The Worst Run Organization In Baseball

Dave · August 14, 2008 at 4:15 pm · Filed Under Mariners 

In case you weren’t sure, today was a great reminder that we’re all rooting for the worst run organization in baseball. There’s not another franchise with worse leadership or more incompetence in positions of power. From the CEO on down, these people don’t know baseball. They don’t know how to run a baseball team, build a roster, or win baseball games.

This organization is a massive collection of failures. They pile ridiculous decisions on top of each other, only outdoing their stupidity with an arrogance that refuses to learn from their mistakes. They are the Pets.com of MLB, only they refuse to go out of business.

I’m far too attached to the childhood memories I have to ever root for another team, but if the M’s screw up this offseason and don’t completely overhaul the baseball operations department, hiring somebody who actually understands baseball, I’ll spend the next few years rooting for these people to fail miserably and be embarrassed publicly.

These people don’t deserve success. They deserve to be looking for new jobs.

Fire them all.

Comments

72 Responses to “The Worst Run Organization In Baseball”

  1. RaoulDuke37 on August 14th, 2008 4:20 pm

    USSRays.com ?

  2. Sports on a Schtick on August 14th, 2008 4:21 pm

    Only in baseball? You’re being too nice Dave.

  3. Tek Jansen on August 14th, 2008 4:22 pm

    I agree. Seattle and Houston will contend for who will wear the crown of “Mr. Abysmal Baseball Franchise.”

  4. Sports on a Schtick on August 14th, 2008 4:30 pm

    The Rhodes trade offered a glimpse of hope. But if Chuck and Howie stick around and Lee and Riggleman get full reign in 2009… it’s gonna be the freakin’ Ice Age.

  5. Joe C on August 14th, 2008 4:31 pm

    Wow.

    I’d like to see a list of the worst moves made by this organization over the past few years. That would be interesting, sad, and maddening all at the same time.

  6. Sports on a Schtick on August 14th, 2008 4:42 pm

    Much like not offering Jose Guillen arbitration the M’s have a way of snatching defeat from the jaws of victory. The Twins basically offered the M’s $10 million and a roster spot for a disgruntled and replaceable pitcher. Seattle’s response? No thanks.

    Even with an awful (and much more crippling) Bedard trade, there was a slim chance it would improve the team. With today’s debacle and the Guillen fiasco the M’s declined guaranteed ways to improve the organization. These types of decisions, in a sense, are much more dismaying.

  7. Steve T on August 14th, 2008 4:42 pm

    Yeah, I think it’s the D-Rays for me. Screw this team. I’m not interested in the Seattle Royals.

  8. cody on August 14th, 2008 4:45 pm

    I’m far too attached to the childhood memories I have to ever root for another team

    This is the part that annoys me the most. No matter how hard I could try, I wouldn’t be able to root for any other ballclub with the same passion as a do the Mariners.

    But I won’t have any problem rooting for the Rays in the playoffs since the Mariners aren’t in them.

  9. Kunkoh on August 14th, 2008 4:51 pm

    i’ll spend the next few years rooting for these people to fail miserably and be embarrassed publicly.

    The funny thing is (or maybe not so funny), they already ARE failing miserably, and a public embarrassment. It’s not like you’d be rooting for them to do any worse, just maintain! They are a “demotivation poster”-child for epic fail.

    At least some day, say in 20yrs or so, we can all think back and laugh about how truly, god-awfully embarrassing the M’s were. How they found the bottom, and then grabbed a shovel. It’ll be funny. Ha ha, right?

  10. LA M's Fan on August 14th, 2008 4:56 pm

    It’s the Bush administration of baseball franchises.

  11. seatownsports on August 14th, 2008 4:57 pm

    It’s okay. As long as the owners can trick fans into buying garlic fries and considering a Yuniesky Betancourt Bobblehead a collector’s item, they’ll keep on making profits. Which is the point of baseball right? Obviously winning as a priority is long gone. It’s a mess right now.

  12. TumwaterMike on August 14th, 2008 4:57 pm

    Aren’t Howard Lincoln and Chuck Armstrong part of the ownership group? If so its kind of hard to fire an owner. It would be nice to see someone buy out their interest. Then they could be let go.

  13. skyking162 on August 14th, 2008 4:59 pm

    To all you Mariners fans, my condolences.

    I realize it’s sacrilege to give up on the team you first loved. But if you have room in your hearts for a second team to root for, the Rays would love to have you. Tampa Bay struggles to find fans, and the fan base could use some intelligent ones. As an added bonus, you get to root directly against the Yankees and Red Sox.

    If the Rays feel too bandwagony, how about the Pirates? They are a few years away from having a chance to compete, but you’ll get to enjoy competent decisions by the front office along the way.

  14. Joe C on August 14th, 2008 4:59 pm

    As sad as it is, I (and probably many others here) keep watching games whenever I get the chance. This Washburn thing sucks, but won’t stop me from watching, unless Washburn is pitching. I was trying to think of what it would take for me to finally start ignoring the M’s.

    I think it would go something like this:
    1) They let Felix go
    2) They trade Ichiro (who then leads the Yankees to the World Series)

    That would do it for me, but keeping Washburn doesn’t help.

  15. bat guano on August 14th, 2008 4:59 pm

    It was one thing to get fleeced by the Braves in the HoRam trade, but having this incarnation of the Orioles front office take us to the cleaners was truly humiliating. Thank God we have the comfort of knowing the Mariner franchise doesn’t have to take money into account when evaluating player personnel moves.

  16. docmarsh on August 14th, 2008 4:59 pm

    A question (I’m not fishing, I’m truly asking here)…is it possible that the Twins blocked a deal that may or may not have been made with another team? The claiming the first time a player is placed on waivers can be rescinded…it can’t be a second time…may the front office is hoping that the Bus will pass by the Twins and into another lap…or maybe the Bus has a no-trade clause he wouldn’t rescind…whatever. Is there a chance (albeit slim and unintelligible) that this will turn out to be a good thing in the long run? I.e., they place him on the wire again and dump his contract?

    I’m wondering if this is an end-around to a no-trade clause.

    Although, I do think this is just the FO being asinine and looking at the recent “success” of this truly poor pitcher who can’t seem to miss a bat…

  17. Griffey IsMySurrogateDad on August 14th, 2008 5:00 pm

    my heart hurts

  18. VaughnStreet on August 14th, 2008 5:00 pm

    Back in March, after the Ms signed Wilkerson to play right field, it became obvious to me that the idiots who run this team will never learn unless they produce a staggeringly awful record.

    So I stuck a pin in the voodoo doll. We all know what happened next.

    I refuse to remove the hex until they hire a front office that is capable. The losing will continue…

    That’s all.

  19. Tek Jansen on August 14th, 2008 5:04 pm

    #16 — I would bet against a deal being “in place” with another team. Even if that was so, the M’s could simply have said, “fine, take him and pay him.” The fact that they chose not to do that is the reason why Dave wrote what he did and why we are writing what you see in the comment thread.

  20. bat guano on August 14th, 2008 5:06 pm

    When it comes to figuring out what the M’s are doing with Washburn, many of you are missing the point. They don’t have another deal, nor are they likely to get one. The problem is that they actually think he’s a $10 million pitcher, even today. Of course, these are largely the same people who brought you Carlos Silva for $12 million a year. What’s wrong with this picture?

  21. Dave on August 14th, 2008 5:10 pm

    The whole “they’ll just put him on waivers again” thing is dumb – if they place him back on waivers, they’re irrevocable, and they cannot pull him back. Guess what – that means that they have zero leverage to negotiate a trade. If they go through this whole process again, and Minnesota puts in a claim again, it’s not like the M’s can be like “no, seriously, we want a prospect for Washburn.” The team that wins the claim would have no motivation to give up anything for him because the Mariners would have no recourse.

    If the M’s wanted to just let Washburn go, they would have.

  22. docmarsh on August 14th, 2008 5:15 pm

    Fair enough…I didn’t know. Was hoping there was a silver lining…understand there are a few esoteric rules about waiver deals and hoped there was something I didn’t know that Pelekoudas did that made this explicable.

  23. NickBob on August 14th, 2008 5:16 pm

    @Tumwater Mike: Howard is an owner, I don’t think Chuckles is. They are other partners that could take over for Howard, as has been discussed here and by Thiel in the P.I., but I could see Howard staying on to run the business side with a strong baseball grounded prexy and a modern GM running the team and the minors. But there will be no progress as long as Chuckles has his hand in the day to day operations.

    I’d root for Tampa Bay in the playoffs if it didn’t mean yet another team behind us in the World Series line got in first, and I still nurse a mild resentment from when they were going to snatch the M’s. But better them than the hated ones or bandwagon nation.

    Dave: Their leverage is that another team could offer up a player to induce the M’s to re-waiver him if they felt they had to have him. Small leverage it is, but it’s not quite zero.

  24. TotallyNotWilly on August 14th, 2008 5:16 pm

    Well, there’s still a chance the M’s were planning to stand on their demand for a player this go-round, and if that failed put him on irrevocable waivers. Ostensibly, Minnesota will still take Washburn for nothing the second time around. If so, it’s an interesting bit of brinksmanship that may well backfire. And it does prove once again that the M’s do not understand the abject void that is Washburn’s trade value.

  25. hititagainandagainandagain on August 14th, 2008 5:17 pm

    If Washburn is a $10 million pitcher, and Silva is worth $12 million, then Miguel Batista must be worth $14 million.

  26. Jed MC on August 14th, 2008 5:19 pm

    The only teams that save the M’s from the worst in all major American sports are the Detroit Lions and the New York Knicks. I’m inclined to put the Knicks ahead of the M’s because they fired Isaiah Thomas.

  27. DarkKnight1680 on August 14th, 2008 5:22 pm

    It may have finally happened…I may have to start rooting for my hometown blue jays. They still suck, but I don’t think I can take the mariners anymore. In fact, perhaps I will root for an offseason trade to the tune of Ichiro+felix+#2 overall pick for AJ Burnett. Seems fair, right Lee?

  28. DMZ on August 14th, 2008 5:24 pm

    No, no, no, no

    If you think the Twins or any other team would take Washburn if the team put him on irrevocable waivers, taking only his contract, then you JUST HAD YOUR CHANCE TO STICK THEM WITH HIM. 100% CERTAINTY! No chance he blows out his arm or they find someone else or anything.

    The M’s blew this. Blew it entirely.

  29. Benne on August 14th, 2008 5:26 pm

    Wow.

    I’d like to see a list of the worst moves made by this organization over the past few years. That would be interesting, sad, and maddening all at the same time.

    Here you go. Reading that list is like watching a cute puppy being slowly tortured.

  30. Ninja Jordan on August 14th, 2008 5:28 pm

    The best thing to do from a fan standpoint nowadays is to actively root for the team to lose. Stop going to games, stop paying attention. Only loss after loss will clear the detritus from the front office. It may take entirely new ownership before things truly change. As long as Howard Lincoln is effectively acting as Yamauchi’s ‘de facto owner,’ I don’t see necessary changes coming.

  31. JMHawkins on August 14th, 2008 5:44 pm

    Absent a shocking turn of events (say, hiring Antonetti), I won’t be renewing my season tickets this year. I considered it last year, but decided to stick it out one more year. Done. I’ve had it. This is sheer incompetence. The handful of good moves this team has made over the last several years are clearly the result of random luck (blind squirrels, stopped clocks, and the like).

  32. Red Apple on August 14th, 2008 5:47 pm

    It’s okay. As long as the owners can trick fans into buying garlic fries and considering a Yuniesky Betancourt Bobblehead a collector’s item, they’ll keep on making profits. Which is the point of baseball right? Obviously winning as a priority is long gone. It’s a mess right now.

    What’s infuriating is that they DO consider winning a priority over making money — trading Adam Jones for Erik Bedard added salary — not trading Washburn retains $10m of salary for next year. As stupid as these moves are, you have to realize they’re made (or not made) with the intent of winning…when all they accomplish is spiraling this organization deeper into its own freefall of perpetual losing. Arghhh!

  33. MarinerDan on August 14th, 2008 5:50 pm

    The best thing to do from a fan standpoint nowadays is to actively root for the team to lose. Stop going to games, stop paying attention. Only loss after loss will clear the detritus from the front office. It may take entirely new ownership before things truly change. As long as Howard Lincoln is effectively acting as Yamauchi’s ‘de facto owner,’ I don’t see necessary changes coming.

    Way ahead of you, dude. I’ve been rooting for them to lose for two years now. Unfortunately, it hasn’t gotten better yet (although Bavasi was fired). I figure it might take one more year — say, 100 losses — before the true gravity of the situation sinks in for the ownership.

  34. gwangung on August 14th, 2008 5:51 pm

    What’s infuriating is that they DO consider winning a priority over making money — trading Adam Jones for Erik Bedard added salary — not trading Washburn retains $10m of salary for next year. As stupid as these moves are, you have to realize they’re made (or not made) with the intent of winning…when all they accomplish is spiraling this organization deeper into its own freefall of perpetual losing.

    This can’t be over-emphasized.

    THEY WANT TO WIN.

    But they have absolutely no clue how to do it. And they have no clue that they DON’T have a clue.

    Arrrgh.

    (And what may be worse is that LP may actually know this, but can’t do a thing because of the nimrods who are his bosses).

  35. bdunn02 on August 14th, 2008 6:08 pm

    Went to the game last night and was suddenly struck by the absurdity of a team having a $119 million payroll and starting Bryan LaHair at 1B. And then subbing him out for Miguel Cairo.

    I handled the Mariners being too cheap to win (read: the 80′s) a lot better than I’m able to handle the Mariners being too incomprehensibly stupid to win (read: now). And while we’re at it, we should demand public humiliation for every sportswriter who said they thought the M’s had a chance to contend this year.

    Andriesen (Seattle P-I): “While getting prospects in return for Ibanez and/or Washburn has some appeal, the subtraction of two of the best players on the team would not help the Mariners in their quest to avoid a 100-loss season.”

    Cuz that’s the most important thing this year: not losing 100 games.

  36. Bodhizefa on August 14th, 2008 6:11 pm

    It’s simply unfathomable to me that those in charge of the Seattle Mariners are making millions of dollars per year while many of the readers and writers of this blog (and other blogs, too… we love you, Lookout Landing!) could run circles around the current regime in most regards. The one thing we all lack is experience, which for some reason, this particular organization seems to love more than anything else in the world. And its been their Achilles heel for many a moon. I guess it speaks volumes that my biggest hope for the off-season is that Chris Antonetti (or someone like him) is interviewed for the job and that he absolutely reams the F.O. about how ridiculously dumb they’ve been in terms of talent evaluation and monetary expenditures in the past five years. And no, I don’t expect him to get the job. This is, after all, the Mariners we’re talking about.

    I don’t think I can be positive about this team any longer. Their stupidity has beaten me into submission, and I just don’t know how to be optimistic any more.

  37. ChrisK on August 14th, 2008 6:28 pm

    Unfortunately, this organization is really good at making gobs of money by exploiting a gullible fanbase that continues to buy this crap product.

  38. gwangung on August 14th, 2008 6:38 pm

    The one thing we all lack is experience, which for some reason, this particular organization seems to love more than anything else in the world.

    Hey, Chuck Armstrong has over three decades in the game….

    Unfortunately, this organization is really good at making gobs of money by exploiting a gullible fanbase that continues to buy this crap product.

    That’s not gonna happen for much longer…

  39. great gonzalez on August 14th, 2008 6:58 pm

    Unfortunately, this organization is really good at making gobs of money by exploiting a gullible fanbase that continues to buy this crap product.

    That might have been conceivably true in the early 2000s, but attendance is dropping like a rock. Losing is not a good way to make money in MLB.

    THEY WANT TO WIN.

    But they have absolutely no clue how to do it. And they have no clue that they DON’T have a clue.

  40. earinc on August 14th, 2008 6:58 pm

    Amen, Dave.

  41. diesel3958 on August 14th, 2008 7:27 pm

    [no]

  42. The Beer Baron on August 14th, 2008 7:29 pm

    Andriesen (Seattle P-I): “While getting prospects in return for Ibanez and/or Washburn has some appeal, the subtraction of two of the best players on the team would not help the Mariners in their quest to avoid a 100-loss season.”

    You’ve got to be shitting me. I know the local sports media is full of boobs, but this has to be satire.

  43. JI on August 14th, 2008 7:42 pm

    This hurts.

  44. Deez on August 14th, 2008 8:22 pm

    This shouldn’t surprise anyone this organization prides it self on being a good wholesome organization, that will keep people happy and if they win on top of that it is a bonus. Pelekoudas, is nervous that if he tinkers he isn’t going to be able to be the GM next year. As far as I am concerned he just sealed his fate and in no way shape or form should be even interviewed for the GM spot.

  45. msb on August 14th, 2008 8:44 pm

    how about the Pirates? They are a few years away from having a chance to compete, but you’ll get to enjoy competent decisions by the front office along the way.

    you promise? ’cause that would be something I’ve been waiting, oh… 15, 20 years to see again.

  46. gwangung on August 14th, 2008 8:47 pm

    Pelekoudas, is nervous that if he tinkers he isn’t going to be able to be the GM next year. As far as I am concerned he just sealed his fate and in no way shape or form should be even interviewed for the GM spot.

    Oh, it’s worse than that…Pelekoudas HAS to agree with his bosses. If HowChuck vetoes any deal he tries to make, there’s no way for him to do anything about it.

    And, frankly, HowChuck’s list of GM qualifications includes the ability to follow orders and keep your mouth shut…even when you know infinitely more about baseball than Chuck and Howard put together (see Piniella, Lou).

  47. matthew on August 14th, 2008 9:03 pm

    Thank you for posting this Dave.

  48. Sinking Away on August 14th, 2008 9:59 pm

    This so totally sucks. We’ll be losers until this team has an owner who really does want to win. And not not ballgames, win it all. Not someone who is just looking to make some money, Safeco will make money for a while even if the teams they send out are losers, but eventually, people won’t care to watch losing baseball year after year no matter how great the ballpark. Eventually people just won’t think it’s worth it. I get the sense that people here, like me, wouldn’t spend money to watch this, but will still listen on radio or watch on TV because they are the team we’ve always wanted to win, and not just win ballgames, but win it all. Win a pennant, win a series (hell, play in a series). Until ownership changes nothing is going to change.

  49. PADJ on August 14th, 2008 10:11 pm

    I agree…thank you for posting this Dave. Every time we think the FO can’t F-up things any more we’re proven wrong. I’ve moved past numb to the point where I’m actively upset when the M’s win a game. An organization like this deserves to lose. Fire them all and burn it down.

    Not that these decisions have to make any sense to those not living in Mariner-land, but the simplest thing that makes sense is that Wash-out and Ibanez are both worth more in the deluded minds of the M’s FO than in the view of anyone else.

    To quote Monty Python…”I fart in your general direction.”

  50. Breadbaker on August 14th, 2008 10:22 pm

    “Root and branch.”

    If the only continuing non-player employee of this franchise next year (above the level of clubhouse attendant) was Dave Niehaus, I wouldn’t complain.

  51. PADJ on August 14th, 2008 10:23 pm

    Andriesen (Seattle P-I): “While getting prospects in return for Ibanez and/or Washburn has some appeal, the subtraction of two of the best players on the team would not help the Mariners in their quest to avoid a 100-loss season.”

    Assuming for the moment that Andriesen is being serious, and the team’s enormous will to win not withstanding, does anyone care if we lose 100 games this season?

  52. killer_ewok18 on August 14th, 2008 10:23 pm

    Mariners in 2033!!!

  53. Carson on August 14th, 2008 10:34 pm

    Absent a shocking turn of events (say, hiring Antonetti), I won’t be renewing my season tickets this year. I considered it last year, but decided to stick it out one more year. Done. I’ve had it. This is sheer incompetence. The handful of good moves this team has made over the last several years are clearly the result of random luck (blind squirrels, stopped clocks, and the like).

    I bailed this year. I told them when I talked to them on the phone that if John McLaren was retained as manager there was zero chance I’d pony up for more than a handful of single game tickets.

    The guy wanted me to put down a deposit. When I asked him if I could have the money back if McLaren was retained, he said no. So, I hung up and never called back. I sure hope there isn’t a huge waiting list when I’m ready to buy again.

  54. gwangung on August 14th, 2008 10:38 pm

    The guy wanted me to put down a deposit. When I asked him if I could have the money back if McLaren was retained, he said no. So, I hung up and never called back. I sure hope there isn’t a huge waiting list when I’m ready to buy again.

    That’s the advantage of blogs like USS Mariner…you’re wayyyyyyy more likely to spot the trends ahead of time and get your tix before the non-stats minded finally notice that there’s a turnaround…

    Of course, here’s hoping this will happen before you hit old age….

  55. jordan on August 14th, 2008 10:40 pm

    Just because the deal didn’t go down this time, that doesn’t mean its over. Wash will go back on waivers, the Twins will re-claim him, and the Mariners will (well, you never know with these M’s) lower their asking price.

    They were originally asking the Twins for a player off the 40-man roster. They will probably not ask that again.

  56. PADJ on August 14th, 2008 10:48 pm

    Wash will go back on waivers, the Twins will re-claim him, and the Mariners will (well, you never know with these M’s) lower their asking price.

    If Washburn goes back on waivers and the Twins claim him, then don’t they get him without having to necessarily make any deal at all (from DMZ’s “How Waivers Work” post)?

    M’s FO: “We couldn’t get what we consider an adequate return the first time on waivers, so we’ll put him out again and take less.”

    Ummm…okey doke…

  57. jordan on August 14th, 2008 10:59 pm

    From Bakers column. He knows more about this than we do.

    “Apparently, the M’s wanted a player off the Twins’ 40-man roster. Not sure who, but I’m told it was one of their many starting pitchers. That’s where the deal fell apart. This is interesting because it suggests there would be room for continued negotiation. I mean, there’s nothing stopping the two sides from continuing their talks, agreeing on something and then the M’s putting Washburn through waivers again, the Twins claiming him (since they could very well be the lowest ranked claimant again) and then sending Seattle the player agreed upon. Since this isn’t a “block” but more of a need situation by Minnesota, I don’t see their needs changing in the next few days. The only reason this had to end now was the 48-hour negotiation window.”

  58. Joe C on August 14th, 2008 11:02 pm

    If the Mariners put Washburn back on waivers, they’ll have no leverage with the Twins. Even if the Mariners ask for a player, the Twins wouldn’t have to do anything to get Washburn other than make the claim. The only way the Twins give up anything is to dump a player they don’t want on the Mariners (that could happen irregardless of the Washburn situation. Really, with irrevocable waivers next time, the Mariners will get nothing. But they could get rid of Washburn. Could. And that would be great.

    I haven’t agreed with Baker in a while on anything.

  59. PADJ on August 14th, 2008 11:07 pm

    Jeez, they already got Silva from the Twins. How can they top that acquisition? :-)

  60. qwerty on August 14th, 2008 11:20 pm

    Dave,
    How about a post making a case for the best run teams that aren’t in Boston that we can consider as our new surrogate team……?
    I nominate Minn and TB.

  61. DMZ on August 14th, 2008 11:23 pm

    Here’s one problem w/that scenario: presumably, the Twins put the other person on waivers, the M’s claim them, it’s a quid pro quo. And if you’re the Twins, you’re on scout’s honor that you’re not going to claim Washburn and back out of the deal and keep your player, hoping that a future Mariner org of fresh faces doesn’t care.

    It’s that if you couldn’t get a deal done in the window, and dumping Washburn for nothing would have been a great move for your team, that’s a pretty attractive fallback position. You’re guaranteed to be rid of him.

    Now, unless the Twins promised that they absolutely would trade the M’s someone and it was just a matter of making up the list and agreeing to a name (which couldn’t be done in 2 days for some reason) the M’s are now in a situation where they’ve given up their pretty attractive guaranteed fallback option in exchange for nothing, and now have no guarantee of anything. They put Washburn out again, maybe someone bites and maybe they don’t. Maybe it’s the Twins, and maybe it’s someone else and they get nothing. Maybe the Twins don’t put in a claim at all.

    Washburn for nothing would have been a good move. Take the available good move, rather than risk having Washburn sucking up payroll next year.

  62. TotallyNotWilly on August 14th, 2008 11:37 pm

    Maybe it’s the beer, but I think I (gulp) understand what Pelekoudas is doing.

    Lee Pelekoudas wants to get a player of value in exchange for Washburn. He may or may not understand how valueless Washburn is in trade given his contract. But the best way to leverage what value Washburn has, is not to cave in to a salary dump deal if you don’t have to. Yes, at the last second, Lee could have dumped Washburn on Minnesota since they refused to give up a player. I agree he should have. But I think the point was to insist upon the deal he wanted, and not cave in order to have the best shot at getting a player. If it had worked, we’d all think he was a genius.

    Which is the whole point. Lee only gets this job if he does something special. Just dumping salary doesn’t stand out as a brilliant move. He needs to make a splash and he’s playing a risky game with the team’s future to do it. Maybe they should just tell him he’s not getting the job, and he’ll be fired if he does anything dumb. Might be safer.

  63. jteckmann on August 14th, 2008 11:37 pm

    #58 – as I understand it, the M’s leverage comes from the fact that they don’t have to waive Wash again. They’ve shown the Twins they’ll cut their nose off to spite their face and keep Wash around rather than take the salary dump. So basically they make a handshake deal beforehand, “send us X in a separate transaction, and we’ll waive Wash so you can claim him again”

  64. melo_otto15 on August 15th, 2008 12:57 am

    I’m thinking we should fire everyone, change our logo, change half of our name (if possible?), and change our colors slightly, and then we have the complete recipe to go from worst to first!

  65. pinball1973 on August 15th, 2008 5:02 am

    I’ve mostly stayed well out of it, since the trade for Bedard (and that was something vaguely defendable even to me.)

    The ownership also clearly hold their fans in utter contempt, even more than is typical for MLB, whatever they say in public (and whatever pretense they make to themselves.)

    I’ll drop back regularly only when the rubbish at the top goes, as there is no hope before that – the latest inexplicable idiocy served, in rubbing its hew-and-improved super-radium salt into you sad, still-faithful fans of the team, to prove that proven beyond doubt fact.

    Go Ichiro!

  66. PADJ on August 15th, 2008 7:41 am

    After sleeping on it, I’m left with the conclusion that the Mariner FO stuck to their demand of a player from the Twins 40 man roster because of their stunning player evaluation abilitites.

    After all, if someone is paying a player @ $10 million a year, then that means the player is really really good. Right?

    They blew it on evaluating Washburn’s talent when they gave him the contract they did, and since there hasn’t been any significant difference in who’s running the ship (LP was stalking the halls somewhere during this time) they overestimate him now.

    Yeesh…

  67. skyking162 on August 15th, 2008 9:07 am

    The Twins should look almost as dumb in all of this as the Mariners. Why the hell would a low payroll team with boatloads of young, talented pitching want a below-average starting pitcher that’s overpaid? If the Mariners had dumped Washburn on them, what do they do with him?

  68. Brian Rust on August 15th, 2008 9:17 am

    As I said when Bavasi was fired, I believe the LincStrong era is coming to a close. The embarassment is simply too great NOT to be dealt with by the board of directors.

  69. DMZ on August 15th, 2008 9:30 am

    Lincoln would need to be fired by Nintendo — the minority owners have 0 say in how the team runs. There’s no coup possible as things stand now.

  70. downwarddog on August 15th, 2008 9:45 am

    It’s fun to think these people could be embarrassed by failure, but if there’s one thing I’ve learned from the Zeroes is this: nothing bad that results from the actions of the rich and powerful in this country is ever their fault. There’s always someone else to blame. The buck can always be passed. Even if these jokers do get fired, they’ll land somewhere else and keep doing what they’re doing. Look at Bavasi – dude didn’t exactly have to pound the pavement looking for a new gig.

  71. Brian Rust on August 15th, 2008 10:49 am

    He doesn’t need to be “fired,” and there doesn’t need to be a “coup.” High executives with a long record of dedicated service are not subject to such ugly circumstances, especially in a business environment influenced by Japanese culture.

    I’m just saying that I consider a Lincoln departure to be a likely outcome of frank and honest discussion involving Lincoln and the board which will include frequent occurences of the phrase “empty seats.”

  72. stoyboy on August 15th, 2008 11:16 am

    Now after this post, do you know why FA don’t want to come to this organization?

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.