As we head into the All Star Break, struggling to stay in the race (and above .500), many words are being written about whether to "go for it" in 2009, or take a longer view. Z has stated publically that he's looking to do both, (which is probably true), which is pretty much the typical non-answer one expects from GMs in tricky circumstances. But, much of the discussion is not just about where the Mariners stand -- but there are casual comments about the strength or weakness of the in-division opponents.

Heading into 2009, Anaheim was viewed as the cream of the West. They had won the division by 21 games in 2008 after all. They were the only division team to break .500 last year, also. Finishing 21 up on the Rangers and 39 up on Seattle made the choice a no brainer. But, the majority of 2009 has been a nightmare for the Angels. They lose their 22-year old phenom pitcher after his first (6-inning shutout) start to a tragic auto accident.

Meanwhile, Texas caught nearly everyone by surprise, moving into 1st in the division the first week of May, behind their typical offensive output, but supported by an unexpected massive improvement defensively, creating an adequate run suppression side of the equation despite bringing their generally poor pitching to the table.

Many are saying that NOW is the time to move, because Anaheim and Texas are weak and ripe for the plucking. But, the reasoning behind many of these comments is either devoid of supporting data - or more often, chooses to look at the data available purely from a perspective of how it can work in favor of the Mariners. The purpose of this essay is not to call into question specific arguments - but rather to bring up the more general question of how SHOULD one judge the enemy chances?

My perspective is that one should always attempt to use the same logic that you use for both the home team and the competition. Whatever the underlying beliefs may be, they should be applied equally to all parties - and the temptation to "qualify" analyses is where homerism and fan bias can creep in and undermine what might begin as very solid analysis.

Item 1: Records -- Obviously, the first place to look to determine future performance is the current record. As a rule, if you're back by double-digits, the tendency is to dismiss the current season, (barring a MAJOR an obvious reason for the skew). Only Oakland has suffered double-digit deficits this season, and as June is ending, the top three in the AL West are all within 5 games of each other. But, if the Mariners were 1 or 2 games up instead of the Rangers, would the typical response be that because they were overachieving, they shouldn't be expected to continue to do so? In the mid-June poll for who would win the west, did ANYONE pick the Rangers to win - even while still leading the division?

The tendency to dismiss the competitor as a fluke - but to accept that your own team is "for real" - is probably the single largest hurdle for a home-team analyst to clear.

Item 2: Run differential: As I write this, the run differential for the 3 contenders in the AL West are: Seattle: 282-303 (pythag = 34-39: wins = 37); Texas: 356-332 (pythag = 38-34: wins = 40); Anaheim: 357-344 (pythag = 37-34: wins = 39). Based on runs scored and allowed to data, the standing are pretty darn accurate. Texas has legitimately earned 1st place, with Anaheim having climbed up to nearly equal them. Seattle is the team exceeding their projected wins the most, (but Seattle is +3 games, while both of the other candidates are +2). Nothing shows up in the run differential examination that points to Seattle being advantaged, or either of the other clubs over-(or under)-achieving.

Item 3: Health: This is one that is perhaps the trickiest to fairly analyze. When health matters jump up, typically the performance of replacements is almost complete guesswork. But, there are cases where reasonable assumptions can be made about potential for continued performance, gain or loss. If a great hitter goes down, you can expect to suffer as the replacement won't likely be as good. (Pierre in for Manny). If a poor player goes down, often the guy getting a chance can outperform the original guy.

Each of the AL West contenders has had some health issues of differing flavor:

Seattle: Johjima has been out a month, just returning. An expected gain in offense is reasonable, as Johnson has been posting a .550 OPS. Endy Chavez is lost for the season with his .669 oPS gone. Though Wlad's performance thus far hasn't been great, (.654), becoming the full-time guy could help him, (anyone heard of this guy Branyan getting his first shot at full-time-dom?). Seattle's staff has been hit by injuries, but RRS and Kelley are potential returnees in the next month. Bedard is the only injury the club is dealing with at the moment that is "obviously" detrimental. The impact of Kenji and Endy on the run suppresion side of things is a concern for some, (myself included), but much harder to quantify - and therefore, more reasonable to mention, but not go too overboard in terms of projection. If Bedard goes down, (a distinct possibility, given past history), the pitching takes a major blow.

Texas: Josh Hamilton has been hurt, and has produced well below his 2008 level. But, the club took a gamble on Andruw Jones, and have thus managed to mitigate much of the damage from a sub-par and injured MVP candidate. But, the club doesn't have a starter at any position with less than an 81 OPS+ as I write this, and three guys with 90+ OPS+ figures as reserves. No one stands out as having a monster season, so one could expect an offensive increase if/when Hamilton is fully healthy. Pitching-wise the Rangers have been pretty healthy. Every starter has at least 11 starts, and only one (the 23-year-old Matt Harrison, has an ERA above 5 as I write this).

Anaheim: Vlad has been limited to about half his expected PAs, and has performed drastically below his level while playing, (a .668 OPS thru 6/26 -- Endy Chavez was bringing Vlad Guerrero level offense, believe it or not). Howie Kendrick has been a major disappointment, enough to get sent down, and replaced by Maicer Izturis. The reality that Anaheim ALREADY had a guy capable of maintaining (or improving) in the middle infield is a testement to a well-designed roster. But, Gary Matthews is having a miserable season, (.600 OPS), leaving the club without an offensive threat off the bench. But, for the 2nd half, the club has MAJOR upside, in that if Vlad is healthy, they can expect a 250 point gain in OPS from a guy already on the roster.

Pitching-wise, the Angels have been smacked hard in 2009. Adenhart lost after 1 start, Santana hurt and lousy when in, Lackey having a career worst season. Weaver, Saunders, and the surprising Matt Palmer have carried a rotation with Escobar and Santana both MIA. But, this brings up a danger zone for analysis. If Seattle had 2 or 3 previously established quality pitchers in various states of health and production, the strong trend would be to expect an eventual return to previous performance levels for at least SOME of them. If the club believes that Morrow can transition to starter and develop consistency, that is an optimistic outlook for a player with an extremely erratic performance history. But, a FAIR assessment would suggest Lackey should likely get a higher projection for the rest of the season than Morrow.

=========================

Ultimately, any projection is a guess. You try to make that guess and educated one. But, the biggest danger is polluting the data with emotion. In this case, my analysis suggests that Anaheim, a team that is ahead of the Mariners DESPITE losing its best offensive player for a chunk of the season to date, and has had three of its top pitchers hurt for the same period of time is NOT a reason to expect Seattle to make up ground. On the contrary, it is reason to expect the second half of the season to get increasingly more difficult. The LA offense has a .770 team OPS, (7th in the AL), and they are 7th in runs scored. There is no data to suggest a swoon is likely. The more likely scenario is as some of the health issues vanish, Anaheim is more likely to run away with the division than to collapse.

With Texas, the pitching hasn't been good, but the defense has been stellar, and the defense is why Texas isn't surrending 14 runs a game as they typically have done. Defense doesn't tend to slump, and as a rule, if you're top 10 defense by mid-season, you'll typically finish in the upper half of defensive teams. Their rotation is a mix of youth and experience. The youth all have potential for improvement, and the veterans are likely to maintain. The offense, which was monster early on, has cooled significantly of late - but being 5th in OPS and only 9th in runs suggests they will be better as the year progresses.

An impartial analysis of the three teams shows reasons why all three "could" be better in the 2nd half than they are at the moment. There is little evidence to support any of the teams as actually overachieving in any substantial way - and if one wanted to pick a genuine overachiever in the bunch, it would probably be the Mariners. The best news for Seattle is that during the past month, they have managed to produce a .770ish team OPS, (which is right in the neighborhood of what Texas and Anaheim have produced for the season as a whole). If the Mariners can continue to generate those offensive numbers without fading on the run suppression side of things, they could stay in the race. However, if the recent .770 OPS is transient, and the full-season OPS of .715 is closer to reality - then the odds of staying in the race drop significantly.

My view? I believe Seattle's best chances for BOTH this season and the future lie in going with the guys already on board. Wlad getting a full 300 PAs in the second half gives him a legitimate chance to adapt to the majors. If the pitching and defense remain at the top of the league, then the return of Johjima is a certain offensive improvement over Johnson. And if Clement can get healthy, he could return to the majors to replace Johnson as the backup catcher later in the season. If Seattle is going to EVER learn how to develop talent of its own, it is going to have to give its prospects the time to suffer their learning pains. Adam Jones got a full season posting a .711 OPS in 2008. This year, the club is reaping the benefits of their patience, as Jones was over 1000 for much of the season, and sitting at .880 at the moment.

It was asked recently, if you do not "go for it" when only 3 games back nearing mid-season, when do you go for it? I would ask -- if you do not allow your prospects a legitimate full-time chance to learn on the job during a season where you were expected to be an also-ran, when do they get a chance to struggle and learn and improve? Standing pat is not a popular position these days. The common "wisdom" is that you're supposed to either sell talent for the future or buy talent and trade specs for the moment.

Captain Jack has done a nice job of culling out the culture of entitlement from the past few years. But the job is not complete - not by a long shot. Part of excising that culture includes allowing the prospects and projects a legitimate opportunity to develop, learn and fail, (at least temporarily). When dealing with young players, it CANNOT be simply about production. There has to be allowance for the time it takes to incorporate new information and learn and grow. The production may not be immediate, but the EFFORT and ATTENTION are traits the club can see, and those traits MUST be rewarded by extending reasonable time to these players. And even if a given player fails, the knowledge that the club didn't toss him aside at the first 3-week slump is something that every other prospect in the pipe will likely know and understand.

Though the end-of-July trade deadline is where everyone has their attention focused, Seattle may be in a situation where the best move is to be patient, and if they slip completely out of the race during August, then they can test the waters to see if any of the short-timers can get through waivers to be traded late. Of course, the thing that really pushes the decisions is not the desire of what Seattle wants - but the state of mind of the other teams. If Seattle can trade a Victor Zambrano (Washburn? - that's really an insult to Wash, actually), for a Kazmir, then it is always possible that someone with some really juicy specs will come calling. Or maybe someone wanting to dump salary will let someone go at very low cost in terms of prospects. One can view the current situation as Seattle being disadvantaged because they are on the hedge between contender and also-ran. I believe patience could be rewarded with some potentially wonderful offers being proposed between now and July 31st. And Seattle, being where they are, is likely getting calls from BOTH camps.

But, a fair assessment of what to expect from the competition is critical to that decision making process. The loss of Beltre likely moves Seattle out of contender consideration in many people's minds. But, baseball is a strange game. The season is a marathon, and there are more surprising turns yet to come.