Playing with Fire
Posted by SBG on Thursday, August 14th, 2008 at 8:54 pm
Well, you’ve got your diamonds and you’ve got your pretty clothes
And the chauffeur drives your car
You let everybody know
But don’t play with me, ’cause you’re playing with fire
On August 1, 2008, the Twins designated Livan Hernandez for assignment and called up Francisco Liriano. Since this move was made after the trading deadline, the Twins had to offer waivers on Hernandez and he was claimed by the Colorado Rockies. The Twins subsequently dropped Hernandez on the defending National League Champions, and the results so far have been predictable. Hernandez was an innings eater, something that may or may not come back to bite the Twins in the wallet, but whatever, he's not what you would call an ace or anything.
Let's compare Livan with the other four starters that comprised the Twins starting staff before he was cut free:
| Pitcher | IP | K/G | BB/G | HR/G | xFIP |
| Livan | 139.7 | 3.3 | 1.8 | 1.10 | 4.77 |
| Baker | 114.3 | 8.1 | 2.0 | 1.38 | 3.93 |
| Blackburn | 144.7 | 4.8 | 1.5 | 0.88 | 4.42 |
| Perkins | 110.7 | 4.5 | 2.3 | 1.04 | 4.88 |
| Slowey | 114.3 | 6.7 | 1.4 | 1.27 | 4.26 |
Yep, Livan can go out there, let the game get out of reach, and then pitch another five or six innings. If you can live with losing a lot of games when he's pitching, he can take a helluva a beating and prevent the bullpen from being further strained. So, there's that. Another thing is that his pitching wasn't that much worse than some of these younger starters. But, he's got a $5 million contract with bonuses based on innings pitched that could make it a $7 million contract. Hell, Boof Bonser had pitched better than Livan has (4.51 xFIP), and he's making about a half mil, and he's also been banished to the bullpen.
Let's look at that chart again with mystery player JW added in.
| Pitcher | IP | K/G | BB/G | HR/G | xFIP |
| Livan | 139.7 | 3.3 | 1.8 | 1.10 | 4.77 |
| Baker | 114.3 | 8.1 | 2.0 | 1.38 | 3.93 |
| Blackburn | 144.7 | 4.8 | 1.5 | 0.88 | 4.42 |
| Perkins | 110.7 | 4.5 | 2.3 | 1.04 | 4.88 |
| Slowey | 114.3 | 6.7 | 1.4 | 1.27 | 4.26 |
| JW | 135.7 | 5.0 | 2.6 | 1.03 | 4.96 |
Old JW doesn't miss many bats, although he kind of fits in with the Twins starters for most part in that category, he walks a few more than the Twins staff, and his home runs allowed are fairly low, but look at that xFIP -- 4.96. He's also making $10 million this year and next. Of course, he's Jarrod Washburn.
Seattle put Washburn on waivers and the Twins claimed him. Wow, what a risky move. Had Seattle just let him go, Washburn would have been the 7th best starter on the staff -- and he would also have been one of four guys making $10 million plus on the 2009 Twins (the studs Nathan, Morneau, and Mauer being the other three). Honestly, I was sick to my stomach worrying about this from the time I heard that the Twins had made a claim (apparently to block Washburn from going to the White Sox, or at least that's what I've heard) until I found out that he wasn't going to be a Twin.
Apparently, the Twins were in serious talks with the Mariners about Washburn. It should be pointed out that Washburn has sucked for a while -- his 4.96 xFIP is the best he's done in the past five years -- and there's absolutely no reason to believe, at the age of 34 (older than Livan, supposedly) that he'd get any better. The prudent course of action for the Mariners was to unload him to the Yankees at the deadline, but Seattle wasn't interested in that. Apparently, the Yankees weren't interested in Washburn anymore, either, since the Twins won the claim, despite having a better record than the Yankees. At this point, it should have been clear that the market for Washburn was practically non-existent. Merely dumping Washburn on the Twins would have saved the Mariners $13 million. Instead, though, the Mariners thought that they were dealing from a position of strength and wanted the Twins to take on Washburn's salary (which, inexplicably, the Twins were apparently willing to do, WTF, Billy Smith!) AND get this, give up one of their starters.
HA-HA-HA-HA-HA-HA-HA-HA-HA-HA-HA-HA-HA-HA-HA-HA-HA-HA-HA-HA-HA-HA-HA-HA-HA-HA-HA-
HA-HA-HA-HA-HA-HA-HA-HA-HA-HA-HA-HA-HA-HA-HA-HA-HA-HA-HA-HA-HA-HA-HA-HA-HA-HA-HA-
HA-HA-HA-HA-HA-HA-HA-HA-HA-HA-HA-HA-HA-HA-HA-HA-HA-HA-HA-HA-HA-HA-HA-HA-HA-HA-HA-
HA-HA-HA-HA-HA-HA-HA-HA-HA-HA-HA-HA-HA-HA-HA-HA-HA-HA-HA-HA-HA-HA-HA-HA-HA-HA-HA-
HA-HA-HA-HA-HA-HA-HA-HA-HA-HA-HA-HA-HA-HA-HA-HA-HA-HA-HA-HA-HA-HA-HA-HA-HA-HA-HA
Luckily, the Twins were dealing with fools. Luckily, when the Twins backed away from the table, the Mariners didn't just dump Washburn on the Twins. Tomorrow night, Washburn will be in the Metrodome, but thankfully in a Mariners uniform. The Twins were playing with fire here. Billy, you just about got burned.
Loading ...
This really is hard to believe. Even using "traditional" stats like W-L and ERA, Washburn doesn't look good. If you use something just slightly advanced, like WHIP, he looks awful. The starters the Twins are using are all at least as good, and probably better. Then, you add in the contract. The only explanation I can think of is that Bill Smith is catching some heat for missing the boat on relievers like Hawkins and Bradford and is feeling pressure to do something.
That's not playing with fire, that's playing with a small nuclear weapon designed to destroy everything the Twins have built. Okay, maybe not that bad, but terrible none the less.
After reading this post and some extremely peeved posts over at USSM, the question is rightfully begged: if the Mariners truly are the worst-run organization in baseball for not just dumping their Washburn albatross on the claiming team, does that make the Twins the second worst, by virtue of seriously entertaining taking on Washburn and his contract?
I'm not ready to go there, but unless the Twins were absolutely sure that the Mariners were not going to dump Washburn on the Twins, this is a very puzzling move.
Not really. Good teams can make bad decisions sometimes. The Twins looked at the cards and decided that the Mariners weren't going to dump Washburn for salary. It was certainly a risk, but they deemed it to be an improbable enough event that they would be able to keep the White Sox (and their ever-growing payroll) from adding someone who might help them.
I wouldn't have done it, but the Twins had talks with the Mariners, so if they knew that the Mariners were asking for a lot back in return for Washburn, that's a bit of a different story.
I wonder if Bill Smith talks to the gun he's playing Russian Roulette with?
It was certainly a risk, but they deemed it to be an improbable enough event that they would be able to keep the White Sox (and their ever-growing payroll) from adding someone who might help them.
That's what I don't understand, though. If Washburn is as bad as the guys at USSM think he is, and if being saddled with Washburn would have been such a massive mistake for the Twins to make, isn't that this a situation where Bill Smith should have stood back and let the White Sox play Russian Roulette by winning the Washburn claim?
Granted, it's certainly within the realm of possibility that Washburn recaptures a bit of his age-30 2005 form (which is his only solidly above-average season since age 27/2002), but that possibility has to be pretty minuscule. Even if Reinsdorf is planning on throwing around cash like he's bailing out banks, there has to be an upper limit to what he's able to spend. The far better odds would seem to be that Washburn continues to stink (or gets even worse) going forward and the $13 million he would be owed by the White Sox becomes a burden which might prevent them from adding someone who actually would help either this year or next.
It just seems like Bill Smith and the Twins got a little too caught up in their own strategery and it very nearly blew up in their faces. I guess that doesn't necessarily automatically vault them in to second worst-run status, but it's not exactly confidence-inspiring.
I agree that it is not confidence-inspiring. But, if all the rumors are true, the Mets, Rockies, White Sox, and Yankees all also showed interest in acquiring Washburn. So even if we view the waiver claim as a negative (which I would), it's tough to suddenly vault the Twins into a 2nd-worst position. There are really a lot of reasons to believe that the Mariners have serious problems and could have the worst FO in baseball. I think the Twins have some problems with their operation, but certainly not more problems than 28 other teams.
Regarding why the White Sox might want Washburn, Washburn is bad, but he's probably a tad above replacement level and they really want to make the playoffs right-now-this-very-moment. Clayton Richard could be about as good as Washburn right now, but this is his first year above A-ball and I can understand why the White Sox would have reservations about throwing him into the mix right now. Lack of starting pitching depth was a big reason that the Sox didn't get a good PECOTA-projected win total at the beginning of the season, but so far they've been able to dodge that bullet. Plus, the Twins might fear that while the Mariners were completely unreasonable by demanding one of their young starters in return, the Mariners might be enamored with some Pale Hose non-prospect. Their demands for Washburn were so bizarre that I have a hard time trying to figure out what they are thinking.
Ok, I think I understand what you're saying. Maybe the Mariners would have given the Sox some salary consideration if the Sox sent a prospect or two along in the deal. Since they were ultimately willing to eat all of Washburn's salary instead of at least get him off the books for nothing in return, maybe the Sox could have negotiated a deal where they only paid 85% of Washburn's remaining salary. If Washburn is replacement level or just slightly better, then such a deal might just make sense for a club that knows it has to win now.
But here's the other thing: the White Sox and the Twins aren't both in that "win now" boat. Both teams might be outperforming pre-season expectations, but that doesn't mean they're in the same position as organizations. The Twins shouldn't be getting caught up in the moment and significantly changing their organizational plan simply because the division is up for grabs right now, and they definitely shouldn't be altering that plan to block a division rival that is currently lucky, but ultimately trending downward in the long run. The White Sox have fairly good reason to be desperate and willing to take chances. The Twins should be very pleased with where they are already and not changing course simply because of what others are doing.
This brings me back to the original question. If the Twins accept that getting rid of Livan for nothing was addition by subtraction (and they had to, or they would have pulled him back off waivers), then how does adding an even worse pitcher simply so a rapidly fading rival can't get him even make any kind of good sense? The GMs of the Mets, the White Sox, and the Yankees can make moves like that because their organizational situations are different that what Bill Smith has at his disposal, and because those teams are aging, on their way down, and probably don't have much to lose in relation to where they're headed. The Twins not only don't have those resources to squander, but they're not even in a position where they should be thinking about moves like this yet.
I have a bad feeling that the Bill Smith era is not going to be all that happy in Twinsland. This year, Smith is still largely riding on TR's coattails, and Smith seems to have almost a blatant disregard for defensive value and an irrational attachment to glory stats of yore like RBI and pitcher W.
I'd like to think that he knew that he wasn't going to get Washburn's contract handed to him and that he was just blocking Washburn to ChiSox...but I'm not sure yet whether or not to give him the benefit of the doubt.
I laughed along with you during that paragraph, ubelmann.
What a crazy deal - no strong play at a couple of decent relievers, and then this bluff at Washburn? I almost agree with Carter Hayes - why not let 'em start Washburn?
If we ended up with Washburn, I'd be very very frightened.
I laughed along with you during that paragraph, ubelmann.
I think you mean SBG?
You're right, my bad. I just assumed it was your column given your Mariners proximity. I should have been tipped off by the Stones material though.
I guess that means I should recommend that the post author name get some more prominent styling - I skimmed right over it in this case
This column was like suffering through the All-Star Break.
All kidding aside, I should make the byline more prominent.
This move scared me and encouraged me all in one. On one hand, the fact the Twins were willing to take on that contract shows that they are willing to spend more than ever before. I think that's great. Of course, when you have more money to spend, you still have to be wise about it.
On the other hand, Jarrod Washburn? Seriously? It doesn't take any advanced metrics to see this guy is not any better than any of our current starters. And he makes 20 times as much money. Even if you do have the money to spend, do have to just throw it away?
The STrib reported that the Twins were wanting to put Washburn in the rotation and send one of the starters to the bullpen. Yeah, that's what the Twins need, another long reliever. Perkins and Blackburn are probably the two men lowest on the list for starters, but Blackburn has consistently performed well all year and Perkins just pitched eight shutout innings against the Yankees and neither of them would appear to be of any help in the eighth inning. You need a guy who can miss a lot of bats for that spot. The only two starters with that kind of repertoire would appear to be Liriano and Baker. The Twins have repeatedly said Liriano is not an option for the bullpen, which would leave Baker. And I would have to say that if we were to start a playoff series tomorrow, you would probably want Baker to start Game 1. Do you really want to replace your best starter with someone worse than your five current starters so that you can put your top starter in a role he's never held to make a probably marginal improvement in the back end of the bullpen. Oh, and it will cost you $13 million.
Another scary thought is since the Twins were "negotiating" with the M's, it would appear they were not only willing to take on the $13 million, but they were also willing to give up at least one player for him. That player better have been Bass, since he was the odd man out and would have been placed on waivers anyways.
And I don't buy that the Twins were counting on the Mariners to pull Washburn back. The Twins never operate in such a risky way. Remember when Terry Ryan refused to make an offer to Eddie Guardado or LaTroy Hawkins until he had dumped Eric Milton on the Phillies. He wasn't going to spend money he didn't have yet.
My friend declared the issue with the Mariners is that some Starbucks are closing down, and the GM can't get his coffee as easily, thus making him unable to think logically.
"Hmm, I've got an expensive, under-performing pitcher. There's no reason another team wouldn't give up a cheap, talented starter for him."
"Hmm, I've got an expensive, under-performing pitcher. There's no reason another team wouldn't give up a cheap, talented starter for him."
In this regard, the Seattle GM has much in common with the average commentor on the Strib blogs. I believe another reason Bill is having so much trouble getting a deal done is that other teams really covet our young pitching and are unwilling to deal with us unless we give some of it up to them. When he was trying to get Belte, Seattle's rumored demands were far from reasonable. If that's the case, then I'd rather see Billy stand pat and roll the dice with what we have this year than make a deal that hurts us in the future. Also, Seattle's FO is just a total mess right now. They want to get rid of their white elephants, but they expect top dollar in return.
In this regard, the Seattle GM has much in common with the average commentor on the Strib blogs.
Now, that's just plain mean. But, yeah, there's obviously a pattern here. They are trying like hell to sucker someone and in the process, they've been unable to cut their losses. The Mariners can put Washburn out there again, but this time it would be irrevocable waivers. If they were smart, they'd do that. Would the Twins claim him? Maybe, but they'd have to hope that the Yankees wouldn't claim him first. (I'm hoping that the Yankees would claim him first.) The Mariners need to be torn down, but I don't think their front office is willing to admit that yet.
I think we're also seeing that the Mariners aren't just going to dump salary. They have more revenue coming in than a team in a similar market, so none of their moves are because of financial constraints. It looks like they are just trying to bring in young talent. Dumping Washburn's salary would probably help them be able to sign a free agent next year, but maybe they have learned from recent mistakes in the free agent market.
Also, Washburn is far from their worst problem in the rotation. In fact, he's probably been their second or maybe third best starter. I'm sure Silva was put on waivers, but no one was dumb enough to risk taking on that contract.
The Mariners' biggest problem is how much they gave for Bedard. I think they are using that as a standard comparison for prospects they get for veterans.
I think the point a lot of people have been making about Washburn is that that $10 million can be so much better spent. Invest in the farm system, get a bat (have you seen their DH situation?), anything. Plus, if xFIP is your thing, he's only Miguel Batista away from being the worst starter this year on their club. Worse than old Carlos. Just dump the salary and try to do something else with it. Now, they are stuck. The market for Washburn in the offseason is going to be non-existent.
Dumping Washburn's salary would probably help them be able to sign a free agent next year, but maybe they have learned from recent mistakes in the free agent market.
Not all free agent signings are Jarrod Washburn and Carlos Silva for $TEXAS. Signing free agents and making good decisions are not mutually exclusive.
This makes it sound pretty bad. The Twins were apparently willing to take on Washburn's contract and deal Boof for Washburn. Washburn doesn't do anything that Boof can't already do for a lot cheaper. Sometime next year, I think the Twins will be pretty glad they didn't make that deal.
They are drinking a big cup of stupid in Seattle. I just don't know what to think of this from our side of the deal. I mean, are we that dumb? Seriously? I think we are.
I mean even Joe C. is publicly scratching his head on this one.
I really want to be patient when it comes to judging Bill Smith, but he really seems to be GM'ing by cliche. Gomez was fast, so he was going to spark the offense at the top of the order. Delmon had a bunch of RBI last year, so he was going to be a run producer. Livan had his 200 IP streak, so he was going eat innings, 83 mph "fastball" be damned. Washburn is left-handed and has veteran experience, so Smith probably figured that he could move Perkins to the bullpen to limit his innings (Perkins is the only guy who remotely makes sense to move to the bullpen right now, since he has already had experience there, and they aren't moving Liriano out of the rotation.)
It would make some sense if Washburn was actually good, but I don't think that Smith really has much ability to evaluate players. I have faith that the Twins have a lot of smart people in their organization (particularly scouts at the lower levels), but I don't have much faith that Bill Smith is the right guy to lead them.
I'm not that down on Smith and it's way to early to define him (not that you've done that.) Smith was hired for his acumen with contracts and negotiations. Radcliffe, Rantz and co. are supposed to bring the player expertise the the table, plus they have Ryan to lean on who can provide valuable insight from both perspectives. I really don't mind having someone dispassionate or somewhat removed from pure player evaluation as King Solomon. Gomez was supposed to be more than just speed, and the fascination with speed pre-dates Smith anyway. I think he's playing from the same playbook. There's too much institutional knowledge there to mess things up too bad.
There's too much institutional knowledge there to mess things up too bad.
I don't disagree with that. But there's also too much conventional/conservative thinking that could easily prevent the team from making the right moves to significantly improve the roster, both now and in the long run. In hindsight this Washburn incident is more troubling than surprising. Having missed the boat on making a smart move or two before the trade deadline when we had two clear opportunities to improve (RH bat and setup relief), the FO now seems to be willing to make a dumb move just to demonstrate that they're not overcome by inertia. We got lucky in this case that their conventional thinking about the value of our own starting pitching, and Seattle's demonstrated propensity to overvalue their white elephants, prevented the deal from happening.
Very well stated, even if it is damn scary. The Twins have the reputation as one of the last 'old school' front offices, and it is the lower-level scouts that have propelled the team to success. Baseball could be at the point where the anti-statistical darlings are undervalued and the Twins could luck into some bargains, but it will be a boom/bust situation.
I guess this move makes a little sense if Washburn's contract expired at the end of this season, but to commit to $10mm next season is ridiculous considering there are already 5 youngsters holding down the rotation. How is Washburn any better than Boof or Livan?
Bradford wasn't worth a claim, but Washburn is? WTF?
Bradford wasn't worth a claim, but Washburn is? WTF?
Here's the part that has part of my brain begging me to just start ranting incoherently about this whole thing like some raving lunatic: they were apparently pursuing Washburn to shore up the bullpen. So, no go on Bradford, a fairly effective reliever at a decent price, but balls out on Washburn so that they can turn Perkins into a reliever? God, the stupid. It burns!
Fortunately, the M's are proof positive that there's more stupid out there.
At least the Twins are trying? This team was not given a chance really in the offseason (including me I thought they were at best an 81-81 team). The exception was Michael Cuddyer. From what I remember of the press reports from Spring Training was that he was thinking that the Twins were going to be good, and even made up some t-shirts. But didnt really expand on the meaning ('162-0' or something to that effect). The Twins, even after eating Livan's contract, is still under budget (from what I understand). Why not take a gamble?
I wonder how many players the Twins have claimed but were low in the pecking order and have not been reported in the press.
its only been about a year since Bill Smith has taken over in the GM role. If managers are given a grace period, I would think the GM role would have a bit of a longer leash. They cant just dump everybody and hire 20 new players in a year. Im willing to give Billy Smith another offseason to make any judgements.