Contend In '09: What We've Got
With the Mariners spending yet another season trying to pull themselves out of the crapper, there's been a developing groundswell of arguments that they need to tear everything down and rebuild. "Trying to win now was a giant mistake," people say. "This organization badly needs to start from scratch, because the roster in place is far too flawed to ever compete."
It's easy to understand where they're coming from. This is a bad team. This is the fourth bad team we've been forced to watch in the last five years, and after so many seasons of having the front office shuffle things around in an effort to create the right spark, people are getting fed up. And people who're getting fed up want to see big sweeping changes, because generally speaking, that's the most effective way of leaving a disappointing present day behind. If the now sucks, why try to build off of it? Better to take it apart and reassemble with newer parts, right?
Here's the thing: these guys were expected to contend for a reason. And while a lot has clearly gone wrong, I still think the roster has enough talent to fill out the bulk of a 2009 contender. So what follows is my list of guys in the organization who I think have it in them to hold significant roles and help this team make a push for the playoffs.
But first:
Constraints/Assumptions
-Miguel Batista is untradeable
-Carlos Silva is untradeable
-Kenji Johjima is not untradeable but sticks around anyway
-the team won't try to deal Yuni
-Jarrod Washburn is tradeable and is traded
-Ichiro stays in right because God dammit McLaren
Now then. On with it.
Infield
Jeff Clement: Ignore the small sample size struggles at the plate; Clement's going to hit, and he's going to hit pretty well. And while his defense is a concern, (1) it's light years ahead of where it used to be, and (2) there are worse defensive catchers holding down regular jobs right now. Johjima extension or not, the team's smartest course of action would be keeping Clement behind the dish where he holds the most value.
Kenji Johjima: Nothing we can really do about this, I don't think. There are worse backup catchers.
Jose Lopez: Lopez seems to have turned himself into a decent hitter for his position, and with average/plus defense and a low cost, he's a valuable asset. He'll only turn 25 in November, so there's also still a fair bit of growth potential left in his bat.
Yuniesky Betancourt: Yuni's defense sucks and his offense hasn't really progressed at all, but then almost to a man the American League has terrible shortstops, so whatever. The team could probably find somewhere to trade him if it looked hard enough, but for purposes of this post, I'm taking the safest route and assuming that won't happen.
Adrian Beltre: Stud.
Outfield
Ichiro: Why bother writing anything? We all know what Ichiro brings to the table every single day. I'm not wild about the switch back to right, but I'll do my best to overlook that and focus on how he's a nice building block for a strong defensive outfield, which this team badly needs.
Jeremy Reed: I wrote Reed off. I wrote him off completely and was prepared to let someone else take him off our hands for nothing. So what does he do but go and turn himself into a useful player? Reed turned 27 a few weeks ago and will spend the next couple seasons in the middle of his physical prime, a prime during which I think he could hit something like .270/.330/.400 with reasonable defense and a low low cost. In center, that's a value. If you think about it, Reed potentially rebuilding himself a Major League career may be an even bigger 2008 bright spot than the emergence of Brandon Morrow. By many indications, he seems to have gone from backup outfielder to legitimate regular, and the team should be thrilled that a free everyday center fielder may have just fallen back into its lap.
Starting Rotation
Felix: Megastud.
Erik Bedard: There's a lot of talk out there about how Bedard might be back on the market, but to me, trading him away would be a sign that the front office doesn't intend to compete next year, because as of this writing he's a pretty big piece of the hypothetical puzzle. Bedard's a great pitcher when he's healthy and a good pitcher when he's a little bit broken, easily one of the top #2's in the league. This team stands a better chance of competing next year with him than they do with whatever they could get in return.
Carlos Silva: Nothing we can do about this one, either, but hey, he's not terrible. He just isn't very good. We know the contract sucks. Might as well just focus on his contribution, and his contribution should be similar to that of a #4 starter.
Brandon Morrow, RRS, or RA Dickey: I think any one of these three would be perfectly capable of bringing up the rear. They all have their flaws - Morrow doesn't really have a pitch against lefties, RRS barely has any stuff, and Dickey's just a regular dude with an irregular pitch - but good luck finding a #5 who doesn't have anything wrong with him. Being a #5 starter isn't that hard. You basically just have to throw 5-6 innings without giving up more than 3-4 runs. A lot of people can do that. These people could do that for cheap. I don't want two of them in the rotation for depth purposes, but one should be no problem.
Bullpen
JJ Putz: Won't ever be as awesome as he was in 2006, but there's little reason to think he won't be effective. Should still be a fine closer.
Brandon Morrow, RRS, or RA Dickey: This is where you put the two who miss out on the #5 slot. We know that Morrow's basically unhittable as a one-inning atom bomb of awesome. We know that RRS can come up big against lefties. And we know that Dickey can soak up multiple innings without embarrassing himself. All of those things have value, so no matter which way the three go in this hypothetical, they're still doing some good.
Miguel Batista: >:(
Sean Green: Sean Green remains way awesome and way underrated. Provided his arm doesn't run away screaming, he should once again be a big part of the pen.
Mark Lowe: Impressive stuff, erratic command, inconsistent results. If you think that sounds like Mark Lowe, you're right. It also sounds like every single other middle reliever in the league. If middle relievers were awesome, they wouldn't be middle relievers, so as far as I'm concerned, having Lowe's stuff and upside handling the odd 6th and 7th inning is just ducky.
-----
So there you have it. That's 17 players off of the current roster that I think could help this team win in 2009, and I didn't even bother really thinking about the bench. Hell, you might be able to throw Wlad and Josh Fields in there too, although I'm not going to get ahead of myself. Let's just go with what I listed above. Here's what it looks like overall:
That team's at least average almost everywhere, with enough big-time talent to keep things interesting. It also only costs somewhere around $80m, which gives you $35-40m to spend on filling out the rest of the roster. What are the needs?
SP
LF
1B
DH
Utility
4th OF
Bench bat
Bench bat/reliever
...I'll save the particulars of that discussion for Part 2. For now, the big point I'm trying to make is that I don't believe for a second that this team is in dire need of reconstruction. Resurfacing, perhaps, but even that seems to imply something more dramatic than I think is necessary, because we already have a lot of the pieces to build a contender. We're just being dragged down by some heavy, heavy anchors. Anchors that won't be coming back after the season.
This team is capable of winning, and it's capable of winning pretty quick in a fashion that doesn't at all require sacrificing the future. Like I said, I'll address some of the additions we could make in Part 2, but for the time being, be encouraged. This team isn't a lost cause, and with a better-qualified GM running the show, we could be back in contention in a God damn hurry.
6 recs |
173 comments
Comments
Keep Bedard? Madness...
(Please don’t kick me into the bottomless abyss of death)
Actually, sticking with Bedard sounds like a capital idea. It’s always possible that he restores some of his trade value in the next year. The M’s can always deal him at the deadline or let him walk in the offseason after next for a pick or two.
What if Ichiro patrolled Safeco's outfield while riding a Utahraptor?
by Frosty Raptor on
Jul 4, 2008 2:54 AM PDT
reply
actions
0 recs
Five minute penalty for roughing the English language, second down
Abyss is by definition, an immeasurable chasm. Therefore, the adjective “bottomless” is not only unnecessary but redundant.
What if Ichiro patrolled Safeco's outfield while riding a Utahraptor?
by Frosty Raptor on
Jul 4, 2008 2:59 AM PDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Wait... Optimism?
What happened to Jeff?
We don't negotiate with terrorists.
by Mariner John on
Jul 4, 2008 2:55 AM PDT
reply
actions
0 recs
He's been saying this for a while.
The big caveat is “competent GM”.
Fans are typically idiots.
by The Typical Idiot Fan on
Jul 4, 2008 4:08 AM PDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
What about Ibanez?
I got no problem with him being the DH on a possible 2009 contender. That takes away one need.
One Vision, One Purpose
Peace Through Power
by Goose on
Jul 4, 2008 3:31 AM PDT
reply
actions
0 recs
I fear a multi-year extension
We don't negotiate with terrorists.
by Mariner John on
Jul 4, 2008 3:40 AM PDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
I'm with you most of the way, here
Can’t argue that anyone should be shifted out, although of course we know that those 17 guys will probably look something like this in 2009:
- 11 roughly the same as 2008
- 3 a little better than in 2008
- 3 a little worse than in 2008
and if those who get worse were average in 2008 then that becomes a position de la suck again. Ultimately, what I’m trying to say is that whilst that sounds good, there’s little chance that you can rely on all 17 of those coming good the way we’d like next year.
Accidental Mariner - P3 W1 L2 (.333)
Sponsor of Jamie Burke's baseball-reference page
by MarkE on
Jul 4, 2008 6:27 AM PDT
reply
actions
0 recs
Here's another thought, too...
Is the assumption that this team will want to be a 2009 contender valid?
Depending upon the appointment of a Manager/GM in the offseason, they may come in with a very different plan that sees the Ms doing well in 2010/2011 as a higher priority than doing well in 2009?
On that basis, the motivation to trade Bedard increases significantly.
Accidental Mariner - P3 W1 L2 (.333)
Sponsor of Jamie Burke's baseball-reference page
by MarkE on
Jul 4, 2008 6:29 AM PDT
reply
actions
0 recs
Trade Rumors
Well, if trade rumors are a barometer, then the club seems to be leaning towards rebuilding. Bedard, Ibanez, Washburn, and several other M’s have been mentioned in trade rumors, many of which are fairly believable. I think the willingness to blow this thing up is there. In fact, it could be Lee’s mandate after taking over.
by Jerry on
Jul 4, 2008 4:11 PM PDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Worries about Yuni
I agree with most of this, and I agree that a good GM could make this a decent team in 2009. But I worry about whether Betancourt is too much of a liability. He’s been terrible at the plate this year, and it’s getting to the point where it looks like he won’t get a lot better. But worse still is his defense. Our pitchers, Felix in particular, and Silva, if he ever discovers how to get groundballs again, need to have good defenders behind them. And Yuni is terrible now. Is he going to get better? It’s a lot to hope for. I think they need to try to find an all-glove/no hit shortstop to replace him. Maybe they can even get something for him, if the other GM is overly optimistic or not paying attention.
by b_rider on
Jul 4, 2008 6:35 AM PDT
reply
actions
0 recs
Yuni
I can’t comment on the defensive side, I don’t profess to know anywhere near enough about defensive metrics.
Lifting THT data though, I can tell that Yuni has had 81 games this year and 293 at bats.
Six other AL shortstops* have appeared more often than he has yet he ranks 5th in hits (81), 3rd in doubles (21), and 2nd in triples (2 – okay, poor data quality this low). He’s slugging 4th best (.392). Yes, he’s striking out a bunch and not walking, but that’s a case of his judgement when not making contact, rather than his skill when he is making contact. Surely the former is a more fixable attribute than the latter?
IMV, you’re going to have to find one hell of a glove to compensate. Who do you have in mind?
- data based upon sample of all 2008 AL SS with at least 20 games to July 3rd.
Accidental Mariner - P3 W1 L2 (.333)
Sponsor of Jamie Burke's baseball-reference page
by MarkE on
Jul 4, 2008 7:48 AM PDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Yuni's home/road split
Was just browsing BR PI and noticed this. Apologies if this has been pointed out before, but if it hasn’t then it’s worth noting.
Home (40 games) .324 / .338 / .475 (.813 OPS) (.331 BABIP)
Road (41 games) .234 / .239 / .318 (.557 OPS) (.245 BABIP)
Just… wow.
Accidental Mariner - P3 W1 L2 (.333)
Sponsor of Jamie Burke's baseball-reference page
by MarkE on
Jul 4, 2008 7:57 AM PDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Why Yuni (apparently) sucks
I am not an expert on defense metrics, either, but Matthew has argued several times recently that Yuni’s defense is awful, nearly the worst in the league. From Matthew’s June 26 post:
“We’ve been harping on it for awhile now, but Yuni’s defense has regressed worse than Miguel Batista’s pitching. He stands near or at the bottom of shortstops at both making plays in zone and making plays out of zone. He’s always had trouble with the routine but when he first came up in 2005 and in 2006 he would make up for that with terrific range, getting to and at least stopping balls that Derek Jeter doesn’t even reach in his most frenzied ESPN-induced self-glory dreams. Those days are gone. Long gone. “
What really got me was when I was surfing on Fangraphs yesterday. They always talk about “WPA” and “WPA/LI”, so I was trying to understand the concepts. Then, I checked out the leaderboards, and went to see if any Mariners near the top or bottom of the standings. None near the top (of course) but Yuni was near the bottom of both (15th from bottom in WPA; 13th from bottom in WPA/LI). Similarly with RC/27 (10th from the bottom).
Granted, there were a lot of shortstops around him, but many of those were good defensive shortstops. I have no problem if Adam Everett doesn’t hit.
by b_rider on
Jul 4, 2008 9:02 AM PDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
I'm glad you wrote this
Many are leaping off the deep end over wanting to tear the entire team down. This team has a lot of competitive pieces… it’s just that the previous GM’s additions have been expensive, useless and mostly stupid.
by Gomez on
Jul 4, 2008 9:02 AM PDT
reply
actions
0 recs
Here's what I don't like about this team
Many of the pieces that are in place and can potentially help next year are a tick above or a tick below average. They’re good enough, but nothing spectacular really (ok, 3B and RF are sweet but what else? I’m not holding my breath for Clement to kick ass until ‘10).
What’s my point? Well, for this team to get over the hump they need some remarkable bats to complement the merely competent ones that make up much of the lineup. And those bats need to be in LF, 1B, and DH. These are exactly the positions that should be manned by competent bats from within the system, so the big money can be spent on a great hitting SS or 2B.
I think the team is doomed to repeat the Sexson blunder as they see a 1B power bat as such a dire need for the team, and that type of production is overvalued. I agree that we’re not so far off from contention, but I’m pretty sure I’m going to hate whatever contract they hand to their new DH and 1B this winter. One can hope, I suppose, that Pelekoudas surprises everyone by dealing Washburn to the Brewers for some of the promising bats logjammed behind Fielder and Braun… yeah… could happen.
Anyhow. Our offense plus better pitching plus awesome D gets you the Blue Jays, which is worse than sucking if you ask me. They need to make dramatic improvements to the lineup to make things interesting and I shudder to think of the kind of things they will do to achieve that, given the needs.
the artist formerly known as Mere Tantalisers.
by Bearskin Rugburn on
Jul 4, 2008 9:19 AM PDT
reply
actions
0 recs
A lot of pieces on a lot of competitive teams are a tick above or a tick below average
by Gomez on
Jul 4, 2008 9:30 AM PDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
not my point
the artist formerly known as Mere Tantalisers.
by Bearskin Rugburn on
Jul 4, 2008 10:17 AM PDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
According to BP's 3rd-order adjusted standings the Blue Jays should be 48-38
but I’ll leave the rest of that to Part 2.
by Jeff on
Jul 4, 2008 12:07 PM PDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
I hope that makes Ricciardi feel better about himself
but seriously, I’m stunned. That team scores fewer runs than we do.
the artist formerly known as Mere Tantalisers.
by Bearskin Rugburn on
Jul 4, 2008 1:10 PM PDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
BP is racist
We don't negotiate with terrorists.
by Mariner John on
Jul 4, 2008 8:17 PM PDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Well, the bullpen would be solid as a unit
and Felix and Bedard are/can be both significantly above average….
by Matthew on
Jul 4, 2008 12:11 PM PDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
And we wouldn't have any black holes like Weaver, Pineiro, Ramirez, Everett, Sexson, Vidro, Sele, Franklin...
...
>:(
by Jeff on
Jul 4, 2008 12:14 PM PDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
You have players already in mind for part 2 or you open to ideas?
by Matthew on
Jul 4, 2008 12:17 PM PDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
If I hadn't been ordered to stay positive
I’d say “Adam Dunn, Aubrey Huff.”
by JI on
Jul 4, 2008 8:44 PM PDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
right
I’m talking offense. Pitching is solid, and I’m going to assume that the back of the rotation isn’t going to be the leprosy ridden parasitic twin it has been the last couple of years. I’m taking all that as a given, but my point is that to be contenders they have to get some high quality bats in those positions, and I hate having to get those bats off the FA market.
I’m not saying they can’t contend, only that I hate what they have to do to get there.
the artist formerly known as Mere Tantalisers.
by Bearskin Rugburn on
Jul 4, 2008 12:19 PM PDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
They don't need high quality.
Even league average would be a huge improvement over Sexson/Vidro.
by acblue on
Jul 4, 2008 12:20 PM PDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
League average offense + above average pitching + above average defense = 86+ wins
by Matthew on
Jul 4, 2008 12:24 PM PDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
how does the D go from worst to above average?
Tampa Bay did it, but they changed a lot of pieces around from last year – new SS, new 2B, new 3B, new OF (or was it two new OF?). The positions Jeff identified as needs aren’t going to drastically impact the team’s defense, so at best I see this group as lower middle class next year. Well, OK Ibanez and Sexson do a lot of damage between the two of them, but I still don’t see how replacing them with average guys will get you an above average defense. Which is why it seems they have to get very high quality bats.
the artist formerly known as Mere Tantalisers.
by Bearskin Rugburn on
Jul 4, 2008 12:31 PM PDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Ibanez and Sexson, by most measurements are somewhere around 30-35 runs below average
on defense. Wilkerson and Wlad were bad as well. Jeremy Reed is good. And nobody has yet said anything about who might be the new LF and 1B. They could be good at defense.
by Matthew on
Jul 4, 2008 12:35 PM PDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
sure.
but when you last wrote up the team’s D you divided the blame equally between the infield and outfield, and while the outfield promises to be closer to competent the infield will only have one player replaced. Everyone else will have just aged a year.
the artist formerly known as Mere Tantalisers.
by Bearskin Rugburn on
Jul 4, 2008 12:38 PM PDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Huzzahwhat?
Going by RZR, the infield doesn’t appear to be the brunt of the problem. They do have a lower than average RZR (.767 to .782) which through nearly half a season represents about 10-12 fewer plays on balls in zone, but they compensate by recording nine more plays out of zone than average so on the whole, it roughly balances out, though they are still a touch below average.
However the outfield is a whopping two percentage points below average (.876 to .896), which translates to again about 10 plays (fewer balls in zone to OF than IF), but they are also 11 plays under the average out of zone number putting them around 20 plays (or more) below average overall. And these are OF plays so their run value is higher than the 0.8 you’d use for overall analysis, in fact it’s a lot closer to 1.
by Matthew on
Jul 4, 2008 12:42 PM PDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
my bad
I guess I was looking at in-zone plays only. I understand that we’ve got a superlative RF and competent CF now, and chances are Sexson won’t be at first every day come August. So I guess whatever the second half defensive numbers are should be taken as a baseline for what this team can do going forward.
the artist formerly known as Mere Tantalisers.
by Bearskin Rugburn on
Jul 4, 2008 12:50 PM PDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
One example.
Reed was called up on May 20th and started getting regular playing time on May 31st.
Plus/Minus on May 27th: -36 plays
Plus/Minus on July 4th: -39 plays
by Matthew on
Jul 4, 2008 12:55 PM PDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
see, that's what I'm saying
Reed’s cost us 3 plays – he’s not a very good defender.
the artist formerly known as Mere Tantalisers.
by Bearskin Rugburn on
Jul 4, 2008 12:57 PM PDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Just kidding there.
that’s very impressive.
the artist formerly known as Mere Tantalisers.
by Bearskin Rugburn on
Jul 4, 2008 12:59 PM PDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Hah come on
If i did that you’d yell at me for using a week to draw conclusions about defensive value.
by Edgar for Pres on
Jul 4, 2008 1:27 PM PDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
dude that's a month and a week
they were – 19 plays per month through April/May, then they were -3 through all of June and then some. Not much else to say there
the artist formerly known as Mere Tantalisers.
by Bearskin Rugburn on
Jul 4, 2008 1:40 PM PDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
That's why I just said one example
instead of “See, Reed makes all the difference in the world!!!!!!!111”
It’s also a point about regression. The team’s defense isn’t as bad overall as it was through the first six weeks.
by Matthew on
Jul 4, 2008 1:49 PM PDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
this reminds me actually
I think it’s important to reconcile individual defensive numbers with group defensive numbers, and this is a great opportunity to do so because you have a group that has both the best and worst gloves at their positions.
The infield as a whole was at -10 runs through almost half a season. Beltre has been playing fantastically, let’s put him at +5 (assuming he’s a +10 defender over a season, which may be wrong but I’m not the data ferry here). Sexson is terrible – he’s cost us 8 already (-15 over a season). Lopez is average, maybe a tick better, so let’s say +2. That means Yuni must have cost the team almost 10 runs over half a season! That’s Jeterian suck.
the artist formerly known as Mere Tantalisers.
by Bearskin Rugburn on
Jul 4, 2008 1:09 PM PDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
the team as a whole was -36 when you made the post, right?
The outfield is responsible for ~20 of those missed plays. The rest would have to be the infield.
the artist formerly known as Mere Tantalisers.
by Bearskin Rugburn on
Jul 4, 2008 1:45 PM PDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
but do you agree that at some level the individual contributions
have to be reconciled with the group’s? I think this will be a good measure of any system’s accuracy actually, since the team (and OF/IF) numbers seem to be solid even over one season.
the artist formerly known as Mere Tantalisers.
by Bearskin Rugburn on
Jul 4, 2008 2:55 PM PDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Look at the players:
Clement: whatever, catchers are impossible to measure anyway
Lopez: average/decent
Yuni: bad/below-average
Beltre: great
Ichiro: good
Reed: good
You’ve got one – maybe two – problem defenders out of those six, and you can probably guess that when I set about filling 1B/LF, I’m not going to choose guys who can’t move. This defense can get a lot better in a hurry by ditching Richie, Ibanez, and the Wlad/Wilkerson experiment.
by Jeff on
Jul 4, 2008 12:46 PM PDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
I am starting to question a little if Beltre is really an elite 3B
I think he’s probably +10 runs but I don’t know if he’s higher than that. Maybe he is.
by Edgar for Pres on
Jul 4, 2008 12:53 PM PDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
But that's still just an assumption
This year’s RZR 3b rankings shows Beltre just a tiny bit ahead of… Jorge fucking Cantu.
Yes, yes – small sample, individual defensive metric. We can take this with as many grains of salt as may be required. But his RZR was approximately the same in 2007 (ca. 660-670).
The point here is that I don’t think we can honestly say that the defensive problems lie with a few players – that if you replace LF/1B that the defense would shoot back to average. Maybe it would, but the sheer magnitude of this year’s suckiness makes me wary of that.
That’s basically what I (and Graham) thought last year – that the replacement of Guillen plus some regression to the mean would put this team close to league average. That’s not at all what happened.
I think we may have to be open to the idea that Beltre and Ichiro just aren’t plus defenders any more. Given the suddenness of the shifts, I don’t think that’s necessarily “true talent” or anything, but for two years, MOST players on this team haven’t really been getting it done.
by marc w on
Jul 4, 2008 1:43 PM PDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
out of zone plays matter,
they matter a lot.
by Matthew on
Jul 4, 2008 1:51 PM PDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
OK.
Its hard to see beyond the way the team’s been playing, but yes, piece by piece they should be at least decent. It seems so improbable that the two least important positions defensively can drag them down so far. Well, them and Yuni, whose deterioration I still can’t believe.
the artist formerly known as Mere Tantalisers.
by Bearskin Rugburn on
Jul 4, 2008 12:56 PM PDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
To be contenders, they need to have a good run differential
this can come from any number of places. Really good pitching. Really good defense. Really good offense. A mix of two or three of those. And so on and so forth. This team doesn’t need to get better bats – it just needs to get better, period, and I think the partial roster we already have in place represents a pretty substantial step forward in that regard. That’s a pretty solid foundation of players.
Plus, at least wait until Part 2 before saying they don’t have enough.
by Jeff on
Jul 4, 2008 12:25 PM PDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
I agree with your premise
all I’m pointing out is that they’ve struggled for three years to come up with a 1B/DH solution. These are easy positions to fill, yet they’ve been sucking the life out of our offense and they keep on dipping into the FA/trade pool and pulling out lemons. These are the positions that ML bats with no glove and rule 5 draftees are born to man, and here we are putting Yuni at short and calling it good so we can spend the big bucks on a LF. Its silly, is all I’m saying.
the artist formerly known as Mere Tantalisers.
by Bearskin Rugburn on
Jul 4, 2008 12:43 PM PDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
So I guess the question is
do you think we’ll have really good pitching, defense, or offense. I have a tough time seeing it in any of these areas.
Felix and Bedard are borderline amazing but the rest of the rotation will probably be pretty pathetic. Two SP with ERA ~ low 3 plus three SP with ERA ~ mid 4 to low 5. Hmm I’m not gonna get too excited about that. Probably 10-20 runs above average. Not bad but isn’t going to be one of the best staffs out there.
If Putz can get healthy and get back in form we have an amazing bullpen. I feel like none of us are that shocked if Putz just kinda dissapears as he did this year with injuries and ineffectiveness. I really hope he gets back to where he was but I have a tough time counting on this. The rest of the bullpen is much like most other pens out there. Probably a little better than average but without Putz this won’t be a major strength.
Defense…I have a tough time seeing how our defense is going to go from horrid to amazing. I’m not sure what we are projected at for the season exactly. I’m gonna guess since THT has us for almost -40 plays this will translate to around -60 runs for the whole season (being generous with a little regression to the mean). Taking Sexson and Ibanez and replacing them with average defenders takes us to -20 runs probably. If Wlad is your replacement for Ibanez, calling Wlad an average defender appears to probably be pretty generous from what we saw in limited action this year. Maybe Reed and Ichiro in the OF together will increase that to -10 runs. Clement probably isn’t as good as Kenji but who the fuck knows how that translates to runs. Beltre and Ichiro aren’t getting any younger and probalby have slowly been slipping from elite defenders to just being well above average and will probably slip a few next year. Our middle infielders are both in danger of putting on pounds at any moment so there is also that defensive worry too.
And then above average offense? Good luck with that. Ichiro is our offensive star. He’s good but he’s just not going to ever produce like an offensive star. Beltre? Yeah I don’t want to rely on him. Lopez, Yuni, Reed, and Wlad would hopefully be able to be league average but I doubt it a little. Clement probably can be counted on to be a few runs above average for a catcher but I wouldn’t expect to be amazed next year. Who do we get at 1B and DH that would move us from hovering around league average (hopefully) to being good?
Oh yeah, don’t forget to project a few total black holes and injuries. You can’t see them coming but they will sap probably at least -20 runs from any projection you put together.
This team isn’t a last place team with a few tweaks. We all realize this I think. I have a tough time seeing how this team could contend but maybe 81 wins is good enough. The other thing that worries me is 2010 and 2011. If we follow this path will they be better or worse than 2009.
by Edgar for Pres on
Jul 4, 2008 12:51 PM PDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Sorry I should have broken that one up. Congrats to anybody who reads it all
by Edgar for Pres on
Jul 4, 2008 12:55 PM PDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
the defense paragraph is a doozy
the artist formerly known as Mere Tantalisers.
by Bearskin Rugburn on
Jul 4, 2008 12:58 PM PDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
I think you underestimate what other people have in the back of their rotation.
mid 4 to low 5 from your 3->5 starters is nowhere near pathetic.
by Matthew on
Jul 4, 2008 12:57 PM PDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
I didn't think it was pathetic. Its just not going go let us compete by itself.
Look at the top 5 teams in the AL. Their rotations are kicking ass and taking names right now. I’m not saying that our rotation is bad but really truly have a chance of contending we are probably going to need to expect to score about 100 runs more than we allow (gives us about 90 wins). I don’t think our rotation would be much more than 25 runs above average with that. Maybe my math is super wacky.
Average ERA ~ 4.4 (Safeco adjusts that to 4.2 lets say)
Felix + Bedard give 400 IP ERA ~ 3.25<br />SP 3-5 give 540 ERA ~ 4.8
That gives me a SP staff that is 7 runs above average. If you drop the SP 3-5 down to an ERA ~ 4.5 that gives us a staff that is 24 runs above average. If the starting rotation is the strength getting us into the playoffs I would like to see something more like 50 runs above average.
If our starting rotation is 25 runs above average (reasonable), we call our bullpen about 10 runs above average (since they might be good but its risky) and our defense is 15 runs above average (reasonable) then we need our offense to go from the worst in the league to 50 runs above average. I just don’t see this happening.
by Edgar for Pres on
Jul 4, 2008 1:52 PM PDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
WFT happened
Ok whatever it shouldn’t have a block quote and it should say:
Average ERA ~ 4.4 (Safeco adjusts that to 4.2 lets say)
Felix + Bedard give 400 IP ERA ~ 3.25
SP 3-5 give 540 ERA ~ 4.8
by Edgar for Pres on
Jul 4, 2008 1:53 PM PDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
I don't want to get into heavy duty math until Part 2 is finished
but FWIW, SafeCo would adjust down to 4.3, not 4.2
by Matthew on
Jul 4, 2008 1:57 PM PDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Ok then it goes to
17 and 35 runs respectively. I just wanted to go through some quickly to just think about it a little to see where we need to be. Nothing I did is even close to respectable analysis although back of the envelope calculations are pretty valuable to do.
by Edgar for Pres on
Jul 4, 2008 1:59 PM PDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
yeah, if we have Felix, Bedard
and three guys with a cumulative 4.5 ERA…. Maybe it won’t be the best pitching staff in the majors, but it’ll definitely be in the top two.
the artist formerly known as Mere Tantalisers.
by Bearskin Rugburn on
Jul 4, 2008 1:01 PM PDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Teams that may have better 2009 pitching rotaitons than what the M's have:
Boston, Tampa Bay, Toronto, Diamondbacks, Giants, and Reds.
and teams who would be close:
Angels, Dodgers, and Cubs.
by Edgar for Pres on
Jul 4, 2008 2:04 PM PDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Oakland is somewhere there too.
by Edgar for Pres on
Jul 4, 2008 2:05 PM PDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Of those, Seattle only has to compete with the Angels and A's.
Oakland has no offense and the Angels are most likely going to be worse next year than this year. And they’re .500 team this year.
by acblue on
Jul 4, 2008 2:09 PM PDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
I don't know if you've noticed
but our offense is worse than both those teams.
We still have to play alot of those other teams too so it does matter.
by Edgar for Pres on
Jul 4, 2008 2:30 PM PDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
acblue resides in his own little individual world of reality.
by 44FAN on
Jul 4, 2008 3:04 PM PDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Yes. The reality where people are correct.
by acblue on
Jul 4, 2008 3:12 PM PDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
RS numbers for 2008:
Seattle-346
Los Angeles-353
Oakland-373
Jose Vidro-.220/.268/.322
Richie Sexson-.224/.313/.380
by acblue on
Jul 4, 2008 3:27 PM PDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
what, you really think the Angels are as good as their record indicates?
the artist formerly known as Mere Tantalisers.
by Bearskin Rugburn on
Jul 4, 2008 4:01 PM PDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
He thinks John Lackey
is the best pitcher in the majors.
by acblue on
Jul 4, 2008 4:16 PM PDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
he's a pretty good pitcher
but… yeah whatever.
the artist formerly known as Mere Tantalisers.
by Bearskin Rugburn on
Jul 4, 2008 7:37 PM PDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Lets agree to disagree
the artist formerly known as Mere Tantalisers.
by Bearskin Rugburn on
Jul 4, 2008 2:56 PM PDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Also, keep in mind that Part 2 is on its way.
Kind of hard to judge a roster when 28% of it is blank.
by Jeff on
Jul 4, 2008 1:20 PM PDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Is Teixeria a possibility at first in your part 2?
Jl/Robert '08: Promise for a CoachCage tomorrow!
by Fin on
Jul 4, 2008 2:12 PM PDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
I'm not even attempting that.
Jl/Robert '08: Promise for a CoachCage tomorrow!
by Fin on
Jul 4, 2008 2:10 PM PDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Great writeup.
Though the parts about Silva and Batista are depressing obviously. I wish we could get one mulligan per year, that would be nice.
Also, I’ve asked about this few time and have received mixed answers, but you classify Jose Lopez’s defense as average or slightly above average, and I’ve seen people say it’s almost Yuni-like (maybe just due to the mental blunders). I believe USSMariners had a list of problems that the FO needed to recognize, and after Sexson’s hitting and defense, Yuni’s hitting and defense, Vidro’s hitting, Ibanez’s defense, and some other stuff, Jose Lopez’s defense was listed 8th.
So besides Tex, any good 1b out on the market?
Any good SP out on the market, and by good, I mean definitely better than RRS/Dickey/Morrow. I still hope we give RRS some more starts. If his fastball is the same as a starter (not sure if it was due to short start, just increased velocity after having a slow fastball, or what?), might as well give him a few more shots. I always find it weird that teams don’t do more experimenting when they’re clearly out of contention. Sure no one wants to lose 100 and embarass themselves, but I think it’d be cool to do some experiments, like, I dunno try Ichiro at CF, Reed at LF, and Raul at RF. Or call up Feier in a month or so, give him a few shots.
by LantermanC on
Jul 4, 2008 9:41 AM PDT
reply
actions
0 recs
There are always good 1B on the market.
Same with DH. There aren’t any super high-impact bats (that have proven to be such, at least) but those guys are always floating around.
Now that Bavasi’s gone, I’m off the Teixeira bandwagon. He’s a good player, but he’s going to cost a lot of money for a lot of years, and I’m hopeful that the new front office will be capable of making better decisions than the old one. And really, I never thought him coming here was all that likely in any event.
by acblue on
Jul 4, 2008 10:03 AM PDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Wait wait wait wait
I think you missed putting Vidro at first when he inevitably gets his contract picked up. Seriously, he’s a cleanup hitter!
by Scrupio on
Jul 4, 2008 9:52 AM PDT
reply
actions
0 recs
You know what's funny?
I’d bet dollars to donuts that the suits are actually pondering a complete teardown and rebuild from scratch, and will possibly even move that direction. They’re incompetent enough to not recognize this, and it’s really funny. Of course, if they hire a competent GM that DOES recognize this, then I’ll bring several dozen donuts to the next LL event I attend after that. Only way THAT happens is if BOTH Chuck and Howie are gone after this year, really, and I just don’t see that happening…
My layout.spellcheckDefault goes to 11
by PositivePaul on
Jul 4, 2008 10:21 AM PDT
reply
actions
0 recs
Two night in a row I've had dreams about Sean Green.
The first dream is he’d turned into an absolutely lights-out reliever (ERA around 1.50 for several years running), and last night’s dream he was being traded to the Oakland A’s.
I think I have a man-crush on Sean Green.
I reject your reality and substitute my own!
Also, I'm always down for some online Grand Theft Auto IV or Rock Band. Gamertag: Phildopip
by Phildopip on
Jul 4, 2008 10:35 AM PDT
reply
actions
1 recs
Where's the dream where his arm explodes?
We don't negotiate with terrorists.
by Mariner John on
Jul 4, 2008 8:37 PM PDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
With Putz out,
I feel like we rely on Morrow and Green exclusively. Green have any trade value?
by LantermanC on
Jul 4, 2008 3:27 PM PDT
reply
actions
0 recs
Some problems
Nice argument Jeff. I agree with a lot of what you are saying. There is definitely talent on this club.
However, I have some issues with a lot of your assumptions:
-Kenji Johjima is not untradeable but sticks around anyway
Why is this a safe assumption? The M’s are going to have a new GM, and could even have a new ownership group (if the rumors of Johjima’s extension as a farewell gift have any merit). The team has been pretty quick in pushing Johjima aside in favor of Clement, so the extension doesn’t seem to be effecting their decision making on playing time at all. If the M’s can get a decent return for Johjima, or just get him off the books, I wouldn’t be surprised if they did it.
-the team won’t try to deal Yuni
Why do you say this? Yuni is insanely mediocre. It is not like the M’s have a great SS prospect waiting in the wings, but SS is a spot they could improve dramatically, especially in fixing their OBP problem. Why is he unlikely to be traded?
-Ichiro stays in right because God dammit McLaren
Again, McLaren is gone, and Bavasi is gone too. Having Ichiro in RF means undoing one of the best decisions the old front office made. Ichiro and Reed in the same outfield is a great way to keep the M’s offense terrible. I know that everyone here values defense greatly, but leaving Ichiro in RF is not a good move.
by Jerry on
Jul 4, 2008 4:34 PM PDT
reply
actions
0 recs
WHOOSH
-Ichiro stays in right because God dammit McLaren
by seattlebruin on
Jul 4, 2008 7:37 PM PDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
One last comment.
Adrian Beltre is not a stud.
I like Beltre. I loved the signing at the time, and he is still the guy I root for the most on the team. However, he is very definitely not a stud. Studs don’t hit .252/.324/.447. Especially not at 3B. Beltre is a what he is: a good defensive player who has some pop, terrible plate discipline, and substandard offense for his position. He is Pedro Feliz with a few more HRs. That is not a stud. I think that everyone got a little to worked up in their arguments against the widespread opinion that his contract is a debacle. He is better than that. But he is just not an excellent player.
Even if you consider his defense, Beltre is just a role player type. A solid part, but not a cornerstone or even an above average player.
by Jerry on
Jul 4, 2008 4:36 PM PDT
reply
actions
0 recs
Look at his LD%, BABIP, home park and league averages. Then get back to me.
Also, you’re way too obsessed with the idea of “cornerstone” players.
by acblue on
Jul 4, 2008 4:43 PM PDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
It kinda depends on your definition of stud
Beltre probably would screw your girlfriend all night long and you wouldn’t do shit about it but he is not one of the top third basemen in baseball right now. I agree with everybody he is a very good player and one of the major strengths of our team but he isn’t one of the top five 3B in the game right now and shouldn’t be on the all star team as a 3B.
by Edgar for Pres on
Jul 5, 2008 2:24 PM PDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
He is easily one of the top 3B in the game right now.
by acblue on
Jul 5, 2008 2:55 PM PDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
He is a good 3B
but there are many other great 3B I would rather have.
Chipper Jones
Alex Rodriguez
David Wright
Evan Longoria
Aramis Ramirez
Scott Rolen
I would say Beltre is in the top 25% of 3B in the league. MLB has a great group of 3B in the game right now so its very good to be in the top 1/4 but he won’t be getting an All Star selection or MVP votes (even if they were won fair and square).
by Edgar for Pres on
Jul 5, 2008 4:05 PM PDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Rolen? Really?
Jones, A-Rod and Wright are all better players than Beltre, I’ll certainly concede that. Ramirez is close, but I’d still take Beltre. Longoria, because of his age and contract status, is more valuable at this point, but I think Beltre is the better player right now.
But even if you’re right, being the seventh best 3B in the majors, especially considering how stacked the position is right now, is pretty damned good. And I don’t think he’s the seventh best, I think he’s easily top 5. Out of 30 teams, I think you would almost certainly have to consider him to be one of “top 3B” no matter what your definition, especially when considering his raw stats, park factors and defense..
by acblue on
Jul 5, 2008 5:23 PM PDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Come on!
You seriously think that Beltre is better than Evan Longoria?
Go look at his stats. Longoria is also an excellent defensive player.
Those two are not close.
by Jerry on
Jul 5, 2008 7:03 PM PDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Longoria's numbers this year aren't that much better.
Beltre is better defensively and has had bad luck and plays in a tougher park. I think Longoria will end up being better, but I think Beltre is better right now.
by acblue on
Jul 5, 2008 8:02 PM PDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Empirical facts
Beltre: .252/.323/.448
Longoria: .281/.351/.529
It is true that park factors are a huge issue with Beltre, but the same it true for Longoria:
Beltre Road: .278/.355/.477
Longoria Road: .328/.386/.608
However, the home/road thing with Beltre seems to be an aberration over the first half. Over the three previous years, Beltre splits haven’t been nearly as marked:
Home: .259/.314/.425
Road: .273/.320/.479
You can’t pin all of Beltre’s ills on Safeco.
I am surprised I am having this conversation. Do you honestly believe Beltre is a better player than Longoria?
It is possible to root for a player and still objectively evaluate his talent.
by Jerry on
Jul 5, 2008 9:59 PM PDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
It is? Wow. I had no idea.
I guess that’s my problem.
by acblue on
Jul 5, 2008 10:17 PM PDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Rolen is done.
Chipper is on his last legs and is giving his last hurrah this year. The man can rake, but he is a liability everywhere else. And at age 36+, his legs are not going to hold up much longer.
by Wilder. on
Jul 5, 2008 5:42 PM PDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Umm I think you are completely wrong.
by Edgar for Pres on
Jul 5, 2008 10:38 PM PDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Funny, because I think you are completely wrong.
What a coincidence!
by Wilder. on
Jul 5, 2008 11:27 PM PDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Rolen is amazing at defense
Chipper Jones is about average in the field. If you wouldn’t take Jones over Beltre you are crazy.
by Edgar for Pres on
Jul 6, 2008 10:13 AM PDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
WAY ABOVE AVERAGE
BRAVES RULE!
Fred Garvin.........................male prostitute
by Fred Garvin on
Jul 7, 2008 5:19 PM PDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
More
Garrett Atkins, Ryan Zimmerman, and Mike Lowell are all clearly better hitters. Zimmerman is also a better defensive player than Beltre, and Lowell is damn good with the glove himself.
Troy Glaus has much better numbers, but his defense is an issue. Probably a push when you consider both sides. You could argue that he is as good or better than Beltre. Same thing with Chone Figgins. Although he doesn’t match the typical offensive profile at 3B, his OBP makes him a more valuable offensive player.
Joe Crede is basically Beltre’s twin, and the only thing Beltre does better is stay healthy (which is obviously a big plus).
And although they haven’t yet fully adjusted to MLB, I would much rather have Alex Gordon, Andy LaRoche, Ian Stewart, or Chase Headley than Beltre.
by Jerry on
Jul 5, 2008 7:24 PM PDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Atkins is nowhere near the hitter Beltre is
Zimmerman may better one day, Lowell is his equal at best.
Park factors matter.
by JI on
Jul 6, 2008 12:04 AM PDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
I wouldn't say
Atkins or Zimmerman are better hitters. I also think Lowell and Beltre are close but Lowell is on the verge of collapsing. The Crede comparison is a little insulting to Beltre probably.
The list of prospects is only because you value prospects much higher than anybody else here (and we like prospects). Some will be good and some will be the next Russ Davis.
by Edgar for Pres on
Jul 6, 2008 12:36 PM PDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
You're right
I do value prospects a lot. That is something I have always been a bit guilty of. However, the M’s have been such a wreck since 2003, you have to look elsewhere for a silver lining.
Perhaps this discussion is getting a bit too polemic.
The truth is in the middle. Beltre is a better player than perhaps I have suggested, but I still don’t think that the term ‘stud’ fits. He is a solid player.
by Jerry on
Jul 6, 2008 12:48 PM PDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Yeah I think that was what I was trying to say.
I’m sure people disagree although I think he might deserve the title of “stud” because he hit a HR from his knees and a HR on a pitch around his eyes. That is probably “stud” worthy.
by Edgar for Pres on
Jul 6, 2008 12:57 PM PDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
You are correct
He is clearly in the top 20.
by Jerry on
Jul 5, 2008 7:01 PM PDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
You're wrong dude.
He’s having an unlucky run, but he’s hitting the ball better this year than any year since 04. Looking at PrOPS, a stat that projects a players OPS based on batted ball data, thus removing park effects and BABIP fluctuations (neither of which should have any place in a discusison of a players skill), Beltre is the fifth best offensive 3B in the majors this year. He is behind Jones, Rodriguez, Wright, and Ramirez. Of that group, Wright plays good D.
You’re wrong about this.
the artist formerly known as Mere Tantalisers.
by Bearskin Rugburn on
Jul 4, 2008 7:50 PM PDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Luck versus track record
That is absolute crap. If you are arguing that he is having an unlucky run, that that ‘luck’ has been bad for 6 of the past 7 seasons.
Beltre has a very consistent track record of mediocrity. If a guy puts up roughly the same numbers year after year, at some point you have to accept that it is not luck. He is a near lock to hit about .270/.320/.460 each year. He managed to avoid his normal slow start this year, and might finish the season with better numbers than the rest of his time in Seattle. The BABIP numbers help explain his low BA this year, and that should come up. But he should get back up to .270-.280, with a corresponding rise in OBP and perhaps his SLG. But that isn’t too far outside his normal production.
That expected regression to the mean would put him right about at his career averages. Instead of .270/.320/.460, perhaps he finishes at .270/.330/.475 with 30 HRs instead of his usual 25.
Like I said before, that is a solid player, but not a stud. Not a elite player. Not even close.
Everyone loves Beltre, and I really like him too, but I think bloggers are seeing something in him that just isn’t there. He plays great defense, but he is very mediocre offensively for his position. He is a good piece, but not the type of guy that should be protected at all costs. For a team in the M’s position, if they can get a decent return for him in a trade, they should pull the trigger. Obviously, his value is tied significantly to his defense. If other clubs don’t value defense enough, and the trade return isn’t that good, then they should keep him. But it seems like there is significant interest.
People keep arguing that his value goes way beyond his stats, but, eventually, if he is a ‘stud’, shouldn’t that be reflected in his numbers? And if a guy is getting ‘unlucky’ for the vast majority of his career, at some point shouldn’t we just accept that that is his established level of performance?
by Jerry on
Jul 5, 2008 8:52 AM PDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Ah, OK
I will have to take your word for it, since you don’t really outline any argument or line of thought.
by Jerry on
Jul 5, 2008 7:26 PM PDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
He's made it countless times.
Do people have to keep re-hashing the same arguments over and over and over again, each time a topic comes up anew? I’d like to think no.
by acblue on
Jul 5, 2008 8:08 PM PDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
OK, then
You’re wrong.
See, I can do it too.
by Jerry on
Jul 5, 2008 9:51 PM PDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Damn my inability to put aside my undying love for Adrian Beltre.
It so often causes me to overlook such things. It doesn’t matter though, because concepts such as these are well outside of my reach in any event.
by acblue on
Jul 5, 2008 10:16 PM PDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Dead Serious
Two months is a small sample. Particularly for an established big league player with a good body of data to draw from.
You yourself list his numbers from previous seasons. Although they do reflect that his actual numbers are a little misleading, his PrOPS of .758, .816, and .790 hardly shows that he is a misunderstood superstar. In fact, those numbers are not significantly different than his actual OPS numbers of of .716, 792, and .802.
He is very likely to fall back to his established levels. Two months just isn’t enough data to draw any real conclusions. Case in point: you posted that piece about Beltre just over a month ago. At that time, his predicted numbers were (299/.366/.552). Since then, he is down to .297/.360/.519. That is 40 points off his OPS in just a month. That is regression to the mean. Most likely, that continues and he ends up not far off his normal numbers.
By the way, if we are going to use PrOPS to decide who is a unappreciated stud, look at these numbers:
2008 Real: .221/.319/.375
2008 PrOPS: .264/.357/.460
Those are Richie Sexson’s numbers. The gap between real and projected numbers are bigger for him than with Beltre. But I don’t see people arguing that he is an under-appreciated player.
If Beltre is really much better than his raw stats suggest, why is it just this year that that shows up? What changed? He does seem like he is hitting the ball better from subjective observation. But I don’t think that supersedes all the other available data. Once you focus on the larger sample sizes throughout his career, his projected stats are VERY similar to his raw stats.
The better explanation is just that it is just too small of a sample to say anything definitive about.
by Jerry on
Jul 6, 2008 1:13 PM PDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
You are doing a phenomenal job of completely missing the point
by Jeff on
Jul 6, 2008 1:40 PM PDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Banging head against wall
I think I have a very good grip of the point here.
You (and several others) are arguing that Adrian Beltre is a stud, or an elite player, or one of the top 5 or 10 third basemen in baseball. Isn’t that accurate?
These arguments are based on two lines of reasoning: 1) Beltre is an excellent defender; and 2) Beltre is a much better hitter than his stats indicate due to both luck and an unfavorable home park. Again, correct me if I am mistaken.
I am arguing that he a decent player, but not a great one. He is just about average. His offensive production is substandard, but he makes up for it partially with excellent defense. In my opinion, he is a frustrating player because he has elite talent but just can’t transfer that into quantifiable production as he did in 2004.
The data I have used to support my argument are his numbers with the M’s over past three years, his home/road splits, and subjective comps with other players.
I am sorry if I am missing your point, but, honestly, it is hard to know what exactly your point is since your arguments are restricted to one line blubs that can be summarized as “you’re wrong”. That, and links to an analysis using one single stat over a ridiculously small sample (which is an anomalous subset taken from a otherwise very homogenous data set over the past few seasons).
Honestly, I am surprised by the intolerance of differing opinions on this issue. I disagree with a common conception on this blog, and people are calling me stupid and substituting cogent arguments or reasonable discussion with snarky comments. It is not like I am making an argument that is radical or ridiculous. In fact, the suggestion that Beltre is a very good player is counter the consensus on the issue. Pretty much nobody outside the M’s blogosphere (more specifically the USSMariner and this site) have made similar arguments. However, from the reactions to my posts here, you would think I was arguing that Cairo needs more playing time. I expect this with my ‘trade Ichiro’ diatribes, but this is way different.
If I am still doing a phenomenal job of completely missing the point, then please explain why that is the case. Because your one-line posts just apparently aren’t getting the idea across.
by Jerry on
Jul 6, 2008 4:42 PM PDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
It is not like I am making an argument that is radical or ridiculous.
but you are
by JI on
Jul 6, 2008 9:42 PM PDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
I just looked at his batted ball stats from fangraphs.
I… you… Beltre… it’s just that… 
you know, Jeff Clement is hitting under the mendoza line right now. We should probably release him, huh?
the artist formerly known as Mere Tantalisers.
by Bearskin Rugburn on
Jul 4, 2008 7:56 PM PDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
The problem
OK, one more issue.
The fundamental issue I have with your post is that you miss the M’s biggest weakness: very good players.
I agree with your general rundown on the M’s assets at this point. The M’s do have solid players at 2B, C, 3B, CF, and RF (although Ichiro should not be playing there). But those guys are just solid (save Ichiro and Clement). The M’s don’t have any elite hitters. They don’t have anyone in the top 75 in OPS, and only two in the top 100. There isn’t one guy in the lineup that is a good fit as a middle of the order hitter. They are nice pieces, but the team lacks really good hitters.
That is why I would like to see the M’s blow this team up. To fix their problems, the M’s need to bring in at least one real stud hitter, because they don’t have any right now. Ideally, they need two or three. If those guys can be pluses on defense as well, great. But these types of players are extremely difficult and expensive to get in free agency. The best way to get elite, cornerstone players is through player development. Right now, the M’s lack exceptional players. Their best bet to get them is by trading guys like Bedard, Putz, Ichiro, Beltre, and Ibanez in the right deals.
If you want to keep Ichiro and Reed in the same outfield and deal with .320 OPBs from three spots in the infield, the team needs to make up that offensive deficit somehow. Right now, they don’t have the guys who can do that.
Until they fix that problem, it will be real tough for them to be better than a .500 club.
by Jerry on
Jul 4, 2008 4:48 PM PDT
reply
actions
0 recs
It's like AK came back from the grave.
I’m waiting for the top-10 lists.
by Faux on
Jul 4, 2008 5:00 PM PDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
There's more than one way to skin a cat.
Average/above average run scoring+above average/good run prevention+weak division=contention. And if they improve the team slightly without giving up anything of value to do it even if they’re a .500 team in 2009, they haven’t put themselves in any less of a position to compete in 2010, 2011, etc.
I think there’s a push for the team to be blown up and rebuilt because it’s seen as the conventional thing to do when a team performs this poorly. The fact of the matter is, a lot of teams do a lot of things that aren’t really all that smart. There’s no reason for a team with a lot of money to spend and a lot of valuable pieces to blow it up. None. If it was Ichiro, Felix and a big sack of crap, sure. But it’s not.
by acblue on
Jul 4, 2008 5:02 PM PDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Longoria?
I agree that you don’t need Walker/Pujols/Rolen/Edmonds to win.
by JI on
Jul 4, 2008 8:50 PM PDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
or for a more current example,
Rollins/Utley/Howard/Burrell.
the artist formerly known as Mere Tantalisers.
by Bearskin Rugburn on
Jul 4, 2008 9:03 PM PDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Tampa Bay is a perfect example
Haven’t we already had this conversation about a week ago?
Tampa Bay has excellent, high-ceiling players. That is exactly the type of club that I would love to see the M’s build.
BJ Upton and Evan Longoria are excellent players right now, and they are only going to get better. They also have Dioner Navarro in the midst of a breakout year (.315/.368/.434). Given his age and late season performance last season, he looks like the real deal.
On the pitching side, they have Scott Kazmir, Matt Garza, and James Shields, arguably the best 1-3 in baseball.
Of all those guys, Shields is the only one over 25 years old.
Oh, they also have a ridiculously stocked farm system, with potential star players in David Price, Desmond Jennings, Wade Davis, Jake McGee, Reid Brignac, and Jeremy Hellickson.
The Rays have more excellent young players than any team in baseball. They are loaded with cornerstone talents. That is EXACTLY what I am talking about.
The M’s simply do not have that. Only Felix, Clement, and perhaps Morrow are guys with star upside who aren’t heading into their decline phases. They should build around those guys.
I am not saying the M’s MUST trade all their vets. But they should be actively shopping everyone. The M’s farm system is not nearly as good as it was a year ago today, and they should be looking to bring in high-upside guys the team can build around in 2009, 2010, and beyond.
by Jerry on
Jul 5, 2008 8:27 AM PDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Why not just keep everybody who is good and take the draft picks when they leave?
by JI on
Jul 5, 2008 9:33 AM PDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Not a bad idea
For guys like Ibanez and perhaps Rhodes, that probably isn’t a bad idea. The likely draft pick compensation outweighs the likely trade return.
Bedard probably doesn’t have enough trade value right now to make it worth dealing him this season anyhow. I would just hold onto him and see what happens. Ditto with Putz.
by Jerry on
Jul 5, 2008 7:28 PM PDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
right church, wrong pew
the artist formerly known as Mere Tantalisers.
by Bearskin Rugburn on
Jul 4, 2008 7:59 PM PDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
I vote for Chris Duncan at 1B and Xavier Nady for LF
Ibanez is a Mariner for life so he going to be the DH.
by houseofprime on
Jul 4, 2008 5:38 PM PDT
reply
actions
0 recs
Hmm.
Nady, maybe. His LD% is WAY above career norms, and his BABIP is at .354. If he does this the rest of the year, possibly, but it also depends on money/years (duh).
Duncan? Unless there’s something I’m missing (and it’s possible) I say no thanks.
by acblue on
Jul 4, 2008 6:00 PM PDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Duncan's LD% is 23 and BABIP is .285. His LD% last year was 20% and his BABIP was .329 and
he had a 834 OPS last year.
by houseofprime on
Jul 4, 2008 6:28 PM PDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Also, the Ibanez thing...
Really, if Raul doesn’t fall off a cliff between now and the end of the year, I have no problem with him getting a one or two year extension to DH. He’s not going to cost a ton of money, and his bat isn’t the problem. If he can put up an ~.800 OPS as a lefty (and maybe platoon with a RH bench player) he’s not too shabby.
by acblue on
Jul 4, 2008 6:05 PM PDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Can Duncan field anywhere or is it just OF that gives him problems?
We don't negotiate with terrorists.
by Mariner John on
Jul 4, 2008 8:40 PM PDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Yes and No
Chris Duncan would be a good addition if the price is right.
Xavier Nady is a mediocre hitter who has a track record of very strong first half performances. He is playing way over his mean right now, and any team that goes after him is buying high.
by Jerry on
Jul 5, 2008 8:11 AM PDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Tell em to load the busses
And set the GPS to Oklahoma City
Fred Garvin.........................male prostitute
by Fred Garvin on
Jul 7, 2008 5:14 PM PDT
reply
actions
0 recs







