A Case For Felipe Lopez
This post probably should have been written a month ago when a Jose Lopez trade looked much more possible. As the roster comes together there is less flexibility in moving Jose and teams that were seen as potential targets have solidified their rosters as well. That said there still remains a small possibility of Jose moving on to another team before the season starts. Most people have thought that Orlando Hudson is the natural fit if Jose is moved. While Hudson has been a very nice player, worth at least two wins since 2004, Felipe Lopez may present a bigger upside. Just as Hudson has been consistent, Lopez has been consistently inconsistent.
In 2005 and 2009 Felipe Lopez was worth 4.6 WAR. What happened from 2006-08? He posted seasons of 1.6, 0.4, and 0.8. What do those three seasons have in common? He spent significant time with the Washington Nationals in each season. Now I can really only speculate, but when Lopez played with the Nationals he played horribly. I don't know whether it was on purpose or not, but during the parts of three seasons where he was with Washington he posted 0 WAR in Washington. In his 128 games with the Cardinals and Reds during those same seasons he posted 2.8 WAR. Maybe there was something in the water in DC or maybe Lopez was just really unhappy to be on the worst team in baseball. The reasonable thing would be to think that it is just noise in the data, but the 2.8 WAR over 128 games fits much better with his 2005 and 2009 seasons.
Outside of the wild theory that Lopez hated playing with the Nationals, there are some other legitimate reasons to think he could out produce Hudson in 2010. First, Lopez is younger and closer to his prime than Hudson. Next, UZR seems to think that Lopez is currently a better 2B than Hudson. There isn't enough data to really validate either way, but Hudson is no longer the defensive player he once was. Interestingly, both the fan projections and CHONE projections available on FanGraphs show Hudson and Lopez with identical 2.2 and 2.6 WAR seasons for 2010. The thing in Lopez's favor is that he has the potential to have the better season. Where Hudson is consistent 2-3 WAR, Lopez has been as high as 4.6 WAR and as low as 0.4. The variability is favorable to the Mariners who appear to be in contention for a playoff spot, making the marginal value of each win higher. Basically Hudson's upside is just above 3 WAR, while Felipe's is just below 5 WAR. If you're willing to exclude his time with the Nationals Lopez has been worth 3.9 WAR per 600 PAs. By comparison Hudson has been worth nearly 3.0 WAR per 600 PAs since 2004.
All of this said, it appears to be all for naught, as the season draws near and the trade locations for our own Lopez appear to be dwindling. On top of that the Hudson to Minnesota rumors grow louder, so Felipe may be our only option if Jose finds greener pastures.
0 recs |
9 comments
Comments
Or we could wait till 2013 for another 4.6-Win season
Not sure there is a good trade partner out there for Jose (ChiSox? STL? FLA?), but I’m a Felipe fan.
by tait644 on Feb 5, 2010 10:04 AM PST reply actions 0 recs
Well apparently Felipe is a bad club house presence and really lazy
Two Milton Bradleys= bad
by MJ5 on Feb 5, 2010 5:51 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
I would love another couple of Milton Bradleys
by Graham on Feb 5, 2010 6:18 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I would love another Milton Bradley to hear one say:
“There’s some one in MY clubhouse, eating MY birthday cake, with MY teamates!”
by dkulich on Feb 6, 2010 11:13 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
For some reason this just reminds me of the year we had Carl Everett.
I was totally waiting for him to get into a postgame interview on a weekly basis and say if alligators are evolved from dinosaurs how is that possible because dinosaurs aren’t real. But it never really happened, he just kind of sucked all year, and then he got released. It was really sad.
I suspect two Milton Bradleys would be similarly anticlimactic. If the M’s could find a way for Mark Grace to be effective again, though… that would be a great complement for Bradley.
by Johnny Slick on Feb 10, 2010 12:43 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Carl Everett was never good though.
Though Carl Everett was better for comedy, simply because of the things he said before arriving. Dinosaurs and all that.
...and now I'm here
by CapSea on Feb 14, 2010 11:57 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

by 













