Community Projection: Jose Lopez
The third in a non-alphabetical and irregularly updated series of review pieces for each of the players we predicted last winter. (All entries are linked in the left-hand sidebar, below the Rotoworld stuff and the interviews.)
LL/USSM Community: 587 AB's, .285/.330/.435 (n=159)
Actual Line: 524 AB's, .252/.284/.355
Closest Projection: aptait, .241/.288/.361
Jose Lopez: not dope. If you want to say that the Mariner community was optimistic in picking a 23 year old to improve his OPS by 41 points, then fine, but I don't pin this one on us; rather, Lopez just fell flat on his face at an age where most young talents are taking a step or two forward. I don't think we can really be blamed for not seeing this coming.
There seems to be a pattern developing, here.
Winter: Mariner fans high on Lopez's ability, expect big things
Late spring/early summer: Lopez hits well, justifies expectations
Late summer: Lopez falls apart, becomes shell of early-season self
Autumn: Mariner fans gradually begin to cede to the opinion that Lopez is an overrated talent
Winter: Mariner fans high on Lopez's ability, expect big things
This has been the case in each of the last four years. However, because the first halves of both 2004 and 2005 were spent with Tacoma, people disregarded Lopez's struggles in Seattle as an adjustment period, and then after he did it again in 2006, some people thought he was just getting accustomed to playing a full schedule in the Major Leagues. Simply put, there were explanations.
When he did it again in 2007, though, there weren't. Well, there was one, as a few fans pointed to the death of Lopez's brother in June as a turning point (he had a .776 OPS before and a .547 OPS after), but for reasons I don't think I'm allowed to discuss, I'm not buying that. I think it's more likely that Lopez just collapsed again, and people are looking for any reason to explain it away so that they don't have to entertain the possibility that Lopez simply may not be as good as we thought he was.
I wish I could sit here and tell you that Lopez's 2007 season was the product of at least a little bad luck, but I can't. He really was that awful. Even if you normalize his BABIP (prOPS again), he was still the 13th-worst qualified hitter of 156 in the league. A season is not a success when the only people you substantially out-hit are Tony Pena Jr, Nick Punto, and the mummified remains of Craig Biggio. We would've been better off had Lopez just called it quits and taken an early vacation after his walk-off double against Boston on June 27th (God, sweeping Boston kicks so much ass).
It's not even that Lopez has been one of those guys who flashes a ton of skills early on but struggles to put them all together. No, if you just watched the last two years with zero knowledge of Lopez's minor league track record, you'd wonder what all the hoopla is about. He almost never has a good, long at bat. He almost never pounds a breaking ball. He almost never kills a pitch into left field, and rarer still does he smash it the other way. In two seasons, covering more than 1100 at bats, Lopez has hit exactly two balls over 400 feet (407 and 408). Even Yuni has more than that. This is the guy who's supposed to turn into our power-hitting second baseman of the future? His swing is all hands. The only even moderately consistent skills that Lopez has shown in Seattle are playing defense, making contact, and beating the crap out of a guy after he delivers a walk-off hit.
We can learn two lessons from Jose Lopez. They're not necessarily mutually exclusive, but they might be depending on how you look at them. The first is that it's important not to overrate your prospects. Young talents fail to blossom all the time, and just because minor league performance is generally a good indicator of Major League success doesn't mean that it always works out that way. While prospects are a great resource to have, there is value in certainty.
The second is that prospects don't always flip out Braun style and make an impact the instant they arrive. It takes some of them a lot of time. Lopez has collected 1500+ at bats over 400+ games with Seattle, but he still doesn't turn 24 for three weeks, so it's far too early to call him a bust. While he could be the new Luis Rivas, he could also be the new Jimmy Rollins, and Rollins took more than 2000 at bats before he turned into a legitimate threat. If you're going to put yourself in a position where you're relying on some young guys to contribute every day, sometimes you have to have a lot of patience.
Patience is something of which people are running out. Lopez's lack of progress has frustrated countless fans and team officials alike, and his occasional boneheaded mistakes haven't exactly helped his case. I don't put much stock in the "Lopez's head is never in the game" opinion, but I'll be honest, it's not like he's offered much evidence to the contrary. All we and the Mariners have been asking for is a sign every now and then that Lopez is starting to figure things out, but so far, no dice.
So now we've reached the point at which the front office is actively searching for a replacement. They were sniffing around Mark Loretta last July, but that was just for the stretch run; this reeks of more permanence. I think the Mariners are just about fed up with Jose Lopez. There's not much out there, but they'll view guys like Loretta, Ray Durham, Luis Castillo, Kaz Matsui, Tadahito Iguchi, and, I dunno, Mark Grudzielanek as much more dependable veteran solutions, and I highly expect them to make a push for somebody to take Lopez's place.
And no, I don't think it's a good idea. Jose Lopez has been an extraordinary disappointment so far, but again, he doesn't turn 24 for three weeks. He is still very, very young, with way more upside than any of the veterans listed above. People think of Yuni Betancourt as some little kid who's only going to get better, and he's two years older than Lopez is. Newsflash: sometimes young talent can get on your nerves. There's a reason contending teams trade for stopgap veterans at the deadline instead of 22 year olds in AAA. If you're going with a young player, he's not a short-term fix - you're committing yourself to him for the long haul, and committing yourself to riding it out and getting as much as you can before calling it quits.
We know Lopez has the talent to hit well somewhere in his body. We saw those tools in Tacoma. It's not as if he was some hack like AJ Zapp who put up decent but meaningless statistics; Lopez had the skillset to back up his glowing reputation. That's still there. The Mariners just need to commit themselves to finding it and bringing it to the surface. Otherwise, if they let him go, they're sending the message that if you're a young player who wants to stick around, you sure as hell better make a quick impression. And that's not a good way to build a ballclub when your ability to identify talent from outside the organization already sucks as bad as it does. The only way the Mariners are ever going to keep up with smarter front offices is by developing their own young talent. Dealing Lopez and replacing him with some retreat veteran is a step back in that regard.
By no means am I giving Lopez a blank check for destruction. I just think he ought to get one or three more chances before we give up and look somewhere else, especially if the intended external solution is some 33 year old who offers at most a 5-10 run improvement. The "better to trade a guy a year too early than a year too late" mantra doesn't apply to players who have yet to reach their physical prime. If Lopez's next set of 1500 at bats is better than his first, then at the very least he'll be close to an average second baseman, and that has value. Isn't it worth finding out if he can take that step? How many guys really stop developing when they reach 23?
Keep Jose Lopez. He may have been the biggest liability in 2007, but he's not this team's biggest problem.
0 recs |
65
comments
Comments
Jose Lopez
by ThundaPC on Nov 2, 2007 7:44 AM PDT 0 recs
I agree
Although because of his recent struggles, I don't think many teams like that exist. So that is probably a non-issue.
by Librocrat on Nov 2, 2007 10:11 AM PDT 0 recs
Hmmm..
Well, I'm aware a little bit of his MiLB track record, so count me in as someone who's wondered all along what the hoopla was about. I just never got it, really.
In two seasons, covering more than 1100 at bats, Lopez has hit exactly two balls over 400 feet (407 and 408).
I realize that this isn't really evidence, but I'm curious how much Safeco Field is in Jose Lopez' head. Of course, when you're popping out to the infield or in foul territory all. the. time. it wouldn't matter what park you were playing in (well Oakland w/its vast expanse of foul territory would suck for Jose).
When I look at Jose Lopez, the hitter, I see someone who probably has about as much of a clue as to how to hit MLB pitching as, well, I do...
I remember watching Carlos Guillen coming up, at only a slightly older age (24-25), and recognizing him as someone who had a clue as to how to approach his at-bats. Jose Lopez has never shown this to me. Maybe those two years indeed make a huge difference, but it seems to me that Carlos Guillen had more talent than Jose does.
Jose Lopez is the most frustrating Mariner for me. Yes, even more frustrating than Ho and Weaver and Rick White...
by PositivePaul on Nov 2, 2007 10:18 AM PDT 0 recs
More frustrating than White?
by Librocrat on
Nov 2, 2007 10:39 AM PDT
up
0 recs
Yes.
Rick White didn't annoy me so much as McLaren using him in high-leverage situations did.
by Patrick517 on
Nov 2, 2007 10:45 AM PDT
up
0 recs
For me, no question
by pdb on
Nov 2, 2007 10:49 AM PDT
up
0 recs
Definitely...
I just haven't ever really seen Lopez' talent with the bat. Even when he was in the minors. Heck, to me, Mike Morse has more talent with the bat than Jose Lopez. And he's nothing special himself, really...
by PositivePaul on
Nov 2, 2007 11:03 AM PDT
up
0 recs
I was going to make a joke
by Librocrat on
Nov 2, 2007 11:34 AM PDT
up
0 recs
Well, then...
CUP CHECK!!!!
by PositivePaul on
Nov 2, 2007 12:02 PM PDT
up
0 recs
I really like this photo
by Librocrat on
Nov 2, 2007 12:15 PM PDT
up
0 recs
Hmmm.
by PositivePaul on
Nov 2, 2007 12:21 PM PDT
up
0 recs
Maybe it's his body type...
by toonprivate on Nov 2, 2007 11:07 AM PDT 0 recs
A better idea
by Alex Johnson on Nov 2, 2007 11:08 AM PDT 0 recs
Or, better
by Librocrat on
Nov 2, 2007 11:38 AM PDT
up
0 recs
I really dont have a problem with Lopez
Im just ranting now, but man, how do I yearn for the days when if you had a middle infielder with a decent glove and hit around .230-.240 with 8-10 hrs, you had an anchor for your infield. Im just glad that the likes of Ozzie Smith, Jose Lind, Shawon Dunston, Harold Reynolds and many others even in different positions played when they did. It would have really sucked if these guys would have got the Rey Ordonez treatment.
OK, Im done.
by RED29 on Nov 2, 2007 11:13 AM PDT 0 recs
I agree with you about Ozzie, etc Red.
That being said, I am disappointed that Lopez has not developed more at the plate over the last few years.
by Thingray on
Nov 2, 2007 11:33 AM PDT
up
0 recs
The way I see it is,
Yes, I too think stats are overrated. Im glad Im not the only one. I pay attention to a few but I usually dont like or dislike a player just from a numbers standpoint.
Of course we all want to see Lopez develop into a great player. But Im just surprised how many people on here want to GIVE UP on him already.
by RED29 on
Nov 2, 2007 11:48 AM PDT
up
0 recs
I think people would have more confidence
When the team is taking so many risks already, taking yet another risk with Lopez is much more difficult than, say, if we had Boston's team where few of the players could be considered "high risk."
by Librocrat on
Nov 2, 2007 11:52 AM PDT
up
0 recs
You're right. If we had more of a
by Thingray on
Nov 2, 2007 12:02 PM PDT
up
0 recs
What about Chen?
by Sec 108 on Nov 2, 2007 11:34 AM PDT 0 recs
I was wondering about this earlier
by Librocrat on
Nov 2, 2007 11:35 AM PDT
up
0 recs
Chen is recovering from shoulder surgery,
by Thingray on
Nov 2, 2007 11:40 AM PDT
up
0 recs
Here you go
by Librocrat on
Nov 2, 2007 11:56 AM PDT
up
0 recs
On a side note I have an M's calendar
by Thingray on Nov 2, 2007 11:44 AM PDT 0 recs
Amen, Jeff.
by eponymous coward on Nov 2, 2007 12:06 PM PDT 0 recs
But but but
by Goose on Nov 2, 2007 12:50 PM PDT 0 recs
Lopez isn't killing this team
An average 2B: .275/.331/.407
Jose Lopez 2007: .252/.284/.355
Its bad but its not an offensive position. The baseline for a 2B is probably about -5 runs offensively. Lopez was -23.5 runs last year offensively. If you adjust that for Safeco, I'll say he's -20 runs. I'm gonna guess Lopez was probably +5 runs defensively so he was about 10 runs worse than the average 2B. That basically means he cost us about 1 game. Thats right, we were probably one win less with Lopez. Thats all.
Plus I don't think he can get worse than what he showed last year. Due to the fact that 2B is not a position you expect much out of it really isn't too catastrophic that Lopez is a bad hitter right now. He should get better next year. He might not but its worth the chance because he costs us nothing and I think has a pretty decent chance of at least giving us average production.
by Edgar for Pres on Nov 2, 2007 1:07 PM PDT 0 recs
Your 23.5 runs below average
BPro's BRAA has him at 24 below. It's also adjusted for park.
by rfloh on
Nov 2, 2007 1:55 PM PDT
up
0 recs
Ok thanks for that yeah it was
by Edgar for Pres on
Nov 2, 2007 2:00 PM PDT
up
0 recs
Can Morse play 2nd base
by johnbai on Nov 2, 2007 2:45 PM PDT 0 recs
I don't think he's be "adequate" at 2nd.
by Thingray on
Nov 2, 2007 2:47 PM PDT
up
0 recs
There's a reason
by G_ on
Nov 2, 2007 3:01 PM PDT
up
0 recs
Prince Fielder for 2nd base!
by Thingray on
Nov 2, 2007 3:06 PM PDT
up
0 recs
And about 25 yrs ago
by Edgar for Pres on
Nov 2, 2007 3:07 PM PDT
up
0 recs
Exactly. That's his problem.
by Thingray on
Nov 2, 2007 3:11 PM PDT
up
0 recs
We'll just have to adopt a 5 man IF
by Edgar for Pres on
Nov 2, 2007 3:13 PM PDT
up
0 recs
I've done essentially that in softball before.
by Thingray on
Nov 2, 2007 3:24 PM PDT
up
0 recs
SS don't have to pivot on the DP
Even after Ripken (who really should have moved SS long before he did) and A-Rod, big shortstops are still very much the exception, not the rule.
by G_ on
Nov 2, 2007 3:33 PM PDT
up
0 recs
Most 2B are 6' tall
Any shortstop should be able to shift to 2B because shortstop is a much more demanding position because it requires greater quickness, softer hands, and a stronger arm. Maybe the big SS sacrifice quickness and hands an have a cannon to make up for it and since 2B don't need an arm this sacrifice does not need to be made. It kinda comes down to where you want the balance to lie in the position, offense or defense.
by Edgar for Pres on
Nov 2, 2007 3:42 PM PDT
up
0 recs
You're forgetting that Morse was at best,
by Thingray on
Nov 2, 2007 4:31 PM PDT
up
0 recs
How many are "over 6'0 tall?"
So even after Ripken, A-Rod, and Moneyball (how did the fat catcher work out?), teams are more open than ever to bucking conventional wisdom when it comes to evaluating players.
Yet despite that, second basemen top out at 6'2 Jeff Kent, who really should have moved off second base years ago but still has the bat to make up for it.
And at least in the majors, the fraternity of big shortstops who field well is pretty much down to Troy Tulowitzki, a freak of nature. And Mike Morse still has one inch and (at least)twenty pounds on Tulowitzki.
And it is not just baseball. It is the same reason why even after Magic Johnson, there are still few 6'9 point guards in the NBA. Or why there are no tall acrobats at the circus.
by G_ on
Nov 2, 2007 4:40 PM PDT
up
0 recs
It's kinda along those lines
by Matthew on
Nov 2, 2007 4:52 PM PDT
up
0 recs
The ball in the hole
by davidcameron on
Nov 2, 2007 4:56 PM PDT
up
0 recs
you could play further to (your) right side
by Matthew on
Nov 2, 2007 4:58 PM PDT
up
0 recs
By UZR, Kent was above
by rfloh on
Nov 2, 2007 11:57 PM PDT
up
0 recs
Exhibit A why defensive metrics
by G_ on
Nov 4, 2007 12:38 PM PST
up
0 recs
When are we going to do
by Coach Owens on Nov 2, 2007 4:31 PM PDT 0 recs
Dude, we might want to wait until we have an idea
by Thingray on
Nov 2, 2007 4:36 PM PDT
up
0 recs
Three months?
by Coach Owens on
Nov 2, 2007 5:10 PM PDT
up
0 recs
Now
by chrisisasavage on
Nov 3, 2007 9:50 AM PDT
up
0 recs
You should have brought some snacks!
by Thingray on
Nov 2, 2007 5:13 PM PDT
up
0 recs
'm not finished. You should have gotten a snack!
by JI on
Nov 2, 2007 5:36 PM PDT
up
0 recs
And that
by Rollo Tomasi on
Nov 3, 2007 3:47 AM PDT
up
0 recs
I watched the ATHF movie last night
by Thingray on
Nov 5, 2007 12:54 PM PST
up
0 recs
ATFH is a show that gets better
by JI on
Nov 6, 2007 8:59 AM PST
up
0 recs
I think that's the key to the movie,
Unfortunately, I quit doing that a long time ago, and drinking multiple beers didn't make it any better.
by Thingray on
Nov 6, 2007 11:08 AM PST
up
0 recs
I love the show.
by Thingray on
Nov 6, 2007 11:09 AM PST
up
0 recs
"Monday, Tuesday, Wednesday, Thursday
"Monday, Tue-"
Mooninites: "We only do it once!"
Am I doing this wrong?
by Thingray on
Nov 2, 2007 5:12 PM PDT
up
0 recs
Are we gonna keep with the same
by Edgar for Pres on
Nov 2, 2007 8:47 PM PDT
up
0 recs






