Jack Wilson, 31, is an exemplary defensive shortstop. He is very clearly comfortable at his position, and according to the numbers we have, he's probably worth 5 or 10 runs above average in the field. He doesn't, however, have much of a bat, with a career wOBA of .298 and a ZiPS projection of .294.
Jack Hannahan, 29, is an examplary defensive third baseman. He is very clearly comfortable at his position, and according to the numbers we have, he's probably worth 10 or 15 runs above average in the field. Recently he's begun taking balls in the middle infield and getting some time at short, where last night he made a sensational diving stop to his left. The positional adjustment we have for moving from 3B to SS is worth about five runs, and there's little reason to believe that Hannahan won't be able to handle the change. He doesn't, however, have much of a bat, with a career wOBA of .298 and a ZiPS projection of .306.
0 recs | 84 comments
Thought-stealer
Graham MacAree - August 13, 2009
That's what you get for not wearing your tinfoil hat.
Eyebrows - August 13, 2009
Platoon!
Not that a platoon would do much to increase the value of the two I suspect. Wait, let me check…
Jack Wilson: .670 OPS v RHP, .744 v LHP
Jack Hannahan: .641 OPS v LHP, .675 v RHP
So maybe a platoon of the two gets you up to like a .310-.315 wOBA?
Anyway, the thought of a Jack and Jack platoon tickles me.
Matthew - August 13, 2009
I feel like it would be stupid to pay Jack Wilson as much money as he's going to get to be part of a platoon
Jeff Sullivan - August 13, 2009
In fact I'm beginning to feel like it would be stupid to pay Jack Wilson as much money as he's going to get
Jeff Sullivan - August 13, 2009
Is it tree burning time again?
Dewey N - August 13, 2009
I swore I wouldn't do this with our new front office
Jeff Sullivan - August 13, 2009
Luckily, I think it's only going to be "stupid" because we have a good proxy for him.
I do think Jack Wilson is going to end up being worth his contract on fair value.
For instance, he’s already been worth 8.4M this season, was 7.1M last year and over 10M in 07.
Matthew - August 13, 2009
I agree with you
At first glance though, it just appears that the money going to Wilson could be better spent elsewhere, given the resources we already have.
Jeff Sullivan - August 13, 2009
What happens if Hannahan gets hurt?
There is no depth in the MIF in the org.
CMC_Stags - August 13, 2009
Bill Hall! Paging Mr. Campeau, we're good to go on plan ac alpha
marc w - August 13, 2009
It's not like utility MIF players are hard to come by
I mean, Woodward, Hannahan, Wilson (Josh) were all acquired for very little. At some point you do want to start getting good bats to play the infield but having a backup is not something to be overly concerned about.
Bearskin Rugburn - August 13, 2009
Outside of Hannahan
They all suck. And Oakland obviously wasn’t valuing him as a MIF.
CMC_Stags - August 13, 2009
Hannahan is not all that much better than those guys
maybe ten or fifteen runs at most over a full season of play, but since we’re talking about a fraction of that, as a utility player there is a five run difference at most. And players like Bill Hall, Everett, Punto or McDonald are usually available.
Bearskin Rugburn - August 13, 2009
I guess I'd rather have a bench depth problem than a budget problem
Jeff Sullivan - August 13, 2009
I agree with you
I guess the counters to that are:
A) Putting Hanners at SS does mean we’d still need a MIF backup for next season.
B) Wilson has a longer track record than Hanners
C) The FO seems to like other things about Wilson
D) Trust the FO?
Matthew - August 13, 2009
I agree with you
D it is!
Jeff Sullivan - August 13, 2009
"Trust the Front Office" almost rhymes with "Trust the Process"
But, yes, I too will gladly be LLemminged by bLLengino.
Decatur - August 13, 2009
From the way Zduriencik talked about Wilson on Saturday, I got the sense he might decline Wilson's option and sign him to a cheaper two-year deal.
Decatur - August 13, 2009
Isn't that what the Pirates tried doing?
Wilder. - August 13, 2009
I thought most people believed they were just posturing to try to raise his value on the trade market.
But I might be wrong on that.
Decatur - August 13, 2009
I think they were just posturing to the fans and the players on the team.
They had no intention of re-signing Wilson.
Wilder. - August 13, 2009
I think longer than two!
Jeff Sullivan - August 13, 2009
Yikes
Bearskin Rugburn - August 13, 2009
They used the words "retire as a Mariner" in sequence at one point
Jeff Sullivan - August 13, 2009
...in 2013?
Bearskin Rugburn - August 13, 2009
...after a year as a utility player?
Bearskin Rugburn - August 13, 2009
Note: Ken Griffey is also likely to retire as a Mariner.
So, Zduriencik is planning on bringing Wilson back for a farewell season in 2015 as a gift to Seattle fans delighted by his notYuniness.
Matthew - August 13, 2009
I'm in.
Sec 108 - August 13, 2009
See, I wouldn't mind having Wilson around for a few more years if he can keep up doing what he does in the field.
It’s not like shortstop has been an offensive boon for this team the last few years and we don’t exactly have a shortstop on the verge of breaking into the majors. But is it realistic to believe Wilson will continue to be a defensive whiz in the field to justify a contract size he is likely to receive ($6-7 million/year)?
Wilder. - August 13, 2009
Not a whiz necessarily, but he's got a ways to go before he's a problem in the field.
Aaron Campeau - August 13, 2009
Compared to what we've been through the last few seasons,
Wilson will be in his grave before he becomes a problem in the field.
Wilder. - August 13, 2009
He'll still have more range than Yuni.
But his arm strength will take a nose dive.
CapSea - August 13, 2009
Jack-Jack Attack?
With all due apologies to Pixar, of course
Tube - August 13, 2009
He even looks like Jack Wilson!!!
Just needs half his face to melt a little.
CapSea - August 13, 2009
What about Hannahan at second?
Of course, if Beltre leaves, the need for another 3B is pretty minimal with Hannahan around in my opinion. Beefing up the bats at C and DH strike me as much more important than at 3B and SS
Jack Moore - August 13, 2009
Lopez is adequate and cheap at second
Graham MacAree - August 13, 2009
If you can get something neat for Lopez though...
Aaron Campeau - August 13, 2009
Right, this is the only situation where I'd put Hannahan at 2B, but I think it's a good option to have.
Also, Hannahan as a Chris Woodward-with-talent super-utility type player could be valuable. We might have another Craig Counsell on our hands here.
Jack Moore - August 13, 2009
Right, that would also be a way to go
Jeff Sullivan - August 13, 2009
I guess what I'm saying is that options are neat!
Aaron Campeau - August 13, 2009
Who needs a 2B though?
there seems to be an excess of pretty good to real good hitting 2B around the league
Bearskin Rugburn - August 13, 2009
We're not touching the catcher position
Jeff Sullivan - August 13, 2009
When is Adam Moore supposed to be ready?
Jack Moore - August 13, 2009
He'll be up at or around the beginning of next season to job share with RJ
Jeff Sullivan - August 13, 2009
So what you're saying is
I’ll hate Rob Johnson even more next year.
Jeff Nye - August 13, 2009
If Moore impresses I imagine it shouldn't be long before he becomes the regular
Jeff Sullivan - August 13, 2009
then playoffs!
Dewey N - August 13, 2009
Profit!
Poochie - August 13, 2009
Yeah, I didn't necessarily mean beefing up the position through FA.
I mean, if Moore hits at league average levels (expecting a lot, I know) it would be an incredible boost to this lineup.
Jack Moore - August 13, 2009
For all the talk about Moore's bat
Moore at 25 in AAA: .340 wOBA
Johnson at 25 in AAA: .349 wOBA
Moore’s got the much more impressive career stats, though park effects and ARL complicate the picture slightly. Moore had a monster ‘08 at age 24 in AA, but Johnson never played AA ball – skipped to AAA at 23.
The point of this isn’t so much that Moore can’t hit or that Johnson is awesome, it’s that I think people expect a lot from Moore simply because he’s a catching prospect that isn’t Rob Johnson.
marc w - August 13, 2009
Well shit.
Bearskin Rugburn - August 13, 2009
Johnson was repeating AAA, though.
Aaron Campeau - August 13, 2009
Yes, that's why the ARL stuff is complicated and I'm not making some definitive point here
There’s no right or wrong way to weigh these variables. Do you dock Johnson for repeating (it was technically his 3rd stint in AAA)? Or do you credit him for making it there at 23 and skipping AA altogether?
Do you knock Moore for a declining ISO, or is that natural given the parks/leagues he was moving through? Do you knock Johnson for a pathetic ISO, or credit him for the upward trend line?
marc w - August 13, 2009
Jeff Clement has 20 home runs this year
Graham MacAree - August 13, 2009
LaHair has 23. Lots of AAA MiLB 1Bs having nice seasons this year.
marc w - August 13, 2009
I hope Asdrubal Cabrera forgets how to throw
Graham MacAree - August 13, 2009
recrecrecrecrec
marc w - August 13, 2009
We also haven't seen Moore's ability to catch and block pitches.
While I haven’t heard exceptional things, Rob Johnson lowers my threshold for satisfaction.
Fuckmikereilly - August 13, 2009
YOU haven't.
He’s not a guy who’s going to be stellar at blocking the plate. He gave up 23 PBs last year in 107 AA games, and is still working on his defense now. It’s a work in progress; if you’re looking for an instant, clear improvement in CS% or PBs or something, Moore’s not your guy. The total package has a bigger upside, but….
marc w - August 13, 2009
Yeah, this...
And even as Moore’s biggest non-organizational fanboy, I recognize that he has…limitations.
PositivePaul - August 13, 2009
IOW...
It pains me to say that RIGHT NOW Rob Johnson is a better MLB catcher than Adam Moore would be. I wouldn’t call up Moore until mid-2010, myself. If Joh’s indeed gone after this season (oh please oh please oh please) I’d give Jamie Burke first dibs at being the backup to start the season. I’d rather have Moore catching ~every day in AAA for half a season than once a week in the bigs.
PositivePaul - August 13, 2009
What's the word on Bill Hall?
He looks like the perfect ~freely available platoon mate for Hannahan in 2010 (and he’s been an above average 3B, SS, and CF in recent years). Do you, as a Brewers fan guy, have any additional insight on why he’s been so bad or what he would cost?
Decatur - August 13, 2009
He's tried to change his approach from a power hitter to a contact hitter since that 35 HR season
He just can’t do it. He never could hit right handed pitchers, but then it got even worse when he stopped taking walks and tried to make more contact (walk rates went from 10.5% to around 8%), and the 19.4% HR/FB in 2006 was surely unsustainable. I think he could function pretty well as the left-handed part of a platoon, but mentally, he really doesn’t seem suited to taking multiple days off. He’s going to strike out over 30% of the time, and LASIK obviously wasn’t the solution to that. He still has power, and he can still field quite well, and he could play both infield and outfield. He’ll get on base at a roughly .310 clip if you’re lucky, though, and probably not even that.
Jack Moore - August 13, 2009
By the way, I was a HUGE Bill Hall fan. I really thought he could be a franchise cornerstone along with Braun and Fielder.
Just wasn’t to be.
Jack Moore - August 13, 2009
Its an idea, but I think this is going a little too far too fast.
Beltre has been in the 10-20 range since forever but I’m fairly certain he would be in trouble at SS long term. I love the idea of Hannahan as a utility player, and like his approach enough to want to see him in the lineup more often than Woodward for example, but I imagine we’d be disappointed with his play at SS in the long run.
Woodward, incidentally, made some phenomenal plays at third in the early going if I remember right, but then went right back to being meh.
Bearskin Rugburn - August 13, 2009
But if the overall point you're making is that we'll be paying Wilson too much next year I cant argue
last winter we saw Everett sign for a lot less, Punto is being paid half as much I think, and Orlando Cabrera is paid about the same but is supposed to hit better. So yeah.
Bearskin Rugburn - August 13, 2009
I think Beltre was just too established to think about moving around
Hannahan’s ripe for the…messing around with?
I’m certain he could be at least league-average, at which point it just becomes an issue of wear and tear and durability.
Jeff Sullivan - August 13, 2009
Bingo
Reflexes, quickness and arm being perhaps equal between Hannahan and Wilson, my guess is Wilson is simply the better natural athlete. A guy who hits as little as Hannahan does would have stuck at SS if he could, wouldn’t he (I know, terrible argument but nevertheless)?
Bearskin Rugburn - August 13, 2009
By the way, the point of this post isn't necessarily that I'd slot Hannahan in at short and punt Wilson
It’s more that, hey, look how much value we found for nothing.
Jeff Sullivan - August 13, 2009
Justin Souza sucks.
Matthew - August 13, 2009
I'm sure Oakland fans still think we're crazy for putting any value in Hannahan.
Fuckmikereilly - August 13, 2009
They may also be wondering why they traded for Souza, however.
28 RA in 20 IP or something? Guy’s getting annihilated so far.
marc w - August 13, 2009
Skimming the conversations it seems like Hannahan isn't getting much consideration at third.
Why is that?
Nate Dogg - August 13, 2009
I would love to see a platoon involving Hannahn at third, but he's way more valuable at SS if he can play it.
Aaron Campeau - August 13, 2009
In our hearts we are all hoping for Beltre to be back is why
Graham MacAree - August 13, 2009
I think most of us just love the idea of having a super-utility guy again
and Hannahan fills that role much better than as a regular 3B. That being said, he wouldn’t be the worst option out there if we can’t retain Beltre, but I’d like to find someone with a bit more offense.
Fuckmikereilly - August 13, 2009
Platooning him there with Tui seems like a good way to get Tui's feet wet
but I’ll say right now I don’t know how much of a prospect Tui is, only that the management seemed to be besotted of him.
Bearskin Rugburn - August 13, 2009
He seems to strike out a lot for a guy who doesn't have exceptional power.
He put up decent offensive numbers in AAA last year when he was only 22, but his defense is definitely a problem.
Fuckmikereilly - August 13, 2009
At 22 though, we would expect his power to increase
Even if his strikeouts don’t improve. You figure he bumps up his HR numbers slightly and the bat gets better very very fast.
Andersean - August 13, 2009
Yeah but if he's relegated to the OF, as seems likely
I can’t see him winning a job from Saunders and I can’t see him outperforming Ackley once he signs.
Fuckmikereilly - August 13, 2009
(A) It seems the organization likes him more as a super utility guy
(B) They probably want Beltre back
Jeff Sullivan - August 13, 2009
His bat
I think the assumption is that we can find someone to play plus defense and hit much better than Hannahan. Our expectations for SS however, have been falling through the floor for a couple of years.
Bearskin Rugburn - August 13, 2009
I thought this post meant "Boy, sure am glad we didn't trade Washburn & Bedard for JJ Hardy"
Spoomeister - August 13, 2009
You must Login with your SB Nation account and be a member of Lookout Landing to post a comment.