Article: Five reasons re-signing Mike Pelfrey could be a steal

[twinsfan34]

Loved the analysis, Thrylos, bertrecords, and Willihammer.

 

I tend to agree with h2oface and Brock.

 

And just watching Pelfrey - not knowing the stats - his balls were just plain very hittable.

 

Would like to see him mix up the fastball a bit - I could sit 'dead red' at 72% of the time throwing a very hittable FB and come out somewhat OK. Which is probably why his ERA was over 5.

 

I found it somewhat amusing that when he came to the Twins, and after TJ surgery, that he had his highest strikeout/9 ever. Dang Twins pitching staff! Pitching to contact all the time!

 

In 2013, his GB% was the lowest of his career, 43.2%. His BABIP was a little higher, but he has a career .312 BABIP - so the .337 isn't too far out.

 

All in all, I hope he's better. He'll need a few more Ks and his GB% needs to get back up over 50% if we want to see anything close to an ERA below 4.

[cmathewson]

That is a 2011 article and indeed in 2011 and 2012 when with the Mets he threw a cutter, in addition to the slider. Fangraphs also has him throwing both pitches those seasons with the cutter being the least favorite of the two. That cutter was 2-3 mph faster than his slider then. He did not throw a single cutter in 2013.

 

Different pitches

 

http://farm6.staticflickr.com/5543/11571283035_599b390966_o.jpg

 

 

Edit: This is a great gif that shows the difference between a cutter and a slider. And this slider is a lot like Pelfrey's (and Harvey's; with more vertical than horizontal movement) . Hope it works. Cutter on the left panel, slider on the right panel:

 

http://i203.photobucket.com/albums/aa173/xvue84/pitching%20clips/smoltzcutterVSslider.gif

 

Awesome! I was hoping someone would do that. I don't really think he meant to throw cutters last year. He threw good sliders and hangers. His slider was a work in progress last year because of the elbow. But it got better as the year went along. I presume the one on the right is from later in the year. The hope is that is the pitch he throws a lot more of in 2014.

[Thrylos]

Awesome! I was hoping someone would do that. I don't really think he meant to throw cutters last year. He threw good sliders and hangers. His slider was a work in progress last year because of the elbow. But it got better as the year went along. I presume the one on the right is from later in the year. The hope is that is the pitch he throws a lot more of in 2014.

 

That is a current MLB network analyst and HOF hopeful pitching in the gif. One Mr. John Smoltz. Not Pelfrey.

[Willihammer]

Edit: This is a great gif that shows the difference between a cutter and a slider. And this slider is a lot like Pelfrey's (and Harvey's; with more vertical than horizontal movement) . Hope it works. Cutter on the left panel, slider on the right panel:

 

http://i203.photobucket.com/albums/aa173/xvue84/pitching%20clips/smoltzcutterVSslider.gif

 

And that's a depth Pelfrey's pitch didn't have, at least not consistently. His 4.6 inches of average rise was more than anyone else on your list. Fangraphs calls it a slider, I assume because of the 6.1 mph differential off his fastball. Brooksbaseball calls it a cutter, probably because of the lack of depth. Its pretty borderline IMO.

[Parker Hageman]

Agreed, great discussion on this thread. Couple notes:

 

(1) The only thing that is completely off-based is rating any future performance on slider velocity. While the above chart provided includes some impressive names, if you broaden that list over more years, you will find others that have not had as much success. According to TruMedia's list (via ESPN Stats & Info), since 2010 the hardest slider velocity list includes Kevin Correia (87.7 mph) among others. Yes, a lot of good pitchers have hard sliders but future success cannot be predicated on that.

 

(2) That said, Pelfrey had a good slider (and Bryz, it was a slider) in 2013. The reason it was likely thrown at a higher velocity than previous seasons is because he was trying new things. According to the well-hit average, Pelfrey's opponents posted a .102 WHA, much better than the MLB average (.132). But, as Willihammer noted, it is "straight" when it comes to horizontal movement with it has a 4.7 inch vertical drop -- only Haren, Quintana and Wainwright had less vertical movement on their sliders (via TruMedia). The pitch was a below average swing-and-miss offering (25% compared to 32% league average) but hitter's contact was not good overall. Of course...this is all just based on a 60 plate appearance sample-size in 2013.

 

(3) Yes, there is some defensive factors playing into the high batting average on balls in play but his well-hit average overall was .182 (10th highest in MLB). It doesn't matter if the ball was on the ground or in the air, he was hit hard. Now, that rate dropped significantly from the first-half to the second-half (shown here: http://twinsdaily.com/content.php/2499-What-The-Twins-considering-Mike-Pelfrey-again) so there should be optimism that there is something to build upon from his second-half performance.

[Shane Wahl]

I will just hope here. I will just hope. I don't know, man.

[Oxtung]

Pelfrey has a stronger track record, albeit not impressive, than any of the other back-end options. There's still room for one of them to make it in the rotation if they deserve it. If these last few years have proven anything, I think it's that a lot of these guys are replacement level. WAR is an easy snapshot. If Pelfrey continues to average 1.8 WAR (2008-2013, TJ 2012 excluded), it's not hard to see how that's good for the Twins even at $5.5M compared to his replacement-level counterparts.

 

The two-year deal makes this even more likely to turn out as a positive for the Twins. It also sets them up well with a departing starter for each of the next four years that they can fill from inside if there's a viable candidate.

 

If you look at bWAR then he averages .75 WAR per season. So, while he could exceed the value of his contract it is anything but a given. However, even if he does how does that help the team return to contention? Let's use your 3 WAR over 2 seasons. For the Twins, which won't sniff the playoffs, that is pretty much useless. He is just a filler while we wait for somebody better (which we could have signed this year or signed a 1 year contract and then signed a better pitcher next off season which looks like it could be a good crop of FA pitchers).

 

But we could trade him you say! Just looking at recent trades, back of the rotation starters bring back very little of value (which shouldn't be too surprising). At best they seem to bring back a usable bullpen piece on a short contract like Joe Saunders in 2012. Of course they often bring back nothing of value, like Joe Blanton that same season.

 

So, the upside here seems to be 3 WAR, a bullpen piece loaner or some combination there of.

 

The downside is we are going to lose a young pitcher who could be just as good as Pelfrey. There is also the chance that this signing blocks Gibson or another prospect for a while. Finally, let's say he sticks around and we get a couple of WAR out of Pelfrey, we still aren't contenders and now we have a worse draft pick.

 

Mike Pelfrey makes sense on a team with 4 good to great starters that is looking to shore up the back end of their rotation for a playoff push. For the Minnesota Twins, not so much.

[jay]

Mike Pelfrey makes sense on a team with 4 good to great starters that is looking to shore up the back end of their rotation for a playoff push. For the Minnesota Twins, not so much.

 

I agree with a lot of your points, but will have to agree to disagree on the conclusion. Worst-to-first just doesn't happen all that often. We can't play the draft pick game forever. The farm is already stocked. It's time to strive for improvements where we can find them and that doesn't usually mean you're in the WS the next year. It's time to start building on some success, fill in from the farm, and make some targeted acquisitions. If it doesn't work, then you restart the cycle.

[cmathewson]

That is a current MLB network analyst and HOF hopeful pitching in the gif. One Mr. John Smoltz. Not Pelfrey.

 

No wonder it looked so good. :-)

[cmathewson]

The downside is we are going to lose a young pitcher who could be just as good as Pelfrey. There is also the chance that this signing blocks Gibson or another prospect for a while. Finally, let's say he sticks around and we get a couple of WAR out of Pelfrey, we still aren't contenders and now we have a worse draft pick.

 

I don't see it. You're talking about Diamond or Worley? Sure, they could be as good as Pelfrey for part of a season. But they're fifth starters on a bad team. I'd much rather take my chances on Pelfrey getting back to his good years with a healthy elbow than either of those two guys. The Twins have one slot open for either Deduno or Gibson. Deduno and could spend time on the DL. Gibson has options. They wouldn't lose either of those guys in any event.

 

Your comment about the worse draft pick is asinine. If you polled 100 fans and asked them to choose between winning and getting a better draft pick next year, 99 of them would choose winning.

[YourHouseIsMyHouse]

Also, if you believe in WAR-based monetary value, according to Fangraphs, Mike Pelfrey's contribution to the Twins in 2013 (a down season) was worth $10.7 million

 

I'm not saying you aren't correct, but I would never pay Pelfrey 10 million a year to do what he did last season. This is pretty controversial and why I prefer BR to Fangraphs.

Pelfrey fWAR: 2.1

Pelfrey bWAR: -0.3

 

He looked below replacement level last season and bWAR reflects that. I like FIP as much as the next guy, but I like it much more as a predictor rather than an evaluator.

[Thrylos]

I don't see it. You're talking about Diamond or Worley? Sure, they could be as good as Pelfrey for part of a season. But they're fifth starters on a bad team.

 

Diamond maybe. But Worley was the fourth best starter in a 102-60 team...

[Thrylos]

 

I'm not saying you aren't correct, but I would never pay Pelfrey 10 million a year to do what he did last season. This is pretty controversial and why I prefer BR to Fangraphs.

Pelfrey fWAR: 2.1

Pelfrey bWAR: -0.3

 

He looked below replacement level last season and bWAR reflects that. I like FIP as much as the next guy, but I like it much more as a predictor rather than an evaluator.

 

xFIP is the predictor. FIP is a measurement that is trying to take defense, ballpark, and "luck" out of ERA to describe actual performance. Whether it succeeds or not it is arguable and nothing is perfect, but as a measurement, IMHO, describes how someone pitched better that ERA. Also, other pitchers' work and intentional stuff is reflected in ERA.

 

Hypothetical Example: Bloop single to left (which could have been caught in a LF had normal range), bloop single to right (which could have been caught in a RF had normal range), intentional BB to load the bases and get the right matchup. Reliever in, Base emptying triple. All 3 runs charged to the starter and included in the ERA. Does that reflect how well the guy actually pitched that inning? With real corner OFs that could have been a zero out there... That's why I don't like ERA-based WAR and prefer FIP-based WAR.

[cmathewson]

Diamond maybe. But Worley was the fourth best starter in a 102-60 team...

 

That was two years ago. Since then, his career has spiraled down considerably.

[Steve Johnson]

Let me be a naysayer for the sake of naysaying:

 

1) His recovery time tells us little other than he heals fast from Tommy John. How's his pitching? And you can't just pick and choose which months are important like that when we have a long, established history of stats that tells us he's nothing spectacular.

 

2) No, he doesn't have excellent stuff. Hitters can hit 90+ fastballs at this level as well as 86+ MPH sliders. Excellent stuff should at some point translate into missed bats, not 10+ hits per 9 innings.

 

3) He is going to play infront of a mediocre defense this year too, and it wouldn't hurt him so bad if he missed bats.

 

4) I would like to hear how these intangibles will help him produce less base runners. If congeniality won baseball games, the Hall of Fame would have a far different makeup.

 

5) So your reasoning is that its okay because you can compare Pelfrey's contract to another error they made? At one point do the Twins realize that these were obvious, avoidable mistakes? When they add up to Robinson Cano's contract? I just want to hear from somebody that Pelfrey had a two-year offer somewhere else because it's doubtful he did.

[The Wise One]

Diamond maybe. But Worley was the fourth best starter in a 102-60 team...

 

Ever notice how average pitching becomes better an a winning team. 2008 Mets and Pelfrey

[thetank]

 

I'm not saying you aren't correct, but I would never pay Pelfrey 10 million a year to do what he did last season. This is pretty controversial and why I prefer BR to Fangraphs.

Pelfrey fWAR: 2.1

Pelfrey bWAR: -0.3

 

He looked below replacement level last season and bWAR reflects that. I like FIP as much as the next guy, but I like it much more as a predictor rather than an evaluator.

It's hard to believe that he is above an average replacement. Seems like he was overpaid as well considering that last year wasn't very good.

[Oxtung]

I agree with a lot of your points, but will have to agree to disagree on the conclusion. Worst-to-first just doesn't happen all that often. We can't play the draft pick game forever. The farm is already stocked. It's time to strive for improvements where we can find them and that doesn't usually mean you're in the WS the next year. It's time to start building on some success, fill in from the farm, and make some targeted acquisitions. If it doesn't work, then you restart the cycle.

 

I agree with you that worst to first isn't reasonable to expect and that moderate improvements need to be made. But Pelfrey isn't a moderate improvement. He was here last year, was terrible, has been below average for his career, is going to be 30/31 and there were better options out there that would have cost roughly the same amount of money. So by all means let's improve, but let's do it with players who are actually above average. So far this off season we've signed zero of those. How can a team expect to get to the playoffs with a bunch of below average guys?

[Oxtung]

I don't see it. You're talking about Diamond or Worley? Sure, they could be as good as Pelfrey for part of a season. But they're fifth starters on a bad team. I'd much rather take my chances on Pelfrey getting back to his good years with a healthy elbow than either of those two guys. The Twins have one slot open for either Deduno or Gibson. Deduno and could spend time on the DL. Gibson has options. They wouldn't lose either of those guys in any event.

 

Your comment about the worse draft pick is asinine. If you polled 100 fans and asked them to choose between winning and getting a better draft pick next year, 99 of them would choose winning.

 

As Thrylos pointed out Worley has been a good pitcher except for last season. I know that you have the impression that he is a poor pitcher but that doesn't change the fact that he has been a better pitcher than Mike Pelfrey over the last few years.

 

As for your polling I disagree. If you asked fans "do you want 1 more win this season, a season which we'll still be below .500, or do you want to draft up to 4 spots higher?" I think you'd get a lot of people answering draft.

[jay]

I agree with you that worst to first isn't reasonable to expect and that moderate improvements need to be made. But Pelfrey isn't a moderate improvement. He was here last year, was terrible, has been below average for his career, is going to be 30/31 and there were better options out there that would have cost roughly the same amount of money. So by all means let's improve, but let's do it with players who are actually above average. So far this off season we've signed zero of those. How can a team expect to get to the playoffs with a bunch of below average guys?

 

A strong case has been made many times to show that Pelfrey will put up better overall numbers than he did last year. Saying you can't call that an improvement because he was already here seems to ignore context. Even if these signings don't put up above average numbers, I'm pretty sure it will still end up categorized as an improvement.

 

Your last line assumes that playoffs is the only acceptable outcome for next year. I'd be okay with even playoff contention and continuing to move forward from there.

[Oxtung]

A strong case has been made many times to show that Pelfrey will put up better overall numbers than he did last year. Saying you can't call that an improvement because he was already here seems to ignore context. Even if these signings don't put up above average numbers, I'm pretty sure it will still end up categorized as an improvement.

 

Your last line assumes that playoffs is the only acceptable outcome for next year. I'd be okay with even playoff contention and continuing to move forward from there.

 

If all you want is an improvement over last season, well that shouldn't be hard to come by. That isn't enough for me. IMO, every move should be made with returning the playoffs in mind. If it doesn't help us get there then don't make the move. There in lies the crux of my problem with the Pelfrey (and the Hughes too) signing. I don't see how he helps get the team there in either 2014, 2015 or beyond. There were pitchers out there who could have helped with that goal.

 

If you can show how Pelfrey helps the Twins to the playoffs in 2014 or beyond and how he was a better option than the likes of Colon, Hudson, Haren, Johnson, Kazmir, or any number of other pitchers that have or will sign 1 or 2 year deals I would love to hear it.

[The Wise One]

If all you want is an improvement over last season, well that shouldn't be hard to come by. That isn't enough for me. IMO, every move should be made with returning the playoffs in mind. If it doesn't help us get there then don't make the move. There in lies the crux of my problem with the Pelfrey (and the Hughes too) signing. I don't see how he helps get the team there in either 2014, 2015 or beyond. There were pitchers out there who could have helped with that goal.

 

If you can show how Pelfrey helps the Twins to the playoffs in 2014 or beyond and how he was a better option than the likes of Colon, Hudson, Haren, Johnson, Kazmir, or any number of other pitchers that have or will sign 1 or 2 year deals I would love to hear it.

 

How do you know the Twins did hot try to sign any of the pitchers listed as they all signed before Pelfrey? In terms of helping the team beyond, only Kazmir would fit that role.

Arroyo wants a 3 year deal, Maholm might be better than Pelphrey, but not by much. Pelphrey is fill in until the replacements mature. 5 mil a year is a little easier to swallow than 10 million dollar question marks.

[diehardtwinsfan]

 

As for your polling I disagree. If you asked fans "do you want 1 more win this season, a season which we'll still be below .500, or do you want to draft up to 4 spots higher?" I think you'd get a lot of people answering draft.

 

This is a philosophical discussion that I think really deserves a separate thread at some point. I tend to agree with you that if this was the choice most fans woud choose the draft. One less win in 2013 would have been the difference between 3 and 4, and living up to our pythagorean record (60 wins if I rememer right) would have had us drafting 2 overall. With what is looking like so much elite talent in the top of the draft, it won't matter that much except that we could have a bit more control over which elite piece we grabbed.

 

That said, there really does seem to be a "win now" vs. "win later" debate going on. Personally, while I like to win now, I don't see it worth it at the expense of long term winning. A boom/bust cycle is fairly normal in sports (unless you are the Yankees) as teams need to have a few bad years to restock on talent.

[cmathewson]

Do you really think the Twins should throw games and intentionally choose worse players so that they can get a better draft position? If so, I'm on the wrong board.

[TheLeviathan]

That said, there really does seem to be a "win now" vs. "win later" debate going on. Personally, while I like to win now, I don't see it worth it at the expense of long term winning. A boom/bust cycle is fairly normal in sports (unless you are the Yankees) as teams need to have a few bad years to restock on talent.

 

There are degrees to it as well. I'm not sure many here would sit a 3 WAR player for a negative WAR player.

 

But would you willingly pass over an old, 1 WAR player in favor of someone younger? I'm not sure that's a win now vs. win later stance so much as it is prioritizing winning later vs. winning now. I want to win more now, but the prize is still later.

[jay]

I don't think we, as super internet Twins fans, get to decide they'll go straight from being one of the worst teams in the league directly to in the playoffs. I'd love that, but I'm not sure it's realistic.

 

I do think Pelfrey can provide value in the contract that he signed. Maybe there were some better options, but I don't think it's black and white in that price range and we also don't know the context behind any of those other negotiations. I think, overall, it's a step in the right direction. Get better in 2014 and keep marching forward from there.

[Shane Wahl]

Let me be a naysayer for the sake of naysaying:

 

1) His recovery time tells us little other than he heals fast from Tommy John. How's his pitching? And you can't just pick and choose which months are important like that when we have a long, established history of stats that tells us he's nothing spectacular.

 

2) No, he doesn't have excellent stuff. Hitters can hit 90+ fastballs at this level as well as 86+ MPH sliders. Excellent stuff should at some point translate into missed bats, not 10+ hits per 9 innings.

 

3) He is going to play infront of a mediocre defense this year too, and it wouldn't hurt him so bad if he missed bats.

 

4) I would like to hear how these intangibles will help him produce less base runners. If congeniality won baseball games, the Hall of Fame would have a far different makeup.

 

5) So your reasoning is that its okay because you can compare Pelfrey's contract to another error they made? At one point do the Twins realize that these were obvious, avoidable mistakes? When they add up to Robinson Cano's contract? I just want to hear from somebody that Pelfrey had a two-year offer somewhere else because it's doubtful he did.

 

I superlike this post!

[Oxtung]

This is a philosophical discussion that I think really deserves a separate thread at some point. I tend to agree with you that if this was the choice most fans woud choose the draft. One less win in 2013 would have been the difference between 3 and 4, and living up to our pythagorean record (60 wins if I rememer right) would have had us drafting 2 overall. With what is looking like so much elite talent in the top of the draft, it won't matter that much except that we could have a bit more control over which elite piece we grabbed.

 

That said, there really does seem to be a "win now" vs. "win later" debate going on. Personally, while I like to win now, I don't see it worth it at the expense of long term winning. A boom/bust cycle is fairly normal in sports (unless you are the Yankees) as teams need to have a few bad years to restock on talent.

 

Perhaps that is part of the discussion, but there were players they could have signed that helped in both the short term and probably the long term as well. They could have signed above average players and tried to contend this season. Assuming they weren't in contention they could have kept the players and then added a few more pieces next season or tried to flip the players for some good prospects that could help in the future. Either way the key was to add good players.

 

On a separate topic, last season the difference between 73 and 74 wins was drafting 7th or 11th. Considering the new qualifying rules that is a pretty big difference. In 2011 the difference between 71 and 72 wins could have meant drafting 9th instead of 5th.

[Oxtung]

Do you really think the Twins should throw games and intentionally choose worse players so that they can get a better draft position? If so, I'm on the wrong board.

 

I think the Twins should do whatever will help bring them back to contention. A higher draft position increases the odds of that happening. I have yet to read how Pelfrey will help. My own opinion, and those that I have read here as well, is that he was signed as a stop gap. A guy with pretty much no expectations that he will be good and really nobody will care how he pitches as long as it isn't as God awful as last season. That's a waste of an opportunity IMO.