Article: Dozier Trade Talk Heating Up?

[Doomtints]

 

It makes no sense for those two to talk to Dozier, both have been on the job for less than a month pretty much, no? They need to be working 24/7 on how to improve the team. Dozier is under contact for the next couple years, so honestly, there is no reason for them to meet with him during this very busy time during early FA, GM meetings etc.

 

It makes all the sense in the world for them to get to know their players.  It doesn't matter how busy they are.  This is like the director of a film never talking to the actors.  If they need to be "working 24/7 on how to improve the team" --  a huge part of improving the team would involve actually talking to their talent.    

 

Sure, you don't want to make promises to a guy if you intend to trade him.  And you don't want to communicate an intent to trade in case the trade does not go through.  Nevertheless, they should have had a conversation with the guy.  

Edited November 28, 2016 by Doomtints

[Doomtints]

 

I don't get all this excitement over the possibility of trading Dozier.  We (the Twins) finally get a genuine power hitter, after not having one for years, and the first thing we want to do is swap him for a pitching prospect? What? 

 

This depends on your opinion of Polanco.  Polanco is ready and Dozier has just peaked.  Trade opportunities rarely come as gift wrapped as this one, again, unless you think Polanco is a failure.  If you think that it's certainly not based on any available evidence.  Polanco may not have the same fiery bat that Dozier has, but he on the bottom line Polanco looks to me like he will be an upgrade.  

Edited November 28, 2016 by Doomtints

[Han Joelo]

I agree with Doom's and other's sentiment--Polanco is a ready replacement.  As good as Dozier's final numbers were, I still blame (probably irrationally and non-factually) his horrid start as the catalyst for the tire fire that was last season.  Not sure I trust him to "lead" this team anywhere.  So, if you can make a GOOD deal, I'd support it.

 

Seems like an additional fit would be taking on a contract like Ryu, McCarthy, or Kazmir, but when you are talking about a billion dollars of debt servicing, my eyes glaze over.

[bcs4]

I don't know why everyone seems to be in such a hurry to trade Dozier.

 

A)  Puig is a pain in the ass.

 

B.)  The Twins don't need another first base prospect because they already have more first base prospects than any other position, and the leading candidate is probably Sano.

 

C)  The Twins have a horrible history with SP prospects (as do MOST teams). Hopefully that will change in the near future, but who knows.  Everyone should remember that Dozier has a WAR of 5ish with a history of improvement every year.  That's worth SEVERAL high quality pitching prospects, and I don't mean prospects that project to 4s or 5s.  Quantity is not a replacement for quality.  If the Twins get 3 or 4 pitching prospects, they'll have to make room for them, so they have to be better than the pitchers that they replace.  It would take a very strong minor league system for a team to be able to offer that many really quality pitching prospects.

 

D)  Everyone keeps talking about the future being at least 2 or 3 years away, but Dozier has value now because there is the real possibility of a team that is in the chase until the last 2 or 3 weeks of the season.  That makes NEXT year much more enjoyable.  It might also give some of the younger players a taste of how it feels to compete.  I want to keep Dozier for these reasons alone.  A Pennant in 2 or 3 years could be the result of a semi-successful 2017. The future also includes next year.

 

E)  A lot of the people that want to trade Dozier also want to trade Santana.  What do most of them want for Santana?  Pitching prospects.  Why trade our only good players for maybe a 15% chance of a #1 or #2 SP in 2 years?  Again, what about NEXT year?

 

F)  Dozier was one of the only reasons to watch in the last 1/3rd of 2016. That in itself is an important reason to demand a very, very good return if he's traded. When you consider his WAR too, the Twins need to get a  young #3 SP or a 3+ WAR catcher.  Other than that, they need another 4+ position player for him.  If not, keep him.

 

Now leaving the podium.  Win Twins!

[Thrylos]

 

As for the SPs in the minors, NONE look like legit number 2 types. How do you propose acquiring good/great pitchers, if you won't trade for them?

 

Romero certainly does.  So does Berrios, but he needs to get over last season.  Jay may be there as well sooner rather than later.  The problem is that there is nobody who looks like a legit number 1 in a winning team.   So I'd rather package one of those listed (or the ones not listed, like Gonsalves and Stewart) along with a (let's say Dozier) to get closer to a number one...

[Thrylos]

 

 

 

 

 A Pennant in 2 or 3 years could be the result of a semi-successful 2017.

 

 

 

This is pretty wrong, in many levels, the least of it is that based on that logic, one could credit the "semi-success" of 2015 for a potential pennant in 2018.

 

Nope.  A pennant in a particular year is the result of a very successful year in that particular year.  

 

Matter of fact, "unsuccessful" (in W-L) previous rebuilding seasons have more to do with winning a pennant, that half-mashed .500 mediocre seasons with mediocre veterans blocking rebuilds (ask the 1991 Twins, if you don't believe me.)

 

Got to sell high.  That's why both Dozier and Santana have to go.

Edited November 28, 2016 by Thrylos

[Mike Sixel]

 

I don't know why everyone seems to be in such a hurry to trade Dozier.

 

A)  Puig is a pain in the ass.

 

B.)  The Twins don't need another first base prospect because they already have more first base prospects than any other position, and the leading candidate is probably Sano.

 

C)  The Twins have a horrible history with SP prospects (as do MOST teams). Hopefully that will change in the near future, but who knows.  Everyone should remember that Dozier has a WAR of 5ish with a history of improvement every year.  That's worth SEVERAL high quality pitching prospects, and I don't mean prospects that project to 4s or 5s.  Quantity is not a replacement for quality.  If the Twins get 3 or 4 pitching prospects, they'll have to make room for them, so they have to be better than the pitchers that they replace.  It would take a very strong minor league system for a team to be able to offer that many really quality pitching prospects.

 

D)  Everyone keeps talking about the future being at least 2 or 3 years away, but Dozier has value now because there is the real possibility of a team that is in the chase until the last 2 or 3 weeks of the season.  That makes NEXT year much more enjoyable.  It might also give some of the younger players a taste of how it feels to compete.  I want to keep Dozier for these reasons alone.  A Pennant in 2 or 3 years could be the result of a semi-successful 2017. The future also includes next year.

 

E)  A lot of the people that want to trade Dozier also want to trade Santana.  What do most of them want for Santana?  Pitching prospects.  Why trade our only good players for maybe a 15% chance of a #1 or #2 SP in 2 years?  Again, what about NEXT year?

 

F)  Dozier was one of the only reasons to watch in the last 1/3rd of 2016. That in itself is an important reason to demand a very, very good return if he's traded. When you consider his WAR too, the Twins need to get a  young #3 SP or a 3+ WAR catcher.  Other than that, they need another 4+ position player for him.  If not, keep him.

 

Now leaving the podium.  Win Twins!

 

Welcome to the site....

 

they were the worst team in all of baseball last year, and have been one of the 5 worst for 4 of the last 5 years....do you expect them to compete next year? I don't.

 

As for reasons to watch the team, I disagree. Most fans watch teams that win, not 1 player in baseball....and certainly not Dozier.

[Doomtints]

 

This is pretty wrong, in many levels, the least of it is that based on that logic, one could credit the "semi-success" of 2015 for a potential pennant in 2018.

 

Nope.  A pennant in a particular year is the result of a very successful year in that particular year.  

 

Matter of fact, "unsuccessful" (in W-L) previous rebuilding seasons have more to do with winning a pennant, that half-mashed .500 mediocre seasons with mediocre veterans blocking rebuilds (ask the 1991 Twins, if you don't believe me.)

 

Got to sell high.  That's why both Dozier and Santana have to go.

A pennant in any year is technically possible.  You're going down the rabbit hole here.

[Mike Sixel]

 

A pennant in any year is technically possible.  You're going down the rabbit hole here.

 

You don't set strategy based on .00001%.....do you? 

[Doomtints]

 

Welcome to the site....

 

they were the worst team in all of baseball last year, and have been one of the 5 worst for 4 of the last 5 years....do you expect them to compete next year? I don't.

 

As for reasons to watch the team, I disagree. Most fans watch teams that win, not 1 player in baseball....and certainly not Dozier.

Depends on what you mean by "compete." 

 

The Twins can be very disruptive to their division even if they aren't a team that can make the playoffs.  I would call that competing.  The bulk of the Twins schedule is against the division, so starting small and learning how to win games in the Central division would be a huge first step.  

 

In the 00s the Twins dominated the division (and interleague, thanks in part to the dome) but often struggled against the East and West.  If the Twins can put up respectable divisional records, they'll be "competing" very well even if they're not making the playoffs for another couple of years.  This also means that the recipe for success (or, at least, playoff berths) isn't as far away as we might think.  (Next year, no.  But so what?)

 

Cleveland still looks like a team on the rise, and the Royals are fighters.  But the other two teams have flaws that could be exploited with the right lineup.  Finishing in the middle of the division instead of at the bottom would be monstrously successful and I would call that competing.  

Edited November 28, 2016 by Doomtints

[Doomtints]

 

You don't set strategy based on .00001%.....do you? 

 

No, I'm simply responding to a long-winded post that was trying to use logic to defend a point that wasn't logical.  This is sports, not chemistry.  So the person he was responding to wasn't logical, big deal.  The response wasn't logical either.  Let people have their opinions.  It's not like "compete in 3 years" hasn't been said by hundreds of different people over the past few years.

Edited November 28, 2016 by Doomtints

[Mike Sixel]

 

Depends on what you mean by "compete." 

 

The Twins can be very disruptive to their division even if they aren't a team that can make the playoffs.  I would call that competing.  The bulk of the Twins schedule is against the division, so starting small and learning how to win games in the Central division would be a huge first step.  

 

In the 00s the Twins dominated the division (and interleague, thanks in part to the dome) but often struggled against the East and West.  If the Twins can put up respectable divisional records, they'll be "competing" very well even if they're not making the playoffs for another couple of years.  

 

Cleveland still looks like a team on the rise, and the Royals are fighters.  But the other two teams have flaws that could be exploited with the right lineup.  Finishing in the middle of the division instead of at the bottom would be monstrously successful.  

 

How'd that work out last year, with Dozier?

 

They NEED pitching. The won't buy it.....how do you propose they get it?

[Doomtints]

 

How'd that work out last year, with Dozier?

 

They NEED pitching. The won't buy it.....how do you propose they get it?

I'm unsure what you're responding to.  I support trading Dozier.  

Dozier's power surge last year is proof that power in a vacuum is pointless.  

[nicksaviking]

 

How'd that work out last year, with Dozier?

 

They NEED pitching. The won't buy it.....how do you propose they get it?

 

And even if they would buy it, there's none to buy.

 

And it might not just be a fluke this year, it's just as likely a trend that nearly all teams are willing and are able to meet the demands of their best pitchers enabling the club to retain them into their early 30's.

 

It's trade or bust this year and could be for the foreseeable future as well.

[Hosken Bombo Disco]

I know .00001% is exaggeration, but 1/3 of the teams make the postseason nowadays. So, closer to 33% chance. A mid-80s win pace gets you in the pennant chase most years.

[Taildragger8791]

 

Depends on what you mean by "compete." 

 

The Twins can be very disruptive to their division even if they aren't a team that can make the playoffs.  I would call that competing.  The bulk of the Twins schedule is against the division, so starting small and learning how to win games in the Central division would be a huge first step.  

 

In the 00s the Twins dominated the division (and interleague, thanks in part to the dome) but often struggled against the East and West.  If the Twins can put up respectable divisional records, they'll be "competing" very well even if they're not making the playoffs for another couple of years.  This also means that the recipe for success (or, at least, playoff berths) isn't as far away as we might think.  (Next year, no.  But so what?)

 

Cleveland still looks like a team on the rise, and the Royals are fighters.  But the other two teams have flaws that could be exploited with the right lineup.  Finishing in the middle of the division instead of at the bottom would be monstrously successful and I would call that competing.  

 

Setting the bar for "middle of the pack" in the division is pretty weak though. Sacrificing future potential for a pennant-winning team in order to push for being the division pain-in-the-ass isn't enough for me or most people. And nobody outside the home market cares about teams that finish 3rd+ place and 10+ games back in the division.

 

Sure, it was fun at first when the Twins were winning a weak AL Central in the mid-00's. But if you just wind up getting embarrassed and out-classed in the playoffs every time it really takes the shine off those division crowns and seasons. Why not learn from that and push to be better?

[jimmer]

I don't know why everyone seems to be in such a hurry to trade Dozier.

 

A) Puig is a pain in the ass.

 

B.) The Twins don't need another first base prospect because they already have more first base prospects than any other position, and the leading candidate is probably Sano.

 

C) The Twins have a horrible history with SP prospects (as do MOST teams). Hopefully that will change in the near future, but who knows. Everyone should remember that Dozier has a WAR of 5ish with a history of improvement every year. That's worth SEVERAL high quality pitching prospects, and I don't mean prospects that project to 4s or 5s. Quantity is not a replacement for quality. If the Twins get 3 or 4 pitching prospects, they'll have to make room for them, so they have to be better than the pitchers that they replace. It would take a very strong minor league system for a team to be able to offer that many really quality pitching prospects.

 

D) Everyone keeps talking about the future being at least 2 or 3 years away, but Dozier has value now because there is the real possibility of a team that is in the chase until the last 2 or 3 weeks of the season. That makes NEXT year much more enjoyable. It might also give some of the younger players a taste of how it feels to compete. I want to keep Dozier for these reasons alone. A Pennant in 2 or 3 years could be the result of a semi-successful 2017. The future also includes next year.

 

E) A lot of the people that want to trade Dozier also want to trade Santana. What do most of them want for Santana? Pitching prospects. Why trade our only good players for maybe a 15% chance of a #1 or #2 SP in 2 years? Again, what about NEXT year?

 

F) Dozier was one of the only reasons to watch in the last 1/3rd of 2016. That in itself is an important reason to demand a very, very good return if he's traded. When you consider his WAR too, the Twins need to get a young #3 SP or a 3+ WAR catcher. Other than that, they need another 4+ position player for him. If not, keep him.

 

Now leaving the podium. Win Twins!

Twins do not have a single 1B prospect that is good. Not one that is as good as Bellinger both offensively and defensively. Having a group of guys that can only play 1B or Dh doesn't actually mean having quality prospects for 1B.

 

Santana and Dozier will not be around when this team is really good again, and they are at peak trade value. They should get prospects that hopefully WILL be around when we are really good again.

Edited November 28, 2016 by jimmer

[Doomtints]

 

Setting the bar for "middle of the pack" in the division is pretty weak though. Sacrificing future potential for a pennant-winning team in order to push for being the division pain-in-the-ass isn't enough for me or most people. And nobody outside the home market cares about teams that finish 3rd+ place and 10+ games back in the division.

 

Sure, it was fun at first when the Twins were winning a weak AL Central in the mid-00's. But if you just wind up getting embarrassed and out-classed in the playoffs every time it really takes the shine off those division crowns and seasons. Why not learn from that and push to be better?

 

Sure, it's a "weak" strategy if your team is already in the middle of the pack.  The Twins are coming off their worst record since being in Minnesota.  A move to the middle of the pack is a huge leap and one I would be very happy about.  

Ryan was very much into this "all or nothing" approach and we ended up with five years of the nothing.  A year or two in the middle would be a huge turnaround for this team.  

[Taildragger8791]

 

Sure, it's a "weak" strategy if your team is already in the middle of the pack.  The Twins are coming off their worst record since being in Minnesota.  A move to the middle of the pack is a huge leap and one I would be very happy about.  

Ryan was very much into this "all or nothing" approach and we ended up with five years of the nothing.  A year or two in the middle would be a huge turnaround for this team.  

 

Agreed. I just want to make sure that we don't trade the potential to be significantly better in 3 years for the potential to win a few more games next year. We still have a couple more years of growth and prospect graduations to go through before this team is likely to really take off and be pennant-quality.

[Mike Sixel]

 

I know .00001% is exaggeration, but 1/3 of the teams make the postseason nowadays. So, closer to 33% chance. A mid-80s win pace gets you in the pennant chase most years.

 

Except this isn't a coin toss....some teams are more talented, and more likely to make it. I bet my odds are closer, actually. 

 

This isn't a random event....

 

You expect them to win in the mid-80s next year? What are the odds of that, given the last 5 years, and last year in particular?

[Thrylos]

 

Twins do not have a single 1B prospect that is good.

 

Lewin Diaz, Amaurys Minier, and Zander Wiel would beg to differ.  

Vargas is not a prospect, but is pretty good too, and more proven than someone who exhibits power only in California, Texas, and Pacific Coast Leagues...

[Kwak]

LA isn't the only possible trade partner. There are several win now teams (even KC!) that could be desperate to add Dozier. How desperate?--I think we will find out very soon.

[nicksaviking]

 

Ryan was very much into this "all or nothing" approach and we ended up with five years of the nothing.  A year or two in the middle would be a huge turnaround for this team.  

 

I'd have to disagree, Ryan seemed to be a bit of a fence straddler to me. I don't think he ever embraced the "All" part of all or nothing. He never made the big move to go for "All" likely because he was fearful that if it didn't work out he would have "Nothing" which is what his half-measures got him anyway.

 

I'd welcome a new approach even if it doesn't work out, and if it doesn't, try something different the next time.

[Mike Sixel]

 

Lewin Diaz, Amaurys Minier, and Zander Wiel would beg to differ.  

Vargas is not a prospect, but is pretty good too, and more proven than someone who exhibits power only in California, Texas, and Pacific Coast Leagues...

 

None of those guys are even in A+ ball yet, are they?......hard to tell how good they really are.

 

And, isn't Bellinger one of the top prospects in all of the minors....

[nicksaviking]

 

None of those guys are even in A+ ball yet, are they?......hard to tell how good they really are.

 

And, isn't Bellinger one of the top prospects in all of the minors....

 

Yeah he has power, his K rate dropped from 27% in A ball to 20% in AA while his BB rate increased from 9% to 12%. This guy is is starting to look really good.

[jimmer]

Yeah he has power, his K rate dropped from 27% in A ball to 20% in AA while his BB rate increased from 9% to 12%. This guy is is starting to look really good.

and he is really good on defense too.

[s1xthw1]

 

I'd have to disagree, Ryan seemed to be a bit of a fence straddler to me. I don't think he ever embraced the "All" part of all or nothing. He never made the big move to go for "All" likely because he was fearful that if it didn't work out he would have "Nothing" which is what his half-measures got him anyway.

 

I'd welcome a new approach even if it doesn't work out, and if it doesn't, try something different the next time.

 

Exactly.  When did Ryan ever do anything to put them over the top at the trade deadline?   I would never, ever, consider Ryan an all or nothing GM.

 

[TheLeviathan]

Glad that all signs point to this happening.  It should.  It needs to.

[gunnarthor]

 

None of those guys are even in A+ ball yet, are they?......hard to tell how good they really are.

 

And, isn't Bellinger one of the top prospects in all of the minors....

Yeah, he kind of reminds me of Kepler 2015.  Same build, both are lefties.  Not as good a hitter but more power and fewer walks but a real strong AA season. He's only 20.  He entered last season as BA #54 prospect and will probably move up into the top 30.  But he does have warts. I don't think he's an elite prospect like Buxton/Berrios/Sano were but he's probably in that next grouping with Kepler.  

[Pardon My Dinger]

 

I know .00001% is exaggeration, but 1/3 of the teams make the postseason nowadays. So, closer to 33% chance. A mid-80s win pace gets you in the pennant chase most years.

I...uh...I don't think you're doing that right.