What Nick Johnson Means
Before the whole Milton Bradley trade went down, the trending topic of the LL universe was us losing out on Nick Johnson. He seemed like such a good fit and was inking such a reasonable deal with New York that understandably some people were confused why Zduriencik didn't simply top the Yankees' offer.
One of the great things about rooting for a team helmed by Jack Zduriencik is the level of trust that we can place in him partly because we share similar thought processes and talent evaluations. The Mariners were interested in Johnson for the same reasons that we were. Just as with the Rich Harden signing, when the Mariners have an identifiable hole and a player they are interested in who would fill said hole signs somewhere else for a reasonable amount, it's a pretty safe bet now a days that the reason Zduriencik didn't reach for that player is because he has other options at his disposal.
Milton Bradley is not really a fall back option from Nick Johnson though. Hopefully, Bradley's role is as the primary DH and getting occasional starts in left field. That still leaves us with a hole at first base currently occupied by Jack Hannahan or possibly Mike Carp. What's the options for this hole?
There's trades. The Brandon Morrow for Mat Gamel type of deal that, while maybe not being the exact deal, illustrates the type of deal that could be made. Essentially Zduriencik would be swapping the hole at first base for a hole in the rotation. For which there are still numerous free agent solutions (Randy Johnson being my favorite) still abound. There's Luke Scott in Baltimore or maybe Ryan Doumit in Pittsburgh and yes, the door has to be open on Adrian Gonzalez simply because who knows what Zduriencik is capable of.
There's also free agents, a simpler fix. Namely, there's still Russell Branyan. We know the two parties are comfortable with each other and earlier in the offseason it seemed incredibly likely that Branyan would return for 2010. He wanted two guaranteed years, the Mariners weren't budging on one and Zduriencik was content to wait things out. Nick Johnson may have been why. Not only as an alternative to Branyan but look at what just happened. Johnson just signed for one guaranteed year at $5.5 million.
Branyan had the better year last season, but it was close and Johnson is certainly the better bet as a hitter based both on his past performances and his age, 31 compared to Branyan's 34. It's going to near impossible for Branyan's camp to defend him getting two guaranteed years in light of Nick Johnson getting only one and furthermore, it would be difficult to justify Branyan being worth significantly more in guaranteed salary.
Johnson has been the more historically injury prone player, but a few of those injuries were freak accidents and none are as recent as Branyan's troubling back issue that ended his 2009 season. It's hard to see Branyan netting more than a one year deal in the $4 million guaranteed range with some incentives based on playing time and possibly an option thrown in. With about $10 million left to spend and 1B being the biggest hole left, that should bring Branyan right back into Seattle's wheelhouse.
I am not writing this based off any inside information, but it would surprise me not at all to see Branyan signed with Seattle before the clock strikes 2010. And if not, if Zduriencik, with Bradley aboard, decides to pass on Branyan's health risks, it's probably because he has someone even better in his sights.
30 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
With DH plugged up I'm growing more skeptical that Branyan's coming back
Just can’t see these guys wanting to play him in the field unless his back really checks out.
Yeah, except as a last-ditch kinda thing
They’ve already got a slew of guys who are quite familiar with the DL. Branyan’s not going to help resolve that to say the least.
Same here. Not sure what else is out there on the market.
Laroche? He’s pretty solid in what he gives you, but Branyan has higher upside.
I really like Gamel, but Im hesitant to part with Morrow.
Bradley will still play some LF and get days off, so it is not like Branyan would have to play 1B everyday
Branyan could get a start or two per week at DH, more when Griffey goes on the DL. Bradley could DH three times per week, with Branyan and Griffey splitting the other three or four days. And if Bradley or Branyan does get hurt, Hannahan, Hall, and Langerhans are there to fill-in in the short term, and Carp and Saunders are a Sounder train away in case of a DL stint.
by G_ on Dec 18, 2009 3:57 PM PST up reply actions
Really? You don't think there's a 1y/4M standing offer to him
and Branyan’s just waiting for someone to offer two?
Branyan’s always been questionable as an everyday player, but it seems like 400PA of Branyan plus filler is still a good bet for 2.5-3.5 WAR at a very low cost.
De Gutibus non disputandum est
by Bearskin Rugburn on Dec 18, 2009 9:24 PM PST up reply actions
Would signing Russell Branyan preclude an Adrian Gonzalez deal?
Gonzalez, signed through 2011 for $5 million a year, is the only big impact move getting any buzz right now that we could actually afford (Prince Fielder is $15 million a year; Matt Holliday would cost something similar). Assuming Saunders is part of that deal (he’d almost have to be) there’d be a bit of a jam with Bradley in LF/DH, Gonzalez as full-time 1B, and Branyan as DH (not to mention no space for Griffey).
Bradley as a full time OF would be a :( for durability reasons.
I’m not going to say it’s impossible, just that I find the idea unlikely.
I second this remark.
If you pencil Bradley in at left, you can expect him to miss 40 games. A game or two a week might be fine but even then you’re tempting fate.
by Johnny Slick on Dec 18, 2009 3:34 PM PST up reply actions
Everyone's guesses as far as available payroll are based on last year's budget
It isn’t inconceivable that the ownership gives Zduriencik a freer rein once they see what he’s been able to cobble together, so don’t rule out another big move altogether.
But to answer your question all indications are that Bradley was signed to share DH duties with Griffey and LF with Langerhans and Hall, so no, there’s probably no room for Gonzalez if Branyan comes back.
De Gutibus non disputandum est
by Bearskin Rugburn on Dec 18, 2009 9:32 PM PST up reply actions
My personal preference would be Luke Scott
He should come cheap in terms of prospects and he’s a decent bat with flexibility to play multiple positions.
At this point I’d rather hold onto Saunders and Morrow unless an incredible deal came down the pipe. Adrian Gonzalez would probably cost us both of those plus Triunfel, and although I don’t think it would be a bad trade I don’t think it would be the clear win Z’s other moves have been.
One of the nice things about Luke Scott is that he's a pretty decent corner outfielder.
The outfield is so crowded now that I don’t see how take advantage of that.
by Manzanillos Cup on Dec 18, 2009 4:42 PM PST up reply actions
Bradley can't play every day in LF.
A Scott/Bradley/? rotation between the OF, 1B, and DH would work nicely.
Anyone in favor of Ryan Doumit?
Seems like a great way to add a couple more wins. A good bat and another switch hitter. I don’t know how he is as a fielder, but he gets something near average at fan scouting reports. A platoon of Doumit and Johnson/Moore could net us 3 or 4 wins. Not to mention he’s played OF in the past. He might give us the most flexible roster in baseball.
Wak will have so much fun with the lineups.
De Gutibus non disputandum est
by Bearskin Rugburn on Dec 18, 2009 9:39 PM PST up reply actions
We'll actually get to see him work! So many options, this ought to be fun.
Platoons, switch hitters. Fun stuff.
From all the scouting reports, he's a pretty awful outfielder/1B
plus he might cost some decent talent to acquire. The Pirates seem aware that he’s decently valuable, even if they’re not sure what to do with him.
by seattlebruin on Dec 21, 2009 11:19 AM PST up reply actions
Maybe this is stupid
But is Beltre impossible to hope for?
Is he just too expensive at this point? (with the money going to the Cubs)
Beltre at third, Figgins and second and Lopez moving to first.
I saw this mentioned in a comment somewhere and I’ve become filled with hope…
I would love Beltre back but not if it means Lopez-->1st.
He’d be a pretty bad first baseman.
by Aaron Campeau on Dec 19, 2009 11:58 AM PST up reply actions
Is that a primary reason?
I feel like a defensive infield of Beltre, Wilson, Figgins, would more than make up for Lopez at 1st. Isn’t 1st a low impact position as far as defensive ability is concerned?
by Snuffleupagus on Dec 19, 2009 12:10 PM PST up reply actions
Lopez's positional value takes a 1.5 WAR hit if he moves from 2nd to 1st (+2.5 to -12.5)
Plus, his batting runs above average aren’t really affected by which position he plays at, so if he’s a +0 2B he’d probably be a +5 1B or +10 at the most, but he needs to be a +15 defensive first baseman (basically, he needs to be the best fielding third baseman in the game) just to break even with his value at 2nd base. Plus, look offensive firepower around the AL and NL at 1st base (basically, Lopez would be like the 26th best hitting first-baseman in the game) versus at 2nd base (where Lopez, as a league average hitter, was about in the middle of the pack). You need a first baseman who can RAKE and get on base well to have him be a worthwhile player, and Lopez just can’t do both of those things.
sweet
I’m not trying to propose it, I just want to read someone break it down.
by Snuffleupagus on Dec 19, 2009 1:55 PM PST up reply actions
That would be great!
Then we could focus on how Beltre also doesn’t hit well enough for a first baseman and get that much more aggravated at his swinging at everything within a yard of the plate! Sign me up!
by Johnny Slick on Dec 19, 2009 6:35 PM PST up reply actions

by 










