Article: Twins Sign Closer Rodney To One-Year Deal

[Otto von Ballpark]

giving up Melotakis+Bard+Burdi for a combined nothing

Unless I missed something, Melotakis is still in the org, he is just off the 40-man roster.

[ashbury]

Unless I missed something, Melotakis is still in the org, he is just off the 40-man roster.

Randy Rosario and Nik Turley are the players lost via waivers after the World Series, AFAIK. A guy or two was simply cut from the 40-man, also - Mike Tonkin.

[SwainZag]

I like how it's structured

 

 

[Foghorn Leghorn]

Huge

[Nick Nelson]

 

Yup.Crushing it. NOT!

I absolutely hate this.

First, I have to watch Colon.

Now I have to watch Rodney.

Absolutely hate it.

And bye bye Burdi.

Damn.

 

First, you had to watch Colon deliver (probably) the final surge of effectiveness in a Hall of Fame career, adding watchability to a rotation that severely lacked it in the middle of the season. At literally zero cost.

 

Now you have to watch Rodney, who's been a successful closer for many contenders, including the D-backs last year, for whom he pitched quite well. On a small commitment that won't prevent them from doing anything else.

 

And bye bye Burdi, who you've never watched in a Twins uniform and wouldn't have this season. 

 

The horrors.

 

If you're going to continue making these smarmy "CRUSHING IT" remarks, and mocking my positive reviews of the front office, how about bringing some reasoned critique instead of just griping about your personal distaste for these players?

 

For me, I find it quite enjoyable when an aging star comes here and gives one more strong effort at the end of a long and storied career. We saw it with Thome. We saw it with Hunter. We saw it with Colon, somewhat. It adds an additional dimension of historical significance to the season. I hope Rodney puts an exclamation point on a very impressive career next season.

[ashbury]

If you're going to continue making these smarmy "CRUSHING IT" remarks

Moderator's note: Independent of any discussion with TD ownership, the moderators had been discussing the "crushing it" meme. It was fine to debate the term in the comments for the article that introduced it, indeed that is what occurred. However, throwing it around left and right, in thread after thread, starts to look more like trolling than good-natured banter. Regardless of the intentions behind it, I'd like to ask that posters refrain from this particular attempt at humor, going forward.

[Nick Nelson]

I don't know why anyone would take issue with Rodney being closer. They clearly signed him specifically for his experience in the role. It's where he is best suited, because his walks don't hurt as much when he always enters with a clean slate, and his strikeouts can help him get out of self-manufactured trouble. 

[Don Walcott]

I think we could have done better than Rodney. I've never thought he was that good, and I don't care that they managed to not spend very much money to get him. But I hope to be proven wrong. And I hope they sign one more good reliever.

[Mike Sixel]

 

I don't know why anyone would take issue with Rodney being closer. They clearly signed him specifically for his experience in the role. It's where he is best suited, because his walks don't hurt as much when he always enters with a clean slate, and his strikeouts can help him get out of self-manufactured trouble. 

 

Because he's not all that good, and they'll just have to fix the problem again next year.....

[drjim]

I think we could have done better than Rodney. I've never thought he was that good, and I don't care that they managed to not spend very much money to get him. But I hope to be proven wrong. And I hope they sign one more good reliever.

They definitely could have done better, but it is pretty hard to know who for sure would be better (outside of the top 2-3 who will get the really big contracts).

 

Rodney seems as good a bet to be good as any reliever who has signed so far.

[drjim]

Because he's not all that good, and they'll just have to fix the problem again next year.....

The problem is that based on recent data/experience, seems about equally likely they would have to fix it again next year even if they signed a guy for 2-3 years.

[beckmt]

Relievers tend to come and go.  I have seen it pointed out that when Rodney implodes it is for crooked numbers, so ERA tends to be high, but the results are not so bad.  

According to MLBtraderumors there is an option for 2019.  

Edited December 16, 2017 by beckmt

[D.C Twins]

The Twins strategy for relief pitchers has been reasonable. Every year there are relief pitchers that excel on bad teams. We can then trade for said relief pitchers that we KNOW are pitching well this year. Yes you can lose some prospects, but you have a much more reliable return on investment in the often volatile world of relief pitching.

[Mike Sixel]

The Twins strategy for relief pitchers has been reasonable. Every year there are relief pitchers that excel on bad teams. We can then trade for said relief pitchers that we KNOW are pitching well this year. Yes you can lose some prospects, but you have a much more reliable return on investment in the often volatile world of relief pitching.

You go thru more than half the year with bad relief pitchers then.

[D.C Twins]

 

You go thru more than half the year with bad relief pitchers then.

Certainly a risk.  I think our current group can hold the fort down until the cavalry is needed and will fall more in the 'average' than 'bad' category....but "thinking" is not "knowing", so feel free to bank this quote in the event of any future implosions

[Don Walcott]

Although there were some bright spots like Hildenberger, Rogers and Busenitz, I think we can count on this bullpen imploding if we don't make any more moves this off season. Kind of like Rodney, last year, we were lucky to have the bullpen implosions take place in big ways in relatively few games, rather than in smaller ways in more games. I don't know if Rodney was lucky in this same way or good. I hope I'm wrong, and he's good and the Twins bullpen also is good, and they don't lose us a lot of games. But I think that will happen if we don't sign at least one more proven reliever.

[h2oface]

 

Because he's not all that good, and they'll just have to fix the problem again next year.....

 

......or, after the first couple of months this year, perhaps........

[Kwak]

RPs will be promoted from the minors during next season. Maybe some of them will have enough success to stick through 2018 and also the future. If not, ... .

[USAFChief]

Although there were some bright spots like Hildenberger, Rogers and Busenitz, I think we can count on this bullpen imploding if we don't make any more moves this off season. Kind of like Rodney, last year, we were lucky to have the bullpen implosions take place in big ways in relatively few games, rather than in smaller ways in more games. I don't know if Rodney was lucky in this same way or good. I hope I'm wrong, and he's good and the Twins bullpen also is good, and they don't lose us a lot of games. But I think that will happen if we don't sign at least one more proven reliever.

Concur.

 

I’m not a big fan of Rodney, but starting the year with him at closer looks much better if they take a concrete step or two to solidify the rest of the pen.

 

I don’t even know if that’s possible anymore, but I’d sure hate to think they’re done.

[kab21]

People are free to complain about Rodney as an addition to the bullpen. He isn't great but he is a solid pitcher and the price paid reflects that. 

 

But the more important item missing from many posts is that the closer role is totally overrated. It doesn't matter if Rodney is the 7th inning guy or the closer, if he is good enough for one of those roles then he is good enough for a different one. See Kintzler and Belisle as last year's closers.

I also wouldn't have had any problems with Kintzler returning on his contract either. Rodney has some troubling numbers but so does Kintzler. So far his 5.5 K/9 has gotten him by (125 IP) but that is scary out of the bullpen. I can understand passing on him and picking someone with a longer track record on a shorter commitment. 

[Brock Beauchamp]

 

Because he's not all that good, and they'll just have to fix the problem again next year.....

Wait, so you want the Twins to sign a reliever to a multiple year contract? Why?

 

Relievers are terribly volatile. If you can get a guy for one year, you do that nearly 100% of the time unless he's Mariano Rivera in his prime.

 

I'm not thrilled with the Rodney signing but he's a decent reliever on a one year deal. Now go get another one of those, please.

[Brandon]

Im fine with Rodney signing. I still think this is Ryan 2.0 going after a low cost closer. Not a bad move. Not great either. Waiting to see what next move is. And i know im a little impatient. Im excited to see what we can be next season. I orefer a nice rotation addition. But it sounds like the Twins will resign Colon and Belisle and wait for the youth thus punting next season. But well see. Anxiously and nervously waiting.

Edited December 17, 2017 by Brandon

[kab21]

 

Im fine with Rodney signing. I still think this is Ryan 2.0 going after a low cost closer. Not a bad move. Not great either. Waiting to see what next move is. And i know im a little impatient. Im excited to see what we can be next season. I orefer a nice rotation addition. But it sounds like the Twins will resign Colon and Belisle and wait for the youth thus punting next season. But well see. Anxiously and nervously waiting.

I really don't understand these snide remarks about Ryan 2.0 because the FO (wisely) goes after a low cost closer instead of giving a 3+ year contract to 30 something yr old RP. There were things to criticize from the Ryan era but not spending big money isn't one of them.

And I still can't connect the dots with how this means that the Twins will be bringing in retreads for the rotation instead of adding a good pitcher. Nearly everyone understands that the FO is working with a limited budget (even if we want higher spending) and they can't spend big in multiple areas this offseason. Saving money on volatile RP so they can add a better starter is a wise move.

But it remains to be seen who that starter(s) will be. I will wait with my pitchforks until then and am fine (for now) with the various small moves that they have made. I just can't get bent out of shape for a small one year contract to an effective RP or Rule V losses/additions.

[h2oface]

When the game has changed so that the manager is pulling a starter after the 6th (or sooner depending upon when the all mighty 100th pitch happens), consistently..... a starter that now only starts once every five days (remember the 4 man rotation forever before it was replaced by 5), and a 6 man rotation is even, perhaps, to become a standard in the future..... the relief pitchers pitching in the most important innings of the game are important. Maybe to be the most important pitchers on the team. I don't agree that it is a good plan going forward to leave that to happenstance and hodgepodge year to year. Championships are being won by the bullpens. A FO that identifies, and locks up, a set of pitchers for the back end of games, will be a FO that wins a World Series.... or two.

[Brandon]

Im not criticizing Ryan 2.0. Im saying this is a Terry Ryan move. I dont see why he was fired to begin with. The moves made since he was let go are all types of moves he would make. Signing Rodney being one. The only criticism i had of Terry Ryan is he never made a move to put us over the top so to speak.

[kab21]

 

When the game has changed so that the manager is pulling a starter after the 6th (or sooner depending upon when the all mighty 100th pitch happens), consistently..... a starter that now only starts once every five days (remember the 4 man rotation forever before it was replaced by 5), and a 6 man rotation is even, perhaps, to become a standard in the future..... the relief pitchers pitching in the most important innings of the game are important. Maybe to be the most important pitchers on the team. I don't agree that it is a good plan going forward to leave that to happenstance and hodgepodge year to year. Championships are being won by the bullpens. A FO that identifies, and locks up, a set of pitchers for the back end of games, will be a FO that wins a World Series.... or two.

And your alternative is?

Spending big on 30+ yr old RP's?

Trading really good prospects to the Reds for Raisel Iglesias?

I think everyone would like to have an elite bullpen but buying it with prospects or money is not a good solution.

[jokin]

 

 Until then i am glad they are at east as good as Terry Ryan was at the Terry Ryan things.

 

Talk about damning with faint praise...

[jokin]

 

I really don't understand these snide remarks about Ryan 2.0 because the FO (wisely) goes after a low cost closer instead of giving a 3+ year contract to 30 something yr old RP.

 Nearly everyone understands that the FO is working with a limited budget (even if we want higher spending) and they can't spend big in multiple areas this offseason. Saving money on volatile RP so they can add a better starter is a wise move.

.

 

As we all know, and in this decade especially, the game is rapidly transitioning to focusing on multiple dominant bullpen arms as the best translation to successful W-L outcomes. And because the costs, and risks, of acquiring quality starting pitching is forever escalating to levels out of reach for all but the biggest market clubs, assembling a horde of live bullpen arms is by far the most cost-efficient means to stay competitive with the big budget behemoths.

 

Perhaps the Twins see Phil Hughes becoming a lower velocity version of the next Brandon Morrow- they both have a career K-BB% of ~ 13.5%. Levine just went public with a very positive outlook on Hughes for 2018. And Trevor May may be on a faster track back by throwing out of the pen? Francisco Liriano is out there, would he welcome an offer to return to the Twins with a chance to be the premiere RP?

 

Whatever the case, the staff needs ALOT more Ks to get to the next level. And the cheapest way to get more Ks in the short-term is more live bullpen arms. Hey, why not take some more chances on other washed-up starters like Morrow (signed minor-league deal prior to season). Getting two bargain-bin Pinedas  in FA0 and two live FA BP arms- and plus having possible help from the young arms as well as possibly getting a shot in the arm from Hughes and May, is probably a more realistic way to remain competitive than banking on or hoping that the Twins somehow win the Darvish Derby (6 X $27.5 M.... really?).

Edited December 17, 2017 by jokin

[drjim]

When the game has changed so that the manager is pulling a starter after the 6th (or sooner depending upon when the all mighty 100th pitch happens), consistently..... a starter that now only starts once every five days (remember the 4 man rotation forever before it was replaced by 5), and a 6 man rotation is even, perhaps, to become a standard in the future..... the relief pitchers pitching in the most important innings of the game are important. Maybe to be the most important pitchers on the team. I don't agree that it is a good plan going forward to leave that to happenstance and hodgepodge year to year. Championships are being won by the bullpens. A FO that identifies, and locks up, a set of pitchers for the back end of games, will be a FO that wins a World Series.... or two.

This hasn't actually been true for the past 2 champions, or most of the recent champions outside of KC in 2015.

 

An elite bullpen is nice, but not required, and throwing tons of resources at it, despite the poor return historically, is probably not a good strategy.

[kab21]

 

As we all know, and in this decade especially, the game is rapidly transitioning to focusing on multiple dominant bullpen arms as the best translation to successful W-L outcomes. And because the costs, and risks, of acquiring quality starting pitching is forever escalating to levels out of reach for all but the biggest market clubs, assembling a horde of live bullpen arms is by far the most cost-efficient means to stay competitive with the big budget behemoths.

 

Perhaps the Twins see Phil Hughes becoming a lower velocity version of the next Brandon Morrow- they both have a career K-BB% of ~ 13.5%. Levine just went public with a very positive outlook on Hughes for 2018. And Trevor May may be on a faster track back by throwing out of the pen? Francisco Liriano is out there, would he welcome an offer to return to the Twins with a chance to be the premiere RP?

 

Whatever the case, the staff needs ALOT more Ks to get to the next level. And the cheapest way to get more Ks in the short-term is more live bullpen arms. Hey, why not take some more chances on other washed-up starters like Morrow (signed minor-league deal prior to season). Getting two bargain-bin Pinedas  in FA0 and two live FA BP arms- and plus having possible help from the young arms as well as possibly getting a shot in the arm from Hughes and May, is probably a more realistic way to remain competitive than banking on or hoping that the Twins somehow win the Darvish Derby (6 X $27.5 M.... really?).

Step 1 is to assemble a competent bullpen that can get it done from the 7th (or the 6th) through the 9th.

It doesn't do the team any good to get one dominant RP if they lose the lead in the 7th inning and don't use him.

And do you have an analysis that even backs this up? There have certainly been great teams that had great bullpens but I haven't seen an analysis that said it was the best translation of W-L outcomes or the more realistic way to be competitive.