Cuddyer AND a Pitcher? « SethSpeaks.net

Cuddyer AND a Pitcher?

For Garrett Atkins?? According to a rumor from Hall of Famer Tracy Ringolsby, the Rockies and Twins are discussing a deal involving the Rockies 3B and the Twins veteran outfielder.

Ringolsby notes that the Rockies would be looking for a right-handed run-producing bat. Cuddyer certainly fits that mold. It annoys me immensely how quickly many Twins fans have given up on Michael Cuddyer. He was hurt most of the season, but he is a productive right-handed bat who, had he remained healthy, would have helped out the middle of the Twins lineup. The emergence of Denard Span certainly made the Cuddyer loss more bearable, but Cuddyer is too talented to just give up on.

That said, I am not completely against the idea of dealing him, if it makes sense. First, he will be making $6.75 million in 2009. That is not very much and no reason to deal him. However, that number goes up in 2010 and there is an option for 2011. But if there will be a trade for Cuddyer, it better bring back 1.) another productive hitter, and 2.) a productive hitter at a defensive position of need for the Twins, like 3B.

Garrett Atkins’ name has been brought up quite frequently over the last year or more. His base numbers sure don’t look too bad. In 2008, he hit .286 with 21 homers and 99 RBI. However, I think we need to look a little more at his numbers.

· Atkins overall 2008 OPS – .780 (certainly nothing special for a 3B.

· Atkins OPS in 2008 against lefties – 1.014 (that’s pretty impressive)

· Atkins OPS in 2008 against righties – .710 (Ick! But then again, how many lefties did the Twins face in 2008?)

· Atkins 2008 numbers at Coors Field – .342/.380/.523 (.903 OPS)

· Atkins 2008 numbers away from Coors Field – .233/.278/.383 (.661 OPS) (Those numbers are hard to ignore!)

· Atkins 2008 numbers in domes – 0-9 (OK, very small sample!)

OK, one year is not really enough, so let’s look at the same numbers but for a three year period.

· Atkins OPS past three years – .867 (That is a very solid performance)

· Atkins OPS past three years against lefties – .941 (that’s very good, yet a little more normalized than the one year numbers.)

· Atkins OPS past three years against righties – .845 (Much better than those 2008 numbers would have suggested)

· Atkins past three years numbers at Coors Field – .346/.402/.544 (.946 OPS)

· Atkins past three years numbers away from Coors Field – .266/.337/.453 (.790 OPS) (Alright, again this isn’t so bad, but certainly nothing near All-Star caliber.)

· Atkins 2008 numbers in domes – 891 OPS (just 60 AB’s)

Another part of this story that can’t be ignored – Garrett Atkins made about $4.4 million in 2008 in his first year of arbitration. He will likely make as much if not more than Michael Cuddyer’s $6.75 million in 2009 and more in 2010.

So what does this all tell us? Well, for me, it tells me that trading Michael Cuddyer for Garrett Atkins probably makes some sense. The Twins can replace a productive right-handed hitter with a productive right-handed hitter. The differences is that the Twins have other options in the OF to replace Cuddyer. 3B has been deemed a position of need for the Twins. I like the platoon of Macri/Harris/Buscher at 3B, but Atkins would certainly be an upgrade, at least offensively.

However, the Ringolsby rumor also says “The Rockies are looking to add a quality starter in the offseason, and the Twins could offer the likes of Nick Blackburn or Kevin Slowey”.

Again, Cuddyer for Atkins makes some sense, seems pretty even. But if the Twins were forced to offer a Major League starting pitcher in addition to Cuddyer, then the trade becomes flat-out laughable! Personally, I would not trade Slowey straight-up for Atkins, so I clearly wouldn’t add him to a deal. And I think Blackburn showed enough that he should be worth a little more than this.

So, again, we are in very early November and we are going to hear a lot of rumors. But we always need to step back and think about them a little bit. Some just don’t make sense as they are written. Should the Twins be talking to the Rockies about Garrett Atkins? Sure. But this is clearly just a starting point for negotiations and, hopefully, nowhere near an end story!

Any thoughts?

November 7, 2008 - Posted by Seth | Garrett Atkins, Michael Cuddyer, Minnesota Twins | | 8 Comments

8 Comments »

I wouldn’t do the trade the way it was rumored, however, I also realize that Cuddyer for Atkins would not be an even trade either, mainly because of their positions. Slowey should never be a part of this conversation, but I would be listening if they wanted Blackburn, but I would have to get another player in return from the Rockies, at least some sort of prospect. Of course, the Twins also need to figure out what to do with Boof Bonser and Philip Humber, since both probably can’t remain in the bullpen and neither can be sent down, or at least Humber has to clear waivers first. If the Twins can get the Rockies to take Humber off their hands, that would be a good deal. And remember, it was the Rockies who took both Livan and Ramon Ortiz off the Twins’ hands.

Comment by SoCalTwinsfan | November 7, 2008 | Reply
I wonder why the Rockies just don’t move Atkins to the OF when they trade Holiday. Otherwise I am indifferent to this trade proposal from a baseball sense. Although I do like Cuddyer and would like him to stay.

I would include either Boof or Humber in the trade for Atkins. overall I don’t care for the trade that much as I like the idea of having the OF logjam. And signing Casey Blake would be a good move and I’d give the possibility of that at more than 50-50, or a trade for Beltre. But the proposed trade does free up some cash. That’s only an issue in my book if Pohlad makes it an issue. The economy is tanking so maybe the budget is going to be a little conservative next year. say 65-70 million instead of 75-80 million. We shall see.

Comment by Doofus | November 7, 2008 | Reply
No way I trade either blackburn (maybe, maybe straight up, but I doubt it) or slowey in a deal for Atkins. There is no evidence he is a true difference maker. I think his numbers have dropped each of the last few years, but that could be a recency effect. I’d deal for Beltre if he was signed for more than 1 year, but they blew that chance last year (when seattle got stupidly greedy).

Teams don’t do this, but I’d try to package Nick, Phil, and an OF for a very good OF or 3B. I’m not sure there is a bad team with a good player that wants more players, though. I’ve just not given it enough thought yet.

Comment by mike wants wins | November 7, 2008 | Reply
1) the OF logjam is workable with everyone getting plenty of at bats. I propose a rotation whereby Span generally rotates through all of the OF positions, giving the others a base of playing 2-3 days. Giving Span an occasional day off and getting Cuddy at bats as DH against lefties can make up some of the at bats. Unless they can really strenghen a position of greater need (which with Atkins seems debatable) they should not make this move just to clear a log jam.

Rigolsby is treading into Sid Hartman/Charley Walters territory by suggesting that the Twins would throw in Slowey, and even Blackburn for that matter. Twins have plenty of arms in the high minors that are attractive in a deal, as well as Boof (who I do not see as a good fit for Coors field with his flyball tendencies). Humber is not going to entice anyone and to the extent a team wants pitching from us it is going to come in the form of Deunsing, Delaney, Robertson, Swarzak or someone close to the majors with a higher upside than Humber’s long relief/5th starter projection. Would much rather put such a package together for Beltre, who has been playing in the AL, is better defensively and is just as solid offensively.

Twins should not make this deal.

Comment by J. Lichty | November 7, 2008 | Reply
Is Atkins any better at third base than Cuddyer? I am not suggesting that the Twins move Cuddyer to third, but its not clear that Atkins defense at third base is up to Twins standards either. If you look at his numbers away from Coors, Atkins is probably not going to provide the offense Cuddyer does either.

That said, the Twins can only play three outfielders at a time. Even if they trade one, they still have Pridie as a fifth outfielder. Atkins gives them another right-handed bat in the lineup. In the future he could also DH or spell Morneau if his defense is suspect. He has a couple years left until he is a free agent. So they would have him at least through 2010.

I would not “throw in” Humber. Bonser is a possibility, but then they ought to get at least a low minors prospect back.

Comment by TT | November 7, 2008 | Reply
Young pitcher and young outfielder for young third baseman.

Perkins and Span for Ryan Zimmerman?

You have to give up a lot to get a lot. Span might be our most marketable “extra” outfielder. Cheap, 5 more years under team control, excellent defense even if he regresses offensively.

Still, this opens up a gap at leadoff.

On second thought, get me Casey Blake for two years.

Comment by Heinie Manush | November 7, 2008 | Reply
Hall of Famer or not, this came from the same reporter who wrote that the Twins only offseason need is another bullpen arm. I believe this rumor as much as Charlie Walters’ or Sid Hartman’s.

Comment by thrylos98 | November 7, 2008 | Reply
his came from the same reporter who wrote that the Twins only offseason need is another bullpen arm.

He got that right – assuming they re-sign Punto. The Twins have opportunities to improve at third base, shortstop and the rotation. But they don’t really have holes at any of them.

The bullpen is a different issue. They really do need to add a bullpen arm. Otherwise they would be gambling on Neshek returning to form or Mijares being ready to pitch the 8th inning for a full season. Or someone else improving dramatically.

Comment by TT | November 8, 2008 | Reply