SI reports no deals for Wash, Ibanez
DMZ · August 14, 2008 at 2:51 pm · Filed Under Mariners
Heyman reports the M’s failed to work out a deal and both players will be returning to the team.
If true — The M’s could have just rid themselves of Washburn’s horrible contract for next year. This is absurdly horrible mistake of the team that should disqualify our interim GM and anyone associated with the decision from even being considered for a leadership position in the future.
Dave adds: Seriously, this is an indefensible position. None of the people involved in this decision deserve to work in baseball. Fire them all.
Comments
79 Responses to “SI reports no deals for Wash, Ibanez”
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
USSM uses and recommends
So, we gonna burn this mug down?
Can the M’s dump Keifer Beaver-san onto waivers again and just give him up now? I’m still fuzzy on how the whole second-time-on-waivers thing works.
One more year.
A riot is an ugly thing, and I think it’s about time we had one.
Wow, just wow.
What the hell is wrong with the people running the M’s? This was as no-brainer as no-brainer gets. Unbelievable.
Also, what’s the likelihood of us unloading Wash at the Winter Meetings?
re: Washburn, the only thing I can come up with is (if it was the Twins just trying to block him from going to someone else) maybe they didn’t want to damage future relations with the Twins by screwing them by forcing them to take him? maybe?
otherwise, I’m stumped.
This is the guy that said Ichiro doesn’t play hard last month. But if he’s right, this stinks.
Why would the M’s put him on waivers and give up on him? It’s clear they think he has much more value than nothing at all, and who knows what they were expecting in return from a trade. Talent evaluation seems to be a talent this organization doesn’t have. Emptiness…that’s what I feel.
It made no sense to trade Ibanez without gettng something good back because the type A free agent compensation would be lost.
It made no sense not getting rid of Washburn because we are guaranteed something good back (like about $10m).
I’m stunned.
Another way to look at this that makes it even worse for not giving away Washburn to the Twins: By doing so, you not only free up $$ for the M’s, but you lock up $$ the Twins have to spend. You could cripple a competitor for a couple of years!
The Twins would have to be pretty bold to get pissed over this. That’s the risk you take when you claim someone to keep them from going somewhere else. You can’t very well be offended if the other team sticks you with him.
I’m not.
It goes back to the root of this organization’s problem. They have no clue on how to evaluate players. If they’re paying Washburn $10 million to pitch, then they believe that he’s worth $10 million and are expecting to get similar value in return.
And just as obviously, they don’t believe that RR-S, Dickey, et al are as valuable as Washburn, even though they will probably put up just as good numbers…..
Despite what Heyman says, I think it’s very likely that the Twins’ claim was a mere blocking maneuver.
Which is exactly why letting this thing become subject to waivers was a stupid idea. Should have dealt him back in July when they had a chance.
So, this means we not only get to spend $10 million on Washburn next year, but a rotation spot has just been burnt up. YAY!!
How many times is Pelekoudas going to get run off the road in a game of chicken before he realizes the other guys aren’t fucking bluffing?
Every day you swear this team can’t get any dumber. And every next day you are continually proven wrong.
So, can the team put him on irrevocable waivers at a later date after the mob finishes beheading the front office?
I thought that monkeying around with waiver claims in ths way was standard operating procedure. Okay, this impression was based on an article I read one or two decades ago, but it described how teams would make waiver claims even though they had no intention of actually trying to acquire that player — mainly as a way of blocking other teams from getting him, just as the article suggests. I don’t know if this is still current custom.
More than just idle speculation — but you can thank Howard Lincoln for this decision.
I think that Chuck, Howard and Lee are doing a great job. They are so good at making decisions all 3 of them would be a great fit in the Angels orginization. Look at what they did for our team.
So does this mean that Washburn isn’t going anywhere at all, or just isn’t going anywhere today? I wish I better understood how this process works.
The next step would be to put Washburn on irrevocable waivers, but why would the Mariners, once the realized they couldn’t work out a deal with the Twins, not just hand him over now? That would be better than hoping that Washburn doesn’t start pitching like Washburn and some other team claims him again.
I really hope Pat Gillick comes back and brings his good friend Brian Cashman with him.
[dupe]
EPIC FAIL
I keep thinking of the joke about the optimist kid who is digging through a pile of horse manure on Christmas morning saying “there must be a horse in here somewhere!”
I’m starting to think there is no horse.
It’s no longer standard at all. This ended in the late 90s when San Diego got stuck with a broken-down Randy Myers for $13/year and saw their payroll crippled for it, after making a “blocking” claim. They never in a million years thought they’d end up with him.
This is what makes the non-move of Washburn infuriating. The Ms got bailed out, and just blew it.
well, I was expeting this to happen, because it’s obvious the current FO doesn’t understand the benefit of the salary dump. For them, that’s a last resort only available when there’s no possible way to unload a guy (Vidro) It goes back to their inability to properly value talent internally, or find chaper alternatives – they have to let the “market” decide for them. In their eyes, Silva’s contract itself isn’t “bad”, it’s simply what players of his calibre cost on the market, and it’s Silva’s fault for not pitching up to expectations.
Knowing the M’s, they probably looked at the waiver claim from the Twins and thought, “hey, if a low payroll team is willing to take on that contract, then Washburn must be a good deal!” and decided he was an asset worth keeping. So when the Twins wouldn’t give back “equal value” player-wise, the deal failed.
It’s counter-intuitive, but any waiver claim was simply going validate the M’s notion that Washburn is in demand, and convince them that he is still an “asset”
Burn baby burn. Burn it all down.
This is ridiculous.
“It made no sense to trade Ibanez without gettng something good back because the type A free agent compensation would be lost.”
Really? Do we have any idea what those draft picks are? Right, nothing sure…oh, but I guess we could have picked a relief pitcher or a catcher with those picks.
Why is it that this team – when we are starting to trust, and hope and possibly believe that they are not stupid – has to screw the fans?
Why can’t we just get a AA player for Washburn? Why not just a AAA player or a possibly ready player for Ibanez?
Anything they could have taken away would have been a win…which they know VERY little about right now.
If we keep this up, it may be a long time before we get back into contention.
We may be sitting around on the Mariner’s 100th anniversary wondering what the hell we did up here in the Northwest to deserve having the only MLB team to never win a World Series.
That’s impractical, though. Sooner or later the FO will smart up and realize what idiots they’ve been. We can’t go forever without winning it all.
Then again, the Cubs haven’t won in a century, so sooner or later could be a looooooooooooooong time.
Familiarize yourselves with the history of the Kansas City Athletics, because that is our future.
on that subject, Groz just tossed Dave Valle’s name into the GM hat. Because he played 20 years. And knows the game. And knows guys in the Mariners.
Who’s more retarded? Lee or Bavasi. I guess my money is now on Lee! Unreal. Clean the f**kin house!!
NEEDED: A few good men.
I am going to buy 4 tickets on stubhub for the front row of the bleachers for Friday night’s game against the A’s.
I am making a sign that will say:
Lee, Chuck and Howard:
Dumbest Front Office
in Baseball.
Need 3 other people with similiar aspirations.
http://www.overlookingseattle.com for more details.
Oops, my post above should cite Randy Myers’ salary as $13 million/year.
Oh, and pass me a pitchfork and a torch.
Dave Valle?
WTF?
Maybe the M’s FO heard from respected sources that The Bus had learned the splitter from J.J. Putz and made an adjustment to the grip on his changeup, making him a front-line pitcher capable of sustained success and worthy of a high price in trade.
They had to hold out for maximum return, lest they incur the collective wrath of the blogosphere.
Why am I not surprised.
Did Lee ask for Nick Blackburn and Span in return…
Here is how our front office see’s the Washburn situation:
I would like to give you my Ford Pinto for your Ferrari. The Pinto has been running good for a couple of weeks.
cry. i would have loved to see my twins friends get stuck with washburn.
taken from a post on fangraphs
I’m not clear on whether you could put him on irrevocable waivers after recalling him from revocable waivers, but what’s the point? Allowing him to go on revocable waivers would mean someone would take on every dime of the rest of his salary. Putting him on irrevocable waivers, where no one would pick him up, would just put the M’s on the hook for the very $12MM they were one simple smart decision away from never having to pay–and as someone pointed out, making someone else pay, tying up their salary structure.
Looked at purely as sunk costs, Washburn is a fine no. 5 starter and it makes no sense to pay him to play elsewhere, just as it made no sense not to let someone else pay him the Mariners’ mistakenly high salary to play elsewhere.
This is a sad, sad day if the news is true.
Oh good Lord, I need to go breathe into a paper bag right now.
This is just pathetic. Sometimes you have to realize that 10 cents on the dollar is still better than nothing at all.
Here is a news flash to the FO.
THERE IS NO MARKET FOR WASHBURN THAT WILL NET YOU WHAT YOU WANT.
Way to squander the opportunity, way to block some of your young pitchers from developing, way to tie up your free agent money for next year, in general, way to go.
Why do we follow this team?
Thank you Lee.
You never know–he might make an expecially good GM.
The Mariners front office doesn’t think Washburn is overpaid. After three years of proof to the contrary, they actually think he’s worth what they’re paying him. Do we laugh or cry?
Oh my God, we’ve all been too clever for our own good. The only team in baseball dumb enough to take those posts at face value were the Mariners themselves!
Hoist on our own petard.
Bingo.
They really think that Washburn is a valuable pitcher, and they won’t trade him unless they get something (even something that is truly worthless but at least looks to them like it may have value) back.
Based on the response they have been getting from the rest of the teams when they called to ask about trading, oh, Vidro, Washburn, and even Ibanez, I would expect their heads would have exploded.
How can they reconcile it? They must be telling themselves that every other team in the Majors is stupid. That is the only way they could reconcile their belief in the value of their players.
Why haven’t we heard them trying to trade Silva? Is it because even the M’s realize his contract is an albatross?
I feel like I know.
You just knew this was going to happen when they couldn’t close the earlier deal with NYY. It was clear they didn’t think they were being offered enough for Washburn, which made clear that they actually thought he was worth something. So they must have been just clueless negotiating these deals. It’s amazing to think about, but this organization still hasn’t realized how bad some of Bavasi’s signings actually were. I despair about our chances for rebuilding if this team is dumb enough to keep Washburn around after having him claimed off waivers.
Baker:
WHAT THE FUCKING HELL.
Just out of curiosity, does Washburn project as a type A or B free agent after next year? If so, that’s worth 10 mil to me. We’re not competing next year, the free agent market isn’t encouraging, so why not carry the albatross in the hope it bears a couple golden eggs?
This organization’s management is a known quantity. I frankly would have been surprised if they made a deal for either Washburn or Ibañez. So it goes.
Ibañez staying isn’t such a raw deal thanks to the draft picks the M’s will get should they offer arbitration this offseason and he refuses. But we’re stuck with Washburn and his salary through next year, all because Lee thought he was worth more than he actually was. Lame non-move by a lame duck GM.
Here is a trade Lee would try to make.
Jamie Burke to Yankees for Jeter,Wang and cash.
The risk is that he might accept arbitration, and the way arbitration works, he might soak them for $15MM to be a back of the rotation anchor. And I mean “anchor” in the sense of “that which can drag you to the bottom of the ocean if not used properly.”
I’m waiting for the Keyser Söze moment. I have a feeling I’ll be waiting for a long time.
What’s sickening about this, is that the M’s f’ed up a 3 minute negotiation.
Lee P.: “So, GM(Sucker)Schmuckatelli, you’ve claimed Washburn, you wanna give us anybody good for him to keep us from pulling him back?”
GM S: “Nah, not really.”
Lee P.: “You wanna give us anybody for him, that way I can claim at least a minor victory for adding to our farm system?”
GM S: “nope, but hey, we’re already taking his contract, isn’t that enough?”
Lee P.: “How about a dozen balls and a coupon to Sizzler?”
GM S: “We can do the balls, but we’re not going to be able to do the coupon…”
Lee P: “Ok, you win, enjoy Washburn’s splitter”
We hosed this, and now we’re either stuck with him for next season, or more likely than not, we’re taking somebody else’s bad contract in a trade to make any offseason deal financially equitable… I’m fine with them keeping Raul, but Washburn???
Is anyone besides me worried that they’re going to keep Ibanez around by giving him a rich multiyear deal in the offseason? With this group of idiots I think it’s dangerous to assume that we’ll have two additional premium draft picks next year. There is no evidence that they’ve realized that their habit of overpaying non-superstar old guys is the primary reason for this abysmal season (and for that matter the previous four seasons as well).
Yea, that multiyear deal for Ibanez is something to worry about in the back of our minds. Frankly though, it’s probably not even in the Top Ten of things this organization can (will??) do wrong.
Fuck the Seattle Mariners.
I’m throwing 30 years of fandom into the toilet here.
Seriously: fuck them. Fuck them hard. No lube.
Fuck them with a red hot fireplace poker.
Go ahead and moderate my language if you want. I no longer care about this team. No, scratch that: I do care. I wish them all the ill will in the world. Death, dismemberment, pestilence, plague.
Howard Lincoln, you make me vomit.
Ugh. I don’t have anything else to say, just ugh.
I have no doubt that they will try to keep Ibanez, a great guy and fan favorite (big smile for the camera!) around, and will probably offer him a 3/$25 deal with a club option for a fourth year.
Mutual option, I’d wager.
my heart hurts.
Hopefully Raul wants to play for a winner instead though.
Arthur Rhodes for GM… Everyone will play hard and other GM’s would be afraid to say no to him.
For those of you confused with the post 7/31 waiver process, DePodesta breaks it down for you:
http://itmightbedangerous.blogspot.com/2008/07/deadline-has-passed.html
Boy that is two wildly disperate views of what free agent compensation is worth:
and
I think the correct answer is somewhere in the middle. Even a AAAA player in return for Ibanez wouldn’t be worth it because Raul’s salary isn’t an issue, and we could expect to get at least one player that projects to a major league player in the draft as compensation for Ibanez. A 4A player is a great pickup when you are paying nothing, but he isn’t worth 2 draft picks.
On the other hand 10m plus what ever Wash would get in arbitration is WAY over what the draft picks would be worth, and would Washburn even qualify as a type A free agent?
Plus, you’ve got one more year of having the guy on the roster. Raul, to put it mildly, is not hurting us in the lineup, and even his play in the field is not hurting the team as much as his bat is helping it. The analysis is completely different with Washburn.
The Minneapolis Star-Tribune says that the Mariners wanted one of the Twins young starters for Washburn. Why the Twins would ever go for that deal (or even risk getting Washburn handed to them) is beyond me. As a Twins fan, I am stunned that a) the Twins claimed Washburn and b) that Seattle didn’t just dump him. I don’t understand.
Our team is stupid.
Even Woody Woodward’s deals, at the behest of that noted curmudgeon George Argyros, pale in comparison to the deals during the Bavasi Regime.
Reminisce with me about the few glimpses of relatively good GM’ing for what amounts to a New York Minute in the lifespan of the Mariners organizaiton, Pat Gillick’s short stay here. John Ellis probably had something to do with that.
I have to think that the same old more recent upper management interference is the heavy hand in these boggled bungled aborted non-waiver and waiver deals: Howard and Chuck. I mean, Lee Pelekoudas has been a Mariner gofer through ALL of those regimes, surely after all this time and experience he recognizes good management when he sees it. He’s probably hoping his term as interim GM ends ASAP.
Mainly because he stayed out of the way and let the baseball people make baseball decisions.
HowChuck think they know baseball.
27:
Sounds reasonable (and familiar). But the DePodesta article (linked in posting 71, above) says “Furthermore, many teams will place claims on players with absolutely no intention of acquiring them. They do this in order to block another organization from being able to trade for that player. This can get tricky, though, as the originating Club can choose to dump the player on the claiming Club along with the player’s entire contract.”
So it might no longer be standard practice and it “can get tricky”, but according to DePodesta, it is still done by “many teams”.
Yeah, but you see the distinction. Teams are making a risk/reward calculation: is the chance I get stuck with a player worth blocking a potential deal?
Besides which, for a huge portion of players put on waivers (and claimed) their contracts are quite attractive, and the risk isn’t all that great. If you see Pujols on waivers, of course you claim him.