Article: Twins Trade Targets

[cmb0252]

Philly loves Hamel so I doubt they would move him with out one of Buxton/Sano. I rather trade Meyer+ for Latos (if he would agree to a contract extension). Kemp is interesting if the Dodgers would be willing to eat some of his contract because I don't see them doing this Kemp for Nolasco swap everyone is talking about.

[ashbury]

I think their best bet is to try to bring in Kemp or Ethier and give the Dodgers Nolasco.

Dodgers didn't want to re-sign Nolasco last year.  Why would they want him now?

[the_youngster]

Best fit for any trade with the Dodgers really is Pinto. They don't have any realistic everyday catcher now or in the near future via prospects. They will want to improve. They have an excess of outfielders, but I don't want to pick up an older one in their decline via trade. An older player possibly in their decline from free agency is better than a trade. Then there is only a loss of money instead of players. I'll take Cuddyer/Span/Hunter and spending money over Kemp/Ethier/Crawford and the potential loss of prospects or major league contributor. Keep Nolasco for now because if he is needed by another team during the season (which pitchers always are) then there's a better trading situation. Pinto for Van Slyke and Carlos Frias. Throw in a mid level prospect if needed and thus we have a LF for next year and a flame throwing reliever who could be a steal if converted into a starter (and a little bit of luck of course).

[Dantes929]

Does anyone else think maybe Hicks has turned a corner? He ended up with a better OBP than Ben Revere. Anyone have a problem with Escobar at shortstop?. Seriously, an outfield of Hicks, Santana and Arcia would not be bad and once Buxton arrives we can start talking about Santana going back to shortstop or have a really elite outfield of Hicks, Buxton and Santana.

[Dantes929]

I am now officially gun shy about acquiring National League pitchers. Focus on AL East and AL West pitchers.

[the_youngster]

If Hicks has really turned a corner after his last disappointment, then I want him in centerfield and Santana at shortstop. Another left fielder who can keep Schafer as the 4th outfielder would still be nice to have. That's why I like Van Slyke. Left field to start off, but as soon as another outfielder like Buxton comes up, Van Slyke can move to the role he has had with the Dodgers, a back up outfielder who can still get 200-300 at-bats and fill in nicely for an injury.

[stringer bell]

I certainly don't think Hicks proved anything in September. He did look better, yes, but he didn't drive the ball. His OPS in September was only .648. He has to get some extra base hits.

[diehardtwinsfan]

yeah, if I were Ryan, I'd plan for Hicks in AAA. If he's dominating there, he can be called up, but he has an option left, and I'd rather exercise it and force him to earn the job than to hand him the job and be forced to exercise it if he fails. I like the idea of getting Rasmus. He signed a 1/7M deal for Toronto and really didn't have a great season, though his .720 OPS with good defense would be fine in CF for the year. I'd think a similar deal or a deal for slightly more would get him here in MN, as I don't see anyone offering him a long term contract.

[Mike Sixel]

Hicks, to me, continued to show he can't hit, so if "did he prove anything", do you mean "did he continue to prove he can't hit", then yes.

 

Hicks should be in AAA next year.

[Kirby_waved_at_me]

I am now officially gun shy about acquiring National League pitchers. Focus on AL East and AL West pitchers.

How about a guy like Ian Kennedy or Brett Anderson who pitched for years in the AL but were in the NL last year? 

[USAFChief]

If LA trades Kemp it will be to dump salary, so a team willing to take on Kemp's entire contract could probably get him for almost nothing. No team is going to both take on the salary AND give up real prospects.

 

Same for Crawford.

 

Do it.

[tobi0040]

If LA trades Kemp it will be to dump salary, so a team willing to take on Kemp's entire contract could probably get him for almost nothing. No team is going to both take on the salary AND give up real prospects.

 

Same for Crawford.

 

Do it.

 

I think you could get Kemp for nothing and have the Dodgers pick up $5M a year.  So it would be like going out and signing Kemp to a 6 year deal at $15M a year.  It would be an option for me, but something tells me we can find a better alternative to uprade LF (and I don't think the Twins want to go out 6 years on a guy that age, injury concerns, etc.)  

 

In the last few years, the White Sox have found Carlos Quentin and Eaton and did not give up much either time.  

Edited September 30, 2014 by tobi0040

[Physics Guy]

How about a guy like Ian Kennedy or Brett Anderson who pitched for years in the AL but were in the NL last year? 

Kennedy had a grand total of about 60 IP for the Yankees.  He established himself in AZ.

[Kirby_waved_at_me]

Kennedy had a grand total of about 60 IP for the Yankees.  He established himself in AZ.

Oh - you're right - Kennedy is a bad example then.

 

The overall point is that I don't think the Twins should ignore NL arms, just be more selective about which ones they go after.

[drjim]

I think you could get Kemp for nothing and have the Dodgers pick up $5M a year.  So it would be like going out and signing Kemp to a 6 year deal at $15M a year.  It would be an option for me, but something tells me we can find a better alternative to uprade LF (and I don't think the Twins want to go out 6 years on a guy that age, injury concerns, etc.)  

 

In the last few years, the White Sox have found Carlos Quentin and Eaton and did not give up much either time.  

 

You meant Rios, not Eaton right? They traded an actual starting pitcher for Eaton.

[ashbury]

Two outfielders signed for $20M+ through 2017 and 2019 respectively, with declining defensive abilities, belong in LA.  For that kind of money you could be going after a couple of borderline-ace pitchers as FA this year or next.

[Otto von Ballpark]

Does anyone have a good sense about how many and which teams may be in the mood to dump salary?

 

I know some of you will be incredulous, but indulge the thought for a moment, OK? Jim Pohlad has hinted rather strongly that Ryan has his permission to part with more cash if that's what it takes to improve the team. So maybe acquisitions like Kemp are more realistic this winter.

If TR is finally willing/able to part with more cash, I'm not sure trading talent for bad contracts is the best way to do it.  Why not just put it towards a FA?

[Otto von Ballpark]

Trading Nolasco to the Dodgers?  Ice cubes to Eskimoes, Oil to Saudis, etc. What a fantasy.

The other thing to remember is that the Dodgers gave up virtually nothing (3 players who were DFA'd within the year) for Nolasco last summer, and I don't think they even made an offer for him when he became a FA.  I think Nolasco likes the Dodgers more than the Dodgers particularly like Nolasco.

 

Also, we're over 2 years past the big Boston-LA trade, and the Dodgers have yet to dump any salary.  I'm not sure it's at all clear that they need to, certainly not to the point where they have to take contracts like Nolasco's in return.

[SwainZag]

2014 Hicks    :  .215/.341/.274/.615  -0.2 dWAR   Age 24, $508K, 2 pre-arb years left, 2 years arb left

2014 Revere :  .306/.325/.361/.686   -1.8 dWAR   Age 26, $1,95M salary, 1 year arb elig left.

2014 Rasmus: .225/.287/.448/.735   -0.5 dWAR   Age 28, $7M salary, 2015 FA

2014 Ethier:     .249/.322/.370/.691  -0.9 dWAR   Age 32, $15.5M, $18M in 2015, $18M in 2016, $17.5M in 2017, $17.5M vesting option with $2.5M buyout in 2018.

 

Hicks was much better after the break as well.  Just some comparisons from players I have seen on this thread when it comes to OF.

[Mike Sixel]

IF I read that right, Rasmus is much, much better than Hicks.....Rasmus had 3 positive defensive WAR years (on fangrapsh), and 3 negative. How many positive does Hicks have so far? None.

 

Rasmus' offense is worth A LOT more than Hicks' offense.

 

Don't forget, WAR is a counting stat....so the more Hicks plays, the worse his WAR. I think you need to double Hicks dWAR score to make it close to comparable, maybe triple it.

[SwainZag]

IF I read that right, Rasmus is much, much better than Hicks.....Rasmus had 3 positive defensive WAR years (on fangrapsh), and 3 negative. How many positive does Hicks have so far? None.

 

Rasmus' offense is worth A LOT more than Hicks' offense.

 

Don't forget, WAR is a counting stat....so the more Hicks plays, the worse his WAR. I think you need to double Hicks dWAR score to make it close to comparable, maybe triple it.

 

Rasmus is also 28 while Hicks is 24.  You are right, Rasmus had + dWAR is 2009, 2012 and 2013. This season Rasmus played 719.1 innings of defense to get to his -0.5.  Hicks played in 528 defensive innings to get his -0.2, so not even close to double.

 

Rasmus also made 14 times what Hicks did this year.  Hicks also has less than 500 AB of major league experience.

 

I know I am in the minority but I STILL think Hicks could be AT LEAST an average ML OFer.  I still think letting him start 2013 as the starter at age 23 with no AAA experience was bad for his development.  He has been treated like a yo-yo ever since then.  MLB-AAA-MLB-AAA-MLB-DL-AA-AAA-MLB.  That's in a 2 year span.  I'm not saying anoint him as an everyday starter, but I'm very anti-kick him the curb.

[Mike Sixel]

Kick him to AAA. 

 

I don't care about the money, they are flush in money (well, the Twins are, the Pohlads might actually have to pay some taxes.....).

[drjim]

Rasmus is also 28 while Hicks is 24.  You are right, Rasmus had + dWAR is 2009, 2012 and 2013. This season Rasmus played 719.1 innings of defense to get to his -0.5.  Hicks played in 528 defensive innings to get his -0.2, so not even close to double.

 

Rasmus also made 14 times what Hicks did this year.  Hicks also has less than 500 AB of major league experience.

 

I know I am in the minority but I STILL think Hicks could be AT LEAST an average ML OFer.  I still think letting him start 2013 as the starter at age 23 with no AAA experience was bad for his development.  He has been treated like a yo-yo ever since then.  MLB-AAA-MLB-AAA-MLB-DL-AA-AAA-MLB.  That's in a 2 year span.  I'm not saying anoint him as an everyday starter, but I'm very anti-kick him the curb.

 

Also interesting that Hicks has an almost .060 advantage in OBP over Rasmus, so not clear Rasmus has significant advantage in offensive value. Pretty much the only advantage of Rasmus is a significantly higher ISO, but Hicks seemed to have an ISO much below what would be expected.

 

I would take Rasmus on a one year deal but nothing more than that.

[freshinthehouse]

Unless we are getting a player as pretty much a salary dump, I see no reason to trade for a quality starting pitcher.  This is looking like one of the better high end FA SP crops in some time.  Why give up prospects when you get someone off the street?  Open up the checkbook and get it done, Pohlads.

[USAFChief]

Two outfielders signed for $20M+ through 2017 and 2019 respectively, with declining defensive abilities, belong in LA.  For that kind of money you could be going after a couple of borderline-ace pitchers as FA this year or next.

Kemp is owed $21m for each of the next five years, which will be his age 30 thru 34 seasons. He put up a .850 OPS (140 OPS+) this year, right in line with his career average. He's probably not the superstar he once looked like, but he's a good bet to post similar numbers, and a huge bet to be way better than anything the Twins are likely to put in left field for the next few years.

 

If the Dodgers want prospects in return, no. If its nothing but money, well the Twins have that, and should be going over budget the next few years anyway if they're going to meet their famous 52 percent promise, considering they've been below it for a couple years now.

 

I'd take Kemp off their hands, put him in LF, and not look back. They still could buy any pitching they want, if they were so inclined.

[drjim]

Kemp is owed $21m for each of the next five years, which will be his age 30 thru 34 seasons. He put up a .850 OPS (140 OPS+) this year, right in line with his career average. He's probably not the superstar he once looked like, but he's a good bet to post similar numbers, and a huge bet to be way better than anything the Twins are likely to put in left field for the next few years.

 

If the Dodgers want prospects in return, no. If its nothing but money, well the Twins have that, and should be going over budget the next few years anyway if they're going to meet their famous 52 percent promise, considering they've been below it for a couple years now.

 

I'd take Kemp off their hands, put him in LF, and not look back. They still could buy any pitching they want, if they were so inclined.

 

Kemp might have been available in July but I highly doubt the Dodgers would be interested in moving him in a straight salary dump at this point. Not especially interested in Ethier or Crawford, though moving Nolasco might make it worth it.

[Otto von Ballpark]

Kemp is owed $21m for each of the next five years, which will be his age 30 thru 34 seasons.

That's part of the advantage of trading for a guy -- you usually get a slightly shorter term on the contract, covering slightly younger ages, as compared to signing a free agent.  But yeah, we shouldn't give up any talent in return -- cash is fine, though.

 

I had similar thoughts back in 2003 when Boston was sending Manny Ramirez through waivers.  I guess Alex Rios is a more modest recent example.

[DocBauer]

For what it's' worth, I'm against making any major trades this off season. I believe the Twins will be in a much stronger trade position next year after another year of prospect development, talent that arrives to push for, or actually take jobs, or getting close.

 

I don't believe in spending merely to spend, or attempting to build a team strictly through FA. However, the Twins have money to spend. Right player, right contract, I could see a FA SP signing. Santana could be both. I think there's a major opportunity to improve the team offensively and defensively with a quality LF option, and I think there's going to be at least a few options available we could make a move on there. (And no top prospect immediately blocked either)

 

A CF acquisition could be tough. You're not going to trade for a quality player there with Buxton on the way, and I'm not sure if Span or any other possible quality CF option will want to sign only to be bumped sometimes in the next year or so. There are a couple cheap options that might be solid options to bring in to compete with Hicks and Schafer for the spot, or a share of the spot. Losers go to AAA or 4th OF status.

[USAFChief]

Kemp might have been available in July but I highly doubt the Dodgers would be interested in moving him in a straight salary dump at this point. Not especially interested in Ethier or Crawford, though moving Nolasco might make it worth it.

I'd at least look into it.

[tobi0040]

Kemp is owed $21m for each of the next five years, which will be his age 30 thru 34 seasons. He put up a .850 OPS (140 OPS+) this year, right in line with his career average. He's probably not the superstar he once looked like, but he's a good bet to post similar numbers, and a huge bet to be way better than anything the Twins are likely to put in left field for the next few years.

 

If the Dodgers want prospects in return, no. If its nothing but money, well the Twins have that, and should be going over budget the next few years anyway if they're going to meet their famous 52 percent promise, considering they've been below it for a couple years now.

 

I'd take Kemp off their hands, put him in LF, and not look back. They still could buy any pitching they want, if they were so inclined.

 

 

Payroll will be about the same next year. Scratch Kemp and Hamels.  You could get really creative, but the Twins have said they don't want two players making 50% of payroll as well.

 

Not. Going. To. Happen.

Edited October 1, 2014 by tobi0040