Minnesota Twins News & Rumors Forum
Page 2 of 8 FirstFirst 1234 ... LastLast
Results 21 to 40 of 153

Thread: Twins' Trade Bait and Why the Twins Should Sell

  1. #21
    Agreed, but it's not just for salary relief. It's for one of Seattle's top five prospects.

  2. #22
    Quote Originally Posted by strumdatjag View Post
    Correia and Willingham are trade-able. It would be crazy to trade Hughes, Morales and Suzuki.
    Correia has very little value now. Could be part of an August waiver deal, though. Not at all crazy to move Hughes, Morales, and Suzuki. Maybe a little for Hughes, but Morales was basically trade bait the moment he signed, and Suzuki was a pleasant surprise that you can't pass up on when a contender is in need of a catcher.

  3. #23
    Quote Originally Posted by Twinsoholic View Post
    I don't know if anyone has mentioned this elsewhere, but I have to believe that Pino, if he pitches well, would be a trade piece. His numbers at AAA are fantastic, but he's not going to fetch much as a AAA pitcher. Giving him a shot to pitch at the MLB level increases his trade value if he pitches well. Of course, if he pitches well, one might ask "why trade him," but with Meyer, May, Berrios, and Darnell and Johnson also pitching well, Pino is sort of a placeholder. If he pitches well, he could be potentially flipped to a team looking for pitching help in July. The Twins could then shift May or Meyer or Johnson/Darnell into his rotation spot. Pitchers who are effective will always have trade value even if they are thirty year old rookies.
    Contrary to popular belief, I highly doubt there is a GM in baseball that is as dumb as some of us Twins fans would love to believe. Short term success is not going to increase trade value to anything more than the nearly nothing we could have gotten for him yesterday. This guy could have been had by anybody 5 short months ago...

  4. #24
    Quote Originally Posted by GoGonzoJournal View Post
    Correia has very little value now. Could be part of an August waiver deal, though. Not at all crazy to move Hughes, Morales, and Suzuki. Maybe a little for Hughes, but Morales was basically trade bait the moment he signed, and Suzuki was a pleasant surprise that you can't pass up on when a contender is in need of a catcher.
    I would also point out that trading a guy like Morales right now proves that fans don't always understand the human aspect of player development. Let's be honest, if you are a free agent, and you see a team that is willing to trade a player less than 2 weeks after signing that player, the person is going to be incredibly leery of that team.

    I know it is hard for us to always thing of the players as more than a commodity, but in building a long term brand, it MUST be considered.

  5. These 3 users like Intramural Legend's post and want to buy him/her a steak dinner:

    Highabove (06-19-2014), Sam Morley (06-19-2014), Siehbiscuit (06-19-2014)

  6. #25
    Senior Member Triple-A
    Posts
    498
    Like
    2
    Liked 80 Times in 50 Posts
    Fans massively overrate the trade value of their team's players. Many players mentioned have literally zero trade value (or even negative value - other teams don't want to pay their salary).

    Hughes obviously won't be traded so its purely philosophical, but I don't see a credible argument in favor. He gets paid very little for even a decent mid rotation starter, let alone someone at his current performance level.

  7. These 3 users like drivlikejehu's post and want to buy him/her a steak dinner:

    Beezer07 (06-19-2014), Intramural Legend (06-18-2014), James (06-19-2014)

  8. #26
    Quote Originally Posted by Thrylos View Post
    I think that they should sell high on Dozier, because his reminds me a lot of this guy (check how the OPS is driven by SLG and the BA and OBP levels) and his peak will not even be close to that guy's, but he does have value now.
    I do not see a problem with listening to offers for Dozier but would be extremely hesitant to deal him with the amount of team control he has left. While they have a couple similarities the Uggla comparison is a bit off the mark. Dozier probably won't sustain the type of power Uggla had at his peak but is a better defender, strikes out a bit less and is a threat on the base paths.

  9. This user likes HansGruber's post and wants to buy him/her a steak dinner:

    gunnarthor (06-19-2014)

  10. #27
    Senior Member Big-Leaguer Highabove's Avatar
    Posts
    584
    Like
    25
    Liked 22 Times in 15 Posts
    The Twins number one priority, is to have a better and more entertaining product on the field. The Twins realize that they have to stop the exodus from Target Field. Making wholesale trades in the name of prospects will not cut it this early in the season. Like it or not, that's the reality.
    Last edited by Highabove; 06-18-2014 at 09:02 PM.

  11. This user likes Highabove's post and wants to buy him/her a steak dinner:

    Monkeypaws (06-19-2014)

  12. #28
    Longtime lurker, but I had to register to respond to this…Trading Hughes would be detrimental and I think shortsighted (on the same level as trading JJ Hardy for Jim Hoey) for a team that's close to competing. Sure he could fetch a nice prospect, but it's important to remember the point of signing guys in the first place: to be competitive. The goal is to build a team that can win the world series. When you start unloading top of the rotation starters that are under contract for three years, which we know don't fall from the sky, you are acting against your own interests.

  13. These 2 users like RonCoomer's post and want to buy him/her a steak dinner:

    h2oface (06-20-2014), Siehbiscuit (06-19-2014)

  14. #29
    Senior Member Triple-A
    Posts
    287
    Like
    10
    Liked 39 Times in 27 Posts
    Blog Entries
    1
    I couldn't disagree more on Hughes. He seems comfortable here and has a team friendly contract, at some point we have to keep some of these players. Dozier also née to be extended. Suzuki I am torn about. I don't think he keeps up his hitting pace, but we have no one to replace him except signing another FA, so I would actually keep him also. Willingham will probably not be back next year with Rosario probably ready, unless he is your full time DH, meaning Morales is gone. However, they would be blocking Vargas, who I hope gets at least a September callup this year.

    Good trading chips are Hammer and Morales. Trade Correia and Duensing for whatever you can get

  15. #30
    Senior Member All-Star
    Posts
    1,243
    Like
    106
    Liked 104 Times in 76 Posts
    The only reason to trade Hughes is if he said he would never sign another contract with the Twins. Trading Dozier would also be an act of foolishness. The twins just lost three games they should have won because...they can't hit! Dozier is one of the few who can actually hit a HR (and play some defense). Trade Suzuki? Who will play catcher? Pinto is barely adequate as a backup catcher. The minor league catchers? puhlease!

    I believe this season was built around the premise of veteran ballplayers, especially those who have "won before". The Twins need to finish this 'tack" until they are satisfied that a major rebuild is required.

  16. #31
    Twins Moderator All-Star diehardtwinsfan's Avatar
    Posts
    4,381
    Like
    415
    Liked 813 Times in 513 Posts
    Blog Entries
    3
    I'm not against them selling. Not terribly against them going for it either. Selling on Hughes though is a bad idea. Morales, Suzuki, and KC are all free agents this offseason, none of which are getting a QO, so I don't see a problem trading them if the Twins don't feel they are in the long term plan. The fact that they signed Morales though indicates to me that they have no intention of selling.

  17. #32
    Junior Member Rookie
    Posts
    22
    Like
    0
    Liked 17 Times in 9 Posts
    Even players we perceive as having little or no value can end up helping. At the time Liriano had 'no value' and now we have Escobar. At the time Morneau had 'no value', and to Pittsburg he was of no value-but we end up with Kris Johnson out of the deal. Ryan Doumit had 'no value' but we got Gilmartin out of it. And last but not least(or is it first in this type of discussion) is the great Drew Butera. His trade for Michael Sulburan was nothing more than an afterthought, but half a season later it brought us Eduardo Nunez who is proving to be a pretty valuable guy.

    So my point is-in this quest to get the Twins back to being a legitimate post season threat no deal should be left unexplored. I want the Twins to get back to being great and when they get there I want them to stay there. That requires both short and long term vision. The deals I mentioned above show that there has been at least a little of both since TR has been back in charge. And that is why I am optimistic about this season and beyond.

  18. These 2 users like zwiefz's post and want to buy him/her a steak dinner:

    gunnarthor (06-19-2014), Siehbiscuit (06-19-2014)

  19. #33
    Senior Member Triple-A DocBauer's Avatar
    Posts
    457
    Like
    219
    Liked 173 Times in 98 Posts
    Blog Entries
    10
    I appreciate the enthusiasm. I really do. But no. No pretty much across the board.

    Hughes is still young, a former top 100 prospect who had #2 starter potential "ace" ability. His career has been marked with high and low inconsistency. He seems to have found new life, new hope, and a new home. And dare I say it, is pitching like an ACE. You don't trade that. Especially when this team is getting so close with its young talent.

    Morales is a proven veteran producer, recently signed. Not sure what the rules dictate about trading him so soon, but again I say no. I'm in favor of actually trying to re-sign him. Again, he's a proven producer, and this offense needs some of that, this year, and next, awaiting the arrival of youngsters.

    I am sooo tired of hearing how the Twins should have traded Willingham after his career in 2012. Who was clamoring then to trade our best HR RBI threat when that season ended? Nobody I'd say. 20-20 backwards vision is always a great thing. Now? If he keeps producing he might bring something to a team making a move. I'm not opposed. But he's just going to bring back a top prospect at this point. Is he more valuable to us this season or an A prospect. Heck, he might even be an option for us next season on a 1 year deal.

    Correia, gone next season anyway, if he continues his positive trend, might be the one guy who might have value for a contending team to flush out its rotation.

    Suzuki? He might have some decent value. But to me, he's a lot like Willinham in that he might be more valuable to us than what he brings. And what about next season? Let's say Pinto is ready to catch 50-75% off all games next season as our primary C, and I hope he is, who is the backup? Re-signing Suzuki might be a better option than hitting the FA market again.

  20. These 3 users like DocBauer's post and want to buy him/her a steak dinner:

    70charger (06-18-2014), Siehbiscuit (06-19-2014), TFelton (06-19-2014)

  21. #34
    Twins Moderator MVP ashburyjohn's Avatar
    Posts
    8,678
    Like
    2,653
    Liked 3,302 Times in 1,753 Posts
    Blog Entries
    28
    Quote Originally Posted by DocBauer View Post
    I am sooo tired of hearing how the Twins should have traded Willingham after his career in 2012. Who was clamoring then to trade our best HR RBI threat when that season ended? Nobody I'd say. 20-20 backwards vision is always a great thing.
    The backwards vision also needs to include this fact: Josh ended the 2012 season injured.

    Nobody had outbid the Twins, because durability was the issue. He then had a career year, but confirmed the worries at the end. The other teams may have been happy to let a bottom-feeder team like the Twins assume the risk inherent in the contract, and then swoop in if the risk proved to be negligible. That scenario did not wind up playing out.

    The contract hasn't turned out to be team friendly; it's instead been approximately market-correct all in all (with some months left to go of course). You don't get much in trade, for a contract perceived to be market-correct - otherwise, the team you're trading with would have signed him in the first place.
    Last edited by ashburyjohn; 06-18-2014 at 11:32 PM.

  22. #35
    Senior Member Triple-A
    Posts
    395
    Like
    3
    Liked 149 Times in 78 Posts
    People tend to over-react after a bad loss. You can't trade Willingham and Morales and Corriea and Deduno Suzuki and Burton and Duensing and Hughes.

    Corriea and Burton should be traded as soon as you can get anything for them. Willingham, Morales and Suzuki should be traded if we're not withing 4-5 games on 7/31. Duensing or Deduno if the offer makes sense.

    Trading Hughes or Dozier is completely foolish. We are trying to build a legit contender in 2015. Trading away guys who should clearly be key players in it is not the answer.

  23. This user likes howeda7's post and wants to buy him/her a steak dinner:

    Butterfingers8 (06-19-2014)

  24. #36
    Trading Hughes would be utterly stupid. Give me an all-star quality pitcher, especially with a team friendly Deal, in the prime of his career, over a prospect any day!

  25. #37
    Senior Member All-Star
    Posts
    1,492
    Like
    154
    Liked 141 Times in 74 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by strumdatjag View Post
    Correia and Willingham are trade-able. It would be crazy to trade Hughes, Morales and Suzuki.
    Why would it be crazy to trade Suzuki or Morales?
    They are both here on 1 year deals. These are exactly the kind of players that selling teams SHOULD be trading.

  26. #38
    Twins News Team All-Star TheLeviathan's Avatar
    Posts
    4,839
    Like
    177
    Liked 664 Times in 375 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by DocBauer View Post
    I am sooo tired of hearing how the Twins should have traded Willingham after his career in 2012. Who was clamoring then to trade our best HR RBI threat when that season ended? Nobody I'd say.
    This did not require hindsight. I know I was one of a few back in 2012 BEGGING the Twins to sell high on him at the deadline. The guy was mashing in July, he screamed "I'm only going to get hurt a lot in the future", and his odds of matching that production were slim.

    People, mistakenly, convinced themselves an injury prone guy with a softball player's body was going to somehow become more productive and durable into his mid-30s and be more valuable in the final year of his contract. (The argument was that an additional 2 years and 14M was somehow destroying his trade value in 2012)

    Some of us were railing against that aggressively back in 2012 and, yes, clamoring for us to move him. No 20-20 hindsight required on that one - every argument made by the advocates in 2012 of dealing Willingham came true because none of it should be all that shocking if you look at his career.

  27. #39
    Considering trade offers should always be looked at if you are not contending, certainly on players who are not signed for next year. You would have to blown away with an offer for Hughes or Dozier to consider trading them sense they are under team control for a reseasonble amount.

  28. #40
    Twins News Team MVP
    Posts
    6,738
    Like
    870
    Liked 851 Times in 547 Posts
    Blog Entries
    3
    Quote Originally Posted by TheLeviathan View Post
    This did not require hindsight. I know I was one of a few back in 2012 BEGGING the Twins to sell high on him at the deadline. The guy was mashing in July, he screamed "I'm only going to get hurt a lot in the future", and his odds of matching that production were slim.

    People, mistakenly, convinced themselves an injury prone guy with a softball player's body was going to somehow become more productive and durable into his mid-30s and be more valuable in the final year of his contract. (The argument was that an additional 2 years and 14M was somehow destroying his trade value in 2012)

    Some of us were railing against that aggressively back in 2012 and, yes, clamoring for us to move him. No 20-20 hindsight required on that one - every argument made by the advocates in 2012 of dealing Willingham came true because none of it should be all that shocking if you look at his career.
    Yep, we were in the exact same camp, and on these very pages, too. Signing veteran FAs, on a rebuilding team- as clearly the Twins were at the time, behooves said team to move any of those FA assets upon which they temporarily strike gold. The Twins had little left to sell high with after trading Span and Revere, they clearly missed the chance after the 2012 season. Josh had a career year in 2012- and a history of injuries longer than his shirt sleeve.

    Of course they should have moved Willingham, just as many of us also clamored that they should have moved, rather than extended (dumb!), Jared Burton and Ryan Doumit, for whatever they could get after the end of 2012.

Page 2 of 8 FirstFirst 1234 ... LastLast

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
©2014 TwinsCentric, LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Interested in advertising with Twins Daily? Click here.