M’s still pursuing #1 starter
DMZ · January 25, 2008 at 12:53 pm · Filed Under Mariners
Baker writes of Bavasi’s continued pursuit of Bedard. I mean, a #1 starter.
I guess we’re not out of this yet.
The thing that stuck out to me was the comment about getting “from 88 wins” to where they want to be. Clearly, they don’t see last season’s performance as a fluke, and think that any addition they make will add on to that — rather than a .500 team that is unlikely to compete for a playoff spot next year.
Also — Tony Clark rumors. What in the world would the M’s want Tony Clark on the team for?
Comments
68 Responses to “M’s still pursuing #1 starter”
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
wasn’t Tony Clark’s little brother a Husky? That must count towards being a hometown guy …
Yes. I had an Econ class with Greg Clark at UW.
Hasn’t Clark been through the Wars? He’s be perfect to convert to a reliever.
Here’s the problem with Clark: if the M’s carry 9 starters + Bloomquist, Burke, and Cairo (as they are supposedly planning), you’re up to 12 hitters, of which only Burke can hit at all. What do you want out of the last bench slot you’ve got available, assuming McLaren goes into the season carrying 12 pitchers?
I may be straying from the question a bit, but as long as they’re dead set on a bench that generally can’t hit, I’d feel more comfortable having 3 catchers…preferably one of whom can bat left-handed. I know that could make for a glut of position players, but really — how many bad relievers DO you need in your bullpen?
I read Bavasi’s comments re 88 wins completely differently. He is discussing the difficulty in getting more than 88 wins, which could certainly mean that he knows the team overachieved, and thus will need to add a lot of talent to improve from 88 wins to being a playoff-caliber team.
53 – the M’s only have one bad reliever, and that’s hopefully HoRam.
Bavasi said at the end of last season that if Sexson had had an average year, that would have been 5 more wins and they would have been in great shape. You swap out Weaver for Silva and there’s so much improvement you barely need to factor in the loss of Guillen. At least that’s what I figure they’re thinking.
Sexson goes to LF. Ibañez plays RF…
What’s the record for triples in a game?
Pentland and Elia sat down together in the off-season and tortured themselves by watching Sexson’s 2007 ABs.
apparently their hope is that Uncle Lee will fix everything.
oh, and Bedard is not a happy camper.
(which some say is his normal state of mind)
59 – I am hoping that quote about Triunfel being off limits is true. Just the three of those guys for Bedard is a complete steal for the Orioles.
#45: I think they truly believe that the team performing above its Pythag was not an aberration. The Mariners over the years have been very clear that they believe that “chemistry” is an important part of performance and that if you find the right blend of players with “character” that team will play greater than the sum of its parts.
I think the Mariners FO believes that:
– the team’s performance prior to the late season collapse was indicative of the true capabilities of the team; i.e., that the team is built to beat Pythag and that is sustainable and repeatable.
– had the team had better performance in the starting rotation the late season collapse in 2007 would not have occurred and the Mariners would have been in the playoffs with well over 90 wins.
– in light of the above if they fix the rotation they are right in the hunt for a division title. Thus the willingness to move Jones and significant other talent to fix the last hole keeping them from winning the West.
The best we can hope for is that Baltimore is too dumb to take advantage of the M’s.
I’d say, based on recent history, there is a good chance of that being the case.
If the M’s make the Bedard trade, all five pieces of the starting rotation would be guaranteed in place. There won’t be any auditions for the 5th spot. And Brandon Morrow would not be thrown into the rotation.
Any chance that Morrow could be sent to Tacoma to learn to be a starter?
Could acquiring Bedard actually help Morrow’s development?
Would the M’s actually do this? Or will Morrow be in the pen – again? (if Bedard is acquired)
How on earth is Ichiro supposed to cover 2 (or 3 if Jones is traded) outfield spots, run out his infield hits to keep his average up and steal 60-80 bases?
From all hints from McLaren and Bavasi, Morrow (if he’s still with the team) will be with Seattle and only be with Tacoma for rehab. No matter what happens.
So, ESPN.com finally is mentioning Bedard to Seattle in their little insider teaser. I refuse to pay for the service, so no idea what their reasoning is.
One of the things that has kept me optimistic about this whole thing is ESPN hasn’t touched it at all. If a trade were as close as we thought it was a couple weeks ago, you’d think they’d have said SOMETHING, right?
Not that they always get it right, but they have enough sources, and it’s of enough national interest that I figured we’d have seen something.
The espn blurb is just quoting the Baltimore Sun. Nothing new. I still do not understand Bavasi’s reasoning. Put two outfielders that can run next to Ichiro and watch the pitchers improve. Put in a 1st baseman that can field the position and watch the infield defense improve. Put in a great starting pitcher with a mediocre defense and offense and watch him have a meltdown.
When does the recent Seattle-Baltimore trade get announced?