TheLeviathan

I used career numbers. The ones that don't fall victim to using small sample sizes or being caught up in over-emphasizing one season at the expense of taking in a more full view of the data. Both mistakes are prevalent in your analysis.

Totally agree Brock. Right now the roster is crunched, especially on the 4/5 starter front. By my count they have 9 guys that would slot as long relievers or 4/5 starters. That just isn't sustainable on the 40 man for very long. It'd help if Diamond could profile as a bullpen lefty too, but I can't see that being a good transition for him. Worley maybe, but if they do get slid in to start later are we just pulling another Slowey and setting them up to fail. That concern is there for me as well.

Unfortunately the relevant decision happens in March not May. Though I agree with your idea of dealing bullpen. I have a lot of confidence in Ryan assembling a bullpen and several guys you noted (Fien especially) are at peak value right now.

Hence why subs are hard to find all over. So hats off to Alex, that's a thankless job.

There is nothing irrational about the position. You are welcome to disagree with it, philosophical disagreements are perfectly appropriate. The idea that what was argued was "without reason" is a distortion and completely unfair. As for the logic there are a number of problems: Worley and Diamond already regressed. Last year was terrible, what is more likely is they return to the mean. The mean for these three are as follows: 1.3, 1.1, and .7. Here's career ERA+ 89, 92, and 98. I'll give you a hint - neither Diamond nor Worley are the lowest WAR nor the lowest ERA+. Some other gentleman is. The same reasons you want to pick Deduno over Correia are why I want to pick Worley and Diamond. We just disagree about that, but it's not illogical or irrational. It's based on youth, upside, and potential to be part of the future. So you seem to use this same argument, you just have a philosophical disagreement about whom to apply it to. And, lastly, I think I'm done with the "Let's leave Gibson in AAA for arbitration reasons" last year. Another round of that sounds about as appealing as watching a Honey-boo-boo marathon. So, again, Doc restated my argument very well. There are rational reasons to be on both sides of it, but I just feel strongly we're a 70ish win team who shouldn't be worrying about 34 year olds with no future on the team. I'd rather have someone be awful and know they're awful.

Good post Doc, my concern remains that A) I'm not sure the Twins will ever really open him up to that kind of competition and that ST is really hard to prove much of anything for anyone. But what you said is spot on : I just feel we're a 72 win team, so in my mind, we're not at the point where you give up upside for tomorrow for solid chances today. We'd have to do more for the offense before I make that trade.

In my district it's $75, so it may not be that far off. ive always justified not taking days off just so that some poor person doesnt have to endure my kids without me for only $75. That seems cruel.

I'd love this but I think they've spent all they can this offseason on pitching. Be a pleasant surprise though, if you are landing high upside/talent...go for it.

I think that's hard to say with certainty right now. We have seen some awesome athleticism on video but also some high error totals. I think until we see him for an extended time we can't say for sure. That answer may be years in the making.

Judging any player coming off a difficult injury should always take that injury into heavy consideration. It can have a major effect. Let's hope he's healthy and has a lot of opportunity this year to show all that promise that we so recently held for him.

Exactly and he approaches observational/experience humor in a way that is ridiculous. It's so clever and so well delivered you can't even tell he's doing the same type of humor as Seinfeld. Just on a completely different level of awesome.

All offseason discussion is teeth knashing. BUt I'm hoping the roster crunch is sorted out soon as well.

If they don't make the roster - the Twins. And there isn't much room on the roster, that's the genesis of the point. To me, it's a symptom of an inconsistent/poor argument when it can't keep the opposing view straight. It feels like people are constantly shifting the conversation. If Ryan trades someone - relievers, Correia, or anyone else - then it frees up a lot of this problem. But we're talking about the current situation hypothetically. *deep breath* I implore you to go back and read my posts and show me where I've made any mention of that. I've said repeatedly that I want the 4 guys fighting for two spots. If you're deadset on Correia, make him actually fight for it to. I'm not scholarshipping anything, that was introduced by a consistently derailing poster. Not me, I've been very specific in my language to open up more competition for the spots by opening up another spot. You should be better than once again misrepresenting my point as others have been want to do here. And the continued insinuation is that these guys will just slide into the rotation when injuries happen. Well, fine for Gibson if you're ok with that. And even if you do, it's akin to putting Parmele on the bench for two weeks and then wondering why he went 1-9 in the two random games you played him in later. But the other three can't just go to AAA and wait for that. They have to make the team in some capacity and, as I laid out, there doesn't appear to be a lot of room for that. If they had options, I wouldn't be concerned one iota. I'm concerned we may lose them for nothing and they represent too much upside for me to stomach that on a team that still isn't ready to contend and still needs significant pitching help long-term.

They were hurt. And it was one season. That's your reasoning for giving up on them. Those are two very poor reasons. Then we disagree. Unless this team dramatically improves it's offense (right now, minus signing Drew and a legit DH for example) - it's still an 85-90 loss team. Hughes and Pelfrey were also both worse than Correia last year and yet you've penciled them in as being enough to put the Twins into, what, a .500 season? 75 wins? Even though you carry the same hopes for them that I do for Diamond and Worley. Except I'm rooting for cost controlled 25 and 26 year olds and you're banking on established sub-par guys finding another gear here. I share the hope in their upside, but for the very same reasons I hope for Worley and Diamond! I'm just being consistent in that belief where there is talent and a track record and hope for the future. The moves made this offseason were good for 2015. 2014, as it stands today, is still another lost season. So, no, the reasons are the same. You just believe 2014 is going to be much better than I do. I have them at probably 72-88, somewhere in that range. Seems like the kind of team that shouldn't jerk around 25 year olds with major league track records of success. Invest in those guys and hope.

One of them likely will if we can put Deduno on the DL to start the year and Gibson gets a ticket to AAA. I don't like that basically Gibson has zero chance of making the rotation at this point, but let's take a look at the roster. Assume we have a 13 man pitching staff: The four pitchers that have a spot (again, whether you agree or disagree they should, they do) and the one open spot. The other 8 are eaten by: Perkins, Duensing, Burton, Fien, Swarzak, Pressley, Thielbar, and one other spot. I think we can assume the Twins will probably bring in some other savvy pickups to compete with the bottom tier of that pen. Could they hide someone in one of those spots? Maybe, but are you actually going to see their best then if they've sat in the pen working once every 10 days and then throw them into the rotation? That's just pulling another Parmelee on two pitchers that could be part of the future. If the difference between this rotation being not-awful is dumping Correia for Worley - then I have a newsflash for you - we'll still be awful. Correia has such a low ceiling for those guys to surpass, why not risk that they can be that good with the chance they could be much better? (Because, again, at ages under 27, they've already done that!) That is PRECISELY the kind of risk you should take when you're still in a rebuild and it's precisely the same argument you're making in another thread. The difference is people have gotten so worked up about the pitching lately (for good reason) that they're losing sight of good practices.

This appears to be the point people are missing. Among Correia, Deduno, Worley, Diamond, and Gibson there is only one with a guaranteed spot. The rest have to compete and may end up being lost for nothing. The one with the guaranteed spot is the one on a scholarship that I'd like to see lost in the woods somewhere. Diamond and Worley have both shown, over significant periods in the majors, the ability to be a better pitcher than Correia. Now, while we have another lost season ahead of us, is the time to be seeing if that was a fluke or not. Correia as a Twin is toast after this year. We'd be wasting our time rolling him out again. At least in Worley/Diamond/Deduno/Gibson we are answering questions about the future. Which, strangely, some in here seem to be all about in one thread and then completely flipped in this one.

It's possible Parmelee just isn't talented enough, but there is no doubt he's had a shorter leash than several similar prospects we've brought up. I can't help but think that leash could be a factor in his struggles. The man needed to get 600 ABs last year - even if he was awful for most of them.

You do realize why citing any staring pitcher who lead our team in anything last year is a comical argument right?

That may ultimately be the case, but I don't think right now is that time. We have at least one more lost season to audition these guys. i know what Correia is - marginal to bad. I will take one more chance with a 25/26 year old to be better than that. Next year with Meyer and a better offense would be a different story.

I've been focused on Correia from step one, but no one has approached replying with any degree of fairness to my point so it's been lost. im not convinced Diamond has a lot of upside but I would've said the same of Dozier not long ago. It's dangerous to give up on young players who had one dip in performance due to injury. Especially when they already have had major league success. In the name of upgrades (Nolasco) or guys with rebound upside (Pelfrey and Hughes) I'm not concerned. When the roster squeezes and Correia survives at their expense? Yeah, that's a problem.

The main argument has fell victim to one persons derailing. LEts hit the actual main points: 1) the odds of Correia's spot on this team being subject to competition is unlikely. so I don't believe that these guys are going to have to beat him out, I believe the Twins (fairly or not) don't view him as on the bubble. That leaves four guys for one spot. 2) This is not an indictment of "too much pitching" or the offseason. Write those three guys in as locks. the problem is Correia's marginal butt blocking young, higher upside gambles. especially since its unlikely we can keep all of them. There are a finite number of spots for guys with no options. SO the real issue is would you rather have Correia or Diamond/Worley. 3) if stashing them in the bullpen was an option...fine. But again I doubt the Twins construct their pen with that many long relief guys. Again I am approaching this practically not fantasy. 4) This is about Correia costing us a good young player. SO trade him, cut him, mysteriously lose him in the woods, replace him with Arroyo or someone better, or anything that removes him from blocking a better gamble. GIve me youth and upside 100% of the time. Especially when your main argument is that this young player had one tough year of adjustments likely caused by injury in both cases. Its the absolute worst kind of selling low.

I'd flip the question.....how on earth do you make sense of cutting 25 year olds with major league success for marginal declining players based on ONE bad year? Good thing we didn't listen to you about Dozier, Perkins, or dozens of others. Its silly and shortsighted.

Well, for one I'm unconvinced there would be genuine competition with Correia. its more that he has a cemented spot. if I felt a genuine five man competition would happen for two spots - fine. BUt its more like four for one. As for why I'm concerned - Diamond, Deduno, and Worley have all been significantly better than Correia in the very recent past and none of them are already in their decline phase. Correia is done after this year with the Twins. Worley, Diamond, and Deduno all possess FAR more longterm potential. Unless you think we are a playoff contender this coming year (we aren't right now), then you need to invest innings in the future. Not waste them on old, marginal players. Best part of that is if Worley and Diamond bounce back to recent above average pitching.....you have a damn fine staff and A LOT more resale value.

There are four for one spot. After that they would be redundant in the bullpen if more than one made it. I don't see the Twins constructing their pen that way. If they are damaged goods, that would be an acceptable reason to keep Correia over them. Otherwise, I think it's a mistake.

Because some here are confusing my concern, you are missing a key piece. If they don't make the team they will have to be DFA'd and there is zero chance they clear waivers. So, yes, they will be tossed aside. That's the unfortunate pickle and why I said earlier that if they had options this would be a non-issue. If they earned AAA and had that option - fine. But it's not an option so it changes the dynamic. if they don't make the rotation they will prove their worth elsewhere. And we will have lost that potential for aging spare parts.