Dave on KGA

Dave · July 6, 2010 at 2:57 pm · Filed Under Mariners 

I’ll be doing my regular weekly spot on SportsRadio 1510 KGA in Spokane tonight, rather than in our normal Monday slot, due to the holiday. I’ll be on with Toby and Danny at 5:35. You can listen live here.

Comments

7 Responses to “Dave on KGA”

  1. Sports on a Schtick on July 6th, 2010 5:55 pm

    Bullet points recap!

    * Prior to Dave’s segment the guys were talking about Kobayashi and the whole hot dog fiasco. Also “Gettin’ Jiggy wit It” was playing a lot in the background. Great omen or really great omen?

    * Dave has one helluva intro song.

    * All points suggest Cliff Lee will be dealt before his Friday start.

    * Dave likes Twins, Rangers and Rays as potential trade partners from the M’s perspective. Hicks/Ramos is interesting. Rangers need $$ and perhaps M’s can throw in cash to get a guy like Martin Perez. Rays might be in a win-now mode; M’s could work a three-way and grab a guy like Prince Fielder.

    * Phillies don’t have pieces to reacquire Lee (Domonic Brown is off-limits; rest of system is ehh).

    * Aardsma is a name to dangle, as is Brandon League. Jose Lopez has low value because, well, we know. Dave mentions the M’s will probably buy him out next year.

    * Kotchman doesn’t have a role on the team. Probably trade for nothing much or released.

    * Felix deserved to be an All-Star but didn’t have enough shiny wins.

    * “No one should ever expect to see the Erik Bedard of old again.”

  2. henryv on July 6th, 2010 6:01 pm

    * “No one should ever expect to see the Erik Bedard of old again.”

    I’m beginning to wonder if Erik Bedard is even a real person.

    Either that or he’s dead, and the M’s are just using his name to collect his social security checks. However, he is Canadian, so he might not get them.

  3. joser on July 6th, 2010 6:08 pm

    I wonder if that intro will ever get old? Cracks me up every time. Though Dave has said a few more bite-worthy bits so they could mix it up a bit as time goes on.

    (I can’t believe I refreshed USSM at precisely 5:35 and discovered this post, thus managing to hear the entire thing, no more and no less)

  4. joser on July 6th, 2010 6:11 pm

    Either that or he’s dead, and the M’s are just using his name to collect his social security checks. However, he is Canadian, so he might not get them.

    Maybe they send various players over the border using the Bedard identity to get free health care and cheap pharma.

    Besides, the only guy on the opening day roster old enough to collect social security was Griffey.

  5. matthew on July 6th, 2010 8:55 pm

    If Lee is penciled in on Friday, I’m going to the game. If not, I’m curious to know how many no shows there are — even on a Friday — even on a day where it’s predicted to be 86 degrees…

  6. henryv on July 6th, 2010 10:13 pm

    Maybe they send various players over the border using the Bedard identity to get free health care and cheap pharma.

    If Bedard could get cheap parmecuticles you know that the Yankees would have signed him to help out with A-Rod.

  7. joser on July 7th, 2010 8:53 am

    In terms of recap we should also mention that Dave gave a succinct and sensible argument for trading Lee rather than hanging on to him: the M’s are out of it (this isn’t 1995: we don’t have a young Griffey about to come back from the DL and there’s more than one team to catch), so the M’s realistically are looking at just three months of awesome but ultimately meaningless production from him. Meanwhile, the teams that are looking to trade are looking at three meaningful months plus October. Thus Lee is far more valuable to them than he is to the M’s, and that difference should be exploited. (Moreover, Texas in particular has no payroll room and so are willing to give up even more talent to teams willing to pay the salary of the player they are trading — they gave up real talent to get Bengie Molina, for example — which is why Dave thinks the best deal might come from them… even setting aside the bonus of simultaneously weakening the system of a division rival).

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.