M’s feel they’re much better
DMZ · January 2, 2007 at 12:58 pm · Filed Under Mariners
“Our lineup is better,” Bavasi said. “Our rotation is different. I’m not sure it’s better, but it’s different and it’s certainly not worse. We have a rotation that might have a different approach to the game, and maybe that’s an upgrade. But we certainly think we’re as good and possibly better. We know our lineup is much better.”
Anyone want to guess what he means by “a different approach to the game”?
How would Miguel Batista and Horacio Ramirez approach the game that would be different than Moyer/Meche/Pineiro (and the rotation’s patches)?
Comments
28 Responses to “M’s feel they’re much better”
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Batista and Ramirez are both groundball guys. They’ve replaced Moyer and Meche, who were both flyball guys. The M’s did make a conscious effort to make the staff more groundball friendly this year – that’s probably what he’s referring to here.
That said, it’s very telling that the Mariners admit they spent the offseason making themselves “as good and possibly better”, and all it cost them was $20 million in salary and several of their best young players.
I don’t know what bizarre world they live in, where it is acceptable to spend a huge amount of resources to make a lateral move, but at least Bavasi is aware that he did exactly that.
I’d feel better if they were talking about a different approach offensively, i.e., ditch the aggressive out-making approach. Of course, we need only look at the trading of Snelling for Vidro to know that philosophy ain’t changing.
lateral moves are great……..in bullfighting…
in baseball, they are bullshit….
speaking of bulls, any chance we can take up a collection aimed at buying Bavasi a trip to participate in the running of the bulls?
Dave,
That kind of says it all, doesn’t it? $20m and a murkier future for a 50-50 shot at being a better club. Rad!
That’s the one thing you’re really supposed to get by selling off kids in favor of high-priced free agents: known commodities. When the M’s still don’t really know what they’ve *bought* for all that money… yeeesh.
And in any event, how difficult is it to be ‘as good and possibly better’ when, for the second consecutive year, the team has had giant, gaping, soul-wrecking black holes in its line-up? The team got better when it DFA’s Joel Pineiro. Congratulations. So, er, what was the point of all that other stuff then?
I still think that these lateral moves, including the trade for Vidro, have a lot to do with Grover’s presence as manager. Bavasi should be blamed for pulling the trigger, but Grover is the one who can’t find room for the Snellings and needs a Vidro simply because Vidro does not strike out.
at least Corey is clear-eyed:
Horacio may be a GB guy but he gives up HRs like a FB guy so I don’t see how it really matters.
Dave — I was hoping for something funnier, like “reduces by 100% the number of pitchers that t believe frosting their hair increases their strikeout rate”. But I guess I’ll settle for actual reasoning.
Horacio may be a GB guy but he gives up HRs like a FB guy so I don’t see how it really matters.
Because there’s more to being a GB/FB pitcher than home run rate?
howsabout a t-shirt that reads:
Batista, at least, will provide a more literary approach to the game.
The better lineup approach is to finally rid the Mariners of those pesky bases on balls.
While I appreciate the honesty I don’t think I have ever heard a GM say something like this:
“Our rotation is different. I’m not sure it’s better, but it’s different”
I mean if one of (if not THE)his primary jobs is to improve the team during the year shouldn’t at least HE believe that the moves he made create a better team? I mean if they didn’t lead to a better team than why would you even make the move?
Maybe Bavasi is being told he can say that because the Mariners have had a better offseason than the Nintendo Wii rather than the other 29 Major League clubs.
Just a thought. . .
13 – Indeed, perhaps it’s his way of lowering expectations … ie don’t expect different results, just different names on the back of their jerseys.
Well, if the GM in question had spent basically nothing, or perhaps even improve the farm system, ‘Our rotation is different. I’m not sure it’s better, but it’s different’ would be fairly acceptable, especially if your plan is to synergise the M’s strong infield defense with groundball pitchers.
Of course, that’s not what happened….
In a perfect world, I’d like to see the Ms take advantage of Safeco by combining their cavernous outfield and righty-power killing stadium with some crazy-amazing outfield defense and then get into the business of signing slightly-below-average flyball pitchers on the cheap and then trading them for prospects when Safeco and their defense make them look like #2 and #3 starters. Ryan Franklin could have been the archetype for this project, if he’d been better handled.
I think that what you’re all overlooking is what kind of outs Jose Vidro will apply to the M’s. Everybody who isn’t a dummy stathead knows that an out that advances the runner is just as good as a home run. What are the “statistics” on that, people? Ahahahaha! I laugh because you don’t know! However, I bet Jose Vidro gains his teams 400 runs a season based on productive outs that don’t show up in the boxscore. How many is Snelling going to give you? Negative seven? Australians don’t even know how to play baseball. What would they know about productive outs?
Where the heck is Jon Stewart when you really need him?
How is the lineup better? Seven of the guys are the same and five of them are on the downside of their careers in terms of age. I guess Vidro is better than what Everett/Perez/Broussard DID in 2006 but he’s still a replacement level DH. I guess Reed/Bloomquist were so bad that Guillen is indeed an upgrade. But really our “improvement” is addition by subtraction.
This quote sounds like Bavasi himself doesn’t know what he’s got for a team.
“Our rotation is different. I’m not sure it’s better, but it’s different and it’s certainly not worse.” Well which is it Bill? If it’s certainly not worse, but you’re not sure it’s better, then that leaves “the same”…but this rotation is “different.” Riiiiight…
“We have a rotation that might have a different approach to the game, and maybe that’s an upgrade.” Might? Maybe? Different approach? What? Throw underhanded?
Yeesh. I don’t care if you’re a ball player or work anywhere else. It has to play games with your noggin when the big boss is saying stuff like this about you before anyone shows for spring training. I’m reminded of watching our most amusing citizens try to explain their way out of trouble on episodes of Cops. Nice job Bill.
– it’s certainly not worse
certainly: 1: in a manner that is certain
certain: known or proved to be true – indisputable
Certainly, it’s not as much fun to beat up on Bavasi as it is to anticipate a great season. Certainly, it’d be great if we’d gotten players who were actually assets rather than roster placeholders. Certainly, Bavasi keeps getting mugged by his fellow GMs. Certainly, Bavasi shouldn’t be allowed out of the office with a pen again. And, certainly, there is absolutely no reason to think that 2007 will bring more wins than 2006. Certainly, it could happen. Certainly, the future is uncertain. August 18th is the date that I predict the Bill & Grover show will finally close down.
Throwing underhanded would be interesting. Better yet, maybe they could hire a girl to pitch for them like Walter Matthau did. How old is Tatum O’Neal these days?
THE BIG PICTURE?
We (you, me, and the moron sitting next to you in the bleachers who the only thing he knows is that Bobby Ayala sucks) are being taken for granted.
BTW, blaming Bavasi for rearranging the deck chairs on the Titanic is a mistake. Now that the Nats are bought, we are the only team in ML sports without an owner. Are there better moves he could have made, yes. But they have no intention of making the tough decisions that teams like Cleveland and Detroit made to take a short terrm hit for a long term gain.
This team will never win with the Nintendo regime in charge. Never ever ever no way not now not ever…
In Bavasi’s defense (not that I’m sure he deserves one), he seems to have had a plan that did not work.
Much like other leaders overtaken by facts on the ground – to coin a phrase – he didn’t adjust well.
I suspect he knows this offseason was a failure. Which is, of course, no excuse for the two last-minute panic moves which hurt the M’s future without aiding the present.
I’d be curious what he had hoped to accomplish.
This is not a defense of the Nintendo regime or Howard Lincoln, but the “Nintendo regime” bought the Mariners in 1992. The team has had a little success since then. If you’re going to blame ownership for recent failures (and there have been plenty) you really have to give them some of the credit for past successes.
Infielders that became DH’s in their thirties and went on to have some of their best offensive years;
Edgar Martinez
Paul Molitor
Harold Baines
Julio Franco
Andre Thornton
ANd those are just the guys that won the Silver Slugger at DH… I am sure there are more if someone wanted to do more investigating.
My guess is that Vidro will hit better than his lifetime average next year which makes this deal decent (.301 .363 .459 with 15-20 HR’s)
I’m not sure it’s better, but it’s different and it’s certainly not worse.
Didn’t Bill use exactly that same line last off-season? I’m sure I’ve heard him say that before.
Infielders that became DH’s in their thirties and went on to have some of their best offensive years;
Edgar Martinez
Paul Molitor
Harold Baines
Julio Franco
Andre Thornton
But how many infielders became DHs in their thirties and then sucked and left baseball within 3 years? I bet that’s a way bigger list, but because they didn’t get famous we can’t call their names to mind.
Anecdotal evidence should never convince anyone of anything.