Article: Trevor May Is Thriving In The Bullpen

[Blackjack]

 

 

At this point, it makes sense to keep him in the bullpen for this season which I don't think anyone is questioning.  between Jepsen, May, Perkins, and now Cotts we have an adequate and as we saw last weekend sometimes dominant pen.  While we need our starters to keep it up I'll be happy knowing we have a good shot of keeping a lead after the 6/7th innings.

There you have it. Until the Twins find better relievers for the pen, this year AND in 2016, May should stay in the pen. 

 

The one problem I see with that is May's attitude. I'm sure that Molitor sat down with him this year and said "we need you out there" , so May has worked hard and performed. If he gets forced to the pen next year without a chance at starting and big bucks down the road, will he have the same attitude??

[John Bonnes]

The value of a reliever versus the value of a starter is an interesting question. The most commonly cited metrics to show the value of a starter are innings pitcher and WAR, but really they're the same thing: WAR is higher because there are more innings and the value of those innings is all seen as the same.

 

However, if you look at WPA (Win Probability Added) which takes into account how valuable those innings are, relievers often score higher. For instance, for the Twins, the top five are all relievers:

 

http://www.fangraphs.com/leaders.aspx?pos=all&stats=pit&lg=all&qual=0&type=3&season=2015&month=0&season1=2015&ind=0&team=8&rost=0&age=0&filter=&players=0

 

Nevertheless, I still think starters are more valuable - because they're rarer. You don't need metrics to show it, You need supply and demand. They're paid more. And while May is valualbe in that role this year, provided the Twins clear up some of the logjam in their rotation, he should probably be back as a starter next year. 

[spinowner]

 

The value of a reliever versus the value of a starter is an interesting question. The most commonly cited metrics to show the value of a starter are innings pitcher and WAR, but really they're the same thing: WAR is higher because there are more innings and the value of those innings is all seen as the same.

 

However, if you look at WPA (Win Probability Added) which takes into account how valuable those innings are, relievers often score higher. For instance, for the Twins, the top five are all relievers:

 

http://www.fangraphs.com/leaders.aspx?pos=all&stats=pit&lg=all&qual=0&type=3&season=2015&month=0&season1=2015&ind=0&team=8&rost=0&age=0&filter=&players=0

 

Nevertheless, I still think starters are more valuable - because they're rarer. You don't need metrics to show it, You need supply and demand. They're paid more. And while May is valualbe in that role this year, provided the Twins clear up some of the logjam in their rotation, he should probably be back as a starter next year. 

The thing about WPA is that a late-inning event has a larger effect on the number than an early-inning event. That's fine, because it's more important to perform well when it makes a bigger difference, but it does create an apples/oranges issue when comparing pitchers who almost always pitch in earlier innings to pitchers who almost always pitch in late innings. That's much less of an issue with comparing batters because they are much more likely to play the entire game.

The other issue is that WPA for pitchers must be measured and compiled on a half-inning-by-half-inning basis, not including the WPA produced by his team's offensive half-innings. Measuring a starter's WPA from the beginning of the game to when a he is removed includes his own team's offensive performance during that time.

I assume someone has developed a stat measuring WPA achieved as a percentage of maximum possible WPA. That would be a better way to compare starters and relievers.

[DJL44]

WAR gives a leverage bonus to relievers and they still can't match starting pitchers.

[Mike Sixel]

If anyone wonders who is more valuable.....check out what they are paid......

[tobi0040]

 

A good reliever pitches 70 innings.

 

A good starter pitches 210 innings.

 

That's why starters have more inherent value. They spend more time on the field.

 

If May's ceiling was middle of the rotation starter - and let's not diminish that role, it's really valuable to a team - I'd have fewer issues moving him to the pen... but May has looked better than that this season. He could be a fringe #2, very good #3 for several years. A good #2/3 is going to bring 2-4 wins to the team per season... Only a handful of relievers can match that in 70 innings and Trevor May isn't one of them.

 

Spot on Brock.

 

Taking your most electric arm that throws multiple pitches and moving him to the 7th or 8th inning guy is not a smart organizational move.  

 

Many good relievers are failed starters, like Perkins or Wade Davis.  But May did not fail.  Big difference.

 

We should also discuss the opportunity cost of each, a starter and reliever.  At 2/15 or 3/15, you can sign a really good set up guy.  A #2 starter is a 4-5 year and upwards of $15-$20M a year proposition.

 

 

 

[halfchest]

 

If anyone wonders who is more valuable.....check out what they are paid......

 

While I agree, there are different measures of value than Metrics and money.  So long term, yes you are absolutely right that starters are worth more, they cost more as free agents, they generally will provide more value assuming they can pitch the same or close to it as a starter vs. a reliever.

 

However, looking at value, you also have to factor in who is the replacement.   Since the Twins have a logjam of pitching and overall it has been solid this year with some hiccups overall.  Realistically May is being replaced by Pelfrey or Milone both of who have had solid years if you look at the results.  Which in the end, for this year, is all that really matters right?  We can argue about Santana but it's a small sample size and with his history he actually does deserve a long leash. 

 

Point being, in the rotation, as much as we like his peripherals and he is probably the better pitcher, the only guys he was likely to replace have actually had better real results that being ERA.  Therefore, him being in the rotation you can argue wouldn't have been any better than Pelfrey or Milone based only on the actual outcomes of their starts this year.

 

In the bullpen however, we have had a number of guys faltering that would be in the bullpen if May were not.  Where he is providing a very good late inning option instead of a mediocre to bad middle reliever.  Therefore he is providing a ton of value to the team in the bullpen this year.

 

Again, I'm going with actual results (ERA) instead of future predictors/value and looking at replacement value.  Right now, May is more valuable to the pen because he's getting rid of a much worse player I the pen where in the rotation he would be replacing someone who has had similar results. 

[Mike Sixel]

I'm done arguing over this year, that ship has sailed. Next year? He should, imo, be in the rotation. He is a better pitcher, imo, than several other options. If that is true.....move those players to the bullpen.

[Halsey Hall]

May should start in the rotation next season, but he's certainly shown his value in the pen.  If need be, plug him back in the pen next year.  They tried this with Alex Meyer but the pen hasn't seemed to get him going either.  It doesn't work with everyone, obviously. 

 

Nolasco shouldn't be around next year and I'll bet Gibson is on the block this off season.  Malone probably will be here, and possibly Pelfrey.  So that makes the rotation Hughes, Santana, Malone, Pelfrey and May, with Duffey and Berrios as possibilities.  That all changes if we're stuck with Nolasco, and either or both of Malone and Pelfrey go.  TR has some pondering to do this off season. 

[Steve Lein]

 

Would be interesting to see at least two or three more quality starts out of Tyler Duffey to see if he is a viable option for a rotation spot in '16.  If he is, then maybe you can think long and hard about using May as a  power  arm in the 'pen. 

 

Also, if May and Duffey look like solid rotation pieces going forward, do you put Gibby on the block this winter?

 

Why are we contemplating if Duffey is a better starter option than May? May earned it this year, yet still got moved to the 'pen.

 

May has been miscast out of necessity in this move to the bullpen. Duffey was converted to a starter from relief after being drafted...

 

I have a very hard time believing Duffey would be the better starter option moving forward, and have no doubt he could make a similar transition as May moving back to the bullpen. He was a power-arm closer.

 

This is thinking about this in the reverse fashion from what it should be, in my opinion.

[Willihammer]

I think it would be foolish to keep May in the pen. He has the makings of a 200 IP/year workhorse IMO.

[Old Twins Cap]

May will be given his chance to start and win a spot next year and I expect he will be in the rotation a long time.

 

Thing about relievers is:  you can buy them in Free Agency, trade for them at the deadline and create them internally by converting a strong arm SP to relief.

 

How easy is it to find a quality, long term starting pitcher?

 

Twins get that and will give May every opportunity to start.

 

Don't forget RP and Bullpens go up and down like the stock market, year to year.  I think the best strategy has always been to assemble a great frontline rotation, find a closer, then piece it together from there with Free Agents, castoffs, trades, MiLB strong arms, etc.

 

RPs are important, witness KC, but they are also easier to find or create.

[troyhobbs]

May is the most talented P on the roster and I'd want him to pitch as many innings as possible if I'm trying to win games, including the rest of this year. Santana has given up more HRs in half as many innings as May so if it was me I'd make the switch today for May to the rotation and Santanta to the pen.

[howieramone2]

I think it would be foolish to keep May in the pen. He has the makings of a 200 IP/year workhorse IMO.

This is pretty much what Rob Anthony said a couple of Sundays ago. I would be shocked if May isn't already penciled in as the 4th or 5th starter next season. I give May a lot of credit. He took one for the team, and has been lights out as a power arm in the pen. Teammates and coaches don't forget that type stuff.

[jimmer]

 

May will be given his chance to start and win a spot next year and I expect he will be in the rotation a long time.

 

Thing about relievers is:  you can buy them in Free Agency, trade for them at the deadline and create them internally by converting a strong arm SP to relief.

 

How easy is it to find a quality, long term starting pitcher?

 

Twins get that and will give May every opportunity to start.

 

Don't forget RP and Bullpens go up and down like the stock market, year to year.  I think the best strategy has always been to assemble a great frontline rotation, find a closer, then piece it together from there with Free Agents, castoffs, trades, MiLB strong arms, etc.

 

RPs are important, witness KC, but they are also easier to find or create.

Clearly the Twins DIDN'T give him every opportunity to start, because he did zero to lose his spot. They yanked him out of the rotation and slowed his development as a starter.  This isn't a guy 21, 22 years old.  He's already starter his prime years.

 

IF, and that is a big IF, he's ever back in the rotation full time, they will have to baby him again with his innings.  They have really messed up with him if the goal is to make him a quality starter.

[halfchest]

 

Clearly the Twins DIDN'T give him every opportunity to start, because he did zero to lose his spot. They yanked him out of the rotation and slowed his development as a starter.  This isn't a guy 21, 22 years old.  He's already starter his prime years.

 

IF, and that is a big IF, he's ever back in the rotation full time, they will have to baby him again with his innings.  They have really messed up with him if the goal is to make him a quality starter.

 

I tend to agree that May should have remained in the rotation but I also see why the Twins chose him at that time, it was definitely a tough one to make. 

 

Hughes and Santana obviously aren't getting demoted at that point, hughes has been mediocre this year and Santana was our big acquisition no way he's going straight into the pen.  Gibson was our best pitcher at the time IMO even though he has had some bumps since the break.  Pelfrey while he had horrible peripherals had about a 3.00 ERA and sorry can't argue too much with results even if they're smoke and mirrors.  Milone also was on a tear after destroying AAA for a month and had 5 starts up in the majors of sub 3.00 ERA and has been solid overall this year. 

 

So it wasn't an easy decision by any means, glad that it's at least working out to fix up the bullpen.  May will be a starter again next season, and I'm not concerned about half a season in the bullpen messing with him at all.

[tobi0040]

 

Clearly the Twins DIDN'T give him every opportunity to start, because he did zero to lose his spot. They yanked him out of the rotation and slowed his development as a starter.  This isn't a guy 21, 22 years old.  He's already starter his prime years.

 

IF, and that is a big IF, he's ever back in the rotation full time, they will have to baby him again with his innings.  They have really messed up with him if the goal is to make him a quality starter.

 

Jimmer,

 

But this way we keep the development going for Milone and Pelfrey, key building blocks for us.

 

 

 

[Dr. Evil]

Either way, I hope next year we have a solid pen. The value of a solid closer/setup combination seems to get understated at times(not pointing fingers at anyone here). If you can consistently shorten the game to 7 innings there is a lot of value in that. We have more options at starting pitcher than we do quality pen arms. Some of our pen arms are more suited for mop up duty. This imbalance can't continue. If that means May as the setup guy and Berrios or Duffy in the rotation next year, I see it as a net overall gain for the team in it's entirety. If a guy like Meyer suddenly emerges and figures things out while becoming a flame thrower in the pen too, I have no problem with that either.

[Danchat]

It's interesting to think that once Ervin Santana joined our rotation, he gave our rotation a noticeable downgrade but it also made the bullpen better (once May actually got to throw high-leverage innings, that is).

 

[Dr. Evil]

The net value of a starter vs a reliever can also be looked at relative to the strengths and weaknesses of the current staff. If his replacement in the rotation is 10% worse than him and he is 50% better than the next late innings pen option(Fein or Duensing as examples) then I would say it is a net gain for the staff in it's entirety if he is in the pen. Especially when you consider he would be in high leverage situations late in games out of the pen.

[diehardtwinsfan]

 

The value of a reliever versus the value of a starter is an interesting question. The most commonly cited metrics to show the value of a starter are innings pitcher and WAR, but really they're the same thing: WAR is higher because there are more innings and the value of those innings is all seen as the same.

 

However, if you look at WPA (Win Probability Added) which takes into account how valuable those innings are, relievers often score higher. For instance, for the Twins, the top five are all relievers:

 

http://www.fangraphs.com/leaders.aspx?pos=all&stats=pit&lg=all&qual=0&type=3&season=2015&month=0&season1=2015&ind=0&team=8&rost=0&age=0&filter=&players=0

 

Nevertheless, I still think starters are more valuable - because they're rarer. You don't need metrics to show it, You need supply and demand. They're paid more. And while May is valualbe in that role this year, provided the Twins clear up some of the logjam in their rotation, he should probably be back as a starter next year. 

 

I fail to see how the 9th inning is more valuable than the first inning.  A run is a run.  I get that you have less time to make it up per say, but if the offense does it's job, it doesn't matter if that run is in the 9th inning or the first inning.  Just because a guy excels at preventing those runs for an inning late game doesn't make him a better player than the guy who did a good job preventing them for 6 straight. 

[tobi0040]

 

The net value of a starter vs a reliever can also be looked at relative to the strengths and weaknesses of the current staff. If his replacement in the rotation is 10% worse than him and he is 50% better than the next late innings pen option(Fein or Duensing as examples) then I would say it is a net gain for the staff in it's entirety if he is in the pen. Especially when you consider he would be in high leverage situations late in games out of the pen.

 

Some truth to this logic, but the fact that the numbers needed to be 50% vs. 10% shows me the rotation is way more valuable.

 

The other side of this is you can't just move guys from the rotation to pen and back at will based on short term needs.  Especially for a young player looking to establish himself.  Further, why were we blindsided by the depth/talent level of the pen?

[USAFChief]

 

I fail to see how the 9th inning is more valuable than the first inning.  A run is a run.  I get that you have less time to make it up per say, but if the offense does it's job, it doesn't matter if that run is in the 9th inning or the first inning.  Just because a guy excels at preventing those runs for an inning late game doesn't make him a better player than the guy who did a good job preventing them for 6 straight. 

Is a HR that adds 2 runs to a 10-1 lead, making it 12-1, as valuable as a HR that turns a 1-0 deficit into a 2-1 lead?

 

Context matters, I think.

[Willihammer]

Would May be 50% better than Phil Hughes in relief? Seems like the comparison to Fien misses the mark.

 

Someone was going to get demoted. In hindsight, probably should have been  Hughes, no?

[Dr. Evil]

 

Some truth to this logic, but the fact that the numbers needed to be 50% vs. 10% shows me the rotation is way more valuable.

 

The other side of this is you can't just move guys from the rotation to pen and back at will based on short term needs.  Especially for a young player looking to establish himself.  Further, why were we blindsided by the depth/talent level of the pen?

The percentages I chose to use were arbitrary. My point is that what's best for the overall group is an additional consideration to be made. Not to minimize other factors at all. Those are also real important.

[SweetOne69]

 

May will be a starter in 2016.  Pelfrey will be gone at seasons end and Nolasco will spend the rest of the season on the disabled list before the Twins dump him this off season.  The Twins will not pick up Milone's option either. 

 

 

Next season it will be Hughes, Gibson, Santana, May and Duffey /Berrios.

 

Only 1 of these 3 is true. 

Pelfrey will be gone.  The Twins' are NOT going to eat $25M and dump Nolasco.  They are definitely going to offer Milone Arbitration, he may get traded in the offseason but they aren't going to give him away for nothing by letting him become a FA.

[gocgo]

 

Only 1 of these 3 is true. 

Pelfrey will be gone.  The Twins' are NOT going to eat $25M and dump Nolasco.  They are definitely going to offer Milone Arbitration, he may get traded in the offseason but they aren't going to give him away for nothing by letting him become a FA.

Why can't all 3 be true?  I see Pelfrey gone.  I don't see the Twins eating Nolasco's contract, but I could see them having to pay quite a bit of it and trade him or have him pitch from the pen to try to salvage some innings.  I agree with them offering Milone arbitration as well.  I don't see him getting traded though.  They could use a lefty in the rotation.

[Thrylos]

 

What say you?
 

 

I said this on March 2nd:

 

As far as righties go, the Twins will likely take Casey Fien up north (and hopefully not use him in high leverage situations, because he is below average in all of the above categories, and he is one of the major drivers of the low GB%, since his is only 32.1.)  Fien would not be my choice.  I would rather see what Trevor May can do as a reliever.  Similar discussion with Pelfrey, his 91.9 mph FB average will get to the mid 90s as a reliever, plus he had the second best K% of the group in the majors and a respectable SwStr% (mostly as a starter, and will get better as a reliever.)  And the cherry on top is that he led the 2014 Twins' pen with 2 Ground Balls per Fly Ball and a 57.1% GB%. May projects as an above average reliever.

 

So May being successful in the pen, is like preaching to a choir here

And I don't think I am psychic...  The writing was on the wall about what May can accomplish as a reliever. 

 

Now as far as the future goes:

 

 

Right-handed relief will probably still be a prioritized need in the offseason as they gear up for true contention efforts in 2016, and May is looking like their best bet. He has the makings of a lights-out setup guy in front of Glen Perkins.

 

a couple notes here:

 

a. I do not see Perkins as having a scholarship for the closer position in 2016.  As we witnessed, he is not "lights out" and he might actually serve the Twins better in a LH setup role.

b. Some numbers:

 

Perkins 2015: 2.61 ERA, 3.41 FIP, 1.117 WHIP, 22.2% K%, 33.8% GB%
May as a RP 2015: 2.00 ERA, 3.37 FIP. 1.200 WHIP, 23.4 K%, 37.8% GB% (as SP & RP)

 

High Leverage 2015:

 

Perkins: opponents: .250/.299/.403, 27.3 K%, 6.5% BB%, 1/28 WHIP, 3.79 FIP
May: opponents: .167/.186/.268, 32.6% K%, 2.3% BB%, 0.65 WHIP, 2.15 FIP

 

Plus Perkins will be 33 and on the decline, while May has not reached his prime yet.

 

However, there is another guy:

Career as RP:

 

2.06 ERA, 2.03 FIP. 0.97 WHIP, 31.8 K%, 34.3% GB% (2015) (opponents: .183/.250/.243 career as RP)

 

And he is in his prime with 3 more years to go under contract.

 

He might whine, but I'd love to see Phil Hughes as the Twins' closer in 2016, with Perkins as the LH set up guy, and May as the RH set up guy.   This is a great Free Agent SP class, with real talent and the Twins should go after one (let's say Zimmerman) leaving the 5th spot as a competition between Berrios and Meyer in ST (assuming that Pelfrey is not re-signed - 'tis Ryan after all - and Santana and Nolasco and Gibson stay put.)

 

Add Jepsen (under contract) Pressly and another lefty, and you really got a bullpen for 2016...

Edited August 25, 2015 by Thrylos

[jimmer]

Ryan is not going to go after a top flight starting pitcher.  It could be the best FA SP class in history and they still wouldn't do it.

Edited August 25, 2015 by jimmer

[Thrylos]

 

I think it is way too early to throw in the towel on Ervin Santana. History has shown that he will be worth his contract. Here's an interesting link to the salaries of MLB starting pitchers - it's not like Terry Ryan went nuts and started handing out obscene contracts for no reason. 

 

http://www.spotrac.com/mlb/rankings/cap-hit/starting-pitcher/

 

Before I accept that, I'd love to see the juice/no-juice splits.

For 2015 the no-juice splits suck...

 

(*and the next CLA should allow teams to get out of multi-year contracts of players who get suspended...)