The Twins need to sign Liriano to a 2-3 year contract ASAP

[Seth Stohs]

Wow. That's $24M/year. Holy cow.

not a bad deal for a quality #2 starter!!

[Top Gun]

Twins can't even make a attempt to offer Liriano half that. Maybe they should just sign Moyer!

[BrentMpls]

I wouldn't be totally against a 2 year deal at 10-12 a year, but I really hope they unload him (for as good as a return as possible), he is just too inconsistent. And if they do sign him, that eats up the majority of next seasons dough that the Twins have to play with, which leaves little hope to acquire a solid #2/3 guy for next year.

[Oxtung]

That's cute that you completely left 2010 off.

I did some work digging through stats and brought some actual data to this discussion. I am trying to have a real dialogue and had a very logical question; why is this year different. You come back at me with sarcasm. Either you don't understand why 2010 was left off, which is makes me sad because I thought I was being very clear in my point, or you think you are being witty and your sarcasm is an attempt to quell any future discussion on the subject. If the later is the case why did you even start the thread? If the former is the case go back and re-read my post. If you still don't understand why 2010 was left off then ask why.

 

Also his k/9 rate of 10.9 is the big difference...................

 

This makes me think you didn't understand the point of my previous post. Yes, you can see that by looking at the chart but do you really think because Liriano is striking out a few more batters every game he won't return back to his April/May self?

[DaveW]

do you really think because Liriano is striking out a few more batters every game he won't return back to his April/May self?

If Liriano continues to strike out 10.9 batters per nine inning(assuming his bb/9 rate stays the same) he will not return to his April/May self, he will be pitching like a top of the rotation type guy.

 

It's disingenuous to not inlcude 2010 in any discussion of Liriano's talents, I know what you were trying to do (claiming that Liriano is only good a for a stretch each year and terrible the rest) if you would have included the 2010 stretch it would have shown that Liriano posted a 9.4 k/9 rate throughout the full season, in 2006 Lirianos best year he had a k rate of 10.7

 

This year he has a 9.9 overall and 10.9 in his past 10 starts, its pretty easy to surmise that Liriano is a damn fine pitcher when he is striking out a lot of folks, when he isn't he is somewhere between medicore and bad. The real question is: Do we think Liriano can keep up his current k rate? And from watching his starts over the past couple months I don't see any reason why he can't.

 

I know it's super against the grain here to give Anderson or any coach credit for anything, but perhaps he is the reason why Liriano is dominant again? They put him in the pen, Anderson had more time to work with him and he comes back up and starts to dominate.

 

Make no mistake about it, the Twins won't have another starting pitcher who even approachs 9k per nine for at least 2-3 years if they dump Liriano for some C+ prospect.

[BrentMpls]

Make no mistake about it, the Twins won't have another starting pitcher who even approachs 9k per nine for at least 2-3 years if they dump Liriano for some C+ prospect.

Should that be the goal, even if that is the case?

 

Having a reliable starter who can get you through 7 innings without a home run derby occurring is worth a lot more than Liriano. Bert recently defined a "quality" start as 5 innings with giving up 3 or less runs. I'm assuming that is what this organization is realistically looking for - someone who can produce a 'quality start' on a regular basis.

 

Liriano has been solid the last two some months, for the most part. But can you really trust that to stay pace for the next 2 years? I sure can't. 2 months on, 2 months off isn't worth having, even if he is the only guy who can throw strikes more oft than not when on.

 

I think the Twins, for better or worse, would much rather have 5 guys that can do what Blackburn did last night on a regular basis, than a "filthy" strikeout guy that you can't count on.

[Guest USAFChief]

Should that be the goal, even if that is the case?

 

Having a reliable starter who can get you through 7 innings without a home run derby occurring is worth a lot more than Liriano. Bert recently defined a "quality" start as 5 innings with giving up 3 or less runs. I'm assuming that is what this organization is realistically looking for - someone who can produce a 'quality start' on a regular basis.

 

Liriano has been solid the last two some months, for the most part. But can you really trust that to stay pace for the next 2 years? I sure can't. 2 months on, 2 months off isn't worth having, even if he is the only guy who can throw strikes more oft than not when on.

 

I think the Twins, for better or worse, would much rather have 5 guys that can do what Blackburn did last night on a regular basis, than a "filthy" strikeout guy that you can't count on.

New to baseball?

[notoriousgod71]

Should that be the goal, even if that is the case?

 

Having a reliable starter who can get you through 7 innings without a home run derby occurring is worth a lot more than Liriano. Bert recently defined a "quality" start as 5 innings with giving up 3 or less runs. I'm assuming that is what this organization is realistically looking for - someone who can produce a 'quality start' on a regular basis.

 

Liriano has been solid the last two some months, for the most part. But can you really trust that to stay pace for the next 2 years? I sure can't. 2 months on, 2 months off isn't worth having, even if he is the only guy who can throw strikes more oft than not when on.

 

I think the Twins, for better or worse, would much rather have 5 guys that can do what Blackburn did last night on a regular basis, than a "filthy" strikeout guy that you can't count on.

Liriano's HR/9 is fine. He's top 30 in MLB at .8/9. That's not a home run derby.

 

I would much rather have what Blackburn did last night too, but unfortunately we don't have anyone who can do that on a regular basis so Liriano is still better.

 

Come next year when we have a rotation of Blackburn, DeVries, Diamond, Walters, and Gibson/Baker/whoever we are all going to be bitching about not having a strikeout pitcher and how we should have kept Liriano.

[BrentMpls]

Liriano's HR/9 is fine. He's top 30 in MLB at .8/9. That's not a home run derby.

 

I would much rather have what Blackburn did last night too, but unfortunately we don't have anyone who can do that on a regular basis so Liriano is still better.

 

Come next year when we have a rotation of Blackburn, DeVries, Diamond, Walters, and Gibson/Baker/whoever we are all going to be bitching about not having a strikeout pitcher and how we should have kept Liriano.

Or bitching about having a guy who occasionally shows glimmers of talent, but not enough to count on.

 

It's a tough call either way - my hope is Ryan finds a trade that gets us something of decent value, failing that a 2 year 20-24 mil deal would be acceptable to see what happens.

[Oxtung]

If Liriano continues to strike out 10.9 batters per nine inning(assuming his bb/9 rate stays the same) he will not return to his April/May self, he will be pitching like a top of the rotation type guy.

 

It's disingenuous to not inlcude 2010 in any discussion of Liriano's talents, I know what you were trying to do (claiming that Liriano is only good a for a stretch each year and terrible the rest) if you would have included the 2010 stretch it would have shown that Liriano posted a 9.4 k/9 rate throughout the full season, in 2006 Lirianos best year he had a k rate of 10.7

 

This year he has a 9.9 overall and 10.9 in his past 10 starts, its pretty easy to surmise that Liriano is a damn fine pitcher when he is striking out a lot of folks, when he isn't he is somewhere between medicore and bad. The real question is: Do we think Liriano can keep up his current k rate? And from watching his starts over the past couple months I don't see any reason why he can't.

 

I know it's super against the grain here to give Anderson or any coach credit for anything, but perhaps he is the reason why Liriano is dominant again? They put him in the pen, Anderson had more time to work with him and he comes back up and starts to dominate.

 

Make no mistake about it, the Twins won't have another starting pitcher who even approachs 9k per nine for at least 2-3 years if they dump Liriano for some C+ prospect.

First, I didn't include Liriano's 2010 because it had no bearing on my point which you still don't seem to haven't answered. Nobody is arguing whether Liriano has great stuff. Nobody is denying that if Liriano is on he is a good pitcher. Everybody knows Liriano's 2010 was a good year.

 

Secondly, I am not sure that I agree Liriano's resurgence is only because his k/9 is up. That seems a very simplistic answer. I'll have to go back and do some number crunching.

 

Third, and this is my real point of contention with the "this time Liriano is going to stay good and we should sign him now, crowd", what has changed? Let's say for the moment that Liriano's resurgence is tied to his k/9. What separates 2012 from 2009 and 2011? He regressed back to bad in each of those years. So what is different this year that suddenly his k/9 is going to stay at ~11k/9?

[Guest USAFChief]

First, I didn't include Liriano's 2010 because it had no bearing on my point which you still don't seem to haven't answered. Nobody is arguing whether Liriano has great stuff. Nobody is denying that if Liriano is on he is a good pitcher. Everybody knows Liriano's 2010 was a good year.

 

Secondly, I am not sure that I agree Liriano's resurgence is only because his k/9 is up. That seems a very simplistic answer. I'll have to go back and do some number crunching.

 

Third, and this is my real point of contention with the "this time Liriano is going to stay good and we should sign him now, crowd", what has changed? Let's say for the moment that Liriano's resurgence is tied to his k/9. What separates 2012 from 2009 and 2011? He regressed back to bad in each of those years. So what is different this year that suddenly his k/9 is going to stay at ~11k/9?

I don't think there is a "this time Liriano is going to stay good" crowd.

 

There is a "Liriano has better stuff than anything we have" crowd. A "has a good chance of being better than any other gamble they're likely to take crowd.". A "how in the hell do you dump his talent when starting pitching pitching is in such short supply throughout the org" crowd.

 

Anyone trying to convince us they KNOW he will, or won't be, worth a **** going forward is lying.

[DaveW]

Should that be the goal, even if that is the case?

 

Having a reliable starter who can get you through 7 innings without a home run derby occurring is worth a lot more than Liriano. Bert recently defined a "quality" start as 5 innings with giving up 3 or less runs. I'm assuming that is what this organization is realistically looking for - someone who can produce a 'quality start' on a regular basis.

 

Liriano has been solid the last two some months, for the most part. But can you really trust that to stay pace for the next 2 years? I sure can't. 2 months on, 2 months off isn't worth having, even if he is the only guy who can throw strikes more oft than not when on.

 

I think the Twins, for better or worse, would much rather have 5 guys that can do what Blackburn did last night on a regular basis, than a "filthy" strikeout guy that you can't count on.

Bert's 5 IP 3 ER quality start stat is complete Rubbish and doesn't even warrant a response. Giving up 3 ER in 5 Innings is quite terrible IMO. Give me a starter that goes 7-8 IP and gives up 4 ER any day of the week. The problem with "what Blackburn did last night on a regular basis" is that through 100+ years of baseball statistics it is near impossible for a guy like Blackburn (not great stuff, doesn't strike anyone out) to throw gems on a regular basis.

 

Is it to much of a stretch to say Liriano has the highest upside of anyone in the Twins system? If that is the case or he is close to that then you have to keep him around.

[DaveW]

 

Third, and this is my real point of contention with the "this time Liriano is going to stay good and we should sign him now, crowd", what has changed? Let's say for the moment that Liriano's resurgence is tied to his k/9. What separates 2012 from 2009 and 2011? He regressed back to bad in each of those years. So what is different this year that suddenly his k/9 is going to stay at ~11k/9?

He is posting the 2nd highest k/9 rate of his career, that is what has changed thus far, if he can manage to keep it around the 9.9 rate he has now, while keeping his bb and hr rates constant he should be able to stay an effective starter and possibly even an "ace" type guy. Is there a chance that he falls off a cliff again? Of course there is, if there wasn't that good chance we'd be talking about a much much much larger contract then a 2/20 or 3/30 deal.

 

I'd rather pay that money to the risk that is Liriano over the next Carl Pavano who is going to give you pretty standard #3/#4 numbers. Every year fans bash the front office for signing guys like Marquis, Hernandez etc over high risk/high reward guyes like Harden, Bedard, etc, at this point we have a guy who has a solid track record, has been on fire since he was sent down to the pen (adjustments?) and according to that latest Star Tribune article enjoys his time with Minnesota and wants to stay a Twin.

[TheLeviathan]

He is posting the 2nd highest k/9 rate of his career, that is what has changed thus far,

Why though? Is it a fluke? Did he change his delivery? Start throwing a pitch more often? Tossing 30M guaranteed at a fluke is a bad bet. What if this change is due to a return to his violent, injury-inducing delivery? You're dismissing a valid question with a lot of hot air.

 

Also, is there not a third choice beyond these: A) Pay Liriano and keep him Pay some other scrub and complain we let Liriano go? Because I see plenty of other options despite the way the argument is being construed.

[DaveW]

Why though? Is it a fluke? Did he change his delivery? Start throwing a pitch more often? Tossing 30M guaranteed at a fluke is a bad bet. What if this change is due to a return to his violent, injury-inducing delivery? You're dismissing a valid question with a lot of hot air.

 

Also, is there not a third choice beyond these: A) Pay Liriano and keep him Pay some other scrub and complain we let Liriano go? Because I see plenty of other options despite the way the argument is being construed.

He is throwing the slider quite a bit more recently then he was in the early year and in 2011. His current slider usage percentage is basically even with his 2010 year, in 2008/09 his slider % were pretty low as well. So maybe that is one explanation?

 

His fast ball velocity has averaged 93.2 MPH his year, in 2011 it was 91.8, in 2008/2009 it was 90.00 and 91.5

In 2010 his Fast ball averaged 94.2

 

In Liriano's last start before his demotion to the pen he averaged 90.4 MPH on his fastball (topped out at 91.7) in his latest start he averaged 93.7 MPH on his fastball (topped out at 94.1). Clearly something has changed for him.

 

Also his 2012 stats still show his ERA is over a run higher then his xFIP and FIP (this includes his horrific start as well), his LOB% is a little lower then normal as well so it can be said that Liriano has actually been somewhat unlucky this year.

[TheLeviathan]

All of that is great....but then why did 2011 happened? What has changed? I was excited as anyone after 2010 and I thought this year was going to be a return to 2010 for him because I felt the issue in 2011 was his lazy ass basically saying "screw it" to his offseason program. If that wasn't the issue, what is it? I don't know either, but I would need to know what it is to feel comfortable offering him 30M. Paying 10% of our payroll for another Liriano 2011 version would be awful and the track record shows we are more likely to get that than the 2010 version.

 

I worry we are seeing his delivery get more violent again and the team is looking the other way knowing this is the last we'll have to deal with him. Which means an injury could be very likely.

[DaveW]

All of that is great....but then why did 2011 happened? What has changed? I was excited as anyone after 2010 and I thought this year was going to be a return to 2010 for him because I felt the issue in 2011 was his lazy ass basically saying "screw it" to his offseason program. If that wasn't the issue, what is it? I don't know either, but I would need to know what it is to feel comfortable offering him 30M. Paying 10% of our payroll for another Liriano 2011 version would be awful and the track record shows we are more likely to get that than the 2010 version.

 

I worry we are seeing his delivery get more violent again and the team is looking the other way knowing this is the last we'll have to deal with him. Which means an injury could be very likely.

Over his last ten starts he is basically mimicking his 2010 performance with: Speed, # of pitches thrown,% of breaking stuff thrown. He hasn't had any real injury issues since coming back from Tommy John surgery, if he gave us 191.2 IP in 2010 without any arm issues, and hasn't hard any arm issues this year there isn't some reason to assume he will suddenly develop arm issues again.

 

Of course the risk is still there as it is with every other pitcher, but I don't see him as some "high injury risk" just because he is throwing hard again like he did in 2010. Also I added an edit to my previous post which shows his velocity has kicked up about 3MPH from his last start before demotion to currently, obviously something was tweaked, I am not a pitching coach nor do I pretend to be an expert in mechanics, I would be interested to see someone do a thorough analysis on it to see what/if anything was changed.

 

From my purely "eyes" only approach it seems apparent to me the staff found something, worked with Liriano and fixed it thus leading him to pitching more effectively.

[TheLeviathan]

I am not a pitching coach nor do I pretend to be an expert in mechanics, I would be interested to see someone do a thorough analysis on it to see what/if anything was changed

Same. But what I keep pointing out to you is that as great as he was in 2010 - he followed it with 2011 and several starts into 2012. As great as these last 10 starts have been....how can we not anticipate the same pattern? Someone would have to give me a detailed reason for why we shouldn't expect him to be awful again following this stretch, it's been his pattern.

 

Talk about "stuff" and "frontline" and "only non-Blackburn"" we have is irrelevant. At some point, as Jonathan Sanchez can attest, stuff isn't enough. And it's damn sure not enough to invest 30M. If he's changed something, ala Plouffe, then we could expect different results. If he hasn't changed anything, then we have no reason to anticipate anything but Liriano reverting again soon. The definition of crazy, as someone posted awhile ago on this subject, seems to apply.

[DaveW]

Same. But what I keep pointing out to you is that as great as he was in 2010 - he followed it with 2011 and several starts into 2012. As great as these last 10 starts have been....how can we not anticipate the same pattern? Someone would have to give me a detailed reason for why we shouldn't expect him to be awful again following this stretch, it's been his pattern.

 

Talk about "stuff" and "frontline" and "only non-Blackburn"" we have is irrelevant. At some point, as Jonathan Sanchez can attest, stuff isn't enough. And it's damn sure not enough to invest 30M. If he's changed something, ala Plouffe, then we could expect different results. If he hasn't changed anything, then we have no reason to anticipate anything but Liriano reverting again soon. The definition of crazy, as someone posted awhile ago on this subject, seems to apply.

His fastball is up 3 MPH, and he is now throwing his slider 30-50% more than he was prior to demotion (example: he threw 39 and 28 in his last two games vs 20, 18 and 22 in his 3 starts leading up to the demotion) Those two things alone seem like "proof" that he has changed something. Whether that is mechinical, mental or coaching is is TBD.

[IdahoPilgrim]

His fastball is up 3 MPH, and he is now throwing his slider 30-50% more than he was prior to demotion (example: he threw 39 and 28 in his last two games vs 20, 18 and 22 in his 3 starts leading up to the demotion) Those two things alone seem like "proof" that he has changed something. Whether that is mechinical, mental or coaching is is TBD.

Let's say for the moment you are right, and he's found something that will let him continue to be effective.

 

How much do you think we should pay him, then? For me, that's a big part of the equation. Given his track record, should he be willing to sign a team friendly contract for a couple of years, to show that this time is for real? What if he holds out and decides to test free agency? Do we try to compete with other teams out there? Liriano may be high reward, but he is also high risk. How much should we risk in a guaranteed contract offer?

[TheLeviathan]

I could be wrong but wasnt one reason they had him throw less sliders was because of the increased risk of injury?

[Brock Beauchamp]

I could be wrong but wasnt one reason they had him throw less sliders was because of the increased risk of injury?

Yes, but that was when they thought he could be effective throwing less sliders. That hasn't been the case, though I don't understand why he's also throwing his fastball harder again. I think this success has more than one element to it (as is often the case).

[70charger]

Bert's 5 IP 3 ER quality start stat is complete Rubbish and doesn't even warrant a response. Giving up 3 ER in 5 Innings is quite terrible IMO. Give me a starter that goes 7-8 IP and gives up 4 ER any day of the week. The problem with "what Blackburn did last night on a regular basis" is that through 100+ years of baseball statistics it is near impossible for a guy like Blackburn (not great stuff, doesn't strike anyone out) to throw gems on a regular basis.

 

Is it to much of a stretch to say Liriano has the highest upside of anyone in the Twins system? If that is the case or he is close to that then you have to keep him around.

1) A quality start is at least 6 innings (not 5), and 3 earned runs or fewer.

2) Bert Blyleven didn't just make it up, it's actually a baseball stat. Blows my mind that you haven't heard of it...

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quality_start

[DaveW]

1) A quality start is at least 6 innings (not 5), and 3 earned runs or fewer.

2) Bert Blyleven didn't just make it up, it's actually a baseball stat. Blows my mind that you haven't heard of it...

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quality_start

I am well aware of the Quality start stat, champ. It blows my mind that people use Wikipedia for sports information....

Also if you would read the orginal message it's pretty obvious I'm not the one who said it was 5 innings/3ER, I was quoting someone else who said it. That user wrote that Bert said 5 IP/3ER.

 

Regarless the Quality Start is not the end all/be all in determining a pitcher's effectiveness. It is much better then wins/losses though.

[DaveW]

Let's say for the moment you are right, and he's found something that will let him continue to be effective.

 

How much do you think we should pay him, then? For me, that's a big part of the equation. Given his track record, should he be willing to sign a team friendly contract for a couple of years, to show that this time is for real? What if he holds out and decides to test free agency? Do we try to compete with other teams out there? Liriano may be high reward, but he is also high risk. How much should we risk in a guaranteed contract offer?

I have mentioned a few times that I would prefer a 2/20-22 type contract with a team option but would be willing to goto 3/30-3/33.

Would he take it? Who knows, but if they offer it now I think there is a chance he takes it. He and his agent know his track record as well.

 

They also had that article recently that said Liriano wants to stay in Minnesota and likes playing for the Twins, so that has to count for something? Prior to that I believe Kobs and Kab both had said there was no way Liriano would ever want to stay with the Twins.

[IdahoPilgrim]

I have mentioned a few times that I would prefer a 2/20-22 type contract with a team option but would be willing to goto 3/30-3/33.

Would he take it? Who knows, but if they offer it now I think there is a chance he takes it. He and his agent know his track record as well.

 

They also had that article recently that said Liriano wants to stay in Minnesota and likes playing for the Twins, so that has to count for something? Prior to that I believe Kobs and Kab both had said there was no way Liriano would ever want to stay with the Twins.

Offering that much would be a gutsy call for Ryan, I think, and if it doesn't work out expect him to be tar and feathered on websites like this.

 

I could maybe go $20M for 2 years (plus a team option) but I couldn't justify 3 guaranteed years. For me the amount we pay him is less important than the length of the contract. If he really wants to stay here, that is a more than fair offer given the track record. My guess is he would opt to test the free agent market. He could of course re-sign here after he sees what other teams are offering, but my guess is some team will be desperate enough to offer him a foolish contract and he'll accept.

[DaveW]

Offering that much would be a gutsy call for Ryan, I think, and if it doesn't work out expect him to be tar and feathered on websites like this.

 

I could maybe go $20M for 2 years (plus a team option) but I couldn't justify 3 guaranteed years. For me the amount we pay him is less important than the length of the contract. If he really wants to stay here, that is a more than fair offer given the track record. My guess is he would opt to test the free agent market. He could of course re-sign here after he sees what other teams are offering, but my guess is some team will be desperate enough to offer him a foolish contract and he'll accept.

I'd rather the Twins take a risk on a guy who can be a great pitcher rather then spread out that $30 million on a splattering of mediocre arms like Pavano (who they have given 24 million over the past 3 years), Marquis, Hernandez, Capps, etc

[IdahoPilgrim]

So if we're talking about Liriano and the $10M+/year range, then how does that affect a decision on Baker's option next year, for about $9M. Yes, he's recovering from TJ surgery, and the first year back can be rough. But after that year, many players now bounce back completely (look at Joe Nathan). He's 30 right now, but he could have several good, solid years left. I guess my question is, which is really the higher risk - re-signing Liriano or keeping Baker?

[Mike Sixel]

Baker will barely pitch next year, so you are paying him that just to keep on him on the roster and hope he recovers and hope he'll re-sign with you after that. That is a much, much bigger risk.

[IdahoPilgrim]

Baker will barely pitch next year, so you are paying him that just to keep on him on the roster and hope he recovers and hope he'll re-sign with you after that. That is a much, much bigger risk.

I disagree - not because I think Baker is not a risk, but I still think signing Liriano to a multi-year extension is an even bigger risk.

 

Why do I say this? Because I think June and July are fool's gold. Look at Liriano's career splits:

 

Month BA OPS ERA WHIP

Apr .278 .798 6.27 1.639

May .260 .738 4.32 1.432

Jun .212 .583 3.21 1.078

Jul .217 .629 3.24 1.197

Aug .256 .710 4.01 1.436

Sep .267 .800 5.24 1.334