Before they blew out of the Winter Meetings, the Giants snuck in a last minute signing, Michael Morse, to play LF. Morse is a guy with enormous offensive talent, an extremely poor defensive player, and has a body that is apparently made of glass. Brian Sabean loves to talk about "catching lightning in a bottle." It doesn't always work, but when it does, it's can be spectacular. When it doesn't, who cares as long as the risk is low?
In short, Michael Morse is pretty much Pat the Bat all over again, except they are paying more up front for Morse. The plan is obviously to start Morse in LF most games then pull him for a defensive replacement as soon as they get a lead from about the 6'th inning on. If he can stay healthy, something he has rarely been able to do, he should be good for a .280-.300 BA with 25 HR's. He may give 2/3's of that back on the defensive side, but hey, MLB needs more scoring and Morse will give it on both offense and defense!
I don't happen to think this is an upgrade for LF when all things are considered, but Morse brings a few other possibilities to the table. He can DH for the interleague games and in AL parks in the postseason. On days he does not start, he can be a power threat off the bench as a PH. He can play 1B if Belt gets hurt or needs a few days off to work on his swing again.
It's not a great move, it's not a terrible move. Most of all it is a low risk move. I would have hated to see one of the pitching prospects traded and apparently the Giants felt the same way. It's 1 year/$6M. If it doesn't work out, nice knowin' ya, Mike. I know I am looking forward to seeing him bat out of the 7 hole, which if that's where he hits, it means the rest of the Giants lineup is pretty darn good!
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
The only comps between Morse and Burrell are below-average defense and great power potential. Burrell knew how to get on base, though. He always had a hight OBP. Morse does not.
ReplyDeleteStill, his power potential is intriguing, and he's the guy I figured we'd get anyway. In a platoon role, we probably couldn't have done better. Doesn't necessarily tip the scales, but it certainly rounds out the roster.
Lucky
An OBP of .330/.340 is not spectacular...But it's fine by me especially if power comes along with it....The negative, of course, is his defenese......But there are so many positives that make this a really good move..
Delete1) Gives the Giants 4 solid and varied ML OF's (Some Power, Speed and defense) and a speedy defensive OF like JCP being used where he should be
2) Bochy wanted MORSE and Sabean got Bochy what he wanted..The chemistry between these two and how well they work together can not be overlooked
3) MORSE had three good offensive years for Washington...I don't expect his best but a 20-25 HR. .280/335 is very likey and would help the Giants immensley..Who doesn't want that? If his defense is a liability, the Giants have the players and flexibity to cover it.
4) IMO, Blanco now gets to be used where he can provide most value...occasional starter, backup all OF, defensive replacement..
5) Taken together with Belt's ability to play some OF if need be..and MORSE's ability to play some 1B,, BOCHY has alot of field and lineup flexibility with Belt, Morse, Blanco, Pagan and Pence..
6) Giant LFs contributed 5 HRs last year..Power was definitely needed there and on the bench. Both the line-up and bench have been empowered and lengthened
SteveVA
Grant made a good point over on MCC that I was not aware of before: The Giants were something like 4'th in the league in wRC+ and 10'th in Runs. Was that due to bad luck or does the wRC+ calculation if you get too far below average in power? As Grant put it, we don't know, but it's worth asking.
DeleteI do know that power it rapidly becoming the scarcest commodity in MLB and therefore, it's value relative to other tools and skills may be increasing.
If nothing else, it will be interesting to watch and it will provide a laboratory of sorts to test some of these theories. I just won't be shocked if Blanco is the starting LF by the end of the season.
....er make that.....does the wRC+ calculation lose precision if you get too far below average in power?
DeleteDid a little more digging to follow up on Grant's comment: Last year, the Giants ranked #8 out of 30 in non-pitching WAR, #4 in team defense, #11 in wRC+, #21 in Runs and #29 in HR's.
DeleteI'm guessing the Giants had those numbers in mind when they decided to go after Morse.
Isn't wRC+ field/league adjusted? Maybe that difference between metric and runs is partially due to the run lowering settings of AT&T, Dodger Stadium, O.co, etc.
DeletePossibly, but the difference between #11 and #21 is quite large. The Giants had no problem getting men on base last year. They just couldn't drive them in to save their lives and a lack of HR power likely had a lot to do with that.
DeleteGreat points about run scoring calculations. You get the feeling front offices have their own proprietary models for calculating these factors and don't have a team of monkeys scrolling through fangraphs player pages. There's a value to power. Arizona feels this way too. There may be less value to D than what one year of UZR leads on.
DeleteWe need balance...Pitching, Defense and Run Scoring, even with emphasizing the first two.
DeleteI need Morse balances our hitting...complementing Blanco's defense, speed, OBP with power, slugging as a homerun threat.
Apparently, he's Bochy's choice all along.
If he stays healthy, he will likely start even at the end of the year, I believe.
Obviously, the ideal would be a guy who hits for power but also doesn't hurt you on defense which is why I was looking at Ruggiano and Maxwell. Of course those two would have had to come in a trade and maybe Sabes didn't want to give up what their team was asking. Also, Ruggiano and Maxwell don't hit for average which Morse has done when he's healthy, so I guess there are always trade-offs.
DeleteI agree there are trade-offs. That's just life, and the way Bochy likes it as he is good at managing his pieces to maximize each player's talent.
DeleteRyan,
DeleteThere is still enough variance in defensive metrics that I look at them as more of an approximation rather than an exact number. A guy is either a good fielder or an average fielder or a poor fielder. I also back it up with a healthy dose of the "eye test".
As for wRC+, that is a calculated, weighted stat that is derived from other calculated, weighted stats. Each time you make a calculation that is one more layer removed from the raw data, you introduce calculation error and bias into the equation that gets magnified with each new calculation.
A raw number like Runs Scored may not tell you what you want to know, but at least you know it is a fact that the player touched home plate safely that many times. With wRC+, whatever the number actually means it is a number that you think the player would have achieved if they played in an average lineup in an average ballpark in an average league. Yes, that is information you want to know, but you it is not a fact that happened like the number of times a runner crossed home plate.
Doc,
DeleteWhat do you (or anyone else, for that matter) know about defensive metrics? I am basically completely ignorant as to how the numbers are calculated and what they mean. I know that a high number generally means the player is good at defense and a low number means they are bad, but that is the extent to my understanding.
One of the numbers I would use was dWAR from BR. Not because I had any great faith in it, but because I trusted BR and using the WAR terminology led me to somewhat understand what the resulting number meant. The problem arises when you look at sample numbers. JT Snow, for example has a career dWAR of -11.2!! How can I trust a defensive metric that give JT Snow that bad of a rating?
Am I misunderstanding what that metric says? Is there a better, quick-reference number for ignorant-blocks like me should use instead?
Sorry for the long, semi-OT post. This is probably more geared to it's own blog entry...
I think we all agree that traditional defensive measures such as errors, assists, putouts, chances don't come close to measuring a player's true defensive contribution. For instance, in order to be charged with an error, you have to touch the ball, but what about the guy who just stands there and watches it go by? That play is just as damaging as an error, maybe more so, but he is not charged with one. Same with assists. It's great to gun down a runner, but what if the runner knows the fielder has a cannon and just decides not to run. That fielder prevented a run from scoring but did not get credit for the assist.
DeleteAdvanced defensive metrics are extremely complicated and very few people know the exact calculations, but they are supposed to measure the total defensive contribution of the player which does include errors and assists but also includes making plays on balls that other fielders might not have been able to touch and runners prevented from advancing.
Again, I look at them as very rough approximations. I want to see at least 2 years of reasonably stable data before I make a judgement and then I mentally divide the players into 3 categories: good, average, poor. I suppose you could got with 5 categories: Great, good, average, poor and terrible.
I would probably rate Gregor Blanco as good and Mike Morse as terrible.
First base is a position that has a reputation as being more difficult to measure than other positions, so it's possible that JT's numbers are not an accurate reflection of his true fielding ability. It is also possible that JT made a lot a great looking plays but was not able to get to some balls that more rangy firstbasemen would have gotten to, kind of a "....past a diving Jeter..." syndrome. All I know is that when other people like Andres Gallaraga played the position there were many balls that got past where I said to myself, "JT would have had that," so he certainly did pass MY eye test too!
Just looked up JT's career numbers on Fangraphs. What's really interesting is that his UZR's got significantly better as he neared the end of his career, which is the opposite of what you see from most players.
DeleteIf he can stay healthy, it's an upgrade to depth.
ReplyDeletePeter
Don't underestimate the value of a real DH for the interleague games. No defensive liability. Morse could be very valuable in just those 12 or so games.
ReplyDeleteI did mention that, but then again, don't you want to let Buster DH some of those games to rest his legs?
DeleteYes, but it's not necessary that he DH all of them. Furthermore, Posey's defense and leadership behind the plate is a plus. Add to all that the possibility of WS games - where the NL's lack of a bonafide DH often becomes a severe disadvantage - and you're covering a lot of bases all at once with this signing.
DeleteIt's not even like Morse is a power-only bat either. Until 2013's injury ridden season, Morse's average filled in right around .290 - .300.
I agree that he is more than just a HR bat. I'm just not sure there is any big advantage to putting Morse at DH with Blanco/Perez playing LF vs the Posey/Sanchez or Pablo/Arias tradeoff.
DeleteBTW, for those of you who thought the Giants might be able to trade for Brett Gardner? MLBTR says the Yanks turned down a Gardner for Brandon Phillips deal. When you figure that Kelly Johnson is their 2B right now, that really says something!
ReplyDeleteI was very surprised the Yanks turned that down. What are they looking for?!
DeleteDunno. Seemed like a perfect fit to me.
DeleteMight have been a salary thing with Phillips, he is still owed a good amount I believe.
DeleteSaw the Morse deal first thing this morning getting ready for work. Was pleasantly surprised to see the Giants got something done... I guess I feel similar to most with this deal: I don't love it, don't hate it. I do think Morse could be the bargain of the winter though if he's healthy. I like the guy, and obviously will be rooting for him even more now. Any move that lengthens the lineup is a good one in my opinion. Hard not to think about DeRosa with the wrist injuries though... yikes!
ReplyDeleteSabes set out to find an every day LF, and he did. Nice work.
Will try to follow up with a reaction post on my site tomorrow.
Sabes loves to try to "catch lightning in a bottle" and has been successful at it often enough that it has to be more than just luck.
DeleteI agree with your lightning idea. Reflecting on our good seasons, we did have to have the Renterias, Cody Ross's, Marco Scutaro's to hoist the trophies in 2010 and 2012. Of course, I wouldn't mind if our pitching manages to eke out another "torture" season for us.
ReplyDeleteLooks to me that Morse has only once in his career had an fWAR over 1, in 2011, so maybe the appropriate cliche is more like "catch Halley's Comet in a test tube."
ReplyDeleteWell, there is some thought that fWAR may overvalue defense. The Giants are pretty savvy at positioning. Add in using a defensive replacement in the late innings, maybe they can minimize his defensive cost. When the guy is healthy, he's a ferocious hitter.
DeleteIf fWAR overvalues defense, what about rWAR? He has had an rWAR over 1 only twice, once in 2011, and the other time a 1.3 rWAR a year earlier; otherwise, sub 1 year after year. Of course, now that the signing is complete, we shall see what Wotus's cunning as to positioning and Bochy's as to late-inning substitutions can do. In terms of probabilities, however, and the opportunity cost of losing a roster spot to an often ailing galoot who will have to be given a thorough opportunity to prove himself, I still think Halley trumps lightning as an apropos simile.
DeleteI don't know anything about rWAR or its differences from fWAR. I suppose it's just a different equation.
DeletePersonally, if he were to put up 2.0 WAR and in the process hit .280/.320/.500 with 25 dingers, I'd take that over 2.0 WAR put up by a guy who does most of it with defense. Whether Morse can do that or not, well, it remains to be seen. I do think it COULD happen.
As for opportunity cost, It doesn't look to me like there were a lot of opportunities out there to cost, so that is a moot issue to me.
Again, the contract is just for 1 year and it's not my money, so I'm OK with seeing if he can put up one more big offensive season. I won't be shocked if Blanco is the starting LF come September and hopefully October, though.
And as I've said many times, the success and failure of the Giants in 2014 will hinge on their starting rotation, not on whether it's Morse or Blanco or anyone else playing LF.
DeleteAmen to that, DocB
Delete