nytwinsfan

Lot of interesting stuff here, especially about Kepler. Thanks. You really think so? If he puts up the same numbers as last year I'd be fine with him moving into a platoon-like role, only starting against RHP (or even less).But I'm not sure Terry Ryan and DSP would be ok with that. Hopefully he returns to his 2013 numbers or something approaching that, and it becomes a moot point.The Sano/Plouffe/Arcia/Mauer/Park/Vargas log jam really is something (with Kepler soon to be joining them). You gotta think that at least one of those guys, if not two or three, won't be in Fort Meyers come February. And the only ones I'm sure will be there are Sano and Mauer.

Lot of interesting stuff here, especially about Kepler. Thanks. You really think so? If he puts up the same numbers as last year I'd be fine with him moving into a platoon-like role, only starting against RHP (or even less). But I'm not sure Terry Ryan and DSP would be ok with that. Hopefully he returns to his 2013 numbers or something approaching that, and it becomes a moot point. The Sano/Plouffe/Arcia/Mauer/Park/Vargas log jam really is something (with Kepler soon to be joining them). You gotta think that at least one of those guys, if not two or three, won't be in Fort Meyers come February. And the only ones I'm sure will be there are Sano and Mauer.

Yes, but as you sort of acknowledge, most teams don't have Dozier for a 2B or Buxton for a CF, both of whom have a lot of power/power potential. But more importantly no, Teams do not "have to" get power and extra base production from somewhere. Look at the Royals, to take the best example. Very low on the power. But exceptional outfield defense. During the last two years, with TWO World Series appearances, they were 16 out of 30 in power, and most of that limited power was based on a high BA, as they were 27 out of 30 in ISO. All that being said, i'm fine with the trade, because we have a deep corner outfield with Rosario, Kepler, Arcia, and Walker all arrived or on the doorstep. The first provides more in defense, Arcia in power, and Kepler and Walker probably somewhere in between. They can all be potentially average or above average Corner Outfielders (although obviously Walker has the most work to do and is the least likely to make it as a starter). Value is value, no matter what part of a player's game it comes from.

I wouldn't let Papelbon or his bull**** get within 100 miles of Buxton, Berrios, Sano, etc. No effing way. F that guy. I think everyone agrees on this though. What would it take to get Storen? If it would take Stewart, I'd consider. If Polanco or Gonsalves, no dice.

Yeah, agreed. No way they do that.

That's a fair criticism as far as it goes, and honestly probably the best criticism of this trade. But it also really is a larger criticism of the organization's (and coach's) unwillingness to platoon, because the reality is that the Twins were never going to and remain uninterested in platooning on a systematic basis. Given that as a background assumption, the trade makes some sense to me. If I were running the show though, yes, I would have tried to trade Plouffe, Gibson/Milone, and some lesser prospects for a catcher, and kept Hicks as a platoon corner outfielder and backup for Buxton.

I'll respond to your paragraphs one by one. (1) You suggested that there were two reasons Murphy's OPS shouldn't be taken seriously, (a) BABIP and (b his Home/Away splits. My point was that it is ironic/inconsistent to use (a) to criticize my point when (a) also undermines your criticism (b. And it does. As you admit, the home/away splits, which are not minor, are definitely driven largely by BABIP. So if you think BABIP is a good criticism of his OPS because it shows it was luck driven, then it also shows his home/away splits are also luck driven (or unlucky driven for the away splits), and therefore not sustainable. You can't have it both ways. (2) His BABIP was league average away, but it wasn't at home, which is about half his plate appearances. So are you saying to find his true BABIP we should take his home/away splits and choose the lower one? Is that how you calculate "true BABIP" for other players? Of course not. Do you think Yankee stadium leads to a .417 v. .288 BABIP split from home and away? If so, then wow, Yankee stadium is a really really friendlier park for singles and doubles, which were most of his hits. Also, note that Murphy's ISO was much higher away than it was at home (.159 v. .105). This just goes to show you that these differences between home and away based on even smaller samples than his overall numbers last year are being driven by short-term luck/unluck, not Yankee stadium. The most likely outcome is that his "true BABIP" is somewhere in between .288 and .417, and yes, I admit, probably a bit lower than the .357 BABIP he had last year although not .288. Which brings me to my third point. (3) Mauer is related because I started by comparing Mauer to Murphy and making light of those who call for Mauer to catch but are upset that we traded for someone to catch who had a better OPS than Mauer last year by .15. You criticized this point originally (surprisingly, since I don't think you are one of the ones calling for Mauer to catch again, so I don't know why you would be defensive, but maybe you do think Mauer should catch again afterall). That is why Mauer is relevant. And yes, saying that the worse half of Murphy's splits is almost as good as Mauer's overall performance is relevant and interesting because it shows that even under your strongest assumption (that Murphy will regress to his away splIts -- which I think is pretty unlikely), he is still pretty close to as good as Mauer. Also, I don't agree that it is "widely believed" that Mauer underperformed. According to whom? According to previous years? Sure, but he is a 32-33 year old still obviously dealing with the lingering effects of a concussion. Another word for "underperformance" may just be "decline." I'm not a Mauer basher, and I hope he returns to his 2013 numbers next year, but I really don't think we should count on it.

And I think it is funny that people who are purportedly really into BABIP point to home/away splits without taking into account that his home/away splits are being clearly driven by an extremely higher BABIP at home than away (.417 v. .288), but that even just in away games, his OPS was still .699, not that much worse than Joe Mauer's OPS of .718.

LOL, funny how some of the same people (not necessarily at Twins Daily, but probably some here too) that were demanding Mauer to move back to catcher are now upset that the Twins traded for a catcher that had a higher OPS than Mauer last year. Yes I understand that part of the Mauer thing is about freeing up 1st base, which isn't an issue with Murphy. I still think it is funny though.

Keith Law calls it a draw, or rather, a win-win because both teams traded from an area of surplus for an area of need and because the value was about equal. http://insider.espn.go.com/blog/keith-law/insider/post?id=4482 On Murphy:

Except switch Escobar and Murphy to put more speed before Buxton, which is what the Twins tend to like to do anyway even if you don't agree with it. Also, I assume this is against a lefty. Against a righty, I'd move Arcia up to 5th and slide Park back to 6th.

Just FYI, among catchers with more than 150 PAs, Murphy was 20th last year in OPS. And at least one of the 19 ahead of him--Schwarber-- is not really a catcher. Combine that with the fact that he is only 24 (which for a catcher is still pretty young) and by all accounts has at least average defense, and it is really a stretch to claim that he is only a "backup" catcher. This guy has a likely outcome as a league average catcher, with some upside and some downside. But he also is 2 years younger than Hicks and has 1 more year of control. Plus he is at a position the Twins really really need to improve at. Is it a great trade? Clearly not. But I do think it is one of those trades where it is fuzzy who got the better deal. For all his performance last year, Hicks never showed he could hit right-handed pitching. A plus defender in CF who can hit lefties is obviously a good player, but unless he can hit RHP, which the Twins I think concluded he would not, his upside is limited.

Maybe I'm missing something obvious here, but is the Angels are interested, why is nobody talking Taylor Ward? Would he take a lot more than Plouffe?

It is probably like poker. A good poker player rarely completely bluffs. Usually, when you bluff, you have some cards and have a chance of winning anyway, but you are just betting beyond what your cards can justify. So I have no doubt that Ryan really means Sano will be ready to play OF. It is just that he hopes he can trade Plouffe, and having Sano ready to play OF makes the threat of not trading Plouffe and holding out for better value more credible. But if nobody offers value, he really will send Sano to RF on opening day. Then that makes the threat even more credible, and maybe in June someone will decide it is worth paying the higher price for Plouffe.

Patience. If Ryan ****s this up there will be plenty of time to bitch and moan about it later. I for one, will gladly join you. But we don't know what he's planning or what deals he's got in the works. As others have repeatedly pointed out, moving Sano to OF could just be a ruse to gain leverage in a trade of Plouffe (and potentially Arcia and Vargas too). The offseason just began. Let's judge him on the final result, not the first lap.

As others have pointed out, Sano in the OF could just be keep some leverage to trade Plouffe, not because they really hope to have Sano play OF all year. Of course, they could be hedging their bets, and actually plan to play Sano in the OF unless they get good value for Plouffe.

Ok, that's a very good point.

More than a platoon of Rosario, Kepler, and Hicks (and maybe Arcia) in the corners?

Fixed that for you.

Uggh. Even putting aside his ability in the OF, and acknowledging in theory that it would be beneficial for him to have that capability of playing there: (1) this increases his chance of injury, especially as someone who has never played there before (just watch as he sprains or jams a wrist), and (2) starting in about late May or early June, 2016, the outfield is going to get really really crowded.

Not as much as we need to acquire a good catcher and another good reliever. Especially since we have a possible candidate at AAA who has ace potential.

Happy to be wrong, but wouldn't it be a first-round pick this year, given that we draft 17th this year?

I think most people assume Arcia will get a chance to start the year in one of the corners. I completely share the sentiment that that should not be his long-term position, as I have grown used to having competant (or even excellent) corner outfield defense over the past year. But it may make sense for the first part of the year while Kepler and Buxton are in AAA. Then, once one or both of Buxton and Kepler are called up, Arcia will either be let go (if he's terrible), moved to DH (if Plouffe is gone and Sano slides over to 3rd) or platooned as a combo corner outfielder/DH, bench bat against righties. So assuming no injuries, and that Arcia is not atrocious in Spring Training/April, I assume it will be Rosario/Hicks/Arcia until May or June, when it gets crowded in the outfield really fast.

Please say this is a joke. Definitely LOL'd.

Completely agree. Very good chance he is going to be a contributor in the next few seasons.