The M’s Should Not Trade For A Third Baseman

Dave · July 6, 2009 at 9:00 am · Filed Under Mariners 

The 5-4 road trip, the latter portion coming with Adrian Beltre on the disabled list, can’t be construed as anything other than a huge success. No one thinks this is a great team, but they just played ball with three of the best teams in baseball, on the road, and didn’t embarrass themselves. Yes, there was some bounces going their way, but they put themselves in the position to have those lucky breaks translate into wins in a stretch of games where getting blown out early and often wouldn’t have been much of a shock.

Given the strong performance and the team’s place in the standings, just 3 1/2 games behind both Anaheim and Texas, the organization has ample reason to focus on improving the team they’re putting on the field and giving the 2009 team a chance to make a run at the playoffs. And, realistically, it’s pretty easy to identify the glaring weakness on this team right now. Chris Woodward seems like a nice enough guy, but when he’s your starting third baseman, you have a problem. Considering the M’s inconsistent production (or just total lack thereof) at other positions, they can’t afford to punt third base in a playoff race. Woodward has to be replaced if this team really wants to try to make a push for the AL West title.

That fact, obvious to most everyone, has led to speculation about which third baseman the Mariners could possibly acquire. Names tossed around include Mark Teahen, Garrett Atkins, Kevin Kouzmanoff, Ty Wigginton, and Blake DeWitt, as fans and reporters alike try to come up with some possible options for the club. For most people, the discussion simply comes down to which 3B the M’s should go after, but I’m of the belief that the best option is none of the above.

Making a move for a third baseman would provide an upgrade over Chris Woodward and improve the team’s ability to stay afloat while Adrian Beltre is on the shelf. I don’t disagree with any of that. However, what do you do with New Guy if Beltre is able to come back in September? Or, even better, what do you do with New Guy if the M’s actually pull this thing off and make it to the playoffs? There’s not a third baseman available in trade that you’d want in the line-up over a healthy Adrian Beltre, or even Beltre at 80% of his normal abilities. At that point, you’ve given up some presumably valuable asset(s) to help you for the next ~7 weeks and then improve your bench for the final month/playoffs. Meanwhile, the guy lining up next to Beltre would still be Ronny Cedeno or Yuniesky Betancourt.

That’s the real hole – shortstop. The M’s don’t have a single major league quality starting shortstop in the organization. Cedeno’s flashed the leather the last few weeks like we hoped he would earlier in the year, but there’s still too many problems with his offensive production to look at him as a real solution. Yuni, we’ve talked about to death. On a team trying to contend, both of these guys are bench players.

If we’re going to accept the premise that this team should be bolstering the roster for a run this year (for the purpose of this post, we are), we have to look beyond August 31st. The team only has so many trade chips that will bring them back assets in return, and using one or more of them to acquire a guy who may not have a full-time job for the last month of the season and any October baseball could be a mistake.

The team has to replace Woodward, but they don’t have to do it by acquiring a third baseman. Instead, if the team is going to aggressively pursue an upgrade on the roster, I’d suggest that shortstop is the position to target. If you can make a deal that brings back an SS, you still replace Woodward, but you do it by shifting Lopez to third and Cedeno/Yuni to second.

The starting 2B/3B/SS, in either scenario, will be Lopez-Cedeno/Betancourt-New Guy. How those players are deployed is the issue. And I’d argue that with Beltre potentially returning for September and beyond, it is in the organization’s best interests to make sure that New Guy can play next to Adrian down the stretch, rather than being displaced by him. You don’t want to give up assets for a two month player if you can get a three month (plus playoffs) player instead.

Thankfully for the Mariners, there are a pretty decent selection of shortstops who potentially could be acquired by the M’s. There’s a couple high rent district guys who would cost a lot but could also be terrific acquisitions (J.J. Hardy and Reid Brignac), the veteran rent-a-player option (Jack Wilson), and a trio of need-a-change-of-scenery players (Stephen Drew, Jhonny Peralta, and Yunel Escobar, the latter two of whom could potentially play third until Beltre came back, then shift over to shortstop).

Any possible deal involving Hardy or Brignac is going to cost you Erik Bedard (and then some), so he’d have to be lights out in his two starts this week in order to facilitate a move. More realistically, Wilson would cost significantly less in talent to acquire, thanks to his contract and the Pirates perpetual rebuilding phase, while providing a really good glove guy who isn’t an automatic out. The last three are all questionable gloves at short, but they have a track record of hitting well enough to make up for it – how much the M’s should give up for a guy who might have to move off the position after 2009 is a legitimate question, but they provide options at least.

The worst thing the M’s can do right now is overreact to the road trip and make the easy move that doesn’t help them enough for 2009 and costs them talent for 2010 and beyond. If they’re going to make a move to improve this club for the stretch run, it should be a move that can help them through the rest of the season, even after a potential Beltre return, and in an ideal world it would be a player with some value to this club in 2010 as well.

Replace Woodward, yes, but replace him with a shortstop.

Comments

95 Responses to “The M’s Should Not Trade For A Third Baseman”

  1. mearls on July 6th, 2009 11:35 am

    jro – results based analysis would say that Woodward is the answer at 3B because he’s hitting .313.

    Given the M’s roster this year, a run at the playoffs is possible but not hugely likely. However, we’re living in a universe where, as we approach the all star break, they’re in contention. That has to factor into planning.

    Given that the M’s have lost one of their best overall players in Beltre, it’s a given that the team is going to have a hole in its lineup. The question really is, where do you want that hole sitting? In the big picture view, the entire organization has a gaping hole at SS. Plugging that gap is the best move.

    The key to me is that, regardless of how the M’s fare this year, SS was a hole at the beginning of the season, and unless something happens it’s going to be a hole heading into next season. A move there works for both the short and long terms.

    Even if Beltre walks or can’t play again in ’09, the M’s list of needs begins at SS. The 3B issue is the new problem, but it doesn’t leap to the front of the line.

  2. Sports on a Schtick on July 6th, 2009 11:37 am

    Heyman at SI, after his usual awful opinions, reports that the Indians have put Jhonny Peralta on the block. Could be a potential match as the M’s have prospects Cleveland would be interested in.

  3. jro on July 6th, 2009 11:40 am

    Therefore, we aren’t sunk, but still have a reasonable shot at the playoffs — a long shot, yes, but close enough to be worth gunning for. Therefore, the direction isn’t “sell” but “buy smart, if you can.”

    Ok, I understand the sentiment. I guess I don’t see the roadtrip as a litmus test against it.

  4. mearls on July 6th, 2009 11:41 am

    As for the Bedard thing, he’s too fragile to rely on. Plus, some bloated budget team will vastly overpay him in free agency. Give him a chance to prove his worth and trade him for whatever you can get.

    Yeah, the Jones deal was a turkey, but don’t let one mistake spawn another.

  5. Mike Snow on July 6th, 2009 11:48 am

    Maybe someone can poke some holes in this for me, but why isn’t an option at 3B Shelton? I know he’s been playing there in Tacoma of late and he’s had a solid OPS all year. Is his defense just awful over there?

    Bingo.

  6. coasty141 on July 6th, 2009 12:08 pm

    What about letting Woodward hold down the fort for a couple of weeks and at that time see if Tui is ready to roll? Address the SS/2b problem in the offseason or at the trade deadline if a good situation presents itself. Two more weeks of Woodward won’t be a difference maker in the M’s 09 season.

  7. Dobbs on July 6th, 2009 12:14 pm

    That’s crazy talk. Johnson was at his peak as a HOF pitcher, and Schilling isn’t far off from being a HOF pitcher.

    Isn’t there a huge difference between stringing together a few near-shutout performances in the playoffs versus putting together HOF careers over many years?

    Teams have pinned their hopes on much worse and still won the WS.

  8. Jake N. on July 6th, 2009 12:17 pm

    I see Woodward as a less flexable pony boy like Bloomquist. Woodward has had some good abs and quite a few atempts that looked frankly like me trying to fight off a slider. That middle in cutter slider really makes him look foolish. Plus he has less power then Cedeno. With this offense the M’s just cannot keep these one run games up. We have been lucky. That is most definately going to run out! They need bats and quick. I would not lay odds on this pitching staff holding to a sub 4 era much longer. Not with anyones money, because it will not happen.

  9. JMHawkins on July 6th, 2009 12:20 pm

    The key to me is that, regardless of how the M’s fare this year, SS was a hole at the beginning of the season, and unless something happens it’s going to be a hole heading into next season… the M’s list of needs begins at SS. The 3B issue is the new problem, but it doesn’t leap to the front of the line.

    I agree 100% with this. It doesn’t leap to the front of the line short or long term. The M’s can “fill” the 3B hole by shifting another middle infielder freed up by getting a SS. In fact, they’re already doing this with Woodward.

    To have a chance in the playoffs with this team as constructed, you’ll need strong pitching…

    Unless of course you upgrade defense or run production enough to win without “strong pitching.” Geez, I would’ve thought last year would put the kibosh on the whole “one-two-punch” notion. And, as folks have noted, this team -as constructed without upgrading anything – just played over .500 ball for 9 games against likely playoff teams without Bedard.

    Results based analysis? Well, results might not be good for predicting what is probable, but they’re very good at demonstrating what is possible. And the last nine games proves that it is possible for this team to win a playoff series or two without Bedard in the rotation.

    So the question to ask is, when Bedard is once again available, what is the bigger upgrade: Bedard over Olson/Vargas, or New Guy SS over Woodward/Yuni?

    Similar question for Washburn. What’s the bigger gap: Washburn to Olson/Vargas/RRS, or New Guy #2 to Yuni/Cedeno?

    [Texas has] a bunch of financial issues that will keep transactions to a minimum.

    Hoo boy, ain’t that apparently the truth. Anybody else hear that Hicks had to borrow money from MLB to keep the doors open?

  10. Jake N. on July 6th, 2009 12:31 pm

    Breaks my heart to hear that Hicks took that blow. He and many other owners deserve a little reality check. It will help in the future going after free agents. I would love to see the Angels take a real bath in the red. Just maybe they will take a walk down memory lane and give Vlad a 4 year 50 mill contract. It would be a nice matching black eye to Mathews. And Lackey 2!

  11. eponymous coward on July 6th, 2009 12:40 pm

    Teams have pinned their hopes on much worse and still won the WS.

    How about pinning your hopes on someone like Bedard, who’s pitched exactly zero innings in September for several years, and has a history of trying to come back from rest and skipped starts mid-season and ending up with season-ending surgery anyway?

    If you get a reasonable trade offer involving Bedard that addresses a hole on the 2009 roster, there’s no real reason not to take it- wins can just as easily come from good SS play as from a #2 starter, and Bedard’s amazing stuff does you no good if it’s on the DL, which is a real risk any time he takes the mound. I’m actually somewhat skeptical this will happen precisely because his injury history easily means you could lose bigtime on any deal involving him, but like I said, if you can trade Rich Harden…

  12. frontstreetfan on July 6th, 2009 1:00 pm

    Bedard is going to have to put up at least two or three starts at 100 pitches 5-7 innings to justify
    any trade value. At the moment his upside is staying with the Mariners. If we fade in August he probably would clear to a trade anyways after the non-waiver deadline.
    Sweeney should be placed on theDL bring up Shelton as a RH DH platoon with Griffey. He is simply not a major league third baseman. His Power will greatly improve the offense against lefties even at Safeco he’s capable of putting up some numbers. Agreed, pickup a contract but don’t give up a prospect for a potential 7 week 3rd baseman.

  13. Joe on July 6th, 2009 1:06 pm

    what exactly would it take to get Brignac in a deal?

    If it started with Bedard, what else would be in the deal on our side? I can’t fathom they’d be interested in Clement or Balentien…or even Saunders, for that matter.

    Start with Aardsma, and toss in somebody from Tacoma, and maybe they’ll talk. I’m sure the discussion has already happened, and whatever their price was, it was too high. They really are in a strong position — there’s nothing they absolutely need at the moment, and while Brignac looks like a surplus part in their system at the time, there’s no pressure to move him — so they can afford to ask the moon.

    And while it is true that they have plenty of outfielders, two of them (Crawford and Burrell) are going to be pretty expensive next year and will be free agents after that. In fact, the Rays may well exercise their buyout option on Crawford next year and cut him loose, so they may be more receptive to a cheap young infielder than you’d think. (For that matter, Pena is getting expensive and is probably gone after ’10 as well, so while 1Bs are relatively easy to find Tampa might be interested in a cheap young player at that position as well… and that’s one thing the M’s do have in excess).

    What about letting Woodward hold down the fort for a couple of weeks and at that time see if Tui is ready to roll?

    Considering that Tui only just started taking swings after his surgery this past week, it’s probably more than a bit optimistic to think he could be a starter on a major league team in just a couple of weeks. (At least that’s the impression I have — it’s been hard to find hard information on his progress).

    I’m actually somewhat skeptical this will happen precisely because his injury history easily means you could lose bigtime on any deal involving him, but like I said, if you can trade Rich Harden…

    But look at what the A’s got back for Harden. It seemed low to me at the time, but obviously his injury history devalued his side of the deal. I agree that it’s an instructive comparison, but unfortunately the lesson it teaches is not particularly encouraging.

  14. Kazinski on July 6th, 2009 1:07 pm

    The truth is we are just screwed. We need to fill all four infield positions for next year. Beltre and Branyan are both in their walk years. Yuni, Cedeno and Woodward are all replacement players, Lopez is marginally useful at best.

    And we have don’t have enough prospects to fill the holes we have, let alone surplus to trade for rent-a-players.

    I think Jack needs to fill the holes the best he can, as cheaply as he can, and build for the long term. If he can get decent value from a trade then everybody except Ichiro, Guti, Felix, and possibly Morrow should be on the block.

    This years team is extremly lucky to be only 3.5 behind the Angels, our luck just isn’t sustainable. I’m not saying we should pull the plug on the season, what I am saying is that we shouldn’t double down.

    We realistically need to be scoring at least a 1/2 a run a game more than we are scoring now. That would get us up to 10th in the AL from 13th. And I can’t see any combination of moves that is going to get us that .5 run, either offensively or defensively.

  15. Jake N. on July 6th, 2009 1:11 pm

    Well said Kazinski.. There it is right there. Were in a real hole with few options.

  16. DMZ on July 6th, 2009 1:18 pm

    For all the one-run winnitude, overall the team’s only a game or two over where you’d expect, luck-wise

  17. Dobbs on July 6th, 2009 1:39 pm

    How about pinning your hopes on someone like Bedard

    Again, there’s a lot worse to pin your hopes on. The fact is the person’s point is that it’s possible to get a run out of Bedard and Felix similar to Johnson/Schilling.

    Maybe that’s not the most intelligent move in the playbook, hence the suggestion to move Bedard by Dave/DMZ.

    But let’s not discount the possibility that Bedard could help us a lot in the post-season if he’s not moved (and we make it there).

  18. JMHawkins on July 6th, 2009 1:43 pm

    The truth is we are just screwed. We need to fill all four infield positions for next year… And we have don’t have enough prospects to fill the holes we have, let alone surplus to trade for rent-a-players.

    Trading for a rent-a-player is a terrible idea. That’s (I think, if I understood Dave’s argument right) one of the reasons Dave says we shouldn’t trade for a 3B. The 2B/SS options have better chances of being useful next year too.

    But the point about not having surplus prospects doesn’t fly. We don’t have any middle infield prospects. It’s not a question of whether we should trade a potential 2010 replacement for Yuni in order to get a 2009 replacement for Beltre – we don’t have that guy to trade.

    What we do have are surplus 1Bs and pitchers. We’ll need to trade some of those to get middle infielders anyway, the only question is when. Trade them now for a guy who could help make a run in 2009 or trade them in the offseason for a guy who will only help in 2010?

    Obviously if you could get equal return it’s better to trade now than later since now might pay help capitalize on some first half luck. Plus, two of the possible trade chips – Bedard and Washburn – are wasting assets. Washburn goes to zero value at the end of the season, and Bedard likely goes to Type B marginal return. Trading either now will bring better returns than sitting on them for the season.

    If the team didn’t have such glaring needs at 2B/SS/3B, then maybe it would be worth holding onto them for a playoff run, but given the other holes, the team probably has better playoff chances if it can turn one or both of them into middle infield help. Adding in one of our 1B prospects is a fine thing. Even if Branyan walks, we’ll have an easier time filling that hole in FA than we will upgrading Lopez/Yuni/Cedneo.

  19. Joe on July 6th, 2009 1:50 pm

    jro: it’s not analysis per se, and the sample size is irrelevant. How the road trip clarifies direction is this: we’ve just gotten through the hardest road trip of the year, one that could have brought us home 0-9, and we went 5-4.

    Yes, the way to look at this is that the roadtrip (because it is a small sample) doesn’t tell us about as much about the team as it does about the season. Prior to the roadtrip, the schedule held 90 games including 42 (yikes) against division leaders (counting Boston/NY and Angels/Rangers as leaders, plus the Tigers and Dodgers). After the roadtrip, the schedule holds 81 games but just 33 games against those division leaders. So the schedule is now 10% shorter but the slate of (presumably) most difficult games has been shaved by 21%. That is what makes the roadtrip significant.

    The team’s performance may still be something of a mirage, but the longer it hangs on knocking off better teams the less opportunity remains for the illusion to completely evaporate. That said, a lot can still happen in half a season.

  20. Joe on July 6th, 2009 1:53 pm

    …and I forgot to close an italic tag. Sorry about that.

  21. Jeff Nye on July 6th, 2009 2:00 pm

    But let’s not discount the possibility that Bedard could help us a lot in the post-season if he’s not moved (and we make it there).

    Of course he’d help, but so would eliminating the sucking holes in our middle infield. Probably more than Bedard would help.

  22. JH on July 6th, 2009 2:21 pm

    Ok, I understand the sentiment. I guess I don’t see the roadtrip as a litmus test against it.

    The decision of whether to buy or sell mid-season has nothing to do with results based vs. process-based analysis. It’s entirely about playoff odds. For the former, 9 games are beyond meaningless. For the latter, 9 games can make a world of difference.

    A 3-6 roadtrip, and you’re looking at a team with a very steep climb to contention. 2-7 and the team’s got virtually no shot. 1-8 and the season’s pretty much over. Instead, the team went 5-4, and we’re only a couple games behind two very flawed teams. It’s time to think about rentals, or potentially investing a lot of the team’s trade chips in a multi-year solution.

  23. Slurve on July 6th, 2009 2:51 pm

    Vargas? Why are you talking about dealing Vargas? That wouldn’t be bright at all.

    If you can trade a league average starter/back-of-the-rotation starter that is pretty much redundant in your system for a piece that you need then you do it.

  24. Double Suicide Squeeze on July 6th, 2009 3:21 pm

    If you can trade a league average starter/back-of-the-rotation starter that is pretty much redundant in your system for a piece that you need then you do it.

    Agreed. What exactly makes Vargas untouchable?

  25. eponymous coward on July 6th, 2009 3:26 pm

    The fact is the person’s point is that it’s possible to get a run out of Bedard and Felix similar to Johnson/Schilling.

    Sure, but I could do lots of “let’s pretend”- Ichiro could go on a monster postseason hot streak, Washburn could pitch lights-out for a postseason, Griffey could pretend it’s the 1995 ALDS for a game.

    I’m not arguing “dump Bedard for whatever A-ball prospect you can get, he sucks”- but the idea that the best the M’s can hope for is that Erik Bedard does something he hasn’t done the past three years and pitch meaningful innings past August 31… well, no, that’s just not true. There are lots of different ways to win in the postseason.

    Oh, and the Mariners’ record since Erik Bedard’s last start? 14-10. Now granted, that’s the ultimate in results-based analysis- but the Mariners haven’t collapsed since they lost Bedard in the rotation, so why is it essential that they have him for the stretch run and the playoffs?

  26. heyoka on July 6th, 2009 3:35 pm

    the Mariners haven’t collapsed since they lost Bedard in the rotation, so why is it essential that they have him for the stretch run and the playoffs?

    Run prevention. 🙂

    And while I agree that SS is a higher priority than 3B, I don’t think the argument that we’d have two 3B-man for the playoffs matters. We need to get to the playoffs first and it’s still a hole.

  27. Oolon on July 6th, 2009 3:38 pm

    DMZ wrote:

    For all the one-run winnitude, overall the team’s only a game or two over where you’d expect, luck-wise

    Make that 4 games over what you’d expect. According to MLB.com’s standings the team’s expected W-L is 38-43 and actual is 42-39.

    It doesn’t seem that long ago that we were all berating Bavasi for thinking the 88-74 finish in 2007 meant the team was a step away from the playoffs. I remember many here pointing out that the expected W-L for that 2007 team was actually 79-83 and that the team wasn’t really of 88 win quality.

    Fast forward to the present mid-season 2009 and we have talk of the playoffs for our 42-39 team. The current expected W-L is 38-43 (which extrapolates out to 76-86 – close to what many of us predicted prior to the season).

    Talk of playoffs is good for the box office and for the fans – but I’m not sold that this team is a middle infielder away from the playoffs. On the other hand, maybe they are and this “expected” W-L stuff is nonsense and Bavasi was right but just got unlucky in 2008…

  28. eponymous coward on July 6th, 2009 3:39 pm

    The other reason why comparing Erik Bedard to Schilling or Johnson is wishful thinking is this:

    Erik Bedard MLB career CGs: 1
    Curt Schilling MLB postseason CGs: 4
    Randy Johnson MLB postseason CGs: 3

    Simply put, Erik Bedard is, when he’s on, a nice pitcher for 6-7 innings, but expecting him to duplicate Schilling OR Johnson at their peak is seriously wishful thinking.

  29. heyoka on July 6th, 2009 3:44 pm

    (Though, really? Playoffs? Really think we’ll catch the Angels? Vlad’s heating up, the offense is solid, and the starters are back. One the M’s keys to success was to be ahead in the standings at this point, and then hold on.)

  30. eponymous coward on July 6th, 2009 3:47 pm

    It doesn’t seem that long ago that we were all berating Bavasi for thinking the 88-74 finish in 2007 meant the team was a step away from the playoffs. I remember many here pointing out that the expected W-L for that 2007 team was actually 79-83 and that the team wasn’t really of 88 win quality.

    You do remember correctly, but here’s the thing: the Mariners do not have to give back any 2009 wins due to overperformance. This will be a factor when evaluating the roster AFTER the season, but in-season, when you get hot at the craps table, they don’t make you give the house money back, and we’re playing with it as of today.

    Also, have you looked at the Pythags of the other teams in the division we’re chasing?

    LAA of A: 42-38, +3 on Pythag luck
    Texas: 43-37, +2 on Pythag luck

    Nobody’s running away with this division, or a particularly awesome team at this point in the season. A couple games of improvement really DO make a difference here.

  31. Jeff Nye on July 6th, 2009 3:51 pm

    but I’m not sold that this team is a middle infielder away from the playoffs

    Nice straw man.

  32. Oolon on July 6th, 2009 3:59 pm

    Nice straw man.

    I am humbled by your rebuttal of my argument.

  33. eponymous coward on July 6th, 2009 4:11 pm

    I am humbled by your rebuttal of my argument.

    But you haven’t addressed Dave’s argument, which is not “Hey, all we need is a shortstop!”, but is, rather:

    The worst thing the M’s can do right now is overreact to the road trip and make the easy move that doesn’t help them enough for 2009 and costs them talent for 2010 and beyond. If they’re going to make a move to improve this club for the stretch run, it should be a move that can help them through the rest of the season, even after a potential Beltre return, and in an ideal world it would be a player with some value to this club in 2010 as well.

    In other words: this isn’t the time to be trading this year’s Shin-Soo Choo and Asdrubal Cabrera to patch holes (like Bavasi did in 2006 when the M’s were on the edge of contention).

  34. Oolon on July 6th, 2009 4:23 pm

    In other words: this isn’t the time to be trading this year’s Shin-Soo Choo and Asdrubal Cabrera to patch holes (like Bavasi did in 2006 when the M’s were on the edge of contention).

    My point exactly – I totally agree. I don’t think my post even hinted at the need to trade anyone to patch any holes.

  35. eponymous coward on July 6th, 2009 4:31 pm

    So, what was the point of saying:

    Talk of playoffs is good for the box office and for the fans – but I’m not sold that this team is a middle infielder away from the playoffs. On the other hand, maybe they are and this “expected” W-L stuff is nonsense and Bavasi was right but just got unlucky in 2008…

    if you and Dave are in agreement? Who are you arguing with? I believe we call that a “straw man” argument.

  36. Oolon on July 6th, 2009 4:57 pm

    if you and Dave are in agreement? Who are you arguing with?

    I totally agree with Dave that any move has to be not just for this year but also for the future. With the emphasis on “the future”.

    My comments were directed to others here that seem to think we’re in serious contention for the post-season based on our 42-39 record. Those 42 wins are a bit of an illusion – just like 2007’s 88 wins were.

    The first half of the season has been fun, but I fear regression to the mean in the second half. I hope that I’m wrong.

  37. djw on July 6th, 2009 5:44 pm

    My comments were directed to others here that seem to think we’re in serious contention for the post-season based on our 42-39 record.

    How do you define “serious contention”? coolstandings has the Mariners at 12% for the division (and 2% for the WC). That seems about right to me. Does that count as serious contention? Making minor improvements to boost that to 20% or so seems sensible if the costs are low.

  38. Oolon on July 6th, 2009 6:09 pm

    How do you define “serious contention”? coolstandings has the Mariners at 12% for the division (and 2% for the WC).

    Seems about right to me too. And I think 1 chance in 8 is definitely not “serious contention”. I’d say “overwhelming underdogs” might be closer if I were picking an adjective.

    A 20% chance might be “serious underdogs” if I were to pick an adjective. Not really worth giving up much (if anything) unless it would also improve our chances in 2010 and beyond.

  39. Dustin Shires on July 6th, 2009 10:09 pm

    Dave, what do you think it would take to acquire J.J. Hardy? I’ve always liked him as a solution at shortstop.

  40. qwerty on July 6th, 2009 11:54 pm

    Chris Shelton? then Tui?

  41. rightwingrick on July 7th, 2009 7:59 am

    It’s important to keep things in perspective here. #1 on the list is that this Mariners team has LOTS of holes, both short and long-term (few minor-league ready position players): SS, 3B, a “maybe” left fielder, and three “maybe…if we are lucky” starters, for example. That’s just way too many holes to think we are truly a COMPETITIVE playoff team. Yes, we might make the playoffs (another “iffy” proposition), but to think we would advance far is more than iffy, it’s a dream.

    Given that scenario, we have to be sellers, given that we have at least four guys with big contracts who are unlikely to return to Seattle next year anyway (Bedard, Beltre, Batista, Washburn). Since they are not likely to be Type A free agents (therefore limiting return to us if signed elsewhere), we are forced to try to get high-level prospects at the trade deadline.

    If we assume that at least a rejuvinated Washburn would consider resigning with Seattle, and that Beltre is untradeable given his DL status, that leaves only Bedard (if he pitches well for the next couple of starts) and Batista (if he doesn’t blow up in the bullpen over the next couple of weeks) as trade bait.

    Bedard, with his health history and desire to play in Toronto, will get limited return even for a contender. He might return a good position player having a subpar year, if the team has a top prospect waiting in the wings at his position.

    Bedard to Milwaukee for SS J.J. Hardy (#1 prospect Alcides Escobar, a SS, is about ready at AAA).

  42. Dobbs on July 7th, 2009 8:38 am

    You have to hope that Felix/Bedard can come close to matching Johnson/Schilling of the 2001 Dbacks.

    That’s crazy talk. Johnson was at his peak as a HOF pitcher, and Schilling isn’t far off from being a HOF pitcher.

    This is what my original response was directed towards. The argument was made that since Johnson and Schilling are future HOFers and Felix/Bedard aren’t currently, that hoping they could pull off a similar dominating run in the playoffs was “crazy”.

    I’m just wondering, why is being a future HOFer is a necessity for the ultimate success in the playoffs? Is it truly crazy that Bedard and Felix could make a similar run? I guess the craziest part is that Bedard would be healthy, but I wasn’t contending that.

  43. lunchboxlabchef on July 7th, 2009 8:40 am

    Woodward has been solid with the leather and the stick. He is a veteran. Another Jack Z. gem along with Langerhans who really has solved our OF dilemma. The big Texan has been super solid. Cedeno has been really good as of late. I actually want him to stay in over Yuniesky. He brings bad Juju. He would be someone I would try and slip into any trade made. Of the third baggers listed I like only Teahen because he can play many positions. He worked on them all to get that utility status. Hell I would love the M’s to try and bring back Willie Bloomquist. Guy has reinvented himself and has confidence. He is a true blue mariner for life to me and he is a local. He could be that day off at every position literally. Fan favorite hustle guy who fits in our system.

  44. Benne on July 7th, 2009 1:33 pm

    Woodward has been solid with the leather and the stick. He is a veteran. Another Jack Z. gem along with Langerhans who really has solved our OF dilemma. The big Texan has been super solid. Cedeno has been really good as of late. I actually want him to stay in over Yuniesky. He brings bad Juju. He would be someone I would try and slip into any trade made. Of the third baggers listed I like only Teahen because he can play many positions. He worked on them all to get that utility status. Hell I would love the M’s to try and bring back Willie Bloomquist. Guy has reinvented himself and has confidence. He is a true blue mariner for life to me and he is a local. He could be that day off at every position literally. Fan favorite hustle guy who fits in our system.

    Bill Bavasi? Is that you?

  45. Miles on July 7th, 2009 3:01 pm

    Dave,
    Lots of good comments here. Still, I’ve not seen much discussion about what it would cost to land Brignac without moving Washburn, Bedard or Aardsma. Do we have the prospects to land him if we move say just one bullpen arm? Has Clement really lost that much value. He may be a good fit in TB. If healthy and behind the plate, I figured Clement would be worth nearly as much as Brignac by himself.

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.