Game 158, Indians at Mariners

Dave · September 26, 2007 at 7:14 pm · Filed Under Mariners 

Game Two game thread.

Comments

140 Responses to “Game 158, Indians at Mariners”

  1. serpentear on September 27th, 2007 2:34 pm

    at least* a bench player

  2. Dave on September 27th, 2007 2:39 pm

    There’s no nice way to say you don’t know what you’re talking about, so consider this the not-nice way: you don’t know what you’re talking about.

    I suggest you hang around and learn. But don’t expect anyone to take you seriously until you grasp some basic concepts about the game.

  3. Jeff Nye on September 27th, 2007 2:44 pm

    Mike Morse does not offer sufficient offensive potential to offset the large step backward you’d be taking in infield defence.

    That’s the simplified explanation (at least as I see it) for why Dave is telling you you don’t know what you’re talking about.

    I think he’s probably just more tired of explaining it than I am!

  4. currcoug on September 27th, 2007 2:50 pm

    Gentlemen,

    Mike Morse is the player Bob Fontaine insisted on being part of the Garcia trade, rather than Joe Borchard (at the time, a higher rated prospect).

    Morse is reputed to be one of the most intelligent, hard-hard working hitters in the Mariners’ system. Mike Hargrove also stated several times that Mike Morse would be a success in MLB and that he has legit power. Remember his center field shot last season?

    It is not an accident Morse hits well in MLB. He has the ability to go the other way consisently. Bill Krueger mentioned this ability last night, as did Mike Blowers. They both stated he can play in the majors.

    Lest we forget, Morse had to make way for Betancourt. BTW, Morse is much better defensively than most of you give him credit for. Morse is an outstanding athlete, and he has done a nice job at 3B. I am surprised the Mariners haven’t had him work on 1B, however.

    As I stated last year when Bavasi gave up Cabrera, Mike Morse would have been a better option than Perez. Perez’s numbers after the trade certainly bore that belief out (.195, .304, .241, .545).

    We would still have Cabrera but for Bavasi’s profound inability to grade talent, not to mention his inability to make a good trade.

  5. bermanator on September 27th, 2007 3:06 pm

    On the positive side, an extended debate over Mike Morse’s value during the offseason would add a little variety to the usual debate over Willie Bloomquist’s value.

  6. Doc Baseball on September 27th, 2007 3:10 pm

    Mike Morse does not offer sufficient offensive potential to offset the large step backward you’d be taking in infield defence.

    The issue is not just that Morse is bad defensively; he also has no potential offensively. His 8-year minor league OPS is .720. He’s only been over .800 2 years out of 8. His one-year of getting about 250 AB’s in the major leagues (2005), his OPS was .719.

    What’s with all the Morse/Dobbs love?

  7. Jeff Nye on September 27th, 2007 3:12 pm

    Well, I was trying to soft-shoe it, but yeah, he’s nothing special even offensively. That plus trying to put someone who is charitably a corner infielder at an up the middle position = bad idea.

    As much as I like to talk trash about Willie, he can play credible defense in the middle infield, so he does have SOME value. Morse has less.

  8. Colm on September 27th, 2007 3:13 pm

    So…
    You’re asserting that Mike Morse will be a success in the bigs becuase Bill Krueger, Mike Blowers and Mike Hargrove say so?

  9. Dayve on September 27th, 2007 3:20 pm

    Like I said above in 82, Morse on 1B in 2008. He’s inexpensive, he’s probably a better fielder than anyone on the roster at that position now and he will bring a better bat than we had there this year. Is he Prince Fielder? Nope. But he’s probably a better option than anyone we can find in FA this year.

  10. Colm on September 27th, 2007 3:23 pm

    I am both intelligent and hard-working, and I can’t hit a baseball worth a damn.

    My mother and several of my high-school teachers thought I’d be a successful lawyer. They were wrong.

    I once scored a good goal in a competitive football game (Gaelic football at that); several people remarked upon it. I was still a bloody awful player.

    At this stage of my life, I’m a better cyclist than a washed up old chubber like Bernard Hainault – but that doesn’t make me world class.

    Currcoug: Subjective, cherry-picking, anecdotal analysis is not worth a damn.

    Mike Morse is a replacement level talent who might one day make a bit of contribution in the big leagues, but he won’t make the Mariners better in 2008.

  11. scraps on September 27th, 2007 3:23 pm

    If we can’t do better than Mike Morse at first base, we deserve to lose.

  12. Colm on September 27th, 2007 3:27 pm

    Don’t we have an option on Broussard for first base next year? And we’re locked into Vidro, who will spend some time there. That should give us a reasonably effective platoon at first.

    They should at least match Morse’s upside projections, which can’t be more than about .750OPS.

  13. Jeff Sullivan on September 27th, 2007 3:28 pm

    The Justin Leone Era was never one of dark days.

  14. joser on September 27th, 2007 3:36 pm

    There’s a reason Morse has never played a game at 2B, and hasn’t played any games in the OF this year (he did play 16 games at 1B in ’06 though) — he’s not the athelete you think he is. Now I love the idea of having kids in camp every ST to push the incumbents at their positions (and all the disrespect to veterans that implies), but I don’t think Lopez would consider Morse much of a threat. Even if Morse had the bat some of you think he has, it wouldn’t be enough to compensate for his liabiity in the middle infield. And the corner positions are blocked by players with bats that are even better (or, in the case of 1B, blocked by too many players period). As a bench player he’d be fine, except Bloomquist is more versatile and not much more expensive (in the way baseball does its accounting, anyway). I suppose you could make a case for Morse as your other infield backup, and if this was a team that carried an 11 man bullpen there might be room for him as that. But there’s no place for him to play everyday, and there’s no evidence he’d tear the place up if he did. Sure, that last half-season in Tacoma looks mighty nice, and he’s got some small-sample-induced otherworldly numbers in Seattle at the moment, so if you could find a GM unable to look past those he’d be a fine piece in a trade.

  15. Dayve on September 27th, 2007 3:36 pm

    We had Broussard on 1b this year. Pretty uninspiring, don’t you think? If we he’s on 1b next year, “we deserve to lose”.

  16. Colm on September 27th, 2007 3:41 pm

    Yup: 273 .324 .414 .738 vs RHP – uninspiring. What makes you think Morse would be better?

  17. joser on September 27th, 2007 3:43 pm

    The Justin Leone Era was never one of dark days.

    Uh, Leone played for the M’s from July 2nd to August 17th, 2004; the team had a 10-21 record in his 31 appearances (10-19 in his starts). Even if he was a bright spark, I’d call those days pretty dark.

  18. Teej on September 27th, 2007 3:45 pm

    Ben Broussard’s OPS+

    2003: 103
    2004: 124
    2005: 107
    2006: 112
    2007: 97

    This is the first year in the past five he’s been below average, and it wasn’t by much. He’s a lefty pull hitter, which is perfect for Safeco, and he’s a defensive upgrade over Sexson. He’s not an All-Star, but he’s serviceable. And he’s easily a better player than Mike Morse.

  19. HamNasty on September 27th, 2007 3:45 pm

    115- We had Sexson for a majority of the year, and 1 month with Broussard.

  20. Doc Baseball on September 27th, 2007 3:49 pm

    Dayve: Broussard is a legitimate major league player — well above replacement level. His minor numbers were over .900 OPS — In his entire 6-year career, his major league OPS is .776. His .730 or whatever this year was in the lowest number of AB’s he’s ever had, being badly platooned by two idiotic managers, in a pitcher’s park. He’s left-handed, which helps him in that pitcher’s park a lot more than Morse’s being RH. Please….

  21. SequimRealEstate on September 27th, 2007 3:50 pm

    76 You made the assumption that serpentear is a male. Could be a teen age girl. Which might explain her fascination with Mike

  22. Colm on September 27th, 2007 3:52 pm

    I did. That was foolish of me. Serpentear, please forgive my sexual stereotyping.

    But lay off the prospect analysis..

  23. Mike Snow on September 27th, 2007 3:55 pm

    he’s a defensive upgrade over Sexson

    That might be the only person he’d be a defensive upgrade over. Broussard is pretty brutal out there too.

  24. Dayve on September 27th, 2007 3:57 pm

    In reponse to the earlier post of Morse not having a stellar OPS for first base. I say: Jose Vidro to you.

    OK so Ben is a serviceable player at first and has that big lefty swing we need for Safeco. Great, let’s put him there. I can’t argue with his numbers or his performance. He’s just boring. He’ll never be an All Star. We know that. He’s nearly 32 and past his prime. He’ll get no better than he already is.

    Morse, however, as much as you can point to his less than spectacular stats in AAA, you cannot say he doesn’t have potential. He at least harbors that. You can argue how much he has all day long. But he’s quicker than anyone we have there, a better athlete (in spite of a few posts that contradict this above). He’s a gamer. I like that. I know that won’t go over well here, but he’s the kind of guy that will end up in Oakland and crush us one day.

  25. MikeMLT on September 27th, 2007 4:01 pm

    Potential? Based on?

  26. Colm on September 27th, 2007 4:02 pm

    Yes I can.

    “Less than spectacular stats in AAA” = “doesn’t have [much] potential”. What’s so hard to grasp about that?

  27. Dave on September 27th, 2007 4:03 pm

    Morse doesn’t have potential.

    You guys are just wrong about him, and the sooner you get over your obsession with every kid who comes up and hits well for 50 at-bats, the better off we’ll all be. I don’t know how many years we can have this exact same discussion.

  28. Jeff Nye on September 27th, 2007 4:03 pm

    Mike Morse will never be an All Star either.

    And Mr. Sullivan, I was mostly teasing! I fondly remember Leone For Third.

  29. galaxieboi on September 27th, 2007 4:10 pm

    If nothing else I’ve done today works out, at least I can say I helped spur a discussion that had posters on ussmariner complimenting Willie. =)

  30. Colm on September 27th, 2007 4:15 pm

    Oakland would seem like a poor fit for Morse.

    They focus on patience and power, and he doesn’t have much of either.

    They like good defensive players, and even on the corners is reputation is not stellar.

    He’s not going to supplant Chavez at 3rd (even Chavez is toast, which I have no evidence to suggest).

    Oakland also has Swisher who can play first, and not even you are suggesting that Morse will hit THAT well.

    Morse might give Dan Johnson some competition, but I don’t see Beane being satisfied for long with that level of production out of first base.

    Pipe dream/nightmare. That suggestion lends no credibility to your already flaky argument.

  31. HamNasty on September 27th, 2007 4:16 pm

    124- I was looking on Baseball-reference and I can’t find the Gamer stat column anywhere?? I looked everywhere for it in a scouting report and couldn’t find it there either. What proof or even guess do you have that he is a gamer?

  32. Doc Baseball on September 27th, 2007 4:22 pm

    Fun with numbers:

    Guess the player (which one do you want on your team going forward?)

    50 AB’s or whatever in their first year in the bigs as Triple A call-ups:

    #1: 53 AB’s — .502 OPS
    #2: 43 AB’s — .994 OPS
    #3: 33 AB’s — .991 OPS
    #4: 54 AB’s — .445 OPS

  33. Doc Baseball on September 27th, 2007 4:23 pm

    #1: Manny
    #2: Edgar
    #3: WFB
    #4: A-Rod

  34. Jeff Nye on September 27th, 2007 4:24 pm

    Well, I’m a known “Willie Basher” (I’m even linked on his Wikipedia page for coining the term Princess Willie, even though I’m pretty sure I didn’t come up with it), but here’s my take on him:

    I think he adds value to the team as a defensive sub and pinch runner. Where he starts to become a DETRIMENT is when he starts to believe the people that think that he should be an everyday player based on that short hot streak that he had.

    It’s actually sort of analogous to the Morse conversation; Willie is a marginally better player but grouses about his playing time, which I’ve never seen Morse do.

    As long as he knows his role, I have no problem with Willie Bloomquist, though. That role just doesn’t have the word “starter” anywhere in it.

  35. Doc Baseball on September 27th, 2007 4:28 pm

    …I can’t find the Gamer stat column anywhere

    THT does have a “clutch” column — and Morse is completely vanilla (kinda sorta zero on a loosely speaking +10 to -10 scale). He looks good. You’d think he was a good athlete from the way he carries himself. It could be argued he’s a nice kid. He called Grover “Big Dog” in such an endearing way. He’s just not in reality a good baseball player.

  36. Teej on September 27th, 2007 4:29 pm

    Morse has an OPS of 1.778 in the big leagues this season, which means he’s at least twice as good as Ichiro.

  37. galaxieboi on September 27th, 2007 4:37 pm

    “#3: WFB”

    Is Willie’s middle name, ‘F***ing’?? Sweet. He IS a gamer.

  38. joser on September 27th, 2007 4:48 pm

    You guys are just wrong about him, and the sooner you get over your obsession with every kid who comes up and hits well for 50 at-bats, the better off we’ll all be. I don’t know how many years we can have this exact same discussion.

    I hate to say this Dave, but I think you have to face the facts: we’re going to have this discussion every year (unless there’s a year when no kid comes up and hits well for 50 at-bats). Because every year there’s going to be some people new to baseball, or new to the Mariners, or new to the blog, and because every year hope springs eternal. We want some unheralded kid to get a promotion and suddenly find his stroke and become the Sensation Nobody Saw Coming, the perennial allstar that showed no sign of it at the lower levels. Nevermind that it’s impossible now, and — despite the myth — almost never happened in the past when it was at least possible because data was sparse or simply unavailable. It’s a romantic notion, and as such is completely impervious to rational argument or even common sense.

    So we’re going to have this conversation every year, but you don’t need to feel like you have to weigh in and try your patience repeating yourself each time. One of the fruits of all the labor you and Derek and Jason and Jeff put into your sites is the ever-growing cadre of people who now understand things like sample size and replacement level and freely available talent and the value of defense. So there are lots of folks to carry the burden of rationality, and we’re going to be able to link back to these threads too; you shouldn’t feel like you have to burn yourself out fighting the same fires over and over (even if the same fires keep being re-lit).

  39. currcoug on September 27th, 2007 5:45 pm

    Morse is making the Mariners better right now, and would have made them better in August after he got off the DL.

    Morse consistently hits well at Safeco Field: .293 .368 .429 .797 (133 AB’s, three years). That is notable.

    Since Bavasi and McLaren are coming back, I expect to see more trades for aging, expensive veterans and the loss of more minor league talent. I would platoon Morse and Ibanez at 1B, platoon Clement and Johjima at catcher, Jones in CF, Balentien in LF, Ichiro in RF.

    Finally, the M’s made a mistake by not sending Lopez home after his brother died. It is too early to give up on Lopez, but it appears Bavasi is leaning that way.

  40. Dayve on September 28th, 2007 2:00 pm

    124/135–

    Good zingers! You both are gamers.

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.