<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: The Budget</title>
	<atom:link href="http://ussmariner.com/2009/01/08/the-budget/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://ussmariner.com/2009/01/08/the-budget/</link>
	<description>Seattle Mariners and general baseball discussion with David Cameron and Derek Zumsteg</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sat, 21 Nov 2009 08:17:03 -0800</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.5</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: BLYKMYK44</title>
		<link>http://ussmariner.com/2009/01/08/the-budget/comment-page-2/#comment-309179</link>
		<dc:creator>BLYKMYK44</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 09 Jan 2009 23:00:45 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://ussmariner.com/?p=7044#comment-309179</guid>
		<description>Are you suggesting that the Mariners have not been trying to win, and that all of the spending they’ve been doing has just been to make it look like they were trying to win? I only ask because of your quotational emphasis on “trying”.
&lt;blockquote&gt;

- Im suggesting that they used their payroll as validation that they were trying to win. So, when the team sucked they had the ability to throw up their hands and say: 

&quot;we&#039;re spending the money necessary to win so keep coming to the game and we&#039;ll figure it out&quot;

Also, as I think i noted...its been my understanding that the Ms artificially inflate the amount they report as spending on payroll. Again, this is done because they want to imply that spending money on payroll means they really care and are not trying to make a profit off of you when they raise the the beer prices to $79.00 a cup.&lt;/blockquote&gt;</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Are you suggesting that the Mariners have not been trying to win, and that all of the spending they’ve been doing has just been to make it look like they were trying to win? I only ask because of your quotational emphasis on “trying”.</p>
<blockquote>
<p>- Im suggesting that they used their payroll as validation that they were trying to win. So, when the team sucked they had the ability to throw up their hands and say: </p>
<p>&#8220;we&#8217;re spending the money necessary to win so keep coming to the game and we&#8217;ll figure it out&#8221;</p>
<p>Also, as I think i noted&#8230;its been my understanding that the Ms artificially inflate the amount they report as spending on payroll. Again, this is done because they want to imply that spending money on payroll means they really care and are not trying to make a profit off of you when they raise the the beer prices to $79.00 a cup.</p></blockquote>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: droppedrod</title>
		<link>http://ussmariner.com/2009/01/08/the-budget/comment-page-2/#comment-309178</link>
		<dc:creator>droppedrod</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 09 Jan 2009 22:57:30 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://ussmariner.com/?p=7044#comment-309178</guid>
		<description>Cutting the budget this year strikes me as a shrwed business--and baseball--move.  If you assume that the goal of a successful franchise has to be to compete for the World Series and not just make the playoffs, spending big free agent money on a 100-loss-plus team in a weak division makes no sense.  

If the AL West turns out to be as bad as it looks like it might, it is hard to imagine that the division champ will have any real chance to advance in the playoffs. The M&#039;s stand pat, they have an outside chance of winning the division.  The alternative is to spend on a free agent and marginally increase that chance.  In either case, you are probably still looking at an early October departure from the post season with as little as one home playoff game.  

I would rather see them save $$$ now by cutting payroll, getting a solid core of young players, and then spend money in the free agency market when that money buys more than just increase the chance of another meaningless division title (of which Seattle has plenty).</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Cutting the budget this year strikes me as a shrwed business&#8211;and baseball&#8211;move.  If you assume that the goal of a successful franchise has to be to compete for the World Series and not just make the playoffs, spending big free agent money on a 100-loss-plus team in a weak division makes no sense.  </p>
<p>If the AL West turns out to be as bad as it looks like it might, it is hard to imagine that the division champ will have any real chance to advance in the playoffs. The M&#8217;s stand pat, they have an outside chance of winning the division.  The alternative is to spend on a free agent and marginally increase that chance.  In either case, you are probably still looking at an early October departure from the post season with as little as one home playoff game.  </p>
<p>I would rather see them save $$$ now by cutting payroll, getting a solid core of young players, and then spend money in the free agency market when that money buys more than just increase the chance of another meaningless division title (of which Seattle has plenty).</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: msb</title>
		<link>http://ussmariner.com/2009/01/08/the-budget/comment-page-2/#comment-309130</link>
		<dc:creator>msb</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 09 Jan 2009 17:52:19 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://ussmariner.com/?p=7044#comment-309130</guid>
		<description>FWIW, &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.heraldnet.com/article/20090105/SPORTS/701059926/1009&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;Kirby Arnold&lt;/a&gt; weighs in on the budget with: 

&quot;The Mariners&#039; payroll in 2009 is expected to be less than $110 million, and close to $90 million of it could be tied up after the team deals with Felix Hernandez, Erik Bedard and Aaron Heilman, who all are eligible for arbitration.&quot;</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>FWIW, <a href="http://www.heraldnet.com/article/20090105/SPORTS/701059926/1009" rel="nofollow">Kirby Arnold</a> weighs in on the budget with: </p>
<p>&#8220;The Mariners&#8217; payroll in 2009 is expected to be less than $110 million, and close to $90 million of it could be tied up after the team deals with Felix Hernandez, Erik Bedard and Aaron Heilman, who all are eligible for arbitration.&#8221;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: BobbyAyalaFan4Life</title>
		<link>http://ussmariner.com/2009/01/08/the-budget/comment-page-2/#comment-309125</link>
		<dc:creator>BobbyAyalaFan4Life</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 09 Jan 2009 16:31:46 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://ussmariner.com/?p=7044#comment-309125</guid>
		<description>&lt;blockquote&gt;It’s like Russ Ortiz, only fatter. And that was someone else’s tsuris.&lt;/blockquote&gt;
It&#039;s like Russ Ortiz in fat alone...Ortiz was way better in comparable ages. Until Silva wins 21 games or throws four straight 200+ inning seasons, let&#039;s not bring Ortiz down. 
Silva&#039;s life stats (began at age 23 in 02 with Philly; 7 seasons): 59-61, 4.61 ERA, 1,098.2 IP, 1.40 WHIP, 464 Ks, 203 BB, -4.29 WPA, -4.91 WPA/LI
Ortiz (began at age 24 with SF in 98; through 2004 for seven season comparison): 103-60, 4.00 ERA, 1,341.2 IP, 1.43 WHIP, 1,004 Ks, 682 BB, 5.35 WPA, 5.24 WPA/LI
This quick snap shot clearly shwos the only area Silva can even compare at the same ages against Ortiz was walking way fewer batters. If Silva managed to approach those same numbers, then we&#039;d all be a lot happier with him!
Aaron M.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<blockquote><p>It’s like Russ Ortiz, only fatter. And that was someone else’s tsuris.</p></blockquote>
<p>It&#8217;s like Russ Ortiz in fat alone&#8230;Ortiz was way better in comparable ages. Until Silva wins 21 games or throws four straight 200+ inning seasons, let&#8217;s not bring Ortiz down.<br />
Silva&#8217;s life stats (began at age 23 in 02 with Philly; 7 seasons): 59-61, 4.61 ERA, 1,098.2 IP, 1.40 WHIP, 464 Ks, 203 BB, -4.29 WPA, -4.91 WPA/LI<br />
Ortiz (began at age 24 with SF in 98; through 2004 for seven season comparison): 103-60, 4.00 ERA, 1,341.2 IP, 1.43 WHIP, 1,004 Ks, 682 BB, 5.35 WPA, 5.24 WPA/LI<br />
This quick snap shot clearly shwos the only area Silva can even compare at the same ages against Ortiz was walking way fewer batters. If Silva managed to approach those same numbers, then we&#8217;d all be a lot happier with him!<br />
Aaron M.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: DaveValleDrinkNight</title>
		<link>http://ussmariner.com/2009/01/08/the-budget/comment-page-2/#comment-309120</link>
		<dc:creator>DaveValleDrinkNight</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 09 Jan 2009 07:56:55 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://ussmariner.com/?p=7044#comment-309120</guid>
		<description>Maybe I&#039;m wrong here but I think Z is looking at &#039;11 to contend.

You dump or let go of Washburn/Bedard/Batista/etc.
Take the picks, stockpile players in the minors, and pick up sound free-agents that will be key parts of a contender for years to come.

God forbid you can lure a Braun or Crawford away with the extra money you&#039;ve got from dumping the dead weight.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Maybe I&#8217;m wrong here but I think Z is looking at &#8216;11 to contend.</p>
<p>You dump or let go of Washburn/Bedard/Batista/etc.<br />
Take the picks, stockpile players in the minors, and pick up sound free-agents that will be key parts of a contender for years to come.</p>
<p>God forbid you can lure a Braun or Crawford away with the extra money you&#8217;ve got from dumping the dead weight.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Breadbaker</title>
		<link>http://ussmariner.com/2009/01/08/the-budget/comment-page-2/#comment-309119</link>
		<dc:creator>Breadbaker</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 09 Jan 2009 06:26:52 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://ussmariner.com/?p=7044#comment-309119</guid>
		<description>&lt;blockquote&gt; It’s going to fly by, I promise.&lt;/blockquote&gt; Like a large dirigible flies.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<blockquote><p> It’s going to fly by, I promise.</p></blockquote>
<p> Like a large dirigible flies.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Alaskan</title>
		<link>http://ussmariner.com/2009/01/08/the-budget/comment-page-1/#comment-309110</link>
		<dc:creator>Alaskan</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 09 Jan 2009 00:56:33 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://ussmariner.com/?p=7044#comment-309110</guid>
		<description>Breadbaker,

Next three years, you mean.  It&#039;s going to fly by, I promise.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Breadbaker,</p>
<p>Next three years, you mean.  It&#8217;s going to fly by, I promise.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Breadbaker</title>
		<link>http://ussmariner.com/2009/01/08/the-budget/comment-page-1/#comment-309109</link>
		<dc:creator>Breadbaker</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 09 Jan 2009 00:44:26 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://ussmariner.com/?p=7044#comment-309109</guid>
		<description>The Silva contract is going to be a Silva-sized anchor around this team for the next four years.  The only good thing about it is that the imagery is so fun to play with.  The reality, on the other hand, is frightening.  It&#039;s like Russ Ortiz, only fatter.  And that was someone else&#039;s tsuris.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The Silva contract is going to be a Silva-sized anchor around this team for the next four years.  The only good thing about it is that the imagery is so fun to play with.  The reality, on the other hand, is frightening.  It&#8217;s like Russ Ortiz, only fatter.  And that was someone else&#8217;s tsuris.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Robo Ape</title>
		<link>http://ussmariner.com/2009/01/08/the-budget/comment-page-1/#comment-309106</link>
		<dc:creator>Robo Ape</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 08 Jan 2009 23:55:03 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://ussmariner.com/?p=7044#comment-309106</guid>
		<description>@ BLYKMYK44

&lt;blockquote&gt;I (and Derek) doubt they want the fan base who has continually been fed the idea that spending money equals “trying” to think they’ve stopped trying.&lt;/blockquote&gt;

Are you suggesting that the Mariners have not been trying to win, and that all of the spending they&#039;ve been doing has just been to make it &lt;em&gt;look&lt;/em&gt; like they were trying to win?  I only ask because of your quotational emphasis on &quot;trying&quot;.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>@ BLYKMYK44</p>
<blockquote><p>I (and Derek) doubt they want the fan base who has continually been fed the idea that spending money equals “trying” to think they’ve stopped trying.</p></blockquote>
<p>Are you suggesting that the Mariners have not been trying to win, and that all of the spending they&#8217;ve been doing has just been to make it <em>look</em> like they were trying to win?  I only ask because of your quotational emphasis on &#8220;trying&#8221;.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: ThundaPC</title>
		<link>http://ussmariner.com/2009/01/08/the-budget/comment-page-1/#comment-309105</link>
		<dc:creator>ThundaPC</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 08 Jan 2009 23:26:01 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://ussmariner.com/?p=7044#comment-309105</guid>
		<description>&lt;blockquote&gt;But everyone and their mom knew that dumping Washburn was a good idea. If you had polled 100 journalists, bloggers, etc. and asked them if dumping Washburn and his contract for nothing make sense, 90 would have said yes. If you asked about trading Raul for less than what you’d get in from his arbitration picks, most people would tell you that was a bad idea for a number of reasons.

Not making bad trades is good in general. Dumping contracts where the returns are much below the market rate of 1 win per $5M should always be done.&lt;/blockquote&gt;

Believe me, I was 100% behind trading Washburn at the deadline.  Hell, even Washburn himself wanted to be traded to the Twins.

I just understand why Washburn and others were held on to and not simply dumped.  Armstrong wanted that to be Zduriencik&#039;s call (pretty much an admission of them not really knowing how to build a good baseball team).  Zduriencik chose to make someone like Washburn potentially better by improving the defense.

To me, focusing on what Zduriencik would do if he had plenty of money is a waste of energy.  We&#039;ll be able to find that out as early as next offseason when, as mentioned, roughly $40 Million come off the books.  It&#039;s great to know what Zduriencik can do in a pinch.  He&#039;s practically overhauled the roster spending peanuts.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<blockquote><p>But everyone and their mom knew that dumping Washburn was a good idea. If you had polled 100 journalists, bloggers, etc. and asked them if dumping Washburn and his contract for nothing make sense, 90 would have said yes. If you asked about trading Raul for less than what you’d get in from his arbitration picks, most people would tell you that was a bad idea for a number of reasons.</p>
<p>Not making bad trades is good in general. Dumping contracts where the returns are much below the market rate of 1 win per $5M should always be done.</p></blockquote>
<p>Believe me, I was 100% behind trading Washburn at the deadline.  Hell, even Washburn himself wanted to be traded to the Twins.</p>
<p>I just understand why Washburn and others were held on to and not simply dumped.  Armstrong wanted that to be Zduriencik&#8217;s call (pretty much an admission of them not really knowing how to build a good baseball team).  Zduriencik chose to make someone like Washburn potentially better by improving the defense.</p>
<p>To me, focusing on what Zduriencik would do if he had plenty of money is a waste of energy.  We&#8217;ll be able to find that out as early as next offseason when, as mentioned, roughly $40 Million come off the books.  It&#8217;s great to know what Zduriencik can do in a pinch.  He&#8217;s practically overhauled the roster spending peanuts.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
