Livan Hernandez a Twin

Hmm..

Just looking at BB/K and ERA from last year in the NL West:

(79/90, 4.93)

This doesn't look like a guy we want facing the Tigers and Indians all year. Especially for $7 mil. My initial reaction is broad skepticism.

by Neil on Feb 12, 2008 9:56 AM EST reply actions

Neither Ortiz nor Ponson had been any good for several years prior to signing last year. At least Hernandez has been a work horse and a consistent innings eater for a while. But I still don't like this deal.

Pluses

Innings: Hernandez is one of only three pitchers to make at least 30 starts and throw at least 200 innings in each year since 2003.
Budget: The Twins were about $22 million under budget on salary before this signing. So they can afford this.

Minuses

Lack of quality innings: He had an ERA of nearly 5 while giving up 34 HRs last year in the National League. He will not even do that well in the AL.
Cost: This will cost the Twins at least $6 million. That seems like a lot of money for a downgrade from Carlos Silva. Then again, Silva got $11 millon a year for four years....
Roster issues: As Roger's Pick 5! thread indicates, there were seven pitchers vying for five spots prior to this signing. Because it's a guaranteed deal, there are now seven pitchers vying for four spots. And the guys who will not make the team are better than Hernandez.

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

by cmathewson on Feb 12, 2008 10:02 AM EST reply actions

One minus you forgot...

34 home runs allowed in the NL last year.

I knew this needed to and would happen. But he was not who I had in mind.

by TheMattWilke on Feb 12, 2008 10:31 AM EST up reply actions

No biggie

I did include that:

Lack of quality innings: He had an ERA of nearly 5 while giving up 34 HRs last year in the National League.

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

by cmathewson on Feb 12, 2008 10:34 AM EST up reply actions

Oops

Nevermind. I guess nauseau can effect reading comprehension.

by TheMattWilke on Feb 12, 2008 10:49 AM EST up reply actions

Livan

I don't like it. The only silver lining I could think of is if they are able to flip him at the trading deadline for a decent young prospect.

by Diggity Dino on Feb 12, 2008 10:50 AM EST up reply actions

One big minus...

"Roster issues: As Roger's Pick 5! thread indicates, there were seven pitchers vying for five spots prior to this signing. Because it's a guaranteed deal, there are now seven pitchers vying for four spots. And the guys who will not make the team are better than Hernandez."

That's one BIG minus in my book. Makes me think the Twins brass is covering their "payroll" ass by:

this signing allows them to shrink the difference between their proposed budget and how much they are actually paying (which is, of course, stupid if the players signed and paid aren't worth it, but will appease the average fans who don't put a lot of time or effort into thinking about these things);
keeping a couple of young arms down on the farm and gaining another year or two of indentured servitude from them (cynical, I know). But Livan for $6million now, when we can afford it, is a lot cheaper than 1st year of free agency for a young arm _____ (fill in the blank with a pitcher of your choice) in 2010, 2011, 0r 2012 when we expect to have payroll troubles and inflation has hit us (what would Silva's contract look like in 2012 4 years/$64million?)

by montanatwinsfan on Feb 12, 2008 10:37 AM EST reply actions

Good point

If you can keep Blackburn in AAA until June, you gain another year of servitude. I'm not sure how Slowey or Perkins fall in service time. But my guess is they would both need to spend the majority of this year in the minors for the Twins to gain that year.

Slowey spent nearly three months with the big club last year. So perhaps if they wait until the All-Star break, they can gain a year. Still, he probably would be a Super 2 in that case. Perkins spent most of last year on the MLB DL. So he's gonna get paid sooner rather than later.

Here are the locks:
Baker
Bonser
Hernandez
Humber
Nathan
Rincon
Neshek
Crain
Guerrier
Reyes

That leaves two spots between these four guys
Perkins
Slowey
Liriano
Blackburn

I'd bet on Perkins and Liriano going north, Liriano in the rotation and Perkins in the pen.

Hernandez allows you to keep Blackburn in indentured servitude until he's past his 30th birthday.

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

by cmathewson on Feb 12, 2008 10:58 AM EST up reply actions

I think it's a pretty smart move

As someone who believes the Twins are also-rans this season, I love this move. Plug Hernandez in, let him throw 200+ terrible, terrible innings, and let him limit the service time of your young pitchers (plus, let them toil in the wonderful anonymity of Rochester).

by Bobomojo on Feb 12, 2008 11:24 AM EST up reply actions

I think it is a terrible idea,

for the same reasons you like it. We have a ton of young arms. Why not test them. See who is ready and who isn't. We are going to have a rebuilding season anyway, why spend money on a "veteran". You spend money on a veteran when you think you might win and just need a little extra help.

Just as importantly, holding off young players in order to save money pisses the players off. Not just the one's held back, but ALL of them. It erodes confidence in the organization and the management and it sticks in everybody's craw. THEN, when one of those players hits it big (think Santana here) he still has that bad taste in his mouth from what the organization stands for and is unwilling to consider a hometown discount.

Why would I sign with you now when I have the power, when you treated me like a peon when you had the power.

We see this over and over again from the Twins organization. I am not saying this is happening in this case, and the recent signings of Morneau and Cuddyer support the proposition that maybe Bill Smith is seeing some of that past animosity come home to rest and is fixing some of that.

Ask any business person. Being frugal and smart is good for business. Penny-pinching and miserliness, isn't.

by montanatwinsfan on Feb 12, 2008 9:16 PM EST up reply actions

Confused

Are you seriously arguing that Johan Santana's decision to seek a trade to the east coast had nothing to do with promoting his own financial self-interest, but rather a comment on the Twins' mindfulness of the arbitration process? That it was his limited confidence in the organization (and not his self-interest) that drove his decision to guarantee himself tens of millions of dollars?

Do you honestly believe that in 5-6 years, the signing of Livan Hernandez - which can easily be chalked up to protecting an overused bullpen, or adding a veteran presence to a young rotation - will affect Nick Blackburn's decision whether to accept a below-market contract from the Twins?

Frankly, I see this as a smart move by a small to medium payroll team to play within their confines. It's an easily defensible move that will benefit the team in future years, when we will perhaps be competing for something better than 3rd place.

by Bobomojo on Feb 13, 2008 12:06 AM EST up reply actions

please re-read my post with an eye toward nuance

"Are you seriously arguing that Johan Santana's decision to seek a trade to the east coast had nothing to do with promoting his own financial self-interest, but rather a comment on the Twins' mindfulness of the arbitration process?"

Absolutely not! See what I wrote on the other threads regarding the Santana deal. I believe Santana had his mind made up, wanted out of Minnesota, wanted his big payday (and deserves it if anyone deserves these ridiculous contracts) and unfortunately (and a little selfishly) put Bill Smith in a tight spot to get something done, thereby decreasing some of the Twins' bargaining leverage.

My point is that I believe had the Twins consistently shown players a desire to improve, a desire to win, and a commitment to paying their players a fair market value rather than consistently undermining the team and the palyers by penny-pinching the organization would have fostered a whole lot more loyalty.

You cannot deny that both Hunter and Santana's number one complaint before they left was a distrust of the organization, a belief that the Twins weren't committed to winning and that the organization was not going to spend the money to sign (re-sign) the players needed to win. What does all of that equal? Distrust, which leads to a desire to get to another organization that you might be able to trust more.

"Do you honestly believe that in 5-6 years, the signing of Livan Hernandez - which can easily be chalked up to protecting an overused bullpen, or adding a veteran presence to a young rotation - will affect Nick Blackburn's decision whether to accept a below-market contract from the Twins?"

Again, no. please re-read what I originally posted. I do not believe that. I do believe that as cynical as it may sound, it is a valid point to bring up for discussion. I believe that many people will not agree with that possibility. I don't know that I agree with it either. I simply raised it as a valid discussion point.

I did raise both of those issues however, as part of my larger point. The Twins have been overly, hyper-conservative. Some might call that miserly, greedy, or penny-pinching. That type of atmosphere is incredibly erosive to employee morale.

You may not believe it, but go back and read what Hunter and Santana had to say over the past year or two. I do believe that had the organization improved morale by showing a commitment to the players (the way Smith has done this off-season with Morneau and Cuddyer) there would have been greater morale amongst the veterans which would lead to greater loyalty, which would lead to a better chance at signing veterans to a hometown discount.

I don't believe that would have been enough to keep Hunter. The Angels threw WAY too much money at him.

As for Santana, I do believe we would have had a chance at re-signing him had he been happy with the organization. Look at Twins Geek's post:

http://twinsgeek.blogspot.com/2008/02/could-we-have-kept-santana.html

He doesn't tackle the issue from Santana's perspective, per se. But he makes a powerful argument that our contract offer for Santana was extremely close to what he signed for. One logical conclusion to draw from that possibility is that Santana wasn't happy, and therefore had no sense of loyalty. If that is true, then you have to ask yourself why. I hypothesize that one major reason is that the Twind organization was so ultra-conservative that it has undermined the player's morale.

by montanatwinsfan on Feb 13, 2008 12:19 PM EST up reply actions

minor correction...

"Do you honestly believe that in 5-6 years, the signing of Livan Hernandez - which can easily be chalked up to protecting an overused bullpen, or adding a veteran presence to a young rotation - will affect Nick Blackburn's decision whether to accept a below-market contract from the Twins?"

I believe that if the players feel the Twins organization is pinching pennies now by keeping players in the minors in order to maintain control over them, that feeling will lead to resentment. Last couple of seasons/spring training we heard a lot of grumbling from players/fans/bloggers that the Twins might be doing that to young players who are on the cusp when the Twins decided to hire Batista, Ortiz, Ponson, ? (shortstop whose name I am now blanking on).

If the player's feel that way, why wouldn't it affect them when it comes time for them to sign as free-agents? I am not saying it WILL affect Nick Blackburn, but I am saying that it could, and I am also saying that I believe it did influence both Hunter and Santana.

by montanatwinsfan on Feb 13, 2008 12:33 PM EST up reply actions

I like this post much more than your previous one

It seems to me that you have to draw a distinction between complaining about the Livan signing and the general resentment players feel towards ownership that is unwilling to loosen up the purse strings.

The Livan signing, if used properly, is a smart way to limit our future obligation to what could be an awfully good starting pitcher. Despite the fact that MLB doesn't have a salary cap, Bill Smith does. Frankly, I don't think Mr. Smith can do his job properly if he allows perspective resentment from a Nick Blackburn to retard his ability to make smart financial decisions.

Do the Twins have an image problem among their higher salary players? Probably. But, honestly, how much of that resentment is PR propoganda spouted by players looking to maximize the financial payoff for their services?

Now, of course the players would be happier (although I'm not willing to say more loyal) if Pohlad threw money around like a Steinbrenner. If you feel Pohlad's penny-pinching is worth ripping, go right ahead. But take the Livan signing from Smith's perspective (working under the assumption that limiting service time played a role in the decision). It's just smart roster management.

The best argument against the trade I've heard is that the money would have been better spent on scouting/signing draft picks. It's a great argument, but I don't know that we can say with any certainty that unspent payroll dollars would have been recaptured by the team, rather than Carl's big vault of cash. And, in many ways, the argument works even better when discussing the money we're spending on Monroe.

by Bobomojo on Feb 13, 2008 3:25 PM EST up reply actions

Image

Do the Twins have an image problem among their higher salary players?

Not anymore. We let Image Enemy #1 and 3 go to free agency and we traded Image Enemy #2. We're in serious discussions on a long-term deal with Image Enemy #4 and I expect them to get that done before spring training. And we signed Image Enemies #5 and #5 to long-term deals. There just isn't anybody left to complain about the penny pinching Twins.

By the time guys like Blackburn are up for arbitration, the Twins will be solidly in the middle of the pack in terms of salary. Of all the things that can keep Bill Smith up at night, worrying about how a player will react to a deal three years down the road is not one of them.

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

by cmathewson on Feb 13, 2008 4:30 PM EST up reply actions

I always enjoy...

...how precisely you put forth your point, which is usually right on.

I expect that what a player such as Nick Blackburn could make 3, 5 or 6 years from now is not his major concern. It is likely his desire/hope/dream of making it to the major leagues to play baseball together with the perks that major leaguers have versus those bus rides and budget hotels they are used to at Rochester.

For a young man who didn't get much of a signing bonus and likely made a lot less than $100k last year, that nice major league minimum of almost $400,000 is like dying and going to heaven. I expect he isn't staying up at night worrying about what his salary could be in the distant future.

by roger @ Twinkie Town on Feb 15, 2008 5:23 PM EST up reply actions

Reaching

Players will draw the conclusions that seem most expedient to them. The front office can do little to convince them that their opinions are wrong. When the players' minds are set against the organization, it's time for the player to move on. This is true in every organization.

The Twins can't worry about massaging players' fragile psyches. If they want to play here and are willing to give the front office the benefit of the doubt, the organization will try to keep them. If they see conspiracy theories in every move the organization makes, they're not a good fit for the team.

The Twins must do what they think will help them win short and long term. You can make an argument that this deal accomplishes both. It's not without risk, but not making a move is also risky.

As a fan I'm willing to give them the benefit of the doubt that this was the best available option and hope for the best. That doesn't mean I'm a naive homer.

I just don't want to over analyze offseason moves because I can certainly understand and appreciate the position the front office is in and I really just want to start rooting for the team in actual games.

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

by cmathewson on Feb 13, 2008 12:25 AM EST up reply actions

There

"I really just want to start rooting for the team in actual games."

Best thing I've heard in awhile.

Baseball is great because you cant take a knee or kill the clock. You gotta put the ball over the plate and give the other guy his damn shot E Weaver abridged

by AdamOnFirst on Feb 13, 2008 3:08 AM EST up reply actions

Yes.

Hear, hear.

by Neil on Feb 13, 2008 11:02 AM EST up reply actions

Also.....

It also comes down to budgeting, period. Short-term and long-term. Money, for some reson, doesn't really carry over, it seems, except money lost does seem to come with some cuts the following season.

It was a good time for Cuddyer and Morneau to be where they are with the organization. The money was there, a bit more up front, more reasonable down the line.

A team also can't compete when people throw funny money at someone (a la Hunter). And the gamble on Santana was a major dollar gamble. One can question if Santana "asking" for a trade and then signing away his career was a smart move by him...now. Would he have done betetr just taking a short-term (3-4 year deal), of even chancing free agency after another 15-13, 3.30 year with the Twins. Could he be $25-50 million richer over those 6-7 years if he waited?

Yes, for some reason players want to win. They want that ring. Just like fans hope to experience those paper parades more than once every 100 years. Being competitive, although a start, is often not just enough. But the Twins, when they are good, TRY to be competitive. If there was a surefire formula to creating a perfect winning team, then the Yankees would be champs like they were during the golden-era.

check out Twinkies autograph collection at www.TwinsCards.com

by twintown on Feb 13, 2008 1:02 PM EST up reply actions

Slowey and Liriano

I'd bring Slowey and Liriano north, let Perkins stretch his arm/innings out starting every fifth day in Rochester. Maybe there's a bit of a ST battle between Slowey and Perkins, but at this time, Slowey seems more ready, I'd like to see what he can do starting the season in the bigs. Liriano can move to the #5 spot early in the season with Humber pitching long relief until Cisco can get the innings and arm strength up.

Rotation:

Hernandez
Baker
Bonser
Slowey
Liriano

Bullpen:
Nathan, Neshek, Rincon, Crain, Guerrier, Reyes, Humber

Rochester Rotation:

Perkins
Blackburn
Swarzak
Mulvey
Duensing

One positive aspect of this signing is that it may make it easier for us to trade a reliever and/or 1-2 of our prospects before the season.

by Adam Peterson on Feb 12, 2008 12:14 PM EST up reply actions

I agree

If they really want Perkins to be a starting pitcher they send him to Rochester. He pitched so few innings last year and in 2006 most of his time was at AA. Think it would do him some good to be pitching regulary and stretch the arm out.

richman

by anderson800 on Feb 12, 2008 2:14 PM EST up reply actions

Opening Day Starter

This is just a move made simply not to have the onus of being the #1 starter on any of the young pitchers. Remember, it took a Cy Young for Johan to finally get an opening day start from Radke.

I'm sure our young pitchers will get their shot if deserving this year, but our philosophy over the years is to make them earn major league starter status, not given.

Far from an exciting move, but entirely predictable.

by sportsvulture on Feb 12, 2008 10:47 AM EST reply actions

Protecting young pitchin arms? No.

Standard wisdom is no more than 30 more innings additional for young pitchers, which in theory could limit the young staff...but add 30 innings and here would be the limits in no particular order.

Baker - 215
Bonser - 203
Blackburn - 190
Slowey - 229
Humber - 176
Perkins - Maybe 140 Innings - he only threw 49 due to injury last year, but 121 the year before.
Liriano - Everybody seems to think 120ish.

This doesn't look to be all that limiting. The logic of this deal eludes me.

by elkboy on Feb 12, 2008 11:06 AM EST reply actions

Innings limits are not expectations

Four of those guys on your list have a combined total of 120 career ML innings. And only about 60 of those innings are as starting pitchers -- Perkins and Blackburn have never started a ML game, Humber only 1.

And another pitcher on your list is fresh off of TJ surgery.

And another pitcher on your list, despite being one of our two most experienced starters, is coming off of a 85 ERA+ season, or roughly the kind of performance that Ramon Ortiz turned in last season.

I'll bet the Twins aren't as concerned about "innings limits" as they are rushing inexperienced starters before they're ready.

by spycake on Feb 12, 2008 4:18 PM EST up reply actions

It isn't

It isn't a matter of rusing anyone anymore. Liriano, Perkins, Bonser, baker, Slowey, Humber, and Blackburn all have nothing to prove and little to learn fro staying in AAA at this point. It's time to put them in the big leagues and see if they sink or swim. This was a perfect year to do that because we almsot certainly won't be competing.

But now we'll learn less about our future young pitchers, and we very well may lose some too options.

Baseball is great because you cant take a knee or kill the clock. You gotta put the ball over the plate and give the other guy his damn shot E Weaver abridged

by AdamOnFirst on Feb 12, 2008 4:37 PM EST up reply actions

7 guys

Liriano, Perkins, Bonser, baker, Slowey, Humber, and Blackburn

Liriano and Perkins have a lot to prove -- namely, whether they are full recovered from injuries. And even then, Perkins has a whopping 34 IP and zero starts on his ML record. Do they even see him as a starter, or as a reliever?

That takes your list down to exactly five guys. I'd rather not hope and pray that all five of them -- including Mr. Blackburn (11 IP) and Mr. Humber (9 IP), and Mr. Bonser of the 85 ERA+ "sophomore slump" -- are ready to pitch in a big-league rotation on March 31st. If not, what alternatives are generally available on that date? Do you rush Liriano and Perkins, regardless of their recovery status? Sign Ponson again? Where's Ramon Ortiz? Jose Lima? What a great way to start the season!

I wouldn't be surprised if the Twins envision Humber in particular as a good relief candidate, and I wouldn't be disappointed if 3 guys from your list begin the season in AAA or the bullpen. The day they cut a useful player to make room for Livan on the staff, then I'll be far more likely to agree with you.

by spycake on Feb 12, 2008 7:49 PM EST up reply actions

A Lot Of Money

Except the Twins have it to spend, as I doubt it caries over.

There is still the question of Liriano, not to mention Crain.

Humber could make the team, as well as Balckburn, as either a starter or that long-guy in the bullpen, i.e. 12th pitcher perhaps.

It will allow the Twins to "season" Perkins, Slowey if they wish.

He could be flipped depending on how well he or the Twins are doing.

The scary thing about 2008...the Twins do have promising pitchers as well as a beefed up offense, themselves. But the chances of the Twins pitchers giving up a combined less-than 4 runs per game is slim to none. Mainly because Cleveland, Detroit and the White Sox have the potential to hit just okay pitching. Not to mention the East AND West. So the Twins WILL have to score at least five runs a game just to stay in the mix...sadly.

check out Twinkies autograph collection at www.TwinsCards.com

by twintown on Feb 12, 2008 11:53 AM EST reply actions

money to spend

If we have lots of money, sink it into Latin American prospects and draft guys who will want $ above slot... To me this seems like a nobrainer. We have so much young pitching that they can throw someone who they do not deem as a future option out there every 5th day to keep service time down for others (if service time is what they want)... we cannot possibly hold on to all of them anyways, so why not let them try out for it... Spend the money on some hot hitting prospects that my help them out in 4-5 years...

by diehardtwinsfan on Feb 12, 2008 12:50 PM EST up reply actions

Not a horrible move

I don't like the player, the money seems ridiculous whether we have it or not. However, we all believe so much in Rick Anderson to give pitchers that extra edge. Maybe he can work some magic.

Like everyone else said this protects us from having to burn up service time and even more importantly from having to burn out young arms. I don't think I've ever been so bored with a free agent signing. OH wait, I forgot about Ortiz and Ponson . . and BATISTA!!!

by halfchest @ Twinkie Town on Feb 12, 2008 12:12 PM EST reply actions

Who's off the 40-man roster?

Garrett Jones?

by Adam Peterson on Feb 12, 2008 12:17 PM EST reply actions

Hmm, I'd say Cali

It's too bad it's not a minor league deal. Cause you just wait to add him until you can put Mijares on the 60-man at the end of spring training.

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

by cmathewson on Feb 12, 2008 12:23 PM EST up reply actions

Money

The Twins tried to get Silva to take $7 million a year. Now they've taken that money and given it to Silva's nearest replacement.

Doesn't seem like a bad move at all - sure, Hernandez isn't great, but he throws even more innings than Silva.

by Jon Marthaler on Feb 12, 2008 12:49 PM EST reply actions

+1

I'm warming to this. One year and $5 million is not bad, considering the four years and $44 million Silva got. Just for sh*ts and giggles, here's a comparison of their innings since Silva became a starter:

Silva

203
188
180
204

Hernandez

255
246
216
204

If Hernandez gives the team 200 innings, he's worth $5 million. If he gives the team significantly more, he's worth the extra $2 million in incentives.

Here's hoping Livan likes his money.

Sorry, couldn't resist.

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

by cmathewson on Feb 12, 2008 3:54 PM EST up reply actions

That's funny.

He shall be a good man.

by Neil on Feb 12, 2008 4:07 PM EST up reply actions

Well if he earns his $5million,

he can spend his days counting in a gArage by the motorway... But I ain't gunna believe it til I see it.

by montanatwinsfan on Feb 12, 2008 9:31 PM EST up reply actions

Not only...

Not only is 1 yr, $5 mil probably a good deal in this market, but with even average performance over a reasonable number of innings, there's a fair chance that Livan could either be flipped at the deadline for a prospect, or bring in a compensation draft pick in 2009.

by spycake on Feb 12, 2008 4:20 PM EST up reply actions

Flipping yes, compensation, probably not

I don't know what the list looks like, but if Silva didn't warrant compensation after last year, I doubt Hernandez will after this year. I hope he does, though. If he does, it means he's significantly above average this year because it is based on two years of performance. And last year he was well below the line.

If he pitches well and the Twins are still out of it come trade deadline time, he could fetch more than Ortiz did last year, which is not half bad.

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

by cmathewson on Feb 12, 2008 4:32 PM EST up reply actions

Compensation

I don't really know why, but last year, Livan was solidly in the "B" range in the NL. I don't know if his ranking would be substantially different in the AL. He ranked 29 out of 105... top 20 were "A"s and 21-42 were "B"s so he was right in the middle of the "B" range. I would imagine that innings thrown make up a big part of the ranking, which would boost him up.

http://www.usatoday.com/sports/baseball/nl/2007-10-31-elias-rankings-complete_N.htm

So it would not seem out of the realm of possibility that he could remain in the "B" range and get some compensation back.

by Diggity Dino on Feb 12, 2008 4:49 PM EST up reply actions

Wow

That surprises me. Well, this deal is looking better all the time. Hopefully Andy helps him rediscover some of his old magic and he pitches better this year than the last two.

Here's a pipe dream. By many accounts, the Twins are better offensively, defensively and in the bullpen in 2008 vs. 2007. The area where they appear worse is in the rotation. If:

Hernandez pitches better than the Silva of 2007
Baker pitches better than Ponson/Baker of 2007
Bonser pitches closer to his 2006 than his 2007
Slowey pitches better than Ortiz/Slowey in 2007
Liriano even comes close to how Santana pitched in 2007

The Twins could be better in all phases in 2008 than they were in 2007. Now, those are five big ifs, but I wouldn't be shocked if three out of five happens.

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

by cmathewson on Feb 12, 2008 5:01 PM EST up reply actions

4/5

I wouldn't be surprised if four of five occur (no one will confuse Liriano for Santana, but we can certainly hope; at least he may give up fewer home runs). The problem is that better than 2007 still probably doesn't get us to the playoffs. We probably have to be better than 2006 (Cleveland and Detroit are likely to be very good).

I'll be entertained this year as long as a) we are competitive (read within long-shot distance of the playoffs for most of the year), and b) our young players get a lot of opportunities to improve/prove themselves.

Still, to get to the playoffs, we'd have perform at least as well as 2006. Our offense may just do that. While I don't expect MVP and batting champ this year, we are deeper. Our defense should be comparable to that year. Our rotation, on the other hand, would have to really surprise me.

I love surprises. (except the one where all 18 prospect pitchers crap out and Gardy has to make Punto the "Ace" of the staff)

by snolls on Feb 12, 2008 6:04 PM EST up reply actions

Punto

Actually, I may be on to something. At least Punto wouldn't be expected to hit. Still, if this happens, then the team definitely has to carry 3 catchers. There is no excuse for putting LNP at the dish.

by snolls on Feb 12, 2008 6:06 PM EST up reply actions

Not great, but no Ortiz/Ponson at all

I don't have a problem with this move at all. Livan may be fat, and he may not be as productive now as he has been, and he may be an NL pitcher, but the dude is a workhorse.

97 - 96.3 IP
98 - 234.3 IP
99 - 199.7 IP
00 - 240 IP
01 - 226.7 IP
02 - 216 IP
03 - 233.3 IP
04 - 255 IP
05 - 246.3 IP
06 - 216 IP
07 - 204.3 IP

He'll save bullpen arms. Throw him out there every 5th day, and you're taking major pressure off the pen. This team may fight to finish .500, but he's a veteran who can at least eat a huge number of innings. He averages 6 2/3 innings per start. That will be nice to throw him in the mix with the kids.

by nathaneide on Feb 12, 2008 3:36 PM EST reply actions

bullpen

This move may be more about saving the bullpen than denying the young starters a chance with some experience. with a starter who can go 6-8 innings consistantly, you are giving the bullpen a breather once every 5 days. I don't think this is about not having enough experienced starters. The Twins management knows they have 10 candidates for 5 spots so they have replacements. What they don't know is whether anyone will consistantly give the bullpen a breather and pitch 7-8 innings in a game more times than not.

by doofus04 on Feb 12, 2008 5:11 PM EST reply actions

Last year. . .

It was ridiculous to sign a guy like this(ortiz/ponson) because we knew that Silva and Santana would be back and take quite a few innings. This year it completely makes sense when there's almost no experience and still 4 spots up for grabs instead of 1. You could argue the Twins have penciled in Bonser/Baker/Slowey and most likely Liriano reguarding health but Bonser is definitely going to have to prove himself after his 2007 and none of the other three have ever pitched a full season in the majors. So many question marks its ok to have a solid if not spectacular horse in the rotation.

by halfchest @ Twinkie Town on Feb 12, 2008 5:18 PM EST up reply actions

Interesting stat on Livan

I just was checking out his game log and noticed a lot of decent games he started. Then I checked quality starts and he has gotten between 19 and 22 quality starts the last 6 years. That's good enough to put him in the top 30 most years and was even 9th one year. So even though he'll probably have some huge stinkers, if he can give the Twins 19 quality starts next year I'll take that any day.

by halfchest @ Twinkie Town on Feb 12, 2008 7:12 PM EST reply actions

QS

Yes, Livan has been a model of consistency most of his career. And he has given his teams a healthy share of quality starts. But how about some perspective, in 2007 he started 3 games against AL teams (boo interleague), and all 3 were stinkers, giving up 17 ER in 14 IP. In 2006 he made 4 starts against the AL, 3 actually were QS (2 were against Baltimore), but in the 4th he got ripped for 6 ER in 1.2 IP. In 2005 he made 2 starts against the AL, and both were QS; however they both took place at RFK, so NL rules and a very good pitchers park. In 2004 he made 4 starts against AL teams, 2 were QS, with one at Safeco and the other in RFK; the other 2 took place in Toronto and in Minnesota. In 2003 he made 4 starts against the AL, with 1 QS taking place at Safeco; Texas beat him up once and Toronto beat him up twice, once at RFK.

Going back further shows him having a little more success, but he was also still fairly young at that point. What does all this prove? Well not a whole lot since the sample sizes are ridiculously small. But to have any notion that Livan will give the Twins 19 QS next season, is well rather silly. This deal isn't a bad one, but lets not forget that, aside from the occasional start in an AL park, he has always faced a pitcher a time or two at least every game. And also the talent level in the NL the last few years certainly does not match what he will be facing nearly every game this year (aside from the start or two at an NL park).

I hope he finds the fountain of youth, and pitches like he did as a youngster. Because that is the only way he is going to give any AL team 19 QS in 2008.

Anyone want Jose Vidro? Please?

by larrybowa on Feb 12, 2008 8:33 PM EST up reply actions

Familiarity

I just mentioned this in the other thread, but maybe Livan's unfamiliarity to AL hitters (he has never pitched in the AL before) will help, or at least help slow his decline. Those interleague stats don't support that theory, but like you say, that small of a sample doesn't really prove or disprove anything.

by spycake on Feb 12, 2008 9:02 PM EST up reply actions

6 years though

I totally see what you're saying but 6 years in a row speaks pretty loud whether it's AL or NL. I don't see him putting up quite 19 QS either but it's not exactly silly to think he might. I was mostly just pointing it out because it surprised the hell outta me and makes me feel a lot more confident about signing him.

by halfchest @ Twinkie Town on Feb 12, 2008 9:36 PM EST up reply actions

I love this signing

livan hernandez is going to step in as the twins ace next season and the twins wont have to rush scott baker who is a great pitcher but isnt ace material yet and all the twins pitchers who were in the rotation will all move 1 step back in the rotation and wont have to over pitch themselves and if the twins sneak into the playoffs they have the one pitcher who is always calm in pressure situations and is a work horse who doesnt get hurt and will tutor the young kids in the clubhouse so 5 million for livan is one hell of a bargain!

by MauerPower07 on Feb 12, 2008 8:37 PM EST reply actions

I love the stuff you're smoking.

But is has addled your brain.

by montanatwinsfan on Feb 12, 2008 9:25 PM EST up reply actions

Hernandez might be the opening day pitcher,

to take pressure off of any of the youngsters. And he might do an effective job of eating some innings to reduce the stress on the bullpen (both excellent points by people posting above) but please look at his numbers again.

Livan Hernandez couldn't be the "ace" for the St. Paul Saints.

by montanatwinsfan on Feb 12, 2008 9:36 PM EST up reply actions

Baker

I'm pretty sure another name could be substituted in there besides Baker....

by clutchhit20 on Feb 13, 2008 9:06 AM EST up reply actions

I don't like it....

It's not about the money (I could care less) and I'm not even sure it's about the young guys (we could deal them more easily now). It's about stuff.

I just don't think his stuff will translate to the AL. I am of a firm belief that you need some solid velocity to succeed in the AL. Livan has none. There's a reason why a crafty guy like Moyer switched to the NL and Maddux won't even consider the AL.

I just would be shocked if Livan's ERA is below 5.50 this year in the AL and in this division. And I think a combo of our young guys could get close to a 5.00 ERA in the 5th spot. So ya, I'm not happy.

I am really curious what this does for roster spots though. I think you're right CMath that it will probably be:

Baker
Bonser
Livan
Cisco
Slowey
Pen: Nathan, Neshek, Guerrier, Perkins, Humber, Reyes, Rincon

I think Crain and Blackburn will begin in the minors, and we will deal a guy in a month or 2.

Actually I wouldn't doubt if:

A deal from pitching is coming right now (maybe Crisp still?)
If not Crisp, a Lofton signing might still be coming.

We shall see.

I do like the chance for Type B for Livan, but I just really think he's going to blow that out of the water this year in the varsity league.

by djskilbr on Feb 12, 2008 9:40 PM EST reply actions

Leagues

There's a reason why a crafty guy like Moyer switched to the NL

Has Moyer's performance been appreciably different in the NL? I hear a lot about these theories, but I'm just not sure how much it translates to actual performance.

It's worth noting that the Diamondbacks were actually tied (with the Giants) as the worst-hitting team in the NL West, so Livan didn't have the luxury of facing them. And the White Sox and Royals were probably just as bad at hitting as those two clubs in 2007.

by spycake on Feb 12, 2008 10:26 PM EST up reply actions

The difference in ERA...

between the JV league and the varsity league is around 1 run by performer. There was a good study on this in the last couple years that took data exclusively from guys switching between the leagues.

I really think Livan will have a hard time getting his ERA under even 5.50 in the AL this year.

by djskilbr on Feb 12, 2008 10:43 PM EST reply actions

Park factors

1 run in ERA? I doubt that was either the average or median jump. If you can locate this study, I'd be curious to read it.

In this case, the park difference could be enough to offset the league difference (it was for Livan's ZiPS projection, which didn't materially change when transposed from Arizona to Minnesota).

by spycake on Feb 13, 2008 4:17 PM EST up reply actions

It was a 1.01 run difference, I believe...

I'll see if I can find it.

Basically, I think Rob Neyer's analysis is right; the NL is as close to the level of the AL as the Japan league is to the level of the NL.

It really is JV baseball right now.

by djskilbr on Feb 13, 2008 9:16 PM EST up reply actions

League differential

Ramon Ortiz performed about the same after switching leagues from 2006-2007.

A quick glance at some other recent league-switchers who ultimately haven't performed worse in the AL:
Gavin Floyd (some of these are small samples, admittedly)
Javier Vasquez
Odalis Perez
Brian Bannister
Kyle Davies
Jorge de la Rosa (a lot of Royals, eh? I'm just skimming the AL Central & East here)
Josh Beckett
Andy Pettitte
AJ Burnett
Steve Trachsel
Edwin Jackson

That's a quick scan of two 2007 divisions. The only guys I found here that were worse in the AL than NL were Clemens, Pavano, and Ohka, and there are certainly other circumstances in some of these cases.

If you can find that study, I'd really like to see it. 1.01 seems like a pretty wild ERA swing -- I can't possibly believe that would be the average of well-controlled study.

Here's another forum that references such a study, claiming .75 run difference for league-switchers since the DH was instituted:
http://www.sportsworldny.com/lofiversion/index.php/t15605-50.html

Still can't find the actual study, though...

by spycake on Feb 14, 2008 2:52 PM EST up reply actions