Jake Woods, Litmus Test
Jake Woods is 25-years-old, left-handed, makes the league minimum, is a former semi-hyped prospect, and has now thrown 95 innings this season with an ERA of 3.88, which is 15 percent better than the average AL pitcher in 2006.
What the Mariners decide to do with Jake Woods this offseason will be an interesting test of whether their methods for evaluating pitchers have improved at all in the past year. Woods’ combination of age, handedness, salary, and ERA will make him a somewhat valuable player to a decent number of teams this offseason. The Mariners, however, couldn’t need a guy like Jake Woods any less.
He’s a replacement level pitcher in an organization that has so many replacement level pitchers, they don’t have room for them all. If the Mariners are willing to look past the ERA and see him for what he is – a guy with average stuff and bad command whose ERA is a complete fluke – they should admit that the best service he could provide for them going forward is to return a more suitable player for this team in trade.
Jake Woods is a litmus test. An organization that understands pitching would trade him this offseason. We’ll see if the Mariners are up to the challenge.
I gotta say Dave, while I’m usually right with you on player evaluating and projection, I’m not sure I entirely agree about Jake. He’s never going to be an ace or anything close…but teams need 4th starters too. And really, the guy has jsut one flaw (and it is a MAJOR one), in that he just can’t stop walking batters. Yes, he’s not an extreme GB pitcfher but in Safeco he can get away with that a little. And yes, he doens’t have the stuff to go striking a ton of guys out, but that is in part due to the hitters knowledge that he can’t hit the plate (resulting in a lack of swings). i went and dug up his minor league stats and he was usually not great…except the years when he got his walks down. In AA at arkansas, he somehow managed to drop his walk total to 19 in 90 innings, and had a terrific year. I just don’t think he’s so old and intractable that he couldn’t learn to cut down on the free passes, at which point i think he’d be a very servicable 4th or 5th starter.
So, in conclusion: get the man a pitching coach who knows what he’s doing and see if he can look more consistently like AA Jake.
When you write, do you have the possibility that someone in the organization might happen by and catch some ideas in the back of your mind?
Dave – what kind of player could we expect to get in return for Jake Woods? Or, would you imagine him being part of a package deal?
I’d also like to see the team trade Woods this offseason.
Of course, this is the same Seattle Mariners ballclub who got excited over Washburn’s ERA last season, and couldn’t help but offer him $9M.
Actually that would be the perfect package, use Woods to get someone to take Washburn’s $9 million/year off our hands. Too bad nobody will go for it, because they’d be getting two of the same pitcher.
Instead, the Mariners will probably sign him to a long-term contract in order to “buy out” his arbitration years.
Dave,
I like the idea, but wouldn’t Jake Woods only get us a younger version of Jake Woods in a trade?
Or would he be a part of a multi-player deal?
Seriously, has the whole world gone mad! Trade Jake Woods! Lock this kid up! This is the kind of guy you paint a picture of on the side of the stadium!
Sorry, I thought someone should speak for Woods’ mother.
I agree completely that Woods should be traded. Looking at next year’s rotation, we only have two starters you can pencil in at this point- Felix Hernandez and Jarrod Washburn. There are three other spots that need to be filled.
So how will those spots be filled? I would love to see the team sign two TOR type starters, but thats an optimistic thought and would still leave one rotation spot to be filled.
So who fills that last spot? Probably one of the “replacement level pitcher’s.” So a good question to ask is, which pitcher will probably be awarded a starting job next year? I’m not terribly excited about having Baek pitching every 5th day for 6 months next year.
Yes, off-topic. But the TNT’s John McGrath tells us who one of the minor league coach dismissals Dave alluded to earlier was:
So long Dave Myers
Though I watched Myers win a lot of games in Tacoma, I always hated him as 3rd base coach. Kinda like I feel about Brundage, but without the bad Doyle memory. Anyway, I’m with McGrath that he deserved more than a phone call.
Little Timmy just finished first grade, let’s see how he does on the SAT! Of course they won’t trade Jake Woods…
… Except by accident. It’s not clear that trading Jake Woods would tell anyone anything.
The people running this site do a lot of work attempting to determine the explanatory weight that luck plays in any given even. If a guy hits his 10-year career average for a month, it’s probably not luck. But, if anyone hits 400 for his first month in the majors, it’s almost certainly luck. But, is it Willie Bloomquist luck or Chris Snelling luck?
If the Mariners trade Jake Woods this year, how do we know what role an understanding of ERA’s inability to predict future performance played? Or, were they just Willie Bloomquist lucky? We probably won’t know, so even if he is traded, and he probably won’t be, the trade won’t really tell us much without a statement from management along the lines of “well, we found a sucker who still thinks ERA predicts future success” [sinister cackling]. Highly unlikely.
We won’t have the sample size to determine whether the organizational philosophies have changed for at least a while.
I say trade him to the Reds for Adam Dunn
Dave, is there no chance (or no real chance) that Woods improves his performance and becomes and effective 4th or 5th starter?
Looking at his components instead of his ERA his “problem” is that he walks way too many hitters, close to a 1:1 K:BB ratio. However, over his career, except for Salt Lake City in 2004, his K:BB ratio has been 2:1 or better. Could he recapture that control of years past or does he simply not have the “stuff” to get out major league hitters which forces him to adopt a different approach where he either nibbles and walks batters or gets hammered? Could he become a Jarrod Washburn-like pitcher?
I gotta say Dave, while I’m usually right with you on player evaluating and projection, I’m not sure I entirely agree about Jake. He’s never going to be an ace or anything close…but teams need 4th starters too. And really, the guy has jsut one flaw (and it is a MAJOR one), in that he just can’t stop walking batters.
Yes, teams need fourth starters. Jake Woods just isn’t one.
Woods has two major flaws; bad command and inability to fool hitters. The problem, though, is that those things are the two most important aspects of pitching. Those are the building blocks of pitching talent, and Woods fails at both.
So, in conclusion: get the man a pitching coach who knows what he’s doing and see if he can look more consistently like AA Jake.
Rafael Chaves knows what he’s doing. Perhaps you might want to consider that Double-A hitters aren’t as good as major league hitters, and his “success” in Double-A wasn’t a predictor of major league ability?”
Dave – what kind of player could we expect to get in return for Jake Woods? Or, would you imagine him being part of a package deal?
Almost certainly part of a package deal. He wouldn’t anchor a trade for anyone, but he could easily be a second or third player in a larger deal.
It’s not clear that trading Jake Woods would tell anyone anything.
A team that values ERA as highly as the Mariners have in the past wouldn’t even consider trading a 25-year-old lefty making the league minimum who posted an ERA 15 percent better than league average. They wouldn’t do it by accident, they wouldn’t do it on purpose. They just wouldn’t do it.
Dave, is there no chance (or no real chance) that Woods improves his performance and becomes and effective 4th or 5th starter?
There’s a chance that every pitcher alive improves his performance and becomes a fourth or fifth starter. There’s no greater chance that it happens to Jake Woods than any of the other thousand professional pitchers, and there’s no reason to give him a roster spot when more talented pitchers with a better chance of success just need an opportunity.
Could he become a Jarrod Washburn-like pitcher?
It’s very unlikely. His stuff isn’t going to get any better, and it’s fringey right now, so he’d have to take a big leap forward in command without losing any velocity or movement, and that’s just pretty rare for a guy with his skillset.
If Jake Woods is the answer to anything pertaining to the M’s in ’07, then I don’t want to know the question.
15:
I’m thinking of a pitcher. He plays for the Mariners. He isn’t very good. His initials are JW but he isn’t Jarrod Washburn. Who is he?
#16 – Hmm, I am stumped. I was going to say Jered Weaver, but he plays for the Angels.
I agree this is a great opportunity to see if any philosophies regarding ERA have changed. My guess is that there’s about a .00005% chance that they have. Given that, Jake Woods will be in the mix for the fifth starter job next spring, along with Baek. He is cheap, left handed, and has had enough success this year (lucky or not) that the M’s will feel he is marketable to the throngs of M’s fans who value ERA as the end-all tell-all stat. Prediction: Woods will be the Willie Bloomquist of the pitching staff.
speaking of offseason pitching, the Texas Star Telegram tackles the legend of the gyroball as they hype up the Get Matsuzaka machine in Arlington
Dave, Are you therefore arguing for Cruceta as the 5th starter at this point?
#10– am I wrong, or is it unusual that the Ms have had so many guys stay with the organization as long as they have? I thought there was a fair amount of movement among minor league coaches….
Why decide who the 5th starter is now? We only have two slots filled in next year’s rotation as it stands. The 5th starter can be picked at the end of spring training, after seeing some more of Baek, Cruceta, Feierabend, and whatever non-tenders or NRIs we pick up in the offseason.
Saarloos and Halsey are replacement level starting pitchers and they are useful for A’s.
Woods and Baek are the M’s version of Saaloos and Halsey.
Dave, Are you therefore arguing for Cruceta as the 5th starter at this point?
No.
Why decide who the 5th starter is now? We only have two slots filled in next year’s rotation as it stands. The 5th starter can be picked at the end of spring training, after seeing some more of Baek, Cruceta, Feierabend, and whatever non-tenders or NRIs we pick up in the offseason.
The competition needs to be stronger than that. Cruceta probably belongs in the bullpen, and they can do better than a Baek/Woods/Feierabend competition.
Saarloos and Halsey are replacement level starting pitchers and they are useful for A’s.
Woods and Baek are the M’s version of Saaloos and Halsey.
Saarloos is an extreme groundballer. But yes, Brad Halsey is a good comparison for what Jake Woods could be if he threw strikes. He’d have to get better to be Brad Halsey.
The M’s have better internal options, and there are better pitchers than Woods who will be available for next to nothing this offseason. It’s up to the M’s to understand that, however, and react accordingly.
It’s up to the M’s to understand that, however, and react accordingly.
nah, they’ll be too busy destroying the fabric of the organization through their ruthless housecleaning.
#20: Dave, Are you therefore arguing for Cruceta as the 5th starter at this point?
In addition to Dave’s reply, I think the point is that Woods is likely to be overvalued right now by some other teams. Therefore, packaging him provides the opportunity to bring in better talent. That better talent could be an added and improved candidate for the rotation. You might be able to get someone to include they’re legitimate #4/#5 starter as part of a package, since they will be getting Woods to fill that spot in the rotation.
The competition needs to be stronger than that.
Well, I did mention picking up non-tenders and NRIs, I just didn’t fill in any specific names there because it’s uncertain who would be in the pool. Your Rodrigo Lopez idea earlier sounded good to me, if we could plug him in as the leading candidate but have the rest compete with him, that would be great. The problem is that the spots above 5 aren’t filled either, and I don’t think we want to have to find two capable starters out of this group.
So… anyone interested in Joe Girardi?
Like it or not, I think that more than likely we’ll get the “pleasure” of seeing Woods, Baek or both at the back end of the rotation next year.
I would greatly prefer that the M’s sell while Woods’ & Baek’s stock is high with shiny ERA and win numbers, but I’m resigned that it’s just not going to happen. Time and time again, it seems as though the organization is willing to going what they have even if they hold on too long.
What kind of player could they fetch in return, given their high relatively high (overvalued) stock? It was Baek’s third year of AAA, so I’d guess he could probably return a similar player.
I would greatly prefer that the M’s sell while Woods’ & Baek’s stock is high with shiny ERA and win numbers, but I’m resigned that it’s just not going to happen. Time and time again, it seems as though the organization is willing to going what they have even if they hold on too long.
Hm. That’s a traditional organizational failing–overvaluing what they have, and holding onto pieces for too long. Though it seems to me that Bavasi has less of that trait than GMs past…(And perhaps that’s the sort of failing that’s going to flushed out in the near future).
Baek is better than Woods. I don’t think they’re really the same. I’m fine with keeping Baek for next year.
Let’s not forget that the Mariners have another Jake Woods in the organization … his name is Bobby Livingston.
Thinking that Jake Woods is a quality major-league starting pitcher is like thinking that Kirk Saarloos, who doesn’t strike out anybody, has suddenly become Roger Clemens on the basis of his five-inning, 11-strikeout performance against Cleveland earlier this week. (And, to me, that wins the Flukiest Single-Game Performance of the Year award so far, with Willie Bloomquist’s five-hit game as a runner-up.)
But why couldn’t we keep Woods in the role he’s held all season, the LH long reliever? Every team seems to have one. We won’t have Joel around next year (thank God) but Woods is cheap and seemed to pitch well in the clean up role.
What’s wrong with keeping him for that role and have him around as a spot starter should we need him for emergencies?
…But then again (sorry for two responses in a row) if we do trade him, it only will prove that Bavasi is smarter than his detractors say he is.
After all, this guy was a waiver wire pick up and if traded for a more useful part, just proves that too many undervalue Bavasi’s eye for young talent.
But why couldn’t we keep Woods in the role he’s held all season, the LH long reliever? Every team seems to have one. We won’t have Joel around next year (thank God) but Woods is cheap and seemed to pitch well in the clean up role.
The Mariners currently have about six guys who could fill that role. If you assume Putz, Soriano, Lowe, Sherrill, and Mateo are locks for the first five spots in the bullpen, then you’ve got O’Flaherty, Fruto, Green, Huber, Woods, and Cruceta fighting for the last two spots in the bullpen. And if the team sensibly went back to 11 pitchers instead of 12, they’d be fighting for one spot.
And no, he didn’t pitch well in the cleanup role. Jake Woods has sucked as a pitcher this year. His ERA just doesn’t reflect how poorly he has pitched.
So… anyone interested in Joe Girardi?
Not me. The Marlins have done well, yes, but I’d be inclined to give more credit to Larry Beinfest for the players he got in the fire sale than to Girardi for how he managed those players.
from Mike Berardino:
“The last straw for Girardi, 41, apparently was his ill-fated decision to bring back prized right-hander Josh Johnson after an 82-minute rain delay at Dolphin Stadium on Sept. 12. “Not one of the smarter moves of the year,” said the source, adding the Marlins’ decision makers were “shocked” Johnson returned to the mound that night.
With the Marlins still clinging to wild-card hopes, Johnson tried to stay loose by playing catch with Dontrelle Willis in an indoor batting cage. That Johnson left four innings later with cramping in his forearm and was subsequently shut down for the year with a strained ligament did not help Girardi’s case.”
Really? I figure you’ve got to give Girardi credit for leading a team of youngsters into contention after a terrible start. I’m not saying he’s the answere here, just that inasmuch as we can judge managers at all from this distance, it looks like a good job.
Anyway, people seem to think he’s likely to go to the Cubs, since he went to Northwestern and is from Chicago.
They’re dinging him for making mistakes in a playoff race that it’s amazing they’re in in the first place? Sheesh. It seems clear these guys are looking for a reason to fire Girardi. (A public reason, I mean.)
This is a Jake Woods thread. There will be a thread on managers later.
39, I agree completely, but that Josh Johnson decision referred to above is mighty worrying for a candidate to be managing Felix, Soriano, Lowe, etc.
Sorry Dave.
Do I have to assume Mateo is a lock for the bullpen next year?
Yes. He’s under contract for $1 million. The team isn’t going to eat that, and he’s got very little trade value.
If management must have a second lefty in the bullpen (which is overrated but let’s deal with the more pressing issues first), the M’s already have O’Flaherty who has better control, misses more bats, and induces more groundballs than Woods.
The shift of the organization’s draft and player acquisition strategy toward power arms (and away from soft-tossing lefties) has to be a good sign regarding the team’s evaluation of Woods, right? Right?
If Soriano and Lowe are both healthy next year, at least it pushes Mateo more towards one of the mop-up roles.
and we could have had Matt Thornton going into next year– Matt does feel that he’s “made his point” though.
Yes. He’s under contract for $1 million. The team isn’t going to eat that, and he’s got very little trade value.
That’s nothing a ski mask and a piece of pipe couldn’t fix.
I don’t understand the point that Matt Thornton was trying to make. Didn’t the Mariners give this guy every opportunity to succeed? The guy is like 30 years old. What more could he ask from his first organization? What a little puke.
I’m sorry, Dave.
Did i read that Thorton quote correctly? Every team he faces, he wants to shove it up their butts? That’s got to make for awkward clubhouse chemistry.
My fault, Dave. Didn’t think that one through.
As a junkballer, there are some clear limitations on what Baek’s good for, but at least he can throw strikes. I’d rather give a rotation spot to a guy like Ryan Franklin than to Jake Woods.
I didn’t think it would be possible to dislike Matt Thornton anymore, but I do after reading that. The Mariners held on to him for about four years longer than any sane organization would. He should be grateful they even gave him a chance to show off his walk per inning, two homers a game stuff.
Dave, relative to Baek vs. Woods, has your opinion of Baek improved at all from a few weeks ago? “I’d be fine with keeping Baek for next year” is a little better than “Baek is not a prospect”. Or not. Do 2 decent results against Texas count for anything?
Baek isn’t a prospect. He’s still a replacement level pitcher with fringe stuff and above average command. He’s just better than Woods, who has fringe stuff and below average command.
I’m fine with keeping Baek for next year because he costs nothing and he throws strikes.
I was thinking the same thing RE: Franklin. Ryan Franklin > Jake Woods, if only because he throws strikes, even if they’re not very good strikes. Same w/ Baek, and Baek > Franklin, because he’s not an extreme flyball pitcher like Franklin and Woods. I’d take Baek over the other two. That doesn’t take into account cost, in which I wouldn’t touch Franklin w/ a 10 foot pole, but if he was league minimum, you could do worse I guess.
Dave,
When you say, “above average command” and “below average command”, is that judgment based more on stats, or observation. And other than bb/9, bb/k, what are good stats for evaluating “command”.
A pitches per batter faced stat?
Dave,
When can we expect to read about “Undervalued Pitcher #2″?
Is it Jamey Wright?
When you say, “above average command†and “below average commandâ€, is that judgment based more on stats, or observation. And other than bb/9, bb/k, what are good stats for evaluating “commandâ€.
It’s a combination of stats and observation. I like to use BB% (walks per total batters faced) for a statistical reference, but observation is useful too, as some pitchers are consistently missing their spots, even if they’re hitting the strike zone. For instance, Gil Meche’s command sucks, even though his walkrate isn’t terrible.
When can we expect to read about “Undervalued Pitcher #2?
I’m not sure. I’ve got about six posts that I’m working on, and I’m trying to figure out the best way to release them so that we’re not throwing a ton of content at you guys in one day and having holes on other days.
Is it Jamey Wright?
No.
I’m fine with keeping Baek for next year because he costs nothing and he throws strikes.
Well, to be perfectly honest, I suspect if you were a GM trying to deal for Player X, and the package you offered was “Jeremy Reed, Julio Mateo and one of Cha Sueng Baek or Jake Woods” and the team dealing Player X picked Baek, you wouldn’t be crying in your beer. (I left Player X as a cypher because all we need now is this year’s Ryan Howard to plague the USSM threads for the next 3 months.)
Basically, Woods == John Halama, Baek == Ryan Franklin. There’s a marginal difference in Franklin’s/Baek’s favor, but it’s not a HUGE one- it’s like the difference between a D and a D+ grade, and, realistically, your pennant hopes are not going to rest on a marginal upgrade in talent in your 5th starter (note that the M’s and A’s both won pennants in years where Halama made some starts).
And also, to amplify on this point, I don’t think it’s a big deal if the M’s have Woods or Baek at 5… as long as they don’t fool themselves into thinking EITHER of them are anything more than 5th starters.
Realistically, you need 6-7 ML starters to make it through a MLB season- and because of the distribution of major league talent, starters 5-7 are likely to be replacement-level talent. If Woods is one of those guys, it’s not a big deal as far as I am concerned, because he’s A) cheap and B) able to take a trip to Tacoma if one of Ryan Feierabend, Tony Butler or Brandon Morrow is setting the minor leagues on their ear in late June 2007. (This is typically Billy Beane’s trick- throw in some generic Cheap Replacement Level Guy in the 5 slot for the first couple of months while the REALLY talented kids sort themselves out in the minors, and it’s also why we won 116 in 2001- Joel Piñeiro replaced John Halama, back when Piñeiro HAD a good fastball.)
I do agree that I sincerely hope the M’s are starting to understand the concept of replacement level talent- though I think the poster child of “guy you should trade while he has some value” on this roster is actually Julio Mateo. Somebody will see that he only makes a million or so, had a decent ERA and 9 wins, and assuming he looks fine in spring training, might look at him as a useful piece of a bullpen… and might not notice things like K rates and GB/FB ratio.
Realistically, you need 6-7 ML starters to make it through a MLB season- and because of the distribution of major league talent, starters 5-7 are likely to be replacement-level talent. If Woods is one of those guys, it’s not a big deal as far as I am concerned, because he’s A) cheap and B) able to take a trip to Tacoma if one of Ryan Feierabend, Tony Butler or Brandon Morrow is setting the minor leagues on their ear in late June 2007.
Woods is out of options, so no, he can’t take a trip to Tacoma. Also, Butler better not see the major leagues next year, considering he’s 18-years-old and hasn’t even faced a batter in a full season league yet.
If Woods is on the roster next year, it’s at the cost of a better pitcher. That’s why I’d prefer he be traded away, because if we’re going to be giving low leverage innings to someone, I’d rather it be Cruceta, Huber, Fruto, O’Flaherty, or Green.
I agree 100 percent with Dave, that Woods isn’t the answer. His ERA is a mirage, and his stuff isn’t that great. Trading him is the best option.
As far as Cruceta goes he’s been awful. I would even go as far as saying he wouldn’t even be a good bullpen option unless Chaves can miraculously work out his control problems.
Dave, how do you feel about Felix being allowed to pitch on Saturday after initially being shut down after his last start?
As far as Cruceta goes he’s been awful. I would even go as far as saying he wouldn’t even be a good bullpen option unless Chaves can miraculously work out his control problems.
He’s thrown TWO innings. Good Lord.
Dave, how do you feel about Felix being allowed to pitch on Saturday after initially being shut down after his last start?
He wasn’t shut down after his last start. This was the plan all along.
I hate to defend Matt Thornton, but what did he say in that article that was any kind of criticism of the M’s or sour grapes? He’s had a rocky career and finally had a good year. Why shouldn’t he feel good about that? And shouldn’t a pitcher want to (metaphorically, I hope) shove it up the other team’s asses? As he said, that’s his job. Maybe a few of our pitchers would be better if they had that attitude (yes, I’m talking to you Gil).
ec-
Totally agree with you on both Mateo and Woods. Plenty of teams do a really bad job of building bullpens so I have to believe that they could bring something on the open market.
With Julio Mateo you have a pitcher who is only making a million next year, someone will view as a good option to pitch the 6th or 7th inning. I think we should remember that we got Travis Chick for Eddie Guardado earlier this year and there are always a couple of teams who need bullpen help. Woods falls into the 6th starter/mop up guy category but he is cheap and left handed so someone will probably be interested in him as well.
I’d rather they trade Mateo (Guillen style if they must) and keep Woods. They can always DFA Woods when he gets beat out by one of the many servicable arms in the org.
Ralph:
I hate to defend Matt Thornton
I hate that you defended Matt Thornton.
It isn’t that Thornton took a shot at the Mariners–It’s just the very idea that he thinks the Mariners are actually sorry to see him go.
He’s had a rocky career and finally had a good year. Why shouldn’t he feel good about that?
Let’s be honest–the guy has pitched decent at best. His performance certainly does not merit a “stickin’ it to my former team” piece.
And shouldn’t a pitcher want to (metaphorically, I hope) shove it up the other team’s asses?
I don’t know. It didn’t work for him while he was in Seattle.
OK, hate Thornton because he sucked when he was here. Fine. But don’t hate him for things he didn’t say. He didn’t say anything about sticking it to his former team or that he thought they were sorry they let him go. Hate the sportswriter who implied that when he didn’t say it.
If there’s interest from other teams you should definitely trade anyone they overvalue. If there’s a match. You shouldn’t trade someone just to trade them, but Woods, Baek, Mateo and Putz are good examples of players who other teams might overvalue this offseason. If you’re packaging them with Reed, Perez, Broussard or Sexson (players more likely to be underrated) you might be able to reshape the roster the way you want. There’s still Free Agents to discuss, but that’s quite a bit of trade bait in comparison to recent M’s offseasons.
but Woods, Baek, Mateo and Putz are good examples of players who other teams might overvalue this offseason.
Which of these is not like the others.
How did you write Woods, Baek, Mateo, and Putz with a straight face?
Because Putz is likely to be valued higher than reality as well as the others. Granted I have more faith in Putz, he has more value because he is a better pitcher. My point was that they may be overvalued by other teams, nothing more.
It’d be pretty hard to overvalue J.J. Putz. He’s been otherworldly this year. He’s outpitched pretty much every reliever on the planet, and he’s had one of the best seasons of any reliever in recent history.
You just did.
AL relievers, by FIP:
Nathan, 1.61
Putz, 1.91
Papelbon, 2.07
Ryan, 2.20
There’s your big four relievers in baseball this year, and Putz was just as good as any of them.
So, no, I’m not overvaluing J.J. Putz. You just apparently don’t realize how amazing a season he has had.
So maybe all four of thier careers continue as strong as this year, but I’d bet on Nathan and Ryan because of previous years. If that’s the case then no one has overvalued Putz. The other comment of my post was tradability.
Putz has the most value among players that could be replaced from within. I’m not saying you’d get the same numbers from the replacement. You can’t say we’d get the same numbers from J.J. either. I have loved what J.J. has done this year and aside from watching him put people on before closing out, he’s been wonderful to watch work. The position that the team is in requires maximizing value of the roster and they could package Putz in the right deal to get someone they can’t find within (say LH power/LH power SP.)
Of course there are possibilities of both, as Snelling may provide power from the left side and Clement may be doing so before long.
So maybe all four of thier careers continue as strong as this year, but I’d bet on Nathan and Ryan because of previous years. If that’s the case then no one has overvalued Putz. The other comment of my post was tradability.
Find me a pitcher that had a breakout season as good as J.J. Putz just had, and then fell apart due to a reason other than injury. Good luck. I’ve tried.
Putz has the most value among players that could be replaced from within. I’m not saying you’d get the same numbers from the replacement. You can’t say we’d get the same numbers from J.J. either.
I’m willing to state that, beyond injury, J.J. Putz is going to be one of the five best relievers in baseball next year. He’s not replaceable. He’s a relief ace. Relievers are fungible. Relief aces are not.
I have loved what J.J. has done this year and aside from watching him put people on before closing out, he’s been wonderful to watch work.
J.J. has put 66 men on base in 73 innings. In terms of baserunners per innings pitched, it goes Nathan, Papelbon, Ryan, and Putz for best in the AL. He’s allowed less baserunners per inning than Mariano Rivera, who I doubt you’re predicting decline for. I’m not sure what exactly your standard is, but it’s pretty obviously too high.
The position that the team is in requires maximizing value of the roster and they could package Putz in the right deal to get someone they can’t find within (say LH power/LH power SP.)
You can’t win a championship without a relief ace. We’ve got one of the best in the game. There’s no reason to trade him right now. You’ve picked the wrong reliever to try and deal.
If there was ever a time to sell high on Jake Woods, now is it.
Dave, is there a list of available high-frequency groundball pitchers (including prospects) that you keep an eye on? Is that generally what you think the organization should be looking for when turning over stones in search of pitching?
You see, we’re still looking for a Griffey and Johnson because that’s what the park was built for.
Dave, what’s the line between what you’d consider a relief ace and a plain old reliever?
I think Johnson was gone by the time they finalized the dimensions, no? But I’m sure Griffey had a lot of input. And so he leaves town a few months after it opened.
Dave, is there a list of available high-frequency groundball pitchers (including prospects) that you keep an eye on? Is that generally what you think the organization should be looking for when turning over stones in search of pitching?
Not necessarily. There are lots of ways to skin a cat. Getting a lot of groundballs is one way, but it’s not the only way.
But yea, I keep a mental tab on extreme groundball guys who fly under the radar. The Indians just outrighted Jake Dittler (61% GB rate for Buffalo last year) off their 40-man roster. He’d have been a nifty little waiver claim, and a better use of a spot than six or seven of the guys the Mariners currently have on their 40 man roster. His minor league numbers are only slightly worse than Jake Westbrook’s, and he’d have been an interesting low-cost flyer.
Have you looked at the FA list Dave?
It amazes me that J.J. is third in saves on a team that seldom has a save opportunity. Don’t even think of trading Mr. Putz.
Dave, what’s the line between what you’d consider a relief ace and a plain old reliever?
Its a little subjective, I guess. Here are the major leaguers that I consider relief aces, in no particular order:
Papelbon, Zumaya, Ryan, Nathan, Putz, Rivera, K-Rod, Wagner, Saito, Lidge, Hoffman, and Street. I may have missed one or two.
Have you looked at the FA list Dave?
Many, many times.
I agree the team needs a Relief ace. Unfortunately we’re down to one possibility (Soriano) who would be a shaky proposition to put all your hopes in. Last year I argued the same thing when there were two possibilities in trading Guardado. It may not be a great idea to trade J.J. but I don’t think this team is going anywhere until some major improvements are made both offensively and SP wise.
Along those lines there is a Lefty that may be available. Pettitte. What fo you think of trying to aqcuire him?
’05 Guardado isn’t anything like ’06 Putz.
Sorry LF, we’re not getting into roster acquisition speculation in this thread. We’ll do posts on those issues in the near future.
Can we discuss who this need to trade Woods involves? Players who’d be worth going after in trade?
No. We’ve talked about this before; roster construction threads suck to read. We’ll give you guys a few, because I know there are guys out there like you who love this stuff, but most of us hate these crazy speculation threads, and if we don’t enforce the rules tightly, the place gets out of hand.
Well I think Woods is better than Harris
This post reminds me of Harris talk from last year
You can’t win a championship without a relief ace.
The Diamondbacks did it. Nobody else has for quite a while, though.
There have been reasons to beleive that Bavasi is smart enough with talent evaluation to try and get valuable pieces for players like Woods. If Hargrove is gone we’ll see more surely what kind of GM Bavasi is. If Hargrove is still here in the offseason we have no way of knowing if he’ll tell Bavasi not to trade Woods (a la “get me Everett”) unless it gets reported as the Everett thing did. Bavasi was sure trying to make it clear that Everett was Hargroves choice. Hargrove meet bus?
We could probably leverage an extra 2-3 wins if we actually used Putz like a relief ace (look at BJ Ryan’s use pattern this season) rather than saving him for save situations like we so often did.
scraps,
I guess you can win without a relief ace if you have two HOF quality starting pitchers who can each pitch multiple times (including in relief) out of the bull pen.
As hard as relief aces are to find, I bet it’s easier to come up with one than two starters as good as Schilling and Johnson were that year.
Arbeck, sure, I agree.
Dave, your right its only been 2 innings for Cruceta in Seattle. However, in a larger sample size of 160 innings pitched this year in Tacoma, he showed some serious command problems along with wild pitches. Two starts I watched with my own eyes, showed Sisco falling in love with his plus splitter for most of the game. Without his splitter being as nasty as a Sasaki plus-plus forkball, I really question Sisco having a role at the major league level next season. Just my 2 cents.
For Cruceta to have a “plus splitter,” he’d have to have some idea of where it’s going when he throws it.
Motion is only part of what makes a good pitch.
Late to the party however…we’d be nuts to trade away JJ. He’s only 29 and likely to age well due to his limited number of innings.
He is the perfect late game pitcher: Tall, large, and and mean looking. He has a devestating fast ball with great movement and a splitter that disappears. He fools batters and gets outs.
He could be dominent for another 5-8 years, perhaps beyond. Here is the litmus test…If JJ is traded, we’ll know that the FO has absolutely no clue.
I say we go for James Woods.
James Woods should just stick to making cameos. The Simpsons, Family Guy and Entourage is a pretty impressive resume. You don’t want to mess that up by making actual acting performances.
Regarding Jake Woods last night, kind of a neat quote about Johjima…
“If you want to know what I did that was so effective, just ask Joh,” Woods said of his catcher. “I never shook him off all night. I threw what he wanted.”
Take that, ESPN.
Oh, Woods is out of options? And all of “Cruceta, Huber, Fruto, O’Flaherty, or Green” would be out of options as well? Well if we can’t keep them all, yeah, I guess Woods should go.
That being said, I simply don’t think whoever starts the season as your 5th starter is THAT big a deal- as long as 1-4 are clearly better options, it’s not a complete disaster, and ESPECIALLY if it’s just as roster filler for better options (and I think Feierabend is clearly the guy who SHOULD be the 5th starter out of the Woods/Baek/Feierabend trio- if not after winning a competition in spring training 2007, than after a stint in AAA that shows he can pitch). The difference between Woods and Baek isn’t a big deal to me. If any of those guys were clearly a better option in the rotation than those two, then sure- but you shouldn’t win or lose pennants based on your replacement-level players being 103% or 98% of replacement value.
And Butler was just an example. I doubt he’d come up unless he was REALLY setting things on fire, and even then, probably not.
Huber, Fruto, O’Flaherty and Green should all have options because they haven’t spent much time on the 40-man roster.
I think the M’s think Jake Woods is a legit #4 starter at this point, and I think they not only won’t trade him, but they’ll give him a job in the spring without so much as a tryout, and they will demonstrate the same comprehensive grasp of Dave’s analysis that they always have: none. When Bavasi says he uses “both analysis and scouting” to evaluate pitchers, he means “won-loss record and guts”.
I hope I’m wrong, but can you point to a SINGLE example of a player, pitcher or hitter, that Bavasi took where the fancy analysis recommended it and the old-boy thinking didn’t? I have no faith.
Dave, what’s the line between what you’d consider a relief ace and a plain old reliever?
Its a little subjective, I guess. Here are the major leaguers that I consider relief aces, in no particular order:
Papelbon, Zumaya, Ryan, Nathan, Putz, Rivera, K-Rod, Wagner, Saito, Lidge, Hoffman, and Street. I may have missed one or two.
And MLB pretty much agrees… the finalists for The 2nd annual “DHL Presents the Major League Baseball Delivery Man of the Year Award” (aka best reliever – has this replaced the old award that Tums sponsored? Does this mean every time an award gets a new sponsor they start counting it from 1 again?)on MLB.com are:
Hoffman, Jenks, Nathan, Rivera, Rodriguez, Ryan, Papelbon, Putz, Wagner, Zumaya
Green and Huber may have had options burned with their previous clubs.
That being said, I simply don’t think whoever starts the season as your 5th starter is THAT big a deal
EC, didn’t you argue strongly against trading Pineiro at the end of the spring training because it would have created a big hole with the rotation’s fifth spot?
Pretty sure the previous award was sponsored by Rolaids, not Tums. If anyone cares.
Zumaya is an interesting choice among those since he only has 1 save in 6 opportunities this year — Jones has been the Tigers’ closer, for better or worse. He’s really been a top set-up man, a la Soriano. I guess throwing the big Heat gets you some credit.
I think he’s just fine as a long man/spot starter. When Grover began to be smart enough to give him semi-regular work out of the pen seemed to coincide with his pitching being more effective. Granted, I’d hope we could do better for the rotation though come next year.
The Diamondbacks did it. Nobody else has for quite a while, though.
If Byung-Hyun Kim wasn’t a relief ace that year, he was pretty close.
I hope I’m wrong, but can you point to a SINGLE example of a player, pitcher or hitter, that Bavasi took where the fancy analysis recommended it and the old-boy thinking didn’t? I have no faith.
At least w/r/t Woods, Dave seems to be making a fairly old-fashioned scouty analysis of his abilities going forward. Overvaluing Woods is more a matter of caring too much about stats that don’t matter (ERA, etc.) than it is about being old-fashioned.
EC, didn’t you argue strongly against trading Pineiro at the end of the spring training because it would have created a big hole with the rotation’s fifth spot?
See my point about “it’s not a complete disaster”. There weren’t a lot of “hey, she should start at 5″ candidates in spring training. In hindsight, yeah, I guess you could have thrown Baek in there to have a season like Piñeiro’s- but that’s with the benefit of hindsight knowing that Piñeiro tanked and Baek came back from being pretty awful. Plus, um, Piñeiro made a lot of money, so it’s not like he was WORTH muvh on the trade market.
Mat, I think looking at ERA as the be-all and end-all IS old-fashioned, and Dave’s analysis of Woods is more advanced than that: but it is is statistical.
I dunno. 19 saves, 5 wins, 6 losses — I don’t know how many blown saves — 2.94 ERA doesn’t look like a relief ace to me, or pretty close. You may remember he had a terrible world series, too (after pitching well in the NL division and championship series).
19 saves, 5 wins, 6 losses — I don’t know how many blown saves — 2.94 ERA doesn’t look like a relief ace to me, or pretty close.
Saves, wins, losses, ERA? I didn’t consider any of these when I evaluated Kim, and they don’t seem like any help.
Looking closer than what I did before, his walk rate was a bit higher than I remember, but he was striking out a ton of guys, and his DT translated HR rate looks pretty good, too, suggesting groundball tendancies, which I would also suspect with his sidearm/submarine delivery. Relief ace is a big too strong for Kim, he’s not in the class Dave was describing, but I think it’s fair to say he wasn’t too far behind.
Also, as far as the WS goes, remember how many innings he was asked to work? I think it was more of a usage issue than any particular failing on Kim’s part.
The issue with Jake Woods here isn’t that he should/shouldn’t be the 5th starter, but rather that his present perceived value is higher than his projectible real value, and so his _perceived_ value should be cashed out in a trade. I only wished that the Ms thought like this in assessing their players, but very clearly they do not. This is a ‘test case’ set up for them to fail, then—and they will.
I have no interest in Jake Woods coming back in the bullpen. As said above, there are 6-7 guys better than him for ‘pen roles. I think even the Ms management is likely to see it that way if only because promoting Fruto, O’Flaherty, Huber et. al. makes their player development program look shiny and nice. (And in the category of Useful Reliever, their program is in fact shiny and nice.). However, the Ms have three spots to fill in their rotation next year. They have been terrified for years of moving starting pitchers only to have them shine and their replacements here suck –> Garcia. The org is likely to push Meche out the door, gritting their collective teeth all the while for just that reason, while calling for the trashman to come and cart away Joel Pinata who one ‘could have been somebody’ here. In that context, it’s very hard for me to see the Ms let go of ‘a starter’ who is showing anything that has the appearance, however illusory, or success in that role. Just yet. Come next May, they’ll be dumping the detritus, but I just don’t think they have the cojones to trade down in an area of obvious weakness—even though in this instance they probably should.
In essence, I’m not sure that the Ms org really has a non-faith-based strategy for filling the starting rotation. The team has held onto low-value veterans too long in this role; the team has rushed young guys unready into this role; the team has signed free agents well above their actual talent for this role. They’ve bungled it every way possible over the last three years. Why should the same crew suddenly get smart now? I only wish.
I don’t mean to imply in #120 that F. Garcia has thrown all that well for Chicago. We’re talking about perceptions not reality since it’s the Ms FO we’re speaking of.
See my point about “it’s not a complete disasterâ€. There weren’t a lot of “hey, she should start at 5″ candidates in spring training.
There’s not a lot of candidates for next year. So Jake Woods, major league starter, is “not a complete disaster,†but Jeff Harris would have been?
Plus, um, Piñeiro made a lot of money, so it’s not like he was WORTH muvh on the trade market.
At the time, Pineiro had some value. The Pineiro discussion came up in a thread on a possible Pineiro for Craig Wilson deal, which would have saved us both Asdrubal Cabrera and three months of Carl Everett futility against lefties.
The Pineiro for Craig Wilson trade was never a possibility. Bavasi and Littlefield barely even said hello to each other over the offseason. That was a media fabrication.
Or re: the team’s multi-bungle approach to overhauling the starting rotation, they haven’t yet made a trade for a physically declining famous name who then shatters on them in mid-season. Perhaps this is what we’ll see this offseason.
There’s not a lot of candidates for next year.
For 5? There’s Baek, Woods, Cruceta and Feierabend. Which is the entire POINT of Dave’s piece- Woods represents a surplus.
The Pineiro discussion came up in a thread on a possible Pineiro for Craig Wilson deal, which would have saved us both Asdrubal Cabrera and three months of Carl Everett futility against lefties.
Right, because the M’s were going to decide not to use Carl Everett once they acquired Wilson in spring training, even though they gave him a deal no-one else in the majors would have given him and was hyped as our big FA signing.
Here’s the thing- Piñeiro wasn’t viewed as a 5th starter/replacement level guy back in March. He’d had some decent peripheral stats in the later part of 2005 and his fastball was back a bit. Once it finally deserted him for good this year, yeah, he’s Jeff Harris with bleached hair.
I can think of a lot of things that would have made sense in hindsight- not trading for Benuardo, Olivo, etc. It wasn’t unreasonable to hope Piñeiro would have a year like Meche is having.
I think a What went right/What went wrong thread is in order, but the too many ‘what went wrong’ categories may put a damper on the season. However, there were plenty that did go right.
As to Woods, it amazes me that he’s done this well when he’s not blowing anybody away. Give the nod to Baek for 5th starter, but I wouldn’t mind having Woods in the pen as a longman, either. If we can get something valuable in return for him, give him the boot.
EC, they all still project as replacement level candidates (at least for the start of 2007), just as Harris, Livingston, Foppert (prior to his re-injury), Appier, etc. were last year. The point is that in spring training you made a “sky is falling” argument that a replacement level starter in the rotation would be a disaster, but now take the position that it is not that big a deal. If you want to take the position that Woods is less a “complete disaster” than Harris, that’s fine, but the availablity of four replacement level pitchers instead of two or three does not really explain your change in position.