1
The World According to Dr. D (career arcs dept.)
................
This Golden Rule that we discuss a lot lately, that of wanting to see uninterrupted development? Sho' nuff, it is an important generalization, but not an absolute.
The higher a player's career arc, and the earlier ... the better it is for him. That's axiomatic. And if the arc is perfectly smooth, so much the better. If a player adjusts to new pitchers without the slightest hiccup, beautiful. That's a piece of evidence in his favor.
But the career arc is just one factor to look at. In every realm of life, human beings learn in different ways, and jell at different times. Raul Ibanez might take five years to hit his "Eureka!" moment. Nick Franklin might never need one.
People are complicated. Child development, for example, is a fantastically complicated subject.
................
A picture's worth 1,000 words, so here's just one: Shin-Soo Choo had quite a disappointing age-20 season in the low minors. Repeated A+ ball and was lackluster.
In fact every late bloomer in the bigs, Raul Ibanez and Ryan Howardand everybody else, is a counterexample. Jose Bautista. Nelson Cruz. Jayson Werth. Jason Varitek. Probably 1/3 of the players on the All-Star team had serious travails somewhere in their backgrounds.
.............
Obviously, if you give me 100 hitters who are in the bigs at age 22, vs another 100 who couldn't make it until age 26, the group of 100 hitters are going to produce a ton more career R and RBI than the second group. James' rule of thumb is that if you are an average-solid ML player at age 22, then you have a 1/3 chance of having a HOF type career.
The age-arc is huge, but not the only thing to look at. Jose Lopez was an All-Star at about age 22 or whatever it was. Some guys can just get on the court early - they are boys who have the games to play with men. It doesn't mean they're going anywhere after that. Many, perhaps most, child prodigies become mediocre adult performers.
...........
A hitter with absolutely uninterrupted development at every league change -- that is a huge plus. It is a red flag that maybe you have somebody special here.
Kyle Seager's stunning 1-week adjustment to the AL (out of AA, not AAA) is very exciting to everybody, including to the Mariners' old-school guys. A guy who hits unfamiliar pitching well, a guy who is not phased by better competition, that's a guy with a major plus on his checklist.
Not everybody who --- > hits unfamiliar pitching well --- > is doing it because he's got immense talent. Some guys' games are just suited to that.
.
=== Mojo ===
Noticed something that I, for one, hadn't:
Z recently said that his priorities are backup shortstop, big bat, and pitching. He only guaranteed that he was going to hire a backup shortstop.
Noticeably absent from Z's grocery list is a starting third baseman.
This sounds to me as if Seager won the job, and won't lose it, unless Z trades for or signs a really big 3B bat.
And my first thoughts go to Capt Jack's belief that infielders can improve themselves defensively. Apparently he's been around several ML infielders who did.
I honestly thought that Seager was overwhelmed at 3B last year, failing to reach one-hoppers that were 5' fair down the line.
But if he can improve, and bring his glove up to mediocre at 3B, he could be an awfully exciting part of Felix' and Ackley's background scenery.
My $0.01,
Jeff
Comments
2
"Who they can or need to trade:
3B Chone Figgins: Since signing a four-year, $36 million deal, Figgins has largely lost his place in Seattle's plans after hitting a career-low .259 in 2010 and then .188 last year before finishing the season on the disabled list. The Mariners moved Seager and Alex Liddi into third base the last half of the year and will let those two battle with Figgins for the job in Spring Training, barring a trade."
So Says Greg Johns
3
His minor league OPS of .860 is eerily close to Smoak's .859. Both headed up the glide path at similar rocket pace before hitting turbulence and injuries.
Clement isn't even on Pittburgh's 40-man roster anymore.
I've had great faith in Smoak recovering, but the Clement example gives me some pause.
4
While your question was posed to Doc, I'll throw in my own 2 cents anyway.
While Clement and Smoak have similar aggregate lines, Smoak only has 773 minor league PAs and only 477 in AAA. Smoak got 397 PAs in the majors at age 23. Clement got 224 at age 24 and another 153 at age 26.
In the minors, what I see is "static" production all the way up for Smoak. He puts up a .290/.410/.443 (.853) line in 471 PAs in 2009 (age 22) and gets promoted to the majors after 15 good games to start the next year. But, his eye, his patience, his slugging. Nothing moved. Of course, only being in the minors for 174 games, detecting movement from stats is basically impossible. Smoak was promoted based primarily off how he looks at the plate, not what he was doing at the plate.
Clement has triple the minor league time ata this point. He started off with roughly 80 patience and 200 ISO at age 21. While there are some fluctuations, that's basically where he was in AAA when traded away.
The real parallel between the two is what happened in the bigs. Both were .280 hitters in the minors. Both have been .220 hitters in the majors. But, Smoak's 'gift' is a 100-120 patience rating, (about 40 points higher than Clement's). While Clement had a much better ISO throughout his minors career.
The projection for Smoak is based mostly on his size and 'look' at the plate make it seem like 30 HRs should be trivial (given his eye ratio). But, Smoak has consistently run 160-170 ISO lines from infancy to present.
For me, the defining characteristic for both is stagnation. They have remained what they were the day they signed contracts until present. Both have suffered (fairly normal) reduction in production going from minors to majors. Neither has shown adaptability - (at least statistically).
The worst part of this, IMO, is that gifted with such a gorgeous swing as Smoak, what is he supposed to do to improve? I feel like Yoda when I examine Smoak's production compared to the Doc's scouting reports - "Much fear in this one I sense, hmmm."
In truth, you cannot detect adaptability without some time (a larger data pool) to assess the situation. And Smoak is certainly not someone I would write off. But, players who do not HAVE to adapt, don't learn to adapt. Players gifted with natural ability rely on that ability until it is not enough. And then they are on unfamiliar ground - and it's anyone's guess as to what happens next.
My old saw is that players do not improve because they get older. They improve because they learn how to do 'something' better. The truly greats are blessed with ability AND a drive to learn and get better. Pujols is lauded for analyzing every failed PA. He adapts within a game. Mere mortals take weeks or months to adapt. Some players simply don't have the capacity - so when they reach their ceiling they're stuck. Worst case - when they begin tinkering, they get worse and then cannot even get back to where they were originally.
Is it possible that Smoak could make a change to unleash a 230 ISO? Yes. But, I haven't seen evidence that this is 'likely' to happen. This is why I remain bearish on Smoak - but continue to hope I'm wrong.
5
Smoak is someone I think lacks the explosive swing or freakish pitch recognition for stardom. One game after he was promoted to MLB and I was shocked at the disconnect between the scouting reports and the swing in front of my eyes.
Smoak has actually shown signs of adusting. His swing is fit for opposite field hitting and showed signs of that early in the year. He fixed his load.
My impression of Smoak is the exact opposite. An overachiever without freakishly gifted talent. I still think Smoak has the potential to be an above-average starter. He could still bust, but it would be a little suprising if he didn't pan out to be at least an averagish regular.
6
Smoak basically went from .218/.307/.371 to #3 hitter overnight. Safeco was his home stadium, and he was supported by a lineup that had Miguel Olivo as the big bat. His numbers took a huge dip (understandably) around the time his father passed away, and I also believe the thumb injury affected his second half more than most acknowledge.
Mildly discouraging that he didn't achieve the same sophomore success as most of the comps we threw on him (Berkman/Teix/Chipper), but he had a much rougher time while the others were in extremely favorable situations. Berkman was in a stacked lineup with a hitters' ballpark. Teixeira significantly benefitted from the Ballpark in Arlington (.965 OPS at Home / .646 on the Road). Chipper's breakout was supported by a World Series winning offense. Don't believe Smoak's 2011 is reason to dismiss those comps just yet.
Still not sold he's going to be mashing 35-40 HR's per year for the Mariners, but I don't think expectations should be reduced because of his 2011. He showed us the top potential he has in April, and made progress overcoming one adversity after the next throughout the rest of the way.
7
Hadn't even read this before the 7-parter. Then I turn to the summary. Time machine there, champ? :ooweeeoowohooweeoowoh: