Jump to content
Twins Daily
  • Create Account

  • Cardinals "Very Much In" on Brian Dozier

    Seth Stohs

    By Seth Stohs

    This afternoon, KSTP and 1500 ESPN's Darren Wolfson provided a very interesting update on the Brian Dozier trade discussions. The Dodgers are still in, but now we hear that the St. Louis Cardinals are 'very much in' on Dozier too. What could it mean?

    Image courtesy of Jeff Curry, USA Today

    Twins Video

    While it's no surprise that the Dodgers are still in it heavily, the Cardinals being 'very in it" is new information.

    So immediately the thoughts jump to... Who do the Cardinals have that might entice the Twins?

    A quick look at the Baseball America Top 100 Midseason Prospects list provides some insight.

    For a little background information, in that midseason ranking, Jose Berrios ranked #20 and Jose De Leon ranked #25. Here are the Cardinals prospects who are among the Top 100:

    #2 - RHP Anthony Reyes

    #75 - RHP Luke Weaver

    #88 - RHP Jack Flaherty

    #89 - OF Harrison Bader

    Alex Reyes and Luke Weaver were called up to the Cardinals on the same day. Reyes went 4-1 with a 1.57 ERA and a 1.22 WHIP in 12 games (including five starts). In 46 innings, he walked 23 and struck out 52. In 14 starts at AAA Memphis, he went 2-3 with a 4.96 ERA (ah the joys of the International League). In 65.1 innings, he walked 32, but he struck out a remarkable 93! (Note - my assumption is that Reyes is in about the same category as Julio Urias, likely unavailable.)

    Luke Weaver came up and made nine appearances (8 starts). He went 1-4 with a 5.70 ERA and a 1.60 WHIP. In 36 innings, he walked 12 and struck out 45. He went 6-3 with a 1.70 ERA in 12 starts in AA before making just one start at AAA before his big league promotion.

    Reyes is 22-years-old and signed with St. Louis in 2012 as an 17-year-old. Reyes throws really, really hard (upper-90s) and has a sharp slider.

    The 23-year-old Weaver was the Cardinals' first-round pick in 2014 (27th overall) out of Florida State. Weaver is the more polished pitcher, which means he has more control. His upside obviously isn't quite as high but he will almost certainly be a mid-rotation starter with a chance to be something more.

    Jack Flaherty was the Cardinals' supplemental first-round pick in 2014 (34th overall) out of high school in California. He went 5-9 for Palm Beach as a 20-year-old this past year. Obviously he's a little further out, but the upside is there.

    Harrison Bader is a right-handed hitting outfielder who was the Cardinals' third-round pick in 2015 out of Florida. He split the 2016 season between AA and AAA. In 82 AA games, he hit .283/.354/.497 (.851) with 12 doubles, four triples and 16 home runs. He moved up to AAA and played in 49 games. He hit .231/.298/.354 (.652) with seven doubles, a triple and three home runs. He's likely a year away, but there is some power potential there.

    There would certainly be more to any such deal that just one (or maybe two?) of the above, but these would be the headliners.

    The Cardinals have second baseman Kolton Wong - who the Twins drafted in the 16th round in 2008 out of high school - signed for four years and $24.25 million with an option for 2021). Maybe he is part of the return as well.

    The Cardinals acquired Jedd Gyorko from the Padres a year ago. He had been pretty much awful for a couple of years. He went to St. Louis and hit 30 home runs. He's signed for the next three years at $29 million. He played in 128 games, but no more than 46 games at any one of the four infield positions. So, they could still have both on a roster.

    The Giants have Joe Panik (a 2015 All-Star) as their second baseman, so either Panik or Dozier would likely move to third base. Eduardo Nunez is probably the incumbent at third base.

    The Nationals have Daniel Murphy at second base. Now, he could move to first base, but Ryan Zimmerman still has a lot of money owed and that's about the only position he can play.

    It is certainly good to hear some more specifics on teams that might have interest in Dozier. Hearing that the Cardinals might be one of those teams is very intriguing because they have Reyes and Weaver, two very good pitching prospects, which would push the Dodgers - possibly - to offer more.

    What are your thoughts on the rumors?

    Seth Stohs has been blogging about the Minnesota Twins since May 2003. A founder and owner of Twins Daily, Seth has been a Twins fan for 40 years and has a passion for covering the minor leagues and prospects.
    Follow Seth Stohs on Twitter: sethtweets

    MORE FROM TWINS DAILY
    — Latest Twins coverage from our writers
    — Recent Twins discussion in our forums
    — Follow Twins Daily via Twitter, Facebook or email
    — Become a Twins Daily Caretaker

     Share
     Share
    Go to articles

    Community Blogs

    • How many games will the Minnesota Twins win in 2023?
    • Gopher Preview (Week 3)

    Forum Topics

    • PVTEST
    • Hey, look here
    • This is an exceptionally long title to test how various points look on a phone and smaller devices
    The Ultimate Fan Guide to Target Field

    User Feedback

    Recommended Comments



    Featured Comments

    Doomtints

    Doomtints 2,816

  • Verified Member

    • Posted

     

    The problem is, the odds of De Leon turning into an ace are also slightly north of 0%.

     

    So? Four out of the five slated starters on the Twins could have a negative WAR next year. If you replace a -1 pitcher with a +3 pitcher, you just improved by 4 WAR -- roughly what one should expect from Dozier in any future year. And this calculation doesn't even add in the fact that Polanco is probably good for 3 WAR as well. 

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites
    Oxtung

    Oxtung 516

  • Verified Member

    • Posted

     

    Maybe. I don't know enough to project that.

    But I'd rather gamble on DeLeon than bleed out Dozier for a few more 90 loss seasons.

    Or you the Twins could take the middle option and reassess the trade market this July and again in December and if need be the following July again.

     

    Last July he might very well have been a toxic asset; now here we are six months later talking about a top of the line pitching prospect as a return. We have no idea what his worth will be six months from now let alone 18. 

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites
    TheLeviathan

    TheLeviathan 17,473

  • Old-Timey Member

    • Posted

    Or you the Twins could take the middle option and reassess the trade market this July and again in December and if need be the following July again.

     

    Last July he might very well have been a toxic asset; now here we are six months later talking about a top of the line pitching prospect as a return. We have no idea what his worth will be six months from now let alone 18.

     

    No, I don't know, but it is vastly more probable he has less value. Id call it a near certainty.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites
    TheLeviathan

    TheLeviathan 17,473

  • Old-Timey Member

    • Posted

    I'm not sure it's that dire. I expect them to add a flyer arm and a legit RP and possibly a representative 4th OF.

    They are probably a 74-75ish true talent team with a unusally large beta. Probably makes them about a 20-25% chance to be in the playoff hunt.

    We lost 103 games and will return virtually the same pitching staff. We may improve to a 90 loss team with luck....but that's still a 90 loss team. by the time we get this thing righted he's going to have dramatically less value.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites
    Oxtung

    Oxtung 516

  • Verified Member

    • Posted

     

    No, I don't know, but it is vastly more probable he has less value. Id call it a near certainty.

     

    So you don't know but it's a near certainty? I don't see how both of those could be true.

     

    Either way I don't agree with your assessment for two reasons. First, I think it is just as likely he goes on a hot streak to start the season and has a .900 OPS in July. Second, the premise that he is at "peak value" is predicated on the idea that his HR binge has somehow changed GM's perceptions of Dozier. I think the discussions here, the reported offer and common sense suggest that is false. Dozier is viewed as he always has been; a player that will likely give you 3-5 WAR each year for the next two seasons.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites
    drjim

    drjim 7,100

  • Provisional Member

    • Posted

    We lost 103 games and will return virtually the same pitching staff. We may improve to a 90 loss team with luck....but that's still a 90 loss team. by the time we get this thing righted he's going to have dramatically less value.

    Not a believer in pythag or base runs I take it.

     

    If they keep Dozier statistical projections will have them at 74ish to start the season. Doesn't matter what the record was last year.

     

    And at least 3 of the other teams in the division will be worse.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites
    Mr. Brooks

    Mr. Brooks 7,174

  • Provisional Member

    • Posted

    Not a believer in pythag or base runs I take it.

     

    If they keep Dozier statistical projections will have them at 74ish to start the season. Doesn't matter what the record was last year.

     

    And at least 3 of the other teams in the division will be worse.

    Am I reading this right? You are saying the Twins will finish 2nd in the division at worst?

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites
    drjim

    drjim 7,100

  • Provisional Member

    • Posted

    Am I reading this right? You are saying the Twins will finish 2nd in the division at worst?

    Wrote that poorly. 3 of the teams in the division will be worse than last year entering the season, not necessarily worse than the Twins, but I do think at least 50/50 the Whiteys are worse to start the season.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites
    TheLeviathan

    TheLeviathan 17,473

  • Old-Timey Member

    • Posted

     

    So you don't know but it's a near certainty? I don't see how both of those could be true.

     

    Either way I don't agree with your assessment for two reasons. First, I think it is just as likely he goes on a hot streak to start the season and has a .900 OPS in July. Second, the premise that he is at "peak value" is predicated on the idea that his HR binge has somehow changed GM's perceptions of Dozier. I think the discussions here, the reported offer and common sense suggest that is false. Dozier is viewed as he always has been; a player that will likely give you 3-5 WAR each year for the next two seasons.

     

    How in the heck is that contradictory?  Yes, I'm acknowleding it's not a 100% certainty (because he could, conceivably, his 100 straight home runs to start the year, it's just bloody unlikely), but it's as close to that as I can imagine.  

     

    I would suggest to you that he goes on some binge early in the season is not "as likely" as my suggestion that he ages and has less team control.  It also flies in the face of how valued position players have been mid-season the last five years. 

     

    So if you're correct that his second half didn't impact his value, then his age and contract are even larger factors and make it even more important to deal him now.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites
    TheLeviathan

    TheLeviathan 17,473

  • Old-Timey Member

    • Posted

     

    Not a believer in pythag or base runs I take it.

    If they keep Dozier statistical projections will have them at 74ish to start the season. Doesn't matter what the record was last year.

    And at least 3 of the other teams in the division will be worse.

     

    Even if I believe in base runs it's still a 90 loss team who has only one meaningful starter that it could hope improves dramatically.  Retaining Dozier means we also field half an infield with some serious question marks as well.  (And Dozier is not stud himself)

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites
    USAFChief

    USAFChief 58,010

  • Community Moderator

    • Posted

    Even if I believe in base runs it's still a 90 loss team who has only one meaningful starter that it could hope improves dramatically. Retaining Dozier means we also field half an infield with some serious question marks as well. (And Dozier is not stud himself)

    Trading Dozier for De Leon leaves you with one extra iffy starter, with an innings limit to boot, and Escobar at shortstop.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites
    ewen21

    ewen21 1,343

  • Verified Member

    • Posted

     

    I'm pushing back on the perception that the Twins future hinges on this trade being made immediately or they are doomed because his value will fall. Or the idea that the Twins pitching will be solved if only they can get an ace out of this deal.

    .

    Oh please. This is an opportunity for the Twins. They had one with Perkins a few years ago and they extended him in a move that was tone deaf.

     

    I think the push back on the Twins is the market. Dozier had 3 amazing months. Have we forgotten how terrible was during the two half seasons prior?

     

    Dozier is no sure thing and this 103 loss team stands to gain nothing by having him stick around for two years. Get the best deal you can without the silly posturing

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites
    ewen21

    ewen21 1,343

  • Verified Member

    • Posted

    We lost 103 games and will return virtually the same pitching staff. We may improve to a 90 loss team with luck....but that's still a 90 loss team. by the time we get this thing righted he's going to have dramatically less value.

    Hello?

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites
    TheLeviathan

    TheLeviathan 17,473

  • Old-Timey Member

    • Posted (edited)

     

    Trading Dozier for De Leon leaves you with one extra iffy starter, with an innings limit to boot, and Escobar at shortstop

     

    It means you have one young starter to build around and a chance to play Polanco at his natural position with a glove-first guy at short.

     

    We simply will not contend for anything without adding talented pitchers.  That is going to have to happen via trading and drafting. So why not use your highest value asset that also has minimal chance of being here much longer? 

     

    That's what smart teams do, play the highest probabilities.  Recognize what you are and don't pretend to be anything else.  Not dealing Dozier means we had to settle for a much worse probability of immediate and future success.  

    Edited by TheLeviathan
    Link to comment
    Share on other sites
    diehardtwinsfan

    diehardtwinsfan 14,830

  • Community Moderator

    • Posted

     

     

     

    So is Mike Trout but not even he can carry a team to the playoffs. An Ace might bring 3 extra wins a year more than a back of the rotation pitcher. The Twins need 30. While an Ace would be great and everyone wants one the Twins future hinges on the young pitchers and hitters already in the organization.

    Hyping the Dozier trade up by saying the Twins future depends on it forces a scenario where they are desperate, unable to walk away and as a result accept a lesser return because they absolutely must trade him.

    To be clear I think they should trade him but if the return isn't adequate then keep him and live to play another day. That is not failure.

     

    I'd argue this is a flaw of WAR in that it doesn't adjust for the real value that shut down starting pitching brings.  I get that they show up once every 5 days, but to have someone that (once every 5 days) will essentially carry a team on his shoulder is impressive.  I get that SPs have a bad day from time to time.  But I think people fail to understand just how valuable top end SPs are.  Even Trout cannot carry a team on his shoulders once every 5 days, and while once and a while he can single handedly win a game, that doesn't happen 40 games a season.  I'm not saying a guy like Kershaw will do that 40 games a season, but he will do it far more than a guy like Trout. You can only hope that Trout does it when Kershaw isn't pitching or when Kershaw has a bad game... but a guy like Kershaw is priceless. My point is this:  an ace brings far more than 3 extra wins, and I think WAR is flawed for that reason. It undervalues starting pitching.

     

    As to your conclusion... I'm 100% with you.  Trade Dozier if it makes sense... and making sense implies getting some SP options we don't have now.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites
    Doomtints

    Doomtints 2,816

  • Verified Member

    • Posted (edited)

     

    I'd argue this is a flaw of WAR in that it doesn't adjust for the real value that shut down starting pitching brings.  I get that they show up once every 5 days, but to have someone that (once every 5 days) will essentially carry a team on his shoulder is impressive.

     

    Yep.

     

    WAR is a great shorthand stat. But you always gotta dig in more to get the full story. It's like saying, "I made $50,000 last year." That's nice. but maybe you dig in more and find that you made $100/hr selling widgets and $8/hr shining shoes. Before you can make a smart decision about where you should be spending more time next year, you have to look at more than just the $50,000 number at the top. WAR is one of these top level numbers that is a helpful starting point but all of the underlying data is hidden.

    There is no doubt that some players, particularly elite starting pitchers, can provide more value than their WAR numbers indicate. If you never bother to look at the underlying stats, you will never know what's truly going on. 

    Edited by Doomtints
    Link to comment
    Share on other sites
    jimmer

    jimmer 9,961

  • Verified Member

    • Posted (edited)

    There isn't a player in MLB I would take over Trout. Most valuable player in the game.  

     

    Pitchers still need the catcher to help manage the game plan, the defense to field the ball and the offense to score runs for him.

     

    No one player carries a team, regardless of position, regardless of the traditional thinking we've been taught.

    Edited by jimmer
    Link to comment
    Share on other sites
    jimmer

    jimmer 9,961

  • Verified Member

    • Posted (edited)

     

    No one player carries a team, that's true.  But I might argue no single player, each game, has more to say about the outcome than the starting pitcher.

    for the 30 or so games he plays for however many innings he throws, true.  the best throw maybe 15-16% of a teams innings in a season.

    Edited by jimmer
    Link to comment
    Share on other sites
    Mike Sixel

    Mike Sixel 41,021

  • Old-Timey Member

    • Posted

     

    I'm not sure it's that dire. I expect them to add a flyer arm and a legit RP and possibly a representative 4th OF.

    They are probably a 74-75ish true talent team with a unusally large beta. Probably makes them about a 20-25% chance to be in the playoff hunt.

     20% likely to be in the playoff hunt? No chance. Wow. Based on what, and if you really believe that, you should be in Vegas betting for sure. 

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites
    drjim

    drjim 7,100

  • Provisional Member

    • Posted (edited)

    20% likely to be in the playoff hunt? No chance. Wow. Based on what, and if you really believe that, you should be in Vegas betting for sure.

    They are probably about a 74ish true talent team. Slightly more than one standard deviation from that, especially considering their high beta, would put them in the low 80s and playoff contention. 20% chance of being in contention sounds about right.

    Edited by drjim
    Link to comment
    Share on other sites
    drjim

    drjim 7,100

  • Provisional Member

    • Posted

    They are probably about a 74ish true talent team. Slightly more than one standard deviation from that, especially considering their hogh beta, would put them in the low 80s and playoff contention. 20% chance of being in contention sounds about right.

    And that's not saying 20% chance to make playoffs, only to be in contention. I would put odds right now of playoffs as less than 10%.

     

    But this is baseball and they have superstar upside on a couple of guys. That is enough that they will always have a floor of 10% to make the playoffs.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites
    diehardtwinsfan

    diehardtwinsfan 14,830

  • Community Moderator

    • Posted

    I'd note to look at 2015... largely the same team. One played meaningful games into September.  One didn't.  There's enough talent on the team where being in contention is possible.  Yes, it's unlikely.  That's why we are talking about trading Dozier.

     

    Keep in mind when Johan was traded, these same discussions were going on. Turns out that trading him was the wrong call. We could have used him. Not saying this is that same team, but I am saying that it is possible we end up in the same place, especially if we don't take value for Dozier.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites
    Mike Sixel

    Mike Sixel 41,021

  • Old-Timey Member

    • Posted

     

    I'd note to look at 2015... largely the same team. One played meaningful games into September.  One didn't.  There's enough talent on the team where being in contention is possible.  Yes, it's unlikely.  That's why we are talking about trading Dozier.

     

    Keep in mind when Johan was traded, these same discussions were going on. Turns out that trading him was the wrong call. We could have used him. Not saying this is that same team, but I am saying that it is possible we end up in the same place, especially if we don't take value for Dozier.

     

    That team was very lucky in 2015, can luck happen again? Sure. Can every player get better and healthy? Sure. 

     

    But, imo, a huge corporation shouldn't bet its future on luck. 

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites
    drjim

    drjim 7,100

  • Provisional Member

    • Posted

     

    That team was very lucky in 2015, can luck happen again? Sure. Can every player get better and healthy? Sure. 

     

    But, imo, a huge corporation shouldn't bet its future on luck. 

     

    I wouldn't bet on 20% either, but it is still part of the equation if the offer for Dozier just isn't there.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites
    Mike Sixel

    Mike Sixel 41,021

  • Old-Timey Member

    • Posted

     

    I wouldn't bet on 20% either, but it is still part of the equation if the offer for Dozier just isn't there.

     

    Of course it is part of the equation. Everything is, that's what is so hard about building an organization. LOTS of variables, many outside of your control.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites
    Otto von Ballpark

    Otto von Ballpark 20,320

  • Community Leader

    • Posted

     

    Keep in mind when Johan was traded, these same discussions were going on. Turns out that trading him was the wrong call. We could have used him. Not saying this is that same team, but I am saying that it is possible we end up in the same place, especially if we don't take value for Dozier.

    Of course it's possible that the Twins contend in 2017, but you can't act solely on what is possible, you have to take into account what is probable.  The 2008 Twins were probable contenders, simply on the basis of returning the same young club that won 96 games in 2006.  The 2015 Twins winning 83 games doesn't help the probability for 2017 quite so much, plus there's that 59 win season last year and four straight 90 loss seasons before that... simply put, it's not probable.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites
    diehardtwinsfan

    diehardtwinsfan 14,830

  • Community Moderator

    • Posted

     

    Of course it's possible that the Twins contend in 2017, but you can't act solely on what is possible, you have to take into account what is probable.  The 2008 Twins were probable contenders, simply on the basis of returning the same young club that won 96 games in 2006.  The 2015 Twins winning 83 games doesn't help the probability for 2017 quite so much, plus there's that 59 win season last year and four straight 90 loss seasons before that... simply put, it's not probable.

     

    I'm not disagreeing, but I do think drjim is right here in that at one point it factors into things, especially if the return for Dozier isn't what we want.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites
    Otto von Ballpark

    Otto von Ballpark 20,320

  • Community Leader

    • Posted

     

    I'm not disagreeing, but I do think drjim is right here in that at one point it factors into things, especially if the return for Dozier isn't what we want.

    It's not a factor unless it changes the amount of return we are looking for in Dozier.  And frankly, it shouldn't.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites


    Join the conversation

    You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
    Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

    Guest
    Add a comment...

    ×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

      Only 75 emoji are allowed.

    ×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

    ×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

    ×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

    Loading...
    ×

×
×
  • Create New...