It’s A Sellers Market
We’ve heard a lot of talk about how the economy is going to cause players with big contracts to be significantly less valuable as trade chips, and that the market for high paid players is going to be way down this summer.
So much for that. The Cardinals just traded their best prospect, Brett Wallace, along with a quality pitching prospect in Clayton Mortensen, and a third okay prospect in Shane Peterson, for two months of Matt Holliday and $1.5 million in cash. With the A’s kicking in 25% of his remaining salary, the Cardinals are on the hook for $4.5 million over the rest of the season.
Holliday’s a good player, but this is a ton to give up for a rental. To put into Mariner equivalencies, this would be similar to if the M’s had shipped off Michael Saunders, Ryan Rowland-Smith, and Tyson Gillies for Holliday. We’d all be throwing up if the M’s had made that move, so you can imagine how Cardinal fans are reacting right now. St. Louis wanted Holliday, and they paid through the nose to get him.
If Zduriencik needed a nudge one way or another on what he should do with Bedard and Washburn, this should push him towards selling. It’s clearly still very much a seller’s market.
Yeah, that trade would have sucked for the M’s. Thank goodness Zduriencik is the GM.
Dave, what kind of haul could the M’s expect for one of those pitchers? The Dodgers seem to have interest in Washburn. If the M’s sought out a deal with LA for Wash, what could they reasonably expect to get? I wish that they could get Eithier, but my wishes do often come true.
If the M’s were 1.5 games back, with an older core, and not overperforming true talent (as I feel we are right now), I’d probably be willing to trade Saunders, RRS, and Gillies to rent Holliday.
Maybe I’m wrong to feel that way, but the entire (theoretical) package from our side is still probably worth less than Adam Jones or Chris Tillman alone.
Do I underestimate Saunders’ potential?
And Wallace >> Saunders in my opinion.
Not sure about Mortensen; seems like he’s intriguing if he can keep the GB rates sky high, but they never quite made it to AAA. He’s always going to be hittable.
Anyway, this fills a huge need for the A’s, but also for the Cards. They’re now in a great position.
I never knew what to make of the rumors that they’d give up Wallace in the right deal… wondered if that was all about his defense, or just something to say to make sure teams always include them in trade talks.
I know this is an unpopular view on this site, but I am a huge Washburn fan. Washburn is just dominant, and he has been over the past 5 starts (1.81 ERA). I know a lot of people are going to get on me because of his flyball ratios and other stuff, but the results are the results. He is clearly our second best pitcher, an trading him away would be sending a white flag to the fans. I don’t even think we can talk about Wash and Bedard in the same conversation. One is dominant, and can go 7+ every time out. The other shows flashes of brilliance, but is injury-prone and rarely goes more than 5 innings. If we can get a good (or even average haul) for Bedard, I say go for it, but to lump Washburn and Bedard into the same conversation is ridiculous, I think.
Not that the Bedard trade was in any way good, but we were trading for 2 years of Bedard at a reasonable salary. The Cardinals just got 2 months of Holliday. That’s a lot to give up for a couple hundred at-bats. They’re both horrible deals.
but to lump Washburn and Bedard into the same conversation is ridiculous, I think.
You’re right, it is. You just aren’t correct about why.
Read this.
Re: Flowin
You have to take into account our position in the standings. If we can’t catch the Angels even when all cylinders are firing, it doesn’t mean a thing even if Washburn pitches the lights out the rest of the year. Not making the playoffs is not making the playoffs.
It would do the Mariners better to get a couple prospects out of the guy if Z thinks we will be stuck in 2nd or 3rd the rest of the year.
The one thing id say about the Holliday trade is it does help the cardinals, he is A comp,and Wallace is not going to be able to play 3b at hte major league level.
But it is quite a haul. Come on yankees, you cant let sergio mitre start when you got the Bus on the market!
Flowin, I disagree with your assessment of Wash, but if you can convice Ned Colleti or Joe Torre of Wash’s dominance, I will not stand in your way.
If the market is this heavily biased towards sellers, then yes, the Mariners should move Washburn and/or Bedard. With that much talent coming back in trade, it’s possible that the M’s could get back an ML-ready player who would contribute this year.
If you believe that selling high and buying low is prefarable to selling low and buying high, you should be ready to move Washburn.
As you note, his value has probably never been higher. There is little in his career to suggest that he is capable of sustained performance at this level. IOW – it’s far more likely that he will regress than it is that he will sustain.
*****
This is the classic situation for selling high. the history of baseball (as well as other endeavors, such as investments) is piled high with cases of people who fell in love with an asset that suddenly started performing well and convinced themselves that they had previously undervalued it.
Washburn’s performance screams out “Sell now” more clearly than almost any other player in recent Mariner memory.
Yes, Bedard is the vastly superior pitcher.
The stunning thing is that Beane managed to get a fair bit more for two months of Holliday, even after Holliday’s awful start, than he gave up to get a full year of Holliday. Honestly, Wallace alone would have been more than equal value for Holliday — to get two pitchers along with him? Granted, they sent the Cards some cash, but still . . . I know Dan Szymborski over at BTF was suggesting that maybe it was time for Beane to go, but if he can still fleece people like this (even if it was the Cards, who were also the last team he really fleeced), I think it’s safe to stay he still has the touch.
Point taken.
This is just a thought, but if the M’s did indeed trade Washburn for prospects, what would be the possibility of him resigning with the M’s for next season? He really wants to be here.
I think that if we keep Bedard past the deadline we need to have him throw more pitches. He needs to throw AT LEAST 100 pitches.
Are you sure? If your boss asked you if you wanted to still have a job next year wouldn’t you say “I really like it here and would be happy to stay if you continued to pay me well?”
TurnwaterMike-Washburn wants to be where he makes the most money…period. He has no loyalty to Seattle, and why should he? He’s been mediocre (at best) in his time in Seattle and his leaking the whole “I want to stay in Seattle” is nothing more than a negotiating ploy.
If we trade him, his re-signing this offseason would still be contingent on his getting overpaid ($12million + per year) and this front office won’t be doing that.
I say good riddance – he’s been a bad pitcher, throwing Joh under the bus for his being a crappy pitcher, and overall a vast disappointment. Why people are falling in love with this guy now, saying that he should be re-signed, screams that these people haven’t been watching the team very long.
I just threw that out there to think about. He seems to have a good relationship with Wak and Adair.
My first reaction: I’d love to see the M’s get that kind of haul from somebody. My second reaction: oh, crap, the A’s did. We’ve been fixated on the Angels lately, and understandably so (you’re not going to go undefeated the rest of the season, and you’re no longer playing KC, so just start fricking losing already, will ya?) especially as the Rangers faded (and their financial issues appeared to grow). But even though the A’s had to postpone their new stadium plans, they now have an owner who appears willing to throw a little more money around. Beane hasn’t gone away, and he’s been getting pretty good performances out of some really young pitchers (shades of the big 3 all over again). When you take the entire Holliday story into account, he essentially traded the equivalent of Sherrill, a left-handed Balentien, and Cesar Jimenez for this haul from the Phillies. (Ok, that might be a little harsh: of the guys he traded to the Rockies for Holliday — Huston Street, Carlos Gonzalez, and Greg Smith — Gonzalez at least has a chance of turning into Adam Jones)
Well, Drayer seems to think Washburn’s desire to hang around is more than just the usual smoke-blowing. But even if the sentiment is genuine at the moment, it may not survive his next phonecall with Boras. The question is, would he accept $6-$8M for a year if Zduriencik offered it instead of arbitrarion, or would he look for higher pay elsewhere, or even just retire? And is that the best use of $8M next year, particularly when you have a group like Morrow, RRS, and Vargas to plug the holes left by departing starters?
Last year when people wanted to trade Ichiro a very detailed article was written explaining how few prospects pan out as a justification on why he should not be traded.
Why is this trade any different? Sure it is a rental…but it seemed pretty clear that most of the time the prospects you give up don’t pan out.
I have a feeling this was a rhetorical question.
The hole at SS, figuring out what to do at 3B, 1B, 2B, LF, and C, are going to be a higher priority than a free agent SP for the rotation.
Not making the playoffs is not making the playoffs.
Not exactly true. Being in the hunt all the way to the end and not making the playoffs is way more profitable for a team and way more exciting for a fan base than being done by July 24th. There is something to be said for going for it, even if you fail, and this should be taken into account when considering trades.
With that said, the Ms should absolutely trade Bedard and/or Washburn for the right price. But if they don’t trade them at least the Ms will probably stay in the hunt as a dark horse until the wire which is better than most teams.
Maybe they thought they were getting Halladay, not Holliday.
Man, if the Twins wanted Washburn last year, how bad do they want him now? They need pitching REALLY bad, and Washburn has become WAY better than he was last year.
Maybe we can ship him to MN for Anthony Swarzak.
Anytime you calculate the cost of selling you have to figure in the lost attendance. Even if the deal brings in enough that they’re not a worse team this year, a fan perception (however unjustified it might be) that it’s a “white flag” deal will cost ticket sales.
If Z’s looking at a deal where he puts in money, he’s got to add to that his estimate of lost revenue when he justifies the deal to the boss.
A really, really good player, two first round picks as potential compensation and keeping Pujols happy. Don’t see why Cards fans would be upset.
What can you really get for Washburn? If it is a pittance than I say keep him. I realize that he isn’t as good as his stats would lead you to believe but sentiment to fans can be taken into account. Trade Bedard for a young SS, as has been suggested, Reid Brignac/JJ Hardy would be great.
In the West you have to go for it. Once the playoffs start it is a crap shoot.
I agree with Tumwater Mike that something needs to be said for cohesion. This team obviously has some good chemistry. On paper, preseason, this roster shouldn’t have been much better than the team we ran out the year before.
Yes, the Cardinals gave up a lot, but it is a drastically different calculus they’re working with that the M’s are. The Cardinals quite realistically believe they’re one piece away from winning the pennant, so they made the move. Sure, they probably overpaid, but if it takes them deep into October, it’ll have been worth it. Plus, let’s not forget (as theMsfan noted) the Cards will get 2 compensation picks when they inevitably offer arbitration and have it refused.
A line-up of Pujols and Holliday, yikes. We don’t have one hitter of that ilk.
The Apostrophe Police ask you to kindly reconsider this post’s title.
What’s (hint: that is a contraction for what is) wrong with the title?
If the M’s could get a basket of talent for either Washburn or Bedard, and said basket included a player who could help a little this year to balance out the loss of the pitcher traded the short term, plus a player or player who could make the team better in the future, you have to pull the trigger on that.
If you get less than that back, like nobody to help in 2009, then the decision gets tough.
I presume that if the sellers own the market, then it would be the sellers’ market instead of the sellers market.
Not that I would have mentioned it, but just to jump in and help clear things up.
I disagree.
Just getting Sexson, Vidro, and Cairo out of the middle of the lineup is a huge difference.
Add to that Bedard actually pitching sometimes, and adding two good fielders to the outfield, and on paper this team was a lot better preseason than the 2008 team.
I agree with Sports. The Cardinals organization knows what they are doing. Well run organizations tend to pick up these type of players (Holliday) and than sign them to longer contracts if they choose to keep them.
The Astros will take Washburn for Tejada
One would think that a “Sellers market” would be a market selling Peter Sellers, Brad Sellers, Scott Sellers, the USS Sellers, and the like. (A market favoring the seller is usually referred to as a “seller’s market.”
Not that I would have mentioned it either, but since Jeff asked . . .
I don’t think it’s fair to compare Saunders to Wallace because Saunders isn’t trapped in Tacoma. I agree three players is way too much.
Huh, I didn’t even think about that. I’m not changing it though, the apostrophe police can gnash their teeth over it!
Man, if the Twins wanted Washburn last year, how bad do they want him now? They need pitching REALLY bad, and Washburn has become WAY better than he was last year.
Maybe we can ship him to MN for Anthony Swarzak.
You don’t want Swarzak. As much as I hate to rail against guys for lack of focus, character, etc. Dude got busted for smoking pot twice in spring training drug tests two years in a row before he finally wised up. He still seems to show a bit of a lack of focus as well.
Last year when people wanted to trade Ichiro a very detailed article was written explaining how few prospects pan out as a justification on why he should not be traded.
Why is this trade any different? Sure it is a rental…but it seemed pretty clear that most of the time the prospects you give up don’t pan out.
Washburn is not a hall-of-famer who is consistently amazingly productive. Big difference.
You trade Ichiro you are giving away sure fire production for a chance with prospects. You trade Washburn, you are giving up a chance at production for a chance at production for a longer time (prospects are young.), and from possibly more than one position (multi-player deal).
Keeping Washburn is a risk. Prospects are a risk with more reward.
Keeping Ichiro is almost no risk. Prospects are a risk with more reward.
Get it?
edit: I meant with ‘possibly less reward’ with trading Ichiro because Prospects can’t be given the task to become a hall of famer like him.
To what extent is a flyball pitcher helped by outfield defense and ballpark?
Is this a rhetorical question?
To what extent is a flyball pitcher helped by outfield defense and ballpark?
See Jarrod Washburn last season vs. this season.
That will give you at least a basic idea.
I was wondering under what circumstances a flyball pitcher would be has effective has a groundball pitcher.
Edit
Oops! I forgot. You also have to multiply out 1 dolphin at a rate of about .016 against pitches thrown. ;0)
Yes, the market is for seller’s.
Count me in for a big “Get your Flakey Veteran Talent” sign on the lawn with free lemonade for desparate shoppers.
The Ms have been playing as good as they can with this roster, getting very, very, lucky in 1 run games, and having a closer pitching so far off his bubble gum card that its scary.
And they have lost ground in the AL West. And the Wild Card aint happenin. AND, most importantly, next year’s roster, as currently constituted, will be much less talented than this year’s, which currently has a -13 run differential.
If the plan is to go into offseason and rebuild with FA, that rarely works, and Seattle has some built-in problems attracting FAs.
If the plan is to build from within, 2010 is a writeoff with no big time prospects in the wings. Tui, I dont think so at this point, Saunders, is probably a full time player. Clement? Karp? Nice bench guys.
For guys they can build on, guys who you can ride in 2010, we return 1 proven big league starting pitcher, Guitterez, Ichiro… And Ichiro has never been more than the ultimate complimentary player. Then we have a bunch of Replacer types and below. We have a great bullpen, thats something, and maybe Vargas is legit guy…
Sell, and sell big, and sell often. If you believe we can make a run and insipire our FA to resign out of team spirit? OK, sounds fun, but thats not really a good bet in the Seattle market, never has been. Nobody lives here except for Richie Sexson Dave Heaverlo, and Jeff Cirrilo.
If ya want to play the market, Bedard, Beltre, and Branyan could be traded and made an offer in the off-season. Maybe they really like Seattle, maybe not.
Jose Lopez and Balantien have some trade value, as does Clement.
And the one guy you could trade off this roster that could transform Seattle baseball? How about a soon to be 36 year old outfield superstar who could bring back two or three top tier, near big league prospects…
I don’t understand why there is a debate. Simple logic would suggest that the Mariners must sell. They currently sit 6 games back of the Angels(loss column), and the Angels are the better team. When you look at the Mariners, what are you suppose to be hopeful of???
The Mariners are full of potholes that would throw any team out of alignment, steering them off the playoff road. Their LF’er is a No bat, all glover. Their CF’er is a good piece of the future. Their RF’er is a gold glove superstar. Their 3bman is an all glove/no bat, or when Beltre comes back, great glove, mediocre bat. Their SS is an all glove, no bat. Their second baseman is an all bat, no glover. First base? He is a guy who took the expected tumble, and has far too hard a time fielding his position. At catcher we have a no bat/good handler of pitchers, or a decent bat/horrible handler of pitchers.
As for pitchers, they have a superstar, a guy playing way over his head, a guy who can’t go 7 innings, an guy who doesn’t get the concept of “offspeed pitch”, a guy coming back from the minors after injury, a guy who is playing over his head…yet still struggles to get through 5. Oh, then there is the overworked bullpen. Thanks to the fact that they decided to convert a reliever to a starter at the major league level, and bring back an injured starter back from injury without proper rehabilitating…oh and that 5th starter that struggles to get through 5.
All the signs point to this team playing over their heads. Furthermore, there is nothing about this core group that would suggest that they could do this in the long run. Why on earth would they not blow this team up, and build a foundation that could make them WORLD SERIES contenders. Right now we are faintly competing for a division title…that’s only if other teams fall apart. That’s just not good enough for me.
And Ichiro has never been more than the ultimate complimentary player.
Turbo, is that you?
I want to know what’s up with these so-called poor clubs throwing in cash in deals with cash-rich clubs like the Yankees and Cardinals. Perhaps we can get the Pirates to trade us their middle infield for Washburn and Bedard and Balentien in some kind of three-way deal with another contender, and the Pirates will end up paying everyone’s salaries. This is just bizarre.
Washburn is still giving up about 42% of his balls in play as fly balls, but the BABIP against him has dropped from about .300 the past 3 years to .251 this year. Given that the mix of parks he’s played in should be roughly the same, that tells you a lot about the value of outfield defense — he’s still giving up balls in the air, but a lot more of them are falling into gloves.
The park effects are smaller, and harder to tease out since a pitcher starting every 5 days may only get one start per season in an out-of-division stadium (and the sample size gets even smaller when you get serious and try to break it down by handedness of batter and the differential park effects for that).
That’s not the end of the story with Washburn, however. A big factor — particularly for flyball pitchers — is the HR/FB rate, since even the best outfield defense can’t catch balls already in the seats (nor are you always playing in your pitcher-friendly home stadium). That’s one of the keys to Washburn’s success this year: he’s at only 6.8% HR/FB, compared to more like 9% over his career prior to this. Combine that with a lower walk rate (2.14 BB/9, compared to closer to 3 his past three years with the M’s) so home runs hurt him less, plus the aforementioned outfield defense to eliminate the gaps, and you have a career season. (He has also improved his strand rate to almost 80% from his previous M’s historical values closer to 70%, but a big chunk of that is that he’s not giving up dingers to clean the bases). So some of it is the defense, and some of it is a real improvement in him. This isn’t a reinvention along the lines of Moyer (or apparently Joel Pineiro, who this year has turned himself into the most extreme groundballer in baseball), and it’s unclear how much of that improvement is sustainable at this point in his career (or even over the rest of the season).
Which is why he looks like a sell-high candidate to a lot of people around here.
Heh. Well, the probably figure that they’ll be losing enough to make it back in revenue sharing from those same clubs, aka the Marlins Business Model.
Stupid question but gonna ask, [deleted, asked stupid question]
Paul B
2008 Mariner’s come into the season ripe from 88 wins the previous year. Yuni is playing well (he hit .289 with a .967 fielding percentage). Raul is hitting well, Ichiro is in CF, Kenji hit .287 with 14 bombs, Beltre is hits .276 with 26 dingers. Pitching is thin but you have the best closer in the game.
Now coming into the 2009 season. You lost your second best hitter. Your catcher pooped his pants. The pitcher that you sold the farm for is always hurt. You bring in a DH who is past his prime. Sign a first baseman who’s career average is .236 and strikes out a third of the time. Trade your closer for a bunch of pieces.
Preseason, on paper, 2008 looked better than 2009. My point was about team chemistry. This team has it and the other didn’t have it.
kakson, I’m pretty sure there is an even more recent piece here in which the option of trading Ichiro was presented as more of a “maybe we should actually start thinking about it” proposition. Earlier this season, if memory serves.
I don’t see how the M’s can sell right now, because it would be a P.R. disaster. The M’s just went 5-2 on the road, took three of four from Texas, won more than they lost on the Roadtrip of Death, and are 30-18 since their low mark of 21-26 in late May, outscoring their opponents by 28 runs during that stretch. The fans would riot and the players would become completely demoralized if they sold. If the M’s had dropped five of seven to fall 5.5 games behind the Angels, then it would be a different discussion. The psychology of the moment, though, makes it virtually impossible for the M’s to sell.
Nor should the buy soft, acquiring an Aubrey Huff, Ty Wiggington, Josh Willingham, or any of the other names that have been floated. To catch the Angels and Texas, or Texas, Tampa Bay, and Boston, the M’s need a big piece, a big bat, as well as a complimentary player that improves a week position like SS.
I know that few want to give up Saunders, but what is the M’s projected lineup in 2011? Is it Saunders, Gutierrez, Ichiro? Or is it Halman, Gutierrez, Ichiro? Or is it Ackley, Gutierrez, Ichiro? While Saunders is an excellent prospect, we could trade from a position of strength for a big piece.
St. Louis will NOT offer Matt Holliday arbitration.
He’s making 13.5M this year, and if offered arbitration, the arbitration figure throwing around is about 16M, which is about 20% increase over his current salary.
If St. Louis offers it to Holliday, Holliday will definitely take it. The fact that Bobby Abreu signed for 5M and Adam Dunn got 2 years 20M has got to make his decision simple. Why wouldn’t Matt Holliday take a 16M/year deal in arbitration this off season?
St. Louis will either try to re-sign him for the Adam Dunn money, or just let him walk after the year.
That’s exactly Oakland’s thinking for trading him: they’d lose him to FA with no compensation if they keep him, because they won’t offer him arbitration.
Mark Oh: sure, there were folks who were foolish enough to buy the line on 2008 . . . but on dispassionate analysis, 2009 not only looked better than 2008 on paper, it looked a lot better.
2009 preseason looked better? Really. What is your reasoning?
We are talking before the season. Coming into a new year. You are more optimisitc about winning ballgames after you lost 101 games…than say coming off a year where you won 88?
Holliday probably ends up in the AL East somewhere next year, with a nice, big contract. Abreu is old and Dunn plays defense like my Nana, which is why they didn’t get good deals. Holliday is 29 and a solid defender – I would bet he ends up with a Beltre-esque deal in free agency, if not better.
Paging Mr. Martinez…Edgar Martinez…
Just curious with all this talk of trading our folks who are coming off contract and then negotiating with them over the winter…
I’d be curious if a team has ever signed a player for a future season while trading them away for the current season… ie, signing Washburn for 2010, but then trading the rest of 2009 to some other team for a playoff run. Does that/has that happened?
Because Matt Holliday is a much better baseball player than Bobby Abreu or Adam Dunn and the only way he doesn’t get more than $16 million in guaranteed money this offseason is if his legs fall off?
5-win players get long-term contracts, even if it means sacrificing a first-round draft pick. Abreu got a low salary because nobody wanted to give up a first round pick AND a lot of money for a good but not great hitter who can’t play defense. Dunn got 2/20 because he has no idea what to do when he puts a glove on his hand.
Both of these guys got squeezed out of huge free agent paydays because the market wised up to the fact that the totality of their skills really wasn’t all that valuable. Matt Holliday shouldn’t have that problem, because he’s legitimately very, very good at baseball.
You are not able to quantify team chemistry. This team has team chemistry. Management needs to be mindful of the chemistry when thinking about roster moves. That was my point. To say that before the season in 2008 you thought that it would all go up in smoke and they would lose 101 games, I would like to see that post. Also to say that you saw a .500 plus team out of this roster, this year, I would like to see that post.
If St. Louis offers it to Holliday, Holliday will definitely take it.
The last few weeks, you’ve made a habit out of making declarative statements that are just totally wrong.
Seriously, Holliday’s a $20 million a year player. He’s going to get offered arbitration, and he’s not going to take it.
Stop being wrong all the time.
Also to say that you saw a .500 plus team out of this roster, this year, I would like to see that post.
The search box is your friend.
Mark Oh: heck yeah, I was, and so were the authors here (go back and check the archives, and you’ll see). Sexson gone, Vidro gone, vastly better OF defense (plus I believed in Gutierrez’ bat; I’m not surprised by how well he’s hit this year), Branyan in, Vargas and Olson added to the mix on the mound, Aardsma added to the bullpen mix (no, I didn’t think he’d be this lucky, but I didn’t think Putz had anything left in the tank), Cedeño in to give Yuni competition (I thought he’d hit much better than this, but I expected the glovework) . . . heck, even though I didn’t expect anything much out of Junior, he still projected as an improvement over Vidro. Yeah, absolutely I thought we’d be better than last year. Dave was calling this a 78-84 team on true talent with an outside shot at the playoffs, and I thought that was about right.
I like this team much better than the 2008 version, just as much as you. I read this site all of the time, hardly ever post.
Looking at this team before the season, they shoulnd’t be much better than the 2008 version. Wins and Losses.
(repost)
2008 Mariner’s come into the season ripe from 88 wins the previous year. Yuni is playing well (he hit .289 with a .967 fielding percentage). Raul is hitting well, Ichiro is in CF, Kenji hit .287 with 14 bombs, Beltre is hits .276 with 26 dingers. Pitching is thin but you have the best closer in the game.
Now coming into the 2009 season. You lost your second best hitter. Your catcher pooped his pants. The pitcher that you sold the farm for is always hurt. You bring in a DH who is past his prime. Sign a first baseman who’s career average is .236 and strikes out a third of the time. Trade your closer for a bunch of pieces that you know very little about.
Preseason, on paper, 2008 looked better than 2009. My point was about team chemistry. This team has it and the other didn’t have it.
I am tired of waiting until next year. I think we are a few bats away from being a real contender. I think our pitching staff as is, could be a real threat in the playoffs.
I would love to see us go for it…
I’m all for building a contender that can continue to win for seasons to come..but at the same time if we have a shot at it…why not go for it?? I’m tired of being one of the only three never asked to the dance…
Preseason, on paper, 2008 looked better than 2009. My point was about team chemistry. This team has it and the other didn’t have it.
No. For reading almost every post, how did you miss all the posts where we explained all winter how much better this year’s team was?
It would violate the CBA and the major league agreement, but otherwise go ahead. Seriously, even if you had a gentlemen’s agreement, it would be illegal and the M’s would get a whopping fine from the Commissioner’s office (the equivalent of what happened to the Minnesota Timberwolves re Joe Smith).
Preseason 2008 you knew they were going to lose 101 games?
Dave, could you walk us through what Washburn would likely get in arb and what he’s going to fetch as a free agent if he’s not offered arb?
http://ussmariner.com/2009/04/03/a-quick-note-on-predictions/
http://ussmariner.com/2008/02/05/the-2008-mariners-through-zips/
February 5, 2008
http://ussmariner.com/2009/07/13/bedard-currently-middle-of-the-type-bs/
Thanks Liam.
Methinks it would help that you do a little research on what the blog authors actually said on this, and not rely on conventional wisdom (which may be conventional but is certainly not wise). Then, perhaps we can begin with some ELEMENTARY sabremetric concepts.
This thread is starting to hurt my head…
So as it stands, we’re 5 1/2 games out, and the Angels have a game in hand on us. The way they’re playing, and with their winning %, lets assume they win that game, making us 6 out. 6 games is a LOT to overcome. Coolstandings puts us with about a 11% chance of making the playoffs. I just don’t see how anyone can justify going for it this season based on an 11% probability. That’s a 1 in 9 chance!
Not to mention, the farm system is essentially bare especially at the infield positions. We have no 2B, SS or 3B prospects to really speak of until Truinfel gets healthy, and even he’s a few years away. (Don’t tell me Tui is a good prospect.)
This is a chance to get some players in at key positions, hopefully for as soon as next season. I say trade Bedard, Washburn, Aardsma while their values are about as high as they will get. Then build around these youngsters for years. Do you realize that after this season, the only old veterans (over 30) left will be Ichiro and Johjima?
Let’s face it, the A’s future got a lot better today. Texas has a ton of good prospects coming up, some of whom are already performing at the major league level. Not to mention the Angels who seem to never want to go away even for a season. If the Mariners want to avoid a string of 4th place finishes for years, now is the time to sell, sell, sell!
Anyone who thinks we have a real chance of making the playoffs and thinks Jack Z should bet the next 2-3 years of this franchise’s fortunes on a run needs to give their head a shake.
I gave my head a shake and it didn’t help. If we can get there this year we should make a go of it!! I’m all for trading Bedard or Washburn because I think RRS can step in and pitch well for us…but lets get a bat or two….
My simple wish:
To have Jack Z pull off a blockbuster and make all of you “fans” who have given up on the season already look incredibly foolish.
Mark Oh, lots of people do predict records based on using pretty standard projection techniques for players and reasonable assumptions about playing time. Using these techniques the 2008 team looked like a ~70 win team, although one with more downside than upside. The 2009 team looked like a ~80 win team with more upside than down. The 2008 had some bad luck, and the 2009 has had a little good luck so far. These projections are easy to find if you look around a little.
Thankfully he’s too smart to do this.
“You are not able to quantify team chemistry. This team has team chemistry. Management needs to be mindful of the chemistry when thinking about roster moves. ”
If as you say chemistry is not quantifiable, then roster moves would have no measurable effect upon it either way.
Chemistry is the single most hilariously overused, overrated concept in sports and sports psychology. It’s only attributed positively when a team is winning and negatively when they’re losing. Nobody ever reads stories about awful, 100-loss baseball teams that just have a fantastic clubhouse full of great guys that hit homers for orphans and take each other for pony rides and beer pong on off days.
Put simply, winning breeds “chemistry.” Not the other way around.
It’s clearly still a sellers market? It was one trade that one team overpaid for, how does this prove that everybody else is willing to do the same? This proves nothing other than the Cardinals might have overpaid for Holliday.
Dave, DMZ-
Last week, Dave ran a really good post on the thought of getting J.J. Hardy for both Bedard and Washburn. I liked the idea, do you guys still think it a viable option?
(I have to believe Zduriencik’s speed-dialed Milwaukee- or vice versa- at least once over the last few days. They’re too natural of a trading partner- Z knows them six ways from Sunday, they need pitching- to not have been.)
Secondly, had a thought regarding Stephen Drew of the D-backs. What would it take to acquire him? He’s a lefty bat, 27 in January, and under team control for the next two seasons after this (if I’m not mistaken)…the Diamondbacks aren’t going anywhere this year, and Drew’s not having a great year.
I still think Hardy makes more sense in terms of price tag, mind you. But if it behooves us to acquire a shortstop with a stick (and we all know that it does), Stephen Drew doesn’t sound like a terrible thing to me.
But would the price tag of acquiring Drew be too much, IYO?
My gut feeling is that discussion would start with guys like Halman and Aumont. And I’m not even sure if Halman’s current skill-set would interest them.
Isn’t Wallace about 6 foot 250 lbs? He’s the prototypical A’s player!
- My original post was actually more focused on the Cardnials/A’s trade. However, I’m still sort of confused about the whole concept of trading for prospects.
I apparently can’t search this site very well, but I do remember an entire post showing all the big trades that happened mid-season and how few of the prospects actually turned out to be any good. This was used as justification on why trading Ichiro would be a bad move.
Since I would assume you are going to get better prospects for Ichiro then you are going to get for a Washburn then wouldn’t trading Washburn net you the same risk as you would trading any player?
Of course you are. It shows up in wins and losses (otherwise it doesn’t matter). And since you can predict a range for wins and losses through other means, those other means must implicitly include whatever contribution you think chemistry provides. You can wave your hands and whisper “oooooh, it’s magic” all you want, but the performances of the individual players taken in aggregate tend to be quite predictive, suggesting whatever “chemistry” might add, it doesn’t matter all that much. And while players obviously prefer a happy clubhouse — who doesn’t prefer that kind of work environment — there’s plenty of evidence of winning teams that had corrosive atmospheres, and losing teams that had good chemistry except for all the losing.
As others have already posted, there’s plenty of evidence for both of those points, but I’ll add a couple more for 2009:
– Dave, April 5, 2009
– Dave, February 2, 2009
And for 2008. Remember that everyone assumed Bedard would pitch for a full season, though (given his history) perhaps not super deep into games.
– Derek (who of all people should know better than to cheat) February 9, 2008
Obviously the M’s came in that year towards the very lowest end of the range — a lot of things had to go wrong to be that bad — but nevertheless within the predicted range. It’s worth noting that the 2008 M’s expected ie Pythagorean W-L was 67-95, so perhaps you’d like to use that as evidence for “bad chemistry” on that team, but it could just as easily be called “bad luck” (they were 18-30 in one-run games); clearly it got “quantified” and factored in either way.
John McGrath just posted an interesting column about the Mariners having a better chance getting to the Wild Card playoff spot. If the Angels continue to win like this, I think that we have a better chance getting past the Red Sox and Texas for the Wild Card than getting past the Angels for te division title. It is really weird that Salk never mentions anything about the wild card in his radio show. He just keeps on repeating that the moment we get over six games behind the Angels, we need to start selling. Could that be because he is a big Red Sox fan and he thinks that we could never get past the Red Sox for the Wild Card?
I think this is what you’re looking for:
http://ussmariner.com/2007/06/20/letting-ichiro-leave-for-nothing/
@ stevie_j13
Obivously, if the Angels “continue to win like this”, no one can catch them, because if they never lose, they will remain in first place regardless of what the M’s do. We do have six games left against the Angels, and this division is often won by head-to-head competition. Or lost (see 2007).
Breadbaker,
The remaining six games are too few. If we had ten or twelve games remaining, that’s a different story. Unless we sweep the Angels 6-0 or maybe go 5-1 in the remaining six games, we would not gain enough ground. Example: we win the two remaining series 2-to-1 games each and we only gain two games on the Angels in the standings.
This is not Chicago, New York or Boston. No riots unless it is about fur coats.
Well, they don’t actually riot in those cities, either. Nor would the M’s keep winning if they became sellers. Selling means the front office has given up on this season. Why should the fans react any differently, especially when this team is contending right now after a dismal stretch from 2004-08.
My beef is not with the analysis of the market. Dave is right that sellers are much more likely to get value than buyers. I just don’t think the M’s are in a position to sell because of how they have played the last two months. Trading pitchers for prospects now would be too demoralizing to the players and many of the diehards, while a lot of casual fans will just not bother to go to games in August and September.
Generally the argument against looking at the wild card is that you have more control over your destiny in your own division. But since the Angels apparently are never going to lose again, it might be worth casting a glance in the wild card’s direction. We’ll just assume the M’s can pass Texas (you have to assume that to win the division too, of course). On the positive side, the Red Sox and Tampa still have to play each other, and the Yankees, several more times. So the M’s get “help” in pushing those teams down. On the other hand, both of those teams are probably still going to win more games than the M’s. Tampa right now is on track for 88; the Red Sox could still win 95. The M’s may make it to 85 wins, but are neither of those teams going to do so?
Put another way: to end up at 84-78, the Rays would have to go 32-34 (.485) over the rest of the season; the Bosox would have to go 29-39 (.426). Sure, they’re slumping, but you really think both of these two teams are going to have losing records over the course of almost half a season? Really? That would be an epic, near-historic collapse if one team did it, and you want to believe two of the most talent-packed teams in the AL will do it in the same season? Even if you think the M’s are capable of 90 wins, the Red Sox would have to be a .500 team for the rest of the season (34-34) to come in at 89.
That’s why Salk never talks about it.
Regardless of the buyer/seller question (and it’s not either/or: I think the team could make a case for spinning off one of Bedard/Washburn for prospects while installing RRS/Vargas in the rotation and not make it look like a white flag on the season; dumping both clearly would be a tougher sell).
Anyway, regardless of that, I don’t think anything is going to happen until Cliff Lee and Halladay are no longer in play (either because they got traded, or because teams dropped out because the price was too high). Washburn and Bedard are the prizes for the runners-up.
It’s a seller’s market, so let’s sell. This is becoming more and more obvious with every day that passes by. Can you imagine if we got anything near the Holliday haul for Washburn or Bedard?
We’ve played 95 games, or 58.6% of the season. We’re 5 1/2 games back. That means that for the rest of the year, we have to play over 13 games better than the Angels on a full-season pace. Even if we were the ones that traded for Matt Holliday, and got him for free, it wouldn’t be likely that we’d catch up. There just aren’t enough games left to be played.
The thing that makes 2009 so exciting is that we have Zduriencik now, so we aren’t handicapped by hoping for bad processes that lead to good outcomes. We were much closer to the division lead in 2007, but how quickly we forget. Let Zduriencik see what he can get for our two quickly diminishing assets.
Off the top of my head … Edgar. Buhner. Wilson. Moyer. Nelson. Lampkin. Randy Myers.
I imagine the Angels have team chemistry, as well.
Wrong sport, but don’t forget the immortal Dale Ellis! Never stopped calling Seattle home. God I used to love to watch him play when I was a little kid.
Geoff Baker shares my opinion of the market. It is not a sellers market because of 1 trade.
Well, who the heck are we to argue with you and Geoff Baker, then!
Just mentioning that somebody else disagrees with original post. I’m just curious how this “clearly” makes this a sellers market?
[you're looking for a fight that no one here is going to give you]
This is how the whole arguement begins:
I agree with Tumwater Mike that something needs to be said for cohesion. This team obviously has some good chemistry. On paper, preseason, this roster shouldn’t have been much better than the team we ran out the year before.
In summation this team should more or less approximate the win total of the 2008 team. Shouldn’t have been much better.
Thanks for proving my point that 2008 and 2009 preseason win totals should have been predicted to be similar.
2008
2009
I shouldn’t have said that Dave didn’t predict that this was a .500 ballclub. The real arguement that I wanted to discuss was the chemistry of the team. Please don’t say that it doesn’t matter. If you have ever been in a highly productive work environment you know what I mean. Chemistry isn’t about feeling good about the people with which you work. Good chemistry would be a place where you strive to be better. Sometimes a combination of people make you want to work harder.
Also I love how the piranhas pick out little sections of a statement and don’t address the arguement.
Who is the catalyst of this sudden change and who is supporting it?
It was predicted that 2009 would have one more win than 2008. I said that this team wasn’t predicted to be much better.
We’ve talked about chemistry ad nauseam, go search the archives.
Mark Oh: you clearly aren’t understanding what was actually said — either that or you’re cherry-picking. You’re also trying to rewrite history, since what you actually said was that “Preseason, on paper, 2008 looked better than 2009.” To which our response is: no, it didn’t — the 2009 team looked better.
It was one of the first things I posted today. Maybe you should read the thread. You are trying to argue semantics. You didn’t take the time to look at the context of the discussion.
Actually, you’ve almost singlehandedly dragged this comment thread horribly off-topic, so you aren’t in a position to be telling anyone else to “read the thread”.
Further chemistry-related comments will be treated like the off-topic comments that they are.
[ot]
JJ Hardy is the worst call ever. He would be Cirillo’s caddy out at Newcastle 2 months into his first season at Safeco. A right handed, .260 hitting, quasi power hitting ex-Brewer? Haven’t we tried that? That guy gets dropped by more fantasy teams than Shawn Alexander.
You know why the Cardinals sent their prospects? Because they have money, and they have Pujols, and they are going to win the World Series this year. Who cares if a prospect projects to be a solid number 4 starter in 2017. By the time any of those players are good, the A’s will have already traded them back to the Cardinals for prospects in a rebuilding effort to get back to the World Series in 2037.
The A’s big 3???
We have a better big 3 right now.
Dreeze: way to distort everything. In any case, the Cards are far from guaranteed even to make the WS, let alone win it; but that sort of mindset is one big reason why, despite everything, it really does look like a seller’s market this year.
And they have lost ground in the AL West. And the Wild Card aint happenin.
Let’s revisit this October 5.
BTW, are you aware that the MARINERS are closer to the RED SOX than they are to the ANGELS?
I think it’s still possible to improve this year’s squad, AND build for the future.
That’s no bold or unique statement, Dave’s endorsed that from Day One….but I believe it still holds true.
But by “improving this year’s squad”, I don’t mean “overtake the Angels” as a primary goal. I think that primary goal should now be to take steps to match and exceed the moves our division rivals have made to improve themselves for the future.
It’s very clear to me that this team- as it stands- does not have the horses for the 2009 title, they just don’t. If the Angels were playing at something other than meta-human levels, it’d be one thing.
But the Angels are playing like what they are- the best team in our division. It’s our bad luck they’re playing their best prolonged stretch of baseball right when we needed them to falter.
But falter they’re not doing, and so I think it’s time we sell, sell, sell…and buy a little, too.
We can pitch with most teams, play much better than average ML defense- but we just don’t have enough bats to be in this at this time.
And the elephant-sized hole is- of course- at shortstop.
But, there’s the rub. Where to go for improvements? Hell, our own erstwhile shortstop is living proof what a depressed market it is for ML-caliber shortstops. If Betancourt hadn’t been a shortstop (loosest sense of word here), we’d've had to settle for a Coke machine that works, maybe a free 18-pack thrown in.
Internal options? Years away. I know the two names currently in the org- Gabriel Noriega, Juan Diaz- that the M’s hope come through.
If/when he signs, Nick Franklin might get included in that group. I have my doubts about him as a SS, but really, that’s another discussion…
Free agency could hardly be more fallow in Winter 2009, at the SS slot in particular. A really quite vexing situation for an off-season when we have a lot of bad money coming off the books.
That’s why I think finding a fairly long-range SS- with a bat AND glove- is very important in 2009.
J.J. Hardy. Stephen Drew. Jack Wilson. Reid Brignac. Any one of them would make sense to bring in. This is where Zduriencik’s biggest test of the year sits….find the right guy and get him without doling out the farm.
Hardy for Bedard and Washburn would absolutely qualify as that- turning two depreciating assets into a guy who’ll play for us well in 2010.
(If I can sing just a bit of praise, Dave- yeah, I thought that scenario was brilliant, it made me wish I’d thought of it.)
And then…what other talent is there, waiting to be sold at under-value terms? If one looks around, I bet some interesting trinkets are still there to be had.
(And who’s been better at finding under-valued trinkets this year than Jack Zduriencik?)
We all know Ian Snell can be had for a song, maybe a short medley of Isley Brothers tunes. He wants no part of the Buccos, they want to get rid of him ASAP.
Trade them Balentien and a guy like Nathan Adcock, and watch Snell become a stabilizing rod at the back-end of the rotation.
You can get wins from Snell that you’d also get from Washburn, I really believe this. Plus, lots of chances to pick up another starter for a promising young player or two. What would the Padres want for Chris Young? The Rockies for Aaron Cook? The Marlins for Ricky Nolasco?
This has been a really long post, and I’m a notch below realllly drunk, I best cut this off where it is.
But, basic point: The Mariners are better than what they were, and have a real chance to get MUCH better, soon. I’m now in favor of sell a lot, buy a little…as long as a shortstop comes back, some way, somehow.
Well, damn, if he sucks in fantasy baseball I want no part of him on the M’s. Thanks for adding your light to the discussion.
Sorry, Dave, your valuation of Hardy was WRONG!