The Brian Dozier dilemma

[DocBauer]

OK, just in case you hadn't fully realized it, former solid Twins SS prospect, failed SS prospect, has turned out to be one of the top 2B in all of baseball. Hes not just handsome with great hair and a tremendous ambassador in regard to charity and community, Brian Dozier has established himself as an All Star caliber ML ballplayer...(damn the whole KC Royals ballot box stuffing controversy)...who...dare I say it?...might honestly and argueably be establishing himself as one of the top overall players in all of baseball.

 

But incredible talent, and a little good luck, (something the Twins are owed in spades), Byron Buxton...(what an amazing name....BYRON...so proud and noble...anyway...),will be healthy and back to close out the season, turning the world on it's proverbial ear, tantalizing and teasing, and getting himself ready to establish himself as the Twins starting CF for the next 10-?teen years. He might, I believe, slide down eventually to the #3 hole. But for now, and the near future, he should be an absolutely outstanding leadoff hitter. This will bump our leading man, Dozier, from his place in the leadoff position...gratefully and thankfully so.

 

And the reason I say that is, despite some of the absolutely amazing stuff he has done as the Twins leadoff hitter the past few seasons....(along with time as a #2 and #3 hitter)...I believe his overall game may actually be more benificial  lower in the lineup. He has real power, XB and HR. He has OB ability. He has clutch hitting ability. He has the speed to make things happen, and even steal some bases. The only thing Dozier lacks in his ML pedigree is the BIG BA. And I don't know that it matters when you look at his overall game, numbers and production. Guys excell in different ways.

 

Now, Buxton taking over the #1 spot doesn't just affect our beloved and glorified Mr. Dozier...it also potentially affects several other spots in the lineup. But that is part of the arguement here.

 

First comes Mauer...(come on, you didn't think he wouldn't be part of any lineup discussion did you?) This is the abbreviated version of Mauer for this year:

 

Mauer, healthy, has potential. Gets off to a quality start and drives in runs.

Mauer slumps. Mauer sucks. Mauer is finished. (though he still drives in a few runs) Twins are screwed royally.

Mauer picks up the pace again and seems to be out of slump. Mauer produces again. Many posters have nothing to post about suddenly. RX for anti-depressants suddenly decline in the TC area. (increase for Mauer detractors)

 

In all seriousness, Mauer being anything close to Mauer could be valuable in the #2 hole in the lineup, the #3 spot in the lineup....or valuable down lower in the lineup as an AVG and OB hitter with 2B power who hits a few HR's, provides contact, but doesnt have enough pure power to hit in the mid spots. (BTW, if you haven't noticed, he's been turning in to a hell of a defensive 1B!)

 

Rosario, goodness-honest, has the real ability to be a major player as a #2hitter, #3 hitter, or #5 through #8 hitter. Great overall ability across the board...despite discipline...but all factors and talent and potential have him potentiall effective in any of the above mentioned spots.

 

Bash the Twins SS potentials all you want, but there is the very real possibility that Santana, Escobar and Polanco could each/all be very productive bottom of the order/turn over the lineup options...but with REAL #2 potential. Escobar offers consistency, but not much special, and XB potential. (there's nothing bad about that folks) Santana offers even more speed,more power, more overall explosiveness and excitement and ability. (though there may always be plate discipline issues--though that is negotiable as high BA and power and speed can offset OB to a degree). Polanco may have the best overall game and potential, though he is the furthest away...AT THIS POINT.

 

Right now, we haven't discussed Plouffe, or Sano, or anyone else...(Kepler, Vargas, Arcia, whoever)...and that's kind of deliberate. 

 

Buxton becomes the new-age Ricky Henderson. And that is NOT a stretch! What do you do with Dozier? Does he mash at 2? Despite a so-so career AVG is he your best overall hitter and thus your #3? Is he your best overall cleanup option with Sano hitting behind him? Or is his overall game best fit to be the Twins #5 hitter, smack dab in the middle of the lineup, with decent BA, quality OB, power and speed, knocking 'em in and settin' 'em up!

 

Where does Dozier fit best overall?

[drjim]

Second. Generally where you want your best overall hitter. Doesn't strike me as a dilemma as much as an opportunity to drop the Plouffes and Hunters (if he is still here) and Rosarios lower in the order where they probably belong. All this would take Buxton coming back healthy and proving he belongs at leadoff, seems he is a ways away from that.

[Mike Sixel]

Second. Not that hard a decision for me.

 

Mauer is the one that needs to DROP in the order.

[DocBauer]

Been super, super busy the past week to address my own thread.

 

Bad, bad Doc!

 

And I seem to have a bad habit of burying my own lead by posting, sometimes multiple times as in this case, around holidays.

 

But at the All Star Game "mid point" of the season...Mauer on a recent resurgence that reminds us of a strong finish to '14 and a nice start to this season, before the slump....weird how he and and Plouffe seemed to slump at the same time...the Twins on a recent romp, second best record in the AL, and the amazing B-Dozier making the ASG in a ridiculous, almost sports-criminal fashion before being allowed to shine, I felt it was time to attempt to resuscitate what I feel is a worthwhile debate.

 

We'll see where and how it goes.

 

No matter how great BD has been in the lead off spot, I simply have to believe this spot will be Buxton's very soon. (Until he slides down-all previously stated) I completely agree Dozier could be outstanding as a #2 hitter. I completely disagree that your "best hitter" hits #2. From everything I have ever seen or heard your best overall hitter is your #3 hitter. From a "hit/AVG" factor, that is not BD. It has been Mauer in the recent past. Could it be still and yet again? To be determined. If B-Dozier is really your best overall BAT, (forget the standard "hitter" phrasing), then he might bump Mauer somewhere else.

 

Assuming Mauer is never Mauer again, maybe Dozier in the 3 hole makes sense. But considering his bat, especially if Mauer does surge again, as he has been lately, should BD's big bat and XB/RBI ability hit cleanup? Are we better with super stud prospect Sano hitting behind Dozier? Or should Dozier, with OB, power and speed sit in the #5 hole, right in the middle of the lineup, behind Buxton, ?, Mauer and Sano? He'd be, theoretically, behind a group of 4 talented hitters while having multiple opportunities to not only drive in runs, but begin and perpetuate innings with his OB, speed and power ahead of some other decent hitters such as, possibly, Plouffe, Vargas, Rosario, Kepler, Polanco, etc.

 

I think B-Dozier is the kind of all around great ballplayer that could succeed almost anywhere. So maybe it's not so much where he fits best, but where you THINK he fits best dependent on where you see the rest of the lineup.

[pierre75275]

I think Dozier third and Mauer second makes a lot of sense with Buxton leading off. Hit and run becomes a real weaponto stay out of the double play and Mauers walks and single potentially turn into runs with Doziers xb power

[Shane Wahl]

Buxton-Mauer-Dozier-Sano

[DaveW]

 

Second. Not that hard a decision for me.

 

Mauer is the one that needs to DROP in the order.

Mauer has been hitting well lately, I think he is fine as where he is for now.

With Dozier, I think you keep him leadoff until one of Hicks or Buxton "earns it" at that point you move him to cleanup and Sano up to third. This gives Sano and Dozier protection.

[kab21]

This isn't a dilemna.  The only dilemna is how long will it be until the team has a good 1-4 in the lineup.  Where they bat is a small issue.

[spsdrock]

I think Dozier would be a awesome batting 3rd.  Move Mauer to 2nd or 6th in the order.

[ttreadway]

1. Buxton

2. Mauer

3. Dozier

4. Sano

5. Rosario

6. Plouffe

7. Hicks

8. Santana/Escobar

9. Suzuki

 

[nicksaviking]

Here I thought this was going to be an appeal to try Dozier at SS again.

 

Yeah, Dozier should be batting 3rd. He's not stealing many bases anyway, either because of a concerted philosophy change or more likely his shear number of extra-base hits.  Put those XBH to work!

[goulik]

Buxton

Mauer

Dozier

Sano

Plouffe

Hunter/Rosario

Rosario/Hicks

Suzuki

Santana/Escobar

[Loosey]

I think in the next year or so the Twins need to bat the top 3 spots almost purely base on OBP.  That might not be Buxton next year.  If Sano continues to trend in the direction he appears to be I want as many guys on base for him as possible in every at bat.  But for the sake of the discussion here is my hypothetical 2016 lineup.

 

Dozier

Rosario/Hunter

Mauer

Sano

Plouffe

Hicks/Rosario/Hunter

Buxton

Catcher

Polanco/Escobar/Santana

[SwainZag]

Until Buxton shows he can hit major league pitching he should be nowhere near the leadoff spot.  Long term, sure, I like penciling him in there, but right now no way.

[Hosken Bombo Disco]

What do the sabermetricians say about the best way to construct a lineup? I only skimmed part of the thread so sorry if it was addressed. It's a good dilemma to have for sure.

 

I don't mind Dozier batting lead off. He's only leading off once a game and thanks to Hicksie and the others, it seems like Dozier's getting a lot of at bats with runners on base right now anyway. In other words it already feels like he's hitting in the middle of the order.

[Brock Beauchamp]

 

I think Dozier would be a awesome batting 3rd.  Move Mauer to 2nd or 6th in the order.

Moving Mauer down the lineup is a mistake, especially now that he's stopped hitting for average.

 

You want that guy further up the lineup, not down.

[Loosey]

 

What do the sabermetricians say about the best way to construct a lineup? I only skimmed part of the thread so sorry if it was addressed. It's a good dilemma to have for sure.

I don't mind Dozier batting lead off. He's only leading off once a game and thanks to Hicksie and the others, it seems like Dozier's getting a lot of at bats with runners on base right now anyway. In other words it already feels like he's hitting in the middle of the order.

I'm not a sabermatrician.  (Did I even spell it right?)  But it from a sabr standpoint I would assume lineups would be constructed with high OBP guys in front of high Slugging % guys, followed up by high OBP guys again at bottom of order so if you put the batting order on a loop it would be OBP,SLG,OBO,SLG.  Again, I am just guessing and that seems to be the way lineups have been constructed since the beginning of time except maybe years ago Batting Average was mixed in instead of OBP.

[gocgo]

Considering that a #2 hitter needs to be able to advance the leadoff hitter if he gets on by either bunting or hitting to right, that would indicate that Dozier isn't ideal for the #2 spot.

[SwainZag]

 

Considering that a #2 hitter needs to be able to advance the leadoff hitter if he gets on by either bunting or hitting to right, that would indicate that Dozier isn't ideal for the #2 spot.

 

But if you have a high OBP guy leading off, a guy who hits a lot of extra base hits from your 2 hole is ideal.  Your leadoff hitter is statistically only going to leadoff an inning once per game.

[Rosterman]

I don't have an overall problem with Dozier batting second. If we don't like Mauer at third, who put him at the number 2 spot.

 

Right now, let's say, Buxton gets on base. He is a threat to steal second, and would mroe than likely take third on any kind of reasonable hit. So you maybe have Dozier at first with second open, and not Brian is a potential stolen base candidate, made easier by the fact that Dozier is on third. And Brian would less likely be dubled up, too, on decently hit ground ball. He would be able to take that extra step of a lead off first.

 

He also has the potential to hit a two-run homer rather than a solo shot.

 

Would his overall runs scored decrease? Probably not. He still ahs the ability to move to second on a steal, or end up at third on a hit. And suddenly the Twins have 1st and 3rd with no outs and one run in. The dreams of having a two-run first inning more often than not are realized.

 

But it boils down to Mauer.

 

Again, if we don't like Mauer hitting third, why move him to second. Who do we put at second if Dozier hits third. Who do we put at third if Mauer isn't around (Rosario, perhaps?).

 

[Willihammer]

I wouldn't fiddle. He's the best hitter on the team, getting the most PAs. No problem, IMO.

[drjim]

A nice rule to consider is having your best hitters getting the most at bats. I would not have Dozier bat any lower than 2nd.

 

The sabermetric argument for not having your best hitter batting 3rd is that there will be a higher frequency of at bats each season when he will be up with 2 outs and no one on base relative to other top of the order lineup positions. Having a hitter with OBP and power bat 4th will come in handy for driving in high OBP hitters in front of him and also the certain amount of times he leads off the 2nd inning (higher OBP).

 

With Dozier and Sano, the Twins almost have prototypically modern 2 and 4 hitters. Buxton will probably be a great leadoff hitter very soon and I think Mauer is fine as a 3rd hitter. Lots of OBP with those 4.

 

From there you probably just stack the best hitters in order with some adjustment to L-R matchups, and you usually want a better hitter (especially if they have some speed) batting 9th than 8th, so makes sense to go catcher 8th and Santana 9th.

[dxpavelka]

 

Second. Generally where you want your best overall hitter. Doesn't strike me as a dilemma as much as an opportunity to drop the Plouffes and Hunters (if he is still here) and Rosarios lower in the order where they probably belong. All this would take Buxton coming back healthy and proving he belongs at leadoff, seems he is a ways away from that.

Show me a MLB manager who consistently bats his best overall hitter in the # 2 spot and I'll show you a manager who will be unemployed in 2 years.  Your best overall hitter should bat third.  Your number 2 guy should be someone adept at advancing your leadoff guy to second or third base whether by bunting or hitting to right field increasing the chances of the runner advancing to third.  A better case could be made for putting your best overall hitter in the leadoff spot giving him a couple dozen more at bats over the course of a season which theoretically could translate into 2 or 3 extra wins.  Bobby Bragen tried this with the Pirates in the late 50's and Whitey Herzog toyed with it, batting George Brett & Hal McRae 1,2 in the late 70's.

 

[RealTwinsFan357]

Show me a MLB manager who consistently bats his best overall hitter in the # 2 spot and I'll show you a manager who will be unemployed in 2 years. Your best overall hitter should bat third. Your number 2 guy should be someone adept at advancing your leadoff guy to second or third base whether by bunting or hitting to right field increasing the chances of the runner advancing to third. A better case could be made for putting your best overall hitter in the leadoff spot giving him a couple dozen more at bats over the course of a season which theoretically could translate into 2 or 3 extra wins. Bobby Bragen tried this with the Pirates in the late 50's and Whitey Herzog toyed with it, batting George Brett & Hal McRae 1,2 in the late 70's.

I can think of a couple examples:

 

The A's bat Vogt 2nd

The Blue Jays bat Donaldson 2nd

The Cubs bat Rizzo 2nd

 

I don't see anything wrong with batting your best hitter 2nd, especially if your second/third best hitters are as solid as Bautista/Encarnacion/Bryant

[Willihammer]

Baseball has been moving toward the best-batter-in-the-2-hole for a little while. I know Josh Donaldson is getting most his PAs in the 2-hole, for example, as is Rizzo. There are probably others.

[70charger]

 

Show me a MLB manager who consistently bats his best overall hitter in the # 2 spot and I'll show you a manager who will be unemployed in 2 years.  Your best overall hitter should bat third.  Your number 2 guy should be someone adept at advancing your leadoff guy to second or third base whether by bunting or hitting to right field increasing the chances of the runner advancing to third.  A better case could be made for putting your best overall hitter in the leadoff spot giving him a couple dozen more at bats over the course of a season which theoretically could translate into 2 or 3 extra wins.  Bobby Bragen tried this with the Pirates in the late 50's and Whitey Herzog toyed with it, batting George Brett & Hal McRae 1,2 in the late 70's.

 

Just so we're clear, you're stating that the difference in wins that comes from batting your best hitter third instead of second is enough to get a manager fired in two years?

 

That's some mighty chunky claim chowder there, my friend.

[Secondary User]

 

Considering that a #2 hitter needs to be able to advance the leadoff hitter if he gets on by either bunting or hitting to right, that would indicate that Dozier isn't ideal for the #2 spot.

 

This is a dated mode of thinking

[drjim]

 

Show me a MLB manager who consistently bats his best overall hitter in the # 2 spot and I'll show you a manager who will be unemployed in 2 years.  Your best overall hitter should bat third.  Your number 2 guy should be someone adept at advancing your leadoff guy to second or third base whether by bunting or hitting to right field increasing the chances of the runner advancing to third.  A better case could be made for putting your best overall hitter in the leadoff spot giving him a couple dozen more at bats over the course of a season which theoretically could translate into 2 or 3 extra wins.  Bobby Bragen tried this with the Pirates in the late 50's and Whitey Herzog toyed with it, batting George Brett & Hal McRae 1,2 in the late 70's.

 

Based on this reasoning, wouldn't the same apply (on a slightly different scale) to moving the best hitter from #3 to #2?

 

The NL and AL are slightly different scenarios because of the pitcher. There is logic in not having your best hitter within 2 spots of a black hole, which is why Maddon probably bats his pitcher 8th and his best hitter #2.

 

I think the era of a #2 hitter whose primary responsibility is to advance the leadoff hitter is over.

[Secondary User]

This is a brief rundown of lineup optimization from a modern (2012 anyway) sabr point of view

 

Lineup Optimization

 

 

One Quote:

 

 

 

The Two Hole: The old-school book says to put a bat-control guy here. Not a great hitter, but someone who can move the lead-off hitter over for one of the next two hitters to drive in.

The Books says the #2 hitter comes to bat in situations about as important as the #3 hitter, but more often. That means the #2 hitter should be better than the #3 guy, and one of the best three hitters overall. And since he bats with the bases empty more often than the hitters behind him, he should be a high-OBP player. Doesn't sound like someone who should be sacrificing, does it?

 

[USAFChief]

I get pretty irate watching a number 2 hitter sac bunt or "hit one to the right side."

 

Hit the freaking ball.