Article: GM For A Deadline, Part One

[Otto von Ballpark]

 

As long as Dozier and Escobar finish strong, I would make the qualifying offer. I don’t go into the deadline feeling I must trade them. Instead I expect a return of at least a comp pick before I deal them.

As long as they sign for less than $50 mil (a virtual certainty for Escobar, and a likely possibility for Dozier), the comp pick is going to be roughly equivalent to the 70-something pick we traded with Hughes. We got $7 mil for it, but many observers thought it was a bit of an overpay by San Diego, and of course it was one of only a couple picks that could actually be traded/sold which boosted its value. The expected player value of that pick may only be $4 mil? And we paid $4 mil for Littell last deadline. I don't think that is a high bar to clear.

[snap4birds]

 

This probably won't be popular, and I understand.  I'd rather watch better baseball for a couple of months than backfill the bottom end of the org or get the rights to a player whose equivalent can be had on a minor league deal next ST (Alex Presley).

It seems like it's harder to get teams to give up good prospects.  (Or maybe we're just more aware of their warts now with all the scouting resources/websites.)  I used to be impressed to hear a prospect was in BA's top 100, now if they're not top 50 I figure they're pretty questionable. 

 

Plus, there is some value to making players earn their salary.  Especially with younger players, they need to see that the really successful players work HARD at their craft.  If you're just advancing youngsters to the MLB level without them earning the promotion, you're risking them learning the process to reach their ceiling.  

 

On the other hand, every game you win could be costing you a spot or 2 in next year's draft, so there is that  .

[jorgenswest]

As long as they sign for less than $50 mil (a virtual certainty for Escobar, and a likely possibility for Dozier), the comp pick is going to be roughly equivalent to the 70-something pick we traded with Hughes. We got $7 mil for it, but many observers thought it was a bit of an overpay by San Diego, and of course it was one of only a couple picks that could actually be traded/sold which boosted its value. The expected player value of that pick may only be $4 mil? And we paid $4 mil for Littell last deadline. I don't think that is a high bar to clear.

I agree. Earlier I said a return of a guy like Adalberto Mejia at the time of the Nunez trade was above that bar. A similar return for Dozier or Escobar is better than the expected value of a comp pick.

[dbminn]

 

I have to admit ... I did not think there were ANY reasonable examples. However, if you manipulate the numbers, you can make a case for Hosmer. However, you chose a 3 year period which included 2 years when he was at his worst and had near zero WAR. You elected to position the numbers in a manner not reflective of recent history. For example, he had 7.8 fWAR the 3 years immediately proceeding his FA year and that included a very bad year of .2 FWAR. You could have also used the last 5 years where he averaged 2.14 WAR.

 

He was also rated the 3rd best FA on the market my MLB Trade Rumors so manipulating of war aside, comparing Hosmer  and Escobar makes little sense and the fact he received a $144M contract would suggest the league does not see them as anywhere near comparable.

 

While berating another forum member's opinion, you asked if anyone had received a QO that had a three year WAR less than 2.I used the three years before FA for Escobar that you used in your comment (I assumed you weren't considering 2018 a full year). I tried to do the same with Hosmer. Manipulating to 600 PA is what most people do when comparing someone has been used as a utility player vs an everyday player. In any case, I fulfilled your question on three-year WAR.

Edited July 20, 2018 by dbminn

[Major League Ready]

 

While berating another forum member's opinion, you asked if anyone had received a QO that had a three year WAR less than 2.I used the three years before FA for Escobar that you used in your comment (I assumed you weren't considering 2018 a full year). I tried to do the same with Hosmer. Manipulating to 600 PA is what most people do when comparing someone has been used as a utility player vs an everyday player. In any case, I fulfilled your question on three-year WAR.

 

I have no problem at all with how you represented Escobar's numbers, it was the way you manipulated Hosmer's track record where I have a problem. It would have made far more sense to use the previous 3 years, 4 years or 5 years. Instead, you separated his best year (the most current year and then used a 3 year period where he had two bad years with very good years before and after that period. In other words, instead of portraying the numbers as accurately as possible you elected to manipulate the

numbers to look as bad as possible. 

 

The question of if Hosmer is a reasonable example is easily verified by looking at where he was rated among top free agents last year. You could also evaluate the comparison based on the contract Hosmer got and the projected contract for Escobar. Six months from now we can compare the actual contracts. They are not remotely close to comparable free agents.

 

 

[TheLeviathan]

 

This probably won't be popular, and I understand.  I'd rather watch better baseball for a couple of months than backfill the bottom end of the org or get the rights to a player whose equivalent can be had on a minor league deal next ST (Alex Presley).

 

Dozier and Escobar are still playing for contracts, so we should get to see some good baseball.

 

The irony is that Escobar himself is precisely the kind of player you're opposed to us acquiring.

[Twins33]

I guess you never know, but Milwaukee might be desperate/willing enough to deal Peralta. If not, I guess we’d all know why they lost out on the Machado sweepstakes (also a rental).

MN’s got nothing to lose, and everything to gain, when it comes to dealing these rentals. The fact that I can’t say the same about the Brew Crew, a team that went “all in” to start the year (and still might not make the playoffs), means we “should” have leverage in making a deal with them.

I'm not saying don't try, because it doesn't hurt to ask, but I'm thinking the Brewers laugh their butts off on the other end of the phone. I don't think there's a chance in hell that the Brewers would be that dumb.

 

Rumors are rumors, but it sounds like Peralta was not included in Brewers-O's talks. So they don't seem that desperate.

[dbminn]

 

I have no problem at all with how you represented Escobar's numbers, it was the way you manipulated Hosmer's track record where I have a problem. It would have made far more sense to use the previous 3 years, 4 years or 5 years. Instead, you separated his best year (the most current year and then used a 3 year period where he had two bad years with very good years before and after that period. In other words, instead of portraying the numbers as accurately as possible you elected to manipulate the

numbers to look as bad as possible. 

 

The question of if Hosmer is a reasonable example is easily verified by looking at where he was rated among top free agents last year. You could also evaluate the comparison based on the contract Hosmer got and the projected contract for Escobar. Six months from now we can compare the actual contracts. They are not remotely close to comparable free agents.

 

I wasn't using Hosmer to defend Escobar. Like I said, the Hosmer contract was outrageous. I only meant to cross you up where reality got really funny.

[beckmt]

Escobar makes sense for a decent 3 year contract or a QO.

Dozier does not plan on being here after this year. Get what you can for Dozier, Escobar would need a bigger return for me.

[Otto von Ballpark]

Escobar makes sense for a decent 3 year contract or a QO. Dozier does not plan on being here after this year. Get what you can for Dozier, Escobar would need a bigger return for me.

Actually, a player who doesn't plan to re-sign with you would make more sense for a QO -- it's a free draft pick.

 

For the player you plan to retain anyway (Escobar), a QO makes it possible/likely you will be stuck paying him $18 mil for just 1 year, when you could perhaps get him for something like 2/20 or even 3/24 instead.

[Dman]

I guess I don't understand the narrative that Dozier doesn't want to be with the Twins next year.  I thought he was just disappointed the Twins did not offer him an extension.  The market was very strange last year so I can see why Twins are reluctant to do anything ahead of time. Also he is older so maybe the Twins are worried about regression but I don't think it is Dozier that doesn't to be here more the FO not wanting to strike a deal early.

 

Let Dozier see what his worth is and how many years he can command on the market. The Twins might be able to sign him to a 2 year deal with a third year option or maybe even a reasonable 3 year deal depending on his value on the market if they want him back.  They certainly will have the money to do that it just depends on where they want to allocate their money.  Pitching or position players.

[ND-Fan]

I am going to give another view point on trading talent for future prospects in my years over watching the Twins I never have seen where that has produced a winner and if you look at it most times it meant on the whole team has taken a step backward in near future. Yes there's time to blow up team when whole team is has aged past being able to compete but look at it now only players on the team in that category is Mauer and Santanna. Yet Mauer is still valuable piece in the Twins line up and so was Santana until this year.

I look at this team they are just starting to learn how to win and now were talking about breaking them up. In Major league baseball young teams very rarely win it all and even have hard time qualifying to make the playoffs. Look at the Yankees, Red Sox, Dodgers, they keep veteran players around that have been winners they teach there young players how to win and fight through adversity and they always looking for next veteran player to fill that roll. Dozier and Escobar are in prime age to be this player and they now have idea what it takes to win with year like last year. Now were going to trade for the future but this means were putting off winning again at least another 2 to 3 years. To when if Buxton and Sano can learn to become big leaguers and have learned to win but here again we will becoming to when they will need to be traded. What I am saying a GMs need to look at players they have if they think they can win that group they need to invest in them long term and you have enough talent in pipeline to add to these players to win a championship. FAlvey talks about being contender long term but I don't believe that can be done win a championship. This is especially true of smaller market teams. KC is example of doing it the right way they kept their talent some say to long but they had championship run and now are paying the price again to rebuild. The Twins have been playing other game since the 90's see what its got them some trips to playoffs but it has been one and done deal mostly until you run out talent and start all over. To ownership having contender is good for the pocket book but you never experience being champion. Carl Pohlad must of understood this because he invested players long term at beginning of his ownership giving big contracts to Puckett, Hrbeck, and longterm contracts to Gagne, Gladden, Tapini, and then signing the veteran players who knew how to win. The small market teams need to pick their time and go for it. The question for the Twins what group of players are they going to choose to do this otherwise we see year after year of trading for the future but never winning the big one and even then if wrong thing happens you may never get to pot of gold and you have to start all over again.

[Dman]

 

I am going to give another view point on trading talent for future prospects in my years over watching the Twins I never have seen where that has produced a winner and if you look at it most times it meant on the whole team has taken a step backward in near future. Yes there's time to blow up team when whole team is has aged past being able to compete but look at it now only players on the team in that category is Mauer and Santanna. Yet Mauer is still valuable piece in the Twins line up and so was Santana until this year.

I look at this team they are just starting to learn how to win and now were talking about breaking them up. In Major league baseball young teams very rarely win it all and even have hard time qualifying to make the playoffs. Look at the Yankees, Red Sox, Dodgers, they keep veteran players around that have been winners they teach there young players how to win and fight through adversity and they always looking for next veteran player to fill that roll. Dozier and Escobar are in prime age to be this player and they now have idea what it takes to win with year like last year. Now were going to trade for the future but this means were putting off winning again at least another 2 to 3 years. To when if Buxton and Sano can learn to become big leaguers and have learned to win but here again we will becoming to when they will need to be traded. What I am saying a GMs need to look at players they have if they think they can win that group they need to invest in them long term and you have enough talent in pipeline to add to these players to win a championship. FAlvey talks about being contender long term but I don't believe that can be done win a championship. This is especially true of smaller market teams. KC is example of doing it the right way they kept their talent some say to long but they had championship run and now are paying the price again to rebuild. The Twins have been playing other game since the 90's see what its got them some trips to playoffs but it has been one and done deal mostly until you run out talent and start all over. To ownership having contender is good for the pocket book but you never experience being champion. Carl Pohlad must of understood this because he invested players long term at beginning of his ownership giving big contracts to Puckett, Hrbeck, and longterm contracts to Gagne, Gladden, Tapini, and then signing the veteran players who knew how to win. The small market teams need to pick their time and go for it. The question for the Twins what group of players are they going to choose to do this otherwise we see year after year of trading for the future but never winning the big one and even then if wrong thing happens you may never get to pot of gold and you have to start all over again.

 

While I sympathize with your point I don't know that I completely understand where you are coming from.  Trades are a big part of making teams better.  One team is taking the short term upside the other the long term.  Kansas City took a huge risk when trading with Tampa and it is that trade for pitching that really put them over the top. The Cubs made short and long term trades that took them to the World Series.  Houston made lots of trades some for the future and some to get their World Series win most notably getting Verlander.   So trades for the future most definitely do work.  Not always, but there is risk in trading just as there is risk in not trading or having your young players not turn into star players.

 

Most of the people on this board are only talking about trading players that will be free agents at the end of this year.  A couple Odorizzi and Gibson have another year of control but either player being traded wouldn't mean the Twins would not be able to compete next year.  I have seen a few posts recommending trading Buxton or Sano but you can't take those seriously.  

 

Also there seems to be a flaw in your thinking with Dozier and Escobar.  Even if the Twins don't trade them they still might not be able to keep them because another team might offer more money or more years or both.  Getting nothing for those players in a season where we have very little chance at the post season would be very poor team management if you ask me. 

 

There is no reason to blow this team up.  As you said they are young and if a few players step up next year then this team will be just fine.  Trading guys who will free agents at the end of the year is not blowing the team up just changing the window of contention. The Twins are getting closer to being a top tier team but they need their young players to be difference makers and we just didn't get that this year.  Even the vets had a hard time this year.  

 

We have five or six guys that are free agents at the end of year.  The Twins should do their best to shop them and find value.  After the season is over they might even be able to trade some of those prospects for a MLB player.  If this year is not our window we need to play for next year and beyond.  You do that by trading.

[diehardtwinsfan]

 

I guess I don't understand the narrative that Dozier doesn't want to be with the Twins next year.  I thought he was just disappointed the Twins did not offer him an extension.  The market was very strange last year so I can see why Twins are reluctant to do anything ahead of time. Also he is older so maybe the Twins are worried about regression but I don't think it is Dozier that doesn't to be here more the FO not wanting to strike a deal early.

 

Let Dozier see what his worth is and how many years he can command on the market. The Twins might be able to sign him to a 2 year deal with a third year option or maybe even a reasonable 3 year deal depending on his value on the market if they want him back.  They certainly will have the money to do that it just depends on where they want to allocate their money.  Pitching or position players.

 

I think there are two narratives being spun, and both are wrong, or partially right depending on how you view this. It's not an issue of wanting to stay or wanting to leave or wanting to stay. Dozier made it clear that he wanted to test free agency. I do think it means that he wanted to gage his market and take a fully informed offer (and yes, I think dollar value is probably a big factor, perhaps even the primary factor). I think he wants to know his true value and take an informed decision. He's got one shot at this. At this point, I doubt he's too willing to negotiate. He bet on himself when he signed that extension, and I don't think he's going to fold now. 

[diehardtwinsfan]

 

I am going to give another view point on trading talent for future prospects in my years over watching the Twins I never have seen where that has produced a winner and if you look at it most times it meant on the whole team has taken a step backward in near future. Yes there's time to blow up team when whole team is has aged past being able to compete but look at it now only players on the team in that category is Mauer and Santanna. Yet Mauer is still valuable piece in the Twins line up and so was Santana until this year.

I look at this team they are just starting to learn how to win and now were talking about breaking them up. In Major league baseball young teams very rarely win it all and even have hard time qualifying to make the playoffs. Look at the Yankees, Red Sox, Dodgers, they keep veteran players around that have been winners they teach there young players how to win and fight through adversity and they always looking for next veteran player to fill that roll. Dozier and Escobar are in prime age to be this player and they now have idea what it takes to win with year like last year. Now were going to trade for the future but this means were putting off winning again at least another 2 to 3 years. To when if Buxton and Sano can learn to become big leaguers and have learned to win but here again we will becoming to when they will need to be traded. What I am saying a GMs need to look at players they have if they think they can win that group they need to invest in them long term and you have enough talent in pipeline to add to these players to win a championship. FAlvey talks about being contender long term but I don't believe that can be done win a championship. This is especially true of smaller market teams. KC is example of doing it the right way they kept their talent some say to long but they had championship run and now are paying the price again to rebuild. The Twins have been playing other game since the 90's see what its got them some trips to playoffs but it has been one and done deal mostly until you run out talent and start all over. To ownership having contender is good for the pocket book but you never experience being champion. Carl Pohlad must of understood this because he invested players long term at beginning of his ownership giving big contracts to Puckett, Hrbeck, and longterm contracts to Gagne, Gladden, Tapini, and then signing the veteran players who knew how to win. The small market teams need to pick their time and go for it. The question for the Twins what group of players are they going to choose to do this otherwise we see year after year of trading for the future but never winning the big one and even then if wrong thing happens you may never get to pot of gold and you have to start all over again.

 

I think there's merit in what you're saying; but to cherry pick a bit, the Yankees, just two years ago, blew up their roster. They produced a playoff team the following year by beating us in the WC.  They currently have the 3rd best run differential in all of baseball playing in what is its toughest division, sitting in second. No one will challenge them for the WC, and they have a real chance at making up those 4.5 games. 

 

They made a smart decision, stocking their farm with talent. Some have produced at the major league level, and some can be used to acquire talent for the run over the next two years (which is why Gibson is in play with them). 

 

I think there's merit in making an intelligent decision, and I think at this point, the right answer is sell. I wouldn't punt on 2019, because the talent is there. I'm definitely selling this year. 

[Riverbrian]

 

I guess I don't understand the narrative that Dozier doesn't want to be with the Twins next year.  I thought he was just disappointed the Twins did not offer him an extension.  The market was very strange last year so I can see why Twins are reluctant to do anything ahead of time. Also he is older so maybe the Twins are worried about regression but I don't think it is Dozier that doesn't to be here more the FO not wanting to strike a deal early.

 

Let Dozier see what his worth is and how many years he can command on the market. The Twins might be able to sign him to a 2 year deal with a third year option or maybe even a reasonable 3 year deal depending on his value on the market if they want him back.  They certainly will have the money to do that it just depends on where they want to allocate their money.  Pitching or position players.

 

In late February, Brian Dozier publicly expressed that he was going to be a free agent. 

 

Since then we've had a couple TD posters take this public expression as some sort of declaration that he doesn't want to be here.

 

These comments by a couple of TD posters ignore previous public statements by Dozier in January that he would be willing to sign an extension and saying that he wants to remain a Twin. It also ignores that the Twins didn't offer him an extension leaving Dozier no option but to become a free agent. 

 

These are big boys making big boy money decisions and it is much better for everyone if they don't make public comments that can be misunderstood and can and will be used against them in the court of social media.    

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Jeremy Nygaard]

 

Wait, how do you know this?

 

Is there something lower than "no value"? I guess Sano could balloon to 400 pounds and that would be lower... but right now the club could get nothing of value for him. 

[Jeremy Nygaard]

 

Falvinegaard has a nice ring to it ...

 

My question to you, Jeremy, is now that we've seen a few trades go down and have some feel for how guys are being valued, would you change your expectations at all on what the Twins may be able to fetch for Dozier/Escobar? Or have things panned out close to what you would have expected?

 

Machado was going to require a king's ransom. Beyond that we've only seen moves in the RP market. 

 

Hard to comp for Dozier or Escobar so far. I thought the return on Familia was light, but not sending money and getting IFA money back adds variables that make that trade unique.