Tom Froemming

Thanks tobi, secret sauce is a good way to put it. What I wonder is if the Twins should just kinda let him do his thing and hope for continued success or if they should try to uncover what that secret sauce is and see if they can help him take the next step. Personally, I hope they do as little tinkering as possible. My worry is that they'll try to get him to lower that walk rate/pitch count in the hopes that he can go deeper into games. I fear if he stays in the zone more and tries to attack hitters he'd just get clobbered.

Santiago hasn't been quite as impressive in the LOB% this year. His 75.9 LOB% is 39th among the 98 pitchers with at least 100 innings. Nolasco is 95th at 64.5%. But if you look back to when he became a starter (2013), there have been 81 pitchers who've thrown 500 innings and he ranks 14th with a 76.8 LOB%. Also over that stretch ... He has the highest fly ball rate at 49.0% Second lowest line drive rate at 17.5% Sixth highest infield fly ball rate at 12.6% Sixth lowest BABIP at .271 He is elite in the areas he excels in. On the ugly side, only Liriano and Ubaldo have a worse BB/9 than Santiago's 3.94 over that span. But I think that may be part of his strategy. He keeps guys off balance and doesn't challenge hitters when the count's in their favor. Obviously, that's a dangerous game to play, and I'm sure will be infuriating to watch from time to time, but it has been working for him.

In the wake of the Twins acquiring Hector Santiago from the Angels, some have questioned how big of an upgrade he'll be over Ricky Nolasco, mainly pointing to Nolasco's vastly superior numbers in terms of FIP (fielding independent pitching). While the peripheral stats may be in Nolasco's favor, they don't tell the whole story.The biggest divide between these two players is how they bear down when things start to not go in their favor. If you take a look into how each pitcher performs with runners on, it's clear that while Nolasco crumbles, Santiago shines Career FIP vs. ERA Santiago: 4.63 FIP, 3.68 ERA (0.95 worse) Nolasco: 3.85 FIP, 4.58 ERA (0.73 better) So you can see that both pitchers have been FIP busters, with Santiago looking a great deal worse than the ERA he has pitched to. These kinds of gaps are abnormal for veteran pitchers. Just for reference, Ervin Santana's FIP and ERA are only off by a difference of 0.11 over his career (4.24 FIP, 4.13 ERA). FIP is a great indicator of pitcher performance because it only looks at home runs, walks, hit batsmen and strikeouts. As the name indicates, any plays in which defense is a factor are not taken into account. Another thing FIP doesn't take into account, however, is game situation. Obviously, it's better to not allow batters to reach safely, but Santiago has limited damage with runners on at an elite level. Even just skimming the surface it's easy to see this is where Santiago gains a considerable amount of value over Nolasco. Career with men on base Santiago: .216/.322/.336 (.658 OPS) Nolasco: .294/.345/.448 (.793) Career with RISP Santiago: .184/.300/.271 (.571) Nolasco: .287/.347/.437 (.784) Career with 2 outs and RISP Santiago: .173/.310/.248 (.558) Nolasco: .264/.355/.397 (.752) To put some perspective on just how excellent these numbers are for Santiago, Johan Santana was only slightly better over his career with men on base (.647 OPS) but not nearly as good with RISP (.623) or with RISP and two outs (.606). Santiago's greatest weakness is walks, and looking at his excellent July it's a wonder how he managed to put up such great results with how many free passes he issued. But, while he did walk 21 batters, in the following at-bat opponents went just 1-for-18 with eight strikeouts and two walks (for those of you tallying things up at home, he was pulled for a reliever after one of those walks). That is a small sample, but it shows a slice of how effective Santiago can be at stepping up, wiggling out of jams and neutralizing the walks. There are people who don't believe in the concept of clutch, or even pitchers adjusting their approach based on game situation (pitching to the score for example). But after over 650 career innings, it seems like a stretch to look at Santiago's excellent track record in adverse situations and just say he's just been lucky. He clearly is unfazed by the pressure of pitching with men on base. Hector Santiago plays with fire but rarely gets burned. If he can continue to demonstrate this skill, he should also continue to outperform Ricky Nolasco with ease. Click here to view the article

The more I look into the numbers, the more fascinating Hector Santiago becomes. Since 2013, there have been 81 pitchers who've thrown 500 innings. He ranks ... 1st with a 49.0 fly ball % 2nd with a 17.5 line drive % 6th with a 12.6 infield fly ball % 6th with a .271 BABIP 14th with a 76.8 LOB% He is elite in the areas he excels in. On the ugly side, only Liriano and Ubaldo have a worse BB/9 than Santiago's 3.94 over that span. But I think that may be part of his strategy. He keeps guys off balance and doesn't challenge hitters when the count's in their advantage ... or maybe he just has terrible command and has been scraping by on a high-wire act that's unsustainable.

Thank you for bringing that to the table. Of 152 pitchers who have thrown at least 150 innings combined over the past two seasons, Santiago ranks 16th with a 78.3 LOB%. Nolasco is dead last at 62%. But Hector was particularly fantastic at leaving men on in 2015. This season is very solid, but definitely less impressive. Santiago's 75.9 LOB% is 39th among the 98 pitchers with at least 100 innings. Nolasco is 95th at 64.5%.

In the wake of the Twins acquiring Hector Santiago from the Angels, some have questioned how big of an upgrade he'll be over Ricky Nolasco, mainly pointing to Nolasco's vastly superior numbers in terms of FIP (fielding independent pitching). While the peripheral stats may be in Nolasco's favor, they don't tell the whole story. The biggest divide between these two players is how they bear down when things start to not go in their favor. If you take a look into how each pitcher performs with runners on, it's clear that while Nolasco crumbles, Santiago shines Career FIP vs. ERA Santiago: 4.63 FIP, 3.68 ERA (0.95 worse) Nolasco: 3.85 FIP, 4.58 ERA (0.73 better) So you can see that both pitchers have been FIP busters, with Santiago looking a great deal worse than the ERA he has pitched to. These kinds of gaps are abnormal for veteran pitchers. Just for reference, Ervin Santana's FIP and ERA are only off by a difference of 0.11 over his career (4.24 FIP, 4.13 ERA). FIP is a great indicator of pitcher performance because it only looks at home runs, walks, hit batsmen and strikeouts. As the name would indicate, any plays in which defense is a factor are not taken into account. Another thing FIP doesn't take into account, however, is game situation. Obviously, it's better to not allow batters to reach safely, but Santiago has limited damage with runners on at an elite level. Even just skimming the surface it's easy to see this is where Santiago gains a considerable amount of value over Nolasco. Career with men on base Santiago: .216/.322/.336 (.658 OPS) Nolasco: .294/.345/.448 (.793) Career with RISP Santiago: .184/.300/.271 (.571) Nolasco: .287/.347/.437 (.784) Career with 2 outs and RISP Santiago: .173/.310/.248 (.558) Nolasco: .264/.355/.397 (.752) To put some perspective on just how excellent those numbers are for Santiago, Johan Santana was only slightly better over his career with men on base (.647 OPS) but not nearly as good with RISP (.623) or with RISP and two outs (.606). Santiago's greatest weakness is walks, and looking at his excellent July it's a wonder how he managed to put up such great results with how many free passes he issued. But, while he did walk 21 batters, in the following at bat opponents went just 1-for-18 with eight strikeouts and two walks (for those of you tallying things up at home, he was pulled for a reliever after one of those walks). That is a small sample, but it shows a slice of how effective Santiago can be at stepping up, wiggling out of jams and neutralizing the walks. There are people who don't believe in the concept of clutch, or even pitchers adjusting their approach based on game situation (pitching to the score for example). But after over 650 career innings, it seems like a stretch to look at Santiago's excellent track record in adverse situations and just say he's just been lucky. He clearly is unfazed by the pressure of pitching with men on base. Hector Santiago plays with fire but rarely gets burned. If he can continue to demonstrate this skill, he should also continue to outperform Ricky Nolasco with ease.

I think Santiago isn't as good as his ERA has indicated over the past few years, but I like the flexibility he gives the club. If they decide they don't want him around next year, they can just non-tender him. With Nolasco they were gonna be on the hook for his 2017 salary either way. If they keep Santiago next year and are sellers again, he could be a decent trade chip at the '17 deadline. Or if they're contenders and he pitches well, Santiago could be a qualifying offer candidate after the end of next season and net the Twins a draft pick. Some will probably laugh that off, but if Ian Kennedy can reject a QO and sign a multi-year deal, anything's possible in my eyes. This is all obviously looking way far ahead, but it certainly appears Antony has opened up some doors with this move that were never going to be there with Nolasco.

Gotta be a Lucroy trade coming .. then Suzuki goes?

An Erv deal with Hutchison as the centerpiece would not excite me. He's only under team control for two more seasons, same as Santana. But I suppose that may be an indication the team isn't confident Ervin will hold up that much longer.

John Sickels took an in depth look at Pat Light this April, here's the link: http://www.minorleagueball.com/2016/4/25/11500342/boston-red-sox-rookie-pat-light-scouting-report His conclusion: "Overall, if Light maintains his control he should be a useful bullpen asset. If his command maxes out he could close games eventually."

Some quick thoughts ... -Twins are in a great position with Erv. Teams know we're not motivated to move him and the SP market appears to be pretty dry judging by the names on the rumor mill. -I'm sure the team has had advanced talks regarding Suzuki with multiple clubs. They have no incentive to hustle to get a deal done prior to Lucroy being traded. Wait for that shoe to drop and see if it makes anybody desperate. -I don't think anybody's drooling over Kintzler or Abad, but the RP market has already been thinned out more than any other position. I wouldn't expect much in return, but anytime you can flip a minor singing like that into a prospect it's a good deal. Even if they're not dealt today, I think either of these guys could be waiver trade candidates. -I love what Kennys Vargas has shown of late, but is now the time to sell high? There's not enough room for him, Mauer and Park all on the same roster, and I think Vargas has the most trade value of that group right now.

I say third base. If he could play short, they never would have moved him off the position. The team hopes to compete sometime over the next 2 years, so I expect Dozier to stay. Plouffe should be traded at next month's waiver trade deadline, and it's sinking in for me that Miguel Sano is going to be a man without a position. Instead of trying to fit him into the team's needs, they should put him in the best position to succeed, which unfortunately is DH. Obviously that's going to muddy things up for Vargas and Park (Mauer's not going anywhere), but it does open the door for Polanco to play 3B everyday.

Great to see a young but near MLB-ready starter coming back for Nunez. The ERA doesn't look as sterling since his promotion to Triple-A (4.20), but Mejia's 9.5 K/9 and 3.91 K/BB ratio over seven starts at Sacramento are very nice. Plus the PCL is a hitter's league. Atta boy Antony. Sad to see Nunie go, but I think he'll fit in nicely with the Giants.

Yeah I struggled with the best way to put that. Let me try to make that point again. In 2013 the Twins got Kohl Stewart at No. 4. That's great, he's got plenty of potential, and as a 21-year-old in Double-A the book's still out on him, obviously. But if the Twins were just a bit crappier that year and picked second, they would have had the opportunity to draft Kris Bryant, who is already a ROY, two-time All-Star and possibly the favorite for NL MVP. Who knows, maybe the Twins would've taken Stewart anyway. But the difference between going 66-96 in 2012 instead of 61-101 (the Cubs record that year) cost them the opportunity to even consider drafting Bryant. Was it worth 5 wins in a lost season? I'd definitely say no.

When I say tank, I'm thinking like in the movie Major League Ownership completely handcuffs the organization in an effort to lose as many games as possible. Except in this scenario we're trying to get the no. 1 pick/ International bonus slot, not move the team to Miami.

I've been struggling with Santana as well. Two more years of Erv is looking very attractive right now The rotation is still the biggest weakness in my eyes, so it doesn't seem smart to thin out that group even further. On the other hand, I do worry about him breaking down. He's 33 and has a lot of mileage on that arm. Would be a shame if he falls off and the team missed out on an opportunity to trade him at his peak.

I've only glanced through some 2017 draft coverage, but it doesn't look like there's an automatic 1st pick. But, even picking as high as they have recently, the Twins have missed out on the opportunity to draft the likes of Carlos Correa , Kris Bryant, Carlos Rodon and Kyle Schwarber, just to cherry pick the big names with MLB experience. It's certainly possible the team would've still taken Buxton, Stewart and Gordon over those guys in their respective drafts anyway (and it's still way too early to make conclusions on any of those players yet) but it's always nice to have your pick of the litter, even when there's not an obvious choice at No. 1 overall.

That was a fun win. Hopefully that performance will help Gibby turn the corner. To me, he's is one of the more important players to the Twins future, as he isn't a free agent until 2020.

Correct, this was originally posted to the blogs section Thursday afternoon, prior to the start of the Boston series.

After getting off to the worst start in franchise history, the Twins appear to be turning things around this month, but is that something fans should be excited about? It seems like a crazy question, but when you look at the big picture could it be in the best interest of the team's future to tank the rest of the season?In MLB there is nothing but incentive to tanking a season. The worse your record is the higher up you draft and the bigger your allotted bonus pool is to divvy out to those picks. Same deal with international spending, the worse you do the more money you can spend without incurring penalties. And it's not like these are small margins. The Phillies, who were the worst team in baseball last year, had over $4 million more to spend in the draft (per MLB.com) and over $1.5 million to spend on the international market (per Baseball America) than the Brewers, who were the 5th-worst team last season. The moral of the story is if you're going to be terrible it pays off to be the worst. With the 2016 season already sunk, is there any reason to root for the Twins to turn things around? Personally, I'm not so sure, and the team's performance over its last 15 games has me feeling conflicted. Beginning with their 17-5 rout of the Rangers on July 2, the Twins are 10-5 and have outscored their opponents 94-53. The pitching staff hasn't given up more than 6 runs in any game over that stretch, and the offense is clicking after a number of personnel changes. Max Kepler and Brian Dozier have been two of the best hitters in baseball over that stretch and the pitching staff has the fourth-lowest ERA (3.23) this month. In a lost season, you're put in an awkward position as a fan. Rooting against your own team seems like a rotten, unthinkable thing to do, but tanking may be the best thing for the future. But how does a team tank? You're never going to get the manager, coaches or any of the players behind the idea of giving away games. I suppose a massive, roster-crippling fire sale could do the trick. On the other hand, if the team keeps performing well it's certainly possible that a strong finish to 2016 could carry over. A positive finish to the season could make the long winter seem a little brighter and is only going to help the team attract free agents, if that's the route the new GM decides to take to improving the roster. Nobody is going to want to sign with the worst team in the league. Speaking of the new GM, could the way the Twins perform over the next two months also have an influence over what kind of candidates would be interested in the job? And if that's the case, which would be more attractive to the future GM: a young team on the upswing or the No. 1 pick in the draft? It's definitely something to keep in mind. What do you think? Would you rather see the Twins tank, or end on a high note? Click here to view the article

I've only glanced through some 2017 draft coverage, but it doesn't look like there's a Bryce Harper-type automatic 1st pick. But, even picking as high as they have recently, the Twins have missed out on the opportunity to draft the likes of Carlos Correa , Kris Bryant, Carlos Rodon and Kyle Schwarber, just to cherry pick the big names with MLB experience. It's certainly possible the team would've still taken Buxton, Stewart and Gordon over those guys in their respective drafts, but it's always nice to have your pick of the litter, even when there's not an obvious choice at No. 1 overall.

Sounds good to me! One way or another the prospects need to come up/stay in the lineup. Who cares if Buxton hits .200 and Berrios has an ERA over 10 the next two months? Those guys have nothing to prove or learn in Triple-A, and if we lose because of their struggles it's not like it matters at this point anyway. It would be great to see some of the other guys mentioned in Seth's recent "It's Time!" piece come up too.

After getting off to the worst start in franchise history, the Twins appear to be turning things around this month, but is that something fans should be excited about? It seems like a crazy question, but when you look at the big picture could it be in the best interest of the team's future to tank the rest of the season? In the MLB there is nothing but incentives to tanking a season. The worse your record is the higher up you draft and the bigger your allotted bonus pool is to divvy out to those picks. Same deal with international spending, the worse you do the more money you can spend without incurring penalties. And it's not like these are small margins. The Phillies, who were the worst team in baseball last year, had over $4 million more to spend in the draft (per MLB.com) and over $1.5 million to spend on the international market (per Baseball America) than the Brewers, who were the 5th-worst team last season. The moral of the story is if you're going to be terrible it pays off to be the worst. With the 2016 season already sunk, is there any reason to root for the Twins to turn things around? Personally, I'm not so sure, and the team's performance over its last 15 games has me feeling conflicted. Beginning with their 17-5 rout of the Rangers on July 2, the Twins are 10-5 and have outscored their opponents 94-53. The pitching staff hasn't given up more than 6 runs in any game over that stretch, and the offense is clicking after a number of personnel changes. Max Kepler and Brian Dozier have been two of the best hitters in baseball over that stretch and the pitching staff has the fourth-lowest ERA (3.23) this month. In a lost season, you're put in an awkward position as a fan. Rooting against your own team seems like a rotten, unthinkable thing to do, but tanking may be the best thing for the future. But how does a team tank? You're never going to get the manager, coaches or any of the players behind the idea of giving away games. I suppose a massive, roster-crippling fire sale could do the trick. On the other hand, if the team keeps performing well it's certainly possible that a strong finish to 2016 could carry over. A positive finish to the season could make the long winter seem a little brighter and is only going to help the team attract free agents, if that's the route the new GM decides to take in improving the roster. Nobody is going to want to sign with the worst team in the league. Speaking of the new GM, could the way the Twins perform over the next two months also have an influence over what kind of candidates would be interested in the job? And if that's the case, which would be more attractive to the future GM: a young team on the upswing or the No. 1 pick in the draft? It's definitely something to keep in mind. What do you think? Would you rather see the Twins tank, or end on a high note?