Bedard Passes Physical, Deal Done
The M’s announced the Bedard deal officially today. It’s the reported one year deal, but it also has a mutual option for 2011. Now, before you get too excited, mutual options are generally not exercised. If Bedard doesn’t come back, the M’s won’t pick it up. If he comes back and pitches really well, Bedard won’t exercise it. It’s there, but it’s not overly important.
Yusmeiro Petit is the casualty of the 40-man roster, being DFA’d to make room for Bedard. If you’re wondering, they can’t put Bedard on the 60 day DL until the end of spring training, so for now, he’ll use up a 40-man roster spot. He’ll be DL’ed before the season starts, though, so if the team needs to add a non-roster player (like Josh Bard) to the team, they’ll have Bedard’s spot to do so.
Comments
51 Responses to “Bedard Passes Physical, Deal Done”
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Shoot. At first glance I thought it was a player option and a team option, which would have been pretty cool.
That is what a mutual option is. It’s both a player option and a team option. It only kicks in if both sides exercise the option. If either side opts out, it’s void.
I liked the description over at LL of Bedard as a “pinch pitcher,” coming in during the season’s second half to give us (in theory) a boost/advantage. I like the deal. Even if he pitches like he did here, he’s still an upgrade. If he ever returns to Baltimore form, then we might just go places (the postseason?) even with our offense.
Dave,
Any reason to be upset about Petit? Will he clear waivers? Is he even worth worrying about?
And I think the Bedard signing is great by the way.
Thanks Dave. I was thinking it was an either or situation. I seem to recall a contract structured like that this offseason, but can’t put my finger on which one. Then again, I could be suffering from a lack of adequate caffeine this morning…
Was only lukewarm on the notion, but the more it’s been bandied about the blogosphere, the more I can see it working.
If Bedard works out, it will be like we got one of the best of the free agent pitching market without having to fight other contenders to get him. Jack’s skills as a GM are so advanced, he’s able to make midseason trade deadline deals in February.
So are the Ms done now? Yes, yes, “always looking for ways to make the team better”, blah blah blah. But practically speaking, there really isn’t too much more room on the 40-man to pick up halves of platoons, bargain-basement guys, high risk/reward injury people, etc. Sooner or later they have to try going with what they have…
It ain’t over until GMZ says it’s over.
So is Washburn a dead issue now? My thought was they would make a call on him once Bedard’s progress was evaluated. If he won’t be ready until July, they could add Wash for the first few months. Injuries, etc. happen – it would be nice not to have to resort to the Fister/Vargas/French/Olson group too often for starts.
How about Smoltz for the 3rd starter role until Bedard is healthy? Then we move him to the bullpen and we get added value out of our starters and relievers.
Smoltz has said he wasn’t to stay out East.
The difference between Washburn and Vargas (the best of that bunch, IMO) is almost entirely on the percentage of homeruns they give up on balls in the air.
Let’s look at a comparison of what they did in 09, with the M’s.
Swinging strike percentage: 2009 Vargas with the M’s, 7.6, 2009 Washburn, 7.4 (highest of his career – it dropped back to 6.5 with Detroit, which is much more in line with his career numbers). So Vargas is likely better here.
Ball percentage: JV 39.2, JW 37.8 (up to 40.1 with Detroit, which is not in line with his career numbers). Slight advantage Washburn.
Called strike percentage: JV 16.2, JW 15.2. Advantage Vargas, though this isn’t as much of a skill.
So what happens on batted balls?
JV 38.7 groundballs, 29.5 flyballs, 22.2 line drives, 7.7 infield flys.
JW 35.6 groundballs, 33.2 flyballs, 22.6 line drives, 6.5 infield flys.
Advantage Vargas on all types, and keep in mind this doesn’t include when Washburn got shelled with the Tigers.
Of those flyballs, 9.03% of JV’s left the yard, a ridiculous 4.25% of JW’s left the yard (which turned into an even more ridiculous the other way 13.64% in Detroit).
In short, Vargas comes out (slightly) better in every single metric except ball percentage and percent of flyballs which turn into homeruns. If we accept that the difference in their abilities to keep flyballs from being homeruns is negligible, as it is with most pitchers, and simply regress their numbers to what we’d expect out of a left hander pitching in Safeco, then Vargas was the (slightly) better pitcher in the innings he pitched. Seriously, the difference is all caught up in the home run rates. But really the differences are negligible. What this comparison really shows is how incredibly similar the two are.
Now, Washburn is proven, he’s an innings eater, Vargas might not be quite as good as he looked in 09, yadda yadda yadda. If you want to say the Bus is worth a quarter to a half a win more than Vargas for that, I won’t argue with you, although I could make the argument the other way, too.
But we’re really just talking half a season until Bedard comes back (as the team seems very committed to Snell and RRS). Which makes it more like an eighth to a quarter of a win difference, at the most.
That advantage isn’t worth the money it would cost to sign Washburn, not is it worth the spot on the 40 man roster.
Stick with Vargas.
In short, Vargas comes out (slightly) better in every single metric except ball percentage and percent of flyballs which turn into homeruns.
And yet Vargas has never been a +1 WAR pitcher (and has been <0 WAR two of his four seasons); Washburn has been between 1.3-2.4 WAR per year his entire career. Washburn's FIP has run in the mid-4s; Vargas in Seattle had an FIP of 5.07 — and that's with a .286 BABIP.
Everyone is predicting Vargas to improve while Washburn declines, and past performance doesn't predict blah blah blah. But Washburn has a better pitcher than Vargas, and if prices were equal I'd choose Washburn over Vargas. But prices, of course, aren't equal. Is Washburn's probable .5 WAR advantage over Vargas worth spend $5M/year more? Probably not, not when you can get that advantage over Vargas if you get lucky with just one of Fister/French/Petit. Or, hell, if Vargas manages to improve that much himself.
Will some other team please sign washburn so people can stop asking about him?!?! That’d be swell thanks
A mutual option as you have described it seems to have no penalty to either side for declining the option. Is that true? I suppose there may be some value in saying “this is what we project could be a fair deal in the Fall of 2010″ but both sides will have a lot more info by then, so it would seem a long shot for the situation then to match precisely what appears to be fair now. Why go through this exercise? Public relations?
Thank you, Dave, for the Bedard news and explaining the roster move. I wish there was a contest here on U.S.S. Mariner for commenters to pick the Mariners Opening Day 25 Man Roster ( with proceeds going to support this great website) Can it be done ?
I thought this was supposed to be about Bedard, not Vargas/Washburn? But whatever. If you want to compare numbers of Washburn to Vargas that badly, maybe you should take a realistic view of the numbers that matter and interpret them to a pitcher pitching in a spacious outfield with great outfielders. Detroit numbers aside, comparing fly balls to groundballs at SAfeco, you would preferably want fly balls, unlike what you seem to think in your comparison to Vargas. Balls on the ground have a chance to be a hit, while fly balls are far more likely to be outs. Look at Washburns ERA to Vargas and their is considerable difference. WAshburn is a proven commodity, while Vargas hasnt even established that he can be a consistent, reliable number 5 starting pitcher.
Furthermore, your comparing a pitcher that is not even projected into the starting rotation against one of our better starting pitchers last year. Vargas will not even make the starting rotation this year unless there is an injury to RRS, Snell, or Fister. I think, as of right now, Fister is the 5 and Vargas could still be behind French. I like Vargas, but he is just not as good as the pitchers in front of him, right now. But who knows, Spring Training will determine a lot more.
Does the mutual option preclude the team from offering him arbitration?
The MLB article says that there is a buyout if the Mariners decline.
Thanks Liam. It will be interesting to see how large the buyout is.
I hate to suggest it, but I could imagine a scenario where the mutual option was exercised: if Bedard initially pitches well but then comes up injured again. In that case you might have exactly the situation you have right now: the M’s willing to take a cheap flyer on him while most other teams are scared off.
The Z has gone from dominating baseball to bending time itself to his will.
I don’t understand why Doug Fister isn’t getting just a little bit more attention for next year based on how he threw in ’09.
I admit in advance that my lack of understanding has largely to do with what I saw (wicked darts thrown for strikes), and very little to do with empirical numbers. I’d like to know what those were.
Larry stone posted an interview with Bedard’s agent. Most interesting to me is this gem:
I realize as an agent it’s his job to talk up his client, but we’ve been projecting 10-12 months as recovery. If this is true, Bedard’s doctor sees him as 8-9 months. Throw in recovery time and we’re not getting a half season of Bedard. We’re getting 2/3-3/4 of a season.
In the words of Mark Pieper: “Boy, that would be outstanding.”
I don’t understand why many of the commenters hate RRS. Someone explain that to me. He’s a servicable #3 and a great #4.
SlowRoast: you bring up an interesting point regarding groundballs vs flyballs for this team. I have no idea where the tipping point is, but I hypothetically there must be a defense/ballpark combo that make flyballs more desirable than groundballs. I would be very surprised if we’re at that point, but it’s worth looking into.
As a rule, a pitcher who induces groundballs is much better than one who gives up flyballs, but I’m sure you’re aware of that.
Washburn and Vergas are projected to have similar FIP, but far more IP for Wash.
Washburn is probably a 1.8 to 2.5 WAR pitcher.
If price is right, We should get him.
Is there a possibility that Bedard is furhter along in his rehab then both the M’s and him want to announce? Maybe he might be ready by May.
Actually, ground balls are preferable to fly balls, especially with a competent defense.
A ground ball will never turn into a HR (except for one down the line that turns into an inside the parker, which generally is because of an injury to an outfielder or a bizarre ricochet), but a fly ball very well may.
A ground ball pitcher is generally much preferred over a fly ball pitcher, because hitters have a much more difficult time turning two-seamers and splitters into line drives than they do with four-seamers.
Even if Bedard is ready to pitch by May he’ll need some rehab starts in the minors and will be on a restricted pitch count for awhile. I doubt we’d see any lengthy outings from him until July.
@rsrobinson: If Dr. Yocum is right about Bedard’s recovery rate (and he’s the expert, so there is at least a good chance), he should be ready in mid-April and thus ready for the Mariners in mid-May or so. Given the amount of off-days the M’s have in April and May, they’ll only need a fifth starter 4 times looking at the schedule, as long as Bedard is back by the end of May.
Of course if his recovery time is expected to be this quick, they won’t be able to use the 60 day DL on him, but small price to pay if he’s really going to be ready to go by mid to late May.
Interesting quotes from Bedard from camdenchat:
“They’ve done a phenomenal job this off-season,” Bedard said. “Getting Cliff Lee? Man, with Felix (Hernandez) and Lee at the top of the rotation, how are you ever going to lose?”
“I’d love it – put me down as No. 3B, because Ryan (Rowland-Smith) could be No. 3, he’s ready,” Bedard said. “I’d love to be back in Seattle.”
I liked the description over at LL of Bedard as a “pinch pitcher,†coming in during the season’s second half to give us (in theory) a boost/advantage.
In ’96, KJR’s the ‘Fabulous Sports Babe” opined that RANDY JOHNSON’s return from the DL would be the better than any deadline deal.
Well, it wasn’t.
Let’s hope that BEDARD’s DL return is better.
I don’t understand why many of the commenters hate RRS. Someone explain that to me. He’s a servicable #3 and a great #4.
Amen to that, bro. After coming back from his bout with tendonitis, he was averaging 6-1/3 innings per start. If he’s healthy over a full season, he could very well have a breakout year.
I haven’t seen much hatred for RRS. Most people assume he’s earned a spot in the rotation so most speculation about rotation spots revolve around the combo platter of Snell/Fister/Vargas/French.
Any chance that we still end up trading for Harang?
With all the potential LHP starters, and now adding Bedard, I would think Harang would be HUGE espeically if Cincy sent $4M cash back on Harang which I would expect.
It would also give a very balanced rotation without having 4 LHPs, and Snell would be bumped to the pen in long relief…or sent back to Cincy in the same trade?!
Felix/Lee/Harang/Bedard/RRS.
Damn.
“If” the Z Man found a way to land Harang now, I can now see RRS added to the package that it would take to land Gonzo for 1B.
We have so many #5 starters now it ain’t even funny. Seattle adds a few of these pitchers that include RRS and also Aarsdma, allowing the Pads then to trade Bell…
That would be a nice ‘start’ to a Gonzo trade, but it will definitely take more. In my mind RRS is a #4, with #3 potential.
Trading RRS at this point is a bad idea. Next year we will not have Cliff “fucken” Lee around to drool over, and it will be a near miracle if Bedard every pitches anywhere near 06-07. RRS is under team control for some time and on the cheap. We need those inexpensive players to keep producing. Were not the Yankees. We need to develope him not trade him.
So we have done our deadline deal, but in February. For a serious impact pitcher for whom we pay essentially nothing.
One thing we haven’t even had time to ponder yet, with Bedard back in the fold, is the value of offering our slew of #5 pitchers their own mini instructional league day in and day out, getting to watch three #1 pitchers prepare for and then face (and hopefully dominate) various AL lineups. It’s great to be optimistic about our young starters, but the rosters they’ve succeeded against previously are beginning to have a better feel for their styles, which can lead to some struggles with division rivals– so hopefully King/Lee/Bedard can be helpful in this regard (like Edgar was with so many young hitters during games).
If our top three can embrace that roll as teachers we’re well on our way to jump-starting the “build a winning team from within” approach that Z preaches.
For just these reasons, I wouldn’t be in a hurry to trade the young guys yet. Keep ‘em or trade ‘em, they’ll be better commodities a year from now.
(Man, it’s really amazing how much more relaxing it is to be a baseball fan when you believe your GM has a firm grasp on EVERY aspect of your favorite team. And what a CHANGE it is for us M’s fans.)
Okay so do we know what these incentives are???? I would really like to know….. i wonder if one of them if for finally going over 100 pitches in a game????
I’d brain the GM who put that in as an “incentive.”
Ha. Ha. So funny. You mean like he did eight times in last season alone? You know, while injured?
And six times in 2008 with an additional three at 99?
Over three quarters of his games in 2007, his last “healthy” season, were over 100 pitches, too. Crazy talk!
/sarcasm
Just to be clear, you don’t have to wait until Opening Day to put Bedard on the DL. I’m not sure what the earliest date you can do that is, but its usually in February. Last season the Braves put Tim Hudson on it on February 26th.
If Bedard thinks he may be back in the bigs by May, he can’t go on the 60 Day DL on Opening Day.
[link]
I have a Mac”F”ail conspiracy theory.
The end of 2007, Bedard was put on the 60-Day DL, and didn’t pitching past 8/26 that year. I know Bedard had to pass a physical with Seattle, but Bavasi was so blasted desperate to make anything work I feel that as long as Bedard walked in without an amputated left arm…the deal was going to get done.
I wanted Bedard really bad at the time, but I was extremely skeptical about his health coming off of the 60 DL. The question is “Why” they took him off prior to the MLB WS in 2007 was to trade him. I felt MacPhail and the O’s management knew that there could be continued Bedard injuries going into 2008. So thus their huge effort that offseason to hurry up and trade him to the highest bidder. They had BoSox, Dodgers, Cincy, and Seattle as potential trade candidates asking for the moon.
Bavasi ended up being the lone sucker in the end, and MacPhail literally soaked our franchise with Bavasi’s ignorance!
This was such an unethical trade to start with, and I even thought MacPhail wanted another organization to take the 2008-2009 risk of Bedard, and then they would come back and work at grabbing him back in FA in 2010. That would of been horrible PR for Seattle, despite Bavasi already being sent packing.
WOW…like the Baltimore Sun article above clearly brought out now…they were working as hard as the M’s to do it too!
My worse nightmare was that Bedard would go back to the O’s on the contract he just signed with Seattle. This would of been the final nail in the coffin on the Bedard deal, and to slap the M’s franchise in the face even more. MacPhail would of landed our franchise’s 6 top prospects AND get Bedard back 2 years later.
UNBELIEVABLE.
I do NOT like MacPhail and his unethical business practices, and will be happy if we NEVER trade with him ever again. You can bet the Z Man has already figured that out too, so we won’t have to worry about that.
How it’s turning out now, we could have Bedard for 4 years now (08-11). A “little” more palatable.
Hopefully we’ll see the 06-07 Bedard (before his 8/26/07 injury that is).
What is unethical about the trade Bedard trade? The Mets can say the same thing about Jack Z being unethical regarding the trade of JJ Putz. Putz admitted he was damaged goods at the time of the trade. It is up to each organization to do their due diligence.
Don’t get mad at MacPhail for doing his job. Why wouldn’t the Orioles try to sign him now? Every thing that we are all saying that for the money is low risk would be for the same for any club.
Your anger is directed at the wrong person. Bavasi was the idiot. Was MacPhail supposed to negotiate against himself and say that “no, you are giving up too much, we will just take Jones and Sherrill. You can keep the other players.”
So as of right now if the baseball gods are with us we can look forward to mid-season additions of Bedard and Ackley. Nice.
Alleged. As in all cases, there’s a vast amount of grey here. Teams need to provide undamaged players and medical records if requested as part of the trade, or these cases go to Selig for arbitration (and compensation). If Putz was really injured to the point of being unusable, it requires a set of things to happen:
- Mariners know (obviously) and don’t disclose
- Mets don’t know (less likely than you’d think) and still go ahead
- Mets doctors sign off on the trade, or the Mets decide to wave the doctors off and not do a physical.
- Once the trade is made and Putz shows up, unable to pitch, the Mets decide it’s no big deal and don’t protest or ask for the trade to be voided by MLB.
So.. yeah.
I am not sure how that changes anything I wrote. Caveat emptor. Personally, I loved watching Putz pitch when he was closing games for the Mariners, but I don’t really respect him. For all I know he could have been making the entire thing up, but no one has come out to deny what he said as far as I know.
Players have pain all them so the Mets might not have thought anything about the situation. If I were a betting man (and I am not), I would guess your third point is most likely true.
But, let’s go back to the point I was making, there is no reason to be mad at MacPhail.