Add new comment

Why is Kotchman still playing 1B?  Because Seattle is today - (unlike the last decade) actually running a DEVELOPMENTAL system. 
Okay - please everyone raise their hands who believes Tui's long-term outcome makes sense as a first basemen?  Anyone?  Bueller?
Playing Tui at first is something you if you HAVE to -- because you opted not to DL your lame-back 1B option - and it's either him or Jamie Burke.  (oh, wait -- Jamie Burke DID play a game at first last year).
Why not play Tui at first?  Because that will only HURT Tui's ultimate path to success.  It truly amazes me how so many really, really bright people continue to treat playing a specific position in baseball is so trivial that it's perfectly fine to just throw anyone out there to play 1B -- the silent assumption being - (who cares how dreadfully bad he plays defense - he can IGNORE looking like a complete idiot because he doesn't know where he's supposed to go on a ball to "X" -- or because he gets cross-footed and doesn't make it to the bag at all on what otherwise would've been a routine 1-3 play). 
Every ounce of energy he puts into learning a skill that he will have ZERO use for - (if he succeeds in baseball) - is energy he is NOT putting to the skills that he will need.  You've just made his development slower - and more likely to fail.
But -- aside from that -- playing Tui at first is a bright green neon sign that Figgins was *RIGHT* to simply not bother to covering any bag on any play?  Why?  Because the season is over - defense doesn't matter.  We're just taking live batting practice every day - (sorry Felix, Jason, Doug ... no need for you guys to work hard - we don't care how much the defense behind you sucks, anyway -- go ahead give up 10 a night - that'll make your next contract more manageable anyway).
If you want a guy to try a new position - fine - do it in the minors -- or, if he's ALREADY done developing as a hitter, give it a try during Spring Training -- you might get lucky, and only lose 10% of his hitting production for a month or two - (or maybe not).  But, it at least HAS to be a position you're willing to have him play long term, if he becomes competent at it.
Carp *WAS* up -- and failed miserably.  Smoak *WAS* up - and failed miserably.  Why aren't they in Safeco?  Because the guys who are actually trying to DEVELOP their skills believe *THEIR* development is (currently) better served in AAA.  And the reality that they'll be arriving in the bigs in less than a week likely plays some part in this - (especially with a team that is in first place - and DOES have something to play for).  For me, it seems utterly contradictory to yank them OUT of a winning, team-oriented experience and drop them into the karmic cesspool that is the current Safeco clubhouse.
If your focus *IS* on development - (and mired in last place, it should be), then you do what is best for each individual developmental project.  You do NOT throw Pineda into Safeco just to face some real MLB bats, if you have a genuine belief that he's thrown enough innings already.  You DON'T yank Smoak back up and throw him to the lions just because he's hitting .830 in AAA if you don't believe he's ALREADY fixed what it was that had him hitting .500 on his first Mariner tour.
The decision to play Kotchman isn't ABOUT Kotchman.  It's about what is best for Smoak and Tui and everyone else in the organization that might be a part of something special in the future.  Just because Kotchman isn't in that future does NOT make playing anyone else there *THEIR* best development plan.
But, of course, has Seattle actually ever developed a successful hitter?  AROD and Griffey weren't developed.  They just "were".  The entire Bavasi era was the Peter Principle gone wild -- "promote them until they suck".  Why would anyone in Seattle actually understand the ups and downs and growing pains of REAL player development?  They've never seen it.
The WONDERFUL reality in Seattle is almost none of the "likely" breakthru talent *IS* blocked by anyone of note.  (well, perhaps Ichiro blocks the next RF candidate - Mike Wilson?)
But, the ultimate truth about "successful" clubs - whose prospects come up and ARE productive, and hitting .800 from day one is NOT that they are great talent evaluators.  It's that they don't stunt - (or kill) - player development by simply throwing their prospects into the deep end and seeing if they drown.  Atlanta's PLAN was for Heyward to start 2010 in the minors.  Why?  Because at the end of 2009, they didn't believe he was ready for the majors.  They saw SOMETHING that told them - "this brownie is not done baking."  But, in Spring Training, whatever it was that they thought needed fixing, didn't any more. 
Now - it's fine for fans to think the developmental coaches for their team are idiots - (and with Seattle, there's plenty of data to support this from the last decade).  But, I see a distinct difference in the way Seattle is handling its prospects since Z arrived.  And given the success of the Milwaukee developmental program - I have every reason to believe that these choices are making Seattle MUCH better at development.
Why did people want to see Pineda and Ackley in Safeco this year?  Because they've seen other clubs move "some" players from AA to MLB successfully - so why not these guys?  Because those other teams don't make those choices JUST because they suck at the majors - but because they were confident THIS prospect is ready to make that change.  Brian McCann jumped from AA to the majors - Heyward, too.  But, Chipper, Furcal and Javy Lopez all got a year in AAA.  But Andruw only got a dozen games in AAA.
It's not a one-size fits all world.  Seattle will KNOW it is making progress in player development when it's prospects DO start showing up in the majors and start posting .800 OPS figures from day one.  Not every one -- but some.