Prospect Insider - Update on Sheets

Update on Sheets

By Chris Crawford

By 01-24-2010

As Jason tweeted here, the Ben Sheets race may be coming to its climax, and it may be a dramatic affair.

The Cubs, once believed to be the frontrunners, have put Sheets on the backburner, according to ESPN.com's Jayson Stark. The L.A. Dodgers went with Vicente Padilla, the L.A. Angels went with Joel Pineiro and Milwaukee signed Doug Davis. All three are believed to be out of cash to the level Sheets is asking.

Boston is not believed to be as interested as the Mets and Mariners, and the Astros may need Sheets to give them a big time home state discount.

Texas is the wildcard here. The ownership situation is getting ironed out and they really could use another high-quality starting pitcher to go with Rich Harden and their kids.

If the money is available, the Rangers could be the favorites. They have the need, are closest to his home state of Louisiana and is where he spent most of last spring and summer rehabbing from flexor tendon surgery that took place last February.

One has to wonder, however, whether he'd rather pitch in a ballpark where his numbers would help him get a bigger deal next winter rather than in Arlington, where even good pitchers have posted poor ERA results.

If I had to handicap the race, I'd call it even between the Rangers, Mets and Mariners. This is getting really interesting, because if Sheets is even 80 percent of his old self, he's a legit option in any rotation and helps any of the aforementioned clubs get where they are trying to go.

update-on-sheets

Comments
The following 98 comment(s) for this article are shown below:

1. By: FelixElRey on 01-24-2010 13:41:24
This is, by far, the most encouraging report about our interest level and our likelihood of signing sheets. My concern that it did nothing to discount any of the belief that Sheets doesn't want to pitch here. I would think he'd have to choose us over Texas in order to set himself up for a huge payday in a couple years.

2. By: jgstecker on 01-24-2010 13:46:21
Seattle would have to be Sheets' last choice of those three. Which means the Mariners will have to be high bidders.

I'm guessing the Mets. They have money to burn after losing out on Molina and Pineiro. NL, Great pitching park and lots of hype heading into Free Agency.

3. By: universalguru on 01-24-2010 13:57:30
I hope it's the M's... but it's tough to tell, especially with the rumors that Sheets didn't want to come to Seattle early on. Then again maybe Jack and Don can work their persuasive magic.

4. By: eastcoastmariner on 01-24-2010 14:04:58
Don't forget Oakland might still be in the mix

5. By: CrustyJuggler on 01-24-2010 14:11:55
I'm guessing he goes to the Mets. Then I think Jack will put his plan B into effect. Maybe deal Jose Lopez++ for a pitcher. Lets just pray that Cameron's Liriano dreams are a possibility. Then we could sign Hudson and be pretty well set outside of maybe another OFer.

So I think if the M's don't land Sheets, we will see a quick move by Jack close after.

6. By: Stormton on 01-24-2010 14:14:05
I'm trying reallllly hard not to get my hopes up, but man... That would be unreal

7. By: rjfrik on 01-24-2010 14:31:13
I would have to think we might be the favorites in this thing. If it really is the Mets and the M's. We have a pitchers park for him to pitch in, we have the best defense in baseball behind him, we will actually be a winning team with a realistic shot to get into the playoffs, he is familiar with Z, we have a family atmosphere as a clubhouse, and Seattle is a much more family friendly city to live in versus NY.

Just my 2 cents

8. By: Jason A. Churchill on 01-24-2010 15:12:22
I thought the Mets would be the favorites, too, but then I learned they'd have to move payroll to sign Orlando Hudson -- not just Castillo's 12 mil because he plays the position Hudson plays, but because of the money itself. Which suggests that they don't have a ton of it to spend in the first place, and still have plans to upgrade the offense (2B or 1B).

Off topic, but the Mets are not a very well built team. Francouer is making $5 million to be worse than Jose Lopez offensively and a mediocre right fielder to boot.

Castillo, their catching situation, their rotation after Johan... if they dont get lucky with health, they are toast.

9. By: marinerdan on 01-24-2010 15:42:31
Jason, if we signed sheets, do you think Z will be done with any major moves? Or do you think it will be win now mode and shoot for a major upgrade, since Lee and Sheets would be here on 1 year deals.

10. By: rjfrik on 01-24-2010 15:46:20
If Sheets is signed for only a one year deal and him and Lee are let go after next year we could be looking at a boatload of draft picks. Kind of like the Angels this year. I'm sure if Sheets comes here he will at least become a type B FA after the season.

11. By: Jason A. Churchill on 01-24-2010 16:02:43
marinerdan,

That probably depends on how much Sheets gets guaranteed, and how much the team is actually willing to spend. Lets not forget that we don't know what that total is.

12. By: Blowgun7 on 01-24-2010 16:05:55
Jason, so you have pretty good sources saying the M's are definately in this thing?

13. By: Jason A. Churchill on 01-24-2010 16:14:42
The M's are in it, but I don't know how deep. Honestly, it doesn't sound like ANY team is all hot and heavy on Sheets.

14. By: jgstecker on 01-24-2010 16:17:34
Speaking of off-topic, can I just say its great to have this forum to talk semi-intelligently about stuff like this? I mean, the Sheets issue is THE big issue in Marinerland right now and this is the only site talking about it in any detail.

PI should be getting a lot more press and a lot more traffic. Its the best site for anything Mariners related and should be every fans first stop for information.

If you weed out all the "Dave/Derek is spot on and I have nothing new to add to the conversation" posts at USS Mariner, Prospect Insider is the blogosphere leader in number of insightful comments per day. Plus the censorship here allows for most of us to get our opinions out with minimal molestation.

Anyway, thanks guys.

15. By: JohnMcD on 01-24-2010 16:21:40
When would you think an anoucement would be made of either of these teams signing Sheets?

16. By: Jason A. Churchill on 01-24-2010 16:22:09
Oakland would have to outbid everyone else. Not impossible, but they aren't one of Sheets' preferences, from what I hear.

17. By: Jason A. Churchill on 01-24-2010 16:23:46
Oh, this could last for three more weeks or more if Sheets wants it to.

Love that you feel that way, jg, I've tried to back off the past year or so, and kind of let it play out, and I think it's working. Easier for me, too!

18. By: SethGrandpa on 01-24-2010 16:25:37
While I understand the reasoning why Sheets would choose Texas, it would be a horrible career move. He's going to get a short deal and will want to re-establish his value. If that's the case the Mets or the Mariners would be far better options. With the Mets he gets to stay in the NL and pitch in a big market with lots of media coverage (kind of the same thought process of Beltre going to Boston in that respect) and with the Mariners he would get the statical benefit of Safeco and the M's D.

And jgstecker, JAC is really the only reporter among the M's bloggers and the other sites have previously delved into the Sheets issue, so I think it's fair that they don't just post frivolous write-ups essentially saying, "Ummm...yep...Ben Sheets is still an option." I'd rather them keep their own quality up and let JAC do the reporting. I don't like the "fight" over the blogs by readers. Every M's blog has it's place. Use them all together.

19. By: JohnMcD on 01-24-2010 16:32:45
JAC is the best by far!

20. By: pwhit44 on 01-24-2010 17:05:01
I think all three sites have something awesome and unique to offer. And Baker adds his beat writer locker room stuff. Overall, M's fans have a lot to be grateful for -- a sweet pool of resources for reliable information and/or analysis and insight.

I would say I wish every fan base was this fortunate.

But I don't.

21. By: kyle_mahlstedt on 01-24-2010 17:25:28
JAC,

The M's seem to be serious about acquiring another player that can play 2B like Hudson....

Why haven't we heard Orlando Cabrera's name linked to the Mariners... he seems to be a cheaper option, with somewhat comparable numbers to Hudson... he probably could be had for $2MM plus too....

2009 Hudson: .283 AVG .357 OBP .417 SLG, .774 OPS

2009 Cabrera: .284 AVG .316 OBP .389 SLG .705 OPS

Cabrera: .959 FPCT 4.45 RF 5.547 ZR (AT SS THOUGH)

Hudson: .988 FPCT 4.84 RF 5.201 ZR (AT 2B)

22. By: universalguru on 01-24-2010 17:30:22
I don't think the M's would give up Lopez only to replace him with Cabrera unless they got a BIG upgrade in trading Lopez which is unlikely.

23. By: Edman on 01-24-2010 18:14:41
Just where have the Mariners shown that they are seriously seeking a secondbaseman? That's 99% internet speculation. There isn't a credible rumor that links Seattle to any of the secondbaseman that are currently available. Every team that has a real or apparent need is going to be mentioned.

Because a bunch of bloggers and a few reporters think that Seattle should sign Hudson, doesn't mean there's any genuine interest.

Realistically, Seattle would first have to move Lopez, one way or the other. And, I don't Jack is going to move him, to make room for Hudson or Cabrera.

Not to mention, that I don't think he has have a great deal of value, without including other players or prospects.

As for Sheets, I go along with everyone else. It's going to get down to what Sheets wants, and I don't think anyone really knows. I don't think Seattle is any greater or lesser a place he could end up.

24. By: Jason A. Churchill on 01-24-2010 18:23:01
Um, because Cabrera sucks?

He hasn't played 2B in 10 years and was worse at SS in 2009 than Lopez was at 2B. And offensively, Lopez was the superior player and by a fairly wide margin, despite also having a poor OBP.

Fielding Pct, Range Factor and Zone Rating are not good statistics by any measure.

Hudson's ability to get one base blows away Cabrera (and Lopez) and he's still good enough with the glove.

The two player are not close in terms of value. $2 mil is a waste. Just keep Lopez, he's better and he's already signed for $2.3 mil.

-----

I certainly agree on the value of the blogosphere here in Seattle. It's tremendous and those that have contribute to those places are all over the country doing things for national publications.

25. By: DRWheelock on 01-24-2010 18:51:45
Last I heard, as early as yesterday on MLBTradeRumors, was that Hudson is "still" wanting 1yr $9M. He eventually has to come to grips with not being able to get near that much, but that's what they are reporting he is still asking for.

Lopez for $2.3 or Hudson for $9M? I'll take Lopez thank you very much.

"If" Lopez is moved, I think the better choice (and cheaper choice) will be Felipe Lopez to replace Jose. Felipe could go for a 2009 Branyan deal in the $1.75-$2M range.

If Z can move Lopez in a Willingham deal to the Nats, and then pickup Felipe for $2M or less, then I think that would make the team strong defensively, while not losing Jose Lopez's power by getting a LF RHB with 25 HR power.

Jason what are your thoughts on a potential Nat trade, since they are looking for a 2B (and not wanting to pay $9M in $$$), and then Seattle signing Felipe for 2B until Ackley is ready (hopefully 2nd half...or start of 2011).

Thoughts?

26. By: pwhit44 on 01-24-2010 18:55:40
"I" like "cake."

27. By: DRWheelock on 01-24-2010 18:59:50
Felipe Lopez is also a switch hitter? His OBP blows Jose's OBP away too in 2009 he had a 383-OBP versus Jose's that was under 300, and FanGraphs had him valued at over $20.6M in 2009.

AND "if" Ackely hits the 25-man roster sometime this year, Felipe would be a great guy to be pushed to the bench, since he has a lot of experience at 2B/SS/3B. His defense isn't great at SS, but in a pinch he'd be a decent fillin if needed for a little while.

I just think Felipe brings more to the table than Hudson does, and for far less. He also seems like a guy Z would bring in, and provides superior D at 2B over Lopez.

28. By: pwhit44 on 01-24-2010 19:05:46
ALSO, do "you" like cake? And "if" you do, how "much?"

"Or" is it really more of an "interest" in cake?

29. By: universalguru on 01-24-2010 19:07:43
Cabrera has a more reliable history but if Felipe is available for $4+ million less, he's probably a better fit. I'd love Willingham but it depends on what Washington is asking.

30. By: cusefan15 on 01-24-2010 19:09:38
I agree that Felipe might be a good fit for the team. But one thing to be wary of with that 383 obp is that his babip was unsustainably high last year - 360. I think 2008, is more in line with what we could expect offensively, 280/340/380. The thing that really intrigues me about him though is his ability to play left field.

I actually think it is conceivable that he and Jose could be on the same roster. Jose playing some first (a minimal amount of games) with Felipe playing left field, shortstop and second. There have been some rumors that some motivational issues have dampened Jack's interest in him though.

31. By: The Great Pumpkin on 01-24-2010 19:13:26
Are all thos quotation marks some sort of joke?

32. By: DRWheelock on 01-24-2010 20:49:03
{edited for length}

33. By: Chris Crawford on 01-24-2010 20:54:07
DRWheelock, we get it...stop posting your entire roster ideas every single post...its taking away from some really good conversation, theres other places to do that.

34. By: FelixElRey on 01-24-2010 21:50:23
Along the lines with what Jason said about the Mets being strapped for cash, let's just hope that they realize that they are too many pieces of the puzzle away to spend their remaining budget on one player instead of attempting to upgrade at a few positions.

I just hope this doesn't drag on painfully as his agent tries to drag more teams into it to drive up the price...

35. By: Stormton on 01-24-2010 22:01:55
Totally agree with you FelixElRey

Not going to hold my breath, but I'd be ecstatic if this ended some time this week.

36. By: CrimsonNW on 01-24-2010 22:11:38
This sounds very encouraging. A rotation with Felix, Lee and Sheets would be outstanding. Thanks for the update, Jason!

37. By: cusefan15 on 01-24-2010 22:17:09
I don't think it would be very wise for Sheets' agent to try to create a bidding war, not with how the bottom has fallen out of this market. And definitely not with the number of interesting arms left in free agency. Just too risky a game.

38. By: DRWheelock on 01-24-2010 22:30:15
Chris Crawford,

I stopped posting lineups and "entire" roster ideas LONG ago. Everyone has been posting ideas for 2B if Lopez is traded, along with SP rumors. That's all I've been doing here Chris.

I guess I can just leave and quit posting all together and even cancel my membership. It's sounding like thats what you want anyways.

If I were a betting man I'd bet this post makes it maybe 5 minutes before you edit and remove this too.

39. By: 200tang on 01-24-2010 23:41:17
#27

I wouldn't be totally opposed to Felipe Lopez taking over for Jose Lopez, but he's not quite as good as you think he is. Yes, his OBP was great last year (.383), but that was a career year and not his true value. He's probably a .340 OBP type player, which is still good, but not even close to that .380 range.

Another thing to keep in mind is that he's a career NL player so he should see a drop in offensive production, although it wouldn't be a ton it's still something to keep in mind. I personally don't believe he'd be better than Jose in overall offensive production, but he should get on base more for what it's worth and out play him defensively, not to mention he's a switch hitter.

Still though, I'd bet money Orlando Hudson can outproduce him next year and would be my #1 target for 2B.

40. By: masonb on 01-25-2010 00:25:23
Jason or Chris:

hypothetically, if Sheets is signed, what are the chances Bedard/Wang are brought in on an incentive laden deal? A top four of Felix-Lee-Sheets-Bedard/Wang would be sick

41. By: universalguru on 01-25-2010 00:27:21
If Bedard stays unsigned into the season and Snell looks like he's not cutting it I could see him picked up... but I doubt there would be a lot of salary flexibility at that point.

42. By: Jason A. Churchill on 01-25-2010 00:30:34
" A top four of Felix-Lee-Sheets-Bedard/Wang would be sick"

That's what she said.

As for Felipe Lopez, he's known as a bit of a clubhouse killer and is a Boras client. There's a reason he's still out there and has never got the big money.

Cabrera is terrible, however.

43. By: kyle_mahlstedt on 01-25-2010 00:46:28
haha thats funny shit Jason lol

44. By: Plaws on 01-25-2010 00:53:45
Thanks, as always, for sharing. I thought there was no way Sheets would come here until I heard that he's more concerned with cmpetitiveness and a family friendly environment/clubhouse than location. It's good to hear there's at least some interest from both sides.

I love the local blogosphere. There are more than 10 M's related sites that I read everything on, (plus national sites that I read here ad there) which usually leaves me with little time to comment on any of them. Usually my sentiments have been posted and I don't usually post merely to agree. I post here because the discussions are often informative and inspire thought.

That's too bad on the elder Lopez, Jason. Otherwise he looks like an ideal option, really. With Wakamatsu apparently not being afraid of headcases is that something to consider or is the problem not in belief system/attitude?

I don't see any team trading anything at all for Jose if Felipe or Hudson could be had for around the same money. It doesn't seem logical for a team to give up anything when a comparable player can be had around the same price while giving up nothing. I am happy with any of those 3 as the opening day starter at 2B. Depending on the timetable of Ackley a one year deal might be better with Felipe than Hudson. The more realistic timeframe of a year and change makes either keeping JoLo or switching to the more defensively flexible Felipe make the most sense if it takes a 2 year deal for either FA 2B. That's just how I see things, though...

No holding breath here either. I'm pretty sure the FO will do what needs to be done and after all the midseason wheeling last year I'm not concerned of they start the season with the roster as is.

I hadn't thought of it before, but couldn't Felipe actually fit the RH(SW)/LF/Inf role that many consider open (or Tui's)? Probably just not enough AB's and too expensive for the role, but if the team was anticipating another role being open midseason...

I hope this isn't too long, just trying to respond to everything at once.

45. By: SMariners11 on 01-25-2010 04:03:10
I just got the time to watch the Cliff Lee introduction and interview, and all I got from it is that he wants to "put up 0s" and wants $200 billion. Hilarious

46. By: cusefan15 on 01-25-2010 11:20:53
Jason or Chris,
What do you think about Pat Burrell? What kind of bounce-back potential do you think he has?

47. By: Hollywood_and_Vine on 01-25-2010 11:49:46
Seems like the only trade scenario I've heard any interest in ( and like personally ) is the Liriano for Lopez trade that DAVE ( I think..) posted about over at USS Mariner a few weeks back. I have a feeling Lopez ( Jose ) will be here at least thru Opening Day.

Btw, this has been the BEST off-season to be a Mariners fan since Griffey re-upped back in '96!!

48. By: Hammy47 on 01-25-2010 11:55:44
With what we are paying Jose Lopez (2.3 million this year I believe) I don't know what the rush is with wanting to deal him. I don't think we would get anything near his value in return, plus he is really one of our only legitimate power threats in our lineup. Yeah he defense is shaky, but he makes up for it at the plate. I know our new team makeup is all about defense, but would Willingham in left field be that much of an upgrade? I like giving Saunders the shot in LF, plus his defense is much better than Willingham's if I am not mistaken. I just don't see the hooplah about needing to trade Lopez asap.

49. By: Edman on 01-25-2010 12:23:41
I think the whole Lopez thing is fueled by the "The Grass is Always Greener" crowd. He's been the anti-OBP sacrificial goat, and those that believe OBP is the only stat that count, continue to harp on his leaving.

Lopez is not a horrible fielding secondbaseman. No, he won't ever win a Gold Glove. But I've seen much worse (see Dan Uggla). My gripe with him was during the 2007 season, under McLaren, when he consistantly lacked focus. He was much better last year. He had lapses, but nearly everyone has a few.

It's funny to me. People are willing to forgive Beltre's equally bad decision making at the plate, because of his fielding. Agreed, he's the best defensive thirdbaseman in the game. So, if some can look past Beltre's lack of plate judgement, why can't some do the same for Lopez, and recognize that his power impact in a line-up? How many power hitting secondbasemen are there?

He hit 25 HR and 42 doubles last year. He's not even at his peak yet. He has the potential to hit 30 HR. Do I want him hitting clean-up? No. But 6th or 7th in the lineup, is fine with me.

50. By: littlelinny6 on 01-25-2010 12:30:18
Edman, alot of the skepticism of Jose Lopez is based around him not only being an incredibly impatient hitter, but despite all his HRs they all go to LF and barely leave the park (you can check all his HR distances to verify). He hits in a park that kills RH power hitters and a few of those 335 ft. HRs from last year could easily become outs this year and all of a sudden he is a 10-15 HR guy that can't get on base. Jose's power is fools gold and must less sustainable that guys with some plate discipline that can take a walk--like Orlando Hudson.

Furthermore Lopez has been borderline pudgy the last few years which will long term affect his mobility and range at 2B. Don't get me wrong, Lopez is an average player which is good to have and they in no way have to trade him, but if they can get a Franscisco Liriano under team control for more than a year it may be worth the gamble and sign a FA to play 2B.

51. By: Edman on 01-25-2010 12:45:08
linny, I do believe that Seattle plays half its games on the road. Should we fill the team only with players who can hit at home?

Homeruns from last year could easily become outs this year? Based on what? He's not even in his prime. What a silly comment to make. Would you say the same to rationalize Ichiro, that his infield hits could turn into outs? Until they do, they don't. It's absolute voodoo to start playing the "what if" game.

How many bases does a walk advance a runner? One is the answer. How many times do you see walks drive in runs?

And to bring up Lopez as being borderline pudgy. Would you feel better if he was skinny as Jack Wilson?

And please, kill the Liriano talk. It's and internet red herring. It was brought up as nothing more than an example without ANY teeth. Unless you know different, of which I'd love to know your source.

52. By: jgstecker on 01-25-2010 13:05:15
The only way trading Lopez makes sense is if there's a decent return for him. There isn't enough of an upgrade between Hudson and Lopez to force a trade on its own.

If Lopez can bring in a #3 SP or a productive right-handed bat, then it might make sense to trade him and go get Hudson. There's been little indication that a trade like that is going to happen though.

53. By: maqman on 01-25-2010 13:13:00
Edman is right IMO, Lopez is actually an average fielder according to UZR/150, better than Hudson, is younger, and hits HRs to left field on a line drive, so they don't get up in the Safeco prevailing wind stream and come down inside the park. We need RBIs as well as OBP and he's a bargain at his salary. Save the money for where it's needed.
On Sheets, he's a career DL rider, having only pitched over 150 innings once since 2005. High risk/high reward players are risky for a reason. High cost, high risk players are not prudent choices, but if Z is okay with that so am I.

54. By: CrimsonNW on 01-25-2010 13:53:40
Olney is tweeting that the A's are pushing to sign Sheets now. Their plan B is a veteran OFer, probably Damon.

Very interesting... Heard anything about how serious they are Jason?

55. By: Edman on 01-25-2010 13:59:01
It will be interesting. If Sheets signs with the A's, then he's purely a liar. If it's about family and winning, as he said to the press, then Oakland isn't in any way a fit.

If he signs with the A's, it was only about the money.

56. By: opatty18 on 01-25-2010 14:18:14
Edman@55, your ignoring the family aspect of his demands. We have no idea whether Oakland is more family friendly than Seattle; how would we even go about measuring that? For all we know his children were wowed and loved Oakland.
And declaring that if he signs with Oakland it was all about the money is superfluous until we actually see the contract.

I'm not saying I won't inevitably agree with you, just that you should give Sheets and the negotiation process the benefit of the doubt before trashing him.

57. By: Edman on 01-25-2010 14:43:13
Sorry, but I won't back down. Oakland, itself isn't a good family enviroment, on a whole. San Francisco and it's surrounding areas aren't nearly as bad. You're right, I can't truly be sure what it's like today. But the Oakland of a few years ago, had crime issues, and wasn't a place to let your kids hang out.

Besides, one of his criteria was winning, and Oakland is not anywhere near that, atm.

58. By: littlelinny6 on 01-25-2010 14:49:31
Edman, you are missing the point. Infield hits for Ichiro and HRs for Lopez are comparing apples and oranges--one is very dependent on the nature of the ballpark the other is not (minus the hybrid turf they have in TOR and TB). Lookoutlanding went in-depth on this:

http://www.lookoutlanding.com/2009/11/4/1115105/points-of-contention-jose-lopezs

66 of 70 HRs to LF, the hardest place to hit a HR in Safeco. There is a reason Adrian Beltre can't hit in Safeco. It is much easier to hit the ball to RF and get it out of Safeco but every one of Lopez's 42 HRs the last two years have been to RF. Last year he had only 1 HR over 400 ft. and an average of 381 ft. This is not to say Lopez is weak but his power if probably maxed out at this point given the ballpark constraints. And yes, being able to be an effective hitter for 81 games in the year is important.

As far as Lopez driving in runs, that is a matter of cirumstance more than anything, not necessarily indicative of skill. Finally, Lopez's physical fitness is important for mobility--effecting among other things his range. These are important factors as we move forward. I am not saying Lopez is a bad player (he's average)--I'm just saying a guy with a .303 OBP with average power should be availabe for trades if it can net us a #3 SP or something like that.

59. By: littlelinny6 on 01-25-2010 14:50:24
sorry, meant to say all of Lopez's 42 HRs went to LF.

60. By: ernier on 01-25-2010 14:58:45
WOW!!! Did Jim Street do any research at all. I made the mistake of reading his Inbox article on the M's website.

Thank goodness for the M's blogosphere!

Here is one of the questions:

Why haven't we heard anything about some of the better hitting players from Tacoma, like Chris Shelton, Jerry Owens, and Prentice Redmond? Can we expect them to contribute at the Major League level?

All three will be competing for reserve spots on the 25-man roster during Spring Training, but I would anticipate that they will be returning for another season at Tacoma. That being said, unforeseen circumstances at the big league level could prompt a promotion for any of them at any given time.

61. By: Edman on 01-25-2010 15:13:03
Average power? For a secondbaseman?

Please don't quote "in-depth" statistics to me. They are pointed, at proving a set point of view. Few, are ever objective. True statistical analysis is blind. It doesn't care who, when clearly, the person doing the analysis is trying to prove their point.

Orlando Hudson as never, in his entire career, driven in more than 67 runs. Has he lacked opportunity? Is it your contention that if he was hitting clean-up, he'd drive in 90 runs? How is OBP gonna drive in a run?

OBP is important for setting the table. It does little to drive in runs. One walk equals on base at a time.

Would I like Lopez to draw more walks? Absolutely. But using it to discount the things he does do well, is flawed.

62. By: Edman on 01-25-2010 15:32:46
One added thing, and I apologize for multiple posts.

Last year's runs + rbi totals:

Hudson = 137

Lopez = 175

Was that circumstance too?

63. By: Adam T on 01-25-2010 15:35:17
OBP is important for setting the table. It does little to drive in runs. One walk equals on base at a time.

Yeah - we know how walks just KILL rallies.

Aside from the fact that walks alone do not make up OBP, and aside from the fact that sometimes walks and hits do actually drive in runs, the best way to score runs is NOT MAKE OUTS.

I don't understand why people see OBP and RBI or runs scored as somehow unrelated (or at least very distantly related)...

64. By: DKulich44 on 01-25-2010 15:40:54
Edman,
Using RBI to prove your point isn't going to work. In fact, Lopez was a worse hitter with runners in scoring position than he was in any other situation last year (255/.307/.395 vs .272/.303/.463). Also, the only thing he was better at with RISP was getting on base (.307 vs. .303) showing a trend that (for Lopez) OBP does in fact drive in runs. Jose spent the majority of his time last season hitting 3rd, behind Ichiro, Branyan, Gutierrez, etc. who were the best hitters on the team. Hudson predominantly batted 2nd, and set the table to a tune of .377 OBP, beating Lopez's OBP by a great margin. He also had 67 hits from that spot, which was good for driving in 25 runs so its not like Hudson goes up there looking for a free pass every at bat. Lopez isn't bad, he's about average, with a great contract. That said, Hudson would be an obvious upgrade especially if Lopez could bring value back via trade. Asking how OBP drives in runs is just fundamentally flawed way of looking at how baseball works. Look at the teams who score the most runs, and there's a clear relationship to OBP. There's a reason it gets more weight than SLG in wOBA and offensive value calculations.

65. By: Adam T on 01-25-2010 15:48:55
Was that circumstance too?

Lopez had 17 more PAs with RISP. So yes, circumstance did have something to do with it.

Lopez also made 46 more outs than Hudson did. Isn't that important?

66. By: PositivePaul on 01-25-2010 15:49:33
Wow. I knew Street was terrible, but uh, wow...

Dude probably is still posting to the Internet using a Word Processor type of typewriter...

67. By: PositivePaul on 01-25-2010 15:50:38
I mean Divish is an idiot, but even HE would've known that Redman and Shelton signed elsewhere.

Just kidding. I love Divish.

68. By: pwhit44 on 01-25-2010 15:55:04
I don't think anyone would argue that Lopez has more pop than Hudson. But RBI's really are not a good way to compare players.

Runs are the result of good hitters getting hits when others are on base. The more good hitters you have, the more opportunities there are to score, the more runs come around. And yeah, OBP is one of the best indicators of a good hitter. Certainly far more so than RBI. (That's not to say that good hitters don't often have lots of RBI. They sometimes do.)

An optimistic view of Lopez would make him about equal to Hudson in overall value, as Hudson's defense is far better.

The money might be the issue here. If Hudson wants like $8M, maybe Lopez is the better value -- he is still awfully cheap.

69. By: CrimsonNW on 01-25-2010 15:55:16
Good point. I just hope we lose another high-risk/high-reward pitcher to a division foe again. We all know what happened last time...

70. By: pwhit44 on 01-25-2010 16:02:25
Ok good, people already jumped on the RBI point. It's kind of silly, really.

RBI's are the natural result of OBP. The more OBP you have, the more runs.

Homers don't hurt, but still.

71. By: jkcmason on 01-25-2010 16:20:16
{edited for length} Edman and Linny,
Your discussion is pretty entertaining, but I think that you are missing a couple things.

The reason why Jose Lopez is continually discussed as a trade chip is because he simply doesn't fit the mold of players that Z has been bringing in. Look around the Diamond at all of the positions. Langerhans, Gutierrez, Suzuki, Figgins, Wilson, & Kotchman. All of these players have two things in common:
1- The play above average to excellent defense.
2- They work counts a little bit and aren't completely impatient.

Jose Lopez doesn't have either of these working for him. It foes back to Sesame Street. "One of these things is not like the others." It isn't that Jose Lopez isn't a productive player, he definately has value. He just doesn't seem to fit the model that GMZ is using.

If you have the ability to trade Lopez for something that will help this team, and then sign another player that is overall as valuable, you are improving. The only problem is that you have to find a team that values Jose Lopez more than what is out there on the market.

72. By: ARock on 01-25-2010 18:13:25
Re: 'RBIs'

As mentioned, we shouldnt look at RBIs, it doesnt distinguish between the batter's skill versus the skill of those who get on base before him.

The original comment was:
"We need RBIs as well as OBP"

A better thing to say if you're making this point might be "We need SLG as well as OBP". That way you are talking about a skill of the batter himself, not simply something that groups together his skill with that of the batters ahead of him.

As we all probably know, both OBP and SLG contribute to run scoring. While on average OBP contributes more, it depends on the lineup and the hitters around the batter to determine how valuable each factor is.

Last year the Mariners were last in the league in OBP, and below average in power/SLG but not last, resulting in being last in runs scored. The lack of OBP was a much bigger problem for us than lack of power. The Mariners have done a good job of improving their offense by getting some high OBP guys like Chone Figgins. Our #1 offensive problem last year wasnt power it was OBP, so the Mariners are correctly addressing it.

73. By: slamcactus on 01-25-2010 18:30:08
Idea: If, as Dave Cameron speculates, the perfect fit for the Ms' last roster spot for position players is a RH bat who can sub at the outfield corners and maybe even play a little infield, why not work Matt Tuiasosopo out in the outfield and give him a shot to take that place on the roster in ST? He's got the tools and athleticism to play a quality corner outfield, the team clearly isn't married to playing him at any one position, and the worst thing that happens is he doesn't provide enough offense (or sucks in the OF) and you send him back to Tacoma and give the spot to one of the other options you bring in to compete for the spot (a Fernando Tatis-level guy). Obviously it'd be nicer to see someone with more of a track record take that spot and run with it, but we don't have a whole lot of $ or flexibility left, and Tui may be just about ready to be a quality utility guy in the majors.

74. By: Edman on 01-25-2010 19:04:43
Yes, Jack prefers solid defenders. But, he's also a value guy. Lopez is an inexpensive option, at this point. Even if Hudson does sign for less than he wants, it's a pretty good bet that he's not coming for the same kind of money as Lopez.

Some of you act like Seattle's gonna just keep on spending, without thought.

Lets put it into different terms. Which would you rather have:

Lopez and Sheets

or

Hudson and Washburn?

Chances of getting Sheets and Hudson, are pretty remote.

75. By: Lailoken on 01-25-2010 19:10:27
Tuiasosopo had his first decent year of infield defense in 2009. Until he repeats that performance it's hard to envision him learning OF on the MLB-level. He played a passable second base in limited time last year but that was a really small sample. He boots a lot of balls still. Asking him to do both IF & OF might just make him worse & therefore a liability.

2004: 11 errors in 18 games
2005: 26 errors in 80 games
2006: 35 errors in 110 games
2007: 17 errors in 127 games
2008: 29 errors in 121 games
2009: 6 errors in 63 games

76. By: Edman on 01-25-2010 19:17:34
I agree, Tui needs some more time in Tacoma to refine being a role player, unless he can breakout and force Seattle to find him a position.

77. By: 200tang on 01-25-2010 19:18:54
#74

You realize you're trade scenario is totally screwed up, right?

You say we have to choose between Hudson/Washburn or Lopez/Sheets, but that's 100% false. What did we trade Lopez for in the Hudson/Washburn example? It would be more like :

Willingham/Hudson/Washburn, but even that's screwed up because you have no way to know how much both players are going to sign for. Just because Hudson wants 8M per year doesn't mean he's getting that and there's little market for him so he has no leverage. Then even if you can't get Hudson, Felipe Lopez is still on the market.

Also - Nobody should ever use RBI/Runs to determine how good a player is offensively. Ever. Lopez is an average hitter and nobody will mind going in to next year with him on the team because he's not bad, but if you can use him to upgrade the other roster spots and bring back a solid replacement it's worth it.

78. By: Faceplant on 01-25-2010 19:57:32
"Runs are the result of good hitters getting hits when others are on base."

It's not that simple. Just because someone wasn't actually the one to plate a baserunner, doesn't mean they didn't contribute to the run that crossed the plate.

Say there is a runner on second with two outs. Player A works a walk. Player B, the next hitter, then singles to CF scoring player A.

Player B greatly contributed to that run scoring. If he makes an out in that situation then the inning is over, and nobody scores.

When all is said and done I keep coming to the same conclusion. Although hitters who make the same amount of outs are not necessarily equal hitters (a guy who makes few outs but hit's for good power, is clearly more valuable than a guy who makes few outs but has no power) in the end not making an out should be a hitters primary goal. Everything else is secondary.

79. By: Faceplant on 01-25-2010 20:00:47
"Say there is a runner on second with two outs. Player A works a walk. Player B, the next hitter, then singles to CF scoring player A.

Player B greatly contributed to that run scoring. If he makes an out in that situation then the inning is over, and nobody scores."

WOW... I really screwed that up. Let's try that again.

Say there is a runner on second with two outs. Player A works a walk. Player B, the next hitter, then singles to CF, scoring the runner from second.

Player A greatly contributed to that run scoring. if he makes an out in that situation, then the inning is over and nobody scores.

Whew. Hope that makes more sense.

80. By: FWBrodie on 01-25-2010 20:13:41
Jason, could you tell me anything about Danny Espinosa of the Nationals organization by any chance? I was looking over some Nationals prospects, and he just sort of piqued my interest. Have you ever seen him or heard anything about him?

81. By: slamcactus on 01-25-2010 20:17:54
Tuiasosopo's tools have always been more suited to the outfield than infield. Error-rate tells you nothing about his defensive performance. He'll probably never be plus anywhere, but he could turn into a guy who's serviceable at all 4 corners plus second base.

It's really not that hard to learn a corner OF spot, and scouts have been suggesting that as Tui's ultimate destination for years, given his tool set. You don't lose much by seeing what he can do out there.

82. By: Edman on 01-25-2010 20:30:52
#77, you do realize that the example I gave was as loose as your speculation that the Nats would trade Willingham for Lopez?

Of course it's not exact. Not knowing what potential trades are out there, it's impossible to know what can and can't be done. And, that's exactly my point.

Some here are treating the whole issue as if trading Lopez is vital to success. If he was a player making $8 million , I might agree. But, he's not even making $3 million next year.

Just for fun, I took RBI/Plate Appearances, and here's the result, over the last three years:

With runners on base resulting in an RBI:

Hudson: 21.2%
Lopez: 26.3

With runners in scoring position resulting in an RBI:

Hudson: 31.3%
Lopez: 36.4%

Stats are a great measure, but they're a tool, not script.

83. By: Lailoken on 01-25-2010 20:30:59
Sure, seeing what he can do out there is great. The more versatility the better. Learning on the big league roster when the team is built to head to the playoffs is far from ideal. He is already a bit of a liability in the field & spare playing time mixed with a new position would likely aggravate an already pronounced weakness. Better he learns in AAA after Spring Training.

84. By: slamcactus on 01-25-2010 20:50:15
Nobody suggested he learn at the big league level unless he shows real aptitude when he starts. The season doesn't start for another 2 months, and the training complex's doors aren't locked. Plenty of time to get the kid some reps in the outfield.

If you're acquiring a guy who preserves enough flexibility to call Saunders up if he shows he's ready (which I think is and should be one of the team's priorities), whoever takes this spot will be getting about 1/4 to 1/3 of a season's worth of playing time in the outfield, max. If Tui responds to a move to the OF the way I think he will, he'll range from slight liability at first and probably develop into a ~ league average fielder. There's very little difference between that and Fernando Tatis in limited playing time.

Beyond that, we already have him in the system. If you try him out in the OF in ST and he's absolutely brutal, you move on to another player.

85. By: Lailoken on 01-25-2010 20:55:31
Sounds reasonable to me. Sure he would have competition. I just worry that if he's learning the OF he'll be even worse in the IF when they decide they need a RH bat there.

86. By: Faceplant on 01-25-2010 21:54:51
"Some here are treating the whole issue as if trading Lopez is vital to success. If he was a player making $8 million , I might agree. But, he's not even making $3 million next year."

I don't really see that. Nobody is suggesting that we trade Lopez for nothing.

Lopez is garnering a lot of attention as a possible trade chip because he is both a good value, AND replaceable.

"Just for fun, I took RBI/Plate Appearances, and here's the result, over the last three years:"

That's nice, but you can't just ignore an entire component of a players contribution.

87. By: Jason A. Churchill on 01-25-2010 23:13:53
Brodie,

I saw Espinosa in the Fall League and liked what I saw. He doesn't scream star, due to lack of a plus tool and average power potential (probably at best), but he might be the shortstop version of Scott Sizemore; capable, slight chance to be a little more than average during peak years.

I'm trying to think of a good, productive reason for Washington to trade him, however.

88. By: FWBrodie on 01-26-2010 00:43:15
Thanks Jason. I like to kind of mentally file away prospects that could be potential targets for the Mariners someday (Scott Sizemore was an example btw). I don't really see a reason for Washington to deal him right now either, but if Desmond begins to solidify himself soon...

89. By: Edman on 01-26-2010 02:49:19
No, Lopez is gathering a lot of speculation. I haven't seen teams clammoring for his services. There are still a couple of good secondbasemen available. Thus, you'd be selling low on Lopez, and driving up the price on the unsigned Free Agents.

No, you can't ignore the other components. However, that's what many of those lobbying for him to be traded are doing. Most sight OBP and his defense.

My point was that stats generally can be used any way that the creator intends. Most are going to support their argument, and ignore the parts that aren't supported.

I have no idea what Jack will do, but keeping Lopez on the team is just as viable an option, as anything else.

90. By: Faceplant on 01-26-2010 03:40:04
"No, Lopez is gathering a lot of speculation. I haven't seen teams clammoring for his services."

Well, I meant "garnering a lot of attention from fans" but point taken. I obviously have no inside info, but from what I can tell the market for him has not been great.

"Thus, you'd be selling low on Lopez, and driving up the price on the unsigned Free Agents."

That's kind of a leap. Lopez may be comparable in talent to someone like Orlando Hudson, but he's also a lot younger, and has played the majority of his games in a park that is especially detrimental to players of his skillset. I think there are certainly teams who would value Jose Lopez more than they would an Orlando Hudson.

"My point was that stats generally can be used any way that the creator intends. Most are going to support their argument, and ignore the parts that aren't supported."

Sure. I agree that they certainly can be cherry picked, and many people do ignore data that contradicts their opinions. But I haven't seen that when it comes to Lopez. Just because someone cites a statistic doesn't mean they aren't being objective. A lot of people understand the value of Lopez's power, and contact ability. They just feel that those positive attributes are largely cancelled out by the fact that he makes a metric ton of outs.

People who feel that way may disagree with you on what skill is more important. But just because they disagree with you does not mean they aren't being objective.

"I have no idea what Jack will do, but keeping Lopez on the team is just as viable an option, as anything else."

I totally agree. What really matters is what other teams think Jose is worth.

91. By: jgstecker on 01-26-2010 09:35:54
The last wo paragraphs of this article are interesting:

http://mlb.mlb.com/news/article.jsp?ymd=20100125&content_id=7965908&vkey=news_tex&fext=.jsp&c_id=tex&partnerId=rss_tex

Sounds like the Rangers may not be able to keep up in the Sheets hunt. Are the A's the favorites now? Really?

92. By: safecochatter on 01-26-2010 11:08:36
sheets would be in oakland long enough to show some value then traded. sheets doesn't seem like the type of player that would want to go thru that.
getting the feeling jack has one more move in him before st. and having sheets in the 3 slot would be awesome. flying into boston or ny and be able to throw felix,lee and sheets at them in a three game series. priceless!

93. By: Edman on 01-26-2010 11:27:00
If Sheets does go for the money in Oakland, then he deserves the A-Rod Insincerity Award for the spoken word.

94. By: ernier on 01-26-2010 11:56:04
Looks like it's Sheets to the A's and Nady to the Cubs. Can cross them off the M's list

95. By: Rudolf on 01-26-2010 12:12:35
MLBtraderumors reports Sheets to the A's for over 8 million.

96. By: mazono on 01-26-2010 12:13:15
For Some odd reason i am not that disappointed in this. I did want to to see Sheets in M's uni. I am trying to compare myself from when the Rangers signed Harden to now. Harden signing pissed me off. This one i just shrug my shoulders.

97. By: ernier on 01-26-2010 12:20:59
MLBFanHouse says Sheets deal is 1 year for 10 Million. No Thanks.

98. By: Edman on 01-26-2010 13:20:54
Anyone still think Billy Beane is the boy genious?

Moneyball is Moneybull, IMO.

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!