd pick was in the way of the right deal. Over the last few months, we have heard it both ways. That said, I would be very happy if we signed Santana.

#38 kab21

kab21

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 2,641 posts

Posted 25 February 2014 - 09:02 PM

the only way we are contending in 2015 with a Nolasco, Meyer, Hughes and Gibson staff is if some magic happens. 3 of those pitchers have potential but the Twins would basically need all 3 of them to hit their potential very quickly. Those odds are not that good but they get better if you have Santana and only need 2 of those pitchers to turn out.

#39 SpiritofVodkaDave

SpiritofVodkaDave

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 4,256 posts

Posted 26 February 2014 - 12:14 AM

the only way we are contending in 2015 with a Nolasco, Meyer, Hughes and Gibson staff is if some magic happens. 3 of those pitchers have potential but the Twins would basically need all 3 of them to hit their potential very quickly. Those odds are not that good but they get better if you have Santana and only need 2 of those pitchers to turn out.

I would toss Pelfrey in that group as well as I believe he still has some upside.
"You miss 100% of the shots you don't take"- L. Harvey Oswald

:whacky028::whacky028: :whacky028::whacky028:

#40 kab21

kab21

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 2,641 posts

Posted 26 February 2014 - 09:38 AM

I would toss Pelfrey in that group as well as I believe he still has some upside.


Pelfrey has no upside beyond a quality #4. He's thrown 1000 innings and never posted a K/9 >6 nor is he good at not walking guys. And if he's your #4 on a playoff team then there is a big temptation to skip him in the playoffs and run your starters out there on short rest.

#41 Brock Beauchamp

Brock Beauchamp

    Owner

  • Administrators
  • 9,309 posts

Posted 26 February 2014 - 09:43 AM

Pelfrey has no upside beyond a quality #4. He's thrown 1000 innings and never posted a K/9 >6 nor is he good at not walking guys. And if he's your #4 on a playoff team then there is a big temptation to skip him in the playoffs and run your starters out there on short rest.


Which is okay for this franchise at this point. A quality #4 is still a huge step up from what we've had the pleasure of watching the past few years.

But at some point, the Twins need to stop signing the Pelfreys of the world and go after legitimate talent (which they also did this offseason). I hope that we've seen the last of the Correia/Pelfrey type signings for a few years.

#42 mike wants wins

mike wants wins

    Would Like to be More Positive

  • Members
  • 7,259 posts

Posted 26 February 2014 - 09:49 AM

At some point, they have to run Worley, Meyer, and Gibson out there, to see what they have.....this would have been a good year to do that, not to sign Pelfrey, imo.

What I just typed is probably an opinion, not a fact. I mean, I'm usually right, so you should maybe assume it is or will be a fact soon, but that's up to you. :)


#43 nicksaviking

nicksaviking

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 4,464 posts

Posted 26 February 2014 - 09:51 AM

I'm not sure Pelfrey is on this club in 2015 anyway. Meyer, Gibson and May are all going to be given a chance sometime between now and 2015. I'd guess both Correia and Pelfrey are trade bait come July and Pelfrey would be a trade candidate next off season regardless.

#44 kab21

kab21

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 2,641 posts

Posted 26 February 2014 - 10:00 AM

Which is okay for this franchise at this point. A quality #4 is still a huge step up from what we've had the pleasure of watching the past few years.

But at some point, the Twins need to stop signing the Pelfreys of the world and go after legitimate talent (which they also did this offseason). I hope that we've seen the last of the Correia/Pelfrey type signings for a few years.


There is nothing wrong with the Pelfrey's or the Corriea's. The point was that he doesn't have upside and he's just another of the not going to get the team killed #4/5 starter type. Every team has them but he should never be part of a playoff caliber rotation.

#45 Brock Beauchamp

Brock Beauchamp

    Owner

  • Administrators
  • 9,309 posts

Posted 26 February 2014 - 12:22 PM

There is nothing wrong with the Pelfrey's or the Corriea's. The point was that he doesn't have upside and he's just another of the not going to get the team killed #4/5 starter type. Every team has them but he should never be part of a playoff caliber rotation.


Agreed, my point was that I hope the Twins can fill those 4/5 spots with internal solutions going forward, leaving money open to go pick up truly good players instead of just filler.

#46 TheLeviathan

TheLeviathan

    Twins News Team

  • Twins News Team
  • 5,760 posts

Posted 26 February 2014 - 02:21 PM

Agreed, my point was that I hope the Twins can fill those 4/5 spots with internal solutions going forward, leaving money open to go pick up truly good players instead of just filler.


Right and we may end up not liking the length of the Pelfrey contract more than the amount. Much like Correia. I'd prefer, if we're going to watch bad baseball, to at least see it invested in youth/upside. Two of our signings did a nice job of that. One last year and one this year did not.

#47 thetank

thetank

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 204 posts

Posted 15 March 2014 - 08:10 AM

I see that Garza in his first 3 ST starts for the Brewers has a 19.06 ERA.