Miguel Olivo Fun Fact
by Jeff Sullivan on Dec 9, 2010 12:45 PM PST
in Seattle Mariners Stats
Email
PrintMiguel Olivo, as you know, is a Seattle Mariner. Miguel Olivo, as you know, has been a Seattle Mariner before, and when Miguel Olivo was a Seattle Mariner before, he was arguably a worse hitter than Mario Mendoza. Some people have used this history as evidence that Safeco Field is just going to absolutely cripple his offensive value once again over the next two years.
Olivo, as a Mariner, at Safeco: .203/.236/.418
Olivo, as a Mariner, on the road: .149/.200/.247
Olivo, at Safeco, overall: .219/.259/.422
We're dealing with small sample sizes of data, here. And, to be sure, those Safeco numbers aren't great, as they're dragged down by an OBP lower than Garth Brooks' friends. But when Miguel Olivo was a Mariner, Safeco didn't kill him. He was actually at his absolute worst on the road, where he hit like a pitcher.
Safeco Field is not a good fit for Miguel Olivo. It will turn some of his homers and doubles into doubles and outs. That's unavoidable. But let's not overreact. Safeco Field's still a Major League ballpark that doesn't reduce righty pull hitters to rubble. Miguel Olivo could very well have some success.
71 comments
|
3 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
And with that, Jeff Sullivan becomes the top contributor
to SBN’s Garth Brooks page.
Charter Member: Dave Sims Sweet Hat Club // Career .384 BA, .543 OBP for Rocky Diablos
by Two Rs and Two Ls on Dec 9, 2010 12:49 PM PST reply actions
I came here to post that!
I thought Jeff was making some kind of joke way over my head as opposed to a simple country music reference
by tootthekazoo on Dec 9, 2010 12:57 PM PST up reply actions
I'm not as annoyed as I was yesterday.
It just seems like I have to try really hard to justify not disliking this signing.
$3M/y won't break the bank.
and we’re not looking to compete, we’re looking to get 9 guys on the field. I’m more miffed about having to watch him on TV.
Thank you for the reality check
At the very least, our production from our C position should be better than last year, right? It has to be better, right? I mean, $3.5 million/year seems like a lot to throw at a career .250 hitter, but the fact is that would be a major improvement over last year, and on a team like this it seems like that would result in a few more wins. But maybe like JLPRock I’m trying too hard to justify it.
Our catchers hit .201/.263/.303 last year
It’s hard not to be an improvement
by Graham MacAree on Dec 9, 2010 12:59 PM PST up reply actions
In fact you could probably put Moore and RoJo out there again and probably get improvement.
I think I’d pencil both of them as a team for .5 WAR.
Basically, I think Olivo is ~the finished product that Moore would end up being, if you gave him time. I just hate signing FAs for $millions that basically replicate what we have talentwise, especially when the skill set fits poorly here. The team needed an upgrade at C. I just think stocking up on “RHB with no strike zone discipline at all and pull hitter” is a strategy that hasn’t worked all so well in the past.
But yeah, Jose Lopez had some decent years playing here. So could Olivo. Still don’t like it.
by eponymous_coward on Dec 9, 2010 3:42 PM PST up reply actions
I don't like this.
Reasons being he seems to have the same problems Rob Johnson had with actually being able to get a glove on the ball along with Jose Lopez’s horrible plate approach. Graham makes a decent point in that it should at least be an improvement over what we have had but I thought 2011 was going to be about seeing what the kids can do. Not sure if we can see what Moore can do(or continue to NOT do) if he doesn’t get a chance to play EVERY day. Just my take on why many might not be a fan of this.
GRAHAM should be an improvement over what we had in 2010.
That he has a reasonable chance of besting the M’s catchers’ 2010 batting line doesn’t really say much about the move.
Oh no, you've found out the secret!
Graham is not actually a human. G.R.A.H.A.M. is an acronym for Gyroscopic Robotic Artificial Human Approximation Machine.
by Eyebrows on Dec 9, 2010 1:49 PM PST via mobile up reply actions 6 recs
I can't follow up Eyebrows' response, but
I will say, I disagree… it does say a lot about the move if your goal is to make the team better. It would’ve been fun to put all our chips on Adam and watch him sink or swim, but having someone else, anyone else, who has a long history of being barely adequately competent makes more sense than running out there on a wing & a prayer like last year.
I'm trying to agree with you!
Of course it’s likely to be an improvement over the 2010 results. Doing nothing would likely produce an improvement, as the 2010 results are staggeringly poor. And I think it’s funny that we’ve now committed 2 years to the one guy with a recent history of worse performance than Moore/Johnson/Alfonzo/Bard.
That he’d likely produce better results (though at 32 it’s not certain) is a necessary but not sufficient condition for giving the move a thumbs up… that was my point.
So you're saying we might not get an awesome draft pick as compensation in 2013?
"Ever tried? Ever failed? No matter. Try again. Fail again. Fail better." - Samuel Beckett Mariners Minors
Looks like Moore understands Z's operating philosophy.
# Ryan Divish TNTmariners Moore: "I don’t believe they’ve given up on me. I just have to earn it. They aren’t going to just give it to me." 8 minutes ago via TweetDeck
# Ryan Divish TNTmariners Moore: “I know I have to perform offensively, that’s what it comes down to, hands down. I have to hit.” 10 minutes ago via TweetDeck
Not like he would say “I’m emotionally crushed and plan on drinking myself to sleep in the corner this very evening.”
"Ever tried? Ever failed? No matter. Try again. Fail again. Fail better." - Samuel Beckett Mariners Minors
Miguel Olivo is taking your job
There’s no Hallmark card in the world that can ease that pain.
by Kingdomer on Dec 9, 2010 2:54 PM PST up reply actions 1 recs
Adam Moore was a 26 year-old rookie with an OPS+ of 44
He doesn’t need to read the news to have a reason to drinking himself to sleep in the corner.
The more I think about this deal, the more I actually like it
There’s reason to be pessimistic about Adam Moore’s future, and the Mariners need to protect themselves in case Adam Moore fails. An average of 3.5 million over 2 years really isn’t something that could hamstring us that badly, and with the market charging ~5 million per WAR that means that Olivo need only be a semi-adequate starter or a good backup to be worth it. That doesn’t make him a bargain or give us much surplus value, but the risk is that you run replacement/below replacement level talent out there for all of 2011 should Moore struggle.
In my mind, this isn’t too dissimilar to the Jack Wilson extension. Miguel Olivo fills a need at a position where we lack some depth and comes cheap enough that we’re not overpaying for a modest upgrade.
by JLC on Dec 9, 2010 3:16 PM PST reply actions 1 recs
I like this a ton more than the Wilson extension, and I'm not a big fan of this move.
He won’t block a superstar, and even if Moore turns out to be amazing he’ll still need a backup, being a catcher and all. If Moore doesn’t work out, Olivo should be worth the money.
What I'm about to say is oversimplification at its best
But unless Olivo completely tanks, we’re talking about a catcher that could OPS .700 and throw out 40+% of basestealers. Other than Russell Martin, he’s the best catcher on the market, and honestly, is probably better than Moore. It would be nice to know for sure that Moore can’t be better, but the M’s can’t bank on that. Moore improving and Olivo starting are not mutually exclusive either. And like you said, JY, this contract won’t hamstring the Mariners, and in fact is pretty movable next year, should such a thing tickle their fancy.
And the biggest difference between Olivo and Lopez: Olivo won’t be batting 4th (unless Eric Wedge is an incomparable fucktard). I think a lot of people would have hated Loafie a lot less if he was batting in the bottom third of the lineup.
Every time you masturbate... God kills a kitten? Fuck kittens.
by Matt Erickson on Dec 9, 2010 10:36 PM PST up reply actions
Russell Martin may be broken.
Is Olivo better than Yorvit Torrealba, who’s got less pop but a 10X better approach, and who signed for 2/$6.25 deal w/Texas?
Is what this team really, really needs a C who may be average-ish if things go OK on a 2 year deal? I think this may be a decent move for some team, just not this one.
I would have been happier with Torrealba
By “best catcher on the market”, I was referring to catchers available when the Mariners signed Olivo.
You’re right, a “C who may be average-ish if things go OK on a 2 year deal” isn’t exactly what the Mariners need. At the same time, they also don’t need whatever it is that Moore has offered them so far. Now, granted, they can’t completely give up on him this quickly. But Olivo’s contract doesn’t demand that. If Moore decides to explode finally, the M’s have a decent veteran backup who has recent experience catching two borderline aces (Greinke and Ubaldo) signed to a cheap contract—relative to market, that is. At the same time, if Moore continues to underwhelm, they still have an average catcher signed for another year until they can come up with a long-term solution.
You would know better than I, but honestly, how much better than Olivo could we expect Moore to be in the first place?
"Retarded isn't a race." -Thingray
by Matt Erickson on Dec 10, 2010 4:25 AM PST up reply actions 1 recs
Significantly better?
I mean, Adam Moore had a .224 wOBA last year. I don’t like the move either, but unless Moore breaks out, and who knows on that, Olivo is probably a good deal better
by BrettJMiller on Dec 10, 2010 4:42 AM PST up reply actions
Agreed.
Looking at Moore’s AAA numbers, he hasn’t exactly made a name for himself as a super patient hitter. Not quite the hacker that Olivo is, but no Jack Cust either. And from what I’ve seen of him in the majors, he’s having a damn hard time figuring out where the strike zone is.
"Retarded isn't a race." -Thingray
by Matt Erickson on Dec 10, 2010 4:45 AM PST up reply actions
I see it as insurance really.
The team isn’t convinced Moore can do the job so you sign Olivo and give yourself a competent player to step in should Moore continue to suck.
Absolutely, they needed to get insurance!
But if that’s what they wanted, is this the best way to acquire insurance?
I think my problem with it isn’t that he won’t be better, it’s that this move splits the difference between making a move for the future and just going with a stopgap for 2011. It can’t be the former because they just acquired a guy who will turn 33 during the year on a 2 year deal with an option for 3. The length also makes it hard to see this as a stopgap.
So it certainly seems that the team doesn’t have a whole lot of confidence in Moore, and while I understand and grudgingly support that move, it hurts when the message is wrapped up in a $7m contract to a catcher with a lifetime OBP of .283.
MYSTERY BOX!
"Ever tried? Ever failed? No matter. Try again. Fail again. Fail better." - Samuel Beckett Mariners Minors
by JY on Dec 10, 2010 4:09 PM PST up reply actions
I'm so happy you're back to posting.
All your comments entertain me.
by Kirk on Dec 9, 2010 5:10 PM PST via mobile up reply actions
Some well reasoned comments
Jeff, I appreciate the level-headedness of these two Olivo posts. You’re exactly right—he could be terrible but the move itself is not terrible. And good grief, Ichiro could be terrible next year. We weren’t going to get a Victor Martinez—but we had to get someone. JackZ was not going to start the season with a catcher who hit all of 4 HRs last year after the team only mustered 101.
Sometimes you have to look past the bad analogies and just think oh my god Rob Johnson
by JamMasterJesus on Dec 9, 2010 4:12 PM PST up reply actions
Although he might have been referring to Adam Moore because
upon checking Rob Johnson’s stats he only hit two dingers all year, not five like I thought.
Either way, Olivio wont be that bad. He will probably be like 6.75 times better in fact
by JamMasterJesus on Dec 9, 2010 4:28 PM PST up reply actions
The inference was that even the greatest players have a chance of sucking it up every year.
The possibility of failure should not deter one from attempting success.
Olivo possibly being terrible doesn’t mean he necessarily will be.
I don't share Jeff's optimism about Olivo.
But although it looks like the FO got Jose Lopez again, I’m hoping Olivo will not be as terrible to watch because he seems a bit more fiery and may not be as complacent-seeming while sucking as good ole Lopie.
However, if this is a move made with any intent/calculation as Jeff mentioned, to get Felix another “buddy”, it sucks.
Maybe we can trade him to another pitcher named Chaz
I am the master of my fate; I am the captain of my soul - Invictus
by EequalsMc2 on Dec 9, 2010 4:16 PM PST up reply actions 2 recs
This takes the phrase "personal catcher" to an entirely new level.
Every time you masturbate... God kills a kitten? Fuck kittens.
by Matt Erickson on Dec 9, 2010 10:38 PM PST up reply actions 1 recs
Jose Lopez and his career averages would be just fine if he were a ML catcher.
by Rudy4three on Dec 9, 2010 7:11 PM PST up reply actions 1 recs
Excellent point, sir.
A rec for you!
Every time you masturbate... God kills a kitten? Fuck kittens.
by Matt Erickson on Dec 9, 2010 10:39 PM PST up reply actions
Anyone think that Olivo and Nix set us up nicely to trade Moore and Saunders?
If we were sure we’d be keeping those two I’d think a guy like Zaun and a right-handed OF would be better fits. As it is we’re well set up to lose both.
WE'RE GETTING ZACK GREINKE AND TRADING HIM AT THE DEADLINE!
"Ever tried? Ever failed? No matter. Try again. Fail again. Fail better." - Samuel Beckett Mariners Minors
by JY on Dec 9, 2010 7:27 PM PST up reply actions
I hope that most of the pessimism about Olivo is related to bad memories of his first stint here.
Yeah, he was bad but he was 26 when he left. He has been decent since he left and while the potential for him to be horrid is there, he’s a lot more likely to be good than Moore or Johnson are. He has been walking more the last couple of years and his BB/K has been less totally terrible than it was. Is this a fantastic move? No. I don’t necessarily love it but I don’t think it’s enough money to be worth getting too upset over. But I also thought Casey Kotchman could be good.
Most of the pessimism is related to being Mariner fans.
by marc w on Dec 9, 2010 10:34 PM PST up reply actions 5 recs
/slits wrists
Every time you masturbate... God kills a kitten? Fuck kittens.
by Matt Erickson on Dec 9, 2010 10:39 PM PST up reply actions
I just don't get that.
Z’s generally done a pretty good job with most of his moves. Yeah, last year didn’t work out. I just don’t get the doom and gloom, nothing will ever get better, life sucks mentality. We have a baseball team with a group of young players that is improving. We have the best pitcher in the game. We have Ichiro, and Guti.
Yeah, being a Mariners fan has sucked, but to just assume the worst because the past has sucked? Seems silly to me. I really, really don’t like the Olivo move, but I think Jack’s other moves have been good enough to give him the benefit of the doubt. I mean honestly, is the organization not in much better shape from the minors on up than before Jack got here?
Only one team will win the world series in any year. Yes, that’s the ultimate goal. But we’re actually building towards it. The odds say Z probably won’t be successful, but then, most GMs are unsuccessful. I understand tempering expectations, but pessimism I just don’t understand.
Maybe I’m crazy. But I don’t know. I guess I just don’t think the doom and gloom, world coming to an end, pessimistic point of view is funny anymore. It’s almost a dead meme to me.
by BrettJMiller on Dec 10, 2010 4:54 AM PST up reply actions 1 recs
I have been a Mariner fan for 30 years.
In those 30 years the team has made the playoffs only four times. For the first ten years of that they never had a .500 record. Marc’s point is that this organization does not have a glowing history and as long time fans it is easy to expect the worst. Judge people’s response however you choose, but I totally get why people are pessimistic.
I get the impression that Zduriencik has more leniency than "he has to win +73 games"
I could, of course, be off-base with that impression but I’m thinking this season simply has to be monumentally smoother than last season’s chaos. With the inflation of free-agent prices and the lack of payroll space this off-season, the 2011 team’s lack of performance could easily be attributed to not being able to buy the improvements that were needed.
It seems to me, if anything, 2012 would be D-Day for Zduriencik’s team to show some solid results.
Well, as a franchise we have won 46.85% of all games.
That averages out to 75.89 wins a season, with 86.11 losses. So we need to have an average season. I am asking for an average season. Give me that, Z.
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
Related FanPosts on Lookout Landing
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recent FanPosts
In Association With
Big League Stew - MLB - Yahoo! Sports
- The Juice: Nelson Cruz matches career high eight RBIs, Pujols stays hot in Seattle
- Benches clear at Fenway as Red Sox-Rays rivalry heats up
- Keeping good company: Albert Pujols becomes fourth-youngest player to hit 450 home runs
- Giancarlo Stanton misses cutoff man, and Logan Morrison is thankful he did (Video)
- Snoop Dogg delivers memorable first pitch at U.S. Cellular Field
