Jump to content
Yankees-Twins game thread is live — talk the game with us! ×
Twins Daily
  • Create Account

Otto von Ballpark

Old-Timey Member
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    20,669

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    74

 Content Type 

Profiles

News

Minnesota Twins Videos

2026 Minnesota Twins Top Prospects Ranking

2022 Minnesota Twins Draft Picks

Minnesota Twins Free Agent & Trade Rumors, Notes, & Tidbits

Guides & Resources

2023 Minnesota Twins Draft Picks

The Minnesota Twins Players Project

2024 Minnesota Twins Draft Picks

2025 Minnesota Twins Draft Pick Tracker

2026 Minnesota Twins Draft Tracker: Picks & Bonuses

Forums

Blogs

Events

Store

Downloads

Gallery

Everything posted by Otto von Ballpark

  1. Otto von Ballpark
    See my post above. I think the QO is considered almost like the previous year's salary in negotiations with the current team. Like Morneau a couple years ago, after he made $14 mil for the Twins, while that salary was no longer binding, I think we were going to have a tougher time signing him to a ~$6 mil contract than other clubs.
  2. Otto von Ballpark
    Despite having recently played the position, Plouffe is absolutely not checking anyone's 1B box. He's got a career and 2015 OPS+ of 99, and a peak of 110. I think looking team-by-team at 3B will show you if there are any clubs where a good hitting 3B could be shifted to cover a hole elsewhere and make room for Plouffe... although the best example of that might be Plouffe's current team.
  3. Otto von Ballpark
    It's not that easy. The 10 teams that aren't set at 3B include the Brewers, Phillies, and Braves. They may not really care about getting "set" at that position for the next two years at the cost of ~$16 mil salary plus whatever talent they have to surrender in trade. For a few more like the Padres and Diamondbacks, the improvement of Plouffe over internal options might be marginal. For a few others, like the Yankees, Red Sox, Mets, etc., they're already committed to other 3B. And 2-3 more of the teams considered "not set" are in the same division as the Twins, which might add another layer of reluctance to part with talent to get him.
  4. Otto von Ballpark
    My guess is that the Angels wanted to explore other options, with no risk of being locked into Freese and to not give Freese any expectations about AAV. From 2012-2014, 34 players received a qualifying offer, and only 8 times has the player re-signed with their former team that same winter. 2012 (QO $13.1 mil): LaRoche 2/24 Ortiz 2/26 (in leui of rejecting the offer) Kuroda 1/15 2013 (QO $14.1 mil): Kuroda again 1/16 Napoli 2/32 Drew 1/14.1 (prorated) 2014 (QO $15.3 mil): Martinez 4/68 Liriano 3/39 As qualifying offers multiply this might change, but I get the impression that the QO, even when rejected, acts as a reference point for these guys much like previous year's salary, and they'd have to sacrifice some pride to re-sign for notably less with the same club. So a rejected QO, while it would have hurt Freese's value to attach the draft pick, it would have probably made it more difficult for the Angels to snag him for 1/10 or 2/20, which seems like a reasonable fallback should their other 3B options fall through.
  5. Otto von Ballpark
    The very same month that this new Bedrosian was born!
  6. Otto von Ballpark
    Yeah. When we say "market" we often only look at the available players, and in that light, Plouffe looks pretty attractive compared to the alternatives. But the whole "market" should also include the demand side of the equation, which definitely drops Plouffe down. Indeed, part of the reason there are so few 3B available is that many teams, especially the most aggressive competitive teams, are retaining their incumbent 3B this winter.
  7. Otto von Ballpark
    Jett Bandy is a catcher, with a fun name. Although Iannetta is a free agent, so I'm not sure the Angels would be looking to throw a catcher into this deal. Plouffe? No. (Well, maybe Storen, depending on how Washington resolves that mess.) A team that wants Plouffe the next 2 years probably plans to compete those years, but relief aces like Chapman and Kimbrel almost certainly have more value to competing teams. Not sure if such a trade would ever really make sense for both teams....
  8. Otto von Ballpark
    Cam Bedrosian was a HS SP draftee, but since the start of 2014, he's looked a lot like what we hoped for Burdi/Reed/etc. Still hasn't successfully transitioned to MLB, but obviously as soon as he does it becomes much harder to acquire him. I wonder what Angel fans would say to Bedrosian plus Tropeano? (Although I don't think there's a real serious 40-man crunch, that is two 40-man guys for one.)
  9. Otto von Ballpark
    Tropeano does look interesting on the numbers, kinda like Trevor May. Although I've seen him called a "finesse artist" who "projects as solid number four starter": http://www.scout.com/mlb/angels/story/1518372-prospect-countdown-5-nick-tropeano http://www.minorleagueball.com/2015/8/25/9175289/los-angeles-angels-top-20-2015-pre-season-prospects-in-review
  10. Otto von Ballpark
    I don't think that's an unusual situation at all. A lot of players are useful if you already have them, but notably less useful if you have to sacrifice resources (particularly in trade) to get them. Plouffe is probably on the upper end of that spectrum owing to his defensive position, but still firmly in that group, in my opinion. (Willingham had the added complication of being only 20% into a recently signed long-term deal.)
  11. Otto von Ballpark
    As much as I like our young players, there is still a lot of potential for sputtering or stagnation in our OF and at DH. And we already are committed to a Plan A at 1B who has been the textbook definition of sputtering and stagnation the last 2 years. I'd feel kinda dumb if Sano is costing us runs defensively at 3B while we're stuck with one or more sputtering/stagnant guys in the OF/DH/1B mix. If Plouffe can net, say, a good catcher or a real immediate bullpen weapon, I could see it being a worthwhile risk for 2016. If he nets less than that, say some bullpen options that we could approximate internally or on the FA market, I really don't think we lose anything by waiting a year or even two, and in the meantime we have more confidence in our 2016 projection.
  12. Otto von Ballpark
    Sure, explore away. I just think you might be overrating the positive effect of "balancing the roster" by trading Plouffe prior to 2016.
  13. Otto von Ballpark
    I never suggested that was your argument. Like you, I was speaking of his relative trade value.
  14. Otto von Ballpark
    When you make statements like : It does seem to put more emphasis on the subtraction of Plouffe rather than what the return would be, that's all. Not trying to invent strawmen. I suspect we are all in agreement about investigating Plouffe deals, except I just don't think the demand is that strong for Plouffe this winter. If Plouffe is still on the team next spring, I suspect the culprit will be weaker demand rather than the Twins not shopping him aggressively enough.
  15. Otto von Ballpark
    Angels interest in Plouffe reported at MLBTR, Cam Bedrosian being the lead name cited: http://www.mlbtraderumors.com/2015/11/angels-interested-trevor-plouffe-twins.html
  16. Otto von Ballpark
    Probably don't want him seeing game action in the OF this soon due to the risk of a collision, eh?
  17. Otto von Ballpark
    I think Plouffe's value is probably a function of demand as much as anything. Saying he's got 2 years of control is great, but if not a lot of teams are in the market for a 3B right now, or willing to pay much for a 3B, it doesn't matter. And I don't think the 2016 Twins are better off simply selling Plouffe for whatever we can get this winter.
  18. Otto von Ballpark
    If Plouffe is likely to make roughly half of $16 mil AAV on the open market in 2 years with no comp pick attached, then why do you think his trade value would be very high now, or appreciably lower next winter? Sounds like he just isn't worth that much, period, which means you're probably not getting many great trade offers and your best course of action might simply be to hold on to him for the time being.. Not a lot of guys with that FA profile get dealt early, or if they do, the return is modest. What did Freese fetch a couple years ago? Bourjous?
  19. Otto von Ballpark
    Wright is basically their Mayer, he's not getting dealt. And he actually is still pretty good, 2.7 bWAR in a down offensive year in 2014, and 128 OPS+ coming back from injury in 2015. In fact, his injury/medical situation is so unusual, there is a good chance he eventually retires early and/or insurance picks up a large tab. But they are hoping that won't be necessary for a few years, and there is zero percent chance they deal him and replace him with Plouffe this offseason.
  20. Otto von Ballpark
    This is quite possible to dismiss, I just did. . Seriously, that trade idea is so nuts for SD, it boggles the mind how often it gets repeated around here.
  21. Otto von Ballpark
    Yankees are committed to Headley, and the Mets are VERY committed to Wright.
  22. Otto von Ballpark
    Not sure if this what you meant, but Plouffe is gone after two more years (eligible for FA following the 2017 season). I'm not sure his value is that much more now that it will be next winter. (Of course, I don't think his value is as high as some folks here do, owing largely to demand.)
  23. Otto von Ballpark
    Note that you also commented on that same poster's suggestion back in June, in case that is what you were thinking of. Plouffe does't beat them by raw fWAR -- Lowrie and Valbuena combined for 7, versus Plouffe's 6.1. Plouffe does beat them in bWAR, although Lowrie logged most of his innings at short and DRS didn't care for his defense there. Of course, Plouffe has a WAR per PA advantage, but it's slight (roughly half a win over a full season) and almost all due to defense, further muddied by some positional differences (Valbuena and Lowrie haven't had anywhere near Plouffe's ample opportunity to become a competent defensive third baseman). Valbuena actually has more Rbat than Plouffe, in fewer PA the last two seasons. As you say, they have issues at first, probably in the outfield and catcher too, and most teams have some kind of issues on their pitching staff. I would be shocked if a speculative half-win defensive upgrade at third base would be any kind of priority for them. Which is probably why I can't find any such suggestion anywhere, except by one commenter at one site.
  24. Otto von Ballpark
    I hope nobody is digging out trade proposals from the comments section here. Searching the site, I found only one other mention of it, from June, by the exact same commenter, suggesting it is an extreme minority opinion: http://www.crawfishboxes.com/2015/7/27/9053813/trade-target-trevor-plouffe Seriously, I have no idea why the Astros would pursue Plouffe in trade, for perhaps their #1 org prospect, with Valbuena and Lowrie under contract and producing at a roughly similar rate, unless they can flip Valbuena or Lowrie as part of a bigger upgrade at another position.
  25. Otto von Ballpark
    Thanks, I figured there was a way to do that at Fangraphs!
×
×
  • Create New...