Heyman: Twins asked about Santana

[jorgenswest]

http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/tool-basically-every-pitching-stat-correlation/

 

http://www.hardballtimes.com/standard-deviation-and-era-estimators/

[jimmer]

Projections and predictions aren't the same thing.  

 

One is based solely on what a team should do if everyone plays the way they should (basically measuring the true talent of a team). The other in made by people who know sequencing can't be taken into account along with understanding that it's ridiculous to assume every player will not only stay healthy, but will play to their exact abilities.

 

 

[Otto von Ballpark]

Though I wouldn't mind if they made a move now, I expect his value would be greater at next July's deadline. Erv has been remarkably consistent over the past decade, and I think the odds favor that will continue into 2017. Right now, everyone who thinks that they need another pitcher has an internal fallback option or two that they hope can step up. Come July and a few games back in the standings, some teams will know that those options aren't realistic. It's amazing what the other guys desperation can do to increase your properties value.

But Santana's value is affected by more than just Santana's performance. The primary factor will be other pitchers available, and evidence suggests that could hurt his value come July. Look at this past trade deadline -- a bunch of SP moved who were not really on the market in the offseason.

[mudcat14]

 

But Santana's value is affected by more than just Santana's performance. The primary factor will be other pitchers available, and evidence suggests that could hurt his value come July. Look at this past trade deadline -- a bunch of SP moved who were not really on the market in the offseason.

 

Good Point.

 

I'd really like to know what kind of offers they're getting right now.

[jorgenswest]

I trust that the offers are reflective of his value and that our new leadership can assess the best offer. I think they should take that best offer.

 

If the offer isn't that exciting, it simply would reflect the reality that Santana wasn't that valuable.

[diehardtwinsfan]

 

Agreed.  Here are his numbers in 2016:

 

Among starters with 130+ IP he is ranked:

fWAR t25-28th/106
ERA 28th

FIP 37th
WHIP 40th (BABIP .285)
SIERA 65th
K%-BB% 59th
K/9 72nd

 

So as far as WAR and ERA went, he was a top 30 pitcher, but his peripherals are forecasting a large regression coming, in addition to the other risk factors mentioned above.

 

To be clear, I'm not against trading him.  I'm just annoyed by people brushing him off like he's a mid-to-back of the rotation type guy. Santana has been a pretty good pitcher for years now.  You're right in that he's going to fall off at some point, and we'd be better to not have that contract when it happens.  That could happen next year, or three years from now... who knows.  But that said, I'd definitely move him if someone gave me a borderline top 100 prospect plus another one around top 150..

[Major League Ready]

 

To be clear, I'm not against trading him.  I'm just annoyed by people brushing him off like he's a mid-to-back of the rotation type guy. Santana has been a pretty good pitcher for years now.  You're right in that he's going to fall off at some point, and we'd be better to not have that contract when it happens.  That could happen next year, or three years from now... who knows.  But that said, I'd definitely move him if someone gave me a borderline top 100 prospect plus another one around top 150..

I hear ya .... You would think if ever there was an off-season where a SP like Santana would fetch a nice return, this would be the year. 

[The Wise One]

 

Multiple takes can usually be found after each season. Here are a few that show up early in a google search.

http://www.hardballtimes.com/evaluating-the-2014-projection-systems/

http://www.fangraphs.com/community/evaluating-2013-projections/

http://www.beyondtheboxscore.com/2016/1/21/10795210/marcel-pecota-steamer-zips-pitchers-projections-review

On SERA

http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/want-to-be-more-consistent-just-be-better/

The range mean error on ERA was like 1.  That is a wide gap for accuracy on ERA

[The Wise One]

 

You looked at a one year sample. I looked in the past at career averages and at multiple year samples (conveniently leaving out his worst season - 5 years ago). These are more reliable indicators than one season of one of the best ERA's of his entire career. That was the point of my response. But I am sure you could make all kinds of great decisions based on a one year sample size that looks like an outlier.

I have never ever compared Gonsalves and Mejia as prospects. I don't know where you think that I have. Every ranking has Gonsalves higher. I have given a range of prospects that I would consider acceptable in a Santana. You have clearly made it known that Mejia is not an acceptable return for Ervin but despite all of your nitpicking you still haven't answered my question. Is Gonsalves an acceptable return? If not Gonsalves what is an example of a prospect that would be acceptable? 

You said something about a Gonsalves Mejia type prospect

[kab21]

 

You said something about a Gonsalves Mejia type prospect

That isn't a comparison. It is naming two names that I would consider to be acceptable.

And you are still avoiding the question that I asked (of everyone) and nitpicking instead.

[ShouldaCouldaWoulda]

 

Are there any articles that focus on a single season of ERA as a reliable indicator for future performance? This nitpicking about projection systems is kind of silly when they have only been used for a ballpark indication of future performance. 

 

For Ervin his career ERA is 4.09 and 2014/2015 were almost exactly 4.00. Perhaps we could include 2013's 3.24 but then we should also include 2012's 5+ ERA. The point is that Ervin is very unlikely to have an ERA as low as he did last year. It doesn't matter what kind of analysis you do.

It isn't all the same. I look at all years for the most part, but look for recent career highs or lows, and then look to see if there was reasons for that....velocity, control improvements, ballpark, defense, new pitch, ditching a pitch, etc.

[kab21]

 

It isn't all the same. I look at all years for the most part, but look for recent career highs or lows, and then look to see if there was reasons for that....velocity, control improvements, ballpark, defense, new pitch, ditching a pitch, etc.

And I am guessing that you would project that Ervin would be a high 3's ERA as a best reasonable case. Of course, it is possible that he could repeat last season but that is something that he has done only in something like 3 seasons in his career.
 

My frustration is that the same people that have criticized the usage of projections turned around and made arguments based solely on how valuable he was last season.

[diehardtwinsfan]

 

And I am guessing that you would project that Ervin would be a high 3's ERA as a best reasonable case. Of course, it is possible that he could repeat last season but that is something that he has done only in something like 3 seasons in his career.
 

My frustration is that the same people that have criticized the usage of projections turned around and made arguments based solely on how valuable he was last season.

 

He's been pitching like this since 2010 averaging 30+ starts and a sub 4 ERA.  Since 2010, only last year he did not do this. 

 

My frustration with projections as they are cited as gospel truth and no seems to look at their accuracy, and even less can understand how confidence plays into them. Santana will eventually fall off a cliff. That's a fact. The question is when and who absorbs the risk.

[Doomtints]

Santana's worst year was 2012, which is the lone year that his fastball dipped below 92 MPH.  This is not unusual, most pitchers who can't hit 92 struggle. 

 

But it's not just velocity.  Heat maps for 2012 show he was throwing it right down broadway.  This also is not a recipe for success.

 

Since 2013, heat maps show he is throwing the ball down and away to right handed hitters with great success.  And he has been over 92 MPH every year as well.  Even if his velocity drops a bit, he may still show success with his down-and-away placement.

 

Look, every single year people have predicted that Santana's production was about to fall over a cliff.  It has yet to happen.  When looking at the pitchf/x data, there is no reason to believe he is living on borrowed time.  I honestly have no clue where the the doom & gloom around Santana comes from, but it has been a little annoying hearing it year after year. 

 

But even a broken clock is right once a day.  Maybe 2017 really will be the year that the majority of people are right and Santana stops being productive.  But this prediction certainly isn't based on any data.  He will, after all, be 34 year old.  However, last year he was much better in the 2nd half which suggests his arm isn't tiring out quite yet. 

[kab21]

 

He's been pitching like this since 2010 averaging 30+ starts and a sub 4 ERA.  Since 2010, only last year he did not do this. 

 

My frustration with projections as they are cited as gospel truth and no seems to look at their accuracy, and even less can understand how confidence plays into them. Santana will eventually fall off a cliff. That's a fact. The question is when and who absorbs the risk.

2010 - 3.99 ERA

2011 - 3.38 ERA

2012 - 5.16 ERA

2013 - 3.24 ERA

2014 - 3.95 ERA

2015 - 4.00 ERA

2016 - 3.38 ERA

 

Saying that he had a sub 4 ERA since 2010 is EXTREMELY generous. 3 times he had a 3.95-4.00 ERA and once he was WAY over 4.00 during the select timeframe that you chose.

 

Nobody is saying that he isn't a good pitcher nor is anyone giving him away for nothing.

 

People seem to have taken exception that I question whether or not he is a low 3's ERA pitcher and instead expect him to post a high 3's ERA.

I am much more interested in what type of prospect you would expect to get back in a trade rather than this nitpicking. I have stated that I like someone in the Gonsalves to Mejia range. Of course, that brought about more nitpicking since that was considered a comparison of the two. No, it includes both of them and Jay. If that range of prospect isn't acceptable then what is acceptable? A DeLeon or Alvarez level prospect? Again this isn't suggesting a trade for either but these (and the Twins prospects) are two that most fans are familiar with.

[The Wise One]

 

That isn't a comparison. It is naming two names that I would consider to be acceptable.

And you are still avoiding the question that I asked (of everyone) and nitpicking instead.

Not  nitpicking. If you think that Santana should be traded for a player with high rotation potential and a player with back of rotation/relief potential, I would say you are in the right area. You are saying one or the other.  A back of the rotation, relief prospect like Mejia only for Santana. Any system should have plenty of them, you do not need to trade a useful part for one. Santana is useful, Nunez was replaceable with Polanco.   Gonsalves was viewed as a fringy prospect last year at this time. Did he peak? IDK. Romero, Jay, Jorge, Stewart, Gonsalves, and to some extent Mejia, Duffrey, and Berrios are providing enough potential to sort through for the next 2 years.  If the brains in the outfit are the pitching wizards of spotting talent, get a 3 prospects that  have very high upside but are a ways away

[beckmt]

Gonsalves and Mejia are both #4 to #5 starting pitchers with a slight upside to a #3.  Why would I trade Santana for that?  Twins have multiple options like Gonsalves and Mejia for the lower end of the rotation.  If I went that route I would rather take 2 High A type lottery tickets.  I might lose, but also might come out ahead big time.  Remember Falvey has a reputation of finding gems at that level and I would trust that reputation for making that type of a deal work.  If it does not, you have not lost a piece of the next very good Twins team, so go for it.

[jimmer]

Something kind of funny.  

 

Since the beginning of 2010, only 49 starters have logged 1000 or more innings.  Ervin Santana and Hughes are two of them and they both have the same FIP (4.15) .  Only two of the remaining 47 pitcher have a worse FIP during that time and some of the pitchers aren't even in baseball anymore.

 

I really have no point, BTW, just interesting (and probably only to me) :-)

[kab21]

 

Not  nitpicking. If you think that Santana should be traded for a player with high rotation potential and a player with back of rotation/relief potential, I would say you are in the right area. You are saying one or the other.  A back of the rotation, relief prospect like Mejia only for Santana. Any system should have plenty of them, you do not need to trade a useful part for one. Santana is useful, Nunez was replaceable with Polanco.   Gonsalves was viewed as a fringy prospect last year at this time. Did he peak? IDK. Romero, Jay, Jorge, Stewart, Gonsalves, and to some extent Mejia, Duffrey, and Berrios are providing enough potential to sort through for the next 2 years.  If the brains in the outfit are the pitching wizards of spotting talent, get a 3 prospects that  have very high upside but are a ways away

Okay so you clearly don't like Mejia. At least you have said something solid rather than dancing around the question. If you hope to get 3 prospects for Santana then they are likely going to be ranked in the Twins 15-30+ range. It could happen but not as likely.

 

I also think you overestimate the potential starters that the Twins could have up in the next couple of years. More arms like Mejia and Gonsalves are needed imo.

 

I also think you either overestimate Santana's current ability or underrate Mejia's potential.

 

But thanks for actually saying something finally and showing a preference for 3 lottery tickets that won't rank in the top 100 and if you are getting 3 then at least 2 of them won't be top 200 prospects. I don't mind this approach but I wouldn't dismiss making a trade for a pitcher that could merely be good and up quickly. The Twins have a severe shortage of those.

[diehardtwinsfan]

 

2010 - 3.99 ERA

2011 - 3.38 ERA

2012 - 5.16 ERA

2013 - 3.24 ERA

2014 - 3.95 ERA

2015 - 4.00 ERA

2016 - 3.38 ERA

 

Saying that he had a sub 4 ERA since 2010 is EXTREMELY generous. 3 times he had a 3.95-4.00 ERA and once he was WAY over 4.00 during the select timeframe that you chose.

 

Nobody is saying that he isn't a good pitcher nor is anyone giving him away for nothing.

 

People seem to have taken exception that I question whether or not he is a low 3's ERA pitcher and instead expect him to post a high 3's ERA.

I am much more interested in what type of prospect you would expect to get back in a trade rather than this nitpicking. I have stated that I like someone in the Gonsalves to Mejia range. Of course, that brought about more nitpicking since that was considered a comparison of the two. No, it includes both of them and Jay. If that range of prospect isn't acceptable then what is acceptable? A DeLeon or Alvarez level prospect? Again this isn't suggesting a trade for either but these (and the Twins prospects) are two that most fans are familiar with.

 

I'm not sure how I missed 2012 (and I should have went back to 2010), so you're point is valid.  Now that said, I think the question is the type of pitcher that everyone seems to peg him for. He's a sub 4 ERA pitcher and has been doing that pretty consistently since 2010.  yeah, there were some high 3s in there, but that still equates to a better than average major league pitcher. Even last year, with an ERA of exactly 4 in a half season, you're looking a pitcher who is a bit better than the average major league starter.  That's not a back of the rotation type.  The major league (not AL) average ERA for starting pitchers in 2016 was in the low 4s.

 

Santana may not be a top 30 pitcher in 2017, I think we agree there, but I'm rather tiered of people tossing him aside as if he's a back of the rotation option. Just about (if not) every team in baseball likely had multiple spots in their rotation that Santana would have provided a significant upgrade, and that has generally been a true statement for Ervin since 2010. 

 

As to your other question, I do agree that the real question is what would you get back. I think it depends on what you value the return. A Gonsalves/Mejia type prospect both have the potential to be Ervin some day.  Of course that means you have to absorb the good and the bad of 2005-2009 Ervin before you see 2010 Ervin (and there was only one decent year there in 2008). That's a pretty risky proposition on its own, so I've got to think that this would only be the headlining piece... Now that said, if Dozier is dealt for a few pitchers, I'm not sure I'd want a pitcher. I might go after that 3B prospect that Jimmer wants or even better a C prospect given how few of them we have in the system. I really like Garver, but beyond him, there's very little upside at C in our entire system, especially in the high minors.

[jimmer]

Santana is a weak #2 type pitcher or a strong #3. He is a tweener.

[jorgenswest]

For his career, Santana has an ERA- of 99, FIP- of 102 and xFIP- of 100. He is a league average pitcher entering his ag 34 season. How likely is it that league average pitchers through age 33 continue to be league average from 34 to 36?

[nicksaviking]

 

For his career, Santana has an ERA- of 99, FIP- of 102 and xFIP- of 100. He is a league average pitcher entering his ag 34 season. How likely is it that league average pitchers through age 33 continue to be league average from 34 to 36?

 

To be fair to Santana, he's been a much better pitcher since 2010. His numbers prior to that year really weigh down what he's done since.

 

But I'm all for trading him, but that's only because I don't trust old pitchers.

[diehardtwinsfan]

 

For his career, Santana has an ERA- of 99, FIP- of 102 and xFIP- of 100. He is a league average pitcher entering his ag 34 season. How likely is it that league average pitchers through age 33 continue to be league average from 34 to 36?

His FIP may be league average. His results have consistently been better. 

 

Now that said, you're right that at some point he's going to fall off that cliff.  No one is debating that... Just stop slamming the poor guy.  He's a good pitcher

[diehardtwinsfan]

 

To be fair to Santana, he's been a much better pitcher since 2010. His numbers prior to that year really weigh down what he's done since.

 

But I'm all for trading him, but that's only because I don't trust old pitchers.

 

This is another really good point that often gets missed, and it bothers me about these discussions.  Just about every player has a period where they break into the league and struggle.  In Santana's case, that's 2005-2009 where he spent some time up and down in the majors with one good year in 2008 but mediocre to bad years other than that.  When we use an ML average, those numbers get averaged in when determining value, and that couldn't be further from the truth, which is that he's pitched in the 2/3 range for 6 of his last 7 seasons.

 

That also goes for any youngish pitcher, and we often lack the patience without our own young pitchers (Gibson is a great example here) knowing that there could be quite a bit of growth just yet. Santana shouldn't be valued on 2005-2009.  That was 7 seasons ago.  He'll eventually move back down to that type of performance as he ages, but his last few seasons are a far better predictor of his aging curve and value then his early years.

[jorgenswest]

 

To be fair to Santana, he's been a much better pitcher since 2010. His numbers prior to that year really weigh down what he's done since.

 

But I'm all for trading him, but that's only because I don't trust old pitchers.

For comparison purposes all pitchers would have the same early career challenge. You are correct that a better comparision would be going back 5 years and comparing similar pitchers at age 33. 

[kab21]

 

His FIP may be league average. His results have consistently been better. 

 

Now that said, you're right that at some point he's going to fall off that cliff.  No one is debating that... Just stop slamming the poor guy.  He's a good pitcher

Who slammed him?

I called him a mid rotation starter going forward and that we should expect him to post an ERA around 4 during the next two seasons. That is a good pitcher in my book.

 

If you want an example of a pitcher being slammed then check out the sentiment towards Hector Santiago. It seems like sub 4 ERA's have been considered some sort of benchmark for being a good pitcher in this thread and he had 4 straight seasons before 2016 with a sub 4.00 ERA. And we aren't talking about 3.95 or 3.99 sub 4.00 ERA seasons.

 

Just saying...

[Doomtints]

 

Something kind of funny.  

 

Since the beginning of 2010, only 49 starters have logged 1000 or more innings.  Ervin Santana and Hughes are two of them and they both have the same FIP (4.15) .  Only two of the remaining 47 pitcher have a worse FIP during that time and some of the pitchers aren't even in baseball anymore.

 

I really have no point, BTW, just interesting (and probably only to me) :-)

 

Hughes is done.  His fastball has sat at 90 for two years. 

[gunnarthor]

 

Hughes is done.  His fastball has sat at 90 for two years. 

No, the surgery will fix EVERYTHING ....  I'm sad

[diehardtwinsfan]

 

Who slammed him?

I called him a mid rotation starter going forward and that we should expect him to post an ERA around 4 during the next two seasons. That is a good pitcher in my book.

 

If you want an example of a pitcher being slammed then check out the sentiment towards Hector Santiago. It seems like sub 4 ERA's have been considered some sort of benchmark for being a good pitcher in this thread and he had 4 straight seasons before 2016 with a sub 4.00 ERA. And we aren't talking about 3.95 or 3.99 sub 4.00 ERA seasons.

 

Just saying...

Jorgen and I were talking about this privately and I should clarify this a bit... I wasn't necessarily responding to any one person (and that mistake is 100% on me). 

 

I'm responding to an idea that Santana is a 4/5 back end guy on a good team (which has been used to describe him on numerous occasions at TD, though not necessarily by you).  He was  a borderline top 30 pitcher this year. He's been in the top half of major league starters for 6 of his last 7 seasons.  He's a very good pitcher.

 

Will he be next year?  Who knows. I get a bit tired of tossing around the 1-5s without any context of what those mean (and yes, I know we  all disagree to an extent, but pegging an above average starter as a 4/5 seems a bit odd to say the least).  Just as pegging guys like Mejia and Gonsalves as 4/5 upside is also unfair. They could settle into that, but both have ceilings much higher than that at this stage of their careers.  Santiago, on the other hand, was not a good pitcher this year.  Yes, his results in previous years were better, but he's done so with horrible peripherals that scream Nick Blackburn more than Ervin Santana. 

 

I hope that clarifies things a bit.  I should not have accused anyone of slamming him.