I'll be happy to see Kendrys return, (3 years would be perfect, but 4 is not dreadful).
That said ... I'm still in the wanting no part of Morse camp. It's not ONE thing. It's the combo of things that puts me off.
1) Late arrival - (earlier you become a full-timer, the longer and smoother your career age arc). Morse didn't stick in the Majors until age 28.
2) Injury history - (he's 31 this year, and even in his minor league history rarely played a whole season). After his 258 PAs in 2005, he got 21 games (48 PAs in 2006), and didn't stick (98 games) until 2010. What did he do in the minors from '06-'09?
2006 - 57 games (.702)
2007 - 81 games (.818)
2008 - didn't play
2009 - 110 games (.894)
So, since 2006, he had only two seasons ('09 and '11) that he did not lose a significant amount of PT to injury. That is when he was "in his prime".
3) Age - I specifically start worrying about decline at age 32 ... and expect a second decline phase at age 36. This is consistent with the pre-steroid James' age assessments from back in '87.
4) Defense -- while it's not THE factor for me, it should certainly be *A* factor. He's a bad glove ... has always been a bad glove ... and is often injured and is getting older. He's starting from one of the worst defenders in baseball today and CAN ONLY GET WORSE.
5) Outlier season driving his stats -- despite 9 years, he's only at 1926 PAs. But the 575 PAs from his one healthy 2011 season are (IMO) distorting the view of what he actually is. Even in his precursor 2010 season, while his OPS was great (.870), his HR total was 15 in 98 games. That's only a 22-HR pace. In the followup 2012 campaign - 18 HRs in 102 games ... a 27 HR pace. So, he's actually not a "prolofic" HR hitter. He doesn't even reach Richie Sexson level of power. He's a mid to upper 20s HR guy with no patience, speed or defense.
Honestly, if you cannot find a better OF, I wouldn't mind too much a one year flier on him. But, typically the entire purpose of players taking 1-year contracts is to "audition" and prove they deserve a multi-year deal.
To me, Morales has passed the audition, is younger, is healthier, and his defense doesn't matter.
But Morse has easily failed his audition. He has confirmed he cannot stay healthy, has confirmed his bad defense and even if he finishes strong, there is just no upside there.
The bigger question to me at this point becomes Raul. At the break, most were not only wanting him back, but some were even suggesting multi-year deals. I'm wondering how much his 11 game slump since the break has changed opinions.
.159/.260/.205 (.465) in the 11 post-break games. That's just a hair worse than the .158/.213/.298 (.511) he hit in his 17 April games.
All in all, I'm more convinced in a "soft drop" (.700 - .730 OPS) with Morse than Raul. The age thing makes Ibanez a perfect mark for the .400 OPS cliff that many Hall of Famers leap off in that one last year they opt for, (anyone remember Griffey?)
Me? I think it would be better for ALL parties for Raul to hang 'em up. I still think he's hunting for those last 5 dingers to reach 300 ... and I *really* want him to get there, (to give himself an excuse not to come back). I'm just starting to fear the workload has finally caught up to him and without some significant rest getting those last 5 dingers may be a reach.
.
Q. Good game today.
A. Yeah, man. First inning, Franklin on 2B. Some young righty flamethrower fired a ball into the RH batter's box. Kendrys leaned out like Ichiro and rifled a Kendry-ball back up the middle. 1-0 M's.
Saunders, then got (1) squeezed by the ump and (2) minced by the Sox, in that order. Which is the way it's going without Zunino. Sigh. There went our little run, out the door along with one headshake-inducing young rookie catcher pheenom.
But another day, another coupla hits for Big Ichiro. And he missed a Pesky Pole HR by ten feet or so.
.
Q. Is Kendrys Morales going to be next winter's version of Adam LaRoche?
A. He's not, no.
.
Q. Is he the type of player hurt most by the broad-brush comp system?
A. He is, yes.
I love this insight, the one that Big Blog pointed out (and that others have brought up here). They underlined the fact that there is now a LaRoche/Morales class of quality 3.0 WAR* player who is going to be caught in the gears of this system. This is a fascinating type of player who will now (often) be leveraged quite visibly by his retaining team.
From the Mariners' point of view it's an exciting opportunity -- Morales is a good player, and one you could win your next pennant with, and one that the current comp system actually helps you retain.
Why that should be a blinkin' Greek Tragedy, that once in a while a team has a nice inside track on its own player, I dunno. But according to MLBTradeRumors.com, the Mariners have indeed long intended to extend Morales precisely this "qualifying offer." Morales has been a likely future Mariner for some time now; we all just didn't know it.
.
Q. Does Morales resent this situation?
A. For those who didn't see the Boston game on TV today ... Dave Sims did some excellent reporting. He asked Morales about his future in Seattle. Morales said happily, I love it here. I plan to be here. "And there was a big smile on his face when he said it," Sims mused.
Morales is well aware of the economic system, is almost certainly aware that he'll be QO'ed, is unquestionably aware that it's dubious whether the Twins or somebody will offer him 4/$60M.
He knows all that, and knows he'll have to take 1/$14M or maybe negotiate 2/$30 or 3/$40 or something like that. He's apparently not real torqued off by it. (So how badly broken do you figure the system really is?)
.
Q. Gordon said he'd go even 4 years. Where is Dr. D on this?
A. Considering that the Blog-O-Sphere was into Nick Swisher at 5/$75 to 7/$105, four years for Kendrys has to be kept in proportion, yeah. We've since triangulated our guesstimates... probably three years. Maybe even two... wait a minute. As you know, SSI ain't CPA corner. You don't win pennants by paying Nick Swisher a shade the better, a shade the worse. You win pennants by finding Nick Franklin...
Morales could be a really cool piece of the puzzle. I think that particular puzzle would need a Felix-Iwakuma-Taijuan-Lee(?) type image on the front of the box. If you're not going to get a Fielder or Hamilton or AGone -- if you're going to settle for an Oakland A's offense -- I think you need something you do great. If that's starting pitching, fine by me.
.
Q. Earlier you comped him, loosely, to Swisher, the current Teixeira, and Quentin ...
A. As a pure DH, I wouldn't give you much for the difference between Kendrys and Nick Swisher. Lifetime stats:
| Lifetime | AVG | OBP | SLG | OPS+ | Remark |
| Kendrys | .281 | .333 | .486 | 121 | Age 30, holding firm |
| Swisher | .255 | .359 | .462 | 118 | Age 32, maybe declining |
You'll remember that last winter, Big Blog recommended 7 years, big dinero for Swisher. SSI's opinion was that Swisher, though a classy player, was beginning to see his batspeed decline already. It looked pretty obvious to Dr. D that he was a major age-arc risk, as we published here.
This year, Swisher's slugging percentage is down to .399. His swing-and-miss rate is considerably up this year. The case isn't closed, but I'd be fretting about Nick's age-arc at this point.
.............
At the plate, Kendrys has been 95% of what Swisher's been -- more of a .300 hitter, less of a pitch-stalker. From here on out, I expect Kendrys to be the better hitter. Kendrys hasn't lost anything at all. He looks 25 years old. Well, a 25-year-old who has a punch card at Panera.
The fact that Swisher plays the field ... you decide how relevant that is to this current roster, after it adds Stefen Romero, and so forth. Not hugely relevant to us. The point is, Kendrys is looking like he'll provide us a .300'ish, lower-BB Nick Swisher DH, pretty much, over the next couple of years.
If your star power comes from the rotation, that's mondo cool.
.
Q. Meaning Mike Morse is gone?
A. Oh, I dunno. He has to re-establish value, right? We all know about his injury issues. Injured players sometimes have healthy years. Mark McGwire disappeared for 2-3 years in 1993-1995, then got healthy :- ) and hit 52 bombs.
You could find a bunch of guys. At a cut-rate deal, it's possible that Morse could spend 2014 playing 135 games and hitting 40 homers for a Cinderella M's team.
I mean, if you're going to spend your $$ on Cliff Lee...
Cheers,
Dr D
Comments
Until the 3 years from 30-32 when he hit 40+.
Then his injuries caught up with him and he fell off a cliff to the end. If Morse has another year or two of power in him, we could use it (if he's healthy). But I agree with you, he's bad in the field and can't stay healthy there. And I much prefer Morales at DH. He's both younger and the better hitter - though not much better of an injury risk, so we can't play Morales at 1B and Morse at DH.
If Morales could hold up to full-time play at first base, that might have been our best option. Play em together another year or two, then swap em out for Peterson and Choi at the same positions. But as it is, Smoak will just have to hit, and Morse is likely gonna go DH for B-More or somebody, hit a billion homers, and make us look bad again til he does find that cliff.
Because that's the Mariner Way. As long as we can avoid bringing him back here at age 35 to do that lemming run, it'll be okay.
~G
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. For my money, there is not room on a properly constructed roster for both Morse and Rauuul. My preference would be Morse, with Rauuul retiring.
We gotta get rid of Morse, if for no other reason than to avoid continuing to hear numerous Mariners broadcasters seem to call him "Morris."
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.
WHAT was the problem with "too many 1B/DH types?
I look at the 2013 roster and see him NOT making the 2012 mistake of not having nearly enough talent in reserve at multiple positions.
On day one of 2012, Carp went down. That knocked out the ONLY 1B alternate to Smoak. It also exposed how utterly devoid of OF talent there was in the organization as FIGGINS was the immediate replacement for Carp. The upside was that this allowed Seager to play immediately, (since Figgins become the primary LF initially). But, when your first injury results in turning to FIGGINS as your cover, you've pretty much told the world you have zero bench.
And the notion of having "too many" 1B/DH types and then also bashing the having too many injury prone guys are contradictory.
If you KNOW you have some injury prone guys (Morse and Guti), then what do you do? You stock up with as many competent backups as you can.
Is there ANY position in 2013 that when trouble arose, Z did not have at least one MLB-competent alternative?
When the season began, Z already knew he had: Zunino, Miller and Franklin on the farm. So, he had options for the infield, (EXCEPT 1B).
For the OF, there was zero near-ready talent on the farm. NONE. The only guy the club had any real interest in was Peguero, who had pretty much shown as too flawed to make the leap.
So, what did Z do ... he went out and (your opinion), "overstocked" with 1B/DH types. Of course, it was really 1B/DH/OF types.
Morales
Raul
Bay
Endy (starting the season on the farm)
The notion that he had too many is non-sensical simply from the observation HE USED THEM ALL!
Yeah, I'm sure Z (and Wedge) would have prefered not to have to dip down into AAA and yank up Endy. But, Endy was already there specifically because Z recognized the farm offered no prospect help (for 2013) in the OF.
It would actually be easier to argue Z did not get ENOUGH 1B/DH/OF types ... which would have precluded the need to have Ackley attempting to learn CF in the Majors rather than doing so in the minors.
I remember in April before Raul started hitting there were complaints about the roster construction. Well, Z turned out to be right about Raul ... and Bay ... and even Endy. Oh, and some people wanted Casper Wells to stick around. No other MLB team really had a use for him, but in the tiny PT he has gotten this season, his line is: .179/.246/.196 (.442).
If the roster was constructed so poorly, who was it that actually sat rotting on the bench, (or in AAA), that should have been playing?
=======
Mind you, I'm like #1 on the "Ms defense sucks" hit parade, and understand that Raul and Morse (and Ackley) are contributors to that issue. But, I also understand, when you are picking BACKUPS, they are by definition going to be deficient somewhere, (else they wouldn't be backups). In an ideal world, the OF would have been Guti, Morse, Saunders and Raul and Bay would have been reserves, THAT OF, (which was actually the primary starting OF before (Saunders and then Guti) hit the DL, would have been a much stronger aggregate OF defensively. But, unlike previous years, Z was not "forced" to run out and bring in an emergency fill-in with a low-level trade, (Hanahan? Josh Wilson? ring any bells?). He had options already in place.
The only roster construction issue of 2013 was catcher, where Shoppach didn't work out, and then you had a particularly bad "string" of injuries. Z was forced to run out and snag Blanco. That move could be blamed at least partially on poor roster construction, (though the Shoppach release complicates that assessment).
Given the constraints of what he started with ... the money available ... the prospects knocking on the doors ... I cannot imagine a BETTER constructed roster than Z managed in 2013 ... if one accepts the basic reality that backups are going to have flaws ... and not even the Yankees can just go buy whatever they want on the FA market like going to Wal-Mart.
=====
You want to slam Z for the pitching he assembled ... there is LOTS of room for discussion there. But, offensively, Z took a lineup that had posted an 89 OPS+ (.665 raw OPS) in 2012 ... and managed to produce a roster with a 104 OPS+ (.709 raw OPS) ... DESPITE losing Guti for 90% of the season, despite losing Morse for about 40% of the season (to date), and despite having "the big 3" prospects ALL struggle mightily early on with one not in the Majors at all at this point.
Not only is the roster better than last year by a mile - it has gotten better as the year has progressed.
What is the telling reality for how good your roster construction is? It is not simply how good you are. It is how you deal with adversity. GOOD roster construction means that when you run into an injury or two, you are PREPARED to deal with that. You should expect to suffer SOME reduction in performance somewhere, but injuries should not devastate your production.
Z allowed the farm to cover the IF. He "overloaded" with "flawed" talent at the 1B/DH/OF positions, because that was in fact his best (and only) option for covering his bases based on what was available and what he could get. The end result is an offense which has gotten steadily better as the year unfolded.
You know whose roster was truly flawed? Try the Yankees. Yes, they suffered by losing Jeter, AROD and Teixeira. But, they knew ahead of time that there were health issues with all of these guys. Yet, who did the Yankees stock up with? Vernon Wells, (34 and already in decline), Ichiro (39 and already in decline), Hafner (36 and not in decline before arrival, but high risk due to age). The Yankess, basically went out and DECIDED to purchase the 2004 Seattle Mariners offense, (a host of players who had once been very good, but who were either clearly already in decline or super high risk for production dives). THAT is lousy roster construction.
Sandy - Dave Cameron, who is a pretty smart guy, believes the 2013 roster was flawed & that there is only room in 2014 for one of Morales, Morse, and Rauuul. He has a fresh article today on the subject that sets out his reasoning, which seems pretty solid to me.
Could you provide a link? I am interested.
That being said, I personally would like to see only Morales brought back (with Morse and Raul gone). The club was very lucky getting Raul's last hurrah season, and I still contend they DID need the "overstock" on the 1B/DH/OF types, (which was actually proven to be the correct move specifically by the Morse injuries).
But, in constrcuting a 2014 roster, Almonte, Romero and even Poythress (already at Tacoma), and Ji-man and Morban at Jackson, gives the club some minor league possibilities for next year that simply did not exist at the beginning of this year.
At this point, the MLB roster looks pretty solid in the infield, (some lingering questions about Smoak not withstanding). BUT ... the depth that they plumbed this season from the minor league ranks means they are going to be in big trouble if injury/sophomore slumps happen to hit any of the "good kids". Priority for roster construction next season is going to be, (from my perspective), getting quality backups for the infield ... while getting quality starters for the OF. Basically, the NEEDS are 180 degrees different for 2014.
At the moment, the next wave of infielders are at the lower levels, while the best hitters in the upper levels (that *might* be ready in 2014) are concentrated in the 1B/OF positions.
While I expect Ryan to leave, he really wouldn't be a horrible BACKUP utility infielder. Plus glove and deficient bat makes him flawed (as backups will be), but while your mix changes if he is forced to swap in due to injury, the total negative pull isn't as bad, since his glove makes up for "some" of his lumber lack.
Me? I liked the Morse (starter) and Raul (backup) pickups for 2013. I don't like either for 2014.
http://www.ussmariner.com/2013/08/01/pick-one-dh-just-one/ ...... 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.
And Bourn is a $14 mil/year player going forward for glove-first player on the wrong side of 30. The Ms had Guti in center, with Saunders backing him up and Chavez stashed in the minors in case of emergency. And they needed him, because Guti simply cannot be healthy. Which is very frustrating, because he could finally hit again, and if he was on the field it would have meant big things for this team. It's a Grady Sizemore/ Rocco Baldelli kind of shame.
But since I think Bourn is gonna Chone Figgins it off a cliff before the end of that contract, I'm pretty happy the Ms did not sign him. Were there flaws in their offseason plan? Of course there were. We had to go trade for Harang in April because we screwed up the back of the rotation coming out of Spring Training. We took a lot of vet fliers, and those vets had to play more than expected because of injuries and incompetence amongst the kids.
You don't get the #3 pick in the draft without having holes. We patched them pretty well while allowing the kids to play, considering everything that went wrong this year. Our failures are more pitching failures than not having a good enough backup plan if half the team faceplanted coming out of Spring Training. Because Morse, Saunders and Guti all got injured while Ackley and Montero were both awful (and Smoak too for a bit), and we STILL have formed a semi-decent offense out of that wreckage. Now we're giving demerits for that because of the defensive hiccups our Frankenstein offense created?
It's the rare team that can lose its entire starting OF for a significant chunk of time, some of it for the whole season, and have perfect offensive and defensive replacements waiting in the wings. If we had a good glove guy who couldn't hit, people would be screaming about black holes. Because we had Ibanez who DID hit (amazingly) but is a bad fielder, now that was a bad plan too.
This team needed Joe Saunders to be good, and Hultzen and E-Ram not to get injured in March, and for Beavan not to regress. Noesi getting it together would have been nice. Maurer sticking the landing. But none of that happened, and STILL we're a couple of stupid losses (Felix giving up a 7 run lead for the first time ever, the bullpen last night blowing another huge lead for him, the sweep in Cleveland, random losses to the Twins and Astros) from being a .500+ team.
The ability to forge that season was here, we just haven't grasped it. That's okay. It's what happens with a young team. When the Pirates fell out of contention last year and blew their shot at .500 like they'd been shot out of orbit, was that the GM's fault? The manager? Roster construction and deployment? Or was something else happening?
IMO it's not the unforgivable flaw of too many DHs in the kitchen, it's part of the process of turning a terri-bad team for a decade into a winning conglomeration of players. We're getting there.
~G
As dismal as our OF is right now, the thought of having to lug around a Swisher or Bourn for several years gives me nightmares. Glad the M's dodged both of those bullets! M's tread water in the OF this year with varying amounts of production from Bay, Ibanez, Morse. Clean slate in 2014, can go sign a better OF than either Bourn or Swisher potentially.
Well, I think we had every offensive problem available to a team since we were dead last in every slash category, as well as in runs and hits, but still - if you can't raise the BA of everyone on the team or get a bunch of OBP machines, maybe some thump will help plate a few more runs.
So we added those "redundant" 1B/DH guys, and watched us go from 14th (aka LAST) in everything to 10th in most everything (now in a 15 team league). We spiked to 3rd in HRs. When Smoak, Morse and Saunders went down it didn't kill the O because Ibanez and Morales could still plate runners (as can Seager, our all-world everything over there at 3rd base). The redundant power bat theory actually HELPED the Mariners through their injury spate, certainly at the plate. Jack covered his butt by adding Raul to backup Morse. We screamed about Carp (and his 150 ABs with the Bo Sox certainly point to that being a less-than-optimal move) but Carp's attitude is much like Shoppach's: not the kind you need when trying to mold young players.
Ibanez is the guy the rookies like Franklin run to, and even our 3rd year players like Seager. He's the professional voice that Ackley and Smoak didn't have in their locker rooms. Brendan Ryan chews himself up Cirillo-Style. If you're trying to teach kids to pace themselves and not get into a doom spiral when things get tough, Brendan Ryan CANNOT be the vet example in the locker room. The 2011 locker room had Ryan, the corpse of Jack Wilson (same problem), Jack Cust (bad attitude, terri-bad end to his career), and Adam Kennedy (role-player who got a last partial season in the sun). Oh, and a smidge of Milton Bradley's final meltdown to pair with the inscrutable Ichiro's locker room poker face.
Morales and Ibanez helped this team A LOT, and not just in plate performance.
I don't want the 4 DH solution next year, but we may have a defense problem again because we NEED right-handed thump to offset the lefties that can decimate this lineup. Yes, Franklin, Smoak and Morales are switch-hitters, but they're much better as lefties. Our pure RH hitters are Zunino and, um, hang on...
So if we go with a player like Corey Hart (32 yo RF, like a good Mike Morse both at the plate and in the field, had knee surgery) or back with actual Mike Morse, it's a risk. We need the RH bat in the lineup, but I doubt we're paying for Hunter Pence (and Hunter's not the best defensive outfielder in the world either). If Ackley and Saunders are out there, they can cover a lot of ground, and they'll likely need to in order to help whatever RH thumper we sign or trade for, because RH thump with great defense is expensive.
Sometimes these things aren't driven by optimal metrics, they're driven by need and availability. I hope we can get what we need to continue to make this lineup into a contender - and to back the new faces in the rotation and the pen with as many runs as we can put together.
~G
A real joy to read. Always a pleasure when Sandy weighs in, and Gordon - you rule. But everyone was simply on his game. Man, I would have to kill myself if I had only the other two big blogs to get Mariner discussion.