Jeff and Derek discuss the 2005 offseason
At length, written over the break
Derek:
Let me throw out the spring-training-optimistic view.
DH: Everett
C: Johjima
1b: Sexson
2B: Lopez
SS: Betancourt
3b: Beltre
LF: Ibanez
CF: Reed
RF: Ichiro!
(I figured that given a chance to compete for the starting second baseman job, Bloomquist loses)
Johjima’s a huge upgrade. Everett’s a huge step back at DH, and a defensive downgrade in forcing Ibanez into left. Lopez should hit better than M’s got out of 2B last year, and Betancourt should improve. Beltre should hit somewhere between 2004 and last year, which is good. Sexson’s likely to fall off a bit, though, because that was a really great season. Ibanez will hit better than what we got out of left field. Reed should improve, and Ichiro should bounce back at least somewhat to Ichiro!
That’s a hundred-run improvement pretty easily.
So, to the starters:
SP: Hernandez
SP: Washburn
SP: Moyer
SP: Meche
SP: Pineiro
A full season of King Felix, then we figure Washburn, in a park similarly-suited to him, puts up 2004 again, Moyer doesn’t get any worse, and both Meche and Pineiro show a little improvement — you can figure that’s “fixed” Pineiro or a dead-cat bounce for both of them.
That’s a hundred-run improvement there, tempered a little by the slightly degraded defense.
So we look back at 2005, add a hundred runs scored, subtract 100 runs allowed — that’s a 90-win team! We’re going to the playoffs! Wooooooo!
Jeff:
It feels a little like role-reversal for you to do the positive view and me to do the negative, but here it is. First you got the bull, now you get the horns — the pessimistic scenario.
DH: Everett
C: Johjima
1b: Sexson
2B: Lopez
SS: Betancourt
3b: Beltre
LF: Ibanez
CF: Corey Patterson? (Or Ichiro!, with a rotating tandem of Lawton/Everett/Ibanez/? filling the other slots)
RF: Ichiro!
Any pessimistic view must include a trade of Jeremy Reed, which is why he’s not in the lineup. Some proposed Reed trades would be worse than others, but all of those that have been reported as possibilities would be a drain.
It’s true that Johjima will almost surely be a big boost over last year’s catchers, but there’s got to be some uncertainty about his production given that he’s Japan’s first catching export. Sexson will likely backslide from last year’s monster. We’d all like to see Betancourt improve, but it’s not like he could be the next Alfonso Soriano or anything. Indeed, he could hit more like Rey Ordonez next year. Carl Everett isn’t good even if he stays healthy. Reed should be better, but if he’s gone ….
Of course, if Reed isn’t dealt, that’s a different story. And even the pessimistic view has to acknowledge that there is likely to be at least modest improvement here. But it’s also true that a mere modest improvement is a real possibility.
SP: Hernandez
SP: Washburn
SP: Moyer
SP: Arroyo, maybe Papelbon (doubtful)
SP: Pineiro
This assumes that Meche is dealt for Corey Patterson, or otherwise moved to make room for whatever pitcher we get in a potential Reed deal.
King Felix looks dominant, but he’s the only guy in this rotation that’s going to generate many strikeouts. Washburn and Moyer especially give up lots of fly balls, so they’ll be helped by Safeco Field — but they have to pitch on the road sometime.
Plus, remember the Cameron-Ichiro-Winn outfield, where doubles went to die? Thos outfield is where doubles go to grow strong, with dreams of becoming triples.
In short, the pessimistic view is a dramatically weakened defensive outfield playing behind defense-dependent pitchers, a lineup where old players could break down and younger players may not develop offensively. That’s the phone, and I think it could be fourth place calling.
Derek:
But why do anything further if the team’s already improved by 200 runs and will win 90 games? I don’t understand the need to keep tinkering.
Or why we’d bother trying to divine what might yet happen this off-season. I’ve mentioned this before, but this year’s been amazing in how many crazy moves didn’t come off not for lack of trying but for other, almost trivial hang-ups. A Juan Pierre trade, for instance. Reed traded everywhere. And what we’ve seen come through: Carl Everett, Jarrod Washburn… these are bad moves too. I’m not arguing that the Mariners should have spent $12m next year on Kevin Millwood, but that’s a much better move than what they gave Washburn.
Which brings me to another point that gets into market value. I think there are a couple of factors at work that we haven’t really considered:
- If the team starts out slow, Bavasi’s going to get canned. He’s said as much, and I think everyone knows it.
- The team wants to demonstrate to the fan base that they’re (again) serious about winning, and they’ll spend to get there
Taken together, it’s a strange situation. Bavasi had a ton of money to spend in a horrible market for spending money, and saving it — even if the team would let him — would have done him no good. As much as I like to argue that if you’re going to write off 2006 as another rebuilding year, you might as well sign interesting gambles with a lot of potential to surprise (and who might turn into trade bait) and sign every shiny prospect that emerges out of the Dominican, Venezuala, and any Cuban national player who makes it to Costa Rica, for Bavasi, that’s not an option anyway, because a horrible opening two months means someone else gets to run the show.
And there’s no way the ownership’s going to go in front of the fans and say “Hey, we know you’re all really, really ticked about the last couple of years. But there’s going to be at least one more bad one, and we hope you all continue to stick with us.”
So as much as Bavasi has done to repair the neglected farm system, and as well as he’s done in the dump trades, this is World War 2, defense-of-Moscow stuff: here’s your budget, we know everyone’s overpriced, we know you’d rather continue to build. Now go charge the enemy. If you hesitate or turn around, Commisar Armstrong here will shoot you.
Faced with this dilemma, there are things to be done. You can spend on the highest prizes, hoping that Millwood or Burnett at over $50m will be a better deal than a second-tier guy, and try to fill in around that. You can look for undervalued guys, like Loaiza, and sign them. You can try to trade for players in contracts their teams no longer find attractive: pick up Jim Thome to DH, for instance, or find a place for Carl Pavano (and I’m not endorsing either move).
Instead, we say really the worst way to go about it, and it’s been something we’ve seen before from the team: the fixation. We need “x” whatever x is. X can be veteran grit, or left-handed power, whatever. Once they’ve decided on that, they find x or something that can be hammered in to fit x, and they’re willing to pay sometimes ridiculously for it. If they’re turned away, they fixate on another possible x solution.
Sometimes this works out: they were convinced they needed Ibanez’s bat, and that it would play here, and they paid him far more than other left fielders were getting. And he did much better than skeptics (like me) thought.
And sometimes they go looking at a guy like Jacque Jones as a cheap, intersting upside guy, and he wants too much money for too long. So be it. But when the quest for left-handed sock leads you to Carl Everett, something’s gone wrong.
I look at these acquisitions and I don’t see hope for a kind of Ibanez surprise. Everett hasn’t been any good in years, his gaudy two stats aside (23 HR! 85 RBI!). Even looking at Washburn optimistically doesn’t get me to where I can imagine giving him that deal.
Moreover, what worries me was the Reed stuff. I would trade Reed in the right deal, but Reed’s not the team’s problem. A young guy who makes MLB minimum playing a decent centerfield is a huge boon to the team, and the fact that all off-season the team’s been looking at Juan Pierre, Preston Wilson, Corey Patterson, whoever — it’s like the house is on fire and they’re looking at getting new cabinets for the kitchen.
Or to put this another way, this off-season reminds me a lot of the 2003 one, when the team decided to trade a little of their stellar defense for offense, and in making a series of bad choices, managed to downgrade both severely. This year they had a lot of problems to fix, and they’ve created more problems, and these problems are going to hurt whoever takes over the team next.
Jeff:
Say this for Bavasi: he’s a stand-up guy.
It would be easy (and even, arguably, sensible) to strip-mine the farm system, trading prospects for quick-fix players that would enhance the Mariners’ chances next season. That might be the best way to save his job, and it would certainly be the easiest thing to do — but he didn’t, and you get the feeling he wouldn’t. I think that’s pretty honorable.
He is, I believe, doing what he thinks in his heart is best for the franchise in the long term. I don’t think the Washburn deal is a demonstration deal for Bavasi. I think he believes in his heart it’ll make the squad better.
That being said, his record so far is hit or miss, and over the past two months it’s almost entirely composed of bad deals that did go through and terrible deals that didn’t.
Derek:
That’s true, and that’s sad. Coming in and fighting Gillick for (essentially) his first year, he also set to work righting the fundamental problems of the franchise that brought us here: poor drafting, poor player development, all the things that contributed to the team’s long inability to field home-grown players that could contribute.
You don’t right a franchise in two years after such long neglect.
I’ll stop writing the obit, though.
This isn’t a bad team. I know I say this every year and I come up with some win number and every year the Mariners do dramatically worse than that, but really, it’s not. There are two legitimate stars in Ichiro and King Felix, there are a bunch of young players who should improve, and so on.
But you look at what the A’s did this off-season, or even the Rangers and… there’s just no way. They may scrape back to .500, but they’re unlikely to win the AL West, and if they don’t win the pennant, there are teams in the AL Central and East that are going to have much better chances to win the wild-card. Which will mean a third year without playoffs.
The question, then, is what happens if the team stinks? Do the fans still come out? And if they do, is that good, or bad?
Yikes! Even in your optimistic scenario there are plenty of question marks. We’re counting on everybody but Sexon and Everett to be better than what we had last year. I like Reed, Lopez, Betancourt, and Beltre as much as the next guy, but It’ll be a miracle if they all come through. Not to mention a starting rotation with one steallar 19-year-old rookie and four HUGE question marks.
January 3rd, 2006 at 9:08 amIt really does boil down to the starting rotation. The offense will be good enough, the bullpen will be excellent, but the season hinges on the rotation.
Washburn will be ok. Felix will be excellent. Moyer will be ok. That leaves Pineiro and Meche to make or break the season, and that is an admittedly major gamble. They have the talent, at least. They have shown that they CAN do it. They haven’t been consistent, but that must change now.
January 3rd, 2006 at 9:49 amI think that I see a 75-87, 3rd place in the AL West finish in the M’s future.
January 3rd, 2006 at 9:56 amI’d already planned to predict 75 wins for this year. A hit-lucky pitching staff could get us above .500, but that’s quite a gamble.
January 3rd, 2006 at 10:04 amPeople are being way too pessimistic about this team. Realism is fine; going all depressive about two 90+ loss seasons at the cost of ignoring the facts is a bit much.
We may not need Gil/Jo-El - we have a fine #5 coming up in Nageotte, who is pretty dominant at the moment. Add that to the large number of other good SP prospects we have in the system, and you have to figure that at least one of them will be worthy of the starte’s role… last year was, quite simply, an unluckyone for the M’s in that regard.
I could go on for a while, but the simple point really is that we have many more reasons to expect improvement rather than decline. I don’t know where in the AL West we are slated to finish, but if we win less than 80 games I’ll be very surprised, indeed…
January 3rd, 2006 at 10:05 amThe big difference between the two scenarios is Reed. Jeff’s part of the post just highlights why trading Reed, at this point, would weaken the team. The flaws in the starting staff cannot be hidden as easily, and the bench becomes worse.
January 3rd, 2006 at 10:08 amWhat, if any scuttle-butt is there on Sn…I mean Doyle? And if by some miracle he can heal up would DH be a possibility for a decent hitting but fragile guy?
January 3rd, 2006 at 10:10 amMissing from the optimistic scenario: Everett gets hurt and is replaced by Bucky. Bucky manages to stay healthy and hits 40 homeruns in 400 ABs.
It could happen. Right?
January 3rd, 2006 at 10:16 amFWIW, a 200 run improvement in the team to ~799 runs scored, 651 runs allowed pythags to a 97 win team, not 90.
January 3rd, 2006 at 10:20 amBucky was released some time ago.
January 3rd, 2006 at 10:20 amUmm Bucky is no longer with the organization. Perhaps that was sarcasm on your part?
January 3rd, 2006 at 10:21 amJeeze! I completely forgot the bullpen. Seems like a lot of questions there, too. Is Sherrill really our lefty set-up guy? Is Soriano healthy? Is “Gas-Can” Thornton still in the mix? Can we expect Guardado to keep fooling hitters with that 85 mph thing he tosses up there? At least Mateo is solid in the middle. Putz keeps getting better, at least.
January 3rd, 2006 at 10:25 amNageotte is a reliever these days. Also, he’s not very good.
January 3rd, 2006 at 10:26 amFoppert could be a dark horse candidate to make the rotation.
January 3rd, 2006 at 10:30 amAnd I will freely admit “not very good” is a horrible over-simplification.
January 3rd, 2006 at 10:31 amDerek, Is the whole Nageotte-as-starter officially over? I know he started in the AFL, though he came out of the bullpen in Tacoma last year. I’d thought that he was doing that to ease his way back from injury - when did they make the decision? I suppose it was kind of inevitable anyway…
The bullpen should be fine, and the bench may be better than last year as well. The M’s should be significantly better simply because their all-consuming black holes at C and 2B have been (partially) remedied. The rotation is thin, but whose isn’t (okay, the A’s, but what if Harden goes down again? Is Haren healthy yet?)? I’ll say they go 84-78.
January 3rd, 2006 at 10:46 amTo add to the list of missed opportunities — Wes Helms signed with the Marlins for $800K plus $200K incentives. (The Fish also signed Olivo to a one-year deal).
January 3rd, 2006 at 10:48 amFoppert could well be a dark horse candidate, and I’m rooting for him. I think he was a solid acquisition. We’ll know more about this as spring training approaches, of course.
January 3rd, 2006 at 10:50 amNageotte is one of those prospects that Ms fans wanted to be more then what he ever projected. In reality, he is just another AAA arm.
His biggest claim to fame will be his sweating. I’d be happy to never see him again if only to never hear the broadcasters speak of his sweating so often. It seems that sweating is the only distinguishing thing about his appearance on the field.
January 3rd, 2006 at 10:59 amNageotte is one of those prospects that Ms fans wanted to be more then what he ever projected. In reality, he is just another AAA arm.
Well, that’s just not true.
January 3rd, 2006 at 10:59 amWell, that’s just not true.
I don’t see any evidence from either 04 or his very abbreviated 05 appearances that indicate he is ready to pitch in the majors. I have not looked at this minor league stats however.
I’ll look this deeper when I get home from work to back up my position but I’d be surprised if there is much to point to hope that he’ll be a contributor in 06.
January 3rd, 2006 at 11:13 amI don’t see any evidence from either 04 or his very abbreviated 05 appearances that indicate he is ready to pitch in the majors.
I think Dave was calling attention to was the following statement which you made, oddly enough, without every looking at his minor league stats.
Nageotte is one of those prospects that Ms fans wanted to be more then what he ever projected.
He was a very nice prospect at one time, and thus ‘projected’ to be a better pitcher than he has so far turned out to be.
January 3rd, 2006 at 11:22 amI don’t see any evidence from either 04 or his very abbreviated 05 appearances that indicate he is ready to pitch in the majors. I have not looked at this minor league stats however.
Is not ready to pitch in the majors is a far cry from “just another AAA arm”.
Jeff Harris is just another AAA arm. Clint Nageotte is not Jeff Harris.
January 3rd, 2006 at 11:23 amSo i guess the main point is that we improved, but not enough. I mean is there any doubt that Loaiza and Milton Bradley were the two best moves of the offseason?
January 3rd, 2006 at 11:24 amDidn’t Bavasi insulate himself abit when he stated Everett was Hargrove’s choice? If Mariners indeeed get off to bad start is Hargrove shot as well? Is his replacement in the stands scouting games?
It would be nice to feel all warm and fuzzy about the Mariners’s chances but as pointed out by Derek the competition has improved more than Ms. Still they should be entertaining as Ichiro, Yu-Bet, Beltre and King Felix are impressive acts on thier own.
January 3rd, 2006 at 11:27 amI mean is there any doubt that Loaiza and Milton Bradley were the two best moves of the offseason?
Yes. I still like the Johjima signing better than either of those moves. Also, Brian Giles for 3/30, Octavio Dotel for 1/2.1, and Rudy Seanez for 1/2.1.
January 3rd, 2006 at 11:29 amI agree with Derek’s optimistic view of the offense. Going from below replacement level to Johjima is a HUGE jump. Ibanez and Sexson will fade a bit, but all of the other returning players should be better and might improve a lot. And there’s actually some semblance of a bench.
But the starting pitching is scary (and not in a good way). Even in the optimistic view, there’s a starter missing. Felix has an innings limit that will likely hold him to 25 starts. Moyer is 43 and ineffective on the road which should limit him to 27 starts. And the other three guys have recent injury history. Best case you need a sixth starter for 10 games and 50 innings and really even optimistically we’re short 20 starts and 120 innings. (The pessimistic view is 40 starts.)
Felix is great. Moyer could be pretty good if he’s used optimally — more starts at home. But everyone else is a 4th or 5th starter.
I still think that puts us at 500.
As for whether the fans will come out… Well, 500 is a pretty big improvement. And if we’re improving fans will show. But if Jeremy Reed is an all-star for some other team and/or the rotation is Felix and pray for rain (despite $24M in salary) and the offense carries the team, fans will stay away in droves, unless it’s a first place team.
January 3rd, 2006 at 11:31 amThe question, then, is what happens if the team stinks? Do the fans still come out? And if they do, is that good, or bad?
I’ve been thinking about this a bit lately. Casual fans will still probably enjoy going to the park for a few games per year, and of course the same certain teams will sell out the stadium, but we’re only getting the Yankees for one series this year, and it’s during the week. Two weekends of Red Sox, and one series against the White Sox. Then what?
Johjima will probably attract some more Japanese fans to the park, at least, but I don’t foresee it being a significant attendance boost if the team doesn’t improve overall.
And to top it all off, despite the fact that the Mariners aren’t likely to be much better than last year, they actually *raised* prices for single game tickets next year across the board, with the exception of the $7 center field bleacher seats. Terrace Club infield is up to $60 and the infield Box seats are up to $55. If I were still living in Pittsburgh, I could sit 15 rows behind home plate in an equally great stadium and see an similarly bad team (they have a Duke, we have a King; they have the Bay Area, and we have Area 51) for less than half the price (well, $27).
January 3rd, 2006 at 11:34 amSo i guess the main point is that we improved, but not enough.
To expand on this — and I don’t feel comfortable making projections until we get closer to the season — my biggest fear is that we improved a marginal amount in the short term and got markedly worse in the long term.
I think some of the moves, like Washburn, will probably help the team this year, though not enough to really matter. But I think that those moves risk handicapping the team in terms of financial flexibility and roster space in 2007 and beyond.
It’s possible that I’m wrong about either or both of these things, but I think it’s the most likely scenario.
January 3rd, 2006 at 11:34 amOn that note, Dave, I remember you doing a list of the top 10 worst and best contracts last year. I’d be interested to see where you put some of ours (Washburn, Johjima) in relation to those around the league.
January 3rd, 2006 at 11:35 amI honestly don’t know if I could come up with 10 contracts that I liked this offseason.
January 3rd, 2006 at 11:39 amSome thoughts:
1. It seems there is an assumption among a lot of people that because we’re all so excited about Betancourt, that he’ll stick for a whole season. But is there enough that’s projectible in his record to bely the assumption that he’ll hit well enough to stay in the lineup? I worry that the Mariners, given a choice between a, say, .218-hitting glove wizard and a .264-hitting Wiffle-glove, will take the hitter because Bavasi’s track record doesn’t indicate that he understands the comparative importance of defense. What can we reasonably project for Betancourt on offrense, and on what do we base that projection?
2. As I’ve said before, I don’t think there’s any reason to believe Jarrod Washburn will drive off a cliff in 2006. He won’t be GOOD, but if he can stay healthy it seems reasonable to think he can sponge innings at about a league-average rate.
3. I’m with Derek in that I don’t see that there are any more big trades to be made. Meche for Patterson? You only make that move if you move Jeremy Reed, and I’m squarely in the keep-the-cheap-solid-defensive-centerfielder-with-upside camp. Nothing Boston will give up is worth the loss of somebody we can’t capably replace right now.
4. I’m in the somewhat-optimistic-about-2006 camp as well, and a big part of that is that the bullpen ought to be FANTASTIC. Eddie’s back to close, and we don’t really have any reason to think his shoulder’s going to snap off. J.J. Putz and George Sherrill project well as setup men, as does Rafael Soriano (it’ll be interesting to see how the roles get straightened out). There’s nothing much wrong with Julio Mateo, and I believe in Scott Atchison’s ability to be a quality reliever (he just doesn’t walk guys, and his K rate is good). And Miguel Carvajal, based on everything I’ve read, is exciting. And if Clint Nageotte finally breaks through … wow. (Though there’s no need to count on it.)
There’s just no weaknesses here. A lot of teams in baseball would love to have a pen this good. If Hargrove works it well to keep our weaker starters from getting themswelves into too much trouble, this could be the unsung story of a successful 2006 season.
5. How can we determine how much the Mariners’ below-average defense at second base and left field will offset the strong defense from short, third, center and right? Is there a metric for this?
6. Can we live with Joel Piniero if he’s essentially what he was in the second half of 2005?
7. My one pessimistic note: There is NO organizational depth at many positions. If Sexson gets hurt, for example, who fills in and gives the Mariners league-average offense from the position? Or if Beltre gets hurt, who can play third? If Reed goes down, who can play center?
8. And just what credence can we give at this point to the conflicting reports that Ichiro is willing to play center field? Even if he’s willing, is it a desirable shift of resources? Why or why not?
9. What faith can we have in Mike Hargrove to make the best of Matt Lawton, Carl Everett and Raul Ibanez at two positions? Any lineup that keeps Ibanez’s bat on the bench, in my opinion, is a poor one — Ibanez was a hell of a good offensive player in 2005.
Thanks for the pub burgers for thought.
T-minus 43 days until pitchers and catchers report.
January 3rd, 2006 at 11:40 am“5. How can we determine how much the Mariners’ below-average defense at second base and left field will offset the strong defense from short, third, center and right? Is there a metric for this?”
I’m not so sure if we’re looking at that bad of defense at 2nd. Lopez will be better than Boone was last year, and at least as good as Bloomquist was, and a lot better than the other 2nd basemen we ran out there (Spiezio, Santiago, etc, but not better than Betancourt). I can’t envision a situation where our 2B defense is downgraded.
As far as left field, on days when Everett finds himself benched, Ibanez back at DH, and Lawton in left, that’s not the worst situation either. Slightly downgraded, but towards the end of the season we were putting Ibanez, Morse, Bloomquist, and Dobbs out there and this is a LOT better than that.
January 3rd, 2006 at 11:52 amCorc, I’m not sure it’s a ringing endorsement of second-base defense if the best we can say about it is that it’ll be better than last year’s. I’m not interested in our strength comparative to last year … I’m interested in our strength comparative to the rest of the American League. Which is the only relevant comparison to be making here, in my opinion. If Jose Lopez provides lower-than-league-average defense, he’s a liability unless he makes up all the runs with his bat that he might cost with his glove.
January 3rd, 2006 at 12:00 pmRE: #32 “…if Beltre gets hurt, who can play third? If Reed goes down, who can play center?”
Do we get more than one guess?
January 3rd, 2006 at 12:01 pm“Do the fans still come out? ”
Fans Wins
2001 3.5M 116
2002 3.5 93
2003 3.3 93
2004 2.9 63
2005 2.7 69
Wouldn’t the more appropriate question be “Do the fans come back?”. And after a 69 win season, the answer to that question is generally “no”. I expect 2.4M this year.
January 3rd, 2006 at 12:04 pmTo clarify, if this wasn’t already obvious: that first chunk is not me making a projection… it’s trying to look at everything in the most optimistic view possible. It was a conversation-starter.
January 3rd, 2006 at 12:05 pmThis isn’t a few years ago, we don’t have 5 reliable guys to go 200 innings. Moyer is another year older, Washburn hasn’t proven to be that guy, Pinnie and Meche are always questionable to be horses, and god no, I can only hope Felix pitches 200 solid innings without any problems, who is the first guy called up to have a few starts?
Deadline deals… who is looking to be dumped when we are out of contention — same thing we’re looking at last year? Guardado, Moyer, Ibanez (isn’t this the last year of his contract?), Meche, Pineiro, Everett? Maybe some pen guys with other arms coming up?
January 3rd, 2006 at 12:08 pmESPN has done a chart of the projected starters at each position in the AL, which neatly lines up the Ms (for better or worse) against their AL West-mates …
January 3rd, 2006 at 12:10 pm#28 - If I were still living in Pittsburgh, I could sit 15 rows behind home plate in an equally great stadium and see an similarly bad team.
I’m not sure I would call it an equally great stadium. There is nothing like sitting 15 rows behind home plate in Pittsburgh. It is the jewel of the new stadiums in my opinion whereas Safeco wouldn’t make my top five.
January 3rd, 2006 at 12:11 pm34: But in terms of assisting the pitching staff, even if Lopez is not even league average (which I am not convinced of), the defense is still improved in some way, even if it is from bad to slightly-less-bad. That still can net us a few runs.
January 3rd, 2006 at 12:16 pm#41: Again, that only does us good if it keeps pace, or better, with run improvement around the league. My point is that we want to keep an eye on how the 2006 American League is doing, not the 2005 Seattle Mariners. That’s over with.
January 3rd, 2006 at 12:19 pm#32: The cupboard is bare because Safeco was transformed into Tacoma last season. Its difficult to replace one level of your farm system in a single off season! The M’s squeezed every ounce they couldve out of the tube of toothpaste……whts left is probably two years away from ready or simply placeholders for new toothpaste on its way to the farm.
To me the most frustrating thing about the M’s transformation was that they couldnt plug major-league ready answers into the lineup but rather simply had to take the best they had from the farm and develop them at Safeco. It made for some optimism (Felix, Bettie, Reed, Lopez?, the pen) but mostly it made for some unwatchable baseball. The solice for me is that hopefully the ugly growing pains may be behind the M’s and each of these *answers* will be better. Of course, if these guys stick, then the Washburn contract isnt so limiting because at least half of the lineup will be locked up at league minimum. A potential emergence of an outfileder like A. Jones or Bohn could also make this even better.
Im not as pessimistic about the M’s future as some-though there is no way they can compete next year for the wild card. Im mostly bitter over what I consider the unnecesary ugliness of the transition these last two seasons and probably the next.
January 3rd, 2006 at 12:37 pmI’m praying standard HTML anchor text works here…
Oakland Writer Mychael Urban gave Billy Beane a 9/10 post season score for his work with the A’s, which I’d mostly agree with. He added Loaiza, one of the better contracts signed, didn’t give up a whole lot to get Milton Bradley, and added depth with Antonio Perez. Also, their Bullpen grows stronger with moving Sarloos to the pen with the Loaiza signing. Doesn’t look as strong as a year ago on paper, but at the time, who knew Dotel would need Tommy John and Huston Street was as good as he was? And, to who is to say Beane is done? With guys like Piazza and Thomas out there, likely to come cheap, I’m sure Beane wouldn’t detest from a tasty signing.
What does Bavasi get? 5/10? Lower? Johjima looks like his best signing, who could be a bargain, but it’s a questionmark — will he be the next Kaz Matsui or Hideki Matsui? Everett or Washburn signings were decent, but borderline bad, and either player doesn’t have a lot of room for improvement. The defense in left is worse, and the rotation which needed much fixing is near the same. Too much money for too little brought in.
January 3rd, 2006 at 12:42 pmI personally think that you can get fans to come out and see prospects in a losing year a lot more easily than you can get fans to come out and see aging veterans in a losing year, or even a 500 year.
I have a question about the concept of Moyer being a good Safeco pitcher but a crummy one on the road. Is there any stats to back that up? I know he did a lot better at home last year, but was that due to repeatable skills or random chance?
January 3rd, 2006 at 12:46 pmDerek -
You mentioned that the defense will be worse. But, do you think that the fact that we should have YuBet at SS for a full year will offset the fact that we’ll have Ibanez in LF? Also - when Richie signed, everyone was talking about how he was a great defensive first baseman. However, this year, the stats didn’t show that. Do you think he’ll improve defensively?
With regard to the Betancourt/Ibanez defensive question…yes, I know that we have a flyball staff, so having Ibanez in LF might hurt us more than Betancourt helps. However, I would love to read your thoughts on the subject, please.
January 3rd, 2006 at 12:54 pmCorco -
I forgot we let Spiezio play 2B last year. Gods, what were we thinking?
It makes me think that we can’t help but improve from a season so awful that we let Spiezio play second.
January 3rd, 2006 at 1:28 pm35 - Hunter Brown for third!
40 - The only reason I vastly prefer Safeco to PNC Park is because of the roof. The first game I went to after PNC opened, it rained, as it often does in Pittsburgh. There was absolutely nowhere decent to take shelter (unlike at Three Rivers where you could hide in the concrete), which just plain sucked. The fact that we don’t have to deal with rainouts in Seattle, but can still have outdoor baseball, is a big plus, as far as I’m concerned.
January 3rd, 2006 at 1:28 pmWilson Valdez was a disaster at the plate, but he did OK defensively.
My guess is that barring contention, the Mariners end up around 2.4-2.6 million. This is where Baltimore and Texas have largely settled with similar scenarios (crappy team that used to be good, good ballpark, large metro area to draw from).
I also suspect this is Bavasi’s last year, barring contention. I’m going to keep harping on this, but EVERY FA resigning and pickup this offseason made us older. Some of the decisions are more defensible on individual merits (Johjima, Moyer, Lawton, Guardado) than others (Washburn, Everett), but collectively, I think it’s pretty indefensible to have ALL your offseason roster decisions add (or keep) guys on the wrong side of 30 to a team that’s been terrible for two years. It’s a prescription for disaster- the odds that you’ll get unpleasant, Cirillo/Spiezio-esque surprises far outweigh the odds Bret Boone shows up to chip in an MVP year as he did in 2001 (and the closest analogue to Boone out of those signings is Johjima).
January 3rd, 2006 at 1:31 pmI understand the idea, but how many FAs are under 30? Usually the only route to get under 30 players is through trade, and the Ms just don’t have the pieces to trade unless you want to trade young for young. I just don’t see a way the Ms could have avoiding signing 30+ year people. And really, I wouldn’t count 1 year deals as anything significant, so really you’re looking at Johjima and Washburn as the plus 30 signings.
January 3rd, 2006 at 1:36 pm47: That’s what we call a lack of depth, ain’t it.
January 3rd, 2006 at 1:37 pmmsb -
Those ESPN projections are nifty. A few comments:
-Did the Twins try to get worse? Tony Batista? Wow.
-And yet, they’re still going to finish 30 games ahead of KC.
-I really like Toronto’s rotation. It matches up well with their division. They need another bat, though. RF and DH are their best bets (I actually like the Johnson/F-Cat platoon in left).
-The A’s are going to allow like 300 runs this year.
January 3rd, 2006 at 1:38 pmMatthew no. 50 - I agree the Ms didn’t have much to offer in trade. They did have Guardado, though, and I would think he’d have been fairly valuable in light of what other closers are making this offseason. Hanging on to him while his value peaks and while the team continues to be mediocre will be one of Bavasi’s bigger failures in my opinion.
January 3rd, 2006 at 1:53 pmThey also list Randy Winn as “fighting” for an outfield spot with Old Man Finley…
January 3rd, 2006 at 1:54 pmRichie is an adequate defensive 1st baseman and is suprisingly good for his size. That doesn’t make him John Olerud. He’s a big target with decent hands.
I see a team that will struggle to break .500 this year. Partially because they’ve only improved in 1 position (catcher) and partially because their primary competition in the AL West has improved more than they have.
I also agree that lack of depth will be a killer for this team. One significant injury and they’ll be back at 90 losses.
January 3rd, 2006 at 1:58 pm“Did the Twins try to get worse? Tony Batista? Wow.”
Actually, you might be surprised. Cuddyer was very bad defensively at 3B last year for the Twins, and Batista looks like at least an average fielding 3B based on UZR and the DT defensive numbers. And once you factor stuff like GIDP, Batista really doesn’t make outs that much more than Cuddyer, but he hits for a lot more power (good ISO). Actually, if Batista posted his career ISO with the Twins last year, he would have been something like 1st or 2nd on the team.
It appears that Terry Ryan had $10M this offseason to upgrade 2B, 3B, and DH, and he snagged Luis Castillo, Rondell White, and Tony Batista for that money (plus two pitchers for Castillo). It’s tough to understate the upgrade from Luis Rivas to Luis Castillo. If the Twins signed someone else at 3B, they would have blown the rest of their budget on someone like Randa or Mueller and been left with a big hole at DH. Putting their money into a (non-guaranteed) $1.25M contract for Batista at least helped improve the team defense while upgrading the DH spot with Rondell White. Looking at all the moves together, I don’t think the Batista move was really bad at all.
January 3rd, 2006 at 2:11 pmGiven that all but three or four spots on the roster have legitimate questions/doubts/worries associated with them, I will be surprised to see this team win more than 72-73 games.
I also will not be surprised to see attendance take a big drop to something like 2.25 million, since virtually all of the casual fans’ favorites are gone. Seattle is not enough of a baseball town to come out and see Lopez, YuBet, and company develop unless they are winning.
Let’s hope one or two of these guys has a breakout year.
January 3rd, 2006 at 2:23 pmCCW, I agree, I would have liked to see them trade Eddie (and they still could), but I also see clear reasons to keep him and by the accounts I’ve heard, the offers are just not up to par.
metz, they haven’t just improved at catcher. They’ve improved at 2 starting pitchers (Felix and Washburn over Sele/Franklin/Harris/etc) and quite possibly three (average Pineiro over sucky Pineiro[take a look at the FIP]).
The improvement at Ca is likely to be vast. They’ll improve at 2B and almost certainly will improve in RF and 3B. Also, the bench should be improved.
The bullpen is no worse than the same, and possibly quite better with Shiggy, Nelson, and please god Thornton not racking up IP and Soriano healthier.
Too many people are mistaking the team that ended 2005 as the team that racked up only 69 wins. The team that ended the season would have been a lot closer to 80 wins than 70.
Nick, try looking at other teams and see how many players they have that don’t have question marks next to them. Guess what? They don’t have many either. It’s the nature of baseball.
January 3rd, 2006 at 2:33 pmMy one pessimistic note: There is NO organizational depth at many positions. If Sexson gets hurt, for example, who fills in and gives the Mariners league-average offense from the position? Or if Beltre gets hurt, who can play third? If Reed goes down, who can play center?
This was one of my reasons for going after someone like Aubrey Huff in a trade. Dave tells me that Huff’s defense isn’t good at any of the positions he plays.. OF, 1B, 3B. But is it sufficient as an injury backup at those positions with his remaining time at DH? Granted, that means Ibanez is a full time LF but I think Huff would have been a better 1 year DH solution than Everett. Obviously the Devil Rays are still hanging onto him, but he still seems like the moveable piece in the outfield logjam that still exists in Tampa.
January 3rd, 2006 at 2:43 pmCuddyer v. Batista
That 60 point OBP advantage for Cuddyer looks pretty big.
Some day I’m going to track down the worst seasons (by VORP or EqA or something) by players who still managed 30 HR and 100 RBI. I suspect Batista will be on that list at least once.
January 3rd, 2006 at 2:57 pm#58 said: ****Too many people are mistaking the team that ended 2005 as the team that racked up only 69 wins. The team that ended the season would have been a lot closer to 80 wins than 70.*****
Well, while I admire your optimism, the team that ended the season for the M’s in ‘05 had a winning percentage of .413 for the months of August/September/October (24 wins and 34 losses). That would translate into 67 wins in a full season…. the season ending M’s didnt perform any better than the early or middle season M’s.
In order to EXPECT the M’s to win 81 games next season, you generally have to assume the following in some combination (i pretty much think they all have to happen): their young guys perform better (significantly better), the transition from Japan to Seattle goes well for Johjima, the off season moves work out, and no key guy gets hurt (there is no cavalry waiting in Tacoma and no real depth at any position other than the bullpen). While there are reasons to hope each of things have a better than average chance of happening, to have to rely on all of them happening makes the M’s chances next season seem much bleaker. Then consider that Oakland and Texas have both gotten signifincantly better (each generally improved greater than the M’s improved this offseason), and the Angels on paper still compare favorably to the M’s. These things have to somehow mitigate any effect that the M’s improvements might make towards improving the M’s record since in reality, the M’s dont get to play in a vacuum.
A break-even season seem optimistic to me….
January 3rd, 2006 at 3:12 pmfor some reason, this all reminds me of the fine Letter to the sports editor from Yelm, wondering where are all the good signings? …. you have to scroll past the Seahawk love
January 3rd, 2006 at 3:24 pmThat guy’s awesome. Although I’m having trouble following the Varitek/Lowe thing. Does he realize that Lowe isn’t a Red Sock anymore? Or am I missing the point?
January 3rd, 2006 at 3:31 pmI think the point is that Lowe and Varitek for Slocumb was horrible then and is horrible now. That wasn’t a Bavasi move though, and if it’s any consolation, our pen was horrible then.
January 3rd, 2006 at 3:38 pmWhat were the M’s projections going into the 2001 season?
January 3rd, 2006 at 3:44 pm#63-64 — and just to be accurate, the last time we sent a position player to Boston for a pitcher it worked out ok for us
not that I am for sending Reed anywhere….
January 3rd, 2006 at 3:44 pm#65– there was an ESPN hot stove projection posted on asbsm back in 2001:
January 3rd, 2006 at 3:53 pmThe biggest hole I see, and it’s been stated before, is the injury thing. For like the last 5 years we’re completely screwed if Ichiro gets hurt.
I wonder where everyone’s predictions will be if Felix tears his labrum on opening day.
January 3rd, 2006 at 4:14 pmRE 2001 . . .
Maybe there is hopefor 2006, because the feeling in my gut today is exactly the same feeling I had before the 2001 season.
January 3rd, 2006 at 4:17 pm61, I think you’re underestimating the likelihood of improvement. It’s not that Reed, Lopez, Beltre, Johjima, etc. ALL have to have great years, or that they all must improve significantly - the M’s just need to stop fielding players who are far, far worse than replacement level. Frankly, that shouldn’t be hard, and it’s worth thinking about the number of at bats given to players who played not just poorly but historically poorly in 2005. Will Johjima improve on Olivo’s 2005? Yes, simply by stepping off the plane. This has nothing to do with him meeting some optimistic projection; he simply needs to be a couple runs over replacement and that gets you 20 runs right there. He doesn’t need to be Hideki Matsui - he just needs to be Kaz Matsui. Anything more is gravy.
January 3rd, 2006 at 4:21 pmDon’t forget that other teams are probably questioning their depth as well - okay, maybe not the Dodgers or A’s, given the farm systems they’re blessed with, but think of what happens to the Angels if Vlad goes down. Robb Quinlan? What if McPherson never puts it together? What if Bartolo Colon regresses towards the mean, or even if he gets a bit less lucky on BABIP and the like? What if Garrett Anderson’s 2005 heralds a short, sharp, unceremonious collapse?
The point is that given natural improvement from some of the young guys, the improvements at C and SS, and yes, the overpaid Washburn, the team has probably done enough to make them a 50/50 bet for .500.
They said it would be 2001 in 2004, too, is my problem.
January 3rd, 2006 at 4:23 pmHere’s BP’s 2001 projections.
*hopes the tag works*
January 3rd, 2006 at 4:25 pmHey! But our man Mat picked Seattle to come in 2nd that year!
January 3rd, 2006 at 4:26 pm#68 - I wouldn’t be worried about what happens to everyone’s predictions… I’d be more worried about a beer shortage in the Pacific Northwest after Derek recovers from the shock, if such a tragedy were to happen.
January 3rd, 2006 at 4:36 pm#67 “#63-64 — and just to be accurate, the last time we sent a position player to Boston for a pitcher it worked out ok for us
Actually, if you really want to be “accurate”, 1997 (Varitek and Lowe for Slocumb) came after 1996 (Darren Bragg for Moyer). And neither of those deals were the last time Seattle traded a position player to Boston for a pitcher. In 1999 Woody Woodward, in one of his last trades as GM, dealt Butch Huskey to the Red Sox for left-hander Rob Ramsay…
January 3rd, 2006 at 4:46 pm#70: I understand the argument but you miss my point…. replacing the pond scum from last year with replacement level players, does nothing to ensure a .500 season. In a vacuum, sure, we’re talking alot of hypothetical wins. However, the A’s, Rangers, and the Angels represent over 30% of the M’s schedule. Unfortunately those hypothetical wins quickly disappear when the reality of actually playing teams with superior rosters is considered…..
January 3rd, 2006 at 5:03 pmterry, by the team at the end of 2005 I meant the team sans Boone, Olivo, Spaz, a starting Bloomie, etc. I don’t mean the actual team they ran out there in Aug-Oct since that team generally consisted of lineup people just as bad including Dobbs, Hansen, Choo, Bubela, et al.
Intertia is a big problem in baseball fandom. What teams did in 2005 should have no basis in projecting what they will do in 2006. You have to look at the players making up those teams. Do you realize how many ABs were thrown away in 2005 by some people no longer on the active roster? Olivo, Borders, Wilson, Ojeda, Valdez, Boone, Spiezio, Hansen, Dobbs, Choo, Bubela combined for 1,025 ABs and posted a combined OPS of .537
January 3rd, 2006 at 5:14 pmLast year, the Nationals went from 67-95 to 81-81. They still finished in last place in the NL East. That being said…they were leading the division as late as July 20th.
Might we do that this year? I suppose it’s possible. Even doing what the Mets did and going to 83 wins is possible. I’m just not seeing contention- the rotation’s full of ??? and there’s going to be enough disappointment from the FA signings to undermine things.
January 3rd, 2006 at 5:15 pmI agree with Terry. I’m not sure folks are giving enough weight to the degree to which Texas and Oakland have gotten better. Not only that, but the AL in general has improved a lot. Every division is at least 3 quality teams deep now, which puts the Ms solidly in bad shape. I’d say all the following teams look better than the Ms on paper right now:
Oakland
Texas
Angels
Toronto
NY
Boston
ChiSox
Indians
Twins
And you could reasonably argue that Tampa Bay, Detroit, and Baltimore are all around the level of the Ms. Only the Royals are obviously worse. I think 2006 is going to be rough on the Mariners.
January 3rd, 2006 at 5:18 pmI completely disagree that the Angels are a better team than we are. Their lineup is worse, their SP is full of as many questions and our bullpen is better.
January 3rd, 2006 at 5:22 pmThese projections–both optimistic and pessimistic–seem to be based on the assumptions that EVERETT starts at DH, and IBANEZ in LF.
There’s an adage that every spring (in every camp) a surprise makes the team. Who’s to say that the 2006 surprise won’t be SIN-SOO CHOO, with MATT LAWTON a close second ? That Ibanez remains as DH, that Everett becomes 2nd DH, 5th OF, 1st bat off the bench?
BTW, BASEBALL AMERICA has finally taken notice of ANDRE ETHIER. (His OPS of almost .900 was hard not to notice.) BA named Ethier Oakland’s top minor leaguer * and the Texas League’s best hitting prospect.
January 3rd, 2006 at 5:24 pmAnd for the 4th consecutive year, CHOO was said to have the best OF arm in his league. (No such award was given in his other ml year.)
Their fielding averages were a wash. (Ethier: .990; Choo: .991; but Choo had 24 assists to go with his 200 po, whereas Ethier had 16 assists to go with his 275 po.)
________
*Oakland traded Ethier to the Dodgers, and unless he makes the jump, he’ll be playing for Las Vegas next year
I’d take the Anaheim pen over ours anyday.
Also, you have to figure that McPherson and Kotchman will start hitting sooner or later. Although, they’ve really done nothing but subtract from their team last year, haven’t done a whole lot to help themselves. That’s why I’m taking Oakland in the division.
January 3rd, 2006 at 5:27 pm#75– picky picky picky
January 3rd, 2006 at 5:27 pm“That 60 point OBP advantage for Cuddyer looks pretty big.”
It does, but then take a closer look. A basically full season in the 7th spot in the batting order, which looks about where they will slot, is in the ballpark of 500 PA. So, you start off with about 30 extra outs for Batista. Then over 500 PA, Batista hits about 8 more HR than Cuddyer and 6 fewer 2B. So far, Cuddyer’s still looking good.
For his career, Cuddyer has a ridiculous double-play rate of about 21%, owing to a large G/F ratio. Batista is right around a league-average 13% rate. Cuddyer hit in about the 7th spot of the Twins’ order last season, and got 75 or so DP opps. Normalize that to 500 PAs, and use it to find the DP opps over 500 PAs, and you get that Cuddyer also hits into 8 or so more DPs than Batista. Then, go check the run expectancy charts, and you see that those outs (which are not reflected in the OBP) are much more damaging than an out with no one on base. So conservatively, this knocks Cuddyer’s advantage down to about 20 outs over 500 PA.
Looking at each’s last season at 3B, and using BP’s defensive statistics because they are handy, Cuddyer ranks 20 *runs* lower than Batista on defense. I think that might be a bit high, but conservatively, I’d say we’re looking at a 10-run or so difference on defense.
So, overall, putting Batista in there gives you something like 20 more outs, 6 fewer 2B, but 8 more HR and a 10-run edge on defense. To me, that looks like mostly a wash, but considering the Twins’ last in the world ranking in ISO, and the fact that if Cuddyer starts hitting better, he can play in RF where he’s not such a defensive liability, it seems like a move in the right direction.
I think we’ve gone all the way from undervaluing OBP to overvaluing it, especially in the case of hitters with extreme skill sets.
January 3rd, 2006 at 5:31 pmWhy do you have to assume McPherson starts hitting? He looks terrible, his swing has huge holes in it, he has ALWAYS struck out at a prodigous pace, he’s not young anymore for a prospect and he has injury problems. He seems like a total bust to me.
It’s not so much what the Angels have done, it’s that the players they had who sucked, sucked legitimately, but the players they had “breakout” are due for a regression. Colon wasn’t as good as he looked, Lackey’s K rates came from nowhere (even going back to his MiL numbers) so that looks like a fluke, they actually plan on starting Hector Cassasco, etc. In this sense they seem like a totally opposite team from Seattle, whose crappy players you reasonably expect to improve and good players should maintain.
Thinking the Angels are a top team is, to me, the biggest case of intertial thinking.
Bad thinking: They won a lot of games in ‘05 and they didn’t do much in the offseason, they must be good again in 06.
Better thinking: They overperformed their pythag, the players they had overproduced for their periphs, and they didn’t do much in the offseason to protect against regression
The Angels are about a 85 win team right now. I’d put Seattle and Texas right at that 85 win mark as well. Oakland I haven’t looked into yet.
January 3rd, 2006 at 5:54 pmIf you say Seattle and Texas win 85 each, then Oakland is a 100+ win team, and they’re not.
January 3rd, 2006 at 6:09 pmUmm, care to spell that one out? I must be missing some connections.
January 3rd, 2006 at 6:20 pmre: #24 Loaiza and Milton Bradley as best signings of the offseason.
I really like the Octavio Dotel signing by the Yankees. It was at 1Y~2.1M. He has injury issues but so does our own Eddie and so does Braden Looper who went for 3Y~$13.5M+incentives. Tom Gordon is 38 years old and went for 3Y~$17M+option(1M buyout). It isn’t much risk for the Yankees to take and could look really good if he stays healthy.
As far as trades, I thought getting Cameron for Nady was good for San Diego and getting Loretta for Mirabelli was good for the Red Sox.
*hugs*
January 3rd, 2006 at 6:49 pmMandy
#85: Id love to see how you arrived at the 85 wins for the M’s (really…because I WANT to believe)….but there is no way that Texas and the Angels win 85, Oakland presumably wins even more and the M’s win 85. Where are all of these wins coming from?
January 3rd, 2006 at 7:02 pmterry,
the wins come from other teams. The 05 NL East was all .500 or better, why can’t the 06 AL West be? And I said about 85 wins, I’d but a confidence interval somewhere around 5 wins plus or minus.
Why do I think the Ms will win about 85? Simple, I went through the lineup and the staff and have pegged the Ms at about a 120 run imrpovement over last season, about 60 on each side. So I think 759 RS and 691 RA is about right. That pythags to 88.6 wins, which I trend down to 85 to account for the strength of schedule.
January 3rd, 2006 at 8:04 pmI’d like to see the 120 run improvement, what kind of numbers our roster needs to put up for a 120 run improvement.
We’ll no doubtedely be better — we can’t be worse, but I don’t think that much better.
January 3rd, 2006 at 8:06 pmThe M’s are going to win thier 123 games
Matt Lawton will prove to be the best per$ signing of this offseason, Felix Hernandez pitches 24 2/3 consecutive perfect innings over 3 games (2 consecutive P.G.) Richie Sexson will hit 57 HR and nearly break the RBI record with 187 as Ichiro scores 183 to take the AL record from the Babe and comes just short of opening a 300 hit club with 298 hits as he bats .422. Meche’s career year re-kindles his value and compensates for Pineiro’s 11 losing efforts (a record for being on a team that wins 120+ that lasts until 2073.) Reed proves to be an excellent table setter batting second after being inserted into that spot on April 5th and earns his first All-Star selection as a bench player in 2006. The best AL defense from 2005 goes on to win 5 gold gloves in 2006…
Anyway
January 3rd, 2006 at 8:06 pmWould you beleive 90 wins…
How about 75?
I think they’ll be somewhere in there. Kenji’s a HUGE improvement even if he’s as bad defensively as the young guys that were run out there last year. There is some chance that he could be worse, but not enough worse as to counteract his offense. The roster that finished the season batted 20 points higher over the year than the overall team total.
January 3rd, 2006 at 8:15 pmDallas McPherson is younger than Jeremy Reed, FWIW. So is Reed just as much of a “total bust”?
I noticed you didn’t mention Vlad Guerrero, BTW. Who is, with all due respect to Ichiro, the better player of the two, hands down. And you skipped over Kotchman (who is going to give the Angels a LOT more offense at 1B than Erstad just by projecting his 2005 over a full 2006 season, not including growth).
January 3rd, 2006 at 8:16 pmec, no, he’s not. Reed was born in 81, Dallas 80.
I didn’t mention Vlad because what’s there to say about him? I wouldn’t expect him to get any better or any worse in 06.
January 3rd, 2006 at 8:29 pmThe explanation of 120 runs.
Pitching:
Another 120 IP from Felix = +30
Washburn at around a 4 ERA = +15
Piniero at his 4.5 FIP = +23
Better bullpen = +7
Moyer decline = -5
General injury = -10
Hitting:
January 3rd, 2006 at 8:41 pmThis one was done more in aggregate than in pieces. Basically I subtracted out the “contributions” by the 11 players mentioned above, which by itself raised the team OPS by 40 points to .747. Figured Everett and Ibanez are a wash compared to Winn, Ibanez, and company from 05’s LF/DH. Figured Johjima for a 760 OPS and some minor improvement by Reed, Beltre, Ichiro, Lopez and came up with a team OPS a shade under .770, or about 60 points better than in 05. Than going by the rough approx (it tends to be more accurate in this range of 750-800 RS), of RS = OPS * 1000, come up with 770 RS and knocked it down a few points to account for SafeCo.
DMZ-
I hate to be even more of a pessimist, but if the M’s fail to make the playoffs this year, it’ll be the FIFTH year without playoffs–not the third.
January 3rd, 2006 at 8:56 pmThe Angels rotation goes
Colon
Lackey
Escobar
Santana
Carrasco! Laugh all you want, but he did pitch well last year. He’s not much different than 3/5 of the Ms rotation.
And their bullpen is pretty solid, as most would agree.
I’d take that run-prevention crew over the Ms’ any day. It’s just about as good as last year’s Angel pitchers, which were very good. To whomever said Lackey’s strikeout rate last year was a fluke… what makes you say that? He threw 200+ innings last year. What part of making a hitter miss the ball is flukey?
And their lineup looks like this:
CF Erstad
SS Orlando Cabrera
RF Vladimir Guerrero
LF Garret Anderson / Juan Rivera
DH Rivera / Anderson
1B Kotchman
3B Dallas McPherson / Figgins
C Jose Molina
SS Adam Kennedy
That could be a weak offense, but it’s also potentially an awesome defense. It’s actually similar to the Ms in some ways. Anyway, I’d rather pin my hopes on Kotchman, McPherson, and Rivera having breakout years with the bat in 06 than on Reed, Lopez, or Betancourt… they’re just far more developed hitters.
I don’t see a way to reasonably argue that the Ms will be better than the Angels next year.
January 3rd, 2006 at 9:28 pmI looked at the projected starters for all for ALW teams and feel better about the M’s chances than before.
#98 makes an optimistic prediction about the Angels in 06 but it’s not a sure thing. Just like with ALL the teams, some luck here, an injury or two there and the ALW is a crap shoot.
If I were a betting man, i’d say the order of finish would be:
January 3rd, 2006 at 9:33 pmA’s with 91 wins
M’s with 87 wins
Angels with 84 wins
Rangers with 80 wins
Here’s the Rangers’ lineup:
RF Brad Wilkerson
SS Michael Young
1B Mark Teixeira
3B Hank Blalock
LF Kevin Mench
CF Gary Matthews, Jr.
DH David Dellucci
2B Ian Kinsler
C Rod Barajas
SP Kevin Millwood
SP Adam Eaton
SP Vicente Padilla
SP Kameron Loe
SP Juan Dominguez
CL Francisco Cordero (Otsuka setting up)
While aknowledging that Texas’s offense may be overrated, adding Wilkerson to the top of the lineup is huge. The pitching is certainly suspect, but again, is it any more suspect than the Ms? I think it’s pretty clear the Rangers 06 are better (on paper) than the Ms 06.
January 3rd, 2006 at 9:36 pmI have to beleive that if Kenji is as good a game caller as he’s reputed to be and he’s behind the plate often that Pineiro and Meche might improve from a consistent good game caller(over last year.) However, being a good game caller is considered Wilson’s best asset and they both pitched consistently to him in multiple seasons without stringing any consistency together themselves. I think Kenji will prove to be a definite improvement to the pitching staff. I couldn’t possibly count all the pitches that I couldn’t beleive some young catcher was calling for last year. Even ones that didn’t end up in the stands.
I want to beleive that the M’s will be as good as this team could be this year, but even if Beltre hits like 04 and Kenji hits like in Japan it would take a few career years from the pitching staff to get them into the playoffs. I do think the AL west is somewhat up in the air and wouldn’t be too surprised by any team winning it.
Got to win the AL West or go home…
It’s VERY doubtful that the Wild Card won’t come from the East. I can’t even say whether I think the BJays, Bo-Sox or Yank’s will end up third. That’s an incredibly tough division and will make the Wild Card even tougher to get.
January 3rd, 2006 at 9:57 pmThe odd thing about Texas’ scary lineup:
I’d rather have Ichiro than Wilkerson as my RF
I’d rather have Reed than Matthews as my CF
I’d rather have Johjima than Barajas at catcher
I’d rather have Beltre than Blalock at 3B
Lopez and Kinsler are close enough at 2B
Sexson and Teixeira are close enough at 1B
Mench and Ibanez are close enough in LF
I’d rather have Dellucci than Everett
I’d rather have Young than Betancourt
Texas has a distinct edge over Seattle at DH and SS, and that’s it really.
January 3rd, 2006 at 10:24 pmRight now off the top of my head I have the division pegged at:
Oakland 98 wins
Anaheim 89 wins
Texas 84 wins
Seattle 73 wins
Oakland’s pitching is potentially devastating if Harden can remain healthy, while they may not be suited to go far in the playoffs (unless Johnson, Swisher and Crosby take big steps forward and they can keep Payton from getting too many at bats), their pitching depth could give them a hundred wins.
Nothing short of a complete miracle gets the M’s over .500 and into the hunt. By, miracle I mean the following
-Moyer posting an ERA under five
-Beltre having an OPS of at least 8 and a half
-Reed hitting .300
-Carl Everett not getting DFAed by July
-Betancourt hitting league average clip
-Jose Lopez drawing more than one walk per payday
-a) Jarrod Washburn has not exhausted his supply of magic beans.
b) Jarrod Washburn is still in favor with the clutch pitching Gods.
*Since Sexson’s contract is heavily backloaded, and since many contenders (NYY, BOS, CLE, ANA, ATL) could be in the market for a hard hitting firstbaseman, wouldn’t it make sense to deal Sexson in July if the price was right?
January 3rd, 2006 at 10:36 pmCCW, I was the one who said Lackey’s K rate was flukey and I gave the reason why I said it.
Furthermore, Escobar has had constant arm problems. Ervin Santana is nowhere near the type of pitcher most people think he is. And Carrasco is a joke. First of all, he’s 36 and has made 6 career starts. Next, the last time this guy had an ERA under 4.25 was 1997 and it was in the NL. Next, he had his great year in Washington, mayhaps the best pitching park in the world. Finally, his periphs were not radically different than ever as shown by his 4.32 xFIP. Comparing him to 3/5 of the Ms rotation is a joke.
and pslim has it right about Texas. A HUGE reason for their offense being so scary is the ballpark. Take a look at Teixiera’s splits. Also, Blalock is not a good hitter. Furthermore, their rotation is full of more ?s than ours. How will Dominguez and Loe adjust to starting full time? Padilla is bad at giving up HRs. Eaton can’t even post above avg ERAs in Petco.
It’s nowhere near as good as last year’s. Colon and Lackey are due to go backwards, not forwards. They lost Washburn’s 3.20 ERA and “replaced” it with Carrasco. It’s a markedly worse rotation.
As for their breakouts, McPherson’s not more advanced, Kotchman is, and Juan Rivera is, but that’s saying nothing since next year he’ll be 27 and be spending his 6th year in the majors.
January 3rd, 2006 at 11:16 pmIsn’t Beltre like 27 and spending his 6th or 7th year in the majors?
January 3rd, 2006 at 11:20 pmYes, and that relates to Reed, Lopez, and Betancourt how?
January 3rd, 2006 at 11:23 pmMatthew, why do you think good K rates that “come from nowhere” are a fluke? I thought striking people out was a repeatable skill. Also, Lackey’s always had good K rates… better than any Mariner other than Felix. And his K/BB have consistently been better than 2.5/1. That’s quite… again, better than everyone on the Ms staff other than Felix. Lackey’s a good pitcher… one of the best in the AL last year in fact.
Anyway, this is silly. When one of us has the time and effort to pick a real methodology to back up our conclusions, we should pick up the debate. Probably the easiest will be to wait for PECOTAs’s to come out. Until then, we’re wasting space.
January 4th, 2006 at 6:34 amBeltre will be 27 on April 7th and this will be his 9th year in the majors if you include a 195 A/B in 77 games when he was 19.
January 4th, 2006 at 9:26 amJeff and Derek, you make a fair point about Bavasi not sacrificing the long term for the short term. The M’s have only five players with guaranteed contracts beyond this season: Beltre ($11.5 million per year through 2009), Ichiro ($9.5 m/2007), Johjima ($5.2 m/2008), Sexson ($14m/2008), and Washburn ($9.3 m/2009). Obviously, one of these contracts does not look like the others. Setting aside the indefensible Washburn signing, the remaining contracts are for two elite talents (Beltre and Ichiro) albeit ones who played below their talent in 2005, a good hitter (Sexson) capable of great seasons, and a relatively unknown catcher (Johjima) who projects as at least a solid major leaguer. Bavasi’s bad moves this offseason may cost him his job, but at the very least, the team has financial flexibility and an improved minor league system going forward.
January 4th, 2006 at 9:57 amLopez is not a good infielder, Dave has done a far more eloquent
job of describing that. Betancourt makes him look far better
than he is…
Johjima will be an upgrade. It is a difficult thing
January 4th, 2006 at 10:14 amto be successful at both aspects of his game immediately
given the adjustment required by him to play here. I would
suspect that his bad will lag his defensive progress.
“Matthew, why do you think good K rates that “come from nowhere†are a fluke?”
Well, to be technical, I never said they WERE a fluke. I said they LOOK flukey. And you asnwered your own question. By definition, something that comes from nowhere is a fluke.
“I thought striking people out was a repeatable skill. Also, Lackey’s always had good K rates… better than any Mariner other than Felix.”
It is. He’s always had slightly above average K rates, not good K rates. He’d been low to mid 6s the previous 3 years in MLB and his MiL K rates never got higher than 7.2. Everything in his numbers paints him as a low to mid 6 K guy which is what he was for 3 years and then he suddenly posts an 8.2 K rate last year. That looks flukey. I don’t know how to explain it any clearer. The last part of your statement is completely irrelevant.
“And his K/BB have consistently been better than 2.5/1. That’s quite… again, better than everyone on the Ms staff other than Felix. Lackey’s a good pitcher… one of the best in the AL last year in fact.”
I never said he wasn’t. I said he would likely regress. Most likely his K rates go back to the level he established with his first 1000 or so IP and his ERA climbs back to the low to mid 4 range.
“Anyway, this is silly. When one of us has the time and effort to pick a real methodology to back up our conclusions, we should pick up the debate. Probably the easiest will be to wait for PECOTAs’s to come out. Until then, we’re wasting space.”
I can’t speak for you, but I feel comfortable with my method of player evaluation and feel that I’ve quite explicitly stated why I feel what I do about each player.
January 4th, 2006 at 12:34 pm