Jon Paul Morosi: Mariners Focusing On Willingham?

[John Bonnes]

http://mlbbuzz.yardbarker.com/blog/mlbbuzz/article/sources_mariners_considering_willingham_craig/11325958

 

It's an interesting thought. The Twins give up Willingham or young Mariners pitching. They could move Revere to left field and plug Parmelee in right. Mariners are loaded w pitching prospects. Walker, Hultzen or Paxton could each be in play for Willingham, I think.

[DPJ]

Paxton maybe, but I truly doubt the M's would move Walker or Hultzen for Willingham.

[AllhopeisgoneMNTWINS]

The time is now to trade the Hammer, he will never have a better year then the one he is currently having now. I dont see anything wrong with Revere, Span and Parmalee roaming the outfield. We need pitching.

[gunnarthor]

I have no idea why Seattle would think to trade for Willingham but if they'd give up a guy up the pitching, then sure.

[Mike Sixel]

I am all for it....trade from strength and age, for pieces you are lacking.

[DaveW]

Agree with DPJ I can't see any way Hultzen or Walker are available, but if either one is the Twins should send Willingham to them ASAP. What about Willingham+Benson for Hultzen?

 

Also beware of BingGentleBen, he blasted me last month for saying we should trade one of our OF to the Mariners, since according to him they had such amazing OF depth in Seattle

[Brock Beauchamp]

Agree with DPJ I can't see any way Hultzen or Walker are available, but if either one is the Twins should send Willingham to them ASAP. What about Willingham+Benson for Hultzen?

I don't think it's the time to deal Benson. His value hasn't been much lower than it is right now.

[DPJ]

I know Willingham's name has been thrown about like crazy this trading deadline like he's the ****ing prom king. But why would teams, who had a chance to sign him in the offseason for not a ton of money now buy at an all-time high, whiling taking on the rest of his contract and giving up legit prospects.

 

No doubt there's a market for Willingham, but I don't understand how he went from undervalued in the winter and now 7 months later he's the king of the world.

[DaveW]

I don't think it's the time to deal Benson. His value hasn't been much lower than it is right now.

Fine, then someone else aroudn the 6-10 range of our prospects.

 

The point is if the Marines were for some reason making Walker/Hultzen available (I can't see it happening) we should offer them Willingham and one of our top hitting prospects in return.

 

Anyways its all a pipedream anyways, but I'd give up anyone in a package not named Sano/Arcia/Hicks along with Willingham for a chance to land a high upside guy like Walker ot Hultzen

[Badsmerf]

What about Willingham and Arcia? Right now Arcia's value is sky high, and would profile to be a very good hitter at Safeco I think. He might not have 30HR potential in that park (who does) but his hitting tools would allow him to rack up doubles and triples. Dealing from organizational strength to organizational strength.

[DaveW]

What about Willingham and Arcia? Right now Arcia's value is sky high, and would profile to be a very good hitter at Safeco I think. He might not have 30HR potential in that park (who does) but his hitting tools would allow him to rack up doubles and triples. Dealing from organizational strength to organizational strength.

I'd hate to give up Arcia, but if thats what it took I would probably do it.

[Riverbrian]

I'd make the deal but I'd be surprised if the Mariners gave up any of those 3 pitching prospects.

 

They need to acquire hitting to time with the the arrival of those 3 arms. Not give up those arms to acquire the hitting.

 

Trading those arms for Hitting would be like a cat chasing it's tail. It will spin the organization dizzy.

[Brock Beauchamp]

What about Willingham and Arcia? Right now Arcia's value is sky high, and would profile to be a very good hitter at Safeco I think. He might not have 30HR potential in that park (who does) but his hitting tools would allow him to rack up doubles and triples. Dealing from organizational strength to organizational strength.

I hate hate hate the idea of dealing Arcia but if he brings a can't-miss pitching prospect back, that is a bitter pill the Twins should consider swallowing.

[Badsmerf]

I'd make the deal but I'd be surprised if the Mariners gave up any of those 3 pitching prospects.

 

They need to acquire hitting to time with the the arrival of those 3 arms. Not give up those arms to acquire the hitting.

 

Trading those arms for Hitting would be like a cat chasing it's tail. It will spin the organization dizzy.

Unless you're trading for a guy you think can be a cornerstone in the middle of the order. Arcia would fit that bill on many levels for the M's.

[beckmt]

I would be more willing to give up Benson than Arcia, But if we could get a front line pitching prospect and possibly some other B and C types, go for it. Oakland is proving you can win even in the American league with good to great pitching.

[Riverbrian]

Unless you're trading for a guy you think can be a cornerstone in the middle of the order. Arcia would fit that bill on many levels for the M's.

Not Knocking Arcia... I'm getting excited about the kid... The Mariners need hitting but... They have been in a real dark place for a long time now. The light is at the end of the tunnel... King Felix and 3 Top line starters at AA...

 

To trade any of those arms is kinda like taking a long journey to get somewhere and then taking a right turn for no reason just before you get there.

 

If the Mariners are talking about Willingham... I'm guessing the Arms in return are Vargas or someone else.

[Winston Smith]

Not sure why either team would do this deal now. They aren't going anyplace this year but this winter Hultzen and Vargas might be ok. Vargas could fill a spot next year, god knows we need starters and Hultzen is the potential ace we need. Vargas could always be flipped next July for more prospects.

[Mike Sixel]

Also not sure why the Mariners would do this.....

[James]

This really seems like a deal that could be done in the off-season. If Willingham keeps anything resembling this pace the whole season, there will be plenty of teams that will be willing to give up some pieces for him some time in December.

[ashbury]

I know Willingham's name has been thrown about like crazy this trading deadline like he's the ****ing prom king. But why would teams, who had a chance to sign him in the offseason for not a ton of money now buy at an all-time high, whiling taking on the rest of his contract and giving up legit prospects.

 

No doubt there's a market for Willingham, but I don't understand how he went from undervalued in the winter and now 7 months later he's the king of the world.

I think you can view it in terms of risk. At the time the Twins signed Josh, it was regarded as a good signing but with risk of injury and/or decline from a career peak. With Josh playing full-time and at a high level, the Twins have "paid" the risk some other teams didn't wish to, and now can turn a profit if they want. That profit could be in the form of a different sort of risk when you take on a young player who isn't yet established; if Ryan and his scouts are better than average at assessing all these risks, it can be a self-sustaining model, but it's (*ahem*) risky.

[ashbury]

I meant to add my usual caveat that the question of risk is totally aside from whether the Twins want to become known as a team that will flip a player one year into his three-year free-agent contract.

[DPJ]

I think you can view it in terms of risk. At the time the Twins signed Josh, it was regarded as a good signing but with risk of injury and/or decline from a career peak. With Josh playing full-time and at a high level, the Twins have "paid" the risk some other teams didn't wish to, and now can turn a profit if they want. That profit could be in the form of a different sort of risk when you take on a young player who isn't yet established; if Ryan and his scouts are better than average at assessing all these risks, it can be a self-sustaining model, but it's (*ahem*) risky.

But the risk is still there in Josh entering his mid-30's with around 16 million left on his deal and a pretty solid injury history. I guess I don't see how you go from being undervalued and in 7 months you're king ****.

 

Much like every team in the league doing backflips to get Liriano only to see him get traded for ****, I think this is more about idiot reports and stupid ESPN writers naming a good player on a bad team instead of the actually intrest in Josh.

[TheLeviathan]

Much like every team in the league doing backflips to get Liriano only to see him get traded for ****, I think this is more about idiot reports and stupid ESPN writers naming a good player on a bad team instead of the actually intrest in Josh.

One important difference is that Willingham is killing the ball. While his track record suggest a career abnormality, he's always brought power. Which is different than Liriano stringing together 10 starts against some of the worst offenses in baseball (with a few exceptions).

 

I think concerning ourselves with the perception of the team to future FA is the cart before the horse. It's not relevant to the team in its current composition - we need to add talent and Hammer at "sell high" value is a good way to do that.

[Seth Stohs]

the Twins should not feel the need to add anything to Willingham to get something. For Willingham, I'd want Hultzen-plus... I wouldn't add a top prospect. Willingham is a proven contributor at the big league level who is vastly underpaid for the rest of this season and two more seasons. Hultzen isn't a proven. He's a terrific prospect, but to me, that's the kind of guy that the TWins should get to give up Willingham. Otherwise, just keep him and his value.

[DPJ]

One important difference is that Willingham is killing the ball. While his track record suggest a career abnormality, he's always brought power. Which is different than Liriano stringing together 10 starts against some of the worst offenses in baseball (with a few exceptions).

I used Liriano more in the sense that everyone was linked to him, every team was in on him and he gets moved for ****.

 

If every team is creaming there jeans for Willingham, why the hell did he sign so cheap with one of the worst teams in baseball. Hell the only team I heard linked with Josh when he was a free agent was the Native Americans. Now 7 months later and he's the king of baseball. It just doesn't add up to me and I think it's just lazy reporting of a good player on a bad team then the actually amount of teams that are really intrested in Josh.

[diehardtwinsfan]

I think concerning ourselves with the perception of the team to future FA is the cart before the horse. It's not relevant to the team in its current composition - we need to add talent and Hammer at "sell high" value is a good way to do that.

I don't know about the last statement. If 2014/15 is their target, they are going to need some decent pitching for that team. I don't see how they can do that without going into FA. With the FA pitching market being reasonably strong this offseason, it might make for a decent time to add a long term option.

[Klochner]

"Walker, Hultzen or Paxton could each be in play for Willingham, I think."

 

That's exactly the kind of thinking that leads to the disappointment we've seen with the Liriano trade. Willingham has more value than Liriano, but Taijuan Walker isn't going anywhere, and Danny Hultzen wouldn't go in a deal unless they were getting more than Willingham. The Mariners are by far the worst team in their division (until the Astros join next year) and their window for contention is a few years off. They're not going to give a pitcher who is a big part of their future for an aging hitter, even if he has a team-friendly contract.

 

Willingham's value is likely lower with Seattle than other teams because of how Safeco kills right-handed pull power. While Target Field is perfect for Willingham, Safeco is exactly the opposite, something the Mariners learned the hard way with Adrian Beltre.

[DaveW]

the Twins should not feel the need to add anything to Willingham to get something. For Willingham, I'd want Hultzen-plus... I wouldn't add a top prospect. Willingham is a proven contributor at the big league level who is vastly underpaid for the rest of this season and two more seasons. Hultzen isn't a proven. He's a terrific prospect, but to me, that's the kind of guy that the TWins should get to give up Willingham. Otherwise, just keep him and his value.

I couldn't disagree more with this. Willingham is a proven contributor but he is on the wrong side of 30 and is having a career season. There is zero chance the Mariners would trade their top prospect for Willingham. Yes, his contract is nice but its only for 2 more years, its not like he has 4-5 cost controlled years left and several more years of upside.

 

example: Would we trade Sano for Kubel straight up?

 

no way.

 

The poster above me is correct, when we set ridiculous expectations like this it makes perfect sense that everyone then screams that Ryan "blew it"

[rickyhawaii]

i commented on mlbtr that the Twins should go for a package with Carlos Triunfel - think he can be an everyday starter at SS with a decent bat, Brandon Maurer - good pitching prospect(Maurer to Mauer..), then two other pitchers.. if the Mariners offer Paxton though I'd hope Ryan makes that deal in a heart beat.. Part of me rather keep Willingham for next year because I feel the Twins need him to try and contend next year

[boney]

the Twins should not feel the need to add anything to Willingham to get something. For Willingham, I'd want Hultzen-plus... I wouldn't add a top prospect. Willingham is a proven contributor at the big league level who is vastly underpaid for the rest of this season and two more seasons. Hultzen isn't a proven. He's a terrific prospect, but to me, that's the kind of guy that the TWins should get to give up Willingham. Otherwise, just keep him and his value.

 

+1