Article: State of the Starting Corps

[old nurse]

I guess if you want to believe that, despite there being pretty much no hint whatsoever of the Twins doing more than "checking in" with agents of real pitchers, Terry Ryan has actually been working his ass off to sign one or more of those guys and always comes just THIS close, but always gets outbid by another team or the pitcher always wants to sign with better teams (like those perennial champions the Chicago Cubs, for example?), that's fine. I think you're giving him too much credit and I'll actually believe he is seriously going after a real pitcher when he actually gets one to sign on the dotted line... because the next time he lands one will be the first time. Until then, I'm done giving him credit for "trying".

So far this year the Cubs have signed no one. Nor have the Mets, Marlins, Cleveland, Colorado, Houston or SanDiego. Arizona signed McCarthy, KC got Guthrie, Seattle Iwakuma. If I missed a mid market team in a down cycle, sorry.

[Top Gun]

CBS Sports' Jon Heyman reports that the Cubs have agreed to a deal with Carlos Villanueva.

[Top Gun]

CBS Sports' Jon Heyman hears that Edwin Jackson is still "in play" for the Cubs following the signing of Carlos Villanueva.

[FrodaddyG]

My review of the Twins' rotation as it stands would be the same as this magical album review:

 

Jet: Shine On | Album Reviews | Pitchfork

[Oxtung]

I'm going to try this one more time, and perhaps I'll get a better response. Let me go back to that ever-flowing cancer-analogy well.

 

If you go into the doctor and have a biopsy, and the biopsy comes back negative, you do not not have cancer. You have an absence of evidence of cancer (i.e., you didn't find any in the biopsy). On the other hand, the biopsy may have missed a small cancer cell cluster that could turn into a major problem. Until all is known, there is not evidence of absence of any cancer cells.

 

Note the difference - and it is a crucial difference. Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.

 

Let's again extend the point. That which is currently known is that the Twins haven't signed anyone of note. There is an absence of evidence that they have attempted to sign or will sign someone that TD can agree is good. On the other hand, without something more substantial than speculation, there is no actual knowledge that we have not tried.

 

We have absence of evidence. We do not have evidence of absence. I'm not "giving the front office credit." I'm simply not excoriating them for something that we don't know that they haven't done.

 

There are a few things wrong with your analogy. First there were many good FA pitchers out there this year that the Twins could have pursued; not just one. Second there are many journalists out there trying to get the inside scoop on each of those pitchers; not just one doctor. So a more accurate analogy would be the patient took 7 or 8 different types of tests and he went to a dozen different doctors who each wanted to run their own tests. Every single one of those tests came back as negative. So sure, I guess everyone of those tests could have been incorrect but a higher likely hood would be that you truly are cancer free.

 

To bring this back to the point at hand; if there were only one or two available pitchers out there or if none of the media really tried to ferret out the truth or if the Twins were known as an orginization that was well versed in keeping their dealings secret maybe you would have a point. But the there were many pitchers out there, there are a dozen writers trying to break the news, especially when it comes to the big names, and the Span and Revere trades as well as both the Pelfrey and Correia signings were all swirling in the rumor mill.

 

At some point the lack of evidence, while never definitive, becomes so overwhelming as to imply that in fact no big name pitcher was ever being truly considered by the Twins.

 

If this post doesn't make sense I apologize in advance. It is currently 4am as I am finishing this up and am thinking to myself, WTF am I still doing up! Stupid TD message boards.

[oldgoat]

The Twins rotation at the beginning of last year was completely alarmingly bad. I think people forget that sometimes. Correia may be bad, but he is not THAT bad. He is likely a 5th starter. The Twins didn't even start the season with a legitimate 4 starter last year. They were all bad, bad, bad. Starting the year with Diamond and Worley is in itself a big improvement. Also, DeVries and Deduno were much better than Marquis and Blackburn last year.

 

Don't get me wrong, I want the Twins to pay Shaun Marcum the money he wants to come pitch for the Twins. That one move could significantly alter things chain-reaction style.

 

Also, starting Kyle Gibson in the rotation for the Twins would be stupid. He should be on an innings limit in Rochester until June 1st. I would think, right now, that Pelfrey/Deduno/DeVries would hold down that spot in the rotation until Gibson is June-ready to go 5-6 innings. Until then, I would really throw Gibson 3 innings a game in Rochester and have Andrew Albers (lefty) be his personal reliever. This would keep Gibson at 30 innings and then he would have 100-110 for the Twins.

 

The only reasonable rotation, barring any other additions, is Diamond, Worley, Hendriks, Correia, Pelfrey/Deduno/DeVries. This group is marginally better than the 2012 group as a whole and much better than the April-May rotation.

The most lucid blog I've seen. Let's not forget the beauty of baseball is the out of nowhere stories. Last year at this time all those that thought Scott Diamond would win 12 games please raise your hand. That's what I thought. Being a true baseball requires patience. Cub fans laugh at Twins fans impatience! This guy who's going to boycott the Twins....don't let the door hit you in the butt. With fewer fans comes better seat jumping opportunities at the park to watch the greatest game ever invented up close and personal.

[TheLeviathan]

To extend the point, all of the blind speculators here are pointing at the people we didn't sign and assuming that this is proof positive that we didn't try, that we didn't care, that Terry Ryan is one of the three stooges, that the Pohlads are actually descendants of Hitler, that the general management of the club is full of functional retards, that the Twins are pure evil incarnate...

 

Seems to me the people really guilty of "silent evidence" were those that believed the Twins were going to remold their pitching staff in one off-season on the basis of a few pre-offseason interviews designed to keep season ticket holders around. The actual evidence is that Ryan doesn't like handing out big contracts to pitchers - never has, never will. (Which, again, I don't mind. I'm not a Ryan basher - I like him.)

 

But the fact is those that took him at his word that he was going to add significant pitching have a right to hold him accountable to those words. All the spinning and deflecting being done from that is the problem.

[savvyspy]

The rotation has improved just by the addition of Worley and the subtraction of Blackburn over last year. Marquis and Correia are a wash, both horrendously bad. I like Diamond and Worley. It's a start and they both know how to pitch. I kind of wish they'd let Deduno pitch. He was the only guy in the rotation that could miss bats. His control could come around. He's honestly better than Hendriks or DeVries just by way of he has upside. I'd go Worley, Diamond, Deduno, Hendriks, and Gibson after May when Correia is Marquis 2.0 and Pelfrey is shut down in Spring Training with arm soreness.

[Mike Sixel]

It is not Ryan's job to try to make the team better, it is his job to make the team better. Drew Buyers tries to hot, does not mean he should keep his job. I do not care what Ryan tried or did not try. So far, he has failed to do what he said he would do.

[jokin]

I'm going to try this one more time, and perhaps I'll get a better response. Let me go back to that ever-flowing cancer-analogy well.

 

If you go into the doctor and have a biopsy, and the biopsy comes back negative, you do not not have cancer. You have an absence of evidence of cancer (i.e., you didn't find any in the biopsy). On the other hand, the biopsy may have missed a small cancer cell cluster that could turn into a major problem. Until all is known, there is not evidence of absence of any cancer cells.

 

Note the difference - and it is a crucial difference. Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.

 

Let's again extend the point. That which is currently known is that the Twins haven't signed anyone of note. There is an absence of evidence that they have attempted to sign or will sign someone that TD can agree is good. On the other hand, without something more substantial than speculation, there is no actual knowledge that we have not tried.

 

We have absence of evidence. We do not have evidence of absence. I'm not "giving the front office credit." I'm simply not excoriating them for something that we don't know that they haven't done.

 

Seems to me the people really guilty of "silent evidence" were those that believed the Twins were going to remold their pitching staff in one off-season on the basis of a few pre-offseason interviews designed to keep season ticket holders around. The actual evidence is that Ryan doesn't like handing out big contracts to pitchers - never has, never will. (Which, again, I don't mind. I'm not a Ryan basher - I like him.)

 

But the fact is those that took him at his word that he was going to add significant pitching have a right to hold him accountable to those words. All the spinning and deflecting being done from that is the problem.

 

I hope I'll get "credit" for "trying" to unravel all of the triple negatives and FO analogy-spinning going on in this discussion.

 

A few questions:

 

1) Is TR not having John Lannan thrown into the Span trade evidence of absence- or- absence of evidence?

 

2) Is TR's continual failure to take advantage of his waiver wire position " patiently shrewd frugality"- or- putting 2013/2014 on automatic pilot while maintaining to the public that the Twins will be "competitive"?

 

3) Does the "actual" evidence presented, Ie, the "actual" current roster, the "actual" FA signings, gives the club license to shout a unifying rallying cry to all the fans in Twinsland? Is anyone in the FO in possession of "actual" optimism that 2013 will be an improvement on 2011/2012? ( You yourself already stated that they are merely "trying" to field a "< 100-loss team" as signatory of how hard they're trying and how shrewd they are in spending money only when it matters)

[jokin]

So far this year the Cubs have signed no one. Nor have the Mets, Marlins, Cleveland, Colorado, Houston or SanDiego. Arizona signed McCarthy, KC got Guthrie, Seattle Iwakuma. If I missed a mid market team in a down cycle, sorry.

 

I think any objective observer would concede that the Cubs' signings of Villanueva, Baker and Feldman is a significantly better offseason SP upgrade over the Twins efforts.

[old nurse]

I think any objective observer would concede that the Cubs' signings of Villanueva, Baker and Feldman is a significantly better offseason SP upgrade over the Twins efforts.

 

Long term Feldman is better than Meyers? Worley and May are combined worse than Baker? Oh, you meant for this week.

[jokin]

Long term Feldman is better than Meyers? Worley and May are combined worse than Baker? Oh, you meant for this week.

 

I believe the topic is the current state of the starting corps.

[70charger]

I hope I'll get "credit" for "trying" to unravel all of the triple negatives and FO analogy-spinning going on in this discussion.

 

A few questions:

 

1) Is TR not having John Lannan thrown into the Span trade evidence of absence- or- absence of evidence?

 

2) Is TR's continual failure to take advantage of his waiver wire position " patiently shrewd frugality"- or- putting 2013/2014 on automatic pilot while maintaining to the public that the Twins will be "competitive"?

 

3) Does the "actual" evidence presented, Ie, the "actual" current roster, the "actual" FA signings, gives the club license to shout a unifying rallying cry to all the fans in Twinsland? Is anyone in the FO in possession of "actual" optimism that 2013 will be an improvement on 2011/2012? ( You yourself already stated that they are merely "trying" to field a "< 100-loss team" as signatory of how hard they're trying and how shrewd they are in spending money only when it matters)

 

Let me reiterate. I'm not attempting to cover for the front office or give them credit for things they're doing or not doing. I'm just objecting to the conclusive (read: conclusory) statements being thrown around about the front office's actions in the absence of silent evidence. Again, my thoguht is that they're likely trying to save money for addition of free agents when their talented core of cost-controlled current-minor leaguers hits the big leagues in 2014-15. I may yet be proven wrong. But many of the posters here may yet be proven wrong when they say things like "TR isn't trying," or "the Pohlads are greedy," or "the Twins cannot be competitive next year." I think there's too much confidence in people's presumed knowledge of what is actually unknown. If anyone has real evidence, by all means let's hear it. If you don't, and you're speculating, say as much. That way, when you're wrong, we'll know why.

 

Now, to answer your questions:

 

1. Still absence of evidence; we don't know if he tried to get the throw-in. Certainly given the actual situation, there is a high likelihood that he didn't try for Lannan, and let's assume that he didn't for argument's sake. I still maintain that we don't know why, but I posit that perhaps Terry Ryan didn't want Lannan. Isn't that at least as likely as the idea that he's cheap? (Or more likely, since Lannan wasn't expensive at all?) In any case, he is in a better position to evaluate these things than you or I.

 

2. We don't know. How would we know that? Claiming that we know this for sure one way or another is incorrect and a little arrogant. Speculate all you want, but don't tell me you know unless you can back it up.

 

3. The actual evidence doesn't give "the club license to shout a unifying rallying cry to all the fans in Twinsland," and I think you already acknowledged that I never said anything like that. Of course, the PR department is going to do their job, and Terry Ryan will never tell you that he is anything but optimistic for next season. But like I said, given the evidence presented, I find it likely that they're going to field a below-average team, hope for some luck, and save their money for the future. Feel free to disagree.

[Top Gun]

You do not save money for the future by putting in your pocket. You invest it or you lose it.

[jokin]

Let me reiterate. I'm not attempting to cover for the front office or give them credit for things they're doing or not doing. I'm just objecting to the conclusive (read: conclusory) statements being thrown around about the front office's actions in the absence of silent evidence. Again, my thoguht is that they're likely trying to save money for addition of free agents when their talented core of cost-controlled current-minor leaguers hits the big leagues in 2014-15. I may yet be proven wrong. But many of the posters here may yet be proven wrong when they say things like "TR isn't trying," or "the Pohlads are greedy," or "the Twins cannot be competitive next year." I think there's too much confidence in people's presumed knowledge of what is actually unknown. If anyone has real evidence, by all means let's hear it. If you don't, and you're speculating, say as much. That way, when you're wrong, we'll know why.

 

Now, to answer your questions:

 

1. Still absence of evidence; we don't know if he tried to get the throw-in. Certainly given the actual situation, there is a high likelihood that he didn't try for Lannan, and let's assume that he didn't for argument's sake. I still maintain that we don't know why, but I posit that perhaps Terry Ryan didn't want Lannan. Isn't that at least as likely as the idea that he's cheap? (Or more likely, since Lannan wasn't expensive at all?) In any case, he is in a better position to evaluate these things than you or I.

 

2. We don't know. How would we know that? Claiming that we know this for sure one way or another is incorrect and a little arrogant. Speculate all you want, but don't tell me you know unless you can back it up.

 

3. The actual evidence doesn't give "the club license to shout a unifying rallying cry to all the fans in Twinsland," and I think you already acknowledged that I never said anything like that. Of course, the PR department is going to do their job, and Terry Ryan will never tell you that he is anything but optimistic for next season. But like I said, given the evidence presented, I find it likely that they're going to field a below-average team, hope for some luck, and save their money for the future. Feel free to disagree.

 

Thanks for a thoughtful response. You and I actually aren't too far away in opinion on this.

 

Let me say regarding evidence about 2013, the current roster and the reality of career regressions, injury recurrences, player trades and rookies' wall-hitting, the chances for Twins success is equivalent to....well Las Vegas says the Twins are 100/1 and only the Astros have longer odds.

 

1) I have posited that the Twins really, really, didn't want John Lannan. But it's arguable that he has more, or as much, to offer as Pelfrey and Correia, for less money. Notwithstanding, PR-wise, the trade would have looked better with Lannan thrown in and sent the word out that the Twins were on the move, possibly inducing other interest from players and clubs for other deals.

 

2) The Twins one big advantage in their position is first in line in watching that waiver wire for sabremetric bargains, market inefficiencies and other potential circumstantial opportunities. They also have the money to be creative in some of these types of deals, that they're not doing so is not speculation, the names of veterans, role guys and intriguing prospects that the Twins have not claimed is there for all to see. The farthest the Twins go in their pursuit of these opportunities has been the likes of Erik Komatsu.

 

3) On this, we mostly agree, although now, you're the one who's speculating that they're "saving their money for the future". Sadly, as of today, "below average team" is more optimistic than realistic. Last year's FA signings were thrifty replacements, not upgrades (in Willingham's case, there's some of that "luck" you were talking about) and not every vacant hole was even replaced. This year's signings aren't thrifty, they would make the two bag ladies down at the local Savers blush. The next big FA signings (in 2014/5?) will be the first such signings in over 20 years. And yet, I think that actually crossing that 8-figure threshold for an "outsider" FA paralyzes the FO in a state of abject fear and panic

[ThePuck]

I think any objective observer would concede that the Cubs' signings of Villanueva, Baker and Feldman is a significantly better offseason SP upgrade over the Twins efforts.

 

And it looks like they're gonna add Jackson. I find it amazing they can add Feldman, Jackson and Villaneuva. I mean, they lost 5 more games than we did last year and have only missed being in last the last three years cause they had the Astros in their division. How can they possibly attract an Edwin Jackson when we know the only reason the Twins can't sign players like that is cause we're so bad?

[70charger]

jokin, I doubt we're actually that far apart either. I will address one final point, in your #3. I am absolutely speculating. I never said that speculating was bad, I would just prefer it to be called out as speculation. If you want to guess what's happening or what will happen, feel free, but call it a guess.

 

I despise the posts that are nothing more than "Terry Ryan is a joke," or "the Twins are clearly punting," or "the front office isn't even trying to go after free agents." I despise them because they presume to know things that aren't actually known. They're guesses gussied up as factual statements. Remember that every good free agent that isn't signed does not prove that the Twins won't sign a good free agent, but only a single good free agent signed would disprove the idea that the Twins won't sign free agents. Empirical proof is funny that way.

[johnnydakota]

Over the years i wonder how many pitchers decide it was time to retire after getting a call from Terry Ryan with a 1 year offer?

[ThePuck]

jokin, I doubt we're actually that far apart either. I will address one final point, in your #3. I am absolutely speculating. I never said that speculating was bad, I would just prefer it to be called out as speculation. If you want to guess what's happening or what will happen, feel free, but call it a guess.

 

I despise the posts that are nothing more than "Terry Ryan is a joke," or "the Twins are clearly punting," or "the front office isn't even trying to go after free agents." I despise them because they presume to know things that aren't actually known. They're guesses gussied up as factual statements. Remember that every good free agent that isn't signed does not prove that the Twins won't sign a good free agent, but only a single good free agent signed would disprove the idea that the Twins won't sign free agents. Empirical proof is funny that way.

 

Then maybe one should also call out the people who say that the only reason, or even the main reason, quality FA pitcher don't sign here is because we are a last place team. Where's the empirical proof in that. Have pitchers said that?

 

The difference between that speculation and the speculation you dislike so much is one of them slams Ryan and the other lets him off the hook. It's all speculation to varying degrees, but you seem to only have issue with the speculations that slam Ryan. Thing is, now we're seeing Jackson about to be signed by a team worse than ours. Not a last place team, mind you...but a team that finished 5 games worse than ours. Could it be because the Cubs made the best offer and he took it, regardless of them losing over 100 games last year and over 90 the year before?

[70charger]

Then maybe one should also call out the people who say that the only reason, or even the main reason, quality FA pitcher don't sign here is because we are a last place team. Where's the empirical proof in that. Have pitchers said that?

 

The difference between that speculation and the speculation you dislike so much is one of them slams Ryan and the other lets him off the hook. It's all speculation to varying degrees, but you seem to only have issue with the speculations that slam Ryan. Thing is, now we're seeing Jackson about to be signed by a team worse than ours. Not a last place team, mind you...but a team that finished 5 games worse than ours. Could it be because the Cubs made the best offer and he took it, regardless of them losing over 100 games last year and over 90 the year before?

 

Silent evidence problem. QED.

 

Of course I have a problem with the people who claim that the only reason we're not signing certain people is because they don't want to come here. Not only is that ridiculous (I love it here in June), but there's no way of knowing unless you're able to ask the player. The fact that I didn't mention it doesn't mean that I don't have a problem with it.

 

If it makes you feel better, I'll call it out in the future.

[Riverbrian]

Starting Pitching... It seems to me... You have a handful of amazing guys... Kershaw and such... You also have a handful of pretty damn bad... In between the small percentage of Lights out and awful.

 

There is this very large pile of average pitchers.

 

The problem with the Twins is that we had more than the acceptable share of awful Starting Pitchers in 2012 and no place to turn.

 

Marquis 7 starts 8.47

Blackburn 19 starts 7.39

Pavano 11 start 6.00

Walters 12 starts 5.69

vazquez 6 starts 5.68

hendriks 16 starts 5.59

liriano 17 starts 5.31

duensong 11 starts 5.12

Swarzak 5 starts 5.03

 

Thats 104 starts...

 

There were a total of 67 pitchers in MLB who had an ERA over 5 that made at least 6 starts. That's a little more than 2 per team... We had 9 of them.

There were 40 Pitchers in MLB who had an ERA over 5 that made at least 11 starts. A little over 1 per team... We had 8 of them.

There were 28 pitchers who had an ERA over 5 that made at least 16 starts. A little less than 1 per team. We had 4 of them including Marquis.

 

Diamond... Dedeno and DeVries made 58 starts and averaged AVERAGE!!! I find it amazing that we were able to win 66 games.

 

I guess my point is this. There is absolutely no way that we are going to acquire Kershaw and such. None... Unless we catch a kid like Meyer or May before he gets here. Dickey... was going to cost Sano... No one wants to do that. The really good pitchers are not coming period.

 

The best FA pitcher available was Greinke and Im sorry if anyone disagrees with this but Greinke gets thrown into the average pile. 2009 was clearly an elite pitching year for Greinke... Every other Greinke year was average and now worth 147 million.

 

The difference between Greinke and Ian Kennedy and his average 4.02 is 11 runs over 33 starts. So in the end... What is it that we are discussing here? And what are the Dodgers paying for?

 

TR isn't wrong when he says he needs options to turn to. Diamond... DeVries... Deduno are options... Worley... Correia and Pelfrey are Options... Gibson and Hendriks will be Options. Even Blackburm is an option and hopefully we will sign another option to give us ten.

 

I realize nobody is excited about those options but what we need is this... If one of those options fail... We have another option to turn to.

 

We did not have that last year. Blackburn made 19 starts... Liriano and Hendriks made 17 and 16 starts because we didn't have anyone to turn to.

 

Hopefully this year... We have someone to trot out there if Correia fails. Hopefully we will have at least 5 pitchers who perform at least average. With Average pitching... we can then begin to assess the kind of offensive players we truly have because they will be in games with a chance to win. We will find out what we are made of.

 

Shooting for average is OK because true quality isn't available in the FA market or the trade market.

 

You just end up spinning your wheels over shades of average.

 

This is what quantity over quality is all about. True Quality is not available so you might as well load up on the quantity.

 

I'd like Jackson or Marcum... And the reason I really want TR to bid aggressively for either of them is because I think they have a chance to contribute in 2015.

 

For 2013... They are both average? If we sign them... They get thrown into the quantity pile.

[old nurse]

I hope I'll get "credit" for "trying" to unravel all of the triple negatives and FO analogy-spinning going on in this discussion.

 

A few questions:

 

1) Is TR not having John Lannan thrown into the Span trade evidence of absence- or- absence of evidence?

 

2) Is TR's continual failure to take advantage of his waiver wire position " patiently shrewd frugality"- or- putting 2013/2014 on automatic pilot while maintaining to the public that the Twins will be "competitive"?

 

3) Does the "actual" evidence presented, Ie, the "actual" current roster, the "actual" FA signings, gives the club license to shout a unifying rallying cry to all the fans in Twinsland? Is anyone in the FO in possession of "actual" optimism that 2013 will be an improvement on 2011/2012? ( You yourself already stated that they are merely "trying" to field a "< 100-loss team" as signatory of how hard they're trying and how shrewd they are in spending money only when it matters)

 

The lack of Lannan being thrown into the Span trade was evidence that Ryan did not think he was worth the arbitration price. That proved to be accurate with his low figure he signed for.

 

Waiver wire pickups are different than free agents. What waiver wire prospects are going to make a huge difference? Essentially they have been fringe AAAA players. There are plenty of people complaining of the last bunch he signed.

[LaBombo]

 

Shooting for average is OK because true quality isn't available in the FA market or the trade market.

 

You just end up spinning your wheels over shades of average.

 

This is what quantity over quality is all about. True Quality is not available so you might as well load up on the quantity.

 

I'd like Jackson or Marcum... And the reason I really want TR to bid aggressively for either of them is because I think they have a chance to contribute in 2015.

 

For 2013... They are both average? If we sign them... They get thrown into the quantity pile.

 

Jackson is apparently off the board, and while I like Marcum too, I'm not holding my breath.

 

But I'm curious about your definition of true quality. Wouldn't Marcum and Jackson fit that category? Didn't Greinke before he signed? And what about guys like McCarthy and Villenueva, with upside and risk? Don't they fit in an entirely different category from the pool from which the Twins signed their guys or have shown genuine interest in?

 

Like you I'm hoping they concentrate on the future, but they could've been better this year while getting a head start on the future instead of wasting time and money with guys like Correia.

[Shane Wahl]

Baker>Villanueva>Pelfrey>Correia = Feldman = Garcia (if he is added)

 

$17.5 million for B, V and F, and about $12-13 million for P, C, and G.

 

Roughly Denard Span's salary, which was . . . saved by trading him.

[Riverbrian]

Jackson is apparently off the board, and while I like Marcum too, I'm not holding my breath.

 

But I'm curious about your definition of true quality. Wouldn't Marcum and Jackson fit that category? Didn't Greinke before he signed? And what about guys like McCarthy and Villenueva, with upside and risk? Don't they fit in an entirely different category from the pool from which the Twins signed their guys or have shown genuine interest in?

 

Like you I'm hoping they concentrate on the future, but they could've been better this year while getting a head start on the future instead of wasting time and money with guys like Correia.

 

You have some guys like Kershaw... Verlander... King Felix... Guys so talented that when they take the mound... You wouldn't bet anything important that they won't hang a zero every inning they pitch that day. Guys who can win the game by themselves. There are very few of these guys.

 

The next group is the average group and membership in this group is overflowing. These guys can pitch but they don't dominate... They will have games where they shut the door followed by games spent in the showers early but most games are just run of the mill 6 inning and a couple of runs given up just like the guy they face on the other team that day. The good and bad starts can't be counted on... Yet... the average starts are fairly consistent. When you hear the term innings eater... This is the group they come from.

 

Then there are truly bad... No confidence... Throwing pitches scared... Trying to be to fine and missing. Praying that the ball finds a glove. They are capable of giving up 6 runs in an inning any time they take the mound. There are not many of these guys in MLB because the majority of them are tossed aside to start up a drywall business.

 

With Greinke... I was probably a little harsh... He does have that hang a zero ability but he just hasn't hung enough zeros to be in the upper group.

 

Marcum... Jackson... Villanueva and McCarthy... Are clearly in the average group. I don't think any of them are zero hangers.

[old nurse]

I believe the topic is the current state of the starting corps.

 

So you should ignore the tomorrows? OK Gibson or Pelfrey could be as good as Baker. They individually might pitch as much this year as Baker does. Worley as good as Feldman. DeVries, Deduno or Duensing as good as Vilanueva

[Nick Nelson]

Have we really reached a point where Terry Ryan is being blasted for failing to acquire John freaking Lannan? Really?

[Riverbrian]

That point was reached a long time ago... Where ya been Nick?

[Monkeypaws]

So, after the 2010 season of 94 wins, we didn't sign any pitchers to improve our pitching staff even though we were a first place team, had money...so we should be an ideal spot for FA pitcher. Why no signing then? What's the excuse then? I'm guessing, because the team did well they didn't feel the need to upgrade the rotation? Cause first place teams almost always rest on their laurels on pitching after fluke seasons by some pitchers?

 

What about after 2009? First place team, 26th ranked rotation. Ideal spot for FA pitching, right? First place team...Who'd we sign in the offseason after 2009?

 

What about getting even one top notch pitcher in FA after 2002, 2003, 2004, 2006? first place teams, all ideal spots for FA pitchers. I'm guessing that was because our staff was good enough? Or was it because we didn't have money then?

 

How do you know they didn't make offers? You can't hold a gun to a free agent's head and order them to sign your offer, hence the "free" of free agent.