Game 29, Mariners at Royals

DMZ · May 7, 2009 at 10:00 am · Filed Under Mariners 

11. Washburn v Bannister. Stupid inconvenient time zones. Why can’t the Earth be flat? Or a torus, or something?

RF Ichiro
CF Gutierrez
2B Lopez
1B Branyan
3B Beltre
DH Griffey
LF Balentien
C Johnson
SS Cedeno

Comments

167 Responses to “Game 29, Mariners at Royals”

  1. seattleslew on May 7th, 2009 1:59 pm

    I might be totally out of my mind but should the M’s give Ray Durham a call?

    Seems like he would be a great addition off the bench. Dave?

  2. seattleslew on May 7th, 2009 2:01 pm

    I mean, give him a call now, this minute!

    Come on Jack, duh!

  3. rmac1973 on May 7th, 2009 2:08 pm

    Ray Durham… seriously?

    The M’s are reduced to wondering if they can pick up Ray friggin’ Durham? Wow. If that’s not a new low, then I don’t know what is.

    Wait… unless you meant to pitch?

  4. seattleslew on May 7th, 2009 2:11 pm

    He’s a better option than Betancourt at the plate.

  5. seattleslew on May 7th, 2009 2:12 pm

    Actually, he’s probably a better option than Betancourt entirely.

  6. Elwood P. Dowd on May 7th, 2009 2:18 pm

    I would not mind going with 11 pitchers and Durham on the bench. He’ll help more than the seventh reliever.

  7. rmac1973 on May 7th, 2009 2:18 pm

    True, he is.

    So is a fifty-pound sack of rotten onions, and it’d come much cheaper.

    How many mid-to-late-30’s guys do the M’s need on the roster? Griffey, Sweeney, Batista, Stark and Branyan just aren’t enough, so let’s add a 38-year-old second baseman who’s lost two steps, has no power to speak of, and hasn’t played in more than about 130 games since 2001 or 2002 or so?

    Ehhh… I’ll pass.

    Stick to the craptastic crap we have now. Forget about acquiring shiny and new craptastic crap. Then again, he could be like the Mariners’ own version of Vinny Testaverde. Kinda. But, less hair and a smaller nose. And no arm.

    Drastic measures aren’t necessary at this point, just 29 games in. Replacing a backup MI with another backup MI wouldn’t hurt, no, but would it really help? Possibly.

    Sorry about the ridiculous replies. Just bent at another silly loss based on having no switch-hitters and not enough lefties to fill a single hand.

    POOOOOO!

  8. rmac1973 on May 7th, 2009 2:20 pm

    Why we had 12 pitchers to start with is a mystery to me.

  9. seattleslew on May 7th, 2009 2:28 pm

    He batted .303 with a .385 OBP last year against righties. That’s good enough for me.

  10. Axtell on May 7th, 2009 2:56 pm

    joser-

    walks are hardly ‘exciting’ though with this offense I suppose they will have to do.

    I get the feeling that this team is rapidly falling back to where they should be (remember the 77 wins that most everyone predicted?) and a lot of people are upset because they saw the 15-10 start and thought it could be sustained. As was pointed out in a previous post here at the USS, their record in one-run games could have meant the team easily could have been 10-15.

    I’m not in favor of rash decisions, and I’m sure Z and Wak have figured what’s out there now is closer to their skillset than the previous 25 games. I don’t see Bedard in an M’s uniform next year, regardless of his performance this year. What I most hope for is that Wash and Bedard continue to pitch well enough that we can deal them by the deadline for a boatload of talent. Enough that we can leave Silva out to dry and make the roster moves we need to make to undo the years of abuse by the previous regime.

    M’s fans, we need patience now more than ever. Yes, it’s frustrating as hell (believe me, I’ve been very frustrated) especially tasting as much success as we did. But we can’t delude ourselves into thinking this incredibly flawed team should have had any business winning as many games as they had.

    The first pieces are in place, but there’s still a ton of work to do to undo Bavasi’s mess.

  11. griffin on May 7th, 2009 3:04 pm

    bad news: M’s can’t score runs and lose for Washburn who pitched very well.

    good news: Oakland-5, Texas-0 Top of the 5th.

    doesn’t matter if they lose, we can’t win or put anything together as of late, so they can lose all they want, if we cant show up on offense, it really doesn’t matter.

    “slump” has finally hit the mariners now.

  12. wabbles on May 7th, 2009 3:48 pm

    “the roster moves we need to make to undo the years of abuse by the previous regime.”

    LOL That reminds me of Hannibal Lecter describing Buffalo Bill in “Silence of the Lambs.” “Our dear Billy wasn’t born that way. He was made that way by years of systematic abuse.”
    So true, so true.

  13. eponymous coward on May 7th, 2009 5:09 pm

    Yes, it’s frustrating as hell (believe me, I’ve been very frustrated) especially tasting as much success as we did. But we can’t delude ourselves into thinking this incredibly flawed team should have had any business winning as many games as they had.

    The offense isn’t this bad. Really. They are actually OPS’ing UNDER where they were last year, and I’m not buying that the offseason moves in toto made them worse.

    Unfortunately, yeah, they are a ~.500 team with lots of flaws (too many impatient RHB, bad players at SS and C, some veterans who are cluttering the roster).

  14. Diehard on May 7th, 2009 8:11 pm

    Well they are still above .500!

  15. xxtinynickxx on May 7th, 2009 8:25 pm

    Just watched Mark Bellhorn rock one out of the park against Portland….I use to love Bellhorn even though he played for the Red Sox just always thought he could be such a Mentor……….

  16. hoponpop01 on May 7th, 2009 9:10 pm

    Just watched Mark Bellhorn rock one out of the park against Portland….I use to love Bellhorn even though he played for the Red Sox just always thought he could be such a Mentor……….

    Yea, we need 35-year old who hasn’t had an OPS+ over 80 since 2005 and strikes out every three at bats to “bring the clubhouse together” like we need another right-handed, 93-96 mph fastball only bullpen arm.

  17. xxtinynickxx on May 7th, 2009 9:27 pm

    [deleted, extremely dumb]

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.