Looking back on the Graterol trade

[Riverbrian]

27 minutes ago, CCHOF5yearstoolate said:

Right, it's a prototypical approach that gets you 3 months of awful production in a 6 month season if the guy has this much swing & miss in his game. I don't view his 2023 season as all that dissimilar to Joey Gallo - his April was better for longer and overall made a bit more contact.

I like Brent Rooker, he's a great Twitter follow, but I think 1 month colored a lot of people's view on him. 

Rooker only hurts if you are playing somebody worse because you don't have Rooker. 

You should have better than Rooker on your roster. 

If you don't have better than Rooker... You got problems kind of like the A's have problems.   

[nicksaviking]

I'm not giving Luke Raley any credit until he does something with the Mariners. He looks like one of those nobody players the Rays find and  turn into gold before they turn into dust with their new team.

But willing to open up to the idea of this being a bust if the Mariners find the same success.

[old nurse]

Brent Rooker and Luke Raley each had a career year last year. Time will tell if they are solid hitters or not. They were not the couple years before last year after the Twins traded them.

The Twins under this regime has had 8 second round draft picks. Only Jeffers has worked so far. Deron Johnson did not have any better luck before. That Beeter may be in the Yankee starting rotation really doesn’t mean a whole lot. He is still a prospect. Win or lose a trade. The trade looks bad as the Twins only git the short season and a little bit last year out of Maeda. Graterol would have helped the bullpen. Then there is the curse of being a Twins pitcher and Graterol’s shoulder would have went out sooner than later and the Twins would have still had the same production.

[laloesch]

On 3/14/2024 at 3:29 PM, jkcarew said:

Who saw Graterol becoming an extreme ground-ball pitcher with a low (easily below league average) K-rate…who relies on an extraordinary low BABiP-against??

I never saw him as a starter...but I didn’t see this coming, either.

Graterol throws hard but he’s a one dimensional pitcher and definitely a one trick pony.  From what I’ve heard from Dodgers fans they are disappointed in him because the Dodger’s pitching staff has tried working with him on other offerings but to no avail.  His k rate is not good enough to be closer material either.  Don’t get me wrong he’s not a bad RP, but he was overhyped to a degree and hasn’t developed as envisioned.

[IndianaTwin]

19 hours ago, DocBauer said:

I think trades of this nature ALWAYS have to come with the caveat of "did you get what you needed/wanted in the trade". And to me, that's far more important than "did my team win this trade"? Now, don't get me wrong. It's always nice to come out on top of any deal! But there's just SO MANY FACTORS to consider....

 

Yes. 

And the corollary is that both teams can "win" a trade, because both received what they needed in exchange for something they needed less. In fact, the ideal is when both teams "win" the trade, because you get a good reputation and are able to make future trades. Trades aren't a zero sum game, particularly when they happen across league lines. 

In my vast experience as a geezer, even in my half-vast experience, seeking to "beat" the other person in a negotiation situation is rarely a long-term winning strategy.  

 

[big dog]

17 hours ago, Riverbrian said:

We don't know but the potential of the draft slot could have been Spencer Strider who was available to be drafted out of Clemson at 66 in 2020. That is cost... that was included in the deal.  

True, but that wasn't just a cost of the trade- it was a cost of every draft pick above 125. I think it's too much to say it was the cost of the trade alone. Strider was there 65 times earlier. I think Spencer Strider is the cost of choosing Aaron Sabato in the first round and Alerick Soularie in the second. Why put all the blame on this trade?

 

 

[stringer bell]

Good conversation about a trade. I am not convinced that Graterol is elite as a bullpen arm. He's had quite a few injuries and he's not been a closer. The low strikeout rate is eventually going to get him in a season. Circumstances limited Maeda's contribution to the Twins. His "great" year was the COVID year and he missed an entire season due to TJ surgery. He's a quality pitcher in his mid-thirties and now pitching for somebody else.

The other guys in the trade may or may not balance out. I am not particularly high on Camargo, but it stands to reason he will debut this season and hopefully provide valu

[jmlease1]

41 minutes ago, stringer bell said:

Good conversation about a trade. I am not convinced that Graterol is elite as a bullpen arm. He's had quite a few injuries and he's not been a closer. The low strikeout rate is eventually going to get him in a season. Circumstances limited Maeda's contribution to the Twins. His "great" year was the COVID year and he missed an entire season due to TJ surgery. He's a quality pitcher in his mid-thirties and now pitching for somebody else.

The other guys in the trade may or may not balance out. I am not particularly high on Camargo, but it stands to reason he will debut this season and hopefully provide value

I mean, even with the big injury to Maeda, he still threw 50 more innings for the Twins than Graterol has for the Dodgers. The Twins really really needed the starter at that point, and as it's harder to and more expensive to find and keep starters...I'm still fine with this trade for the Twins, regardless of anything Raley might end up doing.

[Riverbrian]

3 hours ago, big dog said:

True, but that wasn't just a cost of the trade- it was a cost of every draft pick above 125. I think it's too much to say it was the cost of the trade alone. Strider was there 65 times earlier. I think Spencer Strider is the cost of choosing Aaron Sabato in the first round and Alerick Soularie in the second. Why put all the blame on this trade?

 

 

Blame isn't the right word. The draft pick was part of the trade. This wasn't a Maeda for Graterol straight up deal. 

I'm not going to pretend to know who the Twins would have taken at 66 if they kept the pick. They could have nailed it or blown it... or somewhere in between but there were pretty good current major league players and highly ranked prospects who were available at that pick #66. 

It's hard to factor the value... but that pick had value and it needs to be considered if you are going to consider a winner or loser to this deal.  

[bean5302]

19 hours ago, laloesch said:

Graterol throws hard but he’s a one dimensional pitcher and definitely a one trick pony...

Yep, his one trick is keeping batters off the bases which is standard for elite relievers.

2 hours ago, stringer bell said:

...I am not convinced that Graterol is elite as a bullpen arm. He's had quite a few injuries and he's not been a closer. The low strikeout rate is eventually going to get him in a season...

Duran missed almost 2 years with his UCL surgery and he's pitched in 116 games in the past two years compared to Graterol's 114 games. Graterol had 7 saves last year because the Dodgers use a closer by committee approach, he ranked 2nd on the team in saves and was used in high leverage situations where he generated the most WPA on their pitching staff. Strikeouts are valuable to get out of jams, but not any more than pop ups which Graterol generates at 3x the rate of Duran. Also valuable is limiting home runs. Graterol is 2x as good as Duran at preventing homers.

We can cherry pick, twist and turn, but when it comes to actual and expected results when all is said and done, Duran and Graterol are have been very similar. So again, if you're arguing Graterol hasn't been elite, that's fine, but it rationally means Duran hasn't been elite, either.

[big dog]

1 hour ago, Riverbrian said:

Blame isn't the right word. The draft pick was part of the trade. This wasn't a Maeda for Graterol straight up deal. 

I'm not going to pretend to know who the Twins would have taken at 66 if they kept the pick. They could have nailed it or blown it... or somewhere in between but there were pretty good current major league players and highly ranked prospects who were available at that pick #66. 

It's hard to factor the value... but that pick had value and it needs to be considered if you are going to consider a winner or loser to this deal.  

Agreed, it had value. I might argue that it had the average value of other #65 picks, or I might argue that anyone who chose Sabato first and Soularie second probably would have not made a great pick at 65 or I might argue that they would have chosen Strider. But the expected value of that pick isn't all that great.

[big dog]

12 minutes ago, bean5302 said:

We can cherry pick, twist and turn, but when it comes to actual and expected results when all is said and done, Duran and Graterol are have been very similar. So again, if you're arguing Graterol hasn't been elite, that's fine, but it rationally means Duran hasn't been elite, either.

So if you have Duran on your team and I have Graterol on mine, send me your cell # and I will be extremely happy to do a straight-up trade.

[bean5302]

33 minutes ago, big dog said:

So if you have Duran on your team and I have Graterol on mine, send me your cell # and I will be extremely happy to do a straight-up trade.

Where did I argue Graterol is a "better" relief pitcher than Duran? Between the two, if they were both healthy, and had the exact same team control, I'd still prefer Duran. It doesn't mean Graterol hasn't produced similar results to Duran.

[jmlease1]

18 hours ago, bean5302 said:

Where did I argue Graterol is a "better" relief pitcher than Duran? Between the two, if they were both healthy, and had the exact same team control, I'd still prefer Duran. It doesn't mean Graterol hasn't produced similar results to Duran.

you did suggest that Graterol was elite, though, and that's a little more questionable. He's had one elite season (2023), but there were some underlying numbers that should make you wonder whether he might have been a little lucky in there. And beyond that, we've seen many times that relievers can have an outstanding season of results and follow it up with a season where they're just another guy. I'd want him to prove it over more than one season, which Duran has done. Graterol is a certainly a good reliever, but not yet in Duran's class.

[laloesch]

On 3/16/2024 at 1:57 PM, bean5302 said:

Where did I argue Graterol is a "better" relief pitcher than Duran? Between the two, if they were both healthy, and had the exact same team control, I'd still prefer Duran. It doesn't mean Graterol hasn't produced similar results to Duran.

He hasn't and that's the point.  Graterol has difficulty striking guys out, Duran not so much.  Graterol and Duran are not equivalent pitchers. 

[laloesch]

On 3/16/2024 at 1:01 PM, bean5302 said:

Yep, his one trick is keeping batters off the bases which is standard for elite relievers.

Duran missed almost 2 years with his UCL surgery and he's pitched in 116 games in the past two years compared to Graterol's 114 games. Graterol had 7 saves last year because the Dodgers use a closer by committee approach, he ranked 2nd on the team in saves and was used in high leverage situations where he generated the most WPA on their pitching staff. Strikeouts are valuable to get out of jams, but not any more than pop ups which Graterol generates at 3x the rate of Duran. Also valuable is limiting home runs. Graterol is 2x as good as Duran at preventing homers.

We can cherry pick, twist and turn, but when it comes to actual and expected results when all is said and done, Duran and Graterol are have been very similar. So again, if you're arguing Graterol hasn't been elite, that's fine, but it rationally means Duran hasn't been elite, either.

He's not an elite reliever though, let's keep this real.  And yes he's a one trick pony (he throws hard) and that's about it.  His strikeout rate is NOT good for a RP.

[smitbret]

For the Dodgers:

• Pros: Acquired a solid starting pitcher in Maeda who contributed to their World Series runs.
• Cons: Gave up a high-potential reliever in Graterol, who might have filled a bullpen hole during their "lean years."

For the Twins:

• Pros: Added Maeda to their rotation during their competitive window, potentially improving their playoff chances. They also got a young catcher with upside in Camargo.
• Cons: Maeda underwent Tommy John surgery later, limiting his impact. Graterol and Raley have become valuable relievers for the Dodgers.

[laloesch]

1 hour ago, smitbret said:

For the Dodgers:

• Pros: Acquired a solid starting pitcher in Maeda who contributed to their World Series runs.
• Cons: Gave up a high-potential reliever in Graterol, who might have filled a bullpen hole during their "lean years."

For the Twins:

• Pros: Added Maeda to their rotation during their competitive window, potentially improving their playoff chances. They also got a young catcher with upside in Camargo.
• Cons: Maeda underwent Tommy John surgery later, limiting his impact. Graterol and Raley have become valuable relievers for the Dodgers.

I would add as a side note: the expectation was that Graterol was a soon to be top of the rotation starter.  (Almost everyone on TD was saying that and throwing a fit when he was traded). He hasn't reached those expectations.  He throws very very hard but he has almost no movement on his fastball and hasn't (yet) been able to add or work in any more secondary offerings to reduce his reliance on that fastball and therefore he can't be used as a starter nor as a closer which is what the Dodgers were / are hoping for.  Not saying he won't, just progress to date.  I'm also not saying he's not a good RP, because he is, but he hasn't lived up to expectations. 

Overall, the Twins did alright in this trade.  Now if Graterol had continued to add pitches and improve his repertoire and become a ++ starter this trade would have looked really bad for the Twins.   

[stringer bell]

1 hour ago, laloesch said:

I would add as a side note: the expectation was that Graterol was a soon to be top of the rotation starter.  (Almost everyone on TD was saying that and throwing a fit when he was traded). He hasn't reached those expectations.  He throws very very hard but he has almost no movement on his fastball and hasn't (yet) been able to add or work in any more secondary offerings to reduce his reliance on that fastball and therefore he can't be used as a starter nor as a closer which is what the Dodgers were / are hoping for.  Not saying he won't, just progress to date.  I'm also not saying he's not a good RP, because he is, but he hasn't lived up to expectations. 

Overall, the Twins did alright in this trade.  Now if Graterol had continued to add pitches and improve his repertoire and become a ++ starter this trade would have looked really bad for the Twins.   

Agree, but expectations of any pitcher to be a ++starter are probably inflated. 

Where would Graterol rank in the current Twins' bullpen? Certainly behind Durán, would he be ahead of Stewart or Jax? Honestly a tough call. I don't know if I'd trade him straight up for Jax, because Jax seems to be a rare one with durability (quickly looking for some wood to knock on) as well as good stuff. 

[USAFChief]

3 hours ago, laloesch said:

I would add as a side note: the expectation was that Graterol was a soon to be top of the rotation starter.  (Almost everyone on TD was saying that and throwing a fit when he was traded). He hasn't reached those expectations.  He throws very very hard but he has almost no movement on his fastball and hasn't (yet) been able to add or work in any more secondary offerings to reduce his reliance on that fastball and therefore he can't be used as a starter nor as a closer which is what the Dodgers were / are hoping for.  Not saying he won't, just progress to date.  I'm also not saying he's not a good RP, because he is, but he hasn't lived up to expectations. 

Overall, the Twins did alright in this trade.  Now if Graterol had continued to add pitches and improve his repertoire and become a ++ starter this trade would have looked really bad for the Twins.   

By the time of the trade, I don't recall most people believing Graterol would still end up a starter.

He'd always been a likely bullpen candidate, and been moved to the pen the year before. Starter dreams--always a long shot--were long gone. 

[Richmond Dude]

What if, and just stay with me here, *both* teams came out ahead on the deal?

[KirbyDome89]

4 hours ago, stringer bell said:

Agree, but expectations of any pitcher to be a ++starter are probably inflated. 

Where would Graterol rank in the current Twins' bullpen? Certainly behind Durán, would he be ahead of Stewart or Jax? Honestly a tough call. I don't know if I'd trade him straight up for Jax, because Jax seems to be a rare one with durability (quickly looking for some wood to knock on) as well as good stuff. 

Jax has thrown 20 more innings th last two years, that isn't negligible, but there isn't some availability gulf between him and Graterol. Unless you think Brusdar has been insanely luckly (his FIP might suggest he has been a bit) I wouldn't consider putting him ahead of Jax a tough call. If durability is part of the analysis, Stewart has no place in the conversation. 

[laloesch]

15 hours ago, USAFChief said:

By the time of the trade, I don't recall most people believing Graterol would still end up a starter.

He'd always been a likely bullpen candidate, and been moved to the pen the year before. Starter dreams--always a long shot--were long gone. 

That's not what I remember.  In fact, I remember A TON of people here being extremely upset about the trade thinking he was the next Johan Santana or Francisco Liriano which appeared to be the consensus amongst the majority of fans posting on TD.  

[jmlease1]

1 hour ago, laloesch said:

That's not what I remember.  In fact, I remember A TON of people here being extremely upset about the trade thinking he was the next Johan Santana or Francisco Liriano which appeared to be the consensus amongst the majority of fans posting on TD.  

You might be recalling intensity rather than size? I'm sure there were people on the site who were very loud about how they shouldn't do this because Graterol could be the next great starter for the Twins. I'm not sure there were huge numbers of them who were convinced that he was the next Santana/Liriano. The same 6 people posting often on the topic can create a false sense of what the broader community is thinking. I mean, we still have people that pop up from time to time suggesting that Duran should be turned back into a starter, but I don't think they're representative of the community as a whole.

I think there were people who still saw Graterol as a potential starter at the time of the trade, but it was increasingly a minority position. Because there was a lot of talk about this deal in terms of trading a reliever for a starter from the Twins perspective. There's also no question that the Dodgers acquired him with the intent that he be a reliever.

[Linus]

My recollection is the Twins were willing to trade Graterol because they determined he was bound for the bullpen. One reason why some fans got upset was that Graterol was our first true flamethrower.  Interesting guy - throws 100 but doesn’t strike out that many.