Dream Trade Target: Aroldis Champman

[Brock Beauchamp]

Joaquim Soria at the deadline last year fetched a guy comparable in some ways to Berrios (Jake Thompson, SP, 2nd round pick 2012, BA's #48 prospect for this year) and another guy comparable to Reed/Burdi (Corey Knebel, RP, 2013 comp pick, minor league 12.4 K/9, plus he had already reached MLB with a small sample 11.4 K/9 for Detroit).

 

And Soria is no Aroldis Chapman. You're not getting him in return for failing prospects or possible MLB mediocrities.

Yep. All that for about 80 innings of Soria (he pitched all of 11 innings for Detroit after the trade last season). Uh, no thanks.

[Mike Sixel]

 

Joaquim Soria at the deadline last year fetched a guy comparable in some ways to Berrios (Jake Thompson, SP, 2nd round pick 2012, BA's #48 prospect for this year) and another guy comparable to Reed/Burdi (Corey Knebel, RP, 2013 comp pick, minor league 12.4 K/9, plus he had already reached MLB with a small sample 11.4 K/9 for Detroit).

 

And Soria is no Aroldis Chapman.  You're not getting him in return for failing prospects or possible MLB mediocrities.

 

Dang, ok. nm then.

[Willihammer]

Math.

I'm all ears.

[drjim]

 

I'm all ears.

 

1 loss when they have lead in the 6th inning or later. And it was early - the game where Hughes left early and Stauffer gave up a couple of bombs.

 

EDIT: My mistake, it was two. I had heard that stat many times and assumed it was true, but found a second game.

 

http://espn.go.com/mlb/recap?id=350421107

 

and

 

http://espn.go.com/mlb/recap?id=350429109

 

I think the stat was when leading after the 6th, not heading into the 6th, but these are the two the bullpen gave up.

 

But none in May, which is impressive considering 20 wins.

[Mike Sixel]

 

1 loss when they have lead in the 6th inning or later. And it was early - the game where Hughes left early and Stauffer gave up a couple of bombs.

 

1 loss is very different than not giving up any leads.

[drjim]

 

1 loss is very different than not giving up any leads.

 

Correct I said that all wrong and I take it back. The stat I should have said was the bullpen lost one game when leading after 6. But in my mind, the better way to look at it is the team has only lost two games when the bullpen pitched with the lead.

 

Going through the game logs, I don't think that the bullpen has turned a lead into a deficit outside of the two losses.

 

Not what I said, but quite impressive and pretty close to the point I was trying to make. The bullpen has not been dominant, but also hasn't exactly been leaky either.

[Willihammer]

Correct I said that all wrong and I take it back. The stat I should have said was the bullpen lost one game when leading after 6. But in my mind, the better way to look at it is the team has only lost two games when the bullpen pitched with the lead.

OK then, two blown leads after 6, fine. But you are cherry picking, I think you know that. The bullpen is responsible for four more losses from tie games and there are other games like the one against the Jays last week. Stauffer came in for mop up duty, the offense scored 3 and tied the game, then Stauffer gave the Jays the lead right back. He would have been on the hook for a loss were it not for the offense scoring two more runs after Molitor yanked him.

[TheLeviathan]

Even if the bullpen has been good thus far, it's also riding a select few arms really, really hard.  That doesn't bode well for the stretch run.

[drjim]

 

OK then, two blown leads after 6, fine. But you are cherry picking, I think you know that. The bullpen is responsible for four more losses from tie games and there are other games like the one against the Jays last week. Stauffer came in for mop up duty, the offense scored 3 and tied the game, then Stauffer gave the Jays the lead right back. He would have been on the hook for a loss were it not for the offense scoring two more runs after Molitor yanked him.

 

While all that is true, I think not blowing leads is a functional bullpen. Without checking, I imagine they have probably held as many tie games (of not their own doing) as well. So if they can be close to even in tie games and blow very leads into losses you can live with that.

 

All that said, I am certainly on board with an upgrade in the pen. I just don't see it with Achter and Oliveros, they are more of what the team already has there.

 

Obviously Stauffer should have never come back from the DL, but that strikes me as causing a shortage of bats, not actually impacting the bullpen in a meaningful way, because they should have 7 guys. Stauffer pitching against Toronto was a fluke, and not exactly clear that either of the other two guys mentioned would be able to get into a third inning effectively.

[drjim]

 

Even if the bullpen has been good thus far, it's also riding a select few arms really, really hard.  That doesn't bode well for the stretch run.

 

No it doesn't. That is why having Oliveros and Achter (and others) in reserve is a good thing.

[TheLeviathan]

 

No it doesn't. That is why having Oliveros and Achter (and others) in reserve is a good thing.

 

Trusting them to replace Boyer turning into a pumpkin or an injury is awfully dicey.

[Willihammer]

While all that is true, I think not blowing leads is a functional bullpen. Without checking, I imagine they have probably held as many tie games (of not their own doing) as well. So if they can be close to even in tie games and blow very leads into losses you can live with that.

I don't know why you insist on downplaying certain innings or situations. You need to be better than .500 in tie games. You need to win a few long shot come from behind games. This is what good teams do.

 

I'm not sure that Achter or Oliveros are upgrades either but we are well past the point of finding out.

[drjim]

 

Trusting them to replace Boyer turning into a pumpkin or an injury is awfully dicey.

 

Ideally it would be Pressly and Tonkin that replace Boyer, with Oliveros and Achter taking the Pressly/Tonkin role.

 

Or, if they really wanted to get it right, Meyer to take the 7/8 inning role.

 

Plus, I am fully on board with trading assets to shore up the bullpen, if it is actually an upgrade.

[Brock Beauchamp]

Trusting them to replace Boyer turning into a pumpkin or an injury is awfully dicey.

Doubly so if you don't call them up and give them a shot to see what they can do.

[Craig Arko]

My ten-foot pole tells me to avoid this trade.

[nicksaviking]

In my opinion, the smartest option for the Twins right now is to give internal players a shot first, let them play for 4-6 weeks, and then see what you need at the deadline. I think it's a bit presumptuous and reckless to start giving away players for a guy like Chapman when you have Achter and Oliveros dominating in Rochester (not to mention Burdi later in the season if he turns it around). Before you try to acquire players and fill holes (giving up valuable players in the process), dig into your own organization and see if you can get a "good enough" solution at the minimum. If that doesn't pan out, then look outside the org.

I'd normally agree, but I don't know that you can tell much about a guy long term from only 4-6 weeks. I do believe you could kill a guy's trade value in that time though.

 

I wouldn't normally advocate trading prospects like this but I really think a lot of these guys are going to get squandered. The better the team is, the less likely they will be to let young players take their lumps at the MLB level.

[Brock Beauchamp]

 

I'd normally agree, but I don't know that you can tell much about a guy long term from only 4-6 weeks. I do believe you could kill a guy's trade value in that time though.

The 4-6 weeks would mostly apply to the bullpen guys. The other guys (Vargas and Arcia, mainly) will require more time.

[Mike Sixel]

 

The 4-6 weeks would mostly apply to the bullpen guys. The other guys (Vargas and Arcia, mainly) will require more time.

 

which they are not getting.

[Brock Beauchamp]

 

which they are not getting.

Yeah. Yeah. I just don't understand.

[Cory Engelhardt]

If we are talking dream targets, I'd love to pursue a young, cost controlled, great defensive catcher who could hold down the position for 3-4 years. How would the Twins acquire Austin Hedges? I know he isn't supposed to be an amazing hitter, but he is supposed to be great defensively. What would it take to acquire him from the Padres?

[Brock Beauchamp]

 

If we are talking dream targets, I'd love to pursue a young, cost controlled, great defensive catcher who could hold down the position for 3-4 years. How would the Twins acquire Austin Hedges? I know he isn't supposed to be an amazing hitter, but he is supposed to be great defensively. What would it take to acquire him from the Padres?

This is a reasonable idea. With Norris on the roster, Hedges might be available for the right price.

[Cory Engelhardt]

What would that price be? He is a top 50 prospect for sure, so it wouldn't be super cheap. By any means. It wouldn't take a Sano or Buxton, but they'd probably want Berrios. I don't know if I'd go that far. Would Polanco and Meyer be a good start? Would it be more than that? Is that crazy?

[70charger]

 

My ten-foot pole tells me to avoid this trade.

 

Awesome. Mine usually just talks to me about girls.

[beckmt]

If we are going down this route, I would rather get an ace pitcher.  But would rather give the chance to bring up minor league players to see what they can do first.  Twins are not in the place where one piece will put them over the top.  Good thread though,  many good ideas for targets.