What Can the Twins Get For Nick Gordon?

19 minutes ago, Jeff K said:

I can't see Castro getting optioned.  he is younger, has greater positional flexibility and is coming off of a strong year.  And he appears to be a better fielder.

I don’t disagree that Castro is the better player but that’s really not the point. The difference between the two isn’t huge and optioning Castro for a short period of time allows the Twins to keep both which the FO loves to do. 

I'm not sure what Nick Gordon does better than anyone else on the roster. That's why I have trouble figuring out his role on the team. It's fine to have guys around for depth that are just depth but usually you stash them in AAA.

Castro, I believe, is a better defender and is coming off possibly a breakout season, but the fact he is a switch hitter puts the nail in the coffin. We are loaded with left-handed bats.

Left handed batter and doesn't have a strong arm to play OF, doesn't draw walks consistently and isn't a great baserunner. Don't see a fit

2 hours ago, Linus said:

I don’t disagree that Castro is the better player but that’s really not the point. The difference between the two isn’t huge and optioning Castro for a short period of time allows the Twins to keep both which the FO loves to do. 

Castro was too integral to the team last season for them to option him in favor of a more limited player. And if Farmer gets moved, he's also the only backup SS they realistically have. the 26-man roster is very tight right now unless the Twins suddenly have a change in philosophy and start carrying only 12 pitchers (which is something I think they should consider, frankly; having 2 pitchers that only get used once a week is a redundancy they maybe can't afford; there were stretches were a guy like Winder or sands was on the roster but only threw once every 10-14 days).

I agree the FO doesn't like to give a away a player for nothing, and would rather exercise options when they can...but Castro is just ahead of Gordon on the depth chart now. Moreover, I think they increasingly see him as an OF rather than an INF, which means they'd need to be finding room for a 5th OF, since he's not going to take Kepler or Wallner's spot, unless they seriously think he can be the primary backup to Buxton in CF...which seems unlikely.

Just now, arby58 said:

I don't understand the business logic of cutting loose a player who plays the same set of positions, is faster, better defensively, hits for more power, and had a far better year than Gordon last year. This strikes me as too cute by half.

You wouldn’t be cutting him loose. You would option him to St Paul and recall him at the first injury. If you read what I posted I never said Gordon was the better player - he’s not. And that’s not the point. The point is this FO loves to hang onto players if at all possible. This is a way they could do it. I’m not endorsing the move rather making an observation of the player decision making tendencies of the FO. 

15 minutes ago, arby58 said:

I don't understand the business logic of cutting loose a player who plays the same set of positions, is faster, better defensively, hits for more power, and had a far better year than Gordon last year. This strikes me as too cute by half.

Even tho Castro has options, so does Larnach and other players. You don’t stash them in AAA just to play other guys that don't have options.  The best players make the varsity club to make the best team possible.  The only way Gordon makes to opening day roster is if he is crushing it in spring training and there is at least 1 key player injured that he can cover for.  There are also at least 2-4 guys right behind him in AAA already trying to take his spot on the 26 man. 

1 hour ago, arby58 said:

Gordon was hitting .176 with a .503 OPS through 91 at bats before the broken bone - it's not as if he was assured of a roster spot. Yes, he had a nice 2022, but he's got 696 career at bats, a .685 OPS and a 92 OPS+. I wouldn't expect much in return for him but agree they might as well see what they can get.

Gordon lack of production in the beginning of '23 was an extention of their experiment of trying to play Gordon in INF. Often FO overlook poor production if it's their idea & good production from someone like Castro.

I’m guessing Gordon is being held onto as a CF floor.  In car all other CF options dry up and sign elsewhere or trades don’t emerge you can go with Gordon in CF to start the yr.

If we sign or trade for one Gordon is a easy likely option to cut off the 40 man to make room.

I think his value is too low right now to trade him.  Pick up his 1MM option and see what he can provide in ST.  If Castro, and other competitors at his position(s) are all healthy in ST, possibly they can work out a trade at that time.  If he excels in ST, make room for him on the roster and hopefully he will build value and you can trade him at the deadline.

8 hours ago, SteveLV said:

Minimal trade value.

More value--IMO--to go into Spring Training and let the chips fall as they will.  Injuries, slumps, other trades could all impact his value to the Twins' roster in 2024.  He may continue to blossom and make the roster at a very economical price.

This.

He seems buried on the depth chart by now. But there will be 3 injuries before we know it...If not, let the DFA system work itself out. Maybe they work out a post-DFA trade for something minimal.

8 hours ago, JD-TWINS said:

What happens if Buxton isn’t healthy (about 60% chance is my estimation) & Martin & Gordon aren’t hitting by late April. Grim!!

Well, given that the offensive expectations of a league average CF hitting is basically Michael Taylor, they'd have to really not be hitting.

But I agree, I'd prefer a starter-on-a-bad-team, Taylor-level insurance policy in CF again. 

Is my memory off because I could swear last off-season there were a lot of people praising Gordon and calling for him to be the starting LFer?

14 minutes ago, arby58 said:

Leverage decreases as you approach the fulcrum. Every team will know that Gordon is out of options, so thinking you'll just wait until late in spring training to decide means you are left with the options of keeping him on the roster or waiving him. If there is something to get for him, you have to do it sooner rather than later.

You aren't wrong, but you are debating the value of the rookie league wild card player TBA you'll get in return, basically. You get an 18 year old or a 20 year old.

Other teams already know he's in a roster crunch and at peak value he isn't worth much in a trade. I think the difference here is negligible.

2 hours ago, arby58 said:

It's still cute by half. You don't do this to players who performed well for you the prior year. It creates ill will you do not need with players you are going to need.

Teams make roster decisions based on available options or no options all the time.  Ask Bailey Ober if he liked starting out in St Paul last year.   

Gordon's only potential value to any team is if he can be made into a functional CF, and the Twins would want to do that in St Paul. Alas for Gordon it may be that the plan is to make Martin a functional CF in St Paul and the innings pinch might not work for him.

They need to find someone who is short a CF and has the time and roster space to create one.  I'm thinking the Jazz Chisolm Experiment in MIA is worth reconsidering, for example.  But there's nothing for him in MN.  He got a great shot in 22 because of injuries to others, and he missed his shot in 23 because of injuries to himself. The history of baseball is littered with the careers of guys who watched their window close due to injury and Gordon might end up being one.  He seems like a likeable guy so it's a bummer, but it's hardly a new story.  Send him out asap to get him as good a shot as possible while he's still young, but they shouldn't expect much of anything back.

Maybe we can get 5 players from the Braves for him?