Since when does pitching 190 innings, or 200 for that matter, win games?

"The fact that the replacements were every bit as good at times as the guys they replaced tells you just how bad things were for Seattle's rotation last year."

Well, it actually tells you how easy it is to find a cheap worthwhile 5th starter without trading away important pieces of the team to get them. It tells you that internal options in the 5th starter spot will often give you the best value (similar production for a fraction of the cost).

The fact that replacements were required to spell bad starters who were obviously bad gambles in the first place (and cost over $10 mill in salary) also tells you this front office doesn't know how to build a rotation or evaluate talent properly.

I won't argue against the notion that the rotation was bad, but we all knew that it would be a likely outcome when you have 2 back of the rotation starters in your rotation (Washburn and Batista) and 2 guys who have no business pitching in Major League baseball anymore (Ramirez and Weaver). It's not a recipe for success, even if one year guys outperform their talent level (or get saved by the offense).

I think he just explained that Bob!

I think the point is great. Our BP hit a wall in towards the end of last year because of all the work they had to put in. Though Batista and Washburn may not be able to hurl 200 IP, Felix, Bedard and Silva would be, and theres hardly another team that can boast 2 pitchers who went 200 IP in one season, let alone 3.

No, it doesn't mean wins automatically, but generally, guys who go deep into games have more innings, and when they go deep into games it's because the coach doesn't yank them because they are pitching effectively. If they are pitching effectively then it means their team usually has a chance to win it. A pitcher who can hurl 200 IP is more likely to be a pitcher who gets you wins than a pitcher who hurls 140 IP over the same or similar amount of starts.

Anyway, Geoff stats translate into a more durable rotation and bullpen, two things you need to be a truly competetive team, he's absolutely right to be encouraged by the prospect of durable starters.

Good logic behind this, but in my opinion, Wash threw about 20 innings too many. Stottlemyre seems to want even more and that is not a good thing. It was well documented last year how high the cliff was that Jarrod fell off of once he hit about 90 pitches. So if Silva can pick up that slack and Felix stops having fastball-itis in the first inning and running up 30 plus then hopefully J-Wash day can have a well-rested pen.

And let me clarify one thing. I actually think the Weaver contract represented the right kind of thinking. Here's a guy who has looked washed up at times, but also shown flashes of effectiveness, even in the postseason. Good thinking says, "Let's sign him to a short-term contract and see how he does." They overpaid him, but it's a gamble that's not too economically problematic given the payroll (and to avoid a second year).

But we should never have expected too much, and when he performed poorly out of the gate, you cut him loose much earlier than the M's did, rather than run him out there time after time, and then, amazingly, reserving a spot for him to come back to after a mystery injury.

See, even when the team has the right idea, more or less, it hangs on to dear life until it's too late to make an effective change (or scoots somebody out of the rotation to see if the ineffective guy can make a comeback). The beauty of a short-term contract with a guy who is a risk is you have the chance to cut your losses early if it doesn't pan out, and can usually cover his role pretty cheaply.

Great point, hcoguy. I think Geoff's theory is ok if, as a rotation, the innings pitched increase. But Jarrod gets into trouble and runs out of gas before he hits 100 pitches, and usually around the 5-6 innings. It's a pretty clear thing to investigate. So, if I am Mac, I keep a short leash on him around that pitch count, and don't insist he pitch longer into ballgames. I just know my pen has got to be ready when he steps on to the mound that day for 3+ innings of work most times. If others pick up the slack, you can plan around this, as you say.

I have to agree.

One of the most overlooked downfalls of the M's last season was how much pressure was put on the bullpen for the better part of the season. It really became apparent later in the season when the relievers numbers started to balloon...

However, this should also remind people about how great our bullpen really was last year. It was much better then we had any right to expect and the spring-training questions the Mariners had about their staff were answered seemingly out of nowhere by guys like Sean Green and Eric O'Flaherty.

In other words, certainly replacing schmoes like Weaver and Ramirez (?) with someone decent like Silva, etc. should definately improve our pitching staff, but other problems that were hidden by some extraordinary performances (Guillen, Ibanezs' second half, the bench...) are more then likely to be exposed this season.

My guess where the M's end up? Low 90's wins, not in the postseason. Here's hoping that the M's don't do anything foolish before they have a real shot in 2009 on...

A more interesting, possibly more accurate way to look at this, especially at last years rotation, would be avg. innings per start. under an avg. inn./ start stat, how do those AAA replacements stack up against Weaver and Ramirez?

Interesting that the Sporting News has just come out with their list of the best outfields in the American League. The good news is that the Mariners got the nod at #3. The bad news is that the Angels came in first.

Tigers #2, Red Sox #4, Yankees #5, Indians #6.

TSN had Raul in LF, Ichiro and Adam Jones in RF. They listed the reserve as Mike Morse.

I'm sure if AJ moves that ranking would change quite a bit. They list Baltimore at #13, with Luke Scott in LF (the guy some propose the M's pick up in any deal with the Orioles).

I might also disagree with their reserve. I personally think Jeremy Reed is going to make the team as the #4 OFer. His left-handed bat would be ideal to sub for AJ against some tougher right-handed pitchers. They did note that Jones K'ed about a third of his at-bats last year with the M's so a slight platoon wouldn't be such a bad deal, I'd think. Reed's defense is very good and his bat, though not powerful, is adequate for the occasional start.

IMHO, it would be best for Morse and the team if he gets dealt to an NL team so he can play more, seeing that he's out of options.

Not for nothing, but the Baltimore Sun blogger is saying that this week is a self-imposed deadline for the Orioles to cut deals. So, it's entirely possible the end is near.

Also, as an east coaster not far from the likes of Baltimore, their fans have written the next two seasons off and are all about getting Jones or prospects out in the organization. Theres a bit of a push to make a trade from the fan base.

"Well, the 2006 White Sox didn't win their division, so innings totals aren't everything. Not everything," ---Geoff

No, but probably more for Seattle than for most. This team stayed with the Angels until the bullpen faltered from overuse. That needs to change for them to do it for a full six months .

Also, Geoff, one element you may have overlooked is that Felix missed two months of the season! That makes his 2007 totals all the more impressive. Think what a full year of Felix in the rotation can do for this team!

And, a small note I'd like to toss in is the name of Robert Rohrbaugh as a guy who could surprise and help us in 2008. Not outstanding numbers in AAA last year but very good and a true innings eater. Here's a guy who could really surprise this season.

Can all of the Bedard deal haters who obviously don't want to play competitive baseball this decade please join the Ty Willingham haters on a bus headed to Pullman? Please? We're "this" close to pulling off the impossible, bringing an ace to Seattle, and everyone wants to whine about how good a 19 year old pitcher might be in 4 or 5 years. Or how Adam Jones is the next Tori Hunter. Guess what, Tori Hunter has been overrated his entire career. I think he's finally turned himself into a SOMEWHAT productive hitter, but he's still not a middle of the order guy. I love the idea of Adam Jones being our next Griffey and absolutely loathe the idea of going back to being a crappy team with a superstar outfielder. We can get one of the best pitchers in baseball for 2 guaranteed cheap years and that entire time period to try to extend him. He gets to pitch in the best pitchers park a south-paw could ever ask for in a 2 team division. And the kicker--he hates the intrusive media and won't consider NY or Boston! I think our chances of resigning him while playing some very competitive baseball are solid. LAND THE ACE! If we had 10 Tillmans, I'd reconsider because statistically one of them would be a good MLB pitcher (if we were really lucky, as good as Bedard). The rest would wash out. And if we had 10 Adam Joneses, I'd develop 8 of them as pitchers. As we've all learned in Seattle, mediocre pitching is exceptionally expensive. Great pitching is unatainable. Get the pitcher before the prospects come down to earth!!!

Give Geoff credit. Last year before the trade deadline he realized a starting pitcher wouldn't be available via trade and was a strong proponent of acquiring a reliever (Gagne,Dotel) to help the tired bullpen. The Mariners didn't, and the bullpen collapse down the stretch was one of the main reasons they didn't make the post season.

Now Geoff is advocating acquiring a starting pitcher that is available (Bedard) to help rest the bullpen and make them strong into the post season. I agree that an additional workhorse is needed, so you can use RRS, Feirabend or Baek as an injury-replacement, something they are much more capable of, than logging 175+ innings so early in their careers.

For comparison's sake, here are the innings pitched by starters for other notable teams:

Boston - 991
NY - 921
Cleveland - 1021
LAA - 976
Detroit - 932

So the Angels' starters pitched less than a 1/3 of an inning more than the M's starters, and the Red Sox's starters got just about 1/3 of an inning more. And the Yankees and Tigers, who were both superior to the M's, fared worse.

Today I was looking up the English meaning of German surnames (don't even ask), and I thought the Feierabend translation was pretty funny: "time off, non-work hours".

Hopefully he won't live up to that this season.

Something Geoff didn't mention was that neither McLaren nor Hargrove resembled sparky Anderson (the Hook). In many cases--Felix and others gave up 4-5 runs in the first couple innings, but by the time the bull pen took over in the 6th plus inning we were too far behind to recover. Hence eating up innings, but not giving the Ms a chance to win. By the same token it might be worth examining the ERA's of the bull pen members in the last two months of the season when their arms with tired, compared with the first part of the season when the were live.

Oregon Gal - "abend" is evening, "Feier" is down time/party/relax time. Put them together somehow. . . .
Lance (1:08) Raul in LF will bring down the OF ratings for the M's - but put Vlad out there, and the defense is as good as anyone's; maybe better.

Given the quality of Mariners starting pitching, would they have done worse if the starters had gone deeper?

Geoff, Tom Verducci of Sports Illustrated shares your ideas:

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2008/writers/tom_verducci/01/22/rotation.stability/index.html

Baker, Verducci, and every other adult (and some children) who watch baseball on a semi-regular basis. It's right up there with Murphy's Law and the Peter Principle. Irrefutable facts of life.

It's almost unfortunate that Geoff has to write an article like this, but some will even disagree with him.

E.F.- so what's your point?

Big Wil - "Bedard haters"? Really? Don't you think that's a bit overblown?

Even though I don't speak for anybody but myself, I feel comfortable saying that the overwhelming majority of people who have been anti-trade in this ongoing discussion have nothing against Bedard. He's fantastic. Rather, it is a combination of very high expectations for AJ, low expectations for being able to overtake the Angels with Bedard/sans Jones, and the chance to compete longer-term given how long Bedard is under team control (and for what marginal $$/win) versus AJ. The fact that people like you ignore everything that has been said on all these points (and more), and choose to lump the everyone who disagrees with you as "Bedard haters" doesn't help, either.

BTW, I am a Ty Willingham supporter.

Lance - my point is that your point is subject to change - Raul in LF makes us a #2 ranking; a better LF, such as Vlad, makes us a #1 IMNTBHO. I agreee with you on Reed, 4th OF - let Morse back up the corner IF spots.
To hoser (4:04) If the starter goes 9 innings every day, will we win the pennant? (Even if he gives up 10 runs doing so?) I'm glad you aren't the manager. . . .
To Pete L - good comments.
To Oregon gal - I meant to suggest Feierabend is something like (some Holiday) Eve.

"I personally think Jeremy Reed is going to make the team as the #4 OFer. His left-handed bat would be ideal to sub for AJ against some tougher right-handed pitchers."

I wouldn't trust Reed against even the weaker right-handed pitchers. As a platoon player against righties, he flat out stunk it up. (In the majors, where it counts) .243/.286/.423 in a platoon role just isn't going to cut it.

I don't know if Silva is going to eat alot of innings this year but I guarantee you he'll eat alot of the postgame spread.

Everett, thanks for info on Feierabend's name. In spite of my snarky comment, I have a soft place in my heart for him. For a kid to come into the Griffey lovefest game and have his hometown crowd boo him when he threw to first was kind of bush league. I don't know if he'll be a starter, but I would like to see him stay up with the club this year. He got shellacked a couple of times, then came back and threw a good game the next time out. I like that kind of nerve.

E.F. - it wasn't my point. It was the Sporting News'. And, they had the M's outfield at #3, not #2. So, I still don't know what you're trying to say.

And, to say that if the M's could replace Raul with Vlady would make them a lot better is rather obvious don't you think? As if that's ever going to happen. So, why even mention it?

Mr. X - Reed spent much of 2006 recovering from a broken wrist. This obviously effected his hitting. He hit much better in 2007, albeit in AAA. The Mariners just had no need for him last year. But, to simply write him off as someone not to be trusted for the 4th OF spot I think is shortsighted.

You're entitled to your opinion, but I strongly feel that AJ can be much more productive, this year anyway, if the M's had a left-handed bat that can come off the bench to sub for him on occasion. Reed is the best they have right now. If they get someone better so be it. But for now I think Jeremy stands the best chance to come north as the 4th OF as anyone they've got.

Geoff,

I agree that having starters that eat innings will definitely help the bullpen. But I think the bullpen also suffered from McLaren's annoying habit of trying to play "match-up" in the middle innings which would burn two or three relievers to get out of one inning. Even with a 7-man bullpen this causes a lot of strain since guys are pitching 4 or 5 times a week. Sure, from an inning pitched or pitch count perspective it might not look bad on a stat sheet, but the constant getting up and down in the bullpen and warming up also takes a toll. So in addition to starters going longer in games, McLaren has to do a better job in managing the bullpen.

Big Ebu - Thanks for bringing that up. It's the part of Mac's managing last year that was most distressing to me, because it couldn't be blamed on taking over the team mid-year. I didn't like his lineups, but I could understand why he would make those choices coming in the way he did. Burning the bullpen was just stupid. Hopefully, he learned that lesson last year.

Now if he'll just take out Wash after 90 pitches.

Now, if Wash could just reach the 90-pitch mark in an inning beyond the 6th (and that's on a good day).

Lance and Oregon Gal - good points; I may be suffering from poor memory, but didn't Hargrove do mostly the same thing with the pen? Maybe MaC was just following the same procedure?

Everett - Yeah, I think you're right about Hargrove's use of the pen. And clearly using pitchers was out of Mac's area of expertise. So it will be interesting to see what he learned in the off-season, now that he's had time to prepare for the job.

Lance - Mel S. seems to think the pitchers need better conditioning and that he can get them to throw fewer pitches in similar innings. If he can get Wash through six, or beyond 95 pitches on a consistent basis, I'll buy into the miracle worker label.

I would like to add some analysis too. It may not be quantifiable, but it is interesting to ponder.

Geoff mentioned that the starters (Silva included) threw for about 930 innings last season.

Since extra inning games rarely involve starters one could assume that there are 1458 possible innings to be played per season (9 innings x 162 games).

930 innings of a possible 1458 yields about 64%. That means the bullpen has to make up for the remaining 36% of the innings in a year. We saw that down the stretch last season that the bullpen grew tired from overuse.

By adding another starter that has roughly 190 innings pitched changes the picture a lot. That brings the total innings by starters up to 1120 innings pitched. Dividing out of the hypothetical 1458 innings yields a workload of 77% by the starters.

By adding on more quality arm the workload of the bullpen is reduced to roughly 23%. Going down the stretch with a less taxed bullpen almost guarantees a better chance of winning games late in the season.

Keep in mind that this idea does not account for details such as extra innings, or offensive production by the team. It is merely a broad view of workload on the pitching staff.

In my mind the cost vs. gain of adding Bedard is very reasonable. He is a known quantity with a strong chance of repeating last season’s numbers. Our prospects are merely that, just prospects. I say take a gamble, tax the bullpen less, and let’s enjoy the playoffs in 2008.