Twins Sign RHP Michael Pineda

Passing along some stuff I already shared on Twitter ...

 

Michael Pineda last three seasons: 9.46 K/9, 1.98 BB/9. That 4.79 K:BB ratio ranked seventh among the 78 pitchers to log 400 IP in that time frame, trailing only Kershaw, Sale, Scherzer, Kluber, Bumgarner and Carrasco.

 

His overall numbers were far less impressive because he had the worst BABIP (.328) of that sample and the second-worst HR/FB rate (17.4%). He's given up a lot of home runs, but over his career he has a 1.6 HR/9 rate at Yankee Stadium and a 0.9 HR/9 rate everywhere else.

Great numbers.  Get him healthy, behind a solid defense and out of Yankee Stadium.

He has been a negative value pitcher for the past two years, and past 3 years as a whole, when compared to league average pitchers. Those are the numbers, there's nothing disingenuous there. In fact, it's disingenuous to have a narrative that is the opposite of the numbers, no?

So, half the pitchers in major league baseball are negative value?

I really don't understand fans who are being negative about this signing. It's almost a certainty that the Twins will take out insurance on him because he's coming back from TJ surgery, which will basically make the cost zero if he doesn't ever fully recover.

He could very well be a relief pitcher for the Twins come September and into the playoffs if they make it there.  He'll be 14 months removed from surgery by September and then by the time the next season starts in April he'll be ~ 21 months removed from surgery. This signing isn't going to hurt the Twins in 2019 from going out and signing other players.

He has been a negative value pitcher for the past two years, and past 3 years as a whole, when compared to league average pitchers. Those are the numbers, there's nothing disingenuous there. In fact, it's disingenuous to have a narrative that is the opposite of the numbers, no?

That's just not true. Last year he was worth 1.1 fWAR and .7 bWAR in about half a season's worth of starts. 2011: 3.2 fWAR and 2.3 bWAR. 2012 & 2013: did not play. 2014: 2.2 fWAR & 2.7 bWAR. 2015: 3.5 fWAR & 1.7 bWAR. 2016: 3.2 fWAR & 1.2 bWAR.

For his career, he has an ERA+ of 101, almost exactly league average. Career FIP of 3.60 and career xFIP of 3.33.

Having an opinion is one thing, but it's simply false to say Piñeda has provided negative value. One could say he has been below average in certain areas, but there is indeed still some value in that.

So, half the pitchers in major league baseball are negative value?

Of course. You are probably familiar with ERA+, OPS+, wRC+, etc., where values under 100 are below average (negative value) players.

For a team to make the playoffs, teams want as many above average players as possible. Replacement value (WAR) is worthless. Look at WAA instead.

That's just not true. Last year he was worth 1.1 fWAR and .7 bWAR in about half a season's worth of starts. 

Except I'm talking about WAA and not WAR.  

WAR = the baseline, you never want a player below 0 WAR, but a player with positive WAR can still be a below average player.

WAA = the average player. Good players have a positive WAA. ****ty players can still have a positive WAR but will have a negative WAA.

Here is his WAA by year:

2011 - 0.6

2012-2013 - Minors

2014 - 2.0 (in a small sample size)

2015 - 0.2

2016 - -0.4

2017 - -0.1

From 2015 on, he has a WAA of -0.3.  That's a below average (minus) player. "Replacement level" means nothing, you want to field a team that is better than your competition (WAA) -- not better than the minors (WAR).

Again, I can't comprehend the mentality of some people.

We don't have any pitching, yet no pitcher on the market is good enough for this team.

It's unreal.

Except I'm talking about WAA and not WAR.  

 

WAR = the baseline, you never want a player below 0 WAR, but a player with positive WAR can still be a below average player.

WAA = the average player. Good players have a positive WAA. ****ty players can still have a positive WAR but will have a negative WAA.

Here is his WAA by year:

 

2011 - 0.6

2012-2013 - Minors

2014 - 2.0 (in a small sample size)

2015 - 0.2

2016 - -0.4

2017 - -0.1

From 2015 on, he has a WAA of -0.3.  That's a below average (minus) player. "Replacement level" means nothing, you want to field a team that is better than your competition (WAA) -- not better than the minors (WAR).

Thank you for the conversation. We disagree on a few of irreconcilable points: 1) what value means 2) whether one must look past a single stat in determining value 3) whether one must account for the margin of error when using the aforementioned stat(s). I really think it's cherry picking to look at WAA and WAA only, when other stats tell a more holistic story.

Overall, I like this signing without feeling passionately about it. In essence it's a one year deal, and those basically never hurt teams.

Not a bad signing, but this doesn't address any area of need for 2018.  Unless they come away from the winter meetings with Archer, Cole, or a badass reliever one would have to call the winter meetings this year a loss.

Here we go again. Why do these guys have to be so creative? I wanna go back to the previous regime. I miss the crickets dammit

He could be a September addition to the bullpen when rosters expand. The bullpen might be the best spot for 2018 also.

Its going to be a disappointment if he is a 8 million dollar reliever next year considering they don't seem to be willing to spend that on a healthy, already established, good reliever this year when there is a clear hole.

If you look at his stat sheet, the likelihood of a breakout year is low. He's a #3/#4 guy at best.

 

If he pitches well in 2019, no one is going to be paying big money for a guy with one good year by age 31/32.  

Best case (for him) is he has a #3-level year and the Twins extend him, or he becomes a good bullpen arm and the Twins extend him.

Worst case is he turns into Scott Baker and the recovery from TJ is long. He may never actually play for the Twins before his contract runs out.

This has all the red flags of the bad signings Ryan made post 2011. Let's hope this one works out.

We're again talking about the $ involved, which doesn't matter. This team isn't going bankrupt and they have yet to make an investment in a top or even mid-level player that doesn't have an asterisk. If the Minnesota Twins ever reach a point where they can't pay their bills, then let's talk about $!

In what universe is a pitcher that has pitched to a fip in the high 2s, low 3s a number 4 starter 

Its going to be a disappointment if he is a 8 million dollar reliever next year considering they don't seem to be willing to spend that on a healthy, already established, good reliever this year when there is a clear hole.

If he pitches well it won’t be a disappointment.

In what universe is a pitcher that has pitched to a fip in the high 2s, low 3s a number 4 starter 

https://www.baseball-reference.com/players/n/nolasri01.shtml

Like Nolasco, Pineda has some fangraphs pundits scratching their heads. "His FIP looks nice, why does he suck? We just can't figure it out."

https://www.google.com/search?q=michael+pineda+fangraphs

Sometimes (always?) you have to use actual metrics instead of algorithms.  

If he pitches well it won’t be a disappointment.

I guess if all pitchers pitch well................... with Pineda, I just hope he pitches, instead of hanging out with Phil Hughes season after season. 

I was really hoping the FO would go after truly above average pitchers. Depth is good. But that is all this is. I sure hope to see better deals in the future. This looks a lot like the old boss to me.... Nolasco, Pelfrey, Hughes.......... comebacks can happen..... sure they can. Sometimes for one season. Sometimes for more.... sometimes never. 

If he pitches well it won’t be a disappointment.

I refuse to be critical of what amounts to a one-year $8 million deal...simply because I wanted the team to make bigger deals for better pitchers.  I honestly don't think this deal will limit in any way what the Twins may want to consider later...including later today.  Nor will it make them less likely to pull the trigger on anything.  If/when they pass on the $100-$200 million pitcher, it won't be because of the $8 they've spent on Pineda.

So, for what this deal is...I like it.  Decent chance of representing at least a marginal improvement to the rotation or (if we end up doing better later), a huge improvement to the bullpen.  And in a year where we should be in a position for it to matter.  I think both sides showed creativity in this deal.

I agree. Strategic thinking, committment to sustained excellence, courage to assume calculated risk.

it's a gamble no doubt, but he is the kind of pitcher that can beat the Yankees because well he's a former Yankee!

I'm obviously still assuming we'll sign/trade for another starter this offseason. If we can do that and acquire one reliever I think it's been a good offseason. If we get one of Archer, Stroman, or Cole for a reasonable trade or sign one of the top 4 starters and are able to get kintzler, Rodney, Cishek or a guy like that I'll be happy.

I'd be ecstatic!