caulfield12 Posted December 13, 2008 Share Posted December 13, 2008 (edited) Trade Delmon Young for Jonathan Broxton. Trade minor leaguers/spare parts and/or take on salary for 3B Garrett Atkins or Kouzmanoff. Or simply sign Tyler Wigginton. They could also move Cuddyer back to 3B and sign Dunn/Burrell/Rivera/Griffey, etc. to play LF and share time with Jason Kubel as DH. Decide where to put Cuddyer, LF or RF, and leave him there....probably LF, with Span in RF. Much simpler than fixing the White Sox issues at 3B, 2B, CF and at least one slot in the starting rotation. Edited December 13, 2008 by caulfield12 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kenny Hates Prospects Posted December 13, 2008 Share Posted December 13, 2008 QUOTE (caulfield12 @ Dec 13, 2008 -> 07:07 AM) Trade Delmon Young for Jonathan Broxton. I don't think that would be possible. The Dodgers already have a crowded OF and still want to bring back Manny, plus they just lost Saito due to injury. And why would the Twins want another potential closer? If they can't get a very good young SP or position player then they'd do better holding on to Young for another year to see if his power finally comes. QUOTE (caulfield12 @ Dec 13, 2008 -> 07:07 AM) Trade minor leaguers/spare parts and/or take on salary for 3B Garrett Atkins or Kouzmanoff. Or simply sign Tyler Wigginton. They could also move Cuddyer back to 3B and sign Dunn/Burrell/Rivera/Griffey, etc. to play LF and share time with Jason Kubel as DH. I don't necessarily think "minor league parts" gets them Atkins or Kouzmanoff. They'd have to deal some very good prospects to do that and if it's Atkins, then they'd probably end up with a defensive downgrade from Harris or whoever they would play at 3B. Wigginton could be a decent signing, but he's not really anything special. They'd probably do better going after Beltre, because even though he's cost them prospects, he'd bring them Type A compensation to back that up and provide much better defense as well as more power. The Twins aren't known for those kinds of moves though. QUOTE (caulfield12 @ Dec 13, 2008 -> 07:07 AM) Decide where to put Cuddyer, LF or RF, and leave him there....probably LF, with Span in RF. Span > Young > Kubel > Gomez's potential > Cuddyer. They should deal him if possible. QUOTE (caulfield12 @ Dec 13, 2008 -> 07:07 AM) Much simpler than fixing the White Sox issues at 3B, 2B, CF and at least one slot in the starting rotation. I disagree. The Sox have some good candidates for 3B, 2B, and Anderson in CF may not be quite so bad. The Sox right now don't have a prototypical lead-off hitter but that's not necessarily a bad thing. Right now the biggest problem the Sox have is starting rotation depth, and that problem is much more severe than the need for a true lead-off guy. The Twins' strength OTOH is starting rotation depth. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
caulfield12 Posted December 13, 2008 Author Share Posted December 13, 2008 If they don't want to pay Ramirez or Furcal, I think Young is much more logical. They have Kemp and Ethier, with no plans whatsover to start Andruw Jones or Pierre. Broxton wouldn't be a closer with MIN. He'd be the primary RH set-up man and closer in waiting, allowing them to move Nathan eventually. That was the biggest problem for Minny last year, going through Crain, Guerrier, Bonser and Bass. They're the Twins. They always have some good prospects. They're not going to deal Aaron Hicks for a stopgap...though...and Beltre just added the Twins to his new "non-trade" list, so that might complicate matters. The Mariners want pitching, and they'd have to part with Blackburn or Perkins (at a minimum) to get Beltre, who might turn into a one-year rental and has Boras as his agent. Dangerous territory for the Twins to venture into. It's quite hard to be a defensive downgrade from Harris, fwiw. The Twins have Cuddyer, Kubel, Young, Gomez and Span for four positions...and they have five quality (and young) starters. They're in a much better position at this point than we are for 2009. With Morneau, Casilla and Punto, their IF is more settled than ours at this point too. Huge advantage at the catching spot, obviously. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fathom Posted January 23, 2009 Share Posted January 23, 2009 Joe Crede appears to be close to signing with the Twins. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
caulfield12 Posted January 27, 2009 Author Share Posted January 27, 2009 Well, the theory (one of many) at the beginning of the offseason was that maybe Crede and Cabrera would end up as the left side of the Twins' revamped infield, with Punto as the super-sub and one of Buscher/Harris traded along with either Blackburn/Perkins to bring in a dominant RH set-up guy (most recently, they were talking to Gagne, please take him!) and/or 3B, like Adrian Beltre. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MexSoxFan#1 Posted January 30, 2009 Share Posted January 30, 2009 Wherever Crede ends up,the Twins is the last team I want to see him go to.I'd hate to have him have a monster comeback and be on the other side of his desire to whup our ass. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SoxFan562004 Posted January 30, 2009 Share Posted January 30, 2009 Crede on that rock hard field for 81 games will probably mean a few games missed due to ouchy back Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kalapse Posted January 30, 2009 Share Posted January 30, 2009 QUOTE (MexSoxFan#1 @ Jan 30, 2009 -> 01:55 PM) Wherever Crede ends up,the Twins is the last team I want to see him go to.I'd hate to have him have a monster comeback and be on the other side of his desire to whup our ass. I hope he signs with the Twins, see how they like having their starting 3B miss 90 games due to injury. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Melissa1334 Posted January 30, 2009 Share Posted January 30, 2009 (edited) QUOTE (fathom @ Jan 23, 2009 -> 11:55 AM) Joe Crede appears to be close to signing with the Twins. i dont get why they would want to sign him with that back of his, playing on the turf. itll be interesting to see how much money he gets. QUOTE (Kalapse @ Jan 30, 2009 -> 02:27 PM) I hope he signs with the Twins, see how they like having their starting 3B miss 90 games due to injury. shouldnt we be wishing joe the best?lol Edited January 30, 2009 by Melissa1334 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balta1701 Posted January 30, 2009 Share Posted January 30, 2009 QUOTE (Melissa1334 @ Jan 30, 2009 -> 12:42 PM) shouldnt we be wishing joe the best?lol As long as he doesn't sign with someone in the AL Central, sure. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kalapse Posted January 30, 2009 Share Posted January 30, 2009 QUOTE (Melissa1334 @ Jan 30, 2009 -> 02:42 PM) shouldnt we be wishing joe the best?lol You can wish a player the best while being totally realistic about his future prospects. Personally, I don't see Joe Crede ever playing 140 games in a season again. Have him play half his games on concrete and I can't see him surviving past June. And I have to be honest, I can't hope and pray that every player who departs the Sox will go on to do great things, that's just not realistic. I wish him no ill will much like Aaron Rowand, Tadahito Iguchi, Jon Garland or any other player who has come and gone. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kyyle23 Posted January 31, 2009 Share Posted January 31, 2009 Why would we want the Twins fixed? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balta1701 Posted January 31, 2009 Share Posted January 31, 2009 QUOTE (kyyle23 @ Jan 31, 2009 -> 08:06 AM) Why would we want the Twins fixed? I think we mean it in the sense of a cat. So that they can't reproduce. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
caulfield12 Posted February 4, 2009 Author Share Posted February 4, 2009 (edited) According to John Hickey of the Seattle Post-Intellegencer, the Twins have "some interest" in dealing for left-hander Jarrod Washburn. Hickey writes that the Mariners and Twins discussed a deal last week that would have sent Washburn and catcher Jeff Clement to Minnesota for 23-year-old outfielder Delmon Young. It's not known whether that particular deal fell through, but it's likely. The pieces just don't seem to fit. Washburn, 34, went 5-14 last season with a 4.69 ERA and the Twins already have a young, All-Star catcher. mlbtraderumors.com This is a real head-scratcher. The Twins already have five young starting pitchers. Why would they take on Washburn's huge/ugly contract, which is almost as bad as that for Silva? Unless they really, really want to get rid of D. Young (and that would be coming from Gardenhire obviously). I can see a trade of Beltre for Perkins/Blackburn and a second-tier prospect (or someone like Buscher, Tolbert or Harris to replace Bloomquist). This one is makes very little sense. Unless they see something in Clement nobody else does. But you can't move Mauer to 1B and Morneau to DH because Mauer's still pretty young and that would leave them with Kubel (essentially a DH with his knee problems), Cuddyer, Span and Gomez fighting for 3 spots. Bottom line, many teams would be able to put together a more attractive package for D. Young than a superfluous, aging veteran pitcher in Washburn who's not even going to improve them and will provide them even less financial flexibility moving forward. For that contract, you could have Dunn, Abreu and/or Hudson, maybe even two of them when it gets even closer to spring training. Edited February 4, 2009 by caulfield12 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HuskyCaucasian Posted February 4, 2009 Share Posted February 4, 2009 Remember a few years back when "fixing" the Twins meant contracting the Twins as well as the Expos, and maybe the DRays as well? Amazing how things change. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
witesoxfan Posted February 4, 2009 Share Posted February 4, 2009 QUOTE (Athomeboy_2000 @ Feb 4, 2009 -> 10:05 AM) Remember a few years back when "fixing" the Twins meant contracting the Twins as well as the Expos, and maybe the DRays as well? Amazing how things change. The DRays were never really considered for contraction thanks to their lease on Tropicana Field (I think they are "supposed" to stay there for like 25 more years unless they can get another stadium made for them). The thought process the entire time was to bring the totals in both leagues down to 14 to make an even number of teams in both leagues and thus never having problems with interleague. Having an odd number of teams in baseball will never work, as schedule setting would forever be messed up. It would have been really weird to see the DBacks in the AL West and the Rangers in the AL Central though. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HuskyCaucasian Posted February 4, 2009 Share Posted February 4, 2009 (edited) QUOTE (witesoxfan @ Feb 4, 2009 -> 10:25 AM) The DRays were never really considered for contraction thanks to their lease on Tropicana Field (I think they are "supposed" to stay there for like 25 more years unless they can get another stadium made for them). The thought process the entire time was to bring the totals in both leagues down to 14 to make an even number of teams in both leagues and thus never having problems with interleague. Having an odd number of teams in baseball will never work, as schedule setting would forever be messed up. It would have been really weird to see the DBacks in the AL West and the Rangers in the AL Central though. I'm sorry. i should have made it more clear. Tthey WANTED to dump the Drays, but couldnt cause of the a for mentioned lease. I remember the Twins, DRays, KC, and A's all mentioned as possibilities in the AL and the Expos and Marlins in the NL. (Marlins because of pitiful attendance). Edited February 4, 2009 by Athomeboy_2000 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted February 4, 2009 Share Posted February 4, 2009 QUOTE (witesoxfan @ Feb 4, 2009 -> 10:25 AM) The DRays were never really considered for contraction thanks to their lease on Tropicana Field (I think they are "supposed" to stay there for like 25 more years unless they can get another stadium made for them). The thought process the entire time was to bring the totals in both leagues down to 14 to make an even number of teams in both leagues and thus never having problems with interleague. Having an odd number of teams in baseball will never work, as schedule setting would forever be messed up. It would have been really weird to see the DBacks in the AL West and the Rangers in the AL Central though. For us old timers, it has been weird not having the Rangers in our division for so long now... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GoodAsGould Posted February 4, 2009 Share Posted February 4, 2009 QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Feb 4, 2009 -> 03:10 PM) For us old timers, it has been weird not having the Rangers in our division for so long now... They do belong in the central, It makes very little sense for them to be considered west coast. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.thumb.webp.29cc6c9fee0f01ceeb4f722593e5e3ba.webp)
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.