Bill Bavasi and the AL West
A historical perspective
One of the best ways to evaluate a team is by how efficent they are, using replacement level. Doug Pappas has done a lot of work around this: a team of scrubs can win fifty games for a couple million, so you need to look at how much each team pays to get over fifty wins. In that way, the Yankees, who pay a ton and win a ton, come off well, and the A’s of late, who pay little to win almost as much, are even better. But the Mets, who have a top payroll and stink, look terrible. With that in mind, here’s how the AL West shook out during the Bavasi years.
1994
Rangers, $1.54m/MW
Mariners, $1.55m/MW
Angels, $1.59m/MW
Athletics, $1.75m/MW
1995
Angels, $0.85m/MW
Mariners, $0.97m/MW
Rangers, $1.08m/MW
Athletics, $1.64m/MW
1996
Athletics, $0.78m/MW
Rangers, $0.97m/MW
Mariners, $1.18m/MW
Angels, $1.58m/MW
1997
Rangers, $0.84m/MW
Angels, $0.95m/MW
Mariners, $1.07m/MW
Athletics, $1.83m/MW
1998
Athletics, $0.96m/MW
Angels, $1.2m/MW
Rangers, $1.56m/MW
Mariners, $2.26m/MW
1999
Athletics, $0.71m/MW
Mariners, $1.71m/MW
Rangers, $1.94m/MW
Angels, $2.94m/MW
What’s that mean? Well, when Bavasi really got a budget in 1999, he blew it: he spent that money on some awful stuff. Of course, the M’s did that in 1998, too.
Take those six years together.
A’s, $1.28m/MW
Rangers, $1.32m/MW
M’s, $1.46m/MW
Angels, $1.52m/MW
The Angels were the worst at using their budgets, limited or not, to improve the team. The A’s, who started here spending wildly, thrashing around trying to bring a championship to their dying owner, still managed to come out ahead of the Angels by a ways.
Don’t tell me Bavasi is somehow not responsible for that last year. I’ve never had much patience for the “well, if you drop his disastrous outings, Bobby Ayala was pretty decent” school of statistics, and I’m not going to let it in here. Bavasi gave those bad contracts out, and that should be taken into account.
Woody Woodard was a better GM than Bill Bavasi.
Now, Derek, lets not get too emotional about this. Yeah, I would have preferred a different type of GM, and I’m not bubbling over thinking that Bavasi believes Gillick was a master of roster manipulation, excellent at filling out his roster with solid 24th and 25th guys, which is just obviously not true.
However, its a press conference. His quotes mean absolutely nothing. Its chicken feed for media types to fill column inches. Its public relations. To be honest, I’d be more worried if he had come out, ripped Gillick’s philosophies to shreds, torn the old-school mentality a new one, and proclaimed that a new day was dawning. Bavasi showed respect and class for those who laid the groundwork for what he is about to attempt to build. Had he come out and said anything remotely negative about the previous regime, I’d be concerned about his ability to work within a management structure and handle the press effectively.
Bill Bavasi is a giant mixed bag. There are positives and negatives, and we really have no idea what kind of GM he’s going to be here in Seattle. Those who are extremely excited about his hiring are misguided, being led on by quotes a decade old and presuming to know something about his abilities that we simply have no chance of ascertaining. On the other hand, those ready to throw themselves off a bridge are misguided, as we’ve had 4 years of experience that a GM who does not do things the sabermetric way can succeed in this organization. He might say some dumb things to the press, but Billy Beane called Eric Chavez a better player than Alex Rodriguez in Moneyball, which is the most indefensible value comparison I’ve ever heard a GM publically make. When you’re being asked hundreds of thousands of questions a year, you’re invariably going to say some things that just aren’t that smart. Judging a man’s ability to run this franchise based on what he said to a reporter is bad analysis.
I stumped for Chris Antonetti harder than anyone, because I believe his blend of statistical analysis combined with his experience in an organization that emphasizes scouting and player development more than any other would have been a tremendous blend for the Mariners. I’m not sure a sabermetric-only GM like Paul DePodesta would have worked here, and I’m not sad that he didn’t get the job. Bill Bavasi might turn out to be a bad fit, a mini-Gillick who repeats the mistakes of the previous management, but he might not. There are qualities that make up a good general manager that we simply have no possible way of knowing about Bill Bavasi right now that devoid us of any ability to make a strong stance either way on this issue.
The logical point of view on this hire is that he deserves a chance to succeed. If he gives a contract to Mark McLemore, attempts to lure Ken Hill out of retirement, and trades Clint Nageotte for Lenny Harris, I will skewer him more than anyone else. But to write him off because of what he told the media yesterday, well, thats just not like you. Give Bavasi a chance. If he’s awful, you can bet we’ll let him have it. But there’s no point in being negative when there’s not enough evidence to give us reason to be.
We’re screwed
I don’t want to be negative. I really don’t. But… from the Everett Herald:
“”The person we’ve selected is, in my opinion, the perfect fit for this organization, and the man who can help lead us to the next level,” Mariners CEO Howard Lincoln said. “He’s smart, confident, enthusiastic and decisive. He’s an experienced and knowledgeable baseball executive who is well-respected by his peers.”
Bavasi, at best, is a decent hire: a guy who understands technology is changing the game but loves his veteran scouts, a scouting and development guy who hasn’t done particularly well at scouting and development. While Gillick had his flaws, there’s no evidence Bavasi does not share those flaws. To say that he’s going to take the team to the next level… no. Bavasi’s a caretaker GM, a safe an inoffensive pick. The person to take the team to the next level would have to be someone who took risks or, at worst, brought strengths to the team that the team did not already have. Bavasi doesn’t offer that.
But that’s not the kick in the groin. This is:
“During Friday’s press conference, Bill Bavasi expressed admiration for Gillick’s ability to manipulate a roster, and for San Francisco GM Brian Sabean’s ability to recognize veteran players who bring the right competitive spirit to the clubhouse. He also praised Anaheim’s 2002 offensive style of putting the ball in play and moving runners around the bases, rather than waiting for the big blow.”
If Bavasi is sincere about this, we’re fucked. We’re totally and utterly fucked. I would not buy tickets for next year if I hadn’t already committed. This is fertilizer-grade manure, and we’re going to see flowers grow in the outfield at Safeco before we see a team advance in the playoffs.
What the Mariners need is not more veteran leadership — that’s exactly what led to the massive, stupid contracts for Dan Wilson, Mark McLemore, etc etc. This is a team in a weird, delicate position:
– competitive but greatly flawed major league team
– many, many quality pitchers rising in the farm system
– few position prospects in the farm system
Olerud needs a platoon partner. The team needs to figure out what they’re going to do in the outfield, and cobble together a quality bullpen with two lefties or put Box Melvin in a room with some guys who will beat the matchup fixation out of him.
Reader Jen Van Dijk (who you’ll remember was officially endorsed on these electronic pages) writes:
“So, there’s this baseball team, and they build a big lead in the first half, only to see it go to waste during the dog days of August & September because they totally choke and the second place team in their division is kicking ass & taking names. The GM of this team is criticized for not making any moves before the deadline.
Sound familiar? It’s the Mariners of 2002 or 2003 (take your pick), and the GM is Pat Gillick, right? WRONG!!!!!! It’s the 1995 Angels and the GM is Bill Bavasi!
It’s nice to know we’re getting someone different and interesting with fresh ideas.”
You see why were so impressed by Jen Van Dijk we gave her our full endorsement.
I just wrote an amazingly long post on Bavasi’s years at the helm of the Angels as part of the AL West during that time and lost it when I hit ‘post’ and the dumb wireless router I’m borrowing flaked out, which mean blogger cleared the ‘post’ box, started to load the page and then… boom. Post dropped into the ether somewhere.
I may re-do it tomorrow, probably editing this one, but short version: the contention that Bavasi was limited by payroll and would do better with a larger budget is not supported by data.
The Angels under Bavasi:
Year W-L Place
1994 47-68 4th
1995 78-67 2nd
1996 70-91 4th
1997 84-78 2nd
1998 85-77 2nd
1999 70-92 4th
TOT. 434-473 (.479)
I’m just sayin’, is all.
Soooo Bavasi pro:
He was a big part of USA Baseball, and that’s cool.
Con:
He signed Mo Vaughn to his current deal while GM of the Angles, a decision that’s… well, it’s pretty close to indefensible. And from here:
“When we embarked on this offseason, we decided we wanted to be real specific about the kind of players we wanted,” general manager Bill Bavasi said. “Only the best would do. We think we’ve done that, with the addition of Mo.”
Bavasi said the fact that Vaughn has star power was probably the third reason the team signed him.
“First and foremost is his ability on the field, and second to that but real close is his presence in the clubhouse and his presence on his ballclub,” Bavasi said.
Um, no, and no, and no. Also, no.
Responsible for the patchwork Angels teams of 94-99. Now, that’s sort of good and sort of bad. Those teams had some terrible players on them, but there’s also some weirdness. Take 1994’s team: Rex Hudler, Harold Reynolds at the end of his career, but also Jim Edmonds at 24, Tim Salmon at 25, and then Chad Curtis and DiSarcina at 25…. there are some good things to look at as you look at the Bavasi Years: Garret Anderson comes up and starts playing. Erstad debuts (as a first baseman!) in 1997 (and hits .290/.360/.466) (yes, that Erstad). In fact, 1997’s the only year they fielded good offensive and pitching units together: most of the time their hitting was awful (95, 97 the exceptions, when it was good).
During that time, the Angels farm system did pretty well, and the team did a pretty good job of bringing kids in as they went.
I covered the Angels for Baseball Prospectus when Stoneman came on to take over after Bavasi, and that organization was wasted, utterly devoid of hitters worth paying any attention to (and don’t mention Gary Johnson, because I called him out as not being interesting back then, and I was right), but with a couple of pitchers. For all of the talk about his farm system credentials, covering that farm system was like listening for signals from aliens at Arecebo, only without the hope and awe.
Well, I’ll leave at this, because I don’t have time to write something much longer: Bavasi is not the guy I wanted for the job, and I suspect he’s not the guy the M’s really wanted, either. I would have gone in another direction entirely looking for someone who could turn around the team’s weaknesses, rather than fit in with the team’s existing strengths, but it’s clear Bavasi is not the worst hire the team could have made, either.
This off-season will reveal a great deal about his abilities and thought processes.
Here’s the ESPN story, via the AP.
The M’s issued a statement — it’s Bavasi. Seattle Times (“Paper of Quality”), elsewhere. More thoughts later.
I think this hire is going to go badly.