Dave and I do an M’s preview at Ducksnorts

DMZ · May 16, 2008 at 9:09 am · Filed Under Mariners 

Check it out if you’re interested, though it’s for the Padres side and you probably already know everything we’re saying about the M’s.

Comments

32 Responses to “Dave and I do an M’s preview at Ducksnorts”

  1. jspektor on May 16th, 2008 10:01 am

    DMZ – that is pretty damn funny. Dave’s answers were *slightly* upbeat and you just hit the nail right on the head. So funny seeing the different reactions from you two. I enjoyed that interview immensely, and the negativity/dark comedy/realism you injected.

    Also the worst part of the the whole blog was the first comment:

    In response to the assertion that King Felix has the best stuff of any pitcher in baseball, and that “it’s not even close,” I have a simple reply:

    Lincecum.

    That could have been our damn pitcher and that’s so upsetting. Even if Felix is better, our 1-2 punch for the future could have been The King the Lincecum.

  2. Jeff Nye on May 16th, 2008 10:17 am

    I liked the part about how the only thing Vidro can hit is the buffet.

  3. fret_24 on May 16th, 2008 10:18 am

    What’s really funny is if you read the comments there is someone asking what the price would be for Griffey. I thought it was funny that their thread got hijacked with Griffey speculation.

  4. jlc on May 16th, 2008 10:34 am

    I liked the Miss Congeniality 2 loop. Dante would use that if he were writing today.

  5. Zero Gravitas on May 16th, 2008 10:38 am

    That seemed like an oddly simpatico interview, considering it was on a blog dedicated to our deadly, hated natural rivals. The Kenny G dig was totally uncalled for, though.

  6. jlc on May 16th, 2008 11:37 am

    Miguel Batista hurts our team by liking Kenny G.

  7. dnc on May 16th, 2008 11:55 am

    Derek’s response to the Kenny G shot was perfect. “How dare you.”

  8. jro on May 16th, 2008 12:31 pm

    The Padres are well considered the absolute worst team in baseball at present. Even the M’s rate better.

    And Yahoo’s current stat:

    The all-time series between the clubs is tied 28-28, with San Diego winning two of three at Seattle last May before being swept at home by the Mariners in June.

    SURELY the Mariners are the favorites here….right?

  9. joser on May 16th, 2008 12:46 pm

    San Diego has Ted Danson, RuPaul, and Mario Lopez to answer for, so I don’t know that Kenny G means much in the scheme of things.

  10. CCW on May 16th, 2008 12:47 pm

    That was awesome. I’m happy for DMZ. I know when I came to grips with how I really felt about the M’s – that is, Mclaren sucks, Bavasi sucks, the rest of the Front Office sucks, half the team sucks, and they all should be fired – and embraced that fact, I felt much better about the situation. Seems like maybe DMZ may have reached a similar place.

  11. joser on May 16th, 2008 12:48 pm

    Since the start of interleague play, how often have the then-worst teams in each league faced each other in the World Series of Suck? I can’t figure out how to query the usual sources to determine that.

  12. scott19 on May 16th, 2008 12:59 pm

    Joser — Not sure about that, either…but those classic Expos-Rays matchups played in front of like 4-5k fans always come to mind.

  13. Mike Snow on May 16th, 2008 1:12 pm

    I found one example, sort of. One June 8, 1999, the Florida Marlins, then with the worst record in baseball, swept a doubleheader from the Orioles. This dropped Baltimore into a tie with the Twins for the worst record in the AL. So on June 9, they finished their three-game series as the worst team in each league. The Orioles won that one and broke their tie with the Twins in the process, so it didn’t hold up long.

  14. Mike Snow on May 16th, 2008 1:25 pm

    Never mind, here’s a real one. From June 20-22, 2006, the Kansas City Royals hosted the Pittsburgh Pirates for a three-game series. The Royals entered the series at 19-49, by far the worst record in baseball, while the Pirates at 26-45 were two games behind the Cubs for the worst record in the NL. Nevertheless, in a clear reflection of the AL’s superiority at the time, the Royals swept the Pirates to win (lose?) that edition of the World Series of Suck. Despite the sweep, the Royals still had the worst record in baseball when it was over.

  15. metz123 on May 16th, 2008 1:49 pm

    Now if we could only figure out how to get MLB to actually have the “world series of suck” at the end of each season I’d have something to look forward to this year.

  16. metz123 on May 16th, 2008 1:55 pm

    And you shouldn’t bring up the L name in this blog. The authors were all pretty adamant that both Morrow and Miller would be better MLB pitchers than Lincecum. All three are still early in their careers but I think Lincecum is well ahead of the other 2 in becoming a stud pitcher.

    San Fran did a great job with Lincecum, putting him in the minors, letting him prove himself against the competition before putting him into the rotation. We all know the M’s haven’t done Morrow and favors and I wonder how the jump between teams has affected Miller. He doesn’t look 1/2 the prospect he did a year ago.

  17. Dave on May 16th, 2008 2:01 pm

    Hey, I have an idea – why don’t you not misrepresent what we said? Thanks.

  18. metz123 on May 16th, 2008 2:19 pm

    Let me know where in the comments of this post you rate Lincecum higher than either Morrow or Miller and I will.

    You guys rated him the #10 pitching prospect in that draft. You stated that his command was truly awful and he was far far away from being a MLB starting pitcher, you stated that any team taking him was rolling the dice because he wasn’t as good as either Miller or Morrow.

    You did admit he’s got crazy good stuff but pumped up his risks along with every other scout because he didn’t fit the conventional mold of what a pitcher should look like or throw like.

    Lincecum didn’t fit the mold. That made teams scared and made his draft rating drop. It wasn’t just the authors of this blog. He fell because almost every team looked at his body type, his mechanics and his pitch count instead of his results.

    In this case the marriage of scouting and statistics didn’t work. The statistics were more important than the scouting reports.

  19. azfred on May 16th, 2008 2:53 pm

    metz123 – if you actually read the discussion in the post you linked to, Dave never said that Miller and Morrow would be better pitchers than Lincecum. He did rank them ahead of Lincecum when “balancing reward and risk and ignoring team situations of who actually owns those draft spots.” There is a difference.

  20. DMZ on May 16th, 2008 2:59 pm

    The authors were all pretty adamant that both Morrow and Miller would be better MLB pitchers than Lincecum.

    Hi. I don’t believe that I said that. If you could point out where I did, I’d appreciate it.

  21. Go Felix on May 16th, 2008 3:04 pm

    I’m Pro-Lincecum but I’m also patient for Morrow since that’s the Mariners took. I’d rather see Morrow in short relief appearances now and then develop him into a starter later instead of blowing his arm out early in his career. Lincecum is a freak of nature, the guy doesn’t ice his arm of his starts and he generates a lot of power from his arm through his awkward follow through. It just pisses me off because the guy is a local product and the Mariners seemed to not even look his way in the draft.

    I’ll wait for Morrow but I would like Lincecum now.

  22. Dave on May 16th, 2008 3:04 pm

    I’m not having the Lincecum argument again. If you want to interpret my comments as “adamant that Miller and Morrow would have better careers”, then that’s your deficiency in reading comprehension.

  23. jro on May 16th, 2008 3:14 pm

    metz123 said:

    And you shouldn’t bring up the L name in this blog. The authors were all pretty adamant that both Morrow and Miller would be better MLB pitchers than Lincecum.

    Dave said:

    Hey, I have an idea – why don’t you not misrepresent what we said? Thanks.

    and metz123 said:

    Let me know where in the comments of this post you rate Lincecum higher than either Morrow or Miller and I will.

    metz, it sounds like you’re questioning Dave/DMZ’s credibility *NOW* based on a pre-draft prediction from two years ago. It sounds vindictive.

  24. okobojicat on May 16th, 2008 3:16 pm

    metz123

    I read through that link you supplied, and really, Dave and Derek didn’t say what you are saying. They said that Lincecum has epically good stuff

    No – Lincecum has crazy, lights out stuff. His fastball is 95-98, and he maintains his velocity late in games. His curveball has some serious drop, and he throws it with power.

    But that the risks associated with him outweigh that. Their point is that if you have an early pick, and you are going to spend a ton of money, take it on someone who has a lot fewer risks associated with them.

    The Ranking system that Dave Posted:

    1. Miller
    2. Lincoln
    3. Morrow
    4. Scherzer
    5. Snider
    6. Hochevar
    7. Longoria
    8. Bard
    9. Kershaw
    10. Lincecum

    was clearly stating that the best return on the money was to get a great pitcher while reducing the risk of getting no returns (i.e. Lincecum’s risk of injury). Dave and DMZ are never

    pretty adamant that both Morrow and Miller would be better MLB pitchers than Lincecum

    as you claim.

    You are inferring more and not dissecting their qualifications that came along with those rankings.

    At this point, we have to realize that the risks of injury to Lincecum are still piling up. The kid has only 200 major league innings pitched. Wood didn’t get hurt until after 300 innings. Prior, even later. Evaluating this draft, this early, is sort of ridiculous.

    Speaking of which, when is Kershaw getting his shot…that curveball is Zito-esque……

  25. Mike Snow on May 16th, 2008 3:31 pm

    Everybody, that’s enough. Why is a discussion of random non-Mariner young pitchers, or a rehashing of the 2006 draft, on-topic for this thread? Oh, wait, it’s not.

  26. Mike G. on May 16th, 2008 3:42 pm

    [I thought it was mildly amusing but it’s not worth this thread turning into a gripefest about it]

  27. red_devil20 on May 16th, 2008 3:49 pm

    [I thought it was mildly amusing but it’s not worth this thread turning into a gripefest about it]

  28. joser on May 16th, 2008 4:00 pm

    [I thought it was mildly amusing but it’s not worth this thread turning into a gripefest about it]

  29. Mike G. on May 16th, 2008 5:35 pm

    I had a feeling it was headed for deletion.

    I really enjoyed the interview. I don’t know if there’s any interest on the USSM side of doing something similar but it could be interesting. I do like the communication between team based blogs. It was a crossover reminiscent of the fabulous Magnum PI/Murder She wrote crossover. Encore good sirs, encore.

  30. SequimRealEstate on May 16th, 2008 6:08 pm

    I second Mike G’s idea and also that you ran with a couple of topics based on readers statments. Thanks, USSM.

  31. DMZ on May 16th, 2008 6:20 pm

    We do that all the time – email us, we do do requests.

  32. Mike G. on May 16th, 2008 7:00 pm

    Ooooh, I know who I want to play at my wedding!

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.