Thread: Neal: Twins interested in bringing Liriano back

Francisco Liriano was impressive again in Wednesday’s loss to the Orioles, allowing two runs on four hits and a pair of walks while striking out 10 over six innings.

It’s the second straight game that Liriano has punched out 10 or more hitters, as he set down a season-high 15 against the A’s over the weekend. He’s been nothing short of spectacular since returning to the Twins' rotation on May 30, going 3-4 with a 2.84 ERA and 77/28 K/BB ratio over 63 1/3 innings. It’s looking increasingly likely that Liriano will be moved before the trade deadline. And he just keeps helping his value.



Jul 18 - 11:01 PM I say once you master that talent you own it!

Originally Posted by Nick Nelson

Sure, quote me. How about the part where I referred to Liriano as a back-of-the-rotation starter and not a safe bet? Just because you want to jump to one extreme doesn't mean you need to cast me in the other.

You put yourself there. You implied that everyone was intentionally forgetting his successes to hate on him. You can look at the full picture and still be emotionally fed up and exhausted with the guy. That's why you're in that corner, not because myself or anyone else magically put you there but because you put yourself there with flimsy criticism of a perfectly valid position.

I'm emotionally fed up and exhausted with him, but I'm not opposed to gambling on him. (So, in other words, I don't disagree with you) But my emotional exhaustion and frustration with him is perfectly valid even if I remember his good stretches. And it's perfectly valid for others to not want him back. You called it out like people are being unfair to him and it was pointed out to you that plenty of stats validate that opinion. You then went on a cherry-pick to back up your invalid insinuation.

At this point, in my eyes, you can make a fair case to gamble on him. But you can also make a fair case to leave that bridge burnt. So implying people are leaving out information or ignoring details to be in the latter position is just nonsense.

Originally Posted by Nick Nelson

Why has Liriano been allowed to throw 620 innings over the last four years despite being "one of the worst starters in the AL," and why will he get paid this offseason?

Question 1) Because he pitched for an organization whose dreadfully inept GM's four year reign of terror left the team so utterly bankrupt of pitching that the net result of his tenure was indistinguishable from sabotage? Question 2) For the same reason people flock to casinos? Or drink and drive?

Did I guess right?

Angels claimed INF Thomas Field off waivers from the Twins.

The Twins had just claimed Field off waivers from the Rockies earlier this month. The 25-year-old has been mostly been at Triple-A the last couple years, where he batted .246/.315/.400 with eight homers this past season. He could compete for a bench job in spring trianing.

Originally Posted by Nick Nelson

It's amazing to me how quickly people forget Liriano's stretches of brilliance over the past three years. Has he been frustrating? Yes. But the guy has legitimate talent and that's in short supply here. When you're looking for a guy on a low-cost one-year deal, you're going to have to accept some frustration and downside. We're talking about one of the league's best strikeout pitchers who is in the prime of his career.

It's amazing to me how you can forget how utterly useless he has been in between his brief bouts with "brilliance" over the last 3 years.

His legitimate talent is in far too short supply.

Originally Posted by twinsnorth49

Originally Posted by Nick Nelson

It's amazing to me how quickly people forget Liriano's stretches of brilliance over the past three years. Has he been frustrating? Yes. But the guy has legitimate talent and that's in short supply here. When you're looking for a guy on a low-cost one-year deal, you're going to have to accept some frustration and downside. We're talking about one of the league's best strikeout pitchers who is in the prime of his career.

It's amazing to me how you can forget how utterly useless he has been in between his brief bouts with "brilliance" over the last 3 years.

His legitimate talent is in far too short supply.

His lack of confidence outweighs his talent. Total headcase.

Originally Posted by TheLeviathan

Originally Posted by Nick Nelson

Sure, quote me. How about the part where I referred to Liriano as a back-of-the-rotation starter and not a safe bet? Just because you want to jump to one extreme doesn't mean you need to cast me in the other.

You put yourself there. You implied that everyone was intentionally forgetting his successes to hate on him. You can look at the full picture and still be emotionally fed up and exhausted with the guy. That's why you're in that corner, not because myself or anyone else magically put you there but because you put yourself there with flimsy criticism of a perfectly valid position.

I'm emotionally fed up and exhausted with him, but I'm not opposed to gambling on him. (So, in other words, I don't disagree with you) But my emotional exhaustion and frustration with him is perfectly valid even if I remember his good stretches. And it's perfectly valid for others to not want him back. You called it out like people are being unfair to him and it was pointed out to you that plenty of stats validate that opinion. You then went on a cherry-pick to back up your invalid insinuation.

At this point, in my eyes, you can make a fair case to gamble on him. But you can also make a fair case to leave that bridge burnt. So implying people are leaving out information or ignoring details to be in the latter position is just nonsense.

Egad, this is NN in full "I support Brian Duensing for No. 3 Starter redux mode (except when I don't support him)".

Nick casted his own self in both extremes on that particular case.

I can just imagine being a Pohlad when Terry Ryan is updating me on his plan to improve the team, and this is his best idea. "How much am I paying you?"

Alright, easy on Nick. I disagreed with his overall position on Liriano, but it's not like he's being totally unreasonable.

I just think it's a moot point because there will be some money for Liriano somewhere, and in order for him to end up back on the Twins, both Terry Ryan AND Liriano would have to want that to happen. Oh, and the money has to be there for him. I'm not sure ANY of those 3 things are true, despite the recent reports about the Twins' interest.

Lots of pitchers have had flashes of brilliance and completely lost it due to physical or mental breakdown. Ubaldo Jimenez was nearly a Cy Young winner in 2010, but then he started sucking, got traded, threw at Tulowitzki in the preseason over contract jealousy and was as bad (or worse) than Liriano last season.

I'm prepared to be wrong about Liriano - I honestly won't be shocked or terribly jealous if he goes somewhere else and has a successful year. Sometimes you just need to move in another direction.

Did I really not drunkenly post in this thread last night? How did I miss it?

I cannot imagine why Twins fans would want to reload with players who aren't very good, especially those who have been bad for the Twins. Liriano, outside of 2006 and 2010 has been bad. Sorry. There is no other way around that. This team is useless if it shells out $6 million for Frankie and $3 million for Pavano instead of spending $9 million on a good pitcher. They could also take the view that Blackburn is sunk garbage cost that will be gone after 2013, so they could be willing to spend more. 2 of Marcum, Blanton, and Myers could be had for $15 million or so, and Myers and Marcum may only require one-year deals.

It's as though people have forgotten the performances of Twins players in the past few years.

Um 15m probably isnt going to get you those three arms.

Originally Posted by TheLeviathan

Um 15m probably isnt going to get you those three arms.

Your bad, he said 2 of the three.. 17-18 million might be more of the figure per year needed to sign them.

Originally Posted by TheLeviathan

At this point, in my eyes, you can make a fair case to gamble on him. But you can also make a fair case to leave that bridge burnt. So implying people are leaving out information or ignoring details to be in the latter position is just nonsense.

You're going a little over the top with these "implications" you have me making. It's nothing so sinister. All I was doing was calling attention to the fact that Liriano has repeatedly shown an ability to dominate, which I believe you're unlikely to find among other pitchers available on cheap-ish one-year deals in this market. This is a guy who was a Game 1 postseason starter two years ago.

You admit that your frustration with him is tied up in emotion, and that's sort of my point. I believe that his struggles overshadow his strengths in the minds of many fans who have watched it all unfold. As Pseudo pointed out, he's the kind of upside play that the vast majority of people would be on board with if they hadn't experienced his downside up close over these last few years.

I wasn't criticizing the viewpoint that he shouldn't be brought back so much as the viewpoints that he's terrible and useless.

Originally Posted by jokin

Egad, this is NN in full "I support Brian Duensing for No. 3 Starter redux mode (except when I don't support him)".

Nick casted his own self in both extremes on that particular case.

It's odd to me that you would continue to push this (proven) false narrative six months later but hey, whatever floats your boat dude.

Originally Posted by Nick Nelson

Originally Posted by TheLeviathan

At this point, in my eyes, you can make a fair case to gamble on him. But you can also make a fair case to leave that bridge burnt. So implying people are leaving out information or ignoring details to be in the latter position is just nonsense.

You're going a little over the top with these "implications" you have me making. It's nothing so sinister. All I was doing was calling attention to the fact that Liriano has repeatedly shown an ability to dominate, which I believe you're unlikely to find among other pitchers available on cheap-ish one-year deals in this market. This is a guy who was a Game 1 postseason starter two years ago.

You admit that your frustration with him is tied up in emotion, and that's sort of my point. I believe that his struggles overshadow his strengths in the minds of many fans who have watched it all unfold. As Pseudo pointed out, he's the kind of upside play that the vast majority of people would be on board with if they hadn't experienced his downside up close over these last few years.

I wasn't criticizing the viewpoint that he shouldn't be brought back so much as the viewpoints that he's terrible and useless.

Originally Posted by jokin

Egad, this is NN in full "I support Brian Duensing for No. 3 Starter redux mode (except when I don't support him)".

Nick casted his own self in both extremes on that particular case.

It's odd to me that you would continue to push this (proven) false narrative six months later but hey, whatever floats your boat dude.

Actually, I demonstrated that it was true. What say you about Duensing now?

Originally Posted by jokin

Actually, I demonstrated that it was true. What say you about Duensing now?

I've posted with Nick and argued with him for a half decade now. He was one of the first people off the "Duensing as starter" bandwagon way back in 2010 or so. You're grossly misrepresenting his point and you're doing it intentionally.

When the Twins were awful, did Nick support Duensing in the rotation? Yeah, we ALL did because the other options were so dreadful that they made the team completely unwatchable. Nick didn't want Duensing in the rotation, he reluctantly admitted that Brian was less awful than the Twins' other choices. It's not a difficult concept to grasp. While nobody wants to take a kick in the nuts or the shin, if you're forced to choose one or the other, you take the kick in the shins because it hurts less. It doesn't mean you walk around town with a "Please kick me in the shins" t-shirt because you love it so much. Christ.

Originally Posted by Nick Nelson

Originally Posted by TheLeviathan

At this point, in my eyes, you can make a fair case to gamble on him. But you can also make a fair case to leave that bridge burnt. So implying people are leaving out information or ignoring details to be in the latter position is just nonsense.

You're going a little over the top with these "implications" you have me making. It's nothing so sinister. All I was doing was calling attention to the fact that Liriano has repeatedly shown an ability to dominate, which I believe you're unlikely to find among other pitchers available oncheap-ish one-year deals in this market. This is a guy who was a Game 1 postseason starter two years ago.

You admit that your frustration with him is tied up in emotion, and that's sort of my point. I believe that his struggles overshadow his strengths in the minds of many fans who have watched it all unfold. As Pseudo pointed out, he's the kind of upside play that the vast majority of people would be on board with if they hadn't experienced his downside up close over these last few years.

I wasn't criticizing the viewpoint that he shouldn't be brought back so much as the viewpoints that he's terrible and useless.

I can unemotionally agree with you and state unequivocally that his "struggles" have more than just "overshadowed his strengths" since 2009. I can also unequivocally state that he has far more repeatedly shown an ability to not just merely suck, but year-in, year-out constantly vie for the most WTF??? outings of any starting pitcher in all of baseball.

You talk about falling into an emotional argument--? Face it, the guy is an emotional basket case, demonstrably uncoachable and an extreme distraction at all times to his teammates and coaching staff.

As the other poster has stated, on a strictly business-decision-basis, divorced from the reality of the scorched earth he leaves in a club's bullpen, it can be argued that signing him for flipping purposes in yet another lost season in 2013 is worth rebuilding that burnt bridge with a temporary pontoon bridge. Just don't let your other young impressionable pitchers trod on that flimsy structure when it inevitably blows up with Liriano on it, replete with another 8.00 ERA midseason performance on yet another trip across the lake and back to the bullpen to "work out his mechanics".

Nope, many of us did not support Duensing as a starter last year. It was a bad decision. It gave away effective innings in games they could win, while not really increasing the likelihood of winning games he started instead of a bad pitcher.

Frankly, they should sign 1 very good starter, add him to Diamond, and use relievers for the other 60 percent of the starts, each pitching 2 or 3 innings. Since they are unlikely to acquire 3 legit starters. But they are not innovative enough to do that.

Originally Posted by Brock Beauchamp

Originally Posted by jokin

Actually, I demonstrated that it was true. What say you about Duensing now?

I've posted with Nick and argued with him for a half decade now. He was one of the first people off the "Duensing as starter" bandwagon way back in 2010 or so. You're grossly misrepresenting his point and you're doing it intentionally.

When the Twins were awful, did Nick support Duensing in the rotation? Yeah, we ALL did because the other options were so dreadful that they made the team completely unwatchable. Nick didn't want Duensing in the rotation, he reluctantly admitted that Brian was less awful than the Twins' other choices. It's not a difficult concept to grasp. While nobody wants to take a kick in the nuts or the shin, if you're forced to choose one or the other, you take the kick in the shins because it hurts less. It doesn't mean you walk around town with a "Please kick me in the shins" t-shirt because you love it so much. Christ.

Actually, if you do the research, he was advocating for Duensing when the Twins were on their "mini-hot streak" in May/June and you guys looking to write stuff pretended the Twins could still make a run at the Central Division when they cut the lead to 8 games. Look it up.

You are rewriting history to some extent. I did some archival research at the time and there was some giddy optimisim present at TD last June- though the season was lost from day one and only certain people in Twins management and TD were in denial of that fact. SP depth was an ever-present problem and wasn't sufficiently addressed as the Twins chose instead, to cut payroll in the 2011 offseason. By mid-May the Twins FO should have accepted the state they were in with the SP and stuck with trying out youngsters and taking the inevitable poundings and they could also have gone to a 3x3 inning pitching matrix when appropriate.

The result of which by forcing Brian's round peg into Gardy's square hole in his head, Duensing went from having a great season and enhancing his future value to being wholly physically unprepared for his statistical-peripherals- predictable and inevitable collapse as a starter. As you said- and I concurred at the time- and told him he was better than what he was writing- Nick wrote as such about what the Dunce brought to the table in 2011 as well as 2010/

Originally Posted by jokin

Actually, if you do the research, he was advocating for Duensing when the Twins were on their "mini-hot streak" in May/June and you guys looking to write stuff pretended the Twins could still make a run at the Central Division when they cut the lead to 8 games. Look it up.

You are rewriting history to some extent. I did some archival research at the time and there was some giddy optimisim present at TD last June- though the season was lost from day one and only certain people in Twins management and TD were in denial of that fact. SP depth was an ever-present problem and wasn't sufficiently addressed as the Twins chose instead, to cut payroll in the 2011 offseason. By mid-May the Twins FO should have accepted the state they were in with the SP and stuck with trying out youngsters and taking the inevitable poundings and they could also have gone to a 3x3 inning pitching matrix when appropriate.

The result of which by forcing Brian's round peg into Gardy's square hole in his head, Duensing went from having a great season and enhancing his future value to being wholly physically unprepared for his statistical-peripherals- predictable and inevitable collapse as a starter. As you said- and I concurred at the time- and told him he was better than what he was writing- Nick wrote as such about what the Dunce brought to the table in 2011 as well as 2010/

I went and did the research. Searched through every blog post Nick wrote with the words "Brian Duensing" in the post. These were the glowing accolades I found:

Anthony Swarzak has been working long relief and could be stretched out quickly, but he's best suited for where he's at. The same goes for Brian Duensing, who really seems to have found his calling as a lefty specialist.

Last spring, I bemoaned Ron Gardenhire's decision to hand Duensing a spot in the rotation, reasoning that his success as a starter in 2010 was unsustainable and that facing righty-stacked starting lineups would eventually do him in. Sure enough, the lefty had a tough year in the rotation, finishing with a 5.23 ERA and 1.52 WHIP.

When stacked up against the likes of Blackburn, Brian Duensing, Cole De Vries, Liam Hendriks, P.J. Walters and others, Deduno is far more likely to issue a walk but also far less likely to give up a hit or home run. At the end of the day, that might make him a more effective pitcher.

Brian Duensing and Matt Maloney, like Swarzak, are pitchers with a history of starting who are better suited for relief roles.

Brian Duensing continues to excel as a lefty specialist, and several guys have emerged in the minors as possible blocks with which to build around those three

Brian Duensing. His struggles as a starter (6.92 ERA) and success as a reliever (2.98 ERA) should have the Twins convinced of what his role needs to be.

Oh, wait. Here we go. Here is Nick showering Duensing with accolades.

Brian Duensing. His extreme vulnerability against right-handed hitters makes him a far better option in the bullpen, but Duensing is a solid pitcher and he has quietly turned in a 3.77 ERA in four starts since rejoining the rotation at the end of July.

Or maybe not.

Originally Posted by Nick Nelson

Originally Posted by TheLeviathan

At this point, in my eyes, you can make a fair case to gamble on him. But you can also make a fair case to leave that bridge burnt. So implying people are leaving out information or ignoring details to be in the latter position is just nonsense.

You're going a little over the top with these "implications" you have me making. It's nothing so sinister. All I was doing was calling attention to the fact that Liriano has repeatedly shown an ability to dominate, which I believe you're unlikely to find among other pitchers available on cheap-ish one-year deals in this market. This is a guy who was a Game 1 postseason starter two years ago.

You admit that your frustration with him is tied up in emotion, and that's sort of my point. I believe that his struggles overshadow his strengths in the minds of many fans who have watched it all unfold. As Pseudo pointed out, he's the kind of upside play that the vast majority of people would be on board with if they hadn't experienced his downside up close over these last few years.

I wasn't criticizing the viewpoint that he shouldn't be brought back so much as the viewpoints that he's terrible and useless.

Originally Posted by jokin

Egad, this is NN in full "I support Brian Duensing for No. 3 Starter redux mode (except when I don't support him)".

Nick casted his own self in both extremes on that particular case.

It's odd to me that you would continue to push this (proven) false narrative six months later but hey, whatever floats your boat dude.

WHAT?!?! Leviathian misrepresenting something someone said so he could argue against the fictional, non-existent point??? Jokin exaggerating/lying to go on a negative rant for some unknown purpose??? Huh...must be a day that ends in 'y'...again.