Article: Purchasing A Rotation, And What It Means

[TheLeviathan]

Aside from Nolasco, 100%. Milone has an option and Pelfrey can come out of the pen (or get waived).

 

Right, so there is only one spot despite the way you tried to portray the situation just a few posts back.  But even more than that....do you really believe that if they are better pitchers through March, April, or even May....that the Twins will just go to them?

 

Mind you, we've seen lopsided evidence to the contrary on this.  I want to believe it, but damned if I can.

[Major League Ready]

In 2015 it means

• We have a shot to be a 500 team
• We won't be relying on AAAA SPs
• One spot available for May, Meyer, Milone or it means you are relying on an injury to make room for them.  Sps are often injured but it is hard to feel good about relying on failure (injury) to make room.  It just is not consistent with building a contender. 
• Loss of a 2nd round pick.  Not a big deal but a guy like Burdi is valuable for several years.
• Provides an opportunity to trade Milone, Pelfrey or both.  Would the Giants trade Susac and two top SP prospects for Plouffe and Milone.  (pelfrey too if they want him)

For 2016

• If position prospects advance as expected, we are likely above 500 but not likely to contend
• One spot open for May, Meyer, Berrios, Milone, and others.  This troubles me because I don't like any of the potential scenarios.  The only way there is room for they guys we need to develop in order to contend is multiple injuries. 

For 2017-18

• Hughes is likely gone
• Maybe Nolasco and Santana defy age regression and play a role in contention
• Maybe they defy age regression and we trade them for prospects
• More likely, Age related regression is makes Nolasco and Santana league average or worse.  They are not tradable and the money invested in them could have been used to get one legit front of the rotation starter or elite position player with money left over.

So, these investments give us a decent team the next couple of years but not contender.  If we are quite lucky in terms of them maintaining performance and health, Nolasco and Santana could supply veteran leadership and be part of bring the Twins into contention.  If we are not lucky or if they regress normally and have the normal level of injuries for 33-35 y/o SPs, we tie up payroll that could have been better utilized.  I guess the question is ... should we take this risk to improve to what is likely 500 at best this year and perhaps slightly better than 500 in 2016?  Obviouly, this is wildly speculative.  Anything could happen.  These are just likely scenarios.

[jorgenswest]

The only way out of mediocrity is to develop starting pitching. That takes talent and opportunity. The Twins front office at this point must not see much talent or isn't willing to risk the chance that their struggle may cost a few games.

 

Meyer is at an age where he is close to peak velocity. He will spend that time in the minors. May likely won't be given enough starts to develop. Viola and Radke struggled for two years without being sent down. Today's Twins would have returned Santana after a few months of awful pitching his rookie year. The new stadium need people In the seats. The Twins have a better chance of filling those seats short term by giving the illusion of being competitive into July. The short term gains accomplished by filling with decline phase veterans has a cost on the long term solution.

[Linus]

The only way out of mediocrity is to develop starting pitching. That takes talent and opportunity. The Twins front office at this point must not see much talent or isn't willing to risk the chance that their struggle may cost a few games.

 

Meyer is at an age where he is close to peak velocity. He will spend that time in the minors. May likely won't be given enough starts to develop. Viola and Radke struggled for two years without being sent down. Today's Twins would have returned Santana after a few months of awful pitching his rookie year. The new stadium need people In the seats. The Twins have a better chance of filling those seats short term by giving the illusion of being competitive into July. The short term gains accomplished by filling with decline phase veterans has a cost on the long term solution.

Well, you don't know any of your post will come true. Since he traded a good centerfielder for him, TR should be more inclined to promote Meyer, not less inclined.

 

Another way out of mediocre starting pitching is to sign a proven veteran and not rely on prospects, particularly when you only have two for the coming season.

[jorgenswest]

Well, you don't know any of your post will come true. Since he traded a good centerfielder for him, TR should be more inclined to promote Meyer, not less inclined.

 

Another way out of mediocre starting pitching is to sign a proven veteran and not rely on prospects, particularly when you only have two for the coming season.

Meyer has 40 starts in AAA and AA.

 

Compare that to Ventura or Duffy or Richards or Sale or Zimmerman or Cueto or ...

 

Meyer has 27 starts in AAA and counting. Some teams would have had him in the rotation after half season at that level. The only possible conclusion is that the Twins don't see him as a good starter and are unwilling to invest starts in a future back end of the rotation guy. If they see otherwise, they need to make a spot for him now. They same can be said for May.

 

This team will continue its cycle of mediocrity if they can not acquire, develop and invest playing time into their own young talent. The signing of Willingham followed by Hunter, the string of starters beginning with Correia, Doumit followed by Suzuki have helped them approach mediocre. It won't help them develop the next team that wins a playoff series. That help must come from within.

Edited December 17, 2014 by jorgenswest

[jay]

Right, so there is only one spot despite the way you tried to portray the situation just a few posts back. But even more than that....do you really believe that if they are better pitchers through March, April, or even May....that the Twins will just go to them?

 

Mind you, we've seen lopsided evidence to the contrary on this. I want to believe it, but damned if I can.

One spot out of spring training.

 

A few posts back, we were talking about the backup QB -- i.e. the guy who doesn't win the job out of spring training... And he'll have FIVE "QBs" he can replace, not just one like a football team. Not making the rotation out of spring training isn't nearly as dire as being a backup QB. If you're the #6 guy, you ARE going to start at some point that season.

 

We've seen the Twins change up the rotation every year recently for injury or poor performance. Also, in those years, I think the Twins had AAAA guys they wanted to look at and the argument of a prospect being ready to pitch wasn't as strong.

 

I think the evidence is lopsided only because of the way you're looking at it.

[USAFChief]

One spot out of spring training.

A few posts back, we were talking about the backup QB -- i.e. the guy who doesn't win the job out of spring training... And he'll have FIVE "QBs" he can replace, not just one like a football team. Not making the rotation out of spring training isn't nearly as dire as being a backup QB. If you're the #6 guy, you ARE going to start at some point that season.

We've seen the Twins change up the rotation every year recently for injury or poor performance. Also, in those years, I think the Twins had AAAA guys they wanted to look at and the argument of a prospect being ready to pitch wasn't as strong.

I think the evidence is lopsided only because of the way you're looking at it.

I agree with this.

 

I would be very surprised if both May and Meyer don't get opportunities to pitch out of the rotation in 2015, even if neither are in the rotation out of spring training.

 

Keep in mind Meyer only threw 130 innings last year, so it isn't realistic to think he would be in a big league rotation for six months anyway.

 

Lets get into May or June before worrying the Twins have too many starters, or refuse to put the correct ones in the rotation.

[jay]

Meyer has 40 starts in AAA and AA.

 

Compare that to Ventura or Duffy or Richards or Sale or Zimmerman or Cueto or ...

 

Meyer has 27 starts in AAA and counting. Some teams would have had him in the rotation after half season at that level. The only possible conclusion is that the Twins don't see him as a good starter and are unwilling to invest starts in a future back end of the rotation guy. If they see otherwise, they need to make a spot for him now. They same can be said for May.

The difference between Meyer and the guys you've cited is blatantly clear when you look at their MiLB track records. While Meyer's stuff is electric and he has potential, we need to get past this falsehood of what other young aces have done. Meyer quite simply hasn't done that.

 

I agree with your concepts around development. I don't agree with making conclusions that Meyer is doomed to the minors and May won't get starts either. Those are some HUGE jumps requiring some big assumptions around ALL the veteran starters.

[Linus]

The difference between Meyer and the guys you've cited is blatantly clear when you look at their MiLB track records. While Meyer's stuff is electric and he has potential, we need to get past this falsehood of what other young aces have done. Meyer quite simply hasn't done that.

 

I agree with your concepts around development. I don't agree with making conclusions that Meyer is doomed to the minors and May won't get starts either. Those are some HUGE jumps requiring some big assumptions around ALL the veteran starters.

Well put.  Several big differences: first one is health.  The Twins were careful with him last year coming off some serious shoulder issues.  Seems like a prudent approach.

 

Secondly, the guy couldn't consistently throw the ball over the plate with all of his pitches.  The two added up is not a compelling argument to promote him to the big leagues and let him learn on the job and burn service time.

Edited December 17, 2014 by Linus

[Willihammer]

The only way out of mediocrity is to develop starting pitching.

You don't need to look very far back to find counterexamples to that statement. The 2014 AL champs were fronted by a trade acquisition and 2 free agents. Similar story for the Pirates and O's. There are countless other playoff teams and World Series winners if you look back through the years. There are a lot of ways to put together a contender.

[TheLeviathan]

We've seen the Twins change up the rotation every year recently for injury or poor performance. Also, in those years, I think the Twins had AAAA guys they wanted to look at and the argument of a prospect being ready to pitch wasn't as strong.

 

I think the evidence is lopsided only because of the way you're looking at it.

 

 Here is just a sample of the evidence: these are the names of the pitchers we chose to use over Alex Meyer, Trevor May, or Kyle Gibson the last two years:

 

Yohan Pino, Kevin Correia (or as you might know him in 2015 - Mike Pelfrey), Sam Deduno, Anthony Swarzak, Logan Darnell, Kris Johnson, Scott Diamond, Pedro Hernandez, Andrew Albers, Cole DeVries, Liam Hendricks, and PJ Walters.  

 

Now I'll save you the trauma of their numbers, but suffice to say we didn't need to look at these players.  We certainly didn't need to look at all of them more than once.  We have a definitive pattern of delaying our young players longer than any other team, so suggesting otherwise is demonstrably false.  We do it and we do it frequently and moreso than basically any other team in the league.  (At least in the last 5-8 years)

 

I think it's comical that we defend the way in which we've handled some young starters the last few years under the guise that we "had some AAAA guys to look at" and then champion the improvement of the rotation because we won't be using AAAA guys.  Seems like a self-inflicted wound the team repeatedly has not learned from and one I'm not prepared to believe they've learned from until I see the behavior change.  Until we ACTUALLY waive Pelfry or option Milone out of ST for May or Meyer this seems like wishful thinking.

 

And, hey, I get the argument with Meyer.  Trevor May?  If Pelfrey goes north in that spot over him it's nothing short of ridiculous.  

[jay]

I think it's comical that we defend the way in which we've handled some young starters the last few years under the guise that we "had some AAAA guys to look at" and then champion the improvement of the rotation because we won't be using AAAA guys. Seems like a self-inflicted wound the team repeatedly has not learned from and one I'm not prepared to believe they've learned from until I see the behavior change. Until we ACTUALLY waive Pelfry or option Milone out of ST for May or Meyer this seems like wishful thinking.

 

And, hey, I get the argument with Meyer. Trevor May? If Pelfrey goes north in that spot over him it's nothing short of ridiculous.

"Defend" is too broad for my intent. "Context" would seem more my intent. You also name Gibson, Meyer and May like their 2015 versions are the same as their 2013 versions, which isn't true.

 

A BP study from several years ago to declare "demonstrably" is a stretch. I've seen that study before and it misses the context of viable prospects to promote. The win-loss results from 2011-2014 are a demonstrable example that the Twins didn't have prospects or talent worth promoting rapidly in that timeframe.

 

If the AAAA guys is a repeatedly self-inflicted wound from which you want to see different behavior, isn't that what the Twins are doing here? Adding better talent so we aren't relying on AAAA guys as soon as there's a need? Meyer, May, Pelfrey and Milone are all better names to look at than the list you provided.

 

I think their doing exactly what you're asking for and it's still in how you're looking at it. If Pelfrey goes north in the rotation over a healthy May... yeah, we'll both be pissed.

[TheLeviathan]

A BP study from several years ago to declare "demonstrably" is a stretch. I've seen that study before and it misses the context of viable prospects to promote. The win-loss results from 2011-2014 are a demonstrable example that the Twins didn't have prospects or talent worth promoting rapidly in that timeframe.

 

If the AAAA guys is a repeatedly self-inflicted wound from which you want to see different behavior, isn't that what the Twins are doing here? Adding better talent so we aren't relying on AAAA guys as soon as there's a need? Meyer, May, Pelfrey and Milone are all better names to look at than the list you provided.

 

I think their doing exactly what you're asking for and it's still in how you're looking at it. If Pelfrey goes north in the rotation over a healthy May... yeah, we'll both be pissed.

 

1) The study has the same problem for all the teams and the sample is large enough to draw pretty reasonable conclusions.  Namely - the Twins are definitely on the less aggressive side of things.  Particularly as the player gets to the upper minors.

 

2)  The Twins adding Ervin Santana is not the problem.  The Twins' tendency to default to a guy like Mike Pelfrey over Trevor May is.  My issue in this thread started with the pollyanne arguments that there would be a true competition for the spots that are available.  (I think there is one, two tops)  Given this team's decision making for quite some time, I have significant doubts that will happen.  As Nick said earlier - Trevor May should walk into ST the favorite and I couldn't feel any less confident in that.

 

That's the problem.  Not Ervin Santana but the Twins ridiculous penchant for veteran innings eaters over younger, more talented pitchers.  I'm glad we agree about the 5th spot going to Pelf over May and I genuinely hope I'm wrong, but we have a lot of evidence over the years to indicate I'm worried for good reason.

Edited December 17, 2014 by TheLeviathan

[Otto von Ballpark]

Viola and Radke struggled for two years without being sent down. Today's Twins would have returned Santana after a few months of awful pitching his rookie year.

Radke was almost a league-average starter out of the gate at age 22, and then was 8th in the league in IP and 13th in ERA+ his second year.  Viola is the better example.

 

Looking it up, Johan Santana actually wasn't that awful out of the pen in his Rule 5 season either.  Bad peripherals, but his run prevention was pretty much on par with Swarzak's bullpen work last year, and close to Pressly's from 2 years ago.  Santana's spot starts really dragged his numbers down, however.

[jay]

1) The study has the same problem for all the teams and the sample is large enough to draw pretty reasonable conclusions. Namely - the Twins are definitely on the less aggressive side of things.

Not all teams lost 90+ games for the last 4 years with league-worst rotations. I can agree with the more reasonable "less aggressive" than "a definitive pattern of delaying our young players longer than any other team".

 

That's the problem. Not Ervin Santana but the Twins ridiculous penchant for veteran innings eaters over younger, more talented pitchers.

I guess I don't see handfuls of prospects that have been held back. The "less aggressive" piece has maybe meant a few months for a few guys, but I don't quite buy it to be as big of an issue as it's made out to be.

 

Either way, here's to seeing May pitch for the Twins in April (and May, and beyond).

[TheLeviathan]

Not all teams lost 90+ games for the last 4 years with league-worst rotations. I can agree with the more reasonable "less aggressive" than "a definitive pattern of delaying our young players longer than any other team".

 

Jay, these are the same thing.  Just one makes you feel better about it by how you phrase it.

 

Let me be clear, I don't think we've wrecked any careers or anything like that, but we have deliberately played worse players with less upside for whatever reason you want to cite.  We seem to be in prime position to do so again in a few months and I hope that doesn't happen.

[jay]

Second paragraph, spot on and I won't both trying to cite any reason.

 

First paragraph, partially true but I do see them as different. Are the Twins less aggressive with promotions than a team like the Mets? Yes, that's reasonable to conclude... but I wouldn't use that study to make the other statement. In either fashion, the study doesn't prove either approach to be advantageous.

[Hosken Bombo Disco]

You don't need to look very far back to find counterexamples to that statement. The 2014 AL champs were fronted by a trade acquisition and 2 free agents. Similar story for the Pirates and O's. There are countless other playoff teams and World Series winners if you look back through the years. There are a lot of ways to put together a contender.

I think it was implied that the Twins will not trade for or sign an actual #1 starting pitcher. That guy will have to be developed from within. Also, no rule stating you can have only one.

 

Hughes had a nice season but what a Hughes/Nolasco/Santana rotation will usually get you is something close to average or above average. In other words, mediocrity. Teams that go deep into the playoffs without a #1 are an exception, not the norm. The most recent example I can think of is the 2010-2011 Rangers.

[IndianaTwin]

Can anyone point to a study that reveals the average number of starts that are lost due to injury and replacement from the rotation a team installs to begin a season? 

 

The 15 AL teams used from 7 to 15 starters last year, averaging 10.33. (The Twins used 12, by the way).

 

So, there's a pretty good likelihood that Hughes, Gibson, Nolasco, Meyer, May, Milone, and Pelfrey aren't enough to get through the season. Given that, I'll gladly add Santana to the mix.

 

On average, the first five pitchers to start a game started 109.33 games for that team. Perhaps not surprisingly, the four teams that got at least 120 starts out of their first five starters all made the playoffs. (The Twins got 118 out of Nolasco, Correia, Hughes, Pelfrey, and Gibson.)

 

So, there's also a pretty good chance that about a third of the games will get started by guys who aren't in the rotation at the beginning of the year. If Meyer and May don't make the rotation out of spring training, it seems almost a certainty that they will get opportunities if they stay healthy and effective in either Rochester or the bullpen.

 

 

[Major League Ready]

I think there is a very strong likelihood Meyer gets his chance this year.  However, every response here in favor of buying a rotation is almost completely focused on THIS YEAR.  That is not an adequate examination of the situation given Santana was signed for 4 years with the possibility of 5 years if I understand the option correctly.  Nolasco has 3 more years and we can't ignore we also have $23M tied up in Mauer for 4 more years.  This short term view is the difference between how GMs think vs alot of fans.

 

Is the goal to build the best team possible this year or build a contender.  They require a substantially different approach.

Edited December 17, 2014 by Major Leauge Ready

[USAFChief]

I think there is a very strong likelihood Meyer gets his chance this year.  However, every response here in favor of buying a rotation is almost completely focused on THIS YEAR.  That is not an adequate examination of the situation given Santana was signed for 4 years with the possibility of 5 years if I understand the option correctly.  Nolasco has 3 more years and we can't ignore we also have $23M tied up in Mauer for 4 more years.  This short term view is the difference between how GMs think vs alot of fans.

 

Is the goal to build the best team possible this year or build a contender.  They require a substantially different approach.

Wasn't it a GM that inked those contracts?

[KGB]

 

That's the problem.  Not Ervin Santana but the Twins ridiculous penchant for veteran innings eaters over younger, more talented pitchers.  I'm glad we agree about the 5th spot going to Pelf over May and I genuinely hope I'm wrong, but we have a lot of evidence over the years to indicate I'm worried for good reason.

 

I agree that Pelfrey will be given every opportunity to win the 5th starters spot.  He has a guaranteed contract and if he can still pitch they will try and get some value from him.  So the thought that we’ll have an open competition and select the best is unlikely.  If someone has guaranteed money verses someone with minor league options, they are sending down the player to the minor league.

 

It seems the front office is not able to look at the team and evaluate it.  Last year they signed Morales instead of playing a younger player because Ryan thought “why not us” for the wild card.  So we ended with another 90 loss season and missed another opportunity to evaluate players at the major league level.

 

From a marketing stand point, I understand the positive spin, but the last four years have shown that it’s not a realistic evaluation.

[Willihammer]

I think it was implied that the Twins will not trade for or sign an actual #1 starting pitcher. That guy will have to be developed from within. Also, no rule stating you can have only one.

 

Hughes had a nice season but what a Hughes/Nolasco/Santana rotation will usually get you is something close to average or above average. In other words, mediocrity. Teams that go deep into the playoffs without a #1 are an exception, not the norm. The most recent example I can think of is the 2010-2011 Rangers.

I'm not convinced that's the magic formula (look at the 2014 Dodgers, or the Angels, or the Cardinals, or the A's...) but for sake of argument, was Hughes season worse than Bumgarners?

[Mike Sixel]

MLR's last two posts sum up my thoughts.......especially the parts about blocking Meyer, May, Berrios (et. al.) with the "long term" nature of the Nolasco and Santana deals.

 

Don't get me wrong, I'm glad TR is trying to make the team better. I'm not certain what I'd do differently, actually. I'm just wondering how they plan to use 2-4 really good young assets.

 

Frankly, if they don't plan to start Meyer this year, I'd see what I could get for him. Because I think other teams would start him this year (note, that's a belief based on no facts, obviously).

[Hosken Bombo Disco]

I'm not convinced that's the magic formula (look at the 2014 Dodgers, or the Angels, or the Cardinals, or the A's...) but for sake of argument, was Hughes season worse than Bumgarners?

True, teams with aces can and do flame out (Kershaw) in the postseason. Usually to another team with an ace-like pitcher. A true #1 guy is the closest thing to a magic ingredient for contending, imo. Hughes had a great season, especially measured by xFIP, but Bumgarner is the guy more likely to repeat that type of season over and over. It was my understanding that Meyer had that potential. Santana is nice but no one is calling him a consistent #1.

[TheLeviathan]

True, teams with aces can and do flame out (Kershaw) in the postseason. Usually to another team with an ace-like pitcher. A true #1 guy is the closest thing to a magic ingredient for contending, imo. Hughes had a great season, especially measured by xFIP, but Bumgarner is the guy more likely to repeat that type of season over and over. It was my understanding that Meyer had that potential. Santana is nice but no one is calling him a consistent #1.

 

In addition to Willihammer point, I think you'd be surprised if you looked back at how ineffective many aces have been relative to some schmo with a magical postseason.  Bumgarner was amazing in the playoffs, but that is far from common.  

 

The last time the Giants won the pennant it wasn't Bum, Cain, or Lincecum that lead the way.....it was Ryan Vogelsong.  A guy all of us cringe at adding today.  I'd recommend anyone that believes "Ace = World Series" to go back and look at just how very untrue that idea is.

 

They are, however and as you point out, extremely valuable to being a better baseball team over the long season.

[Major League Ready]

It sure would be interesting to sit on the internal discussions for a few days.  Who knows what the process has been.

 

• Maybe they are going to try to get a big return on Hughes by the ASB and bring up Meyer.
• They might feel they can do the same with Nolasco and/or Santana in the following years.
• Perhaps the FO does not agree with Vegas odds makers and think we can contend with this rotation.
• Maybe it is purely a business decision.  They may feel they are forced to make decisions that are not optimal in terms of building a contender for the sake of protecting the Twins brand.
• It is also a reasonable position to assume there will be enough time via injury but I have a tough time with a line of thinking that suggests we will get to the prospects as a result of FAs failing in one form or another.  If you are sure they will fail, skip the failure and give the prospects the ML experience they need to grow.

Maybe they have a plan that Mike would like. 

Edited December 17, 2014 by Major Leauge Ready

[Mike Sixel]

I am sure they have a good plan. I am not sure what it is, I just hope it works.

[Hosken Bombo Disco]

In addition to Willihammer point, I think you'd be surprised if you looked back at how ineffective many aces have been relative to some schmo with a magical postseason.  Bumgarner was amazing in the playoffs, but that is far from common.  

 

The last time the Giants won the pennant it wasn't Bum, Cain, or Lincecum that lead the way.....it was Ryan Vogelsong.  A guy all of us cringe at adding today.  I'd recommend anyone that believes "Ace = World Series" to go back and look at just how very untrue that idea is.

 

They are, however and as you point out, extremely valuable to being a better baseball team over the long season.

Point taken--sort of. I wouldn't use the phrase "very untrue" to describe the value of an Ace to a WS contender, which is kind of where I see some posters going. I went all the way back to the 2013 season and saw that Lester pitched pretty good in the postseason. San Francisco has three World Series trips in five years with all their own drafted pitchers. Aces like Cain and Lincecum, plus the occasional schmo like Sanchez and Vogelsong who gets hot. They had both. Admitted they also signed Zito. But Bumgarner has pitched like an ace basically every season except his late-2012 fade. He's also the same age as Meyer, fwiw.

 

There may be several ways to assemble a good rotation but I honestly don't believe the Twins new approach of signing average or above average free agents for their age 30 years is the best way, or even close to the best. It's an imperfect science but other teams seem much more willing to fast track a guy who shows promise. If a young guy is pitching well with confidence, maybe that's the right moment to try him in the Major Leagues.

[jay]

Right or wrong, Terry Ryan seems to agree with the views being shared here that a "#1" isn't essential.

 

http://www.tout.com/m/bbsvcd