Larry Stone thinks M's should make a trade, Rob Neyer doesn't.

by Kenny Knows Sports on Jul 21, 2009 2:57 PM PDT

This is my first fanpost, so please forgive me if I do or say anything improperly. (Like my first line there.)

I read the SweetSpot from Rob Neyer on a semi-regular basis and he seems to have kept a keen interest in the Mariners. Today he referenced a recent Larry Stone post about the Mariners needing a bat and he'd be willing to trade Jeff Clement or Greg Halman or Brandon Morrow in order to get one, so long as it's not a rent-a-player.

Rob Neyer thinks the M's need to look no further than Mike Carp over Griffey and Michael Saunders over Langerhans.

Which writer would you tend to side with? I'm sure the popular answer would be not Larry Stone, but honestly I couldn't make a judgment unless Stone or somebody told me who we were getting in return for those prospects. And Neyer doesn't mention our problems at SS, because he probably knows we have no internal solution for that.

I don't think Jack Z is going to trade any of our own prospects unless he's getting a long-term impact bat in return, and are any available?

Rob Neyer SweetSpot

Tweet Comment 62 comments | 0 recs |

Do you like this story?

Comments

I disagree with Neyer here

Langerhans is a better player than Saunders at the moment, and there’s no guarantee at all that Carp would out-hit Griffey over the final 2+ months.

by Jeff Sullivan on Jul 21, 2009 3:05 PM PDT reply actions

And even if Saunders were even with or slightly better if the organization feels like he needs more time at AAA then he should stay there.

by Aaron Campeau on Jul 21, 2009 3:10 PM PDT up reply actions

Is Neyer even up to date of defensive metrics?

He seems to be two years behind the times

by Poochie on Jul 21, 2009 3:13 PM PDT up reply actions

It seems pretty obvious that he's not when he so strongly disses Langerhans as not being a fan favorite.

by Kenny Knows Sports on Jul 21, 2009 3:16 PM PDT up reply actions

What?

these two things are not correlated at all

by seattlebruin on Jul 21, 2009 4:34 PM PDT up reply actions

Yes they are.

by Kenny Knows Sports on Jul 21, 2009 5:45 PM PDT up reply actions

You are mistaking LL readers for common fans.

by Teej on Jul 21, 2009 6:02 PM PDT up reply actions

My point is that while Langerhans may not be a fan favorite, Neyer uses the correlation himself between being a fan favorite and being a valuable player.

So because he makes that correlation, I am saying that obviously he doesn’t take defense into account when grading a players value.

by Kenny Knows Sports on Jul 22, 2009 1:52 PM PDT up reply actions

I think you're getting yourself mixed up.

Neyer is arguing a few things, and only two are related:
*Griffey can’t be benched because he’s a fan fave.
*Langerhans is less useful than Saunders.
*Langerhans should be benched for Saunders.

Applying the “fan favorite” test to Langerhans in this case is the polite equivalent of “WTF”. Example:

But do the fans love Ryan Langerhans, too? If not, why is Langerhans playing left field [when Saunders etc.]

WTF? Why is Langerhans playing left field [when Saunders etc.]

It's hard to convince people to let you eat them if you're an asshole. - Thingray

by Faux on Jul 22, 2009 2:07 PM PDT up reply actions

Maybe I am getting mixed up when he says "But do the fans love Ryan Langerhans"

I took it as him saying Griffey won’t be benched because he is a fan favorite but he should be benched because he’s not performing. And then he is comparing that to Langerhans as “he’s not performing and he’s not a fan favorite so he should be benched.”

I could be reading it wrong.

by Kenny Knows Sports on Jul 22, 2009 2:19 PM PDT up reply actions

The heart of the matter is that I was just agreeing that Neyer doesn't seem to take into account defense.

by Kenny Knows Sports on Jul 22, 2009 2:25 PM PDT up reply actions

Or he could also be overenthusiastic about Saunder's abilities.

If he thinks that Saunders will be better with the bat, and have the same defense, then he would argue it in the same way as if he didn’t take defense into account.

But there’s no way to tell from the three sentences he put into it.

It's hard to convince people to let you eat them if you're an asshole. - Thingray

by Faux on Jul 22, 2009 2:30 PM PDT up reply actions

This is a bizarre thing to be debating so strenuously

Nice Guys Finish Third - My semantics are a waste of time.

by pdb on Jul 22, 2009 2:36 PM PDT up reply actions

I like arguing.

It's hard to convince people to let you eat them if you're an asshole. - Thingray

by Faux on Jul 22, 2009 2:38 PM PDT up reply actions

No you don't

Nice Guys Finish Third - My semantics are a waste of time.

by pdb on Jul 22, 2009 2:39 PM PDT up reply actions 1 recs

Oops. So sorry, good sir.

I suppose you are right. I’m not sure what came over me there.

It's hard to convince people to let you eat them if you're an asshole. - Thingray

by Faux on Jul 22, 2009 2:42 PM PDT up reply actions

TAKE MY BAIT DAMMIT

or I’ll have to post this instead.

Nice Guys Finish Third - My semantics are a waste of time.

by pdb on Jul 22, 2009 2:43 PM PDT up reply actions

Not like Saunders isn't a good defender

by Rudy4three on Jul 21, 2009 4:33 PM PDT up reply actions

I tried to leave this exact comment on his blog but ESPN logged me out for some reason

by seattlebruin on Jul 21, 2009 3:30 PM PDT up reply actions

You were probably capitalizing and spelling properly

by waldo rojas on Jul 21, 2009 3:38 PM PDT up reply actions 2 recs

And making coherent statements.

They don’t like that.

Awaiting the day I catch a Russell Branyan foul ball. I will make love to it.
Preserved In All His Greatness - R.I.P. The Reignman 1989 to 1997

by JLProck on Jul 21, 2009 11:21 PM PDT up reply actions

We're fine everywhere except SS,C, and the bullpen

If we could pick up a reliever for next to nothing that would be great. Otherwise I fell our best option is to eat Jack Wilson’s salary or hope the Brewers lose ten in a row.

by Poochie on Jul 21, 2009 3:15 PM PDT reply actions

Well Mike Burns got pretty well shallacked last night.

The Brewers are going to have to make a move sooner or later and I don’t see them getting Halladay or Cliff Lee.

by Kenny Knows Sports on Jul 21, 2009 3:17 PM PDT up reply actions

Except the whole thing how the Brewers are one of the teams that has the talent to put together a package for Halladay

by seattlebruin on Jul 21, 2009 4:32 PM PDT up reply actions

sb, why do you hate me so?

The Brewers aren’t trading Gamels and/or Escobar. The Brewers therefore aren’t getting Halladay.

by Kenny Knows Sports on Jul 21, 2009 5:45 PM PDT up reply actions

How do you know?

by Poochie on Jul 21, 2009 5:46 PM PDT up reply actions

Okay, of course I can't say 100% they aren't.

Only that Doug Melvin said that they aren’t.

by Kenny Knows Sports on Jul 21, 2009 5:47 PM PDT up reply actions

I wouldn't say we're fine in LF or 3B. We filled the holes at an acceptable level with good gloves and some OBP skills

but I don’t think Langerhans or Hannahan are the answer at those position and they could certainly be upgraded

by Rudy4three on Jul 21, 2009 4:34 PM PDT up reply actions

At what cost?

good glove + OBP skill is about as good as you’ll get for near-free

by seattlebruin on Jul 21, 2009 4:35 PM PDT up reply actions

Well I don't know if he was talking about in general or in regards to moves to be made in the next 10 days.

I think if we are shopping for upgrades, left field and short would be where I would be looking to pick up a guy. With Beltre coming back, I can live with Hannahan for the time being.

If we’re talking in general where this team could use significant upgrades at this exact moment, I’d have to throw 3B and LF in there

by Rudy4three on Jul 21, 2009 4:46 PM PDT up reply actions

There's a guy named Michael Saunders in Tacoma

he’ll be ready next year. Why give up assets for something else now?

by seattlebruin on Jul 21, 2009 4:47 PM PDT up reply actions

Langerhans is fine in LF.

by Aaron Campeau on Jul 21, 2009 5:20 PM PDT up reply actions

LF is fine, Langerhans is league averageish

by Poochie on Jul 21, 2009 5:45 PM PDT up reply actions

Neyer also has opined that it will all be the fault of playing Griffey if the M's miss the playoffs by a few games.

by msb on Jul 21, 2009 3:34 PM PDT reply actions

The most blame would fall on our former tree climbing shortstop

by Poochie on Jul 21, 2009 3:37 PM PDT up reply actions

Well it's not helping.

by SethGrandpa on Jul 21, 2009 3:49 PM PDT up reply actions

I like Griffey and Langerhans.

And I dislike Clements and Morrow. The choice seems pretty clear, to be frank.

"Part, fools!
Put up your swords. You know not what you do."

by Fearless Frog on Jul 21, 2009 4:52 PM PDT reply actions

I would much rather have Clement as our LH DH than Griffey.

by BrianL on Jul 21, 2009 5:08 PM PDT up reply actions

Even I have a hard time saying I'd like to bench Griffey, even though I know there are better options.

by Kenny Knows Sports on Jul 21, 2009 5:48 PM PDT up reply actions

Well this is stupid

by seattlebruin on Jul 21, 2009 6:44 PM PDT up reply actions 1 recs

e.g. what evidence do you have that Clement will outhit Griffey?

Clement sucked in the majors last year and has sucked in AAA this year. No thanks.

by seattlebruin on Jul 21, 2009 6:45 PM PDT up reply actions 1 recs

He's not sucking he's just sucking compared to last year.

He’s putting up respectable numbers down in TAC

You got slurved!

Hehehe Mark Reynolds is so awesome.

by Slurvey on Jul 21, 2009 7:23 PM PDT up reply actions

And by last year I mean his AAA line.

You got slurved!

Hehehe Mark Reynolds is so awesome.

by Slurvey on Jul 21, 2009 7:28 PM PDT up reply actions

I'm not sure what constitutes as sucking in your book

But Clement has a .838 OPS in AAA with a .973 OPS against righties.

by JLC on Jul 21, 2009 7:55 PM PDT up reply actions

I hope Jose Lopez rapes your mother

by Graham MacAree on Jul 21, 2009 7:58 PM PDT up reply actions 7 recs

raped*

This signature space for rent.

by PositivePaul on Jul 21, 2009 10:13 PM PDT up reply actions 1 recs

But he'd like that.

He could have Lopez’s kid as his half-brother.

angels fan in seattle

by Eyebrows on Jul 22, 2009 12:00 PM PDT up reply actions

It would be deformed

Derosa.

by vivaelpujols on Jul 22, 2009 8:22 PM PDT up reply actions

He'd hit better than .215/.331/.385.

Even with all the homers, that’s a Vidro-esque line.

by Coach Owens on Jul 21, 2009 9:09 PM PDT up reply actions

Griffey's wOBA this season is 56 points higher than Vidro's 2008.

by Aaron Campeau on Jul 21, 2009 10:07 PM PDT up reply actions

Well, Vidro in 2008 was basically the equivilant of a retarded Rob Johnson

I think he means Vidro in less hilariously awful years.

At any rate, ZIPS projects Griffey to have a .334 wOBA for the rest of the season. It seems likely that Clement, or really most waiver wire DH types, would be able to exceed that.

Derosa.

by vivaelpujols on Jul 21, 2009 11:25 PM PDT up reply actions

I don't think that seems likely at all.

by Aaron Campeau on Jul 21, 2009 11:27 PM PDT up reply actions

Would you care to explain why not?

ZIPS projects Clement to have a .339 wOBA.

Derosa.

by vivaelpujols on Jul 22, 2009 12:09 AM PDT up reply actions

It projects Griffey to have a .334 wOBA.

Even based on the projections it’s .005 points of wOBA and given Griffey’s .223 BABIP I think it’s reasonable to assume he is due to perform a bit above that level. As much as I wish Clement had been on this team from the beginning of the year, he has a pattern of struggling when moving up a level and there isn’t a whole lot of season left. Clement aside I don’t think “most waiver wire DH types” are going to give you league average-ish production at the plate.

And really, it’s a moot point. Unless Griffey totally craters he is the DH and as much as I wish the Mariners were getting more than slightly-above-replacement production out of their DH he isn’t killing the team. As far as my initial point, Vidro’s results in 2007 weren’t terrible; they were fueled by unsustainable BABIP rates, sure, but the line he ended up with wasn’t bad. So if you are going to say that Griffey’s performance has been “Vidro-esque” as a slight, you are almost certainly going to be talking about his 2008. And Griffey has been much better than Vidro’s 2008.

by Aaron Campeau on Jul 22, 2009 1:20 AM PDT up reply actions

You can't have an average hitter who can't field playing everyday.

When we got Guti we assumed he’d be worse something because he could run and he can play defense. Griffey’s been worth -0.3 runs as a hitter this year. Not what you need out of a player that starts at a position that demands good hitting.

by Coach Owens on Jul 22, 2009 5:23 AM PDT up reply actions

On paper, sure.

However, Griffey’s ability to field is irrelevant as he either is penciled in as the DH or isn’t penciled in at all. Odds are good that Clement would be DHing in this scenario anyway.

Unless a GM gets drunk and cuts someone like Jason Kubel*, you’re not going to be able to scoop up a better left-handed hitter without trading assets. The situation isn’t ideal, but that’s where we are.

*Who, according to statcorner, has been worth something like 5 bRAA more than Griffey to this point. 5.

by abender20 on Jul 22, 2009 9:02 AM PDT up reply actions

Except you can because there isn't any other option.

by Aaron Campeau on Jul 22, 2009 12:04 PM PDT up reply actions

Larry Stone is awesome at everything.

Also, I think the key phrase here is “trade for a bat that is not a rent-a-player,” and I would say as long as that bat is at shortstop, or catcher, maybe 3b or 2b (sorry Essby), then it is a definite yes. With the exception of maybe Brandon Morrow, and that’s a big maybe, the other two players he mentioned are extremely expendable, while a player that fills the void of one of those positions is extremely valuable for this franchise.

...and now I'm here

by CapSea on Jul 22, 2009 12:38 AM PDT reply actions