Should we consider having Duran as our other postseason SP?

[chpettit19]

15 minutes ago, JD-TWINS said:

I get he’s been healing since the Fall but still fresh off surgery…….not a great health history……...GAS for 12-25 pitches at a time seems like a sound usage for Canterino this year. Get him 55-70 innings between ST. PAUL & The Show. Big affect on Team’s success with this approach. If he holds up in ‘24, stretch him out over the Winter and into Spring of ‘25. IMO.

He said the medical people told him 125 innings so if that's what he's cleared for that's what I'd be targeting.

[jkcarew]

Should they? No.

Would it work as suggested? No.

[Doctor Gast]

Looks like almost everybody wants Duran to stay in the BP. I've been big on Cabrera, he has some really great stuff but has had control problems. I thought it'd be worth a chance to trade for him. This spring he seems to have found it so his asking price, more than likely has gone up.

[JD-TWINS]

1 hour ago, chpettit19 said:

He said the medical people told him 125 innings so if that's what he's cleared for that's what I'd be targeting.

I believe what you’re saying! …….in ‘19 (after college season of 90+ innings) he threw 25 innings in low minors…….nobody played in ‘20…….in ‘21 he threw 23 innings ………in ‘22 he threw 37 innings ………hurt & zero innings in ‘23. So, he’s thrown 85 professional innings in 2.25 seasons & not pitched at all the other 2 years. With that level of experience he doesn’t seem ready to spring into action as a starter in the Show.

To me, that history doesn’t add up to 125 innings in ‘24. Not personal……don’t think it’s smart to target that many innings just because we all want him to be great.

Festa & Raya are treated with kid gloves and they’ve never been hurt that I’m aware of - maybe? ………Limit Canterino’s innings and use him where he’ll bring most benefit.

[JD-TWINS]

A thought about the dilemma coming up with a high test starter for game #2 in a postseason series. Nothing earth shattering.

12 guys typically on the Staff for playoff baseball……..Starters are reduced to 4 guys at this point.

At this point I think these guys are on the Staff:

Lopez - Paddack - Ryan - Ober

Canterino - Varland - Thielbar or Funderburk - Okert - Stewart - Jax - Alcala - Duran

Game #2 Paddack starts with the premise that he’s going 3 innings maximum……….Okert or one of the other lefties, assuming opponent stacks line-up toward LH batters, goes 1+ innings. Varland goes 2-3 innings. Seems like a quality solution to get through 6-7 innings. We then have the normal 6 other relievers to finish the game. Next is an “off” day.

I don’t know who a team goes and gets that’s better than the two righties letting it out over 2-3 innings with Okert in the middle for 1+. Unconventional, but great chance to be effective, IMO.

[chpettit19]

1 hour ago, JD-TWINS said:

I believe what you’re saying! …….in ‘19 (after college season of 90+ innings) he threw 25 innings in low minors…….nobody played in ‘20…….in ‘21 he threw 23 innings ………in ‘22 he threw 37 innings ………hurt & zero innings in ‘23. So, he’s thrown 85 professional innings in 2.25 seasons & not pitched at all the other 2 years. With that level of experience he doesn’t seem ready to spring into action as a starter in the Show.

To me, that history doesn’t add up to 125 innings in ‘24. Not personal……don’t think it’s smart to target that many innings just because we all want him to be great.

Festa & Raya are treated with kid gloves and they’ve never been hurt that I’m aware of - maybe? ………Limit Canterino’s innings and use him where he’ll bring most benefit.

I have no idea what they'll actually do, but him as a starter is worth significantly more than him as a reliever. I'm no Dr or trainer or anything, but neither are Rocco or Falvey. I'd hope they've hired medical professionals they trust and would look to follow their lead when making these decisions and not go off anything else. It sounds like a big jump to me, too, but the team Drs don't keep their jobs if they keep getting guys hurt and they have way more knowledge than we do on him and his situation. If they give him the all clear for 125 I'd try to get him there. Cuz that means he can do 150+ in 2025 and if he reaches his ceiling they have the co-ace they're looking for. Giving him 50 innings this year means he's still got the training wheels on in 2025 and I don't like that idea.

Give him AA and AAA starts for the first half of the year and then move him to the pen if he's succeeding. If the pen is really as good as people seem to expect it to be there's no reason to banish him to the pen to start the year. They supposedly have a great pen without him so he brings the most benefit by stretching out and being a starter in the minors until it's shown he's needed in the bigs.

[JD-TWINS]

11 minutes ago, chpettit19 said:

I have no idea what they'll actually do, but him as a starter is worth significantly more than him as a reliever. I'm no Dr or trainer or anything, but neither are Rocco or Falvey. I'd hope they've hired medical professionals they trust and would look to follow their lead when making these decisions and not go off anything else. It sounds like a big jump to me, too, but the team Drs don't keep their jobs if they keep getting guys hurt and they have way more knowledge than we do on him and his situation. If they give him the all clear for 125 I'd try to get him there. Cuz that means he can do 150+ in 2025 and if he reaches his ceiling they have the co-ace they're looking for. Giving him 50 innings this year means he's still got the training wheels on in 2025 and I don't like that idea.

Give him AA and AAA starts for the first half of the year and then move him to the pen if he's succeeding. If the pen is really as good as people seem to expect it to be there's no reason to banish him to the pen to start the year. They supposedly have a great pen without him so he brings the most benefit by stretching out and being a starter in the minors until it's shown he's needed in the bigs.

……..nobody is suggesting banishing him to the Pen. He needs to get his competitive legs at AA &/or St Paul  - agreed. I just don’t want to burn up 60 innings of decent pitching from mid-April to mid-July and none of them are helping the Big Club win & then somebody decides he needs to taper off…….Frankly, may be short sighted, but I don’t care today ……through ‘24 season……about where Canterino fits into the ‘25 rotation.

Best situation may be to have him start through June in minors, into July even & then taper him down with use through the Pen in Minneapolis? Just want every guy that can contribute effectively in ‘24 to do so.

[Twins_Fan_in_NJ]

I'm not as baseball savvy as some other folks here, so perhaps I'm oversimplifying with this take - but considering how hard Duran throws and the amount of pressure that he puts on his arm, I don't understand why anyone would want or why anyone thinks its a good idea to put him into the starting rotation. He seems tailor made for a closer role with 2 innings as his absolute max. 

[chpettit19]

11 hours ago, JD-TWINS said:

……..nobody is suggesting banishing him to the Pen. He needs to get his competitive legs at AA &/or St Paul  - agreed. I just don’t want to burn up 60 innings of decent pitching from mid-April to mid-July and none of them are helping the Big Club win & then somebody decides he needs to taper off…….Frankly, may be short sighted, but I don’t care today ……through ‘24 season……about where Canterino fits into the ‘25 rotation.

Best situation may be to have him start through June in minors, into July even & then taper him down with use through the Pen in Minneapolis? Just want every guy that can contribute effectively in ‘24 to do so.

That's what I suggested. Build him up and let him be a starter in the minors for the first half of the year and put him in the pen in the second half to limit his innings. They aren't going to drop any of their recently signed pen arms for him early in the year anyways. So build him up as a starter and test out all the pen arms to find out who's good this year and fit him in as needed later in the year.

[TopGunn#22]

Canterino is the Wild Card.  When you look at how much he's pitched for the Twins in the minors since Rice University over-used him it just doesn't seem possible he could reach 125 innings.  Yet, smarter people than me have stated he can do it.  There is no question Canterino is worth more as a SP than a RP and with his stuff, if he could just stay healthy he could be VERY valuable as a RP.

Canterino is probably the #1 guy I'm curious to see how 2024 unfolds.  Will he be a SP?  Will he end up in the bullpen?  Will he FINALLY stay healthy?  The stuff is undeniable.  Yes, I'm also very interested in Brooks Lee, Emmanuel Rodriguez and Walker Jenkins. but Canterino sits at the top for me and who he becomes will be very interesting in influencing the Twins fortunes in 2024 and beyond.   

So while the article is interesting and has elicited some excellent conversation, I'd just leave Duran in the bullpen.  

[DJL44]

1 hour ago, Twins_Fan_in_NJ said:

I'm not as baseball savvy as some other folks here, so perhaps I'm oversimplifying with this take - but considering how hard Duran throws and the amount of pressure that he puts on his arm, I don't understand why anyone would want or why anyone thinks its a good idea to put him into the starting rotation. He seems tailor made for a closer role with 2 innings as his absolute max. 

He wouldn't throw as hard if he were pitching in the rotation. You can still get people out throwing 97 MPH.

[Twins_Fan_in_NJ]

11 minutes ago, DJL44 said:

He wouldn't throw as hard if he were pitching in the rotation. You can still get people out throwing 97 MPH.

Perhaps. But I just think he's a likely candidate to get injured pitching extensive innings. The same can reasonably said for any starting pitcher, but some guys are a higher-risk and I think Duran's one of them.

[JD-TWINS]

35 minutes ago, chpettit19 said:

That's what I suggested. Build him up and let him be a starter in the minors for the first half of the year and put him in the pen in the second half to limit his innings. They aren't going to drop any of their recently signed pen arms for him early in the year anyways. So build him up as a starter and test out all the pen arms to find out who's good this year and fit him in as needed later in the year.

Was agreeing that your thought may be the best approach ……..stressing not wasting talent and limited GOOD innings in Wichita or St. Paul. To me, to protect against this, he pitches less innings early….potentially relief, to better monitor innings and to see if his stuff is up to being on the MLB staff in the Pen. He can contribute in June/July, before potentially getting fatigued, just as well as Alcala, etc.

[JD-TWINS]

15 minutes ago, DJL44 said:

He wouldn't throw as hard if he were pitching in the rotation. You can still get people out throwing 97 MPH.

He throws his splitter at 99MPH …….there’s only so much a guy can dial back naturally. I think the, “he’ll coast more and conserve himself…..”, premise is misguided. He’s a power guy and that’s why & how he’s effective. IMO.

[chpettit19]

2 minutes ago, JD-TWINS said:

Was agreeing that your thought may be the best approach ……..stressing not wasting talent and limited GOOD innings in Wichita or St. Paul. To me, to protect against this, he pitches less innings early….potentially relief, to better monitor innings and to see if his stuff is up to being on the MLB staff in the Pen. He can contribute in June/July, before potentially getting fatigued, just as well as Alcala, etc.

Him developing and working his way towards being a major league starter isn't "wasting" innings to me. They're not going to put him in the pen to start the year and then try to transition him to starter in the middle of the year once they decide if they want to use him in the major league pen or not. That's not a good development plan at all. He's building up to be a starter now. Asking his arm/body to build up and get used to throwing more pitches every 5th or 6th day then switching it to being able to handle throwing fewer pitches at higher effort every 2 or 3 days and then switching back to the original more pitches every 5th or 6th day isn't how you save his arm. They're only going to make that transition to the pen once during the year. And it won't be at the start of the year.

They can get him 15-20 starts in the minors without being overly concerned about his inning total and still use him in the pen later in the year. If the pen is as good as advertised they may not need him anyways.

[DJL44]

9 minutes ago, chpettit19 said:

Him developing and working his way towards being a major league starter isn't "wasting" innings to me.

Canterino hasn't proven anything yet. His walk rate in Double-A was terrible. He needs to show he is ready in the minor leagues before he earns a promotion. I wouldn't be surprised if he begins the season in Double-A again considering how full the rotation is in St. Paul.

[Riverbrian]

When considering the question posed in this thread. I think it's important to consider the value difference between a starter and reliever. 

We live in a baseball world (created by MLB GM's value assessments) where Sean Manaea coming off a 4.44 ERA in 2023 and a 4.91 ERA in 2022 and Ryan Pressly consistently one of the top closers in baseball signed. Each signed for essentially the same years and dollar amount in the same off-season. 

Twins pitchers threw a total of 1,451 Innings in the 2023.

Starters accounted for 922 of those innings. 

That leaves 529 innings for the relievers. 

5 Starting pitching slots = 184 innings per starting pitcher slot

8 Relief pitcher slots = 66 innings per relief pitcher slot. 

Look again at what Manaea recently signed for and what Ryan Pressly signed for and it wouldn't be a stretch to theorize that the front offices are paying for innings and they should... because starters are throwing 3 times more innings than a relief pitcher throws. Sure you can argue High Leverage/Low Leverage as justification and I'll concede a value difference but I'm just going to counter that performance is important each and every inning no matter what leverage you assign to it. 

Next Year Joe Ryan and Jhoan Duran will be entering into the 1st year of arbitration and they are both on track to reach free agency in 2028.

Between Ryan and Duran, under the scenario that each will continue to pitch like they have pitched to date. Does anybody want to take a guess on who will get rewarded more in the three upcoming years of arbitration or who signs the bigger free agent deal? 

I'll go first... I'm going to guess Joe Ryan will be paid more. 

While I love Joe Ryan, I'm a big Joe Ryan fan so I don't want to say anything negative about him... however... in my opinion... I think Duran is a much better pitcher than Joe is. 

Front offices are paying for innings. Arbitrators are rewarding innings. The more zero's hung... more wins.

I'd like to see our best pitchers get more innings.  

Anyway... why you are all discussing the merits of the possibility of Duran starting. You may want to consider value to not only the team looking for zero's on the scoreboard but also consider the value to the pitcher looking for zero's on a contract. 

 

 

 

[bean5302]

I'll have to defer to the Twins coaching and management on Duran's ability to handle a starter workload, but if they believe he might be able to then yes, I'd like to see him in the rotation. But not mid-year. To me, that's just asking for injury. I'm interested in him in the rotation simply because the upside is enormous, and Duran was only in the bullpen because he was coming back from Tommy John. I saw some comments about his velocity. Guy throws 102 average... if he has to take it all the way down to 99mph to get 6 innings and only reach back for 104 every once in a while, I'm not sure it matters that much.

I did want to point a little something out on Canterino. He has not been cleared for 125 innings. His surgeon, Dr. Keith Meister, said 125 innings wasn't out of the question from a medical standpoint. 125 innings should be looked at as absolute ceiling if everything goes perfect throughout the season. Also, there's no guarantee his stuff plays at the MLB level. He was walking 5.77 per 9 innings at AA in 2022. His K rate dropped from 18.43 to 13.11 from A+ to AA and his BB rate skyrocketed from 1.71 to 5.77 at the same time. Generally, gotta throw some strikes at the MLB level.

[ashbury]

On 3/4/2024 at 7:47 AM, Riverbrian said:

I asker her if it was possible if she was just disappointed with him at the moment.

You already recognize, you got lucky on that conversation.

[Doctor Gast]

1 hour ago, Riverbrian said:

When considering the question posed in this thread. I think it's important to consider the value difference between a starter and reliever. 

We live in a baseball world (created by MLB GM's value assessments) where Sean Manaea coming off a 4.44 ERA in 2023 and a 4.91 ERA in 2022 and Ryan Pressly consistently one of the top closers in baseball signed. Each signed for essentially the same years and dollar amount in the same off-season. 

Twins pitchers threw a total of 1,451 Innings in the 2023.

Starters accounted for 922 of those innings. 

That leaves 529 innings for the relievers. 

5 Starting pitching slots = 184 innings per starting pitcher slot

8 Relief pitcher slots = 66 innings per relief pitcher slot. 

Look again at what Manaea recently signed for and what Ryan Pressly signed for and it wouldn't be a stretch to theorize that the front offices are paying for innings and they should... because starters are throwing 3 times more innings than a relief pitcher throws. Sure you can argue High Leverage/Low Leverage as justification and I'll concede a value difference but I'm just going to counter that performance is important each and every inning no matter what leverage you assign to it. 

Next Year Joe Ryan and Jhoan Duran will be entering into the 1st year of arbitration and they are both on track to reach free agency in 2028.

Between Ryan and Duran, under the scenario that each will continue to pitch like they have pitched to date. Does anybody want to take a guess on who will get rewarded more in the three upcoming years of arbitration or who signs the bigger free agent deal? 

I'll go first... I'm going to guess Joe Ryan will be paid more. 

While I love Joe Ryan, I'm a big Joe Ryan fan so I don't want to say anything negative about him... however... in my opinion... I think Duran is a much better pitcher than Joe is. 

Front offices are paying for innings. Arbitrators are rewarding innings. The more zero's hung... more wins.

I'd like to see our best pitchers get more innings.  

Anyway... why you are all discussing the merits of the possibility of Duran starting. You may want to consider value to not only the team looking for zero's on the scoreboard but also consider the value to the pitcher looking for zero's on a contract. 

There are a lot of pitchers even in the Twins that have a lot of problems staying on the mound but still many think they should remain a SP. Duran has been amazingly healthy these past 2 yrs., if you ask him which he'd prefer to be a SP or RP? I'd guarantee he'd say SP.

[Riverbrian]

33 minutes ago, ashbury said:

You already recognize, you got lucky on that conversation.

You and I have learned over the years. 

If you are going to ask someone what is wrong.

Before you ask the question. Make sure that you have recently gone to the bathroom and make sure that you are supplied with drinks and snacks. 

[Riverbrian]

14 minutes ago, Doctor Gast said:

There are a lot of pitchers even in the Twins that have a lot of problems staying on the mound but still many think they should remain a SP. Duran has been amazingly healthy these past 2 yrs., if you ask him which he'd prefer to be a SP or RP? I'd guarantee he'd say SP.

Prestige and Money

A reliever that prefers to remain a reliever is roughly equivalent to a position player who only WANTS 100 AB's a year instead of 500 AB's a year. 

In other words... if Anthony Rendon was a pitcher... He'd want to be a reliever.   

[ashbury]

31 minutes ago, Riverbrian said:

A reliever that prefers to remain a reliever is roughly equivalent to a position player who only WANTS 100 AB's a year instead of 500 AB's a year.

Pitching and hitting have always been so different, and recent trends have made it more so.  The current philosophy is that relievers are max-effort every time out.  Trevor May would be a good example where, going from starting to relieving, his K/9 rate shot way up.  The tradeoff is the number of effective innings you can get from a guy.

There isn't an equivalent for a hitter, but you could imagine some home run hitting specialist who swings so hard he injures himself constantly but increases his HR/9 rate by doing so.  You can get only 100 AB from him, but they are prime center-cut ABs.  Tough way to make a living though, even if I'm sure the money helps him ignore the discomfort. (Maybe Rendon should lean into his limitations and become that guy, I don't know.)

Relievers who "prefer" their role aren't sitting in the bullpen sipping margaritas and snickering about the eager-beaver kiss-ups in the rotation who work harder than they have to.

[Battle ur tail off]

22 hours ago, chpettit19 said:

That most certainly may be where he ends up, and I'd bet it's where he debuts in 2024, but he's got the most upside of any arm in their system so I think it's worth building him up as a starter to begin the season before moving him to the pen to limit his innings later in the year. They're starving for a homegrown ace, and he's the closest guy to the bigs with any sort of chance to be that.

Hasn't he been injured a ton though? Maybe limiting his innings is the way going forward?

[Riverbrian]

32 minutes ago, ashbury said:

Pitching and hitting have always been so different, and recent trends have made it more so.  The current philosophy is that relievers are max-effort every time out.  Trevor May would be a good example where, going from starting to relieving, his K/9 rate shot way up.  The tradeoff is the number of effective innings you can get from a guy.

There isn't an equivalent for a hitter, but you could imagine some home run hitting specialist who swings so hard he injures himself constantly but increases his HR/9 rate by doing so.  You can get only 100 AB from him, but they are prime center-cut ABs.  Tough way to make a living though, even if I'm sure the money helps him ignore the discomfort. (Maybe Rendon should lean into his limitations and become that guy, I don't know.)

Relievers who "prefer" their role aren't sitting in the bullpen sipping margaritas and snickering about the eager-beaver kiss-ups in the rotation who work harder than they have to.

Ok

Not a perfect simile however... I usually have a pretty idea what I'm going to get in a box of chocolates so Forrest Gump struggles with perfect similes as well so I'm in good company. 

I understand the point you are making about Max effort for shorter stints and I don't disagree. Those are the choices that confront managers when they are handing out roles. I'm saying that if the player (not the manager) is offered the choice.

A. Do you want to go full max effort for 3 innings a week

B. Do you want to back off a bit and be on the mound for 9 innings a week. 

I don't have any polling data to refer to but my guess is that most will opt to back off a bit and throw for 9 because they get to play more, compete longer in their chosen profession and ultimately get paid more. 

The position player who would rather play occasionally rather than be the guy they count on most every day will also be a pretty rare find. 

These type of attitudes may exist in the MLB landscape because on occasion I do reach into a box of chocolates and am shocked by Molasses and Coconut instead of butter cream. 

[Squirrel]

35 minutes ago, Riverbrian said:

Ok

Not a perfect simile however... I usually have a pretty idea what I'm going to get in a box of chocolates so Forrest Gump struggles with perfect similes as well so I'm in good company. 

I understand the point you are making about Max effort for shorter stints and I don't disagree. Those are the choices that confront managers when they are handing out roles. I'm saying that if the player (not the manager) is offered the choice.

A. Do you want to go full max effort for 3 innings a week

B. Do you want to back off a bit and be on the mound for 9 innings a week. 

I don't have any polling data to refer to but my guess is that most will opt to back off a bit and throw for 9 because they get to play more, compete longer in their chosen profession and ultimately get paid more. 

The position player who would rather play occasionally rather than be the guy they count on most every day will also be a pretty rare find. 

These type of attitudes may exist in the MLB landscape because on occasion I do reach into a box of chocolates and am shocked by Molasses and Coconut instead of butter cream. 

I think I get what you’re saying but I don’t agree with how you are saying it. I don’t think it’s a choice of max effort vs backing off a little for more money. I think whether a starter or reliever they are both giving max effort, but given the role of a starter vs the role of a reliever, there are different physical limitations and requirements. It’s not about max effort vs not max effort, it’s the difference between a marathon and a sprint. Some bodies are better suited to one vs the other. I think Duran can pitch how he does because his time on the mound is limited. He would need to be a different pitcher to pitch more innings. That said, yes, great starters get paid more. A lot more. Because I think their value is more because they pitch a lot more innings. But is a so-so starter paid more than a great reliever? I don’t have any figures on that but I wonder if that isn’t comparable. Just because one is great at one role doesn’t make them suited for the other role. A lot of posters here seem to think Duran can be as successful over many innings as he is in one. I think there were reasons he was converted to a shut-down reliever. 

[chpettit19]

57 minutes ago, Battle ur tail off said:

Hasn't he been injured a ton though? Maybe limiting his innings is the way going forward?

He has been very injured. I'm not smart enough to guess at the right answer for him and his health. I trust that the Twins have highly paid medical professionals who are going to provide him with information and he'll make a determination with the team on what is best for him. I don't think it's crazy at all to just put him in the pen and hope the fewer innings helps him stay healthy.

I'm less risk averse than most. I want big swings even if I know they come with an increased risk. Especially when the team has built as good of a floor as the Twins appear to have. I want some shots at ceiling raisers, and Canterino as a starter can raise the ceiling way more than he could as a reliever. Certainly not telling anyone they shouldn't believe putting him in the pen is a good option. Just not what I'd do, assuming the medical pros are telling them he can throw 125 innings.

[ashbury]

1 hour ago, Riverbrian said:

Ok

Not a perfect simile however... I usually have a pretty idea what I'm going to get in a box of chocolates so Forrest Gump struggles with perfect similes as well so I'm in good company. 

I understand the point you are making about Max effort for shorter stints and I don't disagree. Those are the choices that confront managers when they are handing out roles. I'm saying that if the player (not the manager) is offered the choice.

A. Do you want to go full max effort for 3 innings a week

B. Do you want to back off a bit and be on the mound for 9 innings a week. 

I don't have any polling data to refer to but my guess is that most will opt to back off a bit and throw for 9 because they get to play more, compete longer in their chosen profession and ultimately get paid more. 

The position player who would rather play occasionally rather than be the guy they count on most every day will also be a pretty rare find. 

These type of attitudes may exist in the MLB landscape because on occasion I do reach into a box of chocolates and am shocked by Molasses and Coconut instead of butter cream. 

Front offices, or managers, or players themselves are unlikely to be in any disagreement that the starting role brings the most value in pursuit of a pennant and will bring the most reward at contract time.

I probably was reacting to your repeated use of "prefer" and "want."  A player first wants a major league career; after that, money or prestige plays a role.  Options A and B might come with "get batters out" for A, and "get tattooed regularly before being sent back to the minors" for B.  The smart players figure out how to balance the demands versus their particular physical limitations; if not, then the manager figures it out for them, or at least takes a best-guess approach.

I seem to recall Trevor May, a smart and chatty guy who gives good interviews, telling us that he had a serious talk with his manager and pitching coach, and came to grips with the likelihood that he could not cut it as a starter.  They probably had tried various ideas, boiling down to how close to max-effort he needed to be in order to get major leaguers out on a regular basis, and found that there just wasn't enough stamina to do what was needed.  He wanted to be in the majors, so he embraced relieving, and (apart from TJ surgery) it worked out for him.

Trevor May decided that coconut was a palatable option, given the alternative of an empty box of chocolates. Other pitchers are handed coconut and told to take it or leave it; most who are faced with that choice take it, until not even that is offered.

/ squirrel took the same stance while I was typing, phrasing it differently, and maybe there are nuances between what she and I said

[Riverbrian]

4 minutes ago, Squirrel said:

I think I get what you’re saying but I don’t agree with how you are saying it. I don’t think it’s a choice of max effort vs backing off a little for more money. I think whether a starter or reliever they are both giving max effort, but given the role of a starter vs the role of a reliever, there are different physical limitations and requirements. It’s not about max effort vs not max effort, it’s the difference between a marathon and a sprint. Some bodies are better suited to one vs the other. I think Duran can pitch how he does because his time on the mound is limited. He would need to be a different pitcher to pitch more innings. That said, yes, great starters get paid more. A lot more. Because I think their value is more because they pitch a lot more innings. But is a so-so starter paid more than a great reliever? I don’t have any figures on that but I wonder if that isn’t comparable. Just because one is great at one role doesn’t make them suited for the other role. A lot of posters here seem to think Duran can be as successful over many innings as he is in one. I think there were reasons he was converted to a shut-down reliever. 

I agree with what you are saying. No argument here... The inclusion of Max Effort into the discussion came from Ash and I was just going down the Ash Path that was mostly absent of the math of 1 inning here or 6 innings there. 

Yes... Physical limitations and requirements would sensibly part of the decision process. Griffin Jax might be an example of that. He struggled as a starter but has seemingly found his feet in the pen.

Is that a physical limitation or requirement? Maybe shorter stints of letting the big dog eat was the key to unlocking it all. Did he just unlock his slider and just happen to be a reliever when it happened? John Smoltz was good at both roles. Dennis Eckersley was good in both roles. It's hard to say. Could Duran be a good starter if he backed it off a bit. If he was a good starter will he be as valuable as he is currently... as perhaps the best the closer in baseball. I don't know the answer to these questions but... 

I am reasonably certain that if he was capable of being a good starter. He would be paid a lot more.  A lot More. You ask the question:

Is a so-so starter paid more than a great reliever? 

DeScalfini is making 12 million this year. Wacha just signed for 16 million. Not many relievers are making that kind of money.  Only 5 are making more than Disco is. 

The answer to your question is yes. 

[Riverbrian]

13 minutes ago, ashbury said:

Front offices, or managers, or players themselves are unlikely to be in any disagreement that the starting role brings the most value in pursuit of a pennant and will bring the most reward at contract time.

I probably was reacting to your repeated use of "prefer" and "want."  A player first wants a major league career; after that, money or prestige plays a role.  Options A and B might come with "get batters out" for A, and "get tattooed regularly before being sent back to the minors" for B.  The smart players figure out how to balance the demands versus their particular physical limitations; if not, then the manager figures it out for them, or at least takes a best-guess approach.

I seem to recall Trevor May, a smart and chatty guy who gives good interviews, telling us that he had a serious talk with his manager and pitching coach, and came to grips with the likelihood that he could not cut it as a starter.  They probably had tried various ideas, boiling down to how close to max-effort he needed to be in order to get major leaguers out on a regular basis, and found that there just wasn't enough stamina to do what was needed.  He wanted to be in the majors, so he embraced relieving, and (apart from TJ surgery) it worked out for him.

Trevor May decided that coconut was a palatable option, given the alternative of an empty box of chocolates. Other pitchers are handed coconut and told to take it or leave it; most face with that choice take it, until not even that is offered.

/ squirrel took the same stance while I was typing, phrasing it differently, and maybe there are nuances between what she and I said

I agree with you and Squirrel. 

I can only say that It seems that my preferred use of similes, metaphors, analogies, parables often times fall short. 

In the case of Duran... He's a great closer. I think it's quite possible that he has the talent to be a starter. If he doesn't... he doesn't... But... If he had the ability to do both well and help the team... I think he'd choose starter because he would play more and get paid more.

Also... if the Twins felt that he had the ability to do both... even the Twins would convert him to a starter because he would hang more zeroes. 

Yes... It does take another John Smoltz to ultimately answer the question because John is the only guy that pops into my mind as someone who was successful as a starter and then successful as a closer and then successful as a starter again.