Article: Deadline Primer: Catcher On The Rise

[Nick Nelson]

The All Star break is over. Now, with just over two weeks until the deadline, it’s trade season. That much was made clear on Thursday, when the Red Sox dealt a top pitching prospect to San Diego in exchange for impact starter Drew Pomeranz.Boston had been mentioned as a possible destination for Ervin Santana, who suddenly carries intriguing trade value, but is now off the board for starting pitching. And yet, one position where the Red Sox, along with many other contenders, could still use help is catcher. It's a source of offensive weakness across the league. American League catchers collectively have a .671 OPS, which is 60 points lower than the next-worst position (left field).

 

This makes the timing of Kurt Suzuki's astonishing evolution with the bat quite fortuitous. It's difficult to comprehend, but after his scorching last six weeks Suzuki suddenly leads all AL catchers in batting average and ranks third in OPS.

 

Given the generally subpar level of play that we've seen from him over the past two years, it's tempting to pass this off as a fluke. But Suzuki's torrid streak has sustained for quite a while and shows no signs of dissipating.

 

What triggered this shocking turnaround? Optimal health at last? A new bat type? Plain and simple adjustments?

 

Who knows, but this much is clear: Terry Ryan now stands at a point of great leverage.

 

The Case For Trading Suzuki

 

Boston's willingness to surrender Anderson Espinoza, one of the most highly regarded young arms in the minors, for Pomeranz signals that we're looking at a seller's market. The addition of a second wild-card slot means that 19 MLB teams are realistically in the postseason race, and looking for an edge.

 

Picking up a catcher who is in the zone like Suzuki would provide just that. Some teams are flat-out desperate for any kind of offensive threat behind the plate. The Indians, who currently lead the AL Central, have had no choice but to stick with Yan Gomes as their regular despite his .166 average and .516 OPS. The Tigers are chasing them with James McCann – owner of a .208 average and .563 OPS – as their majority backstop. The third-place White Sox are trotting out Dioner Navarro, who is also batting .208. And that's just in this division.

 

The aforementioned Red Sox, who have demonstrated an all-in type of aggressiveness, may fancy the idea of bringing in a well respected and red-hot veteran like Suzuki to bang liners off the Green Monster.

 

He's inexpensive this year. He has a very reasonable $6 million option attached to his contract for next year. His unceasing toughness sets a good example, and pitchers love working with him. It isn't difficult to envision a scenario in which Suzuki garners some significant offers, especially if he keeps raking for a couple more weeks. Can the Twins, now thrust back into rebuilding mode, afford to pass them up?

 

The Case For Keeping Suzuki

 

The problem with giving up Suzuki is that the cupboard is completely bare for 2017. John Ryan Murphy is batting .208 with a .558 OPS in Triple-A, and he qualifies as the next most credible option in the organization as a starting catcher.

 

If the Twins have aspirations of bouncing back and returning to contention next year – and it's not that far-fetched – they either need keep Suzuki and activate his option, or enter the offseason frantically searching for an answer. Are they ready to get into a high-stakes bidding war for Wilson Ramos or Matt Wieters, given the number of clubs seeking such players? Not likely.

 

This team has stuck with Suzuki through some lean times. He stayed in the lineup steadily last year even while posting terrible numbers, and during the offseason, the front office brought in more of a caddy/protege than replacement. Now that he's finally playing up to his potential, and the organization is bereft of contingency plans, it won't be easy to pry Suzuki away.

 

It all comes down to getting an offer that can't be refused. With 17 days remaining until the deadline, we'll see it if comes.

 

Click here to view the article

[beckmt]

Zuck has had 1/2 a great season and a great month and a great month and a half.  Trade him now if you can get a fair prospect for him.  We do not know what will happen next year, it is not likely we will be contenders until 2018 at the earliest.  Turner or Garver could be here next year, along with possibly Murphy or you could pay big buck(which Twins should be able to afford given trading 2 pitchers this year, for Ramos or Wieters. 

Banking on Zuck is not an option.

[DocBauer]

Just curious, but do we have any breakdowns for Murphy on a month to month basis? His numbers just aren't good overall, but he also planted himself in quite a hole to begin the season. It seems as though he's been at least a little better the past month or so.

 

Mitch Garver is amongst the Twins milb batting leaders in slugging, OPS, HR and RBI. Every report I've ever heard has him as quality behind the plate and throwing. He's not ready now, and there is no guarantee as to how he turns out, but he provides future optomism.

 

I'd still trade Suzuki if the market bears a solid offer. But it sure appears we'really going to have to sign a veteran of sorts in the offseason.

[mumoo13]

Trading Suzuki would allow us to bring up Murphy for the rest of the year and make a more informed decision on what do to next year. And that decision could be to re-sign Suzuki even if we trade him.

[mikelink45]

Based on what I expect TR to get for Suzuki I think we have no choice but to keep him.  It might not be popular, but the catching cupboard is too bare.  We can see what TR gets in trades when we look at the next catcher on the list who is stumbling in AAA.  Trading santana and Dozier who have young replacements ready makes sense, Suzuki does not. 

[troyhobbs]

Even if Suzuki continues to rake he's got a watermelon arm and I think his calling of games might be a little over rated. If JRM is a defensive upgrade then that helps compensate for some of the offensive drop off at least. I don't feel contending next year is all that reasonable because the Twins finally had one good week of baseball. Not trading Suzuki would be a mistake. TR is all about winging it and hoping for the best, this is one instance where I'd advocate that strategy w/ the C position for next year.  Fingers crossed somebody steps up.....

[nytwinsfan]

If the Twins can get even a decent prospect for him, trading Suzuki is a no-brainer. He is not going to be part of the next Twins contender. Trade him.

[Boom Boom]

Let's not fall into the same trap that resulted in the second Suzuki contract or the Hughes extension.

 

The guy you're seeing out there is not the real Kurt Suzuki.

[jimmer]

 

If the Twins can get even a decent prospect for him, trading Suzuki is a no-brainer. He is not going to be part of the next Twins contender. Trade him.

How many of these guys do you think WILL be part of our next contender?

[Riverbrian]

You can probably trade him and sign him as an FA.

 

So unless Zuke is needed for a 2016 playoff run or the development of Berrios?

 

 

 

 

[Otto von Ballpark]

As inexpensive as Suzuki may be this year, he actually has a higher salary than either Lucroy or Norris, both this year and if his option is exercised next year.

[JaleelWhite FanClub]

Trade him. Trade him. Trade him. How many times does he have to stink, then have a perfectly-timed hot streak (see 2014) and the Twins miss the chance to sell high?

 

Use all the money "saved" when Ryan doesn't live up to his word and does nothing this month and spend it on Wilson Ramos in the offseason.

[clutterheart]

 

The guy you're seeing out there is not the real Kurt Suzuki.

 

Disagree.  This is the real Suzuki.  He has a few hot weeks, a few OK weeks, a few really stinky weeks.  In the end he is a catcher who is not good, but not terrible and can play a lot of innings.   Some teams value that.  

 

But I highly doubt this is a sell high moment on Suzuki.  Every GM would know what they are getting with him.  

 

[tobi0040]

If next year is an option we can simply exercise, I bet that is what we do. Our GM has never let an unsustainable run stop him from extending a guy before.

[nytwinsfan]

 

How many of these guys do you think WILL be part of our next contender?

 

Sano, Kepler, Buxton, Berrios, Duffey, May, Tonkin, Pressley, Vargas, Park, Rogers, maybe Rosario, maybe Grossman, maybe Mauer, maybe Escobar, maybe Dozier, maybe Gibson, maybe Kintzler, maybe both Santanas.

[Otto von Ballpark]

If Suzuki's option next year can be exercised by the team, shouldn't it be called a "team option" somewhere? I have not seen that.

 

For example, Ervin Santana has a "team option" on his current deal, which can also vest based on IP.

 

By comparison, Suzuki's has only been reported as a "vesting option" with no mention of team/player. Maybe it is just semantics, and any vesting option is also assumed to be a team option? It is strange because it is usually explicitly defined, like Santana's.

Edited July 15, 2016 by spycake

[Jacksson]

Since the Twin's system is so flushed with catching talent that we can give away talent at the position, how is Hicks doing for the Tigers??

[jorgenswest]

I don't get the connection between the value of Pomeranz return and Suzuki (or Santana) for that matter. Young starting pitchers will get a good return in any market. I don't think it has any meaning for Suzuki's trade value.

 

His trade value will depend on the supply and demand of catchers. It will depend on how other team's value defense at catcher. It will depend on how they project second half offensive performance. No team is foolish enough to take first half stats and use them to project second half stats. Slash stats need a larger sample. They probably go back to 2014 to project (if they use stats at all). In that case, they would see Suzuki as a slightly better than league average hitter (relative to catchers) with a very poor arm, history of poor framing numbers and adequate ability to block pitches.

 

That has some value to a team like the Indians, but they have many other options in the market. Considering offense and defense, Suzuki probably isn't a significant upgrade to many other teams in a starting role.

[Vanimal46]

I don't really see a case for keeping Suzuki this season. Worst case, if the cupboard is bare in 2017, there's nothing stopping this team from resigning Suzuki or a Suzuki type in FA.

 

Trade him now, gather data on Murphy the next 2 months, re-evaluate in November.

[jimmer]

 

I don't really see a case for keeping Suzuki this season. Worst case, if the cupboard is bare in 2017, there's nothing stopping this team from resigning Suzuki or a Suzuki type in FA.

Trade him now, gather data on Murphy the next 2 months, re-evaluate in November.

How is Murphy doing down in Triple A?

[Vanimal46]

How is Murphy doing down in Triple A?

Does it matter this season? I would rather have 2 months of MLB data to see if Murphy is a legitimate candidate to be a full time C for 2017-18.

[nyazbeck]

Sano, Kepler, Buxton, Berrios, Duffey, May, Tonkin, Pressley, Vargas, Park, Rogers, maybe Rosario, maybe Grossman, maybe Mauer, maybe Escobar, maybe Dozier, maybe Gibson, maybe Kintzler, maybe both Santanas.

No Tonkin yes Rosario no kintzler neither Santana

Odds are Vargas got on a pharmaceutical diet and will be suspended so no on him

[jorgenswest]

How is Murphy doing down in Triple A?

His strike out and walk data is OK. He has a very poor ISO. He has not been very successful throwing out runners. Not enough data for slash stats to be meaningful. There is very little that can be seen in 183 PAs of AAA ball.

[Nick Nelson]

 

If Suzuki's option next year can be exercised by the team, shouldn't it be called a "team option" somewhere? I have not seen that.

For example, Ervin Santana has a "team option" on his current deal, which can also vest based on IP.

By comparison, Suzuki's has only been reported as a "vesting option" with no mention of team/player. Maybe it is just semantics, and any vesting option is also assumed to be a team option? It is strange because it is usually explicitly defined, like Santana's.

http://m.mlb.com/glossary/transactions/vesting-option

"In most cases, a vesting option that fails to vest can still be exercised as a club option."

I believe this to be the case. 

[jimmer]

 

Does it matter this season? I would rather have 2 months of MLB data to see if Murphy is a legitimate candidate to be a full time C for 2017-18.

Sorry, I was just asking.  I have no idea.  Stopped paying attention.

[Vanimal46]

 

Sorry, I was just asking.  I have no idea.  Stopped paying attention.

He's not doing well. .199 BA. Had a hot month in June but back to below the mendoza line so far this month. Certainly a drop off in production from Suzuki to Murphy but it shouldn't really matter this season.  

[diehardtwinsfan]

I don't think we had a great offer on the table 2 years ago, but based on what Nick just posted, we can ask for (and get) something nice... I'd trade him. 

[diehardtwinsfan]

Murphy, BTW, has come on strong of late.  Not sure what was going on earlier this season, but he seems to have figured things out (at least in a SSS capacity). 

[Mike Sixel]

I'd trade him, but man, the replacements are awful........not surprising really. When trading Aaron Hicks, you aren't exactly (or shouldn't be expecting) getting a great return. Aim low, hit low.

[jimmer]

Murphy is hitless in his last 5 games (gotten on base once) and has 4 hits in his last 35 PA (or, 4 for July, if you will).

Edited July 15, 2016 by jimmer