Danny Hultzen is Our Number One Pick

Jay Yencich · June 6, 2011 at 4:32 pm · Filed Under Minor Leagues 

Leading up to the draft, I spent the past couple of days researching hitters. Everyone told me that the Mariners were going to draft a hitter. It was a foregone conclusion. I sat at my computer and wrote up three different draft posts, one for Rendon, one for Starling, and one for Lindor. The way I figured it, any of these options would be more or less satisfactory: Rendon solves the third base issues, Lindor shores up the defense all around and gets some power, and Starling, though risky, had a lot of power potential and would likely play a good centerfield. Any of these options on the table, and we’d be in pretty good shape. Hell, Dave and I both had “M’s Draft Anthony Rendon” posts in the draft queue here. It was practically a foregone conclusion once the Pirates did their thing.

Now this happens. If you remember my post from last week, you’ll remember that Hultzen was the guy I thought was least likely to go to the M’s. He was good and all, but not sexy in the ways that a lot of number two picks should be. He’s low-90s with the fastball (some say he’s sitting mid-90s at times) and commands a strong three-pitch mix. The stuff has had people project him more as a #2 starter than anything else.

I think where Hultzen may have separated himself is that, in addition to being relatively safe, he gets rave reviews for the work ethic and mindset that put him around the top of his class in this draft. One has to think that if the M’s are buying into him as a legitimate number two pick, they’re also buying into him as a #2 pitcher and maybe then some. It’s easy to draft a guy like Rendon or Starling when the need is there and it’s a position of weakness in both the major and minor leagues. It’s really tough to justify picking a pitcher with your number one if you already have a killer rotation and a few other interesting hurlers on the way in Paxton, Walker, Erasmo Ramirez, and Robles. The Mariners scouting department had to have been supremely confident in Hultzen’s abilities in order to pick him where they did.

Right now, we’re all stunned to the point where we don’t really know how to rationalize it. If I were writing purely from a gut reaction here, the results would be nearly unintelligible. I was practically livid when the pick was first announced, simply because it was so hard for me to figure out where Hultzen fits into the Mariners scheme. But the M’s probably have a better sense of that than I do, and there’s no backsies on this kind of thing. I hope that the fear I had that, regardless of who we picked, the fans would be grousing three years from now about us not picking X obvious player, won’t end up being extra justified in this case.

Comments

142 Responses to “Danny Hultzen is Our Number One Pick”

  1. NBarnes on June 6th, 2011 11:46 pm

    I’m pretty sure that job security for Zduriencik is not what’s happening here. Even though Hultzen is ‘close’, he’s not close enough to save J-Zed’s job if the Ms struggle (though he probably earned some more leash with the strong start to 2011).

    I suspect that two things are happening here, A) the FO likes Hultzen. As many have pointed out, lots of people in the larger baseball community saw Hulzten as a top-tier draft, so he’s hardly an overdraft. If you combine that with the idea that somebody in the Ms FO saw something in particular, it’s not hard to explain the pick, and B) Hulzten has a good chance of being ready to contribute just as the next actually good Mariners team comes together. The various timers on the team (Ichiro’s (unknown, possibly mythical) aging decline, Felix’s shelf life and contract, Pineda and Ackley reaching their peak, various contracts ending or close to ending (I’m looking at you, Chone Figgins)) are somewhat in synch. Hultzen looks like he might be ready at about that time as well. That’s all guesswork, of course, but I find it plausible.

  2. Joof on June 6th, 2011 11:47 pm

    I hope everyone likes 3-2 ball games because it appears that this regime thinks offense isn’t worth much.

    You’re saying this when the GM of the team took Prince Fielder about 20 picks before he was projected when he worked for the Brewers, and has had noted success with drafting hitters through his career.

  3. Chipanese on June 7th, 2011 12:05 am

    I hated this pick at first, but now I’m starting to like it. It’s a VERY gutsy move by Z and McNamara. They’re sticking their necks out on this one by going against what everyone thought was a consensus number 2 pick. He’s pretty much saying “I know what I’m doing, and I’m betting my job on it.”

  4. gwangung on June 7th, 2011 12:13 am

    I hope everyone likes 3-2 ball games because it appears that this regime thinks offense isn’t worth much.

    Translation: I want to draft for need.

    Two points:

    A) I LOOOOOOVE 3-2 games….when we win.

    B) It ain’t about offense…it ain’t about defense…it’s about run differential….however you get it.

  5. gwangung on June 7th, 2011 12:15 am

    This stinks of a “win now and save my job” pick.

    Picking a guy that was projected to be #3, #4, #5 at #2?

    You must have a very sensitive nose.

  6. kenshabby on June 7th, 2011 12:27 am

    They could be expecting Hultzen to increase his value by DHing once or twice a week.

  7. Snake Hippo on June 7th, 2011 12:36 am

    I want to defer to the organization on draft picks, but I can’t help worrying that they’re stockpiling pitching in order to prepare to trade Felix or let him walk when his contract is up. Having no Felix would make me sad on the inside.

  8. gag harbor on June 7th, 2011 12:49 am

    Dang! To think Jack and Mac could have just stayed home and let ESPN pick for them would have been so much easier. Who needs a team of scouts when people are so sure Hultzen was the wrong choice?

  9. SonOfZavaras on June 7th, 2011 2:09 am

    I want to defer to the organization on draft picks, but I can’t help worrying that they’re stockpiling pitching in order to prepare to trade Felix or let him walk when his contract is up. Having no Felix would make me sad on the inside.

    I’m dead-ass certain that was a factor in their thinking. The potentiality of life without the King.

    But I think Felix re-ups anyway when he sees a winner taking place. And I’d bet cash money that we’re going to win before his current deal is up.

  10. Mekias on June 7th, 2011 6:15 am

    Picking a guy that was projected to be #3, #4, #5 at #2?

    You must have a very sensitive nose.

    Picking a pitcher who’s almost most major league ready and has a low floor but not a particularly high ceiling is a reach at #2. This move was all about being afraid to “miss” on a potential big time player. In addition, the starting pitching in AAA isn’t exciting anyone so Hultzen is a hedge against injury or trade of one of our major league pitchers.

    While this pick may look good for a year or so, will we say the same thing in 2-3 years when those hitters we could have had start making big noise?

    Don’t get me wrong, Hultzen is a good pitcher who will help make Seattle competitive but safe picks like this won’t help us win a championship.

  11. charliebrown on June 7th, 2011 6:21 am

    Translation: I want to draft for need.

    No, that’s not the translation. The translation is, the Mariners have needed offense for years now. They don’t do anything to fill it vial free agency, and they don’t to anything to fill it in the draft.

    Trading for Smoak is the only move the Mariners have made in the past two years that was designed to upgrade the offense.

    Seriously, they had the worst offense since the advent of the DH last year and the plan for improving it was “these guys can’t suck this bad again can they” and “Jack Cust will draw a lot of walks”.

    It doesn’t matter if it’s the draft or free agency, this front office doesn’t value offense.

  12. bookbook on June 7th, 2011 6:32 am

    I didn’t like the pick, but that’s my problem. No one else’s.

    It very clearly was not a “signability” pick–which is the one thing that would make me turn away in disgust as a fan. It very clearly was not a reach at #2.

    I was, like many others here, a Rendon, Franklin, Ackley, Smoak dreamer.

    Oh well.

  13. rsrobinson on June 7th, 2011 7:12 am

    If Jack Z and the front office haven’t upgraded the offense by the time that Rendon would’ve been ready (much less Starling or Lindor) then they would probably be gone. To claim that they have no plans to upgrade the offense is silly.

    Jack Z isn’t going to stand pat while hoping some hitting prospects eventually pan out. He has always stated that his goal is to inject much more talent into the organization and he’s done a good job of that so far. With Smoak, Guti, and Ackley he has acquired three players who could become the cornerstone of the team for years to come and there’s no reason to think that he won’t be acquiring more promising young position players in the near future.

    The organization’s starting pitching depth has just gotten deeper and much more talented with the addition of Hultzen and they are a long way from being done drafting.

  14. gwangung on June 7th, 2011 7:17 am

    Picking a pitcher who’s almost most major league ready and has a low floor but not a particularly high ceiling is a reach at #2. T

    Yet he was projected to picked at #3, maybe 4, #5.

    That does not make sense if you hold onto both statements. One of your statements needs to be modified.

  15. gwangung on June 7th, 2011 7:18 am

    No, that’s not the translation. The translation is, the Mariners have needed offense for years now.

    Yes, that IS the translation.

    And you’re STILL saying “Draft for need”. Why? Because you’re still focussing on one side of the equation.

  16. charliebrown on June 7th, 2011 7:25 am

    Yes, that IS the translation

    Now you’re telling me what I mean when I post things? Can you tell me what lottery numbers I should pick too?

    And I’m not the one focusing on one side of the equation. This front office is.

    I don’t care if they don’t draft a bat. I don’t care if they don’t sign any hitters in free agency. I DO care when they do both and ignore one side of the equation.

  17. Mekias on June 7th, 2011 7:41 am

    Yet he was projected to picked at #3, maybe 4, #5.

    That does not make sense if you hold onto both statements. One of your statements needs to be modified.

    Hultzen was projected as a top 10 pick because he has a low amount of risk associated with him, not because of his high ceiling.

    Honestly I think Hultzen could start for the Mariners right now and end up with around a 4.25 ERA. I like the kid a lot and know him quite well (live near Charlottesville and have seen him pitch live 3 times this year). But we had a chance to grab a potentially great player with the #2 pick and decided it was too risky.

  18. jordan on June 7th, 2011 8:01 am

    Charliebrown: Your saying we need hitters and your saying we should have drafted a hitter because we don’t have any. The translation of that is we should draft for need.

  19. Westside guy on June 7th, 2011 8:19 am

    I’m sure there are Nats fans that are saying pretty much the analog to what many are saying here – “we have an all-star third baseman already signed through 2013 so… we picked a third baseman?” But smart analyst after smart analyst, GM after GM says you simply don’t draft for need.

    Bottom line is – we all like to play GM, but we’re not. We haven’t seen everything the M’s have seen, nor been a party to their internal discussions. We haven’t seen Rendon’s records. We don’t even know if they were in play with regard to the Mariners. There was talk about the Pirates taking Hultzen at #1. People can grouse about the pick all they want, or they can draw comps to the Fielder draft if they prefer. Bottom line is… you can’t evaluate a draft on draft day. You can’t even come close.

  20. Mekias on June 7th, 2011 8:50 am

    But smart analyst after smart analyst, GM after GM says you simply don’t draft for need.

    I don’t get why drafting a hitter is seen as drafting for need. If so, hitting is a need for every team in the major leagues. It can easily be argued, however, that picking Hultzen “is” drafting for need. We have a need for quality depth in starting pitching because that would allow us to trade one of our pitchers or survive an injury to our rotation.

    Hultzen makes the Mariners a better team right now when the other players available at #2 won’t be ready for a few years. But speed to the major leagues doesn’t exactly help the team in the long run. We get a young player for 6 years after they reach the major leagues. It shouldn’t matter whether that’s 2012-2017 or 2014-2019. The goal is to get the best possible player for those 6 years.

  21. groundzero55 on June 7th, 2011 9:02 am

    I don’t get why drafting a hitter is seen as drafting for need. If so, hitting is a need for every team in the major leagues.

    Not really. Drafting for need is more specific, in this case, “we need a third baseman, we should have drafted Rendon.” Or, “we need a catcher, let’s draft Clement.”

    The draft exists to beef up the system. Depth in the minors is not “need.” If a draftee is good enough they can be fast-tracked to the majors, that’s just icing on the cake.

  22. asuray on June 7th, 2011 9:16 am

    Let’s assume that the front office didn’t like Rendon, whether it be due to injuries, how his power, or potential lack thereof, might play in Safeco, or both. If that’s the case, who would you have preferred the Mariners to select? Lindor or Starling? There might only be one or two players on our current roster who will still be around by the time either of those two would be major league ready. Hell, by that time we might be scoring 800 runs a season and running a staff FIP of 4.75+. Even if Figgins, Wilson, and all of the other players people like to hate on played out their contracts, they would be long gone by the time one of the good H.S. bats made worked their way up the system. Hultzen was one of the best, if not the best, pitchers in this draft and has little risk involved to boot, which couldn’t really be said of any other pitcher in the draft. Other than Felix, Pineda, and now Hultzen, we really only have 2-3 starting pitching prospects with the potential to be better than a back end starter, of which we might expect one to actually pan out. This pick gives us the chance to have 3-4 solid, homegrown starters, most of which will be under team control for a nice stretch of time. As for being able to find pitchers like Hultzen on the FA market, I’d challenge whoever said that to name one left-handed starter with a low-to-mid 90s fastball, plus-plus change, solid control, good makeup, and no injury history who hit the FA market in recent memory and signed for less than $15 million per year.

  23. JMHawkins on June 7th, 2011 9:17 am

    I’m dissapointed at the quality of comments. What’s happened to USSM? Let’s pick it up a little, folks. This isn’t your run-of-the-mill lunkhead sports blog, we have a tradition to live up to, and in this thread we’re not doing it.

    Regarding charliebrown’s point, I don’t agree with him, but he is quite clearly not claiming the M’s should draft for need. He is quite clearly stating a hypothesis that under Zduriencik, the M’s have preferred to use their resources (draft picks, FA dollars, etc.) on pitching and defense instead of hitting.

    Now, like I said, I don’t agree with him, and can debate him by mentioning Smoak, Ackley and Figgins (though the offense part of the last one hasn’t panned out), but I’m willing to show him the respect of debating him on the point he’s arguing rather than trying to spin his arguent into a strawman easily dismissed with some creaky old shibboleth like “You don’t draft for need.”

  24. MrZDevotee on June 7th, 2011 9:27 am

    Bottom line- you don’t draft for need because a guy with a 90% likelihood of making it to the Major Leagues is ALWAYS more valuable than the “need” guy who may have a 50% chance of making it to the bigs.

    How? Well after 10 years (hypothetically, play along) one team has 9 guys that will be playing major league baseball (for less than you could sign an equitable free agent, presumably)– while the other team has at most 5 (but more risk for fewer than that too).

    Simple math says by drafting for “need”, the 2nd team actually ends up having MORE NEEDS at the end of those 10 years, because fewer of their prospects are reaching the majors.

    The assumption I’m making here is that there were more issues to Rendon than any of us knew about, and if that was so, then you were looking at 2 high schoolers as the next best hitting prospects.

    You’re betting that kind of money on two kids who’ve never faced a truly competitive level of baseball, against Hultzen, one of the 3 guys up for the College Player of the Year award– who has better numbers than the #1 draft pick Gerrit Cole (btw- NOT up for the Golden Spikes award), while playing in arguably the most difficult conference (the ACC). (And until last week was in the debate for the Pirates as to who they would pick #1 overall.)

    Then there’s work ethic. Which is almost impossible to gauge with high schoolers, who haven’t been part of a full-time program yet. Are these two guys who are gonna be able to jump IMMEDIATELY into a 24-hour a day career and not just survive, but grow, develop, and prosper? Don’t know. Hopefully.

    With Hultzen, he’s unanimously praised for his unnerving work ethic– that goes so far as he informed every team considering him that he wouldn’t sign before the first semester of college next year ends, because he’s finishing his degree (by going to Summer School and then 1st Semester next year) before turning pro.

    Saying he doesn’t have a high ceiling is INCREDIBLY presumptious, in terms of believing we know what it takes to reach a high ceiling.

    Saying two kids in high school have a higher ceiling than a guy who’s proven he will work his butt off, to excel at a high level, and continues to improve (his relevant numbers got better each year in college) heading into the final rounds of the College World Series as we discuss him– well, that doesn’t make a ton of sense to me.

    Hultzen from everything I’ve researched in the last 12 hours has the makeup to be the type of guy who is first on the field, and last to leave, day in and day out, for the next 10 years of his career. That’s not safe, that’s smart. THAT is literally a high ceiling, if you consider the benefits of that sort of dedication, including how long a guy like that can play in this league, while also including how quickly he might get here (within a year of signing is a LOT of people’s prediction).

    He’s an ALREADY polished pitcher, who also happened to increase the speed of his fastball by almost 3 miles per hour this season (was sitting at 90 last season, and has been known to hit 95 this year)- so he’s coachable, able to make improvements to his game, as a finished product.

    The more I read up on this, I’m finding it almost IMPOSSIBLE to call this a bad pick. Say hello to your 2013-2015 top of the rotation: King Felix, The Terminator (Pineda), and The Incredible Hultz…

    Oh, and listen to teams leave town, after being swept, muttering “F*ck you guys, and your draft genius GM!”

    ***By all accounts this kid has the ability to BE the next Cliff Lee… Whom if you go back and look at the stats was NOT a dominant MLB pitcher until he learned to really pitch with the stuff he has (three 10 K games in his first 8 seasons, twelve in his last two seasons– oh and hey, guess who his manager and pitching coach were when he was developing into the dominant pitcher he is today??? Yep, same two guys who helped CC Sabathia develop into a nice option too.)***

  25. Chris_From_Bothell on June 7th, 2011 9:28 am

    It doesn’t matter if it’s the draft or free agency, this front office doesn’t value offense.

    Too early to say that.

    Up to this point, this f.o. has been hamstrung by bad past contracts and insufficient payroll. They couldn’t and didn’t spend much at all on anyone. (Figgins being the obvious exception, and likely Z’s biggest mistake to date… but hindsight is 20/20 there, I liked the Figgins signing originally.)

    This coming offseason is when Z will have the most payroll flexibility he’s had so far, assuming higher-ups don’t lower the payroll further due to poor attendance / the economy / whatever.

    His draft choices won’t say how much he values offense. In any given draft, only a couple players could have an impact in any way, and even then only a few years down the line. (I’m assuming the examples of draft choices becoming core players and all-stars is the occasional exception out of hundreds of players, and not the norm…) There’s no way – even with the sin of drafting for need – that Z could immediately fix the ML club through the draft.

    Up til now, Z’s been doing a good job of damage control and shoring up the farm. The system’s cycled enough of former picks and former AAAA players out that this is really Z’s club now.

    Z’s acquisitions this coming winter will definitely say a) whether this f.o. values offense and b) whether they are good at getting the best available high quality players by any measure, offense /defense / pitching /whatever. That’s the time that Z will have the most latitude, and the most pressing need, to make a direct impact on the major league club that will pay dividends the very next season.

    Chirp about acquiring offense in a year. Or, at the earliest, if the Ms are still less than 3 games out a month from now, and have the opportunity to trade for offense in a way that doesn’t sell the farm.

  26. JMHawkins on June 7th, 2011 9:32 am

    And regarding the Hultzen pick, I’m not a fan of it because his ceiling seems too low (I think anyone taken in the top 5 ought to project out as HOF material if they hit their ceiling, and it seems like Hultzen tops out lower than that), and because in general I’m wary of pitchers. Put not your faith in young arms, for lo! They are fragile… As far as what the M’s need, you’re always one worried trip to the mound by Rick Griffen away from needing another pitcher, so in that regad, another arm is fine. But the attrition rate makes drafting pitchers high risk (hope the rehab’s going well, Mr. Strasburg).

    But, well, Zduriencik has had a few more successfull MLB drafts than I have, and even though I got an email from a headhunter this morning, it was for an Engineering exec at a tech company, not for GM of a baseball club.

  27. NBarnes on June 7th, 2011 9:35 am

    I’d take charliebrown more seriously if he took the time to present an argument that offense was available to the Ms at a reasonable price, but the Ms failed to take advantage of the opportunity ‘because they don’t value offense’. But nowhere has he made this argument. He just claims without evidence (claims, in fact, while ignoring evidence like Smoak, Ackley, Bradley, Cust, and Olivo, who were all bat-first aquisitions) that the Ms’ FO doesn’t care about offense.

    I’d say that the evidence is pretty clear that the FO thinks that offense is usually overpriced, but that’s a very different statement than the one charliebrown seems to be making.

    I’d also say that charliebrown’s focus on offense undermines him, because we’re all generally on board with the idea that saving a run is more or less of equal value as scoring a run. Given that, if run saving is cheaper than run scoring, I’m not sure where charliebrown’s offensive monomania comes from.

  28. Chris_From_Bothell on June 7th, 2011 9:39 am

    I’m willing to show him the respect of debating him on the point he’s arguing rather than trying to spin his arguent into a strawman easily dismissed with some creaky old shibboleth like “You don’t draft for need.”

    As a frequent reader and occasional poster here, thanks for saying this.

    I’ve been burned by making poor arguments here, and let’s be honest, sometimes having a poor attitude too. I deserve what I get when I do that. 🙂

    But it’s a real turnoff to see the occasional lack of respect to some commenters here – to those who may not argue the same way, or do it as well, or who don’t agree with the majority of posters, or just plain aren’t as read-up on the same baseball theory that many others here learned years ago.

    I’m glad to see calls for civility and reasonable debate in here. And particularly the effort to make the difference between a troll or a boor (which charliebrown definitely isn’t) and someone who is just expressing a different point of view.

  29. Chris_From_Bothell on June 7th, 2011 9:41 am

    we’re all generally on board with the idea that saving a run is more or less of equal value as scoring a run.

    Respectfully: no, we’re not, after a certain point.

  30. MrZDevotee on June 7th, 2011 9:45 am

    It doesn’t matter if it’s the draft or free agency, this front office doesn’t value offense.

    This always baffles me– when we drafted Dustin Ackley, a guy who obviously doesn’t pitch, and has been moved around positionally because he couldn’t throw as well after injuries (sound like anyone familiar– Mr. Rendon?)

    Last week Z was basically DEMANDING (gently) that Rendon release his medical records– so we obviously were CLOSE to drafting two guys valued for their bats as our first picks that last 3 years.

    As I said above already, if Rendon wasn’t going to be the pick, then you were gonna be betting on one of two high school kids to be your miracle offense? They might not even make it in ‘A’ ball… There are two many variables there.

    As evidenced by this:

    Miller is a switch-hitter who won the ACC Player of the Year award and batted .395 with 50 RBI this season

  31. charliebrown on June 7th, 2011 9:46 am

    I’d say that the evidence is pretty clear that the FO thinks that offense is usually overpriced, but that’s a very different statement than the one charliebrown seems to be making.

    I’d also say that charliebrown’s focus on offense undermines him, because we’re all generally on board with the idea that saving a run is more or less of equal value as scoring a run. Given that, if run saving is cheaper than run scoring, I’m not sure where charliebrown’s offensive monomania comes from.

    Now this is a good point. However, if run scoring and run prevention are of equal value, shouldn’t the front office be placing somewhat equal resources in to each?

    Also, just because something is overpriced doesn’t mean that it isn’t necessary.

    Take gasoline for example. If I drive a small hybrid, and keep the maintenance up on it, I can certainly reduce how much gasoline I have to buy. And, a dollar spent maintenance probably does more good than a dollar spent on gasoline.

    However, I will still have to buy gasoline at some point. Overpriced doesn’t mean unnecessary, and minimizing how much I need to buy doesn’t mean unnecessary either.

    It just seems to me as if every move this front office makes is about run prevention. I have no problem with run prevention, and dollar for dollar is gets you more wins than offense. But you still need some of that overproced offense eventually.

  32. MrZDevotee on June 7th, 2011 9:46 am

    Whoops, didn’t post my whole cut&paste:

    Mariners take shortstop Brad Miller in second round

    After nabbing pitcher Danny Hultzen with the No. 2 overall pick on Monday, the Seattle Mariners selected shortstop Bradley Miller of Clemson with pick No. 62 in the second round on Tuesday.

    Miller is a switch-hitter who won the ACC Player of the Year award and batted .395 with 50 RBI this season, both team-highs. Click here for Miller’s bio and career statistics. Scouting reports indicate Miller has solid speed and a decent glove.

  33. CMC_Stags on June 7th, 2011 9:54 am

    built2crash wrote:

    that’s some thick sarcasm CMC_STags, you can honestly say you happy with this pick over Rendon, or Buba Starling?

    Well, since 3 other teams passed on Rendon and 2 other teams passed on Starling, I don’t think the M’s were unjustified in taking Hultzen.

    Is it possible that Rendon has no lingering problems with his shoulder or that Starling signs for slot and that both become stars? Of course it’s possible. Is it possible that Hultzen becomes a top of the rotation LHP in 2-3 years to help Felix, Paxton, and Pineda carry the rotation? Of course it is.

    No one here has the information on the prospects or time invested the front office does. No one here has the reputation for success with first round draft picks that the current front office does. To overreact to picking a pitcher (who was rated as the 4th or 7th best prospect in the draft) is just idiotic. It’s like the people who complained about Smoak over Montero (where are they now again?).

    So to turn this around, built2crash, can you honestly say you know more about Starling, Rendon, and Hultzen than the front office?

  34. asuray on June 7th, 2011 9:55 am

    It just seems to me as if every move this front office makes is about run prevention. I have no problem with run prevention, and dollar for dollar is gets you more wins than offense. But you still need some of that overproced offense eventually.

    This argument only works for me if you assume that the run prevention provides no offensive value. In reality, a team comprised solely of star pitchers and defense-first position players would still score some runs. Your hybrid car example isn’t analogous to this case as a dollar spent on maintenance doesn’t provide any fuel, and vice versa, whereas a dollar spent on defense in baseball still provides some offense. Of course if you want a player that provides premium defense and offense, then you really need to open up the wallet.

  35. MrZDevotee on June 7th, 2011 9:58 am

    Okay, I care about run prevention more than run scoring– ’cause I like old school baseball, 3-2 games, etc.

    But in Charlie’s defense:

    Yes. Run prevention is every bit as important as Run scoring…

    TO A POINT.

    But run scoring is EVERY BIT AS IMPORTANT as run prevention when it comes to run differential.

    Both extremes are counterproductive.

    All the run prevention in the world will NOT help put up runs on the board for our offense. Ever. If we don’t score runs, we can’t win.

    Just like really good slugging will not compensate for a lacking of defense & pitching. If we don’t prevent runs, we’ll lose too. (see: ’90s Indians, ’00s Rangers)

    To me it’s another “straw argument” as it sometimes appears on USS Mariner… Some people say “run differential” in a way that really seems to say “we can win with the focus on pitching and defense”. Which, yes, is true… But only to a certain point.

    Think of it as politics (which we’re not supposed to talk about here, right? *laugh*)…

    Some folks have far-right beliefs, some folks have far-left beliefs– but if you want to WIN (an election) you better be closer to the middle, with folks from both sides in your corner.

    I don’t think anyone would think it unreasonable if the Mariners shifted some of their focus slightly towards hitting efficiency, and scoring.

  36. NBarnes on June 7th, 2011 10:00 am

    It just seems to me as if every move this front office makes is about run prevention. I have no problem with run prevention, and dollar for dollar is gets you more wins than offense. But you still need some of that overproced offense eventually.

    I did give a list of offensive-minded roster moves the Ms have made over the last two years or so. It’s not like nothing has been done. That’s why I think the burden of argument is more on you than you’ve taken up to show that the Ms have overlooked opportunities to improve their offensive at a reasonable cost.

  37. Westside guy on June 7th, 2011 10:06 am

    Hultzen makes the Mariners a better team right now when the other players available at #2 won’t be ready for a few years. But speed to the major leagues doesn’t exactly help the team in the long run. We get a young player for 6 years after they reach the major leagues. It shouldn’t matter whether that’s 2012-2017 or 2014-2019. The goal is to get the best possible player for those 6 years.

    I think in an ideal world you’re right; but I expect there are real-world pressures – whether it’s the GM wanting to keep his job, or the ownership worrying about turning around declining attendance, or whatever – that make having a guy contributing in 2012-2017 (using your example) preferable to having a guy in 2014-2019.

  38. MrZDevotee on June 7th, 2011 10:10 am

    Another more realistic way to look at it than simply saying:

    (robot voice)
    “Run differential”

    WHERE does this M’s team seem to be most deficient? Offensively, or Pitching/Defensively?

    And I think the answer to that question answers where you could make the most impact in trying to improve this team.

    >>>>>

    Plus another thing that I think weights the run scoring/run defending argument is that Defenders and Pitchers (successful ones) tend to succeed at a much higher rate than batters do. And a single pitcher/fielder can have “run saving” effects on a single play, but other than a home run, it takes multiple plays, by multiple guys, all being successful at less than a 30% rate (on this team), to score runs.

    The difference between a .320 hitter and a .240 hitter is a greater impact on the succession of events necessary to score a run (especially on an offense devoid of power, like our’s), then say the difference between having Michael Saunders or Carlos Peguero in left field (they may not even make a play– whereas the batter definitely takes at bats, up to 6 times a game, roughly).

    Even to the point that a mistake by an outfielder doesn’t necessarily equate a run scored by the opponent. Whereas a mistake by a batter will almost certainly lead to out(s), which get in the way of that succession of events it takes to score a single run.

    This seems right and real to me, anyways– although as usual, I could easily be wrong.

  39. Paul B on June 7th, 2011 10:15 am

    I felt better about the pick after I did some research. Since I had never heard of him before, and based on the reactions in the blogosphere, I assumed the M’s have used their first round pick on some guy they could have gotten in the second round.

    But after looking around, I saw that Hultzen was commonly considered to be a first rounder, and likely to go high, like in the first 6 picks.

    So it isn’t like they punted the pick or anything.

  40. MrZDevotee on June 7th, 2011 10:48 am

    Paul B-
    Yeah Hultzen was widely considered to be going 3rd to the Diamondbacks, who already drafted him already, three years ago.

    I think the shock in the MLB Analyst’s world all centered on the belief that we would take a hitter.

    And then fans took all the “surprising pick” headlines and pushed the PANIC! button, all together. *laugh* (Me included, until I read up on him.)

  41. xsacred24x on June 8th, 2011 10:52 am

    People are upset with this pick can you name any Left Handed starting pitchers that can throw 94-96? The only one i can think of that has hit 94 is C.C Sabathia. There really rare and our 2 aces at the top are Right Handed we need a Left Handed ace. Its not like Z reached here either the Pirates were in on Hultzen at #1 and he was rated as a top 5 pick.

  42. greentunic on June 8th, 2011 3:42 pm

    I like this pick, but to the general point of the offense vs defense, at a certain point overpriced offense becomes economical to pursue…

    It’s sort of like economies of scale. Our pitching is so effective that in order to improve it further, we would need to get a very high quality pitcher (as our rotation is made entirely of at-least-good-quality major league pitchers, and our bulpen has been very effective this year).

    In order to improve our offense, we just need some league average players, or even REPLACEMENT production at positions like 3B, LF, and DH(mostly 3B). While offense may be more costly in general, it shouldn’t be for us at this point.

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.