Jump to content

Providing independent coverage of the Minnesota Twins.

The Store

Subscribe to Twins Daily Email

From MinnCentric


Photo

Article: Trade Talk: Cincinnati Reds

  • Please log in to reply
14 replies to this topic

#1 Nick Nelson

Nick Nelson

    Owner

  • Administrators
  • 2,169 posts

Posted 07 July 2013 - 08:16 PM

You can view the page at http://twinsdaily.co...Cincinnati-Reds

#2 Uncle Jesse's Mullet

Uncle Jesse's Mullet

    Junior Member

  • Members
  • 21 posts

Posted 07 July 2013 - 08:35 PM

How long is Willingham out? Could we flip Plouffe, Perkins, and Willingham (as a PTBNL) for Stephenson and Guillon?

#3 diehardtwinsfan

diehardtwinsfan

    Twins Moderator

  • Twins Mods
  • 5,051 posts

Posted 07 July 2013 - 08:35 PM

I've been a fan of Cingrani for a while, but I'm guessing he's not an option. Stephenson is technically the higher rated prospect, who I believe is a top 100 guy. I don't think they will part with him... not for Fein or Duensing, maybe for Perkins, but I highly doubt it.. Corcino at this point is a throw in to any deal. Not really a prospect anymore.

#4 jorgenswest

jorgenswest

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 1,761 posts

Posted 07 July 2013 - 08:47 PM

The Reds weren't willing to part with a top prospect last year for Span. They didn't have to give up a good prospect for Broxton. It is very hard to get teams to part with good prospects.

#5 jokin

jokin

    Twins News Team

  • Twins News Team
  • 7,930 posts

Posted 07 July 2013 - 10:50 PM

Clearly, Josh Willingham would have been a potential fit here, so the timing of his injury is unfortunate. Trevor Plouffe's right-handed pop could be of some interest, but the Reds already have a fairly similar third baseman in Todd Frazier.


How about Plouffe playing Left Field for the Reds?

#6 Ozziedavisfan

Ozziedavisfan

    Member

  • Members
  • 62 posts

Posted 08 July 2013 - 09:00 AM

I say this as I know that the reds are willing to trade with us but being what we have to trade. I dont see a case where we get stephenson.

#7 markos

markos

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 272 posts

Posted 08 July 2013 - 09:33 AM

I say this as I know that the reds are willing to trade with us but being what we have to trade. I dont see a case where we get stephenson.


I agree. Unless the Reds are crazy, there is no way the Twins could get Stephenson. Maybe - MAYBE!!! - they would consider it for a 100% healthy and effective Willingham, but even that seems like a stretch.

#8 Ozziedavisfan

Ozziedavisfan

    Member

  • Members
  • 62 posts

Posted 08 July 2013 - 01:10 PM

This my problem with the twins. They have asset and they hang on to it to long. So the fact that they didn't trade willingham at the start of the season didn't suprise me. this what they do. They are in rebuilding mode, so everyone expect mauer, and the players there trying to delvelop. Any why shouldn't trade mauer, first off the twins hold two of the top ten propects and anyone they get back would not be comprobable to them. Second, why trade your best player, whenour teams is build around him.

#9 jorgenswest

jorgenswest

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 1,761 posts

Posted 08 July 2013 - 02:00 PM

This my problem with the twins. They have asset and they hang on to it to long. So the fact that they didn't trade willingham at the start of the season didn't suprise me. this what they do. They are in rebuilding mode, so everyone expect mauer, and the players there trying to delvelop. Any why shouldn't trade mauer, first off the twins hold two of the top ten propects and anyone they get back would not be comprobable to them. Second, why trade your best player, whenour teams is build around him.


How often do other teams trade players at a near peak value? I would not count any trade where a player was headed to free agency (Grienke). That player has for forced the teams hand in those cases.

Looking at last winter. The Rays traded Shields. The Twins traded Span. The Twins traded Revere.

If Ryan was willing to trade Span and Revere, why wouldn't he trade Willingham if offered reasonable prospects?

Why would team offer a good prospect for a decline phase player with a history of injury trouble? Who would be willing to endure his continued decline in the field? Why risk that two year commitment and risk losing a good prospect?

I am sure teams offered to take Willingham's contract for a return of marginal prospects. I think J.C. Sulbaran was a name mentioned last year and the Reds eventually traded him for Broxton. Should Ryan have traded Willingham for a prospect like Sulbaran?

#10 Rick Niedermann

Rick Niedermann

    Member

  • Members
  • 107 posts

Posted 08 July 2013 - 03:09 PM

No one on this list interests me at all. We have enough projects in our own system.

#11 diehardtwinsfan

diehardtwinsfan

    Twins Moderator

  • Twins Mods
  • 5,051 posts

Posted 08 July 2013 - 03:16 PM

No one on this list interests me at all. We have enough projects in our own system.


You have pretty high standards if Stephenson doesn't interest you... He was a top 50 guy on BA's list today.

#12 Nick Nelson

Nick Nelson

    Owner

  • Administrators
  • 2,169 posts

Posted 08 July 2013 - 08:31 PM

You have pretty high standards if Stephenson doesn't interest you... He was a top 50 guy on BA's list today.

I think he's referring to the realistic targets. The Twins aren't getting Stephenson, or Cingrani (who is also quite appealing). And I tend to agree with that take... as I was researching this list, all I could think was, "Woof." Nearly all of their top position players are outfielders, too. Just not much of a match here.

#13 Ozziedavisfan

Ozziedavisfan

    Member

  • Members
  • 62 posts

Posted 08 July 2013 - 09:50 PM

my only point about about willingham is that it is easier to get something for him when he had just hit thirty five homers then when he was hitting 215. your probably going to get a better prospect. I trust terry ryan, he got David ortiz for dave hollins, I trust his judgement more often then he finds players. So if last year he shopped willingham and didn't get anything that could help you i'm glad he didn't make the trade. I just find it odd that willingham had a silver slugger season and couldn't get a very good propect for him. while he got meyer, for span, and worley and May for revere. I'll give you they are younger, still i wonder what he got offered that was so bad, aside from sulbran

#14 Nick Nelson

Nick Nelson

    Owner

  • Administrators
  • 2,169 posts

Posted 08 July 2013 - 10:38 PM

I just find it odd that willingham had a silver slugger season and couldn't get a very good propect for him. while he got meyer, for span, and worley and May for revere.

The league obviously had its notions about Willingham. I mean the guy was a free agent one year earlier, coming off a 29-HR season in a pitcher-friendly park, and yet he barely drew any interest in free agency. The bidding came down to Cleveland and Minnesota, two non-contenders, and the Twins won with a pretty dang low bid.

Yes, Willingham had an awesome season last year. But one great season isn't going to change the perception of him that much. He didn't get a huge contract because he was in his mid-30s, injury-prone and a terrible fielder. A career year in 2012 didn't change any of those things.

#15 Ozziedavisfan

Ozziedavisfan

    Member

  • Members
  • 62 posts

Posted 08 July 2013 - 11:02 PM

All i'm saying basicilly is that what you could have gotten for willingham at the start of the season and what you could get for him now has dropped. So while I don't expect them to esp, it is fair assume that willingham might have more value at the start of the season come off two seasons of hitting 29 and 35 home runs then what his value is now, which is much less. That being said I think the flaws of willingham you talked about is part of the reason he doesn't draw a big prospect, but who ever we get back if we trade him I like the odds of terry ryan finding something because I see this as front office strength. do you agree?