That’s easy- he’s a built in good story (“local, scrappy kid tries hard every day, blah blah blah”) that gets you positive coverage in the media because he keeps his nose clean, he’s one of the few recent draft picks that hasn’t totally washed out yet (and thus the team has an inflated perception of his worth), and he embodies a number of baseball cliches that tradtional baseball thinking really overemphasizes as being part of “winning baseball” (clubhouse chemistry, hustle, little ball things like stolen bases and bunts, as examples of “intangibles” we hear about endlessly). Plus he’s not eligible for arbitration yet and is thus relatively inexpensive as your 25th player, and at least theoretically can be used as the backup for multiple positions- which is important if you are carrying a 12 man bullpen, as that means you really only have 3 bench spots outside of the backup C.

It’s not a disaster to be carrying Willie Bloomquist on your bench, necessarily. If this bench had a backup C who could hit pretty decently, Dave Hansen as a late inning PH backup corner IF and a decent 4th OF, having Willie B. as your primary pinch-runner, “hustle guy”, middle IF backup and final utility guy would be quite defensible (assuming that your infielders are pretty healthy and only need the occasional day off)- at least until he starts costing you much more than the minimum, at which point you find the new Willie Bloomquist. Yeah, ideally David Eckstein would be your backup IF. Sometimes you don’t get your ideal.

The problem is that the entire bench is basically people who hit like Willie Bloomquist, and the team seems to think a bench full of hustle guys who seemingly can’t hit water falling out of a boat (Wilson/Dobbs/Spiezio/Willlie) is a great idea. Willie gets some of the backlash from that here.

OK, let’s look at some sample FA’s we could have signed instead.

Raul Ibanez? Ooops, bad example.
Jose Cruz Jr.? Not really better, but I guess that’s an example.
Juan Gonzalez. Uh, whoops, probably would have been a bad idea.
Jose Guillen? Well, in 2003, sure. He’s making 3.5 million now, though.
Ruben Sierra? Well, he makes less. But he also is a worse player.

You have some better examples of players who’ve been consistently at league average for corner OF and uninjured the whole time? Otherwise, I’d say Randy Winn really isn’t a bad deal at his current salary (especially when you consider the inflation that happened this offseason).

I also don’t think Choo is likely to be a substantially better player anytime soon- if he turned out to be Randy Winn (.350 OBP/.425 SLG/25 SB’s) we’d be doing pretty well. To be honest, NONE of the M’s starting OF’ers and best prospects (Ichiro, Reed, Winn, Ibanez, Snelling, Choo) have the kind of consistent .500 SLG/25+ HR slugging power you classically associate with a corner OF’er. Winn, Reed, Choo and Snelling ALL strike me as guys who have to hit with a pretty high average to be good, because they aren’t likely to ever hit 20 bombs (though Winn’s the least likely of them to do so since he probably will K the most).

Randy Winn isn’t the problem, really. I’d argue the problem is we haven’t produced a power hitter from our farm system at ANY position since Jose Cruz Jr. (unless you count Ibanez, and I have a hard time classifying someone whose career high in HR’s is 24 as a power hitter).

If what people want out of their team is a bunch of lovable scrappers, by all means load the team up with the Bloomquists and the Dan Wilsons of the world. If, however, people want the M’s to be a playoff contender (which I think most people on this site do…), there are other options to fill that spot (like the aforementioned Chone Figgins) who would do a far better job than Willie.

See also:
Everett, Carl
Garciaparra, Nomar
Segui, David (but only around Randy Johnson)
Guillen, Jose
Bradley, Milton

All distracting clubhouse influences on and off the field who, probably, have effected their teams in one way or another. I can’t say for sure without going and talking to every single player they ever played with and getting direct testimony, but it is interesting that those people mentioned have rarely played for championship teams.

Jordan and Bonds might be comparitive examples, but those are also the extremes.

Back to Willie. Let’s turn the question around on you then, why do YOU think the Mariners management has kept Willie Bloomquist on the team? You want us to come up with something, but you’re the ones questioning it, not us. You tell us why he’s stillt here. The answer of enlightenment will only come from your own journey. Or some such crap.

Can you please lay off the Strat-O-Matic comments? Nobody’s arguing that baseball is a board game or a statistical thesis here, and things like that just serve to cheapen your argument. Thank you.

As for your points, I’ll give you Bloomquist as a marginal hitter (and I can’t prove this without hitting the stats, so I won’t go there), and that he would beat Bucky at first. But then, a dead cat could probably beat Bucky at first – Bucky’s a hitter, nothing more.

Your point that Bloomquist is versatile is something that’s been noted here many times, with little debate – but I would suggest that doing six things at par or slightly below is less valuable to a club than doing one thing reasonably well (like Bucky, or like Ibanez as DH). If Bloomquist says “Hey Grover, put me in at short today”, and he muffs a routine ground ball, then tomorrow Hargrove puts him at second to shake things up, and he does it again, he’s just hurt the team twice; if Bucky strikes out as a DH, he’s only hurt the team once.

Yes, it’s a bit of a reductionist argument, but hopefully you can see the point I’m trying to make.

As for the asshole thing, Michael Jordan was widely reputed to be the biggest asshole in the NBA. He seemed to do all right. If a guy’s that much of an ass, nobody will talk to him in the clubhouse anyway (see Bonds, Barry), so I don’t think that’s as big a problem as you seem to.

Here’s a thought. When Jose Lopez gets healthy, should we bring him up to replace Bloomquist? He might perform better. Still, I would hate to see it. Lopez is still developing and I’d rather he get the work in Tacoma than sit on the bench here. We need him to be ready for next year.

I would say that bench players generally share these qualities:
1) They’re not good enough to start. If they are, we should either play them or trade them.
2) They’re probably one-dimensional, either as pinch hitters or defensive subs. See #1.
3) They’re basically finished products. At least, we don’t feel like the long-term good of the team is hurt by having them sit on the bench.

So, should we blame Bavasi for having Bloomquist on the roster? It may sound funny, but I think I’d be more critical of Bavasi if we had a quality player in that spot. In that case, I’d want to know why we have such a valuable asset wasting on the bench when we have so many other holes to fill.

BTW, I think it’s very interesting that Dobbs is up with the team. I think that means that the M’s have decided that he’s a career pinch hitter.

So how does he measure up to other American League CFielders? Are
you using the defensive efficiency numbers? Total Chances? What is it?
In two plus years here, I’ve yet to see go near a wall on top of goat trail routes and no arm.

1) I don’t think he’s nearly as bad a defender as the bashers make him out to be. In fact, I think he’d compare pretty well to the current Boone at 2nd. He beats Raul, or Bucky, at 1st. He’s at least as good as the Leone of last September at 3rd. He looks lost in the outfield at times, and might cost you a game there someday, but not by making a bad decision (like Byrnes last night).
2) He’s good enough at the plate that you’d be hard pressed to find a much better hitter with his defensive ability and versatility, who isn’t already a regular somewhere, or bound to be, or too expensive.
3) Near as I can tell, he’s not an asshole. Sorry if that is “intangible,” but I’ve worked with assholes in marginal roles, and nobody needs that kind of attitude fouling up their workplace. Like I said, this is not Strat-O-Matic.

I don’t mean this in a confrontational way, but what exactly are the reasons to keep a guy like Bloomquist around? “Good clubhouse presence” doesn’t count, because it doesn’t help a team win on the field; nor do his “intangibles” – if they’re not tangible, they’re not useful.

And I don’t mean that last in a statistical sense – the fact that Willie Bloomquist plays the piano is an “intangible”, and it matters not a whit as far as his baseball playing goes. What matters is what he can do on the field and at the plate, and in that respect, actions speak louder than words.

I think the whole point of this whole thing is that intangibles aren’t enough. Talent plays a big part, and Willie’s main talent seems mostly to be polarizing these comment threads.

The perspective I was hoping to illuminate is this: You’ve got four subs to cover eight spots. One is the #2 catcher, and two are LH hitters. The fourth guy has to be versatile to give you flexibility with your two pinch-hitters. It also helps if he’s not an asshole.

I recognize your opinion and where you’re coming from, just as I hope you can reciprocate. But remember, this is not Strat-O-Matic — the roster is made of real people. Lots of GMs, and managers, and fans think there are reasons to keep a guy like Bloomquist. Just because they’re not based entirely on his statistics does not mean they are not valid.