Sit Dozier for a Week

[mudcat14]

Let's see what Polanco can do for a week. Dozier has no interest in playing the role this team needs from him. It's beyond time to see what Jorge can do.

[Brock Beauchamp]

So you want to bench the guy with an .883 OPS over the last two weeks, a guy that has been well above average for three consecutive seasons?

 

Seems like a legit argument.

 

Hell, even last night had the wind not be coming in from LF so hard, Dozier hits a two run shot and ties the game (or would they have taken the lead? dunno).

 

Never mind that just the day before that, Dozier had three hits, scored twice, and drove in a run.

[HitInAPinch]

"Dozier has no interest in playing the role this team needs from him."

 

Well, the Team needs someone to play 2nd and the Team has selected Dozier.  Problem, problem solved.

Right?

[alarp33]

 

So you want to bench the guy with an .883 OPS over the last two weeks, a guy that has been well above average for three consecutive seasons?

 

 

I'm not arguing, because I don't believe Dozier should "sit for a week", but where do you get those numbers?  I don't know where to look up past 2 weeks, but I see the last 15 days his obp is .284, so slugging is .599 in that time?

 

Edit: I've got his Slg% in that time at .377.... 

[Brock Beauchamp]

 

I'm not arguing, because I don't believe Dozier should "sit for a week", but where do you get those numbers?  I don't know where to look up past 2 weeks, but I see the last 15 days his obp is .284, so slugging is .599 in that time?

 

Edit: I've got his Slg% in that time at .377.... 

Pulled it from BB-Ref. 

 

http://www.baseball-reference.com/players/split.cgi?id=doziebr01&year=&t=b

[alarp33]

 

Pulled it from BB-Ref. 

 

http://www.baseball-reference.com/players/split.cgi?id=doziebr01&year=&t=b

 

I see that... I'm not sure where they got those numbers from... 4/13-4/27 he had 61 at bats.... 

 

13-61 4 doubles, 2 home runs, 5 walks... .284 obp .377 slg

[USAFChief]

I'm not arguing, because I don't believe Dozier should "sit for a week", but where do you get those numbers? I don't know where to look up past 2 weeks, but I see the last 15 days his obp is .284, so slugging is .599 in that time?

 

Edit: I've got his Slg% in that time at .377....

 

Baseball ref. 2016 splits. Going into last night, last 14 days, .314/.368/.514

 

Now that I look closer, that can't be right, they have him for only 9 PAs in the last 7 days and 38 in the last 14. He's had more than that, no?

[Brock Beauchamp]

 

I see that... I'm not sure where they got those numbers from... 4/13-4/27 he had 61 at bats.... 

You know, BB-Ref has been awful in the mornings lately. I thought that number seemed high.

 

For example, yesterday their 2016 stat lines dropped off entirely from 6-8am (as did all their splits pages). It was the third time I've seen it happen this season.

 

It's very possible they're having some sort of data problem when stats update overnight but it seems to clear up by mid-morning.

[alarp33]

 

 

You know, BB-Ref has been awful in the mornings lately. I thought that number seemed high.

 

For example, yesterday their 2016 stat lines dropped off entirely from 6-8am (as did all their splits pages). It was the third time I've seen it happen this season.

 

It's very possible they're having some sort of data problem when stats update overnight but it seems to clear up by mid-morning.

 

Yeah even the "28 days" is clearly off, the season isn't even 28 days old and they are almost 20 at bats short... 

[alarp33]

 

Baseball ref. 2016 splits. Going into last night, last 14 days, .314/.368/.514

Now that I look closer, that can't be right, they have him for only 9 PAs in the last 7 days and 38 in the last 14. He's had more than that, no?

 

You know, BB-Ref has been awful in the mornings lately. I thought that number seemed high.

 

For example, yesterday their 2016 stat lines dropped off entirely from 6-8am (as did all their splits pages). It was the third time I've seen it happen this season.

 

It's very possible they're having some sort of data problem when stats update overnight but it seems to clear up by mid-morning.

 

It looks like they are almost saying 7 days = week period, starting on Monday

 

Last 14 days  (Monday thru Sunday)

 

April 18-24 

April 25 - May 1 

 

But even these numbers are slightly off... they have the correct number of hits, but are short 10 at bats.  He's 11-45 since April 18, they have him 11-35

[Brock Beauchamp]

 

It looks like they are almost saying 7 days = week period, starting on Monday

 

Last 14 days  (Monday thru Sunday)

 

April 18-24 

April 25 - May 1 

 

But even these numbers are slightly off... they have the correct number of hits, but are short 10 at bats.  He's 11-45 since April 18, they have him 11-35

Yeah, the data is wrong right now but BB-Ref tracks days while MLB.com tracks games.

 

So on BB-Ref, you'll get "7 days". That might be five games.

 

On MLB.com, you'll get "7 games".

[Rosterman]

Yeah, sit him when he's hot. I would argue moving him down in the batting order (Santana, Mauer, Sano, Park, Arcia, Dozier)...but he is still hot. Keeping Sano at third is important. Nunez should play short for awhile. Let's see how THAT current lineup works. If anything, Polanco can be that late inning replacement.

[Otto von Ballpark]

Fangraphs to the rescue!

 

Twins batters, last 14 days:

 

http://www.fangraphs.com/leaders.aspx?pos=all&stats=bat&lg=all&qual=0&type=1&season=2016&month=2&season1=2016&ind=0&team=8&rost=0&age=0&filter=&players=0&sort=9,d

 

Dozier, .682 OPS

 

In case anyone was unaware, you can also sum up any date range on the player's game log page, although it's not quite as slick as the same process at B-Ref (but it does include league/park adjusted rate stats like wRC+/ERA-/FIP- for the date range, which B-Ref doesn't do):

 

http://www.fangraphs.com/statsd.aspx?playerid=9810&position=2B&type=2&gds=2016-04-14&gde=2016-04-27&season=

[Pardon My Dinger]

The stats are juiced!

[alarp33]

 

 

In case anyone was unaware, you can also sum up any date range on the player's game log page, although it's not quite as slick as the same process at B-Ref (but it does include league/park adjusted rate stats like wRC+/ERA-/FIP- for the date range, which B-Ref doesn't do):

 

http://www.fangraphs.com/statsd.aspx?playerid=9810&position=2B&type=2&gds=2016-04-14&gde=2016-04-27&season=

 

Thanks, I knew you could do that on Fangraphs I was just forgetting where to click to get to the Dates Range part

[Platoon]

With all this confusion about the stats, I now have no idea whether to play Dozier or not. And since the eye test, and intuition, and years of experience have no validity whatsoever, I am lost. Maybe a poll? Polanco and Dozier can draw straws? Paper, rock, scissors?

[Riverbrian]

I believe he is our primary starter at 2B but I think it has gotten to the point where Brian needs to actually check the lineup card to see if he is penciled in because he may not be.

 

He's not a 162 game player at this moment and there is no way he's a top of the order guy.

 

That said... I'm a fan and I'm glad he's a Twin.

[nokomismod]

I hope Dozier and the Twins have a great season. I also hope the Twins trade Dozier during the offseason and go young (Polanco).

[Brock Beauchamp]

 

I believe he is our primary starter at 2B but I think it has gotten to the point where Brian needs to actually check the lineup card to see if he is penciled in because he may not be.

He's not a 162 game player at this moment and there is no way he's a top of the order guy.

That said... I'm a fan and I'm glad he's a Twin.

I agree he shouldn't be near the top of the lineup but I've always believed that to be the case, even when Brian was rolling an .850 OPS.

 

When he's rolling, he's maybe a 5 hitter. When he's lukewarm, he's a nice 6/7 hitter.

[Mr. Brooks]

Dozier should not be benched but he should bat 6th or 7th and should get at least one or 2 games off per week.

I think he'd be more effective starting 130 games per year.

[Dr. Evil]

Statistics aside, I think if you asked Mr. Dozier to rate his performance from mid last year to present he would place himself in the disappointed range. I don't think I would sit him for a week straight. But, I think I would play Polanco at 2nd twice a week.

[chopper0080]

My issue with Dozier is that he is not a top of the order player, and his inconsistency is highlighted by an inconsistent lineup.

 

and I like Sano at 3B...

[Mike Sixel]

I like Dozier's game overall. I think he should be playing 140 games, though, and Polanco should be playing 22. I also think Polanco should get some time at SS. Maybe LF or 3B, if the bottlenecks lessen.....

 

I'd like to see what Polanco can do, other than sit on the bench and watch other people play.

 

Oh, and Dozier should not be your leadoff hitter...

[TheLeviathan]

Yeah, I like what Dozier did the night before - drop his butt down in the lineup and make him earn his way back up.   Right now, even while being mildly more productive of late, is still not a guy that should be hitting second.

[mudcat14]

OK, OK, I'll grant I may be overreacting a bit in suggesting a week on the bench.  The whiff in the bottom of the 9th with the tying run on 2nd base set me off a bit.  I'd still like to see what Polanco could do with a regular role in the #2 hole, and 2nd base is probably his best position.  Dozier simply doesn't reach base enough, and strikes out too much to hit ahead of Mauer, Sano, Park, Arcia & Plouffe (?).  They could form a pretty dangerous heart of the order, especially with runners on. 

[Platoon]

I am not sure if we ever resolved what Doziers OPS was or wasn't. But the exercise could serve as a cautionary tale. If someone's numbers seem extremely high, despite looking like his on field performance is not, then it's a reminder that not all one sees on paper does not necessarily transfer to on field results. There are an awful lot of variables in the game, and you have to plug different ones into every situation. And some of those equations come from the gut. It's what separates managers. Otherwise a nice algorithm would be far cheaper.

[ScrapTheNickname]

I wrote this yesterday in the thread but I want to repeat it.

Dozier, being the pull-hitter he is (and he's not about to suddenly change), should be hitting 7th in the order. We have a very powerful lineup in teh middle that, once they get clicking, are going to do serious damage. I see Dozier's skills working after those big hitters, because that what he essentially is.

 

But then who on this team is capable of being an actual table-setter, ala Tovar, Knoblauch, Carew, etc.? They gave Nunuz a shot and he did well for awhile, now they're giving Santana a shot and he's doing well. But is Polanco the answer down the road? This is this third cup of coffee, for christ's sake, I would like to see him penciled in at #1 or #2 on a half-time basis, as least. Give Dozier/Nunez a day off here and there. We are 7-15 after all.

[bluechipper]

It's unfortunate that neither of them can play a consistently decent SS. If they could, you could move one of them there, leave the other at 2B, put Polanco in the 2 hole and Dozier in the 5-7 range, and have Escobar and Nunez as two quality utility guys, neither of whom is really quite good enough or consistent enough to start on a contending team.  Or am I wrong about either Dozier or Polanco's SS abilities?

 

Brian Dozier's got one of the weakest arms I can remember seeing. I have no idea how he stayed at shortstop for so long.

[bluechipper]

I wrote this yesterday in the thread but I want to repeat it.

Dozier, being the pull-hitter he is (and he's not about to suddenly change), should be hitting 7th in the order. We have a very powerful lineup in teh middle that, once they get clicking, are going to do serious damage. I see Dozier's skills working after those big hitters, because that what he essentially is.

 

But then who on this team is capable of being an actual table-setter, ala Tovar, Knoblauch, Carew, etc.? They gave Nunuz a shot and he did well for awhile, now they're giving Santana a shot and he's doing well. But is Polanco the answer down the road? This is this third cup of coffee, for christ's sake, I would like to see him penciled in at #1 or #2 on a half-time basis, as least. Give Dozier/Nunez a day off here and there. We are 7-15 after all.

Buxton-Polanco-Kepler is probably the ideal 1-2-3 in the near future. Maybe Mauer 2nd and Polanco 9th for as long as Joe is playing well.

[Reider]

Dozier needs a day off or two every now and then so I am in favor of Polanco starting a game or two, but I don't think I am in favor of benching Dozier for a full week. He needs to get his work in too.

 

Also, for those of you saying that Dozier shouldn't be the lead off hitter or the second hitter etc.. who should be hitting at the top of the line up? Span and Revere are legit lead off hitters, but they both got traded away. Buxton is a potential lead off hitter, but he's not ready to take the spot yet.

 

For those of you who keep saying "Buxton-Polanco-Kepler," as the first three hitters in the line up, those guys are not ready yet. Please talk about the here and now and not your dreams of the future.

 

Reality is that I don't believe we have a proper lead off hitter at the moment and I'm not sure who the #2 should be. But if you want to talk about hot hands, guys like Nunez, Santana, and Mauer have the best averages and OBP's this year. Santana and Nunez both have decent speed.

 

I think it's pointless to criticize the top of our line up when the solutions people are responding with are dream / future scenario's. If you are going to complain, please suggest current legitimate solutions.

 

Here's an example. Based on current stats and speed, I would be open to promoting Nunez to the #2 spot and see how he does. Please be objective.