Logan's stance that we're not in a pennant chase right now at 15-18 (at the time it was 13-17) just breaks my brain...because if every team that was 15-18 made moves under the impression that it shouldn't fight for the season, there would be about 9 teams each year that continued caring about baseball games past May 1. How dull would THAT be?
The Mariners need to keep fighting for 2013 until it's next to impossible for 2013 to matter. Now fighting doesn't mean acting imprudently...you don't call up Franklin just because he's a shade better than Andino...he has to be able to handle the environment...and Andino has to have no upside. Both of which are, IMHO, likely to be true.
Logan makes a reasonable case...but it flies in the face of what I consider the most productive attitude to take regarding sports. And let me tell you...the Yankees don't look too kindly on moves made that sacrifice anything for the current season before there is reason to do so.
.
Sparkling article by Logan Davis. I hope he puts in one a week. It raised half-a-dozen separate issues, all worthy of extended debate.
His positions were (1) all eminently reasonable, and (2) almost all, I think, on the other side of the fence from where I would be. Which makes a ball game. Thanks Logan :- )
.
Q. Is it better for Nick Franklin, if the Mariners keep him in AAA?
A. Suppose I believed that. How would I document that claim?
We asked Bill James about it once ... he said, "I think the best, and the only, place, for a player to learn to play in the major leagues is in the major leagues."
We don't much talk about 2014. What is better for Nick Franklin's 2014 season, for him to be in Tacoma this year or the American League this year? Kyle Seager was in the major leagues in 2012, and now he's apparently ready to shed some serious blood in 2013. That's probably what would happen with Franklin IF he were the player the Mariners hope he'll be.
"He needs to work on playing shortstop" is an argument I find unconvincing. (1) He's not likely to play SS in the majors. (2) If he is, then Safeco is where he'll get games there. For Tacoma he plays mostly other positions.
I honestly am confused about the notion that it's bad for Franklin to get him started, learning the league. I'd like to see the case made, in a detailed manner.
.
Q. Should the Mariners punt 2013?
A. In roto, there IS such a thing as factoring the standings into your moves. You know, it's fine to say "trading Felix for five blue-chippers is not a move I would make if I were in first place." Of course you factor in your chances to win.
Or you say, I think I will trade Felix for blue-chippers; that fits well with my 3-year plan. That is 1,000 miles from saying, "I quit."
A baseball team is down 5-1 in the fifth. Does it quit? In baseball, basketball, or football, what does a team do when its chances to win are down to 2-3%? Don't pinch-hit Montero, dude. He could get hurt unnecessarily, right?
............
When you say, "I wouldn't call up a player from AAA because we can't win anyway," you have QUIT. It's one thing to say, "Avoid major sacrifices of the 2015 season for short-term gains."
It's a different thing to say, don't even call Rainiers up here, because that would be an attempt to win, and I don't want to see that, pal.
...........
PHXTerry sez,
Making, or not making, the playoffs is not the only issue. The 10,000 pound elephant in the Mariner's front office is the continuing attendance downward spiral.
OK, when did the mighty HAL-9000 Omniscient Computer define playoff qualification as the only success outcome?
Suppose we are tied for the lead with two weeks left -- and then miss the playoffs. Was that a success?
Saying that we have a 2% chance of a successful season is misleading. What are the chances of being in the race in September? More like 25%, right? What are the chances of making dynamic progress?
Which is what Rick said:
Don't give me odds of winning a pennant, give me odds of competing for one, IF WE CARE.
And the 2014, and 2015, effect on player development -- based on whether you fight, or whether you quit.
Which is like what Gordon said:
If the front office is only 60% in the fight, why is the team supposed to play like they're more into it? GM moves set a tone. Maybe the team will fall apart if Andino is canned and Franklin is brought up, because that was just too mean a thing to do to a veteran. Or maybe it ignites a team.
Just so! Somewhere along the way, sabermetricians calculated a Nick Franklin's value at +1 WAR over Brendan Ryan, or so, and then they CAPPED Nick Franklin's impact at that.
What about the scenario in which he ... um, ignites?
We've mentioned that in Bill James' Win Shares book, he found that historically, Cinderella seasons occur precisely because of "Igniters" -- two or three players had great seasons by their own standards "and everybody else gets caught up in the excitement."
.................
Should the Mariners attempt to compete in 2013? Let's be clear. That question is philosophical, not sabermetric.
My own philosophy is not to quit merely because I'm the underdog. If the Mariners truly had no UP scenario, as Houston doesn't, that would be different.
Comments
If I got this figured right, we are about two minutes before the end of the first quarter, we are down about 5 pts., but we have momentum. Going into the second quarter of a tight game, it's not a bad time to look down your bench, and see if you can find a little energy, a little advantage, an edge. I may want to plant an image in my opponent's mind that there's a little more to my team they need to worry about.
I worry about Nick's ability to hit against lefties for the sake of earning a win or two.
If he comes up and gets detonated by LHP's--or even worse is put into a strict platoon where he doesn't get to face them--that hurts him as a player. I'd rather he be allowed to struggle with lefties in AAA, than have no chance in the majors.
In 23 games, and is hitting them well (if not for power, and in veeeery limited ABs). You're gonna keep him in the minors for another two months so he can get another 40ish appearances against lefties? Maybe? That's the difference between his future success against lefties (or at least treading water) and "detonation?"
Franklin is splitting time between 2B and SS as well, with more 2B appearances (matching last year at AAA, where he played a little more 2B than short).
If the Ms are trying to maximize his time working on SS skills or LH appearances, they're doing it poorly. So either they don't want him to, or they don't care. If they don't care, then they should promote him so he can help us. If what they're doing is limiting his LH at-bats and his SS exposure to up his trade profile, then I guess we should leave him down there to look nice and shiny, but I'd rather not pretend it's "for his good" or will help the 2013 Ms at all. Unless the guy we're trading is Ackley, I guess.
Franklin's minor league OPS is 100 points higher than Ryan's was (when Ryan began in the minors at the same age Franklin is now) and 140 points higher than Andino's. Brendan Ryan's minor league line was built entirely around average, of which he has NONE right now. Jeter had an .804 OPS in the minors and posted a .800 his first major-league season. Ray Durham had a .780 minor league OPS and posted a .690 his first season.
Nick Franklin's .820 minor league OPS might not translate at 100%, but how bad a percentage does it need to be for this to be an awful idea?
~G
Zduriencik has been painfully :- ) clear that, if you want value for a prospect, he HAS to show something in the majors first. USSM's logic is, max the value by hiding him in AAA (so he won't be exposed as the fish that he is; then you can flip him to a sucker). On that particular point they are definitely way off the mark.
I don't know how many times Zduriencik has to say that. He hears pathetic offers on minor leaguers, and good offers on guys like Pineda and Seager.
You want to trade Nick Franklin? Have him hit three or four homers in Safeco.
Scoreboard isn't bothering me at all.
There is a preseason assumption that the M's are not legit, and that assumption will change --- > AFTER the M's become contenders. Year 1, they'll win 92, and then Year 2, the websites will forecast a good chance to win.
That's why he's switch-hitting, so he won't be detonated. My complaint was that he also won't be Junior or Ichiro.
The switch-hitting will contain the K's, and therefore BABIP theory (and his reasonable speed) will give him decent(ish) results from that side -- better than the average young LHB against LHP's.
It ain't like he's Peguero. At minimum, he'll get some grounders between the infielders. Not that I'll be happy with them.
And am always happy to hear from our "mole" as to the internal culture at MLB :- )
You could say, well, that's the Yankees, but you hear exactly the same from Bill James at Boston, and in fact from EVERYBODY who is actually inside an org. The concept of punting in May is an extreme, extreme situation, reserved for Astros-like contexts.
You get to June 30, for that matter, and you still can't make trades, because nobody has given up yet, to the point of making ANY concessions toward defeat.
It's not only about him not being able to learn more in MLB. That's not the point. The point is: Is the 2 month jump-start worth the increase in salary that will come with it?
My personal opinion is "no". Because if we bring him up now, we will pay him more for all of his 4 arbitration years, in which we can use the difference in salary to improve 1-2 wins in each season, while also having a team more likely to contend than this year's Mariners.
If he's Buster-Posey good then it's a significant chunk of money to go to Arb 4 times instead of 3. Or you could just extend him before it gets that far.
But if he's gonna be that good don't you want him to struggle (if he's going to struggle) this year instead of next? That way he can be properly deployed next season when we are willing to put all our chips on the table and push in to try to get that title. The difference in salary is half a mil to a mil the first couple of years of arb unless he's a ROY, MVP candidate. So what you're talking about is 5 years from now he'll start to get expensive. If he's great, and if he's still on the team, and if he's healthy, and if...
If he's Derek Jeter in 5 years then yes, he's gonna cost us a fortune. He'll also be on the cover of SI and headlining SportsCenter and showing off his World Series ring, so who cares?
Here's an argument against promoting D'Arnaud for the Mets: http://www.amazinavenue.com/2013/3/11/4080186/mets-travis-darnaud-super-...
Everything he says is true. IF you promote a player who is a Super Two and IF that player becomes a world-beater who is worth his weight in gold in Arbitration THEN you have flushed money away...
Or you just paid a player what he was worth to you. What's a pennant worth to you, as a fan? After all, it's not your money and Jack plucks golden prospects from the tree like apples to get some of those "free" pre-arb years from other players too offset the extra cost of Nick. Should we be fiscally responsible? Because it's only fiscally responsible if this mega-wonder-prospect who will bankrupt you in arbitration is also useless to this team in the next 2+ months. Otherwise, you're paying to get his assistance THIS YEAR.
If this team can't possibly even compete for a pennant or WC spot and is due for 75 wins again, then by all means leave Nick down. OTOH, if we're one Darvish-Arm-Injury or super-prospect-assault-campaign from rolling up in here with guns blazing, then...
I guess risk is in the eye of the beholder. As Doc often says, this year counts too.
~G
Would Zduriencik have traded Pineda for Jesus were it not for that mashing Montero did in his September call up? Sounds like it played a big part, especially since I remember a good deal of that mashing being against us.
If this Franklin kid is oozing so much potential that Super Two is a super risk, then YES, I want to see him NOW! Give me a reason to buy a ticket this weekend. I suppose I could drive a little further down to Tacoma, and fight all that traffic. But, I'll let the ballclub that found $2.7 million for a 40 year old Ibanez figure out how to cough up the money to keep him around.
I just read an article by a business guru who said, yes - 3-5 year plans are good. But (especially if you are a startup), that next $50,000 is pretty darned important too. And actually, it is probably more important than whatever plans you have 3-5 years from now.
The opposite of the "Call Up Nick Franklin Right Now" campaign isn't "Wait Until Next Year," it's "Wait One Month."
If the team waits until June to call him up, it gives Nick more development time against lefties, saves money, and takes virtually no hit in the standings. Meanwhile, Nick still has June-September to be seasoned for 2014.
The worst-case scenario for holding him back a month is that Nick is an "igniter" who hits the ground running. The Mariners' comeback starts a month later and they fall just short of the wildcard. The worst-case scenario of calling him up early is that he becomes locked into a platoon role and never develops enough to hit lefties.
The other side of waiting until July to call up Nicky is to watch Andino bat with the bases loaded. I personally never want to see that again. But, I by nature am an impatient person. After all, we've been waiting for 10 years, what's another few months?
Trying to figure out when to call up Franklin. Man, this is much preferable to what we faced in 2006 when we were trying desperately to compete (as we should have), and trying to figure out which prospects to trade in order to fill the DH spot. Bavasi had brought in Everett to be our DH, and by late June we were trading Choo and A Cabrera in order to piece together a DH out of Broussard and E. Perez. Not a bad idea at the time, but it flopped and set us back a few years. This decision, by comparison, is a walk in the park.
Not the first or second week of June, like it used to be. Super two isn't a "real" date, it's based on how many callups happen and when, and the number of callups that it will apply to was increased in the latest CBA. So you have to hold a prospect back longer, which takes it really close to the trade deadline, which means that as time goes on I expect it to get closer TO the trade deadline - unless more teams throw up their hands and decide waiting 3+ months is not like waiting 2 and simply call a prospect up as soon as his extra service year is accrued - which is what the point of the change was in the first place.
So it's not "wait one month" it's "wait til the trade deadline."
At which time if we're out of it we'll sell players like Morales and there may be no impetus at all for promoting Franklin, and we can rinse and repeat next year if he's still with us.
There's always a good reason to delay. "Wait til his service time is accrued" turns into "wait til his Super Two status has passed" which becomes "don't waste service time in a lost year, see how he looks in March" which is then "wait til his service time is accrued..."
And actually the worst case on Franklin is that we never use him, so we form no attachment to him, and we trade him to somebody else who gets Derek Jeter instead of us. How dumb would we look with Kyle Seager and Michael Saunders as extra pieces on a deal now? Or wait, what happened with As-Cab and Choo again? 40+ WAR (so far) out the door for 2 halves of a useless DH for one season.
Knowing who to keep is as important as getting "value" in a trade. Maybe we don't like Franklin's D, or his attitude. I've compared him to Stephen Drew before as a baseline, but I think he's gonna be better than Drew. How much better? On the Drew-to-Jeter scale, where is he?
Won't know til be plays in the bigs, but I certainly want to find out, sooner rather than later. Unless we're gonna trade him, then I hope he fails terribly. *laughs*
~G
This year counts, too, G. Yes it does.
And even if "Vote Franklin in '13" doesn't mean much in '13, say a win or two (at least), it might mean a bunch in '14 because Nick will be a seasoned dude by then.
I suppose folks could argue that he's more likely to do a Charboneau and rip as a rookie while crashing as a sophomore so therefore you keep him down until '14. But how often does a lack of exposure really become a good thing?
I just don't see the risk in all of this. If he becomes a mashing Pedroia-type IF then he'll be cheap anyway, as you'll get 3 "free" years and then the more expensive arb years. On a yearly average, he will still be very affordable. Let him go after that if you wish.....or trade him for shiney things, because somebody smart (say, Beane, Boston or NY) will always pay for a mashing LH hitting middle IF.
And if he doesn't become that good, well he's still better than Andino/Ryan/not-even Mendoza, right now, and you just wait a season for Miller to get here. Hardly a loss, I say.
By the end of this Pirate series we will have played 36 games. That = 108 2B/SS/3B starts. Two of the worst bats in the majors will have started at least 43 of those possible starts. That will not do. Looking at track records there is almost no indication that Ryan or Andino will suddenly reverse their augering-in tracks.
Beyond that, the risk in bringing Franklin up is largely conjectured/what-iffed/hypothetical. Unless you think he can't hit MLB pitching, the benefit is real.
Make it so.
moe
1. Do you punt on 2013? Obvious answer to me: no!
2. When do you call up Nick Franlin? When it's the right time to call up Nick Franklin.
This reminds of the NFL team that really needs a QB ... so they get panicky and reach for Heath Shuler (or whomever) in the 1st round.
It's two different issues: "Who's our next QB?" and "Is high in the 1st round the right spot to take Health Shuler?"
Maybe "now" is the right answer to "When do you call up Nick Franklin?" but I don't think "because I really don't like Andino and Ryan" is part of the answer.
He hasn't had the PAs vs. LHP because he missed time with illness and because of the luck of the draw. It's not like they've been having him avoid lefties (as far as I can tell).
One reason to bring Nicky up is the M's offense needs a boost -- 3 runs on 8 hits , with no HRs and only 3 XBHs, over the last 18 innings. The season is more than 20% gone. Behold the wonder of the 2013 M's offense:
1) The M's are averaging 3.47 rpg compared to 3.82 rpg in 2012, despite the 2012 team having Olivo and Figlet.
2) The M's are tied for last in run production in the AL, and behind 12 of the 15 NL teams.
3) This despite adding 2 MOTO sluggers in the offseason and adding a MLB veteran bench.
4) This despite moving in the fences at Safeco.
5) This despite having 6 games against Houston, which barely qualifies as a AAA team.
So if the M's aren't punting 2013, then the offensive cavalry better come over the hill soon. Nicky looks to be most ready of the prospects, and he plugs the biggest offensive black hole. What are we saving him for?
It isn't because I don't like them Spec, it's because they are terrible.
How many vL AB's does he need? What's the magic number?
Heck, I've even said that Triunfel is a better option than Andino. If we're going to set some un-defined arbitrary number of vL AB's for Franklin then gimme Triunfel until he gets there. Or send 'em both this way and bat Triunfel against most lefties.
We're not getting anything for Andino in trade and Ryan has shot his value terribly. I have little doubt that a Franklin/Triunfel platoon is WAY better than they are.
I'ld rather we just got out of Nick's way and find out what he's got. But the other will do for now.
moe
First one is purely procedural... If we call up Franklin today, and then send him down tomorrow for the rest of the year, does that still count as giving him "Super Two" status? If not then why not call him up to see if he can be an igniter, and if he falls on his face, then send him back down.
Second one is also procedural... Would Triunfel also be considered Super Two if we called him up right now? And if so why don't we care about his super two status?
Third one is moral... If Nick Franklin deserves to be called up right now (like a good handful of us believe he is), then doesn't he DESERVE to be super two? And if the club is in fact ONLY waiting to get past Super two status to call him up then isn't that tantamount to stealing from him? ie morally and legally wrong? For those who are for the club keeping him down only to make him cheaper next year, are you for stealing from him?