Instead of Tulowitzki, I Might Rather Grab...

[Mike Sixel]

 

may isn't a bullpen guy for much longer methinks

 

people have been typing that since he moved there.

[Mike Sixel]

Point being, they've drafted, signed, and traded for power arms for three years, they actually have one in May, and aren't using him.....and apparently NONE of the other guys they've acquired over the last three years is ready/good.......

[Brock Beauchamp]

 

Point being, they've drafted, signed, and traded for power arms for three years, they actually have one in May, and aren't using him.....and apparently NONE of the other guys they've acquired over the last three years is ready/good.......

It's all a bit infuriating, isn't it?

 

You can (maybe) talk yourself out of each decision but when you factor them all together, it makes you want to scream.

[nicksaviking]

 

It's all a bit infuriating, isn't it?

 

You can (maybe) talk yourself out of each decision but when you factor them all together, it makes you want to scream.

 

With the volume of relievers dafted, you'd think the team could luck it's way into some success.

 

On the other hand, the only reason Perkins and Duensing are in the pullpen now is because they were starters who were out of options and they sure weren't lighting the minors on fire when their options were out. Maybe it's time to start throwing babies into the water to see if some of them can swim.

[Mike Sixel]

Careful, you guys seem to be questioning THE PLAN.....

[drjim]

Wait, they finally use May as an 8th inning setup guy, as requested, and people are still complaining?

[drjim]

But I agree with the previous post that May is probably not long for the bullpen this season.

[Mike Sixel]

 

Wait, they finally use May as an 8th inning setup guy, as requested, and people are still complaining?

 

my complaint is that they've spent 3 years drafting, trading for, and signing guys, and this is the bullpen they have.......

[drjim]

 

my complaint is that they've spent 3 years drafting, trading for, and signing guys, and this is the bullpen they have.......

 

Hard game.

[Mike Sixel]

 

Hard game.

 

True, but you are judged on success or failure. It is one of the great things about sports compared to much of the rest of the world......

[nicksaviking]

 

Careful, you guys seem to be questioning THE PLAN.....

 

I'm still not sure I question the plan so much as the execution.  I like the drafting of hard throwers; for the ones that are going to be kept in the bullpen I'm less sold on changing their mechanics.  I think if it worked for them in college the team should at least let them keep that approach until it proves unsuccessful or they get injured.

 

Either way, let's start seeing which ones sink and which ones can actually swim.

[nicksaviking]

 

Hard game.

 

I agree, it isn't easy and we are judging them based largely on inexact science.

 

However the other teams do not appear to have the same issues, and I'd venture that few, perhaps no team, has put as much effort into finding hard throwrs/bullpen pieces than the Twins over the last several years. 

 

Something's just not adding up with all signs pointing to the Twins either not being very good at identifying or developing these kinds of guys.

[kab21]

 

I don't agree with that at all. The Twins don't need an ace, they need a guy who pitches like one at the right time. The Royals made it to game seven of the World Series without a bonafide "ace". They had two very good pitchers and one of them was terrible last postseason. The other guy has been pretty bad this season.

I can play this game also.

 

The Royals made it to Game 7 of the World Series with a DH and 1B that could barely crack .700 OPS and 2B and 3B that hit .632 OPS.  The Twins holes (2 positions) don't look so bad.  

[Brock Beauchamp]

 

I can play this game also.

 

The Royals made it to Game 7 of the World Series with a DH and 1B that could barely crack .700 OPS and 2B and 3B that hit .632 OPS.  The Twins holes (2 positions) don't look so bad.  

My greater point is the Royals were outstanding at a few things and those "bad" players contributed in some way. One can't look at the 2015 Twins and say the same (Santana is bad at everything and Suzuki is bad at almost everything).

 

The rotation is adequate. Would I like it to be better? Sure, of course... but I think the most prudent use of resources is to acquire players who fill the biggest needs at the biggest holes.

[Mike Sixel]

 

I can play this game also.

 

The Royals made it to Game 7 of the World Series with a DH and 1B that could barely crack .700 OPS and 2B and 3B that hit .632 OPS.  The Twins holes (2 positions) don't look so bad.  

 

That's why you have to look at the whole team, not just 1-2 spots, not to mention luck and other stuff. Given the Twins current construction, they could really use upgrades in a few areas

[kab21]

 

That's why you have to look at the whole team, not just 1-2 spots, not to mention luck and other stuff. Given the Twins current construction, they could really use upgrades in a few areas

And the first place I would upgrade is an ace.  many teams have bad catchers or SS's.  It's unfortunate that the Twins have both.  Brock looks at a rotation with Hamels in it and still doesn't think it is very good.  I would have to think that the rotation must look awful currently if that is the case.

 

But as far as I can tell some are going to say no to any trade for a good player because it costs a prospect.  At the end of the day I don't expect the FO to be exploring any blockbusters though. 

[Brock Beauchamp]

 

And the first place I would upgrade is an ace.  many teams have bad catchers or SS's.  It's unfortunate that the Twins have both.  Brock looks at a rotation with Hamels in it and still doesn't think it is very good.  I would have to think that the rotation must look awful currently if that is the case.

But that's not what I said. I look at a rotation with Hamels in it and see a team that's still not very good.

 

Hell, just a few posts ago I called the rotation "a position of relative team strength".

[drjim]

I agree, it isn't easy and we are judging them based largely on inexact science.

 

However the other teams do not appear to have the same issues, and I'd venture that few, perhaps no team, has put as much effort into finding hard throwrs/bullpen pieces than the Twins over the last several years.

 

Something's just not adding up with all signs pointing to the Twins either not being very good at identifying or developing these kinds of guys.

They had plenty good bullpens for a long stretch in the aughts. I don't buy it is anything systematic.

 

I think the best explanation is that the pitching depth collapsed so spectacularly in 2011 that they haven't had the excess pitchers to move to the bullpen.

 

As you suggested there are now finally some options. Personally at this point I would add from the outside for the stretch run but I would be pretty surprised if there isn't some significant improvement next year.

[DaveW]

Brock: Who helps the Twins most in a one game wild card playoff game:

 

Cole Hamels or Lucroy?

[Brock Beauchamp]

 

Brock: Who helps the Twins most in a one game wild card playoff game:

Cole Hamels or Lucroy?

Cole Hamels but even if I'm super-optimistic, it only moves the Twins' chances from maybe 45 to 55%.

 

In a one game playoff, I don't like those odds.

 

I think the current WC setup is terrible and I'd prefer the Twins not bank on something so entirely luck-driven.

[Mike Sixel]

Lucroy makes it a lot more likely they are in the playoffs in the first place.....

[DaveW]

Lucroy makes it a lot more likely they are in the playoffs in the first place.....

lucroy is having a pretty bad year, what makes you so confident he can just turn it around?

[Brock Beauchamp]

 

lucroy is having a pretty bad year, what makes you so confident he can just turn it around?

He was injured early in the season and has turned it around nicely since that time.

 

OPS by month:

 

April: .393

June: .671

July: .772

[nicksaviking]

 

They had plenty good bullpens for a long stretch in the aughts. I don't buy it is anything systematic.

I think the best explanation is that the pitching depth collapsed so spectacularly in 2011 that they haven't had the excess pitchers to move to the bullpen.

As you suggested there are now finally some options. Personally at this point I would add from the outside for the stretch run but I would be pretty surprised if there isn't some significant improvement next year.

 

That was a differet game.  That was when a high contact low velocity guy like Matt Guerrier could be your second best arm out of the pen any you could have two or three other guys just like him. 

 

From 2000-2010 the Cubs had the best bullpen K/9 at 8.69.  The median team K/9 was 7.32, which was theTwins mark.  In 2015 the top bullpen K/9 is the Dodgers 10.13 mark with the median figure at 8.23.  Meanwhile the Twins have fallen back to a 6.13.  Even if the Twins had kept the same successful approach they had during their good bullpen years, their 7.32 K/9 would have placed them tied for 29th.

 

I certainly give the team credit, with their current draft stratagey they sure seemed to see the way the future of the game was going to be played out, they just were late to the party and are still struggling to catch up.

[nicksaviking]

 

And the first place I would upgrade is an ace.  many teams have bad catchers or SS's.  It's unfortunate that the Twins have both.  Brock looks at a rotation with Hamels in it and still doesn't think it is very good.  I would have to think that the rotation must look awful currently if that is the case.

 

But as far as I can tell some are going to say no to any trade for a good player because it costs a prospect.  At the end of the day I don't expect the FO to be exploring any blockbusters though. 

 

 I also would have previously been down for getting an ace as i think they give you the best chance to win.

 

However I'm not on board now, as available aces are generally 30+ and at or near their decline and on ugy contracts.  Had the team not already siged faux aces Nolasco, Hughes and Santana I'd be happy to go for Hamels, but I can't stomach four such pitchers.  The future would be bleak, particularly considering how the team prefers veterans over youngsters regardless of performance. 

[Otto von Ballpark]

 

They had plenty good bullpens for a long stretch in the aughts. I don't buy it is anything systematic.

I think the best explanation is that the pitching depth collapsed so spectacularly in 2011 that they haven't had the excess pitchers to move to the bullpen.

Our bullpens in the later aughts were generally not comprised of excess pitchers moved to the bullpen.  Guerrier is the closest, although he was a waiver claim who only briefly started.  Crain, Nathan, Rauch, Mijares, Neshek, Reyes, Breslow, Balfour, Jackson, etc. were all acquired or developed as relievers.

 

The effect you speak of was primarily limited to Rincon and Romero in the aughts, with Hawkins and Guardado being legacy examples remaining from the 1990s too.

[drjim]

 

That was a differet game.  That was when a high contact low velocity guy like Matt Guerrier could be your second best arm out of the pen any you could have two or three other guys just like him. 

 

From 2000-2010 the Cubs had the best bullpen K/9 at 8.69.  The median team K/9 was 7.32, which was theTwins mark.  In 2015 the top bullpen K/9 is the Dodgers 10.13 mark with the median figure at 8.23.  Meanwhile the Twins have fallen back to a 6.13.  Even if the Twins had kept the same successful approach they had during their good bullpen years, their 7.32 K/9 would have placed them tied for 29th.

 

I certainly give the team credit, with their current draft stratagey they sure seemed to see the way the future of the game was going to be played out, they just were late to the party and are still struggling to catch up.

 

I would expect similar talent to increase at roughly the same rate as league as a whole, which further indicts how far the Twins fell in regards to bullpen construction.

[IndyTwinsFan]

 

It worked out for KC the second season with Shields but it sure didn't work out for them the first season.

I'd prefer to skip that first season when trading away talent.

I keep saying it over and over again... The 2015 Twins are simply not that good a baseball team. One name is not going to fix their problems (especially when that name plays at a position of relative team strength). People are too fascinated with a name and not fascinated enough with the gaping holes at catcher, short, and the bullpen. Sure, the Twins can fill one, maybe all three, of those holes (unlikey) but they're not going to fill all those holes and acquire the best SS (Tulowitski) or the best SP (Hamels) on the market.

It's not like this is a great (or even very good) team with a few holes. This is a team that is not very good at anything they do. They're not particularly good in the rotation. They're pretty horrible in the bullpen. They're not particularly good at scoring runs. They're not good at hitting for average. They're not very disciplined at the plate. They're not making good use of their team speed. They're not very good at preventing runs in the field.

Sure, they had one great month of baseball. I enjoyed the hell out of that month... But there's a reason why they're way under .500 outside of that single month. This isn't a team that likely wins the World Series because they have Cole Hamels on it. This is a team with multiple flaws that are too great to fix in a single deadline.

So, shore up the biggest holes, hope for lightning to strike, don't be surprised if it doesn't, and prepare to make real fixes to your biggest problems in the offseason when it's not only easier to do it but often cheaper to do it.

I saw all of these issues before the past nine games but after seeing the Twins flounder against some of the better teams in the AL, I don't see how it could be any more obvious the Twins are not built to win in the 2015 postseason. They don't have the horses and one name doesn't change that fact.

I agree wholeheartedly with the last paragraph.   When the team is multiple horses away from being serious contenders, adding one horse (Hamels, Tulo, etc.) just doesn't make a whole lot of sense to me.   Especially if it means giving up current young and/or high-value players who may well be part of the foundation for the next era in Twins pennant-caliber play.  That being said, I would have no problem with adding at least one useful bullpen arm this season, provided the price isn't very high (no more than a mid-level prospect).   Same thought regarding a catcher and/or a left-handed power bat.

 

I think it's safe to say that most of us weren't expecting the Twins to be even close to .500 this year after 100 games, so let's enjoy the early preview of things (hopefully) to come.   Not much point in grasping for straws quite yet, IMO.

[Otto von Ballpark]

 

I agree wholeheartedly with the last paragraph.   When the team is multiple horses away from being serious contenders, adding one horse (Hamels, Tulo, etc.) just doesn't make a whole lot of sense to me.

But there's no guarantee that when you are fewer "horses away from being serious contenders", there will be another horse as good available to you.  Potential multi-year assets should be always signed/acquired when the best opportunity presents itself, not when the need dictates.  Otherwise you can make some very bad decisions (i.e. I think we signed Nolasco more because of our desperation and his willingness to sign than about his talent/projection).

[IndyTwinsFan]

 

But there's no guarantee that when you are fewer "horses away from being serious contenders", there will be another horse as good available to you.  Potential multi-year assets should be always signed/acquired when the best opportunity presents itself, not when the need dictates.  Otherwise you can make some very bad decisions (i.e. I think we signed Nolasco more because of our desperation and his willingness to sign than about his talent/projection).

Don't disagree with the theory of what you're saying.   However, I'm just can't convince myself of the logic of this type of move, given the potentially one-and-done nature of the MLB wildcards.   I really don't see us, or maybe any other Central team, overtaking the Royals.   So I think that's probably the best available outcome this season.  

 

I'd prefer to wait and see if more of the upcoming wave of prospects is enough to get us closer to our goal.   If not, then maybe more drastic measures are in order.