He may not be a grandmaster among grandmasters...but he's a more-than-solid GM...in four years he's taken the Mariners from among the worst farm systems in the league (and with not much in the MLB chest to trade to get any) to one of the best despite having already graduated a number of his best prospects over the last few years. He has demonstrated an ability to be flexible and change plans quickly when things didn't go his way, and he's batting at leas t.650 on his transactions working out as well as he planned. We can win our next pennant with Zduriencik. No doubt about that to me.
.
Kelly Gaffney sez,
.
.
What I find most compelling about the (Jaso) trade is that I never would have done the trade, but compelled to think about it, I have now concluded it was the right move. Most criticisms seem to view it as a failure of old school color by numbers thinking. I think it reflects Z's confidence that -- since he has been given the time to build organizational depth -- he can always fill the back end of the roster with capable role players. If the M's saw Jaso as a catcher, rather than a platoon DH, he'd still be on the team.
.
=== Geniuses SHOULD See Things the Rest of Us Don't ... ===
... As Bill James put it about Whitey Herzog (?) one time.
For me as a fan, that is a minimum standard of competence for a quality GM, that he make some decisions that I don't like, and that the GM turns out to be right. I don't resent the idea that a GM might understand things that I don't; for me that is one of the joys of sports, being surprised by Russell Wilson's skill set.
Has Jack Zduriencik done things that, in retrospect, were well ahead of my own perception at the time? We're not talking about Z anticipating a development that I didn't have information towards. We're talking about his making a decision that, after reflection, given time to think about it, I still thought was wrong.
You might like some or all or none of these suggestions:
- Danny Hultzen is in this category for me. About three days after the trade, SSI managed to publish a Cole Hamels / Johann Santana template to recover a few hit points, but still. We all howled with outrage the day of the trade, at least.
- Nick Franklin, certainly. Maybe Gordon can claim that he was up to speed on the day of the draft. Most people can't. I can't.
- Brendan Ryan maybe? There have been extended periods of time, during Ryan's tenure, when I thought it was pretty clear that Ryan was costing more with the bat than he was giving back with the glove. But he's given us 4-5 WAR in his two years and last year I came to perceive that Ryan's play-in-the-hole was an 80 skill. A skill that wins baseball games all by itself. At the moment, I have an inkling that really we just need to fix the other 8 slots in the lineup and stop blaming our glove wizard.
- The fast-tracking of Kyle Seager was very impressive. Did you see any particular reason to single this kid out and race him through the minors to Safeco?
- Possibly the M's saw Pineda's injury on the horizon. I felt terrible, terrible, terrible no matter who the M's got back; Pineda was my emotional salve against the old Randy Johnson wound. But Pineda went to camp injured and the Yankees darkly insinuated that Zduriencik played them. The local "genius" might have understood that the injury risk factor was more like 60% than it was like 10%. Of course, we already knew that Taro was a genius; he never loses a roto league.
- The trade for Jason Vargas and Mike Carp was stunningly insightful. Some blogs -- not mine -- have the right to claim that they were in step with Zduriencik on Franklin Gutierrez in that deal. (Asterisk here; possibly Vargas is just spaghetti-against-the-wall in view of Luke French and co. But Vargas and Carp had special makeup, so I dunno.)
- Zduriencik's decision to hire Eric Wedge might have been over my pay grade. Wedge is MUCH better than I gave him credit for; the "blown quality start" has been no issue at all, and he's the rare hard-case who can instill discipline without drawing a mutiny.
- The deal for John Jaso ... if you go back and Google SSI, you'll find that I thought his swing looked very static back in 2011. When he became our best player in 2012, it was something we fans didn't see coming. At all.
- The Wilhelmsen and Delabar stories were pretty freaky.
- Moving Ackley to second base goes here for anybody who didn't think Ackley could play there, though this wasn't "genius" vis-a-vis SSI. It was a good amount of GUTS.
- ... fill in your own.
You might say, well, he sure fouled up the Fister deal though, didn't he?! We are not arguing that Jack Zduriencik is great, that he's above average, or that he's below average. We are arguing that he often sees things we don't. I liked Bill Bavasi, but how many things could you put in such a list for him?
I'm not talking about, you roll some dice, you hit your 7's on a Russell Branyan here, you crap out on a Hector Noesi there. The above decisions don't look like dice rolls to me; they look like a shot-caller knowing more about baseball than I did. Maybe you could put the Jaso deal in the luck category, or maybe not. What do you think?
Neither are we talking about Zduriencik having had Russell Branyan in Milwaukee, and understanding that Branyan's plate coverage was better than most people thought. We're not talking about bringing in a Mike Sweeney and having it work out extremely well. That isn't brilliant enough to hit the standard we're proposing here.
A General Manager HAS to hit this standard in my view, or I as a fan withdraw my support for him as a decisionmaker.....
.................
Right now we are hoping that the new #3-4 hitters, and the shifts of the kids into the bottom of the order, go into that category for some people around the blog-o-sphere.
.................
Zduriencik has lost a lot of games.
And I don't believe in excuses, usually, but I think he's hit a whale of a lot of bad luck so far with his Ackleys, Smoaks, and Gutierrezes. Man. You go out and trade for the three best hitting prospects in baseball* and you get absolutely zero. Imagine if you got a GM job, and now imagine if your big moves turned out to be spit.
And you deal for Cliff Lee, and Justin Upton, and slam contracts for Prince Fielder and for Josh Hamilton... none of whom become Ryan Braun for you. if I had no bad luck, I'd have no luck at allllll...
As an observer, you gotta figure all it takes is for a bounce of the ball to go their way for once't. Who knows. Maybe a #3-4 hitter set, the kids come through, and the Young Guns give you Pineda seasons. I've seen franchise momentum change in sports, gentlemen, and change based on catching a break or two. Just saw it with the Seahawks.
.
Comments
I definitely agree with the assessment that it's unreal how many Whammy's he's hit in regards to top flight prospect bats thus far.
Of course, some of this is park effect, (the Seager and Saunders numbers don't "feel" as good as they actually are, given the context. But, I was railing against the developmental incompetence of the organization long before Z arrived. I still wonder how much of the drag on hitting prospects could be due to entrenched organizational problems. I certainly think the club is moving in the right direction - and Saunders and Seager suggest improvement - but part of me thinks by now clubs like Cleveland or Anaheim would have already gotten .850 seasons out of at least some of Ackley, Montero, maybe Smoak and Saunders too.
You're not going to hit a HR with every prospect, obviously. But, seriously, how many hitting prospects have to fail miserably before it ceases to just be bad luck?
In truth, I understand that Z actually has a VERY short time-span for his own hitting prospects to blossom. It's not like Adam Jones hit .800 immediately upon arrival in Baltimore. But, it is difficult to have patience with Z given the decade long hitter hiatus Ms fans suffered before he arrived.
then the best we can say is we don't yet know how good Jack is. He hasn't had much success at the big league level. At what point we can say he is NOT an effective GM is up for debate. He came in with a strong reputation for scouting and drafting. There is absolutely no doubt he has turned around the farm system, and based on that he has created an expectation of future success. But we also need to note that this is Jack's first job as GM. He does not have a track record of success as a GM. All he has is what he's done so far.
For those who pay close attention to Minor League Baseball, for those devoted to prospect watching, I understand that what Jack HAS accomplished with his drafts and trades for prospects makes him a sort of cult figure, a fallible man (who isn't?) but still a hero and some sort of genius. I have no acumen as an analyst of prospects to dispute this, and so I presume that those who view things this way, those whose views I trust, have a valid basis for doing so.
But speaking for myself only, I cannot crown Jack a genius and a hero until his record in Major League Baseball warrants it. Of course, he labors under organizational constraints that would be daunting for the best GM's. So does Billy Beane. Beane has earned his genius and hero status. When Jack begins to accomplish the kinds of things that Beane has accomplished, then I will be convinced that he is a genius and a hero.
I don't think it particularly realistic to expect the M's under current top management to go toe-to-toe year after year with teams that devote far greater passion and resources to winning championships. But until the M's start pulling a little Tampa Bay or Oakland magic, I simply must reserve judgment on Jack. It would help my confidence in him a bunch if we started seeing one or two some of his big acquisitions (via trade or draft) develop into perenial All-Star candidates.
... that his best role is as GM, isn't.
Am sure he'd be the first to agree. You gotta deliver the results before you can talk about your place in the game.
Lincoln and Armstrong seem to be taking that strongly into account. A lot of us -- not so much. :- )
We fans talk about 'doing the rebuild right,' but objectively speaking, we really aren't yet to the date at which Zduriencik's internal rebuild is due to pay its bill.
............
Looks like maybe Atlanta could wind up with Upton?
You'd have to be made of ice, or rock or something to read Wedge's comments from the luncheon today and not respond positively to his enthusiasm for this club and where he thinks it can go.
(see Larry Stone's excerpts at http://seattletimes.com/html/thehotstoneleague/2020199140_eric_wedge_we_... )
The excitement of young talent that may, just MAY be on the verge of realizing its' potential. The commitement to the young core. The response during the offseason to what was clearly a need to have some credentialed, veteran hitters in the lineup to take some pressure off the kids (no one called for this more than me, and I have to admit that at least for 2013 Jack has brought them in, more of them than I anticipted). Some quality veterans who can school the kids effectively (as opposed to last year's group who, Wedge strongly implies, were not effective leaders in that regard. All this before even mentioning the young pitching talent that may put a lot of pressure on Beavan and Noesi to perform or be replaced.
Of course Eric does not mention some of the potential weaknesses of the club, but hey, no need to focus on that at this point if you're the manager (as opposed to the GM).
I do not consider my comments that Jack has to prove himself as an MLB GM to be a prophecy that he will not do so. If we take his and Wedge's public comments at face value (and I do), the two are deeply commited to bringing a championship team to Seattle, and they themselves are convinced it is not way off in the future. I certainly do not question their passion and commitment. (If only it was shared by their bosses to the same degree as the owners of our primary competition.) We're about to turn the corner into spring, and all that lies before us at this point is the optimism of possibility. Why? Because it IS possible that their progress will be clearly discernible in 2013. And if in fact the M's reach the level Wedge talked about today within the next few years it will indeed be time to crown his immediate superior with plenty of accolades. Here's to it...it's a tough job, not for the fainthearted, but somebody's got to do it.
I've considered this to be an offense that would take strides forward with a couple MOTO bats, but never expected that would happen. Well, it has.
There's big questions in the starting rotation and some depth questions on the left side of the infield. Other than that, the lineups are all "how do we get enough AB for the players deserving of them" and the bullpen is going to probably be a squeeze too. If one of the 2 unknown starting spots produces even #3 production i'm very exited for this year being the beginning of MLB production that verifies his status as a good GM. All this while hitters (Figgins obviously doesn't count) have avoided signing here. That's a pretty big stumbling block that he worked his way around and its likely to be way more lauded in a few months than the initial "blah" to...well, if you read the lookout landing reactions...ha ha. I'll just say much cursing. Adding Morse and Morales in this offseason as cheaply (overall value) as he did was miraculous in my book. 3 years of Jaso pales in comparison to 7 of Maurer+7 of another 1 or 2 to approximate what Oakland paid. Not that I care much about the money, but $9.5 million for Vargas isn't a all that cheap either.
I'm confident in the talent that's here and the flood that's on it's way. We've risen 20+ spots in minor league ranking since he came in and they're still bringing in more. There's only 1 or 2 spots to rise, but even if they fall out of the top 5 next year adding all those blue chippers, the roster is already going to be pretty full of these young guys. The next 5 years are going to be very interesting.
I understand the idea that the club needs to win to justify his genius, but I think his genius is already justified in the quantity of talent. Winning can't be far behind.
not actually going to go full bore 25 man prediction. Just Positions possibly filled by young MLB players by then.
Any questions on pitching at all? the bullpen is already nearly filled by younguns alone. So on to the positions.
Catcher. Triple check, or so
1b. possibly the 2nd most likely spot to need infusion, but Smoak could be producing here as could Montero possibly.
2nd. around 6 possibilities? Looks pretty covered.
3rd. I like Seager just fine. maybe could improve. Not much behind him except for the full infield + of other 2nd basemen that can't all play there.
SS. Probably covered between Franklin and Miller, with other options probably further away than 2015 but good none the less.
LF/RF Saunders and a 2nd base convert, not much else in house though a few maybes like Jones and Peguero. Wouldn't mind everybody.s favorite target, Stanton
CF. Most likely spot to need something from outside, though I've heard good things about Landry here and other places and there are some maybes here too.
So there aren't many spots that aren't likely filled just by in house guys. But new cream keeps rising to the top and we may quickly run out of places to put them. 2nd base is kind of funny now, but we could add the bullpen to that list this year, the rotation next year, how many positions backloaded in 2 years? The only thing to do will be trading 4 for 1 or veteran to restock. Free agents? So what if they don't want to sign? There's no room for them anyway.
I doubt it goes that cleanly, but it's approaching that foreseeably.
Wishhiker: "(Jack's) genius is already justified in the quantity of talent."
True ONLY IF you believe that assembling young talent yet to achieve it's potential is the equivalent of actually reaching it's potential, or IF you are so enamored with minor league baseball (a legitimate interest, I concede) that it's assembly is sufficient in and of itself.
"Free agents? So what if they don't want to sign? There's no room for them anyway."
Well, lets not get ahead of ourselves. When we have yet to see even one of Jack's young players actually break out big, it seems a tad premature to foresee being able to say to our division competitors, "Pujols? Hamilton? We don't need no stinkin' superstars!," and back it up, especially when they have trumped us also (so far) in the development of young, accomplished stars.
like I said, I doubt it goes that cleanly. But it's a foreseeable possibility.
I may be overexcited or even overvaluing the chances this year. I think there will be much closer to star performances out of a few of the guys this year though. This is a way better offense than any point in the last 3 years for sure. I think it will be looked back at as best since 2003. The pressure aspect and the addition of 2 slugging contact guys in the middle added to simply players having more experience is a good recipe. How many guys are 26 here? if there's a magic year for putting it together or having a breakout year, I think that's it. I'm very optimistic and I could be wrong. But there are quite a few reasons to be.
The free agent comment was, yeah, at least a bit overstated. I meant it as a "i'm taking my nintendo and going home" joking pout. Certainly I'd like to see the team pick up an Ellsbury or whoever to improve the roster. A part of it is also that Jack was able to add via trade when the free agents went elsewhere. Top Free Agents aren't required to build a roster or acquire a piece you need. There sure is a lot of Free Agent money available for next year especially if the W//L record significantly improves this year
I went back and looked at the stats. 2006 seems about comparable to my expectations for the roster. Ibanez and Sexson SLG .500, Johjima, Lopez the all star, Beltre, Ichiro, but with Everett, Betancourt, Reed and Broussard. The pitching could be comparable, hard to say, but I think the bullpen now is better.
that we start seeing a better payoff this year from the youth movement. I think the presence of some certified veteran bats to help carry the load will help a lot. My preference would have been to obtain a veteran core piece in the middle of the order and then add a Morse or a Morales. That seems like it was Jack's preference as well, he just wasn't able for whatever reason to get it done. But in the end he has done what many including myself were crying out for heading into the 2012 season. In fact, he went a buck-and-a-half farther by signing Ibanez and Bay.
Wedges comments yesterday make it clear that "he who produces plays." That's as it should be. With Ichiro gone the days of entitlement without the production to back it up are history.
If either Morales or Morse turn into one-and-done Mariners, Montero will be able to play a lot of first base because we can expect Zunino to hit the big time for sure in 2014, probably at the ASB or September of 2013.
i think that was everyones preference, yeah. Maybe they'll be calling about Stanton with some regularity. If it's the 85 win or so club I think they can be and add Stanton midseason...playoff push is a possibility. I'm pretty sure I'm among the most optimistic not with the club though. That's another thing is there's presumably going to be room to add a contract at the deadline if there's opportunity and need.
If you read what has been coming out of Philly since they signed Delmon Young and since their media day, I can't help but think Domonic Brown can be had for not much. Apparently Charlie Manuel does not like him. I wonder how he would have felt about Saunders after his first 3 years - and Brown has been considerably better than that. Again, he looks like the #1 change-of-scenery candidate in all of baseball.
If getting him now and giving him a whirl does not preclude going after Stanton later if it doesn't work, then I think it would be a great move. His play in RF has apparently dissatisfied Manuel, but he was ranked as a good fielder with outstanding arm by BA in 2011. Something doesn't add up. The Phillies are a VERY veteran team, and have shown that even more by signing Young. Being a rookie / young player on that team may not be fun. Put him with Saunders and Morse, get him in the clubhouse with Seager, Ackley, Montero, Felix, et al, and see if he blossoms.
Since the Phillies want young right-handed power, backup for Utley and Young, and bullpen help, I wonder again if Liddi, Triunfel, and Kelley would do it.
Out of options, but not out of value.
Boston apparently has interest in Carp. I suspect JackZ is just figuring out what he wants back. Carp would do well in Boston, he's a blue-collar grinder that the fans will love.
Wells is valuable here for now because he can play all three OF spots. But if both Guti and Saunders are here and healthy, does he really have a place? Again, I suspect JackZ is figuring out from where he could bring back something shiny. Philly is a possibility if we got one of their LH outfielders (please, please). Or going back to Detroit, or maybe the White Sox.
There's still more intrigue for the Genius to process.
Can Jack really afford to double and triple down on young, underperforming talent though? I mean, the payoff could be huge: adding Brown to a lineup featuring a ton of young hitters in Ackley, Seager, Saunders, Montero, Zunino...
Man, if that were to work out it could be a Mid-90s Indians thing. They had Albert Belle, Jim Thome, Manny Ramirez, Omar Vizquel AND Kenny Lofton all in their 20s. Yeesh. How did they not win a World Series again? That's about as inexcusable as the 90s Ms failing to do so.
Of course, we'd be trying to do that while also having a baby pitching staff. Has any team ever fielded so many young players on a winning team? Trying to marry the Giants baby rotation that won them the World Series (or the 2000s As 100-game-winning teams) with the early-to-mid 70s Red Sox offenses seems like a tall task, but if you believe in your kids...
It would really be something to see if it worked. Like a minor league All-Star team barnstorming the bigs, led by a mid-20s Cy Young winner. It would definitely be different - nobody would have a team that looks anything like ours. Well... the 2013 Braves might be trying something similar now with both Uptons and Heyward on the team.
Would still be interesting.
~G
It's difficult to believe they don't carry him. with Gutierrez, and really in general, it seems best to have 3 CF options between AAA and MLB. They could pick up another player with options remaining between now and the season. Otherwise you're in a situation that if Guti misses anything more than a few days at any point who's your backup CF? Does Saunders just play through and you hope he never needs a day off or has even a minor injury or illness? I think it's to risky to build a roster with such a foreseeable problem. Unless it's part of a move for a replacement or follows an acquisition, I just can't see them moving Wells right now. I think they're married to Ackley at 2nd, which otherwise might be the only reasonable answer in CF for a situation like that. Maybe he plays out there some this spring. Otherwise Wells is probably making the team.
Sorry to keep bringing them up - BUT, they ARE the model for this many young players on a winning team. Mays was the only long-term veteran. Kuenn was signed, much like Ibanez, for veteran leadership (in those days, black men like Mays were not yet considered as leaders - especially for a guy like Alvin Dark, who had to learn to like Mays, McCovey, Cepeda, Alou, etc. - to his credit, he did). Davenport-3B, Haller-C, Cepeda-OF, McCovey-1B, Marichal-P, Pagan-SS, Mota-OF, the Alous-OF, Hiller-2B, were all 1-4 year guys. The veteran on the pitching staff was Mike McCormack, who had come up under the old "bonus baby" rules at 17 and was still only 23.
The Ms are VERY comparable to the 1960-61 Giants, except they aren't bravely signing Puerto Ricans and Dominicans when other teams were still signing their first American black players (yes, you, Red Sox). That was the Giants "secret" weapon. With Clemente on the Pirates, Aparicio on the White Sox, and the Giant's plethora, black and Latin players were that day's "undervalued asset" a la "Moneyball". That was the fall of the Yankees, and the rise to dominance of the NL for the 60s.
If you want a good read, try any of David Halberstam's books, but especially "October '64", which covers this transition using the Yankees and Cardinals as the exemplars.
I was going to put this in the shouts. I guess I don't have the street cred ;)
“He was really unable to stay on his back leg and drive off his back leg because of the spur,” Griffin said. “On day games, he would walk into the training room, we couldn’t tell if he was a 23-year old or a 90-year old.
In 151 AB's in day games Ackley hit just .166/.244/.204. 0 dingers! I'm excited to see him play a full year healthy.
Andino has played a few games out there, and probably would play there before Ackley, but, on the whole, the discussion is somewhat like the "3 Catchers if one DHs" - only a few innings and you bring up Almonte, Morban, or Landry, whoever you think can take the lumps, and go on until Guti or Saunders is available, or you pick up a replacement from somewhere.
Gaylord Perry was a rookie in 1962 and went 3-1 for the Giants. Much later, he played in 82-83 for the Mariners on a club that included Dave Henderson. Hendu played on a 1986 Ms club loaded with young players like Harold Reynolds, Dave Valle, Alvin Davis, Jim Beattie... Dave Valle played for the Ms thru 1993 (Lou Pinella's first year), and was teammates with Junior. Junior played in 2010 with Saunders, Gutierrez, Smoak, Carp, Felix and Kelley, all of whom are on the roster today.
So, at most, 5 degrees of separation between the '62 Giants and todays M's, three if you just count Valle announcing for Root.
Pitchers and Catchers gotta start soon, huh.
-- double post ---
Back to college, right? And didn't we use Beltre's spur as the source of his superpowers in his one great LA year?
Regardless, I hope Ackley is healthy and happy and PRODUCTIVE. I think the world of him. If he fails to be a pro star I'll be shocked... but I've been shocked before.
C'mon Mark-Grace-At-Second-Base, put it together. No more weak BABIP because of limp grounders to 2nd, no more pathetic daytime performances. Get it done. if he was really hurting that badly from the spur then I hope he feels like a million bucks and starts driving the ball into the gaps again.
We need it. A couple of plus years from him and Montero, for instance, would go a LONG way to making this a Mariners team that holds winning potential into June and Beyond, which would be a nice change.
~G
Also had ROY candidate Danny Tartabull. You want to talk about bad trades for all the people whining about Jaso for Morse, go look at the Tartabull deal. As a Rookie he's .270-25-96 and the M's immediately dump his next 5 years for a bucket of spare parts. My teenage mind was blown by such a horrible trade as Tartabull went on to OPS+ 142, 145, 128, 128, 171. No offense against some of the younger commenters on other local blogs but I don't think they've been fans long enough to truly appreciate some absolutely terrible M's trades/decisions.
Last year was hard to understand. It was like watching Jeremy Reed again except...how could Ackley have fallen that low. His MLB history, MiL history, college history...WTF is going on? An injury was the most likely reason, really the only reason that really made sense, but nothing was said for so long that I just kept scratching my head. Most of the time I'd hear about an injury like that and think that maybe that was it. In his case I think that had to be it. That or he's falsified his age and just fell off a cliff at 32. He wasn't the same hitter at all anymore, in most peripherals or really anything.
Bone spurs can be not really a problem for years but continue growing and become a problem.
Not to the same degree, but I couldn't understand Ryan's hitting woes either. I'm also not as confident that he's significantly better this year, but he hadn't been nearly that bad a hitter anywhere either. He could be decent again and surprise people.
Also had ROY candidate Danny Tartabull. You want to talk about bad trades for all the people whining about Jaso for Morse, go look at the Tartabull deal. As a Rookie he's .270-25-96 and the M's immediately dump his next 5 years for a bucket of spare parts. My teenage mind was blown by such a horrible trade as Tartabull went on to OPS+ 142, 145, 128, 128, 171. No offense against some of the younger commenters on other local blogs but I don't think they've been fans long enough to truly appreciate some absolutely terrible M's trades/decisions.
Ackley's swing is very long, with that extreme bat wrap and all. He doesn't have ++ bat speed but he does have a good eye. I think that clubs got some tape on his debut in 2011 and pitchers adjusted. He tried to make his own adjustments in-season and got all out of whack. We will see if he's been able to make his adjustments in the off season. This is, to me, the root cause of the "sophomore slump" for hitters. They get booked - many for the first time in their life - and adjusting during the season is just too much. It takes an off season to get themselves right.
I'll be looking for reports on his swing in early ST games. Does he still wrap the bat around his head and stay long or does he move to a more traditional stance in order to get better coverage? He may have to sacrifice power for average but given his hit tool and his size, that's a trade I would make.