Jump to content

Providing independent coverage of the Minnesota Twins.
The same great Twins Daily coverage, now for the Vikings.

The Store


Photo

Legit Trade Candidate: Dee Gordon

  • Please log in to reply
30 replies to this topic

#1 SpiritofVodkaDave

SpiritofVodkaDave

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 4,134 posts

Posted 03 December 2012 - 08:41 AM

The Dodgers are shopping him and I think the Twins should be interested:

Pros:
-Fast as ****! Over a full season this kid can swipe as many as 60 bags, the Twins aren't a running team, but with Revere+Hicks+Gordon in a lineup they could change that.
-Potential Long term solution- Under team control until 2018, so in addition to helping the team out now, he could be a long term fit.
-He wouldn't cost an arm and a leg- He is coming off a rather poor season, so the Dodgers won't be able to ask nearly as much as the Indians are for Cabrera for example.
-Was only a year removed from being the #26 prospect in all of baseball
-He proved he could hit in the minors, in 2011 he put up a .783 OPS in AAA and has an overall .742 OPS in the minors. He doesn't have any power, and his offensive game may remind you of Revere, but you can live with Revere like production from a SS, much harder to swallow in the OF
- Has potential to be very good defensively even though he hasn't shown it.

Cons:
-I recall him having some attitude/maturity issues last year with Dodger management.
-He hit poorly in 2012. Very poorly.
-His UZR was terrible as he struggled defensively.
-There could be several teams interested in him.


Summary: The Twins as we know are a disaster in the MI for now and most likely the future as all the in house candidates have large question marks one way or another (Dozier- Can he even hit?, Rosario- Will he stick at 2B? Levi- Still far away)

Gordon has all the potential in the world but hasn't put it together yet, he is a perfect " buy low" candidate and shouldn't cost a whole lot at this point. I wouldn't trade any of the Twins top 8 prospects, but would give up any of the 9-15 type guys, or even a couple of 15-25 guys to bring him in.

Thoughts?
-

#2 mike wants wins

mike wants wins

    Would Like to be More Positive

  • Members
  • 6,132 posts

Posted 03 December 2012 - 08:50 AM

Better than any option they currently have, and would not cost much. I vote yes.

#3 notoriousgod71

notoriousgod71

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 1,012 posts

Posted 03 December 2012 - 06:02 PM

His father would be the second best pitcher on our staff.

#4 diehardtwinsfan

diehardtwinsfan

    Twins Moderator

  • Twins Mods
  • 4,681 posts

Posted 03 December 2012 - 06:08 PM

He might be fast, but when your manager refuses to call the steal, I'm not sure what advantage it brings. I'm for it if it's cheap, as he'd be an upgrade in the middle assuming is defense is as good as his speed.

#5 SpiritofVodkaDave

SpiritofVodkaDave

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 4,134 posts

Posted 03 December 2012 - 06:13 PM

He might be fast, but when your manager refuses to call the steal, I'm not sure what advantage it brings. I'm for it if it's cheap, as he'd be an upgrade in the middle assuming is defense is as good as his speed.


He has struggled defensively in the majors, but from the scouting report I read he should be able to be a pretty good SS defensively. Again he isn't a sure thing, but the potential is there and the asking price shouldn't be to high. Do the Dodgers need RP help? Maybe Burton could be included or something as well?

I'm not sure so Gardy is adverse to stealing bases, Revere had 40 in 120 games last year, and Alexi had 21 in like 100 games. The Twins just didn't have a lot to work with as the other "speedster" Span seemed to get picked off quite a bit. Gardy used to send Mauer and Cuddyer every once in a while back in the day as well.

#6 Riverbrian

Riverbrian

    Goofy Moderator

  • Twins Mods
  • 9,467 posts
  • LocationGrand Forks

Posted 03 December 2012 - 06:25 PM

I think certain players have a green light against pitchers that are timing slow. The players then go when they get a decent lead and feel for pitcher.

Dee Gordon would be like Revere... Green light to go until he gets nailed more often than preferable.

I love Speed... I'm all for it with the hope that we don't gut our future to get him.

#7 rickyriolo

rickyriolo

    Member

  • Members
  • 90 posts

Posted 03 December 2012 - 06:34 PM

I've seen a lot of Dodger games...Dee Gordon, weak bat, not very good defensively, way too many errors on routine plays but will make a great play once in a while..very fast but this kid is really skinny

#8 Tecmo

Tecmo

    Junior Member

  • Members
  • 16 posts

Posted 03 December 2012 - 06:36 PM

Doesn't sound like he'll be as cheap as hoped.

From Ken Rosenthal: https://twitter.com/...722380108775424
Source: #Dodgers only will trade Dee Gordon for significant return. Still view him as young player with big upside, stolen-base potential.

#9 Brandon

Brandon

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 798 posts

Posted 03 December 2012 - 07:00 PM

thats just posturing. There seems to be several SS candidates on the trade market right now. I hope we get one.

#10 gunnarthor

gunnarthor

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 2,773 posts

Posted 03 December 2012 - 07:05 PM

I'd be ok with giving up someone like Harrison for him but not much more than that. And that assumes the FO likes Gordon.

#11 ThePuck

ThePuck

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 3,232 posts

Posted 03 December 2012 - 07:05 PM

There's an article written about 30 years ago by Bill James entitled 'So What's All The Fuss' It talks about the actual value of the stolen base. Talks about how stolen bases are pretty over-rated. I highly recommend the reading.

#12 YourHouseIsMyHouse

YourHouseIsMyHouse

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 1,235 posts

Posted 03 December 2012 - 07:15 PM

I just don't see the Twins landing him. Look into it, but don't get too serious. There are question marks about his bat and his glove. I'm sure the glove will come with given time, but I seriously wonder if he has the ability to get on base.

#13 SpiritofVodkaDave

SpiritofVodkaDave

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 4,134 posts

Posted 03 December 2012 - 07:20 PM

I'd be ok with giving up someone like Harrison for him but not much more than that. And that assumes the FO likes Gordon.


Yeah that is what I was thinking. Someone around #10-#12 in the system. Or a couple guys in the lower teens/twenties range.

#14 ashburyjohn

ashburyjohn

    Twins Daily Moderator

  • Twins Mods
  • 4,800 posts
  • LocationLake Tahoe, Nevada

Posted 03 December 2012 - 07:26 PM

I've seen a lot of Dodger games...Dee Gordon, weak bat, not very good defensively, way too many errors on routine plays but will make a great play once in a while..very fast but this kid is really skinny


Sounds exactly in line with the stats I see for him on baseball-reference.com. His range factor looks about average, he makes more than his share of errors (not that that's a prime metric for a middle infielder) and his bat should be more of an asset by age 24 than it is. If, as another poster states, the Dodgers are posturing that they want a prospect-not-a-suspect in return, I'm not interested.

#15 ashburyjohn

ashburyjohn

    Twins Daily Moderator

  • Twins Mods
  • 4,800 posts
  • LocationLake Tahoe, Nevada

Posted 03 December 2012 - 07:30 PM

There are question marks about his bat and his glove.


Picky, picky, picky. -- Pat Paulsen

#16 SpiritofVodkaDave

SpiritofVodkaDave

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 4,134 posts

Posted 03 December 2012 - 07:30 PM

I've seen a lot of Dodger games...Dee Gordon, weak bat, not very good defensively, way too many errors on routine plays but will make a great play once in a while..very fast but this kid is really skinny


Sounds exactly in line with the stats I see for him on baseball-reference.com. His range factor looks about average, he makes more than his share of errors (not that that's a prime metric for a middle infielder) and his bat should be more of an asset by age 24 than it is. If, as another poster states, the Dodgers are posturing that they want a prospect-not-a-suspect in return, I'm not interested.


The Dodgers can think and say whatever they want, nobody is giving up anything close to a top 100 prospect back for this guy at this point. The whole point about getting Gordon would be buying low on a kid that still has potential.

He did have a .302 in his cup of coffee in 2011 and hit .302 in the minors, so he has shown in the past that he can get on base. Though hoping for anything more then a .700 OPS would be wishful thinking, however, he has speed, and tons of team control if he gets it together.

I'd also be willing to trade for Jed Lowrie if he is truly on the block.

#17 ashburyjohn

ashburyjohn

    Twins Daily Moderator

  • Twins Mods
  • 4,800 posts
  • LocationLake Tahoe, Nevada

Posted 03 December 2012 - 07:59 PM

He did have a .302 in his cup of coffee in 2011 and hit .302 in the minors, so he has shown in the past that he can get on base. Though hoping for anything more then a .700 OPS would be wishful thinking, however, he has speed, and tons of team control if he gets it together.


Sounds like Revere with less defensive ability. Do we need more table-setters on offense? I grant that any realistic SS/2B will be a table-setter, but does Gordon bring significantly more than what we already have in, say, the Florimonster?

#18 SpiritofVodkaDave

SpiritofVodkaDave

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 4,134 posts

Posted 03 December 2012 - 08:06 PM

He did have a .302 in his cup of coffee in 2011 and hit .302 in the minors, so he has shown in the past that he can get on base. Though hoping for anything more then a .700 OPS would be wishful thinking, however, he has speed, and tons of team control if he gets it together.


Sounds like Revere with less defensive ability. Do we need more table-setters on offense? I grant that any realistic SS/2B will be a table-setter, but does Gordon bring significantly more than what we already have in, say, the Florimonster?


I think Gordon has significantly more upside then a guy like Florimon, who personally I don't think should ever be counted on as a starter at the major league level.

You can survive with Revere type production out of SS/2B, and his speed is truly an asset. He is just raw, which maybe isn't the best fit seeing as our record with "raw" MI hasn't worked out to well in the past.

#19 ashburyjohn

ashburyjohn

    Twins Daily Moderator

  • Twins Mods
  • 4,800 posts
  • LocationLake Tahoe, Nevada

Posted 03 December 2012 - 08:45 PM

You can survive with Revere type production out of SS/2B


The production stats already factor in his speed to an extent (the OPS would be lower with the triples as doubles, some of the doubles as singles, and a handful of the singles as outs), his SB/CS isn't quite as favorable as Revere's, and I'm not convinced his other baserunning is that much of an advantage over someone like Florimon - he should not be compared to Willingham on the basepaths to gauge his value.

Morover, if we were to trade even a non-top-ten prospect, I would hope for more than someone we can "survive" with.

I really think the Dodgers have concluded that Gordon's value will decline to the point he's waiver-wire fodder in couple of years, and are trying to salvage anything better than that now.

#20 70charger

70charger

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 1,154 posts

Posted 03 December 2012 - 09:20 PM

You can survive with Revere type production out of SS/2B


The production stats already factor in his speed to an extent (the OPS would be lower with the triples as doubles, some of the doubles as singles, and a handful of the singles as outs), his SB/CS isn't quite as favorable as Revere's, and I'm not convinced his other baserunning is that much of an advantage over someone like Florimon - he should not be compared to Willingham on the basepaths to gauge his value.

Morover, if we were to trade even a non-top-ten prospect, I would hope for more than someone we can "survive" with.

I really think the Dodgers have concluded that Gordon's value will decline to the point he's waiver-wire fodder in couple of years, and are trying to salvage anything better than that now.


Or maybe that Hanley Ramirez is simply better? I doubt they have any inclination to waste that investment.

#21 ashburyjohn

ashburyjohn

    Twins Daily Moderator

  • Twins Mods
  • 4,800 posts
  • LocationLake Tahoe, Nevada

Posted 03 December 2012 - 10:58 PM

Or maybe that Hanley Ramirez is simply better? I doubt they have any inclination to waste that investment.


Sure. That's a chicken-and-egg question though - if they thought that Dee had super-upside and was about to break out, would they have acquired Hanley? I think they've made their judgement, and the Twins scouts need to be very very confident that they are smarter than their Dodger counterparts. Maybe they are, and maybe this is the last season Gordon will put up Nick Punto numbers.

#22 kab21

kab21

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 2,428 posts

Posted 03 December 2012 - 11:06 PM

I like it how Dave hypes up gordon and then says he's not worth anything close to a top 100 prospect.

I have never been a fan of gordon so I'm not surprised by his struggles. He might be similar to Revere but he's not as good of a hitter as Revere. He might have hit .302 in the minors but Revere hit .326 and people seem to think he's a .290-.300 hitter in the majors. I could see Gordon hitting .270 and not walking or hitting for any power. Mediocre defense kind of sinks his value to a utility player. and the Dodgers aren't going to just give him away this offseason. they will want someone pretty good imo.

#23 kab21

kab21

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 2,428 posts

Posted 03 December 2012 - 11:08 PM

The Dodgers got Hanley for free so this argument doesn't go anywhere. And he can play 3B unlike anyone else on the Dodgers.

#24 ThePuck

ThePuck

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 3,232 posts

Posted 03 December 2012 - 11:15 PM

If Revere is a .290-.300 hitter, but still maintains a sub .350 OBP, he will hold little offensive value. He has no power, with almost twice as many balls in play to, or first through, the infield as opposed to OF. His only value offensively is to get on base and use his speed. So we'll see what happens with him. Will going back to leadoff hurt his OBP as he likely sees less fastballs?

Edited by ThePuck, 03 December 2012 - 11:21 PM.


#25 ThePuck

ThePuck

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 3,232 posts

Posted 03 December 2012 - 11:18 PM

The Dodgers got Hanley for free so this argument doesn't go anywhere. And he can play 3B unlike anyone else on the Dodgers.


The man had a -8.7 UZR/150 at 3B this year. Horrible defensive shortstop, horrible defensive 3B. So if he's the best defensive 3B they have, they are hurting big time :-)

#26 kab21

kab21

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 2,428 posts

Posted 03 December 2012 - 11:48 PM

The man had a -8.7 UZR/150 at 3B this year. Horrible defensive shortstop, horrible defensive 3B. So if he's the best defensive 3B they have, they are hurting big time :-)


Wouldn't it be fair to say then that he's an even worse SS? Which means that the Dodgers acquiring Hanley has little to do with their confidence in gordon as previously argued in this thread.

If Revere is a .290-.300 hitter, but still maintains a sub .350 OBP, he will hold little offensive value. He has no power, with almost twice as many balls in play to, or first through, the infield as opposed to OF. His only value offensively is to get on base and use his speed. So we'll see what happens with him. Will going back to leadoff hurt his OBP as he likely sees less fastballs?


Not sure if you're paying attention to this thread but it's about Gordon. Imo Gordon is a fair amount worse than Revere offensively and I'm not really interested in a low .600's OPS with mediocre defense even if that player is a SS and steals bases. Revere is kind of unimpressive as a starter but at least he has a chance at a .700 OPS and plays good defense.

#27 ThePuck

ThePuck

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 3,232 posts

Posted 03 December 2012 - 11:57 PM

[quote name='kab21'][QUOTE]The man had a -8.7 UZR/150 at 3B this year. Horrible defensive shortstop, horrible defensive 3B. So if he's the best defensive 3B they have, they are hurting big time :-) [/QUOTE]

Wouldn't it be fair to say then that he's an even worse SS? Which means that the Dodgers acquiring Hanley has little to do with their confidence in gordon as previously argued in this thread.

[QUOTE]If Revere is a .290-.300 hitter, but still maintains a sub .350 OBP, he will hold little offensive value. He has no power, with almost twice as many balls in play to, or first through, the infield as opposed to OF. His only value offensively is to get on base and use his speed. So we'll see what happens with him. Will going back to leadoff hurt his OBP as he likely sees less fastballs?[/QUOTE]

Not sure if you're paying attention to this thread but it's about Gordon. Imo Gordon is a fair amount worse than Revere offensively and I'm not really interested in a low .600's OPS with mediocre defense even if that player is a SS and steals bases. Revere is kind of unimpressive as a starter but at least he has a chance at a .700 OPS and plays good defense.[/QUOTE]

I'm not going to pretend to know what the Dodgers are thinking with Hanley or how it affects what they're thinking with Gordon.

As far as my comment about Revere, I apologize for commenting on something you said about Revere.

#28 Shane Wahl

Shane Wahl

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 4,092 posts

Posted 04 December 2012 - 12:39 AM

Absolutely not unless it was for Logan Darnell and Pat Dean or something. Gordon is not good, but I wouldn't write him off completely.

#29 SpiritofVodkaDave

SpiritofVodkaDave

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 4,134 posts

Posted 04 December 2012 - 12:56 AM

I like it how Dave hypes up gordon and then says he's not worth anything close to a top 100 prospect.

I have never been a fan of gordon so I'm not surprised by his struggles. He might be similar to Revere but he's not as good of a hitter as Revere. He might have hit .302 in the minors but Revere hit .326 and people seem to think he's a .290-.300 hitter in the majors. I could see Gordon hitting .270 and not walking or hitting for any power. Mediocre defense kind of sinks his value to a utility player. and the Dodgers aren't going to just give him away this offseason. they will want someone pretty good imo.

I didn't hype him up, I said he would be a good buy low candidate to go after due to his upside, however he isn't worth a top 100 prospect at this point. I don't think those things have to be mutually exclusive?

#30 SpiritofVodkaDave

SpiritofVodkaDave

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 4,134 posts

Posted 04 December 2012 - 12:59 AM

. Imo Gordon is a fair amount worse than Revere offensively and I'm not really interested in a low .600's OPS with mediocre defense even if that player is a SS and steals bases. Revere is kind of unimpressive as a starter but at least he has a chance at a .700 OPS and plays good defense.


Give me a break, low .600's? He posted a .742 in the minors, just because he had a bad half year this year doesn't mean he will hit for a low .600s OPS, also range etc wise he is fine, he had a really, really terrible stretch this year where he basically got steve bass disease, other then that there is no reason not to think he cant be a solid contributor defensively.

Offer a C prospect for him, worst case scenario is he is a better option as a bench guy/UTIL guy then an Escobar or Florimon, best case is he can become a cheap league average SS overall (including his speed).