Game 92, Rangers at Mariners

marc w · July 14, 2011 at 5:10 pm · Filed Under Game Threads, Mariners 

Jason Vargas vs. Derek Holland, 7:19pm

The M’s kick off the second half with comfortably low expectations. They’re within a 8 games of the Rangers, but with the Rangers healthier than they’ve been in a while and with the M’s coming off a sweep in Anaheim, Seattle isn’t exactly a sexy dark horse pick for the division right now. Shannon Drayer’s blog post sums it up.

Derek Holland’s got very good raw stuff (the 2nd fastest average FB velocity for a lefty starter), but a home run problem has prevented him from becoming a legitimate top of the rotation starter. His peripherals are better than his ERA, but they’re not jaw dropping. After struggling with the HR ball in Arlington – and who hasn’t – he’s actually given up more on the road this year. Of course, Holland is facing the Mariners at Safeco field tonight, so all of that stuff about home runs is just hypothetical anyway. Holland’s left-handedness even gets him a bonus: Chone Figgins is in the line-up.

I’d always harbored some hope that Holland would struggle in Texas the way he did in 2009, and that the Rangers would move him to make room for Scheppers/Feldman/Ogando/Hurley/whoever, but facing a team with a wOBA of .278 on a cold, rainy evening is not going to help him put up superficially bad numbers.

As always, check out Lookout Landing’s series preview for a lot of good information on what Holland (and the other Ranger starters) throw, and how the teams fare offensively and defensively. Hint: the Mariners aren’t good offensively.

The line-up:
1: Ichiro!
2: Ryan
3: Ackley
4: Olivo
5: Smoak (DH)
6: Kennedy (1b)
7: Gutierrez
8: Figgins
9: Halman (LF)

On a brighter note, Taijuan Walker, fresh off his first career complete game, came in at #30 on Keith Law’s list($) of the top 50 prospects in baseball. Jackson Generals SS/concussion victim Nick Franklin’s at #40.

Chris Seddon takes the hill for Tacoma against Salt Lake at 7, James Paxton’s pitching right now for Jackson vs. Carolina, James Gilheeney faces Lancaster, Tony Butler leads Clinton vs. Great Lakes, Seon-Gi Kim’s given up a run so far for Pulaski, and Stephen Kohlscheen gets his 3rd start for Everett against Spokane.

Comments

81 Responses to “Game 92, Rangers at Mariners”

  1. lalo on July 14th, 2011 9:36 pm

    15 more games this month against Texas, Toronto, Boston, NY, and Tampa. If the M’s win 4 of those I’ll be amazed.

    I´ll be amazed if they score more than 10 runs in 15 games

  2. kenshabby on July 14th, 2011 9:37 pm

    Fun fact: The Blue Jays scored more runs tonight than the M’s have in their last 8 games.

  3. Westside guy on July 14th, 2011 9:39 pm

    The phrase “pitching and defense wins championships” has been turned upside down. That may have held true in the past, but a team just cannot be constructed with an offensive void and expect to compete.

    I think your point is valid – but a lot of people look at the team and seem to think it proves “pitching and defense” is overrated. It’s not – just look at the Giants last year. Pitching and defense can offset a mediocre offense… but not a truly awful one.

    Even if your defense is a whole run better than the average; as long as your offense is two runs worse than average, you’re gonna lose a lot of games.

  4. pgreyy on July 14th, 2011 9:40 pm

    I tend to agree with Drayer–this team IS the team that I thought it would be going into this year. It’s the bargain we made–to build a team through the draft and not try to pull off an immediate (and expensive and unlikely to be successful) turn around via free agency. I’m certainly not going to join in the chorus of those saying that everything has to change just because things are frustrating right now.

    Instead, I’ll concentrate on a damn fine performance from the bullpen–Gray & Ray did just fine–and dream of the days ahead when the hits lead to runs and the runs will lead to wins.

    …and I’ll thank my lucky stars that I wasn’t at the ballpark to suffer through yet another weak sauce loss in person. (After all…I’m an M’s fan with hope for the future, not a masochist.)

  5. Westside guy on July 14th, 2011 9:43 pm

    I really want Fielder for 2012, but, 150 millions? That would destroy the budget like, forever!

    The problem with getting Fielder in 2012 is you’re still paying him huge piles o’ cash to likely suck in 2017.

  6. make_dave_proud on July 14th, 2011 9:55 pm

    Pitching and defense can offset a mediocre offense… but not a truly awful one.

    Yep, right there with you. And I agree that everyone is a little overboard on it right now. But the imbalance in competency across facets of the game (hitting, pitching, defense) is comical, at this point.

    I wonder if “Trader Jack” is basically stuck with what he’s put together. If I were another GM in baseball and was interested in a player on the Mariners, there is barely a non-zero chance it’s a position player. Jack might be able to move a few guys, but only for scrap heap guys. Unless he’s trading pitching, I can’t see this team changing anytime this year.

  7. Glen on July 14th, 2011 10:08 pm

    I wonder if “Trader Jack” is basically stuck with what he’s put together. If I were another GM in baseball and was interested in a player on the Mariners, there is barely a non-zero chance it’s a position player.

    That is what makes this year’s draft a little strange as it was almost exclusively pitching and catchers — the organizational strength, if the M’s have one.

  8. xsacred24x on July 14th, 2011 10:16 pm

    The problem with getting Fielder in 2012 is you’re still paying him huge piles o’ cash to likely suck in 2017.

    I think its well worth it considering the amount of years we could get out of him since he is only 28 years old when he would sign. He would make Ackley and Smoak better aswell they could get better pitches to hit. We don’t have any offensive help on the way either like others have mentioned all we got is pitching down in the Minors Paxton,Walker,Hultzen (when he signs).

  9. lalo on July 14th, 2011 10:24 pm

    I think its well worth it considering the amount of years we could get out of him since he is only 28 years old when he would sign. He would make Ackley and Smoak better aswell they could get better pitches to hit. We don’t have any offensive help on the way either like others have mentioned all we got is pitching down in the Minors Paxton,Walker,Hultzen (when he signs).

    If the price is right, do it, he´s the kind of hitter we need, but the risk would be huge, probably risking the next 6 years or so…

  10. eponymous coward on July 14th, 2011 10:42 pm

    I don’t care if it costs 150 mill at least you create some excitement and get people to the ballpark again.

    You know what? I was watching Mariner games when Ken Phelps was hitting home runs, along with Jim Presley and Alvin Davis. Danny Tartabull could park it (even when he got his power from his mom’s side of the family).

    The team still sucked, and people didn’t come to the ballpark.

    Concentrate on being good, not on HOW you get good. Losing by 5 runs in an 11-6 game isn’t any better than losing 5-0.

    More recently Richie Sexson hit almost 40 dingers on a Mariners team that lost 90+ games. So quit thinking it’s all about the home runs, OK? It’s about not having crappy players at LOTS of positions. Something the Mariners can’t say right now.

  11. lamlor on July 14th, 2011 10:44 pm

    If the price is right, do it, he´s the kind of hitter we need, but the risk would be huge, probably risking the next 6 years or so…

    I had to laugh at this, nothing personal because others have said it as well. I have always believed there is no risk when you have nothing to lose.

  12. lamlor on July 14th, 2011 10:52 pm

    More recently Richie Sexson hit almost 40 dingers on a Mariners team that lost 90+ games. So quit thinking it’s all about the home runs, OK?

    But in his 4th year they had a 25 game improvement compared to the year just prior to him joining the team. But I agree with your point that it isn’t all about the homers and is about improving the talent. The overall talent and not just one guy. Fielder would be a great start, not a one man turn around. If Fielder came to the plate with this lineup, what would a pitcher do? Ball Four! Now we have a 300 lb runner on 1st.

    Either greatly increase the team payroll, or use what money you have on improving the entire lineup outside of a few hitters we currently have.

  13. SonOfZavaras on July 14th, 2011 11:00 pm

    There’s many a slip twixt the cup and the lip, yet the M’s are looking even more pitching prospect rich than during the glory days of Anderson-Meche-Pineiro 🙂

    I admit it. I would never have looked into my crystal ball at that time and said “Joel Pineiro will have the longest career of the three, and Ryan Anderson will never see a game in the major leagues”.

  14. xsacred24x on July 14th, 2011 11:14 pm

    More recently Richie Sexson hit almost 40 dingers on a Mariners team that lost 90+ games. So quit thinking it’s all about the home runs, OK? It’s about not having crappy players at LOTS of positions. Something the Mariners can’t say right now.

    Richie Sexon also never hit for an average i think it was in the .236 range when he hit 42 HR’S. Fielder hits for power and Average plus hes LH which gives him a huge advantage in Safeco. I bet with his power though he could belt them from the right side if he was RH.
    Also i hate when Beltre and Sexson are brought up as a argument to not sign Fielder Sexson was not in his prime and Beltre put up 1 good year with the Dodgers Fielder has been very consistent.

  15. Westside guy on July 14th, 2011 11:35 pm

    Also i hate when Beltre and Sexson are brought up as a argument to not sign Fielder Sexson was not in his prime and Beltre put up 1 good year with the Dodgers Fielder has been very consistent.

    What I’m about to say has nothing to do with Fielder. 😀

    I hate it when people see Beltre as having been a failure while here. He certainly didn’t put up the numbers people had hoped (and, in Safeco, we all know why) – but defensively he was other-worldly.

    I miss Adrian Beltre. Especially when we have to see him so often.

  16. Glen on July 14th, 2011 11:48 pm

    More recently Richie Sexson hit almost 40 dingers on a Mariners team that lost 90+ games. So quit thinking it’s all about the home runs, OK? It’s about not having crappy players at LOTS of positions. Something the Mariners can’t say right now.

    Nobody is saying for the team to go to the other extreme of exceptional hitting, no pitching of the early 90s Kingdome teams. At this point most fans would be happy with just a below-average offense instead of whatever they currently offer.

  17. Jordan on July 15th, 2011 12:06 am

    It’s about not having crappy players at LOTS of positions. Something the Mariners can’t say right now.

    I’m trying to think of the last year the Mariners didn’t have gaping holes at several positions.

  18. scott19 on July 15th, 2011 1:17 am

    I hate it when people see Beltre as having been a failure while here. He certainly didn’t put up the numbers people had hoped (and, in Safeco, we all know why) – but defensively he was other-worldly.

    Thanks, Westy…I totally agree. I’m amazed at how many people still diss on Beltre’s years in Seattle while failing to see the whole big picture of everything he brought to the table. From the moment he signed here back in ’05, I never expected him to duplicate that last monster season he had with the Dodgers…still in all, he was one of the few decent moves that Bavasi made as GM…

    Not to mention, now having to face him so often in inter-divisional play! 🙁

  19. Breadbaker on July 15th, 2011 1:49 am

    Wall Street Journal sez M’s win 4.2 to 3.7!

    In a universe where you can score .2 of a run, I’m sure we’d have won.

  20. eponymous coward on July 15th, 2011 8:49 am

    At this point most fans would be happy with just a below-average offense instead of whatever they currently offer.

    There are plenty of ways to do that without blowing the entire free agent budget on ONE player who doesn’t play a premium defensive position (and the Mariners need a 3B and probably AT LEAST one OF before they start talking about “who should play DH?”).

    The problem isn’t that Fielder isn’t a good player right now. The problem is signing one player solves one position. The Mariners need more than one position dealt with in the offseason (aside from the fact that 1B is fine, and paying 20 million plus for a DH is completely, irredeemably stupid, even the Yankees aren’t doing that), and signing a player like Fielder to a boat anchor contract means that if you screwed up and Prince Fielder doesn’t age well, like, say, Mo Vaughn (who was a lefty bopper at 1B and quite consistent, so since people are saying “don’t compare him to Sexson”, well, fine, we’ll compare him to Mo Vaughn), you once again have crippled the Mariners on the salary front for years to come.

    So, no. I don’t want Fielder unless he’s at a contract that makes him a good deal- maybe 3 years at 10 million per. Fat chance of that, so let some other team overpay for him to hit .210 with no power when he’s 35.

  21. scott19 on July 15th, 2011 12:34 pm

    Fat chance of that, so let some other team overpay for him to hit .210 with no power when he’s 35.

    And, for comparative purposes, his dad — with a similar build — was down to around the .230 mark by age 35 and couldn’t really do much except DH anymore at that point, either.

  22. NateTheGreat on July 15th, 2011 1:10 pm

    Its another 7 years till he is 35. In the meantime we could actually have a hitter who can drive in runs and produce from the DH spot and also give Smoak some rest at first.
    Yeah we have other needs as well but you worry about tying up money in a top end hitter. What about when we spend a lot of money on mid tier players that don’t produce when they get here (Figgins, Cust, etc.)
    So take your poison overpaying for middler players and hoping they work out(we have been trying this for a while now) or ponying up and getting a player you know will produce for you and hoping some of the young guys coming up can plug some of those holes.

  23. G-Man on July 15th, 2011 2:03 pm

    Figgins is highly paid, something around $9 million/yr with 2+ to go. Cust is on a one year $2.5 million deal. Chone is a millstone, Jack is not.

    I still fear that Fielder will fall apart in a few years. I wish there were a few more moderately priced free agents coming up for LF or 3B, but I don’t see a large selection. I hope Jack Z plays conservatively with the purse strings early in the winter, make conservative offers and see what happens. Then see who hasn’t found a home by late January and might sign for a reasonable price. Better to do that and go into 2012 with no more bats, expecting improvement from some of the young hitters, than to overpay and regret it later.

  24. NateTheGreat on July 15th, 2011 2:14 pm

    Again, this has been the plan the last few years and we now have the worst offense in all of baseball.
    You don’t usually get bargains in free agency. We have been playing conservative and it hasn’t worked.
    Fielder is far and away better than any of the cautionary tails of Beltre and Sexson (who both did actually contribute).
    At some point you have to quit wishing and hoping for a miracle year out of some player pulled off the scrap heap and spend the cash for a player that is not only proven but still young. And yes that will cost you a pretty penny.

  25. Swungonandbelted on July 15th, 2011 3:26 pm

    I had to laugh at this, nothing personal because others have said it as well. I have always believed there is no risk when you have nothing to lose.

    You have to put your risk in perspective. It may look no risk now relative to where the M’s are at, but say you get him for 6 years, and in the fourth year of that contract he starts to decline. (Given his weight right now that’s not an unrealistic possibility, look at another batter of his body type in Mo Vaughn). That could be a HUGE financial anchor, especially if the system is producing several good young players, and the M’s are on the cusp of contending for the next few years. That ~$25 mil/year makes Figgin’s contract look like peanuts.

  26. eponymous coward on July 15th, 2011 4:55 pm

    We have been playing conservative and it hasn’t worked.

    You think signing Beltre, Sexson, Washburn and Silva to something like 200 million in FA contracts during the Bavasi era is “playing conservative”?

    News flash: we tried it your way. It failed. Miserably. That doesn’t mean “never sign a free agent”, it means “think about how the player fits on the roster”. Fielder is a lousy fit on a roster where 1B is near the bottom of the list of things to worry about, and where paying $20 million for a DH on a multi-year deal is stupid.

    Fielder is far and away better than any of the cautionary tails of Beltre and Sexson (who both did actually contribute)

    Fielder, ages 24-26: 11.2 WAR
    Beltre, ages 24-26: 15.6 WAR

    Adrian Beltre has had 5 years of 4+ WAR, which is basically All-Star level performance. Fielder has has 2.

    Fielder’s clearly a better player than Sexson at comparable ages, but he’s not better than Beltre. Beltre averaged over 3 WAR as a Mariner.

  27. jordan on July 15th, 2011 5:07 pm

    Beltre was not a FA flop. He was a good player, and anyone that knew anything knew he wasn’t going to be the same player in the AL at safeco as he was in the NL in LA.

  28. NateTheGreat on July 15th, 2011 5:14 pm

    So you are going to compare Fielder to Silva and Washburn? Really???
    Of course those were stupid signings(and most people thought we overspent on them at the time) that was my point. They gave big bucks to middle of the road players hoping they would work out.
    Its time to spend some coin on players that will actually produce.
    Fielder does translate very well to this team. A left handed power bat that is not going to be hurt by the ballparks dimensions.
    Players like these don’t just fall into your lap sometimes you have to pay for them. And despite what you think this team is in need of a DH and they apparently aren’t as easy to get either (as many would like to think) as the years of futility since Edgar have shown.
    I’m well aware its not the only hole they have to fill but we have been paying a slap hitter in right field big money for years now. I think we could manage to pay someone who will actually drive in that slap hitter.

  29. Swungonandbelted on July 15th, 2011 7:10 pm

    The budget for next year isn’t magically going to increase by $25 mil over this year, especially with a team that will likely not be a serious contender in 2012. With the contracts that we have rolling off (Silva/Bradley etc…), The M’s are going to have quite a bit of financial flexibility to patch a bunch of holes. if you blow that all on one player though in Fielder, you’re severely limiting how you approach filling your other holes (LF, CF, SS, C, as well as bench. a $25 mil/year Prince Fielder doesn’t take the M’s from winning 72-75 games to winning 95 games.

  30. eponymous coward on July 16th, 2011 10:29 am

    So you are going to compare Fielder to Silva and Washburn? Really???

    Look, I don’t care that you have a schoolgirl crush on someone with good power. I want a better team, not just the ability to watch Fielder hit dingers while we lose 5-1 instead of 5-0.

    Ted Williams played on crappy teams. Barry Bonds played on crappy teams. Adding one player to a bad team doesn’t make a good team- it improves the team, but it doesn’t fix everything. Realistically, this team needs two OFs (one who can slide into DH as needed- and personally, I am a fan of what Sparky Anderson did; don’t have a guy whose ONLY position is DH, use it to rotate through players and give your 4th OFer or whoever extra PAs to keep them sharp) and a 3B, plus a replacement for Bedard. Spending all of the Mariner salary budget on Fielder leaves us with a crappy OF, crappy 3B, and a weakened rotation.

    The Mariner offense for 2012 is NOT going to be fixed with one FA signing. Would Fielder improve the offense? Sure. But he plays ONE position, and we already have a decent young player at that position. As for moving Fielder to DH… unless you can BANK on him being at a Manny/David Ortiz level of good (which you can’t; his WARs the last 4 years before 2011: 5.1, 1.7, 6.4, 3.4), he’s likely to be overpriced. I don’t want an overpriced player soaking up the budget.

  31. NateTheGreat on July 16th, 2011 1:13 pm

    Problem with your theory is that we already have overpriced players that give us nothing(always overspending money on mediocre players and hoping they produce).
    We have done exactly what you like by not spending a whole lot on anyone.Hoping that these cheap options will plug our holes.
    Guess what they haven’t and they won’t. There is a reason why they are cheap options.
    Spending the money on Fielder does not exclude us from any other options either.
    Yes we may not have as much cash to spend but at least we will get someone who will produce with his bat.
    I also disagree that it won’t make a big difference to have someone like Fielder in our lineup. It makes the guys around him get pitches to hit(so that guys like Smoak will actually get some offerings over the plate).
    It will also be easier to attract free agents and keep the players we have when they see the management going for a player like that and know that our offense will actually be able to produce.
    You seem to have this outlook that signing Fielder is the only thing we could do and no other options would then be available to us.
    I see it opening a door so that other free agents see a lineup that isn’t devoid of talent.
    It also would most certainly generate some much needed excitement and put buts in the stands which means the owners can open up there wallets a little more as well.

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.