130 Responses to “Offseason Predictions”

1. Chris on October 28th, 2004 6:31 pm

   Why would the Dodgers not match Beltre at 6Y $80M? Purely because they don’t think their payroll can sustain it or because they think 2004 was a fluke?

2. David J Corcoran on October 28th, 2004 6:32 pm

   Fascinatin’ .

   What are the chances of getting Hidalgo AND Hillenbrand? And if so, does that mean Ibanez and Bucky fight for the DH job?

3. David J Corcoran on October 28th, 2004 6:36 pm

   Also, if we get Beltran instead of Beltre, could we potentially trade for Hillenbrand to play 3rd???

4. eponymous coward on October 28th, 2004 6:38 pm

   Wow, Shea Hillenbrand. That’s pretty, um, mediocre. I’d suspect they might take a flyer on Sean Casey too if they are looking at mediocre, good glove high average 1B, and he’d have more upside than Hillenbrand.

5. David J Corcoran on October 28th, 2004 6:39 pm

   Call me insane, but I kind of like the idea of acquiring Hillenbrand. He is high average, only 29, etc…

   Envision Hillenbrand hitting 2nd…

6. David J Corcoran on October 28th, 2004 6:40 pm

   Never mind.
   That would be just like Winn hitting 2nd.
   Why not just keep Winn instead of acquiring Hillenbrand?

7. eponymous coward on October 28th, 2004 6:45 pm

   I would say, though, a bench of Cruz/Kapler/Spiezio/whichever catcher/Cabrera is unequivocally better than a bench of McCracken/Bloomquist/Cabrera/whichever catcher/Bocachica.

   So, the team’s only spending 80 million in 2005 salary by your projection? That means they’ve cut budget, even if you add back the 7 million for benefits that Lincoln uses as “salary”, down from 92 to 87 million.

8. eponymous coward on October 28th, 2004 6:48 pm

   Hm, what if they paid their 1B 8.5 for 2005 instead of Hillenbrand 3.5 and put the 5 million back? Who could they get then?

9. Grant on October 28th, 2004 6:48 pm

   I can’t think of two players that walk less than Hillenbrand and Deivi Cruz, if those two are in the plans the front office is no better than it was under Gillick. Getting Beltre and Clement would be exciting though. I think this regime in the FO may get the right stars but there downfall is going to be the guys they select to fill out positions that not much is expected from offensively

10. Tom on October 28th, 2004 6:48 pm

    Honestly, I’m not sure what to expect out of the Mariners this offseason. I’m a junior in high school, and as much as I like to think positive about the M’s future, my dad tells me otherwise. Though that could be because he’s a Red Sox fan too, so he’ll think worst case scenario sometimes.

    But here’s what I think will happen.
    I’ve estimated they’ll spend about 27.5 million this offseason.

    With that money, we probably can’t turn every single thing around in one year. It will be a start, but of course, Rome wasn’t built in a day.

    The roster I think will look the same for the MOST part, but there will be some new faces too.

    Here are the people that will come back for sure:
    Bret Boone
    Bucky Jacobsen
    Miguel Olivo
    Jose Lopez
    Scott Speizio
    Ichiro (duh)
    Jeremy Reed
    Jamie Moyer
    Bobby Madritsch
    Gil Meche
    Joel Pineiro
    Ryan Franklin
    Eddie Guardado
    Shigetoshi Hasegawa
    Willie Bloomquist

    OK now that we got that out of the way.
    Here’s what else will happen:

    The Mariners likely will resign both Ron Villone and Dan Wilson. Both either did well last year, or have a good veteran clubhouse presence. Plus, they’ll want to stay. Dan will need to groom Olivo. And Villone can give us some OK innings out there in the bullpen.

    As for trades, the management will likely trade Winn or Ibanez for a relief pitcher. Chances are, it will probably be a middle reliver. But that’s OK, I mean, we had nothing in that pen last year just about.

    We’ll probably trade Winn for a middle reliever, and we’ll probably have to give whoever team we trade him to some cash or just a AA prospect. I know someone suggested Jorge Julio, that would be intresting although he’s had some problems in recent years in Baltimore.

    As for free agent signings:
    I don’t see them getting Beltran, and it’ll be open season for the Seattle sports writers.

    I do see them getting a power hitter, but not Beltran.

    I see them going after a infielder. So that means Carlos Delgado, Adrian Beltre, Richie Sexson, Nomar, etc.

    We’ll probably offer Tejada money, 10-13 million, only this time, we’ll offer 6-8 years instead of 5 with Tejada.

    I think your’e rotation is OK for know, considering there are some prospects in the minors that should be ready to contribute in 2006-2007, i.e. Felix Hernandez.

    So we’ll focus on the bullpen.
    Shiggy goes to middle relief, and the closers job belongs to Guardado when he comes back, and Soriano, you can’t bank on him contributing next year because of Tommy John Surgery, so lets assume we won’t have him.

    You can probably pay a middle reliever and set up guy that are great up to 8 million a year, and we should have enough to get 2 of those kind of guys in there.
    Then your’e probably looking at Sherill, Putz, and Mateo clawing at that final bullpen spot in Spring Training.

    So here is what I think the lineup looks like next year:
    LF: Raul Ibanez
    CF: Jeremy Reed
    RF: Ichiro
    3B: Scott Speizio/Jolbert Cabrera/Justin Leone (not a roster lock)
    SS: Jose Lopez
    2B: Bret Boone
    1B: Richie Sexson/Carlos Delgado (assuming one them signs with us)
    C: Miguel Olivo

    Bench
    ———————-
    Jolbert Cabrera/Scott Speizio/Justin Leone (two of them)
    Dan Wilson
    Willie Bloomquist
    (25th man—Jamal Strong, Justin Leone, maybe a free agent reserve OF)

    Starting Pitching
    —————————-
    Jamie Moyer
    Bobby Madritch
    Gil Meche
    Joel Pineiro
    Ryan Franklin/Ron Villone (one of them)

    Bullpen
    ——————
    Free agent Middle Reliever
    Free agent Set Up Man
    Trade for a Middle Reliever
    Eddie Guardado- Closer
    Shiggy Hasegawa- MR
    Julio Mateo/George Sherill/J.J. Putz-MR (one of them will make it)

    So over all, kind of different, but kind of the same.
    I’m not sure if this plan they have in place will work.
    But if they commit to their players, farm system, and keeping their payroll fine. They should be fine.

    If they spend the money this winter, I see them winning 75-85 games and getting back on track for 2006-2007

11. Grant on October 28th, 2004 6:49 pm

    Also, you don’t see Sexson or Delagado in the M’s plans Dave?

12. David J Corcoran on October 28th, 2004 6:49 pm

    Fairly Versatile, too, Cruz can play SS and some 2nd and 3rd, Kapler can play corner OF (and CF too?) and Speez can play 1st 3rd and corner OF, and 2nd in an emergency, Cabrera can play everything…. Pretty good.
    What if we could work out a trade for Eli Marrero instead of Kapler?

13. Dave on October 28th, 2004 6:55 pm

    E.C.,

    Remember that the M’s count the entire 40 man roster as part of the budget, so those guys account for an additional ~$3 million or so. Toss in the unnamed reliever that is Guardado insurance for another $500K, and the team outlay will be closer to $85 million by their accounts. Beltre is also likely to get a “signing bonus”, which the M’s can count towards the ‘05 budget if they feel like it. The payroll will be a bit higher than it was this year, about the same as it was in ‘02. Using funky accounting, the M’s will claim its around $93 million or so.

    I think Sexson will re-sign with Arizona and Delgado is going to price himself out of the Mariners market. They’re only going to spend $10 million plus on one player, and that will be Beltre. If they miss out on Beltre and Beltran, Delgado is a possible option.

    Grant’s dead on, by the way. I think the M’s have done a pretty good job at deciding which star free agents to acquire, and I’m not too worried that we’re going to throw a ton of money at a terrible player. But I don’t believe that the new regime is going to analyze downroster talent well, and we’re going to pay several million to replacement level players to fill holes with performances that will be heavy on batting average and low on everything else.

14. Jonathan on October 28th, 2004 7:03 pm

    I think you’ve made a reasonable guess as to the final roster and the current regime’s thinking. However, I’d argue that you’ve overestimated how many games they’ll win. Filling 1B/LF/DH with Hillenbrand/Ibanez/Jacobsen/(Spezio) is reminiscent of the fine work the M’s did filling those offense positions under Woody Woodward. This M’s team doesn’t have Griffey/A-Rod/Edgar to compensate. Nor will it have the excellent defense of the early aughts. (the pitching will be better than Woody’s teams, I will grant.)

    They’ll be the 4th best team in the AL West, lucky to scrape out 78 wins or so.

15. Darrell on October 28th, 2004 7:24 pm

    #13 I agree with Jonathan – over .500 seems like a stretch for that roster. The starters would have to come up big. As for the moves themselves, I think this is a fine approximation of what we’re looking at. Obviously the actual names may end up being different, but I’ll bet you’ve got the general shape of things pretty darn close. Well done Dave.

16. big chef terry on October 28th, 2004 7:51 pm

    I think its an excellent bit of work…the market and their tightness will present some interesting adjustments as this plays out.

    It all goes to hell if they don’t sign Beltre and or he performs like he did in 2003. I would be shocked to see them outbid the Dodgers. Who’s plan C?

    This is a below average defensive team, especially at second and ss. Is there any closet camps for Garciaparra, Cabrera or Renteria?

17. eponymous coward on October 28th, 2004 8:05 pm

    Dave:

    But they had to count LAST year’s 40-man roster against the budget, and that was around 85 million in player salaries on the 25 man roster + 7 for “benefits” (read: slush fund), if you go by Dugout dollars.

    http://dugoutdollars.blogspot.com/2003_09_21_dugoutdollars_archive.html

    (85.33 M for Salary, 7.55 for benefits)

    I read what you’re proposing as a $5 million cut, in real terms.

    That being said, I figure the M’s would say something like “oh, we’re counting a salary bonus this year” or something. Which is dumb- that $5 million could go a LONG way to upgrading a position from semi-craptastic to pretty solid.

    Deivi Cruz as a one year backup IF/fallback plan for Lopez I can live with (though $2 M for a UT IF? Why not Julio Lugo for cheaper or something like that?), but Hillenbrand at 1B…yeeech.

18. stan on October 28th, 2004 8:06 pm

    Dave, I know this is what you think will happen rather than what should happen, but Deivi Cruz? I would rather have Julio Cruz leave the Spanish language radio booth and suit up. Shea Hillenbrand? I’d prefer to sign A.J. Zapp and watch him stike out 200 times a year. I have never been a proponent of signing Beltre anyway, but if you sign him with no left handed bat with some power around him he won’t see ten good pitches a week unless the Mariner pitching is so bad the game is over by the second inning anyway. 82-85 wins for that squad might be possible if Vlad spends the year on the DL, Hudson, Mulder, Zito and Harden can’t pitch and everyone on the Rangers forgets how to hit.

19. Chief on October 28th, 2004 8:08 pm

    Nice, thought provoking post Dave. I agree that we will not see Beltran in an M’s uniform. Recently several posters have penciled him in to their lineups but I believe they are thinking with their hearts instead of their heads. Boras will go with the highest bidder for Beltran and that won’t be the Ms. I believe Beltre would be a nice pick up. Unfortunately I agree with Jonathan (#13) and Darrell (#14), the suggested moves and the roster Dave listed would probably result in a solid fourth place in the AL West. No suprise though given the FO proclivity for mediocrity when it comes to obtaining quality players versus the bottom line. Can we offer Howard Lincoln free agency?!!

20. Dave on October 28th, 2004 8:12 pm

    E.C.,

    The $85 million from last year comes into play if you count a players annual average value of their contract versus the actual 2004 payout. I used actual payout, so I’m actually projecting about a $3 million cut in “real payout” (based on opening day payroll; as the year went on, the M’s slashed pretty heavily, and their 2004 payroll was much lower), which the M’s will explain away by using annual average value. In Beltre’s case, the difference will be nearly $6 million.

21. Scott on October 28th, 2004 8:16 pm

    Excellent post, Dave. I am with the others, this roster is not going to get us far and the line up put way too much pressure on the rotation. If we package Winn and Franlin together, would we be able to land someone a bit better?

22. chrisw on October 28th, 2004 8:21 pm

    It’s studs and overpriced scrubs – exactly what you’d expect from an organization with a lot of money but not a lot of skill at evaluating talent. I hope they tank to such an extent that Bavasi gets fired. There, I said it.

23. IgnatiusReilly on October 28th, 2004 8:38 pm

    You mean, we might get a chance of seeing Kris Benson getting it on with his wife at our very own Safeco parking garage?

24. Digger on October 28th, 2004 8:40 pm

    Omar!

25. Bela Txadux on October 28th, 2004 8:52 pm

    I’m with you on the overall assessment, especially on the uproster part, Dave. One big position sign—check—Beltre the more likely of the two. One mid-rotation + starter—check—Clement, maybe with some bidding. Winn traded—check—most likely for a set-up guy (wish this was a better thought out package for someone really useful, but I’m not counting on it). Cabrera as His Utilitiness—check—Bavasi acquired him after all, so looks good if he stays. Wilson back on a one-year—check—someone has to be the back-up, and as as such Dan is a good fit, especially because he knows the pitching staff which is what a catcher really has to do for a team, grass-level VORP or not.

    The real key to this rebuild is the downroster part. Whose on 1B? Who’s acquired for whichever of CF or 3B that isn’t filled with the Big Sign? Who’s really going to play short, or be there to step in if 2b becomes a real problem (don’t count on Boone staying healthy)? A smart FO would come up with better than Hillenbrand/Hidalgo/D. Cruz for that matrix, but I greatly fear that you have the existing Ms FO pegged dead on, these are they kind of guys who fit Bavasi’s history and the Ms budget projections. I have very little confidence in the overall offense that this group plus the returning bats will muster; there’s still too little power, and worse the teams OBP will continue to decline with this group of signings. I would love to propose a ‘B Team’ of my own, but I think you are only too likely to be right, certainly regarding the overall approach here.

    The Ms pitching staff next year figures to be quite good with this overall group, though, as you say, _if_ Pinero is healthy. Meche has had no arm problems for 2+ years, it’s effectiveness that’s been the issue. He was effective at the end of ‘04 and I take him at that value going into ‘05 myself—unless he’s traded. What I really wish we would see this offseason are a couple of well-thought out major trades. This is the only way, in my view, that the Ms could really contend in ‘05; they simply can’t sign enough high end talent on the open market to make the jump. It _is_ possible to do this; for example, Winn, Meche, and a relief arm for ?????. Ibanez and Sherrill for ????? There’s always risk in deals like this, but the key is who you get back, not who you give up. But I don’t see Bavasi as a wheeler-dealer, that’s always been my problem looking forward to this rebuild; it doesn’t seem in his nature, and the FO and ownership as a group are quite risk-averse at this point, they’ll play safe. So I think some New Pretty Faces on a near-.500 season with the back end of the 25-man being pretty much a dead end is much more likely what the FO will produce. *Sigh*

26. jackson argo on October 28th, 2004 9:17 pm

    Why no mention of Orlando Cabrera, I seem to recall both brothers saying they wanted to end up on the same team this year (2005) as it seems apparent that Jolbert will be remaining here, and the M’s still need a SS, will they make a play for Orlando?

27. Jerry on October 28th, 2004 9:18 pm

    Dave,

    Interesting post. I think that you are being very realistic. However, I hope that the M’s make some different moves. Most importantly, I don’t see the need to pick up veteran bench players at this point. These spots can probably be filled from within the organization.

    I have a few comments about the predictions, which are more focused on the quality of these moves than on your rationale.

    -First, why sign a second utility player (Cruz)? I don’t like the idea of picking up a second utiltiy player who is a mediocre fielder. Plus, he is very similar to Cabrera at the plate, with a decent average hiding a bad OBP. Instead of spending 2 million on a player like Cruz, I would rather see the M’s bring back Bloomquist, or put Santiago or Leone on the bench. Any of these guys would save the M’s about 1.7 million. If they do decide to go outside the organization for an infielder, why not get someone who is at least an incredible fielder? I think that Cruz is just a waste of money. However, I think that this is the type of player that the M’s will probably get: a bad veteran player who can do the same job as a aging minor league player.

    -Second, I think that Hillenbrand is a really bad idea. He reminds me a lot of Spiezio. Actually, if you disregard Spiezio’s 2004 stats, the two have pretty similar numbers. Spiezio’s AVE is a little lower, but he walks more. Hillenbrand has a bit more power, but Spiezio is a far better fielder. If this is the route that the M’s want to go, I would rather see them just play Spiezio at 1B. I can’t believe that I am hearing myself say that Spiezio should start, but why have 6-7 million invested into two bad first basemen? If the M’s really want a low-budget first baseman from outside the organization, why not pick up JT Snow? At least he can get on base, and won’t cost them any players in a trade. Plus, with Hillenbrand, he will get another raise in arbitration next year as well. I would rather see them take a chance and acquire a young first baseman (someone like Ryan Howard, Hee Seop Choi, Kendry Morales, or Carlos Pena). This way, they get a player with some upside. They can take a chance on a young first baseman because they have Spiezio as a backup in the likely event that there is a catastrophic failure.

    If the M’s decided to fill the second utility role with Bloomquist, Santiago, or Leone, they would save themselves over 1.5 million. Since you have Hillenbrand pencilled in for 3.5 million, that would give them 5 million for other options while still staying within your budget. At this level, they are very close to what it would take to get Carlos Delgado, Richie Sexson, or Troy Glaus (assuming that they could have a slightly backloaded contract). If the M’s could dump Franklin (perhaps in a deal with some other pitchers) without taking back much payroll, they would be there. Lincoln told the press that the M’s payroll would be 95 million. Even with their lame math (the other 15 players on the 40-man roster, ‘contingency funds’ and other crap) they can still add another 2 million or so to the payroll.

    If the M’s have a decision to make between Cruz, Hillenbrand, and 2 million, or Sexson, Leone/Santiago/Bloomquist, and a slightly higher payroll, they would have to be absolutely deranged tightwad lunatics to not go for it. Another alternative would be to shift Ibanez to 1B and try to acquire someone like Magglio Ordonez, Jermaine Dye, or Richard Hidalgo in the OF. One of these guys might be available for below-market price. It just seems like a waste of money to bring in veterans to do a job that can be filled sufficiently with players already in the organization.

    Hopefully, the M’s can swing one good blockbuster trade. It is pretty pointless to speculate on what they might be able to do work out, but if they can fill one major hole in a trade, and/or move a contract or two, it could be the difference between creating a mediocre lineup and a good lineup.

28. ChrisK on October 28th, 2004 9:31 pm

    If the M’s honestly expect Boras to accept a “take it or leave it offer” for Beltran right out of the gates (regardless of how much $$ is offered), they should just skip to Plan B. Boras will simply use it as a baseline to start negotiating with other teams. His entire strategy is predicated on finding that one owner willing to pay the most for his client, using all available resources at hand – other offers, time, and well-placed media leaks. If the M’s aren’t willing to get into a bidding war for Beltran, then just move on to the other targets. But obviously that won’t happen because they want to show fans that they’re now “serious” about long-term deals, for PR impact at the very least.

    BTW – I find it amusing that some people think Bavasi’s “good relationship” with Boras is some sort of advantage for the team. Of all agents, Boras is the least likely to let personal feelings get in the way of negotiating the maximum value for his clients.

29. eponymous coward on October 28th, 2004 9:42 pm

    Thanks Dave. I guess if this comes about we can look forward to Derek’s rant on the topic. So much for “keeping payroll the same”. My thoughts on the matter aren’t really printable in a family weblog.

    I guess the glass-half-full way to look at it is that at least we could get Beltran out of it, but this ownership group does really consider us chumps, huh?

30. Chief on October 28th, 2004 10:19 pm

    ChrisK – Totally agree with you (#26). I believe all the previous postings relating to bringing Beltran to the Ms are disingenuous at best, there is no way Boras agrees to a deal with the Ms. Boras will use any offer from the Ms as leverage with the deep pocket owners and Beltran will end up with the Cubs, Yanks, Bosox or some other big bux team. And the FO knows that, but look at the PR they will get. I can just hear it now – well we tried for the big dog but it just wasn’t fiscally responsible or some such!!

31. Econ guy on October 28th, 2004 10:23 pm

    Good post Dave. I hope that the M’s do better than this but I am not holding my breath.

    Hillenbrand is a bad idea. I agree with Jerry, I would much rather see the M’s take a chance on a young player.

32. G-Man on October 28th, 2004 10:54 pm

    I like the plan of getting a couple hitters this winter, but make pitching additions second priority. I do think the returning pitching is shakey, especially the starters, but we’re committed to overpaying Moyer, Shiggy and Franklin, so let’s use ‘em. They can eat up some innings and might surprise us. I’d figure on a 72-82 win season, free salary dollars a year from now and retool the pitching then. Reed and Leone should contribute more with another year of experience, and the M’s can market the addition of an arm or two to those willing to pay for season’s tickets one more time in 2006.

33. Chris Robertson on October 28th, 2004 11:07 pm

    One thing people forget is that a 10 mil contract with the Mariners puts a lot more jingle in a player’s pocket than it does with other teams, with the exception of the Astros and the Rangers, because Washington and Texas have no state income tax.

34. LB on October 29th, 2004 12:24 am

    Hillenbrand? He’s a right-handed pull hitter who has no idea of the strike zone, and whom Safeco will chew up and spit out. Wonderful idea.

35. eponymous coward on October 29th, 2004 12:56 am

    “Reed and Leone should contribute more with another year of experience”

    Uh, I didn’t notice Leone on that roster. And it’s going to be kind of hard for him to contribute, what with Beltre playing 3rd every day and Cabrera and Speizio also being options at 3B.

36. Melvin Bob on October 29th, 2004 2:32 am

    Ugh….what a roster. That has to be good for 55-65 wins. No, wait, Deivi Cruz and Mrs. She Hillenbrand with their excellent bats will make it 52 wins.

37. Bernard Aboba on October 29th, 2004 2:41 am

    Here are some ideas.

    1B
    –

    Trade pitching prospects (Meche?) for Ryan Howard of the Phillies. The Phillies are looking to move Howard, who hit 46 home runs last year between Reading and Triple-A Scranton. If you want some power in the lineup, how can you do better than Bucky as DH and Howard at 1B?

    2B
    –
    Trade Brett Boone and cash to the Houston Astros for a prospect such as Chris Burke. Burke is fast (37 SB), and hit .315 at Triple-A New Orleans. The Astros are looking to dump Kent, perhaps they would bite on Boone (we can dream).

    3B
    –
    Pick up a young 3rd baseman such as Kevin Youkilis from the Red Sox, or perhaps Joel Guzman from the Dodgers. I think the Dodgers need pitching, and we’ve got prospects to unload.

    Bullpen
    ——-
    Go after Armando Benitez, offering a one year contract for close to his 2004 salary of $3.5 M. Since Benitez would prefer to be closer to home, he may not want to go back to Seattle, but his 2004 ERA of 1.29 and 47 saves sure looks good.

    Catcher
    ——-
    Don’t go after Jason Varitek. Trade Olivo to the Cardinals for Yadier Molina and a prospect.

    Molina was the top defensive catcher in the PCL in 2004 and hit .310 with .390 OPS in the minors, .267 with .329 OBP and .684 OPS in 135 AB with the Cards in 2004. Yes, the OPS is worse than Olivo’s, but Molina comes from good stock (brother of Bengie and Jose) and has exhibited good plate discipline and bat control.

    Varitek is unlikely to perform much better and will cost considerably more. Varitek is 32 years old, and so signing him for more than 2 years is probably not a good idea. Plus Varitek hits way better at Fenway (.336) than away (.256) where his stats are barely better than Olivo’s (.784 OPS vs. .725 for Olivo).

38. David J Corcoran on October 29th, 2004 6:42 am

    What about Pokey Reese instead of Deivi Cruz? Or will Reese want to start?

39. Graham on October 29th, 2004 7:14 am

    Why not use that last 15 million to go for JD Drew? He’s a good defender at all 3 outfield positions, has BB’d more than K’d, plus he’s a left handed power bat. I know there’s quite a lot of ingury history there, but in Atlanta he’s shown what he can do over a full season. He’s not Beltran, but he’s definately the next best outfielder available this season… if the M’s have the cash, why not go for it?

40. stiletto on October 29th, 2004 8:39 am

    re: #28
    I’d bet that the M’s will make and offer knowing full well they will be getting nowhere with it. they gotta show the fans they are bidding for the top FA’s, even if they’re really not.

    I like #39. if we could swing beltre(numbers WILL go down in safeco), clement, and drew, that would be … well thinking with my heart instead of my head.

41. Econ guy on October 29th, 2004 8:55 am

    Dave,
    Do you think that there is much chance that the M’s land 2 good bats instead of 1 good bat and one good pitcher?

42. Troy on October 29th, 2004 9:12 am

    Re: #28: ChrisK
    I don’t think Bavasi having a good relationship with Boras is going to get us a better deal, it just makes Bavasi more likely to tolerate Boras’ tactics and stick out the negotiations then someone like Gillick. Many GMs can’t stand him and seem likely to throw up their hands and just move on. Bavasi shouldn’t do that.

43. forgotten schmo on October 29th, 2004 9:13 am

    Dave nice work, very thoughtful. If the M’s go into spring with your or a similar line up any chance they would consider a discounted Griffey to upgrade at DH? Assuming you don’t trade Bucky a Griffey injury would not be a big deal because you would end up with the guy who was going to dh anyway if you did not get him. I would not pay a lot for him but it seems like a risk worth taking IF the team has a good offseason. Is it a dead idea or would the m’s consider?

44. Frozenropers on October 29th, 2004 9:21 am

    Dave,

    While it it good to see the M’s go after a solid young FA like Beltre and he fills a position that’s been a black hole for the organization for quite some time……..that lineup would once again, prove the front office has no clue when it comes to building a team to fit its home ball park.

    That lineup is completely devoid of left handed power, which is what thrives in Safeco Field (or is the least negatively impacted by the wind currents and the stadium dimensions). Lets not forget, Safeco was designed with Griffey Jr. in mind and his left handed power.

    If once again, the M’s go into the 2005 season with Ibanez as the only inkling of left handed power in their lineup, then one can just shake their head in disbelief and continue to wonder when this organization will get finally get it. As someone already mentioned….Hillenbrand could be the “poster child” for the type of hitter than doesn’t do well in Safeco Field. Right handed, dead pull hitter……..he’d be doomed from the start.

    Thanks for the write up, its interesting and the M’s going after Beltre and Clement would be nice building blocks, but until they bring in some legit, left handed power for the middle of the lineup its just going to be more of the same at home.

45. dmc on October 29th, 2004 9:30 am

    The idea of adding Beltre and Clement to the roster is very exciting – the idea of supplementing those acquisitions with overpriced scrubs is thoroughly depressing.

    Personally (and I offer the following with several significant caveats), I would like to see them supplement Beltre (or Beltran, or even Drew) with Delgado – IF (and this is a very big “if”), they could get him at a reasonable price on a short term contract (2 years max, with a club option on the 3rd, and perhaps only one year with a club option. My feeling is that a one or two year contract is the only way that Delgado will get anything close to the kind of money he’ll likely be looking for. Then again, I don’t claim to know what I’m talking about). If the Mariners were to sign Delgado, I do belive such an acquisition MUST represent a supplimental move, intended to complement the “main piece” (in this scenario, Beltre). If Delgado were to represent the key off-season acquisition for the Mariners, it would probably make for another very long year

    On the other hand, I would prefer a Beltre/Drew combination to Beltre/Delgado, but I have a feeling the latter is the more likely, (which is not to say I think it’s likely at all) and think that it could work out nicely. The FO could compensate for stretching financially for two big bats by filling other needs (shortstop, a defensive first baseman, Centerfield or 3rd base, dpending on which – if either – of the Bs we sign) within the organization or with non-roster invitees

46. Scraps on October 29th, 2004 9:46 am

    Is there evidence that left-handed power has an advantage in Safeco?

47. Brent Overman on October 29th, 2004 9:58 am

    #39 – I really like JD Drew as well, injuries aside. He’ll come cheaper than Beltran, and if you look at the stats, he’s not too far off his production level. When you factor in the cost to acquire, money may be better spent on JD Drew than the splashy choice of Beltran (not that I’d complain about having him, mind you).

48. Frozenropers on October 29th, 2004 10:15 am

    Yes, there is evidence that left handed power is affected less by Safeco than right handed power is.

49. brain on October 29th, 2004 10:23 am

    does anyone think Edgar Rentaria is a good fit?

50. Lefebvre Believer on October 29th, 2004 10:36 am

    Agree with #45. Beltre, Delgado, Ibanez, Boone, Bucky. The extra amount of money spent for Delgado would give us a lineup that is every bit as potent as what the Angels have. Then it would be just a matter of hoping our pitching stays healthy

51. The Ancient Mariner on October 29th, 2004 10:51 am

    So then, question to Dave: you have them going after Hidalgo (though not getting him); any chance they go after Drew for that slot instead/as well, and if so, any chance they might land him? If we could add Beltre/Clement/Drew as opposed to Beltre/Clement/Hillenbrand, that would be a pretty significant difference.

    As for those mentioning Ryan Howard, I’d love to see it, but I don’t think we can make an offer that would be realistic for both teams.

52. Econ guy on October 29th, 2004 10:54 am

    Dave, I think that this is a good analysis of what the M’s might do this off season. I have two main comments.
    First: I would not be surprised if the M’s wind up with 2 good bats (Delgado and Glaus) instead of a good bat (Beltre), a good pitcher (Clement), and an ok bat (Hillenbrand, bad fit for M’s).

    Second:
    I think that the M’s would be better off:
    1. Trading Winn (and maybe a prospect) for a young 1B like Howard.
    2. Signing J.D. Drew. (It would be great to make a run at Beltran but I think that we will fall short).
    3. Signing Glaus (2 years). (I would much rather sign Beltre, but he may end up overpriced after this season).
    4. Sign Matsuzaka.
    5. Resign own free agents (Wilson, Villone, and Cabrera). (I am not sure that these are great moves but I will include them because we all expect this to happen).

    I think that a team with these moves would have a lot of potential to be great in 2006 (with more moves), and if we got lucky they may even be good in 2005. There is a lot of risk to this team (several rookies, several injury risks, a poor bullpen, a risky rotation, not a lot of depth), but I would rather see the M’s take this risk. As far as payroll is concerned, I think that Drew, Glaus, and Matsuzaka would cost less than Betre, Clement, Hillenbrand, Cruz, and Kapler.

53. joebob on October 29th, 2004 11:23 am

    If we find ourselves with 15 million left to spend, I say go after drew or even beltran again if he’s still on the market NO SPENDING MONEY ON REPLACEMENT LEVEL SCRUBS!

54. brain on October 29th, 2004 11:24 am

    …or magglio ordonez?

55. chris w on October 29th, 2004 11:26 am

    What’s everyone’s facination with Ryan Howard? He’s basically Bucky Jacobsen, a guy that’s already on the team…

56. Dash on October 29th, 2004 11:58 am

    Ordonez’s health is a big question mark right now. I don’t know if it’d be a good idea to take a flyer on him right now.

57. stan on October 29th, 2004 12:04 pm

    Chris W, the Howard hype is because he has hit lots of homeruns at lower levels in the minors…. I have never seen him play and can offer no opinion about him…. I wonder in this age of information if there is any data that tells what type of pitch a player hit out of the yard, location and speed of the pitch, etc…. I assume the Phillies have that type of info for Howard, but I don’t know that it is available to the general public…

58. Aaron on October 29th, 2004 12:06 pm

    I see this offseason as the first of a two-season rebuilding plan. Next winter, Boone and Moyer come off the books. The Gillick machine collapsed fast, but there are no terrible long-term contracts that will disable the team for the next 5 years. I think at this point, we should really be talking about the 2006 lineup/payroll. Next year is just a transition.

59. Econ guy on October 29th, 2004 12:09 pm

    Jacobsen is a good guy to have in the M’s orginazation (a low price power hitter). Howard is a better prospect than Jacobsen for the M’s because he is significantly younger, left handed, can play 1B (Jacobsen is more of a DH), has better minor league stats (two years of top notch performance), and does not have the injury history of Jacobsen. Also, I think that there are still questions on whether Jacobsen is going to be able to handle breaking pitches in the majors.

    I am a Bucky fan, but the upside on Howard is much higher.

60. Dave on October 29th, 2004 12:20 pm

    I’m not sure where the Howard fascination came from, honestly. I’m guessing someone on a message board somewhere suggested him as a viable player, no one was around to provide the counter argument, and everyone reading took it as a good idea. I’ve said this before, but Ryan Howard is not worth trading for.

    The Phillies aren’t going to give him away for players we don’t want. He’s their top offensive prospect (which is kind of like being the best prospect from the Mariners 2001 draft class…), and one of their main trade chips. He has value to Philadelphia; don’t think that just because they have Jim Thome they’re looking to dump him.

    He’s also got some pretty serious flaws in his game. His swing is loooooong and anything inside is going to give him problems. He’s got a below average eye and doesn’t do well with good breaking balls. He’s been consistently old for his level, and has just over 100 at-bats against Triple-A pitching despite turning 25 in three weeks. His strikeout rate is abominable, and most minor leaguers who swing and miss as much as he does do not develop well.

    He’s much more Russ Branyan than Jim Thome (who, incidentally, didn’t strike out all that much in the minors). He’ll probably be a semi-useful major league player in his prime, but the odds of him contributing to a major league club next year are slim, and there are serious issues with his swing that will probably prevent him from ever being more than an average player.

    Stop with the Ryan Howard madness. Please.

61. msb on October 29th, 2004 12:23 pm

    “What’s everyone’s facination with Ryan Howard? He’s basically Bucky Jacobsen, a guy that’s already on the team”–Comment by chris w — 10/29/2004 @ 11:26 am

    and why does everyone think the Phillies would move him, anyway? They’ve sent him to learn the outfield, since Thome is clogging first– have there been any reports that he failed miserably in AFL?

62. Dave on October 29th, 2004 12:30 pm

    Okay, trying to catch up on all the questions. If I miss any, let me know.

    1. No, I don’t think we’re legitimate contenders for J.D. Drew. I expect him to re-sign with Atlanta for something in the 3 year, $36 million range. Drew’s probably going to get near as much as Beltre and Beltran in per-year dollars, but will take a shorter contract due to his injury history.

    2. Yes, I realize that the M’s could make a run for Delgado, Hidalgo, or Glaus if they went with cheaper options than Cruz, Hillenbrand, and Kapler. I don’t believe the organization wants to fill out the roster with rookies or minor league veterans, however. The M’s prefer to have reserves with some experience, and they’re willing to pay a bit more for it.

    3. No one is going to take Bret Boone off our hands. The Astros certainly aren’t going to give us Chris Burke for him. When you invent scenarios like this, try, just try, to look at it from the other team’s perspective. The Astros just declined a $9 million option on Jeff Kent, who hit .289/.348/.531 for them, instead choosing to pay him $700,000 to go away. So, after cutting ties with their slugging 2Bman because he was too expensive, they’re going to give up one of their better young players for the right to pay our significantly worse one the same amount of money? Obviously not. People aren’t going to give us their prospects for the guys you don’t want. Franklin, Boone, Hasegawa, and Spiezio have negative trade value. Including them in any package will make it less attractive to another club.

    4. The M’s second priority is a pitcher. I don’t see any scenario in which they go after two name hitters and ignore the pitching staff.

    5. Edgar Renteria and Orlando Cabrera are going to be overpaid. The M’s would do well to avoid these two.

63. Pete on October 29th, 2004 12:41 pm

    Dave, Thank you so much for setting people straight on Ryan Howard. I’ve had to read about him for months now, and I was getting so tired of it. I feel like the brilliant idea can be traced to Jerry, who I remember bringing Howard into a discussion many months ago. He’s still trying to push the guy. Not sure what the fascination is.

    Also…thank you so much for your “People aren’t going to give us their prospects for the guys you don’t want” comment. Maybe those words will have more credibility or weight with your name attached. Thank you thank you thank you.

64. Pete on October 29th, 2004 12:44 pm

    I also appreciate your more tempered outlook on what the M’s might do this offseason. It looks a lot more realistic than those who feel we’ll end up with Beltran, Beltre, Pavano, Delgado, and Drew (or four of the five).

65. forgotten schmo on October 29th, 2004 12:59 pm

    Dave thanks for the answers, but one miss, post #43 if they put together a good roster, griffey in the spring, gets a consideration or wait a minute I’m laughing too hard?

66. chris w on October 29th, 2004 1:17 pm

    Dave, I really like what you’ve done. Thanks. Even if you’re wrong about every single player, I really think you’re right about the general nature of next year’s team. 2-3 quality, expensive, players added, plus some short-term, overpriced, veterans. The offense is going to be somewhere from 3rd – 10th best in the league. If the pitchers all come through, which is possible, the team could be very good and win 95 games. Madritsch, Meche, Moyer, and Meche could, however, all tank. Most likely, they’ll be decent, and we’ll win 80 games.

67. PositivePaul on October 29th, 2004 1:51 pm

    Well, I think that in order to save the long-term future of the M’s, the FO has to be looking at 2004 Anaheim. M’s fans are very fickle, and aside from us freaks who are addicted to blogging on the M’s (and might be able to tolerate a 2-3 year rebuilding plan), they are very ready to jump off the bandwagon. And it sounds to me that finally Howard, et al, have at least gotten a little bit of a clue (though, of course, I’m reserving my judgement for later).

    Getting back to Anaheim, though… After winning the WS in 2002, they tanked in 2003 (went from 99 wins to 77), though not quite as badly as the M’s tanked this season (although an argument could certainly be made that it’s one of the worst tanks of the WS champs since FLA in 97). Arte Moreno came in as the new owner and gave the OK to go all out and take some HUGE risks, not all of which panned out as well as they’d hoped. I’m very curious if Howard, et al, are finally willing to do the same. Anaheim signed a cornerstone player, the best on the market, to a long-term deal. Vladie is a guy that instantly transformed that lineup, and likely will bolster it for the length of his contract. Again, that’s a risk (especially considering his back injury history), but it’s a well-calculated risk. In addition, they added other players around him (specifically: Jose Guillen, however awful off the field he may be, he still was a big contributer to getting them into the playoffs, and was sorely missed when they were there). And, they signed a front-line starter (Colon) and another guy with tons of upside (Escobar). Did their pitching signings disappoint, certainly, but they still took the risk to sign them.

    The key is, they really opened up the purse to really have the flexibility to get their team back up and running, and didn’t seem to make stupid moves that would hurt the team in the long run. The one thing they accomplished was to fill the plethora of holes that opened up after 2002. They went from 77 wins to 92, and won the division. If Boston can come back from 3-0 on the Yanks, we all should see that anything is possible.

    Certainly, I would hope that Howard, et al, would really be willing to rescue this team like Arte Moreno did to Anaheim. Sure, there’s a lot of work to do, but we have more of a revenue base to work from, and a much bigger purse. Let’s hope they use it, and use it wisely.

    If they don’t, then Howard and Chuck will be forever stuck trying to figure out how to create another 1995 to save baseball in Seattle. Maybe it is logical, then, to understand how Howard and Chuck still are caught in the timewarp of making their main priority keeping baseball in Seattle…

68. Paul Covert on October 29th, 2004 1:52 pm

    Re. the various comments on the lack of left-handed pop in the lineup: Do you have any insight, Dave, on whether the Bavasi administration perceives this as an important factor?

    (As others have said: Thanks for the writeup, Dave. I agree with the general view that this looks like about a .500 team, maybe a little above. But I won’t be unhappy with that, as long as it provides a good base from which to build for the “Felix Era” of 2006 and beyond. Winning 88 games with a Gillick-style team of 35-year-olds would please me less.)

69. Evan on October 29th, 2004 1:55 pm

    3rd – 10th best offense in the league?

    That’s a pretty broad range, but it means we’d have to finish ahead of at least 4 teams in the AL. The bottom 4 AL offenses in 2004 (by runs scored) were:

    11th – Kansas City
    12th – Toronto
    13th – Tampa Bay
    14th – Seattle

    Any guesses as to the bottom 4 in 2005?

70. Digger on October 29th, 2004 1:55 pm

    Dave–

    #6 asked why you thought Hillenbrand at 1st and Ibanez in left was any better that Winn in left and Ibanez at 1st. I’m curious too.

71. The Ancient Mariner on October 29th, 2004 2:02 pm

    Dave, that’s why I said I don’t think we could make an offer for Howard that would be realistic for both teams–he’s worth more to the Phils than he is to us (or to anyone else, really). I think somewhat more highly of him than you do, but I still wouldn’t give them what they would need to get for him in order to deal him (or even close, really).

72. The Ancient Mariner on October 29th, 2004 2:06 pm

    Re #70: He didn’t say any such thing. Rather, what he said was that they’ll move Winn to make room for a better hitter at OF/1B, though he then projects that they won’t.

73. Econ guy on October 29th, 2004 3:09 pm

    Dave,
    Sorry if I have been pushing for Howard too much. While I think that there is a chance that he will be a good player, there is a very real chance that he will never be more than an average player. I do think that Howard is a prospect that is worth looking into (Winn does have positive value, and the Phils need a CF). If the Phils want more than Winn (and possibly a non high prospect from the M’s) then the issue should be completely dropped.

    I hope that the M’s don’t go after Hillenbrand. I would much rather see them take a chance with a young 1B prospect (or maybe someone like Hatteberg if the price was low enough).

74. chico ruiz on October 29th, 2004 3:16 pm

    Dave:
    I hope you’re right that they’re pointing towards younger, top level free agents. Also, you made an excellent point in comment 62 about Franklin, Boone, Hasegawa and Spiezio having negative trade value. That said, do you think there is any way the M’s might come to their senses and see that it would be worth paying some team off to clear the roster of Spiezio? He’s just going to take at bats away from a younger player who might have some potential worth developing (or at least from Ibanez or Jacobsen, who would appear to be better options).

75. Evan on October 29th, 2004 3:33 pm

    3 year deal or no 3 year deal, Spiezio is the guy they should have released – not Olerud.

76. eponymous coward on October 29th, 2004 4:02 pm

    Hell, I’d rather they went with JT Snow than Hillenbrand- and I wouldn’t be surprised to see him be the guy they pick up as a cheapass FA instead of trading for Hillenbrand, considering they tried to deal Olerud for him this summer.

77. David J Corcoran on October 29th, 2004 4:05 pm

    Why did the FO try to trade Olerud for Snow? What would that have accomplished? An all field no hit old 1B for an all field no hit old 1B both in their walk years…

    Olerud must’ve said something about the FO…that is all I can figure

78. stan on October 29th, 2004 4:19 pm

    JT certainly had a good year for the Giants in 04… In a previous post on a long ago thread I praised Bavasi for trying to make that deal.

79. Ralph Malph on October 29th, 2004 4:20 pm

    I am at a loss to understand why anyone would be upset about Olerud being released. He was taking at bats away from Bucky/Leone/Zapp/Dobbs/whoever, and doing nothing at all for a team out of contention. He got a chance at a WS ring (ha ha ha) out of it, and probably a chance to prolong his career. Cutting him had no downside for the M’s.

    Cutting Spiezio, on the other hand, would require the M’s to continue paying him for 2 more years and would give up the 5% or so chance that he will return to being a marginally useful major league ballplayer.

    While the downside of cutting Spiezio in August was small, it was real given the 2 years left on his stupid contract.

    I expect Spiezio to make the team and then be cut next season a la Kevin Jarvis. But maybe he’ll surprise us and come out and have a great year. There’s nothing to lose from giving him a shot next spring.

80. PositivePaul on October 29th, 2004 4:32 pm

    While I agree it’s unlikely, and the signing may turn out to bite us, let’s not forget that Spiezio has had some major back issues that if he were to be totally healthy, would resolve a lot of his hitting woes. NO, he’s never been that great of a hitter, but he certainly underacheived greatly, even by his standards, in 2004. Plus, they were relying on him to be the team’s savior (along with Ibanez) when they signed him. He’s a great role-player, bench guy that can replace an injured person, but he’s not a carry-the-team-on-my-shoulders type of hitter, and shouldn’t ever expect to be.

    Indeed, however slim the chances, unlike Cirillo and Aurillia, I think Spiezio could bounce back to being a .265/15-18 HR/70+ RBI hitter. I quite honestly think that his back was a lot of the problem. Plus, he’s a very solid defensive backup.

    I believe he’ll be given a short leash, and if he pulls a Cirillo, then we’ll find a way to dump him.

81. hans on October 29th, 2004 4:33 pm

    I think this development (even solely as an intention) is encouraging. If the FO does indeed follow this plan, or something close to it, it says to me that they are approaching this the right way. You cannot go from losing 99 games to winning 99 games without something absolutely extraordinary (something like, adding $100 million to your payroll, or having all of your players exceed reasonable expectations). With this in mind, if Dave’s predictions are close, the front office is carefully selecting and trying to acquire building blocks that have a good chance of maintaining value over the next several years (i.e., players who have shown ability, and are still young). These blocks would be Ichiro, Beltre, Clement, Madritch, and Pineiro, with the possibilities of Reed, Lopez, Sherill, (and perhaps even Olivo, Meche, Nageotte, or some of the other young pitchers) developing into long-term fixtures.

    This strategy is about the top end players. The people who fill in around the top players next year are not as important, because they are not part of the long term plan. Their only job is not to seriously blow, so that fans this year see a team that has some potential to succeed. And they are not likely to be as awful as they were this year. I expect to see something of a rebound from Spiezio, Boone, and Olivo. I think we can expect something close to an .800 OPS from Ibanez, Reed, Boone, Jacobsen, and Hillenbrand. That would 7 of the 9 hitters either over .800 or right around there. If this is correct, the M’s offense next year will not be world beaters, but neither will they be something to shake a stick at.

    2006 is when things will really look up. The building blocks mentioned above will have a high likelihood of maintaining or improving performance into 2006 and beyond. This is when tantalizing additions like Felix Hernandez, Chris Snelling, and Rafel Soriano become real possibilities, and have the chance to be effective. The team can then keep its servicable parts (like Ibanez and Jacobsen if they another year like the last one) dispense with the non-performers, and see which core pieces they can add with the $17.5 million suddenly available because they are no longer paying Boone and Moyer.

    Bravo!

82. Chris Robertson on October 29th, 2004 4:40 pm

    Now that the Red Sox have locked up Bill Mueller for another year, other than LA, which teams will actively pursue Adrian Beltre? The Yankees don’t need a third baseman, neither to the Red Sox, Cubs, Cardinals, Rangers, Phillies or Angels. All teams with money.

83. paul mocker on October 29th, 2004 4:46 pm

    “This is when tantalizing additions like Felix Hernandez, Chris Snelling, and Rafel Soriano become real possibilities”

    yes!

    And I would rather stink again in 2005 and watch fresh prospects than 81 wins in 2005 with 2nd tier guys like Radke, Hidalgo, and Polanco.

    Magglio would be a good risk if he were offered 2 years at 15 – 20 million.

84. chico ruiz on October 29th, 2004 4:51 pm

    I can’t see a rebound by Spiezio. What was he, 32 when we signed him? How does he go from being a .260 hitter at 32 in Anaheim two years ago to a better hitter at 34 in Safeco in 2005? If he’d ever done much more than that, I might hope for something, but I think it’s Cirillo redux—he’s not going to get better and the sooner he goes, the better.

85. Eric on October 29th, 2004 5:03 pm

    77, I thought the whole point to the Olerud for Snow trade was just to save a couple mil when they released him since he had a lower contract than Ole, but maybe I remember that wrong

86. Jerry on October 29th, 2004 5:50 pm

    A few comments on Hillenbrand versus Howard or another young first baseman:

    Dave and I have argued about how Howard projects in the major leagues before, and I don’t think that it is necessary to get back into right now. He is correct about the K/BB rate being bad for a minor league player. I totally dismiss the age/level comments, though, because Howard was kept back in AA by the Phillies for some totally unknown reason. He should have spent almost all of 2004 in AAA, which would put him right on track (though not young). Scouts were puzzled why the Phillies didn’t promote him. So it is not a problem that is related to his performance. The real issue is whether he will hit ML pitching. In a lot of ways, the Bucky comparison is really valid. People said the same things about Bucky when he was tearing through AAA. But with Bucky, there are added concerns about his very advanced age and lack of consistent performance. Really, Howard is a much much better prospect than Bucky in every way. And Bucky did fine at the ML level. So did Howard in limited time in Philadelphia. And he is killing the ball in the Fall League right now.

    Really, this conversation should not be about why or why not Howard is going to be the 2005 Rookie of the Year. It is about whether picking up someone like him (or another young, potentially available firstbaseman like Hee Seop Choi, Carlos Pena, or someone else) is a better plan that Hillenbrand. I definitely think that it would be.

    The problem with Hillenbrand goes beyond his marginal stats. Supposing that he does get 3.5 million in arbitration next year, he will potentially get another raise in 2006. He is clearly not a guy that you want to rely on long-term. He is only slightly better (if that) than a career-average year from Spiezio. Plus, he is a righty pull hitter: exactly what the M’s don’t need.

    Instead of the Winn for Jorge Julio trade that Dave suggested (which is a distinct possibility), why not trade Winn for Howard. It would fill a need for the Phillies, who are looking for moderately priced help in CF and a good #2 hitter. The Orioles are looking for a corner outfielder who can get on base with a bit of power. For them, Ibanez probably makes more sense. The M’s could trade Ibanez to Baltimore for Julio, and then both Ibanez’s and Winn’s contracts come off the books.

    With Howard, it is a huge risk that he will end up being a good long-term solution at 1B. But who cares? He is cheap, with a ton of upside. We know that Hillenbrand is a mediocre player, and it is almost certain that he will struggle bigtime in Safeco. The M’s could hedge their bets, and go out and sign Kendry Morales as another pseudo-prospect at 1B. But Howard at least has the tools that we are looking for: lefty bat, raw power, decent defense, and a small contract. If he fails, the M’s lose little. Winn’s contract is off the books, and they can stick Spiezio at 1B until they find another option.

    Hee Seop Choi is definitely on the block as well, although I don’t know what LA would be looking for. They have a lot of free agents, so they will probably be a bit flexible. Who knows. But with Choi, the M’s would get a decent player proven at the ML level, but still young enough to be a pleasant surprise. Even if he duplicates his 2003 or 2004 non-LA numbers, you are getting a guy who gets on base, plays decent defense, and, as a lefty, his power numbers probably won’t decline as much at Safeco. He is a guy who could put everything together. All of the teams he has been with have given up on him far too early. If he just plays the way that he has before, he is better than Hillenbrand right now. But with Choi, you get some upside. And he will not be eligible for arbirtation until 2006.

    You can make a good argument that Howard is probably not going to hit at the ML level. But people also made that argument for Bucky. People have compared Howard with David Ortiz, although Howard has a lot more power than Ortiz did when he was coming up. But if you have to make the choice between Howard and Hillenbrand, I will take a chance on the rookie. Hillenbrand is not a good long-term solution at 1B, and the M’s could get a better 1-year player than him. Howard might actually pan out. If you have to make a choice between Howard for 300,000 and Hillenbrand for 3.5 million, that is an absolute no-brainer. Same deal with Choi, who is probably a better option. With Choi, you at least have some idea of what he might do against ML pitching over an appreciable number of at-bats.

87. Jerry on October 29th, 2004 5:58 pm

    To add to the comments above, if the M’s could somehow pull off those two trades (Winn for Howard and Ibanez for Julio), they would free up about 7 million in payroll. If the M’s make the right decision and pass on Deivi Cruz, they would have 9 million to spend on a free agent. At that price, they could get Ordonez (?), Drew (on a backloaded contract), or perhaps try to trade for someone like Carlos Lee. It would allow them to actually bring in a player that could help beyond 2005, which should be the ultimate goal of this offseason.

88. Dave on October 29th, 2004 6:11 pm

    Jerry,

    1. Can you just admit that you don’t know that much about Howard and be done with it? Comments such as “Scouts were puzzled why the Phillies didn’t promote him.” are just untrue. Howard isn’t very well liked by most scouts. The general consensus is that he’s a one-trick pony with a swing that has holes. Howard made the jump from high-A to Double-A this year, just like every other prospect does. The Phillies haven’t held him back; he’s just been old for his league because he hasn’t forced the Phillies to promote him. And seriously, quoting Arizona Fall League stats? Ken Harvey hit .450 in the AFL last year. The AFL is completely worthless for evaluating talent. The comparison to Bucky is specious; he was signed as a minor league free agent. If the question was “Should we claim Ryan Howard on waivers?”, that would be one thing. But Howard isn’t “cheap” in the cost of acquisition, no matter how much you want him to be. Bucky’s existance is a point in favor of not trading for a first baseman; they can be found relatively easily at little cost, so why give up real talent to get one?

    2. The Phillies aren’t going to trade Howard for Winn. The Orioles aren’t going to trade Julio for Ibanez. Stop with these crazy “dump guys I don’t want for other teams young players” theories. It isn’t going to happen.

    3. I’m not advocating a trade for Shea Hillenbrand, so don’t expect me to defend it. But you simply need to stop assuming that Carlos Pena, Hee Choi (who is not “definitely available”, by the way), and Ryan Howard can be had for guys you don’t want on the roster anyways. Their teams aren’t giving them away. Really. I’m not lying.

89. tvwxman on October 29th, 2004 7:12 pm

    Nice job, Dave.

    I echo hans (#81). Anyone who thinks this team could truly contend next year needs to take off the rose-colored glasses. You don’t have almost a complete roster overhaul and make up 40 games in a year. I would be more optimistic if this were the AL Central or the NL East, but there are 3 90+ win teams in the West to deal with, and with the possible exception of the A’s, they’re getting better, not worse.

    Yeah, Hillenbrand isn’t the solution we all want to see. But he’s only be a Mariner for a year (right?) and none of us have looked ahead to see who’s a FA in the 2005 offseason.

    While I would bicker with the reasoning behind signing 3 average/below average veterans when 3 rookies and a better FA could be had, the other ideas are much better than previous administrations: Sign a big name who is still young (Beltran/Beltre), get another power arm to replace Freddy at the top of the rotation (Clement), and give the kids (Lopez, Reed) a full season to get used to the bigs.

    Then, do it again in 2005: acquire another big bat to play 1B and make a legit push for 90+ games.

90. David J Corcoran on October 29th, 2004 7:34 pm

    Another thing to think about. If Howard were so great, the Phillies would be moving THOME, not Howard…

91. George on October 29th, 2004 8:14 pm

    don’t like Hillebrand or Hidalgo, Beltre a big yes
    Delgado is a no thanks same for Howard
    concerned the bullpen is not updated enough
    I like #43, Griffey if cheap enough, what the hell we need all the bats we can we get but I doubt Howie would allow it – you hear anything on that Dave

92. MacMariner on October 29th, 2004 8:43 pm

    Quick question Dave. Were you given some information that Bavasi and the front-office are looking/planning to acquire Hilenbrand, or is he one of the more “speculative” parts of your off-season preview. My sanity may be at stake here.

93. The Ancient Mariner on October 29th, 2004 10:05 pm

    tvwxman: well put and right on the money, as always. One positive aspect to the scenario laid out here is that it would probably mean a starting job for Jeremy Reed, which would be good both for his development and for the team’s potential to overachieve. Reed’s going to need to hit .320 to be a good player, but I think he can do it.

94. Ty Brown on October 29th, 2004 10:05 pm

    I’ve never tought we have a chance at getting Beltre. It would be a good thing, but my gut tells me he’s not commin’ to Seattle.

95. Bela Txadux on October 29th, 2004 10:46 pm

    So Jerry re: #86,

    While I have argued the other side from you on Ryan Howard before, I will say that I like your approach in general in this post; it’s very Billy Beane-esque, in a way, looking over incomplete players starting with a most-desired feature (lefthand power in this instance) and giving a guy 250-300 ABs to show what he can do. Now, I’m no particular fan of Howard, Choi, or somewhat less strongly on the negatory Pena. These guys all have big holes in their swings; none of them are young anymore; the opening odds on any of them having major upside at the ML level are 2-1 against. Still, the odds on Hillenbrand being mediocre or below at Safeco are 10-1 for at least. I didn’t discuss it in detail in my previous post in this thread, but I would view the acquisition of Hillenbrand in and of itself as a major negative; as another blogger opined above, he is _exactly_ the kind of player NOT to acquire for this park. They guys you are reaching for here, Jerry, are at least lefthanded, have power, and are cheap salarywise. They are not cheap in trade talent, however, as Dave points out. Pena, the best of the bunch, was the starting 1b for his team for the last two years, and hit close to 30 jacks in a pitcher’s park (his only real offensive positive). The Tiges aren’t going to move him short of getting a mid-rotation starter back, count on it. And that’s far, far too much to pay for him.

    Conceptually, this isn’t a bad way to go, and frankly I would prefer the Ms FO to be a bit more open to a gamble on the upside for at least one of the position players they must acquire this offseason. Hillenbrand has _ZERO_ upside, so why take him other than to try to look good to the fans going into Opening Day ‘05? Not that I’m laying this off on Dave; Hillenbrand isn’t _his_ choice, just his projection of the FOs approach, if I read him right at the start of this thread. I do not want to see the Ms go for safe mediocrity, and that’s all Hillenbrand and Deivi Cruz and Jolbert Cabrera are _at best_. I do agree with the Ms FO that the bench is a place for experienced guys, not minor league flyers on the whole. Experienced guys with some _significant_ positives. Last offseason’s moves does not encourage me at all that the current FO can accurately assess _significant_ positives for incomplete players, and Dave’s best-guess list for the downroster moves this offseason essentially projects more of the same there, which is my gut feeling also. I’d love the FO to prove me wrong here, but . . . . : (

96. eponymous coward on October 29th, 2004 10:54 pm

    Kapler’s not such a bad choice (considering last year’s 4th OF at the start of the year was McCracken), but yeah.

97. Jerry on October 29th, 2004 11:01 pm

    Dave,

    You are I are beginning to argue past one another. This is obviously a communication problem. Let me break down my argument to avoid more confusion:

    -I think that Shea Hillenbrand would be an incredibly bad move. Hillenbrand is exactly the type of player who is most likley to fail in Seattle. He is a very mediocre righty pull hitter. He cannot draw a walk to save his life. His stats will almost surely decline in Safeco. Plus, he is a bad defender. He is EXACTLY what the team should be avoiding. I hope that Bavasi et al are not this dumb. If they are interested in avoiding long-term risk, why not go for a younger player who might actually play better than expected.

    -If the M’s want to get a one-year 1B standin, they aleady have one with Spiezio. If the really want to get someone from outside the organization, there will be options that make far more sense than Hillenbrand. If we are looking at short-term solutions, why not go for someone who could be a surprise. Why not take a chance, like the Angels with Jose Guillen and the Tigers when the picked up Carlos Guillen. Both guys were risks, but both had upside. Hillenbrand has no upside. He has had a chance to play in the past, and has done little.

    -I don’t know what to make of a comment like: “Hee Choi (who is not “definitely available”, by the way)…” Dude, you are just dead wrong. LA was so unimpressed with Hee Seop Choi that they didn’t even put him on the playoff roster. He is about as available as a guy can get. The Dodgers are rumored to be very interested in Delgado also, which will make him even more available. If the Dodgers like him so much, why would they not let him play? The guy was traded to LA at the deadline, and afterwards played in 32 games with 62 at bats. He didn’t gain any supporters there. They will trade him.

    -”Howard made the jump from high-A to Double-A this year, just like every other prospect does. The Phillies haven’t held him back; he’s just been old for his league because he hasn’t forced the Phillies to promote him.” That is just not true. Howard started the year in AA at Reading, and hit .297, 37 HRs, 102 RBI, .647 SLG, .386 OBP, 1.033 OPS at age 24. If that is not enough to get promoted, then what is? Really, very few players are allowed to accumulate 37 HRs at a single level. The reason the Phillies left him in AA is that it would make him look less like the career minor-league sluggers, like Ken Harvey, who make a living in AAA. The Phillies knew that he wasn’t going to play for them, so they left him in AA WAY longer than he would have been with most other organizations. Why rush a guy who won’t go past AAA? This is pretty common knowledge.

    Beyond your criticisms of Howard, there is a huge contradiction in your logic. You say that Howard is not highly regarded by scouts, then you say that the Phillies won’t let him go for a player like Winn. How does that work? You can’t have it both ways. He either sucks or is a valuable commodity. Which is it?

    -How can you say that it is unrealistic that the Phillies would trade Winn for Howard, while at the same time saying that the Orioles would give up Jorge Julio for him. Julio is a proven reliever with a minimum salary. Winn fill more needs for the Phillies than he does for the Orioles. Julio has more value than Howard, who, as you say, “isn’t very well liked by most scouts.” Your logic is strange.

    -My MAIN point (the one that you don’t address at all) is that if the M’s are looking for help at 1B, there are dozens of better choices out there than Hillenbrand. They should take a chance on a younger player for two reasons: 1) lower salary and more money to address other needs, and 2) a chance that you might find a player who can be a long-term contributor. Hillenbrand is neither. Plus, he is a disaster waiting to happen at Safeco.

    I am not married to the idea of Howard. I just think that the Winn/Howard trade makes sense, given that the Phillies need a decent center fielder who can hit #2, and the M’s need a lefty hitter at 1B with some power. It makes sense.

    If not, there are loads of other options. Boston will probably put one of their first basemen on the trading block, and Doug Mientkiewicz and Kevin Millar both are far better options than Hillenbrand. Hee Seop Choi is available. Lyle Overbay might be available if the Brewers want to bring up Prince Fielder soon. If the Tigers acquire another first baseman, they will be looking to unload Carlos Pena. There are also other players besides Howard who are blocked at 1B, like Casey Kotchman and Adrian Gonzalez. The point is, there are loads of better options out there besides Shea Hillenbrand. One of them might be a good fit.

    I don’t know if you have some inside information about the M’s interest in Hillenbrand, or Cruz for that matter, but both would be horrible moves. Hillenbrand especially. I just don’t understand why you would go out and trade prospects or players for a guy like him, when there are far better options out there. Or, the M’s could just try to fill their bench needs internally, spend 2-3 million more, and sign someone like Richie Sexson or Carlos Delgado.

    Ibanez also gives the M’s some flexibilty. They could go out and sign or trade for someone who could play LF, and move Ibanez to 1B for the time being. Carlos Lee is on the block, and he would be a great pickup. This would cost the M’s some good prospects, but he is a good power hitter. Austin Kearns will probably be available once the Red’s give up on his 3B audition. His value is low and his upside is well worth a trade. He would be a great pickup. All of these moves make far more sense than Hillenbrand.

    To sum up, there are a lot more intestersting options than Hillenbrand. I realize that you are “not advocating a trade for Shea Hillenbrand.” But I don’t know why you suggested that it is a possibility. I doesn’t seem to make any sense. I just hope that Bill Bavasi also understands how dumb this would be. You might be right that guys like Carlos Pena, Hee Seop Choi, and Ryan Howard might not be available for spare parts. But I don’t think that Hillenbrand will be either. But wouldn’t it be worth giving up a prospect or two to take a chance on a player who might actually be GOOD? I think it is.

98. G-Man on October 29th, 2004 11:52 pm

    Here I go again, defending Spezio. Not that I think he’ll be a starter, but he’s viable as a bench player. He’s got a good glove at third and first, can play OF in a pinch, and he’s a switch hitter. Sure, I’d say sayonara if he was a free agent, but we’ve paid him for 2 more years, so keep him around. He is not automatically the second coming of Jeff Cirillo.

99. tede on October 30th, 2004 12:49 am

    I think I’m going to be ill after reading Pocket Lint’s latest in the Saturday Times (hopefully DMZ or Dave will start a new thread). He says only $13 million to go after free agents and gives the false club promise of “what till next year when the big contracts come off of the payroll” when Boone/Moyer/Cirillo etc are no longer being paid. If you believe that, then you’ll believe that Boone’s Lasik surgery will make a world of difference and just having some catching drills in Arizona has suddenly made Olivo into a viable catcher.

    2005 is going to be ugly.

100. LB on October 30th, 2004 1:00 am

     #82: Just because the Sox exercised the option on Mueller doesn’t mean he’s playing for them next year. They could trade him if they wanted to join the hunt for Beltre. Mueller’s contract is very attractive. (And he “knows how to win” and gets “clutch hits” in the post-season, just like Spezio, so he’d probably look great to the M’s front office types.)

101. eponymous coward on October 30th, 2004 1:59 am

     Yeah, Dave, is Pocket Lint talking to someone else in the front office that’s part of the Gillick clique?

     I think I’ll also drop him as line reminding him “So, what DID happen to the Sasaki money, anyway?”

102. Scraps on October 30th, 2004 2:23 am

     >Yes, there is evidence that left handed power is
     >affected less by Safeco than right handed power is.

     Sorry, I guess I should have asked: What is the evidence? Can you point me toward it?

103. wmj on October 30th, 2004 3:59 am

     Dave,
     Your projected contracts for Clement and especially Beltre are too optimistic. And while I admit that predicting offseason moves is difficult, your expectations for the Mariners seems a bit arbitrary. Then again, rational thought is not the first thing that comes to mind when contemplating most of the ballclubs past decisions. Perhaps your prognostication should have included the team overpaying some worthless veterans.
     And out of curiosity, can you explain the dicrepancies, however slight, between the salaries of the 2005 staff mentioned in your post and the ones reported by Bob Finnagan in his recent Times article.

104. Dave on October 30th, 2004 5:52 am

     Jerry,

     Here’s the deal; you’re arguing what you want to happen, and then trying to support it with hopes and wishes. I’m telling you how teams actually feel about their players. The Phillies like Ryan Howard (they did draft him, afterall). Most teams don’t, at least not to the extent the Phillies do. This is pretty common. The M’s loved Willie Bloomquist coming up through the system too, though you couldn’t find another team who thought he had a chance to be a player. Same thing with Hee Choi; you want him, so you’ve rationalized why he might be available. Unfortunately, he’s not. You’re just going to have to believe me on this. Paul DePodesta isn’t giving up on Choi after 60 at-bats.

     Hillenbrand is a bad move. I think we all agree with that. You don’t need to convince anyone here.

     I never proposed that the M’s would trade Winn straight up for Julio. I believe that, if a deal of that nature went down, the M’s would include a pitcher, probably from the Atchison/Baek/Mateo grouping. The O’s would swap pitcher for pitcher, and take Winn as well. He doesn’t have nearly as much value as you want him to.

     Oh, and Carlos Lee is not on the block. He just signed a pretty large extension with the White Sox. Can you just stop making stuff up please?

105. Dave on October 30th, 2004 5:53 am

     I’ll respond to Finnigan’s article in that thread.

106. Jerry on October 30th, 2004 9:34 am

     Dave,

     You know, you can have a debate without getting grumpy or accusing me of making things up. Just because I don’t agree with you doesn’t mean that I am making things up. Every trade speculation I have come up with is based on rumors I have read or moves teams have made. All I am saying is that I hope that the M’s will explore options for younger players who can fill in at 1B instead of going for someone like Hillenbrand. I think that we all can agree with that.

     I am not making stuff up about Carlos Lee. Why would I just make up stuff? He is rumored to be on the block. If you haven’t heard that, then maybe you are not as informed as you seem to think. He signed an extension that goes through 2005, with a 2006 option, so it is not like he is locked in for years. There are rumors that the ChiSox want to get faster and more athletic. Some have suggested that Paul Konerko and Lee might be on the block (I last read this in Sporting News magazine). Most of the ‘rumors’ I refer to are from fairly reputable sources, although they are still just rumors. Hee Seop Choi is a guy that has played badly in LA, and was benched quickly after he arrived there. LA has Shawn Green that can either play 1B or LF. If the Dodgers sign an OFer, Green is their firstbaseman. The Dodgers also might sign a free agent firstbaseman, like Carlos Delgado. If either of these things happen, the Dodgers will be very likely to trade Choi. Regardless, LA has done everything to suggest that they are unhappy with Choi at 1B. Both DePodesta and Williams are pretty bold about making trades, so you never know what they will try to do. Obviously, everything is contingent on what other moves these teams make, and what they have in mind for offseason pickups. These things that I bring up are just ideas, just like your suggestion about Hillenbrand. Most of them probably won’t pan out.

     Look, all I am trying to say is that the M’s should be looking for a bargain. Late in the offseason, after most teams have made some moves and their needs are more clearly defined, the M’s might be able to pick up a cheap option at 1B. Preferably, they can find someone like Choi, Howard, or Pena who might actually turn out to be a long-term option. This might be possible without giving up important players, or they might have to trade some pitching to address that need. But if that is what it takes, why not do it? Hillenbrand is not going to be free either. If you are going to make a trade, why not get some balls and actually go after a good player? Or at least find a player who makes sense for Seattle on some level.

     It is clear from your analysis above that the M’s are going to be hard pressed to bring in two middle-of-the-order hitters and a starting pitcher in free agency. The front office has made it clear that they are going to sign a starting pitcher and one star hitter. I think that Clement and Beltre would be great choices here. But if the M’s do sign these two guys, they will really need a lefty power hitter to rebuild the middle of the order. To do this, they will need to make a trade. Either they can focus on acquiring a player in a trade, or move one or two contracts to free up enough cash to sign a third free agent. I think that the former is the most likely, becasue, as you say, players like Franklin, Spiezio, Boone, and Shiggy have negative trade value.

     I would rather see them go after someone like Howard. A trade like Winn, Baek/Blackley, and Atchison/Mateo for Ryan Howard and Marlon Byrd would be a good move. It would make some sense for both teams. The M’s would get a 4th outfielder cheap, plus a decent prospect at 1B. Both of these guys could exceed expectations. The Phillies get a pitching prospect, a reliever, and a CF/leadoff hitter. Or the M’s could try to pick up a player with a bigger contract in exchange for one of our bad contracts. Cliff Floyd could make sense at DH or in a possible move to 1B. His contract is bad (6.5 million/year through 2006), but if the Met’s were willing to accept one of our bad contracts, like Spiezio, it begins to make more sense. When he is healthy, Floyd is a good hitter, and at 1B or DH the M’s could possibly get a full season out of him. He could be a good pickup, because he is a lefty with power who gets on base. The Met’s would definitely listen to offers on him. The Met’s are going to have to accept a bad contract to move him because of his high price tag. If the M’s could trade Spiezio or Ibanez for him, he only would cost the M’s 3 million (6.5 minus Spiezio’s contract). Who knows what the Met’s would want for him, but he makes more sense than Hillenbrand.

     These ideas are all just speculation. I am not saying that any of these things are a done deal. I just hope that the M’s explore all of their options. I am just thinking out loud about possibilities. Really, isn’t your whole post above just making stuff up? Why is it OK for you to make stuff up, but not any of the rest of us? Does an idea have to be a bad idea to be OK here?

107. George on October 30th, 2004 2:58 pm

     If I’m going to spend over 6 mill on a guy who can no longer field to dh I’d rather see if Griffey was available for that. Both have injury risk but the upside of Griffey is higher than Floyd.

108. George on October 30th, 2004 3:01 pm

     Dave you never answered anything on Griffey, something you can’t say or just laughing too hard at the notion as it was put.

109. Jerry on October 30th, 2004 3:56 pm

     George,

     DH’s still have to run the bases. Griffey is a bad idea. Floyd can actually play baseball occasionally.

110. Logan on October 30th, 2004 4:30 pm

     Jerry, your obssesion for Howard is disturbing. Blackley could be Derek Lowe in 2-3 years.

111. Logan on October 30th, 2004 4:37 pm

     Why would any GM perfer Shea Hildebrand over Ibanez? They are similar offensively, why get rid of a known commodity veteran for another veteran. I’d rather trade for a younger power hitter, Ibanez performed admirably with no protection in the line-up and gave the team leadership and heart to a lifeless club in 2004.

112. Econ guy on October 30th, 2004 4:55 pm

     Jerry is not the only one interested in players like Howard. I think that Jerry is correct in the sense that the M’s should go after a young 1B that has an upside (even if there is a large risk that he will fail). If the M’s were in a position to be competitive in 2005 I think that a proven veteran player would make sense. Since they probably will not be competitive in 2005, it would be much better to build a team that at least has the potential to be good in 2006. Howard may fail, but he does have a real upside. I am not saying that the M’s need to get Howard, but they should be looking into acquiring a young 1B with an upside.

113. Dave on October 30th, 2004 7:48 pm

     Jerry,

     I’m telling you that you’re “rumors” are crap. Believe what you will; I’m telling you what i know to be true. Choi is not “obviously being shopped”. Howard is not available for Winn. The Orioles don’t want Ibanez (the M’s have no interest in moving him anyways). Konerko and Lee aren’t being shopped. None of these “rumors” have any validity at all.

     Griffey-no, I don’t think the Reds will eat the necessary amount of salary to make any team want to take a shot at him.

114. George on October 30th, 2004 7:52 pm

     thanks dave

115. Dave on October 30th, 2004 8:00 pm

     Oh, and I think I forgot to mention the Hillenbrand question. I know that there are people in the organization with some pull who like him quite a bit, more than most folks do. I know that if Sexson resigns with Arizona, as expected, they’re going to put Hillenbrand on the market and he’ll almost certainly be dealt. I haven’t been told “Hillenbrand is one of our target players” or anything to that effect. So, that was more a speculative suggestion based on a few pieces of unconnected information.

116. Tom on October 30th, 2004 9:30 pm

     Forgive me beforehand if I go a little out of context here.

     Well, it’s official, I’ve lost faith in Howard Lincoln.
     I’m forever the optimist, but the Seattle Times article by Bob Finnigan today made me think otherwise. You know, it really ticks me off. Howard Lincoln, Chuck Armstrong and Bill Bavasi, have been saying all summer that they’ll spend significant money this year, and actions speak louder than words, and we can get back into contention next year, and then I read this trash.

     You know, I just hate this, I don’t care whether you guys had a feeling he would be cheap or not, but Lincoln still lied.

     He still lied to you all about him spending money, and I’m tired of it. That is why my manager (Lou), my general manager (Gillick), are gone.

     Dosen’t the fool see how much money the Red Sox, Yankees, and Angels make when they invest over 100 million in players? For petes sake, he was the president of Nintendo! Of course he has the money!!!

     And what especially makes this bitter is that, unlike the Sonics or Seahawks, people actually give a crap about this team when their around. At least that’s how it is been the last 10 years.

     I’m sick of it!!

     Instead of getting 2-4 top tier free agents, were only gonna get 1, if that. And even if we have money next year, what are we gonna hear?
     Excuses, excuses, excuses.

     I’m so sick of Seattle being “losertown”

     I wish the owners could prove they gave a crap about this team and get some great players. Like Arte Moreno, John Henry of the Red Sox, and even George Steinbrenner has. Even our ownership for a time cared about getting the best players. I mean, it wasn’t until a couple years ago where Pinella and Gillick said that they couldn’t handle it anymore. And Gillick was here for about a good 5 seasons, and Pinella was here for 10.

     But forget it, they think baseball is a business more than a sport. And that’s what ticks me off more than anything.

     For 10 years, since I was 7 years old, I’ve been dreaming about seeing these guys in the World Series. But this is crushing.

     I don’t think your’e gonna see a product that is much better next year.

117. David J Corcoran on October 31st, 2004 8:29 am

     What about Mark Teixiera? With Adrian Gonzalez coming up, will he be traded, or moved to DH/OF?

118. Jerry on October 31st, 2004 11:08 am

     Dave,

     You are not understanding my point at all. All I am saying is that the M’s would be smart to look into trades for younger first basemen. They might be able to pick up a cheaper option in exchange for a player they don’t really need.

     You are being a total hypocrit. You say that the rumors that I mentioned, which have been discussed in the media, are ‘crap’ then you just spin your own ‘rumors’. Your Shea Hillenbrand ‘rumor’ is just as much ‘crap.’

119. Mark on October 31st, 2004 1:21 pm

     I agree with you dave for the most part. I would just like to see a few names change. Like Jose Viscaino instead of Cruz and maybe sign Rheal Cormier instead of trading for julio. Then trade for a 1st baseman of greater caliber than Hillenbrand. Maybe trade for Mike Sweeney, you know KC wants to get rid of him like VD. Just tweeks but I like the main pieces.

120. Dave on October 31st, 2004 8:19 pm

     They might be able to pick up a cheaper option in exchange for a player they don’t really need.

     Its amazing to me that you still believe anyone else might want to give up something of value for something that is clearly worthless.

121. The Ancient Mariner on October 31st, 2004 8:34 pm

     Jerry, the difference is that Dave has contacts which we don’t have, and therefore knows things which we don’t. Thus his speculation is informed to a degree which ours isn’t. This is an important distinction.

     Oh, and Mark: Hillenbrand is at least cheap. Sweeney has a horrendous contract. Given the money situation, I’d actually rather have Hillenbrand.

122. DMZ on October 31st, 2004 8:49 pm

     I believe Sweeney’s contract also has some poison-pill style clauses, where if he gets traded it gets far, far worse than it is for KC now.

123. Mark on October 31st, 2004 9:31 pm

     Also I would not be averse to signing Sele again, of course for the right price as insurance for the SP’s. Franklin moving to the pen seems like a great idea to me. Especially with the success of other mediocre starters turned relievers, it’s worth a shot. Of the available SP I would prefer Radke to Clement and would settle for Millwood, realistically probably none of them but wishful thinking.

124. Jerry on October 31st, 2004 11:19 pm

     Dave,
     “Its amazing to me that you still believe anyone else might want to give up something of value for something that is clearly worthless.”

     Not sure what you are referring to. You yourself said that Winn has trade value, so we both agree that he is not totally worthless. Hillenbrand, on the other hand, is completely useless. With the Boone/Vazquez trade, I was referring to two players who are basically bad contracts. It is just a matter of whether one player is ‘less worthless’ to another team. The Yankees are going to ditch Vazquez, and they have supposedly expressed interest Boone although they don’t want his contract. If the M’s were taking most of Vazquez’s contact off their hands, it might be something they are interested in. If they get a better deal, they get a better deal. I just don’t think that they are going to have a lot of good offers for a player with a contract like Vazquez’s. Just like the M’s aren’t going to get a lot of offers for a player with a contract like Boone’s.

125. Bela Txadux on November 1st, 2004 12:30 am

     Dave, on the issue of giving up something of value for something worthless, oddly enough folks do this all the time in baseball; it’s called seeing what you want to see. Since statistically sound, objective analysis has come in over the last twenty years this happens _much_ less often than it used to—but it still happens. Every year. Particularly at the trade deadline in July, but in the offseason, too. Consider the Ms most famous instance of this: Slocumb, Timlin, and Spoljaric [yesss! I can still spell his name]. Now, I’ll grant you that Timlin in ‘98 was something better than useless, but in ‘97 he and the other two were ABSOLUTELY USELESS, and the other two stayed that way. And look at what the Ms gave up for them; definitely non-useless, however we figure there value.

     . . . Strange as it may seem, folks will see what they want to at times. This doesn’t mean that anyone will take Spezio after his ‘04 year, under any circumstances, of course. But I would have said Cirllo was untradeable under any circumstances, and not only was he traded (without any savings of $$ but that _was_ impossible), but the Ms even got one player, Dave Hansen, who actually could do a little bit of something useful. I wouldn’t mind Hansen coming back this offseason, either, I’ve got a sweet spot for professional hitters. Sometimes one can turn manure into mutton stew, Porterhouse, no, but mutton stew, yes.

     I do agree with you overall, Dave, that discussing player acquisitions en blog it is better if we stay with real possibilities than wishtastic ejaculations or mere scenario spinning. I think most of Jerry’s posts are something other than in these latter two categories, more ‘reaches’ in my view than dreamcasting; you simply don’t agree with his points, which is your prerogative.

126. Bela Txadux on November 1st, 2004 12:34 am

     Oh, and Derek Bell! Dave. He was traded several times AND signed to a multi-year. And if ever there was a ‘useless baseball player’ in recent years D-wreck is surely at the head of the list.

127. paul mocker on November 1st, 2004 11:52 am

     Dave wrote this in his article:

     I expect the Mariners to come out with a “take it or leave it” offer in the range of 6 years, $95 million and a 2005 salary of about $9 million. The Mariners would love to have Beltran and will give Boras an opportunity to set the market with a contract larger than what Vladimir Guerrero commanded last year, but they have little interest in getting involved in a prolonged negotiation. If Boras intends to keep Beltran on the market and create a bidding war, the Mariners will retract their offer and move on quickly. I don’t expect Boras to accept the Mariners terms, and I believe he’ll eventually sign with the Chicago Cubs for about the same money, perhaps a little bit more, than what the Mariners original offer will be.”

     What does this say about the mole in the Safe that Dave presumably gets some of his info from? Does this reflect any insider info?

     My question for those who have excerieance in employee acquisition and retention: Why start out the bidding? If you expect to lose by a few million and don’t want to engage in high level bidding, why start with an offer?

     The Mariner’s have it wrong. The objective is to retain Beltran. The method is to beat the other bidders. Simply say to Boras: We will beat any offer can get the job done. Am I wrong?

128. Jerry on November 1st, 2004 12:13 pm

     Paul,

     Even if they have no real interest in signing Beltran, at least they would be upping the bidding for other teams. I think that the numbers that Dave posted are pretty much what Beltran SHOULD be worth. That is a lot of cash (average salary of 15.8 million). Really, the M’s would probably be better off going to Beltre and a starting pitcher, like Dave proposed. I would rather see them get some balls and sign three good players: Beltre, Clement, and a third hitter, perhaps JD Drew or Carlos Delgado. A lefty bat would really help the M’s in building a strong lineup. But if the M’s are going to follow Finnigan’s advice and be stingy, that is probably not going to happen.

129. Steve on November 1st, 2004 7:08 pm

     I can think of several rational reasons for the Mariners to approach Beltran as Dave suggests>

     1. If the Mariners bid becomes a floor from which bidding proceeds, the Mariners will have succeeded in driving up the price that another team pays for Beltran. That works to the Mariners advantage.

     2. If the Mariners offer is turned down, they signal clearly to other players and agents that the Mariners are serious about free agent acquisition this year.

     3. It plays well with the local fan base if the Mariners make a big time offer.

     4. The Mariners have enough holes to fill that it’s not in their interest to drag things out. If they wait too long on Beltran, other players they are interested may sign with other teams. That greatly weaken the Mariners off season situation.

     5. It may be good PR with Scott Boras – give Boras a strong opening bid for one of his players. As mercenary as Boras appears to be, it’s still critical to work relationships with his baseball execs. So he does operate in a quid pro quo world. The payback could come later in negotiations with Drew, for example.

     6. If the Mariners offer is an above market offer – but one the Mariners are willing to pay – there is a possibility that Beltran will receive no offers better than the Mariners offer. In that case, Beltran and Boras may come back to the Mariners, asking if the Mariners are willing to repeat the orginal offer. In such a situation, the Mariners would have some negotiating leverage to get Beltran for a better deal than the original offer (and remember that the original offer would be one the Mariners were willing to pay.

     With all of that being said, I think the biggest consideration that will drive the Mariners is the need to act decisively and quickly. The Mariners plans will be stymied if none of their primary targets are ready to act quickly.

130. paul mocker on November 3rd, 2004 2:59 pm

     Steve,

     #1. This advantage is very small. They rarely make first offers.

     #2 – I don’t understand how a rejected offer would be a signal that they were serious.

     #3 – Agreed. The PR value is good but fleeting. Very few fans even remember who the M’s offer contacts to.

     #4 – Agreed. They don’t want to prolong things. This is why you make an offer that is close to market value and that signals you are serious.

     #6. The M’s offer won’t be above market. Is there a consistent pattern of Bavasi making above market offers? Perhaps with the Angels.

• Recent Posts

  • Dustin Ackley, Second Baseman?
  • Waiver claims
  • I before U, except after T
  • A Name To Tuck Away
  • Have A Hot Dog With Me, Don Wakamatsu
  • ‘09 40-man Preview Extravaganza
  • Zack Greinke Is Awesome
  • This And That
  • M’s rumored to be interested in signing, trading for, players
  • Weekend meta: new user registrations

• USSM uses and recommends

  

• Author Links

  • David Cameron Photography
  • Cheater’s Guide to Baseball Blog
  • Hate Life, Will Travel: Derek’s blog

• Local M's Coverage

  • Geoff Baker’s M’s blog (Times)
  • Kirby Arnold’s blog, Everett Herald
  • Larry Stone (Times)
  • Mariners Insider (TNT)
  • Seattle P-I
  • Seattle Times
  • Shannon Drayer
  • Tacoma News Tribune

• M's Blogosphere

  • Bleeding Blue and Teal
  • Lookout Landing
  • Mariner Melee
  • Mariner Minors
  • Prospect Insider
  • Seattle Marinerds

• M's Official Sites

  • Clinton LumberKings (A-)
  • Current 40-man roster
  • Everett Aquasox (short season A-)
  • High Desert Mavericks (A+)
  • Safeco Field seating chart
  • Seattle Mariners
  • Tacoma Rainiers (AAA)
  • West Tennessee Diamond Jaxx (AA)

• Player Blogs

  • Ryan Rowland-Smith

• Resources

  • Baseball’s Collective Bargaining Agreement
  • Bullpen Usage
  • Fangraphs
  • Minor League Baseball
  • MLB Contracts
  • MLB Official Rules
  • Retrosheet
  • StatCorner
  • The Baseball Archive
  • USA Today Salary Database

• Twittah