Dustin Ackley, Second Baseman?
Shannon Drayer ends the boredom with some real news – the Mariners are going to start working Dustin Ackley out at second base. This is something that had been speculated on pre-draft, as his college coach had publicly said that he though Ackley could make the transition, but the Mariners had been adamant that they saw him as an outfielder.
Clearly, something has changed since June. I don’t believe that the team was lying and intended to do this all along. Since getting him signed, they have either seen something in Ackley, or made a decision about the rest of the roster, that made this a more attractive option than it was this summer. The options of things that may have changed:
1. They weren’t impressed with Ackley’s outfield abilities in the AFL. I find this pretty unlikely. The reports I’ve heard on him from down there have been pretty positive, and you never expect a perfect transition to a position that a player doesn’t have much experience at. Toss in the fact that its a small sample from a bunch of games that don’t really mean anything, and I just can’t see the M’s deciding that he couldn’t hack it in the outfield yet.
2. They were so impressed with Ackley’s bat in the AFL that they’ve moved up their timetable for getting him to the majors. This is slightly more plausible than the above option, but still seems like a stretch. His AFL performance is exactly what everyone expected – a bunch of singles, some walks, and some doubles sprinkled in here and there. The M’s had scouted him extensively in college, so it’s hard to imagine that they saw something in his bat that they didn’t see during the spring, and the performance just wasn’t eye-opening. He was as advertised. That’s not impetus for a change.
3. They’re preparing to acquire a long term answer in left field – i.e. Curtis Granderson. This will get spun into that rumor, but I don’t buy it. I can’t see the M’s paying the price it will take to get Granderson when they already had Saunders, who potentially gives you a similar type of player when he develops.
4. They have decided that Michael Saunders has more of a future on this team than Jose Lopez does. This strikes me as the likely scenario. Lopez has long been rumored to be trade bait this winter, even though there aren’t many in-house options to replace him long term. If they trade Lopez, there’s no one keeping Ackley from a major league job when he’s ready. Saunders is younger, cheaper, under team control for significantly longer, left-handed, better defensively, more athletic… there are a ton of reasons why the M’s would rather have Ackley displace Lopez than Saunders. It’s not that hard to imagine that during one of the post-season meetings between the front office and the coaching staff, everyone decided that Saunders was a keeper and Lopez was a goner. That kind of decision would make an Ackley-to-2B shift more viable.
We’ll find out eventually, as the team puts the roster together. But if I was Jose Lopez, I’d be looking at how much it costs to break my lease.
Comments
118 Responses to “Dustin Ackley, Second Baseman?”
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
That last option would make me very happy; Not only because it would mean that the organization is willing to give Saunders more time, but that they don’t feel it necessary to give up real talent (Geoff Baker’s Triunfel supposition gives me shivers) in order to make immediate gains in LF.
Could it also be a ploy to tell Lopez “Get your act together, we’re serious”? I know they’ve done it before so maybe they’ve already given up, but I suppose it could be possible.
Two other thoughts:
1. I immediately came over here to see if someone had commented on this after getting a tweet from Drayer and then seeing her post
2. How good is Shannon Drayer? She’s right up there with Larry Stone on the “Go-to people other than USS Mariner” list
Now this is truly some real news. Bakers suggestion made me cringe as well Adam. I really hope the last option is the case and Saunders isnt dealt for another more expensive guy like Granderson.
Dave, any thoughts on how Ackley might project as a second basemen? I know its really early to get into this but I was wondering if you had any thoughts about it yet? Thanks
Might it also mean a potential shift of Lopez to 3b?
I can see the Granderson scenario, but yea, it does seem at the surface that Lopez will be sold high.
There are far less controversial or inconvenient ways of inspiring a player then sacrificing the #2 draft pick.
Also, what would the Mariners be inspiring Lopez to do? I don’t think anyone thinks Lopez wasn’t playing to his potential last season.
I too think this has something to do with Lopez, but I don’t think it involves him sticking it at 2B in any contingency–At least not for the Mariners.
I doubt it. He’s not going to be any better of a fit for the team or the park at a corner infield spot than he is in the middle.
I’ve been hoping for something like this for a while, as it’s a really good solution to the potential outfielder logjam down the road if Ackley can stick at second, and makes him even more potentially awesome.
5. They’ve learned something about his Tommy-John-repaired arm (or something has shown up while he’s playing in the AFL) that leads them to believe it’s too risky to have him making maximum-effort throws from the outfield. Seems kind of unlikely — throws from second to first still require some arm strength, and lots of pitchers come back from TJ to put way more stress on their arms — but is it possible? If they have any concerns, moving him to the apex of the infield would seem to be the safest way to preserve their investment.
Also, is there any chance that Lopez is headed to platoon duty somewhere in the infield? He doesn’t have huge platoon splits (though we know his power only fits some parks, and Safeco isn’t one of them) but you could pair him up with Branyan I suppose. Nah, just writing that I’m having trouble convincing myself — and a young, 25 HR-hitting second baseman has to be worth more in trade (especially for teams that don’t pay attention to defensive stats).
Also: Shannon Drayer is awesome. She’s clearly baseball-savvy enough to give the best of the local sports journos a run for their money if she wanted to, but instead she provides insight none of the others do (and the likes of which is rare in any sport in any city, from what I’ve seen). Some of the things she’s written — about Eddie Guardado, and Jose Guillen, and others — are the among the best things I’ve read about Seattle sports, ever.
Who’s to say Lopez wouldn’t be in a Granderson trade?
Sorry.
Anyway, hopefully Ackley can make the switch to 2B. The Utley comparisons will be coming full force, no matter how unfair they are.
I just thought Lopez might be a passable defender at a more ‘reactionary’ position, as long as he could handle the slow roller or bunt OK.
I don’t really have a problem with Lopez at the plate other than his low OBP (can patience and ’selectiveness’ EVER be drilled into him?)
One thing for sure.. if they do deal him, they’d better have something coming back to replace the 25 dongs and 96 RBI on an already anemic offensive roster.
There was a story out earlier today about Jose Lopez moving to first base, so take that for what it is worth.
Well, at least he might be a bit of an upgrade at the plate for the Tigers over Brandon Inge…
Actually, though, if I were J-Lo, I’d check out Houston first. Besides the nice softball-field fence in left at M-M Park, the housing prices seem like they might be fairly reasonable — if the For Rent listings for that area are any indication, that is.
Dave – Option 2 pretty clearly suggests that 2B would be a faster route to the majors than LF. I don’t see how that could be true given the defensive premium on 2B.
The…Mariners….are….stoooooooooopid.
If this seems to predicate a Lopez trade, who plays 2B in 2010? The bigger question would be who replaces Jose’s bat in 2010? Especially if they are planning on giving LF to Saunders.
Not compared to some of the folks who post here, clearly.
Dave,
Excellent analysis, as usual. Perhaps the answer is a slight variation on #2.
The decision to make him an outfielder was made when he was selected in the draft. Much later, when he was actually signed, circumstances changed slightly. His contract was written to place him on the 40-man roster, which, as I understand it, means he needs to be on the fast track to the big leagues for the Mariners to maximize the return on their investment. This could be another delayed decision, similar to what occurred with the third base coach termination.
On ESPN radio this afternoon, Shannon Drayer seemed to give the impression that Zduriencik told her the move is experimental–it is designed to give Ackley exposure to another position, and that it might not be a permanent move at all.
Coryjro may have a point. Polanco is a type A free agent and had a similar year at the plate to that of Lopez. If the Tigers let Poloanco walk and take the draft pick, then trade for Lopez it would work out pretty nicely for them.
Yeah I think Lopez is a logical fit for the Tigers, am surpirsed not many people have said that previously. I could see GMZ giving up Lopez and Morrow and getting Granderson and Jackson back. On the surface it’s good for both clubs???
Tui, could cover 2nd till Ackley was ready and if we get Tampa involved Willy Aybar could help cover Tui at 2nd also.
The fact that you are asking this question is the very reason that he needs to go on to greener pastures.
I have to agree with you Jeff. Even if Ackley doesn’t end up sticking at 2b (there really is no reason to think he won’t) at least the move will open up some space into mid ‘10 season.
Possible? Yes. Probable? Not really. You know as well as I (probably better actually) that the current regime wouldn’t have made a statement like this if Jalopy wasn’t essentially history on this roster.
Do you have a link to this story? I can’t seem to find it. It would be a rather amusing piece if it had him moving to 1B with the M’s though.
Well stated, joser.
If you were the Mariners, and shopping Lopez, why would you announce that your top prospect is being groomed for his job? Wouldn’t that decrease your leverage in trade negotiations?
While this is possible, it’s quite unlikely. If things had changed that much with him physically, I would think that we would have heard about it by now. The last I heard/read they wanted him to be in the OF.
Good point. But I would counter that question with this one: What if a trade was already in place before they said what they did? (Yes I’m truly hoping here. Please don’t burst my bubble)
Is this a potential contingency plan in case they can’t get Branyan signed, and feel that Lopez will be a stop-gap for 1B until something better comes along?
This might also make Lopez better trade bait in terms of making him expendable.
Personally, I would think that this year’s team is going to be a minor step back in terms of wins, in order to develop some talent at the major league level. If you’ve got Wilson, Saunders, Tui, and Moore/Johnson starting for you, you’re probably not going to win a ton of games, unless these 4 suddenly become much better players.
Sure, we could pick up some good deals in free agency again, or make a few trades, but then we’re probably still looking at a 90 win team, which still isn’t going to catch the Angels. So, bide your time, try out your kids, and save buckets of money for a better fit in free agency, or a great trade. By 2011 you could have some very good players out there playing 5-6 positions, from within the organization, all under club control. Imagine that.
Trade “leverage” is largely a myth.
And Lopez at 1B would be worse than any number of cheap free agent options. No thanks.
Ok, done.
Now you imagine, if you will, that Felix flat will not sign with a team that isn’t going to be in playoff contention. Does this change your plan at all?
And no better at 3B would be my bet. Hence my thought that he’s already been traded but not yet announced.
I’m not arguing, I’m just wondering who is going to be a 2.5+ WAR 1B that could be picked up for cheaper than Jose Silva Jr… Errr.. Lopez?
And if you can’t trade Lopez, and you don’t find him that useful at second base… What do you do with him?
here
Even if you believed in leverage, Ackley won’t be the 2010 second baseman, so there’s no reason to believe the Mariners suddenly have no use for Lopez. This announcement, on its own, should have no effect on Lopez’s value.
These are the only two quotes from Zduriencik from that article discussing Lopez’s potential move to 1B. Since these say absolutely nothing about, well, anything, I can’t use this at all to lend credence to the belief the Mariners will seriously consider Lopez at 1B. And I certainly agree it is not a very good idea.
Ackley could have been a high level contributor by the end of the 2010 season. Now the earliest arrival will be the end of 2011 and that is the best case, more likely is ST 2012. This is another mishandling of a high draft pick just as bad as the mishandling of Morrow.
One lingering question in my mind is this: why not put Ackley at shortstop rather than second base? Can someone explain why, from a skillset perspective? Perhaps Ackley lacks the tools to be a major league shortstop.
JoLo = possibly a candidate for RH DH?
Someone has to play 2B until Ackley’s ready. That’s probably at least a full year away. Why does Jose Lopez have to go because of this?
Moving Ackley to 2B makes sense because His bat with league average defence at 2B makes him more valuable than his bat with above average defense in LF.
I really hope this works out, at least until we know if Saynders is a big league regular or not. If he can’t cut it, then it may make sense to shift Ackley back to the OF.
As for Jose, I hope they’re thinking of him more as a 3B at this point. The club could use a bit more OBP next year and you can get that a lot easier at 2B (Hudson/FLopez/Polanco/Kelly Johnson) than at 3B. Plus some in the scouting world think he’s better suited for that job defensively.
Sure, Jose’s bat is weak, but you got have somebody right-handed in the lineup. And he’s had about as productive as any righty we’ve had for a few years. I’m not sure I’d want to swap out his known value for an unknown value like Inge, Crede, or Tui. There’s a real chance those guys could all struggle here.
wsm, I think the main issue is, if the team does not see Lopez as the long-term answer at 2B (whether Ackley is or not), then they probably won’t get back more in a trade for him than they would this offseason, especially if they are able to trade him to a team where his skill set will play better (for example, the White Sox or Reds, where Lopez would potentially be a 35-HR guy).
The other issue is whether or not, PR chatter aside, the M’s really expect to contend for a division championship next season, or anticipate another solid campaign that lays the groundwork for 2011. While I am emotionally happy Junior is back, I would say that decision would seem to suggest the latter, but who knows. If I’m right, then there’s no real cost to having a Hall/Hannahan platoon keep Ackley’s seat warm for him for a year. And if you are building for 2011, why not trade one of your better chips (Lopez) at the top of his market and maximize the return?
Is it “If I was Jose Lopez” not “If I were Jose Lopez”?
This is the only baseball blog where I’d ask this question and expect to learn from the answer.
If you can get value in return for Lopez, then go for it. We’ve yet to hear of any substantial interest in Lopez though, despite the fact he’s been widely assumed to be available. We’ll see.
As far as contention in 2010, I don’t see how they can’t try to improve in 2010. They have the pieces and the resources to improve on last year’s success. They can get better without sacrificing anything from the farm system or any future building blocks. There’s no reason not to compete.
Great post as usual, Dave. The one thing that I don’t buy about it is that you think that Saunders projects to be Granderson-like. Really? I mean, you’re a smarter guy that I am, but I just don’t see Saunders being able to do all the things that Grandy can.
Saunders just turned 23 on Thursday and Granderson is 28. Grandy’s speed didn’t really turn on until his 3rd season. Can Michael really patrol a vast CF if asked?
Anyhoo, as a tangent I would love to know your opinion on Brandon Inge’s defensive value and if it would outweigh his all-or-nothing (sucky) right handed bat?
wsm, I wholeheartedly agree. Was just trying to throw out some considerations. And, of course, competing and contending, as has been rehashed several times in this forum, are not exactly the same thing. I expect the M’s to compete again in 2010 (I don’t see any necessary reason why they can’t); whether or not they’ll contend will depend on how much they are able to sustain/improve and whether or not the Angels and Rangers come back to them. No matter how much of a genius Zduriencik is, it will be a real challenge to jump yet another 10 wins in one season, which is what I would imagine it would take failing a major toe-stubbing by the Angels, their FA losses (which remain to be seen) notwithstanding.
Bookbook: it’s a rather obscure rule of English (subjunctive mood of “to be” attendant on the word “if”), but “If I were…” is indeed the appropriate form.
I agree with Dave that his #4 is the most likely scenario/reason for this (M’s have decided Saunders has more future with the team than Lopez) but I don’t think the four options Dave has laid out are mutually exclusive. In fact, the most likely scenario is some combination of at least a couple of them. Personally, the only one I would dismiss as being unlikely to have played any role is #1.
And bookbook, I was going to tell you it is “if I were” but GarForever beat me to it, and with a good explanation for why, to boot!
That seems unlikely.
We see it all the time. When a player gets hurt mid-season and a team needs to find a replacement on the trade market, they usually have to overpay.
Or just look at the Johan Santana and Cliff Lee trades. Everyone knew their teams had to move them, and they got far below what most would consider “fair value”.
Anyone who ever had to negotiate seriously, either as part of their job, or on real estate transactions, or for a new job, knows that leverage (i.e. who needs to make a deal now, who has reasonable alternatives) is a real phenomenon.
If you’ve ever negotiated pay for a new job when you have multiple offers, and then when you have no other offers, you know leverage is very, very real.
There is a huge difference between contract negotiations and trade negotiations.
In trade negotiations, you want as many teams as possible bidding for the player. Teams don’t bid for players they don’t know are available. There’s no lost value in making it clear that you’re taking offers on a particular player. You’re simply increasing demand, which drives price up, not down.
If Ackley can become anything like Chase Utley… woo boy
I don’t think I get the premise. Ackley at 2b, fine. Jose packs his bags? I don’t think so.
It just isn’t reasonable that Ackley is going to switch to a high skill infield defensive position in less than 2 full years in the minors. He has never played 2nd in college, only 1B and the OF. It just isn’t reasonable to see him playing 2nd regularly before 2012 in the Majors.
You’re overestimating how hard the switch is.
Curtis Granderson is already better than Saunders, and that’s fact. He’s under team control at a very good, team friendly contract.
In this, you basically say that Saunders has the potential to be a similar player to Granderson, when he develops. The problem with this is that you assume he’ll develop. There’s no given with prospects, you know that.
I don’t think #3 is the likely scenario, but I at least do believe that it is being considered. If you want to keep Saunders in left field over Granderson…why?
I don’t assume he’ll develop. The fact that he might not is obvious. There’s no point in saying it.
The cost to acquire Granderson is much larger than the difference between their respective abilities, however. It just doesn’t make sense to give up what it will take to get him, when the team already has an LF who can offer that kind of upside on the roster.
Ackley is on MLB Networks right now playing in the AFL Championship game.
[BEES!]
i am posting here for the first time having just started following baseball for the last couple of years, as i live in Ireland we don’t get to see too much baseball, but i chose a team and as you can guess i decided to follow the Mariners. I had been watching the official mariners board but they were a bit boring then i stumbled upon this site which has really given me a lot of information and insight into the intricacies of the game and seems to have informed people posting.
I am watching the Arizona fall league game online at the minute and i can see here there is a lot of buzz for Ackley at the minute from M’s fans. Are there any other young M’s prospects worth looking out for in the next few years? or anyone in this game from other organisations that are looking good?
Finally, jack’s starting to figure it out!
If you really thought Lopez was capable of hitting 30+ home runs next year, wouldn’t you want to keep him around? He might well have more trade value at that point.
nathaniel, I don’t think GarForever’s point was that Lopez could ever be a 30-35 HR guy in Seattle. I think most people who post here think Lopez probably maximized what he can do, power-wise, in Safeco last year at 25 HR. In a park more friendly to RH hitting, like the New Comiskey or Fenway, or whatever the Reds’ park is called these days (or Houston, or…pick your park), Lopez should do better. Furthermore, smart teams with parks built like that might value Lopez higher than a team like the Mariners.
If Jose Lopez is potentially capable of hitting 35 HR’s in one of those other parks, then he’s capable of hitting 30 or more in Safeco Field.
I don’t know, but I think joser’s #5 could well be a partial reason. If you’ve watched Ackley and you’re concerned that his arm might not hold up to playing CF, then he needs to move to the right side of the infield — and if so, better 2B than 1B, especially given the scarcity of good LH bats at the keystone.
And nathaniel: no, 35 HR for Lopez at a launching pad like Cincinnati doesn’t in any way translate into 30 in an airport like Safeco.
Welcome. Dave’s Future 40 is a great reference.
Thanks Jack i will check that out
He’s probably a lot closer than I thought at first glance, if we are talking about the stadiums in Chicago or Cincinnati. My mistake for just taking a quick glance at last year’s park numbers. You go back a few years, and those parks are a lot more homer-friendly than I realized.
I don’t have time to try and find park factors that split up righties and lefties, but unless there’s some extreme split, he’d never come close to that in Houston or Fenway. More in the range of 25 to 30 there.
Wish I had more time to look for better park factors than the ones I used. It would be nice to know how all those parks affect left-handers and right-handers. (Why don’t I save those things when I run across them?)
I’m neutral on this move in itself, but just once I’d like to see the Mariners make a really high selection in the first round and then not tinker with him at all. Between Morrow’s yo-yoing between the bullpen, the rotation, and back again, the shameful treatment of Clement as a C/DH/occasional 1B and the years of mixed messages as to where he’d end up, Aumont’s shift to the pen and now this, the Mariners’ development folks are really starting to toy with me a bit. You can even throw Tui in there, since he got top-half of the first round money to sign. They left him at SS way longer than was reasonable.
I know most of this is on old regime guys like Hunter and Maddox (not to mention Bavasi), but it’d sure be nice to use a top-15 pick and know exactly the kind of player you’re getting one of these days. I’m not really complaining or blaming, just venting.
The thing about just about any park factors freely available on the internet is, they’re highly generalized numbers that may not apply equally to both LH and RH hitters, or equally to all fields in a given park. For those of us who know Safeco, we know this to be true almost inuitively: a LH hitter is not punished nearly as much as a RH hitter is, and RH hitters who use the RF power alley and go the other way are punished much less than pull hitters are. There may be one (or more) out there, but I’ve yet to see a park factor that takes this into account. I suspect that this is the kind of thing most clubs have done with their proprietary systems at a very high level.
Anyway, I think this is a HUGE factor in the way the Mariners (and other teams) view Jose Lopez and whether he will be better served in another ballpark. And I think people like Dave, Derek, and many others around here who follow this team closely understand this as well (I wouldn’t be surprised if Dave or Derek has seen much more sophisticated park factor than usually get thrown about, either). So, I don’t find B-Ref’s or ESPN’s park factors to be very persuasive in arguing the point that Safeco won’t hurt a dead-pull RH hitter like Lopez much more than parks like the Reds’, Fenway, Minute Maid, or Chicago’s.
Yes, you’re absolutely right. There are a lot of folks who publish park factors each year and they each use their own methodology. Year-to-year parks vary in results as well. Tough to know which ones are the best to use. From looking at them over the years, a good estimate for Safeco Field would be around 15% reduction in home runs to right handed hitters. We don’t know if that affects all hitters the same, but there’s a good chance that a guy like Lopez would be hurt more. So yes, it’s possible that he might hit have hit 35 in one of those parks. We wouldn’t expect that, but it could happen.
Hmmm…I think it’s more likely Lopez is a 20-25 HR batter in Safeco, and 25-30 HR batter in more RH friendly territory.
Unless you are Jose Lopez, it’s “If I were Jose Lopez…” If you are Jose Lopez, you can start a sentence “If I was Jose Lopez…”, but it’s not semantically different from just saying whatever follows “…”.
“Were” in the antecedent of an english language conditional indicates the subjunctive mood, which is used to speak about non-actual possibilities or possibilities where we’re unsure about whether the antecedent is true.
JH:
Make up your mind?
Morrow and Lopez to the Brewers for…..who?
What the hell are you talking about?
Ancient Mariner:
the organization kept Tui at SS even though absolutely nobody thought he had a chance to stay there. They didn’t do it because they had a singular mind about what he was. They could have spent those seasons evaluating him at 3B instead of wasting time. Instead, we’re 5 years into his professional career and he’s still a player without a real position.
While I might also agree that Tui isn’t ultimately going to be a SS, that really doesn’t mean that the organization was wrong in keeping him there. Even the minors have to keep positions filled with the best available players. It’s not really the current regime’s fault that Bavasi decimated the system.
Clearly random people with internet access are better general managers than Jack Zduriencik.
Lots of talk about Lopez and the Safeco effect. Here’s his numbers for the last three seasons at home.
‘07 .225/.274/.336 5 homers
‘08 .313/.329/.511 13 homers
‘09 .229/.254/.387 8 homers
If you assume that the real Lopez has showed up the last two years then you get a mixed bag of numbers on the Safeco effect. In ‘08 he hit very well at home and bonked 13 of his 17 taters there. In ‘09 he didn’t hit squat at home and only bonked 8 of his 25 taters there.
Take your pick. I was sure he would be gone. I’m not so positive now.
I’ve described him as a hacking hack of a hack with the bat. But as a number 6 or 7 hitter..he ain’t bad. As a #3 or #4 guy….he’s a hack.
Keith
TP: You don’t spend $2.1 million on a guy to help fill out your roster. I know that the current regime had nothing to do with Tui, and really I don’t fault them for any of the player development moves. It would just be nice, with as many top-15 picks as the Ms have had the past few years, to see one of these guys rocket through the system without any complications for once. Like I said earlier, I was venting, not blaming.
Yes, the ESPN park factors are garbage. With respect to park factors in general and Jose Lopez in particular I’d point you first to this fascinating article at THT that breaks down parks in much greater detail (albeit just for HRs) and (for the 2002-06 timespan under study, anyway) calculates Safeco to be the most hitter-un-friendly park in the AL when it comes to drives towards the LF foulpole or left center field; and then to Lopez’ 2009 HRs as plotted by HitTrackerOnline to demonstrate how much that matters in Lopez’ case. Interestingly, according to that THT article the second-most hitter-unfriendly left field in the AL is McAfee Coliseum, which of course is also in the AL West. So a right-handed pull hitter with “just barely” power is disproportionately penalized if he plays for either the A’s or M’s, because he’ll be playing ~90 games in parks that severely punish him. The takeaway from that is neither Seattle nor Oakland should be investing in such hitters.
Jeff over at lookout landing used the Hit Tracker data to go off in another direction, comparing Jose to Aaron Hill.
And, speaking of Lopez coverage at LL, Jeff also posted this earlier this month.
The Safeco field part sounds about right to me, but to be in the 25-30 HR rsange, he would have to be in an extremely good park for a right hander.
That earlier post was supposed to say you don’t pay someone $2.1 million to fill out your minor league rosters.***
Indeed, Pete, that was exactly what I was thinking. And while the discussion has more or less passed me by in the last 24 hours, I was thinking along the lines that if Jose Lopez could hit 25 HR playing approximately 56% of his games in Safeco and McAfee, then some other team with a RH pull-hitter friendly park that values traditional power stats might let their imaginations run wild as to what he could do if he played half his games for them. Houston, Boston, Chicago (AL) and Cincinnati all leap immediately to mind (though Boston is pretty set at 2B) as examples of teams who might see Lopez as a potentially more valuable asset for them than he could ever be for the M’s, and therefore might offer a decent return in trade.
Just to be clear: I am a bigger fan of Lopez than some, less of a fan than others. While I see 2B as an area of potential improvement (in part because I’m not sanguine he can repeat 2009), I also wouldn’t want to ship off a more-than-serviceable secondbaseman for less than he’s worth just to make a spot for Ackley or any other prospect.
I am a big fan of Ackley and excited to see what he can do at the major league level. However, Jose Lopez is only 26 years old, holds a fairly inexpensive contract at just over $2M, and has consistantly improved since he entered the league with the M’s in 2004. He had a career year in HR’s, RBI’s, OPS, and SLG. I realize his defensive abilities leave something to be desired. However, when I consider his consistency, age, and career year in formentioned categories. I personally would like to see if he can replicate this season and return to this “trading jose lopez” topic next offseason.
Am i alone on this one? Dave since your a bigger fan than most would you say that would be a fair shake for Lopez all things considered?
sorry dave, didn’t mean that to you, the comment above me from “garforever” said he was a bigger fan than most.
How in the world do you say that Jose Lopez has “consistently improved” since his debut? His hitting was worse in 06 compared to 05, massively horrible in 07, then got better in 08 and stepped back this year.
His fielding’s been all over but he was legitimately good in 06, sucked last year, and was decent this year.
There’s just no way to say he’s consistently improved unless that means “is generally better now than in his rookie year” which is totally true. Or unless you have some reason 07 doesn’t count.
Actually if you take a closer look at his stats his HR’s and RBI’s HAVE increased every year since his rookie season with the exception of 2007 when he had almost 100 less at bats then he did is 2006, 2008, and 2009. From an offensive stand point, the fact that he is not even 26 till later this month and showing the consistency that he has, speaks highly of his dedication and will to produce sucessfully at the major league level.
2008 – 192 hits, .297AVG, 17HR’s, 89RBI’s
2009 – 167 hits, .272AVG, 25HR’s, 96RBI’s
I personally would consider those fairly good numbers for a second baseman and considering his age would not be suprised to see him hit .280, 28HR’s, aand 100 RBI’s next season.
I can’t argue that from a defensive stand point he’s below average, but our team was if i remember right ranked #1 defensively in 2009.
That’s the most superficial analysis you could possibly have offered. All of those are terrible means of evaluating players.
Can we possibly take Jack Z at something like face value, and assume that getting Admiral Ackley some reps at 2nd give the M’s more flexibility going forward? Have Ackley able to step in for either Saunders or JoLo gives the M’s a lot more options in trades and whatnot…
We should probably note that Jose Lopez had the 10th worst BABIP (click on the column header to sort) last year. There’s a fair debate about BABIP: some players (like Ichiro) consistently post high values, indicating they have some control over it, whereas for others it seems to be more about luck. Lopez would seem to fall into the latter camp, and his “good” and “bad” seasons correlate:
Year BABIP
2004 0.251
2005 0.276
2006 0.312
2007 0.269
2008 0.311
2009 0.274
Avg 0.288
I don’t think anyone has figured out how to teach batters to improve their BABIP, but until Lopez does he’s going to give you a lot of inconsistency.
FWIW, Bill James projects .285 BABIP for him next year, which is enough of an improvement that even with a drop in power (or just a little less luck on balls barely getting over the left field wall) — his 2010 HR projection is just 19 — he ends up with .324 wOBA, essentially identical to last year. But it seems just as likely that his BABIP next season could be as bad as ‘09, or worse. So it’s a coin flip, and it may not even be a fair coin; if he’s unlucky with both HRs and BABIP in general he could look terrible and have little to no trading value, while still being essentially the same player.
On the other hand, a Lopez with a .285 BABIP playing regularly in a park where his “just barely” HRs consistently find the far side of the LF fence would be a much more valuable player, especially as a 2B.
Unfortunately, that park isn’t Safeco.
From the looks of it, if you’re trying to sell high you’re more likely to be able to do so this off-season than hope that you can sell even higher at the end of next season.
Didn’t all his “just barely” home runs find the far side of the left field fence? He didn’t hit any anywhere else.
Yes. The point I was making is that next year he might happen to hit more of those at Safeco or McAfee, where they fall short of the fence and are caught for outs; if he was playing somewhere else, they might comfortably clear it and, in addition, some that were caught for outs last year might go for HRs as well. HitTracker shows us the balls that cleared the fence, but not any that fell short, no matter how close.
You know…There is a lot of writing going on about getting rid of Lopez and getting a Hudson or a Polonco as replacement.
Hudson has been only marginally better over the last two years (WAR: 4.9 vs. 4.6), is significantly more costly and his defense is actually worse over those two years. He’s not a step up and the moeny could be better spent on a starter, DH/1B or LF.
Polanco is about 1.5 wins better over two years and certainly fields better. But he’s 8 years older and significantly more expensive.
More and more I’m learning that Lopez, at the rate he produced last year, is at least guy I can live with.
If Ackley is the guy at 2B in two years…then Polanco is a better deal….but money spent on him is money not spent elsewhere. Can that money get more return with a LF, for example?
Keith
It sounds to me like people are more concerned with Lopez’s defense rather than offense. I would consider Hudson or especially Polanco a down grade over Lopez. He’s proven he can hit at Safeco and has proven to be rather durable. I would venture a guess that Hudson or Polanco might plummet rather than flourish in Safeco. I couldn’t agree more with Keith’s dissection of the situation and would also like to see our money spent elsewhere. After all, if Lopez isn’t the guy, then we have viable options work into the role of starting 2nd base.
Does anyone really think Ackley or Tui would put up a .280AVG, 25HR’s, and 90+ RBI’s this season or next. I for one, would be very surprised.
If you think that average, home runs, and RBI are the way to evaluate players, you have some books to go read, and you’ll spend the next couple of weeks very surprised.
Yeah. Everyone knows that player evaluations should be based on grit and clubhouse chemistry. Where is WFB when we really need him?
I’m not a big believer in the WAR statistic. Not to mention the “players worth evaluator” or whatever its called. They don’t encompass everything. There just another random stat. They mean about as much to me as, “in the bottom of the 4th, with a runner on 2nd, he has a .259 AVG against lefties, but with a runner on 1st he hits .301.” They don’t take in every factor, there ARE some aspects of sports that can’t be measured and do have a great affect on performance.
If you think those things DON’T have a huge affect then maybe you should put down the book and play the sport.
So you think that just because people here look at advanced stats and use them for evaluation of players means that none here have played baseball?
*Sigh* We have another one folks.
I don’t know whether to laugh or cry.
I admit, I’ve never played a game of baseball in my life. I’ve played many sports at various levels of competition, but baseball doesn’t generally figure into an Englishman’s sporting curriculum.
You’ve found me out. I’m a fraud. Forget the advanced degrees in engineering from elite universities, the hundreds of thousands of words written on baseball, the fact that I invented a statistic now used by front offices throughout baseball. I didn’t play high school ball, so Wag is clearly more in tune with the realities of baseball (and no doubt life in general) than I. I’ll stop writing and researching immediately and plan on erecting a shrine – no, that would be doing an injustice – nay, a cathedral in honour of the inestimable Mr. Wag, who, as someone who has played the sport, is clearly the font of all knowledge and whose words of wisdom should be taken as gospel.
For those who disagree with Lord Wag’s writings: For shame! How rare is it that someone so illustrious deigns to correspond with us mere mortals? How dare you mock someone who plays the sport!
If they can’t be measured then they don’t have an effect. If they do affect performance they must be measurable. If the effect isn’t measurable, it’s imaginary.
How about I assert that the player’s horoscope has a huge effect on his performance, but it doesn’t show up in any stat (and therefore doesn’t affect the outcome of the game) yet is really, really important because, well, because I insist it is.
Now, you can claim that existing stats don’t capture some aspect of the game, or capture it imperfectly, and — depending on the aspect you’re talking about, such as defense, or the catcher’s role — you’d get little argument. But existing stats can predict aggregate outcomes fairly well (just look at full-season 3rd order wins, for example) so the remaining uncertainty represented by your uncaptured “factors” has to be quite small. In other words, even if they’re real (which is doubtful in many cases, whatever you might think), there’s no way they can have a “great affect” (or even a “great effect”).
Well, perhaps I’ve misunderstood you, and you’re right: these things do have a great affect. That would seem to require the book-learning you’re so adverse to, however.
Anyway, to get back on topic (and not tilt at the same windmills of ignorance over and over again)….
There’s an interesting recent example of an outfielder switching to 2nd base: Skip Schumaker of the Cardinals, who switched during spring-training last year. Schumaker had played some college ball as a shortstop, but as you might expect the initial transition was rough; however, as Dave wrote in September, it worked out pretty well (even though the Cardinals were fielding a grounder-oriented pitching staff headed by Joel Pineiro). So there’s some reason to hope that Ackley — noted for his general athleticism and starting even earlier in the year — could make the transition fairly quickly.
Then maybe Big Z and the Mariners organization are wrong. However, Athletes know it makes a difference. And in sports confidence is a major factor in the success of an athlete. A talented player with no confidence is useless. This argument is like comparing an atheist and Christian. “we can’t see or measure it so it must not be real”
That’s fair, I guess I can’t argue it. Yet, I’m pretty sure that any actual athlete you speak to will tell you how important these factors are on a player as well as a team. When it comes down to it, none of us can prove that any of this does or doesn’t’ matter. Agree to disagree?
Again, i reiterate that I think that stats have a major place in sports. However, I think people get to wrapped up in the numbers rather than the actual performances. I am not saying that using WAR to determine a players worth is wrong, but I do feel it lacks several factors.
But the numbers come from their actual performance in the league. How can they be overlooking their performance? Outside of injury, because it’s very difficult to quantify exactly how much a nagging muscle pull or strain affects play exactly, they are pretty damned accurate.
If only we had written posts on evaluating chemistry and confidence issues.
Or if other people had looked at the same issues.
Oh well. I guess if you haven’t found any of those, you must be right.
DMZ:
Of course he’s right. HRH Wag played sports.
Really? haha that has nothing to do with anything. I haven’t reference my playing or sports or tried to imply that I knew more for doing so.
All I am saying is theres a correlation between confidence/chemistry and performance. None of you believe that?
I do not feel that I am capable of having this discussion with Your Reverence as I am now physiologically incapable of disagreeing with someone of your immense stature. Sir.
I have a masters degree in Psychology and am a Lieutenant in the US ARMY. So please don’t assume I’m some moron with a computer.
I haven’t said anything immature or rude. This started out as a conversation about statistics. My opinion was that people tend to focus too much on stats and don’t pay enough attention to performances. I think that there are other immensurable factors that directly affect a athlete/teams performance.
If you disagree, that’s completely understandable. However, there’s no need to get aggressive or disrespectful. I by no means meant to come across agressive.
Irrelevant. Sports!
I believe the idea came from this statement:
It kind of implies as much.
So Wag, by your own admission, you don’t believe in what we look at on this blog. Why do you keep coming back?
Tranquil,
What difference to you does it make if Wag keeps coming back? Or if I keep coming back? Or anybody else?
Just wondering.
Wag is right when he insists some things in sport are unquantifiable.
Griffey may or may not have had an effect on last year’s M’s well beyond his crappy numbers at the plate. Wak and Z certainly seem to think so, but that effect is beyond actual measure.
For example…Check out Mike Jacobs ‘09 #’s for the Royals, they are very similar to Griffey’s. (His WAR is a bit lower). About the same number of PA’s, both hit 19 hr’s, both played almost all of their games at DH. Jacobs BA was a bit better…and if he had a few more singles fall in and another walk or two their OPB would be nearly identical, too. So give Jacobs those singles and another tater or two…Would the M’s have gone out of their way to sign him? Absolutely not. The M’s are convinced that there is an unmeasurable quality to Jr. that makes them a better team.
I thought Jr. was a stupid signing lasst year….but something changed with the M’s. I’l willing to give him a bit of the credit…and certainly not for being a crappy DH.
Some things in sports defy accurate measurement.
However, I think Wag is way wrong when he discounts WAR which I think is of great value and make great sense.
But that doesn’t mean that Wag is wrong across the board nor does it mean that I should challenge his reasons for hanging around here.
Just thinking,
Keith
Fixed that for you.
I simply asked why he keeps coming back if our ideas bother him so much. It’s not that I really give a rip that he’s here. I’m just curious why he continues to beat his head against the wall.
This is true. If it could be measured, it would be. But since it cannot be measured, how do you quantify it’s value. Simple answer; you can’t.
That’s what most folks don’t understand. When the folks here and other places blow off chemistry, it’s not because it doesn’t exist. It’s because nobody can prove (with numbers) that is has an effect on the game.
I enjoy talking sports, especially my team (the Mariners). I am not saying using WAR to determine a players value is useless by any means. It’s another stat that when used moderately can be very useful. However, a lot of people on this site seem to think that it’s a flawless system that should determine a players full worth. Not to mention they use it to determine wither we should or shouldn’t sign a player. And since this site is mostly a trade rumors/speculation site the two go hand in hand.
I enjoy reading other people opinions, my only issue is “some” people on here need to remember that stats don’t tell everything. For example, when a team sign’s an aging vet. They have a great affect on a teams development (physically AND mentally). Is that measurable? No.
You have here — as in other topics — absolutely no idea what you’re talking about.
How many times do we have to repeat this to you (and others)?
If you can’t measure something, you can’t say that it has a “great effect”. Stop it.
You’ve long since passed the point of potential educatability and have moved solidly into pointless conflict-seeking.
Because it adds one more name to the mental list I keep of folks whose posts I skip over because they’ve demonstrated they add nothing to the discussion, and I value my free time. I like coming to USSM to read about new things; I don’t appreciate seeing the same well-refuted arguments resurrected over and over again.
As a stats geek who’s also played baseball (not professionally, but still) let me say, yes, when guys hustled we appreciated it, mostly because their hustle often resulted in outcomes that also happen to be quantifiable. And our appreciation of those results in helping us win improved everybody’s attitude. When we won, if a guy loafed on a play or missed a sign or hung a slider, we didn’t care. When we lost, another story. In other words, winning led to chemistry, not the other way around.
But if you don’t believe me, Player X (the anonymous NFL player writing a column for ESPN the Mag) had a recent piece in which he says pretty much the same thing (chemistry is overrated if not mostly imaginary), and it’s something all of us who work for a living intuitively know: if everyone is doing their job and the company is going well, then, hey, going to work’s not so bad. If everyone’s pulling their weight and the company’s circling the drain anyway, not so much fun.