Jump to content

Providing independent coverage of the Minnesota Twins.
The same great Twins Daily coverage, now for the Vikings.

The Store


Photo

Article: The Rising Cost of Brian Dozier

  • Please log in to reply
81 replies to this topic

#1 Cody Christie

Cody Christie

    Twins Contributor

  • Twins Contributors
  • 838 posts

Posted 12 May 2014 - 08:57 PM

You can view the page at http://www.twinsdail...of-Brian-Dozier

#2 whosafraidofluigirussolo

whosafraidofluigirussolo

    Member

  • Members
  • 57 posts

Posted 12 May 2014 - 09:40 PM

The off-season or spring training seems like the right time to consider this. They'll have a better idea of whether Rosario or Polanco will push Dozier at 2B, depending on how Polanco's taking on more SS goes and how Rosario plays once he gets reinstated.

#3 Hosken Bombo Disco

Hosken Bombo Disco

    refuses to choke up with two strikes

  • Members
  • 1,191 posts

Posted 12 May 2014 - 09:54 PM

Yep. Off season is the time to do it. I'm on board. Dozier doesn't seem like the greedy type but don't know if Wolfson mentioned who his agent is.

#4 Monkeypaws

Monkeypaws

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 662 posts

Posted 12 May 2014 - 10:20 PM

I'm not sure I'd go 8 million a year for Dozier. He's a nice piece, but just paying him market rate would likely be less expensive.

#5 diehardtwinsfan

diehardtwinsfan

    Twins Moderator

  • Twins Mods
  • 4,631 posts

Posted 13 May 2014 - 05:29 AM

I still think there could be a switch to SS in his future as well. Like Cody said, this is something that should be done. I'd also note that 8M a year would be a bargain for someone who is likely to be one of the better 2B in the league. My guess is that it happens this offseason. Dozier certainly deserves it.

#6 jorgenswest

jorgenswest

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 1,611 posts

Posted 13 May 2014 - 06:57 AM

The Twins can afford to pay his arbitration costs. They don't need to buy his decline phase.


Go year to year and plan trade high in his free agent year. Let some one else buy the decline.

#7 mike wants wins

mike wants wins

    Would Like to be More Positive

  • Members
  • 6,051 posts

Posted 13 May 2014 - 07:29 AM

They have so much money.....non-issue to pay him $8MM per year or so. Willingham and KC come off the books next year. They won't be signing a FA pitcher, probably. They won't sign an OF, because apparently they are all comfy with their OF, no 3B, and any SS would come cheap. If they think this is real, they may as well pay him. NOT ONE other player on the roster is getting a raise anytime soon.

#8 nick5253

nick5253

    Junior Member

  • Members
  • 21 posts

Posted 13 May 2014 - 08:06 AM

5 yr 40 mil seems insanely high. 2015 will still be pre-arb, so that's 600k or so. The first arb year will only be 2-3mil range? So then you're giving him what 8,12 & 15 mil those last 3 years? That makes no sense to me. Go ahead and play it year-to-year. There is a tiny risk he's going to out-play that first FA year of 15 mil at which point you give him a QO and take the pick if he declines. The Twins simply have cheaper replacements (hopefully) and given his limited success so far, it would be Nick Blackburn like to make this deal.

#9 mike wants wins

mike wants wins

    Would Like to be More Positive

  • Members
  • 6,051 posts

Posted 13 May 2014 - 08:09 AM

Who cares if it is Blackburn like? They have tens of millions sitting around.......and they aren't likely to go spend it.
Lighten up Francis....

#10 cmathewson

cmathewson

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 2,273 posts

Posted 13 May 2014 - 08:10 AM

Pay the man now before he gets crazy expensive.

#11 Brock Beauchamp

Brock Beauchamp

    Owner

  • Administrators
  • 8,758 posts

Posted 13 May 2014 - 08:13 AM

5 yr 40 mil seems insanely high. 2015 will still be pre-arb, so that's 600k or so. The first arb year will only be 2-3mil range? So then you're giving him what 8,12 & 15 mil those last 3 years? That makes no sense to me. Go ahead and play it year-to-year. There is a tiny risk he's going to out-play that first FA year of 15 mil at which point you give him a QO and take the pick if he declines. The Twins simply have cheaper replacements (hopefully) and given his limited success so far, it would be Nick Blackburn like to make this deal.


Blackburn-like? Not so much. What Dozier is doing is sustainable; what Nick Blackburn was doing was not sustainable.

The biggest question about Dozier right now is the power but even if it turns from home run power to gap power, he's still an above average player by a considerable margin. Dozier has a skillset that suggests he'll continue to produce at a decent level. Nick Blackburn's skillset was "luck".

#12 sorney

sorney

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 136 posts

Posted 13 May 2014 - 08:18 AM

.... Nick Blackburn's skillset was "luck".


Some might call it luck...I like to call it....well, luck, I guess.
- Happy Gilmore

#13 nick5253

nick5253

    Junior Member

  • Members
  • 21 posts

Posted 13 May 2014 - 08:22 AM

Blackburn-like? Not so much. What Dozier is doing is sustainable; what Nick Blackburn was doing was not sustainable.

The biggest question about Dozier right now is the power but even if it turns from home run power to gap power, he's still an above average player by a considerable margin. Dozier has a skillset that suggests he'll continue to produce at a decent level. Nick Blackburn's skillset was "luck".


Agree - I was simply saying it could be Nick Blackburn like in that he's given an extension needlessly with no or very limited upside for the deal. The biggest take-away from the Blackburn deal was to not handcuff yourselves into a player without getting a heck of a lot more benefit than minimal cost certainty.

#14 Brock Beauchamp

Brock Beauchamp

    Owner

  • Administrators
  • 8,758 posts

Posted 13 May 2014 - 08:23 AM

Agree - I was simply saying it could be Nick Blackburn like in that he's given an extension needlessly with no or very limited upside for the deal. The biggest take-away from the Blackburn deal was to not handcuff yourselves into a player without getting a heck of a lot more benefit than minimal cost certainty.


And that's fair. Personally, I wouldn't sign Dozier yet. If he's still hitting in May of 2015, then I'd consider buying out his arb + 1 years as a goodwill gesture toward an above average complementary player.

#15 birddog

birddog

    Junior Member

  • Members
  • 29 posts

Posted 13 May 2014 - 08:29 AM

A lot less risk of paying hitters than pitchers, and Dozier continues to improve his numbers as he is on the leader board in HRs, Rs and SBs. Enough said. Twins told us when we give them a new stadium they will pay to keep our stars. Dozier is our star, possibly even moreso than Mauer, and continues to get better every year. The exodus of our stars has to stop or we will add Dozier to the former Twins putting up all-star numbers.

#16 kab21

kab21

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 2,393 posts

Posted 13 May 2014 - 08:49 AM

People said that the Span extension was also unnecessary at the time for the same reasons. Having that extension in place was one reason that Span was able to be flipped for a top pitching prospect.

I think locking in his arb years and one FA year are a very good idea. There's something to be said about taking care of your young players for improving clubhouse morale. It's really not that much money and it could end up saving the Twins some (a lot of money) in the long run.

#17 Winston Smith

Winston Smith

    Old Geezer

  • Members
  • 1,375 posts
  • LocationOceania

Posted 13 May 2014 - 09:13 AM

Free agent in 2019 no reason to be in a hurry.

#18 Shane Wahl

Shane Wahl

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 4,076 posts

Posted 13 May 2014 - 09:19 AM

He is a free agent a long time from now. I don't understand the rush.

#19 DAM DC Twins Fans

DAM DC Twins Fans

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 487 posts

Posted 13 May 2014 - 09:29 AM

What is the rush. We have had about a year of solid play from Dozier. He has another year before arbitration. Maybe the offseason. I would wait a year, see where Rosario stands and see if Dozier keeps it up.

#20 Dantes929

Dantes929

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 314 posts

Posted 13 May 2014 - 09:39 AM

"There's something to be said about taking care of your young players for improving clubhouse morale. It's really not that much money and it could end up saving the Twins some (a lot of money) in the long run." There is also something to be said about keeping a player hungry. I didn't like the Span or Blackburn or Harris or Lamb deals. I am generally a mid to long term guy but we have him already for 2014, 2015, 2016, 2017, and 2018. Buying him out now for what you probably would pay him anyway seems like needless risk. Buyouts can happen anytime. Players agree to longer term in their arb years because of injury risk and a guaranteed big payday. No real need or benefit to it now. Yes, the twins have a ton of money. If things go the way we want them to we will also have a good core of guys who will eventually be using it up. No need to be reckless with it and tie it up now. I have always liked Dozier and hope his OBP rate continues the upward trend. He is a nice piece of the puzzle but you can still hedge your bet next year or the year after.

#21 amjgt

amjgt

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 523 posts

Posted 13 May 2014 - 09:44 AM

I don't think there should be a rush to ink a 5/40 extension, but from Dozier's perspective I certainly understand the "rush" to get a long term deal in place. Obviously knowing you're getting _,000,000 per year for 5 years regardless of injury or regression is a huge thing for him and his family.

5/40 might be a fair market deal but it's about 39.5M more guaranteed dollars than he has right now.

Unless you are buying out a bunch of FA years for a probable star player, there's rarely much incentive (in my opinion) for a team to get into these 5/40 type deals.

Dozier's got to give something to get something. 5/30 Seems like a place we can agree is:
a) a chunk less than he will likely get over the next 5 years if he continues to play the way he is playing, and
B) enough money to incent Dozier to potentially leave some money on the table to guarantee the security I'm sure that he wants.

At 5/30 both sides have some incentive

#22 diehardtwinsfan

diehardtwinsfan

    Twins Moderator

  • Twins Mods
  • 4,631 posts

Posted 13 May 2014 - 09:56 AM

He is a free agent a long time from now. I don't understand the rush.


The sooner you do it, the more team friendly the contract as the team is assuming more of the risk. If Dozier continues to improve, that also makes it more of a Span like contract where he can be flipped for something of need if say Rosario/Polanco force the issue.

#23 drivlikejehu

drivlikejehu

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 525 posts

Posted 13 May 2014 - 09:59 AM

This notion just baffles me. It makes absolutely zero sense under any circumstances. I'm sure his agent wants a nice extension - he knows that getting the Twins to overpay now is the best move for Dozier's finances (and the agent's of course). The reality is that Dozier has zero leverage... the Twins can keep him through his prime with no downside to the club.

#24 mike wants wins

mike wants wins

    Would Like to be More Positive

  • Members
  • 6,051 posts

Posted 13 May 2014 - 10:13 AM

"no downside".....sure there is.

Bad feelings on not getting an extension.
Lack of certainty on where he will be after his FA, meaning they need to plan more for the possibility he leaves.
Possible insane inflation that skyrockets his cost.
lack of predictabiliy of the budget
etc.

The list is actually quite endless for why you MIGHT want to do this.
Lighten up Francis....

#25 Winston Smith

Winston Smith

    Old Geezer

  • Members
  • 1,375 posts
  • LocationOceania

Posted 13 May 2014 - 10:16 AM

"[COLOR=#0066cc]The Rising Cost of Brian Dozier" should actually read The potential rising cost of Brian Dozier. They have this year and next before arbitration kicks in, no reason to be in a hurry. Let him prove himself for more than a year. A lot of baseball and a lot of bad things can happen before he even reaches his first year of arbitration.[/COLOR]

May all our prospects be All Stars and the beer be free.


#26 Shane Wahl

Shane Wahl

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 4,076 posts

Posted 13 May 2014 - 10:22 AM

If I owned the team, I would throw in nice little performance bonuses in these "cheap" years. I know that isn't realistic in this scenario. Anyway, he isn't even in his arb years yet. One way to deal with this might be to see what he wants in his first year of arbitration and instead of coming up with their own amount and then bargaining or going to arbitration, just giving him that amount.

#27 drivlikejehu

drivlikejehu

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 525 posts

Posted 13 May 2014 - 10:33 AM

"no downside".....sure there is.

Bad feelings on not getting an extension.
Lack of certainty on where he will be after his FA, meaning they need to plan more for the possibility he leaves.
Possible insane inflation that skyrockets his cost.
lack of predictabiliy of the budget
etc.

The list is actually quite endless for why you MIGHT want to do this.


So what's he going to do, quit baseball? The rules are the rules. His "bad feelings" aren't a downside.

The Twins have him under contract through what, 2018? They don't need to plan 2B for 2019 - they have enough problems already.

The chances of Dozier turning into one of the game's elite players is close to zero. That's the only scenario where an extension makes sense.

#28 TheLeviathan

TheLeviathan

    Twins News Team

  • Twins News Team
  • 5,035 posts

Posted 13 May 2014 - 10:36 AM

You don't give non-elite players deals like this. The day may come to smartly buy out some FA years, but it sure as heck isn't now.

#29 amjgt

amjgt

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 523 posts

Posted 13 May 2014 - 12:13 PM

If I owned the team, I would throw in nice little performance bonuses in these "cheap" years. I know that isn't realistic in this scenario. Anyway, he isn't even in his arb years yet. One way to deal with this might be to see what he wants in his first year of arbitration and instead of coming up with their own amount and then bargaining or going to arbitration, just giving him that amount.


It would be interesting to base this on that player's WAR (or some other internal metric).

When you're in you're rookie contract WAR 1.0 to 1.9 gets you $50k, 2.0 to 2.9 gets you another $50k, and so on.

Not enough to break a team's budget, obviously, but enough, when you're "only" making 500k per year to significantly incent that young player.

#30 amjgt

amjgt

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 523 posts

Posted 13 May 2014 - 12:18 PM

In writing my two posts in this thread I have discovered that "incent" is not really a word (according to Merriam/Webster).

Well, I'm going to keep using it, but now I'm going to feel like a rebel when I do.