Loosey

Good work on finding this. I wonder if his vision and slowed reactions due to concussions have an effect on judging pitches that are not down the middle. If his swing hasn't slowed (I don't know if it has or hasn't) then something like sight, timing or judgement could be a cause for this. If that is the case no number of analytics will help him unfortunately.

It's amazing he was able to play any level of professional baseball with 20/50 vision. I was around 20/75 before lasik and felt I was near blind without contacts or glasses.

My thoughts on Dozier are if you can't maximize is value or at least get back what you think he is worth do not make the trade right now. There is no rule anywhere that says he needs to be traded before the season starts. It would be nice and would put a stamp on regimes list of accomplishments. If there is more value at the deadline you can trade him then, or next offseason his value might diminish some but then the return will be more on par if it is similar to what they are being offered now.

If I place bets with Minnesota sports team, I always bet against them. That way when they lose I can be happy I won money and when they win, the happiness of the win offsets by pain of losing money. My own emotional betting hedge.

This is different that not trading Perkins. The market for Dozier is ice cold. De Leon could become a superstar, or he could be just a middle of the road starting pitcher or worse. I want multiple lottery tickets to improve my chances of hitting on one.

Here is my question. Let's say Dozier stays with the team all year long. Dozier hits 30 HR's and bats .250 with an .830 OPS. De Leon has a decent rookie year 3.90 ERA with a FIP around 4 and 9 SO/9. If the Dodgers are still a 2B short next year, is De Leon for Dozier straight up better deal since the Dodgers now only get 1 year of Dozier and De Leon is more of known commodity? Or do De Leon's stats diminish his value and Dozier increases his by following up 2016 with a nice 2017?

I agree.

I'm not saying they went into it with those thoughts, but it could be a subconsious thing. I know when I get a new job I want to really do well at least early on to make an impact and set a precedent. A year later I gradually start to not care as much about my impact in each thing I do since I already have built up credibility. (I still care about my work, but the impact thing diminishes).

I think the problem is the Twins have no one other teams are willing to give up prospects for, especially pitching prospects. Dozier should have been but as we have seen the interest isn't exactly there as most thought it would. Ervin Santana is another guy who could fetch prospects but, again, isn't exactly the guy who will move a playoff contender to WS contender. So what do they use to get future parts? The only other tradeable assets are the Twins prospects like Buxton, Sano, Berrios, Kepler, etc. I don't want to trade those for more prospects since those guys are still unknowns.

It doesn't. But I don't think getting bent over by the Dodgers is good for future dealings. I think if this was not the first major deal the new regime was in it would have a different outcome. It seems like the Dodgers are posturing as not to lose to some "Kid GM's" working on their first deal, and Twins are trying to show they won't be pushed around now or in the future.

Since non of us know what was really offered, I am going to give the Front Office the benefit of the doubt for now. If in fact, It was DeLeon for Dozier straight up I would have held strong as well and not gave in until more value was returned. Since the trade Dozier movement was highly publicized, I am surprised at how well Falvey and Levine stayed strong and committed to their no trade unless blown away statement. In the Ryan/Smith era this trade would have been made once it became public knowledge. The difference is they maybe would have traded him at a discount (my opinion). So in reality they are still looking at the bigger picture and one trade of a all-star quality player for one pitching prospect doesn't move the needle of the future enough.

Good points. It just feels like the whole off-season hinged on getting a good return from Dozier. Maybe Falvey and Levine thought there was going to be a trade and were caught off guard at how little interest there is and now they have to take a step back and re-evaluate what to do. I was never in the camp to bring in a bunch of free agents. I was in the rebuild mode camp. Use the current assets to bring in younger cheaper assets that can help the team in 1-3 years. If they could have done that, then next year would be the year to possibly trade away a prospect and go big after a free agent to speed things up. I in no way think the offseason was a failure. It just hasn't live up to what, at least my own, expectations.

Damn! This sounds fun! Too bad I will be on flight back home from a trip and won't be home until 8:00PM. Bonnes, will anyone be recording this in podcast or video podcast form? At least the speakers? I think you guys tried last year and forgot to hit record or something. . . Also, I will offer 10 CRISP one dollars bills (plus any loose change I find) to the winner of the Buxton bat, in exchange for me receiving the Buxton bat .

Here we sit on January 10th and we are asking ourselves the same questions we have been asking since October 3rd, "Are the Twins going to trade Brian Dozier?" So far this off season the Twins have hired a Chief Baseball Office and General Manager and signed Jason Castro to a 3 year $24.5M contract. Since then they have non-tendered Trevor Plouffe and signed a handful borderline replacement level/minor league free agents. In a normal off-season this would be big changes for the Twins organization. They released a long-time member of the team and signed a player to area of need. Good work! But this off-season is different. The Twins are currently in a position to deal a player who is probably at his peak value from an area where they already have a replacement ready to go. In return the expectation has been to receive a massive haul in prospects MLB ready pitchers to build for this team's future. But it hasn't happened that way. Brian Dozier's perceived value doesn't appear to be as high as many have thought it should be. The only real suitor right now is Los Angeles and they are "low balling" the Twins. Did Falvey and Levine expect to make a Dozier trade sooner? Was this their main off-season priority are question I have to ask especially now with rumors swirling the Twins are ready to start the season with Dozier on the roster, would the off-season activity have been different if everyone knew Dozier was going to stay? By keeping Dozier the on field product has only changed by adding a catcher. No young pitchers have been added to the future rotation pool of prospects, Jorge Polanco will be forced to play shortstop which is not his natural position causing the left side of the infield to be suspect. If a Dozier deal was always known to be a long-shot, should the front office have been adding players through other means? Should Santana have been shopped more? I don't like to give out grades before everything comes to fruition but this off-season could have a very large variance depending on what happens with Dozier. Keep him and do nothing else, this off-season would be a sub-par one, call it a C-. Trade him and receive the future players and it could swing into A grade territory.

My thoughts: By the Twins putting a deadline on the deal they can give themselves leverage. Let's say the Twins told the Dodgers Tuesday at noon is the deadline. The Dodgers don't offer anything more and the Twins walk. It shows the Dodgers the Twins are serious about needing more and won't just fold and get a deal done for the sake of making a deal. That's when the Dodgers are stuck and have to make a real offer to get Dozier.

I call it a build up.

Whether this is all spin or if it is real interest that has come out, I think the Twins are playing this Dozier hand great. I don't think the old front office could have done this as long as Falvey and Levine. Maybe they really were 24 hours away from a deal and another team came knocking to have them put it on hold. In the TR days, I think Dozier would be gone already and there would be a lot of opportunities that were not explored and/or possibly missed. I don't know how things were with TR internally, but (this is my own perception) his personality and likability could have caused other teams to take advantage and tell him things like, if he goes and explores other options, the current offer might not be there when he gets back or reduced, etc (I watch too much Shark Tank...) When this is all said and done I still think Dozier ends up in LA. But it looks like "Falvine" have stirred up interest and explored multiple opportunities prior to finalizing anything just to cover their bases in case a better opportunity came up.

Ruben Sierra?

He had a 6.93 ERA for the Twins. And that wasn't even inflated. His FIP was still 6.03.

Can I buy one right now? How do I pre-order.

And Bautista would be in Minnesota. I think that is a fair trade-off.

Man, I forgot they won 84 games. I guess a Yankees tank isn't as bad as Twins tanking season. Especially after trading way high-end relievers and getting high end prospects back... Once again, you are probably right, and I am probably wrong. I HATE THAT!

The Yankees are sort of in a rebuild. Well, as much of a rebuild as the Yankees the do. Does 2 years of Dozier get them to where they want to be which is always World Series Champions? I'd so they are not contenders in 2017 and depending on what offseason moves they make in the next year are probably not in 2018. So they would be trading their future World Series contending pieces away for a player that will be available in 2019 when they could get him with big $ if they want him then. Teams going for it now are teams I see wanting Dozier.

I would non-tender Santiago. Not because I think he is expensive or bad, but because I don't think he will be a part of this team when they are ready to contend. I would use the money on a longer-term asset if one is available now. He will only get more expensive year after year. Non-Tender him, make a trade or sign a piece that could be here for next 3-4 years.

I still think the Twins should target pitching in return for Dozier. HOWEVER, if they were to get Bellinger or a position player where we already have talent and depth I would be ok with it if they in turn are willing to flip either the incumbent or even Bellinger (or whoever they get) in return for areas of need like pitching. Would a team needy on position prospects be willing to trade a young near major league ready pitcher for prospect like Bellinger or Kepler if the Twins decided to keep Bellinger in this scenario? If so, i'd be on board.