Jump to content
Twins Daily
  • Create Account
  • Impasse


    Nick Nelson

    Are the Twins and Dodgers moving on from Brian Dozier trade talks? It's beginning to look that way. Let's break down the latest developments and potential ramifications.

    Image courtesy of Brad Rempel, USA Today

    Twins Video

    Earlier this week, Ken Rosenthal of FOX Sports reported that the two sides had reached an impasse in their negotiations with "no momentum toward deal." That's an ominous sign at this late stage of the offseason and Rosenthal later wrote that the Dodgers were "back to square one in their search for a second baseman."

    Derek Falvey and Thad Levine took over the Twins front office with a tremendous opportunity to leverage a high-quality player at peak value in order to bolster the organization's lackluster pitching corps. But it appears that timing may have been against them.

    For one thing, they've been unable to develop much of a market for Dozier. The list of contenders with high-caliber young arms and a need for an impact hitter at second base was short to begin with, and shrunk when the Mets decided to bring back Neil Walker.

    Los Angeles was a very obvious fit from the start but unfortunately, no others really emerged. While a few clubs were loosely connected with Minnesota, it was evident all along that no one was going to press hard enough to create a bidding war. This placed the Twins at a rather disadvantageous negotiating position.

    Beyond these isolated circumstances, there is a larger trend at play. Baseball teams, in general, seem to be losing their thirst for power. It's the name of Dozier's game, but the home run doesn't carry the same appeal it once did.

    Consider this: Most expected Edwin Encarnacion, who ranks second in baseball since 2012 in both homers and RBI, to land a deal in excess of $100 million as a free agent this offseason. Instead, he settled for $60 million from Cleveland. His former Toronto teammate Jose Bautista, another of the game's premier power bats, has yet to find a job. Same for Mark Trumbo, whose 47 bombs led the majors in 2016.

    In other years, it would feel crazy that a second baseman coming off a 42-homer campaign wouldn't generate an aggressive market. In this current environment, though, it's kinda par for the course.

    Every report on the matter has made sure to emphasize that trade discussions are not considered dead. Levine said this week that a point might come where the Twins would stop initiating calls, but they would never stop listening.

    However, Rosenthal's note about how the Minnesota front office "wanted to give Dozier a heightened peace of mind about his status with the club" matches a similar relay from Mike Berardino of the Pioneer Press a week earlier.

    Reading between the lines, one can infer that Falvey and Levine have informed Dozier he'll be back in 2017 barring an unforeseen development. They're wise to keep their antennas up but at this point, it's tough to see what would change to precipitate a deal. More than a month after discussions began, there has been little in the way of evident progress.

    The Dodgers might feel they've done their part by offering up Jose De Leon, who is viewed by some as a top five prospect in the entire game. The Twins, meanwhile, are understandably opposed to giving up their best and most popular player for a single lottery ticket whose future could be thrown into question with a reoccurrence of his shoulder soreness, or an extension of his initial big-league struggles.

    It looks like the trenches that have been dug here. And while it's odd to see no accord despite such a natural match, it's not like either team is in a corner.

    Dodgers president Andrew Friedman, who gained notoriety while running operations for the Tampa Bay Rays, understands as well as anyone the value (and fickleness) of cheap young pitching talent. He'll be content keeping his full arsenal of young hurlers and looking elsewhere for an offensive boost. Maybe someone like Bautista could be an option.

    Meanwhile, the Twins can hang on to Dozier, who still doesn't turn 30 until May. He's in his prime and the possibility exists that we still haven't seen his best campaign. With two years left on his contract, he figures to retain strong value going forward, and if Minnesota surprisingly jumps out to a competitive start this season, he'll almost certainly be a big reason for it.

    That's a precarious gamble, though. Outside of adding Jason Castro, the Twins haven't done much to meaningfully upgrade a 100-loss team. It's reasonable to expect significant improvements from a contingent of returning players, but gaining 20-plus wins on that basis is a tough sell. If the shiny new front office brings back a largely untouched roster in 2017, the luster is going to quickly wear off in the eyes of fans and season ticket holders.

    So if Dozier stays, what's the plan? Spend some money to supplement the team around him and hope to catch lightning in a bottle? That definitely would not jibe with Falvey's initial talk of building for the future and looking at the big picture.

    But then again, you've got to work with what you've got. All that the Chief Baseball Officer and his GM can do is play the hand they're dealt. Now, we'll see if they push in their chips or continue to slow-play and straddle the line between trying to rebuild or retool.

    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


    User Feedback

    Recommended Comments



    Featured Comments

    Here is why I would trade Dozier for DeLeon straight up:

     

    Keeping Dozier means we either get Dozier for 2 years that will be meaningless because our pitching staff is a ways off

     

    Or Extending Dozier, probably for around $100 million while he is 30-36 or so.

     

    Neither one of those seems like a good option to me. We can be upset that we didn't get what we thought, but those are the two options. Now we could move him at the deadline, but he could decline and even if he doesn't I don't see how 1 year and two months of a good player will be worth more than two.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

     

     

     

    How did not trading Perkins or Plouffe work out? Everyone happy on not taking 50 cents on the dollar for Plouffe last year? Or keeping Perkins around because he was cheap?

    By this logic, the Twins should trade everyone no matter the return.  There was no market for Plouffe, just like there was no market for Dozier.  And yes, I was ok with keeping Perkins.  If he had stayed healthy in 2015 we probably make the playoffs.  That's the risk with pitchers but it was the right risk.

     

    There is no reason for the Twins to tank 2017 or not to care about it.  We might be a 75 win team, we might be a 81 win team.  We won't be a playoff team.  That doesn't mean you throw out everything that's not bolted down.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    "Baseball teams, in general, seem to be losing their thirst for power. It's the name of Dozier's game, but the home run doesn't carry the same appeal it once did."

     

    I don't think this necessarily is it. A quick glance back at the history of player's receiving qualifying offers shows a lot of sluggers.

     

    It's not as appealing to sign these guys because of the cost of doing so. And I'm not talking about the money, I'm talking about the draft pick. With the picks that are lost basically determining a good chunk of a teams draft budget, if a team is going to sign that player, they absolutely aren't going to invest as much money in the player. Edwin Encarnacion demonstrates that pretty well.

     

    I would expect players to start accepting their Qualifying offer after how this offseason has gone. They won't get paid like they should on the open market until they don't have that anchor tied to them.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Prior to the offseason a top 50 prospect was the ideal centerpiece and now that we have that (top 25 even!) we bemoan it as not enough. And we heap on top of that the weird (and rampant) belief that Dozier's value will endure and that some mythical better deal awaits us.

     

    Don't like DeLeon? Alright, I get it, shoulDer injuries are scary. But he is a near ready, top 30 prospect. Who is going to top that? Because if you can't actually identify them, we should drop the "better deal in the next year" talk and get real.

    Edited by TheLeviathan
    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

     

    Well, that's not the route the Astros or Cubs or Phillies are taking....or the White Sox. All of whom have managed to rebuild faster than this team has. Not, imo, a coincidence. Keeping veterans around to win 78 games and not 71 games is not good strategy, imo.

    The Cubs spent their way out of the cellar.  The Astros had 6 losing seasons in a row - three worse than our worse year - and have topped out at 86 wins two years ago.  The White Sox are the very definition of a team constantly winning 71-79 games, having done so in 6 of the last 9 years with two winning seasons (2010 and 2012) and a disaster year mixed in.  The Phillies have had four straight losing seasons.  They don't seem out of the rebuild yet.  

     

    The Twins have a very strong offensive nucleus in place that just needs experience.  There's no reason to think the Twins can't be like the 2001 Twins or the 2014 Astros.  They have a lot of good pieces that should come together.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

     


    Don't like DeLeon? Alright, I get it, shoulDer injuries are scary. But he is a near ready, top 30 prospect. Who is going to top that? Because if you can't actually identify them, we should drop the "better deal in the next year" talk and get real.

    I'm not too sure how realistic their interest was but I liked the idea of Weaver and Flaherty from St Louis or Newcomb from Atlanta over De Leon.  None of those pitchers had De Leon's ceiling but I trusted their floors a lot more.  If I thought De Leon would need TJ surgery and come back, that's one thing.  But shoulder soreness is such a red flag for me that I'd probably walk away from that guy. 

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    I think we have reason to heavily doubt this team will be like the 2001 Twins. We had a team ERA of 5.08 last year. Anyone optimistic about Berrios, that is great but he at best will offset the 3.38 ERA that 34 year old Ervin had last year.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    I left the Braves off my list of teams that traded for prospects and got more and got better.....so that's another one.

     

    As for the WS, they didn't figure it out until this year. They are 1 year into their trying to rebuild, aren't they?

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

     

    I think we have reason to heavily doubt this team will be like the 2001 Twins. We had a team ERA of 5.08 last year. Anyone optimistic about Berrios, that is great but he at best will offset the 3.38 ERA that 34 year old Ervin had last year.

    Sure, Santana won't be as good but it's unlikely that Santiago and Gibson are as bad, either.  Those three combined for 66 starts, 390ip, 4.36 era and a 4.8 WAR.  I think the three of them combined could improve on those numbers as a group.  If pitch framing is a thing, Gibson is the type of pitcher who would most benefit.  

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

     

    I left the Braves off my list of teams that traded for prospects and got more and got better.....so that's another one.

     

    As for the WS, they didn't figure it out until this year. They are 1 year into their trying to rebuild, aren't they?

    So they're ahead of us after not having a winning season since 2012?  That's some pretty strange logic.  Atlanta's entering their 4th year of rebuilding.  Not sure if they're ahead of us.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

     

    So they're ahead of us after not having a winning season since 2012?  That's some pretty strange logic.  Atlanta's entering their 4th year of rebuilding.  Not sure if they're ahead of us.

     

    Fair, I was mostly listing them as a team that traded veterans, got prospects, and have a loaded minor league system ,as compared to a system MLB or BA said might be bottom ten, after this much losing.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

     

    Not in the same realm as DeLeon. And your explanation emphasized floors over ceilings.

    Maybe that's the real impasse. I'm long done with that thinking.

    Not really that different.  Sickels on Newcomb - "power lefty up to 97 with a plus curve and developing change-up, excellent strikeout and hit rates confirm the stuff but control and command remains shaky".  mlbpipeline wrote "Newcomb does have to cut down on his walks to reach his ceiling, but as a Northeast guy who used to divide focus among two sports, he has more upside than your typical college arm. If the control improves, he could even outperform those Jon Lester comps."  They had him pretty close to De Leon in their rankings (47 to 33) and his future grades were just as good.  De Leon's stuff wasn't graded as well but they liked his command/control.  Sounds like a Twins pitcher.  Both got 55 FV grades.  mlbpipeline reported De Leon's shoulder soreness and "shoulder inflammation."  

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    I doubt there is much, any, fire in that smoke from the Braves' talk.....unless a deal is made, we'll never know, of course. I don't know why the Braves would do that, given they have Swanson and Albies and some other MIF I can't think of right now.....not to mention they aren't good yet, and Dozier only has 2 years left on his deal.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

     

    The Cubs spent their way out of the cellar.  

    Not accurate. Rizzo came in a trade (Cashner). Russell came in a trade (Samardzija, Hammel). Arrieta came in a trade. Hendricks came in a trade (Dempster).They drafted Bryant, Baez, and Schwarber. That's pretty much their core. 

     

    Unless you're placing all the credit for the Cub's meteoric rise in the hands of Chapman (rental), Lester, Lackey, Zobrist, and Heyward (who was arguably their worst player and unarguably their most expensive player last year), then it seems to me that trading Dozier would be a step in the same direction the Cubs have taken to pivot their franchise.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Ok, maybe Newcomb could fit as a centerpiece. Now tell me why the Cardinals don't care? They don't appear to have any interest and their roster doesn't scream need either.

     

    Could that change? I guess, but you have to admit how flimsy the odds are right? You are several layers down in your hypothetical better deal now.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

     

    Ok, maybe Newcomb could fit as a centerpiece. Now tell me why the Cardinals don't care? They don't appear to have any interest and their roster doesn't scream need either.

    Could that change? I guess, but you have to admit how flimsy the odds are right? You are several layers down in your hypothetical better deal now.

    I think the Cardinals aren't in because they have Wong locked in.  Would the Twins take a Wong/Weaver deal?  I'm not sure.  

     

    I don't know what the future holds but I know that I don't want the Twins to make a bad deal now just because it's the only deal in town.  

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

     

    Not accurate. Rizzo came in a trade (Cashner). Russell came in a trade (Samardzija, Hammel). Arrieta came in a trade. Hendricks came in a trade (Dempster).They drafted Bryant, Baez, and Schwarber. That's pretty much their core. 

     

    Unless you're placing all the credit for the Cub's meteoric rise in the hands of Chapman (rental), Lester, Lackey, Zobrist, and Heyward (who was arguably their worst player and unarguably their most expensive player last year), then it seems to me that trading Dozier would be a step in the same direction the Cubs have taken to pivot their franchise.

    This has come up several times but the Cubs highest sources of WAR this year came, in order, from FA signings, trades, draft picks.  

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    I think the Cardinals aren't in because they have Wong locked in.  Would the Twins take a Wong/Weaver deal?  I'm not sure.  

     

    I don't know what the future holds but I know that I don't want the Twins to make a bad deal now just because it's the only deal in town.

     

    Part of how you are determine bad deal is, in part, on the basis of expecting similar or better future offers. You don't get to do that and then hide behind future uncertainty.

     

    That's my whole point about probability and the probabilities are decidedly against your position.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

     

    But they started with trades....then the used FA. That's the point. The point isn't that they didn't use FA at all. It isn't that FA didn't help. It is that they used ALL avenues to build their team. So tired....

    How did they get Hendriks? Because they had the money to extend Dempster.  How did they get Chapman? Because they had 20m laying around.  How did they get Russell?  Because they signed Hammel in FA.  Yes, they made some great trades but they were able to do them because signing a bad 4/50m pitcher didn't cripple their options.  Constantly comparing a 200m+ payrolll team to the Twins is useless.  And they didn't make bad trades. They held onto Samardzija when they didn't get an offer they liked in 2012 and saw him pitch worse in 2013.  

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

     

    That's my whole point about probability and the probabilities are decidedly against your position.

    You think that but that doesn't mean you're right.  Making a bad trade now - and we all agree it's a bad trade - isn't ok just because you don't think you'll get a better trade later.  If you don't get your value, you hold him.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

     

    How did they get Hendriks? Because they had the money to extend Dempster.  How did they get Chapman? Because they had 20m laying around.  How did they get Russell?  Because they signed Hammel in FA.  Yes, they made some great trades but they were able to do them because signing a bad 4/50m pitcher didn't cripple their options.  Constantly comparing a 200m+ payrolll team to the Twins is useless.  And they didn't make bad trades. They held onto Samardzija when they didn't get an offer they liked in 2012 and saw him pitch worse in 2013.  

     

    They kept trading, and didn't quit because they made bad ones. Bad ones happen. We get it, you don't think the trades mattered, and you don't think they should get credit for making good ones, because they have money to use. We don't agree. How about the White Sox, or Braves? Do they get no points for their trades if they later sign free agents? 

     

    Putting that aside.....this reminds me of the don't trade Adrian Peterson situation, only worse, because AP could carry an offense almost on his own. Imagine if they had dealt him 2 or 3 years ago for a couple early picks and a young player......that team would be better off right now.

    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...