Article: Grading Last Year's Free Agent Pitching Market

[PseudoSABR]

He signed a pitcher that has pitched to the best of his abilities and is worth next to nothing in the trade market and has been only mediocre for this team (and if you look at his peripherals that might be generous).

Your framing the Corriea signing to make TR look as foolish as possible. It just seems intellectually dishonest, especially when you really have no idea what KC's trade value is (likely more than next to nothing).

 

Ryan didn't do a good job, but in my mind, a good job wasn't really possible. Evaluating TR is based not only the pitchers he acquired, but also the ones he avoided. It's dishonest to continue to critique TR for not signing such-and-such pitchers and not to credit him for avoiding such-and-such pitchers. It's a wash.

[drjim]

Ryan shouldn't be judged on how players perform after they were signed. He should be judged on how they were expected to perform at the time of the signings. He has little control over what happens after the pen meets the paper.

 

Expected to perform based on what standard? Your standard? Ryan's standard? A standard based on previous performance?

 

This is the most baffling thing that you continually assert. A GM's acquisition(s) should be judged pretty much exclusively on how they perform. The job of the GM is to take all information - recent performance, scouting reports, health risks, fit to clubhouse/roster/ballpark, etc. - and make a decision. You can examine the process but it is ultimately about results.

[PseudoSABR]

The job of the GM is to take all information - recent performance, scouting reports, health risks, fit to clubhouse/roster/ballpark, etc. - and make a decision. You can examine the process but it is ultimately about results.

Right, too many are assuming they have as much information as the FO does. I think many are relying too heavily on stastical analysis (because that's all they have to work with).

 

I wonder how the various prognosticating metrics (Zips etc) did in predicting how all of these free agent pitchers would do. My guess is that they did no better than the ML GMs... It would be an interesting exercise.

[Oxtung]

To boot, endorsement money in the LA area is worth quite a bit more than endorsement money in the TC area. Money has more to it than just the amount written on the contract.

 

That is a very valid point and one I had not considered. On the other hand endorsements are just opportunities with nothing guaranteed unlike a contract. He would also be sharing the LA market with not just the superstars on the Angels but also with the Dodgers (and all the other sports teams there), hollywood stars and the other high profile people who live in/near L.A. For the Twins he would be sharing endorsement opportunities with Mauer, perhaps Morneau, Adrian Peterson, Jared Allen and one or two of the Wild and Wolves though I don't know enough about hockey and pro basketball to mention names.

 

Just to be clear he specifically mentioned "the team that pays the most" in his previously quoted statement.

[Otto von Ballpark]

There were only 3 good signings that the Twins could have reasonably acquired.

 

Look, I get that Greinke, Sanchez, and Jackson were out of the Twins league right now. No disagreement there.

 

But in what universe would a Carlos Villanueva signed be deemed "unreasonable"? Joe Saunders? Feldman? Either TR went after these guys and failed, or he opted not to go after them and wound up starting Pedro Hernandez and PJ Walters again.

 

TR was at the helm of an epically bad MLB rotation in 2012, and he's at the helm of another epically bad MLB rotation in 2013, with little hope for change in 2014 unless -- you guessed it! -- TR makes some good moves in the offseason. Sound familiar?

 

I'm not calling for TR's head or anything, and I'm glad we've got some new pitching blood in the minors even if they're still in AA, but I think it's pretty clear that TR either failed to acquire proper MLB pitching talent in the offseason or he under-estimated the pitching talent he needed (or, over-estimated the talent he acquired). I don't see the problem in pointing that out. I think we are all hoping for a different/better approach this offseason, in hopes of better results next year.

[Alex]

They would be more than marginal upgrades. but it's only hindsight that would have told someone that Diamond, Worley and Gibson would have been dreadfully awful this year. Some on this board were up in arms that Gibson should have been up opening day and would be an #2/3 as early as this year. I was pretty optimistic about Gibson this year myself.

 

If anyone knew Gibson wouldn't be starting the year in the majors, it was Ryan. That was something he should have been aware of, so he could have made a plan for this. The argument was often made that additional signings would block Gibson. Of course, we have at least two spots that could open even after he has been called up.

 

Most of us, thought that Diamond would be considerably worse this season, though arguably not as bad as he was. His early numbers were too good to be true but his end of the season numbers should have been a warning.

 

Worley is certainly a disappointment, and those of us who can only view numbers certainly hoped for better, but I would hope Ryan would have been able to make a better decision with more information than that. Of course, maybe he's been hurt all season.

 

No matter how we cut it, results or prediction, there wasn't a ton of hope for this starting staff, so IMO, those backing TR here don't have that much to stand on unless, of course, not a single GM in the league improved his rotation through FA this season?

[Oxtung]

Your framing the Corriea signing to make TR look as foolish as possible. It just seems intellectually dishonest, especially when you really have no idea what KC's trade value is (likely more than next to nothing).

 

Ryan didn't do a good job, but in my mind, a good job wasn't really possible. Evaluating TR is based not only the pitchers he acquired, but also the ones he avoided. It's dishonest to continue to critique TR for not signing such-and-such pitchers and not to credit him for avoiding such-and-such pitchers. It's a wash.

 

I am only judging KC based on his statistics this year and in past seasons. They are not kind to him. As for his trade value you are correct that we don't ultimately know his value yet. On the other hand he has not been mentioned as having any value that I have seen. If you have evidence to the contrary I would be happy to reconsider that position.

 

I see that you have left off judging TR by the good pitchers he didn't sign. What was that about intellectual honesty?

 

And you don't know his level of sincerity, lip-service, and media sweet-nothings. You can go on believe that if the Twins would have paid Grienke one more dollar than the Dodgers did he would come here, but I really doubt his decision was so simple.

 

The only person who knows those things is Zach Greinke himself. The only words we have from Mr. Greinke is that he would sign with any team that paid the most money. You seem to be implying that you know more than Mr. Greinke about Mr. Greinke's own actions. That seems preposterous to me.

[PseudoSABR]

I see that you have left off judging TR by the good pitchers he didn't sign. What was that about intellectual honesty?

Dude, I specifically mention critiquing TR for not signing "such-and-such pitchers" (i.e. the good ones) in what you quoted. (I didn't intentionally leave it out of the sentence before that, if that's what you thought). My point is that you can't have it both ways. And more than that, crediting and critiquing TR is spurious business, because in my opinion (and I think supported by the short and cheap contracts so many pitchers signed) is that beyond the first tier the FA pitching pool was a crap shoot.

 

The only person who knows those things is Zach Greinke himself. The only words we have from Mr. Greinke is that he would sign with any team that paid the most money. You seem to be implying that you know more than Mr. Greinke about Mr. Greinke's own actions. That seems preposterous to me.

I'm implying no such thing. I don't know what Grienke thinks nor do you. All we have is something he said to the media. I tend to be pretty cynical about what any professional athlete says about contracts and where they want to play. And as RP, points out LA would certainly help with his branding and outside baseball income. I doubt he'd eliminate that from the equation, in spite of what he outwardly said.

[jokin]

I see that you have left off judging TR by the good pitchers he didn't sign. What was that about intellectual honesty?

 

???????

[Oxtung]

Expected to perform based on what standard? Your standard? Ryan's standard? A standard based on previous performance?

 

This is the most baffling thing that you continually assert. A GM's acquisition(s) should be judged pretty much exclusively on how they perform. The job of the GM is to take all information - recent performance, scouting reports, health risks, fit to clubhouse/roster/ballpark, etc. - and make a decision. You can examine the process but it is ultimately about results.

 

What do you think about the J.A. Happ signing? How about keeping Mastroianni for this season? How about Chris Carpenter? Santana's signing with the Mets?

 

You've said it right in your paragraph actually.

The job of the GM is to take all information - recent performance, scouting reports, health risks, fit to clubhouse/roster/ballpark, etc. - and make a decision.

It is about the information he had at hand and what decisions he made with it. Not about things he can't control.

[Brock Beauchamp]

That is a very valid point and one I had not considered. On the other hand endorsements are just opportunities with nothing guaranteed unlike a contract. He would also be sharing the LA market with not just the superstars on the Angels but also with the Dodgers (and all the other sports teams there), hollywood stars and the other high profile people who live in/near L.A. For the Twins he would be sharing endorsement opportunities with Mauer, perhaps Morneau, Adrian Peterson, Jared Allen and one or two of the Wild and Wolves though I don't know enough about hockey and pro basketball to mention names.

 

Just to be clear he specifically mentioned "the team that pays the most" in his previously quoted statement.

 

I'm sure guaranteed contract money weighs more heavily than possible endorsement money but as someone who has lived in both Los Angeles and the Twins Cities, I can tell you that there is waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaayyy more money to be had in LA. Sports stars do not lack for endorsements (particularly when you factor in that LA doesn't even have a football team). Hell, even middling players seem to get more than their fair share of endorsements out there.

[Oxtung]

Dude, I specifically mention critiquing TR for not signing "such-and-such pitchers" (i.e. the good ones) in what you quoted. My point is that you can't have it both ways.

 

I'm implying no such thing. I don't know what Grienke thinks nor do you. All we have is something he said to the media. I tend to be pretty cynical about what any professional athlete says about contracts and where they want to play. And as RP, points out LA would certainly help with his branding and outside baseball income. I doubt he'd eliminate that from the equation, in spite of what he outwardly said.

 

If you meant including the good pitchers then I misunderstood your point. Mea Culpa. I agree you can't have it both ways, that was my point that you originally quoted. I guess we're not disagree on this.

 

Why exactly should we not believe Greinke when he is talking about his motivations, something that only Greinke can know?

[drjim]

What do you think about the J.A. Happ signing? How about keeping Mastroianni for this season? How about Chris Carpenter? Santana's signing with the Mets?

 

You've said it right in your paragraph actually.

It is about the information he had at hand and what decisions he made with it. Not about things he can't control.

 

Twins traded Santana partially because they didn't think he would hold up. Probably the reason they passed on Marcum and McCarthy. The Cardinals knew the risk of Carpenter but still signed him. These are different than a line drive off the dome.

 

So Terry Ryan signs a guy, states that scouts recommended him for a specific reason, he does outperform expectations and thay means nothing because statistical predictions suggest he should have done worse? That is the logical conclusion.

[PseudoSABR]

If you meant including the good pitchers then I misunderstood your point. Mea Culpa. I agree you can't have it both ways, that was my point that you originally quoted. I guess we're not disagree on this.

No worries. In a conversation like this, it's easy to talk passed one another.

 

Why exactly should we not believe Greinke when he is talking about his motivations, something that only Greinke can know?

There's nothing that Grienke has done specifically, but certainly taking that position is way to drive up your price. I mean there's lots of reasons for professional athletes to disassemble about something like that. Maybe we can take Grienke at his word, but it's hard for me to imagine him going to Houston or Minnesota if they marginally outbid a competitive, big market franchise. If the Twins could have signed Grienke by substantially outbidding competitors, well, I'm not sure that's so wise--at least when we were so far from actually competing. I'd rather sign a Grienke (not that there is going to be one) next offseason or the following one, when the core begins to emerge. I know that's too long for some fans, but I'd rather concentrate our assets to optimize the fantastic minor league talent and depth.

[TheLeviathan]

Twins traded Santana partially because they didn't think he would hold up.

 

Well, I don't think that's a fair characterization. They don't think any pitcher can hold up for 7 years, nor do they think he deserves 100+ million. There were a lot of factors there, but the point is that it's unfair to judge strictly on the results of the move.

 

I'd say, at the time the Mets made the trade - they both got a bargain on the trade itself and got Johan locked up. Ultimately it didn't turn out well, but if I'm the Mets in that position - I make that deal 100 out of 100 times. (Not knowing what the future holds) I think that's the part that reveals how you are being unfair in evaluating things.

[Brock Beauchamp]

Well, I don't think that's a fair characterization. They don't think any pitcher can hold up for 7 years, nor do they think he deserves 100+ million. There were a lot of factors there, but the point is that it's unfair to judge strictly on the results of the move.

 

I'd say, at the time the Mets made the trade - they both got a bargain on the trade itself and got Johan locked up. Ultimately it didn't turn out well, but if I'm the Mets in that position - I make that deal 100 out of 100 times. (Not knowing what the future holds) I think that's the part that reveals how you are being unfair in evaluating things.

 

Well, I think you need to evaluate actual results but if a guy gets hit by a bus and ends his career, you can't hold that against the GM. Weird crap happens and unexpected injuries occur. The Santana pick-up was a risky one because of the money and pitchers often blow up in a front office's face... But Johan had shown to be a pretty sturdy guy. If you're going to take a risk on a pitcher, there was no reason it shouldn't be him.

 

But if the guy goes out and pitches well and remains injury-free, the GM's decision shouldn't be written off as entirely "lucky", either. Results matter.

[TheLeviathan]

But if the guy goes out and pitches well and remains injury-free, the GM's decision shouldn't be written off as entirely "lucky", either. Results matter.

 

Absolutely, it should go both ways. You have to consider the factors at the time of the signing and the ultimate results. You just have to be fair evaluating the results too.

 

Another example is using the results of this year to judge the quality of the FA crop. I think, again, it's far too much emphasis on results and not enough on a balanced view.

[Oxtung]

Twins traded Santana partially because they didn't think he would hold up. Probably the reason they passed on Marcum and McCarthy. The Cardinals knew the risk of Carpenter but still signed him. These are different than a line drive off the dome.

 

Look at the tenses you use in this paragraph. Everything you are saying is about what the manager did or didn't know before he signed said player.

 

So Terry Ryan signs a guy, states that scouts recommended him for a specific reason, he does outperform expectations and thay means nothing because statistical predictions suggest he should have done worse? That is the logical conclusion.

 

I don't understand what you're trying to say in this paragraph.

[Oxtung]

No worries. In a conversation like this, it's easy to talk passed one another.

 

There's nothing that Grienke has done specifically, but certainly taking that position is way to drive up your price. I mean there's lots of reasons for professional athletes to disassemble about something like that. Maybe we can take Grienke at his word, but it's hard for me to imagine him going to Houston or Minnesota if they marginally outbid a competitive, big market franchise. If the Twins could have signed Grienke by substantially outbidding competitors, well, I'm not sure that's so wise--at least when we were so far from actually competing. I'd rather sign a Grienke (not that there is going to be one) next offseason or the following one, when the core begins to emerge. I know that's too long for some fans, but I'd rather concentrate our assets to optimize the fantastic minor league talent and depth.

 

Whether the Twins would have or should have signed Greinke is beyond my point. Certainly valid points have been made on both sides of the argument and I personally have no desire to rehash that conversation.

 

My only point was to refute the argument that Greinke would turn down the Twins offer simply because they were a losing team.

 

BTW, Greinke made the statement after he had signed with the Dodgers so it wasn't a marketing ploy.

[Oxtung]

Well, I think you need to evaluate actual results but if a guy gets hit by a bus and ends his career, you can't hold that against the GM. Weird crap happens and unexpected injuries occur. The Santana pick-up was a risky one because of the money and pitchers often blow up in a front office's face... But Johan had shown to be a pretty sturdy guy. If you're going to take a risk on a pitcher, there was no reason it shouldn't be him.

 

But if the guy goes out and pitches well and remains injury-free, the GM's decision shouldn't be written off as entirely "lucky", either. Results matter.

 

Look at what you wrote here Brock. Everything is about what a GM should have known before he signed said pitcher. You argue a GM can't know someone is going to get hit by a bus therefore it shouldn't be held against him. Then you say we know that signing pitchers long term carries significant risk and the GM of the Mets knew this before he signed Santana therefore he should be held accountable.

[Thegrin]

1) We can't judge the Free Agents of 2013 Free Agents until the 2013 season is done. We have 66 games to find out:

A) if Deduno can be a dependable starter despite his control issues.

if Pelfrey can be a solid, innings-eating starter.

C) if Gibson is more than just a prospect.

D) if Diamond can regain his 2012 form.

E) if Correia can actually throw 200 innings.

F) if Blackburn can come back.

G) if any of the other Rochester pitchers finish the season strong.

H) if Myers and/or Mays shows they can be moved up.

 

When we have analyzed the Twins pitchers and seen what the 2013 Free Agent pitchers did for a full year, Then we can measure the success of failure of last off season.

 

2) Ryan took over for Smith in the fall of 2011. Kubel and Cuddyer wanted more money than they were worth. Ryan tried to improve the Twins and

A) Signed Willingham for 3 years.

Signed Doumit and later signed him for 2 more years.

(These 2 signings out-produced Kubel and Cuddyer in 2012)

C) Signed Carroll to steady the young infielders.

D) Signed Burton for 3 years.

E) Picked up Fien, Wilkin Ramirez, Deduno and Florimon as minor league Free Agents.

F) Picked up Matoianni and Clete Thomas on waivers.

G) Signed Thielbar and Colabello from independent leagues. (What other GM can show any similar success.

(I feel like I forgot someone, but that is a truly impressive collection of moves.)

 

3) 2013 Free Agent pitchers looked at the Twins infielders and saw there was little chance of improving them from Free Agency. Then the Twins traded away BOTH their center fielders. Free agent pitchers were not impressed with the Twins defense. This meant that if a pitcher was going to sign a one-year contract and hope to improve their stats for 2014, the Twins were not the team for them.

 

4) All of the pitching Free Agents of 2013, with the exception of Greinke average about 6 innings per start.

There is no sense investing big money and long contacts on a 6 inning pitcher.

 

5) So far, Ryan got us Correia, Pelfrey, Presley, Roenicke as success's weighed against Worley. I'd say Ryan's off season was pretty good.

 

6) At least once a week I consult and give thanks for

[h=3]Minnesota Twins Roster & Payroll 2013[/h]

by Jeremy Nygaard

[drjim]

Look at what you wrote here Brock. Everything is about what a GM should have known before he signed said pitcher. You argue a GM can't know someone is going to get hit by a bus therefore it shouldn't be held against him. Then you say we know that signing pitchers long term carries significant risk and the GM of the Mets knew this before he signed Santana therefore he should be held accountable.

 

You honestly don't understand why the GMs culpability would be different in these two scenarios? Do you think all injuries are flukes?

[drjim]

I don't understand what you're trying to say in this paragraph.

 

It was a hastily written explanation of why perhaps Ryan deserves more credit for Correia than you grant him. He is obviously not great but is among the top free agent signings from last year and has exceeded expectations. I don't think that is merely luck, the front office deserves credit for identifying that relative to other options.

[TheLeviathan]

5) So far, Ryan got us Correia, Pelfrey, Presley, Roenicke as success's weighed against Worley. I'd say Ryan's off season was pretty good.

 

In what world is Pelfrey a success?

 

He's been injured part of the time and a pretty bad pitcher the rest of the time. I'd argue it's been a wash this season if nothing else because the team's pitching performance has basically been unimproved. (For whatever reasons you want to cite, it's not relevant to my point)

[Thegrin]

Since June Pelfrey has had Quality Starts in 4 of his 6 starts and given the Twins a chance to win in all of them. Plus, if you watch the games, his control is improving, his speed is up and his balls seem to break harder.

[TheLeviathan]

And the twelve previously awful starts stop counting somehow?

[Oxtung]

You honestly don't understand why the GMs culpability would be different in these two scenarios? Do you think all injuries are flukes?

 

I'll start with your second question first. I wouldn't call injuries "flukey" because they happen for very specific reasons, but I don't think we are able to predict when an injury will occur because we don't know enough about the human body, either in general and in regards to a specific player. However, I am no doctor and if you have information to contradict this I would be happy to read any links you can provide.

 

To your first question, I think you're missing my point. I am not arguing either should or shouldn't be held accountable. I am saying that, even in Brock's own analysis and your own a few posts earlier, it is the fore knowledge that is important in assigning culpability.

[Oxtung]

It was a hastily written explanation of why perhaps Ryan deserves more credit for Correia than you grant him. He is obviously not great but is among the top free agent signings from last year and has exceeded expectations. I don't think that is merely luck, the front office deserves credit for identifying that relative to other options.

 

And what exactly has that done for the Twins? We are not in contention and from everything I've read he is not expected to bring back anything of value on the trade market. As far as I can tell he has not helped the Twins in any way. That has been my problem from the beginning. He had no upside.

[old nurse]

You are disputing comments made by Greinke about Greinke. You don't know the man. You don't have any inside information. Do you see how preposterous that is?

 

He made the comments with the only thing to gain is by defining his role with the team. Make Zach Greinke money. Why did Grienke demand to be traded out of KC with a list of teams that he did not want, and could not be, to be traded to? Past actions would indicate being on a competitive team is what he wants. That is not inside information. That has been published. It is not a stretch or a twist.

[diehardtwinsfan]

And the twelve previously awful starts stop counting somehow?

 

No, but given he's recovering from TJ, you might get someone willing to send something over for him... Like others, it won't be for much, but if you can get a potentially useful piece, I think you do it.