Smoak and Mirrors

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: Smoak and Mirrors

    In response to jasko2248's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to moonslav59's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Sox going with 6 SP this year are they?

    If you think Lester, Buch, Doub, Demp, and Lackey each get 32+ starts, you better think twice. It is almost guaranteed that there will be at least 25 starts of our 6th starter or lower.

    [/QUOTE]

    I don't think that was his point.  Why would Shawn Marcum sign with a team that has a set rotation already?  They will obviously add rotation depth, and they obviously already have some, but it's not going to be a guy like Marcum.

    [/QUOTE]

    Marcum will sign for the most money, like 99% of players do. He will look at Lackey and Doubront and know he's top 5.

     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from jasko2248. Show jasko2248's posts

    Re: Smoak and Mirrors

    In response to moonslav59's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to jasko2248's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to moonslav59's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Sox going with 6 SP this year are they?

    If you think Lester, Buch, Doub, Demp, and Lackey each get 32+ starts, you better think twice. It is almost guaranteed that there will be at least 25 starts of our 6th starter or lower.

    [/QUOTE]

    I don't think that was his point.  Why would Shawn Marcum sign with a team that has a set rotation already?  They will obviously add rotation depth, and they obviously already have some, but it's not going to be a guy like Marcum.

    [/QUOTE]

    Marcum will sign for the most money, like 99% of players do. He will look at Lackey and Doubront and know he's top 5.

    [/QUOTE]

    That's not reality, Moon.  The Sox are not going to "offer the most money" to a Shaun Marcum when they have a set rotation.  The only way Doubront and Lackey aren't in the rotation is if they are injured or traded, which is highly unlikely.  Lackey makes 15 million and is healthy for the first time in a Sox uniform.  He'll definitely be in the rotation.  I also think the Sox like Doubront a whole heck of a lot more than you do.  So again, the Sox aren't signing Marcum.  

     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: Smoak and Mirrors

    In response to jasko2248's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to moonslav59's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to jasko2248's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to moonslav59's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Sox going with 6 SP this year are they?

    If you think Lester, Buch, Doub, Demp, and Lackey each get 32+ starts, you better think twice. It is almost guaranteed that there will be at least 25 starts of our 6th starter or lower.

    [/QUOTE]

    I don't think that was his point.  Why would Shawn Marcum sign with a team that has a set rotation already?  They will obviously add rotation depth, and they obviously already have some, but it's not going to be a guy like Marcum.

    [/QUOTE]

    Marcum will sign for the most money, like 99% of players do. He will look at Lackey and Doubront and know he's top 5.

    [/QUOTE]

    That's not reality, Moon.  The Sox are not going to "offer the most money" to a Shaun Marcum when they have a set rotation.  The only way Doubront and Lackey aren't in the rotation is if they are injured or traded, which is highly unlikely.  Lackey makes 15 million and is healthy for the first time in a Sox uniform.  He'll be definitely be in the rotation.  I also think the Sox like Doubront a whole heck of a lot  more than you do.  So again, the Sox aren't signing Marcum.  

    [/QUOTE]

    I nver said we'd offer marcum the most money. I was answering the point about why would Marcum sign here... most money.

    I do not think ben has even called about marcum: his mistake.

    If the worry is having 6 starters, then we could trade Doubront as part of a bigger package: Doubront, Salty, Ellsbury and Breslow for a better OF'er.

     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from jasko2248. Show jasko2248's posts

    Re: Smoak and Mirrors

    In response to moonslav59's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to jasko2248's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to moonslav59's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to jasko2248's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to moonslav59's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Sox going with 6 SP this year are they?

    If you think Lester, Buch, Doub, Demp, and Lackey each get 32+ starts, you better think twice. It is almost guaranteed that there will be at least 25 starts of our 6th starter or lower.

    [/QUOTE]

    I don't think that was his point.  Why would Shawn Marcum sign with a team that has a set rotation already?  They will obviously add rotation depth, and they obviously already have some, but it's not going to be a guy like Marcum.

    [/QUOTE]

    Marcum will sign for the most money, like 99% of players do. He will look at Lackey and Doubront and know he's top 5.

    [/QUOTE]

    That's not reality, Moon.  The Sox are not going to "offer the most money" to a Shaun Marcum when they have a set rotation.  The only way Doubront and Lackey aren't in the rotation is if they are injured or traded, which is highly unlikely.  Lackey makes 15 million and is healthy for the first time in a Sox uniform.  He'll be definitely be in the rotation.  I also think the Sox like Doubront a whole heck of a lot  more than you do.  So again, the Sox aren't signing Marcum.  

    [/QUOTE]

    I nver said we'd offer marcum the most money. I was answering the point about why would Marcum sign here... most money.  Ok, since the Sox wouldn't offer him the most money, the possibility of him coming here is not realistic then, right?

    I do not think ben has even called about marcum: his mistake.  The Sox Front Office does some due dilligence on everybody, available or not.  Since Marcum has a bit of reputation for being a jerk, maybe they didn't take very long to decide he doesn't fit.  You're right though, I don't think they ever had any interest at all. 

    If the worry is having 6 starters, then we could trade Doubront as part of a bigger package: Doubront, Salty, Ellsbury and Breslow for a better OF'er.  Those 4 guys aren't going to get you a "better" outfielder than Ellsbury.  Again, you're not a Doubront fan, but the Sox aren't in any hurry to trade young left handed starting pitchers who throw in the mid 90's.  Barring injury, the rotation is set. 

    [/QUOTE]


     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from notin. Show notin's posts

    Re: Smoak and Mirrors

    In response to tom-uk's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    IMO The case against trading for Smoak is strong.

    Last 3 years on road:  .707 OPS   .271 BABIP   .168 ISO   173 games

    Looking at a low BABIP and blaming bad luck is too simplistic, and in this case wrong.

    Why is his BABIP low?  

    Line drive 18% is low  (11th of 61 1B)

    Pop-ups 11% is high (17th highest of 61)

    Infield hits 2% is low (4th of 61)

    Flyball 42% in high (13th highest of 61)

    His HR/FB 12% is average (25th of 61)

     

    McQwire had a career .255 BABIP  but.....

     

    [/QUOTE]


     

    I expected a similar response from you. You have made the most compelling anti-Smoak arguments to date. and the only one to use a range of statistics.

     

    Per the line drive rate, I would argue that the league average runs from 18 to 20% typically (per fangraphs), and has fallen in to that range for the past 5 years. So Smoak’s “low” line drive rate is really low end of average. And in 2 of the last 3 years, has been either high end of league average or above. In 2011, he did have an abysmally low 13.4%, however. Smoak has been hampered by some bad luck on his line drives, as his BABIP over a 3 year stretch is about .690, which is behind the league average of .720.

     

    Also his HR/FB rate is apparently largely ballpark dependant. In 2011, he did have a higher rate (13.4%) at home than on the road, but the home / road splits were reversed drastically in 2010 (20% / 7%) and 2012 (19.5% / 4.9%). The end result are career splits of 15.8% and 8.5%. So, if you take Smoak out of Seattle, nearly one of every 6 flyballs goes for a HR. That is not an elite rate, but certainly not one that should be ignored. Over the past 3 years, that number is greater than the HR/FB rate of Matt Holliday, Evan Longoria and Adrian Beltre, among numerous others. The Sox alternate 1B front runner, Mike Napoli is 2 overall in MLB, behind Giancarlo Stanton.

     

    His popup rate is certainly a concern and a factor. Fangraphs lists it as 12.8% over the past 3 seasons, which places him 40th in MLB over that stretch. There are some impressive names worse in this regard (Trot Tulowiztki), but not many. Mark Trumbo has a 14.1%, if you consider him a viable alternative. (He is not. The Angels dealt Kendrys Morales to pave the way for him.) However, around 12% is where the big names start appearing, such as Giancarlo Stanton (12.5%). Frankly, if he hits a home run on every sixth flyball, I can live with a popup every eighth.

     

    Your previous argument was based on wRC. While Fangraphs search I did differed slightly from your results, and placed him 56 of 57 with your criteria, ahead of only Travis Lee, the point was taken, as “Better than Travis Lee” is really not much of an argument. My counterargument is that if Smoak is hitting outside of Safeco and homering at a higher rate, and if he can hit around .720 on LD percentage like any hitter with normal luck does, it would certainly increase his wRC, and might do so significantly. After all, on the page I looked at, James Loney was more productive than Paul Konerko with that criteria. So there is no doubt that it is not etched in stone as a forecast for the future.

     

    The real question to me is the price tag. Several bloggers feel Smoak still carries significant trade value, although I have yet to see an actual name attached. What is not disputed is his future in Seattle. With Kendrys Morales, Jesus Montero, Raul Ibanez and Jason Bay all on board with expected playing tome at 1B and DH, Smoak does appear to be one of the odd men out, along with Mike Carp. The Mariners are also repeatedly linked to productive OF bats, such as Justin Upton and (more recently) Mike Morse. Now if the price for Morse is a LHRP plus a prospect, the Sox might be able to “help” Seattle out by sending Andrew Miller for Smoak, either enabling the Mariners to deal Miller plus directly for Morse, or allowing Miller to take over the LHRP role from Charlie Furbush. Either way, acquiring Morse would further reduce the role of Smoak in Seattle. The only questions remaining are whether or not Miller is enough, or what other pieces are involved. There is most definitely a line somewhere where Smoak’s price should be considered too high.

     

    Get the 2011 Smoak, and things will certainly not work out. But if the Sox get the 2010 or 2012 version, and he has potential to be a steal and grow into the role of Smoak Monster.

     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: Smoak and Mirrors

    Get the 2011 Smoak, and things will certainly not work out. But if the Sox get the 2010 or 2012 version, and he has potential to be a steal and grow into the role of Smoak Monster.

    I'd certainly trade Miller or Breslow for Smoak and his 4 years of team control. We really have next to nothing in terms of young 1Bman, except for maybe Travis Shaw (who is at least 1-2 years away from any chance at the bigs) or by moving Middlebrooks, Cecchini or even Bogaerts to 1B. I don't see Mauro G as the answer.

     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from hill55. Show hill55's posts

    Re: Smoak and Mirrors

    I doubt Seattle will sell low on Justin Smoak unless the Mariners get a decent return.

    I expect Smoak to remain in Seattle because the Mariners would not get a decent return this offseason.

    One Seattle blogger suggested the Mariners are not ready to give up on Smoak:

    http://www.ussmariner.com/2012/12/20/the-end-of-mike-carp/

    ... although on Sunday the same blogger raised concerns about the Seattle roster:

    http://www.ussmariner.com/2013/01/13/current-roles/

     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: Smoak and Mirrors

    In response to hill55's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    I doubt Seattle will sell low on Justin Smoak unless the Mariners get a decent return.

    I expect Smoak to remain in Seattle because the Mariners would not get a decent return this offseason.

    One Seattle blogger suggested the Mariners are not ready to give up on Smoak:

    http://www.ussmariner.com/2012/12/20/the-end-of-mike-carp/

    ... although on Sunday the same blogger raised concerns about the Seattle roster:

    http://www.ussmariner.com/2013/01/13/current-roles/

    [/QUOTE]

    Would you think Seattle would go for this:

    To SEA: Mike Morse

    To WSH: A Miller, Lava or Salty, & Prospect from Sea

    To Bos: Smoak & Prospect from Sea

     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from hill55. Show hill55's posts

    Re: Smoak and Mirrors

    In response to notin's comment:

    Get the 2011 Smoak, and things will certainly not work out. But if the Sox get the 2010 or 2012 version, and he has potential to be a steal and grow into the role of Smoak Monster.

    2011 was Justin Smoak's best year.

    http://www.baseball-reference.com/players/s/smoakju01.shtml

    I doubt Seattle would trade four years of 26-year-old Justin Smoak for one year of Mike Morse, who will be 31 years old on Opening Day. Hence the prosposal of Andrew Miller-for-Smoak and then Miller-plus for Morse is not realistic. The Mariners have little need for Andrew Miller because the solid M's bullpen already features lefties Charlie Furbush, Oliver Perez and Lucas Luetge.

    This offseason the Mariners have supplemented their young roster* (that ranked eighth among the 30 MLB teams in runs scored on the road) by adding veteran hitters Kendrys Morales, Raul Ibanez and Jason Bay. With the anticipated further development of Seattle's talented young hitters, this Mariner fan is more concerned about the starting rotation that lost Jason Vargas and Kevin Millwood. The M's need a bridge to their touted pitching prospects.**

    * even with the additions of the 29-year-old Morales, the 40-year-old Ibanez and the 34-year-old Bay, Seattle has the second-youngest roster in baseball: http://espn.go.com/mlb/stats/rosters/_/sort/average_age/order/true

    ** Seattle's Big Three pitching prospects -- Taijuan Walker, Danny Hultzen and James Paxton -- started the 2012 in the same Double A rotation as 22-year-old Brandon Maurer, who went on to be named the Southern League Most Outstanding Pitcher. Baseball Prospectus recently ranked those four pitchers among the top six prospects in the loaded Seattle farm system, followed immediately by three teenage pitchers: 16-year-old Luiz Gohara, 17-year-old Victor Sanchez and 18-year-old Tyler Pike. http://www.baseballprospectus.com/article.php?articleid=19227

     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from hill55. Show hill55's posts

    Re: Smoak and Mirrors

    In response to moonslav59's comment:

    Would you think Seattle would go for this: To SEA: Mike Morse; To WSH: A Miller, Lava or Salty, & Prospect from Sea; To Bos: Smoak & Prospect from Sea


    I doubt Seattle would trade four years of 26-year-old Justin Smoak for one year of Mike Morse, who will be 31 years old on Opening Day (much less Smoak plus two prospects). And I question whether Washington would be interested in Ryan Lavarnway or Jarrod Saltalamacchia.

    Seattle won't surrender much for a one-year rental such as Mike Morse (or Saltalamacchia or Jacoby Ellsbury) as the Mariners realistically don't expect to contend in 2013. A single one-year rental of Kendrys Morales (in exchange for a one-year rental of Jason Vargas) should suffice for Seattle.

    I can't help but note that outside his solid if unspectacular 3.3 WAR* posted in 2011, Morse has never exceeded the WAR posted in 2012 by current Seattle outfielders Michael Saunders, Casper Wells and Raul Ibanez. Mariner centerfielder Franklin Gutierrez faltered in 2012, but had four season WAR (including 6.3 in 2009) higher than Morse's second-best WAR. Seattle doesn't have room for Morse at 1B/DH while Ibanez and Jason Bay have already filled the roles of defensively challenged corner outfielders.

    * Wins Above Replacement as reported at FanGraphs

     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from southpaw777. Show southpaw777's posts

    Re: Smoak and Mirrors

    Although Id rather have Daric Barton from the A's, I still think Smoak, because of age and control, will cost more than our leftovers...

     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from tom-uk. Show tom-uk's posts

    Re: Smoak and Mirrors

    I understand why Smoak interests some Sox fans, the buy low approach has given mixed results  with Salty, Aviles, Hermida, and Miller.  The problem with JS is that other than strong hitting in hitter friendly minor league parks, I don't see any positives other than age:

    1.   Platoon player?  Splits are even.

    2.  Seattle hurt his numbers, yes but his road numbers are also bad (see above).

    3. Bad luck, no his BABIP on the road is .271 and his road peripherals are consistent with a low BABIP (see above).

    4. Small sample, not after 173 road games.

    5. Power will come with age, unlikely as Eno Sarris showed power peaks at 24 to 25 yo.  His career road HR/FB is a bit below average for a 1B at 12%.

    I see Smoak as a Kotchman type, strong in the minors but bad years will outnumber good ones. As Dave Cameron, pointed out it is rare for 1B to start out as poorly as JS has and then turn it around.

     

     

     

     

     
  13. This post has been removed.

     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from hill55. Show hill55's posts

    Re: Smoak and Mirrors

    From Red Sox blogger Timothy Brooks at Firebrand of the American League:

    http://firebrandal.com/2013/01/15/justin-smoak-a-backup-plan/

    ... and the reaction on a Seattle message board:

    http://forums.seattletimes.nwsource.com/forums/viewtopic.php?f=22&t=192293

     

     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from southpaw777. Show southpaw777's posts

    Re: Smoak and Mirrors

    In response to hill55's comment:

    From Red Sox blogger Timothy Brooks at Firebrand of the American League:

    http://firebrandal.com/2013/01/15/justin-smoak-a-backup-plan/

    ... and the reaction on a Seattle message board:

    http://forums.seattletimes.nwsource.com/forums/viewtopic.php?f=22&t=192293

     




    Seems like Seattle fans are realistic about the return if he was dealt, which is not getting much more than a low level prospect with a high ceiling...ie; Brandon Jacobs, Sean coyle.

     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: Smoak and Mirrors

    In response to southpaw777's comment:

    In response to hill55's comment:

     

    From Red Sox blogger Timothy Brooks at Firebrand of the American League:

    http://firebrandal.com/2013/01/15/justin-smoak-a-backup-plan/

    ... and the reaction on a Seattle message board:

    http://forums.seattletimes.nwsource.com/forums/viewtopic.php?f=22&t=192293

     

     




    Seems like Seattle fans are realistic about the return if he was dealt, which is not getting much more than a low level prospect with a high ceiling...ie; Brandon Jacobs, Sean coyle.

     



    Not sure how "high" Coyle's ceiling is, but I think you are right about what it might take to get Smoak without breaking mirrors.

     
  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from parhunter55. Show parhunter55's posts

    Re: Smoak and Mirrors

    Interesting to read the thread from the Seattle fans.  They seem to be realistic, and they seem to lean towards NOT wanting to give up on Smoak just yet.  But most impressive...there was not one attack against another person's position, accompanied by some outlandish support for or vitriol against the player(s) being discussed.  No lofty softies, and pike/anti-pike nonsense.  Just considered baseball talk.

     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from parhunter55. Show parhunter55's posts

    Re: Smoak and Mirrors

    I've got to be honest.  The best matchup for Smoak from the Sox is Gomez.  Gomez was undrafted and signed (as a walk-on I suppose) to a rookie league at 19.  He took a year or two to do well there but then raked for two seasons.  At age 22 he was promoted straight to high A ball.  Did not do too well so he was demoted to low A ball.  Took him two years to figure it out at that level.  But once he did, he has excelled at each level he's gone to, and he was promoted each year  (2009 A+, 2010 AA, 2011 AAA 2012 MLB), with OPS of .868, .820, .878, and .746 at each level (not counting his .960 OPS at Pawtucket to start the 2012 season). 

    Gomez does not quite have the OBP skills Smoak has shown for working a count and drawing walks, but he shows more power.  It took Gomez awhile to learn to hit in pro ball, and he was moved along slowly, probably because he was an alternate route candidate, so to speak.  But he seems to have figured it out.  He has succeeded at every level for 4 years in a row.

    One reason people here suggest Gomez as an option at 1B is that he is at least as promising as Smoak, and it costs the team nothing to give him a shot.  And that view makes a lot of sense to me.

     
  19. You have chosen to ignore posts from parhunter55. Show parhunter55's posts

    Re: Smoak and Mirrors

    In other words, if it costs more than Gomez to land Smoak, just keep Gomez and give him a shot.  He has as much chance to succeed as Smoak, IMO.  I am not swayed just because Smoak was a 13th overall pick and Gomez went unsigned.  Each year the draft is full of those kinds of mistakes.

     
  20. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: Smoak and Mirrors

    In response to parhunter55's comment:

    In other words, if it costs more than Gomez to land Smoak, just keep Gomez and give him a shot.  He has as much chance to succeed as Smoak, IMO.  I am not swayed just because Smoak was a 13th overall pick and Gomez went unsigned.  Each year the draft is full of those kinds of mistakes.



    I'd rather have Smoak than Gomez, and I'm not sure Seattle wants Gomez. Anyone could have had him last year.

     
Sections
Shortcuts

Share