Jump to content
Twins Daily
  • Create Account

Twins to Sign RHP Chris Archer to One-Year Deal


Recommended Posts

He's definitely an upgrade on Lewis Thorpe. (BTW - When I heard the Twins signed Correa I first thought of Kevin Correia, not Carlos). The prospects will still definitely get a chance to pitch this season but now they'll get a chance to make their first starts in St. Paul and earn their way up instead of getting a scholarship.

Jax and Thorpe can both go to St. Paul and learn how to pitch out of the bullpen to see if either can contribute to a big league team in the future.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, Harrison Greeley III said:

2. Pinpoint what worked about his slider in 2015-17 and rediscover what he lost somewhere around 2018.

I am going to guess this is also velocity related, just like his declining fastball.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's funny (well, not all that funny, really), but even if Archer pitches no better than he did last season with the Rays and is just healthier...it'll still be a significant improvement over what we got out of the 58 (58!) starts we gave to Happ, Shoemaker, Jax, Dobnak, and Barnes last season. Of that 5, only Barnes had an ERA under 6 (congrats, Charlie: 5.92 was the best of the worst). That's how dreadful our starting pitching was last season. If Archer can lend basic competence to the group, then he's a decent veteran addition. If he can't stay healthy and can't perform, we can walk away pretty easily.

I'm hoping this is a "raise the floor" move that helps us hold the line and let what should be a pretty good offense keep us in games. I'm a big believer that the easiest way to improve your team from being bad to good is to stop giving innings to bad pitchers and ABs to bad hitters. Reduce the amount of time you let terrible players on the field. We had a lot of starts and innings from terrible starters last season. Healthy, Archer should be at least ok. Would I have preferred someone with a better recent track record and greater likelihood of higher value? Sure. But as a raise the floor move, I'm still happy with this.

(removing all those ABs from likes of Jake Cave, Astudillo, Rooker, Refsnyder, et al will help too...)

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It seems to me that the signing of Chris Archer itself is not risky, it's one year and very low cost. What is risky, though, is going into an ostensibly competetive season with a rotation that is built out of reclamation projects and unproven rookies. The write-up by Do-Hyoung Park goes as far as to say that Archer fills the last hole in the rotation. Whether or not you like this signing I think we can all agree that this is another back end addition, and they still don't have a front end, therefore this rotation still has a glaring hole.  I hope I'm wrong and that the rookies can step up and be very good, or that the reclamation projects can succeed, or that there is someone else coming. The way this rotation stands right now I can see another 3 games sweep in October if they make it that far.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, LA VIkes Fan said:

Besides, there is some potential upside here. Archer is 3 years away from being an effective MLB starter, with 2018 the last last decent year. He lost most of 2019 to a shoulder injury, and then part of 2020 and all of 2021 to a hip injury (likely because he changed his motion due to the shoulder issue). IF that's now all ok, a big IF, maybe he rebounds to a 3.75-4.25 ERA, 130-150 IP performance like he used to have before the injury. Not great, but plenty good enough for a #5 starter.   

100 innings with an ERA anywhere in the 4's would be a huge success IMO for a guy you're only paying 3.5 million and expecting to be your 5th starter.  

For reference, Shoemaker went 60 innings with an 8.06 ERA so that's a pretty low bar.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

45 minutes ago, Otto von Ballpark said:

You realize the Twins actually did cut Shoemaker as soon as he ERA reached that threshold, right? They didn't waste a spot on a guy with an 8.06 ERA.

In fact, Shoemaker's ERA entering his final start with the Twins was 5.90. Still not good, but in a 50 IP sample, it's hardly an "automatic cut" level.

After that start, Shoemaker was sent to the pen for mostly mop-up duty, 5 appearances and 4.2 IP over three weeks, before getting DFA'd. It didn't work out, but it didn't suck the life out of the organization either.

I was aware of that.

The June 4th start in Kansas City where he achieved one solitary out while giving up 8 Earned Runs was his final start (rightfully so) and his ERA ballooned from 5.90 to 7.28 over the course of that one third of an inning and then off to the bullpen for further elevation of the ERA.  

Actually... if he could have just avoided starts against Kansas City his ERA would have only been 6.04. 16 earned over 3.2 innings is bound to hurt a little. ?

Shoemaker wasn't the sole life sucker of our miserable season. We have a bunch of 1 year deals that I could of included in what would be my overall point. I'm singling out Shoemaker to make a briefer example.

I'd rather it be easier to escape from out and under the bad free agent. Younger players with options would have been sent down in May... even with better numbers.   

The fact that 5.90 isn't "an automatic cut". is my point. These vets get more rope and that rope can hang us. I get why they get the rope but I'd rather go young for roster movement ease and future development.          

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Riverbrian said:

The fact that 5.90 isn't "an automatic cut". is my point. These vets get more rope and that rope can hang us. I get why they get the rope but I'd rather go young for roster movement ease and future development.          

Roster flexibility and future development are certainly good things. We gained a bit in both areas when we bounced Shoemaker from the rotation. But once he was in a mop-up role in the pen, we stood to gain relatively little more from cutting him completely.

I'd extend that on the other side too: bouncing him earlier, before June, would have had diminishing returns, weighed against rising risks (especially coming off the limitations of 2020 shortened/cancelled seasons).

It didn't work out, but I really don't see how 2021 would have been any more productive with a tighter leash on Shoemaker (or Happ). As it was, we saw all the healthy young pitchers we wanted to see and then some, and saw them enough to slot a few into our 2022 staff while moving on from a few others (like Barnes).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Otto von Ballpark said:

Roster flexibility and future development are certainly good things. We gained a bit in both areas when we bounced Shoemaker from the rotation. But once he was in a mop-up role in the pen, we stood to gain relatively little more from cutting him completely.

I'd extend that on the other side too: bouncing him earlier, before June, would have had diminishing returns, weighed against rising risks (especially coming off the limitations of 2020 shortened/cancelled seasons).

It didn't work out, but I really don't see how 2021 would have been any more productive with a tighter leash on Shoemaker (or Happ). As it was, we saw all the healthy young pitchers we wanted to see and then some, and saw them enough to slot a few into our 2022 staff while moving on from a few others (like Barnes).

The gain is always significant in my eyes. The gain is the roster spot. The gain is MLB evaluation of players that might or might not have something of future use.  

I honestly admit... I don't know where I would have pulled the plug on Shoemaker... I'm guessing that I would have started plug pulling on Shoemaker and others right about the same time that I started looking at 2022 instead of 2021 which was probably sooner than the front office was ready to.   

Yeah... Barnes and Jax were slight improvements (if that) and I agree that they certainly didn't significantly move the needle for 2021 but I wasn't too interested in 2021 anymore. That roster spot provided to them should have been helpful for the upcoming 2022 decisions that were just around the corner. Barnes was evaluated and he isn't here now. I'm lot more comfortable with the decision on Barnes than I was with the decision on Nick Anderson because Nick wasn't given the chance to strike out two batters an inning for us at the major league level. 

Now, the argument that is typically used against my thinking is that the front office knows who to give that opportunity to, They do... better than I... but they haven't perfected it or Nick Anderson would have gotten that roster spot over Matt Belisle and Anderson is probably on our DL right now.      

I agree that 2020 put a huge crimp in the development arc that limited the 2021 options. 2022 looks like a different can of beans. This year... we got some young arms on the 40 man that are crowding the gate. Winder is 25... Archer was 23 back in his glory days... So... while I'm willing to give Bundy and Archer a chance to show that they can help us, if they go Shoemaker on us... I'd like less rope. ?  

These types of signings always make me nervous. It's the rope... It's the rope. 

   

 

   

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I like this move better if he's taking a spot from Bundy, but I really don't like both in the rotation. This team is never going to afford top end pitching on the free agent market. If they want to get over the hump, they have to develop their own and I don't want to keep kicking the can down the road and pushing that hump further and further back. They should really be finding a way to get Ryan, Winder, Balazovic, Duran, Woods-Richardson, Strotman and Henriquez at least 50 - 100 IP this year at the majors. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Look at the performances of Wood, DeSclafani, Gausman and even Sanchez the year or two before the Giants signed them. They were all pitchers who had previous success as a starter but recent struggles and some injuries. I don’t think it was good luck on the Giants part. Their staff deserves the credit for finding that talent again and Minnesota must do the same with Archer and Bundy. It won’t be bad luck either if the Twins continue to fail to identify inexpensive pitching help. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, Riverbrian said:

You are probably correct that injuries played a role in the length of Shoemaker's leash... our injury situation got ridiculous, however it still doesn't hold water.  

Shoemaker's ERA was 8.08 when he was finally designated for assignment on July 1st....

 

Shoemaker stunk and probably needed to go, but if you look at his game log, it sorta tells a different/weird story. From the beginning of the season: 

  • 6 IP, 1 run, so a quality start.
  • 5 IP, 4 runs, not so good.
  • 3.1 IP, 5 runs, another turd
  • 5.1 IP, 2 runs, so close to a quality start, but particularly because of the third start, he's at an ugly 5.49.
  • 3.1 IP, 8 runs. Ouch. They were down 4-0 after 3, so it was already tough to come back, so I suspect he was taking one for the team in trying to get another inning or two out of him, but after he gave up 8 runs total, Rocco mercifully takes him out. Now he's up to 7.83 and seems to be pitching for his job. They actually gave Thorpe a start after this to give a recently pummeled starting staff an extra day. And lo and behold, Shoemaker give us...
  • 5.0 IP, 0 runs. Yay!
  • 6.0 IP, 5 runs. Boo! He'd given up a run through four, but then gave up a pair in the fifth on a walk and a homer and then went 1-2-3. In the sixth, he went out-out, but then walk-homer and they're down 5-0 and a decent start had turned ugly.
  • 6.0 IP, 2 runs. Yay!
  • 6.0 IP, 1 run. Yay! And he'd gotten the ERA down to 5.48, thanks to nearly having four quality starts in a row, with one of them having turned into a bad outing. 
  • 4.1 IP, 5 runs. Boo. And it was about here that the team's injuries were starting to kick in, as I recall.
  • 0.1 IP, 8 runs. The turd that got him booted from the rotation and skied his ERA back to 7.28.

So yeah, the ERA was horrible, but he actually had a bunch of decent starts (particularly for a No. 5) thrown in there. It's just that when he was bad, he was really bad. And as a veteran, Rocco knew that he could take it for the team in a way that a rookie probably couldn't.

And with those starts, he also bought time for Ober. Ober had been up a couple weeks earlier and gave up four runs in four innings, but then went back down and apparently righted himself, coming back up to take Shoemaker's spot in the rotation. 

Then Shoemaker went to the pen in a last-gasp effort to right himself (and to eat innings, as I recall). He pitched a high-leverage game and threw a scoreless inning in the eighth before the Twins tied it in the bottom. Then he blew it in the ninth. A couple days later, he came in to mop up and threw the last two innings after they were down 11-2. He added to it, giving up three more runs in the process. 

But then he had eight days off. And Rocco went to him in desperation, bringing him in as the sixth guy out of the pen in an extra-inning game. And he threw two no-hit innings to pick up the win! And then a couple days later, he threw a scoreless ninth in a 4-1 loss, and you started to think that maybe he was going to be serviceable in the pen. And maybe, just maybe, would right himself enough to get back to the rotation. 

And then he came in to be the long man after Ober gave up four runs in three innings. Ober had gone walk-out-single to start the fourth. Shoemaker came in, gave up the sac fly and got an out, keeping the team in the game. But in the fifth, Bad Shoe returned. No, make that Really Bad Shoe. He gave up six that inning, and you knew the writing was on the wall. In a final act of sacrifice, he went back out for the sixth and gave up two more. After the game, he was DFAed with the 8.06 you describe.

So, as we agree, he needed to go. But I honestly think he did better than he's given credit for. He was quite close to having five quality starts out of his first nine. I bolded those above. But for comparison, using a similar generous interpretation of quality starts, Berrios also only had five quality-ish starts out of his first nine. It's just that Bad Shoe was so very, very bad. And again, I think part of that was Rocco knowing that Shoemaker could handle being thrown to the wolves in a way that others couldn't. And then the wheels fell off, but by that time, they had also bought time for Ober and gotten other guys healthy.

Again, I'm agreeing with you and pretty much everyone else that he needed to go. But that's the Paul Harvey Rest of the Story.

And sorry -- I wasn't planning to go into that much detail, but I was intrigued in trying to reconstruct what actually happened. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, Riverbrian said:

...Shoemaker wasn't the sole life sucker of our miserable season. We have a bunch of 1 year deals that I could of included in what would be my overall point. I'm singling out Shoemaker to make a briefer example...      

And Riverbrian sorta ninja-ed me by being briefer.

It's just that "brief" and "IT" are rarely used in the same sentence. You should hear me when it's my turn to preach on Sunday morning!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 hours ago, jrod23 said:

I'd probably move Montas down my list of wants after know that though.  Who knows, maybe it fully worked for him.  I had no idea Kenny Rogers had it done.  Didn't even know it was a thing back in 2001.  Again, good sleuthing.

I remember the days of plays not being able to return to form after TJ or ACL's.  Those days seem to be behind us and players coming back stronger.  Hopefully this type of surgery gets to that level.

Just looked this up because I thought I had read it recently: Montas had TOS and had his surgery in 2016, before he was established in the majors. It is a troubling injury for sure, but it seems safe to guess that he's more of a recovery success story than a health risk now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

54 minutes ago, Otto von Ballpark said:

Today’s sermon: “The Parable of the Shoe Maker”

My favorite folk singer has an album entirely of baseball songs, the title track being "Sermon on the Mound." If you search for "John McCutcheon baseball songs" on YouTube, you'll find his songs about Roberto Clemente, Yogi Berra, the '57 World Series, etc., but unfortunately not that cut. He also wrote a wonderful song following Hank Aaron's death, but it's unfortunately not been recorded. 

https://www.folkmusic.com/store/p18/Sermon_On_the_Mound.html

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 3/28/2022 at 7:14 PM, Vanimal46 said:

100%. With expanded playoffs all we need to do is hover around .500 until the deadline. Then we can pounce and make bold moves for August and beyond. 

Do you see enough of the prospects getting sufficient major league time in 3.5 months that the Twins are comfortable making a decision that at the moment they might not be? Do you think the FO is willing to reverse course and pay a premium in July for an even shorter rental? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, KirbyDome89 said:

Do you see enough of the prospects getting sufficient major league time in 3.5 months that the Twins are comfortable making a decision that at the moment they might not be? Do you think the FO is willing to reverse course and pay a premium in July for an even shorter rental? 

Yes, they’ll mix in quite a few of the young arms to see who sticks early on. Looks like Winder will get the first crack at it in the majors. 

Past history would indicate that Falvey and Levine have no problem changing course to supplement (arguably not enough) contending teams and sell when things aren’t looking good. Sometimes both directions within a week like 2018. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

50 minutes ago, Vanimal46 said:

Yes, they’ll mix in quite a few of the young arms to see who sticks early on. Looks like Winder will get the first crack at it in the majors. 

Past history would indicate that Falvey and Levine have no problem changing course to supplement (arguably not enough) contending teams and sell when things aren’t looking good. Sometimes both directions within a week like 2018. 

Sure, but I'm guessing even that won't be until May at the earliest, barring injury or an implosion. Realistically you're looking at a couple months of guys in and out of the rotation. I just don't think their stock, in the eyes of the Twins or the rest of the league (for better or worse) changes much in that time.

Flipping Jaime Garcia is one thing. What I'm really asking is do you expect them to commit to making a big time purchase and subsequently outbid other potential contenders? There's no history of that, and it's clear they aren't willing to throw multiple years or $$ at arms outside of the deadline either. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

28 minutes ago, KirbyDome89 said:

Sure, but I'm guessing even that won't be until May at the earliest, barring injury or an implosion. Realistically you're looking at a couple months of guys in and out of the rotation. I just don't think their stock, in the eyes of the Twins or the rest of the league (for better or worse) changes much in that time.

Flipping Jaime Garcia is one thing. What I'm really asking is do you expect them to commit to making a big time purchase and subsequently outbid other potential contenders? There's no history of that, and it's clear they aren't willing to throw multiple years or $$ at arms outside of the deadline either. 

I’m not sure what we’re arguing here. The group of pitchers in the building is what we’re starting with. 3.5 months is more than enough time to sift through prospects and see who will or won’t stick. All they gotta do is hover around .500 then Falvey and Levine have historically made supplemental moves to make a playoff push. Are you implying with your question that in order to be contenders, we need to go after the shiniest brand name player available at the deadline?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 hours ago, Vanimal46 said:

I’m not sure what we’re arguing here. The group of pitchers in the building is what we’re starting with. 3.5 months is more than enough time to sift through prospects and see who will or won’t stick. All they gotta do is hover around .500 then Falvey and Levine have historically made supplemental moves to make a playoff push. Are you implying with your question that in order to be contenders, we need to go after the shiniest brand name player available at the deadline?

I see the prospect value holding steady; 30-40 IP won't make dramatic changes or provide much of a SS to make long term assessments. I guess I don't know why we'd assume the Twins would pay a premium in July for a shorter rental if they aren't doing it now. If they're comfortable starting with the season with this rotation, I don't see them being all that motivated to wheel and deal mid season. 

They've made moves, but they've sold far more often than they've purchased. Romo is probably their biggest "get." There's no precedent for acquiring the type of impact arm (Berrios tier) this rotation needs. I'm out on expecting a reliever or middling end rotation piece to move the needle.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...
On 3/28/2022 at 8:04 PM, Squirrel said:

Yes, he's already passed his medicals and is already in camp

 

I had no doubt about that.

The "medicals" I was interested in are the "he's recovered and there's nothing physically preventing him from pitching at the level he did before the surgery, etc."

We're talking about the injury / condition which finished off Phil Hughes, one which has proven difficult to recover from in the past, after all,

I'll say this - off first two starts, it looks real good.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
The Twins Daily Caretaker Fund
The Twins Daily Caretaker Fund

You all care about this site. The next step is caring for it. We’re asking you to caretake this site so it can remain the premier Twins community on the internet.

×
×
  • Create New...