The Dream Scenario
When I posted my offseason plan, I noted that it was made with the understanding that the front office has real limitations they have to work under – they aren’t allowed to just trade half the roster and pitch the executives on the concept of freely available talent, so I made the suggestions to comply with the structure that Bavasi and the rest of the baseball operations team are working under.
This post, however, ignores all that. This is what I would like to see the Mariners do this winter if there were no executives to yell that we can’t trade the marketable left fielder, no writers penning wishes for a frontline starter everyday, no season ticket holders to placate, no press conferences to deal with, and the front office was just allowed to shape the roster based on baseball decisions without any outside influences. This, of course, isn’t any kind of realistic scenario, but it will show where I see the weaknesses of the team and potential ways to address them.
So, here goes – if Dave controlled the universe and didn’t have to answer to anyone, the offseason would look something like this.
| Lineup | Player | Position | Salary |
| 1. | Ichiro Suzuki | CF | $17,000,000 |
| 2. | Scott Hatteberg | DH | $1,800,000 |
| 3. | Nick Johnson | 1B | $5,500,000 |
| 4. | Adrian Beltre | 3B | $12,000,000 |
| 5. | Geoff Jenkins | RF | $8,000,000 |
| 6. | Kenji Johjima | C | $5,200,000 |
| 7. | Adam Jones | LF | $400,000 |
| 8. | Yuniesky Betancourt | SS | $1,300,000 |
| 9. | Ronnie Belliard | 2B | $1,600,000 |
| Bench | Player | Position | Salary |
| 1. | Ray Durham | Util | $7,500,000 |
| 2. | Willie Bloomquist | Inf | $950,000 |
| 3. | Jamie Burke | C | $400,000 |
| 4. | Wes Helms | 1B/3B | $2,150,000 |
| 5. | Kevin Mench | OF | $2,000,000 |
| Rotation | Player | Position | Salary |
| 1. | Felix Hernandez | Starter | $500,000 |
| 2. | Miguel Batista | Starter | $9,000,000 |
| 3. | David Wells | Starter | $4,000,000 |
| 4. | Bartolo Colon | Starter | $10,000,000 |
| 5. | Edwin Jackson | Starter | $500,000 |
| Bullpen | Player | Position | Salary |
| 1. | J.J. Putz | Closer | $3,800,000 |
| 2. | Sean Green | RH Setup | $450,000 |
| 3. | Jeremy Affeldt | LH Setup | $3,000,000 |
| 4. | Eric O’Flaherty | Middle | $450,000 |
| 5. | Todd Coffey | Middle | $450,000 |
| 6. | Cha Seung Baek | Long Relief | $450,000 |
Transactions that get us to this roster:
Trade Jarrod Washburn, Raul Ibanez, and Mike Morse to Philadelphia for Wes Helms and Adrian Cardenas
Trade Jose Lopez and Jose Vidro to Washington for Nick Johnson and Ronnie Belliard
Trade Richie Sexson and $4 million in cash to San Francisco for Ray Durham
Trade George Sherrill and Horacio Ramirez to Cincinnati for Scott Hatteberg and Todd Coffey
Trade Wladimir Balentien to Tampa for Edwin Jackson
Sign Geoff Jenkins to a 2 year, $16 million contract
Sign Kevin Mench to a 1 year, $2 million contract
Sign David Wells to a 1 year, $4 million contract
Sign Bartolo Colon to a 1 year, $10 million contract
Sign Jeremy Affeldt to a 3 year, $9 million contract
Quick explanations of why the other teams would make this trade:
Philadelphia adds the LH outfielder they’ve been looking for and another veteran starter to help fulfill Gillick’s old pitcher fetish while only parting with a utility player they don’t need and a prospect who plays the same position as Chase Utley.
Washington gets a toolsy young second baseman and relieves their 1B roster logjam, while Bowden gets a chance to trade Jose Vidro for young players for the second time in as many years.
San Francisco gets a first baseman at basically no cost and opens up second base for Kevin Frandsen.
Cincinnati creates a line-up spot for Joey Votto, continues to improve their bullpen, and gets an extra arm with a pulse for their rotation.
It’s a pretty significant gutting of the roster. Gone is half of the ’07 line-up, including the three DHs and the underperforming second baseman. In their place are a pair of high on-base left-handed first baseman, a slugging left-handed outfielder with range, and a serviceable veteran second baseman to hold down the fort until the shiny new second base prospect is ready in a few years.
On the pitching side of the ledger, the calls for a frontline starter are ignored, and the rotation is filled with two overweight question marks and an Australian kid with very little experience in the rotation. However, the key isn’t the three names in the rotation – it’s the guys who are still around, ready to take their jobs should anyone fail. Still in the organization are Ryan-Rowland Smith, Cha Seung Baek, Brandon Morrow, Ryan Feierabend, and Robert Rohrbaugh. The M’s would go to camp with 10 guys potentially available to break camp as a starting pitcher and to fill in for the inevitable nagging injuries that the new rotund pitchers will have to work through.
This team, while not perfect and filled with potential injury issues, would have a solid chance of taking the division if certain things break right – Nick Johnson’s recovery goes well and he plays a full season, either Colon or Wells are healthy and effective, Rowland-Smith or one of the young kids solidifies another rotation spot, and Affeldt/Green/O’Flaherty/Coffey can replicate some of the terrific performances the pen got from Sherrill and company in ’07. It’s all within the realm of possibility, and does give the team something like a 20-25% chance of knocking off the Angels and stealing the division title.
The beauty of this roster, however, is the 2009 team. About $33 million of the budget is coming off the books after the season, giving the team significant financial flexibility going into the future while retaining the core young talent to build around going forward. The team creates potential opportunities for Jeff Clement and Brandon Morrow to demand playing time through strong performances in Tacoma, keeps all it’s valuable trade chips for a midseason deal if the team is showing signs of being a contender, and realigns the organizational talent to better fit together and complement each other’s strengths and weaknesses.
The defense is good (potentially terrific, depending on how Nick Johnson moves after a year off with a broken leg), the offense is solid and balanced with both LH and RH hitters who can get on base and drive the ball into the gaps (while also being perfectly setup to take advantages of platoon strengths), the bullpen is still good, and the rotation is good enough. No, it’s not filled with a bunch of big name Cy Young contenders, but for once, it’d be nice to see the team stop obsessing over the quality of a couple of pitchers and figure out that teams win baseball games, not starting pitchers.
Of course, none of this is going to happen, and a lot of it couldn’t happen even if the front office wanted to be so radical, but it is at least nice to dream every once in a while.
92 – Why? If Triunfel can play 2B, why wouldn’t you want him to do that? There are far more players available that can play 3B or, of course, the OF.
That rotation sucks. With the exception of Felix, of course. But otherwise, yeah, it really sucks.
So many things that make little or no sense to me, but I obviously can’t pollute this thread with a response to all of them.
How ’bout just a couple?
You’re trading Sexson plus $4 MM cash to SF for………Ray Durham? How the heck is that supposed to help us? We need offense, and you’re trading away one of our best hitters for a guy that’s going to be a benchwarmer? Really? You would really rather have Durham for $11.5 MM than Sexson for $14 MM? Hey, I know he sucks in the field, but we sure could use his bat. Since this is all a fantasy, couldn’t you come up with a way to get him off first but keep his bat in the lineup?
Trying to piece together a rotation with a bunch of question marks is one hell of a way to put together a winning team. But you’ve created this mess in part because you’ve traded away one of our most reliable arms, Washburn, and getting back a rather questionable return for him. Hey, I’m all for trading Ibanez now while he has a lot of value to other teams, and I know Adrian Cardenas is highly regarded…..but he is only in low A and hasn’t exactly been tearing it up, and losing Washburn would put a huge hole in our rotation. And Wes Helms????? We’re giving away a heck of a lot of talent here without getting a whole lot back to show for it.
It’s great that we’re freeing up a lot of money for 2009 — but that in itself is a problem. We would have a lot of positions to fill and it’s hard to find that many appropriate peices in just one offseason to put together a whole roster the way you would want it. In other words, too much work to do in just one offseason. Better to split the work up into 2 or 3 years and make good solid decisions all along the way.
#97, that’s got to be the best example of replacement level posting I’ve ever seen on the internet.
you’re trading away one of our best hitters …
Care to elaborate on how Sexson is one of our best hitters? He hit 205/295/399. Our weak-hitting SS hit 289/308/418. Aside from Lopez, Sexson was our WORST hitter last year and that’s before you adjust for position.
Sure Sexson is likely to rebound, but so is Durham. Given that, I’d plan to start Durham instead of Belliard at 2B. I know some people get excited about home run totals, but Richie Sexson simply isn’t very good right now and that’s assuming he rebounds. A repeat of 2007 should get him released in June. Hatteberg and Johnson are both better hitters at this point than Sexson.
98/Sports on a Shtick,
While Yuni is no superstar, he’s playing (offensively) to his known potential, roughly. Lopez is underperforming, and last year was much worse than Yuni, if you can believe it. Defensively, as you noted, Yuni may not be what we thought, but I think defense is always harder to analyze statistically, so it’s harder to say at this early point. He was having problems early in the year and he fixed them, which is a good sign, right? So while Yuni may not be the ideal SS, his issues are nothing compared to what Lopez did last year.
102 –
Durham is atrocious in the field. Really, really bad. If you play Durham at 2b, why the heck wouldn’t you keep Raul in the field?
Also, are you sure Hatteberg, coming into his 37yo season, is a better hitter than Sexson? He had a nice BABIP, a soft platoon and a delightful home ballpark. Put them both in Safeco, and I think Dave would agree that Sexson’s production would likely be higher. The question concerns cost.
I am not sure how you managed to type “one of our best hitters” in regards to Richie Sexson with a straight face.
94 & 101,
My understanding of Dave’s proposal is that Adrian Cardenas will be ready for 2B in a few years, not Triunfel. Doing a little searching on the web, however, I see that some Phillies bloggers and the experts they’ve talked to (Phuturephillies.com) have some doubt about whether Cardenas will stick at second, so it’s a debatable idea. However, a slight liability defensively could be made up for if he reaches his hitting potential, which is supposed to be high
Overall, I think Dave’s ideas are interesting, to say the least. I wish it had more young guys and less short-term veterans, but I realize that our guys just aren’t ready yet. I’ve pretty much written this season off, and I think I’ll be spending more time following the minors than the Mariners. I’m already looking ahead to September callups, and ST hasn’t even started yet! That’s how optimistic I am.
I think perhaps the most interesting thing to see this year is if Bavasi will find a way to hold on to his job. I don’t know which way to lean on this, because even though BB is less than the ideal, he is a known. The Mariners have taught me to fear the unknown.
106-By “best”, he doesn’t necessarily mean at hitting I don’t think. I’m sure Sexson is the best at something. Perhaps at Ping Pong, or maybe he’s really funny. Actually, depending on perspective, he is the best when it comes to height…nobody on the M’s roster grew taller than he did.
[ot, getting its own post]
How is Belliard’s defense at second? And Durham’s? They seem like they would be poor considering Durham’s age and Belliards shape. With the number of ground ball pitchers on this staff it seems like defense at second base would be quite important. Also what’s to like about the second base prospect coming over from Philly his numbers seem pretty mediocre.
How will Mariners ever be able to keep attendence up if their ticket prices will be that much more expensive?
111-
the fans will come in droves next season to watch Lohse take the mound…
and to watch the outfield of Ibanez, Ichiro, and Morse chase down fly-balls after they trade Jones and the rest of the farm for Bedard…
get ready for a GREAT season!
Hey, great news!
[being OT is not great news]
[ot]
[ot]
You’re trading Sexson plus $4 MM cash to SF for………Ray Durham? How the heck is that supposed to help us? We need offense, and you’re trading away one of our best hitters for a guy that’s going to be a benchwarmer? Really? You would really rather have Durham for $11.5 MM than Sexson for $14 MM?
Richie Sexson’s last 12 months of OPS:
March/April 2006: .659
May 2006: .610
June 2006: .859
July 2006: .877
August 2006: .890
September/October 2006: 1.140
March/April 2007: .606
May 2007: .737
June 2006: .816
July 2006: .584
August 2007: .706
September/October 2007: .167 (2 PAs)
Richie Sexson’s career OPS is .859. Out of the last 12 months of hitting data for him, he’s been at or over his career norms in 4 of them, and well below them in 8 of them, including 5 months where he’s hit like Willie Bloomquist, while playing terrible defense at 1B.
I know you keep asserting Sexson’s a superior player, but the performance data for the last two years does not back that assertion up (an average 1B in MLB had a .850 OPS in 2006, so Sexson was at best a bit above average if we adjust for park- and then we have to adjust for defense). If we are lucky, he will be an average 1B again offensively (.276/.357/.464, for an .820 OPS), which makes him JUST a bad player due to his defense. If we aren’t lucky and he really is done, we’ll get Willie Bloomquist playing bad 1B.
Oh, and:
But you’ve created this mess in part because you’ve traded away one of our most reliable arms, Washburn
If you mean “a reliably mediocre 4th starter”, then yes, Jarrod Washburn is “reliable”. He’s posted awful peripheral statistics, doesn’t go deep in games and hasn’t hit 200 IP since 2003, and clearly isn’t worth the contract he was signed for, while playing in a ballpark that is tailor-made for his type of pitcher (lefthanded finesse flyball pitcher).
You seem to be putting inordinate value on guys like Sexson and Washburn who are completely replaceable- the only thing distinguishing them from any other number of mediocre to bad veterans is the “Seattle Mariners” on their uniform. Is it possible you work for the Mariner front office?
eponymous, are you saying that Bartolo Colon or Edwin Jackson or David Wells are more reliable and a better fit for the Mariner’s rotation next year than Washburn? Would you rather replace him with one of these guys going into next season?
Of course Washburn is replaceable — every player is really, when you come down to it. And there are certainly guys available as free agents this year that could approximate his production, who we could sign while giving up no more than a draft pick or two. Like Kyle Lohse or Carlos Silva. Which could be had for somewhere near the salary that Washburn has. Would you rather have one of these guys?
As far as Sexson goes, you’re puting to much emphasis on short term results. The guy’s been an excellent hitter for the bulk of his career, and will almost certainly hit near his career levels next year. Can’t understand why people think he’s somehow forgotten how to be a good hitter.
Half of Sexson’s career was in the NL.
He’s also 33, and his OPS has declined steadily every year since 2005. He is pretty clearly on the decline phase of his career.
There is no reason to expect that he will be any better in 2008 than he was in 2007, and pretty good reason to expect that he will be worse.
There is certainly no factual basis for claiming that he is one of the best hitters on the team.
There is certainly no factual basis for claiming that he is one of the best hitters on the team.
There’s no factual basis for claiming he isn’t, either. We absolutely don’t know what he’s going to do next year, just like we don’t know what Lopez or Jones or Ichiro or Beltre or Johjima or any other player will do next year. We only have the past to go on to tell us what is most likely, and that tells us that Richie Sexson is likely to hit at or near his career levels next year.
I think you’re making the same mistake as eponymous in putting too much emphasis on short-term results. The overwhelming evidence that Sexson has provided during his career for us to draw on to come to a reasonable expectation for his production next year says that he should be a very good hitter, relative to the league.
I’m not sure why anybody would look at last year’s numbers and come to the conclusion that that defines the type of hitter that Sexson is now. It’s only one year. We’ve got plenty of evidence in the past that says he’s a much better hitter than that.
He is pretty clearly on the decline phase of his career.
That statement pretty much elicits a “no s—, Sherlock”. Of course he’s in the decline phase of his career. He’s 33 now, and very few players are not in their decline phase at that age. I don’t think anybody could reasonably expect him to hit 40 or more homers with an OPS near .900 anymore. Well, not like he absolutely couldn’t do that another year, but it’s highly unlikely. He’s probably not going to be the hitter he was a few years ago, and we don’t have to look at his numbers to know that. It’s pretty much an axiom about ballplayers that they don’t hit as well in their 30’s as they do in their mid-to-late 20’s. In fact, looking at an individual’s numbers might only skew our perception of a players decline by making it seem more or less than it actually is (Ibanez is likely a good example of this).
There is very little reason to think that he’ll duplicate last year’s poor showing. He almost certainly will hit better than that, and by quite a bit.
There’s a great factual basis for claiming Sexson isn’t one of the best hitters on the team: he isn’t.
You can argue he could be, next year, sure.
But then, taking a three-year average of a player’s performance gets you to a pretty high degree of accuracy projecting the next year’s performance.
Which is like… .245/.335/.480 (which is actually almost right on the Bill James projection for next year).
That’s be above-average for an AL first-baseman. That’s not great.
taking a three-year average of a player’s performance gets you to a pretty high degree of accuracy projecting the next year’s performance.
Usually, for most players, I think that would be true. But Richie Sexson’s season last year was far from usual for him, or for any player. It’s a highly unusual thing to see a player’s production vary so much in one season. We normally do see considerable variance from players year-to-year, but what he did last year was well beyond the norm. And that three year average does put him at .815 OPS, which is certainly within the range of what I would expect from him next year. I’d probably expect a little bit higher, but somewhere between .800 and .870 seems most reasonable.
Maybe you think I’m arguing that he’s going to be an above-average firstbaseman next year. Well, no, I don’t think that. His defense is pretty bad, and if he’s around league-average hitting wise, that makes the whole package somewhat below average. But it’s because of the defense, not the offense. What I am arguing is that he has value, and it seems counter-productive to trade him off without getting some reasonable value in return. We are going to need a firstbaseman next year, no? If we can find one that’s better than Sexson that we can reasonably acquire, I’d be all for it. But if we were to find that guy, why not just move Sexson to DH where he has plus value to a team?
<I.eponymous, are you saying that Bartolo Colon or Edwin Jackson or David Wells are more reliable and a better fit for the Mariner’s rotation next year than Washburn? Would you rather replace him with one of these guys going into next season?
If I can clear up salary for 2009, sure, why not? Washburn just isn’t very good for the premium salary in terms of years/dollars he commands. Let Philly deal with the downside risk of the rest of his multiyear deal.
As far as Sexson goes, you’re puting to much emphasis on short term results. The guy’s been an excellent hitter for the bulk of his career, and will almost certainly hit near his career levels next year. Can’t understand why people think he’s somehow forgotten how to be a good hitter.
Again, Sexson’s career OPS is around .850. His performance was below that in 2006 AND 2007, and for 9 months of the past 12 Richie Sexson played baseball, he basically hit like Willie Bloomquist, and spent 3 months hitting like Richie Sexson. It’s not a one year fluke. He’s been a drag on the offense for a season and a half.
Besides, your argument is that we should ignore Richie Sexson’s most recent performance when we assess his value- so why shouldn’t we ignore Ray Durham’s most recent performance when we figure HIS value? Ray Durham was a better hitter in 2006 than Richie Sexson was (.293/.360/.538 as opposed to .264/.338/.504). Or does this argument only work for Richie Sexson?
It’s a highly unusual thing to see a player’s production vary so much in one season.
Jeff Cirillo, Scott Spiezio and every player who started a decline phase say “Hi” to you. There are plenty of hitters who start working their way out of the league in their early 30’s, and there is nothing that says the decline has to be gradual- especially when Richie Sexson’s stock in trade boils down to mashing pitches into the bleachers and doesn’t include foot speed, particularly good strike zone judgment or coverage.
What I am arguing is that he has value, and it seems counter-productive to trade him off without getting some reasonable value in return.
A below-average 1B has very little value, because it’s relatively easy to find 1B who can hit decently and not be horrible defensively. A backup plan at 2B for Belliard who could also fill in in the OF (basically, a Mark McLemore type) is fine for the return on value.
Yeah. It’s not that unusual at all to see that kind of variance.
123 (eponymous)
If this is true (and I believe that it is), why don’t we have one in our minor league system? Or is there, that I’m not aware of?
#123:
Well, #1, I’m not ignoring Sexson’s most recent performance. But I’m also looking at it in the perspective of his career as a whole, which tells me a heck of a lot more than just one year does. And I’m not exactly sure what you’re point is about Ray Durham. I’m not ignoring his most recent year, I also consider it in perspective of his whole career. Ray Durham has a 103 OPS+ for his career. In 2006, it was 126. In 2007, it was 65. He also has experienced pretty wild swings the last two years, but the average of the two is pretty much in line with what you’d expect from a guy that’s in his mid thirties and has an OPS+ for his career of 103. Now you can go ahead and believe that 2006 is closer to his true talent level than 2007 is, if that’s what you’re trying to say, but myself, I find that hard to agree with. Going forward, somewhere in the low 90’s seems reasonable to expect. I’m not at all familiar with his current defensive proficiency, but unless he’s at least average for a second baseman, he doesn’t hold a whole lot of value for a team. He’s still got a place in Major League Baseball, but would you really rather pay Durham $11.5 MM rather than Richie Sexson $14 MM?
Jeff Cirillo, Scott Spiezio and every player who started a decline phase say “Hi†to you. There are plenty of hitters who start working their way out of the league in their early 30’s, and there is nothing that says the decline has to be gradual
Well, yes there is. The vast majority of players do not suffer precipitous declines in performance during their decline phase. We know this from the many age-related decline studies that have been done. Since you can’t look at any one player’s numbers and know whether you’re looking at reliable information that tells you anything about his decline, we can look at huge numbers of players and make good conclusions from that large data set. With the caveat, of course, that the study is done well with a good design and precepts. What those studies have been telling us is that baseball players, in the absence of factors such as injury, debilitating illness, lifestyle habits, or lack of conditioning, do not suffer huge declines in true talent level or performance from one year to the next. So when you see numbers that suggest to you that a player has done otherwise, you should be mighty skeptical about coming to that conclusion.
In other words, ball players don’t just “lose it” from one season to the next. Well, at least not if they’re keeping themselves in shape, they haven’t had a career-altering injury, they don’t practice bad lifestyle decisions, etc. There are certainly times when players would fall under one of those categories. But that’s the exception and we usually know about these things. But nothing that I at least know of about Sexson suggests that any of those are true about him. Maybe something is wonky with him and he just can’t play like he used to, but like I said, in the absense of any knowledge of something like that, I’d be pretty dang skeptical of coming to that conlusion about him.
Much more likely that he was the recipient of what you might call negative random occurence, and we should expect a return to more normal levels for him next year.
And honestly, you can’t just bring up one or two names and point to them and go “aha!” That’s ecological fallacy taken to it’s most extreme. Every player is an individual, and trying to look at one certain player to discern something about one other particular player is just, quite frankly, bad baseball analysis. It’s much more informative to look at large groups of people to try to understand trends as a whole, with the understanding that while these trends apply to the majority of players, it’s not going to necessarily apply to every individual.
With the caveat, of course, that the study is done well with a good design and precepts. What those studies have been telling us is that baseball players, in the absence of factors such as injury, debilitating illness, lifestyle habits, or lack of conditioning, do not suffer huge declines in true talent level or performance from one year to the next.
I’m sorry, but you’re wrong.
There’s a huge amount of variability in player careers. Many players stave off decline from year to year, many suffer huge declines. Happens all the time.
As a group, certainly, the decline is gentle, but there’s also a selection bias there… but ignore that for a second. Given any player over the age of 27, there’s a chance they’ll have an up season, a down season, a normal season, a shockingly great one, and a decline. All of these happen more than you give them credit.
In the decline phase of a player’s career, a dramatic year-to-year decline often ends their career.
In other words, ball players don’t just “lose it†from one season to the next. Well, at least not if they’re keeping themselves in shape, they haven’t had a career-altering injury, they don’t practice bad lifestyle decisions, etc. There are certainly times when players would fall under one of those categories. But that’s the exception and we usually know about these things.
This just isn’t true. It happens all the time.
I don’t know what studies you’re reading, but there’s massively more player performance variation season-to-season in their career, and players can and do, indeed, fall off a cliff one year.
I don’t know what studies you’re reading, but there’s massively more player performance variation season-to-season in their career, and players can and do, indeed, fall off a cliff one year
Their stats certainly do — but that’s not telling us that their performance is. Age-related studies are incredibly, incredibly difficult to do in a way that returns data where you can be confident in what it’s telling you. There is just too much selective sampling being forced into the study.
So let me ask you. When is a player most likely to leave the game? Well, there can be different reasons why, and that affects when any one player leaves the game, but I’d have to guess that it’s much more likely to happen after the player has had a bad year. That’s probably not too surprising. Either the player himself decides that he’s had enough and it’s time to hang it up, or no team is interested in his services anymore. Because if a player’s going good, they’re generally going to want to stick around a bit longer and there are going to be teams that want them. It’s usually not till their numbers decline that they stop playing. So you do an aging study and you find out that, what do you know?, players at the end of their careers seem to deteriorate dramatically. But that’s just an artifice created by selective sampling. You see the problem?
I’m pretty sure it was Tangotiger that said that we don’t have the luxury of seeing all players play for 2-3000 at bats every year from the time they are 17 until they are 45 so we can get a totally accurate picture of how players age. There is just so much bias and selective sampling employed by Major League teams to trust that you can assume that any one study is telling you what it’s supposed to. There’s no reason at all to think that, in actuality, players true talent levels deteriorate dramatically all of a sudden. It’s only the way it’s perceived to happen.
Okay, but you said before there were all kinds of studies proving your point, and now you’re arguing that no study can prove your point.
So again — where are these great studies you said exist that prove player performance doesn’t deteriorate suddenly, so I can go check them out?
Apparently Christina Kahrl of of BPro thinks Mr. Balentien should be starting this year. *sigh* She should spend some time with us here at ussmariner.
http://www.baseballprospectus.com/article.php?articleid=7000
Sorry, it’s probably the pay part. I’ll qouthe,
“Me, I’d rather see the Mariners make Jose Vidro disappear, give most of the DH at-bats to Raul Ibañez, and play Balentien and Jones in the outfield“.
I’ll give her credit. She does advocate removing Vidro and setting Raul in at DH. Maybe she is reading??
He’s still got a place in Major League Baseball, but would you really rather pay Durham $11.5 MM rather than Richie Sexson $14 MM?
Yes, because neither of them are close to the sort of return you’d want for a player playing their position, and right-handed pull hitters who are statues defensively are poor fits for Safeco. I’d rather do Dave’s plan. You’re wasting money on both of them, but I have more use for a utility IF/OF in a decline phase than a 1B in a decline phase.
Their stats certainly do — but that’s not telling us that their performance is.
Ah, performance divorced from statistics. Maybe we can start talking about what makes for good team chemistry, too, if we’re going to divorce ourselves from any discussion of things we can objectively analyze.
Also, your hypothesis is “There aren’t big declines; people just leave baseball when they have a flukey bad year in the course of gradual decline.” There’s also the hypothesis of “People leave baseball when they have big declines”. How would you test between these hypotheses? And if you can’t, you can’t SAY one is more true than the other, can you?