Article: Grading Last Year's Free Agent Pitching Market

[Craig Arko]

This is not an uncommon sentiment of the anti-Ryan group. They feel signing a top tier starting pitcher during free agency is the only way. The pro-Ryan group realizes there are only about 5 per year and very unlikely this happens. IMHO this is insurmountable.

 

I wouldn't say solving the actual problem is insurmountable, but the timing has to be right.

 

As for the pro-who and anti-who struggles, insignificant is a better term than insurmountable.

[Otto von Ballpark]

This is not an uncommon sentiment of the anti-Ryan group. They feel signing a top tier starting pitcher during free agency is the only way. The pro-Ryan group realizes there are only about 5 per year and very unlikely this happens. IMHO this is insurmountable.

This is a terrible mischaracterization.

 

At the end of 2012, the Twins had virtually nothing for reliable MLB starters. The only one close was Diamond, who looked pretty flukey after a disastrous 2011 at AAA. After that, it was pretty much Gibson recovering from surgery at AAA and some 2012 draftees.

 

When was the last time the Twins pitching cupboard was that bare? Probably around 1995-1996, and it was a long slow painful rebuild until 2001.

 

If we want to avoid that this time, we need to see some free agent successes, not just MLB placeholders and more low-minors prospects. I'm not at all confident that TR can deliver that, or that the Pohlads are OK with spending on that. So I would have loved to see some evidence to the contrary this past offseason, even if it didn't make 2013 a likely contention year.

 

As it is, we just have to wait another offseason to see if they can do it, and every year spent waiting is more evidence that TR and/or the Pohlads are unwilling or incapable of using free agency to improve the franchise.

 

(Said as a long-time TR defender who is really starting to wonder about this franchise's longstanding free agent issues.)

[Otto von Ballpark]

didn't straddle us with any stupid contracts.

I'm starting to worry that this is the chief goal of the Twins free agent approach -- avoid stupid contracts -- rather than a by-product of a sensible approach balancing good scouting with an aggressiveness to really improve the MLB club.

 

While as a rule, it's good not to rely too much on free agency, or invest too much in free-agent priced players (i.e. contract extensions), there is still good value to be had there for smart teams. And it's hard to find good teams anymore who rely on free agency as little as the Twins have, historically, much less teams that have pulled themselves out of a funk like the Twins' past few seasons without some aggressiveness in free agency.

[ThePuck]

I'm starting to worry that this is the chief goal of the Twins free agent approach -- avoid stupid contracts -- rather than a by-product of a sensible approach balancing good scouting with an aggressiveness to really improve the MLB club.

 

While as a rule, it's good not to rely too much on free agency, or invest too much in free-agent priced players (i.e. contract extensions), there is still good value to be had there for smart teams. And it's hard to find good teams anymore who rely on free agency as little as the Twins have, historically, much less teams that have pulled themselves out of a funk like the Twins' past few seasons without some aggressiveness in free agency.

 

With all the money coming off the books in the next couple years, those players replaced by prospects, and no raises due to any player (s) that would cost a lot, I wonder how signing someone would straddle our team, anyway.

[drjim]

This would be a more damming critique if there were more than 2-3 options to spend money on. This is above and beyond the several other issues thay are being debated.

[Major League Ready]

With all the money coming off the books in the next couple years, those players replaced by prospects, and no raises due to any player (s) that would cost a lot, I wonder how signing someone would straddle our team, anyway.

 

Because the SPs that could make a difference command long-term deals where they are likely to perform significantly below their current level. Any 5-6 year deals right now would have us relying on these Sps in their declining years just when the Twins should be serious contenders again.

 

Go back and look at these deals. Sure, some of the really elite guys have worked out. Those guys gone to a handful of teams with significantly greater revenue than the twins. All in all, the track record for these SPs has been more bad than good, especially in the later years. Go back 5 years and look at the 2008 FA Sps.

 

John Lackey

2010 4.40 ERA / 215 innings

2011 6.41 ERA / 160 innings

2012 out

2013 Rebounded nicely so far with a2.95 ERA

 

AJ Burnett 5yrs / $82M / 4.80ERA over the 5 years

 

Derek Lowe 4 yrs / $60M / 4.67 ERA over the 4 years

[ThePuck]

Because the SPs that could make a difference command long-term deals where they are likely to perform significantly below their current level. Any 5-6 year deals right now would have us relying on these Sps in their declining years just when the Twins should be serious contenders again.

 

Go back and look at these deals. Sure, some of the really elite guys have worked out. Those guys gone to a handful of teams with significantly greater revenue than the twins. All in all, the track record for these SPs has been more bad than good, especially in the later years. Go back 5 years and look at the 2008 FA Sps.

 

John Lackey

2010 4.40 ERA / 215 innings

2011 6.41 ERA / 160 innings

2012 out

2013 Rebounded nicely so far with a2.95 ERA

 

AJ Burnett 5yrs / $82M / 4.80ERA over the 5 years

 

Derek Lowe 4 yrs / $60M / 4.67 ERA over the 4 years

 

And how would the money being spent hurt us? That's the part. Yeah, they may be declining, but is the money that we'd be spending stop us from spending? No. We are 20M below the likely 50% of this year's revenue right now and over 30M will be coming off the books in the next 2 years. Then you get 25M in the TV contract money. You saying one 16M a year contract for 5 year would hurt us? How? Who are we spending big money on in 2017, do you figure? We have so much financial flexibility in the forseeable future, it's ridiculous to think a 5 year contract for double digit money would straddle us. Not only that, but not all long contract end up bad. Twins didn't want to sign Hunter to a long term contract, worried about the same thing, and he's outplayed that one and has a new one to boot.

 

You've listed bad contract and failed to mention how it straddles us. because Ryan is going to go ape sheet in FA some time in the future and the remaining 40M or so just won't be enough?

 

Any long term contract can come back and not work out, doesn't mean you don't try once in awhile...especially when it won't stop you from being able to put a competitive team on the field if it doesn't quite work out

[jokin]

This would be a more damming critique if there were more than 2-3 options to spend money on. This is above and beyond the several other issues thay are being debated.

 

So that official Twins FO meme, from as recently as 2011, about being able to compete with the large market teams for talented players- now that we have a new ball park, can officially be laid to rest, then?

[ThePuck]

So that official Twins FO meme, from as recently as 2011, about being able to compete with the large market teams for talented players- now that we have a new ball park, can officially be laid to rest, then?

 

 

being able to and being willing to are two different things. :-)

[howieramone1406390264]

So that official Twins FO meme, from as recently as 2011, about being able to compete with the large market teams for talented players- now that we have a new ball park, can officially be laid to rest, then?

Yes

[TheLeviathan]

This would be a more damming critique if there were more than 2-3 options to spend money on. This is above and beyond the several other issues thay are being debated.

 

Seems pretty damning to me considering 2-3 "very good" options are pretty standard. I fail to see how this exit route is helpful. If the best you have is "we're just waiting for that one super awesome FA class when we have basically our choice of good options!"

 

I'm not, in the least bit, hopeful.

[jokin]

Yes

 

So, the State of Minnesota, Hennepin County and Twins fans everywhere were defrauded then?

[jokin]

being able to and being willing to are two different things. :-)

 

Except that they were one and the same when they were negotiating with the local suckers who unfortunately failed to get the "being willing to" in writing.

[howieramone1406390264]

So, the State of Minnesota, Hennepin County and Twins fans everywhere were defrauded then?

I have heard people say that.

[jokin]

I have heard people say that.

 

And what say you?

[Otto von Ballpark]

Go back and look at these deals.

 

Actually, as you mention, Lackey is performing great in year 4 of his contract despite coming off a year of inactivity, and Burnett has been strong in years 4 and 5 of his contract for a young and (hopefully) up-and-coming club. And Lowe's 4-year contract may not be a good comparable -- he was 36 years old when it started, basically older than Burnett and Lackey at the conclusion of their respective deals. I don't think anyone here has suggested this Twins team should give a four-year deal to a 36-year-old pitcher.

 

Which highlights something else: good, established MLB pitchers (of a reasonable age) are far more likely to still be good MLB pitchers in 3-5 years than virtually any minor league pitcher. While no player is a 100% certainty to forecast that far out, and they may still have some ups and downs over that time, Anibal Sanchez (for example) is still far more likely to be a positive MLB contributor in 2016-2017 than either May or Meyer in the Twins organization.

[jokin]

Actually, as you mention, Lackey is performing great in year 4 of his contract despite coming off a year of inactivity, and Burnett has been strong in years 4 and 5 of his contract for a young and (hopefully) up-and-coming club. And Lowe's 4-year contract may not be a good comparable -- he was 36 years old when it started, basically older than Burnett and Lackey at the conclusion of their respective deals. I don't think anyone here has suggested this Twins team should give a four-year deal to a 36-year-old pitcher.

 

Which highlights something else: good, established MLB pitchers (of a reasonable age) are far more likely to still be good MLB pitchers in 3-5 years than virtually any minor league pitcher. While no player is a 100% certainty to forecast that far out, Anibal Sanchez (for example) is still far more likely to be a positive MLB contributor in 2016-2017 than either May or Meyer in the Twins organization.

 

Excellent point. But it goes back to the Twins philosophical decision in acquiring pitching is to go full economy-mode... pursuing quantity in terms of prospects and 3rd-tier reclamation projects over major league-proven quality options. A Venn Diagram of this construct shows very little intersection between these 2 sets.

 

Right now, it's hard to envision the Twins ever going out beyond 1 or 2 years/$10M on any FA pitcher.

[AROG]

We can excuse Ryan all we want, but at some point, you have to judge the quality at the MLB level. And right now, it is awful, especially the starting pitching.

 

I think you also have to consider that he took over one of the worst teams in baseball with the worst farm system in baseball. We knew Ryan's game plan from the beginning. He has never been shy about the fact that he is building for the future. He did say that he was going to try and improve the team for this year and the moves he made were enough to make a lot of professional analyst think they would be better, not a playoff team, but better.

 

Basically, Ryan isn't the the problem. If we don't want to build for the future and spend money to win now the ownership and Pres are to blame.

[Major League Ready]

Actually, as you mention, Lackey is performing great in year 4 of his contract despite coming off a year of inactivity, and Burnett has been strong in years 4 and 5 of his contract for a young and (hopefully) up-and-coming club. And Lowe's 4-year contract may not be a good comparable -- he was 36 years old when it started, basically older than Burnett and Lackey at the conclusion of their respective deals. I don't think anyone here has suggested this Twins team should give a four-year deal to a 36-year-old pitcher.

 

Which highlights something else: good, established MLB pitchers (of a reasonable age) are far more likely to still be good MLB pitchers in 3-5 years than virtually any minor league pitcher. While no player is a 100% certainty to forecast that far out, and they may still have some ups and downs over that time, Anibal Sanchez (for example) is still far more likely to be a positive MLB contributor in 2016-2017 than either May or Meyer in the Twins organization.

 

 

Wow,

 

You guys just intpret the information in whatever way satisfies your position. The contracts of Lackey, Lowe, and Burnett when evaluated over the duration of the contract were all poor deals that did not have the intended impact. All performed poorly and/or were injured for prolonged periods. How about our own Johan Sanana. He had a couple great years but that huge investment has not paid off so well. How about Sabathia. He is already falling off and he is signed through 2017.

 

The argument what would it hure completely ignores the timing of the investment. Now is not the time. Why in the world would you risk the investment now on a team that clearly need 2-3 more years to be a serious contender and have that contract which will be much more likely to fail in the couple years when this team could be a contender?

 

The argument about not exploring all avenues is similarly flawed. Top tier SPs are all but impossible to land if you are not in the top 10 markets in terms of revenue. How complicated is it that those teams can simply outbid the Twins? How about trades. Who were we going to trade. The only plater that would have brought front of the rotation guys is Mauer. I actually would be OK with that trade but I suspect most would not. Should we have given up Buxton or Sano because they are the only prospects that would have brought the kind of SP prospects we need. And, we still have not touched on the most fundamental flaw and that would be that now is not the time. KC was premature in their move and they are a couple years ahead of the Twins in terms of rebuilding.

 

Some of you may also need to come to grips with the fact this is a business.

[Alex]

 

It would be interested to go back and see who thought the Twins had an improved rotation and see if they are are also leading the 'Ryan screwed up' charge. I wouldn't consider myself a Ryan supporter but playing hindsight is pretty questionable.

 

 

I think you'll find less hypocrisy than you think. Most of us frustrated with the results were saying not enough done, though I'll admit I thought it would be better than it is.

 

Ironically, I think, it's more likely you're seeing some people who took the stance that the rotation would be better are now saying, "Well, what could he have done?" using hindsight to justify their original position.

 

For example....

 

I also think people's expectations are completely out of line with reality. There are 20-30 GM's that are interested in adding low cost solid starters. Being critical of a GM when he didn't sign one out of a whopping three options is just silly. It's even sillier when the guy that he did sign has basically performed just as well as that trio

 

You use hindsight here, but there are other problems with the argument. For example, there are more than a dozen pitchers in the list that would have improved the Twins rotation, not just three. Some of us point out that fact repeatedly but it seems to get ignored.

 

Also, if you're only going to go for low cost starters, you better be better at it than everyone else, but people are using it as an excuse as if it's not his fault that TR limited himself and then wasn't able to improve the rotation.

 

Finally, what's silly is people saying we can't be critical of a GM who said starting pitching is the Twins #1 need and that we want to be competitive in September, but we're out of it in July and have the worst rotation in baseball. Seriously?

[Oxtung]

I think you also have to consider that he took over one of the worst teams in baseball with the worst farm system in baseball. We knew Ryan's game plan from the beginning. He has never been shy about the fact that he is building for the future. He did say that he was going to try and improve the team for this year and the moves he made were enough to make a lot of professional analyst think they would be better, not a playoff team, but better.

 

Basically, Ryan isn't the the problem. If we don't want to build for the future and spend money to win now the ownership and Pres are to blame.

 

Your argument would be much stronger if anyone had made that argument. Instead, people have consistently argued for signing quality FA's to attempt to improve the squad while we wait for that future. In any given year if they aren't competitive then look to trade those FA's for prospects which will just further help the future. It is possible to both use FA to help the current club as well as help the future club. They are not mutually exclusive no matter how many times that fallacy is repeated.

[Otto von Ballpark]

Wow,

 

You guys just intpret the information in whatever way satisfies your position. The contracts of Lackey, Lowe, and Burnett when evaluated over the duration of the contract were all poor deals that did not have the intended impact. All performed poorly and/or were injured for prolonged periods. How about our own Johan Sanana. He had a couple great years but that huge investment has not paid off so well. How about Sabathia. He is already falling off and he is signed through 2017.

 

Look, I don't doubt that their have been free agent busts (although Burnett probably doesn't fit that label, and Lackey could shed the label with a solid finish this year & next).

 

But there have also been unqualified successes -- how good would the Twins of the 2000s have been if they had inked Mike Mussina at the beginning of the decade? Or on the other side of the ball, if they had ponied up for Jim Thome after 2002?

 

Now, I wasn't even necessarily arguing for a big splashy signing for this season. We weren't likely to contend anyway, and maybe the available players weren't right. But it would be nice to eventually witness an actual quality free agent pitcher signing by our GM, even on a short-term cheap contract. It's easy to debate the particulars of why he didn't sign Sanchez, Feldman, or Dempster this year... but the fact is, he's never really signed a Sanchez, Feldman, or Dempster ANY year. Not when we were contending, not when we've had payroll to spare, never. Kenny Rogers, Bob Tewksbury, Mike Morgan... that's about it for his FA starter successes. Correia and Pelfrey are better than Ramon Ortiz or Jason Marquis again, but that's a pretty low bar.

 

Any quality FA signing by TR would give me great confidence we could actual get out of this rut in less than the 5-6 years it could easily take relying on prospects alone.

[Oxtung]

Because the SPs that could make a difference command long-term deals where they are likely to perform significantly below their current level. Any 5-6 year deals right now would have us relying on these Sps in their declining years just when the Twins should be serious contenders again.

 

Go back and look at these deals. Sure, some of the really elite guys have worked out. Those guys gone to a handful of teams with significantly greater revenue than the twins. All in all, the track record for these SPs has been more bad than good, especially in the later years. Go back 5 years and look at the 2008 FA Sps.

 

John Lackey

2010 4.40 ERA / 215 innings

2011 6.41 ERA / 160 innings

2012 out

2013 Rebounded nicely so far with a2.95 ERA

 

AJ Burnett 5yrs / $82M / 4.80ERA over the 5 years

 

Derek Lowe 4 yrs / $60M / 4.67 ERA over the 4 years

 

I have actually done research on the 25 largest pitching contracts signed and let me say you are off base here. How about these guys?

 

Pedro Martinez: 6 seasons, 212 ERA+, 194 IP/season

Roy Halladay: 3 Seasons, 159 ERA+, 245 IP/season

Roy Oswalt: 5 seasons, 121 ERA+, 191 IP/Season

Mark Buerhle: 4 Seasons, 115 ERA+, 212 IP/Season

 

I could continue if you really wanted but what it comes down to is on average over a 5 season contract you'll get 1 injured season, 1 below average season and 3 great to elite seasons. Over the course of the contract an ERA+ of 116 with an average of 200 IP/season excluding the injured year is mean.

 

For those of you against signing an elite pitcher I have a question. What percentage of bottom of the barrel pitchers have produced an elite season? Is there a team that has gotten 3 elite seasons out of every 5 pitchers they sign?

[Guest USAFChief]

I think you'll find less hypocrisy than you think. Most of us frustrated with the results were saying not enough done, though I'll admit I thought it would be better than it is.

 

Ironically, I think, it's more likely you're seeing some people who took the stance that the rotation would be better are now saying, "Well, what could he have done?" using hindsight to justify their original position.

 

For example....

 

 

 

You use hindsight here, but there are other problems with the argument. For example, there are more than a dozen pitchers in the list that would have improved the Twins rotation, not just three. Some of us point out that fact repeatedly but it seems to get ignored.

 

Also, if you're only going to go for low cost starters, you better be better at it than everyone else, but people are using it as an excuse as if it's not his fault that TR limited himself and then wasn't able to improve the rotation.

 

Finally, what's silly is people saying we can't be critical of a GM who said starting pitching is the Twins #1 need and that we want to be competitive in September, but we're out of it in July and have the worst rotation in baseball. Seriously?

Fantastic post.

 

It's especially frustrating to me when I see claims that there were "only 2 or 3 realistic options" this past winter.

 

Well, yeah, if you go and eliminate all the good options as "unrealistic" beforehand, sure.

[Oxtung]

Really? How about giving them credit for knowing who not to sign? Give them a little credit for having a scouting department. Considering the many negative comments in regards to those they did sign I find this comment a bit disingenuous.

 

Not disingenuous at all. I really would rather have them try and fail then to not try at all. I'm not sure what you're arguing against really. You have claimed many times that there was no way we were getting Sanchez or Greinke or Jackson who are the only pitchers who signed long term deals. If they Twins had signed one of the other pitchers who failed but they were only signed to 1 or 2 year deals then what difference does it make? How is that worse than signing Pelfrey and Correia? It's not like Pelfrey and Correia have done anything to improve this club. We still have the worst starting rotation in baseball. We still aren't competitive. So what exactly would have been lost by signing one of those "failures"?

[diehardtwinsfan]

Not disingenuous at all. I really would rather have them try and fail then to not try at all. I'm not sure what you're arguing against really. You have claimed many times that there was no way we were getting Sanchez or Greinke or Jackson who are the only pitchers who signed long term deals. If they Twins had signed one of the other pitchers who failed but they were only signed to 1 or 2 year deals then what difference does it make? How is that worse than signing Pelfrey and Correia? It's not like Pelfrey and Correia have done anything to improve this club. We still have the worst starting rotation in baseball. We still aren't competitive. So what exactly would have been lost by signing one of those "failures"?

 

I don't think you can say that they didn't try. They traded for Worley, Meyer, and May and signed Correia, Pelfrey, and Harden. They very much tried... Wether you or I like their effort is a completely different point.

 

Also, Correia has improved the club. Pelfrey not so much as he clearly needed some recovery time, though of late, he's been pretty good.

[TheLeviathan]

You guys just intpret the information in whatever way satisfies your position.

 

The problem is the argument has got steered into some bizarre need to look at trades/signings only in hindsight and not take in the full picture. It's bizarre to me to use hindsight as the primary tool for predicting whether it's time to make a move now or later. If we're strictly going to use hindsight....wouldn't the Johan case tell us we should never do it? Afterall, here was a fairly young guy, without a ton of innings on his body, a perfect picture of health, AND he came at a relatively tiny price.

 

Yet, but what most of the "defend Ryan no matter what" crowd is arguing would tell us that was a horrible move and it educates us how to proceed. I don't see a way we ever get a quality pitcher.

 

1. Johan tells us we never trade for one, no matter how perfect it is.

2. Don't sign any top flight pitchers because 1) you can't because you are too small market and 2) because they'll be bad by their 4th/5th year

 

Alex said it perfectly, we heard from these same Ryan defenders that he'd surely be charging in on his white horse to fix the rotation, afterall, how could it not get better? And now, when it's not better we have excuses like: we can't ever do anything because we aren't a big enough market, nobody likes Minnesota, the top guys don't come here, middle guys want too much money and too many years, the stars have not aligned perfectly yet, we have to wait until there are somewhere between 7-30 "good" options right when we most need them in our rebuilding process, and on and on and on)

 

Why can't we all just say - Ryan failed to accomplish his goal when there were options on the market, a goal that was easily attainable, and considerable resources to accomplish it? I don't see any other possible conclusion in fairness to all the facts.

[Oxtung]

I don't think you can say that they didn't try. They traded for Worley, Meyer, and May and signed Correia, Pelfrey, and Harden. They very much tried... Wether you or I like their effort is a completely different point.

 

Also, Correia has improved the club. Pelfrey not so much as he clearly needed some recovery time, though of late, he's been pretty good.

 

I need to be more clear with my writing. I am only talking about their approach in FA. I appreciate what Ryan did in acquiring May, Worley and Meyer as it shows a willingness to try and improve this club for the future. I don't know if it will work out but the attempt is what matters to me.

 

You are the second person tho claim that Correia has improved the club and I wonder how exactly the Correia signing will help this team return to contention?

[drjim]

I have actually done research on the 25 largest pitching contracts signed and let me say you are off base here. How about these guys?

 

Pedro Martinez: 6 seasons, 212 ERA+, 194 IP/season

Roy Halladay: 3 Seasons, 159 ERA+, 245 IP/season

Roy Oswalt: 5 seasons, 121 ERA+, 191 IP/Season

Mark Buerhle: 4 Seasons, 115 ERA+, 212 IP/Season

 

I could continue if you really wanted but what it comes down to is on average over a 5 season contract you'll get 1 injured season, 1 below average season and 3 great to elite seasons. Over the course of the contract an ERA+ of 116 with an average of 200 IP/season excluding the injured year is mean.

 

For those of you against signing an elite pitcher I have a question. What percentage of bottom of the barrel pitchers have produced an elite season? Is there a team that has gotten 3 elite seasons out of every 5 pitchers they sign?

 

You are comparing extension guys to free agents. That is pretty meaningless. There is a reason guys are extended vs. allowed to hit free agency.

[drjim]

Fantastic post.

 

It's especially frustrating to me when I see claims that there were "only 2 or 3 realistic options" this past winter.

 

Well, yeah, if you go and eliminate all the good options as "unrealistic" beforehand, sure.

 

I would argue there were 2-3 guys that moved the needle. They were signed by teams that were top five payrolls and playoff contenders. The rest of the options were more or less Correia.