Article: The Brian Dozier Trade That Almost Was

[Brock Beauchamp]

 

I'm not discussing the possibility of injury.  Every pitcher is an injury risk.

 

I'm talking "bust."  That's the "floor" for any minor league pitcher.  Getting hitters out in the minor leagues does not guarantee a successful major league career, even with perfect health.  

 

My remark is in response to a statement that JDL's floor is "4/5 starter."  I do not agree.  Part of why you can trade for minor leaguers in the first place is that "might never pan out" is part of the equation.  And part of why a trade of JDL for Dozier would have been, IMO, a poor gamble last winter.  You can't get one decent (not great) prospect for an established above average big league player.  You'll lose that trade a very high percentage of the time.  

 

I imagine DeLeon will get major league starts in the future, if only because every team needs pitching, and TB has invested a lot in him.  But that does not make him a "4/5 starter."  It just means he will be given chances he won't have to earn, and might not deserve.

Yes, this. De Leon is not, say, Mark Prior. He's not a "mechanically perfect" prospect who was elite and had no real injury history. De Leon is an old Jose Berrios not only lacking Berrios' durability but the fact that he (still) hasn't pitched anything close to a full season is a red flag.

 

That's a huge gamble. Sure, even Prior and his "perfect mechanics" bombed out due to injury. It can happen to anybody. There is an inherent risk in any pitching prospect... but then there are guys like De Leon, who are good (not great) and have a fair amount of baggage coming along with them. And when taking on those guys, you ask for more because of that additional baggage.

 

I would have liked to pick up De Leon last winter plus another prospect or two. But De Leon isn't some kind of savior. He doesn't even have the upside of Meyer, IMO, which is why I keep bringing up Alex. De Leon peaks around 92mph. That's not super impressive, no matter how good his breaking stuff may be. Today's game is all about velocity and that's another black mark against De Leon. He's older, less durable, and throws more slowly than Berrios.

[Squirrel]

That rotation that "made the playoffs," got to a one game wild card and was rocked. You don't think JDL is an improvement over Gibson, Gee, Mejia, Colon, or any of the other 20 something starters they trotted out?

 

No, not the way DeLeon pitched this year, he would not have been an improvement to the club this past year and would not have been an improvement over the others we saw this past year. And further, if we had De Leon and not Dozier this past season, we wouldn’t have made the playoffs. Period. That doesn’t mean that next year we might be regretting it. But we still have Dozier, who has more sure value now than at this time last year, we can still trade him and will come out ahead, IMO. Some feel that DeLeon, the more that time marches on, and given what he’s done so far in his career, is not going to be the SP that this club needs. I get that you still have hope that DeLeon will be that 1/2 SP we need, but he’s not yet, so, given where Dozier is today and where DeLeon is today, it was right for us not to make that trade one to one last January. I don’t think anyone is calling the trade a definite win, because, as I said, maybe next year we’ll regret it, but for this year, no, it was not a regrettable move.

 

That we still need SP is no doubt. That either through trade and signings and development, we need to do something. I don’t think anyone is arguing that. But this one transaction that didn’t happen, because we refused to give up an asset this past year that would have ended up being a net loss if we had, it’s a good thing, even if in hindsight. If you think DeLeon is still the future ace we need, maybe we can trade Dozier this year to the Rays for DeLeon straight up. Where is the loss then in not doing that last year?

[ashbury]

I imagine DeLeon will get major league starts in the future, if only because every team needs pitching, and TB has invested a lot in him.  But that does not make him a "4/5 starter."  It just means he will be given chances he won't have to earn, and might not deserve.

First of all, I'm in complete agreement that JDL wasn't enough in return for Dozier, and with his injury history might not even have been a desirable piece in a package deal.

 

Looks like a matter of semantics here. It's the nature of the 5th starter to be given chances that may or may not look legitimate. There's some value to a team in having arms for the innings that need to be pitched. There's also perceived value in trying to get a guy the experience to achieve some part of his high ceiling.

 

If we're in agreement that certain prospects are highly likely to rack up major league innings, and your quibble is that they won't be quite the right kind of innings, then I think we can live with the remaining difference of opinion.

[diehardtwinsfan]

 

That rotation that "made the playoffs," got to a one game wild card and was rocked. You don't think JDL is an improvement over Gibson, Gee, Mejia, Colon, or any of the other 20 something starters they trotted out? 

 

It is debatable, and it'll be a mistake if they're overpaying in FA for more back end Hughes, Nolasco, Santiago type pitchers in order to cobble together a rotation that gives them a shot at the postseason but no real chance of advancing. 

 

He's not an improvement if he's on the DL. He's also not going to be an improvement when he's ML ready but on a strict innings limit because he hasn't pitched much.

 

I don't have a problem with the Twins asking for JDL, but I do agree with the front office when they said they wanted more. There was WAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAY too much risk being absorbed by doing a JDL + crap for Dozier trade. That's why a lot of people were interested in guys like Brock Stewart and Walker Buehler being added to the deal.

 

That, is how you trade a guy like Dozier and build a rotation that can go deep in the playoffs. You won't do that by trading off your best chip for whatever you can get.

[KirbyDome89]

 

No, not the way DeLeon pitched this year, he would not have been an improvement to the club this past year and would not have been an improvement over the others we saw this past year. And further, if we had De Leon and not Dozier this past season, we wouldn’t have made the playoffs. Period. That doesn’t mean that next year we might be regretting it. But we still have Dozier, who has more sure value now than at this time last year, we can still trade him and will come out ahead, IMO. Some feel that DeLeon, the more that time marches on, and given what he’s done so far in his career, is not going to be the SP that this club needs. I get that you still have hope that DeLeon will be that 1/2 SP we need, but he’s not yet, so, given where Dozier is today and where DeLeon is today, it was right for us not to make that trade one to one last January. I don’t think anyone is calling the trade a definite win, because, as I said, maybe next year we’ll regret it, but for this year, no, it was not a regrettable move.

That we still need SP is no doubt. That either through trade and signings and development, we need to do something. I don’t think anyone is arguing that. But this one transaction that didn’t happen, because we refused to give up an asset this past year that would have ended up being a net loss if we had, it’s a good thing, even if in hindsight. If you think DeLeon is still the future ace we need, maybe we can trade Dozier this year to the Rays for DeLeon straight up. Where is the loss then in not doing that last year?

You don't make that trade thinking that JDL immediately produces the same value as Dozier. That should be obvious. 

 

He has more value even though 16' > 17' and he has one less year left? I don't know where people are getting this....

 

They need to have the talent in order to develop it. They don't seem to have it, and even if they did there isn't much of a track record to suggest they could do it. They aren't going to spend real money on front end FA pitchers. They either trade the few valuable vets they have, or start gutting the farm and/or trading some of the core. I would rather see the vets go...

 

You think TB is interested in a one year rental for JDL? C'mon.... 

[KirbyDome89]

 

He's not an improvement if he's on the DL. He's also not going to be an improvement when he's ML ready but on a strict innings limit because he hasn't pitched much.

 

I don't have a problem with the Twins asking for JDL, but I do agree with the front office when they said they wanted more. There was WAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAY too much risk being absorbed by doing a JDL + crap for Dozier trade. That's why a lot of people were interested in guys like Brock Stewart and Walker Buehler being added to the deal.

 

That, is how you trade a guy like Dozier and build a rotation that can go deep in the playoffs. You won't do that by trading off your best chip for whatever you can get.

So you're cool with Dillon Gee and the 10 other AAAA pitchers rolling through the 4-5 spots in the rotation?

 

You don't build playoff rotations by turning down the best offer you get for the best tradable asset you have. 

[prouster]

So you're cool with Dillon Gee and the 10 other AAAA pitchers rolling through the 4-5 spots in the rotation?

 

You don't build playoff rotations by turning down the best offer you get for the best tradable asset you have.

Personally, I prefer Gee etc. with Dozier on the roster than Gee etc. without Dozier. As others have pointed out, DeLeon provides no value if he's injured, which has been a major and persistent problem throughout his young career. There's no way to say the Twins botched this with a straight face.

[Brock Beauchamp]

 

You don't build playoff rotations by turning down the best offer you get for the best tradable asset you have. 

You don't build playoff teams by selling your best assets for fifty cents on the dollar.

[KirbyDome89]

 

You don't build playoff teams by selling your best assets for fifty cents on the dollar.

You don't build playoff teams by refusing to sell veteran players nearing FA because you've assigned a value that nobody in the league is willing to pay. You don't build playoff teams by stocking your rotation with middle to back end guys and propping them up as front end starters. 

[KirbyDome89]

 

Personally, I prefer Gee etc. with Dozier on the roster than Gee etc. without Dozier. 

If you're cool with a rotation that features Gee then enjoy struggling to make the one game playoff and watching prime years of talented young position players be wasted by a rotation that is at best a dumpster fire. 

[diehardtwinsfan]

 

So you're cool with Dillon Gee and the 10 other AAAA pitchers rolling through the 4-5 spots in the rotation?

 

You don't build playoff rotations by turning down the best offer you get for the best tradable asset you have. 

No, I'm not cool with it. But trading Dozier for JDL would have gotten us Dillon Gee and 10 other AAAA pitchers rolling through the rotation in 2017. And it would do that again in 2018, because even if JDL is healthy and successful, he's going to get shut down due to innings limits leaving us with... well... all those 4A types that you deride.

 

As I said before, trading Dozier for JDL is fine if other pieces were included. That's usually how these types of trades work. LA had no desire to add other pieces, and as such the Twins wisely said no.

[prouster]

If you're cool with a rotation that features Gee then enjoy struggling to make the one game playoff and watching prime years of talented young position players be wasted by a rotation that is at best a dumpster fire.

Never said I was cool with it, just that the options were Gee etc. + Dozier or Gee etc. - Dozier. Given those choices, I'll take the former ten times out of ten.

[Don Walcott]

At this point, Dozier's trade value seems to be this offseason for a team that needs someone this year and may be willing to let him walk at the end of 2018 after making him a QO. If we don't trade him this offseason, and we don't extend his contract, we make him a QO at the end of the 2018 season. If we get two years of Dozier on this contract, and a draft pick for 2019, I expect that result will have been much better than having done the DeLeon trade. (Having said that, I hope they explore a reasonable extension with Dozier).

 

As much credit as Falvine may deserve not trading Dozier, his 2017 was, IMO, a pleasant surprise. Their assessment likely was that he would revert to pre-2016 numbers, and they still didn't make the trade. So far, they were right either way, but Dozier's 2017 makes them look a lot better. I think the take away from this is that, so far, they've earned our trust in their assessments of players. (And, if that's the case, can we please give them some money to work with this offseason?)

Edited October 27, 2017 by Don Walcott

[Brock Beauchamp]

 

As much credit as Falvine may deserve not trading Dozier, his 2017 was, IMO, a pleasant surprise. Their assessment likely was that he would revert to pre-2016 numbers, and they still didn't make the trade. So far, they were right either way, but Dozier's 2017 makes them look a lot better. I think the take away from this is that, so far, they've earned our trust in their assessments of players. (And, if that's the case, can we please give them some money to work with this offseason?)

I don't think they expected Dozier to revert to pre-2016 levels. His peripherals suggested he was a different player going forward.

 

How much different was the question. Was he an .800 or .850 OPS guy?

[KirbyDome89]

 

No, I'm not cool with it. But trading Dozier for JDL would have gotten us Dillon Gee and 10 other AAAA pitchers rolling through the rotation in 2017. And it would do that again in 2018, because even if JDL is healthy and successful, he's going to get shut down due to innings limits leaving us with... well... all those 4A types that you deride.

 

As I said before, trading Dozier for JDL is fine if other pieces were included. That's usually how these types of trades work. LA had no desire to add other pieces, and as such the Twins wisely said no.

Innings can be managed smartly throughout the course of a season. What about 19'? 20'? 21'-23'? You realize making that trade isn't about only 2017 right? 

 

So JDL + C- single A prospect gets it done for you? 

 

[KirbyDome89]

 

Never said I was cool with it, just that the options were Gee etc. + Dozier or Gee etc. - Dozier. Given those choices, I'll take the former ten times out of ten.

If your focus is only 2017 then sure. If you're concerned with building a staff and still being able to pay all your young position players over the next 5 seasons maybe you reconsider that stance. 

[Major League Ready]

 

I'm sure it's difficult to hear your endless amount of baseball knowledge questioned. Nice argument from authority though...

 

I guess I'm not satisfied with getting smashed in one game playoffs and gutting out seasons with AAAA staffs. They had a chance to move a vet who is set to become exponentially more expensive following this season, plays at a position in which they have depth, and can potentially decide not to come back to MN, for a pitcher who could actually make a difference in the rotation. The market determines the value of a player. It's that simple. I disagree with not making a move when Dozier was at peak value. That shouldn't be difficult to understand yet here we are....

 

Unsurprisingly, notice how most of the posters "liking," your responses all happen to be the same on nearly every post. There's a reason for that....

I absolutely agree that trading veterans should be a primary strategy during a rebuild or even to sustain a high level of play .  I also agree that a lot fans are extremely focused on the immediate and don’t consider the implications on building an organization that sustains winning. 

 

Having said this … Our front office obviously did not feel that JDL was a prospect with an adequate probability of contributing to our future in a meaningful way.  Therefore, while many of us agree with your concept we don’t agree that you sell for whatever the market will bear.  I suspect the FO felt as I did at the time that 2 years of Dozier + a draft pick >>> JDL.  Plus, there was also the possibility of moving him at a later date for a better return.

[ashbury]

 

It’s truly fascinating to me that you’re digging in your heels on this when you’re so obviously wrong. 

 

I'm sure it's difficult to hear your endless amount of baseball knowledge questioned. 

Mod note: Per the site's Comment Policy, I'd like to ask all parties to remember to avoid making it personal when disagreeing on substance, and in particular to not express concern with the inner workings of someone else's mind. It never leads anywhere good.

[Siehbiscuit]

I'm sure it's difficult to hear your endless amount of baseball knowledge questioned. Nice argument from authority though...

 

I guess I'm not satisfied with getting smashed in one game playoffs and gutting out seasons with AAAA staffs. They had a chance to move a vet who is set to become exponentially more expensive following this season, plays at a position in which they have depth, and can potentially decide not to come back to MN, for a pitcher who could actually make a difference in the rotation. The market determines the value of a player. It's that simple. I disagree with not making a move when Dozier was at peak value. That shouldn't be difficult to understand yet here we are....

 

Unsurprisingly, notice how most of the posters "liking," your responses all happen to be the same on nearly every post. There's a reason for that....

I think most everyone agrees with your theoretical. Always try and sell when the value is high. BUT...don't sell when for $0.80 on the dollar when you truly aren't desperate. JDL is an intriguing propspect, but he has some major warts (age, "stuff", injury history and lack of innings). JDL could be special, but we know what Dozier is. At worst, we get him for two seasons (and he is not blocking Nick Gordon or anyone else) and we'll get a first round Comp A pick for him at minimum.

 

Bottom line is team's weren't clamping for a 29 year old 2B coming off a potentially fluky season. There wasn't a market, so don't sell him just to sell him.

[laloesch]

 

I'm sure it's difficult to hear your endless amount of baseball knowledge questioned. Nice argument from authority though...

 

I guess I'm not satisfied with getting smashed in one game playoffs and gutting out seasons with AAAA staffs. They had a chance to move a vet who is set to become exponentially more expensive following this season, plays at a position in which they have depth, and can potentially decide not to come back to MN, for a pitcher who could actually make a difference in the rotation. The market determines the value of a player. It's that simple. I disagree with not making a move when Dozier was at peak value. That shouldn't be difficult to understand yet here we are....

 

Unsurprisingly, notice how most of the posters "liking," your responses all happen to be the same on nearly every post. There's a reason for that....

 

JDL in and of himself was not a sufficient return for Brian Dozier but who knows what exactly was on the table in that deal.  It's clear though that the Twins were right (for now) for not moving forward in that potential trade.  However, I agree in principal though that you deal from strength to address weak spots which currently is starting pitching.  Trading Dozier and Santana for the right long term pieces is the right move here.  Especially Dozier because they have Escobar, Gordon, etc. that could take over at second. 

 

I think many here are being extremely short sighted and somewhat hypocritical based on their comments last offseason when there was all the trade buzz surrounding Dozier.  But that is not the big picture here.  Santana is an unrestricted free agent in 2020 and 34 already.  How much longer do you think he keeps this up before declining significantly?  Wouldn't it be better to trade him in the right deal for pitching prospects while he still has high value knowing that he's 35 next offseason?  I don't know.  I just see too many holes on this team to not be open minded about dealing some of the older veterans for key long term pieces. 

 

They REALLLY NEED to start bringing in good young starters to fill out the rotation with Berrios NOW!  I doubt they do it via free agency given current payroll and holding some back to extend Sano, Buxton, Rosario, etc.  I get what you are saying no doubt.     

Edited October 31, 2017 by ashburyjohn

[Brock Beauchamp]

 

JDL in and of himself was not a sufficient return for Brian Dozier but who knows what exactly was on the table in that deal.  It's clear though that the Twins were right (for now) for not moving forward in that potential trade.  However, I agree in principal though that you deal from strength to address weak spots which currently is starting pitching.  Trading Dozier and Santana for the right long term pieces is the right move here.  Especially Dozier because they have Escobar, Gordon, etc. that could take over at second. 

 

I think many here are being extremely short sighted and somewhat hypocritical based on their comments last offseason when there was all the trade buzz surrounding Dozier.  But that is not the big picture here.  Santana is an unrestricted free agent in 2020 and 34 already.  How much longer do you think he keeps this up before declining significantly?  Wouldn't it be better to trade him in the right deal for pitching prospects while he still has high value knowing that he's 35 next offseason?  I don't know.  I just see too many holes on this team to not be open minded about dealing some of the older veterans for key long term pieces. 

 

They REALLLY NEED to start bringing in good young starters to fill out the rotation with Berrios NOW!  I doubt they do it via free agency given current payroll and holding some back to extend Sano, Buxton, Rosario, etc.  I get what you are saying no doubt.     

These three paragraphs don't make much sense alongside one another.

 

I was open to a Santana trade last winter. I wasn't shocked the front office held on to him but I thought exploring a trade was a solid idea, at the very least.

 

But then the Twins won 85 games, 10-11 more than I expected, so what do I know?

 

Trading Santana and then picking up "good young starters" isn't going to happen. If a team has a good young starter, why do they want Santana? If the starter is 3+ years away from MLB, how does that help the Twins? Pitching for pitching deals don't usually work if both teams are trying to compete in the next two seasons.

 

Never mind that even if Santana declines, he's still likely a 3/4 in the Twins rotation for the next one or two seasons. Given the rotation and pitching depth, that's badly needed on this team. The position players aren't getting younger and they're burning service time by the day. The Twins can't wait for a guy to graduate to Minnesota in 2020, they need guys who can help immediately.

[diehardtwinsfan]

 

Innings can be managed smartly throughout the course of a season. What about 19'? 20'? 21'-23'? You realize making that trade isn't about only 2017 right? 

 

So JDL + C- single A prospect gets it done for you? 

From the sounds of things 19 will be an issue with JDL as well. I agree that it is not only about 2017, but I'm with Brock on the idea that JDL for Dozier straight up was a bad trade and will be a bad trade. Even if JDL turns into an above average pitcher, its' a bad trade. There is way too much risk that the Twins are absorbing there to trade Dozier for 50 cents on the dollar. I was all for a Dozier trade last offseason, and I'd entertain it again this offseason. I would want more than one injury prone pitcher in that scenario. As a matter of fact, I'd target pitching, but I'd want more than one.

 

I was on record for something like JDL, Stewart, Buehler, and a guy like Kiebert Ruiz. I probably would have compromised down a bit from there, but that was not an unreasonable ask for a 5 WAR 2B with 2 years left.

[Linus]

These three paragraphs don't make much sense alongside one another.

 

I was open to a Santana trade last winter. I wasn't shocked the front office held on to him but I thought exploring a trade was a solid idea, at the very least.

 

But then the Twins won 85 games, 10-11 more than I expected, so what do I know?

 

Trading Santana and then picking up "good young starters" isn't going to happen. If a team has a good young starter, why do they want Santana? If the starter is 3+ years away from MLB, how does that help the Twins? Pitching for pitching deals don't usually work if both teams are trying to compete in the next two seasons.

 

Never mind that even if Santana declines, he's still likely a 3/4 in the Twins rotation for the next one or two seasons. Given the rotation and pitching depth, that's badly needed on this team. The position players aren't getting younger and they're burning service time by the day. The Twins can't wait for a guy to graduate to Minnesota in 2020, they need guys who can help immediately.

This. The Twins can't wait around for 3 more years for internal candidates to emerge. They have a relatively short window with the entire young core.

[laloesch]

 

These three paragraphs don't make much sense alongside one another.

 

I was open to a Santana trade last winter. I wasn't shocked the front office held on to him but I thought exploring a trade was a solid idea, at the very least.

 

But then the Twins won 85 games, 10-11 more than I expected, so what do I know?

 

Trading Santana and then picking up "good young starters" isn't going to happen. If a team has a good young starter, why do they want Santana? If the starter is 3+ years away from MLB, how does that help the Twins? Pitching for pitching deals don't usually work if both teams are trying to compete in the next two seasons.

 

Never mind that even if Santana declines, he's still likely a 3/4 in the Twins rotation for the next one or two seasons. Given the rotation and pitching depth, that's badly needed on this team. The position players aren't getting younger and they're burning service time by the day. The Twins can't wait for a guy to graduate to Minnesota in 2020, they need guys who can help immediately.

 

I don't follow Brock.  What i said makes perfect sense.  The Twins need good young pitching and how they go get it via free agency or trading veterans for prospects.  Nobody is saying THEY WILL trade Santana or Dozier for anything.  All that is being said by some is that its ONE WAY to bring in future building blocks that this franchise needs. Nothing more nothing less.  I don't understand why everyone is getting so bent out of shape about it.  Happens all the time.  I am not interested in getting into a cut and paste spat here.  .   

 

 

Edited October 30, 2017 by laloesch

[Brock Beauchamp]

 

I don't follow Brock.  What i said makes perfect sense.  The Twins need good young pitching and how they go get it via free agency or trading veterans for prospects.  Nobody is saying THEY WILL trade Santana or Dozier for anything.  All that is being said by some is that its ONE WAY to bring in future building blocks that this franchise needs. Nothing more nothing less.  I don't understand why everyone is getting so bent out of shape about it.  Happens all the time.  I am not interested in getting into a cut and paste spat here.  .   

The point is that it's hard to trade Santana for pitching that will help within the next 36 months (or 24 months moving the timeline back a year). It's a great idea in theory but in practice, it would be incredibly difficult to pull off, if not impossible. If a team has young pitching close to the majors, they're not going to trade those pieces for a veteran pitcher. They'll just lean on the good, young arm that they control for the next seven seasons.

 

So you're trading a 3-ish WAR pitcher for a few prospects that are a few years away. What do you do in the meantime as Sano, Buxton, Rosario, Berrios, et al are accruing service time? By the time this hypothetical pitcher is ready, all those guys would be at 4+ years of service time, at the minimum.

 

If you want good pitching, you're going to have to either give up prospects or open the wallet. Trading pitching for pitching between contenders isn't really an option.

[Dantes929]

I get that Deleon may end up being a piece that is well worth having but don't understand why anyone would wish we had made the deal.     If the front office is really high on him still I am sure he could be acquired now for something far less than Dozier.  

[dgwills]

 

At this point, Dozier's trade value seems to be this offseason for a team that needs someone this year and may be willing to let him walk at the end of 2018 after making him a QO. If we don't trade him this offseason, and we don't extend his contract, we make him a QO at the end of the 2018 season. If we get two years of Dozier on this contract, and a draft pick for 2019, I expect that result will have been much better than having done the DeLeon trade. (Having said that, I hope they explore a reasonable extension with Dozier).

 

As much credit as Falvine may deserve not trading Dozier, his 2017 was, IMO, a pleasant surprise. Their assessment likely was that he would revert to pre-2016 numbers, and they still didn't make the trade. So far, they were right either way, but Dozier's 2017 makes them look a lot better. I think the take away from this is that, so far, they've earned our trust in their assessments of players. (And, if that's the case, can we please give them some money to work with this offseason?)

I pretty much agree with you, but I have a couple of nits to pick.

There's no reason to think Falvine thought Dozier was going to regress that much. I heard many times that the other prospect they wanted was Alverez (16 million dollar signing bonus guy). They (correctly) wanted significant prospects with JDL.

The other one is offering Dozier a long term contract. To me it pretty much depends on how Polanco does this year. Polanco and Dozier were an adequate middle infield together this year. That is likely the best it's going to get. Dozier will regress and Polanco would be much better at second. We have Gordon, Lewis, and Javier coming up and hopefully one of them can be a plus shortstop. Others will be moved to 3rd, 2nd or outfield. There's really no room for Dozier if 2 or 3 of the four guys work out. Unless you want to DH him, but the Twin's need money for pitching.

The QO is just the best option by far. Either you get a pretty good prospect or Dozier for another year while you are waiting for you players to develop.

[KirbyDome89]

 

I absolutely agree that trading veterans should be a primary strategy during a rebuild or even to sustain a high level of play .  I also agree that a lot fans are extremely focused on the immediate and don’t consider the implications on building an organization that sustains winning. 

 

Having said this … Our front office obviously did not feel that JDL was a prospect with an adequate probability of contributing to our future in a meaningful way.  Therefore, while many of us agree with your concept we don’t agree that you sell for whatever the market will bear.  I suspect the FO felt as I did at the time that 2 years of Dozier + a draft pick >>> JDL.  Plus, there was also the possibility of moving him at a later date for a better return.

If that comp pick could make an immediate impact I might be able to get on board with that, but it's highly unlikely that pick contributes before Buxton and co. reach arbitration. 

[KirbyDome89]

 

I think most everyone agrees with your theoretical. Always try and sell when the value is high. BUT...don't sell when for $0.80 on the dollar when you truly aren't desperate. JDL is an intriguing propspect, but he has some major warts (age, "stuff", injury history and lack of innings). JDL could be special, but we know what Dozier is. At worst, we get him for two seasons (and he is not blocking Nick Gordon or anyone else) and we'll get a first round Comp A pick for him at minimum.

Bottom line is team's weren't clamping for a 29 year old 2B coming off a potentially fluky season. There wasn't a market, so don't sell him just to sell him.

I would say they are truly desperate, especially given the money it's going to take to keep the core together. That dollar is relative. The Twins can assign any price  they please to Dozier, but if others teams don't meet that price it doesn't mean they're offering $.80 on the dollar. 

 

I agree, teams were lukewarm on Dozier for those and other reasons, but isn't that an indicator that the Twins were asking possibly asking too much? 

 

 

[KirbyDome89]

 

From the sounds of things 19 will be an issue with JDL as well. I agree that it is not only about 2017, but I'm with Brock on the idea that JDL for Dozier straight up was a bad trade and will be a bad trade. Even if JDL turns into an above average pitcher, its' a bad trade. There is way too much risk that the Twins are absorbing there to trade Dozier for 50 cents on the dollar. I was all for a Dozier trade last offseason, and I'd entertain it again this offseason. I would want more than one injury prone pitcher in that scenario. As a matter of fact, I'd target pitching, but I'd want more than one.

 

I was on record for something like JDL, Stewart, Buehler, and a guy like Kiebert Ruiz. I probably would have compromised down a bit from there, but that was not an unreasonable ask for a 5 WAR 2B with 2 years left.

If JDL is an above average pitcher in a few years and the Twins continue to struggle with putting together a rotation that can actually win a real playoff series (they've done nothing to suggest they won't be) it'll be a giant black eye...

 

No chance LA or ANY other team offers a package like that for Dozier...