Smith vs. P. Alvarez

[Frobby]

In a way, I think Seth Smith is filling the Pedro Alvarez LH platoon player slot.

Smith 2016: .249/.342/.415, 108 OPS+, 16 HR, 63 RBI (438 PA, 399 vs. RHP)

Smith career: .261/.344/.447, 112 OPS+, 113 HR, 426 RBI (3711 PA, 3153 vs. RHP)

Alvarez 2016: .249/.322/.504, 115 OPS+, 22 HR, 49 RBI (376 PA, 335 vs. RHP)

Alvarez career: .238/.311/.449, 108 OPS+, 153 HR, 450 RBI (3160 PA, 2495 vs. RHP).

Both are pretty helpless against LHP, but Smith is a little more so (.594 career OPS vs. LHP for Smith, .606 for Alvarez).    Smith has been platooned more heavily (91% of PA vs. LHP in 2016, 85% career, vs. 89%/79% for Alvarez).

Smith is four years older than Alvarez, and his OPS+ has declined the last two years and was below his career average last year.    Alvarez tied his career high OPS+ last year (115).

Smith got more playing time than Alvarez last year, which I think is a function of the fact that Alvarez sat in the games at NL parks and in some of the September games once Bourne was on the team.   In other words, Alvarez's incompetence in the field cut into his playing time even though the AL has the DH rule.   Smith had a poor year defensively but is generally at least a competent corner OF.

If we were to re-sign Trumbo (which I'm not necessarily advocating), it seems to me that Smith/Trumbo is likely to be a small step down from Trumbo/Alvarez.   However, on this particular team, the OBP boost from Smith and the reduction in strikeouts (19.3% vs. 28.6% career K%) might be worth the reduction in power, and the defensive upgrade from Trumbo to Smith in RF probably makes that the better overall combination, even though Smith is no defensive wizard.   Admittedly, I haven't seen Smith play a whole lot, so it's hard for me to judge how much of a defensive upgrade he'd be.   I do think he's more athletic than Trumbo.

Bottom line, I think Smith is a better fit than Alvarez if Trumbo is re-signed, but not by a significant amount when you weigh all the factors.    If we go a different direction than Trumbo, Smith may or may not be a better fit.   

[Spy Fox]

One thing to note defensively is that Smith has played half of all his career games in Seattle, Colorado, and Oakland. Those are three of the biggest outfields in the league. So I'm with you in not knowing that much about Smith's defensive abilities, but I wouldn't be surprised if he grades out a bit better in the smaller Baltimore right field. 

[25 Nuggets]

5 hours ago, Spy Fox said:

One thing to note defensively is that Smith has played half of all his career games in Seattle, Colorado, and Oakland. Those are three of the biggest outfields in the league. So I'm with you in not knowing that much about Smith's defensive abilities, but I wouldn't be surprised if he grades out a bit better in the smaller Baltimore right field. 

I don't think he will - metrics seem to penalize outfielders in Camden Yards for playing in a smaller park.  But we'll just have to see - Travis Snider graded out well defensively and we just didn't see that out of him.

[Number5]

6 hours ago, Frobby said:

In a way, I think Seth Smith is filling the Pedro Alvarez LH platoon player slot.

Smith 2016: .249/.342/.415, 108 OPS+, 16 HR, 63 RBI (438 PA, 399 vs. RHP)

Smith career: .261/.344/.447, 112 OPS+, 113 HR, 426 RBI (3711 PA, 3153 vs. RHP)

Alvarez 2016: .249/.322/.504, 115 OPS+, 22 HR, 49 RBI (376 PA, 335 vs. RHP)

Alvarez career: .238/.311/.449, 108 OPS+, 153 HR, 450 RBI (3160 PA, 2495 vs. RHP).

Both are pretty helpless against LHP, but Smith is a little more so (.594 career OPS vs. LHP for Smith, .606 for Alvarez).    Smith has been platooned more heavily (91% of PA vs. LHP in 2016, 85% career, vs. 89%/79% for Alvarez).

Smith is four years older than Alvarez, and his OPS+ has declined the last two years and was below his career average last year.    Alvarez tied his career high OPS+ last year (115).

Smith got more playing time than Alvarez last year, which I think is a function of the fact that Alvarez sat in the games at NL parks and in some of the September games once Bourne was on the team.   In other words, Alvarez's incompetence in the field cut into his playing time even though the AL has the DH rule.   Smith had a poor year defensively but is generally at least a competent corner OF.

If we were to re-sign Trumbo (which I'm not necessarily advocating), it seems to me that Smith/Trumbo is likely to be a small step down from Trumbo/Alvarez.   However, on this particular team, the OBP boost from Smith and the reduction in strikeouts (19.3% vs. 28.6% career K%) might be worth the reduction in power, and the defensive upgrade from Trumbo to Smith in RF probably makes that the better overall combination, even though Smith is no defensive wizard.   Admittedly, I haven't seen Smith play a whole lot, so it's hard for me to judge how much of a defensive upgrade he'd be.   I do think he's more athletic than Trumbo.

Bottom line, I think Smith is a better fit than Alvarez if Trumbo is re-signed, but not by a significant amount when you weigh all the factors.    If we go a different direction than Trumbo, Smith may or may not be a better fit.   

I pretty much agree with all of this, but I think we also have to factor in the Gallardo part of the transaction.  I think that Smith plus whatever pitcher replaces Gallardo will either have superior combined production or significantly reduced cost versus Gallardo plus Alvarez.  Quite possibly both.  If we sign or trade for an unexpected true upgrade to our rotation, the benefits are obvious.  If not, we might be able to use the money savings for a true upgrade in the outfield.  Yes, Smith and Alvarez are comparable players, but I think the trade provides with us more value than meets the eye if we look only at Smith vs. Alvarez.

[Moondoggie]

I don't see Seth Smith regularly, but he's always impressed me as a very average defender. The sort of guy you don't notice out there one way or the other. And that's fine. Good, in fact. It's an improvement over Trumbo. It's infinitely better than Doctor Strangeglove, whose potential return to the team baffles me if the Orioles are also planning on carrying Mancini. A good DH platoon they may be, but you're killing your defensive flexibility by carrying two guys who will rarely, if ever, see the field. I like Pedro and think he could have a great year if just left alone to DH full time, but it makes no sense unless you trade Mancini or keep him in the minors.

[Number5]

57 minutes ago, 25 Nuggets said:

I don't think he will - metrics seem to penalize outfielders in Camden Yards for playing in a smaller park.  But we'll just have to see - Travis Snider graded out well defensively and we just didn't see that out of him.

I agree.  I've not seen anything that supports the notion that playing in the Orioles' park is an advantage as far as defensive metrics is concerned.

[theobird]

7 hours ago, Frobby said:

In a way, I think Seth Smith is filling the Pedro Alvarez LH platoon player slot.

Smith 2016: .249/.342/.415, 108 OPS+, 16 HR, 63 RBI (438 PA, 399 vs. RHP)

Smith career: .261/.344/.447, 112 OPS+, 113 HR, 426 RBI (3711 PA, 3153 vs. RHP)

Alvarez 2016: .249/.322/.504, 115 OPS+, 22 HR, 49 RBI (376 PA, 335 vs. RHP)

Alvarez career: .238/.311/.449, 108 OPS+, 153 HR, 450 RBI (3160 PA, 2495 vs. RHP).

Both are pretty helpless against LHP, but Smith is a little more so (.594 career OPS vs. LHP for Smith, .606 for Alvarez).    Smith has been platooned more heavily (91% of PA vs. LHP in 2016, 85% career, vs. 89%/79% for Alvarez).

Smith is four years older than Alvarez, and his OPS+ has declined the last two years and was below his career average last year.    Alvarez tied his career high OPS+ last year (115).

Smith got more playing time than Alvarez last year, which I think is a function of the fact that Alvarez sat in the games at NL parks and in some of the September games once Bourne was on the team.   In other words, Alvarez's incompetence in the field cut into his playing time even though the AL has the DH rule.   Smith had a poor year defensively but is generally at least a competent corner OF.

If we were to re-sign Trumbo (which I'm not necessarily advocating), it seems to me that Smith/Trumbo is likely to be a small step down from Trumbo/Alvarez.   However, on this particular team, the OBP boost from Smith and the reduction in strikeouts (19.3% vs. 28.6% career K%) might be worth the reduction in power, and the defensive upgrade from Trumbo to Smith in RF probably makes that the better overall combination, even though Smith is no defensive wizard.   Admittedly, I haven't seen Smith play a whole lot, so it's hard for me to judge how much of a defensive upgrade he'd be.   I do think he's more athletic than Trumbo.

Bottom line, I think Smith is a better fit than Alvarez if Trumbo is re-signed, but not by a significant amount when you weigh all the factors.    If we go a different direction than Trumbo, Smith may or may not be a better fit.   

I think Trumbo will be coming back as the DH. I think Reimold will be coming back as the RH part of the RF platoon with Smith. I think Kim and Rickard are the LF platoon. That's not what I would like, that's what I think will happen.

[weams]

2 minutes ago, theobird said:

I think Trumbo will be coming back as the DH. I think Reimold will be coming back as the RH part of the RF platoon with Smith. I think Kim and Rickard are the LF platoon. That's not what I would like, that's what I think will happen.

I don't think you will see Reimold as a major leaguer again. 

[theobird]

1 minute ago, weams said:

I don't think you will see Reimold as a major leaguer again. 

so you think Trumbo is in RF against a LH starter?

[Rene88]

11 minutes ago, weams said:

I don't think you will see Reimold as a major leaguer again. 

AMen!

[Frobby]

3 hours ago, weams said:

I don't think you will see Reimold as a major leaguer again. 

I'd never say never.    But he won't start 2017 in the majors, for sure.