| By Jason A. Churchill |  | By 05-30-2011 |
The talk all year, and especially the past few weeks, has been about when Dustin Ackley will be called up to the big leagues. That move is certain to be made soon, as early as this week -- but probably not later than the series versus the Philadelphia Phillies that runs June 17-19. The Tacoma Rainiers start a road trip on June 4 that runs through the day prior to that Philly series. The timing works out well.
But for me, the big deal right now isn't about when Ackley gets the call it's about what role he plays once he's here. We've talked a lot lately about which player is sent out when Ackley comes up -- Jack Wilson? Luis Rodriguez? An outfielder such as Carlos Peguero or Michael Saunders with the club moving Adam Kennedy into the third-base rotation?
Maybe none of the above. Sure, any of those names suggested above could be shipped out or moved around, but here's a thought that we haven't discussed here, but I'm hearing the club is actually considering, or at least have considered: Ackley as the new starting left fielder.
Yes, it would mean an automatic upgrade at the position without sacrificing defense. It would probably mean Peguero or Saunders get sent down -- Peguero unless the club sees Ackley as an option to back up Franklin Gutierrez in center field.
Calling up Ackley and using him in left field doesn't necessarily mean the club will abandon the second base idea, but it may mean they abandon their search for an outfielder via trade. The decision on the position could also hinder on whether or not the club can acquire an outfielder so they can use Ackley at second.
But using Ackley in left is the best way, without making a trade at all, that the Mariners can get better.
The draft and Ackley
Anthony Rendon's time at second base in the Conference USA Tournament means nothing to me, and it's not a change I'd make permanently. The scouts I have spoken to believe the shoulder won't prevent Rendon from playing third, and moving a guy with two previous ankle injuries -- one to each ankle -- to second is a disaster waiting to happen in terms of injury.
The M's may very well draft Rendon; it seems the industry, including ESPN Insider's Keith Law, believes Rendon will be the pick (check out Law's latest mock draft here), but the chances they delay his arrival in the bigs, the same way they have Ackley's, by moving him to second base, aren't good.
Moving Ackley to left field permanently isn't the worst thing in the world -- we know he can play the outfield and despite a below-average arm, he'd be an asset there with his speed and instincts. It would also lend more credence to the idea that the club could draft Florida prep shortstop Francisco Lindor and ultimately move Nick Franklin to second base. Such an alignment actually covers more positions looking forward.
If had to make a prediction today, I'm stuck in the middle. I don't have any insider information on whether or not Ackley will move to left field when he comes up, or if he'll get some time in left at Triple-A Tacoma to get acclimated, which would make a lot of sense. But if you see that lineup even once in Tacoma it's not for no reason, it's because that's where Ackley is likely play when he makes the jump.
Ackley's progress at second
Every time someone asks me about Ackley's progress at second base I say things like "he's fine," or "he still looks like an outfielder to me." And that isn't because I don't think he can "handle" the position, because I do. I just don't think he'd ever be really good there. I do think he'd be a good defensive left fielder, or even centerfielder.
Adequate is a good word to use right now, and I do think ultimately he'd be average at second, so if he comes up and plays second, he's not going to kill the club. I have a hard time believing the team is going to give up entirely on the transition this summer, but it may be too valuable to get his bat in the big leagues and not have to trade for an outfielder or hope Peguero, Saunders or Mike Wilson flips the switch.
That is what winning does -- it changes your priorities.
about-ackley\'s-call-up
Comments
The following 68 comment(s) for this article are shown below:
| 1. By: FWBrodie on 05-30-2011 17:56:20 What are your thoughts on Kennedy as a LF? |
| 2. By: FWBrodie on 05-30-2011 17:59:15 Bonus question: how would you weigh the importance of not rocking a young player's boat by switching his position vs. getting the most likely best aggregate defensive production (Ackley at 2nd/Kennedy at 3rd and vise versa)? Is Ackley above such an idea? |
| 3. By: FWBrodie on 05-30-2011 17:59:56 Damnit, and by "3rd" I meant LF. |
| 4. By: John_S on 05-30-2011 18:12:37 Jason, Do you think the progression of Triunfel playing D at short could play any part of this? Triunfel - SS Franklin - 2B Ackley - LF Rendon - 3B With Smoak,you could conceivably have all positions set for years except CF,RF and C. |
| 5. By: Jason A. Churchill on 05-30-2011 18:14:37 FW, Why do that with Kennedy? What's the upside? The downside is that he's played all of seven innings in the outfield in his entire career -- one total frame in left and none since 2009. I'm not saying he can't do it, but that's asking an awful lot of a 35-year-old, 12-year veteran. Just play Ackley out there and leave Kennedy alone at second. |
| 6. By: Jason A. Churchill on 05-30-2011 18:18:01 John_S, No matter what the M's and a few scouts tell me, there are other scouts and an inordinate number of routine mistakes that strongly suggest Triunfel cannot play shortstop. It's not range, arm strength or even footwork, it's the fundamentals such as hands, errant throws and rushing plays. So I'd say no. I'm a big proponent of moving players the moment I am convinced they can't play their current position and especially when they would be blocked in the current org. Franklin would be ahead of Triunfel at short, and while there is no current surefire 3B answer, Rendon could change that. So I'd have moved Triunfel to the outfield last winter. It's not a move I'd make mid-season, however, but some time there during instructs or fall ball would probably be smart. |
| 7. By: FWBrodie on 05-30-2011 18:20:57 The upside is that Kennedy is 35, a veteran, and on a one year deal while Ackley is a kid in the fragile stage of his career. At least in theory. I'm just thinking that staying the course with Ackley for now could be the safest move just for the sake keeping as much consistency in his environment as possible. I guess you kind of answered my question. |
| 8. By: Jason A. Churchill on 05-30-2011 18:28:22 We already know Ackley can play the outfield. He's done that. If you leave Ackley at second and move Kennedy to left, you weaken BOTH positions defensively versus what it could be if it were flipped. At second, Kennedy>Ackley. In left, Ackley>Kennedy. |
| 9. By: FWBrodie on 05-30-2011 18:33:48 I see that logic, and did from the beginning. I was concerned with the potential blow to Ackley's psyche caused by a position switch, but it seems like you are not, Jason. Which is good to know. |
| 10. By: Jason A. Churchill on 05-30-2011 18:37:40 I think he could go hitless for a whole season and still have the right approach to his next plate appearance. |
| 11. By: TheDudeAbides on 05-30-2011 19:05:08 There is NO WAY Kennedy plays left at Safeco. People may not realize, but playing left field at Safeco is tougher than many parks. Especially with all the day games coming up, the sun and shadows can play havoc on even a good left fielder. With the changes in the club over the past two weeks, becoming a contender in the thick of the AL West race as well as the emergence of Kennedy playing good second base, the Mariners priorities have changed. You can ill-afford to receive no production from left field. The way I see it you have three options: 1. Bring up Ackley to play second and shift Kennedy to third. Then you would have to go out and trade for Seth Smith, Denorfia (I like him as a defender and a pretty good bat), Nix, or Kubel. Of course with this, you could also move Figgins to left and still have him play third while he works out his mental problems. 2. Bring up Ackley and immediately put him in left field. As JC said, he is a good athlete with an arm that only stands to be the problem. Although his arm strength is below average, he is still rather accurate. In this situation Figgins stays at third or you go out and try to get Jeff Baker from the Cubs, who plays second, third, and left. However, his defense is suspect, but he would be a welcome addition as he mashes lefties. 3. Bring up Ackley to play second, period. Keep Figgy at third and give Kennedy some time there if Figgens continues his struggles. Jack Wilson could even see time at third, as he was taking grounders at third and the transition would be an easy one. In this situation you simply see if you can buy yourself some time before you figure out what your need is truly going to be. I favor getting someone like Denorfia right away. He is used to playing in a big park, plays for the Padres whom the Mariners have a good relationship with, and it would not take any big prospects to land the right-hander. I know many do not know much about Denorfia, but he plays average defense, hits lefties well, and could give us some production from Left Field. In this case you send Wilson down and keep Saunders around for a couple more weeks to play center while Gutierrez is getting his strength back. This allows you to mainly play Ackley at second, but also give him some time in left and not rush him out there. I am sure Jack will make a decision shortly, as we can ill-afford to wait another 6 weeks without making a change in left field. As the Giants did for the last 2-3 years with Nate Schierholtz, Saunders may very well turn into a defensive replacement in the late innings. Both actually have similar histories, as Schierholtz was a high upside, tall, athletic lefty drafted In the 2nd round a year before Saunders. He is finally beginning to hit for the Giants, and if Saunders could turn into Nate of the past for the M's this year, it would be welcomed. If Saunders could produce a bit versus righties and be a defensive replacement when needed, it would be a shot in the arm. A shout out to all who have served our Country and allow us to watch this great game, you are on our minds everyday and I believe speaking for all of us, we do not take your service and sacrifice lightly. |
| 12. By: rth1986 on 05-30-2011 19:11:04 I'd prefer keeping Ackley at 2B. He has way more value at that position with his bat. If he can play average defense at 2B, he'll be one of the best overall second basemen. If you move him to LF, his overall package is merely good or slightly above-average. Right now, I'd like to see the Mariners to send down both Peguero and Saunders to Tacoma. Saunders is completely lost at the plate and Peguero is needs a year in AAA. I'd call up Carp and give him a look in LF, even if it sacrifices the defense. The defense in LF has already been miserable this year, and at least we'd have an average bat. I don't like the Cuddyer idea. He's really poor defensively and his bat wouldn't play that well in Safeco. Would rather the M's target a versatile OF who can platoon in LF and cover for Gutierrez in CF, like Angel Pagan. Jason, is there anything the M's can do with Figgins? Would he accept a reserve role (ala McLemore)? Would anyone take his contract at this point? |
| 13. By: ghill3406 on 05-30-2011 19:15:02 Jason- What do you know about Jandy Sena the M's 23rd rnd pick last year? I see he's at AA already and has a 0.00 era. |
| 14. By: Jon O on 05-30-2011 19:41:47 JAC - any chance the potential shift for Ackley to LF is related to how high the organization views Kyle Seager as a 2B? He seems like a solid, gap power, accountable 2B with a potentially similar career to Adam Kennedy. |
| 15. By: Jason A. Churchill on 05-30-2011 19:43:21 rth, No and no on Figgins. Sit him some is my next move, but not everyday. ghill, Not a lot on Sena, but he's getting ground balls with a sinking fastball. Big kid, 250+ pounds and gets downhill plane. The club hoped to pull more velocity out, but he's still 89-92. Will ask about him. May try and call Pedro tomorrow and finally get an update on Valdivia, ask about Robles, Sena, Franklin... |
| 16. By: Jason A. Churchill on 05-30-2011 19:44:17 Jon O, No, because moving Ackley may or may not be permanent -- I'd imagine it would not be at this stage -- and more about putting a better 25-man roster together for this year. |
| 17. By: baseballman on 05-30-2011 20:01:17 I can see why this is being discussed. It makes so much sense for 2011 to put Ackley in LF right now with us getting no production there and the logjam that is our INF. BUT taking 2011 out of the equation and thinking about the future, 2012 and beyond, Ackley has too much value at 2B to be put in the OF. His bat (marginal defense and all) is just too valuable for us to be played anywhere but 2B. And thus we have a dilemma. Do we play Ackley for the rest of 2011 in LF and lose all those valuable innings he should be playing at 2B for the future, or do we just keep him where they've been trying to put him at 2B? JAC, if Ackley does in fact get put in LF full time for 2011, will the Mariners abandon him at 2B for good? I would have to think it would be difficult for him to even be marginal defensively in the INF 2012 and beyond is he has to play over 100 major league games in the OF. |
| 18. By: Jason A. Churchill on 05-30-2011 20:07:36 I wouldn't think so, baseballman. And I don't think he'd have issues getting back at it at second after the season -- or when the club falls out of contention if he spends significant time in left. |
| 19. By: baseballman on 05-30-2011 20:13:54 Thanks for the reassurance. |
| 20. By: ndcohn on 05-30-2011 20:20:13 I agree that if we're building the line-up to maximize our short-term chances that Ackley at LF and Kennedy at 2B is the best combination of existing options. However, if we're trying to compete this year, I'd rather see a trade for a better option in LF, and I'm generally hesitant to move Ackley off of 2B. The Mariners have made an investment in moving Ackley to 2B. So long as they remain committed to that long-term objective, I would rather them find an alternate solution in the outfield. A compromise might be to move Kennedy to LF. He's obviously not experienced in the outfield, but to my eye, he seems athletic enough to do at least as well as Pegeuro. |
| 21. By: sexymarinersfan on 05-30-2011 21:13:13 I do not agree nor do I even remotely like the idea of moving Adam Kennedy, a career middle infielder to a position that he's not familiar with. If anything you leave what ain't broke alone! What I do like however is that Dustin is being considered for the LF position, UNTIL a suitable replacement is found. I don't think he should be playing multiple positions his first year in the bigs. If you're gonna move him to the OF in the bigs, then leave him there for the year. Ultimately he needs to be moved back to the 2nd base position at the beginning of 2012. A trade for some lineup help shouldn't be completely ruled out. This team needs an offensive infusion in the worst way possible. I'm not talking about sacrificing the farm. I'm talking about adding a piece here or there that makes sense. Right now the entire AL is practically in the running for the playoffs excluding some teams in the Central. I say bring up Ackley when the time is right and send down Saunders to AAA. Use him as a LF, keep Kennedy at 2nd and platoon Figgins and Rodriguez at 3rd for NOW. 1.RF-Ichiro 2.SS-Ryan 3.1B-Smoak 4.DH-Cust 5.CF-Gutierrez 6.2B-Kennedy 7.C-Olivo 8.3B-Figgins/Rodriguez 9.LF-Ackley But that's just me. |
| 22. By: TheDudeAbides on 05-30-2011 22:06:05 ghill, Per the Jany Sena question, he is a Military Institute kid and almost 22 years old. Like JAC said he is big and they want to work with him on a couple issues and JXN needed a little relief help so they brought him up. He is very raw, but evidently has some pretty decent upside if he can fix a few flaws and get his speed up along with developing a third pitch. Just what I heard. sexymarinersfan, Yes, there is no way Kennedy gets moved to left field. Ideally you could land a rather inexpensive left fielder from San Diego (Denorfia) or one of Colorado's guys (Smith or Spils) on the cheap. However, the front office has the money and the go-ahead to spend it this year and next. So we could see Jack come up with something pretty interesting and get a better option who we could have around 2-3 years. But the clock is ticking and we need something fast. I like Denorfia or even talk to Boston about Reddick, whom I covet. They could use some bullpen help in the worst way. But Reddick will not come cheap, though you have him for 6 years, and he is a stud. |
| 23. By: sexymarinersfan on 05-30-2011 22:46:38 Agreed. Denorfia would be nice. It'll be interesting to see what happens in the upcoming weeks. Nice shout out to the troops btw. I lost my baby brother in Afghanistan two years ago and went to a memorial service held today in Seattle for fellow fallen soldiers. I'm so proud of them all. I also have a baby sister who has now decided to join. She deploys to Afghanistan as well next May as an ER nurse. Our prayers are with them... God Bless America. |
| 24. By: Marlin Man on 05-30-2011 23:24:45 Sexymarinersfan-- sorry your loss From an old Viet Nam Vet: All gave some and some gave all God Bless America- M.M. |
| 25. By: zeuswsu on 05-31-2011 01:40:58 Long time reader first time poster....A couple of points. 1. Moving Ackley to left field is something I never really thought of after all his time at 2nd in Tacoma. Definitely makes sense if we are going to compete this year and no better options are available. Thanks for continuing your thought provoking posts Jason, I promise I will subscribe once my financial situation is looking a little better. 2. But.....I agree with everyone who is saying trading for a left fielder would be the best option. Maybe it's because I don't know much about baseball or something, but it seems keeping Ackley at 2nd for the entire year would be good for our future...maybe I'm just so far gone of thinking of what MLB team do when they are actually trying to compete for wins or something. Seems like you would want to keep someone where you think they would be most useful long term. 3. In the spirit of Memorial day- If you haven't watched the documentary Restrepo, I definitely recommend watching it. A friend who served in Afghanistan recommended that I watch it and said it's similar to what he went through over there. Gives you a real respect for what the current war veterans have gone through. I don't want to give anything away...definitely worth a watch especially if you can watch it for free on Netflix. Sorry if this post is too long, thanks for reading! |
| 26. By: StandinPat on 05-31-2011 11:30:21 I don't agree with the sentiment that putting Ackley in LF for the rest of the year somehow destroys his chances of being a 2B long-term. It's just over half a season, and nothing says he can't take early infield. If his defense is already slightly below average, his bat should be good enough to make him stick there. Our opening day starters the past couple of years have been Lopez, Figgins and Wilson, he couldn't be much worse than that. I hadn't thought of moving him to LF for the short-term before, but I agree it prob makes the most sense if the M's want a free upgrade to try and better gauge their role in this division race. Calling up Ackley at 2B was already gonna be an upgrade, but putting him in LF for the time being allows you to keep Kennedy's bat, currently the M's second best, in the lineup and greatly improves your D and O outta LF. |
| 27. By: rjfrik on 05-31-2011 11:48:14 Why not put Kennedy at 3b, keep Ackley at 2b and throw Chone Figgins in LF. He's played the OF before and would be an upgrade over the LF situation right now. That way Ackley can stay at 2b and you don't lose Kennedy's bat. |
| 28. By: Edman on 05-31-2011 12:05:39 One of the purposes would be to get Figgins' bat out of the everyday lineup. Ackley is most likely the better defensive outfielder, since many talked about him as a potential CFer pre-draft. Why weaken yourself defensively, just to get Ackley to play additional games at secondbase? It's not like putting him in a more natural position like LF is going to destroy everything that has been done. He could rotate in to play secondbase as needed. If that's a major concern, then leave him in Tacoma until September and go find help in LF and at 3B. If the result is just to shift bodies around, then nothing is gained. My preference would be to make Figgins and his sunk cost a utility player, and find an offensive upgrade for LF that won't break the bank. Move Peguero and Saunders back to Tacoma. Carlos swings at more bad pitches than is acceptable. As I predicted, Kennedy's bat is too valable to a struggling offense. His bat needs to be in the lineup against righthanded pitchers. Nothing gets solved without finding a useful outfielder to put in LF. And, unfortunately, there are none available in the M's minor league system. |
| 29. By: eknpdx on 05-31-2011 12:39:46 The Marlins did the same thing with Chris Coghlan, and he never played the OF in college. Moves like the one JAC suggested happens all the time. We are lucky in this instance that Ackley actually has experience in the OF, and also at 1B. Jason, under the scenario where Ackley mans LF, if Halman proves healthy in the short future, is he an option to be the 4th OF, allwoing the club to send down Wilson, Peguero and Saunders? |
| 30. By: baseballman on 05-31-2011 12:43:38 Edman, why would you leave your possibly best bat in Tacoma where he won't help your major league team? Ackley does no good for anyone in Tacoma, he needs to be in Seattle. I don't know how weak you think Ackley is defensively at 2B, but his bat more than makes up for any defensive deficiencies. I'm not necessarily opposed to Ackley moving to LF for this year only, as long as he is put at 2B in 2012 and beyond. Because if they decide to permanently keep him the OF, we should all be angry because he should have been called up a lot sooner. |
| 31. By: gwangung on 05-31-2011 12:53:20 "I don't know how weak you think Ackley is defensively at 2B, but his bat more than makes up for any defensive deficiencies." Um, you know this how? These are the things that can be roughly quantified now....And it's entirely in the realm of possibility (though not probability) that Ackley's bat does not make up for his defensive liabilities. |
| 32. By: Edman on 05-31-2011 13:29:34 Having visited the USSM and read several of the comments to Dave's near insistance that Kennedy must be moved to LF, and that Ackley will somehow be set back by playing a position he's already familiar with, I find narrow minded. Really, three months of Ackley in LF is going to break him? Is he that fragile an athlete? I certainly hope not, being a second overall pick. Seems to me, they could send him back to the AFL or give him some time at second in the winter leagues, if they were that concerned. And even more short-sighted is that because Kennedy is 35, that he's the sccepted choice to move. Really, you want one of the few guys who is hitting the ball, to be in an uncomfortable position? |
| 33. By: Edman on 05-31-2011 13:35:06 baseball man, my point was not that Ackley isn't ready to be a major league hitter, it was that the paranoia about him moving to the outfield is essentially unfounded. The find the idea that keeping him at secondbase is somehow more important than getting him into the lineup, even if it's in the outfield. It was a sarcastic approach to a flawed contention that service time at secondbase is so damn important. It's not like he's never played the outfield before. |
| 34. By: Edman on 05-31-2011 13:36:02 Excuse the typonese.....I still need more coffee. |
| 35. By: baseballman on 05-31-2011 13:43:33 '"I don't know how weak you think Ackley is defensively at 2B, but his bat more than makes up for any defensive deficiencies." Um, you know this how? These are the things that can be roughly quantified now....And it's entirely in the realm of possibility (though not probability) that Ackley's bat does not make up for his defensive liabilities." The word I should have put in there was "should" "his bat SHOULD make up for any defensive deficiencies." I stand by that. If his bat is at the level that has been talked about, then yes it does. I've seen several games of Ackley in Tacoma at 2B and he's where near a liability. Is he great? No, can he be average? I believe so. I don't know if you've seen him in person or just read about him...he's a good baseball players getting better at a new position. |
| 36. By: Jason A. Churchill on 05-31-2011 14:44:21 I love how Geoff Baker comes to the conclusion that Ackley won't play left field in Seattle because Jack said he's the 2B of the future. Love it. |
| 37. By: Edman on 05-31-2011 14:50:37 LOL.....evidently, Geoff Baker's future only starts from today. It couldn't start say in 2012 or beyond? Nah, that's decades away. |
| 38. By: Jason A. Churchill on 05-31-2011 14:56:53 I'm not even saying -- and never did -- that Ackley was going to play left for Seattle in 2011, or ever... But that was some kind of assumption! |
| 39. By: subterranean on 05-31-2011 15:19:41 So let me summarize, Edman - We don't want to move Kennedy to the outfield because he might be uncomfortable (he must be fragile), but we shouldn't expect Ackley to be uncomfortable being moved around the diamond (because he's the second overall pick)? I get that Ackley has played outfield before, but I don't think we should apply these double standards here. We have seen a number of players moved off their natural positions (Figgins, Lopez, Wilson) to know that in some cases the player adjusts well and in some cases not. I wouldn't presume that every player can be Zobrist. Couldn't I also assume that a wily old vet like Kennedy should be more able to shift positions and not have it impact his 'comfort'? I think what is really at issue is the short versus long term perspective - how much do we react to the current record? Do we take a player development detour to get Ackley into left field and if we do can we really be so sure he doesn't stay there? Based on the Morrow handling, I think there is some precedent for concern in terms of the impact juggling a players role and position can have on their development as well as the difficulty in moving a player back to a desired position once they have had success in some other one. |
| 40. By: sexymarinersfan on 05-31-2011 15:43:49 Albert Pujols didn't mind coming in at 3rd base, then LF, before settling down once McGwire was gone. I believe switching a pitcher from starter to closer is a lot more difficult than a position player being moved around the diamond. Especially when the pitcher had previously had pitching injuries in the past. |
| 41. By: PositivePaul on 05-31-2011 15:58:55 I'm a bit behind with this latest round of news/discussion - I saw on Twitter that J was blamed for being 'wrong' about Ackley being called up for playing LF, so I had to figure out the scoop. Seriously, I can't believe the illiteracy amongst the M's fans. "The M's might consider calling up Ackley to play LF, and maybe it's not the worst idea in the world" DOES NOT EQUAL "The M's ARE CALLING UP ACKLEY TO PLAY LF!!!" Sheesh... If I had to pick sides between Jason (Ackley to LF, keep Kennedy at 2B) & Dave (move Kennedy to LF and call up Ackley for 2B), I'm definitely siding with Jason. Being 'athletic' does NOT mean you can make the reads you need to make to play the outfield. Can it help to make up for making a bad read? Sure, if you run like pre-Yuni Endy Chavez. Carlos Peguero is a reasonably decent athletic player -- he just sucks at reading the baseball. Having spent next to Zero time in the OF, I'd wager Kennedy would probably make Mike Morse-esque reads and routes to the ball. While he's 'athletic' he's nowhere near athletic enough to make up for that. Ackley is. Ackley also likely still has an OFer's instincts. And, really, you can't convince me that giving Ackley a few months in the OF with Seattle (if even that long) will do serious long-term harm with him playing 2B. He'd have potentially AFL/Winter League games and all of Spring Training to re-acclimate himself. He's never going to be even above-average at 2B, so it wouldn't take him too long to re-adjust to the 'barely passable' defense that he might play there today. I don't have time right now, but I could make a pretty strong case that moving Ackley to LF permanently might be a huge boon to the Mariners, both in the short-term and in the long term. So, yeah, I expect to be thrashed for that thought. Have at it! |
| 42. By: dawgncarolina on 05-31-2011 16:21:14 "Seriously, I can't believe the illiteracy amongst the M's fans." Welcome to the internetz. Reading comprehension is hardly a prereq. |
| 43. By: short on 05-31-2011 16:25:31 I would not mind seeing Ackley moved to left field permanently. A quick look at the OPS put up by major league teams' left fielders puts an average LF at about .750 OPS. I wouldn't be surprised if Ackley could do that this season, with an OBP of .350-.380 and an SLG of .375-.400. (This would be a big improvement for the M's whose LF's have put up a .625 OPS). In a few years he could probably push into the upper .800s. I would look at a permanent move because switching him now would hinder his shot at moving back to second base in the future. To do that would probably take an offseason or more time in the minors. Once Ackley is established at the major league level, asking him to do either could be problematic. But if Ackley's contribution defensively at second base is likely to only be average, but he would be a plus defender in left, he could contribute just as much out there. Even with the drop down the defensive spectrum, the defense could make up the difference. |
| 44. By: Edman on 05-31-2011 16:30:49 No, subterranean, you didn't summarize anything at all. You assumed that based on your opinion, how my perceptions must be. Screw the double-standards issue. He's not a woman seeking equal rights. Kennedy has spent nearly all his career on the infield. His instincts are based on those experiences. To put him in the outfield now would be a mistake, IMHO. Yes, Ackley has the most recent experience and should be the more logical choice. And please, don't try to compare this to Morrow, that's just silly. So because of what happened with Morrow, the team should be afraid to make any changes? Really? They aren't even relatable. Long-term harm from playing a position he's played before for at the most four months? You seriously believe that? Ackley's a premiere baseball player. If he wasn't, then they wouldn't have switched him to secondbase at all. Perspective you say? The M's should pack in this season and only worry about Ackley's personal player development? He shouldn't be expected to fill a need? Just how stupid do you think he is, that he's lose valuable time if he's asked to shift to LF? If he can't adjust quickly to a return to secondbase, after this season, then he should be moved to the outfield full-time. Dave is flat out wrong, IMO....Kennedy moving to the outfield could be disasterous to the team. You'd be moving him to keep his bat in the lineup, while forcing him to adjust to a new position. Don't you think that might affect his hitting? |
| 45. By: subterranean on 05-31-2011 16:31:36 In my mind it's a little more of a toss up right now which configuration gets the team the most benefit. At least Ackley has experience in LF. However, it seems in part that we are assuming that Kennedy is going to continue to hit the way he has when his iso is a career high and his wOBA is close to it. If he regresses, does that change the calculus? |
| 46. By: Edman on 05-31-2011 16:35:42 Even if he dropped to his career norms, he'd be an offensive upgrade over many others. Until he regresses, assume he won't. You're definitely seeing the half-empty side of the glass. |
| 47. By: dawgncarolina on 05-31-2011 16:38:35 "Dave is flat out wrong, IMO....Kennedy moving to the outfield could be disasterous to the team. You'd be moving him to keep his bat in the lineup, while forcing him to adjust to a new position. Don't you think that might affect his hitting?" This same logic could be applied to Ackley. I understand your perspective that Ackley's played OF more recently, but that's not any better or worse logic than the point that your already asking Ackley to adjust to big league pitching and now you want him to change positions too. If I have to vote I'm keeping Ackley at second just because I want to see him succeed at second, but I don't have a major dog in the fight. If they move Ackley to left I'll be fine with it. Anyone claiming that someone else is flat out wrong is getting a little carried away, in my opinion. Truth is, it's all hypothetical. None of us know how Kennedy or Ackley would respond. |
| 48. By: Jason A. Churchill on 05-31-2011 16:57:00 FTR, I don't think moving Kennedy to left is stupid, I just don't think it makes as much sense as moving Ackley there until the M's either fall out of contention or win the World Series. He'd provide plus range while second base would remain Kennedy-Wilson, a better defensive duo. It also allows Ackley to play everyday without the concern of how to get Wilson and Kennedy in the lineup. |
| 49. By: sexymarinersfan on 05-31-2011 17:03:28 Outfield is not that hard to play or even adjust to for that matter, especially if it was your recent regular position. I've been playing outfield for over 20 years, baseball and softball combined. There's not a whole lot to it. I'm sure there's a lot more to it than what I know, but he played there and 1st base extensively his entire collegiate career. Ackley could easily handle himself in the confines of LF in Safeco. I think everyone hear knows that. Jack Z however has said that Dustin is still our 2nd baseman of the future. |
| 50. By: short on 05-31-2011 17:31:01 I strongly disagree, sexy. Having played OF in softball myself, there is a really big difference even between playing vs. co-ed league weenies and the competitive league players in terms of how hard they hit the ball. While I was always fine handling the high pops, those blazing liners were a different matter. In MLB the ball is probably going another 50mph faster. Watching Guti play out there vs. even a decent outfielder like Saunders demonstrates amply (to me) that talent makes a big difference. I hate watching stiffs play outfield. Drives me nuts. Give me the athletic guys who can run down anything. |
| 51. By: Edman on 05-31-2011 17:39:35 short, in an ideal world you could have three of those guys. The reality is that most teams have to fit in an offensive option somewhere, and typically it's the outfield, and LF in general. Seattle is lucky to have Guti and Ichiro, defensively. But, I'd be all for replacing Saunders' lack of offense with a real bat, even if he's not the best defender. |
| 52. By: Jason A. Churchill on 05-31-2011 17:40:16 Ackley would have no issues playing left field at Safeco. Might he need a few weeks to get used to the ballpark and it's intricacies? Sure. But he'll be average or better out there from day 1. He tracks well, takes good routes -- he could play center from day 1, despite lacking the arm strength to profile well there. |
| 53. By: sexymarinersfan on 05-31-2011 17:51:23 I actually agree with Jason for a change. HA! |
| 54. By: short on 05-31-2011 17:54:12 If we didn't have Guti, center field would be a nice fit. It's next to second base on the defensive spectrum and his bat would play great there. Edman's point is a good and and I'm sure that's why the team wants to get Dustin Ackley-mated to second base. But without having that power bat in left field, it doesn't make much difference. Right now we're a better team with Ackley there. |
| 55. By: dewey on 05-31-2011 19:52:59 Read Keith Law today he said allmost every scout he talked to said Ackley isnt a 2ndbaseman but a few no it alls here no more then the scouts if the shoe fits where it.. |
| 56. By: Blowgun7 on 05-31-2011 19:55:51 Is Taijuan Walker becoming our #1 prospect? |
| 57. By: Edman on 05-31-2011 20:24:04 dewey, who cares what "almost" every scout said? What if he asked three, and two didn't agree? The only scouts who matter are the ones in Seattle's system who monitor his day-to-day progress. And so what if he isn't? He goes to leftfield. Oh God no, not the horror of that. |
| 58. By: 11records on 05-31-2011 20:35:51 R.E. 56... Seriously. He's faced one over the minimum tonight thru 7 2/3. 3 hits. One was caught stealing. Another was erased with a DP. One of the singles was a bunt... And a ton of groundouts. Wow. Both he and Paxton have been impressive in Clinton. But Paxton is 22. Walker turned 19 this month. |
| 59. By: baseballman on 05-31-2011 21:33:51 Hey dewey you watch more and read less. Try getting your own opinion. Some of us actually watch Ackley and don't rely on what others "write" to base our opinions... |
| 60. By: dewey on 05-31-2011 21:49:42 Exactly the point they our paid and we arent.By trhe way ive seen 11 games at Cheney this year and i agree with the scouts sorry. Baseballman you and Ed should try getting out there also instead of just watching the TV .I will be glad to see him in LF if it makes us better in Seattle. |
| 61. By: baseballman on 05-31-2011 22:33:52 I do go to Cheney to see Ackley play dewey, unlike you I don't rely on what others write to form my opinion of a player. |
| 62. By: rjfrik on 05-31-2011 22:37:28 Uh oh. Is that Edman and baseballman teaming up on another PI poster? Yep! |
| 63. By: StandinPat on 05-31-2011 22:49:59 So after a year at 2B, some scouts think Ackley won't stick at 2B and some think he will. Sounds definitive to me, must mean he's a bust. |
| 64. By: dewey on 05-31-2011 22:59:46 Pat who said he was a bust? Maybe he isnt built for 2nd that doesnt meen he wont hit and be a good player.Im hoping he becomes a allstar myself but i guess if you disagree with a couple of know it alls on this site you might get cained ..oops my bad..Baseballman do you not read ive been to 11 games there fella so read before you speek out of that blow hole you call a mouth! |
| 65. By: baseballman on 05-31-2011 23:03:52 RE 62: huh? |
| 66. By: sexymarinersfan on 06-01-2011 00:42:21 Nick Franklin's skill set might be a better transition to 2nd base eventually in the future. Kyle Seager looks like a utility INF, and could help the club down the road. This club will find out whether or not that Ackley is the man for the job. He's gonna have his bumps and bruises, and eventually at some point the M's are going to have to evaluate him and find out if his defense is going to hinder the ball club. Franklin and Seager could potentially be up here after another year or two, maybe three. |
| 67. By: Edman on 06-01-2011 01:32:44 Evidently, baseballman, we aren't suppose to challenge other posters who make outlandish statements. |
| 68. By: Mackie on 06-01-2011 10:51:58 Use Ackley in LF now, but look at him at the 2B of the future. It seems that, at least for now, this year is not only about building for the future and auditioning young players so the organization can see what it has and doesn't have, but it has also become about contending. So it seems the logical thing to do would be to call up Ackley and use him in whatever way it makes the team better. If that means using him mostly in LF and giving him some innings at 2B now and then for the rest of this season to keep him fresh at that position, great. Then it would seem they'd have more options for next season. They could move forward in 2012 with Ackley as their second baseman and find someone with a good bat to play LF, or they could use Ackley in LF and find someone who would be a better second baseman to play there. It is an evolving script; I don't think they ought to approach everything in a black-or-white way. If they can make the team better now while keeping options open for the future, that sounds like a great way to go. |
Haven't created a Prospect Insider account yet? Sign up!
|
|
 |
|
|
| Copyright 2010 Prospect Insider | Created by AQ Central Prospect Insider is optimized for Mozilla Firefox and Google Chrome |