Random Notes During The Downtime

Dave · November 5, 2007 at 8:21 am · Filed Under Mariners 

As I’m sure you’ve noticed by the lack of posts recently, Derek and I are both pretty busy, and with very little going on in the baseball world, it’s given us both a chance to do non-blogging things. Don’t worry – this isn’t the pace we’ll hold the whole offseason. Expect more posts as the winter heats up.

From scanning the papers around the web today, however, I did notice one trend – the annual hot stove rumor mongering is kicking into high gear. In separate articles today, we were told that Miguel Cabrera will be shopped by the Marlins, the Orioles will listen to offers for Erik Bedard, and that the Devil Rays might market Scott Kazmir as a Johan Santana alternative if the bidding gets ridiculous.

This is what happens when there is no news, but there’s still a significant demand for insider ideas into what might happen. The Orioles might listen if… The D’Rays might consider doing this if… I might move to Darfur if…

If Bob Finnigan was still around, he’d be writing his annual “Mariners might bring Griffey back” column right about now, so remember, just take these rumors with truckloads of salt.

Comments

80 Responses to “Random Notes During The Downtime”

  1. Chris Miller on November 5th, 2007 4:49 pm

    #47, what Brandon Fahey isn’t their best player?! I’d never guessed.

  2. cebo04 on November 5th, 2007 5:28 pm

    I’ll admit, I was reamed out a last week for suggesting we could play ball with the Orioles for Bedard. All of you seem hip to the idea that we have no shot and that bashing people and making fun of fellow Mariners fans, however educated they are, along the way. I just want to know, what do you think other teams will offer for Bedard? I know there are to be a ton of options but you have to imagine the Orioles are going to want players that aren’t going to cost them huge dollars in the next two years as I’m guessing they would just pay that money to Bedard. Do you think they are going to look for low level prospects with upside or near major league ready players?

  3. Jeff Nye on November 5th, 2007 5:35 pm

    The discussion would probably start with either Adam Jones or Carlos Triunfel, and that is the point at which Bavasi should hang up the phone.

    That’s the point that people are trying to make, it’s going to take top-level talent (whether major league ready, or still in development) to pry Bedard away from the Orioles, not whatever is left in the dusty back corners of the cupboard.

  4. Teej on November 5th, 2007 5:41 pm

    Nobody’s saying the M’s can’t trade for Bedard. But the Mariners can’t trade crap for Bedard.

  5. cebo04 on November 5th, 2007 5:44 pm

    I totally agree that it is going to take a ton to get him. Is Triunfel truly that untouchable? He looks like an absolute stud but he is just 17. If it didn’t take much more than Triunfel wouldn’t we at least have to listen to it?

  6. Jeff Nye on November 5th, 2007 5:51 pm

    Well, it was meant as a more general example of the fact that for a trade to work, both teams have to feel that they’re getting equal value out of it.

    Bearman’s suggestion of Reed/Broussard/Baek would not even come close.

    Bedard is 28, and the Mariners need more than one more starter to get into the playoffs. I wouldn’t give up Triunfel for him.

  7. cebo04 on November 5th, 2007 5:57 pm

    Ok, I’m always interested to see how a 17 year old who is probably 2-3 years away is valued. We, especially in this case, hope for Triunfel to be the absolute real deal. But how do we really know how good he will be in comparison to star mlb ready players? I’d love to hear people’s opinions because I love the idea of promoting from within but with the possibility of 3 of the best left handers in the league being available, we have to at least take a long hard look at what it would take. Are people afraid to say that a Triunfel, player B, and player C might get it done?

  8. RussM on November 5th, 2007 6:44 pm

    I don’t think anyone will ever come up with a formula for predicting how much a 17 year-old player is worth now compared to current major leaguers. It’s always a gamble when it comes to trading future talent for talent now (otherwise you wouldn’t see as much turnover at the GM spot as you do!)

    However, once in a while a player comes along where almost everyone agrees has all of the right tools. Whether they’re an old-school scout, a moneyball believer, a new-school moneyball 2.0 GM, or a Bill James sabermetrician; everyone seems to agree that a certain player may have the combination of whatever tools or metrics that they believe in – basically a “can’t miss” player by anyone’s standard. Felix was (is) one of those players. I think that the M’s are fortunate to have another in Triunfel.

    It’s players like these who you definitely have to let develop for a few years before deciding how much they’re worth on the trade market. In this respect, I think that Triunfel would be “untouchable,” at least for now.

  9. jimmylauderdale on November 5th, 2007 6:52 pm

    I think Scott Olsen of the Marlins is one player I would like to see the M’s target. After all his troubles last year Florida may be willing to part with him and he still has alot of upside. Would definately be worth an inquiry as he could just need a change of scenery.

  10. Chris Miller on November 5th, 2007 7:11 pm

    I’d be all over Olsen, depending on the price. He seems like a good fit for Safeco, especailly if he can go back to the pitcher he was before this year. I suspect the whole “F**k David Sampson” thing puts a damper on that pipedream.

  11. Steve Nelson on November 5th, 2007 7:14 pm

    #57 However, once in a while a player comes along where almost everyone agrees has all of the right tools. Whether they’re an old-school scout, a moneyball believer, a new-school moneyball 2.0 GM, or a Bill James sabermetrician; everyone seems to agree that a certain player may have the combination of whatever tools or metrics that they believe in – basically a “can’t miss” player by anyone’s standard. Felix was (is) one of those players. I think that the M’s are fortunate to have another in Triunfel.

    It’s players like these who you definitely have to let develop for a few years before deciding how much they’re worth on the trade market. In this respect, I think that Triunfel would be “untouchable,” at least for now.

    Ryan Anderson was also one of those guys, and was deemed “untouchable”.

  12. Chris Miller on November 5th, 2007 7:16 pm

    Ryan Anderson was a pitcher, so there’s more uncertainty inherently, but yeah, there’s alway that risk of being the next big bust with all prospects.

  13. Chris Miller on November 5th, 2007 7:28 pm

    You have to weigh the risk and reward relative to each other. I’m really not sure of the attrition rate for #1 rated prospects like Triunfel, but it seems to me a fairly large percentage (no idea how many) of them turn into good players. IMO the attrition is the very reason to hang on to them, the more stars you’re trying to develop, the more stars you will develop. Cost controlled star players are more valuable than just about anything.

  14. Jeff Nye on November 5th, 2007 7:28 pm

    You can’t treat every prospect as if they’re going to turn into Ryan Anderson.

  15. RussM on November 5th, 2007 7:30 pm

    My point was that the Mariners view Triunfel’s potential in the future as more valuable than any talent that the Mariners might be able to trade for now. Hence, they have labeled him as untouchable. This, of course, may change in the future. But I think for this winter, the M’s will and should stand pat on any Triunfel trade discussion.

    Obviously hindsight would tell us that any Ryan Anderson, Ben McDonald, Todd VanPopple, or Brien Taylor should have been traded for a Joey Cora in the 1990s…

  16. Chris Miller on November 5th, 2007 7:34 pm

    By “more stars you’re trying to develop, the more stars you will develop”, meaning, trading away a prospect, especially a top prosepct, reduces your chance of having a cheap star. The more chances you have for a star player to develop, the more likely you will have a star player develop. Sometimes the immediate needs outweigh the risk, but you never know when you’ll throw away the next Johan Santana or David Ortiz, not meaning to pick on the Twins, since we’ve done our fair share of that.

  17. Tom on November 5th, 2007 7:44 pm

    #65: To continue what you said at the end of the post. This is exactly why I always say that prospects are nothing more than a piece of paper until they get to the show and you can see what they can do in the highest level of baseball possible. It’s just so hard to tell beforehand when you call up a prospect from the minor leagues whether or not he’ll be a instant star like Junior, a work in progress like Edgar Martinez was in the early years, or if he’s just going to be a complete flameout like The Little Unit was.

    But at the same time, if you just trade every prospect you have for just veterans. Then you are only going to see more and more trades that feature the likes of Jason Varitek for Heathcliff Slocumb or David Ortiz for Terry Mulholland, and all know how those trades in the ’90’s bit the M’s right in the buttocks.

    Really all you can do with a minor league system is draft and develop the best players you can and then once they are good enough to play in the major leagues, give them every opportunity to do that so you can see what kind of player you just called up.

    The Mariners may not need Carlos Trinufel, Yung-Chi Chen or Jose Lopez in a few years, or they might. One or two of those players may become stars with the Mariners, or they could be flameouts.

    But how will you know if you trade them all for “veteran grit” before they get to the show and really get a chance to do anything?

    That’s what I thought. . .

  18. bermanator on November 5th, 2007 8:08 pm

    I don’t think anyone will ever come up with a formula for predicting how much a 17 year-old player is worth now compared to current major leaguers.

    I bet we’ll see one relatively soon — or at least, a model that gives some idea of that.

    I don’t know how accurate it would be with somebody that young because the range of potential outcomes would be greater, but especially for players in the high minors I would guess that there are formulas being developed that weigh the various potential outcomes and their value, aggregate the numbers, multiply it by it a certain weight to correct for any additional risk factor, and come up with a number. It just seems logical that the stats-based front offices would be looking to develop something like that, because the ability to value minor league talent more accurately than your rivals would be a massive competitive advantage.

  19. msb on November 5th, 2007 8:12 pm

    the one floating about today was Lincecum for Crawford & Young +

  20. Carson on November 5th, 2007 9:24 pm

    I tell ya, there really is no better comic value to be had than Jim Street’s mailbag feature on the M’s website. We must take for granted the level of intelligence we see on this blog, as even some of the really bad ideas can’t top this one:

    Knowing that the Mariners’ starting pitching fell apart toward the end of the season, I’ve heard rumors that C.C. Sabathia will be a free agent next year. What would be the probability of getting Sabathia for Jeff Weaver or Horacio Ramirez?
    — Josh B., Fullerton, Calif.

    Seriously? Bearman gets bailed out of worst idea of the day.

  21. Steve Nelson on November 5th, 2007 9:37 pm

    The point with Ryan Anderson is that there really shouldn’t be anything as an “untouchable” prospect. Every prospect is suspect until they have actually demonstrated they can perform at the MLB level. Until they do that, their future performance profile needs to be discounted, and the further away from the big leagues and younger they are, the larger the discount that needs to be applied.

    At the time David Arias was traded for Dave Hollins, he was only a prospect whereas the Mariners had need for a third baseman. Setting aside the issue of whether Hollins was an intelligent solution to that need, there was nothing wrong with trading a prospect such as Arias (slugger with a big hole in his swing and marginal defensive skills) to plug a hole on the MLB roster, even though the player acquired might only be around for that season.

  22. msb on November 5th, 2007 9:49 pm

    #70– I entertained myself by asking Street about the all-B infield, and he missed the point of the question, but mananged to answer the mis-read question incorrectly.

  23. Jeff Nye on November 5th, 2007 9:53 pm

    Any player should be judged and valued based on what you can evaluate about their skills.

    There is no good reason to arbitrarily value a player less because they are in the minor leagues.

    Ryan Anderson was a flameout of near-historic levels; saying of every prospect “but they could turn into Ryan Anderson!” really doesn’t tell you anything useful.

  24. Steve Nelson on November 5th, 2007 11:12 pm

    Any player should be judged and valued based on what you can evaluate about their skills.

    There is no good reason to arbitrarily value a player less because they are in the minor leagues.

    Of course there’s a discount for a minor leaguer. Potential is not the same as performance. Consider two player whose skill sets evaluate equally. Player A has successfully made it to MLB and demonstrated performance that indicates he is one or two years away from realizing his projected potential. Player B, with identical potential and skill set, has yet to successfully complete AA ball.

    Despite having equal skill sets, Player A ought to be – and will be – valued more highly than Player B.

  25. Thoan on November 5th, 2007 11:56 pm

    Getting back to the original post:

    Sexson for Griffey, straight up. I don’t want Griffey here, but I want Sexson gone even more.

  26. Trev on November 6th, 2007 12:47 am

    The Reds have Scott Hatteberg, Adam Dunn, and Joey Votto.

    Richie makes $14 million next year. Griffey’s contract contains so much deferred money it equates to $9.2-9.3 million for the last year of his contract ($4 million buyout on $16.5 million 2009 option).

    So the Reds make their 1B/DH logjam worse and take on salary all to acquire a poor man’s Adam Dunn. Who they hate.

  27. thefin190 on November 6th, 2007 12:56 am

    70 & 72 – While we are commenting on the ignorance of people unaware of the USSMariner, I might want to add a quote from a Mariners’s fan on foxsports.com

    izzyluvfootball
    11/3/2007
    11:09 AM (report inappropriate content)

    Once again, the Seattle Mariners prove their ignorance by letting a good hitter and player go, and keeping a BLEEP coach. Why is seattle so intent on adam jones being the outfielder he hasn’t proven himself at all! here we are ready to make a push for the division title and we immediatly take a step backwards. This is so frustrating.

    Wow, I just shook my head reading that.

  28. Sports on a Schtick on November 6th, 2007 1:18 am

    I would LOVE for Seattle to be so intent on AJ being an outfielder.

  29. cebo04 on November 6th, 2007 6:00 am

    I agree #78. That needs to happen!

    Do you think we could get Dunn from the Reds for Sexson, a prospect and some cash? He is in the last year of his contract as is Sexton and if they feel Votto needed some more time Sexson could certainly be somewhat successful in Cincy. On top of that Dunn would give us the left handed bat that we need in the middle of that lineup. I know he is somewhat of a defensive liability in the outfield but could we develop him more at first base and then sign him to a long term contract? I’m sure it would take a lot but for a 40 hr guy who is younger than 30, it may be worth it.

    As to the talk of Truinfel, that’s what I was hoping to learn and I think I have a better idea of our feeling on him. I really wanted to know if we think this is the impact player that everyone seems to be making him out to be. I’ll be honest, if he is untouchable, I hope he becomes an absolute stud!

    I like the idea of Olsen from Florida. It probably wont take too terribly much. I like the idea of moving a veteran (like Ibanez, though I know they wouldn’t) because you know that Florida is always looking for someone to be a leader on that young team and on top of that their outfield has been weak in recent years.

  30. jimmylauderdale on November 6th, 2007 9:14 am

    I think the Marlins are pretty happy with their corner OF’s, Hermida and Willingham. They’d be looking for a CF, catcher, or pitching, I imagine.

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.