Potentially Trading Polanco and Kepler and the possibilities Twins could use QO, after Teoscar signing

[Hawkeye Bean Counter]

So Teoscar signed for what is effectively a 20 million 1 year contract.  I have had this discussion with many on the board,  its that Kepler and Polanco if they have healthy good years,  are better players than Teoscar and would likely be worthy of QO.   Now there was no draft compensation included in Hernandez's signing,  I understand that,  but Polanco and Kepler are better players than he is by a significant amount.  

Any trade will need to bring back significant compensation,  as the new team, may be able to offer the QO themselves, or the Twins can keep and hope for healthy good season from the players.   I am fine with a trade, but there value not only to the team this year, but also potentially with QO  and draft compensation is significant.  

I don't look so crazy anymore do I LOL.    

[chpettit19]

Polanco is more complicated as he would have to be good for 2 more years before the QO could be put on him. But I'll admit I was shocked by that Teoscar deal. It's tough to really gauge anything the Dodgers are doing this offseason vs what it means for the rest of the league, but that deal was aggressive. It also included some deferred money (Dodgers loving that move these days) so it's not a straight comparison, but I'll admit it made me more accepting of a possible Kepler QO if he were able to maintain his overall production for another year. 

I've always been of the belief that you need to get a real return for either of those guys in general because of where they rank in talent on the Twins club, but I'd definitely be mentioning the QO possibility in talks with other teams about Kepler now. You are looking less crazy! 😄

[Hawkeye Bean Counter]

You are correct that Polanco has 2 more years,  but you still have the potential in 2 years of a QO so it should be included in your trade compensation.  How you do that I have no idea.  All I know is a late first round draft pick is worth a lot more than mediocre prospect.   

[Mike Sixel]

40 minutes ago, Hawkeye Bean Counter said:

So Teoscar signed for what is effectively a 20 million 1 year contract.  I have had this discussion with many on the board,  its that Kepler and Polanco if they have healthy good years,  are better players than Teoscar and would likely be worthy of QO.   Now there was no draft compensation included in Hernandez's signing,  I understand that,  but Polanco and Kepler are better players than he is by a significant amount.  

Any trade will need to bring back significant compensation,  as the new team, may be able to offer the QO themselves, or the Twins can keep and hope for healthy good season from the players.   I am fine with a trade, but there value not only to the team this year, but also potentially with QO  and draft compensation is significant.  

I don't look so crazy anymore do I LOL.    

The Dodgers have infinitely more money than the Twins. They can take that risk....the Twins can't, imo, take the risk those players take the QO and are not good. 

[chpettit19]

1 minute ago, Hawkeye Bean Counter said:

You are correct that Polanco has 2 more years,  but you still have the potential in 2 years of a QO so it should be included in your trade compensation.  How you do that I have no idea.  All I know is a late first round draft pick is worth a lot more than mediocre prospect.   

Whether the QO came into play or not I'd be pissed if they traded either of them for a mediocre prospect. 1 year of Kepler and 2 of Polanco are both worth more than that. And to be fair, the QO doesn't automatically net them a pick after the first round. They'd have to sign for more than 50 mil to get that. Otherwise it's a pick after competitive balance round B so right before the 3rd round, and that's a significantly worse prospect pool to be choosing from.

That Teoscar deal makes it plausible that Kepler could be QO worthy next year (2 years for Polanco drastically changes the equation so I don't know that it's worth talking about), but that equation still comes down to how likely teams think it is that Kepler can maintain his offensive success from last year. Teoscar is getting paid to thump. If Kepler is back to being more valuable on defense than offense his QO worthiness isn't the same. This all really comes down to how good teams think Kepler's bat will be. And he's shown a huge variance on that.

And on a related side note, the Twins ability/willingness to pay Kepler 20 mil in 2025 also comes into play here. If their payroll is going to remain in the 130 range for 2025 it changes their willingness to "risk" Kepler accepting the QO and having to pay him 20+ mil.

[Hawkeye Bean Counter]

7 minutes ago, Mike Sixel said:

The Dodgers have infinitely more money than the Twins. They can take that risk....the Twins can't, imo, take the risk those players take the QO and are not good. 

If a player is worth 20 mil yes it gets complicated.  The Twins can do the math,  but right now Kepler is likely worth 25 mil on a 1 year contract, and on a 3 year well above $50.   Above average players will continued to get paid very well.   There is lack of quality it baseball.   Polanco and Kepler are very good players and worthy of QO.  

[Mike Sixel]

Only 7 players got QOs this year.....do we think Kepler will be a top 10 FA next year? If so, the Twins should just extend him if he'll take the money....but sure, if he's one of the top 10 FAs next year, they might do a QO. I'll take the under on that. We disagree. I'm ok with that.

[Hawkeye Bean Counter]

Chpettit,  if Kepler is his 2020-2022 version,  that is still better than Teoscar.   If he is 80% of his second half performance,  he is a guaranteed QO.  If he is early season Kepler that would be a negative.  However,  Kepler swinging earlier in counts at better quality pitches,  than out of the zone and poorly hit balls can be replicated.  

[Hawkeye Bean Counter]

1 minute ago, Mike Sixel said:

Only 7 players got QOs this year.....do we think Kepler will be a top 10 FA next year? If so, the Twins should just extend him if he'll take the money....but sure, if he's one of the top 10 FAs next year, they might do a QO. I'll take the under on that. We disagree. I'm ok with that.

Top 10 doesn't mean squat,  it all comes down to what you are worth.  Teoscar was always on the fence of being a QO and his slightly down season made it not worth Seattle's risk.   Kepler has a much higher floor with his defensive skills.  If his offense is even decent he is a much better player than Teoscar.  Kepler has a career WAR of 20.  Teoscar's is 12.8 and Polanco's is 17.   Polanco and Kepler have consistently been much better players than Teoscar and average close to 2 WAR or higher as a floor for several years.  

[Hawkeye Bean Counter]

10 minutes ago, chpettit19 said:

Whether the QO came into play or not I'd be pissed if they traded either of them for a mediocre prospect. 1 year of Kepler and 2 of Polanco are both worth more than that. And to be fair, the QO doesn't automatically net them a pick after the first round. They'd have to sign for more than 50 mil to get that. Otherwise it's a pick after competitive balance round B so right before the 3rd round, and that's a significantly worse prospect pool to be choosing from.

That Teoscar deal makes it plausible that Kepler could be QO worthy next year (2 years for Polanco drastically changes the equation so I don't know that it's worth talking about), but that equation still comes down to how likely teams think it is that Kepler can maintain his offensive success from last year. Teoscar is getting paid to thump. If Kepler is back to being more valuable on defense than offense his QO worthiness isn't the same. This all really comes down to how good teams think Kepler's bat will be. And he's shown a huge variance on that.

And on a related side note, the Twins ability/willingness to pay Kepler 20 mil in 2025 also comes into play here. If their payroll is going to remain in the 130 range for 2025 it changes their willingness to "risk" Kepler accepting the QO and having to pay him 20+ mil.

Teoscar on a 3 year likely would have been right around the 50 million mark.  I think Polanco and Kepler would both net more than 50 million on a more than 3 year contract.  

[Mike Sixel]

3 minutes ago, Hawkeye Bean Counter said:

Top 10 doesn't mean squat,  it all comes down to what you are worth.  Teoscar was always on the fence of being a QO and his slightly down season made it not worth Seattle's risk.   Kepler has a much higher floor with his defensive skills.  If his offense is even decent he is a much better player than Teoscar.  Kepler has a career WAR of 20.  Teoscar's is 12.8 and Polanco's is 17.   Polanco and Kepler have consistently been much better players than Teoscar and average close to 2 WAR or higher as a floor for several years.  

Except not many people get QOs....that's the point here. 14 got one in 2022...and 2 accepted...so, top 15 give or take? And, as has been pointed out, the Dodgers have A LOT of money to spend.

And 8.5 million of the money is deferred over 9 years starting in 2030, so his present value isn't at QO level. 

[Hawkeye Bean Counter]

14 minutes ago, Mike Sixel said:

Except not many people get QOs....that's the point here. 14 got one in 2022...and 2 accepted...so, top 15 give or take? And, as has been pointed out, the Dodgers have A LOT of money to spend.

And 8.5 million of the money is deferred over 9 years starting in 2030, so his present value isn't at QO level. 

Not many players average 2+ WARS as a floor Mike,  and both Polanco and Kepler do.   

Teoscar WAR

2023- 2.1

2022 - 2.8

2021- 3.8

 

Kepler

2023 -  2.9

2022 - 2.2

2021 - 2.1

 

If Kepler discovered even a 20% improvement over his baseline from the end of last year, he is a slam dunk worthy QO.  He was nearly a 4 WAR in the last 3 months of the season.   Kepler has a projected steamer value of 2.4 while Teoscars is 1.9.  

[chpettit19]

18 minutes ago, Hawkeye Bean Counter said:

Chpettit,  if Kepler is his 2020-2022 version,  that is still better than Teoscar.   If he is 80% of his second half performance,  he is a guaranteed QO.  If he is early season Kepler that would be a negative.  However,  Kepler swinging earlier in counts at better quality pitches,  than out of the zone and poorly hit balls can be replicated.  

Offensively? 2020-2022 Kepler was absolutely not better than Teoscar offensively. .760, .719, .666 were Kepler's OPS's from 2020-2022. Teoscar's down season last year was a .741 OPS. He was over .800 from 2020 through 2022. Team's don't pay for corner outfield defense, they pay for corner outfield offense. That's why I said Teoscar is getting paid to thump and if Kepler goes back to being more valuable for defense than offense he's not getting the QO. No chance they put a QO on Kepler if he's back under a .750 OPS. 

16 minutes ago, Hawkeye Bean Counter said:

Teoscar on a 3 year likely would have been right around the 50 million mark.  I think Polanco and Kepler would both net more than 50 million on a more than 3 year contract.  

Again, it all comes down to Kepler's bat. 2020-2022 Kepler isn't getting anywhere near 50 mil (I'm just not going to talk about Polanco's possible contract because he's under control for 2 more years so the situation is very different). Team's don't pay for corner defense. If he puts up another .800 OPS season he'll likely get a QO assuming the Twins are willing to pay him that 20 mil if he accepts (that's a real question in this). But .750 OPS Kepler has no shot at a QO.

[chpettit19]

Jason Heyward is probably the better comp here. Much closer to the same kind of player. Defense first corner outfielder with wildly fluctuating offensive outputs. He got 1 year, 9 mil this offseason. But he's older than Kepler so there's a little difference there. But he also put up an .813 OPS in 124 games last year. Good for a 117 OPS+. Compared to .816 and 121 for Kepler. Kepler's lowest of lows wasn't as bad as Heyward's, but their peaks have been about the same. Heyward is probably the comp, and if Kepler's offense dips back down again he's going to be much closer to 1 year, 9 mil than a QO.

[Hawkeye Bean Counter]

Chpettit,  I already stated in previous posts,  I greatly think fans are underestimating Keplers value.  I also have as a baseline than he will be at minimum a .250/.330/.470.   

2021 and 2022 don't matter as much,  as the over-exaggerated shift is no longer allowed.   You add in a more free swinging confident Kepler and you are looking at a 3 WAR minimum player.  

[Hawkeye Bean Counter]

6 minutes ago, chpettit19 said:

Jason Heyward is probably the better comp here. Much closer to the same kind of player. Defense first corner outfielder with wildly fluctuating offensive outputs. He got 1 year, 9 mil this offseason. But he's older than Kepler so there's a little difference there. But he also put up an .813 OPS in 124 games last year. Good for a 117 OPS+. Compared to .816 and 121 for Kepler. Kepler's lowest of lows wasn't as bad as Heyward's, but their peaks have been about the same. Heyward is probably the comp, and if Kepler's offense dips back down again he's going to be much closer to 1 year, 9 mil than a QO.

Heywards steamer is a 1.0 WAR,  or effectively 10 million.   Keplers is 2.4 or effectively 24 million.  Quite difference.  Teoscars is 1.9  or 19 million,  voila he received a present value contract of 19 to 20 million.  Do we see a trend here?   

[chpettit19]

1 minute ago, Hawkeye Bean Counter said:

Heywards steamer is a 1.0 WAR,  or effectively 10 million.   Keplers is 2.4 or effectively 24 million.  Quite difference.  Teoscars is 1.9  or 19 million,  voila he received a present value contract of 19 to 20 million.  Do we see a trend here?   

And what are the hitting projections tied to that 2.4 WAR? Are they like last year's or 2020-2022? Is there a trend there?

[Mike Sixel]

I'm going to speculate the Dodgers don't pay him that much if they thought he was only a 2 WAR player.....but I could be wrong here. Either way, we've all made our points and no one is changing their mind.

[chpettit19]

5 minutes ago, Hawkeye Bean Counter said:

Chpettit,  I already stated in previous posts,  I greatly think fans are underestimating Keplers value.  I also have as a baseline than he will be at minimum a .250/.330/.470.   

2021 and 2022 don't matter as much,  as the over-exaggerated shift is no longer allowed.   You add in a more free swinging confident Kepler and you are looking at a 3 WAR minimum player.  

And I said that if he hits the way he did in 2023 then it's a different situation than 2021 and 2022. You're far more confident that Kepler will produce to his 2023 numbers than I am. But I've stated multiple times that if he does hit to those levels he'll be a QO possibility if the Twins are willing to pay him 20 mil should he accept it. The question is absolutely whether or not he can hit like he did in 2023. We'll see.

[Hawkeye Bean Counter]

8 minutes ago, chpettit19 said:

And what are the hitting projections tied to that 2.4 WAR? Are they like last year's or 2020-2022? Is there a trend there?

.780 OPS,  so a step back on 2023 number,  significantly better than 2021 and 2022.  However like I stated,  I think you have to add .20 to .40 OPS when you remove the exaggerated shift.  Kepler went from the most unlucky hitter in all of baseball in 2021 and 2022 ,  to one of the top 10 luckiest hitters in the last 3 months of 2023.  All we need for him is to be average LOL.  Remove the outliers and you have a very solid player that is well worthy of a QO.  However if he continues to get more quality hits early in the count rather than trying to defend the plate and hitting weaker contact with 2 strikes,  you will likely see a better Kepler.  Will teams start to throw more junk early in the count?  If they do can Kepler adjust and then have more 1-0 counts which means that second pitch will need to be a quality pitch or the at bat is significantly trending Keplers way.  Kepler just willing to give the 1st strike was a killer for his production in my opinion.  

[nicksaviking]

1 hour ago, chpettit19 said:

And what are the hitting projections tied to that 2.4 WAR? Are they like last year's or 2020-2022? Is there a trend there?

Zero teams are going to pay a 32 year old based on WAR from their 20s.

They aren't paying for Kepler's WAR anyway since it's largely made up from defense and he's now older, and a corner outfielder where it's less important.

[chpettit19]

56 minutes ago, Hawkeye Bean Counter said:

.780 OPS,  so a step back on 2023 number,  significantly better than 2021 and 2022.  However like I stated,  I think you have to add .20 to .40 OPS when you remove the exaggerated shift.  Kepler went from the most unlucky hitter in all of baseball in 2021 and 2022 ,  to one of the top 10 luckiest hitters in the last 3 months of 2023.  All we need for him is to be average LOL.  Remove the outliers and you have a very solid player that is well worthy of a QO.  However if he continues to get more quality hits early in the count rather than trying to defend the plate and hitting weaker contact with 2 strikes,  you will likely see a better Kepler.  Will teams start to throw more junk early in the count?  If they do can Kepler adjust and then have more 1-0 counts which means that second pitch will need to be a quality pitch or the at bat is significantly trending Keplers way.  Kepler just willing to give the 1st strike was a killer for his production in my opinion.  

Kepler wasn't even close to the most unlucky hitter in all of baseball. He was just really bad at making quality contact. I don't believe a .780 OPS Kepler would get a QO. I don't think a 2.4 WAR Kepler would get a QO.

Actually, I looked up the OPS and WAR totals for QO eligible position players the last 2 years (I did this before and it may have been in a discussion with you) and now I'm back to the thought that there's almost no chance Kepler gets the QO next year.

2023:
Offered: 
Chapman- .755 OPS, 4.4 bWAR (rejected, still unsigned)
Bellinger- .881 OPS, 4.4 bWAR (rejected, still unsigned)

Not offered:
Brantley- .724 OPS, 0.1 bWAR (retired)
Kiermaier- .741 OPS, 3.9 bWAR (1 year, 10.5 mil)
Merrifield- .700 OPS, 0.7 bWAR (still unsigned)
Hoskins- Hurt (still unsigned)
Teoscar- .741 OPS, 2.1 bWAR (1 year, 23.5 mil with 8.5 mil deferred)
Soler- .853 OPS, 1.8 bWAR (still unsigned)
Garver- .870 OPS, 2.1 bWAR (2 years, 24 mil)
Duvall- .834 OPS, 1.6 bWAR (still unsigned)

2022:
Offered:
Pederson- .874 OPS, 1.3 bWAR (accepted)
Swanson- .776 OPS, 5.7 bWAR (7 years, 177 mil)
Contreras- .815 OPS, 3.9 bWAR (5 years, 87.5 mil)
Turner- .809 OPS, 4.9 bWAR (11 years, 300 mil)
Bogaerts- .833 OPS, 5.9 bWAR (11 years, 280 mil)
Nimmo- .800 OPS, 5.1 bWAR (8 years, 162 mil)
Rizzo- .817 OPS, 2.3 bWAR (2 years, 40 mil)
Judge- 1.111 OPS, 10.6 bWAR (9 years, 360 mil)

Not offered:
Brantley- .785 OPS, 1.3 bWAR (1 year, 12 mil)
Haniger- .736 OPS, 1.3 bWAR (3 years, 43.5 mil)
Martinez- .790 OPS, 1.1 bWAR (1 year, 10 mil)

Kepler is clearly much closer to the guys in the "not offered" sections in both of those lists.

[DJL44]

3 hours ago, Hawkeye Bean Counter said:

So Teoscar signed for what is effectively a 20 million 1 year contract. 

The QO will be higher than that in 2025, probably more like 1 year $22M. The Twins should only offer it if they actually want to pay Kepler that much money because he is more likely to accept it than not.

[JesusisLord7]

We are a team that had 18 or so consequetive playoff loses while Polanco and Kepler played. How are we better with them on the field. Maybe the opportunity is getting to this next generation of Twins. Lets roll with Brooks Lee. The Shrewd business man takes what he can get and dumps these players who spent their whole career losing. Go get that 17 year old rookie ball player as compensation. The opportunity is take the cash and address needs and the opportunity is letting Brooks Lee and Ed Julian play. I'd move Julian to 1st base and put Kirilloff back to the outfield or trade him. 

[Rik19753]

I see a lot of people discrediting Kepler's defensive value because he isn't playing a premium defensive position, but that is taken into consideration in WAR. The best defensive RF doesn't get nearly as much credit as the best C or SS. The WAR he puts up is perfectly legitimate and there is no room for "corner outfielders are less important defensively thus they have less value" arguments. 

[Fatbat]

18 hours ago, Mike Sixel said:

The Dodgers have infinitely more money than the Twins. They can take that risk....the Twins can't, imo, take the risk those players take the QO and are not good. 

No one will every be $11M Gallo bad. $20M isnt that much $$$ anymore. I suggested the FO hive a QO to Maeda. Either way he would have chose, we would be better off right now. 

[chpettit19]

8 hours ago, Rik19753 said:

I see a lot of people discrediting Kepler's defensive value because he isn't playing a premium defensive position, but that is taken into consideration in WAR. The best defensive RF doesn't get nearly as much credit as the best C or SS. The WAR he puts up is perfectly legitimate and there is no room for "corner outfielders are less important defensively thus they have less value" arguments. 

Teams don't pay for corner outfield defense. This is a discussion about whether or not Kepler would be likely to receive a qualifying offer or get a similar contract to Teoscar Hernandez. There is absolutely room for arguments that Kepler's defense being the main driver of his value hurts his value. Do you have a bunch of examples of QOs or $23.5 mil, 1 year deals being handed to guys who specialize in corner outfield defense? Because I have a whole bunch for corner outfield guys who are terrible defensively, but can absolute mash a baseball. Including Teoscar Hernandez.

[chpettit19]

8 minutes ago, Fatbat said:

No one will every be $11M Gallo bad. $20M isnt that much $$$ anymore. I suggested the FO hive a QO to Maeda. Either way he would have chose, we would be better off right now. 

Kenta Maeda is getting 24 million for 2 years, but you think it'd have been smart for the team currently cutting payroll to pay him 20.325 million for 1 year?

[Fatbat]

7 minutes ago, chpettit19 said:

Kenta Maeda is getting 24 million for 2 years, but you think it'd have been smart for the team currently cutting payroll to pay him 20.325 million for 1 year?

Yes. Even if he only had an average year, our SP staff would be better right now. If you think $12M is fair compensation to him but you overpay by $8M then the FO could either suck it up or cut that amount some other way.  He likely would have turned the QO down anyway. 

[chpettit19]

Just now, Fatbat said:

Yes. Even if he only had an average year, our SP staff would be better right now. If you think $12M is fair compensation to him but you overpay by $8M then the FO could either suck it up or cut that amount some other way.  He likely would have turned the QO down anyway. 

I think he would've signed that QO before it hit the table in front of him. Why wouldn't he? He'd get 83% of the money he got on the Detroit deal and be able to hit the market again next season. 

Do you think the Pohlads would "suck it up" and eat an extra 8 mil when they're choosing to cut payroll after having just won their first playoff game in 2 decades? So they would've had to cut that money somewhere else. Likely Polanco or Kepler for prospect return. Do you think the team is better with Maeda on a significant overpay or Polanco on a significant underpay? Overpaying by 66% is a terrible plan. Especially for a guy who isn't that good. 

If they were willing to sign Maeda for 20 mil they would've been better off signing Gray for 25. Eduardo Rodriguez only got 20 a year. Giolito was under 20. Wacha for 16 is lightyears better than Maeda for 20. Lugo for 15 would've been better. Flaherty for 1, 14 would be better than a QO to Maeda. Overpaying by nearly doubling a player's actual value is never a good strategy. Unless you're playing with Monopoly money like the Dodgers.