FanGraphs: Is Brian Dozier's Power Repeatable?

[Seth Stohs]

Garald Schifman of FanGraphs wrote an article today asking if Brian Dozier's power is repeatable...

 

It leads to the question of why, being owed just $15 million over the next two years, he's still a Twins player. Yes, the Twins asked for a ton (as they should) and the plethora of quality second basemen in baseball right now. 

 

There are fancy things like exit velocity and true distance and charts and stuff too. 

 

http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/is-brian-doziers-power-repeatable/

 

 

[Brock Beauchamp]

Seems pretty fair and my expectation for Dozier is that he's roughly a 30 homer guy going forward. He's capable of 40 homers (obviously) but I just don't see him as that type of player perennially.

 

But I'm interested how his early season struggles affected the numbers used in that article. Will Dozier struggle to that magnitude again? It's certainly possible but I don't know whether he'll be as bad as he was through April and May again.

 

And I bet his batted ball profiles suffered mightily during that stretch, as he just wasn't hitting the ball with authority (198 PAs, 5 homers, 7 doubles).

[Parker Hageman]

 

oh no, i've gone cross eyed.

[Lee-The-Twins-Fan]

The conclusion of the story is to expect Dozier to have a 30-homer season.  Now to me, Dozier's value as a 42- homer guy is high, but a big part of his value is in leadership, and the other things he does as a batter and a fielder. Would I like another 42-homer season? Sure. But let's hope his RBIs and runs scored both get into the triple digits as well. That would be a better sign that the Twins are competing better.

[goulik]

 

Seems pretty fair and my expectation for Dozier is that he's roughly a 30 homer guy going forward. He's capable of 40 homers (obviously) but I just don't see him as that type of player perennially.

 

 

The conclusion of the story is to expect Dozier to have a 30-homer season.  Now to me, Dozier's value as a 42- homer guy is high

Frankly, having a 30+ homer 2nd base guy on my team for the next few years with Sano, Kepler, and Buxton in that same line up excites me. I can take a defense first catcher and a declining first baseman if those other guys all are what we hope they are offensively. That just leaves me worried about defense at Short and Pitching...

[Doomtints]

Is Dozier's power repeatable?  Hell yes, he's a power guy.

 

Is his 42 home runs repeatable?  Doubtful.  Opposing pitchers did not have to bother pitching around Dozier last year because the rest of the lineup sucked.  How many of his dingers were solos?  85%?  More?

 

As a pitcher, there was no reason to fear Dozier last year because he was the only guy who was going to bite you.

 

If Dozier hits more than around 32 home runs again it's because the rest of the Twins are still hitting like little leaguers.  As a pitcher, why tire yourself out trying to challenge Dozier?  Just get the at bat over with, with as few pitches as possible, and move on to the lambs in the lineup.  His 1 solo home run that might come out of that won't cost the game. 

[Brock Beauchamp]

I believe the opposite would be true.

 

If there's one guy in a lineup who can hurt you (and in a lineup with Miguel Sano, I don't believe that's the case), you make sure that guy doesn't hurt you, not the other way around.

 

Why give up a free run (or two) when you can pitch around a single guy and coast through the rest of the lineup? It's not like this is the NBA where points/runs come fast and furious and a single point/run is mostly irrelevant. Even terrible teams win 30-40% of their games.

[Thrylos]

 

 

a big part of his value is in leadership,

 

I hear this.  However, if Dozier was indeed a leader in a 103-loss team, (plus the two 96-Loss teams) doesn't this mean that his "leadership" does not work?   Leadership produces team results not individual stats.  

 

Here are Dozier's splits in 2016:

With nobody on: .286/.345/.605, 30 HR, 400 PA (13.3 PA/HR);

with men on: .242/.332/.460, 12 HR, 291 PA (24.3 PA/HR).
Late and close: .177/.290/.283, 3 HR, 131 PA (43.7 PA/HR);

2 outs RISP: .191/.313/.426, 3 HR, 80 PA (26.7 PA/HR).
High leverage: .192/.288/.384, 6 HR, 146 PA (24.3 PA/HR),

Low leverage: .266/.338/.588, 15 HR. 223 PA (14.9 PA/HR)

 

In other words, Dozier was at his best when the game was not on the line and at his worst when it was.  The anti-Kirby.  That's why he is part of the problem with the Twins and needs to go...

[Doomtints]

 

I believe the opposite would be true.

 

If there's one guy in a lineup who can hurt you (and in a lineup with Miguel Sano, I don't believe that's the case), you make sure that guy doesn't hurt you, not the other way around.

 

Why give up a free run (or two) when you can pitch around a single guy and coast through the rest of the lineup? It's not like this is the NBA where points/runs come fast and furious and a single point/run is mostly irrelevant. Even terrible teams win 30-40% of their games.

 

Doesn't seem like it.  Teams gave up 42 home runs to him for a 103 loss team.  His power was not a threat.  In fact his power was completely irrelevant.  Why tire yourself out against him so that the other guys have an easier time with you?  Like the lion on the kill, spend your effort not on the strongest of the herd but the weakest. This is game theory.

 

Obviously this strategy isn't the one to have if there is suddenly more than 1 guy in the lineup who can hurt you. But this was not the case. Thus, Dozier only "repeats his HR numbers" if the Twins are still ineffectual. Dozier was 10% of the lineup. Who cares if he hits a solo shot? Focus on tricking the other 8 slots in the lineup.

 

[Brock Beauchamp]

 

Doesn't seem like it.  Teams gave up 42 home runs to him for a 103 loss team.  His power was not a threat.  In fact his power was completely irrelevant.  Why tire yourself out against him so that the other guys have an easier time with you?  Like the lion on the kill, spend your effort not on the strongest of the herd but the weakest. This is game theory.

Seems like people *did* pitch around him in the rare moment that he was at bat with someone on base with his strangely high amount of solo dingers (granted some of that is from him hitting leadoff).

It's not like Dozier hit 42 home runs out of nowhere. His seasonal tallies since entering the league:

6 / 18 / 23 / 28 / 42

 

The guy has legit 30 homer power, maybe even better than that. I can't buy into the idea pitchers are throwing him batting practice, particularly when coupled with the idea they're doing it because the rest of the team is so horrible.

 

If I'm a pitcher, I pitch around the lone good hitter in the lineup and then attack the bad hitters to get my outs. I don't give up a free run "just because".

 

Besides, you're acting as if the Twins were last in the league in offense. Once you adjust for their terrible sequencing last season, they were close to the middle of the pack, if not a touch below.

 

It's not as if the Twins were trotting the 2000s era Dodger lineup to the plate every night. Their offense was some form of competent.

[Doomtints]

 

Their offense was some form of competent.

 

Not competent enough, clearly. 103 losses is no joke. "Sequencing" isn't the random thing we think it is -- it's a reflection of competence.

 

And yeah, Dozier is a known quantity. Pitchers knew he had power but apparently weren't worried about it. They made the right bet.

[Brock Beauchamp]

 

Not competent enough, clearly. 103 losses is no joke. "Sequencing" isn't the random thing we think it is -- it's a reflection of competence.

Sequencing is largely a form of luck. If it was competence, explain why the Cubs actually underperformed their sequencing last season and not by a little bit. It was a significant number (-4 wins IIRC).

 

And if you think the 103 losses were due to anything other than the pitching staff, I question whether you watched this team last season. They weren't 15th in the AL by a small margin; by many metrics there was a smaller gap between 10th and 14th place than there was between 14th and 15th place.

 

The Twins' pitching staff was historically awful last season. Not just "last in the league" bad but "one of the worst teams of the past decade" bad.

[Brock Beauchamp]

And what happens when you have a slightly below average offense and a historically bad pitching staff?

 

You field a truly terrible baseball team.

[Brock Beauchamp]

And if we're using the metric of home runs to measure how dangerous a hitter is to a pitcher, the Twins were dead-center middle of the pack last season in homers, hitting 200 for the first time since I've been a Twins fan (pretty sure about this unless they hit 200 in 87/88, can't remember).

 

It wasn't only Dozier who regularly went yard on this team.

[jimmer]

Sequencing is largely a form of luck. If it was competence, explain why the Cubs actually underperformed their sequencing last season and not by a little bit. It was a significant number (-4 wins IIRC).

 

And if you think the 103 losses were due to anything other than the pitching staff, I question whether you watched this team last season. They weren't 15th in the AL by a small margin; by many metrics there was a smaller gap between 10th and 14th place than there was between 14th and 15th place.

 

The Twins' pitching staff was historically awful last season. Not just "last in the league" bad but "one of the worst teams of the past decade" bad.

I think it is fair to say the defense was also a major factor in how poorly we performed.

[Brock Beauchamp]

 

I think it is fair to say the defense was also a major factor in how poorly we performed.

Oh, sure. Throw that on the list, too... But I was just kinda bundling that in with pitching, as defense directly correlates to runs allowed.

[jimmer]

...defense directly correlates to runs allowed.

yes, which is why its frustrating to see any position marginalized in its defensive importance. The concept of hiding a guy in a corner OF or IF spot should have gone the way of the dodo bird a long time ago.

[Brock Beauchamp]

 

yes, which is why its frustrating to see any position marginalized in its defensive importance. The concept of hiding a guy in a corner OF or IF spot should have gone the way of the dodo bird a long time ago.

I'm not against doing it at one position, maybe two if you include first, but a team certainly can't do it all over the field as the Twins have done in recent years.

 

To me, that's probably the most disappointing aspect of retaining Dozier. I don't like the idea of Polanco at short and I hate the idea of Polanco on the bench.

[Mike Sixel]

 

Doesn't seem like it.  Teams gave up 42 home runs to him for a 103 loss team.  His power was not a threat.  In fact his power was completely irrelevant.  Why tire yourself out against him so that the other guys have an easier time with you?  Like the lion on the kill, spend your effort not on the strongest of the herd but the weakest. This is game theory.

 

Obviously this strategy isn't the one to have if there is suddenly more than 1 guy in the lineup who can hurt you. But this was not the case. Thus, Dozier only "repeats his HR numbers" if the Twins are still ineffectual. Dozier was 10% of the lineup. Who cares if he hits a solo shot? Focus on tricking the other 8 slots in the lineup.

 

 

Or maybe they "gave up" home runs because Dozier is a good HR hitter. It's not like they said, "heck, I'm not going to try to get this guy out". That's like old school thinking that a walk is all the pitcher's fault. No one gave up trying to get him out.

[Doomtints]

 

Sequencing is largely a form of luck. If it was competence, explain why the Cubs actually underperformed their sequencing last season and not by a little bit. It was a significant number (-4 wins IIRC).

 

And if you think the 103 losses were due to anything other than the pitching staff, I question whether you watched this team last season. They weren't 15th in the AL by a small margin; by many metrics there was a smaller gap between 10th and 14th place than there was between 14th and 15th place.

 

The Twins' pitching staff was historically awful last season. Not just "last in the league" bad but "one of the worst teams of the past decade" bad.

 

Much of what people think of as being pitching is actually defense.

[ashbury]

Much of what people think of as being pitching is actually defense.

But the vast majority of what people think of as being pitching is actually pitching.

[tarheeltwinsfan]

Much of what people think of as being pitching is actually defense. Good point Doomtints.

I really think the Twins defense was the cause of much of the pitching woes. Put 3 speedsters in the OF, plus a quick, glue-gloved, rocket armed SS, and a catcher that can actually call a smart game (say for example a Stanford graduate), and the Twins' pitchers will "improve" greatly.

[darin617]

Not gonna waste my time with all these made up stats.

 

Brian Dozier is going to be a victim of his own success.  Let's face the facts if he can hit at least 25-30 hr it should be viewed as a great year for a 2b. Sad part will be everyone will say last season was a fluke. Dozier has steadily increased his HR production over the last few years.

 

The thing is nobody will say anything at all if he goes out and either matches or exceeds 42 HR in 2017. All you read is he can't do it. All the stat loving haters will jump out to say they were right but nobody will say the were wrong if he repeats.

[mikelink45]

I remember the Ernie Banks cubs.  He hit 40 regularly SS and 1B, he even had HOF Ron Santo and HOF Billy Williams and even HOF Fergie Jenkins and they were perpetually in last place.  Do you think that if things were the same back then that they might have sacrificed Banks for another pitcher?  In fact Ernie his 40 + six times http://www.baseball-reference.com/players/b/bankser01.shtml 

 

Sure he wanted to play two, but I bet he would have loved a post season team.  An interesting essay about this hall of famers team - https://launiusr.wordpress.com/2011/07/15/the-1969-chicago-cubs-the-best-team-that-never-made-the-postseason/

 

[Pardon My Dinger]

Not gonna waste my time with all these made up stats.

 

 

Take it to the Trump thread, buddy!

[bird]

 

yes, which is why its frustrating to see any position marginalized in its defensive importance. The concept of hiding a guy in a corner OF or IF spot should have gone the way of the dodo bird a long time ago.

 

 

I miss the dodo bird. A lot.

[USAFChief]

yes, which is why its frustrating to see any position marginalized in its defensive importance. The concept of hiding a guy in a corner OF or IF spot should have gone the way of the dodo bird a long time ago.

So you wouldn't play Manny Ramirez? Harmon Killebrew? Barry Bonds later in his career?

[TheLeviathan]

I sure hope he can approximate his production.  And if he's going to have the Dozier trademarked 2-3 month stretch of being a pumpkin at the plate, I sure as hell hope he picks August and September this year.  

[Thrylos]

 

I sure hope he can approximate his production.  And if he's going to have the Dozier trademarked 2-3 month stretch of being a pumpkin at the plate, I sure as hell hope he picks August and September this year.  

 

In a different uniform

[Riverbrian]

When I look through 2016 numbers... it seems to me that Home Runs were up across baseball. I've never checked the major league total but there were a lot of players who jumped up significantly with the long ball in 2016.

 

To me the question isn't just is Dozier's Power Repeatable but also is the home run power across the MLB board repeatable.

 

It sure seems like the ball was flying out of the parks last year. I guess I'm saying that Dozier has established himself as the top power hitting 2B in baseball today and I think he'll hit 40 if the ball is flying out of the park for everyone like it did last year.