Minnesota Twins News & Rumors Forum
Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 41 to 60 of 72

Thread: Vance Worley surprised Twins wanted him to lead the rotation in 2013

  1. #41
    Senior Member Big-Leaguer
    Posts
    877
    Like
    485
    Liked 84 Times in 63 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by nicksaviking View Post
    ONLY the Yankees "rebuild" the way the Twins do, going after aging vets. Except the Yankees do it with better quality aging vets. The other recent celler dwellers who are reversing their fortunes, Houston, Miami and Pittsburgh, gutted their teams of nearly every vet and went with young players.

    Your assertion that the people who aren't in favor of the "Yankee" rebuild are impatient is flat out wrong, getting these vets will probably win a couple of extra games each year, but those of us who want the vets flipped or cut understand and are willing to accept the longer, more fruitful rebuild.
    The Twins are not rebuilding with vets. They're rebuilding with prospects. Name a vet that's been added in the past two years, besides Nolasco and Hughes, that you think the Twins view as someone who figures into the future.

    You are mistaken about my assertion here.

  2. #42
    Twins News Team MVP
    Posts
    6,783
    Like
    896
    Liked 867 Times in 557 Posts
    Blog Entries
    3
    Quote Originally Posted by birdwatcher View Post
    I don't agree with this at all, jokin. May is a top 10 prospect in our system and was a top 5 in Philly. And why wouldn't the Twins take a secondary asset like Worley? Why wouldn't they hope to occasionally get the type of performance from him like we saw yesterday? And who disagrees with the assessment that Revere ends up as a 4th outfielder, a defensive replacement, pinch-runner type suited best for the NL, whose career fizzles out as his speed diminishes? It's preposterous to suggest, right now, that the trade was a bad decision, or that the outcome of it is clear, at least for those of us that know the limits of our predictive capabilities.
    I don't need any "predictive capabilities" to categorically state:

    The "outcome" of Vance Worley's time with the Twins is quite "clear."

  3. #43
    Senior Member All-Star
    Posts
    1,670
    Like
    11
    Liked 54 Times in 35 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by jokin View Post
    I don't need any "predictive capabilities" to categorically state:

    The "outcome" of Vance Worley's time with the Twins is quite "clear."
    You are correct on Worley's time. A throw in on a trade. He did not throw the ball low in the zone like the Twins wanted him to do and got the kind of results you would expect. He is not the first pitcher to come over from the NL and not succeed. Bought low as you said. It is not a egregious error as you make it out to be. They brought him in and thought they could improve him. The player did not improve. Little cost, no big deal.

  4. #44
    Senior Member All-Star
    Posts
    3,620
    Like
    70
    Liked 384 Times in 235 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by birdwatcher View Post
    The Twins are not rebuilding with vets. They're rebuilding with prospects. Name a vet that's been added in the past two years, besides Nolasco and Hughes, that you think the Twins view as someone who figures into the future.

    You are mistaken about my assertion here.
    Your assertion was that teams incrementally rebuild and you included the Yankees as an example. I agree that the Yankees incrementally rebuild as they bring in a mulitple vets each year and suppliment them with younger talent when they are ready.

    This is not what Houston, Miami and Pittsburgh do. They overhaul the whole operation and stock the 25 man mostly with players younger than 30-years-old, usually much younger. I'm not casting judgment on which method is best, I am arguing against the notion that the Twins are "rebuilding" the same way that every other club does it.

  5. #45
    Twins News Team All-Star TheLeviathan's Avatar
    Posts
    4,868
    Like
    185
    Liked 672 Times in 381 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by birdwatcher View Post
    I will submit that, if you exclude the barrage of Smith mis-assessments.....
    You then went on to change your point. The notion that all the Twins woes fall on Smith is preposterous. Ryan had a healthy share of mistakes, whiffed drafts, etc. that lead to a collapse in available talent.

    Your point was never to compare them against other teams, you said their own good assessments are "far, far" more prevalent than their poor ones. Which is also utter rubbish. In order to achieve 300 losses in three years it would take bad luck unseen since the Donner Party to achieve that kind of futility while operating brilliantly as an organization.

    Cmon.

    And that people look under every stone for an excuse to be critical and are so stingy with their praise.
    How are you not doing precisely the opposite and how is that any better?

    The Worley trade is perfectly defensible, Levi. Worley may or may not end up being a "mistake",
    There is no more story to write about Worley. He was acquired and made the opening day starter. He failed miserably and was released for nothing. IT was a failure. There really can't be any debate about that.

    The Revere trade may still be great for the Twins but even if it wasn't I stand by the move at the time. It's possible to support the move and still criticize the results. So far the results are an absolute failure and some encouragement we hope to see soon, but May's success won't change the story on Worley. So yes, it is 100% unassailable that Worley was a failure for the Twins.

    The very fact you're taking issue with that should be something you reflect on.

  6. #46
    Twins News Team MVP
    Posts
    6,783
    Like
    896
    Liked 867 Times in 557 Posts
    Blog Entries
    3
    Quote Originally Posted by old nurse View Post
    You are correct on Worley's time. A throw in on a trade. He did not throw the ball low in the zone like the Twins wanted him to do and got the kind of results you would expect. He is not the first pitcher to come over from the NL and not succeed. Bought low as you said. It is not a egregious error as you make it out to be. They brought him in and thought they could improve him. The player did not improve. Little cost, no big deal.
    I never used the word "egregious'. The Twins tabbed him as their opening day pitcher in 2013 (and he would have been tabbed at worst, the #2 starter behind a healthy Diamond), not a throw-in. It is silly to pretend that his acquisition and the results don't represent a complete failure- his inability to be in any way effective last year was a big deal to the Twins fortunes in 2013. While Worley probably bears much of the blame, the Twins have to accept responsibility for not recognizing how little chance they had to improve him.

  7. #47
    Twins Moderator MVP ashburyjohn's Avatar
    Posts
    8,685
    Like
    2,656
    Liked 3,308 Times in 1,755 Posts
    Blog Entries
    28
    Moderator's note: this is getting overly personal and is too much bickering and not enough constructive discussion.

  8. #48
    Senior Member All-Star
    Posts
    1,251
    Like
    108
    Liked 105 Times in 77 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by nicksaviking View Post
    ONLY the Yankees "rebuild" the way the Twins do, going after aging vets. Except the Yankees do it with better quality aging vets. The other recent celler dwellers who are reversing their fortunes, Houston, Miami and Pittsburgh, gutted their teams of nearly every vet and went with young players.

    Your assertion that the people who aren't in favor of the "Yankee" rebuild are impatient is flat out wrong, getting these vets will probably win a couple of extra games each year, but those of us who want the vets flipped or cut understand and are willing to accept the longer, more fruitful rebuild.
    This doesn't match with most of the posts I've read on this thread. Many of those who I thought were of the "rebuilding mode" sure changed their tone the last week or so ago. Initially I thought 'they are on the payroll', but now I think they really believed the Twins were on their way to the playoffs and just needed a bit of luck, and for management to promote 2-3 guys from the the minors to the Twins. They are likely more representative of the public (than several TD posters) given the "welfare checks" written to billionaires for new sports stadiums. They are impatient and truly do want to "win now"--even if it results in being eliminated 1st round, or missing the playoffs entirely by 1 game.

  9. #49
    Any comparison between the Yankees and Twins in terms of free agent strategy, especially before 2012, is borderline ridiculous. The Twins didn't even play the free agent game until recently. Willingham, Nolasco, Hughes, and now the rental on Morales really signal a sea change in management/ownership, even if we still aren't signing guys to $100+ million deals (which, let's face it, the majority of them end up being bad deals anyway).

    But I don't see those moves as "rebuilding". You have so many guys in jobs they have had for so long, I just instantly assume that people like Gardy, Ryan, etc. don't want the the bottom to completely fall out, so they add a veteran piece here or there to appease the fanbase and to keep it from being a completely rebuilt roster.

    And I have to catch myself because whereas in hockey or basketball that would be a terrible strategy that would get you stuck with draft picks in the teens, the MLB draft is so much more unpredictable (and until recently, was dictated as much by signability as it was by talent) that tanking doesn't really do anything for you. Sure, you can end up a Byron Buxton because your team was bad, but you could also just sign Miguel Sano or a Cuban player with no impact from the draft whatsoever. And that Buxton pick could just as easily have been Mark Appel, which isn't looking that great right now.

  10. #50
    Senior Member All-Star
    Posts
    1,251
    Like
    108
    Liked 105 Times in 77 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by jokin View Post
    I don't need any "predictive capabilities" to categorically state:

    The "outcome" of Vance Worley's time with the Twins is quite "clear."
    No, it isn't clear. Revere was a marginal OF. Worley's poor play permitted the Twins to select earlier in the draft (think Kohl Stewart and Gordon). Plus, the real kicker--Trevor May might become at useful starting pitcher.

  11. #51
    Senior Member All-Star
    Posts
    1,670
    Like
    11
    Liked 54 Times in 35 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by jokin View Post
    I never used the word "egregious'. The Twins tabbed him as their opening day pitcher in 2013 (and he would have been tabbed at worst, the #2 starter behind a healthy Diamond), not a throw-in. It is silly to pretend that his acquisition and the results don't represent a complete failure- his inability to be in any way effective last year was a big deal to the Twins fortunes in 2013. While Worley probably bears much of the blame, the Twins have to accept responsibility for not recognizing how little chance they had to improve him.
    The Twins warm body approach to fill the pitching rotation (Correia, Pelfrey coming off surgery, Worley and the cast of AAA pitchers from the year before) was not a very good idea. Whatever order they were in the rotation was inconsequential, somebody had to pitch the game. The whole approach was the wrong idea. Why they had that idea was hashed ad nauseum last year. Worley was but a small part of the problem. You could insert Cole DeVries or Liam Hendricks, who were counted on to be on the opening day roster, or Diamond, Hernandez, Walters, or even Deduno in your rant in place of Worley. Was it a misguess of talent or lack of other options? The lack of quality starting pitching that off season (again more than well covered), the signability issues (argued last year), the steep price that would be asked for starting pitching all could have led to what I called the warm body approach. To count on 3 pitchers coming of surgery, 4 AAA pitchers and a prospect that had not had success at the big league level was a recipe for disaster. It does not warrant the tone you set forth to blame it all on the Worley decision. More than 8 pitchers could have stepped forward last year to show they were going to be big league pitchers for the Twins last year. Only Deduno and Diamond remain. Worley was but a small part of the problem. The seed for such a disaster were set years ago with bad trades and bad drafts. It was not going to be corrected overnight. To get higher upside pitching prospects Ryan made the trades he did. They did nothing for 2013. If they don't pan out, that would be the bad mis guess of talent.

  12. #52
    Twins News Team MVP
    Posts
    6,783
    Like
    896
    Liked 867 Times in 557 Posts
    Blog Entries
    3
    Quote Originally Posted by Kwak View Post
    No, it isn't clear. Revere was a marginal OF. Worley's poor play permitted the Twins to select earlier in the draft (think Kohl Stewart and Gordon). Plus, the real kicker--Trevor May might become at useful starting pitcher.
    You're missing the context of my post....ie, the outcome of Vance Worley's time with the Twins, is inarguably, quite clearly an utter failure.

    If you wish to allege that the Twins master plan was to put the most horrendous Starting Staff possible on the field to absolutely tank the Twins in 2013- for the third year in a row, causing a massive fall-off in attendance, which in turn, forced the owner for the first time to go public and call the current product an "embarrassment"- all in order to draft Nick Gordon at pick #5 (I don't see how Kohl Stewart comes into play here, whatsover), well then, I guess Terry Ryan must be considered to have engineered quite a trade. I wonder if Terry is scouting as we speak to see if there any other players we can trade for in order to insure future 96-loss-season tanking opportunities?

  13. #53
    Twins News Team MVP
    Posts
    6,783
    Like
    896
    Liked 867 Times in 557 Posts
    Blog Entries
    3
    Quote Originally Posted by old nurse View Post
    Worley was but a small part of the problem.........Worley was but a small part of the problem.
    You can repeat this twice, as you did in your wall of type, and it still misses the point of the argument.

    It does not warrant the tone you set forth to blame it all on the Worley decision.
    Who said anything about "blaming it all" on Worley? What "tone" are referring to? We are judging the Worley situation specifically on its own merits (or in this case, the obvious lack thereof), nothing more is being judged here.

  14. #54
    Senior Member All-Star Shane Wahl's Avatar
    Posts
    3,995
    Like
    4
    Liked 124 Times in 90 Posts
    Blog Entries
    67
    Vance probably can be a legitimate starting pitcher. It was not going to work here. It just wasn't.

    Anyway, the rebuild certainly is in process and the results, so far, are surprising. Who could have imagined this team this close in the division given:

    A: The Sano and Buxton injuries.
    B: The Hicks struggles and the Pinto demotion
    C: The fact that none of the pitching prospects have moved to the big leagues.
    D: Joe Mauer batting like a below-average first baseman
    E: The injury to Oswaldo Arcia, effectively delaying his contribution

    ?

    The team is still on track for the arrival of Sano and Buxton in 2015, with a more mature Arcia, Pinto, and Hicks. Mauer's struggles still cannot be indefinite. Brian Dozier is the real deal. Eddie Rosario will be up in September. Danny Santana is somehow doing this well. Eduardo Escobar has emerged. Phil Hughes and Kyle Gibson appear to be real pitchers at the top of a rotation. This rotation will soon become better with an improved Nolasco, and the arrival of Alex Meyer and Trevor May. Meanwhile, the Twins *could* be trading partners with a number of teams with regard to Willingham, Morales, Fien, and Duensing.

  15. This user likes Shane Wahl's post and wants to buy him/her a steak dinner:

    Ben Noble (06-16-2014)

  16. #55
    Senior Member Triple-A
    Posts
    427
    Like
    71
    Liked 72 Times in 49 Posts
    Personally I would be surprised to see Worley work out well for the Pirates long term. This feels a bit like Deja Vu with Liriano. Worley was touted as at tops a number 3 pitcher when we got him and he performed like a AAA pitcher when we started him. The Twins gave him ample time to prove himself and we all hoped to see the best of Worley this year in spring training. After all the prep and hype in the off season he didn't look any better than the year before. Worley seems like a number 5 at best and we have plenty of those already. I would argue we have guys waiting with higher upside than VW.

    The train-wreck story that is Vance Worley will live in infamy but the Twins will survive it.

  17. #56
    Senior Member All-Star 70charger's Avatar
    Posts
    1,116
    Like
    138
    Liked 198 Times in 97 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by StormJH1 View Post
    And I have to catch myself because whereas in hockey or basketball that would be a terrible strategy that would get you stuck with draft picks in the teens, the MLB draft is so much more unpredictable (and until recently, was dictated as much by signability as it was by talent) that tanking doesn't really do anything for you. Sure, you can end up a Byron Buxton because your team was bad, but you could also just sign Miguel Sano or a Cuban player with no impact from the draft whatsoever. And that Buxton pick could just as easily have been Mark Appel, which isn't looking that great right now.
    True. And Mike Trout was drafted 25th.

    Baseball is an odd duck.

  18. #57
    Senior Member All-Star
    Posts
    1,251
    Like
    108
    Liked 105 Times in 77 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by jokin View Post
    You're missing the context of my post....ie, the outcome of Vance Worley's time with the Twins, is inarguably, quite clearly an utter failure.

    If you wish to allege that the Twins master plan was to put the most horrendous Starting Staff possible on the field to absolutely tank the Twins in 2013- for the third year in a row, causing a massive fall-off in attendance, which in turn, forced the owner for the first time to go public and call the current product an "embarrassment"- all in order to draft Nick Gordon at pick #5 (I don't see how Kohl Stewart comes into play here, whatsover), well then, I guess Terry Ryan must be considered to have engineered quite a trade. I wonder if Terry is scouting as we speak to see if there any other players we can trade for in order to insure future 96-loss-season tanking opportunities?
    Please respond to the statement I made when you respond: The outcome of the Revere trade is not clear. I never said it was the Twins' plan for Worley to stink (in fact I believe they thought he would be a bit of a success). A few more wins by Worley and it is likely that: the Twins hang-on to Worley; the fall a slot or two in the Rule 4 draft and Stewart and Gordon are selected before the Twins can select either of the; and the team still stinks--but the FO clings to the fantasy that things are on the right track.

    My point: More time is required to complete the assessment of the Revere trade.

  19. #58
    Senior Member All-Star
    Posts
    1,689
    Like
    3
    Liked 337 Times in 214 Posts
    Blog Entries
    1
    Quote Originally Posted by Kwak View Post
    No, it isn't clear. Revere was a marginal OF. Worley's poor play permitted the Twins to select earlier in the draft (think Kohl Stewart and Gordon). Plus, the real kicker--Trevor May might become at useful starting pitcher.
    The Twins finished a full 5 wins behind the next best team in 2013 (66 vs Seattle's 71), so I don't think Worley mattered much in getting us Gordon. (Although if we had let him start the whole year, and he posted the same negative rWAR rate all season, we could have drafted as high as #2.) And of course Stewart's draft position was determined before Worley arrived.

    That's all the further I will wade into this debate.

  20. #59
    Senior Member All-Star
    Posts
    1,689
    Like
    3
    Liked 337 Times in 214 Posts
    Blog Entries
    1
    Quote Originally Posted by Kwak View Post
    Please respond to the statement I made when you respond: The outcome of the Revere trade is not clear. I never said it was the Twins' plan for Worley to stink (in fact I believe they thought he would be a bit of a success). A few more wins by Worley and it is likely that: the Twins hang-on to Worley; the fall a slot or two in the Rule 4 draft and Stewart and Gordon are selected before the Twins can select either of the; and the team still stinks--but the FO clings to the fantasy that things are on the right track.

    My point: More time is required to complete the assessment of the Revere trade.
    I think you are misinterpreting the other posts. The discussion appears to clearly be "the outcome of Vance Worley's time with the Twins", NOT the Revere trade as a whole.

    The trade may have been worthwhile (I think so), and Worley, even if damaged goods to some extent, was a worthwhile gamble. But it's hard to dispute that the Twins erred in counting on him as much as they did (he should have been a 4-5 and not 1-2) and failed to get any kind of decent results/value out of him.

  21. #60
    Twins News Team MVP
    Posts
    6,783
    Like
    896
    Liked 867 Times in 557 Posts
    Blog Entries
    3
    Quote Originally Posted by Shane Wahl View Post
    Vance probably can be a legitimate starting pitcher. It was not going to work here. It just wasn't.

    Anyway, the rebuild certainly is in process and the results, so far, are surprising. Who could have imagined this team this close in the division given:

    A: The Sano and Buxton injuries.
    B: The Hicks struggles and the Pinto demotion
    C: The fact that none of the pitching prospects have moved to the big leagues.
    D: Joe Mauer batting like a below-average first baseman
    E: The injury to Oswaldo Arcia, effectively delaying his contribution

    ?

    The team is still on track for the arrival of Sano and Buxton in 2015, with a more mature Arcia, Pinto, and Hicks. Mauer's struggles still cannot be indefinite. Brian Dozier is the real deal. Eddie Rosario will be up in September. Danny Santana is somehow doing this well. Eduardo Escobar has emerged. Phil Hughes and Kyle Gibson appear to be real pitchers at the top of a rotation. This rotation will soon become better with an improved Nolasco, and the arrival of Alex Meyer and Trevor May. Meanwhile, the Twins *could* be trading partners with a number of teams with regard to Willingham, Morales, Fien, and Duensing.
    I get that help is soon on the way, although probably delayed now at least another year, but what parts of actions taken during the rebuild, with the full intent to actually "rebuild", have been specifically responsible for the success this year? It seems the main success this year is attributable to choosing the "quick fix" option- the veteran Free Agent signings and waiver claims since 2012 (Hughes, Suzuki, Nolasco, Willingham, Morales, Fuld, Nunez) and to players already in the organization before 2010 (including Plouffe 2004, Pinto 2006, Santana 2007, Dozier 2009, Gibson 2009).

    Escobar could be argued as the primary product of 2014 success from the rebuild, and the Twins were practically forced at gunpoint into making him a starter. Is the then-28 year old rookie, Chris Colabello, signed in 2012, considered a part of the rebuild?

    The Twins average age for pitchers this year has gone up to 29.8. Put into perspective, this is the oldest the Twins team pitchers have been since 1988, the year after the World Series win- at age 30.0. And the average age has gone up, instead of down in each year in the rebuild:

    2014: Average age of 29.8
    2013: Average age of 28.3
    2012: Average age of 27.8

    This year's Twins team batters are actually older than in the veteran-laden year of 2011- 28.1 vs 27.6.

    fWAR leaderboard for 2014

    FA Veterans

    Hughes 2.3
    Willingham 1.4
    Suzuki 0.9
    Correia 0.7
    Nolasco 0.4
    Fuld 0.5
    Nunez 0.3
    Morales 0.2
    Deduno 0.1
    Pelfrey -0.6

    WAR Total 5.6

    How many of these FAs are intended to be part of the rebuild that leads to a perenially successful team? Nolasco, and maybe Hughes if the Twins are intent on winning in 2015-16.

    Pre-rebuld prospects and veterans

    Dozier 2.7
    Plouffe 1.1
    Santana 0.9
    Pinto 0.2
    Hicks -0.1
    Bartlett -0.3
    Parmelee -0.4
    Hermann -0.7
    Kubel -0.9

    WAR total: 2.5

    It's arguable that all of the prospects would have been called up, rebuild or not. Kubel and Bartlett's "contributions" to the rebuild speak for themselves.

    Rebuild-specific trades for prospects

    Escobar WAR total 1.7

    Here's the one guy that has directly come about from the rebuild- and again his WAR result has happened outside of the Twins expectations for him.
    Last edited by jokin; 06-16-2014 at 02:27 PM.

Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
©2014 TwinsCentric, LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Interested in advertising with Twins Daily? Click here.