Kinley's Magical Horseshoe Remains Intact

[ThejacKmp]

 

The Twins used Rogers in both games in Puerto Rico, and then he helped lose 2 games in Tampa this weekend. You don't think maybe that usage is related to carrying Kinley who has no practical usage on this staff?

Taylor Rogers pitched four times in six days, only once back-to-back. Before that he hadn't pitched since April 9th. Two of those four outings were less than 12 pitches. One was one batter. I think saying that Taylor Rogers was overworked would be a pretty big stretch. Set-up men work that load regularly. 

 

Also, not sure how Kinley changes that. The Twins snowed-out weekend means that all of these guys had a long break. No idea how having Duffey up instead of Kinley changes Rogers pitching. The Twins don't trust Duffey in close games. The way I know that is they sent him to AAA and called up several other relievers before him.

 

Pretty tenuous argument. 

[Otto von Ballpark]

I'd feel more concerned about Kinley for Curtiss (who I get very excited about) if the Twins hadn't also been carrying the Moya/Buesnitz/Duffey revolving door already. If Duffey sticks and is good, then I think Curtiss for Kinley begins to make some sense.

Keep in mind, we weren't using Moya either. So we weren't really executing this strategy very well.

[ThejacKmp]

 

Keep in mind, we weren't using Moya either. So we weren't really executing this strategy very well.

 

Yeah, I think that would be a big part of my "we overreact to Kinley" thoughts. We should be more upset about not using Moya's spot since we could easily move guys up and down for that role.

[wsnydes]

 

I'm sure some will be shocked I'm saying this... Make Hughes the mop up guy (replaces Kinley) and call up a SP instead. That's a real upgrade.

To me, if they're going to keep Hughes around anyway, this is what makes the most sense.  he's competent enough to burn multiple innings.  Much more of a bullpen saver than Kinley, in my view.

[Otto von Ballpark]

Taylor Rogers pitched four times in six days, only once back-to-back. Before that he hadn't pitched since April 9th. Two of those four outings were less than 12 pitches. One was one batter. I think saying that Taylor Rogers was overworked would be a pretty big stretch. Set-up men work that load regularly.

 

Also, not sure how Kinley changes that. The Twins snowed-out weekend means that all of these guys had a long break. No idea how having Duffey up instead of Kinley changes Rogers pitching. The Twins don't trust Duffey in close games. The way I know that is they sent him to AAA and called up several other relievers before him.

 

Pretty tenuous argument.

It was just an example. Rogers pitched both games in PR, and we immediately went back to him our first game back. Pressly pitched 2 innings in that 16 inning game, and we turned to him in the very next game and he had his worst game of the season (2 inherited runners scored). Also our first game back, we had to turn to a struggling Duke in a tie game in the 10th to give up a double to a RHB. Gee, maybe having TWO pitchers on the roster who were off-limits even in a 16 inning game was having some indirect effect on usage and effectiveness of the rest of the staff? I mean, I can't prove a hypothetical, but this doesn't seem like a stretch by modern MLB standards.

 

Look at last year -- for awhile, we had Breslow in this role (mop up short reliever, last pitcher on the staff) and it DID hurt us and he was eventually replaced. This year, we doubled down with 2 short relief mop up guys, maybe even less trusted than Breslow, not a stretch to say it has had an impact or will in the forseeable future.

 

If you are looking for criminal conviction-level proof that Kinley has contributed to Twins losses (beyond the ones he has pitched in), that is an impossible demand. On the flip side, I won't say it is 100% incontrovertible that he has either, but given that he is clearly not helping in any way, shape, or form, it's not that much of a stretch to suggest he could be hurting us. If not already, then he will at some point, and I'd rather avoid that if possible.

[Otto von Ballpark]

Does anyone here actually like what they have seen in Kinley so far? Honest question, I am no scout.

[ThejacKmp]

 

It was just an example. Rogers pitched both games in PR, and we immediately went back to him our first game back. Pressly pitched 2 innings in that 16 inning game, and we turned to him in the very next game and he had his worst game of the season (2 inherited runners scored). Also our first game back, we had to turn to a struggling Duke in a tie game in the 10th to give up a double to a RHB. Gee, maybe having TWO pitchers on the roster who were off-limits even in a 16 inning game was having some indirect effect on usage and effectiveness of the rest of the staff? I mean, I can't prove a hypothetical, but this doesn't seem like a stretch by modern MLB standards.

Look at last year -- for awhile, we had Breslow in this role (mop up short reliever, last pitcher on the staff) and it DID hurt us and he was eventually replaced. This year, we doubled down with 2 short relief mop up guys, maybe even less trusted than Breslow, not a stretch to say it has had an impact or will in the forseeable future.

 

Maybe this is memory bias but I don't remember past Twins teams being different. Teams don't pitch guys three games in a row and usually not four out of five but not strange to depend on your better relievers in set roles. Like when Rogers came in I didn't think "Oh man, him again?" It seemed like a natural spot for him with all the rest he's been getting.

 

I don't buy the overall overtaxing issues either. The Twins are carrying an absurd number of pitchers and with all the days off, no one has been overtaxed. That might be an issue going forward and may be an excellent reason to bring up a Duffey who seems more likely (based on past performance) to be a guy you can trust in the 5th or 6th or 10th. But as is, the Twins bullpen has been ineffective, not overtaxed. On paper, it's a deep pen that has 5-6 guys you should be able to trust.

 

Bigger issue to me is Moya. He's on the team but wasn't even used as a LOOGY, which seems a natural role especially with that funky delivery. He was on the squad for far too long - should've kept a Vargas-type over him and had some position-player flexibility.

[USAFChief]

 

Yeah, I think that would be a big part of my "we overreact to Kinley" thoughts. We should be more upset about not using Moya's spot since we could easily move guys up and down for that role.

I think a useless roster spot is upsetting no matter if it's Kinley or Moya. And I'd argue Kinley is (was) way more useless than Moya. Moya would be used in a spot that mattered before Kinley.

[ThejacKmp]

 

I think a useless roster spot is upsetting no matter if it's Kinley or Moya. And I'd argue Kinley is (was) way more useless than Moya. Moya would be used in a spot that mattered before Kinley.

 

But Moya can be moved down without losing anything. Kinley can't. You can argue that losing Kinley doesn't mean much but it is a loss. If you were going to fix one, you'd work on Moya's spot first cuz you lose nothing.

[wsnydes]

 

But Moya can be moved down without losing anything. Kinley can't. You can argue that losing Kinley doesn't mean much but it is a loss. If you were going to fix one, you'd work on Moya's spot first cuz you lose nothing.

But that's the point.  Kinley is locked in.  He's not going anywhere and he isn't used.  Moya's spot can be used to cycle through multiple relievers from the minors regardless of whether you use Moya or not.  That spot, even when Moya holds it, has value for that reason alone.  You can't do that with Kinley's spot.  You get Kinley...that's the only option.  If you aren't going to use Kinley, they may as well not even have that spot.

[KirbyDome89]

 

The Rule V has worked out for the Twins overall. If they take a terrible Rule V guy for ten years it still has been better.

 

Agree with you on Kinley's age being an issue. I wouldn't have taken him, would've protected Burdi (and sadly, likely would've let Chargois go).

 

My overall point is that Kinley hasn't been the reason the Twins are where they are. His role (mop-up guy) is pretty meaningless for overall record. I'm fine with dropping him but let's have an appropriate level of ire when examining the situation and let's not act like the Twins will be unable to compete if their mop-up guy sucks. 

You're right, Santana certainly makes the Twins a bigger "winner," than "loser," in the Rule V, but the point is that they can't really afford to be taking terrible guys via that draft every year. When MN grabbed Johan they had lost 90+ games the previous season and were set to repeat. That's a very different situation than fighting for a WC spot. 

 

No, Kinley absolutely isn't the only reason the bullpen has been bad, but I don't think most posters are insinuating that. I don't think it's particularly fair to say "He's only the mop up guy, his impact is minimal, so the bullpen issues don't really fall on him." He's in mop up duty because he can't be trusted to pitch at any other point in a game, and he's been fairly terrible even in those situations. The Twins are very obviously hiding him. He isn't costing games in the later, more meaningful innings, but that's because he isn't competent enough to be brought in for those innings. 

[USAFChief]

 

You're right, Santana certainly makes the Twins a bigger "winner," than "loser," in the Rule V, but the point is that they can't really afford to be taking terrible guys via that draft every year. When MN grabbed Johan they had lost 90+ games the previous season and were set to repeat. That's a very different situation than fighting for a WC spot. 

 

No, Kinley absolutely isn't the only reason the bullpen has been bad, but I don't think most posters are insinuating that. I don't think it's particularly fair to say "He's only the mop up guy, his impact is minimal, so the bullpen issues don't really fall on him." He's in mop up duty because he can't be trusted to pitch at any other point in a game, and he's been fairly terrible even in those situations. The Twins are very obviously hiding him. He isn't costing games in the later, more meaningful innings, but that's because he isn't competent enough to be brought in for those innings. 

The fact he IS "the mop up guy" is all the proof you need that he's using up a valuable roster spot. No bullpen "needs" a mop up guy. Anyone can pitch mop up, including your best reliever. It doesn't matter who pitches mop up. Ryan LaMarre can pitch mop up, and already has.

 

If that's all someone is used for, he's costing them, by being unavailable for the 90% plus innings that aren't mop up.

[mikelink45]

The issue of Kinley should not be intertwined with this Yankee blow out.  It is the full body of work, his age, and the fact he has so far to go that makes him frustrating.  The FO does fall in love with the players it adds and seems to be ready to jettison players it has no emotional connection to.  

​The real question is - does Kinley have the potential to really help?  Is he better than what we have in the minors?  I do not think so and if that is the case, let him go and keep experimenting with players of potential and future promise. 

[Danchat]

My problem with Kinley is simple: he's a 27 year old pitcher who has yet to have a good season in AA who's taking up a roster spot. He doesn't look like a future MLB player. He's not the primary reason why the bullpen stinks and not responsible for losing any games, but there's no reason to keep him around the entire season. He'll be 28 next year and he'll still need to repeat AA. He might be 29 or 30 by the time he's "ready", already past his physical prime. He's a non-prospect at this point, so no reason to waste any more time or roster space on him.

[Gagne Fan]

Let’s try someone who has been successful in the highest level of the minor league who has not already failed in the Big Leagues

Recycling guys like Duffey, Busenitz + Moya is not the answer

[KirbyDome89]

 

I disagree, the discussion shouldn't be about each and every failing player, but about the entire failing bullpen. Keeping Kinley wasn't a popular decision, so this all sounds a lot like "See I told you so". 

 

Thus far the front office appears to have been wrong about keeping the Rule V guy, they appear to have been wrong about the league not catching up to the junkballers Rogers, Duffey and Hildenberger, they appear to have been wrong about the development of the higher velocity young guys and they appear to have been wrong about the quantity over quality free agent approach.

 

The Kinley part of the equation is the low hanging fruit which everyone gets to say "Ah ha, I was right all along!", likely because no one previously raised much concern about the other aspects of the system failure.

You're right, it isn't just Kinley struggling, but he's very clearly the easiest fix, and I would argue he's very clearly the most overmatched. He had no business being a major league roster to start the year, and the need for performing arms in the bullpen has only magnified that. 

 

Kinley certainly is the lowest hanging fruit, and I do think it's a bit of "told you so," but I also think it's deserved. This was the most predictable outcome, and even the staunchest FO supporters were questioning the decision at the time it was made. IMO this is as much about the poor performance of Kinley as it is about the stubbornness of the FO hurting the team. 

 

I was a "hater," this offseason for expressing disappointment with the quantity vs quality approach but that isn't as clear cut as the Kinley situation. Comparing the two is apples and oranges. 

[Otto von Ballpark]

Another factor to consider is team morale. The players know when a guy is only there because of Rule 5. They can also see when a guy is just tossing batting practice on the mound. Note that Moya did it Saturday and got sent out immediately, Busenitz did it last night and got sent out immediately, but Kinley did it both games, arguably worse, and is still around? Had to be relieved mid-inning by LaMarre? I know, we tell guys "worry about yourself" and publicly they usually say that too, but they don't have their heads in the sand.

 

Not saying this alone has to dictate moves -- heck, we saw at the trade deadline last year it may not matter -- but it's not necessarily something you want to push a lot. Maybe they figured it was worth it for the prospects received at the deadline -- but is it worth it now for Kinley? Consider it another potential cost.

[Riverbrian]

Are you a contender? If you are a contender... you don't waste a roster spot on a rule 5 guy unless you know he can keep up with the rest...  It's pretty simple.

 

If you are not a contender... grab 7 rule 5 guys... it doesn't matter. 

 

If you trade for Odorizzi, Sign Lance Lynn, Fernando Rodney, Addison Reed, Logan Morrison and significantly increase payroll that suggests that you fancy yourself a contender. If you spend that money and make those moves... it makes no sense to marginalize your gains with intentional losses. 

 

If you are a contender... each roster spot on the 25 man roster is gold because there hasn't been a single time in history that any club hasn't needed contributions from more than 25 guys to win. 

 

Right now... the front office has to ask themselves one question. Is Kinley a tweak away? If he is... make the tweak now.

 

If he will have to be hidden for a couple of months... cut him. You need people who perform if you are a contender. 

 

Before the season began... the front office needed to ask themselves one question... Are you a contender? Or are you not a contender? I say we are... Kinley on the roster... seems to suggest that we are not. 

 

 

[twins_89]

The Twins looking to make the playoffs and keeping Kinley on the roster don't seem like moves with the same goal. Kinley remaining on the roster is a mystery to me since a single extra win could be important at the end of the year. I'd much rather see the Twins utilize the last roster spot on someone who might actually contribute. The Angels, who we are directly competing with for a wild card spot, have already waived Luke Bard who was a more useful player than Kinley.

[yarnivek1972]

I think saying Kinley only being the mop up man means it doesn’t matter is a statement that fails to see the big picture. If someone else were in the mop up role (right now most likely Hildenberger), it would ripple through the entire pen and likely put everyone into better roles. Rogers and Duke, for example, are both being used in situations where they have to get RHB out and neither has the ability to do so. They are being used against them because they lack enough solid arms to use in higher leverage spots. Not HIGHEST leverage, just higher. Quite frankly, a team should always be looking to replace it’s worst reliever. There is no doubt that is Kinley. There is also zero doubt that the Twins have several better pitchers. Kinley hasn’t had success above A ball. The Twins have probably 20 guys that have besides those on the MLB roster. The basic job of the general manager is to put the best 25 players he can on the field. If he isn’t doing that, he is setting his team up to fail.

[jud6312]

 

Does anyone here actually like what they have seen in Kinley so far? Honest question, I am no scout.

I liked watching him leave the mound after being pulled from that embarrassment last night. That count?

[jud6312]

Just with a quick glance at the Rochester roster, you've got Jake Reed, Nick Anderson, John Curtiss, Matt Magill, D.J. Baxendale, and Mason Melotakis that would likely be no worse, if not a huge upgrade, over Kinley.

 

And that's if you don't want to move any of the starters to the pen.

 

 

[ThejacKmp]

 

You're right, Santana certainly makes the Twins a bigger "winner," than "loser," in the Rule V, but the point is that they can't really afford to be taking terrible guys via that draft every year. When MN grabbed Johan they had lost 90+ games the previous season and were set to repeat. That's a very different situation than fighting for a WC spot. 

 

No, Kinley absolutely isn't the only reason the bullpen has been bad, but I don't think most posters are insinuating that. I don't think it's particularly fair to say "He's only the mop up guy, his impact is minimal, so the bullpen issues don't really fall on him." He's in mop up duty because he can't be trusted to pitch at any other point in a game, and he's been fairly terrible even in those situations. The Twins are very obviously hiding him. He isn't costing games in the later, more meaningful innings, but that's because he isn't competent enough to be brought in for those innings. 

 

Okay, my question is this:

 

Are people saying that (1) The Twins are too competitive to have a Rule V guy on the roster or (2) that this Rule V guy is not worth it?

 

Because I can very much get behind #2. If he was 24 and had the makings of 3-4 pitches to become a starter, I'd get it. But he's 27 with limited upside.

 

But #1 I have a hard time with because of everything you said above. He's the last man in a large pen and the situations he's terrible in have little to no effect on the bottom line for this year's team.

 

Thoughts?

[ThejacKmp]

 

But that's the point.  Kinley is locked in.  He's not going anywhere and he isn't used.  Moya's spot can be used to cycle through multiple relievers from the minors regardless of whether you use Moya or not.  That spot, even when Moya holds it, has value for that reason alone.  You can't do that with Kinley's spot.  You get Kinley...that's the only option.  If you aren't going to use Kinley, they may as well not even have that spot.

 

I guess I'd say that until I see the Twins optioning useful relievers down to AAA (and Duffey bombed last night so not off to a good start) because they have to keep Kinley, I don't really see how this is super relevant. Kinley's lack of options only becomes an issue when the next-to-last spot in the pen is competent.

[ThejacKmp]

 

Just with a quick glance at the Rochester roster, you've got Jake Reed, Nick Anderson, John Curtiss, Matt Magill, D.J. Baxendale, and Mason Melotakis that would likely be no worse, if not a huge upgrade, over Kinley.

 

And that's if you don't want to move any of the starters to the pen.

 

Totally cool with trying some of them. But let's fill that Moya/Buesnitz/Duffey spot with someone competent before we get rid of Kinley. Unless two of those guys demand a call-up.

 

Big elephant in the room is what to do if starters are all healthy when Santana comes back. Hughes seems pen bound and then you lose that spot you can move guys up and down with. At that point, Kinley seems not long for this team.

[ThejacKmp]

 

Does anyone here actually like what they have seen in Kinley so far? Honest question, I am no scout.

 

Yeah I never know the answer to this. I'm not a scout and I don't know many on Twins Daily that are scouty enough to tell. I assume the Twins see something in him and I trust their talent evaluation skills. For me, the big question with him is upside and age. He's just too old to take the Pressey two-year-development-plan. If he were 24, I'd be more inclined. If he had four pitches, I'd be more inclined. 

[Riverbrian]

 

 

 

But #1 I have a hard time with because of everything you said above. He's the last man in a large pen and the situations he's terrible in have little to no effect on the bottom line for this year's team.

 

Thoughts?

 

I see your point however... 

 

The large pen needs to be larger than it has to be because you are wasting a 25 man spot on a pitcher that will only be used when he has little to no effect.  

 

Having a larger pen means a shorter bench and a shorter bench means you have less pinch hit options for LaMarre so you have to burn both Mauer and Grossman pinch hitting for LaMarre. Having a larger pen means that Molly can't pinch hit for Adrianaza when Sano is the DH. 

 

That's just what I thought of this morning and I don't have the immediate time to put a full brain on it. Give me some time and I can come up with a more comprehensive list of reasonable roster (seasonal and game) situations where burning a 25 roster spot will compromise your favorite baseball team.  

 

Why would a contending team want to carry a player with little to no effect on the bottom line? 

[wsnydes]

 

I guess I'd say that until I see the Twins optioning useful relievers down to AAA (and Duffey bombed last night so not off to a good start) because they have to keep Kinley, I don't really see how this is super relevant. Kinley's lack of options only becomes an issue when the next-to-last spot in the pen is competent.

So they should only try to improve one roster spot at a time?  Why not bring up two or three guys to help out?  With as much as the pen is getting used lately, fresh arms are hard to come by.  That spot could also be filled with another bat off the bench, though that will have to come from AA or outside the organization I imagine.  Duffey alone, even if he does become effective, isn't going to fix the pen.

 

If you're trying to improve the bullpen, it'll take more than figuring out what to do with the 24th spot.  That locked in spot and having/not having the ability to make multiple changes at a time makes that point very relevant.  That's not even considering how it handcuffs the manager.  

 

They have younger guys in AAA that are pushing to be brought up.  I'd rather they take their lumps now than in July or August.  As I see it, Kinley is blocking their progression.  In my view, it's really not worth taking a flier and tying up a roster spot on a 27 year old that has a fairly unimpressive resume in the minors when there are younger, more accomplished relievers in the minors ready to come up and contribute.

[ashbury]

Okay, my question is this:

 

Are people saying that (1) The Twins are too competitive to have a Rule V guy on the roster or (2) that this Rule V guy is not worth it?

 

As a team that was competitive last year, their spot in the Rule 5 draft is too low to expect to find anyone really compelling. This draft is not what it was, back when Johan Santana was snatched, with different rules. And with the requirement to keep such a player on the 25-man all year, versus the flexibility to option a guy if they had kept one of the ones they exposed to draft/waivers, the upside has to be all the much higher. All in all, Rule 5 is for the bottom feeders, which is something I was hoping we no longer were. And this guy isn't proving to be the exception.

[ThejacKmp]

 

I see your point however... 

 

The large pen needs to be larger than it has to be because you are wasting a 25 man spot on a pitcher that will only be used when he has little to no effect.  

 

Having a larger pen means a shorter bench and a shorter bench means you have less pinch hit options for LaMarre so you have to burn both Mauer and Grossman pinch hitting for LaMarre. Having a larger pen means that Molly can't pinch hit for Adrianaza when Sano is the DH. 

 

That's just what I thought of this morning and I don't have the immediate time to put a full brain on it. Give me some time and I can come up with a more comprehensive list of reasonable roster (seasonal and game) situations where burning a 25 roster spot will compromise your favorite baseball team.  

 

Why would a contending team want to carry a player with little to no effect on the bottom line? 

 

I think the position player is one of the more reasonable alternatives. Hard to believe that yet another pitcher changes things too much.

 

That said, I doubt the Twins would carry another position player even without Kinley. None of the discussion is "Bring up Vargas", it's "What reliever would be better?"

 

As for why a continuing team would want to carry that player, it would be with the long-term view in line. If you believe you have a guy who can be a contributor down the line, that may be more useful than carrying a random reliever who seems unlikely to develop into anything more.