Twins Starters Picking Up Their Slack
While Kevin Slowey is trying to shake out of his first slump of 2009, the other four starters are starting to put something together.
For Nick Blackburn it's all about maintaining what's been working all season long. For Glen Perkins it's about finding a groove after missing a little bit of time. But for Scott Baker and Francisco Liriano, it's simply about time. All four of these guys are putting together streaks of various lengths, and it's not surprising that their stretches have coincided with more competetive play from the team as a whole.
Scott Baker
On Tuesday Baker lasted just five innings, but he also allowed just one run, and it was the first time in seven tries that he didn't give the Twins a quality start. He's now got his ERA under 5.00 for the first time this year. In June, Baker was commissioned for six starts, and he racked up 39.1 innings, a 3.20 ERA and a 4-0 record if you're into that kind of thing. More telling, he's cut down on how often his opposition reaches base and increased his strikeout rates (35 K's in June). It always takes a little while to recognize trends in baseball, to see who can establish something and how they do it, but Baker is re-established. It's good to have him back.
Nick Blackburn
Captain Consistency has been doing it almost all year, leading the team in quality starts (12) and innings (107.1). It's now eighth quality starts in a row, with 58 innings amassed over that stretch. 22 strikeouts aren't great, and versus 13 walks the ratio isn't strong either but Blackburn's general control this year has been outstanding. His 2.02 ERA over these eight starts is a little unreal, but Nick's succeeding in spite of his peripherals, not because of them. He keeps the ball in the park and doesn't shoot himself in the foot, and as long as his fastball continues to sink and his defense picks him up, even if he's not as good as he's been the last month and a half he can still be an effective pitcher.
Glen Perkins
If it wasn't for May, Perkins would be having one helluva year. As it stands, it still isn't bad; he's been at his best since returning from the disabled list. That's just four starts but covers 27 innings, and a 2.67 ERA in spite of just nine strikeouts. He's allowed just one home run over that stretch, and just a pair of free passes, meaning that just like Nick he relies on hitters making contact the way he wants them to. There will always be questions of sustainability for guys like Perk who don't strike people out, but right now that doesn't matter. Glen has been great since returning from the DL, and he's giving his team a chance to win. That's what it's all about.
Francisco Liriano
Every game, every inning and every pitch is like a crap shoot with Cisco, or so it seems, but he was effective throughout June...if not efficient. His 3.77 June ERA has helped him start to get his 2009 line under a bit of control, pushing his yearly ERA under 6.00. He's struck out 30 in 31 innings over five starts, allowing just 27 hits. Sure, the 14 walks aren't a good thing and he can throw too many pitches, but he's been getting himself under a bit more control physically and mentally these last few weeks. The big innings aren't happening, at least in terms of runs, and that was the biggest source of Liriano's failings early in the year. What's best about Liriano is that if he can keep his mechanics under control, keep his elbow and shoulder where they're supposed to be and maintain a consistent release point, and just focus, these are numbers he can easily sustain.
15 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Too much pitching?
I love all five of these guys in this rotation. Each one brings something different to the plate and are usually fairly consistent. However, it seems that all of these guys are good, not great. This will keep the Twins in contention but how far can it actually take them. You need a Cole Hamels or Josh Beckett. A dominant pitcher to carry a squad in September and October. I propose trading away two of those guys for a front-end, legit number one starter. You then bring Swarzak in to fill the missing void. The Twins shouldn’t focus on just the playoffs, but the whole thing.
But who makes that deal?
Who trades great for good? The only way it works is if it’s an expensive player on a team going nowhere. The only guy that jumps to mind is Roy Oswalt, but he has a full no trade clause.
by Eric in Madison on Jul 2, 2009 9:58 AM EDT up reply actions
Is that really true?
You need a Cole Hamels or Josh Beckett. A dominant pitcher to carry a squad in September and October.
I don’t know about that… the Twins had the best starting pitcher in all of baseball in 2003, 2004, and 2006, and it got them precisely nowhere once the playoffs started – in fact, the only time in the Gardenhire era that they made it out of the first round was 2002, when Santana spent the playoffs in the bullpen (the “ace” starter was probably Rick Reed).
I don’t mean to say that having a dominant starter doesn’t help. but I don’t know that it’s necessary – if the Twins go into a series with Scott Baker starting game 1, I’m okay with that.
"There are only two things that are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the former." - Albert Einstein
Past Champions
2008 Philadephia Phillies – Cole Hamels
2007 Boston Red Sox – Josh Beckett
2006 St. Louis Cardinals – Chris Carpenter
2005 Chicago White Sox – Nobody
2004 Boston Red Sox – Curt Schilling
2003 Florida Marlins – Josh Beckett
2002 Anaheim Angels – John Lackey
2001 Arizona Diamondbacks – Schilling/Randy Johnson
2000 New York Yankees – Roger Clemens
This isn’t to rip or tear down any of the guys we have, but to get setup for October you have to have a front-heavy rotation. The Twins wouldn’t be able to use all 5 so 1 or 2 of them would have to be put into the bullpen anyway. I think the rotation is great….for the regular season.
I think it's a solid point you bring up...
and listing the examples is effective. I did this a couple of years ago when Punto was raking at third base, although without power; the problem with lists like this is that I’m not sure (even after using it myself) how much they prove. It’s like saying you have a better chance of winning the world series if you have a power hitter in the middle of the lineup. Does it make it easier to win the big one if you have that asset? Absolutely. But there’s just so much that goes into the equation.
I'd like to see it over a longer time frame.
There are so many variables, the sample size makes the results suspect. One variable that comes to mind is resources. Teams that have huge payrolls can afford ace pitchers. They also can afford a lot of other things, like rosters full of good hitters and fielders, and solid bullpens.
It’s certainly easier to win if you have one or two ace pitchers at the top of your rotation. And the playoffs intensify this because you don’t need the bottom of your rotation at all. But it is by no means a necessity. 2005 proves that just from the above list.
I don’t think the Twins are that far from having a guy who fits the mold. Liriano has the stuff and has shown consistent control in the past. If he ever develops into the pitcher he was late last year, he’d be about as good as Cole Hamels. This year, by the numbers, he already is as good as Hamels. Which is another thing to keep in mind. Aces tend not to be aces for very long. For most of their career’s they’re above-average pitchers who put it all together for a season or two. Frank Viola, for example.
My sense is the best way to get aces is to draft them. It takes a heck of a lot of resources to get them once they’re established. College pitchers move fast, so Gutierrez and Gibson (assuming he signs) are not far from being ace-level.
"You're thinking too much. Just have fun." -- Bennie "The Jet" Rodriguez in Sandlot
Peavy also
but the same situation with a no-trade clause. Seattle would trade Bedard but I’m not convinced he’s better than what the Twins already have. I don’t think they need to deal anyway. There is still hope that Liriano’s command/control issues get better and Baker was nearly an ace last season. If they make a deal they would probably only trade one major league pitcher and add a prospect like Swarzak or Manship.
I think they will get a decent setup reliever for not much they will miss. I don’t think they’ll fill the hole at 2B which is a crying shame.
Trades
They will not trade any of their starters….what a bonehead idea.
Not a boneheaded idea
I don’t think you can get an ace for 2 of their current starters, but there are upgrades that could be made. If I could get a good shortstop I’d consider moving one of my current starters, for example.
by Eric in Madison on Jul 2, 2009 11:50 AM EDT up reply actions
Throw me a bone...
I won’t necessarily disagree that it is boneheaded. I think long-term it won’t be beneficial. However, to win championships you have to build up for a 3 to 5 year window and I see that window as right now with Mauer and Morneau.
Lots of criticism, none of it constructive or encouraging of discussion.
Don’t worry about that one.
Let's weaken our strengths so we can strengthen our weaknesses!
Unless you have a hot prospect who is dominating AAA, it’s a zero-sum game.
"You're thinking too much. Just have fun." -- Bennie "The Jet" Rodriguez in Sandlot
It's a strength for a reason.
The Twins call their pitching a strength because of their depth. Which means you can lose a player and two and fill those spots with little dip in production. So use your strength. Excuse me for my NBA reference, but did the Celtics have zero-sum when they traded for KG? They lost their dominant post-player, role player, future point guard, and a shooter to trade for an elite forward that played the same position as Al Jefferson. So lets trade a bunch of small pieces for a KG. There may not be a KG available right now, but there will be as soon as some teams fall back.
We could probably move a 4-5 starter and not lose much
bringing Swarzak into the mix. The problem is, we’re not going to get all that much for Perkins. Maybe if we think Blackburn is performing a bit over his head (IMO he is, but he shouldn’t regress beyond near league average), we might get a little more for him.
Honestly, the “sweet spot” for trading a SP might be Slowey or Liriano. I’m getting more and more convinced that Liriano is no longer Santana-in-waiting, he looks like a #2 starter, tops. Very valuable, but not untouchable. With his risk, if I could get a major piece of my infield (J.J. Hardy, Tulowitzki, etc – not that they’re available…), I’d trade him. Slowey is somewhat the same. Can we solve a major organizational hole at 2B/SS?
I guess what I’m saying is that the gap between (for example) Liriano and Swarzak is less than Hardy-Punto. In this case, it’s not a zero sum game.
by Adam Peterson on Jul 3, 2009 10:41 AM EDT up reply actions

by 



















