M’s must make Cano signing count

GarzaGetty 300x187 Ms must make Cano signing countWith unofficial word coming out Friday that the Seattle Mariners and free agent second baseman Robinson Cano have come to terms at 10 years and $240 million, the M’s have one job: Make it count.

Regardless of whether or not $240 million is a good investment in a 31-year-old, the Mariners now must make sure Cano doesn’t stand alone on the club’s acquisition list when spring training starts in nine weeks. Call it a responsibility to themselves, but this team has to keep adding talent this offseason and make sure they are capable and legitimate contenders in 2014.

Anything short of that and the Cano signing becomes a mess. Why? Because the latter portion of the contract is bound to be a time when Cano isn’t worth what the team will be paying him. That makes the first five or six years critical, and wasting even one season with Cano greatly reduces its value to the team.

General manager Jack Zduriencik and his staff have put their irons in nearly every fire in baseball. Even after the Cano commitment, the Mariners are expected to be major players for free agent outfielders Shin-Soo Choo and Rajai Davis, starting pitchers Matt Garza, Ervin Santana and Ubaldo Jimenez, first basemen Corey Hart and Kevin Youkilis, and a number of relievers and part-time players.

They also were mentioned as an interested party in the trade availability of left-hander David Price earlier this week. Price is under club control for two more years, but will earn about $30 million over those two years. Kansas City Royals designated hitter Billy Butler and Los Angeles Dodgers outfielder Matt Kemp have also been linked to Seattle. Butler’s availability seems to be tied to the Royals’ acquisition of another hitter.

The M’s have just over $33 million committed for 2014 before adding Cano to the ledger, plus whatever numbers arbitration-eligibles Michael Saunders and Justin Smoak settle at — if they aren’t included in trades — and the team-controlled contracts, which go for around $500,000 a pop. We don’t know for sure what the club’s payroll limits will be for next season, but it appears there is still plenty of money remaining.

Is Price worth Walker?
The cost for Price in terms of trade bait is going to be high. The expectation is that top prospect Taijuan Walker will have to be included. While this remains a possibility, there are indications that Zduriencik much prefers to keep Walker and add a significant No. 3-type starter via the free agent market.

There are mixed reviews on Walker’s future, however. There are those believe Walker is more of a No. 3 starter and more than a year from being a real value to a major league rotation. I believe he’s a future No. 2 starter, possibly a No. 1, and that he can help in the big leagues right away, perhaps right out of spring training next spring. Trading six years of club control of a talent of that caliber that is ready to contribute in exchange for two years of almost any player in baseball is not a sound decision, in my opinion.

The upgrade of Price over Walker for 2014 and 2015 may not be very large, either. Price’s best season was 2012 when he posted an fWAR of 4.8 and he’s totaled 13.5 fWAR over the past three seasons. Assuming the 28-year-old maintains similar performance, he’ll be worth somewhere between 8.5 and 9.0 wins above replacement during his final two seasons before he hits free agency. Price will do so earning about $13 million in 2014 and probably between $16 million and $18 million for 2015. It would not be out of the realm of expectations for Walker to surpass that production over the next 3-4 seasons, as 1.7-2.2 WAR per season is only slightly above league average for starting pitchers.

Walker is too much to sacrifice for Price, and on top of that it could cost more than just the 21-year-old right-hander to pry the former Cy Young winner away from the Rays, who will undoubtedly have other offers for their ace.

One possible exception: If the Rays are willing to give up more than just Price in a package deal — perhaps an outfielder such as Desmond Jennings — the equation changes. Until then, the wise decision is to pocket Walker, pass on Price and spend more money on a starting pitcher and perhaps another hitter or two.

Trades can still be part of the process, possibly including Kemp. Considering his contract and the risk with which he comes, the trade cost to acquire him must be fairly modest, unless the Dodgers send cash along with the outfielder, who would likely play right field in Seattle.

In October, I wrote about Milwaukee centerfielder Carlos Gomez being a potential target, and while the Brewers’ trading of Norichika Aoki to Kansas City may very well nix any chance of Gomez being available — if there was any shot in the first place — but right-hander Yovani Gallardo could be a fairly inexpensive alternative, provided he’s healthy.

Absolutely not done
The baseball world has every reason to believe the Mariners will do exactly what I’m suggesting and urging here — make the Cano deal count, and right away. The Mariners are not done, by a long shot.

The smart bet is that the club adds at least one significant starting pitcher, at least one more significant bat, and 1-2 other upgrades to the lineup — first base, outfield — that aren’t considered big names but are still deemed better than what the club finished with in 2013, and at least one veteran relief pitcher, possibly more.

That could mean Garza, Santana or Jimenez, for example, plus Hart, Youkilis, Butler, Nelson Cruz or Kendrys Morales, an outfielder such as Kemp, Gerardo Parra, a catcher such as Michael McKenry, Ramon Hernandez or even Kurt Suzuki, and a bullpen option such as Jose Veras or Joaquin Benoit.

Not bad, eh?

Adding Cano is a major coup for the Mariners. Their ownership, CEO Howard Lincoln as well as Zduriencik and his staff all deserve a lot of credit. Lincoln and the ownership for being bold and understanding the kind of financial commitment it takes to climb out of the hole they have been in for years, the GM and his group for properly identifying the one player in this year’s market worth overpaying for, and for communicating that properly to Chuck Armstrong and Lincoln.

Sure, we can blast them for not taking such necessary risks in the past, and we can sit on our couches and claim the only reason they are making such inroads now is because of the expected influx of revenues from the acquisition of the regional sports network — Root Sports — but it’s still a major financial risk and a potential sacrifice of future profits. Give credit where credit is due, and credit is due here, to everyone involved in these personnel transactions.

The above scenario post-Cano is a special offseason. It’s one that completely changes the culture and overall view of the franchise. A week ago, such an offseason was an absolute pipe dream. Today, it’s more than plausible. In fact, it’s closer to probable than it is anything else.

Last offseason, I started to write a piece on the M’s needing their ‘Bam Moment’ the way the Seahawks had theirs when they acquired Percy Harvin and a sent a message to the rest of the NFL.

Cano is it, M’s fans.

Bam.

Written by Jason A. Churchill

Moi2 Ms must make Cano signing count

Executive Editor
Jason founded Prospect Insider in 2006 after getting his start at Inside the Park and covering prep, college and pro sports for several news outlets, local and national, including MLB.com and ESPN Insider. He currently serves as co-host of the Steve Sandmeyer Show on 1090 The Fan, CBS Sports Seattle.

twitter Ms must make Cano signing countfacebook Ms must make Cano signing countgoogle plus Ms must make Cano signing count

34 comments on “M’s must make Cano signing count

  1. rotoenquire says:

    Agreed, The M’s have to be the worst ownership in baseball.

  2. docsmith says:

    Considering the M’s record, I wouldn’t expect things to be harmonious. A number of the accusations has me concerned. But there seem to be two issues at play. The first being are Lincoln/JZ jerks?

    Of course, I’d prefer it if they weren’t, but I find myself asking the question, does it matter? Do I stop being a M’s fan if JZ and Lincoln are jerks? I hear Jobs and Bezos were/are nightmares to work for and yet I still buy/use their products. The key difference is that Jobs and Bezos products are/were top notch. In the end, it may be the most damning if JZ and Lincoln can’t assemble a competitive team.

    And that is the second question that is woven into the “they are jerks” line into the article…are JZ/Lincoln competent enough to run a baseball team? It is easy to say no, and maybe that is the right answer, but we’ve all lauded TMac’s drafts….and he is part of the organization. If JZ is such a tyrant, why is TMac still around? Our farm has gone from horrid to one of the better ones in the MLB. Our MLB product has been poor, but I am not one to forget that baseball is a competitive sport where as many games are lost as are won. In looking at JZ’s decisions, I fault him for several, but I can’t say I think he did worse than your typical GM. Ackley was regarded as the #2 talent in ’09. I remember Dave/USS Mariner practically being over the moon we got Smoak for Lee instead of Montero. Did anyone see Montero being the bust that he has become? The exception here is that if the Seattle environment is cancerous, that could explain why so many have underperformed. That part still has me thinking and listening to the criticisms. But again, even if true, do I stop watching? Being a fan?

    Not everyone is going to like everyone. I am aware of and fine with that. Just look at Nolan Ryan’s exit in Texas. Plus, when you are in a losing situation, I think it is going to bread some disharmony. And Blengino is certainly upset. I just saw a quote that Baker’s report is “the tip of the iceberg.”

    In the end, I hope that this is just disharmony that goes with losing and that JZ/Lincoln field a good team and harmony is restored. I hope they aren’t jerks. But even if they are, I hope they put it together…soon. I really surprised myself. I started watching the M’s around 1980. I lost interest last year. I really haven’t regained it. If they are jerks, it takes away from my affinity for the team. But, playing bad baseball will hurt it even more.

  3. mgvernon says:

    The Mariners have a five person analytical department. That seems a hell of a waste of resources if nobody is paying attention to their product. Wedge complaining about being told to have the team take more pre-game practice and drills sounds counter productive to the team improving to me.

    The Yankees front office is taking heat for a similar calcified dysfunctional ineffectiveness and an inability to build a farm system. Given all of their monetary advantages they are going the wrong way. The M’s haven’t cornered the market on screw ups. The Angels are still paying Vernon Wells and will be paying Pujols and Hamilton too much for too long. The Rangers are not fault free either, poor old Nolan Ryan last some of the money he invested in them.

  4. rjfrik says:

    doc,

    except for the fact that after Baker used the statement about JZ mocking Tony for the font size and the borders (something completely arbitrary) he then backed up that statement by stating that Tony said,
    “Jack always did that, made fun of things he didn’t understand. He made a joke about something he couldn’t understand”. That’s just ignorance and comes from the same mold as a High School kid making fun of a gay kid because he doesn’t understand it. Let’s get all of my peers on board to make fun of something because I’m uncomfortable with it or don’t understand it. That will make me feel better.

    That might be the most damning thing to me. If JZ really is like this then I have no respect for the guy at all. It’s bush league that a person with that high level of responsibility would act in that manner.

  5. rjfrik says:

    Going to have to agree with Jerry here. When it happened I was in Edman’s camp. I thought it was bullshit that he left the team. But after reading what actually happened behind closed doors and the ineptitude of the Executives I don’t blame Wedge. And I don’t think this will effect Wedge’s future.

    I still have a picture of Lincoln busting into Wedge’s office and demanding that we win. “We need to win!!” says Lincoln. Wedge replies, “I agree.” “No I mean, we need to win now. We need to go 5-2 on this road trip. We need to win now!!”, clamors Lincoln.

    Could you imagine? How far gone is Lincoln? This small snip it from an example of what goes on behind doors just shows me that Lincoln doesn’t know a thing about baseball. You put together one of the worst teams on record and you demand that the team win? I mean, words can’t comprehend. I just shake my head.

  6. JerryEK says:

    That’s one way to look at it.

    The other side I that coin is that the work atmosphere in the organization must have been REALLY caustic to force someone to walk away like he did. Like, epically bad.

    You say this is all about Wedge being a selfish, terrible person. But this is not an isolated instance. The M’s have had TWO well-regarded veteran managers quit on them during the regular season. That provides strong evidence that there is something SERIOUSLY wrong with the teams leadership and direction. It’s a pattern.

    I think you’re dead wrong about this ruining Wedges career. Any potential employer will know that the M’s have a terrible track record for alienating people. Its not a secret that the M’s are dysfunctional. With Wedge, the fact that he’s not a great manager will hurt him far more than walking away from a bad work environment.

    After reading Bakers article, I don’t see how you could blame him. Who would want to work in that environment? If anything, it shows that Wedge valued his integrity over money and job security. I’d have probably done the same thing.

  7. docsmith says:

    First off, unfortunately, everyone could be right. What was said about upper management is likely true. I am still mulling over how damning it really is, but there is likely truth to it. Regarding Baker….it was probably his most eloquent piece, and what he did was provide a negative framework…the context. Really, if you pull each statement out of the context that Baker provided, there are only a few that are really bad…on their own. For example, the bit about JZ mocking the font…that could have been constructive criticism or JZ being an A$$. My issue is that Baker has not earned my trust. If what he wrote hadn’t at least partially fit with what we’ve seen and snippets that we have heard (few quotes from JAC and others), I’d be tempted to disregard all of it.

    What I’d love to know is all of the “source’s” reaction to the piece. Are they thinking “you took me out of context” or are they thinking “nailed it.”

    That said, there is far too much smoke here for there to not be at least some fire. It is unfortunate, but true. But, at the end, I just want Seattle to be successful.

  8. JerryEK says:

    Edman,

    Did you actually read the article? Nearly the entire thing is from comments from named sources from inside the organization. And there are multiple independent authorities (include Jason’s comments in this very thread) that corroborate those comments.

    Unless you think he falsified peoples comments, there isn’t much room for bias.

    The article provides an unusually detailed view of the problems that pretty much every knowledgable fan (besides yourself) already knew existed.

  9. Shawnuel says:

    Snave, you hit the nail on the head.

  10. Edman says:

    I will never forgive Wedge for leaving with three days remaining in the season. His actions were selfish, especially when he tries to come off as someone who “cares about the kids”, when he selfishly left then behind. He lacks a lot of character, and will now be lucky to find any GM to hire him. He just threw away his career, for a Geoff Baker commentary.

  11. Edman says:

    No Jerry, it’s to report unbiasedly. He was not unbiased, same as he was not when he made statements about the Mariners being positioned for sale.

    As a “Editorialist”, he only needs to have an opinion. Where were his remarks about statements being confirmed by unbiased witnesses?

  12. rjfrik says:

    I don’t know how anyone could look at Baker’s article as sensational. There was no opinion in it at all. It wasn’t an Editorial piece at all. Baker wasn’t giving his opinion on the subject. He was stating facts that were given to him from interviews.

    Now you can discredit those facts if you want and claim that the people telling them were fabricating the truth or just, plain, lying. But it seems odd to me that so many people are voicing the exact same thing. Are all of these people colluding? Did they all get together and put a plan together to bash the front office? Or could they all be saying something that has some truth to it?

    Usually it’s the latter. Yes they all were let go and might have bad feelings and all could have agreed to bad talk the organization. But I doubt it. Especially when most, if not all, of these people are highly skilled and respected individuals in the baseball community. Bob Engle is the best at what he does in the entire world. Tony Blengino is a highly respected front office guy.

    Bottom line is what was being reported is what most people already felt about the organization. The truth is finally coming out and there is nothing wrong with the truth. Hopefully some change can and will happen.

  13. JerryEK says:

    It’s his job to be critical of a poorly run organization.

  14. rotoenquire says:

    Ownership will need to change 1st before anything else with the M’s upper managment can change. Lincoln has all the say and ears of Nintendo of America. It is being run to make a proffit and not to be a winner. Just look at Lincoln’s respnce in interviews. It is all about the stadium and experience at a great stadium. Team and winning is almost an after thought. The M’s have a self impossed budget that is designed to make a proffit and nothing more. The worst thing that ever happened for us as fans was the no big name winning season the M’s had it made ownership stick in the trenches for their formula. Winning is not the goal it is a lucky by product that will happen from time to time.

  15. mgvernon says:

    I’ve dislike Baker’s writing for years, he’s more interested in building himself up than communicating information. He got into trouble when he wrote for the Toronto paper (The Globe and Mail I believe) for insinuating that the Blue Jays were racist and it turned out they had more employees of color than the average MLB team or Toronto business. It’s mentioned in the book “Moneyball”.
    Despite my dislike I’m inclined to believe the thrust of his argument and the front office is dysfunctional, including Jack Z. I now believe the owners should clean house but I would be surprised if they did. This represents a major change of my opinion. If you read above I was approving of their financial management and willing to “let bygones be bygones.” No more. I get that most of this is from disgruntled former employees but I accept that they have real and good reasons for feeling the way they do. I have lost my confidence in Lincoln, Armstrong and Zduriencik and even a winning team won’t change that. They should just go.

  16. Snave says:

    Be angry with management, not with Geoff Baker, he’s just the reporter, reporting about what they do? As a fan, I’m angry with both.

    The article does a huge service to Baker by putting him in the national sports media limelight. This is right after the M’s got into the national sports media limelight by signing Cano, so in this regard his timing (whether intentional or not) is impeccable. People are still paying attention to the Cano signing, so they will also pay attention to the story Baker is piggybacking onto it. I suspect the timing was intentional in this way. Why not wait a week or two to release the article? Because people are paying attention to the M’s right now.

    I think the article does a disservice to M’s fans who desperately want the ball club to put the best players possible onto the field by potentially compromising the club’s ability to do so. In this regard, his timing is also impeccable, that is, if he doesn’t like the Mariners and maybe has a major ax to grind with them.

    I don’t doubt that a lot of what he says in the article is true. It looks one-sided when those under attack won’t defend themselves, and they would probably say lots of silly things if they responded. And yes, in the long run the article might help some changes to be made in management. But for changes to be made on the field? THAT is what most fans are going to pay attention to. I thought this off-season was off to a promising start for the Mariners, but what’s going to happen now? It’s like suddenly there’s real hope for the fans, and then the rug looks like it’s getting pulled out from under us again.

    Thanks Geoff, and no thanks.

  17. ripperlv says:

    Baker is a low life as demonstrated by the timing of his article. It’s all about Baker wanting a national exposure. Even if he is right he’s still a low life.

  18. JerryEK says:

    Seriously? This is your reaction to that article? You’re completely brainwashed.

    I usually don’t like Baker’s work. But that article is incredibly well researched and informative about what is going on in the organization. It is, by far, the best article I’ve ever read by Baker.

    The information in the article also fits what we’ve seen from the club, particularly the change in organizational philosophy towards roster construction and scouting.

    I personally don’t like how this team has been run the last few years. They are making bad decisions, and have adopted a fundamentally flawed process. This article exposes why things have gone sideways. Its damning, but its well researched and comes from highly reputable sources from inside the organization. And, again, it passes the litmus test in terms of what this team has done. We’ve all seen how the team’s tendencies and philosophies have changed in the last few years, particularly how the team has favored one-dimensional power hitters over complete players. This explains WHY that happened. There is nothing really surprising, expect perhaps the level of detail provided about the team’s internal disfunction.

    The M’s need MAJOR changes at the top. Hopefully this starts the ball rolling towards realizing those changes.

  19. Edman says:

    This failed the minute I read “After Geoff’s article…… He’s the most disrespected sports journalist in town. This is the same man who insisted that the Mariners were positioning themselves to be sold……because he drew incorrect conclusions.

    Never take people with a grudge and ask them to be truthful. They will always see things from their personal perspective. Tony’s comments about about font size were childish. If it was part of a presentation, and his boss had a hard time reading it, the’s not a rejection of his presentation, it’s constructive criticism.

    His comments about Engle were completely off the mark. He quit because the Mariners fired his friend, a man he put in place, who had ethics problems, trying to get someone in the United States by helping to lie about his age. He deserved to be fired.

    Boo at the Seattle Times for releasing the story right now, just as the M’s sign Cano. Seems like more Baker grandstanding and misanalysis of the circumstances.

  20. retiredleaguer says:

    I vote Jason to replace Jack, Chuck and Linc…..all in favor say “aye”

    After reading Geoff’s article, I’m really scared of what Jack may Bavasi this off-season

  21. Paul Martin says:

    I wouldn’t make that trade, you would be selling Franklin for pennies on the dollar. I think Franklin is a piece in a bigger trade or he starts the year in Tacoma. Also have no desire to bail out the Yankees, rather make them overpay on a free agent…

  22. nighthawk180 says:

    One big problem with that idea. Gardner is only controlled for 1 season vs. Franklin 5+. I know a trade and extension isnt out of the question but its not a straight Vargas and Morales swap of 1 year contracts. I do like the idea of adding Garner but for franklin we better get an something more than just Gardner. What that additional thing should be I dont know but Franklin is worth more than one year of Gardner.

  23. rjfrik says:

    Be ready for a Gardner for Franklin trade. It was just reported that New York has made Gardner available and are open to trading him to alleviate their logjam in the OF. Wells, Ichiro, Soriano have literally no trade value and Beltran and Ellsbury are not going anywhere. So it’s Gardner. They are looking for a starting 2B.

    I think Gardner for Franklin makes all the sense in the world, the same way Vargas for Morales made sense a year ago. If the M’s can’t convince the Dodgers to trade Kemp/Either with Franklin as their bargaining chip, I could see the Yankees and M’s getting a deal done. They have traded many times before and are comfortable doing business with each other.

  24. rotoenquire says:

    After thinking on it some today. I believe we maybe over thinking the rumors and what JackZ still has in the works. N. Cruz a RH Bat would be a must or via trade a OF RHB. A back up catcher and a DH of some sort. Pitching one starter is all that is needed. Trading Walker won’t solve that the M’s would still need another SP. So that being said a line up like waht follows makes a ton of sense.

    C M. Zunino
    1B Seagar
    2B Cano
    SS Miller
    3B Franklin
    LF A. Almonte/X. Avery
    CF R. Davis/Saunders platoon
    RF Cruz
    DH Choi/Smoak platoon

    Bench
    W. Bloomquist Util
    T. Teagarden C

    SP’s
    SP Felix
    SP Iwakuma
    SP Paxton
    SP Colon
    SP Walker

    Bullpen

    Capps
    Furbush
    Wilhelmsen
    Pryor
    Beavan
    Farquhar

    Bloomquist allows this type of idea due to all the positions he can play. Granted his D is nothing more than average at best. It opens up situational play by the manager. This also requires one fo the bull pen guys to step up as closer.

    Granted I would love to see Choo and Itoi over the platoon option. Also keeping Seagar at 3rd and bringing back Morales then trading Smaok, Saunders and Franklin for a SP or DH.

  25. mgvernon says:

    Cano and Willie Ballgame bring their payroll up to about $70 million for 2014. They have the income to double that. They have more payroll space than any team in the game. Trading Walker or Paxton would be dumb just as they are getting ready to graduate. Spend for free agent arms. If Tanaka gets posted they can buy in for $20 million and outbid even the Yankees.

  26. ripperlv says:

    I certainly hope the M’s go for 2 experienced pitchers like Colon/Jimenez or Garza. A top notch rotation would really help to send notice. I hope the M’s go hard after the best bat, Choo to fill RF. Snatch John Buck to split catching duties. Trade Franklin/candy for B. Gardner or Colby Rasmus or option C sign Rajai Davis for CF. Do not trade Walker/Paxton, everyone else is eligible. Doesn’t fill that RHB bat problem and this is where Hart comes in to play LF, if able, if not then DH/1B. But I image Cruz might be the best RHB left. I don’t think we need a designated DH like Morales when you can rotate position players. Then rumours have the M’s going after a closer such as Balfour/Benoit. Hypothetically, signing Cano/Choo/Colon/Jimenez/Buck/Hart/Cruz/Balfour plus Felix/Iwakuma (at known or predicated $) would comes out to around $145 million dollar budget. That’s still less than NY, Det. LAA, Texas, LAD, and maybe PHI, and SF (best I can tell). The M’s would be competitive. Good luck signing all those players. JZ, as Jason points out, you have a lot of work to do my man. Kick Ass.

  27. rotoenquire says:

    I am on board with many to not trade Walker. Add Colon and run with that with the starters. As for bats Cruz is needed in this line up being a right handed power bat. That still leaves 2 OF spots, DH and 1B to fill. Give Choi his chance at first and add Choo and either R. Davis or Itoi. And do what the A’s have done just get an or have a onbase guy hit DH.

  28. wsm says:

    I say leave Price alone. The cost is too high when Matt Garza could be had for just cash. Garza also doesn’t cost a draft pick which makes him a little more attractive to me than Ubaldo or Santana.

    I think Choo has to be our top priority next week.

    Can Matt Kemp be had for a package starting with Nick Franklin that doesn’t include Walker or Paxton? That’d be as far as I’d be willing to go I think.

  29. rth1986 says:

    Love the Price + Jennings idea, but the Rays need Jennings and I fear the trade package that would be required. Do you think a package of Franklin, Paxton, Maurer, J. Montero and Wilhelmsen for Price & Jennings would get it done? Not sure where the Rays would turn to replace Jennings though.

    If the Mariners want to compete in 2014, they truly need to add at least one good SP, two good OFs and one DH. They’d basically need to be like the Red Sox last off-season when they dominated free agency. Unfortunately, the Mariners already missed the boat on a lot of great bargains like Chris Young, Dan Haren and Doug Fister. Unless the Mariners plan on paying a premium for those spots, the only possible remaining ‘bargains’ I can see that might still be available are A.J. Pollock / Gerardo Parra (I’d prefer Pollock since the M’s are too lefty-heavy), Chris Capuano, Bartolo Colon, and Corey Hart. The M’s will likely need to get a ‘deal’ at one of those spots to keep the prices (either payroll or prospects surrendered) reasonable.

    Cano is quite a splash, but the remaining moves will be the telling ones as to whether the M’s can compete in 2014. As of now, I think they’re a 75 win team.

  30. mgvernon says:

    The Mariners really had no alternative to making this deal. Their brand was so tarnished by multiple failures on and off the field that they were becoming a joke. Even their die-hard fans (like me) were sick and tired of it. It was becoming exhausting to care about the Mariners Misfits. They overpaid, everyone gets that, but they had to do it. Today M’s fans can start to believe again. They will make more moves, they know what they need and they now have the financial underpinning to make more moves. L&A have taken care of business and moved us up the resource ladder to the Angels and Rangers level. They deserve credit for that, as well as the blame for Bavasi. At this point I’m willing to let bygones be bygones. The Angels and Rangers have already spent much of their newfound wealth. Most of the M’s is still available. As is our rich farm system. It’s a new day and a new baseball world.

  31. Shawnuel says:

    If Cano contributes to the Mariners what Harvin has to the Hawks, I’ll be pretty bummed!

  32. rjfrik says:

    You know the M’s have some big plans up there sleeves. And you know that in the room JZ and the executives told Cano about their plan. I’m sure that part of the reason Cano signed was because of the promises made to him to upgrade the roster and the promise to fulfill the plan they presented Cano.

    I don’t think Cano would have come here knowing the M’s were going to sit on their hands after his signing.

    So expect some big changes in the next two weeks.

  33. Paul Martin says:

    Jason, with Napoli and Beltran off the board there are not many premium bats still out there. Combine his with the crazy numbers for Ellsbury and Cano, what will it take for Seattle to sign Choo?

  34. marinercoug says:

    JAC- You so stole my ‘Jennings in the Price deal’ idea, I want reparations!!!

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>

Facebook IconTwitter IconProspect Insider RSS