Please keep trades to a minimum, Twins

[Tomj14]

 

Attendance is pretty much locked in for next year based on this year's results. It has virtually nothing ot do with the going in roster. There is plenty of research on the internet on this. Even if you thought it mattered.....is Ervin Santana putting butts in seats?

 

welcome to the site, keep posting!

Thanks Mike, Santana absolutely does NOT help attendance. Winning does and if you go into next year with possibly a worse pitching staff next year than this year it could even get worse. I just can see their being much hope next year (perceived or real) with Gibson, Duffy, Berrios, May and somebody else or different combination of rookies. We seen what happens with young guys this year on offense. But if you can combine him with a prospect or two for a high end prospect that makes some sense. But it isn't like we need to dump Santana for the money or because he is horrible. Imagine if Gibson finally lives up to his potential next year and Berrios is doing a Johan or F-Bomb imitation, and the rest of the staff is Duffy being Duffy, May failing to make it out of the sixth, and none of the other rookies doing anything, We will have to give up more to get a Santana like pitcher than we got for him. Or you say 2017 is worthless, and in that case dump or cut everybody and tell the fans  we are now thinking 2020 is our year.

[Jham]

Really interesting debate... Some important decisions and some necessary gambles, and here we sit with no real GM in place...  The direction of the team for the next 3 years sits on the edge of a knife with an interim at the helm.  Do we do a total rebuild, with no one being safe?  Do we do a partial rebuild and waste 2-3 years of Sano, Kep, and Buxton in their primes?  Do we trust in the young unproven core and expect to compete?  Yikes, I can see why Ryan said back me or fire me.

Personally, I play it in the middle for at least one more half-season.  As many doubts as I have about this core, I can't bring myself to give up 2-3 years or start from scratch just yet.  If we don't see vast improvement in the top prospects (regardless of what the rest of the team does) I think we have to look at a total rebuild.  Problem is our most valuable assets would have lost a lot of value by that point.  
So after going back and forth a number of times, I would make these difficult managerial moves:

 

1. I would look to buy Plouffe's Arb years/a FA year in a fashion similar to what we did with Dozier.  The Twins hate to arbitrate, Plouffe can get a quasi-extension, and diminish risk while still being allowed to chase a big FA deal in a couple years.  I am not willing to roll with Sano as my #1 3B.  Apparently the market is low on 3B so a re-sign could be affordable after a down year.

 

2. I would look to move Dozier.  If we believe Polanco can play, we can jettison Dozier who is the exact type of player often targeted in trades, controllable, cost effective, productive, lower risk.  His trade value is many times higher than Plouffe.  We still get Polanco into the line up, and we might be able to get an MLB quality or near ready pitcher in return.

3. I'd hold on to big Erv.  I don't see us competing without him.  I don't see him losing much value next season this time unless he's been hurt (which you can't predict).  His contract isn't crippling anyhow, I don't want to sign low level starters or more long contracts for mid-level guys as place holders.

4. I'd keep Gibson.  I still believe in his upside.  I'd consider adding Duffey to a deal if a pitcher is demanded back as part of moving Dozier.

 

5. I'd trade Suzuki, hope that the trade partner does not pick up the team option, and then look to re-sign and possibly re-trade next season.  I'm not sure Zuke's got another year like this in him, but the chances are better for that than Centeno or Murph or Garver being ready, IMO.  I'd also trade Nunez.  He's a solid player, but realistically we're not trading Escobar, our only legit defensive SS, and not trading Polanco unless it's a sweetener to bring back pitching in a Plouffe or Santana deal, in which case I'd do a total sell out which may include our "corner stone" guys.

6. I'd dangle Rosario.  Solid player, I was, and still am big on his upside because despite some experience and success, he still appears raw in his approach.  I think he's hitting on talent alone.  His problem isn't getting fooled consistently, it's swinging at everything.  That said, he has way more trade value than Palka or Walker who need to be added anyway, and he may not be that much better of a player.  

7. Palka, Walker, Vargas, and Park all project as similar bats.  Deciphering between them is difficult.  It's quite possible NONE of them are major league talents.  In fact, that's the likely probability.  I see Palka and Vargas as the most movable with Vargas and Park as the most likely to have success.  We already have Sano and likely one of Plouffe or Dozier.  I'd like to see 2 of those 4 traded.  

8.  Non-roster construction move - Sano to first base, Mauer to DH, Polanco up until Plouffe returns.

 

 

[jimmer]

 

8.  Non-roster construction move - Sano to first base, Mauer to DH, Polanco up until Plouffe returns.

Curious about this part.  How would this help the club?  Mauer is playing an excellent 1B.  Mauer's OBP and defense are where he's giving us value.  You think it's a good idea to move arguably our best defender at his assigned position (Buxton with the best defensive upside...when he's allowed to play) to DH so our worse defender can play his position? 

[Jham]

Curious about this part. How would this help the club? Mauer is playing an excellent 1B. Mauer's OBP and defense are where he's giving us value. You think it's a good idea to move arguably our best defender at his assigned position (Buxton with the best defensive upside...when he's allowed to play) to DH so our worse defender can play his position?

I'm trying to salvage some defensive value from Sano. I'm trying to salvage as much offense as i can from Joe. I'm not positive Joe can stick as a DH. I think Sano could play a solid 1B. This is a step toward the inevitable future. If this team is any good in the next few years, it is unlikely we will be able to play Joe anywhere. I'm hoping that a move to dh will allow us to squeeze the last drop of elite offensive talent left in his body. If not, we move on with Sano at the position he's best suited for.

[Jham]

Curious about this part. How would this help the club? Mauer is playing an excellent 1B. Mauer's OBP and defense are where he's giving us value. You think it's a good idea to move arguably our best defender at his assigned position (Buxton with the best defensive upside...when he's allowed to play) to DH so our worse defender can play his position?

Also, as awkward as it would seem, if Mauer is a better fielder than Sano,and we want to capitalize on Joe's defensive ability, he should just swap places with Sano. Then we could trade Plouffe and Dozier.

[Major League Ready]

 

Maybe. But if you have more people potentially bidding on the pitcher then that competition will yield higher bids. And he's still cost controlled for multiple seasons. 

 

But my main point is this: Do you want Rob Antony to make that trade? Do you? Wouldn't you rather have the person who will be in the permanent job do this deal? Why do you want the previous regime to collect the talent? 

 

This leadership has had its chance. I want the new regime to do the roster construction.

What is the difference who makes the trade if they net a solid top 100 prospect?  This is one of those times when the result is more important than the process.

[Richie the Rally Goat]

Still don't agree. More teams bidding to trade for your starting pitcher naturally increases the price through simple supply-demand rules.

 

And in any event, my main point is this: I'd rather have a new GM make this trade than the interim GM.

your right demand goes up, but supply goes up even more. Deadline is much further out and the alternatives are immense.