| By Jason A. Churchill |  | By 11-24-2012 |
It's been four years since Jack Zduriencik took over the reins as general manager of the Seattle Mariners. When he arrived, the club was coming off a 61-101 season in a year when they spent nearly $120 million.Since then, the team has won 85, 61, 67 and 75 games -- not exactly a sign of an organization turning around. This offseason and into 2013, that has to change, or Zduriencik could find himself on the hot seat.
The team took on a philosophy, likely strongly supported by Zduriencik and his staff, to pair down payroll organically and build from within so the success at the end is sustainable. To do that, they'd need to draft well, avoid pricey free agents make a few key trades to get the club through the lean years and remain patient. The latter perhaps the most difficult with restless fans frustrated and tired of the same old result.
Things have moved a little slower than many expected, including myself. In February 2009, I believed 2012 was the target year; a reasonable expectation to get the club back to respectability and the .500 mark. They fell six games short this past season.
The time for Zduriencik to shine is now. This offseason and into next year, significant acquisitions must be made. I 'm not going to pretend to know what the suits think of the situation and time table, but general managers do not typically last five years if they aren't winning by year five. So even if we make the assumption that the ownership, Howard Lincoln and Chuck Armstrong understand the mess that needed sanitized when Zduriencik was hired, it's difficult to imagine things being peachy and business-as-usual this time next year with another sub-.500 season in 2013.
Zduriencik should be willing to take some calculated risks this offseason, both in terms of trades as well as free agency. The roster is at least a half-dozen upgrades from becoming competitive -- with as many as three coming via development of in-house solutions. The good news is, the organization isn't the same and this offseason rings different than in years past.
The tallest of tasks
Money is something with which Zduriencik has to barter this offseason. Some significant free agents could fit into the club's plans. Convincing the player that Seattle is the place for them is not quite as easy.
ESPN Insider's Jim Bowden wrote earlier this month on the five toughest jobs for general managers this offseason. He did not mention Zduriencik, but in my opinion, Zduriencik's job this winter is by far the most difficult of any in baseball.
You tell me what's tougher -- trying to convince a thirty-something all-star hitter to sign a long-term deal in Seattle or finding a way to maintain a 90-plus win club with a $180 million payroll, despite no further payroll flexibility? Brian Cashman isn't getting fired anytime soon. The Yankees' CEO and team president aren't on the hot seat this winter. Are we sure Lincoln, Armstrong and Zduriencik are safe? As an organization, the Mariners are not.
The sell job for Zduriencik is almost impossible, considering the team's recent history, hence the idea that overpaying to an extent may be necessary. It's not something that should deter the M's, in my opinion, and I don't believe it will.
Having said that, I also believe a major trade may have to come first. If an impact hitter is added via that route, the free agent targets have to consider the roster with that player in mind. If the M's are talking to Nick Swisher, Mike Napoli or even Josh Hamilton, the money can be right, but the player isn't taking 20 percent more to lose 85-plus games in the final years of his prime. They have to believe contention is likely, and at least within the first two years.
Why this offseason is different
The suits in the M's front office are running a business. They work for themselves and the ownership group, of which Lincoln is a part. Part of the criticism, fair or not, is that the team has been run too much like a business and not enough like a baseball team, which, if true, is a major disadvantage to the baseball operations department in Seattle, since the Los Angeles Angeles and Texas Rangers are two of the biggest "baseball" businesses in sports and share a division with the Emerald City folk.
With the exception of the 4-year deal given to Chone Figgins, the Mariners have not spent significant dollars on player acquisition since the current regime came aboard the ship. Most of the trades have been for young, inexpensive players or one-year factors, such as Cliff Lee.
They have, as I have reported every winter, been open to adding to payroll. Thing is, they weren't going to do it for just any player for the sake of adding payroll and appeasing fans, or anyone else. It had to be ideal, nearly perfect. If Prince Fielder had interest in the Mariners, however, the Mariners were willing to pay him -- not $210 million over nine years, most likely, but something otherwise competitive, and certainly more than any player in franchise history.
There have been others, too, along the same lines. It just never made sense to grossly overpay for a player in the middle of his prime years when the team wasn't quite ready to break through, even if he had interest in signing with the team.
That isn't true anymore, and the club has a different approach to payroll this season. With contracts having expired, such as Ichiro's, and young players manning several regular roles when the '12 season concluded, the team has created room under the 2012 salary levels to spend money.
They also have given indications that the $85 million payroll with which they began last season could be eclipsed. They are currently sitting at about $68.5 million.
This offseason isn't a situation where the player or players have to be the perfect fit for the club, as in the past. The M's, from Zduriencik and his staff all the way up through Lincoln, Armstrong and the ownership group, plan to make the team better and spending money is part of it.
Whether they accomplish their goals is another story -- that is the Zduriencik part of the equation -- but the money is there, readily available, as is depth in the farm system to make a significant trade or two.
The toughest task is to get free agents to come to Seattle, a team with but two winning seasons since 2003 and one that is not expected to contend for the division title until at least 2014. The club may have to pay 120 cents on the dollar to get their man.
There are no further excuses, no explaining away the poor results, no caveats that can call off the dogs. Time is running out on the Mariners, both in terms of Zduriencik's tenure and the way the organization is viewed in Seattle.
At some point extremely soon -- as in 2013 -- the rebuilding job has to take an aggressive, significant step forward in the win-loss column, and if doesn't happen now the club may be the third pro sports option in town by the time they do make such strides, and that isn't a scenario the Mariners can afford to allow.
Not as a baseball team, not as a business.
And they know it.
time-for-zduriencik-to-earn-stripes
Comments
The following 70 comment(s) for this article are shown below:
| 1. By: Rampageoholics on 11-24-2012 20:17:52 I whole-heartedly agree with your synopsis. I would sign Grienke 5/90 and Swisher 5/70. I would then put together a package like Hultzen, Ramirez, Vargas, and Nick Franklin for Wil Myers. Won't happen, but I think that these moves would dramatically improve the M's. Jaso-C Ackley-2nd Swisher-RF Montero-DH Smoak-1B Seager-3B Myers-LF Gutierrez-CF Ryan-SS King Grienke Bear Beavan Walker (by June) |
| 2. By: Jason A. Churchill on 11-24-2012 20:26:03 Rampage, I wish it were that easy and I am sure Jack wishes that, too. There is NO chance Greinke takes 5/90. He's getting 100 plus, probably 115-125 at least. Swisher may get more than 70, too, but like I explained above, how you get him to take market value in Seattle is a mystery. |
| 3. By: southpaw360 on 11-24-2012 20:50:28 I would like to see Mike Napoli signed. Maybe 4 years 44 million. Front load the contract 14, 12, 10 and 8 for the final year. Sign Franciso Liriano (1 year at 7 million) and perhaps hit lightning in a bottle. This is probably a huge dream but trade Jesus Montero, Brad Miller, Taijuan Walker, James Paxton, Erasmo Ramirez, Hector Noesi and Carter Capps to Miami for Giancarlo Stanton and Logan Morrison. I'm not even sure if that is enough value for Stanton. Just a dream I guess. |
| 4. By: Rampageoholics on 11-24-2012 21:13:13 It's not my money and there's only a self-imposed cap, so I say go for it. Eventually they have to win if they want to bring the fans back. Not that you have to spend huge money to win, but it doesn't hurt. On a separate note, would you rather put together a package to go after Myers or Taveras? Who do you have as the higher rated prospect (specifically hit/power tools)? |
| 5. By: Jason A. Churchill on 11-24-2012 21:43:46 Myers is the answer to both questions. |
| 6. By: studentofthegame on 11-24-2012 22:39:29 It is definitely time for Z to have some success. For the most part his results as a major league appear to be a disaster. However how could he have foreseen the epic failure that Chone Figgins turned out to be? I mean the year before that Figgins was a OPB god. At the time I was really excited to see Figgins as a Mariner. Sadly that turned out to be a crap sandwich that everyone had to take a bite of. His first trade as GM was pretty neat. 12 player shakeup between three teams. Some good, some bad, but hey it was imaginative and we are still using Vargas and Gutierrez. Also, Z did get is Cliff Lee. Unfortunately the team faltered again and that awesome trade turned into a trade that was not so awesome. At the time getting Smoak looked great, but the rest of the package left me scratching my head. Now we know that Smoak likely will never live up to even modest expectations as a Mariner. I mean if he could even hit 20 dingers and knock in 80 that would be great. Seager did it! The rest of the trades have been kinda crappy. Fister to the Tigers for a relief pitcher that was horrible last year, a platoon outfielder, a decent lefty for the pen and a third base prospect that probably won't do anything for the team ever. It would be nice if anything ever worked out for Z. The free agent he got sucked and his trades have basically sucked because the players consistently under perform. Maybe Montero will grow up a bit this year and salvage some of the trade reputation? At any rate, seeing the M's in action this winter is at least somewhat encouraging that they are going to take some calculated risks to build a stronger team. How Z does it is going to be interesting. |
| 7. By: dangayle on 11-24-2012 22:49:49 Declining player, catcher/DH/1b, big contract? That means a big no on Napoli. I'd be willing to trade the farm for Wil Myers, if the Royals will deal him. Any of our big 3/4 pitchers will do, with whoever else not named Hernandez will do. |
| 8. By: Paul Martin on 11-25-2012 00:33:06 I have lost faith in Jack's ability to trade for talent. I think he is great in the draft, which makes me wonder why he can't evaluate talent better when it comes to trades. Jack did great with the initial 12 player trade, got Brendan Ryan from St. Louis for a lame prospect, and got Cliff Lee for Fringe prospects, but look at all the failures: 1. Trading Morrow for a reliever, sold way too low. 2. Traded Fister for prospects that were no good. Why the rush to trade Fister? Has he waited, we could have gotten a lot more or just kept him. 3. Trading away Mike Morse for nothing, oops! 4. Getting nothing for Washburn or Bedard. Washburn should have been traded for an offensive prospect, not pitching prospects. 5. Silva for Milton Bradley. Should have just cut Silva. 6. Failing to flip Cliff Lee for better talent at the deadline. Again, where was his talent evaluation skills on Smoak? Another miss... 7. Montero trade, I realize the Yankees would love to have a do over on this trade, but GMs said they didn't even know Jack had made the pitcher available for trade. Noise was made that teams would have given up more. Montero is a decent bat, but not a future catcher. Jack's only free agent signing was Figgins, and that was a huge flop! I really like Jack Z as a person, and am rooting hard for him, but it doesn't look good. I think he will be fired after this year. Wish we could keep him on to just run our draft and let someone else handle trades and free agent signings... |
| 9. By: sexymarinersfan on 11-25-2012 01:09:20 Oh how easily everyone forgets that Jack traded for our best hitter last year in John Jaso for a rapist. He's drafted pretty well I say. He can't really sign anyone with his hands tied in salary restraint. |
| 10. By: Gibbo on 11-25-2012 01:58:09 @#9....yeah that's the annoying part a lot of people rip into Jack about some of his trades, but the nature of trading away players is sometimes they will do better for us and other times they won't. No GM ever wins every trade. But Jaso is a great example, how many people trumpet the success of that deal? If you took the three guys and that he traded for Lee and said they turned them into Bevan, Jaso and Smoak, that's an outstanding result. For me the only dicey trade he has really made was Morrow. Fister just took off after he left, and that can happen both ways. I would love to get Myers and Swisher and Napoli at the right money would be a good add too |
| 11. By: rjfrik on 11-25-2012 02:29:23 Morrow and Fister trades were god awful. I would say JZ is about 50/50 on trades. A couple of great ones, a couple of awful ones and some that were a wash. He has been atrocious in FA. Why the hell you don't resign Beltre is beyond me, didn't even make the guy a qualifying offer, instead go sign a 3B who sucks for a huge contract. SWEET!!! I think JZ is 50/50 in the draft as well. Ackley is a bust, which is unfortunate. But he did nail Franklin, Seager, Walker, Romero and Paxton in later rounds which is fantastic. But JZ's biggest mistake that he's made while running the show was in the draft. He decided to keep Bavasi's pick, Fields, by making him an offer in the 24th hour instead of taking that pick into that years draft. Mac had targeted Mike Trout as a player he wanted. They just couldn't justify taking him at #2 over Ackley. If they don't sign Fields, Mike Trout is a Mariner and everything is different. Everything. That one mistake is most likely going to cost the guy his job. Missed opportunity. |
| 12. By: Jason A. Churchill on 11-25-2012 03:02:59 rj, You forget -- it's not a matter of deciding to re-sign someone and voila, it's done. Why in the world would Beltre want to come back to Seattle? No chance. |
| 13. By: dewey on 11-25-2012 04:09:25 I give GMZ a incomplete in the draft we will find out in the next 3-5 years if any of these big 3 or any good and we will see if Ackley ,Zunino etc are players.Roght now like every team in baseball who drafts they are all paper players until they have sucess are failure at major league level. Alot of hype and hope just like all teams have through the draft.One thing ive noticed being a baseball fan is Baseball America says what ever the team wants them to say i think that newspaper is wrong most of the time. |
| 14. By: jgstecker on 11-25-2012 07:19:40 I don't think Jack has been a terrible GM and I still trust his evaluation skills. I think Seattle needs to take a big step back next year for him to lose his job. That said, his biggest offense came early in his tenure when he foolishly decided to sign Bavasi's final first rounder, Josh Fields. It would've been the easiest thing in the world to pocket the $1.75 million bonus and snag the 21st overall pick in 2009. Mike Trout went 25th and signed for $1.21 million. And then there's this quote: "Jeff Trout, based on his conversations with different clubs, thought the Mariners might grab Mike at No. 2 — Mariners GM Jack Zduriencik says Trout was in the mix, but the M’s took Dustin Ackley, a first baseman/outfielder from the University of North Carolina" http://msn.foxsports.com/mlb/story/how-los-angeles-angels-hooked-rookie-phenom-mike-trout-in-mlb-draft-051212 That one hurts a lot more than Fister. |
| 15. By: Paul Martin on 11-25-2012 08:24:58 Jg, that one hurts more than Lincecum, don't know if the sting will go away in a few days or not! Lets not mention this one again!! |
| 16. By: Jackson on 11-25-2012 08:37:47 The Mariners did offer Beltre arbitration, which he declined. They got the 43rd pick in the draft and took a guy named Taijuan Walker. Beltre ended up taking less money to sign with the Red Sox for 1 year to rebuild his value. The Mariners never had a chance to resign him. |
| 17. By: aerichner on 11-25-2012 08:57:23 @ 11, "He has been atrocious in FA. Why the hell you don't resign Beltre is beyond me, didn't even make the guy a qualifying offer, instead go sign a 3B who sucks for a huge contract. SWEET!!!" Im sorry, before signing Figgins, when exactly did he suck? The signing ended up being a bad one but when it happened, there was nothing negative to say about it. Also, we got Taijuan Walker with the pick we got for losing Beltre. "I think JZ is 50/50 in the draft as well. Ackley is a bust, which is unfortunate. But he did nail Franklin, Seager, Walker, Romero and Paxton in later rounds which is fantastic." Ok so, were you saying Ackley was a bust when he was in the minors? During his 1st half season in the Majors? I doubt it. Give the guy a break, he just had his 1st full MLB season. It's RIDICULOUS to call Ackley a bust right now + you need to hold off on judging Nick Effing Franklin (and the other prospects) who hasnt made it to the show and has questions about his position and switch hitting abilities. Prospects are volatilie, that's why you end up overpaying in trades with prospects for proven MLB talent - you dont know that the prospects will end up making it to the show. Every player is a piece of the puzzle - some are stars, some role players that arent flashy but they're still valuable. So we at present time only got Furbush and Casper for Fister. Casper can be a useful platoon guy and Furbush a killer lefty reliever. They're helping the team, not at the level that Fister did with the Tigers but they're helping so the deal isnt god awful. |
| 18. By: aerichner on 11-25-2012 08:57:45 And just stop with the Trout thing, he didnt go 3rd, 4th, 5th where we can say we passed him up for Ackley, he went in the 20s, maybe Jack and Tom etc said there's no way this guy makes it to the 20's lets take a shot with Fields. Wrong decision in the end but it happens with every single GM. Nobody hits on 100% of their transactions. Jack has been 50/50 being able to find value in cheap players in FA and trades but hopefully this season he can spend big money on the right guys to improve the lineup (or rotation) |
| 19. By: pwhit44 on 11-25-2012 09:06:57 rjfrik... You list Ackley as a bust, then list Seager and four prospects who haven't even reached the big leagues as successes. Do you realize what you did there? Come on, man. |
| 20. By: slamcactus on 11-25-2012 10:51:21 "I have lost faith in Jack's ability to trade for talent" Franklin Gutierrez, Jason Vargas, Brendan Ryan, and John Jaso were all very good gets. Jury's still out on Montero and Noesi. Smoak looks like a bust (though I'm still fanning that flame of optimism), but Smoak and Montero are guys you can't really fault Z for valuing highly even if the deals turn out poorly - there was strong industry consensus on both players. If Z was blinded by something on either player, so were the entire scouting and analytical communities. If you think Washburn had significant trade value, you're crazy. Teams knew his low ERA was unsustainable. They traded Washburn for a cheaper guy who had a chance to become Washburn. The Fister trade doesn't look great in retrospect, but Fister in Detroit, for whatever reason, has been a much better pitcher than he was in Seattle. Criticizing that move presupposes that 1) the breakout was foreseeable, and 2) Fister would've made the same leap forward in performance had he stayed in Seattle. "He has been atrocious in FA. Why the hell you don't resign Beltre is beyond me" You see, you can't simply re-sign a free agent just because you want to. The player actually has a choice in the matter. Beltre knew that Safeco was killing his numbers, and there was no way in hell he would have re-signed here at anything approaching a reasonable salary. |
| 21. By: maqman on 11-25-2012 11:11:13 JZ is a fine GM in my book, I'm not in any hurry to see him leave. I hope he stays for many more years to come. He doesn't always make the right move, nobody does. Hindsight is 20/20 but the only deal he made I didn't like at the time was the Morrow trade. I do know he has brought a lot of talent into the organization, talent we can afford and control for some years into the future. That's the only way the M's can become and stay competitive, we can't build on free agent signings, too many players just don't want to play in Seattle. Even with the new media money, which is going to drive up the price of free agents. |
| 22. By: slamcactus on 11-25-2012 11:18:56 ""I think JZ is 50/50 in the draft as well. " If you think Zduriencik/McNamara have been merely mediocre in the draft, you're nuts. Their drafts have already produced 4 legitimate big-leaguers, and the system is likely top-5 in baseball. Even without Hultzen/Zunino, it'd be top-10. And the success of the system is rooted squarely in the draft--the Ms' international efforts have more or less been a dud over the past several years. There are still several interesting guys from those crops, but the system's top talent is coming from domestic sources, not imports. It would be nice if Ackley had a better year last season, but a) he's still a quality player with a ton of room to grow, and b) he was the absolute consensus #2 pick in a draft where everyone thought there was a huge cliff after pick #2. And please don't bring up Trout - if it was in any way evident that he'd become what he is now on draft day, then Kris Kline is the only scouting director in baseball who can even begin to make a case that he deserves to keep his job. |
| 23. By: slamcactus on 11-25-2012 11:20:51 "Hindsight is 20/20 but the only deal he made I didn't like at the time was the Morrow trade." I liked the Fister trade at the time, but I thought Furbush would be used as a starter. If I'd known the team thought of him more as a reliever, I wouldn't have liked the trade, even though he's proven to be a damn good one. For the record, I still think he should be given a chance to start. |
| 24. By: Jerry on 11-25-2012 11:49:39 Wow, lots of reactionary pessimistic posts, and way too much hindsight second guessing. First, the jury is still out on Smoak, Ackley, and a lot of the others. But they were smart calls when they were made. The only trade I really didn't like at the time was Morrow. The trade nobody seems to be mentioning is the deal to acquire Cliff Lee. That was a brilliant move. In fact, maybe we should think of the Lee deals in aggregate, with a few side moves. We traded JC Ramirez, Phillippe Aumont, and Tyson Gilles for a half year of Lee (who was phenomenal), then flipped him for Smoak, Beavan, Matt Lawton, and Josh Lueke. We flipped Lawton for Aaron Laffey and Lueke for John Jaso. So, think of it this way: M's trade: Mark Lowe, JC Ramirez, Phillippe Aumont, and Tyson Gilles M's receive: Justin Smoak, John Jaso, Blake Beavan, and Aaron Laffey Who wouldn't make that move now? I agree with Jason. The M's need to make a great trade or two this offseason. But Jack has a pretty damn good track record of success in trades. |
| 25. By: Mackie on 11-25-2012 13:28:20 120 cents on the dollar, or maybe more, could well be what it would take to get a FA or two to come to Seattle. I would rather see the M's pay like that for Nick Swisher than for Mike Napoli. I tend to think they would be less likely to view a Swisher signing as a mistake after about the second year of the deal. The M's need more than just having something like 19 games against Houston next year to get to a better W-L record. The M's have a good number of valuable trade chips, and I trust that they will use some of those this winter to do what they believe will help their offense. Some of us may not end up liking the deals at first glance, but I like to think Z will make one or two good ones. |
| 26. By: rjfrik on 11-25-2012 13:42:23 Only reason I'm calling Ackley is a bust compared to the other players mentioned is because Ackley was the #2 pick in that draft. If Ackley was picked, lets say at 25, then he wouldn't be a bust. The #2 pick holds a ton of value. It's a pick you CANT miss on. When you do it sets your club back a few years. Top 2 picks are the picks that turn your club around. Ackley has been decent for all of 3 months. He was awful the 2nd half of his rookie campaign and that awfulness continued into this year. I really hope he turns it around. And I guess I'm mistaken on Beltre, I thought the Ms didn't even offer the guy. Shouldn't they have received Boston's first round pick and a compensation pick if they offered and Beltre declined? Beltre was a class A FA right? All they received was the compensation pick (45). Am I missing something? |
| 27. By: aerichner on 11-25-2012 14:31:03 @26, Beltre was a Type B free agent... |
| 28. By: Ungnome on 11-25-2012 14:40:15 @26 Right, because one year is plenty of time to properly evaluate whether a pick is a bust. Dustin Ackley sincerely apologizes for not being Mike Trout. |
| 29. By: Rudolf on 11-25-2012 15:07:46 @26: Alex Gordon says hello! The guy for whom so many of us want to trade stunk it up at the major league level from age 23-26. It wasn't until his age 27 season--his 5th-- that he put it all together. He was taken where in the draft? The second pick. He was highly successful in college. He looked like a bust, suffering ups and downs, but despite the concerns that he would never figure it out management held on and reaped the benefits. Does this sound familiar or relevant? That being said, if another team wants Dustin Ackley as part of a package for Myers, Stanton, Gordon, etc., I say we ship him off with loving care and without a second thought. A middle-infielder with potential .300/370/450 splits is not untouchable-- especially since he's so far from them now. We need production, especially in the OF, and we have plenty of young options at 2B. |
| 30. By: pwhit44 on 11-25-2012 16:28:04 rjfrik, I was slightly less concerned with you calling Ackley a bust than I was with you calling players who haven't even sniffed the majors successes relative to Ackley. Totally bizarre. There is no guarantee any of them will even reach the majors. Walker hasn't yet pitched past AA. How can you judge the merit any of those four draft picks without seeing the end result? Just seems weird. And completely apples and oranges when compared to Ackley. |
| 31. By: jellison on 11-25-2012 17:27:53 Missing from the discussion is what the organization was trying to accomplish when Z took over. These early trades were part of a strategy to stock talent for a future that has now all but arrived. Typical of this strategy, the M's were offering the best talent (Lee, Putz, Fister) in the transaction for multiple prospects, some of which were expected to pan out. But nobody ever promised they all would pan out. As mentioned in the article, the M's are now in an entirely different place, both with respect to their financial obligations and available talent within the organization. With this change the trade strategy has naturally shifted. The M's made trades in 2012 in which, at the time of the trade, they were exchanging equal talents (Pineda for Montero; Lueke for Jaso) to address immediate needs, even if the outcome appears to have been uneven for the M's trading partners. We might now expect the M's to be involved in trades in which multiple prospects are packaged for the best talent in the transaction. Fortunately, the M's are well stocked with pitching so they have the luxury of dealing for the talent having the most reliable/predictable outcomes (i.e., the middle of the lineup hitters). Apparently, some of this talent will be acquired via free agency. It's not fool-proof, but it's hard to find fault in the plan. |
| 32. By: rightwingrick on 11-25-2012 19:59:04 Forget year one. That was a fluke. But 61 wins, to 67 wins, to 75 wins sounds like steady progress to me. Add six more and we are at 81, add eight the next year we are at 89. And if our drafts continue as well as they've been going under Zdurienck, we will be well-positioned for a great future. Yes, it's clear we need a couple of bats and veteran leadership. But we've moved the fences in, we've got some great young players on the cusp, and I like the way Jack trades. 84-86 wins in 2013, 90-94 wins in 2014. I'm thinking we'll be doing that with at least one of these guys on-board: Alex Gordon, Billy Butler, or Justin Upton. |
| 33. By: Mackie on 11-25-2012 20:10:47 @32, good comment! I hope you're right. I'm thinking the same way you are with the trajectory for wins. And I think adding necessary pieces here and there to the foundation already being built is a good way to do it. How about Swisher at 1B and Upton or Gordon in the OF next year? It's at least within the realm of possibility. |
| 34. By: Paul Martin on 11-25-2012 21:50:19 You idiots who think Fister was only good AFTER the trade need to go back and check your stats. He had a 3.33 ERA after 21 starts for Seattle that year. He was a young, cheap and under team control pitcher. Now there were concerns that his stats were aided by our defense and Safeco Field, and no one would have guessed he would get crazy good in Detroit after the trade, but Jack took a high valued asset and flipped it for a bunch of lesser parts. When you are DESPERATE for offense, and you take a valuable chip and turn it into a reliever and a 4th outfielder and AAAA bat then you deserve some scrutiny. There was no need to trade Fister at the time, and Jack chose to move him for spare parts. See my post #8 for more details on his failures, bottom line he just hasn't gotten it done and I don't believe he will make the necessary moves to improve our offense this offseason either. Maybe we win more games next year because Houston is in our division and we have soft ownership and upper management, so Jack keeps his job another year. But for me, I am done with him. |
| 35. By: Edman on 11-25-2012 22:00:34 Paul, I think you're on the wrong board. Go on over to the PI board, there are lots just like you. Or, maybe head on over to the Times board. As far as I'm concerned, you're nothing but a whiner, who is only going to see your narrow-minded view of the situation. So, if that's the case, there are better boards to be on, where you can sing with the choir. Most here are rational, and not likely to fall for the crap you spew. Be done if you wish. Just don't call others here "idiots" because they don't share your polluted view. |
| 36. By: Paul Martin on 11-25-2012 22:05:42 Closer look at my criticism of the Montero/Pineda trade: At the time of the trade Pineda had a ton of value. Young, cheap, under team control pitcher with off the charts stuff who could develop into a #1 starter. Jack quickly and quietly moved him to New York. Other GMs were upset at the time because they didn't even know Pineda was available. They was noise other teams would have offered more, or at least the possibility of starting a bidding war was missed. We get Noesi, a AAAA pitcher who will be an adequate relief pitcher if we are lucky. Montero can't catch, and as a DH, he is really only worth it if he has an elite bat. It is early, but it doesn't look like he has an elite bat. As a DH with an average to good bat, he just doesn't bring the value that a top trading chip like Pineda should have brought. |
| 37. By: Paul Martin on 11-25-2012 22:14:50 Edman, in my frustration maybe I could have used a better word than "idiots," but my points are all very rational and valid. I hope I am wrong, and Jack signs a needed bat and makes a good trade or two for other offensive help. I have been very patient the past few years waiting, trusting, and hoping the offense will get better, but it hasn't and at some point you have to demand results. |
| 38. By: Edman on 11-25-2012 23:32:20 Not going there, Paul. But if you're looking to lead a revolt, this isn't likely the place to do that. There are other fear mongers that will jump on that bandwagon. Not so much, here. |
| 39. By: rjfrik on 11-25-2012 23:41:10 Something is immensely wrong with baseball's compensation system if in the same year that both become Free Agents Adrian Beltre is ranked lower then Chone Figgins as far as compensation value. Figgins - Type A Beltre - Type B What? Something is wrong with this picture. One of these things is not like the other. Wow. |
| 40. By: Gibbo on 11-26-2012 02:27:08 Rjfrik... The problem was Figgins came off a career year and Beltre was injured and suppressed by Safeco, but yeah the old rankings system was still hopeless. Paul Martin... I don't get the Montero frustration, he is 23, finished stronger in the 2nd half, both pitchers we traded got injured and Montero may end up at DH or could possibly make it to 1B (unlikely), but even at DH if he improves with age what's not to like? As far as not telling teams, well who knows and I do remember reports that there were 3or 4 guys identified as targets, so they got their man, but there is no way you can value this trade a win or loss so early. Drop by the Yankees board and complain how they got the better deal and see how we'll that is received over there. |
| 41. By: Ungnome on 11-26-2012 09:02:09 Jesus Montero sincerely apologizes for not being Mike Trout. Seriously folks, player take a little time to develop. One year is hardly enough time for a player to reach their full potential and any conclusions you do make need to be looked at through the context of Safeco Field sucking the life out of hitters last year. Calm down, stop being irrational and look at ALL the facts. |
| 42. By: Edman on 11-26-2012 09:50:35 rjfrik, hindsight is an absolutely accurate was to assess talent. They do not rank Free Agents on their absolute value, but on their value on their latest season. A Figgins can and will happen every year, because players have career years. From Jack's point of view, and that of many others, Figgins, on paper, probably had the best chance of success going forward. He didn't appear to have a game that depended on the things that typically go wrong as players age. It just didn't work out....end of story. #40 and #41, you're exactly right. Paul is making stuff up as he goes. Montero is pretty close to what I expected. And, defensively, not a horrible embarrassment that some expected him to be. He had a good first year with the bat, especially considering the Safeco effect. Paul is just trying to stir-up fellow haters. Turning Seattle into a winning baseball team was not going to happen overnight. My favorite comment was about Jack "quickly and quietly" working to trade Pineda. If I had to guess, Montero discussions had probably continuted after the Lee trade. And, to think that Jack wouldn't look for the best deal for Pineda is insane. There were only going to be so many suiters for Micheal, and Jack had a good idea who those teams were. And really, other GMs were upset at the time? Probably more like GM speak trying to make it sound to their fans like they were never in it. Nobody knows who Jack talked to, and MLB Rumors is not the best source for accurate comments. |
| 43. By: Ungnome on 11-26-2012 10:08:24 Considering Jack almost traded Lee for Montero in 2010, and that Montero was still highly rated after 2011, made the trade fairly easy. Not many teams have/had a prospect on the level of Montero that was also available and filled a need on the Mariners. |
| 44. By: maqman on 11-26-2012 11:07:06 Changing the subject a bit might help. We have Smoak, Carp, Montero, Jaso and even Ackley on hand and Zunino on the near horizon. The need for capable outfielders is stark, they need to address that first. Napoli can hit and we need offence and I get that but not for four years of a guy on the downhill slope of his career - we gave Silva and Figgins four years, didn't they learn anything from that? |
| 45. By: VikingArthur on 11-26-2012 11:34:22 I have said that I think Jack is the right guy for the job before. I do think he needs to bring in someone who can properly evaluate major league talent/near major league talent... I don't think he and his team are good at that. This front office can really draft. We have more drafted players/prospects now that we've had in 20 years. The system is littered with guys who have MLB talent, almost all of them drafted in the last 4 years. A huge improvement from the barren drafts under Bavasi and Gillick. I hated the Fister trade at the time and I still do. Many of you said "Fister is a Safeco product, maybe a 5th starter in a regular park". In other words, you bought into the scouting report and saber numbers and didn't use the eye test. It was obvious, to me (and others here) that Fister was improving with every start. The problem is that if he threw 95 and had the EXACT SAME numbers prior to the trade he would be called a top of the rotation guy. He just knows how to pitch and he figured it out and we gave him away. The Morrow trade was horrendous but that may have been necessary, I think Morrow had given up on our clueless Bavasi front office. I have ZERO problem with giving Hamilton 4-5 years at 25 per. It is an overpay? Yes. Could it be a rough contract in 2015-2016. Sure. But it may not be and guys like him don't grow on trees. If we are going to sign a free agent and spend big money... go for someone who can change your franchise. You don't spend top dollar on decent players like Swisher and Napoli... they won't help us get significantly better at their best. So either go for Hamilton (I'd be happy with Pagan as well) and leave the rest alone. |
| 46. By: aerichner on 11-26-2012 12:03:37 @39 and 42, I believe Type A and B Free Agents were assessed on their previous 2 seasons (I thought it was 3 but according to Wiki it's 2). Figgin's BA, Runs, high amount of SBs helped him. Beltre's last season hurt him. With regards to the system, yeah, there was something wrong and they changed it. A Greg Colbrunn type of player will never ever be able to yield a supplemental pick again b/c those types of players (role) will not be offered the qualifying offer (13.5 million this year) that allows team to gain a pick if they decline and sign elsewhere. Same with relievers unless they are absolutely essential to a team (Mariano Rivera type). It also helps that players traded during their final contract year cannot be offered the qualifying offer (Zack Greinke). It doesn't fix it completely but it's absolutely better than the previous bullshit system. |
| 47. By: diderot on 11-26-2012 12:13:17 "Are we sure Lincoln, Armstrong and Zduriencik are safe? As an organization, the Mariners are not." I don't understand this. Who is the 'organization' that may decide these guys aren't right? Aren't THEY the organization? I guess other members of the board could somehow ask/demand that they all go...but wouldn't the board have been involved in all key decisions to date in the first place? And isn't Nintendo's interest still controlling? For all the Internet chatter of Jack 'being on the hot seat', I'd like to hear just one source for the speculation. My guess is he's here indefinitely...unless there's an ownership change. |
| 48. By: d2ret on 11-26-2012 14:45:30 Franklin, Paxton, Romero, Guttierrez, Pryor for Upton, Bauer. Fair. |
| 49. By: rocketdawg31 on 11-26-2012 15:04:40 Franklin, Paxton, Romero, Guttierrez, Pryor for Upton, Bauer. Fair. Fair? Perhaps. But jumped on by Arizona? With all due respect, d2ret... NO WAY. The Snakes don't move Upton for anything less than Taijuan Walker. Because they don't have to move Upton. That means they don't have to move off what they'd demand in return. And Walker would certainly be who they first target. To acquire a Justin Upton, a pretty big bullet must be bitten. I've heard reports that Bauer is far less in the good graces of the Diamondbacks organization, however. But I'm not sure as to why that would be. |
| 50. By: d2ret on 11-26-2012 15:09:21 The only way we can make SEA look attractive to the top Free Agents is with a decent sized trade for an outfield bat. I have no doubt Z will make trades... Will the timing be good enough a la toronto?? If possible, we want to trade a big 3 arm for the stud controllable bat (Myers), then sign a pitcher. It is way smarter than overpaying a Hamilton or Swisher because you move assets to hedge risk with the young pitchers and also, keep the 12th pick. Greinke and Sanchez dont cost the pick but perhaps command too much money. Id still overpay for Greinke, as I see this as the way to win a WS. But then there are a lot of bargains out there as well. McCarthy, Liriano, Young, Marcum, Capuano should be looked into. This is the smartest offseason for me. Then in minor moves you can bring in Sizemore, Bonderman, Hafner. Even Lillibridge can home now that hes a FA. |
| 51. By: d2ret on 11-26-2012 15:23:18 @ 49 I believe the Dbacks are bluffing with the pricetag on Upton and every GM is calling them on it. The Rangers have held back BOTH of their SS, and I believe their statement that they wont surrender Andrus or Profar. Who else is there? Hak Ju Lee from the Rays? I think the Dbacks would 'settle' for Franklin. I just tend to think more along Jasons thinking that Upton is overvalued for numerous reasons (park factors, attitude) That deal at least has a really good mix of upside and diverse players that play different positions. My point is, because teams value their prospects so much more now, I have a serious doubt the Dbacks could find a better deal (that included a SS) |
| 52. By: d2ret on 11-26-2012 15:31:03 ...you could throw in Marder or Hicks if the Dbacks felt greedy. Im serious. I think the deal that eventually gets Upton will be less than people expect. |
| 53. By: DMac33 on 11-26-2012 15:31:05 Couple of thoughts: 1) When Beltre's contract expired, many wanted to run him out of town. It wasn't that Beltre wasn't productive, it was that he was poorly cast in Seattle ... he's a 5 hitter in a good lineup ... he was the team's best hitter in Seattle w/ no protection. Beltre was far from the problem for Seattle. 2) I see a lot of people saying that Napoli isn't the answer for Seattle. He may not be a "savior" type of acquisition. And it is possible that the number of years/$$$ may be a tad on the ridiculous side when it gets to the end. But to suggest that he would not be an upgrade to this current team is really not that debatable to me. Worst case he's going to be a .800 OPS guy w/ 25 HR potential if he stays healthy. He gives you 3 position flexibility in that he can play C, 1B, and DH. He fits with what the Mariners have in place w/ Montero and Zunino on the way ... you have the potential to limit their exposure/burden behind the plate by limiting the number of games that they catch and thereby allowing more quality ABs from your better hitters. Best case is that you get a few years of .270-.280 and closer to .850-.900 OPS and pushing 30 HRs if you get a full season of ABs out of him (again, limiting the number of games caught). I'd really be hesitant to go 4 years with him ... but you may have to do that to get the deal done. That's the "tax" you have to pay in Seattle right now while you are a) uncompetitive and b) have a negative view from potential hitters about coming to your team. Napoli can be part of your solution ... just don't view him AS THE solution. |
| 54. By: Sharky on 11-26-2012 15:58:51 Sounds like the Royals might be the team to trade with right now. How about something like this. We trade these guys to the Royals: Montero Jaso Tajuan Walker Hultzen Nick Franklin Vargas + is more needed, or is this too much??? For Wil Myers and Billy Butler. We only would include Jaso if we knew we could get Napoli. So our money would go to Napoli and hopefully the best OF we could find. Another starting pitcher if we had enough left. I like the idea of going for both Myers AND Butler from the Royals, as it might open up some of the backlog at those positions in the trade. |
| 55. By: diderot on 11-26-2012 16:26:41 DMAC, I don't think there's any question that Napoli could be a boost to our offense. The issue is that his positional flexibility overlaps that of Jaso, Montero, Zunino, and Smoak. With Napoli (and his disturbing strike out trend) in the mix, two of those guys don't have a place to play. If only one of those guys could play the outfield, things would be a lot easier. |
| 56. By: VikingArthur on 11-26-2012 16:31:12 So let me get this straight... we can pay $10 mil a year for a catcher who isn't great at catching? When we already have two guys who don't catch particularly well under team control. With another top notch catcher probably a year away? The Napoli idea is a disaster on every level. Is he a better offensive player than Jaso? Sure... is it worth an extra $8-9 million a year. No way. If you get Napoli you basically eliminate Jaso. At least with Swisher you have a spot for him to play where it would be a significant upgrade (in theory). Hamilton/Pagan are the only free agents that make any sense for this franchise. |
| 57. By: Rudolf on 11-26-2012 16:50:59 @56: Swisher makes perfect sense! If you can get over the cost of the 12th pick he's a great offensive option. 5 years and 80 million. He's overpaid but so what? @54: Break it down: Walker for Myers straight up. Throw in Vargas if you think it's uneven, but it's super close. That leaves us shipping Hultzen, Montero, Franklin and Jaso for the one Billy Butler, which is asinine overpay. I, for one, support Jack Z. He has rebuilt the system and rid the major league roster of almost all deadwood while showing steady improvement in the win column. Not that he was perfect in his decision making. Sucks to lose Morrow and Fister, but whatever. Figgins was a turd (but let's not call him a 25 million/year turd like flippin' ARod-- Cashman!). That's a mistake contract, not some 4/36 booboo. The Fields signing was a mistake. I think the Montero swap was timely to say the least, and to pan the move is simply unjustified. BTW, Pineda did not have "off the charts stuff". He had a 97 mph fastball that suddenly was a 92 mph fastball, and a decent slider. He was getting heavier by the minute and kinda lazy. I remember Jason saying that Jack Z might be the guy until the farm is rebuilt then the org might go another direction. If that is the case then Jack Z is getting screwed. Give him until 2015 at least. |
| 58. By: sexymarinersfan on 11-26-2012 17:06:34 Zack Greinke is not coming to Seattle. Both LA teams with their new tv deals would not let Seattle outbid them for the top FA pitcher on the market, just as Seattle would not be foolish to get into a bidding war with either teams for the services of a #2 pitcher. That money will be used to sign Felix to an extension when the time comes for that. Secondly, Justin Upton has put Seattle on his no trade list. He's not coming to Seattle either. Thirdly, can we please get off the Billy Butler bandwagon. We have a younger version in Montero that's a lot cheaper and has not fully developed. I wouldn't be terribly thrilled if the M's signed Napoli, but I think that if you do sign him, then other moves need to be made or ready to be put in motion. Any deal to come to Seattle would have to be an overpay. Anybody thinking that we want to acquire Wil Myers from KC are going to have to prepare themselves for the package of Taijuan Walker and others. KC has been talking up Myers to their fan base more than Seattle has it's "Big Three." So any trade for Myers would have to be justified with a significant impact prospect in return, such as Seattle's Top Prospect. |
| 59. By: DMac33 on 11-26-2012 17:25:57 Here are my thoughts re: Napoli. 1) I don't buy the K argument with him. He's going to strike out. Whatever. Throughout his career he's shown an ability to get on base - his OBP is about 100 points higher than his BA. I guess the question on the K rate is do you believe that it had as much to do with injuries as decline in bat speed. I'd worry about the bat speed ... not so much about the injuries. 2) You will not hear me say that Montero should be given up on. I had made a point in a different thread that the 1st/2nd half splits for Montero showed a lot of progress and growth last year. I expect to continue to see that. I view him as part of the solution as well. 3) I also think that there's a place on this team for Jaso at this point - at least until Zunino arrives in town. You are starting to build a lineup that has potential if Jaso is hitting 7th or 8th for you. 4) My biggest concern w/ power bats at the C position is that you run the risk of limiting their bat by asking them to catch on a day in and day out basis. My youngest brother plays catcher at a Top 25 caliber college ... I know how tired he gets by the end of the summer season and how the stats can go downhill quickly. I don't think it's a bad thing to have MULTIPLE options at the C position such that you can relatively maintain the bat at its full use throughout the full season. 5) I don't have much confidence left in Smoak and don't think he's part of the solution at this point. You can't plan that he will be ... if he turns out to be at this point then great. 6) This is how I'd envision the lineup playing out next season in an ideal world (assuming you fill a piece w/ Napoli): 1 - Ackley (2B) 2 - Seager (3B) 3 - Free Agent/Trade Target (OF) 4 - Free Agent/Trade Target (OF) 5 - Napoli (C/1B/DH) 6 - Saunders (OF) 7 - Montero (DH/1B) 8 - Jaso (C/DH) - assuming Zunino isn't ready until 2014) 9 - Ryan/Franklin (SS) If you can get Ackley to revert back more to the .270/.350 range that he had as a rookie (if not even exceed it), Seager to continue to make gains, Saunders to get more into the .270 range and threaten the 25/25 level, and Montero to put up numbers close to what Bill James projects, then you have a young lineup with upside with far more protection and depth. It's a lineup that you have a chance of getting into the 85+ victory category with if your pitching falls into place. |
| 60. By: Bookbook on 11-26-2012 18:46:59 That's quite a nice pair of OF's you're picking up there. Let's assume they get one true middle of the line up pickup. Best case they pick up a legit leadoff type for another OF slot. I doubt you can import a 3-4-5 all in one year without a Yankees-sized assymetrical advantage over the other 29 competitors. There's a real chance we're looking at Guti/Carp/et al trying to put together a spot between them. Assuming no one real comes up in 2013, here's what I got... 1 - Ackley (2B) 2 - Seager (3B) 3 - Free Agent/Trade Target (OF) 4 - Napoli (C/1B/DH) 5 - Jaso (C/DH) 6 - Saunders (OF) 7 - Guti/Carp/Liddi/Peguero/ 8 - Montero (DH/1B) 9 - Ryan (SS) The OBP at the top of this line up could be very ugly, but Napoli and Jaso don't look enough like traditional leadoff hitters to appeal to Wedge there, in the least. Hopefully Franklin and/or Romero and/or Zunino (but where would you put him?) emerge in time for the second half. |
| 61. By: Rudolf on 11-26-2012 19:05:20 1. Ackley 2B 2. Jaso C/1B/DH 3. *Acquisition OF 4. Napoli C/1B/DH 5. Montero C/1B/DH 6. Seager 3B 7. Saunders OF 8. Gutierrez/Carp/Romero 9. Ryan I agree that two OF acquisitions are what is best for the team. I'm not sure we can do that AND sign Napoli. It is highly possible that if the team signs Napoli either Jaso or Montero are going to be traded. I really hope we keep Montero. If it were up to me we would sign an OF-- Swisher, ideally-- trade for another, and pass on Napoli. If we sign Napoli and have to run Guti/Wells/Thames in the third outfield slot, fine. As much as I want us to trade for a young-ish all*star type bat, I will be happy to watch the farm grow for another year. 2014 is the year in my mind. |
| 62. By: rjfrik on 11-26-2012 19:15:32 The one FA that made all the sense in the world was Cabrera. The Melk Man should have been a Mariner. I know some say, maybe he didn't want to come here. But I know one thing that entices any player in the world and that is money. The M's have money to spend and for some reason they didn't want to spend it on the best guy to spend it on. Most likely they would have had to overpay. But I would rather pay 9-10 million a year for two-three years for a guy just entering his prime (28) then pay the same amount for a guy already past his prime (Swisher, Napoli). Plus Melky doesn't cost you a draft pick. This was the year to take a gamble on players like Cabrera. He is going to be the steal of the FA market, especially for the price the BJays paid, IMO. They got him on the cheap. I just don't see another player out there that fits our team. All the main pieces on this team are younger then 30. Next year is a .500 year IMO, the year after is our year and Cabrera would have been a huge cog in that 2014 machine. Maybe we just hang on to our money and let the young kids develop one more year and then go all in for 2014 and try to sign guys like Votto, Cano, Wright, Zimmerman, Morneau, Kinsler, Gordon, A. Jones, or Ellsbury. That might be my plan now if I was JZ and I knew I would get one more year. You sign two of those guys to go with all the young kids and you could have a real contender. |
| 63. By: sexymarinersfan on 11-26-2012 19:49:29 Cabrera was never going to come here. He wanted to go to a place where he could pad his stats for a year or two, to a lineup that would be able to protect him as to get better pitches to look at. He also went to a contender and not a cellar dweller, and can DH to keep his numbers up if he's battling nagging injuries. The M's would've had to shell out so much money it would've been "mittens-on-dick insane!" I love J.S.! |
| 64. By: DMac33 on 11-26-2012 20:20:02 Re: #62 I don't think you should spend money just to spend money this year ... and I would tend to agree with you that there are some guys on the radar for 2012 that you could go after in the free agent market. I wouldn't make a deal for someone with a 1-year deal unless I could get the contract signed in advance of the deal. Re: #60 I'm not against one of the bats that you pick up being a leadoff bat and leading to some people getting dropped in the order as needed. I am a big proponent of making sure that the young kids are placed in a position where they can be successful and not feeling undue pressure to produce. |
| 65. By: dewey on 11-26-2012 20:26:51 #9 You mean the guy JMZ lied to press about? When his pitching coach who he later fired said he gave him the info that guy? #22 WHO ARE THE 4 LEGIT ml. PLAYERS?..#45 yOU MEAN PUTZ ,JONES,THORTON AND FREE AGENTS FELIX CABRERA CHOO ALL UNDER GILICK SORRY BUT RIGHT NOW jACK HAS ALOT OF HOPE AND ACKLEY A 230 HITTER WITH 2ND PICK IN FIRST ROUND CMON MAN? Im not trying to be a jerk but until players become major leaguers they our paper players just prospects with alot of hype and as we all know 2 out of 10 become ok players so as Flava Flav once said dont believe the hype! |
| 66. By: d2ret on 11-26-2012 22:30:34 Haha. nice. I actually ran into Flava Flav at Mandalay Bay a couple weeks ago! I dunno, it makes more sense when he says it.. |
| 67. By: d2ret on 11-26-2012 22:34:28 @ 58 Yeah I realized that about Greinke afterwards, and got too lazy to repost... Youre right though.. (darn) M's on Uptons no trade list? Negates most of my entire post... (damnit!) ...Better off without him... |
| 68. By: d2ret on 11-26-2012 22:39:55 T Walk for Myers it is. Depressing to give up Walker. Hes my fave M's spect. Id rather Overpay with a package centered around Hultzen or Paxton... :( |
| 69. By: d2ret on 11-27-2012 01:39:02 I just had the full realization that had Bavasi simply stood pat, Choo, Cabrera and Jones would be our 2, 3, and 4 hitters today. What in the hell?? I want to punch Bavasi square in the face. |
| 70. By: d2ret on 11-27-2012 01:43:23 But Id settle for a kick in the balls. |
Haven't created a Prospect Insider account yet? Sign up!
|
|
| Copyright 2013 Prospect Insider, Inc. | Created by AQ Central Prospect Insider is optimized for Mozilla Firefox and Google Chrome |