Dozier Trade Discussion Thread

[TheLeviathan]

 

The Dodgers signed a FA starting pitcher this offseason. You don't do that if you truly believe De Leon is a #2 starter.

 

So the Cubs signed Jon Lester because they didn't believe in Kyle Hendricks?

 

 

[Otto von Ballpark]

The Dodgers signed a FA starting pitcher this offseason. You don't do that if you truly believe De Leon is a #2 starter.

No one truly believes De Leon is a #2 starter right now. He is a prospect with #2 potential. Re-signing a MLB SP is not incompatible with that belief. (Last I checked, teams generally need at least 5 SP for the regular season, and 4 for the postseason.)

 

Furthermore, there was no better use of $48 mil on this winter's FA market for the Dodgers than re-signing Hill.

[drivlikejehu]

 

1) I have readily acknowledge the risks of JDL.  Repeatedly.  I've said that gambling on upside is something we have to do.  That's the definition of risk. So no, I've acknowledged it.  Repeatedly.  And just did so again.  And will do so again in the next paragraph.

 

2) "relatively low chance of being a good starter" is nonsense.  That's your opinion and a host of established scouts disagree with you.  Don't suggest this as fact.  It isn't.  He has more risk than Dozier.  He and Dozier have different forms of risk, but JDL is riskier.  Hence why I do want 2nd and 3rd pieces and have said so.  I just am not going to demand Kepler with my Berrios to make a deal like many of you.

 

3) All it shows is that they'd rather use him to augment another position, not that they view him as garbage.  They're trying to maximize an asset that will best help their team.  This kind of phrasing is basically just dressed up "nefarious" talk.  That the Dodgers have put lipstick on a pig and are selling it to us.  That's EXACTLY what I'm saying is nonsense.  

 

JDL is highly regarded by a wide array of publications and scouts.  Unless you allege some vast Dodger conspiracy that they've roped in a multitude of outlets to join them for the sole purpose of duping some future trade partner....it's absolute nonsense.

 

De Leon's modest chances of being a good starter aren't my "opinion." It's an undeniable historical fact that pitching prospects - even top prospects - have a very high failure rate, for various reasons.

 

So unless De Leon is somehow exempt from the same factors that apply to every other pitcher in baseball, he is not statistically likely to reach his theoretical ceiling.

 

That's what you don't seem to get - even if everything everyone says is 100% true, De Leon is STILL not a good return for Dozier. 

 

It's nothing against De Leon. He's a nice prospect and it would be great to have him in the Twins organization. You are just not able separate those facts from the reality of pitching prospects. Once you price in risk, two years of cheap Dozier deserves more than De Leon + a mediocre 2nd piece.

 

Of course, unlike myself and some others, you have never actually provided your own valuation of De Leon. It's easy to throw out red herrings and generalities - what is the probability distribution you think is fair for him?

[DaveW]

 

I'm wondering if he meant Sheffield, as that's what the person he quoted was saying.

Yeah oops

[jimmer]

 

Yeah oops

I should have been able to put 2 and 2 together.  My bad.

[Otto von Ballpark]

No one here is claiming De Leon plus "junk" is a good return for Dozier. Unless you expand the definition of "junk" to include solid B grade, borderline top 100 prospects like Calhoun.

[Squirrel]

No one here is claiming De Leon plus "junk" is a good return for Dozier. Unless you expand the definition of "junk" to include solid B grade, borderline top 100 prospects like Calhoun.

Oh great, are you adding in this discussion a debate to define 'junk/not junk'?

[TheLeviathan]

 

De Leon's modest chances of being a good starter aren't my "opinion." It's an undeniable historical fact that pitching prospects - even top prospects - have a very high failure rate, for various reasons.

 

Of course, unlike myself and some others, you have never actually provided your own valuation of De Leon. It's easy to throw out red herrings and generalities - what is the probability distribution you think is fair for him?

 

You said "relatively low chance to be a starter" - relative to what?  That statement sounds an awful lot like an opinion relative to other pitching prospects.  So what or who is it relative towards?

 

Dozier is not going to get you the equivalent of Berrios + Kepler.  If that's what you're waiting for, you're never going to get anything.  No one in their right mind would pay that.  I doubt 99% of the posters here would want to do that if the situation was reversed.  

 

I value DeLeon a lot like I did Berrios.  A pitcher with some noticeable flaws, but who has put up some gawdy numbers on his way up the ladder who has real potential as #2 with good coaching.  So...a damn nice piece.   And better than I expected as a centerpiece for a 30 year old middle infielder with ok defense and no future on this team where we win anything.

 

So DeLeon plus Stewart?  Or Calhoun?  Or even Sheffield?  Yeah, I'm for sure listening.

[jimmer]

 

 

 

Dozier is not going to get you the equivalent of Berrios + Kepler.  If that's what you're waiting for, you're never going to get anything.  No one in their right mind would pay that.  I doubt 99% of the posters here would want to do that if the situation was reversed.  

 

I value DeLeon a lot like I did Berrios.  A pitcher with some noticeable flaws, but who has put up some gawdy numbers on his way up the ladder who has real potential as #2 with good coaching.  So...a damn nice piece.   And better than I expected as a centerpiece for a 30 year old middle infielder with ok defense and no future on this team where we win anything.

 

So DeLeon plus Stewart?  Or Calhoun?  Or even Sheffield?  Yeah, I'm for sure listening.

absolutely all of this.

[drivlikejehu]

 

I value DeLeon a lot like I did Berrios.  A pitcher with some noticeable flaws, but who has put up some gawdy numbers on his way up the ladder who has real potential as #2 with good coaching.  So...a damn nice piece.   And better than I expected as a centerpiece for a 30 year old middle infielder with ok defense and no future on this team where we win anything.

 

So DeLeon plus Stewart?  Or Calhoun?  Or even Sheffield?  Yeah, I'm for sure listening.

 

Well OK, but that doesn't really answer the question because even if you equate De Leon to Berrios (pretty reasonable comparison) - the question is how do you value a guy like that relative to Dozier?

 

Under the right assumptions, I could see De Leon plus Stewart being at least somewhat reasonable (in light of the overall 2B market). But saying that is different from spelling it out with numbers. Not because those numbers would be precise - anything like that is a rough estimate - but because you need to convert the players into a common system of value. 

 

Are you saying something like, Dozier is worth $50MM, De Leon is worth $35MM, Stewart is worth $15MM, so therefore the deal is fair? Or are you saying something more like, Dozier is worth $50MM, De Leon is worth $25MM, Stewart is worth $10MM, but that's the best return the Twins can get so they should take it?

 

In other words, even if you agree on player value, you can disagree on whether to accept a particular deal. But without breaking it down into those parts, you are not being clear as to why something does or does not make sense.

 

The same is true for a hypothetical Twins trade involving Berrios and Kepler. If you want to put the shoe on the other foot, that same analysis would have to be done. Otherwise you are just tossing names around.

[Otto von Ballpark]

I am not sure why you'd say you have no clue how Levi values the players in question. He has offered plenty of "clues". I am not sure it is reasonable to demand that he put it in number form when few other posters have done so (and when doing so with any accuracy would require a great deal of work). His opinion, even without numerical values attached, seems perfectly clear to me: through various ranks and grades, De Leon seems close enough in value to Dozier for this Twins team and in this market, that adding interesting B/B- second or third pieces likely makes it worth doing from the Twins perspective. Nothing about that seems unreasonable enough to demand that he assign numerical values to each player -- De Leon is a consensus top 20-30 prospect at least by pretty much every observer.

 

If Levi were stating that Chase De Jong plus Trayce Thompson was acceptable, then I think you'd have a case to press for details -- that opinion would be well outside any mainstream opinion on the players in question. But that's not the case.

[drjim]

The Souhan burn was especially cruel.

[drjim]

If Sheffield is now on the table, seems like there's finally a first and third piece. Wonder who the second piece will be.

[nicksaviking]

 

So the Cubs signed Jon Lester because they didn't believe in Kyle Hendricks?

 

Who in baseball thought Kyle Hendricks would be a #2 type pitcher last year let alone three winters ago?

[TheLeviathan]

 

Who in baseball thought Kyle Hendricks would be a #2 type pitcher last year let alone three winters ago?

 

Maybe the Cubs did.  Either way, signing a veteran starter doesn't mean you've abandoned all hope in your other pitchers.  The idea that signing Rich Hill means the Dodgers think DeLeon is a lemon is nonsense.

[Otto von Ballpark]

 

If Sheffield is now on the table, seems like there's finally a first and third piece. Wonder who the second piece will be.

There is no report of Sheffield on the table.  It was apparently a Dodgers fan suggesting that as a possible way to break the deadlock.

 

There hasn't been a report of Sheffield off the table either, so he's in the group of guys I think would be in play as the 2nd or 3rd pieces if the Twins were willing to listen.

[drjim]

 

There is no report of Sheffield on the table.  It was apparently a Dodgers fan suggesting that as a possible way to break the deadlock.

 

There hasn't been a report of Sheffield off the table either, so he's in the group of guys I think would be in play as the 2nd or 3rd pieces if the Twins were willing to listen.

 

Come on, I'm trying to get optimistic here.

[Loosey]

 

Two things:

 

-That goes against everything my source has said.
-If DeLeon and Stewart were the offer, the Twins promptly would have said no way!

DeLeon and Stewart 4 Dozier is MAYBE close to fair value if it was the trade deadline and Dozier was a FA after the year (3 month rental) definitely lopsided for 2 years.

I don't fell like going back multiple pages and reading everything.  Can you please summarize what  your source is saying as of today?  

 

Is the deal still on the table?  What are holdups, etc?

[Otto von Ballpark]

 

Come on, I'm trying to get optimistic here.

Sorry! It would be nice to have an honest to goodness report of something. Even just the Dodgers signing or otherwise acquiring someone else.

[AlwaysinModeration]

I'm personally ready for the Twins to cave and trade Dozier for De Leon, Alvarez, and two nobodies. Just an FYI.

[nicksaviking]

******Moderator Note*********

 

This thread is starting to get personal again. Let's stay on topic, which is a hypothetical and increasingly unlikely trade of Brian Dozier, and stay away from debates such as who can define the definition of "value" the best.

[Hosken Bombo Disco]

Dozier for De Leon and Stewart

Dozier for De Leon and Calhoun

Dozier for De Leon and Sheffield

 

These strike me as three different offers.

 

As far as Dozier for De Leon and Stewart, I am inferring from Berardino's report on the 11th that the Dodgers would not offer Stewart in a deal with De Leon, so saying "the Twins should take that" is besides the point.

 

Dozier for De Leon and Calhoun is something, but the Twins aren't really shopping for a guy like Calhoun any more than the Dodgers are asking the Twins to kick in an outfield or third base prospect. They only want Dozier.

 

Dozier for De Leon and Sheffield is surely something the Dodgers would agree to, and I'm glad the Twins do not consider that an acceptable offer.

[Otto von Ballpark]

I don't know if the current Twins roster means we can afford to "shop" for specific positions beyond the top piece in the trade. Best player available and all that.

[Hosken Bombo Disco]

I don't know what the Twins think of Calhoun, but if the Twins are not high on him, they shouldn't feel obliged to accept him as the second piece just because the Dodgers tell us he is the next best available piece they will offer us. I feel the Twins are right to hold out for pitching.

[Otto von Ballpark]

I don't know what the Twins think of Calhoun, but if the Twins are not high on him, they shouldn't feel obliged to accept him as the second piece just because the Dodgers tell us he is the next best available piece they will offer us. I feel the Twins are right to hold out for pitching.

I was specifically responding to your claim that Calhoun wasn't the "type" of player we should be looking for. I am saying "type" doesn't really matter IF we like the player, especially beyond the first piece in the deal. We should be able to fit just about any young player into our roster right now.

 

If they don't like Calhoun as a player, fine, obviously they shouldn't accept him, but don't dismiss the value he could bring just because he's not a pitcher.

[Hosken Bombo Disco]

I was specifically responding to your claim that Calhoun wasn't the "type" of player we should be looking for. I am saying "type" doesn't really matter IF we like the player, especially beyond the first piece in the deal. We should be able to fit just about any young player into our roster right now.

If they don't like Calhoun as a player, fine, obviously they shouldn't accept him, but don't dismiss the value he could bring just because he's not a pitcher.

I agree Calhoun has value. But beyond Bellinger we just haven't heard much about guys like Calhoun or Verdugo, suggesting the Twins aren't interested perhaps.

[CiabanItReal]

 

Two things:

 

-That goes against everything my source has said.
-If DeLeon and Stewart were the offer, the Twins promptly would have said no way!

DeLeon and Stewart 4 Dozier is MAYBE close to fair value if it was the trade deadline and Dozier was a FA after the year (3 month rental) definitely lopsided for 2 years.

That would be an insane return for 3 months of Dozier.

[Squirrel]

 

That would be an insane return for 3 months of Dozier.

Dave corrected that post later on. He meant Sheffield, not Stewart, as he was replying to someone who suggested DeLeon + Sheffield might be something to consider in a trade.

[TheLeviathan]

 

I agree Calhoun has value. But beyond Bellinger we just haven't heard much about guys like Calhoun or Verdugo, suggesting the Twins aren't interested perhaps.

 

Or they haven't budged.  Or the Dodgers have made them unavailable.  

[sampleSizeOfOne]

Thousands of posts on this same subject and I'm still enjoying it.

 

Clearly there is something very wrong with me...

Nothing wrong with wanting to know what's up. Admittedly i followed Dave's thread to the bitter end, then took the first 100 pages of this one off before picking it back up.

 

It is like watching a nature documentary or something.

 

The father penguin holds the Dozier egg off of the snow to keep it warm as the Dodgers march across the barren snow fields to hunt for prospects to feed the fledgeling trade rumors, and continue the circle of life in this inhospitible environment.

 

Everything is better when Morgan Freeman is narrating it.