Comments on: A look at Nick Blackburn’s new contract

By: Ragstoriches

Ragstoriches — Tue, 09 Mar 2010 14:29:48 +0000

Well Gleeman’s suggesting Nathan’s done for the year. At least we won’t have to see him melt down in the playoffs this year. Him or any of the other Twins, probably.

By: Ragstoriches

Ragstoriches — Tue, 09 Mar 2010 14:26:37 +0000

It’s a ridiculously small sample size, but he’s pitched very well in big games – Game 163 in ‘08, Game 2 vs. the Yanks, down the stretch last year in general. If the Twins want to do anything in the playoffs they need a go-to pitcher. So I think it’s a reasonable risk to take.

By: FunBobby

FunBobby — Mon, 08 Mar 2010 19:51:53 +0000

I think a lot of the people who are “giddy”, don’t understand that Blackburn wasn’t going anywhere anytime soon. The twins website has a headline that is something like “Twins lock up Blackburn”. We locked up cost certainty. Blackburn wouldn’t be eligible to leave the Twins for several years.

By: sirsean

sirsean — Mon, 08 Mar 2010 19:11:18 +0000

I find Gleeman's demeanor to be fairly sour about everything the Twins' front office does, and thus the fact that he isn't excited about a deal is basically meaningless to me.

Looking at Blackburn's K rate alone ignores his solid 2.46 career K/BB ratio. And while he's not a super groundball pitcher he does generate a good amount of them and should stand to benefit from a vastly improved infield defense behind him (more than the other pitchers, probably).

Maybe I'm wearing rose-colored glasses. On the other hand, maybe I'm just not wearing shit-colored glasses like Gleeman always does.

By: rghrbek

rghrbek — Mon, 08 Mar 2010 16:59:44 +0000

By “rosy” I mean other blogs out there, not FG. This one was positive, and posted numbers to explain, but not giddy like a few others I have read.

By: rghrbek

rghrbek — Mon, 08 Mar 2010 16:55:48 +0000

No question this is an interesting topic. The Twins did not spend a lot of money here, so there are worse things that could've happened.

However, by buying out his service time, they are guaranteeing money to someone I am not sure will be pitching with us 3 years from now.

He's pitched well in some big spots. People want to point out how well he did down the stretch last year. He's had basically identical years, that have been serviceable.

However, He gave up more hits than anyone last year, he's not a true ground ball pitcher, our ball park dimensions are smaller and have less room in foul territory than before. He pitched terrible mid year and then pitched well against the worst teams in baseball. I mean all of this makes me uneasy. I can't shake all the Silva comparisons.

Gleeman and the Twins Geek agree that this is risky, if you want to read different perspectives, that are not all rosy.