(Full disclosure dept: This article contains a section that tilts at saber windmills. If such discussion tends to annoy you, please view our alternate ending.
This great sabermetric article argues that "pitch framing" is a skill worth +20 to -20 runs per season.
The value of "pitch framing" was concluded to be worth as much as having a "pitcher friendly" umpire vs. a neutral umpire.)
.
Q. How do you predict the output of a machine that has 25 moving parts, no one part of which you can confidently predict?
A. Geoff Baker's Sunday "my bad!" is a terrific article even by his own lofty standards. Dr. D learned long ago that you can't predict a team's season in advance, because you can't predict even one player's season in advance ...
Baker absolutely buried the M's in March, mistakenly as SSI saw it then. So did almost everybody else But Baker (along with LL today) does something wicked cool: he sits down like Garry Kasparov and tears the position apart, asking, "What was wrong with my thinking process--- > that I can get right next time?"
He concludes that this was the fatal move in the chess game:
... it looks like I was still wrong. I misjudged this offense and its potential to change.
And in doing so, I broke one of my cardinal rules about looking at only stats and not considering the human element to ballplayers.
Now that I've had several more weeks to study Brendan Ryan and Olivo up close, I see the intangibles that I'd missed. These guys have it. Ryan began seriously impressing me about a month ago and hasn't stopped. The Mariners have not had a player with his energy level in the five years I've been here. He's given this club a dimension it did not have before and it's come at a time when the M's needed a boost at the top of the order.
Olivo is a bit quieter, but he's a warrior. He goes out there prepared to leave it all on the field every day. It's not a cliche. He really does. The Mariners have not had players like Olivo since their glory years. He is the leader of this team. Kennedy might be next in the leadership department, squeezing every bit of talent he has into the four games per week this club can risk playing him.
Just so!
.
Q. Is that "offensive potential for change" the actual key to the 2011 pennant race?
A. In March, as you are well aware, SSI pencilled in Michael Pineda and the 21-months-rested Erik Bedard for huge ML impact in 2011.
And since the offense was Stars & Scrubs fungible, the logic was there for a lot of upward mobility.
Of course, I've predicted 101-loss teams for upward mobility too :- ) ...
... but we're just sayin'. Now, say (1) the M's had lost -101 last year, and (2) their rotation consisted of Batista-Silva-Washburn, if they'd been stuffed with aging Civics, we'd have .... well, taken up roost at Cheney Stadium this year.
But the offense indeed had S&S fungibility ... what we're not used to is the GM Committee actually fung'ing it mideseason. Only with a single yachtsman at the helm do you have the agility to tack the boat quickly.
.
Q. What's Geoff's idea about "considering the human element?"
A. Few sabermetricians have noticed a very common phenomenon in baseball: a lot of baseball teams have 25 guys all put up good years together, and a lot of baseball teams have all 25 guys put up bad years together.
Not all 25, of course, I know, Egbert. But this phenomenon occurs. Sabermetricians wish that it didn't, and they resist the idea, because it lessens their authority. :- )
Many sabes expressly confess that they HATE the idea of baseball phenomena that they can't measure with the numbers (1, 2, 3, .... ).
Non-measurable factors, if real, imply that sabes don't have 950 of 1,000 light bulbs on --- > and therefore might not have the right to audit GM's in quite the way they do.
***
Geoff Baker asked Bill James -- who is on Theo Epstein's team, gentlemen -- about this unnatural conflict:
Q: WHAT'S YOUR ATTITUDE THEN, WHEN YOU CAN'T QUANTIFY STUFF? I'VE READ AS RECENTLY AS THIS MORNING, ONLINE, SOMEBODY WROTE SOMETHING LIKE "THE STUFF THAT WE CAN'T QUANTIFY, WE MUST LEARN TO IGNORE". AND THESE ARE PEOPLE WHO ARE PRETTY KNOWLEDGEABLE ABOUT BASEBALL AND STATISTICS AND STUFF LIKE THAT.
A: That's exactly backward.
You don't learn by studying the stuff you know. You learn by studying the stuff that you don't know. So, if you divide the world into (crap) that you know and (crap) that you don't know, and you study the stuff that you know, then you're not going to learn very much.
All of the progress comes from studying the stuff that you don't know. So, that's really what's interesting. And that's where most of your focus should be. Studying stuff that you can't agree about.
...
... one of the questions people ask me all the time is "What's the next frontier of sabermetrics?" Maybe that's it. I don't know.
Maybe somebody will try to figure out a way to classify personalities and quantify the impact of those. I don't know. I doubt that's going to happen in my career. But maybe the next one.
At bottom, James is a curious man. He's interested in pushing frontiers ... as opposed to getting certified as "Dr. Got It Solved" and then stigmatizing people who think outside-the-box as idiots.
Some people hate dissension. Others are stimulated by it.
.
Q. Who are the Mariners guilty of the human-element pennant race in Seattle in 2011?
A. Geoff is saying that he should have seen that Miguel Olivo, Brendan Ryan, and Eric Wedge -- those three guys -- would cause that macro push of the "LET'S DO THIS THING" button in Seattle.
I don't know that he should have seen that. But now that it's occurred, recognizing it is critical to understanding the 2011 M's season.
If you're too painfully narrow-minded and locked into your own wOBA specialty to --- > perceive the leadership effect brought by Wedge, Olivo, and Ryan, you will never truly understand the 2011 Mariners season. We mean it in a good way.
It's not a 2D being's fault that it can't perceive a 3D environment. But who would choose that fate?
.
Q. Are those the right three guys to credit?
A. What do you say we include Jack Zduriencik as a 4th in this bridge party. The message starts Top Down.
Capt Jack is the one who powerflushed Milton Bradley, who chose a strong manager, who brought Pineda north from Arizona, who wined and dined Bedard for two years, who chose Justin Smoak over low-minors hype jobs, who empowered Wedge to cut Figgins down to size, etc.
.
Q. Can you give us a few pictures of "chemistry" seasons, in lieu of 1,000 more words?
A. The 2009 season you watched, Don Wakamatsu, Mike Sweeney, and Ken Griffey Jr. managed to hit the "ON" button on the "LET'S DO THIS THING!" machine.
The fact that Griffey and Wak didn't accomplish this in 2010 .... well, life's complicated. It takes dozens of variables clicking, to create a winning attitude. That doesn't mean you don't attempt one.
***
When he wrote Win Shares, James noticed a Macro pattern to Cinderella seasons in baseball history. Two or three team leaders had big seasons and "then everybody else got caught up in the excitement and had UP years."
***
Those two or three team leaders having big seasons, in 2011, were --- > our starting rotation. They carried the M's through two months of offensive Fangorn Woods out into the sunny Shire of pennant contention.
.
Q. Leaving our Lesson Learned as what? What's the light bulb?
A. Mike Scioscia's teams always have the "LET'S GO DO THIS!" button on. Lou Piniella's did, in those cases it was humanly possible. Tony LaRussa's do.
Some managers can hit that button. Billy Martin did it for six different teams, improving them by an average of about 20 games each in his first seasons there. I don't notice that Bobby Cox' teams ever laid down and died the way Mike Hargrove's often did.
***
The bad news is, saber-brethren, that some teams are "on" due to chemistry, and some teams are "off."
You'll need a manager (or other dominating leader) ... he'll need Assistant Leaders ... you'll need a certain minimum watermark of talent ... and you'll need other things. But hitting the "ON" button was the invisible key to the seasons of the 2009 and 2011 M's.
Somebody told you that sports psychology doesn't exist, and that you're not allowed to include it in your sports-watching experience. Just don't listen to them. Just tell them, "Sorry, I disagree. I believe that sports psychology is important." And then enjoy Leadership in sports when you see it.
***
The good news is, guess what. We get to watch a team with the button "ON."
Once you relax about sabermetric dogma for two seconds, it's massively fun to watch Miguel Olivo and Brendan Ryan lead this team into battle. Thunder and lightning (and we're not just talking about passing kidney stones durring ballgames).
What's not fun about watching Brendan Ryan live and die with every play, "crouching with his head buried in his hands after an out", and watching the M's dugout stare at him as he does so? What's not fun about watching the Mariners lined up all the way across the dugout rail in a game they're down three runs?
***
Bill James remarked, concerning Billy Martin, that he was worth more than any single player in baseball.
BABVA,
Dr D
great piece. I'm one of those guys that think intangibles are just as important as tangibles. Having those guys that can keep a clubhouse/team in good spirits(on good days AND bad), and get them to keep working and getting better everyday are the best leaders in sports and are invaluable. The better you are usually makes the message a bit louder.
cpoints Paracorto...
I'm a sabermetrician. Matt is. G-Money, Taro, and a lot of guys are. Sully is an example of a mainstream sabe who goes after many of the same light bulbs that we do.
A lot of sabes wholeheartedly get Zduriencik's need to "blend sabermetrics and tools scouting."
Gotta clarify that not all sabes have the Woolner attitude, but some do, and that needs to be opposed. Not on political grounds, but in the interests of truth. The Woolner approach is going to lead to our believing things that aren't true, as was the case with CERA and PAP.
Baseball is life, and you can't understand life with a calculator alone.
I believe that all 30 give intangibles a lot of weight.
***
It used to be that an aging .230 hitter would keep his job "because he knows how to knock in the clutch RBI," and that was believing a lie, too.
But the ONLINE pendulum has swung much too far the other way. Nowadays if you cyber-mention anything that is not captured by wOBA and WAR, you're glared at.
To comment that saber approach I'd like to quote Knut Hamsun, from Mysterier, 1892:
"A scientist’s brain is something of well definite dimensions – certain centimetres high and certain centimetres wide – that’s something anybody can physically touch. How much vulgarity and what a yokel logic when somebody pretends to trespass with his own dimensions and his quinine into a field that not even the most delicate and wise souls can explain."
the proper way to handle it. I like to read numbers too, but just to verify if they tell the truth - which is what you watch on the playing field, not the contrary. Nothing can substitute the visual approach, just complementing it. Unfortunately the temptation to explain everything by numbers is so wide today. I believe because at the very end that's much easier.
The quality and volume of output is simply awesome. Among the best baseball sites on the internets. I'd like to believe you are being rewarded handsomely for your effort. If not, please just let me keep my fantasy :-)
Certainly in what I saw to start the year. It looked to me like the moment was too big for him at the plate, that maybe he was having Safeco flashbacks to his previous time here. He was injured, too, and that didn't help.
He handled the pitching staff wonderfully, and I was glad to get a catcher from the Dominican to help DR pitcher Pineda figure out the league. But he's EXACTLY the kind of hitter that gets crushed here.
He's not been crushed. He's been working it out, and his hustle and even his faceplant into the dirt says to everyone else, "leave it all on the field and I don't want to hear any crying. There's no crying in baseball."
Brendan Ryan I always liked. When people were down on him early I loved his diamond-hard at-bats, his crazy hustle on the base-paths, his dirt-dog mentality and his OBP so far about his too-low BA. I wasn't surprised when he pulled out of it.
But he's not trying to hit the ball out of the yard as a righty - Miguel is. And Miguel has. He's won us several games nearly single-handedly, and he's taking the pressure off Smoak to do so...which has led to two weeks of Justin crushing the ball again, even if he's forgotten how to take a walk.
I want a catcher in here STAT to learn from Olivo while he's still got it, or I want a job-share with a better catcher than Gimenez at the earliest opportunity. But Captain Jack is pushing the right buttons. I said Peguero is like Wily Mo Pena - great offensive days, bad offensive weeks. But those great days have won us games already. The days he wouldn't make contact with a cricket bat are offset by the days he hammers home runs and triples like he's falling out of bed. We're buying time to get the offense in order. Ichiro was ordered to sit a day, and Figgins has been given both the stick (a benching) and a carrot (hey, no Ichiro, why don't you lead off big fella?).
We're getting the offense in some kind of order. Ackley needs his callup this week - he's a boxcar full of reinforcement right there. We're still in serious danger with Figgins and Ichiro putting on their drowning impression more days than not and the "kids" - Peguero, Carp and Halman - all easily capable of throwing golden sombreros out there in bunches. I wouldn't like to count on this offense for the next 4 months.
But we're getting better. I want to take pressure off the staff. It was really nice to pick Felix up on one of his less-than-perfect days, and it had to be nice for him. We're still hanging around in the middle of June, which is both wonderful and dangerous. I agree with you, Miguel is gonna wear down at the end of the year. I agree with others that Pineda and Bedard cannot throw 200 innings this year at this level, and that our bullpen is another League-implosion from being in a world of hurt, as there are only really 3 guys down there and the rest are just cardboard cutouts stuck together with scotch tape and elmer's glue.
But when do you call up Ackley to see if he can help out, and move Kennedy around to make it work? Do you add an arm for the pen instead of trade Bedard away?
This is a very dangerous year. I'm really happy that Olivo and Kennedy and Ryan and Bedard and Pineda are making it so dangerous - they're also making it fun.
But I'm very curious to see if we are both buyers and sellers at the deadline. I could see us trading Bedard and simultaneously adding a reliever with multiple years, trying to get more back-end help ready for this year and next. We don't have the kind of team that can be parcelled off in 3 or 4 trades. We can basically make one, maybe two for outgoing vets, and that would be Bedard and League. I don't think League goes anywhere, which leaves one.
And nothing about trading him immediately says, "Okay boys, pack it in and stop trying," any more than him getting injured or ineffective from overuse would.
We'll see. I still plan to trade Bedard and let the team continue to surprise...or rather, to improve as we get the right pieces in here. Fun to see us adopting Oakland's model of "two months worth of rearranging, 4 months worth of pennant chase" with a higher payroll. And I'm very curious to see if Prince Fielder will re-join the man who drafted him next year and kickstart this offense into high gear, because some of the pieces we have this year on offense and defense are so very tantalizing.
Because what's more fun than a 4 month chase for a pennant? That's right, a 6 month one.
~G
Great article and source. Bravo!
Now, I'm going to preface the rest of my response by noting a couple of "called shots" that I made along this line of thinking ... and then give my take on the rest of 2011.
I noted long before Griffey's return that he was the one external piece that "could" become the soul of the club. For a year, he did. I noted during that year ... even while things were going great ... that his positive impact would and could only apply during his 'triumphant return'. I harped on the reality that it matters WHERE YOU CAME FROM when judging psychological impact from player acquisitions. Even as I predicted Griffey might have the positive impact he had in 2009 ... I also noted (correctly) that it could not and would not still apply in 2010.
So, in my humble, arm chair sports psychologist view ... the "savior" free agent route is precisely and completely the wrong tool to pull from the toolbox at this time. Yes, this team is succeeding where failure was predicted. And Jack has done a wonderful job of trying to pick up "under appreciated" parts from abroad. Olivo had a double reason to succeed in Seattle (not appreciated elsewhere, but also to make up for his horrid performance from his first stay). Ryan was also unappreciated.
But, I would argue that the emotional success of the 2011 club ... the primary "intangible" is, in fact, that cloud of "nobody expects us to do anything." To me, THIS club is not one that would benefit from a mid-term (external to the organization) acquisition. The club, for the first time in nearly a decade, is poised to actually create and define "Mariner" baseball ... as opposed to "mercenary of the day" baseball.
Remember that in 2009, there was a (momentary) sense that the veteran entitlement from years past had been excised. But in 2010 we discovered it was only an illusion as Griffey was welded to the #5 slot in the order for 6 weeks while hitting even worse than Figgins is today. If the 2011 club really was one that in April could be seen as one with 'obvious' potential to change - (which I personally think is significantly overstating the case - as the greatest changes have been a result of dumping Bradley and Langerhans and Guti being on the DL - but I can appreciate the argument even if I disagree with the conclusion).
IMO, if you find a way to move Figgins for a failed prospect - (Andy Marte?) - then you build on the foundation that is here. Or, if you trade away Ichiro (which ain't gonna happen), you solidify the 'production matters' concept. But, if you go and acquire Fielder to play DH, while Halman, Carp and Peguero *ALL* have OPS+ numbers above 100 ... then, from my perspective, you simply crush the concept that any prospect who isn't in the BA top 100 might as well just quit and sell Lady Kenmores.
The success of the 2011 season has been built primarily on the backs of players who were universally scorned and scoffed at. Olivo and Ryan were dismissed. The bullpen of Pauley, Wright and Laffey was dismissed. From my perspective, the proper "deadline gamble" that this club could make is ... do nothing. Keep Bedard and gamble you can extend him. Risk losing him to FA without compensation. If you really want to "go for it" in 2011, then tell everyone on the team through action -- we believe in YOU.
Although if he'd agree to an extension (ha) a la A-Gone, I'd be willing. But the Brewers look like they'll be in it all year, so I don't know that Prince is going anywhere. I'm more looking at adding him next year to build on what has come this year. The reward for the pitching staff (whomever we retain) for next year is that they don't have to carry the burden alone. We get them more offense and tell them, "Instead of having to carry us on your backs toward a .500 season, we're aiming much higher."
But for this year...if telling Halman (19 plate appearances) and Carp (12 plate appearances) that their body of work doesn't warrant hanging a playoff run on their backs I guess I'm missing the point of upgrading a team. Now, I would expect to trade out one of Halman/Carp/Peguero at some point anyway in part of the package to get the bat in here if we went that route, but that's not the point.
If I was trying to beat Texas and get a pennant to hang from the rafters I'd think the 22 other guys might be looking at me like I was crazy if I told them, "I had the opportunity to add Carlos Beltran at LF/DH but I turned it down because I wanted to reward the 3 LF rookies for their performance this year and not discourage them. I'm sure because of my faith in them they will continue to have success over the last half of the season as their heat charts become widely known. After all, it's not like any of them struck out 170+ times in the minors when nobody had heat charts on em..."
Adam Kennedy doesn't have time to wait. Miguel Olivo is on the back 9 of his career. Bedard might not have another year in the sun, but for RIGHT NOW his arm is holding together. Those guys don't want to hear jack about rewarding the kids and not breaking their poor little spirits. They've fought and scrapped for their major league careers and couldn't care less that Peguero might have his feelings hurt if it means getting another reliable plus bat in here to back this currently-phenomenal staff.
Adding a plus bat in trade is not about slamming the door in the faces of the kids, it's about rewarding all the guys on the team who've upped their games in order to enable us to compete in the first place - and some of whom know they're playing over their heads. We crushed our teams in 2002 (51-30 at the halfway point, 41-40 the rest of the way) and 2003 (53-28 at the halfway point , 40-41 the rest of the way) by not making deadline deals and relying on those guys to play their April and May games the whole year long. We needed an arm in 2002 and a bat in 2003, and got neither. You add Ethier or whomever not because you hate the kids (think of the children!!) but to say, "thank you, Brendan Ryan, for your .900 OPS month, and to you, Miguel Olivo for your June home-run prowess - and we won't make you somehow come up with more of those in order for us to still compete."
You do it so that players only have to do what they are normally capable of and not have year-long hot streaks. Players know what they're missing. They know when they're giving it their all and only just holding their heads above water. It's a long season, and competing is easier if you know that management plans to help you out mid-season instead of trying to ride a horse that nobody believed should even be in the race 2 months ago.
~G
I've been a believer since Sweet Lou was famously denied the extra bat that it's vital for management to get in the game. When Olivo and Ryan are "leaving it all on the field" with "gung-ho" enthusiasm the message from the top down has to be one of "we've got your back".
I was preparing to write a reply about how vital it will be this deadline to make a move in order to signal recognition for a job well done and in order for the organization to create a precedence that performance will be rewarded. Nothing like management pinching pennies to destroy work place enthusiasm.
But Sandy's counterpoint is one I hadn't really considered. IF (a big if) management can sell inaction as "we believe in you" action, then maybe the reward for on-field performance is not being deadline sellers.
On the Ichiro front, while in one thread I'm proposing trading him (and still would) - his under-performance has largely been driven by a ridiculously low BABIP. Ichiro's career BABIP is .354 - his May BABIP ,227, June .220 (up 30 points in two days). I think he's primed for a prolonged stretch of regression upwards towards his mean - at just the right time for this offense.
- Ben.
Thanks for the gracious words Rooster. :- )
Actually SSI is more reward than effort, absolutely, with the cherry on top being posts like yours. Appreciate your saying!
-Jeff
Not a bad MLB commercial, right? Cut from Hanks to Olivo and a few other action shots?
***
The difference between Ryan's "diamond-hard" AB's and Jack Wilson's was beyond my perception, and I definitely whiffed on being able to differentiate the two. But will take it! :- )
***
Hadn't thought of that. Wonder how the M's get an Olivo apprentice in here.
G-Money, you watched him in Colorado last year... is Olivo's 2H fade a foregone conclusion, or ... ?
In fact, that's about as sofistikated an analysis as I can remember in quite a while.
Got me thinkin'. ..... um, for what that's worth ... :- O
Saw some article that noted his BABIP wayyyyy down -- including BABIP on line drives down from 75% to 55% or somesuch.
Maybe Ichiro figures that the 43 Shinto authorities are the ones testing him ;- ) because he's got to be aware of all of the gloves he's hitting.
He does NOT look older to me, not at all, and earlier we offered 20:1 that this is not the age wall for him...
***
On the trade deadline issue.... all things considered, this team has reacted well to new players brought in (from Tacoma).
Because Stacy Keach has been fair about warning first, and then acting, the Cheney Carousel has provoked a benign Oakland A's "produce or be replaced" motivation.
Can't imagine that the players would be cool with transition to rookies, but would react badly to real firepower (e.g. Beltran) being brought in on their side of the battlefield.
It's a delicate assessment to be sure, but thus far the Z/Wedge combo has produced the needed buy-in... with the 600-lb gorilla Wedge at the helm, would imagine that this buy-in is going to be there for a few years at least...
Or not...
Great insights, Sandy. And a good read. Makes me think of the 1995, and to a lesser extent, perhaps 2000, Mariner teams that were forged at those times. The additions made that made the difference were more castoffs that others didn't have use for: Charlton and Vince Coleman. In 2000, we brought in Rickey.
It'll be fun to see what is ultimately forged in 2011.
IMO we can speak of a roster initially made on paper by GMZ and then a team managed on field by Wedge. That could seem and easy assumption but there's much more behind it. I mean the impact of an old fashioned, hard noised and screaming manager like Wedge has been very very important both for some veterans looking for redemption and rookies looking for a guidance. He took all the right decisions so far (Ichiro day off included, about which I read elsewhere some sarcastic comments at the time). Wedge is a real major league manager in the Weaver mould.
Same here. Olivo has suprised me. Early in the year I thought he might implode from Safeco. I've always like the Brendan Ryan acquisition.
Still, the team is overperforming and we still have a worse OPS than our opponents. I don't think we're going to compete for long, but guys like Ackley, Carp, and Halman are certainly wild cards.
Thank you G. That about says it all for me. Sandy...I love your analysis and outside perspective 99% of the time, but this team is about much...much more than Peguero, Carp and Halman. Halman wasn't even supposed to BE here this year...Carp can DH if we get a left fielder (and get rid of Cust, who really shouldn't be here), and Peguero...well...the best managers in baseball history used their hot prospects as fourth outfielders and relief pitchers (see: Weaver, Earl) while they were proving they deserved a harder look. Peguero...he's shown flashes of ability, but even HE can't be thinking he has no holes that need work. If he's 4-th outfielder'ed in order to Carlos Beltran ABs...I think he'll live...and so will the rest of the team.
There's no reason not to go get a bit of help to let the team know that you are impressed with their work. They deserve more than to be thrown out there to twist in the wind in August...much...much more.
I certainly can appreciate the position that acquiring help at the deadline can be viewed by the troops as management 'having your back'. And, in the specific case of 2002 and 2003 clubs ... I would be in agreement that making moves for THOSE clubs would have been wise. But, that was kind of my entire point ... that you have to have an understanding of the psychology of *THIS* team when making moves (or not).
The reality that most of MLB doesn't want known is that the majority of deadline deals make little difference. In most cases, the teams leading on July 31st win. And, in those cases where they don't, the team that does win was typically so close as makes no odds. Moreoever, in those cases where you have a couple of competitive teams, usually both make moves, which means the final result is 50/50 in terms of 'working'. In 2010, the ChiSox were in a dead heat with the Twins in the central and added Jake Peavy and Edwin Jackson. They would finish 6 games behind the Twinkies, whose 'major' acquisition was bringing up Valencia to play 3rd.
If you accept the premise that one of the underlying motivations for this team is that expectations were nonexistent, then the very act of acquiring a "savior" from some other organization almost by definition changes the expectations. The "organization has my back" mentality is one I would associate with veteran players - (Ichiro, Wilson and Figgins ... maybe Olivo) - not with any of the "boy am I lucky to have a job" guys - (Ryan, Peguero, Halman, Carp, LROD ... Kennedy at this stage of his career ... and even Cust).
But, the biggest problem with the 'general' deadline acquisition mentality is that it tends to become organizational crack. You play .500 ball ... so you trade away 3 prospects for a big bat or arm. You win 85. So, next year, you do it again ... and again fail to win anything. So, the next year, you do it again. Before long, you're a 60 win a year club with a ravaged farm system and a bunch of has been free agents for a lineup.
At some point, you have to try and be as objective as possible. Is this roster that we have today "likely" to finish only two games back if we don't make any moves? Because over 1/3 of a season, even the biggest bat isn't going to add more than a couple of wins, (unless the specific person he is replacing is also costing a couple). And there's the paradox of the whole thing. If your existing roster really is capable of finishing "a couple games back" ... then why is a move necessary? A couple of games is a lucky break ... a surprise from a rookie callup ... a timely collapse by an opponent.
Is Seattle *REALLY* that close to Texas in talent? Texas has a 114 team ERA+, (Seattle 111). They have a 102 OPS+, (Seattle 84). They've outscored opponents by 35, while Seattle is -3. And they've played half their season so far without their best hitter.
Short of Endy Chavez taking out Chone Figgins for the rest of the year with a well timed body block, I don't see this team as finishing less than 10 games behind Texas. But, every scenario I see where they do stay in the race revolves around 'miraculous' performances from 5-10 players ... not from 1 mercenary. But, I do believe the right mercenary (at the wrong time) could undo a boatload of progress that this club has made and is currently making.
Great set of pieces; perhaps even more thought-provoking than your normal high standard. One question about the picture: am I right in thinking that's Lou, Steinbrenner and Billy Martin? If so, why is George wearing what appears to be a Huskies hat, given that it's got a purple W? Also, am I the only one to think that in this photo Pinella looks -- unusually -- like Neil Diamond?
My standpoint is fairly straight forward.
Any move made, whether at the deadline or in the offseason, needs to consider both present and future performance. If you're considering a deadline deal for a mercenary it needs to make the team both better now AND next season and beyond.
That said, I'm a firm believer that in baseball the best predictor for future success is past performance. If you want to be an attractive place for free agents, home grown talent, and the fans, then you must win - and win consistently. Nobody wants to give a home town discount to a loser and the family friendly atmosphere only goes so far at the gate.
With that in mind, my philosophy is to trade away scrap or useless parts for mercenaries, but if you are trading something of significant value, you need a longer term reward.
- Ben.
Zduriencik's present-and-future responsibilities ... esp. re an Erik Bedard trade ... are uncommonly hard to balance...
Yup, Sweet Lou it 'tis...
Fortunately don't see the Neil Diamond resemblance :- )
Don't know what the W is, though a quick Bing returns that Steinbrenner went to Williams college, where he graduated in 1952 ... of course if at the time he was trying to recruit Don James to replace Billy, it would have been very understandable...