Most people are on board that a 42 home run 2nd baseman is worth more than a good prospect with a good minor league history but no major league history.    Especially when the Dodgers are pitching rich and 2nd baseman weak.    I don't think competition really enters into the equation much.   They need.  We have.    So if Dozier is too much to give up for DeLeon straight up what would have to be added to Polanco for Deleon?   I don't know Polanco's splits in the minors but his major league season was .857 OPS against lefties.   Good prospect with good performance thus far in the majors against higher ranked prospect with no real history in the majors.    I like the idea of Santana, Berrios, May, and DeLeon in the rotation.   I would like it better with Dozier still on the team.

 

Most people are on board that a 42 home run 2nd baseman is worth more than a good prospect with a good minor league history but no major league history.    Especially when the Dodgers are pitching rich and 2nd baseman weak.    I don't think competition really enters into the equation much.   They need.  We have.    So if Dozier is too much to give up for DeLeon straight up what would have to be added to Polanco for Deleon?   I don't know Polanco's splits in the minors but his major league season was .857 OPS against lefties.   Good prospect with good performance thus far in the majors against higher ranked prospect with no real history in the majors.    I like the idea of Santana, Berrios, May, and DeLeon in the rotation.   I would like it better with Dozier still on the team.

 

Except now you're giving up (potentially multiple) youthful players or prospects. And as a result you'll looking for a new 2B in a couple years when this core they're trying to build should just be entering its prime.

 

1.) Any blame to Molitor for writing Polanco in at short is misguided. The Twins season was over pretty quickly and the FO wanted to see Polanco play everyday. Since they weren't going to rest Dozier as he pursued a HR record (and built his trade value), that meant SS. Molitor was just following orders as best as he could.

 

2.) I think any assumption that Dozier will be with the Twins is way premature. Trades are all different and it still makes way too much sense for the Dodgers to trade for Dozier. They have a big hole and other options are not amazing: the free agents are lackluster options highlighted by Stephen Drew; Ian Kinsler is old and may have a similarly high cost since the Tigers are not rebuilding (plus he has a no trade clause); and other trade targets don't solve the Dodgers problems as neatly as Dozier (and again cost prospects as well). The Twins and Dodgers weren't miles apart and it makes too much sense for the team to compromise in March and find some middle ground.

 

My thoughts too. Until the Dodgers make a different move to bring in a 2B, I'm assuming Brian Dozier is headed there. Now, that could change. But it hasn't up till this point.  Polanco ends up at second.

IMHO quoting offensive numbers for Polanco and EE is not actually missing the point, it is in fact making it! If you need to beef up your SS's creds with batting stats, it's an indication his glove is lacking. As for moving Polanco to third, putting EE at SS and Sano at DH? Sano is still too young and untested on the MLB level at third to be relegated to DH. He won't be a Brooks Robinson, but it's a bat first spot on the field. Moving Polanco over there likely lowers the offense at that spot and the defense is not markedly improved at SS with EE. And of course you can then deal with the Park, Vargas, Mauer issue. Or? We will just have 4 DH style players on the roster? That has a familiar ring to it!

If you do not trade Dozier, you run with Polanco at SS for the first half of the year.  Only issue comes if he cannot handle it, and has to be a super utility player.  Still think there is a chance that Dozier will be traded, but it is not the end of the world if he is not.

Other point is if Twins do well and Dodgers get off to a bad start.  Things can change in a hurry.

Unless we have blocked it from our memories due to PTSD we all remember how much the Nishioka disaster at SS destroyed our team.  A left side of Polanco and Sano is inviting serious run prevention issues.  

 

I'm all about giving Sano run at third, i think he can improve greatly with reps.  But you need a SS next to him that you can rely on and Polanco isn't it.  

Unless we have blocked it from our memories due to PTSD we all remember how much the Nishioka disaster at SS destroyed our team.

 

 

The ideal situation is that Dozier goes somewhere else and Polanco takes his slot. 

 

However, if Dozier stays then the Twins have to put Polanco at SS. Letting Polanco rot in the minors isn't the answer. Will the result be a "disaster"? Not really, but the results on paper may not look great. 

 

Defensive metrics such as Total Zone in particular will look unfavorably upon whoever is at SS even when the ball is bouncing off of the top of Sano's head and not the head of whoever is playing SS. We all can see Dozier's defensive dropoff after Pedro Florimon was no longer standing next to him. Whoever plays next to Sano over the next few years is going to be unfairly rated defensively. Best case is that Sano gets the yips sooner rather than later and shuffles over to DH.

 

And heck, speaking of defensive metrics, Dozier isn't that great either on paper.  We all know he can play 2B adequately regardless.

Edited January 23, 20179 yr by Doomtints

 

Polanco-Nishi.PNG

 

Thanks, thanks a lot....

 

This is like the third article in a row I feel you are trolling points I make to turn into articles Nick.

 

I demand co-authorship credit........

 

(And good article!)

Hah, yeah, just the other day we were talking about the potential damage caused by keeping Dozier and how it creates a defensive domino effect throughout the infield.

 

In no way am I accusing Nick of swiping the idea, just that many of us realize keeping Dozier has some effects that could hinder the team in 2017.

 

Despite Escobar's flaws, I'm far more comfortable with him at short and Polanco at second than I am Polanco at short and Dozier at second.

 

And that's not even bringing up the option of going glove-first at short, either through the minors (Vielma) or picking up a stop-gap solution for a season.

I think we might be getting a little too caught up in defense.  Yes, it's important but bats are still much more important.  The Royals won 95 games (and the WS) two years ago in part because their excellent defenders were hitting.  Last year, their were still a great defense but they didn't hit and were a .500 team.  If the team has to use Polanco at short, so be it.  If he can hit, he won't be a bad player.  And if he can't hit, he'll be benched.

A competent organization moves Sano to 1B and Mauer to the bench. Mauer doesn't want to put in the time in the offseason to build strength and endurance so he's not continually breaking down, well he can save his energy by watching from the bench then.

 

1B Sano

2B Dozier

SS Gordon (by midseason if not earlier)

3B Polanco

 

I think we might be getting a little too caught up in defense.  Yes, it's important but bats are still much more important.  The Royals won 95 games (and the WS) two years ago in part because their excellent defenders were hitting.  Last year, their were still a great defense but they didn't hit and were a .500 team.  If the team has to use Polanco at short, so be it.  If he can hit, he won't be a bad player.  And if he can't hit, he'll be benched.

 

Not sure I understand......are you arguing that if they hit, but played bad defense (i.e., the reverse of last year), they'd be good?

 

I'd argue no, that it takes both run prevention and run scoring....not one or the other (unless you are ridiculously dominant on one side).

 

A competent organization moves Sano to 1B and Mauer to the bench. Mauer doesn't want to put in the time in the offseason to build strength and endurance so he's not continually breaking down, well he can save his energy by watching from the bench then.

1B Sano
2B Dozier
SS Gordon (by midseason if not earlier)
3B Polanco

 

I agree with this, except the part where Mauer is somehow at fault. He was a SUPER TALL catcher, who is wearing down, not out of laziness, but because that's what years of HS football and professional catching has done to his body.

 

If Sano can't play 3rd, I try him at first, but I expect him to be a DH "soon"...

 

Not sure I understand......are you arguing that if they hit, but played bad defense (i.e., the reverse of last year), they'd be good?

 

I'd argue no, that it takes both run prevention and run scoring....not one or the other (unless you are ridiculously dominant on one side).

No, just that we're overly weighing the effect of good defense.  The bat is still far more important. A bad glove, good hitting team is  going to be better than a good glove/bad hitting team.  Ideally, you want both but unless Polanco is a historically bad defender, his effect for a few months won't move the needle much.

I agree with this, except the part where Mauer is somehow at fault. He was a SUPER TALL catcher, who is wearing down, not out of laziness, but because that's what years of HS football and professional catching has done to his body.

 

If Sano can't play 3rd, I try him at first, but I expect him to be a DH "soon"...

In my mind, if he had the drive to match his talent he'd have been one of the best baseball players of all time. There comes a time in every athletes career where they realize they can no longer get by on talent alone, and they're going to have to work at it. He hasn't come to this realization yet, and he never will. His idea of a productive offseason is a little bit of stretching and alot of rest. I've defended him for a long time, but even I can't do it anymore.

 

No, just that we're overly weighing the effect of good defense.  The bat is still far more important. A bad glove, good hitting team is  going to be better than a good glove/bad hitting team.  Ideally, you want both but unless Polanco is a historically bad defender, his effect for a few months won't move the needle much.

 

We blame the pitching but it's only part of run prevention.  Bad defense has a domino effect and getting bad defense from short is especially critical.

 

I would think the last few years would have taught us how crippling that can be.  I mean, we heard last year that Sano's D wasn't going to hurt us and we saw ample evidence to trounce that notion right?  So why are we trotting that same line of reasoning out again?

 

Hah, yeah, just the other day we were talking about the potential damage caused by keeping Dozier and how it creates a defensive domino effect throughout the infield.

 

In no way am I accusing Nick of swiping the idea, just that many of us realize keeping Dozier has some effects that could hinder the team in 2017.

 

Despite Escobar's flaws, I'm far more comfortable with him at short and Polanco at second than I am Polanco at short and Dozier at second.

 

And that's not even bringing up the option of going glove-first at short, either through the minors (Vielma) or picking up a stop-gap solution for a season.

 

Yeah, Nick's a pretty sharp guy.  He'll occasionally latch on to one of the smarter ideas guys like us are trotting out there.  Good for him.....

 

We blame the pitching but it's only part of run prevention.  Bad defense has a domino effect and getting bad defense from short is especially critical.

 

I would think the last few years would have taught us how crippling that can be.  I mean, we heard last year that Sano's D wasn't going to hurt us and we saw ample evidence to trounce that notion right?  So why are we trotting that same line of reasoning out again?

 

How many times did I read "OF defense doesn't matter" last year.....

 

We blame the pitching but it's only part of run prevention.  Bad defense has a domino effect and getting bad defense from short is especially critical.

 

 

I don't disagree but it can be overstated as well.  

 

How many times did I read "OF defense doesn't matter" last year.....

 

Enough that my brain started to hurt.  The only thing more painful was seeing how wrong it was come to life in RF.

 

I don't disagree but it can be overstated as well.  

 

True, in this case (especially with this position), I don't think that's happening.  And I'd rather not learn that lesson the hard way again.  I've learned that lesson enough for a lifetime the last few years.

Hah, yeah, just the other day we were talking about the potential damage caused by keeping Dozier and how it creates a defensive domino effect throughout the infield.

 

In no way am I accusing Nick of swiping the idea, just that many of us realize keeping Dozier has some effects that could hinder the team in 2017.

 

Despite Escobar's flaws, I'm far more comfortable with him at short and Polanco at second than I am Polanco at short and Dozier at second.

 

And that's not even bringing up the option of going glove-first at short, either through the minors (Vielma) or picking up a stop-gap solution for a season.

I really want no part of Escobar as an everyday player any longer. That ship sailed. He's a 2-3 games a week guy. Like Punto should have been if not for a certain manager's infatuation with him.

Aren't the majority of our starters 'flyball pitchers' anyway, save for 'Gibby'?  Does that make shortstop defense more or less critical? (SS gets less chances/more important to convert them?)

 

I really want no part of Escobar as an everyday player any longer. That ship sailed. He's a 2-3 games a week guy. Like Punto should have been if not for a certain manager's infatuation with him.

I agree Escobar is a better backup guy than a starter but I'd still rather see him at short than Polanco.

 

Aren't the majority of our starters 'flyball pitchers' anyway, save for 'Gibby'?  Does that make shortstop defense more or less critical? (SS gets less chances/more important to convert them?)

Yeah, it minimizes it a bit but even flyball pitchers put 30-40% of contact on the ground.

Way too much doom & gloom in this thread for a young prospect's defense.  

I agree Escobar is a better backup guy than a starter but I'd still rather see him at short than Polanco.

I'm just as fearful of Sano at 3B. It doesn't help that Ryan robbed him of a year of development at 3rd last year. It's a supreme frustration to be saddled with Mauer for two more years and being obligated to play him. The infield I posted earlier could be very successful. Sano is the perfect fit for 1st base. I do not believe in playing him at DH.

 

1B Sano

2B Dozier

SS Gordon (pull a Knoblauch and make the team)

3B Polanco

 

This is ideal. Makes so much sense.

I don't understand the dislike for Escobar. He never got healthy last year, but he was pretty good as an every day SS in 2015.  I'd give him another shot there before I closed that door, as I don't think his health issues were due to playing every day.

I don't dislike him. Just view him a utility player. And I want the young players, the future, to play.