.
Carlos Triunfel has a long swing, meaning that he wrist-hinges the bat head way around so that it aims back at the pitcher. This of course means that the bat has farther to travel to get into the hitting area. It also means, in theory, that he hits the ball harder than average.
He sinks his weight gracefully down onto the incoming energy and locks his eyes onto it decisively.
His bat launch and throughswing, as well as his arc-y one hand swing plane, are solidly in key with the Alex Rodriguez school of music. His torque, balance, and power are all pretty to watch.
The problem is that, after he winds that bat so menacingly, he then decelerates the bat into the hitting zone. This results in a flat, static, lifeless swing. I mean, you can see it in the "thonk" of the base hit shown in the video, but the Mainframe was left with this impression on every Triunfel swing.
......................
And why might a 21-year-old* shortstop be indecisive about attacking ML pitches? If you can't connect the dots on that one, we'll refer you to ... well, the Barclays Premier League. While you're trying new sports, you might as well try the most popular one!
Triunfel missed the 2009 season, was effectively 21 in AAA this year, and hit a presentable .260. His EYE was mediocre to crummy, not tragic, but evidencing a heavy rearguard action on Triunfel's part. He did swat 10 homers and 30+ doubles in a huge park.
The reason that fans have wandered off and lost interest in Triunfel is because he's never flashed any upside. It looks to me like, his whole career, he's been doing what Montero did in 2012: he's made blamed sure that he got a lot of contact. On pitches that he doesn't understand.
We don't have any guess when the day will arrive that Carlos Triunfel will start seeing pitches early, and will start accelerating the bat through the strike zone with gusto. It could be when he's 24. It could be when he's 26. It could be next April.
But the kid hit pretty well in AAA at age 21*, and he looks like a shortstop. Jack Zduriencik, as so often, had his own opinion as to which player deserved airtime in late 2012. Don't overlook Zduriencik's own statement on Carlos Triunfel.
...................
It doesn't look logical to me that his career spike would be imminent. But who knows? Right now the Mariners have Ryan at SS next year, and they have Franklin and Miller both in baseball's top 100 prospects and in the UPPER minors. It's going to be tough to invest three years' worth of AB's in Carlos Triunfel.
Supposing that Triunfel was going to have a Jose Valentin or Rich Aurilia career, starting not in 2013 but in 2014. You can't just crinkle that up and toss it in the wastepaper basket. But how do you shoehorn that into the M's plans?
M's fans have never been exposed to this problem before. There are going to be a lot more legitimate major leaguers come down this pipeline than Jack Zduriencik has time or room for. And it's one of the reasons that you trade quantity Scrub prospects for quality Stars.
I think Z thinks Triunfel is the last high profile international guy left from the Bavasi regime...the last guy he can trade for free. The mass purging of Bavasi players has been something to behold and it's gotten us good returns overall, but it's about to be over. I think he's trying to convince other teams that Triunfel is gonna be worth their investment so that he can be an important piece in a trade that gets us a player we need.
Triunfel can play SS. He still has a focus problem in the field - he mentally takes plays off, and does stupid stuff like screwing up transfers or letting a ball get between the wickets. But he's an adequate fielder and his bat works.
He's not dogging it to first anymore, which was nice to see. He rolls over for grounders but sprints to first instead of jogging halfway down the line, stopping, and heading back to the dugout. His attitude seems improved.
But Triunfel doesn't walk much, and doesn't hit doubles like he should. He almost never "hammers" the ball anywhere (unlike Franklin). Like you said, Doc, might be pitch recognition, but I worry about a guy who has 2500 plate appearances and still can't tell what's coming his way. He can hit 30 slow rollers in the gap but he still has yet to attack the zone. Maybe he's got some Carlos Guillen in him. It took that Carlos quite a few years to put the package together, and we traded him the year he was finally putting together hard at-bats (he was one of our only good hitters down the stretch that year) and getting over TB. Guillen had a hundred-ish more OPS points, though, and half the ABs in the minors that Triunfel has.
I still think Triunfel is a few years away, and I don't see us having the time. I get the feeling Triunfel is gonna be one that gets away, because we won't have the time for him, but at this point it looks like we won't have time because of Brad Miller, not because of Nick Franklin.
Unless Jack was showcasing-for-a-trade with Triunfel, then Franklin has been semi-demoted, playing a lot of games at 2nd base - not something you normally do to your future SS. Meanwhile, Miller didn't play a game in the field that wasn't at SS.
Franklin looks GREAT at 2B, btw, and is a field general in the infield, always talking with the other guys and chatting up the pitcher on the mound, going in for conferences, etc. If Ackley wasn't at 2nd, Franklin would be a future hero here. And we could really use his supremely cocky, Brett Boone attitude.
But Triunfel AND Franklin might both get the boot. We have too much talent for some positions, and all of it can't play for us. I could live without Triunfel - he's got dicey mental makeup and a lack of impact skills. I'd prefer not to ditch Franklin, but where does the man play?
I'd still platoon him with Ryan, personally. Let Franklin hit as a lefty to Ryan's righty-ness, have Ryan around for late-game closeness if you don't trust Franklin's glove. They'd complement each other well, and we'd finally have a (combo) SS that can field AND hit.
I'm not sure what Triunfel gives you, but I'm sure in a few years we'll find out - when he's playing short or second for someone else.
~G
He makes the team next year, either in the Kawasaki roll or something bigger. Lock it in.
I'm not quite sure where I chase down the number that shows how many GB's he actually made a play on, compared to Ryan. But Triunfel averaged 2.73 assists per SS game in Tacoma. Ryan averaged 2.87 in Seattle. That's 1 more assist every 7 games. That's 20 base hits denied in Ryan's favor over his 140 games. (I know this is unweildy stuff, but you get the idea).
IF that is a fair figure, then a question to ask would be whether 140 games of Triunfel's bat adds 20 bases. Let's make it 30 bases, just to be fair. Well, Ryan is a machine at "whacking" out 19 doubles, 3 triples and 3 HR's per year. His last three years have been 19-3-2, 19-3-3, 19-3-3. Triunfel gives every indication that he's a 40+ extra-base guy. 15 extra XB hits is at least 30 bases.
You get the idea.
The Magic Beane established that you can just load up with precocious youth and get to the promised land. It's a new paradigm.
So, what would you get in return for a Guti, Ryan, Paxton trawl?
Z probably won't move Ryan out, but with one year to go, wouldn't you be tempted to say, "Here you go kid. Glove 'em up and give me 30+ doubles. The rest is pure gravy!"
Food for thought.
Triunfel, Franklin, Ackley, Seager = a neatly organized 4 for 3 situation. Platoon the SS's if you wish.
Miller and Romero knocking on the door.
Yeah - the main knock on Triunfel that last couple of years hasn't been his range. It's been that he loses focus and boots easy grounders, puts the throw to 1B in row ten, et al. And IIRC, he tends to do it in spurts - airmails four throws to the guy selling peanuts in a week, makes three unforced errors in a game, et al.
No one ever speaks of trading Ackley. I wonder what he could get us.
I am sorry, but I need to ask the dumb question...
How does a guy who has been in the organization for 5 years+, one who we all thought of at one time as a possible major leaguer if not superstar and thus SHOULD be getting extra attention from the coaching staff and the special instructors, and hopefully even JUNIOR himself... How does THIS guy show up in the majors with this super long swing and being allowed to decelerate his bat through the strike zone???
Where is the coaching?
And if it not the coaching but instead his lack of maturity or whatever, WHY condone and give the Mariner's approval of his ways by promting him? Are the Mariner's hoping others follow in this guy's footsteps?
If this kid has had any maturation what so ever, you would think it would show up by starting to listen to the coaching staff.
I fully understand there are different hitting styles, but there are certain characteristics of what NOT to do as well... and Triunfel has a couple of them.
I've wondered the same thing, Grump. Mind you, I'm certainly not in favor of dumping a guy who was a total blue chip and had a sophomore slump, not at all. But I've wondered.
The day after the 9/21 game with "that throw" I posted this on Lookout Landing.
"I wasn’t impressed with his glove that much, but hoo-boy he does have an arm. I was thinking “screw SS, his glove isn’t good enough. His bat isn’t going to get him the job. Put him on the mound, teach him a changeup/palmball, and see what happens.” That throw from the hole? Most SS’s have an arc on that throw to get it to first. Not that one. I don’t know if Smoak was being facetious during the post-game interview, but he said he had to tighten up the laces on his glove between innings." End self-quote
Ryan is a plus-plus-plus defender. Yes, he has a minus bat. But we just need one... more... hit... per week from him to see his average go from .200 to .250. Do you take .250 with Ryan's glove? You betcha. Triunfel might get you the .250 but not the glove. His footwork isn't that great and he takes plays off.
Now, Ryan isn't getting any younger. I know that. But Triunfel's been in the organization for 8 years now. He's had plenty of opportunity. Yes, I know about the broken leg costing him all of one year and part of another. But at this point I think his biggest value to the Mariners is as part of a trade package to an organization that thinks they can cure his mental errors.
If that's Triunfel's defining attribute, that he has no adrenaline on a baseball field and no fear of failure, then how many similarities can you count between him and Betancourt? :- )
Betancourt also had a longish swing, without the zing of acceleration. And a natural effortless contact ability.
Both had the 'relaxation' that created the fluid-and-instinctive impression.
Both had powerful throwing arms ... impressively soft and quick hands ... and a tendency to carry an extra 10 pounds.
.... some of that was also the case with Carlos Guillen as y'mention G. And if he WERE Betancourt you couldn't cut him.
They will definitely get on guys about long swings, but AFAIK, not if there is no contact issue. They seem to get on guys about long swings if they're striking out and slumping, or if they're underperforming career norms.
As far as the concept of bat acceleration, as such, much less the concept of ki, how much do you hear that talked about? ... and it's not like we're talking woo here. A golfer would not dream of analyzing a swing without including the concept of acceleration.
Carlos Triunfel: 22 yo RH in AAA, top-100 prospect in baseball for a couple of years (3 years ago), .692 OPS career (playing several years under average age at every level), .700 OPS last year.
Nick Franklin: 21 yo SH (LH) in AAA, top-100 prospect the last two years, .810 OPS career, .800 last year between AA and AAA, good D at 2nd, problems hitting from the right side.
Stefen Romero: 23 yo RH in AA, .900 OPS career, .990 last year between A+ and AA, will be a top-100 prospect, could play 3B as well, low walks, low Ks, great MIF power.
Brad MIller: 22 yo LH in AA, .925 OPS career (most of it last year in A+), good batting eye, high walks, iffy defense but improving, played SS all year but could move to 2nd.
Jack Marder, 22 yo RH in A+, .980 OPS career, plays multiple positions (C, 2B, LF) but mostly 2nd, good defender, good OBP Fernando Vina-style, probably a utility guy but his bat might change that.
-----------------------------------------
It doesn't help us to move some of those guys (like the huuuge Romero) to third - Seager's there. Franklin, Miller and Triunfel can duke it out for SS, but once that's filled the other guys would file over to 2nd base... except Ackley is playing there, getting great UZR ratings and forgetting how to hit.
Do you trade Ackley? He's been a (B-REF) 6 WAR player in a season and a half, had a better eye than any of the above guys while sporting similar power in the minors, and is gonna go all Robin Ventura for SOMEbody. Do you sell low on Ackley just to replace him with one of the above guys and hope to get 3+ WAR a year out of one of them? Ackley's making 1.5-2 mil a year, IIRC, so money's not the issue.
If you don't trade Ackley or Seager, you HAVE to trade at least one of the 2B and one of the SS options within the year. Romero, Miller, Franklin, Triunfel and Marder can't all play in AAA by the end of 2013, and only one of the potential SS would go to the big club in that timeframe.
Better figure out what we're trading for, quickly.
~G
Ackley in 2H 2012 not only was unproductive, but looked a mess, and called into question (to most) his dynamic future.
We need an article on his swing plane. Have no idea why he started chopping down on the ball the way he did.
's a good pernt Rain. Who knows how well he complied with ultimatums over the period of, say, June-July.
If you didn't address Triunfel's future in the org now, when would you? It's a perplexing issue.
Some infielders hit 90 MPH on their 35-yard throws across the infield. Maybe Triunfel does too.
Yeah, an arm like that goes a long ways towards establishing a player as a permanent SS. Triunfel can afford to play real deep, of course, and he doesn't look at all slow to me.
I don't disagree with a word of that Brent, but ... suppose you can't get anything meaningful back for Triunfel? What then? ... not countering you; am mystified by this problem. The Mariners have never been in a talent traffic jam that actually threatened to force them to just dump young contract-controlled MLB-ready players.
Hey G, have you seen this post at LL?
Your man Maurer is in Sickels' top 120* and, if you count Maurer and Romero, you've got 9 Mariners prospects who are top 120. Pretty funny when an org's Top 10 consists of minor league celebrities. What is this, Texas or something?
Would be amusing to see you pick one other minor leaguer to complete an Org Top Ten wherein every player happened to be (arguably) baseball top-100.
Also would be interested in Justynius' take on this tsunami of national respect for M's prospects.
Ackley's slipping away to Gordon Beckham levels. Beckham, too, demolished the AL in his first partial season, but ever since he's been hitting like, well, Ackley this year. His swing's been corrupted too.
Perhaps Ackley's long swing simply doesn't work up here. I don't think that's it, and I'm not normally one to rush greatness. Will Ackley be great, though? And if he won't, which of the kids will be?
This is where having a Zduriencik at the helm is crucial. He's got to make the call on Ackley vs. Franklin vs. Romero and pick the one that will turn into the All-Star.
Ackley + Paxton or Walker for essentially Nick Franklin + Alex Gordon? Ackley has to get us more in trade than Franklin, wouldn't you think? BIG calls to be made this offseason.
~G
But it's always nice to have 8-9% of the league's top talent in your farm system. It also makes it really hard to figure out who to trade. If the only guy you've got is Clement, then you know where to place your value. But which of the Big Three is really the best? Might it actually be Maurer, high-school teammate of Gerrit Cole, winner of the best pitcher in the Southern League OVER the Big Three...?
Franklin's lefty swing is amazing, IMO. His righty swing is still lifeless. His defense at short is suspect, but at 2nd he looks fabulous. He can't play 2nd without us making a drastic change on the big club. Whaddaya do?
Is Miller really a SS? Can Romero play 2nd while being A-Rod-sized? What happened to Hultzen's vaunted control? Has Paxton righted the ship after his knee issue? What's Walker's timeframe and upside?
Our talent collection is great, but they can't all play here. It's gonna be REALLY interesting to see who goes and who stays - especially with Zunino hitting the afterburners on his expected ascent this year.
Best to stay fluid and temperate. The team remains in flux.
~G
You can't trade Ackley until he's had a good year. He's just a prospect right now...until he proves he can hit here.
I detest Triunfel...for that very reason. He, Betancourt and Rey Quinonez. Talent, but no drive. Get Triunfel off this club before people realize what a joke he is.
In three AFL games, Franklin is 3-8, Catricala 0-8, Zunino 1-8 and Romero 1-4.
Franklin has played two games at 2B, Romero one.
I kid you not. The Atlanta broadcast crew would specifically aim the radar gun there and make all kinds of comments about it during the telecast.
I wouldn't be at all surprised to learn that Triunfel's best value is down the Rafael Soriano road, who was a converted position player, his own self.
Then it stands to reason that, with even a little development as a pitcher, he'd have gone up from there, right?
Would seriously like to know what Triunfel can do. At some time in baseball's future I expect there to be some more Brooks Kieschnicks. Your utility infielder, if he's a Kawasaki type, is only there as insurance.
I dunno what the heck happened to him in the second half of 2012. The first half his strikeouts were all wonky because he was never swinging at the lefty strike and umpires were calling it every. single. time, but his batted ball profile was fine. Then in August he starts being aggressive on the outer half, and the plate discipline fixes itself down to "Seager with more walks", 17% K, 9% BB, but suddenly everything that left his bat was a ground ball (50% GB those last couple months). Impossibly confusing.
or ones run by Billy Beane (read: smart ones) don't actively groom players for this exact role. That 25th roster spot should be one with maximum flexibility, and a backup utility infielder who could pitch to a specific type of situation (righty/lefty matchup, flyball/groundball, etc..) would be a serious weapon, even if he sat below the mendoza line.
Seems odd that there aren't no-hit players with reasonable gloves being prepped for this kind of role.
Or maybe I have it backwards...maybe the fringe bullpenners should be taking fielding and conditioning a bit more seriously at the high minors. Work on one pitch, and two glove positions.
So, would you give up the unknown Ackley + Paxton production for 4 seasons/$44M of known Gordon, say 45 Doubles and 15 homers and 125 OPS.
I would. Not even close. Of course, the big question is whether you can actually get guaranteed performance from Gordon, or anybody else. Gordon's probably pretty close to a dang safe bet, however.
Essentially that trade (for the M's) is Paxton for Gordon, because a Franklin/Romero perfecta is just as likely (or more so) to produce a 110 OPS 2B as Ackley by himself is.
Of course, the same is true for subbing in Romero or Franklin for Ackley in that trade. Ackley looks lost all year. His ability to punish the LF gap disappeared, totally. He homered at a better rate than the year before but his other hard hit ball numbers (2B/3B) dropped dramatically.
Does a Guti, sweeten the deal? KC has a young CF in Wil Myers who ripped in AA and AAA last year. Don't know if he projects more to a COF, but he played a ton of CF last year. What would you get in extra-return?
I think the best M move, if we're going for a bat, is to find the guy most likely to give you 4 years of production and then make the swap (giving up talent) and not look back and worry about it.
Gordon is a pretty sure bet. If you could get him....
KC doesn't need a SS so Franklin's ability there may not have any impact.
BTW, is all the Gordon conjecture just that, or has there been some hint that he's on the table?
As a standalone trade, probably not much. That's why I figure him as part of a group trade; something to sweeten the pot if necessary. If he'd just get his head on straight and not be nonchalant on the "routine" play to avoid that "oops!" moment, he'd have a lot more value; perhaps enough to keep him around.
He had a bad year, but almost all of it was Safeco-effect and bad BABIPs. The guy hit 10 HRs on the road, you know how many 2Bs hit that many? Especially ones who are 24-freakin years old. Uggla, Hill, Zorbist led the league with 12 road HRs, Cano and Weeks followed with 11, and Ackley and Espinosa led the rear with 10. Espinosa's the only guy who's 25 or younger - everyone else is in their 29-32 prime for power. And Espinosa is a 3-3.5 WAR 2B thanks to that power, despite hitting .240/.315 BA/OBP because he strikes out like he's Adam Dunn. If Safeco didn't absolutely murder him and he didn't run a .250 BABIP on the road (you know how worthless 300 PA BABIP samples are?), no would be talking bad about Ackley. Trade him now, and it's the definition of trading low only to watch the guy become an All-star in some hitter's park.
He's young (only 24, don't get lose in the wishing he was Trout or Stanton), he's improving his contact and K% while maintaining his BB%, he has more power potential than any young 2B in baseball right now, his bad road BABIP and Safeco nuked his value to nothing, if Z traded him this off-season it will be the reason he's gone in 2 years. Guaranteed.
Couldn't have said it better myself.
Understood Kite.
Good points. My question was whether you would trade him for a known and very reliable 125 OPS guy, with upside, like Gordon.
2B seems to be our log jam. One of those guys will be moved, I think. Actually, I'll be surprised if we don't see Romero getting some COF fieldtime next ST/year to oopen up some space. Franklin might be the logical trade move...because he is all shiny and he hasn't had a sophomore slump.
But if we're in the trade market, we have three areas of "surplus:" Young 2B, young SP and Vargas.
Trades will begin there. Take your pick.
Wilhelmsen, Pryor and Capps are all individually valuable pieces, while Luetge and Kelley are nice throw-ins. When you can trade your worst reliever for a fourth outfielder at midseason you know your pen is loaded.
I am fully prepared to wave goodbye to Franklin, any one of Cerberus (Walker/Paxton/Hultzen), and any one of Hydra (Wilhelmsen/Pryor/Capps/rest of pen) over the offseason. They just seem like obvious trade bait.
Does a Franklin, Hultzen, Wilhelmsen, Vargas package get you Cliff Lee? - I would think the M's would be the ones turning down that deal or asking for more salary relief or something silly like a Franklin Gutierrez/Domonic Brown swap...
Realistically, if GMZ is offering Frankiln, Hultzen and Wilhelmsen as a package - is there anybody outside of Trout, Harper and Strasburg that the opposing GM wouldn't at least seriously consider it?
- Ben.
First of all, there's no way Ackley is worth anything close to a guy like Gordon after this year. Regardless of how likely Ackley is going to bounce back, until he actually does, he's not worth a 6 WAR player. Second of all, the assumption Gordon has upside is just guessing. Yeah, he might figure out a way to keep his 45-50 doubles and add 20 HRs, but I'm not going to bet on it. Without that "upside" we're talking about a 10% BB%, 20% K%, .160-170 ISO hitter with inconsistent BABIP. Isn't that basically Ackley?
As for 2B, there's no log jam until they're MLB ready. Who says Franklin can't stick at SS? That's what they said about Machado, Ackley, that's what they always say. Until Z says it, I won't believe it. And anyway, they're not MLB ready so it doesn't matter yet. Franklin's struggles in AAA tanked his value, I can't see any team picking Franklin and his 23% K% in AAA over numerous other prospects in a trade situation. Romero has value, but it's not enough to get something significant. You'd have to package Franklin + Paxton, and even then you're not getting anything better than a border-line all-star OFer with 2 years left. Hunter Pence cost the Phillies #35 and #50. Your not getting Justin Upton and his 4 years for #35 and #50. You want to maximize value, get Paxton to pitch 170 IP in the Majors at 4 WAR, then you'll gather interest. But then the question is what are you doing trading a cheap 4 WAR pitcher.
And that's where you hit the snag, what are you doing trying to target 28 year olds right now? 5/9 positions last year posted under 1 WAR; 3/9 positions posted 2-3. Only Seager posted more than 3. SP2-5 gave you 4 WAR. This team had basically zero production in 9/14 spots in the starting line-up. This team isn't in position to trade for older guys with young talent because they need that young talent. Who says Franklin can't play SS, Jeter's doing it in his late 30s. Or Romero can't learn LF. There's a lot of ways this can play out, pre-maturely getting rid of them for MLB talent to help a 75 win team reach the playoffs...that's pretty much everything Z is against. Unless an amazing opportunity presents itself, nothing huge is going to happen this off-season.
I agree, if the M's see Franklin as a SS. It doesn't appear that they do. He played 1/2 of his AA/AAA games last year at SS and the others at 2B. It doesn't look like he's been penciled in as the SS of the future. I suppose that could change next year and he could get all the Tacoma SS starts, which I would like. But it appears he's not Z's SS type.
Franklin, Hultzen, Wilhelmsen, and Vargas is waaaaaaaaay too much for Lee and his contract. But there are plenty of guys that that wouldn't bring back. You're not getting a superstar for that package: Stanton, Tulowitzki, Votto, Longoria, Cano, McCutchen, Bautista, Posey, Kemp, Verlander, Cabrera, Fielder, etc. are all way off the table. The prospects are great, but don't overvalue them.
75% of AA he played SS and 50% in AAA he split with Triunfel who's ahead on the depth chart and by all reports a pretty decent MLB SS. Why start him at SS at all if he's not one? To me they were trying to show Triunfel respect, and give his shot first priority, not worry so much about how Franklin needs SS reps. That's more like Z's MO IMO - don't rush ahead of yourself and annoint a prospect SSotF, give the guy ahead of him first crack. That's why Carraway was called up before Hultzen, even though any armchair GM has penciled in Hultzen for next year with Carraway nowhere to be found, why Walker was 5th starter to start the year despite higher prospect status. Franklin is still a SS until he plays 0% in AAA, until then take the 'scouting reports' from Churchill, Newman, Sickels, KLaw, etc with a grain of salt.
Not sure what we'd be laughing at, but we as fans have no way to know what GM's would or wouldn't do.
It's not just a theoretical objection; half the trades that occur involve FAR different valuations than fans expected. The latest Sox-Dodgers trade being a classic example. Fangraphs spent a month explaining how little the Sox' stars were worth, and then the next month backtracking and trying to call the Dodgers crazy.
...............
You get a ML-ready TOR starter like Paxton, Hultzen etc keying a deal and there's no telling what you'd get back. Like James said, most teams don't worry about deals for ML-ready top-25 pitchers because they're too priceless to even make offers on.
If a superstar did come on the trading block, it's hard to conjecture what a team would value more highly than it would a James Paxton or Danny Hultzen. But, as Justynius pointed out, let them hit the AL and run fifteen good starts and the value peaks.
Gordon might net out at 6 WAR per Fangraphs but with a .294/.368/.455 slash line, I'm not signing off on Alex Gordon's being equal in value to, say, Bryce Harper or Prince Fielder or Felix Hernandez. Gordon is as valuable as Felix, at the same money?
If KC decides to deal Gordon, what they would choose as the return is a huge unknown. That some GM or other would see a big future for Ackley - a recent #2 overall - is hardly farfetched. And of course Ackley has 5 club-controls years left.
I wouldn't deal Alex Gordon for Ackley if I were the Royals, but it's not a question of correct/incorrect.
....................
You make a good case for the idea that the bottom half of the lineup, and rotation, needs to see ACTUAL production before we start talking like we have young production to burn. That point has traction amigo.
Funny thing...I agree with much of what both sides of this little argument have been saying.
I agree that Ackley is worth more than he has shown thus far and had some bad luck and bad park fit problems this year.
I agree that Gordon has a high stop-loss value to him and is a good fielder with multi-position flexibility...but....
I also agree that he does not have star-caliber upside offensively and therefore doesn't address our line-up problem the way we need him to, and that defense-heavy WAR is soft-WAR because defensive wins are volatile by the WAR metric. Incidentally, PCA has not shown in back-of-envelop calculations that Gordon is anywhere near that valuable defensively...he's a little above average...not God.
And I also agree that it's hard to peg Ackley's value if you're the Royals, so you don't want to over-value him.
BUT...this is the problem. This is why we can't trade Ackley now. We think he's gonna be a star...the rest of baseball doesn't know...we'll NEVER get proper value for him right now because it will be darned-near impossible for other clubs to value him the way we do until he goes out there and does it for a whole year. So no...now is not the time to trade Ackley...and it's not because I'm overvaluing him...it's because placing his value right now is not possible.
Some trades are awful from the moment they're made, just bad process... witness the Choo, Cabrera, Morrow and Jones deals. Those four for Cliff Lee would be one such trade; I'd immediately ridicule it. If I were Z, Amaro called me up and offered that, I'd laugh with incredulity. Likewise, if I were the Marlins' GM and got offered that package for Stanton, I'm hanging up instantly. Prospects are valuable, but they're risky as all get out, both in terms of injury and in terms of major league performance, and thus not as valuable as young major leaguers.
You're right, we don't know how GMs think. Any trade might happen... even something as insane as Cliff Lee for Philippe Aumont, Tyson Gillies and Juan Ramirez. That doesn't necessarily mean, though, that we can't point out when their decision-making process seems badly flawed once a deal has been made.
And what "seems" badly flawed seems so based on a long cascade of vague assumptions. How much a person values (say) the rookie Adam Jones depends on an incredibly complex set of variables, such as the delta between Jones and whoever winds up playing CF for the Mariners in his six club-controls years. We can't even delta Jones against the minor leaguer behind him, because trades are part of the fundamental rules of the game. Shortly after Adam Jones left, Franklin Gutierrez was posting 5.0 WAR and had been acquired for next to nothing.
USSM flatly stated that Adam Jones, by himself, was worth far, far more than Erik Bedard even if Bedard pitched at the max of his capabilities and even if Jones did not play well, because the assumption at the time was that any club-controls 2.0 WAR player was worth more than any MLB superstar signed at anything close to market value. This led to two years' worth of the incredulity you speak of, but they lost their incredulity when the roles reversed in a Cliff Lee acquisition. The point is simply that what "seems badly flawed" seems so to analysts who have only a tiny fraction of the information they need to "value" a player "correctly."
As James remarks in situations like this, "We don't have near-perfect measurements of baseball players. It is foolish to assume that we do."
Respect for the complexity of the problem is part of the SSI community standard, as is respect for other posters' ideas. Everybody here is as smart as you and I are. A specific and detailed set of arguments against [Position X] will impress the community far more than will incredulity.
There is a GM (or two) who looks past a tough year to the potential behind it.
How many times have SSI posters said, "Wow, maybe Detroit would deal Alex Avila after that terrible rookie season?" Or Ian Desmond? Or Derek Holland? Or Jacoby Ellsbury?
And other guys go, "C'mon. Just because the Ellsbury had a tough rookie year doesn't mean Boston's giving him to you." :- )
Agree as to Zduriencik's M.O., too. He's always a notch or two slower, than anybody else, to hand a young player a juicy role. They've got to earn not only their playing time, but their positions, slots in the lineup, etc.
No one, I think, least of all me, is advocating that we "dump" Ackley. I think he has a lot of value, for the reasons listed in these comments. Which means other GMs think he has value also.
The question is, does Paxton+Ackley bring you back something better than Paxton+Franklin?
As to Mat's point, sure we don't know Ackley's future... But this is true of any prospect. Remember when Reed was a can't miss prospect?
I'm not particularly downgrading Ackley. I'm not looking to dump him.
I was proposing a question" Would you trade him and a Big Three type for a bat like Gordon?
And if you guys are right, and Triunfel got all the AAA SS innings last year, but Franklin will get them all this year and is really Z's guy for next year, then the logjam at 2B disappears.
I would love to see that solution, btw.
moe
Because (a) I don't think that adds any offense to the Mariners (Gordon isn't that good offensively...he just isn't. 130 OPS+ isn't a game-breaker and his type of 130 OPS+ even less so...he's not changing the scoreboard with a barrage of power...he's getting on base, which doesn't help the Mariners all that much) and (b) I think Ackley is a 130 OPS+ kind of bat in a remarkably similar type of way and plays second not left. Are we that desperate for guarantees right now? Is the team really THAT close to being a dynasty that we should just flip Ackley for his older twin brother just because the older twin is a better guarantee? And then throw in a big pitching prospect on top of that?
No...sorry...I hope we compete in 2013 and I want to see Z go after that...but not by giving up on his first first round draft pick because he had a bad year and he's suddenly nervous that his talent scouting chops aren't all we'd hoped.
Ah.....
But the original premise was whether you would trade Ackley + Paxton for Gordon? Or Ackley + Paxton + Guti for Gordon +?
I'm not ruling out that Ackley doesn't become a 35 double guy next year. If so, he's a 50 x-base hit guy, and that's the magic number.
But, is he the safe bet that Gordon is?
As I think about it more, we may be more likely to do a Franklin/Paxton type trade, rather than trade away our one proven MLB 2B (Unless Seager is a 2B).
So, if you're the Royals, would you sell Gordon and his $44M contract for all those years of Franklin and Paxton.
I think I would do that, were I KC, who isn't winning next year, anyway.
I would be really close to doing it were I Z, too.
Didn't mean to come off as condescending as I did. Perhaps a bad habit left over from time (still, in my opinion, well spent) on other blogs. Mea culpa.
Your posts rock the house amigo... really look forward to 'em...
Mods have to do a little condescension of their own from time to time, in order to make sure that nobody's infringing on their territory :- )
It's what the delta between Ackley and Franklin/Romero/Miller/whoever happens to be in trade value as well as on-the-field value.
If Ackley is another Gordon Beckham, then is is worth locking him into 2B with all the options we have? If he's Robin Ventura waiting to happen at second instead of a corner, then how stupid would you be to trade him and hope Franklin is some sort of Robinson Cano?
If Franklin and Ackley have similar offensive potential, then if Ackley will bring back twice what Franklin would in trade, you'd think you'd trade Ackley. I would keep Ackley, but we have a similar chance of looking dumb if Franklin goes berzerk in KC or wherever and Ackley keeps struggling.
The idea of trading Ackley isn't stupid, it's a judgment call. Here's hoping Zduriencik makes the right one.
~G