Pitchers we didn't get part 3

[nicksaviking]

I don't think the Twins passed on Liriano, Feldman and Villanueva because if salary.

 

How do you figure? The Twins had been interested in Liriano up until he was signed by Pittsburgh.

[drjim]

Just those two? Not Lincecum or Nolasco or Vargas?

 

I would personally be fine with many guys in that tier. I mentioned the two I would target first.

[ThePuck]

I would personally be fine with many guys in that tier. I mentioned the two I would target first.

 

Johnson because he's a Minnesota guy I imagine? Or is it that you think we have a better chance with all his injury history. I guess I'm not asking who you think it's more realistic that we sign so much as who we actually should target. If those two are at the top of the list, why? Why them over the three I mentioned? Just asking

[jorgenswest]

When will this team be ready to compete? Wouldn't getting quality pitching accelerate that time frame.

 

No. Sign old guys and they will be declining in the second and third year of their contracts while the younger guys improve and the Twins stay mediocre.

[ThePuck]

No. Sign old guys and they will be declining in the second and third year of their contracts while the younger guys improve and the Twins stay mediocre.

 

okay, you didn't answer when we'll be competitive, which kind of nullifies everything else you wrote. I'm asking, when is that definitive year that the Twins will be competitive when we can go out and sign FA pitching during the offseason prior in order to ensure none of his years will be wasted?

[BabyJesusBuxton]

No. Sign old guys and they will be declining in the second and third year of their contracts while the younger guys improve and the Twins stay mediocre.

 

Not too many SP above 35 are going to get more than 2 years in a deal but I get your point.

[Seth Stohs]

Not sure about the rest. Overall, it was just a really weak class.

 

I kind of think that's what Terry Ryan said before the free agency season. I think I remember a lot of people vehemently disagreeing with that.

[ericchri]

Most free agents are close to if not 30 or over. Most players don't hit the big till they are 24, 25. 6 years of team control...

 

Yep, I wasn't actually surprised by it per se, but looking at a list like that it kinda reinforces the notion. I think in a sense that's part of why there was so much hype around Anibal Sanchez, since he was only 29 when he hit free agency. Yeah he got 5 years, but he was young enough that it didn't seem quite as big a reach.

 

There's still a fair number of 30's and 31's on that list. And obviously guys older than that can still be really good. Depends on your goals for the player you're signing, but it's hard to see many guys you'd want to risk a lot of years on. Do you like signing guys for a year, then following it up by having to do it again next year, and the year after, or do you like taking the bigger risk on a guy you like and signing him for multiple years? (That's a rhetorical question, not addressed to anyone specifically, but just musing on GM decision-making)

[BabyJesusBuxton]

okay, you didn't answer when we'll be competitive, which kind of nullifies everything else you wrote. I'm asking, when is that definitive year that the Twins will be competitive when we can go out and sign FA pitching during the offseason prior in order to ensure none of his years will be wasted?

 

I have been adamant that signing a FA pitcher last offseason to a long term deal was not the right time. However, this upcoming offseason it looks like the FA class is going to be a lot deeper and the Twins will also know more of what they have in their younger pitchers. Diamond and Worley aren't as good as advertised last offseason, Hendricks hasn't done anything to improve his stock, etc.

 

I agree with your point that you can't wait until the team is good and hope a good pitcher will be available. If you are able to sign an above average (#2 or 3) pitcher to a good long term (3-4 years) deal, you should do it. I just thought last offseason wasn't the right time based on what was available.

[Seth Stohs]

People do realize that Josh Johnson left Minnesota when he was like 2-3 years old, right? maybe still some family here. Also a guy who has been hurt for the majority of his career. When he's on, he can be great, but he's been hurt for so long, and what he's done so far in 2013 certainly doesn't bode well. I'm all for taking a chance on him, but he's not a guy I'd spend wildly on.

[ThePuck]

People do realize that Josh Johnson left Minnesota when he was like 2-3 years old, right? maybe still some family here. Also a guy who has been hurt for the majority of his career. When he's on, he can be great, but he's been hurt for so long, and what he's done so far in 2013 certainly doesn't bode well. I'm all for taking a chance on him, but he's not a guy I'd spend wildly on.

 

I've never understood that hometown argument either. For the standpoint of wanting them over other players or that we think we have an 'in' with him because he's from Minnesota.

 

I'm from California, and I wouldn't move back there unless the offer from a company was so over the top ridiculous as to like quadruple my current salary along with my wife's and no other company in most any other state came close.

[drjim]

Johnson because he's a Minnesota guy I imagine? Or is it that you think we have a better chance with all his injury history. I guess I'm not asking who you think it's more realistic that we sign so much as who we actually should target. If those two are at the top of the list, why? Why them over the three I mentioned? Just asking

 

Johnson because he has upside. I wouldn't go huge on him by any means and he would have to be the second guy signed.

 

Hughes because I think he would be better in Target Field and by leaving the AL East.

 

Vargas and Nolasco would be fine but I see minimal upside beyond what they are. Lincecum is intriguing but is on the decline and will probably be overpaid.

[Mike Sixel]

People in this state love the "hes one of us" angle. Look at Mauer....he fled the state the first chance he got, and yet people here still love to talk about him being from MN. He chose to move, first chance he got.......how is he more minnesotan than Morneau, who chooses to live here full time?

 

That's why people can play the "johnson is from MN" card with the general public. I don't get it at all, but is a thing in MN.

 

On the topic of contracts for Johnson, if he shows he's healthy this year, he'll get 3-5 years on his next deal, imo.

[Oxtung]

I would still rather have signed many of the pitchers being maligned in this thread instead of Correia. Kevin's numbers are about as good as they could possible be and still he is probably untradable. There was no upside in our signings this past season and to me that makes them mistakes. I think MLBTradeRumors put it nicely:

 

...the true arguable failure was not the decision to withhold from spending, but rather the failure to deploy funds in a way that would give the team some upside (either generating an outside shot at contention or building trade chips).

[drjim]

I never thought of Johnson as from Minnesota. I thought of him as the pitcher from that list with the chance to have the best season but with huge risk.

 

I see Hughes as the guy with the best chance to improve in new surroundings.

[ThePuck]

J

Vargas and Nolasco would be fine but I see minimal upside beyond what they are. Lincecum is intriguing but is on the decline and will probably be overpaid.

 

Well, one would argue that most if not all free agents are what they are by the time they get to FA. They are close to if not at or over 30. Why is thats an argument against Varags and Nolasco and not everyone else?

 

And what Vargas and Nolasco are right now are darn good pitchers. Nothing wrong with just getting that. Lincecum si going to cost, but after last year and this not as much as one might think. Besides, it's not like we're strapped for cash. :-)

[Brock Beauchamp]

I kind of think that's what Terry Ryan said before the free agency season. I think I remember a lot of people vehemently disagreeing with that.

 

*wanders off, whistling a tune innocently*

[MichiganTwins]

Well, it might have something to do with him actually being a native Minnesotan? Also, I think it is a feel good story. It is easy to cheer for a guy who went to high school in the area. You feel connected to him. People want to connect with the players, and a person being from Minnesota is one way the player is "one of us."

[PseudoSABR]

I would still rather have signed many of the pitchers being maligned in this thread instead of Correia. Kevin's numbers are about as good as they could possible be and still he is probably untradable. There was no upside in our signings this past season and to me that makes them mistakes. I think MLBTradeRumors put it nicely:

You can't simply chase after upside. You sign a pitcher like Correia because you are chasing after other pitchers with risk (like Harden and Pelfrey). A whole staff risky upside types, leads to even more starts by PJ Walters and Cole De Vries.

 

As others have said Correia was signed to be a back end inning eater, that he is our best pitcher shouldn't be used against the validity of his signing...

[TheLeviathan]

I would still rather have signed many of the pitchers being maligned in this thread instead of Correia. Kevin's numbers are about as good as they could possible be and still he is probably untradable. There was no upside in our signings this past season and to me that makes them mistakes. I think MLBTradeRumors put it nicely:

 

That is part of what is being missed here. Yes, Correia has outperformed expectations and that has got us what? An ok, aging player on a rebuilding team who has no trade value. It was a fine signing, but we are seeing the problem with signing low ceiling innings eaters.

 

The rest of these guys haven't live up to expectations, but they had far more upside. For a rebuilding team give me upside with a big chance of failure over innings eaters 10 days out of 10. Hendricks or Hernandez or damn near anyone else can eat innings on a bad team going nowhere.

[TheLeviathan]

(like Harden and Pelfrey). A whole staff risky upside types, leads to even more starts by PJ Walters and Cole De Vries.

 

i fail to see how that amounts to more than a win or two at the end of the day. I would much rather chase upside for a rebuilding team. Plus.....if those are your "risks" to justify low ceiling replacement guys....we take some awfully predictably stupid risks.

[drjim]

Well, one would argue that most if not all free agents are what they are by the time they get to FA. They are close to if not at or over 30. Why is thats an argument against Varags and Nolasco and not everyone else?

 

And what Vargas and Nolasco are right now are darn good pitchers. Nothing wrong with just getting that. Lincecum si going to cost, but after last year and this not as much as one might think. Besides, it's not like we're strapped for cash. :-)

 

Overpaid was directed at Lincecum specifically as he will ger paid some for whay he has done instead of what he will likely do in the future.

 

I would have no problem with Vargas or Nolasco I just prefer Hughes and Johnson.

[ThePuck]

Overpaid was directed at Lincecum specifically as he will ger paid some for whay he has done instead of what he will likely do in the future.

 

I would have no problem with Vargas or Nolasco I just prefer Hughes and Johnson.

 

Cool. Thanks for the answers.

[drjim]

That is part of what is being missed here. Yes, Correia has outperformed expectations and that has got us what? An ok, aging player on a rebuilding team who has no trade value. It was a fine signing, but we are seeing the problem with signing low ceiling innings eaters.

 

The rest of these guys haven't live up to expectations, but they had far more upside. For a rebuilding team give me upside with a big chance of failure over innings eaters 10 days out of 10. Hendricks or Hernandez or damn near anyone else can eat innings on a bad team going nowhere.

 

I don't think it is no trade value and is certainly higher than the upside arms you called for instead.

 

I think Ryan saw value in Correia as a stabilizing backend starter. Someone who could answer the bell on day one and make a start evert fifth day while he could work through the various other arms. He has at least done that. I think your alternative is sound and I would also lean that way personally but there is value in what Correia has provided the Twins. They still need to put out a lineup abd rotation throughout the season.

[TheLeviathan]

I don't think it is no trade value and is certainly higher than the upside arms you called for instead.

 

Yes, Correia has more value than the failed upside arms.....but when you take incredibly foolish risks (Pelfrey and Harden), you need to do something with upside IMO.

 

As I said, Correia is fine, but he's only well-justified if you take some smarter, more expensive risks like guys you have suggested. (McCarthy for example) Ultimately, McCarthy didn't turn out, but he was a much smarter bet than Harden or Pelfrey.

[TNTwinsFan]

Am I the only one that thinks Pelfrey is going to surprise this last half? He may have his hiccups now and again, but I think Aug/Sep are going to be where he cements himself as a legitimate 3/4 Starter for next year. If the Twins aren't thinking about signing him next year, they ought to start having those conversations with the staff and Pelfrey's agent, like quick. He might be one of the best FA signings the Twins make this decade (that was my best Nostradamos (sp?) impression)!

[Riverbrian]

Am I the only one that thinks Pelfrey is going to surprise this last half? He may have his hiccups now and again, but I think Aug/Sep are going to be where he cements himself as a legitimate 3/4 Starter for next year. If the Twins aren't thinking about signing him next year, they ought to start having those conversations with the staff and Pelfrey's agent, like quick. He might be one of the best FA signings the Twins make this decade (that was my best Nostradamos (sp?) impression)!

 

It's quite possible. It certainly wouldn't surprise me.

 

Personally... I'm just amazed at the patience that the Twins Front Office has shown with him. I don't know if I would have been that patient.

[ThePuck]

Am I the only one that thinks Pelfrey is going to surprise this last half?

 

he's already going in that direction so hopefully.

[drjim]

It's quite possible. It certainly wouldn't surprise me.

 

Personally... I'm just amazed at the patience that the Twins Front Office has shown with him. I don't know if I would have been that patient.

 

It's amazing how patient you can be when there are no other options.

[drjim]

Yes, Correia has more value than the failed upside arms.....but when you take incredibly foolish risks (Pelfrey and Harden), you need to do something with upside IMO.

 

As I said, Correia is fine, but he's only well-justified if you take some smarter, more expensive risks like guys you have suggested. (McCarthy for example) Ultimately, McCarthy didn't turn out, but he was a much smarter bet than Harden or Pelfrey.

 

I'm not sure McCarthy was a smarter bet based upon known medical concerns going into the year.

 

And Harden has little to do with this. He was a minor league flyer.