Three moves were made this week by other teams.  To some, they might have parallels to moves the Twins have made--and been criticized for recently.

 

1.  Astros sign Gurriel, potentially blocking a top prospect.  The same--it's just money, why not add talent where you can, BUT--pushes Bregman to third.  Does his offense play there?  Different--Gurriel is more versatile than Park, as is Bregman.  Still, if it is just about money, couldn't the Astros have picked up say, Melvin Upton Jr. for a lesser prospect and the big contract?  Similarity to the Park signing:  8 out of 10

 

2.  Nationals demote Giolito after two appearances.  Hmm, we've heard that song before.  BUT--he's younger than Berrios, hasn't pitched at AAA at all, and the Nationals are in the playoff hunt.  Still, he's an elite talent, and his first start was off to a great beginning before it was cut short by rain.  Is this how you develop top talent?  Similarity to Berrios:  5 of 10

 

3.  Pomeranz dealt to Padres for two prospects, becomes All-Star then flipped for an elite talent.   Similar to Liriano?  Talented-but-unfulfilled left-hander finds success with fourth team?  With Liriano, the parallels start with being traded from his first organization (Pomeranz was part of the Ubaldo Jimenez trade to Colorado,) he was later traded for two middling prospects, and on his fourth team found success.  The parallels end, as Pittsburgh didn't sell high on Liriano, and now he seems to have regressed.  But still…did all those teams 'mismanage' Liriano and Pomeranz?  Did Oakland really screw up by not recognizing what they had? Should Sabean have been fired years ago for that horrible trade? Is Espinoza a product of the Red Sox hype machine (see Eduardo Rodriguez, Daniel Bard, et al.)  If/when will Pomeranz turn back into a pumpkin?

Similarity rating:  6 of 10.

 

What do you think?  Not necessarily trying to defend the Twins; just pointing out that other teams make similar decisions at times.

Edited July 17, 201610 yr by Han Joelo

In my opinion, an abundance of middle infielders allows for more flexibility than 1B. I do see where you're coming from though.

 

I also agree that the real difference between Berrios and Giolito is the fact that the Nats are in the playoff race.

 

I always liked Pomeranz and thought Oakland was going to make him a starter and do to him what they've done with numerous unfulfilled starters before him. I'm still surprised they didn't do more with him. That being said, I no longer trust former San Diego pitchers. I think he's a good pitcher but I'm going to reserve judgement until we see if his stuff plays the same way at Fenway that it did in Petco.

 

In my opinion, an abundance of middle infielders allows for more flexibility than 1B. I do see where you're coming from though.

I also agree that the real difference between Berrios and Giolito is the fact that the Nats are in the playoff race.

I always liked Pomeranz and thought Oakland was going to make him a starter and do to him what they've done with numerous unfulfilled starters before him. I'm still surprised they didn't do more with him. That being said, I no longer trust former San Diego pitchers. I think he's a good pitcher but I'm going to reserve judgement until we see if his stuff plays the same way at Fenway that it did in Petco.

Yeah, I'm not really trying to make any sweeping generalizations.  Just chewing on some food for thought.

 

Here's another one, kind of apropos to the thread about developing pitching--Kluber was a San Diego prospect that found success with Cleveland; Pomeranz a Cleveland prospect that found success with San Diego.

 

I will enjoy watching the outcome of the Pomeranz trade.  Gutsy, fun move on both sides, with potential for total disaster, total success, and total meh.

Number 2 should be a 0/10, IMO.

First of all, as you mentioned, the Nats are in a pennant race. The Twins were last in baseball.

Washington's #1 priority this year is winning games, while ours should be developing young players.

That alone should make it a 0, but if you need more, Giolito was sent back down so that Strasburg could take his place. Berrios was replaced by Pat Dean.

Giolito is 47 days younger than Berrios.

 

Berrios had an ERA north of 10 after four starts. He wasn't ready to take a spot.

Edited July 17, 201610 yr by dbminn

 

Number 2 should be a 0/10, IMO.
First of all, as you mentioned, the Nats are in a pennant race. The Twins were last in baseball.
Washington's #1 priority this year is winning games, while ours should be developing young players.
That alone should make it a 0, but if you need more, Giolito was sent back down so that Strasburg could take his place. Berrios was replaced by Pat Dean.

0/10?  No similarity whatsoever?  I don't know who Washington's other 3 starters are besides Scherzer and Strasburg, and I'm sure they're all better than Dean, but still--not even a 1/10?  How about if the scale goes to 11?  Or 111?  1/111--just a shred of similarity?

 

I kid.  I appreciate your perspective.

Per MLB Trade Rumor:

 

•The Twins would willingly take a lesser return for right-hander Ervin Santana if it enables them to jettison the remainder of his $28MM salary.

 

Saving money more important than getting a good prospect? Not a surprise really.

 

Per MLB Trade Rumor:

 

•The Twins would willingly take a lesser return for right-hander Ervin Santana if it enables them to jettison the remainder of his $28MM salary.

 

Saving money more important than getting a good prospect? Not a surprise really.

Boo.  That would be lame.

I don't think these moves are particularly similar to Twins moves.

 

The Astros 3B is a pending FA, and they have gotten nothing out of 1B and DH this year (as well as an outfield spot, where they have two more pending FA too). They are also in a pennant race and need a bat or two regardless of position, something that didn't really apply to the Twins and Park last winter. Until they actually do something suboptimal with Bregman, this is not similar to the Park/Sano situation.

 

Liriano's career isn't much like Pomeranz's either. Liriano actually was good to great a couple times for the Twins, and was traded as a pending FA, and has been a great FA value for a Pittsburgh playoff team (no need for them to sell high). I admit Oakland trading him last winter was really weird, but Oakland's weird moves are pretty unique.

 

Giolito was a more aggressive callup, as you note, straight from AA to a contending team. Berrios had a fair amount of AAA experience already, was on a last place club, and got replaced by Pat Dean. The Nationals have the best ERA in the NL, largely in the strength of their rotation, with Strasburg, Scherzer, Roark, Ross, and Gonzalez (with a capable swingman in Petit).

Edited July 17, 201610 yr by spycake

Giolito and Urias both were sent down to the minor leagues around the All Star break. That's a pretty normal thing for teams to with with pitching prospects in similar situations. The idea is they can keep them on a consistent schedule.

Per MLB Trade Rumor:

 

•The Twins would willingly take a lesser return for right-hander Ervin Santana if it enables them to jettison the remainder of his $28MM salary.

 

Saving money more important than getting a good prospect? Not a surprise really.

This had to be an Onion article.....

Oh, and in place of Giolito, the Nationals just promoted another top 100 prospect, Reynaldo Lopez.

The other difference, the Nationals have a 56-36 record, 2nd best in MLB.

 

Yet, they are willing to bring their prospects up.  That should tell the Twins something about how to manage their prospects.  But I guess they know best.

 

 

 

Per MLB Trade Rumor:

 

•The Twins would willingly take a lesser return for right-hander Ervin Santana if it enables them to jettison the remainder of his $28MM salary.

 

Saving money more important than getting a good prospect? Not a surprise really.

When people have complained about the signing of Santana in the first place they called him a middle to back of rotation starter. What is the normal prospect return for a middle to back of the rotation starter?  A  higher risk prospect versus a high risk prospect?  KC picked Santana up at a low point with 13 million  owed for a player now in indie ball. How much would you have to pay for a middling prospect that has a chance to be on the roster but nothing great? Is that really worth the money when you have that in your system now?

 

Oh, and in place of Giolito, the Nationals just promoted another top 100 prospect, Reynaldo Lopez.

Embarrassment of riches the Nats have.  Lopez might serve as another data point for this silly exercise--he seems similar to Berrios ranking-wise.

 

As for Berrios, another great start at AAA.  Get him on a plane.  Buy a seat for Chargois, too.

 

Per MLB Trade Rumor:

 

•The Twins would willingly take a lesser return for right-hander Ervin Santana if it enables them to jettison the remainder of his $28MM salary.

 

Saving money more important than getting a good prospect? Not a surprise really.

It really depends on what they do with the money. If they sign an ace in 2018 buy getting rid of expensive players now, then all is well. Not to mention it takes two teams to make a trade. We don't know what's more important to the other team.

 

Giolito and Urias both were sent down to the minor leagues around the All Star break. That's a pretty normal thing for teams to with with pitching prospects in similar situations. The idea is they can keep them on a consistent schedule.

Yeah, it's pretty clear that was a big factor with Giolito.  He was optioned to AAA, but they were coming up on their all-star break too, so the Nationals actually assigned him to single-A briefly so he wouldn't miss a turn. Presumably he makes his AAA debut tonight in place of Lopez.

 

As for Berrios, another great start at AAA.  Get him on a plane.  Buy a seat for Chargois, too.

I think we can all agree on these statements!

Giolito is 47 days younger than Berrios.

 

Berrios had an ERA north of 10 after four starts. He wasn't ready to take a spot.

The other key difference between Berrios and Giolito (beyond the obvious like them being in a playoff race) is that their team ERA is the best in the big league. We are 28th. So Berrios would be dispalacing a guy like Nolasco and Giolito would take reps from an actual MLB pitcher.

1.  Similarity just about 2/10.  Just because he is a foreign free agent signee.  He signed during the season and in a position the Astros have a need (DH) because their current 30ish year old DH is hitting .215/.279/.422.  The Twins have Mauer and Vargas at 1B/DH, plus Plouffe and Sano potentially.  

 

2. About 2/10 also.  And the 2 is because they are both young RHPs.  Nats' season to date starters: 3.28 ERA, 1.152 WHIP, 9.3 K/9.  Twins' season to date starters: 5.27 ERA, 1.447 WHIP, 6.8 K/9.   No comparison.

 

3. Zip zero 0/10.  The Twins did not flip Liriano... He was around for a while.   Equivalent to Pomeranz & the Padres would had been if Milone was good last season and this season and the Twins flipped him for 2 prospects.  Or maybe (because he is a reliever) if Abad gets flipped for a good return.

 

It really depends on what they do with the money. If they sign an ace in 2018 buy getting rid of expensive players now, then all is well. Not to mention it takes two teams to make a trade. We don't know what's more important to the other team.

If their strategy in 2018 is to "sign an ace", then the entire front office needs to be let go. It's going to take close to 40 million a year to sign the aces that are possibly available that year (Kershaw, Jose Fernandez) and you'll be going up against every big market team. The rest of the free agent pitchers are going to be guys who are getting too old and aren't that great and will just be a repeat of the Hughes, Nolasco, Santana situations. We need to be buying up every prospect we can. This is how the Braves rebuilt their farm system, eating salary to get better prospects. If our strategy is going to be to improve the team via free agency instead of through the farm we are going to be looking at very dark time.

This is kind of a vague response to the last two comments, as well as in the spirit of the "Pitcher Development" thread.

 

Saving cash to chase a free agent is a fool's errand.  As this season has unfolded, I am more and more surprised Greinke took on the burden of that massive contract with Arizona--he seemed like someone who would have been perfectly suited to playing the Sundance Kid to Kershaw's Butch Cassidy, instead he's like Brendan Fraser trying to make "The Mummy" into the next Indiana Jones saga.

 

I mention Greinke, because he represents almost the best case scenario for an available free agent pitcher, and that movie is not going to end well.  It didn't even start well.

 

The real gold in pitching seems to be the secondary evaluation market.  (I'd call free agency the tertiary market--pretty good idea of what you are getting, including the decline, and the knowledge you have to overpay)   Drafting high schoolers and signing teenagers from foreign country's in the primary market is pretty random, but relatively cheap.

 

The secondary market is where it is interesting.  Think about Cleveland--they turned Cliff Lee (secondary market acquisition) into Carrasco (secondary).  They have Bauer and Kluber at least that were acquired on the secondary market.  Meanwhile, their own drafted talent, Pomeranz, became the hottest commodity on the secondary market--after he had been traded away as part of a deal for Jimenez.  Correctly and/or luckily identifying those pitchers--as the Twins successfully did with Liriano and Santana, didn't with Guerra and so far Meyer (hard to say with May)--is the backbone of at least a few successful teams, like Cleveland and the Mets.

 

If I had one great wish for this organization, whether it is instigated by current management or not, is an improvement and willingness to be active in that market.  Meyer and May were worthy attempts, IMO, and maybe they have been mismanaged somewhat, but they didn't exactly dominate the dojo.  Maybe the Twins just need more volume.

 

If I had one great wish for this organization, whether it is instigated by current management or not, is an improvement and willingness to be active in that market.

Good post, and I agree.

 

This is kind of a vague response to the last two comments, as well as in the spirit of the "Pitcher Development" thread.

 

Saving cash to chase a free agent is a fool's errand.  As this season has unfolded, I am more and more surprised Greinke took on the burden of that massive contract with Arizona--he seemed like someone who would have been perfectly suited to playing the Sundance Kid to Kershaw's Butch Cassidy, instead he's like Brendan Fraser trying to make "The Mummy" into the next Indiana Jones saga.

 

I mention Greinke, because he represents almost the best case scenario for an available free agent pitcher, and that movie is not going to end well.  It didn't even start well.

 

The real gold in pitching seems to be the secondary evaluation market.  (I'd call free agency the tertiary market--pretty good idea of what you are getting, including the decline, and the knowledge you have to overpay)   Drafting high schoolers and signing teenagers from foreign country's in the primary market is pretty random, but relatively cheap.

 

The secondary market is where it is interesting.  Think about Cleveland--they turned Cliff Lee (secondary market acquisition) into Carrasco (secondary).  They have Bauer and Kluber at least that were acquired on the secondary market.  Meanwhile, their own drafted talent, Pomeranz, became the hottest commodity on the secondary market--after he had been traded away as part of a deal for Jimenez.  Correctly and/or luckily identifying those pitchers--as the Twins successfully did with Liriano and Santana, didn't with Guerra and so far Meyer (hard to say with May)--is the backbone of at least a few successful teams, like Cleveland and the Mets.

 

If I had one great wish for this organization, whether it is instigated by current management or not, is an improvement and willingness to be active in that market.  Meyer and May were worthy attempts, IMO, and maybe they have been mismanaged somewhat, but they didn't exactly dominate the dojo.  Maybe the Twins just need more volume.

 

Great post.

 

If their strategy in 2018 is to "sign an ace", then the entire front office needs to be let go. It's going to take close to 40 million a year to sign the aces that are possibly available that year (Kershaw, Jose Fernandez) and you'll be going up against every big market team. The rest of the free agent pitchers are going to be guys who are getting too old and aren't that great and will just be a repeat of the Hughes, Nolasco, Santana situations. We need to be buying up every prospect we can. This is how the Braves rebuilt their farm system, eating salary to get better prospects. If our strategy is going to be to improve the team via free agency instead of through the farm we are going to be looking at very dark time.

Why not both? We are going to have a lot of prospects coming up who will have low salaries.The farm system is not barren. If there's ever a time where we can afford a #1 pitcher it will be then. It would be similar to the Cubs signing Lester when their prospects started playing well.

We really don't know what will happen to potential free agents by 2018 either. Look at Cueto. He had a rough couple months before he hit free agency and the Giants got him at a reasonable price.

I don't think a top contender only builds through the farm system. Usually it will be a combination of development and free agency.

 

Why not both? We are going to have a lot of prospects coming up who will have low salaries.The farm system is not barren. If there's ever a time where we can afford a #1 pitcher it will be then. It would be similar to the Cubs signing Lester when their prospects started playing well.

We really don't know what will happen to potential free agents by 2018 either. Look at Cueto. He had a rough couple months before he hit free agency and the Giants got him at a reasonable price.

I don't think a top contender only builds through the farm system. Usually it will be a combination of development and free agency.

 

I agree with you, if we look like we have a nucleus that can contend and can get an actual ace at that time then sure. I know Cueto looks good this year, but I think his contract may be a bit of an albatross towards the end of it. It all depends on who is available, who wants to come to Minnesota and the budget. Rather than sign an aging pitcher with questionable stuff to a long term contract, the rental option might be better off. Based on what I'm seeing now, I don't know that Minnesota is going to be a destination pitchers are going to want to go to in 2018. Things change, but I just don't want to see them signing guys like Nolasco, Hughes, Santana again and trot them out there on opening day. Not a bad option in the #5 spot, but not top 3.

Sometimes the best place for development isn't in the big leagues. In Berrios case I think it is a good idea to put some space in between his rough first time with the Twins and his next callup. He didn't pitch well right after he was sent down. Now he is pitching awesome though and hopefully he is up soon.

 

1st game - 5BB's

2nd game - 1K

3rd game - 7ER's

4th game - awesome

5th game - 5ER's

 

Since then he has been awesome in 5 of 6 games.

Edited July 19, 201610 yr by kab21