Sizzler: Adrian Gonzalez

It's one thing to trade for a good player. It's a different thing to trade for a great player.

Trading for Jered Weaver or Carlos Pena would be fine. Trading for Cliff Lee or Adrian Gonzalez is a little different thing.

Adrian Gonzalez is a great ballplayer, a 100-walk slugger, plus on defense, a young, lefty Edgar Martinez at the plate and a healthy, 155-game John Olerud comp with the glove. Don't be distracted by details. That's free advice. :- )

=== SIZZLER: Adrian Gonzalez ===

I/O: A coupla different times, Baker sigggggghs and moans over how many times the M's play the Padres ;- ) but points out, this gives San Diego ample time to drool over Mariner minor leaguers.

At least twice on his show, he jokingly refers to Adrian Gonzalez the future Mariner, apparently getting a vibe that the M's interest hasn't dribbled off since the 6-for-1 offer.

CRUNCH: An interesting article appeared on the 'net this week, pointing out that AGone's HR scatterchart shows a good amount of HR's to LF, HR's that would be zapped even worse by Safeco than Petco.

Good show, and this might mean that you shouldn't adjust Gonzalez' numbers much coming into Safeco. We cheerfully agree that a use-the-whole park lefty wouldn't match Safeco as well as *he* would if he were a straight pull guy.

But we would ping-pong back the following:

......

(1) What is best for Gonzalez (say, Fenway) isn't the same question as what is best for the Mariners. Gonzalez can get a better team than the M's, but the M's aren't going to get a better hitter than AGone.

The M's point of view is the one we care about here. :- )

Supposing it could be shown that Boeing would be better off in Wyoming, that Boeing would make people $62/year richer there, compared to making them $48/year richer here. That still doesn't mean that Seattleites would like to replace Boeing with Detect-O-Vision.

......

(2) Gonzalez' OPS+ was 166 at Petco last season, he is young, and his stats went wayyyy up in the John Benson second half. .311/.432/.586 in the second half, home and away.

He's a player with possible upside in front of him. Don't let the stat du jour throw you on this guy. Adrian Gonzalez is a BEAST.

......

(3) Players adapt to their home parks. They get conditioned by the positive and negative reinforcements they receive on a game-in, game-out basis.

Do not assume that Adrian Gonzalez might not choose to pull the ball more at Safeco. He's not a Strat-O-Matic card, after all. We can't analyze him like one.

Gonzalez hit 28 homers last year on the road. He comes here, how many are going to bet me that Gonzalez hits only 12 Safeco homers?

The point is well taken that Gonzalez might not get a 20% bonus card at Safeco vs. Petco. Agree with that. I'd bet you a baseball cap that Gonzalez didn't SLG .446 here, as he did at Petco.

=== Adrian. Is. Good. ===

If Gonzalez hit .280/.400/.550 for the M's in Safeco -- as he did for the Padres -- then he's the legit Edgar replacement that Carlos Pena, with a .227/.356/.537 strikeout-filled line, is not.

Gonzalez' EYE is about 1.0; Carlos Pena (for example) fanned 165 times in 135 games the last two years, each. There's a difference between a 160 OPS+ hitter and a 130 OPS+ hitter.

If all you can get is Carlos Pena, you take him and pocket the price difference, but don't confuse him with a great hitter. The aging Pena might fan 190 times this year if he plays every day.

Gonzalez might hit no better than .280/.400/.550 for the M's -- but he might also (a) continue his 2H 2009 surge, or (b) pull the ball more in Safeco, and do even better.

We all know that if you can't get Gonzalez, you take somebody else. But keep in mind: Gonzalez would replace Edgar Martinez in our lineup. Other guys wouldn't.

Cheers,

Dr D

Printer-friendly version

Add new comment

Filed Under

Sports

Adrian Gonzalez

Replies

Pena's last 3 seasons

Pena's last 3 seasons offensively > Gonzalez's last 3.

This doesn't mean Gonzalez isn't going to be better going forward. I'd bet on him being better for sure.

The question is how much better is he really, if at all? And which is the more cost-effective solution?

We must keep perspective though that Gonzalez is a poor fit for the park and Pena a tremendous one. Hitters also typically lose 5 runs in the AL to NL conversion as well.

2007?

Are you expecting Pena and Gonzalez to reproduce their 2007 seasons? That edits the analysis far too much, to include Gonzalez' pre-peak 2007 and Pena's age-30 2007.

You might as well compare Cliff Lee's last 3 years -- he ERA'ed 72 in 2007 -- to Fausto Carmona's last 3 years (since Carmona had a great 2007). Wow! Carmona is surprisingly close in ERA+ over that span!

No way in the world we use 2007 to assess where Cliff Lee, Adrian Gonzalez, or Carlos Pena are now.

If Pena could OPS+ 172 like he did in 2007, I'd want him, no argument. He can't. He's going to be lucky not to decline further than he already has.

You mean decline to AL HR

You mean decline to AL HR champ?

.227 hitting HR champ :- )

And that .227 is becoming more and more scary as his K's per 162 approach 200. The man is past 30 and getting older. The K's are not going to go *down* from here. And no great hitter fans 180-200 times a year.

I'll take Pena over Casey Kotchman, that's for sure.

Right. There are reasons I

Right. There are reasons I think he deserved about 15-20 more BA points last season, but he does K like crazy ya. Its only 1 year though and he should be fine unless he completely falls off the planet (which is unlikely).

I'm just saying. I'm really skeptical about paying a sky high price for Gonzalez when there are FAR cheaper alternatives like Pena around. Next offseason the FA market is going to loaded in 1B.

Gonzalez's career high OPS before last season was 871, and he had 22 IBBs last year.

Maybe this is a sign of new great things to come, or more likely, Gonzalez settles in as the next Texiera (a 900 OPS hitter in a neutral park).

Gonzalez grounds into 19

Gonzalez grounds into 19 double plays per 690. Pena 9.

Theres a 5 run advantage for Pena there.

Champ

this is a silly argument. :- ) Let's not go here.

Pena has been a pretty fair MOTO hitter the last two years -- he's 130 OPS+ but hanging on to that by the skin of his teeth (K's and age). Next # in this sequence is 115, 120.

Gonzalez is looking at the Hall of Fame.

Like we said, if you can't get a great hitter, Pena is a nice fallback.

Gonzalez isn't Zeus. Hes a

Gonzalez isn't Zeus. Hes a ballplayer. Pena is a ballplayer.

Runs are runs. Gonzalez is about 5 runs inferior to Pena in GDP over a full season.

Gotta blend saber and scouting

I read it from a GM.

A scout recognizes uber-talent when he sees it. Talent covers a multitude of sins. :- ) HOF talent is what you want to bet on.

Fine, dock Gonzalez the 5 runs for GIDP:

+63.5 runs - AGone 2009
+26.9 runs - Pena 2009

OK, five runs GIDP cuts the gap to ... Gonzalez is only twice Pena's value.

Let's argue about something else. :- )

The '09 UZRs (a phantom

The '09 UZRs (a phantom difference of 8.5 runs that don't really exist) and career year for Gonzalez, plus injury shortened season for Pena, significantly cloud those WAR figures.

Pena had a better WAR in '08 and a better one in '07.

Me?

I see Gonzalez as a 4.5-5 WARish true talent in the AL (5-5.5 in NL). I see Pena as a 4-4.5 WARish true talent AL player (assuming he stays healthy).

Using the WAR

Using the WAR argument:

2007-2009 average WAR:

Pena - 4.2
Gonzalez - 4.4

Gonzalez has averaged 700 PAs over the last 3 years. Pena has averaged 596 PAs.

Pena averaged 4.9 WAR per 700 PAs the last 3 years.

This doesn't take the NL to AL conversion in consideration, or the 5 runs in GDIP, or the fact that Pena is a better fit for Safeco in consideration.

Unless you see Gonzalez being the exact player he was in '09 and Pena as in STIFF decling starting in '10, theres no way theres much of any gap in overall value between these two players.

The biggest difference in reality is Gonzalez's durability. He projects to be better in '10, but I believe that gap to be very small.

I'll give you the last word

mercifully. As you know, I live to serve. ;- )

Well, Doc what are your WAR

Well, Doc what are your WAR projections for those 2 next season then?

OK, since you invited me to speak up again

Pena was at 2.7 last year, 3.7 the year before ... he didn't get much of a penalty for D, and his skills (HR, RBI) are repeatable, so figure 3.0 to 3.5 wins. But I will grant you it's a "hard" 30-35 runs, runs that decide a division.

Granted also that Pena gets these in 135 games, leaving contribution for his substitute.

................

Gonzalez was at 6.4, getting credit for only 4 runs as a fielder... His arc is up at ages 27-28. His BB are skyrocketing. He just got better. I'm not using his pre-peak seasons to project his ages 27-28...

I'm banking 5-6 wins for Gonzalez, Petco or Safeco, and 6-7 are the upside. WAR is very friendly to guys with .400 OBP's.

The 90th percentile is for him to hit like he did 2H 2009, have UZR give him credit for 10 runs defensively, and he's at 8 wins, like Mauer was last year.

..............

3 - 3.5 wins, plus sub, that's a nice total for a 40-homer man. 3 to 3.5 probably understates Pena's value -IF- his K's aren't going to sabotage him going forward.

:waits to see where this is going:

Pena's best case

I don't expect AGone to suffer any AL/NL transition whatsoever, but suppose he does, and has a lackluster .260/.400/.500 season. (The OBP is a given.)

And suppose that Pena's fit to Safeco boosts his OPS+ by like 20 points of OPS+ (which could happen). Who knows, it's not at all out of the question that Pena could hit 49 homers in Safeco or something.

If those two things happened, then Pena could boost up quite close to AGone in value, will cheerfully concede that.

Well if Pena had Gonzalez's

Well if Pena had Gonzalez's PAs he prorated to 48 HRs just last season. If his BA was even .242, his overall line would have been pretty monstrous.

I don't expect him to repeat '09 over a full season next year, but I expect something in between his last two seasons.

Reasonable enough, though I

Reasonable enough, though I have those two a little closer.

Pena's '09 was actually superior to his '08. '09 looks inferior only due to the UZR swing and a slightly unlucky BABIP.

I expect '10 to be in between those two seasons, Safeco won't hurt him so he'd gain a bit in addition to the value he bring in GDP. He has an outside shot at '07.

In general Pena is underrated defensively and Gonzalez is overrated. Dewan and PMR have Pena as a +5-10 run 1B over the past few years. I haven't seen anybody rate Gonzalez as a GG type despite his reputation. Hes generally rated around 0-5 runs.

I have the over/under at around 4-4.5 WAR in 135 games played for Pena in Safeco.

I see Gonzalez scaling back a bit in Safeco and due to league switch (though he maintains some of his power and BB gains). .280/.380/.510. 4.5-5 WAR in 160 games played.

Most of Gonzalez's gains in BB rate last year were due pitcher's pitching around him and IBBs (45.2% Zone). That figures to go down once he moves away from the Padres, though he maintains some of those gains as well as the power.

It comes down to who makes more sense for the cost. Pena on a salary dump or Gonzalez for your farm system? I don't see these guys seperated by 5-10 runs and thats only due to Pena's tendency to miss 25 games a season.

I finally get it.Its been

I finally get it.

Its been confusing me why Doc and many Mariner fans seem to view Gonzalez in extreme upside scenarios (mini-Pujols esque projected lines) for '10 and Pena in extreme downside scenarios (hes finished, hes in decline, hes the next Sexson), and now it makes sense.

In 2009 vs the Seattle Mariners:

Carlos Pena - .100/.250/.300
Adrian Gonzalez - .333/.462/.667

From what we saw first-hand in '09 Gonzalez WAS Pujols and Pena was a one-handed Michael Saunders '09.

Give me a break

Was reading this thread and it's getting ugly

Carlos Pena is 32 this year

Carlos Pena is 32 this year as a low-batting-average, high-power hitter.

Everyone on his similar batter profile:

Dick Stuart - crashed hard at age 32, was done at 33.
Glenn Davis - fell off a cliff at age 30
Tony Clark - terrible age 30 on
Jim Gentile - again, steep falloff at 31, done at 32
Gorman Thomas - useless after age 31
Don Mincher - okay through age 33, then out of baseball after age 34
Jay Buhner - Maintained pretty well through age 35, though his games played were severely shortened after age 32
Cecil Fielder - done as a useful player after age 32
Norm Cash - maintained well into his late 30s
Andre Thornton - played well until age 34

The comp he gets here:
Richie Sexson, blew up at age 32.
Russ Branyan, threw his back out at age 33.

Pena is not a type that ages well. Maybe he can be the exception, as Norm Cash was, but everybody else was either done or running half seasons within 2 years of where Pena is. Norm Cash also had a lot better contact skills than Pena has had.

Can Pena fill a need for us for 2 years? Sure. In no universe do I extend him past 2 seasons from now (which is a problem, since his contract runs out this year and he's not gonna sign a 1-year deal). Maybe that's fine, and Poythress or Raben or Carp or whoever will be destroying the minors and ready to take over then.

A-Gon can fill a need for the next 6 seasons.

What's that 4-5 years of "security" worth to you? Is it worth the extra 4-5 prospects? I'd want to get him extended now, so that I can have those 6 seasons, but assuming we could lock him up would you pay the extra guys to make that happen?

Pena is like Branyan. I have no problems getting him in here on the cheap as a short-term fix to our power problem, but we'd better have a plan B for when he falls off a cliff. If we're just talking about the next year, then Gonzalez is still better than Pena, but there's a good argument for Pena + 4-5 prospects being better than Gonzalez by himself - especially if we can turn those 4-5 prospects into other (better) players than what we currently have. For 1-2 years only I definitely get the Pena argument (again, he's not under contract after 2010).

But right now we don't have a single batter on our team that I would call a cornerstone for the next 5 years. Gutierrez might be a cornerstone glove, but not a cornerstone bat IMO. We're all hoping Ackley is one, but he's not here yet - and Alex Gordon should be a decent example of a can't-miss bat that still hasn't hit yet.

Pena's not a cornerstone, he's a 1-2 year solution, IMO. If that's what we can do, then do it. It's way better than nothin, and the guy can still club. I'd just like the 28 year old .900+ OPS hitter instead of the 32 year old one if it's workable - and if we can sign him long-term.

I agree with that. I see Pena

I agree with that.

I see Pena as a rich man's Branyan and I'm high on him for next year (there hasn't been any skill decline to predict a falloff yet), then seeing which of the '10 1B FAs I can sign (perhaps Pena himself or Berkman or any number of guys).

I'm with Taro on this one

Is Adrian the better hitter? Yes. He's younger, and VERY slightly more productive. But, the actual productivity of Pena vs. AG isn't very wide. Career lines?

AG: .281/.362/.506 (.869) -- age 28 this year
CP: .247/.355/.502 (.858) -- age 32 this year

AG is almost certainly the "safer" bet. But, the cost-benefit analysis is simply not very large. Pena would cost less in dollars and FAR less in prospects.

Agree... Both guys have

Agree... Both guys have trended up in recent years, but overall there probably isn't much seperating them ability-wise either than durability.

Barring a continued Gonzalez breakout or Pena washout, I just don't see much difference in the short-term.

This biggest difference between the two is the second bargain year for Gonzalez. It makes him legitimately much more valuable of a trade commodity, but the question is whether its worth the cost?

1B is going to be loaded next offseason like this year's 2B. A one-year guy could be pretty ideal.

Ugly? nah.

Nice back and forth IMO.

Have to side with Taro on this one, at least with regards to cost/benefit.

Clearly Z and co. value Gonzalez much higher than Pena, there was no 6-for-1 on the table with him at any time. Everyone agrees, he's the better player with better upside.

But Pena as a close approximation that would not require gutting the farm, that is very very intriguing.

Bear in mind that Gonzales is 95% likely to walk at the end of his contract, rather than sign a new deal. Even if the M's open up the purse strings. He walks and you get two draft picks. So a 6-for-1 deal is really a 4-for-1 deal, long term.

If we can add Pena, he's a 4

If we can add Pena, he's a 4 month rental until he's a FA (Assuming we can get him in June). Plus playoffs, I guess. Will he walk after that? I would expect him to want at least 3 years. Do we want those 3 years at 30 million? We didn't want them from Branyan (injury details apply of course).

Gonzalez is under contract through 2011, so he's not an immediate turnaround. So it's Gonzalez + 4 draftpicks for 1.6 seasons, or Pena for nil (trade a prospect, get one back by offering him arb) for .6 of a season. I get the argument - I guess I just prefer trying to extend Gonzalez rather than throwing money at Pena when I don't think he'll be playing useful baseball in 3 years.

But the prospect haul that we have to give up certainly does come into play.

I think the way to look at it

I think the way to look at it is Pena for 1 year and Gonzalez for 2.

Theres absolutely no way we can reasonably extend Gonzalez with Boras looking for a Texiera-type contract IMO. Its just not going to happen.

Right GL

Taro and I are cool, Dan. :- ) We're buds from way back. He annoys me when we play roto (it's not that he smashes me; it's that he swiped Fukudome from me under very sinister circumstances once), but otherwise, when he gets too intense, you just bring up Nippon baseball and it's strawberry fields forever again.

Lively thread amigos. Nice to see G-Moneyball knows how to spectral-scan the difference between a nice add and a nuclear detonation of the AL West. :- )

Man Doc.. I didn't know that

Man Doc.. I didn't know that bothered you so much. If I remember right, you missed your time slot and I picked the guy you wanted next? It happens pretty often in slow drafts (and is one of the reasons I'm not in favor of them).

Sinister seems pretty harsh.. I would have just traded him to you for Bloomquist if you would have let me know how much that bugged you. :-)