Prospect Insider - Offseason Thread: One

Offseason Thread: One

By Jason A. Churchill

By 11-13-2009

Jack Wilson inked a deal with the M's today, according to multiple sources. A two-year deal, of course, which wipes out the option the M's were never going to pick up at $8.4 million.

I'm hearing the deal is for $10 million or so.

The update on Russell Branyan is that there isn't one, at least not officially. He's yet to get an offer from anyone but the Mariners, and I don't expect him to get one.

He doesn't want to leave, he simply wants to continue negotiation with Seattle. Sure, he and his agent will use his free agency as leverage, but I can't imagine anyone else hands him more than the 1+1 that probably gets offered in Seattle.

It will probably be a deal where Branyan can earn the second year via plate appearances, or he'll get a Varitek option: Team option for more than the player option, giving him security, but saves the club from too pricey a commitment.

The Mariners are not in on Chone Figgins at all, and shouldn't be. Adrian Beltre is not returning. Orlando Hudson wants to stay in the National League, so if the M's want him, they have to clearly beat any offers by the Mets, and it's not a mystery as to why Hudson chose Los Angeles a year ago, rather than a two-year deal with the Twins: The league, and the weather.

Dan Uggla is apparently not an option whatsoever, and in more Marlins news, they don't plan on trading any starting pitching -- only Uggla, Lindstrom and maybe Cantu.

Nick Johnson is getting hits from Washington, Texas, Oakland and Detroit thus far. No word on whether Seattle has made contact.

Carlos Delgado... I got nothing.

Jim Thome told the Chicago Tribune that he'd like to return to Chicago, but is apparently going to be very affordable -- something in the $5 million range.

Johnny Damon wants three years... lemme rephrase -- Scott Boras says he wants three years for Damon. Probably no chance he gets that, though.

Hideki Matsui wants to return, but Seattle is the most mentioned landing spot after the Yankees.

Rich Harden is either really liking the idea of pitching in Seattle, or he's using the M's as leverage to get a better deal in LAA, LAD or Boston.

offseason-thread:-one

Comments
The following 83 comment(s) for this article are shown below:

1. By: littlelinny6 on 11-13-2009 16:29:02
I think considering what was out there at SS once Hardy got traded, this 2 year $10 million dollar deal is actually pretty reasonable. Given the black hole nature of SS with Yuni there even if Jack doesn't hit (and he is better than the .562 OPS he had here) he is an OK value. If the M's really want to challenge the LA Angels of Anaheim of CA of USA or Texas they have to make some high risk/high reward moves like Harden or Nick Johnson.

2. By: Jason A. Churchill on 11-13-2009 16:32:01
I don't like the deal -- I hate Jack Wilson as a player -- yes, very good defensively, but I'm wondering why a two-year deal. Adam Everett is out there. Alex Gonzalez... there were other decent options that could have been better values. And I like I said in the Offseason Options piece, the M's will not make the postseason until the offense is at least AL average.

End of discussion.

3. By: FWBrodie on 11-13-2009 16:38:25
How much of a risk do you think it would be to lock up Nick Johnson for 2-3 years? I mean, I feel like his injuries have been sort of random. Am I right or does he have some kind of ongoing problem?

Another question: do you see any obvious suitors for a Jose Lopez trade?

4. By: M-Pops on 11-13-2009 16:44:19
I thought the Mets would be satisfied with Castillo at 2B. What happens to Castillo if they pick up Hudson?

5. By: marinerseric on 11-13-2009 16:55:25
With Jose Lopez and his lack of dicopline at the plate, we need him out of seattle to have any shot next year and in the future of having just a league average offense.

6. By: Missthosepilots on 11-13-2009 16:57:23
Jason, total agreement. Since Wilson is inked for two, any ideas for the 2011 infield? I realize much can and will change. Or if you prefer, what if you were GM? At least an assistant with clout!

7. By: littlelinny6 on 11-13-2009 17:07:49
Alex Gonzalez is a bad version of Jack Wilson and he is older. He is not quite as good defensively and even worse with the stick. You save money but if that is only thing we are after just have Josh Wilson be the SS. Adam Everett is another one of the same (1 WAR or less the last 3 years), both these guys make Jack Wilson look like Albert Pujols. The bigger question is the improved defense worth the money---maybe not but it is not exactly like the M's are breaking the bank for him and with Gonzalez or Everett you are saving money but also downgrading your roster at the same time.

We can only moneyball our roster so much if we have to sacrifice one position for defense SS is the place to do it. I still think with a good FA signing/s for 1B and DH the M's can be near league average. Alot will depend on Tui and Saunders with the stick but not out of the realm of possibilities. Then picking up Harden or Sheets at least makes the M's competitive. I think no matter what they do this offseason on talent alone they are a 3rd place AL West team but I think the gap can be close considerably this winter.

8. By: Lantermanc on 11-13-2009 17:38:20
I'm sorry Jason, but I love this deal. $10 million for 2 years for a great defensive shortstop? Seems low risk to me.

I keep getting the feeling that we're going to move Lopez for three reasons.
1) Concerns about weight and defense. He's average defensively now, but how long will that last?
2) He's not a fit for the stadium. Righty pull hitters are not what we need.
3) He's at his peak value, he's young enough, and he hit enough dingers and RBIs last year that some GM will like what they see and offer more than he's worth.

Of course I'd like to get a lefty/switch hitting 2b to fill the void, I'm just not sure who that would be if not Hudson or Figgins.

9. By: milksteak on 11-13-2009 18:00:03
Why shouldn't the M's be in on Chone?

10. By: brown1981 on 11-13-2009 18:20:58
with cincinatti now potentially ready to purge their roster, do you think a brandon phillips for jose lopez and some other prospect(s) makes sense. i think brandon phillips would be an ideal fit. he's basically the same as lopez at the plate but he has speed and can defend pretty well. he would be a signifigant upgrade. i don't know if cinci would be interested other than saving some money, but for us i think he would be a pretty solid fit for our team.

11. By: rjfrik on 11-13-2009 18:40:55
I would love it if the M's inked Harden and Matsui! That would be a BIG step in the right direction. I think that they resign Branyan and they don't go after Johnson. I do think Matsui is their primary target for DH.

About Lopez. I think JZ puts him on the block but he is not going to give him away.
About Cinnci. Phillips is nice but the guy I go after is Votto. He would be a God send here. A young hitter to build around.

IF we could get a lineup like this I think it's better then league average, add Harden and we could have something. This of course is without upgading 3b.

Ichiro
Saunders
Votto
Matsui
Lopez
Franky
Moore
Tui
Wilson

12. By: Blowgun7 on 11-13-2009 18:41:55
Im still holding out for Delgado, Harden, Zaun and Figgins along with resigning Branyan.

However, for the price Chone is probably asking for it's probably better we pass.

Still think we need to add something at 2B (and move Jose to third) or 3B. Don't like going into the year with three rookie starters.

13. By: FWBrodie on 11-13-2009 18:58:53
rjfrik, obviously if you can pick a player from Cinci's roster you take Votto, but do you really see that as a legitimate possibility? He would be a "godsend", but he'd cost the M's an arm and a leg.

14. By: Jason A. Churchill on 11-13-2009 19:02:44
I don't think there is a target yet for DH because Matsui isn't even considering other teams yet. He wants to return to NYY.

15. By: Jason A. Churchill on 11-13-2009 19:39:20
linny,

Gonzalez wouldn't have cost $10 mil for two years, either.

Chris,

It's not a wretched deal, but it's not good, either. Not when you have to score runs and just locked yourself into an offensive hole through 2011.

milksteak, read the offseason options post. He's fools gold -- 32 years old, extremely pricey, not what the Mariners are missing most, and most baseball people don't buy that he's a near-.400 OBP guy, and that's what you'd be paying for.

Blowgun, dream on. Minus Figgins and you have an outside shot to not be disappointed.

16. By: slamcactus on 11-13-2009 19:44:50
5: we're never going to have a league average offense until we ship out one of our few league average hitters? Lopez's approach sucks, but he's compensated it for the past 2 seasons by being good at other things (contact in 2008, power in 2009), and he's been 2.8 runs above average during that time.

3B, LF, and DH are the paths to building a league average offense for this squad. If Lopez doesn't get traded, the Mariners currently have him, Johnson/Moore, Gutierrez, Ichiro, and Wilson locked into their 2010 lineup. That group has a combined upside of around 20 batting runs above average if everything goes right and a downside of about -30. If you assume Branyan's back that brings the upside to about 35 runs above and the downside to about 35 runs below average (putting Branyan's range of outcomes somewhere around 5 runs below average to 15 runs above, which I think sounds about right). Chances are a mixture of things go right and wrong and the group ends up somewhere around average. Take away about 10 runs for bench bats and you have a slightly below average but not horrible offense today.

The Ms got a dismal .236/.299/.367 line out of their 3B/LF/DH positions last year over 1,981 plate appearances. In other words, they took 3 positions where it's relatively easy to find good bats and used them to give 2000 plate appearances to Brendan Harris. Filling those spots with 3 good bats makes this an above average offense. Filling them with 3 glove-first guys makes it a really bad one yet again.

Trading Lopez isn't the answer to assembling a league average or better offense. Replacing the utility infielder-level production the Ms got out of three power positions is.

17. By: slamcactus on 11-13-2009 19:49:39
To be clear, I'm not saying trading Lopez is necessarily a bad idea. He might have significant trade value to certain teams, and his production is in no way irreplaceable. I was just taking issue with the idea that he's what's plaguing the Mariner offense.

18. By: mykillmagnum on 11-13-2009 20:00:53
I like the move. I think they will build around his defense by adding more offense so his lack of offense isn't a big deal too me. One player I really want, and I'm sure jack z is probably looking into is rickie weeks, I think he's a star in the waiting. And I think jack thinks that too. I think they are going to make a big push for him. And make him the star of the team and market the crap out of him. Just a thought.

19. By: Jason A. Churchill on 11-13-2009 20:01:40
I agree, slam, Lopez isn't a huge hole. He hasn't FULLY compensated for his horrible OBP with his power, but enough to avoid being a big, giant hole in the lineup.

It's really about DH, LF and 3B.

20. By: brown1981 on 11-13-2009 20:10:42
walt jocketty has said votto is basically untouchable along with probably bruce and bailey, but phillips is about to get expensive for their liking. he would be a gigantic defensive upgrade over lopez while still putting up lopez's hitting numbers and 20-25 sb. i know we would have to give up at least lopez or maybe morrow and some other prospects(aumont or fields). i think that of the possible trade targets for the m's, i think brandon phillips should be right there. it's not often that you can get an above average hitter and elite level defender at 2nd base.

21. By: Jason A. Churchill on 11-13-2009 20:13:08
And Doug Melvin said they weren't interested in trading Matt LaPorta for a rental player.

While it's unlikely that Votto is going anywhere, nothing a GM says in that regard actually means anything, unless it's all in the other direction. When he says he's trying to get someone signed, that's probably the case. But when he's trying to tell the world that he's not trading player x, or player y is untouchable, it's just his way of saying they aren't looking to trade said player. Nothing more.

NOTHING.

22. By: brown1981 on 11-13-2009 20:19:35
i dont think doug melvin will let rickie weeks go. i believe he will be a star, you(magnum) believe he will be a star, and i'm sure jack z believes but most importantly doug melvin does and he will not let go of the relatively cheap talent he has in weeks. especially after braun, prince and probably weeks, they don't have much offense.

23. By: brown1981 on 11-13-2009 20:23:09
i know i should not believe any gm when comments like this are made but the reds are trying to shed payroll and votto is still not even arb eligible yet so i don't think he would trade his only sure thing at the plate for some un-tested minor leaguers unless it was a deal for an elite level veteran.

24. By: hawks02 on 11-13-2009 20:49:25
There were rumors of Callaspo in some trade talks, the M's should jump in that forum. Callaspo put up good #'s, he's also got decent pop and is a switch hitter. The rumors had him going to the Dodgers for a backup catcher. Not too sure if there were legs to that trade but seems pretty cheap for decent 2 bagger. That could also give the M's flexability with Lopez to trade or find a new bag.

25. By: hawks02 on 11-13-2009 20:58:52
There were rumors of Callaspo in some trade talks, the M's should jump in that forum. Callaspo put up good #'s, he's also got decent pop and is a switch hitter. The rumors had him going to the Dodgers for a backup catcher. Not too sure if there were legs to that trade but seems pretty cheap for decent 2 bagger. That could also give the M's flexability with Lopez to trade or find a new bag.

26. By: Jason A. Churchill on 11-13-2009 21:07:43
Callaspo is a worse fielder than Lopez, and he's really only an upgrade offensively versus left-handed pitching.

No reason to give up anything of value for that.

27. By: DRWheelock on 11-13-2009 22:17:01
I really think there's something that "could" happen in cincy this offseason, BUT I Cincy wants to shed $20-25M in payroll. Rumors I've heard is that they would want to move either Arroyo's $11M or Harang's $12M salary along with Phillips $7M.

That would be $19M alone for Harang/Phillips combo that Cincy would save....or even a Arroyo/Phillips salary dump. The thing with Phillips is that in 2011 & 2012 his salary jumps to $11 & $12M respectively, so with Cincy's financial position it appears that it's a lock they WILL move Phillips this Winter.

Last time I calculated, Seattle had $56M come off the books this offseason, and that wasn't including the Jack Wilson contract restructuring.

Lopez 2010 contract is ONLY $2.75M with a 2011 $5M club option, and that's a pretty CHEAP contract and low risk 2B option for Cincy. Lopez HRs are pretty similar to Phillips, but Phillips has the superior 2B defense and is also good for 20-30 SBs every year consistently.

I think Z will definitely be seeing if the Ms and Cincy can work out a deal. I would do:

Phillips & Harang for Lopez/Morrow They "might" bite.

OR

Phillips & Arroyo for Lopez/Morrow

Cincy saves $17M on anyone of those 2 trades, and has Morrow locked up on club control, and Lopez for cheap for 2 years.

We "still" would have a ton of money to sign Branyan & extend Felix & go after Harden or Sheets. I would be willing to run with Hall at 3B if we could do the Cincy trade. The plays Hall made at 3B when Beltre was out in the 2nd half were mouth dropping! We would just have to "hope" his bat comes around like he's done in the past.

Just some of my ideas. After watching Z last year, I have total confidence in whatever he does this year with the money available!

GO Mariners!

28. By: Blowgun7 on 11-13-2009 22:36:25
Don't know if it was mentioned, but Ackley hit his first professional HR today.

29. By: DRWheelock on 11-13-2009 22:43:19
I know it's not reasonable to conclude that Ackley is a lock for LF in April, but God I wish he came out in March ripping the cover off the ball.

Earlier this week, when Z was interviewed he stated that you canNOT count on prospect to fill vacant spots like Triunfel/Tui/Halman/Saunders/etc. You will have some surprise, but you still have to build your team NOT counting on their contributions.

With Ackley close, this "might" sound rediculous, but this week when I heard Granderson was available via trade I was drewling. He is signed for 3 more years for a total of $25M, but can you imagine and OF of Granderson/Gutz/Ichiro WOW. THEN I wake up today to find out that the Angels are NOW talking with Detroit trying to jump all over that...figures. Every guy I want the M's to get the Angels have swooped in to grab them instead (VLAD 4 years ago, Abreu last year, etc). The year I'm not really keen on grabbing VLAD is when the Angels will let him walk. I was interested in Abreu this Winter though, but they've already resigned him this offseason. They land Granderson, and they will move Juan Rivera via trade for something else. Even though I hate the Angels, I sure like how Moreno runs his club!!!

Jason, isn't Ackley good at other postions (ie: 1B)?! "If" Granderson was landed for LF, what about shifting Ackley over to 1B in 2011? Could there be anything there? Just curious on your thoughts about Granderson.

30. By: DRWheelock on 11-13-2009 22:44:01
Ackley's HR today...Woohoo...thats enough for his spring invite!

31. By: DRWheelock on 11-13-2009 23:03:19
Here's my rosterbation post and on the DRs wish list for this offseason for next Spring:

LINEUP
CF Ichiro
LF Granderson ($5.5M)
2B Phillips ($7M)
1B/DH Delgado ($9M)
3B Hall
DH/1B Branyan ($5M)
CF Gutz
C Moore
SS Wilson

ROTATION
SP - Felix Hernandez - $3.8MM+
SP - Harden OR Sheets $9M (Incentive Based)
SP - Harang - $12M
SP - Ryan Rowland-Smith - $420K
SP - Ian Snell - $4.25MM

SP - Bedard (Low base...Incentive Based when he makes team in April)

BULLPEN
RP - David Aardsma - $419K+
RP - Mark Lowe - $418K+
RP - Sean White - $400K
RP - Shawn Kelley - $400K
RP - Chris Jakubauskas - $400K
RP - Garrett Olson - $420K
RP - Vargas- $405K
RP - Carlos Silva - $11.5MM

According to COTS Baseball Contracts we have only $44M committed to contracts for 2010. The additions would add:
Phillips $7M
Harang $12M
Harden $9M (Incentive Based)
Delgado $9M
Branyan $5M
Granderson $5.5M
Bedard (?! Incentive Based once he makes the team. Gets an initial Minor league deal until ready)

Thats $47.5M extra, but subtract out Lopez's $2.75M...you come to $44.75M in additions.

That puts us at $91M without the arb figures, OR extending Felix. Is this realistic then?! Probably not, but "if" somehow we could pickup Phillips without the Harang addition, we could pull it off while staying under $100M payroll!

32. By: kyle_mahlstedt on 11-13-2009 23:26:28
Man, are you kidding me? That is NEVER going to happen... I MEAN NEVER. First off, the Mariners likely dont have what it takes to pull of a trade for Granderson, Phillips and Harang...

They might... but you could kiss our whole farm system goodbye... Wont happen

33. By: Uncle Al on 11-13-2009 23:35:18
After the Wilson signing, the M's still have $29M to spend if they are on a $100M budget for 2010. Currently this has Carp at 1B, Tuiasosopo at 3B, Saunders in LF, and they need a DH (Branyan?)and SP (Harden, Sheets, Bedard?). Zduriencik has enough money for bringing in 3 new players at a minimum and possibly four or five through FA and trades combined. Whether we like the Griffey and Wilson deals or not, it has started some plan in motion early on and leaves Zduriencik a lot less to do this off season.

34. By: brown1981 on 11-13-2009 23:40:39
i think the reds would be more apt to trade phillips, harang and arroyo in separate deals to maximize the return where-as if they trade phillips with harang or arroyo they may only get someone like lopez, maybe a vargas type, and a lower level prospect just to take the big contracts back unless they were to take a chunk of they money(very unlikey since they are shedding payroll but with jocketty you never know; see rolen deal) but with trading phillips by himself they would get (proposed)lopez, aumont or fields, AND a lower level prospect in a deal along with getting something in return for harang and arroyo with also the possibilty of getting something for cordero. still a great deal for the m's.

35. By: Blowgun7 on 11-14-2009 00:35:11
Brandon Phillips is really good. You aren't getting him just because you are taking a bad pitching contract.

M's should just sign Harden, Delgado, maybe Crede for 3B as a stopgap.

Maybe an incentive deal for Bedard, Duscherer, Wang, or Sheets.

Let the prospects we have develop, let last yrs draft class develop, get another draft class in place, and then start getting agressive with trades for top level talent in 2011

36. By: DRWheelock on 11-14-2009 00:43:20
Uncle Al what are you talking about only $29M to spend?!

http://spreadsheets.google.com/pub?key=tWj271vM8jP83pjeMtNrKog&output=html

COTS has updated the Wilson 2yr deal, but the 2010 column doesn't include any arb players "yet" including Felix...and it's showing a $46.5M payroll without the ARB guys listed yet, but majority are for league minimum.

I guess that all depends how much they are willing to dishout on an extension to Felix. that will determine the actual money we will have left.

We freed up:
Beltres contract $12.5M
Washburn $10.4M
Batista $9M+
Johjima $8M
Bedard $7.75M
Dropped Wilson from $8.4 down to $5M
Chavez $3.5M
Bentancourt $3M
Branyan $1.75M (expect to to resign though)
Griffey just resigned for the same contract so thats a wash
Sweeney $500k

ALL we've done this offseason so far is cut Wilson's salary back $3.4M and give it to Griffey, so the moves so far have been a wash.

We have a LOT more than $29M to spend, is we are going to stick to a $100M payroll, but we won't know the exact amount until Felix signs his extension or gets his arb figure completed.

37. By: DRWheelock on 11-14-2009 00:57:46
Crede?! Yuck! He has great D but has NO bat. We can't have Wilson and Crede with Rob Johnson/Moore at Catcher. That would be the worse bottom 3 hitters in any lineup!

I would rather run with Bill Hall at 3B, because at least he's proven he has hit in the past. Hall also has stellar defense at 3B! Plus the Brewers are paying 90%+ of Halls contract for 2010!

It's sounding like Bedard wants to stay in Seattle, and will end up taking a minor league deal until he's ready sometime in April, and incentive based.

I would love to take a flyer on one of Harden OR Sheets (with incentive upside for them), AND Bedard in the wings on another incentive laden deal.

I would love a Rotation of:
ROTATION
SP - Felix Hernandez - $3.8MM+
SP - Harden (Incentive Based)
SP - Sheets (Incentive Based)
SP - Bedard (Incentive Based)
SP - Ryan Rowland-Smith - $420K
SP - Ian Snell - $4.25MM

I can see 2 of 3 of Harden/Sheets/Bedard, but not all 3. My guess is it will be Harden and Bedard, and Sheets will be in Texas.

I love the though of Delgado and Braynan slitting time between 1B/DH all year though! But I think Delgado will be a minimum of $7-8M though.

I would put money on it that Cincy would trade Phillips straight up for Lopez/Morrow!!! Heck, now that Bavasi is over with Cincy maybe they can swap Harang for Silva, and we can give Bavasi back Silva's pathetic contract?!

I would love Granderson but I'm sure they would demand Ackley and others, and we would have to liquidate the farm for him. I don't see Z moving our top prospects for him, but it is a salivating thought of him manning LF along side of Gutz and Ichiro.

38. By: Uncle Al on 11-14-2009 01:22:20
DRWheelok
You are just plain wrong and there is only $29M left give or take a little. You've got about $16m in Arbitration money going to Hernandez, Aardsma, Gutierrez, and Lowe. You could throw in another $1M for Langerhans but he will be traded unless he has options left. It's very important for now to have some idea how much arbitration is going to cost because you must deal with it. Prorated Bonuses are $2.3M and the Contingency Fund is another $3.7M. Add $23M to your $47M and you get $70M. Whatever small differences we have aren't worth argueing over as the Arby numbers are also estimates.

39. By: pwhit44 on 11-14-2009 02:05:31
All I can do is laugh. Reading the rapid degradation of this thread is pretty funny.

40. By: Uncle Al on 11-14-2009 02:21:15
It's this way every year. And it gets to the point after trying to get through it once that it finally goes away. The roster is pretty much set right now having eaten up about $71M of this years budget except for a DH. After they find a DH, they could play with what they currently have. At least Zduriencik pretty well knows what Arbitration is going to cost and he knows how many dollars he can spend.

41. By: Jason A. Churchill on 11-14-2009 02:22:58
Go look at how god awful Granderson is versus left-handed pitching before you give up the farm to land him ( and it will take a hell of a lot).

No thanks.

42. By: maqman on 11-14-2009 11:44:18
Guys look at girls and ballplayers and they all see something different. I'm glad GMZ is our matchmaker and not me or some of you guys. My opinions: Delgado hasn't had a WAR high enough to cover his salary since 2006 and next year is far from a lock too. I think the Reds would trade Phillips for Lopez straight up because it would save them $11M in the next two seasons. Lopez is not the Ms big problem, or even one of them. Check the number:
Lopez: OBP .303, OPS .755, ISO .191, wOBA 324, 2009 WAR 2.6, 2008 WAR 2.1, SB 3, HR 25, 2B 42
10:$2.3M, 11: $4.5M club option ($0.25M buyout)
Phillips: OBP .312, OPS .776, ISO .171, wOBA 337, 2009 WAR 3.2, 2008 WAR 3.0, SB 25, HR 20, 2B 32
10:$6.75M, 11:$11M, 12:$12M club option ($1M buyout)
Weeks: OBP .340, OPS .857, ISO .245, wOBA 365, 2009 WAR 1.5, 2008 WAR 2.0, SB 2, HR 16, 2B 23
1 year/$2.45M (2009) first year of arbitration
Each has strengths and weaknesses relative to the others.
By the way Bedard won't be able to pitch until possibly after the All-Star break.
GMZ has said he wants a veteran catcher to back up the kids. How about Moses Lake's own Ryan Doumit? A bit of a gamble but he can play elswhere if the kid catchers learn to hit. Give the Pirates our choice of Johnson/Moore, we aren't going to want them both long-term and the Ps probably wouldn't mind dumping his cost.

43. By: shemberry on 11-14-2009 12:59:36
Jason,

Olney is saying that the Mariners are his best guess to sign Lackey. What do you think the odds are that we sign him? If you had to pick a most likely destination for Lackey would it be Seattle?

44. By: shemberry on 11-14-2009 13:00:28
Sorry, also, would signing Lackey take us out of the running for Harden?

45. By: 01v-dubs on 11-14-2009 13:11:59
I guess I'll join the in on the rosterbation. I like a lot of your ideas, but realistically I don't see a lot of that happening, but hey Z surprised us all last year. I'll start with the obvious holes on the team

DH-I think that Masui is probably the best out there. He would bring some needed left handed power, and patience, he'd be perfect for the middle of the order. However, Stone recently said he's hearing things about how Matsui and Ichiro might not be able to co-exist.

A back up plan is Nick Johnson, he brings a very valuable bat with him, and can split time at first with Branyan.

3B-I would give the job to Tui, honestly there really is not much of a better option out there, and if he struggles then Hall/Hannahan can take over

A back up plan would be to move Lopez to third, and bring in a guy like Felipe Lopez to play second (I don't mention Hudson because as Jason said he wants to stay in the NL)

another option would be to bring in a guy like Troy Glaus who was hurt last year, but should at least start the year out and play well enough to keep the seat warm for Tui

LF-Again I'd give it to one of the kids and give the job to Saunders, He should be able to handle ML pitching sooner rather then later, and if he struggles then you let Hall play out there

A back up plan would be to send Saunders to AAA and let Langerhans play until LF is ready. Or bring in a guy like Geoff Jenkins or Randy Winn and see what they have left in the tank

C-would go to Moore, and be backed up by Johnson. Out of all the kids I think Moore is the most ready

As for the SP's I'd go with

Felix
Harden
RRS
Morrow
Snell

RF-Ichiro
CF-Gutz
DH-Matsui
1B-Branyan
2B-Lopez
LF-Saunders or Winn
C-Moore
3B-Tui or Hall/Hannahan or Glaus

Obviously this roster does not look all that great, but I'm having a hard time imagining the M's being contenders next year. Saunders, Moore, and Tui all have the ability to be very good ML players, you should let them get their feet wet so the time comes when the M's are really ready to compete they'll be ready.

46. By: StandinPat on 11-14-2009 16:41:37
Some of the player eval going on in this thread is just odd.

Wheelock,
Crede is yuck because he has great D but no bat, and you'd rather have Hall? First off Hall is not a "stellar" defender, rather a solidly above average one, and his bat? His bat is done, at least as a regular, no way I want him to be the starting anything for the M's. And "at least he's proven he has hit in the past" is not a good argument, Richie Sexson has hit in the past as well, should we bring him back to play 1B? Crede is a considerably better defender and has actually had the better bat over the past 3 years. IE, he's the much better player. Granted his back/health suck and I wouldn't touch him with a ten foot pole, but there is no way you can logically say Crede sucks, but Hall's the answer.

Maqman,
You can't just pick out two year's of WAR to make trade proposals. First off, there is much more to how teams value their players, Raw Tools, Age, Contract, etc. No Gm says hey lets go look up these two players WAR from the past two years on fangraphs and make our trade based on that.
Plus you left out some critical data, including each players 06, if we take the past three years you get
Lopez 0.1 2.1 2.6, 4.8 total
Phillips 5.1 3.0 3.2 11.3 total
Weeks 3.2 2.0 1.5 6.7 total

Phillips has a higher WAR total his past TWO years, than Lopez does his past THREE by 1.5. Weeks' 1.5 last year came in 147 AB's or less than 1/3 of a year. He was on pace to be over 4.5 wins!

Oh and lastly, Jason already mentioned Doumit can't catch, so you'd be trading for him to be your 1B/DH, again...no thanks.

47. By: Jason A. Churchill on 11-14-2009 17:22:51
Hall's time at 3B is too small-sample-size the past year or two to even use metrics to define the value of it. But the guy can't hit and is declining physically pretty fast.

He would not be on my OD roster. I'd rather eat the 1.3 mil and keep Langerhans.

48. By: FWBrodie on 11-14-2009 17:35:06
Langrhans over Hall? Hadn't even thought of that as a possibility, but I love it. Letting Langerhans get away would be a terrible mistake. I think that there's a really good chance they decide to start the season with Saunders in Tacoma and a Langerhans/Hall platoon in left field until Saunders makes himself impossible to keep out of the lineup.

49. By: FWBrodie on 11-14-2009 17:41:37
By the way, is it just me or does JZ seem to honestly believe that Hall is going to turn it around?

50. By: Jason A. Churchill on 11-14-2009 17:55:08
He must if he committed 1.3 mil to him. I just don't see any reason to believe he's got value. He's not a plus defender anywhere and while he's versatile, he's not a guy you can live with playing SS or 2B for extended period if Wilson and Lopez get hurt.

New rumor from Friday night: Jack may be looking to add TWO SPs (one frontline type and one MOR type), so he can trade a Morrow or RRS in a deal to get a left fielder, 2B or 3B.

51. By: StandinPat on 11-14-2009 18:19:00
Interesting.....

When you say "two" SPs I'm assuming they wouldn't BOTH be of the oft-injured type. Any thoughts as to the combination the M's might be high on? Lackey and Harden would certainly make for a fun 2-3 behind Felix.

Originally I was thinking the M's might go for one of Harden/Sheets and follow it up with a gamble on one of Bedard/Escobar/Duscherer, figuring if one of the latter found themselves healthy for the second half it would basically be like making a deadline deal without giving up any talent.

Also any thoughts on the type of LF, 2B, or 3B the might be targeting? Younger, still under club control, or maybe a 1-2 year fix?

52. By: Edman on 11-14-2009 18:22:50
Hall > Langerhans because he can play multiple positions. Neither demonstrated they were great with the stick. And no, Hall isn't a gold-glove fielder, but he'd be good at filling in when needed. He doesn't need to be a guy who can replace Wilson or Lopez for an extended time. All he needs to be is a guy who you can fit into various roles, without damaging your team defense.

Langerhans is on outfielder with a plus glove, and has yet to show he can hit. He might be able to fill in at first.....I dunno. Outfielders aren't hard to find.

Losing Langerhans isn't a huge loss of any kind, IMHO.

53. By: marinerseric on 11-14-2009 18:29:17
Frontline has to be John Lackey, there is no other pitcher on the market who is a proven TOR without injury issues. Problem is will the new GM shell out that much with Felix waiting to get a even bigger payday. If Lackey is indeed signed which I really doubt will happen, it be a slap in the face to Felix because he knows the money is there, but not used on him. Kinda like the spending spree before soon retired Walter Jones got his new well deserved contract.

The Mariners should invite Sweeney to spring training as an NRI just in case.

54. By: Jason A. Churchill on 11-14-2009 18:39:05
Right, Pat, I can't see Bedard AND Sheet, or Harden and Bedard or anything.

Hall sucks, Ed. He can play multiple positions the way Bloomquist can. He can avoid embarassment for the most part, but he's a zero bat, average, at best, baserunner, and can't give you value defensively up the middle. Langerhans can, in center.

I'd buy Langerhans bat before Hall's. Hall is in serious decline both in terms of skill and physical ability. Langerhans is not. Still has some upside left.

If Josh Wilson is the backup infielder instead of Hall -- and for 800 grand less -- is the team worse? No, it may even be better. Both are zero bats, really, and Wilson can play 2B and SS while Hall really can't, not anymore. So in all reality, Hall is an outfielder, too. And as you said, Ed those aren't hard to find.

The oft chance that Hall gets some of his bat back isn't worth the 1.3 million.

If your bench is Wilson, Griffey and Johnson, plus Langerhans, you have the infield and outfield covered, including center, as well as a LH bat (Griffey).

If you keep Hall and let Hans go, you don't have a viable center fielder if Gutierrez is out.

If Hall was at least average at 2B and SS, I'd feel differently.

Of course, if Saunders is not the starter in left field, he can be called up to play center if Gutierrez is out, but if Hall and Langerhans are both outfielder, and they really are, Hans is a better player.

Sadly, the M;s owe Hall 1.3 mil and he's going to be on the team. It's just not the way I would go. Rather give hans some of that (or all of that) and let Hall go.

55. By: Jason A. Churchill on 11-14-2009 18:41:07
eric,

Signing Lackey doesn't slap Felix in the face -- because Nero already knows the M's will be willing to go longer and further financially for Hernandez.

56. By: StandinPat on 11-14-2009 18:45:09
Defensively, Langerhans > Hall in the OF and Hannahan > Hall in the IF, so if all you're looking at is defensive replacements, Hall comes in last, and his versatility becomes redundant as Langerhans and Hannahan can cover every position outside of C.

And Langerhans has shown he can hit, at least enough for a backup.

57. By: StandinPat on 11-14-2009 18:49:48
and Jason covered all that while I was mid-post....

58. By: Jason A. Churchill on 11-14-2009 20:26:40
I guess this is all moot, though, because I can't see them eating the money and dropping Hall between now and Spring Training.

59. By: StandinPat on 11-14-2009 20:32:04
Guess we could hope and pray for an 11 man pitching staff and therefore a 5 man bench?
Does Langerhans or Hannahan have an option remaining?

60. By: Jason A. Churchill on 11-14-2009 20:53:01
It doesn't look like either player has options remaining.

61. By: pwhit44 on 11-15-2009 01:14:49
"New rumor from Friday night: Jack may be looking to add TWO SPs (one frontline type and one MOR type), so he can trade a Morrow or RRS in a deal to get a left fielder, 2B or 3B."

That's what I have been hoping for all along.

I think you package Morrow, Saunders, Fields (or whatever package with Morrow headlining), for your #3-hole-hitting-left-fielder. Josh Hamilton is arbitration eligible. Maybe the Rangers would take Morrow and others for him.

Assuming you sign back Branyan and bring in a DH like N.Johnson/Delgado/Thome, Hamilton settles the line-up and slots everyone where they are comfortable. Plus, Hamilton can stay healthier in LF.

Hamilton is just an example. But I love it.

RF Ichiro
2B Lopez
LF Hamilton
DH N.Johnson/Delgado/Thome
1B Branyan
CF Gutierrez
3B Tui/Hall/Hannahan
C Moore
SS Wilson

Or whatever.

62. By: Edman on 11-15-2009 01:30:05
Langerhans has showed he can hit, at least for a back-up? Pat, you better raise your expectations. He can draw walks, but a .215 BA is NOT impressive, even for a back-up.

63. By: slick on 11-15-2009 05:35:39
I read something the other day saying that Ryan Garko might be non tendered by the Giants. Garko would not be to bad as a right handed platoon for Russell at first, and Griffey at DH. Garko's splits versus left handed pitching are not to bad. Garko last year had an OPS of 870 against left handed pitching. Even if the Giants pick up the contract they will probably look to move him, for I think SF wants to move Sandoval to first and pick up a FA or trade for 3B. I dont think it would take all that much to pick him up even at 2 mil he would be a value seeing that he is a 1.0-1.5 war. Garko could add depth and provide insurance for an often injured Griffey and Russell.

64. By: jgstecker on 11-15-2009 08:31:10
Hannahan ought to have an option remaining. He had his contract originally purchased during 2006 by Detroit, During that year he was optioned in May and subsequently outrighted off the roster in August. He resurfaced in Oakland late in 2007 and was never optioned that year. He spent all of 2008 in Oakland. In 2009 he wasn't called up until April 24th, which may have been long enough for the 20 day rule to kick in.

So his only option years were 2006 and possibly 2009. He should have one option remaining.

65. By: maqman on 11-15-2009 10:48:04
Hall's contract has the Ms liable for $1.25M of his 2010 salary of $8.4M, with the Brewers liable for the rest. However there is also a 2011 club option for $9.25M with a $0.5M option buyout. It would seem the Ms may have to pay to buy out the option, making his cost $1.75M for them in 2010. Unless they can move him they will probably hang on to him to try and recoup some of his cost. GMZ must have seen some potential in him to come good. I hope he's right because I can't see it.

66. By: vertigoman on 11-15-2009 12:12:54
Jason, you must be judging Hall by his time in Seattle alone (when it comes to defense and decline). He played with a quad injury.
I know UZR is not the end all be all but I do believe 2 seasons is a reasonable amount of games played at 3rd to get a gauge on his D. And it's good. In 07 he played above average D in CF and on a whole has been above average in the OF.
So UZR likes his defense. GMZ loves his defense. Not sure what James/Dewan think.
As for his bat, I agree.

67. By: StandinPat on 11-15-2009 13:51:44
Ed,

The fact that you just used 122 Ab's for your basis, and even worse the fact that you just used BA to judge a hitters value shows you have no clue what you are talking about.

68. By: 01v-dubs on 11-15-2009 14:13:39
I would love to trade for Hamilton, I'm even convinced that he could spend some time on the DL, but he's so good he'd be worth a lot when he is healthy. He's one of my favorite players. I just think that Texas would not trade him within the division.

Maybe Quintin from CWS? Jason mentioned him as a possible trade target last season. The only problem with him is he's right handed.

69. By: FWBrodie on 11-15-2009 15:39:38
Texas isn't going to be dealing Josh Hamilton within the division.

70. By: slamcactus on 11-15-2009 19:40:27
StandinPat: it's actually 101 ABs (122 plate appearances).

Edman: batting average over 100 ABs is an absolutely horrible way to evaluate a hitter. 3 balls bounce just a tiny bit differently and that .218 BA becomes a .258 BA. Langerhans can hit a bit. He'll never be great, but he's very useful as a 4th outfielder who can play all 3 positions, draw a walk, and has a little pop.

71. By: Jason A. Churchill on 11-15-2009 22:17:13
vertigoman,

No, Hall sucks, period. He sucked in Milwaukee, he sucked in Seattle. He's a global non-factor.

Defensively, you're using numbers from two years ago. With Hall, his conditioning and health now appear chronic, which means expecting a 30-year-old to take a significant step back in the right direction after two-plus years of the wrong direction is expecting too much.

It just doesn't happen much, and almost never happens to the levels that matter.

72. By: Edman on 11-16-2009 02:30:20
OK....how about batting average for his career. Langerhans has a whopping .232 BA. That a big enough sample size? I'm not arguing that Langerhans doesn't have value as a back-up outfielder, he does. But I'd never try to convince anyone that he's a decent hitter, for a back-up. He's not. He's a solid defensive outfielder who has a little power. But, that's not always enough to ensure someone a job.

Hall provides more coverage, because he can play both corners and the infield. No way you can spin Langerhans into anything but an outfielder.

Personally, I'd rather have someone more capable than both. Neither Langerhans or Hall should be on any contending team. Since the M's aren't contending yet, I suppose one of them, or both could have jobs in Seattle, next season.

73. By: Jason A. Churchill on 11-16-2009 10:09:05
Edman keeps talking about Hall as if he's guaranteed to be free of the poor conditioning and health issues that have him hobbling around for the better part of THREE seasons now.

If you go back into the mlb.com archives, you can find quad and hamstring soreness as reasons for Hall not being up to par as far back as May of 2007.

The dude is NOT a viable option at 2B and SS. And Hannahan can play third very, very well. So Hall's ability to play third has very, very minimal value to the Mariners.

Neither Hall nor Langerhans is a good hitter right now, but it's very clear that Hall is on his way down -- maybe even still falling -- while Langerhans at least has a reasonable chance to get better.

And Langerhans is the only center fielder on the roster after Gutierrez -- Hall can't play there, either. Combine all of the above with the fact that Langerhans is a lefty bat and you have two guys who really aren't that good -- maybe equally -- but one that has a better chance to give the M's the kind of value off the bench that good teams need.

But really, we should stop debating this. There's no chance Langerhans is kept over Hall -- the M's owe Hall 1.3 mil and he's Jack's pickup. Jack's ego isn't going allow him to cut the cord on Hall yet.

74. By: Edman on 11-16-2009 11:42:46
Jason, you don't like it when people put words in your mouth, please don't put them in mine.

I never said anything about Hall's health issues. The question was about versatility, and Langerhans has none, other than the outfield, and maybe firstbase in a pinch.

Many teams don't carry a qualified back-up centerfielder. It's a luxury if you can. A lot will depend on if they retain Saunders or if they go get someone in free agency. If Saunders makes the team, in a pinch, he could play center. Until the winter is done, and we know who's likely to be on the roster, it's a moot point.

I'd rather have Hannahan than either Hall or Langerhans. If they give him time to learn SS and 2B, he's a more viable option. And, of the three, I think he's got the greatest chance to become a decent hitter.

I also don't think JZ is joined at the hip with Hall. 1.3 million is less than 2% of the team payroll. That isn't a big enough sting that if he had to, he could say goodbye.

BTW, the other side of the debate was Pat trying to justify Langerhans bat as a reason to keep him. I love his ability to draw a walk, I love that he has a little pop in his bat, but Pat said it would be a mistake to let him go. His skill set hasn't demonstrated that kind of talent.

75. By: StandinPat on 11-16-2009 13:23:39
Holy Crap....where to start?!?

"OK....how about batting average for his career. Langerhans has a whopping .232 BA. That a big enough sample size?"

You are still missing the point. Sample size is not the issue, the fact that you are using BA to try and establish a hitters value is just ridiculous and meaningless. Quit doing it! Quit it! Quit it! Quit it! BA tells us jack shit about a players offensive value. Nick Swisher and Russell Branyan both had very valuable seasons at the dish despite hitting .249 and .251 respectively, ie their BA doesn't even tell part of the story.

"Jason, you don't like it when people put words in your mouth, please don't put them in mine."
"BTW, the other side of the debate was Pat trying to justify Langerhans bat as a reason to keep him."

I just love this one. You chastise Jason for putting words in your mouth, then subsequently put your own in mine. Awesome! Please show me where I try and justify Ryan's bat as the reason to keep him!

You advocated keeping Hall over Langerhans by stating "Langerhans is on outfielder with a plus glove, and has yet to show he can hit."
I responded directly to that statement with "Defensively, Langerhans > Hall in the OF" and "And Langerhans has shown he can hit, at least enough for a backup."

In no way shape or form did I champion his bat. I literally said his OF D is better than Hall's and he has shown to be decent at the plate. How that turned into "we can't afford to lose his bat" I have no idea.

"Pat, you better raise your expectations. He can draw walks, but a .215 BA is NOT impressive, even for a back-up."
Again, using BA is RIDICULOUS for this argument, and just about any other for that manner. If we look at two stats that actually mean something when judging offensive, OPS and wOBA, we see that Langerhans has a career .711 OPS and .311 wOBA both of which are decent for a backup. His .311 wOBA would equate to approx 10 runs below a league average hitter over the course of a full year. 10 runs under average isn't exactly awful from a starter, and again, as I stated earlier is solid for a back up.

Lastly there's this one "No way you can spin Langerhans into anything but an outfielder."
Which causes me to bring up this one again "you don't like it when people put words in your mouth, please don't put them in mine."

I think its important to look at these two statements together, because no one, absolutely no one, tried to "spin Langerhans into anything but an outfielder." I mean seriously, what are you referencing? Who are you responding to?

76. By: Edman on 11-16-2009 13:41:03
By "you" I meant anyone Pat, not you specifically.

I stick by what I said, Langerhans is not a "decent" hitter, for a back-up. His defense keeps him on a roster, not his bat. BA isn't everything, yet many site it in their justification to oppose resigning Griffey. Stats mean little to me. They can be used any way you wish to, to justify a position.

Bottom line is, Langerhans' loss would not be something that the Mariners couldn't recover from. They should seek out better alternatives than Langerhans, Hannahan and Hall. They probably won't find any obvious upgrades. But these guys aren't expendable.

This is getting nowhere, so I suggest we end it now. These guys aren't worth expending any real amount of time justifying their place on a roster. My preference goes to Hannahan, and the acquistion of a better bat than either Hall or Langerhans. Who that would be, I have no idea. I have no idea what JZ is willing to spend.

77. By: Jason A. Churchill on 11-16-2009 14:42:24
Edman,

I never said that you did say anything about Hall's health issues. I said, and I quote myself from above:

"Edman keeps talking about Hall as if he's guaranteed to be free of the poor conditioning and health issues..."

Read more slowly, it may help.

78. By: kyle_mahlstedt on 11-16-2009 16:17:13
Ken Rosenthal of Fox Sports is reporting that the Mariners and the Detroit Tigers have discussed a trade for SP Edwin Jackson. The report says that the Tigers are looking for minimum salary pitching in return. Shawn Kelley and Brandon Morrow fit that bill...

It also mentions that the Mariners have also asked about Curtis Granderson for LF...

79. By: vertigoman on 11-16-2009 20:33:08
Jason,
So when one metric disagrees with your opinion you cry small sample size or old data? What about GMZ's opinion of Bill Hall. I don't know for sure, but I kind of think he has some "insider" knowledge of Mr. Hall and his abilities.
And what's up with the snarky replies? You're doing a disservice to your site. News in from the "insider", "Bill Hall sucks". Thank you for the in depth analysis.
What the hell ever happened to civility?

80. By: StandinPat on 11-17-2009 00:02:02
umm not sure you can technically "cry" small sample size. Small sample size is small sample size, and is ALWAYS a difficult predictor of future performance.

And GMZ has never stated that his opinion of Hall is that of a plus defender at multiple positions whose value at the plate is on the rebound. He simply took a chance, one with very little negative impact, on a player that MIGHT be able to rebound going forward. We have no idea what Z thinks of Hall right now, he might be just as low or lower on him as anyone.

As far as civility goes, I haven't seen many opinionated posts that are back with logic, reasoning, scouting and or statistics, that have been met with "snarky" replys. If however you just post "Adams is no good" without any why or how, you might get an unfavorable response.

81. By: vertigoman on 11-17-2009 12:13:49
StandingPat

Since Hall has been a plus defender at third his entire career, a comment made by the "insider" that "Hall sucks" carries with it the burden of proof. Otherwise it's the "insider" that is making the "Adams is no good" comment you spoke of.
The metrics seem to defy what the 'insider" suggests, that is Hall's defense is in decline. Since those metrics don't agree with Mr. Insider's statement that "Hall sucks" he says the sample size is too small. Fine, but back it up with something.
"He's a good second baseman, an adequate shortstop and a great third baseman,'' Zduriencik said.-Jack Zduriencik August 19, 2009

I never said anything about Hall's offense. GMZ likes his power, his defense and versatility. He started CF for the Brewers 2 years ago and was one of the better CFers in baseball that year according to UZR. Again, for soeone to say that Bill Hall sucks defensively, I think you have to back it up. Especially so if your the "insider".

82. By: StandinPat on 11-17-2009 12:36:48
But you can also clearly see that he has lost a ton of range just by watching him play. Seeing him play LF last year, it was quite obvious he has lost a step, maybe two. Some of that may be due to recoverable injury, some may not. If his UZR was great two years ago, but he is visible slower today, we have to take that into account.

As far as the "Adams Sucks" analogy, I wasn't directing that at you as much as i was giving an example of the type of statements that seem to elicit the most snarky responses.

83. By: vertigoman on 11-17-2009 13:48:09
No he didn't look good in LF for the M's. Actually he looked like he was dogging it. And if I were to judge Hall on what I saw at the end of 09 I'd probably have the same response that the insider had, "Hall sucks".
But he has this whole career thing going for him. He also had this quad injury thing working against him as well. You have to look at that when making an evaluation. Plus, if I were to judge Bill Hall on what little Is saw of him at the end of this last season I'd be guilty of drawing my opinion based on a extremely small sample size wouldn't you say?
So with regards to strong evidence and expert opinion that Bill hall is a versatile and "good" to "great" defender I'd say that if one wants to say that Bill Hall "sucks" he should back it up. Especially so if that same somebody wants to host an informative discussion. Am I wrong?
He shouldn't have been playing the field with that injury. I have to assume that his playing time was more to prove his bat than his D though. And in regards to Hall's bat, well he has a lot to prove.

You are not currently logged in. If you'd like to comment on this report, please log in.
Haven't created a Prospect Insider account yet? Sign up!