Twins Risk Getting (Black)-Burned

Minnesota Twins announce they have come to an agreement with RHP Nick Blackburn on a 4-year, $14 million contract with an option for 2014.

Sometimes you need to make a move for more than just financial reasons. Sometimes you do it to avoid risk, or to put your team in a position to compete. Sometimes you do it to go that extra mile, or to signal to the league or your fan base that things have changed. And sometimes you do it because you just plain like a player and what he's done.

This should NOT have been one of those times.

I think it's fair to say, among the sabremetric set, I'm one of Blackburn's biggest believers. His critics throw the word "lucky" around a lot. They point to his low strikeout ratio, his high hit rate, and his mediocre groundball percentage. They look at his 4ish ERA and claim it will almost undoubtedly move the wrong way. They emphatically state that his luck is going to end.

And to that I say: so what? All of our luck is going to end. If he was lucky last year, and he was lucky the year before, who is to say that he won't be lucky again next year, and the next year, and the next?

The game is a game. There are infinite ways to play and win. We get so caught up in our own ability to identify the prototypical high upside power pitcher that we don't appreciate a guy who gets it done any other way. And Blackburn has unquestionably gotten the job done over the last two years, legitimately being the Twins best starting pitcher over that stretch. We should be celebrating this, not dreading the end of it.

So, to recap - I'm a Blackburn bobo. And I still don't like this deal.

To understand why, we need to understand the other option the Twins had. Blackburn is under their control for the next four years, regardless of whether they signed this deal or not. This year they could pay him whatever they wished. For each of the next three years, the Twins could have decided whether to offer arbitration to Blackburn, and then he would have been paid fair market value for a pitcher with his tenure and performance.

So one could take a look at what other pitchers with Blackburn's tenure and performance are making and have a pretty good idea, right now, what the Twins would have to pay Blackburn if they continued to retain him. The future would look something like this:

2010: $.7M
2011: ~$3M
2012: ~$6M
2013: ~$8M

And while we don't have a year-by-year breakdown of Blackburn's contract, a pretty good guess is that is looks like this:

2010: $.7M
2011: ~$2.8M
2012: ~$4.5M
2013: ~$6M

Which gets us back to why you do a deal like this. It has nothing to do with the guy, or the position your team is in, or sending signals to anyone. It only has to do with one thing: money.

Assuming the Twins were going to pay Blackburn for at least the next two years, they are risking about $10 million to potentially save about $4 million. I just don't think you can do that with a low strikeout pitcher. There's too much evidence that they aren't effective for a very long time.

And the Twins should KNOW this. They've done it twice recently. The first time was disastrous and the second time worked out better because the contract was shorter.

The shorter contract was with Carlos Silva, who agreed to a two-year deal with a third year option. Silva was great the first year and terrible the second year. The third-year option for $4 million was cheap enough that the Twins picked it up, Silva ate 200 innings with a 4.19 ERA and then signed his current deal with the Mariners. That worked out because the option year was just three years out.

But Blackburn's option year is five years out, which brings us to our second example: Joe Mays. Mays also had a low strikeout rate, a high hit rate, but had an incredible year in 2001, posting a 3.16 ERA over 232(!) innings. The Twins also signed him to a four-year deal with a fifth-year option for $20 million. (It was more than Blackburn's because Mays was already arbitration-eligible.)

Over the next four years, Mays pitched less than 400 innings, and posted a 5.81 ERA .

Mays' problems weren't necessarily related to his strikeout rate, as he struggled with injuries which included a reconstructive elbow surgery. But that's the point - there are already plenty of risks with young arms to worry about.

Given all those risks, there needs to be a compelling reason to sign a contract like this. And there just isn't one, just like there wasn't back on January 17th, 2002. I can practically copy and paste the conclusion:

I’m a Twins fan, and I hope I’m wrong about this. I hope Nick has a long and prosperous career. I hope executives in baseball circles laud Bill Smith for years to come. I even hope Jim Pohlad saves millions of dollars over the life of this contract. But from an impartial observer this looks like a $14M gamble on a somewhat questionable commodity that the Twins didn’t need to do.

Listening to Vegas

I hate the overrated/underrated game. You know how it goes: "such-and-such team is overrated/underrated" or "such-and-such team exceeded expectations." What I hate is that the standard is so nebulous. Give me something I can evaluate, like wins and losses.

For my money, the best standard for measuring expectations is the degenerate gamblers. Show me guys who have laid serious money on both sides of a number, and I'll show you guys who have done some homework. Which is why I made a point of sifting through some gambling sites tonight to see what the over/under wins number was for American League teams. (BTW, these are found at betus.com.)

AL West
Angels - 84.5
Rangers - 84.5
Mariners - 83.5
A's - 79.5

Here's why I'm glad I did this - because I already fell into the overrated/underrated trap. I've heard so many people tout the Mariners this year that I hinted six weeks ago that I think they're overrated. But 83.5 wins doesn't seem excessive. That feels about right for the Mariners.

By the way, if you're a big Baseball Prospectus PECOTA guy, here's your chance to put your money where your mouth is. PECOTA states that the Angels should win about 76 games this year, or 8.5 games less than Vegas. It's the biggest spread between PECOTA and Vegas in the American League. Bet the "under" and double your money.

And for the record, I wouldn't touch that "under" bet with a 10 ft pole. The Angels won 97 games last year, and now we think they're going to win just 84? And PECOTA thinks they'll lose an extra 21 games this year?

AL East
Red Sox 94.5
Yankees 94.5
Rays 89.5
Orioles 73.5
Blue Jays 71.5

Here's a shocker - the wild card team is likely coming from the AL East. Vegas' money is ranking the Rays as the underdog, which isn't totally shocking considering all the money that pours in from the Northeast. For the record, PECOTA likes the Rays a couple games more than Vegas and the Yankees a couple of games less, making it a much closer race. I'd love that to be true. I'd love to see the Yankees miss the playoffs. I'm small and bitter that way.

Now let's get to the one you've all been waiting for...

AL Central
Twins 83.5
White Sox 82.5
Tigers 80.5
Indians 74.5
Royals 71.5

That's the order I would come up with too, with the Twins and White Sox a step or two ahead of the Tigers, and way ahead of the Indians and Royals. But I think Vegas is underestimating the spread between the top two teams and the rest of the division. Both of those teams feel like they're 90-win teams. It would truly be a sucker bet to parlay two "over" bets in the same division, but that would tempt me.

Instead, can I bet against PECOTA? It lists the Twins, White Sox AND Tigers as 80 win teams. If only BP would open a casino.

At StarTribune.com: That's What Everyone Says

I'm a little worried about the non-existent Mauer contract extension.

Bill Smith's Report Card

It's been a great offseason for the Twins, to be sure. But what was so great about it?

On Sunday Nick Nelson and I were Doogie Wolfson's guests on AM1500, and I found myself in the minority on the best offseason move. Here's how they grade out:

Re-signing Carl Pavano (Grade: B)
Sometimes it's better to be lucky than good. Offering arbitration to Pavano was almost a no-brainer, because he was either going to result in a good draft pick or a one-year deal. The latter happened and that's fortunate for the Twins, because there weren't a lot of starting pitchers on the market that would have been a good fit. (And the one who was a decent fit was represented by Scott Boras.)

Signing Orlando Hudson (Grade: B+)
This is the move that is being universally praised, and I'm part of that universe. But just because we had to wait for it doesn't mean it was the most valuable move. Hudson is a great fit who fills gaps at both second base and the second lineup spot. But he was part of a slew of middle infielders who would be good fits, including Felipe Lopez who signed earlier this week at 1/4 of Hudson's salary. I'm adding the "+" grade because there are plenty of indications that the Twins stretched beyond their pre-planned budget to make this happen. That's gutsy, and a good sign for the future.

Signing Jim Thome (Grade: B+)
You have to love a bench signing the simultaneously:
1. boosts offense,
2. provides some veteran leadership and
3. reminds Delmon Young that playing the game for money is a privilege, not a right.
To be fair, this kind of guy also isn't exactly rare. Jermaine Dye is still out there. So is Garret Anderson. You can argue that either would be a better fit than the left-handed hitting Thome. But I'm adding a "+" because adding a bench bat like Thome was a stretch goal, and they achieved it.

Trading for JJ Hardy (Grade A+)
If Hardy goes belly up - and he's certainly gone belly up a couple of times in his career - then I'm dead wrong. But the Hardy move was almost the perfect way to start the offseason. The free agent market was stacked with second basemen and third basemen, but there was almost nothing at shortstop. Acquiring Hardy didn't just boost the lineup. More importantly, it gave the Twins the ability to sit back and let free agent prices come down. They did, and that's what made the Hudson and Thome signings possible.

Perhaps it was because the Hardy trade happened so early, or because it cost Twins fans the lovable Gremlin Carlos Gomez. But it seems like it was almost overlooked. It easily the most difficult of the offseason moves and I'll argue that it provided a solid basis for everything else the Twins did.

------------------------

If you're up early tomorrow morning, I hope you'll turn the dial over to the Powertrip Morning Show on KFAN. I'll be talking Twins with the Hawkey, Sludge and the Superstar at 7:20 and pimping the Twins Annual. If you can't listen locally on the radio, you can listen through their website.