Trov

Every pitcher runs into issues and needs to make adjustments. The main question is when will the league adjust to his new change up and how will that play out after that? Will the league adjust and light up the change up, or will it keep them off enough to keep him on top? Duffy is the perfect example of why pen pitchers are hard to predict because their bad outings are normally amplified compared to a starter. A starter gives up 2 or 3 runs to first 3 or 4 batters and settles down to pitch 5 or 6 innings we do not say much, but a pen guy gives up 2 or 3 runs to first 3 or 4 guys and the outing was terrible.

Yes, teams would want someone like Max, but they are unlikely to give up MLB players for him, and that is what we are looking for, MLB pitchers. Now, there has been trades in the past by competing teams, namely Cleveland, who have dealt MLB pitching for OF help, but that is rare. I would still hesitate to trade Max as he is one of our better defenders and he is putting up a 2.1 WAR through half the season. He may not be putting up 2019 HR numbers but he is having a solid season and unless Larnach is back healthy Max is hard to replace in my opinion.

Why would Rockies make deal like this? Pagan does have another year of control, but I see no reason Rockies would want a rental starter for their starter and a aging pen arm.

In terms of Santana I am not a fan of trading for a pen arm on a break out season. Unless you can really see where the change was that made the difference and believe it is sustainable. I mean how many times have we seen someone like say Duffy look like they are on the verge of being dominate relief guy only to struggle again. Someone that has long history of poor pitching to suddenly break out I have a huge red flag on and would not give up much for him. I am always willing to take fliers on guys, but giving up much from one is a huge risk. You need to be really certain they will maintain.

It is nice to see the numbers backing up what the eyes see. I will always remember in his rookie year pinch hitting after a 0-2 count when the hitter got hurt swinging. He managed to work a walk. That is just crazy, coming off the bench, with 0 chance of mistake and he works a walk. At that point I was sold on him as an on base guy. This year he seems to be having a little more power. Maybe not HR power, but getting those doubles. He might develop more power as he ages, similar to Altuve, maybe not as much power, but he could still be a double digit HR guy if he grows a little more power.

There may be a team that will be willing to take a flyer on Sano, but unless you pay for the contract and buy out, you are not getting much of value for him. He does have potential upside and maybe a new home could unlock it. He is also one that if hot can carry a team through the playoffs, but could also be an auto strike out as well. You also point out that we have pretty much no where to play him right now, so why would a team be willing to give up much, if there is a chance we DFA him anyways. Unless he looks amazing during his rehab I would not be surprised if we DFA him and any team can pick him up off waivers or sign him after clears and he becomes FA. Unless a team thinks he will be something more than he has, I doubt anyone gives up anything of much value to us at MLB level for him.

What rebuilding team is going to trade for Max? Maybe a team making a push and looking for OF would want him, but they are unlikely to deal their MLB talent, so unless they have major depth in the pen, they are not trading them away. Also, his hitting may not be tops, but his defense is still one of the better in RF. We could part with Max but as you point out he is not elite, he is aging, and nearing end of contract. His market is very limited and will not net much.

Right now Seattle is hot and looking like they may compete for wild card, I doubt they dump a pen arm, unless it is for something they feel they need more to help in their push.

I am all for them seeking some trades, but just as they did in the Capps deal, I do not want them to overpay. I said when they made it was an overpay. I mean you give up a top catching prospect, which are always hard to find, for a rental relief pitcher. I do not care that we had Joe, you knew he may come of catching at one point, and even if not, you could have got so much more in a trade, then a rental pen arm. I do not expect this FO to overpay for a pen arm.

I do not get why you would use xFIP compared to ERA than xERA or something that compares actual balls in play. I do not get why some people think FIP or xFIP is some telling number. I will agree Joe has not pitched well, but just looking at FIP does not tell a tale on how a guy is pitching just by itself. For example, a guy gives up a walk, then induces a weak contact ground ball double play, his FIP does not look good, but I would say he did not get "lucky" by having a weak contact ground ball. Just because someone does not get strike outs at high levels, does not mean they are lucky if they give up weak contact. Now, if you compare additional stats about barrel rates, hard hit rates, and other stats to compare to outcomes, then maybe luck is there. But to just say FIP and ERA are not in line mean just luck is a poor evaluation in my opinion. Ryan is still 70th percentile in exit velo, 64th percentile in hard hit rate. Not amazing, but I would argue, if you are not giving up hard contact, it is not just luck on why your ERA and FIP are not in line with each other. To me luck is if you give up 110 MPH line drive that gets caught because it is hit right to a defender, not when a 80MPH ground ball or pop fly is caught. FIP does not care if you give up nothing but rockets all over the field but everything is off the wall for doubles, but as long as you are not walking guys and getting others to strike out, FIP says you are pitching well and getting unlucky because you do not walk people and keep balls in the park. I am not saying Ryan is pitching well lately, he is not, but I do not understand why people only look at FIP or xFIP to see how a pitcher is doing. It is a single stat that tells no story other than how many walks, strikeouts, and HR you are giving up, or in xFIP should have gave up.

Because the starting pitcher controls how many runs are scored for him, and how the pen does. Game 1 Berrios pitched .1 innings gave up 4 runs, and his team won 10-8. He had nothing to do with the win, other than he was taken out before he gave up even more runs. His second game he left after 5 when he blew a 3 run lead to leave tied, so again he got pulled before he could give up more runs and his team took the lead late. Games 3,4,5 I would say he pitched well and helped his team get the win. Game 6 and 7 he lost, giving up more runs than innings pitched. Game 8 he pitched well earned a win. Game 9 he had quality start. Game 10 they won, but he gave up 6 runs in 2.1 innings, so gain he did little to help that. Game 11 and 12 he pitched well earned the wins. Game 13 was a quality start 3 runs in 7 innings. Then 2 losses where he was bad more runs than innings pitched. His last 2 games he was okay, 2 runs in 5 and 1 in 6. Bundy his first 3 games he pitched very well 1 run in 15 total innings. Then he had 2 poor starts his fault for losses. Then went 3 innings 0 runs, not his fault for loss. Then he went 5 gave up 1 run, left with lead, not his fault pen blew it and offense did not score more, he left in line for win. Then next game he was not good, but left tied. He did not help get a win or loss. Then 2 bad starts, one he left losing, other pen helped blow it, but he pitched bad. Last 3 starts were good, he won one giving up 1 in 8. Then he lost giving up 1 run in 6 losing game 1 nothing, not his fault team got shut out. He gave up 3, 2 earned and left tied. Last game he pitched gave up 1 in five team won. Overall Berrios get 6.2 runs scored in games he pitches. Bundy get 4.9 runs scored for him when he pitches. Neither have been lights out. Both have put up good games, and some clunkers. The difference is Bundy has lost all his clunckers, and some close games, where Berrios team has bailed him out of a couple of clunkers and scored enough in the close games. If you switched them on the teams, I bet the records would flop as well. It is not like Berrios always kept them in the games, or that Bundy has not. Bundy could have a few more wins if pen held lead, or team scored a few more runs, and Berrios would have a few more losses if his team did not score huge amounts of runs in a few of his clunkers.

Where are you playing Arraez? 3rd?

The second HR of Alex Kirilloff was so pretty. Breaking ball low and away, and he just lined it to LC gap for a HR. That is great hitting. He was looking away, got his pitch and drove it. He is looking every bit the hitter we were hoping he would be since he call back. He hits to all fields with power and line drives. I have high hopes for him.

He stinks against Detroit too. I would just like to see him in less high leverage outings for a while. Some guys do well in lessor leverage than others. I always pointed to Hawkins as a guy that was amazing in set up roll for years, but once he was asked to be closer he would not be as good. I do not know if it is always the pitcher, or the hitters that have a different mind set in the late innings. I would like to see Pagan fill the Jax roll and Jax fill the Pagan roll for awhile.

It is a hard no for me. I always liked him, and could he add some offense, maybe. However, the way we are using the DH this year would make using him very limited. Right now we have a bit of a clog in a couple of positions, and needing to use Buck at DH some games means someone will be sitting out. I like how the Twins are using the DH this year moving different guys in there to give them rest from the field but keeping the bat in there. Cruz would just mess that up.

There was also a few taken just after him that never made majors. Of course we wish we could have went back and took Turner, but a lot of teams passed on Turner too being drafted 13th, but he was the next SS taken. I remember wanting him, but some scouts thought he would move to 2nd. Which he did for a time but back at SS again.

I have said this about Nick Gordon for a long time. He has a slow learning curve at the plate at each level, but give him time he always starts to produce. If you look at his first bit of time at every level he does poor, and we talk about how he was a bust. Then he bounces back and we think he figured it out. Look at his first season in AA he hit .270/.341/.409, then he started the next year in AA where he slashed, .333/.381/.525, then got called up to AAA where he slashed .212/.262/.283 in 93 games, looked like a bust. Then he repeated AAA in 2019 at age 23 where he slashed .298/.342/.459. Then in 2021 after year off and COVID issues, In AAA he slashed ..282/.338/.437, with an MLB slash of .240/.292/.355. This year he is slashing .271/.311/.418, but as article pointed out he is doing even better over last month. For whatever reason he has always been slow to adapt to each level, but given time he picks up his numbers. I have long advocated to giving him a chance to prove himself. He will never be a big HR guy, but he is not just a single guy either. He could be better, but he is a MLB player.

I have long argued this is a stat that is somewhat self fulfilling as well. Most pitchers now a days hardly get a chance to make a full trip through the order a third time, except in rare situations. That is not just on Twins but across the league. Many will get into the third time but not finish, for various reasons, inning count, pitch count, or not doing well. What that means just as you pointed out, that if the first couple of hitters get hits, and he is pulled he cannot balance out that hit. Heck, even if he retires the first 2 and gives up a single that is a .333 average, and he is pulled then he cannot counter that by getting the next guy out and dropping to a .250. I am not saying hitters have a better chance the third time through, but I agree that it is blown way out of proportion that a guy cannot do a third time through a line up. Overall the the sample is much smaller. It is like saying a left hander cannot hit against another lefty, but most of the time the hitters are not given much of a chance to prove it, unless they do it quickly.

Way to think outside the box with this one. "Anthony Bass - Miami Dolphins - 34 yrs old 0.9 fWAR 1.60 ERA 2.34 FIP 8.0 K/9" Looking to the football field for a relief pitcher. HAHAHA

So you are equating age to experience, and not age? Because again, the fact that he is younger than his competition is just a fact. You cannot argue that. You are arguing that his age has nothing to do with it, which is different than saying he is not young. Now that being said, I get what you are saying that people with certain years of experience should be put at different levels of prospect lists, and I do not disagree, however, you seem to ignore that bodies develop more as you get older, and there are times, that guys develop as they age even after years of experience. Look at Jose Miranda, he did not have his breakout year in minors until age 23, even though he was drafted at age 18. Following your argument he should have been called a bust and given up on because he had 5 years in the minors and only at AA. Guess we should have cut him. It is like something just clicked from age 22 to 23 and he broke out. I in no way am saying anybody who is young for their league is open for a breakout, but guys were top prospects for a reason, sometimes it just takes time, sometimes they are flops. The prospects you seem to be pointing to are potential HOF guys, who are in a league of their own. Look at Corey Kluber, a guy that was never even a prospect really, it was not until he was 28 at the majors that he became a Cy young level pitcher. 28 to 32 he either won or got Cy Young votes, guess Cleveland should have sent him packing well before that because he was not going to be good.

My guess the runners saw Roberts play the two Arraez doubles and where like our guy would not catch it so no way Buck does and just took off. What makes Buck so good is not just his speed, which is tops in the league, but he gets some of the best jumps on balls and takes amazing routes. Then is arm is elite too.

First, I have little knowledge of all the draft prospects, other than what I read on here or other mock draft sites. Also, I am not one that you draft for current need at the MLB level, but best player available. However, Kumar Rocker offers an interesting situation. First, at 8 in this draft, he might be the best player available, but he is expected to drop due to lack of leverage with signing, and possible future injury concern, although he could be an under slot value guy for that as well. He was not offered a deal last year by Mets after they thought he arm might fall off, or something like that. He did have surgery last fall, but is in an independent league lighting up the radar gun at 99. I have not seen him, but clearly velo is not something to worry about right now. Longer term health may be of concern. What made me want to write on him though is could he be a pen guy this year for us down the stretch? Other college guys have done that sign and almost right to MLB level as a relief guy in the past. Chris Sale was one that after he signed quickly after draft in 2010 he went right in as a pen guy down the stretch for White Sox and did well. Could Rocker be that type? Should he be? Again, I am not saying you should target Rocker for that reason, but if not for injury concerns long term, I doubt he would fall to 8. He fell last year due to injury questions, only to not be offered a contract. First, thoughts on drafting him at 8, is he a reach or a best player available? Second, if you draft him at 8, would you be willing to move him to pen roll with possible call up this year?

I would be against Winder moving into full pen roll right now as he is our 6th starter will be needed from time to time to step in. Similar with Sands if a guy goes down after Winder makes a start in AAA then he would be next man up most likely. As for Ronny Henriquez it is hard to say a guy with the numbers he is putting up that he will move into a pen roll down the stretch to be a high leverage arm. Maybe the change would help, but he has a high walk rate to go with his k/9, and he gives up a decent amount of HR too, 11 in 48.2 innings. High walks and HR numbers for high leverage situations normally does not work out well. As we have seen with Pagan lately.

I was mainly trying to get people to really think on things. I do not expect any actual answer but more of something to think for themselves. We tend to be in a new thought process with wanting results right away, and a reaction to the moment, unless a guy has a long track record, and even then we sometimes are quick to cast them as finished.

This is not about any player in particular. I was thinking the other day on two main questions. First, how long does a player need to have some level of success before you trust they will break out of a down turn, or slump? How long into a down turn or slump do you stick with that player before giving up? History may suggest it is a combo kind of thing. I know many will look to are the results reflective of underlying numbers. Looking at Correa early on his numbers were not good, but he was hitting the ball hard, and he had years of success, so of course you expect he would break out. We have seen some guys have breakout years in contract seasons and people praise them thinking that will be the long term expectations. So how long does a player need to perform at a certain level before you say, that is who they are? I am sure to the teams there is a lot more that goes into it, like attitude, work ethic, willingness to adjust, money being paid, and so on. But as a fan, when do you adjust your expectations? When do you give up on a guy, or accept they have turned a page? For example, just this year, Jose Miranda, a rookie, has put up a -0.5 WAR. Many fans were ready to have him come up after his breakout minor league year last year. He got off to a terrible start, outside of a couple of hits, he was auto out. Then he was sent down for a day, because of injury came back up. He did not play a game in AAA during that short stint and now has improved a ton numbers wise. At his lowest he was hitting .094/.143/.332. Yes it was very short sample size. We were not calling him a bust, but clearly not ready for MLB action. That was just hitting but fielding was just as bad. Since that time, he has played just over 30 games. In his last 30 games he is hitting .308/.337/.853. We gave him about 14 games of terrible hitting before he was sent down. Now about 30 games since coming back he is doing pretty well. Now if he goes back to the first 14 games, how long before he gets sent back down, or we stop finding playing time for him? It is similar with Vets. Some guys will have long term success, but then have a few years of sub performance, but yet they keep getting chances. I am guessing most people will give a guy that had seasons of success much more slack, than someone who had just 1 season. Look at Baddoo. Last year he was a good rookie and people were thinking he would be cornerstone for Tigers going forward. 17 games this year and a -0.6 WAR he was sent down. He is doing well in AAA overall, and most likely will return, but how much slack will he get back in the majors? Will people look at his rookie year and give him slack again, or will they look at his follow up start to the year? Even in his rookie year he had long stretches of good and bad. Baseball has always been ups and downs for players. I just always wonder how long before teams and fans turn on a guy for good or bad.