Dozier Trade Discussion Thread

[Lee-The-Twins-Fan]

Except I want another pitcher, too.

 

Yes, I am greedy, when it comes to trading Dozier.

[nytwinsfan]

 

If the Twins think they can win in 2017 or 2018 they don't make Dozier available in the first place.

The problem here is that it depends entirely what "think they can win in 2017" means, and if they are thinking about this in a analytical way, that is not a simple concept. Does it mean they think they have a 5% chance to make playoffs in 2017, a 10% chance, a 25% chance or a 35% chance? If 25% or 35% chance, then hell yeah, don't trade Dozier until the trade deadline if the Twins are not in contention. But I doubt Farley/Levine think the chances of making the playoffs are 25-35%. I bet they think it is closer to 5 or 10%. That still means they think the Twins "can win in 2017", but just they think the chances are very very low. So there is still value in keeping Dozier -- might make the 8% they think the Twins have of making the playoffs a 11% chance, which is still significant. But, the return for Dozier might increase the chances of the Twins making the playoffs in 2018 through 2021 from 40% to 44% (I'm obviously just pulling these numbers out of my ass, but Falvey/Levine may have more concrete numbers to assign in their internal calculus). So the calculus is really a lot more complicated than "do Farley and Levine think the Twins can win in 2017." It is looking at whole probability distributions over many years, and how Farley/Levine think different players will affect those calculuses over the years. Or at least, that's what it should be.

[Riverbrian]

 

By definition, doesn't that preclude any trade from happening? As soon as the Dodgers are willing to give someone up, you don't want them anymore?

 

LOL

 

Yeah... it does... I got myself into a loop there

 

 

Dodgers: Alright DeLeon and Alvaraz... It's agreed. I'll send the paperwork over for signature and contact the MLB Office for notification and approval.

 

Twins: Hold On... Why are you willing to deal those two? Something ain't right. I gotta go back to Urias... I know you said no to Urias earlier but it's gotta be Urias.

 

Dodgers: Will Urias get the job done? Will Urias end this discussion? We have been at this day and night for months now... (Pause)... Alright... Urias it is. 

 

Twins: Why are you willing to deal him now? 

 

 

 

 

[Squirrel]

LOL

 

Yeah... it does... I got myself into a loop there

 

 

Dodgers: Alright DeLeon and Alvaraz... It's agreed. I'll send the paperwork over for signature and contact the MLB Office for notification and approval.

 

Twins: Hold On... Why are you willing to deal those two? Something ain't right. I gotta go back to Urias... I know you said no to Urias earlier but it's gotta be Urias.

 

Dodgers: Will Urias get the job done? Will Urias end this discussion? We have been at this day and night for months now... (Pause)... Alright... Urias it is.

 

Twins: Why are you willing to deal him now?

Hahaha ... only you, Brian.

 

But I knew what you meant and I agree.

[HawkeyeDodger]

 

I think the durability question is why the Twins are right to hold out for the right package.

I suppose the counter is that durability is the reason he's even available.

I would say that he's available because he's kind of blocked until they can move Kazmir and McCarthy.  They also have a surplus of arms who are all on there way to the bigs.  Deleon and Stewart are ready now.  De Jong, Oaks, are knocking at the door.  Sborz is a tick behind and may wind up a reliever.  Buehler will be the fastest riser in the system and could theoretically push for a September call up this year depending on how they manage his innings.  2018 is more likely ETA for Buehler at some point and then there is Alvarez plus a good stable of arms not mentioned. 

 

Deleon's slider draws raves from some and meh from others.

[FargoFanMan]

I understand bellinger being a legit pretty much ready prospect. I just don't think we get the dodgers 1 and 2 realistically. I believe de Leon and Alvarez are going to be our best bet. Along with a 3rd throw in. Is abdullah still in the organization? Just saying if we're waiting for bellinger and de Leon we might as well look forward to 2 years of dozier.

[Oxtung]

I used the 2015 version of your source #1, so that's why my index numbers were lower. But the actual prospect value in a trade is complicated by the information asymmetry, because the prospect value chart is derived mostly from prospects that stayed in their organization.

 

To put it another way, there are historical "top 100" prospects as a group, and then top 100 prospects that were traded as a sub-group. I don't know how much specific data/analysis is out there, but trades of MLB players show clearly that traded players under-perform relative to those that stay in an organization. Their pre-trade organization is better able to predict future value, and understandably more likely to part ways with players they are pessimistic about (at least relative to league-wide expectations).

 

If the Dodgers truly believed in De Leon as a top-of-rotation starter, he wouldn't be on the table for Dozier. So for either health or ability reasons, the Dodgers feel he is a trade-able asset. The Twins valuation has to account for this information, and discount De Leon accordingly in comparison to his perceived prospect status. I imagine this is why the trade hasn't happened.

 

If I'm the Twins, I wouldn't insist on De Leon being in the deal. If the Dodgers are claiming he's so incredibly valuable, I just don't see how the gap can be closed. The Twins simply can't accept that at face value. So either the Dodgers can say all of their prospects are hugely valuable, which is not credible and means they just want to fleece the Twins, or they can put together a package with more depth that isn't quite as MLB-ready. That still would be fine for the Twins if the value is there.

That's an interesting way of looking at the peripherals surrounding the trade. I have never heard that traded prospects don't pan out at a similar rate(I'm assuming u mean to other comparatively ranked prospects). Do you have a link for further reading?

[AZTwin]

That's an interesting way of looking at the peripherals surrounding the trade. I have never heard that traded prospects don't pan out at a similar rate(I'm assuming u mean to other comparatively ranked prospects). Do you have a link for further reading?

. Prospects in general are overvalued and rarely pan out. I mean look at the 2010 dodger top prospect list. Maybe 1-2 became anything. Or take a look at the twins list from a few years ago. Similar story

[AZTwin]

Reading some dodger forums and they are absolutely delusional. They think de Leon, Stewart and Calhoun should get it done and is overpaying. The one poster wanted dozier and polanco for that package. They are nuts. We have no need for Calhoun at all unless he is a 4th piece. Stewart is 25 year old already with only 1 maybe 2 pitches. De Leon is 24 year old and good prospect but major concern about his shoulder and ability to fool major league hitters. With how far off the fan bases are, I'm assuming we will keep dozier and let dodgers keep looking up at other teams in the NL

[AZTwin]

A fair package would probably be Bellinger, Alvarez, Keibert Ruiz, and then just throw in a AAAA arm like a brock Stewart

[nytwinsfan]

 

Reading some dodger forums and they are absolutely delusional. They think de Leon, Stewart and Calhoun should get it done and is overpaying. The one poster wanted dozier and polanco for that package. They are nuts. We have no need for Calhoun at all unless he is a 4th piece. Stewart is 25 year old already with only 1 maybe 2 pitches. De Leon is 24 year old and good prospect but major concern about his shoulder and ability to fool major league hitters. With how far off the fan bases are, I'm assuming we will keep dozier and let dodgers keep looking up at other teams in the NL

Agreed, I'd rather have a lottery ticket 18-year-old with some upside than Calhoun. Don't need a 5 foot 8 DH only.

[nytwinsfan]

 

A fair package would probably be Bellinger, Alvarez, Keibert Ruiz, and then just throw in a AAAA arm like a brock Stewart

 

That's probably too much. Not going to happen. Plus if it happens, De Leon will be a part of it.

[Oxtung]

 

. Prospects in general are overvalued and rarely pan out. I mean look at the 2010 dodger top prospect list. Maybe 1-2 became anything. Or take a look at the twins list from a few years ago. Similar story

 

Absolutely prospects are risky but is there any evidence that traded prospects are inherently more risky? There is some logic behind what you posted earlier. In addition I wonder if the change in emphasis between farm systems can mess with development. So while you might be on to something I just wonder if there is any actual research to back it up.

[zchrz]

 

This is for informational purposes.  I haven't seen it linked to this site but here's a Dodger minor league site with video of several Dodger prospects for you to peruse, including Yadier Alvarez, the prospect the Dodgers have (not) agreed to trade.

 

https://minorleaguedodgers.com/2016/08/27/yadier-alvarez-great-lakes-highlights-2/

Well its easy to see why people are hyped on him.  Tall with big shoulders to fill into, big velocity, big break.  Mechanics need a lot of polish and in that short bit doesn't look like he has any real command of the breaking stuff.  Very Meyer-esque guy but that is exactly the kind of upside guy the Twins need (I'm still perfectly fine with the Meyer trade even if it didn't work out that's the gamble).

 

 

[zchrz]

Random though while all this thinking about pitching prospects is going on.... How nice would it be still have Hu in the organization instead of the Kevin Jepsen era.

[AZTwin]

I'm going to do a twins comparisons for some of the guys discussed

 

De Leon = Tyler Jay

Alvarez = Romero

De Jong = Felix Jorge

Buehler = Lewis Thorpe

Stewart = Aaron slegers

Calhoun = Luis arreaz

 

I think the first 3 on that list and a top 30 prospect like Keibert Ruiz would be fair for a 40 homerun 2b. If you look at it this way it almost seems like it's not enough because I think we realize the bust potential of prospects and Dozier is a for sure thing impacting them now.

[King]

 

I'm going to do a twins comparisons for some of the guys discussed

De Leon = Tyler Jay
Alvarez = Romero
De Jong = Felix Jorge
Buehler = Lewis Thorpe
Stewart = Aaron slegers
Calhoun = Luis arreaz

I think the first 3 on that list and a top 30 prospect like Keibert Ruiz would be fair for a 40 homerun 2b. If you look at it this way it almost seems like it's not enough because I think we realize the bust potential of prospects and Dozier is a for sure thing impacting them now.

These comparisons are way off. De Leon is a way better prospect than Tyler Jay, Alvarez than Romero, De Jong than Jorge.. Buehler than Thorpe, Stewart than Slegers and Calhoun than Arraez. Not sure what the purpose of these comparisons were

[AZTwin]

These comparisons are way off. De Leon is a way better prospect than Tyler Jay, Alvarez than Romero, De Jong than Jorge.. Buehler than Thorpe, Stewart than Slegers and Calhoun than Arraez. Not sure what the purpose of these comparisons were

De Leon is ranked 33 and Jay is ranked 36. Same questions about durability.

 

Alvarez and Romero are both guys with great stuff but control issues and high risk associated with them

 

De Jongs write up was similar to Felix Jorge. They are probably about the same as a prospect goes

 

Thorpe and Buehler both have high potential and great stuff but neither have proven anything with surgery to their pitching arm

 

Calhoun and arreaz are both small guys that may not have a position but have a bat. Unfortunately for them their bat probably only plays at a position neither can play. I actually like arraez better than Calhoun here.

 

All I was doing is putting comps in Twins organizations where it made sense to help us see more perspective into what LA is offering us. I don't see a comp in Bellinger or a few others. Maybe a lesser justin morneau.

[Cory Engelhardt]

De Leon is ranked 33 and Jay is ranked 36. Same questions about durability.

Alvarez and Romero are both guys with great stuff but control issues and high risk associated with them

De Jongs write up was similar to Felix Jorge. They are probably about the same as a prospect goes

Thorpe and Buehler both have high potential and great stuff but neither have proven anything with surgery to their pitching arm

Calhoun and arreaz are both small guys that may not have a position but have a bat. Unfortunately for them their bat probably only plays at a position neither can play. I actually like arraez better than Calhoun here.

All I was doing is putting comps in Twins organizations where it made sense to help us see more perspective into what LA is offering us. I don't see a comp in Bellinger or a few others. Maybe a lesser justin morneau.

You do realize that even if Calhoun isn't highly thought of defensively that he is a top 100 prospect in baseball, right? And that Stewart averaged more than a strikeout per inning at every level he pitched at in 2016, including the majors? As a twins fan myself, if we were offered those three for Dozier (De Leon, Stewart and Calhoun) I could see haggling over the need on the twins for Calhoun, but I would absolutely take that deal. To say it is delusional, is delusional

[AlwaysinModeration]

Random though while all this thinking about pitching prospects is going on.... How nice would it be still have Hu in the organization instead of the Kevin Jepsen era.

Still have Hu?

[mazeville]

My mornings these days:

 

1. Get up

2. Check Twitter

3. Check this thread

4. See that Dozier still hasn't been traded

5. Sigh

 

[markos]

 

Absolutely prospects are risky but is there any evidence that traded prospects are inherently more risky? There is some logic behind what you posted earlier. In addition I wonder if the change in emphasis between farm systems can mess with development. So while you might be on to something I just wonder if there is any actual research to back it up.

I have read the same thing over the years from multiple sources. However, I can't seems to find a systematic study. The closest I could find via google was this BP article: http://www.baseballprospectus.com/article.php?articleid=19162

It just looked at top-10 prospects that were traded. Overall, top-10 prospects averaged 12 WAR during their first 6 seasons. Traded top-10 prospects only averaged 6. 

[drivlikejehu]

 

Absolutely prospects are risky but is there any evidence that traded prospects are inherently more risky? There is some logic behind what you posted earlier. In addition I wonder if the change in emphasis between farm systems can mess with development. So while you might be on to something I just wonder if there is any actual research to back it up.

 

I don't have anything handy but was thinking about research related to MLB players, not prospects. That aspect was conjectural on my part. I do think it's safe to say that an organization knows more about its own players than other organizations do. The hard part is quantifying the impact as it relates to trade valuations. 

 

My basically unsupported gut feeling is that the discount should be pretty steep, especially with minor league pitchers and a team as sophisticated as the Dodgers. There is no question their trade proposals are based on a highly analytical evaluation of future value. The basic goal in any prospect(s)-for-veteran(s) trade, for the prospect-dealing club, is to leverage a delta between the perceived and actual future value of the prospects.

[Riverbrian]

 

I agree that Dozier should be dealt right now because the Twins need pitching and more pitching after that and more pitching after that.  

 

BUT... If the Dodgers want Dozier and want the Twins to assume the risk of minor league talent in return and still want to be able to keep their preferred minor league talent. The Twins should walk away. It's the Dodgers who are trying to add that final piece of the puzzle for serious contention. 

 

 

Any price the Dodgers are willing to pay for Dozier right now should be enough to land them any other 2B in the league if it's truly fair value. If the Dodgers are offering X amount for Dozier and it's supposedly fair value and the Twins won't take it... Go ahead... take that same package and offer it to the Rockies for LeMahieu... or to the Marlins for Gordon... or the Tigers for Kinsler... or to the Orioles for Schoop because the Twins are clearly unreasonable not taking it.  

 

Why hasn't that happened? Could it be possible that the Dodgers want Dozier? Could it be possible that the Rockies won't give up LeMahieu for that very same package the Twins have been offered for Dozier. 

 

He's a top 3 2B... Pay Up. 

 

 

[Otto von Ballpark]

I don't have anything handy but was thinking about research related to MLB players, not prospects. That aspect was conjectural on my part. I do think it's safe to say that an organization knows more about its own players than other organizations do. The hard part is quantifying the impact as it relates to trade valuations.

 

My basically unsupported gut feeling is that the discount should be pretty steep, especially with minor league pitchers and a team as sophisticated as the Dodgers. There is no question their trade proposals are based on a highly analytical evaluation of future value. The basic goal in any prospect(s)-for-veteran(s) trade, for the prospect-dealing club, is to leverage a delta between the perceived and actual future value of the prospects.

It is an interesting observation, but a difficult theory to put in practice. Is it basically just "distrust your trade partner"? Obviously you shouldn't let the other team hype and sell the prospects to you, but the Twins scout these guys too, and will do physical exams. They can have specific reasons to disagree with the Dodgers evaluations and not just a general distrust because the Dodgers are offering them.

 

I have no doubt that some attempts to deal are primarily to leverage perceived vs actual future value, but there are deal attempts (and perhaps most consummated deals) based on a good match of needs and circumstances between two clubs.

[d-mac]

 

You are right, a bird in the hand (Dozier) is worth AT LEAST two SP in the bush...

 

Merry Christmas everyone.

 

Last time I checked Dozier doesn't pitch. Wait, let me check again... Nope. Still doesn't pitch.

[markos]

For anyone interested, I started a new thread to try to get feedback (on and off the record) from people regarding Dozier and the Dodgers. It has been interesting following these threads and seeing how varying the opinions are on all the players involved. I'm really curious if there is a consensus somewhere, and what that might be.

 

http://twinsdaily.com/topic/24575-dozier-to-dodgers-feedback/

 

I'll post results after the New Year.

[doscinco]

. Prospects in general are overvalued and rarely pan out. I mean look at the 2010 dodger top prospect list. Maybe 1-2 became anything. Or take a look at the twins list from a few years ago. Similar story

Why does a Dodger prospect list from the McCourt era have any bearings on today? McCourt famously cut all international and amateur draft spending. There are different people running scouting and directing, such as the Twins newly appointed coach, Jeff Pickler.

[drivlikejehu]

 

It is an interesting observation, but a difficult theory to put in practice. Is it basically just "distrust your trade partner"? Obviously you shouldn't let the other team hype and sell the prospects to you, but the Twins scout these guys too, and will do physical exams. They can have specific reasons to disagree with the Dodgers evaluations and not just a general distrust because the Dodgers are offering them.

I have no doubt that some attempts to deal are primarily to leverage perceived vs actual future value, but there are deal attempts (and perhaps most consummated deals) based on a good match of needs and circumstances between two clubs.

 

I think the two approaches are overlapping. The Twins and Dodgers are a good match but, from the Dodgers' perspective, why surrender more future value than necessary to acquire Dozier? It's akin to the legal doctrine that taxpayers aren't required to pay more than the bare minimum they can achieve within the confines of the regulations.

 

For an example, I think there's no doubt that the Rays knew all along that they had fleeced the Twins in the Garza-Young deal, even though on paper it was widely regarded by outsiders, including analytical commentators, as reasonably fair. The Rays' knowledge of Young led them to believe he would never fulfill his potential in the long-run, otherwise they never would have given him up for Garza in the first place.

 

Now, the Dodgers (or any club) do not have an unlimited series of options in how to acquire talent via trade. Only certain teams will have what they want and be willing to deal, and the Dodgers themselves only have a finite number of prospects with any potential trade relevance. So that at least helps narrow the universe of possibilities and partially limits the Dodgers' ability to leverage information asymmetry.

 

My point isn't to reach conclusions about this particular negotiation, to the extent it's ongoing, because I don't have the information necessary to do so. I do think that the underlying dynamics help explain why a deal hasn't happened.

[Lee-The-Twins-Fan]

 

Last time I checked Dozier doesn't pitch. Wait, let me check again... Nope. Still doesn't pitch.

No but he does hit and play a good 2B... He's a top 3 2b. Now what is that worth? I say it's worth two near MLB-ready starting pitchers, and maybe two more prospects. One such pitcher is De Leon. Who is the other?