Navigation: Jump to content areas:


Pro Quality. Fan Perspective.
Login-facebook
Around SBN: Diego Sanchez and the Dangers of Fame in MMA

Why Adam Jones Is Totally Awesome

I didn't think it would come to this, but here we are. And besides, anything to distract us from Silva.

I'm going to talk about glovework first since it's the point that a lot of people seem to be overlooking.

DEFENSE

Once a shortstop, Adam Jones is an extraordinary athlete regarded as a potential Gold Glover in center (I know, I know, Gold Gloves are worthless, but you get the point). Although his experience in the outfield was limited, Jones was terrific in Tacoma last year, helping clowns like Jorge Campillo maintain their appealing ERA's. Then, after getting promoted to Seattle, he had to adjust on the fly to playing a corner and, despite a few ugly drops, performed quite well in a small sample.

Obviously, Ichiro's going to stay in center for as long as he wants, so Jones' immediate future is in right. But don't fall into the trap of assuming this negates the impact of his glove; if Jones is good in CF, then he should be great in RF, relative to his peers (which is how these things are judged).

The way I figure, Jones' defensive contribution probably looks something like this:

(Ed. note: not scientific)

He's a virtual lock to be above-average, and I think, going forward, he should be something like a +10 < x < +20 defensive player in right. Which'll make him stand out, since generally speaking people that good are handed a job in center. This is good news for a pitching staff that isn't going to strike many people out (unless it includes Bedard, but in that case Jones is gone and none of this means anything to us anyway).

Don't ignore the glove. It's an important part of what makes AJ so special.

OFFENSE

AJ has worked hard to eliminate the biggest holes in his offensive game. At this point, he's pretty much a finished product. No, he's never going to draw a ton of walks, and he's always going to strike out a little bit, but that's just his approach. No longer is he easily disposed of with a good breaking ball, and no longer does he give up when he's got two strikes. He's an aggressive, productive player capable of hitting for both average and power.

In a year during which he didn't turn 22 until August, Adam Jones put up a .968 OPS in AAA. The only players in his age group to perform that well were Felix Pie and Billy Butler. That's an impressive accomplishment no matter how you look at it, and it represents AJ's mammoth leap forward, after never previously having topped .849. It's amazing what can happen when a prospect puts everything together.

Yeah, it's possible that AJ could bust in the Majors, but by the time a player performs that well in AAA, a lot of the unpredictability is gone. We're not talking about a Greg Halman here, someone with loads of talent but a long way to go. Prospects who succeed in AAA, as a group, tend to go on to have strong ML careers, with few exceptions. If AJ busts, it'll be because he either starts struggling with injuries or has a huge hole in his swing that as of yet has gone undetected.

Let's put it another way. We know for a fact that a low percentage of prospects who've performed at AJ's level turn into busts. How does this compare to "established Major Leaguers"? In a completely informal study, I grabbed 30 totally random (Excel randomized it for me to remove any bias) qualified ML batters from 2006 and looked at how they did in 2007. Six of them lost at least 20% of their 2006 OPS. In other words, 6 of 30 established Major Leaguers "busted" this year. The odds of an elite prospect like Jones stagnating as a AAAA player are roughly equivalent to those of a "reliable veteran" suddenly doing the same thing.

Let's get over this fear of the Major League adjustment. Yeah, it exists, but very, very rarely does it turn an elite talent like Jones into a bad player. Most people get over it. The odds are on AJ's side.

How do you project his offense? If he ends up like Juan Encarnacion, he's a little above-average overall, thanks to his glove. If he ends up like Reggie Sanders, he's a star. And if he ends up like Curtis Granderson, he's a superstar and eventual HoF candidate. I'll leave it up to you to assign your own probabilities, but the fact of the matter is that if AJ's destined to be any less than at least an average player, he's going to have to really throw us for a loop at the plate. Even if he only repeats last year's small sample .246/.300/.400 for the rest of his life, he's still a decent player. And I think that's the absolute floor.

(For the record, yes, being right-handed in Safeco would take a toll on AJ, but it wouldn't be like Mike Cameron or anything. Jones is a lot better at going the other way.)

COST

Adam Jones is under team control for the next six years. He won't be due for arbitration until the fall of 2010. Over the next three seasons, he'll earn something like $2-3m combined, followed by escalating annual salaries depending on how he performs. But at no point over those six years will he earn FA money. That's not how it works. You know how we think front offices are getting bent over by FA wages? It's the exact opposite for players under team control. They get paid far less than they deserve because they don't have any leverage.

These players - the ones still under team control - are the most valuable players in the game. They give you a lot of production for a very low cost, offering you a ton of flexibility at other positions. You know, the kind of flexibility that enables you to throw huge money at the best free agents on the market to complete the roster. You don't want to be in a position where you're constantly reloading with FA's. You want to be in a position where you're constantly reloading with younger players earning lower salaries. The upside of taking this approach is enormous.

OVERALL

At the very least, Adam Jones is an average overall player who won't be getting paid very much money for a long, long time. The overwhelming probability, however, is that he's even more, a good to great player earning pennies on the dollar for the next six years. Six years! I hate the word "untouchable," because I think you should always be willing to entertain offers for everyone on the roster, but the list of players for whom I'd be willing to give away Adam Jones is only a little longer than the same list for Felix. Forget about whether he'll end up with an OPS of .750 or .800 or .850 or .900; that's only a fraction of the picture, and it undersells his value to the organization. There's so much more to it that people just aren't talking about enough in light of all the Bedard discussion.

I can't make any guarantees as to what lies ahead for Adam Jones. Gun to my head, though, if you forced me to make one, it would be this - trade Adam Jones and you will regret it. Fast.

Comment 93 comments  |  0 recs  | 

Do you like this story?

Comments

Display:

All the more better that we got Mr. Silva!
Now that we have his extraordinary services, we will not have to trade Jones for pitching. Hurrah for Silva! Hurrah for Jones!

Hurrah for me!

We WANT Silva, damn it!

by I Heart Silva on Dec 18, 2007 3:37 PM PST reply actions  

Thank you, Jeff
I needed that pick-me-up.
P3 W1 L2 (.333)

by MarkE on Dec 18, 2007 3:39 PM PST reply actions  

I was always excited for Jones
Now I am even more so.  Please don't trade him, Bavasi :(
Yesterday's Pants
A blog-thingy about the Mariners and stuff.

by BrettJMiller on Dec 18, 2007 3:42 PM PST reply actions  

To completely oversimplify
is Adam Jones Mike Cameron, with more offensive upside?  I don't mean to overly generalize, but Cameron kept popping into my head as I read about Jones' offense; is that at all a decent comp, or would Cameron-level offense considered a failure for Jones?
Nice Guys Finish Third - Hopelessly lost, but makin' good time.

by pdb on Dec 18, 2007 3:45 PM PST reply actions  

Think it's a little low
Cammie had a .992 year in AA but it was his age 23 season, so Jones is already well ahead of him.

by Graham MacAree on Dec 18, 2007 3:48 PM PST up reply actions  

I thought about making that comp
but I already had so many other players' names in there that I decided against it.

It's a pretty good one. AJ does have a higher offensive ceiling, but Safeco murdered Cameron's peak, and Cameron was also a truly elite defensive center fielder at a level that I don't think AJ can match.

If Adam Jones turns into Mike Cameron, I will be thrilled. Cammy was always a dramatically underrated player in Seattle.

by Jeff Sullivan on Dec 18, 2007 3:49 PM PST up reply actions  

Agreed
I never could get over all the people who fixated on Cameron's strikeout rate and ignored the phenomenal glove.  He was a hell of a player in Seattle, and I'd love to see AJ do the same things that Cameron did in the field.
Nice Guys Finish Third - Hopelessly lost, but makin' good time.

by pdb on Dec 18, 2007 3:53 PM PST up reply actions  

does anyone have cammy's defensive #s from
his time in seattle? or barring that, care to hazard a guess as to just how good he was for us?

by seattlebruin on Dec 18, 2007 3:55 PM PST up reply actions  

According to UZR
Mike Cameron was a +23 defender in center field between 2000-2003.

Yeah. Otherworldly.

by Jeff Sullivan on Dec 18, 2007 4:00 PM PST up reply actions  

Seattle fans also didn't really see his bat
At Safeco, while a Mariner: .223/.328/.373

Away, while a Mariner: .286/.370/.514

That's just unreal.

by Jeff Sullivan on Dec 18, 2007 3:57 PM PST up reply actions  

Ouch
I knew Safeco hurt him, I just didn't realize how much.  That's obscene.
Nice Guys Finish Third - Hopelessly lost, but makin' good time.

by pdb on Dec 18, 2007 4:01 PM PST up reply actions  

I'll admit it
I was one of those people back then. I was very wrong.

by Matthew on Dec 18, 2007 4:02 PM PST up reply actions  

I think should come out, too
I'm very ashamed. But back then I knew nothing about baseball compared with what I know now.

Sorry, Mike. That's on me.

by Teej on Dec 18, 2007 5:24 PM PST up reply actions  

I always new Cameron was hellaawesome
but I was wrong about Randy Winn being replaced by Ibanez. Sooooooo wrong.
"Goddamn Romans. Sure know how to make a ... drum room." --Matt Cameron

by JI on Dec 18, 2007 8:28 PM PST up reply actions  

He's come so far
from his days in Wisconsin when the minor league writeups were looking forward to his pitching career.

by MfaninAlaska on Dec 18, 2007 3:46 PM PST reply actions  

hell
lets scrub silva and just have our outfielders pitch. they cant be any worse than horam and weaver
  1. King Felix
  2. Washburn (its hurts just to type that)
  3. Beluga Tits
  4. Ichiro!
  5. Adam Jones
LR - Raul Ibanez

i dont know why i have such terrible ideas today.

by seattlebruin on Dec 18, 2007 3:48 PM PST up reply actions  

I don't
because I don't like to gloat....

Funny how things turned out... I was defending him all the time when he's bad, now I seem to always be asking about his downside....

by MfaninAlaska on Dec 18, 2007 3:54 PM PST up reply actions  

Well written
Points taken.

I still attest that I never said we should trade him.  My argument was about the tendency to overrate our prospects and assume their success before it happens.  If Adam Jones has what it takes to rise above, then great.

by Gomez on Dec 18, 2007 3:58 PM PST reply actions  

to reiterate the purpose of "prospects"
you either groom them for your major league ballclub and take away the "prospect" tag, OR you trade them for a superstar.  you just can't be wishy-washy and have the guy sit on the bench while not giving him the opportunity to show his worth.

all the crazy talks about jones for blanton should be disregarded, because he's our best "prospect" and the only way we should trade him is if we get one of the best players in the league.  under this kind of thinking, no player is untouchable, and that's fine with me.

"You just got AJ-aculated on! In Baltimore?"

by wwbaker3 on Dec 18, 2007 4:08 PM PST up reply actions  

It'll be interesting to see how Jones
ends up as a ML'er

For comparison: Minor League numbers

Ken Griffey Jr. .318 .425 .572 997 (thru age 18)

Alex Rodriguez .318 .379 .591 970 (thur age 19)

Andruw Jones .302 .389 .543 932 (thru age 19)

B.J. Upton .296 .391 .457 848 (thru age 21)

Carl Crawford .295 .336 .400 736 (thru age 20)

by MfaninAlaska on Dec 18, 2007 4:13 PM PST reply actions  

Or another highly regarded OF
in our system back in the days, with an average around .280, OBP around .400, SLG around .480 in the minors...considered a good OF during his days in Tacoma.

major league career: .248, .338, .448

any guesses?

"You just got AJ-aculated on! In Baltimore?"

by wwbaker3 on Dec 18, 2007 4:32 PM PST up reply actions  

*BINGO
like we've been saying earlier - you never know what you're gonna get.  some have a better chance to succeed than others, but there are no guarantees - especially "prospects." we certainly know more about players with a few years of success in the major leagues than a 21-year old with high potentials - because after all, it's only "potentials" not actual observable success on the main stage.
"You just got AJ-aculated on! In Baltimore?"

by wwbaker3 on Dec 18, 2007 4:40 PM PST up reply actions  

This is stupid
Explain Ben Grieve.  Explain Fernando Tatis.  Explain Richard Hidalgo.  If they had their huge years in the majors, you'd have offered it up as evidence that prospects are unreliable.  Since they had their huge years in the majors, they don't get included in the conversation.  

Players are risky - minor league prospects no more so than major league players.  When you know how to evaluate talent, it doesn't matter what level you're playing at.  People who think prospects are higher risk just don't know how to evaluate talent.  

by davidcameron on Dec 18, 2007 4:42 PM PST up reply actions  

I always thought
the traditional guy to point to in this situation is Marc Newfield.

by Jeff Sullivan on Dec 18, 2007 4:49 PM PST up reply actions  

Wasn't he injured?
"Goddamn Romans. Sure know how to make a ... drum room." --Matt Cameron

by JI on Dec 18, 2007 4:56 PM PST up reply actions  

Really?
Cruz-Jones (avg, obp, slg)

Cruz (.280, .400, .480)

Jones(.285, .341, .446)

The point is that many back then also thought JC2 was the next big thing when he was called up in 97 (before a lot of you started watching the M's), and of course history proved otherwise.

The M's totally sucked in the back innings during the time, so they traded JC2 for Mike Timlin and Paul Spoljaric.  We ended up making the playoff in 97, and Timlin was on the team through 98, and was THE  most effective RP on the team BY FAR with a 3.20ish ERA.

"You just got AJ-aculated on! In Baltimore?"

by wwbaker3 on Dec 18, 2007 5:01 PM PST up reply actions  

Well, yeah....
The point is that there is a very good chance that Jones will be a very good to elite player. Just because there's a non-zero chance that he will be an average or below average player is no reason to ignore that good chance.

Let's not get overly caught up in the possibility of failure. You try to stack the odds in your favor every time----you should trade Jones only if you a much bigger chance you'll get a player of equal or bigger impact.

by rtang on Dec 18, 2007 5:15 PM PST up reply actions  

Regardless,
Just like Gomez said earlier today, "I am not about to waste a holiday compiling a comprehensive list of prospects and how they ended up to prove to you that many of the best prospects are question marks... not that you or anyone else bothered to do the same to prove your respective points."

So disregard my JC2 example if it makes you all sleep better at night, but giving examples such as Griffey, ARod, Crawford, etc, just simply doesn't prove anything either.

Anyways, so how's everyone doing today?  Hope you all are having a good Monday.

"You just got AJ-aculated on! In Baltimore?"

by wwbaker3 on Dec 18, 2007 5:16 PM PST up reply actions  

ill admit it
the day they traded jose cruz was my worst birthday ever, closely followed by the day they traded randy johnson. keep in mind i was 12-13 tho.

damn you woody woodward

by seattlebruin on Dec 18, 2007 5:31 PM PST up reply actions  

This isn't about proving anything
It's not about who is ultimately right and who is ultimately wrong, and it's not about listing a bunch of examples.  It's about probabilities, and the probability is that Jones will become a useful-to-elite major league player.  This is demonstrably true and that's the point.

by patsfan on Dec 18, 2007 8:55 PM PST up reply actions  

Cruz has had a productive career though,
even though he didn't turn into a superstar, he's succeeded at the major league level.
I overvalue prospects

by Thingray on Dec 18, 2007 5:10 PM PST up reply actions  

career minor league numbers aren't great to use
especially since Cruz' totaled up to barely more than one season. He played all of 72 games in AAA between ages 22 and 23 and posted about an 875 OPS there.

Jones has over 250 games in AAA spread out over ages 19-21 where he has a cumulative OPS around 885.

by Matthew on Dec 18, 2007 5:11 PM PST up reply actions  

Well, actually...
I think point here is that with all the information we know, we can project a range of performances for a minor leaguer of Jones' accomplishments. And it's not different from the range of performance of a "proven" major leaguer. And, yes, there will be cases where a prospect will fail miserably---but guess what...that happens with all players. Focussing on the potential for failure means you're betting on failure. That's a lousy strategy for running the team.

Far better to use the projections, accept that one or two players will fall out of them, but know that the vast majority of prospects with that kind of performance WILL pan out. And if you have enough of those kind of prospects, you WILL get that superstar.

by rtang on Dec 18, 2007 5:24 PM PST reply actions  

I'm 100% on that.
Make the effort to build a good minor league system. Keep the good ones around, and use those young, underpaid players as a foundation for a winning team. Most of them won't be the leaders of that team -- that's what the superstars are for. You know, the ones you've been able to buy with the savings you're making with the kids.

by nathaniel dawson on Dec 18, 2007 11:30 PM PST up reply actions  

Trade AJ, Not
I believe that Bedard is not a Mariner because BB is unwilling to give up AJ. If he was then this deal would be done. BB knows what he has in this player and is unwilling to give him up for a two year pitcher who is not always healthy. And I am delighted that AJ will remain an M.

by chris d on Dec 18, 2007 8:39 PM PST reply actions  

I've always wanted to buy a Adam Jones
jersey...maybe i should be pre-emptive and buy a Carlos Triunfel next year...hmm, what number might he be? i kid i kid
I fucking hate you Mariners

by kentroyals5 on Dec 18, 2007 8:48 PM PST up reply actions  

+20 runs from RF?
According to PMR, no RF in baseball was more than 19 outs (not runs) above average. RZR is a little more generous, giving Shane Victorino +20 runs, but considering he made only 229 putouts, that seems unrealistically generous. Even +10 runs would make Jones one of the 5 best defensive RFs in baseball.

I'm not saying that Adam Jones won't be an excellent RF, but given the low number of plays in RF compared to CF, it seems awfully unrealistic to expect that kind of impact. It's not a question of ability, but of opportunity.

by MrIncognito @ Lookout Landing on Dec 18, 2007 8:44 PM PST reply actions  

Self-selection
if you can be a +20 RF then you play CF.

by Matthew on Dec 18, 2007 8:46 PM PST up reply actions  

According to UZR
(which I'm using because (A) it rocks, and (B) I have it right here in spreadsheet form), between 2003-2007, there were 43 individual player seasons worth 10+ runs from a corner, 21 player seasons worth 15+ runs from a corner, and 6 player seasons worth 20+ runs from a corner.

It's obviously not common, but it's possible, especially for a guy who'd be playing center field for nearly anyone else. One of the reasons corner OF's don't perform that well is because the best defensive ones tend to play center. Jones is an exception to that selection process.

For the record, I don't expect AJ to be +20. I expect him to be between +10 - +20 (true talent level; individual seasons may vary). That's worth noting.

by Jeff Sullivan on Dec 18, 2007 8:56 PM PST up reply actions  

And if you want to put it another way
over a full season, projected over 308 balls-in-zone (the same number of BIZ for Mariner RF's last year), a league-average outfielder would catch 265 balls, plus another ~45 OOZ.

If Jones defends at the same pace that he did in 2007 over an admittedly small sample, he'd catch 281 balls, plus another ~70 OOZ. That makes him +41 plays over a league-average outfielder, or about +30-35 runs.

Clearly, he won't be a +30-35 run outfielder. He'll regress a little bit, and he won't play every single game, and so on and so forth. But he's already performed at a high level, so the opportunity is absolutely there.

by Jeff Sullivan on Dec 18, 2007 9:05 PM PST up reply actions  

This whole discussion got me thinking
How much of a farce was Buhner's GG in 1996?
"Goddamn Romans. Sure know how to make a ... drum room." --Matt Cameron

by JI on Dec 18, 2007 9:31 PM PST up reply actions  

Moliere level, I'd say...
Even back then, I'd see that his mobility was the weakest part of his defense....and that was a big part.

by rtang on Dec 18, 2007 9:41 PM PST up reply actions  

I don't know.....
While Buhner is seen as a big, homerun hitting guy, he wasn't slow. He moved pretty good for a guy his size. And he was great playing the Kingdome outfield and hardly ever mis-played balls. When you think of all the centerfielders that were probably better than him, well, he probably didn't deserve it. But he was a very good rightfielder, one of the best in the game at the time, so it wasn't that far off base.

by nathaniel dawson on Dec 18, 2007 11:45 PM PST up reply actions  

i think that
part of the the upgrade for AJ is that he is replacing a below average fielder in RF

by seattlebruin on Dec 18, 2007 9:44 PM PST up reply actions  

what were
Ichiro's UZR numbers for right field before he shifted over to CF?  Does Jones project to be a better defender then Ichiro?

by MfaninAlaska on Dec 18, 2007 9:51 PM PST up reply actions  

UZR doesn't like Ichiro
never has, never will. It's some peculiarity with the system that nobody understands (and a rare exception to the rule stating that UZR is currently the gold standard).

Because it's tough to get a good read on just how good Ichiro really was as a RF, I'm not sure the best way to go about answering your question. That said, because I think Jones projects to be a good-to-great RF, then he and Ichiro shouldn't be too different in that regard.

They'll probably look different to the eye, since Ichiro is totally unique, but the results shouldn't be too much.

by Jeff Sullivan on Dec 18, 2007 9:59 PM PST up reply actions  

I was just wonder
because Ichiro is really the only CF type that I could think of off the top of my head to regularly play a corner outfield position that is generally considered an excellent defender.

Only other one I can think of with the skill set would be Carl Crawford but he was never considered a CF type.

by MfaninAlaska on Dec 18, 2007 10:04 PM PST up reply actions  

Bonds?
"Goddamn Romans. Sure know how to make a ... drum room." --Matt Cameron

by JI on Dec 18, 2007 10:33 PM PST up reply actions  

Alex Rios?
Some consider him good enough for CF, if not for Vernon Wells and his big contract.
visiting A's fan.

by rfloh @ Lookout Landing on Dec 18, 2007 10:36 PM PST up reply actions  

See, and that's what the problem is...
I'm not going to say that current defensive metrics are completely useless, but I will say that they're certainly not totally reliable.  There's probably enough out there to be able to somewhat reasonably class players' defense in 4-5 classes ("DH", "Below Average", "Average", "Above Average", "Elite").  But the ability to reliably measure the actual impact on the win/loss totals on folks in those categories is still rather, well, un-ripe. Plus we all could argue every day and twice on Sundays about who goes into those categories.  There's still a ton of noise in the data, nevermind a lot of different "theories" as to how to classify and value

I think we can safely say that going from a "Below Average" defender to an "Above Average" defender in RF will noticably help the Mariners' win/loss totals next year (as would going from a "DH" in LF to even an "Average" defender).  Any attempt to measure how much, though, is still a relative guess, even if it's a well-educated one.  Defense is hugely important, certainly, but you can't get too wrapped up in the numbers -- especially for one specific player -- when looking at the actual impact on the win/loss (RS/RA, pythag, whatever) totals.  

Getting a pitcher that can actually miss bats a lot (i.e. at a rate that's nearly double any other non-Felix starter on the staff) would have a hell of a lot more impact on the run-prevention side of the equation, and would reduce the need for having elite defenders in the first place...

"I restore a sense of childlike wonder to people's lives; you give them Zunes and Vista." -- Fake Steve Jobs to Borg employees

by PositivePaul on Dec 18, 2007 11:00 PM PST up reply actions  

Defensive stats aren't that bad
if you take the right approach, you can sort them out and get a reasonable idea of how good a player really is. You just have to be sure to look at everything and see what agrees and what doesn't.

As to your other main point:

Getting a pitcher that can actually miss bats a lot (i.e. at a rate that's nearly double any other non-Felix starter on the staff) would have a hell of a lot more impact on the run-prevention side of the equation

I don't agree with this.

In a hypothetical world where you directly replace Raul Ibanez with an equivalent offensive player who's league-average in the field, you get most of the way to adding Erik Bedard to this rotation, in terms of runs prevented.

by Jeff Sullivan on Dec 18, 2007 11:27 PM PST up reply actions  

Agreed.
In a hypothetical world where you directly replace Raul Ibanez with an equivalent offensive player who's league-average in the field, you get most of the way to adding Erik Bedard to this rotation, in terms of runs prevented.

I can accept this, sorta, in that, say, using my scale, keeping the player's offense the same and going from a "DH" in the field to "Average" there will be some measurable improvement -- and it quite possibly would be of nearly the same magnitude as adding Bedard to the equation.  I'm just not willing to say with even 90% certainty that we can really nail down the specific number.  We probably could get a range, sure, but even then, you could be talking about a difference of 10 runs (i.e. a -5 > 0 < +5 glove).  

The problem is -- that player (Plus bat, Average glove) isn't necessarily available either.  That player would cost the same in terms of prospects or cash as Bedard or #1 or #2 starter (okay, maybe a bit less since #3-4 starters are getting more than those types of players).  

I also assent that a ton of Adam's value comes from the fact that he's a) ours (and we wouldn't have to shell out prospects to get him) and b) cheap.  Even if it takes him a bit to get started both defensively and offensively (may or may not happen), he's still got a lot of value merely because of his talent.  He's clearly ready for the majors, and has the talent to be a useful player, even if it takes him a year or two to become the all-star caliber player he likely will become.  Just like we're all still waiting for Felix to become the perennial Cy Young candidate he can be.  He certainly doesn't "suck" and he's still nowhere near a "bust" -- but he hasn't exactly been Doc Gooden, either.  He's shown flashes of excellence, but he's certainly also shown a ton of vulnerability.  

"I restore a sense of childlike wonder to people's lives; you give them Zunes and Vista." -- Fake Steve Jobs to Borg employees

by PositivePaul on Dec 19, 2007 12:18 AM PST up reply actions  

Wait, though...
Let's say, for the sake of argument, that I accept that Raul's a -30 run glove (and that I at least accept that you can assign run value to defense, in general).  His +30 bat makes him, essentially, a "0" player.  It's probably a heck of a lot easier to find a +10 player that's a "0" glove than it is to find a pitcher who's a +30 run pitcher.  And, certainly, both is needed.  Improving both aspects of the game is vital.  

Yeah, I get that Jones could likely be a +10-20 glove.  I'm just saying that the 10 run gap between the variability is important not to overlook.  Even if they keep Jones and don't land another pitcher, going from Raul in LF to anyone with a +10 bat and even a "0" glove (again, conceding that this can be accurately and precisely measured, which I'm not sure I can concede, really) would be a major step forward, too.  

I dunno.  I suck at baseball math.  It's late, I'm tired...

"I restore a sense of childlike wonder to people's lives; you give them Zunes and Vista." -- Fake Steve Jobs to Borg employees

by PositivePaul on Dec 19, 2007 12:42 AM PST up reply actions  

The only thing I don't like...
...About defensive runs prevented stats is that it fails a (weak, I may note) reductio ad absurdum test.

Yes, Adam Jones could be worth +10 runs with the glove.

But what if, for some bizarre reason, no balls get hit to AJ! Or, for another absurd example, every single ball hit to AJ's position ends up in what would be considered no man's land. You've officially saved 0 runs, despite having your best defensive option in RF.

Impossible, yes, but I do believe it implies that defensive savings are going to be more volatile and not necessarily guaranteed runs saved.

Although I agree with the premise that Jones may be overpayment for Bedard, I don't necessarily see it as the end of the world. Bedard's projected runs saved will more or less be "real" runs saved where as AJ's defensive runs saved will more or less be a theoretical range, especially in a corner position. Combined with the fact that LF is more cavernous and important than RF in Safeco and the complete misfit that is AJ's righty swing, and I don't see the huuuuge fussfesta about losing Jones in RF.

Optimally, I would want to see Jones flipped for a pitcher or non-CF and/or LH batter of similar caliber and contractual situation. Combined with Ichiro in CF, we KNOW Jones is worth more to a team that wants a good, young CF than the M's. Lincecum, Cain, maybe Snell, I dunno. But I just know the M's aren't smart enough to pull something together like the Rays/Twinkies trade.

Detect-O-Vision

Favor the Bold

by IcebreakerX on Dec 19, 2007 1:52 AM PST up reply actions  

And yes...
I know there is a giantacular bank of sample sizes with regard to balls flying into position X, but I still don't see it as a guarantee. The numbers are only indicative, not predictive.

As much as I'd love to see the airtight Safeco OF again, it's been done and we didn't really get that far last time. Yes, misuse doesn't mean no use, but alas the M's don't really do anything 100% ever.

If we can get Bedard, keep Wlad in LF or RF and get 90% of what it would be like with Bedard and Jones, I'd be damn happy. But it is only a dream...

Detect-O-Vision

Favor the Bold

by IcebreakerX on Dec 19, 2007 2:37 AM PST up reply actions  

The airtight OF got us to the playoffs.
And while defensive stats are volatile, the other reason trading Jones for Bedard is a bad idea is that Bedard would be ours for two years, and Jones would be ours for six.

by Jeff Sullivan on Dec 19, 2007 9:59 AM PST up reply actions  

What if
Every ball hit for the entire season gets hit to Jones and he catches all of them?  162-0, baby!

These sort of improbable hypothetical scenarios don't serve any purpose other than allowing someone to argue an extremely improbable point.

The difference in the number and type of hits to a certain area of the field from season to season is reasonably small (unless you switched your entire rotation from 5 Felixes to 5 Washburns), thus the range of expected defensive outcomes is reasonably small as well.

by patsfan on Dec 19, 2007 6:49 AM PST up reply actions  

I think Ice's point is more
that there could be a lot of volatility in the year-to-year correlation of outfield defensive metrics.

I raised that issue in a USSM thread too, although it had more to do with OF's changing teams/stadia.

I think it's a fair point - given that the total number of balls hit to an OF is much lower than to a SS, say, and given the large number of chances you'd need to really say something definitive about a guy's range based on stats... I think it's fair to wonder how much these things vacillate.
From all I've seen, they don't move all that much.  But then I see Ichiro:worst CF in the AL and think that something's quite wrong.  

I'd just like to know what the YTY correlation is for UZR and RZR, and I'd also like to know why the two are so freaking different for OFs.

This isn't to argue that there can't be such a thing as a +20 run left fielder.  I'm just not sure our current stats alone could identify such people reliably.  

by marc w on Dec 19, 2007 11:36 AM PST up reply actions  

Yeah, I definitely missed his first sentence.
I'd also like to see that correlation... I have to think, again, that it's reasonably small - especially for a young player as opposed to say, an early-to-mid 30's player who is rapidly losing his speed and quickness.  Maybe I'm completely off base though.

by patsfan on Dec 19, 2007 12:10 PM PST up reply actions  

Stolen from tangotiger
(link)

Correlation of UZR is r=.50, when BIP=400 (100 games). That compares to component pitching ERA of r=.50 when PA=300, and RC or LWTS of r=.50 when PA=200 (50 games).

In short, you need 2 years of UZR or other fielding metric to be as reliable as 1 year of hitting stats. How reliable is Andruw Jones' hitting stats this year? Right, so you'd at least like to have 2 years of hitting stats, if not 3. So, you'd like to have 4 years of fielding stats, if not more.

That's just the nature of the beast though.

by Jeff Sullivan on Dec 19, 2007 12:14 PM PST up reply actions  

I just want to throw this out there
Jones is a lot less valuable because we have Ichiro.  He'll be good as a corner OF but he really is a CF.  It's kinda like playing Beltre at 1B.  I don't really think its a big problem but its definitely something to think about.  He is way more valuable to others than he is to us (although maybe not as big a differnce because of how important OF defense is in Safeco).  It would be interesting to see if you could get fair value in a trade for another team's elite prospects for a position we needed more.

by Edgar for Pres on Dec 18, 2007 10:32 PM PST reply actions  

While partially true
we've seen how far this team can get with three center fielders out there. Jones is still a really, really valuable piece.

by Jeff Sullivan on Dec 18, 2007 11:13 PM PST up reply actions  

I agree with you he's really valuable
but what if a team like the Red Sox trades Ellsbury to the Twins (and therefore needs a CF).  Would you think about a Buchholz/Jones swap?  What if it was a Buchholz+Crisp/Jones+RP?  

by Edgar for Pres on Dec 19, 2007 7:22 AM PST up reply actions  

They wouldn't/haven't traded Bucholz for
Johan Santana, they won't trade him for AJ.
I have a cousin with 1 testicle, when they yell play ball, he smiles.

by Montucky on Dec 19, 2007 8:06 AM PST up reply actions  

I would think long and hard about that.
(don't say it)

And since Coco Crisp is one of the best defensive outfielders in baseball, the latter scenario looks okay.

by Jeff Sullivan on Dec 19, 2007 10:02 AM PST up reply actions  

While AJ would improve our RF D,
it seems that the M's are still ignoring the second largest position, LF. Why waste Jones in RF when we could clearly use his range in our 2nd CF (LF)? Are they just expecting Ichiro to overplay CF towards LF? Putting RAUL in RF and AJ in LF would be and even better upgrade in our outfield D. 1st to 3rd runners would always make it, but maybe someone would actually be thrown out at home.
I have a cousin with 1 testicle, when they yell play ball, he smiles.

by Montucky on Dec 19, 2007 8:04 AM PST up reply actions  

Correct that
The Mariners don't understand construction of a baseball team.

by MfaninAlaska on Dec 19, 2007 9:25 AM PST up reply actions  

I wouldn't say they're good
just not as bad...

Jason Davis
John Parrish
Chris Reitsma
Rick White
Brandon Morrow
Sean White

None were considered good decisions for various reasons.

by MfaninAlaska on Dec 19, 2007 10:04 AM PST up reply actions  

I think Hargrove forced the hand on Morrow
and the other guys just didn't occupy real important roles. McLaren badly misused Rick White.

The front office isn't flawless with bullpen building, but it's pretty damn good.

by Jeff Sullivan on Dec 19, 2007 10:09 AM PST up reply actions  

I still wouldn't say
its good at building a bullpen...

it got lucky finding diamonds in the rought with Sherrill and Putz performing the way they have.... everyone else has been a head scratcher for one reason or another.

forgot to add Julio Mateo to the list of "bullpen arms" for last year.

Reitsma was being counted on to be the right handed setup guy... that's a pretty important role.  When he went down for the count they turned to Rick White.. Misused or not they brought him in for that role because Morrow had control issues.

It's not just the manager but the club overall ... the veteraness!

by MfaninAlaska on Dec 19, 2007 10:18 AM PST up reply actions  

I was just thinking
this must be a rarity....

You debating positively about the M's and me debating negatively?

by MfaninAlaska on Dec 19, 2007 10:26 AM PST up reply actions  

Alternate Universes?
or maybe I'm just getting depressed by the lack of frickin' snow up here.

by MfaninAlaska on Dec 19, 2007 10:32 AM PST up reply actions  

Is the LF-CF-RF of
AJ-Ichiro-Raul better than Raul-Ichiro-AJ? Clearly, AJ's range would be better served in LF, but is it more important to have a strong arm in RF or LF? Again, I think LF, but I would want to see numbers on which field LF/RF gets the most throws home.
Maybe I just can't stand to watch Raul's noodle arm make 7 hoppers to home for another season.
I have a cousin with 1 testicle, when they yell play ball, he smiles.

by Montucky on Dec 19, 2007 1:04 PM PST up reply actions  

Raul's arm isn't too bad
its the fact that he's slow and doesn't understand that the quickest way between two points is a straight line.

by Edgar for Pres on Dec 20, 2007 12:20 AM PST up reply actions  

Come to think of it...
I really wonder if I should sell my Spring-Training Game-Used Adam Jones batting helmet.  I'd LOVE to sell it to someone gathering DNA for cloning purposes.  I'm sure there's enough DNA in there to extract for those purposes...

I bought it at FanFest last year before Adam Mania reached its current level (Corco can attest to its validity).  

Hmmm...

"I restore a sense of childlike wonder to people's lives; you give them Zunes and Vista." -- Fake Steve Jobs to Borg employees

by PositivePaul on Dec 18, 2007 10:37 PM PST reply actions  

Don't do it Bozo!
The Silva thing is classic Bavasi.  So classic that you have to think it will happen.  http://marinerlog.blogspot.com/2007/12/ms-need-to-run-not-walk-away-from-silva.html

by PP on Dec 19, 2007 10:22 AM PST reply actions  

Comments For This Post Are Closed


User Tools

By reading a game thread of your own volition you agree to accept all liability for any and all damage done to your delicate sensibilities.

FanPosts

Community blog posts and discussion.

Recommended FanPosts

Moar_bacon_small
Everything I Know About Jesus Montero

Recent FanPosts

Wbc_029_small
Friday Morning Music Thread
Small
OTDOD - Early February Edition
Agentejebaox3_small
A Statistical Analysis of Mariners' Fan Support
Small
Who will have a better season?
Claw_small
BA's Top 10 M's Prospects
Wbc_029_small
Friday Morning Music Thread
Small
Munenori Kawasaki Predictions!!!
Small
The Longevity and Future Success of Felix Hernandez.
Small
The present vs future conundrum

+ New FanPost All FanPosts >


Sexy People

Wbc_029_small Jeff Sullivan

Small Matthew