Ricky Implies He Won't Go Quietly to the Pen

[tobi0040]

 

Sure, this works if Nolasco is actually a bad pitcher. If he's a decent (or good) pitcher, paying for him to pitch somewhere else makes little sense.

 

And that's why I said it *might* make sense in Nolasco's case.

 

Or it might not.

 

If he takes one inning from one pitcher that is better than him we have made the wrong decision.

 

 

 

[Brock Beauchamp]

 

You are right, but I would argue his pouting in March factored into the decision to remove May from the rotation in July, likely costing the Twins a playoff spot. 

Eh, I hated the May decision but it's hard to say it cost the Twins a postseason spot with certainty. I wanted May in the rotation but the bullpen was in worse shape than the rotation mid-season.

 

They robbed Peter to pay Paul. The bullpen improved, the rotation was weakened. Maybe that was worth 3 games, maybe it was worth -3 games because without May, the Twins hand away more late-inning leads.

[Mike Sixel]

 

Sure, this works if Nolasco is actually a bad pitcher. If he's a decent (or good) pitcher, paying for him to pitch somewhere else makes little sense.

 

And that's why I said it *might* make sense in Nolasco's case.

 

Or it might not.

 

ya, but you have to make that decision, maybe, before he pitches this year......

 

The question is, keep him, or keep Duffey, in the rotation (unless May has a real shot, then it is potentially a three way race). You can send Duffey down, but what is better, spending $500K more and have Duffey pitch, or have Nolasco pitch?

 

That's a really hard question to answer, imo.

[alarp33]

 

Sure, this works if Nolasco is actually a bad pitcher. If he's a decent (or good) pitcher, paying for him to pitch somewhere else makes little sense.

 

And that's why I said it *might* make sense in Nolasco's case.

 

Or it might not.

 

I am purely speculating, but I don't believe Nolasco will be in the rotation.  I think Milone and Duffey have the upper hand, and obviously Berrios will be knocking on the door.  He is not likely to be worth $12 million a year as a reliever, and if you can get any relief on the $24 million he is owed, they should do it. 

[Brock Beauchamp]

 

ya, but you have to make that decision, maybe, before he pitches this year......

 

The question is, keep him, or keep Duffey, in the rotation (unless May has a real shot, then it is potentially a three way race). You can send Duffey down, but what is better, spending $500K more and have Duffey pitch, or have Nolasco pitch?

 

That's a really hard question to answer, imo.

I think Duffey should be the guy unless he pitches his way out of the rotation to start the season.

 

Given Nolasco's performance and health concerns, he should be the long relief guy, ready to jump into a spot start here and there as needed.

 

Unless Nolasco is lights-out and pitches his way into the rotation. That changes things.

 

It's March 10th. I can't get too hot and bothered about any of this until the season approaches. Too many variables, too few answers.

[tobi0040]

The best option would be Ricky landing on the Royals or Indians somehow.

[alarp33]

 

 

 

Given Nolasco's performance and health concerns, he should be the long relief guy, ready to jump into a spot start here and there as needed.

 

 

 

You kind of just made my point for me.  They should not pay a long reliever $12 million, if they can get someone to take him by picking up half the salary, that would absolutely be better "money management"

[tobi0040]

You kind of just made my point for me. They should not pay a long reliever $12 million, if they can get someone to take him by picking up half the salary, that would absolutely be better "money management"

I think we would struggle to find anyone to take him at 6m a year.

[laloesch]

 

LOL. Yeah, explore those "other options", Ricky.

 

 

I'd tell his agent.  Your client is going to have to earn a starting gig or he's going to the pen possibly AAA.  If he doesn't like walkaway and don't let the door hit ya on the way out.

[alarp33]

 

I think we would struggle to find anyone to take him at 6m a year.

 

I think that's the starting point... someone mentioned the Dodgers earlier. They may not want him in the rotation next year, but might have a need right now... If the Twins picked up say $6 million this year, $8 million next year I could see it get done.  

[Brock Beauchamp]

 

You kind of just made my point for me.  They should not pay a long reliever $12 million, if they can get someone to take him by picking up half the salary, that would absolutely be better "money management"

Nolasco is owed roughly $25m right now.

 

If you're an opposing GM, what do you require to pick up that contract? If it was my call, I'd want no less than $12m and then I might throw in a PTBNL.

 

Nolasco is an albatross. We need to live with it, at least for now.

[alarp33]

 

Nolasco is owed roughly $25m right now.

 

If you're an opposing GM, what do you require to pick up that contract? If it was my call, I'd want no less than $12m and then I might throw in a PTBNL.

 

 

 

Yup, that's what I would want as an opposing GM as well, and if I was the Twins I would do it.  I'm saving $13 million in that scenario and can give the roster spot to a better pitcher. 

[Otto von Ballpark]

I think that's the starting point... someone mentioned the Dodgers earlier. They may not want him in the rotation next year, but might have a need right now... If the Twins picked up say $6 million this year, $8 million next year I could see it get done.

I am sure Cubs fans said the same things about Edwin Jackson a year ago. I think you are overrating teams willingness to go out of their way to pay a guy with the recent performance and health history of Nolasco. Every team has internal candidates making the minimum they are willing to try this time of year, heck that is why we are trying to unload him from the Twins.

[Brock Beauchamp]

 

Yup, that's what I would want as an opposing GM as well, and if I was the Twins I would do it.  I'm saving $13 million in that scenario and can give the roster spot to a better pitcher. 

You're assuming a GM would even make that deal. I don't know if I would... I'd consider it but I wouldn't necessarily pull the trigger. It requires a team with a rotation in shambles, hopes of contention, and a barren farm for the deal to work under any circumstances (and those three things are unlikely to happen).

 

As I said earlier, I don't know if Nolasco can be moved before next offseason. Even this July is a stretch unless he's pitching out of his mind and at that point, he may be worth keeping the entire season.

[Otto von Ballpark]

And especially a team like the Dodgers has the resources to try their $500k pitchers now, and make a splash for a good pitcher in July if they still need one. They don't go out of their way to guarantee $12 mil just to get a veteran warm body to open the season as their fifth starter.

[alarp33]

 

I am sure Cubs fans said the same things about Edwin Jackson a year ago. I think you are overrating teams willingness to go out of their way to pay a guy with the recent performance and health history of Nolasco. Every team has internal candidates making the minimum they are willing to try this time of year, heck that is why we are trying to unload him from the Twins.

 

In no way am I implying other teams are going to jump at this. I am simply saying if I were the Twins that is what I would be trying for.  Heck, the Twins may even have to pick up $18 of the $25. If he has a good, healthy spring... another team taking him is at least a possibility, that's all.  

[Brock Beauchamp]

 

In no way am I implying other teams are going to jump at this. I am simply saying if I were the Twins that is what I would be trying for.  Heck, the Twins may even have to pick up $18 of the $25. If he has a good, healthy spring... another team taking him is at least a possibility, that's all.  

At that point, Nolasco is down to being a $3.5m per year mop-up man with the potential to be a capable spot starter (or even a fifth starter).

 

And you keep that guy because "why not"? There's some upside in him and he's not costing you anything other than the roster spot where teams usually stash their worst pitcher.

[Craig Arko]

Mr. Rock, meet Mr. Hard Place.

[alarp33]

 

At that point, Nolasco is down to being a $3.5m per year mop-up man with the potential to be a capable spot starter (or even a fifth starter).

 

And you keep that guy because "why not"? There's some upside in him and he's not costing you anything other than the roster spot where teams usually stash their worst pitcher.

 

Because they have plenty of mop-up options, ones that aren't going to cause a scene about not being in the rotation.  

 

I'm not big on "clubhouse chemistry" being a real thing, but Nolasco seems like a problem, he doesn't want to be here... and frankly I think removing him is addition by subtraction.  

[Otto von Ballpark]

Furthermore, when those teams see how desperate the Twins are to move Nolasco, why wouldn't they wait it out further? Even if the Twins rotation picture magically cleared itself up, it's not like there is ever a shortage of mediocre pitchers with Nolasco's recent record available for $12 mil.

[bird]

I'm not sure if the agent influenced Ricky more or if Ricky influenced the agent more, but it's very obvious that their PR skills were heavily influenced by Carl Pohlad. Such endearing fellas.

[Brock Beauchamp]

 

I'm not big on "clubhouse chemistry" being a real thing, but Nolasco seems like a problem, he doesn't want to be here... and frankly I think removing him is addition by subtraction.  

And that's a possibility but I think people are overreacting to the text message. Yeah, it looks bad - and it reinforces my general dislike of Nolasco - but as far as "clubhouse problems" go, it barely moves the needle.

 

Maybe Nolasco apologizes tomorrow and accepts a bullpen role. Maybe he was frustrated in the moment, said something stupid to his agent, and this "problem" vanishes within the week.

 

Or maybe he's a jerk and becomes a legitimate problem. Time will tell. It's the type of decision that needs to be made internally, not based on a single text message that didn't originate from the player himself.

[tobi0040]

 

Because they have plenty of mop-up options, ones that aren't going to cause a scene about not being in the rotation.  

 

I'm not big on "clubhouse chemistry" being a real thing, but Nolasco seems like a problem, he doesn't want to be here... and frankly I think removing him is addition by subtraction.  

 

I think this is really cut and dry and we are throwing out scenarios that are just not going to happen.  This is worse than pretending Duensing was the kicker on a major trade.

 

-Ricky Nolasco has shown over the last two years that he flat out can't get hitters out.

 

-Guys that can't get hitters our have no value.  So sending him along and finding a suitor that pays half his salary or even $4M a year is just not going to happen.  Just as Spy said, the Twins have many more than five options that are better than him and so do other teams.

 

We have three options:

 

-Give him innings and hope he pitches better and can be moved to a team that will pays him $3M a year or so. Other teams need to see him pitch better before they will pay him a dime

 

-Hope he goes to AAA to work his way back or audition for other teams

 

-Cut him

 

I would rank these options as follows:

 

Option 1 - -Hope he goes to AAA to work his way back or audition for other teams

 

Option 2 - Cut him

 

Option 1,000,000,000  -Give him innings and hope he pitches better and can be moved to a team that will pays him $3M a year or so.

[Otto von Ballpark]

I'm not sure if the agent influenced Ricky more or if Ricky influenced the agent more, but it's very obvious that their PR skills were heavily influenced by Carl Pohlad. Such endearing fellas.

Nolasco should follow their lead and somehow involve a kid with cancer.

[Brock Beauchamp]

 

Nolasco should follow their lead and somehow involve a kid with cancer.

Eh, Nolasco doesn't need a new ballpark.

 

And everybody knows you only roll out the cancer-stricken kid when a ballpark is on the line. They're the LOOGY of public relations.

[Otto von Ballpark]

And that's a possibility but I think people are overreacting to the text message. Yeah, it looks bad - and it reinforces my general dislike of Nolasco - but as far as "clubhouse problems" go, it barely moves the needle.

 

Maybe Nolasco apologizes tomorrow and accepts a bullpen role. Maybe he was frustrated in the moment, said something stupid to his agent, and this "problem" vanishes within the week.

 

Or maybe he's a jerk and becomes a legitimate problem. Time will tell. It's the type of decision that needs to be made internally, not based on a single text message that didn't originate from the player himself.

To be fair, the agent's statement seemed pretty calculated and anticipatory. This doesn't feel like the Pelfrey thing at all, where he reacted poorly to the news and when asked about a trade said he'd welcome it. This is getting out ahead of any news, and stating that he will presumably make some requests/demands if that news comes about.

 

I don't know if it rises to the level of clubhouse cancer, but it doesn't feel like an isolated emotional response either.

[alarp33]

 

 

 

-Guys that can't get hitters our have no value.  So sending him along and finding a suitor that pays half his salary or even $4M a year is just not going to happen.  Just as Spy said, the Twins have many more than five options that are better than him and so do other teams.

 

 

 

Forget a real contender for now... If you are GM of a team like the Atlanta Braves - clearly in a rebuild, have shown a knack recently for shrewd trades (mainly by just picking on Dave Stewart)... would you trade for Nolasco if the Twins picked up all but $8 million over the 2 years, and put him in your rotation?  He pitches terribly or gets hurt, you are out $8 million.  BUT, if he is finally healthy, gets some guys out in the NL... you might have a pretty damn good deadline trade piece. 

 

I think I would do that if I were in their shoes. 

[Brock Beauchamp]

 

To be fair, the agent's statement seemed pretty calculated and anticipatory. This doesn't feel like the Pelfrey thing at all, where he reacted poorly to the news and when asked about a trade said he'd welcome it. This is getting out ahead of any news, and stating that he will presumably make some requests/demands if that news comes about.

I don't know if it rises to the level of clubhouse cancer, but it doesn't feel like an isolated emotional response either.

It's definitely something to keep an eye on, I'll agree with that. Nolasco has always rubbed me the wrong way and this event certainly doesn't change my opinion of him.

 

But it's hard to get a read on the guy from the outside. Maybe he's affable and genuinely nice in person. Maybe he's a prick and his teammates hate him.

 

I'm only wary of reading too much into this single event. Ultimately, the people who know him better need to make this call.

[alarp33]

 

To be fair, the agent's statement seemed pretty calculated and anticipatory. This doesn't feel like the Pelfrey thing at all, where he reacted poorly to the news and when asked about a trade said he'd welcome it. This is getting out ahead of any news, and stating that he will presumably make some requests/demands if that news comes about.

I don't know if it rises to the level of clubhouse cancer, but it doesn't feel like an isolated emotional response either.

 

I recall a tweet he sent after the 2014 season where he said he wished he was still in LA (so do we Ricky, so do we)... started off 2015 by booing back at the fans during Opening Day lineup introductions... 

[Otto von Ballpark]

Eh, Nolasco doesn't need a new ballpark.

 

And everybody knows you only roll out the cancer-stricken kid when a ballpark is on the line. They're the LOOGY of public relations.

I was just imagining some kid with cancer, whose make-a-wish would be for Ricky Nolasco to start rather than relieve.

 

And of course seeing Dave St Peter's response...