Huzzah, More Baseball as Mariners Travel to Anaheim
| MARINERS (20-25) | ΔMs | ANGELS (17-27) | EDGE | |
| HITTING (wOBA*) | -5.6 (19th) | 1.4 | 4.4 (14th) | Angels |
| FIELDING (RBBIP) | 2.3 (16th) | -5.6 | -17.1 (27th) | Mariners |
| ROTATION (xRA) | 11.0 (7th) | -2.6 | -24.4 (29th) | Mariners |
| BULLPEN (xRA) | 5.6 (8th) | 1.2 | -7.5 (28th) | Mariners |
| OVERALL (RAA) | 13.3 (14th) | -5.7 | -44.5 (27th) | MARINERS |
Heartbreaking. It’s the word easily at hand for such a series as the one the Mariners just experienced. It’s hyperbolic, of course. Nobody’s heart was literally broken, I hope. Figuratively? I don’t know. Those weren’t the results that most of us were daring to think of after the Mariners seemed on the verge of .500 and had just reached second place in the division.
One thing I wonder is how it might feel to be an Indians fan right now and gone through that series. Have the Mariners had such a series go in their way? They must have, at some point, but if so it’s faded from my memory. This will fade too. Baseball is a long haul and in a sport where they say that failing 7 times out of 10 is a success, at the end of the year there aren’t a whole lot of people celebrating. So go find your light where you can. I’m sad the Mariners were swept. But I’m sad because I cared, so that’s something.
| Batter | PA | P/PA | Slash line | nBB | K (sw) | 1B/2B/3B/HR | Sw- | Ct+ | Qual+ |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| K Seager* | 53 | 4.1 | .227/.340/.409 | 8 | 9 (8) | 6 / 2 / 0 / 2 | 91 | 104 | 115 |
| M Saunders* | 50 | 3.7 | .178/.280/.222 | 5 | 16 (14) | 6 / 2 / 0 / 0 | 101 | 92 | 80 |
| K Morales^ | 48 | 3.9 | .295/.354/.523 | 4 | 9 (7) | 7 / 4 / 0 / 2 | 91 | 98 | 140 |
| M Morse | 41 | 3.8 | .289/.357/.421 | 3 | 11 (8) | 8 / 2 / 0 / 1 | 104 | 87 | 90 |
| J Smoak^ | 40 | 4.5 | .303/.425/.545 | 7 | 11 (10) | 6 / 2 / 0 / 2 | 93 | 101 | 84 |
| D Ackley* | 40 | 4.1 | .171/.275/.200 | 5 | 10 (4) | 5 / 1 / 0 / 0 | 75 | 108 | 110 |
| B Ryan | 38 | 3.3 | .250/.289/.361 | 2 | 8 (7) | 7 / 1 / 0 / 1 | 124 | 94 | 108 |
| R Ibanez* | 33 | 3.1 | .333/.333/.909 | 0 | 5 (5) | 4 / 1 / 0 / 6 | 120 | 92 | 126 |
| J Montero | 30 | 3.5 | .222/.300/.333 | 3 | 5 (4) | 5 / 0 / 0 / 1 | 103 | 93 | 119 |
| J Bay | 27 | 4.4 | .182/.333/.364 | 5 | 7 (7) | 2 / 1 / 0 / 1 | 86 | 78 | 123 |
It’s hard for me to write about the Mariners’ offense and not go down roads that come off as overly negative. Part of it is because the offense, as a whole, is not very good. Part of it is because most of the bits and pieces that have had positive story lines this year aren’t the bits and pieces that I care about when it comes to the future of this team.
I believe that I will take a middling team over an absolute train wreck like 2008 or 2010, but I was really hoping that this season wouldn’t be kept afloat by the performances of Jason Bay, Kendrys Morales, Michael Morse and Raul Ibanez. I have nothing against those four, but they aren’t among the four that I wanted to see success from this year.
| Batter | PA | P/PA | Slash line | nBB | SO (sw) | 1B/2B/3B/HR | Sw- | Ct+ | Qual+ |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| M Trout | 57 | 4.3 | .289/.439/.556 | 11 | 11 (6) | 7 / 3 / 0 / 3 | 72 | 107 | 99 |
| A Pujols | 56 | 4.0 | .250/.339/.442 | 4 | 9 (5) | 7 / 4 / 0 / 2 | 104 | 105 | 77 |
| M Trumbo | 56 | 3.7 | .216/.304/.431 | 5 | 16 (13) | 4 / 5 / 0 / 2 | 107 | 91 | 99 |
| A Callaspo^ | 53 | 3.6 | .256/.302/.419 | 5 | 3 (1) | 8 / 1 / 0 / 2 | 85 | 118 | 100 |
| H Kendrick | 52 | 4.0 | .340/.396/.520 | 2 | 12 (12) | 12 / 3 / 0 / 2 | 122 | 96 | 111 |
| J Hamilton* | 50 | 3.9 | .239/.333/.500 | 4 | 10 (8) | 5 / 3 / 0 / 3 | 116 | 90 | 97 |
| E Aybar^ | 38 | 3.1 | .167/.184/.222 | 1 | 3 (1) | 4 / 2 / 0 / 0 | 116 | 116 | 101 |
| C Iannetta | 38 | 4.7 | .208/.526/.208 | 14 | 7 (5) | 5 / 0 / 0 / 0 | 67 | 89 | 82 |
| J Shuck* | 38 | 3.4 | .273/.342/.364 | 4 | 3 (2) | 6 / 3 / 0 / 0 | 83 | 116 | 88 |
| B Harris | 20 | 4.2 | .263/.300/.579 | 1 | 7 (5) | 3 / 0 / 0 / 2 | 95 | 102 | 71 |
It’s easy to point to the Angels’ disappointing record and focus about Pujols and Hamilton. I’m content to do that. Not even counting the rest of this season, the Angels owe $106 million over the next four seasons to Josh Hamilton. Hamilton has played 2013 below replacement level so far.
Not counting the rest of this season, the Angels owe $212 million over the next eight seasons to Albert Pujols. Pujols has not been as bad as Hamilton though. He’s been one run better according to FanGraphs, and still below replacement level.
| MARINERS | ΔMs | ANGELS | EDGE | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| INFIELD | 3.1 (13th) | -1.6 | -18.5 (30th) | Mariners |
| OUTFIELD | -0.9 (19th) | -4.1 | 1.4 (13th) | Angels |
| RBBIP | 0.304 (16th) | +.007 | 0.327 (27th) | Mariners |
| OVERALL | 2.3 (16th) | -5.6 | -17.1 (27th) | MARINERS |
21 MAY 19:05 – JEROME WILLIAMS vs AARON HARANG
Jerome Williams has had no problems with the Mariners in the past. That doesn’t mean much, or anything, or maybe it means everything. Maybe confidence is what separates the best from the “average” once you reach the stratospheric level that is Major League baseball and maybe William’s past success has him overflowing with confidence right now. I’m skeptical such a mindset matters in baseball but it sure would make all our wrangling with numbers and projection models really funny in hindsight.
You ever stop and think of just how much effort, physical and mental, goes into baseball? Baseball! Of all things. Gosh we’re weird.
22 MAY 16:05 – C.J. WILSON* vs BRANDON MAURER
Pujols and Hamilton are obviously the big financial weights on the Angels’ payroll for the future, but C.J. Wilson was also a big signing and upon donning the Angel uniform rather immediately went from All-Star-level pitcher to ho-hum around league average pitcher. He hasn’t been a complete disaster obviously, and has a relatively short term of three years left after 2013, but boy the Angels sure haven’t gotten their money’s worth yet.
| Reliever | BF | Str+ | nBB | Ct- | K(sw) | GB+ | HR | Qual- | LI |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| C Capps | 47 | 105 | 1 | 93 | 16 (13) | 68 | 3 | 88 | 0.4 |
| T Wilhelmsen | 41 | 110 | 1 | 96 | 10 (8) | 128 | 0 | 125 | 1.5 |
| O Perez* | 39 | 102 | 5 | 81 | 17 (13) | 106 | 1 | 101 | 0.3 |
| Y Medina | 37 | 94 | 3 | 102 | 9 (5) | 117 | 0 | 78 | 0.5 |
| C Furbush* | 33 | 103 | 2 | 82 | 13 (8) | 63 | 2 | 124 | 0.8 |
| H Noesi | 28 | 103 | 2 | 108 | 4 (2) | 51 | 0 | 140 | 0.4 |
| B Beavan | 27 | 101 | 2 | 95 | 6 (4) | 95 | 1 | 161 | 0.3 |
Yoervis Medina has quite impressed me thus far, flashing a mid-90s fastball and generating lots of ground balls. And although so far he’s actually had better control with the big club, he’s still well below average. Which made Eric Wedge’s decision to turn to Medina on Saturday with the bases loaded, nobody out and a tie game in the bottom of the ninth all the more curious.
I hope there was a reason beyond “it wasn’t a save situation” but I have my doubts. I imagine the question was posed to Wedge in the post game media conference and I imagine that Wedge gave some sort of answer I could go refer to. But I’m not really interested in it. I’m sure there are some cases where mathematically-seeming sub-optimal bullpen usage is the best bet because of factors we’re not privy to including how pitchers are feeling that particular day, but I am convinced that substantial portion of the time it’s because managers are slavishly devoted to predefined roles for each reliever.
I find it so odd that there’s so much reverence given to these roles, as though they were commandments passed down from on high instead of a system that developed and now calcified only in the past 20 years or so.
| Reliever | BF | Str+ | nBB | Ct- | K(sw) | GB+ | HR | Qual- | LI |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| D De La Rosa | 58 | 101 | 4 | 99 | 13 (11) | 132 | 1 | 73 | 0.8 |
| E Frieri | 55 | 98 | 11 | 83 | 17 (13) | 33 | 2 | 102 | 2.2 |
| M Kohn | 42 | 96 | 7 | 90 | 12 (10) | 49 | 1 | 124 | 0.7 |
| G Richards | 39 | 100 | 3 | 114 | 3 (2) | 143 | 1 | 86 | 0.4 |
| J Williams | 36 | 102 | 3 | 100 | 4 (4) | 105 | 0 | 92 | 2.0 |
| S Downs* | 30 | 99 | 1 | 100 | 5 (5) | 169 | 0 | 92 | 2.0 |
| M Roth* | 28 | 98 | 0 | 111 | 5 (4) | 127 | 0 | 124 | 0.7 |
| R Coello | 23 | 102 | 0 | 87 | 12 (9) | 82 | 0 | 39 | -0.3 |
| M Lowe | 20 | 90 | 2 | 126 | 1 (1) | 119 | 0 | 89 | 1.1 |
These guys walk a lot of people. The Mariners have become suspiciously adept at taking walks. It the games get into Anaheim’s bullpen, we might see some drawn out finishes. That’s great news if you like baseball on!
Comments
7 Responses to “Huzzah, More Baseball as Mariners Travel to Anaheim”
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
My guess is this is the last series for Montero. He gives us nothing right now and Sucre would be a defensive upgrade and at this point also an offensive upgrade.
I blame CJ Wilson’s and Josh Hamilton’s declines on their new shampoo.
I mean, come on – if you had to worry about strange women grabbing you and sniffing your hair every time you took the field, you’d find it hard to concentrate on baseball too.
I don’t know what’s going on with Pujols, though.
“It’s hyperbolic, of course.” I’d be satisfied if it was parabolic though and we’d passed the point of zero slope and entered into positive derivations. The Angels would be the perfect foil for such a turn as this. Go M’s.
Failling 7 out of 10 times is a success … for a batter. For a team, not so much. Granted the Ms are well better than that level. But they’ve been well below what most of would consider to be success.
I’m in So Calif for a conference, will be attending tomorrow’s game.
“One thing I wonder is how it might feel to be an Indians fan right now and gone through that series.”
I’m not here to troll your blog, but I AM an Indians fan, and I can tell you that it was an amazing series to watch from our perspective. You happened to catch the Indians at a time when every conceivable thing was going their way.
I work on weekdays so I didn’t get to watch the Monday game in real time, but there is no way in hell the Indians should have won that one. It must have sucked to be a Mariners fan and to watch your pitcher drop the ball on what should have been the last out in the 9th inning. And I don’t say that to rub it in, because as an Indians fan, I too know what it is to suffer.
Good luck to the M’s, at least until the Indians come back out to Seattle for a three-game series in July. Thanks for letting me have my say.
Matthew,
I don’t see how it’s possible for your method to deem Ackley a 110 Qual+ when his slash line over that time frame is .171/.275/.200. How can you be 10% better than league average when you put up a .171/.275/.200?
@Jeremy,
See here: http://www.ussmariner.com/2013/04/08/the-mariners-arrive-home/
“From hereon, they will cover the previous two weeks’ worth of games. Most of the above should be self-explanatory except for Qual+. Basically what Qual does is look at a hitter’s batted ball profile and compare the run value of that profile to the league average. Roughly it’s a measure of the quality of a hitter’s batted balls and put on the familiar 100 is league average scale.”
Qual isn’t dependent on a hitter’s batting line. Qual is looking at the make up of a hitter’s batted balls (e.g. what % are grounders, pop flies, pulled fly balls, etc)