Lookout Landing

Oct 31 for Aardsma.

When my favorite offseason move is trading for John Jaso only to have them bring in another "C"...

Welp, that’s underwhelming to me.

SethGrandpa - January 31, 2012 reply

But I have fantasies of Olivo being traded. That fantasy whelms me.

That's fair.

SethGrandpa - February 1, 2012 reply

This offseason reminds me

Of a night where I wanted to go out but nobody else is up for it, so I stay at home and do laundry. I had money and desire to go do something fun, but there was nothing going on. So I didn’t spend my money doing something I wouldn’t have enjoyed and did boring chores and played video games instead. If I spend that money on a particularly epic night out next week, I’ll be glad I stayed in and saved that money. If I don’t, I’ll have had as much fun as I would have if I’d gone out by myself and wasted $30 drinking alone at the bar, but I’ll be disappointed nothing else came up. Either way, it’s better than overdrafting my account on a bitch that doesn’t put out, and I’m glad I didn’t do that!

seattlecougar - January 31, 2012 via Android app reply

This offseason reminds me of a night when

No one will go out with me, I don’t even have $30 to spend at the bar because I have to spend my money on a lease for a crappy Dodge Stratus and my boss won’t give me a raise. Instead I spend my night on the computer, at home alone, thinking about what I could be doing with my 30 bucks, despondent over the fact that some hot chick I want to bang is at a better bar with some douche that has a lot of hair gel. Wait…that’s tonight.

Forever alone, right guys?! Please tell me more about hot chicks that you want to bang!

That’s what makes this site great!

Eyebrows - February 1, 2012 via mobile reply

Let me just straight up say that if you somehow ended up with a lease on a Dodge Stratus in the year 2012 you really did something wrong and probably shouldn't go car shopping by yourself again

And I was just about to say, Eyebrow can mock me, but I hope no one mocks my Dodge Stratus.

Matsui - February 1, 2012 reply

I don't understand what made you decide that the smartest use of your car dollars was to end up making monthly payments on a minimum 5 year old Dodge Stratus that you're not even going to own at some point

Why not just buy a used car if you’re making payments anyway? Or did you somehow end up with a 5 year lease on a Dodge Stratus?

Either way you aren’t very smart when it comes to making car purchases

I mean, honestly you'd be better off just buying a bunch of $600 beaters and driving them until they die

He's a division manager in charge of 49 people, though.

He works too hard!

ThomasG - February 2, 2012 reply

She wouldn't have sex with you? That makes her a bitch, no question bro!!

Fucking bitches not fucking you. Yay misogyny!

Don’t turn this place into Reddit.

Eyebrows - February 1, 2012 via mobile reply

Eyebrows is my favorite.

katal - February 1, 2012 reply

Seriously. You can't get any more Reddit than these top two comments.

“I’m going to make this all about me by saying it’s just like a really boring story that nobody cares about. I am under the impression that my mundane personal experiences are actually really interesting because they happened to me. Also, women are bitches if they don’t fuck me and sluts if they fuck anyone else.”

Eyebrows - February 1, 2012 via mobile reply

Nice, trumping the reddit superiority complex with LL superiority complex

Good move

Dewey N - February 1, 2012 reply

SupeLLiority?

katal - February 1, 2012 via mobile reply

Sounds like something I would say

I guess I haven't missed anything avoiding Reddit.

It's not all bad. It's like SBN as a whole.

You just have to know where to go.

Ok. I guess with two reccomendations I have to check

what you crazy kids are doing with the internets. I’ll type Reddit in altavista as soon as AOL loads this next page.

SeattleJunkieQueen - January 31, 2012 reply

(modem noises)

JY - February 1, 2012 reply

Most of the users on Reddit are interested in whoring Karma and repeating bad jokes while running decent ones into the ground. That's the internet.

But there are plenty of ways to use Reddit to find concentrations of unique and interesting stuff.

abender20 - February 1, 2012 reply

My city and university's subreddits have a combined 500 people so it's a pretty cool way of getting to know people

That said, if you read the front page you’re asking to be hit of the head with repetitive internet memes, injokes, and stupid comments just for the sake of something called Karma. If you make an effort (or even just toy around a bit looking for your interests) you’re going to find some places you like. I’d suggest starting off with the “AskScience” subreddit and then branch out.

bamfor - February 2, 2012 reply

agree totally with this

there are some good (small) subreddits out there — ask science is a good one!

they also have some solid tech and game specific subreddits…

knockoutking - February 2, 2012 reply

Whelms Me

This offseason boiled down to Prince Fielder or no Prince Fielder. The result was the latter, which was not a surprise. The apparent reducing of payroll threatens to put me in underwhelm territory but the Montero trade saves it for me.

ThundaPC - January 31, 2012 reply

I can't be too disappointed because I don't think the Mariners are contending in 2012.

I get the sense that they did their due diligence and did what they could within reason. Hopefully this low-key offseason might slide a bit more money into the 2013-2016 spending pool.

Eyebrows - January 31, 2012 reply

Thoroughly whelmed.

I liked all of the moves that were made this offseason, but at the same time found myself wanting more.

It’s totally irrational, but I find myself wishing that this poll will be rendered irrelevant when Jack Z signs Edwin Jackson and Roy Oswalt on the same day.

ThirteenOfTwo - January 31, 2012 reply

To date, the 2011-2 Seattle Mariners' off season:

• underwhelms me
• whelms me
• overwhelms me
✓ Tom Wilhelmsen

Mayo - January 31, 2012 reply

At least it's not Wes Helms.

Anytime I threaten to become "whelmed" I just remember one thing:

20 losses in a row.

I will change my status to whelmed when I think that the other team scoring 3 runs puts it out of reach for us. I hope we are there, and with this kind of young talent and potential who knows what could happen…. but the people we signed no doubt leave me underwhelmed.

Tezlin - January 31, 2012 reply

I'm fairly whelmed.

I was starting to get excited for the team but the recent projection stuff was a pretty good reality check.

I feel like I’m not going to be rooting for wins this year as much as for rumors of Ichiro’s demise to be an exaggeration, Montero to start at catcher, Casper Wells to take the LF job from Mike Carp, and Guti to be a good, healthy ballplayer.

Of course, I also want Felix to succeed, Ackley to put up similar numbers as his ‘11 campaign, and Justin Smoak to break out. However, I think I’m more confident in those happening than the ones above. Also, wins would be pretty cool, too.

Two Rs and Two Ls - January 31, 2012 reply

If those things happen

wins will happen.

Snuffleupagus - February 1, 2012 reply

Solidly whelmed.

The team is clearly looking towards 2013 and beyond which is fine and the best way to go. Still, a signing or trade for a “big name” player would have done some good for the fanbase. Not a reckless move, but something to at least coax some interest from lapsed/casual fans badly needing something to get excited about.

KC Mariner - January 31, 2012 reply

So much depends on whether the young players improve.

It’s not impossible. We hope they do. Some of them really look promising. So we’ll see.

ignacio - February 1, 2012 reply

Whelmed

ignacio - February 1, 2012 reply

Whelmed, by process of elimination.

I would be underwhelmed if we brought in bad players (we didn’t) or spent money for the sake of spending money.

I would be overwhelmed if we managed to pull off a brilliant trade that resulted quite clearly in more loss than gain or signed some crucial player for a reasonable contract.

As it stands, we made a few good though minor additions and exchanged a promising young pitcher for a promising young hitter. Changes were not made on a large scale, but I’m okay with that given the pieces in play and the fact that what was done this offseason does not prevent us from doing anything in the future. Whelmed it is.

JY - February 1, 2012 reply

I went with whelmed.

For pretty much the same reasons from everyone above. I don’t really see how we could have done a lot more with what was out there.

Aussie Mariner - February 1, 2012 reply

Whelmed.

Nothing really struck me as a real big ‘get really excited’ transaction, but there have been a number of solid moves made that I think will improve the team. If this years team can be relevant at the all-star break, I’ll call it a success.

Romanes eunt domus - February 1, 2012 via mobile reply

Meh

I like all of the players we got back in the trades but I feel like we gave up too much value. It’s going to be nice to have some offense though. And I like the Iwakuma signing, mostly because the cost is friendly.

The rest has been pretty unexciting. It understandable that it was unexciting though, I think it’s good for the club that we kinda stood pat as far as major signings go. Save that for next offseason.

That said, I would've really preferred we went out and got a third baseman somehow

And it sucks that we apparently cut payroll by a lot if that’s what the plan is, as Dave was saying below.

Car-los Gui-llen [clap clap clapclapclap]

msb - February 1, 2012 reply

At this point...underwhelmed.

I kind of agree with Dave’s USSM post (to a point) in that I think it’s possible to build for the future/let the kids play AND add a couple more pieces now to bring up the total in the win column by just a bit more. I think the Ackley/Smoak/Montero core is solid & will be fun to watch but honestly, Seager & (sigh) Figgins platooning 3rd doesn’t instill me with much confidence & if they’re trying fill out the rotation while Paxton/Hultzen marinate in AAA then I think we could have done a little better than Millwood/Iwakuma. We didn’t have to go after a Prince Fielder superstar type but I wouldn’t have been mad at another smaller sized move or 2, which may still be coming for all I know. I’m definitely still excited for the season but as far as off season moves go, I just can’t help but feel a tad underwhelmed.

Does mobile voting not work for anyone else?

Fearless Frog - February 1, 2012 via mobile reply

Mobile voting has never worked for me.

Even if I go to “Full Site”

sofa_king - February 1, 2012 via mobile reply

I am both whelmed and gruntled

Aly Edge - February 1, 2012 reply

Disappointed the Ms look to start the season with a significantly reduced payroll again

I know its dumb to sign players simply for the sake of spending money, but a solid pitcher or a real third baseman would sure have been nice and there are enough unwanted contracts out there that a creative GM like Zduriencik ought to have made something work.

Underwhelmed.

The Montero trade was very exciting (DINGERS!), and Iwakuma is intriguing, but every thing else this off season has been extremely underwhelming.

Mariner Melee - February 1, 2012 reply

Well thank God you didn't forget Munenori Kawasaki, Matthew

anyone care to venture some predictions on how he’ll do this year?

Because it is much like the Mariner's offseason and apropos of Matthew's cold:

“It used to be if you caught a cold you were stuck with it for a week tor so. Now you can take modern miracle drugs and be over it in just seven to ten days.” Mark Twain, 1895. Which is to say the more things change, the more they stay the same.

kimalanus - February 1, 2012 reply

I'm not sure I could have been underwhelmed.

Coming off of such an awful season, I didn’t expect we would make a big FA splash or anything of that ilk. The Montero trade was exciting, but it’s not like it was a huge win and now we’re going to win a bunch of games in 2012. Iwakuma on the cheap is nice, but nowhere near overwhelming.

Unfortunately, so far Z hasn’t been able to pull off a Cliff Lee or Gutierrez/Vargas trade redux.

lailaihei - February 1, 2012 reply

This was kind of a meh offseason as a whole.

There were not that many big free agents.

C.J. Wilson, Albert Pujols, Prince Fielder, Darvish, and I’m sure I missed a few, but many. Everyone of these players were very expensive and as the smart people have discussed would not have pushed the M’s over the edge.

I forgot to add

I really wish Z would’ve figure out a way to upgrade Third base.

Well, if the rumors are true, he attempted to trade Pineda for Brett Lawrie.

So there’s that.

Fearless Frog - February 1, 2012 via mobile reply

Key words: rumor and attempted.

I don’t blame Z for not getting it done. The Blue were likely asking for way too much.

I put whelmed, but I'm strangely optimistic.

It may be a small thing, but there are so many players on this team that I’m rooting for or that I like. Wells, Guti, Ackley, Ryan, Ichiro, Montero – I remember years past when I would actively dislike players on our roster and hate watching them pitch or bat. Now, even if a guy sucks, I have that irrational-love thing going on. If Smoak hits .240/.330/.400 for the entire season, I’ll tell anyone who will listen that he’s THIS close to breaking out.

So, irrationally lovable players = whelmed with upside.

McExpos - February 1, 2012 reply

Same.

I don’t think we’ll do well this season, but I do look forward to see us win ~75 games. Not being terrible is exciting!

katal - February 1, 2012 reply

Whelmed I guess.

I like the Pineda trade, but the apparent Payroll cut is bringing me down.

A positive outlook on the payroll

Is the M’s will have more money for next free agent market, which looks a lot better than this year’s.

Only if that is the way the cut actually works.

In 2008 the payroll was $117 million, the next year the team cut payroll by $20 million to $98 million. If what you are saying is true then payroll should have gone back up in 2010, it didn’t, and it has continued going down ever since.

Reduced budget effect on retained earnings

I keep hearing this discussion and no one points out the obvious. Last years loss ate into the retained earnings surplus by a significant amount (IIRC about $10M). By balancing the budget this season (and maybe saving another $5M all other things being equal), retained earnings will be there to finance payroll expansion, as opposed to being, you know, gone….

kimalanus - February 1, 2012 reply

I'm hoping they'll blow it all on IFAs (Soler?) before the new CBA rules take effect.

WhyGodWhy - February 1, 2012 reply

On the basis of the moves alone, ~whelmed.

I am very displeased that payroll has seemingly been cut by a not insignificant amount, so that pushes me firmly into underwhelmed territory.

Aaron Campeau - February 1, 2012 reply

Edwin Jackson is still a possibility

If we signed him to a one-year I’d be whelmed but I’m underwhelmed right now for the same reason you are.

Dewey N - February 1, 2012 reply

Yeah, same pretty much

Aaron Campeau - February 1, 2012 reply

Maybe he just doesn't want to play here

Otherwise it just makes too much sense to not do it

I had heard such rumors that teams had already offered him 3 years.

But who knows. It could still be plausible that he’d sign a one year deal and try to up his value.

Kenneth Arthur - February 1, 2012 reply

If they trade Vargas for prospects it certainly does

though I don’t know who would take on Vargas if Jackson is going for a one-year deal.

Right now the rotation is Felix-Vargas-Millwood-Iwakuma-Noesi with Beavan and Furbush as depth. Jackson certainly makes the rotation better, but does it make it better for 2013? I’m less sure. I’d still like them to make the move if they can, but I could see a reason why they wouldn’t

In my opinion, fuck Millwood

You could easily just have him “compete” for a spot in spring training then let him go since it’s a minor league deal. Which would open a spot for Jackson. Maybe that’s not what they signed him for but, man, I would so much rather have Jackson in there.

I have no problem with Millwood eating innings in a rebuilding year.

Millwood's just one person though, is my point.

It wouldn’t be the worst case for the Mariners to be having a rotation of Felix, Vargas, Millwood, Jackson, Iwakuma at the big league level come July while the Rainiers rotation is Paxton, Hultzen, Beavan, Furbush, Snow, Ramirez, but I can certainly see how the team might think adding another SP isn’t a huge need for them.

I can see your point, I just think beyond Felix, Paxton, and Hultzen there's a whole lot of probably expendable or unknown quantities by comparison

I’m okay with ditching Vargas. Who knows how Iwakuma will transition to MLB or how he’ll end up bouncing back from his injury. Noesi is a bullpen transition experiment. Beavan doesn’t appear to be very good. Jackson probably represents a decent upgrade over somebody in the 4 or 5 slot down the road.

I get that maybe that upgrade may not be enough to justify the cost if he’s demanding the moon but if the team has money to spend (which maybe they don’t) and there aren’t any hitters left on the market that can fill other needs….I’d say why not?

I agree.

And I mean if he's forced to take a one year deal, then you don't need to worry about making room

It makes less sense if it’s three years, sure, but Noesi and Iwakuma are kinda unknowns, there’s a decent chance somebody doesn’t work out.

I'm a little underwhelmed.

I like or am at least okay with all the moves they’ve made, but and the fact that a number of guys that seemed like they could have helped us went to other teams on reasonable deals makes me feel that the team could have done a lot better. Then again, maybe Jack Z’s hands were tied from the beginning with a major payroll slash, which would be disappointing in a different way. I almost get back to “whelmed” by the fact that we totally “missed out” on Price.

VivaAyala - February 1, 2012 reply

And by Price, I mean Prince.

Typing is hard if you’re dumb.

VivaAyala - February 1, 2012 reply

Whelmed, largely because Z has gone from crafty GM to simply decent GM

I no longer believe or assume he has a Cliff Lee level trade up his sleeve. He’s not made any more Figgins style blunders, though. I think he did as well as could be expected this winter with what was reasonably available. Call it going from “In Z We Trust” to “Yep, Z’s Still Here. Ok. Good.”

I’m anxious to see a full healthy season from the heart of this roster, and get a true look at the future of the M’s for the first time in years (a look unclouded by nostalgic holdovers or blue light specials). I’m not giddy for opening day, but I’m not frustrated or resigned as I was at the start of last season.

Chris_FB - February 1, 2012 via mobile reply

The Cliff Lee and J.J. Putz trades were highway robbery

if Jack Z pulled one of those off every year, teams would probably stop trading with him

Not such substantial highway robbery as to prevent Cashman from trading with him

But yes, true, he could only do so much, I suppose.

Figgins signing was fine at the time.

There was no indication that he was going to go cliff diving and as such it is irresponsible to blame Zduriencik entirely.

abender20 - February 1, 2012 via mobile reply

And quite frankly, $36M really isn't that awful

I wonder who the M's will be willing to risk 4 years / $36M on next.

Dustin Ackley

Free agents, I mean. I'm sure they will be investing well in extensions to some of the in-house youngsters.

I didn't say I blame Zduriencik entirely.

I liked the Figgins signing at the time too, since I thought we were going to in-his-Angels-prime Figgins.

That was one of the few GMZ move I never really liked,

in part, I’m sure, because of my prejudice against the Angels. Everyone else seemed to like it, so I had started to talk myself into it when the ’10 season started but Figgins was never that consistent at the plate, he was on the wrong side of thirty. . .but even I never would have thought he nosedive so quickly and so massively. Plus, it is not a crippling contract.

quacker27 - February 1, 2012 reply

I know that you/LL isn't responsible for #6org,

but I think this speaks to the core issue that people were upset with at the time – that there was far too much love being given to Jack Z before he had really earned it, but it was hard for any criticism or ‘tap the brakes’ argument to stick because of the people who were making the arguments.

That's bullshit.

He had earned it. It just turned out to be the highest point for him so far. Reasonable people can disagree with the ranking but the whole #6org response was because people are petulant fucks who cannot stand to think that they and anything they are associated with is inferior in any possible way to anything else.

Woah.

This seems like an overly aggressive response.

Not too aggressive a response, if you've seen how "#6org" is wielded as a vuvuzela on Fangraphs sometimes.

#6org meme was the absolute stupidest thing in internet baseball history.

I hope everyone who used it seriously loses internet privileges for their life

You seem mad.

I think it’s fairly clear that I’m trying to have a reasoned discussion about the merits of placing high levels of confidence in people/players based on limited data.

It was never intended as a regressed org ranking. They were snapshots.

So limited data isn’t much of an issue. Furthermore, it bugs me to no end how much shit Dave Cameron, and Cameron alone, got for that when, as has been mentioned a quadrillion times, it wasn’t solely his ranking. He did the write-ups, but the rankings were an entire FanGraphs staff effort.

At that time, Zduriencik had made killer moves, hired a staff with a tremendous background and brought in Tom Tango as a stats consultant. The Mariners had a history of high payroll commitment and as many financial resources as any team in their division, which didn’t have a super power.

I agree they should have been lower. I ranked them lower. But they were certainly worthy of something in the bottom half of top 10 based on the information available to the people ranking them at the time.

Ok, let's start where we agree,

I agree that it’s surprising that the Mariners aren’t spending more and I expect that to go back up as they become more competitive. I don’t think the Mariners should expect to have a team payroll amongst the top 5 teams (which creates a problem for the #6 ranking), but they have enough money to compete.

I agree that Zduriencik had made really good moves and I am also a big fan of Tango. The issue that I [and many other reasonable, people who were not foaming at the mouth] were trying to say is that the ranking of him and his front office was too high given the limited data that we had. Other teams have brought in people considered to be very bright in the realm of advanced baseball analysis (Red Sox with Epstein and Bill James) or had front offices who were known to be familiar with and generally act in accordance with that thought (Texas, Tampa, etc).

It’s not that I’m saying Zduriencik is a bad GM, or even that he wasn’t a good GM. It’s that we already had a long track record for the people who were ‘at the top’ and it would be hard for anybody to be able to overcome that in such a short time.

Regarding Dave Cameron, I know that I and many others were very, very critical of the way that he handled the response to that. Advanced baseball analysis borders on an academic pursuit at times and in a sharp contradiction to how Tango runs his site, Dave Cameron came across as petulant, hot headed, and arrogant. I’m sure he caught a lot more heat than he deserved, but he also handled it rather poorly from the start.

I acknowledge that argument, but don't agree with it for reasons I already stated.

One part is that we (the people ranking) had more information than the general public did/does. The other part is that the limited track record of the GM was simply not germane to the ranking. And if that’s your main concern, then I can’t see much of a gulf in disagreement. Honestly looking back, where would you have ranked them?

There are reasonable people who argued that they should have been something like 10th. I have no beef with those people. Those people did not then go around to every Mariners post on FanGraphs regardless of author, every Dave Cameron post regardless of topic and quite a few posts here and post LOLOLOL #6org!! LOL

So, my apologies that the topic touches such a nerve.

And your compatriots from LSB are providing a supreme example of how to be little twerps

Sorry,

it’s something resembling our specialty, though we usually try to keep it over there.

And just for you, LSB

I wasn’t calling your entire blog twerps. Just knockoutking and Bface for coming over here and posting as they did. And they haven’t been banned despite some of you, and the rest of SBN’s, assumption that I/we ban people immediately for stepping on one of our (blog agreed to) rules when they first join.

I joined in 2009.

I have read since then on and off, making less than 5 posts.

I did come and post a gif, that was my fault for not reading the rest of the subthread.

I get that you are a Mod for LL. No reason for you to be difficult with people, just because you can.

I'm not difficult with people just because I can be.

You won’t believe me, but I don’t get a rush of power from moderating a blog. I’d really rather not be doing it.

You truly believe you are not difficult with people on here?

I didn't say that.

I am asking you in general.

Do you think you are not difficult with people on here, both LL’ers and people from other SBN blogs?

I know I'm difficult with them.

The internet, in general, is a shitshow of anonymous-driven base emotional comments. I don’t want LL to be like the comments threads on MLB.com, or ESPN.com for example.

Neither does Jeff. Neither does most of the people who stick around here. We want different, what we think is better and more enjoyable and unfortunately that’s not possible without holding people to a higher standard and generally that means being strict to start with.

Ok then

I know you're asking him and not me, but

I think he works hard to enforce rules. Sometimes it comes off harsh, but the people who read LL regularly want the rules enforced.

Meme’s and crap like the Opera .gif are disgusting and take away from what we are here discuss. You’ve gone far enough off topic as it is, now either contribute or go and enjoy Beltre like I wish I could.

Look

I already apologized.

disgusting? your call. not like I posted a goatse pic.

Clearly, the rules at LL are enforced. I am sure had I continued to post gif’s and pictures and type in non-caps I would get banned.

Further addendum,

What I ask is for mutual respect on the blogs. LL and LSB handle their communities differently. We don’t seek to impose our way on anyone else. Let’s go Tribe wants to make fun of us for using subject lines? Viva El Birdoes wants to assume that a single misspelled comment here will get you banned? Whatever. I don’t care. It just makes them look petty and stupid to me. But we ask that our way be respected on our site.

Though I don’t like the way LSB flows, what I don’t do is link to cherry-picked comment threads and use it as a way to paint Adam Morris as a wimp or kowtow because of how much he lets slide by. I don’t bring up here what you say over at LSB. And for the most part I try to stop anyone here from doing the same. We’ve long held a policy that trolling on any other blogs will get you banned here.

And I find it annoying what does get said at LSB. When a couple things here make their way to LSB and often get taken out of context because frankly you can’t know the context unless you’re here at LL all the time. You see me snap at some poster for something seemingly innocuous, but you didn’t see the 1,000 previous comments that poster made that were intentionally straddling the line and provoking others for instance.

It’s rarely, if ever, “why they do it that way,” but rather “oh, he must be so-and-so type of person.” That’s unfair and makes me think far less of your community that you partake in it so.

What do you not like about the way LSB flows?

BTWooWoo - February 1, 2012 reply

xx

It’s rarely, if ever, "why they do it that way," but rather "oh, he must be so-and-so type of person." That’s unfair and makes me think far less of your community that you partake in it so.

Welcome to the internet.

Where people will continue meme’s that have run their course. where people will hate you for nothing other than the fact you run a Mariners blog. Where people will unfairly judge you based on one or two comments they have seen linked before. Where things are taken out of context almost all of the time. Where sarcasm does not always come across as sarcasm.

knockoutking - February 2, 2012 reply

So we should accept that rather than trying to build a place that doesn't tolerate it?

Sorry, that’s a bunch of crap.

Aaron Campeau - February 2, 2012 reply

And Welcome to Lookout Landing

Where most of this crap isn’t tolerated, thankfully.

ThundaPC - February 2, 2012 reply

Speaking as one who loves lurking at Lookout Landing but is less excited about participating...

I think a bit more work could be done to be welcoming while still strictly enforcing the community’s standards. It’s commendable and entirely justified to create and enforce a set of standards designed to create a dynamic here that is in many ways preferable to what can be found in pretty much any other blog.

At the same time, however, it’s important to recognize how different LL is from what people are accustomed to encountering in the sports blog world (or the blog world in general, for that matter). Given the freewheeling nature of most of the internet, it takes a bit of getting used to for newcomers to understand that they need to learn about the agreed-upon standards for commenting and posting here and observe how things are done for a bit before they jump in and start expressing themselves. Just as they should respect the way this community works, the community ought to respect the difficulty of that transition.

One idea to facilitate that process would be a sort of canned response to inappropriate comments from newcomers. Something like:

“Welcome to Lookout Landing! At this blog, we strive to create a community that fosters high-quality discussion of Mariners baseball and other topics. The group of regular posters here has agreed on a set of standards that we expect to be followed if you want to participate in the discussion. You can read about these standards here: [link]. Unfortunately, this post does not abide by those standards, but we’re confident you can pick them up and start participating in no time!”

I don’t know if this approach has already been tried, but I think it might be easier to not have to deal with these annoyances personally each and every time. If someone reacts to the initial response negatively, you could have a canned follow-up like:

“We’re sorry you don’t find the community here to your liking. We’re sure that if you stick around and observe how our standards work in practice, you’ll come to appreciate them as much as we do, but if you’d rather go elsewhere, we completely understand! Lookout Landing’s not for everyone, after all!”

Sorry for the huge block of text, but what do people think?

I think it sounds patronizing, frankly.

And I’d imagine a lot of people would take it in such a way.

Aaron Campeau - February 2, 2012 reply

Fair enough

But I think patronizing is preferable to confrontational.

And also, we have this conversation every year

LL has never been unwelcoming to people who are willing to follow the rules, and we’ve never been shy about politely asking people to do so.

This is a pretty critical point.

We get looked on as unwelcoming to some sets, probably because they see us get into it with a few select people and think that we’re isolationist and cliquey. That’s not really the case. Sometimes it’s more obviously not the case when we run into those delightful cases of “this is how I always talk on the internet and screw you for not liking it.” That’s about the worst people can get about community standards. But when it gets into that murky “less is more”/“don’t be a punctuation mark” territory, that’s riddled with nuance and is pretty hard for people to get a handle on.

JY - February 2, 2012 reply

The fundamental issue, to me, is that the people who act out and buck against the rules

are usually the ones who get confrontational in the first place. Nadingo’s general idea is a good one, it’s just that the audience in question is much less likely to be receptive to rationality. That’s no revelation. Patronizing is probably okay when the canned response shows the right intent.

Let's just close the comments here and move to Neo LL

That's kind of what I was trying to get at (clumsily)

People who aren’t receptive to rationality don’t deserve anything more than a canned response and a ban if they react rudely. People who respond with good intent can then be interacted with. My thought was that canned responses might reduce the fatigue of having to actually interact with people who have no interest in learning anything about the community.

And by reducing the fatigue, reduce the immediate hostility directed from the regulars toward them.

You know, until they warrant it within a few minutes anyway.

Exactly.

GasolineSnuggie - February 5, 2012 reply

I don't know why you'd find it acceptable to act that way

Matthew - February 2, 2012 reply

I'm just sayin'

Most arguments are really about context.

It was too easy to pass up.

I can’t be a Jack Wilson and take myself out.

Bface - February 1, 2012 reply

No worries, it was just surprising.

I would have had them lower based on present talent and talent in the farm system. I felt similarly about the Mariners front office at the time as I did about the Indians with Antonetti lurking in the wings, though I would have rated the Mariners front office higher.

If I may pry, what was the nature of this other information? I remember it referenced at the time and I was critical because it lent itself to bias.

Quite a bit of contact with multiple members of Mariners front office, past and present.

So, for one example, we had knowledge of just how much (heavily) they were amping up the saber-route in terms of player analysis and that Jack Z was well known for his scouting prowess with Milwaukee. It’s one-sided of course, but that didn’t make it untrue.

See, that's what I had assumed it was.

And I’d probably rather have Tango than anyone else right now.

But don’t you see how this opens it up to bias? How do you know if this is (significantly) better than what the Red Sox or Rays or Rangers or Athletics are doing? I know the Red Sox have a decent sized stat department and their own set of stats; the Rays use some blend of scouting and advanced analysis (that goes beyond stats), how could you know that the Mariners were doing it better than everybody else?

Well, for one, they weren't ranked above Boston, Texas or Tampa.

Secondly, I freely acknowledged it was biased and one-sided. But I didn’t say that made them better than other teams, just that we knew more and therefore their rank went up.

That’s consistent with the entire exercise, we graded on the information we knew. From the machinations of the front offices (it wasn’t just with the Ms where we were granted some inside knowledge), to the track record of the GM to date, to the players on roster, to the financials spent in the past. We went with what we knew. We couldn’t have gathered the exact same info for every organization.

No, they weren't,

but one of my complaints at the time was that in order for the Mariners to be ranked that highly given the relative weaknesses in major league talent and let’s say average spending and minor league talent was that the front office component would have to rate the Mariners as the very best to compensate for no other aspect being in the top 10. Dave tried to address that the next year when writing about the weights applied, but it still hard for me to see how the Mariners rated #1 in the front office or how they rated in the top 10 in other categories.

I’m sure you are tired of defending it by now, so if you’ll just address this, I’ll leave it alone. Thanks in advance.

I'm not tired of it.

I’m tired of dealing with some of the other people who seem bent on creating a self-fulfilling prophecy on how they’ll be treated here (Man, LL is so nazi, they hate it when peope do X, watch me go over there and do X and I bet they ban me!!)

I’m happy to have a back-and-forth on it or anything if it stays away from that however.

To your comment, I can’t say for certainty the rankings within each category. It was almost two years ago. But I think the consensus at the time was that Mariners weren’t weak in Major League talent. For example, here’s CAIRO in February projecting the Mariners to have the best record in the AL West.. They were, I think, roughly average compared to the entire MLB, but divisional strength was a factor. The Mariners had a good chance to make the playoffs due to the perceived weakness and only 4-team AL West and once in the playoffs had a roster that would seem well built for short series.

If you look at the CAIRO playoff percentages, the Mariners are somewhere in the 5-10th highest range.

Furthermore, the young talent on the team was considered the driving force of the Major League roster. Minor League wasn’t a ranking, young talent was. So players like Felix and (erroneously as it turns out) Jose Lopez and Rowland-Smith made them seem more like a team ready to compete for the next few years, not just one.

So, what I think is that the ranks were roughly 10th in Major League talent, average in young talent and 5-10th in management/ownership.

Ah,

that’s a great explanation. I guess I was just less confident in some of those young players than y’all were and/or that I had a right to be. I still disagree with it, but I at least understand some of the thought behind it now. Thanks.

And we should have been less confident as well.

Because again, reasonable disagreement is not the problem, and never was the problem. But #6org morphed into something that was not reasonable. I can’t think of a TX-equivalent off hand. Maybe if every time anyone tried to talk about politics in Texas you were inundated with Kennedy assassination comments.

xx

~~But #6org morphed into something that was not reasonable.~~

It morphed into a meme. It happens all the time on the internet. As with almost all meme’s, if you let them run their course they go away.

When you handle it the way you have in the past (not you specifically, Dave, M’s people, etc) it is no wonder it continues to live years past the time it actually happened.

xx

But #6org morphed into something that was not reasonable.

I think there's plenty of evidence to show that people are terrible at determining when a meme has run it's course

I agree

you are still going to get a random “#6org lol m’s” comment from time to time

but it will die, eventually…

Jose Lopez was soooooo good :(

I wish there was a flag for lying.

I don't require a response but I'll just leave this out there.

You have to be able to take a joke on the internet. There were a lot of respected people that made fun of Dave – people that at the very least you would have had respect for prior to the ranking. Even if Dave hit on the Mariners being a dynasty but still missed on RRS (for instance), someone would have made fun of him for that. And I don’t think that alone evinces mean intentions; the internet just seems like a great forum to take witty shots at people.

I think what really separated the millions of prognostications that are wrong is the appearance of bias and what appeared to be Dave not taking the joke very well. And regardless of the first, I think it could have been diffused by the second.

And I only bring that up because a lot of the time, it appears that you can’t take a joke very well on this board. But you obviously don’t have to change your behavior for me or anybody else. I don’t think I’d change my behavior for a Mariners fan.

I don't think you realize how much of a pain it is to moderate the comments on LL

Jeff/Matthew having a short leash when it comes to crap is probably good thing. It doesn’t mean you were necessarily trolling, but posting annoying things when you have no prior reputation on the site is going to get you on the potential troll watch list pretty quick

Oddly enough, I joined LL before you.

But my reputation doesn’t precede me.

I’ve been thinking on and off for the last 20 minutes how to wrap this in a pithy but non-confrontational comment and I just can’t without it appearing too hostile. So I’ll just say it: don’t use adjectives in the place of adverbs.

There's a difference between a joke and a taunt.

Any many (not all, I never said all) turned into taunts. And for a while, we did just ignore them. But eventually we got tired of it.

And I suspect that people who form opinions about LL don’t regularly read it but instead are only linked here when there’s a hissy fit.

Why do you really care that much if people are taunting you on the internet?

if you feel solid about your decision why do you even respond to those people other than to say, once, the reasoning behind your decisions?

Your assuming I/we didn't state the reasonsing.

I/we did. Many times. Unfortunately, that doesn’t magically stop people who just want to taunt/troll. And I don’t really care what they do, so long as they don’t do it here.

Fair enough

Ill shut up about the topic now.

Additionally,

I thought I was clear in referencing only those that weren’t joking when I wrote:

I hope everyone who used [the #6org meme] seriously

To me, seriously meant as a serious insult. Not as in a joke. I still stand by that the majority of users were not joking.

Sure

I mean, I didn’t pay attention to fangraphs or LL enough to know but I can see that there were probably people out there who weren’t offering anything of substance or just poking fun at someone they still respected – they just wanted to be dicks.

I still think the best thing is to ignore the idiots but still acknowledge the people that are joking. Lots of people were joking about it. And even if he was married to the process, you acknowledge that the ranking looks bad compared to the results. Being defensive or fighting back doesn’t seem to diffuse any problem.

But I also know how satisfying it can be.

So if you freely acknowledge that a list is biased and one-sided

What is the value of said list?

Again, not being a “troll” or messing with you — just asking what is in my opinion a valid question.

The entire list wasn't biased and one-sided.

To repeat from above

That’s consistent with the entire exercise, we graded on the information we knew. From the machinations of the front offices (it wasn’t just with the Ms where we were granted some inside knowledge), to the track record of the GM to date, to the players on roster, to the financials spent in the past. We went with what we knew. We couldn’t have gathered the exact same info for every organization.

It wasn’t a complete picture. I think a complete picture would be impossible and about just as useless since things change so fast. The list was the best attempt to gauge where each team was at the time and for the next couple years based on the information that we had at or disposal. That’s all.

Then you're in the vast minority.

98% of people did not want a reasoned discussion. They wanted to troll

I don't read the comments there that often

but it seems like anytime he writes ANYTHING about the Mariners he gets trolled

d0nkey - February 1, 2012 reply

Not just the Mariners

He gets trolled every single time he writes about anything. People really hate that guy.

I realize that part of the kerfuffle might be because my response came across as a direct accusation of you.

That wasn’t what I meant and I’m sorry it reads that way.

My intention was constrained only to the obvious 6org trolls. I think it’s incorrect to state that too much faith too quickly in Jack Z was the core issue for most people. It was a legitimate issue for some people, I hope I’ve clarified below why I still think it’s overblown, but the “bullshit” I was referring to was the impression that most people were making rational objections in the first place. I found most of them to be deaf to debate.

#6org meme was basically:

“Hey, here’s a team that’s sucked for awhile and now actually has some hope going into this season. OH LOOK, they crashed and burned, THAT’S HILARIOUS. Let’s mock what hope they had by ironically pointing out one of the more extreme examples of hype that media figures gave them.”

When you actually have excitement for your team and then they absolutely fail that’s going to leave a sore spot. Don’t be surprised when people get angry when you come in and poke at that sore spot.

ChristopherA - February 1, 2012 reply

Unfortunately

Since the Twins collapsed after fangraphs ranked them #6 last year, I’m afraid there may now be a #6org curse.

Nadingo - February 1, 2012 reply

They were 5 the year before that!

Z seems to rarely have massive fuck ups, and that already puts him above a good number of GMs.

The fact that he seems to have a good eye for talent and a decent ability in trades is just bonus.

We have way more talent in the organization than we did when he started.

That’s all you can really ask for from a GM. The fact that we’ve sucked the last couple of years is a combination of bad luck and the fact that we started so low.

Exactly. Our farm system is actually legitimate at this point, even with some guys "graduating" to the big club.

Our farm system is farm beyond legitimate.

Over the course of a few years it went from consistently being ranked as a Bottom 5 farm system to a Top 5. Maybe it’s because I haven’t followed minor league ball for long, but that’s just insane to me.

Where has it been ranked as a Top 5 system

if you don’t mind me asking? I know it’s deep with pitchers, but now that Ackley has graduated and Franklin has a few more questions, does it have the position player depth to compete with the Blue Jays, etc?

MLB.com and Sickels are two I believe

Ah, ok.

I know that Sickels is improving, but let’s just say I don’t yet think of him on the same level as some of the other sources.

Nobody else has come out with rankings I believe

BA came out with rankings

I've seen individual team rankings

but not organizational ones, which I think they list here when they’re out. I’d love to see them though

I think we are talking about the same thing

and I believe they were in the BA Prospect Handbook that’s already gone out. I didn’t buy it but someone on LSB did and posted that the Nationals were #1 and the Rangers were #2 (and nothing else).

That ranking was done before the Gio Gonzalez trade.

Right,

which is why the Nats are so high. I guess we also know that the A’s were ranked 26th pre-trade.

Yeah, I haven't seen those and their rankings haven't been posted here. Only the team's top 10

Project Prospect had us #1

They’re not BA or BP but hey

Top heavy

and Montero still having prospect status helps significantly

Ah, forgot that part.

Feels like double counting to say that the big league team has improved and then still use Montero as a sign that the farm system is improved.

True, but it really is true in this case

Montero is very much a prospect, yet also very likely to help the big club this season.

We also have a lot of high risk/high upside depth in the minors from our Latin American signees

And we'll be adding another top pick in the next draft.

I see.

I didn’t know if there were perhaps some guys who were now being thought of as Top 100 guys that perhaps I had missed. Thanks.

Nah, more like guys who are Top 100 watch guys if they have good seasons

so 16-18 year old international guys. The pitchers outside the Big Three are mostly lower upside guys

Yeah, that was my impression.

By the way, I’m still mad that y’all were able to sign Guillermo Pimentel.

Wouldn't have been fair to let him go to Texas

would have hit .150/.155/.600 every year

The Rangers park adjustment obviously is too low,

we needed somebody to completely throw off the scale.

Or just play with Little League fences and see how many dingers Josh Hamilton could hit

A month+ of 100 degree days and a short porch,

what more can we do?

Needs some extreme wind conditions, if you've got any pull with Mother Nature

We need to further amplify the jetstream?

I guess American Airlines is headquartered relatively close by…I’ll see what I can do.

As compensation, mayhaps you can keep Montero and his bat of doom away from our park, hmmm?

Where's the fun in it for Mariners fans if we don't get to have a few dingers too?

You're a greedy bear...

Maybe I could interest you in some barbecue and a local brew instead?

Are there good breweries in the DFW area?

it’s very high on my visit list

Deep Ellum Brewing Company

visit this one

We're getting there.

A semi-regular as LSB has just started one up with his friends and while I haven’t had any of their official beer yet, I’ve had some of his homebrew stuff and it was excellent.

It is called Deep Ellum Brewing Co [Deep Ellum is an area east of downtown Dallas that used to be a big club/concert/bar area but has petered out somewhat since then].

The other in D/FW is in Fort Worth and is called Rahr. It’s not amazing beer, especially in comparison to what’s available in the Northwest, but it’s pretty solid. If you were to try one, I’d recommend this: Rahr Bourbon Barrel Aged Winter Warmer.

Houston also has a decent brewer now in St. Arnold’s, with the Elissa IPA being the the more favored, especially if you can find one it at a place that serves Cask Elissa IPA.

Other than, there’s…Shiner.

I live in San Diego anyway, so the bar is even higher than Seattle area

What I wouldn't give

to be able to get Self Righteous Ale on tap. Le sigh.

It’s no coincidence that virtually all of the places I’m considering for residency have a good brewery profile (West Coast, Colorado, NE). What else is in San Diego outside of Stone?

Heh... my local bar has SSR on perma tap and I don't even order it anymore because I'm bored of it

Stone’s probably our fifth or sixth best brewery – we have Lost Abbey, Port Brewing (all four), Ballast Point (winner of GABF brewer of the year), Green Flash and Alesmith as the big ones.

There’s also about twenty or thirty smaller breweries that have some pretty neat stuff but aren’t real big distributors as of yet.

That sounds fantastic.

I’ve heard of Lost Abbey, but not the others. It’s the smaller brewers that interest me. My favorite part about trips to Quebec and Europe are how easy it is to find new and interesting beers. Sure, they aren’t all hits or the most amazing beers in the world, but I’m always left daydreaming about how great it would be to live in a place where you had access to so many different, local types of beers on tap.

I used to live there

What is your local bar/hood?

BTWooWoo - February 1, 2012 reply

Pacific Beach, so Tap Room

I lived off Ingraham

Been there many times.

BTWooWoo - February 1, 2012 reply

did my DEBC post work above? (the link?)

Others have answered your question

There’s also an excellent FanPost tarheels24 did on our farm system.

Although, as mentioned recently in LL, the number of bad GMs in the game seems to be going down.

HIt's hard to judge Zduriencik overall because he has so far been working under extraordinary constraints

a terrible farm system, a last place roster, and tens of millions of dollars in sunk contracts. His one big FA signing – Figgins – has been an unmitigated disaster. its hard to really fault him for it since absolutely no one saw the collapse coming, but he did have a chance to trade him away, apparently.

The things we can judge, I think, are his drafts and ability to work trades. In these he has absolutely excelled.

I still really hate the Fister trade.

BigR - February 1, 2012 reply

I think market this offseason was lame.

And Jack Z. made the most of it. He should not loose point because the market sucked. I think you’ve been reading too much Baker.

I sure don't enjoy reading Geoff Baker.

I can get mad thinking that the M’s have to endure such doucheyness from one of the cities biggest newspapers. It’s like a blight on the team.

But then LL and USS Mariner – so I guess it’s kind of OK in a cosmic sense.

*city's

His article from this morning was a special blend of awful.

Baker is just the worst.

In any other journalism field, his style of yellow journalism and shit stirring would be rejected as ridiculous (and ironically, he rips on bloggers despite some of them having, you know, standards and research based arguments and all).

At least he doesn't mod his commentors if they disagree with him

Lately I've been thinking, if the Seattle Times were smart...

They would fire Geoff Baker and try to hire Jeff Sullivan.

Perhaps Seattle is vastly different from Dallas in this regard,

but I have a feeling that the readers at large wouldn’t appreciate Jeff.

No Seattle is not different in that regard

one thing blogging in general and SBN 2.0 in particular allows is a more direct interaction between readers and writers and readers and readers. There are many here who were once ‘readers at large’ but have changed after interacting with the mods and regulars.

This is a terrible idea

Jeff would be so restricted if he had to write for a mainstream media outlet

You are probably right.

They could fire GB and be set. Larry Stone does all the good work already.

Divish.

He’d happily do the beat reporting, which Stone would not care to do.

msb - February 1, 2012 reply

Honestly, Baker doesn't bother me that much.

Not that I actually like his stuff but on some level I feel like (sadly) he reflects the same opinions many of the Mariner’s (more casual) fanbase already has. I think Baker gets pinned with this blame for the “No Fielder?! The door to my fandom has been shut!!!1” types but honestly, I think they’d be there with or without his column. You could argue that he makes it worse but frankly, if he has those opinions others do too. I just lump him into the same pile of baseball writers that I don’t particularly agree with or enjoy reading but I don’t carry this giant hate parade in his honor every time he posts something.

You're right, those types of fans will and do show up everywhere.

The problem is that Baker’s articles facilitate and encourage that type of fan behavior. For the lack of a better term, it’s just one big circlejerk where detailed analysis and reason is frowned upon. I don’t expect LL or USSM levels of analysis from a more mainstream media, but there is a comfortable middle ground that could be achieved that Baker doesn’t even come close to reaching.

I’m not entirely sure what my point here is, I feel like that if I keep typing it’s just going to turn into a long, incomprehensible rant devoid of meaning. Maybe that I wish the casual fan had access to somewhat competent analysis instead of the particular brand of awful that Baker provides. Let’s go with that.

I think Baker hurts the franchise.

He writes things like “The M’s are not planning to contend until 2015”. To me, this type of story seems almost designed to erode the patience of the fanbase during what is only year three in Z’s rebuild. Perhaps it even keeps away some casual fans who maybe would have taken the family to see a game or two, but decide to skip it this year, since the M’s “are so far away” from contention. Lost fans equals lost revenue for the organization, which I fear could lead to lower payrolls. Not to over exaggerate his influence, but the guy is prolific and relentless.

If I find out that Geoff Baker is shooting Stellar sea lions

I will be even more upset.

Easley - February 2, 2012 reply

Also

Here is the M’s 2011 opening day line up Vs. what could be the 2012 opening day line up. (The 2012 list is based on position not batting order)

RF Ichiro Vs. Ichiro
3B Figgins Vs. Figgins/Seager
LF Bradley Vs. Carp/Wells
DH Cust Vs. Carp/ Montero
1B Smoak Vs. Smoak
C Olivo Vs. Montero/Jaso
CF Langerhans Vs. Gutierrez
SS Ryan Vs. Ryan
2B Wilson Vs. Ackley

The lineup certainly looks better.

That being said, things don’t look quite as nice when you factor in the starting rotation too.

I agree.

I hate batting order talk, but

for fucks sake Cust was the number four hitter and Bradley was the number three hitter.

Adam Kennedy!

It will be nice to have a LF who doesn't wear ear plugs this year.

Even for the home games.

M'sfan - February 1, 2012 reply

Who cares about ear plugs.

It’ll be nice to have some in Left field who can hit better.

I agree with you.

Was just making a point that of how ridiculous it was

M'sfan - February 1, 2012 reply

So happy Bradley is gone!

Poochie - February 1, 2012 reply

He was so much fun :(

Disagree!

Poochie - February 1, 2012 reply

He was fun before it became apparent he both sucked and was not fun anymore

Yeah.

I wish he could have gotten his shit together.

GasolineSnuggie - February 5, 2012 reply

Me too!

Aaron Campeau - February 1, 2012 reply

Couldn't quite make it up to "whelmed"

I’m happy with the Montero deal. I like Iwakuma, and his contract terms are great. But the team failed to significantly increase the overall talent level during the offseason. If the team is better this season it will primarily be due to improvement by young players. And that was the case before the offseason began.

short - February 1, 2012 reply

Agreed

Stating the obvious to play to my emotions, are you?

His name hasn't come up much here...

… but would signing Jose Reyes have moved anyone to “overwhelmed”? Of the big free agents, he’s the one who filled a position of Mariner need the most (unless you think Franklin sticks at short and will arrive soon).

Short Stop is hardly

the position the M’s needed most. Without digging through defensive numbers I like Ryan better than Reyes.

Ryan v. Reyes?

Ryan’s about 2 Fangraphs WAR; Reyes more like 4-6 WAR.

I was going by defense a lone. Reyes is clearly the better offensive player.

Ryan was 2.6 WAR, Reyes 6.2 in a similar number of games

the Mariners don’t necessarily have a ton of money to spend and Reyes has never been a model of health. I’m happier with Ryan than I would have been with Reyes at what Reyes cost

Reyes is awesome but carries a lot of risk.

We already know he’s injury prone, and he may not have been as good in the American League.

Fearless Frog - February 1, 2012 via mobile reply

Plus the Marlins landed first with a big offer

I’m not sure he was signable at all. And I tend to think that the M’s wouldn’t have reached for any Free Agent this year. But if they were, he made more sense to me at around $100m than Fielder did at $200m.

Certainly.

Although I think Reyes might be a more substantial risk than Fielder. With Fielder you’re looking at someone who should continue his peak production for a couple more seasons but then might rapidly decline. Whereas with Reyes, you’re gambling on a lot of injury concerns. A declining Fielder might have been more desirable than a perenially hurt Reyes, and that’s ignoring if he’d continue his excellence when he’s healthy.

Fearless Frog - February 1, 2012 via mobile reply

Brendan. Ryan.

Brendan? Ryan?

Isn’t he the placeholder for Franklin? 2 WAR at SS isn’t anything to sneeze at, but you might consider an upgrade, with Ryan as the IF utility guy.

Ryan is cheap and fun to have around

Nick Franklin is far from a sure thing, as good of a prospect as he is

Cheap and fun to have around...

… has its charms, I agree!

Underwhelmed.

As outlined here by D.Cameron, I am a little underwhelmed. Personally, I would have liked the 3B position to be addressed or another quality starter added.

Dave makes some good points but I wonder how much payroll room there is

Poochie - February 1, 2012 reply

Thats the real question here.

If payroll was cut on ownership’s orders, or if the front office didn’t like anyone else at the price they would cost, or if the front office was holding back early to see how Fielder played out and wound up missing out on the other guys they liked.

He does make some good points, but I don't know why payroll room matters so much

Either the cheap filler sorts of trades / free agents were gotten to more quickly by others, or the biggest free agents required crazypants Monopoly money spending. I don’t know who the Mariners were supposed to get for LF, 3b, or SP with a $95m – $100m payroll. It seems more about who was available in the first place rather than willingness to spend a reasonable amount.

3B addressed by whom? What quality starter?

I read a lot of wishes, but very few specifics, which makes me wary that people are doing fair counterfactuals

I personally didn't throw out any specific names to avoid rosterbation territory.

But 3B? Casey McGehee, Jerry Hairston. Quality starter? Kuroda, Edwin Jackson, Oswalt.

I'll take giving one of Seager/Liddi/Catricala a long look at 3B over the course of the season instead of giving McGehee or Hairston the starting job.

What we’re really lacking is an alright backup at 3B in case all of the kids tank horribly. As for the starters, I agree with you. Either Oswalt or Jackson would be great, provided they come at the right price.

While I can see give Seager a shot...

I don’t know about Liddi or Cat. Cat isn’t going to stick at 3B, and Liddi’s contact rates suggest he might not do too well.

*giving

I like Seager ok but having him slotted in there as our opening day starting 3B is less than ideal to me.

I’d personally prefer to see Seager in the super utility role that (apparently) Figgins is filling and seeing somebody else in the full-time 3B slot. Seager could still get his ABs by filling in at 3B, SS and 2B.

I can't see Seager playing SS with any regularity

plus, he’s young enough that I want to see him get regular at bats and see what we have. There’s the very real possibility that his plate discipline and hit tool can make him an Ackley-lite player, and I’m all for this.

ed’s note: I may be pretty high on Seager

He started 8/55 games at SS last year

17% of his innings were at SS. Maybe he won’t see it with any regularity, maybe he won’t.

I like his hit tool though. With some better power and discipline he could turn into a Pedroia-lite.

I reallly like Seager's gap power.

I’m excited to see if his decreased K% at the end of the year is for real or not. He could be decent or better if that’s the case.

I've seen some mention of Mark Reynolds being a hypothetical trade target this offseason in order to provide a little bit of stability at 3B.

Nothing official of course, although Dave has mentioned it a few times over at USSM. I wouldn’t mind that if it were to happen though.

Sorry if that’s a little bit rosterbaty.

I understand the limitations.

I didn’t say their offseason was terrible or awful, and like many said before I do not know the circumstances (if Jack Z was working on some sort of limitations or not). Underwhelming is a little different than disappointing, or maybe this is just an argument of semantics.

I'm a little underwhelmed but I am completely bored out of my mind.

Even when Bavasi was signing Jarrod Washburn and trading for Erik Bedard, at least we had something to talk about. The only thing we talked about for the most part was how we might or might not sign Prince Fielder. The recent trade helps a little but its been so boring. Good job to Jeff and Matthew. I have been entertained by the posts all season but the M’s didn’t give you much to work with.

Edgar for Pres - February 1, 2012 reply

You don't seriously prefer having awful moves to talk about do you?

abender20 - February 1, 2012 via mobile reply

Maybe...

I…I just miss baseball!

Omerta - February 1, 2012 reply

It honestly is kinda interesting when the team repeatedly trolls us

That rope is only so long

No I'm happy that our team will be better next year than it was last year. Its just been surprisingly boring.

Edgar for Pres - February 1, 2012 reply

I forgot that Brendan is another link in the Putz trade.

Which also connects him to the Randy Johnson trade via Jeremy Reed.

Yep, this was meant for a different thread.

I'm a Rangers fan who occasionally ventures over,

but I’ve been wondering…why isn’t there a Cespedes watch like there was for Prince Fielder? Doesn’t a move like that ostensibly make more sense than giving Prince Fielder 9 years?

My guess.

Too many unknowns : Too much money.

Never been fervently linked with the Mariners

Prince Fielder was from the get go

Ah, I see.

It’s been hard to pin down a set of teams that are interested. Every time I feel like a certain team is definitely interested, it seems like that team comes out and says they’d rather have Soler.

I agree it seems odd that the idea hasn't been floated more.

I don’t necessarily like the idea, but since the Mariners may or may not have money to spend still, and there doesn’t seem to be anyone else it could go to that the M’s might need. He hasn’t been liked to the M’s but I have been surprised it hasn’t at least come up more since there seems to be some sort of logic behind the idea.

Dave argues that Cespedes projects to be Casper Wells.

So why pay money for someone we already have.

Interesting.

He seems to be more down on him than most, then.

I'm just surprised it hasn't been brought up more, not just here but among M's fans in general.

Considering how many people wished they had payed $210 million to Fielder it seems like more people would be at least talking about him.

I haven't really talked about it on here, but I have with some friends over the course of the offseason.

The guy’s interesting, to say the least. I’d rather put that money towards Soler, though.

Plus,

the Mariners are a franchise that scouts and signs guys from Latin America and are going to be one of the teams that could suffer from the new rules governing those signings. It makes sense to me that to try to use ‘future’ LA money for a big IFA now, but I can see how others would disagree.

or Soler for that matter

t ball - February 1, 2012 reply

Well Carlos Guillen changes everythign

This year's Adam Kennedy!

God no.

Meh. Would a gimpy Carlos Guillen be any worse in a job share with Seager than Figgins would?

Yes, because Figgins' health and athleticism make him a useful (if vastly overpaid) utility player

I rather doubt Guillen makes the roster, but then I guess the same was said about Mike Sweeny and Adam Kennedy as well.

Probably Figgins and Guillen make the roster

gives us lots of options in the infield
2B Ackley/Figgins/Guillen/Seager
SS Ryan/Seager/Guillen/Figgins
3B Seager/Figgins/Guillen

What does the bench look like in that scenario?

Figgins / Guillen / Kawasaki / Wells?
Does Jaso start in AAA?

Olivo/Casper/Guillen/Figgins

There’s no reason to carry Kawasaki- Guillen is a better player and Seager/Figgins can handle the backup middle infield duties with Guillen able to play there in a pinch

I echo your "poor Kawasaki" comment, then. I'm irrationally rooting for him, as he seems to be Ichiro's dino-buddy.

I hope they have a nice spring together and then he either goes to Tacoma or back to Japan

If he goes to Tacoma, I hope he gets called up as soon as there’s an injury if he’s performing, but I just don’t think Kawasaki belongs on a major league roster. I’d rather see Luis Rodriguez have that last bench spot, but since it’s the last bench spot and it’s Ichiro’s friend, may as well give it to him.

But with Guillen you’re not punting that last spot- he’s a better hitter than Figgins

Guillen > Figgins on offense, yes - when he's healthy

The critical question: Is Guillen coming to spring training in the best shape of his life? ;) Seriously, though, perhaps some decent competition will come from this.

I figure odds are pretty good Guillen injures himself before opening day and this conversation is moot

Guillen hasn't played SS since 2007

I don’t see him competing with Kawasaki/LRod.

At this point, Guillen and Figgins feel comparable offensively. It just depends who’s better defensively I guess.

He doesn't have to be able to play SS except in an absolute emergency though

Seager is definitely capable of playing it, and Figgins probably can too

I didn't realize Seager played 20% of his games SS last year

I still think Guillen’s and Figgins’ skills overlap too much to keep them both on the roster though. Z was actively looking for a backup SS this winter even with Seager, I don’t see him foregoing one in L-Rod/Kawasaki for Guillen.

I don't know. Guillen has been awful lately and isnt much of a fielder any more.

seems like he’d be a limitation on the roster.

So you're saying he's perfect for the "be really old but give lots of high fives" role

Only if he gives great hugs too.

Eh, no cost

Opportunity cost?

Bench should be Olivo, Figgins, probably Seager, and a couple of outfielders to platoon with Wells/Carp and back up Gutierrez if need be. That’s assuming Montero can catch somewhat regularly. If he can’t it gets more complicated. But, Im not taking veteranness into account at all.

Figgins and Seager won't both be on the bench unless Guillen is for some insane reason the starting third baseman and Figgins can play the outfield

Oh shit Im sorry. Right. Im a bit distracted.

Well then Figgins or Seager. But the other assumption there is a 6 man pen which is unlikely given how the rotation looks at the moment.

Eh, opportunity cost is only if he makes the team

with a guy like Figgins around to play utility, I just can’t see Guillen making the team unless he can actually contribute

I think we agree?

I don’t think Guillen is a good enough hitter or fielder to supercede Figgins on the roster any more, and its hard to imagine both making the team.

xx

That’s assuming Montero can catch somewhat regularly.

Do people know how often Jesus is expected to catch in Seattle? Or are people seeing him as more of a Napoli role (DH/1B/C)?

We don't know, but suspect it'll be similar to Napoli.

Eric Wedge is too unpredictable

Was not sure if there had been any info about it yet or not

The way I've read GMZ and Wedge's comments is that he'll be eased into the full time catching role over the next few seasons

Provided he can ever be a full time catcher, of course.

Hmm will at least be interesting to see how much he can handle

knockoutking - February 2, 2012 reply

"He'll be given every opportunity to catch"

the GM’s words. Totally unclear what his role will be in the end. Two considerations are that Olivo is an awful defensive catcher and Jaso is not that much better, so the bar is low. The difference with Napoli is he’s well established as an excellent ML hitter and Moreland is fairly mediocre. Smoak blocks Montero at first.

Yeah

I assumed he would be more a C/DH (and the backup 1B if needed) as opposed to all 3…

M’s rolling with 3 catchers on the roster?

Almost certainly Olivo and Jaso will be on the team as well

Probably the best idea

unless you are sure that Montero can catch a ton

If last year is any indication the surplus of fringey catchers won't be a problem.

Just hope Gimenez is never asked to catch.

Montero is galaxies better than Adam Moore

GALAXIES

He perfectly fits "PH against Jered Weaver to piss him off" role.

I can get behind that

I can respect that opinion in the abstract, but Figgins' health and athleticism haven't served him well in Seattle so far.

If Guillen can be healthy and capable enough to play 3b on occasion without flat missing or giving up on one groundball per game, like Figgins, and put up something close to his career line, I’d take it.

Aw, poor Kawasaki

So that’s who we were saving uniform #4 for

Oh good, he gets 8 back

Peguero switches to 4

We now have no available uniform numbers under 80

He's younger than Ichiro!

I liked Carlos okay his first time through (remember ARod telling us how awesome he’d be?), but it seems so long ago, that it really surprised me to see that he’s only 36.

phiat - February 1, 2012 reply

underwhelmed but not disgruntled

Outside of a tantrum my roommate threw over the Pineda trade… the offseason has been a bit boring. I can see the dedication to the kids and honestly didn’t see much out there as serious upgrades. Catcher… sorta upped. 3B… not much to work with. Left Field… not much out there that didn’t look like casper, peguero, carp or other fill in couldn’t pull off. Not a bad offseason… just bored.

Whoopetydoo - February 1, 2012 reply

Not trying to be crass

But shouldn’t Greg Halman be listed under “lost”? That horrible event was also part of the organization’s offseason, unfortunately.

Nadingo - February 1, 2012 reply

Probably, yeah.

I meant to put it under a different heading and then forgot

We've lost Pineda, Fister, and Bedard.

Have they been replaced with equal pitching and/or a substantial gain in offense? Let’s not kid ourselves.

grumpyoldfan - February 1, 2012 reply

The Fister trade was bad

Bedard was a free agent and we got two good prospects back for him in spite of the fact that he was a broken, aging starter.

We got Jesus Montero and Hector Noesi in the Pineda trade.

What?

My point is that our offseason, at best, has just kept us even.

Just my opinion.

grumpyoldfan - February 1, 2012 reply

For next season, yes

I think the team is in better shape looking beyond 2012, and given the state of the division and the kinds of teams the Rangers and Angels will be fielding next year it makes sense to load up for it. I think the Pineda trade was really about that. Chances are Pineda is a better player than Montero next year, but beyond that the risk associated with pitchers starts to balance out the risk associated with prospects. And by then our own near ready MiL pitchers wil be ready. Maybe not all, but surely some.

You don't think it's too soon to judge the Fister trade?

Or, if you’re a fan of judging trades without the benefit of hindsight, you don’t think Martinez, Furbush, Wells, and Ruffin were worth Fister? There’s still a lot of promise in those names.

I thought the trade was a D at the time and an F now

What happens if Fister reverts to 2010 Fister?

The trade will still be a D at the time and whatever grade Fister turns into afterwards

seeing as how Fister still posted an above average tRA in 2010 and has four years of team control left, I can’t see it being any better than a C, and that’s if Wells and/or Furbush turn into something.

Basically I hated the trade – Martinez seemed too Triunfel-esque to me, and Fister seemed like he had improved part of his game every season. He was near dominant at times right before he was traded, and was actually dominant once he got to Detroit

That's crazy

You’re comparing prospects to a pitcher who is essentially a finished product and possibly just had a career season and saying ‘see – they’re not as good’. Every single one of the guys Fister was traded for has a good to decent chance to contribute at the major league level and has years of team control left.

At age 25, Doug Fister pitched 60 ML innings at a 5.88 tRA. At age 25, Charlie Furbush pitched 52 ML innings at a 5.27 tRA (and 22 as a reliever in Detroit which were a bit better). The performances were almost exactly on par compared to the league. Maybe you like Fister’s Minnesota style better, and it certainly remains to be seen whether Furbush can get the homers under control, but his stuff is pretty good and if he develops as Fister developed he alone would make the trade worthwhile.

Your criticism of Martinez is that he’s too much like Triunfel, which is funny because just a few years ago that would have been a glowing endorsement. Triunfel-like prospects don’t necessarily pan out, but when they do you get the good version Jose Lopez so I think its odd that you in particular would be unhappy about him.

I don’t feel like I need to defend Wells because he’s already a pretty good player. it remains to be seen whether he can hit for average but he is clearly a patient hitter with above average power who can play CF. He’s accumulated nearly 3 WAR already in a mere 350PAs. 2WAR if you’re uncomfortable including defense.

Ruffin I don’t want to discuss because he’s a reliever and the samples are tiny but BA puts him in our top 10 so I guess that means he’s good for a reliever? I dunno.

Those are all convenient arguments. Convenient here meaning lazy.

Comparing Furbush and Fister at the same age is dishonest since Fister added velocity and secondary stuff, essentially becoming a different pitcher. Since this isn’t something that happens with any sort of frequency, it’s not fair to just look at tRA and call that a push. It’s foolish to dismiss that Furbush has upside but saying that, at this point, he has any reasonable expectation of being as good as Fister? That’s irresponsible.

Per your Triunfel point, “a few years ago that would have been a glowing endorsement”. That depends who you ask and also just pretends that we’re all still living in the heyday of 2008. I don’t know about you, but I’ve learned a lot about baseball since 2008. In Triunfel’s early days when all we had was prospect bluster and wishcasting based on his early scouting, sure. Dating back to 2009, there have been numerous people with major concerns about his ability to be a successful MLB hitter based on his actual production. Thanks to the broken search function in SBN archives, I can’t go locate individual comments but I know Matthew, Graham, JY, (and me!) have been expressing these thoughts for at least two years. It’s one thing for a guy to have succeeded in college with a less disciplined approach. It’s another for the IFAs, especially when they haven’t made good on their scouting reports. Players of Martinez’s hitting profile are lottery tickets. There’s a reason lottery tickets cost a buck.

Wells is a nice complementary player. He looks like he’s something resembling average, which is neat. He’ll be 27 this year, so odds are he won’t be improving much. So, again, what you have is a ~average outfielder. Cool.

Non-elite relievers. Pile. Next.

I feel about this trade the way I feel about the Marcus Littlewood and Brad Miller picks, and I think it’s an issue holding the organization back somewhat. You shouldn’t use high picks to acquire mostly finished players or at least players with a limited upside and perhaps a higher floor. You can sign Craig Counsell whenever you’d like for 1.5 million a year. Or Adam Kennedy, or whoever the veteran almost average player free agents are every year. Why not use those resources to try to get the Josh Bells of the world (I know he went before Miller, I’m using him as an example.)?

The organization turned a very intriguing talent with lots of club control into a small archipelago of guys who are much more common a commodity. The team has an adequate quantity of roster filler. It needs concentrated value.

I think the most important thing to note about Fister is that his results seemed logically sustainable based on the improvements he had made

it wasn’t as if the swinging strike rate and K rate, and earlier the reduced walks just jumped out of nowhere – he had made a conscious improvement in those areas, and every time he had made an improvement, he had been able to carry it forward as well.

There were lots of reasons to believe that Fister was going to continue to be successful, and less so with the pieces we got in return.

It’s not that I don’t like Wells and Furbush, and think they’re both contributors, or that I don’t really enjoy playing the prospect lottery – it’s that I don’t think they were worth a young, cheap, effective starting pitcher who had shown serious real strides over the past three seasons

Your point on Fister doesn't apply

Between his age 25 and 26 seasons he added 0.2mph on average to his heater, and it was in 2010 that he established himself as an effective ML starter. So, no, no major strides there. What I do remember is many LLers questioning the sustainability of Fister’s 2010 performance (I dont remember if you were in that camp though I suspect you were) based on his very low HR rate. Of course what he did was somehow throw harder and allow fewer dingers, so make of that what you will. I agree that expecting him to be as good as Fister is ridiculous, but expecting Fister to be as good as Fister was even more ridiculous. I think Furbush was written off immediately by many LLers and I think its unfair so that point was more to remind sb of how helpless Fister looked only two seasons ago.

On the Martinez Triunfel question, I think you’re alluding to Dave Cameron’s infatuation with him and the blogosphere’s assumption that he’s right as he often but not always is. However, it wasn’t only DC who was excited about him, as Triunfel was highly ranked by many national prospecting organizations including BA. Some lottery tickets cost a lot more than a buck.

Ruffin – how you can classify him as elite or non-elite at this point is a mystery to me but the way cheap effective bullpens are built is having guys like him in the system. He’s not an especially valuable piece but he’s hardly worthless.

Wells. Yes, nice player at a position of need, who can play center in case Gutierrez remains handicapped. Yes, 27 so you can’t expect much growth although there’s a lot to be said for having players in their absolute prime making league minimum.

I guess it comes down to what was a reasonable expectation for Fister’s services. There were a number of pitchers traded last winter who are much higher profile than Fister, and while the returns for them were better I don’t think they were overwhelmingly so. Look, I realy liked Fister. I still do. He’s super white and gangly and a great fielder and is far more successful than anyone expected. Also, Fister. I think his likability may be clouding people’s judgement of the trade. I wasn’t crazy about it myself but rating it a D or F seems overmuch.

How is my point on Fister invalid?

It doesn’t matter if he made his jump in the same age year of comparison that Furbush just completed. His 2010 made him a nice but still questionable player. Between 2010 and 2011 is what we’re talking about.

I think its pretty clear I was talking about 09-10.

When I compared Furbush’s rookie season to Fister’s I was not implying that Furbush will be a 6 win pitcher in 2013. I was implying he has a good chance to develop into a 2-3 win pitcher.

But the point is that Fister already got there

Furbush has a chance to develop, and it could be argued that he has a very solid chance to develop.

Fister already got there; in 2011 he was that good

My point was that the comparison you made wasn't one that made sense, seeing as how Fister went into a cocoon and came out a Cliff Lee.

The Doug Fister traded away was in no way the Doug Fister of 2009. We both know what seasons you were talking about. That’s exactly my point.

Well I'd hesitate to say he's Cliff Lee and Furbush wasn't the only player coming back in that trade

so Furbush doesn’t need to blossom like Fister did to make it an okay trade.

And once again, looking at the trades recently made for quality pitchers, I see a lot of seemingly underwhelming returns. Haren to Angels, Lee to Seattle, Latos to Cincy, Pineda to Yanks, the Oakland trades this winter… I’m probably forgetting some relevant trades. Either we’re overvaluing pitchers, or teams are overvaluing prospects.

Those trades are underwhelming?

All are Sickels grades.
Haren returned Skaggs (A-), Corbin (B-, Borderline B), and a reliever.
Latos returned Alonso(B+), Grandal (B+), Boxberger (B-), and Edinson Volquez.
Lee to Seattle, well, LOLOLOLOLOL
Pineda to Yanks returned what would be hard to argue for anything other than nearly fair value.
Oakland traded Trevor Cahill, a 2-4 win pitcher for Jarrod Parker (A-), Cowgill (C+), and Ryan Cook (C+)
Gio Gonzalez to Nats for Cole (B+), Peacock (B, borderline B+), and Derek Norris (B), and Milone (B-).

I’ll be goddamned if those aren’t mostly excellent returns.

I'd have been thrilled as hell with any of those returns for Fister (duh).

Obviously he’s riskier than those guys since there’s less data available on him but if that’s the case, I’d much rather keep him and either trade him down the road or just use the good pitching. That’s the big takeaway from my perspective. Unless the team believes this is a Rookie of The Year situation and his magical skills will turn back into a pumpkin at midnight, I’d rather keep him than trade him for value below what his talent may merit.

I think the Cahill return is not oh so much better than what we got for Fister and Cahill is a better pitcher

(andl was traded with Craig Breslow). The big difference there is Sickels has Parker as A- while Furbush is at C+. But we also got Ruffin, whom Sickels had as a B- prospect. So, less given up, almost as much in return, but one trade is excellent but the other is dismal?

Whoa there

Jarrod Parker is a legitimate frontline prospect. If we had traded Fister straight up for him I’d have been reasonably pleased.

I don't know so much about him, just checked out his B-R page.

TJ surgery, K/BB around 2 in the high minors, 24 this year… is it all projection? Whence the hype? Serious question.

He's 23 this year, has pedigree, and looked pretty good (statistically) coming off of TJ.

Scouted well to boot.

9th overall pick in 2007

Killed it until mid 2009 until he went down with TJ, came back and was just as good. Very good fastball and change, decent curve. Control is the only question mark, but it’s not something that very many are concerned about, because a slight loss of command is expected while recovering from TJ.

You know A- is a big deal, right?

Also, Cahill is not definitely a better pitcher than Fister.

Im not that familiar with Sickels' rating system, so no, i didnt.

And, looking at Cahill’s numbers again it seems you’re right. Actually, I think he’s a pretty good comp for Fister – more grounders and a more consistent track record but also way more walks.

I seem to recall that Sickels focuses on upside more than some other prospect watchers

Which would explain in part the poor grades given to Wells and Furbush. I think the Fister trade was driven partly by a need have 25 major league quality players on the roster. The organization had so few players that could hack it in the majors that he was forced to choose polish over upside and so we have this group of lackluster but palatable dudes.

Keep scrambling.

This is how he prefaces every single gradings post.

The list and grades are a blending of present performance and long-term potential.

Keep scrambling?

He's not nearly as upside-friendly as some other prospect evaluators.

A/A- is usually reserved for “number one starters.”

I think the trade-off with Parker is only the TJ surgery. Otherwise, he’s a top 10 pitching prospect for some.

I actually think the A’s/D’Backs trade was rather fair. Now I’m questioning the Fister trade more seriously than I ever have before… though the most obvious difference between Fister and Cahill is how they were seen as prospects. “Name recognition” as a driving force behind the difference in the deals? But in that case, Jack never had to deal Fister. Seemed like a “sell high” move, thinking this is the best he’d ever get for Doug.

Of course, if the Tigers traded Doug now, they’d return significantly more than the Furbush deal. In retrospect, including Castellenos instead of Martinez seems rather fair.

Kenneth Arthur - February 2, 2012 reply

Castellanos instead of Ruffin and sure

"The organization had so few players that could hack it in the majors"

They didn’t have enough players that could hack?

ba dum sss

Aly Edge - February 3, 2012 reply

(And Joe Saunders in the Haren trade)

Not fair to use that when evaluating Haren

Skaggs was not an A- prospect when the Angels traded him

Good catch.

Sickels before the start of last season:

7) Tyler Skaggs, LHP, Grade B- due to lack of experience, but supremely projectable

I seem to remember laughing my balls off at Arizona for making that trade

I was just angry

No need to do the Angels any favors by being stupid. It’s like the rookie in your fantasy league who makes a lopsided trade with your rival.

I had such a hard time understanding

how the FO that made the Haren trade also traded for Kazmir and Wells.

Monkeys and a dartboard come to mind.

I had long since stopped thinking of Anaheim as a rival

Your rebuttal regarding Triunfel doesn't get you anywhere. We have better ways of evaluating players now.

Dave’s support of Triunfel came from the information that was available at the time. We have much more data on Triunfel now and better viewpoints with which to use it. If you insist on somehow arguing that we should just anchor our opinions on prospects from the first information we obtain, great. When all you have is scouting reports, as is the case when IFAs come over, that’s what you have to go on. We have a reasonable quantity of data on Martinez in order to evaluate him and weight it against scouting data.

Thank you for agreeing that Wells is a nice player who is a fairly replaceable commodity and that Ruffin isn’t an especially valuable piece.

You see, we mostly agree!

I don't know where you got the idea that I want you to anchor your opinion on three year old data, although its certainly easier to argue against that..

sb commented that he hates Martinez ‘because he seemed too Triunfel-eque to me’ I reminded him that Triunfel was a good prospect before breaking his leg, and that players of that type can develop well even though Triunfel didn’t. Martinez was ranked very highly by BA in both the Tigers system last year and in ours this year, so the valuation of him as a prospect is not outdated.

But as I pointed out at the end of my last comment, I think our key disagreement is not in how good these players are but in what Fister should have brought back in trade.

You said

which is funny because just a few years ago that would have been a glowing endorsement

Okay so in 2010, BA ranked Saunders as the 30th best prospect in baseball.

However, it wasn’t only DC who was excited about him, as Triunfel was highly ranked by many national prospecting organizations including BA.

Okay so in 2010, BA ranked Saunders as the 30th best prospect in baseball, but I repeat myself.

Martinez still has the problem of his power showing up mostly in scouting reports. His lack of discipline is real. He may grow into his power, sure. Discipline isn’t something many players develop. That’s a problem.

The origin of this discussion was the grade of the Fister trade. If we agree (but not really) mostly on the value of the players returned, then what?

It's not news that prospects can bust. BA's lists are full of players that never make it

And yeah, Martinez is no Brett Lawrie – we wouldn’t have gotten him if he were! But, he’s still a very young player performing well in the high minors at a position that’s an organizational weakness.

I think our key disagreement is not in how good these players are but in what Fister should have brought back in trade.

I feel like there's a distinction here though.

Triunfel was valued, but a lot of his value was predicated on the idea that he was going to do something that he hadn’t done before, specifically hit for power. Guys with his level of bat skills have hit for power in the past, but in reality, Vlad Guerrero probably ruined both prospects and prospect evaluation for a while. The sad fact is that a guy that can cover the plate may become over-reliant on it because, so long as it’s working for him at the lower levels, why bother with anything else? So you end up with pitchers outsmarting said hitter and knowing that you don’t need strikes to get him out, he’ll just get himself out on his own.

Could we have known that a year or two after Triunfel signed? Probably not, because the pitchers at the low levels just aren’t that good. But we should have been increasingly skeptical of him after his supposed selling point didn’t manifest in any appreciable way. This specie of prospect is probably riskier than a lot of people believe.

JY - February 2, 2012 reply

I think we both both questioned Fister's sustainability

then 2011 happened.

Out of curiosity, what do you expect Fister to do in the next couple of years?

I thought he was a 1.5-2 win pitcher last winter and I think he’s a 2.5-3 win pitcher now.

I'd still project him a bit conservatively because of the jump and call it about 3-4 wins as a 50th percentile.

3-4 wins leaning on the high side

I guess that's at the core of our disagreement

I want to see Fister maintain his HR rate for another 200 innings and keep his velocity up before I am confident that he’s well above average.

If you think I liked Jose Lopez because of the production, I'm not sure what to say

I actually have no idea why you liked Jose Lopez

He's frijoles refritos

I liked Jose Lopez because of his production!

4 WAR in 2008! After everyone wrote him off, but I believed!

joof - February 3, 2012 reply

I'll like the Fister trade a lot more if Wells reverts back to his pre-fastball-to-the-face form.

Watching that goofy homerun swing launch balls into orbit was awesome.

All of Wells home runs looked like awful contact, but they all somehow cleared the fence.

It made no sense at all.

joof - February 1, 2012 reply

For what it's worth.

They all looked very wristy, and reminded me of how Indian cricketers often hit.
You can get a lotta leverage out of that but you have to have quick wrists and great hand eye co-ordination.

Aussie Mariner - February 1, 2012 reply

I thought the Morrow HBP was caused by the equilibrium problems

Not vice versa

Aly Edge - February 1, 2012 reply

He said he reacted slowly to the pitch,

but I haven’t found anything that indicated it was anything more than a deer in the headlights thing.

After getting whacked in the nose by a baseball I would speculate that he suffered a minor concussion that caused the problem, and attempting to play through it didn’t help.

xmet - February 2, 2012 reply

Fister and Bedard left last season and do not count here. Bedard was leaving either way, so he is irrelevant to this discussion.

Your question is basically will Furbush, Ruffin, Wells, Montero and Noesi surpass Fister and Pineda in production this year. It’s hard to make predictions about rookies, but I think its not unreasonable to think that they shake out pretty even.

Let'sNotKidOurselves - February 1, 2012 reply

Does anybody have a statistic on which teams sighned the most players to minor league deals for this spring?

I don’t keep up on minor league deals a much with other team, but it feels like we have brought in every “has been” or “never was” that ever exists on the planet. Sorry for being so negative, but I am underwhelmed. I think are big move was a very questionable trade. Again, sorry if I am being a Debby Downer.

I think we had WAY more NRIs last year.

In fact I’d guess that we are probably around middle of the pack in terms of NRIs this year.

Eyebrows - February 1, 2012 reply

It's all tracked here

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_current_Major_League_Baseball_team_rosters

We’re on the high side, right in there with the Twins, Blue Jays and Marlins. The Giants have the most with 33.

I am too lazy to break down how many are team-controlled prospects, and how many are scrap heap NRIs.

Eyebrows - February 1, 2012 reply

Through this I learned that Matt Bush is on the Rays' 40 man roster.

Which is amazing.

Mariner John - February 1, 2012 reply

as a pitcher!

And a potentially not awful one!