Loss on loss

DMZ · August 14, 2006 at 10:13 pm · Filed Under Mariners 

Behind Oakland by only a couple of games on the fourth, I wrote

These three games at home against the A’s aren’t must-win games. But they’re certainly close. A sweep of the A’s would put the M’s a game back in the divisional standings and into the thick of it. A sweep at the hand of the A’s would put the M’s six games back of the A’s with two other teams between them and the season running out. 1-2 would be almost as bad: every day that goes by without making up ground is a day the team falls behind.

Win, team, win.

Since then, facing the divisional opponents they needed to knock off to climb up, they’ve gone
Loss, 5-2
Loss, 5-2
Loss, 7-6
Loss, 8-2
Loss, 14-7
Loss, 5-4
Loss, 10-6
Loss, 5-4

Hope’s back has been broken. There’s no way the M’s can compete for a playoff slot if they can’t beat their divisional opponents.

And coming up, we’ve got the Angels, the Yankees, the Angels before another Tampa Bay rest stop. This may hurt.


114 Responses to “Loss on loss”

  1. Dave Clapper on August 15th, 2006 1:38 pm

    Dave, I’d be interested to know if you’ve heard anything about who’s made it through waivers, who’s been claimed (and by whom), and how that might translate into moves made before the end of the month. (In particular, I wonder if it’s still possible to get something for Meche, now that the team has essentially waved the white flag via performance anyway.)

  2. Thingray on August 15th, 2006 2:00 pm

    Wow, a post can be deleted for misspelling a name, or for a long link but we have 6 feet of the specs for Lowe and Green on MLB ’06? I’ll admit it’s interesting if you play the game (which I have), but it’s a bit much for the thread.

    On to my opinion for the rest of the season. I don’t think it will happen, but I would love for Rohn to be given a shot for the rest of the year for a couple of reasons:

    1) He isn’t afraid of young players.
    2) It would send a message to everyone that losing is unacceptable (especially when it’s within your own division).
    3) I’ve always been a fan of his, and think he deserves a shot at a major league managerial job.

    Other than that, I can’t wait to see the September call-ups, and I really hope they get a shot at some playing time. I know Dave commented yesterday or the day before about who we might see in September, but it would be interesting to see a post devoted to the subject. Maybe a two-part series with one list of who we SHOULD see, and another for who we most likely WILL see.

  3. Karen on August 15th, 2006 2:25 pm

    Can someone e-mail Bavasi and tell him to read this thread?

  4. Zero Gravitas on August 15th, 2006 3:09 pm

    97 –
    You forgot “sacrifice bunting with #3 hitter Jose Lopez, repeatedly and even early in games”. That one causes me to twitch spastically in my chair until I can grab the remote and change the channel.

    By the way, I was about to write “team doubles leader Jose Lopez” until I checked and realized that Adrian Beltre now leads the M’s with doubles (32) over Lopez and Raul (24 each). Nice one, AB! Credit where credit’s due.

  5. John in L.A. on August 15th, 2006 3:37 pm

    105 – Come on, man. Not cool.

  6. Celadus on August 15th, 2006 3:47 pm

    If they do get rid of Hargrove, and get some fresh starting pitching, the question is who are they going to get as a manager that can destroy the Mariners’ chances for the foreseeable future?

    Dusty Baker or Felipe Alou? I think both of those guys get along with management okay, which is probably the criterion that overrides all other criteria to Armstrong/Lincoln.

  7. msb on August 15th, 2006 4:06 pm

    they refused to talk to Baker 2 years ago.

  8. Thingray on August 15th, 2006 4:07 pm

    I don’t know that Dusty Baker is a “get along with management” kind of guy from what I’ve read.

  9. joser on August 15th, 2006 4:31 pm

    Plus the M’s have enough problems with arms falling off pitchers without Dusty having everybody “play through the pain” to 130+ pitch counts.

  10. Emerald on August 15th, 2006 7:08 pm

    Is this tonight’s game thread too?

  11. Ed Tsantamount on August 15th, 2006 8:52 pm


    Limited as in not every day players but 200-300 AB at this time is not a small sample size. What’s your point then?

  12. Ralph Malph on August 16th, 2006 10:08 am

    The point is that players who are platooned or only play in advantageous situations are going to have better stats, most of the time.

  13. Ed Tsantamount on August 16th, 2006 12:22 pm

    Any way you care to spin it. Fact is, there isn’t a player who has done better with the M’s than elsewhere. That’s the point.

  14. DMZ on August 16th, 2006 12:24 pm

    Ken Griffey, Jr.

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.