Article: Ten To Extend: A Five-Part Series (Part 1)

[Brock Beauchamp]

Escobar is in a very different position, though... His increase in performance directly coincided with an increase in playing time in two consecutive years.

 

With that said, I do not expect Escobar to come anywhere near an .800 OPS in a full-time role. I'd be thrilled with .750, very happy with .730.

 

And he shouldn't be in a leadoff role, not with that OBP... But the Twins have some pretty bad leadoff options right now.

[Brock Beauchamp]

 

The question isn't, is Polanco a better hitter than Dozier today.

Actually, that was the exact statement I disputed.

[alarp33]

 

Escobar is in a very different position, though... His increase in performance directly coincided with an increase in playing time in two consecutive years.

 

With that said, I do not expect Escobar to come anywhere near an .800 OPS in a full-time role. I'd be thrilled with .750, very happy with .730.

 

And he shouldn't be in a leadoff role, not with that OBP... But the Twins have some pretty bad leadoff options right now.

 

And as for Dozier's final 3 months? Should we pretend that didn't happen? 

 

As for Dozier vs Polanco, I was more so arguing this; 

 

"Sell high" should only be referenced if at least one of the following criteria is met:

1. The team has no expectation of winning enough baseball games to matter

2. The team has a viable replacement at the position who can step in and won't sacrifice (multiple) wins in the short-term"

 

Not your argument about the better hitter today.  I think Polanco could be a nearly comparable player as soon as mid season, and if you can get a high end bullpen piece and prospect for Dozier, you think long and hard about it (The Twins won't, its not their way... but I would)

[Brock Beauchamp]

And as for Dozier's final 3 months? Should we pretend that didn't happen?

*looks around*

 

Nope, I didn't say anything of the sort but I'm not terribly worried about Dozier. He could regress but I think it's more likely he continues posting the ~.750-ish OPS he has been posting since he adjusted his approach/swing 1900 plate appearances ago.

 

As for Dozier vs Polanco, I was more so arguing this; 

 

"Sell high" should only be referenced if at least one of the following criteria is met:

 

1. The team has no expectation of winning enough baseball games to matter

 

2. The team has a viable replacement at the position who can step in and won't sacrifice (multiple) wins in the short-term"

 

Not your argument about the better hitter today.  I think Polanco could be a nearly comparable player as soon as mid season, and if you can get a high end bullpen piece and prospect for Dozier, you think long and hard about it (The Twins won't, its not their way... but I would)

No one should be off the table if the return improves the team. It's unlikely the team will be improved by trading Brian Dozier. Maybe this July, that changes... Maybe it changes next November. Dunno, but I see little reason to force the issue today. Right now, second base is one of the few positions on the team with an above-average player and few question marks.

[Vanimal46]

If anything, sell high on Polanco this year. He still has 1 (maybe 2?) option years left, and there's still the belief glimmer of hope that he could stick at SS in the future. From everything I've read about him that's not going to happen, and he'll end up at 2B. Why not consider trading Polanco before the dust settles on his inevitable position he'll play in the majors, and before he runs out of option years?

[alarp33]

 

If anything, sell high on Polanco this year. He still has 1 (maybe 2?) option years left, and there's still the belief glimmer of hope that he could stick at SS in the future. From everything I've read about him that's not going to happen, and he'll end up at 2B. Why not consider trading Polanco before the dust settles on his inevitable position he'll play in the majors, and before he runs out of option years?

 

1- Are you assuming he doesn't end up at 3b? 

2- If you believe he will be at least as good of 2b as Dozier, I'm not sure why you would trade him as he's 6 years younger and will be significantly cheaper for awhile.  He also fits this lineup better as its presently constructed (say, if they plan on Plouffe being the 3b for the next few years at least).  Lots of RH bats

3- It's probably likely Dozier would have more value if you are going to trade him this year.  

 

[Vanimal46]

 

1- Are you assuming he doesn't end up at 3b? 

2- If you believe he will be at least as good of 2b as Dozier, I'm not sure why you would trade him as he's 6 years younger and will be significantly cheaper for awhile.  He also fits this lineup better as its presently constructed (say, if they plan on Plouffe being the 3b for the next few years at least).  Lots of RH bats

3- It's probably likely Dozier would have more value if you are going to trade him this year.  

1 - Yep. That would be breaking news if Polanco ends up at 3B. They talked about him getting playing time there last year, and never happened. Not sure if that's going to change, or if they're going to keep trying him at SS in AAA. I however, would like that to happen so he can play the position in the unfortunate case that Plouffe lands on the 15 day DL. 

2 - The reasons you brought up are the exact reasons why I would trade Polanco, as those are good selling points (significantly cheaper, more years of control) compared to Dozier.

3- I don't know who has the higher value between Dozier and Polanco. Frankly it depends on the trade the Twins are trying to make. If the Twins are trading Dozier, it's likely that they're receiving prospects (probably highly regarded young prospects in A or AA) If the Twins are trading Polanco, it's likely they're receiving a player that's already in the MLB. 

[tobi0040]

 

Escobar is 2 years younger than Dozier.  Career stats mean zero when you comparing a player in his prime and one who entering his prime.  Escobar's .754 was on the rising part of his bell curve, while Dozier's .751 at best at the top of the curve, or maybe even the decline.   So you got to try to predict who will be better in 2016 and beyond.  The past is the past, and you can use it to try to build a career curve.

 

I am not willing to say the 800 AB's Escobar had prior to last year mean absolutely nothing.  Dozier has more of a track record.  You think he will decline.  He very well may.  But given we are going off one year, I am not convinced Escobar had a bit of an outlier last year.

[diehardtwinsfan]

I'm not sold on Polanco yet, and I don't think Dozier is going to fall off the face of the earth.  Polanco has options, and I'd like to see if he's figured it out in AAA before I hand him an MLB job..  Just my two cents there.  Now if you get an offer you cannot refuse for Brian, by all means trade him, but understand that this is very likely a setback in 2016 and possibly longer if Polanco flops. 

[Mike Sixel]

It wouldn't be the first time, Vanimal, that the Twins played a player at a position in the majors they NEVER ONCE used him at in the minors, which, frankly, is amazingly bad strategy, imo.

[mikelink45]

These are not vital parts of the teams future and are under contract for what might be their most valuable years.  The Twins are not adept at trading and we would just sit on them players until they move themselves.  Lets save the extension money for the new wave that is arriving in the dugout. 

Edited March 4, 2016 by mikelink45

[Jeremy Nygaard]

This is Polanco's last option year.

 

I hope he plays around the diamond this year in AAA. I don't know if I said it in this thread or a different one, but Polanco is a player that I think could have a lot of success in a Josh Harrison-type role. And he's one injury away from bring a regular infielder at 2B, SS and (I even feel) 3B.

[Brock Beauchamp]

This is Polanco's last option year.

 

I hope he plays around the diamond this year in AAA. I don't know if I said it in this thread or a different one, but Polanco is a player that I think could have a lot of success in a Josh Harrison-type role. And he's one injury away from bring a regular infielder at 2B, SS and (I even feel) 3B.

This is what I'd like to see happen with Polanco.

 

Unless a team out there really wants him and offers big value. Then I may trade the guy.

[spinowner]

 

"Sell high" should only be referenced if at least one of the following criteria is met:

 

1. The team has no expectation of winning enough baseball games to matter

 

2. The team has a viable replacement at the position who can step in and won't sacrifice (multiple) wins in the short-term

 

Neither applies to the 2016 Twins. Maybe in July of this season, that changes and we all feel more comfortable about Polanco's defense and bat. But right now, not so much.

 

Over the past two seasons, Brian Dozier has posted a .757 OPS. Jorge Polanco hasn't posted a number that high since he was in Ft. Myers.

I'll add 3.: There is another GM willing to buy high.

The Ben Revere trade was a good example. 1: Everyone knew we wouldn't win much in 2013. 2: We had Aaron Hicks. I would guess Ryan knew he wasn't quite ready but hoped he could survive. And 3: the Phillies were willing to give a good pitching prospect (May) plus throw in Worley.

In reality I don't think this type of trade happens very often unless the buying team either is desperate, is in a pennant race or misjudges the player being sold high.