| By Chris Crawford |  | By 07-22-2010 |
The rumor mill is open -- and updated at 3:18 PM PT on 7/27/2010 for subscribers!
If you aren't a subscriber, you can change that by signing up here!
As the Mariners struggle to score against, well, anyone -- this edition of the GBU will be strictly minor-league related. The only thing worth mentioning is really Felix, and I don't like repeating myself. And I don't like repeating myself (see what I did there?)
The Good
Josh Lueke and Matt Lawson are doing everything in their power to show they aren't just roster-fillers. Lueke's two appearances in West Tennessee have resulted in six strikeouts over three and a third innings with no walks and only two hits allowed -- while Lawson has put up a 1.024 OPS in his first 27 at bats. Blake Beavan struggled in his first start -- but that was against a pretty decent Huntsville lineup and he did strike out three in his four innings. The sample size is ridiculously small for all three, but the results have been down-right impressive.
The Bad
I hate to mention a High Desert pitcher in the 'bad' section -- but Maikel Cleto deserves a mention, if only because there hasn't been the progression that would have been necessary to move him up as a prospect. Cleto's overall numbers aren't that bad for pitching in the Cal League, but his numbers have gotten worse month by month since April. The right-hander from Santo Domingo does have nearly three times as many K's to walks, and has nearly struck out a better an inning (49 strikeouts in 55 innings) -- but it regression is never a good thing.
The Ugly
Not having Ryne Stanek or Marcus Littlewood signed at this point isn't surprising, nor is it a huge deal. James Paxton is another story. If the left-hander had been able to report to Clinton or maybe High Desert, Paxton could have been a candidate for a mid-season call-up to help the rotation as early as next season. Now the chances of him helping any sooner than 2012 are significantly lower. It isn't a guarantee that he'll struggle the way Aaron Crow and Luke Hochevar did -- but there are plenty of examples of pitchers who struggle after such a long layoff. While it's impossible to know how Paxton will respond to the time off -- it would have been nice to not have to worry about it.
gbu----july-21st,-2010
Comments
The following 151 comment(s) for this article are shown below:
| 1. By: Adam B. on 07-22-2010 01:22:40 Would the Mariners simply be waiting to announce their signings because they're so far over slot? Obviously Boras/Paxton don't have a lot of leverage in this situation, but I'd be willing to bet they'd still hold out for above slot-money on the argument that Paxton is a first-round talent. |
| 2. By: Jason A. Churchill on 07-22-2010 11:05:41 I was told there are no agreements just yet, but once there are, it's certainly possible that they don't announce it until Aug 16. |
| 3. By: Edman on 07-22-2010 11:50:51 Paxton not signing makes no sense to me. If he sits out another season, and he continues to have mediore numbers, he'll be lucky to get drafted before the 5th round next year. Two years removed from from his pro career is a lot. And, teams will not at all be complelled to give him more money than he'd get for signing now. He may never make up for the money that he's lost by not signing sooner. He ends up under team control in his prime free agency years. Boras must be loaning him money, or have arranged for a loan. I can't understand him not having an incentive to sign. |
| 4. By: Edman on 07-22-2010 11:54:03 Sitting how hurts pitchers the most. There is a long list of examples. I bet Josh Fields wishes he had signed sooner. He would have probably been in the majors by now, eating up service time. He too, will likely see his prime free agency years wasted because of it. |
| 5. By: safecochatter on 07-22-2010 12:02:53 i like the way Josh Lueke has started out. with all the trade hub bub he seems very focused with 6 punchouts in the 10 batters retired.it seems he started the year getting saves at high a,but didn't get much of a chance at aa. anyone know if m's are thinking closer on this guy? |
| 6. By: Jason A. Churchill on 07-22-2010 12:06:13 Leuke is a legit 7-8th inning relief prospect. He'd rank higher on the top 30 than Fields right now, for sure. Maybe in the top 15. |
| 7. By: randallball on 07-22-2010 12:32:45 How about a little Nick Franklin on the "Good"? Back at it with the stick again this month it seems. |
| 8. By: marinermutt on 07-22-2010 12:35:25 Would the Red Sox have any interested in Johnson as catching help? |
| 9. By: Fireballer55 on 07-22-2010 12:42:07 Any idea what single idea the Sox would give up for said player? Also, your last mention of trading high, any clue to what we can get? Thanks! |
| 10. By: rjfrik on 07-22-2010 13:00:22 In response to the latest rumor mill. Hmmm, very interesting. |
| 11. By: Edman on 07-22-2010 13:36:22 I have to diagree with the idea that said pitcher's value will never be higher. Thankfully, the Boston Red Sox believed as much about Jamie Moyer. If said pitcher put up a few seasons with an ERA under 4.00, that would be fairly valuable, and would warrant at least a solid #4 status. And, I believe he is capable of that. I don't see players as just trading chips. He's young enough that he can still provide value over the next five years. |
| 12. By: mymrbig on 07-22-2010 13:57:02 I'd love to see the M's swing a trade with either the Mets for Ruben Tejada, or even with the Dodgers for Ivan Dejesus Jr. or even Chin-Lung Hu. None of those guys would be great SS, but they at least have a chance to be averagish shortstops that can hold down the fort for a couple years earning the league minimum until the M's find someone better (Franklin?). Any thoughts on these guys Jason? Any hope of a trade for one of them? Tejada interests me most since he's holding his own as a 20-year-old in AAA (even if he doesn't have much projection). |
| 13. By: baseballman on 07-22-2010 14:22:08 I'm gonna agree with edman in post 11. Depending on what we could get for said player I think we be better off keeping him. But that of course is dependent on what teams are willing to give up |
| 14. By: Edman on 07-22-2010 14:54:14 #12, why block Nick Franklin? Seattle can go with Wilson next year, and another rental the following year, until he's ready. |
| 15. By: mymrbig on 07-22-2010 15:08:49 #12 & #14, I don't think any of those guys would block Franklin if he continues developing as the M's hope. And they might be good insurance in case Franklin hits some bumps along the way or needs to be moved off SS. Of course, no guarantee Tejada or DeJesus can stick at SS, or that Hu can hit enough to stay in the majors at all. Probably all better than Josh Wilson though. |
| 16. By: mymrbig on 07-22-2010 15:09:37 Also, no guarantees Nick Franklin is ready in 2-3 years. Some guys take time. |
| 17. By: rjfrik on 07-22-2010 15:32:49 Exactly my thoughts Mr. big. Franklin is not even in High Class A yet. I'm not sure he will be ready at all in 2-3 years. He is still a teenager. If he excels and does not repeat any level, which I find unlikely, he would still most likely do a full season in High A, a full season in AA and at least a half of a season in AAA, if not a full one. I think he has a minimum of three years left in the minors, most likely 3.5 before he is called up. I hope I'm wrong. |
| 18. By: John_S on 07-22-2010 15:48:41 I agree mymrbig. Franklin seems like a wonderful prospect but he's only his low A so there's no guarantees that he's going to make it to the bigs. Like you said mymrbig, those kids would not necessarily block franklin and if they do why couldn't you trade one of them so the "being blocked" theory doesn't really make sense. If it takes 2-3 years for franklin to make it to the majors, what's wrong with having a young SS who is possible league average or better whose cost controlled by the team for the 2-3 years until franklin is called up? |
| 19. By: Edman on 07-22-2010 16:12:43 Because, you can find a Josh Wilson or similar player, and not give up a valuable piece, to do it. If you can give up French or similar prospect to get one, fine. But certainly not for the pitcher mentioned in trade rumors. It really gets down to what it would cost to get one of those shortstops. If not, bank on Franklin, until he proves he can't be the one to build around and look for reasonable rental players. This cost control concept is fine, but trying to do it in the wrong place, doesn't make much sense to me. Franklin, should he continue to develop, and could go from high A, to AA by the end of next season. Then AAA in the year after. It's all ifs, but not unreasonable. His big test will be next year. But, he's already hit his 18th HR in a league that's not known as a hitter's league. |
| 20. By: John_S on 07-22-2010 16:29:04 I don't think anyone said that we should trade the pitcher mentioned in the rumor mill for one of the three shortstops. It was a general statement that obtaining one of the three shortstops would be nice. Granted Josh Wilson has done an admirable job, but we know what he is and that's a ML backup utility guy which is nice to have. Why not obtain someone who has a chance to be as good or better than Josh? If it's a buy low opportunity and I have no clue if it is, why not jump on the chance? |
| 21. By: Edman on 07-22-2010 16:40:03 You could say that about virtually any position. Catcher? Secondbaseman? Thirdbaseman? With Jack Wilson likely being here next year, it's a moot point, unless the M's are willing to eat much of his salary. And, in doing that, how much are you saving? It really doesn't become an issue, until 2012. And, by then, they could find a rental player. Catcher and second or third have more value right now, than a young shortstop. |
| 22. By: burn31226 on 07-22-2010 16:51:52 What about Jed Lowrie from the Red Sox? Do you think they could acquire him if they trade Aardsma back to the Red Sox. |
| 23. By: John_S on 07-22-2010 16:55:36 Problem with Jack is, you can't guarantee that he's going to play a full season. The last time he played over 135 games or more was in '07. Since then, he's played 87 in '08 106 '09 and 45 for this year. I would consider it an issue because you cannot count on Jack playing for a whole season. Catcher we still have Adam Moore who is ML ready. 2B we have Ackley whose in AAA with a chance to play in the majors next year which would allow Figgins to move to 3B. We have options at the other positions, but there's no one in AAA who's an option for SS. |
| 24. By: rjfrik on 07-22-2010 17:17:12 I think Franklin will fair just fine next year in High A ball, he's a hitter going to a hitters league and the pitching there won't be that big of a jump from what he is facing now. The BIG test is when he gets to AA. That's when the pitching changes significantly. That's where his mettle will be tested. We will see, but, if there is anywhere he has a hiccup and has to repeat a league it will be AA. If he breezes through AA on the first go round then we will have something really special on our hands. Here's to hoping there are no hiccups. |
| 25. By: jgstecker on 07-22-2010 17:25:54 Jed Lowrie is an interesting name. Two injury plagued years have dulled his prospect status, but there's still some potential there at least as a guy who can take over 2B until Ackley is ready and potentially bridge SS until Franklin is close. His future in Boston isn't so bright with Pedroia at 2B and Iglesias at SS soon. I'm not sure how his value would stack up against a late inning relief arm, but it seems like both sides would consider him in play. |
| 26. By: randallball on 07-22-2010 17:38:09 Any idea on the return for Hannahan (just dealt to BOS)? |
| 27. By: Edman on 07-22-2010 17:49:08 Cash or a player to be named later. As close to free as you get in the majors. |
| 28. By: Edman on 07-22-2010 17:52:43 #23, the backup for Wilson, is Wilson light, just like this year. Jack is paid to play in Seattle next year. At this point, it doesn't appear that anyone's gonna take on his salary. So, he's here next season, injuries or not. Until he isn't, he is. |
| 29. By: safecochatter on 07-22-2010 17:55:38 that is trade #3 in july. looks like your 3.5 trades prediction is a slamdunk jason! |
| 30. By: Jason A. Churchill on 07-22-2010 19:02:23 As for SS Wilson, it depends on what Jack and co. want to do next year. Contend? Might need to upgrade the position, regardless of what that costs in sending out Wilson. If not, spending the cash to rid yourselves of the veteran makes little sense. As for blocking Franklin, please... He's 19, in low-A ball and is at least three years away, maybe four or five. Until he's within a year of the bigs or so, you can't think about blocking him. If Arizona wants to give up Stephen Drew or some other good SS becomes available, he better be on your radar. Regarding Vargas -- why compare Vargas to Moyer? It's not the same situation even a tiny bit. The only similarity is the changeup, not the stage of career, development, service time status, none of it is similar at all. Vargas will NEVER be worth more in trade than he is this season while he's rolling. He can impact this year's pennant race before he's even arbitration eligible, and loses value as he gets closer and closer to free agency. As for Hannahan being traded -- it's for a player to be named or cash. |
| 31. By: rjfrik on 07-22-2010 19:16:36 Well I hope they go out and get a good piece for Vargas then. Go Z go. |
| 32. By: Jason A. Churchill on 07-22-2010 19:17:18 I don't think Vargas gets moves this month, but why should he be off the table? |
| 33. By: Edman on 07-22-2010 19:20:51 I'm not opposed to trading Vargas. But, it had better be someone who could help right away and preferably someone for the rotation. There is little stability in the current rotation and trading Vargas only makes it worse. |
| 34. By: Jason A. Churchill on 07-22-2010 19:50:00 Sure, if you plan on contending in 2011, which isn't realistic in the slightest. If not, why no go with Felix, Fister, RRS, French, break in Pineda at some point, possibly Hensley and/or Hill as well, and enter the winter with a flyer out for a mid-rotation (3,4 type) arm on a short-term deal. The M's are at least a half-dozen players away from contention, and Vargas could help acquire one of them (not by himself, necessarily) or he could acquire a young player that could eventually be a chip in a deal for one of those impact roster members. The Mariners absolutely do NOT need Vargas for the '11 rotation. |
| 35. By: Edman on 07-22-2010 20:21:59 No, I could care less about contending in 2011. I'm talking about 2012-2015. Assuming Vargas can stay close to the level he's at right now, going forward, it would give the rotation a foundation to build on. Are you convinced that a rotation with an uncertain Fister, an unpredictable RRS, and a developing at best, French is something to take into 2011? I'd love for them all to turn out well, but if I was Jack, I wouldn't bank on that hope. OK, the M's are at least a half-dozen players away from contending. How does it get better to make it seven? Every quality piece you lose, you have to replace. Hernandez and Vargas, if he stays on the course he is, can provide a foundation for 2012 on. Still searching in 2011 for a guy to follow Felix, can make the journey to contention, that much longer. I'm all for trading Vargas, if Seattle gets someone like Shelby Miller, Clay Buckholtz, etc. in return. Someone who develop in 2011 into what we get from Vargas today. I'm not interested in someone who might be good, in three years. |
| 36. By: marinermutt on 07-22-2010 20:59:57 I would love to get Miller or Buckholtz for Vargas but that isn't reasonable. You might get one "B" or "B-" type prospect for him currently. Miller and Buckholtz are both "A" types in my view. |
| 37. By: Blowgun7 on 07-22-2010 21:05:31 Back to reality Edman.. you aren't getting anywhere near the quality of a Shelby Miller for Jason Vargas. And did you really just suggest Clay Buchholz? Why the hell would Boston ever give him up for Vargas? Buchholz over the last year has been on of the best pitchers in the AL and he actually has lasting stuff and peripherals that suggest he's going to stay a top tier pitcher. Vargas won't pitch like this going forward. |
| 38. By: safecochatter on 07-22-2010 21:26:59 Beavan pulled after 7 innings tonight. much better...only one run and no walks. might just be a very good trade before it's all said and done! Rangers are in such bad shape,Nolan Ryan testified today that he didn't know if they could resign Hamilton,don't know if i buy it,but he said it.. |
| 39. By: littlelinny6 on 07-22-2010 21:57:42 Jason, The thought of RRS and French as the M's 3/4 starters makes me ill. This team is already incredibly difficult to watch and with those guys winning 50+ games next year seems almost like a stretch. I agree they're going to suck again in 2011 but the M's FO have to sell tickets at some point and losing 100+ two years in a row could really hurt them long term. |
| 40. By: d2ret on 07-22-2010 22:00:04 Honestly, you guys (not all), are thinking like ants.. What about packaging Wilson or Lopez with Vargas for B+, near ready prospects. How about Vargas and prospects for near ready guys? The point im emphasizing here is that unless you have names, how in the hell can anybody speculate on speculation? This is a point StandinPat made very succinctly in a recent, previous post. Seems like nobody understood it though.. One thing to your point Edman. I think you are thinking closer along the lines of what Big Z thinks than anybody here who pretends Vargas' presence isnt meaningful going forward. If Z thinks he can sell high and improve for the immediate future that is what he is going to do, but I don't think he is going to do it for some guy a few years away. Just because Vargas' value is limited, it doesnt mean Z is going to change his philosophy in looking for near major league ready talent. |
| 41. By: Blowgun7 on 07-22-2010 22:03:16 Nobody wants Jose Lopez or Jack Wilson. Lopez is having a horrific year and starts making decent money next season. Wilson at 6 million next yr is also a waste given that he can't stay healthy. Those guys add nothing to a package. Michael Saunders is like a B+. Nobody is giving up a Saunders for Vargas + Lopez/Wilson package. |
| 42. By: d2ret on 07-22-2010 22:11:34 Not that I dont believe you Blowgun, but we dont know that. What if we eat partial salary? What more does Z have to do to prove that he is CREATIVE. |
| 43. By: shemberry on 07-22-2010 23:11:07 Jason, Would Jack consider dealing Pineda and Saunders+ in the off season for a proven bat to play LF? I like Saunders and I like Pineda, but to bank on 5 or 6 guys in their first or second year is tough. I hate to give up Pineda, but he may be someone who could bring back an impact bat such. Possible? Good idea? |
| 44. By: Adam T on 07-22-2010 23:24:23 That LF coming back had better be Matt Holliday... |
| 45. By: Uncle Al on 07-22-2010 23:37:52 When are people going to understand that Bavasi left Zduriencik a big steaming pile of shit and it doesn't go away before the 2012 season. You can't correct it in 2011 because of the stupidy of Bavasi in making the Cabrera and Choo trades and in the off season signing Silva and making the Bedard trade. All the M's had to do was wait one more year before doing anything. Those idiotic transactions have cost the M's three more years because the trade chips were just flushed down the toilet. The M's are in pretty much the same situation, finally, and need to make a few small trades by the July 31 deadline, see what the farm system produces the rest of the year, and see what they can do in the off season. There just isn't enough money available to plug all the holes in 2011. It's very important to see what Zduriencik can get done by the July 31 deadline. Or in August. |
| 46. By: shemberry on 07-23-2010 00:47:25 What about Braun? Would the Brewers consider it? |
| 47. By: Juan Valdez on 07-23-2010 00:48:18 I don't know why any of these players absolutely have to be traded at the deadline. If you can get someone to take Lopez, great, but otherwise why not hold on to your chips until the offseason? |
| 48. By: Uncle Al on 07-23-2010 01:45:32 The problem is that you're already in at $89M for 2011 and have no idea how much Bedard or another SP is going to cost you. If you exercise the option on Lopez for $4.5M and Branyan for $5M, they are way over budget and a trade or two must take place first. If you trade a couple players now, you won't get caught in a trap later on that can screw up other trades Zduriencik wants to make. They may also be able to free up enough money for one FA if things go right. |
| 49. By: safecochatter on 07-23-2010 09:52:53 cots has m's at 91 million this year and that's after saving 1.8 on cliff lee. they have the m's at 69 mill for 2011,but that doesn't include any options picked up as u don't know if the m's will or doesn't include any arby. the weird part is after losing silva/bradley/bentancourt in 2012 budget it only drops to 54 million as felix's contract kicks into high gear at 19.2 million in 2012. and of course ichiro could come off in 2013. but the m's could kick the budget back to 100 mill anytime they want. so for someone to say the m's can't afford this guy or that guy doesn't hold a lot of water. |
| 50. By: Uncle Al on 07-23-2010 11:04:46 #49 Your post doesn't make any sense at all. First off, this years budget doesn't have anything to do with 2011. You need to add at least $9M for Rowland-Smith, Aardsma, and League. Vargas may be Arby elgible also. Another $7M for Betancourt, Silva, and Bedard for their buyouts plus at least another $5M for the Contingency Fund. That kicks your $69M up to $90M and you still haven't taken into account what Bedard or another SP is going to cost you or the $4.5M option for Lopez or the $5M option for Branyan. Your last statement is just plain ridiculous as this years budget was smaller because Chuck and Howard expected lower attendance this year and they were right. You're living in a dream world if you think attendance is going to be up in 2011 after this years fiasco. |
| 51. By: safecochatter on 07-23-2010 11:10:10 stumbled on to an interesting article written from the Philly point of view the day after Cliff Lee was dealt to Texas. includes prospects going to Cleveland in july 2009 and prospects coming in from mariners december 2009 and finally prospects m's got july 09 2010. i think we all know the winner in this story. http://www.thegoodphight.com/2010/7/10/1562832/closing-the-book-on-cliff-lee |
| 52. By: safecochatter on 07-23-2010 11:31:25 al your throwing money into the budget that cots doesn't and shouldn't. you can't decide what options are picked up or what players are non tendered or traded. 69 mill is a minimum at this point.sure it will go up.as they do not have contracts for 25 players in that 69 mill. but it does include silva,etc. i didn't say anything about attendence...nothing...zilch. all i said is it's the m's budget and they can raise it or lower it if they want. http://spreadsheets.google.com/pub?key=tWj271vM8jP83pjeMtNrKog&output=html |
| 53. By: Edman on 07-23-2010 11:34:24 Let's be clear, Miller and Buckholtz were a type example, not a who response. The point is, for Jack to trade Vargas, that's the kind of value Jack should be offered, to even consider a return phone call. Jack has some depth getting closer to the majors. Not a ton, but much more than at the beginning of the season. Jason is more value to him, than other clubs. Trading Vargas leaves a big hole to fill, at this point. Not only for next year, but years following. |
| 54. By: dawgncarolina on 07-23-2010 11:53:28 "The point is, for Jack to trade Vargas, that's the kind of value Jack should be offered, to even consider a return phone call." And the point is there's not a chance in hell we're getting anywhere near that kind of value for him. |
| 55. By: Uncle Al on 07-23-2010 12:12:53 safecochatter Zduriencik doesn't give a shit about Cots anymore than I do when putting together a working budget. Use you head and think a little about what the end result is that you are looking for. When they reduced the budget for 2010, it was obvious even then that 2011 was going to be a problem if everything didn't go right. You still miss the point and don't understand how Howard and Chuck control this through the estimated attendance and they can lower the budget but can't just raise the budget whenever they want. |
| 56. By: marinerforever on 07-23-2010 12:34:24 there are only a few moves the mariners should make before next year 1)trade lopez 2)release bradley 3)sign cliff lee 4 yrs 80 4) pick up branyn option then just play the young kids ackley smoak saunders moore then after the 2011 season sign prince feilder or adrian gonazles to replace the branyan power 2012 lineup ichiro figgins ackley big slugger smoak guti saunders moore truinfel rotation felix lee pineda paxton beaven vargas fister french that is very fromiable team that can play with the big boys of the leauge we just need to tolerate one more crappy year in in 2011 |
| 57. By: Edman on 07-23-2010 13:17:41 Cliff Lee is probably going to want at least a six year deal, and around $150 million.....which he'll get. |
| 58. By: Edman on 07-23-2010 13:23:37 That's exactly My point, dawg. Jack should only consider a trade that blows him away, for Vargas. Seattle has one great pitcher, one very good one, one decent one, and two question marks. They don't have enough pitching depth at the major league level, to give away Vargas. So, it should take a great deal, to do it. |
| 59. By: jgstecker on 07-23-2010 15:20:36 Intersting info on that potential 2B target. I think it's a bad idea though. His potential retrade value would be exactly the opposite of Cliff Lee's after spending 3 months in Seattle. |
| 60. By: bcsimons on 07-23-2010 15:28:33 I'm not a subscriber so I dont know if this has been said but if the White Sox for some reason trade Beckham to the Brewers for Fielder then Brett Lawrie would be stuck again. He could be a guy we could try to get and find a place for. |
| 61. By: marinerforever on 07-23-2010 17:02:52 no shot lee gets 6 150 who is going to give him this that would put lee at almost 40 in last year of deal trust me not even the yankees are giving him six yers |
| 62. By: mauricewilliamsiii on 07-23-2010 17:25:47 Talking to a half dozen season ticket holders who have twenty or so tickets a game all told; they have told me that if the Mariners don't sign Carl Crawford this offseason that they are cancelling season tickets. These are all people who have had tickets for more than twenty years. I have tried to explain to them that another Ichiro type player on an Ichiro type contract would basically doom this franchise for a half decade. I would like to hear some others thoughts though. And 5/120 from the Yankees for Lee is about what I expect. Especially if Lee helps the Rangers beat the Yankees in the playoffs. |
| 63. By: Lailoken on 07-23-2010 19:01:22 marinerforever, a six year deal would make Lee 37 in his last year not 40. A few other things on the budget. Whether Aardsma or Lopez get moved now or in the offseason I doubt GMZ let's them take up valuable $ from next year's budget. Branyan may indeed re-sign but his option won't be renewed considering his back issues to start the year & his recent injury too. Branyan & Bedard getting incentive-laden deals would be a start. While trading Saunders & Vargas for an upgrade may help position the team to contend it would definitely take a big return considering their value as reasonably cost-controlled properties. No Lee, Kotchman, Aardsma, Lopez, & Snell clears some room for a pickup or two. Considering the state of the rotation I would think a SP would be in order & a stopgap 2B. Trading Wilson too would save some money. I know the team budgets separately but if there is a way to finagle the budget so the FO spends less on the big club in 2011 for a little more on the draft & IFA I'd be all for that. |
| 64. By: Uncle Al on 07-23-2010 23:02:34 Lailoken May be one other scenario to consider. Lopez doesn't have much value right now and maybe Ackley isn't ready. They keep Lopez for $4.5M, Branyan & Bedard get incentive-laden deals for $1.5M each as a base. Lee, Kotchman, Snell, and Aardsma go and the Budget sits at $92M which still gives them $3M to spend for 2011 if the M's don't reduce the budget again. You still have Lopez at $4.5M and Wilson at $5M which could be traded to free up some additional money during 2011. This is why I think its so important to see what Zduriencik can get done by the July 31 deadline. Or in August. It could eliminate a lot of guess work. |
| 65. By: rjfrik on 07-24-2010 01:41:47 On a brighter note the Safeco 9 lost another one today and now are only 4.5 games out of the Rendon sweepstakes. Meanwhile the Orioles had one of their best players return off the DL, Roberts and returned to their winning ways. On another note the M's have scored the fewest runs in the bigs and by a pretty good margin. I know the Mods here think there isn't a chance in hell we get Rendon, but I think to the contrary. After looking at the schedule I only see 12-14 more wins tops for this team. That would put us at 49-51 wins. I honestly think that could land the number one pick. Let's go M's, tank, tank, tank. |
| 66. By: Lailoken on 07-24-2010 04:30:22 Uncle Al, I just cannot envision Lopez in a Mariner uniform next season. That money & playing time would be better spent elsewhere. Ideally Wilson would retire too & free up money. I doubt another dream scenario like Johjima going back to Japan happens again though any time too soon. rjfrik, Felix & Vargas could go a long ways toward those 12-14 wins by themselves with minimal support. In 11 games is the 2/3rd point. If we lose 7 of the next 11 we'll be 41-67 & on pace for 100 losses. To avoid 100 losses the Orioles would have to go 32 & 34 the rest of the way. I just don't know how realistic the M's finishing last is, especially with the Pirates & Diamondbacks in the thick of that race too. All of those teams are going to shed some pieces too before & after the trade deadline. Either way, a great player will be available in the top five. Gerit Cole would make for a worthy consolation prize. |
| 67. By: dawgncarolina on 07-24-2010 06:02:43 49-51 wins would absolutely land the top pick. It would probably simultaneously kill the fanbase. I'd love the top pick, but at the price of over 110 losses? Wow. |
| 68. By: Uncle Al on 07-24-2010 07:04:25 Lailoken I don't want Lopez here next year either but the M's don't have any trade chips that have any worth except for maybe Aardsma. I don't see Bradley, Figgins, Lopez, or Wilson bringing back much of anything presently. Zduriencik is a smart guy and might get something done by July 31 or August but he doesn't have much to work with and he won't blow up the farm system just for 2011. Zduriencik is a master at getting something back on whatever he has to trade as he treats all of them like trade chips. Getting something for Hannahan was a good move and eliminated a useless part now. Bavasi would have just DFA'd him. |
| 69. By: rjfrik on 07-24-2010 12:45:28 Well what I see is we have 65 games left. 52 of those games are against teams with winning percentages, 13 aren't. Out of the 13 games against "bad" teams we play 6 at home, a three game set against KC and a three game set against CLE. Both of those teams are better then us, especially Cleveland, now that they have their guys back from the DL. Our other series is a three game set against BAL at their place. it doesn't seem too promising from my perspective to win more then 12-14 games. We have been averaging 2 wins per every 10 games over the last month. So if we stick with that number (I see no reason why that number won't hold true), then it puts us at 13 more wins. You can plus or minus a win or two, but the bottom line is this team is going to lose a lot more then 100 games, I think they lose 110. |
| 70. By: mauricewilliamsiii on 07-24-2010 12:53:16 I really hope the M's don't lose that many games. But even if they pick second who is to say that Rendon gets picked first. The Orioles need impact arms a lot more than they need another young bat. And how about Pineda last night. I'm starting to think they should just leave him down in Tacoma and help them in their playoff quest. I don't think any young player should be poisoned by that atmosphere other than the guys who are part of it already. |
| 71. By: The Great Pumpkin on 07-24-2010 14:56:30 Jason - you mentioned over on the 4 letter that the M's migt get in on Grienke is he becomes available. Do we have the prospects to get it done? If they're after near-ready or young pitching than Pineda probably would make a nice headline piece of the trade, right? |
| 72. By: JohnMcD on 07-24-2010 15:21:51 I highly doubt we could land Greinke. The Yankees offer of Hughes and Montero or the rangers giving up Martin Perez. I just don't see us even getting close to a package like that. |
| 73. By: rjfrik on 07-24-2010 15:46:24 I hear ya maurice. But its always a bad idea to draft need over best available, although some teams at the top have been known to do it. I think if Baltimore lands the first pick the onus will be to select the best player available. They need some excitement there. Especially since their neighbors to the south landed Strasburg and Harper in back to back drafts. The tide is turning in the east bay and it's not turning Orange. |
| 74. By: Edman on 07-24-2010 17:46:11 How any fan could root for the M's to lose, for any reason, is beyond me. I get the draft pick thing, but you can't market that out of next year's draft. |
| 75. By: Requiem on 07-24-2010 18:03:48 Rendon would be great, other than the fact that he shattered his ankle. Plenty of time to heel, but that is twice over the span of several ears where he has had issues with that. |
| 76. By: rjfrik on 07-24-2010 21:18:07 I understand your thinking Edman. And we have beaten this topic to death you and me. But you know my line of thinking, without a lottery system in place, I advocate losing if it means acquiring a great talent. I don't think any fan of the M's would NOT want Stephen Strasburg as the second pitcher behind Felix. If I was the GM and I had the number one secured with a series to go, I pull the goalie, so to speak. I know it doesn't work like that in baseball, but sooner or later some GM will think along those lines and if that GM was Bavasi we would have Strasburg right now. About losing this year. All I'm saying is that it's inevitable. The roster is what it is and it's not going to get any better. We can all dream and hope we turn it around all we want or we can live in reality. This offense is dead last in runs scored by more then 20 runs vs the next team. Felix and Vargas could have 2.00 ERA's from here on out, but still lose because this offense is lucky to score 2 runs a game. No matter how great your pitching and defense is, you have to have some offense or you will not win a game. The 2010 Seattle Mariners unfortunately have no offense. I will worry about draft order when there is 2 weeks left to play, that's when it gets fun. All I was doing was stating the obvious. And yes, I know you don't disagree, this is just one of those things we agree to disagree on. |
| 77. By: brockfs1 on 07-24-2010 22:06:21 The Mariners are dead last in every offensive category except OBP(Houston) there is absolutely no hope! therefore im all for going for the 1st pick!!! |
| 78. By: Slack on 07-24-2010 23:00:07 I don't care about the #1 pick in next years draft. I just want the M's to win as many games as they can and pick the best player availible. |
| 79. By: Adam T on 07-24-2010 23:53:16 While there is nothing wrong with a fan hoping his team gets the #1 pick, it also depends on who is available with that pick. Rendon isn't Strasburg, and this draft class is pretty good and deep, so it really isn't a bad thing if the Mariners end up with the 5th pick or something. |
| 80. By: mymrbig on 07-25-2010 00:40:39 Rendon isn't Strasburg? Well duh. But he's probably the best, most complete college hitter since 2005 (or earlier, unless you are a big Weiters fan and he was in 2007). Assuming his ankle heals and he takes another small step forward offensively, he could be the best or 2nd best (after Strasburg) player from the 2007-2011 drafts (5 drafts). And given pitcher injury risks and price tags, there is at least some argument for maybe taking him in front of Strasburg if they were in the same draft coming out of college. |
| 81. By: Edman on 07-25-2010 02:20:31 mymrbig, see Gordon, Alex, Kansas City Royals. There are a guys who get a tag. I still think Alex will be a good player, but complete, doesn't make the best. |
| 82. By: marinerforever on 07-25-2010 03:38:02 personally i would not be interested in trading for grenkie. take too much and i have no want to trade pineda. and as far as trading vargas it doesn't seem to make much sense i am sure you can lock him up to a resonable extention for his arb years. and if you trade vargas you are severally limiting your pitching depth you need pitchers not named felix to pitch and pitch well you could make a case for trading him following the 2011 season when pineda will be redy to take over the slot behind felix. while u should never route for your team to lose it is hard to see the mariners not losing 100 games this year. since after the 31st they should be seeing what they have in some players moore should be the starting catcher for the rest of the year now is as good of time to see what you have in mangani tui halman if feilds can say healthy he should be here to along with lueke so with all the auditions that should go on the last two months it is hard to see us winning more than low 60 for the year |
| 83. By: Juan Valdez on 07-25-2010 04:38:12 Anyone keeping up with how much Justin Smoak's numbers have tanked since the trade? I realize it's small sample and all, but it's like he's forgotten how to take a walk. |
| 84. By: Lamda on 07-25-2010 05:19:29 interesting range of comments - a few thoughts in response: no way we are in on Lee this offseason unless the market just tanks on him. You all listened to Z's press conference, for him the idea of keeping Lee ended when he or his agent put out some rough parameters for what they thought his extension/deal should be. By Z's reaction, it was well outside what he was willing to do and again, unless the market for him somehow really tanks, I can't see us getting involved. Hell no to Lopez next year - i'd be surprised if he's on the team by Aug 1st but if he is, no way we keep him. Figgins would go to 3B and Josh Wilson can man 2B for 2 months or so until they can call up Ackley while still maintaining the max services years. They will need a filler for that time - no point in trading for someone or wasting payroll when a cheap/decent option is available in Wilson. You absolutely trade Pineda to the Royals for Greinke if him and a few mid/low level guys will get it done. It obviously won't though as they'd probably want Pineda/Ackley and then some to get the deal done. But you'd be a complete fool to not trade a promising prospect for a guy who's already dominant and at the top of his game. Some fans get too caught up in the idea of a prospect and somehow get delusioned into thinking he's more important than a guy who's still young and in his prime pitching years. If we got Greinke now we'd be getting him at his peak and he'd stay that way for another 5 years atleast. There is no guarantee Pineda turns into anything. I say we trade Saunders this offseason and bring in a legit power hitting LFer. With little-offense Figgins as our 3B, a young guy at 2B who will take a bit of time to develop, probably a defensive player at SS cause that's Z's MO, we'll have to have some kind of power in LF and we simply can't wait for Saunders to develop into that if he ever will. just my 2cents. |
| 85. By: VikingArthur on 07-25-2010 05:34:06 Lamda, There is no chance the Mariners can contend in 2011. Too many bad contracts, too many below average players. In 2011, Saunders needs 500+ ABs period. If he can't hit...then you figure it out from there but the idea that you are going to get some decent LF out on the market without paying stupid (Jason Bay) money is silly. Getting Greinke makes NO sense. We had CLIFF LEE this year and look where we are...nowhere and Lee is better than Greinke. Without a lineup that can score you could line up five Felix's or Lee's and you still are not a real contender. Ackley, Pineda, Saunders, Moore and maybe one more guys (Halman, etc) need to the maximum number of games next year. Anything else would be Bavasi like. |
| 86. By: VikingArthur on 07-25-2010 05:36:17 If you can get quality prospects, young MLB talent for anyone on our roster not named Felix, you do it...yesterday. Franklin? Ship him out. Ichiro (pipe dream)? Gone. |
| 87. By: mymrbig on 07-25-2010 09:31:15 #81 - I'm pretty sure Rendon is considered a better prospect then Gordon was back in 2005. Gordon had some defensive concerns at 3rd (Rendon is considered a great defender). There were also concerns about Gordon's ability to hit LHP. Rendon's college numbers also look better than Gordon's so far (though obviously competition and park factors have strong implications in college. Gordon hit 44 HR in college (3 seasons). Rendon has 46 (2 seasons). Gordon 2003: .319/.426/.495 Rendon 2009: .388/.461/.702 Gordon 2004: .365/.493/.754 Rendon 2010: .394/.530/.801 Gordon 2005: .372/.518/.715 Rendon 2011: ???/???/??? Look, I'm not saying the M's should purposefully tank, because teams just don't do that (even if they should). The draft is still far off and lots can change. But I won't be sad if the M's do tank. While anywhere in the top 4 or 5 picks will yield a good talent, historically the #1 overall pick is a much better lock then the #2 overall pick, and the drop-off after that is pretty steep. |
| 88. By: Jerry on 07-25-2010 09:35:46 Greinke would be great, obviously. But think about how much that would cost. Greinke is about as good as Felix. Think about what type of package it would take to get Felix from us. Then, consider that the Royals have him signed to a team friendly contract. He'll make 13.5 mil/year the next two years. For a guy that good, that is a relative bargain without a long commitment. That contract probably makes him more valuable than Felix. Perhaps the Royals would deal him for less than he's worth. That organization definitely has made some stupid moves in the past. But every team in baseball would love to have a guy like Greinke. The Royals are finally starting to get good. They have one of the best farm systems in baseball, and a lot of young talent in the upper levels of their farm system. They are a club that could start winning in the next two years. Moving Greinke would just delay that process. If they are still sucking at this time next year, I could see them shopping him. But now seems premature. If I were running that club, I wouldn't deal him unless the return was just overwhelming. They have the luxury of holding on to him and still netting a HUGE return at the deadline next season or during the 2011-2012 offseason. Why move him now? I agree with VikingArthur. The M's need to keep developing talent internally. They should be moving minor pieces like Aardsma, Lopez, Wilson and perhaps Vargas, and giving Smoak, Saunders, Moore, Pineda, and Ackley a chance to develop into core guys. Those guys are the future. To get Greinke, you'd have to give up a few of those guys, plus lower level prospects like Franklin. Now is the worst time for them to consider gutting the system to trade for a starting pitcher. |
| 89. By: DKulich44 on 07-25-2010 09:37:12 Lamda, While I agree for the most part with most of your statements, I disagree trading Saunders for a legit power hitting LF would be the right thing to do. What do you consider legit? Saunders in on pace for about 30 homers pro rated to 600 AB this season, he's starting to hit lefties a little (evidenced by hitting perhaps the best in the planet last night) and he plays a great LF with a decent arm. There's not many players out there that will be under team control for as long as him and as good as him that he would bring back in a trade. As for Smoak tanking, I think we need to lay off him a little bit, and stop calling this trade a bust. It's been less than a month. Never in his wildest dreams did Smoak thing he'd have to not only adjust to hitting Major League pitching at 23, but also adjust to completely moving away from the organization, players, coaches, etc that he's been around for his entire career. Imagine being that old and having to leave the place you are and be asked to compete at the highest level. It's not easy, especially when the team you're going to is not very good. Give the kid some time, he's still headed toward being an elite switch hitting power bat that should theoretically sit in the middle of our lineup for a long long time. |
| 90. By: DKulich44 on 07-25-2010 10:12:41 Sorry forgot to note the second part of that was to Juan, not Lamda. |
| 91. By: Juan Valdez on 07-25-2010 15:59:52 I don't think the trade was a bust at all. It's way too early for that kind of judgment. But, I have to admit, the extreme nature of the drop-off is a concern. |
| 92. By: Ungnome on 07-25-2010 16:19:36 As the Mariners stand right now what is their window for being competitive? It is certainly not 2011 or 2012 and unless this team can improve, 2013 looks weak too. All player transactions have to be made with an eye towards when the Mariners will be competitive with hope of that being 2013. There are a couple posts about upgrading LF by trading Saunders. By 2013 Saunders will be an 825+ OPS LF. Why would anyone want to trade that? Ackley, Smoak, Guti, Saunders, Moore is the core of this offense. All will be playing in 2013 making major contributions. Figgins and Ichiro (will get extended) are on that roster too. So A SS and DH is all that is left open? That is a great position to be in. Youth and tons of potential production from that core will propel this team to possible contention. But an even bigger question for me is the pitching. Felix is King. Vargas is solidifying himself as a solid #3 in this rotation. Behind Felix and Vargas the rotation is young and needs time to develop. The future rotation would be an even bigger problem without Vargas in it. The M's may not expect to win in 2011 but that doesnt mean you get rid of pieces that can help in 2012 and beyond. Vargas is now a building block and a future trade chip. As Marinersforever said, someone besides Felix has to pitch. 2013 continues to look weak even with all our young players stepping up because the Mariners do not have a pitching staff that will be ready by 2013. Felix, Vargas, Pineda, Paxton, Beaven/Fister is not scary. In 2015 this rotation looks good, 2013 not so much. Some FA signings have to happen for this team to be truly competitive in 2013 and beyond. Signing a top end pitcher would take pressure off of Vargas and Pineda to become a #2 starter by 2013. There is no indication that Vargas will become that good and it would be foolish to believe that Pineda or anyone in our system could become that starter in merely 2 years of service time. I believe the mariners need to be active in free agency picking up another mid-top rotation starter and a big DH to be contending in 2013 and beyond. |
| 93. By: mauricewilliamsiii on 07-25-2010 16:21:11 I'd lay off any young player on this team right now. There are serious clubhouse problems amongst veterans like Branyan, Figgins and Lopez. All have been an embarassment for different reasons. These kids are just trying to make it through this season with there heads down and doing the best they can. I say leave them alone, let them play, and the rewards will be worth it in years to come. |
| 94. By: Chris Crawford on 07-25-2010 16:43:35 The rumor page has been updated -- some interesting stuff. |
| 95. By: marinerforever on 07-25-2010 17:50:59 wow seems like the angels got haren for fairly cheap seems like a vargas beaven league would have gotten haren that is a deal i would have done |
| 96. By: safecochatter on 07-25-2010 18:09:03 Dbacks are saying ptbnl is a "big" part of the deal. |
| 97. By: brockfs1 on 07-25-2010 18:28:07 Jason or CC, Is it possible the PTBNL is Mike Trout? I hope it is that kid has all the tools to be a star!!! |
| 98. By: VikingArthur on 07-25-2010 18:40:07 Ung... Saunders 825+ ops by 2013? I am going to say he is going to be close to that this year by the end of the year. That is an awful low bar for a corner infielder and I believe an underestimation of his skill set. |
| 99. By: VikingArthur on 07-25-2010 18:46:09 Marinerforever...why on Earth would want Haren? He won't help us in 2011 or 2012. Vargas, Beaven, League would not have been close to getting that deal done. The reality is that this team can have Felix and develop four starters to put around him. Look at Fister and Vargas, middle shelf pitching talent can be fine here. We need hitters, hitters, hitters. We can always go grab a league average starter and he'll look like a star here. |
| 100. By: Adam T on 07-25-2010 18:50:15 brock - Trout is NOT the player to be named. It could be Skaggs or Conger. |
| 101. By: ASUBoyd on 07-25-2010 18:52:08 If it was Conger he would have been named.. Skaggs signed on August 7 last year, so they would need to wait to trade him; which would make sense if he was the player. |
| 102. By: Adam T on 07-25-2010 18:55:41 From what I've read there is a list of players who could be the PTBNL. All we know is that it is not Trout. All that said, I think the Angels got a steal. Perhaps DiPoto will send Drew over here for a PTBNL. |
| 103. By: littlelinny6 on 07-25-2010 19:25:42 Yeah I second that Adam T, given the low rate of return for a bonafide ace in Haren, Stephen Drew should not cost a huge amount and SS is not a place the M's have anyone in the system within 3 or 4 years of stepping foot in Safeco. Hopefully Z is "kicking the tires" on some type of Stephen Drew deal. |
| 104. By: ASUBoyd on 07-25-2010 19:41:40 Yeah, regardless - a good deal for the Angels. Haren will also likely be a type A free agent when the time comes too. |
| 105. By: Ungnome on 07-25-2010 19:46:58 VikingArthur, Only 33 players in AL have an OPS over 800. Saunders 825 OPS may be low thats why I said 825+ :). Felix and 4 average starters will not get it done. Where you gonna put these bats? Realisticly, this team only has one spot open at DH. A bat is developing at most power positions. The M's only have one move at DH cuz they cant wait to develop someone (no prospect close to majors who can adequately fill the spot). The Mariners future rotation is far weaker than the lineup. Improve the rotation before the offense. Angels did steal it depending on this ptbnl. Seems to me Haren is undervalued anyway. |
| 106. By: marinerforever on 07-25-2010 20:01:50 Viking Arthur have u looked at wht they got for haren joe saunders who is barely a 4starter they got an erratic reliever and a starter that projects like beaven it was an absoulte steal if the ptbnl is not trout then the dbacks gave away haren to rid themslefs of the contract they will be horrible forever hell maybe we can raid the dbacks for drew maybe a headline package of truinfel |
| 107. By: Blowgun7 on 07-25-2010 20:15:45 Man that is really frustrating. Angels were looking like an older team with not a great system to fill in the pieces going forward. Now they just got Dan Haren for a bunch of garbage. |
| 108. By: Edman on 07-25-2010 22:22:09 Blogun, while I tend to agree, until the ptbnl is named, we're not going to understand the full impact of what the Diamondbacks got. I've never been a fan of "more pieces" trades. I'd rather have a couple really good pieces, that a bunch of speculation. |
| 109. By: Slurve on 07-25-2010 23:59:59 He traded Haren for winning percentage HA! I wonder what Jose Lopez could get... He hit 25 HR a year ago and played with Ken Griffey Jr! |
| 110. By: VikingArthur on 07-26-2010 02:17:49 Oh..obviously Arizona didn't get that much for Haren. That said... Haren was in the NL, his numbers won't be so pretty in the AL. If the PTBNL later is a top shelf prospect then it's not so lopsided. I was just making the point that Haren would not make sense for us. Bold Prediction Alert: Saunders ends up at .825 OPS this year. I think he is a consistent .825-.875 from next year forward. |
| 111. By: brockfs1 on 07-26-2010 02:26:05 according to sources the ptbnl is P Tyler Skaggs... #8 angels prospect by keith law |
| 112. By: Edman on 07-26-2010 11:43:22 Based on what it appears that the D-backs got in exchange for Haren, it makes you appreciate just how good Jack is. Jack knows how to play a hand to make sure that he's got a good chance of coming out ahead. With prospects, nobody knows how it will turn out. But, the Lee trade appears to be a big leap forward for the future. |
| 113. By: randallball on 07-26-2010 11:49:10 Saunders is already exactly .825 OPS vs RHP this season. He is improving in leaps and bounds vs LHP right now, too. Saunders would also rank top 7 in P/PA if he had enough AB to qualify. He really is turning into something special. |
| 114. By: StandinPat on 07-26-2010 12:12:33 Saunders is actually at .816 vs RHP this year, over 117 ab. I think it's a bit early to say he is already an .825 OPS bat. He is however starting to become a real asset. I don't know that his average will ever be in the .280-.300 range, but the patience/power package along with his stellar defense and league minimum salary make him an excellent building block for the future. I'm not too concerned with his overall line at the end of the year as much as I am just seeing the continuing improvement and trends. Strikeouts are slowly coming down, walks are continuing to go up, ISO right around .200 and he has been better each and every month May 220/273/413 June 215/271/492 July 292/414/396 It'll be interesting to see if his numbers continue to improve over the last two months, but if he does seem to be a legit .800+ OPS bat for 2011, coupled with his outstanding defense, thats one less gaping hole for the M's to fill. |
| 115. By: rjfrik on 07-26-2010 14:05:23 For anyone posting that thinks the Angels didn't steal Haren away from the Dbacks for chump change must be out of their minds. If the reported deal for the player to be named is legit then I'm actually a little disappointed we didn't throw our hat in the mix with Vargas, two crappy minor league arms and Beavens or Robles, that would of been the same package that the Dbacks obtained except Vargas is a better pitcher then Saunders and is cheaper. For those arguing that Haren isn't worth that lot. He leads the NL in SO's, his home ball park home run factor played a significant role in his inflated ERA and so did his astronomical .350 BABIP. There isn't an ace in the league that would have an ERA under 3.00 with that unlucky balls in play number. For those saying that he's in the NL and his line will get inflated once he's in the AL. Think again. His career ERA and WHIP against the AL are 3.71 and 1.20, while his career ERA and WHIP against the NL are 3.71 and 1.19. Don't forget this kid started in the AL and did just fine thank you very much. The bottom line is he has been extremely unlucky this year due to a horrible bullpen and an inflated BABIP. He is extremely undervalued and was sold at a his bottom value (a horrible move by the dbacks). It really sucks that the Angels got him. He would of dominated in Safeco where the balls stay in the yard and the defense backs him up. Felix Haren Pineda Would of been a hell of a three some for the next three years. Oh well, moving on |
| 116. By: randallball on 07-26-2010 14:09:23 Ah, I see...Saunders .825 OPS vs right handed STARTING pitchers. 2-8 off RHRP. My mistake. |
| 117. By: Edman on 07-26-2010 15:07:36 rj, again with the assumptions. Even though Jason said as much, that the M's are rumored to have been talking to the D-backs about Haren, you concluded that they didn't make an effort to get him. Seattle could have offered the same package you mentioned above, and they did not agree with your position. Nobody knows. But knowing Jack's style, I am sure he was somewhere where his voice could be heard. Because the M's didn't end up with him, doesn't mean they didn't try. All players who do not end up in Seattle, are not necessarily missing for a lack of effort. |
| 118. By: Mackie on 07-26-2010 15:27:46 Re. Edman's comment in #112, I have to agree. I look forward to seeing Saunders and Smoak in the lineup together in 2012, along with Ackley somewhere in the order and with Felix and Pineda in the rotation. It seems a very good nucleus is being developed for successful times in Seattle. I think that for too many people the current Mariners W-L record is a distractor from how nicely the minors are being rebuilt, which in turn will help rebuild the ballclub into a consistent winner. All kinds of good things are happening in the Mariners' minor league system right now, and by 2012 Zduriencik will have another couple of drafts under his belt. This is fun to watch! |
| 119. By: Ungnome on 07-26-2010 15:43:06 While Haren would have been an upgrade over anyone not named Felix in the Mariners rotation would Haren really have been that useful to the M's going forward? Regardless of the package that the Dbacks received, if 2011 and 2012 are years to continue the rebuilding process then what good is it to get a pitcher that will make a bunch of money in 2011/12 and be a free agent when the M's are ready to compete in 2013 and beyond? Secondly, yea Felix, Haren, Pineda looks good in 2014. Pineda wont be GOOD until 2013 at the earliest. To assume that he will be anything above average in his first two years is foolish. |
| 120. By: rjfrik on 07-26-2010 16:27:44 Haren is under team control until 2013, with 13 being a team option that I'm sure will be picked up. Also he is a type A FA, see Cliff Lee on what type of bargaining chip that is for JZ, if we decided to dump him at the deadline in say, 2013. Edman. Maybe JZ did try to grab him, but didn't offer the package I stated above. Maybe JZ didn't see the value in Haren and thinks Vargas, minor league fodder and pitching prospect like Beavens and Robles wasn't worth it. Or maybe the front office squashed any deal that would bring on more money (most likely scenario in my opinion). I don't know but the package I stated is superior to the one Arizona got. The bottom line is the Angels stole a front line pitcher for a bag of peanuts. Haren, Weaver, Pinero, Santana, Kazmir (?) makes for a pretty nice rotation for the next few years. You can subtract about 3 wins from the M's 2011 and 2012 schedules because of this move. |
| 121. By: Lamda on 07-26-2010 17:20:13 I'm not so sure we can write-off 2011 nor should we and you can bet Z won't. Some of you guys on here are a bit funny. I know this is 90% a prospect site but the way some of you want to mail-in next year and even the year after that to sit there and say by 2013 or 14 we'll be hitting our stride - is just not remotely the smart thing to do. I say trade Saunders, very real possibility, cause I don't think Z's sold on him. He's not one of his guys and as others have noted, he's gone out of his way sometimes to dump bavasi's guys and bring in his own. We could also conceivably up our payroll this year to 120mill with the understanding that the following year, 15mill comes off the books so it would drop back down to 105 which would only be an increase of 5-10mill of what we got now. I say we shouldn't mail-in 2011 because if you do what I was suggesting - get a LF to come in and hit 25hrs or more - then our offense wouldn't look so bad. You'd have ichiro, figgins(assume he reverts back to .300 hitter and doesn't have the beltre sydrome), 25-hr LF'er, Branyan, Smoak, Gutz - that first 6 would be pretty good. Branyan/LF'er would hit 25-30 hr's each, and smoak/gutz should hit 20 each - i'm assuming Smoak has a year next year of 20/80 type in his progression and Gutz as well. That would be a pretty good lineup, finally. Our bottom 3 would be wilson, wilson/ackley, moore which would not be stellar next year but sufficient. You'd have enough offense in the first 6 to carry the team. All you got to do to get that is get that LF'er and re-up Branyan. Overall point is that we simply can't forget about the next 2-3 seasons while we wait for smoak/saunders/pineda/ackley, etc to develop into stars and then decide - ok we're ready to try for the playoffs now. The thing is, the only positions we could really look to upgrade would be LF, DH, and C. Figgins/Ackley will take 3B/2B. Smoak is 1B. Problem with upgrading SS is there are very few SS's that can actually hit. I think Arod delusioned a lot of fans into thinking we outta have a SS that is a run producer. Very, very few of them are and those that can are way overpriced. Wilson is stud SS defender which is fine. LF is still a question mark and a place that can be upgraded if you don't want to wait and see if Saunders develops into what some think he can be. Some of you are acting like he's a can't-miss type player. I ask you what type of glasses you wear cause i'd like to get a pair as well, lol. He's so far from a can't-miss type guy. He's still a huge question mark. Hey may never really amount to much more than a 15/75 type guy and with the players we got - we can't have that. DH - well why not pay Branyan 5mill to hit 30hr's a year. You won't get a guy like him anywhere else. C - very few of them hit as well just like SS and again, those that do cost a friggin ton. LF is sadly just the easiest place for us to upgrade this winter which is why I won't be surprised at all if Saunders is traded this offseason. end of book. |
| 122. By: StandinPat on 07-26-2010 18:14:39 "Pineda wont be GOOD until 2013 at the earliest. To assume that he will be anything above average in his first two years is foolish." God I loathe statements like this. No reasoning, no backing up, no examples or inference why, just that he won't be good until 2013 at the earliest? News flash, Pineda might be an above average pitcher RIGHT NOW. He continues to show improvement every start, sat, not touched, but sat 97 with movement, is throwing his slider more and more and getting swinging strikes with it, is still keeping his walks down, while trending as a ground-ball pitcher. Sure he still has things to work on, and is far from reaching his potential, but that's because his potential is as a legit No 2, with an outside shot to be a No 1. I think Pineda could easily be an average to slightly above pitcher in 2011, with a chance to be even more. |
| 123. By: StandinPat on 07-26-2010 18:26:08 And Lamda, who is this 25hr/yr LF'er, that we can simply go get, that you speak of? Payroll might not increase and other teams might not make that type of player available. Also what exactly does trading Saunders for said Lf'er gain you? He's hit 8 HR in 154 AB, which if he kept that pace would push him OVER 25 HR in a full season. Couple that with the fact that he is a plus defender, despite whatever Geoff Baker spits up on his blog, and he could be an extremely valuable part of the M's rebuilding process. Sure he's far from being a star, or even a really good regular, but don't discount the fact he has shown a ton of improvement over the course of the year and maybe be turning himself into a dirt cheap solid contributor. Something that is quite valuable in today's game. |
| 124. By: rjfrik on 07-26-2010 18:48:32 Pat beat me to it. Saunders as of right now projects to a 25 home run guy. As Pat said, he plays great defense, he has started to hit lefties and cut down on his SO's. He needs another year, but this is an Adam Lind type bat that we are sitting on. No reason to go grab someone else. And Pineda, I mean come on, aren't people watching/following him down in AAA? Because if you are then you would never state that he won't be ready by 2013. He will be in the majors next year and in my opinion be very good in 2012. His last time out he struck out 11 batters in a row. 11!!!! In five innings no less. And he didn't just do it with a fast ball that sat at 97 the whole game, some times touching 100. He did it with his slider and changeup. This kid is going to be great. |
| 125. By: Edman on 07-26-2010 19:03:36 Going to be great, rj, not isn't. What were the expectations of Felix, right out of the gate. Some were foaming that he'd win the Cy Young right away. I'm happy for how he's progressed, but many didn't want to accept that it would take some learning at the major league level. And, Felix was a better prospect than Pineda. Prior to last season, there were many (some here) who pondered trading Felix, because he wasn't living up to expectations. Early on in his career, I tried to temper people down a bit, trying to get them to realize there is a learning process involved, with most pitchers. I believe Pineda will be very good, to possibly great. But, it does take some time to get there. Don't believe me? What were the now legendary (via a bad trade by Seattle) Chris Tillman when he was in the minors? How's he doing in his first year so far? We all hope he'll be great from the start, but that's not generally what happens. There's every reason to be excited. Do him a favor, and grant him the right to learn, and lower your expectations until he proves himself. |
| 126. By: Edman on 07-26-2010 19:15:48 On another topic.....it looks like Seattle has signed eighth round pick, outfielder Jabari Brash. Ya gotta love the name if nothing else. OK, back to the regularly scheduled debate. |
| 127. By: VikingArthur on 07-26-2010 20:19:30 Lamda, I am curious who this 25 hr LF fielder is who we can just go get? In free agency? And pay 10-12 million for multiple years? Jason Bay? Disastrous signing and I am sure you were one of the people clamoring for that. Saunders is going to be league average or a bit above NEXT YEAR for the MLB minimum. Trying to stopgap is Bavasism. Branyan? You are projecting him? He is one swing from being done for. If Saunders, Ackley and Moore don't get 400+ ABs next year we are blowing it. Pineda will be a #3 starter quality pitcher next year, heck he is now. Doug Fister is "above average" right now playing here. I feel pretty good about the SP core of Felix, Pineda, Fister, Vargas... I say wait for 2012 and go pick a #2-3 SP up then when you are ready to actually compete. Make 2011 an audition for the future and start RIGHT NOW. Cut Bradley, trade Branyan and dump Lopez for a nice bag of balls. |
| 128. By: Ungnome on 07-26-2010 20:39:14 Pat, While you may loathe statements that have no real facts in them you supplied a few of your own. Dominating AAA does not a #2 starter make. As you state about Pineda, "Sure he still has things to work on, and is far from reaching his potential." Far from reaching his potential means what exactly? How far is far? 2 weeks or 2 years? I said he would reach that potential roughly 2 years after making the majors. The point is that it takes a few years of ML service time before a player, ANY player, reaches their potential. I will happily eat my words for being wrong BUT for anyone to believe that Pineda will come up and be a legit #2 in 2011/12 is a fool. |
| 129. By: Lamda on 07-26-2010 20:44:29 well that line of thinking doesn't get you anywhere. Any player, during any game is one swing/catch/dive/play away from being done for good. As per who - thats for Z to figure out and you can be sure that LF is a position he's going to be looking at this offseason. As I said, its one of only 2-3 positions we could make any move at offensively this offseason. I'm not trying to knock Saunders by any stretch, i'm simply saying he's no guaranteed thing right now and LF is really the only power position we could upgrade this offseason - that and DH. Forget about spending a chunk of change on a C or SS - you way overpay for a guy that at best hits what an average OF'er could do. As for Pineda - he won't start the season in our rotation - hope some of you grasp and understand it. He'll be brought up the same day Ackley will be for the same reasons. Also, to say he won't be a good/great pitcher till 2013 is a logical statement. It basically shows a complete lack of basic intelligence to assume he comes in and starts dominating like some of you think he will. As the poster above said - he'll have his growing pains. It took felix basically 3 years to become what he is today - a dominant/team leading-type pitcher. It usually takes pitchers 2-3 years to do this. I'm not sure how Pineda is supposed to bypass this natural growth period but you guys seem to think he will. Even Jason suggests he needs another pitch or so to have success at the MLB level longterm. |
| 130. By: rjfrik on 07-26-2010 21:17:17 About Saunders. He might be, as of right now, the 2nd best hitter on the team. At least the numbers and productivity points to that over the last month. About Pineda. Yes some guys don't pan out their first year up but some guys do. Look at the rookies in the bigs this year, many are holding their own. Tillman obviously isn't one of them. Does this mean Pineda comes in and is immediately a star? No, but when he is brought up he will be, in my opinion just as valuable as Fister and Vargas. His stuff is superior by far. About the Tillman comparison, in my opinion, Pineda has way better stuff. I've seen both pitch live and Pineda had better stuff in my opinion. I thought Tillman was good but not the ace everyone expected him to be. Lamda, the suggestion of the other pitch for Pineda has been brought up and it is generally agreed upon that pitch is his changeup. It's not like he has to learn a new pitch, he just needs to develop the changeup more. Well all reports out of Tacoma are saying he has done just that. His changeup has looked great since he's been called up. He never really had to use down in AA. With better hitters he now has to use is and has been using it effectively. The jury is still out, but there is a very good argument that Pineda is our best prospect in the system. |
| 131. By: StandinPat on 07-26-2010 21:23:03 Ed, That's not quite the sentiment that was trying to be conveyed. Even before Felix was great, he was very good. Nobody is saying Pineda will come in and be the beast some think he will eventually become, but that doesn't mean he can't be solid even before he hits his stride. Also, the Tillman comparison isn't quite valid, but really most young pitchers wouldn't be a fair comp. The thing that really differentiates Pineda, is that he repeats his delivery very consistently. This allows him to keep his command and pound the zone with his plus fastball, and with that alone he has a chance to basically be Fister with more velocity. Ung, You stated that "Pineda wont be GOOD until 2013 at the earliest" then backed that up with no reasoning or explanation whatsoever. I disputed this, stating his fastball, improving slider, his ability to generate swinging strikes, groundballs, avoid walks, and his improvement start to start. I guess 6 things could be considered only a few, but compared to ZERO, it's quite a bit. "I said he would reach that potential roughly 2 years after making the majors." What does that have to do with him being above average or even good? If his potential is as a No 2, why does he have to reach that to be useful? If he becomes a solid 3/4 before that isn't that pretty good? "BUT for anyone to believe that Pineda will come up and be a legit #2 in 2011/12 is a fool." Again, Nobody said he'd come up and be a No 2, so I'm really not sure what your point in this statement could possibly be. Lamda, Same as above. Nobody is saying Pineda will come up and somehow magically be at his peak level of performance. I'm really at a loss as to why some of you keep responding as if this is what people are saying. Is Smoak, Saunders, Ackley, Felix, Guti, hell any young player gonna just be complete crap until they peak? Hell no, they may have varying degrees of value or performance before they get to that level, but that in no way makes them "not good" until that time comes. I'd say Pineda has a very good chance of being a 4/5 type in 2011, with an outside chance of being a borderline 3. But he, just like Saunders, still has two freaking months to continue to develop and show improvement in the areas that will be keys to their future success. To me those that are foolish and the ones spouting off about how a player won't be this or that come next year, when they haven't even seen how said player will finish this year. |
| 132. By: Ungnome on 07-26-2010 21:50:11 Pat, I was arguing against the M's being one pitcher away from having a fantastic rotation in 2011. Rj at the bottom of post #115 implied as much. So, yeah. As far as stating facts, while I didnt state any is it not a general rule of thumb to expect a pitcher to reach their potential a few years after making the majors? With that assumption in place I said believing Pineda to reach that potential before 2013 is foolish. All that said, you and I agree. |
| 133. By: amm02008 on 07-26-2010 22:04:26 "The point is that it takes a few years of ML service time before a player, ANY player, reaches their potential." Just saying, that sounds like a FACT to me. I don't entirely disagree, maybe just add a qualifier next time. |
| 134. By: rjfrik on 07-26-2010 22:13:23 Ungnome. Did you actually read the post I wrote at 115? That post was about obtaining Haren. If you had Felix, Haren, Vargas, Pineda, Fister to fill out a rotation that would be a pretty good rotation. If you added a solid #3 to that group of guys then I think that group of 6 pitchers, could indeed, make a fantastic rotation. The key was obtaining Haren now. That obviously didn't happen. |
| 135. By: Ungnome on 07-26-2010 22:23:10 you listed all of 3 starters and which implies Pineda as a #3 which I do not believe he will be until 2013. |
| 136. By: SLOmariner on 07-27-2010 01:26:31 Felix Hernandez WAR by year courtesy of Fangraphs. 2005: 2.6 (in only 84 IP) 2006: 3.8 2007: 4.1 No, he didn't put up a superstar season until last year (6.9 WAR), but to Pat's point, he was very good. If you feel comfortable projecting a 2.5ish WAR with tons of upside for Pineda next year, he's a solid contributor on the 2011 pitching staff. 2.5 WAR is worth roughly $11 million. |
| 137. By: VikingArthur on 07-27-2010 06:06:37 #134 The point you are missing about getting Haren is that we had two of the top 5-6 SPs in the league THIS YEAR and were under .500. Is Haren even in Lee's class? No. You bring Haren here and we are under .500 again next year barring some sort of crazy statistically outlier. Why? WE CANNOT SCORE. We are dead last in every offensive category and there is no realistic way to change that for 2011. Period. |
| 138. By: baseballman on 07-27-2010 10:48:13 RE 137: stop with your horrid miss cleo interpretation...you dont know what you are talking about |
| 139. By: StandinPat on 07-27-2010 11:52:31 #137 The point you are missing is that you have absolutely no way of knowing that. You are assuming no realistic way of changing our offense and we haven't even seen the trade deadline, the last two months of the year, or the offseason yet. Yes the M's offense HAS been horrible this year, but how many of the culprits for this anemic offense will be back next year? SO far this year the Mariners have gotten league average or better production from only RF and LF. Next year they could easily see that list include CF, 1B, DH, 3B, 2B, along with considerably better offense from C. Will it be an average or better offense? That might be a stretch, but to say there is no chance for this offense to be better next year is absurd. |
| 140. By: rjfrik on 07-27-2010 13:00:41 #137 The Haren thing is about value. If it only cost you a back end starter, 2 crappy low A minor league arms and a AA arm to get Haren, why wouldn't you do it? It's not costing you anything and you just landed one of the top 10 pitchers in the game. You can then do what you want with him, start him, trade him, bench him, I don't give a rip, but if someone is giving away talent then you go to the front of the line and take it. Haren is/will be a type A FA as well. We have all seen what Jack can get by peddling a top of the rotation starter that is a type A FA, if we suck in 2012 and are out of it then ship him off. It's a moot point because he's an Angel, but you need to think about value, not the we cannot score logic, so we should never go get anybody good. That makes NO SENSE |
| 141. By: VikingArthur on 07-27-2010 14:08:08 Pat... So how do you propose we will get league average production out of 2b and 3b? Maybe Figgins is better next year, I am sure he will be but then are we going to go get someone to replace Lopez? Where are we going to get him from? CF? I hope you don't mean Franklin, I like him but to think he is going to be much more than a .270 15 HR guy is unrealistic. DH? Again...who? Point is that 2011 is not going to be pretty and we should all just wrap our arms around that. |
| 142. By: StandinPat on 07-27-2010 14:48:24 Arthur, Lopez will be gone, and at some point you'd prob be looking at Ackley at 2B. DH? Branyan, Bradley, some schmo in a trade? You do understand what league average means right? You are talking about .330 wOBA or roughly a .750 OPS. You don't think they could find a .750 OPS DH fairly easily? As far as Franklin goes, if he hits .270 w/ 15HR, he's a league average bat or better, so I have no idea what your point there is. "Point is that 2011 is not going to be pretty and we should all just wrap our arms around that" That's a completely different sentiment than "We are dead last in every offensive category and there is no realistic way to change that for 2011. Period." Sure 2011 is prob gonna be a tough year, but to assume there can't be any improvement or that this offense couldn't get markedly better next year is a ridiculous assumption considering we still have 2 months of development from some of the young guys, and some potential offseason moves. |
| 143. By: baseballman on 07-27-2010 15:33:58 No Arthur, the point is you dont have clue what the trade deadline or the offseason will bring...so you can wrap your arms around that. If Figgins turns back into Figgins, this offense is better. If Saunders keeps improving, this offense is better. If Smoak improves, this offense is better. If Guti can slide down the order a bit, this offense is better. Heck, if Moore is the fulltime C, this offense is better. They may not be world beaters yet, but you have no clue what Z has up his sleeve and moves will be made between now and ST in 2011, so stop acting like you do. |
| 144. By: Lailoken on 07-27-2010 16:35:53 baseballman, I'd add Bradley to your list. The 2011 offense may not turn out great but a heck of a sight better than this year is probable. Figgins & Bradley may be in their decline phase but this year is a big drop for both & chances are they bounce back. Ichiro scoring under a hundred runs is a shame that can be fixed. The template of Ichiro & Figgins on base a ton with a middle of the order capable of driving them in is still a viable plan. Can some combo of Smoak/Guti/Bradley/Saunders/Branyan/? do that next year? Yes. Perhaps not an above-average offense but enough to win more games with the pitching & defense on hand. In 2012 above-average might be applicable with more money to spend & the youngsters (Ackley too) getting adjusted. An upgrade in LF with Saunders as a main trade chip would speed up the curve too considering that DH is the only position in the starting nine that will be wide open come 2012. Plenty of time to evaluate what the best plan of action is there. Saunders may well prove worthy, so long as he doesn't tank & lose his value GMZ has plenty of manueverability there. |
| 145. By: mauricewilliamsiii on 07-27-2010 17:32:52 Mariners management decided to move Ackley to second base because of the presence of Saunders. I'd rather take the free and improving production of Saunders than trade him for anything. I could totally see this team being a surprise contender if they catch some breaks and the young players play as well as they are capable of. 2011 lineup for most of season; 1.RF Ichiro 2.3B Figgins 3.1B Smoak 4.DH Branyan/Bradley 5.CF Gutierrez 6.LF Saunders 7.2B Ackley 8.C Moore 9.SS Ja. Wilson I can easily see this lineup performing better than expected and the Mariners team being within 5-7 games of the division lead by September of 2011. |
| 146. By: VikingArthur on 07-27-2010 19:42:20 145- Not a bad idea if the guys produce who are supposed to. Clearly this lineup still has limited power. No team with Franklin Gutierrez hitting in the #5 hole is going to win anything. That said, trades may happen but rarely do you create something out of nothing. We have limited trade chips, almost none really. In 2011, we will be a success if we get to .500. That would be a victory. If you'd like to live in a dream world where the M's can compete in 2011, so be it. I applaud your exuberance/irrationality. |
| 147. By: Lailoken on 07-27-2010 19:57:32 I hear you Maurice. Ideally, Saunders plays well & earns the nod. Upgrading shortstop would be an obvious way to improve the offense though easier said than done. One thing I can't help but think about is Mike Wilson & how he might fit on the 2011 team. So far this year the M's have a bunch of 1B/DH/LF types who have hit poorly againt LHP. I'll go ahead & omit Kotchman from what follows as he won't be back. Smoak .545 vs LHP Branyan .638 Saunders .613 Bradley .705 While there are reasons to believe any or all of those players could fare better against LHP next season the fact remains many right-handed hitters out there would best them & help out in a platoon role. With Sweeney unlikely to be brought back (at least I hope due to his lack of versatility) a Xavier Nady or Fernando Tatis might fit nice but there's a homegrown option in Mike Wilson. Wilson has patience & power, two things this team is sorely lacking. His OPS against LHP in Tacoma this year is .967 (.976 overall if you include West Tennessee). He had a miserable 2009 marred by injuries but his OPS againt LHP in 2008 was 1.056. He may not have the range to play LF in Safeco often but he would play well in smaller parks on the road & as a DH. He could be a cheap, useful piece in 2011 as he enters his prime years (he's 27). |
| 148. By: VikingArthur on 07-27-2010 19:59:03 Agreed 147... let Wilson try to be the DH next year. Can he be worse than Bradley/Sweeney/Griffey? I doubt it. Figure out if he can help long term with 400 ABs. |
| 149. By: StandinPat on 07-27-2010 20:13:43 "If you'd like to live in a dream world where the M's can compete in 2011, so be it. I applaud your exuberance/irrationality." Excellent, change the argument to something no one was saying to make it seem like everyone is crazy... Kudos |
| 150. By: Lailoken on 07-27-2010 20:25:22 VikingArthur, I doubt there would be 400 at bats that could be had but Wilson could warrant some serious PT with performance. Wak may not like platooning or pinch-hitters much but those are needed strategies to maximize this roster. |
| 151. By: littlelinny6 on 07-27-2010 21:11:09 I agree, I'd love to see Wilson get a September callup (along with Ackley and Pineda) just to see if he can hit ML pitching at all. The guy has serious power and could be a platoon bat and a legitimate PH possibility off the bench when (name anyone not name Ichiro, Gutierrez, Smoak, or Saunders) comes up to hit. The excuse has always been he's been hurt when he's been close. Well guess what, he's not hurt so hopefully the M's give him a chance. |
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 |