Where We Stand
With the offseason about to begin in earnest, I thought it'd be a good idea to take a quick look at the roster and see how it shapes up so that we can get a better idea of our needs. So with that in mind, presented below is my best guess as to what the team (or at least, the regulars) would look like were this the group of players we took into 2009:
Listed below or beside each name is my estimate of the player's current Wins Above Replacement rating. It's not an exact science, and there were a few judgment calls, but I'm pretty comfortable with the overall picture. As far as LaHair at first is concerned, that's just a guess, and slotting in, say, Morse or Tuglett barely changes anything. So while you may have a few quibbles here and there, no little changes are going to make that significant a difference.
If you assume that we get an additional, I dunno, 1 WAR from the bench and 1-2 WAR from the bullpen, then this team, as constructed above, would be projected to win between 70-75 games. That's bad, and even if you plug in massive gains by Clement, Wlad, and Morrow, it's still a longshot to hit .500. There are just way too many weaknesses on the roster and in the system for this team to even think about competing next year without going outside the organization for some major help.
Major help that I don't think we're going to seek out. At least, not major help for the short-term. While GMZ has yet to show his hand, it's looking like, for the first time in my blogging career, the Mariners are going to set their sights on some time beyond the next season. For the first time in as long as I've been writing, the Mariners seem to have a plan. A plan more complicated and better thought out than "JESUS CHRIST PLAY FOR TODAY YOU MIGHT DIE TOMORROW". A big-picture plan. A plan intended to help us in the long run, even if it doesn't pay many short-term dividends.
While I'm not awaiting a formal announcement that the front office doesn't care about 2009, I think it's pretty clear that no one really expects to win next season. And that's...well, I think we could build a decent team for next year without making too many sacrifices, but I see where they're coming from, and I'm willing to give them the benefit of the doubt. They deserve it. It's just a weird situation in which to find myself, because I love thinking about good deals and bargains on the market, and this time there's not really a point. There are guys out there who could really help us, but so what? Them looking beyond 2009 kind of defeats the purpose of my imagining how to make this team a winner in 2009.
There are bargains out there to be had, and I'm sure the front office will look at them. They'd be stupid not to. But barring something unforeseen, they're not going to make a splash, and this team won't compete without a splash. It won't compete without a few splashes, really. Instead, first and foremost I imagine this offseason will be about trades. About seeing who's offering what for some of our veterans and taking the best offers to re-stock a system nearly bereft of high-level talent. We might have to say some difficult goodbyes, but that's just part of the process. Sometimes you have to trade a guy you love today in order to get a guy you might love tomorrow. That means Beltre. That means Putz. For a few of you, that means a couple other guys too. We just have to keep telling ourselves the whole time that it's all for the greater good. This offseason has the potential to be as exciting as it is nervous.
This is going to be a different winter. After all, it's not as easy to talk about possible trades as it is to talk about possible free agent signings. This is going to be a different winter, but if you can look past the gloomy connotations of the term "rebuilding", it has the potential to be our best in a long long time. Look at that roster posted above. There's some talent there, but there's not enough of it, and there's not enough on the way. This is an organization in need of an overhaul, and Armstrong and Lincoln aside, I don't know that we could've found many better people to lead it.
The Seattle Mariners need help. It's a team that could compete next year with a few handy additions, but if GMZ and his merry band of competents do indeed choose to overlook 2009 in favor of 2010 and 2012, then I'm going to trust that they're making the right call. While they could very easily shatter that trust in a heartbeat tomorrow, I trust them right now, and my god, does that ever feel good to say.
Comments
But what if we die tomorrow?
But yes it’s nice to have a plan that might actually go somewhere and help us in the the stretch.
BOOYA! You got Slurved!
by Slurvey on Nov 11, 2008 8:00 PM PST 0 recs
I can't imagine how hopeless I'd feel if I lost trust in Zoidberg tomorrow.
Must…..Reload……Defense…..Mechanism….
by Double06 on Nov 11, 2008 8:03 PM PST 0 recs
This is going to be an interesting season.
Basically it will be 162 games of looking for progress from individual players..
Felix, Morrow, RRS, Clement, Balentien, Lopez.
Secondly, you engage in the hot stove league for a full season, throwing trade ideas around and seeing which guys can increase their trade value
Beltre, Putz, Bedard, Betancourt
Finally, to be honest, the day Im most looking forward to in 2009, is the draft.. a real chane to reload this farm system and pick up a franchise type player with that #2 pick.
So it will definately be a difficult year in regards to playing meaningful games, but at least we have the GM in place that you feel comfortable wont dismantle the team or system with terrible, desperate moves
by DarkLou on Nov 11, 2008 8:11 PM PST 0 recs
On a brighter note, tRA is really taking off over there.
GREINKE HO!!!!!
by oc on
Nov 11, 2008 8:53 PM PST
up
0 recs
I almost wish it got cited less
I feel the urge to sign up to random message boards and flame people whenever I read what they have to say about it.
by Graham on
Nov 11, 2008 9:07 PM PST
up
0 recs
If Oakland wants to win next year
He’d make a whole lot of sense there.
by JI on
Nov 11, 2008 11:29 PM PST
up
0 recs
Beltre
While he’s my favorite Mariner, I can’t wait to trade for the guy. There are a lot of teams that could use a good third baseman, and let’s face it, he’s going to be on another team by the time we’re competitive again anyway. I’m excited to see what he nets us.
by katal on Nov 11, 2008 8:42 PM PST 0 recs
The great closer, bleh prospect, bleh prospect package?
by Graham on
Nov 11, 2008 9:04 PM PST
up
0 recs
I have mixed feelings about Carlos
I don’t think he’s as bad as he was this year, even if it means that he’ll never be the player people thought he might be while he was still with Arizona.
I’d take a package that featured a relatively young, established, quality major leaguer, an okay prospect, and a bleh prospect. I’d prefer someone with with more than two years of team control left (as opposed to Street), and we certainly don’t need any more relievers and maybe-maybe-not OFers, but the fundamentals of the Oakland/Colorado trade are all right. The package likely won’t be as great as the draft picks we’d net in 2010, but this way we’re getting talent that can develop in our system right now. The team ought to be ready to contend again by 2011, and I want prospects that can make that happen.
by katal on
Nov 11, 2008 9:15 PM PST
up
0 recs
So maybe a Jonathan Broxton, Andre Ethier, Blake Dewitt/Josh Bell, and Delwyn Young type package?
Yesterday's Pants
A blog-thingy about the Mariners and stuff.
by BrettJMiller on
Nov 11, 2008 9:51 PM PST
up
0 recs
That package would please me
The more talent that can help us contend in 2011-2012, the better.
by katal on
Nov 11, 2008 9:53 PM PST
up
0 recs
I refuse to believe Beltre couldn't get at least one of Ethier/Broxton and one of Dewitt/Bell or Young
Yesterday's Pants
A blog-thingy about the Mariners and stuff.
by BrettJMiller on
Nov 11, 2008 11:44 PM PST
up
0 recs
Beltre for Either straight up could make sense
consider in LA’s OF surplus, the problem is that you’re trading on year of Beltre for three years of Either so you’d have to count on Colletti putting all his resources into 2009 and not giving a shit about the future.
…and trading Either for Broxton is a bad idea. I’d rather let Beltre walk.
by JI on
Nov 11, 2008 11:51 PM PST
up
0 recs
Colletti is pretty bad at his job...
Ethier is already 26, but boasted an incredible 26.6% LD rate last year. Ethier and Broxton for Beltre isn’t outside the realm of possibility. I’d go for Kemp and a lesser second guy instead though. Despite him being a righty, I think I’d much prefer him to Ethier. I don’t think it’s impossible for the M’s to flip Beltre for Ethier or Kemp+
Yesterday's Pants
A blog-thingy about the Mariners and stuff.
by BrettJMiller on
Nov 12, 2008 12:46 AM PST
up
0 recs
Ethier and Broxton for Beltre isn’t outside the realm of possibility.
Yes it is, Either was fantastic last year, and Broxton is their closer. There’s no way they deal both players for Beltre. No major league GM is that dumb— Even Beltre for Either is a stretch. Either was their best player down the stretch this year and he’s the heir apparent for the #3 spot in the order when Manny leaves: that leaves an OF of Either/Pierre/Kemp, so in reality you’re not going to have any hope of being able to pry any worthwhile fixtures from their lineup unless Manny resigns (which seems unlikely).
by JI on
Nov 12, 2008 1:05 AM PST
up
0 recs
Pretty much
Ethier was the best hitter on that Dodger team all season even after Torre screwed him for a month. Broxton is the closer now with Saito’s injury.
Both are HUGE fan favorites as well.
Kemp is slightly more likely to be traded but after he controlled the CF job I’d say its unlikely. Coletti wants to deal either Jones of Pierre more.
You know what? Fuck you Sports Gods, fuck you.
by bluemax on
Nov 12, 2008 5:14 PM PST
up
0 recs
That's a better package than Holliday got
You’re getting:
an MLB ready closer
a lefty hitter with decent defense and good offense in a pitcher’s park
a so so 2B/3B prospect (in DeWitt)
an MLB bench bat with some power potential in Young.
You know what? Fuck you Sports Gods, fuck you.
by bluemax on
Nov 12, 2008 5:11 PM PST
up
0 recs
I could wait a long time to trade the guy.
I’d give almost anything to get him to sign the dotted line on another 5 years. Just doesn’t seem like it’s gonna happen…but I would want a better package than what the A’s got for Holliday.
Yesterday's Pants
A blog-thingy about the Mariners and stuff.
by BrettJMiller on
Nov 11, 2008 9:46 PM PST
up
0 recs
I would too, but we're not going to get one.
If I was a Rockies fan, I’d be a little annoyed at how little a player as great as Holliday netted. Beltre’s put up a very similar value to Holliday in 2008, but half of that came in runs saved, which teams will discount due to its volatility.
I don’t know; I don’t see that there’s an easy answer to this… maybe you have to be happy with a solid/low-ceiling prospect and call it a day. As much as that may make sense intellectually, it’s still going to hurt if it goes down like that.
by marc w on
Nov 12, 2008 9:01 AM PST
up
0 recs
I'm just going to assume Brad Nelson is a Mariner because the truth is too depressing
Please make this happen yesterday.
by JLC on Nov 11, 2008 10:45 PM PST 0 recs
We're going to have a Betancourt/Lopez debate soon
I know you guys are big Lopez fans, but a +1 win difference between the two is nutty.
by davidcameron on Nov 12, 2008 10:00 AM PST 0 recs
I put Yuni as a -10 defender
The gap is .6-.7 wins if you project Lopez for a .325 wOBA, and >1 win if you project him for a .335 wOBA.
by Jeff on
Nov 12, 2008 10:42 AM PST
up
0 recs
-10 at SS and +0 at 2B are basically the same thing
I know Tango’s updated position adjustments say the difference is 7.5 runs, but I’m not sure I buy that yet. I’d stick with a 10 run difference between the two, but either way, it’s pretty close to a push.
So, with defense out of the way, you’re saying that Lopez is a win better than Betancourt with the bat going forward. We know Marcel disagrees with you (.319 wOBA for Lopez, .313 for Betancourt for ‘09), saying the difference is more like a run or two offensively. Even just looking at their ’08 performances, the offensive difference was only 15 runs, and that’s comparing Yuni’s worst season to Lopez’s best season.
The only way to justify a one win offensive difference between the two is to suggest that Yuni’s regression was real and that Lopez’s progression was real, and that what we saw last year was their true talent levels. I’m not buying that. Betancourt’s BA drop was BABIP driven, despite posting the highest LD% and lowest IFFB% of his career. His plate discipline and power were unchanged, and even though I’ve been leading the “Betancourt has peaked” bandwagon for years, I see no reason to believe that an early peak means that an age 26 regression is real.
So that brings us to Lopez – could his step forward last year have been 100% real growth? It’s really, really unlikely. Certainly, some portion of the improvement was almost certainly real, but we have to acknowledge there’s probably some noise in there as well.
If we just look at their skills, their walk rates are nearly identical, Betancourt’s a little bit better at making contact and he’s a bit faster, while Lopez has a bit more power. Based on that, we’d expect Yuni to have something like a 10 point advantage in BABIP and Lopez to have a 20 point advantage in ISO, or something pretty close to that. We’ll give Lopez a tick of an advantage in walk rates to account for his age advantage.
So that leaves us with something like Yuni as a .290/.320/.410 hitter, and Lopez as a .280/.320/.420 hitter.
There’s no way that adds up to a full win.
by davidcameron on
Nov 12, 2008 11:53 AM PST
up
0 recs
My hand is busted open so I can't type much, but here's what I did
Yuni:
(.322 wOBA* – .342) / 1.15 * 700
-10 (defense)
/10.5
+ .75 (position)
+ 2 (RL)
x .83 (PT)
= .54 WAR
Lopez:
(.335 – .342) / 1.15 * 700
+ 0 (defense)
/10.5
+ .25 (position)
+ 2 (RL)
x .85 (PT)
= 1.57 WAR
The biggest point of contention is obviously that .335 wOBA*. That’s already down 11 points from last year, but if you want to knock it down even further, plugging in .325 still gives you more than half a win. And he’s been at or above .335 twice in the last three seasons.
by Jeff on
Nov 12, 2008 1:42 PM PST
up
0 recs
My issues
A five run position adjustment between SS and 2B is just too small. Do you really think Jose Lopez would only be a -5 shortstop? I can’t imagine any way he’s not Brendan Harris bad compared to the SS pool.
Why the playing time difference? Betancourt’s actually got a higher three year average of playing time.
Using a .325/.322 wOBA* for Lopez/Betancourt and equaling out the playing time, we’re basically calling them the exact same player offensively . I don’t think too many people would even disagree with that.
Really, the argument that the Lopez is +1 win better than Betancourt hangs on is that Lopez is a better defender than Yuni. I just don’t buy it. I can’t imagine that you really think that Lopez would just be a slightly below average SS. . His footwork and range would make him a disaster there.
by davidcameron on
Nov 13, 2008 8:13 AM PST
up
0 recs
Come on hand, don't let me down
1) I was just going off of Tango’s adjustments
2) I was using PAs to measure playing time and it only occurred to me later that that isn’t the best idea. But the differences there are negligible
3) I would like to think that Lopez is a little better than a .325 wOBA* going forward but I understand that the projections may not agree with my assessment
4) I would argue that Yuni’s already a minor disaster at short, but I get what you mean
What kind of WAR difference would you suggest? 0.5? None?
by Jeff on
Nov 13, 2008 10:33 AM PST
up
0 recs
Yea
I just think Tango’s revised adjustments undersell SS, and the position adjustment is the driving factor in the difference laid out above.
I think that Yuni and Lopez, right now, are basically the same player. High average, low patience, gap power, mediocre defensive second baseman. The differences are matter of shades and pereceptions – if Lopez was playing short and Yuni was at second, I think we’d view them differently. Lopez is one the we’d be frustrated with for gaining weight and not being able to get to balls in the hole and putting up horrible defensive numbers, while Betancourt would be the guy we’d see as average-ish defensively and an okay but not great bat.
Really, to me, they’re basically the same. Lopez has a bit more upside, but even that’s overstated by the lingering memory of the stupid “he’s the next Tejada” stuff that got way too much traction a few years ago.
by davidcameron on
Nov 13, 2008 10:52 AM PST
up
0 recs
Not to jump in
but if we had a competition in spring training between Lopez and Betancourt for 2B who would you want?
I think we all agree that Lopez probably has more offensive potential (power) and we have all soured on Betancourt as he as put on weight and lost throwing accuracy. I agree that Lopez would be a pretty lousy SS because of his skill set but would Betancourt be a better 2B than Lopez?
by Edgar for Pres on
Nov 13, 2008 7:00 PM PST
up
0 recs
I would choose Lopes
Because of my irrational hatred of Betancourt.
by Sec 108 on
Nov 13, 2008 7:46 PM PST
up
0 recs
I don't want a competition
I want them to sell high on Lopez while they still have shiny numbers to point to (“.297! 17 homers! 24 year old who might go Tejada next year!”), move Betancourt to second to see if he can fix his defense, and if he can’t, give the job to Luis Valbuena when he’s ready.
by davidcameron on
Nov 13, 2008 8:02 PM PST
up
0 recs
Makes sense.
I think we’d both agree that Lopez’s trade value isn’t too high but it is probably higher than Betancourt and maybe could get us something interesting. Probably not a great prospect but something very interetesting.
Do you think Betancourt would be a better 2B than Lopez just for my curiosity?
by Edgar for Pres on
Nov 13, 2008 9:07 PM PST
up
0 recs
I'm not nearly as informed as you, but I just don't understand all the Lopez hate.
Most metrics seemed to like his defense, at least as average, and at his age it’s not impossible that this season was a step forward in development, not a fluke. I know someone said his Marcel is like .280/.320/.430 or something, but for a 2B with defense that grades out to ~average, it doesn’t seem like he’s the problem. Plus, if the step forward with the bat wasn’t an abberation, he may have even more of an offensive ceiling.
I know 2B is easier to play, but when +/- has you at -19 at SS, is it really logical to assume that Yuni would even be an average 2B? -19 is pretty damn bad, and I think most of us that watch this team would agree that Betancourt deserved that rating.
A +1 win difference doesn’t seem that unreasonable. I know you can’t ignore 2007 for Lopez, but you also can’t ignore 2008. If Lopez falls back to exactly average, and Yuni gets a bit better, say -10, then Lopez has the hitting edge, Lopez has the defense edge, and maybe it’s a .5 win. But that’s if Lopez gets worse and Yuni gets better.
I’m not totally doubting you, I know you know more about these players than I do, but all the evidence seems to add up to Lopez being a slightly above average 2B all around, where Betancourt adds up to a shitty SS…
That said, I wouldn’t be against trading either of them. I just think Lopez could be a starter on the next competitive Mariners team, and I don’t think Betancourt can…I could be swayed to believe that the gap is smaller between Yuni and Lopez, but I’ve yet to hear a compelling argument yet. You’re a much better analyst than I could ever hope to be, so ther’s a good chance you could give me said compelling argument.
Yesterday's Pants
A blog-thingy about the Mariners and stuff.
by BrettJMiller on
Nov 12, 2008 10:43 AM PST
up
0 recs
What's depressing
None of the teams young position players projects to be average, let alone above average. Lopez seems the only one that might be close to average, based on how you expect his performance to develop.
PS: Hope your hand heals well, Jeff.
by vj on Nov 13, 2008 1:43 AM PST 0 recs











