Otto von Ballpark
-
Posts
20,669 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
74
Content Type
Profiles
Minnesota Twins News, Rumors & Analysis
Minnesota Twins Videos
2026 Minnesota Twins Top Prospect Rankings
2022 Minnesota Twins Draft Picks & Signing Bonuses
Minnesota Twins Trade & Free Agent Rumors
Minnesota Twins Fan Guides & Resources
2023 Minnesota Twins Draft Picks & Signing Bonuses
The Minnesota Twins Players Project
2024 Minnesota Twins Draft Picks & Signing Bonuses
2025 Minnesota Twins Draft Picks & Signing Bonuses
2026 Minnesota Twins Draft Picks & Signing Bonuses
Forums
Blogs
Events
Store
Downloads
Gallery
Everything posted by Otto von Ballpark
-
Hill sure didn't perform like a mid-rotation arm. He's much more of an upside wildcard than Ervin, so it's unclear they would have accepted him instead. More importantly, the Dodgers gave up 3 good prospects in that deal, which made a viable package that much harder to offer the Twins now.
-
Probably an oversimplification. Fangraphs still gives De Leon a 55 FV, just a tick behind Alvarez and Bellinger, and their KATOH+ projection has him virtually even with Bellinger. Dave Cameron also had an article singing De Leon's praises recently.
-
I do wonder, in the absence of any reporting on the second piece of the offer (aside from Dave's), if the Dodgers offer isn't essentially De Leon and filler. Berardino reported that the Twins liked Stewart, but perhaps they have been unable to get him included. The Dodgers probably aren't too eager to deal their top two SP reinforcements, and despite having a hole at 2B, they haven't seemed particularly motivated to give up much to fill it (dating back to last winter when Zobrist was a FA and Walker was available in trade). I guess what I am saying is, the past month makes a lot more sense if you think of the Dodgers offer as essentially a one-for-one.
-
Firefox even has extension that will automatically open specified domains (like startribune.com) in a private tab. Desktop Chrome has those too. So you can just set it and forget it.
-
LEN did write "If the Twins were willing to accept a one-for-one swap for Dozier, he probably already would be out of town." Which seems kind of silly -- of course they would have dealt him already if they were willing to accept just one prospect like De Leon in return. It doesn't necessarily mean there hasn't been a second or third player component to a Dodgers offer, though. Just that it hasn't met the Twins demands yet.
-
Private/incognito browsing windows are your friend.
-
I don't think he has to be a huge roadblock just to prevent them from reconsidering in March.
-
I think the Dodgers would turn to Utley soon if the Twins pull Dozier back. And they likely wouldn't be willing to deviate from that plan as early as March, barring injury.
-
Very interesting stuff. If you have this in a spreadsheet, would you mind sharing? I've been looking to dive into this kind of analysis.
-
For those not high on Brock Stewart, it is worth noting that there was evidence the Twins were pretty high on him (I know Bernardino dropped his name around the winter meetings). They would have to be unusually pessimistic on De Leon to resist a De Leon plus Stewart package.
-
I think that was actually Erickson-Klingenbeck.
-
I thought that too, but LEN3 and a lot of other observers have pretty much ignored any non-De Leon/Bellinger/Alvarez pieces, so it's hard to say. Brock Stewart is interesting but frankly isn't a big enough name to warrant common mention, which is why I suspect he could have been the second prospect offered in Dave's rumor.
-
You don't seem to be looking at any kind of context with your comparisons. Tapani had a 4.92 ERA and was 2 months from free agency, plus the Twins were a distant last place team. He wound up taking a massive pay cut on a one year FA deal for the following season anyway. Guthrie had an extra year of control, but he was a middle reliever with a 4.19 career ERA (and was coming off a 6.14 in 1994). Those two had virtually zero value. The Twins were frankly lucky to get out of ~$1.5 mil in salary obligations. Like the Kielty-Stewart deal you referenced earlier, it bears absolutely zero resemblance to, or relevance toward, a proposed Dozier swap.
-
Here's the Lavelle link: http://m.startribune.com/want-brian-dozier-twins-imply-time-s-running-out-to-consider-trade-offers/408699505/
-
It probably goes without saying that I was stuck at home today. Thanks everyone for reviving this thread in an interesting fashion! (Although I suppose I should thank Doogie Wolfson for inspiring the revival?)
-
Problem is, only Dave has said it is Alvarez, and the Twins have apparently been shopping this offer for a month and it hasn't remotely leaked anywhere else that Alvarez is part of the offer (despite the De Leon part being widely confirmed). I am almost 100% sure that Dave's source was mistaken about the Alvarez inclusion. It was probably Stewart or someone similar all along. Nothing that has happened in the last month makes any sense if the offer was really De Leon plus Alvarez.
-
And Boston and Washington would struggle to match De Leon + Stewart given their depleted farm systems. I don't know much about Tampa's system presently, but the idea that they would be buyers at that level, at that position with Forsythe already under contract, seems like a pretty big stretch. Probably even less likely than the 103 loss Twins rebounding to contention in 2017.
-
Zack Wheeler was 25 years old with a career 100 ERA+ and in the middle of recovering from TJ surgery (and looking at only ~4 years of team control left when he returned, at best) when that trade fell through. The other piece from the Mets, Wilmer Flores, was in the midst of a career-best 0.8 bWAR season and likewise looking at only 4 years of control remaining (3 of those being at arbitration salaries, of course). It's a real stretch to say that those two for Gomez then would have been a notably better deal than De Leon plus Stewart for Dozier now.
-
To those advocating holding on to Dozier for a possible deadline deal: have there been any recent trade deadline returns that are notably better than an objectively considered De Leon-Stewart-<something> package? 1.5 years of David Price, the $210 mil ace, fetched 4 arb seasons of Drew Smyly, a scuffling Nick Franklin, and Willy Adames on his way to cracking his first top 100 list. (And Price had more value under the old qualifying offer system too.) 4.5 years of Hamels, plus a good controlled reliever in Diekman, primarily fetched Thompson, Williams, and Alfaro for the Phillies. All interesting prospects, but tending toward the bottom half of the top 100 with question marks too. And those were for ace pitchers. Position players seem even less necessary deadline additions. Off the top of my head, recent deadline deals, even blockbusters, wouldn't really blow a De Leon-Stewart-<something> package out of the water. There is not a ton of potential upside to waiting. History suggests you are not getting a Urias at the deadline, you are not likely getting a De Leon plus a Bellinger either.
-
Great post, but I would be careful about invoking the Donaldson deal or you are going to scare a lot of people here! I think a De Leon-Stewart-<something> package absolutely trumps the package that Oakland received, relative to the assets sent in return (Donaldson being more valuable than Dozier).
-
Of course their prospects can lose value. But just because some prospects lose value, it doesn't mean the Dodgers will automatically part with better prospects -- in fact, the opposite may be true (the other prospects importance and thus value to the Dodgers will only increase). And please let's put to rest this "make a trade just to make a trade" nonsense. By most unbiased observers, a package led be De Leon and Stewart is very good, even if it's not as high as some of us would like. If you or the Twins can't see any value in that, then I fear we are setting our standards unrealistically high and we will miss a lot of realistic opportunities to improve this club. (I think TR fell into this trap a bit, waiting for the perfect deal that never comes and passing up some good ones in the process.)
-
If Stewart is performing well in MLB by July, they might not be interesting in subtracting him from the MLB roster to upgrade second base. And you lost me on the Shannon Stewart thing. The Jays were stupid for that? Stewart was a rental (and within a year or two of the end of his effective career), the Jays were going nowhere. And Kielty circa 2003 isn't remotely comparable to De Leon either.
-
Interesting idea. I do wonder what Dozier's price would be, but I can't say I'd be too enthusiastic about this even if he was willing. As you hint at with the "if they can sort out their pitching" qualifier, it wouldn't really be a 5 year window. Assuming the pitching isn't sorted overnight, at best it would be 4 and more likely 3. And it would be harder to sort without an influx of assets like De Leon and Stewart. And I'm not sure that an unproven/untested Polanco brings back much in that regard at this point -- would he be mostly a wasted asset in this scenario? And if you think Dozier's career path so far leaves some uncertainty about 2017, what would it say about 2019-2021 right now? Not just offensively, but also defensively? I think I'd rather get a few pitching assets in exchange for Dozier now, make good use of the cheap Polanco, and leave that $60 mil to be invested elsewhere as needed.
-
At this point, I would need really specific red flags to ultimately turn down De Leon and Stewart. I mean, De Leon is the #30ish prospect in the game, A-/B+ by Sickels, and Stewart is a fast rising B at the moment. And both are immediately MLB ready. Heck, for all the talk about what if Dozier repeats his 2016 season -- if Stewart repeats his, he's probably untouchable by July too. It seems like a pretty big risk to wait and try for something better in July, or to hope for contention in 2017-2018.
-
I'm not sure that is the "flip side" -- De Leon and Stewart scuffling would probably make the Dodgers even more committed to holding onto their other pitchig prospects, no? So you might still get offered De Leon and Stewart as key pieces -- but you just wouldn't want them as much! Maybe they add in Calhoun at that point? I don't see a likely path toward improving the return.
