Twins starters

by e 6 on May 16, 2007 10:07 AM EDT Comment 20 comments

So still no word on who the Twins will call up to start Saturday, but some interesting developments.

Seems it won't be Slowey, who threw 102 pitches last night and would have to pitch on short rest. Surely that won't happen.

Elsewhere, Ortiz got blasted again, and sounds like the Twins may have finally realized exactly what he's capable of. Seriously, at the beginning of the year, who would have thought Ponson and Ortiz would be that bad? Everyone? Well, yeah.

And it looks like Crain may be headed to the DL. My hunch is that the Twins will actually call up two starters - one to replace Ponson and one to replace Ortiz, and then banish Ortiz to mop-up duty in the pen.

Personally I'm hoping for Garza on Saturday, though his AAA numbers so far are the worst of the three.

0 recs | Comment 20 comments

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

Don't forget Perkins

Is the long relief stint in the majors helping out Perkins by giving him exposure to MLB hitters and cutting down his workload or is it causing his development to stagnate because he's out of the routine of starting.

by DavidFoss on May 16, 2007 10:25 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs

That's true

I'm not opposed to using a young pitcher like they're breaking in Perkins, but I don't think they'll push him to the rotation yet. He's only been pitching 2-3 innings per appearance. They need a guy who can give them 6-7, and I don't see Perkins being there yet, so they'd be better off keeping him in the pen for now.

"Baseball is dull only to dull minds." -Red Barber

by e 6 on May 16, 2007 10:50 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Julio DePaula

The Star Tribune is reporting that Julio DePaula will be called up to take Crain's place in the bullpen.

by DavidFoss on May 16, 2007 11:05 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs

Scott Baker

I'm not sure the twins have him in their long term plans, but he is pitching well in AAA and has the most experience of the group. Also, I'm not sure the twins will give up on Ortiz just yet (even though they probably should)

by kaisertown on May 16, 2007 11:30 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs

my money is on baker

he pitched pretty well on monday, which is key because it would give him full rest before taking over Ponson's spot. He has great stats this year in AAA and has the most experience of the three at hte MLB level. I think the twins give him the ball.

Jack Cust is this year's Marcus Thames

by Team Moneyball on May 16, 2007 11:39 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Regardless of the 40 man

Not calling up Slowey is a real head scratcher.

44/3 K/BB ratio and a 1.46 ERA

by Con on May 16, 2007 11:42 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs

Agreed

What more does he have to do?

Surely he is a better option than Ponson and Ortiz, at this point.

by NewKidInTown on May 16, 2007 12:27 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

yeah

And so is the batboy.

by BenB on May 16, 2007 12:55 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

40 man stuff

The Twins opened a spot on the 40 man when they released Ponson. Plus, they can always put Machado on the 60-day DL if they have to. So I don't think the 40 man is much of an issue.

What is an issue is major league experience. The reason they handed the job to Ponson is they're scared to death to give anyone starting jobs if they have not started before. Even though Slowey is pitching much better than Baker, he's third on the list of guys to call up, after Baker and Garza.

It's always puzzling to us Twins fans that the Twins hate calling up their best prospects because they want veterans. The whole organization is built on developing players from within but when it comes time to use the prospects they develop, they always seem to prefer washed up veterans.

cmathewson

by cmathewson on May 16, 2007 12:04 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

RE: 40 man stuff

I think there is a notion among teams that are "in contention" that they don't dare use young pitchers or they are dooming their season. If this were late July and the Twins appeared to be out of the hunt in the Central, they might not have a problem with it. But it seems too risky to throw some rookie against a division rival when they are still "in contention."

I think it's silly, but I bet that is the logic behind it. If you can call anything that justifies inserting Sidney Ponson into your rotation "logic."

by knightgalt on May 16, 2007 12:37 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Defending Ryan (and this way of thinking)

I am reading a couple of comments and I think people are missing the point. Everyone wanted 3 of Slowey, Perkins, Garza and Baker in the rotation to start the season. Fine, but that is a huge risk for any team to start three pitchers with combined experience of less than a year. My qyestion is what had any of those four done to prove that they could take the ball in the first week and be able to pitch an entire season effectively?

Baker was rocked to various degrees during 2006 and had terrible spring. He has rebounded in AAA, but he still has to prove that he can be a consistent starter in the majors. He'll get that chance starting on Saturday.

Garza showed flashes in 2006, but nothing that would scream sure thing for the entire season. He had a decent spring, but also had a nagging injury and struggled out of the gates in AAA this season (with a little help from the weather). He also has had trouble with his secondary pitches, something he can work on in AAA instead of being inconsistent in the majors.

Slowey had a good year in the minors last season, but he had a grand total one start above AA coming into the spring. It would be wishful thinking to assume he would have the arm strength to last an entire season in the majors. He may be pretty close to ready right now, but I think there is little doubt the 4/5 starts he has had so far will benefit him at the end of the year.

Perkins was probable the most ready, but he is probably only a 4/5 starter at best and is probably best suited long term for the bullpen.

Now, I agree that Ortiz, Ponson and Silva are no great shakes, but I think you can give them each a month or two to see what they have this year. Going into the season, odds where that the Twins would need one of them to step out for the full season, so you throw them against a wall and see who is going to stick. This way you keep some depth and hopefully have one or two of them prove they can last all year in the rotation. I think Terry Ryan is good about the thinking that you spend the first two months seeing what you have, the next two months making adjustments, and the last two months going for it.

It is true the Twins are a couple of games below .500, but I would argue it was not really because of the starting pitching, but more because of defensive and baserunning lapses and a predictable cold spell with the bats (helped by an injury to Mauer). The team is not in terrible position right now, they have bought valuable development time for the young pitchers in AAA, they are in a position to dump Ortiz if he continues to struggle, and get things rolling again.

by drjim on May 16, 2007 1:11 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

missing the point

i agree. none of the new kids were sure things. now, i admit that none of the veterans were sure things either--in fact, they are pretty much proven mediocrities or worse--but because of the way rosters work, they had to do it this way. if you have the vets start out in the rotation and the kids in AAA backing them up, you can fix the problem if the vets get lit up. if you start the kids out in the rotation, there is no backup plan. you can't stash the vets in AAA. so if the kids fail the first time out, you have to try to pick somebody up mid-season who can get the job done. if you called bill bavasi and offered him a nice ballpoint pen or a balloon tied in a funny shape, you could probably pry jeff weaver away from the mariners, but that's not exactly a good option either.

by jpahk on May 16, 2007 1:40 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Well...

What about signing the vets to minor league deals, kinda like Ponson, then starting them in AAA with the rooks in the MLB. If the rooks are fine, let them go all the way, if they falter send 'em down and call up the vets?

by cooper7d7 on May 16, 2007 1:51 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Well

you would have lost Silva who would have walked.

And Garza and Baker could just as easily taken a step backwards in MLB instead of developing in AAA.

by pedrophile on May 16, 2007 2:01 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

To jphak's point

I was just adressing the premise that the vets had to start the season in the bigs.

As far as Garza and Baker taking steps backwards in MLB, well, its not like its the first time they've been there - so that probably wasn't the thinking that went on. Now, you can say Garza was thrown into the pennant race due to need, not plan.

by cooper7d7 on May 16, 2007 2:06 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs