Twins rumored to have interest in Kevin Kiermaier for CF

[DJL44]

With Michael A Taylor a free agent and Byron Buxton perpetually injured, the Twins have expressed interest in center fielder Kevin Kiemaier, reports Bob Nightengale of USA Today.

Once an elite defender, perhaps the best in baseball for a time, Kiermaier is entering his age 34 season in 2024 but still posted very good defensive metrics in center for the Blue Jays in 2023. Kiermaier may not be an everyday player anymore, needing rest to stay healthy but the Twins don't seem to mind that.

Quote

The Minnesota Twins, who are losing free agent pitchers Sonny Gray and Kenta Maeda, are planning to use their position player depth to acquire arms in trades. They also have interest in free agent center fielder Kevin Kiermaier. 

View full rumor

[Cory Engelhardt]

I know Bob Nightengale wrote this, so I definitely take it with a grain of salt.

That said, I wouldn't HATE the idea of preparing for Buxton (if healthy) to move to a corner outfield spot. Maybe that's even in 2024. The first part of that quote wrote how the Twins plan to use their position player depth to acquire pitching (also, water is wet) but if Buxton is moving to right field (for example) that makes sense. Longer term, Walker Jenkins will look really good in center field as well, right?

[nicksaviking]

If he's a rotational/bench guy, he'd be a great addition, and a way better fit than Michael Taylor.

He had a good season with the bat last year, but he's been an offensive liability for half a decade and he's going to be 34. I really don't want to do another season with these type of players filling out a starting spot. 

Also not surprised about getting pitching via trade and not free agency. But they need to aim high again, Gray/Lopez level, not Ryan/Ober/Paddock level.

[Fire Dan Gladden]

For the right price, sure.  Last year the Twins did a great job of raising the floor, as was obvious during the season.  Moves like this are necessary to win.

[farmerguychris]

I agree its time to find the next time full CF for our team.  Buxton has to be considered a backup due to health issues.  Not sure if I like Kiermaier over Taylor simply since he's another lefty OF when we already  have a bunch of those.  Would ultimately like to see Martin grab this role and run with it, but not sure the likelihood of that just yet.  If between Kiermaier or Taylor - I think I'd prefer Taylor until Martin is ready to roll.

[ashbury]

6 minutes ago, farmerguychris said:

Buxton has to be considered a backup due to health issues. 

For me that's backwards.  I want my backups to be ready to go when called on.  That's why most backups are less talented, it's the tradeoff in return for more solid health.

[DJL44]

I'm not sure which one of the position players they have they consider "depth". To get an All-Star starting pitcher (Lopez ) they had to give up an All-Star position player (Arraez). They need to replace another All-Star starting pitcher in Sonny Gray. Do they have any All-Star position players left to trade besides Royce Lewis?

[stringer bell]

Kiermaier for 80-100 games in CF, if Buxton can’t play there is a viable plan. As an alternate in the bottom of the order, Kiermaier would be fine. He’d make more contact with less HR power. 
 

Having Castro and Martin available for center field is a pretty good second backup and probably needed given both Buxton’s and Kiermaier’s injury histories. 

[stringer bell]

More on Kiermaier: Both he and Taylor had around 400 plate appearances last year. Kiermaier had a better BA and OPS, Taylor hit way more homers. MAT struck out 44 more times in fewer PAs. Kiermaier is just under a year older than MAT and stole one more base than Taylor. 

[DJL44]

Kiermaier just won another Gold Glove in CF. He's still very good defensively and their starting pitchers have flyball tendencies. If Buxton's only available in CF once a week when the starter is a lefty that would still be an improvement on last season. If Buxton's unavailable that means Willi Castro or Austin Martin fills in which isn't terrible. I don't see a spot for Nick Gordon if they sign Kiermaier which is probably ok.

[Nashvilletwin]

14 minutes ago, DJL44 said:

I'm not sure which one of the position players they have they consider "depth". To get an All-Star starting pitcher (Lopez ) they had to give up an All-Star position player (Arraez). They need to replace another All-Star starting pitcher in Sonny Gray. Do they have any All-Star position players left to trade besides Royce Lewis?

Trade Polanco for decent prospects or cheap relief corp upgrades.  Then use the $ savings to apply to a top FA pitcher.  We use our “depth” and $15MM in extra payroll to get a solid #2.  Easy peasy. 

[Cory Engelhardt]

16 minutes ago, DJL44 said:

I'm not sure which one of the position players they have they consider "depth". To get an All-Star starting pitcher (Lopez ) they had to give up an All-Star position player (Arraez). They need to replace another All-Star starting pitcher in Sonny Gray. Do they have any All-Star position players left to trade besides Royce Lewis?

Something like Polanco + Emmanuel Rodriguez could get a really good pitcher I'd imagine. Someone who is maybe young, a #3 or even #4 or so level starter on another team who the Twins could build up here.

 

[chpettit19]

I think Kiermaier would make a lot of sense here. Primary CFer against righties with Buxton playing against lefties, and some righties. When Buxton goes down Martin gets his shot to fill that Buxton role. Kiermaier hitting in the 9 hole doesn't kill the offense. It's a little tough on days when Vazquez and him both start, but if they give Jeffers 60+% of the starts behind the plate you can definitely survive with a weaker hitting, defensive specialist in CF. 

Not an exciting move by any means, but I wouldn't be upset with this kind of signing.

[nicksaviking]

17 minutes ago, stringer bell said:

More on Kiermaier: Both he and Taylor had around 400 plate appearances last year. Kiermaier had a better BA and OPS, Taylor hit way more homers. MAT struck out 44 more times in fewer PAs. Kiermaier is just under a year older than MAT and stole one more base than Taylor. 

Yeah, this is the biggest thing, and to put this into percentages, Taylor struck out 33.5% of his PA, Kiermaier only struck out 21% of the time. The Twins desperately need to lower their strikeout rate. Should be the top priority after replacing/re-signing Sonny Gray.

[stringer bell]

8 minutes ago, nicksaviking said:

 The Twins desperately need to lower their strikeout rate. Should be the top priority after replacing/re-signing Sonny Gray.

Yes, I would hope that “new” position players would strike out less than the guys they replace. I also would like to see an outfielder who hits left handed pitching. Kiermaier isn’t the answer for that. 

[DJL44]

26 minutes ago, Nashvilletwin said:

Trade Polanco for decent prospects or cheap relief corp upgrades.  Then use the $ savings to apply to a top FA pitcher.  We use our “depth” and $15MM in extra payroll to get a solid #2.  Easy peasy. 

Sure, but that's the opposite of using depth to trade for a starting pitcher. The rumor is saying the Twins have no interest in the free agent market for pitching.

[Muppet]

I'd also add that MAT's power this year seemed to be a bit of an aberration. On any given year, I'd expect Kiermaier's power numbers to be roughly equivalent, or slightly better than MAT's. So replacing Kiermaier with MAT would at worst be even, with a little possible upside. 

[Woof Bronzer]

19 minutes ago, DJL44 said:

Sure, but that's the opposite of using depth to trade for a starting pitcher. The rumor is saying the Twins have no interest in the free agent market for pitching.

I don't understand why they'd prefer to trade assets in order to pay a pitcher vs. not trading assets in order to pay a pitcher.  

[DocBauer]

Works for me, though I can see an arguement for Taylor back as well. The Twins don't need to invest heavily in CF, at this time IMO, with Martin on the cusp. Not necessarily ready NOW, but certainly trending that way. There's a chance Keirsey is a solid LH part time option as well. (Defense wouldn't be his issue). Rodriguez should be at AA. 

There's a couple guys in the low minors besides Jenkins that be CF options. The Twins aren't deep there, but there's some promise. What they need righr now is another fill-in/quasi starter like they had last year.

[Sielk]

I certainly wouldn't mind the Twins signing Kiermaier but on the other hand, I'm not sure how much inside information there is in this report. I totally believe that the Twins are interested in him but I could have told you that before reading it. They might be equally interested in Bader or just re-signing Taylor. 

And it's pretty obvious as well that a pitcher is more likely to come in trade than FA.

That said, I look forward to the offseason really starting. Will be interesting to see what the Twins do.

[DJL44]

Thanks to whoever fleshed out the initial post. Nice photo.

[Sielk]

3 minutes ago, Woof Bronzer said:

I don't understand why they'd prefer to trade assets in order to pay a pitcher vs. not trading assets in order to pay a pitcher.  

I get what you mean and agree for the most part. But I think one underrated aspect of a trade vs free agency is that you can target younger guys with more upside. 

If you look at the available starters (aside from Yamamoto), they're mostly on the wrong side of 30 and have maybe a handful of good years left, if you're lucky, before the decline inevitably begins. 

Meanwhile, the Twins traded for Pablo López in his age-27 season and will have him through his prime. Granted, that trade worked out very well so far and such success may be uncommon, but that's what I find appealing about trading for a SP instead of just spending a boatload of money on someone that might never repeat the performance you paid him that money for.

[Jocko87]

2 hours ago, nicksaviking said:

If he's a rotational/bench guy, he'd be a great addition, and a way better fit than Michael Taylor.

He had a good season with the bat last year, but he's been an offensive liability for half a decade and he's going to be 34. I really don't want to do another season with these type of players filling out a starting spot. 

Also not surprised about getting pitching via trade and not free agency. But they need to aim high again, Gray/Lopez level, not Ryan/Ober/Paddock level.

When you put it that way I'm OK running with Martin/Kiersey as the Buxton fallback.  Unless he's basically free (sub 5m)  another middling left handed bat is not the fit for this lineup.  At least Kiersey's lefty bat is unknown.  I do think there is a good chance to see Buxton in center for a good amount of time next year.  The knee won't be the problem just from a tea leaves reading of how they approached it this year.  They took a 5 year approach rather than a 5 month.  Another injury is certainly possible but I feel like the knee will much better.

I would be highly surprised if this is the first money they spend in the offseason.  Sadly, if it is, its a bad sign for Buck.

15 minutes ago, Woof Bronzer said:

I don't understand why they'd prefer to trade assets in order to pay a pitcher vs. not trading assets in order to pay a pitcher.  

Because they get a younger cheaper pitcher they think has big time upside and a qualifying offer attached to help offset the prospect cost.  Its the right way to do it at their level of spend.

[Woof Bronzer]

9 minutes ago, Sielk said:

I get what you mean and agree for the most part. But I think one underrated aspect of a trade vs free agency is that you can target younger guys with more upside. 

 

Great points.  I do think if you're going to point out Lopez as a success (which it was), you've got to point out Mahle as an example of a failure.  So it's not without risk and this org is not so talent-rich that we can afford to miss on a lot of trades. But yeah the FA starting pitcher list isn't exactly inspiring this year.  

[nicksaviking]

29 minutes ago, Woof Bronzer said:

I don't understand why they'd prefer to trade assets in order to pay a pitcher vs. not trading assets in order to pay a pitcher.  

Trading for pitching would allow them to use their free agent budget on hitting, and offensive players tend to be less volatile than pitchers. 

But probably more importantly, if you trade for pitchers, you can get them in their prime. Free agent pitchers are almost always past their prime.

[Woof Bronzer]

3 minutes ago, Jocko87 said:

Because they get a younger cheaper pitcher they think has big time upside and a qualifying offer attached to help offset the prospect cost.  Its the right way to do it at their level of spend.

Sort of.  The Mahle trade was not the "right way to do it".  And the team has plenty of money to spend.  I'm not sure I agree that risking prospects and money is somehow a safer strategy for the club than just risking money via a FA deal.  I'd say at their "level of spend" (if we're still playing this game) they need a strong prospect pool and they need young guys to contribute.  

[Jocko87]

3 minutes ago, Woof Bronzer said:

Sort of.  The Mahle trade was not the "right way to do it".  And the team has plenty of money to spend.  I'm not sure I agree that risking prospects and money is somehow a safer strategy for the club than just risking money via a FA deal.  I'd say at their "level of spend" (if we're still playing this game) they need a strong prospect pool and they need young guys to contribute.  

They do have to pick the right guys.  Mahle would have been a great fit if not for the injury which is always a risk.  The prospect cost for Mahle was not as crazy as it seems and in 3 years I bet it doesn't look that bad.  I also have a theory that says the new trainer had more to do with signing off on two damaged goods pitchers in trade than the rough end of year injury run.  I don't know who signs off on the medicals but that's where the strategy failed, not the method.  Had they been healthy, the FO is a buncha geniuses.

And yes, we are doing the level of spend game.  I don't know why we wouldn't?  We know roughly where they will be within 10-20% and we should be discussing things in that range.  We have no reason to believe they will go to $50m or $300m payroll so why discuss that?  Its not a commentary on cheapness, just a framework for where they will play. 

[nicksaviking]

7 minutes ago, Jocko87 said:

When you put it that way I'm OK running with Martin/Kiersey as the Buxton fallback.  Unless he's basically free (sub 5m)  another middling left handed bat is not the fit for this lineup.  At least Kiersey's lefty bat is unknown.  I do think there is a good chance to see Buxton in center for a good amount of time next year.  The knee won't be the problem just from a tea leaves reading of how they approached it this year.  They took a 5 year approach rather than a 5 month.  Another injury is certainly possible but I feel like the knee will much better.

Yeah, me too. Kiermaier/Michael Taylor types are hardly reliable offensively. It's not like they're guaranteed to be a better option than the in-house guys, and even if they were, the difference is likely negligible. And it's not like there are really any reasonable better options to acquire than those two, so might as well just go with what you have, hope for the upside but realize that even if you don't get it, all you're out is a below average veteran bat that would have eaten up 10M in payroll that could have been used elsewhere. It's still a win.

And if we really want to drill down on the subject, even if Martin doesn't hit well, we can be pretty confident that strikeouts won't be an issue and he'll get on base at a reasonable clip. Those are two things this lineup needs, so if you're not getting a well-rounded hitter, at least roster against redundancies, because Taylor's power spike just does not outweigh the damage his strikeouts and terrible OBP does to this offense already struggling in those areas. 

[Nashvilletwin]

7 minutes ago, nicksaviking said:

Trading for pitching would allow them to use their free agent budget on hitting, and offensive players tend to be less volatile than pitchers. 

But probably more importantly, if you trade for pitchers, you can get them in their prime. Free agent pitchers are almost always past their prime.

All of our assets - cash available and players - are fungible. We can trade for position players just as easily as we can sign them as FAs. Same with pitchers.  At the moment, this team is long position players, except for maybe CF, and definitely short a #2 starter.  A combination of raising cash by trading a high salary position player coupled with using available FA budget in order to get the pitcher we want within our overall budget constraints is certainly an option. 

[Jocko87]

1 minute ago, nicksaviking said:

Yeah, me too. Kiermaier/Michael Taylor types are hardly reliable offensively. It's not like they're guaranteed to be a better option than the in-house guys, and even if they were, the difference is likely negligible. And it's not like there are really any reasonable better options to acquire than those two, so might as well just go with what you have, hope for the upside but realize that even if you don't get it, all you're out is a below average veteran bat that would have eaten up 10M in payroll that could have been used elsewhere. It's still a win.

And if we really want to drill down on the subject, even if Martin doesn't hit well, we can be pretty confident that strikeouts won't be an issue and he'll get on base at a reasonable clip. Those are two things this lineup needs, so if you're not getting a well-rounded hitter, at least roster against redundancies, because Taylor's power spike just does not outweigh the damage his strikeouts and terrible OBP does to this offense already struggling in those areas. 

While I wasn't impressed with Kiersey much watching him in Wichita it appears he has turned a corner with the bat and does play a legit center field.  Martin is a #5 overall pick who might still be a late bloomer.  They wouldn't be turning it over to just nobody (past names redacted to protect their innocence, it wasn't their fault).