Nick Nelson

[ATTACH=CONFIG]3007[/ATTACH]The Twins have taken a "quantity, not quality" approaching in assembling their starting rotation this winter, piling up numerous pitchers with limited upside and low price tags. Several of the hurlers that will be in the mix for starting jobs in the spring happen to be tagged with question marks due to recent health issues. Kyle Gibson returned late last year from Tommy John surgery and hasn't yet pitched in the majors. Mike Pelfrey is returning from his own TJ operation, which he underwent last May. Vance Worley and Scott Diamond both had minor elbow scopes during the offseason. Rich Harden is trying to come back from major shoulder surgery. Given the sheer number of available arms and the fragile nature of many of them, would it make sense for the Twins to open the season with a six-man rotation? This would allow them to get early looks at several different guys while also increasing the rest periods between starts. With pitchers like Gibson and Pelfrey likely to be facing inning restrictions, this approach might help them pitch later into the year. And while the Twins lack punch at the top end of their rotation, they have no shortage of No. 4/5 types so going with six starters wouldn't necessarily dilute the overall quality of the unit much. Assuming they won't be adding any more legit arms, the Twins have put themselves into a bit of a quirky situation, with a high volume of potentially useful starters but a daunting shortage of reliability. In order to work these circumstances to their advantage, they might need to get a little creative. What do you think?

Are you being serious? Using W/L record as a literal translation for how much a pitcher adds? That's... wow. You think the Twins are going to invest in free agent pitching next year, when prices only continue to inflate as the new TV revenue actually hits? Most of the usual big-market suspects like the Yankees, Red Sox, Rangers and Phillies have actually been pretty quiet this offseason. If the Twins are unwilling to "overpay" for quality talent right now, just wait until next winter. There's a good chance many of these goofy contracts will look downright reasonable in a year. It tells us that people don't want to get into these silly breakdowns of how many theoretical wins a player adds. It misses the point. As I said in the post, there's a difference between contending and making an effort to compete. I don't think many expect the former but we should all absolutely expect the latter, and we haven't gotten it. I'm all for the rebuilding approach but putting such a minimal effort into getting a decent product on the field in the meantime is inexcusable.

I'm sure I'll watch all the games too, but if they're out of it by the end of May again I'll probably get out to Target Field about half as many times as I might have otherwise. As much as I love the summer ballpark experience, it's tough to get amped up to go see a last-place team get throttled, and it's also tough to justify forking over a bunch of money to an organization that doesn't seem all that interested in trying to promptly turn around an abhorrent two-year stretch. The message being sent to fans by scraping the bargain bin for pitching and reverting nearly to Metrodome payroll levels is insulting.

I ranked the players based on accomplishment, or in Bauer's case I ranked him high because he's one of the game's elite pitching prospects. Sorry, Meyer and May just aren't at that level and are unlikely to figure into the 2013 picture significantly. Guthrie has been a workhorse and has survived in the AL East. Davis has more of an MLB track record than Worley and has survived in the AL East. Santana has been very good in two of the last three years and has averaged 209 innings during that span. Worley has a chance to be a solid pitcher, but he hasn't thrown 140 innings in an MLB season and he's coming off a pretty mediocre campaign in the NL that ended with elbow surgery. I don't think he's significantly different than many of the guys I placed above him but he just hasn't done enough yet. I wouldn't argue if you want to move him up a spot or two but the point is that, as the premier pitching acquisitioin of the offseason, he just doesn't stack up very well against the rest of the division. Let's see Worley actually throw 180 innings at any level before we make that assumption. I disagree wholeheartedly. I think this is exactly the time to do it. They lack even mid-tier caliber pitching and they have plenty of extra money this year and next. Just because you're not realistically contending for a championship doesn't mean you shouldn't try and put a respectable product on the field.

There is a difference between mediocre and bad. Correia has a track record that includes neither sustained durability nor success. I'd feel a lot more comfortable slotting any of the guys you mentioned into the rotation.

At this point I guess my "ideal" rotation would be Marcum, Worley, Diamond, Pelfrey, Correia with Gibson & Hendriks starting in Triple-A and ready to step in when guys get hurt or falter.

Well first of all, that's untrue. Bauer made four starts for the D-Backs last year, as a 21-year-old. And prior to the season, he was ranked by BA as the 9th-best prospect in ball, which is much higher than Pelfrey was ever ranked, so I'm not sure about your latter assertion. I'd certainly rather have Bauer than any of the guys below him on the list. Do you disagree? I went back and forth a little bit about how to rank the 6-through-8 guys, and I think they're fairly interchangeable. Ultimately, Worley hasn't thrown more than 130 innings in a season, hasn't pitched outside the NL and is coming off surgery – however minor. That's enough to give the other guys a slight edge for me. This is dead wrong. To acquire established quality pitching, you have to overpay. That's just how it is. The alternative is sitting on unused payroll and trotting out a staff that has almost no chance to succeed this season. How does that benefit anyone? The issue with the Correia signing wasn't that the Twins overpaid for pitching, it's that they overpaid for bad pitching. That's not how you get better.

You can view the page at http://twinsdaily.com/content.php?r=1279-Pitching-Central

[ATTACH=CONFIG]2994[/ATTACH]A new year is upon us, and it doesn't take a rocket scientist to determine the Twins' resolution for 2013: Get better. After consecutive putrid seasons that were essentially over by the All-Star break, the club is aiming to field a more competitive group in the coming campaign and beyond. Certainly they've made some nice moves to address the "beyond" part, but what about the short-term? As I discussed with Aaron on the Gleeman and the Geek podcast over the weekend, there's a sizable difference between striving to compete and actually contending. For Minnesota, the latter is highly unlikely this year but the former should be expected. As the Twins work to escape the AL Central cellar, they need to concentrate on making up ground against divisional opponents, most importantly in the pitching department. So let's take a look at all of the arms that have been added to the Central thus far, and see how the Twins' acquisitions stack up. Below, I've listed all the major-league starting pitchers who've been signed, re-signed or traded for by teams within the Central, ranked by my subjective assessment of quality. If I missed anyone, please feel free to add names in the comments section. 1. James Shields (Royals) 2. Anibal Sanchez (Tigers) 3. Jake Peavy (White Sox) 4. Trevor Bauer (Indians) 5. Ervin Santana (Royals) 6. Jeremy Guthrie (Royals) 7. Wade Davis (Royals) 8. Vance Worley (Twins) 9. Brett Myers (Indians) 10. Kevin Correia (Twins) 11. Mike Pelfrey (Twins) You can quibble a bit with the rankings, but looking over this list one thing becomes clear: every other team in the division has sought and landed higher quality on the pitching market than Minnesota. The Twins had a more urgent need for rotation help than perhaps any other team in baseball, and although they've been aggressive in the sense that they've added several players, the ones they've brought in compare poorly against those acquired by opponents. That's not even touching on the other side of the ball, where other clubs have been making additions (e.g. Torii Hunter, Nick Swisher, Mike Reynolds and Jeff Kepinger) while the Twins have been making only subtractions. Minnesota was the worst team in the Central last year and the rest of the division seems to be only widening that gap this winter. Simply unacceptable. The potentially good news is that there are still a few names on the market that would rank respectably on the list above and would considerably improve the grade of the Twins' offseason. These include Shaun Marcum, Kyle Lohse and Joe Saunders, but the crop is dwindling. It's unclear whether Terry Ryan is interested in legitimately pursuing any of these players. If he doesn't, it will be difficult to look at his offseason as anything short of a failure.

Nice thread, jay. I like the idea of trying to tangibly envision a best-case scenario and what this team could do if everything breaks right. Unfortunately, some of the assumptions required to meet these parameters are dauntingly huge stretches, especially on the pitching side. I really feel like adding even one legitimate, quality starter to the mix would greatly increase their chances of staying afloat.

Not very often you come across a guy with legit scouting skills who can actually write. This and the Buxton piece were excellent reads.

I'm very happy with the Vikings' surprising success. Not sure how it bears any relevance to the Twins. If you're looking for an example to provide hope for next season, go with the Orioles.

This is a touchy subject and I'm willing to let people speak their minds, even if their viewpoints happen to be as misguided as Hunter's. But referring to gay people as "homo's" is a good way to get your comments deleted and your account in danger of a ban.

I think it's probably safer to say they didn't want to sign here because the Twins reportedly didn't make formal offers to any of them.

You can view the page at http://twinsdaily.com/content.php?r=1271-Gleeman-and-the-Geek-Episode-74-Pitching-Preferences-Payroll-and-Hicks

[ATTACH=CONFIG]2965[/ATTACH]With Mr. Bonnes still out of town, I stood in as the geek of the week with Aaron Gleeman for the latest GATG podcast. We spent about 100 minutes babbling about baseball and the Twins, discussing our favorite free agent pitching deals thus far and talking big picture for the local nine. Check out the latest episode via any of these channels: the podcasts the rss feed if you want to subscribe and the podcast on iTunes.

You're probably kidding, so I'd like to know what your actual rationale is for being so opposed to this type of contract. Of course the Twins are not going to sign a top-tier starting pitcher as a free agent next year, when the market will continue to inflate as TV money pours in. If ever in the history of this franchise there was a time when it would make sense to splurge on a free agent starter it is now, with money to blow and a crippling lack of MLB pitching talent within the organization. Yet they still appear to have absolutely no interest in doing so. Honestly, the team's best chance of getting a front line pitcher for 2014 (short of an unlikely best-case scenario with one of their prospects) is probably signing one of these high upside guys to a 2/15 type deal and hoping he puts it together, giving you a bargain for the following year (or a very valuable trading chip for next offseason). At worst, they've got $7M next year sunk into a bust, which is barely more than they've got committed to the lousy Correia. I think they're making a huge mistake by showing no interest in that kind of deal.

Correia is a borderline fifth starter with very little upside. Marcum is a guy with a chance to be a top-of-the-rotation arm. If you're going to spend a significant chunk of money, use it on a guy who actually has a chance to meaningfully upgrade your rotation, not a back-end placeholder.

Twins might not be done looking at pitchers, plus plenty of other notes | StarTribune.com Lots of good notes in La Velle's latest entry, but this bit really stuck in my craw: "Indications are that they are not going to hand out the two-year deal for $14-15 million that has become the rage this offseason (see Brandon McCarthy, Joe Blanton and Francisco Liriano). They will let Joe Saunders walk if that is the case. Same for Brett Myers and Shawn Marcum (there are health issues with Marcum too). But if the offseason continues and the those pitchers remain unsigned, the Twins will take a harder look at them if they lower their demands. Despite having money to spend (they could open the season with a payroll in the low $80M range) they are not going to pay what they think is too much for average pitching." I don't know to what degree Neal is speculating here, but if this actually reflects the thought process of the front office it's disheartening to say the least. How can one balk at $15M for McCarthy or Blanton, yet be OK with giving $10M to Correia? I realize the Twins were probably never going to get involved with a big-money long-term deal for a SP, but their apparent unwillingness to even be competitive for legitimate free agent pitchers is a slap in the face to fans. If they won't "pay what they think is too much" to improve their product, despite being so far below their established payroll level, why should anyone be inclined to pay the considerable price to go out and support that product next summer? When it comes to improving the 2013 club, the gap between this team's rhetoric and actions is way too large.