Article: Dozier Staying With Twins Will Create More Questions Than Answers

[Tom Froemming]

 

 

I have no problem staying pat whatsoever.

 

I don't have a problem with them keeping Dozier, but I do have a huge problem with them staying pat. If Dozier stays, the goal needs to be to field a highly competitive roster in 2018.

[sploorp]

 

With or without Dozier, this team doesn't really have a SS.

And I don't get the "why are the Dodgers so eager to give up DeLeon" point. You have to give up something to get something and the Dodgers know that.

I want Dozier traded because this team likely loses 90 games next year and 2018 is unknown. This team will not get better until the rotation does. But again, no one is saying "just give Dozier away." It has to be more than DeLeon which is what the Twins and Dodgers are fighting over.

Trading Dozier is two steps back.  The infield is better now than it would be if they traded Dozier.  It's just not possible to sell it any other way.

 

What's there not to get about De Leon?  I agree you have to give up something to get something, but my point is are the Dodgers really giving up something?  I can't help but think they may be unloading a potential problem (there goes that smell again).

 

Once again, sometimes the best trades are the ones you don't make.

 

Who's that prospect the Dodgers had that came up and did so well this year?  That would be somebody I could get behind.  That guy and a higher risk decent arm from the lower minors as a slight sweetener is a trade I would go for with no reservations.  The Dodgers won't do that, all they keep offering is the guy with the suspect shoulder and flinch whenever any other names are mentioned.

 

This has bad deal written all over it and I don't know how anybody can possibly see it any other way.  All I keep picturing in my mind is Dozier and the Dodgers marching into the playoffs and possibly the world series and us speculating how long De Leon's Tommy John rehab will take.

 

This team wasn't a 103 loss team last year. A lot went wrong that is unlikely to go wrong this year.  They also won't be a 90 loss team next year regardless of what happens with Dozier.

 

The Dodgers clearly don't want to step up and give us what a player like Dozier is worth, so screw 'em.  We show them what our middle fingers look like and move on.  If we're really talking about a move with long lasting implications, in the long term, it really doesn't matter if we do the trade now or at the trade deadline or even next year.  Is it really so hard to imagine there being at least one contending team in need of infield help at the trade deadline?  Or maybe somebody willing to give up more next off season?  That's the team we want to be dealing with.  That's the team that's going to give us the keys to their farm system.  The Dodgers keep making it clear they are not that team.

 

All that matters is the haul.  We get the deal we can't say no to or we say no.  It really is that simple.  So many Twins fans seem to think not trading Dozier is somehow a failure.  At worst, it's a disappointment.  A bad trade would be a disaster.  If there is even a hint of a problem with what you're trading for, just walk away.

 

A package centered around a prospect with a potentially bad shoulder is a HUGE problem.  Thinking otherwise is just not being realistic about the situation.  I say don't just walk away, run as fast as you can!

 

Are you sure you're not smelling that smell?  It's really strong and coming from the general direction of Los Angeles.

[Twins33]

Trading Dozier is two steps back. The infield is better now than it would be if they traded Dozier. It's just not possible to sell it any other way.

 

What's there not to get about De Leon? I agree you have to give up something to get something, but my point is are the Dodgers really giving up something? I can't help but think they may be unloading a potential problem (there goes that smell again).

 

Once again, sometimes the best trades are the ones you don't make.

 

Who's that prospect the Dodgers had that came up and did so well this year? That would be somebody I could get behind. That guy and a higher risk decent arm from the lower minors as a slight sweetener is a trade I would go for with no reservations. The Dodgers won't do that, all they keep offering is the guy with the suspect shoulder and flinch whenever any other names are mentioned.

 

This has bad deal written all over it and I don't know how anybody can possibly see it any other way. All I keep picturing in my mind is Dozier and the Dodgers marching into the playoffs and possibly the world series and us speculating how long De Leon's Tommy John rehab will take.

 

This team wasn't a 103 loss team last year. A lot went wrong that is unlikely to go wrong this year. They also won't be a 90 loss team next year regardless of what happens with Dozier.

 

The Dodgers clearly don't want to step up and give us what a player like Dozier is worth, so screw 'em. We show them what our middle fingers look like and move on. If we're really talking about a move with long lasting implications, in the long term, it really doesn't matter if we do the trade now or at the trade deadline or even next year. Is it really so hard to imagine there being at least one contending team in need of infield help at the trade deadline? Or maybe somebody willing to give up more next off season? That's the team we want to be dealing with. That's the team that's going to give us the keys to their farm system. The Dodgers keep making it clear they are not that team.

 

All that matters is the haul. We get the deal we can't say no to or we say no. It really is that simple. So many Twins fans seem to think not trading Dozier is somehow a failure. At worst, it's a disappointment. A bad trade would be a disaster. If there is even a hint of a problem with what you're trading for, just walk away.

 

A package centered around a prospect with a potentially bad shoulder is a HUGE problem. Thinking otherwise is just not being realistic about the situation. I say don't just walk away, run as fast as you can!

 

Are you sure you're not smelling that smell? It's really strong and coming from the general direction of Los Angeles.

i agree the infield is better with Dozier than without it. That is because we do not know how Polanco will turn out. I doubt he'll be as good as Dozier but I don't think he'll bust either.

 

I believe giving up DeLeon+ is giving up something, but it depends on what the plus is. If it's not good, then you obviously don't do the deal. I don't even know why you and I are having this conversation as we both seem to agree on that though you think DeLeon is bad, so I'm guessing you'd be fine with a lesser value trade which I actually wouldn't be. If DeLeon isn't your centerpiece then who is? It won't be Bellinger or Urias, which means you'd rather have a lesser prospect than DeLeon and one who is also further away. I'm not okay with taking a trade with even less value. I'm guessing the pitcher you mean is either Stewart or Wood. Probably Stewart. I wouldn't want Stewart to be the centerpiece but as a second or third piece I'd definitely like him. I'd do DeLeon, Stewart and a throw in. Not sure the Dodgers would though. I'd actually prefer more than that but I'm trying to be more realistic.

 

The Twins lost 90+ games five out of the last six years. I don't know why you don't think it won't happen again especially with one of the worst rotations in baseball. It's fine to be optimistic but history is pointing to it happening again until they actually try to fix it. I do agree they are better than they showed last season, but right now I see this as an easy 90 loss team because pitching is part of the game. It's not impossible that they win more, but they've done it once in the last six years. That's an absolutely horrible percentage.

 

And a deadline deal for Dozier where you get more than you're being offered now is pretty unrealistic. Position players do get traded, but the prizes of the deadline are SP and RP which Dozier is not. There's too many things that can go wrong between now and then and to me they outweigh Dozier's value going up, which I see a slim chance at happening. Again, nothing is impossible but you have to play the odds.

 

If they wait until the next offseason then Dozier will just be a rental and will automatically lose value even if he has a good year. Again, you and I are arguing the same thing except you don't like DeLeon as a centerpiece and I do. Otherwise we're both saying "don't give away Dozier for junk."

 

What I don't want to happen is the Twins keep him, never trade him because they can't, and he walks for nothing or a 3rd round pick (and whatever the other pick was) by giving him a QO. Would I rather that happen then a bad trade, yeah because at least we benefit from having Dozier vs having junk but I still don't see this team going anywhere until they get 2-3 more SP's. And if the Twins don't get 2-3 more good SP's prior to Ervin being gone than they are going to need 3-4 more instead. The Twins will be bad until the pitching gets fixed. Plain and simple. And I'm frankly tired of hoping the in-house guys start getting the job done. Gibson has contributed but he's a 4/5 starter and then there was Garza drafted over 10 years ago. That's how far you have to go back to find a contributing pitcher and he didn't even contribute to us. Berrios may become something but we have no idea. Hughes health is in question as his surgery is fairly rare and which Hughes will even show up even if he is healthy? Duffey? May? Mejia? Santiago?

 

All I'm seeing is Ervin plus four question marks. Not sure how that equals greater than a 90 loss team. And a Dozier trade still does not guarantee anything but it's the best chip they have. It must be a good deal on paper though, which is what every fan who sees this as an opportunity is saying though it feels like you think we're all saying "trade him for anything!" Which we definitely are not. Very far from that actually.

Edited January 9, 2017 by Twins33

[beckmt]

 

Okay, let's say the team trades Dozier.

 

They move Polanco over to second to replace one of the best 2nd basemen in all of baseball, that's one step back.  Now, they have a hole at short.  Gordon isn't ready, who do you put there?

 

Benji Gonzalez has the position at AAA.  I'll be honest, I have no idea who the hell Benji Gonzalez is, but after eight years in the minors, I have a sneaky suspicion that he won't be making anybody forget the team's woes at short.  Polonco can at least hit major league pitching, so that's more than likely another step backwards.

 

It would be one thing if Gordon was ready to go and chomping at the bit, but that isn't the case.  At this point, it's still not even 100% certain he would be the answer at short either.

 

I just don't see how trading Dozier solves any of the current infield problems whatsoever.

 

And now for the return.  Not only is there never any guarantees with prospects, but the only player for certain in a trade is pitcher who's had some shoulder problems.  Hmmm?  The Dodgers don't seem to have a problem giving that one up, but ask for somebody else and all we hear is crickets.  Why do you suppose that is?  Why do we want a pitcher the Dodgers seem so eager to give up?  And what's that God awful smell that seems to be coming from the southwest?

 

I think there are way too many people sold on the idea that the team absolutely has to give up Dozier.  I disagree.  Sometimes the best trades are the ones you don't make and the longer it takes for this one to play out, the more I begin to think this is one of those times.

 

I have no problem staying pat whatsoever.

You still have Escobar and if you don't like that you have Vielma, he may not hit, but he sure can field.  Do not see an issue here.  Gordon may surprise us and make the Twins out of spring training.  Twins has Gonsalves, Stewart, Jay at AA, those are all prospects, but the large number that pitched some for the Twins.  Do not believe the starting staff will be worse.   If you can add good prospects to this pool fine, but don't buy the belief you have to deal to make a deal. 

If we stay pat, would like to add 2 reasonable bullpen arms to help out with the transition.  Holland might be the best, but he will be expensive and doubt he would sign here.  Feliz could be another option, or some of the AAA pitchers could turn out OK. 

Until you play them in Minnesota, you will not know what you have.

All this and a high upside starter in the draft, you could still be fine.

[Platoon]

If I thought Dozier would be worth more at the deadline, I would keep him, and then move him. But I really do not. This team has the core to move forward. But obvious pieces are missing. And time, and reality are not on Doziers side. When and if this team matures, Dozier will either have declined, or walk in free agency, and his replacement, Polanco will likely be gone also. To this team Dozier and Polanco are like two things in your garage, that you only need one of. Neither will bring you what you really want in value, and will end up devaluing over the years. One has to go. Me? I turn the older, time limited one into something I need, and keep the long term one that fits into my planning. Keeping both, and having one sit there, deteriorating, is short sighted, and frankly stupid!

[Oldgoat_MN]

Polanco is not going to hit like Dozier, but evidence suggest he will be a solid MI.

 

I don't agree that we have a 'lot' of SP coming up. We have Gonsalves (in AA last season), Romero (spent last season in A and A+), Tyler Jay (83 innings mostly in A+, some in AA) and Mejia. It is a long shot to think that most of them will all be solid MLB pitchers, as it is to think anyone else we have in A ball or above will ever contribute.

 

We have a few potential position players, but this organization is weak, and especially in pitching.

[Thrylos]

 

Polanco is not going to hit like Dozier, but evidence suggest he will be a solid MI.

 

Indeed.  Mater of fact, evidence suggest that Polanco will hit better than Dozier:

 

Polanco Career MLB: .284/.340/.429,  109 OPS+  (up to Age 22)
Dozier age 25 MLB: .234/.271/.332, 67 OPS+

Dozier Career MLB: .246/.320/.442, 108 OPS+ (up to Age 29)

Edited January 9, 2017 by Thrylos

[DocBauer]

Once again, I am not saying don't trade Dozier. And there is no way you can look at the Twins rotation for 2017 and not say it's got a ton of question marks involved. And in no way am I saying it will be a good rotation.

 

But, assuming Dozier is kept as there just isn't a fair trade on the table, the rotation has one major question mark; Hughes. I'm at a loss that we haven't heard more about his offseason progress. Whether it be to open the season, or a month in, etc, a healthy Hughes shores up the potential of the unit quite a bit. Not saying he's a #1, but he often pitched like it in 2014. He was still pretty solid in 2015, though we seem to know now that some of his dip in ability may have been related to his developing injury. Hughes, Santana, an OK Santiago and a rebound by Gibson is not terrible. You still have the young May and Berrios to work with, and Mejia and Gonsalves at AAA that may be ready at some point.

 

There are some "if's" there, to be sure, with Hughes being the biggest. Keeping or selling Dozier does nothing, unto itself, to address SS. Keeping him, however, does provide the team with a big bat and quality offense. The rotation could be addressed further down the line, mid-season via trades or call ups, etc, and next offseason. Not a perfect formula, but not sure there is such a thing as a perfect formula.

[Vanimal46]

 

This cuts both ways.  It could also be the defining non-trade and the continuation of the Ryan Twins' way whose most of its practitioners, unfortunately, still have the same jobs and potentially the same influence in the Twins' front office.

 

For me the bottom line is:  If they do not trade Dozier, the new dual-head regime will start the wrong way.  I expect a bit of risk taking vs. sitting on one's bottom (the paradigm of the Ryan front offices) from the new guys, and so far this off-season I have been vastly disappointed.

Couldn't agree more with this. I'm sure the new regime has done things behind the scenes to improve the organization a bit. They haven't done much of anything with the things us fans are concerned about: roster construction, managerial staff, etc. 

I'm also vastly disappointed that we can only discuss 1 major league signing so far. 

[wsnydes]

 

Indeed.  Mater of fact, evidence suggest that Polanco will hit better than Dozier:

 

Polanco Career MLB: .284/.340/.429,  109 OPS+  (up to Age 22)
Dozier age 25 MLB: .234/.271/.332, 67 OPS+

Dozier Career MLB: .246/.320/.442, 108 OPS+ (up to Age 29)

This is along the lines of how I'm looking at this.  I'm not looking to replace Dozier's output with Polanco, I feel that Polanco's bat fills a different need for this team.  This team hasn't had a table setter in a long time.  This team has power, but nobody that can reliably get on in front of that power.  In my view, Polanco's bat fits the makeup of this team better than Dozier's does.  I'll take the decrease in power output if it means scoring more runs with the power that remains.

Edited January 9, 2017 by wsnydes

[nicksaviking]

 

If I thought Dozier would be worth more at the deadline, I would keep him, and then move him. But I really do not.

 

I agree that his value likely will not be higher at the deadline, however it appears at this point that his value is not going to dictate the return; there simply isn't enough demand.

 

If the Dodgers deal is truly a slap in the face I'd keep him and see if demand bumps up his return this summer, it very well may even if he isn't playing nearly as well as last year. At this point I'm not feeling inclined to do the Dodgers any favors.

[Mike Sixel]

 

I agree that his value likely will not be higher at the deadline, however it appears at this point that his value is not going to dictate the return; there simply isn't enough demand.

 

If the Dodgers deal is truly a slap in the face I'd keep him and see if demand bumps up his return this summer, it very well may even if he isn't playing nearly as well as last year. At this point I'm not feeling inclined to do the Dodgers any favors.

 

take your ball, go home, lose 85+ games with perhaps the worst pitching staff in the majors? 

 

I like the way you think, sir.*

 

*note, I am somewhat inclined to agree with you, but we don't know the offer. It isn't a switch, it's a dial. If it is close to "fair", and it gives them 2 pitchers they think are real, I probably do it if I have to swallow some pride.

[nicksaviking]

 

take your ball, go home, lose 85+ games with perhaps the worst pitching staff in the majors? 

 

I like the way you think, sir.*

 

*note, I am somewhat inclined to agree with you, but we don't know the offer. It isn't a switch, it's a dial. If it is close to "fair", and it gives them 2 pitchers they think are real, I probably do it if I have to swallow some pride.

 

Right, I don't want the Twins turning down a fair deal (which really, we probably all have different definitions of fair).

 

My thinking has just always been that the Twins would almost certainly get less for him at the deadline, let's throw out 75% of his value as it stands now as a hypothetical. Well if the Dodgers are at this moment only offering 75% of his current value, then it doesn't bother me to try again later this summer and hope for better. If the Dodgers are currently offering 100% of Dozier's value and the Twins are holding out for 125%, well then they're just nuts.

[Doomtints]

 

take your ball, go home, lose 85+ games with perhaps the worst pitching staff in the majors?

 

Losing only 85 games with the worst pitching staff in the bigs would be a huge accomplishment. Realistically we are looking at upper 90s in the loss column again. 

 

Personally I'm perplexed that Twins are not doing whatever they can to improve the staff. Just take the current deal and add a PTBNL/Cash rider on it. Work out the marginal B.S. later on like other teams do. It seems incredibly unlikely that the Dodgers would balk at that, unless there really is no deal on the table.

Edited January 10, 2017 by Doomtints

[USAFChief]

 

Losing only 85 games with the worst pitching staff in the bigs would be a huge accomplishment. Realistically we are looking at upper 90s in the loss column again. 

 

Personally I'm perplexed that Twins are not doing whatever they can to improve the staff. Just take the current deal and add a PTBNL/Cash rider on it. Work out the marginal B.S. later on like other teams do. It seems incredibly unlikely that the Dodgers would balk at that, unless there really is no deal on the table.

I guess a PTBNL might be workable.

 

But if the Twins accept cash as any part of a deal for Dozier, I'm heading down to 1 Twins Way with molotov cocktails.

[Mike Sixel]

 

I guess a PTBNL might be workable.

 

But if the Twins accept cash as any part of a deal for Dozier, I'm heading down to 1 Twins Way with molotov cocktails.

 

Gin, or tequila?

[Doomtints]

 

I guess a PTBNL might be workable.

 

But if the Twins accept cash as any part of a deal for Dozier, I'm heading down to 1 Twins Way with molotov cocktails.

If De Leon has 10 wins in 6 months, and Dozier is hitting .210 as he is prone to do for long stretches, why not? Heck, just take a dollar to complete the trade.

Edited January 10, 2017 by Doomtints

[USAFChief]

 

Gin, or tequila?

yes

[Mike Sixel]

 

yes

 

so glad you didn't disappoint me. but really, what kind of cocktail?

[ashbury]

so glad you didn't disappoint me. but really, what kind of cocktail?

Komrade Molotov was partial to gasoline. Left a hell of a hangover, of course.