Why Branyan makes sense (economically)
This team is horrible to watch offensively. They’re hitting .239/.308/.344. At this rate, they’ll be outhit by the 2008 61-101 team (.265/.318/.389). They’re even with the inept 1983 Mariners squad that hit .240/.301/.360. And if you go back and look at that team, they had Steve Henderson for an offensive mainstay. This year has Ichiro! and Gutierrez and they’re still terrible.
They’re not an exciting small-ball team that makes announcers drool onto their microphones: they’ve got two good runners in Ichiro! and Chone, then Gutierrez is adept, aand… yup. They’re a singles-hitting, low-walk, no-power offense where you can go do something else for 2/3rds of the lineup and not miss anything, ever.
I’m not going to argue here about whether or not the team took the right gambles. But even in bad seasons, Safeco Field’s drawn well for home games in the summer. There’s a vast number of fans who attend 3-5 games a year in person when the weather’s nice. They’re vaguely aware if the team is doing well, or terrible. When I talk to them about the team, they ask “so what’s going on with the Mariners sucking it up this year?” and want to talk about where to sit when they take visiting relatives.
The M’s want people who come to a few games a year to have a good time, and see the team win. They want the stadium experience to be lively: a lot of music cues, scoreboard activities, jarring bursts of 115 db noise piped directly into your eardrums, and there’s only so large a bow you can put on this sow before it falls on its side and can’t get up. We’re there. I went to a Felix start where the crowd seemed half-asleep the whole time as he put on a clinic. When the team gets a single and the fanfare kicks up like we just landed humans on Mars or defeated the zombie Nazis and the crowd yawns in response, you’re in trouble.
Branyan solves for that, a little. Kotchman may on balance end up being as good a player, but his offensive value is entirely in cheap singles and walks, and that’s not drawing enthusiastic applause. No one’s going to come home from a game and say “it was so great when Kotchman hit that dying quail to shallow left to advance the runner” but they’ll absolutely talk about the moonshot. And if they want the ugly single, there are still four or five more hitters each night who’ll do their darnedest to serve one up.
The M’s know more about this than anyone. They might well be prepared to avoid trading off good players unless there’s a can’t–miss offer so they play .500 ball the rest of the summer in front of the fatter crowds, and reap the word of mouth benefit, get people thinking maybe they were just off to a slow and unlucky start and might have been in it if only Lee had stayed healthy, and next year they could put it all together.
And for now, as baffling as it may seem at the baseball level, there’s a story they get to tell now, which is “hey, we realized this was a team without power, and you wanted a big bat, right? Here’s a bat you know and love…”
You may be rolling your eyes at that. But if you attended one of the low-scoring home losses where the team seemingly stranded a dozen runners, there’s a good chance you’ll reconsider going next time. And similarly, if you’ve been cursing them for not pursuing Branyan in the off-season*, maybe you feel validated now, and will head to the park.
I know all of that seems vague and foo-foo. And as the most dedicated and tortured fans, we don’t see a lot of difference between losing 85 games and 90, much less 90 and 95. But it’s there, and you can read up on this if you’re interested. The best explanation is Nate Silver’s chapter “Is Alex Rodriguez Overpaid?” in Baseball Between the Numbers, and while it’s true the difference is far greater for wins 81-95 or so, it’s also true that below that it’s fairly consistently $1m/win. There’s a lot of follow-up research that’s added to this, but that’s the crux of it: every loss lowers revenue a little, and every win brings it up. And that comes from all of the small bits of aesthetic arguments: someone who watches the team play horribly on TV is less likely to tune in for the next game, and if they spend $100 to take their spouse out to the park and watch the M’s get beat up by the Orioles, they’re less likely to spend that next time.
From a pure supported-by-research side, if the M’s get a win upgrade from Branyan over Kotchman in the rest of the season, they’ll make $1m — and there’s no reason not to, if the Indians as rumored are picking up salary. And it makes sense that for the M’s in low-attendance seasons, where such a huge chunk of the actual people-in-seats attendance happens late, that they’d value putting a marginally better team on the field so highly, even when it seems pointless in the long term.
In the long term, though, if they can keep fan interest up and it gives the business side confidence to spend on payroll next year** and beyond, then the whole economic reason to give Branyan a shot starts to make sense for the team’s baseball future as well.
* and let’s just again dispel that myth: the Mariners made Branyan a one year offer, guaranteeing him the starting job even though he had a herniated disk and his long-term prospects were uncertain, with a one year option we don’t know the details of but which likely vested at 400 plate appearances or was similarly health-based. Branyan wanted 2-3 years guaranteed for a lot more money. When they agreed they couldn’t come to terms, the M’s made their very public “No really, we’re not re-signing Branyan” comments in order to clear up the wide perception that he wasn’t really on the market. Branyan then explored the free agent market and found nothing near what he wanted and in the end settled for something substantially worse than the M’s came out with.
** I know. It’s the reality of the situation, though, and I’ve long since given up trying to convince teams that budgeting this way is often counter-productive.
Comments
43 Responses to “Why Branyan makes sense (economically)”
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Agreed. Good to hear from you.
I hate the idea that the team could have done this to make themselves slightly more “watchable”.
You know what the difference between a 61 win team and an 86 team is? A worse draft pick.
Neither one is making the playoffs. Neither one matters as of October 5th.
If you can’t win in 2010, try to win in 2011 or 2012.
Maybe I’m jaded from living in Seattle for so long, and being born the year after the city’s last major (pro) sports championship.
I hate this trade. Winning meaningless games is tiring, and pointless, and to be honest, stupid. Strasburg could be pitching for us if we hadn’t won 3 meaningless games against Oakland.
I’m sorry, but it’s just the way I feel, right now. And again, maybe I’m jaded (well, definitely), but this franchise is starting to envy the Cubs for their playoff success.
* And yes, I realize that this MIGHT have a marginal positive effect on revenue and team chemistry and whatever, but it’s also just as likely that Branyan joins the Mike Sweeney/Jack Wilson list in two weeks, and never leaves. In fact it’s really likely.
Derek! Good to see something getting you to write. A world championship would have been nicer, though.
Who are you and who gave you posting privileges?
J/k, good to read you again, Derek.
Great to hear from you Derek.
This is a great take, and an economically sound business decision to boot.
That said, how much do your thoughts here jive with the spin the M’s are putting on it: this was done because a squad that can learn to win now will continue to win in the future? Can that reason bode true as well?
I still don’t like it. Actually, I don’t really care and the move baffles me.
Good to hear from you though, Derek. I love this move in that it made you write something here.
Oh, and welcome back, Derek!
Wanna play catcher?
You know what the difference between a 61 win team and an 86 team is? A worse draft pick.
Not really a worse draft pick, but more accurately, a higher draft pick. Since we’re not going to out-stink the Orioles, and there isn’t a Strasburg in the draft pool, I don’t see a big difference between picking 2nd or 8th.
Is there that much of a correlation between MLB success and where drafted in the top ten picks over the years? I don’t see it.
I’d rather have a few more wins (or even HRs!) this year given the cost of the “prospects” we gave up.
Strategy? Everyone is buying the conventional wisdom on this. I see contrarian, out of the box thinking here. Z wants a winner. This team is not going anywhere. He will keep on getting a new team until it does. Branyan may be a baby step in that direction. But it’s not the strategy. I say Z swaps Lee for a proven, every day, high average slugger–or more. Like, in addition, a catcher who can actually catch and hit. Everybody knows what names are out there in free-agency. Branyan adds power. Get more for Lee. Land more in the off season. Then go sign Lee in free agency. If he likes it here and sees the potential of this pitching staff then maybe the M’s contend for many years and he’s a big part of it. I don’t know if this is fantasy or not. But no one seems to buy the Branyan deal for any reason. Maybe the strategy is not “win now,” or any 2010 attendance goal. Perhaps the strategy is simply “keep Lee,” and do everything needed to make that a reality.
Isn’t this not quite as important in MLB than other sports, though? I mean obviously if the M’s would’ve only lost that series in ’08 against the A’s, then they’d have Strasburg, so I’m not saying it doesn’t matter at all. But MLB’s draft system is somewhat unique in that players fall down the board because there is a perception that they can’t be signed higher up. This doesn’t happen in the same way in the NFL or NBA. So it’s at least possible that you could wind up winning 86 games, then drafting somebody that should’ve wound up on a cheap 65 win team.
Very well stated Derek. Thank you for stating it.
They needed an upgrade with the bat at 1B – and they got one (presumably). They won’t have to go hunting for a power hitting 1B during the offseason if they choose to exercise the Team Option that they now have. It will allow them to focus on the myriad of other holes that need to be filled.
Branyan is a short term “fix.” The team knows this. I am glad he is back (pun intended) to provide a band-aid. Ironic that a guy with health issues could do this, but he can do it for a short period of time … at least that is the risk that the FO has decided to take. The Branyan acquisition buys them some time to develop young players in other positions and to still attempt to win something (err, win more often) along the way.
Blengino and his (Scouting Director I believe) were on the radio post game show yesterday and they were discussing how the team can simultaneously be a “buyer” as well as a “seller.” They made a logical case. Many of you probably heard it too.
This line is certainly getting a lot of response.
The difference between a 61-win team and an 86-win team is also the difference between entertaining, good baseball and terrible baseball. It’s 25 games that people listened to, watched, and went to in person where their team played well enough to win and they probably enjoyed themselves. You still want to give people an interesting product and a good experience, even if winning this year is not your top priority. I don’t think I would just dismiss that.
I believe they said the same thing last year and then traded for Jack Wilson and traded away Washburn.
The most important difference between a 61 win team and an 86 win team is in the tens of millions in revenue. They win 61 games, make alot less money than last year, then they end up cutting budget again next year.
You know what the difference between a 61 win team and an 86 team is? A worse draft pick.
Neither one is making the playoffs. Neither one matters as of October 5th.
The problem with this view is that most teams don’t make the playoffs most years. I think it’s better to have some fun watching a few wins in years you don’t compete then root for your team to lose so you can pick a guy a few notches up the draft.
It’s interesting to see what line drew the most response.
Yeah, I’d agree a 61 win team is less interesting to watch. But to say it’s tens of millions of dollars in revenue is factually incorrect. If wins translated directly into revenue then you would expect the Rays to have money coming out of their ears. Or the A’s to have been rolling in it for a few years (given how little money they spent).
Good franchises make money. Good teams don’t.
(Those are correlated, but often not as much as we’d like.) The Marlins’ championship teams didn’t make very much money.
And yes, a draft pick isn’t worth as much in MLB as it is in the NFL.
And, unquestionably I was being a little hyperbolic (is that an adjective? Well, if it’s not, I’m using it anyways.)
However, Russel Branyan isn’t the difference between 61 and 85 wins.
He’s the difference between 70 and 75, MAYBE. Probably closer to 70 and 73, if that.
So, I am hereby ammending my statement…
“What the difference between 70 and a 75 win team?”
Not much, and that’s what I think of this trade.
Great to hear from you, Derek.
The thought I couldn’t get out of my head while reading this was “Chicks dig the long ball.” I love that commercial.
I think this is a good example of how we sometimes become so focused on the game on the field that we lose track of the fact that baseball is a business, and the ownership group is in this to make money. They don’t do that by putting a boring team on the field that loses 100 games two years in a row. This trade may be stupid or blah from a baseball perspective, but Derek makes a good case for it from a business perspective.
As a guy interested in analysis of players and projections and values, I still don’t really get it. But as a baseball fan who loves going to games, I’ll be happy to see the Muscle crank a shot off the Hit It Here Cafe. Home runs are exciting.
Glad you chimed in, Derek. I’m pretty much with you on the Branyan move.
I can understand the mindset behind not wanting to bother with 2010 and focus solely on rebuilding and test driving parts for 2011. But there are a lot of other factors outside of the team’s competitive standing in 2010 that would compel them to try and field a better team in this lost season.
I think Strasburg terribly altered a lot of folk’s perception of the draft position. Very true that a few more losses that terrible season and we would have landed him. But that kind of guy doesn’t come very often, and half the time he does it’s an international free agent that all the teams have an equal shot at, in theory at least, (see: Hernandez, Felix.) So I’m definitely with the let’s increase the revenue bit, maybe get a few more wins, and maybe when I’m bored some Sunday and wander down to the Safe, see a 500 ft homerun sail out of the yard. I don’t care what the record is watching one of those blasts is cool, especially when you’re sitting right there.
It would be one thing if ownership had earned some kind of a benefit of the doubt to this point. But year after bloody year, they try to sell us a mediocre product and then they inevitably do more damage trying to salvage their poor decisions. No one wants the bottom to fall out of the franchise, but how many last place finishes do we need to suffer through before that happens anyway?
I’m with you in spirit, DMZ… but can’t we agree that building a farm system should be a top priority? We need our own fourth outfielders and utility infielders and Shin Soo Choos to be coming up through the system to be competitive, or we’ll end up with too many Josh Wilsons and Rob Johnsons.
Wins this season has an affect on the payroll budget for next year. The amount they can pull in via season packages and their equivalents this winter is enhanced by more wins now. So while I don’t like to see even secondary prospects like those two guys traded away in a fruitless season, I see the value in doing so.
And OK, I dig the occasional long ball myself. 🙂
This is what I said in the “I Don’t Get It” thread:
Derek used a lot more words to say essentially the same thing.
True fact: I had four tickets to the Memorial Day game that turned out to be Griffey’s last appearance. It was right there on the calendar. I spent the day smoking ribs and it was only after the game was over that I realized we had missed it entirely. We don’t spend an awful lot at the ballpark (usually a couple of dinners and a soda), but that’s just straight lost revenue. And you guys know it’s not for lack of interest in the Mariners as a fan, it’s indifference to this iteration of the team. I’m sick of wondering if the bottom six guys in the order will do anything but ground out to short or strike out.
I can’t believe some of you are rooting for the team to lose. You call yourselves fans? There will NEVER come a day where I will be rooting for the Mariners to lose a game. NEVER.
I’m starting to grasp why the deal was made, but I’m still baffled by the choice of player. Was Branyan the only power bat that worked with what Jack Z was willing to part with? Or was Branyan really the only bat Jack Z could get?
Don’t think I’m bashing the deal. Branyan will be a sight for sore eyes. But only if his herniated disk keeps him in the lineup.
Juan Diaz and Carrera are essentially the Josh Wilsons and Rob Johnsons of the system; they aren’t like Shin Soo Choo.
I was going to say that this too. But no one deserves to be compared to Rob Johnson, regardless how bad they are. 🙂
Ask Cleveland (Cavs) fans how losing for a season did for them. There are fans, then there are smarter fans.
Not quite as directly related, but still it’s there.
Also, I’m not rooting for them to lose. I’m rooting for them to start evaluating younger talent now, rather than filling the roster with players that will (hopefully) never make next year’s team.
That’s not a very convincing argument. Here is the list of NBA first draft picks, nicely annotated to show which ones were Hall of Famers and which ones made the All-Star team. Cleveland also had to win a draft lottery to get LeBron James. Plus, there’s a huge difference between the impact (and the immediate impact) of a single player in baseball versus basketball. Stephen Strasburg is great, but he can’t improve the Nationals offense much, can he? To show perspective, here’s the MLB list.
In five years, Junior will become the first Hall of Famer who was the first pick in the draft. ARod and Chipper Jones will also make it, and Joe Mauer is certainly on track to do the same. Josh Hamilton would have to keep up his current performance a long time to make it. I’m fairly comfortable that no other first pick from 2006 or earlier is going to the Hall of Fame.
In any event, the M’s couldn’t lose more games than the Orioles this year if they really tried hard to do so.
Most of the time that’s probably true…
Though don’t tell the 2006 Cardinals that.
I don’t think we can discount the Branyan move as a statement to the franchise players (Felix, Gutierrez, etc.) and perhaps even Wakamatsu, that the front office does care about building a good team and giving it the tools to win.
After the Griffey debacle, it is quite feasible that there might be some hurt feelings among the rank and file, and this move might be nothing more then a band-aid.
That said, I can’t really complain. Branyan isn’t a part of this teams future, but he doesn’t block anyone–They could still pursue a Ka’aihue type and bench or DH Russell, He isn’t terribly expensive, and though temporarily, he does fill a glaring hole for this and next season.
The inimitable Carmen Fusco. He is the Director of Pro Scouting.
We haven’t had enough stuff like this around here lately. Stick around, Derek!
Root for them to lose? No.
Say, “Meh, whatever” when the game starts? Yes.
It could likely be the difference between a GM or a manager keeping their job and not.
Most MLB front office types don’t have the luxury of sacrificing a year for the greater good – especially those who are getting their first crack at the role. This move is a low risk, some upside move that could be the difference for some people who’d like to keep their jobs.
I agree with your post … and I’m going to repost a comment I made at the end of the long list of comments in Dave’s “I dont’ get it” post because most people didn’t see it …
I fully agree with the post, but I wonder if they are bringing him back for some clubhouse leadership as well. Lee has emerged as a leader and if they get the right trade for him, which will be another loss of leadership. They know what they are getting in Branyan. He is ‘a great guy’ and he has that same quiet but impactful, veteran presence. I know many of the readers here don’t put a lot of creed into clubhouse presence, but I think it might be a factor in the front office’s decision to move forward in the season.
So, I am hereby ammending my statement…
“What the difference between 70 and a 75 win team?”
Not much, and that’s what I think of this trade.
But a 70 win team wouldn’t have gotten Strasburg either, and if the Clone of Strasburg was getting drafted next year he’d be going to Baltimore even if we don’t sign Branyan. We’re 5th from the bottom right now in winning percentage. How often has there been a draft where there was 5 clear hall of famers? Even if you can make the case that the #1 pick is usually miles better than the #2, I doubt the #5 pick is much different than #10.
As long as they keep Branyan for 2011, this move makes sense to me. He’s not blocking anyone, and the M’s desperately need offense and power at 1B and DH. Hopefully, both sides have learned their lesson from last winter’s dance.
If this is true, then the highest level of management are idiots… Oh, shit.
I would consider it a very low risk, basically no real upside. Branyan is going to take at bats away from Carp and apparently Josh Wilson (really?!?) and that’s about the only effect it will have on the future of the club.
Exactly. Not much. This trade is like putting a bandaid on the forehead of Sonny in the Godfather. It has little to no point, and kinda looks stupid.
But if it gets the Bellevue pink hats in the stands, and keeps a good manager and GM with a job, then I suppose I can get behind it a little.
I’m listening to the LL podcast, and I can now see some more value of Branyan, but not for 2010.
The free agents in 2011 show that Branyan for his option wouldn’t be a bad thing compared to Adam Dunn for more.
And we still don’t have a legitimate MLB-quality 1B/DH in the minors.
Which is sad because half of our AAA roster are 1B/DH.
Branyan was a good choice of player for this trade because Mariners fans have personal recollections of having watched him hit dingers.
If the point is to excite the fanbase, Branyan has built-in value.
🙂 Welcome back, it’s good to hear your voice again. I noticed on Sunday that the game day thread only had 24 posts. People are turning away from U.S.S. Mariner in this lost season. Fewer web-hits must mean lower revenue for the owners of this site. I was starting to think they were disinterested themselves but this tells me that they are still trying to put out an interesting product. The humorless approach didn’t work out, the new writers haven’t really caught fire yet, why not bring back a fan favorite and formerly productive writer in Derek! It’ll be nice to read him hit a few out of the park again this summer even if it’s only on an occasional basis.
P.S. When is your bobblehead night?
I look at this as the cost of doing business. Sometimes you have to do something that doesn’t seem productive, in order to insure long-term viability.
I make software, and at every company I’ve worked, we’ve had to do dog-and-pony shows, for various VIPs, where we have to put a demo together. That takes effort, and reduces actual productivity for a time. For a couple of weeks, we are essentially making no progress towards the actual finished product.
But the demos are the cost of doing business: they’re important to the company. Without them, deals wouldn’t get made that need to get made. They’re necessary to bridge to the time when you can continue to be productive.
The M’s have to somehow be more watchable than they are, for the rest of this year. Pretending that being entertaining now isn’t important only leads to not having the resources you need later on down the road.
Thanks for the insight Derek. This season may be a lost cause, but I missed reading your point of view.
If they keep playing Seven Nation Army every time we get a Sac-Fly, then I’m moving to Philly.