Centerfielders

by snolls on Jan 12, 2008 11:47 PM EST Comment 15 comments

If we trade Santana for Melky, Ellsbury or Crisp, its pretty clear that to me that they will start in CF. It is less clear what happens if we trade for Gomez or, in some crazy change, don't trade Santana.

The Twins are much more cautious with their prospects than the Mets, and it seems to work. Gardenhire has also proven to be uncomfortable with very young players. Will/should the Twins start Gomez in AAA if he doesn't have a great spring? He has not yet shown that he can hit in the show or even dominate in the Minors.

2006 (age 20): AA 430 AB, .281/.349/.423 41 SB
2007 (21): AAA 140 AB, .286/.363/.414 17 SB
MLB 125 AB, .232/.288/.394 12 SB

So he can clearly burn on the basepaths, and even seems to have a decent ability to draw walks. I realize that he will be another year older, with the experience that comes along, but if he had been in the Twins system the whole time, I would be sure that he would be at AAA until at least the all-star game.

What should the Twins do? I don't know if anyone will agree with me, but I propose the following, at least for discussion purposes. The Twins put Gomez at AAA (unless he has a spectacular spring) and start Pridie in CF. Pridie is not going to be a strength, but solid defense would be enough for me. He and Everett would be our only two weak spots in the lineup, which is an improvement over last year, and we have better pinch hitters. At the all-star break we swap the two. Gomez gets 80 games of practice/instruction, and they are probably less concerned about damaging Pridie by bringing him along too quickly. Any thougths?

Other options:
1.Try to have Monroe or Young play CF for half a year.
2. Sign Lofton or Patterson. I like the idea of Patterson, but I doubt he and the twins could agree on length. We only need him for 1 year.
3. Trade for Crisp - which prospect(s) would get it done?
4. Start Gomez from the beginning. Expectations from fans may demand this anyway, and Gomez might get upset if he gets "demoted".
5. Put Punto or Casilla there. Casilla has the speed to cover some ground, and Gardy loves playinig Punto.
6. Other?

0 recs | Comment 15 comments

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

I like signing Lofton for 1 year no matter what...

I was in the Cameron camp, but now that he's gone, Lofton makes the most sense. He can hit leadoff and he'll only require 1 year, and his OPS should be pretty solid. Then we can compete with Santana, and if we deal him, we can give whoever time, or easily push Lofton out, or even deal him.

I don't want any part of Patterson. He had a sub-.700 OPS last year. Given that Everett is going to do that next year, we don't need 2 of those in the lineup. I'd rather have Pridie starting that signing Patterson.

by djskilbr on Jan 13, 2008 12:38 AM EST reply actions 0 recs

'08 centerfield

I see Pridie and Monroe manning center in '08. Young and Cuddyer should be at the corners most of the time, with Kubel spelling each for relief. Pridie is someone I am excited to see how he's developed. Monroe would only be a filler if Pridie falters against left handers, for Monroe has a career average of .303 against lefties.
If they do aquire Gomez in a Santana deal, he should start in AA till he proves beyoud the league IMO.

by Jallen on Jan 13, 2008 12:46 AM EST reply actions 0 recs

I too like the thought of Lofton

I think he'd be a fine fit for the Twins on a one-year deal.

However, Pridie really played well in '07 and I've heard a lot of positive things of him since he was acquired.

He might be a reasonable option in center field. I'm still a Denard Span supporter (huuuuh! dun, dun, dun!) and he really played well as the season winded down last year. I think he'd be a decent option in center field as well, especially since he has strong defense and although he doesn't utilize his speed on the basepaths, he can cover a lot of ground. That could come in handy as Michael Cuddyer's range is poor.

Hold the backlash for me supporting him, please. :)

by Joshs Thoughts on Jan 13, 2008 1:27 AM EST reply actions 0 recs

I like Lofton, then Crisp

I'm with you on starting Gomez at AAA. The Mets rushed him to the majors, and he needs to show a bit more with the bat to contribute at the MLB level.

I see Pridie much the same way. Problem is, there's only one AAA CF slot open...

Lofton for one year would be my first choice. Solid production, good veteran presence. Much better than Patterson. My second choice would be Crisp. AA prospect should be enough to get him. Even if he hits as poorly as the last two years, his defense will help us a lot. Good upside if he can return to his Cleveland form.

Bottom line, if we complete the Mets trade, I look to sign Lofton, trade for Crisp as a backup. Let Gomez, Pridie and even Span battle it out for the backup CF spot in ST.

by Adam Peterson on Jan 13, 2008 8:40 AM EST reply actions 0 recs

Crisp

Put me solidly in the Coco Crisp camp. I can't help but think that the Red Sox and Yankees are both staying in this just to make sure the other doesn't get him for cheep. But I think that it'll be the Mets in the end. I don't think Gomez is ready and feel he and Pridie and Span, for that matter, could all use another half-season in AAA, at least.

But Crisp is the best defensive CF in baseball and is only signed to two more years at reasonable prices (considering how much space is available). I think his offense will get better. But he is certainly my choice.

I also think that Smith and Epstein have been using each other in this strategy all along, and maybe because of that we can get Crisp for a mid-range prospect.

by SethSpeaks on Jan 13, 2008 10:24 AM EST reply actions 0 recs

We Need a Lead-Off Guy.....

Ellsbury, Crisp, Melkey could all lead off.

Would I trust thrusting Gomez into the lead-off spot? No. So then it's the matter of who bats 9th...Everett or Gomez. It would be dead air to have Gomex/Everett share the last two spots in the order.

Not that Gomez couldn't bat lead-off, but he may be earning his stripes, so to speak, a la Alexi last season.

Is Pridie an option for center and lead-off? Well, he would be no worse, PROBABLY, than Jason Tyner, basically the guy he should be replacing in the Twins system...available if someone goes dowm, plays those afternoon games giving someone a rest.

Even Ellsbury...trusting the lead-off position to a rookie is a major gamble...if you plan on playing competitive baseball. If you are rebuilding and hopefully just want to stay in the hunt (or 81-81 break even), then you can do anything you wish...like start five youngsters, a rookie in center field, and get your $2 million plus out of Punto.

check out Twinkies autograph collection at www.TwinsCards.com

by twintown on Jan 13, 2008 12:22 PM EST reply actions 0 recs

Two comparable deals

If the Twins go for the Mets deal, they are officially rebuilding. So I don't favor it. I would say the same thing if they go for the version of the Red Sox deal that involves Ellsbury but no proven major league starter. Unless the Red Sox cave, I will assume that deal is not what the Twins will end up with either.

The two deals on the table that allow them to play for this year and the future are as follows:

Red Sox

Lester = #2 starter on this staff until Liriano is fully recovered, #3 after Liriano is fully back in 2009.

Crisp = Capable lead-off hitter and good center fielder for the next three years. Nothing too special, but at least as much offense as Castillo (lower OBP, higher SLG).

Lowrie = Second baseman of the future, would challenge Harris in ST but probably go to AAA all year to work on his defense.

Masterson = Future competition for Boof/Slowey/Blackburn/Perkins/Duensing.

Yankees

Hughes = # 1 starter on this staff right now, second #1 starter when Liriano ramps up to full workload in 2009.

Cabrera = Limited lead-off guy but OK bat and OK glove. Definitely a downgrade at lead-off versus Castillo/Bartlett. Probably would be challenged by Pridie for playing time against tough righties.

Jackson = Future center fielder for 2010. Five-tool player who at the very least will platoon with Pridie/Span/Roberts/Martin/Benson/Revere for a long time.

Marquez = See Masterson.

Let's call the minor leaguers a wash and focus on the major leaguers.

I rate Hughes a notch above Lester. Lester has some upside yet, but Hughes is a future ace.

I rate Crisp and Cabrera as equals, but Cabrera is a better player hitting down in the order, and a marginal CF who's arm somewhat makes up for a lack of range.

So the Sox deal gives the Twins an above average starter and an average CF/lead-off hitter. The Yankees deal gives the Twins an ace and a below average CF and leadoff hitter. It comes down to which is more important, a stud starter or a better CF and lead-off hitter. Considering that Pridie is a decent guy to fill in and a defensive replacement, I now favor the Yankee deal.

If the Sox replaced Crisp with Ellsbury, the tables would be turned. That might be why the Twins are waiting: When the Yankees pulled out, it left the Red Sox. Smith wanted to give the Yankees a chance to reconsider and, now that they have, they're coming to a point where they can offer better value than the Sox. Perhaps Smith gives the Sox one last chance to comply with his demands. If not, he goes with the Yankees deal.

"You're thinking too much. Just have fun." -- Bennie "The Jet" Rodriguez in Sandlot

by cmathewson on Jan 13, 2008 1:08 PM EST reply actions 0 recs

That to me though...

is completely neglecting the value of Lowrie/one of Masterson or Bowden in a deal.

As the deal that's been reported most is Lester/Crisp/Lowrie/Masterson or Bowden.

Heck, some reports have us also getting Kalish with that.

That to me is much better than a Hughes/Melky/Marquez deal.

Masterson and Bowden are both better than Marquez.
Crisp is better than Melky, at least to me.
And Hughes certainly isn't better than Lester to the point of negating Lowrie.

I'd take that Sox package and not think twice.

by djskilbr on Jan 13, 2008 3:12 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Jackson + Marquez = Lowrie + Masterson

Well, not quite, but it's pretty close. And Jackson would be more valuable in this organization than Lowrie. He would become the only right handed hitting outfield prospect besides Benson in the whole system. Whereas the Twins have Casilla and Tolbert and Hughes and Kelly and Thompson.

"You're thinking too much. Just have fun." -- Bennie "The Jet" Rodriguez in Sandlot

by cmathewson on Jan 13, 2008 3:22 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

I don't think so...

First, we don't need another RH OF really. We have 2 right now in Young/Cuddyer. And I like Casilla, but Lowrie is worlds better than him to me.

But anyway, I have not seen that they've offered Jackson at all. I've seen Marquez and a lower prospect, not Jackson/Tabata.

by djskilbr on Jan 13, 2008 4:54 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

If that's true

Then yes, the Red Sox trade is the best.

Just as I said in my post a week ago: These names are all hypothetical because we really don't know who's been offered.

But I agree with one thing: If the Yankees don't offer two prospects--a position player and a pitcher in the package comparable to Lowrie/Masterson--then the Red Sox win. Hughes isn't so much better than Lester that it would mean one A- prospect (Lowrie) taken out of the deal. Jackson is the closest position player to Lowrie in their system, imo. And the Yankees have said they do not want to part with Tabata. So...

Who knows what the Yankees have offered? From the sound of things, there's a lot of internal conflict. Hank was for the deal, now he says he's against it. Cashman has been against the deal from the start, I think. But if they offered Jackson and Marquez along with Hughes and Cabrera, I would take it.

I disagree that the Twins don't need right-handed hitting outfield prospects. Their AAA team will likely be all left handed in the outfield (Deeds, Span, and Roberts). The top three outfield prospects in the system are left handed (Revere, Parmalee, and Martin). And you don't base your minor league depth on your major league roster. Anything can happen. Cuddyer or Young could get hurt. Cuddyer could walk or be trade bait in a couple of years. Who knows?

"You're thinking too much. Just have fun." -- Bennie "The Jet" Rodriguez in Sandlot

by cmathewson on Jan 13, 2008 5:11 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Everyone...

...rates Lowrie very high, does anyone have any knowledge of what happened to him in the AFL this year? He finished with a .163AVE in 98 at bats...which was somewhat shocking after his excelent season in AA and AAA.

by roger on Jan 13, 2008 6:02 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

I think it's funny that...

nobody even pays attention to what Hank Steinbrenner says anymore. He recently just said that the team is "leaning away" from making a deal, and still nobody believes it. Especially as it was just a week after he felt confident that they'd land Santana and that the team was "leaning toward" making a deal.

I love it. He's a schmuck and he's gone back on his words so many times that nobody takes what he says seriously.

by Joshs Thoughts on Jan 13, 2008 1:15 PM EST reply actions 0 recs

Lofton

I'll take Lofton with 2/3 of the playing time and either Pridie or Monroe getting the other 1/3.

by doofus04 on Jan 13, 2008 2:19 PM EST reply actions 0 recs

Plahying for this year / later

Lets say our dream deals are Ellsbury/Lester/Lowrie/Masterson or Hughes/Cabrera/Kennedy. These would both be great deals (that aren't supposed to be possible), but they wouldn't be enough to make me think we are the favorite in our division this year. To be really good this year, no matter whom we trade Santana for, is going to depend on 4 young pitchers really succeeding. This is a gamble, no matter who they are.

That said, I also don't think that making the trade with the Mets means "playing for the future". Again, we're obviously not the favorite, but I think that we still try to get Crisp if we can. We will have plenty to spend, and we will be competetive enough to be exciting, though making the playoffs will obviously depend on consistent production from the young players. Lets say our lineup is this:
CF Crisp / Pridie
DH Kubel / Monroe
C Mauer / Redmond
LF Young / Monroe
1B Morneau / Cuddyer / Lamb
RF Cuddyer / Monroe
3B Lamb / Punto
2B Harris / Punto
SS Everret / Punto
Rotation: Baker/Bonser/Liriano/Slowey/Mulvey
Bullpen: Blackburn/Reyes/Rincon/Gurrier/Crain/Neshek/Nathan

That's a team that would be fun to watch. And it would be extremely cheap.
The question after that becomes where to get all of our prospects in the game.

by snolls on Jan 13, 2008 6:27 PM EST reply actions 0 recs