Jose Fernandez trade rumors?

[Hosken Bombo Disco]

I like Berrios and Kepler, but Fernandez + Span are almost certainly better over the next 3 years.  And if you don't think the next 3 years is really our "window" then you really don't have a window because no one can really predict a window past 3 years from now.

I do agree with your window comment, however. But I think the Twins would prefer to play the long game in that hypothetical transaction.

[JaleelWhite FanClub]

 

I get not including Sano or Buxton, but why wouldn't you trade Berrios? There is about a 99% chance that Fernandez is ultimately the better pitcher.

 

Because any time you mention trading Berrios, he turns into a Pedro-Maddux cyborg in the minds of most posters. I love the kid and hope to see him pitch in Minnesota, but nothing is guaranteed these days.

[biggentleben]

Reading the Shelby Miller and Jose Fernandez threads, I've realized that while I get crap for how high I am on Berrios on general baseball and Braves sites, I may be the low man on him here on TD. Puckett help us if he ever is traded because there is no way the return will be enough around here.

[TheLeviathan]

It seems to me that most of the debate is pretty simple to cut through:  yes, I'd always prefer to package a bunch of low-minors, further away prospects in a deal.

 

The reality is this likely would have to cost us Kepler and Berrios.  So it just comes down to your comfort level with that.

 

Maybe you could get the Marlins to swing you Ozuna in the deal too as a buy low guy.  I don't know, but there are some intriguing ways this could match up.

[nytwinsfan]

 

Oh man, I wouldn't. Fernandez is the exact type of pitcher that can take this team and put them over the top. Also those three years of control give the Twins a head start on getting him on board with a long term deal.

Yeah, with Scott Boras. Good luck signing him for under $200 million.

[Vanimal46]

Why are we acting like it's a bad thing that Fernandez would command $200 million on the open market? That would mean he lived up to the hype as an ace on the team, and more than likely be a multiple year all-star, maybe a Cy Young and help the Twins make the playoffs. Even, god forbid, help win a World Series. 

He's also going to hit the free agent market at age 27. I'm much more comfortable handing out that kind of dough to a pitcher at that age, around 800-900 big league innings under his belt, over a 31-32 year old P. 

[Otto von Ballpark]

 

Which part of his comeback doesn't satisfy you?

Playing devil's advocate, Fernandez did get shut down in August this year with some fanfare.  They concluded it was a biceps strain with no structural damage in the shoulder, but it's certainly worth some concern.

 

Not enough to preclude my interest, though -- I'd definitely talk trade with the Marlins, but I'd just be extra cautious when we get to review medicals and perform a physical.

[Otto von Ballpark]

 

But I don't see how this deal gets done without Berrios in it so I'm basically arguing not to include Kepler. The Twins have enough in the low minors to make this a decent deal for the Marlins without including Kepler.

Do you remember where Kepler was 8 months ago?

 

His 2015 was very nice, but his upside still doesn't look any better than an Eric Hosmer who can play corner OF too.  And given his hitting profile and pro career to date, he might have the same ups and downs over his 6 years of team control as Hosmer has had too.

 

I think it's a little early to put him in the untouchable category when discussing a trade for a talent the level of Fernandez.  Keeping Sano and Buxton in this deal would be an absolute heist, protecting Kepler too seems a little prospect greedy.

[Otto von Ballpark]

 

And the point of a Fernandez trade is a "win now, RIGHT NOW" approach. I'd do whatever I could to keep at least one of the guys who will help "WIN NOW". Kepler is one of those guys, IMO.

I like Kepler, and I know TR says he's got a shot to make the team, but he really hasn't played above AA, his AA success was largely based on doubles/triples power and BABIP and K%, and his track record doesn't scream "seamless transition."  Even if he manages to make the leap and hold his own, he's not really helping us "win now, RIGHT NOW" any more than Denard Span could.  Kinda like how Rosario made the leap and held his own last year, which was nice, but it absolutely shouldn't have prevented us from including Rosario in a blockbuster trade last winter (assuming we looked more like contenders last winter).

[Don Walcott]

I wouldn't worry about Jose's health.  I saw him talk about his rehab on a 5-Hour Energy commercial.  He had me at "They said . . . I was one of the best pitchers in the game . . . ."

[Mike Sixel]

I think saying 3 years is RIGHT NOW is a bit misleading......

[Winston Smith]

Has Terry ever traded a Twins top 10 prospect?? Now how likely is it he trades 2-3 for one player?

[nicksaviking]

Has Terry ever traded a Twins top 10 prospect?? Now how likely is it he trades 2-3 for one player?

I think unlikely, but to be fair, three years ago I was saying that Ryan has never signed a free agent starter to more than a two year deal and Ryan has never paid a free agent more than $8M a year and that Rayn has never fired a manager.

[Vanimal46]

 

Has Terry ever traded a Twins top 10 prospect?? Now how likely is it he trades 2-3 for one player?

 

Bobby Kielty for Shannon Stewart back in the day?

[Otto von Ballpark]

 

Bobby Kielty for Shannon Stewart back in the day?

Kielty was well past prospect status at the time of that trade.  750 MLB PAs.

[cmoss84]

I like John Smoltz. He is a fairly intelligent human being, and said yesterday "when Jose is healthy, he is the best pitcher in the game." If we have a chance at him, without giving up Buxton and Sano, you HAVE to do it...worried about elbow or not. I'm guessing Berrios would have to be included like many of you have said. So here are my 2 offers trying to make most of you happy:

#1: Berrios, Gordon, Stewart and ABW

#2: Gonsalves, Kepler, Jay and a mid-level prospect

 

Something tells me ABW's power would be attractive to Miami-and this allows us to keep our high OBP guy in Kepler to balance out our lineup. Whether or not they are high on Gordon is interesting since Dee is there but they may already have their SS of the future in Hech. Option 2 gives us Jose and Jose to lead our rotation for at least 3 years while not giving up the farm...although it would leave us a little barren LHP wise.

Rotation including Fernandez, Santana, Hughes and Berrios isn't bad. We need an ace...go get him!

[Hosken Bombo Disco]

 

Do you remember where Kepler was 8 months ago?

 

His 2015 was very nice, but his upside still doesn't look any better than an Eric Hosmer who can play corner OF too.  And given his hitting profile and pro career to date, he might have the same ups and downs over his 6 years of team control as Hosmer has had too.

Yet this makes Kepler appealing to Miami as the centerpiece (with Berrios) of a trade for Fernandez? 

 

[Otto von Ballpark]

 

Yet this makes Kepler appealing to Miami as the centerpiece (with Berrios) of a trade for Fernandez? 

That's not the discussion I was having.  We were discussing the reticence of some to include both Berrios and Kepler in the hypothetical trade.

 

I agree it still might not be enough for the Marlins, but I wouldn't shy away from offering it.

[drjim]

 

That's not the discussion I was having.  We were discussing the reticence of some to include both Berrios and Kepler in the hypothetical trade.

 

I agree it still might not be enough for the Marlins, but I wouldn't shy away from offering it.

 

I apologize if it was discussed earlier in this thread - but seems to me a Fernandez trade could potentially include May and/or Duffey (or possibly Gibson) to avoid putting Berrios in. Would almost certainly need Kepler though.

[big dog]

 

I don't understand your point on Santana and how that applies to Jose Fernandez. We traded Johan in his age 29 season when he already logged 1,075 innings in the big leagues. Fernandez is 23 years old with 289 big league innings under his belt. How is that the same kind of trade?

Also, what would the price have to be in order for you to bite on the deal?

I was responding to a post that compared the trade to Santana, it wasn't my idea to compare them.

 

I'm not sure, but I'll go with what I mentioned before- any 4 pitchers that don't include Berrios, and I'd like to keep either Burdi or Reed.

[big dog]

 

Johan Santana was a completely different situation than this.  Fernandez will make 2-3M next season and below market rates for the following years.  That is why (and Bill Smith) the Twins didn't get a comparable package for him.

 

ERA+ is a pretty weak stat to use to show that someone (like Liriano) had fully recovered from TJ.  Velocity was way down, K's were way down and BB's were way up.  Liriano looked borderline awful that year and got demoted at one point.  Fernandez came back like he hadn't been away and he was dominant in his return.  It was only 60 innings but he certainly looks fully recovered.

Liriano's second-best performance as a Twin after surgery was his half-season afterward.  His first full year after was weak, his second was great, the rest of them were poor.  My point is that we would have been better off to trade him if we could have gotten a decent haul.

[by jiminy]

 

At very very tops, Fernandez provides 21 WAR over the next 3 years.  You don't think Berrios and Gordon and Burdi would provide 21 WAR in total over 6.5 years each?

Not saying I disagree with your over-all point, but I would just add that 21 WAR from one player over 3 years is much more valuable than 21 WAR over 6.5 years from three players. At least if your goal is to win a championship.

 

By analogy, imagine we were talking about home runs. Say you could get one guy who would hit 150 home runs in the next three years, or three guys who would hit 150 HR over six years. It's not that those guys don't have value, but you could fill your whole roster three times over with guys who hit 8 home runs a year and never win a pennant. You only get so many at bats, and you need to make the most of them. 

 

Same with high WAR players. It's good to have a lot of guys who contribute a little. But you only get to play nine guys at a time, and if you want to be the best, you need guys who can produce dramatically more in their innings that other players can. A great player producing 7 WAR from one lineup slot, or one rotation slot, is going to help you come in first place a lot more than someone who adds two wins a year but does it again the next two years. At the end of the season, all that counts is wins per season.

 

In your scenario above, you compare Fernandez contributing 21 wins in 3 years to Berrios, Gordon, and Burdi contributing more than 21 wins over 6.5 years. According to that math each current Twin is only contributing a win per season. That won't get it done.

 

You also need to consider that since those wins are spread over three players, you need to compare not to what Fernandez would produce, but what Frenandez plus shortstop X plus reliever Y would produce. If you don't have those guys you don't play short handed. You'll play somebody else, who very likely will be above replacement level themselves.

 

Wow, I'm kinda talking myself into this. Gordon and Burdi may be fine players but are they dramatically better than Polanco and Tonkin, or whoever's next in line? I don't know.

 

It really comes down to Fernandez's injury history. That would be the stumbling block for me.

 

Well, that and budget. You're not really comparing those guys to Fernandez. You're comparing those guys AND whoever else you could get for Fernandez's soon to be very high salary.

 

There, I talked myself back. Give the young cheap guns a chance, and if you're in the hunt in July, make a trade then.

 

Or better yet, sign Greinke, add him to all the young talent you didn't trade, and create a team that could actually scare people for years to come.

[Otto von Ballpark]

 

I apologize if it was discussed earlier in this thread - but seems to me a Fernandez trade could potentially include May and/or Duffey (or possibly Gibson) to avoid putting Berrios in. Would almost certainly need Kepler though.

Good suggestion, but I suspect the Marlins would insist on Berrios.  May and Duffey have been nice, but they're significantly older and just not as highly regarded (and May already has over a year service time, so the Marlins would have to trade him again in 2 years anyway ).

 

Actually, even if we offered Berrios and Kepler, I could see the Marlins insisting on May or Duffey too instead of a lower-level guy.  That might be a tougher decision than just starting with Berrios and Kepler.

[Otto von Ballpark]

 

I'm not sure, but I'll go with what I mentioned before- any 4 pitchers that don't include Berrios, and I'd like to keep either Burdi or Reed.

So not only would you withhold your top 4 prospects (by Sickels: Buxton, Berrios, Kepler, Gordon)...

 

You'd also ask the Marlins not to take both your 4.53 ERA and your 6.32 ERA AA relievers.

 

Got it.

 

In other words, you're not interested under any circumstances.

[nytwinsfan]

 

Not saying I disagree with your over-all point, but I would just add that 21 WAR from one player over 3 years is much more valuable than 21 WAR over 6.5 years from three players. At least if your goal is to win a championship.

 

By analogy, imagine we were talking about home runs. Say you could get one guy who would hit 150 home runs in the next three years, or three guys who would hit 150 HR over six years. It's not that those guys don't have value, but you could fill your whole roster three times over with guys who hit 8 home runs a year and never win a pennant. You only get so many at bats, and you need to make the most of them. 

 

Same with high WAR players. It's good to have a lot of guys who contribute a little. But you only get to play nine guys at a time, and if you want to be the best, you need guys who can produce dramatically more in their innings that other players can. A great player producing 7 WAR from one lineup slot, or one rotation slot, is going to help you come in first place a lot more than someone who adds two wins a year but does it again the next two years. At the end of the season, all that counts is wins per season.

 

In your scenario above, you compare Fernandez contributing 21 wins in 3 years to Berrios, Gordon, and Burdi contributing more than 21 wins over 6.5 years. According to that math each current Twin is only contributing a win per season. That won't get it done.

 

You also need to consider that since those wins are spread over three players, you need to compare not to what Fernandez would produce, but what Frenandez plus shortstop X plus reliever Y would produce. If you don't have those guys you don't play short handed. You'll play somebody else, who very likely will be above replacement level themselves.

 

Wow, I'm kinda talking myself into this. Gordon and Burdi may be fine players but are they dramatically better than Polanco and Tonkin, or whoever's next in line? I don't know.

 

It really comes down to Fernandez's injury history. That would be the stumbling block for me.

 

Well, that and budget. You're not really comparing those guys to Fernandez. You're comparing those guys AND whoever else you could get for Fernandez's soon to be very high salary.

 

There, I talked myself back. Give the young cheap guns a chance, and if you're in the hunt in July, make a trade then.

 

Or better yet, sign Greinke, add him to all the young talent you didn't trade, and create a team that could actually scare people for years to come.

HR isn't a good analogy.  50 HR for three years is worth more WAR than 3 guys hitting 8.3 HR a year for six years (which is what your analogy amounts to). That is because WAR isn't wins, it is WINS ABOVE REPLACEMENT, and a replacement hitter at many positions hits almost 8.3 HR a year. So the latter is worth barely any WAR, whereas the former is probably worth a lot of WAR - possibly even more than 21. The same isn't true for WAR. WAR is WAR is WAR. It is fungible and linear in value, because even if you have someone who contributes more than 1 WAR at that position, you can usually trade that player to another team that has exactly 0 WAR at that position. Think of how many positions the Twins have received 0 (or negative) WAR from over the last 5 or 6 years. Now multiply that times 30 teams.  There are always replacement players out there with significant playing time.  That's the definition of a replacement level player. They can be replaced at no cost. Once you are above 0 WAR, the idea is that it costs something to get that player. Obviously it isn't perfect, because there are tons of market inefficiencies, not to mention because WAR isn't perfect. But the idea is that WAR is fungible and already takes into account opportunity cost at a market level, even if it doesn't take into account opportunity cost at a team level. But market inefficiencies aside, baseball is a market, and I generally think you should approach it as one.

 

I'll just leave this here. It acknowledges your theoretical point (on the margins) while pointing out that in reality, there is little or no evidence for it:  http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/linear-dollars-per-win-again/

[drjim]

 

Good suggestion, but I suspect the Marlins would insist on Berrios.  May and Duffey have been nice, but they're significantly older and just not as highly regarded (and May already has over a year service time, so the Marlins would have to trade him again in 2 years anyway ).

 

Actually, even if we offered Berrios and Kepler, I could see the Marlins insisting on May or Duffey too instead of a lower-level guy.  That might be a tougher decision than just starting with Berrios and Kepler.

 

I agree, but impossible to know if Marlins might like someone else - they generally go for bigger SP.

 

I personally wouldn't shy away from a package built around Berrios and Kepler.

[Mike Sixel]

 

HR isn't a good analogy.  50 HR for three years is worth more WAR than 3 guys hitting 8.3 HR a year for six years (which is what your analogy amounts to). That is because WAR isn't wins, it is WINS ABOVE REPLACEMENT, and a replacement hitter at many positions hits almost 8.3 HR a year. So the latter is worth barely any WAR, whereas the former is probably worth a lot of WAR - possibly even more than 21. The same isn't true for WAR. WAR is WAR is WAR. It is fungible and linear in value, because even if you have someone who contributes more than 1 WAR at that position, you can usually trade that player to another team that has exactly 0 WAR at that position. Think of how many positions the Twins have received 0 (or negative) WAR from over the last 5 or 6 years. Now multiply that times 30 teams.  There are always replacement players out there with significant playing time.  That's the definition of a replacement level player. They can be replaced at no cost. Once you are above 0 WAR, the idea is that it costs something to get that player. Obviously it isn't perfect, because there are tons of market inefficiencies, not to mention because WAR isn't perfect. But the idea is that WAR is fungible and already takes into account opportunity cost at a market level, even if it doesn't take into account opportunity cost at a team level. But market inefficiencies aside, baseball is a market, and I generally think you should approach it as one.

 

I'll just leave this here. It acknowledges your theoretical point (on the margins) while pointing out that in reality, there is little or no evidence for it:  http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/linear-dollars-per-win-again/

 

I've read that article. It does not back up your assertion that the Twins would replace Kepler and Burdi with zero WAR players, which is our point......

 

It is Fernandez plus two other players, compared to Berrios, Burdi, Kepler. If you trust TR, I would think you trust him to find players worth more than Zero WAR to play whatever position you think Kepler is going to play. It also discounts that, if you wanted to, you can trade Fernandez after 2 years, and get other players back. Your WAR projections pretty much ignore all the context, and just compare those three players in a vacuum. 

[HitInAPinch]

Why would the Twins include Berrios in a trade for Fernandez?  It makes zero sense.

First of all, IF the owner wants to get rid of him,  You don't walk into a situation like this and offer your top young player.  You have the upper hand, use it. Kepler gets them interested, Kohl Stewart is the kind of pitcher they like and I'd dangle Polanco.

 

Second:  if you trade Berrios, what would that do for the rotation?  If you're making this trade, you're doing it to match Fernandez with Berrios.  How does a rotation that starts with Fernandez, Duffey and Berrios look to you? 

 

Of course, the Fernandez situation isn't exactly clear....

 

 

[big dog]

 

So not only would you withhold your top 4 prospects (by Sickels: Buxton, Berrios, Kepler, Gordon)...

 

You'd also ask the Marlins not to take both your 4.53 ERA and your 6.32 ERA AA relievers.

 

Got it.

 

In other words, you're not interested under any circumstances.

If you mean my two relievers who are tearing up the AFL, yes, they only get one.  I'm definitely interested, but probably not under circumstances the Marlins would consider.  As I've mentioned several times, I think four-for-one coming off TJ is too much risk.  If you still want to put words in mouth, hopefully this will help you narrow it down.  I apologize if I haven't been clear enough.

[kab21]

 

Liriano's second-best performance as a Twin after surgery was his half-season afterward.  His first full year after was weak, his second was great, the rest of them were poor.  My point is that we would have been better off to trade him if we could have gotten a decent haul.

The problem is that there were a lot of indications that Liriano wasn't fully recovered.  His velocity was down 4 mph, K's were down and BB were way up.  Liriano looked like a pitcher that wasn't fully recovered and he has never returned to his pre TJ form.  Every indication is that Fernandez is completely back.