Article: Brian Dozier: Powerful Asset

[Willihammer]

This guy is so feast or famine it's crazy.  He was borderline DFA material for 130 games and now he's on an insane binge.

 

Trade him.  I don't care what the end of the year stats say, you can't march a guy out for half the season when he's that putrid and hope he'll eventually binge again.  Some modicum of consistency is absolutely necessary.  

 

One of these times he won't binge for a month to recoup value.  Sell high this offseason.

To be clear, there's no evidence streakiness < consistency, none that anyone here seems to be aware of anyways. We all know you're frustrated by it but that doesn't mean his overall line at the end of the year is any less meaningful than for other players.

 

There are four reasons I'd hesitate to trade Dozier this August or winter:

1. Sano's glove at third

2. Ssano's elbow

3. Polanco's glove at third

4. Polanco's bat

 

If any of those doesn't meet expectations / hopes, then who steps in?

[Mike Sixel]

 

That would be highly valuable, if anyone knows how to draw such a distinction.

 

You almost have to feel that a consistent player is better than a wildly erratic one, but I wonder if you can derive that from his stats.

 

I cannot find any analysis of this on line...maybe I'll suggest it to some of the sites?

[Brock Beauchamp]

 

To be clear, there's no evidence streakiness
There are four reasons I'd hesitate to trade Dozier this August or winter:
1. Sano's glove at third
2. Ssano's elbow
3. Polanco's glove at third
4. Polanco's bat

If any of those doesn't meet expectations / hopes, then who steps in?

Those are definitely concerns but you have to try to make up any difference with the improved catching/pitching you get in return for Dozier.

 

There are always concerns about trading an established player for a prospect (even with nearly surefire moves like Pierzynski to Mauer) but you can't let that get in the way of improving the team as a whole.

[Vanimal46]

 

To be clear, there's no evidence streakiness < consistency, none that anyone here seems to be aware of anyways. We all know you're frustrated by it but that doesn't mean his overall line at the end of the year is any less meaningful than for other players.

There are four reasons I'd hesitate to trade Dozier this August or winter:
1. Sano's glove at third
2. Ssano's elbow
3. Polanco's glove at third
4. Polanco's bat

If any of those doesn't meet expectations / hopes, then who steps in?

What would Sano's glove or elbow have to do with Dozier? Dozier's not playing 3B... 

Polanco there's a real concern since he'd be the backup option. Probably Beresford or someone else is signed to step in. 

[Dozier's Glorious Hair]

 

This guy is so feast or famine it's crazy.  He was borderline DFA material for 130 games and now he's on an insane binge.

 

Trade him.  I don't care what the end of the year stats say, you can't march a guy out for half the season when he's that putrid and hope he'll eventually binge again.  Some modicum of consistency is absolutely necessary.  

 

One of these times he won't binge for a month to recoup value.  Sell high this offseason.

 

If consistency (as you define it) is so necessary, then why would any other team want him? How is it possible to "sell high" on a guy who is only good one month a year (and who won't even have that good month "one of these times")? It seems like the return for that guy would be pretty minimal.

[BD57]

Good discussion article.

 

Dozier is a "better than contender average 2B" right now (one of the few the Twins have).  

 

Even if you get a true #1 in return, he pitches once every 5 days, Dozier plays all 5 (more often than not) - you're giving up a lot the other 4 to get that one day with the #1.

 

 

 

 

[Mike Sixel]

 

If consistency (as you define it) is so necessary, then why would any other team want him? How is it possible to "sell high" on a guy who is only good one month a year (and who won't even have that good month "one of these times")? It seems like the return for that guy would be pretty minimal.

 

Well, different people value different things differently, as it were. We also don't know if consistency is more important or not. I'd like to know....but we don't have that data available as far as I know.

 

But, I think your point is, "if he's not that good, he's not that valuable", and I agree with that equation (though I do think Dozier is good...).

[Mike Sixel]

 

Good discussion article.

 

Dozier is a "better than contender average 2B" right now (one of the few the Twins have).  

 

Even if you get a true #1 in return, he pitches once every 5 days, Dozier plays all 5 (more often than not) - you're giving up a lot the other 4 to get that one day with the #1.

 

but you are also freeing up that spot for Polanco (if you are a believer)...but yes, most of the time and every day player is more valuable (and safer) than a SP. But, if you want to get a very good to great SP, trading every day talent is one possible way.

[Willihammer]

What would Sano's glove or elbow have to do with Dozier? Dozier's not playing 3B... 

 

Polanco there's a real concern since he'd be the backup option. Probably Beresford or someone else is signed to step in.

Right, if Dozier is on the team then Polanco would be plan B at third, no? Otherwise a no-upside futility player is getting regular starts in the event one of those 4 things doesn't pan out, which I would like to avoid.

 

Obviously if someone blows you away with an offer for a C or P, pull the trigger amd cross your fingers. As with any other player on the team.

Edited August 15, 2016 by Willihammer

[goulik]

Start the discussion offering Brian Dozier for SF Giants AA Prospect Tyler Beede plus a low A prospect. See if you can work from there to offering other pieces to also get Aramis Garcia. I am not sure if they would take Ervin Santana though Santana has outperformed both Peavey and Cain this year so you would probably need someone else to sweeten the pot for Garcia...

[goulik]

Wait, I forgot to throw in the obligatory Plouffe part of the trade...

[gheggs42]

 

Start the discussion offering Brian Dozier for SF Giants AA Prospect Tyler Beede plus a low A prospect. See if you can work from there to offering other pieces to also get Aramis Garcia. I am not sure if they would take Ervin Santana though Santana has outperformed both Peavey and Cain this year so you would probably need someone else to sweeten the pot for Garcia...

I think Dozier is worth more than Beede and Garcia IMO

[Willihammer]

Those are definitely concerns but you have to try to make up any difference with the improved catching/pitching you get in return for Dozier.

 

There are always concerns about trading an established player for a prospect (even with nearly surefire moves like Pierzynski to Mauer) but you can't let that get in the way of improving the team as a whole.

Sano's 3B glove is a helluva a lot more questionable than Mauer's C glove was. Its borderline speculative that Sano will be playing anywhere on the infield in another year IMO. Add in a hopelessly small sample size with everything for Polanco and there is a lot of unknown going on.

 

We have Dozier for 2 years still. If it were 1 maybe I'd feel more pressed but at this point it seems holding him until at least next year's July deadline seems like it could help clarify the picture while costing how much in trade value? Probably not much.

[Brock Beauchamp]

What a crazy split. I knew the AL had several good 2B but this is ridiculous.

 

Brian Dozier has 3.7 fWAR. That's only good for sixth-highest in the AL.

 

In the NL, it's good for second best.

[goulik]

Sano's 3B glove is a helluva a lot more questionable than Mauer's C glove was. Its borderline speculative that Sano will be playing anywhere on the infield in another year IMO. Add in a hopelessly small sample size with everything for Polanco and there is a lot of unknown going on.We have Dozier for 2 years still. If it were 1 maybe I'd feel more pressed but at this point it seems holding him until at least next year's July deadline seems like it could help clarify the picture while costing how much in trade value? Probably not much.

But of course we still have Plouffe. If your worried about the future of 3B, the better answer is to hold on to Plouffe who has proven himself there. Polanco is speculative on whether that is a place for him as is SS. Polanco is a second baseman.

[mazeville]

 

If consistency (as you define it) is so necessary, then why would any other team want him? How is it possible to "sell high" on a guy who is only good one month a year (and who won't even have that good month "one of these times")? It seems like the return for that guy would be pretty minimal.

 

I agree that if he's a problem because of his inconsistency then other teams might not want him.

 

But I believe he's shown enough for long enough to warrant a strong return on a trade. He's been a consistent performer overall, just inconsistent within the years from one year to the next. I think he could definitely net the team a pretty good haul -- far better than anything the Twins have done in years.

 

Ultimately, the Twins don't have to make the trade. But if they want to shore up multiple positions while trading from an area of strength, they should definitely do it. This isn't a "dump Dozier" situation and anybody who thinks it should be is silly.

[Jham]

 

Good discussion article.

 

Dozier is a "better than contender average 2B" right now (one of the few the Twins have).  

 

Even if you get a true #1 in return, he pitches once every 5 days, Dozier plays all 5 (more often than not) - you're giving up a lot the other 4 to get that one day with the #1.

 

If Dozier is an 8/10 on a fictional player scale,* Polanco is a 6/10, our starters 2-5 are all maybe 5/10** and we can obtain a pitcher who is an 8/10*** we've just gone +1, a 10% gain on that transaction.  

* Fictional player scale already adjusted for differences in position.

** Assuming practically all starting pitchers provide decent team value, less of a guarantee these days especially with this team.

*** an 8 for an 8 representing a perfectly fair trade.

 

[Nick Nelson]

 

This guy is so feast or famine it's crazy.  He was borderline DFA material for 130 games and now he's on an insane binge.

 

Trade him.  I don't care what the end of the year stats say, you can't march a guy out for half the season when he's that putrid and hope he'll eventually binge again.  Some modicum of consistency is absolutely necessary.  

 

One of these times he won't binge for a month to recoup value.  Sell high this offseason.

On the flip side, maybe one of these times he won't slump horribly for a month or two, and he'll win an MVP award. His overall trend is upward, not downward. Dozier's power keeps growing while his strikeouts shrink... 

[Willihammer]

But of course we still have Plouffe. If your worried about the future of 3B, the better answer is to hold on to Plouffe who has proven himself there. Polanco is speculative on whether that is a place for him as is SS. Polanco is a second baseman.

I think you're probably right but I'd like to give him a longer look personally. It might be unlikely he sticks at SS but its not like we'd miss Escobar's production to audition him. Dozier is a different story. Edited August 15, 2016 by Willihammer

[Nick Nelson]

Let me put this out there, since some people seem skeptical of the return for Dozier.

 

Last year during the season the Tigers traded Yoenis Cespedes for Michael Fulmer. Cespedes had lesser numbers than Dozier (as an OF not a 2B), was making $10.5M, and was two months away from free agency.

 

Fulmer is, of course, now a RotY front-runner in Detroit's rotation.

 

Do people really think that Dozier, an elite power-hitting 2B with an excellent clubhouse rep and 2 cheap remaining years of team control, is not vastly more valuable as a trade chip than Cespedes? 

[Mike Sixel]

 

Let me put this out there, since some people seem skeptical of the return for Dozier.

 

Last year during the season the Tigers traded Yoenis Cespedes for Michael Fulmer. Cespedes had lesser numbers than Dozier (as an OF not a 2B), was making $10.5M, and was two months away from free agency.

 

Fulmer is, of course, now a RotY front-runner in Detroit's rotation.

 

Do people really think that Dozier, an elite power-hitting 2B with an excellent clubhouse rep and 2 cheap remaining years of team control, is not vastly more valuable as a trade chip than Cespedes? 

 

good point, of course, the next GM has to listen to the right scouts, and get an actual good pitcher in return...

[Dozier's Glorious Hair]

 

I agree that if he's a problem because of his inconsistency then other teams might not want him.

 

But I believe he's shown enough for long enough to warrant a strong return on a trade. He's been a consistent performer overall, just inconsistent within the years from one year to the next. I think he could definitely net the team a pretty good haul -- far better than anything the Twins have done in years.

 

Ultimately, the Twins don't have to make the trade. But if they want to shore up multiple positions while trading from an area of strength, they should definitely do it. This isn't a "dump Dozier" situation and anybody who thinks it should be is silly.

 

Yeah, I'm good with trading Dozier, provided the return is substantial (the 2016 equivalent of Liriano, Nathan, and Bonser would suit me fine).

[mazeville]

 

To be clear, there's no evidence streakiness < consistency, none that anyone here seems to be aware of anyways. We all know you're frustrated by it but that doesn't mean his overall line at the end of the year is any less meaningful than for other players.

There are four reasons I'd hesitate to trade Dozier this August or winter:
1. Sano's glove at third
2. Ssano's elbow
3. Polanco's glove at third
4. Polanco's bat

If any of those doesn't meet expectations / hopes, then who steps in?

 

Everything is a risk in sports. If the GM can't handle it, he or she should go into knitting. 

[Brock Beauchamp]

 

Let me put this out there, since some people seem skeptical of the return for Dozier.

 

Last year during the season the Tigers traded Yoenis Cespedes for Michael Fulmer. Cespedes had lesser numbers than Dozier (as an OF not a 2B), was making $10.5M, and was two months away from free agency.

 

Fulmer is, of course, now a RotY front-runner in Detroit's rotation.

 

Do people really think that Dozier, an elite power-hitting 2B with an excellent clubhouse rep and 2 cheap remaining years of team control, is not vastly more valuable as a trade chip than Cespedes? 

Yep. Short of demanding a top five prospect, the Twins can/should write their own ticket when it comes to Dozier's price tag.

 

(and they might even be able to swing a top five guy if they bundle in something with Dozier)

 

If you can't get elite talent in return, don't trade him. It's an easy decision.

[Vanimal46]

 

Sano's 3B glove is a helluva a lot more questionable than Mauer's C glove was. Its borderline speculative that Sano will be playing anywhere on the infield in another year IMO. Add in a hopelessly small sample size with everything for Polanco and there is a lot of unknown going on.

We have Dozier for 2 years still. If it were 1 maybe I'd feel more pressed but at this point it seems holding him until at least next year's July deadline seems like it could help clarify the picture while costing how much in trade value? Probably not much.

It could cost plenty in trade value if he regresses back to being a .200 hitter for 2-3 months to start the season. Much like Nunez, I don't think there's going to be a better time to sell than this winter after coming off a career high in HRs. 

[mazeville]

 

Right, if Dozier is on the team then Polanco would be plan B at third, no? Otherwise a no-upside futility player is getting regular starts in the event one of those 4 things doesn't pan out, which I would like to avoid.

Obviously if someone blows you away with an offer for a C or P, pull the trigger amd cross your fingers. As with any other player on the team.

Polanco is the Plan B at third if Dozier is on the team.

 

But as we've been reminded almost constantly in the Trevor Plouffe situation, you can literally find adequate third basemen growing on trees. (Plouffe going into the year was a better than average third baseman and could not fetch squat on the trade market; Chicago got Todd Frazier for pennies on the dollar ...).

 

You can get a third baseman if Sano doesn't work out at third. You can use Beresford or Santana if Polanco doesn't work out at second. But you only get one shot to trade a guy at peak value. Dozier is at peak value. The Twins are not likely to contend before he hits free agency, and even if they are they have more needs than just a power hitting second baseman.

 

You definitely explore the trade market.

[Mike Sixel]

In looking at the top prospect lists.....not sure what team would want Dozier that has an elite SP available, frankly.

[stringer bell]

 

Career numbers:

 

Jeff Kent: .290/.356/.500
Dan Uggla: .241/.336/.447

 

Brian Dozier: .244/.319/.432

 

Become Dan Uggla?  He is Dan Uggla practically

 

Dozier has highs and lows.  He currently is on a high.  I hope that he does not cool off, so the Twins will sell high on him.   His glove is getting worse and worse and the first month he was horrid with the bat.  If he can bring back a top of the rotation arm this off-season, it will be crazy not to do it.  Got to remember, he has been part of the problem, time to go.

You're missing the point. Both Uggla and Kent were hitters with plus power, especially for the middle infield. Kent was a good player until his early thirties and became a borderline Hall of Famer because he mashed well into his thirties. Uggla fell off a cliff. With Dozier also being a "power for his position" guy, I've wondered if he might fall off the map if he couldn't catch up with a good fastball or if he could adjust as Kent did. I do lean toward the sustained fine performance for Dozier, maybe not at the level of Kent, but certainly above average.

 

Kent's top OPS+ season through the age of 29 (Dozier's age now) was 111 in less than full-time play. Starting in 1998 (age 30) he was an All-Star five times for three different teams with an OPS+ of 119 or better for each year for 10 years. I'd venture to guess that Dozier's OPS+ today is superior to Kent's at age 29, but I'm not that good at math to say for sure.

 

 

[troyhobbs]

 

First, Dozier is hardly aging - he is in the prime of his career.  Second, I don't quite understand the singular focus on a youth movement.  I am pretty sure this is what got Ryan fired - his reluctance to deal prospects for proven major league talent.   

 

The whole youth movement perspective assumes that every asset the team has will pan out.  I really like Polanco - but we have no idea if he will ever approach the productivity of Dozier.  I would rather bank on a commodity that has proven he can succeed at the major league level - particularly one with such a favorable contract than hope that Polanco pans out.  Sure you have to rely on youth and develop from within to a certain extent - but you also need to be willing to part with some of those assets to build a more well rounded and experienced team.  This year has proven that you can't put all your eggs in the youth movement basket.

What got Ryan fired was signing bad contracts and extending crappy veterans to supplement the other crappy veterans already on the roster and never fully commiting to a youth movement. If the Twins were fighting for 2nd place in the division and not 10 games back from 2nd to last in the division then, sure, let's build around Dozier.  I don't fully endorse a youth movement per say either, just that he should be traded for youth or MLB talent at a position of greater need since Polanco appears to be just fine for a club about to lose 100 games.

[TheLeviathan]

 

On the flip side, maybe one of these times he won't slump horribly for a month or two, and he'll win an MVP award. His overall trend is upward, not downward. Dozier's power keeps growing while his strikeouts shrink... 

 

That's a fair point, I just think given his age this is less likely than my scenario.  But worth pointing out.

 

It's hard to really peg Dozier with any kind of trend, which for me is part of the problem.  I don't know what to count on him for.