Hey, I am as pissed off about this move as the rest of you.  However, I would like to focus on the bright side of this whole debacle.  

Unlike most other silver lining explanations of this move, I am nost going to waste anyones time BSing about how this is going to help the club win more games, because signing Silva for more than $5 mil per year is pretty much stupid.  He isn't a terrible pitcher.  He is just the type of guy that is useful only before he hits free agency.  Only stupid teams sign guys like this to multi-year deals in free agency.  However, the M's are a stupid team.  That is where the bright side of this deal is.  

The biggest problem the M's have is their general manager and front office.  It is pretty much a 100% certainty that this is a 'win or else' year for Bavasi et al.  Thus, we are watching Bill make desperation moves to save his ass.  That is what is so frustrating about this club.  They don't realize that they aren't legit contenders, and they don't have any clue how to get to that point in the first place.  The inability to evaluate talent is an unconquerable obstacle in this organization.  They just won't be a good team unless changes are made at the top.    

I am hoping that this will be one of the last nails in Bavasi's coffin.  As it stands now, the M's aren't anything resembling a contender.  The Angels are far and away the biggest lock to win their division in baseball.  Adding Silva, plus a few additional minor moves - maybe one of the guys coming off injury like Clement, Colon, Jennings, Garcia or Prior - aren't going to be enough for the M's to close the gap.  

Assuming that this is the big move of the offseason, I would argue that the M's are barely a .500 club.  That is enough to get Bavasi fired.  Most likley, the Angels will win around 95 games and the M's will be effectively out of contention by July.  

Hopefully, this is the worst that Bavasi does to fuck up the roster that his replacement will inherit.  If that is true, this isn't the end of the world.  

If Bavasi manages to not trade away any young talent or lock us in to other terrible contracts, the M's roster will be in relatively good shape.  Sexson, Ibanez, Bloomquist, and Johjima are off the books after 2008.  Washburn, Beltre, Batista, and Vidro are off the books the following year.  While guys like Washburn, Batista, and Silva aren't good contracts, they aren't immovable albatrosses either, especially with the price of mediocre starters going up every year.  By mid-season, and especially by the next offseason, those contracts could actually have trade value.  If Bavasi gets canned, his successor could move some contracts and regain flexibility pretty easily.  

The M's have some near-ML-ready young talent and a few guys locked up on good value contracts for a few years.  This would be an easy club to get back into contention, if we only had the right GM.  

Hopefully, this is Bavasi's last failure.  In that sense, perhaps this is some sort of rock-bottom moment.  Sorta like the DWI that forces an alcoholic to re-evaluate his life and get help.  I certainly hope so, because it sucks going into an offseason knowing that the guy running the club just doesn't get it.  

Well, now that the season's over, it is never too early to start chatting about the offseason.  

It seems like most people are pretty comfortable with the assumption that Guillen will be back next year.  He is supposedly looking for a multi-year deal, with Eric Byrnes' recent contract as a guide for what he may be looking for.  The negotiations are going to be starting around 3yrs/30mil, and 4 years, at over $10 mil per is a real option.  

I thought that Guillen was a solid pickup by Bavasi, but I think the M's should seriously consider other options.  

In my opinion, the most interesting alternative is Japanese RFer Kosuke Fukudome.  

I like the idea of going after Fukudome instead of Guillen for several reasons.  One, Fukudome gives you pretty much everything Guillen does: good RF defense, an excellent arm, solid bat, and slightly above average power.  However, Fukudome gives you a lot of things Guillen doesn't: a lefty bat, excellent plate discipline, and more speed.  The lefthandedness and ability to get on base are the biggest factors.  All the scouting reports on Fukudome talk about how he has a very new-school, US approach at the plate, and draws a ton of walks.  More Hideki Matsui than Ichiro.  He probably won't hit 30+ HRs, but he will likely hit 20 or so, with a lot of doubles and a great OBP.  

All in all, he sounds like a Bobby Abreu or JD Drew type player.  He also gets plus grades for athleticism and defense, so sticking him in RF would probably be a slight upgrade at least.  

Nobody is talking about Fukudome right now because he had surgery to remove bone fragments from his elbow and missed a much of the second half of the season.  However, this is actually a good thing for the M's.  His elbow injury is less serious than Guillen's last offseason, and will help keep his price down.  He is projected to be ready by the opening of spring training, no problem.  

Even if Fukudome costs a bit more, I think the M's should pursue this guy aggressively.  He fits perfectly with what this club needs: walks, lefty bat, and good OF defense.  Plus, he won't cost the club a draft pick.  

This is a no-brainer to me.  

Bill Bavasi has been selected as the worst GM in baseball by Dayn Perry at Foxsports.com.  

Congratulations Bill.  It is well deserved.  

Here is what Perry had to say about our beloved GM:

"No GM is worse when it comes to identifying free-agent targets, and on the trade market he's also played a little fast and loose with the organizational depth. He'll leave the M's as an organization that's in demonstrably worse shape than when he arrived."

The whole list is available at:
http://msn.foxsports.com/mlb/story/6392576

The silver lining to this: the M's next GM can't possibly do worse.  

Jim Callis gave his take on the Vidro fiasco.  It was buried beneath an article on Jeff Samardzija.  Not really anything that we haven't been saying for a while, but it is always nice to know that knowledgable outsiders agree with us:

Christmas Comes Early For Nats

Trades have a funny way of turning out differently than expected. Yet it's hard to envision a scenario where dealing for Jose Vidro is going to work out for the Mariners.

Beset by leg injuries, the 32-year-old Vidro is a shell of what he once was offensively and can't cover enough ground to play a passable second base. The Nationals owed him a total of $16 million over the next two seasons, and would have been content to just dump most of his salary, regardless of which players he would have brought in return.

But not only did Seattle pick up $12 million on Vidro's contract--not to mention give him a vesting option for 2009--but it also gave Washington two promising youngsters. Outfielder Chris Snelling hasn't been able to stay healthy, but he's fully capable of hitting for a higher average and more gap power than Vidro. Righthander Emiliano Fruto may be an enigma, but he'll show a plus-plus changeup, a plus fastball and a plus curve, and he should offer some bullpen help.

Vidro will DH for the Mariners, who gave up three more young players (Shin-Soo Choo, Asdrubal Cabrera and Shawn Nottingham) during the summer to acquire the DH platoon of Ben Broussard and Eduardo Perez from the Indians. Embattled Seattle GM Bill Bavasi has a mandate from ownership to win now, but the Vidro deal will hurt Seattle in the present and in the future.

I like how Callis puts the whole search for a DH in perspective.  Basically, the M's have pissed away Snelling, Cabrera, Nottingham, Fruto, and Choo to acquire Vidro's albatross contract and whatever spare parts we got from trading Broussard.  

Sweet.  

http://www.rotoworld.com/content/playerpages/player_previousnews.aspx?sport=MLB&id=3244

"The Rockies have yet to join the Mariners and Padres in making an offer for free agent Brian Lawrence."

Huh.

Lawrence would fit in well with the M's M.O. this offseason:

Injured?

Check.  Lawrence is coming off surgery for a torn rotator cuff.  Who knows how healthy he is, but a few teams are at least giving him offers.  

Mediocre?  

Check.  When healthy, you cannot find a more average starter than Lawrence.  Pre-injury, he ate up innings.  His stats, year to year, are consistently average.  

Groudball tendencies?

Check.  He has groundball tendencies, but not extreme ones.  

Obviously, evaluation of the possibility of adding Lawrence depends entirely on the specifics of the deal.  This is a decent signing if it is an NRI or one year deal for minimal money.  It would also be a decent deal for a few mil for one year if the M's were pretty confident in his health.  

I would not be suprised at all to see this end up as the M's final move add starting pitching this offseason.  

What do you think the terms of Batista's three year deal will be?  

I will put it at 3 years, $25.5 million.  

What do you think?  

I was reading some other posts on this blog, and it got me thinking about what type of approach the M's should take for the rest of the offseason.  

A huge part of this is based on where the front office sees this club in its return to contention.  

Obviously, the roster is far from set.  But a lot of the available players are no longer options.  We have traded our best trade chip, and the other players who we could move (Sexson and others) would be more likely to be 2008 moves than win-now moves.  

So, I wanted to pose the question:

Are the M's actually worse now than they were in 2006?  

Again, it remains to be seen what the team does for the remainder of the offseason.  But, supposing Bavasi et al don't do anything dramatic (which seems unlikely to me), and only add, say, something along the lines of Jeff Suppan and Cliff Floyd, will this club win more games than they did in 2006?

As it stands now, the offense should be better.  Ichiro in CF and Guillen in RF is an upgrade.  It is not unrealistic to expect improvement from Sexson, Beltre, Johjima, and Lopez in 2007.  Adding a guy like Floyd would just make the club better, and Snelling is far better than anyone we have had on the bench in a while.  

But the pitching is way worse than it was in 2006.  We have essentially traded Meche and Moyer for Horacio Ramirez.  Assuming we don't add Barry Zito or pull off a major trade, the next pitcher the M's add is likely to give us close to the same production as Moyer (guys like Suppan and Thomson fall into this category).  Baek and Woods are 6.0 ERAs waiting to happen, and Feierabend is the only guy who I consider a long-term option who is anywhere near ML ready.  He is not an impact player, and definitely shouldn't be counted on to come in like Verlander did last year.  

At the same time, we just subtracted our second best relief pitcher.  The pen is not going to be as good in 2007.  We had a lot of guys who overachieved, and I don't expect guys like Huber, Woods, O'Flaherty, and others to fill that gap in the pen.  They will still be good, but not as good.  

I dunno.  I figured that the M's were a near lock to at least continue their slow incremental improvement since 2004.  But I am not so sure now.  This is looking like a 78-80 win team to me, with a big possibility of setbacks.  The season could all fall apart easily given the lack of starting pitching depth that the club has.  

I would be interested to hear what you guys think.  

I am beginning to think that the M's need to reevaluate their status and reconsider their approach to this offseason.  

I need to get my mind off Whore-atio Rafuckingmirez.  

Baseball America will come out with their annual top 10 prospects for the M's next Monday.  

I like to follow the M's farm system pretty closely, and now that the offseason is officially a bust, I am looking for a reason to turn my attention away from Bill Bavasi's handiwork.  

Anyhow, BA is IMO the best non-team-specific resource on prospects, followed closely by Kevin Goldstien at BP and John Sickels.  Sickels and Goldstien's organization reviews won't be out for a while.  And Jason Churchill should be doing a top-50 soon as well.  

It is always interesting to compare how these authorities rank prospects relative to our own, less informed outsider perspectives.  

Rankings are always subjective, but it is fun to put together lists and compare them with other clubs.  

Lets use this thread to come up with our own lists, and compare them with the ones that should be coming out soon.  

Here is top 25:

1.  Adam Jones, CF: Underrated by national prospect pundits, but played well in AAA at age 20.  Heir apparent to Ichiro?  
2.  Jeff Clement, C: struggled a bit, mainly due to completely incomprehensible promotion by the M's.  Still a top prospect.  Lefty power at C is extremely rare.  
3.  Brandon Morrow, RHP: the prospect that should have been Andrew Miller is still a good arm.  Biggest question is whether or not he sticks as a starter or moves to the pen.  Either way, he could move fast.  
4.  Anthony Butler, LHP:  Huge debut.  Looks like a potential steal of the draft.  Huge, projectable, and only needs to improve control a bit.  Nice prospect.  
5.  Ryan Feierabend, LHP: closest starter to the majors.  His stuff has always been better than his results, but he has held his own against older competition at every level.  The new Travis Blackley?  Could help the M's in 2007.  
6.  Chris Tillman, RHP: big potential.  Has great body and stuff, and could take off in 2007.  Lots of upside.
7.  Emiliano Fruto, RHP: still technically a prospect, Fruto did a lot better last season than a lot of people give him credit for.  With Soriano being given away for nothing, lets hope that Fruto can emerge as a major contributor in 2007.  
8.  Mark Lowe, RHP: Huge question mark.  Should probably be lower given the potential severity of his injury.  Perhaps the M's willingness to trade Soriano for scrap reflects a much better prognosis than we might think?  Or maybe I am just trying to fool myself.  
9.  Greg Halman, CF: He did well in the NWL before injuring his hand.  Scouts love his tools, and he reminds you a bit of Adam Jones based on physique.  One to watch in 2007.  
10. Carlos Triunfel, SS: We don't know much about him, but he is the highest profile international signing the M's have made in a long time.  Initial scouting reports are glowing, and he could be the best prospect in the system by 2008.  
11. Mario Martinez, OF: I put him below Triunfel based mainly on his signing bonus and national exposure, but some people are suggesting that the M's like him just as much as Triunfel.  Again, very little information to go on, but early reports are that he is a toolsy outfielder with a ton of potential.  
12. Luis Valbuena, 2B: Stats look ugly, but peripheral stats are promising.  Could take off in 2007 in High Desert.  Underrated.  
13. Brain LaHair, 1B:  I am not sold on this guy, but his flashes of brilliance at AAA last year were too impressive to rank him any lower. Could be the next Ben Broussard.  
14. Geraldo Avila, 1B: One of the best power prospect in the lower minors.  Bit lefty 1Bman.  
15. Carlos Peguero. OF: tore up the AZL (.313/.380/.649) before earning a late promotion to Everett.  He is huge (6'5", 210 at age 19), lefthanded, and has serious tools.  This is the type of guy that the M's are lacking right now.  
16. Alex Liddi, 3B:  Big, projectable, raw Italian player.  Will be 18 next season, and is a guy to keep an eye on.  
17. Yorman Bazardo: Stuff is better than results, and K rate is very low for a guy with his arm.  Needs to move to pen next year.  
18. Matt Tuiasosopo: like Clement and Jones, the M's have promoted this guy at a breakneck pace.  Why?  Who knows.  I think his struggles are just as much a reflection of the M's handling of him as they are of his talent.  Next season is a make-or-break year for him.  Still has tools and time, but is fading fast.  
19. Justin Thomas, LHP: Could be the next Travis Blackley or Bobby Livingston.  Scouts like him better than the other soft-tossing lefties in the sysem (eg Robert Rohrbaugh).  Faces a huge challenge in 2007.  
20. Wladimir Balentien, OF: Lets hope that he can consolidate the gains he made in plate discipline last season, continue to cut down his K's, and maintain power.  That is much easier said than done.  
21.  Eric O'Flaherty: very good season in 2007, and he held his own in Seattle.  Could use some time in Tacoma next year, but he should be back in Seattle very soon.  
22. Anthony Varvaro, RHP: this is my pick for biggest sleeper in the organization.  A full season removed from TJ surgery, I can't wait to see what this guy can do when healthy.  
23. Rob Johnson, C: Difficult to evaluate due to overly aggressive promotions.  Still a decent prospect, with a good balance of strong defense and some offensive upside.    
24. Kameron Mickolio, RHP: A good sleeper candidate and very reminiscent of JJ Putz.  He is a huge guy (6'9", 256) and could flourish in the pen.  Teach him how to throw a splitter, and he could turn into a very good power reliever.  
25. Steve Uhlmansiek, LHP: solid return from arm problems in 2006.  Next year will be big for him.  

Obviously, I weigh upside more than likelihood of helping the ML club.  Thus, Triunfel, Peguero, Avila, and Martinez are ranked higher than guys who are safer bets.  

The strength of this system is concentrated in the lower levels, and, overall, it is not a good group.  Hopefully, Bavasi's idiocy won't include dealing these guys for more crap.  

Instead of dwelling on the negative (Horacio Ramirez), why don't you guys post your own lists.  Or just bash mine.  Then, we can compare against what guys like Jim Callis, John Sickels, and Kevin Goldstein come up with.  The best Mariners-specific sources, Jason Churchill, should be putting out a list soon as well.  

I was just perusing the list of guys who were/weren't offered arbitration.  Some interesting stuff:

Guys who were offered arbitration:
Gil Meche: Yeah.  It was a no-brainer on offering him arbitration.  But nice nonetheless.  The M's pick up a supplemental pick.  So if they do sign Schmidt or another Type-A guy, the loss of the second round pick isn't so painful.  

Jason Schmidt: no suprise here.  He is a type A, but probably worth losing a pick over.  

Not Offered Arbitration:
Luis Gonzalez: The D-Backs weren't going to offer him arbitration because of his big salary in 2006.  But now he definitely won't cost picks.  

Aubrey Huff: this is the real interesting one.  I figured he would probably be offered arbitration.  His 2006 salary was only 7 million, so I am suprised the Astros didn't take a risk.  I guess that the bloated contracts to Oswalt and Lee, and the possiblity of bringing back Clemens and Pettite played a part in that decision.  IMO, this makes Huff a legit option for the M's.  Picking him up would be a solid move.  His versatility would help the M's with trades also, particularly moving Sexson.  

Barry Bonds: Again, no big suprise here.  He would have gotten a fortune in arbitation.  I love the idea of picking him up.  He is the only real big impact bat that makes sense for the M's.  

I am hoping that the M's take draft pick compensation into consideration this offseason.  It would be really nice to keep all the picks we have, plus the extra one for Meche.  This draft class is looking like an excellent one, particulalry with highschool players.  The M's could pick up a few really good, high-ceiling players this year if they don't piss away their picks.  

More and more, it is looking like Bonds could be the best value on the free agent market.

If you get past the initial reaction to the idea (NOOO!), there are a lot of reasons why Bonds would be a perfect fit for the M's.  

The Mariners badly need a lefthanded power bat, and they also need players who can get on base.  

Bonds fills both needs perfectly.  

Although his final stats for 2006 (.270/.454/.545 with 26 HRs) don't match up with the ludicrous numbers that we have come to expect from the best hitter in baseball over the past decade (~.350/.550/.800 w/ 45+ HRs), there is good reason to think that Bonds still has something left in the tank:

Pre-Allstar: .249/.474/.497
August:  .333/.459/.638
September: .299/.405/.657

When Barry got healthy at the end of 2006, he was putting up incredible numbers.  

All of the scouting reports and information I have been able to find about him suggest that his bat speed and eye are still exceptional.

Everyone talks about how moving him to DH full-time would help keep his legs fresh.  

In all likelihood, you can conservatively pencil Bonds in for .300/.450/.550 for as long as he remains on the field in 2007.  And the upside is a lot better than that.  

The downsides to Bonds are obvious and hugely important.  

First, he is a total douchebag.  

Second, he is a cheater.

Third, he is universally despised.  

Fourth, he will turn 43 next summer.

Fifth, he has knee problems that won't go away.  

Sixth, he has a well-documented reputation as a clubhouse cancer.  

Seventh, he is a total douchebag.  

All important points.  But really, only two of those points have anything to do with Bonds' performance.  

If the M's did go after Bonds, he would create a circus sideshow atmosphere.  About 90% of media attention in spring training and early in the season would focus squarely on Bonds, overshadowing any other good news that comes from the club.  But I do think that the media attention would wane more that people might think.  

The impact on attendance would be tough to gauge.  Everyone loves to see a spectacle, and Bonds is definitely a spectacle.  The M's would draw big crowds for away games, but I am not sure how fans in Seattle would react.  The team would be far less family friendly, but it would be a lot more interesting to watch.  And we would still have Ichiro, Ibanez, and Felix as marketable guys.  

But one thing is really clear to me: if the M's signed Bonds, and he was able to play ~130-140 games next year, he would dramatically improve the offense.  He would help the club win games.  

From a sheerly performance-focused perspective, I love the idea of adding him to the lineup.  Bonds would help fix our biggest weakness - the M's ranked 13th out of 14 teams in the AL in OBP last season - and solve the M's problems with finding a good #3 hitter.  He would also do well in Safeco.  And, as the DH, his horrible defense isn't much of an issue at all (although it would keep Ibanez on the field).  

Finally, Bonds' status as the most hated man in baseball, coupled with his age, will drive down his price.  If the M's could sign him for less than $12 million on a one-year deal, it could be an absolute bargain.  And since there are so few worthwhile things to spend money on this offseason, a one-year deal would be pretty nice.  Maybe throw in an option.  

I dunno.  I am agnostic on this issue.  But the more I think about it, the more sense it makes.  

Continuing in the series of discussions of possible free agent acquisitions...

I think that Randy Wolf is a guy that could actually be a decent value in this market.  

He is coming off TJ surgery in 2005, and had mixed results in 12 starts late last season.  Considering how pitchers usually perform when coming back from this type of injury, he is right on target for a full recovery.  From reading scouting reports, it seems like his stuff came most of the way back, but his command is still a work in progress.  Totally normal for TJ surgery.  Given a normal pattern of recovery, we can expect his HR and BB numbers to return to normal levels as his control and command improve.  

In a lot of ways, he is coming back at the perfect time: he has shown that he can pitch, but didn't get enough starts to clearly demonstrate that he is 100% healthy.  From the buyers point of view, that is great.  His lack of solid stats in 2005-6 help keep his price low.  

At his best, Wolf is a good #2-3 starter.  From 2001-2003, he was looking like he could develop into a very good starter before injuries started to cut into his playing time.  He finally decided to have surgery in 2005.

For a lefty, he has slight above average FB velocity, with an excellent curve, decent change, and pretty good slider.  He mainly works off his fastball, although his curve is his best pitch.  Lefties are useless against him.  From 2001-2003, he was striking out around 8 guys per 9 IP.  His walks and HRs weren't too aweful.  He is a flyball pitcher, and moving from Philly to Safeco would almost definitely help him.  

Wolf would benefit greatly from pitching half his games in Seattle.  He is a flyball pitcher, so Safeco will help him limit his HRs.  He has always been really tough on lefties, so he would neutralize the only demographic who do well in Safeco.  You don't want to go after players who will suck in half their games away from home, but Wolf's repertoir isn't as extreme as a guy like Washburn.  Wolf gets his fair share of K's, and should be OK anywhere.  Basically, he is Washburn with 50% more K's.

Plus, he is only 30 and grew up in California.  And he won't cost the M's draft picks.  

I think this guy could be a real good signing.  

Of course, it would depend on the contract.  But, given his lack of playing time recently, a 2-year deal with a vesting option for a 3rd year could work well.  Given the numbers being thrown around for guys like Ted Lilly and Vicente Padilla, Wolf could be the best value in this free agent class.   A 2 year/$15 mil contract with a vesting option for the third year would be appropriate.  

The news this morning is dismal:

The Seattle Times is also reporting that the M's are looking at Tomo Okha as their 4th starter, because he will be a bargain (a term that is relative in this market).  I have no problem with Okha on a 'bargain' contract, but at market value, he is exactly the type of guy you stay away from.  

Other little tid-bits:

-the M's are NOT going to get into the bidding for Kei Igawa.  Funny, I figured he would be one of the guys who actually WILL be a bargain this offseason.  

-the M's are going to agressively pursue Jason Schmidt, who is asking for $14 MILLION/YEAR (I just spit coffee all over my computer screen).

http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/sports/2003431149_mari15.html

Larry Larue from the News Tribune also chimes in on the M's wish list at the GM meetings:

-the M's have talked to Jason Schmidt, Adam Eaton, and Ted Lilly.  All are likely to get crazy contracts that far exceed any reasonable expectations of their performance.  

-one other name: Woody Williams.  Ugh.  

-Contradictions, anyone?  The Tribune says that the M's WILL enter the bidding for Kei Igawa.  Hmmm.  

-the most interesting tid-bit is that the M's are supposedly recieving trade offers for....Joel Pineiro?  WTF?  Who say that one coming?  If the M's can get even minor league roster filler for him, that would be hilarious.  

-in the notes section, Larue mentions that the Dodgers are currently the front runners for Schmidt.  Great.  I can see a bidding war involving the Dodgers and the M's getting really ugly.  

http://www.thenewstribune.com/sports/story/6232872p-5443134c.html

Even the Everett Herald gets into the action:

-Kirby Arnold repeats a lot of common rumors that the M's are interested in Schmidt and Eaton, but also Ted Lilly.  

http://www.heraldnet.com/stories/06/11/15/100spo_c7msnotes001.cfm

Ugh.  Am I the only one here with an impending feeling of doom?  

I just can't see this offseason going well.  In fact, I think that we might have the perfect storm brewing that could potentially kneecap this franchise for years.  

First, the M's are on the precipice of becoming perennial losers again.  The patience of the fans is wearing out, and they know it.  

Second, the front office and skipper are all on the hot seat.  Lincoln and Bavasi publically acknowledged this, and made statements that seemed very much like ultimatums, like "we'll win, or its on us."  

Third, the club has agreed to raise payroll up above $95 million.  They will have to find some way to spend that money in a market that will likely feature very few bargains.  

Fourth, Bavasi has a strong track record of throwing caution to the wind when he wants a player (Washburn, Beltre, Sexson).  If he gets his mind set on a player this offseason, it could get really ugly.  

I am really concerned that this offseason will be a totally unmitigated disaster.  

I really wish we had a GM like Mark Shapiro, who seems to really understand how to read the market and make potentially unpopular moves to maximize value.  That is the type of GM you want in a situation like this.  

This could be really bad.  

I think that a lot of peoples reactions to the M's unwillingness to kick down ludicrous amounts of cash money for Matsuzaka can be summed up as: "What now?"  

On the one hand, I can understand why the front office doesn't want to get into that bidding war.

On the other, this is a crap group of free agents.  Without a guy like Matsuzaka, it will be really difficult for the M's to construct a contender for 2007 without seriously jeopordizing their long-term success.  

If the M's want to add the talent necessary to contend right away, they will either have to commit to unreasonable contract with aging players, overpay for mediocre players, or mortgage the future by trading the few interesting prospects they have.  

The lack of good possibilities right now is pretty well illustrated by the many "rosterbation" posts on this and other sites.  I am not saying that these are bad ideas, but there just isn't that much talent available this offseason to work with.  

So, I am wondering if the M's wouldn't be best off punting in 2007.  

They are clearly improving, and I think that they will continue to improve even if they don't go balls out and spend irresponsibly this offseason.  

Perhaps it would be in their best interest to trade some of their best chips - guys like Sexson, Ichiro, Soriano, Broussard, and Reed - and continue the rebuild for one more year.  Of those guys, Sexson, Ichiro and Soriano could net the M's some very good young players (especially if they ate some of Sexson's contract).

Over and over, teams that have made these types of moves end up looking really smart down the road.  The Indians, and Marlins have all done really well by having fire sales.  The A's and Twins also always seem to make good trades as sellers, which have helped keep them competative so long.  The Marlins in particular provide a great example of what a smart team can do in a sellers market.  Like the Marlins, the M's already have a good core of young players: Felix, Lopez, Betancourt, and the bullpen guys are all cheap and under team control for a while.  That is a pretty good start.  

The lack of talent talent on the free agent market could be turned into an advantage.  If the M's decide to not make dumb moves, they could really take advantage of this weak free agent class.  With guys like Carlos Lee and Ted Lilly drawing a ton of interest, the M's could really cash in.  This is a perfect time to sell.  

And if the M's are moving all that payroll, they could focus on free agent acquisitions that could end up being great values, like Octavio Dotel, Craig Wilson, Kei Igawa, and other guys who could outperform their salaries.  Also, the team could use some of those prospects and guys in the organization to bring in ML-ready talent.  Jeremy Bonderman would be a real great addition.  If the M's could get the pieces together for a package for him, the would be getting the perfect type of player: a local guy with ace-quality stuff, a reasonable contract, a strong likelihood of signing a extension, and at age 24, a strong liklihood of getting better over the course of that contract.  

The more I think about this, the more I think that the M's should just sit tight, sell high, and build a club like the Marlins or Diamondbacks: young teams stacked with talent who could contend if a few things went right.  

Obviously, Bavasi and the front office couldn't be in a worse position to do this, so it is unlikely it would happen.  And the types of moves discussed above would potentially have a terrible effect on attendance.  But I still think it could be the best way forward.  

Well, it seems like a foregone conclusion that the M's are not going to end up with Matsuzaka.  

The M's have likely turned their attention to the other top pitchers on the market, which is pretty much limited to Jason Schmidt and Barry Zito.  

So, the question becomes: Which do you prefer?  

Really, I think that you could make good arguments for both guys.

Here is a quick and dirty discussion of the pros and cons of each:

Schmidt Pros:
-WA native, who is open to signing with the M's
-Proven ace pitcher, who was dominant between 2002-2004
-prototypical power pitcher
-besides problems in 2004, he has been pretty durable, pitching 200+ IP three of the past four years
-consistently good.  He has been solid to excellent for the past 6 years
-flyball pitcher who should be helped by Safeco, although SF also has a pitchers park

Schmidt Cons:
-at age 34 next season, he is risky on a long-term deal
-if the M's sign him, he would be switching leagues, and even in the best case scenario, his stats should slip a bit
-declining K rate is a major concern
-always has walked too many hitters
-seems to have lost a bit since his injury in 2004, and he hasn't dominated in the past two years like he did in 2002-2004
-in this market, he will be paid elite pitcher money

Zito Pros:
-incredible durability, with 6 consecutive years of 34-35 GS and 210+ IP
-pitched his entire career in AL West, so transition should be minimal
-flyball pitcher who should get a boost from Safeco
-doesn't turn 29 until next May, so even on a 5-year deal, he would still be in his prime at age 33 at the end of the contract
-he is exceptionally lefthanded
-consistently good, with 2004 the only season in which he didn't have excellent numbers

Zito Cons:
-fringy stuff
-mediocre to bad peripheral stats, with scary BB rate
-declining K/BB in each of the past three years
-memories of Cy Young make him overrated
-Scott Boras is his agent, which means he will likely sign late and for an exhorbinant sum
-stuff and repertoire make him project best as a #2 type
-will require a much longer contract than Schmidt

Really, I think that you can make a good argument for both of these guys.  I don't think that anyone denies that Matsuzaka was the best option for the M's.  I am not sure that either of these guys are a good Plan B, but it seems likely that the M's will go after one of them.  

The local ties have led lots of people to suggest that Schmidt will be the M's #1 target.  It remains to be seen how much of a factor that will be for Schmidt.  But I think it is very likely that he ends up a Mariner in 2007.

Anyhow, I figured that this topic will be a prominent and contentious issue, and was wondering what everyone here take on this is.  

Obscured beneath the news that the M's are too cheap to throw their hats into the Matsuzaka bidding, there have been several reports linking the M's to Gary Matthews Jr.  

My initial reaction to this possibility was that is was a horrible idea.  The M's have two CFers, and Matthews is the token example of a guy cashing in on a walk year breakout.  He seems like a Beltre waiting to happen.  

But I took a closer look at his stats, and there are some positive things there.  

Matthews clearly had a breakout year, but his numbers weren't as inflated as I had thought:

2004. .275/.350/.461 .811 OPS in 280 ABs
      
2005. .255/.320/.436 .756 OPS in 475 ABs
      
2006. .313/.371/.495 .866 OPS in 620 ABs

The worst omen for Matthews is clearly his BABIP, which was .349 (well above average).  

Unlike most Rangers, his home/away splits are not at all dramatic.  He played better at home, but still hit .303/.347/.480 away from Arlington.  So you can't really discount his stats for playing in Arlington.  And although it has been in a small sample, he has done well in Safeco.  As a switch hitter, he will be getting most of his ABs as a lefty, so he should do alright there.  

Then, you have to factor in defense.  Matthews is a very good defensive CFer, and he would be a huge plus in LF.  That would give the M's one of the best defensive outfields in baseball.  

Lastly, he is known for being a really good clubhouse guy.  And he is a switch hitter who is good from both sides of the plate.  Minor issues, but definitely pluses.  

I am not too stoked on the guy.  He could ride his breakout year to a big salary.  But on a relatively reasonable salary, he might not be a total albatross.  He is not the middle of the order presence that we need.  But he is like a poor mans Milton Bradley minus the personality flaws.  

I guess that I don't hate the idea as much as I initially did.  Perhaps the worst part would be losing draft picks to the Rangers.  And I have to wonder if, given another year of playing everyday, Jeremy Reed couldn't end up putting up similar numbers as Matthews 2006 stats on a regular basis (and for much less $$$).  I am not advocating this, but it is at least interesting.  

What do you guys think of these rumors?  

Check out this little blurb from MLBtraderumors.com:

http://www.mlbtraderumors.com/2006/10/kei_igawa_hopes.html#comments

This is a posting concerning an article on Yahoo Japan about a Japanese LHP that may be posted this year.  

It mentions the M's a lot.  

Before, I was wondering about what the M's would do if they don't win the Daisuke Matsuzaka posting.  

This could be a viable Plan B (or part of a plan B).  

Things are pretty boring these days.  I am really looking forward to the end of the world series, when the hot stove really starts to get going.  

I was looking at information on some of the free agents this offseason, as well as players who are likely to be available via trade.

Here are some players that I think could be acquired for relatively little and help the club a lot:

Hitters:

Big Names:
Barry Bonds:  Bonds has so much baggage that a lot of clubs won't go after him.  Plus, he has a lot of special needs - he needs to DH, he wants to stay on the west coast, and he needs to be in a mellow environment.  Seattle seems like a good fit, and he has mentioned that he would be open to the possibility.  If he is healthy, he is still one of the best hitters in baseball.  From a marketing standpoint, he is a plus and a minus.  He is a super-villan, but he would sell tickets.  Lots of tickets.  The downsides are obvious: age, ethics, team chemistry, etc.  But those downsides are precisely why he will be undervalued.  On a 1-year contract with a base salary of ~$10 million, he would be a potential bargain.  And he won't cost a draft pick.  

Jim Edmonds: he has been talked about on this blog a lot.  If he is healthy, he offers a lot of the same pluses as Bonds - lefty bat, OBP and power, etc - but could also help improve the defense if he is playing LF.  Although he may need a platoon partner, he could have a few years left in him.  The issue with Edmonds is whether or not the Cardinals are willing to trade him, and his willingness to waive his no-trade clause to play LF in Seattle.  The Cards have a $10 mil team option with a big buyout, so they will either keep him or trade him.  He has previously stated he wouldn't play in Seattle, but he supposedly has a good relationship with Bavasi.  If the M's could work out a trade without giving up any major parts, it would be a great move.  His value could change a lot based on how he and the Cards play in the next few weeks.  

Adam Dunn: he could be shopped around this year, and it seems like he is not really appreciated enough in Cinci.  He is coming off a down year by his standards, and his low BA and insane K rate could drive down his price.  But, he will be 27 next year, and is a lock to give you 40 HRs and a .370 OBP.  He would do well in Safeco.  The downsides are big.  First, he would cost the M's some good players.  The Reds need pitching, both starters and relievers.  The M's would have to give up some major pieces to get him.  Plus, if he is traded, he would only be under contract for one more year.  He supposedly wants to go to Texas, particularly Houston, so he might be a one year rental.  He would only be a viable option if the M's could work out an extension.  Not likely.  

Good Plan B's:
David Dellucci: like Edmonds and Bonds, he is also a lefty hitter who can get on base.  His upside isn't huge, but he could easily put up Raul Ibanez numbers, but with a lot more walks.  He isn't going to help the defense, but he can play LF.  He has been platooned a lot over his career, and that would probably need to continue.  The upside is that he probably won't cost a ton, especially after playing sporatically this year.  He is also a plus as far as makeup and clubhouse presence.  He hasn't gotten a consistent chance to play everyday, and when he does play, he has been good. The downside is that the Phillies really want him back, and he would likely cost a draft pick.  

Geoff Jenkins: he had a horrible first half, and Milwaukee wants to go in another direction next year.  His salary for 2007 is $7 million, and he has a $9 mil team option in 2008 (with a 500K buyout).  The Brewers would definitely move him, and, depending on how much money they would eat, it likely won't cost anything to acquire him.  There is some evidence that he still has something left in the tank.  He had a brutal start to the season, but picked things up in the second half (.284/.397/.494).  He has brutal splits, and could definitely benefit from a platoon.  He is also pretty streaky and prone towards striking out a lot.  But he also has very good power and can draw walks.  He is a lefty Richie Sexson.  I am not sure about his defense, but I remember him being a very good OFer earlier in his career.  He is also local, for what that is worth.  Could be an interesting pickup.  Definitely a high-risk/high-upside move.  

Cliff Floyd: he really needs to DH, because he can't stay healthy.  His stats are all over the place, but, when he isn't injured, he hits.  He has good power and is lefthanded.  He could be everything that Carl Everett wasn't: a good stop-gap power bat.  On the same type of contract, he would be a smart signing.  He strikes me as an east-coast type of guy, and might not want to come to Seattle.  He also has no defensive value and has trouble versus lefties.  But he could be a nice cheap addition.     

Pitchers:

Not nearly as many options for finding cheap pitching as there are among the hitters.  But there are some interesting options.

Big Name guys:

Mark Mulder: this could be a great guy to take a flyer on.  His name has practically disappeared from the rumor mill, as he underwent surgery for a partial rotator cuff injury.  The initial reports suggest that his rehab should put him back a month or so for next season, but he could be ready by June or so.  If the surgey fixed what has ailed him the past few years, he would be a steal.  On a contract like the one Wade Miller signed a few years ago, this is a low-risk, high-reward move.  He is only 29, and was one of the better starters in baseball for a few years.  Worth a look.  

Plan B's:

Randy Wolf: his return from Tommy John surgery could be perfect timing: he is throwing and his stuff is mostly back, but hasn't had an opportunity to show he is 100%.  This should drive down his value.  When healthy, Wolf is a really good #3 type.  He is a lefty who put up good K numbers.  He would be a great pickup to fill the second hole in the rotation if the price is right.  The big question is what the market for him is like.  Other clubs might be willing to give him Esteban Loaiza money, which would probably be too much.  On a two-year deal for $10-12 million, it would be a decent addition.  

Jeff Weaver: I liked this idea a lot more before he started pitching well in the playoffs.  I figured he would be available for nothing, perhaps
a one-year deal for $3-4 million.  That is probably unrealistic now.  I wouldn't be suprised to see him resign with the Cardinals.  But he would have been a nice move, particularly mid-season.  

Jason Johnson: a groundall pitcher who has nearly no value right now.  He would be a great guy to bring in to compete for a spot with Baek.  Why not?  

Carl Pavano: again, he would cost little.  The Yankees can't ditch him fast enough.  This could be like a repeat of Weaver/Vazquez/Contreras/Loaize: the guy who can't handle New York playing well after a trade.  His injuries are not career threatening, as his main issue now is an abdominal problem.  Could be a steal.  

Matt Clement: nearly the exact same situation as Pavano.  Clement needs to play in a mellow AL environment.  He could be a great reclamation project if the price is right.  He has good stuff and has had success in the past.  A great candidate for a bounce-back season if he is placed into the right environment.  

Paul Byrd: the Indians will shop him around this offseason.  He had a down year in 2006, but has been consistently solid, especially in free agent seasons.  He is signed through 2007 for $7 million, with a team option for $8 million in 2008.  If he bounces back, he will more than earn that salary and would be a great trade candidate after the season.  Again, low-risk, high-reward.

Octavio Dotel: he is back from TJ surgery, and is money when healthy.  If the M's do end up trading a reliever or two (especially Soriano), Dotel could be a nice guy to take a flyer on.  Another incentive laden contract would be a smart move.  

I would love to hear everyones comments on these and other players.  Obviously, Matsuzaka is the #1 priority.  But the M's will need to do more than that to contend in 2007.  Some of these guys could be nice complementary moves.  

I have no idea what the organization is doing, but I think it sucks.  

There has been lots of speculation about what the recent firings (or lack of them, in Grovers case) means for the future.  But the organization offered little concrete information about its motives behind some moves that, really, seem to make little sense to anyone.  

Today, the Tribune sheds a little light on the Rohn firing.  And it isnt' good:

"The decision on Rohn, who was in a newly created administrative coaching position, was more about a clash of personalities. Sources said Rohn disagreed with Hargrove's managing and, worse, talked to other coaches and players about it."

"When that got back to Hargrove, Rohn's departure was a matter of time, sources said."

"As for Hargrove, he has one year left on his contract and is expected to return next season. That may not sell season-tickets for 2007, but it makes business sense if the Mariners are to stay with Bavasi - as it appears they will."

"If Bavasi fired Hargrove and hired another manager to a multiyear deal, that manager would be a lame duck should the team then fire Bavasi next season. As it stands, the Mariners are apparently willing to give both the general manager and manager one more year to return to contention in the American League West."

http://www.thenewstribune.com/sports/story/6097343p-5344126c.html

Ugh.  

Hopefully, the tribune got some bad information.  But the article presents this information as if it was from inside sources.  That is a really really bad sign.  

In summary:

-Rohn was fired because he didn't agree with Grovers managing - something he has in common with pretty much every knowledgable fan who watches M's games this year

-Grover will be back because the M's don't want to fire Bavasi NOW, but they want to keep their options open in the likely event that they fire Bavasi next year.  

Sweet.  

Basically, the M's just took a shit on one of the few voices of reason within the club.  Really, I can't think of any better reason to NOT fire Rohn than this.  The guys job was to watch games and give the team advice.  Any person with an ounce of integrity would have voiced his disaproval about what has been going on this season.  It shows that he is paying attention, and understands something about how a club should be managed.  Apparently, in this organization, that will get you fired.  

Am I the only one who thinks that this organization is completely ass backwards?  

Reading this article this morning seriously undermines the small amount of confidence I had in the front office.  

If that article is at all accurate, it is really damning evidence of the ineptitude of Bavasi and the entire front office.  

This is a bad, bad sign.  It shows that the club just doesn't understand what is wrong.  How can you fix a problem if you fail to understand it?  

Usually, I don't put any weight into stuff in the New York media.  Most of the time, it is just empty speculation about how the Yankees will raid everyones roster.  

But this seems like inside information that could be legit.  It doesn't involve the Yankees or Mets directly, and it doesn't seem like it is "gee whiz, wouldn't this be awesome" variety crap.

Here is the link:

http://www.nydailynews.com/sports/baseball/story/446970p-376349c.html

Here is the juicy part:

"There is, however, still a good chance at least one manager will be fired before the season is over, with Seattle's Mike Hargrove the most likely candidate. The Mariners are another team for which ownership approved some significant payroll expenditures ($25 million for Richie Sexson and Adrian Beltre combined before last season, another $7.4 million for Jarrod Washburn this past winter) only to get little in return. With a record streak of 20 consecutive division losses, Hargrove sealed his fate. According to sources, there have already been internal discussions about trying to bring Lou Piniella back to Seattle - something "Sweet Lou" is said to be receptive to now that the family issues back home in Tampa that forced him to resign from the Mariners four years ago have been resolved. But now there are rumblings in Seattle that dismayed ownership wants to clean house entirely - with Hargrove, GM Bill Bavasi and longtime team president Chuck Armstrong, Piniella's biggest champion within the organization, all subject to being let go."

Wow.  The inaccurate figures for Washburn are not that encouraging.  But bad research might not mean that this guy is on the recieving end of bad inside information.  

Interesting.  

The Bob Finnegan era is officially over!  Pocket Lint has written his last article for the Seattle Times.  

While Finnegan was widely known to be the biggest organizational homer in the local sports media, his final article is actually a pretty scathing look at the state of the organization:

http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/mariners/2003228770_marianalysis27.html

Obviously, Finny isn't too worried about maintaining access to the club, which he clearly maintained by regurgitating the M's spin on various issues and problems through the years.  

While his final article is a bit more hard hitting than the typical Finnegan piece, it is still poorly written and includes a few completely ridiculous comments (like Greg Dobbs as the M's new first baseman in 2007).  

Finnigan's last article is actually quite out of character for him: criticisms of the way the club has been run, including the inability to cut payroll and aggressively rebuild; criticisms of Beltre and Sexson's leadership; disparaging comments about Ichiro, including his unwillingness to put the team's needs above his own personal goals; and a suggestion that trading Ichiro would be the best thing for the club.  

In fact, the article is completely different from the usual Finnigan crap that I was wondering if it was ghost written.  That is, untill I read the token Finnegan "there isn't as much payroll flexibility next offseason as you might think" argument:

"In a winter when the payroll budget is near-certain to tighten by 10 percent or more....The departures of Moyer, Guardado, Gil Meche (who could also agree to return for less than he might get on the free-agent market), Carl Everett and Pineiro would reduce the payroll by about $25 million....Some of this money, about $5 million, will go to raises for J.J. Putz, Yuniesky Betancourt, et al."

Ah, I will miss Finnegan's uncanny ability to mix poor mathmatical skills, misunderstanding of service time and arbitration, continuing ability to underestimate the M's payroll, and a lifelong dedication to lowering fan expectations each offseason.  

Also in the Times today, Cathy Henkel wrote a homage piece to Finnigan:

http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/mariners/2003228574_byefinny27.html

The article includes a nice quote from Larry Stone - a far far superior journalist - that succinctly summed up Finnegan's MO as a media homer:

"In my 20 years covering major-league baseball, I've never seen a writer who had a better rapport with those with whom he interacted."

This is a perk that comes along with a career of service as the organizations mouthpiece in the local media.  

Anyhow, the Times will have to scramble to find someone who can take over Finnegan's duties, including:

-the yearly "the M's should re-acquire Ken Griffey Jr!" article

-the annual "despite reports that the M's will have $30 million to spend this offseason, expected raises to Willie Bloomquist and Julio Mateo will leave the club with only $7 million in free payroll" piece

-a few token "Bloomquist is a gamer, and deserves more playing time" articles

-and, most importantly, the token 'yes-man' columns praising the attitude, leadership, and veteran presence when the M's make the 2007 version of the yearly Spiezio/Aurillia/Everett signing

That is a huge hole to fill.  

Good luck Finny!  Don't let the door hit you in the ass on the way out.  

The M's got outbid on one of the best international free agent prospects:

http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/news/story?id=2555073

Always the bridesmaid.......

There seems to be a widespread outbreak of LH 1B releases going on.  

First, Hee Seop Choi was dropped.  Now, it is Carlos Pena.  

I think that Pena is the more interesting guy.  Both have been disappointing, but Pena has been a better all-around player.  

Although the M's are pretty stocked up on these types of guys, Pena would be worth consideration.  He would probably hit better than Everett, and has a lot more upside than Petagine.  Although his BAs have been low, and his K rate pretty high, he has hit for decent power and drawn a lot of walks.  He could be a nice guy to take a flyer on.  

It seems to me like Rafael Chavez is really coming into his own with the M's now.  

The single biggest thing that seems to be changing is the large numbers of pitchers that are using the two-seam fastball more.  

Today, it is Gil Meche:

http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/baseball/261211_mbok01.html

But I can't even remember all the pitchers who are using this pitch a lot more.  I remember hearing Joel Pineiro talking about it, and I know that Clint Nageotte has started throwing the pitch a lot more.  With Nageotte, this has been part of a marked change in his overall approach, as he has switched from being a K pitcher to more of a sinker/slider guy with less velocity.  His ability to induce groundballs is really promising, especially if he can refine his other pitches as well.  

This is an interesting development.  

I wonder what Jeff and others who know more about pitching think about this.  

It is nice to see Chavez jump headfirst into the job though.  With the pitching such a mess over the last two years, and with most of the guys who struggled the most still with the team, shaking things is a good thing.  

Hopefully, Chavez will become more involved in the decision making about player acquisitions in the future.  It would be nice to see the M's get some more groundball pitchers and take better advantage of their great infield defense.  

This was released on Baseball America today (it is free):  http://www.baseballamerica.com/today/news/060223peralta.html

"Brewers Sign Peralta, Dominican Splurge Continues"

"When the Brewers signed righthander Rolando Pascual last fall out of the Dominican Republic, assistant general manager Gord Ash said the organization wanted to make a statement: The Brewers will be a player for top talent in Latin America."

"They made a $710,000 statement with the signing bonus they gave to Pascual, who was the consensus top pitcher available on the international market last summer."

"Now, it appears players and more importantly the agents who steer talent in the Dominican Republic have gotten the message. The Brewers signed another top Dominican prospect, righthander Wily Peralta, for a bonus of $450,000, according to an industry source. Peralta will turn 17 on May 8."

Since the M's are sucking so bad right now, and didn't make a big splash in free agency this year, it would be really nice to see them making signings like this every now and again.  I know that they are still the among the most active clubs in Asia, but I haven't heard of any major signings in Latin America in a while.  

It is important to remember that Felix was a high-profile kid signed out of Venezuela at age 16, and he got a $710,000 bonus.  It would be nice to see the M's get in on some of these top international free agents.  Especially in the Dominican Republic.  It seems like they have slowed way down there and in Venezuela.  Those two countries are hot-beds.  And Felix's success has to be worth something, as I am sure that he is a household name over there.  

Lets hope that the M's can sign a few more Cuban defectors when the Cuban team heads back to Havana with half their club after the WBC.  

Apparently, the M's have signed 1B/DH Roberto Petagine to a minor league contract:

http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/mariners/2002819514_webmari21.html

I think that this is a real good signing.  Petagine played in Japan between 1999 and 2004, and was one of the best hitters over there.  

He played with Boston last year, but they rarely used him (only 34 ABs).  

He gives the M's another lefty bat off the bench, and could make Everett even more likely to be moved during the season.  Petagine can get on base and has good power.

However, I wonder if there will be room for him on the bench with Lawton already there.  Hopefully, he will make the team.  He could be a very useful player late in the year, after the club starts the annual veteran release spree.  

An interesting signing no doubt.  I like it.  Keep your fingers crossed on this one.  Petagine could be a bargain.  

Every year about this time, with Spring Training right around the corner, the local newspapers turn their attention back to the Mariner's.

Normally, I expect to see the worst types of crap coming from Bob Finnigan.  But this year, Finny's token intro piece actually includes some interesting information.  It is not good, but not horrible either.  

This year, Larry Larue comes out of nowhere and publishes one of the most insanely stupid summaries of the upcoming season that I have ever had the displeasure of reading:

http://www.thenewstribune.com/sports/story/5521028p-4973789c.html  

This is a summary:  

-an impressive string of cliche's focusing on Carl Everett, and how he is going to help the club 'learn how to win'.  

"Getting a run home with an out isn't little ball, nor is it Guillen ball.  It's winning baseball, and the Mariners need to learn it before they can play it."

Ugh.  Isn't this what the Seattle media said about Scott Spiezio and Rich Aurillia?  This argument gets stupider every time they regurgitate it.  

-one of the worst "Bloomquist should start" arguments I have ever read.  

"He's done everything anyone has ever asked, playing seven positions over the past four years, and three managers have loved having him on their bench. What the 28-year-old Bloomquist brings to the Mariners is more than a dial-a-glove reserve.  Hargrove says Bloomquist is the best base runner on the team, and Bob Melvin said he was a player who made things happen when he did play."

Here is the best part:

"The rap on Bloomquist has always been that he's impatient at the plate, better when used in short spurts than as a regular player. That theory has never fully been tested, and last year he started 64 games - no more than 29 at any position.  Second base is wide open this spring. For the first time in his career, Bloomquist goes to camp as the frontrunner to win a regular job."

Huh.  That is funny.  I guess that Larue missed all of the games where Bloomquist did start, and managed to put up an impressive .257/.289/.333 line, with 0 HRs.  If that isn't 'testing the theory', then I don't know what is.  Haven't we seen enough of Bloomquist to know that he is a bench player?  

I would argue that the rap on Bloomquist is that he is a genuinely horrible hitter.  

Another thing that I find strange about this article, and every other similar article I have read this year, is a real lack of confidence and interest in Jose Lopez.  Lopez is just a completely superior player.  Even if you totally disregard his minor league track record (which Larue and all the other Seattle beat writers have clearly done), and go solely from watching the two players at the ML level, Lopez is clearly the better player.  Both players have poor ML numbers at this point, but Lopez can hit the ball hard.  You can see the talent, even when he was struggling.  Bloomquist looks like a 15-year-old at the plate.  He is only impressive on the bases.  But so was Charles Gipson.  We didn't hear this type of support for Gipson.  What is the deal?        
I can't believe that Larry Larue gets paid to write shit like this.  

I was just reading some information about Wade Miller, and I think that it wouldn't be a bad move for the M's to look into giving him a shot.  

The M's have a lot of question marks in their rotation, plus a lot of pitchers coming off the payroll after next year.  They also have a serious lack of depth in starting pitching in the organization.  Right now, Kevin Appier is their best Plan B.  Appier hasn't pitched in two years, and hasn't pitched well since 2002.  He could be a nice suprise, but by 'nice suprise' I mean something like Aaron Sele.  

It is tough to get a real good impression of where Miller is in his rehab.  His injury is a frayed labrum.  Labrum injuries are very serious, but it is not a tear.  He is definitely throwing, which is a good sign this early in the year.  His agent keeps saying that he will be ready by May 1st, and that he will be 'just like 2004'.  While you have to take the opinion of a players agent with a grain of salt, the May date could be more or less accurate.  

Miller could be a nice addition for the M's.  He is supposedly looking for a deal similar to what he signed last year with Boston, which was 1.5 million w/ incentives, plus a team option for a second year.  

I figure that there is a 50/50 chance that Miller could pitch a significant amount of innings in 2006.  There is maybe a 30% chance that he can get back to where he was in 2001-2003, when he was a really solid young pitcher.  If he comes back strong, he would be a great #2 or #3 starter.  However, that is a long shot.  

Basically, I don't see much downside in this.  He starts the season on the DL, so he doesn't take up a roster spot.  The 1.5 million it would likley take to sign him could fit within the budget easily.  Even if he never pitches for the M's, it would not really be that big of a loss.  

I don't think the M's have anything to lose in this.  

There are some more rumors flying around about Reed going to Boston: http://www.overthemonster.com/story/2006/1/16/13233/2522#commenttop.  

There are two different versions out there, both of which are pretty unsubstantiated:

Rumor 1: Reed plus a PTBNL for Guillermo Mota, Bronson Arroyo and prospect Randy Beam.

The organizer at overthemonster.com says:

"That was reported false. But, with all false reports, there is some truth. So we may see this trade or something similar pop up soon."

I can't see that happening at all.  Mota would not be a good fit for the M's, as we have plenty of setup relievers as is.  Beam is minor league reliever.  He had good stats in 2005, but, again, is not really the type of player the M's should be looking for, as we have a lot of relievers already.  

Rumor #2: Reed and Gil Meche to Boston for either Jon Lester or Jonathan Papelbon.

This is the more interesting rumor in my opinion.  I would be surprised to see Meche and Reed go to Boston, as that would create two holes in the M's lineup.  If Papelbon come to Seattle, he would take a spot in the rotation, but Lester needs some time in the minors.  Lester is the better prospect, and is a local kid, but this trade would weaken the M's rotation in the short-term.  

I have to admit that I am pretty torn about Reed.  On the one hand, the M's need pitching help more than they need a CFer, especially with guys like Adam Jones and Shin-Soo Choo in the organization.  On the other hand, making this type of trade would not help the M's in 2006 nearly as much as it would in 2007.  I do hope that the organization is focusing on 2007, but that is a pretty significant risk for the future.  

Of course, this would also depend on what the M's did to fill the hole in CF.  If they would go out and get someone like Jason Michaels, Joey Gathright, or some other player to play CF until Jones is ready, then it could work out well.  

It had seemed like everything was quiet on the Reed front for a while.  On the other hand, there was more talk about Boston going for Coco Crisp, but the word now is that that trade is pretty much dead.  I wonder if these unsubstantiated rumors including Reed could signal the start of more concrete talks between the M's and Red Sox.  

There have been a series of rumors flying around that the M's are interested in acquiring Corey Patterson from the Cubs.  These rumors have been linked to other rumors that the M's are in talks with the Red Sox that would send Jeremy Reed to Boston.  

We have already talked extensively about the pros and cons of trading Reed for pitching.  

I just wanted to take a look at the pros and cons of acquiring Patterson independently of other moves that the M's might make.  

Patterson has always been a premium prospect.  He was a highly touted player in highschool and was drafted early in the first round by the Cubs.  

He is a typical tools player, with great speed and power potential.  Like most toolsy high-school players, he entered pro ball needing to work on plate discipline and needing some time to turn his tools into performance on the field.  While he was raw early on, the Cubs were incredibly aggressive in promoting Patterson.  

In his first year of pro ball, he did very well in high A, hitting .320/.358/.592 with 20 HRs at age 18.  Going into 2000, he was recognized as a top prospect.  

The next year, the Cubs started him in AA, where he hit .261/.338/.491 with 22 Hrs at age 19.  While he was striking out at a pretty high rate, and not walking much, that is very good production at AA for somebody so young.  At this point, he was considered one of the best prospects in baseball.

In 2001, he was promoted to AAA, and struggled, hiting just .253/.308/.387.  However, his strike zone judgement seemed to be improving, as his K rate went down.  Patterson was only 20, and was very young to be playing in AAA.  He obviously needed more time to work on his hitting against more advanced pitchers.  

However, the Cubs decided (stupidly) to promote Patterson to the big leagues in late 2001, and he was totally overmatched, hitting .221/.266/.336 in 131 ABs.  Clearly, he was not nearly ready to go against ML pitching.  

However, the Cubs kept him in Chicago for the entire 2002 season, and he continued to struggle, hitting .253/.284/.392 with a horrible 19/142 BB/K rate.  He was in way way over his head.  This was a total failure of the Cubs player development system, as they left Patterson to flail in Chicago at ages 21 and 22.  While he should have been in AA and AAA, working on pitch recognition and plate discipline, he was instead being dominated by ML pitchers.  

In 2003, he started to figure things out.  He hit .298/.329/.511 with 13 Hrs in 83 games before injuring his knee.  He still had a poor K/BB rate, but it was definitely improving.  That type of production at age 23 was very impressive.  

In 2004, he couldn't quite match his 2003 rates, but still was solid, hitting .266/.320/.452 with 24 HRs and stealing bases at a high percentage (32 SB, 9 CS).  While he was still stuggling with plate discipline, with a poor 45/168 BB/K ratio, he seemed to be improving steadily.  

Coming into 2005, many people had Patterson pegged as a breakout candidate.  He held his own at a young age, while playing excellent defense and showing very good power potential.  As a plus defender in CF and a lefty hitter with power and speed, a lot of people were predicting that he would be a future all-star and 30/30 guy.  Even Baseball Prospectus liked him, suggesting that he was on the verge of a breakout season.  

He totally fell apart in 2005, hitting just .215/.254/.348 and earning a mid-season demotion to AAA.  Cubs fans quickly decided he was the antichrist, and he was booed at home constantly.  It seems that, after doing well in April and May, Patterson did consistently worse leading up to his demotion.  Now, it is clear that he is done in Chicago.  

Obviously, the Cubs played a huge role in Patterson's failure.  They promoted him to AAA much to quickly, and he was not given adequate time to develop as a hitter.  While he should have been in AA and AAA in 2001 and 2002, he was promoted to levels where he stuggled badly.  Now, he is a classic case of the pitfalls of promoting young players too early.  

Despite his problems in 2005, I think that it is way too early to give up on Patterson.  He still plays great defense in CF and is an excellent baserunner.  He needs a change of scenery and to change his approach at the plate.  In particular, he needs to work on pitch recognition and learn a little patience at the plate.  

The M's new hitting coach, Jeff Pentland, was with the Cubs while Patterson was still in the minors.  He obviously is familiar with Patterson's skills and the issues he needs to address.  Pentland also had success with Sammy Sosa, another free-swinging power hitter.  He helped Sosa to shorten his swing and wait for pitches to drive.  Word has it Pentland has suggested that the M's should look into Patterson.  

In a recent posting on mlbtraderumors.com, one source suggests that Bavasi has become fixated on Patterson.  This could be a bad thing, but it also could suggest that Bavasi has some inside information on Patterson and a plan on how to sort him out.  

If Patterson's approach at the plate can be fixed, he has the potential to be a truly great player.  He has a power/speed combo that is really rare, and his lefty bat would be great in Safeco.  Basically, he could develop into a lefthanded Mike Cameron.  

Regardless of what the M's do with Reed, they would be smart to take a flyer on Patterson.  He should come cheap, and has huge upside.  If the M's keep Reed, they could afford to work with Patterson in AAA for a while, then bring him up later in the year.  That would allow the M's to ditch Everett, and move Ibanez back to DH mid-season.  An OF of Patterson, Reed and Ichiro would be among the best in baseball.  If he can at least get back to his 2003/2004 level of performance, he would be a very valuable player.  However, Patterson is still just 26 years old, and has a lot of untapped potential.  He could be an absolute steal.  

In the wake of the Rangers addition of Millwood recently, I have started to look at where the M's stand in relation to their division rivals.  

LA Angels
The Angels have lost some players (Washburn, Byrd, Molina?), but they have one of the best farm systems in baseball, and will likely get some help from kids this year.  As it stands now, their offense is a bit thin.  After Vlad, they don't have many impact hitters.  However, their whole lineup is pretty decent top to bottom.  They could have big contributions from Dallas McPherson, Casey Kotchman, Kendry Morales, Jarrod Weaver, and several other prospects.  Plus, I have to think that they are the favorites to land Manny and to sign Jeff Weaver.  A lot of rumors keep mentioning a trade for Erstad, Orlando Cabrera, and prospects.  The worst part is, moving these players would just open up spots for top prospects for the Angels.  As their roster stands now, I think that they should be just as good as they were last year, and they are a near lock to win over 90 games.  If they get Ramirez, the AL west is in trouble.  

Oakland
The A's have improved, adding Esteban Loaiza and Milton Bradley to an already very good, young club. They have a great core of young players, like Bobby Crosby, Joe Blanton, Rich Harden, Danny Haren, Houston Street, Nick Swisher, and Dan Johnson.  The A's won 88 games last year with many rookies and a few big injuries.  In 2006, they should expect big improvements from most of their young players.  Loaiza and Bradley are solid additions as well.  I think that the A's should challenge the Angels for the division, and they could very well win it.  They are also a pretty good bet for 90+ wins.  

Texas
The Rangers are the most improved team in the division.  They have been pretty successful in addressing their biggest weakness, and now have a decent rotation with Millwood, Adam Eaton, Vicente Padilla, Cameron Loe, and Joaquin Benoit.  They also have three blue-chip pitching prospects close to the big leagues in Edison Volquez, John Danks, and Jared Diamond.  The Rangers pitching is no longer a huge black hole.  They are decent now, and should be better by the end of 2006.  Their offense will remain powerful.  They lost Alfonso Soriano (the most overrated player in baseball), but added Brad Wilkerson, who improves their OF a lot.  Ian Kinsler will replace Soriano, and should allow Michael Young to move back to 2B.  This improves their infield defense.  They still have Young, Blalock, Tiexeira, and Dellucci, and will score a ton of runs.  Their bullpen should be better next year if they don't have the same injury problems.  The Rangers won 79 games last year, and I think that they are a near certainty to finish above .500 this year.  If Millwood and Eaton pitch well, they could contend.  

Seattle
I think that the M's will be better next year, based simply on the expectation of gradual improvement from young players, the subtraction of some really horrible players from 2005, and a little improvement from guys like Ichiro and Beltre.  The additions of Johjima, Washburn, Lawton on the bench, and even Everett all should improve the club.  The M's can't really do worse than they did in 2005.  However, the M's still have huge problems.  On the offensive side, the M's should improve, but this was one of the worst lineups in baseball last year.  Putting up average numbers would be a big improvement.  Expecting the M's to improve is realistic, but expecting a high-powered offense is not.  Everett is nothing more than a stop-gap, and the M's will have to find offense to replace him.  Right now, they don't have any hitter who could realistically expected to step in and do so besides Snelling.  Lopez, Betancourt, Reed, Beltre and Ichiro could all improve, but the M's have not added any impact hitters this offseason.  

While the offense might improve, the pitching staff is still a huge mess.  Washburn should be an improvement, but he has had injury problems.  Because they failed to bring in a TOR starter, the opening day starter will likely be Moyer.  Pineiro and Meche cannot be expected to be anything more than adequate (which would be a drastic improvement).  Felix could and should be the ace of the staff, but he is the only guy who has any real upside.  The biggest problem the M's face is depth in the starting rotation.  In the even of injury, the M's are screwed.  Clint Nageotte, Jesse Foppert, and Bobby Livingston could all be decent options by the end of the season, but having them come up before the All-Star break would be bad for the club and the players development.  Even if the M's add another cheap starter (Kim, Brown, Ortiz, Ishii, etc), they will still be susceptible to a total meltdown if there are any injuries or ineffectiveness.  With Pineiro and Meche both being demoted in the recent past, Washburn missing time consistently, Moyer's advanced age, and Felix's inexperience, this is huge problem.  

But does anyone really think that this team has a chance to contend?  

I think that the M's are a pretty safe pick for last in the AL west this year.  If Texas has a few flops, the M's could challenge them for 3rd.  I hate to be overly pessimistic, but I think that you would be pretty stupid to bet money that the M's will finish above 3rd in the AL west.  While the M's should be better in 2006, the A's and the Rangers have improved more.  The prognosis here is pretty grim.  

I would be interested to hear from people who have a more optimistic view of this than I do.  

I really think that the M's would be wise to continue rebuilding.  After seeing what the Marlins were able to get in their fire sale, and after looking at where the M's stand in relation to the rest of the AL West, I think that the M's would be wise to focus on 2007.  The obvious risk is that, in trading big name players and signaling that they do not expect to contend, that the attendance would continue to go down and that they would not be able to maintain a high payroll.  However, this seems inevitable to me at this point.  

The M's have a lot of players coming off the books in the next few years:

After 2006: Ibanez, Guardado, Pineiro, Moyer, Meche, Everett (fingers crossed), Lawton

After 2007: Ichiro, Everett (hopefully not)

Really, I don't see any players that I would want to retain in that group besides Ibanez and Ichiro.  However, both players should be in their decline phase by the time they are eligable for free agency.  Ibanez will be 34 next year, and Ichiro will be 34 by the time he is a free agent.  Ibanez could be retained for a reasonable amount of money, but Ichiro will likely command a contract similar to what Damon just signed, which would result in the M's contributing a lot of payroll to him through age 38 (assuming a 4-year deal).  Since the M's have a lot of speedy OF types, this just doesn't seem like a good plan to me.  For a young team like the M's, I am not sure how smart it is to be resigning older players like this.  

The upside of all this is that the M's have a lot more money coming off the books after 2006, and several of those holes can be filled internally.  They have a good group of relievers coming up, and shouldn't have to spend money in that area.  Guys like Reed, Felix, Betancourt, Beltre, Sexson, Johjima, and Lopez are locked up for a while.  

I hate to be the pessimist here, but this is what the M's have to look forward to:

-another year as sellers at the trade deadline
-another high draft pick in the 2007 draft
-a third consecutive year of declining attendance
-the search for a new manager and general manager next offseason

I think that the M's would be wise to immediately shift their focus to 2007.  That means trading veterans for prospects, moving payroll, and getting even younger.  If they play their cards right, they could bring in a lot young talent into the organization over the next year.  They could then complement this foundation of young talent with a huge spending spree next offseason.  They could then totally rework their roster in one big offseason, like the Blue Jays did this offseason.  However, the team will not be that interesting in the meantime.