Mike Lowell Vs. Everybody Else
Mike Lowell laces a run-scoring single against the Angels on Sunday, October 11th.The passage of Saturday's non-tender deadline -- which predictably flooded the market with more than a few interesting names -- and brand new reports indicating that the Mike Lowell-for-Max Ramirez deal will remain in limbo indefinitely have conspired to fuel growing speculation that the Texas Rangers are searching elsewhere for their cherished right-handed bat. But to what end?
Several schools of thought appear to have emerged with respect to this issue, one of which holds that the expense in terms of already scarce cash ($3 million) and top-15 prospects (Ramirez) isn't worth the uninspiring payoff and that Texas should be pursuing free agent talent in the vein of Jonny Gomes, Ryan Garko -- whom the Rangers believed they were close to acquiring back in late July before San Francisco disrupted their plans -- or even Fernando Tatis. Conversely, the opposing school of thought posits Lowell as the adequate-hitting veteran leader that is needed to fill the clubhouse void created by the departures of Eddie Guardado, Kevin Millwood, Marlon Byrd and Omar Vizquel.
As is the case with the majority of things in life, the best answer almost certainly lies somewhere in the middle, but that's not the thought-provoking element in the pro-Lowell vs. anti-Lowell debate, which ultimately boils down to a matter of risk tolerance. Pictured below are Sean Smith's 2010 CHONE player projections for the Lowell/Gomes/Garko/Tatis quartet, sorted by wOBA (all numbers have been park- and league-adjusted to a neutral environment):
You might notice that Garko enjoys a healthy 10-point advantage over his two closest competitors, although this is potentially misleading in more than one way. First, we don't have the player-by-player platoon breakdowns, so it's impossible to say just how much stronger these numbers would look with a higher ratio of plate appearances against southpaws mixed in, and second, that 10-point advantage equates to a difference of less than five runs per 500 plate appearances -- worthy of noting, certainly, but not tremendously consequential.
The real point of including that chart, however, was to demonstrate just how little separates each hitter's 50th percentile (median) projection, which in turn goes back to the real question: how much risk are you willing to bear in exchange for the potential of greater rewards? Gomes and Garko are the more appealing options on paper, certainly, but both have encountered offensive missteps in the last 24 months and neither represents as much of a known quantity as Lowell, whose boringly predictable output might actually be something of a virtue when you consider that this offense is already loaded to the brim with boom-or-bust sluggers coming off down years (e.g. Josh Hamilton, Chris Davis and Jarrod Saltalamacchia).
I'll pose the question from a slightly different angle: is there value in Lowell's lessened performance variation above and beyond that of his pedestrian forecasted numbers, and if so, is it enough to bridge the gap all the way to Garko/Gomes and beyond? If that's still not enough, do the expected intangible gains in the clubhouse finally do the trick? This is no longer simply a matter of deciding whether the Lowell trade was a good idea or not; it actually runs far deeper than that, burrowing all the way down to our individual philosophies on roster construction and the best ways to maximize expected production.
The last dimension merits only brief consideration, but it's consideration nevertheless: if the Lowell-for-Ramirez swap ultimately does come to fruition, one has to wonder whether manager Ron Washington will be able optimize the value of his new veteran toy by restricting him to merely 350-400 plate appearances, and if not, just how much he's going to overexpose him. The more playing time Lowell receives above and beyond his designated starts against southpaws, the more problematic it becomes for Texas, because at 500 plate appearances he's already nothing special ... and if you go too terribly far beyond that marker, you've suddenly got an offensive liability on your hands.
[Additional Reading: "Thinking about Mike Lowell and Ryan Garko" (Adam J. Morris)]
18 Comments | in Analysis, Rumors, The Off-Season
Reader Comments (18)
I was about to post the following in the Sunday thread until seeing this delicious comparison arrive in the sidebar: Thanks, Joey!
Craig, 2 years ago I would have agreed with you.
SR, agreed on the idea of Almezaga if we actually use his versatility to save a 25-man roster spot for an extra P (Snyder), but otherwise why not get that versatility from our IF guys so our OF pick-ups (one of CF Reed Johnson or RFs Garko/Tatis) or call-ups (Tracy or Moreland) can actually help us offensively on a regular basis?
I think my favorite FA combo is w/RJohnson & Tatis, since we can add 2 bats to the OF vs LHP, since that's insurance against all 4 corners and CF, plus regular production from both vs LHP.
But if we don't want MY to be our back-up SS if EA goes down, then picking up Tatis and trade-targeting Callaspo as UIF makes the most sense. That would give us the same production vs LHP, but force Hamilton to back up CF (and play it vs LHP?). Either way, Tatis makes more sense than Garko b/c he plays all four corners.
Tatis = Garko + Lowell
Key phrase; roster construction.
Though it's difficult for statheads to reconcile, if someone with the on field skins, and now front office credibility, of Nolan Ryan, places a premium value on the clubhouse presence of a Mike Lowell, I'm inclined to defer to him.
I've gone back and forth on this. It's true, Mike Lowell is the unsexy but often necessary type of move that front offices have to make but fans don't care for. It's like an NFL team picking an offensive lineman with their first pick in the draft; it has a proven track record of a good chance of success, but fans would rather see the fast WR taken.
However, the issue is the cost. I feel like your argument makes a good case for Lowell over Garko or Gomes if all 3 were on the non-tendered list. Raising your floor is important enough, especially for this Ranger team, that sacrificing ceiling may be worth it. It's like the opposite of the pitching situation, where there seem to be a goodly number of arms to establish a decent floor, but they were in need of a higher ceiling.
But Lowell is costing the Rangers more money and a decent prospect. This seems like an overpay. Also, I still can't believe that the Rangers are looking at picking between sub-.350 wOBA hitters for the DH spot in the year that the Rangers are supposed to add salary to complement their young, cheap players and finally get to the playoffs. It can never be said enough: Go away Tom Hicks, go far, far away!
Since Lowell may have thumb surgery I have to change my stance and say do not make the trade. I would trade Tampa for Navarro straight up for Max. Wait on a DH from within or trade during spring.
Well written Joey. I think Lowell's stability is just what we need, but I've also been thoroughly unimpressed with Garko and especially Gomes. I think either of those guys is an incredibly bad idea. I think if you're not going to go after Lowell, then you quit the bargain bin shopping and just wait until the financial situation clears up. Then you either go with what you've got, sign a free agent like Vlad if he's still out there, or go with a different trade. I have a hard time believing we couldn't find the same marginal production of a Garko or Gomes from somewhere in our own system, but I think there is value in Lowell's intangibles and it would be nice to have a second gritty veteran named Mike acting as a leader in the clubhouse.
I think our next best option at C is (to keep developing Max at AAA as a long-term DH/back-up C , and trade for a shorter-term vet:
Since Tea CAN hit LHP, and needs experience for us to know/develop what we've got in him, but we need a back-up (like John Buck would'a been...)who can hit RHP... How about:
(35 yr-old) Chad Moeller, who hit .352(OBP) .531 (SLG) .297 (AVG) vs RHP in limited action last year, whom Balt signed to a AAA deal as a 3rd stringer,..
(Balt also needs a closer ... and Balt has the extra CF Pie, whom KC wants...
KC also needs a LOOGY... We now have 2...
We need Callaspo as our lefty-mashing UIF/DH...) which gets me thinkin'...
A 3-Way Proposal:
TEXAS gets Callaspo & CF Meier from KC; plus C Moeller from Balt;
KC gets Pie & a pitching prospect from Balt, plus Rapada & German (again) from TX
BALT gets FFrancisco & Gentry from TX (& Richardson as their AAA string C)
...And we sign Tatis with the $2M saved...
Look I see what you all are saying abou the clubhouse +'s that a guy like Mike Lowell brings but I just don't alltogether buy into that. We already have some good guys for the team. Plus we have picked up an injury prone pitcher, a reliever that may or may not have gotten over an injury, and now we are talking about a guy for a limited role that has had a couple injury issues recently. This all gets added onto our own injury prone CF. What we need is a guy who can come in and the last question we are going to have about them is if they are going to be an injury issue. I personally am interested in getting Garko, just two years ago this guy looked like a great player in the making. I think Garko would be good in OF and if Davis struggles could cover 1b well until Smoak is ready. Give me the higher upside guy over an aging player with somewhat similar projections and a bad hip/thumb.
Don't you think Boston knows Lowell needs thumb surgery? I think that explains why they are willing to give him away + 9 mil bucks for the likes of Max, who had a terrible year last season & is possibly still hurt himself.
I'm glad this revelation has come to light - I think they should look elsewhere for their RH bat. I actually wonder if Max is healthy if he shouldn't be the RH bat to DH? Anyone else think so? And what about Smoak - I can't remember - does he hit lefties or righties better?
I'd concur with the guys above who would prefer either giving a young guy a chance at the start of the season - they can always try to get some into the season if things are going well off the bat.
Smoak was quite lopsided: Jeckyll & Hyde, awful and amazing! Twice as good vs rHP as vs LHP:
vs. LH AVG .196 OBP.268 SLG .314
vs. RH AVG .394 OBP .520 SLG .613
...making MaxRam seem to have a permanent place as DH/back-up C on our team. So, I agree with you, Jim.
And better to find out now whether Max can be that guy before we have to decide (at year's end).
That's why (our) Chad Tracy (at AA-Frisco) shouldn't be ruled out as 5th OF: he's a 1B and 3rd C in an emergency, allowing Max and Tea both to play against LHPs.
But Tea & Max plus a 3rd C who hits RHP (eg Moeller) seems like an even better idea than Tracy.
And the versatility of Tatis, Almezaga, Callaspo ... is what could make a 3rd C (or 13th P) possible. Lowell doesn't offer that.
"Statheads", leadership, defensive versatility, MY backing up at SS, a young and very projectable hitter. Very interesting stuff. Maybe the diversity of opinion on this means it's not a make or break move. I don't have the same feeling I did after I heard about Hafner and Gonzalez but there is some real upside there. I don't think Boston is looking at him as a tack-on in this trade.
Ryan has shown himself to be a pretty even-keeled decision maker. But I'm always a little wary of ex-players' (Washington much moreso) reliance on veterans. Remember it was better baseball men than any of us who traded Sosa and Alvarez. Showalter and Hart were very succesful over the course of their careers, but...
I have a tough time giving up on Max when our cathcing situation is tenuous at best...Max can really hit when healthy
Jack, as far as I can tell, the only thing Max can do at C that isn't below average or worse is take a homeplate collision and hold onto the ball. If he caught 60 games for the Rangers next year like Teagarden did this year, you're looking at adding a half run to every pitcher's era. You could probably have him fill in at catcher for one game every other week, but you're asking for trouble. That's beside the point that he still needs to show us he can even hit AAA pitching much less someone like CC Sabathia. I think Max will end up as a DH who plays about 15 games a year at 1B. If this trade doesn't happen (which I think is a 50/50 shot at this point), I would guess that Max plays about half the year at OKC and then steps into a DH role against LHP in Arlington sometime around the all-star break. He could also end up being packaged in another (hopefully better) deal.
That being said, I like Mike Lowell, and he could end up being a nice usable piece for the Rangers. I personally have my fingers crossed that Byrd has a hard time getting the offer he wants and is still available closer to spring training. Maybe we'd have a new onwner and budget at that time, and we'd be able to keep him around for a few more years.
It looks like the Rangers can obtain a comparable hitter to Lowell with giving up Max. No need to get Lowell.
BTW, why not try Max at DH vs. Left handers? He raked year before last.
We have 4 outfielders who excel vs RHP.
We have only one outfielder and no DH (unless maybe Moreland, Tracy, Ramirez...) who can hit LHP
BYRD in 2009 vs LHP:
.293 OBP .451 SLG .244 AVG
That won't help right the offensive ship.
Michael, I just like Byrd. I don't really think he's the answer for LHPs, but in 2008 .277BA/.359OBP/.482SLG/.841OPS vs lefties was not that bad. His composite for the last three seasons was .277BA/.336OBP/.462SLG/.798OPS isn't too much to expect from him either. My main reason for bringing up Byrd in this discussion was his presence in the clubhouse. If he stuck around, that factor for the Lowell trade wouldn't be quite as important. Having Byrd isn't really more of a priority for me than say getting Albert Pujols. And it's only 2-3 times more realistic (still not very).
Thanks, Dave. I like Byrd, too, and appreciate his and Lowell's willingness to speak up. But scoop off some creme, and more will rise to the top. Surely, without either of those two vocal leaders, someone else will see the need to speak, and meet it. For now, though, JD has to keep doing his amazing job, and fill real holes (in an otherwise really strong team) with real patch so that the team doesn't get split over second guessing the GM's or Mgr's trying to get from some what isn't historically there,
So I'm hoping for Lowell to have a very slow, successful recovery from thumb surgery this winter as a BoSock.
I think part of the issue is that Rangers system is beginning to put guys onto the 40 man and 25 man roster that other teams would want. If the Rangers cannot play these prospects they will lose them via Rule 5 and or Minor Leauge Free Agency. That means they have put lots of money and time into developing these players for other teams. So, how do you free up 40 man roster places? You trade prospects who are somewhat suspect and fill holes with veterans on one year contracts if need be. Because Lowell would probably not be around in 2011 that gives the Ranger's one year of adequate DH and frees two places on the 40 man roster for prospects with more up side than Max and who are cheaper than Lowell.
If the Rangers can't do this then they can't even profitably trade some of the prospects because other teams will know there is a good chance of picking them up through Rule 5 or Free Agency.
Is Ryan Garko going to sign a one year contract? Proably not. Is he a top flight, HoF player? No he isn't. The Rangers have to manage their roster not only this year but for the next several years as well. Otherwise you are going to see lots of bad trades because teams won't pay a fair price for players the Rangers are going to lose anyway.
Lowell or Tatis fit better at this point because they would come for one year.
That's another good point, Cliff. Not only does
Tatis = Lowell + Garko defensively (actually more... Add LF),
but for the slightest offensive difference vs LHP, we get someone needing only a 1-year contract instead of the likely 2 for Garko.
But if Max proves healthy while still a Ranger, then we can use him & Tea long enough to see whom to pair with Salty (once healthy) and whom to package at the ASB. That's no small difference between Tatis & Lowell.
The Rule 5 Draft is still a year away.