DaveW: Dodgers trade for Dozier to be completed within the next 24 hours

[gunnarthor]

 

There were dubious claims earlier that the Yankees might also be interested but lately the smoke seems to be about the Dodgers only.

Yankees would be great, actually.  They have a really loaded system.

[gunnarthor]

 

I hope the Twins aren't afraid to walk away. The market sucks right now.

My guess is that Levine won't get low balled.  If the Twins don't trade Dozier now, they could trade him at the deadline where more teams might want him.  I don't think they can trade the best player on the team away and get panned on the deal.  I'm starting to lean toward thinking they won't trade him.  The new FO will probably want to see what they have anyway and even if the Twins do nothing, they will be better than last year.

[Cory Engelhardt]

My guess is that Levine won't get low balled.  If the Twins don't trade Dozier now, they could trade him at the deadline where more teams might want him.  I don't think they can trade the best player on the team away and get panned on the deal.  I'm starting to lean toward thinking they won't trade him.  The new FO will probably want to see what they have anyway and even if the Twins do nothing, they will be better than last year.

Better hope he doesn't get injured or have a start to 2017 that he did in 2016. Oh, and only having 1.5 years of control, compared to two years doesn't help gain value

[Mike Sixel]

Not trading a player who is 30, who has huge value, on a terrible rebuilding team...that is doing something. Something that probably does not lead to long term competitiveness. 

[Vanimal46]

 

I hope the Twins aren't afraid to walk away. The market sucks right now.

What's changed on the market from a week ago when Eaton = 3 top 10 org prospects? 

[Circus Boy]

Just realized this thread is at 1550 posts and I haven't contributed anything. And I still haven't. That is all.

[laloesch]

 

I hope the Twins aren't afraid to walk away. The market sucks right now.

 

I don't know if the "market sucks right now" but the Twins should not feel obligated in any way to make a deal.  They are in a position of strength.  If the Dodger want Dozier they are going to have to give up multiple valuable prospects to get him.

[Willihammer]

 

What's changed on the market from a week ago when Eaton = 3 top 10 org prospects? 

Different market. The Cards, Mets, etc aren't calling about Dozier because everyone except the Dodgers is set at 2B.

[jimmer]

 

Different market. The Cards, Mets, etc aren't calling about Dozier because everyone except the Dodgers is set at 2B.

that and Eaton is worth a lot more than Dozier.

[Vanimal46]

 

Different market. The Cards, Mets, etc aren't calling about Dozier because everyone except the Dodgers is set at 2B.

Were the Cards, Mets, etc. calling a week ago?

[Vanimal46]

 

that and Eaton is worth a lot more than Dozier.

I agree with that. I don't agree that the market has changed since last week. It's still a seller's market. 

[gunnarthor]

 

Better hope he doesn't get injured or have a start to 2017 that he did in 2016. Oh, and only having 1.5 years of control, compared to two years doesn't help gain value

If we think he's a one half player than the Dodgers should to and he has no value.  

 

If Dozier is getting us a #3, #5 and a UI, I'm comfortable keeping him.  His offensive production will be hard to replace.  Ideally, we're giving up some of that offense to help the pitching staff but if the help is marginal, why bother?  Just because we have a bad team doesn't mean we should just get rid of our good players.  If there isn't a deal we like, keep him.  

[Otto von Ballpark]

 

Forsythe appears to be a lesser 2B defensively, but I'm not sure if the difference is a huge deal. Offensively Dozier looks pretty superior though over the past three years, even if only using the past two years.

 

I wonder what Freidman's feelings about dealing with his former team would be. Surely there would be some added incentive not to "lose" that trade.

By defensive metrics, they are pretty close.  Remember Forsythe wasn't a fulltime 2B anywhere until 2015, really, and his worst marks defensively at the position came in his utility years.

 

Just averaging the last two years:

Dozier: +0.7 UZR/150, -5.5 TZ/yr, +0.5 DRS/yr

Forsythe: -1.4 UZR/150, -8.5 TZ/yr, +5.0 DRS/yr

 

Hard not to see that as a wash.

 

Offensively, Forsythe is actually 1.4 runs ahead of Dozier in Rbat per 500 PA over the last 2 years.  Even if you average their last 3 years, when Forsythe was still a pretty bad hitter, Dozier is only ahead by 3.7 runs per 500 PA.  Dozier and Forsythe have the exact same number of above-average Rbat seasons (2 each).  And Forsythe's came consecutively, if you want to consider consistency.

 

Dozier's advantage is pretty much entirely based on how much you buy into his 2016 hitting explosion, which was about 1 win (10 runs) above Forsythe's peak.  Plus a minor bonus for a couple extra average hitting seasons (2013 and 2015) on his resume too, which raises his floor above Forsythe's.

 

Considering that Friedman left Tampa on his own, and that his replacement was his former right-hand man Silverman, I don't think it would notably change their approach to trading. If anything, they might have an easier time finding common ground. In a general sense, Tampa seems to have closed more deals than the Twins (or Indians with Falvey) in recent years, that could help them come to an agreement too.

[Willihammer]

 

Were the Cards, Mets, etc. calling a week ago?

Not that I know of. I didn't mean to imply the market had changed, I don't think it was ever that great to begin with. Talking about the trade market for MLB 2Bs here, not "the market" for all tradeable MLB talent.

[Vanimal46]

 

Not that I know of. I didn't mean to imply the market had changed, I don't think it was ever that great to begin with. Talking about the trade market for MLB 2Bs here, not "the market" for all tradeable MLB talent.

Ah, gotcha. My mistake, I thought you meant the entire trade market for MLB talent has changed. 

[Mike Sixel]

 

If we think he's a one half player than the Dodgers should to and he has no value.  

 

If Dozier is getting us a #3, #5 and a UI, I'm comfortable keeping him.  His offensive production will be hard to replace.  Ideally, we're giving up some of that offense to help the pitching staff but if the help is marginal, why bother?  Just because we have a bad team doesn't mean we should just get rid of our good players.  If there isn't a deal we like, keep him.  

 

And how do you plan to get great, if you won't trade your good players for prospects? And, Dozier is here for 2 years, not 5-7 years like the prospects.

[jimmer]

 

And how do you plan to get great, if you won't trade your good players for prospects? And, Dozier is here for 2 years, not 5-7 years like the prospects.

just keep drafting baby :-)

[laloesch]

 

just keep drafting baby :-)

 

And stinking it up in the mean time.  Winning a lot of games usually puts an end to high end draft picks.

[Otto von Ballpark]

 

That's why I said he was gone as of now, but he was the only guy providing value there, was my point. They have to do something at 2B, no matter what.  They won't roll with current options and since they are going for it, Dozier is still their best shot. IMO, as long as this FO isn't crazy about what Dozier is worth, the trade happens

They were going for it last year too, and they signed Utley over better options (Zobrist, Murphy, trading for Neil Walker).  And Utley was coming off a worse season then too.

 

And for all intents and purposes, Utley is still their incumbent second baseman, even if he's not technically signed right now -- I don't see him signing anywhere else until the Dodgers close that door, especially now that the Angels have acquired a 2B.  Born and raised in LA, plus he can get more money, more playing time, and a better shot at the postseason in LA than anywhere else.

[Cory Engelhardt]

 

If we think he's a one half player than the Dodgers should to and he has no value.  

 

If Dozier is getting us a #3, #5 and a UI, I'm comfortable keeping him.  His offensive production will be hard to replace.  Ideally, we're giving up some of that offense to help the pitching staff but if the help is marginal, why bother?  Just because we have a bad team doesn't mean we should just get rid of our good players.  If there isn't a deal we like, keep him.  

 

Not half a player. Right now Dozier's contract is for 2 years remaining. If we trade him at the deadline, like you said, he would have only 1 and a half years remaining. That extra half year is valuable to another team. Any team trading for him at the deadline is not going to have that first half of the year of Brian Dozier on their team.

And really, do you think Dozier hits for the first 2-3 months of 2017 like the last 3 months of 2016? I don't see him falling off the map by any means, but he also isn't Babe Ruth.

[Otto von Ballpark]

 

Just realized this thread is at 1550 posts and I haven't contributed anything. And I still haven't. That is all.

Thanks for the update!

[jimmer]

 

They were going for it last year too, and they signed Utley over better options (Zobrist, Murphy, trading for Neil Walker).  And Utley was coming off a worse season then too.

 

And for all intents and purposes, Utley is still their incumbent second baseman, even if he's not technically signed right now -- I don't see him signing anywhere else until the Dodgers close that door, especially now that the Angels have acquired a 2B.  Born and raised in LA, plus he can get more money, more playing time, and a better shot at the postseason in LA than anywhere else.

Yeah, a little different this offseason though, cause when you sign Hill, Turner and Jansen for the money they just did, it's a big message, IMO

 

But we can argue this all day long.  They make those huge commitments, to me, means they are seizing every opportunity and Dozier over Utley does the same thing.

[GP830]

I'm beginning to think that all of the speculation has been off. As in, if it were as easy as any of the prior 3 player packages that have been discussed, it would have already happened. In that case, I'm hopeful that maybe we can get them to offer higher quality in a smaller package. IE, maybe Urias isn't off the table, and the Twins are being bulldogs about it? 

[Han Joelo]

 

Another way to look at Yadier Alvarez: the Dodgers just signed him a year ago for a total cost of $32 million ($16 mil bonus + $16 mil penalty).

 

Elsewhere in this discussion, the surplus value of Dozier's remaining contract was pegged at $60 mil (based on the average of his performances the last 3 years).

 

So by including Alvarez, the Dodgers, in a way, would be giving back over half the surplus value they could reasonably expect out of Dozier.

So is this a good and fair thing?  Just curious.

[gunnarthor]

 

And how do you plan to get great, if you won't trade your good players for prospects? And, Dozier is here for 2 years, not 5-7 years like the prospects.

Adding another Santiago and Escobar isn't going to make the Twins great, either.  I don't see why the Twins should take 50 cents on the dollar back in any Dozier trade.  If they don't like the deal, walk away.  That's not the same as saying don't trade him.  

 

The Twins have a very good nucleus and have the parts to be a playoff caliber offense without really doing much.  They also should upgrade their defense just by not playing Santana and Grossman as much.  They need to improve the rotation.  Ideally, they add better starters but they should also add better bullpen arms (and let May get another shot in the rotation).  But adding guys - even with years of control - that are in the Santiago, Milone, 2016 Hughes etc isn't really going to improve the rotation. Hell, the Twins could sign Ivan Nova or Tyson Ross and not trade Dozier. De leon looks like a #3 type.  Which is nice but I'd probably want more.  

[1965GREATYEAR]

 

If the Twins are holding up a trade offer that has DeLeon and Alvarez/Bellinger already there, and it falls through, IMO, that's a failure.  I have been saying all along that getting Bellinger or Alvarez in this trade would be a major coup in a Dozier trade.

This has to be the hold up. Twins wisely want one of Bellinger/Alvarez and LA won't do it. This deal isn't getting done before season and was never close to finalized. Maybe at trade deadline when some of the other Dodger minor RHP's show more growth.  Dodgers have a ton of RHP prospects in the lower levels as well.

[jimmer]

 

This has to be the hold up. Twins wisely want one of Bellinger/Alvarez and LA won't do it. This deal isn't getting done before season and was never close to finalized. Maybe at trade deadline when some of the other Dodger minor RHP's show more growth.  Dodgers have a ton of RHP prospects in the lower levels as well.

Except that it's been rumored De Leon and Alvarez are already offered and the hold up is whomever is the #3 and maybe the #4.  I'm saying if we miss our on getting De Leon and Alvarez because of haggling over #3 and #4 pieces, it's a failure.

 

And, to speak to your first point, while I understand the Twins want Bellinger or Alvarez, I'm not sure wise is the word I'd use if a deal fails because they couldn't get one of them.  Not getting Alvarez or Bellinger shouldn't be a deal buster.

 

For me, if they CAN get De Leon and Bellinger/Alvarez, then they'd be smart to take it regardless of who else is in there (or if there even IS anyone else).

 

 

[rghrbek]

 

Adding another Santiago and Escobar isn't going to make the Twins great, either.  I don't see why the Twins should take 50 cents on the dollar back in any Dozier trade.  If they don't like the deal, walk away.  That's not the same as saying don't trade him.  

 

The Twins have a very good nucleus and have the parts to be a playoff caliber offense without really doing much.  They also should upgrade their defense just by not playing Santana and Grossman as much.  They need to improve the rotation.  Ideally, they add better starters but they should also add better bullpen arms (and let May get another shot in the rotation).  But adding guys - even with years of control - that are in the Santiago, Milone, 2016 Hughes etc isn't really going to improve the rotation. Hell, the Twins could sign Ivan Nova or Tyson Ross and not trade Dozier. De leon looks like a #3 type.  Which is nice but I'd probably want more.  

 

People toss the phrase #3 starter around like it's a dirty word (almost).  When is the last time the twins had a consistent #3 starter?  Santana for 1.5 years?  If we had a staff full of them, my guess is we would be pretty good.  If DeLeon is a #3, Berrios, and moving forward a few others (prospects), I would argue we would be very competitive.  

 

I am not sure who you comparing Santiago to?

 

Trading Dozier for a #3 starter and maybe another #3 starter, to me is worth it.  Of course my hope is DeLeon and Alvarez (or whomever we may get) exceeds that, than even better.  Gibson, Santiago, and so far May and Berrios are not anywhere close to #3 starters at this time.

[Otto von Ballpark]

 

So is this a good and fair thing?  Just curious.

Not sure what you mean?  Just pointing out that the Dodgers made a $32 mil investment in Alvarez recently, one that doesn't appear to have been unsound.  It would be weird for them to deal him, plus other prospects with value, for $60 mil surplus value from Dozier over the next two years.

 

Hence why I suspect Alvarez hasn't ever really been on the table (at least not along with De Leon or Bellinger).

[nicksaviking]

 

huh?

 

A failed attempt at a joke.