I'll be honest with you - since the end of the season, I've considered the return of Russell Branyan in 2010 all but an inevitability. He's a player that fits here, filling a need and adding a lot to the lineup, and this being the first team to really give him a chance to play every day, it's felt like a situation with, for all intents and purposes, one possible outcome. Any thoughts I've had about how next year's Mariner team is going to fare have pretty much all included Branyan somewhere in the middle of the order.
Being that he's now a free agent who's received calls from a handful of other teams, though, we might as well take this opportunity to discuss the pros and cons of bringing Branyan back, because this is a decision around which a good chunk of the offseason will have to be built.
The biggest pro, and the main reason the team would like to have Branyan back, is the obvious one - he's a good hitter. Though he can take a walk and hit for a little more contact than he used to, Branyan's strength is his...strength...and it was that power that allowed him to conquer Safeco Field and match guys like Maggio Ordonez and Bobby Abreu in productivity. He was arguably the best bat on the team, he wasn't in any way exposed by the regular playing time, and this is a roster that's short on thump. Branyan would serve a major purpose.
Outside of his ability, Branyan would also likely be pretty cheap. I don't know what his demands are, but as a soon-to-be 34 year old who's never attracted a lot of attention from people that don't live in basements, Branyan could re-sign and still leave the team with a lot of financial flexibility to put towards improving the rotation or first base or third base or somewhere. If the Mariners want 2010 to be a competitive season, they need to spend what money they have this winter wisely, and Branyan could help a lot for a reasonable sum.
Finally, Branyan's familiar. He was here last year, he's in tight with the front office, he gets along with his coaches and teammates...this is where Branyan wants to be, and though quantitation is a futile exercise, there has to be some small benefit to signing a guy you can count on to be happy, to be a positive influence. Roster turnover can be a very good thing, but it is not a very good thing on its own.
Those are the positives. Those are the reasons the front office is probably planning on having Branyan come back. You might have noticed that he has yet to sign a contract, though. And that's because, while Branyan's a fine player, he comes with some risks that would give pause to any GM. Branyan may want two years, but there's a reason Zduriencik has yet to give them.
Branyan is about to turn 34. He's about to turn 34, and though no one's particularly concerned that Ichiro just turned 36, Branyan is an "old" 34, in that he isn't known for his conditioning or athleticism. Branyan's posted eight triples and 13 stolen bases in 882 Major League games. He's had old player skills since the day he picked up a bat, and it's those sorts of guys - guys like Ben Grieve and Jeremy Giambi - who tend to age pretty quick. It's not like this is a new phenomenon in Seattle, and one needs only recall Richie Sexson at age 32 to know that Branyan's immediate future is hardly guaranteed. A player like Branyan could decline at any moment, and Branyan can't afford much of a decline if he wants to hang on to his career.
It would be one thing if Branyan were a "clean" 34, but last year he developed a bad back down the stretch that prematurely ended his season. The back thing is an issue for two reasons. For one, it probably has a negative effect on his performance. We saw Branyan struggle when he tried to play through the discomfort, batting just .184 in his final 190 ABs, and while a lot of that was driven by BABIP, it's not like it would be outlandish to suggest that back pain could hurt a guy's productivity at the plate. Branyan's herniated disc is a red flag. A return of the discomfort could really do a number on his performance.
And the second reason is that it limits Zduriencik's flexibility. A year ago, Branyan was brought in to play first base, and that's what he did, but now that the health of his back is a question, Zduriencik would have to account for that by bringing in someone capable of playing the field to fill the other hole and pushing Branyan to DH. You don't want to risk his health by forcing him to play a defensive position very much. The Mariners have openings at both 1B and DH, but if they re-sign Branyan, then that probably takes them out of the running for guys like Jim Thome, Hideki Matsui, and Vladimir Guerrero, because with Griffey's old ass already on the roster, you can't keep collecting guys that can't play the field. That's just a logistical nightmare. If the M's bring back Branyan, then they'll need the other addition to be capable of playing defense.
Russell Branyan is a fine player who can do some extraordinary things, and the Mariners need some guys with his kind of bat. That said, while Branyan's return still carries this air of seeming inevitability, he does come with some downsides, both visible and less so, the recognition of which has brought us to where we are today. We'll see where we go from here, but in the meantime, you can expect to hear the M's linked to just about as many options as possible, because this is not a decision they'll want to make without doing all of their homework.
0 recs | 36 comments
Just to bring it up
Branyan at 3B is out of the question right?
If he was a little younger/healthier it might be worth the defensive hit we’d take so that we could squeeze in another couple bats at 1B and DH. I never heard he was a good 3B but it didn’t sound like he was a complete butcher out there.
Edgar for Pres - November 24, 2009
Not a chance
Jeff Sullivan - November 24, 2009
But our offense is so bad....and i just have a feeling 3B is gonna be a blackhole this year...
No, I understand completely but I just wish it didn’t have to be that way.
Edgar for Pres - November 24, 2009
In 219 career defensive games at 3B,
posted a -10 UZR, or -6.9/150. And played there for 35 games as recently as 2008 I was hoping they would try it out this year when Beltre went down with your same reasoning, but post-back-injury, yeeeeaaahhhh, probably not an option.
appleshampoo - November 24, 2009
There are doubts he'll even be able to play first adequately anymore.
OlSalty - November 24, 2009
I won't be too crushed if we don't sign him
The injuries really turned me off. Like you said Jeff, he’s an OLD 34.
OceanBird - November 24, 2009
True but he was also absolutely crushing the shit out of balls last year
We don’t want a long term commitment but that doesn’t mean he’s necessarily going to suck next year.
OlSalty - November 24, 2009
If Branyan and Nick Johnson were available for the same contract
Nick Johnson, right?
If the M’s signed both, there is a chance they play 162 games combined as a left handed 1B.
CMC_Stags - November 24, 2009
Yes, Johnson easily. They won't be available for the same contract, however.
lailaihei - November 24, 2009
I'm curious to see just how different their contracts end up, though I agree Johnson's upside is much greater
His health record is also very poor.
And I’m beginning to be a bit more interested to see what will happen with Adam LaRoche.
Fangraph WAR totals by year (06-09)
Branyan – 1.1, 0.5, 1.2, 2.8
Johnson – 5.3, DNP, 1.0, 2.4
LaRoche – 2.5, 2.5, 1.6, 2.4
Per a point Dave Cameron made about using Fangraph WAR totals, keep in mind the fact that there is no League adjustment. So if you think that the AL is a more difficult league in which to play, knock off a bit of WAR from NL seasons (or add a touch to AL seasons).
CMC_Stags - November 24, 2009
Johnson's a better player, but I'd bet Branyan plays more games.
Teej - November 24, 2009
Nice nonanswer.
Teej - November 24, 2009
Alternate them at 1B/DH
This might be the way to keep both healthy most of the time. And Griffey can fill in at DH when either of the two needs a day off (e.g. every weekend homegame vs. a RHP starter).
vj - November 25, 2009
I don't want him back. One con not mentioned was his character.
I did not know that he has a reported domestic violence incident in his recent past. Had I known, he wouldn’t have gotten a single cheer out of me last year. He might be a good ball player, but frankly I’m sorry I didn’t check his personal history. It may not matter to any of you, but that’s a huge strike for me. I’m also disappointed in the FO for ignoring this while sponsoring a “Refuse to Abuse” campaign every year. This totally sucks in my mind.
Sinking Away - November 24, 2009
His reported domestic violence incident involves him putting his hand on his wife's face with enough force to break skin.
It has nothing to do with beating his wife, hitting her, or repeating it in any such way. By all accounts it was a “grab” rather than a punch, but it was a grab that occurred with force. While he should not have done it at all, I’m less inclined to consider this such a huge strike that I can’t appreciate him as a baseball player.
I don’t want to get into a what is and is not okay argument about spousal abuse, since none of it is okay, but there is – as far as I can tell – no indicator that this was anything more than a dude that doesn’t know his own strength. I mean, literally – this was the alleged report:
That may be enough to be pissed at Branyan, but to not sign him or like him as a baseball player because of this sounds considerably over the top.
CapSea - November 24, 2009
One act is not enough for me to hate a man
Now a ton of acts might do it.
MT Olson - November 24, 2009
11 children with 10 different women! WOW
Had I only read that I would have thought he were a basketball player.
kentroyals5 - November 25, 2009
About ten years ago a relative of mine was in Pierce County family court ...
… trying to collect on unpaid child support for her son. As court went into session the judge announced that my relative’s case and the next case were going to be consolidated – because they both involved non-payment from the same guy. The kds were about two months different in age.
I think the guy was up to five kids, not paying support on any of them, and still dropping baby batter every chance he got.
Steve Nelson - November 27, 2009
I was trying to craft a graceful response that didn't make me look like a wifebeater, but this does a better job.
I don’t defend the alleged behavior, of course, but I think it’s rare to find a marriage in which no one ever goes too far during an argument. Everyone else’s problems don’t end up in the paper. I know several people who have been through situations that sound similar to this one, and they’re not bad people. It sucks, but it’s common. Until it appears to be a chronic issue*, I’m not going to judge people.
*Though we obviously can’t be sure that the one reported incident is the only one.
Teej - November 24, 2009
And alleged behavior has no business on this blog.
None. Zero. Zilch. Nada. Cero. Nein.
Matthew - November 24, 2009
Sorry for keeping it going.
Teej - November 24, 2009
It is at least theoretically possible that this wasn't mentioned for at least two very specific reasons
the first being that LL is generally concerned with quantitative analysis of player and organizational performance and the second being that conversations about these sorts of issues rarely go anywhere positive.
Aaron Campeau - November 24, 2009
It's not okay
The fact of the matter is, he got angry and committed violence against a woman, however minor that violence might have been relative to more severe cases of domestic abuse. And that’s not okay. He should never had laid his hand on her in the first place. And personally, I think if he’s convicted of this he should be punished somehow through community service obligations or even serving as a spokesperson for the refuse to abuse campaign..
But there’s also an element of forgiveness necessary here. He should have to make good on the things he did but we ourselves can’t assess excessive damages on a person out of pure vengeance because we hate the act they committed. There are very few instances where someone convicted of the crime Branyan is accused of lose their job over it. I just think justice has it’s limitations and we shouldn’t be so quick to arrive at the conclusion that he is an irredeemable, despicable person for this one act.
OlSalty - November 24, 2009
Err, sorry if this is a taboo discussion topic
I just realized that it might be, sorry.
OlSalty - November 24, 2009
For the record if we knew everything about the personal lives of our favorite athletes, none of us would like sports
And if we knew everything about the personal lives of our friends, none of us would have friends.
Jeff Sullivan - November 24, 2009
This is what I was going for. I need an editor.
Teej - November 24, 2009
Indeed.
Goose - November 25, 2009
This subthread is closed.
See: http://www.lookoutlanding.com/2009/11/24/1172986/on-bringing-back-russell-branyan#26133237
Matthew - November 24, 2009
I loved Branyan last year, however I can't help but think that 2009 was a career year and that to sign him is going to take a two year deal, which we shouldn't agree to.
I’d much rather see us take a risk on Johnson if we are going for it in 2010, if not then stick Carp in and see what he does. I’m of the mindset that 2010 will just be a filler year until the real push in 2011 anyway.
EnglishMariner - November 25, 2009
Bbbut who will provide the Fuck Blasts if not for Russell?
abender20 - November 25, 2009
I hear that Gutierrez feller is kinda cute...
PositivePaul - November 25, 2009
Lopez
for Detroit
seattlebruin - November 25, 2009
His don't even qualify as dingers.
At best, you’re looking at dinghies.
abender20 - November 25, 2009
Dinghies are boats just like battleships
seattlebruin - November 25, 2009
One of them leaves everyone satisfied.
abender20 - November 25, 2009
The dinghy didn't leave the battleship last time
it was a destroyer, but whatever
seattlebruin - November 25, 2009
You must Login with your SB Nation account and be a member of Lookout Landing to post a comment.