Minnesota Twins News & Rumors Forum
Page 9 of 10 FirstFirst ... 78910 LastLast
Results 161 to 180 of 188

Thread: Not Hearing Much About Worley

  1. #161
    Senior Member All-Star
    Posts
    2,286
    Like
    32
    Liked 131 Times in 81 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Alex View Post

    If any of the pitchers -- that are now out of options -- we're talking about (Worley, Deduno, Diamond) could become solid #4 or #5, that has a lot of value at their contract level for multiple years. It's possible that they won't, but this is a season where it might be worth a couple of wins to leave room and give a couple of them a last shot.
    Worley will be in arb after the season and Diamond will super 2 so their cheap years are limited.

  2. #162
    Senior Member All-Star cmathewson's Avatar
    Posts
    2,271
    Like
    241
    Liked 461 Times in 290 Posts
    Blog Entries
    1
    Quote Originally Posted by Jim H View Post
    Of course he won't be sent to the bullpen early on. He has earned the opportunity to start. The difference this year(hopefully) is that whoever begins the year in the starting rotation will not stay there if he isn't pitching well. That shouldn't mean he will be removed after one or two bad starts, but there should be depth and hopefully guys pitching well at AAA that a series of poor starts will lead to a different and hopefully better starter.

    I also think that the idea that Hughes represents some sort of great upside is overrated. In his best season as a starter he was a mid-rotation starter. I expect he has a better chance to reach that upside consistently in Minnesota than he did in New York. I am not so sure that upside is much greater than that of Worley or Deduno. The key for any of them is good health or durability and few, really none of the candidates have demonstrated that.

    I am not so sure I understand the idea of filling the rotation with the highest "upside" guys and just leaving them there whether they are struggling or not. Let's put the guys into the rotation who are pitching the best and force the rest to earn their opportunities.
    Your analysis of Hughes misses one crucial point. Yankee Stadium is the toughest place for fly ball righties to pitch. He will get better simply by having an easier home field. As Kwak said, he is inked in to the rotation to start the year. If he fails, they'll need to make a call. But not before May at the earliest. They let Worley get pounded into June last year before replacing him. And he wasn't high paid.
    "If you'da been thinkin' you wouldn't 'a thought that.."

  3. #163
    Senior Member All-Star
    Posts
    1,616
    Like
    3
    Liked 320 Times in 202 Posts
    Blog Entries
    1
    Quote Originally Posted by Alex View Post
    Considering they didn't do that last year with Worley and save an option year, no.
    Well, they did delay Worley's arb eligibility, and it is pretty clear he was not healthy or at least not adequately recovered due to his early shutdown. So I am not sure his situation is quite comparable to Correia.

  4. #164
    Senior Member Big-Leaguer
    Posts
    978
    Like
    3
    Liked 16 Times in 13 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by kab21 View Post
    Worley will be in arb after the season and Diamond will super 2 so their cheap years are limited.
    Valid point that their years are limited, but it's still more value (if they are successful), less risk, and cheaper than going out on the FA market. If they do fail another year, you can make the same decision that is being discussed now but would have more information to do so and won't really be any worse off.

  5. #165
    Senior Member All-Star cmathewson's Avatar
    Posts
    2,271
    Like
    241
    Liked 461 Times in 290 Posts
    Blog Entries
    1
    Quote Originally Posted by spycake View Post
    Well, they did delay Worley's arb eligibility, and it is pretty clear he was not healthy or at least not adequately recovered due to his early shutdown. So I am not sure his situation is quite comparable to Correia.
    I don't believe it. So it's not clear to me. Elbow clean outs are routine. He had his six months before the season started to rest and rehab. Maybe he re-injured it while he was pitching relatively well in AAA. Ligament fraying is not uncommon after chips. But when he was pitching poorly in the MLB, he was healthy.
    "If you'da been thinkin' you wouldn't 'a thought that.."

  6. #166
    Senior Member All-Star cmathewson's Avatar
    Posts
    2,271
    Like
    241
    Liked 461 Times in 290 Posts
    Blog Entries
    1
    Quote Originally Posted by Alex View Post
    Valid point that their years are limited, but it's still more value (if they are successful), less risk, and cheaper than going out on the FA market. If they do fail another year, you can make the same decision that is being discussed now but would have more information to do so and won't really be any worse off.
    I think the risk is greater to give the guys another shot. If they earn it, fine. We tried giving it to them last year and that was a failed experiment.

    It's funny how the board has swung around to not wanting Ryan to use Pohlad's stadium money to improve the team, preferring to give second and third chances to guys with fifth starter upside. After three years of 90+ losses, you would think winning would be more important.
    "If you'da been thinkin' you wouldn't 'a thought that.."

  7. #167
    Twins News Team All-Star TheLeviathan's Avatar
    Posts
    4,819
    Like
    175
    Liked 660 Times in 372 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by cmathewson View Post
    I think the risk is greater to give the guys another shot. If they earn it, fine. We tried giving it to them last year and that was a failed experiment.
    We tried to give HIcks one too and he was historically awful.....are you consistent in wanting to give up on him as well?

  8. #168
    Senior Member Big-Leaguer
    Posts
    978
    Like
    3
    Liked 16 Times in 13 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by cmathewson View Post

    It's funny how the board has swung around to not wanting Ryan to use Pohlad's stadium money to improve the team, preferring to give second and third chances to guys with fifth starter upside. After three years of 90+ losses, you would think winning would be more important.
    I actually think it is, but there is a balance that could be struck, especially when we have signed and still have marginal pitchers in the rotation. We're talking about pitchers who are not drastically, or even definitively, better here. So, saying the risk is greater to give these guys another shot is a complete matter of opinion, especially as all three have had success in the majors.

    If we are evaluating players by one season, we should also be incredibly critical of the Hughes and Pelfrey signings. As Leviathan points out, there are other players we should then be looking to get rid of including Hicks, Willingham, Plouffe, etc..

  9. #169
    Senior Member All-Star cmathewson's Avatar
    Posts
    2,271
    Like
    241
    Liked 461 Times in 290 Posts
    Blog Entries
    1
    Quote Originally Posted by TheLeviathan View Post
    We tried to give HIcks one too and he was historically awful.....are you consistent in wanting to give up on him as well?
    Three thing differ about Hicks:

    1. He has upside, and considerably more upside than he showed last year.

    2. No one is suggesting to just give him the job for the sake of maximizing his value in the talent marketplace.

    3. He has two options left. So if he does not earn it this time around, no big whoop.
    "If you'da been thinkin' you wouldn't 'a thought that.."

  10. #170
    Twins News Team All-Star TheLeviathan's Avatar
    Posts
    4,819
    Like
    175
    Liked 660 Times in 372 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by cmathewson View Post
    Three thing differ about Hicks:

    1. He has upside, and considerably more upside than he showed last year.

    2. No one is suggesting to just give him the job for the sake of maximizing his value in the talent marketplace.

    3. He has two options left. So if he does not earn it this time around, no big whoop.
    The problem is all of this doesn't mesh with your other opinions. Especially since you've spent this thread stating things as matters-of-fact when they are really just matters of opinion.

    Hicks certainly has upside, but that is an opinion. Just like my opinion of Worley and Diamond. If one were to base their opinion of Hicks' upside in the same manner you have with Worley and Diamond they simply could not conclude that. One year's worth of data - deliberately picked out from other relevant data - would conclude Hicks is one of the worst young players to ever make the major leagues.

    You're simply not taking a consistent approach to things, in part because you believe your statements about Worley and Diamond are facts, rather than opinions. One can reasonably disagree with your opinions based on other data and you don't seem to acknowledge that.

  11. #171
    Twins Moderator All-Star diehardtwinsfan's Avatar
    Posts
    4,368
    Like
    413
    Liked 808 Times in 509 Posts
    Blog Entries
    3
    Quote Originally Posted by cmathewson View Post
    I don't believe it. So it's not clear to me. Elbow clean outs are routine. He had his six months before the season started to rest and rehab. Maybe he re-injured it while he was pitching relatively well in AAA. Ligament fraying is not uncommon after chips. But when he was pitching poorly in the MLB, he was healthy.
    These may be routine, but it isn't as though these surgeries aren't without reprocussions... and people do heal differently. I've had one knee surgery, and it was minor. It took years for my knee to actually heal after the said surgery. Admittedly, Worley is going to have access to Drs. far better than the one who did my knee, but that doesn't mean he's just going to bounce back. People do heal differently... not to mention that it would have had to affect his offseason program.

    At the beginning of last season, Worley was listed by many on this board as a question mark because of that surgery. I think that was wise... and based on his results, I'm not sure we can safely say he was healthy.

  12. This user likes diehardtwinsfan's post and wants to buy him/her a steak dinner:

    TheLeviathan (12-30-2013)

  13. #172
    Senior Member All-Star
    Posts
    2,286
    Like
    32
    Liked 131 Times in 81 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by TheLeviathan View Post
    We tried to give HIcks one too and he was historically awful.....are you consistent in wanting to give up on him as well?
    I certainly am not ready to give Hicks a guaranteed starting spot to find out. That is basically what you are proposing with Worley and Diamond.

    If AAA wasn't an option with Hicks then I would stash him on the MLB roster as the 4th OF'er but you seem to think that is an awful option with the loser the 5th spot.

  14. #173
    Twins Moderator All-Star diehardtwinsfan's Avatar
    Posts
    4,368
    Like
    413
    Liked 808 Times in 509 Posts
    Blog Entries
    3
    Quote Originally Posted by cmathewson View Post

    It's funny how the board has swung around to not wanting Ryan to use Pohlad's stadium money to improve the team, preferring to give second and third chances to guys with fifth starter upside. After three years of 90+ losses, you would think winning would be more important.
    I highly doubt that there is a person on this board who is concerned with Pohlad's "hard earned" stadium money. What I do think a lot of people are saying (myself included), is that it's best interests of the Twins to give these second and third chances to some of these guys (and to be clear, we don't believe Worley and Deduno have 5th starter upsides) because they will likely be no worse than the likes of KC and could out perform him by a significant margin.

  15. #174
    Owner MVP Brock Beauchamp's Avatar
    Posts
    8,105
    Twitter
    @rocketpig76
    Like
    48
    Liked 1,584 Times in 822 Posts
    Blog Entries
    6
    Quote Originally Posted by TheLeviathan View Post
    The problem is all of this doesn't mesh with your other opinions. Especially since you've spent this thread stating things as matters-of-fact when they are really just matters of opinion.

    Hicks certainly has upside, but that is an opinion. Just like my opinion of Worley and Diamond. If one were to base their opinion of Hicks' upside in the same manner you have with Worley and Diamond they simply could not conclude that. One year's worth of data - deliberately picked out from other relevant data - would conclude Hicks is one of the worst young players to ever make the major leagues.

    You're simply not taking a consistent approach to things, in part because you believe your statements about Worley and Diamond are facts, rather than opinions. One can reasonably disagree with your opinions based on other data and you don't seem to acknowledge that.
    Ah, come on, Levi... I honestly don't care about this argument one way or the other but you cannot compare Hicks, a 23 year old position player who has been a top 100 prospect for most of his MiLB career, to 26 and 27 year old pitchers who were never highly regarded and struggled mightily during an awful season.

    Diamond was so poorly regarded that the Braves basically gave him away. Worley was never more than a marginal prospect.

    At some point, it stops being "opinion" and becomes "general consensus". The general consensus is that Aaron Hicks is a vastly superior prospect to either Scott Diamond or Vance Worley. He doesn't even belong in the same conversation as those two guys.

  16. These 4 users like Brock Beauchamp's post and want to buy him/her a steak dinner:

    ChiTownTwinsFan (12-29-2013), cmathewson (12-29-2013), Ultima Ratio (12-30-2013), USAFChief (12-29-2013)

  17. #175
    Senior Member Triple-A DocBauer's Avatar
    Posts
    451
    Like
    215
    Liked 172 Times in 97 Posts
    Blog Entries
    10
    Response to two comments listed in some recent posts.

    One I believe I made once before in that procedures for Diamond and Worley may have been relatively minor, but there is the throwing off of normal conditioning and preparation time for an athlete that needs to find consistency n his approach. Further, possibly greater for a pitcher, there is a need to not only have a feel for their pitches, but to mentally trust in their arm's condition as well.

    Two is that Worley and Diamond ARE still on the roster, and each WILL be given an opportunity. Debate at length, as we could of many ball players, as to talent, potential and worth, (goodness knows I've taken cracks at it) but the Twins have not released either player, nor have they given any indication that they will not be given fair chance to prove themselves.

    I am pleased that at least we have depth and options available to us at this point.

  18. #176
    Senior Member All-Star cmathewson's Avatar
    Posts
    2,271
    Like
    241
    Liked 461 Times in 290 Posts
    Blog Entries
    1
    Quote Originally Posted by TheLeviathan View Post
    The problem is all of this doesn't mesh with your other opinions. Especially since you've spent this thread stating things as matters-of-fact when they are really just matters of opinion.

    Hicks certainly has upside, but that is an opinion. Just like my opinion of Worley and Diamond. If one were to base their opinion of Hicks' upside in the same manner you have with Worley and Diamond they simply could not conclude that. One year's worth of data - deliberately picked out from other relevant data - would conclude Hicks is one of the worst young players to ever make the major leagues.

    You're simply not taking a consistent approach to things, in part because you believe your statements about Worley and Diamond are facts, rather than opinions. One can reasonably disagree with your opinions based on other data and you don't seem to acknowledge that.
    Brock covered the difference better than I could. But I do want to respond to your claim that I am mixing facts with opinion. Throughout this debate, I have repeatedly referred to odds and probability, not to facts or opinion. It is not a matter of opinion (or fact) that Worley or Diamond have a lower chance of success than Pelfrey or Correia. It is a matter of probability. It is unlikely that Worley will somehow find himself after two seasons of horrible pitching. I have always said it could happen, but I am not optimistic. I have been more optimistic about Diamond. But he has a very low margin for error. So, given the other options, I don't like his chances. Not that he can't won't won't do it. Just that, he is less likely than the other candidates.

    On the other hand, Correia has a long track record of mediocrity, which is much better than being horrible, as Diamond was last year and Worley has been for two consecutive seasons. And Pelfrey has showed enough to warrant the kind of risk the Twins are taking. He is at least more likely to have a good season than either of the two you favor. Both could fail miserably, of course. And Worley and Diamond could have a miraculous resurgence. But I don't think it's particularly likely.

    You are free to disagree with me. I expect you to. But please don't accuse me of confusing opinion with fact. That is a desperate rhetorical position that does you no justice.
    "If you'da been thinkin' you wouldn't 'a thought that.."

  19. #177
    Twins News Team All-Star TheLeviathan's Avatar
    Posts
    4,819
    Like
    175
    Liked 660 Times in 372 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Brock Beauchamp View Post
    At some point, it stops being "opinion" and becomes "general consensus". The general consensus is that Aaron Hicks is a vastly superior prospect to either Scott Diamond or Vance Worley. He doesn't even belong in the same conversation as those two guys.
    The point, again, is being missed:

    If you limit your analysis to the results of one season and dismiss other avenues to see upside - you're taking far too limited a scope
    .

    This has been a constant theme. And that's how you get lead down the path of stamping your feet that "logically" Worley and Diamond have no upside. Which is a preposterous position. We can disagree about the upside, but we can't narrow the view of two players and then conclude we've figured it out.

    My example was to illustrate that if I similarly narrowed my view of Hicks I could reach a conclusion that someone, like you rightly did, would disagree with. You bring more relevant data and can have a much different opinion. Or maybe the same. But the idea that you can just ignore everything about a player's profile but what fits your argument is simply not a good way to establish your point.
    Last edited by TheLeviathan; 12-30-2013 at 06:56 AM.

  20. #178
    Twins News Team All-Star TheLeviathan's Avatar
    Posts
    4,819
    Like
    175
    Liked 660 Times in 372 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by cmathewson View Post
    It is not a matter of opinion (or fact) that Worley or Diamond have a lower chance of success than Pelfrey or Correia. It is a matter of probability.
    The degree of probability is still a matter of opinion, so this is a distinction without a difference. I disagree with your probabilities and can because they are based on your opinions.

    That problem, combined with you repeatedly insisting upon "logic" and "fact" supporting you are part of the problem. This is a discussion of opinion, which may include opinions of probability, but still an opinion.

    t is unlikely that Worley will somehow find himself after two seasons of horrible pitching.
    Since when is an ERA+ of 127 horrible?

    I'd argue most of your opinions/probabilities are based on bad data/facts and a complete disregard for SSS and relevant data.
    Last edited by TheLeviathan; 12-30-2013 at 06:56 AM.

  21. #179
    Twins Moderator MVP USAFChief's Avatar
    Posts
    6,587
    Like
    3,659
    Liked 3,143 Times in 1,344 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by TheLeviathan View Post


    Since when is an ERA+ of 127 horrible?

    I'd argue most of your opinions/probabilities are based on bad data/facts and a complete disregard for SSS and relevant data.
    Unless I'm reading BRef wrong, Worley didnt have a 127 ERA+ over the past two seasons.
    Every post is not every other post. - a wise man

  22. #180
    Senior Member All-Star cmathewson's Avatar
    Posts
    2,271
    Like
    241
    Liked 461 Times in 290 Posts
    Blog Entries
    1
    Quote Originally Posted by TheLeviathan View Post
    The degree of probability is still a matter of opinion, so this is a distinction without a difference. I disagree with your probabilities and can because they are based on your opinions.

    That problem, combined with you repeatedly insisting upon "logic" and "fact" supporting you are part of the problem. This is a discussion of opinion, which may include opinions of probability, but still an opinion.
    Fair enough. My opinion, based mostly on numbers and somewhat on stuff, is that Worley is not likely to improve enough to be better than the others. My opinion on Diamond is more about stuff than raw numbers, but he did not have good numbers last year, so he's had one year of fooling them and one year of not. That, coupled with his lack of stuff, makes him less likely to beat out guys with better stuff and numbers last year, in my opinion.

    BTW, when I use the expression IMO or IMHO, it means I am expressing my opinion. I used them a lot in this thread. I did not see you using them at all. I sometimes appealed to facts, such as remarks on numbers. But everyone throughout this thread has relied more on opinion. That's what predicting the future is.



    Since when is an ERA+ of 127 horrible?

    I'd argue most of your opinions/probabilities are based on bad data/facts and a complete disregard for SSS and relevant data.
    Worley's ERA+ in the last two years was 96 and 56. A rather precipitous decline from 127 in 2011. As I have said, he could rebound some. But he is not likely to be better than the others.
    "If you'da been thinkin' you wouldn't 'a thought that.."

Page 9 of 10 FirstFirst ... 78910 LastLast

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.