What to do about Blackburn?

[cr9617]

Fighting conjecture and hyperbole with logic and reason doesn't make someone an apologist.

Conjecture? How many MLB starters have been worse than Blackey in the past 2/12 seasons? I'm sure you could find a few, but not much more than that.

[James Richter]

This is about as good of an explanation of Blackburn's troubles that I have seen. He just doesn't have enough quality to his pitches--not enough movement, not a real good fastball, terrible curveball, etc. Everything has to be perfect for him to be successful.

This gets to the heart of it. I like to formulate it this way: Blackburn isn't good enough to get away with walking people. He's always been hittable, but when his BB/9 was 1.8 he could keep the dam from bursting most nights. The extra baserunners that have come from his reduced control over the last couple years have made big innings almost inevitable. He's also unlikely to pick up his defense if they miss a play behind him.

 

Still, they're stuck with him. They just have to hope he can get back to being an adequate #5 starter. At some point next season the front office may have to determine whether it's better for the team to pay him not to pitch.

[Nick Nelson]

There's no doubt that pitchers like Blackburn and Silva walk a slippery slope (then again, so does basically every non-star pitcher in the majors). Doesn't mean they're incapable of being valuable players. In 2008 and 2009, Blackburn was a solid No. 3/4, and he also had some huge performances in big games ('08 tiebreaker, '09 playoffs). Even in 2010 and 2011 when his overall results were ugly, he had some great stretches when he was locked in.

 

Can he get back to the level he was at prior to these last couple years? I don't know. I worry that his arm surgeries over the past couple offseasons may have permanently changed him for the worse, because his command this year has been pretty bad and as James notes he's not the kind of guy who can survive with a 3.5 BB/9 rate.

 

But I think some Twins fans get so fed up with the club's commitment to strike-throwing, pitch-to-contact starters that they want to believe that approach can't yield successful results. It can, and when these pitchers are going good they can rack up lots of innings thanks to their efficiency. Blackburn in 08/09 and Silva in three of his four years with the Twins are good examples.

[James Richter]

Pitch-to-contact can work as long as the following 3 conditions are met:

 

1) You never walk anybody

2) You keep the ball in the yard

3) You have a rangy and sure-handed defense behind you

 

This year, the defense is doing an OK job with number 3. Blackburn (and most other Twins starters) is doing a lousy job with 1 & 2. Scott Diamond is averaging over 6 IP/GS and has a stellar ERA despite pedestrian H/9 and K/9 because he's doing a stupendous job with 1 & 2.

[snepp]

Conjecture? How many MLB starters have been worse than Blackey in the past 2/12 seasons? I'm sure you could find a few, but not much more than that.

Try following along a little closer, no one has argued that.

[Brock Beauchamp]

But I think some Twins fans get so fed up with the club's commitment to strike-throwing, pitch-to-contact starters that they want to believe that approach can't yield successful results. It can, and when these pitchers are going good they can rack up lots of innings thanks to their efficiency. Blackburn in 08/09 and Silva in three of his four years with the Twins are good examples.

It's actually a really good system for filling the back of a rotation... Which is where most guys are going to slot into a major league rotation. Radke, Silva, Blackburn, Kyle Lohse, hell even Scott Baker to an extent... They've all been good to very good pitchers for the Twins over a period of multiple seasons based on the idea that if you throw a bunch of strikes, you'll do pretty well as a pitcher. Scott Diamond looks to be another guy squarely in that mold. I don't think the Twins need to drastically alter their strategy going forward. It's fine to use that methodology for your guys that don't throw in the mid-90s and have no plus out pitch. Instead of those guys scuffling through the minors, you can turn them into a productive major league pitcher by playing to their strength.

 

In my opinion, the Twins' problem isn't that they teach guys without great stuff to pitch to contact, it's that they draft so many guys who don't have great stuff. I think they really need to re-evaluate how they rate pitchers in the draft and not stick so stubbornly to one type of pitcher. I don't mind that the inevitable "pitch to contact" guy comes around and the Twins work with what he has, I have a problem with how many of "that guy" they draft in the first place.

[IdahoPilgrim]

Instead of those guys scuffling through the minors, you can turn them into a productive major league pitcher by playing to their strength.

 

That's the new thinking in how to improve an organization in general - appreciative inquiry. The model used to be to improve an organization you help people identify their weak areas and then help them improve those areas. Turns out it didn't work well; there might be some improvement, but not enough to justify the cost spent on the process. Now organizations seek to identify a person's strengths and then place them in a place where those strengths can really stand out and excel, and if there is no place for that in their organization, you cut them loose.

[James Richter]

Pitch-to-contact can work as long as the following 3 conditions are met:

 

1) You never walk anybody

2) You keep the ball in the yard

3) You have a rangy and sure-handed defense behind you

 

This year, the defense is doing an OK job with number 3. Blackburn (and most other Twins starters) is doing a lousy job with 1 & 2. Scott Diamond is averaging over 6 IP/GS and has a stellar ERA despite pedestrian H/9 and K/9 because he's doing a stupendous job with 1 & 2.

Thank you, Mr. Diamond, for that excellent example of what happens when you don't do 1 & 2.

[cr9617]

Try following along a little closer, no one has argued that.

I disagree with the logic, and the reason. Get it?