Griffey… hey, Griffey
SIGN A FREAKING DEAL ALREADY WOULD YOU ARRGGHHHH
Geoff Baker, The Media, and Judging Motives
This post is probably overdue. In retrospect, I should have written this a while ago.
A little less than two years ago, we held a USSM/LL Q&A with Bill Bavasi down at Cheney Stadium in Tacoma before one of the Rainiers games. Bill was remarkably good to us, as always, spending a good chunk of time answering questions honestly, giving a section of the fanbase most critical of his performance a look into the front office that was essentially unheard of five years ago. At the same time that Bavasi was talking to us, John McGrath was down on the field waiting to interview Rick Ankiel for a story for the Tacoma News Tribune. Ankiel never showed.
After the game, a friend noticed the juxtaposition of the two events as a highlight of how much journalism was changing. The GM of the major league franchise spent an hour being remarkably candid with a bunch of fans, while a well-respected member of the media was getting stood up by a flame-out former prospect. It’s hard to come up with a better example of how the internet changed the game, and how print journalism wasn’t going back to how it used to be.
The Seattle P-I will probably be gone in a couple of weeks. Art Thiel, one of the preeminent voices in the history of the Seattle sports scene, will have lost his place to scribe.
This isn’t something to be celebrated. That isn’t good news. For whatever reason, real or imagined, there’s been this perception of a struggle for power between upstart blogs and the established media. In many ways, it’s probably fair to say that the rise of sites like this one have contributed to the failing of the business model for newspapers. While I think change is inevitable, that doesn’t mean I have to be happy about it. The P-I going away is a loss for us all.
Which brings me to the reason I’m writing this in the first place. In the comments section of the last “holy crap Griffey make up your mind already” thread, there was a surge of comments based around the problems some of you have with Geoff Baker. It wasn’t just frustration with the Griffey thing, either – a lot of you are obviously upset with the way Baker is handling his role as the Times’ primary beat writer. The accusations were flying fast and furious, and unfortunately, our comments section (which is probably at its all time low in terms of quality) became a breeding ground for anti-Baker sentiment.
That stops now.
Obviously, we’ve had our disagreements with Geoff since he got here. Whether it’s been the value of Adam Jones, the relative importance of tensions in the clubhouse, the necessity of veteran relief pitching, or a couple hundred other philosophical disagreements we’ve had with him, we’ve often come down on different sides of the opinion fence about which way the organization should go in terms of making decisions. And those differences have fed the perception of a USSM vs Baker Blog war that just doesn’t exist at the author level, and shouldn’t exist at the commenter level.
In reality, Geoff Baker is doing fantastic work for the Times. He’s fighting for his profession, and for his part, he’s winning. He’s turned a position that wasn’t much more than organizational mouthpiece into a constant stream of information and quality work. He’s changed the way that the blogosphere and the local media interact, given tens of thousands of readers unprecedented access into the thoughts of people in the organization, and improved the quality of coverage around the team dramatically. He’s made the Seattle Times baseball section relevant in a way it never was before, and that is why the Times hired him.
When it comes to a lot of issues about how baseball teams should make decisions, he and I will have different viewpoints. That doesn’t change that I have a tremendous amount of respect for the amount of work he puts in, or that there’s value in both of our viewpoints being put out there. USSM is a better blog because of Geoff Baker’s work as a beat writer, and I think he’s a better beat writer because of USSM. We’re complements to each other, not substitutes for one another.
We cannot fill the role of a beat writer. We don’t want to, nor are we trying to. It is in all of our best interests that the Times not only survives, but flourishes. Through their better coverage, everyone wins.
Whatever issues you have with how Geoff is doing his job, USSM will not be the host for you to air those to the world. I don’t share your judgments about his character, his motives, or the quality of his writing. I agree that he looks a bit like an Osmond, but that’s the extent to which criticisms of Baker himself will be allowed. That doesn’t mean that we’re not going to expose the flaws in his logic if he proposes trading Gregory Halman for Eric Gagne this summer or that we’re going to give the clubhouse issues the same amount of credence he does, but we’re putting an end to your ability to be openly hostile in our comments section.
I hate the judging of other peoples motivations, and the assumptions about their character that go along with those judgments. Just as we reject the “Ichiro is selfish because he doesn’t dive” rhetoric, I also reject the “Baker is intentionally creating stories in order to further his agenda” stuff. You cannot judge the motives of another person, whether it’s a player, a beat writer, or me. Stop trying.
I like Geoff. I think he does a great job. If you don’t, take it up with him on your own time. We won’t let you turn this into a USSM vs Baker war anymore. Seriously. Consider it part of the commenting guidelines – straying from this will result in a quick exit.
Griffey Denies Report
Jim Street talks with Junior, who says he still hasn’t made up his mind.
This is remarkably annoying.
Griffey to Atlanta? Sounds Like It.
The Atlanta Journal Constitution reports that Griffey has agreed to terms with the Braves, though the physical hasn’t been taken and no press conference is expected until tomorrow (Edit: Link corrected – earlier link led to wrong page.
No official announcement yet, but just as it seemed 99.99% likely that Griffey would be a Mariner last week, it’s now 99.99% likely that he’ll be a Brave. Apparently, he chose proximity to his family over playing in Seattle… again.
For those of you who were itching to see Junior play in Safeco, I’m sorry. I obviously wasn’t as enthusiastic as you were, but I can still at least sympathize with your dashed hopes. I do wonder, though, if Junior spurning the fans again will burn some bridges. It’s obviously more important to a lot of Mariner fans to see him play in Seattle than it is to Griffey himself.
So, with Griffey (likely) out of the picture, where does that leave the M’s. Well, first off, let me make one request to the front office.
We Don’t Want Garret Anderson.
Barring the M’s doing something pointless like bringing in Anderson, hopefully this will push the M’s towards other options. Like, say, Nick Swisher or Nick Johnson. The Braves were seemingly the top destination for Swisher, so perhaps this pushes the Yankees to call the M’s and see if something can be worked out. Barring a move to pick up an actual productive player, though, the M’s should be willing to just go forward with what they have. There is no “washed up veteran LH hitter” position that the team has to fill. If they can’t find a potentially productive, low cost OF/DH type, they can go forward with what they have.
Tomorrow’s forecast: 100% chance of scattered Griffey rumors
…20% chance of Griffey news. As Monday draws to a close and Griffey either didn’t show up for a physical or managed to sneak into town and pull it off without anyone noticing. A couple days ago, I thought this was as close to a done deal as could be without having the doctors sign off on it, but here we are. Maybe he shows up tomorrow, or appears in Atlanta, and this whole saga ends. Please let it end.
Riggleman on the continuing clubhouse saga that ended last year
Stone talks to Riggleman to go get another view on last year’s clubhouse problems, and it so, so great:
“It was overblown a little bit. It wasn’t as bad as people say. I got some of the guys I felt were critical in my office. I said, ‘You know what? You’re accusing a man of being selfish. Sit down and have a cup of coffee with him. Talk to him. Don’t say it to a writer.Talk to him man-to-man, express yourself to him over a cup of coffee. It’s not about taking a swing at somebody, or griping to writers. If you think he’s selfish…he’s not in here saying to me you’re selfish, but you’re not even watching the game when you’re not pitching. He could come in here and say you’re selfish.’
Silva, I see he came in 30 pounds lighter. He must have gone home and said, ‘Hey, I’ve got to stop bitching about Ichiro and get my ass in gear here.’
wait wait wait, you’re not even watching the game when you’re not pitching?
They were pitchers? What? I… I had no idea.
Wait, I did.
I’m reminded too of our love last year for Riggleman and his generally dim view of this kind of conduct.
And I appreciate that Larry is putting up a detailed and informative view from Putz’s that differs substantially.
But most of all… there’s a new front office, new manager, substantially different team, and we’re going into spring training rehashing whether or not Putz feels that Ichiro should have hit more sacrifice flies or something?
I want to know about this year’s team.
Stone, Riggleman, and Ichiro
This is why we love Larry Stone. He talked to Jim Riggleman about the Ichiro issue, and he plays the role of a reporter, not an op-ed writer. He just gives you Riggleman’s quotes and leaves it up to you to decide what to think about those quotes.
Read this. It’s good stuff. Riggleman has a great take on all this. I agree with practically everything he said.
This is the money quote:
“It was overblown a little bit. It wasn’t as bad as people say. I got some of the guys I felt were critical in my office. I said, ‘You know what? You’re accusing a man of being selfish. Sit down and have a cup of coffee with him. Talk to him. Don’t say it to a writer.Talk to him man-to-man, express yourself to him over a cup of coffee. It’s not about taking a swing at somebody, or griping to writers. If you think he’s selfish…he’s not in here saying to me you’re selfish, but you’re not even watching the game when you’re not pitching. He could come in here and say you’re selfish.’
A-men.
Keep it up, Larry.
Ichiro Is the Selfish One?
I know you’ve probably all seen Larry Stone’s piece where he talks to J.J. Putz, and Putz makes no bones about the fact that he doesn’t think Ichiro is a team guy. You’ve heard this criticism of Ichiro before – all about himself, all about the numbers, that kind of stuff.
Well, check out these quotes from Miguel Batista when talking to John Hickey yesterday:
“You don’t pay a guy $9 million to pitch middle relief,” he said Sunday, aware that he’s the second highest-paid pitcher on the team. “Well, maybe the Yankees do. My concern is to stay healthy and help the team and we will find some neutral ground.”
“I know we have kids here who have to pitch,” he said. “But if I don’t pitch here next year, I’m going to pitch somewhere. So I need numbers (either wins or saves). So for me, I’ve either got to close or to start.”
There’s a perception that Ichiro is all about gathering personal accomplishments at the expense of the team. Miguel Batista outright says that he’s putting his own statistics ahead of what’s best for the team. Think we’ll see any “Miguel Batista is a clubhouse cancer” stories?
This And That
My first Valentine’s Day as a married man was a lot of fun. It also involved zero baseball, so I’m catching up today. Might as well catch up out loud.
M’s sign Josh Fields for $1.75 million
As Derek noted, this is a bit of a surprise. While Zduriencik has stated that they were talking to Boras in the last few weeks, the tone of the conversations seemed to be “Here’s our offer of slot money, and if you don’t like it, we’ll take the compensation pick this summer.” However, the M’s sort of blinked, and met halfway between their original offer and Boras’ demand, getting Fields into the organization in time to get him into major league camp and get a look at what he could potentially offer later in 2009.
I know the initial reaction to the move wasn’t very positive, and I’ll be honest, I didn’t jump for joy either. We’ve been preaching for years how easy it is to build a bullpen on the cheap, and you just really don’t have to invest much in finding low cost arms who can turn into pretty good relievers. Remember, before J.J. Putz was J.J. Putz, he was just a generic middle reliever with no out pitch. These kinds of transformations happen all the time. So, in most cases, to spend a first round pick on a relief pitcher isn’t really the best use of resources. Not to mention the track record of recent “major league ready” college closers is absolutely horrible, so they aren’t nearly the sure thing that they are often painted as.
So, it’s pretty easy to sit here and wish they would have just let Fields go back in the draft, take the #21 pick next summer as compensation, and let Zduriencik and staff add another higher impact talent in June. However, it’s not so obviously cut and dried.
First, there’s a time-value thing at work here. You get Josh Fields right now, where with the #21 pick, you don’t get him until this summer, and that’s optimistic – the rule on compensation picks awarded for not signing prior year draft picks is that you only get them once. So, if the prospect the M’s took at #21 decided to take a hard line stance on his signing bonus, the M’s would be in a pay-him-or-get-nothing scenario. They would have significantly less leverage with the compensation pick than they have with Fields, so expecting a quick sign for that player is probably unrealistic. In most cases, when the team is in that kind of situation, they’ll go with a conservative pick – an overdraft on talent of a guy who they know they can sign for something close to slot money. So, hoping that the M’s could use that pick to nab an elite talent was probably wishful thinking. In reality, they’d be looking at taking a guy like Fields with that pick – a senior who couldn’t go back to school and had reduced leverage. In this case, they’re getting that kind of player now versus getting a similar player this summer and then hoping they could sign him without a potential compensation pick as leverage.
With Fields, there’s a non-zero chance that he could be pitching for this team in the second half of the year. It’s not likely, but it’s possible, and that possibility holds some value that the compensation pick just wouldn’t have. In a division that looks fairly weak, adding a 10% chance of a potential second half relief ace has some real value. So, to pass up that chance to help the ’09 Mariners, you’d have to believe that you could get a better long term prospect this summer, and sign them with reduced leverage. Is that possible? Sure. Is it likely? I don’t know. I’m pretty sure Zduriencik and McNamara know better than we do, and I’m certain they talked about this before signing Fields.
So, yea, Fields may be a sub-optimal use of a first round pick. In reality, if we could go back and time and have a do-over on that one, we’d gladly take it. But that’s not the option they had here – the question was “sign Fields or try to sign the compensation pick?” I think there’s a pretty decent case to be made that the present value of having Fields in camp now cancels out quite a bit of the possibility of getting a superior prospect this summer. Hopefully, this is the last reliever we spend a high pick on for a while, but signing Fields is a defensible move.
Braves bid for Griffey
Seriously, this is kind of ridiculous. The Braves play in the NL, where there is no DH. They want a LH hitting left-fielder, and are deciding between Griffey and Garret Anderson. Anderson isn’t the hitter that Griffey is, but he can still play the field. The M’s, also deciding between the two, need a DH. Griffey shouldn’t play the field. Anderson has no value as a DH. And we might be looking at a scenario where the M’s end up with Anderson and the Braves end up with Griffey? That’s just dumb. This whole thing is dumb.
M’s claim Luis Pena on waivers, DFA Tug Hulett
Speaking of building bullpens on the cheap, Pena’s a potential closer who just cut loose by the Brewers because he had one terrible season last year. His command deserted him for ~60 innings, and unless it was due to some kind of permanent flaw that isn’t fixable, he’s exactly the kind of decent upside free talent that good bullpens are made out of. Best case scenario, he’s the new Grant Balfour – a true power/strikeout arm with lousy command who figures it out and becomes a dominant flamethrower. The M’s just keep collecting guys like this, and between Walker and Aardsma and now Pena, odds are pretty good that they’re going to find one really good reliever out of the bunch. This is how you build a bullpen.
Hulett goes away to create a 40 man roster spot for Pena. He hit well in Tacoma last year, and he’s a LH bat, so he wasn’t without value to the organization, but the acquisitions of Ronny Cedeno and Reegie Corona made it impossible for him to make the squad this year, and the infield down in Tacoma was getting crowded as well. Hopefully, he’ll skip through waivers and stick around, but even if he doesn’t, Hulett for Pena is a trade worth making for this club.
Larry Stone has his own blog.
This is awesome. Any more chances to read Stone is good news. He isn’t the USSM Endorsed Baseball Wiriter for nothing. He has a great take on the game, and is a terrific writer to boot. Welcome to the blogosophere, Larry – the quality of our sphere just improved exponentially.
Sunday tangentially related to the Mariners linkage
Corruption.
Culinary inspiration involving bacon.
Guerrilla marketing.
Indecipherable high-stakes real estate dealings.
It’s a FATASTIC OPPERTUNITY!!