mgraves

The fact that he has a repeatable, efficient delivery is some of the best news about the guy. He wouldn't have been drafted fourth had he lacked the stuff, but the fact that he doesn't need his delivery fixed, or one that will lead to injuries is very reassuring.

I don't recall saying he was an ace--although there were years he pitched like one. I merely said the alleged Radke clones drafted by the organization, are not. I did imply he was better than Jack Morris, but I said that because the numbers back up the claim. As an aside--one possible Radke clone, Kevin Slowey--who merely lacked Radke's mental toughness--has given up 21 runs in his last 22 1/3 innings (covering five starts). There is more to being a Radke clone than being a flyball pitcher with outstanding control.

The Twins could very much use some Radke clones. They don't currently have any. In a lower K environment, Radke struck out about 5.5/9 and also induced weak contact (above average infield fly ratio combined with a greater number of flyballs, as well as a lower than average line drive rate, indicate an increased rate of weak contact) and possessed exceptional control. [Radke also had a career contact rate of 82% v average pitcher of 80%]. None of the Twins' current staff have any of those qualities. Most of them are groundball pitchers with contact rates of 90% with better than average control. This is not to say anything negative about Stewart, who I am glad the Twins took. If Stewart develops as the Twins (and Twins Territory) hope he will be that Santana-type ace who can lead a rotation. A couple Radkes backing him up would make for a top of the line rotation. The Twins current rotation is made up of guys who could be the 4 or 5 guys on a rotation fronted by Santana/Radke. They just don't have any Santana/Radke guys. Radke has a better ERA+ than does Jack Morris (as well as greater career bWar and fWar, despite pitching fewer seasons). [i add this only to compare the alleged ace, Morris--who may get into the Hall of Fame, with Radke, who never will, and is most certainly a better pitcher in a more hitting friendly environment than Morris].

Bingo. People who are complaining about losing Alex Burnett would complain about the color of the sky. Burnett is a bad pitcher who was getting worse each year. Good riddance and good luck. Maybe a change of scenery will make him a better pitcher. I doubt it.

Saga and the Horizon Red Ale are outstanding. My "Miller" is the IPA--I do mix it up with some of the products of the Boston Brewing Company (Sam Adams) and New Belgium Brewing (they've got at least three IPAs that are outstanding--not as delicious as Saga or the basic Summit IPA, but if you're in Colorado...), but Summit IPA is delicious chilled or no (as the IPA is essentially a "bitter", which I believe is served at 60 degrees). Good stuff. Summit also bottles the Finnegan's Irish Ale (I believe), which is a charity beer.

Brad Radke accumulated 42.6 bWAR in 12 seasons, whereas Morris accumulated 39.3 bWAR in 18 seasons. Radke had a career ERA+ of 113, while Morris' is 105. Their career post-season ERAs are virtually equivalent despite Radke pitching in a more offense heavy era (Radke 3.60, Morris 3.80). In K/9 Morris holds a clear edge, as he pitched during an era of fewer strikeouts and still struck out more, but his K/BB ratio is not even in the same ballpark as Radke, which is why Morris had a higher WHIP. The fact that the two can be compared--oftentimes to Radke's favor--does not speak well for Morris. Radke got two votes in his only year of eligibility, and I would have rather had an in his prime Radke over an in his prime Morris.

"Regress to the mean" does not mean "get worse" or "become more like the average ballplayer". It is any return to his average, provided the initial sample size is large enough. So Mauer can regress from an .861 OPS to an .873 OPS. Granted, Mauer's epic 2009 campaign skews his career averages, but so does his injury plagued 2011, which means his mean [with the rest of his career taken into account] is ".873". The problem, referenced by his age 30 season, is that ballplayer become less effective the older they get [exceptions due to "the clear" and "the clear" notwithstanding]. Age also makes coming back from injuries more labor intensive and longer [again, exceptions due to "the clear" and "the clear" notwithstanding]. In sum, after the last two years, if Mauer were to "regress" to his mean, he would improve, but the effect of age may make what he is typically capable of may decrease his mean. Sidenote--considering his position, I don't like his batted ball profile as he ages.

Outstanding, Sir.

Kepler posted K rates of about 20% his first two years, which then dropped to about 12%. It'll be interesting to see if he can maintain that level of contact going forward. If he can, I'd expect to see him at the big club before Sano. Sano strikes out a ridiculous amount and does not have a position. Both Sano and Kepler, however, I expect to skip AAA.

Florimon was a waiver pickup. Unless he fell all the way through waivers, then the Twins had first crack at him last winter, so he would not have had to be passed on by the other 29 teams.

I am a Joe Mauer fan, but I find his ISO to be terrifyingly low (.127). It recovered from last year, but is still below his career average (.145). I had thought he could wind up (if moved to 1B) being an overpaid Mark Grace (but with intangibles, e.g. ticket and jersey sales, not disturbingly so), but Mark Grace had a lower K rate and a career ISO greater than Mauer's ISOs the last two years (.139, virtually equivalent to Mauer's 2010 of .141). What any of this means, I am unsure, but the extent to which a C/1B can sustain a BABIP of .345 is doubtful. Mauer doesn't really have any easy comparisons, so trying to guess at a career trend line is a mostly useless exercise. I am, however, concerned about the increased K rate, decreased ISO, and Spanian GB rate.

With Blackburn's confidence issues, I'd almost guess that Blackburn would agree with you.

Also fantastic about Kepler (alluded to in your write up) is that he drew almost as many walks as strikeouts, with BB and K rates of 10% and 12.3%. (And an ISO which has increased each year, from .057 to .105. to .241).

Since Liriano has been pitching for Chicago, his ERA is 5.09 (ERA+ 86), his K:BB ratio is 1.56:1, he's averaging five innings a start, and has a WHIP of 1.648. That is terrible. Liriano's last two years have set him up for a buy-low, incentive laden, one year contract. He's someone you take a flyer on to fill out a rotation when you've got four established starters (or your rotation is terrible and you're willing to pray he can eat some innings), and you want a low-risk contract, possibly high reward performance. Liriano is not a sure thing. He's had two good years (half of 2006 and half of 2008, and 2010) in his six year major league career. If you're under the impression that a back end starter like Guthrie or Liriano is going to turn around the starting staff, then you're mildly delusion, to put it mildly.

He was called up in May and made three starts, going five innings each time, and then was sent down. Since he was called back up at the end of June he's made 12 starts, of which six of them have been quality starts. He strikes out more than six per nine (tops among current Twins starters). He has been inexplicably serviceable, but on a terrible team, he's one of the best options. That is why he's starting.