Jump to content

Providing independent coverage of the Minnesota Twins.
Photo

3 Things

  • Please log in to reply
37 replies to this topic

#1 cmoss84

cmoss84

    Ft Myers Miracle

  • Members
  • 384 posts
  • LocationBakersfield, CA

Posted 22 May 2019 - 09:49 AM

I like the "3 Things" bit in the game thread introductions-so I am going to borrow it and use it for its own topic.

 

1) With starters going less innings these days, should a quality start be 5 innings and 2 earned runs or less instead of 6 and 3?

 

2) Will the Cleveland Indians be sellers at the deadline?

(Talk about a big decision for that team-which direction would you go if you were them?)

 

3) The Twins will have some pieces to move around, as many of you have eluded to. 

Here's my first deal:

Trade Ehire back to the Giants, along with Cave, Rooker and Jay for Will Smith and Trevor Gott. 

(This allows them to trade Crawford and/or Panik for more prospects. They need to blow it up and start over.)

  • Mike Frasier Law likes this

I'd rather have a bottle in front of me than a frontal lobotomy.


#2 alarp33

alarp33

    Member

  • Members
  • 2,185 posts

Posted 22 May 2019 - 10:04 AM

 

I like the "3 Things" bit in the game thread introductions-so I am going to borrow it and use it for its own topic.

 

1) With starters going less innings these days, should a quality start be 5 innings and 2 earned runs or less instead of 6 and 3?

 

2) Will the Cleveland Indians be sellers at the deadline?

(Talk about a big decision for that team-which direction would you go if you were them?)

 

3) The Twins will have some pieces to move around, as many of you have eluded to. 

Here's my first deal:

Trade Ehire back to the Giants, along with Cave, Rooker and Jay for Will Smith and Trevor Gott. 

(This allows them to trade Crawford and/or Panik for more prospects. They need to blow it up and start over.)

 

1) Who cares I guess? 

 

2) I think they very well may be. I don't think they should be - but their ownership seems to care more about the bottom line than winning. It seems to be pretty well known already they have no plans to try and sign Lindor long term, why not move him now? 

 

3) Would the Giants take that package for either of those guys individually, let alone both of them? Why do they want Ehire/ Cave if they are rebuilding?

  • IMissJoeMauer likes this

"The game has changed since I've entered, it's for bright, energetic negotiators moreso than anything I possess." - Terry Ryan 2007


#3 diehardtwinsfan

diehardtwinsfan

    G.O.A.T.

  • Twins Mods
  • 13,671 posts
  • Locationthe charred ruins of BYTO

Posted 22 May 2019 - 10:19 AM

The Giants won't take that trade.

  • Danchat, rghrbek, Nine of twelve and 1 other like this

#4 cmoss84

cmoss84

    Ft Myers Miracle

  • Members
  • 384 posts
  • LocationBakersfield, CA

Posted 22 May 2019 - 10:38 AM

 

1) Who cares I guess? 

 

2) I think they very well may be. I don't think they should be - but their ownership seems to care more about the bottom line than winning. It seems to be pretty well known already they have no plans to try and sign Lindor long term, why not move him now? 

 

3) Would the Giants take that package for either of those guys individually, let alone both of them? Why do they want Ehire/ Cave if they are rebuilding?

(1-Just a conversation piece. I am at work lol)

 

2) Fair take. Will be interesting to see which or any of the aces they unload as well.

 

3) Probably a bit light-we'd have to include a Nick Gordon-ish type prospect as well. Smith is in the last year of his contract. Ehire and Cave would be place holders. They need to trade away everyone and get as many prospects back as possible. Guess the point was we get 2 relievers without giving up our top guys. If we have to give up anything else than what I mentioned, why not just give up the draft pick and sign Kimbrel?

  • IMissJoeMauer likes this

I'd rather have a bottle in front of me than a frontal lobotomy.


#5 nicksaviking

nicksaviking

    Billy G.O.A.T

  • Twins Mods
  • 13,952 posts

Posted 22 May 2019 - 10:44 AM

Not sure about #3, I don't value Will Smith like others here, and Rooker has long been one of my favorites, that that doesn't sound right for the Giants. Not really any upside players and two of them are AAAA type players who require 40 man spots with Adrianza also out of options.

 

With his good defense, their large OF dimensions and a glimmer of hope with his bat, I could see the Giants actually valuing Cave more than other clubs and perhaps more than Twins fans though.

 

I don't see Adrianza having much appeal to rebuilding teams either. If anyone would want him, I'd think it would be a contending team that is desperate for MI depth. Rebuilding teams would probably prefer to let their version of Nick Gordon or Luis Arraez take their lumps in a down year.

  • SwainZag and Dman like this

#6 cmoss84

cmoss84

    Ft Myers Miracle

  • Members
  • 384 posts
  • LocationBakersfield, CA

Posted 22 May 2019 - 10:53 AM

 

Not sure about #3, I don't value Will Smith like others here, and Rooker has long been one of my favorites, that that doesn't sound right for the Giants. Not really any upside players and two of them are AAAA type players who require 40 man spots with Adrianza also out of options.

 

With his good defense, their large OF dimensions and a glimmer of hope with his bat, I could see the Giants actually valuing Cave more than other clubs and perhaps more than Twins fans though.

 

I don't see Adrianza having much appeal to rebuilding teams either. If anyone would want him, I'd think it would be a contending team that is desperate for MI depth. Rebuilding teams would probably prefer to let their version of Nick Gordon or Luis Arraez take their lumps in a down year.

This is kind of what I was thinking. Good take on the rest. 

 

 

I'd rather have a bottle in front of me than a frontal lobotomy.


#7 GP830

GP830

    Pensacola Blue Wahoos

  • Members
  • 505 posts
  • LocationMinneapolis

Posted 22 May 2019 - 11:05 AM

That feels like an overpay for two relievers, to me. Perhaps I'm way off base, but I sense that Rooker alone could net a pretty decent reliever. That's two first round draft picks, and two MLB ready role players. 

 

I'd be totally open to acquiring the guys you mentioned, but think we should also be seriously looking at MadBum. It's time. 


#8 Mike Frasier Law

Mike Frasier Law

    Member

  • Members
  • 169 posts

Posted 22 May 2019 - 11:28 AM

I'd love to see Cleveland sell off, but I think it's unlikely for a few reasons. First, they're still in the hunt for the AL Central title and are absolutely in the hunt for one of the WC slots. I don't think any team in their right mind sells when they have a reasonable shot at getting to the post season.

 

Second, they still have team control over the vast majority of their best players for at least one more year. Arbitration might get expensive next year, but if I were them, I'd take a run this year and be buyers this offseason (like they should have been last offseason). If things go badly for them next year, then sell like hell.


#9 spycake

spycake

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 15,563 posts

Posted 22 May 2019 - 11:29 AM

 

That feels like an overpay for two relievers, to me. Perhaps I'm way off base, but I sense that Rooker alone could net a pretty decent reliever. That's two first round draft picks, and two MLB ready role players. 

Rooker alone won't get that much, at least not right now. 24 year old corner player with an 85 wRC+ and 44% K rate at AAA. That's not to say he's a lost cause or anything, he still has some potential -- but there's enough red flags that he's not going to fetch a good MLB reliever on his own right now.

 

Also, Tyler Jay's status as a "first round draft pick" is pretty meaningless at this point. He's a marginal AA reliever. I could see a team requesting him as a throw-in due to his pedigree but he's not bringing any real value to a trade package.

  • GP830 and Tomj14 like this

#10 blindeke

blindeke

    Member

  • Members
  • 444 posts

Posted 22 May 2019 - 11:32 AM

 

I'd love to see Cleveland sell off, but I think it's unlikely for a few reasons. First, they're still in the hunt for the AL Central title and are absolutely in the hunt for one of the WC slots. I don't think any team in their right mind sells when they have a reasonable shot at getting to the post season.

 

Second, they still have team control over the vast majority of their best players for at least one more year. Arbitration might get expensive next year, but if I were them, I'd take a run this year and be buyers this offseason (like they should have been last offseason). If things go badly for them next year, then sell like hell.

 

Didn't the Twins sell and then make the post-season two years ago?


#11 spycake

spycake

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 15,563 posts

Posted 22 May 2019 - 11:45 AM

 

3) The Twins will have some pieces to move around, as many of you have eluded to. 

Here's my first deal:

Trade Ehire back to the Giants, along with Cave, Rooker and Jay for Will Smith and Trevor Gott. 

(This allows them to trade Crawford and/or Panik for more prospects. They need to blow it up and start over.)

Adrianza is almost 30 years old, he's a FA after 2020, and he has a career 78 wRC+ in almost 1000 MLB PA (and a MLB season high of 84 wRC+). He's useful, but not enough for most teams to give up notable value to acquire him -- especially not a team "blowing it up" as you suggest.

 

Cave is a bit more intriguing, although his 2018 was solid but not spectacular (109 wRC+ at AAA, then 108 wRC+ in MLB with the help of a .363 BABIP). His poor start to 2019 at age 26 isn't helping.

 

A rebuilding club should be on the lookout for guys like Adrianza and Cave on waivers or via DFA trades (exactly how the Twins acquired them), not giving up MLB assets of value to get them.

 

(On the general subject of the Giants, Panik is of dubious value -- he may not be that different from Adrianza these days -- and Crawford might be of dubious value too given his contract/age/2019 performance. Guys like Smith, Gott, and Bumgarner might be their best/only way to bring back future potential impact players in trade -- I don't think they can afford to aim lower at AAAA/bench types when selling these assets.)


#12 cmoss84

cmoss84

    Ft Myers Miracle

  • Members
  • 384 posts
  • LocationBakersfield, CA

Posted 22 May 2019 - 11:54 AM

 

I'd love to see Cleveland sell off, but I think it's unlikely for a few reasons. First, they're still in the hunt for the AL Central title and are absolutely in the hunt for one of the WC slots. I don't think any team in their right mind sells when they have a reasonable shot at getting to the post season.

 

Second, they still have team control over the vast majority of their best players for at least one more year. Arbitration might get expensive next year, but if I were them, I'd take a run this year and be buyers this offseason (like they should have been last offseason). If things go badly for them next year, then sell like hell.

Just to add to this:

What if Cle is 10+ games back of us and the wild card spots at the trade deadline (just a hypothetical, I know I'm getting ahead of myself a bit)? Do they get hauls for Kluber and Bauer and build around Clevinger and Bieber? Or do they go all out the next 2 years? 

I'd rather have a bottle in front of me than a frontal lobotomy.


#13 alarp33

alarp33

    Member

  • Members
  • 2,185 posts

Posted 22 May 2019 - 11:57 AM

 

 

Second, they still have team control over the vast majority of their best players for at least one more year. Arbitration might get expensive next year, but if I were them, I'd take a run this year and be buyers this offseason (like they should have been last offseason). If things go badly for them next year, then sell like hell.

 

The reason this is a question is because their ownership has said pretty firmly they won't be buyers, and won't expand payroll next season. Going into next season with Bauer and some others on the last year of the deal likely significantly dwarfs the return they could get for those guys this summer or offseason

"The game has changed since I've entered, it's for bright, energetic negotiators moreso than anything I possess." - Terry Ryan 2007


#14 cmoss84

cmoss84

    Ft Myers Miracle

  • Members
  • 384 posts
  • LocationBakersfield, CA

Posted 22 May 2019 - 12:00 PM

 

Adrianza is almost 30 years old, he's a FA after 2020, and he has a career 78 wRC+ in almost 1000 MLB PA (and a MLB season high of 84 wRC+). He's useful, but not enough for most teams to give up notable value to acquire him -- especially not a team "blowing it up" as you suggest.

 

Cave is a bit more intriguing, although his 2018 was solid but not spectacular (109 wRC+ at AAA, then 108 wRC+ in MLB with the help of a .363 BABIP). His poor start to 2019 at age 26 isn't helping.

 

A rebuilding club should be on the lookout for guys like Adrianza and Cave on waivers or via DFA trades (exactly how the Twins acquired them), not giving up MLB assets of value to get them.

 

(On the general subject of the Giants, Panik is of dubious value -- he may not be that different from Adrianza these days -- and Crawford might be of dubious value too given his contract/age/2019 performance. Guys like Smith, Gott, and Bumgarner might be their best/only way to bring back future potential impact players in trade -- I don't think they can afford to aim lower at AAAA/bench types when selling these assets.)

You're probably right about Panik and Crawford. Middle infielders used to be a lot more sought after. There are so many rising stars and so much depth around the league at these positions that these guys might not be worth much. Good point.

Would you offer 2-3 top 10 prospects in a package to get Bumgarner and Smith/Gott?

I'd rather have a bottle in front of me than a frontal lobotomy.


#15 Brock Beauchamp

Brock Beauchamp

    Owner

  • Administrators
  • 21,458 posts

Posted 22 May 2019 - 12:15 PM

I'd love to see Cleveland sell off, but I think it's unlikely for a few reasons. First, they're still in the hunt for the AL Central title and are absolutely in the hunt for one of the WC slots. I don't think any team in their right mind sells when they have a reasonable shot at getting to the post season.

Second, they still have team control over the vast majority of their best players for at least one more year. Arbitration might get expensive next year, but if I were them, I'd take a run this year and be buyers this offseason (like they should have been last offseason). If things go badly for them next year, then sell like hell.

Yep. Cleveland fans should revolt if the front office sells, unless it’s a minor sell with the idea of retooling in the offseason and competing again in 2020 (a real possibility if they’re 8-9 games out of first in mid-July).

But selling their young, cost-controlled core would be awful treatment of their fanbase.
  • Mike Frasier Law likes this

#16 alarp33

alarp33

    Member

  • Members
  • 2,185 posts

Posted 22 May 2019 - 12:56 PM

 

Yep. Cleveland fans should revolt if the front office sells, unless it’s a minor sell with the idea of retooling in the offseason and competing again in 2020 (a real possibility if they’re 8-9 games out of first in mid-July).

But selling their young, cost-controlled core would be awful treatment of their fanbase.

 

I think we're already past that point, no? With the offseason they just had, the Lindor comments from ownership, etc. 

  • Mike Frasier Law likes this

"The game has changed since I've entered, it's for bright, energetic negotiators moreso than anything I possess." - Terry Ryan 2007


#17 Brock Beauchamp

Brock Beauchamp

    Owner

  • Administrators
  • 21,458 posts

Posted 22 May 2019 - 12:57 PM

 

I think we're already past that point, no? With the offseason they just had, the Lindor comments from ownership, etc. 

Oh, they really blundered this offseason, but trading their young core would be miles worse than that.


#18 drivlikejehu

drivlikejehu

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 1,984 posts

Posted 22 May 2019 - 01:05 PM

Cleveland's young core is a pretty small group, and outside of that they don't have much to trade, factoring in injuries. I don't see them selling.

 

Obviously the OP's trade proposal is not anywhere near realistic, that's the case with most fan-proposed trades (home team gives away multiple low/no-value players in exchange for valuable player(s)).

If you ain't got no haters, you ain't poppin'.


#19 spycake

spycake

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 15,563 posts

Posted 22 May 2019 - 01:06 PM

 

Would you offer 2-3 top 10 prospects in a package to get Bumgarner and Smith/Gott?

Quite possibly. Depends which "top 10 prospects", of course! I'm guessing the level of guys we would prefer to deal (Rooker, Duran, etc.) probably wouldn't get the Giants to bite until July, though (if at all). Which isn't necessarily bad, as long as we keep winning -- it gives us some time to evaluate.


#20 cmoss84

cmoss84

    Ft Myers Miracle

  • Members
  • 384 posts
  • LocationBakersfield, CA

Posted 22 May 2019 - 01:13 PM

 

Cleveland's young core is a pretty small group, and outside of that they don't have much to trade, factoring in injuries. I don't see them selling.

 

Obviously the OP's trade proposal is not anywhere near realistic, that's the case with most fan-proposed trades (home team gives away multiple low/no-value players in exchange for valuable player(s)).

Just curious...who would you give up for 1/2 year of Will Smith? 

I'd rather have a bottle in front of me than a frontal lobotomy.