Article: Grading Last Year's Free Agent Pitching Market

[Oxtung]

After yesterday's performance, I think Pelfrey can be considered a success for Ryan. Perhaps Ryan will spend some of the $20 million, that he supposedly had available, to sign Pelfrey to a long-term contract. Besides pitching well in the last half of the season, he also is reported to be a good guy in the clubhouse.

 

If Pelfrey is a success with a 5.15 ERA and peripherals that match, what would a failure look like?

[ThePuck]

If Pelfrey is a success with a 5.15 ERA and peripherals that match, what would a failure look like?

 

Pelfrey is a Ryan success because he's done pretty well the last month or so. Correia is a Ryan success because, despite having an ERA around 5 since the beginning of May, his April makes it so he's league average so far. See how we can move things around and use different times frames to make each player look like a success for Ryan if we really try?

 

Heck, some apparently think we aren't even allowed to be disappointed about Worley because, well, he's not getting paid that much.

[jokin]

I'm not sure you really know how hindsight works. Saying the Twins should have signed these guys that worked out is hindsight. Saying that you knew that two guys that should have been counted on would be dreadfully awful is hindsight. Saying that the top prospect would be dreadfully awful instead of stabilizing a rotation spot is hindsight. Saying that someone could have targeted guys (done in this thread) like Colon, Feldman, Villanueva or Liriano is hindsight. Liriano had his supporters but I think it was pretty clear that these two were going other directions.

 

The Twins choices in FA:

Go big - Would have worked out well but nobody should have had expectations that the Twins were going this direction. I actually supported going after Greinke since he is actually legitimately good compared to the 40-80M options. Sanchez is not the same pitcher that he was in Miami.

 

The 40-80M options - only Jackson here and I thought he was a terrible option

 

Go after guys that weren't coming here - Kuroda (resigned with the Yankees immediately), Peavy (signed extension) and lohse

 

sifting through the cheap options - I don't think Ryan gets any credit for picking Correia.

Many hated this signing and still don't like Correia. Pelfrey was a bust but perhaps we would feel differently if he had been in the minors rehabbing for two months and he didn't get called up until he had 12 months post TJ. So Ryan hit on one and missed on one. that seems pretty consistent with this tier of starters. 1) The only thing one can justify criticism is that he didn't sign 3-5 of the guys in this group. I don't think that would have went over well on this board though.

 

I hope this isn't considered as defending Ryan. His offseason was hardly inspiring as the 2013 season. It's pretty obvious that despite his Sept comments he was focused on future years. I think most were suspicious of these comments immediately.

 

2) The guy missed in this whole hindsight analysis is Ryu. I liked tossing some money at him similar to the Cuban that is available right now. he at least came with upside and youth. He signed a 6/36 contract with a 25.7M posting fee. Not cheap but he was potentially a long term option for the team vs guys that were stopgaps (aside from Sanchez and Greinke).

 

1) Actually, I don't think many would have been all that upset. I, among many, advocated that if this was the route TR was taking, why not leave no stone unturned with the available monies? (Would a one-year deal in February for $1M more than the Mariners for Bazooka Joe Saunders have crippled the team in the long run? It sure would have stabilized the team in the short run.) It only makes sense given the payroll flexibility and the glaring needs, that the quantity over quality approach used in filling the bullpen so successfully by Ryan should also have been employed with the Rotation depth chart.

 

2) A very good point and a real puzzler. Given the acknowledgement by the team that they were effectively shut out of long-term SP options via FA, why wasn't there a more concerted effort in acquiring SP help on this proven and viable channel for talent-acquisition? (I hope it's not lingering Nishi-Shock Syndrome....)

[Oxtung]

Hardly worth complaining about indeed, unless you care more about the nature of the rotation than whether or not he was worth what he's getting paid. This guy was our opening day starter, one of the three people brought in to be in our rotation this year...and he's in the minors. Whether a guy is worth what he's getting or not is important to the bean counters, as a fan I care more about the overall product on the field.

 

Puck, are you really disappointed with the Worley trade? I understand it hasn't worked out like we all hoped it would but I thought at the time, and still do, that it was a very good move. Disappointing it hasn't worked out but not disappointing that the move was made. From the quote above it seems that you disagree with that view?

[old nurse]

Look at the Cubs and the strategy they employed as just one example.

 

Jackson is not doing much, Better in July

Baker injured

Feldman traded for 2 prospects that have gone backwards in their career

Fujukawa has a 5.25 ERA 12 IP for 9 million

Villanueva. back in the pen after a nice start, 6.48 ERA in July

What is so great about the Cubs off season in terms of pitching? Schierholtz is having a career year as a corner outfielder, Navaro is a good backup catcher.

[ThePuck]

Puck, are you really disappointed with the Worley trade? I understand it hasn't worked out like we all hoped it would but I thought at the time, and still do, that it was a very good move. Disappointing it hasn't worked out but not disappointing that the move was made. From the quote above it seems that you disagree with that view?

 

Nope, actually, I loved the trade...but we should be allowed to be disappointed that a guy we seriously counted on to help the rotation this year (opening day starter) is yet another guy who was coming off injury from last year and isn't working out so far. I, personally, can't see how it's acceptable that two of the three (or three of the four if one believes in the Harden fantasy) people we brought in to truly improve our rotation were people we had to seriously hope would be fully recovered from injury and effectively ready to go. At some point, we have to ask did he improve the team this year? Downgraded the offense, and brought in injury question marks for the pitching (and it's not like any of the these guys were that great when they were healthy and in the NL)

[Oxtung]

Jackson is not doing much, Better in July

Baker injured

Feldman traded for 2 prospects that have gone backwards in their career

Fujukawa has a 5.25 ERA 12 IP for 9 million

Villanueva. back in the pen after a nice start, 6.48 ERA in July

What is so great about the Cubs off season in terms of pitching? Schierholtz is having a career year as a corner outfielder, Navaro is a good backup catcher.

 

Jackson has a sub 2 ERA in July. He has a 3.5 ERA in his last 8 starts.

 

I would be willing to make a signature bet that he and Correia have similar ERA's by the end of the season.

 

Feldman brought in 2 pieces that might help the Cubs in the future, which is 2 more than the Twins have added.

[jokin]

Jackson is not doing much, Better in July

Baker injured

Feldman traded for 2 prospects that have gone backwards in their career

Fujukawa has a 5.25 ERA 12 IP for 9 million

Villanueva. back in the pen after a nice start, 6.48 ERA in July

What is so great about the Cubs off season in terms of pitching? Schierholtz is having a career year as a corner outfielder, Navaro is a good backup catcher.

 

This has been rehashed in another thread. You disagree with the national and local consensus on what the Cubs have accomplished- right now your position on the matter is demonstrably on a lonely ledge. Of course, you ignore successful use of the Cubs strategy in signing talent with the intention of acquring more talent with available payroll dollars.

 

BTW, Pedro Strop has made 10 appearances for the Cubs since the trade, and still sports a 0.00 ERA with a K/9 of 11.5. I think that is an argument that his career is now moving forward. Arrietta has turnaround talent- part of the crapshoot type of thinking that Ryan employs in finding bargain-basement talent. Let's see how it plays out. Of course, the deal was heavily employed to get the International slot money and the Cubs got the #1, # 3 and # 22 prospects, but you know that since we thoroughly hashed it out already.

 

Villenueva starts tonight against Arizona, so....wrong. And a season-long 4.01 FIP is conveniently dismissed in your July ERA cherry-picking (oh, and his July FIP is 4.06, kind of important to get the whole picture).

 

Fujikawa's FIP was 2.79, which also tells a more complete picture of his effectiveness before going down with injury. Injuries to both he and Baker are the price of doing business- there is risk involved, in this case, as with the Twins, affordable risk.

 

Then there's Jackson. His FIP is 3.62, a victim of a low strand rate and a high BABIP- both numbers are wildly normalizing since June 6. Calling this signing a bust is wildly premature.

[diehardtwinsfan]

The club's actions regarding Gibson's "need for consistency" and the final timing of his promotion make it clear that they all along had no intention of promoting him until after he was safely past all potential arbitration strictures. This happened in the face of having the worst AL SP on a month-by-month basis- and the situation screamed to get a live and more viable arm into the situation sooner, not later.

 

I don't think it's as clear as you think. It has more to do (IMHO) with not having him rehab at MLB, especially given that the first few months back are rarely good...

 

As well, judging by how Gibson has performed to date, it doesn't appear that the Twins were wrong.

 

 

And despite your argument about "pitchers as spitballs"- that seems to me rather haughty, in and of itself-- I do take issue with you on FA pitching options, there were, in fact "clearly" more options out there- and there "clearly" was more money to spend in acquiring those options. Look at the Cubs and the strategy they employed as just one example. Relying on not one (Diamond), not two (Worley), not three (Pelfrey), not four (Perez), but five (Harden) potential starting pitchers on the depth chart with serious injury questions surrounding their potential effectiveness going into the season does leave the FO open to criticism concerning the questioning about how hard they really "tried" to effectuate their plan, your impatience nothwithstanding.

 

Go look back at my data. There weren't "clearly" more options out there. Most of the guys who have turned out really good were not options. And of the guys who were in the next tier, we got one of them and were in on two more of them (Liriano and Saunders). And based on the way Pelfrey is currently pitching, by the end of the year, we might be able to say we got 2 of them. It seems as though the complaint here is that we didn't get the right guy, and to me that's a hindsight argument. Worley was a smart move. It failed, yes, but it was a smart move as we were lacking controllable MLB ready pitching, and in his case, he had #3 upside. Unfortunately, Vance regressed. Diamond was going to start no matter what, so I don't get complaints here either. Harden was a $50k minor league contract with no roster guarantees, that should tell you what the Twins thought would happen here, and no one thought this was a bad signing, and no one was counting on Harden. You cannot sign 8 pitchers for 5 spots expecting 3 to get hurt. It doesn't work like that in MLB. The pitchers are going to want to play and will walk away.

 

I'll state what I said before. They most definitely tried. Whether or not you agree with their approach is a different issue. But they did try.. Oh, and I'd add, if they had followed what was the TwinsDaily consensus, we'd be worse off right now... Are they above criticism? No. But I don't think it's unreasonable to suggest that they had a plan, executed on it, and generally knew what they were doing.

[jokin]

Jackson has a sub 2 ERA in July. He has a 3.5 ERA in his last 8 starts.

 

I would be willing to make a signature bet that he and Correia have similar ERA's by the end of the season.

 

Feldman brought in 2 pieces that might help the Cubs in the future, which is 2 more than the Twins have added.

 

Absolutely right. Furthermore, as of today, Jackson's FIP is a full run+ better than Correia's already----3.62 vs. 4.68----and their respective trends are going in the opposite direction.

[howieramone1406390264]

Jackson has a sub 2 ERA in July. He has a 3.5 ERA in his last 8 starts.

 

I would be willing to make a signature bet that he and Correia have similar ERA's by the end of the season.

 

Feldman brought in 2 pieces that might help the Cubs in the future, which is 2 more than the Twins have added.

Hard to argue that if we had followed the brilliant Cubbie strategy, we would have 2 more wins and maybe even the 8th best farm system. Don't forget their record breaking expenditure of purchasing 16 years-olds in the International market. They have adroitly positioned themselves to dominate in the 2020's.

[Thegrin]

The club's actions regarding Gibson's "need for consistency" and the final timing of his promotion make it clear that they all along had no intention of promoting him until after he was safely past all potential arbitration strictures. This happened in the face of having the worst AL SP on a month-by-month basis- and the situation screamed to get a live and more viable arm into the situation sooner, not later.

 

Gibson showed he was not ready to come up in AAA. Again, he showed he was not ready, once promoted to the Twins. I don't think they had "no intention of promoting him until after he was safely past all potential arbitration strictures." I think they made a sound baseball decision to delay his introduction to the Big Leagues.

However, after Monday's game, perhaps, if Gibson had been brought up early, he would have progressed at a faster rate and we would have had Monday's Gibson from June forward. (Of course, I am being wildly optimistic about Gibson's future performance.

 

I do take issue with you on FA pitching options, there were, in fact "clearly" more options out there- and there "clearly" was more money to spend in acquiring those options. Look at the Cubs and the strategy they employed as just one example. Relying on not one (Diamond), not two (Worley), not three (Pelfrey), not four (Perez), but five (Harden) potential starting pitchers on the depth chart with serious injury questions surrounding their potential effectiveness going into the season does leave the FO open to criticism concerning the questioning about how hard they really "tried" to effectuate their plan, your impatience notwithstanding.

 

You overlooked Hendriks, in your list of injured. Taking Worley was an inexpensive risk, and coming out of Spring Training, it looked like it might pay off. Signing Perez and Harden were small investments with the potential for a big payoff. Hardly something that TR should be criticized for.

[jokin]

I don't think it's as clear as you think. It has more to do (IMHO) with not having him rehab at MLB, especially given that the first few months back are rarely good...

 

As well, judging by how Gibson has performed to date, it doesn't appear that the Twins were wrong.

 

 

 

 

Go look back at my data. There weren't "clearly" more options out there. Most of the guys who have turned out really good were not options. And of the guys who were in the next tier, we got one of them and were in on two more of them (Liriano and Saunders). And based on the way Pelfrey is currently pitching, by the end of the year, we might be able to say we got 2 of them. It seems as though the complaint here is that we didn't get the right guy, and to me that's a hindsight argument. Worley was a smart move. It failed, yes, but it was a smart move as we were lacking controllable MLB ready pitching, and in his case, he had #3 upside. Unfortunately, Vance regressed. Diamond was going to start no matter what, so I don't get complaints here either. Harden was a $50k minor league contract with no roster guarantees, that should tell you what the Twins thought would happen here, and no one thought this was a bad signing, and no one was counting on Harden. You cannot sign 8 pitchers for 5 spots expecting 3 to get hurt. It doesn't work like that in MLB. The pitchers are going to want to play and will walk away.

 

I'll state what I said before. They most definitely tried. Whether or not you agree with their approach is a different issue. But they did try.. Oh, and I'd add, if they had followed what was the TwinsDaily consensus, we'd be worse off right now... Are they above criticism? No. But I don't think it's unreasonable to suggest that they had a plan, executed on it, and generally knew what they were doing.

 

Actually, the Gibson "growing pains" we are seeing now, along with some good measure of success would have already been tucked away with a much-deserved (and needed) May call-up. But this all misses my point in my response to the poster, he alleged that the Twins were counting on Gibson as part of "the plan", the Twins actions with him suggest that they were never counting on him and were instead counting their arb dollars saved by not promoting him sooner.

 

You say they most definitely tried..... and they had a plan and executed on it.... and what did that get them? Still the worst SP staff in baseball....that suggests that they didn't know what they were doing (getting better options in the first place, or at least more options). Oh BTW, there was a lot of talk about the Dodgers having too many SP options- this example argues against your point of having too many pitching options. The Twins easily could have signed two more SPs to major league contracts. Using extended DL options like they have done at Rochester could easily have been employed at the start of the season for Pelfrey and Diamond. And Worley, obviously had options left (others also had options left, Diamond for sure, others besides???). So, yes, you can sign 8 pitchers for 5 available spots.

[ThePuck]

Hard to argue that if we had followed the brilliant Cubbie strategy, we would have 2 more wins and maybe even the 8th best farm system. Don't forget their record breaking expenditure of purchasing 16 years-olds in the International market. They have adroitly positioned themselves to dominate in the 2020's.

 

And when do you suppose we'll be dominating? I think it's good to remember that the Red Sox hadn't won a W Series in forever, the whole curse of the Bambino, and then Theo Epstein showed up and they won two in the first six or seven years having him as GM and Hoyer as assistant to the GM and then actually assistant GM.

 

I think the point is, the Cubs are doing everything they can to acquire talent from all avenues possible. Getting FAs that can be traded later for more young talent, aggressively utilizing the international draft, and so on. I wouldn't bet against them being truly competitive much sooner than 2020s.

[jokin]

Gibson showed he was not ready to come up in AAA. Again, he showed he was not ready, once promoted to the Twins. I don't think they had "no intention of promoting him until after he was safely past all potential arbitration strictures." I think they made a sound baseball decision to delay his introduction to the Big Leagues.

However, after Monday's game, perhaps, if Gibson had been brought up early, he would have progressed at a faster rate and we would have had Monday's Gibson from June forward. (Of course, I am being wildly optimistic about Gibson's future performance.

 

 

 

You overlooked Hendriks, in your list of injured. Taking Worley was an inexpensive risk, and coming out of Spring Training, it looked like it might pay off. Signing Perez and Harden were small investments with the potential for a big payoff. Hardly something that TR should be criticized for.

 

See my post above, you're missing the point of my response to the poster in question. ( And I don't think you're being wildly optimistic about Gibson, I think he has good chance to be a long term #3 or even #2 guy answer for the Twins rotation).

 

Also, the poster I responded to mentioned Harden as a viable SP candidate, not me. I threw in Perez because Rob Antony said he was signed with the intention of giving him a chance at gaining a spot in the rotation, not me.

 

Regarding Hendriks, I think it says a lot about the Twins ability to analyze their pitching options, by keeping Hendriks on the 40-man last offseason and removing Deduno.

[diehardtwinsfan]

Actually, the Gibson "growing pains" we are seeing now, along with some good measure of success would have already been tucked away with a much-deserved (and needed) May call-up. But this all misses my point in my response to the poster, he alleged that the Twins were counting on Gibson as part of "the plan", the Twins actions with him suggest that they were never counting on him and were instead counting their arb dollars saved by not promoting him sooner.

 

You say they most definitely tried..... and they had a plan and executed on it.... and what did that get them? Still the worst SP staff in baseball....that suggests that they didn't know what they were doing (getting better options in the first place, or at least more options). Oh BTW, there was a lot of talk about the Dodgers having too many SP options- this example argues against your point of having too many pitching options. The Twins easily could have signed two more SPs to major league contracts. Using extended DL options like they have done at Rochester could easily have been employed at the start of the season for Pelfrey and Diamond. And Worley, obviously had options left (others also had options left, Diamond for sure, others besides???). So, yes, you can sign 8 pitchers for 5 available spots.

Pelfrey isn't going to sign here if he's going straight to the DL. He signed year so he get a 1 year, establish himself, contract and then parlay it into a multi year deal this offseason. Diamond wouldn't have had a say in it in that sense, but he was ready for spring training. There are issues with tossing people on the DL if they are capable of playing. The union won't necessarily back it.

 

I agree that they didn't succeed. Though I find it amusing that their free agent aquisitions in Pelf and Correia haven't been that bad. The guy we expected to hold his own (Diamond) has not. Gibson has had growing pains, and Worley (who was lauded as a good pickup) has not been.

 

It failed, but not for the reasons that anyone has predicted.

[jokin]

Hard to argue that if we had followed the brilliant Cubbie strategy, we would have 2 more wins and maybe even the 8th best farm system. Don't forget their record breaking expenditure of purchasing 16 years-olds in the International market. They have adroitly positioned themselves to dominate in the 2020's.

 

So signing Sano, Arcia and Minier is a good thing, but signing Jiminez, Torres and Jorge Soler is a bad thing. Got it.

[jokin]

Pelfrey isn't going to sign here if he's going straight to the DL. He signed year so he get a 1 year, establish himself, contract and then parlay it into a multi year deal this offseason. Diamond wouldn't have had a say in it in that sense, but he was ready for spring training. There are issues with tossing people on the DL if they are capable of playing. The union won't necessarily back it.

 

I agree that they didn't succeed. Though I find it amusing that their free agent aquisitions in Pelf and Correia haven't been that bad. The guy we expected to hold his own (Diamond) has not. Gibson has had growing pains, and Worley (who was lauded as a good pickup) has not been.

 

It failed, but not for the reasons that anyone has predicted.

 

It's very arguable that Pelfrey should have been DLd at any time in April..... His ERA for the month in 5 starts was 7.22, a WHIP around 2.00 and giving up an OPS of .933.

 

Both he and Diamond could justifiably have been DLd.

 

Where was Worley being lauded? Coming off an enigmatic season, a good riddance from Phillie and arm surgery.

 

Correia was a good pick-up if he was slated as a back-ender, not a front-liner, and he still has no trade value, so kind-of defeats the overall purpose of the signing.

[John Bonnes]

Please excuse the bold font. I want this to be seen as it is an important administrative note.

 

I've received some requests to lock up this thread before it turns to even more bickering about last season's offseason than it already has. I'm actually going to do the opposite. In every other thread where people start arguing about last offseason, I'd like us to direct people to this thread, and this post.

 

But I just want to warn people - don't think this will excuse uncivil behavior or discussion. You can still be banned for trolling, attacking, inflaming, etc in this thread and the moderators are still monitoring this thread closely. But by all means, let the debate continue.

[Major League Ready]

Pelfrey isn't going to sign here if he's going straight to the DL. He signed year so he get a 1 year, establish himself, contract and then parlay it into a multi year deal this offseason. Diamond wouldn't have had a say in it in that sense, but he was ready for spring training. There are issues with tossing people on the DL if they are capable of playing. The union won't necessarily back it.

 

I agree that they didn't succeed. Though I find it amusing that their free agent aquisitions in Pelf and Correia haven't been that bad. The guy we expected to hold his own (Diamond) has not. Gibson has had growing pains, and Worley (who was lauded as a good pickup) has not been.

 

It failed, but not for the reasons that anyone has predicted.

 

When they first signed Pelfey I have to admit I wondered why the heck they did not get a TO for 2014. Then, after considering it from Pelfrey's agent point of view. Why would you give a TO, especially at Pelfrey's age. If he does not perform the Twins don't resign him. If he continues on the path he is on for the rest of the year, someone will give him 2-3 years and a pretty nice payday. This was the perfect landing spot for him. Our rotation was so poor he was very likely to get every opportunity to make it.

 

I would not mind having the Pelfrey we are watching now for a couple more years. Hopefully, he really does want to be here. You have to wonder if he wanted to be here or just realized this was a perfect situation. We don't have nearly enough information to have an insight to this question. Let's hope he is part of the solution.

[TheLeviathan]

Hard to argue that if we had followed the brilliant Cubbie strategy, we would have 2 more wins and maybe even the 8th best farm system. Don't forget their record breaking expenditure of purchasing 16 years-olds in the International market. They have adroitly positioned themselves to dominate in the 2020's.

 

at least try to be fair in your analysis. Ryan did an excellent job in last years draft and in trading his CFs for good specs, but if not for Smiths work repairing the bad system Ryan left him....we aren't number 1. Epstein had no such predecessor, in his short time he has helped the Cubs make tremendous strides with a host of savvy moves.

 

The difference is they have effectively used all three outlets, while we are only using two. The future remains o be seen how both play out.

[old nurse]

Absolutely right. Furthermore, as of today, Jackson's FIP is a full run+ better than Correia's already----3.62 vs. 4.68----and their respective trends are going in the opposite direction.

At 13 million a year versus 5, Jackson should well have a record better than Correia. At 13 mil a year you should have a 1 or a 2 type performance, not a back of rotation.

[ThePuck]

When looking at how he's pitched so far for the season, if one actually believe Pelfrey hasn't pitched that bad, then we need to re-examine what the phrase 'not that bad' means.

 

He's improving and I've said just recently that I expect him to be better than Correia for the remainder of the year, but he has pitched poorly considering the whole season and his performance is a factor in why we are as bad as we are. There are 90 pitchers who have pitched enough to qualify for stats. He's had enough starts to qualify, but hasn't quite given the Twins enough innings to qualify, which is one shot against the idea he hasn't been that bad. The second would be that if he had a couple more innings, he'd rank 86th out of 91 pitchers in ERA. The third would be that his WHIP is over 1.500.

 

I think many people wondered how he'd do going from the NL to the AL and wondered how he'd do after surgery. And while he's been doing well recently, I think many wondered why Ryan thought it was a good idea to sign a guy to let him rehab on a team clearly in need of pitching...especially considering Worley and Harden were also coming off injury and that the other piece was Correia.

[cmb0252]

At 13 million a year versus 5, Jackson should well have a record better than Correia. At 13 mil a year you should have a 1 or a 2 type performance, not a back of rotation.

 

Also, Correia's contract is 2 years vs Jackson's 4 years.

[ThePuck]

Also, Correia's contract is 2 years vs Jackson's 4 years.

 

And everyone thought the Willingham signing over Cuddyer was a great move, then a year later, it's really not looking that way at all. In this case, it hasn't even been a whole season and we're determining who made the better signing between these two.

[drjim]

When they first signed Pelfey I have to admit I wondered why the heck they did not get a TO for 2014. Then, after considering it from Pelfrey's agent point of view. Why would you give a TO, especially at Pelfrey's age. If he does not perform the Twins don't resign him. If he continues on the path he is on for the rest of the year, someone will give him 2-3 years and a pretty nice payday. This was the perfect landing spot for him. Our rotation was so poor he was very likely to get every opportunity to make it.

 

I would not mind having the Pelfrey we are watching now for a couple more years. Hopefully, he really does want to be here. You have to wonder if he wanted to be here or just realized this was a perfect situation. We don't have nearly enough information to have an insight to this question. Let's hope he is part of the solution.

 

Pelfrey might just be blowing smoke but he was quoted as saying he has talked to Anderson multiple times that he wants to stay and that he would be "devastated" if he was traded.

 

I would seriously consider a reasonable two year deal. But if the Twins do that I would want to see Correia traded and one more free agent signed next offseason.

[drjim]

And everyone thought the Willingham signing over Cuddyer was a great move, then a year later, it's really not looking that way at all. In this case, it hasn't even been a whole season and we're determining who made the better signing between these two.

 

Correia will probably end up being less bad.

[Riverbrian]

It's very arguable that Pelfrey should have been DLd at any time in April..... His ERA for the month in 5 starts was 7.22, a WHIP around 2.00 and giving up an OPS of .933.

 

Both he and Diamond could justifiably have been DLd.

 

Where was Worley being lauded? Coming off an enigmatic season, a good riddance from Phillie and arm surgery.

 

Correia was a good pick-up if he was slated as a back-ender, not a front-liner, and he still has no trade value, so kind-of defeats the overall purpose of the signing.

 

Speaking for myself... I was very pleased with the Worley acquisition. I was very sad to lose Revere... I was a huge Revere fan... but I thought that Worley and May was incredible compensation in return.

 

On the rest of the discussion. Why are the Cubs being used as the shining light example?

 

It seems that Terry Ryan has made moves with the future in mind but is being criticized for what is happening on the field right now. The Cubs have been making moves with the future in mind but are not criticized for what is happening right now.

 

The Twins and Cubs have the same record so they should be equally criticized for current performance.

 

As for who has done better for the future... We don't know yet... We will have to wait for the actual future.

[diehardtwinsfan]

When they first signed Pelfey I have to admit I wondered why the heck they did not get a TO for 2014. Then, after considering it from Pelfrey's agent point of view. Why would you give a TO, especially at Pelfrey's age. If he does not perform the Twins don't resign him. If he continues on the path he is on for the rest of the year, someone will give him 2-3 years and a pretty nice payday. This was the perfect landing spot for him. Our rotation was so poor he was very likely to get every opportunity to make it.

 

I would not mind having the Pelfrey we are watching now for a couple more years. Hopefully, he really does want to be here. You have to wonder if he wanted to be here or just realized this was a perfect situation. We don't have nearly enough information to have an insight to this question. Let's hope he is part of the solution.

 

I suspect Pelfrey said no to an option. He hired boras for a reason. He still wants to maximize his revenue. An option won't do that.

[jokin]

 

On the rest of the discussion. Why are the Cubs being used as the shining light example?

 

It seems that Terry Ryan has made moves with the future in mind but is being criticized for what is happening on the field right now. The Cubs have been making moves with the future in mind but are not criticized for what is happening right now.

 

The Twins and Cubs have the same record so they should be equally criticized for current performance.

 

As for who has done better for the future... We don't know yet... We will have to wait for the actual future.

 

It's very simple, really. The Cubs are maximizing and deploying every possible option at getting better. And they are digging out of a far deeper hole than the Twins. Furthermore, unlike the Twins, they've admitted that they are in a full-rebuild. In the process, they are taking on very acceptable risks, with potential higher rewards, that don't jeopardize the chances of making successive moves as the rebuilding process proceeds.

 

They also have a man at the helm with a turn-around track record.