Better Late Than Never....

[jokin]

...but still acceptable information from Phil Mackey Mackey: While Correia crashes back to earth, Pelfrey is building value - Minnesota Twins news | 1500 ESPN Twin Cities ? Minnesota Sports News & Opinion (Twins, Vikings, Wolves, Wild, Gophers) | Sportswire: Minnesota Twins, who has now put his impramatur on the disturbing trend for one Twins FA SP and the encouraging trend for the other Twins FA SP. Many TD contributors have noted that Kevin Correia's terrific April, much like Aaron Hicks's and Mike Pelfrey's awful Aprils, have left misleading perceptions of what the true level of contributions that they've each brought to the Twins since then.

 

The one area that Mackey failed to do in-depth analysis was analyze which teams Correia has started against. Of his 20 starts this year, only 7 have come against winning teams. Of his 10 Quality Starts this season, 5 of those 10 occured during April, when he was 5 for 5 in QS. 3 of his Quality Starts came in June- where Correia made 6 starts in all- and all 6 starts in that month were against teams with losing records. Overall, 7 of his 10 Quality Starts were against losing teams.

 

Here's his month-to-month breakdown:

 

April: ERA 2.23/ 5 starts- 2 against winning teams.

May: ERA 6.26/ 5 starts- 3 against winning teams.

June: ERA 4.29/ 6 starts- 0 against winning teams.

July: ERA 7.11/ 4 starts- 2 against winning teams.

 

It's no wonder that there probably is a very limited market for Correia's services as the deadline approaches.

[The Wise One]

...

 

The one area that Mackey failed to do in-depth analysis was analyze which teams Correia has started against. Of his 20 starts this year, only 7 have come against winning teams. Of his 10 Quality Starts this season, 5 of those 10 occured during April, when he was 5 for 5 in QS. 3 of his Quality Starts came in June- where Correia made 6 starts in all- and all 6 starts in that month were against teams with losing records. Overall, 7 of his 10 Quality Starts were against losing teams.

 

Here's his month-to-month breakdown:

 

April: ERA 2.23/ 5 starts- 2 against winning teams.

May: ERA 6.26/ 5 starts- 3 against winning teams.

June: ERA 4.29/ 6 starts- 0 against winning teams.

July: ERA 7.11/ 4 starts- 2 against winning teams.

 

It's no wonder that there probably is a very limited market for Correia's services as the deadline approaches.

 

So what. Correia was never going to be traded this year. He is not the type of pitcher you would make a deadline deal for.

Somehow I bet you looked up each one of correia's starts and double checked the record of the team he faced to make sure they were above .500.

[snepp]

Somehow I bet you looked up each one of correia's starts and double checked the record of the team he faced to make sure they were above .500.

 

 

Somehow I bet that you could focus your posts on the content, and not the user, if you really wanted to. As it's borderline trolling, consider this an official warning.

 

 

This can also be construed as a pre-emptive warning to anybody's future comments in this thread as well. Leave the personal prodding out.

[buckninetyone]

[h=2]Better Late Than Never....[/h]

no, it's better on time. oh, baseball? ok.

[The Wise One]

Somehow I bet that you could focus your posts on the content, and not the user, if you really wanted to. As it's borderline trolling, consider this an official warning.

 

 

This can also be construed as a pre-emptive warning to anybody's future comments in this thread as well. Leave the personal prodding out.

 

I have found a lot of inaccurate statistics by the negative posters lately. The comment I made is questioning if the content he posted is accurate. As you use my phrasing in your post I find it a little hard to see it as an evil way to phrase things.

[Brock Beauchamp]

I have found a lot of inaccurate statistics by the negative posters lately. The comment I made is questioning if the content he posted is accurate. As you use my phrasing in your post I find it a little hard to see it as an evil way to phrase things.

 

Snepp has a point. There was no reason to jab at jokin... While I'm not crazy about using pure W/L as a metric of quality opposition, it's a fast-and-loose way to tell whether a guy has been facing the Astros offense or the Red Sox offense.

 

If you want to continue the debate, I'd suggest looking at opposing offense and seeing if that aligns with W/L. After all, Correia doesn't face the opposing pitching staff, which might skew the argument of "quality opposition".

[Mike Sixel]

I was hoping this was about Deduno.......who looks like he might be a keeper. I will take my Pelfrey comments to that thread.

[jokin]

I have found a lot of inaccurate statistics by the negative posters lately. The comment I made is questioning if the content he posted is accurate. As you use my phrasing in your post I find it a little hard to see it as an evil way to phrase things.

 

I haven't seen you comment or supply any factual basis for your charge for questioning the integrity and accuracy of certain posters in the TD community. This is very largely a fact-driven blog and is what makes this site such a wonderful resource (and a refuge from more shrill and emotion-based forums).......so.....presenting posts filled with facts is critical in championing one's position. While there certainly is a human element where typo mistakes or incorrect interpretations of data are possible, I have yet to see folks on this forum who fail to offer mea culpas when mistakes have been made.

 

To the facts presented in my OP, these are all easily obtainable by going to ESPN and consulting Kevin Correia's game log:

 

Kevin Correia Game By Game Stats and Performance - Minnesota Twins - ESPN

[The Wise One]

Snepp has a point. There was no reason to jab at jokin... While I'm not crazy about using pure W/L as a metric of quality opposition, it's a fast-and-loose way to tell whether a guy has been facing the Astros offense or the Red Sox offense.

 

If you want to continue the debate, I'd suggest looking at opposing offense and seeing if that aligns with W/L. After all, Correia doesn't face the opposing pitching staff, which might skew the argument of "quality opposition".

 

9 starts against teams in the top 14 offenses in terms of runs scored. 3 quality starts. 4 wins 4 losses. era 5.43

 

Washington was above .500 when Correia faced them, hence the jab. In the game of baseball it is not who you face, but when you face them.

 

Correia is what he is. He appears to be the pitcher he generally is. Averages 6 innings a start, era over 4. It would be more useful to know what the Twins saw in Correia that they could improve. That would take someone who can analyze what Correia does while on the mound. Parker Hagerman is about the only one here who provides that kind of insight.

[jokin]

Snepp has a point. There was no reason to jab at jokin... While I'm not crazy about using pure W/L as a metric of quality opposition, it's a fast-and-loose way to tell whether a guy has been facing the Astros offense or the Red Sox offense.

 

If you want to continue the debate, I'd suggest looking at opposing offense and seeing if that aligns with W/L. After all, Correia doesn't face the opposing pitching staff, which might skew the argument of "quality opposition".

 

I was admittedly being faster and looser in using the QS- which is a flawed, but still quick and easy acid test to measure relative success. But, the underlying Correia ERA month-by-month results don't lie, nor does the information concerning the actual teams with whom he's had generally better success against. Certainly in a pennant race, prospective suitors want to know how a potential SP might stack up against quality opponents with a pennant on the line.

 

In the recent past, in other threads, I have also pointed out that a large, and out-of-proportion chunk, of Correia's games have come against the bottom quartile of MLB teams in terms of offensive statistics. When I have time, I will update them into the thread.

[jokin]

9 starts against teams in the top 14 offenses in terms of runs scored. 3 quality starts. 4 wins 4 losses. era 5.43

 

Washington was above .500 when Correia faced them, hence the jab. In the game of baseball it is not who you face, but when you face them.

 

Correia is what he is. He appears to be the pitcher he generally is. Averages 6 innings a start, era over 4. It would be more useful to know what the Twins saw in Correia that they could improve. That would take someone who can analyze what Correia does while on the mound. Parker Hagerman is about the only one here who provides that kind of insight.

 

I have been arguing just this point since late May. I previously have posted his comparative 2013 stats relative to his career stats and they have shown that the Twins got pretty much exactly what was to be expected from Correia. His numbers after close to 4 months show him to predictably be pretty much across the board to be worse than his NL numbers and within the ballpark of lower statistical expectations we had for him as an AL pitcher.

 

Mackey and many others have been a little off-track early-on and been misled by his great start in April that the Twins had received a pleasant surprise in how much better Correia was than first anticipated in the offseason. In fact, you have now joined me in complete agreement, Correia is what his statistics suggested he would be, a 5th/replacement depth starter.

 

To have been signed as such, probably wouldn't have been a problem for 99% of Twins fans. The problem lay in the fact that Ryan didn't go farther and get an additional arm that projected to be better- and he had the funds to do so.

[The Wise One]

I haven't seen you comment or supply any factual basis for your charge for questioning the integrity and accuracy of certain posters in the TD community. This is very largely a fact-driven blog and is what makes this site such a wonderful resource (and a refuge from more shrill and emotion-based forums).......so.....presenting posts filled with facts is critical in championing one's position. While there certainly is a human element where typo mistakes or incorrect interpretations of data are possible, I have yet to see folks on this forum who fail to offer mea culpas when mistakes have been made.

 

To the facts presented in my OP, these are all easily obtainable by going to ESPN and consulting Kevin Correia's game log:

 

Kevin Correia Game By Game Stats and Performance - Minnesota Twins - ESPN

 

It is in what way is this season any different than any other Correia has had? What makes this so important. If there is no change than the statistics are really kind of meaningless fluff. Correia is what he generally is. So if your point is that he is not a very good pitcher, that has been known and discussed. That he has no trade value as a deadline deal is your point? The simple statistic he has a 2 year contract would suffice unless you know of a comparable pitcher dealt to a contender in the last few years on a multiple year contract.

[jokin]

Mike Pelfrey's year, month-by-month:

 

April: ERA 7.66/ 5 starts- 2 against winning teams

May: ERA 5.90/ 5 starts- 4 against winning teams

June: ERA 4.66/ 3 starts- 0 against winning teams

July: ERA 2.28/ 4 starts- 3 against winning teams

 

So 18 starts for Pelfrey, 20 starts for Correia. 4 of Pelfrey's 7 QS are against winning teams, while only 3 of Correia's 10 QS are against winning teams.

 

The trends are even more telling. Since May 1, Pelfrey has made 7 of his 13 starts against winning teams. His ERA since May is 4.37

 

Since May 1, Correia has made only 5 of 15 starts against winning teams. His ERA since May 1 is 5.60.

 

It's again no wonder that based on established trends, Pelfrey is not only obviously pitching better, he's doing better against a higher caliber of opponents, clearly, he should be considered for an in-season extension by the Twins and as a possible trade acquisition by contending teams, whereas, it can be asserted that Correia has little to no value built up as trade bait and is likely dead weight sunk cost for the remainder of his Twins contract.

[old nurse]

Why would anyone think a career back of the rotation guy would have value at the trade deadline? Irregardless of how he pitches this year. Last year in his walk year Pittsburg had no need for him. He would have been easily available. Nobody needing pitching traded for him.

[Jim H]

I am having a hard time finding the point in this post or the thread. Correia is not a great pitcher. He has little trade value. The Twins would of been better off with a higher upside pitcher. All of that is probably true. I think it is largely irrevelant.

 

I thought the Twins should of picked up one more free agent in addition to Correia and Pelfrey. In retrospect it is doubtful if that would of have mattered. Very few of the free agents that the Twins had much of a chance of getting would have made any difference to this season. Even Liriano missed the first 6 weeks of the season so his good performance after that probably doesn't help that much.

 

No, the real problem was Worley and Diamond. Both might be very useful into the future but up to now, this season, they have been the biggest issue with the starters. The other issue is the inconsistent offense. Even now, with pretty good starting pitching the offense hasn't consistently been there.

 

Correia was signed to fill a spot in the rotation until enough pitchers get good enough to force him out of it. Up till now, he has done that well enough. He will probably continue to do that. For $10 million over 2 years, well the Twins can afford that. I don't think complaining aabout Correia is very useful any more. The Twins did it. He has pitched largely to or perhaps even a little above expectations. We could just leave it at that. I don't suppose we will.

[jokin]

I am having a hard time finding the point in this post or the thread. Correia is not a great pitcher. He has little trade value. The Twins would of been better off with a higher upside pitcher. All of that is probably true. I think it is largely irrevelant.

 

I thought the Twins should of picked up one more free agent in addition to Correia and Pelfrey. In retrospect it is doubtful if that would of have mattered. Very few of the free agents that the Twins had much of a chance of getting would have made any difference to this season. Even Liriano missed the first 6 weeks of the season so his good performance after that probably doesn't help that much.

 

No, the real problem was Worley and Diamond. Both might be very useful into the future but up to now, this season, they have been the biggest issue with the starters. The other issue is the inconsistent offense. Even now, with pretty good starting pitching the offense hasn't consistently been there.

 

Correia was signed to fill a spot in the rotation until enough pitchers get good enough to force him out of it. Up till now, he has done that well enough. He will probably continue to do that. For $10 million over 2 years, well the Twins can afford that. I don't think complaining aabout Correia is very useful any more. The Twins did it. He has pitched largely to or perhaps even a little above expectations. We could just leave it at that. I don't suppose we will.

 

The point of the article was the fact that Mackey and others have been operating under the illusion that Correia was a "pleasant surprise" and has generally been pitching well for the Twins. And just as Pelfrey's and Hicks's statistical seasons have largely been colored by how they performed in April (and in Pelfrey's case, the level of competition faced), so too has Correia's early dominance, easier overall schedule and unsustainable April ERA masked how he has actually done in the whole.

 

Many have also speculated that Correia was a potential trading chip due to his allefged "effectiveness". The negative trend since May 1 and the facts surrounding his season suggest that he offers little value.

 

You mention Worley and Diamond. These really shouldn't be a surprise, should they. Besides the fact that Diamond was due a regression, that most were in general agreement on, both pitchers are coming off of offseason surgery, a major warning sign that should have demanded that the Twins take out more "pitching insurance."

 

Even now, with pretty good starting pitching the offense hasn't consistently been there.

 

You interjected this here, and I'm scratching my head to understand how you came to that conclusion. Yes, the last few days have generally been better, but the month of July has pretty much been just as disastrous in terms of SP ERA and FIP as any other month for Twins pitchers.

 

Twins July SP ERA: 4.86 SP FIP: 5.20

Twins season SP ERA: 5.13 SP FIP: 4.75

 

He has pitched largely to or perhaps even a little above expectations.

 

On the premise of pitching largely to expectations, we agree, but the running meme in Twinsland was that he has been pitching more than a little above expectations and that was my reasoning for underscoring that Correia is just being Correia, ie, a 5th starter/replacement level, depth chart starter (depending on each team's individual situation). Twing management promised more than that during the FA signing process.

 

Again, the average AL SP has an ERA of 4.20 with a FIP of 4.15.

Correia, with April numbers has an ERA of 4.56 with a FIP of 4.79, but most disturbingly, as stated before, the trends are going against him, with an ERA of 5.60 since May 1.

 

Correia was signed to fill a spot in the rotation until enough pitchers get good enough to force him out of it. Up till now, he has done that well enough.

 

This is a point that one sides finds as justification, while the other side finds as rationalization. There was more than enough payroll flexibility to do much better in the offseason, and with the major question marks surrounding Diamond, Worley and Pelfrey's health concerns, there was a clear and pressing need to have a pitcher with more to offer than Correia as your offseason "showcase" signing (and public promise from the organization to the fans they would definitely sign "a pretty darn good pitcher").

[The Wise One]

Macky may have said something long ago in praise of Correia. From the article it looks like there is no sudden revalation to Mackay that Correia is what he is. So your line

 

that Mackey and others have been operating under the illusion that Correia was a "pleasant surprise" and has generally been pitching well for the Twins.

 

is totally a fabrication of Macky's opinion of Correia. Macky attributed the good start of Correa to the advantage pitchers have in cold weather and that teams had not scouted him well. That is a totally reasonable explaination. Your "evidence" proves what? winning record three months later as a criteria? Hardly an accurate way to portray the quality of the batters he faced at the time was the w/l record of the team three months later.

[The Wise One]

Maybe Correia winds up being a serviceable fifth starter.

January 22 Mackey opinion

 

His December 15 opinion was better

/sportswire/Mackey_Twins_newest_starter_Kevin_Correia_brings_little_upside121512

[The Wise One]

Twins GM Terry Ryan says it was "just happenstance" that this offseason saw the club acquire a series of groundball-inducing righties (Vance Worley, Mike Pelfrey, and Kevin Correia), Mike Berardino of the Pioneer Press reports. Ryan has a background in what Berardino describes as "old-school scouting principles." Nevertheless, the GM says that he does not make any decisions without consulting his statistics guru, Jack Goin, whose official title is manager of major league administration and baseball research.

 

 

Found that nugget while trying to find articles I read so long ago. Wouldn't want anyone to blast away that I didn't accurately cite references.

[jokin]

Macky may have said something long ago in praise of Correia. From the article it looks like there is no sudden revalation to Mackay that Correia is what he is. So your line

 

that Mackey and others have been operating under the illusion that Correia was a "pleasant surprise" and has generally been pitching well for the Twins.

 

is totally a fabrication of Macky's opinion of Correia. Macky attributed the good start of Correa to the advantage pitchers have in cold weather and that teams had not scouted him well. That is a totally reasonable explaination. Your "evidence" proves what? winning record three months later as a criteria? Hardly an accurate way to portray the quality of the batters he faced at the time was the w/l record of the team three months later.

 

I'm not sure where you're going here. We agree that Correia is what he is, as evidenced in the stats that have been presented. In the meantime, many on this site and in the media (including Mackey) have reiterated over and over that Correia has been a "pleasant surprise", some have said they were wrong about him being a bad signing and some have said that Correia's proven himself to be far better than what was expected at the time the deal was signed (when it turns out, in fact, that they were closer to the truth with their preseason assessments).

 

Now that nearly 4 months of data have come in, Mackey can return to his original premise from the article you cited last winter. By contrast, myself and some others on TD have been noting Correia's performance data semi-frequently since May and noted the disturbing developing trends, trends ignored by people, who instead continued to conform to early-formed, and ultimately inaccurate meme's about Correia's "pleasant surprise", why Pelfrey should be run out of town for general ineffective suckiness, and why Hicks is the worst player in major league baseball.

[The Wise One]

I'm not sure where you're going here. We agree that Correia is what he is, as evidenced in the stats that have been presented. In the meantime, many on this site and in the media (including Mackey) have reiterated over and over that Correia has been a "pleasant surprise", some have said they were wrong about him being a bad signing and some have said that Correia's proven himself to be far better than what was expected at the time the deal was signed (when it turns out, in fact, that they were closer to the truth with their preseason assessments).

 

Now that nearly 4 months of data have come in, Mackey can return to his original premise from the article you cited last winter. By contrast, myself and some others on TD have been noting Correia's performance data semi-frequently since May and noted the disturbing developing trends, trends ignored by people, who instead continued to conform to early-formed, and ultimately inaccurate meme's about Correia's "pleasant surprise", why Pelfrey should be run out of town for general ineffective suckiness, and why Hicks is the worst player in major league baseball.

 

First off if we agreed on what Correi is you wouldn't have bothered to post anything.

Mackey , as well as many others, had low expectations of Correia. Any game that Correia pitches in that allows the rest of the team a chance to win would please him. Doesn't make him have a man crush on Correia. Your interpretation of Mackey is flawed. If Terry Felton magically became 30 years younger and pitched to an ERA of 4.25, I would be pleasantly surprised. I would not think he was very good most of the time. I was pleasantly surprised my property tax bill went down $100. It does not mean I like my property taxes.

There is no need to rehash the flaws of your "evidence" nor defend it.

[Jim H]

THE FOLLOWING IS A QUOTE FROM JOKIN

This is a point that one sides finds as justification, while the other side finds as rationalization. There was more than enough payroll flexibility to do much better in the offseason, and with the major question marks surrounding Diamond, Worley and Pelfrey's health concerns, there was a clear and pressing need to have a pitcher with more to offer than Correia as your offseason "showcase" signing (and public promise from the organization to the fans they would definitely sign "a pretty darn good pitcher").[/quote

 

A lot of commentators said this when Correia was signed and have continued to say it since. Unforntunately, after the top few very high profile signings, not many of the rest have pitched better than Correia. Even where they have, it is not enough better to really affect how the Twins have performed this year. It is largely beating a dead horse. The Twins should have signed a better pitcher, but the fact is the "better" pitchers haven't really pitched better than Correia.

 

So that is why I say it doesn't matter. Until the rest of the Twins pitchers pitch better, or are replaced by someone who does, the fact that Correia is a placeholder for some young pitchers in the organization who might be good someday, isn't a big deal. I would have like to think that the Twins could have contended this year. The whole team would of had to of been better for that to happen.

 

Spending more money on some pitcher who could have been better than Corriea, but probably wouldn't have been, doesn't really change what is going on this year.