Realistic trade return ideas

[Otto von Ballpark]

 

Suzuki would likely have a higher OPS than he does now if he played as infrequently as Susac.

Maybe that's an argument for playing Suzuki less frequently?  By acquiring someone like Susac?  

[Vanimal46]

I wonder if it's more difficult or easier to negotiate with the Phillies? Especially this year when GM Ruben Amaro is in his last year of his deal, and clearly on the hot seat to lose his job. Either he could hold his players extremely close to the vest and request the world to make a trade... Or he could be like me at my last sales job knowing I was going to be let go.... "Hey why don't I go ahead and upgrade that account for you. AND I'll give you the "end of the month" discount early." AKA don't give an F mentality

[drjim]

 

Maybe that's an argument for playing Suzuki less frequently?  By acquiring someone like Susac?  

 

Sure, I would  certainly take Susac, hope that is clear. But at what cost? Giants aren't trading him unless they get a major league contributor, with 3B as the obvious hole. I don't have any interest in trading Plouffe for a marginal, at best, upgrade.

[curt1965]

Very interesting and spirited discussion! I have a couple of thoughts (opinions)-

 

1.) Nolasco is not tradeable, at least in our lifetime. He could throw no-hitters for the next 6 weeks, and it

wouldn't make any difference. He's a .500 pitcher or less, with an unrealistic contract. Let's pray he will

continue pitching well for the Twins, until he doesn't.

2.) If anything happened to Suzuki for an extended time, God forbid, the Twins would have to go with Fryer.

I don't think anyone else, Pinto or Herrman, could handle the pitching staff.

3.) I don't get all the talk about Hammels, unless it's a generic thought about looking at what it would cost for

a possible #1 stud. Hammels is not elite, and the mileage on his arm would scare the heck out of me.

I'd look at the kid from Tampa Bay or someone his age that's established. And Tampa does have a history

of trading pitching.

[blairpaul715]

 

Very interesting and spirited discussion! I have a couple of thoughts (opinions)-

1.) Nolasco is not tradeable, at least in our lifetime. He could throw no-hitters for the next 6 weeks, and it
wouldn't make any difference. He's a .500 pitcher or less, with an unrealistic contract. Let's pray he will
continue pitching well for the Twins, until he doesn't.
2.) If anything happened to Suzuki for an extended time, God forbid, the Twins would have to go with Fryer.
I don't think anyone else, Pinto or Herrman, could handle the pitching staff.
3.) I don't get all the talk about Hammels, unless it's a generic thought about looking at what it would cost for
a possible #1 stud. Hammels is not elite, and the mileage on his arm would scare the heck out of me.
I'd look at the kid from Tampa Bay or someone his age that's established. And Tampa does have a history
of trading pitching.

I originally brought up Hamels as a generic thought back in April, just seeing what it would cost to get a #1 type pitcher, and then just recently cuz  , at the time it was unrealistic, based on we were not going to be good, and we never trade for that type of pitcher................Now it is getting closer to being realistic that we could be in the race, and i think more people are, including myself open to an idea like that( Hamels, 3 plus yrs left, Cueto rental)...........and the front office has never been in the position of having excess prospects to look at trading for a missing piece for this year or in the near future....................I like your idea of going after someone like a young pitcher from Tampa, but I think they have him locked up already, would have to look and havnt yet as i write this LOL(plus they have a good record this yr).................I do understand the mileage on Hamels arm, but if he is not elite, he is right below the elite, and depends on what you consider elite.................all this talk could be saved for next yr, when it is more realistic that we could be good

[blairpaul715]

To expand on my above post, we will never, and I hope we never sign a pitcher to a 7 or 8 yr contract, but I would be, and would like the team to be open to going after, a good to elite pitcher that has 2 , 3 yrs left on a contract when we are in contention or if we are in contention.

[tobi0040]

 

Sure, I would  certainly take Susac, hope that is clear. But at what cost? Giants aren't trading him unless they get a major league contributor, with 3B as the obvious hole. I don't have any interest in trading Plouffe for a marginal, at best, upgrade.

 

I think you and I disagree on two things.  The value Susac could provide us now and in the future as well as what the Giants would give up for him.

 

Susac has not been platooning his way to good numbers.  He is a righty, just like Posey.  His hit tool is rated at a 45 and his power tool a 55.  I view him as a guy that could play 60 games this year, 80+ next year and dramatically improve backup catcher spot and improve Suzuki by limiting his usage.  He is also a controlled catcher that is an upgrade over anything we have in the pipeline for the future.

 

As far as what it would take to acquire him, Keith Law has Susac higher than most at 46. BA and BP had Susac in the mid 80’s before this season.  He is effectively a back-up in San Fran and already 25 years old.  Their OF is littered with 31-33 year olds and they don’t have a single OF in their top 10 prospects.  We have a glut of young OF prospects on the cusp of the top 100 prospects.  Like Rosario and Kepler to go along with Hicks and Arcia on the current roster.  We also have some SP depth they may find attractive, like Milone or Pelfrey.  They have a 37 year old Ryan Vogelsong in their rotation, sporting an FIP of 5.17.

[Brock Beauchamp]

As a backup that would help in 2015 and beyond, Susac is an interesting trade target. Suzuki will almost surely wear down at he approaches the 120 game mark and Susac is a competent bat with some upside. Giving him 30-40% of the starts behind the dish in 2015 and moving that number toward 50% in 2016 sounds like smart roster management to me.

 

Naturally, it all depends on what it will take to get him. Given the struggles of Hicks, I'm a little wary of giving up Rosario right now and I don't think Kepler or someone of his ilk is nearly enough to sway the Giants.

[RealTwinsFan357]

I wouldn't mind seeing the Twins pursue Lucroy from the Brewers. I know they've said they aren't looking to trade him, but if we offered the right package and extended Lucroy our catching situation would look much better

[drjim]

 

I think you and I disagree on two things.  The value Susac could provide us now and in the future as well as what the Giants would give up for him.

 

Susac has not been platooning his way to good numbers.  He is a righty, just like Posey.  His hit tool is rated at a 45 and his power tool a 55.  I view him as a guy that could play 60 games this year, 80+ next year and dramatically improve backup catcher spot and improve Suzuki by limiting his usage.  He is also a controlled catcher that is an upgrade over anything we have in the pipeline for the future.

 

As far as what it would take to acquire him, Keith Law has Susac higher than most at 46. BA and BP had Susac in the mid 80’s before this season.  He is effectively a back-up in San Fran and already 25 years old.  Their OF is littered with 31-33 year olds and they don’t have a single OF in their top 10 prospects.  We have a glut of young OF prospects on the cusp of the top 100 prospects.  Like Rosario and Kepler to go along with Hicks and Arcia on the current roster.  We also have some SP depth they may find attractive, like Milone or Pelfrey.  They have a 37 year old Ryan Vogelsong in their rotation, sporting an FIP of 5.17.

 

I don't think we disagree all that much on the first point, and the second point is probably more an issue of timing.

 

This type of move would make much more sense in the offseason, or if the Giants have an injury or two in the OF. They aren't going to move a contributing piece to the team for a prospect that might not crack the lineup. Their OF is old but it is still functional for the season. They are trying to win a championship, not reload their farm system or plan for next year.

[drjim]

 

I wouldn't mind seeing the Twins pursue Lucroy from the Brewers. I know they've said they aren't looking to trade him, but if we offered the right package and extended Lucroy our catching situation would look much better

 

I could get behind this if Lucroy proves to be healthy. Might be another offseason move.

[Otto von Ballpark]

 

To expand on my above post, we will never, and I hope we never sign a pitcher to a 7 or 8 yr contract, but I would be, and would like the team to be open to going after, a good to elite pitcher that has 2 , 3 yrs left on a contract when we are in contention or if we are in contention.

So you'd be open to trading Lorenzo Cain, Alcides Escobar, and Jake Odorizzi for two years of Zach Greinke.

 

But you'd never consider keeping those players, and just signing Zach Greinke (or whatever good to elite pitcher is available) to a 7 year contract.

 

 

I think I'd rather just spend the cash.  The Brewers certainly saved money by acquiring the pitcher via trade rather than free agency, but no amount of money allows them to buy back cost-controlled talent like Cain, Escobar, and Odorizzi.

[blairpaul715]

 

So you'd be open to trading Lorenzo Cain, Alcides Escobar, and Jake Odorizzi for two years of Zach Greinke.

 

But you'd never consider keeping those players, and just signing Zach Greinke (or whatever good to elite pitcher is available) to a 7 year contract.

 

 

I think I'd rather just spend the cash.  The Brewers certainly saved money by acquiring the pitcher via trade rather than free agency, but no amount of money allows them to buy back cost-controlled talent like Cain, Escobar, and Odorizzi.

I dont want to just spend the cash on the chance of Greinke when you might get Johan Santana, Carlos Zambrano, Barry Zito, Mike Hampton..........I rather take a chance with somebody like that on shorter term risk ,when you have a chance to win, who has shown durability and sustained success......It all a crapshoot, but I would like to limit my risk.............And if I had a chance to win, YES i would  trade those 3 for Greinke and a chance to WIN NOW............ They are good players, but not superstarsAnd I would for sure give up Berrios for Hamels , and maybe a midtier level prospect in the 15 to 20 range.................now would i give up Sano, if I thought we could win NOW yes, but I dont think we can win NOW, so NO!!!! But that would have to be a straight up one for one.

[blairpaul715]

 

 

So you'd be open to trading Lorenzo Cain, Alcides Escobar, and Jake Odorizzi for two years of Zach Greinke.

 

But you'd never consider keeping those players, and just signing Zach Greinke (or whatever good to elite pitcher is available) to a 7 year contract.

 

 

I think I'd rather just spend the cash.  The Brewers certainly saved money by acquiring the pitcher via trade rather than free agency, but no amount of money allows them to buy back cost-controlled talent like Cain, Escobar, and Odorizzi.

If you had these players at the time would you have traded them for Grienke: Jesus Montero, Dusin Ackley, Carlos Santana?????

[Otto von Ballpark]

 

As far as what it would take to acquire him, Keith Law has Susac higher than most at 46. BA and BP had Susac in the mid 80’s before this season.  He is effectively a back-up in San Fran and already 25 years old.  Their OF is littered with 31-33 year olds and they don’t have a single OF in their top 10 prospects.  We have a glut of young OF prospects on the cusp of the top 100 prospects.  Like Rosario and Kepler to go along with Hicks and Arcia on the current roster.  We also have some SP depth they may find attractive, like Milone or Pelfrey.  They have a 37 year old Ryan Vogelsong in their rotation, sporting an FIP of 5.17.

The Giants will not do this, for many reasons.

 

Their OF "littered with 31-33 year olds" (Pagan, Aoki, and Pence) is currently sporting OPS+ figures of 109, 133, and 136 this season (with similar quality marks last season), and are all signed through at least 2016.

 

Their rotation isn't performing as well, but they have 4 SP signed through 2016, plus Lincecum and Hudson making $30 million yet in 2015.  Not to mention Vogelsong and Petit to fill in.

 

They also have a history of trading for solid veteran MLB players midseason (Peavy, Pence, Beltran, Sanchez), not guys like Rosario and Kepler (or even Milone and Pelfrey).  And outside of Zach Wheeler, they've generally only surrendered marginal/iffy prospects themselves in such trades (and Wheeler was only dealt for Carlos Betran in the middle of a career best OPS+ campaign).

 

And they have a history of aggressively signing and retaining free agents, making them less likely to be interested in a midseason overpay.

 

I would guess they wouldn't seriously consider any Twins offer for Susac that didn't involve Plouffe or one of our "untouchable" prospects.

[Hrbowski]

 

NOT Berrios. The others, maybe.

And NO Stewart, that guy is a real team leader, he can get the whole team on fire, according to some people.

[Otto von Ballpark]

 

I dont want to just spend the cash on the chance of Greinke when you might get Johan Santana, Carlos Zambrano, Barry Zito, Mike Hampton..........

Carlos Zambrano was an extension, not a free agent.  (Technically Johan was too.)  And Zito and Hampton had major red flags when they signed their deals.  What about long-term deals for Maddux, Pedro, Brown, Johnson, Schilling?  Greinke currently?  Even the presently injured Cliff Lee has been a pretty good return on investment for the Phillies.  This is an argument for a smarter, more selective approach to free agency, not that trades are always preferable.

 

Frankly, I'm not sure if avoiding the 3.5 "lost years" of Johan Santana's effective 7 year Mets deal would be worth surrendering 3 strong, near MLB ready prospects (which is what the Brewers gave up for Greinke).  I think you are way over-rating the potential costs of a free agent deal, and under-rating the benefits of multiple quality cost-controlled players.

 

That's not to say trades are never a good deal, but I think the stars have to align for them much more than a straight FA signing.  You really need to have some over-valued prospects at the same time a player is available and you have a very strong 2 year window of contention.

 

Even if you are getting better seasons and risking less money, your margin for error is much smaller for a 2-3 year window than a 7 year one.  I would have probably endorsed Hicks/Ramos for Lee in July 2010, but if Lee was unable to lift us over the Yankees that October, the Twins would have been net losers from the deal.  Whereas had we signing Sabathia or Santana earlier, they could have aided our pennant pursuit multiple times by that point, and cost us only money by 2013-2014.

[blairpaul715]

I think, in general prospects are overrated, heck look at how US TWINS fans, we covet ALL our prospects, and some people say, dont trade any of them , that is crazy!!! Not saying you one of them, but i would trade a prospect for a chance to win a World Series than keep him and hope he makes us good later, later may never come...........again as i have said previously , this is not the year, but if it was, I would do something like your trade scenario for Greinke................and since you either didnt see my other post that was directed toward you, Carlos Santana, Dustin Ackley , and Jesus Montero were all ranked higher than any of the 3 prospects that were traded, and none of them are special, Santana may be close , but he is one dimensional...................So again prospects are just, like a box of chocolates, you dont know what you are going to get.

[blairpaul715]

And really there is little difference in extending vs FA , in terms of giving 7 or 8 yr contracts to pitchers, I just wouldnt do it.........FA you do lose a draft pick, so understand there is some difference, but not in terms of money.

 

 

[Otto von Ballpark]

 

I think, in general prospects are overrated, heck look at how US TWINS fans, we covet ALL our prospects, and some people say, dont trade any of them , that is crazy!!! Not saying you one of them, but i would trade a prospect for a chance to win a World Series than keep him and hope he makes us good later, later may never come...........again as i have said previously , this is not the year, but if it was, I would do something like your trade scenario for Greinke................and since you either didnt see my other post that was directed toward you, Carlos Santana, Dustin Ackley , and Jesus Montero were all ranked higher than any of the 3 prospects that were traded, and none of them are special, Santana may be close , but he is one dimensional...................So again prospects are just, like a box of chocolates, you dont know what you are going to get.

I agree that prospects can be over-rated too.  I said I would have endorsed Hicks/Ramos for Cliff Lee in 2010, and I am actually warm to idea of dealing Sano if we are not completely sold on him, similarly guys like Alex Meyer in the past.

 

But in general, I think it's tougher to make a blockbuster trade to your liking than a blockbuster FA signing.  If you don't even talk to FA SP of the Greinke, Scherzer, Lester level, you probably have no business dealing top prospects for one later.

 

Interestingly, Montero was flipped for another young player in Pineda -- a challenge trade I could get behind.  Likewise Delmon Young for Matt Garza, although I obviously wish we were on the other end of that one...

[blairpaul715]

 

I agree that prospects can be over-rated too.  I said I would have endorsed Hicks/Ramos for Cliff Lee in 2010, and I am actually warm to idea of dealing Sano if we are not completely sold on him, similarly guys like Alex Meyer in the past.

 

But in general, I think it's tougher to make a blockbuster trade to your liking than a blockbuster FA signing. 

 

 

This we can agree on ........and I am not advocating trading Sano, but...................never say never!!

[drjim]

 

I agree that prospects can be over-rated too.  I said I would have endorsed Hicks/Ramos for Cliff Lee in 2010, and I am actually warm to idea of dealing Sano if we are not completely sold on him, similarly guys like Alex Meyer in the past.

 

But in general, I think it's tougher to make a blockbuster trade to your liking than a blockbuster FA signing.  If you don't even talk to FA SP of the Greinke, Scherzer, Lester level, you probably have no business dealing top prospects for one later.

 

Interestingly, Montero was flipped for another young player in Pineda -- a challenge trade I could get behind.  Likewise Delmon Young for Matt Garza, although I obviously wish we were on the other end of that one...

 

I think Bill Smith endorsed Hicks and Ramos for Lee too. Unfortunately the Mariners did not.

[shs_59]

I want Trevor Plouffe to be a part of the 2016 Twins, maybe not 2018..... but 2016 definately.

 

in 3B or LF or RF.

[Otto von Ballpark]

I think Bill Smith endorsed Hicks and Ramos for Lee too. Unfortunately the Mariners did not.

I do wonder if we didn't hesitate or blink -- we don't have much if any history of blockbusters.

 

And if our upgrade target was Cliff Lee, settling for Matt Capps was strange.

[SwainZag]

 

I want Trevor Plouffe to be a part of the 2016 Twins, maybe not 2018..... but 2016 definately.

 

in 3B or LF or RF.

 

If Trevor Plouffe is on this team he should be playing 3B. 

[TheLeviathan]

 

I do wonder if we didn't hesitate or blink -- we don't have much if any history of blockbusters.

And if our upgrade target was Cliff Lee, settling for Matt Capps was strange.

 

Ramos got hurt in the midst of those negotiations.  So it wasn't the value being offered at the time, it was a recurring problem with Ramos that has persisted that came up at a really, really inopportune moment.

[Otto von Ballpark]

Ramos got hurt in the midst of those negotiations. So it wasn't the value being offered at the time, it was a recurring problem with Ramos that has persisted that came up at a really, really inopportune moment.

Ramos missed 10 days in late June, so I doubt it was a significant factor. His .625 OPS for Rochester was probably a much bigger deal -- he simply wasn't an elite prospect.

[TheLeviathan]

Ramos missed 10 days in late June, so I doubt it was a significant factor. His .625 OPS for Rochester was probably a much bigger deal -- he simply wasn't an elite prospect.

Possibly, but Lee also moved well before the deadline (July 9),so the timeline matches well. Its all speculation, but I remember reading reports of how close that deal came to happening and it wasn't our reluctance.

[blairpaul715]

Another trade idea, and we are not trading anything of Major league value this inseason as long as we are in a hunt for a Wild Card or division title.......but maybe more for offseason, but I am a Braves fan also(but much more a Twins fan) ..................but Plouffe to Atlanta, they need a 3B badly and maybe we could get Peraza to be our SS, very good player and a true SS blocked by the best defensive SS in baseball.......And this next idea would never happen now, he is a probably a Twins untouchable, but Dozier for Atlantas 2B Jace Peterson and Jose Peraza(31 on MLB 100 list).

[SwainZag]

As per MLBtraderumors.com:

 

The Twins and Brewers have had some preliminary trade chats, Mike Berardino of the St. Paul Pioneer-Press reports (Twitter links). It is not clear precisely what players were under discussion, though Berardino indicates that Milwaukee lefty Neal Cotts could hold some appeal to Minnesota.

 

Cotts would certainly be an upgrade over Thompson at this point. 9.74 K/9 and lefties hitting .190/.224/.309 against him.  Also has 18/2 K/BB against lefties with 60 batters faced.  He is on a one year deal and is 35 years old, so would be certainly a half season rental, but he would add value, IMO.