Article: Twins Fans Should Be Excited About Jorge Polanco

[caninatl04]

I will likely get flack for this, but he is why I would have, or still would trade Dozier for the best arm out there, or package Dozier. Slide Polanco to second, put a glove first SS out there, until one of the younger glove/bat SS prospects develop. While Polanco won't hit the HR's BD will, he will be a better pure hitter. Some of Doziers value as a HR guy is lost in his insistence on leading off. And the added defense at SS will mitigate the offensive loss. But then again that's just me.

Flack, flack, flack.

[jimmer]

 

From what I've seen of most analytic studies, they agree with you on this. I can't remember the exact order - they seem to vary slightly based on specific analysis - but your best hitter doesn't hit first in the order for the very reason that the point of the game is to score runs and it's hard to drive in runs if inferior hitters follow your best hitter.

 

The leadoff man should be one of your better hitters but only third-ish best in the lineup, IIRC.

I guess for me though, the idea that Dozier hits leadoff because he insists on hitting there is faulty.  Molitor makes out the lineup.  In the end, it's on Molitor if Dozier is hitting leadoff and it's not where he should hit.  It's not on Dozier.  He shouldn't be blamed for it.

 

 

[Brock Beauchamp]

I guess for me though, the idea that Dozier hits leadoff because he insists on hitting there is faulty. Molitor makes out the lineup. In the end, it's on Molitor if Dozier is hitting leadoff and it's not where he should hit. It's not on Dozier. He shouldn't be blamed for it.

Six of one, half dozen of the other. Both parties are at fault, IMO.

[DocBauer]

Always been a fan of Polanco ever since they signed him. Not exactly why, maybe it had something to do with being a young, speedy glove kid who was kvershadowed by other draft picks and international FA signings. But what really intrigued me was that when his bat started to come around, he was very solid and productive overall, despite no single, obvious characteristic. Two or three years he began hitting at the very top of the order before being moved down to the 3 spot because he was one of the best overall hitters on his team. That always spoke volumes to me about potential. Career milb numbers have him at a quad slash line of .286/.346/.411/.757. Nice all around numbers for a middle infielder, especially for a team in real need for infield talent, (At the time at least).

 

He's still only 24 until July. 2017 was his first real, full time season as a regular in the field and lineup. I just don't think you can dismiss his grandfather's passing for his mid year flop. He had an OK start to the season, his awful stretch, and then a huge finish. Is he as good as his last couple of months? I'd say no. But he is going to hit, he is going to make contact, he is going to maintain a solid OB, and there is some legitimate pop and even HR power in his bat. He also runs well.

 

Does he hit .270 or .290? Too early to tell. Either end of the spectrum is good. The bat control is there for consistency and OB. And I'd bet on 30 or so doubles and double digit HR. SS or 2B eventually, I'm really excited for his potential.

[TheLeviathan]

Sometimes managing people requires you to give in a bit.  If Molitor hits him 4th and he sulks through it we can all agree it's 100% Dozier's fault, but will that save Molitor's job when the Twins lose a bunch of games?

 

Doubt it.  Then we'll blame Molitor for not getting Dozier to accept it.  I know the stats show a "clear" path for the lineup, but people and their emotions are a variable we can't yet account for.

[Deduno Abides]

Help me understand the problem with Dozier leading off. He’s scored more than 100 runs four years in a row and driven in almost 100 each of the last two years. Seems like outstanding production, so I don’t see the problem.

[TheLeviathan]

 

Help me understand the problem with Dozier leading off. He’s scored more than 100 runs four years in a row and driven in almost 100 each of the last two years. Seems like outstanding production, so I don’t see the problem.

 

From statistical models, Dozier's skill set might be even more productive hitting in other spots in the lineup.   Assuming, of course, that his production is the same regardless of his position in the lineup.

[Jham]

Help me understand the problem with Dozier leading off. He’s scored more than 100 runs four years in a row and driven in almost 100 each of the last two years. Seems like outstanding production, so I don’t see the problem.

TK would say something to the effect of, "every season you'll automatically win 50 and lose 50. It's what you do in those other 62 games that defines your season." In short, it's a long season. The small percentages add up. A nice that increases your chances of winning by only 1% is worth 1.62 wins in the end on average. If you go from a move costing your team 1% to gaining 1%, that's over 3 wins difference by season's end. No one is doubting Dozier's productivity. Just whether batting him first maximizes that production in the search of those extra percentage points over the course of the years.

[Brock Beauchamp]

 

Help me understand the problem with Dozier leading off. He’s scored more than 100 runs four years in a row and driven in almost 100 each of the last two years. Seems like outstanding production, so I don’t see the problem.

When you hit 40 homers and have a competent lineup behind you, it's hard not to score 100 runs.

 

But would you rather seen Dozier score 100 and drive in 80 or score 80 and drive in 110? Because his profile is a guy who can drive in a massive number of runs if he had guys like Polanco and Mauer in front of him in the lineup.

[ewen21]

 

I guess for me though, the idea that Dozier hits leadoff because he insists on hitting there is faulty.  Molitor makes out the lineup.  In the end, it's on Molitor if Dozier is hitting leadoff and it's not where he should hit.  It's not on Dozier.  He shouldn't be blamed for it.

 

I don't get the logic here.  Dozier is absolved even if insists on batting leadoff?  Of course, Paul makes out the card, but if Dozier insists on hitting leadoff he is giving Paul a conundrum.  Dozier is supposed to be a leader and you would like a guy like him to be more pliable, "Sure skip.  Wherever you feel I should go"

He shouldn't make a big deal out of it.  

[Platoon]

An interesting question is why Dozier prefers leadoff? While analytics has changed the evaluation of players in the FO, I doubt the view of traditional lineup spot prestige has changed among players. Everyone normally wants to hit 3-4, from the time they start in Little League on up. Ten bucks says EE secretly sees himself as a 3 hole hitter, and would jump at the chance.

[Deduno Abides]

When you hit 40 homers and have a competent lineup behind you, it's hard not to score 100 runs.

 

But would you rather seen Dozier score 100 and drive in 80 or score 80 and drive in 110? Because his profile is a guy who can drive in a massive number of runs if he had guys like Polanco and Mauer in front of him in the lineup.

Yes, I personally am satisfied with Dozier’s results. Last year, the offense was clicking with Buxton and Kepler hitting in front of Dozier. The order seems to work.

[Deduno Abides]

TK would say something to the effect of, "every season you'll automatically win 50 and lose 50. It's what you do in those other 62 games that defines your season." In short, it's a long season. The small percentages add up. A nice that increases your chances of winning by only 1% is worth 1.62 wins in the end on average. If you go from a move costing your team 1% to gaining 1%, that's over 3 wins difference by season's end. No one is doubting Dozier's productivity. Just whether batting him first maximizes that production in the search of those extra percentage points over the course of the years.

A lot of teams, with statistical models, are batting players like Dozier first or second. Perhaps the most similar hitter on the Astros is George Springer, who hits first. For the Twins, the expectation is that Sano will be a good clean-up hitter, batting behind Polanco and Mauer.

[jun]

I am really confused why Twins fan should be excited about Jorge Polanco. He is only hitting .154 in the Spring training and already made 3 errors on the field.

Correct me if I am wrong. I still remember Danny Santana had one very exciting year. Where is he now?

Edited March 3, 2018 by jun

[Brock Beauchamp]

I am really confused why Twins fan should be excited about Jorge Polanco. He is only hitting .154 in the Spring training and already made 3 errors on the field.

Correct me if I am wrong. I still remember Danny Santana had one very exciting year. Where is he now?

Polanco was a more highly regarded prospect, had a better MiLB career, and didn’t luck his way to MLB success as Santana did with his .400 BABIP.

 

And Spring Training stats just don’t matter.

[kab21]

 

I am really confused why Twins fan should be excited about Jorge Polanco. He is only hitting .154 in the Spring training and already made 3 errors on the field.
Correct me if I am wrong. I still remember Danny Santana had one very exciting year. Where is he now?

I am excited about Polanco because the Twins appear to have found a starting MI that will be cheap for several years.

I don't see a comparison to Santana. Polanco already had half a season of MLB experience and a .756 OPS prior to last season. He also has K and BB rates that support continued success unlike Santana.

You are right that there isn't enough of a track record to guarantee anything but it seems pretty likely that Polanco can put up a .725+ OPS as a middle infielder. I am not as optimistic that he will approach an .800 OPS since that would put him at borderline all-star level at SS (always under consideration but rarely making the all-star game).

[by jiminy]

I recall a post showing that Dozier's home runs were the least productive of any player in the league. Hitting a home run with the bases empty will score 1 run. He had the highest percentage of solo homers in the league. Why would you do that? Why would you put your best home run hitter lead off?

 

I also recall that Dozier's argument was he wouldn't hit as many homers if he didn't. Something about seeing more fastballs.  Maybe it's true that you can't just decide to hit 40 homers in the 4 spot instead of the 1 spot because there are variables I don't understand.  I don't buy it but who knows. 

 

If I was managing he would not be leading off, Mauer would. He takes a lot of pitches -- which everyone says is good in a lead off hitter because it lets his teammates time the pitcher -- and he has an unbelievable on-base percentage.  

 

I'm all for challenging orthodoxy with statistical evidence. But if someone has read a great rebuttal against the standard idea of putting your best OBP guy in front of your best SLG guy, I'd love to hear it.  Why wouldn't you want to optimize the number of guys on base in front of your best sluggers?  Mauer in front of Dozier will produce a lot more 2 run homers than Dozier in front of Mauer.  Right?

[ashbury]

I recall a post showing that Dozier's home runs were the least productive of any player in the league. Hitting a home run with the bases empty will score 1 run. He had the highest percentage of solo homers in the league. Why would you do that? Why would you put your best home run hitter lead off?

 

I also recall that Dozier's argument was he wouldn't hit as many homers if he didn't. Something about seeing more fastballs.  Maybe it's true that you can't just decide to hit 40 homers in the 4 spot instead of the 1 spot because there are variables I don't understand.  I don't buy it but who knows.

We're getting kind of far from the topic of Jorge Polanco, but I do buy it. Now, I consider myself as analytical as the next Stat-Drunk Computer Nerd^*, but I've also confirmed to my own satisfaction the observation made by others that Dozier basically feasts off the high inside fastball. I don't know how to quantify it, but I suspect that Dozier may be more dependent on the opposing battery's choice than any other 25+ HR hitter today. If men are on base, he doesn't seem to get the pitch where he wants to drive it; when the stakes are lower the pitcher may opt to challenge him.

 

I don't value solo HRs overly highly, but they do score a run immediately, and are hard to beat as an outcome from your leadoff hitter. Rickey Henderson was (a bit) similar; his 297 career HR may have harmed his SB numbers a bit, but his teams surely didn't care. I've mellowed out regarding Dozier's spot in the batting order.

 

^{* _{Any USENET alumni reading?}}

[Brock Beauchamp]

 

I don't value solo HRs overly highly, but they do score a run immediately, and are hard to beat as an outcome from your leadoff hitter. Rickey Henderson was (a bit) similar.

The problem is that Rickey's homers were his third most powerful offensive weapon. The first was that ungodly .401 career OBP, followed by swiping bags at will.

 

It's really not the biggest deal in the world that Dozier leads off, but it's leaving runs on the table over the course of a season and that's always a bad idea if you can prevent it from happening. I don't think that can really be debated.

[ashbury]

It's really not the biggest deal in the world that Dozier leads off, but it's leaving runs on the table over the course of a season

Well you've stated the conclusion that to my mind isn't proved, if an increase in runners on base were to turn a lot of high inside pitch homers into low outside pitch groundouts.

 

Two factors in play - number of opportunities (bases empty, men on), and then what the batter does with them. Dozier, as a leadoff hitter, has a career percentage of PA with bases empty higher than MLB average, as might be expected. MLB-wide (2017), SLG tends to go up slightly with men on, but for his career Dozier's goes down. I haven't dug any deeper than that, but it leads me to think that batting leadoff might be about optimal for him, or at least the benefit of batting him lower is less than for other good hitters in the lineup.

 

https://www.baseball-reference.com/players/split.fcgi?id=doziebr01&year=Career&t=b#all_bases

https://www.baseball-reference.com/leagues/split.cgi?t=b&lg=MLB&year=2017#all_bases

[yarnivek1972]

Who’s to say pitchers pitch to Dozier the same way if he hits somewhere in the middle? His numbers with runners on are noticeably worse than his numbers with no one on. He has a .780 career overall OPS. It drops to .754 with runners on.

 

IMO that likely has a lot to do with why Dozier leads off.

[Old Twins Cap]

Whatever, Dozier tells Molitor he prefers to bat lead-off and so he does.

 

That's it.

 

He is a gritty lead-off man.  Dozier does not get cheated.  If it works, then it works.

 

Get tired of the solo HR all you want, there are other factors in play, psychological for Dozier and psycho-social in terms of the clubhouse.

 

If Twins are scoring runs, don't fuss with it.

[jimmer]

 

I recall a post showing that Dozier's home runs were the least productive of any player in the league. Hitting a home run with the bases empty will score 1 run. He had the highest percentage of solo homers in the league. Why would you do that? Why would you put your best home run hitter lead off?

 

I also recall that Dozier's argument was he wouldn't hit as many homers if he didn't. Something about seeing more fastballs.  Maybe it's true that you can't just decide to hit 40 homers in the 4 spot instead of the 1 spot because there are variables I don't understand.  I don't buy it but who knows. 

 

If I was managing he would not be leading off, Mauer would. He takes a lot of pitches -- which everyone says is good in a lead off hitter because it lets his teammates time the pitcher -- and he has an unbelievable on-base percentage.  

 

I'm all for challenging orthodoxy with statistical evidence. But if someone has read a great rebuttal against the standard idea of putting your best OBP guy in front of your best SLG guy, I'd love to hear it.  Why wouldn't you want to optimize the number of guys on base in front of your best sluggers?  Mauer in front of Dozier will produce a lot more 2 run homers than Dozier in front of Mauer.  Right?

But then we look at Mauer's numbers with men on base and runners in scoring position and wonder, do we want someone who does so well in both scenarios batting leadoff either?

 

Mauer In 2017: 

 

RISP: .333, .465, .472.

Men on base: .318, .425, .444.

 

He does BETTER with men on base and RISP, and he does better than Dozier in both situations too.

Edited March 5, 2018 by jimmer

[Vanimal46]

An interesting question is why Dozier prefers leadoff? While analytics has changed the evaluation of players in the FO, I doubt the view of traditional lineup spot prestige has changed among players. Everyone normally wants to hit 3-4, from the time they start in Little League on up. Ten bucks says EE secretly sees himself as a 3 hole hitter, and would jump at the chance.

Didn't he say in the past it was so he could see a good high fastball to pull right away?

[Vanimal46]

The problem is that Rickey's homers were his third most powerful offensive weapon. The first was that ungodly .401 career OBP, followed by swiping bags at will.

 

It's really not the biggest deal in the world that Dozier leads off, but it's leaving runs on the table over the course of a season and that's always a bad idea if you can prevent it from happening. I don't think that can really be debated.

Ever since I read this article on The Ringer, I'm cool with the idea of the team's best hitter batting leadoff.

 

https://www.theringer.com/2017/3/31/16040426/2017-mlb-preview-leadoff-hitter-revolution-george-springer-kyle-schwarber-2e49f6ff7c58

[bizaff]

 

If we used "The Book", as our model for the current Twins' lineup, what would the lineup look like? Does Paulie3K have a copy of "The Book"?

 

And today I search for 20 seconds and find it.

 

My post in http://twinsdaily.com/blog/536/entry-9070-warne-when-everyone-is-healthy-whats-the-ideal-twins-lineup/ showed what it would be like late last year..

 

vs Lefties

RF Grossman (OBP .402, OPS .732)

CF Buxton(OBP .398, OPS .868)

1B Mauer(OBP .376, OPS .747)

2B Dozier(OBP .440, OPS 1.039)

3B Sano(OBP .395, OPS 1.011)

DH Escobar (OBP .346, OPS .796)

LF Rosario (OBP .299, OPS .715)

C Castro (OBP .337, OPS .709)

SS Polanco (OBP .287, OPS .682)

 

vs Righties

1B Mauer (OBP .385, OPS .813)

DH Grossman (OBP .350, OPS .740)

3B Sano (OBP .343, OPS .826)

RF Kepler (OBP .348, OPS .855)

LF Rosario (OBP .336, OPS .856)

CF Buxton (OBP .290, OPS .684)

2B Dozier (OBP .325, OPS .774)

C Gimenez (OBP .353, OPS .693)

SS Polanco (OBP .316, OPS .733)

 

Maybe I'll put one together for the current roster based on last year's numbers..