| By Chris Crawford |  | By 02-10-2011 |
There are three days between now and the day pitchers and catchers report for spring training on February 13 -- the rest of the squad will report no later than February 18 with the first full-squad workout slated for the day after. The M's first spring game is the annual charity game versus the San Diego on the 27th with their first Cactus League matchup the following day against the same Padres.
Minor leaguers won't report until the second week of March, though these dates are more of a deadline than the day most players show up for camp.
In any case, we'll be here daily to round up the thoughts and ideas as the club heads closer to the 2011 season; lending you all anything you might need to get yourself ready.
Sharing the links
Larry Larue takes a look at how the St. Louis Cardinals and Texas Rangers are handling their tough off-season decisions, and comes to the conclusion that it's not so bad being a Mariner fan right now.
Tacoma Rainiers play-by-play man Mike Curto takes a look at the most likely Mariners rotation, and in return gives some options of what the rotation could look like in Tacoma this season.
Nepotism alive and well with Seattle
The Mariners signed Moises Hernandez to a minor-league contract today, a signing that would have barely appeared on a Twitter feed if not for the fact that Moises is the older brother of King Felix Hernandez.
Moises, 26, is strictly an organizational arm at this point, and didn't pitch at all in 2010 or 2008, but it's a nice signing for a couple of reasons. First, it's the brother of the best thing in Seattle, and unless your name is Vito, that isn't such a bad thing. Second, it keeps the nepotism of great Mariners alive and well. Think about it: we've had the Griffey's (Ken Sr., Ken Jr. and Craig), the Buhner's (Jay and Shawn), and the best of them all, the Holman's (Brian and Brad).
Peoria Tip of the week
The average temperature in Peoria during march is 78 degrees, but the temperature can vary drastically, both based on when you go and and because weather is just not predictable. Using the dates I'm going -- and really, why go any other time? -- the average temperature stays in that same range, but I've been there when it's 90, and I've been there when it's in the low 50's, too. Long story short, it's important to pack for any type of weather. At very least, bring a sweat shirt and pants for the nights -- the sun beats you down, you will get crispy, and you will freeze at night. Which reminds me, make sure you bring sunscreen. Skin cancer is no laughing matter.
Schedule Update: Churchill will have a system review of the Texas Rangers Friday or Saturday and next week a 2011 Draft Preview that you won't want to miss.
three-days
Comments
The following 33 comment(s) for this article are shown below:
| 1. By: Edman on 02-10-2011 11:03:22 I've been wondering the same thing Larue has. I think the Rangers are making unwise moves, and I have to wonder if it's modivated by believing they needed to do something big. What extra is Beltre going to bring, that it was worth paying him too much money at a position they already had strength at? While I don't admire the Rangers, I admire Michael Young. He's done everything the Rangers have asked him to do, over the years. He's been a glowing example of dedication. I'd love to have him be a Mariner. He's one of those gut-check kind of guys. When you consider how much they paid Beltre, along with how much of Young's salary they're going to eat, it's beyond stupid. Beltre would have to be the next coming of Mike Schmidt, in his prime, to justify signing Beltre. Personally, I hope Daniels and Ryan go down in flames for over tweeking the Rangers. I love Adrian and wish him well, but I wouldn't cry a lot if he proved to be a mid-level performer. Keep it up, Texas, it only helps the M's in the long run. |
| 2. By: slamcactus on 02-10-2011 11:15:06 They didn't plan on Michael Young throwing a temper tantrum at the possibility of moving to another position. The plan was to move him to a 1B/DH time share. If you've ever watched him play defense, it's not tough to see why. Beltre's a significantly better defender than Young, and given Young's performance outside of Arlington, there's good evidence that he's a significantly better hitter as well. The Rangers are a very good front office, and they took their opportunity to sign a better player than the one they currently had at the position. "While I don't admire the Rangers, I admire Michael Young. He's done everything the Rangers have asked him to do, over the years. He's been a glowing example of dedication. I'd love to have him be a Mariner. He's one of those gut-check kind of guys." This is twice now that Young has been less than graceful when "asked" to change positions. When Andrus came up, he griped about having to move off shortstop - which is, to be frank, hysterical. He has about as much business serving as a major league shortstop as I do. This time, he's flat-out accused his team, the one who signed him to a ridiculous $80 million contract, of lying and manipulation. How exactly is that "doing everything the Rangers want him to do? Young's not a useless player, but he's overpaid and clearly has an overly-inflated sense of his abilities. He's nowhere near as good a defender as Adrian Beltre. Given the opportunity to upgrade his team, if he was really the class act you think he is, he'd switch positions and keep his mouth shut. |
| 3. By: Rick Randall on 02-10-2011 11:38:23 I agree, slamcactus -- Young is the one in the wrong here. He is a subpar defender at third (likely laughable at SS and barely passable at 2B at this point in his career) and he holds a .730ish OPS away from Arlington career. |
| 4. By: rocketdawg31 on 02-10-2011 12:11:08 It's a pity that Young isn't any kind of fit for us. But I believe Rick and Slam are basically right- and that 1B/DH is where Young belongs at this point in his career. One of the things that worries me about our own system is that with such an influx of younger hitters to depend on over the next few seasons (and we all know the likelier names, I won't bother to reiterate), there isn't going to be enough veteran ballast to help them through those tough first couple of years. I don't mean role players who've been role players for a decade in the bigs. Those have some cred, to be sure... but I'm talking people who've won batting titles, been in MVP talk, have the All-Star Games in their portfolio. Veteran guys with clout, who've been closer to the top of the mountain than what these young studs are and have been. Like it or not, those are the guys who get listened to the most when something needs to be said. That's what we do not have. And a Michael Young on the squad would be nice to have in that regard. With the exception of Felix and Ichiro. But while Felix shows signs of being a true leader on the team now, he's also the same age as a lot of these guys we hope have an impact. He's almost two years younger than catcher Adam Moore. And Ichiro...well, the number of players who feel comfortable coming to him for assistance seems a dubious number at best. But it IS comforting to see our team essentially being the smartest-run in the division as of right now. I don't get what the Rangers are doing. Even less so with the Athletics. And the Angels need a few breaks to make me think that- outside of Trout- their immediate future is a bright one. |
| 5. By: maqman on 02-10-2011 13:18:01 The Rangers with Young and the Angels with Wells are going have to learn to live with albatross contracts as the M's have for the past few years. Next year we should be albatross free (providing Chone don't choke totally). I hope they enjoy it as much as we have. Z with some payroll space should be fun to watch. |
| 6. By: slamcactus on 02-10-2011 13:18:55 "I don't get what the Rangers are doing." They're upgrading a roster that was already the heavy favorite to win the division. At this point, they've probably got the highest playoff odds of any team in baseball. It's not Jon Daniels' fault that Michael Young took his pouting public. I think the Rangers should pull the same move Theo Epstein made with Manny, and make Young publicly available on Waivers. When no team bites on Young at 3 years, $48 million, hopefully he'll be humbled a little bit and he'll show up to spring ready to shut up and do his job. |
| 7. By: slamcactus on 02-10-2011 13:49:32 "Z with some payroll space should be fun to watch." Unfortunately, the Ms won't really be that flush with cash after '11, either. They clear Bradley's $13.3 million, Silva's $5.5million, and Yuniesky's $1 million, and they'll probably either trade or non-tender Aardsma by next offseason, but Felix also gets an $8 million raise next year, and Guti's salary goes up $1.5million as well. We're left with a couple million more to spend in the 2011 offseason than we had this year, but I think the only way the team gets to go on a real spending spree next winter is if they deal Figgins without taking much salary back. That'd give the team about $21 million for arbitration raises, free agents, and taking salary on in trade. |
| 8. By: rjfrik on 02-10-2011 14:03:55 Young may be a gut check player but there is no way in hell I would want him on this team. As Rick and Slam mentioned take him out of Arlington, a hitters paradise, and his best tool, his hitting is a league average hitter. What would safeco do to that? Young is a past his prime infielder that, honestly, doesn't have a lot of value left. Beltre is a completely different story. For six years playing in Dodgers stadium a pitchers park but not as bad as Seattle he averaged 4.43 WAR a year. When he moved to Seattle it dipped to 3.38 WAR a year. Once he got out of Seattle and went to a hitters park he was a lead leader in batting average, HR and RBI and carried the Sox in my opinion all while producing a 7.1 WAR. He is one of the top two fielding 3B in baseball and in my opinion will maintain his hitting success in the bandbox known as Arlington, especially when he is protected between Hamilton and Cruz. I have no doubt Beltre will rake and produce, he may not be the next Mike Schmidt, but heck who realistically can, you are talking about one of the top 25 baseball players of all time in my opinion, a guy who averaged 7.6 WAR for 14 straight seasons. Even if Beltre can't produce like one of the all time greats I have no doubt he will be one to the best players in baseball in that ballpark for the next few years. He's someone that I will definitely have on my fantasy team! |
| 9. By: nater on 02-10-2011 14:09:27 slamcactus, I can't vouch for your numbers, I'll just accept them as true for this, but what I think is important is to note that the way the team is currently structured, we only need that $21 million to upgrade one position, albeit a big one: pitcher. A LOT of assumptions here, but assuming that Smoak, Ackley, and Saunders settle in as decent-to-good big leaguers, for 2012 we are set at RF, CF, LF, 1B, 2B and 3B, and will be committed for another year or two to passable, low-cost options at DH, SS and C. If at least a couple of the pitchers behind Felix are at least league-average, and our young bullpen holds up and proves effective over the full course of the season, then we are really only looking at needing to acquire one or two #2/#3 type starting pitchers. Obviously the team can decide to go other directions with some of those positions, but again, assuming this year things go as well as they went poorly last year, I think that $21 million could be enough to fill our needs. |
| 10. By: rjfrik on 02-10-2011 14:12:19 Slam, There is a thread a few posts back that has a link to M's payroll for the next few years. Here is the link. http://bit.ly/eZoeMH According to this they will have about 70 million committed in 2012 and that is including Aardsma and giving him, Vargas and League Arby raises. Now that's not including handing out the one year deals to all the kids but those are only about 400k each and who knows who we will bring back. Still it will be nice to have an influx of cash to actually spend. The question is where will payroll be, 90, 100, 110, 120? |
| 11. By: slamcactus on 02-10-2011 14:40:27 rjfrik: that's ~$70 million committed to only 10 players. That leaves ~$21 million for 15 open spots. The MLBContracts list doesn't include guys like Smoak and Fister who are good bets to remain on the team at league average, but this team isn't going to have a huge number of guys ready to contribute at the league minimum. The most you could reasonably hope for would be 8 - Smoak, Saunders, Fister, Pineda, Cortes, Leuke, and two more from a large pool of guys that include Beaven, Robles, Pryor, Nick Franklin (that's extremely optimistic), Paxton, and a bunch of other random guys who could be ready by then. Maybe as much as 10 if everyone pans out and the organization gets surprises from guys like Hill and Hensley. The team will have a little more money, but we're not talking spending spree here. That said, moving Figgins could put them a little closer to that territory. |
| 12. By: slamcactus on 02-10-2011 14:57:49 League Average was supposed to be league minimum there. Whoops. |
| 13. By: Jason A. Churchill on 02-10-2011 15:09:00 Again, we all need to remember that the Mariners can have a lot more payroll space if they feel like it. It's not like they are up against the salary cap or anything. We need to stop acting like they CAN'T add players because it puts them over a certain payroll threshold. If they don't add player this summer and next winter via trade and free agency because these players make relatively high salaries, it was the ownership's choice to pass on getting better, assuming Jack made a solid assessment on the player's chances to help the club win in 2012, because they don't want to cut into their pockets. On one hand, I get it. Losing money sucks, a dollar, 100 dollars or millions. We can all relate. But the same people that would be "losing money" are the ones that hired those that put the organization together. Sometimes, in order to dig out of a hole, a company has to make investments, and with every investment comes risk. Does the M's ownership group have the spheres to buck up when the time comes? Maybe, maybe not. We'll have a good idea in a year or so. But let's not pretend that they CAN'T sign this player or that player or won't be able to make certain moves because of the payroll. It's just not true. |
| 14. By: Madison Mariner on 02-10-2011 15:52:13 "There is a thread a few posts back that has a link to M's payroll for the next few years. Here is the link. http://bit.ly/eZoeMH According to this they will have about 70 million committed in 2012 and that is including Aardsma and giving him, Vargas and League Arby raises." Yeah, I've often looked at that page at Cot's--it's really helpful. They actually have $59.5 million as the total obligation for the 2012 Mariners without arbitration raises, so your $70 million could be a fairly close estimate, but it's hard to say what will happen between now and next offseason or to know what players will be around at this time next year, as Jason said. They list 6 players as being arbitration-eligible next offseason(assuming all 6 were still with the M's at that time): David Aardsma, Shawn Kelley, Brandon League, Garrett Olson, Jason Vargas, and Josh Wilson. I believe there should be a 7th player, and that is Jack Cust, because(as I think I pointed out in another thread here), Cust didn't accumulate a full year of MLB service time in 2010 after being DFA'ed and subsequently outrighted to AAA while still with the A's last spring. So, his service time is probably something like 4 years and 140 some days at the end of 2010, and a full season in 2011 won't get him to the 6 years needed to become a free agent at the end of 2011. So, of those 7 players, I'm guessing a few could be traded or non-tendered. Also, not sure how time on the 60-day DL affects service time, but perhaps Kelley won't get to the necessary 3 years to become arb-eligible by next offseason? And I'd be surprised if Josh Wilson--assuming he makes it through the whole 2011 season--is tendered a contract next offseason. A utility infielder seems like the easiest player to replace on the cheap. And, as you said, there's also all of the pre-arb players like Saunders, Smoak, Fister, et al to consider. So, working off a base figure of $59.5 with anywhere from 2 or 3 to 7 arb-eligible players and some pre-arb players is still a nice scenario, and should give us a shot to really improve the team for 2012. :) |
| 15. By: Jason A. Churchill on 02-10-2011 16:03:29 Players on the 60-day DL accrue service, too. |
| 16. By: dewey on 02-10-2011 16:04:40 I guess its allways good to dream but usally 60% of guys come up to the big leagues fail so im guessing out of this list alot have named a few of them arent gonna make it just like the other 29 teams go through.Thats why there called prospects its great to dream but for people to put Franklin as a lock M.L. player is a joke to me.Ive never seen him play but there have been alot of guys who rake in A-Ball that never get out of AA and believe me i hope he is our SS in 3 years.So i guess im a firm believer in reality we have Pineda as a lock ? He has had arm problems allready he didnt dominate 3A yet and he isnt even half the propect our old friend Ryan Anderson was oh yeah im sure we all remember the space needle! Greatest pitching prospect the Mariners ever had and he never pitched a day in the M.L. |
| 17. By: eknpdx on 02-10-2011 16:09:36 JAC, I think there's enough history now - albeit Bavasi years- to indicate the front office/ownership will pull the trigger if they believe it's worth it. The only real question is if our GM can convince them when it is time to pull the trigger. I think that is still an uphill battle. |
| 18. By: nater on 02-10-2011 16:29:14 I agree in spirit with Jason's comments about the budget. The ownership's policy of "not spending more than they project to receive in ticket sales" is a little misguided to me, and suggests they view this as more of a hobby than a competitive business. However, apparently that is their policy, at least according to what was said earlier this year, and I think that's why everyone assumes after another sub .500 year our payroll budget won't change. I do hold out hope though, that if the team shows that it's on the cusp, that Jack can convince them to open the pocketbook so he can go get what we need. |
| 19. By: rjfrik on 02-10-2011 16:30:58 Well said Jason, I was going to say roughly the same thing. We have no idea what payroll will be. If we have a solid core of players and only roughly 70 million to 75 million on the books we potentially would leave ourselves with a ton of cash depending on where the payroll could go. If it makes sense to bring in a prime big league hitter and a couple of starting pitchers to make the team better and they have the ability to offer those players contracts why not bring them in. It's all about value and getting a return on your money. Until we have the best farm system in baseball that's pumping out mlb ready players to fill voids adequately and better or to use in trades to fill holes then we have to spend some cash to get the job done. But it has to be spent wisely and prudently. |
| 20. By: StandinPat on 02-10-2011 16:45:33 "(Pineda)isnt even half the propect our old friend Ryan Anderson" "Greatest pitching prospect the Mariners ever had and he never pitched a day in the M.L." Dewey, where do you even get this crap? Anderson profiled as a front of the rotation starter... as does Pineda. Anderson was a top 15 prospect... as is Pineda. How does that equate to not "even half?" As far as Anderson's career, never pitching in the ML had nothing to do with the fact that he was a "prospect" and somehow didn't develop, yet had everything to do with his inability to stay healthy, and if you've paid attention to baseball at all, you'd have noticed that ALL pitchers are health risks, not just the ones in the minors. |
| 21. By: Chris Crawford on 02-10-2011 17:11:31 Sorry, SP, but Dewey is right. Ryan Anderson projected to a future ace among aces. Michael Pineda projects to be a two starter and has had one year of elite prospect status. Not saying Pineda isn't going to be better than Anderson, but Anderson>Pineda, in terms of prospect "status" |
| 22. By: StandinPat on 02-10-2011 17:49:14 Really? So player A is a future #1 and Player B is a future #2, then Player B "isn't even half the prospect" that Player A is? |
| 23. By: Jason A. Churchill on 02-10-2011 17:50:56 We all know that dewey didn't mean that literally. Come on, people. |
| 24. By: slamcactus on 02-10-2011 18:09:33 "and he isnt even half the propect our old friend Ryan Anderson was oh yeah im sure we all remember the space needle! Greatest pitching prospect the Mariners ever had and he never pitched a day in the M.L." Stop the presses! Breaking news: pitchers get injured! Shocking! Pineda's a slightly less regarded prospect than Anderson was, but that means nothing in terms of his future potential. Also, Anderson is most definitely not the "Greatest pitching prospect the Mariners ever had." That title would go to Felix Hernandez, with Roger Salkeld coming in a close second. |
| 25. By: Madison Mariner on 02-10-2011 18:29:56 In other breaking news, the M's have signed Manny Delcarmen to a minor league contract. M's will have a lot of guys competing for bullpen spots, it seems. Do both Ray and Delcarmen make it on the 25-man roster out of spring training? ny thoughts, Jason/Chris/Rick? |
| 26. By: rjfrik on 02-10-2011 18:37:54 Ugh. God I hate Delcarmen. The only good thing about him was when I need the team he was on to lose or the batter he was pitching against to get on base. He worked out very well for me in both occasions. |
| 27. By: Edman on 02-10-2011 18:48:48 I don't mind signing Delcarmen to a minor league deal. He's not totally useless. Doesn't cost much to get a look at him. |
| 28. By: Rick Randall on 02-10-2011 18:56:29 I don't mind if they bring Bill Swift in on a minor league deal -- it lets them see in ST if these guys have anything left. Delcarmen is a bit of an inigma. Some in Boston were questioning him the last two seasons as every time he struggled, he claimed he was hurt, despite not having any true signs that the medical staffs could find. Velocity has been all over the place since '08, so has his control, but when he was right, he was very good. |
| 29. By: on 02-11-2011 00:26:46 Think about it: we've had the Griffey's (Ken Sr., Ken Jr. and Craig), the Buhner's (Jay and Shawn), and the best of them all, the Holman's (Brian and Brad). And Mike Maddux and his brother... Ah, dagnabbit! We never got Greg Maddux here. |
| 30. By: dewey on 02-11-2011 12:44:30 Who projected Pineda as a #2 atrter? I dont think Jason has?He might end up a bullpen guy who knows remember he hasnt even done nothing at 3A yet |
| 31. By: StandinPat on 02-11-2011 13:43:32 "Who projected Pineda as a #2 atrter?" Fangraphs, Baseball America, MLB.com, John Sickels, Baseball Prospectus, just to name a few. Basically every notable source on the subject. "He might end up a bullpen guy who knows" Considering his stuff plays in the back end of a rotation now, the only way he ends up in the bullpen is if he winds up having durability issues, which can be said on any young pitcher. "remember he hasnt even done nothing at 3A yet" You are correct, he threw 62 very good innings at AAA this year, which would constitute not doing nothing, as it is something. |
| 32. By: dewey on 02-11-2011 22:24:39 3-3 4.76 isnt real good sorry.This conversation is over no matter what i say i know nothing according to you! John Sickels is he the answer ? You better check to see how often he is wrong! |
| 33. By: StandinPat on 02-13-2011 21:04:41 "3-3 4.76 isnt real good sorry.This conversation is over no matter what i say i know nothing according to you!" Using W/L Record and ERA to judge a pitcher isn't the best way to change that perception. "John Sickels is he the answer ?" Does it matter? You asked who viewed him as a #2, I gave several who did, Sickels being only one of them. Maybe check out the ProspectInsider article titled "Trading for Fransisco Liriano" where Jason as well refers to Pineda's future as a possible #2. |
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 |