The Seattle Times Company

NWjobs | NWautos | NWhomes | NWsource | Free Classifieds |


Our network sites | Advanced

Mariners Blog

Geoff Baker covers the Mariners for The Seattle Times. He provides daily coverage of the team throughout spring training, and during the season.

E-mail Geoff| Mariners Forum| RSS feeds Subscribe | Blog Home

January 31, 2008 2:06 PM

Wilkerson deal announced

Posted by Geoff Baker

UPDATE (4:34 p.m.): Latest on the Erik Bedard saga, courtesy of the Baltimore Sun.

2:06 p.m. We told you a couple of days ago that the Mariners had a back-pocket, one-year deal ready to go with outfielder Brad Wilkerson. (And turns out it's for $3 million too, a lot better than what I tried taking a guess at. That's why I'm not the GM.) Some of you would prefer we wait until teams announce things in a news release before we tell you what's going on. Others like to hear stuff ahead of time. Now, you can all be happy. Whether or not this means the Erik Bedard trade we told you about last Sunday is now going to be declared "official" is anyone's guess.

My take is that this deal is exclusive of the Bedard trade. At worst, you get a backup outfielder in case Adam Jones falls on his face. Or, who can give Jones and Raul Ibanez some more regular rest.

Wilkerson could have taken a one-year deal to be a backup with the Boston Red Sox. But he knows he can get into 100 games with the Mariners if that Bedard trade happens (which it most likely will, once the legal issues/hurdles raised by...Peter Angelos???...are dealt with). Anyway, there's a conference call scheduled with Wilkerson in about 20 minutes, which Larry Stone is going to take. Believe it or not, I've actually been on vacation the past week.

For those of you still complaining that we somehow jumped the gun on the Bedard story in relaying it to you last Sunday, here, once again, is what we wrote in the very first blog entry:

"Adam Jones has left his Venezuelan Winter League team and flies to Baltimore tomorrow morning to take a physical so he can be dealt to the Orioles in exchange for pitcher Erik Berdard. No word yet on how many players going Baltimore's way."

The rest was followed by the quotes Jones gave to the Venezuelan newspaper, Diario Panorama. When we got a second source, Mariners spokesman Tim Hevly, confirming Jones had been pulled out of Venezuelan winter league action and called back to the U.S., we told you that, too. We asked Hevly if Jones was headed home to Arizona and he replied: "when we say 'home' we mean the United States.'' That's all he would say. The team allowed Jones to say the rest in his quotes, which the M's did nothing to refute.

When the Baltimore Sun first quoted Orioles officials that night saying a deal had not been finalized, this is what we wrote on the blog: "Many of you have started wringing your hands over this item in the Baltimore Sun, written after our blog post, saying that an Erik Bedard-Adam Jones deal had not been finalized. Well, yes, we know that. If it was finalized, then Jones would not be flying back to the United States to take a physical."

So, what's the problem?

We have always been well aware that no deal is officially complete until a physical is taken, if one is requested. I sat through the nightmare in Toronto seven years ago when the Blue Jays traded David Wells to the White Sox for Mike Sirotka. When Sirotka turned out to have a pre-existing elbow injury that ended his career before he threw another pitch, the Blue Jays were out of luck and the "buyer beware" rule became ingrained throughout baseball. So, no, it is not unusual for teams to do medical checks on players before a deal is complete.

Unfortunately, in this case, nothing "routine" is taking place. The Orioles put the deal on-hold. If it's to work out "legal issues" arising from the Jones interview, take it up with them. My job is to get the interviews and tell you what's going on. Not to worry about what MLB teams might do as a reaction to that news.

Some of you, I know, understand that basic premise of the job a media member has and will comprehend that point. Others honestly do not know that part of a reporter's responsibility, but welcome a clarification of the matter in good faith. There are still others out there who simply do not like the media and will go to any lengths to air their grievances in any forum they can find.

Over the years, I've grown tired of this latter group. If that shows me to have a shortcoming, so be it. I just find it wholly unoriginal. And I'm not talking about those of you who write in with serious questions about how we source things, or decide to publish. That's all very fair. It's the ones who come on to sling mud, their mind already made up that the media is an evil beast. If you feel that way, why spend so much time on here?

But I've allowed you to take your shots. We are a democracy, after all. Just rest assured, if the exact same situation happened today, I would not change a single aspect of our coverage. This isn't me getting defensive, just stating the facts. Two teams had a deal last Sunday pending physicals. Happens all the time in baseball. Let them explain why it's been delayed for much of this week. If they've got a beef with coverage being inaccurate, let them come out and explain themselves instead of hiding all week.

We told you what we know. Larry Stone and myself. Stone deserves as much credit for the original scoop as I do, by the way, it's just me that has the instant forum here. But he did much of the work. What we wrote last Sunday still stands. What we wrote about Wilkerson, well, there you have it.

Those of you who still don't like the media, go find another horse to flog. This one's still riding.

Digg Digg | Newsvine Newsvine

Submit a comment

*Required Field

Type the characters you see in the picture above.

Posted by Pete

2:42 PM, Jan 31, 2008

Aside from a small bump in fielding, can someone explain why we didn't just keep Broussard to fill this spot?

Broussard has great power, and hits for much, much more average than Wilkerson.

This all just seems so utterly pointless. There seemingly is no method to anything.

Wilkerson can cover more outfield ground, which admittedly is great, but Broussard's offense would seem to balance out that difference.


Posted by Chris from Bothell

2:45 PM, Jan 31, 2008

Still waiting to see the "Changes are coming in the months ahead to our comment functionality that will allow us to better-control the content." I look forward to them helping weed out some of the juvenile, barely coherent one-off posts we've seen in the last week.

And is it a total pipedream to think that if Jones stays here, we could have a shuffle that ends in:

LF Wilkerson
CF Ichiro
RF Jones
DH/1B Ibanez
1B/DH Sexson
PH Vidro

I mean, I know that the same McLaren who ran vets into the ground last year, and who projects an epic rebound for Richie this year, won't dare move Raul and Richie. But I can dream...

Posted by scottM

2:45 PM, Jan 31, 2008

So Wilkerson it is. Hard to get too excited about this acquisition, but it does seem to indicate (though not as much as AJ's premature announcement of a trip to Baltimore) that the deal for Bedard will be announced any hour now.

I do hope that between Wlad, Reed, Morse, Wilkerson, and Ibanez, the M's will honestly allow the cream to rise this year in the outfield. Other than Ichiro in center the other pieces are not stellar defensive prospects. And, if any of them slump at the plate, I do hope McLaren has a much quicker hook than last season. That goes ESPECIALLY for Sexson!

Posted by Kyle

2:48 PM, Jan 31, 2008

Hey Geoff, you should send all your "vacation" expenses to the Orioles c/o Peter Angelos.

Just don't expect a speedy reply!

Hope you (and your family) are enjoying this vacation!

Posted by weebs

2:50 PM, Jan 31, 2008

You're doing a great job, Geoff. Ignore the haters - it's your job to break it and even though this has been drug out you've done well keeping us updated, even if it's rehashing stuff.

Posted by Zack

2:50 PM, Jan 31, 2008

Our lineup in 2008


Jeez, that's awful. And our corner outfielders will be Ibanez (terrible) and Wilkerson (average at best). If Bedard and Felix are both top 5 in the Cy Young we might have a shot at the west, but man that offense will struggle

Posted by scottM

2:51 PM, Jan 31, 2008

Pete. Last season I went to an Angel's game with Broussard in left field. A couple of flubs cost us the game out there. He looked clueless even on routine fly balls. Plus the man it twice as slow as Ibanez. The better question is why we didn't extend Jose Guillen. And if the answer is the steriods or HGH connection, the M's and MLB are hardly pure. Which leads to the question: why not Barry Bonds for one year to complement Bedard and give us some great pop at DH?

Posted by Adam

2:56 PM, Jan 31, 2008

Wilkerson has hit .234 over the last three years.

He's stolen 15 total bases in those three years.

He struck out once every three ABs last year, and that was better than his 2006 rate! Think about that!!

He's a downgrade from Guillen.

So, in sum, we'll have downgraded from Guillen to Wilkerson, lost Adam Jones' offense and defense, and Sherrill from the bullpen.

All for Bedard. We've weakened the rest of the team to get a guy with an injury history who only plays once every five days.

And he's expected to make up for that weakening, PLUS the difference between us and the Angels.


Posted by bsstecks

3:06 PM, Jan 31, 2008

Defensively Wilkerson is barely a drop down from Guillen. Offensively he had 35 HR in the last 650 AB's. His AVG and OBP = that of a regular #8 hitter. Plus, he'll only be starting until midseason when Wlad comes up, you get a boost in all categories.

We aren't downgrading defensively from last year, because Guillen wasn't any good in RF and you can't count Jones Defense cuz we never got to use it.

We are upgrading in Pitching with Bedard and Silva over Weaver and Horam which is a HUGE improvement, you lose NO defense from last year and you are about the same as before in offense with a Wlad\Wilkerson platoon in place of Guillen.

Bedard and Silva make about a 100 run change from Weaver and HoRam last year, incidently, 100 runs off our run total last year puts Seattle at #5 in MLB in runs allowed. So you take an 88 win team and beef up the pitching and don't hurt any other part of the team, and you have a team with a solid playoff shot.

All they have to do is split with the Angels which will be hard in the regular season and they have a legit shot at the playoffs.

Sexson, Lopez can only get better and by July Clement will be getting as many at bats as Vidro which improve our offense. We won't be as good as LAA, but the better team doesn't always win. Don't tell me the M's shouldn't have won 88 games last year and that they couldn't do it again, if they did it before they can do it again and now they'll be better than they were last year. The 116 win M's shouldn't have done that either, but they did.

Posted by HelpFelix

3:11 PM, Jan 31, 2008

Wilkerson agrees to $3M!!!

That's a hell of a lot better than Geoff mentioned the other day regarding a $8-$8.5M figure!!!

I told everyone I'd be pissed "if" he was signed for more than $4.5M.

He does have $2M of incentives he could get though. But that's a lot better than $8M and change!!!

Posted by OlyOle

3:12 PM, Jan 31, 2008

Is there any way we could throw in some Cougar Gold if he promises to hit like the 2004 Wilkerson?

Posted by vertigoman

3:21 PM, Jan 31, 2008

Q: When does batting average, strikeouts and stolen bases matter to a Sabermatric stat head (Those stats that money ballers have deemed "overrated") and when does it matter for one player and not another?

A: When it conveniently helps an argument. I wonder how many bases Adam Jones stole in AAA last year. I also have to wonder how many times he struck out in AAA last year (not to mention in his abbreviated stint in the majors).

Q: When has Wilkerson ever been a lesser defensive player than Guillen?

A: Never.

Posted by Pete

3:23 PM, Jan 31, 2008

scottM -

Agreed, Wilkerson is definitely a step up over Broussard in the field -- Ben never belonged in left field in Safeco, that's for sure. Right field was a better spot for him. And you're right, Guillen is the better question.

All I'm saying is that Broussard is a far better bat than Wilkerson. And the way the Mariners are going about assembling the roster seems extremely non-linear, disorganized, and without logic.

Why let Guillen go and trade Broussard for nothing, when you know your entire offseason plan centers around trading away Adam Jones for a starting pitcher? It's coo-coo.

In an apples-to-apples comparison, left-handed hitter comparison, I would take Broussard over Wilkerson 10 times out of ten.

Posted by Frankie

3:25 PM, Jan 31, 2008

I don't understand why everyone is so upset about this.

Wilkerson is the Jose Guillen Replacement. You didn't replace Adam Jones. I hate to break it to everyone but Adam Jones never solidified a spot in the outfield. He was PROJECTED to be the starter this year. If I have to remind you that he dropped a couple of balls out in the field last year when he came up, I will. It isn't like you are having Wilkerson replace Ichiro.

And stop complaining about Bedard. Let's compare the rotation from last year to the potential rotation this year:



Which one is better? That's what I thought.

How can you say the offense will struggle? It is pretty much the SAME offense as last year, only with Wilkerson instead of Guillen!!

Posted by pbk13

3:29 PM, Jan 31, 2008

Well there you have it...your 2008 Seattle Mariners, complete with a mediocre outfield (except of course for Ichiro) and no competent first baseman to be found. A lot of people here seem to think Sexson will rebound, but really, is there any basis for saying that? IMHO, that fork sticking out of Sexson's back means he's done. By May, if we don’t have a winning record, a lot of people who supported the Jones-Bedard trade will be singing a far different tune. If the losing continues, it’s possible that by the trade deadline, the Mariners once again will be sellers, not buyers. Heck, maybe even Bedard could become trade bait. Or alternatively, Bedard will be sitting exactly where he ended the 2007 season: on the injured list.

Sorry I can’t be more optimistic, folks, but that’s how it looks from here. I could easily be wrong. I do try to be optimistic. Maybe Balentien will surprise. Maybe Clement can play first. Maybe a small pox epidemic will sweep through the Angels’ dugout.

Posted by Druv

3:30 PM, Jan 31, 2008

I sure hope that Bedard stays healthy for a change, goes 24-2 and wins the Cy Young narrowly over Felix who also wins 20. I hope that O' Flaherety turns out to be as good as Sherrill and Rhodes returns to his form of 2001 and wins fireman of the year and comeback player of the year. I hope that Sexson wins the home run crown with a batting average north of 250. I hope that Lopez has a breakout year. I hope that Ibanez is the MVP, and the Vidro stunningly starts hitting for power like he did a number of years ago. ANd I hope we have no injuries, as we have no tenable back-up at third, short, second, first (well, we have no starter there either) or outfield.

I hope that a lot of impossible things happen this year, because in a year or two the team will be firmly in the cellar. Again.

Posted by Frankie

3:33 PM, Jan 31, 2008

Wow you people are negative....

Posted by jkherz

3:38 PM, Jan 31, 2008

I would like to chime in here and remind all of the "Bedard deal haters" out there that PITCHING WINS CHAMPIONSHIPS. Not a rookie who "projects" to turn out to be a good player. All he has right now is potential that may never be fulfilled, while Bedard is a proven Major League performer.

If the deal happens, Bedard solidifies our rotation - which is and should be our #1 priority. Whoever plays RF is a secondary concern, and it is a position that is much easier to fill if you are simply hoping for average production (which is all that Jones will provide this year).

Now, if Jones turns out to be the next Griffey or A-Rod, of course all of you who are against this deal can come on here and tout your knowledge and I'll eat my crow. But Jones is a few years away from full development at best, so let's try to cut down on "the sky is falling" projections concerning next year's team... please?!?

Simply put, this deal would make us a better team right now and help improve our chances to make the playoffs this season.

Posted by Tacoma Rain

3:44 PM, Jan 31, 2008

I beg to differ...
We have a competent first baseman...Wilkerson.
He just we NEVER play there.

Posted by The Ultimate Optimist

3:47 PM, Jan 31, 2008

My thinking on the Guillen thing is that Bavasi had a pretty good idea what it would cost to resign him and wasn't enamored with what he'd get in return. He probably had a plan at the beginning of the offseason to move Jones for a TOR starter but, obviously, knew that wasn't a guarantee. He probably wanted to replace Guillen with a better FA than Wilkerson but never thought, or hoped it wouldn't take this long to finalize deal. He was probably reluctant to sign a big name to replace Guillen when he still had Jones. If we could have moved Jones for Bedard back in December, I bet we'd have a different OFer than Wilkerson. The Bedard trade took too long, the bigger free agents signed elsewhere and they got what they could. This way, if the deal never materializes, Bavasi hasn't committed 10-12 million for an OFer that would fight for playing time with Jones.

Make sense?

Posted by Lance

3:55 PM, Jan 31, 2008

OlyOle, don't expect BW to hit like he did in 2004.

They do tests now.

(It's a joke. Kind of.)

Posted by Chris from Bothell

4:00 PM, Jan 31, 2008

bsstecks - Why on God's greenish-gray earth do expect to see either Balentien OR Clement in the lineup until at least September?

This is McLaren's lineup, we're talking about here. Unless you come over in a trade, you can't take the field unless you present an AARP card. :) McLaren will choose "veterans" every, every, every time.

If Balentien or Clement are doing more than bench warming and the usual "I'm just keeping my eyes open and learning so much" nonsense, before say, the ASB, I'll eat my hat.

Posted by Tacoma Rain

4:01 PM, Jan 31, 2008

Everything makes sense...other than we still have Ibanez in the OF...and ANY GM that even remote considers defense would not do this.

Posted by Mariner Pete

4:03 PM, Jan 31, 2008


I'm sorry that you mistook what some of us have said regarding the trade. What I have tried to convey is that even though reliable sources can confirm what might be highly probable, it is still better to sit on a story until all sides have given the o.k. Yes, you as a reporter are doing your job and making sure that you go through the proper channels to allow you to print your story. However, once you give even a sliver of information, even reliable and first hand, someone else can take that and spin it their way.(Which is what probably happened) It's great to get the word out once you get it, but it is also unhealthy for those involved in the trade to get wind of it and suddenly the trade might not happen) I think you can understand my side of this.

Posted by Adam

4:03 PM, Jan 31, 2008

Sorry, vert - Just thought I'd speak with stats most people accept.

How about OPS?

Well, in the three years since his 2004 career season, his OPS hasn't reached .800, despite playing two years in Arlington.

His OBP the last two years is .306 and .319.

Now, will sabermetricians discount the negativity of strikeouts, I think they do so only if the player is still productive, even with a high K rate.

Wilkerson struck out every 3.15 ABs last year.

There are a handful of players with higher K rates:

Ryan Howard - .976 OPS
Jack Cust - .912 OPS
Jim Thome - .973 OPS
Adam Dunn - .940 OPS
Mark Reynolds - .843 OPS
Chris Duncan - .834 OPS

And then there is Wilkerson, with an OPS of .786 in 2007, and an OPS of .728 in 2006.

Not exactly making up for his K rate. He's not a very productive hitter, and thus any improvements he gives defensively are probably nullified.

He doesn't make this team better.

Posted by MONTE

4:05 PM, Jan 31, 2008

We need a bonafide RBI guy in the middle. Does Bavasi have one of those in his pocket?

Posted by Chris

4:05 PM, Jan 31, 2008

What a horrible signing!! 3 million and 2 million in incentives could have been spent more wisely. Now the M's have 2 guys who can't hit their weight (Sexson and Wilkerson) and will strike out 125+ times a year. What happened to Luis Gonzolez? M's could have signed him for less money and gotten a better player. He's better at 40 than Wilkerson will ever be.

Posted by Tom

4:09 PM, Jan 31, 2008


Any update on the Bedard deal? I'm seeing different parts reported in the trade. Keith Law didn't even list Tillman in the top 100 prospects, so I hope this gets doen before Angelos notices.

Posted by Andrew

4:10 PM, Jan 31, 2008

Geoff, enjoy the blog and appreciate any rumors and hearings you get. If I or others want to wait for the official deal to get the news, we can go to ESPN to get the AP releases. I come here to try to get a better feel for how the process is evolving and would rather hear some false rumors than nothing at all. Thanks.

Posted by Adam

4:15 PM, Jan 31, 2008

Re: Jones' "unlost" defense.

He was projected to play in the Mariner OF this year, so we could project that he'd provide improved defense for the M's (the two irrelevant yet infamous drops from last year notwithstanding).

It would be ideal to compare Jones with Ibanez, since Raul was the one who needs to give up his glove, but even if we project Jones' defense vs. Guillen's, there's no question the Mariner OF defense suffers if Jones isn't back there.

Having a year-older Ibanez and Wilkerson flank Ichiro does nothing to improve the OF defense. It could very well be worse. Couple Guillen's superior bat to Wilkerson's, and the team is worse now than it was last year.

So, with the loss of Jones (offense and defense together) and Sherrill, the team loses even more skill.

And Bedard gets to make that all up, plus the 9-win difference (assuming Silva is good for two extra wins) between the Angels and Mariners, all by his lonesome.

Good luck, Eric...

Posted by Druv

4:15 PM, Jan 31, 2008

If the Ms do contend (even if only in their own minds), they will trade Clement and Balentien at the deadline for a "veteran arm" for the pen, to help try to replace Sherrill. If Jones has a nice career, the Ms can pick him up in about 15 years at the end of his career for "mere prospects." By then he will have the "veteran grit" that you just can't quantify . . ..

Posted by scottm

4:30 PM, Jan 31, 2008


Broussard,of course, was solid at the plate, servicable at first base, but he would have cost $5 million (I believe I read) to retain. I don,t think it would have been as safe an investment as the $3 million/ plus $2 m in incentives for Wilkerson. Also, if Wilkerson meets those incentives, all of us will be very pleased with this acquisition. I would rather take my chances on Barry Bonds for a year, than Gonzo at age 40. Broussard would have been a bench luxury the M's can't afford. If Sexson falters, Wilkerson can play first. Again, I hope McLaren isn't as rigid as last season and 1). gives the young guys a true opportunity to play and then start if they deliver, 2). doesn't tolerate poor play from starters (such as Sexson).

Posted by Dblog

4:31 PM, Jan 31, 2008

Geoff,you knew blogging would be tough before you took the job, so take a chill pill put on a flak jacket and buy a bigger shovel to dig up the truth behind these various delays to this trade!

Keep on bloggin'!

Posted by faithful

4:32 PM, Jan 31, 2008

Brilliant move. Now Morse, who can hit and field better than this klutz, becomes expandable and will take his solid future somewhere else since BB and Mac are committed to ancient Mariners.

Posted by Rodney

4:33 PM, Jan 31, 2008

One thing nobody seems to talk about when analyzing the potential Bedard deal is that the M's have the option of utilyzing his services for 1-year, and then dealing him next offseason. Because the Orioles refused to discuss trading Bedard within their division (at least this is what I've read), they never got the Yankees or Red Sox involved. If Bedard has numbers this year similiar to his numbers from '07, I could see the Yanks and Sox competing in a bidding war offering players similiar to those originally offered for Santana. You get Bedard for a year (or even only a half-season if the M's have a terrible first half), and if you can't or decide you don't want to sign him longterm you should be able to recoup a strong package of players. The risk is limited.

Posted by Todd Sullivan

4:35 PM, Jan 31, 2008

This is in my opinion a good sign, if Jones stays he platoons and he can play left giving Ibanez time at DH and maybe giving us the option of moving Vidro if need be or platooning him at 2nd if Lopez's heads not back into the game. but to say that management were idiotic to get rid of Broussard when we knew we were going to get rid of Jones anyway is shallow and does'nt take into consideration the fact that Broussard was pretty unhappy here and while being a pro outwardly was yearning for a chance to play somewhere else. and good management doesn't keep people in an orginization that doesnt want to be there. So in light of that this is a good pickup , much better than going after Luis Gonzalez or Barry Bonds and its only a one year deal.

Posted by usesomelogic

4:36 PM, Jan 31, 2008

I can't believe the neagativity here. You can get a #1 starter, a 20 homerun right fielder and all yo can do is complain. What did you expect?

This is a low risk high reward deal. If Wilkerson comes out and hits .280 w/32 HR's it's a steal. If he hits .220 w/20 HR's it's only 3.5 mill and one year. Also, if we're in a penant race he could be a great pawn to go pick up some bullpen help if needed.

At the worst he platoon's with Balentien who is now set up to be our right fielder of the future. This is a great signing and better than giving $10 mill to a 43 yr old Barryoid....

Posted by jkherz

4:42 PM, Jan 31, 2008

Seriously people... Wilkerson is not an All-Star, but he does improve this team's depth, he can play LF/RF & 1B, he's got the perfect swing for Safeco and could end up with decent power #'s, and Bavasi got him for a good price.

On the other hand, I definitely agree we should get another OF to get Raul into the DH spot at least most of the time so Vidro can pinch hit. There's only one guy who covers less ground in the OF in MLB than Ibanez (Manny Ramirez) and Vidro's offensive #'s will most likely slip this year.

Posted by -k

4:42 PM, Jan 31, 2008

As always, I'm posting an updated look at the Mariners lineup, rotation and needs. This contains no "shoulds" or "coulds," just an honest depth chart based on who is actually on the roster.

1 starter
8th inning righty
Dump Sexson/new 1st Base
Possible upgrade at 2nd


Ichiro CF
Vidro DH
Ibanez/Wilkerson LF
Beltre 3rd
Sexson 1st
Johjima C
Jones RF
Lopez 2nd
Yuni SS

Posted by jkherz

4:47 PM, Jan 31, 2008

K - If we don't make the Bedard deal, Wilkerson will platoon with Jones - not Ibanez.

Posted by Rudy L

4:51 PM, Jan 31, 2008

1) It is you getting defensive. 2) You made a judgment call I think is fine. 3) The problem is that you come across as being the story, which is different than having played a role in the trade (which you did, however fairly).

Just let it go. My only objection is when writers become (whether by design or not) the story.

Posted by Way to Go Bilbo!!

4:55 PM, Jan 31, 2008

This makes no freakin sense other than if Jones is gone he'll be replaced by someone w/ an equally average batting average. Wouldn't want to upset the mediocrity apple cart. Thanks Bilbo!!!

Posted by Donovan

5:04 PM, Jan 31, 2008

If the Bedard deal goes through, Bavasi has successfully acheived a massive overhaul of the rotation. Not incremental, but exponential. He swapped the worst 4 and 5 guys conceivable for a real #1 (the first in 10 years!) and a solid #3. I expect Bedard to win a Cy Young award someday. Maybe in the next two years, maybe not. But the pitching moves are as good as could possibly have happened with the limited market available. Bavasi overpaid to do it, but that's what it apparently took. I'd have done the same. He met the goal that (in my opinion) outweighed all others combined for improving the team. I give him an A+ for the rotation improvement.

The cost was decreased run production in RF, with a partially offsetting improvement in RF defense, I always thought letting Guillen go was primarily a cost savings move, combined with the fact that they didn't want a multi-year deal on an old guy with several young bucks waiting in the wings. 3 million for Wilkerson for one year is a bargain, and he's blocking nobody. The Wlad fans should be very happy with this solution. This also gives us a major increase in versatility. We now have overlap at all the problem positions from last year - 1B, 2B, LF, and DH. Mac will have lot of options (assuming he uses them). We did nothing to improve the power in our offense, but at Safeco that really wouldn't be my top priority. I give Bavasi a C for position moves (so far).

This team now has a (long) shot at the Division and an outstanding shot at the wildcard, given our weak Division sisters and the unbalanced schedule. I'm very happy with the net results of these moves. I certainly like this outlook better than the "play rookies and pray for them to grow up fast" approach. If one or more of our young guys comes on strong in ST, that's just a bonus.

Posted by James from Walla Walla

5:12 PM, Jan 31, 2008

Guys&Gals, Assuming the Bedard trade happens? I contend, the best scenario for the Mariners to maximize our offense & defense is to platoon this year. Depending on the pitchers we are facing? Here is my projected line up.

1.) Ichiro CF
2.) Lopez/Vidro 2B
3.) Beltre 3B
4.) Ibanez 1B/DH
5.) Johjima/Clement C
6.) Sexon/Clement 1B/DH
7.) Morse/Balentien LF
8.) *Wilkerson/Reed RF
9.) Betancourt SS

No one knows how Sexon & Lopez will bounce back. So, this would give us better match ups, righty vs lefty and vise/versa.

Any merit to this line up?

Also, I would love to see the Mariners send HoRam to the Orioles in the

Posted by The Ultimate Optimist

5:14 PM, Jan 31, 2008

Great analysis Donovan. Don't forget (and this might not be as much about Bavasi as it is McLaren) but they've assembled a pretty solid coaching staff to help this new staff and McLaren. I see McLaren using his bench a lot more than last year. He's got better pieces, more experience at the helm and people there to make sure he does - Stottlemyre, Riggleman, Perlozzo etc.

Posted by Zach C

5:16 PM, Jan 31, 2008

Ok, well if we lose this year, we will only need to grab an outfielder and a FB/DH next offseason. I'll take that over finding a #1 starter and a FB/DH...

Wilkerson adds another LHB...hes gonna hit more HR than Jose or Adam would, hes a step up defensively and has power (THATS WHAT YOU WANT FROM THE CORNER SPOT!)...if sexson, ibanez, and lopez can pull it together this offense will be the way Geoff already told you what would happen if the offense stayed the same or improved and pitching got better...remember?

Posted by jkherz

5:20 PM, Jan 31, 2008

Donovan & James - I definitely agree!

Now, get this trade finished and go get another cheap OF to get Ibanez out of LF and into the DH role. Shawn Green, Shannon Stewart, Corey Patterson, or even Kenny Lofton will all be very cheap to sign on 1 year deals and they would be upgrades (some more than others) defensively and continue to improve our depth.

Posted by Shane-O

5:22 PM, Jan 31, 2008

I think Rodney brings up a point no one talks about.

If this deal goes through & Bedard doesn't want to sign an extension, trade him to the Yankees or the Red Sox. Those two are always good for a nice bidding war.

At that point we're probably close to where started anyways.

Does anyone else think we need to address the DH spot in a bad way?

The last time I checked the all-time HR king is available. Whoever hits behind him will be sure to see their fair share of pitches. Bonds is an on base % monster.

Posted by Tacoma Rain

5:25 PM, Jan 31, 2008

I am glad to see so many of you have such good memories.
It has been posted atleast 4 times over the last 2 days that Wilkerson hits LEFT Handed pitching better than he hits RIGHT handed pitching...meaning any platoon with Wlad or Jones or Morse or... does not make any sense.

Posted by bomberboy

5:26 PM, Jan 31, 2008

Be happy the M's are willing to spend $3million for a sort of insurance policy. Brousard would have cost more and plays the outfield like Russ Davis, ie: horrible. And of course Guillen is better, he is being paid $12 million a year! what does that have to do with anything. I would bet that Wilkerson will be a middlin performer at bet and could be sitting for one of the younger guys if Vlad has a good first half in Tac.

Posted by vertigoman

5:33 PM, Jan 31, 2008

I don't think this signing is supposed to, in any way, net us a player like the following for 3mil/1year:
Ryan Howard - .976 OPS
Jim Thome - .973 OPS
Adam Dunn - .940 OPS

So compared to the others:
Jack Cust - .912 OPS-Whole heartedly believe he'll never touch that again
Mark Reynolds - .843 OPS-Great Value, do it again.
Chris Duncan - .834 OPS-Wilkersons' OPS last year if he played in the NL central. Very similar IMO.

I'm not his agent so there is no reason hide the fact that Wilk has struggled the last two years. Hopefully Geoff can give some insight as to whether or not injuries played a role. After all, i'm sure they have coffee all the time with Geoff being Canadian and Wilk, well he played for Montreal.
We do know that he has swung a good stick before and he's not at retirement age yet. In fact, he's near prime age wise so health is the key issue for me at least.
So again, IF he's healthy and back to being Brad Wilkerson (Not Ryan Howard or Adam Dunn etc..) he could be a good sign at 3-5 mil. Low risk, moderately high reward.

Posted by Tacoma Rain

5:34 PM, Jan 31, 2008

The issue that REALLY made several of us saber-metric guys mad was the way Guillen was handled by Bavasi / Mariner's FO.
How the M's could let go a RIGHT HANDED player who crushed the ball in Safeco is flat out dumb. Worse yet, they had the opportunity to either sign Guillen for ONE YEAR at $10M or LESS OR get the 38 pick (or better) in the upcoming draft... Bavasi / M's FO decided that neither was worth it, and just let Guillen go. That move is INDEFENSIBLE!

Posted by Frankie

5:47 PM, Jan 31, 2008

Am I hearing people currently UPSET over Jose Guillen not being with the Mariners??

As the Founder of the (now dead) Extend Jose Guillen Society, it makes me laugh at how people were so quick to disagree with me in August and September, but are now singing the same song that I sang all those months ago.

Ahhhhh, the memories!!!

Posted by HelpMe

5:53 PM, Jan 31, 2008

Your RSS Subscribe link is broken. I'd like to subscribe to the blog, but the only RSS feed listed is for Mariners headlines.

Posted by ansty in anaheim

6:04 PM, Jan 31, 2008

Great work Geoff. It behooves me how don't get it. You are just doing what you are paid to do. Let's bring BARRY! Reed can play RF, Barry DH and Vidro bench. If we get that Arm in Bedard and add to that a left Bat, we're in good shape for a couple of years.

Posted by shortbus

6:06 PM, Jan 31, 2008

Donovan, I really think your analysis is flawed overall, though correct regarding the rotation. There's almost no pitcher the M's could replace Weaver or HoRam with that isn't an upgrade...and Bedard is lightyears beyond either. The trickle-down effect on the rest of the rotation and the bullpen will be huge.

Where I think you're mistaken is in saying that the Jones for Bedard deal plus the Wilkerson deal represents a downgrade in RF offense and a slight defensive upgrade. Overall this represents a small downgrade in offense and a large downgrade in defense, because you have to compare Wilkerson's contribution not to Guillen's, but to Jones'. On that measure It's a very big downgrade to the overall contribution from RF...significantly reducing the benefit of the Bedard deal on the team's ability to "win now." And that doesn't even take into account the impact of losing Sherril will have on the bullpen. THAT will just about negate Bedard's impact on improving the 'pen.

This is a costly deal with significant risk due to Bedard's injury history and, taken as a whole, not a great help to the M's playoff hopes this year. I hate it.

Posted by Druv

6:11 PM, Jan 31, 2008

Great shot at the WildCard????
New York/Boston say hello,

Remember that NY and Boston would not give up LESS than we are giving up to get a substantially better pitcher in Santana (even though they would NOT have been leaving themselves with a retread in right field and no proven lefty in the pen).

Hey, hope springs eternal, just before your door is closed when you smoke that stuff!!!

Posted by Donovan

6:20 PM, Jan 31, 2008

Druv - We don't have to beat the NYY (who will likely finish 2nd in the AL East) head to head. We just have to beat the lowly Rangers and rebuilding A's more times than they beat Toronto and Tampa. Ok, they have the O's to kick around, but with 4 teams in the AL West, two being patsies, we have a much easier schedule than either of the other Division. That's why we have an excellent shot at the WC.

Posted by shortbus

6:21 PM, Jan 31, 2008

Tacoma Rain:

I agree with you on the Guillen non-tendering. The only explanation I've heard is that they were afraid he was going to get caught up in the Mitchell report and wind up suspended for a bunch of games. Either that or they just didn't want another "juicer" associated with the team. Pretty lame reasoning either way, really. There was no way in heck Guillen wasn't going to test the FA market. We gave up a pretty good draft pick for no good reason.

But at least we're about to deplete the minors of talent. I just wish any two decisions the M's make would make sense together.

Posted by jkherz

6:22 PM, Jan 31, 2008

Druv- The Wild Card spot is definitely achievable by the M's this year as we have a weaker division than the AL Central or the AL East. Usually, the strength of the division ends up being just as important if not more important than the overall quality/talent of the team.

We just need to improve our record against the Angels (.500 would be great)and beat the A's & Rangers 2 out of 3 to get ourselves in position to have a good enough record to take the Wild Card.

Posted by petermag

6:23 PM, Jan 31, 2008

keep it up baker. you're the man.

Posted by shortbus

6:26 PM, Jan 31, 2008


Not to pick on you or anything...but the extra sub-.500 team in the AL East give both NY and Boston and extra bunch of easy games. Lets say everyone will play sixty games inside their division. For us those games are divided among one really good team, one .500 team and one terrible team for about forty games vs. .500 and below opponents. For NY and Boston it's one really good team, one .500 team (Toronto) and two terrible teams (The O's and TB). So they'll get about 45 games against the .500 and below's. It's not a big difference, but remember...NY and Boston are both BETTER than the M's. They're going to win more of those games than we will.

Posted by Donovan

6:33 PM, Jan 31, 2008

Druv - One other thing you are missing - The ultimate deterrent for NYY and BOS in the Santana derby wasn't just giving up prospects. It was the fact that they knew it would take 5 yrs. and 100+ million to sign him. That's a huge risk on any pitcher, even a great one. NY in particular has been so scorched by overpaying for burnout big names in recent years, that they didn't have the stomach for it. The BoSox had no reason to break the bank if the Yanks weren't bidding, since their rotation can already dominate NY. That is the dynamic that prevented the bidding war that the Twins were hoping for. The M's are getting a steal in Bedard at the same price they paid Weaver last year, and they don't have to commit to a long term deal before he proves he is healthy. The risk factor for Bedard is much, much lower than Santana, even though Johan is a superior pitcher. People keep trying to compare the two deals, but they aren't comparable in any way. In effect, the Mets just paid the Twins for the right to negotiate with a free agent. They didn't get a player under contract.

Posted by Donovan

6:39 PM, Jan 31, 2008

Shortbus - The O's will indeed be terrible this year, even with the superhuman baseball machine that is Adam Jones. Tampa Bay is going to be much improved however. I don't think either Oak or Tex will be a .500 team, but I think TB will be close.

Posted by downinthegroove

6:59 PM, Jan 31, 2008

So what I get is it's cool to trade our future and hope we make the wild card. As long as we are in the playoffs and even though we are swept it is worth it......Kill me now.

Posted by jkherz

7:05 PM, Jan 31, 2008

Down- So your alternative is to do nothing and not make the playoffs?

I'll take my chances and do whatever it takes to get into the playoffs every single year over continued mediocrity and no chance to ever get a championship. Look at what St. Louis did 2 years ago when they got hot at the right time after barely making the playoffs.

Posted by downinthegroove

7:23 PM, Jan 31, 2008

That is my point. This trade is going to just put us in mediocrity. We are NOT one pitcher away from the world series....A finger plugging a hole in the dam. We need to eat crow and or should have gone with youth. We have wasted Ichiro....We could be a year or 2 away from loading the lineup with youngsters on the books for cheap and filling holes with this incredibly large bankroll. Now we are just like the Seahawks of the 90's...8-8 baby!

Posted by Resin isn't Cheating

7:34 PM, Jan 31, 2008

I don't care if Wilkerson only costs $3 million. Would anybody here in their right mind sign Richie Sexson for $3 million if he was a free agent right now?

I can understand the decision not to re-sign Jose Guillen because he wanted a 3 year deal.

I can understand getting rid of Broussard since Vidro has the DH spot locked for years to come in Bavasi's mind. Bavasi wants to save face with Sexson so he's not going to pay Sexson $14 million to sit on the bench. A smarter GM would admit he's wrong and bench him or deal him and get a club to pay a portion like $5 million of his salary.

Now we have two Sexson's in the line-up, fantastic.

Posted by shortbus

7:37 PM, Jan 31, 2008


Right on the money! The M's shortest path to the WS is to let aging players go and replace them with cheap talent either through trade or the farm system. Then fill holes with FA signings as needed. You keep the cream of the crop, such as Ichiro, Beltre and Putz and let everyone else over 30 go via trade or free agency.

Since we're not the A's we COULD go the route of filling our holes with free agents...but the free agents just aren't out there to sign. And also unfortunately, we have a short-timer who doesn't understand how to estimate the value free agents for a GM. SO we sell out a reasonably bright future in order to finish a couple games fewer behind the Angels and the Wild Card winner.

Posted by Adam

8:09 PM, Jan 31, 2008

I'll take my chances and do whatever it takes to get into the playoffs every single year over continued mediocrity and no chance to ever get a championship.

That's an awesome way to destroy your organization. Good thinking.

Posted by Dave

8:11 PM, Jan 31, 2008

Great, another lefty bat will definately help out . Good move M's

Posted by harmony

8:14 PM, Jan 31, 2008

For what it's worth, here are the 2008 Bill James Handbook projections for Brad Wilkerson and Ben Broussard:

Wilkerson 111 G, 337 AB, 55 R, 14 HR, 45 RBI, 4 SB, .240 BA, .345 OBP, .796 OPS

Broussard 123 G, 356 AB, 45 R, 14 HR, 51 RBI, 2 SB, .267 BA, .329 OBP, .796 OPS

Given the fielding versatility, Wilkerson represents a slight upgrade at about the same price.

Of course, the projections are for Wilkerson playing in Arlington and Broussard in Seattle.

Posted by harmony

8:16 PM, Jan 31, 2008

Those 2008 projections should have Brad Wilkerson with 15 homeruns. I wish I could go back and make the correction.

Posted by dr

8:18 PM, Jan 31, 2008

Geoff - relax. You'll never appease those posters who need a public forum in which to embarrass themselves. Be responsible, check your sources and don't turn this blog into a FOXNEWS boor-fest. In short, just keep doing what you do and once in awhile tell the yahoos to "bite me". Oh, by the way, they keep coming back because nobody anywhere else will listen to them. Remember: some attention is better than no attention.

If the Jones/Bedard trade does get finalized, we can put this longstanding brouhaha to rest and look forward to spring training. Finally!

Posted by Troy

8:28 PM, Jan 31, 2008

I'm AMAZED at all the people on here talking about how much they'd rather have Adam Jones in the outfield than Erik Bedard in our rotation. How can a fanbase in a division with the Oakland A's EVER make that argument?!?! Are you kidding me??!! This division has been DOMINATED by their starting pitching for nearly a decade!!!

Now, without posting all the stats here for your perusal (feel free to look them up yourself), I dug into the archives (2000-2006) just as a sanity check. The A's finished 1st or 2nd in the AL West every year during that period and only missed the playoffs in 2004 (finished 1GB) & 2005. During that stretch they never won fewer than 88 games. Oddly enough, the Mariners finished ahead of them in both team BA and runs scored each of those years, with the exception of 2004 when we were AWFUL (and still had an identical team BA at .270), and a mere 15 fewer runs scored in 2006 (but we had a far better team BA that year). With the exception of 2003, in none of those years did the A's have a stellar bullpen. But, their starters were dominant! Their team BAs during that impressive stretch? .270, .264, .261, .254, .270, .262, and .260. Really raking, eh? Pffffft!! In 2003 when they batted a pathetic .254 as a team and scored a mere 768 runs, they finished with 96 wins!!


So those of you arguing that gaining Bedard and losing Adam Jones does anything other than improve the M's chances of winning more games this year and being more competitive with the Angels? You're fools!!

I don't know that it's possible for Lopez or Sexson to do any worse than they did last year...I believe they'll be better (so does history and their coaches). Wilkerson is not the offensive player that Guillen is, but he's not a major downgrade if he stays healthy, and he's a minor downgrade at most defensively.

Now, if you want to argue that Bedard has a history of health issues or that he hasn't been consistently good for long enough to warrant such a trade, then you're obviously banking on him floundering somehow. However, if he pitches anywhere near as good as he did in his last 14 starts, he is a MONSTROUS upgrade to our rotation!

Wake up and remember why we haven't made the playoffs since 2001. It's not because we didn't score enough runs, or because our defense wasn't good enough. It's because our starting pitching has been inferior!!

Posted by seamar116

8:35 PM, Jan 31, 2008

Re: Sexson

A quick check on for players most like a 32 y/o Richie

Fielder, Stargell, Tino, Strawberry, Klesko, Mo Vaughn, F. Howard, McGwire*, Tartabull, Karros

Looking at how that group produced after age 32 the best case is that Sexson might have one decent year left. He is clearly on the downward slope of his career. Stargell is the only guy that had multiple good seasons and played into his 40s. McGwire* had several great* seasons after turning 32, but we all know how* that happened*
Tino had a decent year or two, but no power #s. If Sexson can hit 30 HR next year and hit .240 call it good. And if he is anything above that at the halfway pointI would certainly trade him if at all possible for anything of potential value. Because he is done in a year or two at best. At least based on career comps.

Posted by tugboatcritic

8:37 PM, Jan 31, 2008

Destroy the org? By taking 2 short term shots to get in the playoffs? I suppose that both the A's and Rangers will take the next 2 years off from re-building just so that you can "project" your minor league dynasty to win by 2010. Goofy. That's not destroying the org. its the mandate of every team. They owe it to the fanbase, and thankfully, they know it despite what the truly intelligent baseball fans think.

I'm sure that the darling Cleveland Indians, who build there roster precisely the way the Saber crowd would like, have an ownership group that is pleased as punch to see them STILL down a million fans from the 90's. The M's simply don't have that option.

Posted by Buhnerboy

8:44 PM, Jan 31, 2008

Geoff, I am not sure why this hasn't been mentioned before (maybe it has and I haven't seen it).

Is it possible that Angelos is angry about the leak because he thought BEDARD, not Jones, might fail the physical, prompting the M's to void the trade? If it hadn't leaked then no one would have known and if Bedard failed the physical then no one would have known.

This is what now makes most sense. I think Angelos now is worried that everyone knows if Bedard isn't traded to the M's, it means he didn't pass his physical. And he's screwed.

Of course, I think he's screwed either way. No one will want to deal with the O's ever again.

Posted by tugboatcritic

8:48 PM, Jan 31, 2008

Bedard is a steal for 2 years. Its contradictory to wax on about long term commitments to pitchers then cry about 2 years for a stud. 10-15 mil. savings relative to value over 2 years is pretty good.

Bavasi did exactly what he said and for fairly cheap. This team contends this year and next, and if we need to upgrade the offense next season, there will be money available. No need for a wealthy org. to punt on any season before it starts.

Counting on 2010 works if no one else can improve their roster between now and then. They, (eastern teams as well) of course, will.

Posted by helpFelix

8:56 PM, Jan 31, 2008

I thought I'd NEVER say this, but Geoff "if" Bavasi really wants to win it all this year I REALLY think that we need to just go sign Bonds now!

NOBODY is even calling his agent, according to reports, and this would definitely be a nice stop gap for our DH spot that would definitely keep Vidro's 2009 option from vesting! So would bringing up Clement and playing him 75% @ DH, and 25% at Catcher, but adding Bonds in the cleanup hole would allow us to put Sexson in the #3 spot. Sexson would see SO MANY fastballs, and that's all he can hit!

I would put MONEY on it with anybody that Bonds would sign the SAME base as Wilkerson, but give him another $4-7M with incentives. Also, you can have an out clause based on any court issues. The ONLY team that was in the running for Bonds was the A's, and since they decided to completely rebuild...Beane has said there is NO reason to go after Bonds now.

Bonds would actually be a nice stop gap until Griffey's team option is declined in 2009. AND "if" for some reason Cincy picks up his $16M 2009 option, Bavasi can always give Bonds a 2009 incentive laden team option too!

2008 Rotation

2008 Lineup
CF Ichiro
2B Lopez
1B Sexson (Beltre would deserve #3 more, but benefit Sexson more)
DH Bonds
3B Beltre
LF Ibanez
C Johjima/Burke
RF Wilkerson
SS Betancourt

2008 Bench
IF/OF Bloomquist
IF Cairo
C Burke
DH/2B Vidro

I also thought I would never say this, but with that lineup...I can bare 1 more year watching Ibanez in LF.

With Bedard AND Bonds, Seattle would THEN be a WS contending team in 2008!!!

Posted by downinthegroove

9:12 PM, Jan 31, 2008

Pathetic. Here is a bandaid. It will fix the wound. We need to build within and keep our young strength. Look how much we overpayed for Silva. I love you die hard fans that think everyday is blue...Wake up...It could be very good if we had good leadership...So are you really telling me you are happy that a top ten pick was wasted on a reliever....

Posted by helpFelix

9:13 PM, Jan 31, 2008

I have another idea that I'd bet would work! Our only competitor for Bedard was Cincy. Once we acquire Bedard, how about the following 2 moves then:

1) Trade Washburn for Griffey straight up, with Cincy paying for the 2008 difference of $2.5M...THEN...

2) Resign Johjima to a 3yr contract similiar to what he's got currently, and I know he'd do it

2) Trade Clement to Pitts for Ian Snell! In fact, I'd bet that somehow you could pulloff a Snell/Bay trade with Clement/Wlad ++.

I've been the biggest supporter of Clement, for Ian Snell I think I would have to consider pulling that off..."if" we landed Bedard!

The above 3 moves wouldn't cost us a penny, and we'd be sliding Snell in our #5 spot.

Bedard AND Griffey would bring SO MUCH PR to Seattle AND produce sellout crowds @ Safeco!

Posted by East of Enumclaw M's Fan

9:21 PM, Jan 31, 2008

Baltimore Sun is reporting Bedard saga to be resolved soon.

Here's the link;,0,5335928.story

Posted by shortbus

9:24 PM, Jan 31, 2008


The A's are a good example of how to build a team, but not for the reason you think. The A's are great at getting rid of players that will soon cost them too much (like Erik Bedard) when they have the most trade value, and getting terrific young players in return from GM's that aren't as clever (like Bill Bavasi). But as far as the "pitching wins games" mentality...winning teams win because they outscore the opponent. This happens with any combination of hitting, pitching and defense that results in you winding up with more runs that the other guys. The A's did it with great pitching, good defense and mediocre hitting. Last year the M's had a decent offense, mediocre pitching (lousy starting pitching / phenomenal bullpen), and lousy defense and many feel they won many more games than they probably should have. Even getting really lucky they were six games out of both the AL West race and the Wild Card.

Adam Jones potentially adds in two areas: hitting and defense. He's basically Jose Guillen at the plate with the ability to steal bases and play great outfield. He's also more or less FREE and he's ours for six years. Instead of him we'll have Wilkerson...a big downgrade in offense AND defense. ALSO we lose one of the best left-handed relievers in the game in Sherril. So our starting pitching will improve, but our defense and relief pitching won't. In the end you're hanging your hopes on the offense improving as well. You're hoping for a good year from Richie Sexson and Jose Lopez along with no regression by Ibanez (35) Vidro (33) or Johjima(31...35 in catcher years). I just don't think that's a good "win now" strategy, especially given the cost in dollars and talent.

Posted by East of Enumclaw M's Fan

9:25 PM, Jan 31, 2008

helpFelix - Can't blame a guy for dreaming big.

I like the Washburn - Griffey Idea, but if we pulled that one off I'd like Morrow in the 5 slot

Posted by tugboatcritic

9:33 PM, Jan 31, 2008

Jones = Guillen at the plate, now? Next year? Not likely.

Winning does mean out-scoring opponents, and it can mean just beating them to death. Question, while so much criticism of the org is derived from not playing to the ballpark, why then is attempting to have a dominant pitching staff wrong? It would seem to address that very issue quite well.

Posted by helpFelix

9:34 PM, Jan 31, 2008

Enumclaw, I thought about Morrow in the #5 spot too "if" Washburn was sent to Cincy for Griffey. That could work, but I personally wouldn't like seeing BOTH Sherrill AND Morrow removed from the bullpen. That would open up too many bullpen holes. I like our bullpen depth though, and expect Lowe to be back to 100% for ST.

Griffey would be a heck of a LOT more popular to have at DH...than Bonds though! The only one out there that has to get over Griffey coming back would be Lincoln, because we all saw what happened when Cincy came to town last year...sellout crowds just to come watch JR!

Posted by shortbus

9:48 PM, Jan 31, 2008


If you include his added speed on the basepaths...yes that's about what Jones projects to give you this year. Guillen put up an .813 OPS. Jones' ZiPS projection is an .812 OPS which won't include any stolen bases or extra bases taken above what Guillen could do. Jones isn't Griffey or A-Rod...but he's a special, cornerstone type player.

As far as the pitching staff should be really upset that Sherrill is in this deal. I can't understand why he is, frankly. Jones and the prospects are already more than we should be giving up. But Sherrill is going to be Baltimore's CLOSER for crying out loud. You're giving THEM a starting CF and a closer...AND prospects! This significantly decreases the improvement the deal will bring to the staff. I'd hate this deal so much less if Sherrill weren't in it.

Posted by helpFelix

9:50 PM, Jan 31, 2008

I have to comment on the Jones thing. I like the guy, but it's amazing to see how many people are so hung up on watching him leave.

Just a couple years ago we acquired Jeremy Reed from ChiSox, and Reed was their BEST top prospect, and at the time ranked in the top 10 overall prospects. In fact, when Seattle landed him, all baseball analysts were publicly stating that within 2 years he would be fighting for the AL batting title along side Ichiro.

Reed does great in the minors, but just can't pull it out at the MLB level offensively! I've seen him make mouth dropping defensive plays, that I've ONLY seen Jim Edmonds do when he was younger in his prime.

What happened to Reed? I'm personally not counting on Adam Jones to play all-star defense/offense AT LEAST for the next 2-3 years. AND I'm not convinced that he will become an all-star OFer. Maybe I'm wrong, and only time will tell, because I had NO DOUBT that Reed would be battling for the batting title by now (along with all the baseball analysts).

Bottom line? We go into EVERY offseason "desperate" for quality pitching. We land Bedard, and next offseason will be the 1st offseason where Seattle won't need SP, and can focus on 1B and Texeira! Everyone else will be focusing on SPing, yes event he Yanks.

What's really interesting to think about though, especially "if" Bavasi could pull off a Griffey/Washburn trade, is that next offseason when Sexson/Vidro/Ibanez/Johjima come off the books (combined $31.5M)...that's a heck of a lot of money to throw at Texeria. OR it's a lot of money to just resign Ibanez to play 1B, keep Griffey @ DH (I know he'd sign less than Washburns contract amount to DH for us), AND THEN to make a huge run with the rest of the money (approx $25M) at CC Sabathia!

All within the same budget they would be spending in 2008!

Can you imagine this:

2009 Lineup
CC Sabathia

2009 Lineup
CF Ichiro
2B Lopez
3B Beltre
DH Griffey
C Johjima
1B Ibanez
RF Wlad
LF Wilkerson
SS Betancourt

Posted by goms

9:53 PM, Jan 31, 2008

a couple suggestions wilkerson in left wlad in right,ibanez dh and mr 6 dingers to the bench.i also think its time for the morrow era at starter to start.bautista has a little experiance in the pen he can set up jj.somebody should feed the rally monkey to their python..please!!!

Posted by tugboatcritic

9:59 PM, Jan 31, 2008

Sherrill will not likely last as or be the closer for the O's. Part of his effectiveness is lack of exposure to RH hitters. Jones gives value on the bases in that he is fast, not as a base-stealer. He hasn't shown that ability. Carefull with projecting him ahead of time. Curveballs are tough to hit at this level, not saying he won't eventually, but this year and next it would have to be agreed would be on a learning curve.

Those 2 seasons are where the M's see an opening, and they are going for it. When the projections of him start with Cammy, I'm not seeing a cornerstone player.

Posted by Joof

10:19 PM, Jan 31, 2008

Ohh god. I think I just broke my hip just reading some of those rosters and how old those people are.

Posted by shortbus

10:23 PM, Jan 31, 2008


In 66 AB's against Sherrill right handers hit all of .212 with an OPS of .579. Sherrill faced only 90 left handed hitters so I'd disagree that that's limited exposure -- and he handled righties extremely well. And even if he's just one of the best left-handed be used against lefties alone...he's too valuable to include in this deal. It really hurts your bullpen.

Posted by tugboatcritic

10:28 PM, Jan 31, 2008

One last idea, Shortbus. If we have already spent too much (disagree) then you would have to agree that obtaining a pitcher of his ilk to be nearly impossible for the M's. Despite their efforts, they have come up short for 3 years or so buying one, there is no reason to assume that they could magically start getting these guys next year or later. Something gets lost in the sales pitch I guess.

When you don't have the position filled, and have decided its of paramount importance, AJ doesn't seem too much of a price. Not saying he won't be a fine ballplayer, but at some point, the fanatic anti-trade/ build from within for the future has to see the carrot and stick philosophy that others object to.

Posted by tugboatcritic

10:33 PM, Jan 31, 2008

Oh, I can't help myself... Sherrill faced very few quality RH's and you probobly know this. Despite the fact that RH's outnumber Lefty's pretty significantly. That makes him a LOOGY, I guess, to borrow a term. Again, fine pitcher, in doses, and not to be over-used. Certainly not tossed aside, but semi-easily replaced, especially in his role.

Posted by shortbus

10:36 PM, Jan 31, 2008


First, I should respond to your other points about Jones. Yes, I was incorrect to suggest he's a base stealer. He just isn't. However his offensive value this season can be credibly projected from his performance in AAA and the majors to be similar to Guillen's once you include his baserunning ability. And if he turns out to be Cammy, overall...I'd take long as he starts next season and keeps it up his entire career. With Cammy we went to the ALCS, you'll recall.

And I also think you're right about the difficulty of acquiring top-notch starters. The best organizations don't trade for or acquire via free agency the best starters. They develop them from within because the market value (as we are now learning) for such pitchers is much too high. And when those pitchers that they develop become free agents they deal them with a year to go, or let them walk at take the compensation picks.

So ANOTHER way this deal hurts us is in the development of Morrow...who should be in the minors becoming one such starter. He'll be needed in the bullpen this year thanks to the losing Sherrill and won't develop. AND we're losing Tillman to boot. I think we've become gun shy about pitching prospects in this town due to the phenomenal bad luck (and it is way outside the norm to lose so many to injury) ours have had. But that's how the best organizations that aren't the Yankees or Red Sox get their starters.

Posted by shortbus

10:42 PM, Jan 31, 2008

Well I'm not sure where to look up the exact batters Sherrill faced, but I'll grant you he probably didn't face the BEST right-handers in the league. But over 40% of the batters he faced were righties and he demolished them. Is there reason to think he'd be that much worse than any LH closer against the best right-handers?

I guess if you can show that he nearly exclusively faced the worst right handers out there you'd have a point. But I still think we're going to miss him even in terms of his effect on lefties. It's pretty key when playing at Safeco to be able to negate the other team's lefty boppers in late innings. Do we actually have a replacement?

Posted by Druv

10:54 PM, Jan 31, 2008

O'Flaherty and Rhodes are the "plan" to "replace" Sherrill. I.e., no. there is no plan.

If good relievers grow on trees why did we wind up with Rick White at crunch time last year?

Posted by jkherz

11:04 PM, Jan 31, 2008

The negativity on this board is rediculus. This organization is potentially going to trade an uproven talent for a proven #1 starter. WAKE UP! If this deal is finally announced, we will have as powerful a 1-2 punch as almost any team in MLB and we will finally have a strong starting rotation through the #5 spot. This is worth trading a possible future gem for to try and win now!

Do you guys think this organization can do nothing right and that we will never have another young talent come through our system again like Adam Jones? This is beyond pessimistic to the point that I have a hard time believing you are actually fans of this team. I am not saying the M's cannot make a mistake because they have made plenty and some of them are obvious at the moment they are made (HRam for Soriano ring a bell?) - but I don't see why signing Wilkerson and the possible Bedard trade have brought out the "Scrooge" comments that have plastered this board today.

Some people are saying that we are destroying the organization and need to be more like the A's by trading for young guys all the time - but the A's are in a rebuilding mode and will not win 70 games this season. Yes, they may stockpile talent better than most teams, but we are not in the same situation right now so there is no need to take the same approach and unload our top talent for prospects. When we find ourselves staring into the basement again, I will agree with that approach.

One of the biggest problems this organization has had throughout the last few years is we were actually in contention is holding onto our young talent without having the guts to make a deal while their value is at their highest to improve an already competitive team. That is why Lou left town, remember? In 2001, we had all of those "can't miss" pitching prospects and didn't make a deal - and then we let the trade deadline pass (and again in '02 & '03) and had our window of opportunity close. NONE of those "blue chippers" ever achieved their potential.

I'm not saying that Adam Jones will be a bust, but he might just turn out to be an average everyday OF (I agree with the Jeremy Reed analogy). Bedard is clearly beyond worthy of taking this risk as we need pitching.

Sorry for the rant... I'm just hoping that some people will realize the sun will rise tomorrow and stop being so negative all of the time. If you want to this negative about a MLB team, go try being an O's fan right now...

Posted by Edman

11:06 PM, Jan 31, 2008

You're WRONG shortbus. The "belief" that Jones' minor league numbers will tranlate are overwhelming. But, he does not possess the kind of ability that makes him a NO MISS prospect. It's pure local hype, because it's been so long since the M's have had a legitimate prospect even close to his ability....which is more a statement about how bad the farm system was.

Jones CAN definitely fail to meet the high expectations of some here. I hope he doesn't, but to use his minor league numbers as some form of reliable indicator, is suicidal. MANY prospects with GREATER potential over the years, have failed to be all they were expected to be.

In fact, Wilkenson WAS one of the most highly tauted rookies in his time, and he didn't meet that great promise.

So, don't spout off about what you THINK, and play it as something you KNOW.

Posted by tugboatcritic

11:10 PM, Jan 31, 2008

They wouldn't be my plan. I never said they grow on trees,, maybe an exotic bush. We are pretty good at developing them. I have no answer for the Rick White move.

Do we need a BP stat to prove that Sherrill wasn't in against the cream RH's last year? C'mon, I'm sure you watch the games, he is the definition of a situational lefty. Again, nearly 50% more of them faced despite the relative scarcity of them in a lineup. He did have success vs. RH's, but I think again that this is due as much to the quality faced as his arsenal.

Posted by Zach C

11:15 PM, Jan 31, 2008

I think it's odd to complain about a player who is contributing (a lot) to a team. Its not like Morrow just needs a half year in the minors to become a starter (do you realize how long it takes, probably 2/3 more full seasons at least!)...its only his second year and hes already facing ML hitting in pressure situations. I would rather have him in the pen for 3 or 4 years than in the minors...

Posted by jkherz

11:18 PM, Jan 31, 2008

"The best organizations don't trade for or acquire via free agency the best starters."

Really? What about the Red Sox trading for Beckett and signing Dice-K and Schiling? What about the Yankees signing Mussina and Clemens a few years back, plus Randy Johnson, and then re-signing Petite last year. The Mets are trading for Santana right now. The White Sox traded for Garcia the year before they won it all. The D'backs just traded for Harden and won the WS the year they signed RJ and traded for Schiling if I remember right.

And those are just the 1st few examples that jump into my mind...

Posted by shortbus

11:19 PM, Jan 31, 2008


My problem with your critique of Sherrill vs. righties is that it's based on how he was used (as a situational lefty...which is true) rather than what he actually did. He made the right-handers he faced look about like a pitcher in the national league. In theory those righties should have had a better OPS against him as a lefty than their overall OPS. So were all the guys he faced sub .579 OPS hitters? That's very hard to believe since that's basically not a major league player's OPS. I happen to think that he should have been the regular set-up man last year due to his effectiveness against righties. But don't get me started on McLaren.

Posted by jkherz

11:21 PM, Jan 31, 2008

Haren - not Harden.

Posted by James from Walla Walla

11:24 PM, Jan 31, 2008

Luv, the Griffey for Washburn idea!! Morrow or Baek can be the 5th starter. Lowe is looking real good in has rehab, could easly do the set up roll for JJ. O'Flaherty, Rhodes, Jimenez, White & Green get us to the set up guy, nice!

Trade Vidro, HoRam, for prospects perferable Outfield talent.

Posted by shortbus

11:29 PM, Jan 31, 2008


I explicitly called out the richest teams as ones that CAN get away with paying the price for FA pitching. We aren't that rich. If we had more players coming up through our system and actually turned them into major leaguers we might be able to play with the big boys for starters...but we can't. As for trades, you can point to some successes...but there are as many busts...very costly busts. It's a big gamble.

And to answer the Jones doubters...I mentioned Jones' ZiPS projections to try to reflect a stats-based projection...which can also be made of a player like Bedard. Veteran players don't project any more reliably than guys coming up from the minors. There's margin for error in both cases. Bedard has an injury history and we could be giving up all those players for two months of the guy we think we're getting. You have to make these calls based on the best information you have. Based on statistical projections we can assume Jones is going to be a player about like Curtis Granderson that we have locked up for six years for cheap. That is extremely valuable to a franchise. He'll be out there every time a ball is put in play and bat four or five times every game. Bedard throws once every five games. Bedard's skills are somewhat harder to come by...but a deal with Jones AND Sherrill AND two good prospects is a BAD DEAL.

Posted by Adam

11:37 PM, Jan 31, 2008

Ok – lots to respond to:

So those of you arguing that gaining Bedard and losing Adam Jones does anything other than improve the M's chances of winning more games this year and being more competitive with the Angels? You're fools!!

Nobody is arguing the Mariners will not be better with Bedard. You need to slow down. What we are arguing (and we have backed this up with honest comparisons of the two rosters) is that, even with Bedard, this team cannot compete with the Angels. Even with Bedard, the Angels have a better rotation. They also play defense better than the Mariners do. And they are better at the plate. And they can probably expect healthier seasons out of Wlad, Kotchman, Napoli, Kendrick, Figgins, Anderson, and Escobar. I’d also note that under the Pythagorean formula, the Angels were actually 11 games better than the M’s.

Meanwhile, the Mariners will, at best, get the same OF defense from Ibanez, Ichiro, and Wilkerson that they got in 2007. I really don’t think Ibanez or Wilkerson will maintain the status quo, but we’ll keep it the same, for argument’s sake. The IF defense will not change from next year. So, best-case scenario, the 2008 Mariner defense equals the 2007 Mariner defense.

That’s not a good thing. According to Hardball Times (and Geoff has cited that site, FYI), the Mariner defense was 64 plays below league average last year. A sabermetrician by the name of “tangotiger” (feel free to google him) has run the math for defensive stats and we can therefore calculate that the Mariner defense, by making 64 fewer plays, cost the team 50 runs – 10 for each starter. Add ten runs to Bedard in 2007, and his ERA jumps a half a point. Contrast that with the Orioles, who only made 2 plays below average, meaning they gave up basically zero runs defensively. Bedard is a worse pitcher the minute he steps in front of the Mariner defense.

I really don’t know how many runs Safeco would save Bedard in 15 of his hopefully 30 starts, but given the fact that, according to’s park factors, Safeco only slightly favors pitchers (Safeco is 97 – 100 is neutral), it really should only save him two or three runs.

Further, by losing Sherrill, the Mariner bullpen will be worse than it was in 2007. The difference in ERA+ between him and Rowland-Smith, who could possibly replace him, was 73 points. BIG difference.

So, Bedard gets to try to overcome the substantial difference between the Angels and Mariners (11 games), the improvements the Angels have made (Hunter and Garland), a crappy defense, and a weakened bullpen – all by his lonesome.

And all we had to give up in order to watch him try to pull off that superhuman feat is a top-10 prospect, one of the best lefty relievers in the game, the best minor-league pitcher in the system last year, and possibly Tony Butler, who has a ceiling as a #2 starter.



No offense, but citing the Oakland A’s doesn’t make this point true. Scoring more runs than the opponent wins games. And studies have been done which show that run prevention is only slightly more important than run production. I believe Faceplant cited to a study that showed winning is 52 percent run prevention and 48 percent run production – and that 20 percent of run prevention is defense. So, pitching alone isn’t the most important factor in winning games. In the playoffs? That’s another story. But you have to get there first.

Destroy the org? By taking 2 short term shots to get in the playoffs? I suppose that both the A's and Rangers will take the next 2 years off from re-building just so that you can "project" your minor league dynasty to win by 2010. Goofy. That's not destroying the org. its the mandate of every team. They owe it to the fanbase, and thankfully, they know it despite what the truly intelligent baseball fans think!

Here’s what jkhertz said:

I'll take my chances and do whatever it takes to get into the playoffs every single year over continued mediocrity

Surely, “whatever it takes” would include selling the farm “every single year” in order to win “every single year.” That’s an idiotic way of doing business, and it would destroy the organization real quick. But don’t take my word for it – go ask the Yankees why they didn’t trade Chamberlin or include Ian Kennedy in a deal to get the best pitcher in the planet.

I have to comment on the Jones thing. I like the guy, but it's amazing to see how many people are so hung up on watching him leave.
Just a couple years ago we acquired Jeremy Reed from ChiSox, and Reed was their BEST top prospect, and at the time ranked in the top 10 overall prospects. In fact, when Seattle landed him, all baseball analysts were publicly stating that within 2 years he would be fighting for the AL batting title along side Ichiro.

Since when does Jeremy Reed = Adam Jones? I can play that game – go check the final minor league seasons for Hunter Pence, Troy Tulowitzki, Chris Young, Jacoby Ellsbury, Dustin Pedroia, and James Loney. Adam Jones’ final AAA stats beat them all.

And Jeremy Reed didn’t come close to doing in AAA what Jones did – and Jones was two years younger.

Sherrill will not likely last as or be the closer for the O's. Part of his effectiveness is lack of exposure to RH hitters.

You do know he had an OPS against of only .589 against RH hitters, don’t you?

Sorry for the long post – I felt like arguing.

Posted by jkherz

11:47 PM, Jan 31, 2008

Agree to disagree shortbus... as almost every single MLB team that has any success uses a combination of signing FA's, making trades, and developing their own talent. Find one winning team that only has "homegrown" talent from the draft in their rotation - please, just try.

Trades and FA signings are like the lotto - you gotta play if you want to win. Yes, sometimes you gamble and lose, but if we just sit and watch without making any deals we stand no chance. Bedard is so much more of a "sure bet" than saying Jones is going to turn into a Granderson this season as Jones is still at least 2-3 seasons from hitting his prime (if he ever gets that far) - Bedard is there right now.

Yes, Sherill is a valuable asset right now and we will need O'Flaherty or Rowland-Smith to step into that role (I'm not counting on Rhodes). But, just like the saying goes for all sports GM's: It's better to trade a guy one year too early than trade a guy one year too late. Sherill fits this statement exactly as he is not going to pitch at the same level as he has for the last 3 years for much longer.

And once again, PITCHING WINS CHAMPIONSHIPS - not young, unproven rightfielders. Every year there are productive corner outfielders if you need to go get one, but there is always a shortage of good pitching - let alone a #1 guy like Bedard.

Posted by Adam

11:50 PM, Jan 31, 2008

Jones CAN definitely fail to meet the high expectations of some here. I hope he doesn't, but to use his minor league numbers as some form of reliable indicator, is suicidal. MANY prospects with GREATER potential over the years, have failed to be all they were expected to be.

Umm, hate to break this to you, but minor league numbers DO serve as a reliable predictor of minor league experience.

And yes, there have been a good number of prospects with greater potential than Jones who have flopped over the years, but Jones has done more than show potential - he's shown production.

And I'd be willing to bet that the list of players with Jones' potential who have gone on to have good careers is a lot larger than the list of players with that kind of potential who flopped.

Posted by Adam

11:53 PM, Jan 31, 2008

Find one winning team that only has "homegrown" talent from the draft in their rotation - please, just try.

Well, how about the Rockies, the Indians (other than Paul Byrd), or your personal fave, the 2000's Oakland A's?

The point is, that smart teams understand the value of young, talented, and cheap players who are under team control. If you can build with those players, filling in the holes via trade or FA is a lot easier.

The Mariners do a horrible job of this.

Posted by Adam

11:56 PM, Jan 31, 2008

Bedard is so much more of a "sure bet" than saying Jones is going to turn into a Granderson this season as Jones is still at least 2-3 seasons from hitting his prime (if he ever gets that far) - Bedard is there right now.

Besides the fact that the debate isn't about whether Jones equals Granderson in 2008, are you really sure Bedard is a "sure bet."

As good as his 2007 season was, it was only one season, and he's never pitched 200 innings, and he's had a career's worth of injuries already.

Careful who you call a sure bet.

Posted by shortbus

12:03 AM, Feb 01, 2008


The actual results of FA pitcher signings last season are stunningly bad. Check this out:

"Those seven big name, big dollar, long term contract guys have given their teams, on average, 163 innings with a 4.63 ERA. Average Annual Salary? $12 million per year."

Trying to build your staff through free agency is extremely costly considering the risk. Trades can work, but the cost in talent can be extreme. Think the Angels are really happy about that deal for Colon right now?

When it comes to pitching, developing from within is massively more cost-effective. Even those that go ahead and pay the big bucks get stung as often as not.

Free agency is a good way to fill holes in a team that needs a couple of pieces to reach the playoffs. We aren't that team. Trades always depend on what you give up and this is a bad, bad trade for the Mariners based on what we're sending to Baltimore.

Championships are won by the team that can pitch AND hit better than the other team can pitch AND hit. Do either the Red Sox or the Rockies seem like no-hit teams to you? You have to have the whole package. And we aren't winning any championships with this team with or without Jones...that's the point. By the time we can put a championship calibre team out there Jones will be a veteran player...aparently in Baltimore now.

Posted by jkherz

12:04 AM, Feb 01, 2008

Adam - As much as I hate them, I'll take a "win at whatever it costs" Yankees attitude over the "sit and hope our young guys develop and win in 5 years" approach anytime. Trading one minor league stud is not going to ruin this franchise.

I do agree with a lot of the numbers you through up there in your post. But a lot of your points are extremely circumstantial. For example, as has been well documented, the Yanks didn't trade their young guys because the majority of their starters are getting old and will be gone soon and they did not want to add Santana'a contract to their already exploding budget. They did not hold onto their talent young SP's just because of your theory. Plus, the M's ARE holding onto their young arm (Morrow) and trading a young guy whose position is much easier to fill.

As for Sherill, you can't compare his numbers to Rowland-Smith or O'Flaherty without mentioning that Sherill is a veteran who has hit his ceiling. He will not get any better, only worse in seasons to come while the other two LH'ers are young with a lot of room to continue improving.

As for Bedard stepping in front of our defense and immediately getting worse, the O's weren't exactly the best defensively last year either and they played in a hitter's park too. Our defense could use some improvement for sure, but Bedard's #'s will easily improve just by starting 10-15 more games at Safeco. If we can just get Raul into the DH role, we will also improve the defense significantly!

Sorry, but it just seems like you are slanting all of your info to fit your opinions instead of trying to look at the stats with an unbiased approach.

Posted by Patrick F.

12:14 AM, Feb 01, 2008

Nice pick up. Wilkerson should fit in well, even if Jones isn't dealt, though I still would like to see Bedard end up in a Mariner uniform.

Posted by jkherz

12:28 AM, Feb 01, 2008

Guys, calm down a bit here. I'm not saying that some of your stuff isn't true. I agree that there is always a risk when you're talking about investing your hopes (and $$$) in a pitcher's arm! But EVERY team deals with this same fear, not just the M's. I mean, how do you think Mets fans feel about Santana's chances of finishing whatever extension they are talking about right now as a productive, healthy, and dominant pitcher?

Yes, I am extremely happy that we didn't sign Pavano, Schmidt, Zito and many other pitchers even though we tried to in the last few years. But just because the FA market has gotten so out of control as far as pitchers go lately doesn't mean that you can't be successful going that route (we got lucky with Batista!).

As for the teams listed with supposed "homegrown" talent, the Indians and A's are good models of how to rebuild a team by trading a lot of experienced players for a ton of young talent in order to truly rebuild. We are not in that situation right now, so its an apples-to-oranges argument. And to get into the fine print, all of those temas had to make "rebuilding" trades to stockpile the talent that enabled them to win last year. But do you think the Rockies rotation is going to do it again this year? Are the A's going to be able to continue making great trades every time they need to unload somebody because they are too expensive? Not likely.

Just please relax a bit and think about this for a second - would you rather have a #1 SP to help this team right now, even though they are not a "lock" to win the division instead of a rookie RF who still has a long way to go before he is an everyday ML player?

Not only that, but the point of making this deal is to give us a better chance at winning - there's no gaurantee that ANY TEAM will make the playoffs next year. There are simply too many games to play, too many potential injuries, too many unknowns in general to say that anything done in the offseason will gaurantee any team a championship. It's all about increasing our chances to win RIGHT NOW, and Bedard in our rotation is the best bet to make this happen.

Sorry, I'd love to continue this but I've gotta get some Z's. Here's hoping the trade goes down tomorrow!!!

Posted by Adam

12:31 AM, Feb 01, 2008

As for Bedard stepping in front of our defense and immediately getting worse, the O's weren't exactly the best defensively last year either

Did I not cite for you the fact that the Orioles defense was 50 runs better than the M's defense?

But a lot of your points are extremely circumstantial. For example, as has been well documented, the Yanks didn't trade their young guys because the majority of their starters are getting old and will be gone soon and they did not want to add Santana'a contract to their already exploding budget.

Give me a break. And you accuse me of "slanting" the facts to fit my argument?

Considering the fact that Giambi, Pettitte, and Abreu ($57 million) come of the books after 2008, the idea that they didn't go after Santana because he costs too much is a bunch of bull. Further, Santana is 29. He would have done just fine with your so-called "youth movement."

Further, you stated teams should do whatever it takes to be competitive every single year. That's almost an exact quote. My point is that other teams, such as the Yankees, don't share that view. Mind telling me how I'm spinning that one?

As for Sherill, you can't compare his numbers to Rowland-Smith or O'Flaherty without mentioning that Sherill is a veteran who has hit his ceiling.

More "slanting" eh? All I did was compare their 2007 numbers, pal. And I did do in arguing that the 2008 Mariners would be worse without Sherrill. Not sure how referring to the MOST RECENT PERFORMANCE to make such a comparison is "slanting" anything. But go ahead and tell us why what Sherrill, Rowland-Smith, and O'Flaherty might do in the future has any bearing on 2008.

Sorry, but it just seems like you are slanting all of your info to fit your opinions instead of trying to look at the stats with an unbiased approach.

Again, the hypocrisy of this statement is almost too much...

Posted by Adam

12:40 AM, Feb 01, 2008

Just please relax a bit and think about this for a second - would you rather have a #1 SP to help this team right now, even though they are not a "lock" to win the division instead of a rookie RF who still has a long way to go before he is an everyday ML player?

No, I wouldn't. Because:

1. The #1 SP still doesn't put us in the same class as the Angels.

2. We are only getting two years of the #1 pitcher.

3. The #1 pitcher, as good as his 2007 season was, has a history of injury concerns and has never gone over 200 innings.

4. The rookie RF, who three different scouts called a "Top 10" talent this week (Callis, Law, and Goldstein), not only has an incredible skill set and has improved every year of his pro career, but is also only 22, is dirt cheap, can contribute to the team NOW, and is under team control for another six years.

So no, I would't take the #1 starter.

Posted by Joof

1:17 AM, Feb 01, 2008

"Just please relax a bit and think about this for a second - would you rather have a #1 SP to help this team right now, even though they are not a "lock" to win the division instead of a rookie RF who still has a long way to go before he is an everyday ML player?"

I don't know what you consider a long way, but the time until Jones is an everyday ML player is the same clock as the countdown to opening day. He is, right now, a major league ready player who is of sufficient caliber to start every game on a team. To say he has a long way to go is complete BS. He might have a long way to go to get to his peak, but he is a legitimate Major League outfielder right now.

Also, Jones is no longer a rookie. Last he played in enough games to lose his rookie title.

One more thing. Jones is only a right fielder here because of Ichiro. In most systems, he'd be a center fielder.

Posted by Troy

6:20 AM, Feb 01, 2008

Adam & shortbus:

Don't take my short rant the wrong way. I do NOT assume that the M's front office has shown any great wisdom in the way they've gone about putting this team together, nor do I believe that this is a "great" trade for us. I believe Adam Jones is going to be a very good player at the major league level. I believe losing Sherrill in this deal does sting, as well...and I don't for one second believe that this makes us better (or even as good) as the Angels.

However, I DO believe this makes us more competitive. Are we in rebuilding mode? Are we conceding the division to the Angels? Is that what we should be resigned to doing simply because they have the better team? Shall we wallow in mediocrity despite our ridiculously high payroll? Do we believe that keeping Adam Jones is going to somehow help us close the gap over the next few years? Is his offensive and (supposed) defensive prowess going to make up for all the runs our lousy starting pitching surrenders? The theory, it would seem, is that Morrow will fill one hole, Felix will carry the load as our lone ace, and Silva won't age as quickly as Washburn and Batista are bound to do over the next few years. Who replaces them? Our farm system? I'll agree with you on one point there...We AREN'T the A's (noone is, for that matter where minor league to major league pitching talent is concerned over the past decade), so we can forget that idea. FA's, I suppose? The same ones that the Yankees, Red Sox, Dodgers, Mets, and Angels snatch up every year? Doubtful.

I agree with your point, Adam, about the importance of scoring runs as a compliment to starting pitching, defense, bullpen, etc. But it's an obvious one. The A's have been an anomaly in that regard during the stretch I referenced, I understand that...especially in 2003. You can't have one without the other and consistently compete. I don't mean to suggest that. Obviously you can't win if you don't score. But are you suggesting that great hitting and the ability to score runs is the main factor in winning? Ask the Texas Rangers of the past several years about that theory. You cite a disparity of only 52% to 48% with respect to pitching over hitting as a winning equation? While that's smaller than I expected, it does still support the idea that pitching is what puts you over the top. But we all know this already!! All the stats about how we weren't as good a team as what our record showed? Hmmm...I wonder if that was because our STARTING PITCHING was so horrible? True, our defense failed to live up to what was expected...will that improve? I hope so (particularly in the infield)! Rosenthal piped off in his article about us having a horrendous percetage of balls in play that were converted to outs...What the hell does that show, if your starting pitching is getting pounded every time out, giving up hit after hit and walks galore, OF COURSE that percentage will suffer. Throw a few errors in there, and that hurts it some more, but please! Talk about a nearly useless stat as pertains to how good or bad a defense is. You can only help out bad pitching so much as a defense.

Does adding Bedard make us the AL West champs this year? Probably not. Does it make us more competitive, and give us a fighting chance? Abso-friggin'-lutely! (in my humble opinion - and yes, it's just an opinion fellas!). Our current rotation with or without Adam Jones, gives us basically NO shot at competing with the Angels. Oh..and don't kid yourselves about the health of the Angels...their track record there speaks for itself - they're brittle.

Forgive my lack of forethought with regard to the M's future and all the "potential" for success with the guys we have come 2010 or 2011. I'd prefer to compete...even if it means possibly playing second fiddle to the loaded Angels.

Posted by eastcoast

6:27 AM, Feb 01, 2008

Despite the fact that I am pro-trade, and happy about the fact that we are only losing 1/4 top prospects - I am still becoming increasingly nervous. First, we heard AJ, Sherrill and Tillman. Then it was 3+Butler or Mickolio, now 3+Butler AND Mickolio. At this point, why don't we just throw inn Lopez and Morrow for Roberts as well. A 7 for 2 deal, with 4/7 being major league ready. Why not??

Posted by Puzzld

7:29 AM, Feb 01, 2008


We have two guys at AAA that can match and probably beat this clowns lifetime stats, namely Morse and Balentien. That would cost only a quarter or less.

Posted by Chuck

7:35 AM, Feb 01, 2008

Sorry, Geoff, you're not "just stating the facts," you're being defensive and its getting boring. Theres no point in arguing with unreasonable people. State your case and move on. Tell us your take on Wilkerson. Is he a defensive liability? Will he take up the hitting slack of the departed Guillen? And of course the clubhouse atmosphere guys will want to know if he will or will not be a "disruptive influence?"

Posted by Mr. X

7:52 AM, Feb 01, 2008

I suppose the Wilkerson deal is just Bill's way of staying consistent. He has to settle at least one or five times per offseason.

I keep hearing this garbage argument about how we're not better than the Angels, so we shouldn't try to improve the top of the rotation. Our rotation still won't be better, blah, blah, parrot, blah. We don't have to be better than the Angels to win the wild card, or even the division for that matter. For those of you have been fans for longer than a couple of years, you might remember that the 1995 Mariners only had a winning record against one team in our division. That team seemed to do pretty well, didn't it? The 2000 Mariners were 4-9 against the Oakland A's. They made it to the ALCS. Not bad, huh? The 2007 Mariners were 5-4 versus Boston.

Again, for the learning disabled, this is not fantasy baseball. You can't line up rosters, compare positions, and draw a conclusion about anything. You still have to play a game or two on the field. Leave the wookies, hobbits, and klingons out of it. In real sports, a low seed in a playoff bracket can make it to the Superbowl, like the Giants just did. Oh by the way, they were the 2nd best team in their division, and 0-2 against the division winner.

Posted by Mr. X

8:16 AM, Feb 01, 2008

Last year's team had a winning record against 7 AL teams. The 2006 Cardinals had a winning record against 7 NL teams.

Real baseball. Real teams. Real leagues. Just imagine all of the precious time you waste with your predictions, number crunching, and spreadsheets. It's nothing but another form of manual self-gratification. All that work for nothing.

Posted by downinthegroove

9:01 AM, Feb 01, 2008

Mr. X....You are an idiot. I guess all those folks that make millions predicting stats and determining scouting and players to draft and sign are just wasting their time. You are right...

Seattle doesn't need to just beat the Angels. If they don't then they can take their chances that they will win the wild card competing against offensively challenged lineups built by those who spend their time prognosticating and studying such as Detroit, Cleveland, Boston, NYY and god forbid those terrible talent evaluators down in Tampa....Give me a break. We don't have the talent, yes anyone can win a game here or there but give me a series and then talk to me.

Posted by hiphopapotamus

9:05 AM, Feb 01, 2008

Can anyone explain why Wilkerson is a better option tha Morse, Reed, or even Balentien this year? It seems like Bavasi is wasting good money once again.

And by the way when are the Ms going to give Morse a legitamate shot? he's a good athlete who has hit well and played decent defense each time they given him an opportunity.

Posted by James from Walla Walla

9:25 AM, Feb 01, 2008

Agreed Hipo,

I have been saying for the last few day, we should just keep our young emerging outfielders.
Platoon the three of them in RF & LF. And, keep Ibanez at 1B/DH. This would keep the speed in our OF and give our young guys a chance to shine.

Only if we were able to trade for Griffey would I change this. Then, I'd use him RF/LF/DH role.

Posted by scrapiron

9:28 AM, Feb 01, 2008

Why Wilkerson was signed

Best free agent available
The Mariners first choice was Geoff Jenkins to replace Adam Jones, but they hoped to make the Bedard deal at the winter meetings. When that didn't happen, the best free agent now left is Wilkerson. Average defender, good power when healthy. He hasn't been healthy for two seasons, so a healthy Wilkerson could potentially put up Guillen-like power numbers. He can also back up Sexson at first.

Bargain price
$3 million seems like a lot, but is roughly the same money that Horacio Ramirez is going to make to be a long reliever at best. He made $4.75 million last year, so he actually took a pay cut.

Better than Balentien, Morse or Reed
Don't get me wrong. Balentien is the long-term answer. That's why Wilkerson only got a one year deal.
1. Balentien: Everyone thought he was ready after his breakout year at Tacoma last year. Then he goes down to Lara and hits (AVG/SLG/OPS) .191/.355/.693. This is the same league and team that Adam Jones hit .304/.406/.808. Balentien needs some time at Tacoma to regain his stroke and be eased into the lineup like Jones was last year.
2. Reed: Great defense, hasn't ever been able to hit at the major league level. He should be a defensive replacement off the bench. IMHO Reed should replace Ibanez from the seventh inning on for every game the Mariners have a lead in.
3. Morse: Projects to be nothing more than a serviceable super-sub. We already have that guy in Willie Bloomquist. The question should be why we are paying Bloomquist so much when Morse can do everything Bloomquist can for less money, but that's another topic.

Posted by helpfelix

9:48 AM, Feb 01, 2008

Adam...two things...

1) I will take Seattle's rotation with Bedard any day over the Angels rotation! They have Lackey, but Escobar has been SOooo up and down over the past 2 years, and inconsistent that he's pathetic...the Angels can have him! Saunders at best is a #5 but young, and will continue to fight with Moseley & Santana for the #5 hole. And if you think Escobar has been inconsistent over the past 2.5 years, Santana doesn't know if he's coming or going. Moseley is even worse. So the Angels top 3 SPs are the ones to look at for a comparison: Lackey, Escobar, Garland. Garland has also been inconsistent over the past 3 years! Everyone that's had him in my fantasy league has been very dissappointed! Weaver is NO better than a #4 currently, and from what I've heard doesn't project to be more than a #3! Sorry but I'll take Bedard/Felix/Silva everyday of the week over the Angels top 3!!! AND Seattle's #4 & #5 Batista & Washburn versus Angels Weaver/Santana? I'm going with Seattle on this. Batista is one of the best ground ball pitchers in the AL, and we have one of the best IF defenses in the league. I know you'll dispute that...but here's the thing...Angels IF just took a MAJOR hit moving gold-glove and 300+ BA hitter Cabrera. The Angels have the best OF in MLB, but they don't have NOTHING in the IF that is worth talking about. Figgins speed is about it! The rest the Angels are shooting below the hip on and taking a MAJOR gamble on. I'm shocked that they DFA'd McPherson, because Woods is out right horrible. I don't think you realize that the Angels IF is going to have a major impact on the Angels SPs this season!

2) Adam you mention that minor league #s are a major indicator of how a prospect is going to do in MLB. I've already posted my detail comments yesterday on this regarding Reed. Reed has been an offensive flop in MLB, but his MiLB stats look great!

I'm not expecting Jones to do anything big for the next 3 years, and would be totally surprised if he hits for average & power and/or allstar status over the next 3 years. Just like Reed, he may never even get there! All scouts and analysts were saying the same thing about Reed just 2-3 years ago, and that he would be battling for the AL batting title along side of Ichiro by now. All the scouts & baseball analysts haven't talked about Reed now going on 2 years!!! What's up with that according to your philosophy?

Bottom line now with Bedard, we will have 3 years of drafting players to replenish our farm to fill any holes that might of been created. 2 years ago every scout out there dogged the Yanks farm system, and publicly would tell the media that they didn't have ANYTHING worth looking at. BUT within 2 years of drafting what do they have now with Ian Kennedy & Chamberlain etc? It doesn't take long to address immediate concerns in the top 3 draft picks every year thru 2010!

Finalize Bedard and our Rotation & IF defense can compete with the Angels this year.

Oh and by the way, even after the M's disaster August in 2007, we didn't end up 11 games back. I recall you keep mentioning that...It was ONLY 6 games back!!! The Angels sucked too in Aug/Sept and were ONLY a 500 team!

Add in Vlad's DL stints every year & Garret Anderson's DLs stints every year, and yes Seattle does have a shot. ESPECIALLY "if" Bavasi ends up pulling off another trade like Washburn/Griffey, and moving Morrow to the rotation...AND maybe even moving Clement for Ian Snell (that would be too much to give up, but I can actually see a Snell/Bay for Clement ++ trade!

Posted by marty

10:18 AM, Feb 01, 2008

Wilkerson + Ibanez + Balentien might be a nice platoonable outfield though. so only one of the Raul/Wilk combo bats against lefties. Hopefully Vlad will have a nice spring to keep the pressure on the old folks.

Posted by Adam

10:38 AM, Feb 01, 2008

Helpfelix –

You say Escobar has been inconsistent over the last two or three years. I’m curious, if you think Escobar has been inconsistent, what do you think of Felix? Escobar has, in the last three years, posted ERA+ of: 140, 126, and 134. Felix? 157, 98, and 110. Now, who is more consistent? Like I said, I think Felix is the best pitching talent in the game. But he’s still got to produce more before I give him the nod over Escobar, who is very underrated. I don’t think you understand what “inconsistent” means.

Re: Saunders/Santana – I think the Angels take Saunders over Santana. His ERA+ last year was 103. Santana was at 79. Match Saunders, who is just breaking in, against Washburn, who has had only one year in the last five with an ERA+ over 100, and I’ll take Saunders.

Re: Weaver. In his two years, he has a career ERA+ of 134. Last year, he was “only” at 117, but still well above league average. Silva, meanwhile, has had only one season over 117 in the five years he’s been starting. Last year it was 103. Given age and pure stuff, I give Weaver the edge.

Re: Lackey vs. Bedard. Track record and health, friend. Let’s see Bedard duplicate his 2007 season before we put him ahead of Lackey. One season doesn’t make one pitcher better than the other.

Re: infield defense. The Mariner infield is probably better than the Angel infield defensively. I’d take Kotchman and Kendrick over Sexson and Lopez, but Beltre’s awesomeness along with Betancourt’s potential make up the difference and put the Mariners over the top. That said, the Mariner OF is so disastrous, I’d much rather have the Angels behind me as a pitcher.

Re: Reed and his minor league stats. They actually are not that great. He had one great year: 2003, when in high A ball and in AA he had an OPS of .992. As a 22 year-old. He then went to AAA and was quite mediocre. In 2004, in AAA, his OPS was only .799. Decent, sure, but nothing eye-popping. So what happened? He was given a starting job in Seattle in 2005, and he didn’t do well. In almost 500 ABs, he had an OPS of only .674. He was even worse in 212 ABs in 2006. So the M’s sent him back to Tacoma in 2007, where his OPS was an again-mediocre .806.

What about Jones? – Well, as a 19 year-old in high A and AA, his OPS was .849. About 150 points lower than Reed’s, but he was three years younger. As a 20 year-old, he was sent to AAA, where his OPS was .829 – better than Reed’s first stint at AAA, all the while doing it while three years younger. The next year, in 2007, as a 21 year-old, all Jones did was put up an OPS of .968 – more than 150 points better than what Reed ever did. Further, in his small and pretty much meaningless sample size of ABs in the majors, Jones has nevertheless outperformed Reed.

While I don’t recall one scouting report saying Reed would be challenging Ichiro for batting titles, it is true he was highly-rated after his 2003 season. However, as he got more exposure to better pitching, his star began to fall. It was clear that he isn’t a very good player. Jones is just the opposite. He’s only gotten better as the competition has improved. There is a reason that, coming out of AAA, Jones is a top-10 prospect, while Reed was not. Jones is the much better player. It is ridiculous to compare Reed and Jones.

Re: 11 wins – as I pointed out, that was the Pythagorean formula projections. The Angels were 11 wins better than the Mariners (90 vs. 79) last year. Personally, if you are talking about projections of win-loss records, I’d rather look at runs scored vs. runs allowed than how many games the team won the previous year.

Re: injuries to Vlad and Anderson. It’s awfully difficult to project injuries, but if you really want to play that game, how about we make sure to include a DL stint for Bedard, okay?

Posted by baseball justice

11:02 AM, Feb 01, 2008

"Re: 11 wins – as I pointed out, that was the Pythagorean formula projections. The Angels were 11 wins better than the Mariners (90 vs. 79) last year. Personally, if you are talking about projections of win-loss records, I’d rather look at runs scored vs. runs allowed than how many games the team won the previous year."


Then when the M's win the west and are in the playoffs with 90+ wins I hope you don't celebrate because there is only an 80 win team that "didn't" make the playoffs according to your numbers. What "helpfelix" was stating was not that the team should have been 11 games back, but the team did, in deed, finish 6 games back.

This is why the movement is often-criticized as pessimistic. You offer no optimism for past or current seasons, but continue to bash the M’s on every corner. There has to be a point where you say, “I know what I would have liked to seen, but it’s not going to happen, and I should enjoy the season.”

Instead you argue with any fan that is skeptical about sabremetrics, which happen to still be a fringe idea. Sabremetrics are well-enough known that those statistics would be the only ones used across baseball – but alas, they are not. The reason is because as I have seen on Ms Blogs, the only stats that are quantified by the movement are stats that support their argument.

Case in point: Silva, whom was trashed on many M’s sabremetric blogs. However, if one took enough time to actually look at his stats for themselves, you would have seen the definition of a MLB average pitcher across the board in a very hitter-friendly ballpark. None of this was explained though.

This is why people have a problem with the M’s sabremetric blogosphere. Add that to the idea that the moderators of those blogs call people “stupid” and “idiots” for not agreeing to their thoughts and you can see why people thing those blogs are assumed to be arrogant.

Posted by Adam

11:32 AM, Feb 01, 2008

baseball justice - I didn't realize this was an argument re: sabermetrics vs. traditional evaluations.

If you have a problem with the numbers I used (is OPS really that earth-shattering?), please feel free to explain why those numbers are flawed.

And regarding the 11 wins under the Pythag. projection, the point is simple. Just because the Mariners were an 88-win team last year doesn't mean they were actually that good, or that they were better than any and all teams that won fewer than 88 games.

And, IN MY OPINION, when projecting how a team will do the next year, I don't think the best way to do so is start with the W/L record from the previous year. I don't think smart teams do that, either.

I really don't think the gap between the Angels and M's was only 6 games. A review of the rosters, talent, coaching, etc. makes that pretty clear in my mind. Shoot, just check out their head-to-head records.

Of course I'll celebrate if the Mariners exceed their Pythag projection and win 90+ games and get into the playoffs. The point is, however, that they shouldn't assume coming into this year that they are an 88-win team and only need six more wins to catch the Angels.

Oh, I argue with anyone if I don't agree with them.

By the way - I really think it's the traditionalists and their "arrogance" that is the problem - they don't like the fact that someone challenges their way of viewing the game.

Posted by shortbus

11:54 AM, Feb 01, 2008

baseball justice

The stats-based blogosphere is pessimistic about the M's chances because they keep making moves that can be mathematically proven to be foolish. I'll watch the M's with as much optimism as the next fan...but like the next fan my optimism will be entirely based on hope, not on what I know to be true about the team they're fielding. Statheads praise the M's when appropriate. Signing Jose Guillen is a good example of a deal that was viewed somewhat favorably as a good short-term, stop-gap move. The Wilkerson deal is similarly not getting trashed for the same reason. It fills a need at a reasonable price with no future committments.

I just wish that need didn't have to be filled by a player that won't be as good as the one we already have, who's also cheaper.

Posted by eternal

12:26 PM, Feb 01, 2008

I don't understand why people get angry about reporting on the Jones trade. This is a blog, right? Isn't it supposed to be information as it happens? Isn't the blog world full of assumptions? You know what you're getting into. Personally, I only come to to read this blog. If this blog didn't exist, I'd never go. The "normal" stories on Seattle Times, the PI and pretty much every local source are pretty awful, but we all know this, right? Blogs like this are their one redeeming quality.

Posted by baseball justice

3:07 PM, Feb 01, 2008

You do realize that according to Forbes the Mariners had a gross revenue of $186 million dollars last year, only $2 million dollars less than the "big market" LAAOA. By seriously UPGRADING our biggest deficit last year and having a minimal to no loss in RF in replacing Guillen (oh yea, I know, JONES didn't start there last year it was Guillen). That the goal of the franchise is to win now. Not to play the play (former) Montreal or Florida way to develop young talent and let them walk. Who knows, Jones may be huge, or he may flop, but nobody -- not even the so called "gods" at USSM knows for sure.

I am not for the Jones trade (mainly for personal reasons) but I am also not against the trade. The trade does help us immediately, which I think we all would like to see. I am sorry that I can't see a player like Jones grow, but we aren't replacing him with dog turds either.


I have nothing personally against the sabremetric crowd because I find them interesting and I use them for my personal thoughts. What I do have a problem with however, is that the "sabermetric" crowd has become bullies. Calling those that don't follow their order "idiots." Those personal attack are what made me stop reading the other blogs all together.

Posted by Faceplant

5:24 PM, Feb 01, 2008

"This is why the movement is often-criticized as pessimistic. You offer no optimism for past or current seasons, but continue to bash the M’s on every corner."

I'd rather deal with reality than wishful thinking. Many people think the Mariners are a terribly run franchise. That doesn't mean they want to see them lose. On the contrary the fact that they are complaining about the team should show that they actually care about it.

"Instead you argue with any fan that is skeptical about sabremetrics, which happen to still be a fringe idea."

Spare me. This is a charge thrown around often, and it has no basis in reality. Many on this blog (resin is a good example) practically look for reasons to criticize the sabermetric community. It's amazing how many people who are openly hostile to the use of advanced statistics pretend to be some sort of victim.

"The reason is because as I have seen on Ms Blogs, the only stats that are quantified by the movement are stats that support their argument."

Show me an example. When people are trying to make a point of course they are going to point to the metrics that most prove their argument.

"Case in point: Silva, whom was trashed on many M’s sabremetric blogs. However, if one took enough time to actually look at his stats for themselves, you would have seen the definition of a MLB average pitcher across the board in a very hitter-friendly ballpark. None of this was explained though."

The problem with Silva isn't the production. The problem is the money you are paying for that production. It's the same thing as Washburn. Is Washburn terrible? No. He's a perfectly serviceable back end starter. But you don't throw millions of dollars at someone to be a back end starter. THAT'S the point. And that's the point that the majority of M's blogs were making.

Posted by Faceplant

5:33 PM, Feb 01, 2008

"Again, for the learning disabled, this is not fantasy baseball. You can't line up rosters, compare positions, and draw a conclusion about anything."

Yeah! Let's ignore proven predictors of future success! Who needs defensive metrics when you have hope. Why try to get better. Even crappy teams win sometimes?

Real teams aren't built on hope and optimism Mr. X. You continue to show that you know very little about actual talent evaluation.

No matter how much you try to pretend that you know more than everyone else, it's glaringly obvious that you don't.

Posted by Faceplant

5:41 PM, Feb 01, 2008

"We have two guys at AAA that can match and probably beat this clowns lifetime stats, namely Morse and Balentien. That would cost only a quarter or less."

Yuck. Why does everyone seem to love Mike Morse? His career minor league line is .261/.319/.408. Morse career minor league numbers are worse than Wilkersons career Major league numbers. There is no evidence that Mike Morse is a better hitter than Brad Wilkerson, and there is a boatload of evidence that Mike Morse is an absolutely attrocious defensive outfielder.

Brad Wilkerson > Mike Morse

Mike Morse is almost 26 and no longer a prospect. His future is as a 25th man in the majors, or a minor league journeyman.

Posted by vertigoman

4:50 AM, Feb 02, 2008

Thanks adam,
a little lower than I'd have thought but certainly not out of line with where a contact hitter should be.
I'm still not sure why anyone would consider him "failed". If you're just looking for power than yes, no good here. However, he's never been accused of being one. As a contact hitter he has assets that you'd fully expect. Low K rate, decent W rate, decent LD rate all while boating a fairly robust 153 ISOP!!! OK not great but good for a contact hitter (compared to Jeter at 130, Ichiro and Vidro at 80).
Making any comparison between Reed and Jones is absurd. Different dudes. You can't just blurt out one thing without saying another (i.e. Jones 23% k rate vs. Reed's 11% while maintaining identical walk rates).

Recent entries

Jul 4, 08 - 03:16 PM
Detroit Tigers at Mariners: 07/04 game thread

Jul 4, 08 - 12:28 PM
Holiday optimism

Jul 3, 08 - 11:13 PM
Better opposition tonight

Jul 3, 08 - 08:56 PM
Detroit Tigers at Mariners: 07/03 game thread

Jul 3, 08 - 05:45 PM
Hernandez throws, Rowland-Smith blogs, Clement struggles







Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
    1 2 3 4 5
6 7 8 9 10 11 12
13 14 15 16 17 18 19
20 21 22 23 24 25 26
27 28 29 30 31    
Browse the archives

July 2008

June 2008

May 2008

April 2008

March 2008

February 2008


Buy a link here