Trade Deadline Thread: How Far Would You Go to Add an Ace?

I don't know why they stopped there.  Why didn't they ask for Kiriloff, Lewis, Garver, Buxton, Kepler, Polanco and Berrios along with cash to sweeten the deal?    Hey, I'd like to get the guy.   After all, with their current ERA;s he would fit nicely in the 5th spot if we go to a 6 man rotation.   Berrios 2.94, Odorizzi 3.84, Gibson, 4.10, Pineda 4.30, Sydergaard 4.33 (NL by the way so maybe he falls to the 6th spot)  Perez 4.38..... I am kidding.   I would like to get him but Kiriloff, Enlow and maybe Gordon is as far as I would go since I liked Stroman just as well and a lesser package got him.  If I am a Mets fan or owner of course I would ask for the moon because they have Stroman now that would help fill out the rotation for next year.   Plus they are not out of it for this year either.   Mostly what I am saying for the Twins sake.  Is this really an ace?   10 quality starts out of 20.    It would be the essence of buying high on Syndergaard and selling low on the prospects.    Go get Lynn.

I'm thinking Minor is the way to go here. Or relievers.

I would love an ace, but Mets seem to want to buy low (they won the Stroman trade) and sell very high.  Mets have a new GM who wants to prove NY can get what they want.  Work on relievers. but I bet prices come down today or tomorrow from the selling teams.  Greinke would be nice, but Twins are on his no trade list for a reason.  Problem is that the Twins need relievers known for their control as we all have seen that umps swallow their right arms, if the relievers are known to have control issues, against the Yankees.  May and Duffey have the curveballs that work well against the Yankees, but they hang way too many of them.  Maybe Jake McGee and Givens or Bradley (they would not cost an arm or a leg) would work.  All have stuff, just on off years, but we all know how fast relievers can turn things around.  Might touch LeClerc, but control may be too big an issue and he comes with a lot of control to sell very low on.  

Maybe because the Twins farm system is good, a lot of these sellers will seem to think they can set a high price and make a point that if the twins will not meet the price to sell elsewhere.  Toronto seems to have made a decision to sell Stroman to an NL club, so if he works well they would not have to see him also.  

Good luck, but the Twins have to make deals for at least 2 relievers if not 3 down this road.

I want Syndergaard but not even close to that price. I would consider trading Lewis or Kirilloff for him but not both and definitely not Buxton or really any other of our young building blocks players

I don't honestly believe either of those were the Mets' final offer. That was probably their "ask high" starting point, but it's an easier sell for Twins fans when you put it the way LaVelle did. 

This way, when fans like me get frustrated at yet another year the FO sat on its hands, other fans can say 'WOULD YOU REALLY GIVE UP BUXTON?' 

I don't want to pay a "Archer" price based on potential instead of production. 

The Mets are really taking it to us. First they take two games that really, REALLY hurt us after a successful series against Cleveland, then they take the starter, Stroman, that we really needed, and now they want to take Buxton from us along with our best prospects. I think we need to just stay away from the Mets!

Wow, Mets asked for Buxton in the Syndegaard deal? Seriously that's just wrong on so many levels.

 

And the Blue Jays' asking price for Stroman demanded that one of either Lewis or Kiriloff be included? And then they took the garbage pile prospects from the Mets? I don't get it.

 

MLBTradeRumors article says Twins have pivoted to look for more bullpen arms now. Okay, okay, let's get some already and play ball!

Buxton?  No.  I'm going to do you a favor and forget we ever had this talk.

 

 

if that was the ask, Falvey was right to hang up the phone. The Mets won't unload Thor with that type of ask. 

 

I'm guessing prices will come down. You're starting to see it with the Stroman and Romo trades. It should be pretty clear to the Met's brass that Thor won't get them that much.

 

As for what I'd trade. I'm not sure. It really depends if the FO thinks they can fix him, because right now, Thor is not an ace. He was an ace. If they are confident that they can fix him, sure, I'd part with one of the big 3 as a headliner to bring him here.

I'd like an ace, but I don't know that one is available this year. Give me a reasonable Syndergaard deal; I'd be OK with Robbie Ray or Zack Greinke, but all of them would be slotting in behind Berrios.

I know it should be an obvious point but SYNDERGAARD IS NOT AN ACE.

Consider me skeptical over the "Mets want Buxton!!1!" report from LENIII. It's LENIII.

 

I know I'm in the minority, but I'd deal Lewis before he becomes Gordon.

Consider me skeptical over the "Mets want Buxton!!1!" report from LENIII. It's LENIII.

 

I know I'm in the minority, but I'd deal Lewis before he becomes Gordon.

If we take LEN's reports at face value, then MLB GMs are no different than friends and family in fantasy football leagues.

 

Consider me skeptical over the "Mets want Buxton!!1!" report from LENIII. It's LENIII.

 

I know I'm in the minority, but I'd deal Lewis before he becomes Gordon.

 

LEN3 is the best PR person the Twins have though.

 

I don't honestly believe either of those were the Mets' final offer. That was probably their "ask high" starting point, but it's an easier sell for Twins fans when you put it the way LaVelle did. 

This way, when fans like me get frustrated at yet another year the FO sat on its hands, other fans can say 'WOULD YOU REALLY GIVE UP BUXTON?' 

 

I'm skeptical that it was, but their new GM seems completely inept at his job, so maybe it really was their best and final.

 

I've been critical of this FO, but maybe they got a read on the guy (or maybe dealt with him during his time as an agent), and realized it just wasn't going to happen.

 

I'd rather they back off of pipe dreams and focus on other more attainable things.

 

Mostly what I am saying for the Twins sake.  Is this really an ace?   10 quality starts out of 20.    It would be the essence of buying high on Syndergaard and selling low on the prospects.

Always difficult to know with pitchers, but I'm pretty confident this is the lowest Syndergaard's trade value is going to get. This would be buying low, in my eyes. *Assuming the asking price comes down, which I believe will.

 

I know it should be an obvious point but SYNDERGAARD IS NOT AN ACE.

I think you'd have been shouting the same thing about Gerrit Cole in his last year with the Pirates. Look at him now. Syndergaard has one of the most elite arsenals in the game. Put him in a situation to be comfortable and give him the information he needs to succeed and you've got an ace on your hands.

 

Always difficult to know with pitchers, but I'm pretty confident this is the lowest Syndergaard's trade value is going to get. This would be buying low, in my eyes.

 

I think you'd have been shouting the same thing about Gerrit Cole in his last year with the Pirates. Look at him now. Syndergaard has one of the most elite arsenals in the game. Put him in a situation to be comfortable and give him the information he needs to succeed and you've got an ace on your hands.

Precisely.

 

 

What I would be willing to give up for a top tier pitcher is largely dependent on the years of team control for that pitcher. I’m not giving up Lewis for less than 3 years of the pitcher in return. The Twins can’t afford to make trades like that unless the financial strategy changes drastically.

 

Now other prospects are more expendable because of depth or talent. But the Twins always need to give a little consideration to the future when trading prospects.

I'm skeptical that it was, but their new GM seems completely inept at his job, so maybe it really was their best and final.

 

Most people seem to think the Mets did all right in the Stroman trade, even if the timing was a bit of a surprise. The Vargas salary dump seems fine. The deGrom extension is all right in its early stages.

 

They did poorly in the Cano trade for sure, although that was basically just a massive overpay for a closer.

I saw a quote stating the Mets GM was basically a kindergartner practicing finger-painting when it comes to these trade negotiations.

 

I fully understand starting at a high price, but asking for Buxton seems downright childish.  

 

If he asked for all the Twins top 100 prospects I'd understand (it wouldn't get the deal done obviously), but asking for a guy who is a key piece in a team looking to contend for a championship just seems more likely to stop a conversation then start one.

 

Always difficult to know with pitchers, but I'm pretty confident this is the lowest Syndergaard's trade value is going to get. This would be buying low, in my eyes. *Assuming the asking price comes down, which I believe will.

 

I think you'd have been shouting the same thing about Gerrit Cole in his last year with the Pirates. Look at him now. Syndergaard has one of the most elite arsenals in the game. Put him in a situation to be comfortable and give him the information he needs to succeed and you've got an ace on your hands.   

For every Cole and Verlander there is a Darvish and an Archer but that's the risk/reward part of the game.    Syndergaard hasn't been a top 10 Cy Young since 2016 but has been very good.   His year so far hasn't been that great and it is hard to argue he has been as good as Stroman who just went for not that much.   My point is Thor's trade value SHOULD be at its lowest but their reported ask would reflect value beyond his highest.     Your caveat of "Assuming the asking price comes down, which I believe will."  changes the whole dynamic.    Buxton plus top prospects would be buying high while selling our assets low.    If the asking price comes down to Kiriloff or Lewis plus lower prospects that changes everything.     Everyone here would like to get Thor and many would be ok with a slight overpay.    If the current asking price doesn't come down would you want to pay that to get him and would you consider that a reflection of a low point in Thor's value?     If the ask does come down then we have a different conversation.   I don't think the Mets want to part with him and are not considering the "lowest Syndergaard's trade value is going to get."  part of the equation.   They are asking what we would hope the Twins would ask for if someone came to us now wanting Berrios.    I get a bit attached to top prospects and don't like giving them up but it certainly projects like at least one of them will be blocked or one of the current guys we like will be expendable so I have come around to the idea of giving up some of the young talent for a guy like Thor.     If their ask DOES come down I hope we can pull the trigger.    What would you be willing to give up?

I'd trade Sano or Garver (and two second tier prospects) for Syndegaard, but Buxton is off-limits.  The Twins win when Buck plays, and lose when he is out of the line-up.

I wouldn't give up much for Syndegaard. Too injury prone. I'm fine with them turning down bad deals. They need a starter and two relievers to help this year. That would be too expensive.

I don't think any prospect should be off limits. Our window is now, and we should be willing to trade long-term value for short-term success (as long as it's not the type of lopsided trade that LEN cites).

As far as whether Syndergaard is an ace, I'll leave that to the Twins to evaluate. They have a lot more information than I do, and they're in a better position to analyze why his results this year don't match his past.

 

I'd trade Sano or Garver (and two second tier prospects) for Syndegaard, but Buxton is off-limits.  The Twins win when Buck plays, and lose when he is out of the line-up.

Really? Garver is putting up near MVP numbers as a catcher this year. No way he should be traded if the WS is at all something we want to get to.

 

I don't think any prospect should be off limits. Our window is now, and we should be willing to trade long-term value for short-term success (as long as it's not the type of lopsided trade that LEN cites).
 

The window is just opening. It could be open for a good long while, especially if there is a steady stream of MLB ready prospects in the pipeline, which is not quite yet the case. Next year it might be, but not if you trade away all the best ones.

 

 

 

I would top out at Kirloff, Garver, Romero, and Duran as my finalbest Offer for Syndegaard and Ramos. Your going to have to give up one of your top two prospects, and a major league starter to acquire Syndegaard that is top of rotation guy. Mets can wait to the offseason, time is of the essence for Twins, it's the penance you pay for waiting this long. Price of Poker is rough someone is going to pay the Piper. Twins want Syndergaard, they are going to feel some pain from the trade. Garvers a stud with the bat it takes type of player to garner a controllable starter that can strike people out. Romero only top pitching prospect we have that is major league ready it experience. I dont if i would do it admitting full well that is a boatload of talent to lose. Kirloff and Romero , Poppen for Stromen if Mets wanted to flip him. None of it would likely move Mets to do deal with Twins. I don't think Mets really want to move Syndergaard.

I really hope this is sarcasm because there is no way in h*ll I'm packaging garver for anyone. We may be sitting on one of the best offensive catchers in the league who has also improved defensively. You don't trade that.

 

If the ask does come down then we have a different conversation.   I don't think the Mets want to part with him and are not considering the "lowest Syndergaard's trade value is going to get."  part of the equation.   They are asking what we would hope the Twins would ask for if someone came to us now wanting Berrios.    I get a bit attached to top prospects and don't like giving them up but it certainly projects like at least one of them will be blocked or one of the current guys we like will be expendable so I have come around to the idea of giving up some of the young talent for a guy like Thor.     If their ask DOES come down I hope we can pull the trigger.    What would you be willing to give up?

Reports have indicated the Mets are definitely interested in parting with Syndergaard, but Jon Heyman recently reported that it seems more likely Zack Wheeler gets traded. That makes a lot of sense, since Wheeler is set to hit free agency at the end of this season.

 

But, let me answer your question anyway. I already said in the article the highest guy I'd feel comfortable potentially parting with is Alex Kirilloff. How do we get there? Since they're asking for Buxton, I'd respond by letting them know they'd have to throw in Wheeler/Seth Lugo and Pete Alonso in addition to Thor. Basically give them a dose of their own medicine in asking for something unrealistic. Of course the Mets would not do that trade, but I think that counter offer puts the Twins back in the driver's seat, now the Mets are on the defensive.

 

From there, I'd make the counter offer of Trevor Larnach, Ryan Jeffers and Nick Gordon for Syndergaard. It's entirely possible the Mets just stop responding to messages at that point, and I'd be OK with that, but it's also possible they'd counter with asking to step it up from Larnach to Kirilloff and boom, you've led them where you were trying to get to in the first place.

 

Of course this is all just hypothetical speculation and the hidden element is we don't know what other teams are willing to offer the Mets or truly how motivated they are to move Thor. 

 

.I think you'd have been shouting the same thing about Gerrit Cole in his last year with the Pirates. Look at him now. Syndergaard has one of the most elite arsenals in the game. Put him in a situation to be comfortable and give him the information he needs to succeed and you've got an ace on your hands.

 

I really want Syndergaard and think he can become an ace, but I don't think he is an ace right now. I'd guess if other clubs were willing to pay for future ace potential, he'd already be dealt. I'm not sure who, if any team will get him, but my money is on nobody meeting anything close to the Mets asking price. 

 

Not that it would impact my desire for Syndergaard, but I really liked Mickey Calloway as Cleveland's pitching coach, so the overall regression of the Mets' staff does have me a bit concerned. Maybe it's all the organizational dysfunction, or was there some kind of gimmick last year that the rest of the league figured out?