Article: What? The Twins considering Mike Pelfrey again?

[Marta Shearing]

Why would Baker want to come back to the Twins? Both Ryan and Gardinhire made fools out themselves insinuating that Baker was unwilling to play through a little pain.

Baker cried wolf a few too many times.

[Squirrel]

Because they're consumed with sports radio talk rather than actual analysis.

 

If this team got Hughes and Baker along with Nolasco, I'd be one happy little Twins fan.

A happy little Twins fan is much better than a sad panda.

 

I'd be happy with this too.

[cmathewson]

Scott Baker is a good man and a good pitcher. He would be cheaper and likely better than Mike Pelfrey. The Twins soured on him because he refused to pitch like Anderson wanted. His out pitch is a high fastball. Without it, he's a 5 ERA pitcher. With it, he's a 4 ERA pitcher. It seems his pitching coach would rather have a 5 ERA pitcher who keeps the ball down than a 4 ERA pitcher who uses his out pitch. For this reason, I highly doubt he signs with the Twins. And it's probably for the best because I'm eager to see him have a healthy season for a team who appreciates a guy who gets outs however he can.

[TheLeviathan]

I was a die-hard fan until they got swept out of the playoffs again in 2010. I probably missed a handful of Baker's starts his entire Twins career. I'm qualified to make an informed opinion on him. I saw a pitcher who benefited from playing in the weak Central with the unbalanced schedule. I saw a pitcher who cracked any time there was pressure involved. Even 163 against Detroit he pitched well when they were behind until the Twins scored a couple runs. Then Scotty went out for the top of the inning and gave it right back. Baker and pressure were never a good mix.

 

Except the stats don't back your opinion. His career splits against the central teams have half of them being below his career ERA (CLE and KCR)and the other two above his career ERA (CHW and DET). The "cracked under pressure" notion is subjective.

 

His biggest issue was his inability to stay on the mound due to injury. But when healthy, he was a vastly underrated pitcher by this fanbase.

[Brock Beauchamp]

I was a die-hard fan until they got swept out of the playoffs again in 2010. I probably missed a handful of Baker's starts his entire Twins career. I'm qualified to make an informed opinion on him. I saw a pitcher who benefited from playing in the weak Central with the unbalanced schedule. I saw a pitcher who cracked any time there was pressure involved. Even 163 against Detroit he pitched well when they were behind until the Twins scored a couple runs. Then Scotty went out for the top of the inning and gave it right back. Baker and pressure were never a good mix.

 

As opposed to Mike Pelfrey, who didn't benefit at all from pitching in the national league or Citi Field... And was still worse than Scott Baker in pretty much every way one pitcher can be worse than another.

[Marta Shearing]

I'll admit in 2011 it looked like he had finally completely figured things out, pitching the best baseball of his career, then he tore up his elbow, which inexplicably didnt show up on the mri. If i remember right they didnt find the tear until they cut him open.

[Marta Shearing]

As opposed to Mike Pelfrey, who didn't benefit at all from pitching in the national league or Citi Field... And was still worse than Scott Baker in pretty much every way one pitcher can be worse than another.

Well we'll see which one pitches better in 2014.

[jorgenswest]

Without Baker, the Twins don't get to game 163 in 2008 or 2009. In terms of WAR, he was the best starting pitcher on those good teams. Over a 5 year period (2007-2011), he average 3.1 WAR per year. That is probably greater than the sum of WAR from the starters in either of the last two years.

 

If the Twins believe Mike Pelfrey is capable of being the best pitcher on a good team, they need to sign him soon.

 

Note: I used BR WAR figures. His fangraph average for the 5 years is slightly greater.

[PseudoSABR]

[baker] would be cheaper and likely better than Mike Pelfrey.

I'm not sure we can judge with any kind of confidence what Baker's performance will be, much less, the likelihood of that performance.

 

The reason the Twins prefer Pelfrey is that he's been healthy more recently and--arguably--has been more effective than his numbers, and improved as the season wore on. Baker would be fine as a buy low candidate, like Santana or Floyd; but all of those guys have serious questions about how many innings they can actually pitch, and that they woudl pitch what little innings they could any better than Pelfrey is a murky proposition at best.

[TheLeviathan]

Well we'll see which one pitches better in 2014.

 

That isn't a fair comparison. Baker is going to be cheaper with higher upside. Hughes should be taken over Pelfrey and Baker should be signed as a cheaper, riskier gamble.

 

Pelfrey may indeed pitch better, the problem is will he pitch anywhere close to earning the salary and roster spot, they'll give him. This is a team that should be targeting high ceilings, not high floors.

[nicksaviking]

I was a die-hard fan until they got swept out of the playoffs again in 2010. I probably missed a handful of Baker's starts his entire Twins career. I'm qualified to make an informed opinion on him. I saw a pitcher who benefited from playing in the weak Central with the unbalanced schedule. I saw a pitcher who cracked any time there was pressure involved. Even 163 against Detroit he pitched well when they were behind until the Twins scored a couple runs. Then Scotty went out for the top of the inning and gave it right back. Baker and pressure were never a good mix.

 

If we don't use the eye test but instead use stats, we may question Pelfrey's mental toughness by the 5.59 ERA he had in the first inning last year, his ability to only get ten total outs after the sixth inning last year or the 30 second soap opera that takes place between each of his pitches.

 

Those things also show up on the eye test. I doubt Baker is more mentally weak than Pelfrey, but hypothetically if he was, I'd still take the guy who gives up fewer runs, strikes more guys out and goes deeper into games.

[jorgenswest]

Well we'll see which one pitches better in 2014.

 

Who is more likely to perform above league average as a starting pitcher?

 

Does Pelfrey win if he gives mediocre performance and Baker doesn't pitch due to injury?

 

With guys like Baker and Santana, they will either pitch well or be injured.

[Reider]

Funny how he's posted multiple seasons better than anything Pelfrey has done in his career, despite being so mentally weak.

 

Baker is a better pitcher. Period. He strikes out more, walks less, gives up fewer runs and hits, and goes deeper into games.

 

A healthy Mike Pelfrey is a #4 pitcher, maybe a #3 on a bad team. A healthy Scott Baker is a #3 in an average year, a #2 when he's really rolling.

 

I will never understand why Minnesota fans didn't appreciate what they had in Baker.

 

I agree. I was a big Baker fan when he was here. He's hands down better than Pelfrey (when healthy).

[Reider]

Scott Baker is a good man and a good pitcher. He would be cheaper and likely better than Mike Pelfrey. The Twins soured on him because he refused to pitch like Anderson wanted. His out pitch is a high fastball. Without it, he's a 5 ERA pitcher. With it, he's a 4 ERA pitcher. It seems his pitching coach would rather have a 5 ERA pitcher who keeps the ball down than a 4 ERA pitcher who uses his out pitch. For this reason, I highly doubt he signs with the Twins. And it's probably for the best because I'm eager to see him have a healthy season for a team who appreciates a guy who gets outs however he can.

If this is true, it says more about Gardy and Anderson than it does about Baker. Every player has strengths and weaknesses. A good coach will play to a players strengths. Trying to force a player to move away from his strengths is a sign of a bad coach, not a bad player.

[Thrylos]

If this is true, it says more about Gardy and Anderson than it does about Baker. Every player has strengths and weaknesses. A good coach will play to a players strengths. Trying to force a player to move away from his strengths is a sign of a bad coach, not a bad player.

 

And Baker is not an outlier as far as their coaching goes: Liriano, Slowey, Garza, Lohse, Bonser etc need to be added to the list. The starting pitchers they did not mess with were either veterans (Pavano, Radke, Livan, Rogers, et al) or sinker/slider pitch to contract types (Blackburn, Silva, Mays et al) which are their model of successful pitchers. One exception: Johan Santana who Bobby Cuellar turned into a star.

[johnnydakota]

If we could get Mike Pelfrey on a contract simular to what the Giants did Vogelsong , then sure ,If not we still need a coupla pitchers who are capible of being #2s or 3s,Which I dont think mike is able to be

[johnnydakota]

Funny how he's posted multiple seasons better than anything Pelfrey has done in his career, despite being so mentally weak.

 

Baker is a better pitcher. Period. He strikes out more, walks less, gives up fewer runs and hits, and goes deeper into games.

 

A healthy Mike Pelfrey is a #4 pitcher, maybe a #3 on a bad team. A healthy Scott Baker is a #3 in an average year, a #2 when he's really rolling.

 

I will never understand why Minnesota fans didn't appreciate what they had in Baker.

 

1st, I had to look outside and see if 4 horsemen were riding by, I think this is 1 of the few times we agree ...Scotty was a darn fine pitcher for us , not the Nancy many made him out to be. If it came down to signing Baker or Johan , I sign Baker, I also sign Baker over Pelfrey...But the real question is, can we get him to return ? After several bus tosses and several non players questioning his toughness, he might not want to come back

[stringer bell]

Baker and/or Pelfrey would be good additions for the Twins. I am more confident about Pelfrey's health than Baker's. Another name that has been mentioned often is Johan. Please fans, let's not waste our hopes on Santana. It would be miraculous if he could pitch well again. I'd rather remember him as the multiple Cy winner he was before he was traded to the Mets.

[Shane Wahl]

Wait, there are people on this planet who think Mike Pelfrey is better than Scott Baker?

[Shane Wahl]

For those who think Pelfrey is better or even all that comparable to Baker, how do you compare Pelfrey to Nolasco?

 

If I were guaranteed 200 innings from any of those three pitchers in 2014, I would take Baker hands down.

[Brock Beauchamp]

For those who think Pelfrey is better or even all that comparable to Baker, how do you compare Pelfrey to Nolasco?

 

If I were guaranteed 200 innings from any of those three pitchers in 2014, I would take Baker hands down.

 

Eh... Baker hasn't really pitched in what, 20 months?

 

He has the most ability of the three but given his rust and TJS, I'd take Nolasco over him in 2014.

 

A healthy and proven Scott Baker might be a different story.

[snepp]

Per B-Ref, Scott Baker's career leverage splits, OPS allowed.

 

Low: .732

 

Med: .755

 

High: .690

 

Cracking under pressure indeed.

[Reider]

I just got an alert from the score on my phone that the Twins just made Pelfrey a contract offer. I was under the impression that the Twins already had a 2year/$10m standing offer on the table. Does anybody know more about this? Is this a second contract offer? Or was the 2yr/$10m offer just a rumour?

[JB_Iowa]

Officials from other clubs are scratching their heads as well at why the Twins and Pelfrey haven’t hammered out a deal.

 

 

“Minnesota is a good place for him,” an official from a National League club said this week. “Pelfrey is soft.”

 

 

Another official, this one from an American League club, said he was taken aback when reports first surfaced of a two-year offer for Pelfrey.

 

 

“I thought it was extremely odd,” the official said. “If he doesn’t sign back with the Twins, I think Mike will probably scramble and sign a one-year, incentive-laden deal somewhere, but it won’t be with a contender.”

 

http://blogs.twincities.com/twins/

 

 

This gets kind of curious -- especially read the comparison between Pelfrey and Hughes. Easy to see the (alleged) Boras point but if the league reaction is as stated above, it also puts Pelfrey in a really uncomfortable spot.

 

Boras has misread the market before. Is this another case?

 

(Oh, and you have to LOVE the comment that Pelfrey is soft. Blech.)

[Mike Sixel]

And the further implication that MN is a good place for soft players, an indictment of the Twins' approach, frankly.

[Reider]

That is absolutely hilarious!! I thought you were just making those quotes up to be funny. 2 years / $10million seems to be a fair deal for both sides (even though I'd rather the Twins sign Garza).

[amjgt]

Is that a real quote? Not only a slam on a relatively unimportant major league player, but a slam on MN.

 

You almost never see quotes like that.

[Marta Shearing]

And the further implication that MN is a good place for soft players, an indictment of the Twins' approach, frankly.

 

Its an epidemic on this team right now, and it all starts with Gardenhire. This is the culture he wants. I think it makes him feel more in control.....more important. Players missing long stretches with minor injuries, but they do it because they can. They're actually almost encouraged to. Shutting Arcia down last year was a joke.

[nicksaviking]

Boras has misread the market before. Is this another case?

 

(Oh, and you have to LOVE the comment that Pelfrey is soft. Blech.)

 

And you know this time of year, Pelfrey is barely on Boras' mind. Surely he's thinking that he's got bigger fish to fry at the moment.

 

I'm not very interested in Pelfrey, but Pelfrey at $5 million for 2015 is probably a hell of a lot easier to move than Arroyo at $12 million. Seeing as Nolasco and Hughes are both under contract longer than 2 years, Meyer/Gibson/May are near MLB ready and the Twins have a plethora of reclamation arms that may be servicable, one would have to think anyone signed to a two year deal this offseason may be looked at as trade bait this time next year.

[jokin]

Is that a real quote? Not only a slam on a relatively unimportant major league player, but a slam on MN.

 

You almost never see quotes like that.

 

You do see them from "anonymous sources", I can imagine it sometimes comes in handy as a good negotiating ploy. And it's something that those of us who watch this organization on a daily basis knows (unfortunately), has the ring of truth attached to it.