Does a Possibility Await the Seattle Mariners in 2013?
by Matthew on Nov 10, 2011 2:45 PM PST
in Looking Ahead
Email
PrintThis upcoming 2012 season seems dire for hopes that the Seattle Mariners might break their playoff drought. That is in part because of the strength of the Texas Rangers an in part because of the weakness of the Mariners and their current lack of enough funds to rectify all the problems. There've been posts about how some of those faults can be mitigated for 2012, but building a true contender seems out of reach unless several members (Ichiro Suzuki, Franklin Gutierrez) progress in significant ways.
Does 2013 hold any brighter of a chance? Simply by being farther away, it paradoxically does as we're more able to feel cheerful about the far future (check out our 2004 2007 2011 2014 rotation!) than the future right in front of us. However, I do believe that rationally the 2013 season offers a legitimate shot at a playoff-capable squad. It requires an optimistic projection. That is required for every team though since nobody currently assembled is a sure-fire 90-win group two years hence.
What encourages me though is that the level of positive assumptions I have to make to fit the 2013 Seattle Mariners into that 90-win territory are not, to me, extraordinary. There are no "Justin Smoak turns into Prince Fielder" level jumps. It's mostly holding onto gains made or recently seen, which, granted, are still hopeful in nature as we've had first-hand viewing of the frequency and magnitude of some people's collapses.
Still, here is how the 2013 roster could, could!, look given the Mariners' current internal assets.
C: Open, 0 WAR
1: Smoak, 2 WAR, $1M
2: Ackley, 4 WAR, $1.5M
3: Seager, 1.5 WAR, $.5M
S: Ryan, 2 WAR, $4M
L: Carp, 1.5 WAR, $.5M
C: Gutierrez, 3 WAR, $7M
R: Open, 0 WAR
D: Open, 0 WAR
SP: Felix, 5.5 WAR, $20M
SP: Pineda, 4 WAR, $1M
SP: Paxton, 2 WAR, $.5M
SP: Hultzen, 2 WAR, $.5M
SP: Open, 0 WAR
It's a simplistic rundown to be sure but what it assumes is thus. Justin Smoak doesn't crater at the plate (.800 2011 OPS sans July and August). Dustin Ackley gets a little worse (his 2011 season pro-rated full would have been nearly 5 WAR). Kyle Seager (or someone) manages to be passable at third base. Brendan Ryan stays the same. Mike Carp (or Casper Wells or Trayvon Robinson or...) is passable in left field. Franklin Gutierrez recovers enough strength from his illness to become 2010 Gutierrez again. Felix Hernandez gets a little worse. Michael Pineda stays the same but throws a full season. James Paxton and Danny Hultzen (or someone) develop into average starters.
The enticing result is how much money is off the books. The above salaries total to $36.5 million. Chone Figgins will still be eating up $8.5 million and I figure another $5 million for the bullpen and that's $50M committed leaving somewhere around $45M free, four open starting spots and a team already pegged around .500 (assuming a league average bullpen and bench). $45 million on the free market should buy them about 10 WAR assuming they can find the right pieces for the open spots.
This does not say the above will happen. I set out to clarify for myself if 2013 represented a reasonable playoff chance and what would be the most favorable path to getting there while staying within the realm of realism. That is all. The Mariners have assembled some stars and some supporting cast who still have greater potential. They need help and this is more unlikely than likely, but I do now think that 2013 is a possibility for the Mariners should they get a couple minor breaks along the way.
65 comments
|
3 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Looks like Tampa Bay, circa 2007.
We have more money to spend then Tampa, and Jack’s plans are finally starting to be visible.
It would be nice to see Walker fill that 5th starting spot and be a 1-2 WAR.
There are no “Justin Smoak turns into Prince Fielder”
Now THAT would be scary. Seriously. Imagine Justin Smoak walking in over 3 bills. Yes, I realize I slightly altered Matthew’s sentence, but I do like the image.
What is also scary is that I fully believe is that Jack Z has something similar to the “Cliff Lee for Bavasi’s trash” up his sleeve. He has 37 AAA outfielders. I believe there is a sinister plan. He just needs a white, long-haired cat to pet.
Walker in 2013 is ambitious and probably unneeded
especially if you are only counting on him for 1-2 WAR. Someone like Forrest Snow, Blake Beavan or Charlie Furbush might be able to give you that.
It's not THAT ridiculous that Walker hits the Mariners by July 2013.
I could easily see him getting 50 innings in Tacoma in 2012.
M's fan newly relocated to SF My homepage
I mean the Mariners are notoriously aggressive promoters.
If he starts the year in AA and dominates, it’s not out of the question.
M's fan newly relocated to SF My homepage
Well, duh, just look at Mike Wilson.
We were way too aggressive with his promotion through the minors.
by Patrick Stites on Nov 10, 2011 6:46 PM PST up reply actions
The Bavasi Mariners, yes
The current Mariners, no.
Seager and Ackley were both up within two years of being drafted.
"Ever tried? Ever failed? No matter. Try again. Fail again. Fail better." - Samuel Beckett Mariners Minors
by JY on Nov 11, 2011 3:11 PM PST up reply actions
You could argue that Ackley was wildly advanced for a college hitter and expected to be ML-ready by this point though
neither Walker nor Franklin have been rushed
by seattlebruin on Nov 12, 2011 5:21 PM PST up reply actions
I don't know that I'd say that.
Walker started in the Midwest League a year out of high school. Franklin reach double-A two years out of high school. I would say both were rushed, but we’re no longer rushing players until they fail. We seem to be promoting guys as they prove themselves capable.
"Ever tried? Ever failed? No matter. Try again. Fail again. Fail better." - Samuel Beckett Mariners Minors
by JY on Nov 13, 2011 4:16 PM PST up reply actions
Not ridiculous, but very optimisitic.
He was only 18 last year and in single A. That’s a lot of levels to move up in one and a half years. Half a year in High A, half a year in AA, half a year in AAA, then the Majors. Very aggressive promotion, and assumes no speed bumps along the way. Much more likely is that he needs more time at each level to work on his game and allow his talent to grow. If he hits the Majors sometime in 2014, that’s really pretty remarkable. At 21 years old and a starter in the Majors, he’d be well ahead of most pitchers.
by nathaniel dawson on Nov 10, 2011 7:05 PM PST up reply actions
That's fair...
But this is a team that just sent Anthony Vasquez to the mound in September. Perhaps on a bet, or as a misspelling on a call-up.
But in July of 2013, after a few months in Tacoma, he might start looking awfully appetizing, given that for some reason you can’t stop giggling after talking about “Furbush”.
He will be 20 in August, and I’d hope he splits time between AA and AAA this year. Maybe 120-140 innings?
Hell, a fan can dream, can’t he?
It's pretty amazing to think that 4 WAR for a Mariners position player could be considered "regression"
Dustin Ackley produced at an All Star level for half a season in the majors, he was a rookie. He will likely get better. What?
I read a Fangraphs article
by Jeff Zimmerman that also doesn’t find it likely that Ackley gets better, that he’s likely at his production peak. Just wondering why this thinking began, what has Ackley done that shows he’s unlikely to improve? I see a young premium player a couple years away from his prime and 2 years into a position switch that can be considered nothing but a success. Historically speaking don’t similar players continue to improve into their peak years?
I respectfully wish to side with Aesop here.
I agree, a 4WAR player is nothing to sneeze at, and if that’s what he is year in, year out, that’s fine. But I don’t really see why we think he has no room to improve defensively, cutting down on strikeouts, or improving his doubles stroke somewhat. It’s fine if we don’t want to assume 6WAR for him, but he has improved at every level, and I won’t be surprised if there’s more to come.
First off, who is "we"?
Secondly, as I stated, he was already performing at a 5 WAR level. That’s what I think it is unlikely he gets better from. The 4 WAR is a projection, not an upside.
Thirdly, I refer only to substantial improvement. His age and newness to MLB doesn’t guarantee further improvement and his skillset appears pretty much maxed out. His BABIP was probably too high this season. He may cut down on his strikeouts for instance, but a more reasonable BABIP balances that. He’d have to become a defensive whiz or a real 30HR threat to jump a level.
Possible, but not likely.
I see what you mean and it certainly makes sense, from a skillset perspective.
I would certainly agree that his BABIP is a tad high though not entirely unreasonable. He makes good contact, runs reasonably well, no history of leg injuries, and hits from the left side, so he’s the type of player that should be able to get hits 30 – 34% of the time he puts the ball in play. He also should be able to cut his K% down (11.1% in June, 29.6% in Sept./Oct.) and raise his BB% (though 10.6% BB% as a rookie is quite good), and couple with a hopeful boost in power (maybe into the .160+ ISO range) would make an annual wOBA in the .350-.400 range more than reasonable. And I’ll concede that his defense might not dramatically improve but his confidence and reflexes surely should, a 4 WAR season looks more like the bottom end of what we should expect, assuming he stays healthy.
An interesting and optimistic comparison to Ackley would be Jacoby Ellsbury, and it would feel more natural if Ackley were still in CF. Both are 6’1" and 185, and both are good contact hitters who limit strike outs. Although Ellsbury’s career BB% of 6.9 is lower than what we’ll get from Ackley, his speed makes up for that, with a fangraphs approved career Speed Score of 7.7 (compared to Ackley’s 6.2). Not including 2011 or 2010 (he only played 18 games that year) Ellsbury has a career ISO of .128, compared to Ackley’s .144 from last season. Now we all know what Ellsbury did in 2011, so a leap for his player type certainly isn’t unprecedented.
So in the end that was an awful lot of writing to say that I agree with you, his skillset looks to be maxed out, though the hopeless optimist in me likes to think about players like Ellsbury and Zobrist and say hey, what if? And even if his skillset stays the same (he doesn’t go all Mike Carp on us) we’re looking at a guy who should be good for 4 WAR a year with a peak of 5-6 WAR a season, one hell of a building block.
by Aesop on Nov 10, 2011 11:48 PM PST up reply actions 3 recs
Right. Thanks for you reply.
I’m fine with your projection and I enjoyed the post. I also appreciate that his BABIP was highish, he may not improve as a defender, and that we have seen his skillset.
I look back at Ackley’s 2010 in Tacoma and his numbers there (.53 BB/K, .340wOBA, .304BABIP) are nearly identical to his first season in MLB. Given the level of the competition, I conclude his 2011 numbers reflect an improvement over his 2010 Tacoma performance. I think that it is not unlikely that Ackley drives the pitches he can handle more often in the future, much as he did in Tacoma in 2011. In any event, I’m just excited about him, and note that he’s a player with ability who has a track record of making positive adjustments at the plate and in the field.
I agree with you that it is not likely that he improves. But if there was a player on the Mariners I thought would buck unlikely, it would be Ackley.
If he continued to be surprisingly awesome, 2014 probably
That’s still ambitious.
Yep, every possibility in the world that the M's could compete in 2013.
This is baseball. A lot of work to be done, a lot of things to go right, but you can say that about every team.
by nathaniel dawson on Nov 10, 2011 7:15 PM PST reply actions
If you add the WAR it's 39.5
We’re gonna need Smoak/Carp jumps and 1-2 OFers to jump, as well as Paxton/Hultzen be more Pineda than Vargas. At least. And do something about Seager because 1.5 WAR isn’t acceptable.
One might be able to pencil in "C, Open, 0 WAR" indefinitely
Seriously, where the hell did the good catchers go? Not just in the M’s system, but seemingly almost everywhere?
by Chris_FB on Nov 10, 2011 7:54 PM PST via mobile reply actions
Good looking team and the only minor league assets used are the two pitchers.
Should leave us with a really good, deep farm system if things continue to develop like they have the last two years.
Thanks Matthew.
I appreciated this.
Now can anyone point me to a good website where I can easily determine who will be a free agent after next season? If we have money I want to know who we might be able to spend it on.
50 WAR is a playoff contender
So, can all this come true? Can the M’s buy 12 WAR at the other 4 starting positions for their 40 million? (actually, at $5 mill/WAR that’s only 8 more. We still need some more developmental miracles)
It's 29.5 WAR without the money
So you would need to add 20 WAR using $45 million. Development is needed, not a luxury.
Oh, and +38 WAR in the AL is average (.500)
so this isn’t a .500 team in the AL, only in the NL (+30 WAR)
I suspect that both you and valencia are cribbing from Dave Cameron without fully understanding the concepts.
50 WAR is indeed a playoff contender, but it’s by no means a requirement. Dave himself even stated
all of the playoff teams had at least +45 WAR
Just because going rate is $5M/WAR (have a link for that?) doesn’t mean the M’s are restricted to paying that rate.
To valencia, no. No. That’s not how this works. You’re trying to compare a run down of the starters on the team (what I listed) to total team contributions (where Dave got his numbers from) and predictably coming up well short. 2 WAR is a league average player GIVEN a certain playing time (WAR is a counting stat, remember?). That playing time is not 162 games, there’s left over time that’s expected to go to a 10th bat, a 6th starter, the bench and the bullpen.
actually it's Tom Tango I'm cribbing from
going rate for WAR was $4.7M/WAR for multi-year contracts in 2009. Just using basic history.
And I don’t know what you mean by that’s not how it works. I just added your expected WAR, and gave you the average WAR in the AL needed for .500. The WAR from the bench (I added 2 WAR for bullpen) or 6th starters won’t noticeably change what the team’s WAR is.
Yes it will.
or else you are assuming that it’s not 2 WAR for a league average player, but 2.5.
38 WAR for .500 divided by 9 lineup spots + 5 SPs + 1 Bullpen slot = 38/15 = >2.5
Is that your contention?
Here’s what you appear to be missing. A full WAR season assumes 600 PAs. However, 9 * 600 PAs is only 5,400 PAs. Even the Mariners, with no offense, had 6,000 this past season. The Red Sox had 6,400. Teams get 10-11 full WAR seasons each year, not 9. At the same time, you should rarely ever project any single player for more than 600 PAs. That’s part of where you fudge in some injury risk.
For pitchers, a full WAR season is based on only 160 innings. There’s roughly 9 full WAR seasons in a pitching staff. 9 + the 10-11 from above = about 19. 38 WAR/19 spots = 2 WAR
In my numbers I am not assuming that the starters listed play 162 games each. The only spot I do is with Felix and sort of with Pineda (which I probably shouldn’t have). For the other players since none of them are Felix (or an Ichiro), they are listed at their projection-style playing times. There’s plenty of PAs and IP left over and many of those would not go to replacement players but rather to the starters that stayed healthy.
You can try to do the total team WAR approach, but that’s completely silly when dealing with a set that isn’t intending to list total team WAR. That’s what I mean by not fully understanding the concept. What’s easier, and more applicable to this is applying the 2 WAR = league average standard and noting that 27.5 / 14 spots listed =~ 2 =~ league average
by Matthew on Nov 12, 2011 11:39 AM PST up reply actions 3 recs
You think 7 BP slots and 4 bench slots is 10 WAR?
http://www.insidethebook.com/ee/index.php/site/comments/how_to_calculate_war/
The baseline Tango uses is 2.5 WAR as league average for the 8 position players in the AL, and 1 WAR for the DH. 21.4 WAR is average for a team’s offense.
6200 is league average PA or so, then you subtract (9 * 600) for a total of 800 PAs for the bench. 1 WAR DH and 800 bench PAs = 1.4 WAR, if 2.5 WAR is league average. This is logical, as the 4 bench players are generally replacement level, and not league average, so they would only put up 0.4 WAR in 800 PAs.
As for pitchers, I don’t know where 160 IP comes from. 66% of 1450 (Tango’s baseline and team league average IP) is 957. Divided by 5 SPs, that’s 190 IP per SP. 12.8 WAR is league average for an AL pitching staff. Divided by 5 SP it’s 2.56 WAR per SP. A league average SP pitches 190 IP for 2.5 WAR.
Our BP was worth 2 WAR in 2011, the top 5 teams ran 5.3-7.7 WAR. Average is around 3 WAR for the bullpen (3.2 using Tango’s baseline), so 7 WAR needs to come from the 4 bench slots if 2 WAR is league average. That doesn’t make sense.
The AL baseline is 2.5 WAR as league average. So yes, if I’m reading this correctly, 2.5 WAR is league average for an AL team.
RTA!
-2.5 wins per 162 games in the AL
You:
You think 7 BP slots and 4 bench slots is 10 WAR?
Me, already:
There’s plenty of PAs and IP left over and many of those would not go to replacement players but rather to the starters that stayed healthy.
This is going in circles because you seem focused to exclusion on 162-game numbers.
And for the record, 160 IP comes from the actual calculations used on
FanGraphs: http://bit.ly/rrZ5zX
(sort by FIP-, and scroll until to you get to a 100 value and find the IP value that correlates to 2.0 WAR)
Baseball-Reference (an example): http://bit.ly/sFB6bQ
And on StatCorner (examples): http://www.statcorner.com/pitcher.php?id=444371, http://www.statcorner.com/pitcher.php?id=457453
If you want to use 2.5 WAR and 190 IP as average, sure, go ahead. But that’s not the standard I’m using. You seem focused on how many PAs and IPs go to the average slot, not the average player. Unless you think the average team uses only five starters the entire season.
by Matthew on Nov 13, 2011 12:08 AM PST up reply actions 1 recs
I don't know what RTA is
I just did the FG one, and 101 FIP- gives guys with 180-190 IP for 2.6, 2.7 WAR in the AL, and the 2 WAR pitcher with 160 IP is an NL pitcher.
The B-Ref one is an NL pitcher. And Mike Leake has a FIP- of 108, if you set it at 100 he would need more IP for 2 WAR. Also, 1.5 fWAR.
The StatCorner ones are both NL pitchers. Karstens’ FIP- is 113, fWAR 1.0, Jurrjens FIP- 105 fWAR 1.5
Cherry picking data much?
Using your FG thing, NL only: L-Hernandez: FIP- 103, 175 IP, 1.9 fWAR; Billingsley: FIP- 103, IP 188, fWAR 2.1; Dickey: FIP- 101. 208 IP, 2.5 fWAR; Lohse: FIP- 98, 188 IP, 2.5 WAR, etc.
All this does is prove 185 IP, 2WAR is NL average~, but 2.5 WAR is the baseline for league average in the AL. In the NL the average pitcher pitches less (185 IP) and has a different replacement value, so 2 WAR in the NL is replacement value.
In any case, the issue is 800 bench PAs and BP IPs will not add up to 10 WAR, assuming the team is 27.5 WAR and AL average is 38 WAR. League average BP is 3 WAR, so 7 WAR left. Even if you give (3 * 30) IP to someone else, assuming only Felix/Pineda pitch max IP (I agree Paxton/Hulzten won’t pitch near 190), that’s a max of 1 WAR at league average in 90 IP: 6 WAR needed left. 800 PAs in bench, for a total of 6 WAR? Unlikely unless your bench is full of Prince Fielders.
Even if you assume league average production in 800 bench PAs, which is unlikely, for 2.5-3 WAR, you’re left with 34 WAR or so. NL average is 30 WAR; AL average is 38 WAR. It makes sense to think then, that we are “average.” But because the benchmark for the AL is higher, we’re in fact short of .500.
Basically
If you think league average – both AL and NL – then this team is borderline .500 with an average BP and league average players at all 4 bench positions (unlikely, because utility players are generally not average).
But we’re an AL team, and in the AL, average is 2.5 WAR because 38 WAR is average. You can’t believe 38 WAR as AL team average without believing 2.5 WAR is AL player average. The only way to account for the 8 WAR difference between NL and AL is to add .5 x (8 +5) = 6.5 WAR for positional players and pitchers, 1 WAR for a DH, and slightly better BP.
Is the average AL team really 8 wins better than the average NL team?
We’ve seen for years that there’s a gap between the two leagues, but it would surprise me if the gap was that large. Perhaps the observed difference was that large last year, but it doesn’t seem like we could project that large of a gap going forward.
by nathaniel dawson on Nov 13, 2011 11:15 AM PST up reply actions
RTA = Read the Article. I left out the oft-used curse in the phrase.
B-Ref’s WAR is based on RA. Again, I can’t help but feel that you’re commenting on issues before understand the concepts and assumption.
No, I’m not cherry picking data. I was trying to present the best examples of players that had FIP+s of 100 (fanGraphs), RA+s of 100 (BRef) or tRA+s of 100 (StatCorner). That’s how the three systems determine their WAR. Your comment leads me to assume that you are ignorant of that since you keep going back to FIP for all of them.
The rest of your comment is just a continued example of you repeating your same argument again. I never said 800 PAs come from the bench. I specifically said they don’t. And yet you keep repeating it. I’m through with this with you. Hopefully the reading audience is more capable of reading comprehension.
And I heartily disagree that your FanGraphs examples prove what you say they do
FIP-s of over 100 are worse than average, so below average rates + >160 IPs ~ 2 WAR does not “prove” that 185IP ~ 2 WAR ~ average.
Your Kyle Lohse example shows this. He has a slightly better than average FIP. He gets 2.5 WAR for 188IP. That’s 75.1 IP per 1 WAR or 150.2 IP for 2 WAR, with again, a slightly better than average FIP. That only reinforces my point that the 20-run replacement value of WAR is predicated around 160 innings or 600 PAs.
That title is so engrish. 'The future made a phone call to today'
And this post had better put an end to all the rosterbation, rather than stoke it. I’m a TERRIBLE commenter and even I hate the rosterbation. We could get Pujols AND Fielder and they could both decide to see who could lose the most weight in a misguided attempt to appease their new fans and end up too emaciated to perform. OR they could leverage their new gargantuan salaries into caloric inputs and became mutual feeders/feedees and escape on a fantastic voyage of fat guy love.
All that was about as useful as trying to communicate through LL to GMZ that we should get Brandon Inge because no one would see it coming, or whatever.
IGNORE ME
That's like a 15% success rate. I spout a lotta shit.
Thanks! “One outta 25 isn’t bad”
IGNORE ME
by tsunamijesus on Nov 12, 2011 7:31 PM PST up reply actions
Thanks for writing this up, Matthew.
I’m not sure if you saw my questions/comments in a previous post on LL, but this is the root of what I was trying to ask, so thank you.
As a followup, the context in which the question was raised was looking at Prince Fielder and whether he made sense for the Mariners. Given that a hitter of his quality isn’t likely to be available next offseason, do you think it makes sense to invest that much in him now?
I understand why Mariners fans want the future to be now, but my impression is that investments of that sort are best served when the team is already an average to above average team. I can see now why the Mariners are a decent bet to be an ~average team in 2013, but I’m not sure Fielder in 2012 is the best fit to make them playoff contenders in 2013.
Moreover, 2013 would only seem to be the opening of a window of competition to me given the Mariners FO’s track record for acquiring and developing young players. To me, it would make more sense to make the big investments like a Prince Fielder in the 2013-2014 offseason.
"I’d love to walk in and hug everybody every day, but that’s not critical to us winning." - Jon Daniels
As you say, that player doesn't appear to exist in the 2013 FA class (Kemp and Hamilton appear to be the "big bats" eligible as things stand).
This is part of why I wish to strike now…hitters like Fielder don’t land on the market just every year.
I probably missed something
where is Vargas in this mess?
He will be in his 3rd arbitration year and might be too expensive at that point.
The money might be better spent elsewhere. You could go to a Beavan or a Snow, or whoever ends up emerging at that point, and while there might be a production drop off, it presumably wouldn’t be too much. And you would only be paying one of those guys league minimum, and would be able to use the cash savings in free agency or whatever to get a greater return potentially.
by Patrick Stites on Nov 11, 2011 8:45 PM PST up reply actions
$6.5 million for a 2.5 WAR starter
is still really cheap. 1-year pitchers cost a lot in FA. I doubt we move Vargas unless it’s for a trade return.
I probably missed something
where is Vargas in this mess?
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
Related FanPosts on Lookout Landing
Related FanShots 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
