I've tracked roughly two dozen MLBer-for-prospect trades over the past three years. Using PECOTA, KATOH, The Point of Pittsburgh tables, and my own best guesses to fill in the projected values, over and over again the Surplus Value of the prospect side vastly exceeds that of the MLBer side.

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.

 

Would could be getting close to a deal.

Twins Reportedly Asking Teams For Final Offers On Brian Dozier
https://www.mlbtraderumors.com/2016/12/brian-dozier-trade-rumors-final-offer-twins.html

Good. My productivity at work will improve a lot once this saga if finally over.

Edited December 30, 20169 yr by markos

I'm getting the feeling that we better prepare to settle in for a long couple of months. If the Dodgers aren't going to offer fair value and other teams aren't in desperate need I think our favorite team has once again found themselves in the rare situation where they have a great trade asset with not enough demand.

 

I don't want to go into the season with Dozier as it's going to take a ton to break right for him to gain value, but if the Dodgers offer is a slap in the face and no one else is offering, there's not much choice but to at least wait until spring and let the Dodgers at least think the Twins prefer to keep him. Maybe they come groveling 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.

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.

Honestly I hope they do

 

That was a nice post. 

Thanks.

Good luck in 2018, 19, and 20 if you won't trade your assets for prospects.

 

THIS is how bad teams stay bad, they refuse to worry about the future, when the present looks bleak.

 

Honestly I hope they do

 

Why?

Well, if LEN is right and the best offer out there is a one for one swap for De Leon the Twins would be better by keeping Dozier. 

 

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.

 

I don't know if signing Utley would be a huge roadblock. He's going to be cheap and probably plays better as a utility/bench guy anyway.

 

If that's the case then we should walk. Just my opinion.

 

Then, how would you propose we acquire enough pitching in time to turn this team around before Sano, Buxton, and Kepler hit free agency?

 

Well, if LEN is right and the best offer out there is a one for one swap for De Leon the Twins would be better by keeping Dozier. 

 

Where did LEN say it's one for one?

I don't know if signing Utley would be a huge roadblock. He's going to be cheap and probably plays better as a utility/bench guy anyway.

Plus good chance he doesn't t

stay healthy.

 

If teams make their final offers and it isn't enough, Dozier isn't going anywhere until the summer at the earliest.

 

Where did LEN say it's one for one?

That's from mlbtraderumor's write up (I don't have any more free reads of strib articles this month).

 

"Neal suggests that the sticking point between the Twins and the Dodgers, who have long been the clear primary suitor for Dozier, has been that Los Angeles is seeking a straight up, one-for-one swap of Dozier and top pitching prospect Jose De Leon."

Good luck in 2018, 19, and 20 if you won't trade your assets for prospects.

 

THIS is how bad teams stay bad, they refuse to worry about the future, when the present looks bleak.

Bad trades are how bad teams stay bad.

 

Bad trades are how bad teams stay bad.

 

Agreed, a bad trade won't help....but until just today, it has NEVER been a 1:1 for trade, in any rumor.

 

that said, are we sure that De Leon+Polanco at 2B < Dozier at 2b and no pitcher? In 2019 and beyond?

 

That's from mlbtraderumor's write up (I don't have any more free reads of strib articles this month).

 

"Neal suggests that the sticking point between the Twins and the Dodgers, who have long been the clear primary suitor for Dozier, has been that Los Angeles is seeking a straight up, one-for-one swap of Dozier and top pitching prospect Jose De Leon."

 

I read the direct story from Neal and I don't think that was ever, even remotely, suggested.  Look it up in an incognito browser.  I think MLBTR really editorialized that.

 

 

Then, how would you propose we acquire enough pitching in time to turn this team around before Sano, Buxton, and Kepler hit free agency?

The Twins have two former top 100 pitching prospects, both under 24, set to start the season in the rotation.  They have a solid vet in Santana and Gibson, who was a disaster last season but should be better, is perhaps the pitcher most likely to benefit from a pitch framing catcher.  Hopefully, May gets back into the rotation.  They have 2 top 100 pitching prospects sitting at AA as well.  They have the prospects.  They just have to have them start pitching well at the ML level. 

 

The Twins can also improve the staff by improving the bullpen and overall team defense by keeping Grossman and Danny Santana out of the field.  They can sign a mediocre FA starter instead of giving up Dozier.

I don't know if signing Utley would be a huge roadblock. He's going to be cheap and probably plays better as a utility/bench guy anyway.

I don't think he has to be a huge roadblock just to prevent them from reconsidering in March.

This is LEN's quote:

 

The Dodgers have long been interested in Dozier, and have righthanded prospect Jose De Leon to anchor any deal. De Leon has a mid-90s fastball, good changeup and developing slider. Their other top prospect is first baseman Cody Bellinger, who could step in after Joe Mauer’s contract is up after 2018.

 

 

"Anchor" implies to me the exact opposite of a one for one.

That's from mlbtraderumor's write up (I don't have any more free reads of strib articles this month).

Private/incognito browsing windows are your friend.

Santana is gone in two years, right? I think even you said next year is pretty much lost for the playoffs....so not sure how Santana plays into long term competitiveness at all...unless you trade him, but trading him seems to say that Dozier isn't good enough to keep them in contention, so why keep him?

 

Then, how would you propose we acquire enough pitching in time to turn this team around before Sano, Buxton, and Kepler hit free agency?

 

It's not even January yet. Just because the Twins don't trade him today doesn't mean they can't in the next several months.

 

A demand for final offers probably doesn't actually prevent the Twins from taking another offer from a more desperate team later.

 

AC/DC has had about a dozen "final" tours. I've been to a couple of them.

 

Bad trades are how bad teams stay bad.

If the Twins do nothing and let Dozier walk in 2 years, they will be bad.

If the Twins do trade Dozier in a bad deal, they will be bad.

If the Twins do nothing, re-sign Dozier, they will be bad, with an expensive 2b in his mid 30s.

 

If the trade is 1:1, then walk away. I don't wont the FO to be perceived as weak pushovers. That's bad for the long term future of the club as well, but even a decent trade, I think, is going to be the best way to turn the team's fortunes around

 

This is LEN's quote:

 

 

"Anchor" implies to me the exact opposite of a one for one.

I hope you're right.  Also, I didn't know about the incognito tab.  Cool.

 

I hope you're right.  Also, I didn't know about the incognito tab.  Cool.

 

Well, I think we all hope that's right.  I was just trying to point out that the paragraph you read on MLBTR has basically no grounding in Neal's story.  They came up with that 1:1 crap out of thin air.

 

It's not even January yet. Just because the Twins don't trade him today doesn't mean they can't in the next several months.

 

A demand for final offers probably doesn't actually prevent the Twins from taking another offer from a more desperate team later.

 

AC/DC has had about a dozen "final" tours. I've been to a couple of them.

 

But people are arguing "don't trade him"......literally, people are suggesting keeping Dozier into the year is a good idea for a 59 win team....

 

Also, just curious, who the heck is going to offer more than a top 10 pitching prospect (top ten among pitchers) and other stuff?

 

Santana is gone in two years, right? I think even you said next year is pretty much lost for the playoffs....so not sure how Santana plays into long term competitiveness at all...unless you trade him, but trading him seems to say that Dozier isn't good enough to keep them in contention, so why keep him?

I'm of the somewhat unpopular opinion that Santana should be on the block as well. I bet the market for Erv is more robust than the one for Dozier

Where did LEN say it's one for one?

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.

 

I'm of the somewhat unpopular opinion that Santana should be on the block as well. I bet the market for Erv is more robust than the one for Dozier

 

I'm with you, though SPs can increase in value during the year more easily than hitters....since you need 5 SPs, and only 1 2B.....