Twins Interested in Brett Anderson

[NoCal]

Actually, I read in the Bay Area media, that Oakland is looking for middle infielders and catchers. The Rosario problem has probably handcuffed the Twins as far as middle infielders, and the Twins do not have much to entice in the catching department.

[twinsfaninsaudi]

Actually, I read in the Bay Area media, that Oakland is looking for middle infielders and catchers. The Rosario problem has probably handcuffed the Twins as far as middle infielders, and the Twins do not have much to entice in the catching department.

 

It makes the most sense that they are looking for that. They might go for a big right handed bat that can play outfield. I know they've been linked to Nelson Cruz.

[howeda7]

If say Worley and Fien or Worley and Burton would do it, I'd take it. Rosario is a lot to give up, but I'd probably do that too. Any more than that, it's not worth it. The injury history is too extensive and if he doesn't light it up, you're not picking up a $12 million option for 2015.

[Trevor0333]

Actually, I read in the Bay Area media, that Oakland is looking for middle infielders and catchers. The Rosario problem has probably handcuffed the Twins as far as middle infielders, and the Twins do not have much to entice in the catching department.

 

Levi Micheal & Vance Worley anyone hahaha

[Don't Feed the Greed Guy]

Here's an interesting article by Clave Jones, entitled "Should the Twins Trade For Brett Anderson? http://fantasybaseballcrackerjacks.com/2013/12/04/minnesota-twins-trade-brett-anderson/

 

Jones quotes Reusse and Mackey, who were discussing such a trade on 1500 ESPN yesterday. Evidently Reusse and Mackey were dropping names like Rosario, Arcia, May, and Gibson as potential bait for the Oakland leftie.

 

That seems outrageous to me. But it's a fun read. Take a look.

[InfraRen]

Here's an interesting article by Clave Jones' date=' entitled "Should the Twins Trade For Brett Anderson? http://fantasybaseballcrackerjacks.com/2013/12/04/minnesota-twins-trade-brett-anderson/

 

Jones quotes Reusse and Mackey, who were discussing such a trade on 1500 ESPN yesterday. Evidently Reusse and Mackey were dropping names like Rosario, Arcia, May, and Gibson as potential bait for the Oakland leftie.

 

That seems outrageous to me. But it's a fun read. Take a look.[/quote']

 

I would like a Brett Anderson trade, for sure - but for none of those guys. MAYBE Gibson, but I kind of feel like Gibson is kind of Brett Anderson-like if he could get it figured out.

 

Would REALLY love the Twins getting in on the Jeff Samardzija trade talks. THEN I'd start looking at the guys in DFTGG's post.

[halfchest]

I would like a Brett Anderson trade, for sure - but for none of those guys. MAYBE Gibson, but I kind of feel like Gibson is kind of Brett Anderson-like if he could get it figured out.

 

Would REALLY love the Twins getting in on the Jeff Samardzija trade talks. THEN I'd start looking at the guys in DFTGG's post.

 

I hate to be the we can't trade anyone guy. I'm open to trading especially for the right guy. Given injury history I don't see how BA can command too much. I don't like trading Gibson because I think his value is way too low. I'd rather keep him and gamble that he puts it together this year.

[Mike Sixel]

He has pitched less than 50 innings a year for several years, and people wnat to give up legit prospects for him?

 

Mind.

Boggling.

[howieramone1406390264]

He has pitched less than 50 innings a year for several years, and people wnat to give up legit prospects for him?

 

Mind.

Boggling.

 

He's a top of the rotation guy when healthy. People talk about them like they grow on trees, and here's a real live one. Recently Ryan has been quoted as saying he won't use his prospects and I don't disagree with that, but I do believe a buy low, top of the rotation lefty is worthy of discussion.

[Mike Sixel]

He is a top of the rotation guy when healthy. People talk about them like they grow on trees, and here's a real live one. Recently Ryan has been quoted as saying he won't use his prospects and I don't disagree with that, but I do believe a buy low, top of the rotation lefty is worthy of discussion.

 

i agree, but giving up one or more top prospects is not "buying low"

[Brock Beauchamp]

i agree, but giving up one or more top prospects is not "buying low"

 

Yeah. Anderson is an intriguing player, for sure... But he's incredibly injury-prone and has been paid quite handsomely to not throw baseballs at opposing batters in anger.

 

And that guy isn't worth a top 100 prospect. He's just isn't.

 

Why give up, say, Eddie Rosario for Anderson when you can go get Johan Santana for a couple of million bucks? When you get right down to it, they're kinda the same guy (though Anderson has a better chance of rebounding... though I wouldn't put it much higher, honestly).

[Otto von Ballpark]

Brett Anderson, career ERA+: 108

 

Matt Garza, career ERA+: 108

 

Not advocating one or the other, just thought that was interesting.

[Mike Sixel]

And all Garza costs is money....

[Siehbiscuit]

i agree, but giving up one or more top prospects is not "buying low"

 

"Buying low" is a subjective term. If trading for a "low-valued" Anderson requires a guy like Rosario or even he and Gibson, what would his value be at his "selling high" value? I recall that the Royals were turned away not too long ago when they offered Wil Meyers (top 3 prospect in all of baseball). This guys value is incredibly low righ now, especially for the cash-strapped A's.

 

To play the what if game: It's 2016 and Matt Harvey hasn't been able to stay healthy and pitched only 15-20 games in 2014 and 2015 combined. Is he worth a couple of very good prospects (Top 100-types)? What if he were healthy? See David Price, that is what these guys are worth.

 

To get elite pitching requires risk. Anderson is ace material. The Twins will not win unless they have pitching that can compete with the Tigers, Red Sox, and Yankees. Buying Anderson now IS buying him at his lowest value.

[Mike Sixel]

I don't see how giving up a starting 2B/LF and a #3 pitcher is an incredibly low price. I don't see how giving up only one of those is a low price.

 

It really depends in your medical analysis of his situation, and how good you think the prospects you are giving up are. I think an everday 2B/LF is worth more than a guy with a 108+ ERA that has not really pitched in three years. I'd rather have Gibson, I think. But I don't know the medicals.

 

Frankly, why not just sign Garza, he costs zero prospects.

[Siehbiscuit]

I agree with the "sign Garza" logic. He doesn't cost prospects and they are very comprable. IMO, Anderson is better than Garza, when he is healthy. The biggest difference to me is Anderson is only 25 (26 on Feb. 1st). We can pay him Garza $, but the prospects are what we pay to get age 26-30 seasons. Age is the reason, imo, to invest with prospects.

[jay]

Brett Anderson, career ERA+: 108

 

Matt Garza, career ERA+: 108

 

Not advocating one or the other, just thought that was interesting.

 

Look at what the Rangers gave up for less than half a season of Garza. A solidly top 100 prospect (Olt), the new #11 and #12 prospects in a deep Cubs system, and a 25 year old starter with 100 sub-par MLB innings but a 3.23 MiLB ERA mark.

 

It's not the trade deadline and Garza isn't coming off injury, but Rosario doesn't seem so far fetched.

[Otto von Ballpark]

I agree with the "sign Garza" logic. He doesn't cost prospects and they are very comprable. IMO, Anderson is better than Garza, when he is healthy. The biggest difference to me is Anderson is only 25 (26 on Feb. 1st). We can pay him Garza $, but the prospects are what we pay to get age 26-30 seasons. Age is the reason, imo, to invest with prospects.

 

Actually, you'd only be getting Anderson's age 26-27 seasons -- he's only under team control through 2015. Best case scenario, he pitches well, but to keep him he'd need a Garza-like deal, albeit at a younger age but also one that will extend further into our impending "Buxton/Sano return to glory" (assuming we care about budgeting for that, extending Anderson would affect it more than a Garza deal now).

 

Also, Anderson has pitched 450 innings in the majors. His 147 ERA+ season lasted all of 112 innings. Just looking at last year's game logs, Garza had a 99 inning stretch with a roughly 144 ERA+. I'm not sure how you can reliably conclude he's a better pitcher than Garza, even when healthy.

 

If you want to take a risk adding this caliber of pitcher now, risking money might be the better play, particularly if Oakland isn't so keen on accepting a "buy low" return.

[drivlikejehu]

In the past 3 years, he's thrown 83, 35, and 45 innings (rounded). The idea he suddenly turns into a 150+ guys seem like pure fantasy to me. And how could a mid-market team give him a pricey extension even if he did do well for 2 years, knowing his history?

 

The Twins need more pitching, but I don't see why someone would give up a good prospect for 2 years of very uncertain upside.

[Willihammer]

Well let's look at the injury history

 

http://www.baseballprospectus.com/card/card.php?id=57286

 

2007: Concussion from a car accident, 29 days missed

2009: blister, 10 days missed

2010: Flexor tendon strain, 40 days missed

2010: elbow inflammation, 56 days missed

2011: Tommy John surgery (Jul 14)

....

2012 (Sept): belly strain, 20 days missed

2013: ankle sprain, 120 days missed

 

Most of that time is related to the elbow so if TJ fixed it, I think its reasonable to expect him to throw more innings in 2014. 4 months for an ankle sprain does seem like a lot though.

[thetank]

Well let's look at the injury history

 

http://www.baseballprospectus.com/card/card.php?id=57286

 

2007: Concussion from a car accident, 29 days missed

2009: blister, 10 days missed

2010: Flexor tendon strain, 40 days missed

2010: elbow inflammation, 56 days missed

2011: Tommy John surgery (Jul 14)

....

2012 (Sept): belly strain, 20 days missed

2013: ankle sprain, 120 days missed

 

Most of that time is related to the elbow so if TJ fixed it, I think its reasonable to expect him to throw more innings in 2014. 4 months for an ankle sprain does seem like a lot though.

How did this guy get such a large contract? He was injured before his arbitration years.

[iTwins]

It all depends on what the A's really want. If names like Rosario, Arcia, Gibson, May (top 20 guys) are being thrown around - no thanks. IF (big if) the Twins were to move those types of prospects, I'd like to see a little more sure-bet return than Anderson.

 

However, if it's true the A's want middle relievers - I'd entertain just about anyone on the roster that fits - Duensing, Swarzak, Worley, Pressly etc.

[JP3700]

I just wanted to point out to the posters with injury concerns on Anderson, Garza has had elbow, shoulder and lat injuries over the last two years where Anderson's injuries were an oblique strain and a stress fracture in his foot.

 

That being said, I wouldn't trade multiple impact prospects for Anderson. I also wouldn't give Garza more than a Nolasco, Edwin Jackson type contract. As a team, you always should try to improve, even when you are this low on the win curve. However, you should be looking for value, not an overpay.

[Mike Sixel]

Well let's look at the injury history

 

http://www.baseballprospectus.com/card/card.php?id=57286

 

2007: Concussion from a car accident, 29 days missed

2009: blister, 10 days missed

2010: Flexor tendon strain, 40 days missed

2010: elbow inflammation, 56 days missed

2011: Tommy John surgery (Jul 14)

....

2012 (Sept): belly strain, 20 days missed

2013: ankle sprain, 120 days missed

 

Most of that time is related to the elbow so if TJ fixed it, I think its reasonable to expect him to throw more innings in 2014. 4 months for an ankle sprain does seem like a lot though.

 

 

The question is, what are you willing to bet that is true? Your future starting LF/2B? A guy that most considered a number 3/4 for the last few years, who should now be recovered from surgery? Both of them?

 

No one is saying don't take a gamble on him. People are disagreeing on what to gamble (I think no one is saying don't gamble on him). People are also pointing out that for more money, but zero prospects, you can get a guy that seems recovered from surgery and has been a number 2/3 over his career.

[jay]

People are also pointing out that for more money, but zero prospects, you can get a guy that seems recovered from surgery and has been a number 2/3 over his career.

 

Mike, I think the difference there is that Garza would require a commitment of much more money and many more years. If you think 25-year old Anderson is as good as 30-year old Garza and can be healthy, there's certainly value in having him for 2 years at $20M as opposed to being locked in with Garza at 5 years and $80M or whatever he gets. Anderson can be qualified or later dealt. I think OAK can get more than just a salary dump.

[TwinsTerritory]

While Anderson has a lot of upside, I don't know that I would give up one of our top 6-7 prospects. How about a package of lesser prospects? Considering Oakland's budget constraints and desire to dump some salary maybe a package like Kepler, Diamond or Worley, and another low-level prospect would get it done? Not sure if Diamond or Worley could stick in Oakland though.

[Trevor0333]

I wouldnt give up any top 10 prospects for sure, probably not top 15 either. I would try & push Levi Michael packaged with someone like Worley & Burton but dont think that would do it. I would probably pull the trigger on a counter offer with Niko Goodrum, Worley, & Ryan Pressley.

 

You still have Danny Santana, Jorge Polanco, & Eddie Rosario so you can afford to give up on a promising middle infielder.

[Trevor0333]

Oakland has money for a change, they just took in Jim Johnson as a closer at $10mill. They are where the Twins hopefully will be in 2015-2018. Loaded with talented pre arbitration players stacking a cheap roster.

 

They wont just dump him for marbles. I get the injury history but most of it is realted to TJ issues with the elbow. He has "Ace stuff" and can dominate games when he is healthy.

[Guest USAFChief]

I would happily part with a top 10-ish prospect for Anderson. Obviously not Sano/Buxton, but something below that.

[The Wise One]

Well let's look at the injury history

 

http://www.baseballprospectus.com/card/card.php?id=57286

 

2007: Concussion from a car accident, 29 days missed

2009: blister, 10 days missed

2010: Flexor tendon strain, 40 days missed

2010: elbow inflammation, 56 days missed

2011: Tommy John surgery (Jul 14)

....

2012 (Sept): belly strain, 20 days missed

2013: ankle sprain, 120 days missed

 

Most of that time is related to the elbow so if TJ fixed it, I think its reasonable to expect him to throw more innings in 2014. 4 months for an ankle sprain does seem like a lot though.

 

120 days is a long time for a sprained ankle. Not so long when you have a fracture, like was listed in baseball prospectus.

 

 

[TABLE=class: display enhancedtable highlight, width: 914]

 

 

[TR=class: even]

2013-05-17

2013-05-17

On-Alr

0

0

Right

Foot

Stress Fracture

Navicular

-

-

[/TR]

 

 

[/TABLE]