Last night I took part in a podcast, which you can listen to here. I enjoy doing podcasts, even though we haven't done an LL podcast in a while. Podcasts provide a different way to talk about baseball - an easier way to talk about baseball, where I don't have to think about every single word and look at it on a screen. Writing can be hard sometimes. Talking out loud is a change of pace.
Over the course of the podcast, I took a few jabs at the Astros. I make Astros jokes the way a lot of people make Prince Fielder fat jokes, which is to say I make Astros jokes all the time. They're really bad. A lot of Mariners fans are looking forward to the Astros joining the AL West in 2013, because the Astros are really bad. They're so bad.
I went to bed having made fun of the Astros. I woke up to this news. The Astros have hired Mike Fast, effective immediately, or effective almost immediately.
Many of you are familiar with Mike Fast. For those of you who aren't familiar with Mike Fast...let's put it this way. I think, generally, there are baseball writers, and baseball researchers. Sometimes baseball writers do research, but Fast was a researcher. Mike Fast was a baseball scientist. Frequently leaning on PITCHfx, he generated so many fascinating studies, including this one on pitch framing from September. Fast was at the top of his field.
And now he'll continue with his analysis, only he'll do it as an employee of a team who'll soon become a division rival. There are people who do similar things to Fast, and for all I know there are people who are better, but Fast has the right blend of intelligence and creativity. And motivation. Definitely motivation.
This is by no means a doom-and-gloom post. Fast is one guy. One employee. He's not a player. He's very far removed from the players. There's no telling how much influence he's going to have, and there's no telling how useful he's actually going to be. Bad teams have hired smart people and stayed bad before.
But this is another sign that the Astros are on the rise. They hired Mike Fast. They have a new owner. They hired Jeff Luhnow. They have a guy whose job title is Director of Decision Sciences, which I'm not even smart enough to understand. The Astros' on-field product was laughable in 2011 and it'll probably be laughable in 2012, but there's reason for them to hope after a few years of misery.
The Astros aren't going to join the AL West as some kind of clown car. They're on their way towards legitimacy. And it's not just them. All teams are getting smarter. Some teams are getting smarter slower than other teams, and some teams are still run by Ned Colletti, but baseball's getting sharp. The intelligence gap between organizations is shrinking, increasing the significance of money and luck.
We trust the Mariners' front office. We think the Mariners' front office is smart, and usually knows what it's doing. Most front offices are smart, and most front offices know what they're doing. On a WAR scale, I don't know where the Mariners' front office would stand. I get the sense that the replacement level keeps getting pushed higher and higher.
Anyway, I don't know how this post ended up this long. The Astros hired Mike Fast. Mike Fast is brilliant, or something close to brilliant. Fast should improve the Astros organization to some degree. The Astros overall are getting better. The Astros are shortly going to join the Mariners' division. Hello to increased competition.
The Mariners better hope like hell that these young players pan out.
0 recs | 34 comments
Maybe he can science them up a good new nickname
If they enter the division as the Houston Somethin’ Elses
lemonverbena - January 24, 2012
More like Houston Ass Crows
OlSalty - January 25, 2012
Colt .45s might be the favorite if not for the whole gun violence thing
lemonverbena - January 25, 2012
Man, the last LL podcast was in September?
No wonder I’ve been so productive at work the last few months.
wetzelcoal - January 24, 2012
I'm incredibly worried about the Astros.
They have a nice stadium in a large and fast growing market. We aren’t talking about the A’s here, were talking about a team that could really be good in the future. Everything is set up for that team except the baseball part.
John Woody - January 24, 2012
The nice thing about GMZ is his ability to swing multiple team trades.
It isn’t necessary or possible every time he makes a move, but at least he’s shown he can manage it.
Kermit. - January 24, 2012
Other than that I wonder what Tony Blengino thinks about all this.
And if Tango is still an advisor.
Kermit. - January 24, 2012
J.J. Putz and Jeremy Reed...
…for Gutierrez, Carp, Vargas, Heilman.
Balance!
cwel87 - January 24, 2012
The Cliff Lee trade still blows my mind
Kermit. - January 24, 2012
Ruben Amaro is to general managing what Mike Singletary is to coaching
cwel87 - January 24, 2012
An asshole?
abender20 - January 24, 2012
Just when the Mariners get smart so does the rest of baseball.
There is no floor.
Mariner Melee - January 24, 2012
Certainly one of the things that worries me
We like to talk about building from within versus paying for wins via FA a lot, but intelligent and resourceful teams like Texas, and to a somewhat lesser degree the Angels, are doing both. It’s nice to imagine building a sustainable winner by drafting and developing well on a meager budget, but plenty of large market teams are wising up and using FA as a means to supplement their young, talented player base. It’s going to be hard to simply use “young guys” without having a budget that can absorb a few mistakes and bring in talent from free agency.
It’s getting harder to find the market inefficiency and to find the competitive edge to beat out teams like Texas and Anaheim without simply outspending them.
JLC - January 24, 2012
Texas has a very good model for the M's to follow and I believe the M's are following it.
Texas’ winning foundation came through stockpiling and developing talent while averaging a $65 Million payroll from 2007 onward until they reached the World Series. They took the time to seek talent wherever they can find it and used that talent to put a strong team on the field. Now that Texas has their winning team, they’re increasing their payroll to sustain a winner.
Mariners have also been stockpiling and developing talent. The team shipped off Cliff Lee, Doug Fister, Erik Bedard and Michael Pineda to shore up additional talent. Despite fan bickering, we still have yet to start a season in which the team is focusing on playing young players. 2011 team? Hosting a bounce-back festival starting Milton Bradley, Jack Cust, Chone Figgins, and Adam Kennedy. 2010 team? Trying to win using Ken Griffey Jr. and Mike Sweeney as offensive threats. 2009 team? Trying to see what happens if it added defense.
I honestly believe the Mariners are taking the best approach to their situation. The team will ultimately have to spend money to make a sustainable winner work but do they have to spend it now? For example, increasing payroll to add Prince Fielder, Edwin Jackson, Michael Cuddyer this year would improve the team and excite the fanbase. But is that a good idea for a team still working on its foundation?
I think all the crazy spending this off-season is making the build-through-talent-development approach look bad. In reality, one of the teams we’re chasing down (Texas) used this approach. The difference between Texas and teams like the Rays is the fact that they now can spend to support their winning team. After reaching the World Series the first time, they signed Adrian Beltre. After reaching the second time, they signed Yu Darvish to replace C.J. Wilson.
As for the Astros, good for them hiring smart people. Now they need to improve baseball operations and change the organization from the top down. Unless they’re planning on spending like the 2012 Marlins when they move to the AL West, they have a ton of work to do. They’re the furthest away from all the division mates. I’m certainly not worried about them right now.
ThundaPC - January 24, 2012
Definitely agree with all of that
The problem is that 3 or 4 years down the road (hopefully, we don’t have to wait quite that long), when the Mariners should be good and winning, Texas will still be smart and good. The Angels will still be good, and probably smarter. By that point, all three of those clubs will be using the same method of building a team and finding success.
The problem is that there can only be one division winner (wild cards obviously exist, but you’re still dealing with elite, resourceful FOs: Boston, Toronto, Texas/Anaheim, Rays, maybe others). The question then becomes whether or not our FO is smarter and/or more resourceful than Anaheim and Texas. I’d argue that at present, no to both, and even in the future it’s hard to see us match Anaheim’s payroll and Texas’ everything.
tl;dr edition: Hard to see one team dominate the AL West for several years. Too many well-run teams.
JLC - January 24, 2012
The way I look at it
If the Mariners can’t jump past the Rangers and Angels, they should at least be able to pull even with them. Currently, and for the last decade, Mariners have been behind (in most cases, way behind). Luckily, it doesn’t prevent them from putting a better team on the field. Putting a team that’s good enough to catch a few breaks to get in to the playoffs is still significantly better than what we’ve had to deal with.
ThundaPC - January 24, 2012
Yeah
I probably came off as more pessimistic about this team than I actually am. I definitely think we can compete with the Rangers and Angels at some point, but it’s obviously going to be difficult. It’s hard for me to imagine the Mariners dominating the AL West for several years in the way the Yankees have, unless the Rangers and Angels completely fall apart.
JLC - January 24, 2012
I do kind of wish we could've gotten smarter sooner!
ThundaPC - January 25, 2012
Also
Congrats to Mike Fast. I love his work and how active he was on the internets. I only wish the Mariners would’ve imprisoned him in a dark dungeon underground and kept him there until he figured out how to create the best team in the history of baseball. It’s out of love, Mike.
JLC - January 24, 2012
So this is different from when we brought in Mat Olkin and Squiggy?
JY - January 24, 2012
I'm currently taking DSCI305
So if anyone has a hookup in the front office I’d be willing to take over as our Director of Decision Sciences.
cedarA - January 24, 2012 via mobile
Applied business statistics!
I take it you go to WWU, and in the college of business and economics. Like myself.
seiferguy - January 24, 2012 via mobile
Yup, working towards the finance side of business administration.
I regret doing it over Financial Economics though, turned out not to enjoy much of the management side.
cedarA - January 24, 2012
Supply Chain Management is where it's at.
Fun degree and guaranteed jobs!
seiferguy - January 25, 2012
Operations & Technology Management
Same thing: fun material and plentiful job opportunities.
ShipstadPilot11 - January 25, 2012
If front offices are getting smarter, doesn't thak make it more likely that replacement level is dropping (since more of the smart people already have jobs with teams)?
quacker27 - January 24, 2012
I could be wrong but...
Replacement level is a way of expressing the quality of the average player or, in this case, smart researcher guy that is employed at a given time. So, as teams get smarter and hire smart people, the replacement level goes up.
ShipstadPilot11 - January 24, 2012
Well, I was mostly joking, but my understanding is that the concept of replacement level is used to estimate the abilities of players (or front office personnel) as compared to the abilities of "freely available talent."
My suggestion was that as front offices get smarter the average ability of the “freely available talent” decreases (and thereby also causing a corresponding increase in players/front office personnel’s Wins Above Replacement). Now, I don’t really think this is likely, as I doubt MLB has come close to exhausting the supply of wise, intelligent, and experienced people.
quacker27 - January 25, 2012
The reason I don't see there being a shortage of replacement level talent is that teams have already tried stockpiling those guys
on the assumption that replacement level + upside will give you some decent players for free. As far as I can tell, it hasn’t quite worked out that way
seattlebruin - January 25, 2012
Front office smarts have no effect on available talent?
The question mark is due to a personal theory that enough educated, science based talent at the top will overwhelm the old school thinking at the lower levels. So maybe the talent stays the same, but the training methods become more cohesive and rigorous at the minor league levels.
Kermit. - January 24, 2012
Argh, reply to ShipstadPilot11. Rookie mistake.
Kermit. - January 24, 2012
I think
Jeff was saying that the replacement level of front offices is going up, not the replacement level of the players.
ShipstadPilot11 - January 24, 2012
Oh, right on. I misinterpreted quacker27. I thought quacker was referring to replacement level players
And misread the intent of the subthreads from there. My mistake.
Kermit. - January 24, 2012
Does signing Cust hurt as much as hiring Fast helps?
It’s just funny that the same organization can make both of these hires so close to one another.
short - January 24, 2012
You must Login with your SB Nation account and be a member of Lookout Landing to post a comment.