Front Page: Should the Twins Be In on Cole Hamels?

[cardsfan]

He is no longer a $17M a year pitcher. He most likely ends up with a contender or closer to wherever is home for himself for like 2/25M.

[cardsfan]

That Phillies pitching staff suddenly fell apart after 2011. Thought it would be effective for a few more years.

 

1 year with Hamels.

[SomeGuy]

 

So, next year, when there are LESS good pitchers, sign more than this year to long term deals? That seems unlikely to me.

 

A team can't, imo, sign multiple good starting pitchers year after year. If they could, the Yankees and Dodgers and Astros would be doing it.

 

Odo is now under a 1 year deal. That's now one spot not locked up for 2021, most likely.

We don't need to sign multiple starters every year.  We just don't need to set our 2021-2023 rotations now.  My plan had one multi year signing this offseason and one next offseason. Actually pretty similar to the Astro's plan of getting one starter per season, Verlander in 17, Cole in 18, Grienke in 19. Or the Yankees getting Happ in 2018 and Paxton in 2019.  Can you find an example of a team acquiring 3-4 good starting pitchers on long term deals in one offseason?

 

We already got Odorizzi on a 1 year deal.  Look for us to add or acquire one multi year deal and another 1 year deal.

Edited November 18, 2019 by SomeGuy

[Mike Sixel]

 

We don't need to sign multiple starters every year.  We just don't need to set our 2021-2023 rotations now.  My plan had one multi year signing this offseason and one next offseason. Actually pretty similar to the Astro's plan of getting one starter per season, Verlander in 17, Cole in 18, Grienke in 19. Or the Yankees getting Happ in 2018 and Paxton in 2019.  Can you find an example of a team acquiring 3-4 good starting pitchers on long term deals in one offseason?

 

We already got Odorizzi on a 1 year deal.  Look for us to add or acquire one multi year deal and another 1 year deal.

 

The Astros and Yankees didn't start those years with only 1 veteran under contract.

 

No, I can't find such an example, that's my entire point. A team should never go into a year with 1 starting pitcher under control for more than 1 year, like this FO did last year. And, if they only sign 1 pitcher to a long term deal this year, they'll have, most likely, two openings again next year. It is not a path to sustainable winning. That's my point.

[nicksaviking]

 

The Astros and Yankees didn't start those years with only 1 veteran under contract.

 

No, I can't find such an example, that's my entire point. A team should never go into a year with 1 starting pitcher under control for more than 1 year, like this FO did last year. And, if they only sign 1 pitcher to a long term deal this year, they'll have, most likely, two openings again next year. It is not a path to sustainable winning. That's my point.

 

The team had and still has a bunch of pitchers under team control for more than 1 year. Most are still under team control for up to seven. Presumably they planned last year for some young guys to step up eventually. It can be debated whether or not that was a good plan, but aside from Berrios, Perez's 2020 option and the possibility of Gibson, Pineda and/or Odorizzi becoming worthy of a QO, it probably wasn't terribly out of line to think that one or two of Gonsalves, Thorpe, Romero, Graterol, Stewart, Smeltzer or Dobnak would have taken the steps needed to compete for a rotation spot in 2020.

 

I agree that most teams don't have three open rotation spots at the conclusion of a season, but most teams also don't have a rotation that is 4/5ths free agents. Most teams do expect to produce enough of their own starters so they don't have to blow their free agent budget on starters every year, which this team has had to do more often than not due to about two decades of poor pitching development, which finally appears to be on the upswing.

[Tomj14]

 

The team had and still has a bunch of pitchers under team control for more than 1 year. Most are still under team control for up to seven. Presumably they planned last year for some young guys to step up eventually. It can be debated whether or not that was a good plan, but aside from Berrios, Perez's 2020 option and the possibility of Gibson, Pineda and/or Odorizzi becoming worthy of a QO, it probably wasn't terribly out of line to think that one or two of Gonsalves, Thorpe, Romero, Graterol, Stewart, Smeltzer or Dobnak would have taken the steps needed to compete for a rotation spot in 2020.

Don't you think the plan is for Thorpe, Graterol, Smeltzer to compete for the 5th and Dobnak for the 4th. That still left leaves spot 1 or 2 open, with a shortage of capable starters filling in when injuries or what not happens.

[nicksaviking]

 

Don't you think the plan is for Thorpe, Graterol, Smeltzer to compete for the 5th and Dobnak for the 4th. That still left leaves spot 1 or 2 open, with a shortage of capable starters filling in when injuries or what not happens.

 

I hope not, Graterol is the only guy who makes me think good thoughts about the future. I want them to sign free agents this year as there is a hole in the rotation, but I guess to more concisely state my point, I don't think it was unreasonable for the front office to think one or two other rotation spots for 2020 would have been filled internally. Unfortunately most options disappointed last year.

 

Also, while I'll take Bumgarner or Wheeler, I'm not a big fan of the typical 2nd tier starting pitching free agents. The Santana/Nolasco/Hughes/Lynn type deals don't really seem to work out any better than the third or fourth tier free agent pitchers. There's rarely any real talent difference while there is minimal upside to these types of arms and the contract length more often than not has an inherent risk. I'd rather go year to year with the bounce back pitcher du jour. Or L' annee I guess, I'd hope he's good for more than one day.