Comments on: Replacing Burrell With Ibanez?

By: Dave

Dave — Fri, 16 Oct 2009 16:15:19 +0000

The whole age argument was always ridiculous. Any Phillies fan knew that Burrell’s body was just as old, if not older than Ibanez’s body. When analyzing the situation last off-season, we figured Burrell had one, maybe two years left where he could play the field (a.k.a: be useful in the National League). Then possibly another one or two years left as a sole DH. At this point, it is heard to argue that Burrell would be nearly unplayable in the field.

Also, before the year we had Dominic (now Domonic) Brown as a top tier prospect in the OF, so I’m not sure what prospect rankings he was looking at when he said we didn’t have a fill in in the outfield. Both Brown and the emerging Taylor should be ready for the big leagues at some point in 2010, though they will probably hold off on Brown until 2011.

By: Joe R

Joe R — Fri, 16 Oct 2009 15:08:27 +0000

And if you did some digging…

2008:

Pat Burrell — PA: 645 RBI: 86 Actual Runners on Base: 383 (193-120-70),
ML Avg. Player with PA: 645 RBI: 74 Avg. Runners on Base: 407 (201-135-70)

2009:

Raul Ibanez — PA: 707 RBI: 110 Actual Runners on Base: 484 (254-145-85),
ML Avg. Player with PA: 707 RBI: 81 Avg. Runners on Base: 446 (221-148-77)

So if we want to make a stat up (call it RBI+, formula 100(RBI/xRBI + xROB/ROB – 1):

Burrell: 122
Ibanez: 128

So hey, way to cherry pick one stat to express your dislike of a player. Not to mention their 2 outs, RISP numbers practically mirror one another. And that in almost exactly the same number of career PA’s, Burrell and his striking out has a higher RE24 (which factors in “moving the runner over” and “productive outs”) than Ibanez.

Ibanez had a much better 2009, but given that I’m the asshole that chews apart a statement 10 months later, I can say you get no hindsight credit.

By: Joe R

Joe R — Fri, 16 Oct 2009 14:56:22 +0000

Overall, the M’s are probably an 88-89 win team with Ibanez’s production out of LF. Their total UZR in LF was +18.4, but pretty much had replacement level hitting, if that.

So works out to about +1.5. Ibanez was +4.1

Would the M’s have been a better team? Definitely. Would it have been worth it to keep Ibanez? Meh, probably not. There’s decent long term LF fixes on the market this offseason if they want to nab one.

By: joser

joser — Fri, 16 Oct 2009 06:26:45 +0000

The Mariners did not have the AL's best pitching, unless you're looking at a bad stat like ERA. They might have been in AL top ten in pitching, barely, but in a 14 team league that makes them below average. Yes, it would've been nice to have Raul's bat in the lineup, but every time an opposing team hit a ball to left field I was very happy we didn't have to watch his "Family Circus" style wanderings finished by a feet-first slide to trap the ball on a bounce (or miss it altogether). Watching the best outfield in baseball (at least until Endy got hurt, and even Sauders was a major improvement over Ibanez) more than made up for any lost opportunities at the plate. A run saved is as good as a run earned. Seattle took the draft picks and kept the money. That was the right decision.

By: Lars

Lars — Fri, 16 Oct 2009 04:30:42 +0000

Seattle gave up a lot when we let him go. Lack of offense kept us out of the playoffs even though our pitching was AL’s best. Those of you that thought it was a mistake, I assume you’ve seen the light.

By: sen-baldacci

sen-baldacci — Sat, 30 May 2009 05:28:26 +0000

Its not too early to say you’re glad they didn’t analyze this trade the same way…Sure its early and it might pan out differently over the long haul, but you’ve got a guy in Ibanez who is showing he can do what he’s done the last 5 years which is hit with guys in scoring position and he’s got a nice OBP. The whole lefty/righty thing seemed strange, but the majority of pitchers are righties, so you would want the matchup more often, especially when he hits lefties so well, too. this isn’t to downplay what Burrell could do if he gets healthy, but it does say that Ibanez is continually underrated, and Pete is glad the Phillies overrated him (with that contract).

By: mattymatty

mattymatty — Fri, 29 May 2009 16:13:15 +0000

We’re two months into a three year contract. It’s a bit early to be making declarative statements like that, pete.

By: Anitra

Anitra — Fri, 29 May 2009 03:39:10 +0000

I TOTALLY AGREE PETE..

By: pete

pete — Wed, 06 May 2009 20:30:48 +0000

glad the phillies don’t come here for advice.

By: offerte lavoro

offerte lavoro — Sat, 17 Jan 2009 19:12:22 +0000

I agree with you