.
Fascinating debate in the Kendrys Morales This Winter? thread. Gotta love the think tank. One of my favorite posters leads off the game with a Brad Miller-type hack at the first pitch:
...........
The M's 2013 opening day roster had too many 1B-DH types, lacked speed, and had 2 main RH hitters that were very injury prone (Morse & Gutierrez). Hopefully GMZ has learned from his mistakes and doesn't repeat them. IMO, having Smoak, Rauuuul, Morse, and Morales all on the 2014 roster would be a repeat of last year's mistakes -- too many 1B-DH types and too slow.
...........
An impressive swing :- ) ... my question is whether this would have been a "mistake," even if it hadn't worked out.
.
Okay, That's the Cost. What Did You Buy?
Bobby Fischer said, "to get squares, you gotta give squares." Any chess move whatsoever leaves a weakness in its aftermath. You speak of tradeoffs, of what you gave up and what you gained in return - how these things ratio.
In fact, at the U.S. Open, as the game gets late, this is a key "trade secret," that after your opponent makes a fast move in time pressure -- look for an attack on whatever square he just vacated! He plays Knight from b6 to c4 ... well, he's no longer guarding d5, right? BOOM, my Qd5! move is very strong. That's the weakness that just opened up.
EVERYTHING you do GAINS something and LOSES something. Including if you do nothing :- )
People say, Wow, did you know there were 1,200 people killed in handgun accidents last year? That cinches it - let's get some laws going. (Often it takes one incident for the media to launch another argument.) Wouldn't any scientist ask, "What is the benefit associated with that cost? How many homeowners repelled intruders? What is the ratio?"
About 35,000 people die in traffic accidents each year in America. Wow! That's quite a cost! Let's outlaw cars. What's missing here? You guessed it: a careful calculation of the benefits associated. (Would that even be possible, or are the benefits of car transportation incalculable?
SSI posters are aware of this, of course, but ... are we giving Capt Jack the right credit for Raul and Morales? There's a tendency to incompletely fill in the right side of the ledger, it seems.
.
Angels Problemos In the Outfield, Dept.
The costs associated with the Morse-Smoak-Ibanez-Morales config --- > were what? Poster PHX follows up with the following excellent "concrete variation," as they say in Russian chess:
..............
My point on 2013, which I believe DC supports, is that by stockpiling 1B/DH types instead of well-rounded OFers, the M's did not have competent defensive OFers that were major league proven to insert when Gutierrez and Saunders were injured. DC preferred Swisher to either Morse or Ibanez. In retrospect, Bourne - pushed by Baker - would have been useful. -
...............
:- O
If you want to compare Swisher and Ibanez, you have to bring in the 2nd players in the $15M player-pairs, don't you? It's [Swisher and Beavan] vs [Raul and Peavy], or somesuch.
If we're talking Roster Config, that's Chavez vs Raul. If we're talking $100M Free Agents, that's Swisher vs Peavy. The USSM recommendation was 7 years, $105M to lure Swisher away from Cleveland et al. Compare Swisher to players costing $100M, not to Raul.
................
Yes ... so they wound up with Endy Chavez and Dustin Ackley playing center field. To date, the number of CF games played by each:
Saunders has been healthy for many of Ackley's games; the Mariners are choosing to put Ackley in CF, since Nick Franklin has made it impossible for Ackley to play the infield. At this point, Ackley in CF isn't a cost; it's a strategic exploitation of an asset.
Chavez is an old USSM favorite ... having typed out the above bullet list, I'm honestly having trouble seeing how a different ROSTER CONFIGURATION in March (Endy Chavez type, rather than Michael Morse or Raul Ibanez) would have mattered. The Mariners did in fact wind up with Endy Chavez playing CF when they needed a replacement.
If you want to talk Michael Bourn specifically -- adding a STAR center fielder -- again, that's not "roster configuration." That's your big free agent add. By "roster configuration" as such, we are asking whether you needed to do something to prevent the Smoak-Ibanez-Morales-Morse-Bay collection.
.
OPS+ of 79, 84, 89, 104 ... What's the Next Number in This Sequence
The BENEFIT associated with Morales, Ibanez, etc was what? The overlooked benefit was that Zduriencik needed 5 draws at the deck to get two Rauuulllls and Moraleses.
Zduriencik found a $3M fourth outfielder who is slugging .526 and hitting 30+ home runs. Billy Beane finds these guys by trying 3, 4, 5, 6 different guys until one pays off. This is where other sites are going to wind up with skewed judgment -- they are loathe to give Zduriencik any credit for Raul Ibanez' season.
On the contrary, Zduriencik now has two huge Billy Beane "scrub" home runs to his credit in five years -- Russell Branyan, and Raul Ibanez. Those "lucky finds" are a critical part of a GM's resume -- Fangraphs thinks in terms of buying known, predictable commodities at, hopefully, 80c on the dollar. Real GM's think in more sophisticated terms -- that of selecting the shrewdest lotto tickets in the division. The Raul find should be emphasized, not minimized.
The Mariners had an offense in 2013. Their OPS+ is 104 -- and that's despite the situations with Montero, Ackley, and Smoak. The team OPS+ the last four years:
| Season | OPS+ |
| 2010 | 79 |
| 2011 | 84 |
| 2012 | 89 |
| 2013 | 104 |
| Remark | How tough is it to go from 89 to 104? |
That was the benefit associated with the Big Bat Search. The cost is that it was kind of awkward to get the defense in the outfield for ... how many games?
.
2014 vs 2013
Another of my fave posters provides a tactical variation on the same issue:
................
Morse's lack of a demonstrated ability to stay on the field leaves me not wanting to bring him back. We ought to have learned our lesson with Gutierrez. A guy can have all the talent in the world, but he isn't worth major bucks unless he has demonstrated the ability to play 130+ games year in and year out. Everyone's entitled to an injury here or there. But chronically injured players wreak havoc with rosters when you count on them to be healthy.
................
Guess here is that 29 other MLB GM's, if you asked THEM, would tell you that it was one of Zduriencik's five most adroit decisions, ever.
That's not just a throwaway comment. :-) I mean it is, but ... at this point, we can predict with pretty good confidence what Bill James SITTING IN HIS SOX CONSULTANT CHAIR is going to say on 90% of questions. On this issue, he would say:
My own confidence level, that Jay-Z would get an "attaboy" from fellow GM's on Rauuuul, is .... about 98%, the level you're at when you're up 7-2 in the 9th. Waitaminnit...
................
But! Does that mean it would be wise to bring back Rauuuul, along with Morse, next year -- with Smoak the starting 1B and Kendrys the 3-year, $36M designated hitter? Not so clear.
Each year, the cards are shuffled afresh. The Rauuuul card draw in 2014 is a completely different gamble than was the one in 2013. Is Morse so injury-prone? The broken hand had nothing to do with being injury-prone, but the shoulder and hammy did. On the other hand, if your roto team snags Michael Morse in the 11th round, and he winds up playing 130 games, you're going to win the league, compadre. It's a classic card draw.
You and I have an emotional reaction to Michael Morse now -- extreme frustration and disappointment. Some other team, one with no past history at all, is going to be awfully thrilled to give him a dance in 2014.
Which brings us to the question of Morse and Raul vs team defense...
.
Raul is 41, Morales and Morse had recent injury histories, and Smoak could easily have ended up a AAAA player back in Tacoma. Having all four gave depth at 1B/DH and offense from the OF. With Morse's injury this year, depth was needed. It was great insurance that we wouldn't suck at 1B/DH like we had in recent years. Great moves Jack.
In fantasy baseball, if you have a shaky closer like Tom Wilhelmsen, you roster the guy behind him, like Yoervis Medina. Then you are virtually HOPING for an injury.
Redundancy, sometimes, is a very sophisticated aid to your plans. That is in fact how it turned out in 2013.
when Billy Beane stockpiles his position players, like he does practically every year, he grabs younger guys to do it with. You know, Kila Ka'aihue, Brandon Moss, Chris Carter, **ahem** Kyle Blanks... and then he doesn't keep 'em all on the roster at the same time. Because he doesn't have to; they're young. They have minor league options. He can give Chris Carter thirty games to show what he is, and then if that's not working demote him and here's Kila Ka'aihue, nope that's not working demote him too, Brandon Moss time, hey look Brandon Moss is demolishing RHPs and fueling the A's to an improbable 2012 playoff run! What a wonderful experiment! Note that he tried to do the same thing this year with SS/2B: first it was Japanese SS Hiroyuki Nakajima, then when he got hurt Lowrie got SS and it was Sogard at 2B, then Rosales, then Green, and then he traded Green for Alberto Callaspo... it's a tried-and-true strategy. There's a reason the A's are always way better in the second half. Teams have been doing this in the bullpen for years - in 2012 the Mariners built a bullpen pile, and it worked marvelously (well, for 2H2012 at least).
But the way Beane does it, with the younger guys, you don't eat like five roster slots trying to find The Guy at 1B/DH and thus nuke your depth everywhere else. You eat one, maybe two roster slots at a time, and the rest of the guys are in AAA. This year, with Morse/Morales/Ibanez/Bay/Smoak/Montero all trying to be The Guy, the roster was overloaded with guys who can't play defense, and the outfield DER seriously suffered as a result. Acquiring other teams' post-2012 Justin Smoaks and post-2011 Brandon Mosses, and keeping them in AAA to start the year, that's a good way to build a pile. Signing a bunch of veterans that have to stay on the major league roster can really hurt you elsewhere.
Beane MIXES youth with vets.
Guys like Brandon Inge, Coco Crisp, Johny Gomes were all part of his 2012 breakthrough. Did Jaso still have options when he picked him up?
But, yes, Beane is exceptionally willing to SWAP players. But, the ability to swap players easily requires a LOT of different variables. One is minor league options. Another is salary. How quick is Oakland willing to demote someone on a $10 million contract? Beane, just like every other MLB manager, when he commits a chunk of change to a player DOES keep him in the Majors. Chris Young has had a lousy season, but has taken up a roster spot all season. When Beane commits $8.5 million to a player, THAT player stays on the roster, (Chris Young and Cespedes have not had great seasons --- but they were not summarily demoted due to non production.
In truth, Z signed two guys expected to stick and start -- Morse and Morales. *ALL* the other pickups, (including Raul), were guys he could have opted to cut before the season began. Did Bay's age prevent him from being DFAed?
Yes, A young kid (with options) can be demoted for additional seasoning and still be an option for later. An older guy WITH MINIMAL CONTRACT can be dismissed out of hand. While you lose the option to go back to him, this type of player does not ossify the roster any more than the young guy. In point of fact, the old guy can often more easily free up a 40-man slot.
THIS SEASON, Z signed an old guy (Endy) to a minor league deal. He also dumped Shoppach without hesitation. He just dumped Bay when it was other factors outweighed keeping him.
In point of fact, Z has done with THIS roster, precisely what Beane has been so good about doing with his roster. Morales and Morse were EXACTLY the type of cheap young(ish) player that Beane collect. A LOT of his "young" players are 28/29.
Per bbref, the most expensive day-to-day salary for Seattle THIS year is Chone Figgins ($8 million).
For all the talk of the old guys preventing flexibility, the simple reality is that Morales or Morse or Bay or Raul could have been dropped at the drop of a hat. Mind you, eating the 6.75 million given to Morse would not be pleasant, it was certainly doable. The flexibility isn't tied up in options. It resides in salary.
Yet,, last year, (and for some, this year), there were scores of Ms fans bitterly complaining that no team with so much youth had ever won anything and that the club DESPERATELY needed veteran talent to "lead" the youth. The decision to overload with 1B/DH types was not correct because it worked. It was correct, because even it had failed, Raul and Bay could have been cut at the drop of a hat and he could've gone fishing for replacements elsewhere.
Me? I was a huge Carp fan, and hated to see him go ... but honestly, exactly what move(s) did Raul and Bay PREVENT? The Mariners farm had no 1B/DH/OF types in the minors that were being blocked. It we pretend the MLB had a special option for players over 40, that allows them to be optioned to AAA. Would that have changed ANYTHING about how good the roster was constructed?
In the end, Z made a call. He decided he was better off getting an optioned out RH injury prone weak glove OF bat with power (and one good year) than keeping the optioned out LH weak glove OF bat with power (and 1/2 of a good year).
But ... once you know you are gambling on an injury prone import (and already have an injury prone CF) then you start looking for ways to cover yourself. He covered himself by bringing in Bay, Raul and Endy.
The plan, the back up plan, and the back up for the back up plan all worked out well enough this season. What do you say? It's better than getting caught with your pants down. The situation is far from ideal and well balanced. But hey, I'm an offense first kind of guy if given the choice between. If the bat is good stick it in there.
There are only so many Adrian Beltre's and Choo's out there to go around. I mean yea, ideally you want guys who play well on both sides of the ball, but I expect the team to trim down on the macho next season with a well placed out fielder.