Dozier Trade Discussion Thread

[jimmer]

In 2014 he struck out almost 14 per 9 IP while walking 2.5 per 9 IP (ERA 2.22, WHIP 1.026).  Was 2015 really out of nowhere?

[Riverbrian]

Right, so maybe DeLeon is, by a wide margin, the best centerpiece we'll see at any point in our efforts to deal him.

 

If true, my care for who piece two or three is dramatically drops off.

Maybe... I have no idea. I'm just not the sort that feels strongly about the strength or weakness of a minor league package of player or players. I'll give my opinion on Brett Lawrie without hesitation but I ain't all that sure about Moncada yet. Thats just the way I am. DeLeon maybe the next Koufax... I don't know and right now I don't care. I choose to trust the decision makers and if they set a price... They should hold firm and wait for it. If you don't get it... You eat it... But you don't settle because it just lets the big boys stay big and strong.

 

I just feel strongly that the team in contention pays for that final piece because that's how it is supposed to work. Quite a few were upset about what the Twins gave up for Jepsen. Not me... I was upset that all we got was Jepsen. I would have paid more for more. It's what contending teams do. We were in contention and we needed bullpen help. So we paid a price for it and that's how it is supposed to work.

 

The Dodgers get to settle... Not us... The Dodgers are the ones with the 200 million payroll. The Dodgers are the ones who have that better than average chance at winning it all. If they choose to fill 2B with Jed Lowrie instead so they can keep their prospects for 2018 and beyond... could've had Dozier... Could've had Dozier... Could've had Dozier... Will be the repeatable singalong chorus of a new Dodgers song if they lose out in the wild card game.

 

Contending teams pay.

[TheLeviathan]

 

If De Leon is the only major piece, concern over piece two and three should dramatically go UP, not down.

 

Not if you think highly of DeLeon.  If the Twins feel he is pretty much a lock to be a good SP - then you have already won the deal even if it is 1:1.  That's the reality of this.  

 

And, even further, if you are confident (and you really should be) that you'll not get offered a player of his caliber again, why are you quibbling over the secondary pieces?

 

 

[TheLeviathan]

 

My guess is a lot of how we as fell as fans is which version of De Leon we get.  Sickels sees him as an absolute stud, giving him a A ranking and feeling that he has top of the rotation stuff.  That De Leon seems pretty exciting.  And then there's the fangraphs view which has a much lower floor, touches on his shoulder soreness and lack of durability, lack of an out pitch and he's not as exciting. 

 

I tend toward the more pessimistic view of him so am not overly excited about him as a centerpiece. I'd actually like to see the Braves or St Louis get involved because I liked their prospects more.

 

That's fine, you are welcome to feel that way.  The thing is: the Twins probably don't, or we wouldn't be here. 

[gunnarthor]

Not if you think highly of DeLeon. If the Twins feel he is pretty much a lock to be a good SP - then you have already won the deal even if it is 1:1. That's the reality of this.

 

And, even further, if you are confident (and you really should be) that you'll not get offered a player of his caliber again, why are you quibbling over the secondary pieces?

I suspect a lot of us don't think as highly of De Leon as you do. We'll see.

 

But ithink the worst possible idea would be for our FO to take a deal that they don't feel is fair value.

[TheLeviathan]

 

I suspect a lot of us don't think as highly of De Leon as you do. We'll see.

But ithink the worst possible idea would be for our FO to take a deal that they don't feel is fair value.

 

For the record, I don't know enough about DeLeon to say.  There are things are like, things I'm wary of.

 

What I won't buy into is some of the pie-in-the-sky thinking that we'll just push this down the line and still be ok.  That's highly unlikely.  Much more highly unlikely than most of you want to acknowledge.  And I get that, because I agree that a bad deal is a bad thing too.  But at the same time, we just went through a season in which a poorly constructed, glut-filled roster turned into a hideous tire fire.  

 

Keeping Dozier and the same putrid pitching staff feels like some of the same mistaken thinking that lead to Sano in the OF to keep Plouffe around.   We prized "get a kick ass deal" over "get this roster looking like something that might actually work"

 

Dozier for DeLeon (if the Twins really like him) is a deal with enormous upside and a relatively high floor as well.  Because our pitching is that bad.  And Dozier is of that little good to us over the next two years.  I can't emphasize that enough.

 

I wonder if it might be why the Dodgers are playing hard ball on this.   

[drivlikejehu]

 

Dozier for DeLeon (if the Twins really like him) is a deal with enormous upside and a relatively high floor as well.  Because our pitching is that bad.  And Dozier is of that little good to us over the next two years.  I can't emphasize that enough.

 

I wonder if it might be why the Dodgers are playing hard ball on this.   

 

I do not understand why you keep saying De Leon provides a high floor, when historically there is like a 50% chance he produces a career WAR of 0 (or less!). How much lower could the floor be for a return on Dozier? 

 

Quantity helps to mitigate pitcher injury risk. Maybe you roll the dice on a single pitching prospect if he's, I dunno, Pedro Martinez. De Leon isn't that kind of guy. He averaged 91 mph on his fastball last year and there's no guarantee that MLB hitters will be as helpless against his change as AA and AAA hitters were.

[TheLeviathan]

The floor is high because even if he accomplishes nothing more than being a #4 starter for 6 years the Twins still gain more from that over the long term than retaining Dozier for two more years of not competing.

 

Would I take a straight up deal? No. But if I really liked DeLeon, the secondary pieces are just about risk mitigation and not value. That is a major difference IMO.

[jimmer]

'Maybe you roll the dice on a single pitching prospect if he's, I dunno, Pedro Martinez. De Leon isn't that kind of guy.'

 

That's easy to say when we know what Pedro became, but did people know the kind of player Pedro was before Pedro became the Pedro we got to enjoy watching all those years? Going into his last minor league season (1993) he was ranked as the 63rd best prospect by Baseball America, taking a big drop from the #10 ranking he had prior to the previous season due to the disappointing year before. He was short, and skinny with less K/9 and more BB/9 than De Leon.

 

We'd be balking at Pedro right now in a trade for Dozier.

 

BTW, I am not saying De Leon is in Pedro category, just saying it's easy to say you take a chance on a pitching prospect like Pedro Martinez when you know how he turned out.

[drivlikejehu]

 

The floor is high because even if he accomplishes nothing more than being a #4 starter for 6 years the Twins still gain more from that over the long term than retaining Dozier for two more years of not competing.

Would I take a straight up deal? No. But if I really liked DeLeon, the secondary pieces are just about risk mitigation and not value. That is a major difference IMO.

 

His floor is getting shelled for a month or two and then being diagnosed with a torn labrum and never recovering. That sort of thing happens all the time. His floor is zero, nothing, zilch. 

 

The chances he materially improves the Twins rotation for any real length of time (1 year+) is much, much lower than you seem to think.

 

Jimmer - obviously the team has to evaluate the prospect. The fact you may get a good surprise, or a bad surprise, doesn't really matter. I only meant that massive upside justifies more risk.

[nicksaviking]

Not if you think highly of DeLeon. If the Twins feel he is pretty much a lock to be a good SP - then you have already won the deal even if it is 1:1. That's the reality of this.

Why would the Twins think he is pretty much a lock to be a good SP? Nobody should think that about any pitching prospect.

 

If that were true it would be De Leon, not Urias who was untouchable.

[TheLeviathan]

His floor is getting shelled for a month or two and then being diagnosed with a torn labrum and never recovering. That sort of thing happens all the time. His floor is zero, nothing, zilch.

 

The chances he materially improves the Twins rotation for any real length of time (1 year+) is much, much lower than you seem to think.

 

Jimmer - obviously the team has to evaluate the prospect. The fact you may get a good surprise, or a bad surprise, doesn't really matter. I only meant that massive upside justifies more risk.

If the example you gave is granted, then so too is the possibility that Dozier is a 600 OPS player like he was for a third of last year. If those sorts of arguments are valid they would seem to wash out. Let's look at more probable outcomes.

 

So, relatively speaking, the floor is high. This isnt an A ball prospect. This is a top 30, near ready starter. The player we are moving, while valuable, has very little value to our ability to turn things around and will be aging into his 30s with less and less affordable control. Given those factors, it has a good chance of doing minimal damage even if this busts.

 

We will have given up an asset for a high upside play that, even if it busts, doesn't set us back any further than we already are. Have we forgotten just how ridiculously far this staff is from competing?

[TheLeviathan]

Why would the Twins think he is pretty much a lock to be a good SP? Nobody should think that about any pitching prospect.

If that were true it would be De Leon, not Urias who was untouchable.

I would hope they are confident in their assessments. If they are targeting DeLeon, they better believe in him.

[nicksaviking]

I would hope they are confident in their assessments. If they are targeting DeLeon, they better believe in him.

So they should only target can't miss players? Those guys generally aren't available. Or you don't think it's possible that the Twins aren't completely confident in De Leon and told the Dodgers that to offset the risk the Dodgers are going to have to give up another good prospect? Because that's what it sounds like, and that sounds reasonable.

 

The Twins absolutely positively should not be confident that De Leon or any prospect is a lock to be a good player.

[DodgerFan1234]

 

De Leon is no slouch and I never said he's without value, but he came out of nowhere a year ago. Also, yes it's unfair but pitchers age does matter, velocity typically starts decreasing in the mid 20's.

But that's not even the biggest concern, for a top prospect, I want a good breaking ball. I don't see a righty with a low 90's FB striking out too many guys with a change up as his out pitch; not at the MLB level and particularly not in the AL. Maybe if he was a lefty.

Can you please point to some articles that show that pitcher velocity typically starts decreasing in the mid-20's?  That's not at all my understanding but I'm happy to be proven wrong.  Velocity is also just one metric as well.   Separation (velocity delta between the fastball and changeup) would in my opinion have a greater impact on getting swinging strikes than strictly velocity.  But again, I'm happy to read up on it and re-assess the value of DeLeon and his relationship to this trade.

 

 

[CiabanItReal]

 

I have never accepted that premise. Not trading him now does not preclude a future trade.

 

But keeping him is still clearly better than making a bad trade, that has too light a return, and doesn't make the team better in the future. A trade is not automatically a win for the Twins in the future. De Leon is not a sure thing.

 

If there is no trade, winning more games season to season is always a positive, even more when there has been such a stretch of lousy play and they are trying to break in younger players into something of a winning situation.

 

They can also extend Dozier beyond two years. 

 

And of course, all of this has been discussed many times over. None of the basic facts have changed. For the right price trading Dozier is a good move. Short of that, keeping him is not a disaster. And a bad trade is the worst of all worlds.

Why would he want an extension though?

He's already made like 6 mill and he has another 15 million on the way regardless of if he's any good or not.

Unless this team looks like they'll be competitive at some point during his extension, Why would he bother?
I'm sure he loves the organization and the fans blah blah blah etc. but at a certain point a guy can only tolerate being on an uncompetitive team for so long.

[drivlikejehu]

 

If the example you gave is granted, then so too is the possibility that Dozier is a 600 OPS player like he was for a third of last year. If those sorts of arguments are valid they would seem to wash out. Let's look at more probable outcomes.

So, relatively speaking, the floor is high. This isnt an A ball prospect. This is a top 30, near ready starter. The player we are moving, while valuable, has very little value to our ability to turn things around and will be aging into his 30s with less and less affordable control. Given those factors, it has a good chance of doing minimal damage even if this busts.

We will have given up an asset for a high upside play that, even if it busts, doesn't set us back any further than we already are. Have we forgotten just how ridiculously far this staff is from competing?

 

The chances of Dozier busting are much, much lower than De Leon, who has a much higher chance of getting hurt, plus a much higher chance of just not being very good. 

 

You don't assess value by saying, well, anyone could bust, so let's not worry about it. Future value is determined based on a probability distribution. If fictional player A has a 90% chance of 3 WAR and 10% chance of 0 WAR, and fictional player B has a 45% chance of 3 WAR and a 55% chance of 0 WAR, then all else being equal, player A is twice as valuable as player B.

 

De Leon's chances of being a successful starting pitcher are way, way below 50%, even if his prospect status is fully justified. That's the problem with being so short on pitching - De Leon is, from a probability standpoint, basically 1/4th of a starting pitcher, maybe 1/3rd if you want to be unreasonably optimistic.

 

Trading Dozier for 1/3rd of a starting pitcher just does nothing for me. 

[drivlikejehu]

 

Can you please point to some articles that show that pitcher velocity typically starts decreasing in the mid-20's?  That's not at all my understanding but I'm happy to be proven wrong.  Velocity is also just one metric as well.   Separation (velocity delta between the fastball and changeup) would in my opinion have a greater impact on getting swinging strikes than strictly velocity.  But again, I'm happy to read up on it and re-assess the value of DeLeon and his relationship to this trade.

 

Velocity actually starts declining earlier than that:

 

http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/pitcher-aging-curves-introduction/

 

Also, separation of velocity is irrelevant. You can google that one, it's been studied a lot and doesn't matter. In fact, all the rage recently has been the hard slider/cutter.

[DodgerFan1234]

 

Velocity actually starts declining earlier than that:

 

http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/pitcher-aging-curves-introduction/

 

Also, separation of velocity is irrelevant. You can google that one, it's been studied a lot and doesn't matter. In fact, all the rage recently has been the hard slider/cutter.

1st paragraph of initial thoughts tends to contradict your and Nick's statement, but its still overall a good read.  As far as separation, I stated that it was my opinion and it's based on hours and hours of discussions with a family friend that's a HOF pitcher and picking his brain about what made him so successful.  He always seems to come back to separation, because yes, at some point velocity goes and it comes down secondary stuff and making each pitch look similar but act differently.

[CiabanItReal]

 

What are the odds De Leon ends up a #1 or #2? Maybe 10%?

The Twins odds of getting the same or better deal later is likely still higher than that.

The team was probably never getting an ace in the Kershaw, Syndagard, Bumgarner sense though. Dozier just doesn't have the kind of consistent track record to get that, he's been to streaky throughout his career.

He's definitely worthy of a good return, but holding out for a Julio Urias type was never going to be in the cards.

assuming we even offer a likely 18.5M QO  when he becomes a FA

I think it'll be even higher by that point.

[AZTwin]

The team was probably never getting an ace in the Kershaw, Syndagard, Bumgarner sense though. Dozier just doesn't have the kind of consistent track record to get that, he's been to streaky throughout his career.

He's definitely worthy of a good return, but holding out for a Julio Urias type was never going to be in the cards.

I think it'll be even higher by that point.

They never went after Urias. They went after prospects with red flags such Deleon, Alvarez, Buehler and Stewart.

[drivlikejehu]

 

1st paragraph of initial thoughts tends to contradict your and Nick's statement, but its still overall a good read.  As far as separation, I stated that it was my opinion and it's based on hours and hours of discussions with a family friend that's a HOF pitcher and picking his brain about what made him so successful.  He always seems to come back to separation, because yes, at some point velocity goes and it comes down secondary stuff and making each pitch look similar but act differently.

 

You mean the part where it says "pitchers lose velocity from the beginning"? Sounds like exactly what I said.

 

You can have whatever opinions you like, but velocity of pitch types is pretty easy to measure, in the aggregate, yet no one has found any evidence that larger differences in velocity are helpful. A lot of people thought it would matter, but that's why data is so valuable.

[CiabanItReal]

 

If he didn't state in his piece that the Dodgers told him they were concerned that Dozier came from a small market then it is implied that he, Rosenthal believes it's an issue. He didn't say, "A Dodgers source says...."

Throwing out unsourced, unverified and undocumented nonsense like that is what convinces nutjobs to go shoot up pizza joints trying to hunt imaginary peodiphiles. If that's the kind of reporter he wants to be these days he should make clear that he's just a blogger.

He doesn't need to say "a dodgers source said" and doing so could unintentionally revel his source to that sources employers, the source could have asked him specifically not to mention him in any form after providing the information.

Also, lets not conflate saying that Dozier hasn't played in a large market is anything close to the whole "pizza gate" nonsense. Or that saying Dozier hasn't played in a large market is the same as promoting a conspiracy about organized child abuse. I don't see why your taking this so personally.

Also, it could well be a concern of the dodgers, though their concerns could be tiered, such as;

1)He strikes out a lot

2)He can be incredibly streaky

3)His power is incredibly pull heavy

4)They don't know how he'll adjust to such a large market.

But not all of those concerns would necessarily be ranked the same.

Lastly, he one of the most respected guys in his industry, he's never been a shill for any team, why would he start now, considering that neither he nor the dodgers had anything to gain by putting that blurb into his article.

I get you don't like it, but there really is no need to be jumping to conclusions, or making personal attacks.

I keep reading that Dozier's value will never be higher. 

 

This is obviously not true if you consider that the Dodgers were seemingly the only team bidding and seemingly low balling. 

Not really, it's not as though his contract is going to get longer or more team friendly from this point, he isn't suddenly going to become more valuable going forward.

And it's not as though only one team that is trying to compete was interested in him, the problem is the other teams were like the Giants and Angels.

Lets say at the deadline you have 4 teams in need of a 2nd basemen, the giants, angels, orioles and marlins, so you have a bidding war, big deal. None of the teams have anything remotely as good as Deleon to offer.

[CiabanItReal]

 

Again, I haven't seen them.  And I've been looking. I've read two or three people at Fangraphs say otherwise, though.

 

You call this an extreme sellers market because some big moves have been made.  One for a True Ace, the other for a guy who is vastly under-paid with 5 years of control left and 2 years younger than Dozier.

 

Also, none of them are 2Bs.  Not a lot of teams competing for Dozier, apparently.  I'm guessing because they don 't see 2016 as the Dozier they'd be getting.

If this was an extreme sellers market the twins wouldn't have had to consistently push fake interest in their player to try to get the dodgers to blink.

 

Maybe... I have no idea. I'm just not the sort that feels strongly about the strength or weakness of a minor league package of player or players. I'll give my opinion on Brett Lawrie without hesitation but I ain't all that sure about Moncada yet. Thats just the way I am. DeLeon maybe the next Koufax... I don't know and right now I don't care. I choose to trust the decision makers and if they set a price... They should hold firm and wait for it. If you don't get it... You eat it... But you don't settle because it just lets the big boys stay big and strong.

I just feel strongly that the team in contention pays for that final piece because that's how it is supposed to work. Quite a few were upset about what the Twins gave up for Jepsen. Not me... I was upset that all we got was Jepsen. I would have paid more for more. It's what contending teams do. We were in contention and we needed bullpen help. So we paid a price for it and that's how it is supposed to work.

The Dodgers get to settle... Not us... The Dodgers are the ones with the 200 million payroll. The Dodgers are the ones who have that better than average chance at winning it all. If they choose to fill 2B with Jed Lowrie instead so they can keep their prospects for 2018 and beyond... could've had Dozier... Could've had Dozier... Could've had Dozier... Will be the repeatable singalong chorus of a new Dodgers song if they lose out in the wild card game.

Contending teams pay.

But what if they trade for Dozier and they experience a bunch of injuries to their starting rotation, and Dozier goes 0-fer in the playoffs, then the choras would be, "should have kept deleon, should have kept deleon" etc etc.

[CiabanItReal]

 

His floor is getting shelled for a month or two and then being diagnosed with a torn labrum and never recovering. That sort of thing happens all the time. His floor is zero, nothing, zilch. 

 

The chances he materially improves the Twins rotation for any real length of time (1 year+) is much, much lower than you seem to think.

 

Jimmer - obviously the team has to evaluate the prospect. The fact you may get a good surprise, or a bad surprise, doesn't really matter. I only meant that massive upside justifies more risk.

Then by that argument, there is literally no pitcher the twins should trade Dozier for, because that's just as true about Reyes of the cardinals, or urias or berrios etc.

They never went after Urias. They went after prospects with red flags such Deleon, Alvarez, Buehler and Stewart.

He was just an example, feel free to substitute in another pitcher like Reyes or anyone else.

[USAFChief]

Not if you think highly of DeLeon.  If the Twins feel he is pretty much a lock to be a good SP - then you have already won the deal even if it is 1:1.  That's the reality of this.  

 

And, even further, if you are confident (and you really should be) that you'll not get offered a player of his caliber again, why are you quibbling over the secondary pieces?

So then despite many claims to the contrary, you're ok with a 1:1 swap?

 

The bottom line here is, it's pretty obvious Falvey/Levine don't think that's fair, or this would be over. Perhaps they have better insight on De Leon.

[DodgerFan1234]

You mean the part where it says "pitchers lose velocity from the beginning"? Sounds like exactly what I said.

.

The very sentence after that says that they tend to stay within .5mph of peak velocity through age 28. 0 brownie points for intellectual dishonesty. Hey, you supplied the article.

[mikecgrimes]

Here's my dilemma if Doizer hit's .233 with 14 HR's would he still help the Twins win games if this team otherwise surprises us and is competitive.  If the answer to that is yes then maybe we don't need to gamble on a trade that isn't what we want.  Of course it's possible he will hit .270 with 35 HR again but I fear he will fall way short, as do probably all the potential trading partners.

[TheLeviathan]

 

So they should only target can't miss players? Those guys generally aren't available. Or you don't think it's possible that the Twins aren't completely confident in De Leon and told the Dodgers that to offset the risk the Dodgers are going to have to give up another good prospect? Because that's what it sounds like, and that sounds reasonable.

The Twins absolutely positively should not be confident that De Leon or any prospect is a lock to be a good player.

 

They should target players they like.  And they should like players they are confident in.

 

I mean, what's the alternative to what I'm suggesting?  That FO run around blindly hoping?  What's the point of even having a scouting department then?

[TheLeviathan]

 

So then despite many claims to the contrary, you're ok with a 1:1 swap?

The bottom line here is, it's pretty obvious Falvey/Levine don't think that's fair, or this would be over. Perhaps they have better insight on De Leon.

 

No, I also think the situation calls for asking for more to mitigate the risk.  But my approach to the second and third pieces is going to be quite different than many of you because I'm realistic about what Dozier's value is.  And I'm realistic about what a fair return is.

 

And more than anything, I'm realistic about what is most probable going forward to help this team win games again.  And that's going to require us to gamble on high upside pitching and hope our new FO identifies the right guys.  

 

Otherwise, enjoy your 25 HR Dozier seasons while we lose 8-5 90 some odd times.