It’s Done

Dave · February 8, 2008 at 12:40 pm · Filed Under Mariners 

Press conference at two. Adam Jones, George Sherrill, Chris Tillman, Tony Butler, and Kam Mickolio for Erik Bedard in the most anti-climactic trade in the history of mankind.

So, now that’s official, and practically everything that could be written about this trade has been, I’d like to offer up one last question to those who think the Mariners have done well this off-season in revamping their pitching staff. Assuming that Erik Bedard and Carlos Silva both stay healthy and make their 34 starts, what do you expect the Mariners record to be in those 68 games?

36-32? 38-30? 40-28? I’d imagine that it’s almost certainly going to be somewhere in that range.

The Mariners record in the 68 games in 2008 that were started by Jeff Weaver, Horacio Ramirez, Cha Seung Baek, and Ryan Feierabend? 32-36.

Yep, for all the talk about how terrible the back end of the Mariners rotation was last year (and in terms of individual performance, it was), the Mariners were a .470 club when their #4/#5 starters were on the hill. Even if you believe they’ll be a .560 club with Bedard and Silva on the hill, and if you believe that neither will miss a start all season, then you’re expecting the team to go 38-30 in those 68 games. That’s a 6 win improvement.

(Bedard + Silva) – (Weaver + Ramirez + Feierabend + Baek) = 6 wins, if you assume that no one gets hurt, everyone else on the roster plays at their ’07 level, Wilkerson = Guillen, and losing Sherrill has no impact on the bullpen.

Yep, this trade still sucks.

Comments

316 Responses to “It’s Done”

  1. terry on February 8th, 2008 12:44 pm

    I’m already past the suckiness of this thing.

    It will be fun watching both Felix and Bedard with Putz waiting in the pen.

  2. LoydKristmis on February 8th, 2008 12:45 pm

    At least we can all stop frantically looking for the final word on the trade. My productivity at work just doubled for next week over the past 2.

    Minor victories… we have to take the minor victories.

  3. Jay R. on February 8th, 2008 12:47 pm

    F**k.

    34-34. If they are lucky. Doesn’t matter who is pitching when you can’t play defense or score runs.

    God this team is so frustrating to love. I haven’t been this unexcited for spring training since the Dick Williams days.

  4. katal on February 8th, 2008 12:47 pm

    Why do you hate the Mariners?
    (dripping with sarcasm)

  5. coasty141 on February 8th, 2008 12:48 pm

    Dave, What do you attribute Bedard’s increase of K’s per 9ins in 2007? Is it sustainable?

  6. jimbob on February 8th, 2008 12:50 pm

    [ponies]

  7. shortbus on February 8th, 2008 12:50 pm

    I can think of a few similar trades to this one involving top-notch starting pitchers (Langston to Montreal, Johnson to Houston, Colon to the Angels)…but I’m no baseball historian. Has the team receiving the “proven veteran” ever come out on top in these deals?

  8. MedicineHat on February 8th, 2008 12:51 pm

    hmmm…so what were the #2 and #3 pitchers records for the Mariners last year since that is who these two are replacing. I’d say comparing Washburn’s expectations and # 5 or Silva and #5 to last years 4 & 5, then using Bedard and Silva or Bedard and Washburn to the #2 & #3 would give you a more accurate +/-.

    Felix
    Bedard
    Silva
    Washburn
    Whoever

  9. tanner829 on February 8th, 2008 12:52 pm

    [violating button terms]

  10. ctillisc on February 8th, 2008 12:53 pm

    [find a keyboard with working shift buttons before you post (there should be one below enter and one below caps lock). Thank you]

  11. IdahoInvader on February 8th, 2008 12:54 pm

    Those are indeed some enlightening numbers. I wonder though, how many games HoRam and Weaver made COMPLETELY unwinnable. Games that if they even had a mediocre start we could’ve won, but ended up w/ NO chance. Sure seemed like there were a lot of those, but I could be wrong.

  12. Xteve X on February 8th, 2008 12:54 pm

    Jesus, I seem to have come to the P-I board by mistake judging from the comments on this thread.

  13. ahhruff on February 8th, 2008 12:56 pm

    I wonder how many games Sherrill saved with him awesomeness.

  14. ctillisc on February 8th, 2008 12:56 pm

    [ponies]

  15. Jay R. on February 8th, 2008 12:57 pm

    I am starting to understand why the Mariners are profitable each year. The vast majority of their fans don’t understand baseball and are just happy to see the pretty uniforms and the Moose.

    I won’t pay for mediocrity, especially when most of the hope for the future just got shipped across the country. Oh well. Beer is too expensive at Safeco anyway.

  16. Tek Jansen on February 8th, 2008 12:57 pm

    #6 — Jeff Weaver was not swapped for Cy Young candidate. The M’s chose not to resign Weaver. The M’s acquired a Cy Young candidate for a good, young starting RF, a great lefty reliever, and three pitching prospects.

    #7 — You probably mean Colon to the Expos.

  17. earinc on February 8th, 2008 12:57 pm

    Let’s just hope Bedard has an amazing year, wins the Cy Young, and gives us something to root for. We’ll miss ya, Mr. Jones.

    “Because something is happening here
    But you don’t know what it is
    Do you, Mister Jones?” – Bob Dylan

  18. Evan on February 8th, 2008 12:59 pm

    (Bedard + Silva) – (Weaver + Ramirez + Feierabend + Baek) = 6 wins, if you assume that no one gets hurt, everyone else on the roster plays at their ‘07 level, Wilkerson = Guillen, and losing Sherrill has no impact on the bullpen.

    So that puts us at, what… 88 wins?

    Welcome to last year.

  19. ctillisc on February 8th, 2008 1:02 pm

    [ponies]

  20. meloyellow15 on February 8th, 2008 1:02 pm

    Dave,
    Is that really a fair way to evaluate the trade? By using wins to evaluate the upgrade aren’t you essentially throwing out last years overperformance of Pythagorean wins and saying we could do it again. In which case, this trade would make us a 94 win team assuming equal offense? That logic doesn’t seem right to me. Also about at what win level would you put the current roster?

  21. joser on February 8th, 2008 1:03 pm

    I still think it’s a bad trade, but at this point I’m just glad it’s over. Now I can look forward to two out of five pitching matchups at least (please stay healthy, please stay healthy…) And I won’t have the frustration of looking at balls drop in the outfield knowing that Adam Jones is mouldering on the bench (or in Tacoma). I’ll still have the frustration of looking at balls drop in the outfield, of course. But I’m already used to that.

    I wonder if they’ll ever come clean on what the holdup was about. I posted this story in another thread, but:

    As a kid I had a friend who had a dog. This was an old, old dog. Older than my friend. It was mostly blind, and mostly crippled, and it mostly just lay around the house. But every once in the while some youthful canine memory or instinct would fire up in that addled brain, and it would head down to the basement. Down there was some old, ugly furniture from the 50s and 60s, including a heavily-upholstered ottoman. Somehow, in what passed for its doggy mind, this crushed-velvet footstool looked like a bitch in heat; and so, with more enthusiasm than ability, that old hound would try to mount that piece of furniture.

    Watching this deal unfold is like watching that dog, with its arthritic spine and hip displasia and general lack of coordination, try to consummate its deal with the footstool: it would be comical if it wasn’t so unpleasant to contemplate, let alone watch; no matter what happens, neither party is going to be satisfied; and those of us who are mere observers have nothing to look forward to except dealing with resulting smell and mess.

    How many days until “pitchers and catchers report”? Bedard has a long drive from Ontario to Arizona.

  22. nickpdx on February 8th, 2008 1:03 pm

    While I’m disappointed in seeing AJ go, I’m excited to root for Felix and Bedard to have a showdown for strikeout king of the A.L. The departure of Santana for the senior circuit helps a lot in this department.

  23. Sports on a Schtick on February 8th, 2008 1:05 pm

    The M’s and O’s took two weeks to get this done. Shaq’s ass passed a physical in half a day. Whatever.

  24. gwangung on February 8th, 2008 1:08 pm

    Come on, if you wanna say something, say something intelligent.

    For example, “getting the top lefty in the AL is good, but losing your starting RF, your top lefty reliever and three of your top four pitching prospects is a bigger loss. Focussing on only one end is half-assed.”

  25. Eastside Crank on February 8th, 2008 1:11 pm

    I am willing to wait and watch good young players develop. I do not care about rent a players that come and go every 2-3 years. Seattle does not have a core group of position players that will put them in playoff contention for the next few years. They also do not seem to have a plan to develop one. Their big strength has been their bullpen and that has now been decimated by trading Soriano last year and now Sherrill. You still need a bridge between the starters and Putz. The Angels will have even an easier time this year dominating the division and then Oakland will be restocked and making their bid if and when the Angels fade. If Bavasi is not willing to keep the minor league gems he signs then what is the point of keeping Bavasi?

  26. Desmond on February 8th, 2008 1:11 pm

    Enough with the holier than thou attitude. USSM is a great site, but believing the average reader to be superior in baseball knowledge than the average Mariner fan is BS.

    I started off being slightly nervous of this deal, but certainly not near as much as the majority here. As time went on though- and I gathered as much information as I possibly could via blogs, articles & the radio- well my anxiety diminished. But today, after hearing the deal was made an hour ago, I actually pumped my fist and got excited about it. Bring it on baby! I can’t wait for spring training.

  27. gwangung on February 8th, 2008 1:13 pm

    Seattle does not have a core group of position players that will put them in playoff contention for the next few years. They also do not seem to have a plan to develop one.

    I think that’s a fair observation. I thought the usual way to compete was to grow them yourself and add key free agents LATER, like the Atlanta Braves. What is our core here of home grown talent?

  28. Jeff Nye on February 8th, 2008 1:14 pm

    Jesus, I seem to have come to the P-I board by mistake judging from the comments on this thread.

    The ponies agree, and as you can see, they are unhappy.

    I cannot promise that they will not eat any further comments that have nothing more to contribute than “haha u ussm whinerz!”

    You know how ponies can get.

  29. ctillisc on February 8th, 2008 1:14 pm

    [ponies]

  30. terry on February 8th, 2008 1:14 pm

    Shaq’s ass passed a physical in half a day.

    Being in the middle of your season probably creates a heightened sense of urgency.

  31. bubblegumcrisis on February 8th, 2008 1:15 pm

    What’s done is done… judging by how he was treated last year it doesn’t take a genius to see that the FO didn’t value Jones the way we do. Sorry to see him go and I wish him all the luck in the world.

    With that said will we start having “Happy Bedard Days”?

  32. Bernoulli on February 8th, 2008 1:15 pm

    What I find interesting about this deal is that, for once, the statistics aren’t really the subject of the debate. We all agree what Bedard could do (assuming he stays healthy). We all (more or less) agree what Jones will do, three years from now.

    Where the numbers fail us is the debate on whether it’s worth it. The Mariners currently have 25-1 odds of winning the World Series. If trading Jones and crew made those odds 2-1, we’d all do it in a heartbeat. If it made them 24-1, I doubt anyone would. So where’s the cutoff?

  33. gwangung on February 8th, 2008 1:15 pm

    Enough with the holier than thou attitude. USSM is a great site, but believing the average reader to be superior in baseball knowledge than the average Mariner fan is BS.

    Really? You can demonstrate that?

  34. bubblegumcrisis on February 8th, 2008 1:16 pm

    What’s done is done… judging by how he was treated last year it didn’t take a genius to see that the FO didn’t value Jones the way we did. Sorry to see him go and I wish him all the luck in the world.

    With that said will we start having “Happy Bedard Days”?

  35. Patrick33 on February 8th, 2008 1:17 pm

    In those 32 games won by our back end starters last year, I wonder how many of them required 4+ innings of work from our pen. This deal isn’t just about bolstering the starting rotation. It will help a bullpen that got worn out last year from lack of quality starts.

    I understand people’s dislike of the trade and it sucks not getting the oppurtunity to watch AJ progress, but I still think it’s a good deal. I also realize that since I like the trade [moderators hate metacommentary. Stop it.]

  36. hub on February 8th, 2008 1:17 pm

    So how long until the M’s FO says, ‘Gee…we sure need to upgrade our offense.’

  37. bergamot on February 8th, 2008 1:17 pm

    USSM is a great site, but believing the average reader to be superior in baseball knowledge than the average Mariner fan is BS.

    The average Mariner fan thinks Raul Ibanez is a great fielder and the M’s should execute more sacrifice bunts.

    More recently, the average Mariner fan thinks the M’s just got one of the two best pitchers in the AL for a handful of prospects.

    So, yeah.

  38. Joe on February 8th, 2008 1:18 pm

    Well, on the plus side bullpen help is the easiest place to find cheap talent — and Bavasi has even shown some ability in that regard. Whether that’s a real ability, a blind squirrel and nuts, or an indication of just how easy it is (especially when you have no choice because all your budget is tied up in overpaid starters and bats) I have no idea. I just hope it continues.

    Shaq’s ass passed a physical in half a day.
    But how long did it take for the rest of him? (A quarter of a day per cheek sounds about right)

  39. ctillisc on February 8th, 2008 1:18 pm

    [you still haven't located your shift keys?]

  40. Tanner Boyle on February 8th, 2008 1:18 pm

    I am looking forward to the Jeff Clement for Coco Crisp or Gary Matthew Jr. trade.

  41. PositivePaul on February 8th, 2008 1:19 pm

    2008 Seattle Mariners: Come Drink Our 1-2 Punch!

  42. Jeff Nye on February 8th, 2008 1:19 pm

    Personally, I’m happy for Adam Jones, because it always seemed clear to me that the organization never really had much respect for him.

    In Baltimore, he’ll get to play everyday, and hopefully get to have the great career we’d all hoped he’d have in a Mariners uniform.

    Mr. Bedard, welcome, and please don’t take the fact that we don’t like this trade as a slight against you; we still think you’re awesome, and will root for you every time you take the hill.

  43. pensive on February 8th, 2008 1:19 pm

    Ok now that is done. I believe he will be a Mariner for at least 3 more years (plus the two. I understand that doesn’t change the insane price paid now, but hopefully the horrible decision will be a bit mitigated.

    Doesn’t really help. On the other hand AJones may have better chance to flourish. Oh crap impossible to feel better about trade. So much to give in return. Just can’t comprehend what Front Office knows that makes this reasonable. Help Please.

  44. Xteve X on February 8th, 2008 1:19 pm

    IMO the deal’s only good from the Ms perspective if they can confirm an extension with Bedard. Two years of Bedard for what the Ms gave up isn’t enough. Their corner outfield defense still stinks, and the offense is also heavily reliant on Vidro and Sexson not brutally sucking.

  45. ctillisc on February 8th, 2008 1:19 pm

    [learn to capitalise]

  46. Tom on February 8th, 2008 1:20 pm

    This trade doesn’t help this year, but I still think an offensive makeover for this team before ’09 could lift us over the top in the AL West at least.

    It sucks to see Adam Jones go and I don’t necessarily agree with the trade because of the young talent we are giving up; but at least we get an ace pitcher in his prime back for him instead of Heathcliff Slocumb and at least we get him for probably 5 years unlike when Montreal traded the farm to Cleveland for 4 months of Bartolo Colon. And plus, if you were going to trade Adam, an elite player like Bedard (should he stay healthy) is the kind of guy you get to give up an Adam Jones for.

    I have a feeling know though where we are at is that last year we had 88 wins by semi-fluke, now we are close to being a legitimate 85-88 win team realistically with both Bedard and Silva in the rotation instead of Weaver and HoRam. Too bad that’s not nearly enough to beat the Angels in the West this year.

    Also too if this team does improve or at least not fall below .500, we are assured of at least one more off-season of Bavasi because he managed to land a future Cy Young winner quite possibly and created that Todd Turner patented buzz around the Mariners (barf).

    Not much we can do though but sing ourselves that Monty Python standard: “Always Look On The Bright Side Of Life.”

  47. msb on February 8th, 2008 1:21 pm

    boy, gone for an hour and obviously I missed some really good [ponies].

    Even if you believe they’ll be a .560 club with Bedard and Silva on the hill

    but Bedard is easily a 18-20 game winner. A guy on the radio says so.

  48. Sports on a Schtick on February 8th, 2008 1:22 pm

    One or way or the other…

    The 2008 Seattle Mariners: hoisted by their own Bedard.

  49. Jeff Nye on February 8th, 2008 1:22 pm

    Also, guys, as you can see, the server is not too happy right now.

    Please, be kind with the refreshing.

  50. gwangung on February 8th, 2008 1:22 pm

    Where the numbers fail us is the debate on whether it’s worth it. The Mariners currently have 25-1 odds of winning the World Series. If trading Jones and crew made those odds 2-1, we’d all do it in a heartbeat. If it made them 24-1, I doubt anyone would. So where’s the cutoff?

    This is a good pount, but I don’t think the numbers fail us here. The numbers can help us project the odds, and these odds lie in a range of probabilities–and that’s all they ever do.

    It’s that by the numbers I’ve seen, the projections fall much closer to the 24 or 23 to 1. The front office is acting like their projections run closer to 2 or 3 to 1—I want to know how they figure on that.

  51. Adam S on February 8th, 2008 1:23 pm

    Enough with the holier than thou attitude. USSM is a great site, but believing the average reader to be superior in baseball knowledge than the average Mariner fan is BS.
    It’s pretty clearly true that the average reader here is superior in baseball knowledge to the average Mariners fan. The average Mariners fan goes to a handful of games each year watches a few on TV and has a rough idea if they team is doing great, so-so, or lousy. They can’t name the starting lineup, much less understand why the team is losing despite its great pitching or have any clue about good/bad defense. It’s not so much that we’re high and mighty here, it’s that the average baseball fan is generally clueless.

    That said, in this writer’s opinion Dave and Derek are in the top 1% of Mariners fans in terms of (Mariners) baseball knowledge.

  52. Tek Jansen on February 8th, 2008 1:23 pm

    #43 — I don’t think the deal’s value has anyting to do with an extension. The M’s are gambling the Bedard helps them these next two years, and that winning in ’08 and/or ’09 offsets the the haul of talent that they sent over to the O’s.

  53. SpokaneMsFan on February 8th, 2008 1:24 pm

    God bless those radio guys, I would never know what was going on if it wasn’t for them!

  54. Graham on February 8th, 2008 1:24 pm

    I will not show any mercy whatsoever to posters who refuse to obey basic rules of grammar. You have been warned (several times, actually).

  55. ctillisc on February 8th, 2008 1:25 pm

    [no]

  56. Sports on a Schtick on February 8th, 2008 1:25 pm

    at least we get him for probably 5 years

    That’s ludicrous. The Mariners have Bedard for two years. They’re not guaranteed his services beyond that nor can Erik decide to terminate his current contract.

  57. terry on February 8th, 2008 1:26 pm

    For example, “getting the top lefty in the AL is good, but losing your starting RF, your top lefty reliever and three of your top four pitching prospects is a bigger loss. Focussing on only one end is half-assed.”

    The kids aren’t that painful to lose. I’d trade them and their clones for Bedard. It’s Jones and Sherrill that take the luster off of this deal. The Ms are better with Bedard. They just aren’t Bedard better.

  58. stevenboise on February 8th, 2008 1:28 pm

    Best case? Bedard wins the Cy Young. We have a great season, win the West. Lose, again, in the ALCS. Bavasi gets the key to the city, hailed as a hero.

    Fast forward two years………Bedard leaves via Free Agency. Jones is MVP in Baltimore. We finish last. Bavasi moves on to another team. We go back to square one (ie 2002) and start over again dreaming for another 2008 season.

    What do we get as fans? Bavasi is gone, but we’re all still here. Thanks Bavasi for thinking short term and about your career at the sacrifice of the long term fans who love this team.

  59. msb on February 8th, 2008 1:29 pm

    so does this mean Ichiro is going to learn how to swear in French, too?

  60. Tom on February 8th, 2008 1:30 pm

    #55: They won’t talk about an extension now, but this time next year, the Mariners would be stupid not to talk to him and I’d be willing to bet they’ll offer a boatload of money for him.

  61. gwangung on February 8th, 2008 1:32 pm

    The kids aren’t that painful to lose. I’d trade them and their clones for Bedard. It’s Jones and Sherrill that take the luster off of this deal. The Ms are better with Bedard. They just aren’t Bedard better.

    Like that statement–they aren’t Bedard better. That’s something people aren’t realizing.

    If we kept Jones, but gave up Sherrill and the kids, I’d be OK with it.

    If we gave away Jones and had a prospect on a level in between him and Wlad, I’d be OK with it.

    It’s giving up the present AND the future that bothers me. I don’t believe that Wilkerson can equal Jones’ production this year…and there are few options for next year. That’s the irritating thing about it…

  62. msb on February 8th, 2008 1:36 pm

    [Oh my god. Well], here is an example of your casual Mariner fan:

    “Adam Jones has a primadonna attitude who doesn’t run the ball out, and doesn’t seem to care. They need to platoon Mike Morse, he’s a hustler who’ll get to the ball.”

  63. Tom on February 8th, 2008 1:36 pm

    #60: “. . .and there are few options for next year.”

    Jeff Clement? Bryan LaHair? Carlos Trinufel? Yung-Chi Chen? Wlad? Jeremy Reed? Mike Morse? We should have plenty of options next year to improve the team in-house, thank god. It just sucks that the best player out of all of them is in Baltimore right now.

  64. eponymous coward on February 8th, 2008 1:38 pm

    I expect ponies in my season ticket package.

  65. Desmond on February 8th, 2008 1:38 pm

    50

    Main Entry: fan
    Function: noun
    Etymology: probably short for fanatic
    Date: 1682
    1 : an enthusiastic devotee (as of a sport or a performing art) usually as a spectator
    2 : an ardent admirer or enthusiast (as of a celebrity or a pursuit)

    Your comments about the average Mariners “fan” is not what I what I had in mind when I argued against the average USSM being superior. A fan knows his team’s lineup. Someone who identifies with the ditzy chick on that Mariners radio commercial is not a fan: “I’m a fairly new Mariners fan, still learning names… terminoligy… How about that Feliz Hernandez, huh?”

    So back to what I was saying earlier, perhaps I should’ve called it PS (Pony Sh*t), rather than BS.

  66. Graham on February 8th, 2008 1:41 pm

    Why do people find HTML so hard?

  67. eponymous coward on February 8th, 2008 1:41 pm

    We should have plenty of options next year to improve the team in-house, thank god.

    Um, none of them realistically can be expected to match Guillen’s performance, which I would argue that Jones could do. Wlad might have a SHOT at it by midyear (Clement’s problem is he’s a 1B or DH, realistically, though he might match him offensively), but I wouldn’t bet the mortgage money on it.

    An OF of Wilkerson/Ichiro/Ibanez isn’t really pumping me up, either.

  68. gwangung on February 8th, 2008 1:41 pm

    Jeff Clement? Bryan LaHair? Carlos Trinufel? Yung-Chi Chen? Wlad? Jeremy Reed? Mike Morse? We should have plenty of options next year to improve the team in-house, thank god. It just sucks that the best player out of all of them is in Baltimore right now.

    Clement, yes. Wlad, maybe. But I think you’re wildly overestimating the talent level and readiness of the others. Also, those are position player, not pitchers; you want a mix of both coming up. And you DO want multiple prospects to remain flexible–right now, I’m pretty sure we won’t be using our farm system for trade fodder for a couple years.

  69. Tom on February 8th, 2008 1:42 pm

    #66: I’m talking about ’09.

  70. Ruminations on February 8th, 2008 1:42 pm

    I’ve resigned myself to the idea that the Mariners pretty much had to take this chance when it came along. I just would have prefered that it wasn’t so costly. It seems to be universally agreed that the package they sent is far superior than what Santana fetched.
    But the sense I have is that M’s fans have seen no reason to expect an improved team up until now. Losing Guillen hurt and Silva didn’t generate any excitement. Let’s face it. The Mariners are one of only 10 teams out of the 30 that have not been to the playoffs since 2001. And the new stadium effect has pretty much worn off. So they are at risk of losing fans in droves if their record doesn’t improve from year to year. And, of course, Bavasi’s and McLaren’s jobs depend on it. It’s pretty hard to dismiss them when the record, whether a good indicator or not, improves but very easy if it does not.
    It’s important to think about the future but in many ways the future has to be now for the M’s. When the Athletics have their new stadium, Billy Beane will be even harder to compete with. And as the Twins and other teams get stadiums, the M’s will slide farther and farther back in terms of economic competitiveness. If they don’t make the playoffs now, I don’t think their odds will be any better in the future even if they retained the players they sent to Baltimore. And if they collapse in a few years, like in 2004, well that is the fate of mid-market teams.

  71. Tom on February 8th, 2008 1:43 pm

    #67: I mentioned the position players just because that’s the part of this team that will have to be made over next.

  72. msb on February 8th, 2008 1:44 pm

    thank you for the edit.

    that call was followed by:
    “we can get a hundred wins with this team”

  73. gwangung on February 8th, 2008 1:45 pm

    Your comments about the average Mariners “fan” is not what I what I had in mind when I argued against the average USSM being superior.

    Then you’re being just as holier-than-thou.

    Snicker.

  74. bakomariner on February 8th, 2008 1:47 pm

    This hurts on so many levels…we will probably lose both Baek and Dickey now, unless they are both on the 25 man after ST…I believe Baek is out of options and Dickey is a rule 5… They’ve already said that Morrow won’t go back to Tacoma, so his career is a starter is now pretty much done…Horacio got a new contract, so he’ll be in the pen for sure…and they’ve already commited to a 7 man pen…

    Horacio
    Green
    Morrow
    Eric O
    Lowe?????
    Rhodes/Reitsma/Dickey/Baek
    Putz

    And let’s not start on the offense and defense…balls dropping all over the outfield…Sexson hacking, Wilks breaking, Vidro being TUUUUUURBOrific…

    The ONLY thing improved is the rotation…(and if you say “Pitching wins championships” you need to be put down) every other aspect of the team and the future, has taken a HUGE step back…

    Get ready for a LOOOOONG season…

  75. elkboy3 on February 8th, 2008 1:47 pm

    #7

    How about Kevin Brown to the Padres before the 1998 season for their #1 prospect, Derek Lee? The Padres improved like twenty games and went to the World Series. I don’t know what else the Pads did that off-season to improve that dramatically, but it seems like them acquiring an ace pitcher may have been part of that jump.

    Maybe? I’m just trying to be optimistic here.

  76. Graham on February 8th, 2008 1:49 pm

    The ONLY thing improved is the rotation…

    The defense has too, due to a combination of regression and losing Guillen.

  77. Borat4President on February 8th, 2008 1:50 pm

    Bedard on SI.com

    “”It seems like a great situation for me,” Bedard told SI.com. “They’re a winning team and they’re not in a rebuilding stage. King Felix and I should be able to do some things at the top of the rotation.”

    Bedard expressed to SI.com a fondness for the Emerald City. “I love the city, other than it raining a little too much,” he said. “I can’t wait to see what it’s all about. If I could have picked where I’d be traded, [Seattle] would have been one of my top choices.”

    Can’t wait for the season to start!

  78. Desmond on February 8th, 2008 1:52 pm

    65 – because I lack your intelegence.

    So what’s the secret? One of the mods must have lended me a hand, correcting my HTML blunder.

    Snicker

  79. SpokaneMsFan on February 8th, 2008 1:52 pm

    Ruminations @ 69 – You don’t think their chances would be better in the future if they kept these players? Is there a good reason to think promising young players, especially Jones wouldn’t help the team in the future? Heck Bedard said he was testing free agency in 2 years no matter what, who’s to say we couldn’t land him then while Jones is hitting his stride and some of the young arms are ready for the bigs.

  80. Graham on February 8th, 2008 1:53 pm

    That mod would be me. Incidentally, it’s ‘lent’.

  81. swwashfan on February 8th, 2008 1:55 pm

    A little perspective for those who don’t limit themselves to USSM. According to Bill James here are the top three candidates to pitch a no-hitter:
    1. Scott Kazmir, 24%
    2. Erik Bedard, 23%
    3. Jake Peavy, 20%
    The Padres are going to be at Safeco on May 16, 17, 18 so there is a possibility of a Bedard v. Peavy pitching match up. Cry babies need not get in line for tickets.

    Here is Joe Posnanski’s take on Eric Bedard from his February 6, 2008 posting:
    Erik Bedard. My favorite Erik Bedard story so far was hearing Brian Bannister talk about facing him in spring training. Banny — what a guy. He takes a lot of pride in his hitting, and he said he was facing Bedard and the guy was throwing serious gas. Banny says that what makes Bedard’s gas so much more effective than most is that he hides the ball really well so that when you’re swinging, it’s ON YOU before you even know what happened.

    Anyway, Banny’s telling the story and he says (I’m paraphrasing), “So Bedard throws me a pitch, and I’m right on it. I mean I’m right on it. And I hit a hard line drive — I’m right on it, this is the best I can do — and it goes foul over the first -base dugout. And then I’m like, ‘Uh, OK, I don’t think I’m hitting this guy.”

  82. bakomariner on February 8th, 2008 1:55 pm

    The defense is worse because Ibanez will only get older and worse and the loss of Guillen should have been filled by the HUGE upgrade with Jones…Wilks is probably a push with Guillen…better range, worse arm…so in whole, the defense is worse…

  83. Graham on February 8th, 2008 1:56 pm

    The defense is worse because Ibanez will only get older and worse and the loss of Guillen should have been filled by the HUGE upgrade with Jones…Wilks is probably a push with Guillen…better range, worse arm…so in whole, the defense is worse…

    No.

  84. Bender on February 8th, 2008 1:58 pm

    I was at dinner with my season ticket holding family last night and they had the following to say about the trade:

    1. How many guys have we heard about being the next A-rod or Griffey that didn’t pan out. We need to win now not wait for someone who will never develop.

    2. Outfielders are a dime a dozen, Ace pitchers are impossible to find.

    This is a window into the mind of the casual fan. They think Jones is just hype who will probably never be good, and that we can easily find outfielders so this trade is awesome.

  85. Graham on February 8th, 2008 1:58 pm

    A little perspective for those who don’t limit themselves to USSM.

    Oh please. Do you honestly believe that the USS Mariner authors think Bedard isn’t one of the best pitchers on the planet?

  86. man on soapbox on February 8th, 2008 1:59 pm

    Dave,

    Just a quick question. Wouldn’t we get more than a mere +6 from Bedard and Silva over last year’s scrubs since the addition of Bedard will effectively move Washburn and Batista down in the rotation which means they will be going against weaker pitchers than they were last year? Now, of course this means Batista will have to replicate last year’s performance, which is somewhat doubtful.

    Also, in a lot of those HoRam and Weaver losses we were being blown out early and went to our bullpen in early innings, both Bedard and Silva seem to be able to at least put in solid innings, which may not translate into Ws per se, helps the team tremendously down the stretch.

    Believe me, I am no fan of this trade. We gave up FAR more talent for Bedard than the Mets gave up for a better, more reliable ace, but I won’t lie: I’m excited for this off season and season. If we could somehow get an actual DH and if Wlad can put up decent numbers I think we’ll be very competitive in the division. Several years down the line… well that’s a different story.

  87. DAMellen on February 8th, 2008 1:59 pm

    The USS Mariner authors have said numerous times that they think Bedard is one of the best pitchers on the planet, but he doesn’t make the Mariners a contender and he cost way too much. The end.

  88. gwangung on February 8th, 2008 2:00 pm

    Wilks is probably a push with Guillen…better range, worse arm…so in whole, the defense is worse…

    No, that’s an improvement. I think range is 80-80% of outfield defense.(Though, to be sure, it matters how much worse or better a player is….)

  89. bakomariner on February 8th, 2008 2:00 pm

    82- Ichiro is the same…Gullien and Wilks are a push…Ibanez will be worse than last year…Jones should be in right…so trading him away hurt the already terrible defense…

  90. Rain Delay on February 8th, 2008 2:01 pm

    83 – Ouch. I’m listening to Dibble and Kennedy on XM and there are all kinds of callers phoning in about the trade.

    The consensus is that Jones wasn’t ‘really’ the center piece to the deal it was GS52. Not to mention both Dibble and Kennedy are on the bash Jones – lift up GS52 bandwagon.

    I could keep going, but it’s getting painful to listen too. It might need to take a nap….

  91. AK4Sea on February 8th, 2008 2:02 pm

    Here’s my mindset:

    Since Jones still has a few years of development before he reaches the, “I can’t believe we traded him!” stage of his career, and since the minor leaguers are still a few years away, this is the honeymoon phase.

    I won’t miss a single Bedard start this year – if I can help it – and I’m going to enjoy the heck out of him. We can’t change what’s done, and catchers and pitchers report soon, so I’m going to drink the kool-aid and start proclaiming the 2008 Mariners as division champs! WHOOO!!!

    Let’s take a ride on that pink pony! (sexual euphemism, much?)

  92. msb on February 8th, 2008 2:02 pm

    thank you, Graham.

  93. Graham on February 8th, 2008 2:02 pm

    82- Ichiro is the same…Gullien and Wilks are a push…Ibanez will be worse than last year…Jones should be in right…so trading him away hurt the already terrible defense…

    Of course losing Jones hurts the defense. You’re a) just forgetting to regress things and b) not realising how awful Guillen was.

  94. bigred on February 8th, 2008 2:03 pm

    I’d like to know where the M’s are with their payroll now. Do they have anything left in their reserves to make any additional moves?

  95. Desmond on February 8th, 2008 2:04 pm

    79- what can I say, I received the majority of my elementary education in Arkansas…. and I ain’t ever recovered.

  96. msb on February 8th, 2008 2:04 pm

    #88– doesn’t Dibble has a tattoo on his ass illustrating just how wrong he was in predicting Ichiro’s major league career?

  97. jephdood on February 8th, 2008 2:04 pm

    Dammit. It’s even worse than I thought. Talk about giving away EVERYBODY. Way to go, Bill. Ass.

  98. Ruminations on February 8th, 2008 2:04 pm

    78. I meant that their chance of making the playoffs in 3 or 4 years if they kept those players will not be better than it is this season, not then. As they slide further into have-not purgatory they will not be able to surround Adam Jones and others with enough good players. And they certainly don’t have the farm system yet to provide the low-cost productivity that they will need. Once the Athletics rebound, they will have every advantage in management and finances so they can pretty well forget about it for another 7 or 10 years.

  99. Sports on a Schtick on February 8th, 2008 2:06 pm

    so in whole, the defense is worse…

    A healthy Wilk is an improvement over Guillen, one of the worst defensive RF in baseball. Ibanez should continue to suck. Betancourt, if he can eliminate silly mistakes, will improve. A full season of Sexson at first means a full season of his awfulness. All in all, the M’s will probably be slightly better on defense.

  100. Bender on February 8th, 2008 2:06 pm

    Yeah, average fans don’t care about wins over replacement level or any of that. They care about having a big name ace. That has to factor into it somewhere. Bavasi isn’t only trying to build a winner, he’s trying to please the fans.

  101. man on soapbox on February 8th, 2008 2:07 pm

    All we need now is Bonds.

  102. DMZ on February 8th, 2008 2:07 pm

    Wouldn’t we get more than a mere +6 from Bedard and Silva over last year’s scrubs since the addition of Bedard will effectively move Washburn and Batista down in the rotation which means they will be going against weaker pitchers than they were last year?

    This turns out to not help, as counter-intuitive as that sounds. Research onto matchups shows that this kind of thing — whether a team’s #1 goes up against a #2-whatever doesn’t effectively matter, both because of the messy way teams lineup during the season and because the difference in your chances is not that great.

  103. Rain Delay on February 8th, 2008 2:08 pm

    msb – there is that. Now Kennedy I can tolerate, but sometimes I want to throw things at my radio when Dibble opens his trap.

  104. Tek Jansen on February 8th, 2008 2:08 pm

    XM channel 175 (MLB Homeplate) is awesome, except from noon-3pm pacific standard time. Dibble and Kennedy are awful. Earlier, Chuck Wilson was on with Thiel, and they had a good discussion about the trade. Wilson has many of the doubts that many of us here do.

  105. Carson on February 8th, 2008 2:08 pm

    Well, I’ll give the Mariners one thing.

    That is one hell of a Photoshop job to have Bedard in full uniform. You’d think they had him suit up during his physical and throw a few balls.

  106. Frerken on February 8th, 2008 2:09 pm

    That analysis doesn’t mean the trade sucked. It means signing Silva sucked. You can’t include Silva when soley talking about a trade. So how about saying that the Silva signing was terrible, and the Bedard trade was just unnecessary.

  107. Jay R. on February 8th, 2008 2:12 pm

    Bavasi isn’t only trying to build a winner, he’s trying to please the fans.

    Building a winner WOULD please the fans. If I thought he was building a winner, I would be overjoyed. Instead, he is sacrificing any hope for the future in a futile attempt to catch the Angels now. The team (even with Bedard) is not good enough, barring career years from everyone and some bad luck/injuries for the Angels.

  108. Bender on February 8th, 2008 2:16 pm

    Jay R., you’re not an average fan. You’re reading blogs and thinking about the team in depth. That’s what makes you not average. The average fan is much more casual.

  109. bakomariner on February 8th, 2008 2:17 pm

    How can you say the defense is BETTER after the trade?

    Ichiro
    Ibanez
    Jones

    is MUCH better than

    Ichiro
    Ibanez
    Wilkerson

    I’m just not seeing the logic that trading Jones IMPROVES the defense…

  110. et_blankenship on February 8th, 2008 2:18 pm
  111. elkboy3 on February 8th, 2008 2:19 pm

    The average fan (I heard this straight from my dad, the most average of fans) thinks Jones’ defense sucks because he dropped those two fly balls last year. They may be happy to see him go!

  112. Dan W on February 8th, 2008 2:19 pm

    Looking at W/L numbers a little differently…

    The non 4/5 slots were 56-38 (.5957 winning percentage). So all else equal, if Bedard/Silva can achieve the same winning percentage as Felix/Washburn/Batista, that’s 97 wins.

    See? The same statistics can have differing interpretations.

  113. meloyellow15 on February 8th, 2008 2:20 pm

    Derek,
    Since your using the six win hypothetical too, would you be interested in answering the question that I posed to Dave up above?

    Is that really a fair way to evaluate the trade? By using wins to evaluate the upgrade aren’t you essentially throwing out last years overperformance of Pythagorean wins and saying we could do it again. In which case, this trade would make us a 94 win team assuming equal offense?

    Also, I know you ran the simulations but what would your actual prediction be as far as wins goes for the M’s this year?

    Thanks

  114. Graham on February 8th, 2008 2:20 pm

    The defense is better than last year.

    The defense is worse than a hypothetical 2008 defense with Jones rather than Wilkerson.

  115. Carson on February 8th, 2008 2:21 pm

    Baker is encouraging people to go to other blogs (I’d have to assume this one is a primary target) and continually state “that’s why they play the games.”

    Now that he is basically telling people to troll us, can we officially all agree that he isn’t as great as we used to think?

  116. msb on February 8th, 2008 2:22 pm

    when asked by Drayer if they are done, Bill sez they might still do some ‘fine-tuning’, they are still talking names, and the roster is never realy set

  117. Sports on a Schtick on February 8th, 2008 2:22 pm

    #109

    You’re right, the defense is worse today than it was yesterday. But at least it’s likely to be better in 2008 (with or without Jones) than it was last year. Of course, it would be much better with Adam but whatever.

  118. lailaihei on February 8th, 2008 2:22 pm

    Bavasi is saying something smart! He said that we can always piece together a good bullpen from our farm system.

  119. bakomariner on February 8th, 2008 2:23 pm

    On a lighter note, Sexson and Willie-Boom-Boom endorse Bedard on the official site…two of our worst hitters struggled against him…imagine that…

  120. Jeff Nye on February 8th, 2008 2:23 pm

    Wow, I just read that on Baker’s blog.

    Thanks for that, Geoff.

  121. et_blankenship on February 8th, 2008 2:25 pm

    ” . . . that’s why they play the games.”

    Sure. So we can reinforce the math.

  122. Graham on February 8th, 2008 2:25 pm

    Carson is being overly melodramatic, methinks, but Baker’s most recent post states:

    “As they say, that’s why they play the games. Feel free to keep repeating that line on this and other blogs, as some of you already have.”

  123. bakomariner on February 8th, 2008 2:26 pm

    114- Who cares about last year. The point is that Bavasi had the chance to improve the team on every front this off-season, and instead, he improved the rotation ONLY and the rest of the parts are hurt by it…this trade is terrible…

  124. kjrounce on February 8th, 2008 2:27 pm

    Has the press conference started? Is anyone watching it on Mariners.com?

  125. lailaihei on February 8th, 2008 2:28 pm

    “Is Morrow being a starter going to be on the backburner for now?”
    “Yes, yep, yeah”

    *cries*

  126. Sports on a Schtick on February 8th, 2008 2:28 pm

    #115

    I think Baker’s usually good but he didn’t win any points trying to convince people Vidro wasn’t awful last year. Nor did he win any today with this:

    As they say, that’s why they play the games. Feel free to keep repeating that line on this and other blogs, as some of you already have

  127. bakomariner on February 8th, 2008 2:29 pm

    Morrow will never start for the Mariners…he’ll be a pen guy or traded…

  128. CrepuscularPoet on February 8th, 2008 2:30 pm

    This is how I look at it. I have NO control over what the M’s crazy ass front office decides to do. I didn’t want the trade to happen, I love Adam Jones – but on this very day Bedard is far, far more valuable then Jones, Jones is still a prospect. I think people are so upset they begin to not think about the fact that we now have quite possibly the best 1-2 punch in baseball. I mean, if we do get to the playoffs, thats daunting for any team, esp. if playing in Safeco. I think Sherrill will have the year any normal lefty bullpen guy has. Our Seattle Mariners are a better team today then they were yesterday. No one, not even Dave can tell you with certainty which prospects will do well or not. This reminds me of the Snelling love fest all over again.

    The deal is done, we got a stud pitcher – and quite possibly lost out on some future talent. Thats baseball though. There’s a reason why all the agents are stat heads, some USSMariner readers could almost make an argument that Jones should get a 5/50 this year off speculation alone. There is a reason why 5for1′s happen – Ryan Anderson, Jose Cruz, Jesse Foppert and Doyle are a few. Success of prospects is a crap shoot. Some things don’t always come down to numbers.

    I mean, my prediction that AJ will turn into the next Dwight Gooden, Strawberry or Columbian drug lord is 100% as right right now as the prediction that AJ is the next [Insert any 5 tool player here]. Downright ridiculous. I have heard him compared to Sizemore and Beltran!

    For the whiny, argumentative folk who just throw more AAA AJ numbers at me – let me expose you to some argument forms. These are the only way to make an argument valid.

    ~Modus Pollens VALID- If P, then Q. (If Adam Jones hits .388, then his OPS will be higher then .388) or something ridiculous (If Adam Jones gets traded, then Safeco will crumble. The argument can be dumb as hell but at least its valid.

    ~Modus Tollens VALID – If NOT P, then NOT Q. (If AJ did not get traded, then he will not go to Baltimore) and a dumb *but still valid* (If AJ is not traded, he will not turn into a white guy) Dumb, but still valid.

    The only way either of these are invalid is if either of them is based on false premises i.e. Since Adam Jones is white, he is a money makin player. Still MP, but false premise.
    These are valid argument forms that can be found sometimes.

    Here is mostly what I see (other then ridiculous pessimism, ridiculous optimism and some creative way to fit ponies into things)

    ~Denying the Antecedent INVALID!
    If P, then Q.
    Not P.
    Therefore, not Q. i.e.
    If the M’s are competitive in 5 years, then they have Jones…so
    If the M’s do not have Jones in 5 years, then the team will not be competitive.

    ~Affirming the Consequent
    If P, then Q.
    Q.
    Therefore, P. i.e. Bavasi has made some horrible trades, there has been a trade.
    If Bavasi has made a trade, its going to be horrible.

    Its just hilarious to read some posts and see the logic and premises people are placing their arguments on. Think before you type. I actually take the time to read almost all the comments, but it can get pretty ridiculous sometimes.

  129. Graham on February 8th, 2008 2:31 pm

    Right. As far as I can make out, you’re saying Bavasi had a chance to improve the defense, but didn’t, but when we point out that the defense did indeed get better between 2007-08, you don’t care about last year.

    Exactly what is your baseline for this hypothetical improvement, then?

  130. Jeff Nye on February 8th, 2008 2:31 pm

    Well, I can only hope that that comment by Baker was meant to be flippant.

    If he’s seriously encouraging people to DDOS this site, well, that’d make the ponies awful sad.

  131. bellacaramella on February 8th, 2008 2:32 pm

    How about the fact that Bedard referenced “King Felix”?

    <a href=”http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2008/baseball/mlb/02/08/bedard.traded/index.html?eref=mostpop

  132. bakomariner on February 8th, 2008 2:32 pm

    Didn’t Dave threaten to send the Bees to anyone calling Jones “just a prospect”?

  133. jephdood on February 8th, 2008 2:34 pm

    Is it just me, or is Bavasi’s head shaped like the baddies in the movie Aliens.

  134. lailaihei on February 8th, 2008 2:34 pm

    Oh wow, this MLB.com TV guy is really pretty smart.

  135. bakomariner on February 8th, 2008 2:36 pm

    129- Jones is a better defender than Guillen, Wilkerson, etc. He had the chance to start Jones and improve the defense. He didn’t. He made a bad trade. Our team will be worse because of it. Especially in the long run…

  136. CrepuscularPoet on February 8th, 2008 2:36 pm

    bakomariner Says:

    Didn’t Dave threaten to send the Bees to anyone calling Jones “just a prospect”?

    I would assume he meant if it was part of a BEDARD RULZ JONES IN A PROSPECT. The idea on what a prospect is can very heavily. To me, you are a prospect until you are a proven player. Dave thinks different

  137. gwangung on February 8th, 2008 2:38 pm

    For the whiny, argumentative folk who just throw more AAA AJ numbers at me – let me expose you to some argument forms. These are the only way to make an argument valid.

    No, they just prove you don’t understand statistics and probability.

  138. Graham on February 8th, 2008 2:38 pm

    129- Jones is a better defender than Guillen, Wilkerson, etc. He had the chance to start Jones and improve the defense. He didn’t. He made a bad trade. Our team will be worse because of it. Especially in the long run…

    Um. I’d love to see an argument that Sherrill + Jones > Bedard in 2008.

  139. Carson on February 8th, 2008 2:39 pm

    Graham – Perhaps.

    Though, considering the way casual fans tend to be puppets when reading what beat guys have to say, you’d know why it made my head hurt to think that we could be swarmed by “Geoff Lambs” attacking.

  140. CrepuscularPoet on February 8th, 2008 2:39 pm

    **is

    135*
    Valid argument, but your pessimism is just as right as me saying Wilkerson will have a career year and bat in 150 runs. I would agree that there is a defensive downgrade, thats why its good Bedard is a strikeout pitcher. With Ichiro in CF in inhibiits the ability for other OF’s to make plays on the ball as well. Plus, how many full seasons has Jones seen in the MLB?

  141. AuburnM on February 8th, 2008 2:40 pm

    6 more wins? Sounds good to me. Six more wins would’ve put us in the post season last year.

  142. Graham on February 8th, 2008 2:41 pm

    Plus, how many full seasons has Jones seen in the MLB?

    Buzz buzz buzz.

  143. CrepuscularPoet on February 8th, 2008 2:41 pm

    I wouldnt say inhibits, Ichiro just gets there so it allows you to have slower corner OF’s. I guess inhibits is right. Pointless post sorry

  144. msb on February 8th, 2008 2:41 pm

    #125– Bavasi did say that the final decision is up to Mel and Mac …

  145. shemberry on February 8th, 2008 2:43 pm

    Is there any place I can see the press conference? I was at a meeting and missed it.

  146. Robobobot on February 8th, 2008 2:43 pm

    You look at the numbers in the most absurd way. There are so many different ways to analyze how many more wins bedard and silva will produce. First of all if you BELIEVE that IF (i know its a big if) they are both healthy, and produce anything close to similar numbers they stay healthy that we will win only 6 more games, you are absolutely wrong.

    Look at ERA’s last year

    Weaver……. 6.20 (27 starts)
    Ramirez……. 7.16 (20 starts)
    Feieraband…. 8.03 (9 starts)

    Silva……… 4.19 (33 starts)
    Bedard…….. 3.16 (28 starts)

    we are getting 5 more starts, and the quality will get us only 6 games? thats a load of crap. Ramirez only got some wins because our bats went crazy when he was on the mound. He got 6 wins off of starts that he had an ERA of more then 5.89. stop looking at the numbers as if you want the mariners to lose. longrun this is a bad trade, but we should be better this year for sure.

  147. bakomariner on February 8th, 2008 2:44 pm

    One thing, watch the games…every time you see a fly ball fall five feet from Ibanez or Wilks, remember that Jones would have gotten there…

    And every time a lefty goes yard in the eighth off Morrow, remember that Sherrill isn’t in the pen anymore…

    Bedard is GREAT and I wish we could have gotten him without getting the roster raped, but he won’t look as shiny and pretty when the worst outfield defense in baseball can’t cover and the pen blows their holds…

  148. Jeff Nye on February 8th, 2008 2:44 pm

    The bees are on vacation today, but the ponies would like to reiterate:

    “We really like the taste of posts that involve the words ‘pessimism’, or ‘prospect’. We can’t guarantee we’ll restrain ourselves if your post tastes like either of those. Also, badly typed attempts at rehashing freshman-level logic courses make us particularly peckish.”

    Please, help the ponies maintain a healthy diet.

  149. sevenfly on February 8th, 2008 2:44 pm

    Responding to the original post:

    Dave,
    You can’t project Bedard and Silva as the 4th and 5th starters. If they are facing the 4th and 5th on other teams I would expect the M’s records in those games to be at least over 40 wins. In theory it seems that by putting Bedard at the top could enhance the success (not ability) of the rest of the rotation by decreasing their competition. This of course rests on the assumption that the order of the rotations will match up more often than not, something that can/should be empirically evaluated…

  150. C.O.Jones on February 8th, 2008 2:47 pm

    First of all, a1). I was really looking forward to watching Jones develop in the outfield next to Ichiro. But what’s done is done. The sad reality is that we are all but passengers on the good ship Mariner.

    Things appear bleak in future years for the M’s, but I find myself growing optimistic for their chances in 2008 (and 2009). The FO is obviously in win-now mode, which is refreshing and tells me they aren’t done yet. If you compare the roster right now with “Dave’s Offseason Plan, v.2007″, you can make a case that they aren’t too far off from achieving many of the goals he espouses – and by my calculations they should still have money to spend either now or at the trading deadline to address the gaps.

    In win-now mode, they cannot tolerate Sexsons’ inadequacies for very long if he doesn’t rebound. In win-now mode, they might be more likely to move Ibanez to DH and move Vidro to the bench. In win-now mode, I don’t expect to see Horacio Ramirez ever to take the mound again unless Mel has somehow truly fixed him. And in win-now mode, I expect to see WFB use sparingly. I expect 2008 to be fun to watch.

    It’s been tough waiting for this slow-motion train wreck of a trade to conclude, but now I’ve already moved on and I’m ready for spring training.

    Hey, we’re tied for first!

  151. gwangung on February 8th, 2008 2:48 pm

    You look at the numbers in the most absurd way.

    Try not to project, dear.

    Start with some of the sidebars, such as here. And then come back.

  152. F-Rod on February 8th, 2008 2:48 pm

    Bedard….23-11.Silva 18-16….=51-27…I am not saying this is a best guess but it is certainly possible..Limiting to the range to 40 seems way low to me…

    I think a lot of people’s point about the pythag situation of last year was that Weaver and Ho-Ram + Ryan Fri.. got blown out a lot. They (Weaver mainly ) had a couple of real gems so there win, loss record was not as bad as their effect on the M’s Phythag/run totals….Those three simply got murdered a couple of games leading to huge blowouts that made the pythag a poorer reflection of the team’s wins.

  153. Bender on February 8th, 2008 2:49 pm

    6 more wins? Sounds good to me. Six more wins would’ve put us in the post season last year.

    Brilliant.

  154. Jeff Nye on February 8th, 2008 2:51 pm

    In win-now mode, they cannot tolerate Sexsons’ inadequacies for very long if he doesn’t rebound. In win-now mode, they might be more likely to move Ibanez to DH and move Vidro to the bench. In win-now mode, I don’t expect to see Horacio Ramirez ever to take the mound again unless Mel has somehow truly fixed him. And in win-now mode, I expect to see WFB use sparingly. I expect 2008 to be fun to watch.

    Boy, would I love all of these things to be true. Here’s hoping you’re right.

  155. gwangung on February 8th, 2008 2:51 pm

    I think a lot of people’s point about the pythag situation of last year was that Weaver and Ho-Ram + Ryan Fri.. got blown out a lot. They (Weaver mainly ) had a couple of real gems so there win, loss record was not as bad as their effect on the M’s Phythag/run totals….Those three simply got murdered a couple of games leading to huge blowouts that made the pythag a poorer reflection of the team’s wins.

    Not sure if you caught it or not, but someone did a Pythag taking out Weaver and HoRam, and the record didn’t change that much.

  156. Manzanillos Cup on February 8th, 2008 2:51 pm

    Yep, for all the talk about how terrible the back end of the Mariners rotation was last year (and in terms of individual performance, it was), the Mariners were a .470 club when their #4/#5 starters were on the hill.

    So you’re saying Bedard and Silva won’t help that much because last season’s #4 and #5 starters had a not-bad winning percentage?

    Fail.

  157. AuburnM on February 8th, 2008 2:52 pm

    #153

    Just answering the question.

    The Ms were close to the postseason last year. Now we have massively upgraded the starting rotation. Sounds good to me.

  158. bakomariner on February 8th, 2008 2:52 pm

    Why would they give Ramirez a contract if they didn’t plan on him pitching? We have not heard the last of Gas-Can Ramirez…

  159. CrepuscularPoet on February 8th, 2008 2:52 pm

    [grammar please]

  160. msb on February 8th, 2008 2:53 pm

    press conference is on the M’s page.

    Houyhnhnm.

  161. Graham on February 8th, 2008 2:53 pm

    The Ms were close to the postseason last year. Now we have massively upgraded the starting rotation. Sounds good to me.

    Ignorance really is bliss.

  162. gwangung on February 8th, 2008 2:54 pm

    So you’re saying Bedard and Silva won’t help that much because last season’s #4 and #5 starters had a not-bad winning percentage?

    What he’s saying that they won’t help as much as you think.

    At least try to grapple with the reasoning.

  163. Bender on February 8th, 2008 2:54 pm

    F-Rod, you really think Bedard is goign to win 23 games? And then lose 11? So he’ll have 33 decisions? That seems like an awful lot to me.

  164. CrepuscularPoet on February 8th, 2008 2:59 pm

    [you have now worn out your welcome]

  165. Karen on February 8th, 2008 3:01 pm

    Well, I hope Ibanez and Sexson get through ST at least, able to stand upright and play ball. And I surely do hope the Mariners have better luck with Bedard than the Red Sox just found out they had re-signing Curt Schilling. Cross your fingers, guys, it’s going to be a bumpy ride! (paraphrasing Mae West) :)

  166. F-Rod on February 8th, 2008 3:02 pm

    The question is posed as the team’s record in games that Bedard (or his spot in the rotaion if he gets skipped a start) will win I think its entirely possible that the team could win 66% of his starts. Maybe Bedard goes 18-7 and has 9 no decisions and they go 5-4 in the games he doesn’t start..

    Maybe Silva goes 12-11 and the team goes 6-5 in his no decisions.

    Putting the cap at 40 is outrageous. Bedard could easily get to 18 games on his own.

  167. DMZ on February 8th, 2008 3:03 pm

    sigh

  168. Manzanillos Cup on February 8th, 2008 3:05 pm

    At least try to grapple with the reasoning.

    I’m trying, but this concept of fluky run support keeps coming up.

  169. rsrobinson on February 8th, 2008 3:09 pm

    I don’t like this if it turns out to be just a two-year deal but if we can lock Bedard up in a long-term contract I can live with it. I don’t think that’s out of the question.

    The back end of the rotation was a train wreck last year no matter what the M’s record was in those starts. I don’t know how we won as many games as we did trotting that sorry collection of rag arms out there. I feel a hell of a lot better about the rotation we’re going to start the season with this year.

  170. gwangung on February 8th, 2008 3:10 pm

    The question is posed as the team’s record in games that Bedard (or his spot in the rotaion if he gets skipped a start) will win I think its entirely possible that the team could win 66% of his starts. Maybe Bedard goes 18-7 and has 9 no decisions and they go 5-4 in the games he doesn’t start..

    You DO realize that Bedard will taking up some of the wins that the bullpen got last year in that slot? Are you saying those wins will now go to the bullpen backing up the other pitchers?

  171. popsey55 on February 8th, 2008 3:10 pm

    Cheer up for once…look at what the rest of the division did…

    A’s traded away 10+ wins in Haren and Swisher
    Angels lost 4 wins in Cabrera, added a 5-win Torii Hunter, not much change
    Rangers didn’t make many moves of significane

    If we gain 6 wins while the rest of the division loses or stays the same, I’d consider it a pretty good off-season

  172. Graham on February 8th, 2008 3:12 pm

    If we gain 6 wins while the rest of the division loses or stays the same, I’d consider it a pretty good off-season

    Yeah, my definition of a good offseason would have either been ‘become as good as the Angels’ or ‘be patient for once, for pity’s sake’. Neither of which have happened.

  173. terry on February 8th, 2008 3:12 pm

    What Baker doesn’t understand is “That’s why they play the games” can be a euphemism for “Baker is a lightweight”.

  174. Robobobot on February 8th, 2008 3:13 pm

    [shift keys are vanishing left and right today. Bizarre]

  175. smb on February 8th, 2008 3:15 pm

    You can’t just lock Bedard up to a long-term deal and say that makes it all worth it. You then have the nailbiting excitement of praying his body doesn’t give out on him and that he continues to perform at the same high level. Otherwise he’s Shaun Alexander, only worse, because you gave up AJ to get him.

  176. shortbus on February 8th, 2008 3:16 pm

    Well at least the M’s got one thing right this year – [they stayed on topic]

  177. ajvis on February 8th, 2008 3:17 pm

    Dave,

    It is unfair to compare last years starter’s record to this year’s improvement with Bedard and Silva. Last year’s #4 and #5 Mariner starters were LUCKY! They went 32-36, but it should have been 24-44. So if Bedard and Silva do go 38-30, it will be a 14 game improvement over what last year’s #4 and #5 starters should have been. HO-RAM was the luckiest dude in baseball. Remember he was like 7-4 with 6.5 ERA?

  178. Sports on a Schtick on February 8th, 2008 3:19 pm

    #171

    The Angels also acquired Jon Garland, so that’s an upgrade over Ervin Santana. Getting Hunter also pushes Garret Anderson to DH, which was a sinkhole last year. Also in 2007 they were riddled with injuries while the M’s were mostly healthy.

  179. Graham on February 8th, 2008 3:20 pm

    Garland is about as good as Jeff Weaver when you get right down to it.

  180. JMHawkins on February 8th, 2008 3:28 pm

    Not sure if you caught it or not, but someone did a Pythag taking out Weaver and HoRam, and the record didn’t change that much.

    Yep, that was me. Replacing Weaver, Ramirez and Feierabend with a clone of Washburn last year would’ve given us a pythagorean projection of 88 wins.

    So, if you assume Wilks == Guillen, losing Sherrill costs us 1 game, and everyone else’s ups and downs balance out, then Bedard + Silva need to be about +7 to +9 wins over, not Weaver and Ramirez, but Washburn. The assumption is we need 94 to 96 wins to make the playoffs, a reasonable assumption in a world with LAA, BOS and NYY.

    That’s if you believe in pythag projections and all that.

  181. msb on February 8th, 2008 3:28 pm

    oh, well, if Steve Phillips thinks the deal propels the M’s to the team to beat in the division …

    Cross your fingers, guys, it’s going to be a bumpy ride! (paraphrasing Mae West)

    [cough] Joe Mankiewicz. “In 2005, the phrase, “Fasten your seatbelts. It’s going to be a bumpy night” (spoken by the character of Margo Channing in the film) ranked #9 on the American Film Institute list of the 100 Best Movie Quotes of American Cinema.”

    [shift keys are vanishing left and right today. Bizarre]

    kinda the way those expensive new cars all seem to come without turn signals…

  182. mr.smartypants on February 8th, 2008 3:28 pm

    177, I think Dave’s point was that, regardless of what the performance of the M’s 4/5 starters should have been last year, their actual performance was 32-36, and if Bedard + Silva are 4-8 wins better, they still aren’t good enough to make the playoffs in all likelihood.

    Steve Phillips, ESPN “baseball analyst” just said that this trade makes the Mariners the frontrunners and “team to beat” in the AL west. Blargh.

  183. my college roomate on February 8th, 2008 3:29 pm

    I for one think this is a perfectly cromulent trade.
    It embiggens us all.

  184. Manzanillos Cup on February 8th, 2008 3:31 pm

    What Baker doesn’t understand is “That’s why they play the games” can be a euphemism for “Baker is a lightweight”.

    Yeah, if Baker wasn’t so ignorant, he could pick the exact number of Mariner wins in ’08. Just like the heavyweight Pecota did for the M’s in ’07.

  185. JMHawkins on February 8th, 2008 3:33 pm

    It is unfair to compare last years starter’s record to this year’s improvement with Bedard and Silva. Last year’s #4 and #5 Mariner starters were LUCKY! They went 32-36, but it should have been 24-44. So if Bedard and Silva do go 38-30, it will be a 14 game improvement over what last year’s #4 and #5 starters should have been. HO-RAM was the luckiest dude in baseball. Remember he was like 7-4 with 6.5 ERA?

    Well, the problem with that reasoning is, you have to discount the luck in last years record. If 4/5 last year should have been 24-44 instead of 32-36, then last year’s record should have been 80-82 instead of 88-76.

    So, starting from 80-82, and having Bedard and Silva go 38-30 will put us at 94 wins, or +6 from last year. Assuming nothing else goes wrong.

  186. awolfgang on February 8th, 2008 3:36 pm

    Hopefully baseball video games will have their rosters fixed before release. If I have to see Adam Jones as the starting RF for the M’s, I’ll cry when the wound is open again.

  187. gwangung on February 8th, 2008 3:43 pm

    Aha! Pony on the front page!

  188. Sec 108 on February 8th, 2008 3:44 pm

    As I was chatting with a coworker a few minutes ago he offered this, “Why don’t we just give Willie a shot at being our everyday right fielder?”

    I need more tissue.

  189. vkut79 on February 8th, 2008 3:46 pm

    Even though we gave up too much for him, I am really looking forward to seeing Bedard dominate at Safeco this summer.

  190. Sidi on February 8th, 2008 3:47 pm

    Bedard….23-11.Silva 18-16….=51-27…I am not saying this is a best guess but it is certainly possible..Limiting to the range to 40 seems way low to me…

    So Bedard does something that’s been done twice since 1990, one of which was Pedro Martinez with a 2.07 ERA (yes, not predictive of the player, but represents the scores it takes), playing for a team with, as I recall, a much better offense and somewhat better defense than the Mariners.

    And I don’t even have the foggiest how to find average decisions for a starting pitcher. But if a starter plays all year, and has two more wins than losses, it’s probably more like 13-11 or so. Even with a four man rotation going 18-16 would be very difficult.

  191. Sidi on February 8th, 2008 3:50 pm

    Sorry for the dropped html end tag for the italics, it came after the first paragraph.

    Between this trade and a baby who’s probably starting to teethe…I hit the bourbon a little too early.

  192. JMHawkins on February 8th, 2008 3:55 pm

    This hurts on so many levels…we will probably lose both Baek and Dickey now, unless they are both on the 25 man after ST…I believe Baek is out of options and Dickey is a rule 5… They’ve already said that Morrow won’t go back to Tacoma, so his career is a starter is now pretty much done…Horacio got a new contract, so he’ll be in the pen for sure…and they’ve already commited to a 7 man pen…

    Good grief. Bako, where did you hear that? If they go with a 12 man staff with this rotation, I just don’t know what to say.

  193. Teej on February 8th, 2008 3:58 pm

    Speaking of PECOTA, I just looked again and Adam Jones had the highest projected VORP on the team for ’08. (Well, second, if you assume that PECOTA is wrong about Ichiro for the millionth time.) That’s incredibly depressing. We are going to struggle to score runs.

  194. Mariner Fan in CO Exile on February 8th, 2008 3:59 pm

    I’m not really sure why you permitted comments for this thread, knowing full well the crap we’d get. I’d have preferred this post combined with the new one containing the pony with no comments. That way I could just say, “Shit” to my monitor and leave the unhappy news at that.

  195. gwangung on February 8th, 2008 4:04 pm

    Well, for me, one way to think about is that if the Ms outperform expectations (projections and Pythags and etc.) for another year, then a) we get the excitement of a good season, and b) we might get an insight to improving our tools. Only real Neanderthals think to throw away tools that can be improved.

    Of course, if they do live to expectations, some of us have the satisfaction of “We told you so.”

  196. Librocrat on February 8th, 2008 4:06 pm

    194 – But then we wouldn’t be thoroughly entertained by DMZ’s mod abilities.

    I’m waiting for the comments after every win Bedard gets. Someone is bound to say “I told you he’d be good, but you didn’t listen.”

  197. AK4Sea on February 8th, 2008 4:07 pm

    I think we can all agree on one thing – if the world ends in 2010, this is the BEST TRADE EVER.

    If we don’t get hit by an asteroid/lose our ozone/develop a sentient killer machine/nuke everything out of existence/experience the rapture, then maybe, just maybe, all the analysis that Dave, Derek et al have done will be right, and we’ll lose out on some pretty talented players.

    Me? I’ve got my fingers crossed for sentient killer machines. But that could be construed as pessimism, so I’ve got my fingers crossed for sentient killer robot PONIES.

    (Or, you know, Terminator Willie Bloomquists.)

  198. AK4Sea on February 8th, 2008 4:09 pm

    Eh, I can’t even be that optimistic. Let’s say 2009.

  199. James T on February 8th, 2008 4:13 pm

    It seems like a crappy argument to tie Bedard in with Calos silva. Won lost records are kind of odd to use as part of the argument. I know you’re trying to look at the team’s final records but Bedard was 8 games over .500 himself last year and that was pitching for the lousy Orioles against the Red Sox and yankees a half dozen times.

    As for comment #190, I believe the earlier poster was suggesting that the Mariners’ record in Bedard’s starts could come out to that lofty result, not that Bedard, himself would end up 23-11. Sure, it’s at the limit of reasonable expectations but not impossible.

    And to simply offer up the Mariners’ record in games started by their weakest starters seems like poor arguing, too. What if, by pure luck, the Mariners scored a disproportionately high number of runs in those weak starters’ games. The record doesn’t reflect their quality as compared to Bedard at all, then, does it?

  200. drjeff on February 8th, 2008 4:14 pm

    We need a new “Spahn and Sain” type rhyme. Bedard and Hernandez and four days of pandas? No. Bedard and The King and no chance at a ring? The King and Bedard cuz Bill trades like a ‘tard?

    I give up. At least Spring Training starts soon.

  201. Tek Jansen on February 8th, 2008 4:15 pm

    #192 — I would say the M’s have committed to a 12 man pen since 2005. I would like to see a change, but I am not sure that it will happen.

  202. Graham on February 8th, 2008 4:15 pm

    The thing is, Dave’s conducted some pretty complex arguments against the trade, which many people pretty much ignored. Getting on his case for this seems… odd.

  203. John09 on February 8th, 2008 4:20 pm

    Just logged on to check out the thought on the trade, and I don’t see the logic in Dave’s question. He states that the record for the Mariners fourth and fifth starters was four games under .500, and I’m not doubting his accuracy. Then substituting Silva and Bedard in to those spots you get an improvement of six games.
    My disagreement is that you aren’t putting Bedard and Silva into those games, they won’t be pitching against other teams 4 and 5′s. Instead you’re putting Washburn and Batista into those games. And those guys, while not being as good as Bedard and Silva, they are a significant upgrade over the group Dave listed. The point here is, the entire rotation is changed. Now we have Bedard going against other teams aces, and that is a much better option than we had last year. And that reasoning continues on down the line.
    Now Felix doesn’t have to go against the Lackey’s and Beckett’s of the league, he’ll go against the other teams second best pitcher which gives us a better chance of winning those games.
    So, I don’t think Dave is looking at it correctly, you aren’t just substituting Bedard and Silva for our old 4 and 5′s, our entire rotation and corresponding matchups is changed, in our significant favor.

  204. regfairfield on February 8th, 2008 4:21 pm

    #199 – The point isn’t that that’s what the back end of the rotation would do in 2008, I’m sure if it happened all over again, it would end up much worse, but that’s the production that needs to be replaced.

    In 2006, the Dodgers effectively had Aaron Sele and Greg Maddux forming one starter, each pitching half the season. A relatively easy tandem to replace, right? Except the two combined for something like a 3.70 ERA that year. In 2007 Jason Schmidt (in theory at least) would be much better than the Sele/Maddux combo, but for the Dodgers to improve their production in 2007 from 2006, he would have to beat the 3.70 ERA that they put up the previous year. Now Aaron Sele wouldn’t have been able to replace it either, he would have been much worse than the theoretical Schmidt, but if he couldn’t pitch his way to a 3.70 ERA, the pitching would have degraded from one year to the next.

  205. equaltojake on February 8th, 2008 4:25 pm

    How can there be 200+ comments on this? Everything was said weeks ago and nothings changed since. I think this is less about getting new ponies and more about beating old horses.

  206. Gomez on February 8th, 2008 4:26 pm

    Does that also assume Richie and Raul will reprise their 2007 season-long slumps?

  207. arbeck on February 8th, 2008 4:27 pm

    John09,

    As has been stated many times in this thread, the match ups make little to no difference. Due to injuries, off days, weird travel, rain outs, and the like your #1 is unlikely to face someone else’s #1. All you can do is subtract who isn’t there and add in the performance of who is.

  208. James T on February 8th, 2008 4:28 pm

    #200-We need a new “Spahn and Sain” type rhyme. Bedard and Hernandez and four days of pandas? No. Bedard and The King and no chance at a ring? The King and Bedard cuz Bill trades like a ‘tard?

    I give up. At least Spring Training starts soon.

    *****
    Felix and Bedard and hope it rains hard?

  209. mln on February 8th, 2008 4:29 pm

    “It’s Done.”

    This could describe not only the Bedard trade but the Mariners’ future for the next several years.

  210. Mariner Fan in CO Exile on February 8th, 2008 4:30 pm

    #203 – “Now we have Bedard going against other teams aces, and that is a much better option than we had last year. And that reasoning continues on down the line.”

    Please produce some evidence that match-ups make a significant difference, as well as that your logic holds when teams with different schedules and days off meet during the course of the season. Not surprisingly, #1 starter from Team A doesn’t always face #1 starter for Team B past the first several weeks of the season. I’ll bet you find no statistical support of any significance to support your point.

  211. jaysbaseballfan on February 8th, 2008 4:35 pm

    If the Mariners win anything in the next two years or otherwise win this trade, the people making a stink on this site will look quite….well nevermind. Yes you overpaid, but you still have a great farm system and it improves your team, and AJ is no sure thing. So what was that word I was looking for?

  212. John09 on February 8th, 2008 4:37 pm

    Arbeck,
    You’re ignoring the post-season, which is what this trade is likely about. If you agree or not, this trade was made with the thought that the Mariners are close, that’s why the Mariners made the trade. I know most people who log on here are skeptical of that, but the Mariners certainly aren’t.
    Also, to say that matchups make no difference, why is that our record with our old #4 and 5 starters wasn’t that bad? Because they were pitching against other teams worst pitchers. Not because the M’s bats just decided to hit well that day. When I saw that record Dave posted I was surprised, sure seemed like the M’s should have lost the majority of Weavers, Ramirez’, etc. starts. But they didn’t, only slightly less than half of them.
    My answer, the matchups. What’s yours?

  213. Graham on February 8th, 2008 4:40 pm

    If the Mariners win anything in the next two years or otherwise win this trade, the people making a stink on this site will look quite….well nevermind.

    Do you know what a probability density function is?

  214. Wsumojo on February 8th, 2008 4:42 pm

    Trading Jones and Sherrill opened up one spot on the 40 man roster……any thoughts of who will fill that? Any good RP’s or 4th OFer’s we could sign to challenge for a last roster spot? (Hopefully not another waste like Cairo)

  215. planB on February 8th, 2008 4:43 pm

    One of the authors (Dave?) made a great analogy a while back: if you trade Ichiro for a can of Sprite, and next year Ichiro breaks his knee while the can of Sprite was delicious, that doesn’t mean it was a good trade.

  216. AK4Sea on February 8th, 2008 4:43 pm

    Oh, man, if the Mariners made this trade on the assumption they’d get to the postseason, then we really ARE screwed.

    Is it so hard for people to understand that we want to be good for a long time (i.e. the new Cleveland Indians dynasty, the A’s of the 90′s) and not just for a year or two?

  217. terry on February 8th, 2008 4:59 pm

    Yeah, if Baker wasn’t so ignorant, he could pick the exact number of Mariner wins in ‘08. Just like the heavyweight Pecota did for the M’s in ‘07.

    Pecota predicted 74 wins, their pythag was 79 (not that far off of a +/- 4 game uncertainty). I’ll take a rational process over counting stats and straw man assertions that stats can’t know everything.

    But hey, that’s why they play the games.

  218. jamesllegade on February 8th, 2008 5:03 pm

    OK ALREADY.

    What now?

    We need a bat? Do we dump more minor leaguers to go after another bat?

    Lets say Bavasi was fired RIGHT now and Dave was hired. What stop the bleeding moves would you make? Pay Richie’s salary and dump him to SF? Trade for a real DH? Dump Lopez and some prospects for Roberts?

    Lets get a breakdown the the dream scenerio and best likely scenerio…

  219. abun24 on February 8th, 2008 5:09 pm

    Matchups matter in the playoffs.

  220. jaysbaseballfan on February 8th, 2008 5:10 pm

    “One of the authors (Dave?) made a great analogy a while back: if you trade Ichiro for a can of Sprite, and next year Ichiro breaks his knee while the can of Sprite was delicious, that doesn’t mean it was a good trade.”

    Yeah, that’s why analogy’s are usually meaningless when making an argument. Can of sprite does not equal a baseball player, let alone one as good as Bedard. It just doesn’t make sense.

  221. MickieB on February 8th, 2008 5:12 pm

    I felt like a casual fan when I first starting reading this blog. I am a season ticket holding +/- 30 game attending, watch on TV when I can’t go to a game, go to ST at least every other year FAN. The fact that I am excited about watching Bedard pitch for us and that I hate that we don’t have a big bat to score runners that are very good at getting on base makes me want to cry. But I wasn’t emotionally attached to AJ yet. Does this keep me in the casual fan status?

    I love the math you all come up with, even if it makes my head hurt. It is fairly pessimistic but I am still excited for baseball season.

    It surely does seem like every time we have a decent player, they go to another team and end up being an awesome player. But I’m still whining over Randy Winn…

  222. ventti on February 8th, 2008 5:14 pm

    This is seriously frustrating. I can’t believe how you guys manage to hear and watch it all happen. As a soon-to-be former international fan, I can at least go on a full day trying to remain ignorant of the whole thing.

  223. planB on February 8th, 2008 5:21 pm

    Yeah, that’s why analogy’s are usually meaningless when making an argument. Can of sprite does not equal a baseball player, let alone one as good as Bedard. It just doesn’t make sense.

    Um, no, it means that evaluating a trade based on what happens later does not tell you anything about whether it was a good decision at the time. Analogies are not meaningless; they exaggerate or reframe to better illustrate a point. Here is a very literal version: “If Adam Jones, George Sherrill, Chris Tillman, Tony Butler, and Kam Mickolio all fail, and Erik Bedard is successful, that doesn’t mean the trade was a good idea.” (only that it happened to work out against probability)

    You can make bad decisions that end up having good results. That doesn’t make them good decisions.

  224. Jeff Sullivan on February 8th, 2008 5:23 pm

    I can’t possibly be the first one to notice that #152 is ten wins off, can I?

  225. Joel on February 8th, 2008 5:26 pm

    At least now we can “get Bedarded”, as the Black Eye’d Peas might say, every five games.

  226. galaxieboi on February 8th, 2008 5:26 pm

    So, when I read a thread for the first time I go through and look at every single comment. This way I don’t look like a fool later on when I ask a question that was discussed, debated and answered 25 posts before mine.

    What’s shocking are the O’s fans on other boards who are like, ‘Ehhhh…this trade is ok. But I think it’s a ripoff that we have to take Sherrill.’ Bah.

  227. wlad on February 8th, 2008 5:27 pm

    This isn’t a bad trade. If you take out the ERAs of Weaver and Ramirez and replace them with Bedard’s and Silva’s we have the best team ERA in the AL. Not to mention the expected improvement of Felix and what Silva should be able to do at Safeco as a ground ball pitcher and what Bedard can do with a full healthy season and some run support. If we can get Beltre or Sexson to not play like crap we should have a pretty good squad. We need someone to step up in the bullpen to replace Sherill. Whether it’s Morrow or may I suggest Ramirez, as long as we don’t leave the ball in his hands for too long.

    Ultimately, I think the M’s will make another deal at the deadline and they will make a push for the division and come out with the wild card. With maybe the best 1-2 punch at the front of the rotation in the AL who knows what they can do in the playoffs…

  228. jamesllegade on February 8th, 2008 5:27 pm

    One more thing…

    AJ was the real bummer but are we REALLY bummed over all these minor league pitchers? Were any of them close at all?

    AJ could end up at the bottom of his projection but Tillman might haunt us for 10 years.

    But sorry… ENOUGH… next best move for the M’s if they were listening?

  229. Graham on February 8th, 2008 5:29 pm

    How about this for an metaphor, then?

    The following is a hypothetical conversation between a General Manager and a structural biomechanicist about a pitcher (assume it’s in the future when biomechanicists are better at their jobs):

    BM: ‘There’s a 1/20 chance of his arm surviving more than 3 seasons, I wouldn’t give him a 7 year contract.’
    GM: ‘Yeah, whatever *signs pitcher to contract*’

    1/20 times, 3 seasons later:

    GM: ‘See, I told you. All those fancy numbers you come up with don’t mean anything. This guy is an ACE.’
    BM: ‘…’

    19/20 times, 3 seasons later:

    GM: ‘Oh well, bad luck. Just the way things go sometimes.’
    BM: ‘…’

    See, if someone tells you that there’s a 5% chance of something happening, and it happens, that doesn’t mean that they were wrong and you were right.

    If you can argue that they have their boundary conditions wrong BEFORE the whole sequence of events plays out, fair enough, but waiting for the outcome before declaring whether they’re right or wrong is pretty stupid. People have done a lot of work coming to the conclusions that they have, but we deal in probabilities rather than certainties. This deal probably won’t get us anywhere. If we do win something, that doesn’t mean that our decision making process was incorrect, and not winning doesn’t validate it either.

    Any argument that forgets this is missing the point. If you have something to say about the a priori assumption that we’re out of reasonable reach of the Angels or whatever, say it. It might be worthwhile. Saying ‘You pessimists will sure look stupid if you do win’ simply betrays your ignorance.

  230. galaxieboi on February 8th, 2008 5:29 pm

    Matchups matter in the playoffs.

    Please see previous posts about a)matchups and b)M’s chances at making said playoffs.

  231. galaxieboi on February 8th, 2008 5:32 pm

    With maybe the best 1-2 punch at the front of the rotation in the AL who knows what they can do in the playoffs…

    The Cleveland Indians and New York Mets say ‘hi’.

  232. wlad on February 8th, 2008 5:35 pm

    when did the Mets get into the AL. i must have missed that…

  233. milendriel on February 8th, 2008 5:36 pm

    220- You completely missed the point of that analogy. It’s not that Bedard is a can of Sprite, it’s that evaluating a trade based on what happens after the trade is meaningless. The best way to evaluate a trade is to look at what is likely to happen going forward–if you’re a GM, shouldn’t that be your starting point for deciding whether or not to do a trade? What happens after a trade is out of anyone’s control, but that doesn’t mean we can’t have a reasonable idea of the likelihood of various outcomes.

  234. SpokaneMsFan on February 8th, 2008 5:39 pm

    Umm FRod, maybe I’m really tired but I believe Bedard… 23-11 Silva 18-16 = 41-27 not 51 so even by your calculations you’re only 1 win above 40.

  235. Zach on February 8th, 2008 5:39 pm

    Hi everyone,
    Thanks for such a great site. I started reading about this time last year and check in (at least) daily. Between USSM, Lookout Landing and MLB.tv, increase in contact with the team and its fans has made being an M’s fan (living in Brooklyn) much more fun.
    That said, today’s post regarding win expectancy registered with me as I had been mulling over some numbers myself concerning Pythagorean win expectancy and actual win/loss results, particularly as pertaining to the switch-off in starting assignments given last year to Jeff Weaver, Horacio Ramirez, and Ryan Feierabend and this year to Erik Bedard and Carlos Silva (Dave’s post includes Cha Seung Baek in this group of atrocity so I’ll do the numbers with him as well.)
    It’s my first real stab at this kind of analysis, so my feelings won’t be hurt if you point out errors in my methodology.
    My starting point for this breakdown was the “Common Sense” notion that replacing Weaver and Ramirez (and Feirabend and Baek) with Bedard and Silva was a gigantic upgrade and that this upgrade would result in a number of more wins for a team that contended for most of last year. A hitch in this notion was the oft called upon Pythagorean win expectancy of last year’s squad. By the calculations I did based on the equation supplied by Wikipedia : Win% = RS2/ RS2+RA2 the team as a whole had an expected win % of .488, projecting to 79 wins over the 162 game schedule. They ended up winning 88 games, which seems weird, even given the +/- of four that seems to be the accepted margin for error with the Pythagorean calculation. All of this has been pointed out and discussed aplenty here and elsewhere, and a common question that seems to arise is (more or less) “Does the M’s management realize that the team got lucky last year? If they do, how could they mortgage the future for a player that won’t get them over the hump?” So, the question I keep asking myself is “How close to hump are they really?” Again coming from the lay perspective of seeing an 88 win season and the fact that they were indeed in contention for so much of the year.
    What I hadn’t seen done was a detailed breakdown of what the removal of Weaver, Ramirez, et al. might have meant to the Pythagorean win expectancy of the team, as last year’s “luck” or Pythagorean overachievement seems to be one of the strongest arguments against the Bedard/Jones trade. So I set out to do that. The first thin g I did was establish a baseline RS/inning for the M’s offense. This is the number to multiply innings by when substituting a hypothetical Mariner Average Pitcher or, later, Bedard or Silva in for Weaver and the gang’s innings pitched and then working out the Pythagorean expectancies for a team without various combinations of the aforementioned perpetrators. The M’s scored 794 runs last year. They pitched 1434.1 innings. Unable to find a stat on offensive innings played, and assuming pretty close equivalency between innings pitched and batted, I used that number for an offensive Runs Per Inning Batted metric. Thusly, the M’s scored (approximately) .555 runs per inning last year. In 1434.1 Innings pitched, the M’s gave up an average of .567 runs per, so the team on the whole was running at a deficit. The next thing I did was to total Weaver’s, Ramirez’s and Feieraband’s innings pitched (293) and runs allowed, not just earned runs (235) to find that these three were giving up an average of .802 RPIP (Runs per Inning Pitched.) Then I subtracted those innings and runs from the team totals to get a non-Weaver/Ramirez/Feieraband team average. This was .507 RPIP. So the rest of the team, assuming a close correlation between innings pitched and batted was scoring .555 Runs per inning and only giving up .507 runs. These numbers in hand, I was able to come up with a non Weaver/Feierabend/Ramirez Pythagorean expected win% of .543, which projects to 88 wins, over 162 games. In other words, if Weaver, et al. had performed as well as the average non-Weaver/non-Ramirez/non-Feierabend Mariners pitcher, the M’s Pythagorean Win expectancy would have been 88. Lord knows how they got there anyway. For what it’s worth, the Pythagorean expectancy for a team of WRF pitchers and Mariner’s offense from last year would be 52 wins at a % of .324. Born out somewhat by the teams record of 24-35 in games started by the big three. (Baek is another story as his RPIP was .616, which doesn’t help the team’s Pythagorean cause, but the team was 10-4 in games that he started.)
    I’m really not sure how to compare these numbers to Bedard and Silva’s 2007s, given differences in parks, competition, and supporting defenses but Silva was giving up runs at a rate of .490 Per Inning, slightly better but roughly on par with an average mariner pitcher, while Bedard was doing it at .362 RPIP. Which is nice. The Orioles were 19-9 in Games Bedard started and the Twins 15-18 for Silva. I have no idea how to project those types of numbers onto a new year with a new team, but it seems clear that Silva and Bedard represent an upgrade to a team that (without Weaver, Ramirez and Feierabend) could have legitimately been considered a contender both in terms of Pythagorean expectancies and actual results.
    I worry that my hopes get in the way of thinking clearly sometimes, so let me know what you think.

  236. mln on February 8th, 2008 5:39 pm

    I love this quote from Bedard, in an unintended irony sort of way:

    “That’s the big thing,” he said. “With Baltimore, it seemed like we were going backwards. Obviously, here, they’re going forwards.”

    The Mariners are obviously going forward. ‘kay.

  237. SpokaneMsFan on February 8th, 2008 5:43 pm

    Whoops I missed Jeff @ 224 you beat me to the punch from my last comment. And Wlad at 227, you aren’t really saying Beltre played like crap last year are you? I thought everyone pretty much agreed Beltre was freaking awesome last year.

  238. Evan on February 8th, 2008 5:47 pm

    I can’t possibly be the first one to notice that #152 is ten wins off, can I?

    I think you were.

  239. marinerfaninvenice on February 8th, 2008 6:08 pm

    can someone post some links to O’s blogs? I’d like to see what the other side is saying too.

  240. terry on February 8th, 2008 6:13 pm

    220- You completely missed the point of that analogy. It’s not that Bedard is a can of Sprite

    Of course Bedard isn’t a can of sprite. He’s an ice cold bottle of mountain dew. In heaven there will definitely be a few things… mountain dew, photoshop, and possibly naked women.

  241. milendriel on February 8th, 2008 6:19 pm

    240- and baseball.

  242. Jeff Nye on February 8th, 2008 6:20 pm

    I wonder how Bedard feels about ponies.

  243. JMHawkins on February 8th, 2008 6:22 pm

    See, if someone tells you that there’s a 5% chance of something happening, and it happens, that doesn’t mean that they were wrong and you were right.

    Any argument that forgets this is missing the point. If you have something to say about the a priori assumption that we’re out of reasonable reach of the Angels or whatever, say it. It might be worthwhile. Saying ‘You pessimists will sure look stupid if you do win’ simply betrays your ignorance

    Jerome K. Jerome has a bit in Three Men In a Boat (to say nothing of the dog) about weather predictions.

    But who wants to be foretold the weather? It is bad enough when it comes, without our having the misery of knowing about it beforehand. The prophet we like is the old man who, on the particularly gloomy- looking morning of some day when we particularly want it to be fine, looks round the horizon with a particularly knowing eye, and says:

    ‘Oh no, sir, I think it will clear up all right. It will break all right enough, sir.’

    ‘Ah, he knows,’ we say, as we wish him good morning, and start off; ‘wonderful how these old fellows can tell!’

    And we feel an affection for that man which is not at all lessened by the circumstances of its not clearing up, but continuing to rain steadily all day.

    ‘Ah, well,’ we feel, ‘he did his best.’

    For the man that prophesies us bad weather, on the contrary, we entertain only bitter and revengeful thoughts.

    ‘Going to clear up, d’ye think?’ we shout cheerily, as we pass.

    ‘Well, no, sir; I’m afraid it’s settled down for the day,’ he replies, shaking his head.

    ‘Stupid old fool!’ we mutter, ‘what’s he know about it?’ And, if his portent proves correct, we come back feeling still more angry against him, and with a vague notion that, somehow or other, he has had something to do with it.

  244. dlb on February 8th, 2008 6:39 pm

    Its a sunk cost now. Lets start figuring out how we are going to win with Bedard. What else do we need to get done to win. Who needs to step up. Who’s are miracle player. Enough with the trade already.

  245. elsid on February 8th, 2008 6:40 pm

    Dave/Derek/et al,

    First I want to say Thank You!!! You have enhanced my baseball knowledge on some of the techical items. I appreciated your site very much. I must say fair thee well to all of the M’s fans.

    Go Rangers!!! and O’s, I guess.

  246. ML on February 8th, 2008 6:45 pm

    What took so long? I’ve had him on my MLB: The Show M’s team for weeks.

    Katy bar the door, Jose Lopez is 6-10 off Bedard.

    Maybe we can hire Rockin’ Leo as official “Erik Bedard Consultant”?

  247. Teej on February 8th, 2008 6:45 pm

    It’s also probably a good time to thank Graham, Mike and the other mods. Couldn’t have been a fun day.

  248. ML on February 8th, 2008 6:48 pm

    Sid, tell your brother how much we have appreciated him! Our condolences to PositivePaul as well…

  249. matthew on February 8th, 2008 7:02 pm

    Looking back, fans of this team will wonder how nobody pulled the plug in those 2 weeks. Beane has to be laughing his ass off. It’s going to be a shame when Bedard signs with the Angels in 2 years for $125M and the Mariners end up with nothing in return, while the Orioles have a perennial All Star centerfielder on the cheap. We’ll be sitting here watch AJ on the highlight reels all baseball season on ESPN.

    Only then will the rest of the Mariner fanbase finally get what a FUBAR trade this is. Two years of mediocrity and not making the playoffs…

    Good times.

  250. hub on February 8th, 2008 7:05 pm

    I miss Sherrill already.

  251. JesseNYC on February 8th, 2008 7:14 pm

    181:

    Yep, that was me. Replacing Weaver, Ramirez and Feierabend with a clone of Washburn last year would’ve given us a pythagorean projection of 88 wins.

    So, if you assume Wilks == Guillen, losing Sherrill costs us 1 game, and everyone else’s ups and downs balance out, then Bedard + Silva need to be about +7 to +9 wins over, not Weaver and Ramirez, but Washburn. The assumption is we need 94 to 96 wins to make the playoffs, a reasonable assumption in a world with LAA, BOS and NYY.

    I didn’t know this, and it’s one of the more interesting observations on this thread.

    Speaking entirely hypothetically then, if last year’s team featured King Felix + Batista + three Washburns – Sherrill, with Wilkerson + Guillen, it would have been a legit 87-win team, rather than a 79-win team masquerading as an 88-win team? Then, for 2008, all other things being equal, if you assume Silva has roughly the value of a Washburn clone and Bedard is worth three wins over a Washburn clone, you’d have a 90-win team.

    The team from Anaheim had a Pythagorean record of 90-72 last year.

    I hate this trade as much as most people here (though, like most people here, I am also excited about the prospect of Bedard in a Mariners uniform), but it would be a lot easier to stomach if it really did make the Mariners projectable as a legitimate 90-win team. I don’t see it with the naked eye, and obviously ZiPS doesn’t see it either.

    Does anyone?

  252. JesseNYC on February 8th, 2008 7:16 pm

    (With Wilkerson = Guillen, that should have said.)

  253. Graham on February 8th, 2008 7:18 pm

    I have us at ~88, but Dave disagrees pretty strongly with my projection for the offense.

  254. BillyJive on February 8th, 2008 7:22 pm

    [ponies]

  255. earinc on February 8th, 2008 7:27 pm

    My faith in this trade is about as weak as most here, but you know what? Whine whine whine. It’s done. Let’s get it on. I hope Bedard and Felix vie for the Cy Young. And I hope Adam Jones wins an MVP or three for Baltimore. Sherrill will be sorely missed. But that’s life. I miss Jamie Moyer and Randy and Alex and Junior etc. but baseball goes on. And there’s a chance – slight as it is – that it could work out, so let’s give Bavasi at least a few months before lynching him. Things can happen. Maybe Escobar is out most of the season and the Angels rotation struggles worse than expected.Pythagoras be damned. We tend to treat last year’s record as an aberration, but one could also argue – not me, mind you – that last year’s aberration was something more and is as much a prediction for it to repeat as regress to the mean. Just sayin’.

    My wife says I’m diplomatic to a fault.

  256. planB on February 8th, 2008 7:28 pm

    I thought 254 was a worthwhile comment. “I am excited to see Bedard; I wasn’t excited about Jones” seems to be the general consensus, more or less.

  257. DizzleChizzle on February 8th, 2008 7:33 pm

    I’m sure everyone’s read this but I found these two quotes rather amusing.

    “We agreed to three names fairly quickly,” MacPhail said from Baltimore. “But getting the fourth and fifth out of him was like getting water out of a stone.”

    What he really wanted to say was what a sucker that Bavasi is.

    “We have a good, solid, five-man staff, maybe as good as there is,” Bavasi said.

    I really doubt that this rotation is as good as there is, but we shall see.

  258. Teej on February 8th, 2008 7:36 pm

    What he really wanted to say was what a sucker that Bavasi is.

    Yup. That quote came off pretty bad. He pretty much complimented Bavasi for waiting a little while before completely folding in half.

  259. Jeff Nye on February 8th, 2008 7:40 pm

    I thought 254 was a worthwhile comment. “I am excited to see Bedard; I wasn’t excited about Jones” seems to be the general consensus, more or less.

    Where was that the general consensus? The second half of that statement, at least, was certainly not the general consensus here.

  260. BillyJive on February 8th, 2008 7:40 pm

    Thanks PlanB
    I thought it was too…but I still get ponies almost everytime I try to post something here…maybe it’s because I’m Canadian..oh well my daughter loves ponies…
    All I was saying was that I am much more excited about seeing Bedard pitch than I ever was about watching Adam Jones play center field.
    I love this trade..perhaps we won’t win the World Series but would we have won it with who we gave up? I think we are closer to it with a decent starting rotation than we were before…Now will someone please wake up Richie Sexson!
    Thanks..feel free to send more ponies my way…

  261. Jeff Nye on February 8th, 2008 7:43 pm

    Ponies notoriously don’t like being accused of being math geeks.

  262. BillyJive on February 8th, 2008 7:50 pm

    …and math geeks notoriously don’t realize they’re math geeks…
    I wasn’t trying to offend anyone Jeff..ponies or otherwise…it just seems with all these numbers and whatnot being tossed around, no one seems to just enjoy the sport for what it is…
    Nothing beats watching the Mariners at Safeco with a cold beer and a hot dog…

  263. Teej on February 8th, 2008 8:03 pm

    And those who are good with numbers inherently dislike beer and hot dogs? And they don’t enjoy watching the Mariners?

    Analyzing baseball and enjoying baseball are not mutually exclusive. You don’t have to ignore statistics in order to enjoy the beauty of the game. We don’t have to pick sides. Baseball was built on numbers.

  264. Jeff Nye on February 8th, 2008 8:27 pm

    I have to admit, I don’t like beer. I do, however, enjoy hot dogs.

    And baseball, which is why I read this site.

  265. Rick L on February 8th, 2008 8:32 pm

    By saying the trade sucks, you are assuming Jones will learn to hit the curve ball and that Tillman, Butler, Mickolio don’t get hurt and amount to something. The Orioles traded us a proven commodity for a lot of unproven potential. Only time will tell if this is a good trade or not.

    And don’t forget, McLaren guaranteed that Richie would hit 40 home runs and be the comeback player of the year.

    Okay, that last part was sarcasm. But I still think there is a chance that the Orioles will look back on this and think they got hosed.

  266. Joof on February 8th, 2008 8:37 pm

    Zach/235: That was acctually a pretty interesting analysis. You think you could in the future use a bit more whitespace in your posts though? Its hard to read giant walls of text like that, especially on a computer screen.

  267. gwangung on February 8th, 2008 8:47 pm

    …and math geeks notoriously don’t realize they’re math geeks…

    Chris Larson and Bill Gates know quite well what they are….

    Basketball, as a sport, is a joy because the sum of all the stats don’t come anywhere near the whole.

    Baseball, as a sport, is a joy because you can break down much of the game into the clear, pure essence of numbers.

    Denying the numbers part of the game is denying the major part of the game. And if a truth can be distilled from the numbers, then you’re denying a truth in the game.

    I’m not sure that’s a good thing to do.

  268. gwangung on February 8th, 2008 8:49 pm

    By saying the trade sucks, you are assuming Jones will learn to hit the curve ball and that Tillman, Butler, Mickolio don’t get hurt and amount to something. The Orioles traded us a proven commodity for a lot of unproven potential. Only time will tell if this is a good trade or not.

    That’s close enough to “they’re just prospects” to unleash the bees, I think.

  269. hub on February 8th, 2008 9:00 pm

    “Nothing beats watching the Mariners at Safeco with a cold beer and a hot dog…”

    Except sex.

    …and a cold beer.
    …and a hot dog.

    BEES!

  270. JMHawkins on February 8th, 2008 9:27 pm

    I hate this trade as much as most people here (though, like most people here, I am also excited about the prospect of Bedard in a Mariners uniform), but it would be a lot easier to stomach if it really did make the Mariners projectable as a legitimate 90-win team. I don’t see it with the naked eye, and obviously ZiPS doesn’t see it either.

    Well, there are a lot of assumptions in the “Bedard makes us a 90-win team” bit. Does Wilks == Guillen? Does everyone stay healthy (there’s zero depth, especially for hitters)? Do all of our 32+ year olds stave off decline? A lot of things have to break right for the M’s to be a 90-win team.

    Every team has those sorts of questions of course, but I have a hunch our other competitors are not as brittle. If someone goes down or struggles in LA or BOS or NY, (or CLEV), it always seems like there’s a decent replacment to be found in AAA. That hasn’t been the experience with the M’s.

    The other thing to keep in mind is, if one of those teams stumbles, it doesn’t mean the M’s automatically get their playoff spot. Detroit or Toronto or Chicago could go into the season with an 85-win club that gets lucky and wins 95 just as easily as the Angels could tank and finish around .500.

    Well, the M’s have a better chance of making the playoffs this year than they did last year. If they get the same amount of luck as they did in 07, they probably will make it. Here’s hoping.

  271. party4marty on February 8th, 2008 9:55 pm

    You make a good point about not being able to improve much from weaver/horam/baek to silva and bedard. That is frightening. However, Cant the records of Felix/Wash/Beluga be improved simply by being slotted “correctly”. Just having Felix not face other teams #1′s will be nice. Heres to saying happy felix and bedard weekend a couple times, rather than happy felix day.

  272. Sec 108 on February 8th, 2008 10:02 pm

    One final rant here before I bury this whole episode for myself.

    All of you people telling me, and many others, that I am a math geek and that I need to enjoy the game. Where were you in 1992? You sure as hell were not in the Kingdome with me and 4,999 other people watching Bill Plummer flail his way through his only season as a manager.

    I was enjoying the game then as much if not more than I do now. At least back then I knew the people who went to the games LOVED baseball. They weren’t there because it was cool.

    If 1995 doesn’t happen, and if Safeco does not get built, most of you will still be making fun of me for being a Mariner fan and having season tickets.

    Dave, DMZ, Moderators. You all rock and I thank you for your hard work researching and explaining what you find and keeping the comments on task.

    I for one was real excited about watching AJ play every day. I am also excited about watching Erik pitch every 5 days. I am however very afraid of watching Bedard go 11-15 with run support in the range of 3.1/game.

  273. gwangung on February 8th, 2008 10:03 pm

    However, Cant the records of Felix/Wash/Beluga be improved simply by being slotted “correctly”

    No.

    (Oh, all right…the available research, which were referenced above, shows that this sort of thing doesn’t have much of an effect. What MIGHT occur is that if Bedard goes further into games AND stays healthy, it could give the bullpen rest and not used everyday).

  274. Breadbaker on February 8th, 2008 10:05 pm

    #7 asked about trades of top-line pitchers and if any of them ever worked out. I can think of a few but they all for some reason involved the Red Sox: the trades where they acquired Pedro (that one scores pretty well, huh?), Schilling, Beckett (closer to even, but that ring sure is shiny) and going back a ways, Dennis Eckersley. The trade that brought Schilling to the D-Backs wasn’t bad either.

    There are dozens of counterexamples (including another involving Schilling and the Red Sox, where they traded a very young Schilling plus Brady Anderson for Mike Boddicker). The ones that work are more of the “last piece of puzzle” type, rather than the “let’s bet the farm and weaken the bullpen”, though.

  275. msb on February 8th, 2008 10:24 pm

    #243 — “I mentioned these feelings of mine to Harris, and he said he had them worse than that. He said he not only felt he wanted to kill the man who caused the board to be put up, but that he should like to slaughter the whole of his family and all his friends and relations, and then burn down his house. This seemed to me to be going too far, and I said so to Harris; but he answered: “Not a bit of it. Serve `em all jolly well right, and I’d go and sing comic songs on the ruins.”"

  276. Boy9988 on February 8th, 2008 10:46 pm

    [coherance-to-letter ratio is somehow negative]

  277. Joof on February 8th, 2008 11:05 pm

    /me reads Boy9988′s post.

    /me facepalms.

    There are so many things wrong with that, especially the fact that Guillen isn’t worth 6 wins over Wilkerson. Beyond that, the bullpen definitely won’t win 10-15 more games then they did last year. Thats an obscene number of wins to take over the previous year for the bullpen.

  278. 300ZXNA on February 8th, 2008 11:05 pm

    276: I really hope that post was sarcasm. If not, for my amusement, could you explain you’re reasoning? (and no, random guessing doesn’t count.)

  279. 300ZXNA on February 8th, 2008 11:06 pm

    doh. No spelling errors in my last post, but I just realized I used the wrong form of “their”. So shoot me.

  280. Sidi on February 8th, 2008 11:14 pm

    Woohoo, time for drunken grammar Nazi.

    your

    Two grammar errors on the first word. Impressive. But then, so many people have problems with those homonyms.

    being short sighted…again. The point is not that they will win more games in the ones that they started, its

    You mean it’s, since you’re using the contraction for it is. Again, very common mistake.

    that they will pitch longer in the game so that the bullpen (which is the only reason the M’s were any good last year) wont get used up so early in the year and they will pick up 2-3 wins on every starter over the course of the season.

    Yes, that was a strength. But we’ve tossed away one of the strongest parts of it, and the bullpen is fungible (since you can plug in guys like Morrow for easy solutions).

    that (5)*(2)+6=16+88=104 Now I’m not saying they will 104, so lets knock off 6 for the M’s losing Guillen, and you still get 98 wins. Thats more than enough to make a real legitimate run.

    Uhh, wow. Do you do accounting for Enron? Runs for and against, importance of defense, blah, blah, blah. Really, I don’t know what to say to this post.

  281. Sidi on February 8th, 2008 11:17 pm

    And drunken grammar Nazi fails. I managed to not add italics to the second portion of his first sentence, and added an apostrophe to the word I was commenting on (its) in the post.

    Umm, DMZ…can you add some sort of drunk check for my posts? I’d ask Dave, but I think you’d better understand drinking and posting.

  282. BigB on February 8th, 2008 11:27 pm

    Can someone please explain to me what all the ponies are about???

  283. Sidi on February 8th, 2008 11:30 pm

    BigB a while back someone suggested it as a sort of mascot. It took off with a Photoshop job (poor, sorry I do it for a living) of Bloomquist on a My Little Pony. Since then, the idea has taken off.

  284. et_blankenship on February 8th, 2008 11:41 pm

    Good grief. I finally got a chnace to see highlights of Bedard’s introduction at mlb.com. How awkward was that press conference?

  285. naviomelo on February 8th, 2008 11:42 pm

    I can already see it. Game on the line in the 8th, Putz warming up, men on base. And George Sherrill is in Maryland, closing for a team with no hope. Great trade.

  286. jinja on February 8th, 2008 11:42 pm

    So between losing the lefty, gaining the lefty, and ra dickey being a rule 5 player. Morrow is almost assuredly going to be coming out of the pen…. again. Especially since “this is the year?”

  287. mln on February 8th, 2008 11:52 pm

    “Can someone please explain to me what all the ponies are about???”

    http://ussmariner.com/2008/01/09/new-ussm-logo/

  288. JMHawkins on February 9th, 2008 12:20 am

    #275

    We tackled the cold beef for lunch, and then we found that we had forgotten to bring any mustard. I don’t think I ever in my life, before or since, felt I wanted mustard as badly as I felt I wanted it then. I don’t care for mustard as a rule, and it is very seldom that I take it at all, but I would have given worlds for it then.

    I don’t know how many worlds there may be in the universe, but anyone who had brought me a spoonful of mustard at that precise moment could have had them all. I grow reckless like that when I want a thing and can’t get it.

    Harris said he would have given worlds for mustard, too. It would have been a good thing for anybody who had come up to that spot with a can of mustard then; he would have been set up in worlds for the rest of his life.

    But there! I dare say both Harris and I would have tried to back out of the bargain after we had got the mustard. One makes these extravagant offers in moments of excitement, but, of course, when one comes to think of it, one sees how absurdly out of proportion they are with the value of the required article.

  289. Graham on February 9th, 2008 1:58 am

    It took off with a Photoshop job (poor, sorry I do it for a living)

    I did it in Paint. Not Photoshop. Photoshop is for losers.

  290. terry on February 9th, 2008 5:03 am

    Photoshop is for losers.

    That’s just the stress of moderating talking. Go have yourself a Dew.

  291. matthew on February 9th, 2008 7:04 am

    It’s painful reading some of these comments. I just posted in another forum that yes, I’m looking forward to seeing Bedard and The King pitch on consecutive days. But that does not equal a better team than 2007 — which you have to ask yourself why are we even comparing the 2008 and 2007 teams? Even if they had won 6 more games, the 2007 team still would have got swept out of the playoffs in the first round. Even if they would have won 117 games. They sucked. Period. Ramirez should have been DFA’d multiple times last year, yet he was given a raise and moved to the bullpen. It’s comical. The post that suggests maybe Mel can fix Ramirez — was he ever good?

    Back to my original point though. I’ll look forward to watching Bedard and Felix pitch consecutive days. Just like I enjoy watching Kevin Durant play for the Sonics. But none of those superstars are going to be in the playoffs anytime soon. And I’d venture to say that the Sonics beat the Mariners to the playoffs, because they actually did what the Mariners should have done years ago. They tore it down and are rebuilding the team.

    That’s why so many of us have no faith in the front office of the Mariners. Sure, many of the high priced players on the team will be off the books in 2009, but does that mean the Mariners will make the right choices when it comes to spending that money? Especially if Bavasi is still around?

    Bavasi’s #1 goal right now should be extending Bedard’s contract. Mostly because everything else he does damages this team’s future…

  292. Graham on February 9th, 2008 7:22 am

    Ridiculous pessimism is just as bad as ridiculous optimism, y’know.

  293. msb on February 9th, 2008 8:54 am

    Good grief. I finally got a chnace to see highlights of Bedard’s introduction at mlb.com. How awkward was that press conference?

    why?

  294. OppositeField on February 9th, 2008 9:08 am

    I thought it was awkward too, can’t put my finger on the reason.

  295. msb on February 9th, 2008 9:18 am

    it seemed to me much like any of them– they are pretty much awkward, no matter who it is, or where it happens …

  296. Carson on February 9th, 2008 9:39 am

    So, I just now got to watch the press conference.

    Am I the only one who feels that, for a club who gave up so much to get what they feel is a difference maker, that there was just no energy or excitement on Bill’s part to introduce him to the media?

  297. gwangung on February 9th, 2008 9:53 am

    That’s why so many of us have no faith in the front office of the Mariners. Sure, many of the high priced players on the team will be off the books in 2009, but does that mean the Mariners will make the right choices when it comes to spending that money? Especially if Bavasi is still around?

    Or the current top brass of Armstrong and Lincoln?

    The top brass doesn’t seem to trust the fan base to be patient with the team through a rebuilding effort. They feel the team HAS to be seen striving for the top, so they do these mini-Steinbrenner efforts of going after gaudy big names, and ignoring the base of the team, which is where you have true value. The vast majority of long term success stories began with building a strong nucleus from within, and not parting with your home grown talent until you have multiple options in your farm system.

    Hm. Maybe Bavasi is Seattle’s George Costanza…

  298. smb on February 9th, 2008 9:59 am

    291

    Thanks for that post. At the risk of taking it to new heights of melodrama, I am beginning to fear that I could live 80+ years without ever seeing my team MAKE a WS, let alone win one. A WS win can’t be your litmus test for whether or not you enjoy watching your team, okay, I can accept that, even agree with it in some senses. But would anyone root for their team if they knew unequivocally that the team would never win anything meaningful in their entire lifetime? My ability to laugh at that thought it slowly eroding!

  299. OppositeField on February 9th, 2008 10:05 am

    Carson, that’s exactly what was odd about it. This trade clearly took an enormous toll on Bavasi. It looked like somebody had to drag him out of bed to get to the press conference on time.

  300. msb on February 9th, 2008 10:33 am

    that might have been the ill-advised decision to grow a full beard rather than the goatee :)

  301. msb on February 9th, 2008 10:41 am

    Drayer has a nice salute to Sherrill and Jones on her blog

  302. Pete on February 9th, 2008 10:56 am

    F-Rod,

    You skipped arithmetic didn’t you?

    Hahahaha, I can’t believe that argument went on as long as it did, with no one noticing that the sum of 23 and 18 is 41. HAHAAHAHAHA!! You sounded so exasperated — “gaw, Bedard could easily 18 on his own!” …uh, that’s not even half of 40.

    You basically proved Dave’s point for him.

  303. Pete on February 9th, 2008 10:57 am

    Wow. Bold tag.

  304. jlc on February 9th, 2008 11:35 am

    But would anyone root for their team if they knew unequivocally that the team would never win anything meaningful in their entire lifetime?

    I guess that depends on your definition of rooting and meaningful. Is the option that the team leaves town and there’s no more baseball? I’d much rather be a fan of a hometown team, even a bad one, than get all my baseball on TV. And, if you actually knew unequivocally the final standings, there’d be that whole messy fixing games component that would be a problem.

    As for meaningful, if you’re saying winning the World Series is all that matters, welcome to the world of the Cubs fans, or earlier generations of Red Sox fans. Cleveland, Texas, Houston and SF, too. Personally, I’m looking for good baseball, and if that means you’re in a small market that turns into a defacto minor league team, I could enjoy watching the youngsters grow and the oldsters wander into retirement (though that is definitely not a rationale for Seattle).

    For me, the frustration is not with how soon we win the Series or get into the playoffs. It’s the spinning of wheels, the promise of getting better, the tease of a few good months only to collapse, the waste of talent and other resources that gets me. If I knew the Ms were going to be horrible, I would have a completely different mind set.

  305. thebig708 on February 9th, 2008 12:05 pm

    [how dare you defame Doyle]

  306. naynay51 on February 9th, 2008 1:15 pm

    1. If you want to win a World Series, you have to bring in some high priced talent to play along side your homegrown talent. The current “class” of MLB, the Red Sox, have a big group of “hired guns” who didn’t come up thru Pawtucket (Ortiz, Ramirez, Varitek, Crisp, Schilling, Beckett, Dice K, etc.).
    2. Growing the major league organization completely on the farm may yield good results, but may not get you over the top. Its been several years since the A’s or Twins or Indians won it all.
    3. There is definitely a role for stat analysis/sabrmetrics in evaluating organiztional performance (although its primary function may be treatment for insomnia). However, ultimate outcomes often turn on “intangibles” (injuries, a good or bad bounce here or there, mental and physical fatigue) over the course of 162 games. How else would one explain the triumph of inferior teams (e.g. 2006 Cardinals, 2003 Marlins) from time to time.
    4. Might the presence of Bedard improve Felix’s performance over the length of the season? I mean, this takes some of the pressure off of Felix to be the “Savior of the Franchise”, and he may thrive in a way unmeasurable by statistical modeling.

  307. Joof on February 9th, 2008 7:12 pm

    For 306:
    1: While getting other talents can be a big part of winning a world series, its not helpful if it doesn’t get you into the playoffs. Also, Varitek… well… God, that trade was stupid. Anyways, Varitek’s played his entire major league career for the Red Sox after we traded him away for Heathcliff Slocumb as a minor leaguer.

    2: The Marlins have done this a couple times. Grow a world series team, sell off the entire team for prospects from other teams, and then wash, rinse, repeat.

    3. While the results often depend on random chance, you want to minimize the need of luck to get you wins. For example, if you’re dealt a 16 in blackjack while the dealer has a 5 showing, you can win by doubling down. However, that doesn’t give you that great of odds, while a better plan would be to stand. Even if everything is determined randomly, there is likely a choice that will result in success more times then the others, which is what Sabermetrics tries to figure out.

    4. No, that won’t have any effect on him playing better. What would make him play better is the fact that he is going to be another year older, with more experience then he was last year. He’s 22 this season, so he still has a lot of growth left, but it won’t be because he’s not the number one starter anymore.

  308. westportman on February 10th, 2008 10:53 am

    Adam Jones may well have been our future…but right now, we are playing for today. Bavasi knows this is his last chance and he very well could be canned if the team doesn’t make the playoffs. BY signing Silva and trading for Bedard (a Cy Young candidate), we have given ourselves a deep rotation. We lose Sherill, but look at who’s all in our bullpen now. Flaherty, Putz, Morrow, Ramirez, Rowland-Smith. As well as possibly having Arthur Rhodes and R.A. Dickey. We may have given up prospects, but now our whole pitching staff is very deep. Another interesting fact I came upon…Sherill is a year older then Bedard. Sherill was a great reliever, but Bedard could be key to us winning the division. Bedard went 13-5 on a very bad team in 28 starts. Let’s say he stays healthy, gets in 34 starts, and has the same ERA as last year. Your looking at a 19-20 game winner, easy. Throw in Silva’s 13-14 wins. Felix will probably get 14-15. Washburn will get 9-10 and Batista 13-14. That’s way better then having last year’s rotation (Felix, Washburn, Batista, Weaver, Ramirez, Morrow, Flaherty). Due to the fact that we now have a great pitching staff and a great defense, I think we did very well in this trade. I don’t think Jones is going to pan out either. The guy didn’t do much at the Majors last year, what’s going to change that this year? Oh…and 3 “highly” regarded prospects may never pan out either. I think we got a steal in the trade by far

  309. eponymous coward on February 10th, 2008 1:17 pm

    If you want to win a World Series, you have to bring in some high priced talent to play along side your homegrown talent. The current “class” of MLB, the Red Sox, have a big group of “hired guns” who didn’t come up thru Pawtucket (Ortiz, Ramirez, Varitek, Crisp, Schilling, Beckett, Dice K, etc.).

    How many of those Red Sox players were acquired by trading away a bunch of farm system talent? Just wondering.

  310. eponymous coward on February 10th, 2008 1:18 pm

    I don’t think Jones is going to pan out either. The guy didn’t do much at the Majors last year, what’s going to change that this year?

    Covered in BEEEEEEEEES!

  311. naynay51 on February 10th, 2008 2:28 pm

    Re: #308.
    You forgot to mention Mark Lowe. When he was healthy, he was an outstanding reliever, and he could step into a 7th or 8th inning role. I think that, by and large, relief pitchers are easier to find than starters. Three years ago, no one had heard of George Sherill, he was a minor league journeyman. The club recognized a gem, polished him up, and ran him out there. They can do the same with the young talent currently available.

    Adam Jones is, by all accounts, loaded with potential. He may be the next Ken Griffey Jr. Or he may be the next Mike Cameron. The next year or two should tell.

    My point about Boston was that some magical mix of homegrown prospects and “Pros from Dover” seems to be the formula for winning big in pro sports. Dealing away young players may not be a bad thing if you deal away the right ones. Spending millions in the free agent market may not be bad if you spend wisely. I know that the recurring theme in USSM is that the current management does neither well. Hopefully this deal will buck the trend.

  312. gwangung on February 10th, 2008 2:56 pm

    My point about Boston was that some magical mix of homegrown prospects and “Pros from Dover” seems to be the formula for winning big in pro sports. Dealing away young players may not be a bad thing if you deal away the right ones.

    Um, notice the timing.

    Generally, you deal the youngsters AFTER you’re core is set, and not the core itself.

  313. cwel87 on February 10th, 2008 3:48 pm

    309 – everybody seems to forget, but Beckett was traded for Hanley Ramirez, who is widely regarded as the next A-Rod, so you’re right, tons of talent has been extracted from the Red Sox farm system for those players.

    The difference is, of course, they actually had a strong lineup when the trade was made.

    308 – “Due to the fact that we now have a great pitching staff and a great defense, I think we did very well in this trade.”

    Who ever said we have a marginal defense, let alone a great one? The King of Bloopers himself is still patrolling RF, and Sexson still blows at first base. He’d blow if he were 7’6”. The middle of the field is very good, as is the third baseman, but anything more is a stretch.

  314. jullberg on February 10th, 2008 7:09 pm

    My opinion of this team has completely changed and now I’m only looking at them solely as a source of entertainment. When Felix and Bedard pitch I’m going to be excited, but I certainly am not going into this season with expectations of the playoffs. Wake me up in four months if the M’s are in the hunt, that way I can watch them collapse again on the back of crappy defense and a worn down bullpen.

  315. sealclubber253 on February 12th, 2008 12:09 am

    With all the Boston talk, I thought it would be interesting to compare the combined numbers between their starting pitchers of 2007 and ours for this year with the 2007 numbers also.

    Boston- Dice-K, Beckett, Wakefield, Schilling and Taverez
    Seattle- King Felix, Wash, Batista, Silva and Bedard

    Boston 68-50 878IP 415ER 4.254ERA
    Seattle 66-52 960IP 426ER 3.993ERA

    If our guys can put up similar numbers to last years, we are almost dead on with the world champs with a more rested bullpen.

    Now, if we can only find a way to score 867 runs like they did last year…

  316. DMZ on February 12th, 2008 12:20 am

    Park effects.

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.