M

[Basketball Jesus]

http://mlb.mlb.com/news/article.jsp?ymd ... p&c_id=mlb

A $1.4MM deal with an extra $500,000 in performance bonuses.


I’m always a little wary when teams make this type of deal but the Mariners are a special case: they’re nowhere near contention, so giving considerable ABs to Branyan isn’t going to hurt them, especially given the putrid performance of their first basemen last season. Unless you’re the type that thinks Bryan Lahair and his career minor league .805 OPS is getting a raw deal, it’s not like Branyan is taking any AB away from a legitimate 1B prospect.

We know what kind of player Branyan is; immense power, lots of strikeouts, lots of walks, very little contact. He’s an ultimate platoon hitter but, even as a full-time 1B/DH type he’s infinitely better than the rotting corpses of Sexson/Vidro/Lahair/Cairo.

[Ex-hippie]

My first response is: um, okay. Low cost, low risk. My second response is: all hail to PNF, who made signing Branyan part of his team rebuilding plan.

I'm not quite sure what to make of this, really. Does the team think Clement can go back to catcher? If not, shouldn't it be holding the 1B position open for him, especially against right-handers? Or is Branyan stepping in as full-time DH, meaning the team waves bye-bye to Ibanez (and doesn't pursue Griffey)?

In 2008, Branyan faced left-handed pitchers 14 times, struck out 8 of those times and got on base zero of those times. Yikes. His career splits aren't quite that extreme -- as recently as 2006, he managed to OPS 841 against them in 44 plate appearances, which is actually better than he did against righties. His production vs. lefties from 2006-2008 is .162/.279/.351. (Compare that to .234/.336/.519 vs. righties, which ain't bad.)

But look on the bright side: that 630 OPS vs. righties is not materially worse than Miguel Cairo's 646 overall or LaHair's 659 overall.

[Basketball Jesus]

I'm not quite sure what to make of this, really. Does the team think Clement can go back to catcher? If not, shouldn't it be holding the 1B position open for him, especially against right-handers? Or is Branyan stepping in as full-time DH, meaning the team waves bye-bye to Ibanez (and doesn't pursue Griffey)?

I think this means all of that. I think Clement’s going to have every opportunity to win the starting catcher spot coming out of spring training. At the least he’ll probably split time at DH with Branyan and take up the back-up catcher’s spot. I can’t see them giving Clement first base full-time without any kind of game experience there. I also think this means that Branyan will assume first until a better option presents itself. His defense is bad but nowhere near Sexson bad.

I really don’t see the M’s re-signing Ibanez, or at least I hope they don’t. They offered him arbitration and, since he’s a Type A, he’s netting the Mariners two early picks when he signs somewhere else. (And he will, probably for more money than he’s worth. He’s been bandied about as the hot free agent bargain du jour.) Those picks are much

In 2008, Branyan faced left-handed pitchers 14 times, struck out 8 of those times and got on base zero of those times. Yikes. His career splits aren't quite that extreme -- as recently as 2006, he managed to OPS 841 against them in 44 plate appearances, which is actually better than he did against righties. His production vs. lefties from 2006-2008 is .162/.279/.351. (Compare that to .234/.336/.519 vs. righties, which ain't bad.)

I think we can all be thankful that his splits aren’t reversed: it’s much easier to find lefty-mashing platoonmates at cheaper prices than guys like Branyan.

But look on the bright side: that 630 OPS vs. righties is not materially worse than Miguel Cairo's 646 overall or LaHair's 659 overall.

Also: much cooler nickname. Although I was always partial to Le Hair.

[Ex-hippie]

Lookout Landing reports (although I can't corroborate it anywhere) that Zdurencik has signed another ex-Brewer, Callix Crabbe, who doesn't even need a nickname to sound cool. Many will recall that Bill Bavasi was criticized in some corners for not taking Crabbe in the Rule 5 draft a year ago. Lookout Landing describes Crabbe as a "living, breathing, replacement level player" who is not materially worse oveall than Jose Lopez at second base. (I'd use Lopez as a trading chip right now and let Crabbe and Hulett compete for time.)

They also signed Chris Woodward, a well-traveled utility guy who has been a bigger waste of a roster spot, for a longer period of time, than Willie Bloomquist. Oh well, it doesn't mean he'll make the team.

[Basketball Jesus]

I’d actually want to keep Lopez. He’s not particularly expensive, he’s about average defensively (according to a broad spectrum of defensive metrics, at least), and a .297/.332/.443 line from a 2B is pretty good, all things considered. (He WARPed an 8.0 last season and he was 7th in VORP for all 2B.) Sure, his trade value is probably as high as it will ever be but he’s only 25 and trading him at this point is merely a lateral move for a team looking to get younger and cheaper across the board.

Crabbe, on the other hand, is the kind of player you acquire to replace the (s)craptacular Willie Bloomquist. His minor league numbers aren’t exactly top-prospect worthy but his speed and OF-IF versatility make him a nice late-inning basestealing option off the bench. And he’s heading into his peak years, unlike WFB. I wouldn’t trust him with anything more than 150 AB, though…

[Ex-hippie]

Well if you're going to go all rational-actor-model on me, you can say that every trade is a lateral move by definition. There are still two reasons to trade a player: the first is the part about how "his trade value is probably as high as it will ever be" -- more specifically, hoping to leverage that near-.300 batting average into something that will help the team a little bit more. Say, a starting pitcher of comparable age (maybe use him to pry loose one of those pitchers the Pirates seem to be ready to give up on). The second is based on what you have to replace said player, which is where our replacement-level friends, Hulett and Crabbe, come in. I'll have to trust you on the WARP/VORP figures; I relied on Lookout Landing, which said Lopez was worth a win or two over replacement level last year. (And of course both of these ignore the suckfest that was his 2007 season.)

[Basketball Jesus]

Well if you're going to go all rational-actor-model on me, you can say that every trade is a lateral move by definition.

That’s not necessarily true. Trading an expensive slugger at the end of his prime for a handful of prospects isn’t a lateral move: You’re trading off current production for future (and cheaper) potential. Conversely, trading young, cost-controlled prospects for a star pitcher isn’t a lateral move: you’re sacrificing the future for immediate returns. Trading a bloated contract in the form of Khalil Greene for a meh reliever on the cheap and a PTBNL isn’t a lateral move: you’re paring payroll at the expense of major-league quality talent for a replacement-level player. A lateral move is like the Volquez-Hamilton deal: essentially trading talent for comparable talent.

If you’re going to trade Lopez, you’re not going to move him for a handful of prospects. There’s no reason to: Lopez is already the cost-controlled major league talent you’d be hoping those players would turn into. (And, let’s be honest, Lopez isn’t going to net this team a Cam Maybin-level prospect. Bill Bavasi is no longer running a team.) You’re not going to package him along with other players to get the star: this team is nowhere near contention, no reason to jeopardize the future for that sake. He’s not expensive, so no reason to shed his contract.

There are still two reasons to trade a player: the first is the part about how "his trade value is probably as high as it will ever be" -- more specifically, hoping to leverage that near-.300 batting average into something that will help the team a little bit more. Say, a starting pitcher of comparable age (maybe use him to pry loose one of those pitchers the Pirates seem to be ready to give up on).

If you are going to trade Lopez, it’s for comparable talent. But, if you do so, then what? Create one hole to plug another? I like Valbuena as much as the next guy but Lopez has already proven he can perform at an above-average level in the bigs. Isn’t that what you’d be hoping Valbuena could accomplish? I think it’d make more sense to trade Valbuena in that regard.

The second is based on what you have to replace said player, which is where our replacement-level friends, Hulett and Crabbe, come in. I'll have to trust you on the WARP/VORP figures; I relied on Lookout Landing, which said Lopez was worth a win or two over replacement level last year. (And of course both of these ignore the suckfest that was his 2007 season.)

The danger with compiling a team full of replacement-level types (or, even better Branyan-types) is that a team full of them still sucks. They’re complementary players. Guys like Lopez have a chance to blossom into borderline good/great types. For a team in transition like the M’s those are the guys you want to keep while surrounding them with the Branyans of the world.

[Ex-hippie]

I heard they also signed Chris Shelton. A year ago I would have praised this as a shrewd move, but now, meh. Granted, Shelton did improve his OPS at the AAA level from just over 800 at Toledo in 2007 to almost 1000 in America's Crappiest City in 2008, but at age 28 that doesn't impress me as much, especially when he didn't hit worth a crap in the majors. Also, despite being a right handed hitter, he's not much of a platoon partner for Branyan (Shelton actually hits righties better than he hits lefties). But I'm sure the Rainiers will be happy to have him.

[Sweezo]

I don't know what to expect out of the team next year, but I do think that a 1B platoon of Branyan/Shelton is much better, and far more cost effective, than the crap we rolled out there last year. Right now, the M's seem intent on shedding past mistakes, clearing salary, and adding low cost role players. I think it's a fair strategy; clearly they'll still need to have their star players to bracket the role players...we'll see.

I think on U.S.S. Mariner someone mentioned that if you took the L/R splits for Shelton and Branyan over their careers, you're looking at Carlos Delgado last year. Specious logic, sure, but if the M's end up getting something similar, they're geniuses. If the M's end up getting nothing, they're out very, very little in a season where not a whole lot is expected.

At the very least, these moves haven't cost us Shin-Soo Choo/Asdrubal Cabrera types.

[Ex-hippie]

Really? How do they figure?

Shelton, 2006-2008 -
vs. LHP .245/.343/.367
vs. RHP .269/.336/.471

Shelton, 2005 (the year of his 15 minutes of fame):
vs. LHP .278/.345/.433
vs. RHP .306/.364/.536

It seems to me, the best that can be said about Shelton vs. lefties is that he's not as bad as Branyan vs. lefties, so maybe Shelton gets those starts by default. And, of course, the majority of plate appearances will be vs. righties (both in regular starts and in pinch-hitting opportunities).

I guess if you cherry-pick Branyan's 2008 stats (1.080 OPS vs. righties) and rely on Shelton's career levels, you might be able to find some mixture of at-bats that gives you Delgadoesque reqults (.871 OPS overall in 2008). That's not much of a methodology, though.

[Basketball Jesus]

I think they were using his career minor league splits, ex-hippie:

vs. LH 0.300 0.413 0.574 0.987
vs. RH 0.297 0.387 0.459 0.846

[Ex-hippie]

So if we combine Russell Branyan's major league stats for 2008, Chris Shelton's minor league stats, Richie Sexson's defense in 2003 with Milwaukee, and Miguel Cairo's defense during Brandon Morrow's one-hitter, we damn near have the perfect first baseman. Outstanding!

[Ex-hippie]

Although, snark aside, I would be interested in understanding how someone's platoon splits can be so radically different at the major league and minor league levels. If I'm not mistaken, I believe I've heard that the predictive power of minor league stats diminishes as a player gets older -- hence my point above that the near-1000 OPS at age 28 doesn't thrill me.

[Hiphophead101]

Legit. I like it.

Good gamble for very little contract.

[BlackMamba]

who?

[PhilipNelsonFan]

I don't know what to expect out of the team next year, but I do think that a 1B platoon of Branyan/Shelton is much better, and far more cost effective, than the crap we rolled out there last year. Right now, the M's seem intent on shedding past mistakes, clearing salary, and adding low cost role players. I think it's a fair strategy; clearly they'll still need to have their star players to bracket the role players...we'll see.

Coupled with the news of the Putz deal, this is so obviously the way they are going. There will be no big free agent splash this year. Although, we'll see if someone like Washburn gets traded. That could be fun.