Giving up 6 years of Kepler (and probably more) for 2 years of Lucroy at this point is short-sighted.

As much as I love him, the confidence level on any Kepler projection is going to be WAY lower than Lucroy's next two years, even given the question marks introduced in Lucroy's 2015 season.  Demonstrated MLB performance is a pretty big deal, especially at a position of scarcity (note the Brewers already have two starting MLB corner OF controlled until 2020 or so, plus two more near-ready corner OF prospects, and zero capable catchers beyond Lucroy)

 

It's pretty clear that the Brewers would almost certainly turn down a straight-up Lucroy-for-Kepler swap, given the public information that we have.  That should give you an indication of what the deal would be like for the Twins.

 

Polanco is rated higher on the boards I checked.  This seems like a good trade for both teams.   I don’t know if it would fly but I would much rather trade Polanco for Sanchez and have the position covered for the next 6 years.

A marginally higher prospect ranking is almost meaningless in these discussions.  A Polanco for Lucroy swap would have the same issues as the Kepler for Lucroy one, meaning the Brewers still say no.  Package the two together, or one of them with other players, and you're on the right track.

 

Sanchez is an interesting target, but there are doubts about him sticking at the position, and the Twins seem particularly sensitive about that.  So you might not be solving anything, and in fact just burning a trade chip to add another name to the 1B/DH logjam.

 

And if there's any consensus he will stick at catcher, the Yankees gain a ton of leverage -- they don't really need Polanco, with Gregorius and Refsnyder slated to start in their middle infield, while the Twins and a bunch of other teams would LOVE a capable young catcher.  Prospect-for-prospect trades also seem somewhat rare, which might raise the bar for the offering team (in this case, the Twins).

Edited November 3, 201511 yr by spycake

 

As much as I love him, the confidence level on any Kepler projection is going to be WAY lower than Lucroy's next two years, even given the question marks introduced in Lucroy's 2015 season.  Demonstrated MLB performance is a pretty big deal, especially at a position of scarcity (note the Brewers already have two starting MLB corner OF controlled until 2020 or so, plus two more near-ready corner OF prospects, and zero capable catchers beyond Lucroy)

 

It's pretty clear that the Brewers would almost certainly turn down a straight-up Lucroy-for-Kepler swap, given the public information that we have.  That should give you an indication of what the deal would be like for the Twins.

 

A marginally higher prospect ranking is almost meaningless in these discussions.  A Polanco for Lucroy swap would have the same issues as the Kepler for Lucroy one, meaning the Brewers still say no.  Package the two together, or one of them with other players, and you're on the right track.

 

Sanchez is an interesting target, but there are doubts about him sticking at the position, and the Twins seem particularly sensitive about that.  So you might not be solving anything, and in fact just burning a trade chip to add another name to the 1B/DH logjam.

 

And if there's any consensus he will stick at catcher, the Yankees gain a ton of leverage -- they don't really need Polanco, with Gregorius and Refsnyder slated to start in their middle infield, while the Twins and a bunch of other teams would LOVE a capable young catcher.  Prospect-for-prospect trades also seem somewhat rare, which might raise the bar for the offering team (in this case, the Twins).

 

As much as I love him, the confidence level on any Kepler projection is going to be WAY lower than Lucroy's next two years, even given the question marks introduced in Lucroy's 2015 season.  Demonstrated MLB performance is a pretty big deal, especially at a position of scarcity (note the Brewers already have two starting MLB corner OF controlled until 2020 or so, plus two more near-ready corner OF prospects, and zero capable catchers beyond Lucroy)

 

It's pretty clear that the Brewers would almost certainly turn down a straight-up Lucroy-for-Kepler swap, given the public information that we have.  That should give you an indication of what the deal would be like for the Twins.

 

A marginally higher prospect ranking is almost meaningless in these discussions.  A Polanco for Lucroy swap would have the same issues as the Kepler for Lucroy one, meaning the Brewers still say no.  Package the two together, or one of them with other players, and you're on the right track.

 

Sanchez is an interesting target, but there are doubts about him sticking at the position, and the Twins seem particularly sensitive about that.  So you might not be solving anything, and in fact just burning a trade chip to add another name to the 1B/DH logjam.

 

And if there's any consensus he will stick at catcher, the Yankees gain a ton of leverage -- they don't really need Polanco, with Gregorius and Refsnyder slated to start in their middle infield, while the Twins and a bunch of other teams would LOVE a capable young catcher.  Prospect-for-prospect trades also seem somewhat rare, which might raise the bar for the offering team (in this case, the Twins).

Sorry, I was not clear.  I meant a trade that featured Sanchez and Polanco with other chips as needed.  I saw something written that the Yankees were concerned about 2B.  Sanchez seems to throw out runners at a good clip.  Apparently the problem is blocking pitches.

 

I also see Kepler as the 3 hole hitter we need badly.  He hopefully allows to move Hicks for value as he is more valuable as a CFer.  We get more left-hand hitting and have two guys capable of backing up CF for short stints. 

Edited November 3, 201511 yr by Major Leauge Ready

 

Stewart, Polanco and Arcia?

this would be a terrible deal... Lucroy isn't getting any younger and he's been beat up as a catcher. only value is as a catcher

 

Translation: "I only want him if he's perfect, but priced as if he's flawed."  Got it.

Otherwise he's no better than the status quo.

 

 

Who is this 25 year old catcher you speak of?  If the Twins had a younger player with an equal projection to Lucroy we wouldn't be having this conversation.

Didn't say we HAD a 25 year old catcher.  Saying I'd rather target a 25 year old catcher than a 30 year old catcher.

 

Let us know what 25 and under catchers are made publicly available in a trade. If there are, hopefully you're on board to offer up Kepler or Gordon + others to obtain that C.  

There are few if any catchers 25 or younger or older who are PUBLICLY available in a trade.  The point is to come away with the best possible option not the first one.

 

There are few if any catchers 25 or younger or older who are PUBLICLY available in a trade.  The point is to come away with the best possible option not the first one.

http://www.mlbtraderumors.com/2015/10/offseason-outlook-san-diego-padres-7.html

 

Norris is 26, so it cheating a little bit but Hedges is 22.  With the current young players coming up, I don't think a short term catcher is the best option.

 

Like nearly every other position on the diamond, the Padres have some trade options behind the plate. Derek Norris is slated to make $3.4MM, so moving him could free up a bit of money, and Austin Hedges represents an MLB-ready replacement. However, the team could flip the defensively gifted and well-regarded Hedges in a trade to fill another hole. Norris had his worst season at the plate in 2015, so they could be selling low, though on the other hand his throwing improved quite a bit. On a thin catching market, he’d draw interest, and Hedges is superior defensively.

Dave Cameron has a great paragraph on the myth of "selling low". Teams don't rate players on one year, they rate them on how they think they can do. Teams have become much smarter of late......I agree with Dave "sell low" is mostly a myth now.