Why hasn't Berrios been called back up?

[ShouldaCouldaWoulda]

 

I don't understand the fascination with draft position. I look at age of the player and prospect rankings, as they are more up to date.

Rodon and Berrios were in about the same position, rated 15-20 at age 22. Rodon was called up and allowed to struggle with his command. 19 BB's in his first 22 innings. A BB per 9 of 4.6 in his first 140 innings.

Fullmer was 22 and about 40th overall, well behind Berrios and basically the same age this year. He has pitched 230 fewer innings between AA and AAA, with worse numbers.

I am not saying this is the right or wrong approach. My happy medium is between the two. I think they rushed Fullmer for example. But I think Berrios has thrown about 80-100 innings too many in AA and AAA. I was simply responding to the comment from I believe Seth that we don't know if Berrios would be treated differently in other organizations. I think we can conclude, he would have been up and likely not sent back down so quickly with the White Sox.

I think it all depends on a teams evaluation process of what a pitchers future is most likely to look like at each age/year, and whether or not you think you want to and can resign him, and will he stay healthy?! 

 

If you believe in a pitchers future and health, you want to bring him fast if you wan to resign him. That way you are resigning while he is still young, and not in his declining velocity and higher millage years. If you don't think you will resign him or don't you can, then I guess keep him down longer so that you have him during his more likely refined and peak years.

[Seth Stohs]

 

Wait, aren't you the guy always saying that age to level doesn't matter with these guys?

 

I say that in the minor leagues, yes.

[Mr. Brooks]

I say that in the minor leagues, yes.

I thought so. Then Duffey being 25 at AAA shouldn't matter to you.

[Rosterman]

In the scheme of things, it might've been nice to give Berrios his 2016 starts in the end of 2015. Let him get his feet wet, etc.

 

But there were some 40-man roster concerns that overweighed that advancement.

 

Although we all would've loved to see Berrios start the season, he probably did need to start at AAA.

 

Also, we had Nolasco, Milone, Santana, Hughes, Duffey, Gibson and, I guess, Dean and somehow Meyer got in the mix.

 

Then they needed Berrios, or they screwed up with Meyer and didn't think of Dean first.

 

Berrios got his feet wet.

 

Yes, he should be back. But right now, he is being passed by because of salary (they are paying Milone millions) and, for some reason, Duffey...who has been brilliant but still does have options and needs to work on consistency just as bad as Berrios.

 

 

[DocBauer]

First off, I want Berrios up as well. And I would have been more than happy if that happened two weeks ago. But there is nothing negative regarding the Twins feelings on him there. Only a rather bland statement of working on consistency and a tweak to his curve. And even when he does comes up, he will continue to work on things.

 

I'm not getting out my pitchfork with a week to go until the trade deadline. For all we know, there is a chance someone is about to be traded, even for a bag of balls. We can all wait until then to break out the whetstone and sharpen up garden and farm equipment.

 

I don't get the Duffey suggestion to be sent doen, especially this close to the deadline of something potentially happenening. We don't know what he can or will be yet. He is not Mr Consistency this season. But we have seen some of his potential. With all the angst we share on here to play the youngsters and get them experience, he's the last guy to be moved right now. Let him work, grow and learn at the ML level.

[twinssouth]

I don't think there's a market for Nolasco and Milone, maybe Santana. What playoff caliber team would want these guys.

[alarp33]

I don't think there's a market for Nolasco and Milone, maybe Santana. What playoff caliber team would want these guys.

Odds are very high none of the 3 are traded by Aug2. No one wants Nolasco and Milone, and no one will want Santana for $30 million.

 

Twins would probably be able to get something for Santana by picking up half the contract, but that seems unlikely

[tobi0040]

I think it all depends on a teams evaluation process of what a pitchers future is most likely to look like at each age/year, and whether or not you think you want to and can resign him, and will he stay healthy?!

 

If you believe in a pitchers future and health, you want to bring him fast if you wan to resign him. That way you are resigning while he is still young, and not in his declining velocity and higher millage years. If you don't think you will resign him or don't you can, then I guess keep him down longer so that you have him during his more likely refined and peak years.

I get all of that. But we have been past super two for a long time and there is no way we will keep him down past next years. Even the Twins could not accomplish that.

[tobi0040]

Odds are very high none of the 3 are traded by Aug2. No one wants Nolasco and Milone, and no one will want Santana for $30 million.

 

Twins would probably be able to get something for Santana by picking up half the contract, but that seems unlikely

For a team that foresees themselves adding a starter in free agency next year, I would think his 2-27 would seem like a decent deal. Mike Leake is a 5-80 guy

 

But those deals are rare

[USAFChief]

 

If you think two weeks is any different than one week and if you think we have adequate information to drawn any hard conclusions, we will have to agree to disagree.  A demotion to the pen is also a blow.  My experience in what is granted only roughly similar circumstances suggests this is not just bad practice to mess with peoples careers (in a negative manner) with events on the very near that are very likely to impact the decision you just made.   Obviously, the situation can also change due to circumstance beyond control in professional sports but that's not the case here.

 

Would you want to work for an organization that acted with disregard for you and your career.  If you think the high profile guys you want to retain to care about how you treat their teammates, we again will have to agree to disagree.

I spent most of my adult life in an organization that was quite willing to act with disregard for my career when my performance was detrimental to the goals of the organization.  

 

I had no problem with that, because I was usually pulling my weight.  And neither did the other folks who were pulling theirs.  Frankly, we were all glad to be in an organization that valued us, and our mission, enough to have the courage to excise those that deserved to be excised.  

 

And to pile on, perhaps needlessly, but what the hey...I find the notion that an organization--any organization--shouldn't make a necessary change simply because of the possibility of another change down the road, to be preposterous.

 

No organization I have ever been in has had that view.  None.  

[FormerMinnasotan]

Odds are very high none of the 3 are traded by Aug2. No one wants Nolasco and Milone, and no one will want Santana for $30 million.

 

Twins would probably be able to get something for Santana by picking up half the contract, but that seems unlikely

Which is why I am upset Nolasco and Milone are taking up a starting spot Berrios should already have. Nolasco should have been gone at least a year ago, this is his final year on his contract and there is no reason not to dfa him by now. Milone as well. At this rate I wouldn't be surprised to see Berrios come up as a September call up. Pathetic the Twins want Berrios to be damn near perfect, while Tyler Duffey can do no wrong, even if he goes through a 5-6 start stretch with an ERA over 9 and not be demoted.

[Major League Ready]

 

I spent most of my adult life in an organization that was quite willing to act with disregard for my career when my performance was detrimental to the goals of the organization.  

 

I had no problem with that, because I was usually pulling my weight.  And neither did the other folks who were pulling theirs.  Frankly, we were all glad to be in an organization that valued us, and our mission, enough to have the courage to excise those that deserved to be excised.  

 

And to pile on, perhaps needlessly, but what the hey...I find the notion that an organization--any organization--shouldn't make a necessary change simply because of the possibility of another change down the road, to be preposterous.

 

No organization I have ever been in has had that view.  None.  

Chief, you and I always disagree when it comes to management issues.  If you think the possibillty of change in most organizations is the same as impending change at the deadline, especially specific to this deadline and this team, we will just have to disagree.  We definitely got our MBAs from different schools.

[USAFChief]

Chief, you and I always disagree when it comes to management issues.  If you think the possibillty of change in most organizations is the same as impending change at the deadline, especially specific to this deadline and this team, we will just have to disagree.  We definitely got our MBAs from different schools.

This seems 180 degrees away from your position 6 pages ago in this thread.

 

In that post, you specifically called the Twins refusal to make change A due to impending change B "Management 101," and claimed it was exactly like other organizations, who would do the same.

 

BTW, I don't have an MBA.

[The Wise One]

 

I think the term "first two FULL seasons" proves his point.

The thing that drives me a bit nuts is they will call up a young position player (OF) and let them struggle for 6+ weeks or so before sending them down, however the patience with pitchers is usually significantly less and it takes them more time to get shot number two.

The inconsistencies are just.....odd.

You are aware that Verlander's season prior to his ROY season was 2 games in July and was sent back down? So the consternation about not calling up Berrios and using Verlander as an example of someone who worked through the rough spots at the major league level is odd at best.

[The Wise One]

Dave, Duffrey's season says hello.

[Richie the Rally Goat]

No but demoting the guy down to AAA certainly might...

 

I would be appalled if the Twins promoted Berrios right now.

 

Why? Cause I'm hoping they are trying to shed as many of our crappy pitchers as possible, and it's hard to sell Milone as an MLB starter if he's AAA!

 

Now come August 2 and he's still not up, that's when I'll be mad.

Milone and Nolasco are as likely or more to get traded in August, when fresh injuries crop up but there are fewer trade options available to back fill.

[alarp33]

 

For a team that foresees themselves adding a starter in free agency next year, I would think his 2-27 would seem like a decent deal. Mike Leake is a 5-80 guy

But those deals are rare

 

Mike Leake is also 28. 

 

I agree on the surface 2/27 isn't that bad.  I think it is more the rotation spot teams aren't willing to fill in 2018 with a 35 year old Ervin Santana.  

 

What contenders fall in this category? I'd cross the Dodgers, Red Sox and Rangers off the list, they can all aim higher than Erv.  Maybe Baltimore?

[mikelink45]

 

One would think you would start seeing moves if the Twins are going to be making multiple, 3-5 moves. It would seem logistically difficult to trade a slew of players on the same day. Negotiations with multiple teams, prospect discussings, paperwork with the league, media coordination, etc.

My gut says if we wait until the last day, we make at most two moves.

I hope you are right.  Firing TR has not changed my opinion of the FO - this is still the Twins, but maybe!!!!!

[Brock Beauchamp]

I didn't have any issues with the Twins' handling of Berrios until they demoted him. I understood why they didn't call him up last season, though I can see both sides of the argument. I understood why they wanted to give the other guys a shot to open the season and give Berrios more time in Rochester.

 

But once he was up, he deserved a real look. Four starts is not a real look.

[alarp33]

 

 

 

But once he was up, he deserved a real look. Four starts is not a real look.

 

 

On a team that has been all but mathematically eliminated since May 

[kab21]

 

I didn't have any issues with the Twins' handling of Berrios until they demoted him. I understood why they didn't call him up last season, though I can see both sides of the argument. I understood why they wanted to give the other guys a shot to open the season and give Berrios more time in Rochester.

 

But once he was up, he deserved a real look. Four starts is not a real look.

There is usually more to it than that. For example they might have seen him pressing because things didn't get better for 5 starts in the minors. He had some combination of BB problems, K problems or H/ER problems in 4 of the 5 starts.

 

I think they saw something they didn't like in how he was pitching and got him out of there before things became worse. 

[Brock Beauchamp]

Okay, so Duffey is going to be replaced by Berrios in five days, right?

 

RIGHT?!?!?!?!

[FormerMinnasotan]

Well in Duffey's last 3 starts his ERA is 10.15...just as bad as Berrios' 10.20 ERA in 4 starts. Honestly regarding Duffey, I think he has been found out and really is not that good, yet the Twins hinge their hopes that Duffey will be a big part of the rotation in the future. Then again...Berrios had a sub-par day yesterday...he had that one inning he's not allowed to have and was part of the reason Rochester lost yesterday. I mean if Berrios can't pitch a perfect game in AAA ball what's the use in calling him up now? (I was being a bit sarcastic about Berrios, just saying)

[tobi0040]

Well in Duffey's last 3 starts his ERA is 10.15...just as bad as Berrios' 10.20 ERA in 4 starts. Honestly regarding Duffey, I think he has been found out and really is not that good, yet the Twins hinge their hopes that Duffey will be a big part of the rotation in the future. Then again...Berrios had a sub-par day yesterday...he had that one inning he's not allowed to have and was part of the reason Rochester lost yesterday. I mean if Berrios can't pitch a perfect game in AAA ball what's the use in calling him up now? (I was being a bit sarcastic about Berrios, just saying)

And he only has 11 k's in those four starts (2 k's in his last 3). Versus Berrios who had 20 k's in 15 IP.

 

I think you are exactly right, we are finding out that he isn't that good. It shouldn't be a huge shock to anyone. He was never rated high and had a good 10 game stretch. It is very unusual in the majors for a starter with two pitches to have that level of success. Even more unusual to see that level of success with a curve tht is thrown 40% of the time.

 

I sort of comes back to development. We sent him down in ST to work on a third pitch. The guy is 25. And we just now seem to realize that Buxton can't bunt? These are guys that have been in our system for 3-4 years.

[FormerMinnasotan]

And he only has 11 k's in those four starts (2 k's in his last 3). Versus Berrios who had 20 k's in 15 IP.

 

I think you are exactly right, we are finding out that he isn't that good. It shouldn't be a huge shock to anyone. He was never rated high and had a good 10 game stretch. It is very unusual in the majors for a starter with two pitches to have that level of success. Even more unusual to see that level of success with a curve tht is thrown 40% of the time.

 

I sort of comes back to development. We sent him down in ST to work on a third pitch. The guy is 25. And we just now seem to realize that Buxton can't bunt? These are guys that have been in our system for 3-4 years.

When Duffey's MLB comparison was a poor man's Scott Baker the Twins should have known Duffey wouldn't amount to much. Baker was at best a low end #2, but mostly a #3 starter, mediocre at best. A poor man's Scott Baker would equal out to a #4 or 5 starter, something the Twins don't need with the likes of Stewart, Gonsalves, Romero, and Thorpe down the road in the minors. Most see Berrios as a strong #2 with low end ace possibilities.

[Brock Beauchamp]

 

And he only has 11 k's in those four starts (2 k's in his last 3). Versus Berrios who had 20 k's in 15 IP.

I think you are exactly right, we are finding out that he isn't that good. It shouldn't be a huge shock to anyone. He was never rated high and had a good 10 game stretch. It is very unusual in the majors for a starter with two pitches to have that level of success. Even more unusual to see that level of success with a curve tht is thrown 40% of the time.

I sort of comes back to development. We sent him down in ST to work on a third pitch. The guy is 25. And we just now seem to realize that Buxton can't bunt? These are guys that have been in our system for 3-4 years.

I continue to hope the Twins come to the enlightened idea that maybe, just maybe, it's a good idea to flip-flop the roles of Tyler Duffey and Trevor May.

[gocgo]

 

So your recent article titled "It's Time!" was actually written in the future?

Seriously, Nolasco and Milone (and probably Santana) are probably better candidates for August trade waivers than the upcoming deadline. Should the Twins just push Berrios back to September 1st too?

Nah...by then he'll have hit his inning limit and we should shut him down for the year!

[jimmer]

 

When Duffey's MLB comparison was a poor man's Scott Baker the Twins should have known Duffey wouldn't amount to much. Baker was at best a low end #2, but mostly a #3 starter, mediocre at best.

 

'Baker was at best a low end #2, but mostly a #3 starter, mediocre at best. '

 

I think a lot of people fail to realize what  #2 and #3 starting pitchers are in baseball.  They are valuable.  They are good pitchers, not mediocre.  They aren't #5 pitchers, or on the edge of being long guys in the bullpen, but solidly set in a MLB rotation. If we had a staff of healthy Scott Bakers, we'd have a fighting chance for the playoffs (same as we would if we have 5 Ervin Santanas).  I'm not sure how/when Duffy first got compared to Baker. but they should never have been compared to each other.  If Duffy can come close to being a Scott Baker, that'd be awesome simply because he's nowhere near Baker.