Prospect Insider - Chone Figgins future

Chone Figgins future

By Chris Crawford

By 11-02-2010

One of the first moves made last off-season by the Seattle Mariners was to sign Chone Figgins to a four-year, $36 million contract with a vesting option for 2014. Figgins, on the wrong side of 30, was coming off arguably the
best year of his career with outstanding defense at third-base and plus on-base skills leading to a WAR above six. The M's thought Figgins would solidify the top of the order and provide a defensive upgrade at second-base over Jose Lopez.

We all know how well that worked out.

And so, one of the question this off-season is whether or not Figgins will be a part of the plans for the future. In order to answer that, the first thing we have to explore is what kind of value Figgins provides. It was pretty easily the switch-hitter's worst year, as he posted career lows in on-base percentage, slugging, batting average and in every defensive metric. His walk percentage dipped from 13.9 percent to 10.5 percent, and Figgins had the highest ground-ball and lowest line-drive percentages of his careers (20.3 and 46.9, respectively).

When you're walk rates are down three percent -- and you're putting the ball on the ground nearly half the time -- it generally leads to failure. In the field, Figgins not only didn't provide an upgrade over Lopez, he didn't provide an upgrade over anyone at the keystone other than Skip Schumaker, who is spending his first season at the position in his entire life.

With all of the negatives concerning Figgins in 2010, there are some reasons to believe that the 32 year old has some value. One of Figgins' biggest assets is his speed, and despite getting on base nearly 100 times fewer than 2009 he was still able to steal 42 bags, despite being caught 15 times. A smart general manager will see that Figgins was much more effective as a left-hand hitter, hitting .286 with a .364 OBP and slugging nearly 60 points higher hitting as a southpaw (.344 to .286) -- which is typical to Figgins' career norms. In the field, those same smart GM's will point to the outstanding UZR's that Figgins accumulated playing third base the last two seasons for the Angels, and the versatility that the Georgia native provides with the ability to play three outfield positions with average success rates.

What this all adds up to is a player who isn't as bad as he was in 2010, but certainly not as good as he was in 2009. Figgins is a player who's been worth two to three wins per year, and in reality, the Mariners aren't paying him much more than what his current performance calls for. The issue is going to become about whether the skills are starting to evaporate now, what is going to happen in years three, four and possibly five? It's very reasonable to assume that Figgins will rebound from last season, but it's also possible that three or four of the five years will be the train wrecks that was the 2010 season.

If the M's do decide to try and move Figgins, don't expect a lot of money to go with him to wherever he lands. Seattle knows that Figgins still has value, and they're not going to treat him like a Carlos Silva sunken cost. On the other hand, there's no reason to expect a middle of the order bat, or top five prospects for Figgins either. A player of his age with zero power and coming off the worst season of his career isn't going to be worth all that much.

Knowing that, here's a few teams and scenarios that might make sense if the M's go forward with shopping Figgins.

Note: All of this is purely speculative. There is little to zero evidence that any of this could happen.

Atlanta
This was the hot rumor around the deadline, and it still makes sense. There is no guarantee that Chipper Jones will return next year after having knee surgery, and the defensive struggles of Brooks Conrad and Omar Infante towards the end of the season have not endeared them to the Atlanta front-office. Infante, however, is likely to have his option picked up.

Figgins may make more sense in the National League, being capable of playing multiple positions and creating runs with his speed. The Kenshin Kawakami for Figgins thrown out there last summer doesn't have any actual substance to it yet, but taking a closer look it does make sense. Because the Braves have so many utility infielders already this isn't the most likely landing spot, but it's one to keep an eye on, especially when it comes to Jones' status.

San Francisco
This is probably the most interesting team that could go after Figgins. Both Edgar Renteria and Juan Uribe are free agents -- and Renteria has hinted at retirement -- so the Giants have a pretty clear need on the infield next season.

Keep this in mind, though -- there were reports that the Mariners asked for Pablo Sandoval for either Brandon League or David Aardsma last July. Might Aardsma and Figgins be worth Sandoval and a reliever or prospect back? Torres and Figgins at the top of the Giants line-up might look pretty appetizing to Brian Sabean, and if the club re-ups with first baseman Aubrey Huff, Sandoval could be left for the bench in the Bay.

Toronto
Edwin Encarnacion is due to make well over $5 million next season, which means the Jays will say goodbye, and there is speculation that the the Blue Jays want to move Aaron hill to third base next season and perhaps pursue Orlando Hudson to play second. But there may be an opening , and with the Jay's struggles to both get on base and steal bases -- Figgins might be a perfect fit. The Blue Jays don't have too many bad contracts outside of the ghastly Vernon Wells deal, but they do have a plethora of back end arms, and a system that is improving. If I'm Jack Zduriencik, this is one of the first places I'm calling.

Los Angeles (NL)
The Dodgers have needed someone to play second-base seemingly since Steve Sax (say that five times fast), and the incumbent starter --Ryan Theriot -- is due for a raise on his $3.5 million salary from 2010. The McCourt divorce has some believing that Los Angeles won't be big spenders, but they just gave Ted Lilly $33 million and have close to $50 million dollars of contracts coming off the books (i.e. Manny Ramirez, Hiroki Kuroda, Vicente Padilla). Maybe a prospect like Trayvon Robinson would be available in this type of deal.

There are some other teams that could become interested as well. Boston, if Adrian Beltre does decide to leave? Colorado if Ian Stewart is moved to first base? Maybe the Angels want Chone back to help wash out the taste of Brandon Wood? There will be options if Zduriencik decided to make a move.

Moving Figgins and a decent portion of his contract gives Zduriencik more payroll flexibility to go after pitching and offensive production, but if it doesn't happen, Ichiro and Figgins will again line up at 1-2 in the batting order. Maybe this time the middle of the lineup will provide more punch and take some of the pressure off the two leadoff men.

Down the road, Figgins may turn into a very pricey utility player who fills in at third, second, left field and center field. But for the time being, it's difficult to imagine him in any other role than starting infielder in Seattle.

Unless one of the aforementioned clubs bite.

chone-figgins-future

Comments
The following 19 comment(s) for this article are shown below:

1. By: PositivePaul on 11-03-2010 02:08:43
Amazing to me was the amount of crap I took in Spring Training on 'other' sites for commenting about my serious concern that while all the attention was being heaped on Lopez for the transition to 3B and how worried people were about him being able to play there, I was mocked as 'ridiculous' to think that Figgins' transition to 2B was something to also be concerned about. Hate to tell them "I told you so" but, well, I TOLD YOU SO!!! Figgins was terrible defensively at 2B. For a guy whose offensive numbers took a massive hit and -- save for a late-season hot streak -- were pretty deplorable overall, he was very frustrating to watch struggle defensively as well.

Having said that -- I totally agree. He's not nearly as bad as he showed himself in 2010, but not as good as he was in 2009. He should bounce back overall - especially if he's moved back to 3B. Even though I'm clearly not the biggest Chone Figgins fan in the world, certainly I wouldn't cry if he's the M's option at 3B in 2011.

Overall, though, if Figgins can bounce back at the plate and return to not killing you at third, then there are bigger problems the M's could have. If trading him is part of the solution, sure. A package with Aardsma might make some sense. What is Boston's option if Beltre doesn't stay there? And if both Lopez and Figgins are gone, who plays 3B in Seattle? Trading him would have to overcome having to fill yet another hole in the lineup.

The M's biggest problems, really, aren't in the top of their lineup. Figgins can help by not repeating his 2010. Both he & Ichiro were on base almost 500 times combined, even WITH Figgins' offensive struggles. They only scored 136 times, even with a combined 84 stolen bases -- unless they steal home every time on base, they're relying on the hitters behind them to drive them in. In 2010, that was the M's biggest failure across the board.

I mean, WTF -- the M's #5 hitter (conglomerate of players at that lineup spot) SLUGGED less than Willie Bloomquist (and an even MORE woeful-slugging Figgins himself). Not that SLG itself is a good measurement, but when the number at that spot in the order is that low, as 'Gar would say:

"Dat's a Prawblum"

It's no secret that I'm not really a Figgins fan, but even still, the M's could do worse than keep him.

2. By: Jason A. Churchill on 11-03-2010 03:01:39
That's partly because Figgins wasn't transitioning to second base in the slightest -- he had 113 games of experience at the position in the big leagues prior to 2010 and almost 450 games at second in the minor leagues -- not to mention he's played dozens of games at shortstop.

The problem with calling Figgins a terrible defensive second baseman is that there's a sore lack of evidence that it's true. You can say he's not great, that's pretty clear, but to take one year of UZR and live on it won't keep the argument alive until there's two more consecutive years of similar value at the position, at least.

Figgins' biggest disappointment was at the plate, not in the field.

3. By: safecochatter on 11-03-2010 09:34:18
i like the toronto idea also.seems toronto is always listening to offers on their arb players.while the "current" blue jay payroll is about 40 mill under last year's it will take a hit when batista resigns. couple of players i like,marcum at arby 2 and escobar at arby 1. and although escobar didn't have a great year,he is on the right side of 30 and could have a bounce back year.and if he can,he would be good trade bait when franklin is ready. plus a log jam in lf with snider,lind,and lewis. with batista in rf and wells in cf.
making my targets..marcum,escobar,and snider.
actually m's and bj's could get an old fashioned blockbuster going if they wanted to. with lueke or fields being a solid young closer for their pen.

4. By: AntsInIn on 11-03-2010 11:18:01
So if we do move Figgins, who plays 3B? I'm all for moving him, but there doesn't seem to be a decent replacement either in house or on the FA market, and this is a team that needs to hold on to its prospects for the rebuilding ahead.

And please don't say Jose Lopez of Matt Tuiasosopo are options :(

5. By: lewis on 11-03-2010 11:19:49
It seems to me another issue is where this team is going. If it is trying to build on youth for the future, the FO will be weighing how much value Figgins has in the areas described, and his being a 'veteran influence' against his attitude he showed last year and how much they feel that affects the young players of the future. Maybe Wedge has a way of dealing with that and it is a non issue, but if they feel it could be a problem, would it be more value added trading him now verses if problems arise during the season? I guess the best fans can do is just guess on that front?

6. By: Edman on 11-03-2010 11:38:14
There is no trade value for Figgins right now. Seattle would be doing a salary dump and get little in return because teams would use his poor offensive performance to drive down his value, saying he's in decline.

Then, if you do cut him loose, you now have two infield positions to fill, unless you bring back Lopez.

Seattle would be selling low, and I don't that that's something Jack would do. If they were to deal him, why not hold onto him and see if his numbers come back up, and if Ackley is ready at the trading deadline, then you can deal him.

I don't see it happening, but that's just the practical side of me.

7. By: maqman on 11-03-2010 13:58:21
As usual I'm on the same page as edman. He saves me a lot of key strokes.

8. By: littlelinny6 on 11-03-2010 14:10:44
Having Ackley play 2B and Figgins go back to 3B seems the best bet. I always thought Ackley would not be up until mid year 2011 but since there is a chance he's the opening day 2B having Figgins back at 3B seems to make most sense. My question is, assuming Figgins returns and Ackley is on the team, where should they hit in the lineup for maximized run production in your opinion Jason or Chris?

9. By: lewis on 11-03-2010 14:22:07
So, assuming Figgins progress's towards his 2009 output, that would certainly seem to add value to what he showed last year, then I am wondering how he is statistically in the first half of season's? Is he often a slow starter or is it variable or was last year a fluke? Would that factor in to the equation of when to trade, because it feels like over the second half of his contract there is a good chance of digression. Or is that an issue the folks that want to keep him feel is important? I mean...keep him this year are the length of his contract?

10. By: PositivePaul on 11-03-2010 14:40:16
"The problem with calling Figgins a terrible defensive second baseman is that there's a sore lack of evidence that it's true. You can say he's not great, that's pretty clear, but to take one year of UZR and live on it won't keep the argument alive until there's two more consecutive years of similar value at the position, at least.

Figgins' biggest disappointment was at the plate, not in the field."

Splitting hairs, perhaps, but I said Figgins was terrible defensively -- implying in 2010. I know the limitations of one year's worth of UZR, certainly, and I'm not so sure he's a 'terrible' second baseman defensively going forward. My larger point was that while people were assuming moving Figgins to 2nd wouldn't hurt him (and he'd remain overall more of an 'asset' defensively rather than a 'liability' moving over to 2B), I was not so convinced. I was right...

I agree that his biggest disappointment was that (save for the end of the season) he was really really bad at the plate. Combining that with being in the 'liability' column defensively in 2010, and it really makes me question his future value with the team. I didn't like the contract at the time, and don't like it going forward either. But that doesn't mean we should just 'dump' him. Why create bigger holes when you don't have means to fill them? Figgins was a massive disappointment in 2010. There's hope (and some evidence) that he can improve in 2011 and beyond. If you can fill another hole by trading him, sure, but you don't need to trade him just to get rid of him.

11. By: rjfrik on 11-03-2010 15:10:13
The way Ackley is not only hitting the ball, over .415 average in AZ, but getting on base, leads the league in OBP and OPS, the M's will be hard pressed to not have him as your starting 2b come opening day. If he continues this over spring training then that might become a reality. Figgins will just stay at 3rd.

12. By: Jason A. Churchill on 11-03-2010 17:01:15
I don't think there is any chance Figgins plays 2B for Seattle next season.

Ackley is going to be ready sometime in 2011, whether that is in April or in July, so it makes no sense to use Figgins there until Ackley is ready, unless a really good 3B falls into your lap.

13. By: sexymarinersfan on 11-03-2010 17:59:33
I'm all for bringing over Pablo Sandoval. Let him play the hot corner. I did some checking on his defense and found this from a San Francisco fan.

"The UZR statistic, or ultimate zone rating, is the best measurement of defensive productivity. It measures how many runs that one person has saved (or lost) over the course of the year. It factors in all facets of defense, such as their throwing accuracy, amount of errors, and range at their position.

When playing first base Sandoval has a UZR rating of 0.2, which makes him the 12th best defensive first baseman in the league using UZR.

When playing third base Sandoval has a UZR rating of -2.7, which makes him the 14th best defensive third baseman in the league using UZR."

I've heard that he can also play C, 1B, and probably some DH ;-)

Then you go after a guy like Jason Bartlett or Nick Punto to help play some SS/2B.

14. By: skeptical on 11-03-2010 18:46:22
Figgins is excess baggage who thinks he's better than he is. Dumping bedard, branyon, et al is a great move and needs to be followed by Bradley and Figgins, even though it cost. In the long run eating their salaries and cleaning house will be well worth it. Management needs to realize that they have a totally dysfunctional team primarily because of about a dozen dysfunctional players [plus two or three in the FO!!]

15. By: Jason A. Churchill on 11-03-2010 19:16:22
He's a wretched C now, was far below-average three years ago -- the last time he played the position with any regularity. Can't count him even as an occasional option there.

And Punto? Really?

16. By: FelixElRey on 11-03-2010 19:18:56
Being from Indiana, I don't read the Seattle papers with the fluff-type articles about players. Is Figgins a problem in the clubhouse or personality-wise, or is Skeptical's comment just born out of frustration at his performance/demeanor on the field? I know he had a run-in with Wak, but sometimes stuff like that happens with a frustrated team.

17. By: sexymarinersfan on 11-04-2010 01:30:40
I'm not saying I want Punto, but he's like a Jack Hannahan or Josh Wilson type that can bridge the gap until Ackley is ready. His name just rolled of the tip of my typing finger tips. LOL!

18. By: Mackie on 11-04-2010 19:08:56
I agree that the M's could do worse than having Figgins back to play 3B in 2011, with Ackley at 2B. There is a chance Figgins might increase his hitting from what he did in 2010.

With the Mariners' infield, when it comes to hitting I think the dilemma next season is more likely to be 3B and SS than 1B and 2B. Like Jason said, Dustin Ackley will be up with the M's next season to play 2B, whether in April or in July, and if he stays true to his developmental history so far he will grow nicely into the position. And it seems Justin Smoak will most likely be playing 1B.

I dread the thought of having The Wilsons at SS for another season, and I have never been a Chone Figgins fan. I don't think the chance of both a decent 3B and SS falling into the M's lap is very likely.

Would Boston's Jed Lowrie represent an upgrade over The Wilsons at SS? Would Boston trade him, and if so, what would be the cost? It seems like he could provide an upgrade in the hitting department; during his short career, as a switch-hitter he has hit lefties very well and righties not so well, although last season he hit well against both.

I'm certainly not for having Lopez back. I'd prefer to see someone else besides Figgins at 3B, but if he and Lopez were both gone, I doubt Mangini could provide much help at 3B next season. Who would they use at 3B? Or who would be available to fill in for a while, who could provide more offense than Figgins?

Anyway, I could handle 3B being a black hole in the lineup if the hitting was upgraded appreciably in the lineup from another position or positions, such as SS, C or DH. And if Figgins is that black hole, I agree they could do worse. Still... !

19. By: sexymarinersfan on 11-05-2010 12:07:41
Looks to me Jason like Dave Cameron has the same idea in Nick Punto as I do.

So Punto? Yeah, really!

You are not currently logged in. If you'd like to comment on this report, please log in.
Haven't created a Prospect Insider account yet? Sign up!