Pablo Lopez update via Ken Rosenthal

[Vanimal46]

19 minutes ago, Mike Sixel said:

If the pitchers they have are doing well, you want them traded, or you'll assume their replacements are bad because they didn't trade players doing well?

What?

[chpettit19]

8 minutes ago, Greglw3 said:

5th best starter??? 180 IP 157 H ~1.16 WHIP in 2022. 3.52 cumulative ERA over last 3 seasons. That’s not 5th best or if it is, we win the World Series!

How would you order these 6 guys?

Pitcher 1: 84 GS (5.4 IP/GS), 3.91 ERA, 108 ERA+, 3.68 FIP, 1.177 WHIP, 8.8 SO9
Pitcher 2: 92 GS (5.3 IP/GS), 3.39 ERA, 133 ERA+, 3.53 FIP, 1.147 WHIP, 10.2 SO9
Pitcher 3: 58 GS (5.6 IP/GS), 3.97 ERA, 106 ERA+, 3.80 FIP, 1.081 WHIP, 10.0 SO9
Pitcher 4: 90 GS (5.3 IP/GS), 4.27 ERA, 108 ERA+, 4.06 FIP, 1.243 WHIP, 9.9 SO9
Pitcher 5: 32 GS (5.4 IP/GS), 3.63 ERA, 108 ERA+, 3.90 FIP, 1.054 WHIP, 9.4 SO9
Pitcher 6: 31 GS (4.8 IP/GS), 3.82 ERA, 108 ERA+, 3.94 FIP, 1.146 WHIP, 8.9 SO9

[Parfigliano]

40 minutes ago, Vanimal46 said:

If they don’t and the prospects remain in AAA purgatory I’ll be driving the “pipeline is a myth” bandwagon. 

In that scenario I'll ride shotgun 

[Mike Sixel]

25 minutes ago, Vanimal46 said:

What?

You said they should trade their starting pitchers, even if they are in first. If they are in first, it is likely those pitchers are doing well..... But you insist if they don't trade them, that says sometime about their replacements, not them. 

[Vanimal46]

13 minutes ago, Mike Sixel said:

You said they should trade their starting pitchers, even if they are in first. If they are in first, it is likely those pitchers are doing well..... But you insist if they don't trade them, that says sometime about their replacements, not them. 

Your second sentence is all your imagination, man. Never said anything close to that. 

This is a mid market team that needs to continuously replenish the roster with MLB ready prospects if there’s any hope of a prolonged contention window. Sonny Gray and Kenta Maeda are highly unlikely to be extended after this season. Nor should the Twins. Maeda will be 35. Gray will be 34. 

By July 31, one or multiple of SWR/Varland/Balazovic/Winder should be proving they are ready for a rotation spot. Hence why they should trade both Gray and Maeda at the deadline. To get something in return before they depart in FA for nothing.

If none of the prospects are proving they are ready for an MLB rotation spot by July 31, the pipeline is a myth. And I will be driving the bandwagon saying so. That’s all I’ve said in this thread. Not anything remotely close to your 2nd sentence that you’ve made up on your own. And I would appreciate you not injecting your own preconceptions into the discussion. 

[Physics Guy]

3 hours ago, Vanimal46 said:

Your second sentence is all your imagination, man. Never said anything close to that. 

This is a mid market team that needs to continuously replenish the roster with MLB ready prospects if there’s any hope of a prolonged contention window. Sonny Gray and Kenta Maeda are highly unlikely to be extended after this season. Nor should the Twins. Maeda will be 35. Gray will be 34. 

By July 31, one or multiple of SWR/Varland/Balazovic/Winder should be proving they are ready for a rotation spot. Hence why they should trade both Gray and Maeda at the deadline. To get something in return before they depart in FA for nothing.

If none of the prospects are proving they are ready for an MLB rotation spot by July 31, the pipeline is a myth. And I will be driving the bandwagon saying so. That’s all I’ve said in this thread. Not anything remotely close to your 2nd sentence that you’ve made up on your own. And I would appreciate you not injecting your own preconceptions into the discussion. 

I appreciate you clarifying your position as I too was confused.  I'm not sure the vitriol in the rest of the post is necessary.  While I now better understand your position, I couldn't disagree more.  Yes, a team like the Twins needs to maximize assets.  Trading expiring contracts is certainly one way to do so, but doing that in the middle of a potential playoff push makes no sense to me.  Regardless of how well one of the young pitchers is doing, it's unlikely they would be more valuable than a veteran that is pitching well.  The clubhouse would be enraged if they traded a starter in that scenario.  If the team is floundering, by all means they should trade.  Actually, not trading them in that situation is negligence by the FO in my opinion. 

[Squirrel]

13 hours ago, Vanimal46 said:

Your second sentence is all your imagination, man. Never said anything close to that. 

This is a mid market team that needs to continuously replenish the roster with MLB ready prospects if there’s any hope of a prolonged contention window. Sonny Gray and Kenta Maeda are highly unlikely to be extended after this season. Nor should the Twins. Maeda will be 35. Gray will be 34. 

By July 31, one or multiple of SWR/Varland/Balazovic/Winder should be proving they are ready for a rotation spot. Hence why they should trade both Gray and Maeda at the deadline. To get something in return before they depart in FA for nothing.

If none of the prospects are proving they are ready for an MLB rotation spot by July 31, the pipeline is a myth. And I will be driving the bandwagon saying so. That’s all I’ve said in this thread. Not anything remotely close to your 2nd sentence that you’ve made up on your own. And I would appreciate you not injecting your own preconceptions into the discussion. 

I actually think this sounds like you are creating a reason to dislike the FO. If the team is doing well, even if they are in first place, with a roster the FO put together, based on trades and bringing up young players, you will constitute the pipeline a failure because we won’t trade half of a winning rotation in order to play prospects? If the FO did that, I would revolt. The time to trade expiring contracts at the deadline is when the team is doing poorly not when it’s winning. If that expiring contract isn’t contributing to the winning season and there is a chance to get someone who will, by all means, yes. None of that has any bearing on the pipeline, at all, imo. And my guess is, the young players you’ve mentioned WILL have contributed to the good season, if indeed there is one. Or, they are used to get someone to add to a winning roster that could strengthen our chances. That, actually, would be an example of the pipeline bearing fruit.

[chpettit19]

12 hours ago, Vanimal46 said:

Your second sentence is all your imagination, man. Never said anything close to that. 

This is a mid market team that needs to continuously replenish the roster with MLB ready prospects if there’s any hope of a prolonged contention window. Sonny Gray and Kenta Maeda are highly unlikely to be extended after this season. Nor should the Twins. Maeda will be 35. Gray will be 34. 

By July 31, one or multiple of SWR/Varland/Balazovic/Winder should be proving they are ready for a rotation spot. Hence why they should trade both Gray and Maeda at the deadline. To get something in return before they depart in FA for nothing.

If none of the prospects are proving they are ready for an MLB rotation spot by July 31, the pipeline is a myth. And I will be driving the bandwagon saying so. That’s all I’ve said in this thread. Not anything remotely close to your 2nd sentence that you’ve made up on your own. And I would appreciate you not injecting your own preconceptions into the discussion. 

Yeah, if the Twins are leading the division and trade any players who are playing well off the major league roster I'm going to be pissed. And I know a number of other fans who would be as well. I don't get why any fan would want that to happen. I don't care if all of SWR/Varland/Balazovic/Winder are "proving they are ready for a rotation spot" if Gray and Maeda are pitching well and the team is winning. There's never a situation that I'd be good with trading veterans who are contributing to a successful season. An IL stint here and there will provide those young guys opportunities throughout the year to get their feet wet. Whether they're ready or not. That's the nature of the beast.

Not to mention the option of putting the young guys in the pen down the stretch like plenty of teams do. They'll carry 13 pitchers all season. That means there's 13 spots for those 4 guys to get opportunities to throw major league innings. Unless you're suggesting all 13 guys on the opening day roster are going to stay healthy and productive all season long. What happens when you trade Maeda and Gray at the end of July and Mahle goes down in his first start of August? Then Ober strains his groin again in early September. Now all 4 of those youngsters really better be ready because they're going to need to carry the rotation the rest of the way to the division title and into the playoffs. No, thank you. I'll hold onto my veterans on a winning team.

The Twins have Ryan and Ober under control through 2027. They have those other 4 into 2030 and beyond. Paddack through 2025. Mahle is a good extension candidate. Prielipp, Raya, and Festa following relatively closely on the SWR/Varland/Balazovic/Winder quartet, and 1 or 2 of them should be ready in the next 2 or 3 years. While you can never have enough pitching, and adding to the pipeline is always good, there doesn't seem to be a dramatic need to sell veterans in the middle of a successful season when you have 3 rotation spots spoken for for the next 2 years, and a reasonable extension candidate for a 4th spot. I don't see any reason at all to force open 2 rotation spots in the middle of a division race simply to get young guys time. None at all.

You'd be driving the "pipeline is a myth" bandwagon based on the team not being willing to force open multiple rotation spots during a successful season. I don't get that logic at all. Again, there's 13 pitching slots, and injuries, on the big league roster, so you don't need to send off 40% of the rotation to give the youngsters a shot. But I'd be driving the "fire the FO in the middle of the season" bandwagon if they traded off successful pitchers in the middle of a successful season simply to get young guys a shot.

[August J Gloop]

I feel like this whole 'trade starters off a 1st place ball club' discourse is a cousin to 'win a playoff game and we'll talk'. It's simply bananas to think that there is any scenario where a first place ball club trades any valuable pitcher. If a pitcher in that scenario gets traded it's from the DFA line. That seems likely to be Pagan's fate this year as some of these young fellas will be putting up good numbers at CHS. 

And in every offseason until Correa's 6 main years are up, the FO better be trading like they're a 1st place ball club. Prospects and vets who have been replaced out for quality vets who raise the floor and the ceiling. 

Right now, the projections have the twins at 84-86 wins. That might seem a little steep to the half empty crowd, but remember that the Pythag last year was 80-82. That was with negative contributions at catcher, corner OF and middle relief. Technically, two of those have been addressed with +WAR and the loss in WAR from losing Gio seems to be covered with full season Miranda and Farmer. Adding Lopez at the cost of Arraez is a wash or even negative, if you don't see Kiriloff or Wallner or whoever as able to cover that margin. 

[David HK]

14 hours ago, chpettit19 said:

How would you order these 6 guys?

Pitcher 1: 84 GS (5.4 IP/GS), 3.91 ERA, 108 ERA+, 3.68 FIP, 1.177 WHIP, 8.8 SO9
Pitcher 2: 92 GS (5.3 IP/GS), 3.39 ERA, 133 ERA+, 3.53 FIP, 1.147 WHIP, 10.2 SO9
Pitcher 3: 58 GS (5.6 IP/GS), 3.97 ERA, 106 ERA+, 3.80 FIP, 1.081 WHIP, 10.0 SO9
Pitcher 4: 90 GS (5.3 IP/GS), 4.27 ERA, 108 ERA+, 4.06 FIP, 1.243 WHIP, 9.9 SO9
Pitcher 5: 32 GS (5.4 IP/GS), 3.63 ERA, 108 ERA+, 3.90 FIP, 1.054 WHIP, 9.4 SO9
Pitcher 6: 31 GS (4.8 IP/GS), 3.82 ERA, 108 ERA+, 3.94 FIP, 1.146 WHIP, 8.9 SO9

I like 2 + 3 you betcha!  But I sure can't wait to find out their secret identities!

[chpettit19]

32 minutes ago, David HK said:

I like 2 + 3 you betcha!  But I sure can't wait to find out their secret identities!

Your choices were Gray and Maeda! 1- Lopez, 2- Gray, 3- Maeda, 4- Mahle, 5- Ryan, 6- Ober.

[specialiststeve]

Unless you are getting someone that has the potential to be an ace... Cabrera AND Luzardo... we should not be moving Arreaz. Clearly we would have to add pieces for that but An Arreaz, Kepler, Martain and a lower level guy should get that done. Lopez is a good pitcher ... I saw him pitch in Miami on a baseball trip and he is good.. not an ace. 

[laloesch]

19 hours ago, howeda7 said:

Do you think Paddock is better than Lopez? I view them as about even, but one is more likely to be hurt.

Lopez is better SLIGHTLY.  

[laloesch]

19 minutes ago, specialiststeve said:

Unless you are getting someone that has the potential to be an ace... Cabrera AND Luzardo... we should not be moving Arreaz. Clearly we would have to add pieces for that but An Arreaz, Kepler, Martain and a lower level guy should get that done. Lopez is a good pitcher ... I saw him pitch in Miami on a baseball trip and he is good.. not an ace. 

I agree I think there were some grumblings that the Twins weren't really interested in Lopez certainly not for Arraez one for one, but replace him with Kepler i agree with previous posters that it would probably be a done deal.  From what i've read though the Twins were desiring a deal for Cabrera or Luzardo, which is the right direction to push this me thinks.   

[Craig Arko]

Are there examples of teams who have done this? Traded veteran starters for prospects while contending? I won’t be shocked if there are, but they would be pretty rare, I expect.

[AlwaysinModeration]

22 hours ago, howeda7 said:

I don't really see how trading Paddock is the issue then. Lopez has two years of team control regardless of what we give up. I'd much rather give up Paddock than Larnach or Woods-Richardson etc.

Are you purposely misspelling the guy’s name?

[Vanimal46]

11 hours ago, chpettit19 said:

There's never a situation that I'd be good with trading veterans who are contributing to a successful season

2018 must have really pissed you off then. Really sucks that we got Duran out of the deal. 

[chpettit19]

11 minutes ago, Vanimal46 said:

2018 must have really pissed you off then. Really sucks that we got Duran out of the deal. 

Good try, but on July 27th, 2018 (the day Escobar was traded) the Twins were 48-54 and 8 games back in the division and had a -12 run differential. Nobody here has suggested not trading Gray and/or Maeda from a below .500 team.

[Vanimal46]

10 hours ago, Craig Arko said:

Are there examples of teams who have done this? Traded veteran starters for prospects while contending? I won’t be shocked if there are, but they would be pretty rare, I expect.

What does contending mean to you on July 31? 

[Vanimal46]

1 hour ago, chpettit19 said:

Good try, but on July 27th, 2018 (the day Escobar was traded) the Twins were 48-54 and 8 games back in the division and had a -12 run differential. Nobody here has suggested not trading Gray and/or Maeda from a below .500 team.

Bet a beverage of the winners choice that Sonny Gray and Kenta Maeda will be wearing different uniforms on August 1, 2023? I’m game. 

[Major League Ready]

On 1/18/2023 at 8:10 PM, Vanimal46 said:

Your second sentence is all your imagination, man. Never said anything close to that. 

This is a mid market team that needs to continuously replenish the roster with MLB ready prospects if there’s any hope of a prolonged contention window. Sonny Gray and Kenta Maeda are highly unlikely to be extended after this season. Nor should the Twins. Maeda will be 35. Gray will be 34. 

By July 31, one or multiple of SWR/Varland/Balazovic/Winder should be proving they are ready for a rotation spot. Hence why they should trade both Gray and Maeda at the deadline. To get something in return before they depart in FA for nothing.

If none of the prospects are proving they are ready for an MLB rotation spot by July 31, the pipeline is a myth. And I will be driving the bandwagon saying so. That’s all I’ve said in this thread. Not anything remotely close to your 2nd sentence that you’ve made up on your own. And I would appreciate you not injecting your own preconceptions into the discussion. 

Cleveland is a good example of your point.  Kluber for 1 year vs Clause for 6+ years.  Clevinger for 1 year vs Quantrill, Naylor, and miller for 5-6 years.  1 year of Carrasco / Lindor vs 5-6 years of Rosario and Gimenez.  Those players provided 15.4 fWAR last year.  They would not have anywhere near the team they have today had the not "replenished" 

[Squirrel]

9 hours ago, Vanimal46 said:

Bet a beverage of the winners choice that Sonny Gray and Kenta Maeda will be wearing different uniforms on August 1, 2023? I’m game. 

I won’t take that bet because it is dependent on too many things. If those two are contributing to a winning record, then no, they won’t be traded. If we still have a winning record but one or both aren’t contributing, then yeah, one or both could be traded at the deadline. But, that would also depend on the readiness of others. And how well those two are contributing, one of them could be extended, but, again, a lot of ‘it depends’ in that, too.

But your definitive statement that if they aren’t traded, regardless how they are doing, regardless how the Twins are doing, the pipeline is a myth … that statement is, in itself, a myth. Or at the very least, just doesn’t correlate. However, if the Twins are doing poorly, yes, they could both be traded and should be traded. That is when you trade veteran players. However, how they are doing will determine the return they get. And whether Maeda is starting or relieving will also make a difference to all of this.

There is just way too much ‘absolutism’ in your opinion to something, imo, simply does not correlate.

[Major League Ready]

On 1/19/2023 at 2:35 AM, Squirrel said:

I actually think this sounds like you are creating a reason to dislike the FO. If the team is doing well, even if they are in first place, with a roster the FO put together, based on trades and bringing up young players, you will constitute the pipeline a failure because we won’t trade half of a winning rotation in order to play prospects? If the FO did that, I would revolt. The time to trade expiring contracts at the deadline is when the team is doing poorly not when it’s winning. If that expiring contract isn’t contributing to the winning season and there is a chance to get someone who will, by all means, yes. None of that has any bearing on the pipeline, at all, imo. And my guess is, the young players you’ve mentioned WILL have contributed to the good season, if indeed there is one. Or, they are used to get someone to add to a winning roster that could strengthen our chances. That, actually, would be an example of the pipeline bearing fruit.

This was your position last year.  "They were in 1st place" so it would be a travesty if they didn't go for it.  Well, they went for it with a team that in no way was an actual contender, especially with the injuries they had sustained.  Fans live in the right now.  That's easy to manage.  To manage sustained success is monumentally more difficult.  I hope they act as Vanimal suggests if they are in contention for the division this year but once again not a true contender.   

[Squirrel]

29 minutes ago, Major League Ready said:

This was your position last year.  "They were in 1st place" so it would be a travesty if they didn't go for it.  Well, they went for it with a team that in no way was an actual contender, especially with the injuries they had sustained.  Fans live in the right now.  That's easy to manage.  To manage sustained success is monumentally more difficult.  I hope they act as Vanimal suggests if they are in contention for the division this year but once again not a true contender.   

Oy ... now you are just convoluting the discussion further.

[chpettit19]

10 hours ago, Vanimal46 said:

Bet a beverage of the winners choice that Sonny Gray and Kenta Maeda will be wearing different uniforms on August 1, 2023? I’m game. 

Both? I will make that bet. 🤝

[chpettit19]

10 hours ago, Vanimal46 said:

What does contending mean to you on July 31? 

Above .500 and within 5 games of the division. I actually thought about looking up what examples might be out there, but it felt like too much work so I didn't do it. Would be interested to see what examples there are, though.

[tarheeltwinsfan]

On 1/17/2023 at 4:53 PM, Craig Arko said:

How about Gallo?

Now that I think about it, why not Gallo?

[Major League Ready]

1 hour ago, Squirrel said:

Oy ... now you are just convoluting the discussion further.

Perhaps but the driving force for most of these discussions is that many fans are very focused on the right now.  Sustaining success requires a very different focus.  I have complied the data in terms of acquisition method of top players for the past 20 years.   Vanimal's position is very clearly supported if one were to look back at how playoff teams have been built by teams in the bottom half of revenue. 

[Squirrel]

1 hour ago, Major League Ready said:

Perhaps but the driving force for most of these discussions is that many fans are very focused on the right now.  Sustaining success requires a very different focus.  I have complied the data in terms of acquisition method of top players for the past 20 years.   Vanimal's position is very clearly supported if one were to look back at how playoff teams have been built by teams in the bottom half of revenue. 

Okay ... then give us examples of when team in contention traded a veteran on an expiring contract, who was contributing to the team's contention, and they received prospects or young players in return, that weren't to help that year's team but to replenish the pipeline and some future team. And then give us examples of teams not doing that and it meant their pipeline was a myth. Because that's what vanimal has said ... that by not trading Grey and Maeda at the deadline, regardless of where the team is at, regardless what those players are contributing, it means the pipeline is a myth. That's what this discussion has turned into (in a topic about trading for Lopez). And you're throwing in something I might have said last year, out of context, from a different situation, that doesn't at all correlate to this discussion where I'm already having difficulties understanding the correlations. Convoluted is what I called this and that's what this discussion has become.

My biggest objection to what vanimal has said is the part about that if we don't make these trades, the pipeline is a myth. I don't understand the correlation in that, at all. At all. I'm not saying we shouldn't trade those two, I'm saying that 'it depends' and it does, imo, and if the 'it depends' means we keep them, it means our team is doing well and so are they and it doesn't mean our pipeline is a myth. If our team is doing well and we can get someone even better to help, then yes, make a trade. If we aren't doing well, but they are, yes, let's hope we can get a good return for future use. And if SWR is that phenomenal that we need him down the stretch, to be a regular starter, then make a move to do that. That's how it should work. There shouldn't be some absolute here. It depends. I get that we do need to make trades to replenish the farm, but I do think it matters when we do this, that that should be a big part of the consideration, and not do it, regardless.

[Major League Ready]

2 hours ago, Squirrel said:

Okay ... then give us examples of when team in contention traded a veteran on an expiring contract, who was contributing to the team's contention, and they received prospects or young players in return, that weren't to help that year's team but to replenish the pipeline and some future team. And then give us examples of teams not doing that and it meant their pipeline was a myth. Because that's what vanimal has said ... that by not trading Grey and Maeda at the deadline, regardless of where the team is at, regardless what those players are contributing, it means the pipeline is a myth. That's what this discussion has turned into (in a topic about trading for Lopez). And you're throwing in something I might have said last year, out of context, from a different situation, that doesn't at all correlate to this discussion where I'm already having difficulties understanding the correlations. Convoluted is what I called this and that's what this discussion has become.

My biggest objection to what vanimal has said is the part about that if we don't make these trades, the pipeline is a myth. I don't understand the correlation in that, at all. At all. I'm not saying we shouldn't trade those two, I'm saying that 'it depends' and it does, imo, and if the 'it depends' means we keep them, it means our team is doing well and so are they and it doesn't mean our pipeline is a myth. If our team is doing well and we can get someone even better to help, then yes, make a trade. If we aren't doing well, but they are, yes, let's hope we can get a good return for future use. And if SWR is that phenomenal that we need him down the stretch, to be a regular starter, then make a move to do that. That's how it should work. There shouldn't be some absolute here. It depends. I get that we do need to make trades to replenish the farm, but I do think it matters when we do this, that that should be a big part of the consideration, and not do it, regardless.

Yes, I absolutely agree with you that the scenario described does not indicate the pipeline is a myth.