Sweet, so you found one random stat that says Murphy is better, meanwhile overall fangraphs had Murphy as the 4th worst in the MLB, lets call a spade a spade, Murphy isn't "good" defensively and his ceiling is "average" at the dish.

 

What is that?

 

http://i.imgur.com/v1F1hk3.png?fb

Mediocre is a hell of a lot better than Pierzynski, who is pretty bad at everything except hitting nowadays.

 

And what FG stat had Murphy as the fourth worst catcher in MLB?

 

Mediocre is a hell of a lot better than Pierzynski.

And what FG stat had Murphy as the fourth worst catcher in MLB?

It was quoted earlier in the thread.

 

Is Murphy better than AJ? Possibly.

 

The problem is though, AJ wouldn't have cost a high upside player like Hicks in return.

It's trading a high upside guy for a guy with "average at best" upside. Not good.

 

Trading Russell wasn't the smartest move either.

Yeah, he certainly made his mistakes, and by no means am I saying "They need to trade everyone and go for it now!!!!" But at some point, in 17 years, and at some point in the Target Field era it would be nice to see them try and succeed in trading for or signing an actual game changer....or two

 

It was quoted earlier in the thread.

 

Is Murphy better than AJ? Possibly.

 

The problem is though, AJ wouldn't have cost a high upside player like Hicks in return.

It's trading a high upside guy for a guy with "average at best" upside. Not good.

AJ also would have cost a lot more money and it might have forced them to make Suzuki a backup.

It was quoted earlier in the thread.

 

Is Murphy better than AJ? Possibly.

 

The problem is though, AJ wouldn't have cost a high upside player like Hicks in return.

It's trading a high upside guy for a guy with "average at best" upside. Not good.

Pierzynski was possibly an option. He's also an *incredibly risky* option that leaves the Twins hanging their ass out the window if a 39 year old catcher (shockingly) loses his ability to play baseball at the highest level.

 

If that's a risk you're willing to take, so be it... But you better be ready to explain to a fan base why you relied on two over the hill catchers to propel an 83 win team to the next level if catcher is a giant black hole again in 2016 (and I'd give the odds of a Suzuki/Pierzynski platoon a 50% chance of being terrible).

 

My first choice would have been to open the pocket book on Wieters. Barring that happening, I don't really see a better "fix" than going after a guy with marginal upside by trading from a position of strength.

 

The catching market is awful. The fact some of you are even talking about AJ-freakin-Pierzynski says all that needs to be said about Ryan's options this offseason.

 

Pierzynski was possibly an option. He's also an *incredibly risky* option that leaves the Twins hanging their ass out the window if a 39 year old catcher (shockingly) loses his ability to play baseball at the highest level.

If that's a risk you're willing to take, so be it... 

This team just took that same chance with our starting RF last year didn't we and that was lauded by so many (even after seeing the results)  Some even called for him to be re-signed before he retired..  Is it wrong this time because one is a fan favorite and one isn't?  Believe me, I agree with you about AJ 1000%.  Signing AJ would be horrible for baseball reasons and he's probably the player I've disliked the most in the game for awhile now, but if this team made the same kind of move last year...

Edited November 13, 201511 yr by jimmer

This team just took that same chance with our starting RF last year didn't we and that was lauded by so many (even after seeing the results) Some even called for him to be re-signed before he retired.. Is it wrong this time because one is a fan favorite and one isn't? Believe me, I agree with you about AJ 1000%. Signing AJ would be horrible for baseball reasons and he's probably the player I've disliked the most in the game for awhile now, but if this team made the same kind of move last year...

To be fair, the Twins had nearly a half dozen OF prospects, many of whom stepped up as the season progressed.

 

Number of catching prospects? Uh... I think we both know the answer to that one.

 

The Hunter signing just didn't bother me that much. I wanted to see him play less than he did but I couldn't get too worked up about it (though I wouldn't have signed him at all if I was the GM).

 

Is it wrong this time because one is a fan favorite and one isn't?  Believe me, I agree with you about AJ 1000%.  Signing AJ would be horrible for baseball reasons and he's probably the player I've disliked the most in the game for awhile now, but if this team made the same kind of move last year...

Hunter is by far a better teammate and mentor than AJ who has the amazing ability to pass-off everybody including teammates. Even if Torii's skills evaporated, he would still been a valuable addition. AJ would be a massive pain in the ..........

 

Pierzynski was possibly an option. He's also an *incredibly risky* option that leaves the Twins hanging their ass out the window if a 39 year old catcher (shockingly) loses his ability to play baseball at the highest level.

If that's a risk you're willing to take, so be it... But you better be ready to explain to a fan base why you relied on two over the hill catchers to propel an 83 win team to the next level if catcher is a giant black hole again in 2016 (and I'd give the odds of a Suzuki/Pierzynski platoon a 50% chance of being terrible).

My first choice would have been to open the pocket book on Wieters. Barring that happening, I don't really see a better "fix" than going after a guy with marginal upside by trading from a position of strength.

The catching market is awful. The fact some of you are even talking about AJ-freakin-Pierzynski says all that needs to be said about Ryan's options this offseason.

So taking a risk on a replacement level 40 year old RF (for a huge overpay to boot) is ok, but taking a risk on a guy (AJ) coming off a 2.1 WAR year where you could get him for a few million is too big a risk?

 

I would have preferred Wieters, Lucroy, Norris etc as well over AJ, but I prefer AJ for a couple million EASILY over giving up Hicks for Murphy dawg.

I can't believe how long it took me to read through 15+ pages of posts.  My head is spinning.  I will go on record as being a guy who liked the idea of Hicks starting the season in CF and giving Buxton some seasoning in AAA.  That is the main reason I don't like the trade.  I've been holding out hope that Hicks would eventually become the player everyone hoped for.  I saw some glimmers of that this year, but it is still too early to say if he has turned the corner.  If Hicks is indeed destined to be a 4th outfielder, or the RH component of a RF platoon, I think this trade will be fine. 

 

I am with Chief (I think he originally stated it) that it scares the hell out of me that he figures it out in New York.  To me, Hicks has much higher upside than Murphy.  People have suggested for the past couple of years that Hicks is a head case.  If that turns out to be true, I doubt he figures it out in the media circus that is NY.  My guess is that in the end, the Twins didn't have faith that Hicks was going to figure things out.

 

In the end, my gut tells me that both players end up being part-time/role players.  I would have rather rolled the dice keeping Hicks, especially if it allows Buxton to come up when he is deemed ready.  On a tangent, what about signing Span to a one-year make-good and incentive-laden deal?  There was a suggestion in the offseason handbook that he might be interested in that since he is coming off an injury marred season. 

 

 

Hunter is by far a better teammate and mentor than AJ who has the amazing ability to pass-off everybody including teammates. Even if Torii's skills evaporated, he would still been a valuable addition. AJ would be a massive pain in the ..........

Time to play our favorite game player A or Player B:

Player A won a world series title

Player B never won a world series title

 

Player A never got in a physical reported fight with a teammate (hard to find any verbal ones either)

Player B tried to punch a young player of a team who was an MVP and one of the best hitters of the entire franchise.

 

 

Drumroll....

 

Player A is AJ

Player B is Hunter

So taking a risk on a replacement level 40 year old RF (for a huge overpay to boot) is ok, but taking a risk on a guy (AJ) coming off a 2.1 WAR year where you could get him for a few million is too big a risk?

Come on, Dave. Organizational depth. The Twins had a handful of prospects should Hunter fail (and I never wanted Hunter in the first place). The Twins have no such fallback option at catcher.

 

To be fair, the Twins had nearly a half dozen OF prospects, many of whom stepped up as the season progressed.

Number of catching prospects? Uh... I think we both know the answer to that one.

The Hunter signing just didn't bother me that much. I wanted to see him play less than he did but I couldn't get too worked up about it (though I wouldn't have signed him at all if I was the GM).

well, yeah, but that makes getting AJ a better option, no?

 

And also, to be fair, Hunter had a 0.0 war in 140+ game the season before we signed him and AJ was over 2.0 last year.  If we had decided to sign AJ, one seems like more of a risk if looking at on the field results.

 

Again, though, I'm glad we didn't sign AJ.  IMO, it would have been a cancer on this team and ten times worse than the Hunter signing because of it.

I would have preferred Wieters, Lucroy, Norris etc as well over AJ, but I prefer AJ for a couple million EASILY over giving up Hicks for Murphy dawg.

Wieters is the only realistic option on that list.

 

Lucroy costs you Berrios. Norris costs you Berrios. That is the reality of the situation.

 

And you're concerned about giving up Hicks? Berrios is ten times more valuable to this org than Hicks.

 

Wieters is the only realistic option on that list.

Lucroy costs you Berrios. Norris costs you Berrios. That is the reality of the situation.

And you're concerned about giving up Hicks? Berrios is ten times more valuable to this org than Hicks.

Straw man alert!

 

Um did I ever say to give up Berrios?

 

Also you have no idea that Lucroy or Norris costs Berrios. Many have suggested that Norris for instance would cost nothing near that.

 

 

 

 

Edited November 13, 201511 yr by DaveW

 

Come on, Dave. Organizational depth. The Twins had a handful of prospects should Hunter fail (and I never wanted Hunter in the first place). The Twins have no such fallback option at catcher.

and they still don't have a fallback position at catcher nor a viable starting catcher. :-)

 

 

Come on, Dave. Organizational depth. The Twins had a handful of prospects should Hunter fail (and I never wanted Hunter in the first place). The Twins have no such fallback option at catcher.

Hunter DID fail. He has a negative 0.8 bWAR last season, that is the definition of failure!

 

What depth did they have that produced in his spot? Santana? no. Buxton? Rough first year. Arcia? Never got a chance, but had a terrible year to boot anyways. Nunez? Nope. Robinson? Oh yeah, we played him 50 games...

 

 

Edited November 13, 201511 yr by DaveW

Straw man alert!

 

Um did I ever say to give up Berrios?

 

Also you have no idea that Lucroy or Norris costs Berrios. Many have suggested that Norris for instance would cost nothing near that.

Those players would cost Berrios because the opposing GM would have to be an idiot NOT to demand Berrios. He's the only established top 100 guy in the high minors (assuming Buxton opens in Minnesota).

 

Cost controlled MLB players at a position of scarcity require a big payout. Berrios is the only guy who fits the bill.

Hunter DID fail. He has a negative 0.8 bWAR last season, that is the definition of failure!

 

What depth did they have that produced in his spot? Santana? no. Buxton? Rough first year. Arcia? Never got a chance, but had a terrible year to boot anyways. Nunez? Nope. Robinson? Oh yeah, we played him 50 games...

I must be forgetting all those times I was clamoring to see Hunter out in right field down the stretch.

 

Oh, that's right. I wanted to see him benched.

Mediocre is a hell of a lot better than Pierzynski, who is pretty bad at everything except hitting nowadays.

 

And what FG stat had Murphy as the fourth worst catcher in MLB?

Um, Pierzynski may not grade out well, but he played very well behind the plate. Heck, his framing was so good, he created possibly the gif of the year framing the heck out of a one-hop pitch.

 

Those players would cost Berrios because the opposing GM would have to be an idiot NOT to demand Berrios. He's the only established top 100 guy in the high minors (assuming Buxton opens in Minnesota).

Cost controlled MLB players at a position of scarcity require a big payout. Berrios is the only guy who fits the bill.

But the GM of the team who has Norris is widely considered (around these parts at least) to be an idiot....

 

 

 

Um, Pierzynski may not grade out well, but he played very well behind the plate. Heck, his framing was so good, he created possibly the gif of the year framing the heck out of a one-hop pitch.

Except that the one hop came AFTER the ball hit his mitt.

 

But the GM of the team who has Norris is widely considered (around these parts at least) to be an idiot....

As is the GM of the team who has Berrios.

Except that the one hop came AFTER the ball hit his mitt.

Seriously, look up the play. AJ had very sure hands for the Braves last year, especially considering the young, erratic staff he caught last year. I was adamantly against signing AJ last offseason, but he played very well behind the plate and handled the young staff well, much to my surprise.

 

But the GM of the team who has Norris is widely considered (around these parts at least) to be an idiot....

Oh, I don't think he's an idiot at all. He made some mistakes but I certainly don't think he's an idiot.

I'm starting to feel bad for this dead horse. How is there anything left of it to beat on?

 

As is the GM of the team who has Berrios.

Not true, nobody has said that. Ryan is a very smart baseball man, he just is far too conservative and unwilling to change to adapt to current market conditions to create a championship caliber team.

 

As has been stated multiple times, I would want a new every day GM with Ryan taking over the President role.

Edited November 13, 201511 yr by DaveW

I'm starting to feel bad for this dead horse. How is there anything left of it to beat on?

Since Torri retired, its Nov., and Hannah has put her horse in the stable one does have to admit that any Ryan thread will fill pages. . Speaking of Hannah.................

 

I'm starting to feel bad for this dead horse. How is there anything left of it to beat on?

Oh come on, it's threads like this that remind me to go check out other websites.

 

First, I'll start this off by saying WAR projections are pure and utter nonsense, but...

 

 

Actually, we've had this discussion many times before, and these WAR projections are remarkably, sometimes frustratingly "in-the-ballpark" when all is said and done. (Remeber Mauer?)

 

You sound more like you're wishcasting that something good will happen with Murphy and the Twins.  I'd like to see something good happen with him, as well. We can only go with what we've seen from him thus far: no power in the minor leagues, and a high BABIP, no power and a Yankee Stadium-centric production level in the majors, along with mixed reviews of his defense.

 

What we do know is that the Twins got a cheap asset at the minimum for the next two years and then 3 more years of control after that if things work out.  All of this to say, this doesn't smack of some "aggressive" move by Ryan, as some allege (or wish) to be the case.