The 5 Rule Draft

[Doctor Gast]

Takes two to tango. Most teams generally aren't eager to deal players the Twins might consider "essential" in return for prospects we deem "nonessential." And rebuilding teams with the most roster space, like Pittsburgh, may not have many/any players who would be "essential" for the Twins anyway.

PIT has had a ton of upgrades in the past that we could have plundered, that we missed out on. I'm sure there are many teams that are willing to trade where they are strong for an area that they are weak. You misunderstand when I say "nonessential" , nonessential doesn't mean w/o value. Nonessential means something I can live w/o, a new Cadilac to me is nonessential. If I had a new Cadilac which I love and was starving, I'd sell that car to buy some food. That Caddy would be very expensive but not essential.

Stressing another point, we often hold onto players when are worth something but have no clear path for making the team until they are worthless. Case in point Nick Gordon. I would've traded him at least 2 yrs. ago when he was worth something. Now I don't think you could give him away unless he has a great 2021, which I hope he does.

[Otto von Ballpark]

 

PIT has had a ton of upgrades in the past that we could have plundered, that we missed out on. I'm sure there are many teams that willing to trade where they are strong for an area that they are weak. You misunderstand when I say "nonessential" , nonessential doesn't mean w/o value. Nonessential means something I can live w/o, a new Cadilac to me is nonessential.  If I had a new Cadilac and was starving, I'd sell that car to buy some food. That Caddy would be very expensive but not essential.

No one is debating your analogies. But if you want your specific claim about the Twins to be discussed seriously, I think you need to name specific players that you feel are "non-essential" and the specific "more essential" players we should have swapped them for.

[Doctor Gast]

No one is debating your analogies. But if you want your specific claim about the Twins to be discussed seriously, I think you need to name specific players that you feel are "non-essential" and the specific "more essential" players we should have swapped them for.

My objective is to bring to light an area that I think needs improvement, not to debate who is essential and who's not. But to humor you let's look at LF. How many players on the 40 man, can play there besides Buxton and Kepler? Let's see Cave, Kiriloff, Larnach, Rooker, Arraez, Garlic and I'll throw in Broxton because he should be. Could we live without any one of these and suffer at LF? I don't think so.

To be more specific. There was an article about a trade for the Reds Castillo. Castillo is a great upgrade in a needed area of pitching that's needed to advance to the World Series. Would I trade Kiriloff (who I'd hate to trade) with a cast of others for Castillo? I would. I wouldn't include anyone who's a true SS or CF (because CF and SS are crucial positions and we only Buxton and Simmons) or anyone who's undervalued due to 2020. I don't think that this trade will happen but if presented, I'd take it. For 2 reasons, #1 it'd be a great upgrade at pitching and #2 it gives more flexibility on the 40 man.

A missed opportunity where Musgrove was offered to the Twins but they stalled. Musgrove was later traded for peanuts. The Pirates were eager to trade and we had low tier players they would be interested in. There have been a few teams that have been open for trades and still might be if they are only sought out.

Again I don't want to debate trades or who's essential and who's not.

[Otto von Ballpark]

 

My objective is to bring to light an area that I think needs improvement, not to debate who is essential and who's not. But to humor you let's look at LF. How many players on the 40 man, can play there besides Buxton and Kepler? Let's see Cave, Kiriloff, Larnach, Rooker, Arraez, Garlic and I'll throw in Broxton because he should be. Could we live without any one of these and suffer at LF? I don't think so.
To be more specific. There was an article about a trade for the Reds Castillo. Castillo is a great upgrade in a needed area of pitching that's needed to advance to the World Series. Would I trade Kiriloff (who I'd hate to trade) with a cast of others for Castillo? I would. I wouldn't include anyone who's a true SS or CF (because CF and SS are crucial positions and we only Buxton and Simmons) or anyone who's undervalued due to 2020. I don't think that this trade will happen but if presented, I'd take it. For 2 reasons, #1 it'd be a great upgrade at pitching and #2 it gives more flexibility on the 40 man.
A missed opportunity where Musgrove was offered to the Twins but they stalled. Musgrove was later traded for peanuts. The Pirates were eager to trade and we had low tier players they would be interested in. There have been a few teams that have been open for trades and still might be if they are only sought out.
Again I don't want to debate trades or who's essential and who's not.

My intent isn't to debate who's essential and who's not. I'm just wondering how you expect to flip the guys you list for meaningfully more "essential" players. I think you admit it yourself when you doubt that Kirilloff -- arguably the most valuable player on your list -- you doubt that even he could be the centerpiece of a Castillo trade -- so why are you criticizing the Twins over it? And the Twins did ship out our 5th OF (Wade) for what we hope becomes our 5th reliever, but there are limits to what you can achieve with deals like that.

 

As for Musgrove, sure it may have been nice to get him, but out of the 28 teams who failed to acquire Musgrove, where do you think the Twins rank in terms of SP need? Our whole starting staff has had better ERAs than Musgrove over each of the last two seasons! Musgrove is an interesting breakout candidate for sure, but despite coming from the Pirates, it's doubtful that he's going to turn into a stud like Cole -- maybe more like Odorizzi upside? And if no other team was willing to give the Pirates a prospect close to Larnach (if that's what the Pirates were after), maybe the Twins were right to not give them that either. FWIW, the top guy the Pirates got back is a CF prospect valued similarly to Celestino at baseballtradevalues.com -- and I'm not sure it's clear that the Pirates would have preferred Celestino and a Twins package (Celestino might be the safer bet but the rebuilding Pirates may prefer to take on more risk for potentially more upside).

 

And Odorizzi and Maeda show that the Twins aren't afraid to make these kind of deals, and they've done pretty well in them, so I'm just not sure of the criticism, at this point. Especially in a thread about Baddoo and Wells.

[terrydactyls]

The Rule 5 draft is like going to Las Vegas. You take some gambles with your own players and with whom you draft. Once in a long while, the slot machine gives you cherries, but most often, you just lose. Se la vie!

[Doctor Gast]

My intent isn't to debate who's essential and who's not. I'm just wondering how you expect to flip the guys you list for meaningfully more "essential" players. I think you admit it yourself when you doubt that Kirilloff -- arguably the most valuable player on your list -- you doubt that even he could be the centerpiece of a Castillo trade -- so why are you criticizing the Twins over it? And the Twins did ship out our 5th OF (Wade) for what we hope becomes our 5th reliever, but there are limits to what you can achieve with deals like that.

 

As for Musgrove, sure it may have been nice to get him, but out of the 28 teams who failed to acquire Musgrove, where do you think the Twins rank in terms of SP need? Our whole starting staff has had better ERAs than Musgrove over each of the last two seasons! Musgrove is an interesting breakout candidate for sure, but despite coming from the Pirates, it's doubtful that he's going to turn into a stud like Cole -- maybe more like Odorizzi upside? And if no other team was willing to give the Pirates a prospect close to Larnach (if that's what the Pirates were after), maybe the Twins were right to not give them that either. FWIW, the top guy the Pirates got back is a CF prospect valued similarly to Celestino at baseballtradevalues.com -- and I'm not sure it's clear that the Pirates would have preferred Celestino and a Twins package (Celestino might be the safer bet but the rebuilding Pirates may prefer to take on more risk for potentially more upside).

 

And Odorizzi and Maeda show that the Twins aren't afraid to make these kind of deals, and they've done pretty well in them, so I'm just not sure of the criticism, at this point. Especially in a thread about Baddoo and Wells.

You misunderstood me again. I'm all in for going after Castillo and I stated that Kiriloff would have to be one of the centerpiece of that trade and the Twins wouldn't suffer that much. I'd hate to give up any top prospects but to gain an ace of Castillo's caliber, I would trade Kiriloff without a doubt.

Pirates pitching staff had been really bad until recently. Pitchers really flourish after leaving there, Cole and Meadows are 2 names that come to mind. So you can't always count on stats, you have to look at underlying conditions. Many teams didn't go after Musgrove because of financial reasons and maybe the others looked at the stats too. I'd take Musgrove over Happ and Shoemaker because he'd be better, cheaper and he could trim down the 40 man. BTW I wouldn't trade Celestino. PIT are deep in CF any way. SD didn't give PIT close to what Larnach was worth. Yes PIT wanted Larnach but they settled for much less. Because SD was proactive.

I agree with you that Odorizzi and Maeda were very good acquisitions. But I believe that in both cases the Twins were approached. TD wanted a SS prospect we had and LAD wanted to unload a discontented Maeda. Neither of these trades helped to manage the 40 man roster which this thread is all about. What I'm saying is that successful teams like LAD, SD, and TD are proactive and Twins need to be much more proactive in trading to improve and manage the 40 man to better compete.

[Rosterman]

If both were offered back to the Twins in the next week, would you take them back?

 

What are the chances that either would get a call to the majors this year? And would they be bonifide candidates to be added to the 40-man in 2022.

 

Of course, both should be taken back, given a chance to shine, and at the very very least would be tradebait add-ons, especially Baddoo.

 

If Buxton is signed longterm, it changes the picture for many a current outfield prospect in the system.

[BSLinPA]

You misunderstood me again. I'm all in for going after Castillo and I stated that Kiriloff would have to be one of the centerpiece of that trade and the Twins wouldn't suffer that much. I'd hate to give up any top prospects but to gain an ace of Castillo's caliber, I would trade Kiriloff without a doubt.

Pirates pitching staff had been really bad until recently. Pitchers really flourish after leaving there, Cole and Meadows are 2 names that come to mind. So you can't always count on stats, you have to look at underlying conditions. Many teams didn't go after Musgrove because of financial reasons and maybe the others looked at the stats too. I'd take Musgrove over Happ and Shoemaker because he'd be better, cheaper and he could trim down the 40 man. BTW I wouldn't trade Celestino. PIT are deep in CF any way. SD didn't give PIT close to what Larnach was worth. Yes PIT wanted Larnach but they settled for much less. Because SD was proactive.

I agree with you that Odorizzi and Maeda were very good acquisitions. But I believe that in both cases the Twins were approached. TD wanted a SS prospect we had and LAD wanted to unload a discontented Maeda. Neither of these trades helped to manage the 40 man roster which this thread is all about. What I'm saying is that successful teams like LAD, SD, and TD are proactive and Twins need to be much more proactive in trading to improve and manage the 40 man to better compete.

 

Pitchers really flourish after leaving there, Cole and Meadows are 2 names that come to mind.

Did you mean Cole and Glasnow??

[Doctor Gast]

Thank you BSLinPA! Yes, was a mental slip. I was called away and couldn't correct my mistake right away.

[sampleSizeOfOne]

I am sad if i don't get to see Baddoo or Wells play at Target (for the home team) but seeing how many players we got on waiver claims in February, then snuck through themselves, i think we came out ahead.

 

And that wouldn't have been possible with a full 40.

 

Time will tell how the decissions turn out. I do hope our losses take their opportunites and run with them.

[Nine of twelve]

 

I'd reduce the # of players by trading away several inferior nonessential players for fewer superior more essential players

 

Here are other trades I'd like to see:

 

Trade away Smelzer to the Dodgers for Kershaw.

Trade away Shoemaker to the Dodgers for Bauer.

Trade away Gordon to the Yankees for LeMahieu.

Trade away Garlick to the Angels for Trout.

 

These trades are similar to what you suggest and about as likely to happen.

[Doctor Gast]

Here are other trades I'd like to see:

 

Trade away Smelzer to the Dodgers for Kershaw.

Trade away Shoemaker to the Dodgers for Bauer.

Trade away Gordon to the Yankees for LeMahieu.

Trade away Garlick to the Angels for Trout.

 

These trades are similar to what you suggest and about as likely to happen.

It's nothing like what I said. When I state superior I don't mean elite, I mean better. Maybe that is what confused you. Read the text again and replace superior with better, later think about it then you can understand the point I'm making.

[Nine of twelve]

 

It's nothing like what I said. When I state superior I don't mean elite, I mean better. Maybe that is what confused you. Read the text again and replace superior with better, later think about it then you can understand the point I'm making.

I confess to exaggerating for the purpose of making my point. The type of trade you suggest would almost certainly make the Twins better but it would almost certainly make the other team worse. Therefore the other team's GM would not make such a trade, especially if the player(s) the Twins offer are likely to become available via waivers or Rule 5 anyway.

[rdehring]

I expect that if 2021 is going to be a more normal year, we will see some of what you all are talking about happen this summer. That is trading a good prospect who is close to being MLB ready to Team X for a prospect of equal or a bit better quality, but further down the minor league ladder.

 

I really liked that the Twins did this in the Maeda trade when they included the AAA outfielder in the package going to the Dodgers. By adding extra players, they got back a catcher who if memory serves was at rookie ball. Unfortunately, these type of moves were pretty much off the table during a shortened season with no minor league games. 

[ashbury]

I did answered the question and to reiterate the main point of this thread- nobody. I'd reduce the # of players by trading away several inferior nonessential players for fewer superior more essential players, leaving more open spots. To repeat I'd try my hardest to not leave any worthwhile player unprotected.

When I think of 5-for-1 trades and the like, one team is trading away a star player because of financial reasons - the player has become too expensive for whatever reason. In return, they generally get 1) an elite prospect, 2) a MLB-ready player to take the star's place on the roster, and 3) a few high-upside but very unproven prospects in the low minors. A few scrub players may be added to the trade, to address roster openings caused by the main parts of the trade.

 

In your terminology, there is just one "inferior" player (guy #2) included in the package, the rest are unproven.

 

Can you provide examples of trades along the lines you describe, where a team separates the wheat from the chaff and bundles the chaff for something worthwhile?

[old nurse]

 

When I think of 5-for-1 trades and the like, one team is trading away a star player because of financial reasons - the player has become too expensive for whatever reason. In return, they generally get 1) an elite prospect, 2) a MLB-ready player to take the star's place on the roster, and 3) a few high-upside but very unproven prospects in the low minors. A few scrub players may be added to the trade, to address roster openings caused by the main parts of the trade.

 

In your terminology, there is just one "inferior" player (guy #2) included in the package, the rest are unproven.
 

Can you provide examples of trades along the lines you describe, where a team separates the wheat from the chaff and bundles the chaff for something worthwhile?

Any trade trade Detroit made with the Marlins.

[Otto von Ballpark]

 

If both were offered back to the Twins in the next week, would you take them back?

There would be no real cost to taking back Wells and Baddoo -- just $50k each (after we received $100k each for them from Baltimore and Detroit, respectively), and neither would have to go on the Twins 40-man roster this season.

 

Of course, they'd also have to clear waivers (with Rule 5 restrictions attached) before the Twins could get them back.

[Dman]

I think what I am hoping the Twins can do is similar to what the Yankee's did to us.  We got Cave who they didn't have room for on the 40 man and we gave them a pitcher (Luis Gil) with the potential to throw 100MPH and who wouldn't need to be added for three or four more years.  The Twins also kind of did that when they traded Lewin Diaz who needed to be added to the 40 man for Romo and had them throw in Vallimont who was a couple of years from needing to be added.  Those are types of trades that I think can bring back the most value for a Smeltzer or Cave.

 

The 4 for 1 or 5 for 1 trades are hard to pull off and as stated earlier in the post generally require not only throwing in prospects but also generally picking up salary as well.  The Twins generally are not in a place to do that very often.  The hope is they can still get value for guys that don't fit as well as they used to. I think the best way for them to do that is grab guys that they can develop since the farm is pretty top heavy as it is.

 

 For guys like Cave and Smeltzer to have any value they need some level of success in the big leagues or a team needs to see their potential to facilitate a trade otherwise as others have said they will just wait it out until those players are waived.  The guys we are talking about live on the bottom of the roster not the top so only so much you can do to gain value.

 

Again trading big time prospects carries risk and generally means you have take on more burdensome salary requirements.  Doesn't mean it can't and shouldn't be done when it makes sense but it has to be carefully thought out because like any budget having one thing means not having another..

 

Having said all that there are a lot of pitchers that will likely need rule V protection next year and while there are a few spots that seem easy to drop from the 40 man there aren't many IMO.  This coming offseason is going to be very challenging for the FO so I hope the decisions they make are good ones.  You can't keep them all so hopefully they keep the best ones.

[rdehring]

 

I think what I am hoping the Twins can do is similar to what the Yankee's did to us.  We got Cave who they didn't have room for on the 40 man and we gave them a pitcher (Luis Gil) with the potential to throw 100MPH and who wouldn't need to be added for three or four more years.  The Twins also kind of did that when they traded Lewin Diaz who needed to be added to the 40 man for Romo and had them throw in Vallimont who was a couple of years from needing to be added.  Those are types of trades that I think can bring back the most value for a Smeltzer or Cave.

 

The 4 for 1 or 5 for 1 trades are hard to pull off and as stated earlier in the post generally require not only throwing in prospects but also generally picking up salary as well.  The Twins generally are not in a place to do that very often.  The hope is they can still get value for guys that don't fit as well as they used to. I think the best way for them to do that is grab guys that they can develop since the farm is pretty top heavy as it is.

 

 For guys like Cave and Smeltzer to have any value they need some level of success in the big leagues or a team needs to see their potential to facilitate a trade otherwise as others have said they will just wait it out until those players are waived.  The guys we are talking about live on the bottom of the roster not the top so only so much you can do to gain value.

 

Again trading big time prospects carries risk and generally means you have take on more burdensome salary requirements.  Doesn't mean it can't and shouldn't be done when it makes sense but it has to be carefully thought out because like any budget having one thing means not having another..

 

Having said all that there are a lot of pitchers that will likely need rule V protection next year and while there are a few spots that seem easy to drop from the 40 man there aren't many IMO.  This coming offseason is going to be very challenging for the FO so I hope the decisions they make are good ones.  You can't keep them all so hopefully they keep the best ones.

Great comment Dman. And I remain hopeful that the Twins will make several trades like the Diaz trade you mentioned, which was a good example. Take Romo out of that deal and it still is the type of deal that needs to be made come July when you know a decent prospect X won't fit on the coming winter's 40-man roster. Better to get a lottery ticket from A ball than nothing come winter.

[sampleSizeOfOne]

I believe our front office is not averse to trading prospects for a star in a role that we need.

 

Wasn't there a few summers back where we wanted a Mets ace, and were basically told the price included Buxton, and predicably that went nowhere. They ended up being traded to Toronto for a package we could have matched and beaten.

 

 

[Otto von Ballpark]

 

Wasn't there a few summers back where we wanted a Mets ace, and were basically told the price included Buxton, and predicably that went nowhere. They ended up being traded to Toronto for a package we could have matched and beaten.

I think you are mixing up a couple rumors.

 

It was a Syndergaard rumor in 2019 that included Buxton, and neither was traded.

 

But that same summer, the Mets acquired Stroman from Toronto for a price many fans thought their teams could have beaten. I don't remember if it was ever reported what the Jays may have asked the Twins for.

[nicksaviking]

 

Stressing another point, we often hold onto players when are worth something but have no clear path for making the team until they are worthless. Case in point Nick Gordon. I would've traded him at least 2 yrs. ago when he was worth something. Now I don't think you could give him away unless he has a great 2021, which I hope he does.

 

But even two years ago, Gordon's value was minimal. Sure, you could have gotten something, maybe a middling reliever at the trade deadline, but the team already had Lewin Diaz filling that same role of getting that middling reliever. Seems to me you'd only want one Sergio Romo at most. Might as well play your hand with the other 'barely-a-prospect' player and see if he breaks out.

[Doctor Gast]

I confess to exaggerating for the purpose of making my point. The type of trade you suggest would almost certainly make the Twins better but it would almost certainly make the other team worse. Therefore the other team's GM would not make such a trade, especially if the player(s) the Twins offer are likely to become available via waivers or Rule 5 anyway.

If you read my other posts, you'd know that I wouldn't offer worthless players in a trade. I agree with you that GMs wouldn't be interested unless they see something that others don't. To rephrase myself, I'd trade 2 or more lesser value players for a greater valued player. Ideally from an excess area for an area of need. Teams do that all the time. That is how I'd help make room and improve the quality of the 40 man.

[Doctor Gast]

But even two years ago, Gordon's value was minimal. Sure, you could have gotten something, maybe a middling reliever at the trade deadline, but the team already had Lewin Diaz filling that same role of getting that middling reliever. Seems to me you'd only want one Sergio Romo at most. Might as well play your hand with the other 'barely-a-prospect' player and see if he breaks out.

I dicovered BTV (baseball trade values) last year, I like to go on there and play around w/ trades. You can argue some on some trade values because we all (including teams) have our biases and over value some players. BTV IMO give unbias trade values based on talent, years of control and salary. Gordon trade value last year was a little over 5, I imagine it was a bit higher 2 years ago, now he's valued at around 1. Like you know Gordon has a pedigree, was drafted high and many fans had high hopes for him that could give him some value to some teams. Normally I wouldn`t trade him one to one, I'd include him with other higher valued players.

[sampleSizeOfOne]

 

I think you are mixing up a couple rumors.

 

It was a Syndergaard rumor in 2019 that included Buxton, and neither was traded.

 

But that same summer, the Mets acquired Stroman from Toronto for a price many fans thought their teams could have beaten. I don't remember if it was ever reported what the Jays may have asked the Twins for.

Yes i was.

 

Thanks, and good job breaking it into component rumors.

 

[terrydactyls]

Dr. Gast

 

Below are minor league statistics for two players in the Twins farm system. Both had played four seasons and reached Fort Myers. Both are outfielders. Which would you protect?

 

Player A Player B

HR 21 21

RBI 131 93

SB 61 47

AVG .274 .249

OBP .346 .357

OPS .746 .780

[terrydactyls]

Dr. Gast

Below are minor league statistics for two players in the Twins farm system. Both had played four seasons and reached Fort Myers. Both are outfielders. Which would you protect?

Player A Player B

HR 21 21

RBI 131 93

SB 61 47

AVG .274 .249

OBP .346 .357

OPS .746 .780

I tried to make it look pretty but failed.

[Doctor Gast]

Dr. Gast

Below are minor league statistics for two players in the Twins farm system. Both had played four seasons and reached Fort Myers. Both are outfielders. Which would you protect?

Player A Player B

HR 21 21

RBI 131 93

SB 61 47

AVG .274 .249

OBP .346 .357

OPS .746 .780

If you read my posts, you would know. Both, of course I'd have to look at underlying conditions. If you knew me, you'd know I'm not a slave to stats.

[twinfan]

We have many prospects and cannot protect them all but Rule 5 players that become stars are relatively rare though they do hurt when it happens. While I liked Baddoo, it is way too early to say he will be a star. After the first month, teams will start to learn his weaknesses and begin to exploit them. If he will be a good player, he will then have to make the adjustments to be one. He may do so and I hope he does- even if only because his name is fun to announce and I have done some PA announcing. But he hasn't played above A ball so we'll see.

[twinfan]

 

Dr. Gast

Below are minor league statistics for two players in the Twins farm system. Both had played four seasons and reached Fort Myers. Both are outfielders. Which would you protect?

Player A Player B
HR 21 21
RBI 131 93
SB 61 47
AVG .274 .249
OBP .346 .357
OPS .746 .780

 

If, after 4 minor league seasons they are only at Ft Myers, something may be wrong with the team's system. I may look to trade both or protect only 1.