Offseason trade targets

[Willihammer]

I agree none are probably a 1. Completely disagree that none are a 2 or 3.

Get Hughes out of Yankee Stadium and he's a really good #3, and probably a solid #2.

 

I would like to squash this idea.

 

ESPN Home Run Tracker :: Player and Field Detail

 

Phil Hughes is another bullpen talent, over-reliant on his fastball due to ineffective secondary offerings. We have about 10 of those guys already.

 

edit: with the HR tracker link, select Target Field as an overlay. By my eye, Hughes would be no better off.

[jorgenswest]

I am with you on his pitch mix. I don't think he has the mix of a mid-rotation starter.

 

As for home and road, he has given up many more homeruns at home in his career. It is 76-35. While his career xFIP is virtually the same and slightly better at home at around 4.34, his ERA has been much worse over his career at home. The home/road difference cannot be ignored.

 

Someone will risk starting pitcher dollars on Hughes this winter. They will be betting that he can be an effective starter away from the Yankees. Maybe it will be the Twins. Whichever team signs him should do so knowing that his pitch mix may lead him to the bullpen in order to find success.

[beckmt]

I am in favor of Josh Johnson and do not think he will be that expensive. Linecum probably will be expensive, but I feel is worth the risk. A lot of the rest of the free agent pitchers will not be worth the money they will get.

[stringer bell]

The Twins aren't the only team desperate for starting pitching willing to take on salary. If it was that easy don't you think Ryan would have already done it?

Who says the Twins are willing to trade and take on salary? I remember very few instances where the Twins took on significant salary. One is John Smiley (in the 80s) and another might be JJ Hardy (by Bill Smith). This is the part of the general managing game that I see the Twins as among the most conservative. They seldom commit money to those outside their system and they seldom take on significant salary--both of these areas are significant risks, and the Twins seem unwilling to take that risk.

[Guest USAFChief]

I am with you on his pitch mix. I don't think he has the mix of a mid-rotation starter.

 

As for home and road, he has given up many more homeruns at home in his career. It is 76-35. While his career xFIP is virtually the same and slightly better at home at around 4.34, his ERA has been much worse over his career at home. The home/road difference cannot be ignored.

 

Someone will risk starting pitcher dollars on Hughes this winter. They will be betting that he can be an effective starter away from the Yankees. Maybe it will be the Twins. Whichever team signs him should do so knowing that his pitch mix may lead him to the bullpen in order to find success.

In general, I tend to be skeptical of players for whom the primary argument is "he needs to face weaker competition and/or play in easier conditions."

 

If "get him out of Yankee Stadium" is the best argument one can make for Phil Hughes, pass.

[TheLeviathan]

They seldom commit money to those outside their system and they seldom take on significant salary--both of these areas are significant risks, and the Twins seem unwilling to take that risk.

 

It should also be noted that most teams operate their payroll budgets closer to their limits, so they have less flexibility to make these sorts of moves. It's not that it's "easy" - it's that it's possible for the Twins.

 

I'm just not sure why anyone would believe they'd pursue that avenue at this point.

[Mr. Brooks]

In general, I tend to be skeptical of players for whom the primary argument is "he needs to face weaker competition and/or play in easier conditions."

 

If "get him out of Yankee Stadium" is the best argument one can make for Phil Hughes, pass.

 

Phil Hughes is a fly ball pitcher who pitches half his games in a stadium that could be used for little league games.

I understand your point of view, but each situation should be looked at on a case by case basis, sometimes it is a legitimate factor.

[nicksaviking]

I would like to squash this idea.

 

ESPN Home Run Tracker :: Player and Field Detail

 

Phil Hughes is another bullpen talent, over-reliant on his fastball due to ineffective secondary offerings. We have about 10 of those guys already.

 

edit: with the HR tracker link, select Target Field as an overlay. By my eye, Hughes would be no better off.

 

It looks to me like many of the HR to RF are just past the wall, which at Target Field likely means off the wall.

 

Still it's not like he'd be trading HR for outs at TF, he'd be trading HR for 2B which is better, but not ideal. Hughes might end up being a very nice pitcher, but I agree that he is going to get overpaid due to the lack of top end pitching talent in this year's free agent class and the common knowledge that he pitches so much better away from Yankee Stadium.

 

Also...

 

In general, I tend to be skeptical of players for whom the primary argument is "he needs to face weaker competition and/or play in easier conditions."

 

If "get him out of Yankee Stadium" is the best argument one can make for Phil Hughes, pass.

 

No kidding, the Twins have historically choked against big name teams in big time markets, do they want to add another player who likely will have 'fraidy-cat syndrome every time they are in NY? The Twins seem to have to go through the Yankees every time they reach the post season, another "ace" who can't get it done in Yankee Stadium seems kind of silly.

[Mike Sixel]

If not Hughes, what would you do to get pitcher here next year, and teh years after?

[ThePuck]

If not Hughes, what would you do to get pitcher here next year, and teh years after?

 

Best not to sign anyone. :-) Pick any FA pitcher out there someone will find fault and reason not to sign him, so just avoid it all and not sign anyone.

 

But on to trading...

[ThePuck]

Who do we have to trade that teams will actually want to give up a quality pitcher for? No one on the active roster who doesn't have a no-trade clause. People also seem adamant about not trading Sano...

 

So, who to trade exactly? Seems some believe we can trade some of our not so highly ranked prospects and land gold star pitching. Not sure how that's going to happen or why one would think it could.

[DAM DC Twins Fans]

Hey DC. As you are on the scene, what is it about Haren this year that has made him such a disaster? His peripherals all look great relative to his career numbers (with the huge exception in that he's practically reversed his GB and FB percentages). He's been very effective in July and August.

 

Based on your description, it seems unlikely that the Nats will try to re-sign him for 2014.

 

This looks and smells like a classic buy-low, big reward-type, opportunity. What are we missing here that you, in your advantageous position as a daily eyewitness, can provide concerning Haren that would dissaude one from pursuing him in the offseason?

 

I have gone to a couple of Nats games (including seeing the Twins here). My son is a partial season ticket holder and has gone to a bunch. He has seen Haren several times. The frigging disaster is his evaluation. The Nats wont try to resign Haren for sure. Based on his reports--Haren is done. This is not a big reward opportunity. Maybe a 10% chance of being a decent starter. Most likely a repeat of Marquis, Ponson, etc.

 

If the Twins could get him on a 1 year $5 million contract and take a shot that he will be better than Pelfrey or Corriea--go for it. I doubt they will see results. If some team is foolish enough to give Haren a 3 year $20 million deal--it better not be the Twins.

[Mr. Brooks]

I would like to squash this idea.

 

ESPN Home Run Tracker :: Player and Field Detail

 

Phil Hughes is another bullpen talent, over-reliant on his fastball due to ineffective secondary offerings. We have about 10 of those guys already.

 

edit: with the HR tracker link, select Target Field as an overlay. By my eye, Hughes would be no better off.

 

I'm not sure about that.

According to fangraphs, he throws his fastball about 62% of the time. I haven't looked it up, but that seems to be pretty comparable to most starting pitchers.

His slider also has a positive value for his career. His curve has been a consistently negative pitch and his changeup has been up and down, positive some years, negative others.

[Mike Sixel]

Who do we have to trade that teams will actually want to give up a quality pitcher for? No one on the active roster who doesn't have a no-trade clause. People also seem adamant about not trading Sano...

 

So, who to trade exactly? Seems some believe we can trade some of our not so highly ranked prospects and land gold star pitching. Not sure how that's going to happen or why one would think it could.

 

The only way that happens is a salary dump.....but do teams need to dump salary if they are all getting $25MM in new revenue next year?

[mk]

Thread titled trade targets and they are back to talking free agent pitching

 

Good FA pitching rarely comes to market and when it does, the cost is out of the Twins range. Who might be available in trade. It seems the Twins have the prospects to get anyone available, but who would you be willing to trade, and for who (realistically because of people like Kershaw are not going to be on the market).

[AROG]

I know this probably isn't popular, but I love Buxton/Sano as much as any of y'all. I would trade Buxton, right now, for Snydergaard. Mets have some good young pitching already and need the help in the outfield. We need pitching desperately and would give us an Ace!

[Mr. Brooks]

I know this probably isn't popular, but I love Buxton/Sano as much as any of y'all. I would trade Buxton, right now, for Snydergaard. Mets have some good young pitching already and need the help in the outfield. We need pitching desperately and would give us an Ace!

 

Buxton is a once in a generation talent. Think Mike Trout.

Snydergaard is a very good pitching prospect if he reaches his ceiling. But, while they are hard to find, there are several aces around baseball. There is generally only 1 or 2 players in the entire league at any given time who are as valuable as a Mike Trout type talent. I would never make this trade.

[ThePuck]

Buxton is a once in a generation talent. Think Mike Trout.

 

Wouldn't Trout and Buxton be considered the same generation? :-)

[Mike Sixel]

I love Buxton, but expecting Mike Trout is overboard, isn't it? Mike Trout is a once in a generation player, probably. I'd think that would imply it is VERY unlikely Buxton is that good....

[drjim]

The only way that happens is a salary dump.....but do teams need to dump salary if they are all getting $25MM in new revenue next year?

 

Teams wouldn't need to dump salary even without the extra $25 mil. Pittsburgh was smart in getting teams thay were cutting veterans or acquiring assets that had fallen out if favor.

 

Twins could look for guys who make more than they are worth, but then also face the same dilemma of free agency and overpaying for assets.

[LaBombo]

Twins could look for guys who make more than they are worth, but then also face the same dilemma of free agency and overpaying for assets.

That approach would have the virtue of being more interesting than watching the existing, recurring dilemma of a rotation and middle infield (Dozey excepted) cobbled together primarily from established mediocrity, fringe prospects, and quad A filler.

 

The Twins face a future where they'll soon have a payroll comprised of Joe Mauer, Glen Perkins, and a bunch of kids making squat. Payroll carryover and front-loaded contracts/extensions are apparently a universal impossibility.

 

That pretty much leaves "overpaying" for FA's or trading non-elite prospects for expensive salary-dump guys as the only alternative to the pitchforks-and-torches scenario of having one of the lowest payrolls in baseball playing in a publicly funded stadium.

[Willihammer]

I'm not sure about that.

According to fangraphs, he throws his fastball about 62% of the time. I haven't looked it up, but that seems to be pretty comparable to most starting pitchers.

His slider also has a positive value for his career. His curve has been a consistently negative pitch and his changeup has been up and down, positive some years, negative others.

 

They're not very good pitches. Especially to some of the other FAs like Lincecum.

 

The sample is all pitches in the 2012-2013 seasons.

 

Sliders thrown: Hughes

http://www.brooksbaseball.net/plot_profile.php?gFilt=&pFilt=SL&player=461833&startDate=01%2F01%2F2012&endDate=08%2F19%2F2013&var=count&b_hand=-1

 

Hughes throws nearly half his sliders low-out of the zone. But hitters only bite 33.9% of the time:

 

http://www.brooksbaseball.net/plot_profile.php?gFilt=&pFilt=SL&player=461833&startDate=01%2F01%2F2012&endDate=08%2F19%2F2013&var=swing&b_hand=-1

 

By comparison, Lincecum throws about the same proportion of sliders below the zone, but hitters bite 47.4% of the time. He also throws a lot more of them - 298 to 500, in those zones. That translated to 136 more swings at sliders low and out of the zone:

http://www.brooksbaseball.net/plot_profile.php?gFilt=&pFilt=SL&player=453311&startDate=01%2F01%2F2012&endDate=08%2F19%2F2013&var=count&b_hand=-1

 

http://www.brooksbaseball.net/plot_profile.php?gFilt=&pFilt=SL&player=453311&startDate=01%2F01%2F2012&endDate=08%2F19%2F2013&var=swing&b_hand=-1

 

Changeups, the same thing. Hughes:

 

http://www.brooksbaseball.net/plot_profile.php?gFilt=&pFilt=CH&player=461833&startDate=01%2F01%2F2012&endDate=08%2F19%2F2013&var=count&b_hand=-1

 

http://www.brooksbaseball.net/plot_profile.php?gFilt=&pFilt=CH&player=461833&startDate=01%2F01%2F2012&endDate=08%2F19%2F2013&var=swing&b_hand=-1

[Willihammer]

Lincecum (Pitchf/x calls it a splitter. I believe Lincecum calls it a change).

 

http://www.brooksbaseball.net/plot_profile.php?gFilt=&pFilt=FS&player=453311&startDate=01%2F01%2F2012&endDate=08%2F19%2F2013&var=count&b_hand=-1

 

http://www.brooksbaseball.net/plot_profile.php?gFilt=&pFilt=FS&player=453311&startDate=01%2F01%2F2012&endDate=08%2F19%2F2013&var=swing&b_hand=-1

 

 

Curveballs.

 

Hughes:

 

http://www.brooksbaseball.net/plot_profile.php?gFilt=&pFilt=CU&player=461833&startDate=01%2F01%2F2012&endDate=08%2F19%2F2013&var=count&b_hand=-1

 

http://www.brooksbaseball.net/plot_profile.php?gFilt=&pFilt=CU&player=461833&startDate=01%2F01%2F2012&endDate=08%2F19%2F2013&var=swing&b_hand=-1

 

Same as slider. Hughes throws that curve in the low-right corner a lot but isn't baiting anyone with it.

 

Lincecum:

 

http://www.brooksbaseball.net/plot_profile.php?gFilt=&pFilt=CU&player=453311&startDate=01%2F01%2F2012&endDate=08%2F19%2F2013&var=count&b_hand=-1

 

http://www.brooksbaseball.net/plot_profile.php?gFilt=&pFilt=CU&player=453311&startDate=01%2F01%2F2012&endDate=08%2F19%2F2013&var=swing&b_hand=-1

 

Lincecum got swings on 88 of 212 curveballs below the zone (41.5%), Hughes got 120 swings on 325 pitches (36.9%).

[Willihammer]

And just to complete the argument, the pitches that hitters are swinging at - primarily pitches in the zone, they aren't missing:

 

http://www.brooksbaseball.net/plot_profile.php?gFilt=&pFilt=CH%7CFS%7CSB&player=461833&startDate=01%2F01%2F2012&endDate=08%2F19%2F2013&var=whiffswing&b_hand=-1

 

http://www.brooksbaseball.net/plot_profile.php?gFilt=&pFilt=CU%7CSL%7CCS%7CKN&player=461833&startDate=01%2F01%2F2012&endDate=08%2F19%2F2013&var=whiffswing&b_hand=-1

 

http://www.brooksbaseball.net/plot_profile.php?gFilt=&pFilt=CH%7CFS%7CSB&player=453311&startDate=01%2F01%2F2012&endDate=08%2F19%2F2013&var=whiffswing&b_hand=-1

 

http://www.brooksbaseball.net/plot_profile.php?gFilt=&pFilt=CU%7CSL%7CCS%7CKN&player=453311&startDate=01%2F01%2F2012&endDate=08%2F19%2F2013&var=whiffswing&b_hand=-1

[old nurse]

Are your numbers career or this year for Hughes and Lincecum?

[Mike Sixel]

While I love the charts, that's just too much to look at.....can you summarize the data?

[LaBombo]

Are your numbers career or this year for Hughes and Lincecum?

2012 and 2013 to date, according to the subtitle.

[Willihammer]

While I love the charts, that's just too much to look at.....can you summarize the data?

 

Hughes throws a good portion of his sliders, curveballs, and changeups out of the zone low, but hitters aren't swinging at them. This behavior I believe evidences the weakness of the action on those pitches. Moreover, when hitters do swing at these pitches, particularly when they're in the zone, they rarely miss.

 

By contrast, batters swing at more of Lincecum's sliders, changeups (Splitters), and curveballs, specifically the ones that are low and out of the zone where any contact is likely to be weak. Moreover, they are whiffing much more frequently. This, I believe, evidences the strength of the action on these pitches.

[Mike Sixel]

Thanks!

[jokin]

See: Chris Davis. Finding someone like him isn't common by any stretch but it does happen. When you have room to provide opportunity and a change of scenery to a oncehighly thought-of player....it's a perfect way to jump start your team.

 

Baltimore is a great example. Machado is a stud and some of their pitching prospects are starting to make it. (Some, again cautionary tale, are not). But they traded two unspectacular players and turned them into a superstar.

 

we have all the ingredients for this: opportunity, unspectacular but semi-valuable vets, and a change of scenery. We should be looking for diamonds in the rough right now.

 

Yes. James Loney is another great example. I momentarily questioned the move for a declining player by the Rays at the time....and then I quickl;y realized it was the Rays who had made the move.....what a classic Rays-type bargain @ $2M.