Time to sign Dozier

[drjim]

 

As for Dozier the player, sometimes it's okay to get on-field value from a player and let him walk. Given how the rest of MLB seems pretty set at second base, this is likely the best route for the Twins. You float that guy in trade to see if there are any takers but if he's worth more to you than to anyone else, you let him play out his contract and try to accumulate wins before he leaves.

 

This is especially true with the position the Twins are in. They should be in a great position to compete next year, and have a replacement prospect almost ready.

 

And even if he doesn't sign an extension this offseason, also not against the rules to re-sign him after next season, and if he walks they would get some draft pick compensation assuming he has a similar season (and they make the qualifying offer).

[Dozier's Glorious Hair]

 

That's one way to look at it: he's the only leader to step up.  But that doesn't make him a good leader.  Potentially a better leader would have stepped up and provided a better direction.  

I heard Hunter pumping up his team mates a couple seasons ago, praising them in the media.  Ditto Giminez this year.  Santana has been praised for his work with Berrios and younger pitchers. Dozier has been most outspoken in criticizing the FO for selling his teammates this season.

It's fairly well known that Dozier writes himself into the lead-off spot because he likes to take advantage of pitchers willingness to pump fastballs early.  He tends to start extraordinarily slow which makes me question his off-season regimen (I know he builds homes for charity in central america, but that doesn't appear to get him ready).  He claims he changed his approach when his power arrived, finding a strategy that worked with his guess hitting approach at the plate.  He hasn't apparently shared his knowledge with any younger players.  

He's a nice player.  He just comes up little when we need him most.  Maybe he's the only leader on the team.  Maybe he's just declared himself leader and others are being surpressed.

 

 

Maybe he's suppressing the other players, maybe he's not sharing his knowledge, maybe he doesn't put in the proper work in the off-season... all of these "maybe" criticisms seem to have been entirely invented in your own mind, with all due respect.

 

The "maybe" game can be played to make any player look bad. 

[Brock Beauchamp]

 

He's a nice player.  He just comes up little when we need him most.

I find this narrative rather humorous given the past three weeks.

 

The Twins sold on July 30th and 31st. Dozier came out publicly against this decision.

 

Since that time, the Twins are 15-9. Brian Dozier has a 1.165 OPS.

[The_Phantom]

107 games

.298/.360/.646 (1.006 OPS)

41 home runs

86 RBI

13 stolen bases

25 Doubles

 

According to Baseball-Reference those are his combined "Second-Half" (which I believe is post all star break) numbers for last year and this year.  

 

I wish he would produce like that in the first half too, but if you extend those numbers out from the 107 games to the 162 games, you have a guy with 62 home runs, 130 RBI, 20 stolen bases, and a 1.006 OPS. 
 
Buxton is improving fast and Berrios is showing signs of his potential. I don't know that trading Dozier is the best bet at this point. I would be on it if the return was big, but I would rather us add a couple pitchers this off season while KEEPING dozier. If Dozier is what it takes to get the best pitching prospects it might be worth it to move him, but that's a lot of second half offense to give up. 

 

[howieramone2]

 

He's a poor leader in my opinion. He's the reason why the team lacks leadership. I think his personality may suppress other better leaders as well. He's a nice player, but to me he's part of the problem, part of the old selfish losing culture.

But the Twins don't have a losing culture. One of the laws of baseball is, every mid-market team will need to rebuild at some point in time.

[Bill Brown69]

I would argue that it is time to sign an outfielder(or all 3) to a 10 year contract. Bring them all in together and put something fair and reasonable in front of all 3. 

[Danchat]

I don't know what this 'team friendly extension' is about, but I think the Twins will have to bid with other teams if they want Dozier back in 2019 and on. He's probably going to command a 4 year $60M+ deal. I imagine they keep playing him through 2018 and decide by the end of the season whether they're willing to spend that kind of cash on him or go with somebody like Polanco/Gordon/etc. at 2B. I don't think he has enough trade value to ship him over the offseason. I'd rather try to win in 2018 with Dozier than get a mediocre prospect for him.

[Blake]

 

I find this narrative rather humorous given the past three weeks.

 

The Twins sold on July 30th and 31st. Dozier came out publicly against this decision.

 

Since that time, the Twins are 15-9. Brian Dozier has a 1.165 OPS.

I was going to say, which would you rather have: a player that get's hot when the season is on the line or a player that starts off hot and cools off when the team needs him?

 

It appears that, for some reason, Mr. Dozier is a second half player. So, surround him with the steady players who will get the job done early and let him be the difference maker after All Star. 

[Brock Beauchamp]

 

I was going to say, which would you rather have: a player that get's hot when the season is on the line or a player that starts off hot and cools off when the team needs him?

 

It appears that, for some reason, Mr. Dozier is a second half player. So, surround him with the steady players who will get the job done early and let him be the difference maker after All Star. 

To be fair, the Twins sure could have used a hot Dozier in August and September of 2015 and... *crickets*

 

My point is that you can build any narrative you like but things are usually more complex than a "good/bad when it counts" binary.

 

For all the flak Dozier gets for his RISP performance, his career OPS difference between RISP/Empty Bases is about 20 points. That's an unusual gap but not extreme by any stretch of the imagination.

 

His men on base number has a larger gap but then you have to build a different narrative, one where Dozier is pretty good with runners on second and/or third but bad with only a runner on first.

 

And that doesn't make any sense at all so I'll chalk it up to statistical noise. Maybe Dozier has a different approach when there's a guy standing on first base (and only first base) but I'm going to have to see that broken down with actual analysis to believe it, not a regurgitation of a stat line because, again, it makes no sense whatsoever.

[nicksaviking]

The problem with a Dozier extension is that because of his numbers, Dozier and his agent are going to want to get paid like a super star. However we have already gotten a glimpse of his true value when the team couldn't drum up any trade interest even with his potent bat. Every team has a good 2B.

 

So if the Twins were to let Dozier walk after next year, he almost surely would be disappointed with the offers available. If the Twins were to extend him now they'd just as surely have to pay him more than he'd ultimately get as a free agent.

 

I feel bad for the guy actually, in just about any other era he'd be looking at a pretty large deal.

[Blackjack]

 

I just feel like if you're going to make these claims you should back them up with some actual proof other than a hunch. 

Thats getting to be the standard response here on TD ' show proof'!!!!  These are online forums, you can write anything you want!!!

 

Just kidding!!!

 

As others have said, this is Dozier's first and last good chance at free agency, he's going to want a 3-5 year deal.  If someone is willing to pay big bucks to sign him, then there should be a trade market for him. Package him this winter with young prospect and bring back a good pitching prospect.  The Twins have enough middle infield players to replace him.

 

[Taildragger8791]

 

I was going to say, which would you rather have: a player that get's hot when the season is on the line or a player that starts off hot and cools off when the team needs him?

 

It appears that, for some reason, Mr. Dozier is a second half player. So, surround him with the steady players who will get the job done early and let him be the difference maker after All Star. 

 

Then I hope he doesn't complain if he gets put in the 7-hole in the lineup next year until August rolls around. We can do better in the leadoff spot than a low-OBP strikeout-prone fly ball pull hitter for the first 4 months.

 

And he shouldn't be surprised when the contract offers reflect that he's a half-season player. The late surge is an awfully fickle thing to gamble on; it's highly unusual for that type of pattern to repeat perennially. The rest of the year he's barley top 15 at his position and that on top of being 31 is going to cap his assessed value.

[Jham]

I find this narrative rather humorous given the past three weeks.

 

The Twins sold on July 30th and 31st. Dozier came out publicly against this decision.

 

Since that time, the Twins are 15-9. Brian Dozier has a 1.165 OPS.

Exactly. Maybe if he showed some fire before hand we'd have bought and we'd be in first. It struck me as a poor time to speak up.

[Blake]

 

To be fair, the Twins sure could have used a hot Dozier in August and September of 2015 and... *crickets*

 

My point is that you can build any narrative you like but things are usually more complex than a "good/bad when it counts" binary.

 

For all the flak Dozier gets for his RISP performance, his career OPS difference between RISP/Empty Bases is about 20 points. That's an unusual gap but not extreme by any stretch of the imagination.

 

His men on base number has a larger gap but then you have to build a different narrative, one where Dozier is pretty good with runners on second and/or third but bad with only a runner on first.

 

And that doesn't make any sense at all so I'll chalk it up to statistical noise. Maybe Dozier has a different approach when there's a guy standing on first base (and only first base) but I'm going to have to see that broken down with actual analysis to believe it, not a regurgitation of a stat line because, again, it makes no sense whatsoever.

To be fair, is there anything about Mr. Dozier that makes sense? Dozier isn't a big guy, yet he is on a pace to have hit, what 100+ home runs in the last 3 years? 

 

Anyway, I was just tossing it out there because Dozier has turned himself into quite the interesting player.

[Thrylos]

Facts: 

 

• The Twins need starting pitching more than a second baseman with at most one win more than his potential replacements (*)
• Dozier's best season was the Twins' worse (since they moved to Minnesota)
• The marker for second base among potential contenders in the next off-season will look better than last with the Mets, Giants, Dodgers (again,) Diamondbacks, and even Rockies and Cardinals in the mix

 

If the Twins can use Dozier, potentially in a package, and get someone like Matt Harvey (who is a question mark health-wise for sure, but), it will be a big win for them.  They can use someone like him more than they can use Dozier

 

(*) Eddie Rosario who has very similar wRC+ and wOBA as Dozier, could be a more than adequate replacement and not sure why the Twins stopped thinking that (well... TR).  Gordon, Escobar, etc. are the ones who can really step in.  

[Jham]

Do you have some behind the scenes knowledge of how Dozier acts in the clubhouse that nobody else knows about? If he feels comfortable hitting leadoff why would it be bad for him to want to hit there - clearly he's had success? Some players aren't meant to hit in the middle of the order and some thrive there. Accusing him of not preparing enough in the offseason - again do you have any proof that he is out of shape coming into the season? Do you have any proof that he doesn't work with the younger players? I haven't seen one negative article about Dozier since he's been a Twins player. Lastly, I highly doubt he was the only player in the clubhouse that was upset the FO traded away a couple of players who were having good seasons. I mean who wouldn't be upset about that since they're in the middle of pushing for the playoffs.

 

I just feel like if you're going to make these claims you should back them up with some actual proof other than a hunch.

Proof works both ways. Show me evidence of the leadership you think he's demonstrating. We've all heard him interviewed about wanting to remain at leadoff despite his hitting profile projecting at other places in the line up. His first half struggles are fact. His trouble with runners on base are fact. The teams overall struggles are fact. His statements after the losing steak/sale are facts as is his absence of statements before. Not all of this is on Brian,btw. Its not personal. I was not a fan of trading him last year. I just wonder if it's time to move on. Is he capable of voluntarily stepping down and letting someone else lead? He's a good player. I'm still a fan. Based on whay we've all seen, I'm wondering if his style of leadership helps or hurts the team. It's a fair question. Given those questions, I'm not for a contract extension. I get that his numbers are hard to replace.

[SwainZag]

 

Proof works both ways. Show me evidence of the leadership you think he's demonstrating. We've all heard him interviewed about wanting to remain at leadoff despite his hitting profile projecting at other places in the line up. His first half struggles are fact. His trouble with runners on base are fact. The teams overall struggles are fact. His statements after the losing steak/sale are facts as is his absence of statements before. Not all of this is on Brian,btw. Its not personal. I was not a fan of trading him last year. I just wonder if it's time to move on. Is he capable of voluntarily stepping down and letting someone else lead? He's a good player. I'm still a fan. Based on whay we've all seen, I'm wondering if his style of leadership helps or hurts the team. It's a fair question. Given those questions, I'm not for a contract extension. I get that his numbers are hard to replace.

 

Dozier career state line: .249/.324/.449/.773

Dozier career men on base: .248/.332/.410/.743

Dozier career RISP: .250/.346/.426/.772 

Dozier career bases empty: .249/.319/.473/.792

It is a complete myth that he hits better with men on or with RISP and statistics back that up.

 

Dozier has better stats batting cleanup than he does in the leadoff position though much smaller sample size.

 

Dozier has been on the Twins from 2012-2017.  The only season in that run that the Twins had a pitching staff rank outside of the Top 5 in the AL was 2015.  So yes, while the team has struggled while he has been a part of that, how much realistically are you going to place on him?

[Thrylos]

 

 

 

 

Dozier has been on the Twins from 2012-2017.  The only season in that run that the Twins had a pitching staff rank outside of the Top 5 in the AL was 2015.  So yes, while the team has struggled while he has been a part of that, how much realistically are you going to place on him?

 

This works both ways as well

 

In other words, no matter how good Dozier is, unless the Twins will get pitching, they will not win.  So, they will better spend that $ on getting pitching rather than extending Dozier...

[nicksaviking]

Can I throw out an alternative option (that will almost certainly get me run out of town)? How about the team extend Escobar instead? Cheaply obviously. Save the money for pitchers.

 

So Escobar is under team control for just one more year and will likely get a decent final arb year raise. However, with Dozier still under contract, Polanco looking like he deserves another shot and Gordon knocking on the door,  Escobar very possibly will have little playing time next year.

 

If the Twins extend Escobar, they can probably get a discount on his 2018 season when he's likely to be riding pine, but would then have pretty cheap insurance in case Polanco and Gordon don't pass muster in 2019 or beyond. If Dozier is gone in 2019 (or sooner) the team will need another Escobar anyway.

 

Escobar may be interested in an extension if he knows his playing time likely will be limited in 2018 which would cripple his chance at a reasonable free agent deal in 2019.

 

He's not exciting, but he's fairly reliable and cheap. Plus, with the young Latin guys, I'd prefer a veteran Latin leader if that's something that's important to everyone.

[Brock Beauchamp]

 

Proof works both ways. Show me evidence of the leadership you think he's demonstrating. We've all heard him interviewed about wanting to remain at leadoff despite his hitting profile projecting at other places in the line up. His first half struggles are fact. His trouble with runners on base are fact. The teams overall struggles are fact. His statements after the losing steak/sale are facts as is his absence of statements before. Not all of this is on Brian,btw. Its not personal. I was not a fan of trading him last year. I just wonder if it's time to move on. Is he capable of voluntarily stepping down and letting someone else lead? He's a good player. I'm still a fan. Based on whay we've all seen, I'm wondering if his style of leadership helps or hurts the team. It's a fair question. Given those questions, I'm not for a contract extension. I get that his numbers are hard to replace.

Bolded first. Proof does not work both ways when you're the person who first made the accusation Dozier was flawed. I will not make the argument that Dozier is a "proven leader" because I don't have evidence one way or the other, nor does anyone else here.

 

And, again, before someone backs up another Dozier isn't clutch argument with men on base numbers, can someone bother to explain to me (and the board) why he's terrible with a man on first base but has an almost identical career RISP OPS to his overall career OPS?

 

Or can we just admit that it's likely a statistical aberration and move on to something else?

 

I'm legitimately open to someone breaking down film and showing their work on this accusation but a stat line ain't gonna cut it because that argument makes no sense. Dozier is literally bad with a runner standing on first base but various levels of underperforms/fine/good/great in all other situations. Does not compute.

[SwainZag]

 

This works both ways as well

 

In other words, no matter how good Dozier is, unless the Twins will get pitching, they will not win.  So, they will better spend that $ on getting pitching rather than extending Dozier...

 

There's a large difference between great pitching at the very bottom of the league you know...

[Jham]

Dozier career state line: .249/.324/.449/.773

Dozier career men on base: .248/.332/.410/.743

Dozier career RISP: .250/.346/.426/.772

Dozier career bases empty: .249/.319/.473/.792

It is a complete myth that he hits better with men on or with RISP and statistics back that up.

 

Dozier has better stats batting cleanup than he does in the leadoff position though much smaller sample size.

 

Dozier has been on the Twins from 2012-2017. The only season in that run that the Twins had a pitching staff rank outside of the Top 5 in the AL was 2015. So yes, while the team has struggled while he has been a part of that, how much realistically are you going to place on him?

It's not a myth over the last 4 seasons he's hit a hugely disproportionate number of hr with no one on. I guess I'd have to see league numbers, but that parts not a myth.

[Darius]

I guess I wouldn't really mind if they signed him to an extension, but what I would like to see:

 

As mentioned, try and do some pre-arb deals with Berrios and Buxton. Those two could be an absolute steal if you can convince them to sign long-term right now. Those guys seems to be pretty safe. Berrios has a work ethic that is second to none and Buxton will be the best defensive player in the league for years. Not a huge amount risk, in terms of what the rewards could be.

 

The next tier id like to see considered are Sano, Rosario, and Kepler. These guys, IMO, still have some risk. I'd feel pretty good about Sano, but he has had some injury issues, so I'd wait those out for another year and see how this offseason goes. I still can envision a scenario where Rosario regressed back to what he was, and that Kepler never advances past what he is now. To be clear, I'm really high in both of those guys, but would worry about a long-term deal turning sour. In the end, I'd wait it out, but the money can't really be tied up elsewhere given the teams frugal ways (aka, can't give a boatload to Dozier).

 

Dozier has been great for this team. But, I'm not sure he should be a priority as this team is really set up for a couple of years down the road. For some reason, even though he's got a pretty good track record, I always worry about him being able to get out of a slump.

 

From Dozier's point of view, I don't know how you wouldn't be set in testing free agency at this point. He could likely get a lot more from a team with deep pockets (Dodgers, Yankees, etc) than the Twins would be would/should be willing to give to guy entering his 30s.

 

He's done a lot for the Twins. But, let's be honest, the Twins have maybe done more for him. In many organizations, he may have never reached the majors. Or, they would've dumped him during one of his 400 AB super-slumps. If he recognizes that, and wants to take a discount, I'm in.

 

In the end, id like to see the Twins keep the young offensive core they have now (Buxton, Sano, Rosario, Kepler Polanco), and allocate any extra funds they have to some pitching.

[Dozier's Glorious Hair]

 

Exactly. Maybe if he showed some fire before hand we'd have bought and we'd be in first. It struck me as a poor time to speak up.

 

I've never heard anyone accuse Dozier of lacking fire. That's definitely a new one for me.

 

When was the right time to speak up? It's hard to complain about the team selling before they actually do so.

[kellyvance]

He's a poor leader in my opinion. He's the reason why the team lacks leadership. I think his personality may suppress other better leaders as well. He's a nice player, but to me he's part of the problem, part of the old selfish losing culture.

This is an undeserved cheap shot. You must not watch many games

[kellyvance]

Exactly. Maybe if he showed some fire before hand we'd have bought and we'd be in first. It struck me as a poor time to speak up.

 

It was the perfect time to speak up. It galvanized the team. Dozier said what the rest were thinking and the team responded. That is leadership. And you judge leadership by one thing and that is does he inspire others. This guy is the real deal. Jham you can't see that? Too bad for you. But don't expect the rest of us to embrace your negativity

[kellyvance]

It's not a myth over the last 4 seasons he's hit a hugely disproportionate number of hr with no one on. I guess I'd have to see league numbers, but that parts not a myth.

 

Yeah, he bats leadoff. What part of that is a mystery to you?

[Shaitan]

I just don't think it's realistic. I'd love him at his current salary to be a 1B/3B/DH type player if/when Gordon and Lewis develop, but I just don't see a fit with his current age, likely free agent cost, etc.

 

Depth is good though. Keep him through the contract and make the kids earn their promotions. Meanwhile, if they get an offer they can't refuse, take it seriously.

[Jham]

Yeah, he bats leadoff. What part of that is a mystery to you?

Once per game. And each year he has more at bats with guys on. And each year he hits way more hr with no one on. Fangraphs breaks down the splits if you're interested. I'm not sure how saying I have an opinion is a cheap shot. Not like accusing another fan of not watching games...

 

I like watching Dozier. He was one of the only reasons you tune in last year. We've seen guys like Redman, Hunter, Puckett, and Hrbek who seem to will teams to success. Dozier is a good player. I just don't get the leadership stuff. He credits work with Hunter and Bruno for helping him become a power hitter. I just haven't heard about him working with anyone on their swing or approach. To me, for my taste, it's hard to lose like they've lost, and not be broken by the losing. You can only survive if you learn to deal with the losing. Certain entrenchments on the team don't seem to be bothered by losses. According to Hunter, the team didn't seem to enjoy winning. I'm not saying my opinion is gospel. Jyst sharing my observations. We're all cheering for the same team here.

[SweetOne69]

 

Once per game. And each year he has more at bats with guys on. And each year he hits way more hr with no one on. Fangraphs breaks down the splits if you're interested. I'm not sure how saying I have an opinion is a cheap shot. Not like accusing another fan of not watching games...

I like watching Dozier. He was one of the only reasons you tune in last year. We've seen guys like Redman, Hunter, Puckett, and Hrbek who seem to will teams to success. Dozier is a good player. I just don't get the leadership stuff. He credits work with Hunter and Bruno for helping him become a power hitter. I just haven't heard about him working with anyone on their swing or approach. To me, for my taste, it's hard to lose like they've lost, and not be broken by the losing. You can only survive if you learn to deal with the losing. Certain entrenchments on the team don't seem to be bothered by losses. According to Hunter, the team didn't seem to enjoy winning. I'm not saying my opinion is gospel. Jyst sharing my observations. We're all cheering for the same team here.

While it is true that he only bats leadoff once per game which accounts for 25 of his 143 career home runs.  He has also hit 59 home runs when leading off an inning (don't know if the 25 home runs when leading off a game are also included in the 59 when leading off an inning).  Assuming they are, that means that 41% of his home runs come when leading off an inning where it is impossible to have a man on base.  Also that 59 accounts for 57% of the total solo home runs that he has hit in his career.