Minnesota’s Undervalued Reliever: Griffin Jax Staying in Twins Bullpen for 2025

I prefer him staying in the bullpen: he's been great there, and is looking like a reliever who can be consistently good-to-great, which is where you really get value IMHO. As a starter, he simply wasn't very good. I realize that he's a better pitcher now than he was back then, and has improved his offerings and ability to pitch...but part of what has led to his success in the bullpen is the ability to go max effort and increase that velocity. Hard for me to believe that he can maintain that velocity through 5-6+ innings and for 30+ starts in a season, or that his deadly slider won't become less deadly when players get to see it a second or third time in a game.

I think he's going to be a key part of a potentially very good bullpen in 2025, and I'm glad he's staying there. Best choice for everyone.

Bullpens are notoriously fickle. If the twins had been able to score runs last year, the bullpen might have lost them a ton more games than it did. 

Also, Duran was nowhere near as sharp in 24 as the year before. Jax might have to be the closer. 

If SWR keeps it up and Zebby and Festa improve a bit, there is no way Jax should be put up front. 

If they can figure out a way to get Jax to 90 innings of mostly high leverage then he will be just as important as a good starter.

IMO the fireman role in '23 & '24 played a role in Duran's dip in '24. The fireman is extremely important, strainful & underappreciated by MLB plus being ignored to start, could have worn on Duran. IMO Duran should be settled in at closer at least at the beginning of the season & see how he does. If that happens then Baldelli would look to Jax to be the fireman. Then Jax might find himself in the same situation as Duran did. Jax is a great reliever & hope that Duran also remains as one.

One thing that seems to help relief pitchers is knowing their roles. Despite the increasing idea that sometimes it is important to use a pitcher like Griffin Jax or Jhoan Duran in the 6th or 7th inning, this is a shift in routine. Leave that for the postseason. Pitchers like Tonkin, Sands, Alcala, Varland, and Stewart are best utilized in those situations. Jax and Duran are suited for the 9th inning.

Linus, what is it that you disagree with in my comment?  How do you think Jax should be used? Curious.

41 minutes ago, tony&rodney said:

Linus, what is it that you disagree with in my comment?  How do you think Jax should be used? Curious.

That he has to be used in a set routine.  Use him in the most critical times regardless of inning.

40 minutes ago, Linus said:

That he has to be used in a set routine.  Use him in the most critical times regardless of inning.

Preparation for pitching is both mental and physical. We just agree to disagree on this. As a former pitcher and long time manager I found the use of pitchers in relief is very tricky. 

It is generally uncommon to use pitchers like Duran or Jax before the late innings. This can change in the postseason.

49 minutes ago, IndianaTwin said:

Neither Jax nor Duran pitched in the 6th inning of a game last year. Duran pitched in the 7th in only game. Only 23 percent of Jax’s innings were in the 7th. 

Yes. i am supporting that idea. 

12 hours ago, tony&rodney said:

One thing that seems to help relief pitchers is knowing their roles. Despite the increasing idea that sometimes it is important to use a pitcher like Griffin Jax or Jhoan Duran in the 6th or 7th inning, this is a shift in routine. Leave that for the postseason. Pitchers like Tonkin, Sands, Alcala, Varland, and Stewart are best utilized in those situations. Jax and Duran are suited for the 9th inning.

I mostly agree with this. The first third or even half of the season is for learning where everyone is. If you're managing games with panic, asking for 6 out saves in May, your seasons gonna go poorly. But I think that sort of management as they get into the dog days of summer is important. 

If Duran wants to act like a top dog, he needs to occasionally come in in the 8th. 

Jax is our best reliever and I like the idea of keeping him in the pen. The only reason he doesn't get more national attention is because he's not our closer and can't rack up saves. I can see the Twins trading Duran at the deadline if we're way out of it by then. Maybe Jax becomes our closer then 

6 minutes ago, LambchoP said:

Jax is our best reliever and I like the idea of keeping him in the pen. The only reason he doesn't get more national attention is because he's not our closer and can't rack up saves. I can see the Twins trading Duran at the deadline if we're way out of it by then. Maybe Jax becomes our closer then 

I remember people saying that about Johan Santana. I still think it's foolish not to allow him to try to stretch himself out in Spring Training. 

Seems to me to be another example of the Twins being behind the times. If you have a potential ace, you don't just refuse to allow them to try to show it. There is some risk, as SP risk of injury is significantly higher than RP, but the potential upside far exceeds that. 

I have yet to see a good argument against allowing him to try to be a SP. The depth argument doesn't work for me. If he worked out, you can trade Woods-Richardson for a good  reliever very easily. Whereas you can't trade Griffin Jax for a #2 starter. Not right now anyways.

Plus, as we all know, even a good pitching staff is going to use 8+ SP. Who's the Twins 8th SP right now? Dobnak? Headrick? 

16 hours ago, Parfigliano said:

Now the need to tell Paddack his role is in the bullpen.

If they put Paddack in the bullpen and keep Castellano and Henriquez, they will only have one spot left for pitchers with options remaining.

Jax, Duran, Stewart, Tonkin, Paddack, Castellano, Henriquez

That leaves one spot remaining for Topa, Alcala, Sands, Varland, Headrick, Funderburk, Canterino or Adams.

13 hours ago, tony&rodney said:

One thing that seems to help relief pitchers is knowing their roles. Despite the increasing idea that sometimes it is important to use a pitcher like Griffin Jax or Jhoan Duran in the 6th or 7th inning, this is a shift in routine. Leave that for the postseason. Pitchers like Tonkin, Sands, Alcala, Varland, and Stewart are best utilized in those situations. Jax and Duran are suited for the 9th inning.

This is a 90's "innovation" from the LaRussa school but I'm not sure there's much data to back it up. It kicked off a 25+ year run where teams had very structured bullpens where you had one reliever designated as your closer (supposedly your best reliever) who came in for the 9th inning in a save situation, and that was about the only time you saw them. Your next 2 best pitchers were the "set-up" guys, who came in for the 7th and 8th innings when the team had a lead that would get you to a save situation. Etc etc. but before that, relievers were used much differently: your best reliever in the 70's was used as a "fireman" to shut down a team's best hitters late in the game, or coming in with runners on base to snuff out a rally. I think what we're seeing now is that teams are realizing that their best relievers have more impact when they're deployed more like firemen rather than always trying to hold your best reliever for the 9th inning when you have a lead.

Do relievers need to have a very proscribed role to be successful, or did a generation of relievers grow up on that being the norm? Can't a pitcher develop a routine where they can start to prepare to get into a game when the other team's best hitters are coming up in the 7th? Can't you challenge a pitcher's mentality and tell them "we want you taking down the other team's best hitters, because we know you're the guy to do it"?

I'd much rather have Duran or Jax facing 3-4-5 on the other team in the 7th or 8th in a close game than 7-8-9 in the 9th. and I want my best relievers pitching, not being held back for a save situation that might never come if my 5th best guy coughed up the lead in the 7th.

28 minutes ago, NYCTK said:

Who's the Twins 8th SP right now? Dobnak? Headrick? 

It might be Paddack. He'll be the 5th starter if they keep him but he might be blocking better pitchers.

Lopez, Ryan, Ober, Woods-Richardson, Paddack, Festa, Matthews, Morris, Raya, Lewis

1 hour ago, NYCTK said:

I remember people saying that about Johan Santana. I still think it's foolish not to allow him to try to stretch himself out in Spring Training. 

Seems to me to be another example of the Twins being behind the times. If you have a potential ace, you don't just refuse to allow them to try to show it. There is some risk, as SP risk of injury is significantly higher than RP, but the potential upside far exceeds that. 

I have yet to see a good argument against allowing him to try to be a SP. The depth argument doesn't work for me. If he worked out, you can trade Woods-Richardson for a good  reliever very easily. Whereas you can't trade Griffin Jax for a #2 starter. Not right now anyways.

Plus, as we all know, even a good pitching staff is going to use 8+ SP. Who's the Twins 8th SP right now? Dobnak? Headrick? 

Twins 8th starting pitcher is probably Adams or Raya

Lopez, Ober, Ryan, SWR, Paddack, Festa, Matthews, Adams, Raya, Lewis, Morris are probably the top guys right now if Paddack a) stays with the Twins, and b) stays in the rotation. Adams & Raya are both on the 40-man, so they'll get a chance before Lewis or Morris. Which one would get tapped first? No idea, could be either.

Dobnak is well out of the Twins plans as a starter, and Headrick probably only gets a chance as a reliever.

But the prediction of Griffin Jax as a #2 starter presumes a lot for a guy who a) was not a good starter before,  b) hasn't started in several years, and c) improved substantially when he was able to start throwing max effort in shorter stints. Calling him a potential ace is beyond optimistic.

the argument against Jax going to the rotation isn't about the depth the Twins have there (although they do have a lot of starting pitching prospects that frankly have a greater likelihood of success as a starter than Jax at this point), it's about whether there's much chance to take an elite reliever and have him be successful as a starter, when he wasn't before and unquestionably some of his improvement as a pitcher in the last couple of years is because of his change in role. 

10 minutes ago, jmlease1 said:

But the prediction of Griffin Jax as a #2 starter presumes a lot for a guy who a) was not a good starter before,  b) hasn't started in several years, and c) improved substantially when he was able to start throwing max effort in shorter stints. Calling him a potential ace is beyond optimistic.

the argument against Jax going to the rotation isn't about the depth the Twins have there (although they do have a lot of starting pitching prospects that frankly have a greater likelihood of success as a starter than Jax at this point), it's about whether there's much chance to take an elite reliever and have him be successful as a starter, when he wasn't before and unquestionably some of his improvement as a pitcher in the last couple of years is because of his change in role. 

 

Agreed, you obviously don't ASSUME Jax would be a #2 starter. I'm talking about potential upside. We've seen it many times over across the league: 

Reynaldo Lopez - struggled as a starter initially, became a reliever where he honed his stufff and then became a very good starter. 

Seth Lugo - struggled as a starter initially, became a reliever where he honed his stuff and then became a very good starter. 

Crochet is arguably the best starter in baseball and didn't start until last season, pretty similar career path to Johan Santana tbh. 

Etc, etc. And there are failures of course. Jordan Hicks struggled as a starter when they tried this experiment and ended up back in the bullpen by the end of the season. He struggled there too, but Jordan Hicks was never that good to begin with. This is why I think the Mets attempt to do this with Clay Holmes is a bit foolish but you could say that about Lugo too. 

Another failure was AJ Puk. They tried him in the rotation and he didn't take to it. So they put him back in the bullpen and he was as good as ever. 

So, what's the real risk of potentially discovering a #2 starter and placating one of your better player's desires? Yes, increased injury risk is there, but other than that, I see no downside at all.

28 minutes ago, NYCTK said:

Agreed, you obviously don't ASSUME Jax would be a #2 starter. I'm talking about potential upside. We've seen it many times over across the league: 

Reynaldo Lopez - struggled as a starter initially, became a reliever where he honed his stufff and then became a very good starter. 

Seth Lugo - struggled as a starter initially, became a reliever where he honed his stuff and then became a very good starter. 

Crochet is arguably the best starter in baseball and didn't start until last season, pretty similar career path to Johan Santana tbh. 

Etc, etc. And there are failures of course. Jordan Hicks struggled as a starter when they tried this experiment and ended up back in the bullpen by the end of the season. He struggled there too, but Jordan Hicks was never that good to begin with. This is why I think the Mets attempt to do this with Clay Holmes is a bit foolish but you could say that about Lugo too. 

Another failure was AJ Puk. They tried him in the rotation and he didn't take to it. So they put him back in the bullpen and he was as good as ever. 

So, what's the real risk of potentially discovering a #2 starter and placating one of your better player's desires? Yes, increased injury risk is there, but other than that, I see no downside at all.

here's the thing about the successes you've cited, though: Lopez was a good starter in MLB in 2018 (on a bad team).  even in 2019 (when he wasn't good) he was better than Jax ever was as an MLB starter. Lugo wasn't great in 2016, but was a pretty solid starter for the Mets when they moved him into the rotation. He wasn't great in 2017 and was more inconsistent...but was still more successful than Jax was in 2021 when he was starting. both of those guys had a lot more success in the rotation than Jax ever did before moving to the bullpen. You've said it yourself that the Mets trying this with Clay Holmes is foolish: what makes the Twins trying this with Jax better?

Crochet is the real outlier, having little experience as a starter at all. but he's also 26, not 30.

there's also an opportunity cost involved here: if you move Jax into the rotation, how many starts do you have to go before waving it off if it doesn't work? 5? (bet that wouldn't be enough to keep Jax happy, and people would be screaming about the Twins not giving him a real chance). 10? 20? How many games do you cost your team because Jax put up a 5.10 ERA and couldn't get into the 6th inning often? How many games are you losing because Jax isn't available in the bullpen again until June and you sent out Castellano for the missing innings with Alcala and Sands having to take more high leverage work?

It's a big risk, with real downside, and a fairly low chance of success.

5 minutes ago, jmlease1 said:

here's the thing about the successes you've cited, though: Lopez was a good starter in MLB in 2018 (on a bad team).  even in 2019 (when he wasn't good) he was better than Jax ever was as an MLB starter. Lugo wasn't great in 2016, but was a pretty solid starter for the Mets when they moved him into the rotation. He wasn't great in 2017 and was more inconsistent...but was still more successful than Jax was in 2021 when he was starting. both of those guys had a lot more success in the rotation than Jax ever did before moving to the bullpen. You've said it yourself that the Mets trying this with Clay Holmes is foolish: what makes the Twins trying this with Jax better?

Crochet is the real outlier, having little experience as a starter at all. but he's also 26, not 30.

there's also an opportunity cost involved here: if you move Jax into the rotation, how many starts do you have to go before waving it off if it doesn't work? 5? (bet that wouldn't be enough to keep Jax happy, and people would be screaming about the Twins not giving him a real chance). 10? 20? How many games do you cost your team because Jax put up a 5.10 ERA and couldn't get into the 6th inning often? How many games are you losing because Jax isn't available in the bullpen again until June and you sent out Castellano for the missing innings with Alcala and Sands having to take more high leverage work?

It's a big risk, with real downside, and a fairly low chance of success.

Agree to disagree then. We just philosophically don't agree with the risks or rewards.