All's quiet on the Garza front

[twinscowboysbulls]

Garza is the best and most affordable FA that will not cost a draft pick until 2015, BOOK IT (yearn to be rav.....)

 

Seriously though.

Homer Bailey (more expensive, better, will cost a draft pick, rumor he will test waters)

Jon Leser (better, more expensive, will cost draft pick, also would assume he gets extended.)

Clayton Kershaw...really?

Max Scherzer....really again? Detroit just made all of these moves to help get him re-signed long term.

 

Justin Masterson is really the only other option and I guess we could argue who is better. 7.9 WAR over past 3 seasons vs 5.5 WAR for Garza. Which probably says Masterson is once again going to cost more than Garza will this offseason.

 

I truly believe the market is going to go down for Garza. If he can be had for same type of money that we got Nolasco, we should snag him.

[ND-Fan]

I would rather have too much pitching because that can always be solved if that is case. I see these projected rotations but nobody has put in anybody getting hurt or not developing as fast as projected. Look at last three years we had projected prospects and veterans get hurt and loose 1 to two seasons. I am willing to bet this continues we have several pitchers that get hurt in next three years and we will need extra pitching. Starting pitching is at premium very few teams have excess pitching and if they do its used acquired new prospects or player needed right now to win. I look at some of big spending teams Yankees are going to need pitching this year and again next year what are they willing to pay, Angels same thing, and Dodgers are stockpiling pitching. So any quality starter the Twins can sign and is in budget now should be done. To be contending team it takes pitching and Twins have prooved this past 3 seasons with poor pitching they have lost 90 + games. So any reasonable young pitcher they can sign to 3 to 5 year deal needs to be looked at. I am quite confident that Twins prospects are going to provide enough offense in the future and defensive ability with exception SS for all fielding positions. Twins history on developing pitching is limited the better pitchers they have develop mostly have come after trades or rule 5 drafts not from their drafting of pitchers. Like Viola, Santanna, Milton, Liraino, Nathan, Lohse, and Tapani and Twins pitchers they drafted came up as starters were Radke , Baker, Garza, Blackburn, Mays and S. Erickson but the Twins pitchers drafted and became quality relief pitchers list is long of Hawkins, Guardodo, Mahomes, Romero, gutherie, Rincon, Balfour, Crain, Neshek, Mirjares, Swarzek, Duensing, Burnett, and Perkins. Like I have said Twins history on drafting pitching there have been very few big successes in past 20 years of producing starting pitching so anytime they can obtain quality pitching they should go for it.

[Brock Beauchamp]

Garza is the best and most affordable FA that will not cost a draft pick until 2015, BOOK IT (yearn to be rav.....)

 

Seriously though.

Homer Bailey (more expensive, better, will cost a draft pick, rumor he will test waters)

Jon Leser (better, more expensive, will cost draft pick, also would assume he gets extended.)

Clayton Kershaw...really?

Max Scherzer....really again? Detroit just made all of these moves to help get him re-signed long term.

 

Justin Masterson is really the only other option and I guess we could argue who is better. 7.9 WAR over past 3 seasons vs 5.5 WAR for Garza. Which probably says Masterson is once again going to cost more than Garza will this offseason.

 

You're not factoring in that some of those guys might be traded if a team falls out of contention (Masterson or Bailey would be my bets), eliminating the possibility of a comp pick.

 

I truly believe the market is going to go down for Garza. If he can be had for same type of money that we got Nolasco, we should snag him.

 

If Garza can be had for anything close to Nolasco money, you have to make that deal... But I don't think it will happen. Too many teams want pitching.

[Marta Shearing]

Much rather sign garza than give up a prospect for Anderson.

[Jim Crikket]

Garza would be a nice add, but how does the team score any runs if you blow the budget this year on pitching (which I've raised in another thread)? Or are we just writing off 2014?

 

I should probably go find your comment on another thread, but at the risk of meandering off-topic of this thread, I'll respond regarding the concern regarding run scoring by saying I think the offense will be improved with minimal, if any, personnel changes. Even if I'm wrong (again), I just don't think it would be all that easy to add the kind of help you'd like via free agency this year.

 

Yes, I believe at least some of Willingham, Doumit, Arcia and Plouffe will have better years than they had in 2013. I admit it's probably just as likely that Dozier regresses a bit.

 

I'm not sold on Pinto yet, but with the preferred options off the market now, I don't see a lot of better options available. If the Twins do add someone, it's not likely to be someone with more offensive potential at any rate.

 

I think Hicks will surprise people. Despite his 1st round pick pedigree, he hasn't been a guy who consistently assimilated to new levels of competition well, but he does show the ability to catch up a year later. Not a good first year of full season pro ball at low A, but improved considerably the next year repeating the level. Not much of a year the following season at A+, but followed that with a solid year at AA. We know what happened next, he rode a hot spring training to a spot in Minnesota, skipping AAA entirely. Not surprising to me, given his history, that he struggled. He won't be an All-Star in 2014, but I think he'll be a solid contributor, even if he has to start the season at AAA.

 

But let's say I'm wrong, especially about Hicks and Plouffe. Maybe you want to sign upgrades for CF and 3B. With Buxton and Sano obviously knocking on the door in Minnesota, how many legitimate upgrades at those positions do you think are going to be anxious to sign in Minnesota? They'd be signing to join a last place team, knowing that when the team DOES turn around, it won't be them playing CF and 3B. That's a tough sell for a GM.

 

2014 is a transitional year. The Twins need to get much better and do so by adding guys who will still be around and useful when Sano/Buxton, et al, arrive. To me, that means you focus on starting pitching and improve there first and foremost.

 

If July rolls around and you find yourself in contention somehow, then you look to where you might benefit by adding short term help, even if that's CF/3B.

[Jim Crikket]

 

If Garza can be had for anything close to Nolasco money, you have to make that deal... But I don't think it will happen. Too many teams want pitching.

 

Yeah, I totally agree. It's been a crazy pre-Winter Meetings period, but I haven't seen anything to make me think Garza or any other top-tier FA is going to see their value going down any time soon. Garza coming to Minnesota for anything close to Nolasco money would happen only if he was so set on a homecoming reunion with the Twins that he was willing to take a sizable discount. I think we can all agree that's unlikely.

[Thrylos]

Re: Garza. I am fairly convinced that regardless of what Ryan might be saying publicly, as long as Gardenhire and Anderson are with the Twins, there is no way that Garza returns. Oil and vinegar.

[richardkr34]

A pitcher no one mentions is Jeff Samardzija. The Twins have the prospects to get it done, and prospect attrition always happens. The Cubs are probably further off then the Twins are, with a (slightly) weaker farm system. I think it's a no-brainer.

[cmb0252]

A pitcher no one mentions is Jeff Samardzija. The Twins have the prospects to get it done, and prospect attrition always happens. The Cubs are probably further off then the Twins are, with a (slightly) weaker farm system. I think it's a no-brainer.

 

Cubs want pitching prospects. We don't have the pitchers to trade them.

[richardkr34]

"We don't have the pitchers to trade them"? Are you serious? Go ahead and look at baseball prospectus's Twins Top Ten, Prospects on the Rise, and Factors on the Farm. Out of those pitchers, Berrios, Gonsalves, Eades, and May could be jettisoned; throw Gibson in there and to sweeten it, put Rosario in the mix. Make your own package from those players and tell me again how the Twins don't have the pitching prospects to get something done.

 

Examples: Berrios, May, Rosario

May, Gonsalves, Rosario

Berrios, Eades, Rosario

Gibson, May, Rosario

[thetank]

What about the Cardinals Lance Lynn or Joe Kelly? Lynn who won 33 games over the last 2 years may be put in the bullpen next year. Kelly may be, also? Not sure what the Cardinals would want from the Twins in regards to prospects though.

[richardkr34]

If the Twins trade Berrios, May, Rosario for Saradzija, the starting rotation looks like this:

 

Samardzija

Nolasco

Corriea

Hughes

Dedundo/Gibson/Diamond/Worley

 

With Meyers on the way, and Stewart, Gonsalves, Thorpe, Jorge, Eades on the way from 2016-2018, the Twins are fine on the farm, too. Kind of a no-brainer, eh?

[richardkr34]

Yeah, something like this. The Twins have prospects, but they're just PROSPECTIVE major leaguers right now, let alone 2/3 type starting pitchers like Samardzija, Kelly, or Lynn. Use the ammo ya got while ya got it.

[Thrylos]

"We don't have the pitchers to trade them"? Are you serious? Go ahead and look at baseball prospectus's Twins Top Ten, Prospects on the Rise, and Factors on the Farm. Out of those pitchers, Berrios, Gonsalves, Eades, and May could be jettisoned; throw Gibson in there and to sweeten it, put Rosario in the mix. Make your own package from those players and tell me again how the Twins don't have the pitching prospects to get something done.

 

Examples: Berrios, May, Rosario

May, Gonsalves, Rosario

Berrios, Eades, Rosario

Gibson, May, Rosario

 

those two cannot be traded until next July

[richardkr34]

Ah, very well. Switch them out for Melontakis and Darnell or something. Or just go with a Gibson, Berrios, Rosario package. Seems fair.

[johnnydakota]

those two cannot be traded until next July

Cant they be PTBN? and then in June traded?

[Don't Feed the Greed Guy]

I'd prefer they take a rest from adding more starters at this point, at least of the veteran FA variety. If there's a youngish starter available in trade, I'd be OK with that, if the price was right.

 

Spot on. The Twins need to stagger free agent dollars over a period of contract years in order to ensure the proper balance of risk vs. reward. Nolasco and Hughes are Twins because Terry Ryan had no other choice than to play "Free Agent Roulette" this offseason. There's enough money on the wheel already. Wait a year, and see how Gibson, Meyer, May and others develop, or if Doumit, The Hammer, or others emerge as "sell high" trade bait over the first few months of 2014. Hopefully, the Twins don't have to press their luck next offseason, but if they have to walk back into the free agent casino next, they will still have some chips to push in. Don't spend all the chips this year.

[Jim H]

I think calling Garza a #2 starter is giving him the benefit of the doubt. He has seldom pitched that well. Giving a mid-rotation starter the money per year and the years he is likely to get is(I think) a mistake. If the Twins are going to have a top of the rotation guy, it will most likely be from recent trades(Meyers or May), high draft choices(Gibson, Berrios, Stewart) or one of the international signings. You can get a top of the rotation starter in free agency but it doesn't happen every year and good share(most) of them aren't top of the rotation throughout the length of the contract. It will also cost you huge money.

 

 

I think going after Garza is not a particularly good idea.

[kab21]

"We don't have the pitchers to trade them"? Are you serious? Go ahead and look at baseball prospectus's Twins Top Ten, Prospects on the Rise, and Factors on the Farm. Out of those pitchers, Berrios, Gonsalves, Eades, and May could be jettisoned; throw Gibson in there and to sweeten it, put Rosario in the mix. Make your own package from those players and tell me again how the Twins don't have the pitching prospects to get something done.

 

Examples: Berrios, May, Rosario

May, Gonsalves, Rosario

Berrios, Eades, Rosario

Gibson, May, Rosario

 

It's not that the Twins don't have pitching prospects. It's that the Twins have finally addressed this horrible weakness in the minors. Trading a couple that we have for a FA in 2 yrs could really hurt the team long term.

[Brock Beauchamp]

It's not that the Twins don't have pitching prospects. It's that the Twins have finally addressed this horrible weakness in the minors. Trading a couple that we have for a FA in 2 yrs could really hurt the team long term.

 

Yep. Right around the time the Twins are waving Samardzija good-bye in free agency, Buxton and Sano are (hopefully) coming into their own.

 

And for the privilege of picking up Samardzija, the franchise is now short at least two minor league arms who could complement Sano and Buxton.

 

Best case scenario is that the team gets to pay Samardzija $80-100m to stick around through his declining years.

 

Yay all around. If the Twins absolutely must pick up a pitcher, throw money at Matt Garza. At least that way you don't lose prospects for the honor of overpaying a pitcher. The Twins have money and no team has ever complained about having too many prospects.

[kab21]

And just for the record I'm all for trading prospects (big trades) at the right time. But this is not the right time.

[Jim Crikket]

The only pitching prospects that should be considered trade chips for a starting pitcher who would only be controlled for 2-3 years (or less) would be those that look unlikely to be significant rotation contributors this year, but are out of options or you project as being minor league free agents before you think they'll be ready to contribute. If you can get something for those spare parts, fine. Otherwise, what kab and Brock said.

[howeda7]

We have plenty of money to spend. If Garza takes a similar deal to Nolasco, we are still only at $90 million and are fine for 2015 and 2016. If the problem is blocking younger guys, that implies that guys like Hughes are pitching well enough to be traded when the time comes.

[Brandon]

I am all for signing Garza or an other pitcher that can help. As for when the other pitchers are ready to come up from the minors... We can always trade Hughes, Nolasco or Garza for a position player or other prospects. Why not get an asset for now and flip it for something useful later when we have other options.

[Otto von Ballpark]

I think calling Garza a #2 starter is giving him the benefit of the doubt. He has seldom pitched that well.

 

Garza's career ERA+ is 108, and he's basically been right around that mark every season of his career. That 108 would rank around #40 among all MLB qualified starters in recent seasons. Last year, Bailey, Lester, Burnett, and Hamels were just a few of the notable guys right around that figure. I think that's definitely #2 starter quality.

 

Now, if you simply meant Garza has "seldom pitched" at all (hasn't qualified last two seasons), I'd agree that's definitely a strike against him. (Although with durability, a consistent 108 ERA+ could be borderline ace material, as evidenced by the names listed above, and Garza himself a couple years ago.)

[Brock Beauchamp]

Garza's career ERA+ is 108, and he's basically been right around that mark every season of his career. That 108 would rank around #40 among all MLB qualified starters in recent seasons. Last year, Bailey, Lester, Burnett, and Hamels were just a few of the notable guys right around that figure. I think that's definitely #2 starter quality.

 

Now, if you simply meant Garza has "seldom pitched" at all (hasn't qualified last two seasons), I'd agree that's definitely a strike against him. (Although with durability, a consistent 108 ERA+ could be borderline ace material, as evidenced by the names listed above, and Garza himself a couple years ago.)

 

If Matt Garza is a borderline ace, then Brad Radke was a legit ace pitcher.

 

And I don't think many people will make that argument about Radke.

 

Garza is absolutely a #2, though... Maybe a borderline #3 a couple of seasons.

[Otto von Ballpark]

And that does not take into account several other prospects like Wimmers, Summers, Melotakis, etc. who could easily develop into major league starters. Upshot: I could see a two-year deal for Arroyo here, but Garza will be blocking better talent as early as 2017.

 

"Easily"?

 

If everything breaks right for the Twins and their prospects, we won't have room for Garza... 4 seasons from now? Do you realize how crazy that sounds?

 

You're assuming that three 18 year olds who haven't pitched above rookie league ball yet will all be healthy and capable MLB starters by age 22. You're also comfortably predicting that our ace will be a guy who has yet to pitch above AA, missed about half of last season with shoulder problems, and was only ranked #59 by BA before those shoulder problems surfaced.

 

I am excited about Meyer and the younger guys as much as anyone, but if it was this easy to develop and project starting pitchers, the Twins would not be in their current situation. Again, there are plenty of fine arguments against signing Garza -- that there's just no room for him on our 2017 depth chart can't possibly be one of them.

[Otto von Ballpark]

If Matt Garza is a borderline ace, then Brad Radke was a legit ace pitcher.

 

And I don't think many people will make that argument about Radke.

 

Garza is absolutely a #2, though... Maybe a borderline #3 a couple of seasons.

 

I think Radke was just about a legit ace. In his prime, he averaged 226 IP with a 118 ERA+ for 6 seasons. He obviously wasn't ever the best MLB starter, but for 5 of those 6 years, he ranked in the top 29 for ERA+ and in the top 15 for IP. Not his fault he was stuck on some awful teams.

 

In the lowest year of his peak, Radke dipped to a still very respectable #33 for IP and #39 for ERA+. I'd say that one season was borderline ace, and pretty much 2008-2011 Garza ranks.

[Brock Beauchamp]

I think Radke was just about a legit ace. In his prime, he averaged 226 IP with a 118 ERA+ for 6 seasons. He obviously wasn't ever the best MLB starter, but for 5 of those 6 years, he ranked in the top 29 for ERA+ and in the top 15 for IP. Not his fault he was stuck on some awful teams.

 

In the lowest year of his peak, Radke dipped to a still very respectable #33 for IP and #39 for ERA+. I'd say that one season was borderline ace, and pretty much 2008-2011 Garza ranks.

 

Fair enough. I guess it all depends on where you draw the line for "ace". Personally, I tend to believe that not every team has an ace and if a guy is outside the top 20 in MLB starters, he cannot be called an ace.

[Otto von Ballpark]

Fair enough. I guess it all depends on where you draw the line for "ace". Personally, I tend to believe that not every team has an ace and if a guy is outside the top 20 in MLB starters, he cannot be called an ace.

Ace is definitely subjective, and I like your 20 estimate.

 

But here's Radke's rWAR ranks among pitchers, for the 5 season period beginning in 1997:

17, 13, 5, 5, 18

 

Prefer fWAR?

10, 14, 17, 8, 11

 

Looks top 20 to me. And consistently so -- filter out the Joe Mays 2001 types from the above lists and Radke could be even higher.

 

I'll grant that a healthy Garza may be better characterized as a very consistent #2 rather than a borderline ace -- his performance, while very good, has never spiked that high. That consistency might actually be more valuable then some borderline aces, though, who may have a spike "ace" type season but much lower lows (i.e. Jimenez, E. Santana).