Cactus League Game 28, Rangers at M’s

Jay Yencich · March 27, 2011 at 11:50 am · Filed Under Game Threads 

RF Ichiro!
3B Figgins
LF Bradley
DH Cust
CF Langerhans
C Moore
1B Kennedy
SS Rodriguez
2B Josh Wilson

P French

There were some cuts today, with Tui, Mike Wilson, Royce Ring, Denny Bautista, and Justin Miller heading out. This brings us down to thirty-five players in camp.

Some of these cuts are a little surprising. Tui wasn’t having one of his amazing springs, but at .300/.349/.475, he was competent, and probably would have remained with the team a while longer if not for the Gutierrez issues forcing us to carry another center fielder. This is Tui’s last option year.

Ring is probably the bigger surprise because it wasn’t too long ago that people were talking of him as though he was a lock for the bullpen. He walked a few too many and demonstrated that he shouldn’t face right-handed hitters ever, but the alternative was Aaron Laffey. Whatever.

Denny Bautista pitched better than his 9.82 ERA, running a 12/4 K/BB in 7.1 innings, but he also seemed to be facing a roster crunch and is the same pitcher as Jesus Colome from last year.

Tom Wilhelmsen and Cesar Jimenez are both still with the team as long as it takes for the M’s to decide what they ought to do with them. This is one of the few similarities between the two.

Tags:

Comments

61 Responses to “Cactus League Game 28, Rangers at M’s”

  1. MrZDevotee on March 27th, 2011 6:13 pm

    At some point you have to combine the theoretical with what can actually get accomplished. Which LF was that who was going to come here for $6 million? I’m trying to remember that excellent left fielder who was available, just waiting for the Mariners to offer him $6 million? His name escapes me. And if it wasn’t for trying to get someone to take Silva off our hands, that $6 million doesn’t exist. We don’t spend that money if we have to keep/release Silva. And, reality is, we were never gonna just release Silva with that much money tied around his ankle for two more years (we probably would have this year, though, as the Cubs did). No one is arguing about the value of the players– it’s a same shit, different pile, scenario. But I prefer the pile that can hit a few homeruns when he’s not at the shrink’s office, then the one who every 5 days has a 10.00 era, and doesn’t take the field the other 4 days. (Way less production than Bradley last year– takes 80% of the games off).

    But feel free to sarcastically disagree some more eponymous, or show some more stats that make a point for which guy was gonna help the 100+ loss team the most last year.

    I’ll still take Bradley over Silva (we can have them BOTH now, if you really want).

  2. Liam on March 27th, 2011 6:41 pm

    Johnny Damon.

  3. The_Waco_Kid on March 27th, 2011 6:47 pm

    We will have won the Silva trade when we are no longer talking about it. Add Bradley to lalo’s list of wildcards. The Silva trade was Jack Z trying to make the best of a bad situation. Given his constraints, I think Jack Z has done about as well as any GM could have.

  4. Westside guy on March 27th, 2011 7:03 pm

    It’s currently a moot argument; but I am certain in 2012 we will have “won” the Bradley-Silva trade. Meaning we won’t have either player taking up $12 million of our payroll at that point.

    Cuz really, right now we’re all just playing semantic games that boil down to “who lost less badly?” 😛

  5. gwangung on March 27th, 2011 7:50 pm

    That’s Ken Levine. He’s from San Diego, and was one of the writers for Cheers. During the Bill Plummer debacle, he was Dave’s partner. He’s funnier than he**. Give him a chance, he’ll grow on you.

    Pretty much like a bad fungus, if you’re not careful.

    I think he worked best with Dave, because Dave was great in feeding Ken straight lines, which then got hammered out of the park. Rick and Sims aren’t quite as good at that…

    Check out Ken’s own blog,, which he keeps supplied regularly with decent material.

  6. Leroy Stanton on March 27th, 2011 8:09 pm

    MrZDevotee,

    I don’t think anyone is arguing that the Silva-Bradley trade wasn’t the right thing to do at the time. How it actually played out is a different question though.

  7. jordan on March 27th, 2011 8:44 pm

    Let me just end this “who won the Silva-Bradley trade” discussion.

    Say you are taking out the garbage, and it just so happens your neighbor is doing so at the same time. You think, “Maybe he’s tossing something good” and he thinks the same thing. So you decide to just swap trash. Nobody wins this trade because both were just giving away stuff they didn’t want anyway. Just because one side may have gotten a half eaten granola bar, that doesn’t mean they win.

  8. CecilFielderRules on March 27th, 2011 8:54 pm

    Let me just end this “who won the Silva-Bradley trade” discussion.

    Say you are taking out the garbage, and it just so happens your neighbor is doing so at the same time. You think, “Maybe he’s tossing something good” and he thinks the same thing. So you decide to just swap trash. Nobody wins this trade because both were just giving away stuff they didn’t want anyway. Just because one side may have gotten a half eaten granola bar, that doesn’t mean they win.

    I was able to follow this until the last part, where it started to get unbelievable. There’s no way there’s a half eaten granola bar laying around when Silva is involved.

  9. jordan on March 27th, 2011 9:03 pm

    There’s no way there’s a half eaten granola bar laying around when Silva is involved.

    Haha, what was I thinking?

  10. mattlock on March 27th, 2011 11:36 pm

    I was able to follow this until the last part, where it started to get unbelievable. There’s no way there’s a half eaten granola bar laying around when Silva is involved.

    Ironic that this quote came from someone named “CecilFielderRules”.

  11. IwearMsHats on March 28th, 2011 9:14 am

    Is waiver priority first come first serve in the off-season?

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.