Lookout Landing

That is an all time great picture.

Seriously what the fuck pitch is that?

Also, Olsen is really high on my get-him-the-fuck-out-of-here list after today. I don’t want to see him in a relief role any more than I want him to start.

Is he trying to barehand a ball hit back up the middle?

I usually call those come backers, but while sounding fine in conversation, it looks really stupid in print.

Yeah that makes a whole hell of a lot more sense.

Hey, if you click on the more photos link, you see the original caption.

Didn’t know that. There’s some good stuff in there.

Kermit. - July 31, 2009 reply

Not as good as this!

Originally I thought that was a photoshopped picture.

Is it not?

Caption contest that picture.

I bet you’d get some doozies.

JLProck - July 30, 2009 reply

"Sorry guys. It's the taquitos."

I cannot stop laughing at this.

Eyeball Kid - July 31, 2009 reply

Olson as a loogy I'd be OK with.

It’s because he throws a slurve thingy though.

Slurvey - July 30, 2009 reply

Yeah his curve and change have actually been decent pitches this year.

I'm also sick of seeing Olson starting,

But as you said, it’s not like Wak has many options.

But what the heck happened to Vargas (whom you didn’t mention)? He seemed to give us a better chance of winnning than Olson, Jak.
(Don’t know about this Fister guy, though he’s got a great name.)

Sam Regens - July 30, 2009 reply

Vargas is already in for Bedard.

If Wash is traded we’d be looking at Felix, Snell, RRS, Vargas and open spot.

MFAN - July 30, 2009 reply

Sorry, you're right. Forgot that Bedard was on vacation again.

Jeez, that rotation looks bad. If only we had been able to trade away Bedard to some fool before he got aching again.

Sam Regens - July 30, 2009 reply

This rotation has been very hard to keep track of the past month, so no need to be sorry.

MFAN - July 30, 2009 reply

Yeah, Bedard coming back would be nice

but I think we all know better than to count on that happening.

I hope his value is low enough that he'll sign for one year on the cheap and maybe we can salvage something out of him.

Honestly, Seattle should appeal to pitchers like himself.

It would?

He comes in and pitches maybe 4 or 5 innings usually because he gets his pitch count so high. I know they are quality innings, but 6 or 7 would be nice.

??

Well sure, but… WHAT?

I'd rather have 4 or 5 innings from Bedard than the 4 or 5 we got from Olson today.

Well, of course...

But that’s not my point. It’s just tiring to see him go so few innings.

Having a very talented glass doll is far, far better than not having a talented glass doll.

Teej - July 30, 2009 reply

I understand that.. but isn't it sad that he can't go Felix innings?

It's sad in a "I believe in a perfect world" way.

But in reality, Bedard has a fragile body, and it’s not very durable either. We knew this when we traded for him. Sure, I’d love him to be Roy Halladay, but the fact that he isn’t doesn’t frustrate me, because I don’t think it’s anything under his control.

Teej - July 30, 2009 reply

I know this away from the subject..

But Rich Harden is actually pitching and not getting injured?

http://www.bleedcubbieblue.com/2009/5/22/884004/breaking-news-rich-harden-to-the-dl

Rich Harden has been getting injured.

He also has a FIP of 4.67 and tRA+ of 109 (Bedard’s is 3.51 and 118 ), has only 15 more IP than Bedard this year, and Harden had to scrap breaking balls entirely because his arm is so fragile. Bedard has been much more effective and valuable this year any way you stack it.

Decatur - July 31, 2009 reply

Hah! I've been seeing that he has been having starts on mlb.com.

But yeah, should we resign him?

M'sin.. - July 31, 2009 reply

Wait, what about mlb.com?

Also, for Bedard, look at this:
http://ussmariner.com/2009/07/27/bedard-and-arbitration/

Decatur - July 31, 2009 reply

Well.

I was basing the fact that I had seen that Harden was pitching on mlb.com on that he is actually pitching without getting injured. Although, I should have done some research.

M'sin.. - July 31, 2009 reply

Also,

Decatur - July 31, 2009 reply

Do you still like him at 10 to 12 million a year?

russak - July 30, 2009 reply

Borderline.

Even with all the injuries this year, he should end up being worth what he’s paid. (In free-agent dollars.)

Teej - July 30, 2009 reply

Speaking of Vargas, he goes up against Padilla. The mound will be covered in grease after tomorrow.

MFAN - July 30, 2009 reply

Padilla

I thought Padilla had the Swine Flu. I guess he got better. He may still be contagious. I think he should be introduced to Silva.

uneasy rider - July 31, 2009 reply

Garrett Olson HR/9 after today = 2.35

I’m surprised Wak didn’t vomit on him when he went to take him out.

Milendriel - July 30, 2009 reply

I can't believe I am about to say this but...Morrow please.

Mariner Melee - July 30, 2009 reply

Morrow has 12 walks and 12 strikeouts

But..but...

You’re right. I just don’t really see a better option.

Mariner Melee - July 30, 2009 reply

I personally don't want to see Morrow back until the September roster expansion.

He needs more time in Tacoma to get his stuff together. Then again, maybe he’ll be traded tomorrow morning and it won’t matter.

Heydude - July 30, 2009 reply

I don't want to see him back

until he has AT LEAST a 2:1 K/BB ratio, and can throw off-speed stuff consistently for strikes.

I expect to be waiting awhile…

PositivePaul - July 30, 2009 reply

This is my thought.

I like Morrow. I really like him. I’ve had the pleasure to talk to him a couple of times, and he’s a good guy. I just want him to buy into and execute what others see in him before he comes back. He can be dominant when he’s in the groove, but he needs to try not thinking as much on the mound.

I'm with you here. Don't want to see him until he's has a chance to figure it out.

He’s been mismanaged to date, but if he can get it straighten out in Tacoma, he will be fine. If he’s gone tomorrow, I’m ok with that too.

Aww Morrow please.

This is also something to keep in mind with any potential Washburn trade that nets us a minor league pitcher...

You haven’t proven a thing until you’ve proven it on the big stage.

That’s why I’m not all that upset with the Clement deal and the 3 pitchers involved.

Look at Olsens previous stop in Baltimore. Daniel Cabrera, Rich Hill, Garrett Olsen, Hayden Penn…

Prospects bust sometimes.

Sometimes they don’t. If you give away 3 decent ones, there’s a good chance you just gave away at least one good major league pitcher who that team will have cost-controlled for 6 years.

That’s why people think we overpaid.

Especially because there is a legitimate chance that Snell doesn't pan out to be a useful piece.

But everyday players bust at a lower rate than pitchers.

Am I glad we didn't give up 3 position prospects?

Absolutely, but that’s beside the point.

Well, its only besides the point if you only ready one sentence of my post. The rest of it talks about pitching prospects being hard to judge.

Look, I love 6 years of club control, I really do.

But there are like, what, 150 players in the Mariners minor league system? And we just had the draft. New guys are coming in.

If people want to make judgments about the prospects themselves, like they just love Lorin and think he’s going to be a stud, that’s fine. But just getting mad about trading away 3 guys with club control is non-sense. We have plenty of those kinds of guys.

Getting worried from a talent standpoint is one thing, but the club control only matters if they have talent and all three of the guys at this point appear to be low-ceiling prospects.

The Giants aren't going to take less for Tim Lincecum because they have 4 other great starters.

Mariner John - July 30, 2009 reply

I dont feel that analogy applies here.

However, if you want to talk about the Giants, I don’t think they would’ve traded Alderson for Sanchez if he was their only legitimate pitching prospect. But they have such a great major league rotation, and a few top-tier pitching prospects, so maybe they felt they could risk it.

I am worried about giving up talented pitchers under club control

Better? They were talented pitching prospects, and their ceilings may be low, but every team needs some low-ceiling guys to fill out the rotation and the pen.

I’m not worried about giving up everyone who is under club control simply because they’re under club control, and I never insinuated anything remotely close to that. That makes no fucking sense.

To me it sounds like

“you just gave away at least one good major league pitcher who that team will have cost-controlled for 6 years.

That’s why people think we overpaid."

If a person thinks that one of these guys will be a good major league pitcher (and they would be in the minority, depending on what “good” means) that’s one argument. The 6 years of club control though is a completely moot point though if they aren’t major league pitchers.

Yeah, you need pitchers that are at that tier, and look at our roster: Jak, Olsen, Vargas. You don’t have to homegrow these guys.

Not to be a jerk but pretty much none of the arguments have made in this ST have been consistent or made much sense.

I'm assuming you are missing the word "you" in that sentence.

If you feel that way, it’s cool, it’s your opinion. i disagree and if you want to tell me what you mean, then I’ll hear you out.

You are massively undervaluing prospects and their value, massively overstating the potential that they will bust and massively misrepresenting the arguments others are making.

Well

A.) I love prospects and I value them more than the average fan. I would’ve loved to get this deal done just for Cedeno and Pribanic and called it good but obviously that wasn’t going to happen. It would be nice to keep around all the guys I’ve been following on USSM’s weekly roundup and see if they get called up, but that rarely happens. Minor leaguers like these guys get moved all the time. A month ago we didn’t have Cortes and now we do. You know what I mean? If it’s not these three guys, it’s going to be three other guys. I don’t mean to make it sound confusing, as I’m sure it is, but we didn’t give up an super great prospects. They might surprise everybody and become great, but at this point, they are viewed as lower-level prospects (still prospects mind you) but on the lower level. And so I’m okay with moving three guys like that.

2. I’m not massively overstating the potential that these three pitchers will bust. I know they won’t bust. Because bust would imply that they are on the level of a David Price or a Madison Bumgarner or a Clay Buchholz. They’ll either surprise or they won’t. All I ever did was point out a few pitchers who did bust because Jeff’s post pointed out that Garrett Olsen used to be a highly thought of pitching prospect.

3. If you think I’m intentionally trying to misrepresent peoples arguments you are wrong.

4. You are massively under-estimating that I know anything about baseball. And that’s not to say that I’m a sports genius. But you are acting like I know nothing and not trying to hear what I’m saying, in my opinion.

I didn't say you were doing it intentionally.

But you are still misinterpreting them.

All prospects are lower level prospects at a certain point. I’m not saying we got fucked here and I don’t think anyone else is either. I think we overpaid a bit for the return we got.

And in my original statement I said "Im not all that upset" which implies that I don't think we got a great deal either.

Not to be a jerk but you're sentence is a grammatical nightmare.

This is a petty comment.

Don't fucking push me friend.

Really? What happened to "you got to have thick skin around here"?

If I were you I wouldn't push this issue any further.

I'm not kidding.. what am I doing? I'm debating with acblue, I'm trying everything I can to be like "okay, talk to me about what you don't understand"

My comment about the grammatical error is really a big deal?

Yes it is, because you were a dick about it.

That’s a no-no.

Furthermore ac has a long history here and is an upstanding member of LL.

We don’t need you to bitch about his grammar.

It's a sentence that starts off with the exact same three words as acblue, the three words that give the sentence the "dickish" tone.

And then it has a grammatical error right in the middle! Can’t we just laugh about it?

There was nothing funny about your reply to him.

Now, again, if I were you I’d drop it.

OK, just pull them out, we'll measure them, and them this

can be over.

I did. I'd like to offer a friendly suggestion from experience

If you get into a position where there is a lot of defensive language/tone, it might be good to walk away for a bit. Take a breather, so to speak. It really helps to regain some perspective, also works as a bit of a cooling off period.

And please do not interpret this suggestion as a negative towards you at all

I think you are a fine person, and I am not lacking in respect towards you in any way by making this suggestion. (Now that’s an awkward sentence)

The funny thing is that I wrote that line and hit post but my connection wasn't good. So it said "Can't post at this time"

I waited and then decided “screw it, I won’t say that, lemme try and understand what acblue is talking about and how I can clarify myself” and it posted like 5 minutes later.

Just stop already.

Having thick skin doesn't mean having to put up with people acting like douchebags.

I'm not a douchebag, but I respect your opinions otherwise.

Having a thick skin and getting annoyed about people trying to push your buttons are two separate things

don’t mix them up.

seattlebruin - July 31, 2009 reply

Everybody settle down please

I’m going to bed and would like to not wake up to a disaster.

I don't know if this was intentional or not but I laughed

bamfor - July 30, 2009 reply

I didn't even notice until you pointed it out, that is kind of funny

Ahahaha. Oh well. Scuffle over.

Oh dear.

royalcurve - July 31, 2009 reply

*yore

;-)

PositivePaul - July 31, 2009 reply

Fister might be terrible

But he brings potentially horrifying .gif’s

argystokes - July 30, 2009 reply

.

lemonverbena - July 31, 2009 reply

Wow does that entire paper not have any editors at all?

I want to high five that headline writer.

kevin_ess - July 31, 2009 reply

I never ever want to see another Olson start in an M's uniform.

He has been adequate in some relief appearances, but he must never start again.

This seems needlessly harsh

He’s not hopeless. He’s just…he needs work.

AAA?

Ideally, yes

In baseball there are very few "Cliff Lee's"

By that I mean it seems like most good pitchers or pitching prospects come up as a rookie, struggle, go to the minors, come back, and soon enough are good. Then there are the ones that come up, struggle, go down, come up, struggle, go down, and it endlessly repeats.

It seems like very few though, stop that cycle a few years into their careers. Its like how I have no hope for Homer Bailey.

Some people just take longer to figure it all out.

Look at Russell Branyan or Raul Ibanez

MT Olson - July 30, 2009 reply

Jamie Moyer, Randy Johnson

argystokes - July 30, 2009 reply

Jamie Moyer is one of the greatest anomolies in the history of this game, and Randy Johnson almost immediately became a good pitcher when he came up.

Randy Johnson was the definition of mediocre his first seven years in the majors.

Actually, strike that, he was out-and-out bad for the first three years.

He had averages ERAs!

Poochie - July 30, 2009 reply

Yeah, he wasn't great.

Are you talking about the 50 innings over two seasons with Montreal?

And PS - that's exactly the type of pitcher I was talking about in the example of guys that struggle out of the gate but then start to get it.

Johan Santana, Roy Halladay, almost everybody else… and Randy Johnson. You come up, you struggle, then you start to get it. Garrett Olsens chances to start “getting it” are probably all out.

I don't see how you are differentiating between Olsen being a pitcher that struggles and falls into the minors/majors cycle and one that struggles and then gets it so early.

As said before, Johnson struggled for 7 years before he got it.

Kenny Knows Sports - July 31, 2009 reply

He did not struggle for 7 years.

Yeah, he kinda did.

Towards the end of that first 7 year stretch he was a lot better, but he didn’t really start putting it all together until year 7.

pdb - July 31, 2009 reply

I don

I don't mean to be harsh, but his starting pitching is awful.

He needs to figure out how to pitch rather than just throw. There is no way this guy is ready to pitch as a MLB starter. Maybe he can be a relief pitcher, but no way he can start until he figures out how to pitch.

Hi Don!

Me Kevin.

Ever since the M's got Olson, he's totally reminded me of someone, and I coudln't think of who.

The actor comment finally made me get it. Olson totally looks like Aaron Eckhart.

I Lick Squirrels - July 30, 2009 reply

Holy crap we scored a run?

I'll speak for Gomez...

…and say, hey, why not give Fister a shot if they trade Washburn. He’s no great shakes, but it’s not like the M’s are going to be contenders this year. If he goes all Blackley or Feierabend, it’s no huge deal since he’s not really much of a prospect. Just a warm body to patch a hole for a few months…

PositivePaul - July 30, 2009 reply

While I'm up for that,

I just don’t want to see a filler-body trotted out every fifth day to start the first three innings and get shelled. I know there’s not much we can do, so it’s just… frustrating.

It would be nice if the rotation depth that makes taking a risk on injury prone pitchers didn't suck balls.

Boy it sure seemed like we had a whole lot more depth at the beginning of the season.

I thought Olson was a steal at the beginning of the season too.

He does as well in relief and anybody else (in our bullpen) in relief.

That would seem like he’s still a steal.

He's had good results as a reliever but I still think he sucks.

Well he sure did tonight, but there'

continued from above. *s no way I'm going to disagree with you.

I’m not at all interested in fighting about this. I just don’t want him to be the starting pitcher again until he knows how to pitch.

I guess my point is that I think he can be a useful starter and he's still young enough to figure it out.

He’s more valuable as a starter and it’s not like he’s a shutdown reliever so I’d prefer he go to Tacoma and see if he can turn it around before moving him to the bullpen full time.

Aaron Campeau - July 31, 2009 reply

I'm willing to give him some time, but holy crap he looked literally scared on the mound today.

Dude needs to get out of his head like Morrow.

kevin_ess - July 31, 2009 reply

If that's the case (and I think it's at least part of the problem)

then he’s not going to be especially useful in high leverage situations and therefore not especially useful as a reliever.

With the season for all intents and purposes over, it doesn’t matter who takes his place in the rotation and it’s not like they can be too much worse. He needs to go to Tacoma.

Aaron Campeau - July 31, 2009 reply

That's what worries me, my friend.

kevin_ess - July 31, 2009 reply

I'm with you here. He needs to figure it out. He looked scared.

If he needs to go to Tacoma for some time, send him to Tacoma. I don’t think he’s ready for another MLB start. I don’t think Morrow is either. Give them their starts in Tacoma.

Sinking Away - July 31, 2009 reply

I still hold out hope that he can pan out and become something marginally useful.

I think he can but dear God does he need to go away.

You can pretty much set your watch by his exploding.

Part of me wishes Carlos Silva wasn't on the shelf so we could send Olson to Tacoma to fix himself.

When is he due off?

We need to give him another chance and better now than 2010.

Fuckmikereilly - July 31, 2009 reply

Do we really need to give him another chance?

Yes.

JMKaustin - July 31, 2009 reply

Well hey if we don't trade Wash we won't have to worry about that.

So does this mean we lost the Heilman trade?

You’re right about Olson looking like an actor. That dude who played Harvey Dent, to be precise.

Bearskin Rugburn - July 30, 2009 reply

I'd be stoked for Fister to make the bigs

he’s the first prospect I followed through the entire system, Aquasox on up. Of course I didn’t follow him because I thought he was promising or had a good story. It was, you know…. yeah.

Bearskin Rugburn - July 30, 2009 reply

Was he a decent lefty out of the pen?

I remember an inning or two where he didn’t suck but don’t have any stats to back it up.

Whoopetydoo - July 31, 2009 reply

tRA of 4.37 through 16.3 innings of relief,

so yeah, decent. SSS issues of course.