Indians & Reds

Trades

Players

Back

Indians & Reds

January 27, 2020

Indians

Name Age Level P1 P2 Availablility Years AFV Salary Surplus Low Median High
India Minors 3B 22.6 18.1 22.6 27.1
Senzel 24 Majors 3B OF Very low 6.0 85.3 18.2 67.1 58.6 67.1 75.6

Reds

Name Age Level P1 P2 Availablility Years AFV Salary Surplus Low Median High
Lindor 25 Majors SS Very low 2.0 95.5 41.7 53.8 53.8 63.4 72.9
Naquin 28 Majors OF Medium 3.0 18.7 7.3 11.4 7.7 9.6 11.4
4 Comments
  1. Brett Narloch

    How could the Indians say no to this trade? By the end of the season the Indians lineup could be this:

    C) Perez
    1B) Santana
    2B) India/Ramirez
    3B) India/Ramirez
    SS) Beckham?
    LF) Senzel
    CF) Mercado
    RF) Luplow (Maybe sign Puig)
    DH) Reyes

  2. The Indians have a 3B prospect Nolan Jones that is #42 in MLB’s newest top 100 rankings to compare to India who no longer is on the top 100 prospect list for mlb.com. Jones could also be ready by the end of 2020 so this is not the automatic deal that you think it is. Asking Senzel move to another position (corner outfield) also could slow his offensive development. I don’t see Cleveland doing this. I would think if Cleveland could be talked into trading Lindor, Lodolo or Greene would have to be involved along with Senzel.

    • Larry Krueger

      I agree with hockeyjohn on this one. Cleveland would ask for Lodolo or Greene instead of India. That would be one realistic trade for Lindor that Cleveland would have to consider. Getting 6 years of Senzel for 2 years of Lindor plus a top prospect pitcher would be a trade worth considering. If I’m Cleveland I begin by leaving out Naquin altogether which would be an overpay by the Reds but it’s what Cleveland has been saying all along. If they are going to trade Lindor, someone is going to make an offer they can’t refuse.

Submit a Comment