| By Paul Marsh |  | By 10-06-2010 |
In looking at 2011 and how the roster may start to take shape, one of the first things we can and should do is look at what vacancies may open up. In this exercise, we can eliminate who is under contract for 2011 and beyond, since we're merely looking at the flexibility first and not looking at trading players under contract.
Here is a quick list of players whose 2011 status isn't guaranteed under a current contract, excluding players who aren't arbitration eligible yet.
Free agents:
Josh Bard, C;
Chris Woodward, INF,
Jamey Wright, RHP.
Eligible for arbitration:
David Aardsma, RHP;
Casey Kotchman, 1B;
Brandon League, RHP;
Ryan Langerhans, OF;
Ryan Rowland-Smith, LHP;
Sean White, RHP;
Jason Vargas, LHP;
Josh Wilson, INF.
Club options:
Erik Bedard, LHP ($8 million);
Russell Branyan, DH (mutual - $5 million);
Jose Lopez, INF ($4.5 million);
Ian Snell, RHP ($6.75 million)
The M's can cut bait with any and all of these players. It's pretty safe to assume that none of the club options for the players listed will be picked up -- although the team does seem to have an irrational love for Jose Lopez. While a good portion of the M's blogosphere seems convinced the M's are done with Jose, I'm still not 100% convinced. I'm leaning towards YES, heavily even, but there's still enough doubt that I'm not willing to commit to it being a certainty.
While personally, I'd love to see the M's give one more shot to Erik Bedard to see if he has any bullets left in his arm, it wouldn't surprise me if he's thrown his last pitch in the organization (if not the major leagues). However - he is expected to be fully recovered from his latest surgery (as fully recovered as Erik Bedard can be) by Spring Training. There's quite of bit of ill-will towards Bedard that remains in Marinerville but I still think he's got enough talent to pitch -- with the most ginormous of IFs he is healthy enough to do so.
So, which of these players might the M's consider bringing back? Which of the arbitration-eligible players might they non-tender?
Without getting too crazy, are there any non-tender candidates on other teams you might be willing to see the M's take a flier on? I'm going to admit my heavy bias and acknowledge that I'd really like to see the Dodgers non-tender George Sherrill and have the M's see if they can fix whatever wasn't working in LA this year. I acknowledge the argument that this sort of move would be best left to a club much closer to contention. When you're a rebuilding type team, the last place you want to invest is in your bullpen. But, well, George "GS52" Sherrill is pretty much one of my favorite players and I believe he's not done yet.
I'll be watching the comments and as I've done before, if things get too heated or if you ramble too long, I will insert random '80s boy band lyrics. We're not interested in trades or discussing players that the M's might target in free agency. Keep this discussion to just looking at our own roster and seeing if there's anything worth keeping in the guys we're not committed to going forward. And maybe looking around MLB at potential hidden gems that may become available via Non-Tender.
Photo Caption: Erik Bedard prepares to pitch a rehab start in the rain at Cheney Stadium in Tacoma, WA. Photo for ProspectInsider.com by Paul Marsh/www.PaulMPhotography.com
discussion:-non-tenders,-options-and-mariners\'-free-agents
Comments
The following 12 comment(s) for this article are shown below:
| 1. By: safecochatter on 10-06-2010 03:56:29 one question m's will have to answer will is who's on 2nd in april 2011. ackley will probably not be called up untill june. earlier in the the year some thought kelly johnson might be a non tender. a freshly minted diamondback team report lists johnson as "in limbo". it also says towers first order of business is to fix the pen.but if a non tender or trade. johnson is a perfect fit. a trade chip in july after ackley is ready or allow johnson to go fa in 2012 and get a dp. all three fa are gone. so are the 4 option guys. we need new blood. |
| 2. By: Madison Mariner on 10-06-2010 05:54:28 First off, I used to be on here as 'Jim', then as 'Jim in WI' until this past spring/summer. I deleted my old account(mostly out of frustration with the Mariners and their awful 2010 season). Anyway, now that the season is over, I am more hopeful, and have decided to rejoin the fine folks at PI under the same username I use at many other Mariners' blogs--Madison Mariner. So, if you see my comments at any other M's site, you'll know it's me. :) Secondly, thanks for the nice article, Paul. Nice to see you contributing after years of commenting. :) 1. Of the first group('Free Agents'), none of them will be back. Also, one name not mentioned was that of Eliezer Alfonzo, the other veteran catcher the M's brought in ona minor league contract before the 2010 season. He was outrighted off the 40-man roster earlier in the season, but remains in the organization as of now, and will still be a free agent at seasons' end(and like Bard, won't be back in all likelihood.) More in my next post. :) |
| 3. By: Madison Mariner on 10-06-2010 06:12:15 My thoughts continued: 2. Of the 2nd group, I'd break them into 3 sub-groups: a. Will be tendered a contract for 2011. b. Uncertain: May or may not be tendered a contract for 2011. c. Won't be tendered a contract for 2011. In group (a), there's Aardsma, League, and Vargas. These are all 100% certain in my mind. In group (b), there's Rowland-Smith('RRS'), White, and Wilson. In group (c), there's Kotchman and Langerhans. Kotchman's a 100% guarantee, while Langerhans is probably a 95% by my estimation. The reasons for each of the players in group (a) are fairly obvious based on team needs and 2010 performances. Aardsma could be traded before the early December deadline, but whatever team acquires him would definitely tender him a contract as well. If the M's don't move him before then, they'll tender him a contract. League will likely take over for Aarsdma as the closer in 2011, so he'll be back. Vargas was one of the nice surprises of 2010 and has guaranteed himself a spot in the 2011 starting rotation, so he's in as well. The arguments for and against the players in group (b) are numerous, and I'm not sure what will happen, but my guess is that 2 of those 3 players will be tendered a contract and 1 will not, but I could be way off, too. I think it's likely that one of RRS or White is back in the bullpen. RRS failed badly as a starter, and the thinking is probably that he could go back to being effective in short stints out of the bullpen. I'd take him over Sean White any day, and I think the M's might be thinking something similar, so a White non-tender would be welcome to me(although it may not be a choice between the 2 of them, and both could be back.) Wilson is tough to say. He'll never be more than what he is, and he shouldn't start regularly like he was forced to do this season, but a good argument could be made for keeping him around as a super-sub utility infielder. I don't think he would command that much, seeing as how, to this point in his MLB career, he's been a "get a minor league contract/get added to the major league roster and earn the minimum/get DFA'ed before the season ends" type of player. But if the M's feel they can target someone who's better, or they pick and choose between Wilson and Tuiasosopo and go with the cheaper option, then I guess Wilson could be non-tendered(I'd rather have Wilson backing up at SS than Tui, though.) In group (c), I think it's fairly obvious that Casey Kotchman is a goner, what with Justin Smoak the future and Kotchman's all-glove, no-bat performance in 2010 contributing to the worst offensive effort in years. Langerhans...I don't see them bringing him back, mostly because they're going to have to use Milton Bradley in some capacity, and that will be as a platoon DH/4th outfielder(DH being the one position they can likely bring someone else in, and Bradley being used there on occassion.) They can't move Bradley right now, so they have to choose between him and Langerhans, and the unmoveable contract wins in this case. I could be wrong on that, but I doubt it(they could just release Bradley and eat the money, but I don't see that happening.) Sorry for the long post, but I wanted to discuss the reasons for each of those guys, and the M's have a lot of arbitration-eligible players this season. Final post will contain thoughts on the last group. :) |
| 4. By: Madison Mariner on 10-06-2010 07:49:50 My last set of thoughts: 3. In the 'Club Options' category, Bedard remains an injury concern, and I don't see any way in which the option is picked up. Oddly enough, the M's left language in this contract so that if the option was picked up by the M's, Bedard could void that move, but he would forfeit the buyout as a result. I say: M's pay the $250,000 buyout, but they cold explore bringing him back for 2011 on another 1-year contract, posibly. Branyan is someone I wouldn't mind having on the 2011 roster, but do we have room for him? As a matter of procedure, Branyan's mutual option could be declined, and the buyout, according to Cot's, will be paid by the Indians as part of the terms of the trade the 2 teams made. Which is cool--it saves the M's $500,000. As to Branyan's future with the M's, I say: The M's decline the option, the Indians pay the buyout, and Branyan becomes a free agent who signs with another team. The M's just won't have room on the 25-man roster, even if they do need a veteran slugger to back-up 1B and possibly platoon at DH. Hopefully, either Mike Carp or Milton Bradley can fill that role in 2011. So long, Russell. ;) Lopez and Snell are both special cases, because while they both have 2011 options, they also are both still short of the required service time to become free agents, technically. Looking at Lopez's case first: His buyout for his 2011 option is $250,000, and it's a lock that the M's pay that and buy him out, since the option is for $4.5 million--too expensive, given his awful year. But with more than 5 but less than 6 years of MLB service time through the end of 2010, Lopez's contractual rights would still be under the control of the Mariners, and he would be arbitration-eligible. In that case, I say: The M's pay the buyout, and look at the 2B free agent market in early December before deciding whether to tender him a contract. Given his 2010 salary of $2.3 million and the maximum reduction of 20% in salary through arbitration, the M's could still offer him about $1.9 million if they go to arbitration, and it's likely they could win that case and give him the reduced salary. And I think the M's, on some level, still have a thing for Jose Lopez, but it's reallly too tough to say right now. So after the option is declined, I'll leave this as a 50/50 chance they tender him a contract for 2011, given that they'll need someone to man 2B until Ackley is ready(even if Ackley is ready out of spring training, I say they leave him in AAA until early June at least.) The final player with an option is Ian Snell. An interesting case, since Snell has options for both 2011 and 2012, but as of right now, he's not even on the M's 40-man roster. That's because after the M's DFA'ed him in June, no one claimed him(who would?), and he cleared waivers and went to the minors. So, a player with a major league contract who isn't on the 40-man roster...sound like Kei Igawa, who still gets paid $5 million by the Yankees next year(2011) while being a minor league pitcher for them. Which begs the question: Snell only has a little over 4 years of MLB service time, so what happens once the option is declined(and Cot's said there was no buyout)? Is he eligible to become a free agent? (i.e. Does not being on the 40-man roster but having an MLB contract affect anything if he doesn't have the neccessary service time to become a free agent? Does he retain arbitration-eligiblity?) Maybe one of Jason, Chris, or Paul can enlighten us. :) The only other thing is that the other players not listed who aren't under multi-year contracts but are on the 40-man roster--such as David Pauley and Guillermo Quiroz--are eligible for automatic contract renewal, and I expect most of them to be retained. However, they can also be non-tendered. :) (Sorry again for the long post, but wanted to be clear on everytyhing.) :) |
| 5. By: Jerry on 10-06-2010 08:33:08 Paul, I get the point in wanting to just look at the players currently on the roster before venturing into the subject of free agency and trades. However, for a lot of these guys, what moves the M's can make before they have to tender contracts has a HUGE impact on whether they are back or not. The no-brainers up there are Vargas, League, and Aardsma. Even though I think they will trade Aardsma (and should), you have to tender those three contracts. They are valuable assets, either as trade bait or as members of the club going forward. Beyond that, a lot depends on what Jack does with the roster between now and the deadline to tender contracts to players under team control. Ryan Rowland-Smith is a good bounce back candidate, and the team would be wise to keep him around. However, if the club gets another starter or two, you have to consider if his cost will be worth it if he's just working out of the bullpen. But I think he is the fringy guy I would be most likely to bring back. Langerhans and Wilson can help the club, but only if the roster doesn't change much. If the M's can pick up a more versatile utility infielder, especially one that can provide a bit of offense, then the M's don't really need Wilson. Langerhans has value as a good defensive outfielder, a lefty bat, and a guy who can draw walks. But he's only a good fit if the M's have a roster spot. If they go with any type of platoon at DH, he's the odd man out. His spot is also dependent on what happens with Bradley. If Bradley is on the team but not counted on to start everyday (which is likely), Langerhans doesn't make much sense. And while Langerhans is a nice piece, its not as if guys like him are difficult to pick up. If they do go with Bradley, and Bradley breaks down (which is also likely), they could always pick up a bench outfielder off the scrap heap. For the free agents and guys with options, I think that Bard and Branyan are legit possibilities to come back, but, again, only if Jack focuses most of the clubs resources on other areas. It might be a good idea to pick up a catcher with a bit of upside, especially if they could get a younger player via trade (perhaps for Aardsma). If that happens, then Bard isn't on the club. But if they decide to give Moore a long look this year, Bard is a capable backup and shouldn't cost too much. Branyan's option is far to expensive, and the M's should decline it. But bringing him back on a salary closer to his market value would be great. But, again, this only makes sense if the M's invest most of their resources in other areas. To make a long story short, I don't think we have enough information to make decisions on a lot of these guys now. Vargas, League, and Aardsma, and to a lesser extent RRS, are pretty good bets to be retained, but beyond that, we are talking about bench guys. The M's don't have to make any final decisions on reserves anytime soon, and a lot will change by the time they have to extend contracts to these guys. I think it's likely we'll see a trade or two, and perhaps a free agent signing, in the meantime. At that point, it should be clear how these guys will fit into the roster. |
| 6. By: Paul Marsh on 10-06-2010 09:50:56 Considering the deadlines, though, you do have to look at these players first. Certainly you do look at them in the context of what else might be available either in trade or free agency -- nothing happens in a vacuum in baseball. I agree that Aardsma, League and Vargas are no-brainers. I also agree that Wilson, Hyphen & Langerhans aren't. While Bedard still may be negotiated with, I'm almost willing to bet my house that Snell will not be. I also have to think that as long as Zduriencik is here, Branyan will be discussed as an option, too -- but isn't someone to fully be counted on because of his health. I like Langerhans well enough, but wouldn't blow a gasket if he's not kept around. Same goes for Josh Wilson. Oh, and for this discussion I did leave off guys like Quiroz and I probably should've left off Woodward since he's in the same category of players who filled a role in the bigs but were acquired as minor league free agents. MiLB free agents is a whooooole 'nother discussion. |
| 7. By: Madison Mariner on 10-06-2010 11:32:19 Woodward is nothing more than an older version of Josh Wilson. Guys like that are acquired either as minor league free agents or on minor league contracts, get added to the MLB roster, play for a while, then are DFA'ed, resulting in a release or outright to AAA. They become free agents and start the next season all over again with a minor league contract. And Woodward has enough service time to be considered a major league free agent now(over 7 years, IIRC), so I think you were fine to include him. :) As for guys like Quiroz, who are AAAA players at best, they usually find themselves the victims of 40-man roster cleaning in October and November by whatever org they're with at the time. Prepping for the Rule 5 draft and free agency forces teams to release and outright such players who are borderline in terms of belonging on a 40-man roster. Quiroz will have close to 2 years of service time and be subject to automatic contract renewal if he stays on the 40-man roster until the December deadline for tendering contracts. |
| 8. By: on 10-06-2010 18:56:45 Tug Hulett is off to free agency right? But what about him? I'm sure there must be reasons why people don't bring him up in the backup SS discussion, but inform me. I'd rather see him than Josh Wilson. Is his defense too bad for his offensive potential to matter? |
| 9. By: Lailoken on 10-06-2010 19:42:25 Free agents: Josh Bard, C; gone Chris Woodward, INF; gone Jamey Wright, RHP. gone Eligible for arbitration: David Aardsma, RHP; traded Casey Kotchman, 1B; gone Brandon League, RHP; definite keeper Ryan Langerhans, OF; non-tendered & possibly re-signed to minor league contract Ryan Rowland-Smith, LHP; non-tendered & possibly re-signed Sean White, RHP; gone Jason Vargas, LHP; definite keeper Josh Wilson, INF. gone Club options: Erik Bedard, LHP ($8 million); hopefully re-signed to incentive-laden minor league contract Russell Branyan, DH (mutual - $5 million); gone Jose Lopez, INF ($4.5 million); gone Ian Snell, RHP ($6.75 million) gone The League vs. Aardsma debate is not worth much effort. League easily wins out because on salary alone. This team has a limited payroll this offseason & Aardsma is an excessive luxury. Vargas pitched himself into a rotation spot. Langerhans suffers from being mostly a corner outfielder with a left-handed bat on a team looking at two starting corner outfielders with left-handed bats (Ichiro & Saunders). Still, at the right salary he is a bargain & that will remain a central theme of this offseason. Somebody with the ability to play center field might keep him off the big league roster anyway. I'm with you on keeping Bedard. If he signs for a similar deal he could be a serious bargain. The reports on his shoulder were not bad at all. Sure, he's injury prone but when he pitches he's effective. An effective lefty in Safeco is money. Hyphen has talent but this year was a disaster & the money he would make in arbitration is not a positive risk/reward scenario. Bringing him back at a lesser cost would be fine though. Branyan has some value but seeing as the team is unlikely to unload Bradley & is looking to go younger & cheaper Branyan is a bad fit at this juncture. Bard & Wilson hold minimal value but upgrades for their spots should be easy enough to find. Some non-tender candidates of interest: Sherrill, Russell Martin, Edwin Encarnacion, Jenks, Church, Aybar, Theriot, Angel Guzman, Maine, Andrew Miller, Brandon McCarthy, Hermida, Bonser, Buck, Callaspo, Perkins, Neshek, Josh Fields, Zumaya, & Marte. (used mlbtraderumors though they're not done with the series so there'll be more) Miller is out of options in addition to being a non-tender candidate. He's someone I'd like to see GMZ take a flyer on. His velocity has declined & his control is suspect but he's been moved around levels a lot & dinged with mostly minor injuries. High expectations hampered him & the Marlins insisted on keeping him as a starting pitcher for value purposes. As a reliever with a simplified repetoire his velocity & a semblance of control might return. The thought of watching more Rob Johnson passed balls horrifies me. I'd rather the team go after a FA who can mentor Moore & swing a lefty stick like Zaun than Russell Martin. For backup or stopgap middle infield options one could do worse than Theriot or Callaspo. Same with Aybar, Fields, & Marte for a corner infielder. Encarnacion to me is a proven starter talent. He'd be a nice bat to have against left-handed pitching & his UZR was impressive this year too. He is the kind of right-handed bat Safeco might eat alive though. The outfield values are mostly left-handed bats comparable to Langerhans. Buck has shown a lot of doubles power in the minors, he's worth taking a flyer on to see if those turn into home runs in his prime years. A bunch of injury return pitchers with some talent. Best to leave evaluation of those to scouts. |
| 10. By: maqman on 10-07-2010 12:45:29 Keep League and Vargas, trade Aardsma, get rid of the rest you've listed. If Bedard will sign a cheap incentivised contract he'd be worth a shot. Sign a halfway decent hitting catcher like Buck and a middle infielder like Theriot or Callaspo. Branyan is worth $2MM tops, he's too frangible. If Bradley doesn't show something good in spring training then eat his contract and open up his roster spot. See if there is anything interesting in the leftovers bin before spring training that will sign a minor league contract. I would take a chance on Matsui as DH if the Angels let him go and he's not too pricey. |
| 11. By: Edman on 10-07-2010 13:46:16 I've given up rosterbating. It's bad for you and can grow hair on your palms. It's interesting to discuss, but often times I find that all it does is frustrate. People start talking about possibilities, as if they're realities. Money is endless, everyone's available, and everyone wants to be a Mariner. I'm just gonna let Jack do his job and watch what he does. For all that we think we know, we don't really. How many thought Sheets should have been a Mariner? That didn't turn out so well for the A's. How many swore that Seattle missed out on signing Dice-K? He's been okay, but did not turn out as planned. Just go to it Jack, and make me smile. If you can do that, I'll be happy. |
| 12. By: Lailoken on 10-07-2010 19:11:04 To clarify, Travis Buck is the non-tender candidate I listed. John Buck is a FA & likely too expensive for the M's. |
Haven't created a Prospect Insider account yet? Sign up!
|
|
 |
|
|
| Copyright 2010 Prospect Insider | Created by AQ Central Prospect Insider is optimized for Mozilla Firefox and Google Chrome |