Article: Twins, Please Don't Trade Brian Dozier!

ShouldaCouldaWoulda · December 6, 2016

There is just too many reasons why we SHOULD trade him, and not enough team ones to keep him. Although I feel we are overvaluing him and aren't likely to get a return many would be hoping for...its still the right move to take the best deal you can get. The potential for him to lose a little to a lot of value going forward is just way too high in a guy like Dozier.

ShouldaCouldaWoulda · December 6, 2016

I think the Sale trade makes this story more credible than when it was written. They need a left handed power bar more than ever with Bostons LHP heavy rotation.

https://www.google.com/amp/yanksgoyard.com/2016/12/06/yankees-showing-interest-brian-dozier/amp/?client=safari

diehardtwinsfan · December 6, 2016

I can appreciate the OPs sentiment, given that BD is without question one of my favorite Twins right now... but... I would have to think that he could do more value for the Twins on another team. That isn't to disrespect his accomplishments, but to recognize a few simple things:

1) We badly need pitching

2) We badly need pitching

3) There's no decent pitchers in FA

4) We have some help in the high minors, but other than Berrios (who had his issues) none is ready now.

5) The offensive core of the team is here now, and should only get better.

6) Dozier will not be around in 2019.

7) Dozier may have figured it out, but he has always been maddeningly streaky.

8) Dozier is at peak value right now. There is nothing he could do to raise it, and plenty can happen that can lower it.

You're right, he's a class act, humble, and the kind of guy I admire watching. Those are good reasons to keep him, but a long term contract here seems odd and the last thing we need is another Maueresque contract that is untradeable and taking up a valuable roster spot.

Oxtung · December 6, 2016

Yes, two years of greatness >>>>>> 1 year of greatness. Way more important.

Even though there are some HUGE questions surrounding the offensive output (and lets be honest, that's where all his on the field value lies) he will provide? What do you think his "real" offensive output is? Use whatever metric you choose.

diehardtwinsfan · December 6, 2016

Several of you have no made statements similar to "His value will never be higher than it is now." Is that really true? There are scenarios where that isn't. For the sake of argument let's say the Twins keep him and he puts up an OPS of .900 next season, surely his value will have risen after two seasons of superstar level work, right? Perhaps that isn't the most likely outcome but it also isn't unbelievable either.

So my question to the brilliant minds here at TD, what kind of numbers would Dozier have to put up next year to actually increase his value at the trade deadline? By next offseason?

Time value of money. Even if BD puts up a 1.000 OPS, his value won't be higher with one less year remaining... even more so when you factor in the new compensation requirements. In the old system, the QO nets a 1st rounder... not in the new.

Let's just say the Dodgers were willing to offer De Leon, Alvarez, and Puig for current Dozier. Do you think they up that to Urias and throw in another prospect a year from now if Dozier puts up even better offensive numbers? I don't.

Mike Sixel · December 6, 2016

Even though there are some HUGE questions surrounding the offensive output (and lets be honest, that's where all his on the field value lies) he will provide? What do you think his "real" offensive output is? Use whatever metric you choose.

Yes, because even if he's good next year, there will still be questions. And no, I don't think he will be THIS good again.

two times as many games, think about that...think about that value, it's not even close.

Otto von Ballpark · December 6, 2016

I view the freedom to deal Dozier as another one of the silver linings of a 103 loss season. There just isn't a likely path to contention for 2017, so we can afford to sacrifice some assets from that goal, with an eye toward seasons beyond.

Add to it that Dozier is getting older, and wants to cash in as soon as his current deal expires, and is coming off a career season amidst an otherwise weak 2B market, and it's a perfect storm.

Obviously we can't just trade him for anything, but I think the moment a reasonable offer is on the table, we should accept.

condor522995 · December 6, 2016

Guys,

I think as Twins fans, we should be thinking we should aim a little bit higher if we want to trade Brian Dozier.

Just think about it, Dozier hit 42 bombs last year. 42 bombs last year, practically triple digit RBIs (99. Seemed like he stayed at 99 for weeks), and he beat his record single season batting average by 24 points (up from 2013 first full year as a Twin). Those numbers to pretty much any big market outside the Twins would be worthy of a blockbuster type trade.

I know expecting anything close to what the ChiSox got for Sale is unrealistic (just the value of a SP over a 2B). But if we really want to see him gone from the Twins forever, we should look for something that will at least get Twins fans really excited over the next few years.

I personally think the Dodgers or Cardinals (or any other team that wants Dozier), should have to be willing to give up more than one top prospect if they want to take our team MVP away from us. Falvey and Levine shouldn't feel pressured to deal our team MVP anytime soon.

On top of having the excitement of watching Dozier on the Twins next year (just think how fun it was watching him bat the last half of last year), fans can have comfort knowing that Dozier is signed through two more years for $15 million. He will be even more valuable in 2017 if his numbers improve like they have each previous year.

Not saying we shouldn't trade him, but if we do, Falvey and Co. should hope to get more than one MLB ready prospect (De Leon and Bellinger or Reyes and Wong) for having to give away that type of player. Dozier is the heart and soul of the Twins and I personally will have a hard time watching us play without him next year if I don't know we got some absolute gems for him.

So I think some of these "dream trades" we have been expecting for Dozier should be thought to be more realistic. Other GMs are on the brink of contention (and more at risk for their jobs) than the Twins' front office and therefore should be the ones who are more desperate to get something done.

Mike Sixel · December 6, 2016

Most fans, from what we know about attendance and tv viewership, don't care about Dozier or most any other player, they care about winning.

There is almost no path to long term winning in keeping Dozier, that's just the reality of this awful team.

De Leon and Bellinger is more than the Whities just got for Sale, no chance Dozier returns that much. Those are two top 25 players.....it isn't happening. If it does, all praise for our new over lords.

BK432 · December 6, 2016

Guys,

I think as Twins fans, we should be thinking we should aim a little bit higher if we want to trade Brian Dozier.

Just think about it, Dozier hit 42 bombs last year. 42 bombs last year, practically triple digit RBIs (99. Seemed like he stayed at 99 for weeks), and he beat his record single season batting average by 24 points (up from 2013 first full year as a Twin). Those numbers to pretty much any big market outside the Twins would be worthy of a blockbuster type trade.

I know expecting anything close to what the ChiSox got for Sale is unrealistic (just the value of a SP over a 2B). But if we really want to see him gone from the Twins forever, we should look for something that will at least get Twins fans really excited over the next few years.

I personally think the Dodgers or Cardinals (or any other team that wants Dozier), should have to be willing to give up more than one top prospect if they want to take our team MVP away from us. Falvey and Levine shouldn't feel pressured to deal our team MVP anytime soon.

On top of having the excitement of watching Dozier on the Twins next year (just think how fun it was watching him bat the last half of last year), fans can have comfort knowing that Dozier is signed through two more years for $15 million. He will be even more valuable in 2017 if his numbers improve like they have each previous year.

Not saying we shouldn't trade him, but if we do, Falvey and Co. should hope to get more than one MLB ready prospect (De Leon and Bellinger or Reyes and Wong) for having to give away that type of player. Dozier is the heart and soul of the Twins and I personally will have a hard time watching us play without him next year if I don't know we got some absolute gems for him.

So I think some of these "dream trades" we have been expecting for Dozier should be thought to be more realistic. Other GMs are on the brink of contention (and more at risk for their jobs) than the Twins' front office and therefore should be the ones who are more desperate to get something done.

And I think we all agree and Falvey and Levine have basically said as much. They need to be "wowed" I believe they've said. Dozier should be worth a lot at this moment. If he's not, they shouldn't trade him.

ScrapTheNickname · December 6, 2016

Nice article, Junior Member.

You have a point of view and you expressed it well.

I, like most of the others, disagree, however.

Trade Dozier while he's at his peak ... make sure you get maximum return.

If not, we'll see him in a Twins uniform in 2017.

We must build for the future. Falvey's view, which I like, is not get attached to particular players.

In today's game rosters change drastically from year to year.

The days of Oliva, Killebrew, Carew and Puckett are long dead and gone.

Wasn't this proven by the mega-deal that Mauer got?

Rest in peace, Twins lifers.

Off topic: I bet it has been discussed ad nauseum but why can't the Twins, even now at this late stage in Mauer's contract, defer money? All it would take, it seems to me, is a meeting of the minds and an agreement to help the Minnesota Twins by reducing his yearly payment and stretching it into future years.

Mike Sixel · December 6, 2016

Nice article, Junior Member.
You have a point of view and you expressed it well.
I, like most of the others, disagree, however.
Trade Dozier while he's at his peak ... make sure you get maximum return.
If not, we'll see him in a Twins uniform in 2017.
We must build for the future. Falvey's view, which I like, is not get attached to particular players.
In today's game rosters change drastically from year to year.
The days of Oliva, Killebrew, Carew and Puckett are long dead and gone.
Wasn't this proven by the mega-deal that Mauer got?
Rest in peace, Twins lifers.

Off topic: I bet it has been discussed ad nauseum but why can't the Twins, even now at this late stage in Mauer's contract, defer money? All it would take, it seems to me, is a meeting of the minds and an agreement to help the Minnesota Twins by reducing his yearly payment and stretching it into future years.

Why would Mauer do that? You'd have to sweeten the pot a lot....also, why would the Twins want to do that? His salary is irrelevant this year (no FAs out there) and probably next year also.

ShouldaCouldaWoulda · December 7, 2016

From a hypothetical Twins FO and fan perspective...say we are a possibly contending team next year and have a glaring hole at 3B (kinda like 2B contenders). We are one of the only teams with a whole there, and Kyle Seager is available in a trade (pretend he has the same contract as Dozier now.) About the same age, overall offensive production, and better defense........

What would be fair compensation for him from the Twins big league roster, and or minors? Maybe some would be willing to give the moon for Seager (with a Dozier contract?) Or would you look at his age? Would you predict his defense to fall off? Maybe his speed and bat speed? More likely to get hurt?

Just a little thinking exercise. Maybe there is a better hypothetical scenario to do this with, but looking at age, IF'er with similar overall production, and IF'r at a position where there is not great need for by other teams. Need to think like they are.

Would you give up Buxton? Would you give up Gordon and Berrios? Would you untouchables?

IndianaTwin · December 7, 2016

I get it. Trade Dozier while his value is high. Get several prospects and watch them take off.

The question is, does it work? I only spent a few minutes doing this, but when I looked through the Indians and Cubs post-season rosters, I found the following:

Drafted by the Indians or Cubs: 11.
Free agent signings: 8
Signed as minor league free agents: 4
Acquired in mid-season trades: 21
Rule 5 draft: 1
Waiver claim: 1
Received in a trade prior to any major league experience: 3.

When I looked at the top 10 in WAR in each league and how they got to their current team, I found the following:

Acquired in draft: 13
Free agent signing: 2
Signed as minor league free agent: 2
Traded as a major leaguer: 1
Received in a trade prior to any major league experience: 2 (one of which was Kluber, also listed above).

I didn't go cherry-picking -- I just went for accessible lists of how two good teams were created and for a list of productive players. And what I see in those lists is that teams hang on to good players they've drafted. And I think Dozier is good enough to still be a serviceable part on a competitive team, even 2-3 years from now. And good teams a) hang on to the players who have developed into good players after they have been drafted (or signed as international free agents) and then fill in the holes by signing free agents and trading for guys who already have some major league experience.

Think of two of our best known trades -- Garza for the prospect Delmon and Pierznynski for several young guys. Delmon didn't pan out, and the best part of the A.J. was getting Nathan, already in the majors but underutilized. Boof who?

Sure, we could trade Dozier for highly regarded prospects, but it seems like for every John Smoltz, there are a dozen Danny Goodwins. We can say that Dozier would be blocking prospects in the next two years, but what if he's just blocking the next Wilson Betemit?

So yeah, listen to offers, but unless you're blown away with a deal that includes some talent that already has a year or two in the majors, I'm inclined to hang on. Quite frankly, we may be able to get a better haul in July of this year or next year when some team is really desparate. In the meantime, we've gotten more of a chance to find out how legit Sano, Buxton, Kepler, Park, Berrios, etc. are, and we have a better sense of what our major league needs really are.

Brandon Warne · December 7, 2016

The days of Oliva, Killebrew, Carew and Puckett are long dead and gone.
Wasn't this proven by the mega-deal that Mauer got?

what

DocBauer · December 7, 2016

Really not sure I have more to add. NOBODY WANT the Twins to trade Dozier. But we have a talented youngsters ready to take his spot, better (potentially) in some ways, not as good in other phases. And while the Twins actually do have some interesting arms coming up, not all will turn out. You need additional options. And BD is a real, viable trade chip to bring in some additional, high quality options.

That's it. Simple. End of story.

Mike Sixel · December 7, 2016

I get it. Trade Dozier while his value is high. Get several prospects and watch them take off.

The question is, does it work? I only spent a few minutes doing this, but when I looked through the Indians and Cubs post-season rosters, I found the following:

Drafted by the Indians or Cubs: 11.
Free agent signings: 8
Signed as minor league free agents: 4
Acquired in mid-season trades: 21
Rule 5 draft: 1
Waiver claim: 1
Received in a trade prior to any major league experience: 3.
When I looked at the top 10 in WAR in each league and how they got to their current team, I found the following:
Acquired in draft: 13
Free agent signing: 2
Signed as minor league free agent: 2
Traded as a major leaguer: 1
Received in a trade prior to any major league experience: 2 (one of which was Kluber, also listed above).
I didn't go cherry-picking -- I just went for accessible lists of how two good teams were created and for a list of productive players. And what I see in those lists is that teams hang on to good players they've drafted. And I think Dozier is good enough to still be a serviceable part on a competitive team, even 2-3 years from now. And good teams a) hang on to the players who have developed into good players after they have been drafted (or signed as international free agents) and then fill in the holes by signing free agents and trading for guys who already have some major league experience.

Think of two of our best known trades -- Garza for the prospect Delmon and Pierznynski for several young guys. Delmon didn't pan out, and the best part of the A.J. was getting Nathan, already in the majors but underutilized. Boof who?

Sure, we could trade Dozier for highly regarded prospects, but it seems like for every John Smoltz, there are a dozen Danny Goodwins. We can say that Dozier would be blocking prospects in the next two years, but what if he's just blocking the next Wilson Betemit?

So yeah, listen to offers, but unless you're blown away with a deal that includes some talent that already has a year or two in the majors, I'm inclined to hang on. Quite frankly, we may be able to get a better haul in July of this year or next year when some team is really desparate. In the meantime, we've gotten more of a chance to find out how legit Sano, Buxton, Kepler, Park, Berrios, etc. are, and we have a better sense of what our major league needs really are.

How do they get better with the same roster? Btw....Park is 29.....

The needs are pretty obvious... They are the worst pitching staff in baseball, maybe second after the Padres. So, you won't trade Doxier.... How do they get better?

ScrapTheNickname · December 7, 2016

what

Meaning long term deals with heroes are a thing of the past. Too expensive, too risky. Everyone moves on. Other teams may do it, but I don't see the Twins paying like that again.

ScrapTheNickname · December 7, 2016

Why would Mauer do that? You'd have to sweeten the pot a lot....also, why would the Twins want to do that? His salary is irrelevant this year (no FAs out there) and probably next year also.

It just seems logical that instead of paying him 23 million a year for 2 more years you pay him 5 million a year for 8 and a half years. But then again, it's also logical to pay him upfront and get off the books. I don't know.

Platoon · December 7, 2016

In fairness to the post, if one looked at Dozier simply as a fan, of course you would keep him. But it would be this fandom which would keep the Twins from eventually improving as a team. One only has to look back a year at Plouffe to see the future folly of not trading Dozier. I know Plouffe didn't have as high a value, but whatever he would brought will always be speculation, because we kept him, he had a poor year, and we released him. Zip! On a contending team I keep Brian Dozier. On this team, several years out, I trade him now for as much as I can get. His history of lengthly hot and cold spells make it a big gamble to wait for the trading deadline. Plus besides the obvious need for pitching , keeping Dozier forces the Twins to keep Polanco at SS. And please, no more Mauer contract talk! Ugh! The issue with Mauer if one has one has to be dealt with by the manager. The FO has only one option, release and pay. Even I think BD has a better chance to hit 50 HR than that happening!

Blackjack · December 7, 2016

In fairness to the post, if one looked at Dozier simply as a fan, of course you would keep him. But it would be this fandom which would keep the Twins from eventually improving as a team. One only has to look back a year at Plouffe to see the future folly of not trading Dozier. I know Plouffe didn't have as high a value, but whatever he would brought will always be speculation, because we kept him, he had a poor year, and we released him. Zip! On a contending team I keep Brian Dozier. On this team, several years out, I trade him now for as much as I can get. His history of lengthly hot and cold spells make it a big gamble to wait for the trading deadline. Plus besides the obvious need for pitching , keeping Dozier forces the Twins to keep Polanco at SS. And please, no more Mauer contract talk! Ugh! The issue with Mauer if one has one has to be dealt with by the manager. The FO has only one option, release and pay. Even I think BD has a better chance to hit 50 HR than that happening!

You were doing good until you got down to the Mauer talk, especially the point about Dozier being hot and cold and it being a gamble to wait until the 2017 trade deadline. Get it done now, get some starting pitching back.

Mauer is not going anywhere. Hometown hero, he grew up here, his wife is from here, he's not going to request or accept a trade. And he's still a better first basemen than anybody else on the Twins roster, and better than a lot of other major league first basemen. There are some things in life you just have to grin and bear it, let time pass, this is one of them. Only two more years, only two more years, only two more years. Keep repeating that to yourself.

Mr. Brooks · December 7, 2016

You were doing good until you got down to the Mauer talk, especially the point about Dozier being hot and cold and it being a gamble to wait until the 2017 trade deadline. Get it done now, get some starting pitching back.

Mauer is not going anywhere. Hometown hero, he grew up here, his wife is from here, he's not going to request or accept a trade. And he's still a better first basemen than anybody else on the Twins roster, and better than a lot of other major league first basemen. There are some things in life you just have to grin and bear it, let time pass, this is one of them. Only two more years, only two more years, only two more years. Keep repeating that to yourself.

Agree on the sentiment, but Joe and his wife don't even live in Minnesota anymore.

Squirrel · December 7, 2016

Don't stray. This is about Dozier, not Mauer. Relate it to the topic, but don't change the topic to Joe.

Taildragger8791 · December 7, 2016

How do they get better with the same roster? Btw....Park is 29.....

The needs are pretty obvious... They are the worst pitching staff in baseball, maybe second after the Padres. So, you won't trade Doxier.... How do they get better?

Not sure why you singled out the Padres unless I missed some player movement, their staff ERA was 0.80 lower than ours and ranked 9 spots better for 2016. Our staff ERA was 5.39, next lowest (Arizona) was 5.19, and after that everyone is sub-5.00. We need to knock a full run off our staff ERA just to get to league average. They'd need another quart-run or so off to get into playoff territory. When you consider Santana's 3.38 ERA is in there, that means the rest of the starters averaged even worse. It's hard to put into context how stupendously terrible that is.

To those who want to keep Dozier...that means we at least need 3 new pitchers better than anyone not named Santana that was on the staff last year, and keep in mind that he's no spring chicken so you'll have to replace him in two years as well. We'll be lucky if we get 2 solid mid-rotation starters from anyone in our system right now. Nobody in the system projects as an ace, some have a ceiling of a #2 but realistically you're looking at 3's and 4's. So where do you find 2-3 more pitchers if you don't trade for them? Buying on the open market is rarely possible or even responsible, especially for a team as unattractive to FAs as this one. And how do you trade for them if you won't give up assets of value?

Steve Lein · December 7, 2016

All great points. However, don't you agree that for Brian Dozier's salary and production he is a steal? Where else are we going to find those numbers at 2nd base for that price? I'd take an inconsistent Dozier over a mediocre Logan Forsythe (similar salary) any day.

As great as Dozier was last year, you have to take some things into account:

1. Dozier will turn 30 next season.

2. His .886 OPS last season was over .100 points above his career average, including last years.

3. His replacement is already on the roster and proven.

4. That replacements name is Jorge Polanco and his career OPS is .005 points below Dozier's.

5. Jorge Polanco is 23 years old.

6. Dozier probably won't ever have a season like 2016 again...

7. He is signed for two more years in which I don't think the Twins will contend...

8. At that point he'll command salary numbers in the high teens...

9. Value is highest it will ever be...

10. Twins need starting pitching more than any team in baseball...

10. We've complained for years about how the Twins waste these players by holding on to them too long...

Conclusion: Most obvious trade candidate in the history of the Twins besides Johan Santana.

If you as a fan want the Twins to become relevant again, this is a move that has to be made. It will suck to lose him, I am with you on that. But I would rather watch winning baseball sometime in the near future than a single player.

USAFChief · December 7, 2016

How do they get better with the same roster? Btw....Park is 29.....
The needs are pretty obvious... They are the worst pitching staff in baseball, maybe second after the Padres. So, you won't trade Doxier.... How do they get better?

There is only one option available to the Twins? Trade Brian Dozier?

They can't get some natural internal improvement from last year? They can't make other trades, targeting lesser known prospects from other orgs that they feel are undervalued? Or trades for other major leaguers? They can't target FAs they feel will emerge next year as terrific bargains?

Trading Dozier hopefully wouldn't be the only move, because in and of itself it's not enough...and not trading Dozier doesn't doom the future.

I'm very hopeful our new management is smart enough, and courageous enough, to look at trading Dozier as only one possible avenue to improvement. One they WON'T pursue unless they feel it makes the Twins immediately better. And all the while they are pursuing other ideas...in addition to as well as instead of trading one player. A good player, by the way, probably the team's best, and one who is absolutely capable of being a big contributor to a winning team.

USAFChief · December 7, 2016

As great as Dozier was last year, you have to take some things into account:

1. Dozier will turn 30 next season.
2. His .886 OPS last season was over .100 points above his career average, including last years.
3. His replacement is already on the roster and proven.
4. That replacements name is Jorge Polanco and his career OPS is .005 points below Dozier's.
5. Jorge Polanco is 23 years old.
6. Dozier probably won't ever have a season like 2016 again...
7. He is signed for two more years in which I don't think the Twins will contend...
8. At that point he'll command salary numbers in the high teens...
9. Value is highest it will ever be...
10. Twins need starting pitching more than any team in baseball...
10. We've complained for years about how the Twins waste these players by holding on to them too long...

Conclusion: Most obvious trade candidate in the history of the Twins besides Johan Santana.

If you as a fan want the Twins to become relevant again, this is a move that has to be made. It will suck to lose him, I am with you on that. But I would rather watch winning baseball sometime in the near future than a single player.

Since you brought it up...the Johan Santana trade is the perfect example of why it is self defeating to ever put yourself in a position of "needing" to trade a good player.

The Twins got bent over a barrel, and ended up with virtually nothing. The move then was to keep Santana, put another 230 innings on his arm and get the value of one more season, and take the picks. Instead, they forced an "obvious" trade and hurt themselves.

twinkies3 · December 7, 2016

I couldn't agree with this take more. I'm so tired of trading away our good players (especially when they have favorable contracts) for unknowns. Brian in a consummate professional, amazing defensive player and top hitting 2B in the majors. I wouldn't take 9 Sanos for him.

If he does go, thank God the Terry Ryan era is over or we would see Dozier signed to a minor league contract in 8 years.

Vanimal46 · December 7, 2016

Don't stray.

I like the cat pun Want to join us next week on "Cat Talk" with Dinger and Van?

IndianaTwin · December 7, 2016

In response to my long post that ended:

So yeah, listen to offers, but unless you're blown away with a deal that includes some talent that already has a year or two in the majors, I'm inclined to hang on. Quite frankly, we may be able to get a better haul in July of this year or next year when some team is really desperate. In the meantime, we've gotten more of a chance to find out how legit Sano, Buxton, Kepler, Park, Berrios, etc. are, and we have a better sense of what our major league needs really are.

Mike said...

How do they get better with the same roster? Btw....Park is 29.....

The needs are pretty obvious... They are the worst pitching staff in baseball, maybe second after the Padres. So, you won't trade Doxier.... How do they get better?

(Comments on the pitching part will come at the end.)

To clarify, I'm not saying, "Don't trade him." I'm just not sure that the suggestions of what to go after (which have focused on high-upside starting pitchers, particularly from the Dodgers) are not necessarily the best option.

Quibble over decimal points, but the chances of us competing in 2017 are about 0.2 percent. By trading Dozier they probably become 0.1 percent. That's not a reason to keep him.

But whatever the chances are in 2018, I think they become less with trading Dozier than they are with keeping him. Pitchers take a while to develop. I'm not sure that even Urias is far enough along to be counted on as an ace in 2018. Someone less far along is even less likely to be a known ace in 2018.

I do think we can compete in 2018, but it will take a number of things going right. For 2018, here's where I see the question marks being if we keep Dozier: SS, 3B, LF, CF, RF, DH, SP1, SP2, SP3, CL, RP1, RP2, RP3, etc.

(We can argue, but I'm being generous in saying that C and 1B can still be served by Castro and Mauer. Hopefully they are what we expect them to be (as in, modestly effective), but they still end up be the 8th and 9th best position players we have. If they are, that's a pretty good lineup.)

What I mean in listing all those as question marks is to say that they aren't yet proven. A lot of those spots have current people who could very realistically be 2018 solutions. We just don't know for sure which ones they are, including which ones will be merely passable and which ones will actually be points of excellence. And maybe some of the current possibilities will turn into one-hit wonders like Eduardo Nunez and net us something in return.

(And I didn't include SP4 and SP5 because I think it's feasible that between Santana, Hughes, Santiago, Gibson, Berrios, May, Stewart, etc., a couple will stick and will fill those two spots. We just don't know which ones from that list it will be. Maybe we even get lucky and they cover SP3 as well. Many of us think Berrios in particular could potentially cover SP2 or even SP1. But I'll accept your argument if you say that SP4 and SP5 need to be counted as question marks as well.)

So, how do we answer those questions for 2018? Well, they say that when you've dug yourself a hole, the first solution in getting yourself out is to quit digging. If you trade Dozier, you add 2B to that list of question marks, and I'd rather not add a question mark at a place where a solution is present.

Many of us agreed going into last season that we could be better and not repeat the 2015 season. We weren't better, and we didn't repeat 2015. But I also don't think that the current roster will repeat only a 59-win season either. There's just too many young guys ranging from lots of potential (Sano, Buxton, Berrios) to some potential (insert your preferences) to not improve.

So, I'm inclined to make modest improvements as we can (Castro's a good example) that ride out the 72-75 win season in 2017. In the meantime, we let the new management more fully understand which prospects (and manager and coaches) have the ability to help us in 2018 and beyond. Then, if we're close enough to contend in 2018, we will probably be glad we still have Dozier. If we're not, we can still trade him for a needed piece. We may not (and likely would not) have as much upside in the trade, but we'll have a better sense of what the needs actually are. If we're not close to competing in 2018, the difference between what we get now and what we'll get later isn't enough to get us over the top.

I get that people are saying that a 2018 need WILL be starting pitching, but my first point is that trading for a high-upside prospect at this time doesn't fill the need. It just gives us one more possibility of filling the need. My second point is that Dozier is a known quantity -- if you trade him, trade him for a known quantity. I'd rather get a controllable, known SP2 or SP3 than a potential SP 1. If we've got a better potential long-term solution at 2B than we do at SS, consider trading him for a known SS. We've got enough question marks already, let's not add another.

As to how to improve the starting pitching, I'm intrigued with what the Braves have done this off-season in a down market. They've rebuilt 60% of the rotation with two one-year signings (one with an option for 2018) and a trade for (mid-level? I'm not sure) prospects. I don't think this is the year for the Twins to do this, both because there aren't good options remaining and because the timing isn't right. Maybe next year the timing is right.

So, what if next offseason included some combination of the following:

The answering (or at least clarifying) of what the needs actually are for 2018.
Continued development of the young guys we have.
A decision on whether we can compete in 2018.
If so,
- A Jon Lester-type signing to fill the hole we assume to be at the top of the rotation.
- An R.A. Dickey-type signing to fill the hole we assume to be in the middle of the rotation.
- A Ben Zobrist-type signing at some position player need. (Maybe even Dozier himself with a contract extension if that's warranted.)
- And a trade or two, using the remaining prospects we have to fill a gap or two.
If not, it's continued evaluation of the progress made to date, which will still include the answering and clarifying of what the needs are. And then on to Plan B (or J, or Q, or whatever we're up to by now).

Sign In

Article: Twins, Please Don't Trade Brian Dozier!

Recommended Posts

Archived

Member Statistics

Prospect News & Highlights

Recent News

Notes & Rumors

Recent Blog Entries

Recent Status Updates