Article: Twins, Rockies Talk Tulowitzki

[Brock Beauchamp]

 

Told you

Well, it's a massive risk. There's a good chance that team finishes under .500 on the season.

 

But it's the kind of "we're banking on our best kids and we're going to sink or swim with them leading the way" move that I can get behind.

[nicksaviking]

 

If Tulo was 33 and/or struggling, I might be with you here.

 

Fortunately Tulo is only 30, and he's still raking.  Now, I would be very open to a scout or a detailed analysis that showed Tulo specifically was likely to fall off quickly within the next 3-4 years, but I don't think you can let generalized arguments derail such acquisitions, or you'd never sign a major free agent, never trade for a veteran, etc.

 

I understand that side, and I know I am stereotyping a whole age group (me included) but if it's me, I'm making my judgments based on recent trends more so than current results.  Only three of the All-Star starters were over 30 this year and these long term contracts have been going belly up since right about the time Kevin Brown got a mega-deal. 

 

His strikouts are up, his speed is gone and his range is follwing his speed rigtout the door. Without even considering park or league factors, he looks like he's one step away from becoming a corner player which this team does not need more of. This game is for youngsters now.  Aging sucks, but it sucks most for pitchers and shortstops.

Edited July 23, 2015 by nicksaviking

[USAFChief]

Well, it's a massive risk. There's a good chance that team finishes under .500 on the season.

 

But it's the kind of "we're banking on our best kids and we're going to sink or swim with them leading the way" move that I can get behind.

A massive risk?

 

You've said you don't like their chances anyway. ..what's the risk?

 

And this keeps getting left out. ..Tulowitzki is not a 2 month rental

[Mike Sixel]

If only the Twins agreed, and would not sign 40 year old OFers, keep Pelfrey in the lineup, sign Suzuki to an extension.........give some AAA pitchers a shot in the bullpen.....if only they agreed, Nick.

[Brock Beauchamp]

 

A massive risk?

You've said you don't like their chances anyway. ..what's the risk?

And this keeps getting left out. ..Tulowitzki is not a 2 month rental

That's exactly why it's the kind of ballsy move I could get behind. It's a feast or famine type of move, which is exactly what I think the Twins need right now to stay in it.

 

And it doesn't sacrifice much of their longterm outlook in the process.

[DaveW]

I think Gibson was exposed the other day, he is a solid pitcher no doubt and will have a long and solid career, but he simply lacks the stuff to be a front of the rotation type, good teams and good hitters are too much for him. (Which is who you face in the playoffs anyways)

 

I'd still trade any of Rosario berrios or Gibson for tulo though

[nicksaviking]

 

If only the Twins agreed, and would not sign 40 year old OFers, keep Pelfrey in the lineup, sign Suzuki to an extension.........give some AAA pitchers a shot in the bullpen.....if only they agreed, Nick.

 

Well of course.  Those weren't high on my list of favorite things either. 

 

The funny thing is, the longer a player is in the league, the more endearing he becomes to me.

[Otto von Ballpark]

 

At the time of the trade (pre-2009), Guerra was not rated. Pre-2008 he was #35 by BA and #79 by BP.  He then went out and put up a 5.41 ERA at high A that year and fell off all lists.

I agree with your general points, but the trade was pre-2008.  Guerra was rated at the time, although it should have come with a healthy dose of skepticism because of it was based almost entirely on age and reputation rather than performance (and he was a long ways away from MLB).

[Otto von Ballpark]

 

His strikouts are up.

I noticed his K and BB rates were worse this season too, but for what it's worth, it was mostly in the first two months of the season (when he was coming back from surgery).  The last two months, those rates have been much closer in line with his career.

 

Hopefully the Twins would be applying a more critical eye than I, of course.

[jimmer]

 

Though an interesting idea is to really roll the dice on the season.

 

Trade Gibson, Polanco, and Kepler or Walker (obviously, Walker is preferred) for Tulowitzki. Do the Rockies listen?

 

Put May back into the rotation and here's where it gets interesting. Move Pelfrey to the bullpen or move him for a middling bullpen arm (that should be a reasonable task).

 

The riskiest part of this deal? Jose Berrios is promoted and inserted into the rotation. The Twins could collapse but the upside is there to be really good.

 

Very risky but that's the type of deal I could get behind. Most of the key components stay in place (minus Gibson) and you roll the dice on Berrios.

There it is. Best idea yet.  Well thought out.  And I think the Rockies DO consider that depending on how much of Tulo's contract they have to eat (which has rarely been brought up when talking about how Tulo won't be worth it down the line at cane carrying ages of, 34, 35.) This helps us in the short and long term. Nice job, Brock

 

 

 

 

Edited July 23, 2015 by jimmer

[diehardtwinsfan]

 

Though an interesting idea is to really roll the dice on the season.

 

Trade Gibson, Polanco, and Kepler or Walker (obviously, Walker is preferred) for Tulowitzki. Do the Rockies listen?

 

Put May back into the rotation and here's where it gets interesting. Move Pelfrey to the bullpen or move him for a middling bullpen arm (that should be a reasonable task).

 

The riskiest part of this deal? Jose Berrios is promoted and inserted into the rotation. The Twins could collapse but the upside is there to be really good.

 

Very risky but that's the type of deal I could get behind. Most of the key components stay in place (minus Gibson) and you roll the dice on Berrios.

 

I'd trade Rosario before I traded Gibson personally.  He's looking more and more like a #2 type pitcher.  You keep someone like him the youth movement.  Rosario, while a nice prospect, is more redundant than Gibson.

[Brock Beauchamp]

I'd trade Rosario before I traded Gibson personally.  He's looking more and more like a #2 type pitcher.  You keep someone like him the youth movement.  Rosario, while a nice prospect, is more redundant than Gibson.

And that's fair. I'd rather trade Rosario as well but I don't think he gets it done. I've just never been that high on Eddie.

[jimmer]

 

I'd trade Rosario before I traded Gibson personally.  He's looking more and more like a #2 type pitcher.  You keep someone like him the youth movement.  Rosario, while a nice prospect, is more redundant than Gibson.

Rockies don't need Rosario like they need a pitcher.  They have OFs and 2B.   When you trade for a guy like Tulo, you expect it to hurt a bit.  Some think losing Gibson would hurt.  Hopefully, the Rockies view him the way many of you do.

Edited July 23, 2015 by jimmer

[USAFChief]

 

There it is. Best idea yet.  Well thought out.  And I think the Rockies DO consider that depending on how much of Tulo's contract they have to eat (which has rarely been brought up when talking about how Tulo won't be worth it down the line at age 34, 35.) This helps us in the short and long term. Nice job, Brock

Add Nolasco to the deal and there's the salary relief, while giving CO a potentially useful piece rather than just shipping dollars off.

[Brock Beauchamp]

Rockies don't need Rosario like they need a pitcher. They have OFs and 2B. When you trade for a guy like Tulo, you expect it to hurt a bit. Some think losing Gibson would hurt. Hopefully, the Rockies view him the way many of you do.

Losing Gibson would hurt not because of Kyle's greatness but because of the depth behind him on the team. That has always been my argument. I think Kyle is a pretty good pitcher and will continue to be one for a few years but he's a lot more Brad Radke than Johan Santana.

 

If you have two other Brad Radkes, cool. If you have Tommy Milones and Mike Pelfreys, not so cool.

[Mike Sixel]

 

Losing Gibson would hurt not because of Kyle's greatness but because of the depth behind him on the team. That has always been my argument. I think Kyle is a pretty good pitcher and will continue to be one for a few years but he's a lot more Brad Radke than Johan Santana.

If you have two other Brad Radkes, cool. If you have Tommy Milones and Mike Pelfreys, not so cool.

 

But they have May and Berrios......and then in AAA they have two number 4/5 types when someone needs time off next year.....

[Brock Beauchamp]

Add Nolasco to the deal and there's the salary relief, while giving CO a potentially useful piece rather than just shipping dollars off.

If you can dish off Ricky Bobby in the process, I'd have the paperwork signed and faxed over before I could finish saying "yes" and hang up the phone.

 

But I think that's a whole lot of wishful thinking and not based in reality. I think Nolasco is a drag on the deal, not a benefit.

[Brock Beauchamp]

But they have May and Berrios......and then in AAA they have two number 4/5 types when someone needs time off next year.....

Berrios is the risk. He might be good, he might be a disaster. That's why the deal is a big gamble and would require some serious stones to sign off on.

 

The loss of Gibson puts a lot of risk into this season. 2016 and beyond it's a lesser risk.

[jimmer]

Right now, Gibson is sporting a 1.3 WAR.  I read earlier that one poster believes Gibson is better than Radke ever was. I think same are over-valuing what we have in Gibson.  I get your argument Brock and hope you are right about him continuing improvement, but I think at this point, his absolute ceiling is a 2.5-3.0 WAR pitcher.  

[TheLeviathan]

 

Losing Gibson would hurt not because of Kyle's greatness but because of the depth behind him on the team. 

 

Right, Gibson has a good chance to be reliably above average.  If you deal him you're willingly agreeing to rely more on Tommy Milone and a very young starter like Berrios to avoid your rotation falling apart.

 

Now maybe you agree to take that risk in order to upgrade another position, but it is a risk.

[Brock Beauchamp]

Right now, Gibson is sporting a 1.3 WAR. I read earlier that one poster believes Gibson is better than Radke ever was. I think same are over-valuing what we have in Gibson. I get your argument Brock and hope you are right about him continuing improvement, but I think at this point, his absolute ceiling is a 2.5-3.0 WAR pitcher.

I don't disagree with that. He might have a 4 WAR season mixed in there somewhere but he's not an ace.

[jimmer]

 

Berrios is the risk. He might be good, he might be a disaster. That's why the deal is a big gamble and would require some serious stones to sign off on.

and you know what, the Rockies may actually prefer Berrios in your trade scenario.  I know if I was the Rockies I would.  Higher potential, much younger, more cost control.

 

And if we switched out Gibson for Berrios in your trade offer for Tulo, I'd still do it in a heartbeat (and I love Berrios).

[jun]

 

Berrios is the risk. He might be good, he might be a disaster. That's why the deal is a big gamble and would require some serious stones to sign off on.

The loss of Gibson puts a lot of risk into this season. 2016 and beyond it's a lesser risk.

You can say the same thing about May.

[Brock Beauchamp]

and you know what, the Rockies may actually prefer Berrios in your trade scenario. I know if I was the Rockies I would. Higher potential, much younger, more cost control.

 

And if we switched out Gibson for Berrios in your trade offer for Tulo, I'd still do it in a heartbeat (and I love Berrios).

I've become really bullish on Berrios despite his physical makeup. I'm really reluctant to trade the kid because he seems like the kind of person who succeeds through sheer force of will. I don't know if that can be quantified.

 

If I gave up Berrios, I'd be reluctant to include Kepler in the deal. Something has to give there and I'd push Walker I that scenario.

[jimmer]

If we gave up Berrios (and I'm with you 100% on Berrios), I'd prefer to give up Walker as well.  In fact, I'd prefer to give up Walker anyway.  If we lost Berrios instead of Gibson, though, I believe the Rockies would eat more of Tulo's contract.  Any way you look at it, it's gonna hurt some to get Tulo.  You don't get a guy like Tulo for nobody you'd mind losing.

Edited July 23, 2015 by jimmer

[Brock Beauchamp]

That's very possible. We step into the world of pure hypothesis in that regard. If I was the Rockies, I'd tell Ryan to pound sand if he wants cash included in the deal.

[Otto von Ballpark]

 

Trade Gibson, Polanco, and Kepler or Walker (obviously, Walker is preferred) for Tulowitzki. Do the Rockies listen?

The Rockies don't listen, which means it's a great deal for the Twins.  Sub Berrios for Gibson, or Rosario for whomever, and it's still great for us.

 

The dicey part would be including both Gibson and Berrios (or Sano).  That's two pitchers who, while not aces, will hopefully be in the upper half of our rotation the next 4+ years.  Or a potential elite 3B/hitter in Sano.

 

Unless we identified another Rockies player/prospect we could add to the deal (and not just Hundley and Hawkins ), I'd probably have to walk away from that.

[Otto von Ballpark]

 

There it is. Best idea yet.  Well thought out.  And I think the Rockies DO consider that depending on how much of Tulo's contract they have to eat (which has rarely been brought up when talking about how Tulo won't be worth it down the line at cane carrying ages of, 34, 35.) This helps us in the short and long term. Nice job, Brock

Like I mentioned in my post above, I don't think the Rockies consider that much, and they certainly don't eat any salary in that deal (Gibson or Berrios, no Sano).

 

But I'm glad to see folks are at least coming around to the idea that the Twins wouldn't walk away from such a deal!

[Brock Beauchamp]

I don't see the Rockies getting a top ten prospect from the Twins or anyone else, not with the money he's owed over the next several years (which is why I think cash considerations will not be part of the deal).

 

Prospects, especially blue chippers, are just too highly prized in today's game and there's a lot of risk coming along with Tulo: age, injuries, money.

[jimmer]

 

That's very possible. We step into the world of pure hypothesis in that regard. If I was the Rockies, I'd tell Ryan to pound sand if he wants cash included in the deal.

Berrios is a high quality MLB ready prospect .  Polanco is a MLB prospect.  They would be getting 18+ year+ cost controlled years while giving up a guy owed 98M over the next 5 years.  They are going to have to have to eat some cash in practically any trade where they get quality prospects