Jason’s Quick Take on the 2005 Season

JMB · April 8, 2005 at 11:32 am · Filed Under Mariners 

People seem upset about the pitching staff. Well, duh. You could have seen this coming all winter, and now it’s gotten worse with the injury to Madritsch. It’s also amusing to me how people (I’m talking fans, here) were picking the M’s to win 90+ games before the year started and after the first game, but suddenly they lose two straight and they’re worse than last year.

So here goes — they’re not going to contend this season, but that’s Ok. You don’t magically go from 99 losses to division champs without something dramatic happening (and you certainly don’t do it with this pitching staff). If they can get back to around .500, we should be thrilled.

This winter they addressed the anemic offense by signing Beltre and Sexson, but ignored the pitching staff. Next winter, they’ll do the opposite and sign a starting pitcher. Put that starter in with a healthy Piniero, a healthy Madritsch, and King Felix and presto, you’ve got a pretty good rotation. And then we can talk about contending. But that’s next season, not this season.


73 Responses to “Jason’s Quick Take on the 2005 Season”

  1. KingSaxomo on April 8th, 2005 5:36 pm

    I meant Sexson is an issue IF his shoulder is not 100%.

    Oh, and the Angels have just as many health question marks as the Mariners in Valad, and Garrett Anderson and others. Finley ain’t no spring chicken either.

    The A’s are almost where the M’s were last year after the All-Star break, trying out the new guys seeing if they can cut it.

    The Rangers are about the same as last year.

  2. Jerry on April 8th, 2005 5:37 pm

    I am definitely in the ‘better but not contending’ camp. I think that the M’s will be hard-pressed to break .500. However, they are on the right track. The first thing they need to do is figure out why they are blowing out pitching prospects at an alarming rate. Then, they can think about what they need next offseason. Obviously, pitching will be the #1 focus.

    As it stands, the M’s will have about as much coming off the books as they did last year (around $30 million). Of the guys whose contracts are up, only a few are likely to come back. They might want to resign Meche, but guys like Boone, Moyer, Wilson, Shiggy, and others are easily replacable with guys in the system or cheaper players.

    The only spot that I could see being an area of need besides starting pitching is a good veteran reliever (not expensive unless we are looking for a closer), a catcher (if Olivo fails), and a SS (if none of Reese, Lopez, and Betancourt are viable options). The M’s will have more than enough cash to add a #1 starter, another high-priced player, and a decent pitcher for the bullpen.

    Regarding the starting pitching, these are the guys that I think could be options, although things will certainly change before next winter:

    Free Agents:
    -AJ Burnett
    -Brad Penny
    -Jeff Weaver

    Trade Candidates:
    -Ben Sheets
    -Kip Wells
    -Barry Zito

    -Daisuke Matsuzaka

    Of these guys, I think that Burnett makes the most sense. Penny and Weaver haven’t been very consistent, but if they have good seasons, it could be worth it. Burnett has true ace-quality stuff and is pretty young, so that would make him the best candidate if he has a good year.

    It will be interesting to see how the Ben Sheets situation unfolds. If the Brewers can’t resign him by mid-season, I think that he is a prime candidate to get moved. He would cost the M’s some good prospects, but he is the best pitcher on that little list above. Kip Wells is trade bait as well, and I think that he could have a good season. He has been inconsistent as well, but he will be in his last year of arbitration this year and the Pirates will likely move him. If he pitches well, he could be a good #2 pitcher for the M’s. However, trading for him would cost some prospects, and Weaver and Penny would be just as good, and probably better.

    The real wild card is Matsuzaka. If he pitches well this year, and his team posts him, he would be a great risk. Just like Ichiro, he wouldn’t cost much for his first few years (besides the money to win his bargaining rights, but that is not from the payroll). He also wounldn’t cost the M’s prospects in a trade or draft picks in signing a player who is offered arbitration. It will also be interesting to see how this works out.

    Needless to say, all of this will likely change. Some of these guys will get hurt or make themselves less savory options through bad play. Plus, I am sure that there will be guys like Carl Pavano and Jaret Wright who establish themselves are solid pitchers. And there should be a few guys who will become available in trades that we wouldn’t think of as possibilities.

    All in all, the M’s are on the right track. If the young players (Olivo, Reed, Choo, Felix, ect) are able to be contributors for 2006, the M’s should be in good shape. Hopefully, someone like Nageotte, Baek, Livingston, or Campillo becomes a surprise like Madritsch was last year. Another interesting internal candidate could be Soriano. If he gets healthy and pitches well in the pen late this year, he could be a legit option in the rotation for 2006. Hopefully, 4 of these guys will emerge as good options and the M’s can focus on adding just one pitcher.

    They will have money to spend. Hopefully, some of these key guys will play well, and the M’s will be able to invest more money in 2-3 really good players instead of spreading the cash around.

  3. Manzell B on April 8th, 2005 5:42 pm

    On rebuilding a franchise…

    It seems to me to be alot harder to recover/rebuild a franchise without pitching than one without hitting. I think Texas is a good example.

    Also, what constitutes a rebuilt team? Is moderate to good veterans at every position (more or less, the post A-Rod Mariners) “rebuilt”? A young team with promise? Or are only wins important?

  4. toonprivate on April 8th, 2005 6:03 pm

    look, after 3 games we’re just reiterating what we thought before the season started — except madritsch is now a question mark, and we’ve actually seen with our own eyeballs that beltre is astonishing. well, and maybe that the M’s have a good chance in any game that Sexson homers twice. to contend, the m’s would have to have several exclamation points in the rotation instead of the staff load of question marks we have now: optimists are saying the ?s we have will morph into !s; pessimists think we need some brand new punctuation because ALL those ?s won’t work out. i am now thinking positive thoughts for aaron sele (ye gods and little fishes…)

  5. Ralph Malph on April 8th, 2005 6:17 pm

    Really rebuilding a franchise requires a farm system stocked with talent. Ours isn’t.

    I’m hoping they can build up the farm system with some midseason trades this season of guys like Boone or Wilson (or Sele or whoever) for prospects.

    The M’s made a good decision a few years back to focus on pitching in the farm system. Unfortunately it hasn’t worked out too well because of the shocking number of pitching injuries. Whether that is the result of some kind of problem with how the organization handles young pitching isn’t clear.

    But the secondary result of that decision is that the farm system is lacking in legitimate position player prospects.

    Those aren’t problems you can fix overnight.

  6. KingSaxomo on April 8th, 2005 6:22 pm

    I think a rebuilding team has a core of young inexperienced player who are high in potential. I.E. – Post A-Rod Texas, the current A’s, the Post All-Star Break Mariners.

    I also think we (the M’s) passed through most of that stage with the signings of Beltre and Sexson. Outside the relief pitching, this is a team with staring pitchers and a closer who are accoustomed to pitching (obviously not refering to last year’s abberation of a year). The team tried out their youngsters and took the top of the line, and then filled in the gaping holes with two three top of the line defenders, two of which can knock the cover off the ball.

    The help this team need is on the bench and in the bullpen with guys not named Eddie or J.J. Putz (or Nelson IMO, and Mateo has proven he can pull his weight too) SP is not rebuilding. They’ll do fine if healthy. Plus, Franklin and, eventually, Felix (maybe even Campillo) are there for back up. We have a hitting line-up outside of Reese / Valdez (I think Olivio will be a good hitter, it’s just going to take a little bit, and Boone needs to rebound). The defense is very quickly perhaps one of the best in baseball after being one of the worst last year.

    I think the M’s are beyond the Rebuild stage and are into the clean up the little things and tweak the system stage. At least until Joel and Eddie go down with season ending injuries that they should have had surgery on last season in the first place. But we’re counting on that not happening.

  7. Matt Williams on April 8th, 2005 6:24 pm

    I think the problem with this argument is that baseball is a game of stats and odds, except you can’t really calculate those odds before you actually start playing the games.

    Any team in baseball could contend. Even a team that should win 75 games might have a fluky 20 games where refs made bad calls, crappy players just got all of it, or things went right while the star or the division favorite hurt himself washing a pickup. Even 162 games isn’t enough to normalize luck.

    The M’s shouldn’t be the favorite to win the division and virtually nobody thought they were. But it’s still not impossible for them to pull it off. This team is basically a birthday gift in lottery tickets. You say “Gee, thanks grandma” until one of them wins $1,000. Entirely writing them off now is as silly as thinking it was a sure thing after game one…the odds are against us, but they’re still just odds.

  8. KingSaxomo on April 8th, 2005 6:27 pm

    I want Sheets, but don’t know how feasible it is that we could snag him. Being who he is, if the Brewers fail to lock him up, there are many other teams wishing for a Sheets in their organization. It’s all just rumors, speculation, and wishful-thinking like people saying Tejada or Kendall would be coming to the M’s last year.

  9. bookbook on April 8th, 2005 6:49 pm


    An old team collapsing is not a historically unique or unusual kind of thing to happen.

    Our 99-losses weren’t, in that context, much different from Arizona’s 110.

    Yes, we’ve had a “strong” farm system for years, but the pitchers mostly washed out, and the only legit position player prospect has been injuring himself out of contention.

    This team has some goods, and could miraculously contend. However, the A’s and Angels are legitimately better teams. It’s hard to imagine both of them collapsing for our pleasure.

  10. roger tang on April 8th, 2005 10:38 pm

    Well, there’s contending and there’s contending….

    Hang close until the end of August then fade? I can see that. Fight and claw till the last day of the season? Nahhh….don’t think so….but even doing the first will be enourmously entertaining….

  11. Pessimistic Optimist on April 9th, 2005 1:10 am

    Wow, it’s amazing how long it takes for me to realize why I don’t come to this M’s discussion board very often. It only takes a post or two, if you’re wondering. Anyway, there are a few reality checks I need to voice:

    1) We’re only four games into the season, and our record is 2-2. It’s waaaay too early to make any judgments on the season ahead, and how we’ll fare. Hell, a month into the season is too early; the A’s always seem to be out of contention at mid-season and manage to fight their way back into contention. Keep that in mind when you try to pass a quick judgment on the ’05 season.

    2) Our offseason acquisitons have a two-fold effect on our team: the obvious offensive addition, and then the “said” obvious defensive addition. Well, defense helps pitching. People forget that Moyer, Pineiro, Meche, and Sele have all been a part of a winning M’s season, with winning records themselves. Those season were due to a tops-in-the-league defense. We have that defensive force again. Madritsch/Campillo are both qualified pitchers for a fifth spot, and even Franklin can be too. The fact of the matter on defense, is that defense helps a number of our pitchers: Moyer, Franklin, Sele, Shiggy, Madritsch, and all the others too (just some more than others). Our off-season acquisitions were to bring missing offense, but ALSO to bring missing defense, and don’t overlook that.

    3) A piggy-back to #2, our pitching is more than sufficient to make the post-season, if they don’t get injured or kill themselves. A healthy M’s rotation has more TALENT than any other AL West rotation, save the young A’s rotation (the talent is there, but the experience is missing).

    4) Our bullpen is currently questionable, however each and every guy in our pen, save Thornton, has had a successfull season in the past, and has tasted the fruits of being a “top” reliever. With a return to tight defense, and a higher team morale, expect our pen to come alive once again too, but it will just take a little longer than we may like (a month?). Injuries are the only thing that will hamper our pen, but then Soriano and Sherrill can/will join the rotation this season too.

    5) On the topic of reaching a .500 season or better, I have no doubt in my mind that we can do that; all the pieces to that puzzle are there, all we have to do is put the puzzle together, and it’s a level 1 puzzle (i.e. we’ll do it). As for reaching the post-season, who knows… but we are definitely a contender.

    The A’s are maybe under-rated, but they have a lot of talent, and if that talent can develope and mature, they will contend too. The Rangers have apotent slugging offense, but lack the defense of the rest of the division, and obviously lack the pitching. The Angels are simply over-rated; they have good pitching, but not THAT good; they have good defense, but not THAT good; they have good offense, but even that has questions around consistency and injury risks. The main point is, we will be in the thick of the race, if not at the front of it.

    There’s a time for pessimism, and there’s a time for logic. Logically, we have gathered all the pieces to a puzzle we’ve put together before, and those were 90+ win puzzles.

  12. DMZ on April 9th, 2005 2:51 am

    Wow, it’s amazing how long it takes for me to realize why I don’t come to this M’s discussion board very often. It only takes a post or two, if you’re wondering.

    Um… I wasn’t, but thanks, I think. Wait, no… anyway.

    I don’t understand why people equate anything except dreamy rah-rah with pessimism. I thought the M’s would win 90 last year. I try and put together balanced pro-and-con analysis when I write about the team, tossing only the most fan-boy comments. And yet this is probably the most frequent criticism we see. I don’t get it.

    Anyway, there are a few reality checks I need to voice:
    1. 2-2 is too early to make judgements


    2. Defense was upgraded too

    Yep. We’ve been talking about that for ages, but that’s fine, if you’re only an occasional visitor, you may have missed that.

    3. Pitching is “more than sufficent” to make the post-season

    You can make the post-season with bad pitching if you have a good enough offense and defense. That doesn’t mean people shouldn’t be worried.

    4. Bullpen guys have “tasted the fruits of being a top reliever”

    Um, by that logic, we should sign all the greatest past relievers, regardless of age… the concern is about age and effectiveness — I don’t think anyone’s argued Jeff Nelson was never any good, for instance, or that Guardado’s had a terrible career.

    5. Team can get to .500

    Again, if you really haven’t swung by often, that’s fine… wait, why am I replying?

    The consensus of authors around here is that the 2005 M’s are a .500 team. Mind you, we thought that last year too, and that didn’t turn out, but ignore that for a second.

    There’s a time for pessimism, and there’s a time for logic. Logically, we have gathered all the pieces to a puzzle we’ve put together before, and those were 90+ win puzzles.

    Soooo we just have to put the pieces together? Or… once the team gels, as you seem to think will happen, they’ll start cranking out the wins?

  13. IggyReilly on April 9th, 2005 8:14 am

    A healthy Pineiro, healthy Madritsch…That might be asking a bit too much at this point don’t you think?

  14. Jerry on April 9th, 2005 9:11 am


    Regarding your comment about the frequent criticisms about pessimism on this blog, I have to agree to an extent. I agree with all of your points above about how the M’s will do. They should have one or two guys who have better-than-expected seasons, but there are a lot of question marks and the team lacks depth to deal with injuries. I think that .500 is a reasonable expectation. I think that they could do significantly worse if a few of the starters don’t come back from injuries.

    The main issue that I have had with this blog – and other M’s blogs – is pessimism about injured players. I agree with most of your predicitons about the quality of the team and how they will do. However, it seems like you guys take a pretty extreme negative view about questions about health. Almost everyone in the blogosphere are looking at these issues as outsiders. Perhaps you guys do have some inside information from the teams medical staff or something, but, from my perspective, it is very difficult to predict how a player will recover from injury. It is even more difficult to determine if a ‘strained shoulder’ will turn into a torn labrum, of if an older injury (like Sexsons) will recur. A lot of times on this blog, these issues are addressed from a worst-case scenario. In reality, nobody really knows if Sexson’s shoulder will get reinjured, if Piniero will need surgery, and if Meche’s shoulder will hold up for a few more years.

    I don’t mean to be bashing your blog. I really like what you guys do here. You mentioned that this is the most frequent criticism that you get, and I thought I might let you know one reader’s opinion on why this is a frequent criticism. I don’t think that you guys are totally off base with your projections except when it comes to injuries. I agree that most of the optimistic views of what the team will do this year is based on a pretty unrealistic expectation that every single question mark the team has will turn out as a big positive. However, when it comes to the question of whether a player will get hurt, reinjured, or return from injury, it usually just comes down to speculation. And a lot of times, these speculations are presented as hard facts or near certainties on this blog (and others).

  15. Baltimore M's Fan on April 9th, 2005 1:24 pm

    Haven’t visited this site in a while, and I’m not sure why. I usually go to the P-I site to talk about the M’s, there’s plenty of Mariner love here.

    M’s win 81 this season and I’ll be ecstatic. I agree completely that this is a 2-year process. I’m not totally worried about the lack of big time pitchers available this offseason. Piniero and Meche, plus one of Burnett?Weaver/Penny, Madritch, and Felix makes for a solid rotation. Reminds me a little of the Cardinals staff last year. No aces, but 5 solid guys with a potent offense and good bullpen makes for a great team.

  16. Pessimistic Optimist on April 9th, 2005 2:24 pm

    DMZ, respectfully, what made you think last years M’s could win 90?? That was a team made of has-beens who had very little to offer the team in a real competative way. Most of the guys lacked defense and offense, and/or were too old. During ST and before, I was just hoping they could muster 80 wins. Of course, the 63 wins is a distortion of reality, because those 63 wins came from a dismantled effort to compete in the AL West (i.e. it was a “rebuilding year” by the time June came around). But still, I never thought 90-ish wins was a near feasible option; it would have required some honest magic. I’m not always optimistic, like last year, but I, personally, see a hell of a lot more potential in this team than last year’s team.

    As for our “Replacement Killers” (‘replacement players’, but I had to give the movie some credit), we have enough solid depth to cover every position to a decent degree of competency.
    C: Olivo/Wilson
    1B: Sexson/Ibanez, and in time Bucky (hey, he’s got a BIG bat)
    2B: Boone/Lopez (Pez is a “natural” second baseman, and “the future” at 2B)
    SS: Reese/Lopez/Valdez
    3B: Beltre/Dobbs/Leone
    LF: Winn/Ibanez
    CF: Reed/Winn(?)
    RF: Ichiro (do we really even need a backup?)
    OF: Choo/Strong/Dobbs(?)
    DH: Ibanez/Dobbs/Leone/Bucky(

  17. Hub on April 9th, 2005 4:07 pm

    What some seem to forget: this ’99-loss’ team was one that gave up in June and practically INTENDED to lose the rest of the way [bringing up every young scrub they could find].

  18. DMZ on April 9th, 2005 4:36 pm

    DMZ, respectfully, what made you think last years M’s could win 90??

    I’m not going to re-hash this in detail. It’s easy for you to say now that you see everything that went wrong, but I predicted last year’s team might win 85 games and I was worried about a lot of things that ended up going wrong (you can read much of it in Jim Thomsen’s article).


    For that, I was painted as the voice of hysterical pessimism. Compared to most of fandom (you can go look at pre-season predictions of the M’s blogosphere if you’re curious), I was pessimistic. Compared to what happened, I was a wild-eyed optimist.

  19. Joseph on April 9th, 2005 7:16 pm

    Jason’s three paragraphs *read like a call to “Abandonnnnnn HO-0oooope!”*

    After we get a Grade A starter and add Felix, then we can “talk about” contending. But not this season. It’s fine to predict the M’s will be DOA this year, but this post is an exhortation to stop “talking” contention. I dunno about anybody else, but I’ll talk contention for this team until they play themselves out of it.

    Even if a fan were putting a thumb on the scale for optimism early on, the first month or two — is that so much worse than a call to abandon ship after the first series?

    I don’t see a lot of people demanding dreamy-eyed rah-rah. I do see a lot of people wanting to *wait and see whether* this team will push for the division, or whether it won’t.

    They won’t surprise me in the least if they push for the division.

  20. Sam Wershow on April 10th, 2005 8:19 am

    A few thoughts – firstly, I’ve heard over and over again how “weak” the FA crop of starting pitchers is going to be for the coming offseason. This is ridiculous. Its got high potential, relatively young talent in Brad Penny, AJ Burnett, and Chris Carpenter. Its got two fairly proven vets in Weaver and Matt Morris. I would be ecstatic to sign either Carpenter Penny or Burnett, all who could be trusted as a #1 or 2 guy at the Safe. Add that to the maturation of Madritsch, Meche, Pineiro, and Felix . . . thats a quality young rotation.
    People forget how good pineiro was just a few years ago. He’s still young, and his stuff is still nasty, he justs needs to build some stamina to join the elite ranks of AL pitchers.
    One thing we’ve seen already is that the 2005 mariners can score runs. Ichiro is unstoppable, and sexson and beltre will get the job done. I’m fairly certain that with the rotation i’ve outlined above and rafael soriano healthy in the Pen (perhaps closing,) the 2006 Mariners will be right up there with the angels, As and Rangers. All of these teams are contenders, but have significant flaws. None of them really have 100 win potential.

    This year, the Angels seem to be the favorite. Their lineup is stacked, their bullpen is stacked, and their rotation has guys that can at least go deep into ballgames. However, i dont see any pitcher in the rotation that is a legitamate ace, one who can be trusted in big games or during the playoffs. If we add a solid FA this winter, I think our rotation will be better, and our lineup/bullpen not far behind.

    The A’s are in transition, but are still a tough team. Erubiel Durazo, Eric Chavez, and Nick Swisher will score them enough runs to contend, but their SP is a far cry from earlier years. Danny Haren and Dan Meyer may not be ready, and while Joe Blanton looks polished, it usually takes the A’s arms at least a year or two to really succeed. (See mark mudler, tim hudson, and rich harden.) In 2006, their rotation may again be the best in the AL. This year, only Harden and Zito can be counted on. I expect 84-89 wins.

    The rangers can beat any pitcher on any day with a brutal young offense. Theyve also finally brought a long a few promising pitchers (Chris Young, others) but who knows whether they can succeed in Arlington. Their Pen is the second best in the division, and they should probably finish above .500.

    So where does that leave our beloved Ms? Probably in 4th place, though all four teams could finish within 14 games or so of each other. If the rotation straightens out by mid May instead of next April, we could sneak into second place.
    As for 2006, I think seattle has a good a shot as anyone in what will again be the Major’s toughest division.

  21. Jerry on April 10th, 2005 8:34 am

    One important aspect of this debate is whether the M’s see themselves as buyers or sellers at the trade deadline. It would be nice if they contend, but I am worried that the M’s will be just close enough to contention that they make some dumb moves like the Mets did last season. That is the worst possible scenario. Ideally, the M’s are half way through a 2-year rebuild. Trading prospects for mediocre players at the trade deadline would be really dumb, and could possibly push back this rebuilding phase another year.

    I see the M’s as sellers by the time the trade deadline comes around this summer. The M’s should consider moving a lot of the veterans on the roster. Boone, Shiggy, and Franklin are coming off the books, and the M’s would be wise to get something for them before they leave. Boone and Shiggy in particular could net us a decent prospect or two if they have solid seasons. Moyer is another guy coming off the books that could have value, although trading him could be a lot more difficult. He has the right to veto any trade that comes up, but, as it is likely his last year, he might want the chance to go to a contender. Other guys that would be nice to get off the books include Ibanez, Winn, Villone, and Spiezio. All of these guys except Spiezio are could have value. Winn is the most tradable, but, if Bucky shows that he is healthy as can DH, Ibanez could be tradable as well, especially if he hits for a bit more power. Relievers are always overvalued at the deadline, so Villone, Frankin, and Shiggy could be tradable, and even Guardado if he is healthy and approves a trade.

    Obviously, the M’s aren’t going to move all of these guys. But moving some of them would give the M’s more money to work with in the offseason as well as allowing them to get some prospects back for players who are likely on their way out anyway. Bringing in a solid SS prospect in particular would be smart, since few of the SSs in the system figure to stick there long-term (except Cabrera, who is a ways away). Picking up pitching would also be really smart. The bullpen is looking like a problem, and bringing in some young players who can fill holes in the pen would be a great move, just like Oakland did this offseason.

    With the high attrition rate of pitching in our system, it would be smart for the M’s to accept the fact that this team is not really a contender in 2005. Moving players mid-season would help them clear money as well as inject some talent into the farm system. Really, the M’s should consider moving every veteran on the roster with the exceptions of Sexson, Beltre, and Ichiro. Trading veterans for prospects will allow the M’s to invest most of their money in a few stars, instead of spreading it around. Plus, some of these players could be used in a package for another player in the offseason.

  22. Pessimistic Optimist on April 10th, 2005 8:51 pm

    Some good points. I agree we’ll be seller, but as a part of the rebuild. I think Shiggy will stay though, because by that time he’ll be too valuable to us (IMO). Moyer won’t go either; he wants to retire after this season, and stay here all season, and I think the M’s wouldn’t even consider trading him… it would be like trading Edgar before he retired. But Ibanez, Winn, Boonie, Spaz, and Villone may all be possible movers. Of those, I think Ibanez would be the least likely to go, but it all depends on what we’re getting in return. It all depends on how well we’re doing when the trade dealine is approaching… I think we’ll be doing pretty good, and not looking like your average sellers, but if we can pull out some crazy Beane-like trade, then it’ll happen. Otherwise, we’re out to make another splash next summer.

    On the topic of what pitchers are out there to get, A.J. Burnett would be a great guy to get, assuming he shows his shoulder is still good this season, and he isn’t overworked anymore. Other quality options, as mentioned before, are Weaver, Millwood, Penny, Washburn, and Wakefield. I think the M’s might show some interest in a few of them, but I have hunch that guys like Chris Carpenter or Pedro Astacio might make a bigger splash this season and add themselves to the list too. There are a bunch of other guys who have team/player options, or arbitration limitations, and it’s entirely possible a few good options will come out of that group, which includes the likes of Woody Williams, Jason Schmidt (won’t be available), Tom Glavine, Kazuhisa Ishii, and CC Sabathia. Who knows who will be available though, and what teams will have ready cash and a big interest in the SP market (gee, would the Yankees maybe be in the market?? Like every year…)

    Anyway, those are just some thoughts.

  23. Ralph Malph on April 11th, 2005 9:41 am

    Who’s to say Moyer wouldn’t want to be traded to a team where he could have one last chance at a world series ring? I wouldn’t trade him against his wishes but if the Red Sox (say) wanted him back for a pennant drive, isn’t it possible he’d want to go?