Jump to content
Twins Daily
  • Create Account

Waldrop recalled; Manship optioned


IdahoPilgrim

Recommended Posts

Posted

Waldrop looks like by the numbers to be pitching better. We will see if it continues up here. For sure he get another shot at major league hitters on July 1 unless the Twins find a proven pitcher..

Provisional Member
Posted

I think this will be good for Manship. I think he's going back to Rochester to be a starter. He'll be better as a starter and I fully expect him to be back with the big club in the future. He is a very talented young man.

Guest USAFChief
Guests
Posted

Captain, we're in waters trecherous with icebergs, what's your plan for the Titanic?

 

"Shuffle the deck chairs, meboy, shuffle the deck chairs."

Posted

Not a Manship fan. Unless the starting staff goes to seed, he really isn't right for a role in the Twins' bullpen. They have a long man (Swarzak) and Manship wasn't a fit to pitch in high leverage late innings. Waldrop will be a middle to setup guy and hopefully will get enough ground balls to make up for his lack of ability to miss bats. I have pictured Waldrop as a Guerrier type and his comeback from adversity is a good story.

Posted

Manship has been ineffective in the majors in 4 seasons. (And the last time he was an above average pitcher was in Fort Myers in 2008.) Will be out of options next season, which means happy trails. I wonder if he is the guy going to the Pirates. Not much of a loss for the Twins.

Provisional Member
Posted

What makes you say that?

Pitched well in some spot starts a few years ago. Got a critical win at the end of the season to keep the Twins in the playoffs. Was hurt most of the year last year but still was part of the no-hitter at Rochester. Good numbers in Spring Training, good numbers in AAA, and good numbers when he was first pulled up. I think he just needs a little more work to get back the way he was a couple of years ago.

Posted

Manship has been ineffective in the majors in 4 seasons. (And the last time he was an above average pitcher was in Fort Myers in 2008.) Will be out of options next season, which means happy trails. I wonder if he is the guy going to the Pirates. Not much of a loss for the Twins.

I was hoping that the PTBNL would be Nick Blackburn. Is there any chance a team would take him if the Twins chipped in 3/4 of his salary for this season and next year?

Posted

I was hoping that the PTBNL would be Nick Blackburn. Is there any chance a team would take him if the Twins chipped in 3/4 of his salary for this season and next year?

But how will the team know if they have a good long reliever without Blackburn?

Old-Timey Member
Posted

Hopefully thats the last we see of Manship. I just think he's a AAAA player.

If he truly is a AAAA player then he def has a spot on this current Twins team unfortunately :/

Old-Timey Member
Posted

What's your beef with Swarzak? He's perfectly suitable in his current role.

Yes, he does appear to have a lot of upcoming opportunites to break out the 4th inning-or-so-mop-up duties during the frequent 10-2 thrashings.

Guest USAFChief
Guests
Posted

He's perfectly suitable in his current role.

Cromulent, even.

Posted

Yes, he does appear to have a lot of upcoming opportunites to break out the 4th inning-or-so-mop-up duties during the frequent 10-2 thrashings.

All I'm saying is, the Twins need a guy who can come in and pitch a few innings out of the bullpen, especially considering the current state of their rotation. Swarzak can usually do that without giving up a bunch of runs and letting things spin out of control. I can understand the desire to be rid of Manship – who hasn't been able to do that – or Gray – who, in addition to not being very good, isn't really a long reliever – but I have a hard time understanding why anyone would be fed up with Anthony Swarzak, of all people on this roster.

Posted

What's your beef with Swarzak? He's perfectly suitable in his current role.

What's the beef? Besides the fact that he isn't good? What else are you looking for here? That 33/12 K/BB ratio in 55 innings isn't an abomination. Except that it is. He wasn't good since 2007 in the minors.

 

Again, another person poo-pooing a minor adjustment of some x number of wins (even .x . . . ) in order to defend the status quo. Swarzak is NOT a major league pitcher and it is rather alarming that people think he is.

Posted

Let's add 'em up here (and it is clear that this doesn't belong in this thread):

 

1. Swarzak, Gray, and now Manship kept beyond serviceability.

2. Chris Parmelee wasted on the MLB bench for some completely absurd reason.

3. Ben Revere not on the 25 man roster from the beginning (perhaps his AAA time helped him?).

4. Drew Butera vs. any other AAAA catchers.

5. Matt Carson instead of Mastro.

6. Slama--not injured if called up

7. Morneau not facing lefties.

 

ETC.

 

These things add up. This isn't addressing the SP issue, which everyone focuses on. Ignoring other wins available is not a good idea though. But maybe I am just crazy.

Posted

What's the beef? Besides the fact that he isn't good? What else are you looking for here? That 33/12 K/BB ratio in 55 innings isn't an abomination. Except that it is. He wasn't good since 2007 in the minors.

I disagree. Swarzak had a 3.99 ERA as a reliever last year; this year it is 2.95. K/BB ratio doesn't measure results. Results measure results, and up to this point your condemnation simply isn't supported by reality. He shouldn't ever be starting a ballgame, but he's been solid when used properly.

 

He's a second-round pick with reasonable success in the minors, he's only 26, and he's making the league minimum. Wasting energy on the argument that he should be released seems misguided considering how many players on this team have actually been terrible in their roles. Not all 12 pitchers on the staff have to be great.

Posted

Ok, so continue to trot him out there in situations where not being terrible would be helpful. It is HILARIOUS that a Twins fan claims that "not all 12 pitchers on the staff have to be great." Does one prefer good or average over great? How about below average over great? Again, another claim that it is "all OK" in the bullpen so that 0.5 win isn't relevant.

Posted

Ok, so continue to trot him out there in situations where not being terrible would be helpful. It is HILARIOUS that a Twins fan claims that "not all 12 pitchers on the staff have to be great." Does one prefer good or average over great? How about below average over great? Again, another claim that it is "all OK" in the bullpen so that 0.5 win isn't relevant.

I never said it is "all OK" in the bullpen. I said Swarzak has not been part of the problem, and that's demonstrably true. You're basically complaining for no reason.
Posted

If I were to make a list of the Twins Top 25 roster issues, Anthony Swarzak would be wayyyy down the list. He's been solid in his multiple roles the last couple of years.

Posted

If I were to make a list of the Twins Top 25 roster issues, Anthony Swarzak would be wayyyy down the list. He's been solid in his multiple roles the last couple of years.

*in best Captain Edward Smith voice*

 

Screw that iceberg! Get those deck chairs in order, seaman!

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

The Twins Daily Caretaker Fund
The Twins Daily Caretaker Fund

You all care about this site. The next step is caring for it. We’re asking you to caretake this site so it can remain the premier Twins community on the internet.

×
×
  • Create New...