Jump to content
Twins Daily
  • Create Account
  • Twins News & Analysis

    Who Says No? Brian Dozier Edition


    Seth Stohs

    Big money is being spent around baseball. Players are signing long-term deals before free agency. There are are a couple of Twins players who would/could be looking to gain some financial security. In this series, I’ll review a Twins player, his numbers, his contract status and his earnings potential. I’ll put out a contract that I would consider fair and ask Twins Daily’s readers, “Who Says No?” We’ll start with Brian Dozier.

    Image courtesy of Joy R Absalon, USA Today

    Twins Video

    Clearly there is some money to spend in baseball right now. National TV revenues are crazy, so the players should cash in. That said, teams still need to make sound business decisions.

    The Kyle Seager 7-year, $100 million contract got me thinking. He is arbitration eligible for the first time this year after making $540,000 in his final year of serfdom. So the Mariners are buying out the 2014 All-Star for three years of arbitration, plus four years of free agency. There is money to be spent, so should the Twins spend it?

    Brian Dozier had a very good 2014 season, his age-27 season. He hit .242/.345/.416 (.742) with 33 doubles, a triple, 23 home runs, 71 RBI and 112 runs scored. He also stole 21 bases. He also played very good defense at second base. If he is able to continue posting those types of numbers, he is going to start making a lot of money in 2016 when he is playing under his first year of arbitration.

    Understandably, he would want to work under some sort of guarantee, so a long-term contract might make a lot of sense for him. The Twins would certainly like to lock up a guy who they consider a quality player and a leader in the clubhouse. Of course, such a contract would have to make sense for both sides.

    So, if Dozier were to put up just the same numbers for the next four or five years, what would he make? Here are some estimates:

    • 2015 (age 28): Not yet arbitration-eligible, Dozier will make between $550,000 and $600,000.
    • 2016 (age 29): 1st year arbitration-eligible, Dozier would likely jump up to about $5 million.
    • 2017 (age 30): 2nd year arbitration-eligible, Dozier would likely jump to about $8-10 million.
    • 2018 (age 31): 3rd year arbitration-eligible, Dozier would likely jump to $10-12 million.
    • 2019 (age 32): He would be a free agent.

    Those estimates are again assuming that he just puts up similar numbers to what he did in 2014. Of course, if he continues to improve, those numbers could go up a little. The other side that is if he gets hurt or declines, he could be a non-tender candidate in a couple of years. That’s what makes these long-term contracts risky for both sides.

    I included the season and age just because those are likely part of the discussion and part of the equation and thought process for such decisions as well. Other factors that come into play include the character of the player, some intangibles, and how will that player handle the security? That’s a big one. Will he sit back and quit working after signing the guaranteed contract, or will he use the security to really push himself to greatness? There’s no way to know, but those thoughts have to run through the collective mind of a front office.

    WHO WOULD SAY NO?

    So, what I’ve done is put together a contract offer for the Twins front office and for Brian Dozier and his agent to consider (hypothetically). My question today for the Twins Daily audience is, Who Says No?

    • 2015: $1 million.
    • 2016: $5 million
    • 2017: $7 million
    • 2018: $9 million
    • 2019: $11 million
    • 2020: $12 million
    • 6 year, $45 million contract through his age 33 season.

    So, the question is there for discussion… Who says No? Or do they both say Yes?

    Follow Twins Daily For Minnesota Twins News & Analysis

    Recent Twins Articles

    Recent Twins Videos

    Twins Top Prospects

    Marek Houston

    Cedar Rapids Kernels - A+, SS
    The 22-year-old went 2-for-5 on Friday night, his fourth straight multi-hit game. Heading into the week, he was hitting .246/.328/.404 (.732). Four games later, he is hitting .303/.361/.447 (.808).

    User Feedback

    Recommended Comments



    Featured Comments

    This plus 100. They have him for the years they want with no obligation. Why give that away?

     

    1) To possibly save upwards of ~$25M in payroll over six years to utilize more productively elsewhere.

    2) To smooth out payroll growth more predictably for future anticipated needs (through frontloading, backloading or steadyloading).

    3) To make the possible acquisition of Dozier by another team more attractive and/or affordable than said team going out on the ever-increasing costs in the FA market- thus yielding a higher level return in talent to the Twins.

     

    In the case of Dozier, it's a close call, to be sure, but very bright minds are making just these kinds of deals, even for the likes of Gyorko, let alone Seager.  They must know something about the financial trends in baseball revenues that makes these deals justifiable. For the Twins not to at least consider a move like this, would mean that they forsee that a Blackburn-esque outcome for Dozier is still a possibility- or that they're convinced that, in fairly short order, Polanco and Santana are going to take both of the MI jobs away from any and all comers, including Dozier. If that's the case, then this entire thread is moot.

    1) To possibly save upwards of ~$25M in payroll over six years to utilize more productively elsewhere.

    2) To smooth out payroll growth more predictably for future anticipated needs (through frontloading, backloading or steadyloading).

    3) To make the possible acquisition of Dozier by another team more attractive and/or affordable than said team going out on the ever-increasing costs in the FA market- thus yielding a higher level return in talent to the Twins.

     

    In the case of Dozier, it's a close call, to be sure, but very bright minds are making just these kinds of deals, even for the likes of Gyorko, let alone Seager. They must know something about the financial trends in baseball revenues that makes these deals justifiable. For the Twins not to at least consider a move like this, would mean that they forsee that a Blackburn-esque outcome for Dozier is still a possibility- or that they're convinced that, in fairly short order, Polanco and Santana are going to take both of the MI jobs away from any and all comers, including Dozier. If that's the case, then this entire thread is moot.

    That is my point. They don't need or want him for 6 more years, physically or financially.

    The thing about Dozier is that he's had half a great season, one and a half ok/good seasons, and half a season where he didn't do anything that made him remotely resemble a passable major leaguer on a halfway decent team.  And he's already 27.  In other words, he looks like your fairly high floor, fairly low ceiling type of player that TR has been good at finding in recent years.

     

    If it was up to me, I'd look for good seasons from Santana and Polanco.  If you get the results you're looking for from them, then try to move Dozier at the deadline.  With Dozier being at a relatively advanced age during his breakout half-season, and having posted streaky results on either side of that half-season, it's really difficult for me to get too jazzed about his place in future Twins teams.

     

    It'd be nice to see if TR can turn Dozier into another Liriano/Boof/Nathan kind of deal in the relatively near future IMO.

    The thing about Dozier is that he's had half a great season, one and a half ok/good seasons, and half a season where he didn't do anything that made him remotely resemble a passable major leaguer on a halfway decent team. And he's already 27.

    2009 - Drafted and rookie ball

    2010 - Low-A and High-A

    2011 - High-A, AA and AFL

    2012 - MLB and AAA

    2013 - MLB and second half breakout

     

    Dozier was drafted as an 8th rounder, but forced a fast track. He broke out in his second MLB year after making the jump from AA for his rookie year. I don't understand faulting him for any of that. He's not some journeyman minor-leaguer who finally broke out.

     

    If Dozier is too old for an extension, that's practically saying don't ever extend a college draftee. I think Dozier is being consistently undervalued in this thread.

    Gyorko was a college draftee. Seager was a college draftee. Dozier may have been on a fast track, but he also had the full track. Seager and Gyorko played A Ball the summer they were drafted. On the short track, both had their first full season in the majors at 24. Dozier was 26. The Twins get two more years of control through the aging curve.

    And that makes all the difference in the world in this situation.  Just because people are not advocating for an extension doesn't mean we don't value him as a ballplayer.  At this point, he is probably my favorite Twin but the circumstances are such that the Twins just don't have to do it.

    . I think Dozier is being consistently undervalued in this thread.

     

    Agreed.  For at least the next six to eight years, he should have pop.  For at least the next four or five years he should provide plus defense and speed on the bases.  Even if his average never comes around to .270-.280 or so that is a plus 2B.

    Agreed.  For at least the next six to eight years, he should have pop.  For at least the next four or five years he should provide plus defense and speed on the bases.  Even if his average never comes around to .270-.280 or so that is a plus 2B.

    I'm not sure he's being underrated as much as people are not sure why you guarantee money to someone when you can get the bulk of that above average production without the contract.

    1) To possibly save upwards of ~$25M in payroll over six years to utilize more productively elsewhere.

    2) To smooth out payroll growth more predictably for future anticipated needs (through frontloading, backloading or steadyloading).

    3) To make the possible acquisition of Dozier by another team more attractive and/or affordable than said team going out on the ever-increasing costs in the FA market- thus yielding a higher level return in talent to the Twins.

     

    In the case of Dozier, it's a close call, to be sure, but very bright minds are making just these kinds of deals, even for the likes of Gyorko, let alone Seager.  They must know something about the financial trends in baseball revenues that makes these deals justifiable. For the Twins not to at least consider a move like this, would mean that they forsee that a Blackburn-esque outcome for Dozier is still a possibility- or that they're convinced that, in fairly short order, Polanco and Santana are going to take both of the MI jobs away from any and all comers, including Dozier. If that's the case, then this entire thread is moot.

     

    1) That is the most optimal situation.  The least optimal, by contrast, is you just lost 50M in available salary over 6 years.  

    2) Arbitration growth is relatively steady already

    3) This also assumes Dozier is a stud into his 30s.

     

    Chief's right, handing guaranteed contracts around when you don't have to is precisely what got us Blackburn's contract.  Is Dozier likely a better player?  Sure.  That doesn't make the thinking any less problematic.

     

    Let him earn what he earns in arbitration and worry about the FA years when you have to.  You're putting the cart a mile before the horse to sign him now.

    I keep hearing about Dozier's defense... if you believe in defensive metrics at all, his defense is actually below average.

    I assume you're citing UZR here, which has him at -0.7 and -4.4 the last two years. People who "believe in defensive metrics at all" also know UZR requires 3 years of data to start becoming reliable and those numbers above can hardly be used to say he's "below average".

     

    Over those same 2 years, DRS has him at +9 and 0.

     

    Sorry, but that statement is hardly accurate.

    What would the A's do with Dozier and Plouffe?

    The real question is... What would the Cardinals do?

     

    They gave a 28 year old Matt Carpenter a six-year extension after 2 seasons. They've also given multi-year extensions to guys with 2 to 3 years of service time in recent years to at least Yadi, Wainwright, J Garcia and Craig. These deals all contain club options at the end for what would have been free agent years.

     

    Jon Jay, Bourjos and Decalso are going year-to-year through arb without a locked in extension.

     

    They'll have similar decisions to make shortly for Wacha, Adams, Wong, Rosenthal, Lynn, etc.

     

    Do Dozier and Plouffe fit closer to the first group that has gotten extensions or the second group that hasn't?

    The real question is... What would the Cardinals do?

    They gave a 28 year old Matt Carpenter a six-year extension after 2 seasons. They've also given multi-year extensions to guys with 2 to 3 years of service time in recent years to at least Yadi, Wainwright, J Garcia and Craig. These deals all contain club options at the end for what would have been free agent years.

    Jon Jay, Bourjos and Decalso are going year-to-year through arb without a locked in extension.

    They'll have similar decisions to make shortly for Wacha, Adams, Wong, Rosenthal, Lynn, etc.

    Do Dozier and Plouffe fit closer to the first group that has gotten extensions or the second group that hasn't?

    In my argument I almost said that if either put up san OPS+ like Carpenter or Donaldson it would be a different question. They both also started career at 26 but put up an OPS+ in the 140s in their second year. There is a whole bunch of room for decline from that level.

    Descalso is a non-tender candidate  - I think Dozier is closer to the first group than the 2nd. Plouffe I think is closer to the 2nd than the first. Don't know why I feel that way, it's unfairly rooted in a gut feeling. Both are better in my opinion than the 2nd group.

     

    I'd rank Dozier above Allen Craig, for sure.

     

    I'd rank Plouffe above everyone in group 2, for sure. Outside of that, until they actually play the games, it's anyone's guess how they will play next year and the following years...




    Create an account or sign in to comment

    You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

    Create an account

    Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

    Register a new account

    Sign in

    Already have an account? Sign in here.

    Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...