by jiminy

That first pair of gifs supports Ashbury's concern that the increase in velocity came at the expense of a loss in movement. The left one, from last year, moves about eight inches to the right. The new, improved one only moves about an inch. If he's really grooving his four seamer like this now consistently, it is going to keep getting hit even if it is 97 mph.

Alcala has a long way to go before being counted as an elite pitcher at the level of Pressly, a guy who can be slotted into a high leverage role for a playoff team. I'm not saying that to knock the trade -- you also have to take into account years of service time, and cost in salary, as Alcala's value will be accruing at low coast for several years to come, while Pressly's cost is already up to market rate. But I don't think you can just look at Alcala's velocity and say, Done! Elite pitcher in the making! As we've seen so many times, velocity is not enough to achieve consistent success. He's got good stuff, and the odds he can contribute in the near future are very good. But what I saw in his last game was an awkward, off balance, inconsistent, out of control delivery, and inconsistent command of his pitches. He got swings and misses, but he also frequently was off target and gave up a massive home run. That is not the kind of elite level relief pitching that you can plug into a late inning role on a playoff team. Can he still become that? Sure. But it's not a sure thing. Most people don't suddenly jump up a level in control and consistency. He's young enough that it's too early to judge -- he should be in the minor leagues right now, working on a consistent, repeatable delivery, away from the prying eyes of people who would unfairly judge him before it's fair to do so. If there were minor leagues, that's where he would be, and should be until he is truly ready. I know that. So I'm not judging him. But that works both ways: If it's too early to judge him negatively, it's also too early to judge him positively. We simply don't know yet whether he will mature into a consistent, lights out, late inning reliever, or will always be a somewhat wild, somewhat unreliable flamethrower. That doesn't make the trade a failure, just because Pressly put it all together and the return is still unknown. The trade could still deliver many years of low-priced value that will far exceed the cost of one year of an elite reliever several years before. I will say, though, that I was disappointed at the time to lose Pressly. His sudden emergence was not really out of the blue. Many people at this very site had pointed out that his peripherals, particularly his spin rate, were elite, and could indicate an emerging star. I think with the upgrade to our pitching staff he very likely would have blossomed here just as he did in Houston. I would love to have seen the Twins sign him to an extension and lock up a potential bullpen ace for years to come. And the extension he signed with Houston would still be a bargain if he hadn't gotten injured. I don't think he's any more of an injury risk than anyone else, so I don't think it's fair to judge the trade harshly on that basis. Truly elite players are had to find, and I think one sure thing is probably worth two prospects who may or may not pan out. I'd love to have him locked up for two more years right now, as Houston does. Given the choice to reverse the trade or keep it, I'd probably still go with keeping Pressly. But I'm certainly not upset about it. This front office is very, very smart! I think the odds great that we will get years of great value from Alcala, and he will produce many more productive innings, at many millions of dollars less cost, than Pressly will. That's how you build long-term success. And if Celestino emerges as a reliable backup CF, all the better. I have no problem with this trade. It's just not one of my favorites--yet. It could still become the greatest trade they ever did, if Alcala surpasses Pressly in production next year, and then keeps it up year after year at sub-market wages. That is a very strong possibility. The roster these guys have put together boggles my mind, with elite depth in both the lineup and the bullpen, at league average salary. It's as good a front office, and as good a foundation, as there is in the game. So I'd need a really, really good reason to second guess anything they do, and this trade is most certainly not an occasion to do that.

If his slider is really running three inches more than last year, that's huge! Hard to imagine always throwing the same kind of fastball to the same location will work forever, even if he is tunneling it with his slider. But hey, you can't argue with success!

Wow, great article! I loved the graphics, the stat comps, and the analysis! I'm assuming the ones hitters pound into the ground are the sinker, slider, and changeup, and the ones they pop up are the four seam fastball? Judging by that graphic, his four seamer has a really dramatic "rise" to it, especially in contrast to the other pitches, which all sink. So it would make sense they'd get under the four-seamer, and hit the top of the sinking ones. This analysis makes me even more encouraged that Dobnak has a solid future. We have yet to see any sign that his success so far is a mirage and the bubble will burst. So I'm going to enjoy this while I can, and hoping it continues indefinitely. After watching his first games, I was so impressed I picked him up as a free agent on my fantasy team -- and that was before reading this article. Not suggesting anyone should care about my fantasy baseball team! I'm just saying, even going by the eye test alone, the Keuchel comp does not seem totally crazy. Every team could use a Marcus Stroman, on a rookie contract. He keeps the ball out of dangerous spots, and keeps hitters off balance. He's fun to watch, and this was fun to read -- thanks again!

He sure looked for real against Cleveland. Not knowing whether a breaking ball will dive to the left or right has to be pretty confusing. And he was locating his fastball really well too. I find your analysis very convincing. Last year, you only had to watch for two pitches, depending on whether you were a lefty or a righty. Now, you have to watch fire all three, with a few others sprinkled in. Why wouldn't that make him harder to hit? And he was already very effective before. I don't see any reason this is a bubble that is going to burst. If he keeps doing what he's been doing, he's going to be very hard to hit.

I am not at all worried about an unequal number of games. The ultra-unbalanced schedule is already completely unfair -- Central division teams play not one game against the coastal juggernauts, etc.. And even a balanced schedule wouldn't mean that much since it's just 60 games. In a schedule that short, fluky things happen. The best teams may not have time to rise to the top. So why am I not concerned? All of those problems are rendered moot by letting 16 games into the postseason. If you can't finish in the top 16, you are not playoff playoff worthy, period. A format in which everyone makes the playoffs except the bottom half of the league is so incredibly forgiving that whether you play 50 or 60 is irrelevant. If you can't win half your games, let it go. You don't deserve a chance to end the season of an actual winning team. I have other problems with the 16-team playoff format -- for instance, a dominant Twins team could get knocked out of the playoffs by a third place team, in just two games. That is a much more serious problem, to me. And with eight of these ridiculous best of 3 series, that is going to happen. Some deserving team that easily made the final eight in the regular season will lose their place in the final eight of the playoffs due to this blatant cash-grab. The one good thing about it, though, is that if because of the short schedule, one of the best eight teams does not finish in the final eight, they still get a chance. In a 60 game season (or 45, or whatever), a little wiggle room is not the worst thing. As long as they ditch this format when the full seasons comes back. If they keep this format, though, which they sadly might because of the TV revenue, I hope they at least make them best of 5 or best of 7. Otherwise a truly terrible team with two good starting pitchers and nothing else will regularly knock a legit contender from the playoffs before they even start. What are the chances of zero upsets in eight 3 game series? Almost nil. If this happens to the Twins, in the year they finally, finally spent the money to build a legit contender, with no holes from top to bottom, I will be beside myself. The only thing that would cheer me up would be if it happened to the Yankees too. But it's not what I want. If the Twins win it all this year, but the Yankees get dumped in the first round by a third place team, it will feel more than a little hollow. What I want is a real, best of 7 matchup between the two best teams, the Twins and Yankees. That would be a victory I could savor the rest of my life. A bogus playoff with bogus matchups would mean much, much less.

Or keep Cave, Kiriloff, and Larnach and trade Buxton for an ace pitcher, someone at the level of Syndergaard. Buxton is who the Mets asked for. An ace with a big contract is a risk, but Buxton won't be cheap much longer himself. Add a front line pitcher and this would be the team to beat and a popular world series pick. Of course Buxton can make a lot of pitchers look like an ace with his defense. I'm not trying to run him out of town. I love seeing him in center field. I'd rather get an ace by seeing Balazavic or Duran break out. I'm just saying, in keeping with the topic of this post, our outfield depth is such that we could afford to trade Buxton for a star pitcher of that's what it took. And that is a good option to have.

Arraez is so great to watch. I keep thinking how amazing it is that we have a guy who hit .334 last year hitting 9th. I've seen non-Minnesota journalists pick him to win the batting title -- add he can't crack the top 8 spots in our lineup. Unbelievable. Remember when Buxton and Sano represented our future hopes? If you would have told me they would be our 7 and 8 hitters, followed by a potential batting champ, I would have been amazed. Especially if i heard it wasn't because they didn't pan out, but the lineup was just too tough, too to bottom, with eight guys with 22 or more homers and 11 wet 10. I am still amazed today. No one would be surprised if any of those three were all stars. Yet they are the bottom of our lineup. I'd be happy to have them as my top three. It's incredible watching this lineup cycle through. I remember years after you'd had to wait two innings before the dangerous part of the lineup cane up. Now, it never stops. Our twelfth best slugger hit 8 homers last year and already hit a grand slam this year. You don't want to look away even when the bench warmers hit. It's like a dream.

If Buxton gets walked with two outs in the ninth to avoid having him start the tenth on second, he could run on every pitch. If he makes it that puts him on second for a potential RBI. If he gets thrown out that's the last out and he starts the tenth on second. It's win-win.

I don't understand why they would be more likely to double up starters in a short season. Doesn't that mean starters are less likely to wear down than over a long season? Seems like you could ride them a little harder, not the other way around. And the expanded roster and short season means you could go to the bullpen earlier, either pitching your best relievers for longer stretches, because their total innings will be reduced, or spreading innings around to more relievers. Meaning if your starter tires, or you want a change of pace, you're more likely to bring in a stud reliever than an unproven young starter barely out of the minor leagues. I'm not against stacking starters for a change of pace or better lefty-righty matchups. I just don't expect to see it much this year. Except maybe at first, because of the shortened preseason. If no pitcher is ready to pitch more than 4 innings, you might need to spread the innings around more. But once they are stretched out, I think the Twins will ride their best pitchers as long as they can, since the season is more of a sprint than a marathon. With such a short season, it's like the playoffs have already started on day one. As long as the game is close anyway. And given the AL Central we may see a lot of blowouts. I suspect those second tier starters will come in mostly when the Twins have bludgeoned the young Royals and Tigers starters early and built up a big lead. Then they can rest their top starters and relievers. Other than that, though, I think they will be trying to win every inning they can. Let your eighth starter blow a few games and you might find yourself behind the Spiders and Sox in the standings without enough time to catch up.

I agree about the depth issue. Our second five are basically what our top five used to look like in a typical year, when we had to hope for some up-and-comers emerging and some veterans bouncing back to be competitive at all. Another big advantage is that Hill and Pineda would be available for most of the season, instead of only half of it.

Could you add a link where you say, "Patrick’s post on the top-5 regression candidates for the Twins"?

Could you add a link where you say, "Patrick’s post on the top-5 regression candidates for the Twins"?

Thank you for this! I thought his weakness was outside breaking balls! I had no idea his numbers were that bad against fastballs. Moving up to bottom third from bottom eighth seems like it has a realistic chance of being sustainable. In fact he could keep improving! If they can convince him there is nothing heroic about intentionally injuring yourself he could still reach his potential. If he's too stubborn to stop running into wall and face planting into the turf, trade him for pitching while he's still worth something. But if he understands he is letting down his teammates by gambling with his health, and his first responsibility is to protect his body, he could lead this team to greatness.

I'm afraid the best candidate for "next Ryan Pressly" is Brusdar Graterol.

Wow, it sounds like he can make it break sideways, downward, and anything in between, and tunnel them all. That would make it very hard to barrel up! I am going to be watching his pitches' movement closely this year.

I like Maeda, but I would prefer to have Ryu, Graterol, and Raley. Imagine Ryu starting against the Yankees, then bringing in Graterol. That's a playoff team could match up with anyone.

Not much good happens going after a low outside curveball. That used to be the bane of Buxton and Sano. If they can continue to hold off on those pitches outside the zone the sky is the limit. If not, they could go back to hitting .180 again.

If Buxton gets injured again Kepler could move to CF. We might need all these guys.

Cruz, Gonzales, Bailey, Hill, and Romo are not painful losses, and that's 39 million right there. Cruz is good but one of Rooker, Larnach, or Kirilloff should be ready to step in. Gonzalez is replaceable with Cave, Astudillo, or Adrianza, and his value was inflated by stealing signs anyway. The three pitchers are not anchors either. So that's below 100 even without losing Odo or May. And there is a good chance someone in house will be the equal or better of Odo by then, potentially freeing another 17 million, bringing the departed salary up to 56 million, none of it core players except maybe Odorizzi. Replace Rosario with a young slugger and there is another 8 million, making 64 million available to restock. And that is just to get back to spending barely half of revenue. Sure several guys will need raises, but I don't see a big crunch. I think they are set up really well for years to come. There is room in the budget to add an ace, especially if they are in win-now mode and decide to make up for all the years they spent under 50% because their window hasn't opened yet. The converse of that logic is you spend more when you finally become a legit contender. I'm optimistic they will strike if they see an opportunity. It's been a long, long wait, and if they don't want to lose the fans that stuck with them through the hard times it would behoove them to spend a little of that stadium money on rewarding their old fans and recruiting new ones. Nothing attracts fans like winning, so even on purely financial grounds it would be money well spent.

Wow, with all the talent on this team Cave was not even on my radar! To hold his own at this stagee of his career is already impressive. But if he really can take it up another notch, that opens up some more options. For instance, instead of trading him, we could trade someone else. If you could play him every day without a big drop off, that makes someone else expendable. It makes me much more interested in trading Buxton for Syndergaard, for example. Kepler in center is a drop off from Buxton, but not as much as the increase in value of having a true ace in the rotation. If either Cave or Rosario can't hack it, corner outfield is our strongest position of depth in the minors. And If Kepler can't hold down center you've got Lewis in waiting there too. Sure, Buxton could be a superstar, but so could Thor. I think we'd be a bigger threat in the playoffs by trading from strength and upgrading our rotation. (Assuming we extended Thor as part of the deal -- I wouldn't trade Buxton for a rental.) But this team would be truly scary with an ace, and Buxton might be the only guy that could land one. The Mets asked about him last year. Why not give them a call?

I don't love giving up Graterol for essentially payroll relief. I would much rather have seen them sign Ryu and keep Graterol. And if you don't sign Bailey, who was also signed because he was cheap, He wouldn't even cost that much more. With Ryu and Graterol, you have two pitchers who could dominate in the playoffs. Bailey and Maeda are compromises, made for financial reasons. It's great they signed Donaldson but that still barely put payroll at half of revenue. If you have a window open go for it. These aren't go for it moves. Imagine Ryu followed by Graterol against the Yankees. That's a playoff team. It's nice they got a cheap, pretty good pitcher, but it's not exciting, and I'll miss Graterol. Probably smart if you're on a tight budget but keeps them a level below the favorites.

The Boston press is hammering the Red Sox even more: https://www.nbcsports.com/boston/red-sox/everyone-knew-brusdar-graterol-was-damaged-goods-everyone-except-red-sox-apparently

Maeda makes $13.15M as a full time starter, and Bailey makes $7 million. Together that adds up to more than Ryu is making. Would you trade them both for Ryu? I would have thought yes. Ryu is guaranteed for four years though and these guys are not. But is Graterol worth the cost of insuring Ryu's contract? Maeda isn't even younger than Ryu. I guess they just like Maeda better. I trust they know more than I do but it seems odd.

To be worth it they have to expect him to pitch enough innings to reach his incentives, which add up to $13,150,000 per year. For another $7 million they could have had Ryu and kept Graterol. They must not think very highly of Graterol.