jorgenswest

Castro is a good choice offensively but there may be some value in pairing catchers with a pitcher. Are there pitchers that benefit more from framing? Will the younger pitchers have a greater need for an experienced catcher? Catchers may platoon but it is not obviously clear that it should be based on the opposing pitcher. It might make more sense to platoon by Twin pitcher. Mauer, Park and Vargas also represent a possibility. There is no way to know when scouting by stat line whether Vargas has an advantage one way or the other though. He does not have enough career major league plate appearances against either side to answer the question. While his major league slash stats look good against lefties the sample is so small it should be ignored. It also conflicts with his minor league data where his slash stats have been better against right handed pitching. Park's record, unless there is something from Korea that should be trusted, has less. Mauer playing less would be helpful but it might be better if he is the bench guy getting starts against right handed pitching rather than the starter sitting only against lefties. Hopefully Kepler develops into a solid hitter that does well against both sides of the platoon. That can't happen unless he sees enough left handed pitching.

Duffey's WAR was good because the FIP was good relative to the Twins. His xFIP was also relatively good. Unfortunately, the exit velocity of balls in play wasn't very good. Hughes and Jepsen were worse among Twins when looking at fly ball line drive exit velocity. I wouldn't be surprised if we learn that exit velocity is a "skill" and there is a correlation year to year. More data is needed before that happens. If it does, the varied ERA estimators will go by the wayside as exit velocity becomes a variable in those calculations.

I was interested in whether most similar players continued to hit well. They did. I don't think he has the value of a 40+ HR hitter today and I don't believe that will be his value in the summer. According to the market his value appears to be a Jose De Leon. The chances are reasonable that his value remains at that level into July. It is a risk. He could be injured. Fly ball/pull hitters tend to fluctuate more in the small sample of a partial season. If the Twins are trying to squeeze out a few moderate prospects, it might not be worth it. They should take De Leon. If they are trying to get a second top prospect and can't this winter, it is possible the demand will be greater in July.

I think there is a reasonable chance (~30%) that Gibson has a better ERA than Santana next year. He was better in 2015, their xFIPs were 0.29 apart last year and I think Castro will have more influence on Gibson's performance. It is likely Santana will move towards his xFIP and possible Gibson towards his 2015 line. Santana still should have the edge as he will go deeper in games and pitch more innings but their projections will probably be close.

I don't think teams are valuing Dozier at his 2016 performance level this winter. They would be foolish to do so. I think they seem him with an OPS in the higher 700s. I think he will perform in that range next year.

The Dodgers don't need to offer the Twins an equivalent return. It just needs to be better than any other club is willing to offer. They don't need to outbid themselves. They know the Twins need pitching long term and Dozier is controlled for the short term.

One of the questions the Twins must be asking is whether Brian Dozier will retain his value. We have seen his streakiness in season, but season to season he has been pretty reliable. I do wonder if hitters with his characteristics (pull hitters, fly ball hitters, relatively high ISO, right handed) tend to be more streaky within season. On the other hand, slash stats don't stabilize short of a full season and really aren't very meaningful in splits. We shouldn't expect them to be reliable by the month or half season. I looked for a comp group with a similar age 26-29 seasons centered on Dozier while trending up at age 29. Searching for right handed hitters with a similar OPS+ and ISO, I found 30 hitters since 1991 with a 4 year OPS+ of 115 and ISO of .215 (Dozier is 114/.208). There were 31 in the age 29 group with an OPS+ of 139 and ISO of .251 (Dozier was 136/.278) The overlap group includes Andruw Jones Brian Dozier Chris Carter Corey Hart Dan Uggla Dean Palmer Ian Kinsler Kevin Youkilis Mike Lowell Pat Burrell Paul Konerko Rich Aurilia Todd Frazier Troy Glaus Vinny Castilla Yoenis Cespedes Chris Carter is the same age as Dozier. Carter and Jones aren't great positional fits in opposite directions. My interest is whether Dozier will continue to hit though. This group of healthy regulars maintained their heath for the most part ages 30 and 31. Only Hart lost a season (31) due to injury. Six of the twelve age 30 seasons made the all star team. The median OPS+ was 127. A drop from the age 29 season but better than the career number. It isn't surprising that it was a drop from age 29 since I looked for players that trended up. That group did not regress very much. Only one player Glaus did not play a full season at age 30 but even he had 456 plate appearances. Jones and Kinsler had an OPS+ below 100 and only Jones had a bad season at the plate. There was a drop at age 31. Jones and Hart were injured. The median OPS+ was 107.5 (without Hart). This group is dropping off. Dozier is probably not a good extension candidate. The discussion needs to be centered around dealing him now, dealing him later or keeping him through age 31. I do wonder if this type of hitter declines earlier than typical but I don't expect that decline to begin next year. Holding onto Dozier for a year seems a reasonable gamble. The Twins don't need to trade him for fear that he will fall apart next year. It could happen. It could also happen that the players they get in return fall apart. That is why they must get more than one significant prospect or wait until they see that offer.

Neal wrote "The Twins have been pushing for De Leon plus another prospect, but the Dodgers haven’t blinked." MLBTR interpreted "Neal suggests that the sticking point between the Twins and the Dodgers, who have long been the clear primary suitor for Dozier, has been that Los Angeles is seeking a straight up, one-for-one swap of Dozier and top pitching prospect Jose De Leon." It isn't clear whether non-prospect minor league filler types have been offered. Does that even matter? I think it is fair to read Neal's article as the Dodgers have offered no other prospects in the deal. MLBTR's statement is a little stronger with the one-for-one but the only real difference might be AAAA types that have little chance to have any major league impact. I don't get how the front office would pass up De Leon and Alvarez. I do get how they would pass up just one of them. My heart wants to trust Dave's source but I have to balance that against the reporting of a veteran reporter respected in the industry and former president of the BBWAA.

If DeLeon and Alvarez are on the table and the Twins management doesn't take the deal we need Terry Ryan back.

There are all kinds of questions surrounding whether the Twins should trade Santana. The market is a huge factor. Is it better to keep him given the limited options in or outside the organization? Is it better to trade him given the demand and supply? Will the demand be greater in July? My interest is exploring the likelihood that he will continue to be a valuable pitcher for the next three seasons that the Twins can control. I looked for a similar group of pitchers with a healthy track record and solid age 33 season as well as providing league average performance age 29-33. I used this criteria Pitchers pitched at least 750 innings in the 5 seasons age 29-33 Pitchers that had an ERA+ centered around 102 for those 5 seasons Pitchers with a good age 33 season and an ERA+ of better than league average Pitchers since 1990 and the change in bullpen usage Note- ERA+ is a searchable tool in play index. The various ERA estimators relative to league are not. At 750 innings, ERA+ will do as well as the others. It isn't as good for the age 33 season but looking at group data will give a good sample. I pulled two groups from B-R's play index. The first group was the age 29-33 group. I found a group of 66 pitchers centered at an ERA+. The second group was age 33 pitchers with a good full season at that age. I found 64 pitchers in that group. After finding the intersection of the two groups I ended up with 23 pitchers. One is Santana of course. Two others were also 33 in 2016 in J.A. Happ and Jason Hammel. This is the remaining group of 20 pitchers. Radke is in the group though he retired after age 33 due to a shoulder injury. Removing him would be cherry picking but you might consider it a group of 19. Ken Hill Pete Harnisch Kevin Gross Woody Williams Ted Lilly Brad Radke Shane Reynolds Tim Belcher Ervin Santana Jason Hammel Miguel Batista Bobby Witt Dave Burba J.A. Happ Jake Peavy Bronson Arroyo Kevin Appier Kyle Lohse Steve Trachsel Todd Stottlemyre Doug Davis Esteban Loaiza Hideo Nomo At age 33, the group had an ERA+ range of 100 to 144. Santana was 124. Comparing Santana against the median median 12-10, 195 IP, 189 H, 60 BB, 143 K, 3.83 ERA Santana 7-11, 181.1IP, 168 H, 53 BB, 149 K, 3.38 ERA The context of offense and strikeouts was a little different in 2016 than the earlier part of the chosen era but it seemed a fair comparison group. The 5 year group had an ERA+ range of 97-111, Santana was 101. median 152-144, 896.2, 862, 309, 661, 4.12 Santana 140-140, 874.1, 820, 264, 704, 3.91 So how did this group perform at ages 34 through 36? Age 34 There were some outstanding age 34 seasons. Nomo had Belcher had excellent seasons. 10 of 20 pitchers had an ERA+ of 100 or better. 9 of 20 pitchers threw at least 150 innings (Batista was a closer) so 10 in 20 were healthy full season. Peavy and Stottlemyre had good seasons while not injured in 19 and 17 starts. 2615.1 innings from the group As a group, the median ERA+ was 95.5 (100.7 ERA+ weighted by innings pitched) Age 35 Woody Williams was outstanding in his 17 starts while healthy 5 of 20 pitchers had an ERA+ of 100 or better. 8 of 20 pitchers threw at least 150 innings. Additionally Williams was very valuable in his 17 starts 2403 innings from the group As a group the median ERA+ was 86 (93.6 ERA+ weighted by innings pitched) Age 36 (19 in this group. Peavy is 36 this year) Tim Belcher had a very good season with 34 starts and an ERA+ of 111 6 of 19 pitchers had an ERA+ of 100 or better though 2 of those seasons were less than 50 innings 5 of 19 pitchers threw at least 150 innings 1426.1 innings from the group As a group, the median ERA+ was 75.5 (96 weighted by innings pitched) Innings as a group 33: 3786 34: 2615.1 35: 2403 36: 1426.1 This started as a group of 20 pitchers that had been healthy ages 29-33 while pitching well at age 33. In spite of their health, injuries were a factor age 34 to 36. Even at age 34 only 10 of the 20 provided full seasons. There is a reason to be optimistic about 2017 for Santana. Those that stayed healthy maintained their solid performance. Twelve of 20 made solid contributions. There is also a reason to be a little optimistic through 2019. The ERA+ weighted by innings shows a near league average performance which isn't easy to acquire and rare among Twin pitchers since 2011. There is also reason for concern. The innings drop off from the group of healthy pitchers is significant. Ervin Santana is a very good pitcher and valuable to any team. He could well perform as a number 2 starter again next year. There is a reasonable chance that he will be a solid pitcher the next three seasons. Perhaps a better chance than Donald Trump winning the election. Should Santana's age be a factor in the Twins decision on whether to trade him? Is there some reason to believe that there is something different about Santana compared to this group of pitchers who were also reasonable healthy through age 33? Pitching is difficult enough to acquire that they might be better off gambling on Santana staying healthy. Those that stayed healthy performed reasonably well through age 36. The Twins could trade Santana for a young prospect, but there is no guarantee that prospect will remain healthy. After looking at this group, I think I might gamble on Santana.

I think the difference between FIP and xFIP is home run rate (which requires a large sample) and fly ball rate (smaller sample). The difference between the two does become meaningless by 500 innings pitched.

Platooning at catcher might often leave the Twins on the wrong side of the platoon late in games. Thinking through how they want to manage those late in game situations is essential. Do they pinch hit knowing they are down to their last catcher? Do they carry a third catcher? Do they lose the platoon advantage and stick with the starting catcher?

Castro's signing shows what Falvey values in a catcher and defensive metrics. It is a 180 degree turn from the Ryan era. Falvey does seem to be getting a pass on this one as those critical of the signing and skeptical of framing metrics are leaving Falvey out of the discussion for the most part. This is his first mark on the organization. Unfortunately, it is no longer possible to acquire a weak hitting catcher with good receiving skills at a bargain contract. The Twins missed the boat on that one and now Falvey and the Twins are paying full retail for the skill.

I hope Garver is a future starter. There are a few reasons to be concerned. Garver is older than John Ryan Murphy. He was very old for a AA prospect. Prospects are not usually near their prime when they play that level. His defense is often referred to as improved which is better than not improved but usually not indicative of a good defender. Sickels recently wrote a report of Garver and his improved defense. You can find Sickels having a very similar take on Josmil Pinto in 2013. We can hope that Garver is a legitimate starting prospect but there are good reason to be skeptical of both his offense (due to his age at the level) and his defense. The Twins can't afford to hope on Garver. They need to be certain that he can receive the ball and give pitchers extra strikes rather than cost them strikes and give the batters more hitters counts. A plan of Garver starting as the top catcher in AAA and signing a defense first catcher for the major league team is probably the best option.

Time will tell. I hope you are right.

He doesn't make the top team prospect list in BBA and isn't among the hundreds in the minor league baseball analyst. It isn't his bat. Antony one of improvement on his radio show this summer. Most recent comment came from Sickels and the fall league this year. "Garver has made considerable progress refining his defense, throwing out 50% of his runners this year" That is good news but they don't make those kinds of comments about good defenders. He could have said he is a good receiver or even average receiver but went with improved. It also sounds as if the improvement is in the throwing game. I think it will be the receiving and game calling skills that will be valued by Falvey. I expect he will seek an above average receiver and not worry about the bat at catcher. Garver will have an opportunity to show he can defend at that level in AAA. If isn't at least an average receiver, he will probably go the way of Josmil Pinto. if Garver is a good receiver, Falvey will recognize it and he will play.

Cleveland was a defense first organization at catcher. They were horrible offensively, Gomes was hurt and they still had no interest in Suzuki. They stuck with Perez who can't hit but does everything well defensively. If Falvey brings that same model, I can't see him giving the catcher job to Mitch Garver. It could be that Garver is a very good pitch framer and game caller. That has never been his reputation though. Turner has had a reputation of a good defensive catcher. I think both will start in AAA and their defense will be under the microscope with the better defender getting the nod when needed.

Neither split sample is enough to draw a conclusion about Vargas' ability to hit left and right handed batters. It takes a large sample for slash stats to become reliable - particularly those chunked over the first three years of a career. Did you know that in each of the last three years in the minors he hit better against right handed pitching than left? At Rochester last year, he had an OPS of 926 against right handed pitching and 484 against left handed pitching. Over the last three year he has been better against right handed pitching when combining majors and minors. That doesn't mean anything either except to point out the need for a large sample to make sense of situational slash stats. http://www.milb.com/player/index.jsp?player_id=573627#/splits/R/hitting/2016/MINORS

Solid offense doesn't do a good job of making up for poor defense up the middle. There are just too many opportunities for lack of range, poor feed on the double play and errors to occur at those spots. When that happens innings are extended, pitch counts are extended and bullpens are overused. The burden on the pitching staff of poor defense at key defensive positions takes a toll in places beyond a player's defensive ranking. I still do think it is possible that the Twins find a way to play Polanco at SS. They need to mare than make up for his deficit at catcher and center field in order to play him. Buxton should be the starting CF all year. They need a real back up plan that can actually be a plus glove in CF though. Santana is not an option. Rosario and Kepler are not options for any long term play in CF. The combination of any of those three and Polanco would be a losing one. If they want to play Polanco, they need a catcher who can contribute more outs stopping the running game. They need a catcher with receiving skills that is on the plus side of framing strikes. A handful of extra pitches every game will lead to more innings from the starters. It is not a matter of just raw count either. Getting that extra strike in any at bat is going to shorten the entire at bat. Starting 1-2 vs 2-1 or 0-1 vs 1-0 will force the batter to be more aggressive and swing at pitches outside the zone. The Twins don't have that catcher ready for next year. It isn't going to be Centeno. It isn't going to be Garver. I don't know if Murphy can be that framer. For his career, he is a plus. He isn't going to contribute outs in the running game. Want to start Polanco? Find a defense first catcher (no bat required) and back him up with Murphy. Do you like the possibility of Garver's bat at catcher? Find a defense first SS and see if Garver can be ready by June. Want to give up a lot of runs and burden the bullpen? Play Suzuki, Polanco and Rosario(or Santana) at the key up the middle spots.

Falvey needs to shake up the pitching staff throughout the system this winter. I hope he has Pohlad's blessing on a short leash for Molitor in 2017. A shake up during season may be necessary.

This starting staff seems so far away from winning. Might be wise to trade Ervin before he falls. Is this team going to contend next year? What will Ervin have left two years from now? They must get starting pitching in any return, but maybe that starting pitching is going to be a key piece towards a contending team.

By age and rank at position, Maeda is a good fit. There is a premium on starting pitching so the Twins would probably have to send an arm to the Dodgers. Maeda also has a laden incentive contract that is very reasonable with longer control. He doesn't have a long track record though. Dozier has three solid seasons from which to project forward. A popular name to throw out in this site is Stewart, but I have to think that the Dodgers might not see a lot of value added from a guy with such a low strike out rate. That will depend a lot on what the scouts see. Scouting Stewart by stat line isn't very encouraging. It will probably need to be someone more significant. Another target might be Chris Archer. He also has a solid three years. They are close to the same age. Archer's season this year looks like a drop in performance but his xFIP remains among the best of starters. This is the guy I would target. It would take more than Dozier. The Rays would find a place for Dozier in the field and have always been very flexible positionally. If not the Rays than perhaps a three team deal where the Dodgers get Dozier and the Twins Archer. The Dodgers send one of the young prospect pitchers like Deleon and the Twins send a significant prospect (It will take more than ABW) to the Rays.

Wouldn't Garver's success to this point suggest the Twins have handled him well? His bat has remained solid as he moved up the ladder and his defense is reports to be much improved. Mishandling might be expecting him to be a major contributor at the major league level from opening day next year. They can hope that he will arrive with little time in AAA, but need to plan otherwise. Planning for him to arrive in the summer with a larger major league role in 2018 would be more reasonable.

If reports are true that his defense is much improved to go with his bat that remains solid, wouldn't that suggest they have handled him well? They might mishandle him by bringing him up before he has established his bat and glove in AAA over a long stretch. They shouldn't count on him for the start of 2017, but can hope he will be a contributor by midseason. They can go ahead and give him some time in September but they must be cautious to read anything into the results.

I can join those concerned about lack of playing time at SS in AAA. I can't join those that are concerned about the option use. I think a poorer use of options is bouncing back and forth from minors to majors without long stays at either spot. Optional assignments allow a player to develop in the minors though they are on the 40 man roster. The Twins have utilized that development time for Polanco and he has arrived displaying a good sense of the strike zone. Is it possible that his path to the majors with significant time in AA and AAA has helped him be ready to take on major league pitching? The Twins did waste an option year with their handing of him in the DSL/GCL. It would have been better that he had the fourth year. They do appear to have done a good job utilizing his option years to give him the development time he needed with the bat. I am perplexed why he didn't get that development time at SS with his glove this year.