Article: It’s Time to End the Tyler Kinley Experiment

[ashbury]

“Don’t bother fixing the last man in the bullpen, there are other fish to fry” = “Don’t bother paying the electric bill, we owe a ton on our student loans.”

So you're saying if we don't bother fixing the last man in the bullpen, we'll have ourselves a lights-out reliever? I like your thinking.

[KirbyDome89]

 

But I believe they had 4 open spots at the time of the Rule 5 draft. So it seems to me drafting Kinley really had little to do with the other guys getting booted. Bard, Burdi and later Chargois were gone for other reasons, likely because the team planned on going big on quantity in the free agent market (speaking nothing of quality).

 

Kinley was a mistake, here's hoping they're just waiting a couple days to give him the bad news so they can get a groupon discount on bus tickets for him, Hughes, Duke and Morrison.

Do you think Bard, Burdi and Chargois were destined to be moved regardless of whether MN selected anyone in the Rule V?

[KirbyDome89]

 

“Don’t bother fixing the last man in the bullpen, there are other fish to fry” = “Don’t bother paying the electric bill, we owe a ton on our student loans.”

So you're saying I've been doing it wrong this whole time?

[adorduan]

 

Yeah, ,they'd have to put him through waivers and see if he clears. If he does, he needs to be offered back to the Marlins for $50K or in a trade for a player. I don't have a problem with them keeping him in the organization. Clearly he's got a ton of talent. But age and minor league track record indicate that it may never happen.

What are the odds he clears waivers? 95%?

[nicksaviking]

 

Do you think Bard, Burdi and Chargois were destined to be moved regardless of whether MN selected anyone in the Rule V?

 

It would appear so. Unless we are to believe the Twins had intended to actually make three Rule 5 selections.

[nicksaviking]

 

What are the odds he clears waivers? 95%?

 

Don't jinx it. The worst pitcher in the Angels pen is still probably the Twins 4th best.

[h2oface]

 

It is not time yet, until we see what his numbers are when the 40.0 HR/FB%, .538 BABIP, and 39.2 LOB% land towards Earth values...

 

BTW, I hear a lot about Luke Bard and Nick Burdi.  Where are they now?

At least Molitor is using him as a mop up pitcher.  There are bigger fish to fry in the Twins' pen than their mop up pitcher.

 

Bard was used for much more significant times in games than Kinley, and only had one bad outing that they should have pulled him after he finally got out of the inning, but they ran him out there again, and Boston crushed him, and they let it happen. It was the game Ohtani got his blister, and got tagged, too. Until then, for something like 5 or6 games and 8 innings, Bard was very good! Very good.

 

The difference is that the Angels made a decisive move, and decided that a roster spot was not worth having taken up by an experiment. Kinley has never been good. Talent? It hasn't translated to anything but hope. It seems very ego driven to me right now, and foolish, (also foolish to ever had taken him with all things considered, and he is too old, in my opinion) to keep wasting a roster spot for a pipe dream. 

 

Nick Burdi is on the 60 day DL for the Pirates, and hasn't had a single bad outing all year!

Edited April 25, 2018 by h2oface

[yarnivek1972]

I'm as guilty as anyone. I bashed the move at the time, ,just based on who the Twins lost in the Rule 5 and who they added. Kinley had little success in the minor leagues up to this point,, regardless of obviously having a huge arm and a good slider and being durable.

 

That said, stepping back a bit, there are a few things to note:

 

1.) Decisions on who to protect from the Rule 5 draft are independent of the decision of who to pick in the Rule 5 draft. They happen at different times and they don't know who other teams will leave unprotected.

2.) The Twins clearly made starting pitching their focus in terms of protecting guys. They protected Gonsalves, Littell and Thorpe, and I think we're all on board with those guys.

3.) We also have to remember that guys who get protected in November can't be removed from the 40-man roster until sometime in spring training. So, if they had added more, they would have had to drop other guys that they may have preferred to keep on the roster. So, they made choices, knowing there was the possibility of losing guys. But, another factor in that is whether those guys would be able to stick on the other team's 40-man roster. Bard's already off of the Angels 40-man. Man, it would be nice to bring him back to Rochester.

4.) I think the Chargois decision, while I don't think I get the full picture of it, was made early enough in spring training that it really wasn't even related to Kinley... though I know some want to play it that way. Chargois was clearly behind several others including Hildenberger, Busenitz, Curtiss and others. And, I still contend that there may have been more to that decision than baseball. That may have been a case where a change of scenery was good for both sides.

5.) Rule 5 picks can be a good thing, even for a winning team. It doesn't hurt to have a bullpen guy hidden if two things are done. First, the rest of the bullpen has to be doing its job so that the Rule 5 guy doesn't have to pitch in key situations. And, the Rule 5 guy has to be able to work an inning or two in a blowout situation. To this point, Kinley hasn't been able to show even that.

 

So at the end of the day, I definitely don't consider taking a shot on a guy with a big arm a bad decision at all. Like most Rule 5 guys, you take a shot on a relatively inexpensive way to acquire some talent and you find out. At this point, or whenever, I'm' fine with that experiment ending and moving forward.

Sorry if you have addressed it elsewhere, but I am curious as to what you mean by this. I was exceptionally high on Chargois after 2016. I had him pegged as a potential closer someday. His 2016 MLB stats don’t LOOK that great, until you look more closely (which I did during the 2016-17 offseason). I seem to recall terrible outings in his first couple MLB appearances, but after that the numbers were pretty good. I was really disapointed when he went down last year as I felt he could really have been an impactful power arm late in games.

[nicksaviking]

 

The difference is that the Angels made a decisive move, and decided that a roster spot was not worth having taken up by an experiment. Kinley has never been good. It seems very ego driven to me right now, and foolish, (also foolish to ever had taken him with all things considered, and he is too old, in my opinion) to keep wasting a roster spot for a pipe dream. 

 

I'd bet the reason for that is that Mike Scioscia has as much or more influence than the GM. Just a guess, but judging by how Molitor uses young pitchers, I'd bet he'd prefer to not have any on the 25-man that didn't "earn" a spot.

[h2oface]

 

Why would we want a pitcher that a contending team didn’t want ????

We already proved we didn’t think he was good enough to help us by not protecting him. Why would we take him back now

 

Why would we want a pitcher that a contending team didn’t want ???? Really????

 

Roster limits, the rules of service time and options. Hundreds of players each season move around that the teams would have rather kept in the system if the rules allowed. Hundreds. Of course they take Bard back, if they can. We didn't get rid of him, he was taken from the Twins, by the rules.

Edited April 25, 2018 by h2oface

[h2oface]

 

This is shaping up as the first colossal whiff from the new front office, IMO, and they just continue to make it worse by refusing to cut bait. 

 

Morrison, Lynn, and Duke aren't shaping up as colossal whiffs, too? The shaping for Kinley is done, and the shaping for the others is still suffering in progress. Oh, did I mention Rodney?

[KirbyDome89]

 

It would appear so. Unless we are to believe the Twins had intended to actually make three Rule 5 selections.

Or one Rule V selection plus FA pitchers. 

[Brandon]

Im ok with waiting a few more weeks and see how it goes. We just went through a cold spell with lots of cancellations and few chances to pitch. Lets see his May numbers and make a decision.

[Thrylos]

 

Yep, once Kinley's ERA gets back in line with his 6.70 xFIP (which accounts for all the things you mentioned) he'll be good to go.

 

Here is the formula for xFIP:

 

 

As you can see it relies heavily on HR/FB%.  Maybe you did not know that...

So if someone has a 40 HR/FB%, xFIP is not a good criterion to predict future performance.

Matter of fact, xFIP does not account for any of the 3 things I mentioned....

 

Maybe you did not know that either.

Edited April 25, 2018 by Thrylos

[Mr. Brooks]

Here is the formula for xFIP:

 

 

As you can see it relies heavily on HR/FB%. Maybe you did not know that...

So if someone has a 40 HR/FB%, xFIP is not a good criterion to predict future performance.

Matter of fact, xFIP does not account for any of the 3 things I mentioned....

 

Maybe you did not know that either.

Ummm, I'm pretty sure xFIP replaces a pitcher's HR rate with league average HR rate.

[Andrew Thares]

 

Here is the formula for xFIP:

 

 

As you can see it relies heavily on HR/FB%.  Maybe you did not know that...

So if someone has a 40 HR/FB%, xFIP is not a good criterion to predict future performance.

Matter of fact, xFIP does not account for any of the 3 things I mentioned....

 

Maybe you did not know that either.

xFIP is literally FIP except it controls for HR/FB% being off from the league average. This makes it the perfect stat to correct for a 40% HR/FB%. That is why Kinley's FIP is 12.17 while his xFIP is a more realistic 6.70.

[DocBauer]

1] Despite being confused and generally unhappy with the decisions on Burdi, Chargois and Bard as a collective, they were not lost because the FO was sitting around hoping for Kinley. I think that's a fair statement. Right or wrong, each was lost for certain reasons, whatever they may truly be. I really think we need to let that arguement go.

 

2] Kinley IS an issue, but not the reason we have been struggling. Drafting and even trying to stash an upside, power arm is not a bad idea. Now, that being said, IMO, despite liking most all moves the FO has made to this point, I questioned his selection.

 

3] There is absolutely nothing wrong with the FO just saying the gambled and lost. Period! Offer him back, or work out a cheap trade if you want him at Rochester because you still like him. But do SOMETHING, because you just keep hiding him.

 

NO FO will always hit 100% of the time. They just won't. But move on when you have to.

[TheLeviathan]

I would like to suggest that I take Kinley's roster spot.  I'll only be marginally worse and they can sign me to a 10 year deal for the minimum and they'll never have to play musical chairs with their throw-away 25th spot on the roster for a decade.

[Hosken Bombo Disco]

DFA, per Berardino

[Danchat]

 

1] Despite being confused and generally unhappy with the decisions on Burdi, Chargois and Bard as a collective, they were not lost because the FO was sitting around hoping for Kinley. I think that's a fair statement. Right or wrong, each was lost for certain reasons, whatever they may truly be. I really think we need to let that arguement go.

2] Kinley IS an issue, but not the reason we have been struggling. Drafting and even trying to stash an upside, power arm is not a bad idea. Now, that being said, IMO, despite liking most all moves the FO has made to this point, I questioned his selection.

3] There is absolutely nothing wrong with the FO just saying the gambled and lost. Period! Offer him back, or work out a cheap trade if you want him at Rochester because you still like him. But do SOMETHING, because you just keep hiding him.

NO FO will always hit 100% of the time. They just won't. But move on when you have to.

   

I couldn't say it better myself.

Edited April 26, 2018 by Danchat

[Danchat]

 

DFA, per Berardino

Thank goodness. I'm thinking we'll see Slegers or Curtiss, but unfortunately this isn't going to fix much. 

[Nick Nelson]

 

Here is the formula for xFIP:

 

 

As you can see it relies heavily on HR/FB%.  Maybe you did not know that...

So if someone has a 40 HR/FB%, xFIP is not a good criterion to predict future performance.

Matter of fact, xFIP does not account for any of the 3 things I mentioned....

 

Maybe you did not know that either.

Maybe you want to delete this comment since its abject falseness has been pointed out by multiple people? xFIP normalizes HR rate, that is its purpose.

 

 

[Nick Nelson]

 

Morrison, Lynn, and Duke aren't shaping up as colossal whiffs, too? The shaping for Kinley is done, and the shaping for the others is still suffering in progress. Oh, did I mention Rodney?

All three of those guys have track records of major-league success. Kinley didn't have a track record of Double-A success.

 

The signings of LoMo, Lynn and Duke were very defensible moves, I'm not going to rip them after three bad weeks. But the Kinley addition was inexplicable from the start, and there was serious opportunity cost from having him clog up a 40-man spot for four months while quality players slipped away. 

 

Mistakes happen, and hopefully you learn from them. This was a big one. 

[h2oface]

 

All three of those guys have track records of major-league success. Kinley didn't have a track record of Double-A success.

 

The signings of LoMo, Lynn and Duke were very defensible moves, I'm not going to rip them after three bad weeks. But the Kinley addition was inexplicable from the start, and there was serious opportunity cost from having him clog up a 40-man spot for four months while quality players slipped away. 

 

Mistakes happen, and hopefully you learn from them. This was a big one. 

 

Agreed. Thankfully, Kinley is now DFAd. Track records are nice, but that is just history, at this point. The Cards wanted no part of Lynn back, or Duke, and they seem to always have some pretty good pitching... pretty savvy. Nobody else seemed to want Morrison either. The track records almost make it worse to me, like Morales a couple years ago. They cost millions more, and need to perform, especially at the beginning of their stay on a new team, if they want fan support. And because of their salaries, the FO and management is locked in and even slower than usual to move on if needed.

 

The career year by Morrison seemed to be an outlier, and he is regressing to his norm and worse. At least they were signed on the cheap, considering what they wanted.

 

So..... one could even say, for 2018, they are all shaping up as colossal whiffs...... which doesn't mean that they can't right their year, but so far, I hear the howl of the wind.

 

I hope they find it soon. We need them too, desperately.

Edited April 26, 2018 by h2oface

[killertwinfan]

Is this true?

 

 

[Hosken Bombo Disco]

You know what I would love? If Molitor made this decision himself and the wonder Twins found out through Twitter

[wsnydes]

Looks like Slegers is coming up.

[Vanimal46]

Looks like Slegers is coming up.

Hey! A SP that can maybe pitch 5+ innings! Good luck to him.

[Andrew Thares]

 

The career year by Morrison seemed to be an outlier, and he is regressing to his norm and worse. At least they were signed on the cheap, considering what they wanted.

 

So..... one could even say, for 2018, they are all shaping up as colossal whiffs...... which doesn't mean that they can't right their year, but so far, I hear the howl of the wind.

 

I hope they find it soon. We need them too, desperately.

The thing with Morrison at $6M is they didn't need a career year from him to make the investment worth it, all they needed was what he had been prior to 2017 (a career 104 OPS+ through 2016) and he would have been worth it. That's the difference between him and Kinley, there was a track record of at least mild success at the MLB level.

[howieramone2]

 

I'm as guilty as anyone. I bashed the move at the time, ,just based on who the Twins lost in the Rule 5 and who they added. Kinley had little success in the minor leagues up to this point,, regardless of obviously having a huge arm and a good slider and being durable. 

 

That said, stepping back a bit, there are a few things to note:

 

1.) Decisions on who to protect from the Rule 5 draft are independent of the decision of who to pick in the Rule 5 draft. They happen at different times and they don't know who other teams will leave unprotected. 

2.) The Twins clearly made starting pitching their focus in terms of protecting guys. They protected Gonsalves, Littell and Thorpe, and I think we're all on board with those guys. 

3.) We also have to remember that guys who get protected in November can't be removed from the 40-man roster until sometime in spring training. So, if they had added more, they would have had to drop other guys that they may have preferred to keep on the roster. So, they made choices, knowing there was the possibility of losing guys. But, another factor in that is whether those guys would be able to stick on the other team's 40-man roster. Bard's already off of the Angels 40-man. Man, it would be nice to bring him back to Rochester. 

4.) I think the Chargois decision, while I don't think I get the full picture of it, was made early enough in spring training that it really wasn't even related to Kinley... though I know some want to play it that way. Chargois was clearly behind several others including Hildenberger, Busenitz, Curtiss and others. And, I still contend that there may have been more to that decision than baseball. That may have been a case where a change of scenery was good for both sides. 

5.) Rule 5 picks can be a good thing, even for a winning team. It doesn't hurt to have a bullpen guy hidden if two things are done. First, the rest of the bullpen has to be doing its job so that the Rule 5 guy doesn't have to pitch in key situations. And, the Rule 5 guy has to be able to work an inning or two in a blowout situation. To this point, Kinley hasn't been able to show even that. 

 

So at the end of the day, I definitely don't consider taking a shot on a guy with a big arm a bad decision at all. Like most Rule 5 guys, you take a shot on a relatively inexpensive way to acquire some talent and you find out. At this point, or whenever, I'm' fine with that experiment ending and moving forward. 

The new regime is relentless in trying to improve our staff. Last I looked at Haley, he would be one of our top 10 starting pitchers, if we had been able to retain him. Only Pressly appears to have better stuff in the pen than Kinley. If Falvey and Levine want take shots for $100,000, I'm all in.