Trade perkins, or not?

[beckmt]

Problem with trading Perkins is the message it sends.  You have issues signing players you want to keep and the Twins then become a team that needs to overpay to hang onto young talent and most agents just have their clients play out the string and sign elsewhere after 6 years or the players contract is up. 

[Loosey]

How close is Perkins to being a "10 and 5" guy?  This is his 10th season in the Majors, but I believe you have to be on a roster for a certain number of days to accrue a season for this to take effect.  But assuming next year he earns those rights, I imagine he will use it since he is from MN, his wife is from here, this is his home.  So unless he is going to a place that would be using him as he would want to be used and is a winning team I don't see a trade happening unless it happens quickly.  Which would be dumb since he is the only really good arm in the pen.

[drjim]

 

I wanted to trade Perk a couple years ago. Won't happen though, he's local and the bullpen would be even more comical with Fien as the closer.

No better way to increase a guy's value than to stick the "closer" label on him. I'd like to see the Twins churn out and trade new "closers" regularly, fleecing the rest of the league before they catch on. It might be too late though as it looks like Oakland is already playing that game.

 

This strikes me as more myth than reality right now, and the little bit it reflects reality is probably more in arb and fa salary. Good relievers, closer or not, are valued - and they probably should be.

 

And Oakland is really an outdated example to cite, they have bought more closers recently than sold.

[dxpavelka]

 

So, for those that think they can't compete this year, and will be borderline next year, why not trade Perkins at this point?

 

If you do think they can compete this year or next, what would it take for you to deal Perkins at this point?

If this team isn't going to compete this year OR next trade the whole damn team.

[drjim]

 

Mike, I wouldn't trade him during this season, but I'd look to have a young alternative for next year (whether it's an internal option or through trade).and trade Perkins, and his very friendly contract, so the new closer can go through his rough patch in 2016 and, hopefully, he or someone else is ready for 2017 when we will supposedly be ready to be serious contenders. Hopefully we get someone or a couple quality prospects for him that also help around that time or 2018.

 

Then again, I suggested trading Perkins a couple offseasons ago and then last offseason too, but got slammed in the offseason before 2014 down because 2014 was supposed to be the year we were really contenders, then this last offseson too because 2015 or 2016 was when we'd be real contenders.  Never the right time, always just around the corner.

 

I appreciate drama as much as anyone, but no way you were slammed in that debate. I'm sure people disagreed, but many people were advocating the same thing.

[jimmer]

 

I appreciate drama as much as anyone, but no way you were slammed in that debate. I'm sure people disagreed, but many people were advocating the same thing.

I forgot, you are privy to all the conversations I have across the net and in real life to know how they went.  My bad.  I don't need to exaggerate to make a point and I know how my debates went better than anyone else.  Certainly better than you, since you weren't involved in any of them.

 

You have the gift of hindsight to see how things turned out to now say no one would have slammed the idea.  At the time the debates happened, no time machine was around.

[Blackjack]

 

 

But, man, the team is literally printing money right now. The stands are packed, concessions are selling, people are buying merchandise. There is hope, but there aren't expectations.

 

Thats exactly why they went out and signed Nolasco and Santana, they knew that if they kept losing, attendance would keep dropping and they would sell a lot less $8 beers and $12 hotdogs.

[Mike Sixel]

 

Thats exactly why they went out and signed Nolasco and Santana, they knew that if they kept losing, attendance would keep dropping and they would sell a lot less $8 beers and $12 hotdogs.

 

which is a perfectly fine reason to do so. Wish they would have done that earlier, but I'm glad they are doing it now, even if I don't agree with every move (or, the combination of moves). They are trying more, imo, to be good.

[Kwak]

The Twins use the "closer" position as a "cornerstone".  Everything is built around the concept of getting a lead to the 9th inning (bunting, "productive outs", aggressive base-running,etc.) and then turning the ball over to "the closer".  Trading Perkins would be like throwing away the rudder to a ship as far as the Twins are concerned.

[drjim]

 

I forgot, you are privy to all the conversations I have across the net and in real life to know how they went.  My bad.  I don't need to exaggerate to make a point and I know how my debates went better than anyone else.  Certainly better than you, since you weren't involved in any of them.

 

You have the gift of hindsight to see how things turned out to now say no one would have slammed the idea.  At the time the debates happened, no time machine was around.

 

Fair enough, I was referring to conversations on the board - I shouldn't have assumed you were referring to offline conversations.

 

If you were getting slammed for a reasonable suggestion you probably need a different sounding board.

[drjim]

 

Thats exactly why they went out and signed Nolasco and Santana, they knew that if they kept losing, attendance would keep dropping and they would sell a lot less $8 beers and $12 hotdogs.

 

Or maybe they were legitimately trying to win. Seems to have paid off.

[Blackjack]

 

Or maybe they were legitimately trying to win. Seems to have paid off.

 

I agree, they were trying to win. And one feeds the other, winning keeps the money machine rolling.

[brvama]

One of my biggest issues with TR has been his reluctance to commit to either building something elite or fully rebuilding.

Not to be a TR apologist but there is this assumption that he is not committed to do either, which I believe is misguided.Since his rehire he has built, or continued to build, the minor system with good talent. We are just now seeing that talent surface at the MLB level.

 

It is my position, which could very well be TRs, that the Twins just are not quite at the point that one should make "gutsy" moves. In fact, many of us held the same view this spring - play the young talent to get ready for 2016 or beyond.

 

That said, trading solid MLB assets for prospects delays the process. Trading sound, strong team assets, such as Perkins, to shore up another hole is a zero net gain. IMO, upgrading where able,while maintaining most of the integrity of the future sounds prudent to me.

 

I hope he can find those upgrades and is willing to help the future without tearing apart the foundation in place. And yes that may require some of the prospects, just not the core of the team.

[Otto von Ballpark]

 

How close is Perkins to being a "10 and 5" guy?  This is his 10th season in the Majors, but I believe you have to be on a roster for a certain number of days to accrue a season for this to take effect.

I think 10-and-5 rights are based on service time, down to the day, just like FA and such.  172 days = 1 full season service time.  Perkins has appeared in 10 seasons, but still has less than 8 years service time, according to B-Ref.

 

The only thing I've seen that factors seasons appeared in, is HOF eligibility.  (A little premature for Perk )

[Mike Sixel]

Mostly the minors have been built on the back of not winning at the MLB level....plus May and Meyer. It's not like the FO has made a lot of trades to improve the minors, or signed Cubans, or went way over international budget. They've largely continued the build of the minors by losing......

[Otto von Ballpark]

 

Or maybe they were legitimately trying to win. Seems to have paid off.

Legitimately trying to win, or not trying to lose so much (which would be trying to win, but less "legitimately" I suppose).  

 

I think Nolasco was definitely a "not trying to lose so much" move, and E. Santana -- while a better signing himself -- was a bit of a reaction to Nolasco's failure.  The Suzuki extension I'd lump in there too.

 

As opposed to signing a guy you target as being a real asset (or just saving up to sign such a guy).

[Loosey]

 

I think 10-and-5 rights are based on service time, down to the day, just like FA and such.  172 days = 1 full season service time.  Perkins has appeared in 10 seasons, but still has less than 8 years service time, according to B-Ref.

 

The only thing I've seen that factors seasons appeared in, is HOF eligibility.  (A little premature for Perk )

Thanks, I assumed it was under 10 but I forgot he had a few longer "punishment" stints in AAA in the Mid 2000's that would take away service time.  I was thinking somewhere around 9, but under 8 makes sense when I think about it from an actual service time perspective.

 

[goulik]

Trading Perkins now seems insane on the surface but teams have made ridiculous trades in the past that if offered, we would be foolish not to accept. Perkins for a Shortstop upgrade or catcher upgrade that was controllable for several years plus a top 2 prospect nearly MLB ready and a PTBNL? I'm listening especially if we could then turn around and trade for someone else's closer using lesser prospects. (there are a few out there)

Never say never but only if I'm blown away with the offer

[jimmer]

 

Not to be a TR apologist but there is this assumption that he is not committed to do either, which I believe is misguided.Since his rehire he has built, or continued to build, the minor system with good talent. We are just now seeing that talent surface at the MLB level.

It is my position, which could very well be TRs, that the Twins just are not quite at the point that one should make "gutsy" moves. In fact, many of us held the same view this spring - play the young talent to get ready for 2016 or beyond.

That said, trading solid MLB assets for prospects delays the process. Trading sound, strong team assets, such as Perkins, to shore up another hole is a zero net gain. IMO, upgrading where able,while maintaining most of the integrity of the future sounds prudent to me.

I hope he can find those upgrades and is willing to help the future without tearing apart the foundation in place. And yes that may require some of the prospects, just not the core of the team.

I see your point, but when did TR ever make the gutsy move to push his contender over the top?  During the times when people are now saying would be the right time to make a gutsy move he still didn't do it.

[Craig Arko]

Not.

[Monkeypaws]

If the Twins make it over .500 this season, next year starts the window of being competitive. A number of top prospects are being integrated this season, with more to follow. 

 

Taking one of their weaknesses, bullpen, and making it even weaker by subtracting its one elite member?

 

I thought Mike wanted wins. 

[Mike Sixel]

This is aimed squarely at the people insisting they can't compete this year or next year........or even the year after that. Why keep him then?

 

I'd rather they go get help, but if they aren't even going to bother trying to fix the bullpen......

[DaveW]

 

This is aimed squarely at the people insisting they can't compete this year or next year........or even the year after that.

Who is saying that?

[Mike Sixel]

 

Who is saying that?

 

People on various thread, hence my original post......

[Otto von Ballpark]

To be fair to mike, some posters have been resisting almost any present day trade proposal with the argument that we need to shoot for 2017 instead.

[Mike Sixel]

 

To be fair to mike, some posters have been resisting almost any present day trade proposal with the argument that we need to shoot for 2017 instead.

 

thanks to coming to my defense.

 

At this point, I'd not deal him. but, if you think they can't compete this year or next year, you have to consider it, imo.

[brvama]

I see your point, but when did TR ever make the gutsy move to push his contender over the top?  During the times when people are now saying would be the right time to make a gutsy move he still didn't do it.

You are right there has not been any move. My point is that, in my opinion and possibly his, that this is not quite the time. Now, if in the next couple of years a gutsy move isn't made, I'll be totally on your sideline. There will be a time in the not so distant future that one will likely need to be made. I'll be greatly disappointed if he doesn't take that step.

[DaveW]

 

To be fair to mike, some posters have been resisting almost any present day trade proposal with the argument that we need to shoot for 2017 instead.

That seems a little ridiculous when talking about a team currently 3 games up in the playoff race that will only get stronger next year.

[Thrylos]

I'd trade him for Chapman, Betances, Miller, Kimbrel, Britton and a handful of others, any day of the week.

 

"Elite Closer"?  As far as relievers go, he is 67th in the majors in K%, 27th in WHIP, and 46th in SIERA.  Total 132 relievers > 30 IP.  So, subjectively,  he is top 1/4 of the RPs.

 

Nothing "Elite" about that...

 

 

[drjim]

Who is saying that?

Unfortunately no one in this thread.

 

If you do believe that trading Perkins would be prudent.