Is Glen Perkins the Twins greatest trade chip?

[diehardtwinsfan]

Cingrani wouldn't happen but this guy could Robert Stephenson » Statistics » Pitching | FanGraphs Baseball

 

That's if the Reds were interested in adding a top setup man. It would be interesting having a lefty/lefty closer/setup combo. I consider this unlikely still but it's the kind of deal that you shoot for with Perkins.

 

btw - Perkins definitely does not make too much money to be a setup man.

 

Perhaps I've forgotten, but I'm pretty sure that Stephenson is considered a better prospect than Cingrani. I personally would be thrilled if the Twins got either of them from the Reds for Perkins. I was hoping last year they could have gotten Cingrani for Span, though I was quite happy with the Meyer trade.

 

My gut, however, says that the Reds won't pony up either of those guys... at least not with including a lower level propsect of their own.

[Shane Wahl]

They might be able to get Cingrani for Perkins and Goodrum or certainly Polanco. I would not do that though.

[jokin]

Perhaps I've forgotten, but I'm pretty sure that Stephenson is considered a better prospect than Cingrani. I personally would be thrilled if the Twins got either of them from the Reds for Perkins. I was hoping last year they could have gotten Cingrani for Span, though I was quite happy with the Meyer trade.

 

My gut, however, says that the Reds won't pony up either of those guys... at least not with including a lower level propsect of their own.

 

It all depends on how much the Reds end up really needing Perkins now. They are on unfamiliar ground for Twins fans, their starting pitching depth is good enough to absorb losing a top prospect.

 

Although, as I proposed earlier in this thread, they would seem unlikely to dump a more sure thing in Cingrani,- Stephenson is probably it, and might be well worth considering for the Twins, as this type of dice-rolling seems to be the only viable way they would consider pursuing a potential future ace.

[ThePuck]

They are on unfamiliar ground for Twins fans, their starting pitching depth is good enough to absorb losing a top prospect.

 

 

You're talking about the Reds' pitching depth, right?

[jokin]

You're talking about the Reds' pitching depth, right?

 

Yeah, that's why Twins fans often forget that other teams actually put a premium on selecting, developing and maintaining a decent depth chart worth of potential quality SP options.

[LaBombo]

The decision whether to trade Perkins should be based almost entirely on what the Twins would get for him. If it's less than a B+ prospect middle infielder or starting pitcher, then I'd rather see them hang onto him. If by 2016 they're not good enough to warrant his presence, they'll have bigger problems than missing out on what a B/C prospect probably would have developed into.

 

It's interesting how many people keep mentioning Perk's very team-friendly contract. Odds are that at least a few of those same people have argued elsewhere that a low-budget season has essentially rendered the Twins' player payroll nothing more than a big pile of monopoly money.

 

In other words, things like burning up team control on Hicks or blowing $15 million on a qualifying offer to Morneau mean nothing because the money will end up going unspent otherwise.

 

By that logic, Perkins' contract is irrelevant other than as it applies to his trade value. Same thing, to a lesser extent, with Doumit and Willingham (anybody who was against entertaining trade offers for him in the 2012-13 offseason changed their mind yet?).