Public Service Announcement: #2 Draft Picks

Babies and Bathwater, Dept.

.

Q.  Is it possible for local fans to over-hype their own prospects?

A.  Asked and answered.

.

Q.  Are Seattle fans doing this with Danny Hultzen?

A.  Danny Hultzen was THE NUMBER TWO PICK IN THE ENTIRE DRAFT.

Look, gentlemen, if we were talking about Mike Carp or Alex Liddi or Kyle Seager or Carlos Peguero, that would be one thing.  But don't paint every prospect hopeful with the same "he's just a prospect" brush.  Each year there are four or five super-prospects.

You don't luck into a Danny Hultzen, dump $10.6 million on him, and then lose interest when he walks a few guys in his first pro year.  Draw a distinction between "the kids" and players who are legitimate super-talents.

.

Q.  In your mind, who are the M's legitimate "super-talents"?

A.  Dustin Ackley was also the #2 pick in the entire draft.  We're not talking about "in Jeff Clarke's" mind.  Ackley and Hultzen and Mike Zunino were, in their drafts, the BEST hitters and pitchers in the INDUSTRY.  Not among the best.  THE NUMBER ONE players.

Jesus Montero also came with a super-elite pedigree:  he was the TOP hitter in the minors, him and Harper, when Montero was in the minors.  Jack Zduriencik evaluated him as comparable to Albert Pujols.  You don't wander off and lose interest because the kid only hit .295 on the road at 22. 

Taijuan Walker is on a Felix Hernandez career path, give or take half a year.  Consider carefully what you'd have felt like, had we traded Felix at age 19?  James Paxton is better than Hultzen.

Trash the actual prospects, Carp and Liddi and Romero, if you want to.  But keep a sense of proportion on Hultzen, Ackley, Paxton, Taijuan, Zunino, and Jesus Montero.  Those players are a different breed of cat.

Nick Franklin, you could argue about.  But there's no arguing about the Six.

.

Q.  Justin Smoak was supposed to be elite.

A.  He was elite.  At this point, there's enough data return to downgrade him.

If your reaction is "Because of Justin Smoak, or Ben Grieve, or Delmon Young, or Sean Burroughs, or Andy Marte, I'm just not interested in 1-1 draft picks any more," then that's on you.

.

Q.  Would it be reasonable to trade Jesus Montero for Billy Butler?

A.  Shedding Jesus Montero for Billy Butler --- > could easily become a historically classic blunder in the Lou Brock for Ernie Broglio template.  Bill James once said, 90% of the worst trades in baseball history were like this:  giving up a super-talented youngster for a well-regarded, proven veteran.

Jeff Bagwell for Larry Andersen, Jason Varitek for Heathcliff Slocumb, Sammy Sosa for an aging Harold Baines... 

And in this case, Montero for Butler type concepts, you don't even expect (reliably) that Butler will give you a significant upgrade over Montero NOW.  You can't just use a "all-hope team" logic to paint Jesus Montero with the Mike Carp, Alex Liddi brush.  Montero is a top-10 BBA prospect.

And yet Billy Butler is a legit cleanup hitter.  Consensus is to shed Montero if you get Butler, but I'm totally opposed to that apples-for-apples swap.  If they grab Butler and keep Montero, that's good by me.

..........

Jack Zduriencik's evaluation, at the time of the trade, was that Jesus Montero compared to Albert Pujols.  He's got to stick with that.  

My considered opinion is similar.  Jesus Montero did things with the ball, in 2012, that ARod and Junior didn't do.  He fought off jam pitches for line-drives to right center ... he got on top of 96 fastballs ... he kept the hands back and drove soft stuff to right field ... he showed the ability to square up literally every kind of pitch in every spot of the strike zone.  It's not a cliche.  I'm talking about watching him do it.

I don't say Montero's a guarantee.  I say he's the kind of young player you don't abandon for baubles lying on the side of the road.

.

Q.  Should there be untouchables?

A.  Pat Gillick was exceptionally win-now.  But he would create a list of 3-4 players that he simply refused to trade on principle.  He felt it would be a broach of his personal integrity to trade the teenaged Felix Hernandez or Jose Lopez -- yes, those were literal names on his lists -- for the ability to win this year.

The M's are now making noises like they'd package truly elite prospects, in bundles, for Billy Butler types.  Even Gillick wouldn't have done that.  When you have sailed past Pat Gillick in your win-now imperative, you have lost your compass.

If you want the Mariners to increase payroll, to try harder to win, then argue for that.  But don't argue that Montero, Zunino, Ackley and the Big Three are overrated.  They are not.

BABVA,

Dr D

 

 

Klat Categories: 

Comments

Well we could, if we wanted to forego all trades or free agents and just start kids all over the place. For the third year in a row.

It's not "giving up" on Montero to trade him for Butler. It's moving a good player to get a good player. Yes, they happen to play the same basic position. But Butler IS doing what we want Montero to do. When will Jesus do it? Could be this year, could be 3 years from now. If we don't make the trade and it takes Montero 3 years to get comfortable at DH and rake like he does as a C then Zduriencik is out of a job, Felix is gone, and we're still talking about the next Jason Bay addition.

Timetables matter. I'm still of the opinion that 28 year old Smoak is gonna be destroying a ball for somebody - it just won't be us. It's taking him too long to put it together.

Replacements matter too - it's Jack's fault that we're not using Montero as a catcher going forward. He's the one trying to add Russell Martin and Mike Napoli and who drafted Zunino as the heir to the throne. He punted Pujols The Catcher off the position. Can't keep Montero if there's no place to play him.

Maybe he can play 1B. Personally I think he'd like that more than DH. He seems like a guy who wants to be in the field, not stuck on the bench except for 4 or 5 plate appearances a game. I'd be trying to make Montero into Paul Konerko right NOW, if we aren't gonna let him catch and aren't gonna trade him AS a catcher.

-----------------------------------

But no team will give you anything useful if you take your 6 best prospects off the trade list. Well... we might trade Doug Fister for a handful of scrubs, but SMART teams try not to give up the best player in the deal. If Hultzen, Walker, Paxton, Montero, Zunino, and Ackley are off-limits, what's your pitch? "Here, take this guy who just lit up the Cal League from High Desert, like everyone ever. Or maybe this guy, who is either a SS or a 2B and should probably stop switch-hitting. Or maybe our 5th best pitching prospect, who won pitcher of the year in AA, like Beavan. Or hey, Beavan..."

We have better prospects in our top 10 than we used to. The days of trading JC Ramirez, Aumont and a junk CFer for Cliff Lee just because all of em were in our top-10 list are OVER.

So if we're gonna make a trade, then we do it with the knowledge that every top-10 prospect we trade might be Rickie Weeks, or Billy Butler, or Jered Weaver. That's the problem with a good farm system. And this is why I'm not trading 4 of our top 5 prospects, plus Montero, to get Butler and Myers (thread from earlier).

If we don't like the chance of ever losing a good player, then we'd better keep all our prospects. Of course, since we have a top-10 every year that's awesome, even though we promote a handful every year, we're gonna run out of places to play them. And you might notice that RA Dickey won a Cy Young this year - he used to pitch for us. Travis Blackley was a nice part of Oakland's run to the playoff, and he was ours too. Morse, As-Cab, Choo, Morrow... former Mariners are making an impact all over the league.

-----------------------

Players play well for other teams. As long as we have as good or better players on our team, who cares? The problem with trading a great prospect (or prospects) is getting junk in return. If you trade Mike Trout for Felix Hernandez, that's not a problem right? For this offseason I would prefer to sign Reynolds (and Hamilton, while we're spending other peoples' money), keep Montero, and flood the remainder of the team with all this talented youth. Ackley/ Seager/ Montero/ Hamilton/ Reynolds/ Saunders/ Zunino/ Franklin/ Guti looks pretty good to me.

Then position Romero to play the OF when Guti's contract is up and call it a day. Simple.

But if we wind up trading Franklin, or Paxton, or whomever to fix this team, then that's a call that will hopefully bring a great player here. Not a decent player, but a great one. Our great minor leaguers deserve to be swapped for a great major leaguer, I would think.

And if that happens, and we don't empty the coffers in the process, I'll have trouble complaining about it. Get great players, whether through promotion, trade, or free agency. That's all I'm asking.

Again - simple. *laughs*

~G

1

That's one thing ... a Montero and ? package could be argued for Butler... you're dealing a megatalented kid and getting back a player you will be very happy with...

At other websites, the idea is that you trade two or three of these six players for merely decent talent back ...

2

Butler, I've said, might be worth Walker and Franklin. And that has always been a "might." It's close.

Mostly I've called for playing the young guys as an investment in a pennant. move 'em up. Let 'em play.

Montero completely mashed LHP last year. He wrecked them. They begged for mercy. Oh, he did it at 22. Oh, he was an adequate catcher, too. Holy snot! What else is a 22-yr old to do? Subtract a Harper or Trout or a Stanton, how many other 22 (or less) year olds did that last year? It's a limited field.

I'm frequently frustrated with the (prevalent) idea that terrific young talent is nothing more than a terrific trade chit, with a somewhat reduced value because they only bring "potential" and not actualy production. Terrific young talent is all of the three. Hang onto as much of it as possible.

We should be finding ways to get the young guns on the field, soon, not ways to ship them elsewhere. If that means a positional change or two, so be it. Steve Garvey was a 3B, until he collided with Ron Cey at that posiiton. Alston easily found a way to play them both. Turn Franklin into a LF or 1B, if he isn't a SS or our 2B. Man, he's gonig to rip 2/3 of the pitchers. That ain't bad. Romero, too. Find a place for him.

Let's go with a bunch of the guys we've got. Some of them are special.

moe

4

They wanted to keep Butler anyway, and we weren't gonna empty the system to add him. I'm cool with that. Like I said, I like Butler, but not at any price.

So who wants to bet that we whiff on Swish and Hamilton, and wind up adding Kubel as the big OF/DH add this winter? After all, let's not be hasty and risk too much.

~G

6

Frankly, my dear Scarlett...well, you get the idea. Too many offseasons we have assumed that the scraps being sought (now Dee Gordon?!) are preliminary to THE BIG MOVE. Which, of course, never seems to materialize. Is Jack starting to perspire heavily? Is he going to be forced to prove that the only way to succeed in Seattle is to finish in last place for several years running and then hope like heck that enough of your high draft choices work out that you can keep the wolves at bay?

7

I agree on our elite prospects - trading them for a 30-something anything seems foolish. Butler is younger, but I still don't think he provides enough more than Franklin very well could - and Franklin plays a position that we need upgrade at. But then again, Brad Miller is right behind and might be as good an overall player, if he's a better shortstop with a stronger arm. So Franklin is a bit of a tweener for us on upside & need. 

On the other hand, if Franklin and Erasmo Ramirez could get us Wil Myers, who would be one of our younger players, I'd do it, both because we need a RF that can hit, and again, Miller is also ours. If Vargas or Beaven were needed to sweeten it, I'd still say fine -- we would still get back a piece we NEEEEED for pieces we have in-line replacements for. If Stanton were available, I'd empty the locker - 2 of the 4, plus whatever else, but for a young top ten in the majors player, who plays a position of need. But to include any of the Six, or Franklin, or Miller, or Sanchez, for merely a good proven MLBtm player, especially when we really need to see if Smoak and Ackley can do a Saunders, and if Montero can settle in at DH, catching once a week or so, and if any (or all) of the four pitchers can make the leap to the rotation -- nah, I'd rather dance with those we brung. 

Looks like we're signing Bay. I hope he returns to form, but I'm doubtful. I'd be happy now if we traded some useful pieces (one of Pryor/CSmith, plus an A+ level B-/C+ 'spec like Jones?) for a Mike Morse or Logan Morrison, who can play left and back up first base and maybe provide grit in the clubhouse, and then call it a day unless a Myers or Stanton become available. I think Myers IS available, and that KC may exhaust their other possibilities soon. Erasmo and Franklin might look real good when the prices of free agent pitchers get set by Greinke and Sanchez, and Tampa Bay decides they need Hosmer and/or Moustakas along with Myers for their arms.  

If that would come to pass, I would hope that JackZ would spend his FA money on Sanchez, keep the draft pick, and trade the extra arms at the point in the season when other teams have a rotation hole, and maximize our return then. Or, see if Minnesota would give us Aaron Hicks for the arms. When Bay/Morse/Wells/Morrison start to fade, we'd have someone to compete with Landry for the spot.

8

pointsette's picture

pointsette

Disagree that Miller is a better SS or has a better arm. I have seen both players in spring training. Franklin is more smooth and plays like he is from the Dominican. Miller is more like a Michael Saunders body type.

I expected more from Miller being older and out of college. Miller needs AT LEAST another year in the hot spot. With his 30+ errors this year would you want him playing SS at the Big League level next year? In fact, there isn't ANY interest in him from other teams. So, we need to sit on him for a while.

9

This is an odd year - lots of teams flush with new media revenue; lots of teams with a reasonable expectation of being within striking distance of the wild card. It's kind of a perfect storm for prospect under valuation and veteran over valuation. This is a tough off season to try and trade cheap, unproven players for expensive veterans. The economics of prospects have changed again.

10

Filtered HTML

  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.
  • Allowed HTML tags: <a> <em> <strong> <cite> <blockquote> <ul> <ol> <li> <i> <b> <img> <table> <tr> <td> <th> <div> <strong> <p> <br> <u>
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.
By submitting this form, you accept the Mollom privacy policy.

Shoutbox

Please log in or create an account to post shouts.
SpectatorIf Andino clears waivers, he can be sent to AAA, but it takes 48 hours for him to clear. Apparently, however, a separate deal from the Sucre move. Baker seems to be backing off a bit from his prior assertion that the 40-man move would be a minor-leaguer, so I still wouldn't rule out Harang DFA'd for Beavan.1 min 57 sec ago
SpectatorWell, now Baker is saying that Andino's on waivers, but not released or DFA'd. Just putting him on waivers doesn't clear a spot for Sucre. So they still need to clear a spot for Sucre by removing a minor-leaguer from the 40-man. So I was premature in the earlier shout, but not alone in that regard.6 min 26 sec ago
okdanWord is Andino has been placed on waivers. Best guess is that Triunfel is up to replace him as backup SS, since he's on the 40 man of course.26 min 9 sec ago
malcontentThanks for the news on Andino Spec! And I hopethat answered your question Terry, thanks for asking.40 min 37 sec ago
malcontentOn Wedge, I really wish he was more progressive, I would love to see guys swapped in as pinch hitters and defensive replacements early, or a long man in the bullpen that was used aggressively (an idea I've discussed a few times). So, part of me wants a new manager, but managers are a lot like catchers in that they get very little positive credit. If the Furbush relief had worked out, that night people probably still would have been talking about how it was a mistake on Wedge's part that didn't burn him. Do we give him credit for Ibanez' success? He definitely didn't get praise for the New York series. So because I can't know what he's doing right, I do defer to the GM, who I would keep through next season.42 min 17 sec ago
SpectatorHa! In the very first shout I said "I wouldn't rule out Andino DFA and Triunfel to majors." Then I backed off since Drayer and Baker were saying the move wouldn't come from the MLB 25-man roster. So now Andino is waived after all. Which must mean Triunfel since there isn't another backup SS on the 40-man. The Triunfel part is not confirmed, though.49 min 39 sec ago
rick82Rick's fun fact: 2002 Oakland 5th starter was...Aaron Harang.1 hour 2 min ago
jon wwhoops...thanks Spectator. Tenbrink isn't a SS. Unless this is all part of the master plan and the M's have been hiding a gold-glove caliber SS at other positions all along. That's what I get for trusting my memory. But the point still stands - I think one of the mistakes this organization has made repeatedly over the last few years is not doing a good job setting up these young prospects for success. Ackley, Smoak, Montero, Seager and Saunders have all been "sink or swim". Yet another way that Figgins signing was a disaster. He would have been spelling a lot of those guys when they needed a mental day off against a tough pitcher. But just because Figgins didn't work out doesn't mean that the Mariners should give up on having a bench that a manager can mix-and-match with in an effective way.1 hour 24 min ago
malcontentTerry: I agree with everyone else about bringing Franklin in to replace Andino, and I would love to see an aggressive trade for some starting pitching like Jake Peavy to give the team a real chance at the season, maybe find a time machine and grab Mark Reynolds for nothing like I begged for. As far as Wedge and Z, I don't know, Z has put this team within spitting distance of having a system like Atlanta's or St Louis where new talent is always a bus ride away, but he's definitely handed out quite a bit of it. I'm not big on blaming them fire bad decisions, if rather try to figure out exactly why they make decisions we don't predict... Love to say more, but work calls.1 hour 25 min ago
malcontentColorado, unless I'm mistaken, contact% refers to the percentage of balls that hirers swung at that were put in play. So 62.7% of Charlie Furbush's pitches were put into play for a hit, error, or out, the rest were whiffs and foul balls.1 hour 38 min ago
rick82Probably everybody here, including myself, was calling for Nick Franklin at SS prior to the road trip. Dave Cameron is a quitter, but he was right in pointing out the advantage in making the switch wouldn't be worth the trouble. Ryan regressed to mean, posting .393/.462/571/.1.023. The Mariners were correct in not making the switch. Even Andino offered a .785 OPS during the road trip. I'm not convinced of Mariner nimbleness, but I haven't really seen anybody else impress me more than they. I wanted to kick Ibanez to the curb well before this road trip. That would have been a mistake. Noesi made a last minute emergency start. Did pretty well. I want to see strategic changes in June. But I don't want to see them based on some blogger's opinion that the season's lost so let's do things that prepare us for next year and beyond.2 hours 3 min ago
moethedogSpec, I'm a fan because he plays 6 positions (he doesn't play SS or C) and for a utility guy he hits decently. Guys like hiim, as the 13th positional player are really valuable, maybe more so in the NL...but his versatility allows a manager to be pretty flexable with his PH'ing and subbing. And he hits some. He's no world beater.....but guys like that stick around for a long time, given a chance.2 hours 19 min ago
phxterryRick - do you see any evidence that the M's Brain Trust is flexible, nimble, quick witted enough to make needed adjustments before the team is so far out of the WC race that it is essentially a mathematical impossiblity to win the WC? (per ESPN, M's have 5.4% chance to make playoffs)2 hours 30 min ago
rick82ON THIS DATE in 2002, the Oakland A's were at 21-26, and staring up at the 116 win Mariners as well as the Monkey Rally Angels. The transformation of this team (which utilized an OBPing first baseman, a slugging lefty 3rd baseman, and, oh yes, a bat first shortstop) was so intriguing Hollywood made a movie out of it and starred Brad Pitt in the lead (I saw the ads in France: it was called: "Le Strategie"). Of course, even with the team losing MVP Giambi, there was still lots of talent on that roster (they had a couple awesome starters for one). But there is a reason why we quote Beane when we say these first couple months are used to find out what you got, and adjust accordingly in June.2 hours 36 min ago
SpectatorI'm a Nate Tenbrink fan, but let's not kid ourselves. He's an emergency fill-in at CF and 2b, and he is NOT a shortstop. He does not fill the Andino role of backing up at three infield positions, so if he were to come up it would be in a different capacity. He's primarily a third baseman, but they have Liddi there so they've been moving him around.2 hours 37 min ago
phxterryThanks, Lonnie, maybe the M's need to hire a charm & personality instructor, as well as hire new (& better) hitting coaches. Just saying ..... a flexible organization will do whatever it takes to win.3 hours 33 min ago
Lonnie of MCTerry, the simple answer is that Triunfel is still a young man, and there is hope that he may one day actually mature to the point that he sees where he is screwing up. Do not look for Triunfel to have a very long AAA career with the M's. I believe that this is his last year in the organization. With Almonte, the problem is a dearth of CF talent in the system that allows a guy like him to stick around longer than most would like.3 hours 36 min ago
phxterrySo Lonnie, if they are cancers in the clubhouse, what should be done with them? Trade them for a bag of balls to another unsuspecting team? And if Triunfel is so lousy and a cancer, why is the M's Brain Trust keeping him around when he is blocking Miller's progress,and in turn, Taylor's progress?? If the M's Brain Trust engaged in rational behavior, why wouldn't they just get him out of the way?3 hours 41 min ago
Lonnie of MCTriunfel will never be an answer as a baseball player because his bat and glove is not good enough to overcome the fact that he is universally disliked everywhere he goes. Same thing with Denny Almonte.3 hours 45 min ago
phxterryMal, Looked up Delabar. Man, has he turned into a monster this year. Guess GMZ picked the wrong reliever to trade for a power hitting LH OFer, who mashes RHP, just to end up in Wedgie's Doghouse. We could really have used Delabar this year. Say Mal, axed you a couple of questions in earlier shoutbox comments and maybe you could humor me with a reply: 1) What is your presecription, if anything, for what currently ails the M's, and 2) Specifically, for you, are GMZ and Wedgie keepers or would you get rid of them? Thanks in advance for the response.3 hours 53 min ago