The Chris Taylor Deal
If you were wrong, how would you know?

. has Jerry Dipoto on record, confessing as to the WORST trade he ever made:  Chris Taylor:


"It's clearly the worst deal I've ever made," DiPoto told Matt Calkins of the Seattle Times. "And it resonates every time he hits a home run."

... "I whiffed. There’s no other way to categorize it," DiPoto added. "He’s young, he was under club control - that was one I wish I could undo."


Wellllll .... when we say "How could I have gone so WRONG?" there are definitely your Darren Dreifort contracts out there.  But the irony here is that Dr. D was just about to write up a post EXONERATING Dipoto for most of this one, the Chris Taylor deal.

Before Dr. D goes off on his /rant he will first remark on this curious aspect of MLB GM'ing.  Since Broglio-for-Brock it's customary for every GM to wince upon the pain of every single Brock stolen base.  The worst pain George Steinbrenner could ever suffer, it seemed, was watching Jay Buhner bounce sliders off the ambulances out beyond the left-center wall.  That's whether or not the Mariners are losing 100 while the Yankee$ are winning 100 ....

Exonerate Dipoto on the Taylor deal why?  No, not because most of us didn't like Taylor.  Most of us did, and the 'Frame was especially taken with his ability to inside-out the ball.

No, not because he's going to fall back to earth suddenly next year.  But we WILL point out that his OPS+ is "only" 122 -- that with a sky-high .361 OBP and a Michael Morse-like 50:142 EYE ratio.  I like Taylor's chances to hit 100 next year, a lot more than I like his chances to hit 122.

No, not because any of us looked at his .300'ish SLG with the Mariners and we all pegged him as slugging .500 some day.  In the National League, of course.


I thought Taylor would have a career, but then a LOT of guys are going to have a career.  They wouldn't be getting 100+ games in the big leagues if there wasn't SOMETHING there that a lot of people could see in the upside.  I'm not sure there's any way to go back to the summer of 2016 and say, "If I was thinking differently, here is what would have had me installing Chris Taylor as my starting shortstop over the next 500 games."  You?

The lesson learned for me is pretty easy.  The chessplayer's takeaway from the Chris Taylor Story, his "How do I analyze this position next time" profit, is not very complicated.  It is this:  86 games in the big leagues does not tell you what you've got.  Although, in Dan Vogelbach's case, the Times is pretty sure that 40 at-bats is.  I think it's three different times now that the Times has flatly declared that Vogelbach has blown his chances to be a Mariner when given them.


Frankly I'll bet you that Jerry Dipoto has made a whale of a lot worse trades than cutting a .233-slugging middle infielder loose.  Could even be, he's just throwing that out there because the average scout with a conscience will reply, "Ahhhhhh, I didn't have Taylor down as a starter either."   I'd be a little happier to get the Montgomery-Vogelbach deal back, if the M's are going to shun their new DH.  But good trades and bad, the Haniger-Segura deal makes up fer quite a few of 'em :- )

Your friend,





Why are the Mariners so sure that Vogelbach is a bust?

It isn't the forty at bats. They're smarter than that, for all the blasting I've given them lately.

They have shunned him because he's appalling then in other ways.


A lot of times there IS info there, completely obvious at ground level, which is invisible to us.

... there better be :- ) because if he becomes the next Smoak / Guillen / etc, then ... scratch one Mike Montgomery sans ROI


So was Kruk,  Matt.  :)

Ah, I know,  Vogs is likely not Kruk.....but 40 PA’s hardly establish how close he can come.

Montgomery for 40 PA’s is way worse that the Taylor trade.  


Yep.  Regardless of 'Bach having talent or not having it, the NARRATIVE ITSELF is crackers.  The narrative is that 'Bach has had his chances and failed to "establish himself" with them.

I don't care if Dr. D actually is a tomata can typing in his mother's basement, that *narrative* is feebleminded.  Whoever says it or votes for it.

Matt's story is far more plausible :- )


He's been called up three times...had three opportunities to leave an impression about how he approaches the game...preparation, seriousness, attitude, work ethic, plate approach (nut just the games...batting practice, etc) and the club has been trying to coach him in AAA.

As you'd say doc...

It says here that the team thinks he's unprofessional, uncoachable, unserious, unfocused...some combination thereof.


No idea why my iPad is touchy/Quirky.  Can you fix that, Doc?

But it doesn’t change the silliness of the trade.  

The guy hits AAA to the tune of .290-.400-.485, with a great eye and 20 HRs.  That’s what you traded for.  If you don’t like his fielding ability or he that he never showers, then those are things you should know before you send off Monty.  


I may have mentioned this before, but at the time of that trade, the Chicago ball writers were unanimous in saying the Cubs absolutely fleeced the Cards by getting Broglio for a nobody.


Add comment

Filtered HTML

  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.
  • Allowed HTML tags: <a> <em> <strong> <cite> <blockquote> <code> <ul> <ol> <li> <dl> <dt> <dd><p><br>
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.

Plain text

  • No HTML tags allowed.
  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.


  • Allowed HTML tags: <a> <em> <strong> <cite> <blockquote> <code> <ul> <ol> <li> <dl> <dt> <dd>
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.
  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.