Olney: White Sox should trade Sale

[spinowner]

Every player who doesn't have a no-trade clause can be had for a high enough price. A team that is one stud pitcher away from winning the WS this year or next may be willing to pay that price to get Sale. And the Twins are not that team.

[TheLeviathan]

They won't trade Sale and it's the right move, but they have routinely failed to build a functional team.  They were the darlings for a lot of people on here and it's been an utter failure.

[gunnarthor]

I don't trust Sale to stay healthy throughout his contract so I wouldn't trade for him.

[Brock Beauchamp]

Berrios is way overrated by most Twins posters on here.......IMO Berrios has a #3 pitcher ceiling. Nice to have, but can be found or made.

Oy, no. Good god, no.

 

I was a huge Berrios skeptic. I didn't believe in the kid at all. He has continually not only beat expectations but shattered them. Even Law is on board with the kid now. I think it's wrong to put a ceiling on the kid at this point. He's the type of prospect you ride out to see what happens because he feels more and more like Pedro by the day.

 

I'd trade anyone in the system not named Byron Buxton before I traded Berrios. The guy seems like someone who will succeed through sheer determination and that can't be quantified.

[Hosken Bombo Disco]

 

Oy, no. Good god, no.

I was a huge Berrios skeptic. I didn't believe in the kid at all. He has continually not only beat expectations but shattered them. Even Law is on board with the kid now. I think it's wrong to put a ceiling on the kid at this point. He's the type of prospect you ride out to see what happens because he feels more and more like Pedro by the day.

I'd trade anyone in the system not named Byron Buxton before I traded Berrios. The guy seems like someone who will succeed through sheer determination and that can't be quantified.

 

This I agree with. I would have trouble trading away Berrios for anything less than a Chris Sale type.

 

[gunnarthor]

I agree with blair - Twins fans are way overrating Berrios.  At his best, he could be a #2 but he could still end up in the bullpen.  I like him a lot but he's not the next Johan or Pedro.  

[drivlikejehu]

 

I agree with blair - Twins fans are way overrating Berrios.  At his best, he could be a #2 but he could still end up in the bullpen.  I like him a lot but he's not the next Johan or Pedro.  

 

Oh well then, if a guy isn't Johan or Pedro may as well throw him overboard. 

 

Berrios is legit. I've been a fan since the draft pick. The guy can pitch, he is a starter, and while he probably will be a good #2 instead of an ace, that's still tremendously valuable. 

[gunnarthor]

 

Oh well then, if a guy isn't Johan or Pedro may as well throw him overboard. 

 

Berrios is legit. I've been a fan since the draft pick. The guy can pitch, he is a starter, and while he probably will be a good #2 instead of an ace, that's still tremendously valuable. 

-sigh- 

 

Trying to calm expectations.  His ceiling is #2, that doesn't mean he's likely to reach it, that's just what his ceiling is.  Jayson Parks loved him and he's a scout for the Cubs now.  He thought he'd be a solid #3 with avg or lower strike out rates in the majors.  BP just had a scouting report on him and he grades out as a #3 if things continue to develop for him.  Obviously, some #3 type pitchers pitched a lot better than that (Brad Radke) but the expectations on this guy are way out of line.  He could develop into a #2 stud but we'd be lucky if manages to have Scott Baker's career, too.  

[drivlikejehu]

 

-sigh- 

 

Trying to calm expectations.  His ceiling is #2, that doesn't mean he's likely to reach it, that's just what his ceiling is.  Jayson Parks loved him and he's a scout for the Cubs now.  He thought he'd be a solid #3 with avg or lower strike out rates in the majors.  BP just had a scouting report on him and he grades out as a #3 if things continue to develop for him.  Obviously, some #3 type pitchers pitched a lot better than that (Brad Radke) but the expectations on this guy are way out of line.  He could develop into a #2 stud but we'd be lucky if manages to have Scott Baker's career, too.  

 

Radke wasn't a #3. Really good pitchers aren't #3s. I've never seen a #3 that throws mid-90s with command and multiple quality off-speed pitches (which is clearly Berrios' potential), but maybe Berrios will be the first. I never saw Baker show that kind of stuff, but maybe my memory is failing me.

[Brock Beauchamp]

Radke wasn't a #3. Really good pitchers aren't #3s. I've never seen a #3 that throws mid-90s with command and multiple quality off-speed pitches (which is clearly Berrios' potential), but maybe Berrios will be the first. I never saw Baker show that kind of stuff, but maybe my memory is failing me.

When healthy - unfortunately, that wasn't often - Baker was a solid #2. Scott's problem wasn't ability, it was health. Baker is one of the more under appreciated Twins players in the past few decades.

[Hosken Bombo Disco]

-sigh- 

 

Trying to calm expectations.

 

Do you feel we should calm expectations on Sano also? Or try to trade him?

[drivlikejehu]

 

When healthy - unfortunately, that wasn't often - Baker was a solid #2. Scott's problem wasn't ability, it was health. Baker is one of the more under appreciated Twins players in the past few decades.

 

I agree completely. And yet Berrios has substantially better pure stuff than Baker and could easily have comparable or superior command.

[Brock Beauchamp]

I agree completely. And yet Berrios has substantially better pure stuff than Baker and could easily have comparable or superior command.

That's definitely possible, though Baker's command bordered on elite. I'd be thrilled if Berrios turns into a healthy Baker. Anything better than that approaches ace pitcher territory.

[gunnarthor]

 

Radke wasn't a #3. Really good pitchers aren't #3s. I've never seen a #3 that throws mid-90s with command and multiple quality off-speed pitches (which is clearly Berrios' potential), but maybe Berrios will be the first. I never saw Baker show that kind of stuff, but maybe my memory is failing me.

Radke was a #3 stuff wise, he also significantly out-pitched expectations.  Josh Beckett, for example, significantly under pitched expectations.

 

http://www.minorleagueball.com/2012/8/7/3226335/defining-1-2-3-4-5-starters

 

Other sites have similar definitions.  

[gunnarthor]

 

Do you feel we should calm expectations on Sano also? Or try to trade him?

Actually, I think we are under rating him.  Look at how well he's hitting after shaking off one year of rust.  I'd be thrilled if they called him up to DH the rest of the year.

[drivlikejehu]

 

Radke was a #3 stuff wise, he also significantly out-pitched expectations.  Josh Beckett, for example, significantly under pitched expectations.

 

http://www.minorleagueball.com/2012/8/7/3226335/defining-1-2-3-4-5-starters

 

Other sites have similar definitions.  

 

So you define a #3 starter based on expectations? What does that even mean?

 

A pitcher's job is to get hitters out. It doesn't make any difference how great he looks doing it. From 1997-2004, Radke was much better than average every single year except 1, when he was only a little better than average.

 

But, according to you, despite the fact Radke's numbers were those of a strong #2 for for 7 out of 8 years, he was 'significantly out-pitching expectations' and therefore actually a #3? For 7 years out of 8? That's now how I remember it. I think after a little while anyone with a brain realized he was actually pretty good.

 

Regardless, I'm fine with Berrios getting strong #2 results but being labeled a "#3" because he 'significantly out-pitched expectations.'

[Hosken Bombo Disco]

 

Actually, I think we are under rating him.  Look at how well he's hitting after shaking off one year of rust.  I'd be thrilled if they called him up to DH the rest of the year.

 

I'd be thrilled too, but it doesn't appear they are going to. I think the benchmark is about a year for position players to pick up where they left off. I could be wrong. Sano is approaching 15 months and just a couple weeks ago Mientkiewicz said he still isn't even close. I have no idea what that means but it's a little bit concerning.

[spinowner]

I've decided that I'm not going to pay attention to any post that states whether a 21 year old AA pitcher is going to be an ace or a #2 or a #3. Nobody can tell yet. Not even scouts, and certainly not amateur groupies like us.

[Thrylos]

 

When healthy - unfortunately, that wasn't often - Baker was a solid #2. Scott's problem wasn't ability, it was health. Baker is one of the more under appreciated Twins players in the past few decades.

 

4.23 career ERA and 4.02 career FIP a "solid #2" in a contender do not make.  Those are numbers for a solid number 4 in a contender.   But he never played for a team that contended in the post-season when healthy.

 

Look at Berrios' numbers.  After his first season in Rookie ball, he is around 3.20 ERA, 3.20 FIP and 20% K% average with 1.100 WHIP.  These numbers just do not project for a top of the rotation guy.  They project for a solid #3 in a postseason contender.   Likely he will be better than Baker.

[Craig Arko]

I've decided that I'm not going to pay attention to any post that states whether a 21 year old AA pitcher is going to be an ace or a #2 or a #3. Nobody can tell yet. Not even scouts, and certainly not amateur groupies like us.

[Brock Beauchamp]

4.23 career ERA and 4.02 career FIP a "solid #2" in a contender do not make.

Good job using career numbers on a guy who I said was rarely healthy and that it impacted his numbers. You also ignored his two 120+ ERA+ seasons while wearing a Twins uniform.

 

Did you even read my post or did you simply view it as an opportunity to take a swing at another ex-Twin?

[Hosken Bombo Disco]

 

I've decided that I'm not going to pay attention to any post that states whether a 21 year old AA pitcher is going to be an ace or a #2 or a #3. Nobody can tell yet. Not even scouts, and certainly not amateur groupies like us.

 

The issue is.......  maybe there are people who can tell. That's what the Cardinals hacking story seems to be about. Look at today's starter Jack Arrieta. In Baltimore, he was nothing more than replacement level. With the Cubs he's a #2 or #3 and throwing complete game shutouts against us. 

 

What do the Cubs know that no one else knows?  

 

[Thrylos]

 

Good job using career numbers on a guy who I said was rarely healthy and that it impacted his numbers. You also ignored his two 120+ ERA+ seasons while wearing a Twins uniform.

Did you even read my post or did you simply view it as an opportunity to take a swing at another ex-Twin?

 

120 ERA plus means 20% better than the average pitcher who is likely no better than a 4 in a contending team.  So at his peak, he was like a 3 in a contending team.  Number 2s in contending teams consistently put 130-140 ERA+   Baker had 2 good seasons.  2. 

Santana was an ace.  His ERA+ was 150-180 during that peak.   I'd consider Mussina the prototypical #2 in a contender.  His ERA+ 130-150 during his peak.

 

Nothing against Baker.  He was who he was.  I just have more stringent criteria for what a #2 pitcher looks like than you (and ERA+ sucks as a measure, because, like ERA, has a lot to do with the relievers who either allow batters to hit bombs, while you loaded bases or strike them out...)

[drivlikejehu]

 

4.23 career ERA and 4.02 career FIP a "solid #2" in a contender do not make.  Those are numbers for a solid number 4 in a contender.   But he never played for a team that contended in the post-season when healthy.

 

Look at Berrios' numbers.  After his first season in Rookie ball, he is around 3.20 ERA, 3.20 FIP and 20% K% average with 1.100 WHIP.  These numbers just do not project for a top of the rotation guy.  They project for a solid #3 in a postseason contender.   Likely he will be better than Baker.

 

Well his K% in full season ball is actually around 24%, which is actually pretty good considering he has always been one of the youngest pitchers in his league. 

 

Chris Archer had a cumulative minor league ERA of 3.76. His career MLB ERA is 3.13 and dropping. Weird how that works when a young pitcher with good stuff continues to improve.

[blairpaul715]

 

So you define a #3 starter based on expectations? What does that even mean?

 

A pitcher's job is to get hitters out. It doesn't make any difference how great he looks doing it. From 1997-2004, Radke was much better than average every single year except 1, when he was only a little better than average.

 

But, according to you, despite the fact Radke's numbers were those of a strong #2 for for 7 out of 8 years, he was 'significantly out-pitching expectations' and therefore actually a #3? For 7 years out of 8? That's now how I remember it. I think after a little while anyone with a brain realized he was actually pretty good.

 

Regardless, I'm fine with Berrios getting strong #2 results but being labeled a "#3" because he 'significantly out-pitched expectations.'

So , i have to ask, are you basing your assumptions on Berrios on results or expectations???? Because his results have been good but not great at AA, now your expectations are higher than the results he has displayed at AA............I dont want to get into a big debate about it, cuz I would love to be wrong, and when i debate, dammit, i want to be right LOL

[drivlikejehu]

 

So , i have to ask, are you basing your assumptions on Berrios on results or expectations???? Because his results have been good but not great at AA, now your expectations are higher than the results he has displayed at AA............I dont want to get into a big debate about it, cuz I would love to be wrong, and when i debate, dammit, i want to be right LOL

 

Sorry, I do not understand any aspect of this question/comment.

[blairpaul715]

 

Sorry, I do not understand any aspect of this question/comment.

Why do you think Berrios will be good, cuz your expectations are high? Or his results show he will be a #1 or #2?

[Brock Beauchamp]

120 ERA plus means 20% better than the average pitcher who is likely no better than a 4 in a contending team. So at his peak, he was like a 3 in a contending team. Number 2s in contending teams consistently put 130-140 ERA+ Baker had 2 good seasons. 2.

Santana was an ace. His ERA+ was 150-180 during that peak. I'd consider Mussina the prototypical #2 in a contender. His ERA+ 130-150 during his peak.

 

Nothing against Baker. He was who he was. I just have more stringent criteria for what a #2 pitcher looks like than you (and ERA+ sucks as a measure, because, like ERA, has a lot to do with the relievers who either allow batters to hit bombs, while you loaded bases or strike them out...)

ERA+ isn't a perfect stat but it's a pretty good one. While you might personally draw the line a touch higher, your statement that a healthy Baker (and his best ERA+ seasons of 122 and 129) is a #4 on a contender is laughable. I can see making an argument for #3. I don't agree but that's a personal line one draws when numbering starters.

 

You're making Mussina's numbers look good with that "130-150" number... his combined numbers during his prime 1991-2003 seasons was a 127 ERA+. Shorten that a bit to cover just his 1991-1999 years and it bumps slightly to an ERA+ of 130. Shorten it to his first four seasons and in two of those seasons, he qualifies as an ace pitcher by your definition and just misses the cut in another year.

 

Sure, Mussina spent most of his time as a #2 pitcher but his numbers weren't terribly different than a couple of seasons Scott Baker threw when healthy. Again, Scott's problem was that he was almost never healthy. Hell, the guy is virtually out of baseball at age 33.

[drivlikejehu]

 

Why do you think Berrios will be good, cuz your expectations are high? Or his results show he will be a #1 or #2?

 

I think he will good because he is good at pitching.

[TheLeviathan]

 

I think he will good because he is good at pitching.

 

Being deliberately difficult doesn't help your cause.  Berrios was dominant last year, but hasn't shown the same level of dominance as he was promoted.  It's fair to question how his stuff (largely considered to be too limited for an ace projection) will play as he advances.