Dozier Trade Discussion Thread

[drjim]

I know what you are saying, but in response to Enge0280's earlier post about the "1 for 1" rumors circling, that started after Neal published this tribune piece (i think). He clearly stated that DeLeon is on the table and the Twins asked for one other prospect (whomever that might be) and the Dodgers held firm in saying no. So if that's true the Dodger are holding firm on a 1 for 1 trade. As to whether he meant that, only Neal knows.

 

If it's true (which i highly doubt) there's no way in hell i trade Dozier for DeLeon straight up. That would be an insanely stupid trade by the Twins. No way can you gamble losing a 29 year old power hitting first baseman for one starting pitching prospect with a history of shoulder problems and a terrible debut last season.

Mlbtraderumors gave the interpretation that it might have been 1 for 1 and LEN3 is a little ambiguous, but probably the best interpretation in my mind is there is not a second significant, highly ranked prospect. Surely there would have to be more to the deal than De Leon otherwise it's a big waste of time to even keep talking.

 

To the previous post, LEN3 is not making this up, clearly a Twins source leaked this to him. The question that Neal doesn't address that we can speculate on is whether it is accurate and what the Twins motivation would be for leaking this.

[mazeville]

Whatever is going on, as a Twins fan I would like to see some resolution to this. And I'm sure that Brian Dozier would like to see some resolution to this, too. TwinsFest is later this month. Players have to make plans for spring training. And, frankly, it's all getting annoying.

 

At this point I'd be mildly surprised if a trade DOES happen (if they haven't agreed on a deal by now, why would things suddenly change?). But it IS getting late. 

[Oldgoat_MN]

I believe that if a trade happens at all it will be announced this week.

Otherwise. we'll see Dozier batting leadoff for the Twins (though why leadoff? Oh yeah, the guy who makes out the lineup card...).

[Cory Engelhardt]

https://twitter.com/jonmorosi/status/816670223268974592

 

Jon Morosi says there should be resolution in the next week or so.

[laloesch]

 

Mlbtraderumors gave the interpretation that it might have been 1 for 1 and LEN3 is a little ambiguous, but probably the best interpretation in my mind is there is not a second significant, highly ranked prospect. Surely there would have to be more to the deal than De Leon otherwise it's a big waste of time to even keep talking.

To the previous post, LEN3 is not making this up, clearly a Twins source leaked this to him. The question that Neal doesn't address that we can speculate on is whether it is accurate and what the Twins motivation would be for leaking this.

 

 

 

I know what you are saying, but in response to Enge0280's earlier post about the "1 for 1" rumors circling, that started after Neal published this tribune piece (i think).  He clearly stated that DeLeon is on the table and the Twins asked for one other prospect (whomever that might be) and the Dodgers held firm in saying no. So if that's true the Dodger are holding firm on a 1 for 1 trade.  As to whether he meant that, only Neal knows.

 

If it's true (which i highly doubt) there's no way in hell i trade Dozier for DeLeon straight up.  That would be an insanely stupid trade by the Twins.  No way can you gamble losing a 29 year old power hitting first baseman for one starting pitching prospect with a history of shoulder problems and a terrible debut last season.  

 

Just realized I said Dozier was a first baseman.  Meant to say he was a power hitting second baseman.

[laloesch]

Looks like twitter users are haggling with Dave, including Darren Wolfson regarding Alvarez being part of the deal.  He and his source are insisting that Alvarez IS part of the deal with DeLeon while others are scoffing at that assertion.  Interesting.  Dave any updates on this?

[DaveW]

 

Looks like twitter users are haggling with Dave, including Darren Wolfson regarding Alvarez being part of the deal.  He and his source are insisting that Alvarez IS part of the deal with DeLeon while others are scoffing at that assertion.  Interesting.  Dave any updates on this?

A lot of Dodger fan trolls are bothering me about Alvarez "there is NO WAY Alvarez would be traded" again those are just fans and it muddles the conversation cause it's just opinion based and most of them are just trolling.

Wolfson has been cool, he says he hasn't heard about Alvarez but has been respectful, tbh I question Wolfsons source on this one after the Cardinals incident. I can assure you he hasn't spoken to my source.

[Otto von Ballpark]

 

I know what you are saying, but in response to Enge0280's earlier post about the "1 for 1" rumors circling, that started after Neal published this tribune piece (i think).  He clearly stated that DeLeon is on the table and the Twins asked for one other prospect (whomever that might be) and the Dodgers held firm in saying no. So if that's true the Dodger are holding firm on a 1 for 1 trade.

Yes, that's when the "1 for 1" thing started, but I think you are misreading it.

 

"Another prospect" (what Neal wrote) likely refers to a specific prospect or group of prospects.  The Twins likely asked for Alvarez, Bellinger, or Buehler to be included with De Leon -- that's pretty much what Neal wrote.  It makes sense that the Dodgers would decline this.

 

"Any other prospect" would have been written if it was strictly 1 for 1.  But it defies logic to think the Twins asked for ANY prospect (i.e. the Dodgers 20th ranked org guy) and were rebuffed.  Neal didn't write anything approaching that -- he didn't even mention anybody outside the Dodgers top 5.

 

If the Dodgers are giving up De Leon, they would clearly be willing to part with someone else -- it's just a matter of how many, and of what quality, which is what this debate has been about the whole time.

 

We know from Neal, Heyman, and others that the rest of the package is unlikely to include Alvarez, Bellinger, or Buehler, but unfortunately they have given zero indication about other names, which further muddies the water.

 

To his credit, Berardino reported that the Twins had interest in Brock Stewart during the winter meetings.  Contrary to Dave's source, I still think Stewart is the more likely second piece to any finalized trade.

[Otto von Ballpark]

 

Mlbtraderumors gave the interpretation that it might have been 1 for 1 and LEN3 is a little ambiguous, but probably the best interpretation in my mind is there is not a second significant, highly ranked prospect. Surely there would have to be more to the deal than De Leon otherwise it's a big waste of time to even keep talking.

That is not only the best interpretation, but the only logical one.

 

Neal and MLBTR don't even address Calhoun, Stewart, Lux, etc. in their reports.  The "1 for 1" thing is strictly in the context of no Bellinger, Alvarez, or Buehler in addition to De Leon.  But the Dodgers have enough prospect depth beyond that to still make an interesting offer, if they so choose.

[diehardtwinsfan]

I suspect that to be true as well Spy.  I hope Dave's source is right in that I'd rather have Alvarez, but a De Leon/Stewart trade, while I'm warming up to it (I think both are decent bets to be above average arms), is lacking in my opinion. We absorb too much risk in that piece. If they tossed in a couple of lower guys like Ruiz and Verdugo (sp?), I'd take that as well... but Stewart/De Leon straight up isn't reasonable.  Heck, while Alvarez has a much higher season, Alvarez/De Leon is too much of a question mark.

[diehardtwinsfan]

 

That is not only the best interpretation, but the only logical one.

 

Neal and MLBTR don't even address Calhoun, Stewart, Lux, etc. in their reports.  The "1 for 1" thing is strictly in the context of no Bellinger, Alvarez, or Buehler in addition to De Leon.  But the Dodgers have enough prospect depth beyond that to still make an interesting offer, if they so choose.

 

I suspect Friedman is testing the waters. He got quite a bit from MN in the Young trade and likely wants to see what he can get again. I suppose it's good that he's hesitant to pull the trigger... Last time he pulled the trigger on a trade with MN, we ended up with a big hot mess in Exchange for a pretty decent young arm.

[mazeville]

FWIW: Doogie on 1500 ESPN said today that the Twins believe the Dodgers will ultimately "cave" and add more to their Dozier trade proposal.

[Otto von Ballpark]

 

I suspect that to be true as well Spy.  I hope Dave's source is right in that I'd rather have Alvarez, but a De Leon/Stewart trade, while I'm warming up to it (I think both are decent bets to be above average arms), is lacking in my opinion. We absorb too much risk in that piece. If they tossed in a couple of lower guys like Ruiz and Verdugo (sp?), I'd take that as well... but Stewart/De Leon straight up isn't reasonable.

Oh sure -- if Stewart was the second piece, there would likely have to be a third.  I'm of the opinion that Calhoun is an interesting enough asset, if he's available like a few Dodger blogs have suggested, but it could be another lower level guy too.

[doscinco]

FWIW: Doogie on 1500 ESPN said today that the Twins believe the Dodgers will ultimately "cave" and add more to their Dozier trade proposal.

Of course the guy with the MIN front office in his ear says this

[Otto von Ballpark]

 

I suspect Friedman is testing the waters. He got quite a bit from MN in the Young trade and likely wants to see what he can get again. I suppose it's good that he's hesitant to pull the trigger... Last time he pulled the trigger on a trade with MN, we ended up with a big hot mess in Exchange for a pretty decent young arm.

I don't think it has anything to do with the Young trade.  Friedman and the Dodgers in general just seem pretty conservative about losing talent.  Note that the big-spending Dodgers have yet to forfeit a draft pick in the qualifying offer era, much less trade elite prospects.  And I can't blame them -- it's a lot easier to recover from a bad contract than it is to recover from lost talent.

 

Seems like that is the general approach of the Yankees and Cubs now too.  It's too bad we didn't have an asset that appealed more to Boston or Washington this winter, or even Houston or Texas...

[Mike Sixel]

I would think TX would want ESan.....not sure why there is no steam there. Heck, Houston should want ESan also.

[HawkeyeDodger]

 

Agreed.  If that's all that's on the table (I doubt it) you walk away no questions asked.

 

I tend to believe Dave that its DeLeon and Alvarez, plus one other.  As was said earlier the likely sticking point is the third piece of the deal that they are haggling over.  Dodgers want it to be a PTBNL but the Twins want something of value with upside and i understand why.  

 

DeLeon had a terrible debut and has had injury issues throughout his minor league career.  He is far from a sure bet at this point.  Alvarez has fantastic stuff but has only pitched 59 innings in the minors so far (A ball).  He's at least 2 to 3 seasons from the majors.  

 

IMO they need something else closer to the majors to make this work in my opinion, such as Brock Stewart who can step in now. 

Deleon has not has injury issues throughout his minor league career.  He had a sprained ankle and a sore shoulder last year. Throughout is an overstatement.

[Otto von Ballpark]

 

I would think TX would want ESan.....not sure why there is no steam there. Heck, Houston should want ESan also.

They probably are interested, just not at any price that would it make it worthwhile for us right now.  They each have about ~4 starters already, and probably want to roll the dice on a cheap or internal option at #5 first.

[AZTwin]

Oh sure -- if Stewart was the second piece, there would likely have to be a third. I'm of the opinion that Calhoun is an interesting enough asset, if he's available like a few Dodger blogs have suggested, but it could be another lower level guy too.

Just curious but what makes you interested in Calhoun? What position would you have him play?

[King]

Mike Berardino ‏@MikeBerardino  7m7 minutes ago
I'm told #mntwins intend to wrap up Dozier talks -- one way or another -- in "short term" out of respect for Dozier. No specific date.

[ShouldaCouldaWoulda]

Getting a strong feeling that this does not play out well for the Twins. Either settling for a disappointmenting deal soon. Or, hanging on to him to trade at the break, but he declines to average, below average, or gets injured.

 

It was pretty clear that there would not be much need or competition for 2B by contenders last year when looking at their rosters. Not an optimal market to have a valuable price not many teams NEED.

[mazeville]

 

Getting a strong feeling that this does not play out well for the Twins. Either settling for a disappointmenting deal soon. Or, hanging on to him to trade at the break, but he declines to average, below average, or gets injured.

It was pretty clear that there would not be much need or competition for 2B by contenders last year when looking at their rosters. Not an optimal market to have a valuable price not many teams NEED.

 

I've already decided the trade won't happen. Don't know why something this week would suddenly change either team's mind.

[Otto von Ballpark]

 

Just curious but what makes you interested in Calhoun? What position would you have him play?

I'm interested in Calhoun because he offers a very intriguing combination of contact and power.  11.6% K rate and .215 ISO in AA last year, with similar numbers the year before.

 

Usually those guys are pretty good hitters, and good enough that it doesn't matter where they play. Only two guys with at least 250 PA in the affiliated minors were better than Calhoun in both measures last year, Benitendi and Bregman; in the majors, only Betts, Beltre, and Murphy.

 

Obviously Calhoun isn't as valuable as those guys, but even lesser quality hitters in that mold, like Carlos Santana and Victor Martinez, are still pretty good (and illustrate how you don't need a position if your bat is good enough).

 

He's not a headliner, but Calhoun is more interesting to me as a third piece than most of the lower minors guys the Dodgers could offer.

 

Seems most evaluators agree -- even while acknowledging his shortcomings in speed and defense, Fangraphs has him at 50 FV the same as Buehler, a step above Stewart and below De Leon.  Sickels had him as a solid B even before his 2016 performance at AA.  MLB has him at #87, and BA had him at #98 on their midseason list right next to Polanco.

[AZTwin]

Maybe as a third piece of Alvarez is included. I don't buy the he doesn't need a position. We got to put him somewhere. I have doubts he can play 2nd or outfield. That really just leaves DH and we have a lot of those types. In his 1 season with over 100 games in minors he has a sub .800 OPS so I'm not sure you can put him in that DH spot either. Also players that don't hit for average in minors usually struggle in majors. He is probably a .220-.230 type hitter.

[Otto von Ballpark]

 

Maybe as a third piece of Alvarez is included. I don't buy the he doesn't need a position. We got to put him somewhere. I have doubts he can play 2nd or outfield. That really just leaves DH and we have a lot of those types. In his 1 season with over 100 games in minors he has a sub .800 OPS so I'm not sure you can put him in that DH spot either. Also players that don't hit for average in minors usually struggle in majors. He is probably a .220-.230 type hitter.

The Fangraphs guy is the one who said Calhoun won't stick at 2B and is too slow for the OF, but still pegs him as a 50 FV player.

 

He's not a batting average guy, obviously, but even with a low average, he managed a 123 wRC+ at AA last year.

 

If he had a plus walk rate, or any kind of a defensive projection, the guy would be a top 50 prospect in all of MLB.  As it is, he still looks like a top 100 type based on a skill set that is interesting, if unusual.

 

For now, let him play 2B or try a corner OF as opportunities arise -- even the ability to hold a glove at those spots can come in handy (see Cuddyer).  But he has a fair chance to have enough bat to handle DH too, in the Carlos Santana mold.

[AWOLNATION_11]

I don't understand dismissing Calhoun because of the lack defense & speed.  He probably has as good a chance to be an impact DH as our current guys in Vargas & Park.

[crapforks]

 

I'm interested in Calhoun because he offers a very intriguing combination of contact and power.  11.6% K rate and .215 ISO in AA last year, with similar numbers the year before.

 

Usually those guys are pretty good hitters, and good enough that it doesn't matter where they play. Only two guys with at least 250 PA in the affiliated minors were better than Calhoun in both measures last year, Benitendi and Bregman; in the majors, only Betts, Beltre, and Murphy.

 

Obviously Calhoun isn't as valuable as those guys, but even lesser quality hitters in that mold, like Carlos Santana and Victor Martinez, are still pretty good (and illustrate how you don't need a position if your bat is good enough).

 

He's not a headliner, but Calhoun is more interesting to me as a third piece than most of the lower minors guys the Dodgers could offer.

 

Seems most evaluators agree -- even while acknowledging his shortcomings in speed and defense, Fangraphs has him at 50 FV the same as Buehler, a step above Stewart and below De Leon.  Sickels had him as a solid B even before his 2016 performance at AA.  MLB has him at #87, and BA had him at #98 on their midseason list right next to Polanco.

He is fun to read about, but limited. From Truebluela.com: "Calhoun’s power is currently pull heavy; all of his 2015 professional home runs went to right field, almost exclusively right down the foul line"

 

from todaysknuckelball.com: "Compounding his issues as a potential third baseman or outfielder is his limited arm strength compared to most major league-level players."

 

His (unlikely) ceiling reads Juan Uribe without the versatility. Juan Uribe was a nice player for a good deal of time. Calhoun's strengths are equalled or surpassed by his flaws

[Strato Guy]

I have a feeling most Twins fans will either be hestatic or very disappointed over a Dozier trade to the Dodgers. It depends mostly on whether Alvarez will be included in the deal. I wonder if a compromise will take place something like Dozier for De Leon, Stewart, Sheffield and one hitter, such as one of the Dodgers promising shortstops.  

[RaymondLuxuryYacht]

 

I don't understand dismissing Calhoun because of the lack defense & speed.  He probably has as good a chance to be an impact DH as our current guys in Vargas & Park.

Not exactly a ringing endorsement, but for a third guy behind JDL and Alvarez, I'm probably OK with it

[AWOLNATION_11]

 

Not exactly a ringing endorsement

 

Ha!  Good Point!  Should have been more clear.  I don't think he should be totally dismissed as part of a larger package.  Need to have at least one DH option that won't strike out 30% of the time.