Escobar isn't good enough defensively to be the everyday SS, that single on his "diving" catch is a perfect example, Santana or any other good defensive SS has the range to make that play and throw the runner out.

 

If Escobar was ever good enough to stick defensively at SS the White Sox wouldn't have traded him in the first place. Escobar is good enough to stick defensively at 2B or 3B but his bat isn't big enough (plus he is big time blocked on the Twins anyways)

Escobar is what he is: a decent Util guy, basically a poor mans Nick Punto with a little more pop, less defensive value and sub par head first slides into first skills.

Dozier to SS, Rosario/Polanco to 2B.

 

Will never happen, but I'd give it a shot.

 

Escobar isn't good enough defensively to be the everyday SS, that single on his "diving" catch is a perfect example, Santana or any other good defensive SS has the range to make that play and throw the runner out.

 

If Escobar was ever good enough to stick defensively at SS the White Sox wouldn't have traded him in the first place. Escobar is good enough to stick defensively at 2B or 3B but his bat isn't big enough (plus he is big time blocked on the Twins anyways)

Escobar is what he is: a decent Util guy, basically a poor mans Nick Punto with a little more pop, less defensive value and sub par head first slides into first skills.

 

Which is more than Santana has shown this year.......lots of guys get traded that don't look like much until they actually play. I'm not saying Escobar is awesome, but he is better than Santana right now, imo.

I agree that right now our biggest priority should be to acquire a catcher, either now or this offseason, but I personally think we're going to be hung out to dry at SS until Nick Gordon gets here. Escobar and Santana were likely flukes last year, and we need to bridge the gap to Gordon (who I'm pretty sure just started hitting at CR).

Tulo is a little old, I would only talk to CO and see if we could get him w/o Berrios if we took on his whole contract. Otherwise, I might look at Jose Ramirez of the Indians, who's blocked by Super Shortstop Francisco Lindor. He had a solid year defensively last year, and is raking at AAA right now despite struggling in the Show. I wouldn't let the fact that he's an in division rival bother me. Is he really an improvement over Santana Polanco or Escobar? He is defensively, but outside of that I have no idea, I'm just posing another option.

 

Escobar isn't good enough defensively to be the everyday SS, that single on his "diving" catch is a perfect example, Santana or any other good defensive SS has the range to make that play and throw the runner out.

 

If Escobar was ever good enough to stick defensively at SS the White Sox wouldn't have traded him in the first place. Escobar is good enough to stick defensively at 2B or 3B but his bat isn't big enough (plus he is big time blocked on the Twins anyways)

Escobar is what he is: a decent Util guy, basically a poor mans Nick Punto with a little more pop, less defensive value and sub par head first slides into first skills.

I agree with all of this.

 

The thing is that still makes him the best Twins SS option by a healthy margin.

The Twins are rebuilding, so no need to rent a player! Trade your prospects for Stars/Proven numbers that have at least 1+ years remaining after this year, or Escobar/Nunez take over. NO RENTALS unless we give them practically nothing in return!

Having fun watching them contend now, really can't wait till 2016!!!!!!!!!

Is Nunez really so bad defensively that he isn't a serious option for SS right now?

 

Dozier to SS, Rosario/Polanco to 2B.

 

Will never happen, but I'd give it a shot.

So you take the best defensive 2B in the league and put him at a position he's not used to anymore, then take a minor leaguer that's not quite an mlb ready SS and put him at 2B, where he hasn't been playing. Or Rosario, who also didn't show much at 2B.

 

Going for a high 1st round pick in 2016?

Edited July 21, 201511 yr by jimbo92107

Santana is dead last among position players in WAR this year. Why is anyone comfortable with that?

 

Santana is dead last among position players in WAR this year. Why is anyone comfortable with that?

people seem thrilled with Gibson too. some things make no sense.

Edited July 22, 201511 yr by jimmer

 

people seem thrilled with Gibson too. some things make no sense.

 

Oh please.  Before his hiccup of a start today he had been excellent for the past 6 weeks and most of the regular season.  

 

Oh please.  Before his hiccup of a start today he had been excellent for the past 6 weeks and most of the regular season.  

The guy was a 1.1 WAR pitcher going into last night.  I hadn't even seen the results of the game when I wrote that.  He is not impressive. His peripherals are nothing special.  His FIP is in the 4s, he doesn't K people.  He's an average starter at best, yet some around here talk as if he's awesome. He'll be 28 before the calendar flips 2016.  He is what he is right now and it certainly isn't anything jaw-dropping.  There are people on this site saying they wouldn't trade him for TULO!  Oh please, indeed.

Edited July 22, 201511 yr by jimmer

The guy was a 1.1 WAR pitcher going into last night. I hadn't even seen the results of the game when I wrote that. He is not impressive. His peripherals are nothing special. His FIP is in the 4s, he doesn't K people. He's an average starter at best, yet some around here talk as if he's awesome. He'll be 28 before the calendar flips 2016. He is what he is right now and it certainly isn't anything jaw-dropping. There are people on this site saying they wouldn't trade him for TULO! Oh please, indeed.

He's been King people for over two months now. His season line is tainted by really bad peripherals in April. He hasn't been that pitcher for 2 1/2 months.

 

He's been King people for over two months now. His season line is tainted by really bad peripherals in April. He hasn't been that pitcher for 2 1/2 months.

So the real Gibson is the one that's the good Gibson.  Use that time frame only? What about last night?  Should we look at that one?

 

Until Gibson shows he can sustain any kind of quality, you're just grabbing at the good and discarding the bad.  I'm not sure anyone is saying he's bad, BTW, just not some awesome pitcher that should be, in any way, untouchable for a player of Tulo's quality.

Edited July 22, 201511 yr by jimmer

 

So the real Gibson is the one that's the good Gibson.  Use that time frame only? What about last night?  Should we look at that one?

 

Until Gibson shows he can sustain any kind of quality, you're just grabbing at the good and discarding the bad.  I'm not sure anyone is saying he's bad, BTW, just not some awesome pitcher that should be, in any way, untouchable for a player of Tulo's quality.

And that's fair but Gibson has steadily become a better player since he entered the rotation in 2013. The recent stats are more indicative of his ability than older stats.

 

He even showed this ability in 2014 but lacked consistency. His 2014 season was marked with insane fluctuations. Going from memory, he started about 30 games. In ~15 of those games, he allowed 2 ER or less. In ~10 of those games, he allowed 5 ER or more. In 75% of his starts, he was either stellar or horrible.

 

That's a player you mark for improvement going forward. You don't ignore the career stats but you take them with a grain of salt.

I don't see how cherry picking Gibson's best is any different than the Tulo people choosing to utterly ignore the guy's fragile health record the last 4 years.

 

I like Tulo and for the right package, I'll take the gamble.  But it IS a gamble given his problems staying on the field.

 

I don't see how cherry picking Gibson's best is any different than the Tulo people choosing to utterly ignore the guy's fragile health record the last 4 years.

 

I like Tulo and for the right package, I'll take the gamble.  But it IS a gamble given his problems staying on the field.

Speaking only for myself, I have't ignored Tulo's health issues one bit.  But that fragile player posted 10.6 combined WAR in 2013 and 2014 during the most frequent two of those four fragile years and 4.3 WAR average over all four of those fragile 4 years (2011-2014).

 

120 games of him and 42 from another combo is still awesome production from the shortstop position.

Edited July 22, 201511 yr by jimmer

 

Speaking only for myself, I have't ignored Tulo's health issues one bit.  But that fragile player posted 10.6 combined WAR in 2013 and 2014 during the most frequent two of those four fragile years and 4.3 WAR average over all four of those fragile 4 years (2011-2014).

 

120 games of him and 42 from another combo is still awesome production from the shortstop position.

 

Using WAR to explain away a fragile health record seems like a copout to be honest.  The truth is, to be what we want him to be, he's going to need to be on the field.  His WAR doesn't help us much on the bench.

 

I have serious concerns about a 30 year old SS with declining defensive metrics and a brutal health record continuing to put up the same production.  

 

Using WAR to explain away a fragile health record seems like a copout to be honest.  The truth is, to be what we want him to be, he's going to need to be on the field.  His WAR doesn't help us much on the bench.

 

I have serious concerns about a 30 year old SS with declining defensive metrics and a brutal health record continuing to put up the same production.  

 

WAR is a counting stat....accumulated by the time on the field. He's been so good, that even playing limited time, he's helped his team win as many games as Dozier does in 158 games a year or so.....So, his WAR takes into account the time missed.

 

Using WAR to explain away a fragile health record seems like a copout to be honest.  The truth is, to be what we want him to be, he's going to need to be on the field.  His WAR doesn't help us much on the bench.

 

I have serious concerns about a 30 year old SS with declining defensive metrics and a brutal health record continuing to put up the same production.  

How did I use WAR to explain away a fragile health record? I showed that despite the fragile health record, he's continued to be highly valuable.

 

Do you want to say having a guy who can produce an average of 4.5 war in 120 games with others filling in the other 42 games is less valuable than a player who produces a 2 WAR (if we are lucky with our choices) over 155 games because that guy who produced a 2 WAR was on the field more? Is that the argument?

 

Even last year, he only played 90 something games, STILL had 5.3 WAR.  

 

WAR is a counting stat....accumulated by the time on the field. He's been so good, that even playing limited time, he's helped his team win as many games as Dozier does in 158 games a year or so.....So, his WAR takes into account the time missed.

exactly

 

WAR is a counting stat....accumulated by the time on the field. He's been so good, that even playing limited time, he's helped his team win as many games as Dozier does in 158 games a year or so.....So, his WAR takes into account the time missed.

 

Weren't you the one that told me people understand how to use WAR?  You know, as a comparative tool best used over a larger sample size?

 

How did I use WAR to explain away a fragile health record? I showed that despite the fragile health record, he's continued to be highly valuable.

 

Do you want to say having a guy who can produce an average of 4.5 war in 120 games with others filling in the other 42 games is less valuable than a player who produces a 2 WAR (if we are lucky with our choices) over 155 games because that guy who produced a 2 WAR was on the field more? Is that the argument?

 

Even last year, he only played 90 something games, STILL had 5.3 WAR.  

 

You're creating a false dilemma to further fall into this trap.  Tulo isn't the only way we could improve SS, so I'm not biting on the false dilemma.   

 

WAR seems to be a really poor way to measure that effect of injury.  The truth is that his defense, by the metrics, looks to have sharply declined.  His recent injury history is a serious red flag.  The normal aging curves for shortstops tells us that what we're seeing is typical at this age and likely to get much worse relatively quickly.

Per MLBTR, Brad Miller and Alexei Ramirez might also be on the trade block. Anyone? Personally I'd love to get Miller.for the right price (career .744 OPS against RHP).

 

You're creating a false dilemma to further fall into this trap.  Tulo isn't the only way we could improve SS, so I'm not biting on the false dilemma.   

 

WAR seems to be a really poor way to measure that effect of injury.  The truth is that his defense, by the metrics, looks to have sharply declined.  His recent injury history is a serious red flag.  The normal aging curves for shortstops tells us that what we're seeing is typical at this age and likely to get much worse relatively quickly.

I'm not creating a false dilemma.  TR has created the dilemma all by himself by having Santana (perhaps the worst starter in baseball?) as our starting shortstop and Escobar as our backup. If you want to throw other trade options, by all means do so and let everyone disect those,but so far the discussion has mostly centered on our options or trading for Tulo.

 

And WAR just measures what a per has done, not what he did when he was out with injury.  When out with injury, a player's WAR is zero.

That's great that he's accumulated WAR as a part-time player three of the last four years, that not's the point.  The point is that his declining defensive stats and age make it unlikely that continues and very likely that injuries continue to hamper his on-field contributions.

 

And since our choices at SS don't necessarily have to be limited to Escobar, Santana, and Tulowitski....it is a false dilemma you're arguing.

 

That's great that he's accumulated WAR as a part-time player three of the last four years, that not's the point.  The point is that his declining defensive stats and age make it unlikely that continues and very likely that injuries continue to hamper his on-field contributions.

 

And since our choices at SS don't necessarily have to be limited to Escobar, Santana, and Tulowitski....it is a false dilemma you're arguing.

 

What are those other options? I'm all eyes......

 

What are those other options? I'm all eyes......

 

Wait..so your contention is that those are our only options?

 

The hell if I know what is all out there or not out there on the market, but I know this fallacious dilemma is just ridiculous.

If it isn't a trade....at least bench Santana.

 

And, it is fair you don't have a full list, I don't either.

 

I think you are underselling Tulo, but it is debatable for sure.

 

If it isn't a trade....at least bench Santana.

 

And, it is fair you don't have a full list, I don't either.

 

I think you are underselling Tulo, but it is debatable for sure.

 

I agree, continuing to play Santana is not wise.  I'd like to see Escobar or even Polanco at this point.

 

I've said I'm not opposed to Tulo (especially if we're not trading anyone currently contributing) but his injury history and declining defense are pretty much right in line with SS aging curves.  And that curve is one of the most precipitous of them all.  That really makes me hesitate.  

 

But for the right deal?  (Berrios+Kepler+?)  I could probably get on board.  It's just tremendously more risky than some are trying to pitch.