"Seems to me that the anti Jones-plus-for-Bedard side wants to assume that everything that can go wrong will, while not admitting that at least a few things could go right and easily erase some of the negatives."

Even if the team traded the farm for Bedard do you really believe the Ms would be a better team going forward than the Angels, Red Sox or Yankees?

If the answer is no then that's all the reason you need to not trade Jones, let alone Morrow, Triunfel, etc.

I think you're also discounting the possibility that the Ms could give up a ton for Bedard, only to have him skate out two years later leaving them with nothing to show for the trade but an empty farm system and a core that's still too old to compete.

So we have no guarantees for 2010 - we have no guarantees for 2008 with Bedard. What we have is speculation and hope. And I speculate that Jones and our farm system, intact, projects better over both the short and long haul than the alternatives so far presented.
Now if the O's give us Bedard for Morrow (replace their starter), Sherrill (we have options to replace him) and Vlad (replace their CF) great! Will that happen? No.
Many a GM has said over the years, as Jerry closed his article, "some of your best trades are the ones you didn't make."
Some one has implied that we could wait until the trading deadline, when the O's are in last place, 20 games under .500, they might lessen their trade demands by a bunch and a half.
Someone pass it on to Bavasi.

I think you're missing the point on the anti trade crowd, at least with me. You are saying:

"What amazes me about the proponents of scrapping a Jones-plus-for-Bedard deal is that they seem so certain that staying the course is going to reap fruit two years down the road. They say that too much will have to go right for the team in 2008 to make the trade worth it."

I'm saying that Bedard won't put you over the top (meaning a playoff spot) for 2 years, while Jones/Tillman/Morrow/Triunfel/...etc etc etc and the million other players Balt wants are under club control for much LONGER than 2 years and you potentially get more years out of them on the cheap. This is also at a time when key Angels players are likely to be in serious decline and you have a better chance to compete against them.

I kind of find your point #3 funny, because you were the one hounding Bavasi to trade the moon for Al Reyes last year at the trade deadline. You have to answer for yourself: is this bullpen good enough or not? Last year, for you, it was no. This year, minus one of their top two bullpen arms, it is?

Point #4 I guess I don't see the logic. If Ichiro is declining, that means Jones takes the CF spot and Ichiro goes back to RF. You trade Jones, in 2010, you don't have a CF in your system to do that with. And what if Wlad becomes one of those 3 outfielders along with Jones?

Point #2, you may be forgetting that next year will be a much much better market for starting pitching in FA. This year, the only chance to get a top guy is via trading the farm, your house, your wife, your kids, to get the stud.

Point #1, I agree, but are you telling me a big big part of the Angels lineup, namely Vlad, is going to be BETTER than he is now? The Angels will likely be worse in two years, not better. The A's are only worse because Beane is looking two years down the road and not doing the win now or else path.

So, Geoff - do you think the Mariners w/Bedard are more likely to win a WS in 2008 or 2009? I sure don't.

It's not like every playoff team is statistically perfect. Pitching and defense wins championships, right? Then how does one explain the 2007 New York Yankees, a 94-win wild-card team? The Yankees had below-average pitching, with an ERA+ of 99, terrible defense (almost as bad as Seattle's) and yet beat out all other wild-card teams with an above average OPS+ of 118. Think that was a fluke?

OK, then how about 2006? The Yankees had a slightly above average ERA+ of 102, and an offense with an OPS+ of 112. So, slightly better pitching, slightly worse offense and I'll assume the defense wasn't much different. New York won 97 games and the AL East -- a much more competitive division overall than the AL West should be this year.

Wait, wait - so getting stud pitching isn't the only way to win? Huh. And here I thought TOR pitching was essential to success...

Both arguments have equally valid points...leading directly to the scouting reports...which nobody in the blogosphere has!

The most compelling argument to me is the 100 mil+ payroll for the past four+ years and we are still building for the future...(?)

What kind of business model is that? The customers will go away (period).

No revenue, no fantasy!

Geoff, I can show you one:

Colorado Rockies WERE a GAURANTTEE, a LOCK to make the WS last year...

...oh wait, I meant the 2004 Marlins were a lock, a LOCK I tell you...no, actually, I didn't mean them...the 2001 Seattle Mariners, now EVERYONE knew they were the best team in baseball...well, drat...I thought they were all locks.

In all seriousness, I agree 100% with your analysis Geoff. But I still want your take on a trade that sends only Morrow, Tillman\triunfel and Sherril for Bedard?

Two great young arms and a solid BP arm for their current "ace". Baltimore loves their young hurlers.

Amendment - 2004 marlins should be 2003 Marlins...the team who had 1 guy hit over .300 all year, that was Juan Pierre, he hit .303. How did they win there games you may ask? 3 Starting pitcher with sub 4.00 ERA's who ate up innings.

NYY Yankees, 2007, .290 avg, 968 runs scored...lost in the first round of playoffs after winning the WC.

I ask you, did the pitching Marlins win a world series, or the slugging Yankees?

Geoff, I agree with your point of view and I'm glad you highlighted Jerry's quote, "Why disrupt the future if it doesn't guarantee us a playoff berth?"


Having Adam Jones, Alex Rodriguez, Albert Pujols, and Babe Ruth does not guarantee us a playoff spot. Neither does having Erik Bedard or Johan Santana. That being said, I don't see how having Adam Jones instead of Erik Bedard gives the M's a better chance of making the playoffs. If the M's don't land a TOR pitcher, then Horacio Ramirez pitches every 5 days. Enough said.


Acquiring a pitcher like Bedard absolutely gives the M's a shot at winning the WS in the next 2 years. Keeping Adam Jones does not. It's pretty simple. In a short series, I would never count the M's out with a top-2 of Bedard and Felix, against Sabathia and Carmona, Lackey and Escobar/Weaver, Beckett and Schilling/Dice-K, and whoever the Yankees throw out this season. Would you?

The problem is Bedard's value is diminished if Raul Ibanez is slogging around the outfield rather than Adam Jones.

Bedard with Jones in left should mean saving a whole lot of runs. Ibanez gives half of those runs back.

By all means I'm for this trade if we replace Jones with Morrow.

Ok, lets look at it this way, Oriole Park at Camden Yard is a hitters park, and Bedard just put up 2 solid years pitching there. He was going to get a boost from Safeco being a pitchers park, let cancel that boost out that he would get with the assumption that Raul is that big of a liability in LF. What is the final answer to the equation? We just netted Bedard with the same stats in Camden, I don't see the problem here...

"So, are the Mariners (with Bedard) statistically any worse off than the Yankees were the last two years?"

Seriously, what? You can't compare the offense between the two teams, however they balance each other. Yes, Yankees line-up plus M's pitching may eqal dream team, but making a comparison with the Yankees of the last two years is a weak argument to make for exchanging Jones for Bedard, as the Yankees fell flat on their face in the playoffs.

Please, no comparisons to the Yankees in a positive manner.

1. Yes, the Mariners will play against a weaker division this year. Will adding Bedard plus the decline from the A's make up the six-game difference between the Mariners (88 wins) and the AL Wild Card team (Yanks - 94 wins) AND overcome the fact that the M's were actually a 79-win team per the Pythag. formula? We'll see. Oh, and if we don't be sure to protect our future, the A's (moving into a new ballpark, a slew of new prospects) and the Rangers (very smart GM in Daniels - a top-five farm system) are going to blow us out of the water in the next decade.

2. First, another one of those teams with five starters who have above-average ERAs is the Angels. And they'll have a superior rotation to ours - even with Bedard. Second, who's to say that we have to rely on Morrow and Aumont in 2010? The 2009 FA class has a handful of good arms (Penny, Sheets, Burnette), and by 2010 we could have trade pieces in Tillman, Butler, Triunfel, etc.

3. True, we don't know what the 2010 bullpen will look like, but we do know that Sherrill, O'Flaherty, Lowe, Kam Mickolio, Rowland-Smith, Sean Green, and John Humber will all be under team control in 2010. I think we'll manage with that group.

4. Not really sure this is a logical argument - all you are saying is that we don't know that the 2010 defense will look like. Not sure how that makes your point. But even if Ichiro declines defensively (I doubt it, given how incredible of an athlete he is, and that speedsters like him age well), we put him into RF and let Jones play CF, where he belongs. Not an issue.

----------------

I've said it many times, we have to hope for a lot to go our way to win with Bedard in 2008. And as Geoff says, that stuff could all happen. But you also have to recognize that the Angels had a lot go wrong last year. They never had a full rotation because of injuries. Santana was a bust. Figgins was a non-factor for the first two months of the year. Kotchman got hurt just when was was starting to hit to his potential. Vlad was dinged. Napoli was dinged. Shields and Speier were hurt. Kendrick, their best young player, was out for over a month.

If we can expect Sexson and Lopez to rebound, and Ibanez to miraculously play decent defense in LF, and Wlad to replace Guillen's offense, why shouldn't the Angels expect better health and rebound seasons?

Again, a ton has to go our way, even with Bedard and the white flags in Oakland and Arlington.

But, in 2010 (and I'm not sure why we are discussing the chances of a WS in 2010, specifically), we'll have Jones, Wlad, Morrow, Clement, all with at least two years of service under their belts. We'll have a hopefully-ready ace in Felix. We'll have a still productive superstar in Ichiro. We'll hopefully have a top-3 3rd baseman in Beltre. Perhaps we'll have a young stud pitcher in either Aumont or Tillman ready to join the rotation (and either will be more prepared to start than Morrow is in 2008). We'll still have basically all of the bullpen pieces we have now - only two years more experienced (no need to go trade for a Reyes or Gagne, right Geoff?). PERHAPS, we'll have an All-star 1B in Teixeira and a very good #2 in Burnette, or Penny, or Sheets.

Here's the possible roster in 2010:

Ichiro - RF
Betancourt - SS
Beltre - 3B
Teixeira - 1B
Jones - CF
Clement - C/DH
Wlad - LF
Bat - DH/C
Lopez/Chen/Other - 2B

Felix
Burnette
Morrow
Silva
Tillman/Aumont/Butler

Putz (assuming he stays)
Sherrill
Green (two years older)
O'Flaherty (two years older)
Lowe
Mickolio
Rowland-Smith/Other

That's an excellent defensive team (Teixeira is a great defensive 1B), a potentially very good offensive team, and a very good pitching team (so long as Morrow develops). It will be young enough to compete with the A's and Rangers for years to come, it will have surpassed the aging Angels (see Hunter, Vlad, Anderson, Matthews, Shields, Lackey (?)), and it will have talent at a level that equals Boston, New York, and other AL teams.

Or we can blow it on Bedard. Whatever.

Geoff, I am in your camp! I have read all the pros & cons, stats for and against posted on yours and other blogs. The addition of Bedard would finally give us five starters would could be proud. Mac could have fun picking the pitching match ups depending on the teams we play next. I have become more convinced reading every ones arguments, that we should keep Jones. That said, a trade for Bedard probably will not happen. I commented in earlier blogs that Morrow
should be the center piece of the trade. I concluded that we have a deeper pool of young talented arm in our system. Thus, losing a couple of our top pitching prospect would hurt us less. Now, I am more convinced! Have you change your thoughts on this??

We should keep as many of our top position prospects as possible. Especially, ones that are 5-Tool players, as Jones is. I would not include
Clement in any deals at this point either. We desperately need a Left handed power hitter to be in our line up.

Finally, does it not seem with our pitcher friendly Safeco Field? The Mariners will be able to fill holes in our line up with FA pitchers vs
position players. Note Griffey & A-Rod weren't happy playing here.

"But who's to say you can't replace Vidro's bat with Wlad Balentien or Jeff Clement at DH if things go wrong?"

I know who! I know who! His name is... John McLaren.

Vidro is a vet, which means he'll play every day unless he goes to the DL. McLaren demonstrated beyond the shadow of a doubt last year with Sexson, and to a lesser extent Ibanez, that he will ride a veteran into the ground before trying anything with even an experienced bench player, let alone a AAA callup. Even when it's obvious that a can of soup would do better.

As has been the case in Seattle for several years now: if they have an AARP card, they're in the lineup.

Even though I'm anxious to get Bedard, even at the cost of Jones, the one bright side to NOT getting Bedard is that it's the only way we'd ever see someone under 30 get run out there every day, (Yuni/Lopez the exceptions of course).

A manager generally doesn't have a huge impact of # of wins in a season, or even on lineup / rotation health over the course of a season. But inasmuch as a manager can have an effect, count on zero effect from McLaren. Any deficiencies in the Ms this year will NOT be able to be masked by anything McLaren might do for choice of players to run out there.

Lets not forget that prospects, given proper time to develop, can help a team be pickier about FA acquisitions. With the contracts ending after this season, I think next years FA class combined with our farm players can get us to the playoffs as legit contenders, not one and done wonders, better than trading the farm for BEdard. Bassically, Bedard, in my opinion, cannot get us there in 08 with Richie (even an improved richie) and Vidro in the everyday lineup.

Great point, Chris. Great point.

I love Bedard. I do. That guy is frickin' awesome. But I can't convince myself in my heart of hearts that the 2008 Mariners, plus Bedard and minus Jones and Sherrill, are going to be better than they would be with Jones, Sherrill, and Ryan Roland-Smith in the 5 slot. This seems to be a foregone conclusion from everything I've read, whether the person writing was pro- or con- the trade.

I'm just not sure that's true in 2008, never mind 2010. Say Bedard is 45 runs better than the guy you replace him with (the difference between a 3.00 ERA and a 5.00 ERA over 200 innings pitched), you've now got to replace your starting right fielder and your high-leverage left handed reliever and not give that advantage back. This is the calculation I need to see. Show me who replaces Jones and Sherrill in the M's starting lineup next season and show me that you aren't giving those 45 runs right back. I'm worried that one big leak is being plugged by creating two smaller ones that are going to drain just as much water.

Who really thinks we can get a top-notch FA pitcher next year when most players do not want to come to Seattle? If the money is the same with another team, the players would rather not have to travel. That is why we have no shot at Johann Santana.

If we couldn't get Jason Schmidt, a local boy, to come pitch for us, tell me what stud FA pitcher will next year and why?

Geoff
You are right there are no guarantees - in 2008 or 2010 or any other year - and therefore it is merely a matter of opinion (whether backed by evidence, prejudice or dogma) as to which you see as being the best option.
Anyone who says they are "certain" which option will turn out better, on either side of the debate, (and to be fair I do not think the anti-traders are making any claims about their crystal ball reading abilities than the pro-traders) are over-stating their case in the heat of debate.
As for being negative about the various options – spot the difference between these two:
“Seems to me that the anti Jones-plus-for-Bedard side wants to assume that everything that can go wrong will, while not admitting that at least a few things could go right and easily erase some of the negatives.”

and

"Well, here's my view. A whole lot more will have to go right for the Mariners to win in 2010 and beyond."

I should declare my lack of faith in the team building abilities of the front office (and I do not know how it works well enough to automatically blame Bavasi) using trades and free agents leads me to lean towards keeping Jones. If other holes in the line up - power LH bat, defence in LF (and RF if you are intending on trading Jones) defence at 1B, 8th inning man etc – had been addressed this off season I would be verging on saying Bedard would be a good idea and the Mariners could do it. But I do not think this has been done.

Injecting some positivity, even with no deal everyone could have a career year at the Ms, the Angels could lose their key men to the DL and we could walk to the pennant. Bring it on!

Adam,
I love it when you project us signing someone like Teixeira for 2010. It shows the fatal flaw in your theory that Seattle can sit around and continue to try to grow from within.
We have NEVER shown the ability to wrestle cream-of-the-crop free agents (like Teixeira) away from the big guns. Not only that, you're assuming we're going to be able re-sign guys like Beltre to a team that has already been rebuilding for the last three seasons. Add in a couple more of those seasons, and I don't think Beltre will have any interest in sticking around.
If you take Teixeira, who I think is completely unrealistic to end up in Seattle, and Beltre out of your lineup, it suddenly doesn't look nearly as good.
What Seattle signs from the free agent market every year are average guys. Sometimes they have a nice season, but I can't think of a free agent we have signed who has made an All-Star team in recent years. It's pretty much always been that way, and I don't see it changing.
To add the type of players who have both experience and talent to compete for a World Series, you eventually have to make a trade, and that trade will have to involve some very good minor leaguers.
Otherwise you are asking your farm system to produce at an astronomical rate, and produce players that are very, very good right away, before they, too, test free agency.
It's a recipe for mediocrity ... in my book. Which is what we've already had for the last four years.

How's this for a scenario: The reason that Adam Jones was pulled from his winter league ball start over the weekend was because a major trade was worked out between the Mariners and Orioles for Bedard, but was contigent on Bedard signing a long-term contract with the Mariners. Bedard repeated what he has said all along, that he wants to test the free agent market in two years, no matter what. That killed the deal and they told Jones to continue winter league play. The Mariners then turned their interest to Ian Snell, and are trying to convince the Pirates that Clement for Snell is a fair deal, and to forget about getting Jones.

Now I'm not saying this rumor is true, but it sure does connect the dots for a lot of the rumors and stories floating around, doesn't it?

Also, I think if they could get Bedard to sign an extension with the Mariners most of the people in the anti-trade Jones camp would be pleased. In that scenario the Mariners would be more competetive in 2010 and beyond.

Would Bavasi actually be smart enough to demand an extension as contigency for a trade?

You wrote: "Seems to me that the anti Jones-plus-for-Bedard side wants to assume that everything that can go wrong will, while not admitting that at least a few things could go right and easily erase some of the negatives."

Of course we do. We're Mariners fans. And no offense, but we've been here longer.

I agree with Jerry B. "Why disrupt the future..." I think the M's farm system has some of the best prospects they've had in years. These guys have a chance to play together for along time and build that elusive chemistry factor that makes mediocre teams good teams and good teams great teams. From my perspective as a fan it's simply fun to watch the young guys coming up from within the system and see what they can do. I like the Detroit Tigers formula of using the farm to rebuild a contending team.

The issue of guarantees comes down to a fundamental truth about regional sports fans: we take pride in what we create.

Adam Jones is really good, and I'm sure all the other prospects are too (and I do know a lot about them, I just don't feel compelled to prove it for the sake of this argument). But in the same respect, why do we as M's fans balk at what other teams ask of us in our farm system no matter what the trade is? We aren't alone. Every team's fans balk at every trade request that includes prospects. The only question is why.

Inherently, prospects are not as good as major leaguers. That's why they aren't major leaguers. The reason why people fall in love with their own prospects is because of potential--but it isn't that simple. We fall in love with them because we raised them.

Adam Jones belongs to us. We drafted him, we raved about him, we knew he was being groomed for us. We've been looking forward to him. Now someone else wants to take him before we get to use him, and we're afraid of that. It's like having your child go away to get married. Sure, you're going to add another child, but you lose the one that you spent all your time and effort into. Flawed analogy, obviously, but you get the essence of what I'm trying to say.

The fact is that we believe that Adam Jones and the other prosepects linked with this trade will fulfill their entire potential, and we believe it because they are ours. Maybe they will and maybe they won't. But until we separate ourselves from our sentimentality just long enough to look at situations like this from a neutral, 3rd party/team's perspective, swallowing a pill like this isn't nearly as hard.

James, I don't know if this is sentimental for me at all. If it's Jones/Morrow/Clement for Santana plus an extension, I'm all over that. But what is being discussed: Jones/some combination of two more of our better players for Bedard for only 2 years, I'll pass...

Mariners prospects that were "can't miss" at one time or another..Ryan Christensen, Chris Snelling, Ryan Anderson, Travis Blackley, Clint Nageotte, Grage Dobbs, Jamal Strong. As Dr. Phil would say "how's that workin' for ya?"

John - not really. Of course, signing Teixeira is a hypothetical. But if you ask me whether Teix or Adam Jones is more valuable to the Mariners, I think you can guess what my answer will be, and I can assure you that talent is not the only variable I take into account.

The whole point of "growing from within" is so that a team can go out and use the FA market to fill in the last remaining holes. You've got it backwards. Imagine what the Mariners would have to do via FA if they traded Jones, Clement, Sherrill for Bedard.

If Beltre walks and we don't sign Teix, can you imagine what trouble the team will be in if we don't have Jones, Sherrill, Clement, and others?

Just because I want to save our best prospects and let them play doesn't mean I can't suggest that we be players in FA. The two are not mutually exclusive.

If you have invested time and money into this new kid, why not give him a shot to see what he can do?

Seattle's bullpen is arguably one of the best in the majors right now and will still be strong even if George Sherrill is dealt in a Bedard swap.

Geoff, you keep saying this without a shred of evidence. It was an average bullpen last year, and is only subtracting parts this year. Instead of just claiming this nonsense, show us your evidence.

xxx

hawkfan - The failures of those previous prospects has no bearing on Adam Jones. None.

i disagree. in fact i dont see why a trade with adam jones is necessary. if the mariners want to trade for a pitcher why not scott kazmir. he is younger and healthier and is more easily gotten.
consider this, the rays have lots of young pitching and lots of young position players but they need a catcher and we have a few. structuring a trade around clement and others preserves the outfield and jones. the rays need some veteran influence as well and that we have plenty of
as for the mariners their track record is horrendous. other than the buhner and moyer trades when has one worked out well? we sign matt lawton and dinosaur phobe carl everett and let scott hatteberg go elsewhere why?
we sign vidro but he has no power and stats that are less stellar. we complain about lopez at 2nd yet give cabrera(sp) to indians for what? why did we need eduardo perez? why did we trade for joe bouchard and then release him--giving up matt thornton? you want more there are plenty
the bottom line is that ownership gives money to people who dont understand/chuck armstrong and bavasi vs any other front office people.
so why not look at grady fuson or jim beattie as a gm? why not look at rick sweet or bobby valentine as mgr? why not try to see how the yankees,angels,redsox,athletics,tigers etc get more young players incorporated into their major league roster from drafts when they had lower picks than the mariners.
this is more than bedard, this is about a foundation that is cracked and needs repair

I agree with hawkfan. Yes, those prospects have no bearing on how AJ will do. However, I think that hawkfans list shows how little it happens that a good minor leaguer has sucess in the big show. Yes, there have been some recent successes, like J-Pez(depending on how you see it), U-Bet, King Felix, J.J, and the departed Mateo, but what about Jeremy Reed, Mike Morse, Jose Cruz Jr., Bobby Madritsch? You could possibly take MM and JR off of the list if they do well this year, but still, minor league success doesn't always equal major league success.

Missoula---

None of those guys had done by age 21 what Adam Jones has done at AAA. Don't believe the numbers? Ask the scouts. Adam Jones is a much better prospect than anyone the Ms have grown not named Kenny or Alex. And I'm not forgetting Edgar. He just developed and got his chsnce late.

Remember back to the "glory days" of 2001-2002 when the future of the franchise was guaranteed because of all the young arms. Lou would not get the missing pieces because the M's were unwilling to sacrifice the future.

Ryan, Clint, Rhett, Blakely, Franklin and a myriad of others never reached their potential much less (in Anderson) never making the big leagues. Others, like Meche realized their monetary goals without ever fulfilling their real potential on the field.

Trade Jones+ for Bedard, it is simply a no brainer.

I'm talking position players. King Felix in is a league of his own.

nwdoc--

I'm not sure how highly the rest of the league valued our old prospects but they do value Jones. Besides, comparing pitching prospects to position players is apples and oranges due to how often pitchers break down.

If we had 2-3 others like Adam Jones in the system I might agree that it is no-brainer. But we don't and the prospect of Raul Ibanez turning potential outs into singles and doubles again should scare everyone.

Geoff - one thing to clarify -

No one is saying don't get Bedard. They're saying don't trade Adam Jones for Bedard. Morrow + Wlad + Tillman + Sherril + Triunfel was even advocated ON USSM as something worth doing, because the defense in the outfield is so horrendous that the loss of Adam Jones negates so much of Bedard's value, that it becomes pointless. Dave Cameron himself said he would give up almost the whole farm for Bedard as long as Adam Jones wasn't included in the deal. Bedard + Jones isn't writing off 2008. Bedard FOR Jones is, because there is not enough of an upgrade to make a difference.

Jones-Tillman-Sherrill-Tui- Chen for Bedard. If Jones has to be traded, that makes Morrow, Clement, and Trunfel off limits. I do not want to trade Jones, but understand you have to give something to get something. You forget we have a lefty with a great on-base in double A, in Michael Saunders. I really like Saunders who is a better base stealer and better eye then Jones and he is a lefty. I look for him to have big year and catapault himself to the upper ranks in the Mariners system. We also have Wlad, so it's not like the cupboard is bare with outfield prospects. I don't like giving up Tillman, but we have Morrow, Butler, Aumonte, and Ramirez.

I think if a few things fall right, with Bedard we can take the west. The big two being progression from Jose Lopez and a regression to the mean from Sexson. I also look for the bullpen to be as good if Lowe comes back healthy and Mickolio makes the squad. I also think they need to give Wlad the chance to earn the starting spot vacated by a Jones trade. Also look for Clement to start the season at AAA and come up mid-year and provide some needed lefty power.

The M's goal for the 2008 season should be to make the playoffs and have a decent chance at the WS. This would seem to be impossible with the current roster. Trading for Bedard changes everything. For reasons pointed out by Geoff and others, the playoffs would be within reach. And having two outstanding starting pitchers would make a WS trip at least possible. In my view, it is crazy to give up this very real possibility in order to keep various prospects (including Jones or whomever) for some imagined future season.

Touche mike. Good points. I'm not saying that AJ doesn't have great talent, or that he won't do well in the Big Leagues. I'm just pointing out that the deck is stacked against him. I'm also saying that it is very hard to judge how good/great a player will be until he spends some time in the majors. On one hand, it is a big risk for the Mariners to trade AJ for a starting pitcher who has hit around 180-190 innings at the most in one year, but on the other hand it is a big risk if the Mariners keep Jones. What if Jones isn't as nearly good as he was hyped to be *cough* Jeremy Reed *cough*. Granted this may not happen, but if it does, then we have a little better defensive outfield, but still end up with less productions/runs scored at the plate. Oy Vey! I'm glad I'm not in Bavasi's situation! In a perfect world, I wouldn't trade AJ for Bedard or AJ and others for Bedard. I would trade some others for Bedard. Since this isn't a perfect world and it was clear that our starting pitching was shaky last year, I reluctantly say if Jones is the linch-pin to a deal getting done, and we don't lose too much else, then do it. Better pitching trumps better hitting.

There's really too much made out of the Mariners' 2007 run differential. The Diamondbacks also had a negative run differential and they got all the way to the NLCS last year.

The M's negative RD was pretty much the result of three awful starters; Jeff Weaver, Horacio Ramirez, and Ryan Feierabend. One is gone and two will either be improved or be in AAA for 2008.

Frankly, I'm against giving up any top prospects for a starter right now. It's really a year premature for that. Nor do I think it's necessary.

Go into the season with Felix/Jarrod/Miguel and Carlos, and let seven guys fight it out in ST for the 5th spot. Among Dickey, Baek, Ramirez, Morrow, Roland-Smith, White, and Feierabend on is apt to earn the job in March. Then reassess in July. No reason the M's won't still be in the race at that time.

And, Librocrat, I, for one, am saying don't get Bedard. The USSM offer as cited is ridiculous.

GeoW - We do not have a shot. The Angels are REALLY, REALLY Good. They were great last year, they've made FA acquisitions and now they're even better. This is not some good team that is easy to overcome simply because we were close to them in the late part of last year.

and MissoulaMarinerFan -

I understand that Jones MAY do poorly, but Bedard also MAY get injured and Sexson and Ibanez MAY not improve... etc, Most likely Jones won't flop. Is there a chance he will? Sure, but there is a chance that anything can happen at any time. There is a chance that Santana signs a 6 year deal with the Yankees, breaks his finger and never pitches well again.

I know you're not disagreeing that strongly, but think of it this way - by using the logic that Adam Jones may not work well, you're basically saying that no team should ever play young people ever because they may not work out. At what point do we draw the line and say "look, this guy has real talent. We should play him even though it is still risky because he has the potential to be great." For Adam Jones, that line is now. How do we know this? That's the reason the Orioles want him so badly.

Also, as terrible as the pitching was (MY GOD WAS IT BAD) last year, two things need to be remembered. First, the numbers would have looked better if we had better defense. Pitching numbers are punished for bad defense. Second, we can still find a FA pitcher or use Ryan Roland Smith, Dickey or Baek, and these three people will already be a huge upgrade from Ho Ram's numbers. Even Ho Ram would probably be an improvement from Ho Ram's numbers. It's hard to be that terrible. We can still IMPROVE our starting pitching (not Bedard level, just better) without trading Adam Jones.

Lance - I don't necessarily disagree with you.

But what the issue here is whether Bavasi is in that "Win in 2008 or be fired" mode. If we assume he is - and, by all indications, he is - then we have to assume that keeping prospects is not where he is right now. Okay, if we grant him that, then how do we win in 2008? Well, we still have to keep Adam Jones. It's not really a question. We can spare all the other young people, but Adam Jones is vital to this team's success. So if we have to trade for Bedard because we have to win in 2008, throw the farm at him but keep Adam Jones, because he needs to be on this team.

USSM didn't endorse that trade. Sorry I gave that impression. They were simply arguing that a move of a large number of our prospects for Bedard would make sense if "win in 2008" is the philosophy, but getting rid of Jones to do it is where that falls apart. If there was a mandate that the team had to win in 2008, then the trade of those 5 prospects for Bedard is something worth doing.

We, Mariner fans, don't have a mandate, so USSM, LL, PI and the rest of us (except for DOV) would never make that trade either.

from Jeff: I kind of find your point #3 funny, because you were the one hounding Bavasi to trade the moon for Al Reyes last year at the trade deadline.

I don't remember it this way at all. In fact, I remember GEOFF being pleased that Bavasi didn't make any trade at all, because the available talent was so poor.

from Reboskar: Seattle's bullpen is arguably one of the best in the majors right now and will still be strong even if George Sherrill is dealt in a Bedard swap.

Geoff, you keep saying this without a shred of evidence. It was an average bullpen last year, and is only subtracting parts this year. Instead of just claiming this nonsense, show us your evidence.

What team were you watching last year? There was this guy named JJPutz who was the BEST closer in the game. The middle relievers played well above expectations and the bullpen was the reason this team was in the race in August. If you were paying attention, you would also realize that it was a poor starting rotation that failed to go deep in games, or like HoRam had too many big innings against him that finally wore down the bullpen on that ill-fated road trip in late August. Other than needing a better right handed set-up guy for the 8th, the Bullpen was the strength of this team. Show some shred of evidence why the Bullpen wasn't well above average, so you at least sound reasonably informed when you post here.

Jeff in post #3 nailed it. It's that simple.

"Then how does one explain the 2007 New York Yankees, a 94-win wild-card team?"

No explanation necessary, they won exactly nothing. Another failed season, though Wang is the real deal. Don't go over to the "dark side" Geoff. It's telling that those of us on the "aces win" side are confident in our beliefs and have no problem debating our (correct) side of the issue here. The other side has to go to other, inferior websites for moral support and some kind of confirmation of their ideas, even if it means hijacking a thread. They are rightfully insecure in their ideas, so they have to seek comfort in their own little sewing circle, coffee klatsche, bathhouse, etc. It's unbecoming. None of these things are necessary when you're confident and know that you're right.

"the Ms could give up a ton for Bedard, only to have him skate out two years later leaving them with nothing to show for the trade but an empty farm system"

And which players traded to Baltimore would still be in the farm system in 2 years? Of course, we don't know who Baltimore might end up getting, but I doubt if more than one (barring injuries) would still be "prospects" in 2010. That would hardly empty the farm system.

And please, I forget who it was, but everyone can stop calling Yuni a former Mariner prospect. He came here ready to start, and just had to prove it first. (which only took about 3 months)

to librocrat - you are a typical liberal politician, repeating the same spiel which is meaningless in the first place.
Jeff nailed it, as pointed out by Bill and others. All this jawing, over and over, is such a waste. I log on every once in a while to see if there is some significant discussion - Its tiring to wade through 100 useless repititions.

test

Mr X--

How very, um, insulting, without a shred of anything to back up your hate.

You know, I see arrogance from both sides of the stats vs old school debate, but nothing quite like this. You've shown your true colors.

Jay, I'm not going to name any names. They know who they are, and that should be embarassment enough.

And it isn't hate, it's pity. Insecurity and cowardice must be a huge burden, but I'm only speculating.

None of these things are necessary when you're confident and know that you're right.

Lol. Thanks, X. Always feels good to chuckle at the end of a long day...

Bedard's a very good pitcher when healthy, but he seems to be hurt half of the time.  Also you would only have him for 2 years and that a pretty steep price to pay for him. Why not keep your prospects this year and in the offseason get somebody like Sabathia for 1 or 2 years only.  You could greatly overpay to get him - say (25 - 30 million) per year.  Thus, we would be able to contend as early as next year and be set up for the future as well.

"First, the numbers would have looked better if we had better defense."

did you watch the back end last year? I dont care how good of a defense you have, it doesnt matter if your 4 and 5 guys thro their 88mph fastball in the middle of the plate.

if we continue to lose with the mentality "just wait a little longer" this francise will continue to fail...

Howbout a little urgency... we're constantly looking to the future because the teams we put together don't have it. We need impact players its gonna take more than three seasons for our young guys to take on the role. If you think we can get them through FA you're wrong...

Lcrat, and others who think similarly: I don't believe Bavasi is basing his decisions under the impression that his job is on the line if the team doesn't win big this season.

He may even survive if the team falls back a bit depending on the circumstances. Cleveland didn't clean house after their disappointing 2006. They stayed the course and then were rewarded in 2007.

Bavasi seems to have strong backing from ownership and there's no reason for him to do anything stupid to get Bedard. If there was a need for him to make a panic trade with Baltimore it would have been done long ago.

I'm sure Bavasi is looking not only to this up coming season, but beyond as well. That's a GM's job.

And, as to "guaranties", there are no guaranties in baseball. Anymore than there is in life. You make the best decisions possible for the good of the team and then play the schedule. No matter where one sits on an issue it would be foolish for anyone to believe anything is guaranteed. Too many things can happen.

Not a problem Adam. We may disagree, but you're just as confident in your opinion as I am in mine. You may be wrong, but you make your case in an honorable way and don't run away to seek false validation elsewhere. (Not that I know of anyway)

"Mariners prospects that were "can't miss" at one time or another..Ryan Christensen, Chris Snelling, Ryan Anderson, Travis Blackley, Clint Nageotte, Grage Dobbs, Jamal Strong. As Dr. Phil would say "how's that workin' for ya?""

Wha... Greg Dobbs and Jamal Strong were "can't miss" prospects at one time? I don't know if they ever so much as sniffed that label in there careers. Not to mention Blackley and Negeotte were never can't miss prospects. They were potential useful parts, but were never top of the rotation material.

Jeff,

While I agree with the second part of your post about the M's foundation being cracked, I'm guessing you were kidding about the M's trading for Scott Kazmir.

At 25, Kazmir had an ERA+ of 130, K/G of 10.4 (second only to some guy named Bedard), and a manageable BB/G (3.9) and GB% (43.1). He's also still under Rays control at a bargain basement salary.

Tampa is now well run by Andrew Friedman, and there are very few players in baseball they'd deal Kazmir for. The M's don't have any of those players that makes sense for a team that's building for 2009.

A more plausible idea (as well as a better alternative to the Jones/Bedard trade) is the one floated by Scraps of Clement for Snell.

I have nothing new to say about the great Jones v. Bedard debate of '08. I see merits and flaws in both advocated courses of action, but neither option comes close to making the M's a favorite for the Division, let alone the Series, any time in the foreseeable future. There is no way to guarantee a World Series by any means, although the Yankees' performance over the last decade suggests that it is possible to guarantee a playoff spot by one means - spending about 2.5X the ML average payroll. That mainly works because nobody else can do it, though the BoSox are getting closer.

I do think Jeff has an excellent point about one factor that is a big (to the point of being unfair) advantage for the M's in '08 (as it was in 2001). The MLB wild card competition is always completely unfair, given the unbalanced schedule. Somebody is always favored, and this year it is the M's. When the 4-team AL West is the weak sister Division, as it is this year, the unbalanced schedule is even more of an advantage for us than it would be for a projected second place team in the East or Central. Honestly, the current Division alignments are ridiculous, with the NL Central having 6 teams, but that's the bed the ML owners made for themselves. We don't have to outplay the Angels this year. We just have to play everybody tough and knock the living snot out of the A's and Rangers, and that just might be doable. Once you get into the playoffs anything is possible. AL wildcard teams are 7-6 in the Division Series, 3-4 in the ALCS, and 2-1 in the World Series over the 13 seasons where we have sent 4 teams to the playoffs. I'd happily settle for a wild card berth right now. Statistically, it's just as good a shot as the Division. Does this justify trading the farm for Bedard this year? Not necessarily, but it suggests that getting an impact player in the short term is potentially really worth something.

"No explanation necessary, they won exactly nothing. Another failed season, though Wang is the real deal. Don't go over to the "dark side" Geoff. It's telling that those of us on the "aces win" side are confident in our beliefs and have no problem debating our (correct) side of the issue here. The other side has to go to other, inferior websites for moral support and some kind of confirmation of their ideas, even if it means hijacking a thread. They are rightfully insecure in their ideas, so they have to seek comfort in their own little sewing circle, coffee klatsche, bathhouse, etc. It's unbecoming. None of these things are necessary when you're confident and know that you're right."

Ah, it wouldn't be a day on the blog without getting insulted by Mr X. A person who really doesn't know how to do anything else. The fact that adults can act as childish as Mr X is pretty sad.

"Tampa is now well run by Andrew Friedman, and there are very few players in baseball they'd deal Kazmir for. The M's don't have any of those players that makes sense for a team that's building for 2009."

Tampa is absolutely LOADED with talent. That team is going to be good. Probably sooner rather than later. Who would have thought that we'd be pointing to Tampa Bay as an example of a well run franchise!

"Jay, I'm not going to name any names. They know who they are, and that should be embarassment enough."

Ooooooo.... Grow up.

LOL, Faceplant, it wasn't directed at you either. A lot of guilty consciences on here today.

Everett - if I agree with Jeff, it can't be Jawing.

From Matt W: I should declare my lack of faith in the team building abilities of the front office (and I do not know how it works well enough to automatically blame Bavasi) using trades and free agents leads me to lean towards keeping Jones. If other holes in the line up - power LH bat, defence in LF (and RF if you are intending on trading Jones) defence at 1B, 8th inning man etc – had been addressed this off season I would be verging on saying Bedard would be a good idea and the Mariners could do it. But I do not think this has been done.

Injecting some positivity, even with no deal everyone could have a career year at the Ms, the Angels could lose their key men to the DL and we could walk to the pennant. Bring it on!

That sums up my view. Geoff posted his 5 points of needed Mariner improvement (sorry, I'm too lazy to look up the real name and date) and I think there are even more problems than that (which I won't repeat for the umpteenth time).

My problem getting too incensed about the potential trade for Bedard (either for or against) is that I don't think Bedard is enough, but I don't know how much a future we have even with AJ. On the other hand, I totally agree that having a two team division is an opportunity to be taken advantage of. Unfortunately, I can go on. On the third hand (remember, Homer Simpson and family are based on Oregonians), from what I've seen, the franchise doesn't see the basic structural problems I do, so I don't see any reason to think they'll be fixed. On the fourth hand...

So I'm going into this season, no matter what happens between now and then, hoping for the best, rooting the team on, but still expecting to be left behind in September.

Hope things are OK in Montreal.

scottM, sorry, I remember it very clearly at the trade deadline. Geoff was posting quite a bit about getting Reyes because he felt the M's were using their bullpen so heavily that it was bound to break down. He ended up being right to a great extent (not that it would have been a good trade for Reyes, regardless).

He felt one more reliever would possibly put the team over the top to get to the playoffs. I remember replying against this idea post after post. Not that trading for help at the deadline was bad, but not what Tampa wanted for Reyes. If I remember the pieces correctly it was something like Wlad for Reyes. No thanks.

I'm not against his or anyone's desire to win now. I'm also not against this desire to trade for Bedard to compete. I just don't think Geoff or the rest of the pro trade crowd is doing a very good job of convincing me that it's ultimately in the best interests of the team long term, not that my opinion matters anyway. But also, from Geoff's posts and the pro trade crowd here, it looks like the anti trade crowd is not convincing them either.

In the end we don't know what the M's are thinking, but I've already resigned myself to the belief that Jones will not be here in the Spring and Bedard somehow will be.

BTW I respect Geoff as a sportswriter as probably all of you do as well, even if we disagree with how he feels the team should build a winner. And the libertarian style of this message board makes it the best since Sando had his blog for football.

Sorry, the positivity paragraph in my earlier post should also have been in italics. It was Matt's.

If you're going to hope that everything goes right, why not just hope that Morrow is a big success as a starter? Then we keep our future AND contend this year.

And how do you get to posit that Clement might be a good DH? I thought he was supposedly going for Bedard.

Give it a rest, Librocrat, your game, as un-original as it is, gets tiresome. As posted on another thread, get your own chops, quit theiving others analysis, and stick with an opinion. Amazingly, gutting the system (as definined by LL) is now OK so long as the club doesn't offer Jones up. So, giving up 4 out of the top 5 is better than 2 so long as one is not Jones? That is stupid.

the latest rumors (or at least the ones from earlier this week) don't have clement in the deal.

tugboat -

If you read what I wrote, and CLEARLY you didn't, I was referring to what we should do if we HAVE to have a "Win now" philosophy in 2008.

I will repost it here, so you can read it again, for the first time:

"But what the issue here is whether Bavasi is in that "Win in 2008 or be fired" mode. If we assume he is - and, by all indications, he is - then we have to assume that keeping prospects is not where he is right now. Okay, if we grant him that, then how do we win in 2008? Well, we still have to keep Adam Jones. It's not really a question. We can spare all the other young people, but Adam Jones is vital to this team's success. So if we have to trade for Bedard because we have to win in 2008, throw the farm at him but keep Adam Jones, because he needs to be on this team.

USSM didn't endorse that trade. Sorry I gave that impression. They were simply arguing that a move of a large number of our prospects for Bedard would make sense if "win in 2008" is the philosophy, but getting rid of Jones to do it is where that falls apart. If there was a mandate that the team had to win in 2008, then the trade of those 5 prospects for Bedard is something worth doing.

We, Mariner fans, don't have a mandate, so USSM, LL, PI and the rest of us (except for DOV) would never make that trade either."

So, as you can see, in this particular analysis (which is unrelated to whether I would do a Bedard for Jones trade), I am saying that if we are trading for Bedard because we have to win in 2008, then we still need to keep Jones. In 2008 (and ONLY 2008) the rest of the farm is expendable, but Jones is vital.

Please be sure and read what I write before responding, since you clearly didn't respond correctly to anything I had written above.

Artfully dodged, not quite as nimble though when you thought the mantra that was being put forth was different. Two dozen smart-alecked posts calling various posters and (now websites?) stupid looked a lot better when you didn't have to concede that Bedard was a great pitcher that was worth a ton.

Since you can't seem to come up with your own stuff, I'll just point out one thing at a time that I have issue with. To start, you under-rate Morrow, to finish, you over-rate Jones' D contribution. He is not (this year) projectible as a plus fielder. Obviously, his youth and athletic ability make him a candidate for the future, but this season is more than a stretch.

I saw this point on another M's blog, but agree with it so I'll bring it up here.

Technically, the way to determine how much better the M's would get with Bedard is to calculate the win value of Bedard, and subtract the difference between the win value of the people we trade for him and whoever is replacing them.

Bedard is a great pitcher, and the player he'd replace on the M's would be (I hope) Ramirez, so that'd be a good number. But if you subtract out the value of Jones (both defensively and offensively) and Sherril/Morrow/whoever, he's probably only a small improvement.

If you're going to blow your future on your current hopes, I think you've got to do something more than this. You can't just get Bedard, you have to go out and get a real first baseman or something.

"Technically, the way to determine how much better the M's would get with Bedard is to calculate the win value of Bedard, and subtract the difference between the win value of the people we trade for him and whoever is replacing them.

Bedard is a great pitcher, and the player he'd replace on the M's would be (I hope) Ramirez, so that'd be a good number. But if you subtract out the value of Jones (both defensively and offensively) and Sherril/Morrow/whoever, he's probably only a small improvement."

No, that's not what you do, unless you believe that Jones, Sherrill, and Morrow (or whoever) will not be replaced as well. You should have just kept that poor reasoning on the "other blog" because nobody is going to buy it here. Fantasy baseball theories don't work in real baseball.

Tugboat -

I disagree with you, but I understand that if those are your opinions, I can see why you would support the Bedard trade. I, personally, think Morrow is not very useful (for a few years, at least) and Adam Jones' D being outstanding, so obviously it's much harder for me to pull the trigger on a trade like this.

One thing you can bet, though, is that if they make the trade, Bedard is going to be ridiculously fun to watch, if nothing else. I'll hold off regretting the trade for Washburn's outings and I watch balls drop in front of Luis Gonzales :).

Looks like the the surgery to remove the huge USSM corncob from up Mr X's butt was a failure.

You really think we could run an ERA+ of 110 with two gimps in the outfield and Sexson at first base? Seriously the biggest difference in ERA among teams with 5 guys resembling decent starters (ie not Horacio Ramirez) is the defense. If you want the pitching to look better more than 1 out of 5 days you keep Adam Jones, and really they need to replace Sexson's incompetent glove, especially if he's not producing with the bat, but that's enough about a non-Jones issue.

Faceplant, just saw your comment on can't miss prospects you had above. And, I must say, you're overstating matter terribly.

First, to say that Greg Dobbs and Jamal Strong were can't miss prospects is laughable. Strong was just a 5th round draft choice out of college. Nothing great ever. Dobbs was never rated higher than #10 by Baseball America as a Mariners' prospect, let alone all of baseball.

The other guys you mentioned all have one thing in common. Their careers were all derailed by serious injuries. Nine times out of ten that's why a can't miss misses. Not because his talent was overevaluated.

And, a few of the guys you mentioned were simply top prospects, like Brackley and Nageotte. Nobody ever said they were can't miss. Blackley was never a TOR prospect, anyway. Nageotte should have stuck to relieving. So, you're off on that as well.

Compare that to guys like Ken Griffey, Jr., and Alex Rodriguez. True can't miss prospects. Felix, one could say, was a 'can't miss'.

Don't confuse top propsects with "can't miss". Those guys are impact players. They often become franchise players.

And, you can make an argument that even Jones isn't can't miss. Many say he'll be an All-Star, maybe perennial. But, he could just end up an adequate outfielder with a decent major league career.

Point is, you don't get five-tool guys in your system often. We've waited five years for Jones to develop. The next such talent is probably three years away (Triunfel). Do you want to let AJ go so quickly? Not me. At least, not for the likes of Erik Bedard, who I'm not excited about at all.

"No, that's not what you do, unless you believe that Jones, Sherrill, and Morrow (or whoever) will not be replaced as well."

But they'll be replaced by someone who probably isn't going to be as good, or else they wouldn't have their spot on the roster. You greatly upgrade one position and somewhat downgrade three positions.

It would be different if we had quality players to step into the shoes of the people we were trading.

Geoff, your posts have been great.

I could be dead by 2010. I'd like to compete now. Just get Bedard for crissakes.

Ichiro could be declining by 2010, Jones could dissapoint. We could lose players to FA. Bedard has pitched 196 innings nad 180+. At Safeco his ERA will be under 3.00 and in his starts last year the O's won 19 of those games. With the M's we coudl win 30 of those games. He is a K machine, and his WHIP is miniscule.

I figured we'd haveto give up Jones-Clement-Morrow to even be talking to the O's about Bedard. They won't even listen to the Reds if Bruce is not included in a deal, why in the world would they listen to the M's without Jones in the deal. I like Jerry Brewer but he's flat out wrong here. He's fallen in love with prospect statistics, which I could give you many more examples of AAA players who showed great AAA statistics and never made it in MLB.

People talk about the "chances" involved in signing Bedard. Well, frankly, they're unable to see what the "chances" may be in not signing him.

Just sign the guy Bavasi or you can pretty much start doing your resume up for your next job after 2008 and watching other teams in the playoffs again.

Lets trade for Griffey (RF),Bronson Arroyo (5th starter).It won't cost us a ton of talent and we could offload some dead weight Ibanez ot sexon on them.We are not going to win the West this year but we would have a full house again.