Dozier Trade Discussion Thread

[Otto von Ballpark]

I will guess the Twins have even backed off that.

 

I don't think they've backed off their original high asking price, at least not meaningfully so. If that was the case, we probably would have seen some sort of consensus emerge on a second piece, and the debate would have shifted to a third piece.

 

My guess is the two teams agreed on De Leon as a starting point, and the Twins have probably asked for so much as the second piece that the Dodgers haven't even bothered formally adding a second piece to their offer (there isn't much point in doing so if it isn't going to complete the trade).

 

This seems consistent with the virtually nonexistent offers from other clubs -- I think the Twins asking price has stayed high enough that no one else is going to bother making offers either.

 

And it's not necessarily a bad strategy as long as the Dodgers don't appear close to landing another 2B.

[TheLeviathan]

 

According to most relevant sources, such as Steve Adams at mlbtraderumors, the offer is De Leon by himself or De Leon and "junk" (Adams words).  No one - aside from Dave - has suggested that the Dodgers are offering De Leon and Alvarez and national writers have suggested that the Dodgers think that De Leon and STEWART are too much to give up.  Again, ignoring Dave, the Dogers list of untouchables in a Dozier trade apparently includes Urias, Bellinger, Alvarez, Stewart, Buehler, Lux and Verdugo (according to different multiple sources).  So right now I think it's pretty fair to say that the Dodgers haven't given the Twins an offer that any of us think is fair and that the Twins are right to have moved off of the talks.

 

If you, Levi, think the Twins have been given an offer of De Leon and Calhoun, for instance, and you feel that would have been a fair offer, fine. 

 

I don't know what they've been offered.  But if all they have been offered is DeLeon we wouldn't still be negotiating for two months.  That makes zero sense.   Now that doesn't mean their counter offer was fair.  It could've been DeLeon and Trevor Oaks.  It could have been DeLeon and some AA scrub.  I don't know.  But I'm pretty much 100% confident it wasn't just DeLeon.  And I'm reasonably confident the counter-offer came close enough to keep the sides talking.  Otherwise they likely wouldn't have continued talking.

 

So what else was on the table is anyone's guess.  The Dodgers may have, at some point, offered only DeLeon.  We may never have budged off of Bellinger and DeLeon.  I don't know.  I've said it before and I'll say it again, most of the credible sources you keep repeating didn't say anything until after Lavelle's poorly worded article.  Then suddenly that became the re-tweet rage.  I don't buy it, it feels recycled.

 

We may never know what package they are negotiating on, but I don't know enough to say what it is would be fair or unfair.  I only know the Twins FO doesn't like it, but that isn't much to go off of.

[Otto von Ballpark]

national writers have suggested that the Dodgers think that De Leon and STEWART are too much to give up. Again, ignoring Dave, the Dogers list of untouchables in a Dozier trade apparently includes Urias, Bellinger, Alvarez, Stewart, Buehler, Lux and Verdugo (according to different multiple sources).

FWIW, most of these guys aren't necessarily untouchable, just not in a package with De

Leon. No one has really addressed any combinations without De Leon.

 

Not that this suggests there is a better Dodgers offer, but it suggests there hasn't been much for negotiations so I am not sure if the minimal discussions so far can even be classified as offers.

[Otto von Ballpark]

I don't know what they've been offered. But if all they have been offered is DeLeon we wouldn't still be negotiating for two months. That makes zero sense. Now that doesn't mean their counter offer was fair. It could've been DeLeon and Trevor Oaks. It could have been DeLeon and some AA scrub. I don't know. But I'm pretty much 100% confident it wasn't just DeLeon. And I'm reasonably confident the counter-offer came close enough to keep the sides talking. Otherwise they likely wouldn't have continued talking.

 

To be fair, I suspect that they haven't actually talked much. But the original mutual interest in De Leon remains and neither team has gone a different direction yet, so the whole thing remains open even if there are no real ongoing talks or negotiations.

[Lee-The-Twins-Fan]

 

Heh, I wonder how many thinking this about DeLeon did about Buxton.  Or Berrios.  Or any prospect in a Twins' uniform.

 

The Dodgers could sign Utley, patch the position, and wait to address it later.  They don't need 2B.  We desperately need pitching to pair with our young prospects.

I wholly disagree... Yes, we need pitching. But not "desperately". I would rather have Dozier for 2017 than trade him for one prospect SP, or one prospect SP and a 'lottery ticket' or two. You do that (consistently) and the Twins will never be successful. The Twins need two near MLB-ready starting pitchers (such as De Leon and Stewart) plus one or two 'lottery tickets' for Dozier. 

 

The Twins are not in a desperate situation here. (Neither are the Dodgers btw.) The Twins have some very good prospects on the way up – including Romero and Gonsalves, plus some talent, like Berrios. They will have the arms to contend in 2019 (or sooner). Plus, there will be better SP free agents next offseason.

 

Those who argue 'we must trade Dozier for a prospect or two,' should remember we still have to play 2017 and 18 – with or without him. To trade Dozier for SP prospects who won't be ready in 2017 or 2018 is pure foolishness, IMHO. We need 2 SP we can plug into the rotation in 2017, if we are to compete. If we don't get that, I'd rather have Dozier's bat in the lineup and his leadership in the clubhouse.

[TheLeviathan]

 

I wholly disagree... Yes, we need pitching. But not "desperately". I would rather have Dozier for 2017 than trade him for one prospect SP, or one prospect SP and a 'lottery ticket' or two. You do that (consistently) and the Twins will never be successful. The Twins need two near MLB-ready starting pitchers (such as De Leon and Stewart) plus one or two 'lottery tickets' for Dozier. 

 

The Twins are not in a desperate situation here. (Neither are the Dodgers btw.) The Twins have some very good prospects on the way up – including Romero and Gonsalves, plus some talent, like Berrios. They will have the arms to contend in 2019 (or sooner). Plus, there will be better SP free agents next offseason.

 

Those who argue 'we must trade Dozier for a prospect or two,' should remember we still have to play 2017 and 18 – with or without him. To trade Dozier for SP prospects who won't be ready in 2017 or 2018 is pure foolishness, IMHO. We need 2 SP we can plug into the rotation in 2017, if we are to compete. If we don't get that, I'd rather have Dozier's bat in the lineup and his leadership in the clubhouse.

 

First, the irony of this post didn't escape me.  Considering what gunnathor said it's kind of funny that you're arguing against the idea of trading Dozier based on projecting AA pitchers 2019 cogs in helping us contend.

 

And secondly, and most importantly, we won't contend for anything without better pitching.  So I would absolutely characterize that as a "need".  And 103 losses as a result of that need certainly stinks of desperate.  

[biggentleben]

 

The same article mentioned Profar as a likely candidate.  This may be pure troll or have some heat to it.  Would think Hernadez from Philly might even have a bigger price tag than Dozier.  I think that Dodgers may decide to move on or this could be just putting pressure on the Twins to fold. 

I am of the feeling of don't give in.  Misguess by the Dodgers in this line will put them behind the 8 ball by middle of next year.

 

Why would Cesar Hernandez have a bigger price tag? That makes no sense whatsoever....

[jimmer]

I think if we're pointing to next season and saying that there will be better pitching available to us in FA, then we haven't been paying much attention to our team.  The quality FA pitchers that MAY be available next offseason will be taken up by teams that are willing to step up and pay the price necessary.

[Doomtints]

 

I think if we're pointing to next season and saying that there will be better pitching available to us in FA, then we haven't been paying much attention to our team.  The quality FA pitchers that MAY be available next offseason will be taken up by teams that are willing to step up and pay the price necessary.

 

Exactly. The top pitchers will be out of the Twins price range.

[Lee-The-Twins-Fan]

 

First, the irony of this post didn't escape me.  Considering what gunnathor said it's kind of funny that you're arguing against the idea of trading Dozier based on projecting AA pitchers 2019 cogs in helping us contend.

 

And secondly, and most importantly, we won't contend for anything without better pitching.  So I would absolutely characterize that as a "need".  And 103 losses as a result of that need certainly stinks of desperate.  

You honestly believe the Twins will repeat a 103-loss season if we don't trade Dozier? I think it's more likely if we DO trade Dozier. 

 

Yes, we need pitching. Yes, the Dodgers have pitching and need a 2B like Dozier. But unless we get decent value for him, we shouldn't just trade him JUST to get a pitcher. We need more than that, and he's WORTH more than that! If the trade market is soft, then we wait to trade him. 

 

No irony was intended in my post. I'm merely pointing out that the Twins have got some very good arms coming up, but most of them are at least a year away yet. That's why we need 2 MLB-ready arms now. If the Dodgers won't do that trade, then we should either look elsewhere, or not trade BD. it's that simple. His leadership, his bat and his glove all have value to the Twins in 2017. The Twins should not trade him for half his value, just to get any pitching return, IMHO.

[darin617]

 

Why would Cesar Hernandez have a bigger price tag? That makes no sense whatsoever....

 

I would have to say purely sine he is in his first year of arbitration so he is cheaper. Just my guess, but he would not command as much as Dozier would.

 

If anything it is starting to sound like Kinsler would not be objecting to a trade to LA according to my link below. I just find it odd that Detroit would want to deal him when they are contending now.

 

http://www.mlbtraderumors.com/2017/01/tigers-notes-kinsler-zimmermann-center-field-gose.html

[Riverbrian]

 

I would have to say purely sine he is in his first year of arbitration so he is cheaper. Just my guess, but he would not command as much as Dozier would.

 

If anything it is starting to sound like Kinsler would not be objecting to a trade to LA according to my link below. I just find it odd that Detroit would want to deal him when they are contending now.

 

http://www.mlbtraderumors.com/2017/01/tigers-notes-kinsler-zimmermann-center-field-gose.html

 

I can't see it either. 

 

Now if the Tigers would have dealt JD Martinez after they dealt Maybin. Now you are looking at a completed shift toward tearing it down. 

 

The Tigers seemed to have hit the brakes and seem willing to give it another shot in a weakened Central. 

 

Trading Kinsler would create a 2nd Hole (2B and CF). 

 

I don't see it at this point. 

 

Unless of course... The Dodgers over pay. If they are going to do that... It might as well be for Dozier instead. 

[TheLeviathan]

 

You honestly believe the Twins will repeat a 103-loss season if we don't trade Dozier? I think it's more likely if we DO trade Dozier. 

 

Yes, we need pitching. Yes, the Dodgers have pitching and need a 2B like Dozier. But unless we get decent value for him, we shouldn't just trade him JUST to get a pitcher. We need more than that, and he's WORTH more than that! If the trade market is soft, then we wait to trade him. 

 

No irony was intended in my post. I'm merely pointing out that the Twins have got some very good arms coming up, but most of them are at least a year away yet. That's why we need 2 MLB-ready arms now. If the Dodgers won't do that trade, then we should either look elsewhere, or not trade BD. it's that simple. His leadership, his bat and his glove all have value to the Twins in 2017. The Twins should not trade him for half his value, just to get any pitching return, IMHO.

 

First, we all agree that the Twins shouldn't trade him for "half his value" or one pitcher.  We've gone around and around that strawman enough.  No one wants that, but it may be true that you are over-valuing Dozier depending upon what you expect fair value to be.  It seems that way since you want four pieces and two very good ones.  I would suggest you have wildly over-valued Dozier.

 

As for next year - it depends on who they put at SS.  I think moving Dozier for a pitcher, plugging in a defensive SS, and moving Polanco to 2B might be more than enough to offset the loss of the offense I expect from Dozier with better D and pitching.

 

The irony was that gunnathor made a sarcastic remark about prospects "not missing" and you're already telling us our future pitching will be fine based on projecting two guys in AA as part of our rotation.   As a Twins fan I hope your projection gets lucky and comes true, but as something to plan around that is a huge mistake.  

[Lee-The-Twins-Fan]

 

First, we all agree that the Twins shouldn't trade him for "half his value" or one pitcher.  We've gone around and around that strawman enough.  No one wants that, but it may be true that you are over-valuing Dozier depending upon what you expect fair value to be.  It seems that way since you want four pieces and two very good ones.  I would suggest you have wildly over-valued Dozier.

 

As for next year - it depends on who they put at SS.  I think moving Dozier for a pitcher, plugging in a defensive SS, and moving Polanco to 2B might be more than enough to offset the loss of the offense I expect from Dozier with better D and pitching.

 

The irony was that gunnathor made a sarcastic remark about prospects "not missing" and you're already telling us our future pitching will be fine based on projecting two guys in AA as part of our rotation.   As a Twins fan I hope your projection gets lucky and comes true, but as something to plan around that is a huge mistake.  

I guess we'll have to agree to disagree... No harm in that. I tend to believe you are underselling Dozier's value. I'm not going to go into his history and stats, because it has been done. But he is a very valuable position player. He hit 42 homers last year – and played good defense, stayed on the field, etc. That's worth more than two unproven starting pitcher prospects! He has proven his value – they haven't (De Leon and Stewart, etc.). 

 

I'm not asking for the moon, here. Just two near-MLB-ready starters (Like De Leon and Stewart) and one or two A-level prospects. Considering Dozier's proven value – that's not a lot. 

 

Now if you're talking about an established 2-3 rotation pitcher for Dozier 1-on-1, i might go for that. But there's a reason they are called PROSPECTS. And I don't want to trade Dozier for De Leon and A-level prospects. He's worth more than that.

 

So we'll have to agree to disagree.

[TheLeviathan]

DeLeon and Stewart is a deal I have said I'd accept as well.  But that is "two unproven starting pitchers", which you've also said is not worth enough to trade Dozier. 

[jimmer]

He has hit 30+ HR ONCE, some are acting as if he's a perennial 40 HR hitter. 

He has a wRC+ over 120 once.  Once.  A wRC+ over 110 twice. Twice.

 

Why are we acting as if he's a consistent offensive force?  Have we just not been paying attention? We somewhat recently extended/overvalued a pitcher based on a career year. Oops.

 

On top of that, he's  not a defensive wiz.  He's an average defender.

Additionally, he has only two years left on his contract, not 4 or 5.  Two.

 

[DodgerFan1234]

 

Now if you're talking about an established 2-3 rotation pitcher for Dozier 1-on-1, i might go for that. But there's a reason they are called PROSPECTS. And I don't want to trade Dozier for De Leon and A-level prospects. He's worth more than that.

 .

Honestly, no disrespect that this is where the argument gets silly. I don't care whether it's JDL, Berrios, or Kershaw in 2008, guys don't establish themselves as 2-3's until they've been in the league for 2-3 years minimum establishing themselves as such. By then, they've eaten up the most important years of control on a team with 103 losses. It's pretty clear that what Twins fans want is a unicorn. A player without the risk of being a prospect but with the control and value of a prospect.

 

The team at some point has to pick its spots. I get the unease of doing so. I'm a Dodger fan, having lived through the Dodgers picking Wilton instead of Vlad Guerrero and Deshields instead of Pedro. These decisions have repercussions for years beyond. But have some sense of reality at the same time. The argument is no different than a Dodger fan saying that they can't give up what are considered two premium prospects in the organization without getting back Buxton, a guy thus far that's been a complete bust but for a month. The guy has had 2 very important years of control wiped out with nothing but one month to show for it.

[biggentleben]

 

I can't see it either. 

 

Now if the Tigers would have dealt JD Martinez after they dealt Maybin. Now you are looking at a completed shift toward tearing it down. 

 

The Tigers seemed to have hit the brakes and seem willing to give it another shot in a weakened Central. 

 

Trading Kinsler would create a 2nd Hole (2B and CF). 

 

I don't see it at this point. 

 

Unless of course... The Dodgers over pay. If they are going to do that... It might as well be for Dozier instead. 

 

Except that moving JD would have made some sense with Moya, Stewart, etc. able to handle the role in his stead. Kinsler could make sense in the same vein depending on their view of JaCoby Jones at 2B (I personally think he'd be below average there, but he wouldn't be dreadful by any means).

[biggentleben]

 

He has hit 30+ HR ONCE, some are acting as if he's a perennial 40 HR hitter. 

He has a wRC+ over 120 once.  Once.  A wRC+ over 110 twice. Twice.

 

Why are we acting as if he's a consistent offensive force?  Have we just not been paying attention? We somewhat recently extended/overvalued a pitcher based on a career year. Oops.

 

On top of that, he's  not a defensive wiz.  He's an average defender.

Additionally, he has only two years left on his contract, not 4 or 5.  Two.

 

While I can agree with most of this, the defensive part goes to where I struggle with defensive stats. Just watching Dozier, he has to cover a lot of ground to his right that most second basemen don't cover, which means he often misses plays to his left that many second basemen make, hurting his overall rating. I don't view Dozier as Andrelton Simmons at 2B, but he's a very solid defender at the position and a good example of how metrics don't take into the account arguably the worst SS play in the entire league being next to him as part of his defensive numbers.

[Brock Beauchamp]

 

I guess we'll have to agree to disagree... No harm in that. I tend to believe you are underselling Dozier's value. I'm not going to go into his history and stats, because it has been done. But he is a very valuable position player. He hit 42 homers last year – and played good defense, stayed on the field, etc. That's worth more than two unproven starting pitcher prospects! He has proven his value – they haven't (De Leon and Stewart, etc.). 

 

I'm not asking for the moon, here. Just two near-MLB-ready starters (Like De Leon and Stewart) and one or two A-level prospects. Considering Dozier's proven value – that's not a lot. 

 

Now if you're talking about an established 2-3 rotation pitcher for Dozier 1-on-1, i might go for that. But there's a reason they are called PROSPECTS. And I don't want to trade Dozier for De Leon and A-level prospects. He's worth more than that.

 

So we'll have to agree to disagree.

And if three teams were champing at the bit for Dozier (or any second baseman who is good), the Twins would probably get that deal. Hell, they might get more if teams were jockeying for position.

 

But it's obvious the market has not valued Dozier at that price, as evidenced by the rigorous bidding war between the Dodgers and Absolutely Nobody Else. So, you take what you can get (likely De Leon + Stewart/Alvarez/whatever), or you keep Dozier.

 

And if the Dodgers are willing to offer up that deal (which isn't a given, they might be unreasonable), I'd take it. The Twins with De Leon + Other Decent Prospect are better going forward than the Twins with Dozier.

[USAFChief]

He has hit 30+ HR ONCE, some are acting as if he's a perennial 40 HR hitter.

He has a wRC+ over 120 once. Once. A wRC+ over 110 twice. Twice.

 

Why are we acting as if he's a consistent offensive force? Have we just not been paying attention? We somewhat recently extended/overvalued a pitcher based on a career year. Oops.

 

On top of that, he's not a defensive wiz. He's an average defender.

Additionally, he has only two years left on his contract, not 4 or 5. Two.

And yet, if one is to believe WAR--which I believe I've seen you defend--he's accumulated over 16 fWAR over the past four seasons. It's not just one year. He's a very good player, in the prime of his career, on a cheap contract, which is why the Dodgers want him. They want him because he's pretty much an exact match for an area of extreme need.

 

So they can either pay up, or find some other, lesser option. It's really that simple.

 

I hope they pay up. If they don't, I'll enjoy watching Dozier play for the Twins, and hopefully enjoy watching the Dodgers be good yet again, but not good enough, yet again.

[Riverbrian]

Except that moving JD would have made some sense with Moya, Stewart, etc. able to handle the role in his stead. Kinsler could make sense in the same vein depending on their view of JaCoby Jones at 2B (I personally think he'd be below average there, but he wouldn't be dreadful by any means).

If rebuilding... they don't appear to be heading that direction.

 

I can't see Kinsler being available unless there is a big overpay for him.

[jimmer]

He's averaged 4 WAR over the last 4 years and turns 30 next year.  A 4 WAR player teeters between being a good player and an all star player (only been one of those once)

 

But when trading him, we're also only giving up two years of that.  Then someone else is going to have to pay up if he continues to be that type of player.

 

A team shouldn't have to give up two very strong prospects for only two years of Dozier.  I'd love them to, but it's too much.  Some say well prospects are just that, not guarantees, and that's fine.  But all players are prospects at one time or another. If we're looking for guarantees on a player/players we get in return for Dozier, there aren't any.  At least none that we'll get 6 years of control each over. None.  Because none have played enough/at all at the major league level.  On top of that, I keep reading how we shouldn't trade Dozier for prospects cause there's no guarantee we'll get a #2 type pitcher. Two years of Dozier isn't worth 6 years of a #2 type pitcher.

 

 

 

 

[USAFChief]

He's averaged 4 WAR over the last 4 years and turns 30 next year.  A 4 WAR player teeters between being a good player and an all star player (only been one of those once)

 

But when trading him, we're also only giving up two years of that.  Then someone else is going to have to pay up if he continues to be that type of player.

 

A team shouldn't have to give up two very strong prospects for only two years of Dozier.  I'd love them to, but it's too much.  Some say well prospects are just that, not guarantees, and that's fine.  But all players are prospects at one time or another. If we're looking for guarantees on a player/players we get in return for Dozier, there aren't any.  At least none that we'll get 6 years of control each over. None.  Because none have played enough/at all at the major league level.  On top of that, I keep reading how we shouldn't trade Dozier for prospects cause there's no guarantee we'll get a #2 type pitcher. Two years of Dozier isn't worth 6 years of a #2 type pitcher.

So then there's no trade to be made, IMO. The Dodgers want to give up De Leon and nothing else of real value. You're ok with that.

 

The Twins want more. I'm ok with that.

 

The ball is in the Dodgers' court.

[jimmer]

Maybe I need to put the fact that I believe Dozier is worth more than just De Leon or De Leon/garbage in my signature block because saying it about 15 times so far hasn't been enough. Then people can stop throwing that strawman argument at my feet even though I have never said anything of the sort.

 

Problem is, not everyone agrees on the quality of the other prospects the Dodgers have. What some might consider having no value, others might see real value. I see great value in Alvarez, others think of him as a flyer.

[biggentleben]

 

If rebuilding... they don't appear to be heading that direction.

I can't see Kinsler being available unless there is a big overpay for him.

 

They don't necessarily need to rebuild to move Kinsler. They could simply be retooling. There are guys in their system right now that could do well to cover certain positions that would allow them to consider offers on guys like Kinsler, JD, Upton, and Victor without it being a full scale rebuild.

 

Heck, they could still compete while moving Kinsler, depending on what it is that they're looking to get in return.

[USAFChief]

Maybe I need to put the fact that I believe Dozier is worth more than just De Leon or De Leon/garbage in my signature block because saying it about 15 times so far hasn't been enough. Then people can stop throwing that strawman argument at my feet even though I have never said anything of the sort.

 

Problem is, not everyone agrees on the quality of the other prospects the Dodgers have. What some might consider having no value, others might see real value. I see great value in Alvarez, others think of him as a flyer.

One post above, you stated "A team shouldn't have to give up two very strong prospects for two years of Dozier."

 

It's hard for me to keep up with your position on this.

[jimmer]

 

One post above, you stated "A team shouldn't have to give up two very strong prospects for two years of Dozier."

It's hard for me to keep up with your position on this.

Are the choices only a very strong prospect or 'nothing else of real value'.  Do you believe there are no other levels? Maybe that's the problem right there.

 

Just because a player isn't a very strong prospect doesn't mean he has no real value. Dozier wasn't a very strong prospect either. Now, apparently, two years of Dozier is worth two very strong prospects in some eyes

[TheLeviathan]

DeLeon is a very good prospect.  Stewart is a good prospect.  I think most all of us are in the camp of getting DeLeon and one other good prospect.

 

But there are some that insinuate they need two guys the level of DeLeon.  Frankly, the Dodgers have no reason to pay that and they almost certainly won't.  Nor will anyone else.  And that is highly unlikely to change as he gets older with less team control.

 

If the Dodgers do offer (or have offered) a prospect like Stewart or Buehler with DeLeon the Twins are making a serious mistake turning that down.

[Lee-The-Twins-Fan]

 

DeLeon is a very good prospect.  Stewart is a good prospect.  I think most all of us are in the camp of getting DeLeon and one other good prospect.

 

But there are some that insinuate they need two guys the level of DeLeon.  Frankly, the Dodgers have no reason to pay that and they almost certainly won't.  Nor will anyone else.  And that is highly unlikely to change as he gets older with less team control.

 

If the Dodgers do offer (or have offered) a prospect like Stewart or Buehler with DeLeon the Twins are making a serious mistake turning that down.

I'm not suggesting two guys on level with DeLeon. DeLeon is ranked (2016 MLB rankings – 2017 isn't out yet) as the 33rd best MLB prospect; he's second on the Angels' list. For comparison purposes, the Twins' Tyler Jay is ranked 37th overall on the MLB list.

 

Yadier Alvarez, whom Dave W says is included in the negotiations, is ranked 91st overall, 5th on the Angels' list. Brock Stewart is not on the overall MLB prospect ranking, and is 14th on the Angels list – definitely not on the same level as either De Leon or Alvarez. 

 

I'm not suggesting two no. 2 starters – I'm suggesting two starting pitchers able to come into the Twins' rotation in 2017, plus one or two low A or A level prospects. De Leon and Stewart fit the first part of that bill - but they're hardly equal. I want two starters who have gone through their paces at the AA and AAA levels, pitched at least 120 innings last year (I believe De Leon fell short of that, though) – in essence two guys i reasonably believe can start games and have success at the MLB level in 2017. That and one or two 'lottery ticket' types. 

 

If it's De Leon and Stewart, it's a prospect at 33rd, and one that doesn't make the top 100. 

 

I'm not asking for the moon here. But Dozier's proven his value at the MLB level. Stewart and De Leon (and one or two others) haven't. It's way more likely that one or both of De Leon and Stewart falter at the MLB level than it is that Dozier does. That's why it will take multiple prospects to mitigate their risk.

 

As I've said before, that's what Dozier is worth. If the Dodgers and other teams don't want to meet that price, then I'd keep Dozier. He has value for the Twins in 2017.