Thread: Reds SS Zack Cozart for... Ben Revere?

Originally Posted by edavis0308

All I am saying is it isnt a good way to run a team to draft and trade for players of lesser talent because they fill a more pressing need.

There are people on this board speculating as what to do in terms of a trade, not people running a team. For the most part Ryan's trades end up about equall or better return in the talent trading department.

Originally Posted by nicksaviking

Originally Posted by edavis0308

Originally Posted by old nurse

Originally Posted by SpiritofVodkaDave

[

That's a goodway to not maximize value then. If a team is going to offer you either a:

B+ Prospect who plays middle INF, or a C+/B- prospect who is a pitcher the Twins would be quite foolish to take the pitcher just because "there is a greater need"

If you do not have enough B- pitching prospect available to fill your needs then you have to trade for what is scarcer. You can always pick up another MI, for younger prospects. You might not always find a pitching rich team.

That's not the most efficient method of doing things though. It's like drafting a pitcher for the sake of needing pitchers instead of drafting best player available. If you always draft to need and not to talent available, you are making your overall system weaker in the process.

Except the Twins GM has proven time and time again that he is afraid to sign free agent pitchers to multi-year deals. Therefore, the only way to get a controlable pitcher is to trade for one. Ryan is not afraid to sign offensive free agent vets.

Besides, it's not like the teams we are talking about are talent rich in offense, the Braves, Reds, Rays and Mariners have much better pitching options to deal than they do on offense. Anyone who thinks there is more value in future utility player Didi Gregarius than in Tony Cingrani, Daniel Corcino or Robert Stephenson is crazy. Trade for cheap young promising pitching and then you can afford to overpay a little to make sure you get your veteran middle infielder. Otherwise your trading for an a uninspriring guy like Gregorius and end up paying top dollar for short term uninspiring starters.

I'd rather rather have a Cingrani or Mike Minor and pay Stephen Drew or Jeff Keppinger on the open market, then end up with Gregorius or Tyler Pastronicky and have to settle for Joe Saunders or Joe Blanton.

You may well be correct that the Twins should pursue a starter prospect instead of a SS. Still, the premise of the discussion was about getting a SS. So, if getting a SS is the goal, then I doubt that the Twins will pick up a better option than Cozart or Gregorious for a player like Span or Revere (both of whom are good players, but not stars). I also think that you're wrong about the value of Gregorius. He's a prospect, which by definition means that he may not pan out. But his potential, both offensively and defensively, and how close he is to being ready make him one of the best SS prospect bets the Twins could make (again, assuming a young SS is the way they want to go).

Originally Posted by nicksaviking

Except the Twins GM has proven time and time again that he is afraid to sign free agent pitchers to multi-year deals. Therefore, the only way to get a controlable pitcher is to trade for one. Ryan is not afraid to sign offensive free agent vets.

What is "proven" in the context of a $40 million payroll and the Metrodome is not proven when we're talking about a $90 million payroll at Target Field. Let's not forget that this is Terry Ryan's first offseason with the new-look Twins. A little patience, please.

Originally Posted by edavis0308

All I am saying is it isnt a good way to run a team to draft and trade for players of lesser talent because they fill a more pressing need.

Drafting and trading are different... Surely you can see that... You don't draft for need because your needs change by the time they are ready... Trading for needs is exactly why you trade in the first place. I have a need... Lets make a trade and try to fix it. If you didn't have a need... There would be no trades.

Right? I'm not crazy here. Yes we need a SS... But we need pitching much much much much much more. We don't have a ton of trade chips so use them wisely. Why make a deal for a .50 to .100 uptick in OPS. What does that accomplish when your pitching staff is collectively over 5 ERA.

Hey we needed relief pitching help a few years ago so we gave up an all star shortstop for relief help, which was of bigger need. How'd that work out?

Originally Posted by 70charger

Originally Posted by nicksaviking

Except the Twins GM has proven time and time again that he is afraid to sign free agent pitchers to multi-year deals. Therefore, the only way to get a controlable pitcher is to trade for one. Ryan is not afraid to sign offensive free agent vets.

What is "proven" in the context of a $40 million payroll and the Metrodome is not proven when we're talking about a $90 million payroll at Target Field. Let's not forget that this is Terry Ryan's first offseason with the new-look Twins. A little patience, please.

Ryan was GM in the mid 1990's as well when payrolls were pretty flat across the league and salaries were not exponentioally larger than league minimum. Only once did he sign a non-Twin starter to more than one year. We don't need patience, we've seen proof. He's amongst the most conservative GM's in the league, but hopefully he'll feel motivated to change if he feels the entire front office's job is on the line.

Below is a graph of the so-called 'flat across the league' salaries of the mid to late 90's. Please note that the average Yankee's payroll is 3x that of the Twins!

Another 14 teams are >2-fold higher than the Twins. Of course, this doesn't prove that TRyan will not be afraid
to sign veterans, just that he really didn't have the opportunity in the 90's as you indicated.



http://www.stlsports.com/articles/ja.mlbsalaries.html

Originally Posted by edavis0308

Hey we needed relief pitching help a few years ago so we gave up an all star shortstop for relief help, which was of bigger need. How'd that work out?

Hey, that was Bill Smith. Guess who is no longer GM. The Hardy saga has been well discussed on this board. Try again to name a trade that RYAN made where he got burned.

Originally Posted by nicksaviking

Originally Posted by 70charger

Originally Posted by nicksaviking

Except the Twins GM has proven time and time again that he is afraid to sign free agent pitchers to multi-year deals. Therefore, the only way to get a controlable pitcher is to trade for one. Ryan is not afraid to sign offensive free agent vets.

What is "proven" in the context of a $40 million payroll and the Metrodome is not proven when we're talking about a $90 million payroll at Target Field. Let's not forget that this is Terry Ryan's first offseason with the new-look Twins. A little patience, please.

Ryan was GM in the mid 1990's as well when payrolls were pretty flat across the league and salaries were not exponentioally larger than league minimum. Only once did he sign a non-Twin starter to more than one year. We don't need patience, we've seen proof. He's amongst the most conservative GM's in the league, but hopefully he'll feel motivated to change if he feels the entire front office's job is on the line.

The minimum wage is negotiated by the union. The upper limit on a player's salary is whaat someone will pay. Even the union realizes there are some limitations to their portion of the revenue. Why would they take fromthemselves to givee to the rookies in the form of higher pay.

Originally Posted by edavis0308

Hey we needed relief pitching help a few years ago so we gave up an all star shortstop for relief help, which was of bigger need. How'd that work out?

I'm not sure how to respond to that. I guess the first thing that comes to mind is WTF does Hardy for Hoey have to do with anything. The second thing that comes to mind is... I'm not sure cuz I have to keep coming back to WTF does Hardy for Hoey have to do with anything.

It was a bad trade and it may be part of the reason Bill Smith is currently hanging around architects in Lee County Florida.

The Royals need pitching so they acquire Santana... The Angels need less payroll so they trade him. Need is the cornerstone of all trades. I'm really not sure that you want to argue that point but go ahead.

Originally Posted by edavis0308

Originally Posted by old nurse

Originally Posted by SpiritofVodkaDave

[

That's a goodway to not maximize value then. If a team is going to offer you either a:

B+ Prospect who plays middle INF, or a C+/B- prospect who is a pitcher the Twins would be quite foolish to take the pitcher just because "there is a greater need"

If you do not have enough B- pitching prospect available to fill your needs then you have to trade for what is scarcer. You can always pick up another MI, for younger prospects. You might not always find a pitching rich team.

That's not the most efficient method of doing things though. It's like drafting a pitcher for the sake of needing pitchers instead of drafting best player available. If you always draft to need and not to talent available, you are making your overall system weaker in the process.

and when exactly do you consider need? Using this logic, you will end up of a top 10 that consists solely of outfielders. I get that you should always take the BPA, but at one point, need has to be factored in.

Originally Posted by edavis0308

Hey we needed relief pitching help a few years ago so we gave up an all star shortstop for relief help, which was of bigger need. How'd that work out?

considering we had no depth in the middle infield, I'd say poorly... Middle infield and starting pitching are what commands a premium in baseball.

That said, I can tell you this. Not one person who is saying trade for need likely liked the JJ trade. That should tell you everything you need to know about it.

Why would you want Hamilton?

But Ryan was still involved with the team during Smith's reign. He wasn't drinking pina coladas with Ginger and Mary Ann in some lagoon in the Pacific.

Originally Posted by 70charger

What is "proven" in the context of a $40 million payroll and the Metrodome is not proven when we're talking about a $90 million payroll at Target Field. Let's not forget that this is Terry Ryan's first offseason with the new-look Twins. A little patience, please.

This isn't Terry Ryan's first offseason with the new-look Twins. Or did someone else sign Willingham, Doumit and Carroll last winter?

Originally Posted by USAFChief

Originally Posted by 70charger

What is "proven" in the context of a $40 million payroll and the Metrodome is not proven when we're talking about a $90 million payroll at Target Field. Let's not forget that this is Terry Ryan's first offseason with the new-look Twins. A little patience, please.

This isn't Terry Ryan's first offseason with the new-look Twins. Or did someone else sign Willingham, Doumit and Carroll last winter?

Yeah, that's my bad. But I do think that my point still stands.

Originally Posted by old nurse

Originally Posted by nicksaviking

Originally Posted by 70charger

Originally Posted by nicksaviking

Except the Twins GM has proven time and time again that he is afraid to sign free agent pitchers to multi-year deals. Therefore, the only way to get a controlable pitcher is to trade for one. Ryan is not afraid to sign offensive free agent vets.

What is "proven" in the context of a $40 million payroll and the Metrodome is not proven when we're talking about a $90 million payroll at Target Field. Let's not forget that this is Terry Ryan's first offseason with the new-look Twins. A little patience, please.

Ryan was GM in the mid 1990's as well when payrolls were pretty flat across the league and salaries were not exponentioally larger than league minimum. Only once did he sign a non-Twin starter to more than one year. We don't need patience, we've seen proof. He's amongst the most conservative GM's in the league, but hopefully he'll feel motivated to change if he feels the entire front office's job is on the line.

The minimum wage is negotiated by the union. The upper limit on a player's salary is whaat someone will pay. Even the union realizes there are some limitations to their portion of the revenue. Why would they take fromthemselves to givee to the rookies in the form of higher pay.

I'm seriously not trying to pick a fight, but I really don't have a clue what this has to do with the discussion about whether TR will finally open up the pocketbook to pay for legit pitchers. Besides, it's not the money Ryan is afraid of so much as it is the years. A higher team payroll isn't going to suddenly make him feel comfotable giving out a four year deal.

The years is really about money though, right? Not wanting to over commit to money in the future.

I think we need to step back and reboot the discussion with the topic at hand a bit. We are all obviously taking completely different looks at things here.

All I am saying is that, of our best trade chips, we shouldn't trade them for mediocre pitching for the sake of acquiring pitching if that same trade chip could have been used to acquire better talent than that. If we can get decent pitching for it - that is fantastic. Don't like the term mediocre pitching? Plug something else into it. The point there still remains. The Hardy trade was brought up (I know it has been discussed at great lengths and everyone is tired of it) because Hardy was dealt for a need, power arms, when he could have likely been traded for a better return than that.

And yes, you don't want to take the BPA in the draft for ten years straight if the best player every year is an OF. On the flip side, you don't want to draft for need for 10 years in a row either... but that's another topic entirely.

Originally Posted by edavis0308

I think we need to step back and reboot the discussion with the topic at hand a bit. We are all obviously taking completely different looks at things here.

All I am saying is that, of our best trade chips, we shouldn't trade them for mediocre pitching for the sake of acquiring pitching if that same trade chip could have been used to acquire better talent than that. If we can get decent pitching for it - that is fantastic. Don't like the term mediocre pitching? Plug something else into it. The point there still remains. The Hardy trade was brought up (I know it has been discussed at great lengths and everyone is tired of it) because Hardy was dealt for a need, power arms, when he could have likely been traded for a better return than that.

And yes, you don't want to take the BPA in the draft for ten years straight if the best player every year is an OF. On the flip side, you don't want to draft for need for 10 years in a row either... but that's another topic entirely.

I getcha Davis... I guess it all rests upon whose definition of mediocre pitching. Mediocre Pitching in my definition is what we currently have.

I honestly don't believe there is a position player that is reachable for us via trade that can overcome our own Mediocre pitching. Trading for Jose Reyes would be fantastic but it wouldn't do much for the Twins in my opinion because the pitching will render the acquisition worthless. Jose Reyes simply couldn't add enough offense to overcome the pitching staff.

Cozart is an improvement but the addition of Cozart will not overcome the pitching hole that we have. We need to acquire arms that are better then what we have and we have limited trade options to accomplish it. No one wants to see a trade of Span for Marquis... Hopefully if Span is dealt it will be for someone with a little more upside.

A direct infusion into the rotation would be much better for the club than an improvement in spots 2 thru 9. I think we are on the same page... Neither of us want a desparation trade for pitching that nets us Marquis.