jorgenswest

It is hard to believe. Can it be ignored? While other teams have hired some of the pitch f/x pioneers like Mike Fast, the Twins watch from the sidelines. Hopefully time will show that the Twins took the right path. Understanding the impact of defense on winning ball games is still in the early stages. It is easy to see the side the Twins stand on with their decisions to sign Willingham and Doumit last year and willingness to trade their best defensive player this year. What's next? Starting Parmelee in RF?

"I don’t say this about many decisions, but starting Doumit at catcher might be a fireable offense. In 60 games at catcher for Pittsburgh in 2011, his framing cost the Pirates 20 runs. In 59 games for Minnesota in 2012, his framing cost the Twins 21 runs. All told, his framing has subtracted 98 runs over the past five seasons, on top of the damage from the other things he does poorly behind the plate, which wipes out his offensive value." Ben Lindbergh, Baseball Prospectus Read the article at http://www.baseballprospectus.com/article.php?articleid=18863 It has been difficult on this site to state concerns about Doumit and the Twins extending him. In a debate last week, I was told 28-29 teams would love to have Doumit and he was more valuable than ever. Let's look at two teams attempt to fill out a bench. Last fall the Twins and Rays were both seeking catching help. The Rays signed Jose Molina and the Twins signed Ryan Doumit. The Rays signed Molina for 1.5 million and picked up his option for 2013 at 1.5 (also reported 1.8) million. The Twins have invested 10 million in Doumit over three years. For several years catching performance has been evaluated using pitch f/x. The results seem to be reliable as the catchers who perform at the top or bottom of the list remain relatively stable. This information and study by Mike Fast was available to both teams. Aaron Gleeman referenced it at the time of the Doumit signing. http://www.baseballprospectus.com/article.php?articleid=15093 Jose Molina was the best catcher at saving runs through framing pitches over a 5 year period. Ryan Doumit was at the bottom of the list. They were at the extremes both in total and average per 120 games. How did it work out for both clubs? http://www.baseballprospectus.com/a/18896 If the metric is accurate, Molina saved his team 50 runs in 80 games. Doumit cost the Twins 21 runs in 59 games. Molina's value is all defense but those 50 runs saved represent 5 wins. Doumits -21 represents a loss of 2 wins and completely wipes out his contribution to the team as a hitter. Molina and Doumit took there familiar positions at the top and bottom of the list. A result that could have been easily projected. 28-29 teams would love to have Doumit? Must be everyone except the Rays. It couldn't be more clear that the Twins evaluation differs greatly from the Rays. One other quote from the first article about the Twins management and pitch f/x "...Ryan Doumit, the patron saint of poor receivers.Except that Doumit hasn’t exactly been blacklisted behind the plate: in fact, he caught more innings for Minnesota in 2012 than he did as a Pirate the season before. Well, okay, you might say, but that was the Twins, the one team you could almost persuade yourself hasn’t heard about PITCHf/x yet. (“Wait, you mean all this time all of our pitchers were throwing really slowly?”) I am assuming you stopped reading this a long time ago if you join the Twins management in skepticism about pitch f/x. If not, what should the Twins do about Doumit? Doumit's only value as a catcher is on someone's fantasy baseball team. In that realm, Molina isn't even an afterthought. Doumit does have value. He can platoon at DH and pinch hit. While I question whether that role merits an extension, the real concern is the Twins management understanding of the impact of defense on wins. The Twins should not enter the season with any plan of using Doumit as a catcher. Anything more than a late inning emergency replacement can not be justified. Our young and struggling pitching staff must be given any edge the Twins can provide. There has been much discussion about the Twins carrying 5 catchers. It is really 4 if Doumit is rightly moved into a Jim Thome role. It is 3 if Butera does not return. One of the three, Pinto, is not near ready for the majors. That leaves Mauer and Herrmann. The bigger question must be asked about the Twins management. From the outside, it seems like they are taking a long time to embrace some of the metrics of the last decade. One roster decision about a back up catcher speaks volumes about the two teams. One team commits 3 million to get two years of top ranked defense. The other commits 10 million over three years for an above average bat without a position. Let's hope the Twins are right and the metrics of the last decade are poor indicators of how to build a roster and win ball games.

"I don’t say this about many decisions, but starting Doumit at catcher might be a fireable offense. In 60 games at catcher for Pittsburgh in 2011, his framing cost the Pirates 20 runs. In 59 games for Minnesota in 2012, his framing cost the Twins 21 runs. All told, his framing has subtracted 98 runs over the past five seasons, on top of the damage from the other things he does poorly behind the plate, which wipes out his offensive value." Ben Lindbergh, Baseball Prospectus Read the article at http://www.baseballprospectus.com/article.php?articleid=18863 It has been difficult on this site to state concerns about Doumit and the Twins extending him. In a debate last week, I was told 28-29 teams would love to have Doumit and he was more valuable than ever. Let's look at two teams attempt to fill out a bench. Last fall the Twins and Rays were both seeking catching help. The Rays signed Jose Molina and the Twins signed Ryan Doumit. The Rays signed Molina for 1.5 million and picked up his option for 2013 at 1.5 (also reported 1.8) million. The Twins have invested 10 million in Doumit over three years. For several years catching performance has been evaluated using pitch f/x. The results seem to be reliable as the catchers who perform at the top or bottom of the list remain relatively stable. This information and study by Mike Fast was available to both teams. Aaron Gleeman referenced it at the time of the Doumit signing. http://www.baseballprospectus.com/article.php?articleid=15093 Jose Molina was the best catcher at saving runs through framing pitches over a 5 year period. Ryan Doumit was at the bottom of the list. They were at the extremes both in total and average per 120 games. How did it work out for both clubs? http://www.baseballprospectus.com/a/18896 If the metric is accurate, Molina saved his team 50 runs in 80 games. Doumit cost the Twins 21 runs in 59 games. Molina's value is all defense but those 50 runs saved represent 5 wins. Doumits -21 represents a loss of 2 wins and completely wipes out his contribution to the team as a hitter. Molina and Doumit took there familiar positions at the top and bottom of the list. A result that could have been easily projected. 28-29 teams would love to have Doumit? Must be everyone except the Rays. It couldn't be more clear that the Twins evaluation differs greatly from the Rays. One other quote from the first article about the Twins management and pitch f/x "...Ryan Doumit, the patron saint of poor receivers.Except that Doumit hasn’t exactly been blacklisted behind the plate: in fact, he caught more innings for Minnesota in 2012 than he did as a Pirate the season before. Well, okay, you might say, but that was the Twins, the one team you could almost persuade yourself hasn’t heard about PITCHf/x yet. (“Wait, you mean all this time all of our pitchers were throwing really slowly?”) I am assuming you stopped reading this a long time ago if you join the Twins management in skepticism about pitch f/x. If not, what should the Twins do about Doumit? Doumit's only value as a catcher is on someone's fantasy baseball team. In that realm, Molina isn't even an afterthought. Doumit does have value. He can platoon at DH and pinch hit. While I question whether that role merits an extension, the real concern is the Twins management understanding of the impact of defense on wins. The Twins should not enter the season with any plan of using Doumit as a catcher. Anything more than a late inning emergency replacement can not be justified. Our young and struggling pitching staff must be given any edge the Twins can provide. There has been much discussion about the Twins carrying 5 catchers. It is really 4 if Doumit is rightly moved into a Jim Thome role. It is 3 if Butera does not return. One of the three, Pinto, is not near ready for the majors. That leaves Mauer and Herrmann. The bigger question must be asked about the Twins management. From the outside, it seems like they are taking a long time to embrace some of the metrics of the last decade. One roster decision about a back up catcher speaks volumes about the two teams. One team commits 3 million to get two years of top ranked defense. The other commits 10 million over three years for an above average bat without a position. Let's hope the Twins are right and the metrics of the last decade are poor indicators of how to build a roster and win ball games.

That is the other end of the argument. A reasonable position. Trading aging major league assets for prospects will cost wins in 2013 and reduce ticket sales. The 1982 and 1999 seasons were among the Twins poorest. They were also the first painful step towards the playoffs.

The early ZIPS projections were reported midweek and the AL Central has sobering information for the Twins. http://insider.espn.go.com/mlb/hotstove12/story/_/id/8599684/projecting-american-league-central-players-teams-2013-mlb Note: Unfortunately, you will need an insider account to access the link above. The Twins in their construction are projected for 66 wins and 5th place in the AL Central. Entering the 2012 season they had a projected 70 win team from ZIPS so in the ZIPS lens the Twins have dropped back some. Clearly, the poor starting rotation has a significant impact on the performance. Scott Diamond and his poor k/9 ratio is the number 1 starter projected for a 4.85 ERA. Gleeman and the Geek had an interesting debate last week about indicators and performance. Runs given up is what matters. However runs given up in 2012 is not the best indicator of runs given up in 2013. Strikeout, walk, ground ball and home run rates are better indicators for 2013. Diamond's indicators and his three year past shows that ZIPS expects a significant regression. The projections have a hard time even finding a 5th starter listing Duensing but giving him an innings number and projection of a reliever/spot starter. The Twins can gain some ground by replacing Blackburn's and DeVries' projection. Replacing Blackburn and DeVries with league average performance will help significantly. Maybe even 6-8 wins. That only gets them to 74. The real concern has to be projections for the Twins offense. Willingham, Doumit, Mauer, Morneau and Span are all projected to regress. Why? All five had a relatively healthy season compared to previous and that can not be expected again. Four of the five are in their 30s. In the steroid era, some players kept their peak performance well into their 30s. That is not likely the case. ZIPS OPS projections for these 5 Willingham .890 to .819 Mauer .861 to .812 Morneau .773 to .767 Doumit .781 to .722 Span .738 to .700 Morneau's is not a mathematically significant drop, but it also isn't a return to his previous level and mediocre play for a 1B. ZIPS projections are based on 3-4 years of previous data based on the player's age. The Twins can choose to ignore them. Somehow they need to convince the faithful that they can add three pitchers and all will be OK. It is necessary for ticket sales. I would suggest that the Twins can not be fixed for 2013. The only long term fix is to repair the minor league system. How do they turn it around? 1) Sign no one to a multiyear contract that will commit the Twins beyond their age 32 season. 2) Trade off declining assets and build the system. Trading Willingham is a must. He is owed 14 million (2 years). He can not be put in LF any longer. He is unlikely to be more valuable than he is this off season. Someone will take on all 14 million and give the Twins prospects 3) Similarly Morneau has 14 million left over 1 year. The Twins should trade him and "buy" prospects in the form of picking up a significant portion of his contract. 4) Do not offer extensions that commits the Twins to anyone beyond their age 32 season. That means pay Burton his due this year and do not extend him beyond 2013. Hopefully he is a tradeable asset midseason. http://twinsdaily.com/entry.php?1968-Burton-What-s-is-the-Future-for-a-31-Year-Old-Set-Up-Man 5) Does Doumit have any value in a trade? Is it reasonable to think his 2014 season will be anything like his 2012 season? http://twinsdaily.com/entry.php?1390-Priorities-The-Best-Backup-Catcher-in-Baseball 6) Wait out the free agent season. Although Ryan would disagree, there are plenty of starting pitchers on the market. Some will be left with few suitors The Twins should be able to sign some of them to a 1 year deal. If the deal is one year, age should not be a factor. It is critical that they no longer sign decline phase players to multiyear contracts. They did it in the 90s with no success. The 1997-1998 teams were among the oldest Twin rosters. The 2012 roster is comparable to those of 98-99. Doing so will only continue the cycle of mediocrity. How do they turn it around? Go young. Build the system. They did it in 1982. The average batter and pitcher age were both lowest in organization history. It paid off. They did it again in 1999. Average batter age dropped 3 years and average pitcher age dropped 2.4 from 1998. Paid off again. Can you wait for the pay off? Would you rather be mediocre? I fear the Twins management doesn't trust the ticket buying public to accept the growing pains of building the system. They will sign decline phase players to multiyear contracts to satisfy the fans and drive ticket sales. This article will be written again next year as it was last year. http://twinsdaily.com/entry.php?332-Are-the-Twins-in-danger-of-entering-a-cycle-of-mediocrity

The early ZIPS projections were reported midweek and the AL Central has sobering information for the Twins. http://insider.espn.go.com/mlb/hotstove12/story/_/id/8599684/projecting-american-league-central-players-teams-2013-mlb Note: Unfortunately, you will need an insider account to access the link above. The Twins in their construction are projected for 66 wins and 5th place in the AL Central. Entering the 2012 season they had a projected 70 win team from ZIPS so in the ZIPS lens the Twins have dropped back some. Clearly, the poor starting rotation has a significant impact on the performance. Scott Diamond and his poor k/9 ratio is the number 1 starter projected for a 4.85 ERA. Gleeman and the Geek had an interesting debate last week about indicators and performance. Runs given up is what matters. However runs given up in 2012 is not the best indicator of runs given up in 2013. Strikeout, walk, ground ball and home run rates are better indicators for 2013. Diamond's indicators and his three year past shows that ZIPS expects a significant regression. The projections have a hard time even finding a 5th starter listing Duensing but giving him an innings number and projection of a reliever/spot starter. The Twins can gain some ground by replacing Blackburn's and DeVries' projection. Replacing Blackburn and DeVries with league average performance will help significantly. Maybe even 6-8 wins. That only gets them to 74. The real concern has to be projections for the Twins offense. Willingham, Doumit, Mauer, Morneau and Span are all projected to regress. Why? All five had a relatively healthy season compared to previous and that can not be expected again. Four of the five are in their 30s. In the steroid era, some players kept their peak performance well into their 30s. That is not likely the case. ZIPS OPS projections for these 5 Willingham .890 to .819 Mauer .861 to .812 Morneau .773 to .767 Doumit .781 to .722 Span .738 to .700 Morneau's is not a mathematically significant drop, but it also isn't a return to his previous level and mediocre play for a 1B. ZIPS projections are based on 3-4 years of previous data based on the player's age. The Twins can choose to ignore them. Somehow they need to convince the faithful that they can add three pitchers and all will be OK. It is necessary for ticket sales. I would suggest that the Twins can not be fixed for 2013. The only long term fix is to repair the minor league system. How do they turn it around? 1) Sign no one to a multiyear contract that will commit the Twins beyond their age 32 season. 2) Trade off declining assets and build the system. Trading Willingham is a must. He is owed 14 million (2 years). He can not be put in LF any longer. He is unlikely to be more valuable than he is this off season. Someone will take on all 14 million and give the Twins prospects 3) Similarly Morneau has 14 million left over 1 year. The Twins should trade him and "buy" prospects in the form of picking up a significant portion of his contract. 4) Do not offer extensions that commits the Twins to anyone beyond their age 32 season. That means pay Burton his due this year and do not extend him beyond 2013. Hopefully he is a tradeable asset midseason. http://twinsdaily.com/entry.php?1968-Burton-What-s-is-the-Future-for-a-31-Year-Old-Set-Up-Man 5) Does Doumit have any value in a trade? Is it reasonable to think his 2014 season will be anything like his 2012 season? http://twinsdaily.com/entry.php?1390-Priorities-The-Best-Backup-Catcher-in-Baseball 6) Wait out the free agent season. Although Ryan would disagree, there are plenty of starting pitchers on the market. Some will be left with few suitors The Twins should be able to sign some of them to a 1 year deal. If the deal is one year, age should not be a factor. It is critical that they no longer sign decline phase players to multiyear contracts. They did it in the 90s with no success. The 1997-1998 teams were among the oldest Twin rosters. The 2012 roster is comparable to those of 98-99. Doing so will only continue the cycle of mediocrity. How do they turn it around? Go young. Build the system. They did it in 1982. The average batter and pitcher age were both lowest in organization history. It paid off. They did it again in 1999. Average batter age dropped 3 years and average pitcher age dropped 2.4 from 1998. Paid off again. Can you wait for the pay off? Would you rather be mediocre? I fear the Twins management doesn't trust the ticket buying public to accept the growing pains of building the system. They will sign decline phase players to multiyear contracts to satisfy the fans and drive ticket sales. This article will be written again next year as it was last year. http://twinsdaily.com/entry.php?332-Are-the-Twins-in-danger-of-entering-a-cycle-of-mediocrity

My apologies to the Urbina family.

A common thought among baseball fans like... "Since there are a larger number of starting pitchers on the free agent market, it is good for my team because we need pitching" I would like to challenge that argument. I do believe a larger market can be an advantage for some teams. I don't believe that a larger market can be good for every team that needs pitching. Many teams need pitching. If the market is an advantage for some, doesn't it need to be a disadvantage for others? In a large market both of these elements are in play... 1) There are more free agent pitchers available. Sounds good for teams like the Twins that have openings. 2) More teams have opening in their rotation. Sounds bad for a team like the Twins as their is more competition in the market. The starting pitching environment really remains constant. 1) The demand does not change from year to year. The number of jobs for starting pitchers is a constant. 2) The supply may change, but it can not be measured by counting the free agent pitchers. An accounting of all major league pitchers would be necessary. Is there an influx into the market of new pitchers that exceeds the number of starters no longer effective and exiting the market? I think it is more likely that the market will not help the Twins. With more buyers in the market, teams have to do something to become more attractive. How else attract the more desirable free agents? How can the Twins make themselves more attractive? These might be factors. - Dollars offered - Years offered - A teams record the previous season - The coaching staff and particularly pitching coach - The medical staff - Geographical location - Opportunities for endorsements - Facilities Would any objective look at these factors come to the conclusion that the Twins are an attractive place to sign as a free agent pitcher? I wouldn't think so. I think one could argue that the large number of job openings will actually be a detriment to the Twins ability to address pitching through free agency. I think they will have two options. 1) Sign the less desirable pitchers who are in decline and on the way out of the market. 2) Overpay for middling free agents risking crippling contract obligations in the future. So which teams will benefit from a larger market of starting pitching? We might look at previous years of large markets and see which teams came out ahead. That may be difficult to study due to sample size. We might try to project whether there will be an increase in pitching supply. That is not as simple as counting free agents, but it is the only way to truly measure the market.

A common thought among baseball fans like... "Since there are a larger number of starting pitchers on the free agent market, it is good for my team because we need pitching" I would like to challenge that argument. I do believe a larger market can be an advantage for some teams. I don't believe that a larger market can be good for every team that needs pitching. Many teams need pitching. If the market is an advantage for some, doesn't it need to be a disadvantage for others? In a large market both of these elements are in play... 1) There are more free agent pitchers available. Sounds good for teams like the Twins that have openings. 2) More teams have opening in their rotation. Sounds bad for a team like the Twins as their is more competition in the market. The starting pitching environment really remains constant. 1) The demand does not change from year to year. The number of jobs for starting pitchers is a constant. 2) The supply may change, but it can not be measured by counting the free agent pitchers. An accounting of all major league pitchers would be necessary. Is there an influx into the market of new pitchers that exceeds the number of starters no longer effective and exiting the market? I think it is more likely that the market will not help the Twins. With more buyers in the market, teams have to do something to become more attractive. How else attract the more desirable free agents? How can the Twins make themselves more attractive? These might be factors. - Dollars offered - Years offered - A teams record the previous season - The coaching staff and particularly pitching coach - The medical staff - Geographical location - Opportunities for endorsements - Facilities Would any objective look at these factors come to the conclusion that the Twins are an attractive place to sign as a free agent pitcher? I wouldn't think so. I think one could argue that the large number of job openings will actually be a detriment to the Twins ability to address pitching through free agency. I think they will have two options. 1) Sign the less desirable pitchers who are in decline and on the way out of the market. 2) Overpay for middling free agents risking crippling contract obligations in the future. So which teams will benefit from a larger market of starting pitching? We might look at previous years of large markets and see which teams came out ahead. That may be difficult to study due to sample size. We might try to project whether there will be an increase in pitching supply. That is not as simple as counting free agents, but it is the only way to truly measure the market.

I was surprised at the suggestion earlier that the Twins should consider extending Burton. They have him locked up next year. In two years he will be 33. On the other hand, he has been very valuable this year. My first thought was it was a horrible idea. Take his season next year at the bargain level. Don't buy his 33 year old season now! That was clearly the minority opinion. I went to Baseball Reference for clarity. I searched for every season pitched by a 31 year old set up man from 2000-2010. I sought pitchers with a workload of at least 60 games. I eliminated closers as they have a different work load. I eliminated guys with ERAs over 4 as most were on their way out of baseball. I found 28 pitchers. I eliminated pitchers jailed for attempted murder in their home country and was down to 27. This is their aggregate data in their 31 through 33 year old season. [TABLE=width: 932] Age W L ERA G GS SV IP H R ER HR BB IBB SO BF WHIP H/9 HR/9 BB/9 SO/9 SO/BB 31 137 109 3.01 1902 0 59 1994 1687 727 666 166 711 99 1654 8256 1.20 7.6 0.7 3.2 7.5 2.3 32 97 95 3.95 1501 32 69 1622 1578 777 711 172 625 94 1326 7019 1.36 8.8 1.0 3.5 7.4 2.1 33 72 77 4.12 979 39 32 1199 1206 592 548 128 433 55 869 5164 1.37 9.1 1.0 3.3 6.5 2.0 [/TABLE] The data per pitcher [TABLE=width: 932] Age W L ERA G GS SV IP H R ER HR BB IBB SO BF WHIP H/9 HR/9 BB/9 SO/9 SO/BB 31 5 4 3.01 70 0 2 74 62 27 25 6 26 4 61 306 1.20 7.6 0.7 3.2 7.5 2.3 32 4 4 3.95 56 1 3 60 58 29 26 6 23 3 49 260 1.36 8.8 1.0 3.5 7.4 2.1 33 3 3 4.12 36 1 1 44 45 22 20 5 16 2 32 191 1.37 9.1 1.0 3.3 6.5 2.0 [/TABLE] The drop in ERA is dramatic at 32. The drop in innings is dramatic at 33. Look at he drop in strikeouts. At age 33, 7 of the 27 pitched 60 games with an ERA under 4. Add one guy who became a starter to make 8 effective pitchers. Braden Looper at age 33 started 33 games and pitched 199 innings skewing the data further. Take him out and the average number of innings pitched falls to 38. I hope the Twins management is wise enough to keep his marvelous season in perspective. The likelihood of decline is far too great to sign him to an extension when he is already locked up next year. Isn't the risk of signing him greater than the risk of losing him at age 33?

I was surprised at the suggestion earlier that the Twins should consider extending Burton. They have him locked up next year. In two years he will be 33. On the other hand, he has been very valuable this year. My first thought was it was a horrible idea. Take his season next year at the bargain level. Don't buy his 33 year old season now! That was clearly the minority opinion. I went to Baseball Reference for clarity. I searched for every season pitched by a 31 year old set up man from 2000-2010. I sought pitchers with a workload of at least 60 games. I eliminated closers as they have a different work load. I eliminated guys with ERAs over 4 as most were on their way out of baseball. I found 28 pitchers. I eliminated pitchers jailed for attempted murder in their home country and was down to 27. This is their aggregate data in their 31 through 33 year old season. [TABLE=width: 932] Age W L ERA G GS SV IP H R ER HR BB IBB SO BF WHIP H/9 HR/9 BB/9 SO/9 SO/BB 31 137 109 3.01 1902 0 59 1994 1687 727 666 166 711 99 1654 8256 1.20 7.6 0.7 3.2 7.5 2.3 32 97 95 3.95 1501 32 69 1622 1578 777 711 172 625 94 1326 7019 1.36 8.8 1.0 3.5 7.4 2.1 33 72 77 4.12 979 39 32 1199 1206 592 548 128 433 55 869 5164 1.37 9.1 1.0 3.3 6.5 2.0 [/TABLE] The data per pitcher [TABLE=width: 932] Age W L ERA G GS SV IP H R ER HR BB IBB SO BF WHIP H/9 HR/9 BB/9 SO/9 SO/BB 31 5 4 3.01 70 0 2 74 62 27 25 6 26 4 61 306 1.20 7.6 0.7 3.2 7.5 2.3 32 4 4 3.95 56 1 3 60 58 29 26 6 23 3 49 260 1.36 8.8 1.0 3.5 7.4 2.1 33 3 3 4.12 36 1 1 44 45 22 20 5 16 2 32 191 1.37 9.1 1.0 3.3 6.5 2.0 [/TABLE] The drop in ERA is dramatic at 32. The drop in innings is dramatic at 33. Look at he drop in strikeouts. At age 33, 7 of the 27 pitched 60 games with an ERA under 4. Add one guy who became a starter to make 8 effective pitchers. Braden Looper at age 33 started 33 games and pitched 199 innings skewing the data further. Take him out and the average number of innings pitched falls to 38. I hope the Twins management is wise enough to keep his marvelous season in perspective. The likelihood of decline is far too great to sign him to an extension when he is already locked up next year. Isn't the risk of signing him greater than the risk of losing him at age 33?

They can guarantee Baker by picking up his option. If he can produce 2 WAR, he will exceed the value of his option.

I think everyone would agree that the Twins greatest need is starting pitching. In order to get major league starting pitching, the Twins probably need to offer starting pitching prospects. Look at all of the Oakland deals where they traded established pitching for pitching prospects. The Twins don't have starting pitching prospects to offer. Conversely, the most attractive way to get starting pitching prospects is to trade major league ready starting pitching. Twins certainly don't have starters to offer. So what to do with Span (or Willingham, Morneau, Doumit)? By 2014 an outfield of Arcia, Revere and Hicks can be foreseen. Parmelee can be projected to help next year. Willingham, Morneau and Doumit will be in decline, The Twins probably can't get significant starting pitching for them. Maybe they can fill another need. Middle infield is a need. The Pirates are an example of a possible trade partner. This is assuming that the Pirates believe in Brock Holt and also realize that his only position is 2B. A parallel trade that might make sense to both teams could be Span for Neil Walker. I suppose Revere for Holt is also a parallel trade of position players at a similar age. The Twins might spend the entire off season trying to trade position players for pitching and come up empty. They came up empty attempting to get pitching this summer. Maybe they need to adjust the target and try to fill a different need.

I think everyone would agree that the Twins greatest need is starting pitching. In order to get major league starting pitching, the Twins probably need to offer starting pitching prospects. Look at all of the Oakland deals where they traded established pitching for pitching prospects. The Twins don't have starting pitching prospects to offer. Conversely, the most attractive way to get starting pitching prospects is to trade major league ready starting pitching. Twins certainly don't have starters to offer. So what to do with Span (or Willingham, Morneau, Doumit)? By 2014 an outfield of Arcia, Revere and Hicks can be foreseen. Parmelee can be projected to help next year. Willingham, Morneau and Doumit will be in decline, The Twins probably can't get significant starting pitching for them. Maybe they can fill another need. Middle infield is a need. The Pirates are an example of a possible trade partner. This is assuming that the Pirates believe in Brock Holt and also realize that his only position is 2B. A parallel trade that might make sense to both teams could be Span for Neil Walker. I suppose Revere for Holt is also a parallel trade of position players at a similar age. The Twins might spend the entire off season trying to trade position players for pitching and come up empty. They came up empty attempting to get pitching this summer. Maybe they need to adjust the target and try to fill a different need.

WPA is more a metric than a statistic. RBI and certainly GWRBI would be examples of statistics with marginal predictive value. The value of a metric is often the predictive value. Therefore it is not surprising that many sabrmetric geeks give little attention to WPA.

Thinking back on the trade in the context of the market, I do think the new CBA played a part in depressing this year's trade market. An additional wild card team should have led to more buyers. I am not so certain it did. At the time Liriano as traded, I was interested to see what kinds of deals were made for starting pitchers on deadline day. After the Liriano deal, two starting pitchers were traded. That surprised me. I expected more. It leads me to wonder how many teams were so interested in starting pitching that they were willing to part with top prospects. Pitchers more valuable than Liriano were left on the table. I look at the two deals an I wonder if Liriano could have been substituted in either. Paul Maholm deal- Liriano has better stuff, but I don't think his stuff is enough. Maholm has been consistently solid over his last 50 starts. He is not a rental and has a reasonable option for 2013. Had the Twins waited, I don't think the Braves would have given the Twins the same package they sent the Cubs. Dempster deal- A rental like Liriano, but performing much better. Given the choice, I think Texas would have more confidence in Dempster. They really didn't give up much. A B- infield prospect and a C pitching prospect. Hendricks looks a lot like a typical back of the rotation Twin pitcher with control. He is 8 months younger than Hernandez. He is also right handed and in A-Ball. He didn't enter the season in the Ranger top 30 but is likely there now. It does not appear that better deals were available had the Twins waited. Another aspect I wanted to look at is what would it take to get a Zack Wheeler type prospect at the trade deadline. I am not sure any Wheeler's were traded this year. The best of the pitching prospects also come with some concerns. Jacob Turner - Entered the season an A- prospect but his arm troubles and K rate are concerns. It took Anibal Sanchez to get him. The Twins don't have anyone like Sanchez to trade so this was not a possibility. Nate Eovaldi - Not Zack Wheeler but a B pitching prospect. It took Hanley Ramirez. John Hellweg and Ariel Pena - These are the pitchers in the Zach Grienke deal. B-/C+ prospects. Hellweg has the arm but lacks in performance. Born in 1988, he is old for a top prospect just hitting AA. Arodys Vizcaíno - Great prospect and huge injury concerns. Second arm injury leads him to Tommy John surgery. I would love for the Twins to have had the opportunity to roll the dice with him. However, I don't think Liriano has near the value of Maholm when you look at performance and next year's contract situation. Maybe a deal of Span and Liriano could brought Arodys Vizcaíno, but that is a lot to give up for such an injury risk. It is very likely that he will return as a reliever. Kyle Hendricks - Wrote about him above. A command and control pitcher from Dartmouth. It took Dempster to get him. J.C. Sulbaran - Noteworthy because this is the guy the Reds were willing to deal. Low 90s fastball curve and changeup. He is in AA this year and continues to struggle with control. Strikeout numbers look good. His upside made him an interesting prospect entering the season (BBA #12 Reds, Sickels C+). If Sulbaran was the key offering from the Reds in a Span deal, would you have traded Span. We do know that these starting pitchers were available since they were ultimately moved. Which pitcher could the Twins have acquired? I think they could have acquired Sulbaran in a deal for Span. They would have received other pieces but I think this is the best starting prospect the Reds were willing to part with. How about Vizcaino? Is Liriano close enough to Maholm that they could see Liriano meeting their needs? Certainly not alone. Would a package of Span and Liriano been enough? Maybe. But that's a lot to give up for an injured Vizcaino with concerns about whether he will hold up as a starter. Starting pitching prospects have always carried the most value. In the context of the new CBA, acquiring them at the trade deadline has become more difficult. The Twins best hope is to find and develop a few more Diamonds among the C prospects available. No easy task.

Thinking back on the trade in the context of the market, I do think the new CBA played a part in depressing this year's trade market. An additional wild card team should have led to more buyers. I am not so certain it did. At the time Liriano as traded, I was interested to see what kinds of deals were made for starting pitchers on deadline day. After the Liriano deal, two starting pitchers were traded. That surprised me. I expected more. It leads me to wonder how many teams were so interested in starting pitching that they were willing to part with top prospects. Pitchers more valuable than Liriano were left on the table. I look at the two deals an I wonder if Liriano could have been substituted in either. Paul Maholm deal- Liriano has better stuff, but I don't think his stuff is enough. Maholm has been consistently solid over his last 50 starts. He is not a rental and has a reasonable option for 2013. Had the Twins waited, I don't think the Braves would have given the Twins the same package they sent the Cubs. Dempster deal- A rental like Liriano, but performing much better. Given the choice, I think Texas would have more confidence in Dempster. They really didn't give up much. A B- infield prospect and a C pitching prospect. Hendricks looks a lot like a typical back of the rotation Twin pitcher with control. He is 8 months younger than Hernandez. He is also right handed and in A-Ball. He didn't enter the season in the Ranger top 30 but is likely there now. It does not appear that better deals were available had the Twins waited. Another aspect I wanted to look at is what would it take to get a Zack Wheeler type prospect at the trade deadline. I am not sure any Wheeler's were traded this year. The best of the pitching prospects also come with some concerns. Jacob Turner - Entered the season an A- prospect but his arm troubles and K rate are concerns. It took Anibal Sanchez to get him. The Twins don't have anyone like Sanchez to trade so this was not a possibility. Nate Eovaldi - Not Zack Wheeler but a B pitching prospect. It took Hanley Ramirez. John Hellweg and Ariel Pena - These are the pitchers in the Zach Grienke deal. B-/C+ prospects. Hellweg has the arm but lacks in performance. Born in 1988, he is old for a top prospect just hitting AA. Arodys Vizcaíno - Great prospect and huge injury concerns. Second arm injury leads him to Tommy John surgery. I would love for the Twins to have had the opportunity to roll the dice with him. However, I don't think Liriano has near the value of Maholm when you look at performance and next year's contract situation. Maybe a deal of Span and Liriano could brought Arodys Vizcaíno, but that is a lot to give up for such an injury risk. It is very likely that he will return as a reliever. Kyle Hendricks - Wrote about him above. A command and control pitcher from Dartmouth. It took Dempster to get him. J.C. Sulbaran - Noteworthy because this is the guy the Reds were willing to deal. Low 90s fastball curve and changeup. He is in AA this year and continues to struggle with control. Strikeout numbers look good. His upside made him an interesting prospect entering the season (BBA #12 Reds, Sickels C+). If Sulbaran was the key offering from the Reds in a Span deal, would you have traded Span. We do know that these starting pitchers were available since they were ultimately moved. Which pitcher could the Twins have acquired? I think they could have acquired Sulbaran in a deal for Span. They would have received other pieces but I think this is the best starting prospect the Reds were willing to part with. How about Vizcaino? Is Liriano close enough to Maholm that they could see Liriano meeting their needs? Certainly not alone. Would a package of Span and Liriano been enough? Maybe. But that's a lot to give up for an injured Vizcaino with concerns about whether he will hold up as a starter. Starting pitching prospects have always carried the most value. In the context of the new CBA, acquiring them at the trade deadline has become more difficult. The Twins best hope is to find and develop a few more Diamonds among the C prospects available. No easy task.

Hopefully the Twins understand sample size and will not give weight to whatever performance Valencia gives in the next week or two. If they use him wisely, he will only appear against lefties which will further decrease the sample. As for any team interested, his performance on the field 2010-2012 will carry the weight.

I agree. It certainly seems necessary this weekend after the burden handed the pen by Blackburn and Hendriks. I also think that some team will better figure out how to use their pitching staff. I recall the 1969 Twins and a 10 man staff. Tom Tischinski was the 3rd catcher on the team. After playing the full season in the majors, he ended the season with 56 plate appearance and 12 starts. They had the left/right pinch hitting tandem of Charlie Manuel and Rick Renick. Both entered games more often from the bench. Frank Quilici was primarily a defensive sub for Harmon Killebrew at 3B. George Mitterwald was the back up catcher starting mostly lefties in a platoon with John Roseboro. There was still a spot on the bench and role for Bob Allison finishing his career and a young Graig Nettles. Imagine the options for Billy Martin with this 7 man bench. Weaver and Stengel were often credited with their ability to build successful platoon combinations. That's a lot easier to do when your carrying a bench with 7 players.

Great report. The Valencia possibility is an interesting one. In the defense of the Dodgers trade of Santana for Blake, Baseball America had ranked Santana the Dodger organization number 25 prospect entering the season. He was having a great half season in the hitting rich California League, but reports of the trade at the time did not portray him as a top prospect in baseball. Let's hope the Twins can find a gem like Santana hidden deep in the list of an organization's prospects.

I enjoyed your report. It is a fun event.

Thanks Parker. I would love to see the Twinscentric group begin debate on the blueprint for 2013. To me, Doumit is the first winter free agent signing and the first step Terry Ryan has made in his blueprint for 2013. If trading Span is in your blueprint, how do you fill RF? Would you pick up options on Baker or Capps? Do you assume the same budget going into 2013? Doumit would not have been part of my blueprint at this point. I would go for pitching and see what was left to fill out the bench. It is not a knock on Doumit. I think his value exceeds the 0.0 WAR assigned to him by Baseball Reference. I don't want to argue that he is worth the contract. I do argue that the Twins have greater needs than catcher.

The Twins are a team of many needs. Doumit fills the need of back up catcher and emergency RF. He hits well for a catcher, but at best adequately for a DH or RF. He doesn't defend well at either spot. As he declines, his best role will be back up catcher and pinch hitter. He will do that job well. He will be a good guy in the club house. Essentially by signing him now, they have begun the winter process of rebuilding this team through free agency. Is this the best first step? Is this one of the key needs to be addressed? Is he a major part of your off season blueprint? Another team might have chosen a different direction. They might have tried to fill this need by using Butera and Parmelee. This might free a few million more to use towards overpaying a free agent pitcher or middle infielder. They might have chosen to fill out the bench from the free agent bargain bin at catcher taking what is left as spring approaches. Worst case, Butera and Herrmann are around. Go back to last winter. Why not take money spent on Doumit, Carroll and Marquis and try to sign Edwin Jackson instead? The other spots would need to be filled with near league minimum guys. Yes, we would be left with Alexi Casilla playing more. We might get to see what Parmelee can do with playing time. Maybe Sean Burroughs would still be on the bench. Butera would have more at bats or we could have signed a back up option like Dioner Navarro. Jamey Carroll and Ryan Doumit are great guys to have in the clubhouse. They have value. They are also the kinds of respectable players you always find on losing teams. The Twins may have the best back up catcher in baseball going into 2013. I simply question whether this should have been the Twins top priority.

The Twins are a team of many needs. Doumit fills the need of back up catcher and emergency RF. He hits well for a catcher, but at best adequately for a DH or RF. He doesn't defend well at either spot. As he declines, his best role will be back up catcher and pinch hitter. He will do that job well. He will be a good guy in the club house. Essentially by signing him now, they have begun the winter process of rebuilding this team through free agency. Is this the best first step? Is this one of the key needs to be addressed? Is he a major part of your off season blueprint? Another team might have chosen a different direction. They might have tried to fill this need by using Butera and Parmelee. This might free a few million more to use towards overpaying a free agent pitcher or middle infielder. They might have chosen to fill out the bench from the free agent bargain bin at catcher taking what is left as spring approaches. Worst case, Butera and Herrmann are around. Go back to last winter. Why not take money spent on Doumit, Carroll and Marquis and try to sign Edwin Jackson instead? The other spots would need to be filled with near league minimum guys. Yes, we would be left with Alexi Casilla playing more. We might get to see what Parmelee can do with playing time. Maybe Sean Burroughs would still be on the bench. Butera would have more at bats or we could have signed a back up option like Dioner Navarro. Jamey Carroll and Ryan Doumit are great guys to have in the clubhouse. They have value. They are also the kinds of respectable players you always find on losing teams. The Twins may have the best back up catcher in baseball going into 2013. I simply question whether this should have been the Twins top priority.