Article: Spring Organizational Depth Chart: The Starting Pitchers

[Seth Stohs]

You can view the page at http://twinsdaily.com/content.php?r=1448-Spring-Organizational-Depth-Chart-The-Starting-Pitchers

[Jeff A]

The Twins rotation looks like a bunch of fourth and fifth starters. That's not great, but at least they do, for the most part, look like legitimate major league starters. If they can just pitch five or six innings consistently, it will at least be an improvement over last year.

[nicksaviking]

You have Baxendale, Melotakis, Rogers, Duffy, Bard and Powell from last years draft class getting a chance at starting. Is this what you would do with these young men or is this information that you have been made aware of? Within reason, I'd like to see most of those arms from the 2012 draft to get looks as a starter, but I was starting to assume it was just wishfull thinking.

 

Aside from Rogers, Bard and Berrios, I believe the only draft pick last year to get starts was Andre Martinez who didn't dazzle but the Twins did pay over-slot to ensure he didn't go to college. Would you have him with the short season crew, or is the team not likely to keep him in the rotation?

[tjsyam921]

Twins starters may all be 4th or 5th on other teams but at least their different 4-5 starters than years past. At least their giving some one else a shot instead of running the same guys out there year after year.

[Shane Wahl]

The Cedar Rapids rotation matches its position player roster in excellence. That is going to be a fun team to watch (esp. for JC). And if Bard is legit (still have some question marks, but we'll see) and Salcedo and Boer can pitch as well as they can, the Fort Myers rotation is going to be excellent as well.

[Seth Stohs]

You have Baxendale, Melotakis, Rogers, Duffy, Bard and Powell from last years draft class getting a chance at starting. Is this what you would do with these young men or is this information that you have been made aware of? Within reason, I'd like to see most of those arms from the 2012 draft to get looks as a starter, but I was starting to assume it was just wishfull thinking.

 

Aside from Rogers, Bard and Berrios, I believe the only draft pick last year to get starts was Andre Martinez who didn't dazzle but the Twins did pay over-slot to ensure he didn't go to college. Would you have him with the short season crew, or is the team not likely to keep him in the rotation?

 

It's what I know they are doing with those guys. I don't know where they will start the season (Beloit or Ft. Myers). I know Bard will be worked into the starting role.

 

Regarding Martinez, the Twins had agreed to pay him over-slot, but then they found something in his physical or something and ended up signing him for well below slot. He's very young, he'll definitely be in the extended spring training group. He'll get a chance to start at some point, I'm sure.

[Seth Stohs]

The Cedar Rapids rotation matches its position player roster in excellence. That is going to be a fun team to watch (esp. for JC). And if Bard is legit (still have some question marks, but we'll see) and Salcedo and Boer can pitch as well as they can, the Fort Myers rotation is going to be excellent as well.

 

Bard may or may not prove to be worth a late supplemental first round pick... like any pick... but there's no reason to not believe he's got a chance to be quite good when healthy. He certainly has the pitches, so now it will come to the development and the health.

[Kwak]

"...4 runs in his 5-6 innings...". Hmm, ERA from 6.00 to 7.20, my oh my! 2 years of this "upgrade".

[ashbury]

"...4 runs in his 5-6 innings...". Hmm, ERA from 6.00 to 7.20, my oh my! 2 years of this "upgrade".

 

4 runs or less. He could keep the ERA down around 4.90 with that.

[diehardtwinsfan]

I didn't realize the Phillies were down on Worley so much that he was the 54th starter.

[cmathewson]

I think Deduno has a shot at the rotation if they decide to send Gibson down to start the year. He's pitched very well really since mid-August. He's the only guy on the list of options who has electric stuff, and he seems to have turned a corner with his control.

[Seth Stohs]

I think Deduno has a shot at the rotation if they decide to send Gibson down to start the year. He's pitched very well really since mid-August. He's the only guy on the list of options who has electric stuff, and he seems to have turned a corner with his control.

 

I'm kind of in agreement with you. I think I saw a corner turned. Control was always the issue. I guess since he's not on the 40 man roster, I don't think they'd do it on Opening Day. They'll make him prove himself for a month or so in AAA (like Gibson), but I'm impressed with what he's done since then. Feels real.

[ThePuck]

Didn't Deduno have an ERA over 6 in 5 starts during September/Oct, with like 15 or 16 walks in just over 20 IP?

[roger]

I'm kind of in agreement with you. I think I saw a corner turned. Control was always the issue. I guess since he's not on the 40 man roster, I don't think they'd do it on Opening Day. They'll make him prove himself for a month or so in AAA (like Gibson), but I'm impressed with what he's done since then. Feels real.

 

Plus he is missing a good part of spring training while with the Dominican Republic team. That can't help making the opening day roster.

[Thrylos]

I really hope that the one Twins' pitcher who was left out (Rich Harden) has the best season of all the starters (and that he is starting), which would probably make this a competing team. Otherwise, until 2015, it will be hard to have a good rotation (or even decent for that matter.)

[fairweather]

Some people think it's better this year because the Twins have got some new names in the rotation. Everyone knows how the season went last year for Liriano, Baker and Pavano but I'd take those 3 over Correia, Pelfrey, and Worley.

[PseudoSABR]

Some people think it's better this year because the Twins have got some new names in the rotation. Everyone knows how the season went last year for Liriano, Baker and Pavano but I'd take those 3 over Correia, Pelfrey, and Worley.

None of the pitchers you prefer are likely to be ready/healthy enough to start the season. So there's that.

[Brock Beauchamp]

Some people think it's better this year because the Twins have got some new names in the rotation. Everyone knows how the season went last year for Liriano, Baker and Pavano but I'd take those 3 over Correia, Pelfrey, and Worley.

 

I don't know if I would, honestly. Pelfrey is the real wildcard but if you line him up against Liriano, he doesn't look so bad. Worley isn't a bad alternative to Baker because Scott could never stay healthy, but was quite good when pitching. Both Correia and Pavano are pretty bad options no matter what.

[bird]

Some people think it's better this year because the Twins have got some new names in the rotation. Everyone knows how the season went last year for Liriano, Baker and Pavano but I'd take those 3 over Correia, Pelfrey, and Worley.

 

Let's test our mettle as a prospective GMs. I'll go with Worley over Baker, Pelfrey over Liriano, and Correia over Pavano. See you in September.

[jokin]

Let's test our mettle as a prospective GMs. I'll go with Worley over Baker, Pelfrey over Liriano, and Correia over Pavano. See you in September.

 

And I'll see you with Marcum, Lannan and Saunders...

[PseudoSABR]

And I'll see you with Marcum, Lannan and Saunders...

And I'll trump you with Grienke, Sanchez, and Lohse!

[jokin]

And I'll trump you with Grienke, Sanchez, and Lohse!

 

D*** you, and your Big Media Market Budget....

[PseudoSABR]

With enough innings (which you seem to assume), Lannan costs $5mil, Saunders, 7.5, Marcum, 8; for a total of 20.5 million. The Twins spent about 10.5 million for the three pitchers they acquired. We were both working with fantasy budgets.

[Kwak]

With enough innings (which you seem to assume), Lannan costs $5mil, Saunders, 7.5, Marcum, 8; for a total of 20.5 million. The Twins spent about 10.5 million for the three pitchers they acquired. We were both working with fantasy budgets.

 

This raises the question: Should Ryan have just saved that $10MM and rolled with last year's rotation--and either lose 100+ and select very early in the draft, or give those fellows one more shot to prove themselves? Hint: Based on earlier threads, the Twins aren't supposed to block the new talent from promotion.

[PseudoSABR]

This raises the question: Should Ryan have just saved that $10MM and rolled with last year's rotation--and either lose 100+ and select very early in the draft, or give those fellows one more shot to prove themselves? Hint: Based on earlier threads, the Twins aren't supposed to block the new talent from promotion.

Do you blame Ryan for the budget or ownership?

[jokin]

With enough innings (which you seem to assume), Lannan costs $5mil, Saunders, 7.5, Marcum, 8; for a total of 20.5 million. The Twins spent about 10.5 million for the three pitchers they acquired. We were both working with fantasy budgets.

 

Actually, they have committed $10M to Correia (2 years) and $4M to Pelfrey plus $.5M to Worley, which makes the total $14.5M. Meanwhile, still cutting around ~$25M from the payroll.

 

The base salary for the 3 pitchers I proposed is $13M. And, they are all on one-year, incentive-laden contracts. In addition, it's extremely unlikely that Lannan and Marcum will hit most of their incentives, so the net cost of the 3 acquisitions is much likely closer to $15-18 M than the $20.5M potential max cost. So, assuming the Twins acquire Worley anyways via the trade, the Twins could have had 3 better pitchers for only a few million more dollars than the 2 they did sign, one attached with question marks after coming off of TJ and the other, 2 years committed to one of the worst SPs in baseball.

 

Regardless, throwing Greinke, Lohse, Sanchez into the conversation is sheer fantasy and not anything close to equivalent comparisons, as you're talking about $275M combined in committments to the three players.

[PseudoSABR]

Actually, they have committed $10M to Correia (2 years) and $4M to Pelfrey plus $.5M to Worley, which makes the total $14.5M. Meanwhile, still cutting around ~$25M from the payroll.

 

The base salary for the 3 pitchers I proposed is $13M. And, they are all on one-year, incentive-laden contracts. In addition, it's extremely unlikely that Lannan and Marcum will hit most of their incentives, so the net cost of the 3 acquisitions is much likely closer to $15-18 M than the $20.5M potential max cost. So, assuming the Twins acquire Worley anyways via the trade, the Twins could have had 3 better pitchers for only a few million more dollars than the 2 they did sign, one attached with question marks after coming off of TJ and the other, 2 years committed to one of the worst SPs in baseball.

Well you certainly construed every contract to fit your premise, including Correia's second year cost while trumpeting the base salaries of health risk pitchers. If Marcum and Lanan don't hit most of their incentives, the haven't been effective--you simply can't have it both ways.

 

Moderator edit -- this is a great thread and I do not want to interrupt, but please refrain from characterizing other people's posts as "patronizing and juvenile". Also, I don't believe that he intended his formatting to be inflammatory -- it seems to me that he was trying to make his position clearer -- and you are both making good points and it will be disappointing if the focus gets distracted by personal attacks.

 

Regardless, throwing Greinke, Lohse, Sanchez into the conversation is sheer fantasy and not anything close to equivalent comparisons, as you're talking about $275M combined in committments to the three players.

Obviously.

 

My point isn't to suggest the Twins should have signed the players that they did (Pelfry/Correia, etc.), nor that they should have signed Sanchez or Grienke, but rather my point is that the pitchers you suggest are only a better bet in an idealistic outcome.

 

My sense is that the Twins are cheap and health-risk adverse, not stupid.

[jokin]

Well you certainly construed every contract to fit your premise, including Correia's second year cost while trumpeting the base salaries of health risk pitchers. If Marcum and Lanan don't hit most of their incentives, the haven't been effective--you simply can't have it both ways.

 

And seriously, if you can't make your point without bolding certain elements, you need to rewrite your post. It's somehow both patronizing and juvenile at the same time.

 

Obviously.

 

My point isn't to suggest the Twins should have signed the players that they did (Pelfry/Correia, etc.), nor that they should have signed Sanchez or Grienke, but rather my point is that the pitchers you suggest are only a better bet in an idealistic outcome.

 

My sense is that the Twins are cheap and health-risk adverse, not stupid.

 

Patronized-easily yet again- and an infusion of pejorative invective, all in one sentence of faux-dismissal, well played. Yet you "somehow" completely missed my point, even with the paint-by-number boldfaced dollar amounts that I provided.

 

Moderator edit -- this is what happens when someone starts throwing around words like "patronizing and juvenile." You gentlemen are having a great debate that is illuminating and fun. Go after each other's ideas as aggressively as you wish, but please refrain from personal attacks that are irrelevant to what is otherwise a profound discussion.

 

An "idealistic outcome", what exactly does that mean? In point of fact and directly contrary to your throw-away proposal, I "realistically" proposed 3 guys that the Twins "very realistically" could have obtained- with clearly better track records, predictable outcomes, durability and medical histories, and for only a slight premium to what they actually committed to (and yes, it is $14M guaranteed money that the Twins are obligated to pay).

 

Finally, we both agree that the Twins have made a choice to be miserly over the next few seasons, but how can you say the Twins are "health-risk adverse", given that virtually every SP in the potential rotation has health questions that are yet to be answered, and of the FA pitchers, all but Correia have serious health concerns that make them more wild cards than players who can legitimately have their likely 2013 production parameters penciled in?

[jokin]

If Marcum and Lanan don't hit most of their incentives, the haven't been effective--you simply can't have it both ways.

 

...while trumpeting the base salaries of health risk pitchers.

 

Wrong. If Marcum and Lannan don't hit most of their incentives, which are based on innings and starts, they can still produce stats similar to what they have accomplished in most of their careers, which would be superior to last year's Twins starters and likely far better than what Correia will produce (I'm sure most will agree that Pelfrey is a wild card that might hit, but certainly a higher risk for a predictable outcome than Marcum or Lannan).

 

Wrong again. Marcum is the one health risk pitcher of the 3, Saunders and Lannan have a history of strong durability.

[glunn]

Wrong. If Marcum and Lannan don't hit most of their incentives, which are based on innings and starts, they will still produce stats similar to what they have accomplished in most of their careers, which would be superior to last year's Twins starters and likely far better than what Correia will produce (I'm sure most will agree that Pelfrey is a wild card that might hit, but certainly a higher risk for a predictable outcome than Marcum or Lannan).

 

Can someone enlighten us as to exactly what incentives they have in their contracts?