Twins Request Final Offers For Dozier

If you are prepared to walk away then you simply walk away.  You don't do this. 

 

For every deal made there are hundreds not made.  How many times have you seen a team not get what they wanted use their beat reporter to make an ultimatum before walking away?

 

Well, I don't agree. And I still don't call it an ultimatum.

Sub Twins for Atlanta, and this is a good reason that Dozier needs to go

 

On the other hand, Atlanta is not on a rebuilding phase:  They have a brand new stadium that they need to start filling with rear ends, before it turns into the ghost town Target Field has been recently, and this means winning.  And signing two 40 year old free agents pitchers, extending one of their hottest commodities, getting the best FA UT in the market for a long term, going after older "value" players like John Danks, Rhiner Cruz and  does not signal rebuilding.  Check their starting OF, if you don't believe me.

 

Dozier would fit really nicely in that team, and the Braves have the young pitching to make it happen...

I disagree. Atlanta is very much rebuilding. Locking up your 4 WAR, 26 year old, gold glove centerfielder through his arb years plus a little at a very reasonable rate is what smart rebuilding teams do. It gives you cost certainty. It's what the Twins will (or at least should) do with Buxton and Sano once the new front office has a good idea of what they think those 2 will be in the long run. You don't need to win at a super high level to fill a new stadium well. It fills itself because people want to come see the new stadium. The next couple years is when you need to be winning. And after the huge haul of prospects they got last winter and all the payroll they've cut they've positioned themselves very well to start winning big the next couple years because at least a couple of their young arms will turn out to be good MLB pitchers. And they'll be very well set up to wait for the big market teams to blow all their payrolls on Harper, Machado, Donaldson, and Kershaw and jump in to sign one or two of the 15 (maybe an exaggeration) pretty big time free agents after the 2018 season.

As for signing 40 year old pitchers and a decent utility guy that's also what smart rebuilding teams do. It's what TR and the Twins refused to do. They'll flip those guys at the deadline for even more near MLB ready prospects if they are having good years and keep them for a full year of leadership for the young guys if they aren't. 2 years for Rodriguez isn't long term. You can simply flip him at either deadline or during the offseason or have him as a solid backup as you get your youngsters experience. Atlanta is doing exactly what the Cubs and Astros did and what MN refused to do. They're rebuilding the most efficient way. And you bring in those "value" guys hoping you find a diamond in the rough. If not you DFA them without thinking twice. Atlanta is doing what MN should be doing. And trading from your stash of top end pitching prospects for a guy who's going to leave in 2 years is how you set your rebuild back a few years. Atlanta is in wait and see mode.

Contrary to some views, Dozier will not become more valuable during the season. It's highly unlikely his offensive numbers will improve from career highs, his defense won't, and his contractual stability is a diminishing asset. The Twins will not be a better team because BD is here next year. That will not happen until the SP is upgraded, and the up the middle defense is improved. It is possible that if, dangling Dozier out there like a 2004 GMC pickup in the front yard with a "For Sale" sign on it that the best offer to the FO underwhelming, Dozier is not worth what some thought. But what is not possible is the fantasy that he will be worth more in the future.

I'm not sure it's really about value that Dozier isn't getting what he's worth. It's more about supply and demand. So are you saying that you would trade him straight up for DeLeon? A proven ML position player with above average defense and well above average power for his position, for an unproven highly ranked prospect within the Dodgers system? No. The only thing you can do is hold him and hope that a better offer comes along. Yes, we need pitching, but ONE pitching prospect isn't going to solve that. It may not even be a start if that ONE prospect doesn't pan out. Yeah, this isn't s great place to be in and we all hoped for more, but that's just how it is. If that's all there is out there for Dozier, you keep him and hope for better. If not, you look for another way. If this is the only way to improve our future, then we don't have much of one.

He isn't saying that at all

Which is why I used a question mark as I was asking. If that's all the offer is for, then what?

You have some very valid points. Nor in a perfect scenario would I argue them. Hopefully there are other avenues to improving the pitching? But thay all have issues. An expensive veteran? Trading one of our top position prospects? A currently non existent FA market? And while your take on supply and demand is likely correct, will the demand increase? The chances of that, and the chances of a prospect like DeLeon are both open to the same level of conjecture. Both the Dodgers and Twins would be trading something they don't need for something they need. That to me impacts my view on this negotiation. While I cannot guarantee DeLeons future success, BD past history of lengthly droughts does not allow the guarantee of his static value at the trade deadline. Nor for that matter his value to the Dodgers playoff chances. While it is true that the immediate impact of the trade most likely will be in the Dodgers favor, the fact remains that short of trading some of the high end Twins position "prospects", this team has little foreseeable avenues to improving its SP in time to take advantage of the maturation of these "prospects". It's not an enviable situation. That said, if I thought BD would have more value in June, or even next winter, I would keep him. But I don't. IMHO he is a luxury this team would be remiss in not cashing in on.

That's fair. And I guess that's the divide here between the varying points of view on this issue. For me, there is a point where you walk away. Yeah, there's risk no matter how you look at it. It's just difficult for me to part with a proven, definite asset for something that may never produce. I'd be more comfortable, obviously, with a return of more pieces in the hopes that one is really good. Is there a point you'd walk away from this situation, out of curiosity?