Thus, it is easy to see why he is considered the way he is. Roughly 60% of his career .820 OPS has come from his slugging percentage, leaving about 40% to come from average. On average over the last three years (for the league), 56% of OPS has come from slugging, so Morales was a notch higher.

But he has changed as a player this year. His overall production is roughly the same as last year (.351 wOBA, 118 wRC+ career .346 and 122 this year), but how that production is coming to be is different. All of the sudden, he has been getting on base at a much higher clip, while losing a little bit of pop.

His OBP is at .356, which is one point above his career high (in what was by far his best season). And his .434 SLG% is a career low, with the previous low being the .467 he posted last year. And he is now getting just 55% of his OPS from his power, going from 3% above “average” to 1% below “average.” So clearly there has been a change in the kind of hitter he is, at least to this point.

Upon noticing this, I saw the opportunity for a post on the topic. So I searched and searched for some kind of deep explanation as to why this is happening. Turns out, there isn’t really a conclusive reason as to why he has become an on-base first guy this season.

I mean, there is the obvious explanation as to why his OBP has gone up. That being the fact that he has been way more patient at the plate, resulting in more walks.

Take a look above at his plate discipline numbers, courtesy of FanGraphs. As you can see, all of his swing rates are down quite a bit. The most extreme of the three being his O-Swing%, which is down almost 10% from the year before, and 7% from his career. Obviously, that means he has not been swinging at as many bad pitches, which has led to more free passes.

So that explains his increase in walks and ability to get on base. But why is his power also down? The two aren’t inversely related in most cases, meaning as one goes up the other does not go down.

This part is not as easily explained. There really aren’t any glaring changes in terms of the amount nor the kind of contact he is making. As seen above, his contact rate is better than his career mark. And there also aren’t any significant fluctuations in his batted ball numbers. His LD% is 2.2% higher than his average, his FB% is down 1.8% (but is up from 2012), and his GB rate is right at his career average. None of those really suggest that his power should be zapped. If his line drive rate were way down, or ground ball rate way up, then maybe.

The best explanation I can find is that his HR/FB is all the way down at 11.6%, which is 5% lower than his career mark, and 9.4% lower than it was last year. But the problem with that is, it may not be a perfect explanation. It does tell us something, but its answer isn’t really specific.

Fangraphs says of FB%:

Was the player still hitting the same about of fly balls but with a lower HR/FB rate? This could imply that the player lost a touch off their power, which could be a result of an injury or the tell-tale sign of an aging slugger. Or did the player still have the same HR/FB rate, but he was hitting fewer fly balls? If a player goes from hitting fly balls to ground balls, that could be attributed to contact issues.

Kendrys falls into the first category, with a fairly similar amount of fly balls, but a crazy low HR/FB rate. And unfortunately, that likely speaks to a more permanent loss of power. We already knew he lost power, but now the numbers might suggest it is because of “an injury or the tell-tale sign of an aging slugger.” That certainly isn’t what we want to here, as I am sure most of us were hoping to find something that would suggest some regression to the mean, and an re-increase in power.

And it still might. HR/FB doesn’t stabilize until about 300 plate appearances, and he is only a little more than half way there. His slugging percentage has been on the rise recently, and that trend may continue until he reaches a more normal mark. Or, he may be sacrificing some aggressiveness and pop for more patience and contact. We don’t really know for sure.

At this point, thankfully, it doesn’t really matter all that much if he stays this way. He has been roughly the same player in terms of productivity, and that is what matters. If anything, this increase in patience and discipline is a blessing. Those traits tend to stick around, and walk rate is much quicker to stabilize — and he is about 20 PA way from that point — rendering a sudden revert to his old numbers unlikely. Conversely, as I said before, there is still a chance that his power returns a little, which would create a perfect situation. Kendrys prior power combined with this current on-base ability would make for a very valuable player. And we like value around here.

One of the I-told-you-so’s came from The Seattle Times’ Geoff Baker, in regards to the Mariners passing on Michael Bourn, who is hitting well this season. He has posted a .364 wOBA and 131 wRC+ this year, which have helped attribute to his 0.9 fWAR to this point. Seeing Bourn play and his team trounce the M’s gave Baker the opportunity to criticize Jack and company for failing to do more in the offseason.

Baker said this of the situation:

 But the Bourn thing, for me, is a classic example of how this rebuilding process has played out for the Mariners. It’s taken a long time to get where we are and I do think we could have seen some better baseball a bit quicker had the Mariners spent some dough this winter and in prior ones to shore-up where they were lacking.

He was a big Bourn advocate all offseason, probably more than he should have been. He may have overstated his value a little. But he is right: Bourn would have helped this team. He may not be hitting the way he is now, but he would be a clear improvement over what the Mariners have going on right now.

The thing is, he is right for the wrong reasons. Baker does not seem like a sabermetrically-inclined guy, so I doubt he likes Bourn for the 6 WAR he posted last year. I doubt he likes him for his 22.3 UZR last year. Heck, he may not even like him for his 10% walk rate. He probably likes him because he is fast, plays defense, and is generally thought of as one of the better leadoff hitters in the game.

But that doesn’t take anything away from Bourn. He is a valuable player, as seen in the 6 WAR I mentioned above. However, there is another problem with Baker saying what he did. This is a team that has suffered a lot of injuries that have forced them to play certain guys more than they planned to. It’s not like they came into the year with Raul Ibanez, Jason Bay and Endy Chavez penciled in as a time-share in left field. Chavez wasn’t even on the opening day roster, and Raul and Bay were meant to be 4th and 5th guys, pinch hitters, and spot-start DH’s. But when you lose Michael Saunders for a month, Michael Morse for a week, and then Franklin Gutierrez for eternity, plans change.

My first thought when I read Baker’s article was “You are wrong Geoff Baker.” This team didn’t need a defensive minded player and speed-only guy. But then I realized that he was only partially wrong, as stated above. And I was also partially, or mostly, wrong. People tend to put players into certain categories based on what they do and who they are. Bourn is the speedy leadoff hitter. Morse is the bat-0nly “outfielder”, et cetera.

Even us all-knowing sabermetricans do this at times. We look at a team that lacks power, and think they need to add power and nothing else. We forget something very important. Value is Value. It really doesn’t matter that much what kind of value that is. Sure, if the M’s had their choice of a 6 win player like Bourn, or a 6 win power hitter, they would probably take the latter. But 6 wins are 6 wins, and value is value. Bourn would have made this team a lot better than they are now. Only one of Morse and Kendrys Morales would be here, as Bourn would have replaced the other, which would be an improvement.

So if you want to criticize the front office for not getting Bourn and settling instead for Morse, then by all means. It is a very valid criticism, one worth roughly 4.5 wins. But don’t pull a Geoff and just say “this is a slow team. Bourn is the opposite of slow, and thus would make them better,” while simultaneously saying missing out on Swisher was not that big of a deal for whatever reason. That is not why Bourn is valuable. It is part of it, sure. But a team doesn’t need speed to win. Just like they don’t need power. You want as much of both as you can get, but in the end, the goal should be value in any way shape or form possible. I repeat, value is value. It may sound simple, but everyone seems to forget. I forget. You forget. Geoff Baker forgets. Don’t forget anymore.

In hindsight, signing Bourn looks like it would have been a good move. But hindsight is 20-20. Right now, it looks like a good thing Josh Hamilton snubbed Seattle. But most people wanted him here more than anything. So I am not letting this realization change my opinion of Bourn. Because there are still some problems with him, that do stem from the kind of player he is.

There is an exception to the “value is value” mantra I am using. Sometimes, the means by which a player accumulates value can depreciate, thus lowering the player’s future value. That is “I am smarter than you language” for speed goes away fast (pun intended). A player’s legs are usually the first things to go as they get older, and that happens to be the biggest part of Bourn’s game.

Bourn is 30 years old, which is generally referred to as the turning the point in a players career. And when a player relies on that as much as Bourn does, it can be scary to commit tons of money to him. When the legs so, so does most of the value. It is not guaranteed that he loses his speed soon, but it is probably pretty likely, and it will affect him more than a Carl Crawford who can fall back on his career .442 SLG%. According to Baseball Reference, Bourn got almost half of his value from his defense last year, and that is a little scary as he gets older.

Then, there are easy comparisons to be made between him and Chone Figgins. And they go past the fact that they are both fast.

Take a look at their respective lines through their contact years, which is 2009 for Figgins and 2012 for Bourn:

It think when most people hear this comparison, they write it off. Well, turns out they probably shouldn’t. As it happens, Figgins was actually better before signing with the Mariners than Bourn was before signing this year. Their WAR’s are close because Bourn gets a boost for being a center fielder, so their overall value is much closer. But it terms of offensive production, which is what we are focusing on, Figgins has the edge.

Then, if we focus in on the final pre-contract season, Figgins still tops him, with a 116 wRC+ and 6.6 WAR, compared to 104 wRC+ and 6.1 WAR for Bourn. Not a huge difference, but it is there.

And that is not to say that any of this is guaranteed. It is far from a perfect comparison, as Desmond DeChone Figgins was almost two years older when he signed his contract than Bourn was. Plus, Figgins didn’t really lose his speed, he just forgot how to hit. Bourn might not face the same fate, but he very well could. We just don’t know, and that is the main concern.

I did not intend for this to be a Geoff Baker bash article. I respect him and think he puts out a lot of good content. But I just disagree with some of his ideas here, and thought it set up a good opportunity to make this point.

Bourn would have been an upgrade to this team. No doubt about it. But it isn’t because he brings “the crucial speed element” that every team needs. It is because he is a valuable player, period. The team has been forced to play Raul and Bay more than I think they planned, and Bourn blows them out of the water. An extra 5-6 wins can make a big difference. But that just this year, and you have to consider the future as well. He is a speed-first player, and that trait does not last forever. He could have come back to haunt them in a couple years, and another Figgins is not what the M’s need.

But, there are still people talking and speculating about who will go where. Over at Lookout Landing, Chris Crawford has been putting up weekly posts on various prospects that the M’s could take, and mock drafts are starting to pop up around the internet. The problem is, there never seems to be a consensus like there sometimes is for other sports. In the NBA, we know who is going to go #1 almost to a tee, and the whole top 10 is generally easy to predict. But with baseball, it is not nearly that simple. Each team has a different way of evaluating players, and value different aspects of the game.

It is still fun to try and speculate about some possible targets, even if you can’t know for sure who your team is going to take. As a general rule, teams will take best player available. In baseball, that is really the best option. No one goes right to the bigs, so these prospects won’t be of value to your team until two, three years off, maybe more. What may be a set position at the time of the draft could be a hole when the draftee is ready to contribute. Prospects can also be valuable trade chips also, so even if a player is blocked, you can get some good value out of him.

So I picked a few guys who I think could be around at #12 that the M’s may have at or near the top of their big-board. This is by no means an extensive list, and there was some personal bias when choosing what four players to highlight. But this is my post dangit. I will do with it what I so choose…within the guidelines of the site and the interests of the readers of course. Also, keep in mind I am no scout, so I am relying on what people who know more than I do have said, as well as what I have seen from the players.

Austin Wilson, OF, R/R
Stanford University
6-5/245

Wilson is a strong athletic outfielder with lots of power potential. He has struggled a bit this year, both with injury and his production. It has caused him to drop a little on some mocks, but he still looks like a decent choice at #12 for Seattle. John Sickels has him going 20 to the Tigers, but I have seen others that have him at 10 or better. The Mariners lack a big time outfield prospect, and that is exactly what Wilson could be. Scouts have his power at as high as a 70 for the future, with that being his best tool. However, it is not his only tool, as he looks fairly solid across the board. He has a massive build, but he does not play like it. He should stick in right field, and looks like a decent base stealer as well.

If everything goes as planned for Wilson, he could be a very good player all around. He figures to be an above average corner outfielder thanks to his speed and arm. The bat is a little different, because there are some holes. But if he turns out like most expect, you are probably looking at a .270/.340/.480 type player, in the mold of a Nelson Cruz, or even Jay Bruce. If he reaches maximum potential and everything that can click does click, then he could be closer to Carlos Beltran or Yoenis Cespedes type player, but that isn’t likely. Then of course, if the contact deficiencies present a problem, he could turn into a Chris Carter type player.

He definitely has a high ceiling, but it is really hard to pinpoint where he stands right now. He could go top 10, or he could fall to 20. He kind of gives off a high school boom or bust vibe despite being a college player. If he is there at 12 though, I think there is a good chance the M’s take him.

Reese McGuire, C, L/R
Kentwood HS (Kent, WA)
6-1/190

I recently saw McGuire play in person, and was very impressed with what I saw. He is a very sound defensive catcher, and just looks like he knows what he is doing back there. If it weren’t for my friends and classmates out there playing against him, I might have thought I was watching a college, or even minor league game.  He is a great athlete, and looks like he should be able to stick at catcher if his team chooses to keep him there. But he would also be fine moving to the outfield, and he has good speed as well. At one point, he outran Bothell High’s hitter to first when going over to backup a throw to first. That kind of thing impresses me as much as home runs and doubles. He also has a cannon of an arm, and very good power from the left side.

I have also seen him going all across the board, from 6 to 23. But, Sickels has him going #12 to Seattle, so obviously there are educated people who think he will be there for the M’s.

The projections for him are a little tougher as he is only 18 and still has a ways to go, but here they are anyway. The low end looks to me to be somewhere around .250/.320/.410, the high end around .280/.350/.465, and the most likely may be something like .265/.340/.440, all of which may not look all that great. Keep in mind though, he is a catcher. A .780 OPS behind the plate is not the same as .780 OPS in general. That production coupled with what projects as above average defense is a very valuable combination, so it is easy to see why people are so high on him. I would say the best comparison is somewhere between Ryan Doumit (with better defense) and Brian McCann. That’s pretty good company.

High schoolers are always risky players. The game is just so much different, and these kids are so far off from their potential. Most of the projections are purely guesswork, and that is not a very stable system. But all signs point to McGuire being a very solid contributor in a few years, and he is receiving high praise all around.

Ryne Stanek, RHP
University of Arkansas
6-4/180

Remember when I said it is all about best player available in the MLB Draft? Well, this is where that comes in. Stanek is one of the higher rated arms in this year’s draft, and most reports have him around where the M’s will pick. Problem is, he is a pitcher, and the Mariner’s farm system already has tons of those. But again, best player available is often the best choice, and if Jack and co. think he is the best on the board, then they will take him.

Plus, the Mariners have already drafted him once. Back in 2010, Seattle took him in the 3rd round but failed to sign him away from college. So obviously they liked him the first time, so that could speak to the chances that they go with him again.

Stanek is a big righty whose fastball sits in the low-mid 90′s with some sink. He also mixes in a solid slider and less-than-solid changeup. He can be a little wild at times, but if he gets his command right, he could be special. Many people say he is a future ace if everything goes right, but looks to be at least a #2/3 if it doesn’t.

I don’t really see the M’s going with another pitcher because there will likely be at least one other bat who they are higher on. But you can’t rule it out, and his Mariner connections could influence their thoughts of him also. He didn’t sign the first time, so maybe they don’t want to deal with him now.

Honorable Mentions:

Justin Williams, OF, Terrabone HS

Williams was connected to the M’s frequently for a while, but that has since died out. A lot of mocks are now leaving him out of the 1st round entirely. This is mainly due to some contact problems, questions about his ability to stick in he outfield, and signability due to his commitment to LSU. There is a chance the M’s love his huge raw power and 35+ HR upside. But they may also be scared away by his  easy comparisons to guys like Chris Carter.

Colin Moran, 3B, UNC

Moran is often mocked at or near #12, and its easy to see why. He is a good hitter with above average patience and moderate power. But there is also some concern that he will have to move off of the hot corner, and to the other corner. If that happens he should still hit enough to be a valuable player, but “moderate power” is not often praised from a first baseman. His line drive swing though indicates that he should be a fine hitter wherever he is, and could maybe (probably not) be a Billy Butler-type hitter in that he is a gap hitter who has enough loft to still lose 20 a year.