One of my favorite Mariners sites is Jon Shields' Bleeding Blue & Teal.
Jon writes in a likeable, easy, fluid manner and puts his own signature on his view of the M's world. He draws from both sabr and visual literacy to go his own way and present a distinctive take on current Blue & Teal events. This article on Orlando Cabrera is a typically fresh read.
Jon & Rob T.'s Big Idea is that one-year contractors give the M's a net gain owing to the M's high drafting -- they give up 2nd-rounders, but gain supplemental 1st-rounders, when renting Type A free agents.
I don't know about you, but this kind of draft profiteering is a resource tactic that hadn't occurred to me. Admittedly, I'm not all that interested in MLB processes and procedures beyond the active 25-man roster. This draft-profiteering would be a routine consideration for GM's and for those very interested in their tactical considerations, but I'm pretty bored by that stuff and so appreciate BBT using one-syllable words I can understand. :- )
*Is* Cabrera a serious upgrade over Yuni, and if so, what do you do with Betancourt? Well, that's another subject...
..........
In this article on Triunfel's power, BBT did a very interesting job of freeze-framing the torque in Triunfel's swing.
Agree of course that the second series of photos shows drastically more power. What you are seeing is that Triunfel kept his weight back -- notice the angle of his front leg shows that his CG has not slid forward. As golfers know, you have to TURN, not SWAY. In the first series of photos, Triunfel's weight has moved forward much too far to put any leverage on the ball.
Of course, if you take the same photos of major leaguers, you'll find instances in which they lunged at the ball. Two swings like that might happen in the same game, LOL. But in this case, the "BEFORE" image shows Triunfel apparently swinging at a pitch right in his wheelhouse as he lunges up at the ball.
Like Jon says, Triunfel is verrrrrrrrry young, and it's wayyyyyyyyy too early to panic over (or even analyze) his power potential. Everybody has to learn how to hit.
The scouts wring their hands that Triunfel chops down on the ball with the A-Rod type swing (let me read that sentence again). It's just too early. And for that matter, Triunfel did start showing the ability to loft the ball in 2H 200.
............
We might mention in passing that scouts are complaining more and more about Triunfel's stated age. To them, his body looks like that of a 25-year-old man, though he's young in the face. (LeBron James' body was absolutely fully developed when he was a senior in high school.)
If Triunfel is the age that he states, then he is one of the very few greatest prospects in baseball, end of discussion. If he's a couple of years older, which I don't doubt, he's still very exciting.
............
In his article on Eric Hinske, BBT makes an amusing case for Hinske vis-a-vis D-O-V's pet target, Adam Dunn. (The thought in there that perked my ears up, was actually his "catch" of Thome-vs-Dunn, in which Dunn comps out nicely).
Hinske as the .260/.333/.450, plus-defense, corner OF template? Wonder how he'd comp out to Nick Swisher, then. In this instance, BBT makes a much more compelling case, IMHO, because Hinske is a genuine Scrub. $2M a year is Scrub money; $8M a year is Civic money. You can pair Hinske with a star for the cost of a couple of Swishers.
In any case, Jon walks a lot of grass that isn't worn to bare dirt by the rest of us. Gotta love it.
Cheers,
Dr D
I've been watching this blog for the last couple of months after stumbling onto it in random rumor surfing...I am very impressed with the writers in his group...
It's nice to see the Mariner blog-o-sphere expanding. And Jon is very non-partisan and very cordial in his conversational style...
Actually I do like Hinske as a fallback option and have mentioned him in the Griffey thread. Hes a lot like Griffey with big RH/LH splits (not quite the bat), but a tad better than Griffey defensively.
Over Swisher though? No way. Swisher is a better hitter and fielder and is 3 years younger. He'd be one of the best position players on the team and wouldn't have to be platooned.
I actually would NOT rate Hinske as a plus defender either. From the times I've seen I don't remember being very agile or having good routes or anything out theree. UZR is the only metric out there that likes him, so naturally they're going to inflate his WAR. PMR hates him, RZR thinks hes below average. BOTH PMR and RZR rate Swisher as consistently one of the best corner outfielder out there. Theres a reason he plays some CF.
Hinske is also coming off of a career year last year. Hes a career .774 OPS hitter with most of his career in bandboxes. He isn't going to hit like Swisher is and hes not nearly as good defensively.
Is Hinske a better bargain at $2mil per? Its close. Hinske is probably a 1-1.5 WAR player in '09 platooned. Swisher is most likely a 3.0-4.0 WAR player and will be making around $6mil the next two years, $9mil in '11, and an option year $11mil in '12. Hes a minor star thats a MASSIVE bargain. I still don't get why you don't like him.
Just next year its roughly $5mil vs $2mil. Hinske a better bargain? Maybe, but its close. Hes very Branyan-ish. The difference is Swisher is a better player, a bargain, and isn't just a short term fix.
Get Swisher. Only go after Hinske if you fail on Swisher.
Using the R/RBI base that you strangely used as an argument against Swisher:
Swisher 96 runs, 86 rbis per 162 (4 runs, 10 rbis less average than Dunn despite pitcher's park in AL)
Eric Hinske (keep in mind hes been semi-platooned the past two years): 80 runs, 72 RBi per 162 (16 runs less, 14 rbis less)
The gap in R/RBI production between Swisher and Dunn is far, FAR less than that between Swisher and Hinske. And that doesn't take the plattoon situation and defense into account.
Over the past THREE years Swisher has been roughly around a 120 OPS+ hitter (adjust '08 for luck) and hes a PLUS defender in a corner by visual judgement and consistently so by any defensive metric out there. Hes dirt cheap. Hes a GREAT fit offensively for Safeco and as a defender in LF.
I really, truly do not understand why you don't like him.
Oh, and regarding the new blog.. I like it. He has a good post on Orlando Hudson up as well.
I only read DOV, LL, MC, USSM for Mariner sites, but this is going to get added to the rotation.
Excellent posts taro...agreed 100%.
And I bookmarked BBT and will be regularly reading.
That O-Hud article made me a little excited. :D
I would probably hit the ceiling with glee if we signed O-Dawg...seriously. If we could somehow sign BOTH ODawg and OCab...I would faint. :)
Doc, I can't keep up with all the output. Good for you (and your readers) if it has the chance to pay off.
Anyway, this bit was fascinating, and I thought it might give you something to riff off of.
http://blogs.thenewstribune.com/mariners/2009/01/07/who_should_close_for...
When it comes to who should close for the Seattle Mariners this season, the team could do worse than listen to the man who closed for them the last three years – J.J. Putz.
Since he never played with newcomers Aaron Heilman or Tyler Walker, Putz couldn’t evaluate them. But he has played alongside Brandon Morrow, Mark Lowe, Roy Corcoran and Miguel Batista.
“Stuff-wise, Mark has the fastball to close, but I don’t know about his other pitches,” Putz said from his home in Arizona. “And everyone knows Brandon can close, but I don’t think he wants to. That’s not a job you want to get if you’re not ready.”
Batista?
“What’s baffling about Miguel is he’s got some of the nastiest stuff you’ll ever see, and he throws a 93-97 mph fastball with movement – and he refuses to throw it,” Putz said. “He wants to throw his other pitches to get you out. I mean, I’ve never seen him get beat with his fastball.”
So, it’s the ninth inning of the first game of the regular season, and the Mariners have a one-run lead. Putz, of course, is sitting in the New York Mets bullpen. Who does Seattle go to?
“If you’re looking for the guy who’s got it downstairs, Corcoran is best suited to close,” Putz said. “Roy didn’t care what his role was last year, when he came in, he was ready. I think if he knew the job was his, he’d be even better at it.
“To me, he’s a right-handed Eddie Guardado with a better fastball. He’s not afraid of anyone, and he can do the job.”
Hey Doc...over at Bleeding Blue and Teal I'm up to my usual arguments re: defensive metrics and their use...
Basically...I think you're right about some of the illogical conclusions that get drawn by Cameron's brand of defensive analysis (E5 Hinske = Adam Dunn? Raul Ibanez = defensively gifted 4th outfielder in part time play?)...but I think you're wrong about the reason thos econclusions get made.
It's not that saberdweebs are overvaluing defense...it's that they're using bad logic in combining offense and defense. The argument goes that a replacement level bat will be, on average, an average feilder. And while this may appear to make sense on the surface...it's a TERRIBLE way to scale offense and defense together to define the value of a player. You're going to systematically overrate part time glove men, systematically underrate full time poor fielding sluggers, and that's why the lists look wonky and USSM's recommendations for players to get are often weird (Jacques Jones, for example).
The reason this happens...the baseline for offensive production is roughly a .350 winning percentage...but the baseline for defensive performance is .500...that's illogical...no matter whether the true replacement player is a .500 fielder or not. So you've been crucading for a very good reason...but with a poor understanding of the cause.
I value defense more than Dave Cameron does. I value defense more than 99% of saberdweebs will. But my list of left fielders ranked by value will not place a 4th outfielder ahead of Raul Ibanez or E5 Hinske ahead of Adam Dunn because I'm not combining two different scales as though they were linearly related.