Jump to content
Twins Daily
  • Create Account
  • Bullpen Competition Gets Crowded


    Nick Nelson

    Twins officials have been insistent throughout the offseason that they wished to bolster the bullpen by acquiring a veteran reliever. On Friday they got their guy, signing 36-year-old righty Matt Belisle to a one-year, $2.05 million deal.

    Let's take a look at how this addition alters the bullpen landscape, and who figures to be the odd man out.

    Image courtesy of Matt Kartozian, USA Today

    Twins Video

    First, some words on Belisle and what he brings to the table. My hope going into this offseason was that the Twins would aim for higher upside, seeking to entice a late-inning weapon such as Neftali Feliz or Greg Holland by dangling a potentially open closer job. On a short-term contract, saves are money.

    Belisle doesn't fit that profile, but isn't a bad get by any means. Dating back to 2010 he has a 3.47 ERA, 3.08 FIP and 1.26 WHIP. His velocity and whiff rates don't scream "dominance" but he has been a very effective reliever for a long time. What he lacks in strikeouts he makes up for with sharp control and consistent ground ball tendencies. Over the past two years he has allowed only three home runs in 80 innings.

    The well-traveled vet has also spent those two seasons playing for division winners, which was undoubtedly a big part of his allure. In 2015 Belisle made 34 appearances for a 100-win Cardinals team. Last year, his Nationals won 95 games. Given all the talk we've heard about bringing in an experienced player with leadership qualities, it's clear this factor weighed heavily.

    Belisle looks like a trustworthy middle-innings guy who can give you multiple innings when needed. In essence he is a rich man's Tim Stauffer, and a good bet to fulfill the role Terry Ryan envisioned with that ill-fated signing two years ago.

    But his presence exacerbates a numbers crunch in the bullpen. There will be some interesting scenarios playing out when the pitching staff reports to Ft. Myers in a week.

    If we're working under the (probably safe) assumption that Glen Perkins will not be on the Opening Day roster, then these are the relievers we can basically consider locks:

    Brandon Kintzler, RHP

    Ryan Pressly, RHP

    Matt Belisle, RHP

    Taylor Rogers/Buddy Boshers/Ryan O'Rourke, LHP

    Barring injuries, those four will be there. Kintzler, Pressly and Belisle have guaranteed contracts and of course Paul Molitor will need a left-hander at his disposal. In fact, he'll probably want at least two in this age of specialized bullpens, and I would suggest that closer-in-training JT Chargois should be pretty close to a lock as well after finishing strong with the Twins in 2016.

    In a seven-man bullpen, those assumptions would leave one spot open. There are three different players who all have a fairly strong case, but two are likely to be left out - from the roster, and maybe even the organization.

    First, there's Michael Tonkin. We all recall his unfulfilling 2016 campaign, which yielded a 5.02 ERA and 1.45 WHIP. On the surface, he looks like the unfortunate but obvious underdog. At least, he would be if the old regime were still in charge. Tonkin barely made the roster last spring and did not perform well during his lengthy audition.

    I would argue, though, that his struggles were tied to misuse. Formerly a dominant Triple-A closer, the flame-throwing righty was thrust into a long relief role, and the extended outings seemed to take a take a toll as he wore down late in the year. I suspect (and hope) that Derek Falvey and Thad Levine are curious to see what Tonkin can do in shorter stints. His tremendous success in the minors and his established ability to strike out big-leaguers make him tough to give up on.

    The team's decision to make room for Belisle by designating Byung Ho Park for assignment confirms their enduring faith in Tonkin, who is out of options. It looks like they intend to give him a real chance this spring.

    But where would that leave Justin Haley? The Twins had the No. 1 selection in December's Rule 5 draft and decided that out of everyone available, the 25-year-old right-hander was the guy they wanted. Unless they can work out a trade, they must either keep him on the active roster or lose him.

    With the urgency to repair this pitching staff being as high as it is, the front office cannot get this wrong. If they expose Tonkin to waivers and he gets claimed only to excel in a more fitting role elsewhere, it looks bad. If they send Haley back to Boston and he turns out to be a quality big-league arm, it looks bad.

    These are the kinds of early missteps that Falvey and Levine can ill afford if they want to win the respect and trust of the fan base (not to mention lingering Ryan loyalists within the organization). So the stakes will be high as they evaluate these two players in Florida. And we haven't yet even mentioned one other name that should be in the discussion.

    Up to this point the team has been mum regarding its plans for Tyler Duffey. There is a common belief that he's best suited for the bullpen, based on his two-pitch arsenal and his background as a dominant closer in college. There hasn't been any indication that he'll be shifted to relief right away, but it looks like his best path since he's behind both Trevor May and Jose Berrios for the final rotation spot.

    The Twins have the luxury of taking it slow with Duffey, who has options remaining. They could send him to Rochester in April and allow him to hone his skills in relief. Though he's a likely candidate to succeed – especially if he can add a few ticks to his fastball – it has been a long time since he's pitched in that capacity.

    Then again, if they try this out in the Grapefruit League and he's firing bullets, how do you send him to the minors? He's a deep sleeper to ultimately take over the ninth-inning gig. Let's not forget how bad Perkins looked in his final run as a starter before almost immediately becoming a lights-out late inning asset.

    These are intriguing storylines, and there are a few others that could emerge. For instance, what if Perkins is healthy and strong enough to fill a role out of the gates? What if May's transition back to starting doesn't pan, and they opt to slide him back to relief? What if Phil Hughes needs some ramp-up time in the bullpen? There's also minor-league signing Ryan Vogelsong, who some feel is very likely to make the roster with a decent spring.

    Injuries happen, of course, and the Twins are setting themselves up well for that. But if this group can get through spring relatively healthy, it's going to set up some pivotal decisions at the end of March.

    MORE FROM TWINS DAILY
    — Latest Twins coverage from our writers
    — Recent Twins discussion in our forums
    — Follow Twins Daily via Twitter, Facebook or email
    — Become a Twins Daily Caretaker

     Share


    User Feedback

    Recommended Comments



    Featured Comments

     

    I see your point but when you can't get lefties out, you walk a ton of guys and you're homer prone and just the same as Nolasco, there is the door.  I read a piece over at twinkie town(link below) and scared the hell out of me.  Then thought, "the twins are paying this clown 8+mil for something May/Duffey can do. I would rather have Vogel in there.  I want him gone as soon as possible.  enough of these, just ok guys.  Are we fixing this or just paying anyone 8 mil to pitch to 5+ERA for 180 innings?

     

    http://www.twinkietown.com/2017/2/2/14445886/hector-santiago-is-not-to-be-trusted-minnesota-twins-pitching

     

    So... he's all these things and still better than Kyle Gibson.

    I agree with you, and that's why I think the FO will be looking for an upgrade within the organization if Santiago or Gibson don't show better results this year.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

     

    I feel the same way but bullpens tend to go nuts in Spring Training. There are so many injuries, starters rotating into the pen, and general madness that I don't get too worked up about the roster until we have an idea what it will look like.

     

    I wouldn't even rule out someone like Burdi coming to Spring Training, mowing down batters, and getting the nod on the Opening Day roster.

     

    I don't think Burdi is invited....

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

     

    So... he's all these things and still better than Kyle Gibson.

    I agree with you, and that's why I think the FO will be looking for an upgrade within the organization if Santiago or Gibson don't show better results this year.

    That they are the same(Gibson a bit worse) but there is still hope Gibson can still rebound and offer the upside we have thought about for the last few years.  They both could go and I wouldn't care much. 

     

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

     

    Not to mention Burdi hasn't even dominated at AA yet. That would be quite a leap to go straight to the MLB roster.

    Given his age and velocity, he's the type of guy who can and possibly should be ushered right to the bigs.

     

    Unfortunately, the dude keeps getting injured.

     

    Relievers like Burdi don't have to learn three pitches and refine their command. They shouldn't be led along at a snail's pace as they were with the old front office.

     

    Not that I'm saying Burdi should be on the MLB roster right now, only that whether he dominated enough lower levels sufficiently shouldn't be the deciding factor. If the dude can throw it 98 over the plate and not walk every other batter, get him up here because, in case no one else has noticed, the bullpen is terrible.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

     

    Given his age and velocity, he's the type of guy who can and possibly should be ushered right to the bigs.

     

    Unfortunately, the dude keeps getting injured.

     

    Relievers like Burdi don't have to learn three pitches and refine their command. They shouldn't be led along at a snail's pace as they were with the old front office.

     

    Not that I'm saying Burdi should be on the MLB roster right now, only that whether he dominated enough lower levels sufficiently shouldn't be the deciding factor. If the dude can throw it 98 over the plate and not walk every other batter, get him up here because, in case no one else has noticed, the bullpen is terrible.

     

    Totally agree. The problem is he doesn't throw it over the plate. His last extended stint at AA (2015) he had 32 walks in 43.2 innings. There's no amount of strikeout ability in existence that can counterbalance walking a guy almost every outing.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

     

    Depending on how Haley pitches in spring, he is likely in the pen.  Hughes will not be in the pen. On the same note, Santiago is not a lock in the rotation.  If he doesn't do well in spring(something I hope happens) he can be released with us only on the hook for 30 days of his salary if he gets cut before 16 days into ST or 45 days salary if he is release before the season.  If he somehow makes the 25 man roster going into the season, we are stuck with his bad contract.  Jason Hammel is making 8mil with the Royals so this is a no brainer, dump the dead weight.

     

    Here is the way I see it playing out.

     

    Pen:

    Kintzler

    Pressley

    Belisle

    Rogers

    Chargois

    Haley

    Duffy or O'Rourke

    DL: Perkins

     

    Rotation:

    Santana

    Berrios

    Gibson

    May

    Hughes

     

    DFA/Released:

    Tonkin

    Santiago

    I think you're pretty close, but... 

     

    Justin Haley will get a chance to start. If he does well in ST, and Hughes struggles or has to go on the DL, Haley could get the fifth spot in the rotation. 

     

    Otherwise, I think you're spot- on.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

     

    ...

     because, in case no one else has noticed, the bullpen is terrible.

     2016 Twins per FanGraphs:

    Fielding.................29th of 30

    Batting..................25th of 30

    Pitching (starters)...26th of 30

    Pitching (relief).......23rd of 30  

     

    So, two things:

    1. You are right

    2. Our bullpen was the highlight of the team last year

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    There's sure a mess of names to fill in the blanks.

     

    Perkins.

    Kintzler

    Belisle

    Pressly

    Rogers

    are all givens.

     

    O'Routke

    Chargois

    Tonkin

    are in the mix

     

    Have to decide about

    Duffey

    Haley.

     

    We also have

    Boshers

    Light

    Baxendale

    Miller

    Reed

    Wimmers

    at Rochester

     

    People like

    Zach Jones

    Hildenberger

    Bard

    Burdi

    Melotakis

    Peterson 

    shouldn't be at Chattanooga.

     

    And then look at the rotation mess at Rochester:

    Greenwood

    Pino

    Rucinski

    Turley

    Tracy

    Tepsch

    Huribut

    Vogels

    Wheeler

    Mejia

     

    not to mention

    Gonsalves

    Jay

    Stewart

     

    And the Twins can't put together a dominant bullpen or rotation...yet!

     

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

     

     2016 Twins per FanGraphs:

    Fielding.................29th of 30

    Batting..................25th of 30

    Pitching (starters)...26th of 30

    Pitching (relief).......23rd of 30  

     

    So, two things:

    1. You are right

    2. Our bullpen was the highlight of the team last year

     

    But wait, don't we hear often that the hitting is fine?

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

     

    But wait, don't we hear often that the hitting is fine?

     

    It isn't "fine" just yet but there is a lot of talent in the lineup presenting a realistic potential for improvement. There are no guarantees, but there is a clear path to success there. That's miles ahead of the rotation which doesn't have anywhere near that level of upside in the system, nor is there even a clear path towards respectability.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

     

    Hildenberger's numbers are flat out nasty, I read in his bio on MLB.com that he's a sidewinder and can throw over the top? Who does he best resemble delivery-wise?

    Here is a short YouTube video of him throwing in the AFL two years ago. To my eye it looks like he comes a little bit more over the top on the last pitch he throws in that sequence, which (as you alluded to) he has a reputation of doing. He also does a lot to try and throw hitters out of rhythm. He'll quick pitch or hold the ball for a really long time. Definitely tries to get every advantage he can.

     

    It's possible he's been getting by on gimmicks, and it's probably a bad idea to get too excited about a 26-year-old former 22nd-round pick, but I'm a believer. Like you said, the numbers are completely filthy. 

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    I'll be totally honest guys, the pen has me stumped. I love to speculate and put pen to paper for all kinds of roster's and lineups and I just don't know how this is going to turn out.

     

    I get all the high potential RP arms that are rising through the system, but really, right now, only Chargois has pitched above AA with any significance. I'm a big fan and believer in Melotakis, but he was pretty much limited to not pitching consecutive days in 2016. Will the new regime be more aggressive with him over a year post surgery? Perhaps. And I would absolutely love to see him force his way on to the club. But I'm betting he begins the season in AAA initially. Hildenberger intrigues me immensely and I think he could be for real. But again, no time above AA. I can't believe the FO moved to acquire Haley and won't keep him in some capacity, via RP spot or trade. Duffey has to have a spot somewhere doesn't he? O'Rourke has proven to be effective when/if used properly. Bang on Boshers all you want because he wasn't a top prospect and came from independent ball, but he was actually good except for a couple of games and had very solid K numbers.

     

    The whole point is I'm rambling because I just don't know at this point. And as stated by others, these things DO have a way of working themselves out. I DON'T think our bullpen is anything to brag about at this point, but I DO think there are enough interesting options here to think we should be better...may be building something...and could/should have the best bullpen we've had in a few years. And I believe it will be in a state of Flux throughout the season.

     

    Quantity does not necessarily mean or equal quality. But in this case, I think there is enough quantity of potential to be a little bit excited for what is to come.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

     

     2016 Twins per FanGraphs:

    Fielding.................29th of 30

    Batting..................25th of 30

    Pitching (starters)...26th of 30

    Pitching (relief).......23rd of 30  

     

    So, two things:

    1. You are right

    2. Our bullpen was the highlight of the team last year

    It appears you are using just overall WAR for batting, so this isn't quite correct.  Fielding is already part of a batter's overall WAR.

     

    If you sort by Offensive runs (the "Off" column at Fangraphs) -- that has the Twins at 17th:

    http://www.fangraphs.com/leaders.aspx?pos=all&stats=bat&lg=all&qual=0&type=8&season=2016&month=0&season1=2016&ind=0&team=0,ts&rost=0&age=0&filter=&players=0&sort=18,d

     

    Of course, that puts the whole "positional adjustment" in the Defense column, which probably isn't right when NL teams have pitchers batting instead of DHs.  NL teams have 15-20 more runs for positional adjustment than AL teams.  Adding those in, that would push two NL teams ahead of us, so perhaps more accurately we could be considered 19th in "batting".

     

    So I think batting was still our (relative) "highlight" of 2016.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

     

    It appears you are using just overall WAR for batting, so this isn't quite correct.  Fielding is already part of a batter's overall WAR.

     

    If you sort by Offensive runs (the "Off" column at Fangraphs) -- that has the Twins at 17th:

    http://www.fangraphs.com/leaders.aspx?pos=all&stats=bat&lg=all&qual=0&type=8&season=2016&month=0&season1=2016&ind=0&team=0,ts&rost=0&age=0&filter=&players=0&sort=18,d

     

    Of course, that puts the whole "positional adjustment" in the Defense column, which probably isn't right when NL teams have pitchers batting instead of DHs.  NL teams have 15-20 more runs for positional adjustment than AL teams.  Adding those in, that would push two NL teams ahead of us, so perhaps more accurately we could be considered 19th in "batting".

     

    So I think batting was still our (relative) "highlight" of 2016.

    Yeah, I didn't take the batting number listed very seriously, more as a humorous take on the bullpen and the team's overall terribleness last season.

     

    The Twins offense was obviously better than 25th out of 30 teams. Their OPS fell right in the middle of the pack in the AL, IIRC.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

     

    Yeah, I didn't take the batting number listed very seriously, more as a humorous take on the bullpen and the team's overall terribleness last season.

     

    The Twins offense was obviously better than 25th out of 30 teams. Their OPS fell right in the middle of the pack in the AL, IIRC.

    Looking at it further -- if you ignore pitcher batting, the Twins were 22nd in offensive runs at Fangraphs.  This includes batting (23rd) and baserunning (8th) and park adjustments:

     

    http://www.fangraphs.com/leaders.aspx?pos=np&stats=bat&lg=all&qual=0&type=6&season=2016&month=0&season1=2016&ind=0&team=0,ts&rost=0&age=0&filter=&players=0&sort=6,d

     

    By raw OPS for non-ptichers, the Twins were tied for 19th:

    http://www.fangraphs.com/leaders.aspx?pos=np&stats=bat&lg=all&qual=0&type=1&season=2016&month=0&season1=2016&ind=0&team=0,ts&rost=0&age=0&filter=&players=0&sort=9,d

     

    8th in the AL in OPS, but down to 11th in wRC+ or batting runs, so we must be getting dinged for park factors?

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

     

    8th in the AL in OPS, but down to 11th in wRC+ or batting runs, so we must be getting dinged for park factors?

    I've noticed that trend over the past couple of years. After being an extreme pitcher's park in 2010, it seems Target Field has slowly evolved into a slightly hitter-friendly ballpark.

     

    Which doesn't make one damned bit of sense. To me, it brings into the question the validity of park adjustments. I can understand some fluctuation as the park plays for a few years but not a wild swing to "cannot hit homers here" to "hey, this place is on the hitter-friendly side of the scale".

     

    It can't be entirely coincidental that as the Twins field an incrementally worse and worse pitching staff, the park suddenly becomes "hitter friendly".

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

     

     

     

    It can't be entirely coincidental that as the Twins field an incrementally worse and worse pitching staff, the park suddenly becomes "hitter friendly".

     

    This is what I was thinking.  Petco would be a hitters park with what the Twins put in place the last few years.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Sorry Brock but I think pitching staff/ hitters for the home team can sway the park factor by a ton. Put Maddux, Glavine and Smoltz in Target field and see what happens. Or maybe put Bonds, Willingham, Dozier and Joeybats all on their best years and see what that turns it into. Sometimes a team comes together with monster pitching and not a lot of O and then "its a pitchers park" but if the home team has no pitching but a couple guys who can/will try to homer to get back in the game then "its a hitters park"

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

     

    Sorry Brock but I think pitching staff/ hitters for the home team can sway the park factor by a ton. Put Maddux, Glavine and Smoltz in Target field and see what happens. Or maybe put Bonds, Willingham, Dozier and Joeybats all on their best years and see what that turns it into. Sometimes a team comes together with monster pitching and not a lot of O and then "its a pitchers park" but if the home team has no pitching but a couple guys who can/will try to homer to get back in the game then "its a hitters park"

    If this is true - and I'm not conceding it is - then park factor is mostly useless.

     

    The only way to properly calculate park factor is to use a wide range of seasons and compare them to other parks during the same year.

     

    For example, one would need to treat the seven years of Target Field nearly equally and Target Field can't be isolated; ie. 2010 Target Field needs to be offset by factors such as "how did the 2010 Indians play in Yankee Stadium, how did the 2010 Rangers play in Angel Stadium, etc." and equalize those numbers against how those same teams performed in 2010 Target Field.

     

    That's the only way I can think of to minimize home team influence on their own stadium.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    For what it's worth, we're not talking huge differences here. The difference between a team ranking 19th and 23rd in a batting isn't that big of a deal.  If that's an example of park factors overstating something, then park factors aren't a big problem.

     

    Although the future of park factors could be a lot cooler:

    https://baseballwithr.wordpress.com/2016/10/03/improving-park-factors-through-statcast-data/

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

     

    For what it's worth, we're not talking huge differences here. The difference between a team ranking 19th and 23rd in a batting isn't that big of a deal.  If that's an example of park factors overstating something, then park factors aren't a big problem.

     

    Although the future of park factors could be a lot cooler:

    https://baseballwithr.wordpress.com/2016/10/03/improving-park-factors-through-statcast-data/

    Ah, yes, okay. They're going even deeper than my idea and that's a good thing. Instead of looking at team performance, they're isolating hit types.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

     

    If this is true - and I'm not conceding it is - then park factor is mostly useless.

     

    The only way to properly calculate park factor is to use a wide range of seasons and compare them to other parks during the same year.

     

    For example, one would need to treat the seven years of Target Field nearly equally and Target Field can't be isolated; ie. 2010 Target Field needs to be offset by factors such as "how did the 2010 Indians play in Yankee Stadium, how did the 2010 Rangers play in Angel Stadium, etc." and equalize those numbers against how those same teams performed in 2010 Target Field.

     

    That's the only way I can think of to minimize home team influence on their own stadium.

     

    Then you'd have to factor in the pitching. "How many runs did the pitchers give up in Target Field in 2010?, 2011?, 2012?..." And for each team.

     

    Otherwise the talent on the pitching staff would have everything to do with how many runs the Giants scored in Target Field, especially as the Giants have a SSS in Target Field.

     

    Lots of variables.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    I think opening day we are looking at 

     

    Rotation:

    Santana

    Gibson

    Santiago*

    Hughes* 

    May

     

    Vogelsong- Just a feeling he has a good spring and bumps someone from above

     

    *I'd like to see Berrios for one of Hughes not being ready yet or Santiago let go 

     

    Pen:

    Kintzler

    Pressly

    Belisle

    Rogers

     

    O'Rourke/Boshers

    Chargois

    Haley- long relief 

     

    Blanton- I hope we can get him and DFA Tonkin

    Tonkin (I think they give him another shot, especially if we have 8 guys in the pen and don't sign anyone else)

     

    I think Perkins starts the year on the DL, as a precaution more than anything

     

    Would like to see Duffey at AAA in the bullpen and one of the first to get a call up

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

     

    If this is true - and I'm not conceding it is - then park factor is mostly useless.

     

    The only way to properly calculate park factor is to use a wide range of seasons and compare them to other parks during the same year.

     

    For example, one would need to treat the seven years of Target Field nearly equally and Target Field can't be isolated; ie. 2010 Target Field needs to be offset by factors such as "how did the 2010 Indians play in Yankee Stadium, how did the 2010 Rangers play in Angel Stadium, etc." and equalize those numbers against how those same teams performed in 2010 Target Field.

     

    That's the only way I can think of to minimize home team influence on their own stadium.

     

    OK we agree. 

     

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites




    Join the conversation

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

    Guest
    Add a comment...

    ×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

      Only 75 emoji are allowed.

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

    ×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

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

    Loading...

×
×
  • Create New...