Twins Lack Starting Pitching Depth Behind Louie Varland

[nicksaviking]

11 minutes ago, beckmt said:

This is 20/20 hindsight, and you don't know with pitchers who will breakout, if and when.  Twins made good trades here, let's not second guess everything.

I've liked the Twins pitching trades, even the ones that didn't work out.

However, I was saying this all winter: The offseason trades the Twins made for pitching have been overall good, the midseason trades have been poor. And I believe there is good reason for this. At midseason, the team buying the prospects have all that more information on them. The team selling the prospects should have the advantage the further away they are from the majors, as they should have a better handle on these players than the team they are dealing them to.

[Mike Sixel]

11 minutes ago, KirbyDome89 said:

Huh? I guess define your expectations here...

If Oakland or the White Sox are the measuring stick then sure, the Twins pitching situation isn't so bad.

If you're trying to make it through the regular season and win some postseason games, praying your 1-4 stay 100% healthy, Paddack's struggles are just rust, and Varland or SWR can hold down the 5 spot because the alternative is a Keuchel clone seems like a lot to ask. Are other would be contenders doing that with a fully healthy rotation? 

Show me the teams with AAA pitchers that you expect to be better than back end. That's all I'm asking. There aren't many, any, when I look. 

[Mike Sixel]

23 minutes ago, chpettit19 said:

What teams have prospects they're excited about in AAA but aren't throwing into their opening day rotation? I'd wager a lot of them. Well, at least a lot of the good ones. It's actually the basis of your entire strategy of relying on young guys. You have to have young guys in AAA to rely on. Good ones. Not just system filler guys. If you're going to do your "rotate through young guys instead of mediocre, or bad, vets" strategy you have to have young guys worth rotating through. I agree with the strategy in general. I just don't think the Twins have done a good job of loading AAA, or AA, with guys you can actually do it with. The average minor leaguer isn't worthy of being part of your strategy if you're expecting to be a good team. Because most won't be any good at all. They'd perform like Varland. They aren't all just automatically high ceiling guys.

Pittsburgh isn't doing anything that weird with Skene. I assume that's what you're referring to. They're going to get an extra year out of him while they build his innings over the first 1/4 or 1/2 the season. It's not some outrageous plan. They had Jared Jones in their opening day rotation and kept depth in AAA to rotate through if he struggled. It's what you're asking the Twins to do. If you don't think it's reasonable to stash talent in AAA at the start of the year you need to change your desired "rotate through young guys with options" strategy because it won't work with just any random minor leaguer.

"Sitting on good pitchers in AAA" is literally the basis of every good team's team building strategy. The Dodgers, Rays, Braves, and Cleveland have been doing it with pitchers for years. It's why they're good. It's what the minors are for. My stance is that the Twins don't have good enough prospects for this plan right now. SWR came into the year going the wrong way as a prospect. Festa was a good, not great prospect with 3 AAA starts. My argument is that 8 years in they shouldn't be having to rely on those types of prospects. 

I think it's reasonable, I don't think as many teams succeed as people think. Twins are already down two, and are bringing up a guy many here believe in. How deep do you realistically expect them to be? 

Not that I'm defending the trade with Seattle as their only move....

[Mike Sixel]

26 minutes ago, chpettit19 said:

What teams have prospects they're excited about in AAA but aren't throwing into their opening day rotation? I'd wager a lot of them. Well, at least a lot of the good ones. It's actually the basis of your entire strategy of relying on young guys. You have to have young guys in AAA to rely on. Good ones. Not just system filler guys. If you're going to do your "rotate through young guys instead of mediocre, or bad, vets" strategy you have to have young guys worth rotating through. I agree with the strategy in general. I just don't think the Twins have done a good job of loading AAA, or AA, with guys you can actually do it with. The average minor leaguer isn't worthy of being part of your strategy if you're expecting to be a good team. Because most won't be any good at all. They'd perform like Varland. They aren't all just automatically high ceiling guys.

Pittsburgh isn't doing anything that weird with Skene. I assume that's what you're referring to. They're going to get an extra year out of him while they build his innings over the first 1/4 or 1/2 the season. It's not some outrageous plan. They had Jared Jones in their opening day rotation and kept depth in AAA to rotate through if he struggled. It's what you're asking the Twins to do. If you don't think it's reasonable to stash talent in AAA at the start of the year you need to change your desired "rotate through young guys with options" strategy because it won't work with just any random minor leaguer.

"Sitting on good pitchers in AAA" is literally the basis of every good team's team building strategy. The Dodgers, Rays, Braves, and Cleveland have been doing it with pitchers for years. It's why they're good. It's what the minors are for. My stance is that the Twins don't have good enough prospects for this plan right now. SWR came into the year going the wrong way as a prospect. Festa was a good, not great prospect with 3 AAA starts. My argument is that 8 years in they shouldn't be having to rely on those types of prospects. 

Holding down skenes for an extra year of control might cost them a chance at the division this year. It better work better than it did with Strasburg, because it cost the nationals that first year. Plus, skenes is healthy and better than nearly all their pitchers right now. 

[chpettit19]

Just now, Mike Sixel said:

I think it's reasonable, I don't think as many teams succeed as people think. Twins are already down two, and are bringing up a guy many here believe in. How deep do you realistically expect them to be? 

Not that I'm defending the trade with Seattle as their only move....

The vast majority of prospects fail. That's not the argument. Of course most teams fail at this, because most prospects fail. The expectation is what I'm talking about. SWR didn't come into this season as someone people around here believed in. Festa has some fans for sure. Who else do the Twins have at AAA? Dobnak? Boushley? Canterino? Headrick? I think Festa is the only guy that people around here had expectations of more than #5 starter for. And the people with those expectations were mostly saying mid-season for his debut. And I'm not one of those people with that expectation for him.

Festa isn't a top 100 prospect, but the offseason leads to many fans staring at the possibilities and convincing themselves these young guys are better than they are and the future of the Twins is as bright as the sun. Festa isn't a great bet at being more than a back end starter. So the Twins have 0 guys in AAA who I expect to be more than a #5. I realistically expect them to have more than 0. Especially by year 8. You can disagree with my expectations for Festa, but I don't see a single starter in AAA with more than back end starter potential (Canterino unfortunately can't stay healthy so he's now a pen arm to me, which I hate to say). My stance is that there are a lot of teams with better pitchers in AAA than the Twins have.

[chpettit19]

7 minutes ago, Mike Sixel said:

Holding down skenes for an extra year of control might cost them a chance at the division this year. It better work better than it did with Strasburg, because it cost the nationals that first year. Plus, skenes is healthy and better than nearly all their pitchers right now. 

I'm not saying it's right, wrong, or somewhere in between. But it's an often used strategy that is by no means crazy or outlandish. Elite prospects are kept in AAA to start seasons all the time. Like literally every single season. The O's did it with Jackson Holliday and it's currently looking like they should've kept him there for longer. You're going to be holding your breath a long time if you're expecting teams to start carrying all their top prospects on opening day. Nobody is going to do that.

[chpettit19]

15 minutes ago, Mike Sixel said:

Show me the teams with AAA pitchers that you expect to be better than back end. That's all I'm asking. There aren't many, any, when I look. 

Paul Skenes, Ricky Tiedemann, Mick Abel, AJ Smith-Shawver, Connor Phillips, Nick Frasso, Carson Whisenhunt, Max Meyer (was on opening day roster then sent down). All top 100 type arms in AAA. That's the Pirates, Blue Jays, Phillies, Braves, Reds, Dodgers, Giants, and Marlins. That's 5 or 6 teams who were/are legitimately trying to make the playoffs this year that all have pitchers that are expected to be better than back end in AAA. It's smart team building.

[Mike Sixel]

7 minutes ago, chpettit19 said:

Paul Skenes, Ricky Tiedemann, Mick Abel, AJ Smith-Shawver, Connor Phillips, Nick Frasso, Carson Whisenhunt, Max Meyer (was on opening day roster then sent down). All top 100 type arms in AAA. That's the Pirates, Blue Jays, Phillies, Braves, Reds, Dodgers, Giants, and Marlins. That's 5 or 6 teams who were/are legitimately trying to make the playoffs this year that all have pitchers that are expected to be better than back end in AAA. It's smart team building.

Multiple? People here are seeing they need two to three guys in AAA ready to start. One? Sure, that's realistic for some teams, but an awful lot of teams don't even have four legit starters in the majors. We'll disagree on what's realistic, I'm ok with that. That's not unusual for me here. 

[Mike Sixel]

9 minutes ago, chpettit19 said:

Paul Skenes, Ricky Tiedemann, Mick Abel, AJ Smith-Shawver, Connor Phillips, Nick Frasso, Carson Whisenhunt, Max Meyer (was on opening day roster then sent down). All top 100 type arms in AAA. That's the Pirates, Blue Jays, Phillies, Braves, Reds, Dodgers, Giants, and Marlins. That's 5 or 6 teams who were/are legitimately trying to make the playoffs this year that all have pitchers that are expected to be better than back end in AAA. It's smart team building.

Pittsburgh doesn't have four legit MLB starters, they don't have depth. 

[chpettit19]

13 minutes ago, Mike Sixel said:

Pittsburgh doesn't have four legit MLB starters, they don't have depth. 

That wasn't what you asked for. You said "Show me the teams with AAA pitchers that you expect to be better than back end. That's all I'm asking. There aren't many, any, when I look." There are teams with guys in AAA that many expect to be better than back end starters. 

 

14 minutes ago, Mike Sixel said:

Multiple? People here are seeing they need two to three guys in AAA ready to start. One? Sure, that's realistic for some teams, but an awful lot of teams don't even have four legit starters in the majors. We'll disagree on what's realistic, I'm ok with that. That's not unusual for me here. 

How do you expect the Twins to pull off your "rotate young guys instead of paying for mediocre vets" plan? You seem to have contradicting views. On 1 hand you say "young guys have higher potential so rotate them between AAA and the majors to find the ones who can stick" while on the other you say "nobody should expect teams to have guys in AAA that are any better than backend guys." You can't have both. Your strategy doesn't work if you don't think teams could/should hold good prospects in AAA. Where are they getting the young guys to rotate through? Your strategy then comes down to hoping no name prospects are suddenly legit MLB talent. And in your idea, not just legit talent, but better than just mediocre talent. The entire history of the game says that's not even remotely realistic. 

I'm legitimately curious as to how you think teams can pull off your strategy when you don't think they can get more than a single AAA starter at a time to be excited about.

[Mike Sixel]

1 minute ago, chpettit19 said:

That wasn't what you asked for. You said "Show me the teams with AAA pitchers that you expect to be better than back end. That's all I'm asking. There aren't many, any, when I look." There are teams with guys in AAA that many expect to be better than back end starters. 

 

How do you expect the Twins to pull off your "rotate young guys instead of paying for mediocre vets" plan? You seem to have contradicting views. On 1 hand you say "young guys have higher potential so rotate them between AAA and the majors to find the ones who can stick" while on the other you say "nobody should expect teams to have guys in AAA that are any better than backend guys." You can't have both. Your strategy doesn't work if you don't think teams could/should hold good prospects in AAA. Where are they getting the young guys to rotate through? Your strategy then comes down to hoping no name prospects are suddenly legit MLB talent. And in your idea, not just legit talent, but better than just mediocre talent. The entire history of the game says that's not even remotely realistic. 

I'm legitimately curious as to how you think teams can pull off your strategy when you don't think they can get more than a single AAA starter at a time to be excited about.

I never said it worked all the time. People here are asking the twins to have depth, pointing out a team with a guy in AAA when they don't have guys in the majors doesn't help their argument that other good teams have depth. Sorry that wasn't clear. I thought I was, but clearly not. 

I don't have to be excited about guys to prefer them over bad veterans....I don't want bad veterans, period. I'd rather roll the dice on severino, who does not excite me, than have Santana. 

Are you arguing at the end that I shouldn't expect more than one player?

[KirbyDome89]

19 minutes ago, Mike Sixel said:

Show me the teams with AAA pitchers that you expect to be better than back end. That's all I'm asking. There aren't many, any, when I look. 

I'm not even locked in on the Twins minor league affiliates, zero chance I can rattle off other prospects, or care enough to start digging.

I sincerely doubt that the Twins current situation is the norm amongst contenders, but I reserve the right to be wrong...

[Mike Sixel]

Just now, KirbyDome89 said:

I'm not even locked in on the Twins minor league affiliates, zero chance I can rattle off other prospects, or care enough to start digging.

I sincerely doubt that the Twins current situation is the norm amongst contenders, but I reserve the right to be wrong...

Fair! I have, and very few if any contenders are deep in pitching anyone here would love to have from top to AAA. 

[David Maro]

This is what happens when the FO who are supposed to be the end all be all of pitching.They traded away pitching to bring in dead arm pitchers one after another.Now they get what they sew.They can only hope that the big 3 stay healthy and until Varland or SWR can become a #5 go BP game.

[chpettit19]

5 minutes ago, Mike Sixel said:

I never said it worked all the time. People here are asking the twins to have depth, pointing out a team with a guy in AAA when they don't have guys in the majors doesn't help their argument that other good teams have depth. Sorry that wasn't clear. I thought I was, but clearly not. 

I don't have to be excited about guys to prefer them over bad veterans....I don't want bad veterans, period. I'd rather roll the dice on severino, who does not excite me, than have Santana. 

Are you arguing at the end that I shouldn't expect more than one player?

My stance is that if you want to rotate through young players with the hope of them being any better than the Gallo, Solano, Farmer, Santana, Taylor, Margot, Bundy, Archer, Shoemaker types the Twins go with then you need to believe it's possible to have legit young players in AAA. And/or AA. Because it can actually get worse than Santana. I'm not excited about Santana either. Hated the signing. Hate their plan to have the bench be all short side platoon bats. I know we agree there. I just think it's possible to actually have legit talent in the minors that you aren't starting on your opening day roster.

It's how the Dodgers, Braves, Rays, Cleveland, Houston, etc. maintain success as teams, or at least as a pitching staff in Cleveland's case. Constant, or close to it, development of prospects to provide real depth is possible. Those teams do it. My argument is that the Twins aren't producing actual prospect talent like that. And if you aren't developing that prospect talent you have to bring in players like the ones I listed above. Because, as bad as those guys are, there's worse. Young guys being young doesn't automatically mean they have a chance at being better than those guys. Most prospects fail. It's hard to continually produce talent from your system. It's why so many teams go through winning cycles. They get a wave of prospects that work out, but then can't back it up with more so go in the tank. Even the Yankees are going through that right now. 

I just think if you're going to push for the strategy you push for (and one I agree with) you have to believe teams can have solid numbers of legit prospects sitting in AAA year after year. It's the only way that strategy works.

[Major League Ready]

19 hours ago, Mike Sixel said:

Let's relitigate stuff again!

As if that never happens here.  How many articles did we have about cutting spending and how many times have we and will we here about how the FO blew it this off season?  The site is often dominated by constant rehashing of whatever fans don't like. 

Povich stepping up and Steer playing at an even higher level is not relitigating.  It's a new development.  The debate has been basically theoretical in terms of if that team was worthy of investment and even more so about the future costs.  Well, the future is here.  We know exactly what we gained (nothing) and we are starting to understand the costs.

We all want the same thing, a team with lots of talent.  We want to get over the hump.  You better make those investments in the right player at the right time because if you trade away players that will contribute for 6+ years, it's going to make it very difficult to get over that hump.  I don't sweat a 1 year $5M player not working out.  Not even a little.  Hell, the really expensive FAs fail at a high rate.  That problem goes away quickly.  

The current Oriole's team is credited with drafting very well and they have.  Eight of the their top contributors were drafted.  Seven other top contributors we prospects/waived players acquired before every amassing 1.5 wins in a season.  One player (Kimbrell) was acquired in free agency.  I realize you and many others hate the message but the methods we love as fans (free agents and trades for proven) succeed far less often than those teams that play that long game if you just bother to look.

[Mike Sixel]

3 hours ago, Major League Ready said:

As if that never happens here.  How many articles did we have about cutting spending and how many times have we and will we here about how the FO blew it this off season?  The site is often dominated by constant rehashing of whatever fans don't like. 

Povich stepping up and Steer playing at an even higher level is not relitigating.  It's a new development.  The debate has been basically theoretical in terms of if that team was worthy of investment and even more so about the future costs.  Well, the future is here.  We know exactly what we gained (nothing) and we are starting to understand the costs.

We all want the same thing, a team with lots of talent.  We want to get over the hump.  You better make those investments in the right player at the right time because if you trade away players that will contribute for 6+ years, it's going to make it very difficult to get over that hump.  I don't sweat a 1 year $5M player not working out.  Not even a little.  Hell, the really expensive FAs fail at a high rate.  That problem goes away quickly.  

The current Oriole's team is credited with drafting very well and they have.  Eight of the their top contributors were drafted.  Seven other top contributors we prospects/waived players acquired before every amassing 1.5 wins in a season.  One player (Kimbrell) was acquired in free agency.  I realize you and many others hate the message but the methods we love as fans (free agents and trades for proven) succeed far less often than those teams that play that long game if you just bother to look.

I literally talk about drafting better being needed, follow the minor league report, and beg them to trust the guys they develop over veterans every year. So I have no idea what you are talking about. 

[USAFChief]

3 hours ago, Major League Ready said:

As if that never happens here.  How many articles did we have about cutting spending and how many times have we and will we here about how the FO blew it this off season?  The site is often dominated by constant rehashing of whatever fans don't like. 

Povich stepping up and Steer playing at an even higher level is not relitigating.  It's a new development.  The debate has been basically theoretical in terms of if that team was worthy of investment and even more so about the future costs.  Well, the future is here.  We know exactly what we gained (nothing) and we are starting to understand the costs.

We all want the same thing, a team with lots of talent.  We want to get over the hump.  You better make those investments in the right player at the right time because if you trade away players that will contribute for 6+ years, it's going to make it very difficult to get over that hump.  I don't sweat a 1 year $5M player not working out.  Not even a little.  Hell, the really expensive FAs fail at a high rate.  That problem goes away quickly.  

The current Oriole's team is credited with drafting very well and they have.  Eight of the their top contributors were drafted.  Seven other top contributors we prospects/waived players acquired before every amassing 1.5 wins in a season.  One player (Kimbrell) was acquired in free agency.  I realize you and many others hate the message but the methods we love as fans (free agents and trades for proven) succeed far less often than those teams that play that long game if you just bother to look.

You're not seriously going to lecture other posters on repetitive posts, are you, Mr Never-Ever-Miss-An-Opportunity-To-Tell-Us-Why-The-Poor-Pohlads-Can't-Possibly-Spend-ANY-Money? 

Really??

[Major League Ready]

7 hours ago, Mike Sixel said:

I literally talk about drafting better being needed, follow the minor league report, and beg them to trust the guys they develop over veterans every year. So I have no idea what you are talking about. 

I was referring to the general sentiment of all posters, not you.  I could have / should have been more clear.  The point was what people want and what has worked are not the same thing.  All the complaining is partially a product of people thinking a given approach makes the most sense without a clear picture of what has worked.  Having compiled the acquisition method for every 1.5+ WAR player on every 92+ win team for every team in the bottom 17 of revenue since the turn of the century, that history suggests the most successful practices are not consistent with how many fans want to see things done.