Twins May Be Open to Trading Liriano

Francisco Liriano is one of the most talented left-handed starting pitchers in baseball.  If last season’s performance is any indication, Liriano is on track to becoming the bonafide ace the Twins have desperately needed since they traded away Johan Santana after the 2007 season.  He does everything you could possibly want out of an ace quality starting pitcher.  He strikes out batters, limits walks, and induces ground balls at a rate exceeding 50%.  Even more impressive is Liriano’s pitch arsenal that features a plus slider that darts out of the zone (worth 60.9 runs in 549 innings); a plus tumbling change up; and an average fastball that sits 91-95 and touches 96-97.  Usually when a team has a pitcher of this caliber under their control, they do everything they can to hold on to him.   Apparently, this is not the case with the Twins. 

Joe Christensen of the Star Tribune reports that the Twins do not consider Liriano to be part of their long-term plans, and have considering the idea of trading the young All-Star.

“With six pitchers vying for five spots in the Twins starting rotation, one possible solution is trading Francisco Liriano. Speaking to team officials recently, I've been surprised how open they are to this possibility, but the logic makes sense.

(snip)

One thing is clear: The Twins don't plan to sign him long term. Last weekend, they avoided arbitration with a one-year, $4.3 million deal. From what I've heard, their long-term talks went nowhere, with Liriano's camp hinting it wanted a three-year, $39 million contract.  Even if that was just a starting point for negotiations -- and to be clear, I'm not sure -- the Twins were wise to pass.”

I can see how the logic might make sense if Liriano was asking for Felix Hernandez money (five years $78M), but he’s not.  In fact, he’s asking for nearly the same contract (albeit slightly more) that Carl Pavano was seeking when free agency started this past November.  While Pavano didn’t get the three year contract he was seeking, that had more to do with his suitors’ comfort level committing to an aging pitcher for his age-35/36/37 seasons than his current talent level. 

With Liriano, 27, age isn’t a concern.  If the Twins had signed him to a three year deal this offseason, they would’ve reaped the benefits of having an ace quality pitcher locked into a team friendly contract (depending on the salary breakdown) for his age-27/28/29 seasons.  Instead, they chose to settle out of arbitration on a one year deal worth $4.3M.  The decision not to actively pursue a multi-year contract with him will likely result in further escalation of Liriano’s asking price. 

Assuming Liriano is a 5.0 WAR true talent level pitcher, we can roughly assume he’ll produce a WAR line of 5.0/4.5/4.0 (13.5 WAR) over the next three seasons.  With average cost of a win being around $5M, and assuming a yearly 5% increase in salary inflation, Liriano would likely provide between $65-70M in performance based value over that period.  If this projection comes to fruition, the Twins (and Joe Christensen) will look down right foolish for not agreeing to sign him to the three year $39M extension Liriano and his representation are reportedly seeking. 

Furthermore, Christensen calls Liriano an “injury risk,” citing both his injury history while pitching in the minors and the elbow injury he sustained during the 2006 season.  I’m not convinced his assertion is either fair, or warranted.  While it’s true Liriano had Tommy John surgery, the surgery was performed nearly five years ago.  Since he returned in 2008, he’s neither missed any starts, nor spent any time on the disabled list due to an arm injury.  While I’ll admit he took longer than expected to return to his pre-surgery form, I don’t think it was completely outside of the norm.  His struggles with command, limiting walks, and maintaining velocity are all common issues of those recovering from Tommy John surgery.  Once he regained his command and velocity, his performance rebounded strongly as a result. 

Christensen goes on to make a few lazy and poorly considered observations.  For starters, he cites struggles in two unconnected starts as reasons to criticize Liriano’s failure to perform in big situations.  The first start he discussed was, in his words, the “much hyped showdown with Colorado’s Ubaldo Jimenez.”  What Christensen fails to recognize is that the showdown he speaks of, didn’t exist.  Liriano wasn’t pitching against Jimenez.  He was pitching against the Colorado Rockies lineup.  In fact, that matchup was a home game for the Twins, so neither pitcher batted.  While it was certainly disappointing to see Liriano give up three runs (all earned) in the first inning, he managed to pitch six scoreless innings thereafter, while putting up a game score of 58.  We shouldn’t be holding him full responsible for the Twins loss that day.  After all, the line-up only provided one run of support in a 5-1 loss.  Additionally, this was an interleague game in mid-June against a team that finished 83-79.  It was hardly a high leverage moment. 

The second start in question was Game 1 of the ALDS against the Yankees.  For the first five innings, Liriano pitched masterfully, shutting out the Bronx Bombers.  In the sixth inning, he fell apart by allowing four runs in 2/3 innings.  While his performance was disappointing, he left the game down 4-3; the Twins tied it up in the bottom half of that inning.  Again, holding him responsible for the playoff loss is pretty unfair.  After he left the game, RP Jesse Crain allowed two runs to give the Yankees a 6-4 lead.  The Yankees never relinquished the lead, and took Game 1.  While Liriano certainly contributed to the Game 1 loss, Jesse Crain and the other 14 players involved in that game also contributed to the loss.

Christensen later goes onto criticize Liriano for not finishing the eighth inning in any of his final 20 starts.  First of all, I feel compelled to point out that Liriano actually did finish the eighth inning in one of his final 20 starts.  It was the final 19 starts in which he didn’t finish the eighth.  I know I’m splitting hairs, but this is my blog.  I can do as I please.  Secondly, it wasn’t his choice to get pulled out of the game.  It was Ron Gardenhire’s decision.  I’m not surprised either.  The Twins were blessed with an unbelievably deep bullpen, especially in August and September, and Liriano didn’t need to pitch beyond the eighth inning.  Furthermore, while Liriano didn’t meet Christensen’s arbitrary eight inning limit over his final 19 starts, he did meet or exceed the seven inning limit nine times, and the six inning limit an additional two times.  He’s not one that I would consider to be a workhorse, but he certainly put in his share of longer starts.

The Twins are making a big mistake if they’re honestly not interested in retaining Liriano long-term.  With his command and velocity returning to his pre-surgery levels, there’s no reason to believe his 2010 season was a fluke.  Liriano is a fantastic pitcher.  True ace quality pitchers aren’t easy to come by, and the Twins need to lock him up immediately.  A three year $39M contract for a pitcher of his caliber is a steal, and they’d be a fool not to jump at that opportunity.

An Alternative Look at the Twins Rotation

Last week when Josh released his Top Ten Worst Rotations - 2011 Edition, I asked the same question many of you are asking now.  Do the Twins really have the ninth worst rotation in baseball?  I certainly didn't think so, and I definitely did not agree with him describing their number 2-5 starters as a "dumpster fire".   The Common Man of the The Platoon Advantage was the first to comment on Josh's oversight, and I thought he was spot on.

"I cannot stress how off you are about the Twins' rotation. Liriano is a legit number one. He had one elbow surgery four seasons ago, has worked his way back, and has been healthy since then. Baker is a solid number 2, whose 4.49 ERA is largely because of the often horrific outfield defense behind him. Slowey gets hurt a little too often, and gives up a few too many homers, but is similarly hurt by the outfield defense. His peripherals are very strong. Duensing has shown a nice K/BB ratio while keeping 52% of the balls hit off him on the ground. And Blackburn. Well, Blackburn's just not very good. He's not a terrible #5, but if the Twins do end up signing Pavano that's a non-issue.

And I'm not sure how the Astros and maybe the Cubs and Tigers aren't ranked lower."

The first thing I want to point out is that the Astros, Cubs, and Tigers have all worse rotations than the Twins--much worse.  The Astros in particular.  Wandy Rodriguez, Brett Myers, J.A. Happ, Bud Norris, and Nelson Figueroa are nice pitchers, but I can't think of anyone that would be psyched to have all five in their rotation at the same time.  Rodriguez and Myers are both solid number threes; Happ and Norris are potential fours; and Figueroa is probably a fringy number five.  Any rotation without a legitimate ace or number two starter definitely belongs in the bottom ten.  The Twins, on the other hand, have an ace, two number threes, a number four, and a number five.  Let's take a closer look at each member of their rotation.

Francisco Liriano - 14-10, 3.62/2.66/3.06, 9.44 K/9, 3.47 K/BB, 53.6% GB, 6.0 fWAR

In 2010, Liriano showed that he was finally fully recovered from the Tommy John surgery he had four years prior.  His performance was so impressive that I named him as my third place finisher on my theoretical Cy Young ballot ahead of Jon Lester and C.C. Sabathia.  Some of you might think that I'm absolutely crazy for picking him third, but there were few pitchers as dominant last year in the American League as Liriano.  Need proof?  He finished first in xFIP, second in FIP, second in K/9, fifth in K/BB, and fourth in WAR.  While he was a little lucky on home runs (6.3% HR/FB rate vs. a league average of 10.5%), he was incredibly unlucky on balls put into play (.340 BABIP vs. .303 xBABIP).  As TCM pointed out, his poor BABIP was largely due to the Twins atrocious outfield defense.

Liriano has command of three pitches, which includes an average fastball, an above average to good change-up, and a plus-slider that induces a ton of whiffs.  Going into his age-27 season, it wouldn't be surprising to see him give an encore performance of his 2010 season.  Liriano is a true ace.

Scott Baker - 12-9, 4.49/3.96/4.02, 7.82 K/9, 3.82 K/BB, 35.6% GB, 2.5 fWAR

Scott Baker is an incredibly underappreciated pitcher that does a lot of things very well that go largely unnoticed.  He strikes batters out at a rate that's slightly above average; limits walks; and keeps the ball in the yard despite having a GB/FB ratio that's typically in the 0.7-0.8 range.  The biggest problem with Baker (and this will be the case with a few of the Twins pitchers) is that he's a fly ball pitcher on a team that has a terrible tandem of outfielders, particularly at the corners.  His .323 BABIP backs up that claim.  Looking a little deeper, I found that Baker's BABIP on fly balls was 58 points higher than expected (.198 vs. an expected .140).  This means he gave up 13 more hits than he was expected to give up.  Depending on the context of the situation in which those hits were given up, it's possible those hits accounted for an additional 6-10 runs allowed.  With a league average outfield defense, I have no doubt that the difference between Baker's ERA and FIP would be rather insignificant.

Baker has good command of four pitches:  a fastball, slider, change-up, and curve.  His fastball is effective and sits in the low 90s, while his slider induces the bulk of his whiffs.  His 11-5 curve ball is slightly above average, and has been a "plus" pitch by Fangraphs run value standards in the past.  His change-up is primarily a "show" pitch.

Baker is probably better suited to be a number three starter, but he's still an acceptable option at the two slot in the rotation. 

Carl Pavano - 17-11, 3.75/4.02/4.01, 4.76 K/9, 3.16 K/BB, 51.2% GB, 3.2 fWAR

I should start by saying that when Josh wrote his article, it was December 31st.  Pavano had not yet come to terms on a two year deal.  (He still hasn't officially signed, but he's close enough for the purpose of this exercise.)  After four gruesome, injury filled seasons in New York, Pavano has spent the last two seasons reinventing himself.  Pavano has a spectacular control (finished second in BB/9 rate in each of the last two seasons), induces a ton of ground balls, and keeps the ball in the yard.  His 4.76 K/9 rate (a 28% decline from his 2009 rate) is a bit alarming, but it shouldn't be a problem as long as he keeps his ground ball rate above 50%, and his BB/9 rate in the 1.50-1.75 range.

He has command of three pitches, including an average fastball, solid slider, and a plus-change up (by Fangraphs run value standards).  Despite the fact Pavano will be entering his age-35 season in 2011, I don't see any reason to expect to see too much performance related regression.  Pavano is still a solid number three starter.

Kevin Slowey - 13-6, 4.45/3.98/4.48, 6.71 K/9, 4.00 K/BB, 28.3% GB, 2.2 fWAR

Kevin Slowey is a slightly less talented version of Scott Baker.  He's an extreme fly ball pitcher with outstanding control and a strikeout rate that sits right around league average.  Slowey's biggest problem is that he can't seem to avoid the injury bug.  Over the last three-plus seasons, he's missed around 25 starts due to assorted wrist and elbow ailments.  To date, he hasn't pitched enough innings (162 innings) to qualify him for the ERA title--not that he would've won the crown anyway.  While this may end up being just a rash of unfortunate injuries, I'm starting to wonder if his injury pattern is symptomatic of something larger.  It's possible he's a brittle pitcher.  Still, he's only 26, so he has plenty of time to right the ship on the injury front.

Other than injuries, the one thing keeping Slowey from being something other than a mid-to-back end starting pitcher is his fly ball rate.  For his career, he's produced a 48.1% fly ball rate and a 0.66 GB/FB ratio.  Maybe it's just me, but those numbers are pretty alarming.  While his career HR/FB rate (10%) is right around expectations, his fly ball rate implies that he'll allow 30-35 home runs per season, assuming he pitches approximately 200 innings.  Combining a high home run rate with a below average contact rate could be a recipe for disaster, particularly if Slowey sees a regression in his ability to limit walks.  At this point though, it's not a problem.

Slowey has command of four pitches, but he lives and dies off of his fastball that sits 87-91 MPH.  He throws his slider and curve ball a fair amount, but both are average pitches.  His change-up is mostly a "show" pitch, but that's a good thing because it's largely ineffective.  If he could develop his change-up, it could become a solid weapon for him; thus allowing him to induce more ground balls.

Slowey is a prototypical number four starter that should provide 2.5 wins above the replacement level assuming he can stay healthy.  

Brian Duensing - 10-3, 2.62/3.85/4.10, 5.37 K/9, 2.23 K/BB, 52.9% GB, 1.7 fWAR

At first glance, it might be tempting to call Duensing the Twins version of Joe Saunders, but that's not exactly fair.  Duensing is much better.  Despite the fact Duensing's ERA greatly outperformed his FIP and xFIP; his BABIP (.276) was well below the expected .300 average; and his strand rate was above 80%, his 2010 performance isn't entirely a mirage.  Will his performance regress to the mean?  Absolutely.  No one should expect an encore performance in 2011.  Still, there's plenty to like about his performance--especially out of the five spot in the rotation.

Like every other member of the Twins starting rotation, Duensing does a few things incredibly well.  In particular, he induces ground balls at a rate above 50% and limits walks.  While he doesn't induce a lot of swinging strikes, his contact rate is still within the acceptable range.  His HR/FB ratio has fallen below the expected range of 9-11% in each of his first two seasons, so he may see some regression in this category next season.  Then again, he may not.  He may end up like one of those pitchers who consistently outperforms the league in this category like Mark Buehrle and Jarrod Washburn.  The fact that he pitches half of his games at Target Field, the most difficult park in which to hit a home run last season, certainly helps him in that capacity. 

Duensing has command of four pitches: a fastball, curve, slider, and change-up.  He throws his fastball about 60% of the time.  It's league average in terms of it's effectiveness and sits 89-93 MPH.  His slider has proven to be very effective, and has been worth 20.1 runs in the 214 innings he's pitched in the majors so far.  His change-up is somewhat of a mixed bag, and his curve is nothing more than a "show" pitch.

All-in-all, he's a solid number five starter that has the potential to be a solid number four if he can figure out a way to cut his walk rate by 30-40%. 

While I respect Josh's opinion, I greatly disagree with his assessment of the Twins rotation.  While I haven't done a full analysis of the league, I figure they probably rank within the top dozen teams of the league.  There is a lot more talent in the rotation than his "dumpster fire" comment would lead you to believe.