Article: Penciling A 2017 Starting Rotation

[Mike Sixel]

Any roster that doesn't have Berrios in the rotation on day one, I don't get.

 

What is he learning in AAA at this point? They let Viola sink, then swim....

[Doomtints]

On Hughes....

 

As you all know, Hughes went from doctor to doctor this year only to find he was affected by something that none of us had ever heard of.

 

A week later a different pitcher was identified in the MLB and had the same surgery.

 

Until Hughes hits the field and becomes a different player, I am a bit skeptical about how the surgery he had will help him.  

[TheLeviathan]

 

People were saying the same thing after the 2014 season, then they shaved off 80 runs and came within a few games of the playoffs. But yeah, totally impossible. 

 

Look, this is not a good pitching staff. But it's been flukishly bad. If the Twins had allowed the same number of runs as the 2nd-worst run prevention team (Texas) they would be a .500 team by Pythag W/L. 

 

If we're talking flukey, 2015 was the fluke here and not a particularly compelling argument for your position.

 

When there is next to nothing on the free agent market, little in the way of immediate reinforcements, and still some huge defensive question marks....I do call that next to impossible.  I hope the new head honcho deals more with probabilities than "well, let's do this because it's not impossible that we could be right!"

 

If we constantly look for "not impossible" solutions, we ignore the multitude of ways they could get worse or go stagnant.  And it absolutely abandons hope of being significantly better in the near future.  Some of you are plainly advocating that 2018 doesn't matter as long as we can turn this 60 win team into a 70 win team.  I say screw it.  70 is just as bad as 60, either way you're losing and not going anywhere.  And in you scenario, we held on to our two biggest assets for nothing.  If I'm not going anywhere I'd rather lose 60 again with the hopes 2018 can bring 80+ wins with the right moves.

 

After all, it's "not impossible" we could deal Santana and Dozier and win 100 games with the talent we get back.  If that bogus argument is still in play.

Edited September 21, 2016 by TheLeviathan

[Nick Nelson]

 

No one said impossible....but how should you PLAN......that's the question. Seriously good straw man though.

He literally said there is "no conceivable path" to a rotation capable of helping this team contend for a playoff spot. In what way was my response a straw man, Mike?

[TheLeviathan]

 

He literally said there is "no conceivable path" to a rotation capable of helping this team contend for a playoff spot. In what way was my response a straw man, Mike?

 

What is the conceivable path?  A string of good fortunate?

 

I don't consider that "conceivable" in any meaningful way.  Unless it's also "conceivable" that I could buy a house with a pot of gold I get from an Irish fairy.  

 

Is it "not impossible"?  Sure.  It's also ridiculously improbable.

[Mike Sixel]

there is no realistic path from here to a playoff spot, I guess, imo, we are now arguing semantics. 

 

Is a playoff path realistic at all, in your opinion? say, even 25%?

[nytwinsfan]

 

Santiago has the highest k-rate of the group (excluding Mejia) career-wise.

 

Ok, fair enough. Low K probably isn't a fair term to use for him. But the overall point about peripherals stands:

 

Brett Anderson Career K/BB: 2.76

 

Phil Hughes Career K/BB: 3.34

 

Hector Santiago Career K/BB: 2.00

[Nick Nelson]

If Santana, Gibson and Santiago perform up to their career norms, while Berrios pitches remotely well, it's not that difficult to envision this being a decent, albeit below average rotation. Especially if you shore up the defense and add a couple more upside arms. Not sure why that concept is so absurd to a few folks around here.

 

No one is advocating going all-in on a World Series in 2017. But saying, "screw it we have no chance let's just get more prospects" is flat-out silly to me. All you're doing is giving up on the present and putting more faulty hope into the distant future on the basis of young pitching prospects, which are basically the most volatile asset in the game.

 

I'm not OK with the idea of wasting years of these good young hitters' careers while not bothering to make an effort to compete. What happens if the prospects you get back for Santana and Dozier fail to pan? Start over? Another rebuild? Submit yourself to a 15-year swoon? No thanks. 

[TheLeviathan]

 

If Santana, Gibson and Santiago perform up to their career norms, while Berrios pitches remotely well, it's not that difficult to envision this being a decent, albeit below average rotation. Especially if you shore up the defense and add a couple more upside arms. Not sure why that concept is so absurd to a few folks around here.

 

I lost track of the "ifs" with a totally positive spin at about 7.  So your "conceivable plan" is that everything good stays the same and 7-10 things all change for the better?

 

There's a word for that: improbable.  But it probably deserves some hyperbolic adjectives too.

 

What happens if the prospects you get back for Santana and Dozier fail to pan?

 

 

Then we probably picked the wrong person and we're screwed either way.

Edited September 21, 2016 by TheLeviathan

[Willihammer]

Both this year and last have been outliers in terms of baseruns. Just by having *no* luck next year, the pitching staff would make up 30 runs. Another ~50 by not playing guys out of position and losing Suzuki.

The offense is due for 10 runs of sequencing regression.

That's 9 wins. That makes them a 68 win team without changing a thing.

Can they gain another 20 through internal improvement in an offseason? Doubtful. They would need a lot of turnover to achieve that, and probably some good luck to boot. And as we saw in 2015, good luck happens. You can't bank on it but should be prepared in case it hits you IMO.

Edited September 21, 2016 by Willihammer

[DocBauer]

First, other than a cheap, make good 1 year deal on someone out there...Anderson has been mentioned...there is just no upgrade available in FA this year better than options already on the roster.

 

Second, I'm ignoring the entire "trade Dozier" arguement. I do so as we don't even have a GM yet, aren't sure what the market will bear, or if said new GM will be in favor of that move.

 

So I'm just concentrating solely on the options available.

 

1] Santana: absolutely nothing says washed up, he's done, count on his arm falling off early next season.

 

2] Gibson: I get the frustration some have with him. But this will only be his 3rd ML season. He was solid in '14 and showed flashes. He was even better in '15. A horrible year for the team, injury, and perhaps the wrong pitching coach, I just don't understand being so down on him at this point.

 

3] Santiago: not a big fan. But is there such a thing as a bad 1 year deal? He's LH, has experience, can get you IP, and he's shown the ability to win some games. And he's been a whole letter better lately since the staff quit messing with him. I'm torn here but I think I bring him back.

 

4] Berrios: He needs to be here, sink or swim, and I'm betting he doesn't sink or sucks. Again, is this partially the pitching coach with his rough start?

 

5] May: a question mark? Yes. All the more a shame he was removed from the rotation at all. How much better and ready would he be in 2017 if he had remained a starter? The kid has a good arm, was a top prospect, and showing signs of life before being pulled from the rotation. Having been a SP his whole career, I don't see the transition back being all that difficult.

 

Hughes could be a factor. He could be a huge factor. But I'm not counting on him for anything at this point. Mejia and Gonsalves could be ready by mid season, which also provides some trade options. I'm not ruling Duffy out of the rotation in the future, but I'm thinking long/middle man at this point. From everything I've heard and read, his problems this year were fastball command, not his change.

 

I'm not saying this is an outstanding rotation, but I like Berrios a ton, and I like May as well. If we get the 2015 Gibson back I'm really happy. Santiago isn't special, but compared to guys like Dean and Albers he's a huge upgrade.

 

Three veteran guys just Pitch like you would expect..two talented youngsters who do well and improve...a couple young arms maybe ready by mid season...and no more Dean, Albers or similar, and I DO see a better rotation in 2017 despite the same names.

[Boom Boom]

If Santana, Gibson and Santiago perform up to their career norms, while Berrios pitches remotely well, it's not that difficult to envision this being a decent, albeit below average rotation. Especially if you shore up the defense and add a couple more upside arms. Not sure why that concept is so absurd to a few folks around here.

 

No one is advocating going all-in on a World Series in 2017. But saying, "screw it we have no chance let's just get more prospects" is flat-out silly to me. All you're doing is giving up on the present and putting more faulty hope into the distant future on the basis of young pitching prospects, which are basically the most volatile asset in the game.

 

I'm not OK with the idea of wasting years of these good young hitters' careers while not bothering to make an effort to compete. What happens if the prospects you get back for Santana and Dozier fail to pan? Start over? Another rebuild? Submit yourself to a 15-year swoon? No thanks.

I wouldn't go all-in on 2017... but I also wouldn't count on everything breaking right.

 

One of Santana, Gibson, Santiago, and Berrios will disappoint, and another will be sidelined with injuries. That's what I would plan for.

[frightwig]

 

If Santana, Gibson and Santiago perform up to their career norms, while Berrios pitches remotely well, it's not that difficult to envision this being a decent, albeit below average rotation.

Career lines

 

Santana 4.10 ERA, 4.22 FIP, 4.18 xFIP

Gibson 4.59 ERA, 4.23 FIP, 4.17 xFIP

Santiago 3.86 ERA, 4.70 FIP, 4.89 xFIP

 

If you're building on that plus the hope that Berrios pitches "remotely well," and maybe Trevor May is decent or Phil Hughes is healthy enough to pitch to his career averages in the second half, what are the chances, really, that the Twins will be a good team in 2017?

 

Keep in mind that the offense this year ranks 11th-AL in wRC+ or fWAR, even with Dozier hitting out of his shoes for three and a half months. And while they won 83 games last year, we also know that they had fantastic cluster luck that boosted them to 11 wins above their BaseRuns record. Below-average, but "decent" pitching (as last year, when the Twins were 10th-AL in ERA, 9th in FIP, 11th xFIP), with their team defense and level of offensive production, probably isn't going to put them in the playoffs, even if the breaks swing more their away again next season.

[Nick Nelson]

 

I wouldn't go all-in on 2017... but I also wouldn't count on everything breaking right.

One of Santana, Gibson, Santiago, and Berrios will disappoint, and another will be sidelined with injuries. That's what I would plan for.

That's fine. I also didn't mention Gonsalves, Mejia, Hughes, May or any FA acquisitions/trade returns for Dozier etc. To act like they're doomed to anything approximating the same historically bad outcome as this year is nothing but blind pessimism. 

 

It boggles my mind that people are treating a statement like "people could pitch to their career norms" as some kind of fantasy scenario. 

[TheLeviathan]

So, to be clear:

 

Trade Dozier: not punting on 2017, reasonable course of action

 

Trade Santana: We're lighting Target Field on fire and the Apocalypse is Nigh

 

Edited September 21, 2016 by TheLeviathan

[diehardtwinsfan]

No to Santiago.  Strong no.  I'm fine with Santana (not against a trade there either). Berrios needs to figure out major league pitching, so I'm fine with those growing pains too.  Gibson probably deserves one more chance to figure things out, but this would be a make or break year for him.  Baring a trade, I'd want May, Duffey, and Mejia to compete for the 4 and 5 spots.  At least there's some upside with most of those guys.  Don't expect it to just happen in 2017, but I do think that over the season they could improve on what we had this year. 

[jimmer]

 

So, to be clear:

 

Trade Dozier: not punting on 2017, reasonable course of action

 

Trade Santana: We're lighting Target Field on fire and the Apocalypse is Nigh

 

Or the idea we shouldn't trade any of our proven guys for prospects, but we should trade for proven top notch established MLB pitching (but without trading Rosario, Buxton, Sano, Kepler and Polanco).  I've seen things like that said too.   How are we going to get quality without trading any quality, exactly?

Edited September 21, 2016 by jimmer

[puckstopper1]

Any chance that Jim Kaat will be available?  SIGH!

[Joe A. Preusser]

Honestly, I would be just fine Rolling with Nicks starting 5, especially if we make some or all of the following moves.

 

Add a quality catcher.

Add a back of the pen piece.

Promote 1 more reliever from minors.

Duffy to pen.

 

Seriously, take out O'Rourke and maybe Kintzler or 1 more and add in Duffy and two fresh, good strong arms and suddenly our pen is young, fast, and a strength.

 

Our offense, a great pen, a nice C, and Nick's starting 5 get us to .500 and probably playing for a playoff spot in Sept.

[diehardtwinsfan]

Couple things on Santana.

 

• 2 years left and probably as high of a value as you can have, so yes, if you get a good deal, shop him.
• He's not going to get major league ready high upside pitching.  Any team with major league ready high upside pitching is far more likely to role with such pitching in their 5 spot than to trade it and more for Santana.
• He might get you that catcher you want.
• If he nets pitching, think guys who just completed some level of A ball (either high or low).
• Dozier could get you a pitcher you want, but probably only one that would be ready to start next spring.

[Jordan1212]

Not Gibson I would trade him. Santana yes berrios yes I agree with that may should be a starter and after that you go get someone and unlike Terry Ryan I would of went and got Ian Kennedy and instead of Phil Hughes, Ricky nolasco we would of used that money for a Zack Greinke that's what I would of done

[jimmer]

I weep for our rotation if it's Santana, Berrios, Santiago, Gibson (actually started his downhill slide last year, which is why I recommended traded him last offseason), and one of the other internal options.  Kind of how I was weeping due to rotation we decided to roll out with to start the season.

 

Brain teaser:  If Gibson was supposedly better in 2015 as than he was in 2014 (as some believe he was), but was horrible this year, how could it be because of the pitching coach?  Because we've had the same pitching coach the last two seasons. Do players only get better on their own and when they get worse, it's all on the coaches?  Seemed most were singing Allen's praises just last year when our pitching numbers got significantly better and now he's the reason we're as bad as we are?

Edited September 22, 2016 by jimmer

[kab21]

 

So, to be clear:

 

Trade Dozier: not punting on 2017, reasonable course of action

 

Trade Santana: We're lighting Target Field on fire and the Apocalypse is Nigh

 

Trade Dozier and replace him with Polanco. A step back but Dozier can get a pile of good prospects potentially.

 

Trade Santana and replace him with Pat Dean (or another mediocre AAAA starter) and hope to get one good prospect.

 

That is the problem with trading Santana. I am for it if there is a good prospect involved but the rotation goes from questionable to much worse.

[Thrylos]

 

Ok, fair enough. Low K probably isn't a fair term to use for him. But the overall point about peripherals stands:

 

Brett Anderson Career K/BB: 2.76

 

Phil Hughes Career K/BB: 3.34

 

Hector Santiago Career K/BB: 2.00

 

Ricky Nolasco Career K/BB: 3.41

 

just sayin'

 

[kab21]

 

I weep for our rotation if it's Santana, Santiago, Gibson, Berrios and one of the other internal options.  Kind of how I was weeping due to rotation we decided to roll out with to start the season.

The options to improve the starting pitching:

 

A) FA - this wouldn't be a great option even if there were decent starters available

 

trade - the Twins have very few significant trade assets available. Dozier is the big one but you need to find a match. A team might trade a bounty for Dozier but do you decline that trade because they don't have the starting pitching that you want? Santana might get a good prospect but same question? The team would be foolish to trade prospects for MLB starters at this point.

 

Nobody is saying that it is awesome but there are restrictions as to what is possible to do this offseason. The biggest hope for 2017 is that Berrios completely reverses his 2016 and pitches like he is capable of and the Twins get some solid pitching from someone else like Gibson, May or Duffey that can carry over to 2018. The biggest though is that Jay, Gonsalves and/or Mejia (and other prospects) take big steps forward and are ready for 2018.

[Thrylos]

 

 

Couple things on Santana.

 

• He's not going to get major league ready high upside pitching.  Any team with major league ready high upside pitching is far more likely to role with such pitching in their 5 spot than to trade it and more for Santana.

 

 

Would Santana plus Stewart plus Gordon get you that?

[kab21]

Stewart is the new Duensing of prospects. I am certain that no GM's have noticed is 5 K/9 rate.

 

And veteran plus prospect trades for MLB ready starters trades are rare. Yes, there are exceptions but usually teams are looking at going one direction (rebuild or contend) or the other.

[jimmer]

If we are waiting for that magical time where we get significantly better without improving any part of our team (especially the rotation), the point in time that it would be okay to trade prospects or sign FA to improve will keep getting backed up indefinitely.   Or, we can do like we've done before, be on the cusp or actually good and determine that we're good enough so we don't need to get better.  Always, ALWAYS a reason not to spend or trade prospects.

 

At some point we're going to have to decide that it might be worth getting better sooner rather than waiting for it to come along at whatever new year has been determined we'll be contenders.

[Monkeypaws]

Shoring up the defense and the fundamentals could shave 1/2 a run off the team ERA. Errors are deflating to a pitcher, and a team as a whole. If Turner or Garver is our best defensive catcher, they should get the job. Add maybe a mild hitting defensive wizard at short(Vielma?), and with Buxton, you got some spine in your defense.

[kab21]

 

If we are waiting for that magical time where we get significantly better without improving any part of our team (especially the rotation), the point in time that it would be okay to trade prospects or sign FA to improve will keep getting backed up indefinitely.   Or, we can do like we've done before, be on the cusp or actually good and determine that we're good enough so we don't need to get better.  Always, ALWAYS a reason not to spend or trade prospects.

 

At some point we're going to have to decide that it might be worth getting better sooner rather than waiting for it to come along at whatever new year has been determined we'll be contenders.

Start suggesting a FA starter that they should sign. This is a dreadfully awful year for starters.

 

I am for trading prospects for veterans but not when you are coming off a 100 loss season and optimistically you are shooting for .500. Perhaps if you were targeting a Sonny Gray type (younger with upside) but most likely it would be a 30+ starter (like Santana whom some want to trade).