bean5302

Well, how messed up it was (maybe is again). There was a revolution in metrics and value during Blyleven's time on the ballot. When he got his first year of eligibility, ERA, wins and Cy Young totals were what was important. Blyleven's 3.31 career ERA wasn't under 3.00, his 287 wins weren't 300 and he'd never won a Cy Young. By year 14, I think a lot of writers were utterly stunned Blyleven hadn't been elected when they started looking at things like WAR. The more metrics advanced, the more they cut through the garbage of politics and made it more clear just how dominant Blyleven was and how robbed he got from playing on bad teams.

Win loss ratio, relative to the team's record, I think, does mean a lot. The reason why wins are typically not considered a valuable statistic is the context is missing. It's not possible to fairly compare pitchers from different teams, eras or even leagues based on wins.

If Blyleven had played on good teams, he'd have won 350 games and 4 or 5 Cy Youngs. Blyleven accumulated the 13th highest total WAR among pitchers in MLB history. 164.8 = Walter Johnson (1907-1927) 163.6 = Cy Young (1890-1911) 139.2 = Roger Clemens (1984-2007) 119.0 = Pete Alexander (1911-1930) 116.3 = Kid Nichols (1890-1906) *109.9 = Tom Seaver (1967-1986) 106.8 = Lefty Grove (1925-1941) 106.6 = Greg Maddux (1986-2008) 106.5 = Christy Mathewson (1900-1916) 101.1 = Randy Johnson (1988-2009) 100.1 = Warren Spahn (1942-1965) *95.9 = Phil Niekro (1964-1987) 94.5 = Bert Blyleven (1970-1992) *Bert Blyleven's contemporaries. Honestly, Bert Blyleven was the second best pitcher in his era (70s and 80s) behind only the legendary Tom Seaver. and pretty even with Phil Niekro. Blyleven was better at his best, but Niekro was less up and down. Blyleven accumulated 49.1 bWAR in a Twins uniform including half-seasons where he was traded from and to the Twins in 1976 and 1985. This is behind only Killebrew, Carew, Mauer and Puckett. No pitcher in history has added more career bWAR in a Twins uniform. Not Kaat, Santana, Viola or Radke (who was much better than you remember and spent his entire career in Minnesota). Blyleven is 5th all time in strikeouts and 9th all time in complete game shutouts.

I don't have any issues with the Twins running with the pitchers they have and rebuilding. I don't have any issues with the Twins trading for front end rotation arms and competing. I do have a problem with the Twins log jamming their older prospects behind mediocre at best arms who the Twins will refuse to release in a timely manner. It's time for the Twins to prove they have the arms or prove they're willing to bring in the arms. It's that simple to me.

If these pitchers are ready and the reason the front office isn't going after high quality, proven, front end starters is to avoid roadblocking the pitchers we have, then no additional starters should be signed. This article reads like having your cake and eating it, too. We've got 3 rotation spots locked up already. Signing more would just be log-jamming our prospects behind mediocre pitchers instead of log-jamming them behind elite pitchers. Even more pointless. No idea why the Twins signed Bundy if they have all these arms ready for 2022, but lets look into them. Balazovic was challenged to make adjustments to use his breaking pitch and changeup more instead of relying so heavily on his fastball. He wound up inconsistent and ineffective down the stretch. He's never spent time at AAA. Duran has arm issues, pitched only 16 innings last year and couldn't get outs or throw strikes at AAA. He shouldn't be considered a starter candidate before 2023, if he doesn't need surgery. If he does, we won't see him as a starter until 2024. Winder seems like he's ready for an MLB rotation spot. He had "dead arm" or a shoulder issue down the stretch and a rough go of things at AAA, but he's honestly probably the most ready of the prospects. Sands, like Balazovic may be ready to make the jump from AA to the big show, but I'm sure the Twins would like him to see action in AAA. He only pitched 80 innings last year due to an undisclosed injury. Vallimont can't throw strikes and can't get outs. Woods Richardson barely pitched for us. I'm really not buying the story on him just needing to work out to pitch again. He had a month off pitching. It doesn't take 2 months to get ready to pitch again. I like him as a prospect, but there's no chance he's ready before the end of 2022 at the earliest. Something's amiss here. Stroatman can't throw strikes and if he tries extra hard to throw them, he gets crushed. Canterino's elbow is awfully sketchy. He pitched only 23 innings in 2021 and didn't make it above A+. 2023 at the absolute earliest in the rotation. Varland is a great story, but there are a lot of tempered expectations because of what he was when drafted. Does Varland have the stuff or does he just have adequate polish to succeed in the low minors? He hasn't pitched above A+ ball. Listing him as a potential MLB pitcher in 2022 isn't realistic, but I suppose it's theoretically possible. Of the list, I would say Winder and mayyyyyybe Sands could take a rotation spot day 1. Balazovic could join the rotation in maybe June after a couple months at AAA? Woods-Richardson could get a cup of coffee. I don't see Canterino or Varland joining the rotation before 2023 and Duran, Vallimont, Stroatman are probably bullpen guys.

Mattingly's fielding percentage was almost always higher than Hrbek's and popularity and fielding percentage were how people won Gold Gloves back then.

Royce Lewis is the prospect I most want to follow in 2022 (please let there be a full 2022). Wallner is a fringy prospect unless he can manage the strikeouts a little better. His AFL appearance hung out at 30% as I recall, which is better than I expected and against competition which is historically better than A+ ball. I sometimes wonder why prospects like Wallner don't invest more time into conditioning. If he had some better wheels, he'd rise a lot in terms of potential value. Some comments in here about Rooker, but I'm not as concerned about him. The advanced metrics showed he had really lousy luck in 2021. His expected numbers were much higher than the actual results. Here's hoping he not only takes a step forward in 2022, but the luck evens out.

Looking back at Hrbek, you see just how good he was. It's just pretty shocking to see him as a 1x All Star and the fact he was #2 in MVP voting without even making the All Star Game in 1984.

Viola had a much better peak than Kaat, plus the Cy Young plus the World Series Championship with the Twins. You mention Kaat's 131 ERA+ in 1966, but Viola did that or better 3 times with the Twins in his 8 years. 1984 = 131, 1987 = 159, 1988 = 154. Viola's peak 5 years with the Twins produced 24.6 bWAR vs. Jim Kaat's best 5 years at 15.5 bWAR and his entire 15 year career with the Twins at 31.1 bWAR. Quite frankly, Frank Viola was just a much, much better pitcher than Jim Kaat. Kaat made it to the HoF, but I wouldn't have supported it. He belongs in the Hall of Good, one step above the Hall of Pretty Decent like Jack Morris.

If I had a ballot, I think it would look like this: 1 Curt Schilling x 2 Barry Bonds x 3 Roger Clemens x 4 Scott Rolen x 5 Billy Wagner x 6 Todd Helton x 7 Andruw Jones x 8 Manny Ramirez x 9 Joe Nathan x 10 David Ortiz x 11 Alex Rodriguez x 12 Tim Hudson x 13 Omar Vizquel 14 Jeff Kent 15 Sammy Sosa 16 Andy Pettitte 17 Mark Buehrle 18 Torii Hunter 19 Bobby Abreu 20 Gary Sheffield 21 Carl Crawford 22 Prince Fielder 23 Ryan Howard 24 Tim Lincecum 25 Justin Morneau 26 Jonathan Papelbon 27 Jake Peavy 28 A. J. Pierzynski 29 Jimmy Rollins 30 Mark Teixeira On the bubble, but no - Sammy Sosa, Jeff Kent, Bobby Abreu, Gary Sheffield. These guys were all steroid era players who rapidly declined when testing was implemented. If players show that kind of pattern, they're going to need more than the bare minimum to get in. On the bubble, and yes - Tim Hudson, Joe Nathan, Billy Wagner. Hudson's career 56.5 bWAR is in that 50/50 historical category, but he was dominant to start his career and managed to have a couple really nice years after his prime to pad out the stats. Nathan was arguably the best closer in baseball for 6 years from 2004-2009 and returned to back it up for a couple more years with the Rangers. Wagner wasn't as dominant as Nathan, but he pitched a more innings and managed to have a peak bWAR of 19.8 across 7 seasons. Show me a reliever averaging nearly 3 WAR per season for 7 years and I'll tell you they're a Hall of Famer. If a player was so far above the threshold as to be automatic, I don't care about the PED usage during the steroid era. Clemens and Bonds needed those PEDs to more than double their value in order to not be basically automatic. I've changed and softened my stance on the issue. The fact is we don't know who used and MLB allowed it to happen and then leaked confidential testing documents. The NFL, NHL and NBA have all handled their PED issues far better. Rodriguez initially gave me some pause. He cheated during the testing era, but you know what, he paid the price. A huge price for cheating. If a player wants to cheat now, that's fine. When they get caught and suspended and lose $40MM and a year of playing time, that's good enough for me.

I took a look into Larnach a couple months ago. It looks like he struggles against almost everything except 4 seam fastballs and curveballs. The problem appears to be that Larnach doesn't recognize pitches. He had an 18.1% called strike rate which is the 3rd worst in MLB with 300+ plate appearances, and he doesn't make contact when he does swing. His whiff rate is in the bottom 4% of MLB players. Larnach's whiff rate on breaking pitches is 55% and offspeed is 54%. I'm not saying there's no hope for Larnach, but it sure seems like he has a major uphill battle to fight. It's also worth noting Larnach has generated impressive power numbers only in his 2018 college junior season. He didn't show big HR power in high school or his earlier years of college and he hasn't shown it again since that junior season. The biggest concern I have is he couldn't hit AAA pitching, either. Again, small sample size with only 62 plate appearances in 14 games, but a 10% walk rate and 30% K rate in AAA with a .176/.323/.373 isn't doing anything to make me feel like Larnach has the ability to turn the corner. He had 300 plate appearances at the MLB level to see much better control and pitching and work on his game so that AAA should have been easy mode.

Not at all what I said. I took the high road. I'll just block you now.

Fair enough. I'll concede.

Pierzynski is a one and done. He was never great, and his counting stats aren't remotely close to there either. Pierzynski is about on the same plane as Greg Gagne.

The only reason I know 3 pitch pitchers aren't aces and rarely become even #3's is because I spent many, many hours looking into pitches top pitchers were throwing while forming the opinion. Even so, I could have been wrong so I still had enough respect for your post to take the time to look into every single one of the pitchers you listed. I even went to multiple sites to confirm the pitches existed. "Poor pitches" can be a benefit in that they can turn average pitches into good pitches by keeping a batter off balance. The weak pitch just needs to be servicable for a starter. For a reliever, they're likely to drop any pitch which isn't at least average.

Giolito - Fastball, Changeup, Slider, Curve. 4 pitches. Montas - Fastball, Splitter, Slider, Curve. 4 pitches. Morton - Fastball, Splitter, Slider, Curve. 4 pitches. Ray - Fastball, Slider, Curveball Changeup. 4 pitches. I suppose I could give credit to Berrios having 4 pitches if I throw his sinker in there, but it's really just a slightly different fastball and most of the pitchers listed above also have a sinker. The splitter is offspeed from a 4 seamer or sinker. The reason starters generally need at least 3 breaking/off speed options, plus the fastball is because breaking pitches aren't generally as effective against RH and LH hitters. Pitchers generally need at least 3 pitches they can throw effectively against RH and LH hitters which is why true 3 pitch pitchers are generally back end of the rotation or bullpen arms.

List a few. Berrios. There. That's the entire list. 3 pitch pitchers are usually seen as borderline starters/relievers unless they have a plus-plus offering. Which Berrios does. What sets Berrios apart is he has multiple plus or plus-plus offerings.

What makes you feel like Balazovic is the best pitching prospect? I guess he's technically ranked the highest, but Wes Johnson was pretty clear he has modest expectations for Balazovic. I think a lot of that is based on Balazovic only having 3 pitches which typically puts a ceiling at #3. Anyway, I don't think there is a prospect in the Twins' system with a higher upside or more riding on him right now than Lewis. Add to that Lewis was a #1 overall pick and he plays a premium position. If Lewis could play up to his athletic skills limits, you're talking about an potential MVP caliber player. If he can't improve on his performance at the plate in AA, he's not MLB caliber at all. That's a huge pivot.

I don't think it matters who we have playing shortstop since the Twins balk at pitcher contracts of more than 4 years or $100MM. In any normal free agency year, pitchers the Twins would really benefit from signing will require at least 5 or more years. Having a 5+ year contract means the pitcher wouldn't really care too much about your next season shortstop. I think it's very aggressive to expect to see Lewis before September. I'm not sure why the Twins would sign a veteran shortstop with no pitching staff, but they've done weirder things.

A bit. The Canada tax would be 54%. In MN 46%. In CA 49%.

The Twins made no obvious efforts to sign any significant pitcher or shortstop so far this offseason and both categories of players were flying off the board. It really doesn't make a lot of sense for them to wait before making these types of signings, especially with the owners proposing a salary floor if they were intending on building this year. Buxton is a semi-notable signing since he's only making $9MM next year. I think it's very clear at this point, based on the Twins' moves and non-moves they're planning on tanking in 2022.

Did you not read my post? Like, seriously? Pittsburgh went to the playoffs in 2013, 2014 and 2015. Other than Seattle, I think Detroit has the longest playoff drought (2014). FACTS: Last 12 years, despite having 40% more teams which make the playoffs and more teams who could (32 vs 30), only 26 NFL teams have made the playoffs. 28 MLB teams have made the playoffs in the same span (I actually think I miscounted and only Seattle hasn't). That means, year in, year out, there is more turnover in playoff teams in MLB than the NFL.

The fans are definitely going to hate Major League Baseball as a whole if the lockout drags on and games or spring training gets canceled. That's why I say Manfred's letter is nonsensical. It doesn't actually accomplish anything except making negotiations tougher, haha.

Bundy was signed as a starter, I don't doubt that at all. Year(s) Started Quality Bad Start Blowout Vel 2016* 13 3 5 5 94.5 2017 28 19 8 6 92.2 2018 31 15 12 11 91.7 2019 30 10 10 6 91.2 2020 11 6 2 2 90.1 2021 19 6 10 7 90.8 *2016 I used all his starts with 87 or more pitches when it looked like his performance, rather than pitch counts were limiting him to under 6.0 IP. Bad Start = game started, left with ERA over 6.00. Blowout = game started, left with ERA over 8.00. Bundy has largely been a sink or swim kind of starter in his career. Never consistently reliable and pretty prone to giving up home runs. Bundy has plenty of starts that last 0-3 innings before he gets chased. Above, @Harrison Greeley III used the first/second/third time through the order for 2021, but it's a super small sample size. Using Bundy's career numbers you get FIPs of All = 4.69, First = 4.63, Second = 4.64, Third 4.84. Bundy is a fine #5 starter, but the Twins don't need a #5.

Sorry, but Manfred's arguments are logical, even if inflammatory. I agree the letter is nonsensical, but not because it's inaccurate. The letter is nonsensical because it will undoubtedly anger the players and make them less interested in resolving the dispute. Equally nonsensical is believing the players are heroes or saints or champions of righteousness fighting for the little guy (fans). Players don't care, at all, about the fans in these negotiations. It's not a knock against them. The MLBPA's job is to secure the best compensation they can from MLB owners and the owners job is to prevent the compensation from exceeding viable team operation.