It was fun
In April, we were all asked at the USSM feed how we thought the team would do. My “85 wins, contends for the division” prediction drew chuckles and scoffs from around the room. In May, when the team was scuffling, I continued to argue that the season was not lost, and I maintained my status as the most optimistic of our quartet of bloggers.
Tonight, I throw in the towel. 6.5 games back with just 52 games to play is a monumental hill to climb. It’s not impossible – the team’s mathmatical odds are probably around 3-5% – but this sweep crippled the team’s chances of making a real run. If this was a better team, making up 7 games in 7 weeks wouldn’t be unheard of. But this team is just too flawed for that kind of run to be expected. It’s hard to play .700 baseball for two months when you have a center fielder with a .450 OPS and don’t have a single hitter on the roster who doesn’t disdain the base on balls.
For four months, we were contenders. Now? We’re waiting til next year. Again.
#196–Presley was okay briefly, but he sucked the last couple of years and it took the team forever to get rid of him, while Edgar Martinez wasted the better part of two years hitting ridiculously well in the minors. I suppose that wasn’t Presley’s fault, but its hard to forgive and forget now that Edgar’s Hall of Fame case is on the line….
In my opinion, EC has a position that is defendable. It’s a position that is debatable, but it is not a position that merits any sort of ridicule. My two cents.
Personally, I have mixed emotions about Bavasi. I wish I knew with certainty what moves he’s made that he wanted to make. Better yet, what moves he would like to make given a completely free hand.
Over the last couple of weeks his critics have come out of the woodwork with angry nonsense like “He should’ve got a number one starter at the deadline!” Yeah? Who?
I am pretty neutral at this point. And I would have to know who was the alternative before I would root for Bavasi to get the boot.
Hargrove is another story. His failures are not really debatable. I’m comfortable rooting for his ouster because most anyone they are likely to hire would be better. Dusty Baker being the only exception that costs me sleep.
Bottom line is that I think it is a slam dunk decision that Hargrove has to go… a much more muddied one regarding Bavasi.
“Don’t forget that a GM is responsible for organizational tendencies.”
You say this like it’s certain. Is it? Is there something I don’t know here?
You think Gillick told Lou how to use his bullpen?
As far as I know Bavasi is responsible for the manager’s moves only in that he should have already fired the manager.
so if aggressive base running strategies aren’t working out, the GM would not have a place to say: “let’s try something else Mike”?
And, that book called “Money Ball” seemed to suggest the GM has quite a bit to say about working a pitcher deep in the count whenever possible. I’m not that much of a Billy Beane fan but posters on this site seem to give that GM a lot of credit for setting “organizational tendencies”.
Finding one that works for this organization is all I’m asking. So far, they players are doing “ok” on indvidual performances but the managing (general or just in the dugout) is falling short in my opinion.
Depends on the organization. The A’s, as you’re probably aware, do things like give their managers charts that say when it’s good to sacrifice a runner over, talk about it, and the manager carries out, more or less, what they want him to. They don’t call him up if he deviates from the direction, but generally, Macha’s there because he’s bought into that and is agreeable.
Most of the time that’s not the case. For almost every other club, the GM can talk to a manager if they think they’re doing something wrong, but that’s about it.
The M’s are like this. If Bavasi (as I’m pretty sure he has) meets with Hargrove and says “Hey look, I’ve been thinking you should stop using Mateo in close situations, especially late in the game..” and Hargrove says “Screw that, I love that kid” and pitches him in a tied game in the 8th that night, there’s really no recourse for Bavasi except to fire Hargrove, and he’d have to get the owners to sign off, and they’re going to say “You want to fire him over what?” and give him a hard time…
So, if this team ends up with 78 wins, a 9 game improvement over 2005, then yes, I’d consider it a step forward
OK, fine. That isn’t unreasonable; given your expectations, Bavasi’s met them. So what’s the next step forward they need to take for 2007, and do you have confidence Bavasi can do this given the track record so far?
It seems to me that the only “sophisticated†measure you can really utilize is a case by case analysis of decision making, which is what Dave offers us in post 118.
The message I get from that post is that Bavasi has been, in a word: adequate. And when you weigh that against the long odds of upper management replacing Bavasi with an Antonetti or an Ng, you stand pat. And you hope your guy has learned from some of his mistakes.
The problem is that I don’t think that list comes out very good. For example, Dave was ragging on the Sexson signing, and while it worked out OK in 2005, it’s looking VERY scary going forward- Sexson is doing what a lot of his comps did in their early 30s and starting to tank hard. I sure as hell hope the Broussard/Perez acquisitions mean we’re going to try trading him this offseason, because the alternative might be a .230/.300/.450 replacement-level 1B eating $26 million in payroll over the next two years. Ouch.
Basically, for every Johjima you end up with a Guardado or Everett, where you are eating the money. Maybe this happens that frequently among good GMs (certainly Gillick saddled us with a bunch of crap in 2004-2005)… but I suspect otherwise.
The tendancy of GM’s and managers to work against each other with roster makeup and usage would drive me crazy – but I’ve worked in corporate America, where crap like that is standard practice.
I wonder if the M’s put Sexson and waivers this season, and if anyone claimed him? I’d have happily let them have him to be rid of $14 million per season for 07 and 08. Sure, he might bounce back next season, but there is too much risk of two more mediocre seasons. Oh, that’s right, politics again – can’t make the signing look like a mistake.
G-Man: I suspect Richie’s salary is exactly why he won’t be claimed if he was ever put on waivers. In fact, I’d bet he has already been put on and passed through waivers for the purpose of making a post-deadline deal. Let’s hope the Giants (4 back in the NL WC) stay in the WC race….
And when you weigh that against the long odds of upper management replacing Bavasi with an Antonetti or an Ng, you stand pat.
Allow me to correct myself: I should have written ‘the Antonetti’ or ‘the Ng’, Chris and Kim for those of you scoring at home – can’t believe I violated my own pet peeve.
The Giants have Shea Hillenbrand. I don’t think they need to pick up Sexson at this point.
Well I certainly agree that if Bavasi wanted to fire Hargrove because he continues to use Mateo in close situations that he’d get resistance but when you take the two years and ALL the things that are going on, there is certainly a strong case (one that authors on this site have pointed out this season). Corporate America might seem unable to look at things closely but privately owned companies often get to the facts and make decisive moves.
The body of work is what Bavasi/Hargrove are being judged on and eventhough Dave points out that we can’t complain just because they choose to do things different but we can certainly complain when their way continues to be a liability on the team’s potential. This team should be better this year, given the talent on the field. Most of the predictions were for 85 or more wins and they won’t get there in 2006.
Assuming that the Mariners do not suddenly tail-dive and finish with one of the worst records in baseball, wouldn’t signing Matsuzaka make sense for another reason, that we wouldn’t have to fork over a draft pick to a team? I mean, if we were to sign Zito, we would owe the A’s our draft pick, right? Same with Schmidt.
The only thing worse than making a bad decision is making a bad decision that directly benefits our opponents.
So, CO, your argument is that Bavasi’s past performance is irrelevant, because it’s unlikely we’d replace him with an improved option at GM, thus we might as well keep him because he’s got his good points. Basically, it’s a “devil you know” strategy.
So, why should we judge him on FUTURE performance then? Is upper management going to be better at replacing him in 2007 or 2008 than today? Isn’t what you’re saying “it doesn’t mattter if he’s good, bad or mediocre, we probably can’t do any better, anyway”?
I would think that a business owner/CEO like Lincoln who’s noticed a third of his gate walk out the door MIGHT think “Gee, maybe we need to try something different as to how we run our team’s baseball operations. Maybe one of these newfangled GMs might have something interesting to add to my management team, after all”. Failure tends to focus you a lot more than success.
EC – The Giants had Hillenbrand – albeit they hadn’t had him for long – when they reportedly were willing to take Sexson (and pay most of his contract) at or in the days just preceding the deadline. Whether they need him or not, they apparently have some interest (and Hillenbrand can also play 3B – where he has more career starts than at 1B – for Pedro Feliz if they really want to keep Hillenbrand in the line-up). Plus, Hillenbrand has only a 1-year deal. If they like Richie, it may be as much about securing the next couple of years as it is about contending this year….
Can someone PLEASE assure me that we won’t get stuck with Barry Bonds next year? What ever happened to the rumor that he said he’d like to finish his career up in Seattle? Please tell me it was reporters trying to create a story where none existed…
In my opinion, EC has a position that is defendable. It’s a position that is debatable, but it is not a position that merits any sort of ridicule. My two cents.
I’m not mocking the position, though I don’t agree with it. It’s a perfectly reasonable position. I’m mocking EC hammering at this issue like Cato the Elder and Carthago delenda est.
OK, fine. That isn’t unreasonable; given your expectations, Bavasi’s met them. So what’s the next step forward they need to take for 2007,
Well, the problem is that the season isn’t over yet. But I expect that they will finish with between 80 and 90 wins in 2007, IF Lincoln and Co. do not ratchet down the budget and Bavasi makes fewer stupid mistakes. An 85 win team will compete in this division and probably start September 2007 with a shot at the wild card.
This team can compete with the formula Dave has already put forward — two starting pitchers, a CF who can play for Jones, and an improved bench. Trading Sexson would go a long way towards making those changes a reality. Ditto going all-out (though not too all-out) for Matsuzaka if he’s posted.
and do you have confidence Bavasi can do this given the track record so far?
Yes and no. He knows what we know. He sees the holes. The problem is that we don’t know how the team is going to handle their money. And having $20M to sign talent is infinitely better than having $10M to sign talent. And the thing we need (pitching) is going to cost a lot of money, and someone is going to overpay for Zito and Schmidt no matter what. So, no, I don’t have undying confidence in him. But I don’t think anyone else we can get would do any better, not without getting a lot more money out of the owners.
So, my floor for 2006 is 80. I think that’s attainable. And I don’t see Bavasi being GM of this club past 2007. But by then, I think he and Fontaine will have finished with rebuilding the sorry minor league system enough that this organization will be able to attract a young kid looking to make a name for himself.
2008: Division champs. That’s what I’m looking to. And once we’re in, we hope that Felix can pitch this team to a trophy.
Can someone PLEASE assure me that we won’t get stuck with Barry Bonds next year?
We won’t. He’s either going to re-sign with SF or retire. I’m guessing retirement.
This team should be better this year, given the talent on the field. Most of the predictions were for 85 or more wins and they won’t get there in 2006.
No, they shouldn’t have been, and no, they weren’t.
As you guys are talking about building a team, this seems like a good time to ask what kind of players the M’s should look for.
Everyone knows about Safeco, but do you think much emphasis should be placed on finding players who fit it? What kind of players are those? If I had to guess, I’d try to build heavily on left-handed players, particularly hitters that walk and pitcher who don’t give up walks.
Dave was ragging on the Sexson signing, and while it worked out OK in 2005, it’s looking VERY scary going forward-
Hey, I was totally ragging on that contract for being way expensive after the first year, too. What am I, chopped liver?
Dave is just so much more engaging in his position on things.
Ow.
not really
My take on Bavasi? His bosses may have told him to trade Guillen but I doubt they told him to give him away, free for nothing. His FA track record is bad. Beltre excepted, well maybe, the caveats on Beltre were always there. Do you really trust him to use $24M effectively this year? Next year? More Washburns, Sexons, Everetts? It is what he does and has done his entire career. Winning percentage here is not the metric so far because Gillick left a mess. Quality of decisions is the metric and he fails.
And what’s this crap about the Field Manager ignoring what his boss says. IF Home Office says this or that, you tend to to it. If you allow the subordinates to stick their finger up you lose control. Bavasi either runs the team or he doesn’t. If not, then what use is he.
Hey, I was totally ragging on that contract for being way expensive after the first year, too. What am I, chopped liver?
Perhaps this is like Nichols’ Law–a blogger’s perceived insight is inversely proportional to the number of humorous comments he posts?
It’s okay, though, DMZ. Brad Ausmus isn’t all that great behind the dish, and you’re not chopped liver, either.
#19: no….what the M’s need is someone who BOTH understands how to best optimize a roster AND also curses a lot. If he scratches himself alot on the way to the mound, even better….
And what’s this crap about the Field Manager ignoring what his boss says.
By that logic, why does any team need a GM? Howard Lincoln could phone down to the dugout during games to order a bench coach to make pitching changes, send in a pinch-hitter for Jones, get the infield to play in with a runner on 3rd and fewer than two outs, etc.
#41: yes and you should really also point out the the M’s failed to include Eddie’s left arm in the deal….he’s been available to pitch about 3 days in the last two weeks….
#228: In addition, of course, to signing free agents, making trades, running the draft, etc.
“And what’s this crap about the Field Manager ignoring what his boss says. IF Home Office says this or that, you tend to to it. If you allow the subordinates to stick their finger up you lose control. Bavasi either runs the team or he doesn’t. If not, then what use is he.”
I’m not understanding the certainty with which this keeps getting stated.
Do you know the terms of hire for Hargrove? Do you know the average situation in MLB for managerial autonomy in in-game matters?
If you do, I’d love to hear them. If not, assuming that MLB runs just like any other business is folly.
There are counter examples in any number of other jobs. DMZ seemed to answer my question about the specific situation the Mariners are in, I have no reason to think that GM’s tell managers the specifics of how to run their team. I do know that that wouldn’t fly in the NFL, and that alone seems enough to counter the blanket business assertions.
Let me put it this way, if Bavasi has to fire players to keep his Manager from playing them, he has lost control. The GM job is not to do the day to day game management but if he does chose to direct and gets ignored, he has mismanaged the franchise.
#50: i’d love to see the breakdown on 15-20 losses
And what’s this crap about the Field Manager ignoring what his boss says. IF Home Office says this or that, you tend to to it.
except if the corporate culture is that the field manager has autonomy over on-field decisions (thus making him liable at the end of the year for those decisions). The Mariner culture, the culture that Bavasi grew up in, and the culture Hargrove has always existed in (up to maybe Baltimore when you had the occasional ownership wild card thrown in the mix) is the one DMZ talked about in #205.
It may be that way but why? Who works for whom? I, GM trust you, Field Manager to run the team on the field. I am, however, the boss. My job is accountable as is yours because I hired you. Therefore, if a GM abidicates his authority to the FM, I have no sympathy. A good GM does not micro manange but at the same time, does not allow the ship to sink in the name of “that’s the way it’s always been”
#79: do you even know who’ll be a free agent after this year?
There will be plenty of arms to chose from this off season. Its more a question of whether its a smart way to spend your money.
Some independent film student in Seatlle should make a baseball parody movie about Mike Hargrove. That reminds me I am looking forward to seeing Talladega Nights: The Ballad of Ricky Bobby.
Eleven, you keep repeating the same tough guy manager mantra, it’s been pointed out why you can’t assume things are the same in MLB as they are in your tight ship of a business.
Unless you have specific baseball management insight, you’re not making your point.
The manager is supposed to be the expert in in-game decisions, having a GM dictate strategy to him would probably A, not go over well and B, not really be a good idea. Assuming you have hired reasonably well.
It’s like a drug company with the CEO telling the scientists how to do their math.
Which brings me back to my point… if you have a dumb scientist, fire him, don’t try mix the chemicals yourself.
#86 and #87:
That sentiment has got to be my biggest pet peeve on baseball message boards/blogs……
translation: *you don’t agree with me so I will completely discount your argument (I really haven’t bothered to educate myself enough to understand it anyway or really to formulate an argument of mine own for that matter) by labeling it as negativity…in fact, I will try to nullify your voice with my drinking buddies by completely mischaracterizing everything youve posted by finding one negative post and continually repeating it….over and over and over. In fact, any use of stats is a sure sign of negativity and automatically invalidates your opinion. Finally actually having reasons for your opinion automatically invalidates it unless its my opinion (and since its my opinion and I trust myself, there is no need to fact check)*
pet peeve #2: you said I was wrong….therefore you’ve labled me as a liar and I’m offended by your obvious challenge to my integrity-my board of directors might read this blog too and will question my decisions by stating, “how can we trust you since you wrote that on the blog and some guy clearly challenged your integrity”. Then of course the whole thread becomes a one-sided whine about the slings and arrows of know-it-alls challenging others integrity and somehow by extension their right to post comments…
wow that was cathargic…. now if only the M’s can win tonight so I can take off my new jersey (4 days and counting)….people will think I’m weird if I wear it to the office again tomorrow….
So, in 205, DMZ says management’s response if Grover defied Bavasi’s advice not to start Mateo in high leverage situations would be: ‘ “You want to fire him over what?†and give him a hard time…’
By which we can only conclude management ain’t been watching Mateo pitch.
So, in 205, DMZ says management’s response if Grover defied Bavasi’s advice not to start Mateo in high leverage situations would be: ‘ “You want to fire him over what?†and give him a hard time…’
By which we can only conclude management ain’t been watching Mateo pitch.
Yes? And the sky’s blue. The point….?
Since long, early-morning busrides in the rural 4th world are conducive to hair-brained schemes, the following strategy for the final two months of the Mariners’ season occurred to me:
It is less likely that Hargrove or any other ‘major-league´manager would implement the following than the Mariners making up 7 games in the standings but…
Roster moves now: Demote Woods and call up Flaherty. Demote Green, call-up Beck, and let Beck start instead of Piñeiro. If possible, trade Sexson now.
Roster moves Sept. 1: With utter disregard for the standings and playoffs of minor-league affiliates, call up all pitchers capable of eating innings in the big leagues, and someone who can play short, someone who can play center, and anyone with extra-base power and some plate discipline.
In-game Stragegy: Deconstruct the idea of the ´starting pitcher´. For Washburn, Meche, and Beck, let them face the opposing team’s lineup exactly twice.
Sometime in the 4th or 5th inning, check the score. If the team is winning or losing by 3 or more runs, let Mateo or Piñeiro pitch. Otherwise, rotate Flaherty, Lowe, Sherril, Soriano, and Putz. Reduce WFB’s PA to zero, but let him run for the catcher and the first basemen in the 8th or 9th whenever he represents the tying run. Pinch hit in these situations for Betancourt and the center fielder.
ooops. hare-brained. and the threads dead anyway.
ndevale – do you live in McCall too??