Article: The Hunt For An Ace Starter

[Brock Beauchamp]

 

If they only have $15MM, this team is in serious trouble. Because that doesn't buy 1 SP.

Well, they're not going to spend $30m in free agency unless they liquidate some valuable players (Escobar, maybe Gibson is "valuable" if you squint).

 

Removing Gibson maybe gets you to $25m. That's still not enough to pay two relievers and a starter.

[USAFChief]

Well, they're not going to spend $30m in free agency unless they liquidate some valuable players (Escobar, maybe Gibson is "valuable" if you squint).

 

Removing Gibson maybe gets you to $25m. That's still not enough to pay two relievers and a starter.

Even if we accept the figures in the handbook, why shouldn't they spend the money in 2018 that they didn't spend in 2017, and 2016?

 

They just get to bank that, without anyone questioning it?

 

They can spend whatever they chose to spend. And they could certainly add $30m in 18 and not lose money, particularly if you average over the past several years.

[Don Walcott]

Rich Hill has pitched 246 innings total over the past two seasons.  He's never thrown 200 innings, and only once started 30 games.  He's also 37.  I wouldn't count on him to lead a pitching staff going forward.

[Brock Beauchamp]

 

Even if we accept the figures in the hansbook, why shouldn't they spend the money in 2018 that they didn't pend in 2017, and 2016?

They've proven time and time again they're not going to do that so I don't see the point in getting upset about it anymore. They've chosen to run this team at a profit - which is beyond irritating at times - but that's just a cold, hard reality of the situation.

[Mike Sixel]

 

Lamet has pitched 1 season with the Padres and wasn't that great. He's not being suggested because of his numbers in San Diego. He's young, has good stuff and a 2.99 ERA in the minors. 

 

He's not a "legit 1/2 type" now, that's the point. He's never been a top prospect and wasn't spectacular as a rookie. But he has the underlying components to break out, IMO. The idea is to find those guys BEFORE they make that leap and thus not have to give up the farm. 

 

Folks, are we automatically dismissing every pitcher that comes out of the Padres system now? Because, you know, some guy named Kluber was fished out of the very same organization...

 

Fair response. I just don't get why the Padres would make a deal for a guy like this, if he has any shot at being good, this early in his career. Most of the guys you find like this, have failed for a year or two, then come back to be good. 

[Brock Beauchamp]

 

Fair response. I just don't get why the Padres would make a deal for a guy like this, if he has any shot at being good, this early in his career. Most of the guys you find like this, have failed for a year or two, then come back to be good. 

The only reason I can think the Padres would be interested is because their MLB team is not very good and most of their organizational depth (which is pretty good) is still in the low minors.

 

But that seems like a bit of a stretch me.

[Vanimal46]

 

Lamet has pitched 1 season with the Padres and wasn't that great. He's not being suggested because of his numbers in San Diego. He's young, has good stuff and a 2.99 ERA in the minors. 

 

He's not a "legit 1/2 type" now, that's the point. He's never been a top prospect and wasn't spectacular as a rookie. But he has the underlying components to break out, IMO. The idea is to find those guys BEFORE they make that leap and thus not have to give up the farm. 

 

Folks, are we automatically dismissing every pitcher that comes out of the Padres system now? Because, you know, some guy named Kluber was fished out of the very same organization...

 

There are a couple of good examples - Kluber being one, and Drew Pomeranz as well. I'm probably just a bit jaded from Tim Stauffer still. 

[howieramone2]

 

Archer > Cole.  Both will require a heavy package.  Twins would have to gut there farm system to get there or give up some major league talent.  Would rather spend dollars than gut the future of a mid market team (if not the future the replacement of the players that do not stay here).

One trade is not going to gut our farm system. I understand free agency is only money and when we lose several of our future stars to free agency it will be only money. Let's save our only money to pay our future stars as much as possible and not spent 10-20+ times as much on those not named Buxton or Sano.

Edited October 25, 2017 by howieramone2

[howieramone2]

 

Maybe I read the tea leaves wrong, but I assumed when the Twins hired Falvey the idea was to do what Cleveland did; identify and procure a young stable of arms before they hit their peak and every other team wanted them.

He took starting pitching with picks 3, 4, and 5 in the 2017 draft and followed that up by picking up 4 arms at the trade deadline. Castro and Gimenez, like all players brought in by our FO, are board scapegoats, but very inspired pickups to work with our young pitchers. Roman wasn't built in a long weekend.

Edited October 25, 2017 by howieramone2

[drjim]

 

They've proven time and time again they're not going to do that so I don't see the point in getting upset about it anymore. They've chosen to run this team at a profit - which is beyond irritating at times - but that's just a cold, hard reality of the situation.

 

I think the other factor is they really don't want to lock up multiple 3-5 year contracts at inflated FA prices as they need to start paying the emerging core, as well as make decisions on Mauer and Dozier, who they may want to keep.

 

They would potentially go bigger on a 1-2 year deal if it presents itself, but those are a little more rare, and for it to be a difference maker it often has to be a vet that is chasing a really good chance at a ring, not sure the Twins can sell that *quite* yet.

[terrydactyls]

They've proven time and time again they're not going to do that so I don't see the point in getting upset about it anymore. They've chosen to run this team at a profit - which is beyond irritating at times - but that's just a cold, hard reality of the situation.

 

You're upset because a business owner chooses to run his business at a profit? I sure hope you don't run your own business.

[Brock Beauchamp]

You're upset because a business owner chooses to run his business at a profit? I sure hope you don't run your own business.

That’s not exactly what I said. They’ve been running with a very low payroll for quite some time. It’s be nice if they chose to sacrifice profits for a season or two after a half decade of big profits but it’s pretty apparent they’re not willing to do that.

[Vanimal46]

 

That’s not exactly what I said. They’ve been running with a very low payroll for quite some time. It’s be nice if they chose to sacrifice profits for a season or two after a half decade of big profits but it’s pretty apparent they’re not willing to do that.

 

Good owners also operate a sports franchise as a hobby/entertainment. I don't think there are any owners left whose primary income comes from a sports team. 

[drjim]

 

That’s not exactly what I said. They’ve been running with a very low payroll for quite some time. It’s be nice if they chose to sacrifice profits for a season or two after a half decade of big profits but it’s pretty apparent they’re not willing to do that.

 

I'm not sure that's fully known yet. Franchises act differently when they are close to a championship vs. coming off 59 wins, for example.

[terrydactyls]

That’s not exactly what I said. They’ve been running with a very low payroll for quite some time. It’s be nice if they chose to sacrifice profits for a season or two after a half decade of big profits but it’s pretty apparent they’re not willing to do that.

Your "exact" words were "beyond irritating" which I think to me is the equivalent of upset. Regardless, I am not a fan of the "let's throw money at the problem and see if that works" business model that many fans (and some owners) seem to like. For example, the Red Sox. They have a pretty good everyday lineup and over the last two years have opted to allocated $50M per year to two pitchers (Sale and Price). That get them to a playoff round. Whoppee. They probably would have gotten there without Sale and Price. I'm just going to sit back, watch what the new front office does over the next couple of years, and then offer them my unsolicitated advice.

[terrydactyls]

Good owners also operate a sports franchise as a hobby/entertainment. I don't think there are any owners left whose primary income comes from a sports team.

 

You are absolutely correct but you still don't like taking a $20M or $30M loss on a hobby.

[Vanimal46]

 

You are absolutely correct but you still don't like taking a $20M or $30M loss on a hobby.

 

Sure, there's a limit for anyone on taking a loss. We can only speculate what that threshold is for the Pohlad's... I've accepted the financial constraints this ownership group put in place. 

[terrydactyls]

Sure, there's a limit for anyone on taking a loss. We can only speculate what that threshold is for the Pohlad's... I've accepted the financial constraints this ownership group put in place.

 

After all, this is Minnesota. Everything in moderation.

[Deduno Abides]

“Wait for the opportune moment.”

-Captain Jack Sparrow

[tvagle]

 

It's a single offseason. I'd be satisfied with one and one. I don't think this team really needs two relievers given how some guys stepped forward late last season and how there are intriguing arms in the upper minors.

 

I don't think the Twins have the payroll flexibility to get a good starter and two good relievers (the upcoming handbook has hard numbers on payroll and there isn't $30m to spare... maybe $15-20m, tops).

Here's a model that keeps them below $150M until 2022...keeps the Core...extends Dozier and Joe...adds $25M for a starter (Darvish in this case) picks up Otani (it's a 50/50 chance for everyone at this point) and budgets 4/$26M for a closer

 

If the Twins are in the playoffs (nothing guaranteed) each of those years and we use the 50% rule for Payroll this should be doable...or somebody will be doing some creative accounting

 

 

Make your own model using the Twins Payroll Tool

[old nurse]

 

IMO, if they don't find pitching help in the next year or two, Sano and Buxton's time will be remembered like Mauer and Morneau's time.....wasted.

It is not like they ever made the playoffs with them. Their time wasted is because they generally had poor post seasons or were injured and could not participate

[Brock Beauchamp]

 

Your "exact" words were "beyond irritating" which I think to me is the equivalent of upset. Regardless, I am not a fan of the "let's throw money at the problem and see if that works" business model that many fans (and some owners) seem to like. For example, the Red Sox. They have a pretty good everyday lineup and over the last two years have opted to allocated $50M per year to two pitchers (Sale and Price). That get them to a playoff round. Whoppee. They probably would have gotten there without Sale and Price. I'm just going to sit back, watch what the new front office does over the next couple of years, and then offer them my unsolicitated advice.

For starters, it'd be nice if they stuck to their own threshold by spending 52% of revenue on payroll. They've been way under that number for six years now.

 

I don't expect the Twins to take a loss on the team in a season. But the reality is that they've been pocketing tens of millions of dollars per season since moving to Target Field and it's time to repay the fans by picking up the required pieces to turn this team into a legitimate contender.

 

I don't expect them to field a $150m payroll. I'd be happy with $125m right now.

 

After all, I'm one of the people who is paying for that nice new stadium that allows them to make that profit.

[bird]

 

That’s not exactly what I said. They’ve been running with a very low payroll for quite some time. It’s be nice if they chose to sacrifice profits for a season or two after a half decade of big profits but it’s pretty apparent they’re not willing to do that.

 

 

It would be even "nicer" if they were actually tracking the dollars they did not spend over the lean years when they "could have" but didn't and instead "overspent" now that the timing is right. If this organization fails to go "over budget" a couple of times here during what appears to be an up cycle, that will really really make me angry.

[GP830]

 

I love the Lamet idea! That would be expensive but he could be amazing. How much would a Lamet/Brad Hand package cost?
Probably doesn’t hurt that Lavine and Preller know each other well.

I wonder if a package of Gordon and Gonsalves gets us close on Lamet and Hand...

[gunnarthor]

 

Hill over the past 2 years: 2.78 ERA, 3.12 FIP, 1.05 WHIP, 10.8 K/9

Santana over the past 2 years: 3.32 ERA, 4.16 FIP, 1.17 WHIP, 7.2 K/9

 

That looks to me like the pretty clear delineation between a #1 and #2. Santana has the advantage in durability (Hill and those pesky blisters), but when both healthy I can't imagine there's a person in the baseball world who wouldn't choose Hill to start a playoff game. 

 

That's a hell of a qualifier. Over the past two years, Hill has put up a 149 ERA+ in 246 innings while pitching in the NL in an extremely good pitching ball park. He's amassed 3.5 WAR.  Santana has pitched in a hitters park in the AL the last two years and put up 8.4 WAR while throwing 393 innings with a 131 ERA+. I can't see how anyone can make a claim that Hill is an ace but Santana is not. And Hill got rocked in his first start this post-season too.

 

Rate stats are nice but you're taking them a bit too far.

[old nurse]

Lamet might be the type of pitcher the FO would look for.   Control would appear to be the issue. If the management believes they can fix it as well as his pitching with men on base he could become the effective starter.

[USAFChief]

Your "exact" words were "beyond irritating" which I think to me is the equivalent of upset. Regardless, I am not a fan of the "let's throw money at the problem and see if that works" business model that many fans (and some owners) seem to like. For example, the Red Sox. They have a pretty good everyday lineup and over the last two years have opted to allocated $50M per year to two pitchers (Sale and Price). That get them to a playoff round. Whoppee. They probably would have gotten there without Sale and Price. I'm just going to sit back, watch what the new front office does over the next couple of years, and then offer them my unsolicitated advice.

To each his own.

 

But if part of your objection is thinking a $140m payroll in 2018 would mean the Pohlad family will lose money, I believe you're mistaken.

 

Just for starters, the value of their asset has gone from $44m to over $1B.

[HrbekRules]

 

Even looking at stats in the minors is a spotty at best. Two stat lines for last two full years in minors for two "Ace" pitchers.

 

Corey Kluber

2011 - AAA - ERA 5.56, WHIP 1.48, K/9 8.5, K/BB 2.04

2010 - AA/AAA - ERA 3.49, WHIP 1.406, K/9 9.3, K/BB 2.95

 

Dallas Keuchel

2011 - AA/AAA - ERA 4.12, WHIP 1.265, K/9 5.0, K/BB 2.33

2010 - A+/AA - ERA 3.77, WHIP 1.285, K/9 6.9, K/BB 3.69

 

Berrios has much better stats in the minors than either of these two, so his chances of becoming an Ace are not out of the realm, nor does it exclude anyone else in the system from becoming an Ace.

[Winston Smith]

I wonder how much Alex Cobb will cost? He's decent and 2 yrs away from surgery and pitched well this year. Trade rumor has him getting something like Santana got.

 

If he gets a QO his market could be real small. Anyone know what pick the Twins would give up for singing QO'd free agent?

[diehardtwinsfan]

 

I wonder if a package of Gordon and Gonsalves gets us close on Lamet and Hand...

 

If you're dangling both of them, I think you are trying to get something more of a sure thing like Archer. I don't know enough about Lamet, but I think the thought is that he could be had cheaper b/c he has more question marks. You shouldn't need two top 100 players for that.