| By Chris Crawford |  | By 07-27-2010 |
The rumor mill is open -- and updated at 3:18 PM PT on 7/27/2010 for subscribers!
If you aren't a subscriber, you can change that by signing up here!
We figured that instead of watching the Mariners get pummeled, you can enjoy the latest installment of the good, bad and ugly (The M's are still being shunned).
The Good
I get asked about Kyle Seager more than any other prospect not in Tacoma, and with good reason. Seager is putting up some interesting numbers in High Desert, and July has been unreal. The left-hander's slugging percentage was in the low .400's coming into the month, but a .620 July has raised that to a much more respectable .471. Seager has plus pitch-recognition and is willing to take walks, as evidence by his .413 on-base percentage. Seager is still more likely to be a utility infielder due to the lack of pop and so-so defense, but the UNC product has turned heads in the Cal League and might earn a promotion to West Tennessee in the coming months.
The Bad
As good as Seager has been in July, Carlos Peguero has been the equivalent in awfulness. For the month, the outfielder has up a putrid .513 OPS with a .284 slugging percentage. In fact, the left-hander hasn't put up an OPS above .770 in any month outside of his ridiculous April. I am not one of the many who believe Carlos Peguero can't be a big-league player, there are some good tools and the raw power is legit. But there's a long way to go before he's anywhere near ready -- and don't let the Futures Game appearance fool you into believing he's something more than he is, a platoon outfielder.
The Ugly
(Shun off) The Mariners offense, having to listen to Hawk Harrelson announce instead of Dave Niehaus, and Ryan Rowland-Smith. (Shun back on)
Seriously though, we talked about Gabriel Noriega earlier, and how disappointing his season has been, but July has been a disaster. A .455 OPS with a .218 slugging-percentage would be acceptable for a relief pitcher -- not a shortstop. There were some who thought Noriega should have been rated above Nick Franklin on prospect lists. Can't make that argument anymore.
gbu----july-27th,-2010
Comments
The following 35 comment(s) for this article are shown below:
| 1. By: JD Kickastro on 07-27-2010 21:49:25 Seager is a pleasant surprise this season. It's nice to have well rounded players in the org even if they don't offer any plus tools. PS. Nice Office ref with the shunning. |
| 2. By: JD Kickastro on 07-27-2010 21:49:25 Seager is a pleasant surprise this season. It's nice to have well rounded players in the org even if they don't offer any plus tools. PS. Nice Office ref with the shunning. |
| 3. By: Slack on 07-27-2010 22:24:07 That confrontation in the Mariners dugout was pretty ugly too. |
| 4. By: littlelinny6 on 07-28-2010 00:11:45 How about Seager's teammate Johermyn Chavez? We all know the Brandon Morrow trade was bad but maybe it will reap benefits for the M's a few years down the road. .342/.444/.579 last 10 games with a 7:8 BB:K ratio and near that for the whole month. That does not include tonight in which he is 4 for 5 with a HR. Does Chavez have a chance to be promoted to WTenn this year? |
| 5. By: Chris Crawford on 07-28-2010 03:39:37 I would say that Seager, Poythress, Chavez and Raben all have chances of being promoted. Whether they will or not I do not know -- but those would be the four that would stand a chance. |
| 6. By: furlong on 07-28-2010 09:54:07 Went to the monday game at Tacoma, I was impressed with the play and hitting of Mangini. Adam Moore is hitting quite well although his throwing is a little suspect. Dustin Ackley looked a little unsure around second base and as a hitter he is a carbon copy of Jeremy Reed. |
| 7. By: Edman on 07-28-2010 11:10:21 Lordy, let's not jinx Ackley. I do think Reed could have been a better hitter, had Seattle slowed his arrival in Seattle. How much better is unclear. I would like to see Mangini get a September call up. I don't think he's an everyday player, but I do think he could be a decent bat off the bench and develop into a good role player. And, who knows, he might exceed my expectations. |
| 8. By: Edman on 07-28-2010 11:22:17 There are a few guys in the minors who at least have peeks some interest. Kevin Rivers is off to a good start in Everett. As an undrafted free agent, I don't think you could ask for more. He's show he can hit and draw a walk. We'll see how he progresses, but it's s good start. I agree with the comments about Seager, and I am surprised that Chavez isn't getting discussed much. He's at least interesting. I think Raben gets promoted before Chavez. Unless he slides dramatically, Raben has nothing else to prove in high A. As far as the comment about the Brandon's trade, I'm not so sure how bad it was, linny. Morrow hasn't been much more than decent. I would put League and Morrow's value, at the moment, as a wash. Both have a chance to be very good. Both have flashed brilliance. But neither has outperformed the other. |
| 9. By: Adam T on 07-28-2010 11:28:47 I'd take Morrow over League right now, no question. However, I'm excited about Chavez. Yes, I know the caveats of HD apply, but he's been showing better plate discipline this year, with no sacrifice in power. Whether it is this year or 2011, I'm very excited to see what he does in West Tenn. |
| 10. By: littlelinny6 on 07-28-2010 11:48:57 Edman, You cant honestly believe that League and Morrow's value is a wash. Morrow started out poorly but has been much better the last 2+ months. You're giving him the Dan Haren treatment of poor ERA = bad pitcher. Morrow 2010 WAR = 2.6 League 2010 WAR = 0.2 I don't know how you could make a case that League is anywhere close to Morrow. The organization needs high-ceiling SPs and they let one get away for an 8th inning reliever. The only hope to make this trade go from horrible to just bad is for Chavez to turn into a MLB player in some capacity years down the road. Z has made a number of solid trades over the past few years but this is definitely not one of them. |
| 11. By: baseballman on 07-28-2010 12:26:49 linny, its FAR too early to say this trade is horrible. thats just irrational babble. if it was morrow for league, then maybe you could somewhat base an opinion off of half a season worth of play...but it wasnt. you really telling me that if chavez turns into an allstar that this trade wasnt solid? |
| 12. By: maqman on 07-28-2010 12:28:33 Johermyn Chavez is what tilts the Brandons trade in the Ms favor, although at the time I didn't think that. I also didn't know League's maternal grandparents were born in Japan, he lives in Honolulu. Wonder if that had anything to do with his acquisition? |
| 13. By: Edman on 07-28-2010 13:18:13 linny, before you tell me to go look things up, I suggest that you do the same. ERA does matter, espectially in Morrow's case. He's had one great month (June), and three with ERA's over 5.00, including July (which I believe would fall under the last two months). If both were starting pitchers, you could use WAR, but they aren't and their roles are valued differently. Sadly, another example of how misusing statistic analysis for comparison, can be misrepresentative of value. And linny, please don't play the four month game, to evaluate a trade. How this trade is viewed, will not relate to the last four months, for either team. In three years or more, then you can evaluate the trade. I think Morrow could be an exceptional talent, but he's not there yet. And, I also think League could be an exceptional set-up reliever. It's way too soon to know. And if you believe otherwise, you're naive. |
| 14. By: Edman on 07-28-2010 13:21:13 magman.....I think that's just silly, to believe that Jack made the trade had something to do with League's grandparents being Japanese. If the M's were owned by an African business man, should ever trade for an African-American be viewed with scrutiny? |
| 15. By: littlelinny6 on 07-28-2010 14:21:20 Edman, Stop using ERA as a valuable pitching metric. It essentially has zero value. WAR rates Morrow as much more valuable because he is--throws lots more innings thus has more value. By your logic it is impossible to compare players that play different positions. WAR allows you to do just that, make a comparison for every player in the game. Relievers are prone to wide swings in results due to very small sample sizes and unless you're named Rivera, generally unreliable. Additionally, getting 8th inning relievers is one of the easiest things to develop internally or for cheap on the FA market. That is not the case with starting pitching. I agree it's not fair to completely judge the trade right now, but alot weight falls on Chavez to be a ML contributor to gain back some value lost in this trade. An exceptionally setup reliever (the ceiling for League) is lower than Morrow has already been worth this year. As a mid-rotation starter you provide more value to your team than a Mariano Rivera does. Relievers are pitchers that are failed starters and there is a reason for that--they are way more valuable. |
| 16. By: littlelinny6 on 07-28-2010 14:22:45 Sorry, last line meant to say relievers are pitchers that are failed starters because starters are way more valuable. |
| 17. By: rjfrik on 07-28-2010 14:28:18 another thing about Morrow and I'm too lazy to look it up right now but, I do believe he is in the top 5 leader board for strike outs by a pitcher. I thought I remembered that stat being thrown out on baseball tonight a couple of days ago. But I agree it is way too early to tell if that trade has is better for this team or that. The key to the deal was Chavez. He was the piece that I loved back when this trade went down and he hasn't disappointed. Remember he was their Minor League Player of the Year, last year. He's good. |
| 18. By: baseballman on 07-28-2010 15:09:50 I love it when someone says "relievers are so easy to find" because its just not true. Well it may be easy to find a reliever, but its not easy to find good ones. If that were true linny, then why do teams target relievers during the trade deadline? Why are relievers EVER signed in the off season? And why are the they ever traded in the first place? because, according to you, ever team should easily be able to put together a stud bullpen because relievers are so easy to find... |
| 19. By: littlelinny6 on 07-28-2010 15:57:57 All I'm saying is the difference between a very good reliever and a crap one is very small. Perfect example is David Aardsma. He is essentially the same pitcher as last year but his HR/FB has regressed. He has the same xFIP as he had last year, 4.12, yet his ERA is 2.2 runs higher. Last year he was considered great and this year he's seen as terrible when he hasn't really been a different pitcher. Because of small sample sizes nearly every reliever is prone to these variations in results so it is definitely risky business to trade for relievers. Good relievers do exist but teams place way too much value on them because their impact on a game is way behind a position player or starting pitcher. Scott Downs is seen as an elite relief pitcher this year and he's basically the same guy he's always been pretty solid has a great ERA this year due to a 6% drop in HR/FB and also an unsustainably low BABIP. The guy is a solid reliever but the idea he is of great value is nonsense. Not necessarily elite, but building a solid bullpen is definitely possible from within. There is only so much money available and especially for the team like the Mariners, they need high impact talent first and foremost, not 7th inning bullpen arms. |
| 20. By: Edman on 07-28-2010 16:07:42 LOL.....OK, linny. Use that belief system of yours. By your definition, a crappy starter, because he throws more innings, is more valuable than a good reliever. WAR is a crap stat in regard to relievers. But, believe what you will. It's why teams don't let SABR statheads run baseball teams. They value math more than the physical elements of the game. I won't even comment on your relievers are failed starters montra. Not just anyone can be a reliever, particularly in the last two innings of a game. |
| 21. By: littlelinny6 on 07-28-2010 18:00:13 Guys without command of multiple pitches by default become relievers and if they can't be relievers, they find another line of work. You have to make it through the lineup multiple times without getting scorched and almost no reliever can do that--hence why that person is a reliever. This is not an either or discussion between sabremetrics and "the physical elements". Any ML team (minus the Royals maybe) use both advanced statistics and scouting when coming up with a roster, drafting, etc. Baseball has the advantage of playing 162 games and hence you get large sample sizes and can actually help identify who is good and who is not, which can be coupled with scouting to evaluate a player. Very good relievers are very often failed starters (Joba Chamberlain,Papelbon, and Ryan Franklin come to mind in the recent past just off the top of my head). Middle to back end starters just have more value. For example, Doug Fister's value this year is slightly better than Carlos Marmol's, the highest WAR of any reliever. When you've only thrown 50 innings or so you impact on winning games becomes fairly muted no matter how incredible the performance. Finally, what does the last two innings of the game have to do with being able to handle relief duties? I suppose you meant to say the highest leverage situations?? Often times the highest leverage in a game can occur in the 6th or 7th inning just as likely as it can in the 8th or 9th inning. |
| 22. By: rjfrik on 07-28-2010 18:07:05 Anyone who thinks there is not any value in metrics has another thing coming. You can't discredit that at all. |
| 23. By: Edman on 07-28-2010 19:14:03 Let's get this straight, linny, you are the one who picked ONE metric, WAR, to try to prove your point in regard to Morrow. I'm sure you KNEW that WAR handicaps relievers. That's nothing new to many who've follows metrics. So, like most who quote the baseball bible, you pick the one that sells your point of view, and completely discount ERA. No, ERA doesn't tell all, just as WAR doesn't tell all. You pick one color to paint a landscape. You're satisfied, because it is over course, abstract. But it doesn't make it anything more than abstract without the other colors. Every team uses metrics as ONE of many checks and balances, not the check and balance. If anyone could be a closer, they wouldn't pay the elite closers 10+ million a year, in come cases. So are those in the game of baseball wrong, because they believe the last three outs are the toughest? WAR one tool in many, not THE tool. Use them all if you're gonna play the game. I don't really give a crap if a starter, by virtue of pitching more innings, is somehow a better VALUE than a reliever. It's about wins and losses. And, it takes many specialists to get that job done. I'll stand by my statement, that Morrow isn't any more value to the Blue Jays, than League is to the Mariners. You're trying to add extra value because he's a starter. I ain't buying it. |
| 24. By: StandinPat on 07-28-2010 20:15:38 Starters are more valuable than relievers, that's a fact, and not an arguable one. How did this even become a discussion? |
| 25. By: StandinPat on 07-28-2010 20:25:52 Oh, and ERA is the second worst stat to use to try and asses a pitchers value/performance after W/L, and WAR IS the culmination of using several different advanced statistics, so by definition using that one metric IS using many others as well. |
| 26. By: littlelinny6 on 07-28-2010 20:47:10 I agree StandinPat, just preachin to the choir. Not sure how this discussion started up and hopefully your response can end it as well. |
| 27. By: baseballman on 07-28-2010 22:16:56 RE 25: you are using WAR to compare two different positions...so no, it doesnt work |
| 28. By: StandinPat on 07-29-2010 00:28:17 #27 1) The point I made was that WAR is based off of several other stats, including FIP(Or xFIP, not sure) which is based off of K%, BB%, GB/FB, etc, so it is in fact the same as using several different advanced stats, not just cherry picking one. 2) WAR actually includes positional adjustments...so yeah, yeah it does work |
| 29. By: Edman on 07-29-2010 11:45:10 WAR is simply the latest trendy stat. It has holes in it. It's better than most, but it is flawed. I'm not going to debate it, because those of you who believe in it being absolute, are like religous fanatics who believe in their God. linny, your preaching to the choir comment is the perfect case in point. It's your God, or no God. There is no single right way to approach player value, only a collection of tools. You use all the tools available and make the best decision possible. Morrow has been no greater than a #4 starter at best. It has some value. But, like Morrow, League has had moments of brilliance, and moments of extreme failure. We could apply the same selective time frame to League's performances, as you do in trying to justify your attempt to say that WE ALL KNOW the Morrow trade was bad. I have seen few complain about it, or it's reasoning at the time it was made. Morrow has shown promise, same at League has in Seattle. Their roles are different, and that doesn't make one any more valuable to their team, then the other. It's like saying that a plumber is less valuable than the guy who frames a house. A bulk of the work falls on the framer, based on time. However, you need a plumber and electrician to finish the house. All three have value, based on their service, not the amount of time on the job. |
| 30. By: StandinPat on 07-29-2010 12:28:08 Holy Geez, where to begin? First of all Ed, no one was preaching that WAR was the end all be all of statistics, I have my opinion of it, which I'm guessing differs from yours, but nothing that was being argued here was how much value you should put into it. What was being arguing were the things you had posted that are simply just flat out wrong. 1) "WAR one tool in many, not THE tool. Use them all if you're gonna play the game" As I stated before, WAR is based off of several statistics, so by definition using it is using more than one "tool" as you would say, but as far as only using one, using ERA is just about the worst possible way to go. 2) Starters are more valuable than relievers, they just are. They throw more innings, have a larger impact on the game, make more money, etc. SP's who can't cut it usually get shifted to the bullpen, when was the last time the opposite happend? And by you own admission, Morrow has been a #4 this year, so you'd take a decent 7/8th inning reliever over a decent #4 starter? 3) "Morrow isn't any more value to the Blue Jays, than League is to the Mariners" Really? SO you think the M's have been better off using the likes of Snell and RRS in the rotation w/ League in the pen, over having Morrow in the rotation and any of the cycled through random bullpen arms, Sweeney, Olsen, Seddon, Pauley, Texeria, Cordero, Colome, Wright, French, etc? |
| 31. By: baseballman on 07-29-2010 12:37:22 Pat take your blinders off, youre arguing over 4 months worth of play with these guys. Youre ready to anoint Morrow over 4 months of play and throw League away? What if League turns into an All Star closer for us next year? And what if Morrow turns into a fringe starter and is moved back into the bullpen for toronto? Youre making statements based on today which is unfair to the trade because it involved factors outside of the first 4 months of the 2010 season... |
| 32. By: StandinPat on 07-29-2010 13:17:15 Or you could take yours off and show me anywhere where I gave my opinion of the trade. I never said jack squat about what I thought of the trade, I only chimed in when the ridiculous reliever vs starter value argument started. League and Morrow could be any generic bullpen arm and starter for all I care, but in this case Morrow has more value than League right now, he just does. "what if Morrow turns into a fringe starter and is moved back into the bullpen for toronto?" Is that really a question? Were you trying to make me look foolish with that remark? What happens if Morrow goes from starter to bullpen arm? Well, then his value goes down, because starters have more value than relievers. Weren't you paying attention to anything I said? Seriously, I really don't care if you agree with me or not, but if you are gonna disagree, please at least have it be over something I actually said. Reading comprehension...it's FUNdamental!! |
| 33. By: baseballman on 07-29-2010 14:34:25 LOL, someone needs to calm down just a bit, ha |
| 34. By: baseballman on 07-29-2010 14:39:07 anyways...since your so butt hurt that I dare challenge your OPINION... why dont you try comprehending what was written, when did I ever say RP were more valuable than SP? oh ya, i didnt...besides thats a weak, generalized argument. You gonna say that every single SP is better than any given RP? really? so you gonna take RRS this year over Rafael Soriano? RRS is a starting pitcher, who cares if he gives up 6 runs in 4 innings right? hes a SP...see, its not so absolute when you get into SPECIFICS, is it? |
| 35. By: StandinPat on 08-01-2010 19:58:38 "why dont you try comprehending what was written, when did I ever say RP were more valuable than SP? oh ya, i didnt" Prob the very reason I NEVER SAID YOU DID...again read, comprehend, maybe reread if you didn't get it the first time "You gonna say that every single SP is better than any given RP? really? so you gonna take RRS this year over Rafael Soriano?" If you really think that was the sentiment of what I said, I really don't know how to help you with that. |
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 |