Article: Twins Taking A Close Look At Justin Masterson

[Sam Morley]

His career 3.7 BB per 9 rate and 1.38 WHIP are red flags for me.  As are the fact that he is 30 and we are talking about mechanics, control, consistency, can't get LHB out, etc. At what point do we suspect he will click?

 

I don't view this as more than a one year thing and we are not making a run next year.  That is probably the bigger issue for me.

Even if you don't count last season, his WHIP is still pretty high. Even in his strong seasons, his WHIP isn't great (1.28 in 2011 and 1.2 in 2013). It's interesting to see, in those strong seasons, the lower WHIP coupled with the higher strand rates (around 75% compared to 66% in other seasons); so he was allowing less runners on base and making sure a higher percentage of them didn't score. I guess if you're pitching better, you're pitching better. I couldn't find a stat for induced double plays. That would be interesting to see, as the high strand rates don't necessarily correspond to a higher K rate.

[diehardtwinsfan]

I think I'd pass here. I'd rather get Anderson.

[jokin]

I think I'd pass here. I'd rather get Anderson.

 

The Twins are repeatedly said to be pursuing 2 SPs.  Why not both on short-term deals?

[nicksaviking]

I don't understand why this wasn't the strategy in 2011-2013 when we didn't have the young pitchers ready to break through.    We signed two guys, Pelfrey and Harden maybe with this in mind.  Pelfrey had no upside and Harden had about a .01% chance of being healthy.

 

I think you sign a guy that is a 2-3 year answer, one that is better than what you have or you give reps to the young guys.  No in between.  This feels very in between to me.

 

It should have been the strategy in 2011-13.  Pelfrey and Harden were both good lotto tickets, the Twins just made the mistake of doubling (tripling) down on Pelfrey.  Why would we want to sign more guys for 2-3 years now though?  We don't need 2-3 year bridges, we need 1 year bridges, maybe two month bridges.  The prospects might not pan out, but we at least have to find out.  Pitchers on guaranteed multi year deals aren't going to get benched or released.  Pitchers on one year deals may though.  Which pitchers would you even need to offer 3 year deals to anyway?  Jason Hammel, Brandon McCarthy, Francisco Liriano, Jake Peavy and Edinson Volquez look like the only guys who might demand three but won't be able to get more.  Not much there I want. 

[jokin]

His career 3.7 BB per 9 rate and 1.38 WHIP are red flags for me.  As are the fact that he is 30 and we are talking about mechanics, control, consistency, can't get LHB out, etc. At what point do we suspect he will click?

 

I don't view this as more than a one year thing and we are not making a run next year.  That is probably the bigger issue for me.

 

I don't get this conclusion, getting Masterson (and getting one other high-upside SP FA to click) would mean the we ARE making a run next year.

 

 

From 2010 to 2013, he averaged 199 innings with a 3.67 FIP. Seems pretty consistent to me. 

 

I really don't think the Twins will make a huge commitment beyond the year for Masterson (or any free agent pitcher). They have plenty of talent behind him in the system. 

 

Including Masterson's bad year in 2014-

 

2010-2014 Stats:

 

Garza-   IP/Yr-  165  K/9- 7.45 FIP/xFIP- 3.76/3.76

Hughes-  IP/Yr-  159  K/9- 7.50 FIP/xFIP- 3.92/4.05

Masterson-  IP/Yr- 184  K/9- 7.50 FIP/xFIP- 3.79/3.79

 

Assuming Masterson gets healthy, and comes at a discount on a "show I'm healthy" short-term contract, what's not to like with this track record?

Edited November 19, 2014 by jokin

[Steven Buhr]

Guess I simply see no point in signing any FA to a 1 year deal unless it has at least 1 (and preferably 2) team options for reasonable amounts.

 

What's the point in allowing a SP to rebuild his value with the Twins on a 1 year deal if expectations are that contention is, at best, a remote likelihood in 2015?

 

Just as TR wasn't interested in Nolasco/Hughes a year ago unless they could be signed for enough years that, if they did work out, they would have a chance to be part of some better Twins teams beyond 1 year, he shouldn't be any more interested paying anyone else this year to rebuild his value without an option to retain.

 

If the guys you sign work out well, great, and if May/Meyer turn out to be even better, that's wonderful! You've got some trade chips with SPs on club-friendly contracts. And if May/Meyer don't pan out, you aren't back to square 1.

 

None of the reclamation project SPs are going to create financial hardships in years 2-3 if they have marginal guarantees or buy-out prices on their options.

[jokin]

Guess I simply see no point in signing any FA to a 1 year deal unless it has at least 1 (and preferably 2) team options for reasonable amounts.

 

What's the point in allowing a SP to rebuild his value with the Twins on a 1 year deal if expectations are that contention is, at best, a remote likelihood in 2015?

 

 

 

1)  A chance to compete w/ a healthy Masterson changes the expectations for contention.

2)  A chance to bridge the question marks between the established SPs and prospect SPs.

3)  A declined QO turns into an extra 1st round pick.

4)  A chance to trade for top prospects in mid-season for the most-coveted commodity.

[Sam Morley]

Masterson-  IP/Yr- 184  K/9- 7.50 FIP/xFIP- 3.79/3.79

 

Assuming Masterson gets healthy, and comes at a discount on a "show I'm healthy" short-term contract, what's not to like with this track record?

Well, you've picked his best stats, and I agree that they look strong. But you ignore his WHIP, 1.4, and his BB/9, 3.7. Plus, I think that K/9 is inflated by a borderline extreme outlier in 2013, and by looking at career averages, you discount a major criticism people are making: his inconsistency. Also, why assume he will get healthy when there are possible indications that he could continue to struggle with injury? And it doesn't really sound to me like he is coming at a discount. 

 

Plus, this:

 

 

Guess I simply see no point in signing any FA to a 1 year deal unless it has at least 1 (and preferably 2) team options for reasonable amounts.

 

What's the point in allowing a SP to rebuild his value with the Twins on a 1 year deal if expectations are that contention is, at best, a remote likelihood in 2015?

 

Just as TR wasn't interested in Nolasco/Hughes a year ago unless they could be signed for enough years that, if they did work out, they would have a chance to be part of some better Twins teams beyond 1 year, he shouldn't be any more interested paying anyone else this year to rebuild his value without an option to retain.

 

If the guys you sign work out well, great, and if May/Meyer turn out to be even better, that's wonderful! You've got some trade chips with SPs on club-friendly contracts. And if May/Meyer don't pan out, you aren't back to square 1.

 

None of the reclamation project SPs are going to create financial hardships in years 2-3 if they have marginal guarantees or buy-out prices on their options.

And Masterson is looking for a short term deal, right?

[jokin]

Well, you've picked his best stats, and I agree that they look strong. But you ignore his WHIP, 1.4, and his BB/9, 3.7. Plus, I think that K/9 is inflated by a borderline extreme outlier in 2013, and by looking at career averages, you discount a major criticism people are making: his inconsistency. Also, why assume he will get healthy when there are possible indications that he could continue to struggle with injury? And it doesn't really sound to me like he is coming at a discount. 

 

Plus, this:

 

 

And Masterson is looking for a short term deal, right?

 

A short-term deal is exactly what the Twins should want.  The pipeline is backed up out to 2019 with good SP prospects.

[Otto von Ballpark]

The Twins are repeatedly said to be pursuing 2 SPs.  Why not both on short-term deals?

I might pursue both, with the likelihood you could only land one.  Not sure if two bounceback guys, who absolutely need playing time to rebuild their value, want to go to the same place at the same time.  Particularly here, now that our rotation isn't quite the vast wasteland it was in 2012-2013.

[Otto von Ballpark]

What's the point in allowing a SP to rebuild his value with the Twins on a 1 year deal if expectations are that contention is, at best, a remote likelihood in 2015?

To add to jokin's excellent 4 point response above, I don't think contention in 2015 has to be THAT remote of a likelihood, especially if we are aggressive with some higher-upside FA.  We were a 75 win pythag team last year, despite some glaring weaknesses.  Target those weaknesses immediately through FA, and deploy Meyer/May as bullpen weapons or SP reinforcements (and similarly use Rosario/Sano/Buxton if you can), and all of a sudden, 2015 doesn't look that bad.

 

Not saying I'd bet on that team contending, but I'd sure prefer betting on them through some 1-year contracts than betting on our prospects and 2014 leftovers filling those holes immediately in any meaningful way.  (And those holes are still big enough to accommodate a couple FA and any prospects that want to force their way into regular action.)

[jokin]

Well, you've picked his best stats, and I agree that they look strong. But you ignore his WHIP, 1.4, and his BB/9, 3.7. Plus, I think that K/9 is inflated by a borderline extreme outlier in 2013, and by looking at career averages, you discount a major criticism people are making: his inconsistency. Also, why assume he will get healthy when there are possible indications that he could continue to struggle with injury? And it doesn't really sound to me like he is coming at a discount. 

 

 

 

I don't assume that Masterson will get healthy. Parker and everyone else acknowledges that the Twins are doing their proper due diligence on him, and should only move forward with assurances that he has no major structural damage to his arm or knee.

 

In the last 5 years, Masterson has only had 2 FIP/xFIP results above 4.00, with one of those, 2014, clearly being injury-related- so only 1 year in the previous 4 years could be rated in the "inconsistent"  column.

 

And further regarding his consistency, his durability is far better than those other two Twins targets I illustrated. 

 

Yes, Garza's WHIP over the last 5 years is 1.23 and Hughes' is 1.28, vs. Masterson's 1.41, but consider this:

 

Men on Base FIP/xFIP

Garza  3.87/4.07

Hughes 4.05/4.05

Masterson  3.83/.3.82

 

And this-

 

LOB% with Men on Base

Garza  18.2%

Hughes 22.5%

Masterson  33.1%

[Sam Morley]

A short-term deal is exactly what the Twins should want.  The pipeline is backed up out to 2019 with good SP prospects.

Yeah, I don't really have a problem with a short term deal, and I think your four points are strong, except that in the specific case of Masterson they hinge first on his health, and second on his performance. Granted, you say "chance" and that's fine, but in his case, I think, too much chance relative to the cost. I think there is a better chance that he will be hurt, be hurt and pitch and stink, or not be hurt and still stink, than the chance that he will be fine and good. Brett Anderson or Josh Johnson I like more. Their injury risk is obviously just as high, but their cost is less- I think- and they are both better pitchers. If the goal is to make an assured upgrade to the rotation for 2015, which it should be, none of these guys is it. Aside from the big dogs, Brandon McCarthy would be my choice (for more than one year if it took)- unless he's a QO guy, but I don't think he is.

[Kwak]

The premise of signing Masterson is:  He will have a bounce-back season.  What?  Are the Twins suddenly contenders for the World Series--or even the playoffs?  No.  If the Twins truly wanted to sign a free agent pitcher--sign somebody who is already good enough to keep 4+ years.  Signing one-year deals with the hope that he will improve dramatically is a losing strategy until the team has four dependable, solid starters and need one guy to "put them at the top".  Twins aren't there.  Play what is in-house.  Let's see if gutting CF for (how many years?) was worth it with respect to the rotation.

[Sam Morley]

I don't assume that Masterson will get healthy. Parker and everyone else acknowledges that the Twins are doing their proper due diligence on him, and should only move forward with assurances that he has no major structural damage to his arm or knee.

 

In the last 5 years, Masterson has only had 2 FIP/xFIP results above 4.00, with one of those, 2014, clearly being injury-related- so only 1 year in the previous 4 years could be rated in the "inconsistent"  column.

 

And further regarding his consistency, his durability is far better than those other two Twins targets I illustrated. 

 

Yes, Garza's WHIP over the last 5 years is 1.23 and Hughes' is 1.28, vs. Masterson's 1.41, but consider this:

 

Men on Base FIP/xFIP

Garza  3.87/4.07

Hughes 4.05/4.05

Masterson  3.83/.3.82

 

And this-

 

LOB% with Men on Base

Garza  18.2%

Hughes 22.5%

Masterson  33.1%

If he had any major structural damage, there wouldn't even be a conversation. Minor structural damage, or even weakness, should eliminate him from consideration. Maybe a guy with ideal mechanics, you go, okay. But watching Masterson's motion and delivery is cringe-inducing: upside down W, three quarter arm slot. Parker highlighted that photo right before release where his fingers are almost under the ball. Just holding my arm out 45 degrees from my body and turning my hand palm up, I can feel stress on the inside of my elbow. Even if he had never suffered any injury, his motion and delivery would concern me.

 

You make a strong case with the FIP/xFIP, but I would say that one poor season not counting last season is inconsistent. In terms of FIP/xFIP, we're looking at two good years, one mediocre year, one bad year, and one disaster. For me, this is not consistency. And we're only talking about FIP/xFIP. His WHIP fluctuates from mediocre to bad. His walk rates are always high. His K rates are mediocre with one good season. And why only compare him to Hughes and Garza? I think, in general, a Hughes comp is inappropriate, given the national baseball media consensus at the time of his signing that he would profile much better in Target Field than Yankee Stadium. Even though he'd had a poor previous season, there was basically unanimous confidence that he would be more successful with the Twins. I don't see any similar factors at play with Masterson. Do you? 

 

The last stat you listed: LOB with men on base, I don't understand. LOB% is the % of runners left stranded, so isn't LOB with men on base redundant? I must be missing something. Masterson's career LOB% is about 70%. Maybe you can clarify on the stat you provided for me. One interesting thing about his LOB numbers is if you couple them with his WHIP numbers. The seasons where his WHIP is lower, his LOB% is higher. So in those seasons he let less men on, and stranded a higher than normal percent of them. It doesn't seem to be connected to K% or GB%, but it seems too large of a sample size to be fortune. I wish I could find a stat for double plays induced/inning ending double plays induced.

[jokin]

The premise of signing Masterson is:  He will have a bounce-back season.  What?  Are the Twins suddenly contenders for the World Series--or even the playoffs?  No.  If the Twins truly wanted to sign a free agent pitcher--sign somebody who is already good enough to keep 4+ years.  Signing one-year deals with the hope that he will improve dramatically is a losing strategy until the team has four dependable, solid starters and need one guy to "put them at the top".  Twins aren't there.  Play what is in-house.  Let's see if gutting CF for (how many years?) was worth it with respect to the rotation.

 

I haven't heard anyone state that they hope Masterson will improve dramatically, just that he offer a very reasonable chance at pitching at his career averages, which by all accounts thus far, are pretty good.  

 

And to the contrary of your opinion, IMO, the signing of one or two SPs at one-, or two-year deals in the case of the Twins- with 3  hot-prospect SPs on the cusp of contributing- seems like a pretty smart strategy to raise the chances for a playoff run in both 2015 and 2016.

[jokin]

 

 

 

The last stat you listed: LOB with men on base, I don't understand. LOB% is the % of runners left stranded, so isn't LOB with men on base redundant? I must be missing something. Masterson's career LOB% is about 70%. Maybe you can clarify on the stat you provided for me. One interesting thing about his LOB numbers is if you couple them with his WHIP numbers. The seasons where his WHIP is lower, his LOB% is higher. So in those seasons he let less men on, and stranded a higher than normal percent of them. It doesn't seem to be connected to K% or GB%, but it seems too large of a sample size to be fortune. I wish I could find a stat for double plays induced/inning ending double plays induced.

 

 

You mentioned one of your main concerns was WHIP.  The FIP/xFIP and LOB% numbers with MOB, indicate that he is a far better pitcher than Garza and Hughes in the same situations, which mitigates some of the concern for Masterson's WHIP issues.  It would seem that his high GB% has likely induced a ton more DPs than Garza and Hughes, that's a good thing.

[stringer bell]

Precious few long term free-agent contracts for pitchers pan out and even fewer are good value in the last half of the contract (when the Twins are being assumed to be contenders). Going for the elite guys isn't the right move and isn't the Twins style. So, pulling Scherzer, Lester and Shields off the table, what is the best move to be made? I think a Masterson or Anderson short-term contract would be the right move to make.

 

I've said this in other threads--I think there is a decent chance for the Twins to be relevant next year. They had a playoff-caliber offense, but need to improve their run suppression dramatically by improving outfield defense (Bourjos, Schafer, perhaps Rosario) and getting much improved production from three spots in the rotation (a healthy Milone, a healthy Nolasco, May, Meyer, Masterson, Anderson, and maybe Pelfrey). They don't have a lot of depth among the position players and they need to replenish their bullpen, but they have a chance.

[shimrod]

The only argument for a one year signing of a Masterson is it may provide enough improvement in the W/L record that the Twins can attract a front-line starter in 2016, when the top prospects have (hopefully) shown signs the Twins are ready to contend in 2017/18.

[Hosken Bombo Disco]

To me, Masterson looks like a slightly above mediocre, pitch to contact guy, with horrible numbers against Detroit and KC, and who is heading towards the wrong side of age 30.

 

Oh-- and whose best pitch is a sinkerball that breaks upward.

 

/trolling

 

I spent all summer complaining about Meyer and May not getting their chance, so I'm already locked in to my position. I think we have at least six guys competing for rotation spots already. But if the Twins pick him up, I'll get on board. I do grant that he has a nice pitch and some nice numbers against righties. 

[Sam Morley]

You mentioned one of your main concerns was WHIP.  The FIP/xFIP and LOB% numbers with MOB, indicate that he is a far better pitcher than Garza and Hughes in the same situations, which mitigates some of the concern for Masterson's WHIP issues.  It would seem that his high GB% has likely induced a ton more DPs than Garza and Hughes, that's a good thing.

What is LOB with men on base? Is it different than LOB? Garza and Hughes both have some of the worst strand rates in the league among qualified starters. Masterson's LOB numbers are also poor; sometimes a little better than Hughes, sometimes worse. Garza's career LOB is actually better than Masterson's. Compared to the rest of the league, Masterson has a high WHIP and a low LOB, the combination of which is not good. I just thought it was interesting that in his good seasons, his WHIP was lower and the LOB% was higher.

 

And, yeah, more ground balls means more double plays. I brought that up in attempt to find an explanation for his higher LOB% in 2011 and 2013. As in, if he had a higher GB% we could figure more double plays, which could go toward explaining a higher LOB%... but, his GB rates are pretty stable. A higher K% could explain it, and maybe in 2013 that was the case, but it doesn't explain 2011 (one of his better LOB rates but lowest K%). This doesn't really have anything to do with why I don't think he's not a good sign for the Twins; I just think it's interesting.

[stringer bell]

I've seen the "good" Masterson pitch enough to believe that if he's healthy, he can be a far above-average starter. He throws hard enough and the sinker is an extremely effective pitch. He was very effective just one year ago. One year plus a team option sounds about right.

[jokin]

I've seen the "good" Masterson pitch enough to believe that if he's healthy, he can be a far above-average starter. He throws hard enough and the sinker is an extremely effective pitch. He was very effective just one year ago. One year plus a team option sounds about right.

 

Yep, and that option year would give the Twins a little payroll flexibility.  Anyone at all familiar with him should agree that he's very close to a #2 level starter when fully healthy.

 

 

Rank  among all qualifying SPs, 2010-2013 for Masterson:

#18  IP/Start

#26  Innings Pitched  (similar to Grienke, Scherzer, Gallardo, Burnett)

#26  Starts  (31.25/Year)

#29  fWAR

#46  xFIP

#49  FIP

#69  K/9

 

 

#6    GB%   (from highest)

#7    GB/FB

#8    HR/9

#9    FB %  (from lowest)

 

 

 

.  

[tobi0040]

For those who would give Masterson a one year deal with an option...I would be on board with that.  We should be building towards a 2016 team, so just a one year thing doesn't do much for me.

[highlander]

NOOOOOOOOO

[Sam Morley]

To me, Masterson looks like a... pitch to contact guy...

Oh! P to the C-izzo! The forbidden phrase! Too soon, too soon. A warning first next time if you must, that the children and faint of heart among us at least might avert their eyes. 

[Rosterman]

We are backed up with starting pitcher prospects thru 2019. Just like we had an abundance of centerfield candidates in the system.

 

You can never have too many starting pitchers.

 

You don't know if Hughes will repeat. If he does, will we be able to afford him or trade him with one year left.

 

What is the fate of Nolasco.

 

Pelfrey IS in reserve, maybe.

 

Kyle Gibson may be a commodity to trade. A young solid pitcher, but still #4 or #5 in the scheme of things if others pan out and he at least stays at his current plateau.

 

Yes, you sign someone hurting for one year with an option. You hope two minor league materialze this year. You hope another comes up late next season. You hope one more is in the 2017 pipeline. You are looking good if you can now find outfielders.

[jokin]

For those who would give Masterson a one year deal with an option...I would be on board with that.  We should be building towards a 2016 team, so just a one year thing doesn't do much for me.

 

I think that's what most everyone wants, including possibly Masterson himsefl.

[Hosken Bombo Disco]

I think that's what most everyone wants, including possibly Masterson himsefl.

when you say "most everyone" I think you are saying that the Twins will pursue JM but that other teams will pursue him harder. To some degree I think the Twins (or at least Ryan) are invested in letting May, Meyer & Milone compete for the final two rotation spots. If it's just those three (possibly Pelf is a fourth -- *groan*) then I would be happy seeing how that plays out, without Masterson in the mix.

[jokin]

when you say "most everyone" I think you are saying that the Twins will pursue JM but that other teams will pursue him harder. To some degree I think the Twins (or at least Ryan) are invested in letting May, Meyer & Milone compete for the final two rotation spots. If it's just those three (possibly Pelf is a fourth -- *groan*) then I would be happy seeing how that plays out, without Masterson in the mix.

 

Based on last season, the questions on the 3Ms appear to remain largely unanswered. Hence-

Every reporter on the Twins beat is saying that acquiring an SP, or two, is either "the" priority, or at the very least, "a" priority.  And Masterson's name came up early on in FA season connected to the Twins, much as their own version of a White Whale, Matt Garza, surfaced early-on a year ago.  I am of the impression that Ahab Ryan will see how the market develops, but hold fast his harpoon to a specific $$$ number/years, and likely lose out in the end, as he did with Garza.  I can see them dropping down to seeking another bounce-back on short-term status, like Gavin Floyd and/or Josh Johnson, or seeking another guy that won't cost a pick.  One or two of the FA SP Big Three will set the market, probably by the Winter Meetings.

Edited November 21, 2014 by jokin