Rundown: On Trading Kepler, DRC+, LeMahieu and More

If Kep’s a below average player, then why are so many teams interested in him?? Simultaneously, why trade Kep if he’s about to breakout?? And why attach Romero and Lewis to the very same deal?? This is the why I’m not a fan of trading for “Thor,” because they’ll “undervalue” guys like Kepler and Romero, but overvalue Syndergaard to the point where Lewis is has to be included. In other words, I think other teams are trying to rip us off, and why wouldn’t they?? I just hope the FO doesn’t fall for it.

I'm all for trading Kepler and other prospects for top end pitching. There's plenty of corner OFs available in FA right now that can match or beat Kepler's WAR value.

After Harper there would be hoping Brantley could stay healthy or players that hope they can overcome old age.

There are two posters in here saying that Kepler is easily replaceable, and suggest trading him for a front of the rotation pitcher.
Why on earth would a team trade us front line pitching, the second hardest position to fill in all of sports, for such an easily replaceable player??

Duensing syndrome?

The funny thing is I'm baffled why the over-love for Kepler. People have to dig deep into the analytics to find positive things about his offense. The stats on the back of his baseball card haven't changed in nearly 3 full seasons. I'll take the guy who can find holes and get hits on balls in play instead of Kepler's lazy fly balls.

It's a fair critique of Kepler, and the fear we all should have on him: this may be exactly the hitter he is. but there's also been enough bursts to tease people. He's still only 25 (same age as Cave). Look at his splits from 2018: crushed it in March/April. Below average in May. Awful in June. Killed it in July. Average in Aug. Poor in September. He's all over the place as a hitter, but he's got all these peripherals that suggest he's capable of being good as well as a track record in the high minors that makes you think he can hit. And the D is stellar (better than anyone else on the roster save Buxton). This could be a make or break season for him. 

It's also why the people suggesting moving Kepler to 1B need to stop. His hitting his the problem. It's fine in CF. It's questionable in RF. Even if he's as good a defender at 1B as Mauer became, it's just not enough at 1B.

Kepler has interesting trade value because he played enough CF to be attractive to other teams. His D there isn't one of the high elite but it's darn good. He can play other OF positions and not be too much of a drag on your offense. But since we don't know if Buxton is going to make it he's also got value to the Twins who know they can slot him in there and not have to worry about Cave being a fluke.

certainty is really helpful in baseball. We know Kepler's floor, I think. The question is does he have much more of a ceiling?

The person that made the Hicks trade isn't here anymore. Don't you think Falvine makes better trades than the past regime so far?

They haven't made any very significant trades yet, other than Odorizi(good one actually) They have given away expiring contracts for lottery picks. Not exactly risky and/or groundbreaking. Hard to really say if they have done good or not yet?

My point is it is kind of irrational to worry about making a Hicks-esc trade when the people who made that trade aren't here anymore. If we hold on to that fear we'll never make a trade again because a trade went sideways 3 years ago.

It wasn't a big trade though. They missed opportunities to package Hicks up and bring back real talent. Instead they dumped him at his lowest point for a catcher that is flat terrible. 

At some point you have to take risks. Whether that is trading your best thought of "prospects" or signing someone to a big dollar deal, or trading some of your best players for prospects you think might be something special. Always going the easy/safe way has put the Twins in the same positions they always are. 

Either miss the playoffs totally, or make them then get bounced right away.

It's totally legal in the rule book to sign another OF if Kepler is traded.

But show me the line on which that OF addition has signed, and then we'll talk. Let's stop trading from already-thin areas. 

Frankly, I'd go in the opposite direction. I'd sign Cutch if possible, then play matchup with RF/1B/DH. I'm skeptical about Cave, and would put equal money on a light bulb going off for Kepler and a wet blanket being thrown over Cave. And if (when?) Kirilloff becomes a real thing, wouldn't Kepler be nice as a 4th OF who can handle a bat AND play good defense? And if Cave is the real thing too, but Kepler id the better player, guess which 4th OF gets moved? Right, the second best one. Reed, Granite, and Wade? So far, they look like commodity items to me.

I want more predictability in 2019. I have enough unpredictability as it is without adding more.

I think some of you people better go back and look at some Cave's numbers and it is pretty small sample size but there are some glaring weaknesses in his numbers. First is he is striking already out at 36% of time he comes to bat. I willing to bet that number will increase further come this year as teams have gotten more data on him and have found out what they can exploit on him. Compare this to Kepler he strikes out half the rate Cave does. Second Caves walk rate is half of Keplers walk rate so were dealing with player that put ball in play last year on short sample size got high percentage of hits with ball put into play. This is something i would worry about for the coming year. People on Kepler keep coming back to his numbers have been same for three years but the things i have seen in three years is marked improvement in his at bats they have become more professional in that he has been working the counts in his favor more but he has lapses in his at bats at pitch selections but it has improved each year. Second thing is two years ago he had absolute terrible numbers against left hand pitching but last year he proved he could hit left hand pitching. I look at his swing and way he barrels up the baseball you can see that he's going to hit and other thing is he works on his game and it reported that he works hard on improving his game meaning its only time before everything comes together because he has ability and the effort for this to happen. I also think another factor for him has been i think he has gotten worn down durning the season in past and it learning curve by players to get there body in shape for major league season. The big thing is he has continued to play and hasn't been hurt to where he hasn't played which alot of young players don't achieve. Like i have said earlier he's young player ready to break out become a star player and i hope this front office see's that also.

Trading Kepler for A prospects or part of a deal to get a top of the rotation pitcher is a no brainer. I would not move him for lesser prospects. We don’t need another JR Murphy deal.

I don’t think he brings in that top prospect or pitcher so I am keeping him. His strikeout and walk rates are trending the right way. His defense in RF is a plus. He may not have any single stand out skill but his all around game is the reason steamer projects him for more WAR than any other Twin position player in 2019.

If Kep’s a below average player, then why are so many teams interested in him?? Simultaneously, why trade Kep if he’s about to breakout?? And why attach Romero and Lewis to the very same deal?? This is the why I’m not a fan of trading for “Thor,” because they’ll “undervalue” guys like Kepler and Romero, but overvalue Syndergaard to the point where Lewis is has to be included. In other words, I think other teams are trying to rip us off, and why wouldn’t they?? I just hope the FO doesn’t fall for it.

Chris, as one who advocated going all in for Thor( I actually proposed a trade including Sano, Kepler and one of our catchers - not Lewis or Kirillof), I must admit that it would be much harder to include Kepler rather than Sano.  I say this because of all the tantalizing improvements Max seems to make, together with his lack of playing time before signing.  Sano on the other hand, while showing flashes of greatness, carries too heavy a burden in terms of temperament, character and lack of conditioning to be able to count on as a core member of a contending club.  But the real issue is how the trade partner values each player.  No real way of knowing. 

I included both Sano and Kepler only because each is unproven as a potential all star and short of giving up one of our two uber-prospects, these two are the most likely major-league - ready players we have.  Sure they would leave holes in an already porous lineup but to get an ace pitcher you must give up quality.  While the Donaldson ship has already sailed, there are some 3B replacements on the FA market and even more for the corner outfield position.  Yes, it would take boldness to trade two of our "starters" but a Syndergaard does not become available every offseason.

As it turns out, the Mets' likelihood of trading Thor has diminished since the first flurry of rumors, so perhaps this whole topic is a moot point, but if a #1 or #2 starter can be pried loose(and signed to a long term deal), this FO should be making an all-out effort to complete such a trade.  Aces don't come along often but when they do, a contending organization must take the risk(see Boston/Sale and Houston/Verlander).  Why not the Twins?

Just because you CAN do something doesn't mean you SHOULD do something.  Keps tries hard every play.  I'd be patient with him. 

Every playoff team has very good pitching, a smattering of power, and a few .300ish hitters. The Twins are furthest away from the third. While pitching is obviously crucial, we have absolutely no one racking up hits from March to Oct. Surprising this fact is relatively unspoken this offseason.

Every playoff team has very good pitching, a smattering of power, and a few .300ish hitters. The Twins are furthest away from the third. While pitching is obviously crucial, we have absolutely no one racking up hits from March to Oct. Surprising this fact is relatively unspoken this offseason.

The 10 playoff teams from last year COMBINED to have 8 players hit. 300 or higher. Only 16 players in the entire MLB hit .300+.

Nobody hits for average anymore. Walks and HR's rule the day now, whether we like it or not.

I don't understand the point of DRC+.  There are half a dozen uber stats for offense already (many of which are pretty good) and we still have defensive metrics that need three years of data to "work."

All defensive stats are going to suffer in this respect, by comparison to the offensive ones. The sample size is smaller. Batters face on average 10-15 pitches a game, from which they compile the plate appearances in the stats. They face by comparison 2-5 decisions/opportunities in the field depending on position. Many of the pitches seem like no-brainers (take or swing), but then many fielding chances are likewise ones that any competent player will make - and yet, sometimes fielders muff the easy chances, and likewise batters will swing at pitches in the dirt. All in all, the two sides of the stats coin are not symmetrical - batters are put to the test on each pitch, and that's why it takes less time for offensive stats to stabilize and have meaning.

I disagree. I have a metric that would only require a few weeks of data, but I need to build it out as a proof of concept (i.e., compare run it against real data) -- and who the heck has time these days? It won't require 3 years of data, it will require the same amount of time as batting statistics to be relied upon.

One way to save time would be to run an idea past others who have studied the problem too. I (or you) can look up some of the SABR types who have done studies - they are usually pretty approachable, at least if you don't initiate with the sterotypical "everybody out of the swimming pool, there's a new lifeguard on duty" kind of self-introductions.

I used to be a member of SABR. What follows is the verbatim response I got when I would reach out to any of the members of the SABR metrics group: