Who Says No? Brian Dozier Edition

I don't see any reason to do anything at this time. Wait at least another year.

I'll 'third' the "wait another year" notion. Let him earn his $500,000-$600,000 in 2015 and then, if he produces at a similar level in 2015, talk about buying out his arbitration years from 2016 on. No reason to rush things just yet, Dozier isn't going anywhere for a while.

I think Dozier would jump at it though I don't know what the new revenue really does.  Is it 30% more across the board?  More, less?    I don't think the Twins should offer it.   That same contract is likely there next year as well so why commit to it now?   I like Dozier and probably want him around for another couple years but in 4 years I see more a mix of Santana, Polanco  or Gordon covering short and 2nd.   18 homers the 1st half, 5 the second half which I think is closer to what he will give us.   If he raises his average and OBP by 40 points next year I would maybe offer the terms you suggest or even higher.    I just wouldn't do it now..

I think most people don't realize how long we have Dozier under team control, and I think that's where the extension talk comes from. The example here would cost at least $15M more to essentially book Dozier's age-32 season. I'm not sure its worth it if you look at it that way. 

I'm in the camp with the folks commenting above. Give it another year. If he maintains the pop he showed, especially in the 1st half, and keeps getting on base at the same rate, book him at least through age 32 as suggested in the Seth's article, probably a year or two more

If he keeps it up, you could be looking at double that to lock him up to something similar in a year, but I agree - I don't care about the Twins' money and I think they'll keep him one way or another - if he can prove himself again next year.

for 6 years you are looking at more money then that.  try:

2015:  1 Million

2016:  6 Million

2017:  10 Million

2018:   14 Million

2019:   17 Million

2020:   17 Million

Those numbers are more in line with the current market and this totals 65 million.  Seager gets 100 Million for 7 seasons so we add another 17 million and turn the 1 million into 17 million because Seager is one season closer to free agency = 98 million.  If you want to go for a home town discount you could see about shaving 3-5 million from this scenario.  But I don't see Dozier giving up too much.  If Dozier was willing to sign a 6 year extension for under 60,000,000 then we should jump on it. 

I think it's very team friendly - it reminds me a little of the contract extension that Denard Span signed with the Twins.

The added benefit of a team friendly contract is that it is also a more appealing trade chip.

The Twins would be fortunate if Dozier signed it, because if he's good for the length of it, he'd make more in Arb, and more in that 1st FA year. I don't think the Twins would want to have him under contract for much longer than this, though...

I think Dozier might politely decline that offer this year, though.

I'm probably in the "wait a year" camp, too, but I wouldn't strongly object to an effort to lock him up now.

However, if I'm structuring the deal from the club perspective, I might front-load the contract more. The money is available this year and next to "overpay" a bit, in return for dropping the rate for the final 2-3 years of the deal. That would potentially make Dozier a more valuable asset in event you're looking to move him in order to make room for Polanco, Gordon, et al., by 2017-18.

He is projected for a 2.9 WAR (steamer) next year which is between his last two seasons.

If he were to continue to be a 3 WAR player through his arbitration seasons, what would he earn in arbitration? I am not sure, but I think the answer to yes or no can be found by studying that progression. The Twins say no unless they get a significant savings in the above deal compared to arbitration.

If I am the Twins, I do say no to buying that first year of free agency at age 33. Instead, they still have the option of tendering. The 5/33 contract is much easier to trade. It is going to be difficult to trade a contract where half of its value is in the age 32-33 seasons.

Assuming he doesn't suffer a major injury, Dozier would definitely make more on a FA contract than any extension offered this offseason. The value of the contract in a trade is worth considering.

It is very close for me.  I love his defense, but unless he grows his offense he will become a liability.  Yes, he did well overall, however, look at the second half of the season when pitchers learned to never throw a fastball inside on him.  I find it funny that people get all on the lefties for having to hit the other way, but guys like Dozier who are right handed there is no big push them to hit the other way.  Dozier pulls the ball as much as anyone on the team and he loves the high inside fastball.  I am in the camp wait another year see if he develops and then just do a 5 year for little bit more money if need be.

I wonder... if the Twins REALLY love Polanco, for example, and see him as potentially ready to be a MLB regular 2B as early as 2016 or 2017 at the latest, wouldn't you just go year by year with Dozier? There's still value in trade market for a guy in his arb years and, worst case, you make him a qualifying offer the first time he's FA eligible. Not a terrible outcome if Polanco or someone else really is as good, or better, within a couple years.

It worked out really well for the Twins on the Span deal, not so much with Nick Blackburn - I think those might be the two extremes. To me it boils down to whether Dozier can be reasonably expected to stay healthy and productive for the next 2-3 years. The original post proposal would be totally worth it at that point. 

Had Span not gotten that concussion, I think he might have netted the Twins even more in trade than they got from the Nationals.