Bradley and Branyan

Dave · December 18, 2009 at 10:06 pm · Filed Under Mariners 

I think there is one wrinkle to the Milton Bradley acquisition that has not been discussed much, and that is how the presence of a player with Bradley’s health history affects what the team will do at first base, specifically with regards to Russ Branyan.

Bradley’s risks do not just end with his personality. He has had 500 plate appearances in a season twice in his career, and he’s only played in more than 130 games once. Thanks to the great injury tool, we can see that, in the last five years, Bradley has spent 188 days on the 15 day DL, 49 days on the 60 day DL, and been labeled day-to-day on 96 different days. He has had problems with his knee, hip, thigh, lower leg, groin, “general medical”, back, wrist, forearm, shoulder, trunk, ankle, hand, abdomen, and even his face.

The man gets hurt an awful lot. He makes up for it by playing well when he’s on the field, but it is going to be a fairly common occurrence that he’s not available to play. And that reality is going to make it hard for the M’s to also have a guy like Russ Branyan as their starting first baseman.

We already have an infielder with a history of injury problems in Jack Wilson, and we just acquired an OF/DH with an even more extensive series of health problems. As we saw last year, Junior’s knees will keep him off the field fairly regularly as well. Over a 162 game season, there’s a good chance that there are going to be days when all three of those guys are just not available due to various tweaks and pulls.

If you add Branyan to the mix, now you have four guys who you can’t really count on, health wise, to play everyday. A herniated disc is no joke, and even if he rehabs well and puts in a ton of work, there are going to be days when he just can’t go. And if that happens on the same day that Jack Wilson’s hamstring is bothering him and Milton Bradley’s (insert any body part here) is ailing, then what? Hannahan’s playing short, Hall goes to left, and Langerhans plays first, while Jr is the DH? Better hope the opponents aren’t throwing a southpaw that day. And if Junior’s knees are bothering him as well, well, apparently Rob Johnson would be your DH and you just play without a bench.

This might sound implausible, and it wouldn’t happen more than a couple of times all year, but the team would be playing with a short bench almost the entire year. On any given day, you would almost expect that one of Bradley/Griffey/Wilson/Branyan would be unavailable for one reason or another. That really limits Wak’s options at the end game. You have to think that there are going to be numerous occasions where Wak is going to want to pinch-hit for Jack Wilson in high leverage, late game situations, but he may be very hesitant to do that if Hannahan was starting at first base and Branyan wasn’t available to go into the game.

Also, you’re likely to see Langerhans used as a defensive replacement for Bradley quite a bit (both to improve the defense and just keep Milton healthy), so if he’s being reserved for that role and the team has another guy on the bench who can’t go that day, they will not be able to pinch run without significant risk.

In the end, I think three 30+ guys with a lot of nagging health problems is probably enough. I don’t know that the Mariners are going to want their #3 and #4 hitters to both be needing frequent rest days as they try to win the AL West. The addition of Bradley makes bringing Branyan back a little less palatable.

I’m certain the M’s have already had this discussion and are aware of this. Perhaps they already know that Russ isn’t coming back, and that he has a two year offer from a team that we haven’t heard about yet. But even if that’s not true, I think this acquisition lowers the value that Branyan can offer the Mariners in relation to someone who is a bit more reliable from a health standpoint.

I could be wrong, but to me, the Bradley acquisition means that we probably won’t see The Muscle back in Seattle next year.

Comments

76 Responses to “Bradley and Branyan”

  1. sonichound on December 19th, 2009 11:28 am

    Seems like Blalock has been battling injury problems his whole career and that usually doesn’t get better with age and I would stay away from him. I agree with a previous poster that Lopez at 2B is a better option than moving him to 1B. His numbers look OK for a 2B but would be sup-par at 1B. While I don’t think a team has to have a big bopper to be successful, I do think that having one to go against the better pitchers is important. Stringing together hits for runs is much easier against lower level pitchers but you sometimes need the big bomb going against the tougher pitchers to get those runs across. The huge plus with getting a bunch of high OBP guys is using up those starters pitches. If you have a bunch of guys getting 4-6 pitches per at bat they start adding up pretty quickly. Get a couple guys on base and 100 pitches comes pretty quickly and you start eating up their bullpen. With our pitching and defense having a guy that can get us a run with one swing of the bat would be huge.

  2. eponymous coward on December 19th, 2009 11:29 am

    Well, if Lopez isn’t going to be able to be moved due to 2B oversupply (though never say never, when Zduriencik is concerned), I’d have to say Beltre doesn’t fit on the team at this point.

    I honestly would be fine with Carp at first base over having to give up prospects for Luke or wasting more money on Branyan/Laroche.

    Carp isn’t very good. He OPS’ed pretty close to what Lopez did his two half-years in AAA (and we can see that it took him a while to get good), and while, yes, he does have better strike zone judgment and is a better bat for the park, I don’t think he’s really proven he belongs in the majors.

    LaRoche on a decent deal (one year, a few million) isn’t going to be a boat anchor for the team or a waste of money, and Scott isn’t going to be impossible to deal for, I think. At this point, a 2ish WAR 1B like Scott or LaRoche is a significant upgrade on a 0ish WAR like Carp for 2010, ESPECIALLY given how close the M’s are to contention. As long as the money is right and they won’t be blocking Carp longterm if he breaks out in AAA in 2010, I don’t see why you wouldn’t make those moves.

  3. Kazinski on December 19th, 2009 11:33 am

    Lopez is downgrade at 1b over Carp. Carp is patient left handed hitter, that is going to show some power, maybe not right away, but he’ll be more productive than Lopez.

  4. eponymous coward on December 19th, 2009 11:34 am

    Blalock’s WAR since 2005: about half a WAR a year. Basically, he’s a slightly improved version of Junior, if that, so pass, even on an NRI. Carp is probably about as good a player.

  5. Mariners2620 on December 19th, 2009 11:38 am

    It depends on what LaRoche wants to do. If he wants to wait it out as long as possible for this 3-4 year deal that he thinks he will be receiving, then we may not have the time to sit around and wait for him to make up his mind.

  6. eponymous coward on December 19th, 2009 11:43 am

    Lopez is downgrade at 1b over Carp. Carp is patient left handed hitter, that is going to show some power, maybe not right away, but he’ll be more productive than Lopez.

    Actually, I’d call Lopez a bit ahead or even on Carp this year. Carp’s the better 1B long term, with them both being fairly comparable players when they are playing at their proper position (1B for Carp, 2B for Lopez), but I’m just not sold that hitting .271 in the PCL with “meh” power means he’s ready- so far, Tug Hulett is a better hitter in AAA than Mike Carp. WWould you make Tug Hulett your everyday 1B?

    Given this, and given that the M’s need to maximize their wins NOW, especially given that Cliff Lee is obviously a win-now move, neither of them should be the 1B unless there’s a really clear move somewhere else that lets you carry a sub-par 1B like Lopez or Carp.

  7. sonichound on December 19th, 2009 11:43 am

    I would be interested to see what it would take to pry away either Joey Votto or Yonder Alonso from the Reds. Both L handed bats and they don’t really have a spot for both of them in the lineup.

  8. Mariners2620 on December 19th, 2009 11:48 am

    I imagine it would take quite a bit for Joey Votto.

  9. dirk on December 19th, 2009 11:48 am

    When we discuss moving Lopez to 1B, shouldn’t we also consider the defensive improvement at 2B and, likely, 1B?

    Adding Orlando Hudson or Felipe Lopez at 2B would give us another swtich hitter, with solid defense, and both guys had 50 extra base hits last year.

    Lopez gives us 40 doubles and 20 hr’s from the right side and becomes a plus defender at 1B, for a decent salary.

  10. sonichound on December 19th, 2009 11:54 am

    With the obvious intent of the M’s front office to win now. It would stand to reason that they would be willing to “mortgage” some of the future to get a bat at 1B to get us over the hump next year. Capitalize on the great fortune of getting Lee for a year teamed up with Felix and make a run while Ichiro is still young enough to play at a high level. I would rather have them pull the trigger on a big move that puts us into title contention next year then not make that move and count on those younger minor league players to pan out and help the team the next few years down the road. Seems like it would go a long way in contract talks with Felix and Lee if we have a shot a title contention team as opposed to a team that is going be in a race to even make the playoffs.

  11. Mariners2620 on December 19th, 2009 11:58 am

    I don’t think that GMZ is necessarily “going for it” this season. He had the opportunity and the money to trade and sign some great players, which he did. It’s not like the Bavasi years, where he had decided to sell the farm and offer out a bunch of multi-year contracts to some declining players. It’s not the same situation at all. A couple of players that he has signed this season have the chance to come back next year, but also can leave which will free up money in order to sign players in the excellent free agent class next season. It’s going to be fun for years to come with him at the top.

  12. argh on December 19th, 2009 12:03 pm

    I wonder to what extent you can quantify the positive effect of grinding down the opposing starting pitcher with our new, improved lineup of Zen-like patience? Empirically it seems pretty obvious but is there anyway to calculate the improvement in run production?

  13. universalguru on December 19th, 2009 12:07 pm

    Well “argh” it will certainly get starting pitchers out of the game earlier which will do nothing but wear out starters and bullpens alike. That’s a good thing for 3 and 4 game series.

  14. eponymous coward on December 19th, 2009 12:12 pm

    I don’t think that GMZ is necessarily “going for it” this season.

    “Win now” does not equate to “do anything for wins in 2010 and turn into Bill Bavasi’s clone”. That’s a straw man, and nobody is arguing that. It simply means that making moves that take you from an 85 win roster to a 90 win roster in 2010 are ones you should be willing to make, as Dave pointed out.

    I think a pretty decent case can be made that Carp does not deserve the 1B job yet, given that his performance in AA wasn’t all that great. If you can make a move that give you a decent 1B, that doesn’t block Carp in 2011 or saddle you with a stupid, Sexson-esque deal, I think it’s fine to make it.

  15. kevinzelko on December 19th, 2009 12:18 pm

    The move also means that we are no longer affected by Bavasi’s immediate decisions!

  16. Mariners2620 on December 19th, 2009 12:18 pm

    Stop turning everything I am saying around to be a negative. It seemed as if sonichound felt that since he was going for the win now approach, he should just mortgage some of the future, which in my mind seems like something Bavasi would do. That is what sonichound suggested, and I didn’t feel that that is exactly what Z had in mind.

  17. sonichound on December 19th, 2009 12:36 pm

    I do feel that acquiring Cliff Lee and Milton Bradley is the sign of the team looking to win now. Bradley less so than Lee since we basically gave up nothing, but trading away minor league players for Lee has got to do something more than get us close to making the playoffs. I am very happy with the deal, but if we end up not making the playoffs and Lee walks for a couple draft picks instead of making one more move to put us into contention I believe it makes that puts the deal in a more negative light. I would rather take a shot at winning it all than have a team with a winning record for multiple years without making that last move that pushes you towards the top.

  18. DMZ on December 19th, 2009 12:36 pm

    I wonder to what extent you can quantify the positive effect of grinding down the opposing starting pitcher with our new, improved lineup of Zen-like patience?

    I did some work on this a long while ago, and it’s not significant. It’s a good way to talk about the benefits of patience to hitters, but in practice, the most impatient team doesn’t see a reliever much faster than the least patient one, and certainly not enough to make a difference.

  19. sonichound on December 19th, 2009 12:38 pm

    DMZ, would that be attributed to the team with less patience scoring more runs and knocking the pitcher out of the game before a high pitch count? Otherwise, it would seem that the team that takes more pitches would have to get to the bullpen faster.

  20. DMZ on December 19th, 2009 12:41 pm

    It’s certainly the obvious assumption, but it’s just not that big of a difference in practice when you work out it.

  21. Leroy Stanton on December 19th, 2009 1:15 pm

    Dave, I agree Branyan becomes more risky because of his back, but he was a no-go once we became serious contenders for 2010. Branyan is fine as a bench player, but he is not a starter for a contender.

    I know you place a high value on sabermetrics and statistical analysis, as you should, but there are limitations. And Branyan is the poster child for those limitations.

    The guy is prone to extremely hot and cold streaks. Over a season the numbers should balance out, so you may be tempted to dismiss this concern. But there is a real-world problem with this. When he goes cold, there is, and has been, a propensity for him to be benched/traded/released. And he’s not falling from a high enough level where a manager has enough faith in him to just ride it out. And, at age 34 and having never been a consistent producer, the faith issue is only exacerbated.

    So, in Branyan’s case, you need to consider this additional risk to his availability. It does the M’s no good to sign him now, while there are other options, only to have to release him later when there a few good options. Bradley is already risky enough in this regard. We don’t need to double down on Branyan.

  22. joser on December 19th, 2009 1:27 pm

    The other thing about “wearing down the starter” is that, contrary to popular belief, relievers aren’t necessarily inferior pitchers. They’re just only effective for an inning or two, which is why they’re not starters. Just getting into the bullpen isn’t necessarily advantageous in itself; you need to do it several days in a row so the relievers are pitching more innings than normal or getting shorter rest, or you’re getting the dregs of the bullpen. Then you come out ahead. But just having the starter pitch one less inning each game isn’t as big a win as you might expect.

    Well, if Lopez isn’t going to be able to be moved due to 2B oversupply (though never say never, when Zduriencik is concerned), I’d have to say Beltre doesn’t fit on the team at this point.

    Yeah, I think that’s a given unless Beltre finds himself the last good 3B left standing after the 3B musical chairs ends (which would be a major failure on Boras’ part, IMO). It’s possible that if he’s going to take less than he thought he may just come back to the M’s (“Hey, remember that arbitration number…yeah”) but even then I would think his best bet would be to take a cut-rate one-year deal somewhere with a park that will inflate his numbers. But I still think he’s going to Boston, and would be there already if not for Lowell’s thumb issues.

    As for Lopez, I think the most important factor is that the team has three promising guys who are all spending time at 2B this off-winter — Ackley, Truinfel, and

    With the obvious intent of the M’s front office to win now. It would stand to reason that they would be willing to “mortgage” some of the future to get a bat at 1B to get us over the hump next year

    Except nothing they’ve done so far could be described as “mortgaging the future” so why would they start now? They get draft picks back when Lee leaves, if he does; if he doesn’t, and they sign him for several years, the future is brighter
    anyway (though I think that’s unlikely: they extend Felix, let Lee walk, and take the draft picks). They didn’t mortgage anything to get Figgins, and they got Bradley for a sunk cost. They have done nothing to squander the future of the org.

    I do feel that acquiring Cliff Lee and Milton Bradley is the sign of the team looking to win now. Bradley less so than Lee since we basically gave up nothing, but trading away minor league players for Lee has got to do something more than get us close to making the playoffs. I am very happy with the deal, but if we end up not making the playoffs and Lee walks for a couple draft picks instead of making one more move to put us into contention I believe it makes that puts the deal in a more negative light.

    I disagree. If Lee leaves and they take the draft picks, then they had a better 2010 team than we had any right to expect without giving up anything except one prospect and a couple of years development time on a couple of others (and maybe not even that). It’s a positive either way.

    As I said over on Fangraphs, this is a sort of “win now” strategy but not the one most people mean when they use that term. Zduriencik has not squandered the farm, he hasn’t ballooned the budget, and he hasn’t done anything in the short term that will harm the long term. Yes, he clearly is making moves to contend in 2010, and those moves have more risk (because there’s more potential reward) but as Dave noted he was going to have to do that anyway — you can claw your way back to .500 just by replacing your weak links with undervalued players, but each incremental win after that gets harder and harder and requires more resources and/or risk.

    But even so, Zduriencik has done nothing to squander future chances. Even with Bradley, the biggest risk, they can always just walk away and eat the money — which they probably would’ve had to do with Silva anyway. There are still the draft picks if Lee leaves. Figgins didn’t break the bank. They’re “going for it” but they have done nothing to “mortgage” the future, and I don’t expect them to start.

    I would rather take a shot at winning it all than have a team with a winning record for multiple years without making that last move that pushes you towards the top.

    Again, I disagree. Strongly. I realize this is a matter of opinion, but I would much rather have the 1990s Braves than the 1995-2005 Marlins…even though the Marlins won two WS to the Braves’ one. I’d rather eat decently every day of the week than have a feast on Sunday surrounded by six days of shit sandwiches. Sure, it would be great to go all the way — but the postseason is a crapshoot. You can have the best team in baseball and still not win it all — the 2001 Mariners should have taught us that. Better to be consistently good year after year and give yourself as many chances as possible than to gamble it all on one roll of the dice. And suppose you do “go for it” and win it all — then what? Yay, we have a parade, and… then what? Oh, great, now we have to live with crap for several more years before we see the postseason again? No thanks.

    I think Zduriencik is going to make the team as good as he can this year without interfering with his ability to make it even better in subsequent years. He’s said several times they have a multi-year plan, and I don’t think the opportunity to grab Cliff Lee for a year has significantly changed that.

  23. joser on December 19th, 2009 1:40 pm

    Ooops, didn’t finish my Lopez thought. My point was that with these guys (Tui, Trui, and Ackley) in the minors all taking reps at 2B, it’s obvious one of them is likely the long-term answer at 2B starting in 2011 (if not sooner). So how much upside is there to replacing Lopez with someone you can get on a one-year deal? Because the good players want more than a one-year deal, so unless you’re planning on moving this new guy to a different position or trading him (in addition to whatever you have to do with Lopez), you’re probably not getting that much of an upgrade over Lopez (especially considering how cheap he is).

    Though Zduriencik keeps finding ways to surprise us. How about: Dan Uggla… for first base?

  24. Wag on December 19th, 2009 7:13 pm

    Im convinced that Bradley will do well as a DH/LF for the Mariners for one main reason.
    Our clubhouse and chemistry. He has already mentioned how excited he is to be playing side by side with ken Griffey Jr.
    Once again, just because a positive clubhouse and attitude can’t be measured, doesn’t mean it isn’t a major factor in the success of a team.
    Without those factors Milton Bradley plays like he did last year. With those factors he’s a potential top 3 on base percentage player.

  25. TumwaterMike on December 19th, 2009 9:27 pm

    Lopez at 1B isn’t a lot better than Carp, if at all, plus they both have a severe case of “swing at any crap pitch” disease, plus they aren’t great hitters at Safeco.

    How about sign Beltre, move Figgins to 2B, then trade Lopez and Morrow plus prospects to Houston for Roy Oswalt. He’s a pretty gritty pitcher and would be an excellent #3.

  26. TumwaterMike on December 19th, 2009 9:31 pm

    Rf Ichiro
    2B Figgins
    CF Gutierrez
    LF Bradley
    3B Beltre
    DH Griffey or whomever
    1B Carp
    SS Wilson
    C Johnson/Moore

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.