Oxtung

I agree that 8 is a SSS but on the other hand when you're talking true aces that in it self means SSS by definition. I'm not sure if you clicked my link to see my whole list or not but almost every player you listed is on my full list so it is good to see we agree who the best pitchers over the last 10 years or so have been even though we are looking from separate criteria. The pre-2001/post 2001 split is evident in your analysis too. I think the real question we should be asking is what is causing that. Is that an artifact of SSS, and maybe this is what you're trying to argue, or has there been a change in how pitchers are evaluated? Given the informational/statistical revolution that has occurred in the last few decades I think it is plausible that we are just better at predicting who the best pitchers will be. Another reason could be the increased team incomes of the last 15 years. Maybe this has allowed teams to put more money into their scouting departments and they get to see more pitchers. Perhaps previously there were insufficient resources to see all the potential pitchers. As a comparison here is a list of "Aces" during the '90s and Round they were drafted/acquired: Roger Clemens (Round 1, College) Kevin Brown (1, College) Mike Mussina (1, College) Randy Johnson (2, College) Tom Glavine (2, HS) Greg Maddux (2, HS) Curt Schilling (2, College) Al Leiter (2, HS) David Cone (3, HS) Jason Schmidt (8, HS) Bret Saberhagen (19, HS) Andy Pettitte (22, HS) John Smoltz (22, HS) Pedro Martinez (INT) Most elite pitchers drafted in the '80's weren't 1st round acquisitions. That isn't what we're seeing today. So I guess my question is why? If we think there truely is a reason, and not just SSS, then it behoves the Twins to draft a pitcher with their first pick because Mike is right. The only way to acquire an "Ace" is to draft or trade, making the safe assumption we won't acquire one in FA.

I went back and reread my post and found it very confusing. That's what I get for trying to post at 3AM. I'll try and clarify my points. Where do "Ace" pitchers come from? I thought this was an intriguing question. To see my methods of determining an "Ace" pitcher see the Method section below. There is an interesting split in the data between those players acquired before 2001 and those players drafted/signed since 2001. So I will break down the data along those lines. Data Before 2001: 16 Aces 4 were 1st round draft picks 4 were international signings 8 were drafted after 1st round Since 2001: 8 Aces 7 were 1st round draft picks 1 (King Felix) was an international signing 0 were drafted after 1st round 5 of the 7 drafted were taken in the first 12 picks. This interesting split potentially implies that in today's game the only way to acquire an "Ace" is to use a very high draft pick. For reference here are the "Since 2001 Aces" (number of times ranked, draft position in 1st round): Felix Hernandez (3, Int) Clayton Kershaw (3, 7) Tim Lincecum (3, 10) Matt Cain (2, 25) Cole Hamels (2, 17) Verlander (2, 2) Jared Weaver (2, 12) David Price (2, 1) You can view the full data set in google Drive by following this link: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0Ar9R-KOx1gfydFEtVkZtU253eS1GanY4cHpwUkJWRUE&usp=sharing Method I looked at the number of times a pitcher was ranked in the top 10 players in ERA for a single season. I choose the years 2003-2012; since my last post I looked back an additional 5 years for more data points. If a player was ranked at least 1 time between 2003-2012 I included all of their ranked seasons in the data regardless if they all fell in that 10 year range. For example Roger Clemens only had two seasons ('03-'04) ranked but I included his other 8 seasons he was ranked (occurring between '86 & '98) so I could get a better picture of just how big of an "Ace" he really was in comparison to other pitchers. Well OK, I didn't really need the data to tell me Clemens >>> Erik Bedard. If a player didn't have a single season ranked between '03-'12 I didn't include them in the data. Sorry Greg Maddux. To qualify as an "Ace" a player drafted/signed before 2001 must have ranked in 3 separate seasons. A player drafted/signed since 2001 must have ranked 2 times. This allows young players like David Price, Justin Verlander and Jared Weaver, who are still in their prime and probably most would consider to be Aces today, to be considered.

This was a very interesting statement for me so I looked up the top 10 pitchers in ERA each year for the last 5 years. This gave me a pretty good idea who the "Aces" were. I then looked at their draft position. There have been 19 pitchers ranked in the top 10 of ERA in 2+ seasons. 6 of those pitchers were NOT drafted in the first round. Of those 2 were international signings (Santana and Hernandez) and 4 were "late round" picks. Of the first round picks only 2 were top 5 overall picks and 3 others were top 10 overall picks (not including the 2 top 5 picks). The average draft position of 1st round picks was 14th overall. So recap: "Ace pitchers" are most likely to come from the 1st round but are most often found outside of the top 10 draft picks. Disclaimer and other thoughts This certainly isn't a comprehensive finding. I only went back 5 years. Also I didn't look at how many pitchers were drafted in the 1st round and were busts. I also didn't look at the distribution of where pitchers were drafted in the 1st round (all pitchers not just "Aces".) It is possible hitters are taken more frequently than pitchers with the top picks. Finally it is unbelievable to me how dominant Halladay has been and comparably how little hype he has gotten.

I doubt it. Corriea is going to be starting for the team all of this season barring injury or a Blackburnesque collapse. They aren't going to just throw away the millions already committed for next year. While Corriea might not be good I don't think he's going to put up a 7 ERA either.

That certainly is an exciting list! You listed off 20 prospects not including Mauer obviously. How many of those 20 do people expect to come up and be average or better players in MLB?

I don't think anyone can say for sure about those three specifically but there were a ton of pitchers available this offseason with better track records than what we signed. Which I think was jokin's larger point (feel free to correct me if I'm wrong.) If you'd like to rehash the FA market from mid September listen to this Gleeman and the Geek episode where they break down the available starters. Gleeman and The Geek - Minnesota Twins Podcast

What exactly do Morneau or Willingham bring to the table that ultimately is going to help the Twins back to the playoffs? I think many people feel the Twins won't compete until there are some new players. Since Ryan doesn't want to spend in free agency the only way to get said players is to wait for prospects to develop. Our prospects won't be ready, well enough of them to matter at least, for another two to three years. At that point Morneau will be 34 and Willingham will be 36; well past their primes. Since they won't be helping the Twins for any play off baseball it makes sense to move them for whatever you can get. I also think that they will bring back some nice returns, perhaps not future #1 starters but something nice.

I think you have some flawed logic in this article in several places. First, you claim there is a moral obligation to "...put their best team on the field...". But if this were true, or at least if the Twins FO believed it to be true then the offseason would have gone much differently. Second, and this is really my larger point, you blame the Twins for potentially hurting Gibson's earning potential when all the Twins are doing is abiding by the rules as set forth in the CBA. The Twins, and any other team exploiting the loophole to acquire a 7th season of control, are not doing anything illegal. If abiding by the rules is morally wrong then the rules themselves are the problem. Since those rules are decided upon by the players association, as well as MLB obviously, the real moral failing here seems to be with the players themselves for allowing themselves to be "exploited" for a seventh year. Since this pay structure has been in place for quite a while and the players have had chances to make changes but have not, I think it is only logical to conclude there is no ethical problems with this particular rule. The Twins are within their rights, both legally and ethically, to hold a prospect in the minors for 20 days to obtain the 7th year of control. Third, I think you overestimate how much a free agent cares about how a team handles the promotion of it's minor leaguers. Money, metropolitan area and competitiveness are much more likely to determine how a free agent responds to a contract offer. I would be surprised if an average player even knows how a majority of teams handle their minor league promotions.

It's amazing how different styles/songs/artists strike different chords with different people. Even though the '90s is my "generation" I can't stand the bands you've listed. Not a one. Give me some Muse or some ACDC please!

I guess I look at this from the opposite direction. Why say this if you don't actually mean it? He just signed a huge deal with a great team. The easy thing to say is the usual lipservice. "I've always dreamed of playing out on the west coast. This is such a great city and great fans ....yada yada..." There is only one reason to say you came for the money and a lot of reasons to NOT say that. The only reason I can think of is because you actually meant it.

You have made some very large assumptions about certain players abilities and outcomes as well as what a "franchise player" should be. Those underlying beliefs then point you to Sano. I have no problem with that. But that doesn't mean your crystal ball is any better than other peoples. I can think of rational reasons one might pick any of the 5 players I listed. Again, I have no problem with you picking Sano. I just take exception to your statement that Sano is the only logical choice. P.S. I did mean Mauer.

I think persuasive arguments can be made for Arcia, Hicks, Buxton, Meyer and Mauer. That's not to say that Sano shouldn't be your choice. His power is certainly intriguing but I don't think he is the blatantly obvious choice either which was your view point.

I don't think Sano is the obvious choice. He has some VERY big question marks. Sure he can hit the ball a long ways but unless he improves his plate discipline will he ever hit enough to be a star? He could be Michael Restovich, Adam Dunn or Cabrera. There is also a good chance he ends up at 1B or RF. Both positions reduce his value considerably.

Because no pitchers are good after their 30 year old seasons.

Not exhibition. They will count towards our final record.

But the Twins didn't get anybody that is a true "innings eater" and durable. Pelfrey is coming of TJ, Harden hasn't pitched in years and Correia has only thrown more than 150 innings twice. Possible, if Ryan panicked it explains the haphazard nature of the signings. Then why jump on Correia? They paid him more in years and in money than he ended up deserving. Ryan could have waited to see who was left without a chair and available on the cheap. He would have ended up with similar pitcher but costing less in both years and dollars. I don't think his plan was to wait out the free agents and scoop up whatever was available on the cheap because as you said he signed Correia and Pelfrey in December. Pelfrey isn't even a high reward player; at best you get an average pitcher. I guess I have come up with another possiblity. Perhaps he felt this was a lost year (or two) and targeted players that were great "clubhouse" guys not really caring what their on the field performance was. Given the young players we will have coming up the next year or two maybe he felt molding them as professionals was more important than trying to win a few more games this year. Does anyone know anything about Correia or Pelfrey from a more personal angle? I appreciate all of your input so far. If you have any other ideas fire away!

Let me say right off the bat this isn't a thread for bitching about the state of the rotation. We have had many of those and don't need anymore. Instead I am curious about the thought process that lead to our current rotation. In essence, why did Terry Ryan bring in the players he did? I can think of several ways the Twins front office could have decided to go entering this years off season. 1) They could have decided to spend money to make significant upgrades. This is a fairly self explanatory and clearly didn't happen. 2) They could have decided the rash of injuries the last couple of years was too detrimental to the teams stability and they needed pitchers without an injury history that throwing many innings. Anybody from Joe Saunders to Edwin Jackson would fit the bill. 3) They could have decided to sign a bunch of players with upside to make good contracts. Jair Jurrjens, Brandon McCarthy, Ervin Santana, Shaun Marcum, hell even Liriano. These players could then have been traded if they had a nice rebound year. 4) They could have decided to go cheap. Wait to see who falls through the cracks at the end or sign a bunch of minor league deals or sign nobody and see what the kids have in the tank. Decide straight away this was going to be a rebuild year. The Twins seem to have followed none of these paths. So my question to you; what was the Twins thought process this off season regarding the starting rotation? Is there an actual plan behind their signings? Again, this is not a thread bashing the starting rotation or to use as your personal bitch fest about the front office. I am really trying to understand the thought process that led to our current situation. Thanks in advance!

I'll just chime in to say I'd have been happy with Marcum + Saunders

How about a half season of Shane Victorino, .724 OPS, for a top ten prospect and a former top ten prospect that had graduated to the bigs? Reed Johnson + Paul Maholm brought back Braves top 10 prospect Arodys Vizcaino plus another prospect Wandy Rodriguez (year and a half of control left) brought back a top 10 prospect Grossman from Pirates plus 2 others Perhaps Morneau won't bring back a top overall top 100 prospect like Span did but that doesn't mean he won't bring back something. Certainly his value is dependent on his production in the first half. We'll have to wait and see.

Don't forget about Berrios (yes a very long ways to go) and Wimmers. While he might not have the upside of some of these pitchers he was a first round draft pick who has talent. On top of that there is a good chance the Twins add another high upside arm in this years draft. That would make six arms in the Twins system with average or better potential with three having frontline potential. We shouldn't forget about Worley either, while he isn't a prospect he is young and has pitched very well when healthy.

Is there anywhere to track his monthly averages against lefties? I couldn't figure out a way to do it on either FG's or BR.

Well since they were a mid-market team in 2008.... (while slightly off topic I still think they're only a mid-market team) All that said I have no illusions that the Twins are willing to shell out big for many players. I certainly don't think they're ever going to pay big to acquire a FA. I have merely been pointing out that they did spend on Morneau as well as Mauer to directly refute your one liner:

It was a big market deal at the time. It was the 3rd highest salary ever for a first baseman. Delgado was not actually making more than Morneau annually. Todd Helton and Lance Berkman were the two that made more. Riverbrian's point was that the Twins were willing to spend to retain their superstars and fan favorites. They did that with Morneau as well as Mauer. If you're looking to counter his point you should be pointing out Cuddyer or Nathan not arguing about Morneau.

Morneau. At the time he signed he was the 3rd highest paid first baseman ever.

Last year the Marlins traded two of their top ten prospects for a half season rental of 36 year old Carlos Lee. He had a .747 OPS and hadn't OPS'd above .800 in 3 years. So even with Morneau's injury history I think it's reasonable to believe he'd bring back something of significance at the trade deadline.