jorgenswest

I think trading May or Gibson would be selling low. You might do that if you were contending for a playoff spot and brought back a piece that help in the second half. May is the kid of buy low guy they might look for when trading a rental in Suzuki.

Plouffe and Nolasco might be August deals. Plouffe will get claimed and the Twins might end up with an Alex Pressley type return. I don't see them taking him to arbitration next year so they may as well get the best the claiming team will offer. Nolasco will not get claimed, the Twins might be able to move him if they pick up some salary. Santana's appeal to other teams is that he should come at a lower prospect cost. Some will argue here that the Twins should have paid some salary to get a better prospect but there is little motivation for most teams to go that direction. If they are willing to part with better prospects they can go after some of the younger pitching options. I am not confident that there is any market for Suzuki as a starter. Some of the teams have poorer hitting catchers but they made the decision to seek defense first at the catcher position in the first place. Suzuki doesn't measure up well defensively when compared to the their current catchers. Back up catchers won't drive a significant return. Is there a market for Dozier? Are there enough teams in need of a 2B to drive a demand? He might get a better return than any other veteran option. Lots of relievers move at the deadline. Kintzler and Abad could be two of them. Neither has a consistent track record for success. I would think neither is as valuable as Jepsen was at the deadline last year. An A-Ball prospect with a back of the rotation potential is a possible return. Nunez has a good bat, but comes with the same question as Suzuki. Does anyone see him as their starting SS defensively? If not, utility players will move but the return will not be inspiring. His 2017 season as a Twon might be more valuable than any return they get. The Twins have several guys they can move. None of them will shift the future of the franchise much. The best route might be to seek a failed prospect that was on the top prospect lists in 2012-2013.

Santana mentioned to Royals here among a group of several pitchers. http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/the-royals-should-be-buyers-sort-of/ His appeal is that his lack of up will result in a lower prospect cost. Yes. The Twins could offer to pay part of the contract to drive up the return but in that case why not go after a pitcher with upside when giving up the better prospect. "Santana is 33 years old and owed $27 million over the next two seasons. His upside is non-existent but he does provide value as a back-of-the-rotation innings eater and did have some success with the Royals when he was with them in 2013, for whatever that’s worth. Also, as a result of his contract status and age, the asking price for Santana will likely be the lowest among this group of pitchers."

I would guess most teams have filtered out the poor performance and are better numerically. The exceptions would be the team's with the injured ace. I don't think it mean's anything going forward. It is very possible that Jepsen will have a better career from the day the Twins released him than that of Bradon Kintzler or Fernando Abad or Buddy Boshers. We don't know what kinds of number Chargois and Berrios may have posted had they stayed in the majors, but I'd like to think they would make this pitching staff better today. While the Twins are numerically better with the staff as composed today, I don't see how it means anything projecting for tomorrow.

Wow! Is that what I said? I tried to say I don't think he is a good fit for the Ramirez role. Boshers is a better fit. He can go three innings if necessary and he can also go unused for a week without worry. In the current pen, Kintzler, May, Rogers and Pressly can probably go three innings. I am not sure I would prefer any of them in the Ramirez role either. Chargois fits better when Abad or Kintzler are moved. If they aren't moved, Kintzler might be the best guy for the mop up role with Boshers going down and Chargois coming up on August 1. Moving Kintzler to that role now would probably hurt his trade value a little. Now I think I have repeated myself. Hopefully I said it better this time.

I do think Chargois will be up by August 1. I don't think he was a good fit for the open role in the bullpen. The last guy in the pen is the one who has to go three innings when the rest of the pen is spent or the team is blown out early. While low leverage, it is not the role that suits Chargois. He is a guy that they should use in one inning later in games. That space will open when Kintzler or Abad are moved. Boshers is a good fit for the open bullpen role. If by August a space isn't open, the Twins will have to consider among other pitchers which might for be a fit for that mop up role. I like Rogers in the higher leverage role with key left handed hitters coming up. I still have hopes for Tonkin in a higher leverage 7th inning role. Kintzler did have the spot earlier but jumped to closer. It would be a poor use of May or Pressly.

The Indians have stated that catcher is not a priority. I am sure they would listen if the deal had a cheap prospect cost. Gimenez and Perez are both good defensive catchers. Suzuki may not be a significant upgrade worthy of a good prospect.

I think the Pirates will opt for defense over offense at catcher. They were among the first to reference pitch framing. Cervelli has been among the best. I wouldn't imagine that Suzuki would be one of their targets.

I really appreciate the effort of your research. Refreshing. Thanks for sharing your efforts.

Whatever direction the Twins take at the deadline, it will be different than the direction Ryan planned. A new GM from outside should lead to an overhaul of on field personnel throughout the organization this winter. Keeping Antony would probably not lead to that overhaul. If the move was about the short term deadline direction, Antony has a shot a keeping the job. If it is about long term direction, an outsider is necessary.

I doubt there will be a point where Santana has more value. If teams are looking for a way to get a league average pitcher this year for lesser prospect cost, Santana might be the solution. They take on the risk of decline and the salary while keeping better prospects they might have to give up to get a Sonny Gray. If the Twins demand better prospects in exchange for paying some of the salary, the other teams would be wise to to take their business elsewhere. The Twins should take the best deal they can find and move on. If he is on the roster in 2018 and no longer effective, I would be concerned that the Twins will keep throwing him out there.

I don't believe Joe Mauer's contract can be reassigned in any way. He can be released outright, but I don't think he can be claimed in the August revocable waivers by another club leaving them on the hook for the salary. The salary, which he deservedly earned with his MVP play, is the burden of the Twins. As long as he continues to get on base at his current rate, he is a value to any baseball team. Since they are going to pay the money in either case, they might keep him until he one plus skill is no longer there.

Thanks. Great work. The international market is another significant contributor to starting pitching. In the central that might include Jose Quintana, Danny Salazar, Carlos Carrasco, Yordano Ventura, Edinson Volquez, Ervin Santana and Anibal Sanchez. I realize that those players did not necessarily start with their current team but it does give a scope of the importance of the international market on developing pitching. Not only are there one or two pitchers on each team, but there are many pitchers key to their rotations. I wonder if the Twins rank changes if international signings were considered.

Isn't the definition of cherry picking selectively picking a sample based on the case? I still have no idea what sample should have been chosen to avoid cherry picking. Of course the confidence interval shrinks when comparing Kluber against Pomeranz. Pomeranz would be more likely to underperform and out perform a projection. There is more risk that Pomeranz has not pitched 200 innings. On the other hand, he also has less wear on his arm. You made the statement extreme cherry picking when using three seasons. What do you suggest should be used so that I am not selecting a sample case by case? I guess the Red Sox must have been picking the same cherries when offering one of the best prospects in baseball for a guy that has made only 36 starts over three seasons.

Three seasons is typical for projecting forward. Far better than a half season stats. I think I also used three seasons in other posts looking at Suzuki and Santana. Was I also cherry picking there? What would you suggest in general to avoid cherry picking? I know that selecting samples differently case by case would be cherry picking.

His strike out and walk data is OK. He has a very poor ISO. He has not been very successful throwing out runners. Not enough data for slash stats to be meaningful. There is very little that can be seen in 183 PAs of AAA ball.

Since 2014, Pomeranz has an ERA+ of 137 striking out more than a batter per inning. He is 27 and under team control through 2018. That kind of pitcher will get a good return in any market. It has no meaning for 2016 other than to set the bar for guys like Teheran.

I don't get the connection between the value of Pomeranz return and Suzuki (or Santana) for that matter. Young starting pitchers will get a good return in any market. I don't think it has any meaning for Suzuki's trade value. His trade value will depend on the supply and demand of catchers. It will depend on how other team's value defense at catcher. It will depend on how they project second half offensive performance. No team is foolish enough to take first half stats and use them to project second half stats. Slash stats need a larger sample. They probably go back to 2014 to project (if they use stats at all). In that case, they would see Suzuki as a slightly better than league average hitter (relative to catchers) with a very poor arm, history of poor framing numbers and adequate ability to block pitches. That has some value to a team like the Indians, but they have many other options in the market. Considering offense and defense, Suzuki probably isn't a significant upgrade to many other teams in a starting role.

To add... Among the best pitch framers in 2014 and 2015. Not part of fangraphs calculation. He has been below average throwing out runners but 42/64 sb against rate far better than Suzuki's.

Maybe it is better not to wait and blow a team say with an offer. How much is three Pomeranz starts worth? That represents about 10% of his full season.

I agree on Nolasco and C+. I don't even think Nolasco would return a prospect. He might return a minor league player. If someone offers to take his contract in an August waiver deal, the Twins need to jump at the opportunity. They should have done that when they had an opportunity with Willingham and passed.

I took a group of 30 successful pitchers and looked at how they performed in the minors. The results were not everything I expected and may have implications for a team trying to develop pitchers with outstanding stuff. http://twinsdaily.com/blog/36/entry-8507-searching-for-radke/

Brad Radke was drafted 25 years ago. He arrived in 1995 and averaged over 30 starts a year through 2006. The Twins haven't developed a pitcher of his quality since. I wondered about today's better pitchers. What were their numbers in the minors? In particular I wondered about strike outs and walks. Those numbers are relatively fielding independent. I went to fangraphs as teams were hitting the 81 game point in the season. Starting with 2013 through mid 2016, I sorted the pitchers by fWAR and pulled the top 30. A group of consistently solid pitchers resulted with many top of the rotation pitchers. They range from Clayton Kershaw to Anibal Sanchez. I grabbed the minor league data for the group of pitchers (throwing out anything that appeared to be a rehab stint). As a group they faced 43897 batters in the minors over 10464 innings. I compared their minor league rates with their major league rates (2013 to mid 2016). K% (Majors) 23.92% BB%(Majors) 6.15% K%(Minors) 23.50% BB%(Minors 8.78% The strike out rates in the majors and minors were similar. The walk rates were not. This group of successful pitchers has significantly greater walk rates while pitching in the minors with an increase of more than 40% of 6.15. Why? Maybe there was some trouble in the low levels of the minors. I compared walk rates at the different levels. 9.32% AAA (3035.1 IP) 8.66% AA (2927.8) 8.15% A+/A (3616.9) 9.08% Short Season (758.1) The group actually had more trouble with walks in AAA. I also noticed that the group as a whole spent about the same amount of time in AAA as AA. I would have guessed that the better pitchers would have jumped to the majors from AA. The data wasn't skewed by high walk rates and different levels. I then wondered if individual pitchers having seasons with very high walk rates skewed the data. I looked at individual season/level lines and considered any line with at least 100 batters faced. There were 128 season lines to consider. There were 39 season/level lines with a rate 10% or greater or a little 30% of the total. There were 14 lines with a rate of 5% or lower or about 11% of the total. Overall there were many more season lines where pitchers exhibited significant trouble with walk rates than there were season lines with very good control. Shouldn't walk rate matter in the minors? Why did so many of baseball's better pitchers struggle with walks in the minors? I wonder if their stuff is so good that they get far fewer outs as a result of weak contact in the minors. Their stuff is so good that a batter (even at AAA) struggles mightily to put the ball in play. The result is deep counts and many more walks. In the majors, some of those swings and misses turn into weak contact and longer counts are avoided. It seems counter intuitive that a walk would be good. It might be. Maybe when looking at minor league stat lines, the strike out rate and the walk rate should be added. I added the rates and found that the majority (62.5%) of season lines had K+BB% rate of over 30%. There were few season lines (16%) in which the pitcher combined for a K+BB% rate below 25% In all of those plate appearances the batter was not able to put the ball in play. The pitcher's stuff was just too good. Perhaps we should call the K+BB% rate their stuff rate. What might it mean for an organization? I wonder if some teams see high walk rates and try to fix a problem that really isn't there. In trying to lower the walk rate, they may end up taking away from a pitcher's strengths also. The deep counts as a result of keeping the batter from putting the ball in play is a good thing even if it results in more walks. How about Brad Radke? He had a very low 5.5% walk rate and a strike out rate of 19% in the minors. Since he retired 10 years ago, the Twins seem to be looking for the next Brad Radke. Maybe that wasn't such a good idea. The google sheet with the data can be found here.

From MLBTR http://www.mlbtraderumors.com/2016/07/playoff-contender-needs-al.html Nunez for Zunino?

The Twins should not be competing in this market for arms. There will be more desperate teams in the pennant race that will overpay. Teams have to overpay for younger arms with some team control in July. The demand far exceeds the supply.