Next shoes to drop off this octopus of sucktasticness

DMZ · June 18, 2008 at 11:00 am · Filed Under Mariners 

It’s interesting — with Bavasi gone and the pretense of contending this year essentially abandoned, Pelekoudas is set up for success for the rest of the year: as much as the team’s been underperforming, he won’t have to do much for his record over the rest of the season to look like improvement with signs of hope for the future, and Armstrong/Lincoln are all about the positive momentum.

We’ve seen reports that the team’s been in nonstop meetings about what to do next, and Sexson’s DFA is rumored. From the Herald:

According to one person familiar with moves that are planned, Sexson will be let go, possibly within days. The timing is not set because the team is dealing with other personnel issues that go beyond the procedures for moving Sexson.

There also is the delicate process involved with getting rid of Sexson, who’s making $14 million this season in the final year of a four-year, $50 million contract.”

Probably not so much a delicate process, if I may. You call everyone else, ask if they’re interested in Sexson, everyone says no, you DFA him and move on. The delicate part of this process took all last season and this one.

Anyway, just think about it: Lee gets to DFA Sexson, to general applause, throw Vidro out or bench him, hopefully get McLaren to come up with some kind of sane defensive alignment, which will make the pitchers look a lot better, and all of a sudden the team’s playing much better ball than they were up to that point, the fan base is happier…

Comments

80 Responses to “Next shoes to drop off this octopus of sucktasticness”

  1. bonesbarry on June 18th, 2008 4:04 pm

    The argument of keeping Richie Sexson around because we don’t have a clear cut replacement is laughable……. Hello? If he’s not going to be around next season….and this season is already through, what positive can come from running his sad sack ass out there 2 out of every three days? Maddening.

  2. RealRhino on June 18th, 2008 4:19 pm

    #47 —

    I’m sorry if you feel insulted, but it’s insulting to hear people advocating a transaction without being able to support it in any reasonable way.

    Say silly things, maybe insults are deserved.

    He’d have to bat 1? Seriously? If he got an average 100 AB for the next month and got 100 hits, he’d be batting .478 on the season. So the only way to suggest he’s not “done” is if he’s batting .478? .450 won’t do it? .400 won’t do it? .350 won’t do it? Hyperbole much?

    Why are we “stuck with” Johjima for three years because we’ve got him signed for that long, but not “stuck with” Sexson for the remainder of the year because we’ve got him signed for 2008? It’s the same thing; we aren’t “stuck with” anybody in any real sense.

    I would agree that you might make a case IF our bench already included some pop AND the plan was to play Clement every day at 1B. The M’s have already said, though, that they plan to play Clement most of the time at C, and our bench doesn’t have anybody who even *might* hit one out. So if Sexson could be a RH bat with more pop than, say, Cairo, off the bench, why not keep him around?

  3. Jeff Nye on June 18th, 2008 4:21 pm

    If you’re starting from the position that anyone who disagrees with you isn’t being “reasonable”, I’m not sure I can bring myself to worry too much about your opinion.

    As far as the batting average of 1, I thought I made it pretty clear I was joking; regardless, there isn’t any number that is going to re-establish any trade value for Richie Sexson. Nobody is giving you more than a bag of baseballs for him.

  4. bonesbarry on June 18th, 2008 4:31 pm

    laughable!

  5. sealclubber253 on June 18th, 2008 4:32 pm

    50. Thanks, you just proved it. He hasn’t hit at a pro level. Just in the minors. I would love to give him a shot in center for the rest of the season, but I don’t expect him to be a starter next year and if someone is showing intrest (don’t worry, won’t happen) then deal him.

    And RealRhino, I still agree with your Sexson stance. It doesn’t do us any good to keep him, but it doesn’t do us any good to let him go. Keep him until a plan is in place for a solution to the problem that he has been. Don’t just cut him because you are emotionally upset at his below expectations performance. He sucks, but he sure has been the scape-goat for why this team is loosing. He isn’t the biggest problem on the team. Hell, I would argue that 2 of the 5 starters are a bigger problem. And thats after they figured out Batista should be in the bullpen.

    On the Batista situation. I would like to see him closing a few games, just not Felix’s games. It may build value in him it he can get a couple saves before the deadline. We can pitch his versatility to the rest of the teams that might be looking for a starter/closer/long relief guy.

  6. Jeff Nye on June 18th, 2008 4:36 pm

    By the way, don’t get me wrong; I think the case for punting Vidro is stronger. But the ideal is for BOTH of them to go away.

  7. cdowley on June 18th, 2008 4:41 pm

    Hey, I just heard from a buddy of mine with an excellent Mariners source (this guy has had most of the moves of the Bavasi era nailed generally before we get any shred of details about ‘em) who’s confirmed that Sexson is as good as OUT, likely within 72 hours.

    His source also says that Vidro and Washburn are on the chopping block, but has no timeline for them as of yet. He says Vidro will be DFA’d and traded if they can get SOMETHING for him, and they’ll aggressively shop Wash and only cut him as a last resort due to his contract. He also thinks they’ll try to trade Raul… apparently there’s been an NL team looking long and hard at him the last couple of weeks.

    As for Griffey, his source says that he severely doubts it’ll happen. They may do something at the deadline, but Lincoln and Pelekoudas are apparently unwilling to give up much to get him.

  8. Logger on June 18th, 2008 4:43 pm

    I don’t understand the confusion here. Giving at bats to someone who has a long-term future with the club and could possibly contribute in ’09, and who otherwise would not be getting those at bats if Sexson were around, is reason alone to DFA Richie. Sexson has no future with the M’s. It doesn’t matter if there are better bats on the bench. What matters is that the M’s could give someone else a chance to demonstrate what they got.

  9. sealclubber253 on June 18th, 2008 4:46 pm

    Jeff, I can’t argue that. They both need to go along with about a dozen other loosers. Just a matter of when and what is the correct “why.” It doesn’t make sense to DFA anyone prior to the deadline other than Vidro for holding up Clement by not being able to platoon him and Kenji between catcher/DH. That move needs to be made now. Yesterday. Two months ago. I can’t come up with a reason to get rid of Sexson today other than “he sucks.”

  10. sealclubber253 on June 18th, 2008 4:49 pm

    Logger, who is he blocking? I agree, he is gone after this year regardless, but who is he taking AB’s away from?

  11. gwangung on June 18th, 2008 4:53 pm

    50. Thanks, you just proved it. He hasn’t hit at a pro level. Just in the minors.

    Bees sent your way.

    One. Minors ARE pros.

    Two. You can project from minors to majors.

  12. RealRhino on June 18th, 2008 5:02 pm

    I’m willing to be disagreed with, Jeff. Just support the claim that he isn’t one of the best 25 batters on the roster and off he goes.

    I just don’t know that he’s blocking anybody better, and if he is, would he be blocking them as a bench bat? If the goal is to play Clement at C most of the time, who is he blocking? Vidro? Why is Sexson at 33 with an OPS of .678 “done” with no hope of recovery, but it’s a good idea to keep a 32-year old Johjima with a .564 OPS at 1B instead?

    If the goal is to try to field the best team (and maybe therein lies the answer), I don’t see how releasing Sexson advances that goal.

    We have to fill C/1B/DH. If the goal is to just put anybody from the minors into a slot, whether they are ready or not, fine. If the goal is to put the best available hitters in those slots, and your choices are Johjima, Clement, Sexson and Vidro, it seems funny to me to suggest that the guy with the highest OPS of the four (by more than 100 points) should be the guy left w/o a chair when the music stops. And I understand that the release of Sexson and Vidro aren’t exclusive of each other, but what’s the point of letting them both go? Doesn’t that leave you with two guys to fill three positions (unless you think Burke-Johjima-Clement is better than Johjima-Clement-Sexson, which isn’t supported by any evidence)?

  13. Logger on June 18th, 2008 5:09 pm

    Seaclubber – Does it really matter? Plugging Sexson in the lineup does nothing for the M’s.

  14. JimThomsen1965 on June 18th, 2008 5:13 pm

    If you just WATCH Sexson, you know he’s done.

    Look how often he strikes out swinging on fastballs in the low-to-mid-90s. His reflexes have fatally slowed; he just can’t get around on a good fastball anymore. When he does make contact, it’s weak contact because his bat is dragging through the strike zone — leading to popups, soft fly balls and weak groundouts (especially to the right side, which he’s done a lot this year).

    This is one case in which statistical analysis is perfectly in line with “what any idiot can see.”

  15. JimThomsen1965 on June 18th, 2008 5:22 pm

    As far as replacing Sexson for the season … why does it have to be done within the organization? There are 20-some guys in Triple-A right now I’d love to have who would almost surely do a far better job.

    My list would start with Cleveland’s Michael Aubrey.

  16. John in L.A. on June 18th, 2008 5:38 pm

    Logger, who is he blocking? I agree, he is gone after this year regardless, but who is he taking AB’s away from?

    That’s a backwards way of looking at it. He is a complete waste of a roster spot. Why does he have to be “blocking” anyone? In any event, he’s “blocking” every available baseball player in the world who isn’t on our roster, if that’s the way you want to look at it.

    How about he’s blocking Clement, by not being able to move Raul or Joh to 1st? Or Wlad?

    Just support the claim that he isn’t one of the best 25 batters on the roster and off he goes.

    Why is that your standard? Why not he isn’t one of the best possible 25 players to have on our roster that we can get anywhere? And why only “batter?”

    Can you really not think of anyone available you would rather have take that roster spot? Really?

    Frankly, I would rather have anyone who could possibly benefit from playing time getting it instead of Sexson… who won’t.

    As for why Joh… a few possible reasons: ownership might insist we keep him and the fact that he does have a lot of value as even a back-up catcher that Sexson doesn’t have.

  17. sealclubber253 on June 18th, 2008 5:39 pm

    Either way, your just being silly now. Regardless of projections, it hasn’t happened. Reed has a tonn to prove. Did anyone project the M’s would be on track to loose 100+ games this year? Projections are nothing more than educated guesses. They can’t read the future.

  18. gwangung on June 18th, 2008 5:42 pm

    Either way, your just being silly now

    Actually, you’re the one being silly. Projections are not educated guesses. They’re statements of probabilities. And there’s a world of difference between the two. Saying “that he hasn’t done it in the big leauges” is kind of dumb on this site.

    And…bees.

  19. gwangung on June 18th, 2008 5:44 pm

    And talk about being silly….considering just his offense is looking at half the story. It’s the whole package we should be looking at and comparing.

  20. cdowley on June 18th, 2008 5:45 pm

    My list would start with Cleveland’s Michael Aubrey.

    Not gonna happen, much as I would love for us to get him. Cleveland LOVES Aubrey, and right now feels like they have to hold onto him in case Hafner is worse off than they think.

    Me, I’d look at Josh Whitesell (26, Arizona, AAA). Solid but not, IMO, a spectacular prospect, and one who’s only real position is blocked on an NL team to boot. Prospect-wise, he’s got good power upside and projects around a .275 to .280 BA and an eye that should get him a .350+ OBP with walks. In other words, Ben Broussard, only with actual potential, not just “potential”.

  21. sealclubber253 on June 18th, 2008 5:51 pm

    OK, I am seeing that we agree to disagree.

    So the better question is: What is the fix? We all know Sexson is gone sometime in the next day to 4 months, right? What are we gonna do to fill first base? Who is the best free agent or internal option? Tex? Positive speculation on the future is a much more fun topic.

  22. sealclubber253 on June 18th, 2008 5:55 pm

    That’s a backwards way of looking at it. He is a complete waste of a roster spot. Why does he have to be “blocking” anyone? In any event, he’s “blocking” every available baseball player in the world who isn’t on our roster, if that’s the way you want to look at it.

    About half the guys on the roster are a waste.

  23. RealRhino on June 18th, 2008 6:01 pm

    Is Sexson the best person in the world for that roster spot? Of course not. If you have somebody better outside the organization, go get them and then release Richie.

    I’m getting the feeling that releasing Sexson, even if it doesn’t make sense, would just be cathartic for a lot of upset fans and so they advocate doing it.

    If you can’t replace him with somebody better from the organization, there’s no point in releasing him. And if you want to do it with somebody outside the organization, there’s no point in doing it until you go get that person.

  24. JimThomsen1965 on June 18th, 2008 6:02 pm

    If Cleveland loves Aubrey so much, I’d be happy to take Ryan Garko instead.

  25. jlc on June 18th, 2008 6:03 pm

    Somebody else (Rosenthal, maybe?) mentioned that Washburn was being shopped around. {Fingers and toes crossed!}

    I don’t see any good reason to keep Sexson or Vidro around. They’re not good and they aren’t part of next year’s hoped for turn around. DFA ’em and if there’s some idiot who can’t wait for them to hurt his team, he’s welcome to them.

  26. Jeff Nye on June 18th, 2008 6:12 pm

    Finding someone that can be an upgrade from Richie Sexson at first base is about as difficult as finding a penny on the ground.

  27. JimThomsen1965 on June 18th, 2008 6:32 pm

    Who else should get a shot: Jon Knott.

  28. Steve Nelson on June 18th, 2008 6:58 pm

    So the better question is: What is the fix? We all know Sexson is gone sometime in the next day to 4 months, right? What are we gonna do to fill first base? Who is the best free agent or internal option? Tex? Positive speculation on the future is a much more fun topic.

    How’s Bucky Jacobsen’s knee these days???

    But that leads to a more serious point. The Mariners acquired Jacobsen as a minor league free agent, signed to a minor league contract (i.e., not on the 40-man roster) simply because they needed to fill out the roster in Tacoma. Another example of freely available talent.

    First base is the easiest spot to fill with a guy who can give you Sexson defense and at least a league average bat.

  29. Adam S on June 18th, 2008 9:22 pm

    Small sample size, but Sexson has killed lefties. Given we have to pay him $7M either way, isn’t he more useful as the RH platoon at 1B/DH (with Ibanez or Clement) than sitting at home? Would you rather play Bloomquist, Cairo, LaHair at 1B? Or is Sexson’s near 1000 OPS just a fluke?

    I wouldn’t mind releasing him for the cathartic effect, but I think he’s a useful bench player.

  30. cdowley on June 18th, 2008 9:33 pm

    If Cleveland loves Aubrey so much, I’d be happy to take Ryan Garko instead

    Not a fan of Garko, and all indications are that he’s hands-off as well, also as much for the Hafner situation as much as anything.

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.