Kotchman is the classic example. Z may have believed (spelled d-r-e-a-m-e-d) that Kotchman was a 110+ hitter about to blossom....but in the end it was decision made because he could glove it at 1B.
When you have the best defense in the league....adding a defender at 1B to replace your only bonker reveals much about a GM's philosophy.
I think Jack is wedded to the idea that you can win 92 3-2 games (or 2-1) and make the playoffs. Maybe Safeco has shapped this attitude. I don't know...
But you can't. You have to mash the ball some to win games.
You don't have to hit the ball out of the park...but you better whack a bunch of doubles.
Even the Figgins acquisition was a result of losing sight of this. If you have guys in the line up who get 40+ extra-base hits you can have Figgins at his norm. (in '08, the Angels had two guys with 50+ extra-base hits and another with 40+. In '09, an out-lier year for Figgins, LAA had 5 guys with more than 40. 1 of those had 50 and another had 79!)
In such a line-up, a normal Figgins has value. In the M's lineup of last year, he doesn't.
LRod (or some other acquisition) has to be an improvement on Jack Wilson, and if he is healthy, you keep JW as your defensive late inning guy.
Can Z change spots? I don't think you can use the Smoak and Ackley moves as evidence either way so you have to look elsewhere? I think there is a trade move coming up.
We need some bonk at DH or 3B or LF (actually we need it at two of the three).
When that trade occurs, we'll have an idea of Jack's current philosophy.
Whether Mike Wilson gets a real ST chance will also be indicative.
Actually this is a great time to be a fan! Lots to chew on and mull over.
I'm hoping Jack changes spots.
I'm not betting on it.
moe
Add new comment
1