Ibanez, No Ibanez, Ibanez...Washburn?

by Jesse on Aug 15, 2008 5:31 AM EDT in News Comment 25 comments

The Twins haven't had this much waiver wire speculation since...um, since...

I blame Buster Olney for causing a ruckus, throwing out careless and haphazard phrases like "The Twins make a lot of sense as a possibility" for Raul Ibanez. Soon afterward, Joe Christensen put the kibosh on that idea, saying the Twins weren't the winners of the Ibanez sweepstakes. Initially saying they didn't place a claim at all, Christensen updated his blog later as it turns out Minnesota did make a move, but were merely out-done by a team higher on the waiver wire pecking order (also known as the Detroit Tigers).

What's interesting about yesterday was that the Twins placed, and WON, their waiver wire claim on Jarrod Washburn. As we all know, teams often make this kind of a snide move in order to screw things up for another team, in this case speculation indicates it was done to block a Washburn-to-Chicago situation. That's not a bad thing, it's always nice to see the Twins doing something proactive. But THEN came the report that Minnesota was actually considering bringing Washburn and his hot streak to the Dome. Says Joe C.:

In Washburn’s case, it sounds like the Twins did indeed win the claim and had extensive talks with the Mariners. The Twins were willing to take on Washburn’s contract, and Seattle could have dumped it on them. But the Mariners also wanted the Twins to throw in one of their current starters.

Over the last couple of months, Washburn had been quite effective. But in the short (and long) term(s) I'm not sure how he fits, unless the Twins were thinking about moving Glen Perkins or Kevin Slowey into the bullpen. Which, again, doesn't make all that much sense for either Perk (there's already a bit of doubt that the Twins would put a legitimate reliever, much less a starter, into the 'pen if he's "another" southpaw) or Kevin (he's been pretty effective this year).

And of course there's the whole snafu of having the Mariners still asking for one of our four young starters not named Francisco Liriano in return...although I have it through reliable sources that that part of the conversation went something like this:

Bill Smith: Yeah, sure, we'll take Washburn off your hands and make him fit somehow.
Not Bill Bavasi: Okay, cool. Oh, by the way, it'll take Baker, Perkins, Blackburn or Slowey to get him.
Bill Smith: Up yours, smartass. (Click.)

At any rate, at least the White Sox won't be ending up with Washburn. Unlike the Ken Griffey Jr. acquisition, he actually might have improved their team.

Anyway, to wrap this up (sort of), Geoff Baker of The Seattle Times insists the Mariners and Twins could still work something out by placing Washburn back onto waivers again...although this time that would mean he'd be irrevocable and would go to the first team in the pecking order that claimed him, even if that wasn't the Twins. Either way it's a no-lose situation for the Mariners who would, at worst, save on dishing out the rest of Washburn's salary.

Personally, I have a hard time believing this organization will let any of their starters walk for a guy like Washburn, but since Seattle is the worst team in the American League they could work something else out for someone on the Twins 40-Man roster, since they'd have first dibs on waivers. And of course there are also those players who aren't on the 40-man.

No matter what Washburn's cost, even if it's peanuts, I'm just not convinced wedging him into the rotation is the best thing to do. Even thinking of October, I'm happy picking a three-man rotation from Liriano, Baker, Blackburn, Slowey and Perkins (and probably in that order, too).

Editorial Update: We offered Boof Bonser? No. No, not even for Boof Bonser will I take Jarrod Washburn...like I said, I'd have a hard time convincing myself it'd be a good idea for peanuts. Good lord, Seattle, if we were foolish enough to offer you ANYTHING other than salary relief...I'm not sure who gets Das Failboot points for this: the Twins for offering Bonser or the Mariners for turning it down. Let's just hope this fiasco is done.

0 recs | Comment 25 comments

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

Good lord

Thank Krishna the Mariners didn’t just dump him on the Twins. Yikes, that guy is getting paid a lot of money next year, and what on earth are you going to do with him? While I’m not entirely sold on the long term of all of the Twins starters, they have ALL performed admirably this season—you can’t just dump them from the rotation.

I wouldn’t have taken this risk, that’s for sure. I don’t know what the M’s were thinking. Why not get out from under that salary when you can?

by Eric in Madison on Aug 15, 2008 10:29 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs

Time for Seattle to surrender one of these players

Washburn, more or less a local boy, would seemingly come cheap from the standpoint of the Twins turning a body over to the Mariners. Washburn is carrying around a contract with a huge sack of gold attached to it, and freeing up his salary alone would seem to be a good move for the comatose Mariner organization.

Washburn would allow the Twins to put Slowey — who has gone beyond he sixth inning once in his last seven starts – into the pen, and return a veteran presence to the staff, which sure as hell can’t hurt if the team squeaks into the post-season. Washburn has plenty of playoff experience.

by Johnny Safron on Aug 15, 2008 10:35 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs

Couldn't disagree more

This whole paragraph is..well, I disagree. First, though it’s literally true that Slowey has gone more than 6 once in his last 7, it strikes me as somewhat misleading. The “one” was a complete game shutout of the Twins’ rivals for the division. Second, he would have gone more than 6 against the Yankees the other day if not for the various fiascoes that took place in the bottom of the 6th. Finally, why cut it off at 7? Arbitrary endpoints are not a fair way to do this. 8 starts ago he pitched a complete game shutout. In fact, he has 3 complete games this year—he’s finished over 15% of his starts. That’s 3 more complete games than the rest of the current starters combined.

Returning a veteran presence to the staff can’t hurt? It sure as hell can hurt if Jarrod Washburn pitches poorly, which there is reason to believe he would. His K:BB ratio isn’t good, and though Jesse says correctly he’s had better results recently, his K:BB ratio has actually gotten worse recently than it was earlier in the year.

I could almost understand taking a flier on him for the rest of the year—I’d stick him in the pen until I needed a starter, if ever, I cannot understand being willing to take on that contract for next year.

by Eric in Madison on Aug 15, 2008 11:06 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Slowey to the pen?

Why in the world would you put Slowey in the pen? This is just a terrible post all around.

Slowey has no business going to the pen. He has an ERA under 4, a WHIP at 1.085, and in the second half of the season, hitters are hitting .233/.252/.379. Does that sound like someone who needs to go to the pen?

Washburn on the season has a 4.58 ERA and a WHIP of 1.45 in a notorious pitcher’s park. The only things he does better than Slowey is being old and making more money. Not only would it hurt the team’s chances to make the postseason, his worse ability will hurt the team in the post-season. You know who else has a lot of playoff experience? Livan Hernandez, and I don’t see you wanting him back around for the playoffs.

by Diggity Dino on Aug 15, 2008 11:37 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

If Anyone where to go to the pen

it would either be Blackburn or Perkins, for me i would go with Blackburn, Perkins has been great lately

by Tony_O on Aug 15, 2008 12:56 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Seattle fans...

are really going to start to hate their GM. They’ve been complaining that he won’t get salary off their hands, and he has the chance to but thinks teams are as stupid as he is and will give up good young players to rent a risky pitcher for a month.

by Twins Territory on Aug 15, 2008 1:15 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

The idea is to strengthen the team, not view the bullpen as Siberia

Blackburn, for obvious reasons, would not go to the bullpen. Perkins would be suited for the role. Slowey pitches better in tie games, and games within 1 and 2 runs, than Perkins. So you’d rather bring him in during the 4th or 5th for a faltering starter. And as Bass would appear to be the odd man out, you want a right-hander to replace him.

Nothing “arbitrary” about Slowey not getting into the 7th. With Washburn on the team, it would be a neccessity to move Slowey to save the bullpen and still be competitive, and I pointed out in another post that he would have made it into the 7th this week if everyone would not have stopped to watch Oprah. So I have taken that into consideration.

Slowey’s complete games are not relevant to the argument, as he fails to get past the sixth FAR more often than he completes a game. And that’s what matters at this point in the season. He hasn’t gotten into the 6th in half of his past half-dozen starts.

Washburn has a post-season record, and last season his best month of the second-half was September, when Seattle was in a race. This will eventually matter. Washburn doesn’t pitch deep into games, either, but with Slowey to enter as a right-hander to replace Washburn, it’s less of an issue, and of course the Twins are not going to shell out that kind of cash and put Washburn in the pen.

The intangibles – for what they are worth – are that not only would Washburn be coming to a park that favors pitchers, he’d be playing with a contender and near his hometown.

And talk about a terrible post, Diggity Dino. Seattle is “a notorious pitchers’ park?” Maybe in your fantasy league it is, but in the real world the Dome and Safeco are historically dead even, and this season Safeco favors hitters more than the Dome. So not a good job on that at all. It’s inexplicable why park factor matters to you when comparing Safeco and the Dome, but being it is, you whiffed on that one.

by Johnny Safron on Aug 15, 2008 2:05 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

Depending on whether you use xFIP or tRA to assess a pitcher’s performance, Slowey has either been the best or the second best Twins starter this year on a per inning basis. Even if we add one inning of mediocre bullpen pitching to Slowey’s starts, he’s still much better than Perkins, no matter the score. It would be ridiculous, in my mind, to take one of the team’s biggest assets and start limiting his workload.

Washburn has a 5.16 tRA this year. His Marcel projection for the rest of the year includes a 4.44 ERA. That would probably be a slight upgrade over Perkins (and only Perkins), but a very slight one.

I don’t care if Washburn had 300 postseason IP, I still wouldn’t start him over Baker, Slowey or Liriano.

by PhoenixV on Aug 15, 2008 3:00 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Well, I still disagree that it makes any sense at all

to claim Washburn at that salary. On one note, you are actually wrong about the park factors—Seattle is a pitcher’s park—96 multi-year park factor, which is the same as the dome.

On another note—Slowey has gotten INTO the 6th in 5 of his last half dozen starts. He has not completed 6 in 3 of his last 6 starts. Again, though, totally arbitrary endpoints.

While its true that he completes games far less than he gets through the 6th, which you announce without evidence is what’s important, he also completes games a lot more often, then, well, anyone else on the team, entirely giving the bullpen a day off. I think this is mildly relevant, regardless of whether you do.

I don’t see how claiming Washburn improves the team one iota. I certainly don’t see how he improves the team by $13M worth. The Twins actually have money to spend, and obvious holes—a good situation to expend resources to solve actual problems. It makes no sense to spend resources to not solve non-existent problems.

by Eric in Madison on Aug 15, 2008 3:06 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

You know, I called you

wrong about the park factors, but rereading your post, I see that you actually point out that it is the same as the dome, which is accurate. It is a pitcher’s park, though, which you seem to deny.

Safeco tends to supress homers quite a bit.

by Eric in Madison on Aug 15, 2008 3:10 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Now you're just making stuff up.

I don’t deny it’s a pitchers’ park.

As clearly stated:
Maybe in your fantasy league it is, but in the real world the Dome and Safeco are historically dead even, and this season Safeco favors hitters more than the Dome.

That makes Safeco less of a pitchers’ park this year than the Dome.

The person in denial is the one who calls it a “notorious pitchers’ park” as if that is relevant here. It is not relevant in an effort to suggest that Washburn’s numbers are skewed because he pitches in a pitchers’ park.

The park factor IS relevant, but only because Washburn pitches better on the road. He didn’t get Diggity’s note about the “notorious pitchers’ park” apparently.

Certainly, the Twins are looking at these Washburn because:

Washburn has had success at five ballparks that can matter down the stretch, and if it happens, into the post-season: Anaheim, Boston, Tampa Bay, Toronto and Minnesota.

You can view his career, three-year, or ‘08 numbers for each of these, and no matter how you slice and dice it, his one blemish is a 3-year 6.4 ERA in Rogers Centre. But he’s 1.3 there this year, and 3.9 for his career. Toronto is a good club, and the Twins will face them in a series that stands to matter.

Assuming that Minnesota can win the Central they will play Tampa or Boston, we presume.

Washburn has a career 3.6 ERA in Fenway and 3.7 the past three. Has not pitched there in ‘08. At Tropicana, he’s 1.9 career, 2.0 three-year, 1.3 this year.

I’ll say it again: Washburn pitches better on the road, and this year the Dome has been more of a pitchers’ park than Safeco. So that squashes the park factor to denigrate Washburn.

The ALCS is just a mirage right now, the first task is winning the division, then the ALCS, and looking at the schedule and the likely post-season matchup in the first round, Washburn can probably help. And that’s what you look for at this point in the season.

As for his big contract and 2009, the Twins might have to eat part of that contract to move it, but there is always a demand for LHP, and come next March 20 there’s going to be some team out there looking for one.

by Johnny Safron on Aug 15, 2008 5:41 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

This is ridiculous

This is ridiculous. We go after Washburn to stick into our bullpen in a panic move, for 13 million dollars, right after we turned down a guy with an ERA under 2.5 because our scouts didn’t like him much after 3 marginal innings they saw him throw. Because 3 innings MEAN anything.

WTF?

"You can't sit on a lead and run a few plays into the line and just kill the clock. You've got to throw the ball over the damn plate and give the other man his chance. That's why baseball is the greatest game of them all."
~ Earl Weaver
"In God we trust. All others must provide evidence."
~ Billy Beane

by AdamOnFirst on Aug 15, 2008 2:45 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

The Twins have not historically made panic moves down the stretch

Particularly not ones that cost them dearly. I think we can safely say that if they see something in Washburn, it’s been well researched. Pitching for the Mariners in Safeco has killed Washburn this season. Something no one here seems to have noted.

by Johnny Safron on Aug 15, 2008 5:46 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Well...OK

He’s been better on the road this year, and last year too. But in 2006, he was much, much better at home (in Safeco). I don’t think any conclusions can be drawn—I think it’s just random. I think he’s pretty clearly established himself as no better, and probably worse, than any of the Twins starters, and I don;t see the upgrade.

by Eric in Madison on Aug 15, 2008 7:02 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

My point, too

But even on the road this year, Washburn’s FIP grades out at 4.10 which is about as good as Slowey’s overall line. Yeah, it would be an upgrade over Perkins, but we’re talking less than 5 runs the rest of the regular season.

by PhoenixV on Aug 15, 2008 7:13 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

And by the way

Since we’re looking at small sample sizes anyway, Washburn has a 4.91 ERA in the postseason. He was absolutely destroyed in the 2002 WS and 2004 ALDS, while pitching well in the 2002 and 2005 ALCS. I don’t think that’s a particularly impressive postseason resumé.

by PhoenixV on Aug 15, 2008 7:22 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Let's see how he did when he was 23, while we're at it

It’s pretty weak support for your argument to go back three years. Three years ago is less relevant than two years ago. And both are less relevant than this year, which is the year the Twins were interested in him, but will not end up with him, making this all rather moot.

Yet this is a good chance to laugh at the designer stats, so I can’t pass that up. Much as we love FIPS and all, the bottom line is Washburn has been given nearly a full run and a half less to work with per nine innings (again, this is True Runs Scored, not Runs Scored. TRS would be the runs scored for a pitcher while he was actually in the game.) To have 1.5 runs per nine innings to work with is pretty nice for Slowey, so nice in fact that Slowey has worked well over half his innings in the lead, and Washburn has worked well, well over half of his innings trailing.

Anyone who knows anything about pitching knows it’s always nice to have some runs scored for you, and it’s nice to pitch with a lead. Designer stats don’t take these real life details into account, they treat all innings as they same. All innings aren’t the same. I also note that all Slowey’s runs allowed are earned, which indicates the Twins have played pretty damned nice defense behind him. Meanwhile, the Mariners’ defense has cost Washburn a run on average every three starts.

And in regard to money, when did everyone start treating Carl Pohlad’s money as if it were their own? Suddenly, he’s a spendthrift?

The Twins can afford Washburn, I have no doubt he could help them to the playoffs, and I have no doubt they can trade him next spring if they desire. I also have no doubt that between now and then, one of the Twins’ current five starters will get hurt. You can never have too much pitching, and Washburn is better than all the middle-relievers who have gone elsewhere. If that were not the case, the other guys wouldn’t be middle relievers. And Washburn would be.

by Johnny Safron on Aug 16, 2008 2:11 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

This is turning into a religious discussion

We’re all starting to use rhetoric like “Anyone who knows anything about pitching” and “I have no doubt”, so it will be futile to continue the debate. I offer this to go out on: It’s true that Washburn has received much worse defensive support than Slowey (.692 vs. .731 DER) but that’s beside the point – the peripheral stats show Washburn as being a level below Slowey at this point in their respective careers.

I have never seen any evidence that pitchers tend to have it easier when they are provided with a lead by their offense. I think you’re cherry picking stats to back your case.

Just because the Twins can afford Washburn it doesn’t mean that they should pull the trigger. Yes, one of the Twins starters may get hurt, but you can say the same thing about any player on the team. If they are willing to spend money, they should address their real problems, not put icing on top of something which is already working well.

by PhoenixV on Aug 16, 2008 4:27 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

What does FIP say -

about Doyle Alexander going to Detroit in 1987?

by Johnny Safron on Aug 16, 2008 6:48 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

It screams "fluke"...

… just like his next two years in Detroit proved. And again: cherry picking. Obviously there are going to be a lot of outliers, and I’m by no stretch of the imagination saying that Washburn will have an ERA which is exactly equal to his fielding independent line. But it’s our best estimate.

by PhoenixV on Aug 17, 2008 6:59 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

A fluke?

But flukes don’t exist in the realm of statistics, so in your world Doyle Alexander down the stretch for the Tigers in ’87 never happened. Unfortunately, reality trumps the calculator.

“I can tell anything from statistics except the truth,” is a good line to keep handy.

Punching a bunch of, numbers doesn’t tell you the effect a trade or a lineup change can have on a team, and those numbers don’t tell you how a pitcher would have pitched if he had some run support or some defense or had pitched with leads rather than deficits.

Pitchers pitch differently with leads. For you, that is translated into “having it easier” which of course misses my point. There’s a big differentce between saying a pitcher has it easier with a lead and saying a pitcher pitches differently with a lead – which they do, of course.

It also ignores the fact that the other team approaches the plate differently when trailing.

Numbers are nice, and provide a broad framework. They fail miserably in identifying Doyle Alexander.

Alas, Washburn is not coming over, so we’ll just never know if he was going to be another “outlier.” But it’s evident to me that having Washburn’s arm on this team would have enhanced their chances of winning the division. I really did not care what he would cost, because it’s not my money. I also know that because he’s been a competent major league starter that he’s more talented than Chad Bradford or La Troy Hawkins or Brian Bass or Boof Bonser. And my guess is that even the numbers will tell us that.

by Johnny Safron on Aug 17, 2008 3:47 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Again, religion.

Your first sentence is downright wrong. Because baseball is a game of probabilities, there’s bound to be a lot of deviation from the mean forecasts. Everybody knows this. There have been thousands of Doyle Alexanders in baseball history – players that no forecasting system would have identified to break out. In professional medicine there are, likewise, thousands of cases where scientifically tested treatments simply don’t work on a given patient – but that doesn’t mean that we should stop conducting scientific studies.

I completely agree that “numbers”, as you put it, don’t tell you everything you need to know about a trade. But it gives you a very valuable starting point. We can’t by any means be certain that a pitcher will live up to the stasticial forecasts, but it is our best estimate, and estimates are what baseball executives have to live by.

If there’s a big difference between a pitcher having it easier with a lead and a pitcher pitching differently with a lead, why can’t that pitcher just choose to perform better when trailing?

by PhoenixV on Aug 17, 2008 5:47 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

>>>>We can’t by any means be certain that a pitcher will live up to the stasticial forecasts, but it is our best estimate, and estimates are what baseball executives have to live by.

Of course, they don’t. Estimates are what Fantasy League executives live by. The Twins don’t rely on crunching numbers, they rely on their scouts, and then to much less a degree, on some numbers. Baseball execs live on scouting reports, not statistical estimates.

Randy Ruiz, for example, has a .302 minor league BA and .524 SA. If baseball execs relied on estimates, he would have been in the big leagues long ago, rather than spending 9 years in A and AA.

>>If there’s a big difference between a pitcher having it easier with a lead and a pitcher pitching differently with a lead, why can’t that pitcher just choose to perform better when trailing?

Your question makes no sense, of course. so I’ll point this out, then ask you a question:

When you lead by, say, 3 runs in the bottom of the 5th, you can rip fastballs in there as often as you want. Don’t nibble. Don’t get cute. Get your team off the field. So if being able to throw more fastballs to major leaguers, who when fed a steady diet of most fastballs will eventually start to hit them, is the same as “having it easy,” then indeed pitchers pitching with a lead have it easy.

Are you suggesting that pitchers pitch the same regardless of score? Regardless of ahead or behind?

by Johnny Safron on Aug 17, 2008 6:48 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

I did not mean to say that statistical estimates are all that baseball executives have to live by. Naturally, they also should rely on scouting, but even scouting involves estimation and uncertainty, just like “number crunching”.

I’m not suggesting that pitchers pitch the same regardless of the score. Nerves play a big part in pitching, and some scores are simply more stressful than others. But a pitcher should always try to pitch his best, regardless of the situation. So if throwing a lot of fastballs means trouble eventually, then only a stupid pitcher would do this. How does ripping fastballs as often as you want get your team “off the field”?

by PhoenixV on Aug 17, 2008 6:58 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Bonser

Joe C. is saying the Twins offered Bonser for Washburn and the Mariners turned him down. Smith is lucky the Mariners don’t know what they’re doing. That would have been a horrible deal for the Twins. I can almost see it if Washburn were a Type B free agent after this year. They could claim they’re trying to save Perkins’ arm by moving him out there now. But what about next year? No way he’s better than any of the five guys they have now.

"You're thinking too much. Just have fun." -- Bennie "The Jet" Rodriguez in Sandlot

by cmathewson on Aug 15, 2008 5:10 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs