Oh, So NOW the Twins Want to Add to Their Bullpen

[Lou Hennessy]

It was a clear need in the off-season, yet the Twins’ front office decided to stick in-house with their relief corps. Predictably, they find themselves venturing to the trade market in an effort to patch up their weak spots. Where was this urgency over the winter?

Image courtesy of John Hefti-USA TODAY Sports

It’s refreshing to see the Twins try to make some improvements on the trade front as they head into the home stretch of a playoff push. However, it feels painfully predictable that they find themselves with such a need in the first place. 

Sure, there is sound logic in a team investing most of its resources into an everyday lineup and the starting rotation. Pound for pound, these areas will get more playing time than their teammates in the bullpen throughout the course of the season. But being short-handed in late-game situations has seemingly become a core tenet of this organization over the past few years, and it’s bitten them time and time again. And after throwing prospect capital to the Baltimore Orioles in last year’s trade for Jorge Lopez, it felt like maybe the Twins’ decision-makers had learned their lesson on that front. Yet here they are again, exploring their options for relief help after standing pat in the off-season. 

It’s not like improvements weren’t out there over the winter. Even if they wanted to avoid higher-priced veterans such as Edwin Diaz, Kenley Jansen, and Craig Kimbrel, there was a bounty of solid middle relievers that would have blended nicely with the current group. And, of course, that caliber of reliever is who they seem to be targeting as the clock ticks toward tomorrow’s deadline.

Guys like Adam Ottavino (3.35 ERA, 82% LOB%), Will Smith (2.84 ERA, 4.88 K/BB), and David Robertson (2.00 ERA, 28% strikeout rate) each signed relatively modest one-year deals, and each would now be back-end options for the Twins had they reeled them in before the season. 

Now, the Twins find themselves with rumored interest in trading for reinforcements such as Brooks Raley of the New York Mets and, to a lesser extent Josh Hader of the San Diego Padres. Make no mistake; those two would be great additions to the Twins’ bullpen picture. But they’ll cost the club a ton in prospect capital, especially Hader, one of the best relief weapons in the game. 

Instead of having to weigh the immense price tag that standout relievers tend to cost in late July, the Twins could be sitting comfortably right now had they made their additions over the winter. It’s reasonable to expect a few more wins at this point had they done that, and at a cheaper price than they’d have to pay for whoever they acquire between now and today’s 5 PM CDT deadline. 

The team’s insistence on molding their relief corps with as little financial investment as possible has gotten in the way of overall success once again. It’s not to say that the group they put together is some catastrophe. Instead, the group is mostly usable. But now the front office finds themselves predictably seeking improvements, and the only way to get a clear upgrade is to give up a package of prospects. 

Fans should be glad to see the club trying to make improvements now. But it could have been a lot easier had they made this call before the season. 

What do you think? Who do you want to see the Twins target between now and Tuesday’s 5 PM trade deadline? What would you be willing to give up to secure another high-end bullpen arm? Let us know your thoughts in the comment section below, and stay tuned to Twins Daily for all your Twins trade deadline rumors. 

View full article

[Linus]

Couldn’t agree more. It’s been the same for several years and yet the FO sticks to their “process” which doesn’t work. 

[chpettit19]

Bullpen arms are notoriously fickle things. I get the idea that the FO wants to let the season play out as they test out a few arms and see who's actually good that year, and fill in around that as the season moves on, but they do it to the extreme/poorly, in my opinion. 

They're way too slow to move on from vets that they expect to be good, but aren't performing, or who they think will magically jump another level to be a high leverage arm because their Stuff+ ratings say they will. They play the St Paul to Minneapolis option game way too frequently with young guys (while also sitting them in the pen for weeks without using them). They overemphasize years of control on the trade market leading them to give up "real" prospects for controllable assets, instead of the much easier Fulmer style trades that don't cost you anyone anywhere near the top of your system. 

I don't need them shelling out a huge contract to the Kimbrels of the world, but the Robertsons of the world should be their sweet spot. So I get the idea, and don't even disagree with not going bonkers investing in pen arms for high costs, but if it leads to a bunch of blown leads before the deadline every year, and you making what turns out to be a horrible trade for Lopez types, you need to change your strategy. Or at least get better at executing it. Their pen is almost always better in August and September under this regime, but they waste 4 months giving the Tyler Duffeys of the world every last chance while trying to get to those August and September pens. I know their whole thing is to not be hasty, but in-season adjustments need to happen before the trade deadline.

[Karbo]

Big mistake was the Gallo gamble. Could have added 2 good relievers on what they pay him. This FO has this fixation on guys that hit homeruns, instead of guys that can actually help a team win.

[USAFChief]

3 minutes ago, chpettit19 said:

Bullpen arms are notoriously fickle things. 

Every time I read this old saw I grind my teeth.

Good relievers are NOT fickle.

Just the opposite.

Placeholders are fickle.

And filling your pen and AAA team with placeholders is what leads to problems

 

[Heiny]

I realize that I am as guilty of this as the next guy, but I'm getting the feeling that the FO can't ever get anything right according to our loyal TD readership.  We are a very critical group and no matter what they do I think as a group we will be unhappy.  Just about the only thing we all seem to agree on, is that the Gallo signing was bad.  Some liked the Lopez/Arraez trade, some hated it.  Some thought the Jose Lopez trade was going to be a big help.  Some didn't.  Hind sight has shown that the Mahle/Paddack/Pagan trades didn't work out but you can't really argue that there was some potential value in those trades.  However it would be nice to see something end up as a "great trade" one of these times.  I still think that the best thing to do would be to make me the GM.  Can we all agree on that?

[mike8791]

Smack on, Lou!  This failure in the offseason is a firable offense.  They saw even after the Lopez acquisition last year that he was unreliable.  So going into the 2023 season they had one "closer-type" reliever in Duran - and he came with the risk of the dreaded sophomore slump.  Fortunately, he has been a lot more than a one year wonder, but without reinforcements, he has deteriorated recently.  To rely on Jax and Thielbar as late-inning relievers was a high risk move.  The 35 year old Thielbar was an excellent signing but it shouldn't be surprising at his age that he's succumbed to injuries, nor should it be a surprise that with his 40% Inheritred Runners Scored rate in 2022, Jax has proven to be shaky in late inning critical situations.  

The FO has been fortunate to see somewhat of a Pagan renaissance and Stewart emerging from the scrap heap, but to expect guys like Sands, Moran, Winder and Blaze to be positive reinforcements was just a pipe dream.  Granted, the big failure this year has been the offense but in the middle of a pennant race(and hopefully a playoff) it isn't too surprising that the starters have fallen off, thereby putting more pressure on the pen.  Short of adding a Hader, it seems more wishful thinking now to expect a meaningful addition to the relief staff before the trade deadline. If only they did more in FA!!  Shame on you, Falvine.  I hope Joe iswatching carefully.

[Dave Overlund]

13 minutes ago, Heiny said:

I realize that I am as guilty of this as the next guy, but I'm getting the feeling that the FO can't ever get anything right according to our loyal TD readership.  We are a very critical group and no matter what they do I think as a group we will be unhappy.  Just about the only thing we all seem to agree on, is that the Gallo signing was bad.  Some liked the Lopez/Arraez trade, some hated it.  Some thought the Jose Lopez trade was going to be a big help.  Some didn't.  Hind sight has shown that the Mahle/Paddack/Pagan trades didn't work out but you can't really argue that there was some potential value in those trades.  However it would be nice to see something end up as a "great trade" one of these times.  I still think that the best thing to do would be to make me the GM.  Can we all agree on that?

Nelson Cruz for Joe Ryan was a clear win. Graterol for Maeda was pretty good.  Eduardo Escobar for Jhoan Duran was a win. Getting rid of Donaldson in a trade was a massive W as well.

Don't get me wrong, there are many more that turned out terribly but these were all pretty good trades. 

[chpettit19]

1 minute ago, USAFChief said:

Every time I read this old saw I grind my teeth.

Good relievers are NOT fickle.

Just the opposite.

Placeholders are fickle.

And filling your pen and AAA team with placeholders is what leads to problems

 

Agree to disagree. Unless by "good" you mean "elite." But even the "elite" guys are time bombs waiting to happen. 

Look at the 6 guys named in this article as offseason possible adds. Edwin Diaz is the highest paid reliever in baseball, but was absolutely brutal in his first year in NY, and just OK in his 2nd. Kenley Jansen lost his closer role in LA numerous times, and hasn't exactly been lights out this year. Craig Kimbrel was absolutely atrocious his first 2 years in Chicago, and was "eh" last year. Adam Ottavino had 1.58 and 1.45 WHIPs and 5.89 and 4.21 ERAs in his last year in NY and his year in Boston before bouncing back to a .98 WHIP and 2.06 ERA. Will Smith had a 1.4 WHIP and 3.97 ERA last year, but has a .84 WHIP and 2.84 ERA this year. David Robertson has been a model of consistency as a good, not great, reliever. So 1 out of 6. 

Banking on year to year performance from almost any reliever is a bigger bet than any other position. They're in the pen for a reason. Very few of them are just completely consistent, and those ones still tend to fall off a cliff at some point, and struggle to get back. Aroldis Chapman was the best reliever in baseball for a decade, and then he suddenly was extremely beatable for 2 years before bouncing back to some success this year. It's incredibly hard to predict year to year success for relievers. Especially as they age. And by the time they're eligible for free agency most of them are on that brink of losing a tick on the fastball, or a couple inches on the breaker, and falling apart. The elite guys get paid a ton for a reason. Trying to predict the years Ottavino types will have a 1.0 WHIP vs a 1.5 WHIP is the riskiest bet GMs make. There's a reason he only got 4 mil coming out of his NYY and BOS stints.

[Squirrel]

2 minutes ago, chpettit19 said:

Agree to disagree. Unless by "good" you mean "elite." But even the "elite" guys are time bombs waiting to happen. 

I get that and see that. However, your chances are better you will have a stronger pen by not relying on AAA guys or AAAA reclamation projects. Yes, you do hit it right on from time to time with those types, but your chances are better if you aim higher. Imo.

[mikelink45]

My only take on this is that we have let a lot of relievers change clubs already - some at reasonable prices.  But more importantly they could have spent money instead of prospects in the offseason.  

[chpettit19]

1 minute ago, Squirrel said:

I get that and see that. However, your chances are better you will have a stronger pen by not relying on AAA guys or AAAA reclamation projects. Yes, you do hit it right on from time to time with those types, but your chances are better if you aim higher. Imo.

I agree. It's why in my first post I mentioned the Robertson types as what should be the Twins sweet spot. Good, not great, relievers with the highest chance of being competent year to year. Snag a couple of those guys (I'd argue that's what they thought they had in Jax, Thielbar, Alcala, and Pagan for this year) to pair with your elite guys (I'd argue that's what they thought Duran and Lopez were this year) and go from there.

My problem with them is their evals of relievers. Pagan being the most obvious one. But letting Coulombe go in favor of Moran who had options left is another one. Where they take "risks" confuses me. They won't drop Gallo cuz Wallner and Larnach have options so they'd rather keep their depth, but they drop Coulombe for Moran instead of keeping both for added options. I think they thought they were coming into this year with 6 good to elite relievers, plus Moran as the 2nd lefty, and 1 long man. I think the vast majority of us saw far fewer than 6 good relievers, though.

[PatPfund]

Yeah, it always felt like we were an arm or two short in the 'pen. (And a LH hitter "who strikes out a lot" heavy in the OF.)

[jorgenswest]

Relievers are no more fickle than any other position. Their stat line varies more but it is random variation due to their sample size. That small sample gives the illusion that they are volatile as a group.

Teams can get in trouble trading for a reliever based on a half season sample particularly if there wasn’t success in the previous 3 or 4. Dylan Floro has ERAs that have a range that varies by almost 2 runs over the last 4 seasons. His xERA is very stable atlas’s than half a run.his xFIP is also stable with a range of 0.8. His strike out rates and walk rates are pretty stable. It is BABIP and HR rates that are not stable and that home run rate need a large sample. His HR/FB rate was unsustainably low in his good ERA season as his BABIP very high in his poor ERA season.

Find a reliever with a track record of good xFIPs, xERAs, strikeout and walk rates and you will have found a good reliever. There is the chance that the small sample remains will get bitten by a high BABIP but that isn’t in the pitcher’s control and only in the teams control as far as their willingness to put up a defense that limits hits on balls in play,

[JD-TWINS]

2 hours ago, mike8791 said:

Smack on, Lou!  This failure in the offseason is a firable offense.  They saw even after the Lopez acquisition last year that he was unreliable.  So going into the 2023 season they had one "closer-type" reliever in Duran - and he came with the risk of the dreaded sophomore slump.  Fortunately, he has been a lot more than a one year wonder, but without reinforcements, he has deteriorated recently.  To rely on Jax and Thielbar as late-inning relievers was a high risk move.  The 35 year old Thielbar was an excellent signing but it shouldn't be surprising at his age that he's succumbed to injuries, nor should it be a surprise that with his 40% Inheritred Runners Scored rate in 2022, Jax has proven to be shaky in late inning critical situations.  

The FO has been fortunate to see somewhat of a Pagan renaissance and Stewart emerging from the scrap heap, but to expect guys like Sands, Moran, Winder and Blaze to be positive reinforcements was just a pipe dream.  Granted, the big failure this year has been the offense but in the middle of a pennant race(and hopefully a playoff) it isn't too surprising that the starters have fallen off, thereby putting more pressure on the pen.  Short of adding a Hader, it seems more wishful thinking now to expect a meaningful addition to the relief staff before the trade deadline. If only they did more in FA!!  Shame on you, Falvine.  I hope Joe iswatching carefully.

Jax is human - he didn’t allow a run for two months after May 22.

Our staff ERA is 3rd in AL - that includes Maeda’s inflated ERA & the bullpen.

With Thielbar & Stewart healthy (can’t have a perfect 11 man Pen ready & waiting) the Pen was as good as anyone in the game and that was with trying to hide Jorge Lopez.

Our management isn’t the problem IMO. Moran can’t walk first two guys faced with a 4 run lead & then give up a double!!!! That’s not the FO’s fault. Lopez having emotional issues isn’t the FO’s fault. Stewart & Thielbar going down at the same time isn’t the FO’s fault. Those 4 guys are 1/2 of the Pen. Mahle’s out for the year. The FO put enough pitching together so that we are still 3rd in AL in ERA.

Big time frustration when players don’t perform - agreed!!! Don’t see it as a roster building problem though. It’s no difference than CC not performing - can’t anticipate that in 2023, and certainly can’t be expected to have a perfect back-up plan.

Guys need to play well or it all goes to ……

[LewFordLives]

I agree 100 percent with everything in this article. 

[Jocko87]

I mean, honestly, what evidence do we have that they want to invest in the bullpen now? Being linked to guys by the media means nothing trying to predict a front office, especially this one.

I'm mostly on their side with the off season plan, I might have added one guy but still mostly like to let the pen fill organically. In my opinion it took way to long to give Blazovic a look and it's flat dumb the way they're using Sands lately. Give some leverage early in the year and find out what you have.

[chpettit19]

1 hour ago, jorgenswest said:

Relievers are no more fickle than any other position. Their stat line varies more but it is random variation due to their sample size. That small sample gives the illusion that they are volatile as a group.

Teams can get in trouble trading for a reliever based on a half season sample particularly if there wasn’t success in the previous 3 or 4. Dylan Floro has ERAs that have a range that varies by almost 2 runs over the last 4 seasons. His xERA is very stable atlas’s than half a run.his xFIP is also stable with a range of 0.8. His strike out rates and walk rates are pretty stable. It is BABIP and HR rates that are not stable and that home run rate need a large sample. His HR/FB rate was unsustainably low in his good ERA season as his BABIP very high in his poor ERA season.

Find a reliever with a track record of good xFIPs, xERAs, strikeout and walk rates and you will have found a good reliever. There is the chance that the small sample remains will get bitten by a high BABIP but that isn’t in the pitcher’s control and only in the teams control as far as their willingness to put up a defense that limits hits on balls in play,

But small sample size is their job. If you can't succeed in small sample sizes you're not a good reliever. The top end of innings pitched by relievers is about 70 innings. Your job is to throw up 0s in as many of those as possible, and definitely to stay away from crooked numbers. Giving up runs in more games, or having more crooked numbers against you, year to year isn't shocking, but it's the difference between being a good reliever and a bad reliever year to year.

Yes, their sample size is absolutely what causes their stats to be volatile, but that's the job. Your bad performances often times turn wins into losses. It's a lot of pressure, and nobody is going to have an ERA of 0. But that's why it's the hardest prediction to make as a front office. Finding the guy who is on the good side of that very thin line this year vs the guy on the bad side is incredibly difficult. You can define a reliever as "good" by their expected numbers, but that doesn't make their performance good when it comes to actually winning games. Don't care if it's BABIP luck that kills you, or HR/FB rates. When you're pitching so few innings you have to be "good" almost every time. Sometimes its just not your year, and sometimes it is.

When it comes to major league baseball player predictions from year to year bullpen arms are absolutely the most volatile and fickle. And it's absolutely because of the sample size. But 5 extra "bad luck" losses this year than last year is still 5 more losses. Expected stats can give you the best educated guess you can make, but it's still a far less educated guess than any other position in baseball.

[Danchat]

I know the whole hindsight thing annoys people... but I and some others called in in that "the Twins don't need to add relievers" thread right before the season began. There were far too many question marks, and the Twins made too many assumptions (Lopez would rebound, Alcala would be back to where he left off, no injuries, a veteran cast-off emerging or other young arms emerging). Pagan did rebound and Stewart was a big find, but that and adding Floro is not enough if this bullpen is going to make it through the playoffs. I suppose if the goal is to win the division then continuing with this cobbled crew could work, but if they are serious about winning in the playoffs then they're going to give up runs like they did in 2019-20.

[old nurse]

7 and 10 million for relievers are not modest contracts

A healthy Thilbar and Alcalla would have made a world of difference. Bullpen Lopez being adequate  and suddenly the bullpen isn’t a black hole. That is probably why they didn’t sign much, though a Will Smith type contract would have been a great add.. Maybe he wanted to stay in the South

[jorgenswest]

4 hours ago, chpettit19 said:

But small sample size is their job. If you can't succeed in small sample sizes you're not a good reliever. The top end of innings pitched by relievers is about 70 innings. Your job is to throw up 0s in as many of those as possible, and definitely to stay away from crooked numbers. Giving up runs in more games, or having more crooked numbers against you, year to year isn't shocking, but it's the difference between being a good reliever and a bad reliever year to year.

Yes, their sample size is absolutely what causes their stats to be volatile, but that's the job. Your bad performances often times turn wins into losses. It's a lot of pressure, and nobody is going to have an ERA of 0. But that's why it's the hardest prediction to make as a front office. Finding the guy who is on the good side of that very thin line this year vs the guy on the bad side is incredibly difficult. You can define a reliever as "good" by their expected numbers, but that doesn't make their performance good when it comes to actually winning games. Don't care if it's BABIP luck that kills you, or HR/FB rates. When you're pitching so few innings you have to be "good" almost every time. Sometimes its just not your year, and sometimes it is.

When it comes to major league baseball player predictions from year to year bullpen arms are absolutely the most volatile and fickle. And it's absolutely because of the sample size. But 5 extra "bad luck" losses this year than last year is still 5 more losses. Expected stats can give you the best educated guess you can make, but it's still a far less educated guess than any other position in baseball.

Our understanding of sample size is very different. Pitchers don’t have control of the random variation due to sample. In a small sample pitchers can have the same skill, effectively throw the same pitches and have very different ERAs and BABIPs. They can only control how effectively they throw the ball.

[Kevin H]

Yep. Given where we are and how many prospects it will cost, think it's better to move one of the starters (Maeda?) to the Bullpen and add Dallas Keuchel as a starter. Get rid of Moran and replace him with Thielbar.

[DJL44]

You could say the same about needing a RH batting outfielder which is why it was so weird they signed Gallo.

[chpettit19]

33 minutes ago, jorgenswest said:

Our understanding of sample size is very different. Pitchers don’t have control of the random variation due to sample. In a small sample pitchers can have the same skill, effectively throw the same pitches and have very different ERAs and BABIPs. They can only control how effectively they throw the ball.

I think the weight we put on "random variation" is different. I'd guess I think there's more change in how they're throwing the ball year to year than you would. And that's totally fine.

But that doesn't change that there is some pretty sizeable variation in their outcomes. And that's what a FO is trying to predict when bringing in any certain player. What will their future outcomes be? Predicting the future outcomes of relievers is significantly harder than any other position.

[Jocko87]

7 hours ago, Jocko87 said:

I mean, honestly, what evidence do we have that they want to invest in the bullpen now?

I was just kidding.