Jim Thome-To-Texas Redux
It's not too terribly often that we end up looking prophetic, or at the very least end up looking like we're ahead of the curve, but it's now happened twice in the last 30-35 days or so -- first, there was Pras writing about the Adrian Beltre-to-Texas notion well before it picked up sufficient hot-stove steam (and in spite of the fact that it was difficult to fathom the Rangers doling out $80 million guaranteed to a third baseman as little as a month ago), and then there was my argument in favor of Texas signing Jim Thome a couple weeks back despite minimal mainstream attention being directed towards the idea, followed by ESPN.com's Buster Olney stating yesterday that the Rangers were "actively trying to lure" Thome to Texas. It's nice to hit the nail on the head every once in a while.
Most of what I wrote about Thome two weeks ago remain applicable in the present, but a couple of things have happened in that two-week window which complicate the picture somewhat: (a) the signing of Beltre, which chews up a large quantity of the available plate appearances at first base/designated hitter due to Michael Young actually needing a place to play, and (b) the revelation that Thome could be seeking as much as $8 million over one year, which -- without having all of the specific numbers readily available -- would easily vault the Rangers' payroll above and beyond the $90 million mark. The first is important because it impairs the likelihood of being able to use the DH spot as protection for the ballclub's highest-value assets, whereas the second is importantif signing Thome impairs the Rangers' financial maneuverability.
Just to be clear about this, I didn't think spending $8 million on Vladimir Guerrero would have been a good idea, and it's really not a good idea with Thome either, although I'm inclined to think that a properly deployed Thome -- which is to say not overexposed to left-handers -- inflicts more damage upon opposing pitchers than Guerrero would given similarly optimal usage. What prevents me from speaking in absolutes is the realization that we simply do not know the extent to which payroll can be expanded; if, for example, a quality, albeit well-paid pitcher were to hit the trade market in July, and signing Thome to a healthy sum had no impact on the Rangers' ability to add the entire remaining 2010 balance of that pitcher's salary, then paying Thome (or Guerrero, for that matter) becomes less important. You don't want to get ripped off, obviously, and what Thome is paid is still important in the grand scheme of the franchise, but the real key here is the preservation of those dreaded buzz words "financial flexibility." If you can't guarantee that with Thome on the payroll, then that's a significant obstacle.
Amazingly, the stickier issue here might be finding enough playing time to keep everyone happy. There are roughly 1,400 plate appearances to be allocated between first base and designated hitter, and giving 400 of those to Thome, and another 600-620 to Young (assuming he logs 20 or so games between second base, third base, and shortstop), leaves fewer than 400 plate appearances to go around between Josh Hamilton, Nelson Cruz, David Murphy, Mitch Moreland, and whoever else, with that figure correspondingly shrinking if management unwisely decides to push Thome too much harder than that. If you prioritize rest for Cruz and Hamilton above everything else, and give them 120-130 plate appearances at DH collectively, Moreland effectively becomes a part-time/bench player... and maybe, just maybe, you can live with any related slowdown in his development given the high stakes in this win-now scenario.
The starting rotation may not be where any of us would really like to see it be three months from now, but I can't imagine a lineup comprising Kinsler-Young-Hamilton-Beltre-Thome-Cruz in the top six spots being anything less than a dream scenario come to life. Good pitching and defense and run prevention might be the core competencies of a great number of successful teams, and are often at the forefront of sabermetric discussion in this day and age, but there's something enthralling about the idea of that much unrelenting offensive firepower giving opposing pitchers fits. It may not be enthralling to the tune of another $8 million commitment, but this could really be something special.
Analysis, Hot Stove Season, The Off-Season
Reader Comments (77)
I think you caould trade Young to the right team and get them to pay 65% of the contract if you got nothing back. But the other thing about it is that if Young is going to throw a fit if he doesn't play, and you can put together a better team by making him a 75-85 game player, but he just won't do that, there may be a benefit to moving him just to make him go away. I wish that wasn't so. I wish he'd be happy making $16m and doing whatever he was asked to do. But I doubt he would be. I doubt that if Thome was brought in, and Blanco was the backup SS, and Moreland turned out to be both a better hitter and defensive 1B than Young, and Young was only the DH against LHP, that he would sit still for that.
JD almost had him shipped off to Colorado. But Young went to the press and said he wanted to stay in Texas, and it was quashed. Young is more tradable than people think. You have to eat salary, but you could save someting like $7-8m/yr for 3 years. That's Soriano if you want him.
If Thome cand not play 1st could he sub in LF?
What about the possibility of trading Murphy or even Cruz? That would provide one less player to find AB for.?
What if they are just signuing him to keep him off the Angels or Yankees?
Thome can DH and play about 3 games at 1B for an injury super-emergency. That's about it. I think dealing Murphy for a really good prospect, and getting Young some extra 1B ABs by making Moreland your 3rd COF as well as a platoon 1B is an option. Save that prospect that you get for Murphy until the Deadline and then use him as part of a trade for a #1 starter. That seems like a viable option. It seems to me, long term, that either you decide to roll with Josh in CF and deal Borbon, or you decide to roll with Borbon, use Hamilton/Cruz as the COFs, and deal Murphy. It just makes sense.
According to Jon Heyman, no deal is close between the Rangers and Thomse
I sincerely hope they are unable to make the deal. I am not a fan of bringing in 41 year old Thome, and I have a lot of respect for the guy, just don't want him on the Rangers.
" He (Gentry) could be exposed playing anymore than a handful of games in center."
I would maybe envision him being exposed at the plate... in CF he'd likely be exposed to a Gold Glove.
...depending on the amount of exposure.
I think I fall in the camp of those against signing Thome but for a few different reasons. If memory serves he did suffer from injuries last year especially at the beginning of the year and that was strictly as a DH and pinch hitter so I don’t think I like the idea of sacrificing Young or Murphy in a trade if there is a significant possibility the player I am replacing them with will go down with an injury at some point. I tend to believe that given his history of back problems Thome would be just as likely to miss time next year as Hamilton, Kinsler, or Cruz.
Thome would also constitute a downgrade on the bases from Guerrero. While I like the fact that he can mash I don’t want to see him clogging the bases. Thome would be less like to score from second on a single than anyone currently on our roster and he’s not really a candidate to move from first to third on single to right either.
Finally for all his amazing slash lines (and some of them are AMAZING) he doesn’t produce as many runs as he should because of his speed. Last year for instance he contributed .759 runs per game played. The three main Rangers he would be taking AB’s from next year all contributed more per game than Thome. Young was at .904 runs per game. Murphy recorded .775 and Moreland came in at .766 run per game. When compared to others with similar OPS+ he fell well short. Morneau averaged 1.123, Cabrera 1.327 and Hamilton 1.226 runs per game. Let’s say Young and Thome split time evenly next year and each plays 81. For those games Young would contribute 73 runs while Thome would generate 61 runs. Since Thome is no longer capable of playing a full season I’d rather not sacrifice Young’s run production in favor of Thome’s impressive slash line.
Don’t get me wrong I love his bat and his clubhouse presence but he’s less of a complete player than Young is and I don’t see how he fits in with what the FO says they are trying to accomplish.
IMO
I agree arp. I love Thome I just feel like he is a square peg in a round hole when it cones to fitting in with the Rangers.
I think you guys are underestimating what he adds to the lineup in terms of good pitches to hit for the guys hitting around him.
True. Real Scooby. I think for Beltre to be successful it is crucial that he is someone that is not pitched around but someone that a pitcher has to come after.
Olney thinks Thome isn't as good a fit this yr with Morneau likely healthy. If Morneau hadn't got hurt last yr, Thome probably wouldn't have gotten nearly as many PAs. JD can convince Thome he'll still be getting his opportunities in Texas, and he'll have enough protection that he'll see plenty of fastballs.
But really, the best way to convince Thome that he'll be counted on enough is to get MY the heck out of town. It's a bad PR move, but, again, if you sell it that MY will get regular playing time in the field with his new team, the Rnagers shouldn't be jurt too much. Having Beltre, Thome and MY on the roster would NOT make Mike happy, however.
So Thome wants to come, and we can get him for something less than $8M, I believe JD can make this happen. The payroll is certainly going to get messy if Young's contract has to be subsidized by 50% or so for another team to take him on. But Thome could really balance out the roster and make this lineup a killer for opposing pitchers.
So Joey, you've accurately predicated the Rangers offseason moves thus far. What do they for SP? Oh, and Universal Studios wants back their Delorean
@Jake
What you say about Murphy is true. Thome is a good hitter but is one dimensional. If we could get him for 3 or 4 mil, we could trade him if he does not make the team better.
If Moreland leaves, that leaves us with not one good glove at firstbase. Does anyone really believe MY will excel there? It's not a put anyone-with-a-glove-there position.
According to Evan Grant, the Rangers are NOT trading Moreland. The Rays wanted him, but the Rangers said no, viewing Moreland as their every day 1B
(1) the Rangers would trade Moreland if an ace became abailable, I suspect. For Garza? No way. In a David Price deal? That'd be different.
(2) 1B is THE anybody-with-a-glove position.
Can somebody explain to me why signing Manny isn't high on our list. He is only 1 year removed from a really good season, and could help in the outfield much like Vlad did last year. If we took a 1 year shot at him he probably would take it to reestablish value in our park. Plus at the price we could get him at if he is a head case then we just release him. Thome had one of his best seasons who is to say that he will again and I believe Manny would still be able to bounce back and is a righty...What do you all think?
@johnsamo - I agree... I don't think you can just stick some hack at 1B and expect the position to be covered. I recall Wash struggling with demoting Chris Davis because his defense at 1B was very good. I believe the Rangers have to stick with Moreland and eventually work MY in the mix to where he can cover not only 3B and 2B but also 1B (you noticed I didn't add SS as a position MY can backup... I'm questioning whether or not he can backup 2B too).
I suppose Thome could be used there in an emergency... but it would have to be a last resort.
I hope JD and the FO have a sound plan going into the 2011 draft. There are several positions that need depth; 1B and C are obvious, but it's time to consider drafting Kinsler's replacement. While I'm in favor of adding pitching, pitching, and more pitching... perhaps we should use a few high picks on the infield too.
In fact, do we have a 2B prospect that's worth a hoot? And don't say Marcus Lemon... or Sardinas. He's viewed as a SS right now and needs to stay there until we figure out if Profar has the tools to 1 day be a good , everyday player.
@ Pabloesque: I think the odds are better, if they both progress as hoped, that Sardinas (the better defender) ends up as the SS, and Profar (the better hitter) ends up as the 2B. Many great 2Bs, if not most, including Kinsler, start out as SS prospects.
@Arp I think you are using a slightly skewed set of numbers there. They show what you want them to, but they ignore one major issue. Which is number of AB's per game. Yes Thome has the lowest number of runs per game the way you are calculating them, I would expect him to also, considering he is going about 2.5 ABs per game as opposed to 3.5+ for the guys you are comping him with. I would expect a player getting more ABs to produce more runs. Runs are counting and basically accumulate based on the amount of PA someone gets.
So the question really is this, in the 300-400, maximum PAs that Thome gets how many runs better then Young, Moreland or Murphy is he. I would argue that he is going to produce, based on your numbers., about .3 runs per AB. vs .22 runs per AB for Murphy, .21 per AB for Moreland, and .21 runs per AB for Young. So who says that the usage pattern for Thome isn't this. He starts the game against RHP, stays in until the later part of the game when a LHP is sent in to face him or he reaches base with a close and late situation where base-running could make a major difference, then you see Murphy or Moreland take any ABs that are left to that slot for the remainder of the game. So lets assume that would be about 3 ABs for Thome, So using your numbers and looking at Thome's likely 3 ABs in the first 2/5 of the game, he would average .91 runs, add in .22 or so from Murphy or Moreland, and suddenly because you are being smart about managing your roster you have scored 1.13 runs from the spot, or more then any of the players would likely account for on their own.
JKolar,
Nice catch with getting to the bottom of the runs per game number, and that it is not an accurate statistic for use with Thome, or anyone really. A better number is runs per at bat.
Just to be sure. Did you divide Thome's runs number from last year by his number of at bats from 2010 and then compare that number with the number for MY and others? Did Thome have a better runs to AB's ration last year than Young and others? Im just asking because your numbers are "estimates." Are these numbers based on last year's numbers?
Arp, (assuming Kolar is right and basing this on accurate numbers) I know it hurts sometimes to admit when you are wrong, or when you didn't think things through sufficiently, but its always better for you and makes you a more careful thinker.
Joe
Last years runs per at bat numbers for MY and Thome.
Thome - .17 runs per at bat
Young - .15 runs per at bat
Murphy had a .12 runs per at bat last year
and
Hamilton had a .19 ratio
Can anyone who knows comment on the relative importance of this statistic in the grand scheme of offensive production as it relates to OPS.
Based on these numbers it seems like MY produces more runs than one would think. Hes only .02 behind Thome and .04 behind Hamilton as far as runs per at bat goes, and those are two of the best hitters in the league.
Do people talk often about combining the RBI number and the runs per at bat number to give you a better picture of run production? Not sure how you would do that, but it seems like it might be a good number to look at as a compliment to OPS. Basically OPS is how often on base and how many bases, then you could show run production by a combination of the runs per at bat and rbi numbers.
How about this guys for an ultimate runs number.
You take RBI's and adjust it to subtract the number of times that you drove yourself in.
Then you take your runs number.
Then you take the adjusted RBI number, add it to the runs number, divide it by the number of at bats, and then you have a Runs Caused Per At Bat percentage. RCAB?
Check out my runs created number discussion as a compliment to OPS in my forum post.
I really would like some more knowledgeable guys to let me know what they think. I've only been thinking about baseball statistics in depth for a very short time.