Article: Blackmon's Deal With Rockies Sets Precedent For Dozier

[specialiststeve]

Love Dozier and would have hoped they would have signed an extension or at least would have had discussions. Pretty clear they are going to play out the string and if at the deadline they are in it they will keep him for the year but if for some reason we are not there he will be a trade candidate.

 

If he stays and gets a 5 year offer for 100m he will be gone. Twin's will not match that. If he would stay for a 5 year 100m deal with years 4 and 5 being a team option we may go there.

 

One thing that we all have to understand is that his kind of production is not something "most" teams have. Very few have and if he leaves there will be a massive hole in production both on the offensive and defensive sides. Also he is a team leader and if Joe leaves also we have very little leadership.... Not good.

 

This should be interesting.

[DirtyHippee]

As a fan I love Dozier. I don't know what more you want out of a second baseman. He hits tons of home runs, his average has gone up every year the past few years, he steals bases, please Gold Glove defense, and is a great Clubhouse guy. He carries himself like a face of the franchise guy. That being said, it's unfortunate to see how things are playing out with contracts around the league and the fact that we have a bunch of young guys that we are looking to sign to extension

It doesn't make sense to sign him at that kind of money. It's unfortunate because I feel like Dozier's numbers and play show high end player, but he isn' talked about that way when it translated to $$$ or trade value. Hopefully the twins can figure out a way to sign him, otherwise somebody else will pay him. Either way, I wish him the best. He's a great player, and MN twins fans got to watch him grow into that great player.

[The Wise One]

Where will Dozier go?  I do not know. Does a team extending  their own player set the precedent for the Twin's  in  extending Dozier? That ship sailed. Blacmon's signing means nothing for Dozier.  The situation is different. 

Edited April 7, 2018 by The Wise One

[ewen21]

This the classic case of what are we paying him for?  Reward him for what he did vs. what he is going to be over the next several years.

 

A lot fans seem to think of Dozier as a leader.  What makes him a leader, I ask?  Is it his personality?  Is it what he says and what he does?  I remember two seasons ago in spring training.  I thought Dozier went out of his way to show everyone covering the team what a fun loving guy he was.  During that camp, there were articles emphasizing what a fun loving group the Twins were and how much they laughed.  Dozier seemed to be knee deep in this campaign.  I recall they did a little profile on how Dozier and Escobar were "brothers" and in this little skit Dozier came off way too clownish for me.  The whole piece seemed to be about how Dozier loved to bust Escobar's chops.  It actually rubbed me the wrong way when he poked fun at Esco's accent.  Dozier was quick to point out how he starts breaking Escobar's chops every day.  To me it seemed  like Dozier was trying to be something he really wasn't.  Almost like he was trying to be Torii Hunter.  There certainly were a group of "fun" guys on this team that spring and several players from this "core group", which included Plouffe, Hughes and Dozier tried to show everyone how they were bringing Byung Ho into their "inner circle" by inviting him over to watch the Bachelor.  Look at how fun we are. Look at us building camaraderie!  That was the pinnacle of ridiculousness for me.  That whole spring training everything I heard about was how loose this bunch was and it all seemed so contrived.

 

Then the season started and when things went sour Dozier got to be mopey.  He did not run out a few grounders and he was just being strange.  At one point, it was said Torii had a conversation with him about "being a leader".  Then when we finally did win our first game in Houston, during the post game "celebration" he went to goof around with Escobar and Esco wanted no part of the silliness.  He gave Dozier a very stiff cold shoulder.

 

I will give Dozier full marks for turning things around that season and I will say that he has been a solid player for the last two and a half seasons.  Can I say he will be THAT player next year and several seasons after that?  Nope.  And in fact, I would bet against it.  When does a guy hit 32 years of age and then maintain a level of play they only just discovered a couple of years prior?  Can someone site an example of a player with that type of career trajectory? I have watched baseball since the early 70s and I am coming up blank.

 

 

Now, If someone wants to believe Dozier is one of those very rare individuals than who am I to even argue that?  Historical data for players who hit that age (at every position) tells us otherwise so why even bother engaging in a debate? THis has nothing to do with hating on a player or thinking "negatively".  It's about historical data and doing what is best for this organization.  Statistically and numbers-wise, a 5+ year 100 million+ deal here is absolutely insane when you consider historical data and how players decline during their age 32 season.  Especially when you consider how we have a couple of decent replacements who will remain cost controlled for a while.  

 

As far as Dozier and his "intangibles" are concerned I am not seeing it.  This "face of the franchise" stuff really needs to end, in my opinion.  Not just with Dozier, but in general.  I remember in the early 2000s there was no such thing as "the face of the franchise' or "voice of the franchise" (as Cuddyer was labeled).  During that era it was more about a group of guys pulling as one.  No one seemed to be designated with any special tag.  In the end, Dozier has been around through a lot of losing.  I think that he has as many flaws as anyone and really isn't a guy who should be thought of as the "face of the Twins" (nor should anyone for that matter.  Again, why that label?)..  I question it.  Especially when Molitor has to insist Dozier is comfortable at leadoff to a level where he cannot even explore the option of hitting him lower in the lineup in order to capitalize on his power makes me wonder.  Why wouldn't Dozier step up and say, "I will bat wherever skip wants to put me.  If he thinks I could be more valuable batting 6th so I could help this team score more runs then I am excited to do that"

Dozier instead has been radio silent on that.  He also made a jackass of himself last week with his comments on the Cisco bunt.  Even before then, though......I couldn't go along with anyone who was saying Dozier's leadership is important to this team.  As a matter of fact, if we cleared him out, maybe we could spend dollars in other areas to make a better team?  Maybe a new and even better chemistry will emerge.

 

Sorry to say, but Dozier reminds me of the old guard.  He was a big Terry Ryan supporter and spoke quite a bit about how much Ryan meant to him after he was fired.  So many little things Dozier has said and done that are head scratching to me.

[The Wise One]

 

Thank you for not insulting me

Of course Dozier would be thankful for Ryan. He was a failure as a shortstop but Ryan stuck with him and had him moved to 2b.  It would take a real horse's behind not to be appreciative of someone's faith in your development. 

[jorgenswest]

All the credit does to Dozier. He would have made it with someone. He worked himself into a player way beyond any expectations. It is so rare for an 8th round pick to have a significant career. At his pick #252, he has more WAR than all of the 52 other pick #252s combined.

[Vanimal46]

As far as players maintaining their productivity past 32... I can think of a few 2B today that's done so. Cano, Pedroia, Kinsler, Utley...

[TFRazor]

 

I know this question wasn't geared for me, so my apologies. I would say the usual suspects-both LA teams, both NY teams, and Boston. Whoever loses out on Harper and Machado will want to add some pop elsewhere. Red Sox have Pedroia, but he is running on fumes and Hanley's contract is off the books after this year. 

 

I really don't think any of those teams are going to be willing to offer dozier that deal.

 

Yankees: Are going to get one of Harper, Machado, or Kershaw. I'm leaning towards Machado (easier to fit him into the lineup than Harper unless either Harper or Stanton or Judge are willing to move to first base) so they won't turn around and drop 100 mil on an older infielder.

 

Mets: Aren't really in a win-now position to tie up that much salary on one guy. (Ownership is also cheap but what can you do?)

 

Bos: Pedroia may be on fumes but he's still under contract. They are also looking at contract extensions in the next few years for the Killer B's so they don't have much room to play with

 

Angels: Ian Kinsler and they've been burned on their last two big free agent signings for lots of money over lots of years (Hamilton and Pujols)

 

Dodgers: They could've had two years of Dozier at his current salary but all they were willing to give up was 1 pitcher with a pretty extensive injury history so I doubt they're going to turn around and hand him 100mil when he's 2 years older.

 

I don't disagree with you that those are the usual suspects, I just think that it's going to take a perfect storm of a free agency for Dozier to get 100mil. I just don't see the market for him. This is why I still think that how the team performs this year is going to be important on where Dozier ends up. If they make a deep run (fingers crossed, BRING HOME THE HARDWARE!!!!) I could see dozier coming back for **less money because they're a contender mixed with the comfort and familiarity factor. 

 

**Less money in that $70million is mathematically less money than $80million, but you're not crying in your sleep because you "only" got $70million. Especially if it's only over 3 years (which is totally a deal I would offer him during free agency)