Plunking punks, perpetual potential, prompt performance pivotal
I recommend Greg Bishop’s entry in the Times blog, which offers Washburn discussing hitting batters.
Also in the Times: Bishop on Meche and his potential.
“He’s full of talent,” Washburn says, “and everybody knows what kind of pitcher he can become. Everybody knows he has a golden arm and electric stuff.”
Can != will. I’ll stop there. The Times carries the same essential story in their Notebook and adds the unwelcome news that they took an MRI of Cesar Jimenez’s elbow yesterday, after he came out of Wednesday’s game with pain.
Ted Miller starts his column on the importance of a fast start:
PEORIA, Ariz. — If you stopped paying attention to the Mariners before the All-Star break last year, you probably did so after reaching two conclusions: 1) The Mariners are infuriating to watch because they can’t win close games; and, 2) Adrian Beltre and Richie Sexson are $23 million worth of a whole lot of nothing.
Wow. Then he quotes a lot of stats that are… selectively picked? For instance, your opinion of Beltre might depend a little on where you stopped watching. Beltre blistered the ball in June. But generally, sure.
But here’s what happens if the Mariners are, say, 20-30 after their first 50 games: 1) The core of the team, topped by Ichiro Suzuki, becomes trade bait; 2) An over-under gets set on how much longer manager Mike Hargrove and GM Bill Bavasi retain their jobs; 3) Speculation concerning Nos. 1 and 2 becomes a massive distraction within a clubhouse already lacking grounding leadership.
The core of the team becomes trade bait? Felix?
Also, Bavasi won’t get fired before year’s end. Won’t happen. GMs almost never leave or lose their jobs mid-season. Hargrove’s over/under’s already been set. So… anyway, Miller also manages to use OPS, talk about sabermetric projections for Beltre and Sexson, and then assert “When high-profile players struggle, the emotional strain affects the entire team.”
I, uh… I don’t know what to make of these columns.
Update: Jimenez decided for immediate surgery. Out a long time.
In the event of a water landing, your seat cushion will be of no use
Injury scenarios and cost to the team. Advanced warning: some of this is scary to contemplate.
Starters: pitcher is replaced by Baek/Woods in the rotation. Cost ranges from about a run a start (Felix) to no impact (Batista). Worst case is Felix goes down for the season before Opening Day, and you can add at least 30 runs allowed to your guess at the team’s totals. And likely a lot more, since that saps the bullpen, too.
Relievers: replaced by Tacoma call-up. Putz down means the ninth gets much rockier, and whole bullpen takes a step back to earth. It’s not going to be have an effect every day, but as a unit, they’re going to give up more runs. But even in the worst case, with Putz out all year, replacing his seventy innings only hurts the team fifteen, maybe twenty runs.
Catcher: Johjima’s replaced everyday by Rivera/Rob Johnson/?. Offensively, that’s a disaster. A full year without Johjima’s 20 runs shaved easily. If Clement’s bat finds him in Tacoma, he’d be a better option, but at this point in his development it’s hard to argue for promoting him again, and almost certainly still a big step back.
First base: If Sexson goes down right now, the best option’s Broussard, and in total production, it depends on your opinion of Broussard – given his career numbers, last year’s time with the M’s looks like a fluke, but you saw him, right? He looked baaaaaaaaaad. His defense at first might even be worse than Sexson’s. Potentially this is a wash, or ten runs back for a season. If Broussard’s not around, it’s likely we see Morse or a reasonable facsimilie, or even an emergency Ibanez move, with an outfield replacement. LaHair’s a better first base option than Morse, I’d say.
Second base: nowww we’re in trouble. Lopez to Bloomquist for a season’s twenty runs easily. A Garciaparra/Tui/Navarro replacement’s unlikely to be an improvement.
Shortstop: same deal
Third base: same deal. But worse.
Outfield: right now, any significant outfield injury presents the team with a choice between calling up Jones and playing Reed. In left, either of those guys would be massive defensive upgrades on Ibanez at the cost of hitting. The no-hit Reed for Ibanez is easily 20 runs a season, for Ichiro it’s ridiculous, losing the offense and glove cost maybe 40, even 50 runs, and Guillen we don’t know, but it’s likely to be 20. A Reed that hits like it once looked like he could hit puts 10-20 runs back.
Jones, if he’s ready and driving the snot out of the ball, is still young and developing, and could be better offensively and defensively than our memory of Reed-to-be. But if looks like he needs more time in Tacoma, Reed should get the call, since he’d be better to contribute immediately and Jones’ development helps the team down the road, when they’re potentially competitive.
In the corners, we could also get Morse. I don’t think I have to say too much more about that.
DH: Like first, it’s Broussard now. A season of Broussard (and likely platoon partner) over Vidro… well, that depends on your opinion of Vidro and Broussard. If you think Vidro’s going to be awesome and Broussard’s a total scrub, swapping them for a year’s a 30-run loss. More likely, it’d be a wash.
A moment of reflection: the team’s extremely vulnerable to injuries. Losing Ichiro or Felix for a couple of months almost means you should turn out the lights and walk away, and the infield situation’s almost as bad. The team, to be competitive, doesn’t need everyone to stay healthy all year, but it does desperately need those two players all season, at least, and the infield as a unit to not miss much time, and even then, whether you’re a believer in lineup presence and bullpen anchoring or not, losing Putz or one of the team’s core hitters would likely cause a lot of disarray as Hargrove shuffled lineups, positions, and bullpen roles trying to find something he’s comfortable with, and that’s no fun to watch.
Bonds in a game, Lopez in the field, Jones in center
In a Baker notebook yesterday which contains a tidbit about Jones spending time in the off-season working with first-base coach Mike Goff on outfield work, the most interesting statement is Hargrove’s:
“Adam made a couple of good plays going back on the ball,” Hargrove said. “When we called him up in July or August, he couldn’t go back on the ball. His game had not developed to that point. And we worked real hard when he was here. Mike Goff did a good job, as you can see by the way he played today.”
I make no secret that I’m a Jones fan, and I disagreed entirely with Hargrove’s disdain for Jones’ defense – I felt Jones was good, though rough and still making mistakes as he learned, and Hargrove’s opinion was much less cheery.
The hope here is that Hargrove looks at Jones’ good play, along with a reason (Goff’s help) to evaluate Jones with an open mind. If the M’s need someone to fill in, at least the decision between, say, Reed and Jones would be made on the merits.
David Andriesen on Michael Garciaparra.
Bonds was the big story out of spring training. Baker on Bonds v fans. Bonds v Felix, Lopez takes the field.
Weird Column of the Day
I promise, this is the last local daily article I’ll talk about today.
Over in the P-I, Ted Miller writes an article that both bemuses and amazes. The premise – J.J. Putz is really good. The ending just finishes totally different than the introduction begins.
It’s J.J. Putz, who, with a brilliant 2006 season, earned a spot on a short list of first-flight, young closers that includes Minnesota’s Joe Nathan, the L.A. Angels’ Francisco Rodriguez and Toronto’s B.J. Ryan.
Not everyone is bullish, though. A’s GM Billy Beane, who fancies himself the original contrarian investor when it comes to closers, is probably rolling over in his smugness. He first introduced the “closers are like volatile stocks” analogy. In “Moneyball,” writer Michael Lewis paraphrased Beane’s belief:
“You could take a slightly above average pitcher, drop him in the closer’s role, let him accumulate a gaudy number of saves, and then sell him off. You could, in essence, buy a stock, pump it up with false publicity, and sell it off for much more than you’d paid for it.”
Beane’s theory would make the Mariners’ decision to bypass arbitration this offseason and sign Putz to a three-year, $13.1 million contract with an $8.6 million club option in 2010 appear unsound. After all, Putz’s 36 saves last season upped the 30-year-old’s career total to 46.
In these four paragraphs, we get the standard shot at Beane and Moneyball, a misunderstanding of how the closer-myth applies to J.J. Putz, an untrue characterization of sabermetric reactions to the Putz contract, and the use of saves as a statistical barometer of anything important.
Not a good start. Here, Miller sets up the argument as Putz vs Moneyball, when those of us who would be considered “Moneyballers” love J.J. Putz and acknowledge how valuable he is. But it’s not because he’s a closer. His value comes from being a true relief ace, a dominant out-machine who can be used in high leverage situations and whose results translate directly into wins. Moneyballers love the Relief Ace. We just don’t think they have to pitch in the 9th inning to be one.
Miller goes on to write about why Putz is different than fly-by-night closers who racked up save totals and then disappeared. Here, he does a nice job, and even includes this paragraph:
He also pencils out well with sabermetricians. Nearly all his esoteric numbers from a year ago — from measures of the number of line drives he surrenders, to his ground-ball percentage, to his ERA compared to the league average, to his FIP (fielding independent pitching: an attempt to measure all elements of pitching) — range from good to fantastic.
FIP shows up in a print article in the local dailies – Be still my heart. That he transitioned from taking a shot at Billy Beane to using FIP to support his argument in a few hundred words is remarkable.
So, a hearty well done to Miller for putting an esoteric stat like FIP in front of the masses. With Miller writing stuff like this, to go along with Stone, Baker, and Hickey, we’ve got a multitude of local writers who are not only acknowledging the influence of statistical analysis, but are, to at least a degree, embracing it.
The sports page has come a long way in the past few years. It’s good to see.
Steve Kelley, Not A Big Fan Of Blogs
We generally don’t link to Steve Kelley’s stuff, mainly because we don’t want you guys to be tempted to read it. But today, Steve decides to talk about the blogosphere.
I can almost hear the dissent building irrationally. Nerves beginning to fray. Cactus League questions lining up like hitters by the batting cage.
Bloggers blogging until their finger tips are as worn as base-stealer’s pants. Anxiety increasing before Felix Hernandez has thrown the season’s first pitch.
His intro paragraph is clear – bloggers are ready to freak out over spring training results.
Before Tuesday’s 10-3 win over Texas, the Mariners were 0-5 and a guy actually came up to me at breakfast Tuesday, shaking his head and telling me, in all seriousness, he thought Mariners manager Mike Hargrove was doing a lousy job this spring.
That comment got me imagining the kind of blogosphere nonsense that could build rapidly if the Mariners keep losing before the real games begin.
Guy in Arizona makes a dumb comment to Kelley during Spring Training? Why, he must be a blogger. And since that blogger is frustrated with the team, they must all be frustrated with the team. In fact, I bet I could guess exactly what they’re saying without even reading the blogs themselves!
I conjured a group of passionate, well-intentioned, if not quite well-informed, fans hunkered in some chat room, debating the Mariners’ slow start in the desert.
“There he goes again, mismanaging his bullpen,” ILuvGar types, beginning the debate. “What’s Hargrove thinking bringing in his closer in the sixth inning of Monday’s game against the Cubs? I know we were clinging to a 4-3 lead, but what’s J.J. Putz doing in there?
I love that Steve Kelley calls us “not quite well-informed”. Pot, meet kettle.
Also, for comparison with what Kelley expects us to write, here’s what I actually wrote about the team’s start the other day:
The team is beginning to build faith in a resurgent year by… losing every spring training game they play. They’re now 0-5 in games that don’t count. No, this doesn’t matter at all. No, you shouldn’t care. No, this isn’t evidence of Mike Hargrove’s inability to motivate his players. It means nothing. Really.
Similar, huh?
The rest of the column is similar drivel about make believe comments that you can’t imagine even an 8-year-old making.
It’s okay, Steve. We’re not the enemy. We’re not even that different than you. We watch the games, we write about what we see, and we use the best knowledge we know how to evaluate what goes on in front of us. We even use full paragraphs from time to time.
The term blogger doesn’t mean irrational idiot any more than staff columnist does.
M’s win! M’s win!
Thank God we have something good to post about. Yayyyyyyyyyyyy.
The expansion, retraction, clarification of Dave’s post
Hi. You may note that Dave’s post, below, was for a time missing a paragraph, marking the first time I’ve ever substantially edited another author’s post. There was discussion of legal action, and, to be clear, as I noted elsewhere, this was not a BP thing.
I’ve written the story of what it was like to write the Rose story elsewhere. The story’s not fabricated, had sources beyond any one BP author, and I (as you can read) stand by the decision to run it, and so on. I entirely disagree with any statement to the contrary.
That said – I declined in the previous post to talk about my own conversations with responsible parties for the Ibanez comment. In particular, I talked to Steve Goldman, one of the editors, about this before Dave posted, and Steve, and I’m paraphrasing only a little–
– took responsibility for the comments
– insisted it wasn’t meant to refer to me
Further, the 2004 comment was in the Royals chapter, which I had no hand in. Insomuch as it could be a slam on anyone specifically, it’s not me. The person who wrote the 2004 Royals chapter is still writing for BP, I believe. So you can, as I did initially, read it as a crack on the guy you’d think wrote that, who did leave, or you can, as the BP guys did, it’s just a joke that clanks, and clearly has no basis in reality or making fun of anyone specifically.
I’m entirely willing to assume that the impression I and others got from the comment is, as Steve said, unintentional, and no slight was intended.
I’ll keep the rest of our conversation private, as much good as that does now. I have the utmost respect for Steve, and I should have posted, at least, that I talked to Steve about the comment in as a follow-up to Dave’s post, if not at the time I talked to him, before Dave posted.
After talking to Dave, we’ve decided to take down his post entirely.
I’ve tried, as much as possible, to admit error as publicly as I make the error, so – I had a couple of opportunities to prevent this from flaring up. I screwed them all up, and I apologize.
Tuesday tinkering
Players make adjustments, experiment. Edgar, Dan, Norm Norm visited camp. Lou = buzz. Or, as Baker puts it
Two managers winless this spring hooked up on Monday, each with plenty to prove and both with different ways of going about it.
He’s talking about the game, and not using the popular slang term. I think.
M’s “@” Texas, noonish.
THT Season Preview
Do you have $9? Do you like baseball?
Then let me suggest plunking that $9 down on The 2007 Hardball Times Season Preview, available as a PDF download or as a real book for $15 (plus shipping). This new effort from THT is a complement to their excellent annual, which I’ve done some writing for in the past. However, I have no affiliation to the preview whatsoever, so buying this doesn’t help me at all. I just think they do great work and we owe them a lot for the knowledge they’ve added to the baseball community over the past few years, and supporting them through purchases like this helps keeps their doors open, which is good for all of us.
The Mariners preview was written by Jeff Sullivan, friend of USSM and a pretty smart guy himself. I almost feel bad that we’re going to have to crush him in that Seattle blogging poll. Almost.
But that’s besides the point – go over and buy THT’s season preview. I’m sure you’ll enjoy it, it’s worth $9, and it’s supporting a good cause.
An extremely inadequate summary of the Feed
Hi, Derek, from lovely Sky Harbor International here in Phoenix.
I don’t have anything to say about the feed, because I missed it. Jonah and I had a flat off 51 on our way to the stadium and while I was trying to figure out the byzantine workings of a Dodge Caravan’s spare tire system (which involves a winch), Bavasi was intervening with stadium people to get everyone their tickets.
I want to point out that Bavasi, no matter what we think of the job he’s done, is the kind of guy who not only carved out a chunk of his time to talk to a bunch of fans, but realized something was up, figured out what went wrong, and solved it, making that bunch of fans happy. He’s a good dude. I wish I agreed with him on baseball stuff, I really do, because there are many, many people in baseball’s front offices who are legitimately jerks, and Bavasi’s one of the nicest guys.
So! I understand that, as you’d expect, once he got everyone in, he was fun and engaging in the short time he had left, and Kevin Towers cut short a meeting with ownership to come by, and was quite candid and enlightening in talking about the Padres.
Sorry I don’t have a better write-up, but you have to put together this tool, see, lower the spare tire using an internal winch, jack the van up, pull the spare assembly down, unhitch it (which is no mean feat), swap it for the tire, then winch the assembly back up…. took for-freaking-ever. Ugh.