Pitchers we didn't get - updated

[jokin]

I'm not sure what "#8" means since you supplied no statistic to go with it. I'll toss a few out there though. Among starting pitchers:

 

2012

WAR - 22nd

ERA - 50th

xFIP - 22nd

 

2011

WAR - 27th

ERA - 47th

xFIP - 13th

 

2010

WAR - 19th

ERA - 34th

xFIP - 54th

 

The only number approaching "elite" status there is his xFIP in 2011. Now combined with his IP and he is a good starter. Still not elite though.

 

It's all in here: Anibal Sanchez » Statistics » Pitching | FanGraphs Baseball

 

here: http://www.fangraphs.com/leaders.aspx?pos=all&stats=pit&lg=all&qual=y&type=8&season=2013&month=0&season1=2012&ind=0&team=0&rost=0&age=0&filter=&players=0

 

here: http://www.fangraphs.com/leaders.aspx?pos=all&stats=pit&lg=all&qual=y&type=8&season=2013&month=0&season1=2011&ind=0&team=0&rost=0&age=0&filter=&players=0

 

and here: http://www.fangraphs.com/leaders.aspx?pos=all&stats=pit&lg=all&qual=y&type=8&season=2013&month=0&season1=2010&ind=0&team=0&rost=0&age=0&filter=&players=0

 

 

 

I computed the WAR values for each set of years in comparison to every other SP and they all came up "8". Or this year #1. Or, "Elite".

[Oxtung]

It's all in here: Anibal Sanchez » Statistics » Pitching | FanGraphs Baseball

 

here: Major League Leaderboards » 2013 » Pitchers » Dashboard | FanGraphs Baseball

 

here: Major League Leaderboards » 2013 » Pitchers » Dashboard | FanGraphs Baseball

 

and here: Major League Leaderboards » 2013 » Pitchers » Dashboard | FanGraphs Baseball

 

 

 

I computed the WAR values for each set of years in comparison to every other SP and they all came up "8". Or this year #1. Or, "Elite".

 

Interesting...Here are some more stats then to just round out the analysis. Over the last three years combined he has been:

 

ERA-33rd

xFIP - 21st

IP - 30th

 

In my mind those WAR numbers don't match up with his overall production levels. I think he is a #2 starter. Not that there is anything wrong with that. I would still have like him!

[cmathewson]

He's not a great pitcher, I never said he was, but the Twins wanted an innings eater, and they wanted something strictly from the bargain basement.

 

Hold on to your hat when you read this:

 

Kevin Correia Total WAR since 2008: 3.3 Contract: $10M

 

John Lannan Total WAR since 2008: 4.5 Contract: $2.5M

 

Lannan hasn't had a negative WAR rating in any season during that time, Correia has had 2 years with negative WAR.

 

You don't pay for past performance, you pay for future performance. Lannan like Marcum had injury issues that scared the Twins off.

[cmathewson]

I don't quite understand how someone can argue that it would be a foolish investment to invest in high quality free agents now

 

There are two variables that affect the prudence of signing big free agents: Available money and available free agents. There is no good argument against the notion that the Twins should spend money now. The next three or four years is precisely the time you should sign free agents given the way the budget works out.

 

But can't you acknowledge that the last FA class, particularly for pitchers, was weak this past offseason, making investment less palatable? Just as you hope you will have a good draft class when you draft in the top 5, you hope that you have a good free agent class when you have the money to invest. It didn't line up like that this past offseason. So they traded down, in effect. Too bad they couldn't stash what they saved and apply it to next year's free agent class. Unlike the draft, there are no restrictions on when and how much you spend in free agency.

 

That's the part of this I don't understand. Yes, you run this team like a business. But it's not a public company. You are not obliged to return profits to your shareholders. You can choose to invest them in the business however you see fit. If you don't like the free agent class one year, save the money for the next free agent class. That's the rule that has the ring of cheapness.

[Guest USAFChief]

There are two variables that affect the prudence of signing big free agents: Available money and available free agents. There is no good argument against the notion that the Twins should spend money now. The next three or four years is precisely the time you should sign free agents given the way the budget works out.

 

But can't you acknowledge that the last FA class, particularly for pitchers, was weak this past offseason, making investment less palatable? Just as you hope you will have a good draft class when you draft in the top 5, you hope that you have a good free agent class when you have the money to invest. It didn't line up like that this past offseason. So they traded down, in effect. Too bad they couldn't stash what they saved and apply it to next year's free agent class. Unlike the draft, there are no restrictions on when and how much you spend in free agency.

 

That's the part of this I don't understand. Yes, you run this team like a business. But it's not a public company. You are not obliged to return profits to your shareholders. You can choose to invest them in the business however you see fit. If you don't like the free agent class one year, save the money for the next free agent class. That's the rule that has the ring of cheapness.

Good post.

 

I disagree to a certain extent about the quality of FAs available this past offseason, but that's just my opinion.

[TheLeviathan]

The next three or four years is precisely the time you should sign free agents given the way the budget works out.

 

But can't you acknowledge that the last FA class, particularly for pitchers, was weak this past offseason, making investment less palatable?.

 

Well said, we can (and should) all agree to the first but also can still disagree on who and how much. I too share your disdain for not squirreling away resources as well - I'd be all about keeping payroll low now if it meant 5 years of 200ish budgets, but that's just not reality.

 

i worry too tht the continued miser-like approach is going to turn away fans and exacerbate the problem further. I know it enters my thinking about where and for how much I buy tickets.

[Mike Sixel]

It has turned this fan off of spending money, and I doubt I'm alone, as other friends have said the same thing. No idea how big that "movement" is though.

[ThePuck]

It has turned this fan off of spending money, and I doubt I'm alone, as other friends have said the same thing. No idea how big that "movement" is though.

 

What makes it even worse, is that we were told the new ballpark was needed to be financially competitive, so they got the new park....and now we're back in a familiar area, bottom 3rd in payroll after finishing last in the AL for wins two seasons in a row...so yeah...

 

On top of that Ryan saying he would do whatever it took to significantly improve the starting pitching for this year...and yeah...

[jokin]

Interesting...Here are some more stats then to just round out the analysis. Over the last three years combined he has been:

 

ERA-33rd

xFIP - 21st

IP - 30th

 

In my mind those WAR numbers don't match up with his overall production levels. I think he is a #2 starter. Not that there is anything wrong with that. I would still have like him!

 

I agree with what your numbers say. I became curious enough during this debate to dig a little and find out exactly where Sanchez stood relative to his peers and I was genuinely surprised as I looked up SP WAR values for that very reason. Everyone agrees that WAR has its flaws, but I think it was designed to be a quantitative analysis of someone's "overall production numbers."

[jokin]

You don't pay for past performance, you pay for future performance. Lannan like Marcum had injury issues that scared the Twins off.

 

Unlike the other sore-armed pitchers they signed? In Pelfrey's case, for more money, with far more serious "injury issues." And it's easy to ask, "what future performance?" are you referring to, in both his case and Worley (also coming off of surgery).

 

Could you please provide evidence about Lannan's alleged 2012 injury issues? I can't find any injuries to Lannan with the Nationals since early in 2010 with a sore flexor tendon, from which he still had 26 ML starts and 7 rehab starts that year. The guy has had more than 30 starts/year every year since '08. He was controversially demoted last year by the Nats after Spring Training, I can find nothing public about any injury-related issues on him in 2012. Lannan's arm was certainly fine to start the season through his first 2 games. He suffered a knee injury that put him on the DL during his 3rd start.

[The Wise One]

Unlike the other sore-armed pitchers they signed? In Pelfrey's case, for more money, with far more serious "injury issues." And it's easy to ask, "what future performance?" are you referring to, in both his case and Worley (also coming off of surgery).

 

Could you please provide evidence about Lannan's alleged 2012 injury issues? I can't find any injuries to Lannan with the Nationals since early in 2010 with a sore flexor tendon, from which he still had 26 ML starts and 7 rehab starts that year. The guy has had more than 30 starts/year every year since '08. He was controversially demoted last year by the Nats after Spring Training, I can find nothing public about any injury-related issues on him in 2012. Lannan's arm was certainly fine to start the season through his first 2 games. He suffered a knee injury that put him on the DL during his 3rd start.

 

Lannan had a 4.3 ERA and a 5.2 k/9 ratio in the minors last year. He did little in the minors to show it was a mistake to send him there.

[cmathewson]

Unlike the other sore-armed pitchers they signed? In Pelfrey's case, for more money, with far more serious "injury issues." And it's easy to ask, "what future performance?" are you referring to, in both his case and Worley (also coming off of surgery).

 

Could you please provide evidence about Lannan's alleged 2012 injury issues? I can't find any injuries to Lannan with the Nationals since early in 2010 with a sore flexor tendon, from which he still had 26 ML starts and 7 rehab starts that year. The guy has had more than 30 starts/year every year since '08. He was controversially demoted last year by the Nats after Spring Training, I can find nothing public about any injury-related issues on him in 2012. Lannan's arm was certainly fine to start the season through his first 2 games. He suffered a knee injury that put him on the DL during his 3rd start.

 

I'm just going on what Antony said in an interview, when describing the process they used to sift the FA class and sign the guys they did. The interview has been cited often here, so I'm sure you can look it up. I don't have any evidence that would differ from what you can find on the Internet.

[jokin]

I'm just going on what Antony said in an interview, when describing the process they used to sift the FA class and sign the guys they did. The interview has been cited often here, so I'm sure you can look it up. I don't have any evidence that would differ from what you can find on the Internet.

 

I'm from Northern Virginia and I haven't heard anything about injury concerns as the reason that the Nats let him go. So at least you admit there was nothing specific from the Twins about Lannan and injuries. Lannan isn't a great pitcher. What the Twins claimed they were looking for was guys that could perform much better than last year in eating innings and giving the team a pitcher that regularly can get through 7 innings. Lannan was the perfect inexpensive, uninjured option that they declined to consider.

[jokin]

Lannan had a 4.3 ERA and a 5.2 k/9 ratio in the minors last year. He did little in the minors to show it was a mistake to send him there.

 

The K/9 ratio is entirely irrelevant to this discussion. Lannan has never been a strikout pitcher, he's an innings eating, pitch-to-contact guy, something you and the Twins claim they love. The Nats declined to trade him last year, despite Lannan's request they do so; even though he had a great Spring Training, the Nats opted to demote him to AAA as a self-described, 'very expensive insurance policy'. Lannan understandably didn't take this well, what with his team finally becoming competitive and him being a cornerstone in the rotation as they evolved to finally reach this point. This pique was reflected in his AAA numbers. He can still pitch, he isn't a savior, he's a #5 guy that gives a manager an opportunity to give his bullpen regular rest....and he was a VERY CHEAP option, with better career numbers, than Correia.

[The Wise One]

The K/9 ratio is entirely irrelevant to this discussion. Lannan has never been a strikout pitcher, he's an innings eating, pitch-to-contact guy, something you and the Twins claim they love. The Nats declined to trade him last year, despite Lannan's request they do so; even though he had a great Spring Training, the Nats opted to demote him to AAA as a self-described, 'very expensive insurance policy'. Lannan understandably didn't take this well, what with his team finally becoming competitive and him being a cornerstone in the rotation as they evolved to finally reach this point. This pique was reflected in his AAA numbers. He can still pitch, he isn't a savior, he's a #5 guy that gives a manager an opportunity to give his bullpen regular rest....and he was a VERY CHEAP option, with better career numbers, than Correia.

Strawman argument on the K/(. Ok he pitched mediocre in the minors with a 4.3. Do you really want somebody who gets piqued and then performs poorly?

Can you show me the quote where I said that "I love pitch to contact" ? Making more claims to satisy what? Are you trying to set up a fight? Why not claim "This guy is a Twins FA apolgist"?

[drjim]

Well said, we can (and should) all agree to the first but also can still disagree on who and how much. I too share your disdain for not squirreling away resources as well - I'd be all about keeping payroll low now if it meant 5 years of 200ish budgets, but that's just not reality.

 

i worry too tht the continued miser-like approach is going to turn away fans and exacerbate the problem further. I know it enters my thinking about where and for how much I buy tickets.

 

One of the shames of the new collective bargaining agreement is that they can't use the extra cash they have for either overslot drafts or extra spending on the international front. That would make a (temporary - hopefully) decrease in payroll more palatable.

 

As I have said previously I don't have a problem with the payroll being at the level it currently is for the current season, but I do want to acknowledge that I understand the other point of view and do realize it has an impact on how many fans will view the team. There is truth that a business needs to spend and invest money to make money.

[TheLeviathan]

One of the shames of the new collective bargaining agreement is that they can't use the extra cash they have for either overslot drafts or extra spending on the international front. That would make a (temporary - hopefully) decrease in payroll more palatable.

 

As I have said previously I don't have a problem with the payroll being at the level it currently is for the current season, but I do want to acknowledge that I understand the other point of view and do realize it has an impact on how many fans will view the team. There is truth that a business needs to spend and invest money to make money.

 

That's good to hear jim. I like to think that if the new CB wasn't the way it was, we'd spend heavily overseas and in the draft....though I have my doubts about that too. I hope they are waiting for some future "right time to strike" - I just have so little reason to believe it's going to happen. It's pessimism I'm not proud of, but can't shake.

[jokin]

Strawman argument on the K/(. Ok he pitched mediocre in the minors with a 4.3. Do you really want somebody who gets piqued and then performs poorly?

Can you show me the quote where I said that "I love pitch to contact" ? Making more claims to satisy what? Are you trying to set up a fight? Why not claim "This guy is a Twins FA apolgist"?

 

No strawman anywhere in my point of view. Just stating the facts, easy to verify what I stated. And yes, I DO want a guy who gets piqued, but, can still show potential to pitch better than the current dreck on the Twins staff. Oh, and by the way, for less money. His case and cause was well-covered in the DC media.

 

There's no need on my part to "fight". It's just I feel an obligation to point out how frequently you are so factually wrong.

 

As far as Twins FA apologists go, the shoes fit, why not just comfortably wear them?

[gunnarthor]

On Lannan. I might be wrong on this but I don't know if the Twins really had a chance for him. We could have traded for him but he was due close to 5m this year which is why the Nats released him. So wouldn't he have been a waiver claim and NL teams would have had the first crack at him before any AL teams? I might be wrong but that's what I thought happened to him.

[drjim]

On Lannan. I might be wrong on this but I don't know if the Twins really had a chance for him. We could have traded for him but he was due close to 5m this year which is why the Nats released him. So wouldn't he have been a waiver claim and NL teams would have had the first crack at him before any AL teams? I might be wrong but that's what I thought happened to him.

 

He was non-tendered and became a free agent. Doesn't change the fact he was mediocre in AAA last year and has already been hurt this year. Just because the Twins signed two less than ideal options doesn't mean this guy was the answer.