Just a little FA SP options homework

[MileHighTwinsFan]

As ineffective as our starting pitching was last year - I would be shocked if there were any signings of starting pitchers.  

 

Trades are another matter - like the Royals, the Twins may consider moving one of their bright offensive prospects for a starting pitcher that has an agreeable contract or would be under team control for some time.  

[nicksaviking]

Last year everyone wanted Santana, Haren, and Johnson (am I forgetting anyone?) on bounceback deals.

 

Those players managed -2.1 WAR in 48 starts. 48!

 As pointed out those numbers are from previous years.

 

As yet to be pointed out: I'd rather have gambled on each of them than be stuck with Nolasco for another three years.

[Willihammer]

As pointed out those numbers are from previous years.

 

As yet to be pointed out: I'd rather have gambled on each of them than be stuck with Nolasco for another three years.

Here are the correct 2014 numbers

 

Haren: 1yr/$10m, 32 starts, -0.6 WAR

Santana: minor league contract, 0, 0

Johnson: 1 yr/$8m 0, 0

 

total: 2 yrs, $18m, 32 starts, -0.6 WAR

 

All 3 bouncebacks were contingent on improving health, which is a horrible gamble with significant risk, esp. when guaranteed a roster spot. Likewise, Masterson's coming off a knee injury and decline in velo, and he'll require a 25 man spot to sign and guaranteed money, etc. Morrow made 6 starts and struggled with a forearm injury, and will also require a 25 man spot. Horrible gambles.

 

If there were bounceback candidates that were perfectly healthy and due for statistical regression (as with AJ Burnett) or were identified as change of scene candidates (as with Hughes or Liriano), those might be worth pursuing -if not for the fact that there are at least 4-5 front of the rotation arms who logged no DL time last year and were extremely effective.

[nicksaviking]

Here are the correct 2014 numbers

 

Haren: 1yr/$10m, 32 starts, -0.6 WAR

Santana: minor league contract, 0, 0

Johnson: 1 yr/$8m 0, 0

 

All 3 bouncebacks were contingent on improving health, which is a horrible gamble with significant risk, esp. when guaranteed a roster spot. Likewise, Masterson's coming off a knee injury and decline in velo, and he'll require a 25 man spot to sign and guaranteed money, etc. Morrow made 6 starts and struggled with a forearm injury, and will also require a 25 man spot. Horrible gambles.

 

If there were bounceback candidates that were perfectly healthy and due for statistical regression (as with AJ Burnett) or were identified as change of scene candidates (as with Hughes or Liriano), those might be worth pursuing -if not for the fact that there are at least 4-5 front of the rotation arms who logged no DL time last year and were extremely effective.

 

However bounceback guys generally require a mere one year gamble.  The Orioles and Padres can already rid themselves of those conracts and roster spots should they so choose.  You get Ricky Nolasco or Brandon McCarthy, you're stuck with tem for many years.

[Kwak]

Sign somebody who projects as a top of the rotation pitcher--or promote from within and use the cash to sign the best position player practicable.  Whichever term you prefer, foundation-stone, tent-pole, "the guy", etc. is the type of player who can most help this team--now and in the future.

[Willihammer]

However bounceback guys generally require a mere one year gamble.  The Orioles and Padres can already rid themselves of those conracts and roster spots should they so choose.  You get Ricky Nolasco or Brandon McCarthy, you're stuck with tem for many years.

Yes they're free to waste roster spots on a whole new crop of injury bounceback candidates. I won't deny there's also risk in signing healthy productive players in free agency but certainly its less than hoping for a new guy to return to being healthy and productive year after year.

[nicksaviking]

Yes they're free to waste roster spots on a whole new crop of injury bounceback candidates. I won't deny there's also risk in signing healthy productive players in free agency but certainly its less than hoping for a new guy to return to being healthy and productive year after year.

 

Perhaps, but it doesn't seem to be a method this team is any good at.  They got it right with Hughes, so maybe they've learned how better to identify these guys, but one above average free agent pitcher in 20+ years? I don't see how the low risk/high reward guys are any more of a gamble than what they have been doing.

 

Also, Hughes was under 30.  Find me more of those guys if the teams wants to sign guys to multi-year deals.  There are hardly any guys past 32 who are still top of the rotation arms.  It will only be a couple years before people start looking at 32-year-old pitchers like we do 30-year-old running backs.

[Otto von Ballpark]

Here are the correct 2014 numbers

 

Haren: 1yr/$10m, 32 starts, -0.6 WAR

Santana: minor league contract, 0, 0

Johnson: 1 yr/$8m 0, 0

 

total: 2 yrs, $18m, 32 starts, -0.6 WAR

 

All 3 bouncebacks were contingent on improving health, which is a horrible gamble with significant risk, esp. when guaranteed a roster spot. Likewise, Masterson's coming off a knee injury and decline in velo, and he'll require a 25 man spot to sign and guaranteed money, etc. Morrow made 6 starts and struggled with a forearm injury, and will also require a 25 man spot. Horrible gambles.

 

If there were bounceback candidates that were perfectly healthy and due for statistical regression (as with AJ Burnett) or were identified as change of scene candidates (as with Hughes or Liriano), those might be worth pursuing -if not for the fact that there are at least 4-5 front of the rotation arms who logged no DL time last year and were extremely effective.

Haren was not contingent on improving health, at least not by any commonly accepted definition of the term.  Dude's started 30+ MLB games each of the last 10 years.  He falls into your "statistical regression" bucket, he's just been thoroughly mediocre the last 3 years.

 

But even for the injury guys, the roster spot isn't guaranteed, only the money.  And while Santana and Johnson didn't work out and I won't blame the Twins for passing on them, these deals can provide benefit and I hope the Twins aren't passing on them on principle.  They should do their due diligence on Masterson and Morrow just like anybody else.

[Physics Guy]

However bounceback guys generally require a mere one year gamble.  The Orioles and Padres can already rid themselves of those conracts and roster spots should they so choose.  You get Ricky Nolasco or Brandon McCarthy, you're stuck with tem for many years.

Or you sign a guy like Hughes to a 3/$24M contract and have a potential steal for the next two years. It's a gamble both ways. Good teams win those gambles more often than lose I suspect.

[brvama]

I would fall into Jorgenswest camp of "Sign big or sign no one." At the same time I would not be disappointed if they sign Masterson - assuming they are not ready to promote Meyer and Milone is not a favaorite for the rotation.

 

Other then that I would either wait for next year's free agent class or (my preference) look into a trade for a young, top of the line SP. IMHO, it is somewhat foolish to add SP that, while that might be an improvement, it doesn't represent a #1 or 2 SP. I believe patience is the key here - that is to find out what we have and then react to our needs.

[Rosterman]

I still shake my head remembering those Santana runors when trade talk was happening with the Red Sox.

 

Lester, Crisp, Masterson, Lowrie, Bowden was one, I think, but the Twins were holding out for Ellsbury and pairing that demand with Bucholtz.

 

Of course, Melky was listed in the trade talks where the Twins Hughes and was it Kennedy that was killing the deal.

 

The Twins could go after a Masterson. They could start May in the bullpen, as many starters do in their major league careers.

 

If Nolasco comes out hot, you dangle him for something, anything, as his salary is not totally ridiculous and he is a proven starter, but let's not have him taking up valuable roster space here.

 

You could also look at Gibson, who is not a youngster, and is a dependable guy, but if also starts the season hot, he is a trade chip. Seriously, look at Kyle and tell me that you will be paying him his arbitration wages down the line (which is also the question you ask of Dozier as a trade chip...is he a $7 or $9 million dollar player...like is Duensing worth $4 million and Burton not worth $3.6, is Plouffe worth $5 million?) 

 

What the A's do is not only look at what a player is doing, but can we truly afford to keep them when they hit arbitration, which actually awards players more money than free agency, especially if you just a solid everyday non superstar. You gat something back for them and then allow the other team to make the tender/non-tender decision.

 

I'm not totally sold on McCarthy or Masterson as 3-4 year contract guys. Someone like Santana would ask for a contract equal to Nolasco (the evils of having that contract out there on your staff). We don't really need to pursue a Saunders of Floyd. If they are still out there when spring training happens, you can always do a minors free agent looksee and if they thrive, then worry about roster decisions. 

 

So it is a juggling act. Heck, you could even trade Hughes. Or extend him. Right now, no one should be safe (even Mauer) on the Twins roster if the right deal could be made, the problem being that few are knocking on Minnesota's door asking about the players and offering anything of worth.

 

Teams may want our prospects, especially if they can jettison their own questionable contracts or players who will be in a tender/non-tender environs in a season or two. That, e don't need.

 

In your research, are there any other names out there like Hughes was with the Yankees...getting to expensive to keep with the hometeam, coming off a bad run, still young, but could surprise people if given the chance in an environment that they may find livable, even if the team id playing last-place ball whenever anyone else starts?

 

The Twins did sign Nolasco, Pelfrey and Hughes last year. Could they sign Santana. Would they have been as well off with Garza? Who would've come here (the magic question) and do gooder? 

 

I think the killer was that we didn't have to see Kris Johnson, Yohan Pino, Sam Deduno, nd in the dregs of September Anthony Swarzak, starting games for the hometown team. Those starts could've should've been put to much better use for anyone that might be in consideration for the future, not being on the 40-man roster be overlooked. 

[USAFChief]

Other then that I would either wait for next year's free agent class or (my preference) look into a trade for a young, top of the line SP.

Teams don't trade "young, top of the line SP'ers" very often.

[DocBauer]

I still shake my head remembering those Santana runors when trade talk was happening with the Red Sox.

 

Lester, Crisp, Masterson, Lowrie, Bowden was one, I think, but the Twins were holding out for Ellsbury and pairing that demand with Bucholtz.

 

Of course, Melky was listed in the trade talks where the Twins Hughes and was it Kennedy that was killing the deal.

 

I always thought the Twins got less by trying for more. And if they had just settled for less, they would have ended up with much more.

[DocBauer]

In your research, are there any other names out there like Hughes was with the Yankees...getting to expensive to keep with the hometeam, coming off a bad run, still young, but could surprise people if given the chance in an environment that they may find livable, even if the team id playing last-place ball whenever anyone else starts?

 

The research I did was, truth be told, based on the "Hughes-like" principle. Someone who may not be an ACE, but could legitimately be a 1-3 SP of Hughes quality. Ideally, I wanted options of 30 yo or less, but was willing to look at older who appeared to have life left, and be affordable and productive, whether that be a 1yr deal or more, though obviously nothing long term. Meaning I eliminated anyone 35 or older right off the bat. I also went through the list of available FA SP and eliminated anyone that didn't clearly show any form of past consistency as a SP. In other words, if they hadn't made 30 starts any time in their career, or only did it once, or maybe twice but multiple years apart, they were eliminated as clearly being nothing more than a 4-5 or fallback option. And that is NOT what this team needs to be adding at this point.

 

It's not an overly distinguished class, but I was surprised to find several options that intrigued me. It's unfortunate that besides Santana, the next two prospects I like the most are both coming off significant injury. But there are a few options there, including Masterson, who have shown real quality stretches in their career where they have made multiple 30 start campaigns with solid overall peripherals. And a couple others who have done the same, but with less overall consistency. To me, these guys are the closest to the Hughes quotient: not overly expensive, but healthy and a solid pitching coach, the right change of scenery, could be that big find/value.