Lookout Landing

I grant an exception for that comment by that username

This is what I was going for

Apologies anyway. If it’s any consolation I immediately regretted it.

Eyeball Kid - January 5, 2010 reply

Good news, everyone! He's not going to get boxed.

Coach Owens - January 6, 2010 reply

Indeed

Well part of the righty platoon in the OF is still Bradley, who hits better right handed, no?

This just gives him more AB I hope (and of course I hope he’s healthy enough to take them).

But DH

Griffdawg hit better against lefties last year

I know the answer to this one!

What is small sample size?

Steroids.

Eyebrows - January 5, 2010 via mobile reply

Its because he was in the best shape of his life to start the season

Rotund?

Ovoids?

Bootay.

Maybe we're going to trade Kotchman for Texieria

We already got Texeira

rule 5 pick.

He was referring to the trade the Braves made with the Angels

Slurvey - January 5, 2010 reply

So you're pretty much whelmed, then?

marc w - January 5, 2010 reply

Yeah, this whelmed the shit out of me

So you're dead?

Damn.

Corco - January 5, 2010 reply

Our team is still pretty much in whack.

This comment thread gruntles me.

88fingerslukee - January 5, 2010 reply

Y'all have no couth.

No couth, but oodles of sooth.

Steve Nelson - January 5, 2010 reply

The money changing hands

I’m assuming this is part of the dough that Milwaukee sent here to pay for Hall’s 8.5M salary. If that’s the case, this can be seen as basically a salary clearing move, since us sending 2M to Boston still leaves us with a few mil left over.

We still don't know how much money we're talking about

Graham MacAree - January 5, 2010 reply

I guess I had Hall tabbed at 1.5M, since that's what he's actually costing us

and wanted to remind people that there’s all that Brewer money that ought to follow Hall to Boston. If we’re only sending part of it then it’s kind of a win for us, and the inclusion of a minor leaguer makes me think it’ll be less than the 7M they gave us.

I don't get how this is part of the Cliff Lee trade.

All less than awesome deals from here until eternity are now automatically part of the Cliff Lee trade.

ARock - January 5, 2010 reply

Not A Huge Deal

If the M’s sent Hall, then they’re also clearing a roster spot. That means Kotchman is quite possibly viewed as a bench player, or half of a platoon.

My current worry is the over-population of lefties on the team. You can have too many left-handed hitters. Right?

robbbbbb - January 5, 2010 reply

Well you can never have too many switch hitters.

Did you know Ryan Doumit is a switch hitter?

No, but I did know Mike Piazza was.

Wink wink, nudge nudge, say no more…

PositivePaul - January 5, 2010 reply

Not sure what to think, until we know how much money we are sending.

ARock - January 5, 2010 reply

Though I do like getting rid of Hall.

I voted him my least favorite Mariner in the poll. (Not for anything personal but for his performance). I’m scared of seeing him used in left field, it should be Langerhans backing up there.

ARock - January 5, 2010 reply

I think Hall would have been fine in left had he not been dealing with a quad injury in September.

Apparently he was still above average.

UZR LIES!

marc w - January 5, 2010 reply

I assumed it was just affirmative action.

I still don't undernstand why Wak was running him out there.

Granted, I didn’t watch a single M’s game in September, but Langerhans was still around and healthy Michael Saunders wouldn’t have been traumatized if he’d struggle for another few weeks while Hall rested up his quad. It seems like the only time Wak played someone who was hurt to the detriment of the team this year.

I think Langerhans had a badly jammed shoulder that was keeping him on the bench.

Saunders is another story, though.

BrianL - January 6, 2010 reply

Probably wanted to see if his previous potential would manifest itself.

OlSalty - January 6, 2010 reply

I'm not gonna miss Bill Hall too much

And Kotchman is at least cheap/useful. I was fully prepared for Bill Hall to suck a big one this year and continue his multi-year decline. Kotchman is a solid but unexciting move. Hopefully they take the money they saved on this move (hopefully they saved $$ compared to a FA) and use it on a SP.

Why didn't we just call Eric Hinske?

Maybe someone can convince Kotchman to hit the ball in the air more

JLC - January 5, 2010 reply

Our DH spot is currently occupied by two guys with large health risks,

And Jack brings in a 1B (presumably would get time at DH if one of Bradley/Griffey gets hurt) with a below average bat who gets alot of his value from fielding. I’d have expected this spot to go to someone with a better bat and average/below average fielding due to the likelihood of seeing DH time. Either there’s something else coming or I’m not sure I like this yet.

Terminator X - January 5, 2010 reply

Yeah, I'm not really comfortable with this lineup.

Where do we go now?

Rudy4three - January 5, 2010 reply

Probably if Bradley/Griffdawg gets hurt

Carp gets called up to DH. His D is pretty meh.

I didn't like Bill Hall very much

Then again, I don’t like Casey Kotchman very much either. Whatever.

Corco - January 5, 2010 reply

Stunning

seattlebruin - January 5, 2010 reply

Yeah

neither of them are Ham Sandwiches, Icehouse, or Idaho, are they?

*Ham salad

.Taylor - January 5, 2010 reply

Doh

I failed at Corco trivia

Am I the only one that loves Kotchman.

Kind of like how Jeff loves Broussard?

Scruffy Lefty - January 5, 2010 reply

Kotchman is not as sexy as Broussard.

Does he play guitar?

I don't want sexy.

I want someone I can drink MGD with.

Scruffy Lefty - January 5, 2010 reply

Kotchy gives the best post game interviews.

Hugs and kisses and all

But Scioscia’s way of nicknaming people by adding a Y to their name is both dumb and highly annoying.

Shieldsy? That is now longer than his name. That should not qualify as a nickname.

Eyebrows - January 5, 2010 via mobile reply

But now we can call him Krotchy

seattlebruin - January 5, 2010 reply

We called him that to all the time.

What about Caseyy?

What about Eyebrowsey?

That's like you're nagging him

Sounds like a perfect fit for you

Last I checked you're the lil bitch

I suggest you check again.

Now what

I don't know. Wanna watch a movie?

Date night

Sorry dear I fell asleep on you

Dewey N - January 6, 2010 reply

Toriiy?

Kirk - January 5, 2010 via mobile reply

Toriiy?

Kirk - January 5, 2010 via mobile reply

Adenhartey

pdb - January 5, 2010 reply

Ironically, he wasn't.

He is pretty darn cute

He's not a cute as Carpey Waarpy

He looks like someone is goosing him.

He's more classically handsome though

Yeah but that's so boring

Shut up troll

From a female perspective

Thumbs down. Just sayin.

My opinion was also from a female perspective ;)

Looks a bit of a bottompincher don't he

Hmm. A beard doesn't change it much

Now he's upgraded from bottompincher to a grabass

I beg to differ.

•

lemonverbena - January 5, 2010 reply

Symmetry is not his friend.

If he and Shannon Doherty were to reproduce, the world might tilt on its axis.

Brilliant.

Something like this I'd imagine

Hmm

Not bad.

Now I'm going to see him as this all the time

But when he's at the plate,

that assymetry allows him to get a better stereoscopic view of the pitch as it’s headed toward home plate.

Ass-symetry?

Who's in your top 5?

At least we have someone to play 1st.

That's like saying "At least I have a sock"

It’s not hard to find a sock.

mebpenguin - January 5, 2010 reply

Tell that to the 80's.

Particularly a lefty sock

ThundaPC - January 5, 2010 reply

We're going to get Jon Lester, just watch

Slurvey - January 5, 2010 reply

Jon Lester has socks.

ralphie81 - January 5, 2010 reply

I thought Jon Lester has cancer

seattlebruin - January 5, 2010 reply

Both!

SethGrandpa - January 5, 2010 reply

Sock Cancer is a serious condition.

Cancer and socks

A deadly combination.

Jon Lester in high socks

would be deadly. Nobody would want to face him.

Offensively a wash at 1B/DH

If Kotchman starts at 1B and Bradley DH’s that’s basically a wash with last year’s 1B and DH offensive stats…only flipped. Bradley’s projected to put up an OPS similar to M’s 1B’s last year (around .840) and Kotchman is projected to put up an OPS similar to M’s DH’s last year (around .750). And Kotchman is a better defender than the M’s 1B’s were last year (7.6 vs. 3.3 UZR/150).

I’d hoped that after adding pop at DH, we could at least hold steady at 1B in WAR. But this move makes us better than we were before making the trade. Just not very much better.

Whelming, indeed.

short - January 5, 2010 reply

Figgins and Kotchman were close friends when they were Angel teammates.

So you got some plus chemistry with this trade.

Hate.

SethGrandpa - January 5, 2010 reply

Big Deal

In a tickle duel, I’ve got Ichiro and Griffey over Figgins/Kotchman each day of the week and twice on Sunday.

Until Bradley goes ape-shit on them…

That makes us a ~100 win team then

I have Kotchman down for 11.0 WAR, so probably more like ~110

Fixed your post

.Taylor - January 5, 2010 reply

Kotchman + Figgins = 4.0 WAR added onto both of them

Its like a card game.

OceanBird - January 5, 2010 reply

Yay for chemistry multipliers!

They get a buddy bonus!

JLProck - January 5, 2010 reply

So does this mean more Langerhans?

Craig Powers - January 5, 2010 reply

I think it might mean more Saunders

Since Langerhans would seem to be the 4th OF

mebpenguin - January 5, 2010 reply

That's What I'm Liking About This Deal

But then, I’m high on Saunders. Getting Hall out of here means it’s more likely that Saunders is on the team, and in an everyday role.

robbbbbb - January 5, 2010 reply

Milton Bradley plays left-field.

Two Rs and Two Ls - January 5, 2010 reply

Nobody really knows what it's going to look like, but I doubt Bradley is an everyday left fielder.

Teej - January 6, 2010 reply

I take it that Kotchman's contract comes up at the end of 2010?

`

He’ll be a free agent after 2011 should he be tendered a contract after 2010.

Two Rs and Two Ls - January 5, 2010 reply

And that's what I get for reading only the first article on the front page.

Does anyone expect to resign Branyan or sign Cust?

Ichiro
Figgins
Lopez
Griffey
Gutierrez
Kotchman
Saunders
Wilson
Moore or Bard

This lineup might be worse than last years unless another power bat is added.

MagicMike23 - January 5, 2010 reply

I expect bradley as DH, Saunders in LF on some days

MagicMike23 - January 5, 2010 reply

Griffey won't get more AB's than Bradley.

MFAN - January 5, 2010 reply

Maybe not, but bradley hopefully can stay healthy. Thats an issue he's always had

MagicMike23 - January 5, 2010 reply

Capitalization is your friend.

Coach Owens - January 5, 2010 reply

Shut Up Coach

Robert - January 5, 2010 reply

Fortunately Griffey is the model of perfect health

Why do we need a "power bat' to improve our offense?

I think another bat like Ichiro’s would be just fine :)

Does this effectively cap of the M's pffseason?

Or is there another position that could be feasibly upgraded with what is left in the budget and the minors?

laxtonto - January 5, 2010 reply

Entirely depends on what money is left

Didn't we still have 8-10 million left? If we deal Hall, this is basically a salary swap.

I would imagine we’re still looking at adding another SP at least

Rudy4three - January 5, 2010 reply

Well it's all hypothetical.

The guess is that the team has a certain budget (in the range that you suggested), but it’s really more speculation than anything.

SethGrandpa - January 5, 2010 reply

Nobody has an idea what the cash part of this deal entails.

I imagine it's sending them the cash we got from Milwaukee

mebpenguin - January 5, 2010 reply

John Hickey at Fanhouse says we're sending about a million to Boston

Tube - January 5, 2010 reply

That would be incredible.

As to mean maybe not credible. It means we would be gaining something like 6 million dollars. I’d be flipping out over this deal if that’s true.

Okay, that was dumb.

I was getting way too excited about the money thing. Kotchman is due some kind of raise in arbitration, so we’d be saving quite a bit less than that, maybe 3 or 4 million. Still, that would be pretty feakin’ unbelievable — upgrade from Hall to Kotchman and add a few million as well.

Yeah no way.

When did John Hickey go to Fanhouse?

My investigation tells me Jan. 1.

First post (on Washburn’s possible return to Seattle) went up yesterday.

Teej - January 5, 2010 reply

I don't think so

I bet they still make a move for a starting pitcher. Either they do the Lopez/Liriano deal (or something like it) and sign Hudson (or someone like him) or they hit the free agent market up for a pitcher.

robbbbbb - January 5, 2010 reply

I say we move him to third!

That's a retarded idea

No but then we could move Figgins to second and sign Branyan

Why not just put Branyan at third

I like my third basemen to be white

Let's ask Fogel.

He likes his third basemen to be white

This makes no sense

Let's ask Poochie

Poor Fogel.

Why not?

Is Branyan not white?

If you cut him, does he not bleed?

I don't think he does.

Let's ask Fogel

No

That's because you're color blind damn dog

arf arf

Please use proper capitalization.

Thank you.

Please spell Cheese Burger properly

Thank you

Cheeseburger.

You’re welcome.
Also, I was joking.

As was I

Please make proper use of the spacebar.

Thank you

.Taylor - January 5, 2010 reply

Please stop obsessing over your spreadsheets

and go enjoy a game of baseball.

Left-handed third baseman. Cool.

Coach Owens - January 5, 2010 reply

We aren't allowed to send more money than it takes to pay Hall's salary right?

I feel like it wouldn’t be approved because it would look like we were buying Kotchman

We aren't going to be sending them $8MM

Yeah but if you include the money we got from the Brewers we aren't paying very much of Hall's salary

Uhhh ok,

I’m fine with giving up Bill Hall, but we’re settling on Casey Kotchman on 1st base? Milton Bradley had better beat the shit out of the ball this year.

This is kinda like the Morrow trade. Not bad per say, but not even remotely exciting.

Time to change that sig of yours.

JLProck - January 5, 2010 reply

Done.

I think this trade is less annoying than the Morrow trade

And I’d say this definitely improves the team more in 2010, without giving up as much (obviously depending on who the minor leaguer is & how much cash).

Yeah I agree

Just doesn’t feel like the best possible move available.

There's another away to look at this.

And of course, a lot depends on who the PTBNL is and how much money is changing hands. Zduriencik once was asked what his plan for building the team was and he said something to the effect of “adding talent whenever and in whatever way we can”. I think most people would think of Kotchman as a better talent than Hall, and this move would be adding talent to the roster.

I agree. Kotchman is definitely an upgrade over Carp.

And since we don’t know the details yet in terms of money or the PTBNL we will have to wait and see. I still trust in GMZ’s plan.

TrustBaseball - January 5, 2010 reply

I really don't like that we have an Angels/Red Sox castoff, but Boston has Beltre.

I agree.

Well at least I now have my question for Satuday.

What exactly did you guys see in Russell Branyan’s medical reports that you didn’t like?

The enormous weight of his dong will continue to cause back pain.

Yeah, they're likely to answer that one.

Twould be awesome

if they cited HIPAA

Most FO's do ....

I'm starting to think

Jack Zduriencik : Angels :: Dayton Moore : Mariners

Also,

.324 career wOBA, plus defender, not very long dingers, doesn’t strike out much…isn’t that basically just Loafie if he were moved to 1B? I’m not a big fan of the deal as it currently stands.

But he bats left!

Loafie is a plus defender?

The nickname on its own kinda goes against the idea.

He would be at 1B.

Ah so

I Lick Squirrels - January 6, 2010 reply

No.

SethGrandpa - January 6, 2010 reply

Matthew predicted him to be ~+5 runs if moved to first.

Link.

My first initial reaction to this deal was...

oh looks like Bavasi is still running things. I really don’t like this deal. I know Branyan has a bad back, but are you trying to tell me that you couldn’t get him for the same price? I was apathetic on the League for Morrow thing because I truly believe it was part of the Lee deal regardless of what Zduriencik says. But there was absolutely no reason to make this deal AND you are helping the Red Sox with their payroll which I have a hard time with! I’d rather have Lopez playing first and Hudson playing 2nd than this deal. Kotchman is a bust and will always be a bust.

While I may not think it's the greatest trade in the world

A) We don’t know how much we’re helping the Sox payroll, if at all.
B) Branyan may have cost more, was holding out for a two-year deal, and we don’t know the extent of his injury
C) To label Kotchman a bust because he was once a top prospect doesn’t convey his true value. He is only 27, so there’s always a chance he recovers, and even if he doesn’t, he’s shown to be a 1-1.5 win player. Failed top prospect, sure, but he still improves the team.

I hope he fails his physical

I know it’s mean, but this is almost Ramirez for Soriano bad for me. I just figured 1st base was a place where we could get run production from and when we get a guy like Casey Kotchman I just think Pete O’Brien. It’s probably unfair, but I just think we’re punting 1st base.

This is no where near Ramirez for Soriano bad.

Can this trade even be described as bad?

yes

I suppose a lot of it depends on how much money we're giving up

but Bill Hall + random minor league fodder + cash strikes me as meh at worst.

The unfortunate thing about how good Zduriencik is:

Any trade that’s not an immediate huge win for us is viewed as the second coming of Bavasi, when in fact, it’s more “ehh”.

xero3k - January 5, 2010 reply

Even trading for Overbay would've been better

I know, more money. Whatever. Fuck them. Do you want to win a World Series or “compete”. I thought they wanted to win it all, but it really all comes down to dollars and cents. I think that’s really why I hate this trade. It’s strictly a money move.

You can't ignore money.

This team has a budget it has to stay within.

I know...

I just thought the team might decide this team was worth spending a few more million on to take it over the top. Now I now that’s not the case. After we traded for Lee and Bradley I was smelling that champagne. All we needed was a 1B/DH (or greedy me, both) that could mash and there you go. But nope, cheaped out.

We could still get one

"Cheaped out".

Yeah we should have paid Figgins more money

Would the grammar police prefer...

“the owners were frugal”?

We prefer 'went Jew'

I will drive all the way to Seattle to shout at you that you are a racist

Jeff greeted me for the first time by marching fervently in place.

For all I know this could be true

Jew isn't a race

At least not anymore it isn't

Robert - January 5, 2010 reply

As a Jew, I am offended and would like a ban on all Jew jokes because they offend me.

.Taylor - January 5, 2010 reply

Just go to the USSM/LL event, stand up and ask Jeff why he's anti-semetic

That's silly, Jeff's great with words.

Actually, Jeff will ask himself that question, since the questions will be submitted before-hand and chosen by the moderators.

Jack Zduriencik: …so we need to wait for the commissioner’s office to sign off whenever the trade involves cash. So that’s why there’s usually a bit of a holdup with deals like the Bradley-Silva one. Any other questions

Jeff Sullivan: Okay, here’s one for me. Why am I, Jeff Sullivan, a racist? Well…

Just don't ban white trash jokes

as white trash, I fully approve.

It's not?

No.

Then why do they all look alike?

Yarmulkes are not genetic.

That's racist

It sort of is. But then we get into a religion discussion that should be avoided.

I don't quite know what you expected

But I’m pretty sure Branyan’s potential cost didn’t dictate his availability; the health of his back did.

Things can change, it’s only January. Don’t go into upheaval mode because of two low-key trade returns.

cwel87 - January 5, 2010 reply

It wasn't the grammar, more the leap of logic.

Or with the money saved by using Kotchman at first

We could get a better SP/2B/C. There is more than one way to win a World Series, and the offseason isn’t over yet.

I hope you're right

I really don’t care what we do at catcher really. Unless we did something outrageous like trade for Mauer or something, I don’t really see where you could upgrade there. I want to see what Moore can do. Sure 2B could be improved, but keeping Lopez wouldn’t be the end of the world.

The talent gap between Moore/Johnson and Mauer is quite large.

Bigger than the Letterman gap

But we’re not getting Mauer. Any catcher out there who you might see an upgrade?

Ryan Doumit is the only name i've heard, but that was awhile back.

MFAN - January 5, 2010 reply

Yeah...

But isn’t he one of the worse defensive catchers in baseball? Like emergency catcher bad?

Depending on the money situation

This may have been a simultaneous talent-increasing and cost-cutting trade.

cwel87 - January 5, 2010 reply

If the team is living beyond its means (i.e. over-budget) before the season begins, it's never a recipe for sustainable success.

It damages the long-term prospects of the team and robs the GM of any flexibility during the 4 months + August trading season during the regular season. The market for particular baseball commodities (starters, relievers, second basemen, young players, whatever) can often change drastically from month to month, so if the M’s are over-budget, Zduriencik might lose out a Cliff Lee-caliber deal that he would otherwise make if he had some financial flexibility.

'Fuck them'

Really? What short memories people have.

Eyeball Kid - January 5, 2010 reply

Oh I remember...

I guess I just expected more out of Zduriencik. I just don’t like this move at all. Can’t help it.

No one in the world can make me like this trade.

Has there ever been a player you’ve just seen play and you thought, why is this guy starting a big league game (I’m sure, Cairo, Vidro, many others)? That’s Kotchman to me.

Kotchman is at least 1-1.5 wins better than Cairo and Vidro were.

Kotchman is slightly below average while Cairo and Vidro were replacement level or worse.

I understand the stats...

I get it, really. Has there ever been a player you just saw and said “I don’t like him”, even if he’s not that bad? Kotchman is that player for me.

Yeah but that has nothing to do with his actual value

This is Ho-Soriano bad in the same way that the Sun is a planet

Robert - January 5, 2010 reply

The scientists ruled that it wasn't a couple years back.

killer_ewok18 - January 5, 2010 via mobile reply

Welcome to the metaphor.

Pluto

killer_ewok18 - January 5, 2010 via mobile reply

No, now you've lost it.

That comment made sense in the same way Pluto is a planet?

Kotchman is better than Bill Hall

But he's worse than Branyan

that’s what I’m getting at. Yeah, if you’re just looking at who’s on the roster now, then it’s an upgrade.

Well

Branyan will most likely be worse than he was last year.

I'm sure he will be...

but at least you’ve got a power threat in the lineup. With this current lineup, I’d be surprised if anyone topped 20. I know the whole "85 Cardinals, blah, blah, blah, but I really don’t want a season of 3-2, 2-1 games.

You realize the 85 Cardinals were three outs away from winning to World Series right

Sure, but ew who wants to watch a 3-2 win in the playoffs?

3-1 wins are where it's at

Literally the only possible NLCS where I wouldn't want either team to win.

It's not like it's Atlanta-Chicago

Meh, personal biases.

The only two NL teams I actively dislike. Of course, I still prefer them to many AL teams.

If this team wins 4 World Series games all by that score...

I will die a very happy man.

Yes, Don Denkinger is never allowed in Saint Louis.

Not if he's on the DL because his back is messed up.

I think what you are saying is that

you expected the team to get a 1B that would be a strength of the team. It was an obvious hole that we could use to drastically improve and it is relatively easy to fill. They chose to do a decent but underhelming move which improved the team but not to the extent you hoped.

Truthfully, I’m hoping somehow that Kotchman is not our starting 1B but then we wasted some money on our bench that we could be using for a SP.

That's exactly what I was trying to say...

You just said it better. I just flat don’t like the guy for no good reason. Hopefully he can perform up to his potential here and turn me, but he’s just such an average-ish guy with very little pop. No one I ever thought the M’s would try to acquire.

tdot mariner fan - January 5, 2010 reply

I am not necessarily dissapointed in them trying the trade route

I would just hope Z would try pulling something with a little bit more upside, even if it brings some volatility. I wonder if we could pry Garrett Jones from the Pirates for even with regression he looks like he could be around a 1.5-2 WAR guy at 1B, while providing outfield backup. Heck, if you found a nice righty bat, like Jeff Bailey, to platoon with Carp, you could probably get the same value with less cost.

I think this is all just a way to ingeniously free some cash to sign Holliday.

killer_ewok18 - January 5, 2010 via mobile reply

Too late.

Says you!

killer_ewok18 - January 5, 2010 via mobile reply

Maybe we can use some of that cash to make Randy change his mind.

Big Seahawk Loser - January 5, 2010 reply

This, I would approve of.

Basically impossible to judge this move

Until the other shoe drops. This move sets up another move – most likely, the acquisition of an outfielder. The M’s basically determined that Kotchman + New Guy > Available 1B + Hall. Until we know who the new guy is, can’t really know how this is going to work out.

davidcameron - January 5, 2010 reply

Any ideas on who that player will be?

Please don’t say Johnny Damon.

Almost certainly a righty

Nady!

katal - January 5, 2010 reply

I see no reason to be excited about Xavier Nady

Aaron Campeau - January 5, 2010 reply

Dingers!

Cool name!

And we could call him Nads

as a nickname.

If he was skinny we could call him the real slim Nady

Nady Ice.

Nady by Nature.

Nady and the Tramp.

GOD.

Nady you should lay off the nicknames.

Xavier a little towards obsessive.

Dang it!

I thought I’d already called dibs on that nickname.

Nadingo - January 7, 2010 reply

Deep thinker!

Save it for Faces

Yes sir

He's cute

I was thinkin the same thing

.

;)?

<l:0

8==D >-|0:>

Scruffy Lefty - January 6, 2010 reply

I'm going say I'm feeling a bit neutral on this one.

I do if we carry 11 pitchers

I was being facetious.

After Damon he was the only OFer I could think of. I don’t want him at all.

katal - January 5, 2010 reply

This would be enough for me to call this a good move.

He was only worth more than 1 WAR in 1 of his 5 full professional seasons....

.Taylor - January 5, 2010 reply

And he's a meh defender

.Taylor - January 5, 2010 reply

And is an average-ish hitter coming off a serious injury whose arm was already crap and isn't likely to be more than a mediocre OFer.

Aaron Campeau - January 5, 2010 reply

PUJOLS!

JAH - January 5, 2010 reply

Winn?

If he could bounce back hitting wise he could be a fantastic pickup.

Coach Owens - January 5, 2010 reply

So boring.

Wouldn’t be the worst, but I certainly hope Z has something more interesting.

I assume this outfielder wouldn't be around long-term, as we have Saunders ready to go in 2011 and beyond.

I could be wrong, though.

.Taylor - January 5, 2010 reply

Unless Saunders is part of the package

for said new guy

He'd better be a consistant all-star caliber outfielder if we're giving up six years of Saunders for him.

Somebody explain to me why Saunders isn't a good option for LF...

He'll be great someday.

The key being “someday.” And with the addition of Cliff Lee, it appears that we’re going for it this year, so if we can get a huge upgrade in that spot (while giving more time to Saunders in AAA to season, which he could use), we benefit quite a bit. You can expect Saunders to provide anywhere from .5 to 2 wins, with 2 wins being optimistic, ergo if you can get a 4 or 5 win player for left field, you do it, and just bring back Saunders in 2011 when he’ll have had more time in AAA.

All Saunders has done is improve

At every step of his career. Better plate discipline, better power, etc. He’s shown he can adapt and excel, despite being younger than everyone else around him.

Let him get his ABs and be a 2-win player. Besides, getting a 4-5 win player isn’t easy, and we don’t have a lot of cash or prospects to get that guy. Who wants to pay what it would cost to get a 2-3 win upgrade?

Expecting him to be a 2 win player his first full season in the majors is a bit of a stretch

It’s not outside the realm of possibility but it’s much more likely he experiences some hiccups while he learns to hit major league pitching. And there is a lot riding on the outcome of this season, it’s not like this is a rebuilding year where we can afford to take a chance on a newbie. The Cliff Lee trade necessitates going for it all.

I think you are missing the point entirely.

If we’re going for it this year, which is what the indications are with the Lee trade, then we only have this year. 2011 matters far less, at least right now. Saunders projects to be about a 1.5 win player, and that’s if he adjust to the majors, which he might not. He also has plenty of options left, and has spent almost no time in AAA, so he could actually benefit from going there (unlike some of the players during the Bavasi era that were spending too long there).

Because Saunders can easily wait – in fact, because Saunders may BENEFIT from waiting so that he can have more practice with better pitching in AAA – we can easily look to that position as a place to upgrade our roster. And if we can find a good upgrade – say a 3 or 4 win player – we have a considerably better chance of making the playoffs this year, AND our young player has extra practice so that when he is up in 2011, he has a better shot at succeeding against the tougher MLB competition.

Also, there’s this whole thing.

Saunders is still a prospect that has not yet shown he can succeed at an MLB level. Can he? Probably. In fact, highly likely. But the growing pains are going to be there, especially with only half a year’s experience in AAA. If we’re going for it this year, we can’t afford his growing pains – at least not this year. And since Bradley may be playing the position anyway some of the time, IF we can replace Saunders this year with someone that is a significant upgrade, we should.

Why LF and Saunders?

We could find several spots on the roster where we can’t risk to run out a certain player. C, for example. Now 1B, with Kotchman. SS, perhaps. 2B, perhaps. Each spot is a potential place for improvment, and just as Saunders has options left, so to are there reasons why upgrading at those spots makes sense. Moore and Johnson have options. Kotchman and Lopez are cheap. Wilson gets hurt a lot.

And none have the “boom” potential of Saunders. We basically know what Kotchman and Wilson and Lopez are going to do. Why isn’t it a risk to run them out there when we could find good upgrades for them as well?

I do agree with those, whoever, who say LF is the likely spot to see an upgrade now. I’d have been fine with a 3-4 win 1B and Saunders in LF, with Bradley the regular DH.

tait644 - January 6, 2010 reply

Saunders doesn't really have "boom" potential.

He’s not going to wake up tomorrow and become a 6 win player.

abender20 - January 6, 2010 reply

Which isn't to say that he won't be valuable, but he is young and won't be a massive upgrade over anyone this season.

abender20 - January 6, 2010 reply

I think you are overvaluing Saunders.

Saunders has "very good" potential for dirt cheap.

That’s a huge value for the team, but that doesn’t make him some ridiculously awesome player that’s going to go all Justin Upton circa 2009 on the league. He’s got a good chance of being very good for several of his 6 years of team control, nothing more. And, again, though I feel I shouldn’t need to repeat this, of all of the players we have, he will benefit the most from more time in AAA. He spent almost no time there at all, and expecting him to come and even be a league average player is questionable. Obviously if we could find some 4 to 5 win player for catcher we would, but since Brian McCann isn’t available, I’m not holding my breath. And upgrading LF doesn’t prevent us from upgrading catcher…..

I feel like I’m repeating myself over and over. See everything else I wrote to everyone else.

nathaniel dawson - January 6, 2010 reply

I'm not sure we should characterize the M's as "going for it this year"

I’ve heard that thought mentioned a lot, but to me, it just looks like Jack is trying to make the team better every step of the way. He’s certainly made some big improvements since he got here, but it doesn’t seem like he’s been sacrificing future wins with the goal of competing for only this year.

I really view most of the moves he’s made as helping the team win now while also aloowing the team to be good in the future. I just don’t se a “win now at all costs” emphasis.

Mortgaging the future is always a bad strategy.

But for the Cliff Lee trade to make any sense, this year has to be a top priority. GMZ clearly knows the limitations – the chances of us getting to the playoffs this year are decent, but by no means exemplary. But the Cliff Lee trade is quite literally pointless if we are not trying to win this year, ergo he needs to maximize this ball club as best he can to do so this year.

“Win Now at All Costs” is an extremely stupid general management practice, but I think it is pretty obvious he’s trying to upgrade the roster considerably right now, and I think it should be obvious to anyone after the Cliff Lee trade and the Morrow trade.

I should add that whether we are "going for it" this year is irrellevant.

Since the choices are as follows:

a) We play Saunders to give him a chance at the majors because we have no better options.
b) We turn down a significant upgrade just because we want to play Saunders, thus making our team worse this year than it could have been for no apparent reason during a season where we are only a few wins away from being division favorite with at least one of the best pitchers in baseball leaving after this year.
c) We get a significant upgrade at LF, send Saunders down to AAA where he benefits anyway, and both make our team better while still improving our chances for the future.

It would be foolish not to take advantage of C if given the opportunity.

Bradley

We traded Silva for Bradley, and Bradley will do better if he can frolic in the outfield grass every so often. Besides, dude could use a little seasoning in AAA.

Yes, this too.

And if we are not going to play Saunders every day, benching him will stifle his development while wasting a team controlled year – and he will provide little upgrade on the bench compared to Langerhans, if any.

It seems like Bill Hall is better than Kotchman

vivaelpujols - January 5, 2010 reply

Hall hasn't been able to hit a lick in three years

Aaron Campeau - January 5, 2010 reply

Hall is owed 8.5M

Not by the Mariners, so that's not really applicable.

I'm pretty sure the Ms don't have to send all the money they were given for Hall

could be wrong on that though.

Did we come up with a pet name yet?

Kotch Rocket

Amazing.

Too bad he's only gonna hit like six of those

Holokotch.

Okay, I really need to stop with these.

Who do we have to bribe

To get that up on the display board at Safeco when he does drive one deep?

I mean, if “Funk Blast” got put on it clearly there isn’t a lot of institutional oversight going on, so it can’t be too hard if we can connect the idea with the right people.

wandergeist - January 8, 2010 reply

Well, if we went the old school anagram route, he does have the most inappropriate anagrams I've ever seen.

ahem nasty cock
am choke scanty
am cocky hasten
say cock anthem
any sack cometh
can shock meaty
cant shaky come
cant yoke chasm
hymen sat a cock.

But I say we take the high road on this one and call him one of Kotch Rot, Kotch Tease, Hot Kotch, Kotch Rocket, Kotch Stain or Kotch Blocker, with every amazing play called a Kotch Grab. Let’s keep it high brow, guys.

Any Sack Cometh, ahaha

My favorite too.

Nice work.

I’m pretty partial to the highly inappropriate ones.

You did fall in love with Miguel Batista.

The dreaded "can't shaky come"

lemonverbena - January 5, 2010 reply

Sounds like you have experience in this area.

Too bad he's not a redhead. Fire Kotch would be perfect.

Wow any sack cometh is almost as good as

Shit-caked anal lot

"Batter nine you sucky" was the best, ever, hands down. "I Am Beluga Tits" takes a close second.

Who was batter nine you sucky?

Really?

Think about it.

Give me a team

There was a player, he batted 9th, and he sucked albino donkey balls at the game of baseball.

Go for it homey, you got this one!

Christ. How could I have missed that?

long long day at work….

Mariners. Batted ninth. Terrible. Monkey.

Oh, I remember when Deanna was still posting here sometimes

she mentioned Chase Utley (maybe with the middle name or initials) came out to something something homers studly

That'd be impressive since there is no D in his name.

Middle initial maybe

don’t remember the details. Cool story huh?

Chase Cameron Utley

But I enjoyed it! It made me think, that’s for sure!

Chase Cameron...

That’s pretty interesting.

Bearskin Rugburn - January 6, 2010 reply

Sure buy Ryan Howard was named after a character in The Office.

Tell me THAT’s not more interesting.

abender20 - January 6, 2010 reply

None of those are as good as "Chief Noggins".

Coach Owens - January 6, 2010 reply

Most of those are better

but that’s entirely subjective

Hymen sat a cock is my favorite, definately.

Kirk - January 6, 2010 via mobile reply

Kotch sure took the starch out of the Gutierrez signing.

Kermit. - January 5, 2010 reply

Yeah, what's that all about Mariners?!

They buried the lead, big time. I had like 2 minutes to be happy before I heard all this Kotchman crap.

Money

According to this article

Hall is in the last guaranteed year of a four-year, $24 million deal that will pay him $8.4 million next season. The Mariners, according to a major-league source, will pay $7.5-8 million of his salary

If true, the Mariners are saving $0.4-$0.9 mil by trading away Hall, while taking on Kotchman’s $3.5 mil. Essentially, it boils down to this: Is Kotchman at $2.5-3 mil better than the free agent 1B options?

Fuckmikereilly - January 6, 2010 reply

Also

Beltre’s joke of a $5 mil option was tacked on simply to lower the AAV of Beltre’s contract, thus helping to put the Red Sox below the luxury tax cutoff.

Kinda seems like a loophole that needs to be remedied if you ask me.

Fuckmikereilly - January 6, 2010 reply

If true, I don't like this at all

Graham MacAree - January 6, 2010 reply

Well that really sucks if it's true

OlSalty - January 6, 2010 reply

Isn't that how much Troy Glaus is making?

Edgar for Pres - January 6, 2010 reply

I am a bit interested in why Kotchman has little upside

To me, he fits the classic profile of a breakout candidate. I know that very few of his fly balls clear the fence, but is that because of a lack of velocity? Is that borne out by hit f/x? Now, I’m out of my depth, but I thought good contact hitters with patience and doubles power have a decent chance of adding home runs as they age.

John Morgan - January 6, 2010 reply

Only if they show evidence of getting stronger, and Kotchman has shown less ISO over time.

Also

It’s not too bad, but even his home runs were not that powerful. It’s true he might get more home runs out of his doubles thanks to things like Safeco and luck, but that’s not really “breaking out” so much as “getting lucky.” Also, players are known to be at their strongest…. pretty much exactly at Kotchman’s age. So it’s not impossible that he becomes outstanding, but based on everything we know about him, there are far too many reasons he won’t be, because bad luck wasn’t what led to his disappointing seasons – being bad did.