Otto von Ballpark

I also tend to doubt that Dozier will be seen as an elite trade target (which he would pretty much have to be, for the Yankees to consider dealing Sanchez right now). Dozier is having a heck of a year, but he's tracked Neil Walker pretty closely for the last few years (and isn't that far ahead of him this year, 132 wRC+ to 118 with some season left to play). I feel like Dozier would be viewed as a very good 2B on a hot streak, but still in Walker's class, or even Daniel Murphy's. Murphy settled for 3/37.5 last winter. I think Walker can get more than that, thanks to his defense, but not an obscene amount more. 4/60? That would put him above Zobrist's deal too. Seems like the Yankees or other big spenders would be far more likely to just write that check to Walker to fill a 2B hole, than to cough up elite talent to get Dozier at 2/15. (Sorta like how the Yankees got Headley for 4/52 a couple winters ago, and took on Castro for $41 mil last winter.)

Thanks, I didn't check Sickels. If you like BA, note that in their midseason list from July, Sheffield was #69 and the other two pitchers you mentioned were not ranked. Despite the fact that BA's midseason list excludes new draftees and amateur signings (hence how Mejia was able to sneak in a #91, even though on their offseason list he would probably rank no better than 130-140). I wasn't really picking on your trade idea except in the context of this thread and discussion, which is about helping our 2017 pitching staff. There's no way to do that in trade with the Yankees. If you want to talk other trade returns, you can certainly talk Yankees and those players you mention could be in the mix. I would be surprised if the Yankees traded Sanchez, though -- their reputation for aggressively trading prospects has long since passed, and it would be very difficult for them to upgrade their catcher production in 2017 without Sanchez. (Note that Wieters is worse than McCann.)

Congrats to Wimmers! I've been calling for this move since Wimmers would have been eligible for minor league free agency after the season anyway, so it's basically a no-cost audition (presuming that he's not blocking anyone else, and I don't believe he is). That said, it's unlikely that he will be able to show enough in the next month to avoid being dropped from the 40-man after the season regardless. I usually oppose wasting too many innings on such players, but it will be good to get a major league look at Wimmers, and it might help convince him to re-sign with the organization. If he can parlay the audition into a major league deal somewhere else like Yohan Pino a couple years ago, more power to him.

Sheffield appears to be in the 80-something range at BA and MLB, and those other two guys did not appear in either MLB's or BA's midseason top 100 list (even though BA's doesn't include recent signings, so it's really probably more like a top ~140 or so). MLB has them at 9 and 10 in the Yankees system right now, although it's an admittedly good system -- the top 7 were in MLB's top 100, although Sheffield is the only pitcher in that group. I was thinking along the lines of the article, and Vanimal's preference for quality not quantity to help our 2017 rotation. In those terms, there is no match with the Yankees. If you are willing to take a mix of non-elite, lower level prospects, perhaps even position players, I suppose the Twins could find a match with the Yankees. It might look something like the return in the Rich Hill trade. Although the utility of such a trade would be more questionable, of course.

What's the "quality over quantity" pitching that the Yankees can afford to give up for Dozier?

I'm not "writing him off" or saying he doesn't deserve another chance. Just that, at worst, the injury probably just denied him a chance at making his adjustment to MLB pitching this year. His "fast start" was not the adjustment; he still has that adjustment to make.

This is a better way to look at it, as compared to cumulative WAR over the entire period. Although I'd probably look at MLB as a whole and not just the AL.

I am pretty much cringing already, based on this club's recent development record. A Dozier trade isn't going to address that.

The value behind his "fast start" was almost entirely in a handful of HR in a small sample. There are scores of players who had a similar "fast start" in MLB and faded -- an injury is not necessary to explain such a thing at all.

Thanks. That makes me even more skeptical that you will be able to trade Dozier. You're already limiting your return to pitching, and now in terms of prospects, a top ~30 one at that (if not already an established major leaguer)? Generally teams that are selling aren't that particular about the assets returned.

That's fair, although can you really expect an extra deadline premium for most position players? Teams don't seem to view them as stretch-drive difference-makers (an elite catcher like Lucroy perhaps being a recent exception, although even then, Cleveland gave up more for reliever Andrew Miller). If you would have accepted the Rich Hill return for Dozier this winter, I think you'd pretty much have to do it at the deadline if it was really offered. Doubtful you could get a better prospect from the Dodgers, or a meaningful addition to the package, and passing on it probably means those prospects will get dealt in other trades and that deal won't be possible again in the offseason.

I was referring to the talk from this past winter, mainly about 2016 projections, so the trades were already completed. A lot of teardown/rebuild suggestions in response to the Zimmermann/Upton signings. To be fair, I don't think anyone criticized the deadline trades that brought in Fulmer and Boyd (and Norris), although perhaps they overlooked how quickly those guys could be ready to contribute. LOTS of folks were completely writing off Verlander and Victor Martinez in their assessments. I am sure the Tigers farm system is still poor, but the point about farm systems is, you don't necessarily need a good farm system. It's obviously preferable to have one, of course, but it's far more important to have MLB or near-MLB talent and be a good judge/developer of such players. I agree the Twins don't have an asset to deal like Price, although to be fair, the Tigers didn't either until they turned Jackson, Smyly, and Adames into him. (Adames still looks interesting for Tampa, but the Tigers are likely getting enough present-day value that they ultimately won't regret dealing him.) Dozier should be a better asset than Cespedes circa July 2015, but with 2 years of control left, the Twins clearly can't afford to trade him one-for-one for a Fulmer type prospect. EDIT: this is mostly my personal Tigers tangent, feel free to ignore!

Rogers has looked fine in his pen role, but let's not get carried away. He's facing a slightly higher percentage of LHB coming out of the pen, and he's seen modest increases in his rate stats. Nothing in that suggests he is any more suited to starting in MLB than he was a year ago.

I did forget about that Rich Hill trade. But that suggests the Dodgers might be depleted in tradeable pitching prospects, no? It certainly doesn't seem to make them likely to deal an elite MLB ready guy in De Leon. (Also, curious: would you have accepted those 3 prospects from the Rich Hill trade for Dozier?) markos lays it out pretty well above. Obviously you can try this winter, but the point is, I will not be surprised if there is no market for Dozier at the prospect price you desire.

Good points on the Dodgers -- I forgot about that recent Hill + Reddick trade (perhaps because Hill didn't make his Dodgers debut until last night). But those felt like "B" prospects at best, and since they just gave up 3 of them, they're probably depleted. (As an aside -- would you have accepted that return for Dozier at the deadline?) If we were willing to get a Carson Fulmer type project, I am sure we could find a deal, but I don't think that helps us much. (Alec Hansen is interesting but a little hard to judge right now -- remember when Shooter Hunter embarrassed rookie league hitters?) The White Sox may also be in that ~2 WAR range already at the position with Lawrie.

It's not a question of taking on salary, though -- we want to acquire great talent in return. For all their profligate ways, I don't think the Dodgers have given up a lot of talent lately. I had forgotten that they had Kendrick under contract for 2017 since he has been in LF. They may want to upgrade, but it should be noted that Kendrick and Dozier have the exact same career 107 OPS+ right now. Dozier is having a much better 2016, but how much better does he project to be, going forward? Perhaps not enough to justify the big return we seek? Especially when we want that big return to focus on pitching? As for the picture being too fuzzy, I am not sure if that is true either. Frankly, lots of teams are set at 2B (hence why Dozier has perhaps struggled to get recognition at times). And others almost certainly don't care to sacrifice talent via trade to upgrade the position right now (i.e. Tampa, Oakland, San Diego, etc.).

Dozier is valuable -- but is there a market for him, at a top price? I know the Braves were mentioned by some around these parts, although they seem pretty intent on rushing their own prospects -- Swanson already, and perhaps Albies not far behind. Otherwise, 2B needs are mostly for teams that are unlikely to give up a lot of talent (KC, Pittsburgh) or teams that have nothing to give up (the Angels). There are a couple big market teams that might have a need (Dodgers and Mets), but both have some prospects and internal options themselves, and Neil Walker will be a free agent too and probably projects similarly to Dozier, given their histories. It's a variation on the Plouffe 3B market last winter, it seems.

Returning to South Korea for the off season, they meant. Which has been reported elsewhere and isn't surprising -- I wouldn't expect him to winter in Minnesota!

Remember all the talk this past winter, about how poor Detroit's farm system was, how much better the Twins rotation depth was, and how the Tigers should just blow it up and rebuild? Ah, memories...

While the team would have certainly dealt with bad press for letting Mauer leave (or even letting him hit free agency), they actually secured the ballpark funding back in 2005. Mauer didn't sign his extension until March 2010, meaning it likely had zero effect on the ballpark and its 2010 revenue. Had he left as a free agent after the 2010 season, it could have impacted 2011 -- maybe the "new ballpark" revenue boost would have worn off a little quicker, although with the Twins poor play, probably not that much quicker than it actually did... (Not that I am arguing we should have let him leave, I don't think the extension really hurt us, although I would have rather seen a more aggressive early extension than the conservative one TR signed.)

It wasn't an RBI double, it was a leadoff double. And Mauer eventually singled, and the Twins got the bases loaded with nobody out and failed to score. Then Teixeira homered to lead off the bottom of the inning. It was an absolutely terrible, indefensible call by Phil Cuzzi, but it ultimately probably would not have mattered.

Plouffe could be in the everyday lineup in place of Grossman or Santana, allowing Vargas to start. Or Mauer could spot in place of Grossman/Santana, if you think Plouffe needs to demonstrate his health more defensively at 3B. Heck, if we hadn't so badly bungled it earlier, I probably wouldn't be opposed to spotting Sano in the outfield either. (Note all of these are spotting, not converting/moving.) Plus a few extra road games off for Mauer. If you're unable to move Plouffe, you will want to do this anyway on September 1st, no? So what's the harm in starting it August 20, or better yet earlier?

That's the point -- Vargas shouldn't be getting sporadic play, he should be starting most games in MLB right now. We shouldn't have waited until August to play Polanco. Etc. There are limits to minor league data and scouting reports, and questions that only regular MLB play can help answer. Odds are Vargas doesn't stick in MLB regardless (like most prospects), but if the primary cost is spotting Plouffe or Mauer (or perhaps Escobar or Polanco) in the outfield during a lost season, it behooves the Twins to take the opportunity to find out, no? What's the benefit of the alternative approach? More PAs for Grossman and Santana? Keeping Mauer happy? (Although good management could get player buy-in.)

You seem to be ignoring that Ryan O'Rourke was also optionable, and you don't have to release Mauer to get more looks at Vargas. In fact, since you say Vargas will be back on September 1st, apparently they will work him into the lineup somehow on that date? Why not do that on August 20th instead? Especially when Kepler and Mauer were both hampered by injury on August 20th. Why wait? Was a just-used Ryan O'Rourke more vital to our roster this past weekend? Would it have been difficult to recall a pitcher similar to O'Rourke over the next 10 days if we needed one? There is still an open 40-man spot waiting for minor-league-free-agent-to-be Wimmers, and Albers is eligible to be recalled again tomorrow if we become really desperate. I get keeping Plouffe in the lineup to show he is healthy and to get his bat going, but his defensive position over the next couple weeks is pretty meaningless to his trade value. Best case, he is getting traded just before the September roster expansion, so teams will have plenty of positional flexibility without needing Plouffe to provide it. If he is traded, it will be for his bat and his years of 3B experience, not because he picked up a 1B mitt again this month. Might as well send him to an outfield corner over Danny Santana or Robbie Grossman, and let Vargas stay in the lineup. (Or send Escobar or Polanco to the outfield, if you want to keep their bats in the lineup and you foresee utility roles for them.)

My kid actually gets excited when Danny Santana comes to the plate. (Seriously.) I do not advocate keeping him in the lineup every day! Would your kid get less excited about Mauer occasionally playing an outfield corner? That would clear either 1B or DH for Vargas to start. And Mauer would be positioned closer to the cheap seats! Also, how about we give Mauer extra days off on the road? That would also mean he comes to the plate in front of the home crowd the same number of times, but could give Vargas a viable opportunity to play too (especially when combined with my other suggestion above).