Buyers Or Sellers – Why Choose?
The non-waiver trading deadline is now 10 days away. Teams have a week and a half to reshape their rosters, either for the stretch run, or for next year and beyond. The trading deadline is an annual exercise in hype with a lackluster payoff, as I don’t remember the last time the deadline came and went when we had a flurry of deals that could actually be classified as exciting.
The local angle, of course, is that the Mariners have 10 days to decide whether to be buyers or sellers. They’re only 5 games out of first place in a division where no one looks particularly good, and despite the recent losing road trip, they played highly competitive baseball with two of the better teams in the American League. Fans have set through several miserable seasons, and the team is wary of throwing in the towel on what still has the potential to be an exciting September that might just draw them back to Safeco Field.
The counter argument is pretty obvious, however. While the team is still not out of the race, they’re still in last place, trailing three teams, and are just 4-10 in July. They also have the toughest remaining schedule of any AL West team, playing Boston, Cleveland, and Toronto before they have to decide what to do with the roster. Considering the opponents, its unlikely the team goes on a 8-1 or 7-2 run that would catapult them right back into the thick of things, so the odds are that this team is sitting in a similar or worse position when the deadline rolls around.
Thus, Bill Bavasi and company are looking at having to decide to add players to a team in last place or remove players from a team within striking distance of a division title. The big question in the front office the next 10 days will be “buyers or sellers?”
In my opinion, this is a great chance for the Mariners to show some creativity for the first team in, well, ever, and steal a page from Billy Beane’s playbook. Don’t choose – be both buyers and sellers.
The team is too close to the division title to waive the white flag, and for all our opinions on the relative strengths of the teams in the division, absolutely anything can happen in a two month stretch of baseball. However, the team also has a strong core to build around, and the last thing the organization needs to be doing is to remove players from the roster who could be substantial parts of the ballclub in 2007. So, instead of taking the normal route of either unloading players or picking up marginal improvements at the cost of young talent, I suggest that the Mariners spend the next ten days rebuilding the guys around the core by both shipping out current players from the roster and bringing in new faces to help contribute right away.
I’d define the core group of players, who I’m not interested in moving, as Felix, Ichiro, Lopez, Betancourt, Johjima, Jones, Clement, Putz, Soriano, and Lowe. I also am willing to accept the fact that the Mariners will never trade Raul Ibanez, so he’s included in the core by default. He’s just not getting moved while the current management structure is in place.
That means I’m willing to move significant talent off the major league roster. Gil Meche, George Sherrill, Jeremy Reed, Adrian Beltre, and Richie Sexson will all draw interest from different ballclubs. However, the goal is not to simply unload these guys (well, not all of them, anyways), but to use their value (and some of the non-essentially minor league guys) to acquire players who fit the team’s needs down the stretch and next season. Easier said than done? Probably. It would take an epic series of moves and a willingness to change up a roster in mid-season, but in the end, I think the team could be better both now and going forward, if they’re willing to take a few chances. And yes, this is almost all 100% speculation. I’ve heard some backdoor rumblings about potential matches for some of our players, but don’t take any of this as legitimate possibilities.
Step 1: Send Adrian Beltre, Shin-Soo Choo, and Julio Mateo to San Diego for Ryan Klesko and Dave Roberts.
Step 2: Send Richie Sexson to San Francisco for Todd Linden and Steve Finley.
Step 3: Send Gil Meche and George Sherrill to the Atlanta Braves for Wilson Betemit
Step 4: Send Wladimir Balentien, Yung-Chi Chen, and Cesar Jimenez to the Pittsburgh Pirates for Sean Casey and Kip Wells
This would leave the M’s with the following line-up for the rest of 2006:
1. Ichiro, RF
2. Lopez, 2B
3. Ibanez, LF/DH
4. Betemit, 3B
5. Casey, 1B
6. Johjima, C
7. Snelling, LF/DH
8. Betancourt, SS
9. Roberts, CF
The bench would consist of Finley, Bloomquist, Perez, Quiroz, and Linden holding the job until Klesko gets healthy. Everett would be released, and Rivera and Jones would be returned to the minors.
The rotation would be Felix-Moyer-Washburn-Wells-Pineiro. The bullpen would be Putz-Soriano-Lowe-Cruceta-Fruto-Woods, and if Cruceta pitched well (read: threw strikes) out of the pen, he’d take Pineiro’s spot in the rotation.
This team isn’t significantly better than what the M’s are putting on the field right now. You could argue that they’re a little bit worse. Casey/Betemit are an improvement over what we’ve gotten from Sexson/Beltre, but the dropoff from Meche to Kip Wells is pretty staggering. The pitching is certainly worse, and Hargrove would hate a bullpen with only one lefty, but the offense would be significantly improved. Overall, I think the new roster would be about as competitive, if different in character, than the current roster.
So why make the moves? Financial freedom. At the end of the season, you’d lose the contracts of Sean Casey ($9 million), Steve Finley ($8 million), and Ryan Klesko ($10.5 million), who you essentially swapped out Beltre and Sexson’s deals for. That’s $27 million you wouldn’t have had available to play with had you kept the status quo. $27 million buys a lot of talent.
In the process, you’ve acquired a guy who you think can be your third baseman for the next several years and a stop-gap center fielder to allow Adam Jones to return to Tacoma.
Looking ahead to ’07, you’d have a complete offense minus first base, which is the easiest position in baseball to find a competant role player. Depending on what you wanted to do with Reed/Jones in center, you could try to retain Roberts or pick up another veteran CF to hold the job a bit longer, but that shouldn’t cost much money.
You’d have a rotation of Felix-Washburn-three holes, and a bullpen that lacked a lefty setup guy. But once you remove the salaries of Moyer, Everett, Pineiro, and Wells, in addition to the $27 million you saved by letting Klesko, Finley, and Casey walk, you’re staring at about $40-$45 million in available cash to fill out the pitching staff.
$40 to $45 million. I’m pretty sure the M’s could find three starting pitchers, a first baseman, and a lefty setup guy for $40 million.
It would take a bold series of moves to reshape the roster that dramatically, but this team is capable of making transactions that would both avoid waiving the white flag in 2006 and still allowing them to improve their chances of contending in 2007 and beyond.
Comments
165 Responses to “Buyers Or Sellers – Why Choose?”
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Do any of those steps listed have even the slightest possibility of becoming reality? Say, a 3-5% chance of happening?
Oh, and would Bavasi have the authority to make these types of big name deals (Sexson and Beltre) from the higher ups?
Interesting. I’m curious, as part two perhaps, who you’d spend that $40-$45 million on this offseason. Not a whole lot I’d like to buy, really, on the free agent market this year. That’s why if we do make trades, I’d almost prefer to get a few guys who’d improve the club in 2007 and beyond. I’m not sure I trust the M’s FO with that much financial flexibility.
I think Bavasi is definitely creative and aggressive enough to explore these, but I wonder how much CHowArmLinStrong would buy it. Not sure there’s enough “names” in those trades that would convince them that the casual fan would be excited that we’re changing the team without waving the white flag.
But, yeah, with a different front office this sounds like a very decent plan.
Do any of those steps listed have even the slightest possibility of becoming reality? Say, a 3-5% chance of happening?
The hard part would be that these deals almost all go together – you don’t want to trade for Betemit if you can’t unload Beltre, and picking up Casey doesn’t make any sense if Sexson’s still here, so they’d basically have to complete four trades at once. On their own, they aren’t that far fetched, but put together, the odds of completing that many trades at once are not good.
Oh, and would Bavasi have the authority to make these types of big name deals (Sexson and Beltre) from the higher ups?
He can’t trade Ibanez or Ichiro. That’s about the end of his restrictions from above, though if he tried to trade Felix, I’m sure they might try to intervene there, too.
Yeah, though, Betemit would be one player that would help in 2006 and beyond.
Dave, let’s just assume for a second that you are the GM and get all of these moves done. Who do you see as the enticing free agents (that we could actually land) this winter on which to spend your new found $40M?
Three things:
1. Why would the Giants be willing to swap Finley etc. for Sexson? Seems like the Giants are giving up prospects AND taking on a net $20M in return. And Sexson is a right-handed hitter in a park that punishes right-handed hitters almost as much as left-handed alley hitters.
2. Is Betemit really an improvement over Beltre, once you take money out of the equation? 3B has been a near-replacement-level hole for the M’s ever since the Tino deal brought in Russ Davis.
3. What these deals do is clear a lot of payroll, but even when the M’s have had this latitude, Bavasi hasn’t made smart decisions with it. I really don’t want Jason Schmidt, but I know that Bavasi will overpay for him if he has the money. And if he overpays, that means there’s less to sign a decent 1B.
I do agree, though, that we have to go get something for Choo and Balentin right now while they have worth.
I forgot on #1: Once Barry leaves the game, the Giants are going to tighten their belts. I don’t think an $11M/year K machine is something they want to take on.
Interesting. I’m curious, as part two perhaps, who you’d spend that $40-$45 million on this offseason.
Matsuzaka and Schmidt would be at the top of the list for starting pitching. There’s a good amount of lefty relievers available – I’d probably start with Arthur Rhodes. And, I’d probably try to turn Ibanez into a first baseman with an offseason worth of work, let him platoon with Eduardo Perez at first base, and spend the money on a left fielder instead of a first baseman.
How about Matsuzaka, Schmidt, Rhodes, and Dellucci? That costs probably $30 million or something close to it.
1. Why would the Giants be willing to swap Finley etc. for Sexson? Seems like the Giants are giving up prospects AND taking on a net $20M in return. And Sexson is a right-handed hitter in a park that punishes right-handed hitters almost as much as left-handed alley hitters.
The Giants have a huge (giant?) sucking hole at first base. They also lack right-handed power. They have a large amount of payroll coming off the books after the season, and I’m pretty sure Sabean would prefer Sexson to all of the available free agent first baseman. Plus, he’d only have a 2 year commitment, versus a 4 or 5 year commitment to a prime free agent.
2. Is Betemit really an improvement over Beltre, once you take money out of the equation? 3B has been a near-replacement-level hole for the M’s ever since the Tino deal brought in Russ Davis.
Betemit and Beltre are similar player types. He might not be any better than Adrian, especially with defense factored in, but there’s no questioning he’s cheaper.
3. What these deals do is clear a lot of payroll, but even when the M’s have had this latitude, Bavasi hasn’t made smart decisions with it. I really don’t want Jason Schmidt, but I know that Bavasi will overpay for him if he has the money. And if he overpays, that means there’s less to sign a decent 1B.
I like Jason Schmidt more than you do, I guess.
So you’re viewing this like an NBA team would … making deals for the purpose of clearing cap space.
I don’t know. It’s not making the team any better this year — at most, it’s probably treading water — and it’s not making it any better next year barring a very productive offseason. Free agency in baseball is risky; not only do you have to pick the right players, those players have to be willing to take your money in a far less restrictive atmosphere than big-spending teams face in the NBA and NFL.
Are you doing anything here besides adding different high-priced contracts this offseason that may serve as albatrosses down the road? $40-45 million is a lot, but who are the three starting pitchers Seatlle could get who would have a reasonable chance of earning their free-agent dollars?
Off the top of my head, these are the decent FA worth spending on:
1B/LF (Move Ibanez to 1B)
Carlos Lee
Nomar Garciaparra
Jim Edmonds
Trot Nixon
Craig Wilson
SP
Jason Schmidt
Barry Zito
Daisuke Matsuzaka
Andy Pettitte
Corey Lidle
Brad Radke
Randy Wolf
LHRP
Alan Embree
Ray King
Arthur Rhodes
J.C. Romero
Ron Villone
Jamie Walker
That’s not a list to spend $40-45 million on. If I had to do it maybe $10M/year for Schmidt, $10M/year for Nomar, $7M/year for Matsuzaka (plus posting fees from seperate foreign player budget), $6M/year for Lidle, $2M/year for Rhodes.
Depending on contract length, that just looks like a more disasterous free agent class than Beltre/Sexson.
Dave,
Just curious, but why do you say Ibanez will never be traded and will retire a Mariner( I’ve seen you mention this in the past too) ? Is he beloved in the FO for being a class-act guy?
Thanks
Interesting trades…with the impetus on freeing up salary for the offseason, they feel like NBA trades, which makes sense when you look at the Mariners adherence to set payroll figures. Any specific reason for all of the trades being with NL teams? Are those just the most likely possibilities, or is that based on a organizational philosophy?
#9
I like the Dellucci idea a lot, but think a number of teams will be targeting him thinking he’ll come cheap.
Schmidt’s 33 years old, right? How many years do you think someone will have to give him this offseason?
Dave, I love the concpet of buying AND selling. I also like getting rid of Sexson and Beltre without eating any of their salaries.
Thje only problem is, the first trade has to be Bill Bavasi for Billy Beane or John Schurholtz, or the others will never have a chance of happening.
Dave has come up with an interesting scenario, and it is fun to read, and speculate, much like fantasy sports, but in my opinion there is no chance of any of it taking place. I have no confidence that the front office has the vision to pull ANYTHING off. I would be ecstatic if they finally cut “Dinosaur Boy”, and call up Doyle. That would be a monumental move by the M’s, and if they could only jettison Grover it would fulfill all of my expectations.
I am much more curious to see what Billy Beane, Texas, and the Angels will do. Any bets that the three other teams in the division will all be more active that the M’s?
I guess me first question would be how the core of the team would react to such a major roster shakeup. It’s not often you see a team change that substantially mid-season and not struggle for awhile.
I sound like the Leprechaun from Lucky Charms cereal! That should be: “I guess MY first question”. Guess my brain shut off for the weekend already.
I really like this scenario. You create available payroll and part with none of your core players. I feel like it was a mistake to sign Beltre and Sexson and this is a way to rectify it. If as a result of all this, the Mariners had the ability to sign Schmidt and Matsuzaka, it’s good enough for me.
Also there is the possiblity of moving Soriano and/or Lowe to the rotation.
So you’re viewing this like an NBA team would … making deals for the purpose of clearing cap space.
It’s a dilemma caused by fiscal year budgets. The Mariners do not roll any payroll savings from this year into next year’s budget, so if the team just dumped $20 million in payroll without taking any back, the owners would just call that a profit and the team would never see it. By taking back bad salaries that go against this fiscal year, you’re allowing yourself to get more value in return player wise without having the owners take your money away from you.
Are you doing anything here besides adding different high-priced contracts this offseason that may serve as albatrosses down the road?
No, not really. The problem is that we’ve got $26 million per year commited to Beltre/Sexson for the next two years, and $12 million for Beltre in 2009, and thanks to the park we play in, its unlikely that either of them will live up to their salaries. So, instead of spending big money on right-handed power hitters, I’m suggesting spending it on pitching.
Just curious, but why do you say Ibanez will never be traded and will retire a Mariner( I’ve seen you mention this in the past too) ? Is he beloved in the FO for being a class-act guy?
Yea, pretty much.
Any specific reason for all of the trades being with NL teams? Are those just the most likely possibilities, or is that based on a organizational philosophy?
There’s a lot more interest in Beltre in the NL than there is the AL. If the team moved him, it’d be the logical spot for him to go. And SF is the only team that I know of that has expressed interest in taking Sexson’s whole contract, thus, that’s where I put him.
Schmidt’s 33 years old, right? How many years do you think someone will have to give him this offseason?
My guess is someting like 3yr/33m with a fourth year vesting option.
Joel-
He’s basically the face of the organization now.
Would Zito be an interesting option for the Mariners next year? Will there be any teams salary dumping in the off-season? We may be able to pick up some players that way.
I think there were some interesting deadline deals done in ’04, e.g. Nomar to the Cubs and LoDuca to the Marlins. And some pretty bad ones, too. Ask a Mets fan if you don’t remember.
Theo Epstein got a world series ring, while the GM in LA (what’s his name again?) got sacked.
On topic: If Bavasi traded away Beltre and Sexson, wouldn’t he be kind of admitting that they were the wrong signings. Is he the kind of GM to do such a thing?
Re: 22
And who would have thought that would happen about six years ago? Funny how things work out.
I have no problem with keeping the team essentially how it is. I think we could make a vast improvement by fixing our DH “problem”, and possibly finding some veteran help for CF. I’d like to see Jones go back to Tacoma and get some more experience.
The utility of freeing up salary is not limited to free agent acquisitions. Payroll flexibility can become a huge asset in the trade market. It would allow the M’s to make deals involving a pure salary dump for a talented player (Delgado), the pairing of a valuable commodity with a bad contract Beckett/Lowell), or a hybrid of the two (Thome for Rowand).
In particular, overpaid players with contracts expiring after 2007 might be more attractive than signing a free agent to a multi-year deal. From a risk management perspective, for example, I’d prefer to take a chance on a guy like Matt Clement (if healthy) for $9 million with only a one-year commitment than make a three-year, $21+ million commitment to Gil Meche.
So Dave isn’t the GM of this ballclub why?
So Dave isn’t the GM of this ballclub why?
Dave,
What value do you think Reed has on the trade market? Have your thoughts changed about his value relative to guys like Papelbon/Lester?
That would be a fascinating set of deadline deals. Wow. Like you say, though, they’re all kind of a piece of one another.
We’re in the midst of real estate transactions now, so the first thing that comes to mind is “contingency offer”. How would other baseball teams feel about “contingency trades”?
“Okay, I’m working this deal right here. If I can get that to go, then we can do our deal, yes? How do you feel about that?”
And there are bits of this wheeling and dealing that you could do at lower-risk. For instance, the Sexson deal would work on its own as a setup. The others kind of have to be of a piece with each other, but maybe the Atlanta deal for Betemit works out if you can do the Sexson deal first.
That’s maybe the most interesting part of this scenario: figuring out how to package things together to make the jigsaw fit.
“So Dave isn’t the GM of this ballclub why?”
Because there’s more to the job than finding value and making trade propositions. Part of it is sales and comfort.
My company has a killer salesman who works here. He’s great at pointing out value to the customer and soothing them when there’s trouble. We give him a pretty good product to work with, but he has awe-inspiring people skills. Some people have that touch.
I don’t know if Dave’s got it or not, but that’s a big part of being a GM. You have to work inside of baseball, build up your networks, and learn how to massage other teams’ GMs. Part of it is just the time in the business to build the network.
Baseball requires just as much “touch” as any other business. There’s a lot that Bill Bavasi does that we don’t see from the outside.
What value do you think Reed has on the trade market? Have your thoughts changed about his value relative to guys like Papelbon/Lester?
Yes, clearly, I’d trade Reed for Papelbon or Lester today. Reed’s value has gone significantly down this year. I think the M’s could still move him for an arm, but a much less valuable one than they talked about last offseason.
With much of the deserved criticism of Bavasi, one must give him credit, he can do business amicably with Boras.
How much do you think the decline in Reed’s value is a function of performance as opposed to his injury? It seems that every game he plays at this point (barring a major improvement) lessens his value.
I don’t know if Dave’s got it or not, but that’s a big part of being a GM. You have to work inside of baseball, build up your networks, and learn how to massage other teams’ GMs. Part of it is just the time in the business to build the network.
Baseball requires just as much “touch†as any other business.
I think this can’t be overemphasized. I suspect that was one of the reasons DePodesta wore out his welcome so quickly in L.A. And those people skills may or may not be something one can learn…
Gotta wonder what’s the best mix of baseball and people skills are optimal, particularly if you can surround yourself with people who can compensate for the weaknesses….
Hypothetically, if Dave was the GM, with complete control, I like these moves.
But I have zero faith in the Mariners to spend money wisey or even use the players they do spend money on wisely.
So with Dave NOT the GM, I hate the idea of a deadline philosophy that lands us money and temporary players.
I put a higher priority on landing talent, young or otherwise, than I do clearing “cap” space, getting out of contracts or lateral moves.
As much as I personally don’t want to move Beltre, I really don’t want to move him for anything but young talent.
But I do like the premise of buying both buyers and sellers, forcing yourself to look at deals from only one angle or the other is self-limiting to me. Each deal or package of deals should be looked at on its own merits.
Then again, I’d sacrifice this year in a heartbeat for a better shot next year and the years after that. And given the make-up of this team, I think “giving up” could actually make the team better in the short and long run. In fact, I see at least some surrender essential to have a shot THIS year. i.e. our DH.
I’m with John. I know I’m in a small minority, but I really don’t want to see Beltre moved. He’s still young and while I doubt he’ll ever put up the numbers again he had in his contract year in LA, I do think he’s likely to perform at about the level he’s shown over the last couple months and probably a bit better. And I love watching him play.
Also, the idea of clearing salary room for the upcoming free agent class just does nothing for me, as it appears to be another weak class (and I also don’t trust the FO enough to know which players would make the best signings).
Brilliant post; even though we don’t have Beane, it is awesome to see the sort of moves that could happen if someone of his creativity DID have control of our roster.
While it would be nice, the need for simultaneity shouldn’t be overemphasized as a barrier to the general idea of this scenario. The pivotal moves seem to be unloading Beltre and Sexson. Acquiring Betemit is somewhat secondary, since there must be a range of possible moves that could be made in response to unloading Beltre. The unity of these four moves really shines through in the details, but really I’d be happy with something resembling steps 1&3 or 2&4 even if the other pair didn’t work out.
$45 million would easily cover the salaries of Jason Schmidt, Daisuke Matsuzaka (and his posting fee) and give us the a rotation of Schmidt, Matsuzaka, Felix, Moyer, and Washburn. I could live with that.
I think Meche falls into the same category as Ibanez in terms of the organization’s unwillingness to trade him. We just won’t let a guy go who is doing well. See Guardado, Eddie.
I remember the post about Meche a couple of weeks ago. Was that assessment the consensus of all of the chief bloggers, or is there a case to be made tha Meche’s improvement is sustainable.
Being the one here that follows the Braves the cloest. I don’t see JS giving up Betemit for a LOOGY and a MOR guy in Meche. Yes the pitching staff isn’t the greatest, but the M’s would more than likely come with something better than the Meche/GS.
Betemit is our uber-go to guy. Yes he could be starting in the Majors some where but not at 3B. His strong posistions are 2B and SS and those two spots are currently wrapped up.
I just don’t see the value in Meche at all, even with his recent come around.
Maybe I’m just dumb, but I just don’t see this deal as something that could be done. I understand this is hypothetical and what not. But the M’s would have to give up something a bit better than what you would offer. As it is we already have a LOOGY in McBride. He’s shaky at times, but he’s better than Remmy was.
Dave, can you explain a little more about your suggestion for “Step 4: Send Wladimir Balentien, Yung-Chi Chen, and Cesar Jimenez to the Pittsburgh Pirates for Sean Casey and Kip Wells”
That just looks terrible to me, but I guess that’s because I never liked Sean Casey and Kip Wells has been a signficicantly worse that he might have been. I realize that those three prospects are high risk, but the return reward is extremely low.
This might be possible if your GM was named Beane or DePodesta. Bavasi? Notta chance.
Also, is Klesko on the DL? If so, he has to be a PTBNL, since you can’t trade guys on the DL (but you can get around that IF they are in another league, since PTBNLs have to be in a different league).
And yeah, that FA list scares me, unless you can add some more names to it. Especially the pitchers. Schmidt’s the guy who most likely comes through that OK, but it’s a scary list.
Re #42. Sorry. That should read: Kips Wells has been a significant worse player than he might have been.
Rain Delay has a point @ 41. They just got Bob Wickman for a guy in A ball.
Maybe, just maybe Bavasi will make a trade that benefits the Ms.
Bob Wickman has really dropped off this year:
Win Shares: 2.0
xFIP: 5.01
K/9: 5.2
BB/9: 3.2
For comparison here are Julio Mateo’s stats for this year:
Win Shares: 1.7
xFIP: 5.25
K/9: 5.1
BB/9: 4.1
I’d endorse all of those moves.
I suspect the Giants would prefer to keep Finley and eat his salary, due to the injury problems they have in the OF. We don’t need Finley anyway.
The Braves ought to be desperate enough to trade Betemit for Meche straight up. We don’t need to gve up Sherrill. I don’t know about Betemit as the #5 hitter.
I like the idea of Dave Roberts, but I wonder if San Diego really wants to part with him.
Kip Wells and Sean Casey seem extraneous to me. Ibanez can play 1B full time. Roberts can play LF until they decide Jones needs to go back down (which they may not ever decide is necessary), then they can install Linden or Snelling (Petagine to DH) in left and slide Roberts over. I’d rather just stick Cruceta in the rotation and get it over with. If Pineiro is really going to implode for good, we can use Baek at that point.
The M’s should take a flyer on Delucci right now anyway. If they’re not going to use Snelling, they might as well give the Phils a cheapo prospect and get Delucci in the lineup.
I don’t think it is time to dump Beltre or Sexson. As Dave himself has pointed out, we could improve the production of this pair (+ Lopez, etc.) with a much less drastic move of modifying park dimensions in RF. Easier to do, and such a move has plenty of precedent in Seattle.
We’d need to address our flyball-happy pitching staff before we go moving the fences in.
Absolutely. Addition by subtraction (of the flyball miscreants) would be the roster-shaping theme.
I like Sean Casey, but I’d rather have Craig Wilson. He’s younger, cheaper, and has the upside of playing reasonable first base and outfield (and in extreme emergencies, third-line catcher), and is from the west coast, too.
(And ugh Kip Wells ugh ugh ugh ugh ugh)
I wonder where Travis Ishikawa fits into San Francisco’s future plans, in terms of the “Giants sucking hole at first base”. I know his bat’s got to come around, but I really liked what I saw from his fielding when he was up in Seattle.
Sell.
According to BP, they have a 5% chance of making the playoffs. CoolStandings has them at 7%. Yes, anything can happen. That’s why it’s 5% or 7%, not 0%. They are clearly in the bottom half, making them sellers.
Unloading Beltre and Sexson for absolutely nothing would be ideal. Trying to trade them for two months of overpaid players that will become free agents is unrealistic. About as unrealistic as the chances of the Mariners making the playoffs.
21- No, not really. The problem is that we’ve got $26 million per year commited to Beltre/Sexson for the next two years, and $12 million for Beltre in 2009, and thanks to the park we play in, its unlikely that either of them will live up to their salaries.
Edgar and Boone both had decent splits at home. Alex definitely had periods where he hit the tar out of the balls that became hard hit outs. I don’t see Sexson and Beltre making long outs as much as I see them swinging at bad pitches. Their problems do not appear ballpark related to me like they were with Alex. I’m not disputing that Safeco is significantly tough on righties, but to state it as fact that the ballpark is to blame for their performance is a little presumptuous. In the case of Beltre, his performance this season is right in line with his performance from 2001, 2002, 2003, and 2005 with OPS ranging from 714 to 729. As far as Sexson goes, his 2005 home/road splits are identical.
I have never been one of the “down on Beltre” people. However, when people talk about how he’s been doing better the last couple of months they need to look at his July numbers, which are just about as bad as his April-May numbers. Good Beltre seems to have disappeared with the changing of the calendar from June to July. I think the good effects of the move to #2 may have worn out as Adrian seems to have gone back to his earlier approach.
Beltre by month:
April 189/284/233
May 264/302/355
June 324/387/611
July 220/292/373
Good Richie, on the other hand, seems to still be here; 1B is not the gaping hole it was in April and May:
April 213/308/351
May 198/252/358
June 255/319/539
July 250/316/558
According to BP, they have a 5% chance of making the playoffs.
BP’s monte carlo simulation assumes that the team’s W3% is their true talent level. I’d argue that, in this scenario, that’s not true. So I think it’s significantly higher than that.
Edgar and Boone both had decent splits at home.
Actually, Edgar had pretty pronounced home/road splits too. Boone’s weren’t as pronounced, but they were still there. You’ll have a near impossible time finding a RH hitter who has not been pretty significantly affected by Safeco Field over a several year time period.
I don’t see Sexson and Beltre making long outs as much as I see them swinging at bad pitches.
Park factors are a lot more involved than long fly outs.
Their problems do not appear ballpark related to me like they were with Alex.
They aren’t entirely park related. Thay are significantly park related, however.
In the case of Beltre, his performance this season is right in line with his performance from 2001, 2002, 2003, and 2005 with OPS ranging from 714 to 729.
This argument has been refuted many, many times here. Sorry, it doesn’t fly.
As far as Sexson goes, his 2005 home/road splits are identical.
And his 2006 splits are not. That doesn’t mean that Safeco didn’t effect him last year – it means he overcame the effect anyways. Who konws what he might have done last year in a park that wasn’t death to right-handers.
Beltre and Jose’s Home/Road splits point to there being a significant problem for the pair hitting in SafeCo.
Dave, I get most of the moves, but serious Sexson for Finley and Linden? Todd (aside from the fact I went ot high school with him) isn’t really a improvement over anyone we have unless the goal is to put him in Tacoma. His number are terrible…way worse than Reed or even Morse and has less speed than morse does. Unless you’d use him as trade bait for someone else. Plus you ru the risk of the FO using the whole local connection thing as an excuse to put him and the Ignitor in the OF and have a Kitsap/Japan outfield.
I mean career OPS of .310?
Hey tango, good to see you here (assuming you are “the” Tangotiger). I have been saying SELL as well, but DAve made a good point in his opening to this thread. The M’s are trying to attract fans, and a third year of sub-500 baseball would cause yet more season ticket holders to give up. While the playoff chances aren’t good, I think that trying to do something, while it may not succeed, will at least show that the front office wants to improve, and if it paves the way for a significant FA signing or two, it’s worth it to their balance sheet in the long run.
I have this reoccurring dream where I win the Power-Ball lottery, buy the Mariners and put DMZ, Dave and Jason in charge. Dave’s post is one of the reasons why. Thanks for the write-up, too bad it’ll never happen.
Jimmie
You’ll have a near impossible time finding a RH hitter who has not been pretty significantly affected by Safeco Field over a several year time period.
Wouldn’t pulling the alley in about 10 feet help? That’s a $20,000 change and a lot cheaper than eating salary.
59 — If the Giants would take on Sexson’s salary, it might be worth it.
I have read some rumors that the Padres are interested in Bustre (sorry, Beltre). Would they really consider taking him without the Mariners paying a large portion of his salary going forward? If so, they are in big trouble. I didn’t think Kevin Towers was that stupid.
It’d have to be a pretty big Power-Ball lottery — or maybe you’d have to win 2 or 3. If the Sonics just sold for $350 million, how much do you think the M’s would sell for? More than the Sonics, I’m quite sure.
I have the same dream, too, except mine’s more realistic. I would’ve bought the Rainiers just to keep ‘em in Tacoma. Don’t worry, that one ain’t comin’ true either. They were just bought today from a group out of Texas…
Trade Sexson, keep Beltre. Or morph ‘em into one person, keeping Sexson’s power and Beltre’s defense.
Wouldn’t pulling the alley in about 10 feet help? That’s a $20,000 change and a lot cheaper than eating salary.
moving the fences in is a terrible, terrible idea.
65 — The new Rainiers owners are planning to keep them in Tacoma.
Dave, if you think the W3 is too low, how much higher do you see it, and what do you think the chances would be based on that new number?
If the plan involves trading for an outfield prospect with less speed than Morse, that’s a problem! Morse isn’t exactly a speed demon!
Dave, if you think the W3 is too low, how much higher do you see it, and what do you think the chances would be based on that new number?
I think the M’s true W3% from here out is something like .530-.540 or somewhere in there (this assumes Carl Everett goes away very, very soon). I’d put there odds at making the playoffs at closer to 15-20% than 5%.
“[T]his assumes Carl Everett goes away very, very soon.”
You’ve hinted before at the possibility of this move. What are the chances that the M’s actually pull the trigger and dump His Dinosaurness? Is something imminent? (Oh please oh please.) Or are we still just hoping?
Why is pulling in the Left Center fences 10ft a bad idea? We can’t raise the temperature or change the winds.
Interesting, but not as interesting, quite, as the fact that you really put a lot of thought and effort into a very complex series of deals that, even if you were inside the organization and had the owner’s ears, would be blocked, undercut, and twisted into failure.
They really are pretty thought-provoking ideas, though. I enjoyed reading them. Perhaps ONE of the points, or at least the general, intelligent drift of their approach, may somehow reach the right person (and there must be at least one right person, even in this franchise’s management.)
Okay, so this is what Dave wants the Mariners to do, if he could have his way, and pull 4 trades at the same time, thinking that the other 4 teams would indeed do them.
What WILL the M’s do?
Chances are we can’t unload Beltre without paying nearly all of his salary. So, do we move him?
Why is pulling in the Left Center fences 10ft a bad idea? We can’t raise the temperature or change the winds.
my theory is this: if you pull the fences in, you increase the workload of the pitchers per out. as you do that, you increase the pitch count per inning, and reduce the number of innings your best pitchers can pitch and force your lesser pitchers to throw more innings. This impacts the visiting team as well, but only for the duration of time that they are in that park. I think it makes it more difficult to build a competitive team since you have to have a deeper pitching staff to be effective for the 81 games at home. The park does not impact the hitters ability to remain in the game, and it affects home and visitor hitters equally.
This is an interesting read, but I dont think they will be able to move Beltre or Sexson. We have seen both of them struggle, so I dont know who will want to pick them up (unless M’s are willing to take a good part of the salary). Like you mention later, Sexson is an eventual possibility, but I really doubt if anybody will be interested in Beltre.
Max – good answer, thank you. It makes sense to me, as long as you have a marginal starting rotation, which the M’s are seemingly destined for a few years.
On the other hand, if we pulled in the fences, Grover would then go to a 13 man pitching staff
my theory is this: if you pull the fences in, you increase the workload of the pitchers per out. as you do that, you increase the pitch count per inning, and reduce the number of innings your best pitchers can pitch and force your lesser pitchers to throw more innings.
Even if that was true, and the evidence for this is very spotty, there’s nothing wrong with bringing the left-center field fence in to make the park more fair to right-handed hitters, while compensating in other parts of the park (RF line, foul territory) to keep Safeco as a pitcher’s park.
In other words, you can have Safeco be evenly tough on LH and RH hitters, instead of its current configuration where its ridiculously unfair to RH hitters.
Aren’t there many teams out there that have parks with similar advantages and disadvantages? Yankee Stadium has the short porch in right, Fenway has the Monster and a BIG right field, Minute Maid Park, etc, etc.
What makes Safeco so different from the others?
#79: What makes Safeco so different from the others?
Cold, damp air, for much of the season (for a start).
Even if that was true, and the evidence for this is very spotty, there’s nothing wrong with bringing the left-center field fence in to make the park more fair to right-handed hitters, while compensating in other parts of the park (RF line, foul territory) to keep Safeco as a pitcher’s park.
i haven’t personally looked into data to suppor/refute this (hence ‘theory’) but i don’t think it’s an unreasonable assumption. that being said, wouldn’t bringing the fences in have an equivalent effect with beltre/sexson and visiting RH batters? my point is that the fences aren’t the problem, the overweight contracts with beltre/sexson are the problem.
The cold damp air affects RH and LH hitters equally though. I was referring to the dimensions of the park.
#82: The cold damp air blows in from LF, which punishes the RH hitters far more than LHers.
That makes more sense, I really hadn’t thought about the wind patterns.
The cold damp air affects RH and LH hitters equally though. I was referring to the dimensions of the park.
No, it doesn’t, because RH hitters drive the ball into the LF-CF gap far more often than LH hitters do. And almost the entirity of Safeco’s park factor can be attributed to the LF-CF gap. That thing is ridiculous.
i haven’t personally looked into data to suppor/refute this (hence ‘theory’) but i don’t think it’s an unreasonable assumption.
If it was true, you’d expect to see teams in pitcher’s parks win a lot more often than teams in hitters parks. There have been studies done on the issue, and while there was an effect, it was like 51.5/49.5 advantage to the pitcher’s park, so it was pretty minimal to say the least.
wouldn’t bringing the fences in have an equivalent effect with beltre/sexson and visiting RH batters?
We did a whole post on this subject a few days ago.
I think the fences could be part of the problem as it affects the pyshcology of our players more than the visitng team. If Beltre/Sexson have 15 near home runs each per season, this has to weigh on them.
Besides, I think Dave demonstrated rather conclusively that the righties are suffering here. The Home/Road splits.
So would screening the wind from LF have the same effect as moving in the LCF fence?
I think we should set up a giant fan along the 1st baseline to blow the winds out to LF when our hitters are up. Then we flip the thing off when opposing teams bat. Problem solved.
So would screening the wind from LF have the same effect as moving in the LCF fence?
I don’t think its wind, honestly. The ball just doesn’t travel through the air in that portion of the stadium. Every few weeks, we bring this up, and all the science guys get into an argument about the specific atmospheric effects that cause that – I’m not sure who is right, but I am sure that the ball dies when it gets to left center field, even on nights without wind.
You really never know. Look at the Rockies this year, they actually have good pitching, but their offense sucks. When we won 116 games, not many people questioned Safeco or it’s dimensions. In fact, may people thought of them as a benefit to the Mariners.
87: I recall a pretty lengthy discussion on atmospheric effects posted some weeks back.
Personally, I wonder if the LF/CF gap issue hasn’t made its way into the scouting reports for opposing pitchers. After all, the supposed strength of both Beltre and Sexson prior to Safeco was “opposite field” power. However, if pitchers can bust these guys inside without fear of having it pulled over the fence (Beltre more susceptible than Sexson), then you effectively mitigate their primary attribute.
“I have read some rumors that the Padres are interested in Bustre (sorry, Beltre). Would they really consider taking him without the Mariners paying a large portion of his salary going forward? If so, they are in big trouble. I didn’t think Kevin Towers was that stupid.”
So you think Beltre won’t hit in the NL?
“Bustre”! See what you did there? You took the front and back of Beltre’s name and added an “ust” in the middle.
“moving the fences in is a terrible, terrible idea. ”
We had a whole thread on this last week… bottom line, it isn’t.
“my theory is this: if you pull the fences in, you increase the workload of the pitchers per out. … The park does not impact the hitters ability to remain in the game, and it affects home and visitor hitters equally.”
1. That assumes that the fences are at the optimum set-up right now. Unless you think they are exactly right, which I don’t.
I mean, we could move the fences BACK a hundred and fifty more feet and really give the flyball staff a break.
2. Yes, it effects home and visitor hitters equally, but that is irrelevant. Since “visitors” covers dozens of teams, they split 50% of the disadvantage dozens of ways… we get half all to ourself.
And if that half pretty much pisses on 60% of the hitters to acquire we are really shooting ourselves in the foot.
You can stop killing righties and still have a pitcher’s park.
It’s going to be hot this weekend. I think we all agreed that heat affects the flight and distance, but disagreed whether this had a greater affect than altitude or humidity.
Let’s see if there’s a lot of long balls this weekend and who gets more, Manny or Richie.
To answer my own question (partially): We all know that Beltre chases the down and away pitch. His pitch recognition has been deplorable at times. However, this fact isn’t incompatible with scouting report idea. The more you guess the easier it is to fool. If he knows he has a weakness inside (Safeco being part of that), then he will be guessing a lot inside and be getting fooled a lot outside.
Besides, I think Dave demonstrated rather conclusively that the righties are suffering here. The Home/Road splits.
I don’t doubt that – you just have to look at a stadium map to see that it’s not going to be real friendly to RH power hitters. I just don’t understand the argument why bringing the fences in would actually help. I missed the last thread on this – what was the summary?
1. That assumes that the fences are at the optimum set-up right now. Unless you think they are exactly right, which I don’t.
I don’t know how far you’d have to move them in to have it sufficiently benefit RH hitters. I just don’t follow the notion that a marginal shortening would have a positive overall benefit. If you shortened them tremendously, then you would have a negative impact – as Dave said, it’s negligible but it’s still a loss.
Why is there this general feeling in the threads that both Sexson and Beltre suck but that Beltre sucks more?
I mean, even given Beltre’s unfathomably bad April, he and Richie are .010 apart in OPS. And that’s a superlative defensive third baseman against an alright FIRST baseman.
Provocative post. Thanks for doing it, even though most of the deals you’ve proposed would make me gag. The only deal I like a lot is the deal for Betemit. Why not pull the trigger on that one regardless of the other deals, cut Everett and use the DH spot to get Betemit in the lineup? It doesn’t free up the money, but it allows the team to shop Beltre and/or Sexson, preferably for something more useful than the washed up swag you’ve named. And if we can’t get rid of Beltre/Sexson we can still try moving in the fences in the offseason……..
Let’s not forget that Sexson blew Beltre out of the friggin’ water last year.
I’m marking it down as a few bad months for Sexson. He’s been slugging as of late.
A theory, based on not a lot really, is if half your games played make you a diminshed player, it affects your confidence and your psyche. Visiting players just come and go, and shrug it off.
Ichiro – home: .360/.410/.475, road: .326/.385/.414
Beltre – home: .225/.284/.324, road: .290/.358/.475
Lopez – home: .250/.303/.389, road: .314/.333/.520
Ibanez – home: .301/.375/.557, road: .262/.325/.506
Sexson – home: .198/.267/.395, road: .242/.315/.441
Everett – home: .225/.314/.384, road: .240/.297/.352
Johjima – home: .231/.311/.351, road: .338/.362/.556
Betancourt – home: .303/.329/.375, road: .271/.286/.424
Reed – home: .196/.255/.330, road: .235/.264/.417
Team – home: .256/.318/.397, road: .279/.327/.446
John in L.A. – assuming LA refers to Los Angeles – doesn’t Beltre now look a lot like pre-2004 beltre? I’m not talking numbers, but physically, and how his ABs look? not sure where I’m going with this.
I think the mental aspect of moving the fences in would benefit the hitters as much as the actual shortened distance itself.
96 – I agree with most of what you are saying, but the idea is that it is so hard on right-handers it kills us in the talent acquistion department. The idea is to adjust the fences enough to give righties a fair shot so that that particular kind of player doesn’t have to die here.
It’s not about bringing all the fences in – or even not bringing other parts out.
But it kills us to have right handed power mitigated for us. And it hurts us A LOT more than it hurts anyone else.
It’s like golfing. You can drive the hell out of the ball on a par 3, but then you step up to a long, straight par 5, and all of a sudden you’re swinging too hard and can’t hit worth a damn.
I think Safeco has the same affect on RH after they’ve been here awhile.
It’s like golfing. You can drive the hell out of the ball on a par 3, but then you step up to a long, straight par 5, and all of a sudden you’re swinging too hard and can’t hit worth a damn.
That’s certainly the case with me and probably lots of other players. But decent golfers don’t make that mistake. Safeco is less severe (at least looking at the dimensions – I don’t know how they play) than Yankee stadium – do the janks have a hard time signing RH hitters or do they just focus on building LH lineups?
Good point. These are professional hitters, where as I am a TOTAL hack on the golf course!
The Yanks don’t seem to have a hard time signing anybody. When your pockets are so deep Stephen Hawking mistakes them for a black hole, player tend to sign up fairly quickly, regardless of which way they hit!
The Yanks don’t seem to have a hard time signing anybody. When your pockets are so deep Stephen Hawking mistakes them for a black hole, player tend to sign up fairly quickly, regardless of which way they hit!
it makes them a lousy proxy except the stadiums kinda look alike.
I wonder how well they golf? LOL!
Pschology affects athletes as well. We’ve all seen pro golfers choke. Pro anything, really. We hit hitters and pitchers press when failing all the time.
Which brings up an interesting point. Does anyone know if Beltre has spent any serious time with an a-list sports pschologist? I don’t pretend to know what Beltre’s root problem is, but he sure seems like a guy who could benefit from it.
Which leads me to answer your question about L.A. Beltre, Max. I wouldn’t say that he looks the same as he did. He does some of the time, but in April, for example, the dude looked LOST. It wasn’t a matter of steroids or AL/NL or anything else, he had just lost all ability.
Now, he is starting to look a bit more like L.A. Beltre to me, laying off the low and away better, taking a few walks, driving the ball. Lot’s of warning track outs.
But remember he is incredibly hard to judge because he rarely had any normal time to evaluate. That botched operation set him back years, for example.
I’m a big Beltre fan, obviously, for reasons I’m not sure I understand. But I think he could be a good hitter and a great defensive player for us for the life of his contract if he had a good shrink and SafeCo was fixed a little. And this team can afford to overpay a great defensive third baseman.
I really hope we don’t discard him for nothing.
Yankee Stadium isn’t anything close to as hard on RH hitters as Safeco is.
Honestly, dimensions are one of the more minor factors in how a park plays. If you want to do some reading on these subjects, I’d suggest an article called “They Play in Parks” by Dave Studemund in the 2006 Hardball Times Annual, several articles by James Click at Baseball Prospectus, and you can see the individual park’s effects on hitters broken down by handedness in the Bill James Handbook.
John in LA — that’s right, I don’t think he’ll hit in the NL. Do you?
Beltre’s home/road splits suggest that Beltre doesn’t need a psychiatrist as much as he needs to get away from Safeco. MarinerDan may not have noticed it, but Beltre’s been pretty good on the road this year. Not great, but good enough for a third baseman with his glove, I think. And he did seem to hit in the NL parks this year, though obviously sample size caveats apply.
(See post 100 for Beltre’s home/road split.)
I’m sure for a few parks it’s a major factor, such as Fenway. But Boston is aware of that, and signs players accordingly.
And by the way, thanks Dave for the reading suggestions. It’s always nice to be informed of new places to find any kind of baseball info. Especially for someone who’s always been a huge baseball fan, but just recently became more interested in the more in-depth numbers side of things.
Will someone remind me what Bavasai signings where good ones? Also give me a list of his bad ones ?Thanks
!
Tip of the Day: If anyone ever asks you about the competency of Mariners management, all you need to say is the following:
“They consider Raul Ibanez more untouchable than Felix Hernandez.”
Remarkable.
111 – Yes, yes I do. Or elsewhere in the AL for that matter.
112 – I certainly agree that that is a bigger problem, but I don’t think we can say it is his ONLY problem. April… man, SafeCo wasn’t to blame for April, Adrian was just lost. There are a few other signs that a good psychologist might help him, too. He seems very agitated/anxious at the plate, he seems to jump back from balls out of proportion to how close they are to hitting him, like that.
Like I said, I’m a big Beltre fan, and a huge supporter of Dave’s SafeCo ideas… but I don’t think it would hurt Beltre to keep on top of a few other things, too.
I don’t know…..this plan sounds eerily like the strategy of Krivsky in Cincy and we all know he’s an idiot (despite my haiku suggesting otherwise-you people really should learn to appreciate a good haiku by the way)….
Payroll flexibility is overrated because it leads to spending money on free agents….
If, as Dave suggests, balls into the L/CF gap tend to ‘die’ even on windless days that suggests to me something is going on with the structure itself that causes a vortex or eddy in the air out there that causes balls go dead. For the kind of money owners spend on baseball, it’s the sort of problem that, in a city full of aeronautical engineers and architects, can be studied and analyzed with the proper people and equipment. Once you know why it’s happening it might well be that you could modify the stadium (in a reasonable way of course) so that airflows didn’t tend to neutralize right-handed power. That would be one heckuva lot more elegant a solution to the problem than simply pulling in the fences.
Might even make Raul Ibanez’ able to run a straighter route….
With the reports of San Diego coming out about them being interested in Beltre, any idea what we may be able to get from them? Is the SD trade mentioned above in the original post plausible? Or is something smaller more likely…
119: I hear you. I’m just pretty dubious about the value of sports psychiatrists.
In my opinion the Padres deal might actually happen. The Padres and M’s have worked on ridiculous deals for years.
124, exactly, thats why this carries a little more merit to me than other teams that may have been interested… salary dumps with these two happen a LOT
Oh, good….then there’s a chance that we’ll deal Beltre and THEN move in the fences…
I get the cost cutting aspect. However, I have no confidence that the Mariners will spend the 2007 payroll wisely. I’d much rather have Beltre and Sexson then give them away for the likes of Klesco and Finley and whoever the M’s would get with the extra payroll.
“Why isn’t Dave the GM”.
Sorry, I have to say it, but I’d be the first to register the http://www.firedavecameron.com website after these moves.
I’d much rather have Beltre and Sexson then give them away for the likes of Klesco and Finley and whoever the M’s would get with the extra payroll.
Adrian Beltre, VORP – 0.9
Richie Sexson, VORP – -2.6
Total VORP: -1.9
I can understand being frustrated with the management, but if you really don’t think the Mariners can do better than 3 runs below replacement level (about what they’re projecting to for the season) for $27 million, you’re crazy.
Not really sporting to not like the moves based on who current management would get with the savings, and then assume Davv The GM would make the same moves.
All this would be more fun speculation if the Mariners would at least get a real DH first. Hard to get excited about any moves until management gets their head out of their ass.
I guess that I just think Beltre and Sexson have a better chance of rebounding than anyone the Mariners are going to replace them with.
#129 – Point conceeded. I guess I really don’t like the suggested moves a bit regardless of what comes next.
Sorry, I probably came on a little strong, but yah, want no part of Klesco, Finley, Casey, or Wells and there are no real prospects coming back.
Yes, I’ve liked Betemit for a long time. I’d rather sign Meche to an extention though.
The problem with trying to do both, be buyers and sellers, is that if you slip up when stradling the fence you’ll end up on an episode of the Dudesons.
If you are going to dump Beltre and Sexson at least get prospects back that are high risk/ high reward. If you are going to be buyers get someone who will actually help this year. None of the players mentioned will do much of that.
I guess that I just think Beltre and Sexson have a better chance of rebounding than anyone the Mariners are going to replace them with.
You think Adrian Beltre has a better chance of hitting than Wilson Betemit? You think Richie Sexson has a better chance of hitting than, say, David Dellucci, or any random left-handed guy who could use a platoon partner (that we just happen to have now)?
Sorry, I probably came on a little strong, but yah, want no part of Klesco, Finley, Casey, or Wells and there are no real prospects coming back.
They all go away at years end.
Yes, I’ve liked Betemit for a long time. I’d rather sign Meche to an extention though.
You’d rather pay Gil Meche, he of the years and years of suckitude, a lot of money to maybe, maybe pitch like a 3rd starter if he doesn’t get hurt, than have 25-year-old infielder who can whack the ball all over the park and play multiple positions while making nothing?
If you are going to dump Beltre and Sexson at least get prospects back that are high risk/ high reward.
Good luck with that.
If you are going to be buyers get someone who will actually help this year.
Sean Casey, Wilson Betemit, and Dave Roberts are far outperforming Adrian Beltre, Richie Sexson, and Adam Jones right now. The difference is astronomic.
The concept behind the post is interesting, if not something that Bill Bavasi is psychologically capable of executing, to say nothing of his bosses. I’m a big fan of this kind of ‘buy _and_ sell’ maneuver, in large part because it forces you to determine who your core guys really are—and aren’t. The downfall of may organizations is that they become overly attached to guys who they have and know, and become blocked in their thinking about upgrading performance from the roster and position spots of those individuals. The Mariners are especially susceptable to this because their roster strategy is designed to generate marketing points more than wins. The evaluation matrix here is limited to: young guy developing, our guy producing, he’s done, and attitude problem. That’s it. So a build-out-the-core re-do would force a real evaluation.
—And in a real evaluation, the tremendous psychological and performance burdens for the team which are Beltre and Sexson are inescapable. Collective -1.9 VORP from the guys ticketed to be your #s 3 and 4 hitters by their contracts, that says it all. Bavasi clearly finds it hard to accept that ‘his guys’ are that lousy and that much of a drag on the team’s competitiveness. After a year and a half of suckitude, I have the sense that the team is prepared to cut Adrian Beltre loose. After only half a year of same from Sexson, I doubt that they’re there yet on him.
Beltre: it isn’t psychological. Look at the home/road splits. Look at his ABs. His plate discipline is erratic, his pitch recognition sub-par, and his swing doesn’t allow him to protect the plate significantly. If he faces pitchers fool enouogh to feed him strikes—and they do this more in the NL league though not necessarily fastballs—then he rockets line drives from gap to gap. In a fair park, a larger number go over or off the wall. In the AL, he sees fewer strikes, and in this park more of those LDs are loud outs. He will never succeed here. It was a gamble when he was signed, he won’t pay off, and the team would be vastly better with another guy making much, much less.
And with Safeco, it _isn’t_ the wind, really; that’s what’s so strange. I’ve followed the ‘science guys’ discussions several times, and they’re illuminating, but even with the flags in left field hanging dead, slack down you can see high fly balls to LF just stop and drop almost straight down short of the warning track into the OFers gloves. Line drives do much better. I don’t know what it is, and pulling in the fence in LF gap would be less radical than avoiding RH power hitters altogether, but acquiring RH _line drive hitters_ would be the best bet regardless. It’s interesting that Betancourt, the RH hitter in the lineup who doesn’t elevate the ball, is the one who clearly isn’t hurt by Safeco.
Still, the idea of the post, to dump a pair of vastly underperforming RH power hitters who will never pay off here and clear their salaries, would tremendously improve the prospects of the team going into next year.
Regarding the specific moves posited, I like Steps 1 and 3. I’d hate to give up Sherrill, and Grover would scream, but he’s not young and exactly the kind of guy whose value is maximized in a deadline deal. Meche shouldn’t be re-signed, and won’t be, so cashing out his value is really the most sensible thing to do, yes, although it looks like the white flag waving. Getting Dave Roberts and Wilson Betamit back would be major positives. Roberts is a useful guy who could fill in any outfield position which this roster desperately needs, and Wilson could hold down 3B very acceptably. So I’d vote YES in a big way for that swap.
But as you say, all the deals are contingent on one another. Since the team is ‘in the running,’ one ‘has to get another established starter back.’ Which is where I run afoul of Step Four. Yes, it brings back Casey, who I don’t much like and would soon be gone though yes he’s outperforming Sexson right now, and Wells who’s pretty bad. And to get them for a two months, one burns three prospects. Now, I know that all three are guys low on your list, Dave, but I’m not keen on this one. I’d rather see how Balentien plays out here. And if you take him out of the lot, there’s no deal unless maybe you put somebody like Feierabend in instead. Still, burning three prospects in order to get offseason salary room by then subsequently dumping Sexson too is . . . worrisome. To me.
I think Sexson needs to go, but I have a feeling a better deal can be made for him in the offseason. He’ll only have two years left. If he sustains his performance of June and July, his market may expand a little. I don’t have any problem with moving him to SF now, but if it means Step 4, then no.
Still, the overall thinking is good here, to me. Like others, I don’t trust the Ms present management team to spend the money freed up at all, in any way. There track record is just bad. And the market isn’t that good. The idea of trading to take on some salary has more appeal, though.
I’m no real fan of Jason Schmidt for reasons we don’t discuss on this blog, though it’s hard to argue with his performance since coming to SF. And I feel sure that he will be a principal target for acquisition by the Mariners in the offseason. Having roster $$$ for Matsuzaka, though, is most desirable.
If Sexson does happen to be traded and the Mariners are without a first baseman during this off-season, could Bryan LaHair be ready to step in?
If Sexson does happen to be traded and the Mariners are without a first baseman during this off-season, could Bryan LaHair be ready to step in?
No. Bryan LaHair is not a major league hitter.
# 57: “This argument has been refuted many, many times here.” [re: the similarity of Beltre's yearly aggregates outside of 2004].
Not. And I really wish you’d quit making comments like this Dave, they’re to your discredit. I’ve raised the issue of the similarity, and indeed continuity, of Beltre’s seasons before here, as have others. You’ve disagreed. Aside from last week when I was on vacation I’ve read every post on the subject in this blog for the last three years. You have NEVER, I emphasize that word, effectively ‘refuted’ the similary of his seasons in anything you’ve said. Period. Indeed, Beltre’s performance this year only _emphasizes_ the real continuity of his performance throughout his career outside of 2004.
One could say, with justice, “He was injured young, and his performance after that wasn’t reflective of his talent.” Or, “There’s more variability in his slugging year to year than such a comment would suggest.” And one could certainly credibly argue, “Adrian’s road totals away from Safeco suggest that he’s a much more effective hitter in a neutral enviroment, and thus that there’s less continuity in his totals and more growth in performance over time then the numbers in and of themselves suggest.” Or reiterate other points you’ve made on the issue. And it’s simple honesty given your history on this to say, “No, I’ve disagreed with that assessment previously, and I don’t agree it now,” and to leave it at that. To imply that you’ve refuted countervailing arguments on this issue is intellectually dishonest.
—And it comes back to bite you, Dave. I remember, midway during our back and forths on Jeremy Reed in a discussion with a someone else you said exactly the same thing ” . . . that’s been refuted many times” when in fact you’d never ‘refuted’ the issues in question regarding his performance or potential. You’d argued otherwised, but not _refuted_ the counter-arguments. Now, sensibly, you’ve stepped back on Reed; that says a lot for your reality testing. It isn’t all that fair, in fact, for the Boston dweeb to pop up in this thread and try to twist your cojones on the Reed-to-Boston-for-? issue. I’d have liked to get Arroyo for him, but your arguments were reasonable in the context of that debate, even if the assessment on the player didn’t come through.
You’ve made this same remark in other contexts, Dave, in effect implying that you’ve won an argument and that the issue in question nis dead when in fact you haven’t come close even though you’re very attached to your position on an issue and haven’t lost the argument either. You’ll be a better analyst when you drop this particular tactic permanently from your repertoire, one whose ability is really that reflected in the trade and roster construction insight behind the post leading off this thread.
I have to say, I would also wonder whether Casey and Wells are really the best we could do in return for Balentien and Chen. I understand you aren’t high on them, and I understand why — indeed, I agree we’re better off dealing Balentien than keeping him — but I would have thought they’d have more trade value than that.
You’ll be a better analyst when you drop this particular tactic permanently from your repertoire, one whose ability is really that reflected in the trade and roster construction insight behind the post leading off this thread.
If you make a point on a faulty premise, and that point turns out to be correct in the long run, your premise was not any less faulty.
Sorry, it just isn’t. You don’t get to say “look, I was right”, when you were right for the wrong reasons. The whole “look at Beltre’s OPS by year” argument is just ridiculously superficial and terrible analysis that does nothing to look at the real issues. It’s the kind of crap Neyer and Sheehan live on.
It would be like me chiming in now and saying “see, I told you signing Sexson was a bad idea”, when a huge amount of the negativity of that contract surrounded the health of his shoulder. Yes, it looks like the M’s are going to regret that contract, but not for the main reason I was worried about it. Sexson’s struggles this year aren’t evidence that I correctly evaluated the issue at the time.
Beltre’s struggles this year aren’t evidence that Jack Howland’s argument has any merit.
If you’d rather read analysis where people get credit for pretending to know the future, there are plenty of places like that out there. This isn’t one of those.
IIRC, in addition to the shoulder a lot of the negativety on the Sexson deal was the amount of money paid to sluggin 1B on the wrong side of 30 in 2007 and 2008. It’s possible he got “old” a year early. It’s also possible that April and May were bad and he’ll continue his June/July performance for the next two seasons.
Dave’s grand plan is now moot, anyway. The Giants picked up Shea Hillenbrand to play 1b.
#138: But the underlying point wont go away…..ignore 2004 and Beltre has been for his career REMARKABLY the same guy he’s been in a Seattle uniform. Unfortunately, it’s remarkably average. For his entire career, he has slugged over .475……ONE season (2006). Ignoring 2004, he has had an OBP above .350 as many times as he has had one below .300.
The notion that what you see is what you’re gonna get with Beltre has hardly been refuted….let alone many times.
I know what Pecota says about him but how many seasons does Beltre have to hover around Pecota’s 10-25th percentile (like this one) before he finally comes through or its acceptable to say, “that crazy Beltre!”?
You can make the argument that Safeco is killing him but Pecota knew what home jersey he was going to wear the last two seasons.
Jeepers, this thread argues that the Ms should jettison him.
Here’s a haiku to definitively put the issue to rest…
Beltre such promise
True but promise like Moses
May not cross rivers.
belaXadux,
Search the archives for your posts every once in a while man. Whats your email?
Dave, if I claimed _anywhere_ that ‘I was right about Sexson being a problem,’ you’d be exactly right in this point. I haven’t (as you know, this is just an example) and I haven’t exactly because such a claim would be flawed, self-promoting puffery. I was terribly concerned about Sexson’s shoulder, but it hasn’t been an issue at all. Richie hit decently in ’05, and put me to shame, and good for him. —Then he fell apart this year, and that’s now a problem regarding which I’ve been critical, but no, I in no way made the argument that he ‘was a high risk to decline,’ although others did.
And to change tack a bit, I actually agree with you that comparisons based on OPS are a poor approach, and that a specific disagreement with _that_ technique is a valid criticism of the comment in this thread to which you responded. If that was your intent—the focus of your remark was opaque—than my apologies for giving you a blast in this specific instance.
That said, the underlying issue remains with Beltre’s relatively stable career numbers reflecting a stable, and flawed, approach as a hitter which we can expect to generate largely comparable seasons to his ’05 and ’06 going forward, the real issue behind the comment to which you responded. I’m aware that you’ve disputed aspects of this continuity in the past, although I haven’t (it’s pointless) gone back and done a site-search for the specifics. The issue isn’t really whether you, or I, or the author of the remark is right or wrong regarding this specific issue, but in how the arguments are made and defended. And the “I refuted that” line has most times led to highly questionable assertions when I’ve seen you use it, and in well more than the instances I site here. If I’m wrong in this instance on your intent, which I rather think I’m not but let’s take it that way, I suggest you take the criticism of the remark and file it away for where it fits at another time. Clearly this has stuck in my craw, but remember I won’t be the only one, and remarks of this kind cost your in how others will perceive your work. That is my fundamental point.
I don’t know that Plan A which Dave puts out here is moot. Steps 1 and 3 could still happen. And the idea that the Ms could do a teardown while still keeping their winning percentage about where it is now is worth considering over the next few days up to the deadline. The Ms management team could certainly make some significant adjustments to the roster, beyond dumping C-Rex, and _should_, and if they’re busy sitting on their hands we can still weigh what their options really are, in part because that tells us more about the difference between who they are and who they should be.
Yo taro, I don’t recall if we’re supposed to put our emails in posts here, and I’m surprised mine doesn’t show, but one you can contact me at is BelaTxadux@yahoo.com. I’m no special bloke on baseball, but you’re welcome to drop me a line. I guess this post will vanish if ‘it’s not supposed to be.’
On a further note, while it will be interesting to see if Papelbon sustains anything close to his absurdly low hit rate, Mark Lowe is the example that demonstrates one issue in the non-trade of Reed-to-Boston-for-? discussion. Most organizations should have a guy or two in their system who they could bring up as a lights out closer. That’s not to say that either Lowe or Papelbon are throw-aways, not at all, only that they are not once-in-ten-years commodities. And both should be in a Major League rotation. And once there, their numbers would be less awe-inspiring, though valuable. In any hypothetical scenario where either were to be moved, it’s who you get back not who you give up. Both are core guys, but neither is a franchise type player, to me. It’s undisputebly great to have a dominating closer; just look at J. J. Putz, who nobody in Boston would have remotely taken back in a swap for Pabelbon or Lester. Great to have one—and not all that hard to find one. Which is why sticking with guys pitching like Wickman or Guapo Guardado is . . . not that smart. Or paying $10M a year for someone in that role.
Lester’s quick success in the Bigs is the larger accomplishment, and we’ll have to see who he really is once video on him gets around the League.
And to change tack a bit, I actually agree with you that comparisons based on OPS are a poor approach, and that a specific disagreement with _that_ technique is a valid criticism of the comment in this thread to which you responded. If that was your intentâ€â€the focus of your remark was opaqueâ€â€than my apologies for giving you a blast in this specific instance.
Jack Howland wrote: “In the case of Beltre, his performance this season is right in line with his performance from 2001, 2002, 2003, and 2005 with OPS ranging from 714 to 729.”
While that statement is empirically true, the assertion was (and I’m sure Jack will agree with this) that Beltre’s true talent level going forward would be a .714 to .729 OPS, and that’s what we should expect.
That’s the point we’ve refuted many, many times. Clearly, there’s an argument to be made that Beltre is never going to get any better – I suggest him dumping him in this very thread, so obviously, I see the merit of that point – but the argument based on year to year OPS is a lousy one. That argument has been refuted over and over.
Jack may be “right” about Beltre, but if he is, he’s right for the wrong reasons.
My point is simply that based upon Beltre’s 20,000 or so previous full seasons in the bigs (give or take 19,973), it’s becoming obvious that Pecota and Beltre aren’t going to be friends. He has shown very little growth during his first 7 seasons. He’s 27 now….right when he should be demonstrating he’s *bonified*.
There is no reason to believe the light is suddenly going to come on just because he turns 28 next April…. normal developmental curve be damned…. didn’t Johnny Cochran say, “If the curve doesnt fit, he must sit” or something like that? Beltre doesn’t fit…
He’s a shinier version of David Bell with more serious leather… I’m fine with that I suppose but not for Scott Rolen money.
it’s becoming obvious that Pecota and Beltre aren’t going to be friends.
If Adrian Beltre was a historical anomoly is who physically capable of improvement, then you’d be right.
But man, I have no idea how you could have watched him the last two month and think that he’s incapable of improvement.
There is no reason to believe the light is suddenly going to come on just because he turns 28 next April
There’s also no reason to believe that the light has no chance of coming on.
Here’s the thing – there’s no a person on planet earth who “knows” what Adrian Beltre is going to hit like for the next week, month, year, or his career. There are degrees to which we can assume some level of knowledge, but to pretend that we have some kind of divine understanding of what Adrian Beltre is… that’s just foolish.
John Clayton, who I think of as a football analyst, had some interesting things to say about baseball today on his Saturday ESPN radio show. Someone called in and asked about the San Diego/Beltre rumors and asked what we should expect to have to take on in terms of an onerous contract in order to get a deal done (the caller suggested an example like Klesko).
Clayton had some very pointed comments. He said you just don’t trade someone who is only 27 and is still a developing player who is underperforming their contract like this. Any bad contract you take on in getting rid of Beltre will be far worse than continuing to pay Beltre.
Clayton also remarked that Safeco is the only new park that hasn’t tweaked its dimensions. He says that’s stupid based upon how brutal the park is on right handed hitters. He says management should sit down with Beltre, Sexson and others and ask what they can do to reconfigure the park to make it easier on them.
He also said if they trade Beltre for a bad contract, in return, then Bavasi should be fired for that reason alone.
It’s almost like Clayton has been reading the authors of USSM to form all of his opinions.
And although the authors here have decidedly mixed opinions about Meche, Clayton thinks the M’s should extend him. He notes that Seattle has been dropping down to the 4th or 5th best in the offseason free agent pitching market, each year. And considering that’s their MO, they might as well simply extend Meche.
Interesting comments, I thought.
My problem with Dave’s plan is that basically, we trade Beltre and Sexson’s contracts for Schmidt and Matsuzaka’s.
I’m not sold that this represents a lesser risk of underperformance, considering that Schmidt’s 34 and the J Leagues are pretty hard on their pitchers. The downside risk is still pretty high that you end up changing the uniform numbers on your overpaid players- and Beltre seems, to me, at least, a decent candidate to bust out.
I vote for revamping the park and using the Piñeiro/Eddie/Meche money as the source for impriving the pitching (and having to pick lesser but younger candidates, though Schmidt might be oon there, too)- though I’d be open to swapping Sexson out.
Clayton’s may be the smartest comments I’ve read on the issue outside of this site.
I did not know that SafeCo was the only new park that hadn’t tweaked its dimensions. Apologies if someone pointed it out here and I missed it.
A few mixed responses about Beltre.
1. I think it’s folly to assume that Beltre couldn’t benefit from an a-list psychologist. I pointed out a couple things I think are indicitive of someone who has problems not directly related to talent, and at the very least, I don’t think it could hurt.
Especially in April, the way he was diving away from high and inside and the way his feet did the anxious dance when he laid off a pitch he really wanted to swing at point to a guy who is not psychologically comfortable with that little white ball coming.
I’m not suggesting it’s a panacea, I’m suggesting that I have NO FRIGGIN idea what the issues are Beltre. I don’t think it’s one thing.
I thnk SafeCo is, perhaps, the BIGGEST issue with him, but it’s not alone. April proved that.
Belte and Sexson are two different cases. Sexson looks like he always has, it just isn’t working right now. Beltre looks like completely different hitters. In April he looked like a little leaguer, with a different swing, a different approach, different everything.
If the season had started in May, Beltre’s #’s would look like: .281 .329 .459. Not great, but signifigantly less stinky.
I’m not suggesting we drop April to make Beltre look good, I’m suggesting that the dude is a scizophrenic. And to trade him based on his April or even overall numbers, to me, is not a good idea. He is a very valuable player in the NL, hell, anywhere else.
Just fix the park.
“It was a gamble when he was signed, he won’t pay off, and the team would be vastly better with another guy making much, much less.”
Vastly? An irreplacable defensive 3rd baseman batting for months now at around an .800 OPS clip?
Do better? Sure. Though I bet you couldn’t do better at all if they fixed the park a bit.
But vastly? Nah.
My concern is making all these deals for National League players. We have seen enough guys who had good numbers in the National League become busts in the AL. How did these guys do in interleague play?
You mean like Bret Boone? Or Richie Sexson last year? Or Mike Cameron in 2000?
For THE LOVE OF GOD, quit saying “NL players become busts in the AL”. It’s not true.
#149: But I used a haiku………
#151: the beauty of dave’s plan is it rids the team of the *bad* contracts and frees up money for free agents next year…
The problem with Dave’s plan is it frees up money for free agents
” . . . There’s no person on planet earth who ‘knows’ what Adrian Beltre is going to hit like for the next week, month, year, or his career . . . There’s also no reason to believe that the light has no chance of coming on.”
Well, given Adrian’s extreme streakiness, anyone trying to predict his results for the next week or month is a fool, and I wouldn’t try. However, he’s been really quite consistent in a fairly narrow band of aggregate performance for his career outside of the 2004 outlier. And that performance matches very well with his approach at the plate. Accordingly, he is, to me, one of the guys most easily pegged for year end results and career path.
There is every reason, absolutely every reason, to believe that the light is _never_ going to come on for Adrian Beltre. After watching him for a year and a half, I’d have to say he’s one of the most stubborn hitters I’ve ever seen, easily in my Top Ten, and well up the list. He takes that great big lick whether the ball is down and in—in which case, a worm-burner to the left side—at his letters—in which case, he fouls it back—or up and away—in which case, swing-and-a-miss. If he gets in a bad streak, he can be persuaded to lay off the pitch down and away most of the time, but as soon as he hits a run of making contact he loses discipline on that pitch, too. As one example, Jeff Pentland was quoted in the paper back in early June saying, in close paraphrase, I can’t get Adrian to lay off the high pitch, the one that usually isn’t called a strike, so I’m going to try and teach him how to hit it. [Translation: I give up, but it's my job to work with the guy.] Pentland also said Adrian listened well, was very patient, seemed open to what was being said, etc., etc., you know, not an attitude problem. —And then, as we see, Adrian goes to the plate and forgets everything that was discussed and hits exactly like he has since the minor leagues. The only adjustment I have ever seen him make is to lay off the pitch down and away when he’s going bad, for awhile.
Forget about Adrian’s April; it’s only tangentially related to who he is as a hitter since he was entirely and totally messed up. Of course ‘he looks different’ since April, ’cause nobody including him looks that bad on a regular basis. Looking forward in ’06: In May, no power, not much contact, cautiously working walks to get more pitches to hit. In June, good contact with that vicious line drive swing, getting some multi-hit games, and bunches of doubles with some HRs; mostly against inferior pitching and away from Safeco in the NL, however. In July, having lost plate discipline, he’s lost contact with the pitches again, and is back to guessing wrong—wildly—on what is coming against better pitching in the AL; your basic out machine. Looking at his OPS component numbers for these three months, John in LA, is exactly why OPS isn’t that great a way to evaluate. Adrian had one hot streak against bad pitching mostly in June, and outside of _that_ his year has been consistently sucktastic. Context is king. And his performance in context does not lead me to believe that he has made any kind of improvement WHATSOEVER over that time. He is and was exactly the same hitter in every month of last year, this year (except April), and really his whole career. And in all high probability, he will continue to be exactly the same guy we see at the park today through the duration of his career to come.
Going to a psychologist may impact Adrian’s stubbornness, but I’m extremely dubious on that, with cause. Seeing that psychologist will do nothing for Adrian’s _inability to recognize pitches out of the pitcher’s hand_. This is Adrian’s 8th year in the Big Leagues, and he still can’t recognize curve ball or fastball on any consistent basis. _That_ kind of consistency leads one to infer that ‘the light is never going to go on.’ Adrian guesses at the plate too much because he can’t read the pitch, but after 8 YEARS IN THE BIGS, he guesses wrong waaaaaa-aaa-aayy to much of the time, an indication that he really isn’t very smart as a hitter. He’s trying, but it clearly takes him years to learn the patterns of individual pitchers and teams. It was, maybe, in his 5th year in the NL that Beltre finally knew that League well enough to be guessing right a good portion of the time. Are we to wait until he’s been in the AL 4-5 years to see results? It’ll take that long at least, if ever, judging by his learning curve so far here.
Adrian swings at many pitches off the plate. Oh, he’ll cut down his ‘go-zone’ a little if he’s going bad, but he goes right back to hacking when he’s hot. He doesn’t protect the plate. He uses the same swing on too many pitches. For example, down and away isn’t really where to go to get him out, it’s down and in. Adrian doesn’t get under the ball to lift it but won’t lay off it so the other team can very reliably get left side GBs out of him. He can’t and won’t lay off of the high fastball, just as Pentland said, but he can’t hit it, either. Adrian can’t/won’t adjust his swing to hit offspeed pitches reliably; he’ll stay back on the ball fairly well if he’s guessed right, but then launch his bat at it at warp speed like he’s trying to brain a snake. There may be psychological issues to his inflexibility, but consider: Adrian hit his way off the canefield in Hispaniola and has made himself a very wealthy man playing the game exactly as he is playing it today. Why would he change? His whole imago as a baseball player is wrapped up in what he’s doing, and that’s a powerful disincentive to truly listen and truly change anything in his game. He’ll listen, but he won’t change. His entire history of consistency as a player says that he won’t change. He’ll tweak a little bit until ‘he get’s going good,’ then revert right back to what he’s always done when he’s going good to try and prolong the streak, making all the mistakes he’s always made. I’d bet his salary on it.
Now, if Adrian is getting strikes from pitchers that aren’t down and in, he’s a great athlete with great bat speed, and he puts a wicked lick on the ball. At that point, Safeco’s characteristics come into play, and yes if the LF-CF alley fence was brought in it would surely help him and every other RH batter here. But it won’t change him as a batter: he doesn’t change. If anything, he’ll hack more trying to reach the more reachable fence, I’d say. Pitching in the AL is about working the corners and getting batters to swing at pitches they can’t do much with; it’s not about challenging hitters, or except for relievers generally about attacking the strikezone. Adrian’s in the wrong League for his game such as it is, frankly.
Clayton’s comments that you don’t trade a 27-year old, toolsy, sometime All-Star with batspeed are %100 wrong. With any player you have to assess their strengths, weaknesses, prospects to improve, and cost of employment. Adrian has significant residual strengths, deep weaknesses as a hitter, no reasonable prospects to improve, and high costs of employment well beyond this season. I can’t believe that any one who has watched him would bet on him improving. It’s not impossible. He also could join the NASA, do well, and earn a spot on the mission to Mars. I wouldn’t bet on either outcome. That said, you don’t trade someone of his residual strenghths for nothing, even less for a bad contract coming back. THat much is dead on. Don’t panic, don’t sit, deal smart.
. . . Which is why I like Dave’s idea in the post to start this thread. Turning Beltre, Meche, and sweeteners into Dave Roberts and Wilson Betamit is exactly the right idea; in fact, almost Beane-esque in approach. You give up flawed ‘names’ with a history of under-performance and high risks of same going forward for two guys undervalued around the game who together will give you more actual value RIGHT NOW and save a bunch of money to spend, probably on pitching. This is what you do: you move guys who don’t cut it for undervalued guys who in reality make your team better.
RE: Clayton’s comments on Beltre sounding like he’s reading USS Mariner, it’s quite obvious that many, perhaps most, local sports commentators read what’s posted here, and work an angle off it for their daily wordcount quota. Repeatedly during this last year, issues discussed en blog but not elsewhere locally in the same way or at all, particularly regarding players in the Ms organization, have popped up in local articles shortly thereafter. I even heard Niehaus and Fairly today discussing the possibility of Mark Lowe being turned into a starter next year (!). They didn’t say, The team is thinking of this; they mooted the issue. —They never think ahead like that, especially if someone is having good success in their present role, where typically they cheerlead. That was an eyeopener, but just another example.
Media types are fishing in the blog for ‘what the fans who care think,’ and taking talking points away. All to the good, says me.
Yes, Beltre has obvious flaws. We all know what they are.
You’ve done nothing to convince me that these are permanent, unchangable flaws. You’d have made this exact same argument about Jose Guillen (ages 21-26, 2200 PA, .680 OPS, then wham, light bulb), Aramis Ramirez, and Torii Hunter.
Or, just for fun, let’s take a look at this hall of famers career:
Brooks Robinson:
In the majors at 18, playing regularly by 21, posts OPS+ of 96 at age 22 and 108 at age 23. Clearly defining himself as one of the best young players in the game.
Age 24, he takes a step back, posting an OPS+ of 97. Bounces back with his best year to date at age 25, posting a 125 OPS+, then declines again at age 26 with his worst year to date, an OPS+ of 89 (.251/.305/.365 raw line).
Through his age 26 season, he had 3,445 at-bats and had posted an OPS+ of 97 with only one year of star level performance.
He then proceeded to roll off seasons with an OPS+ of 145, 124, 124, 125, 117, 92, 109, and 114 before decline finally set in. From ages 27-34, he was awesome, after being thoroughly mediocre in many, many chances from 21-26.
Adrian Beltre, in his career up to 2006, had 4,065 at-bats with an OPS+ of 106. Even his recent suckitude would fit right in with the early years of Brooks Robinson’s career. Except Beltre’s good years were significantly better than Robinson’s good years.
A light-bulb turned on for Brooks Robinson at age 27. He had always been seen as a tremendous talent (thus, being in the majors at 18) and had flashed it from time to time, but was unable to translate that into consistent performance despite being handed 3,500 at-bats over 8 seasons.
He’s now in the Hall of Fame.
I’m sorry, but there are way, way too many examples of talented underperformers who finally figure it out for me to believe that it is impossible for Adrian Beltre to figure it out.
The worst part of the statistical analysis movement has been to equate player performance with talent. There are a significant amount of underachievers floating around life, and many of them play baseball. All that it takes, in many instances, for an underachiever to improve is a change in attitude.
There’s no disputing Adrian Beltre’s talent. I’ve never seen any kind of compelling argument that shows that underachievers can be expected to continously underachieve for the rest of their existance. There are too many examples to the contrary. One of the most comparable players to Adrian Beltre is in the freaking Hall of Fame.
In other words, “If i can change, and you can change, we allllllllllll can change.”
Adrian Beltre has all the world of physical talent; there’s no questioning that. I can’t demonstrate the impossibility of a future hypothetical, and really I’m not trying to do so. We can look at what he’s done, and what he does, and assess the likelihood of change. That’s what I try to do.
Is there anything in Adrian’s history as a player, as a person, and in his demonstrated performance here which suggests that such a change is impending, or significantly probable? No. Therefore, the likelihood of such a change has to be seen as low. So long as Adrian can reel off season-ending numbers roughly in line with his history, there will be very little pressure from _inside the person_ to change. Adrian has salvaged his season more or less to this point so that, particularly if he has a more or less typically hot August he’ll come close to his normal output. Why would he change? Because the Ms management want more for their $$$?? Hardly. We may look at Beltre and see him as something of a failure and a disappointing return on his underlying talent. Do you think he feels that way? I hear _nothing_ in his statements, or in others’ comments about him to lead me to believe that. He’d like to do better, but really he’s doing what he’s always done, and he has his good streaks, and who can ask more for him than to keep giving it his all like he is now? Why would he change??
And it’s not as simple as “the light coming on,” to me. I don’t think Adrian recognizes pitches, and I don’t think that that’s going to significantly change. He’s been employed as a ballplayer to hit pitches for, what?, 10 years, and he still can’t recognize pitches. I don’t think, watching his ABs, that Adrian really understands what pitchers are doing to get him out. He can discuss it with coaches all he wants in the dugout or video room, but once he’s at the plate he has only the shreds of a clue, to me. After ten years, Adrian still doesn’t really know how to bat. He knows how to hit, but not how to bat; he’s all mechanics, no mentality. Ten years and $60M in salary richer. I can’t look at that and say there’s significant probability of change. Why would he change?
Basically, Adrian works to extend each AB until he gets a fastball out over the plate: that’s it, that’s the sum total of his approach. And in doing that, he’s quite willing to swing at pitches off the plate, especially if they’re fastballs. This last issue, swinging at non-strikes, is the one area where Adrian could have an epiphany, and it would greatly improve his results as a hitter. There’s no evidence, zero, to this point that he’s at all interested in doing so. If this year’s April didn’t convince him, it’s hard to see what could.
Any one _can_ change, but what’s the probability? Where’s the incentive?? Where’s the beef???! How many guys comparable to Beltre _aren’t_ in the Hall of Fame, hey? Damn near all of them. _That’s_ the point. Usually, Dave, you make this argument from the other side. That guys who ‘haven’t learned aren’t going to?’ What is it about Beltre that makes you throw that skepticism over the wall and believe in Adrian? His 2004, I would suppose. I’m not going to try and explain that year, but the rest of his career speaks louder, to me.
To me, Wladimir Balentier has a far better chance of turning into Ryan Howard than Adrian Beltre has of making the Hall of Fame. And it will cost much, much less to find out about Wlad the Impeller than Adrian. I’m convinced, I’ll say that. Only time will convince others. But in the meantime, I’d love to execute Steps 1 and 3 and end up with Roberts and Betamit and salary room.
I have nothing against Adrian as a person, and all I hear says he’s a good person, good team mate, and good competitor. I find watching stupid ball players taxing, however. I think in performance-oriented jobs, there should be consequences for inadequate performance. There are always more players to be had, and I’m a believer in cutting ones losses: there are _always_ alternatives in this game. Having Beltre around makes it that much harder to convince Jose Lopez and Y. Betancourt to take pitches and have smart ABs. If Beltre can make eight very large a year without doing so, why should they, hey?
Most players who haven’t learned how to bat by Adrian’s years of service time don’t. That’s the stone reality. Nothing suggests he will buch that trend, either.
Jose Guillen: All I’ll say is that there may be more than one explanation for his rise in OPS, and that explanation suits his behavior and present employment status really well. Torii Hunter: his ‘improvement lies largely in refining an uppercut swing that put more balls in the short seats at the Metrodome; he’s never learned to walk, and his contact rate is still low. Yes, he went from awful to productive, but he didn’t become a complete hitter at all. Aramis Ramirez is the best case, yeah. He was toolsy but underperforming and not very smart in a lousy baseball environment, only to begin putting it together as his walk year approached and the incentive of making big money for improved performance was there.
. . . Adrian’s got his money. Why would he change?
And for all that, if he were traded back to the NL, it’s a good bet he’ll find another monster year somewhere, amongst 7-8 seasons much like his ’05. I don’t care: they can have him.
I’m not arguing that Beltre can’t figure it out. Anything is possible (well i’m not sure that I can convince my wife to let me date Jessica Simpson). I’m wondering about risk management-at what point does it make sense to let someone else assume the risk and take the bet that he WILL figure it out?
This thread points out there are creative ways to be much more cost effective at third base. I LOVE Beltre’s glove. But how much is it worth?
I personally think he will figure it out-especially in the right park- but it’s not my money on the line and its no longer a safe bet he’ll improve offensively. At least no one should be shocked if he doesn’t.
We can look at what he’s done, and what he does, and assess the likelihood of change. That’s what I try to do.
Really – you think statement’s like this one
“There is every reason, absolutely every reason, to believe that the light is _never_ going to come on for Adrian Beltre.”
are assessing the likelihood of change? To me, it’s pretty clear that you believe the likelihood is 0%, and that’s what I’m objecting to. It clearly isn’t 0%. I’d say it’s probably 25-30%, but I’m completely willing to admit that number comes right out of my butt, and I’m just guessing. I have no idea how to even begin trying to accurately predict a person’s future mental capacity, and I don’t believe that you should be as confident in your ability to analyze Adrian Beltre’s desire to improve without knowing the man.
Look, obviously, I don’t think we should hold out hope that Beltre’s going to revert to ’04 form and win a few MVP’s in Safeco. This thread started because I suggested trading him for nothing, so on that point, I’m clearly with you. No need to argue that.
I’m objecting to the idea that Beltre “is what he is”, a .700 OPS guy who is unable to improve any area of his game, despite the fact that he’s 27 years old and clearly one of the most physically gifted players in the game.
In my opinion, you are way, way too confident in your ability to understand what’s in Adrian Beltre’s mind, especially for a person who has never talked to him and has no relationship with the man.
Understanding what we don’t know is just as important and understanding what we do know. And just because we can do a good job of calculating VORP or evaluating a pitcher’s stuff does not mean that we have the tools or experience necessary to predict a player’s future mental state from judging his reactions and body language on the field and the quotes he gives to the press.
We all agree that Beltre’s problems are mental, not physical. I’ve never seen any evidence that mental problems are unfixable, or rarely fixable, but I’ve seen too many players take giant leaps forward to believe that your hypothesis is even close to being correct.
Here’s what I don’t think you realize – if Adrian Beltre never improves, he’ll be the historical anomaly. That’s why his PECOTA projections are so high each year – guys who get to the majors as teenagers, become productive players by age 21, and have an MVP season at age 25 do not suck for the rest of their careers. It just doesn’t happen.
Know what you don’t know. We don’t know what’s in Adrian Beltre’s mind.
One thing about Beltre… No one is disputing whether he CAN improve. I think the issue is how likely is he to improve.
The phrase *historical anomaly* has been used to argue that its likely he will improve because history suggests its a rare fellow who doesn’t.
However, history is replete with anomalies that defy Pecota (the Ms have two other guys in their current outfield who fit that description more or less). Life is a bellcurve. Beltre has had roughly the equivalent of 8 seasons to learn and develop and statistically the 2006 Beltre is underperforming versus the 1999 version of himself. *Historical anonamlies* aren’t in fact that terribly rare. I prefer the term outlier since it is more neutral and probably a more accurate descriptor.
Gazillions of others before him clearly demonstrate a growth curve for their career relative to age…. but so far, Beltre’s career doesn’t fit that curve as outside of one year, he hasn’t shown any growth in any offensive skill (k’s, SLG, OBP, AVE, walk rate etc.). So if during EIGHT seasons, Beltre doesn’t fit the golden curve, how practical is it to use the curve to suggest it’s likely he’ll get better?
It’s not a lack of understanding that leads to the suggestion that with Beltre what you see is what you’ll get, its an acceptance that because Beltre so far has been somewhat of a *historical anonmaly*, the curve doesnt fit.
Right now the Ms are overpaying him based upon production. He’s collecting about 21.5 million for two good months (August ’05; June 06) in two seasons with the Mariners. Just from a risk management standpoint, what are tha chances he’ll be worth 11.5 million next year? I’m suggesting they aren’t great-curve be damned.
Dave,
I think you might be interested in this analysis, as to the effect of being behind, but actually have a better team than your opponents:
http://www.insidethebook.com/ee/index.php/site/article/62_to_go/
Tom