Lookout Landing: An SB Nation Community

Navigation: Jump to content areas:


Sports blogs for fans, by fans.
New Blog: World Soccer Digest for Soccer Fans!

An Assortment Of Thoughts

Note: if you missed it, check out Matthew's July pitcher report card below.

When the Ms. is gone, I need things to do, and tonight my thing to do is write.

  • The Mariners are approaching a dicey situation, where Felix Hernandez only has two remaining years of team control after this one and will be in line for a big pay raise in the winter. It's a situation that could've been avoided had the team earlier signed him to an extension, but as much as Bavasi liked to say "it takes two to tango" (implying that he was open to an extension but Felix was not), the blame for this shouldn't fall on Felix's camp. Felix has always been open to signing an extension with the Mariners. Always. And Bavasi approached him and his agent on a handful of occasions. Bavasi, however, lowballed him with offers to buy out his arbitration years and get options for his first few years of free agency. It would be one thing if Felix turned down reasonable contracts, but Bavasi got frustrated because Felix wouldn't sign for pennies on the dollar. Don't get mad at Felix. Every player deserves the right to a fair contract. It's Bavasi's fault our ace never got one.

  • Mark Lowe through June 25th: 61% strikes, 8% swinging strikes, 1.7 K/BB
    Mark Lowe since June 28th: 63% strikes, 12% swinging strikes, 4.0 K/BB

    I've said a lot of negative things about Mark Lowe this year, mostly lamenting the fact that his results weren't matching his excellent stuff, but lately he's picked it up a notch and turned himself into a reliable late-inning arm. While he's not getting hitters to chase a lot of balls, and it's only a sample size of 15.2 innings, this is an encouraging bit of progress. 

  • Jose Lopez is up to a .767 OPS with a .277 BABIP. He hits the worst home runs on the team, but homers are homers, and he's starting to look like a little bit of a power hitter. For as down as some people were on Lopez last winter, now I'm seeing him as a bargain. A bargain who could top out at any moment, but a bargain nonetheless.

  • A few times I've described Jack Hannahan as a hitter whose overall value is less than the sum of his parts. When you watch him hit, he looks really good, and it's only when you see his numbers that you realize how much of a problem he really is. That said, he's at .264/.344/.415 since coming over from Oakland, and if I didn't know any better I'd almost suggest that he's halfway decent. In a way it's almost too bad that Beltre's going to be back so soon, because I feel like, who knows, maybe when a hitter has the fundamentals down like Hannahan seems to, things can just click overnight.

  • A little while ago I decided to run through what PITCHf/x information we have on Luke French's five big league starts. Here's what I came up with after a little tinkering:
    Pitch %Thrown %Strike %SwS
    Fastball 60.6 63.0 3.8
    Slider 25.6 74.1 28.6
    Change 13.7 50.0 8.3
    Now, you should know that the sample size on this stuff is pretty small. Only a total of 437 pitches in there. But what we can tell is that French's big money pitch is his slider, and his fastball is pretty bad. We'll see on the change. I'm not comfortable jumping to conclusions based on an n of 60, and given that French posted a 4.2 K/BB against AAA righties earlier this year, I imagine his change is better than these numbers make it look. But who knows.

    It's both interesting and encouraging to see French having such good results on his slider early on, because that's the pitch that's made all the difference between the Luke French of before and the Luke French of 2009. French didn't really throw a slider for a while. He only started throwing it in late 2008, and previously his K/9 in the minors had stabilized around the low- to mid-5's. He was even eligible for the Rule 5 Draft this past offseason and didn't get selected. By throwing the slider and becoming comfortable with it, though, French was able to push his K/9 in AAA up to 7.9 before getting promoted. So while his performance this year looks anomalous, there's a reason for it. French picked up a new pitch, and it turned him into a legitimate pitcher.

    I'm looking forward to seeing him. My expectations aren't high, and he has a really low ceiling, but I think he can succeed here, and I think he can succeed here for a long time.

  • I mentioned this in the game thread yesterday, but Jack Wilson has the same problem as me, where the goatee part of his beard is visibly thicker than the rest. It sounds stupid but once you notice it the first time it's all you can see in the mirror. It's annoying. We just want to be even. Now my beard's pretty thick, and I think he's got it a little worse, but it's more than a little disconcerting when you realize that part of your face looks like part of Jack Wilson's.

  • I'm going to take off my sabermetric hat for a minute and put it down on the desk. Today we saw Chris Shelton get DFA'd to make roster room for Luke French while Mike Sweeney remained on the team. Shelton, of course, is the better hitter of the two. I don't think there's really any question. Sweeney's got a .287 wOBA on the year and he doesn't have much in the way of home run power, while Shelton's come in at .391 in Tacoma with a dozen dingers. When you have a roster spot dedicated to a straight-up right-handed bat, you'd think the right move would be to give that spot to the best option available.

    However, as far as this move is concerned, I'm on the team's side, and for three reasons:

    (1) In terms of competing for the playoffs, the season is over
    (2) Shelton is 29 years old and not a prospect
    (3) Sweeney is rather obviously one of, if not the most well-liked player on the team

    Because of point #1, it doesn't really matter who's better, because wins now are less important than they would've been two or three months ago. And because of point #2, there's no reason to treat Shelton like some sort of great unknown or valuable youngster with a bright future with the team. He's a known entity and he's not about to get any better.

    So we're left with point #3. I know in the past I've come down hard on people who've made a big deal out of clubhouse chemistry, but this is a different and specific situation. Keep Shelton and DFA Sweeney and there's no real benefit. You might score an extra two or three runs over the rest of the year, but that's it, and those runs aren't going to get you much. Maybe a meaningless win. By DFA'ing Sweeney, though, you're left having to explain to the team why you just got rid of everyone's best friend. Sweeney occupies a central role in the Mariner clubhouse. I think that much is pretty clear. And I guarantee you - I guarantee you - that if the team cut Sweeney, the players wouldn't understand. They wouldn't understand, and they'd be upset.

    My position on clubhouse chemistry is the same as that of a bunch of other people - given two players, with all other things being equal, you pick the guy who's more likable. Because, while we can't evaluate the effect of chemistry, there's no reason to go against it if you don't have to. Here, there's no reason to go against it. Here, all other things are pretty much equal. Because the tangible production we get out of this particular roster spot no longer means anything. I don't want to see Mike Sweeney in a Mariner uniform in 2010 - and the same goes for Junior - but for these final two months of 2009, I have absolutely no problem with keeping them around. They're going to do more good than harm.

0 recs  |  Comment 99 comments |

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

Display:

As least the goatee part of your beard fully materializes. My mustache absolutely refuses to connect with the rest of my beard.

And it’s frustrating.

Speaking of frustrating. I understand your last point and it makes sense. I guess I’m just tired of seeing this team put inferior players on the field every single year for non performance reasons.

FUCK THE ANGELS! FUCK THE ANGELS! FUCK THE ANGELS!

by Goose on Aug 2, 2009 1:10 AM PDT reply actions   0 recs

I am too

but this time no one’s being blocked. No one with a lot of promise, anyway. Even Brad Nelson’s left-handed.

by Jeff on Aug 2, 2009 1:12 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

That's about the only reason this isn't anything more than a minor annoyance.

Clement was about the only one being blocked, but he’s gone now. And I imagine Carp will get his chance next year if one of Griffey/Branyan/Sweeney don’t return.

FUCK THE ANGELS! FUCK THE ANGELS! FUCK THE ANGELS!

by Goose on Aug 2, 2009 1:20 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Also, Brad Nelson is terrible.

---
http://www.beyondtheboxscore.com
http://www.rightfieldbleachers.com

by Jack Moore on Aug 2, 2009 12:04 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Also, I know a lot of people with that mustache problem

“Hey, yours connects!” is one of the weirder compliments I’ve ever received.

by Jeff on Aug 2, 2009 1:13 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

I have to keep it trimmed on about a 2 setting just to keep the whole thing from looking totally out of whack.

Though I suppose having a thin trimmed mustache with a thick curly beard is out of whack on it’s own merits. Though if I comb it right I can give the illusion of a connected mustache, provided you don’t get within two feet of me.

FUCK THE ANGELS! FUCK THE ANGELS! FUCK THE ANGELS!

by Goose on Aug 2, 2009 1:19 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

I second this

(except that my beard isn’t curly).

by The Ancient Mariner on Aug 2, 2009 4:58 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

At least you can grow facial hair.

You got slurved!

The M's are why the suicide rates are so high in the PNW and Japan.

by Slurvey on Aug 2, 2009 1:44 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

I'm 26 and I can go three days without shaving with little noticeable difference.

Runs in the family. I should probably marry a hairy Mediterranean woman with dominant genes to ensure my boys have facial hair. But then that would suck for my girls to have to shave in places they shouldn’t need to.

by Wilder. on Aug 2, 2009 11:20 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Then just have boys.

2009 Safeco Field Record: 5-0 ; Overall Safeco Field Record: 9-4

by Fin on Aug 2, 2009 12:24 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

I have the same problem.

I can grow a full beard, except for the connectors between the mustache and the chin hair. I feel your pain, it is frustrating. If it isn’t frustrating enough to be only 20 years old and treated like a kid in certain situations, not being able to grow connectors just adds insult to injury.

But fortunately, I am starting to see hints of the connectors starting to grow, but from far away, it looks like the mustache is disconnected from the rest of the beard.

Sorry, I will end my rant, but I am sure you can relate.

2009 Safeco Field Record: 5-0 ; Overall Safeco Field Record: 9-4

by Fin on Aug 2, 2009 1:54 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

I have awesome facial hair. Really easy to grow whatever sorta beard I want.

This is a downfall also, however, as I have to shave every day or else I look like a scruffy… lefty? (I am left handed, that’s a good nick name…)

by AtomicGarden on Aug 2, 2009 1:19 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

If I may add, to the Shelton/Sweeney situation, a fourth point (related to all three).

(4) Punting Sweeney for Shelton means Shelton assumes Sweeney’s playing time.

Sweeney’s playing time is a good fit for the clubhouse maestro getting ABs but not for someone you actually want to see hit. And because Shelton is not a prospect he’ll probably be riding pine quite a bit while platooning with Griffey and filling in for Branyan once in a blue moon. Then guess what? We’ll be complaining about his playing time.

So color me massively indifferent to the team choosing Sweeney over Shelton. Knowing full well that Sweeney has ridden his career way past the Sunset to the point where the moon is shining bright, he’s actually pretty fun to watch, in my view. He’s guaranteed to be done after this year.

And now, for the origin of Luke French’s slider!

A fastball-change-up pitcher who relies upon control, French has been throwing a slider for a little more than a full season, and it’s become an effective pitch for him.

"Jon Matlack taught it to me in the Detroit system, and I played with it, trying to find a grip that works," French said. "I found one I like, and I use the pitch a lot."

This is going to be a fun week.

by ThundaPC on Aug 2, 2009 1:49 AM PDT reply actions   0 recs

Garlic Frenchie Fries

I for one am excited about the acquisition of Washburn 2.0. He is young, obviously working to advance his craft, and he takes instruction and advice. Oh, and so cheap! This will be a fun week, indeed – we finally get to play the Royals!

You kidding? I eat pieces of shit like you for breakfast! You eat pieces of shit for breakfast? Uh...no

by orihci si dog on Aug 2, 2009 10:18 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

For some reason I thought that Shelton was a prospect.

I don’t know why, maybe I just somehow convinced myself that he was but after reading the thoughts, which both made me laugh and excited me for things to come, all I could think at the end was “what the fuck Shelton is 29?”

by Zwakamatsu on Aug 2, 2009 2:18 AM PDT reply actions   0 recs

Have you forgotten about 2006, when Shelton was clobbering home runs left and right for the first few weeks of the season with Detroit?

At least I think it was 2006. Anyway, I remember everyone saying at the time how surprising it was given that he was 25 years old and not much of a prospect. Well there you go.

I don't know how to stop.

by esoteric on Aug 2, 2009 7:09 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Re: Sweeney VS Shelton

Doesn’t your reasoning cut both ways? If you don’t want to see Sweeney on the team next year and this season is mostly meaningless, then what do you care if the clubhouse is upset with Sweeney leaving? A few hurt feelings in the clubhouse leads to a little reduced morale and that translates into a game or two lost that might have been won? “Who cares the season is meaningless anyways…??!!”

And that’s giving lots more credence to clubhouse chemistry affecting win totals than it probably deserves.

So, you want the team to be happy for the rest of this season and hold that to be important. But I’d like to see a rationale. Why does it matter if this would hurt some feelings or rather why should the fan who is mostly interested in seeing the baseball team WIN… care?

by manyoso on Aug 2, 2009 6:15 AM PDT reply actions   0 recs

Are you advocating upsetting a large portion of the team at the cost of a run or two over the course of the season?

It’s a bad idea to piss off players, for any reason. Especially ones that we want to stick around for a while.

by lailaihei on Aug 2, 2009 6:21 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Is it so wrong to be sub-optimal on the level of maybe 1-2 runs when we're not in a playoff race in order to keep the team happy?

And hey, maybe we’ll lose one more game because of this decision and it will net us 3-picks higher in next year’s draft. There’s your tangible effect.

by lailaihei on Aug 2, 2009 6:39 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Two more questions

1) Why do you care, as a fan, to keep the team “happy”? I think it is absurd to make player personel decisions based on the “happiness” of the clubhouse and this reminds me all to much of the Bavasi era.

2) Mgmt. should be making decisions to actively be trying to lose games now?

by manyoso on Aug 2, 2009 7:10 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Okay

So then lets just bench Felix for the rest of the season, then. You know, so that they don’t put too much wear on his arm. I mean, the season meaningless right?

by Jo-Jo on Aug 2, 2009 8:50 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

From a fan base...

If the team is happy, they play better and are more fun to watch. Even being out of a race they still play like they are. We get to watch a whole season, the team gets more fans in the seats, the young guys get veterans to help them along, and the players get a morale boost.

by Whoopetydoo on Aug 2, 2009 1:51 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

I don't think he's saying it has anything to do with wins/loss next year.

Sweeney’s been here all season, everybody seems to love him. If they didn’t cut him a month ago when we were still in the race, why do it now and have to explain it to the team. There is something to be said about keeping a clubhouse happy and all on the same side.

I actually bought a Betancourt t-shirt.
P.S. Fuck the Angels!

by Hopefulmsfan on Aug 2, 2009 7:07 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

No, but it might have a tangible effect on players who will be here next year

If he’s a guy that everyone likes, and DFA’ing him will piss off Ichiro/Gutierrez/whomever, why do it? While I’m sure they’d get over it eventually, again, why agitate what right now seems like a fairly happy group of guys

I'd rather know a little about a lot than a lot about a little

by Sportszilla on Aug 2, 2009 7:07 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

For two reasons! One, because Shelton is the better player and is more likely to lead to more wins now and a baseball team is in the business of winning.

Two, because baseball players are grown ups and lprofessionals and live with the knowledge that they can be traded at any time. DFA’ing Sweeney might make some of them sad, but the idea that this would lead to guys not signing with us or measurably impacting play is both wrong and a dangerious player mgmt. philosophy to be giving encouragement to.

by manyoso on Aug 2, 2009 7:14 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Baseball teams are in the business of making money

The best way to make money is to win enough games to make the playoffs (consistently).

Unless you think this team is going to do that this year (and congrats on the pie-eyed optimism), the correct course of action for the Mariners is to maximize future wins: hence trading Jarrod Washburn (though I know it’s been said that French may equal Washburn this year, it still wasn’t a deal that would have been made if the team were, say, a game out of first place). If the front office thinks they’ll be better down the road by keeping Sweeney over Shelton, well, can I argue with them?

Perhaps they feel like Sweeney would make a great coach next year, but if they DFA him he’s unlikely to consider it.

I'd rather know a little about a lot than a lot about a little

by Sportszilla on Aug 2, 2009 7:25 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Yes, you can!

“If the front office thinks they’ll be better down the road by keeping Sweeney over Shelton, well, can I argue with them?”

Of course! If the front office signs Sweeney next year to play DH you can be very sure that plenty of people will be arguing with them.

If they want to make Sweeney a coach, then why not do so now?

by manyoso on Aug 2, 2009 7:30 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Respect

The FO realizes the effect he’s had on the clubhouse and they are just living up to their end of the contract – perhaps with the thinking that, much like Sportszilla implies, he would be more amiable to a move over to coaching next year to help keep Ichiro!/Guti/Felix/Wilson (he’ll come around) more loose for a real shot at the pennant?

Besides, Sweeney 1b Coach hugs to Ichiro! after a game-winning sibgle would become priceless memories.

You kidding? I eat pieces of shit like you for breakfast! You eat pieces of shit for breakfast? Uh...no

by orihci si dog on Aug 2, 2009 10:24 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

*single - god I need some sleep

You kidding? I eat pieces of shit like you for breakfast! You eat pieces of shit for breakfast? Uh...no

by orihci si dog on Aug 2, 2009 10:29 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

I think you're making mountains out of molehills.

Zduriencik just traded Jarrod Washburn, clubhouse leader and friend to many, yet you think the Sweeney decision indicates a turn toward chemistry-based personnel moves?

Winning an extra game or two is unlikely to swing current Mariners players’ temperments in our favor. On the other hand, keeping Mike Sweeney, who has been universally acknowledged throughout his career as one of the nicest people in baseball and has demonstrated it numerous times this season to his teammates, may indeed make a difference for some players when it comes to their opinion about this organization and it’s management team.

Jeff is absolutely correct here, Shelton’s upside is not substantial enough to justify getting rid of someone so beloved by the players. Why piss these guys off if you don’t have to?

by Omerta on Aug 2, 2009 8:21 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

The Washburn trade does not preclude the possibility that Shelton's DFA was an example of clubhouse chemistry-based personell moves.

As for the rest, I’m not going to endlessy repeat my argument. You are just restating what Jeff said in his original post, not really replying to what I have said in response.

by manyoso on Aug 2, 2009 10:11 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Of course this was a chemistry-based move

But you seemed to imply that this move is an indicator of a trend toward that kind of philosophy, which clearly it is not.

If that was not the case, I apologize.

And you are getting the “same” response back to your arguement because it is the reason this particular move happened. I was hoping that by re-stating it in a slightly different fashion you might find some validity in it. Apparently not.

Obviously the vast majority of frequent/semi-frequent posters here prefer that the club largely eschew clubhouse chemistry, good guy based decision making in favor of statistics based moves, but, as pointed out, this is an exceptional case. I think you’re underrating how much Mike Sweeney means to this particular clubhouse.

by Omerta on Aug 2, 2009 7:42 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Appeal to authority doesn't end the argument

Analysis of player performance/projection and roster construction will always be part of the discussion

by lemonverbena on Aug 2, 2009 9:06 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Rephrase:

I don’t see why anyone would be so worked up of a menial move when Z’s track record has proven success to this point.

by Jo-Jo on Aug 2, 2009 8:39 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Assuming Branyan is healthy again, there isn't much reason to dump everyone's favorite clubhouse guy in favor of a backup 1B who isn't going to see the field

I find it weird defending this because I thought Shelton should’ve made the roster out of camp ahead of Sweeney. Yes, Shelton is a better player than Sweeney. But the difference is marginal enough that keeping Sweeney’s weird infectious warmth around is what pushes the needle over. Keeping Chris Shelton on the bench doesn’t change the fact that the M’s are a .500 team with only a fractional shot at the postseason.

by lemonverbena on Aug 2, 2009 9:05 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

If I remember correctly, at the time there was reasonable logic behind Sweeney over Shelton

The difference in their bats at the time was slight, Sweeney had to be on the 25 man roster or let go so he could pursue other opportunities. Shelton had limited or no options, so if you started with Sweeney and he sucked or was hurt, you could release him and bring up Shelton.

by Kermit. on Aug 2, 2009 10:24 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

This is Sweeney's last season

He’s said as much. If keeping him on now meant that he comes back and takes up a roster spot next year there would be reason to worry, but it’s just not the case. And there’s a big difference to players about a team not resigning them in the winter as opposed to being cut midseason in favor of a gingerknob.

As for the why care about upsetting players thing, well, a lot of those guys are coming back next year and what they think of the organization is important. Clubhouse chemistry may be overblown, but little things add up and you don’t want to end with an Ian Snell on your hands. Oh, shit.

De Gutibus non disputandum est

by Bearskin Rugburn on Aug 2, 2009 10:25 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

It really is as simple as this:

Cut Sweeney and you risk making players unhappy for no reason. No reason. The handful of runs that Shelton might be worth over the final two months are 100% irrelevant.

Would making players unhappy actually matter? I don’t know. It’s very possible that they would get over it in a few days. But why risk it when you don’t have to? What would be the point? Keep them happy and, I dunno, maybe some of the call-ups make better adjustments. Maybe Snell’s able to ride the support to a career turnaround. Maybe Beltre becomes more open to re-signing. And so on and so forth. The potential upside is basically a whole bunch of speculation, but there’s no good reason to go against it.

by Jeff on Aug 2, 2009 11:15 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

And you've got to think that Sweeney makes Wakamatsu's job a bit easier.

Dumping him now in Wak’s first season might upset him too, and he probably realizes how little Shelton being on the roster matters to a greater extent than the players.

by acblue on Aug 2, 2009 11:40 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Basically it's what I've been trying to say in respect to Sweeney

I have no idea what the difference positive clubhouse chemistry makes, but it can’t hurt, so in the case where everything else is the same, go with what you know will be good for chemistry.

by seattlebruin on Aug 2, 2009 12:00 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Many tangible reasons

The Mariners are in the business of making money. Happy players helps this in three ways that are interconnected:

1) happy players might resign for less. I’m not going to say this effect is in the millions of dollars, but over the course of several years I’m sure that having a clubhouse where people want to be playing and where people believe they can win makes resigning players easier. Both cheaper and more likely to happen (if a player has two equal offers he will choose the happy place)

2) Fans like happy players. Fans enjoy seeing players happy and having fun. Happy players = happy fans = more money for the team = more willingness to spend on players (hopefully)

3) major disputes are less likely to break-out. While chemistry might not have a huge effect on play, chemistry can result in lost players. Maybe this is a bigger factor in the NFL or NBA, but an unhappy player demanding a trade is an unfortunate situation. I would argue that it just makes sense that a disagreement with a manager is less likely to become a big issue if the player is happy and the clubhouse is happy. Look at how well Wak has done with keeping Griffey on the bench and out of the field without public griping. This sort of control only benefits from a happy clubhouse. And feeds directly back into point #1 and #2 above.

Saying the happiness of the players is irrelevant is short sighted and just plain wrong.

by Snuffleupagus on Aug 2, 2009 11:20 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

French's slider

the strike percentage on that is off the fucking charts. I guess that’s what you get when people swing and miss 1/3 of th time on it. But it can’t possibly last can it? I mean, that’s a bona-fide knockout pitch, like a Lincecum change if you look at the numbers up there.

My bold prediction is that Luke French will generate a large number of pet names both for him and for his stuff. That slider? French’s Mustard.

De Gutibus non disputandum est

by Bearskin Rugburn on Aug 2, 2009 10:00 AM PDT reply actions   0 recs

French's Spicy Brown Mustard

Mmmm, Mmmm, good

You kidding? I eat pieces of shit like you for breakfast! You eat pieces of shit for breakfast? Uh...no

by orihci si dog on Aug 2, 2009 10:26 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Reasonably advanced pitches

Often the first time through the league, a good pitch gets better numbers. The batters will catch up and tehn we see if he has saavy

by Whoopetydoo on Aug 2, 2009 1:56 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

And Sweeney the coach wouldn't be nearly as influential as Sweeney the player is

…because even with his sub-par stats, being in the lineup occasionally – a guy who can directly contribute to a win every day – gives him credibility with the team.

If he’s a coach, if he doesn’t have to do the same training and conditioning and drills as everyone else, then he’s just some guy. A very nice guy, but just some guy. He wouldn’t be able to make new guys feel nearly as welcomed, or be able to get through to players who are being bastards.

The bench coaches are supposed to be buddy-buddy with the players, it’s part of the job description. A fellow player accepting someone works much better.

So I don’t think he comes back next year in any capacity.Even though it might be a nice stroyline to see Sweeney becoming as beloved in Seattle for being a 1b/3b coach as he is in KC for his time as a player.

by Spoomeister on Aug 2, 2009 11:26 AM PDT reply actions   0 recs

Yeah....

Look, I’m on board with the whole Lopez is a net asset thing. I am – his contract is good, his defense is acceptable, and he has just enough power to make his approach tolerable. But what he’s doing now seems like his absolute ceiling to me (poor BABIP aside) and when that contract runs out I hope they don’t get crazy and resign him or anything.

De Gutibus non disputandum est

by Bearskin Rugburn on Aug 2, 2009 1:46 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

What about Mike Carp?

Do you think the same value proposition applies with Mike Carp vs. Mike Sweeney? Mike Carp whose OBP was 0.538 and slugged 0.375 while up here for a small sample size of 5 games/8 AB.

Chicks dig the long ball.

by LauraBu on Aug 2, 2009 12:07 PM PDT reply actions   0 recs

Carp's a lefty

He’s not really competition for Sweeney’s role.

by Jeff on Aug 2, 2009 12:11 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

You are talking about 13 PA.

His SLG% over 13 PA means absolutely nothing. It means less than nothing, in fact, because trying to draw any sort of conclusion based on 13 PA is almost certainly going to lead you astray. And Carp either can’t play those defensive positions (3B, C) or isn’t in competition for the other slots because of handedness.

by acblue on Aug 2, 2009 12:27 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

I already said that in my first post. Point taken.

I took my gooeyduck to Puyallup for a latte.

by LauraBu on Aug 2, 2009 12:37 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

8 at bats.

Carp will be back in September.

by Jeff on Aug 2, 2009 12:27 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Thank you! That was my intended point when posting the link to the sorted-by-slugging data.

Our whole team suffers from slug-itis, hit-itis, or both. Looking forward to seeing what GMZ will do about this leading into next year.

I took my gooeyduck to Puyallup for a latte.

by LauraBu on Aug 2, 2009 3:06 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Should I be worried about Ackley still being unsigned?

Or are they waiting for everyone else to sign who has to go above slot?

by Mariner John on Aug 2, 2009 2:18 PM PDT reply actions   0 recs

He'll sign, don't worry.

It will just be last minute, as always. Same with SS.

I was at Shea for the Felix-Slam!
Personal M's record: 5-4.

by EnglishMariner on Aug 2, 2009 2:33 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

I have been gone

WASHBURN TRADE YES YES YES YES YES

by OlSalty on Aug 2, 2009 3:53 PM PDT reply actions   0 recs

Comments For This Post Are Closed


User Tools

By reading a game thread of your own volition you agree to accept all liability for any and all damage done to your delicate sensibilities.
Start posting about the Mariners »

Join SB Nation and dive into communities focused on all your favorite teams.

FanPosts

Community blog posts and discussion.

Recommended FanPosts

Max_small
FootbaLL IV (Nov 21st)
Small
The Sabermetrics of Cats

Recent FanPosts

Smell-the-glove_small
OFFTOP 11/19 - The Hand of Fraud
Small
Tony Blengino interview on 710 AM ESPN Seattle's Hot Stove League
Ichirocameron_small
OTFPOTD 11/16: Recipes Edition
Small
Lookout Landing as a communtiy
Small
Royals determined to unload Callaspo...
Ichiro_small
Ackley and Triunfel on MLB TV right now
Small
Xbox LLive, Pt 3
Clemente_small
OT on a friday morning 11/6

+ New FanPost All FanPosts >


Sexy People

1_small Graham

Small Matthew

Small Jeff