Otto von Ballpark

Yeah, part of keeping Dozier has to be a pivot towards winning in 2017-2018 and that hasn't happened. And without a credible threat of it happening, it probably reduces the Dodgers urgency of finalizing a deal with Minnesota.

The Dodgers SP depth chart has Ryu (missed virtually all of 2015-2016), McCarthy (missed most of 2015-2016), and Kazmir whom the Dodgers would probably prefer to unload. Not to mention Hill who has had some trouble staying on the field too. It's not unreasonable that they would resist trading both of their top 2 MLB ready SP prospects right now, but would be willing to move similarly ranked guys like Calhoun, just from a strategic standpoint for 2017. It's not clear that the teams have engaged in much real negotiation on pieces beyond De Leon. If the Twins have shown no willingness to accept less than De Leon + Bellinger/Alvarez, then it doesn't make sense for the Dodgers to even offer a guy like Calhoun right now. It doesn't get a deal done now, and just increases the baseline expectation for future negotiations.

Stewart's exclusion is based less on his prospect ranking, and more on the fact that his absense would weaken the exact same area as De Leon's absense. Imagine if the Twins were willing to move Berrios to make a big upgrade somewhere on the field -- it sorta makes sense that we might want to hold on to Mejia, so we can still maintain some MLB ready SP reinforcements. Or Garza circa 2007 but we wanted to keep Baker... I won't argue with this list of exclusions too much except Calhoun, although Verdugo has oddly been excluded from most reports that meanwhile bothered to name Bellinger and Alvarez. And from your earlier list, De Jong. It's not clear to me that those guys are off the table, or that talks even progressed to the point where the Dodgers felt it was worth offering them up (if the Twins made it clear that they would accept nothing less than Bellinger/Alvarez as the second piece, the Dodgers don't have much to gain from making a counteroffer that is unlikely to be accepted).

But I am not sure Preller's problem was early aggressiveness, that would have been cured with waiting a half season before making major moves. I think he has just exhibited suspect judgement, period. It's not like Stearns is a better GM because he waited half a season to familiarize himself with Lucroy and other Brewers assets before trading him -- Lucroy was at a low value point when Stearns took over, so it wouldn't have been smart to deal him then. If he had been coming off a career year like Dozier, it doesn't make sense to pump the brakes extra hard before a potential deal just because he's new in town.

Look at the context of my post. Sure they need more data on some guys and will welcome it, but that doesn't really mean they need to be extra cautious with how they approach Dozier this winter, which was the other poster's claim. And before anyone jumps in, that doesn't mean they should exercise no caution in trading Dozier -- just the standard amount of caution for assessing any transaction is warranted, no real extra caution because they are unfamiliar with him or Kohl Stewart, etc.

I just think you are setting parameters so strict as to be almost meaningless. How often do teams trade their best player at all? How frequently do teams hire a new GM from outside the organization? I don't think it tells us much that these already rare circumstances overlap infrequently. It's already an important situation for the Twins, no one is disputing that. But I don't think it gains any special importance by this reasoning. Furthermore, stepping into a MLB GM spot isn't like you or I taking over a private business, where you quite literally don't know who people are. Falvey and Levine, in their former posts, likely dealt with collecting and reviewing data on every player in the Twins org, including 5 years of such data on Dozier at the MLB level specifically. I think you are selling them short by suggesting they need an extended period of inactivity just to familiarize themselves with the Twins org. (Not to mention, virtually every other part of the Twins org below them is unchanged -- every internal opinion they seek about Dozier, our pitching prospects, etc. are exactly the same opinions that would have been provided to TR.)

Matt Klentak made the Ken Giles trade about a month and a half after being hired in Philadelphia. Do you have a lot of examples of new GMs hired from outside organizations who made bad trades dealing their best players within 3-5 months? It doesn't seem a real common occurrence either way.

"Okay, let's go over the ground rules. You can't leave first until you chug a beer. Any man scoring has to chug a beer. You have to chug a beer at the top of all odd-numbered innings. Oh, and the fourth inning is the beer inning."

Javier Vasquez racked up 20.8 bWAR over his first 6 seasons of club control. He was extended reasonably beyond that and racked up another 20.3 bWAR in the next 5 seasons. He spent the bulk of his career (10 seasons, age 23-32) averaging 4.2 bWAR per season, barely indistinguishable from Dozier's average of 4.5 bWAR per season over his last 4 years.

This is not clear at all. Are you just going by prospect ranking, and assuming everyone above Stewart was unavailable? First of all, the Dodgers may have different rankings, and second of all, they were resisting giving up Stewart with De Leon specifically because they didn't want to give up two MLB ready SP who could contribute in 2017. You may ultimately be proven right, but there is no real evidence to make this conclusion now. In fact, it is not even clear if discussions progressed to the point where those names could have been included -- if the Twins were insisting on Bellinger, maybe the Dodgers never felt it was worth making their best counteroffer. Even guys they are ultimately willing to deal, I think teams tend to resist offering them toward unlikely deals because once offered, it seems to affect the players value and their leverage.

No prob, sorry if I was a little tough on you there. I do think these broader points kind of obscure some relevant specifics of this particular situation. De Leon level pitching prospects/packages are not that common, for example. The probability of another one cropping up soon to match a contender need at 2B, without additional names entering the 2B market, is pretty low.

When you say "I don't know what the Angels can offer" you are participating in that discussion and ignoring copious amounts of evidence about the state of the Angels organization.

Nobody is saying we should trade for De Leon because he will give us a bunch of 1.5 WAR seasons. No one. When you encounter an argument that seems so easily refutable, maybe pause to consider that is not the argument at all! What people are saying is, a 10 WAR over 6 year projection is actually pretty good for a prospect (Bellinger has the same projection at Fangraphs right now), so there is decent chance that De Leon could be better than that, and that's the kind of chance the Twins should probably be taking if the cost is just ~8 projected WAR over the 2 seasons immediately following a 103 loss season (with 4 out of 5 90+ loss seasons preceding that). And even if he isn't better than that, if he still achieves 10 WAR over 6 years, it could provide more value than a consistent 1.5 WAR per season. Concentrated in 3 seasons, or a spike to 4 WAR one season, could mean an asset that's not that far off from Dozier in terms of usefulness and value. And before ypu say "why teade Dozier for something you hope will be as useful/valuabls as Dozier", let me emphasize again that this isn't De Leon's best case scenario, but rather just another way for the Twins to get value out of the deal if De Leon fails to achieve his better case scenarios. In the worst case, if De Leon achieves zero WAR over 6 years, well, you were going to get zero WAR from Dozier in years 3-6 anyway. A comp pick of some kind, hopefully, in year 3, probably not even in MLB by year 6. If you think the second/third pieces of the trade could be flawed but interesting prospects like Calhoun/Sheffield, that of course adds a bit to the De Leon side of the ledger too.

I get caution about our limited knowledge as fans, but this is taking that to ridiculous extremes. There is no reasonable probability that the Angels can bid on Dozier in the near future at anywhere near the De Leon level. It is fair to point that out, and you pretty much have to be actively ignoring evidence to claim otherwise. It is not very helpful to the discussion to repeatedly dismiss those points with generic "I don't know, anything can happen" platitudes.

Given the Twins apparent demands, if the Dodgers could get Kinsler for "just" De Leon in July, that could be significantly cheaper than getting Dozier. Detroit has a history of aggressive moves like that too. If Kinsler is having a solid season in July, his risk of falling off a cliff suddenly isn't all that great. Primarily the Dodgers would just need him to keep playing well a few more months, and anything in 2018 would be gravy. True an extension is a business decision for Kinsler, but if no one will give him the extension, he might change his tune. If the Tigers fall out of the race, would he want to play the last 1.5 years of his deal going nowhere in Detroit, or going to the playoffs in LA? The latter could be a springboard to endorsements and perhaps a better future contract. Or maybe he still wants the extension but at friendlier terms. Not saying any of this is terribly likely, but they are reasonable factors that contribute to the Dodgers unwillingness to meet the Twins demands at this moment.

Probably worth noting, Kinsler's extension demands could change if the Tigers fall out of the race and he has a chance to go to a contender in July.

It is a sample size problem. A full season of PA's is a pretty decent sized sample -- but for Vargas, you're splitting it not just once, but twice (in AAA/MLB, then vs. LHP/RHP). You're not going to get much useful data about "true talent level" from that. Even full-time MLBers can show weird platoon fluctuations from season to season. You would pretty much have to turn to scouting to get a lead on his platoon potential at this point.

The Dodgers don't get a prize for besting the Cubs in projected Fangraphs WAR. By B-Ref WAR, Forsythe actually has 8.4 WAR the past 2 years, at a higher per PA rate than Dozier over the same period. Tampa loves shedding payroll and might have a rotation opening with Smyly traded...

Any top 20 SP prospect then. Teams are usually pretty stingy with those guys. Or if they are dealt, it is for a guy with wider demand like an ace.

With a MLB ready top 20 SP prospect available, perhaps not.

Aren't those the kind of things already factored into a subjective prospect ranking?

Well, the Greinke example shows that they've received this line of criticism before, and it has shown little or no correlation with actually getting over "the hump" you reference. I don't think anyone has said they are "satisfied" with losing the NLCS, but real meaningful improvement at that margin is far more nuanced than "they should spend what it takes to get Greinke/Dozier/whomever".

So we give other teams credit for getting players back from injury/etc., but not the Dodgers? Heck, Cespedes missed only 14 games on the DL all season. I don't think you can predict any player to miss less than that. I'm not sure I'd call any team a meaningful favorite to be the absolute best right now, but the Dodgers are clearly in that top tier.

De Leon is still "A/A-" according to Sickels: http://www.minorleagueball.com/2017/1/6/14193446/los-angeles-dodgers-top-20-prospects-for-2017 Looks like he simply left off all the slash letter grades on his September list, so I don't think it was necessarily a downgrade since then: http://www.minorleagueball.com/2016/9/24/12932956/top-100-prospects-end-of-2016 Since that list, it looks like Benintendi and Rosario would leapfrog De Leon (to straight "A" grades), but Giolito would fall behind him. De Leon has the same "A/A-" letter grade as Glasnow (September's #3) and Reyes (#8), so I am sure he's still up there in that range even if he isn't precisely #5 anymore.

Seth, you got the date wrong in the thread title, and the first sentence. (I was wondering how they would manage a concert with a home game also on July 18th ) I was checking to see if it was a Twins or Rochester off day so Pat Light could attend. Sadly, no. https://twitter.com/pat_light/status/572933748230107137