Thinking About Mitch Maier In The Second Half
by Freneau on Jul 15, 2010 2:30 PM EDT
in Kansas City Royals News
Email
PrintI'm a Mitch Maier fan. Predictable, in many ways, I know. I campaigned for him to be a 2010 stopgap in CF, and after Rick Ankiel went down with an injury (injuries?) that ended up happening. At least for awhile.
MITCH had his moments at the plate in the first half, but thanks to a bad start and a bad finish, his overall triple slash line is pretty bad: .251/.328/.367. Maier's offensive numbers were dragged down by a positively Bloomquistian stretch run. Over his final 89 PAs, Mitch hit just .220/.281/.354.
Nevertheless, M.M. gave the Royals good defense in CF, racking up a 2.7 UZR. Thanks to his defense, Mitch posted a positive 0.7 WAR in the first half. Again, not great, but mostly acceptable from a guy making the minimum that you produced from your own system. Maier's 0.7 WAR is actually 6th best amongst position players on the team. The Royals employed a Pods-Maier-DeJesus outfield 40 times in the first half, and that is likely the best defensive configuration they've had in the outfield this decade.
Still, I am a little worried about Maier in the second half. It's not sound reasoning to read much into his recent slump, but it's there nonetheless. He's still taking pitches and getting a fair amount of walks, but he's also striking out a fair amount because of that patience. His BABIP is at .292, so he hasn't been hugely unlucky in that regard. All told, you'd probably like to see a 28 year old hitting a little better. In particular, Maier seems weirdly unable to hit doubles. He has just seven two-baggers on the year, which is the same number of triples+homers he has (four and three, respectively). ZIPS doesn't project a huge change the rest of the way, although it does see a mild power uptick, predicting a .265/.326/.378 line.
Of course, looming in the background here is Ankiel. Who knows when he's coming back. On June 19th, the word was his latest setback was... wait for it... not serious. Given all the uncertainty in the outfield, as well as Yost's blooming affection for a certain utility player, Maier could get 20 starts in the second half, or he could get 80. I hope he does well.
45 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Maier is doing what I expected, and is in the general vicinity of his projections
The hitting isn’t good, but no one expected it would be. The defense is good. Overall, for his position, he’s been a little below average. I think that is what we can and should expect from him going forward. He’s basically an all-defense 4th OFer. As long as he’s still inexpensive, that’s something nice to have around. And when your OF talent is shitty, it makes you the starting CFer.
But as soon as they determine that Ankiel is “healthy,” he’ll be starting again (at least 6 games out of every 7), because he has “power” and the Royals need “power.” When the team is short on power, I guess OBP and defense are irrelevant. Oh well, I’m sure Yost values Ankiel as much as he values the Royals other horrible old-timers, so we’ll get to see Ankiel until he goes down again, which probalby won’t take long.
The immoderate moderator
by Scott McKinney on Jul 15, 2010 2:36 PM EDT reply actions 1 recs
I predict that he won't play in the bigs again this year
I sense something Juan Gonzalean going on.
"Things could always be worse." - Buddy Bell
Thank god there's a (mutual) option they can pick up so that we'll get a full season out of him in 2011.
The immoderate moderator
by Scott McKinney on Jul 15, 2010 7:50 PM EDT up reply actions
...
season out of him in 2011
how did I know what you said?!?
Would you like to follow me on Twitter, Facebook, or my blog...well you can't.
by SagehenMacGyver47 on Jul 15, 2010 7:57 PM EDT up reply actions
It seemed like he was hitting well when he was a regular
Then it was decided we had to put Guillen in the field because his bat was too special to keep out of interleague play.
OK, You're Talking
About Mitch, not Ankiel. That makes sense, and yes, he did tail off when Hoagy started bumping him out of the lineup. I don’t know if playing time and performance correlate, but I feel like they did in Mitch’s case. If he gets regular playing time in the second half, I think his offense will improve. Just an unquantifiable feeling.
It’s still a SSS, but he has a reverse platoon split; vs RHP .241 .316 .313 .628; vs LHP .276 .364 .411 .775 . The latter is in 192 PA’s, so it’s probably meaningless, but odd none the less.
I used to be an A's fan until they left town and got good.
by philofthenorth on Jul 15, 2010 3:02 PM EDT up reply actions
He's Nothing More
Than a cheap place holder who doesn’t hurt you too bad. I still hold out hope he’ll have a career year and actually be valuable for a little while, but he should not block anyone. Unfortunately, we have no one to block.
I used to be an A's fan until they left town and got good.
by philofthenorth on Jul 15, 2010 3:12 PM EDT up reply actions
The only person you can consider "blocked" is Gordon
But yeah, I like Maier alright, but I certainly don’t like him playing every day
for the sake of our pitching staff I'd disagree
when all you’re options are bad, if there’s any extent to which Hoch and Davies are still developing, I’d rather have the best defensive guy behind them
Long story short, he's one of the three best OFers on the Royals team (and that includes Gordon)
All that really matters is total value. And Maier’s total value going forward is likely better than Ankiel, Pods and Guillen (esp. as an OFer).
The immoderate moderator
by Scott McKinney on Jul 15, 2010 3:39 PM EDT up reply actions
Sorry, I didnt specifically mean that Maier is blocking Gordon, as phil said there is no one to block
Just saying that he is being blocked by players, for whatever reason
And to be honest I dont know that Maier is any better than Parraz or Lough
It is inferior, overpaid players like Pods, Guillen, and soon Ankiel who are blocking Gordon
The immoderate moderator
by Scott McKinney on Jul 15, 2010 3:32 PM EDT up reply actions
Am I The
Only one who would like to see Gordon in CF at least as a MiLB experiment?
I used to be an A's fan until they left town and got good.
by philofthenorth on Jul 15, 2010 3:41 PM EDT up reply actions
no.
We have met the enemy, and he is us.
by Royal Kingdom on Jul 15, 2010 3:42 PM EDT up reply actions
So This Doesn't
Mean I’m not crazy.
I used to be an A's fan until they left town and got good.
by philofthenorth on Jul 15, 2010 3:44 PM EDT up reply actions
Of course you're crazy, but not necessarily about this
I think it would depend on how his transition to the OF is going in Omaha. If it has gone very well and he looks like a good defensive corner OFer who makes good reads, takes good routes and covers a lot of ground, then they should try him in CF. If the transition is more difficult for him and he’s still having difficulty consistently getting good reads, etc., then I wouldn’t compound his challenge by moving him to CF.
The immoderate moderator
by Scott McKinney on Jul 15, 2010 3:48 PM EDT up reply actions
I always thought that playing CF was easier to get reads on the balls
The corner outfield seems like there is always a (golf terms) draw or fade hook or slice coming at you. Center just needs to be able to get good jumps and cover a shit load of space.
Stuck following the Royals since 1976.
My point is that because a CFer has much more ground to cover, it is extremely important that the CFer get good reads and take good routes so that he can maximize the amount of ground he can cover. If Gordon is having any difficulty with this (and I would imagine that even if he’s doing well, he’s still having some difficulties), then it wouldn’t be a good idea to move him to CF. If he’s not yet a very good defensive corner OFer, then he’s not yet ready for CF. Don’t have him sprint if his development is only up to the jogging level.
The immoderate moderator
by Scott McKinney on Jul 15, 2010 3:56 PM EDT up reply actions
I Still Think
We should have thrown Bert out in LF and called it good. Gordon is a good MLB 3B. Bert, not so much. Bert, DDJ and Mitch would have been fine for 2010, and we wouldn’t have wasted money on Podz and Ankiel.
I used to be an A's fan until they left town and got good.
by philofthenorth on Jul 15, 2010 4:03 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
Agreed on all points
The immoderate moderator
by Scott McKinney on Jul 15, 2010 4:15 PM EDT up reply actions
Mitch has got to go
I love the Royals, follow everything I can about them, but Mitch is not a Major League Baseball player. At best and this is pushing it, he’s a 4th outfielder you bring in late for defense. He brings us nothing on offense. a career .250 hitter, 6 HR, 9 SB, SO almost twice as much as BB, 67 career RBI’s. And this is after 652 ABs. If he’s a part of the Royals future, its not a very bright one.
He's a good defensive 4th OFer
He’s a better OFer than Pods, Ankiel and Guillen. Mitch is not a long-term solution for this team, but he’s better than most of the available in-house options.
The immoderate moderator
by Scott McKinney on Jul 15, 2010 3:41 PM EDT up reply actions
No
He is a career milb guy. D Robinson would be a better 4th OF due to the SB threat.
Are stats relevant to you?
Defense has value. And managing an OBP over .300 has value too. Could D. Robinson do that in the majors? Maybe, but maybe not. Mitch’s combination of an ok OBP (for a CFer) and good CF defense has real value which can be seen in his WAR. That is the WAR of a good defensive 4th OFer. Is your evaluation of Mitch more tools-based without regard to his stats? If so, then I suggest you apply for work in the Royals front office.
The immoderate moderator
by Scott McKinney on Jul 15, 2010 5:40 PM EDT up reply actions
Mitch needs to get on the clear or the cream or whatever
Looking at the guy he should be hitting 30 HR/year. His lack of power is alarming.
If he gets caught, he misses 50 games. Big deal.
Stuck following the Royals since 1976.
@@@Good Idea@@@
I used to be an A's fan until they left town and got good.
by philofthenorth on Jul 15, 2010 3:59 PM EDT up reply actions
We'll be like the late 80's Oakland teams..
When Bloomquist starts hitting 25/year, the commish might notice…
Stuck following the Royals since 1976.
Bret Freaking Boone
I used to be an A's fan until they left town and got good.
by philofthenorth on Jul 15, 2010 4:04 PM EDT up reply actions
Mitch is the kind of guy you keep around while he's making the league minimum
and maybe through the first year of arbitration, before dumping him for the next young 4th OF in the system. Useful to have around, but you don’t go spending Rick Ankiel (or Scottie Pods) money on them.
Ideally, he’d be coming off of the bench, but when the alternatives are JoGui NoLegs and Rick NeverSawABallHeCouldn’tGetABadJumpOn, he has to start.
Unless I'm wrong...
My Twitter feed
by Top Ramen on Jul 15, 2010 4:16 PM EDT reply actions 1 recs
Exactly
As a full season starter, Mitch can give you 1.5 WAR, which is worth about $6M. If he were used as a 4th OFer, maybe that is 0.4 WAR which is worth about $1.6M. So Mitch will be a bargain through at least his first arbitration year.
The immoderate moderator
by Scott McKinney on Jul 15, 2010 4:24 PM EDT up reply actions
Mitch
is probably another player that’d have more value to a NL team.
Looking at games from June 1 to the A.S. break, he had 4 appearances that were not starts (along with 20 starts and 12 games DNP), and all of them were in NL parks. These break down as follows: 1 double switch (Mitch hitting in the pitcher’s spot), 1 PH for DeJesus (Royals down 11-5 at the time), 1 PH for the pitcher (in the 9th inning – never took the field), and 1 time (1!!!!) as a defensive replacement for Jose in the 9th inning (Soria pitched and the inning went: ground out, K, K).
Also, according to Baseball Ref., Mitch has only pinch ran one time all year. On April 24th, he ran for Ankiel (Ankiel would make 2 more appearances – not starts – before hitting the DL).
If he isn’t starting, he’s practically invisible.
Tension is the enemy. - Charlie Lau
by aHorseWithNoName on Jul 15, 2010 4:20 PM EDT reply actions
I like Mitch as well
he plays good defense, cant throw the ball from the outfield to the infield on the fly (unlike Pods and DDJ), and has very occasional power. I wish he got more consistent play. Once Jose is traded to the Red Sox for Dustin Pedroia, this will happen….
"Things could always be worse." - Buddy Bell
Is Mitch just the next Teahen without the expectations?
What if Mitch had a 2009 like Teahen’s 2006? We’d be angry at him for not doing it again. Since he didn’t, we’re OK with him being a passable player as long as his salary is in accordance.
Would you like to follow me on Twitter, Facebook, or my blog...well you can't.
by SagehenMacGyver47 on Jul 15, 2010 8:09 PM EDT reply actions
And he managed two above average major league seasons (3.0 WAR in 2006 and 2.4 WAR in 2007)
The immoderate moderator
by Scott McKinney on Jul 15, 2010 8:55 PM EDT up reply actions
2007 was primarily because of fielding (from what I can tell at Fangraphs)
So let’s say Mitch goes on a tear in the 2nd half of this season, hits 10 more HRs and gets to 3 WAR; next season he puts up 2 WAR, mostly with D but also by being a mediocre but not “bad” hitter.
That’s basically what Teahen did, but his middling production in 2008 and 2009 convinced us he never had it, and this left a lot of us frustrated that he could never duplicate his 2006. As his salary rose, we were generally glad he was passed on to the Sox (at least I was).
But for Mitch, the expectations were never there. Mitch could keep putting up 1 to 2 WAR per season for the next few years and I’ll still be a fan, but Teahen didn’t get that much leeway.
I’m not even sure it was worth your time reading this, frankly (then again, what else are you going to do on an off day), but I thought it was interesting how their careers are similar in a lot of ways, but Teahen’s 2006 changed our expectations about him and led us to sour on him quicker than Mitch.
Would you like to follow me on Twitter, Facebook, or my blog...well you can't.
by SagehenMacGyver47 on Jul 15, 2010 9:07 PM EDT up reply actions
I don't think it helped Teahen's case that he was part of the Beltran trade.
You expect a lot more out of that kind of player. Granted, Mitch was a first rounder, but we didn’t give up anything to get him. And Teahen was the 3B we were missing, and then he wasn’t. And then he was a power threat, and then he wasn’t. And then he played decent outfield. But then he was a 2B, and then he wasn’t. And then he got traded. So Teahen’s career in KC was very frustrating. Mitch didn’t have any expectations put on him. So getting the same WAR out of Mitch as Teahen, I would call that cause for celebration (for Mitch, at least).
Don't Stop Believing!
Of course, the irony
is that we actually did trade Beltran for an all-star.
I know, I shouldn’t bring that up.
I am now channeling Will McDonald's optimism.
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
Related FanPosts on Royals Review
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Certain photos copyright © 2012 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
