Dozier Trade Discussion Thread

[Brock Beauchamp]

 

I was counting the 5.2, he also put up a 3.7 in a full season the year before that which brings the average down to 4.5 which is still a good player.
That being said the fact that he hasn't show a steady line of production, it's not as though he went from 2.4-3.7-5.2-6.5 he's been all over the place.

The last month of the year he hit 263/.323/.561 which is good but not insane.

In fact his whole season was all over the place, the first two months he was awful, then he was incredible, then good, the incredible, then good again.

Last year was like a microcosm for Dozier's career, all over the map, but at the end of the day it all averages to a good not elite player.

While I agree Dozier isn't an elite player - yet, anyway - you're really reaching with a lot of this post.

 

First, Dozier's 2013, for all intents and purposes, should not count as it's partially irrelevant to the conversation at hand (projecting Dozier's worth). It was May of 2013 that he and Brunansky altered his approach and Dozier has been a wildly different hitter since that point. Before the swing adjustment, Dozier had hit around 25 home runs in the entirety of his professional career spanning ~2400 plate appearances. Since that adjustment, he has hit around 110 home runs in ~2300 plate appearances.

 

"he hit 263/.323/.561 which is good but not insane."

 

Whoa, man. Way to set the bar high. True, an .884 OPS is not "insane" but it's really freakin' good, even more so when it comes from a middle infielder. There were all of five qualifying MLB players who play an up-the-middle position and posted a higher OPS than Brian Dozier last season.

 

Last year, Dozier accumulated roughly 6 fWAR in a full season. While I don't believe Dozier is an elite player (yet, anyway), that is absolutely an elite year of play.

 

So it really boils down to how you want to define "elite". Are we talking single seasons or projection of a player's future performance?

[TheLeviathan]

Brock, part of that post is responding to the idea that Dozier is on a trajectory to, I don't know, improve even more?  Continue to be a 6 WAR player?

 

A 4ish WAR player is a really good player, but there is too much talk that suggests he can maintain a 6 WAR pace.  Maybe he can, but his history and age suggest otherwise.  The real outlier would be a repeat of 2016, not settling back in as a very good 4 WAR player.

[Brock Beauchamp]

Brock, part of that post is responding to the idea that Dozier is on a trajectory to, I don't know, improve even more? Continue to be a 6 WAR player?

 

A 4ish WAR player is a really good player, but there is too much talk that suggests he can maintain a 6 WAR pace. Maybe he can, but his history and age suggest otherwise. The real outlier would be a repeat of 2016, not settling back in as a very good 4 WAR player.

Ah, my mistake then. I read that post as if it was claiming Dozier's 2016 wasn't elite, which it very much was.

[AZTwin]

I don't think this is an accurate statement at all. In the last 5 years the only guy I can think of that was a known prospect at the time going through the system that then needed surgery was Stripling. Kershaw came through the system and has been a workhorse for a decade before the back this year. Buehler required it before he entered the system hence why he dropped. McCarthy/Ryu/Wood/Kazmir were not babied through the Dodgers minors.

 

As far as the Dodger philosophy of handling average or better pitchers in the minors they have a specific quotient. They aggressively push the level of competition but remain very conservative in the number of innings and go up 30-50% from the prior year once they have them at the top level or 2. So they may see100 innings top out until AAA or MLB. Then they ease guys in over 2 years. It's what they did with Kershaw. It's what they'll do with Urias and what they'll do with DeLeon should he stay.

 

And who really cares about the Twins philosophy on pitching. For as good as the hitting development has been the pitching development has been crap. Exact opposite with the Dodgers. Just organizational philosiphies and hence why they happen to be decent trade partners at the moment. I (and any team in baseball) would rather get 100 good-great innings than 150 shyte-average innings. The Dodgers generally do a better job at finding those guys that will get you those good innings. Ask them to get you a decent hitting 2B and you get the shrug emoji.

This post just simply isn't true. Kershaw was able to pitch 180 innings his age 20 season. To be 24 and still around 100 innings is concerning. Hell even kershaw's age 19 season he threw over 10% more than deleons most with over 120 innings, At age 19 you are really building them up for their first full season so that isn't an atypical number. To be 24 and not even close to the standard 140 and have shoulder soreness is a major RED FLAG. JMHO

[AZTwin]

My interpretation of it all is that the dodgers are taking some average SP prospects and setting them up to be good relief pitching prospects with the hope that someone buys the fools gold and overpays for what they think can be starting pitchers. Again JMO

[Trueblue222]

If the Twins FO had this view of JDL and the Dodgers other pitching prospects do you think they would be trying to build a deal around them lol

[Brock Beauchamp]

 

If the Twins FO had this view of JDL and the Dodgers other pitching prospects do you think they would be trying to build a deal around them lol

Yeah, that's the crux of the issue. Both of the interested parties are using reports and data we've never seen and are operating on a level well above our layman analysis.

 

For all we know, both front offices are bickering over some player in rookie ball none of us even considered part of the deal and that's what is holding this thing up for a month.

[AZTwin]

If the Twins FO had this view of JDL and the Dodgers other pitching prospects do you think they would be trying to build a deal around them lol

i think it's why they want significant pieces as 3 and 4. They recognize the risk and want to partially mitigate that risk and is why they are holding out. It is very reasonable. At the end of the day, I don't think the dodgers have the depth in their farm system where either team would want to get a deal done

[Trueblue222]

I don't blame the Twins FO for wanting 4 top prospects and I also don't blame(I'm glad) the Dodgers aren't willing to give up that much in this deal. Obviously the Dodgers like Dozier as plan A in solving their 2B issue and to improve their balance against LH Pitching. I think the Dodgers reluctance(it seems) to improve their offer shows that they have at least a very good plan B. Wether it's Braun for the OF or Solarte,Kinsler etc..at 2B. Dozier isn't the end all solution for the Dodgers to the point where they are going to tear down the farm they have built the last few years to get him. Really hoping there is closure to this over the weekend lol I'll be interested to see the direction both teams take wether or not this deal is consummated!

[diehardtwinsfan]

 

i think it's why they want significant pieces as 3 and 4. They recognize the risk and want to partially mitigate that risk and is why they are holding out. It is very reasonable. At the end of the day, I don't think the dodgers have the depth in their farm system where either team would want to get a deal done

I've got to disagree with the second sentence. The Dodgers have plenty of depth in their system. If they don't have that, then really no one does. Just looking John's rankings, the Dodgers and Atlanta are probably both top 5 systems.  It would not be hard to find 3-4 prospects in that system to meet the Twins' requirements.

 

The issue is that the Dodgers don't want to give up that much. That, to be fair, is part of negotiations. If they came to the deal easily, I'd be a bit more concerned. Everyone knows that Dozier is going to cost them something, and it's going to be both quality and quantity I suspect. 

 

Using Sickles:

De Leon is the top prospect

Bellinger is #2

Alvarez is #3

Calhoun is #6 (probably on the edge of the top 100)

Stewart is #10

Ruiz is #11.

 

But getting their 1, 10, 11 and some C+ HS rookie baller with upside is very reasonable, just as getting their 1,3, and 10/11 if you want more quality. We aren't talking about 3 top 100 prospects. We are talking about 2 top 100s along with a couple more in the top 250.  Those aren't unreasonable asks, but I can certainly see the angst on their end. That's a lot to give up, and certainly worth bargaining hard.

[DodgerFan1234]

 

This post just simply isn't true. Kershaw was able to pitch 180 innings his age 20 season. To be 24 and still around 100 innings is concerning. Hell even kershaw's age 19 season he threw over 10% more than deleons most with over 120 innings, At age 19 you are really building them up for their first full season so that isn't an atypical number. To be 24 and not even close to the standard 140 and have shoulder soreness is a major RED FLAG. JMHO

I'm sorry, I must have missed where 140 innings by 24 is "the standard"?

 

Also, to your quote:

"This post just simply isn't true. Kershaw was able to pitch 180 innings his age 20 season."  He actually pitched 171IP (+6PS) in 2009 vs 122IP in 2008, which falls exactly within the range quotient I stated. #math

 

Coming back the the age 24 hangup you have I'm not really understanding it.  Some guys get drafted out of college at age 21 and don't really get started until the next full year in full season ball at age 22.  Some organizations (like the Dodgers) baby these arms to protect them.  That's what they've done with JDL.  If you don't want to believe it because it furthers your narrative, fine.  One of these Dozier threads has a list of well known guys who did not establish them until 24.  Let me give you another example.  In the 60's, an era when 325 IP was the norm, Sandy Koufax never topped 175IP through his age 24 season.  Running with some innings pitched by age 24 narrative (if its some Twin thing) is a terrible way to evaluate talent.  You evaluate talent baed on t-a-l-e-n-t regardless of age.

[Oxtung]

I've got to disagree with the second sentence. The Dodgers have plenty of depth in their system. If they don't have that, then really no one does. Just looking John's rankings, the Dodgers and Atlanta are probably both top 5 systems. It would not be hard to find 3-4 prospects in that system to meet the Twins' requirements.

 

The issue is that the Dodgers don't want to give up that much. That, to be fair, is part of negotiations. If they came to the deal easily, I'd be a bit more concerned. Everyone knows that Dozier is going to cost them something, and it's going to be both quality and quantity I suspect.

 

Using Sickles:

De Leon is the top prospect

Bellinger is #2

Alvarez is #3

Calhoun is #6 (probably on the edge of the top 100)

Stewart is #10

Ruiz is #11.

 

But getting their 1, 10, 11 and some C+ HS rookie baller with upside is very reasonable, just as getting their 1,3, and 10/11 if you want more quality. We aren't talking about 3 top 100 prospects. We are talking about 2 top 100s along with a couple more in the top 250. Those aren't unreasonable asks, but I can certainly see the angst on their end. That's a lot to give up, and certainly worth bargaining hard.

I agree with your framework, 2 top 100 and 2 more (could be a back end starter like stripling or flier like Ruiz), but a trade of De Leon, Stewart, Ruiz +1 doesn't even come close to matching that framework.

[gunnarthor]

 

You evaluate talent baed on t-a-l-e-n-t regardless of age.

You certainly have to consider durability and future health risk in any evaluation. 

JDL is a nice prospect but he has serious flags as well. I'm sure the Twins and the Dodgers are both considering those issues in the trade.

[DodgerFan1234]

 

You certainly have to consider durability and future health risk in any evaluation. 

JDL is a nice prospect but he has serious flags as well. I'm sure the Twins and the Dodgers are both considering those issues in the trade.

Absolutely has red flags I am not denying that. I would absolutely be concerned as an acquiring team about a shoulder issue in the prior year, but to say he "just can't seem to stay healthy" is a false narrative because the issue has not been a thing in the years prior to that.  Also, using innings at age to me is as arbitrary to me as using wins to determine how good a pitcher is.  "Errrrr, he just doesn't know how to win games," "he's not even a .500 pitcher" "being fully established by 24 is the standard" 'well, he's 24, must be a bust."  All arbitrary.

[Strato Guy]

A few weeks ago, I thought a Dozier trade was imminent, perhaps a 90% chance of happening. Now, that % of probability is undoubtedly lower. If they cannot get fair trade value, Plan B is waiting and hope to make a trade later. Of course there is risk with waiting. I wonder if the Twins are now considering another option: Keep Dozier and trade off other assets such as Santana. Dozier could still be a very good player when the Twins get good again. Perhaps the twins can extend his contract after the 2017 season. Santana, on the other hand, will not have any more value than right now. If Dozier stays, then Polanco should be traded. Would the Dodgers be interested in him? Would they consider trading a guy like Stewart for him? Just a thought to consider.

[BuxtonBandwagon]

All this waiting makes me less optimistic a deal gets done. IMO I feel like no deal gets done. If it's been taking this long the sides must be too far apart. Really sad because each team has what the other wants/needs. The trade matches up perfectly, so I hope I'm wrong and the twins and Dodgers get a deal done. If no deal gets done a salute Falvey and co for not backing down tho.

[TyTY23]

 

i think it's why they want significant pieces as 3 and 4. They recognize the risk and want to partially mitigate that risk and is why they are holding out. It is very reasonable. At the end of the day, I don't think the dodgers have the depth in their farm system where either team would want to get a deal done

I really don't get all of your assumptions about Dodger prospects, development, and worth/value of said prospects. I don't know if your just misinformed or just plain trolling. There's no one way to develop prospects since they all come with different backgrounds and have different needs. To compare the development of Kershaw to any other prospects its just not knowledgable. I think we all understand the risks involved with prospects, especially pitching, but these prospects still carry a lot of value.

 

To keep on bashing the Dodger's player development is pretty funny since they have continuously created a solid top of the league system. The Dodgers system has the depth that will continue to graduate prospects for years to come. To bash the way the Dodgers develop their pitchers when they have recently developed many young pitchers is again not smart. I'm not one to bash other franchises that I don't know much about, but from I have read the Twins haven't been too successful at developing blue chip can't miss prospects that just haven't developed in the majors. For you to say that the Dodgers are doing it wrong while the franchise that you cheer for has not gotten things right recently is just pretty hilarious. 

[diehardtwinsfan]

 

I really don't get all of your assumptions about Dodger prospects, development, and worth/value of said prospects. I don't know if your just misinformed or just plain trolling. There's no one way to develop prospects since they all come with different backgrounds and have different needs. To compare the development of Kershaw to any other prospects its just not knowledgable. I think we all understand the risks involved with prospects, especially pitching, but these prospects still carry a lot of value.

 

To keep on bashing the Dodger's player development is pretty funny since they have continuously created a solid top of the league system. The Dodgers system has the depth that will continue to graduate prospects for years to come. To bash the way the Dodgers develop their pitchers when they have recently developed many young pitchers is again not smart. I'm not one to bash other franchises that I don't know much about, but from I have read the Twins haven't been too successful at developing blue chip can't miss prospects that just haven't developed in the majors. For you to say that the Dodgers are doing it wrong while the franchise that you cheer for has not gotten things right recently is just pretty hilarious. 

 

Let's try and circle this one back around a bit.  I understand the idea, but this a bit more than attacking the idea. I don't think anyone (at least most of us) think the Dodgers aren't good at developing prospects. I do however recognize that they are just that... prospects.  Some will pan out, some won't. Just because they come from a system that has done a good job doesn't equate to that meaning that these guys will necessarily be good. That's where the risk comes into play, and it's why we need more than De Leon plus spare parts.

[gunnarthor]

 

 

To keep on bashing the Dodger's player development is pretty funny since they have continuously created a solid top of the league system. The Dodgers system has the depth that will continue to graduate prospects for years to come. To bash the way the Dodgers develop their pitchers when they have recently developed many young pitchers is again not smart. I'm not one to bash other franchises that I don't know much about, but from I have read the Twins haven't been too successful at developing blue chip can't miss prospects that just haven't developed in the majors. For you to say that the Dodgers are doing it wrong while the franchise that you cheer for has not gotten things right recently is just pretty hilarious. 

The Dodgers are having a nice little run but let's not get ahead of ourselves.  From 11-16, your system has been ranked 12, 23, 19, 14, 3, and 1.  Obviously, you've had some nice hits and you've used your international money and comp picks wisely but LA isn't doing anything every other team has done.  Your success has been driven by massive payroll.

Your teams pitching success has been mostly fueled by a great pick in the 06 draft and free agency, not development. That doesn't mean that De Leon or Urias aren't going to be great players but it does mean you're getting a touch ahead of yourself on the ability of your team to actually develop.  Skepticism about De Leon is valid.  He's basically a Berrios-type but a bit taller, older, less experienced.  I like him in a vacuum but he's not an elite prospect by any means. 

[diehardtwinsfan]

 

I agree with your framework, 2 top 100 and 2 more (could be a back end starter like stripling or flier like Ruiz), but a trade of De Leon, Stewart, Ruiz +1 doesn't even come close to matching that framework.

 

You are correct, I didn't re-read what I said... That first deal (De Leon, Stewart, Ruiz, upside guy) isn't that frame work... if they went quantity, upside guy would still be a decent spec in their top 20.  I'm pretty high on Ruiz personally, so maybe that's my own mistake, but upside guy would be a 20-30 in their system and that doesn't come close. I'd probably be pushing hard for one of their OF guys at that point.

[diehardtwinsfan]

Lots of Braves fans really seem to think he's a fit in ATL.  They certainly have the system to get it done.  I think the Dodgers are a better fit with De Leon and Stewart being key pieces and ML ready, but I don't think it's an accident that we keep seeing their name.

 

http://www.thescore.com/mlb/news/1202261-why-the-braves-should-trade-for-brian-dozier

 

[TyTY23]

 

Let's try and circle this one back around a bit.  I understand the idea, but this a bit more than attacking the idea. I don't think anyone (at least most of us) think the Dodgers aren't good at developing prospects. I do however recognize that they are just that... prospects.  Some will pan out, some won't. Just because they come from a system that has done a good job doesn't equate to that meaning that these guys will necessarily be good. That's where the risk comes into play, and it's why we need more than De Leon plus spare parts.

I hope this post didn't sound like I was being general. I was implying to AZTwin's posts. Also, I was simply replying to AZTwin's post about the Dodgers somehow hindering their pitching prospect's development by holding them back from their innings and their promotion to the bigs.

 

I have stated before if I was dealing with the Twins I would offer JDL, Stewart (I would actually prefer Sheffield, but I'm trying to be fair), and a C level prospect. No more, no less, if it didn't work for the Twins then simple move on. 

[TyTY23]

 

The Dodgers are having a nice little run but let's not get ahead of ourselves.  From 11-16, your system has been ranked 12, 23, 19, 14, 3, and 1.  Obviously, you've had some nice hits and you've used your international money and comp picks wisely but LA isn't doing anything every other team has done.  Your success has been driven by massive payroll.

Your teams pitching success has been mostly fueled by a great pick in the 06 draft and free agency, not development. That doesn't mean that De Leon or Urias aren't going to be great players but it does mean you're getting a touch ahead of yourself on the ability of your team to actually develop.  Skepticism about De Leon is valid.  He's basically a Berrios-type but a bit taller, older, less experienced.  I like him in a vacuum but he's not an elite prospect by any means. 

That's why I said "recently". Also, in the years you mentioned we were being run by penny pincher McCourt, yes the same guy MLB basically ran out. 

 

Seager, Bellinger, JDL, Verdugo, Stewart, Stewart, Buehler, Calhoun, Stripling, and Sheffield have all been drafted, money had nothing to do them being selected. 

 

Good thing for the Dodgers many recent top prospect list have evaluated and ranked JDL as an elite prospect. Maybe that's the reason he is the centerpiece is the reported proposal for Dozier. 

[nytwinsfan]

 

Lots of Braves fans really seem to think he's a fit in ATL.  They certainly have the system to get it done.  I think the Dodgers are a better fit with De Leon and Stewart being key pieces and ML ready, but I don't think it's an accident that we keep seeing their name.

 

http://www.thescore.com/mlb/news/1202261-why-the-braves-should-trade-for-brian-dozier

Hey, if they are willing to make a good enough offer . . . And I get it, he is from that area. Maybe they think they can re-sign/extend him at a bit of a premium for that reason. Still agree with you that the Dodgers are much more likely. 

[jorgenswest]

If the result of the Dozier trade is one mid rotation starter under team control for 6 years, it will be valuable addition to the team and probably more valuable than two years of second base from Dozier.

[Brock Beauchamp]

 

If the result of the Dozier trade is one mid rotation starter under team control for 6 years, it will be valuable addition to the team and probably more valuable than two years of second base from Dozier.

To the Twins, yes, but that shouldn't be the only consideration to make a deal.

 

It's similar to the concept of always taking the BPA in the draft every June. Rebuilding teams don't gain much from expiring contracts of veterans but how that rebuilding team values that veteran is not universal to all teams.

 

The Twins should be motivated to move Dozier but they shouldn't take whatever the Dodgers offer just because Dozier's two year value to the Twins is expected to be minimal.

[doscinco]

TyTy is right. Even throw away prospects like Jharel Cotton (used in the Rich Hill/Reddick trade) pitched 40ish innings like a mid rotation arm for Oakland in the bigs. Cotton, who had certain s of his own as a prospect, would probably be the Twins 3rd best SP behind Santana and maybe Berrios.

[HawkeyeDodger]

 

Actually it has been documented in several national places that the hangup may be Bellinger. He is major league ready and would start day 1 in left field and when Mauers contract is up has the glove to move there if needed. That is the likely hangup. Arms are nice but fall off.... bats just keep on ticking. I would guess that if he was included it would be done tomorrow..... Twin's keep waiting for tomorrow.

Some of the national writer's are the absolute worst who do nothing, but rehash old tired stories.  I would almost always listen to a beat writer that travels with a team than some writer for ESPN.  If the Twins were still trying to get Bellinger the discussions would be over.

[diehardtwinsfan]

 

TyTy is right. Even throw away prospects like Jharel Cotton (used in the Rich Hill/Reddick trade) pitched 40ish innings like a mid rotation arm for Oakland in the bigs. Cotton, who had certain s of his own as a prospect, would probably be the Twins 3rd best SP behind Santana and maybe Berrios.

 

Sickles ranked him 11 in 2016 in LAs system with a B- rating.  That's pretty similar to Stewart right now (ranked 10th with the same grade). By your definition, Stewart is the throw away prospect.  You're right, guys like that have value (and I've made it clear I'd be happy with Stewart as one of the pieces back).  But as you put it, he's a throw away prospect, and there's a reason for it. The risk is quite a bit higher, and usually guys like that need time adjusting to the show... usually more time than guys like Berrios and De Leon will (hopefully) need.

 

The Twins can give them the time in 2017.  It's the lopsided risk that they are absorbing in this situation that makes a package of De Leon + Stewart weak.  More is needed.

[TheLeviathan]

 

To the Twins, yes, but that shouldn't be the only consideration to make a deal.

 

It's similar to the concept of always taking the BPA in the draft every June. Rebuilding teams don't gain much from expiring contracts of veterans but how that rebuilding team values that veteran is not universal to all teams.

 

The Twins should be motivated to move Dozier but they shouldn't take whatever the Dodgers offer just because Dozier's two year value to the Twins is expected to be minimal.

 

All true, but jorgen's point is valuable for how we evaluate the deal in the aftermath.  Getting Deleon alone is probably a coup value-wise, everything else is gravy.

 

But we should be looking for extra helpings of gravy too.