How The Pieces Fit

Dave · December 19, 2012 at 7:42 pm · Filed Under Mariners 

In the wake of the Vargas-Morales swap, a lot of the talk has focused on where he’s going to fit, and who might be out of a job with Morales added to the 1B/DH party. Buster Olney is openly speculating about the Mariners “moving on” from Justin Smoak, while Mike Curto is busy printing Smoak’s picture on Tacoma Rainier season ticket packages. Meanwhile, Shannon Drayer notes that Jack Zduriencik agreed with her assessment that Morales might be best served only playing first base 3-4 days per week, and she sees him as more of a DH than a first baseman.

Jack’s only official comment is that they think there will be enough time for everyone, which is a nice way of not committing to anything and having to backtrack later. But, despite the fact that he’s good at talking without actually saying anything, in this case, I think he’s right.

Because of the fact that John Jaso and Jesus Montero are both considered “offensive catchers” by the organization, and because they have Mike Zunino on the horizon, the Mariners C/1B/DH positions are inextricably linked together for at least 2013. While not everyone is interchangeable at each spot, you can essentially see those three jobs as one section of the roster, with everyone else covering the other six spots.

Last year, the Mariners gave 1,964 plate appearances to their catchers, first baseman, and designated hitters. Let’s just round up to 2,000 because it’s easier, and because more runs scored means the line-up turns over more times and everyone gets to hit a little more often. So, basically, the team will be distributing something like 2,000 PAs to those three positions.

Obviously, dividing 2,000 by four gives you 500 plate appearances each, which makes this sound like a perfect job share situation for a lefty catcher who can’t hit lefties, a righty catcher who can’t catch and struggled against righties, a switch-hitter with health problems, and a switch-hitter with hitting problems. You probably don’t want to count on any of these guys to play every single day next year, especially when you factor in the wear and tear that catching takes on a body. Giving each one 500 trips to the plate would be fantastic.

Of course, that’s a perfect world, no-one-gets-injured fantasy, and it won’t actually work out that way. And, it’s pretty likely that the group of four will actually be a group of five, as I still expect the Mariners to carry a third catcher next year if they plan on giving Montero some time at DH. I just don’t think Eric Wedge is going to be willing to put a line-up on the field that doesn’t leave a catcher on the bench, and I get the feeling that they want a catch-and-throw veteran to work behind the plate occasionally. That guy probably won’t play as much as Olivo did last year, but we probably need to give him 200 of those plate appearances. So, now we’re down to 1,800 for the four to split, which is a bit less than each player might want.

But, I still don’t really think it’s much of a problem. We know Jaso’s not going to play against lefties, so he’s probably not getting over 400 plate appearances, even though he’s still the best hitter on the team — yes, better than Morales. If we give him 400, that leaves 1,400 for Montero, Smoak, and Morales to split, or 470 apiece. That might sound a little low, but Morales only got 522 last year, so it wouldn’t be a huge change in usage over how Anaheim used him in 2012. And, we have to account for the fact that Morales may very well not end the year in Seattle.

While I don’t think the Mariners are hopeless, there’s a pretty decent chance that they’re going to be out of contention by the All-Star break, as they simply aren’t on the same level as Texas, Anaheim, or Oakland right now. If you were going to put together a list of teams that you’d expect to act as sellers at the deadline, the Mariners would probably be on it. It doesn’t mean that they’re doomed to failure, or that they can’t put together a surprising run, but you should at least go into the year knowing that mid-season selling might be an option. And, with Morales being represented by Scott Boras, you can be pretty sure that the Mariners won’t be signing him to a contract extension that keeps him from free agency.

So, there’s a pretty decent chance that the Mariners could make Morales available in trade in July. Especially if Smoak and Montero are both hitting, and the logjam has become problematic. In that case, the team could theoretically flip Morales for help at another position, or for a prospect that would help for the future, or just as a salary dump if he’s not hitting well and the Mariners simply want to promote Mike Zunino to take his spot on the team. There are a decent amount of scenarios where Morales isn’t even on the team in August and September, and this playing time dilemma is only an issue for the first half of the year.

Those scenarios involve both Smoak and Montero hitting pretty well, though. If either (or both) flop again, then there is no playing time dilemma, because they’ll have worked their way out of the line-up. This is probably more true for Smoak than Montero, but both have options left, and if either of them are struggling in May, a trip down to the minors wouldn’t be unexpected. And, again, that would relieve any kind of logjam that might be perceived with having these four guys sharing three jobs.

In reality, the guy who gets aced out of the picture in 2013 isn’t Smoak, Montero, or Jaso – it’s Zunino. He’s the one who no longer has a job to fight for in spring training, which is totally fine, considering that he was just drafted six months ago. Between the fact that he only has 200 plate appearances in full-season ball and the defensive struggles he had in the Arizona Fall League, there’s absolutely no harm in giving him a full year in Tacoma. Pretty much every college catcher you can think of spent at least a year in the minors, and most spent more like two or three. To me, this move basically seals Zunino’s fate in Tacoma for the first half of the year at minimum, and I’m totally on board with that decision. If he destroys Triple-A pitching for a few months, the Mariners can figure out who they want to toss overboard in order to get him on the roster, but now, they don’t have to count on him doing that. The team can now plan on giving him a September call-up to get his feet wet, then tell him to come to camp in 2014 fighting for a job. And that’s probably best for everyone.

Personally, I don’t see any real problem here. Having four guys for three spots is a good idea when each of those four guys come with some legitimate questions and shouldn’t just be handed everyday jobs. With a lefty, a righty, and two switch-hitters, the pieces fit together pretty nicely. And, of course, with any four players, there’s a pretty good chance that injuries and/or performances solve the problem for you, as someone is likely to either play themselves out of a job or land on the DL and take the decision out of the Mariners hands. By having four guys for three spots, the Mariners simply give themselves a better chance to have three guys for those three spots on any given day, rather than repeating mistakes of the past that led to things like Miguel Cairo, Starting First Baseman.

If Jaso, Smoak, Montero, and Morales were all +5 win players, then the Mariners would have a problem, and someone would be unhappy when they weren’t starting on Opening Day. But none of these guys have earned any kind of ego, and they’ll have no right to complain if they play five days per week instead of seven. Job shares can work, and they can be quite effective. Given the four players the M’s now have to share C/1B/DH, I’d have some optimism that this group can form a fairly effective job share next year.

Comments

41 Responses to “How The Pieces Fit”

  1. californiamariner on December 19th, 2012 7:55 pm

    This article made me realize something. Unless the Mariners can pull off a run this year where they are in playoff contention, Morales is probably only here for half a season. Hopefully, his name is a little more sexy in the trade market than Vargas.

  2. Nate on December 19th, 2012 7:55 pm

    I think Morales is a net positive, but we still need to get Edwin and Nick to make it a happy off-season.

  3. Westside guy on December 19th, 2012 9:26 pm

    I’m still hoping against hope that Jack Z has been dissembling with all the comments about not wanting to lose the #12 pick, the insinuations they can’t or won’t play with the big boys in the free agent market, and so on.

    But I’m not holding my breath, either.

  4. Leroy Stanton on December 19th, 2012 9:26 pm

    Doesn’t that leave only Andino (INF) and Carp/Bay (OF)? That doesn’t seem workable (in the OF, at least), so should we expect another signing with Wells serving as the backup? Is there any realistic alternative?

  5. argh on December 19th, 2012 9:28 pm

    I understand the logic but what I really see, as a fan, is duct tape. Lots and lots of duct tape.

  6. lalo on December 19th, 2012 10:07 pm

    With this move, the M´s could spend as much as 30 millions. If Jack decide to do something huge he could sign Swisher(15M per year), Cody Ross (8M per year) and Edwin Jackson (12M per year) if they find a taker for Guti.

    Proyected lineup:

    Ackley (2B)
    Jaso (C)
    Swisher (RF)
    Morales (1B)
    Seager (3B)
    Cody Ross (LF)
    Montero (DH/C)
    Saunders (CF)
    Ryan (SS)

    #Smoak also a 1B/DH

    Felix
    Jackson
    Iwakuma
    Erasmo
    Paxton

    I would love it!

  7. Gritty Veteran Poster on December 19th, 2012 10:14 pm

    Dammit Dave! I had successfully wiped Miguel Cairo’s name from my memory banks. Thanks for bringing that up again.

    My question is what kind of trade value would Montero have in a trade package to bring back a solid outfielder? Perhaps that might help balance things out a little better.

  8. bookbook on December 19th, 2012 10:15 pm

    Trade Carp to Houston to DH, thereby solving our need to trade with every division rival. We know Z has been less than forthcoming about the M’s willingness to bid on Hamilton. I see no reason to trust his public stance on Swisher, either. Though, I suppose another trade may be lurking.

  9. Typical Idiot Fan on December 19th, 2012 10:35 pm

    Doesn’t that leave only Andino (INF) and Carp/Bay (OF)?

    DH – Montero
    C – Jaso
    1B – Morales
    2B – Ackley
    SS – Ryan
    3B – Seager
    LF – Saunders
    CF – Gutierrez
    RF – Wells

    Bench – Smoak (1B/DH), Carp (1B/”OF”), Thames (OF), Andino (INF)

    Either the third catcher will take the spot of a bullpen arm, or they’ll ditch one of Carp / Thames to free a spot up on the bench. There’s still time before the season, though, and you could see Saunders, Gutierrez, or Wells dealt to open up an outfield position, which would also solve the bench problem by default.

  10. henryv on December 19th, 2012 10:38 pm

    I’d say I’m 1/3 of the way to being excited about the upcoming season.

    Give me Swisher or Bourne, and Jackson or Marcum, and I could actually see myself buying a ticket package rather than just waiting until a Felix Day comes up.

    I mean, that should be within the $30M budget, and might leave a little bit of room to extend Felix.

  11. Spanky on December 19th, 2012 10:55 pm

    Dave…would you say that the M’s also anticipated some “drop in effectiveness ” for Vargas in 2013 at Safeco because of the fence move? A few more fly-outs fly over the fence in left and thus Z felt he should sell “high ” now?

  12. Adam S on December 19th, 2012 10:56 pm

    LF – Saunders
    CF – Gutierrez
    RF – Wells

    I just threw up a little bit.

    I like all three guys but they sure look better as two part-time OFs and a 5th OF than three starters. Need at least one solid OF to push Wells to 250 PA instead of 600 PA.

  13. uoduckfan33 on December 19th, 2012 11:23 pm

    I don’t know if you can say definitively that Morales has power that Montero does not. Montero batted right-handed in SafeCo for half the year.

    That said, Montero’s road ISO (small sample sizes and all) was still just .142, a ways below that of Morales.

  14. The_Waco_Kid on December 19th, 2012 11:43 pm

    We need a leadoff hitter. I don’t see that being Ackley long-term, and he has he not done well there so far. We may need Bourn. We do not have anyone who gets on base enough to lead off, except Jaso vs. righties and Guti vs. lefties.

  15. justinh on December 20th, 2012 12:29 am

    Spanky,

    Jack Zdurienzik mentioned Jason Vargas was obviously helped some from playing at Safeco Field. And with the fences being moved in Vargas doesn’t have the same value to the Mariners he had prior to the fences being moved in.

  16. justinh on December 20th, 2012 1:10 am

    I think this is a great deal for the M’s. Obviously the M’s only have Morales for 1 year and more than likely he will be dealt at the trade deadline. Nevertheless, the M’s needed a middle of the order hitter to take some pressure off of Montero, Smoak, Seager, and Saunders. Morales will also give the M’s an extra $3 million or so to spend this offseason. Even if Morales is only around for 3 months, it gives the younger guys a chance to play with a good bat and Morales could conceivably obtain the M’s a nice return in July. If he isn’t traded and plays like he did the last couple months, the M’s could obviously tender him a contract after the year and receive draft pick compensation. With Tom McNamara being one of the top scouting directors in the game, acquiring more draft picks is something the Mariners should always be looking to do.

    I would expect Jack to sign or trade for a proven starting pitcher you could pencil in as a 3/4. I feel about as confident in Beaven in the rotation as I do with Seahawks TE Anthony McCoy running after a catch. Both are always just seconds from disaster. I think Carl Pavano, Joe Saunders, Ben Sheets and Chris Young are all worth bringing in on a 1 year deal or minor league deal. I’ve always thought since no hitters want to go to Seattle, the M’s should be a pretty nice place for a pitcher looking to build value.

  17. maqman on December 20th, 2012 2:10 am

    This is a good move and it makes sense, which is the primary criteria for Z. If the Nats sign LaRoche then Morse may well be available at not too high of a cost as he is going into a walk year and getting close to $7MM for 2013. By absorbing his salary the talent we give for him should not be anything major, maybe Capps or Pryor.

  18. leftfield limey on December 20th, 2012 2:52 am

    The upside here appears much more than the downside although I will miss Vargas’ change up.

    1. It appears much easier to attract free agent pitchers to Safeco than acquire a bat of Morales’ calibre so I am pretty confident Z will be able to find Vargas replacement FA pitchers at a reasonable rate (or Furbush/Wilhelmsen being given a chance to start).

    2. This reduces the pressue on Z/FO to make a trade of the Mariners’ young talent for a hitter from a position of weakness/desperation (e.g. Morse).

    3. Vargas was starting to look expensive/less of a sure thing in his last year of arb and with the fences moving in – I was hoping he would be traded.

    4. The likelihood of being able acquire a decent trade piece mid-season or a draft pick via making a qualifying offer appears greater with Morales (given his upside if he bats like he did in August/September or even if he is just semi-decent, his agent being Boras and Vargas being a safe but not likely to break out).

    5. Worst case Morales is injured the whole season, we have a reduction in pitching value from the Vargas sub but at a $3m saving and how much were we expecting from the season anyway?

    A good roll of the dice. I am reasssured that Z (and the FO) appear to be keeping their heads when all about them others are losing theirs and blaming it on them.

  19. bookbook on December 20th, 2012 6:52 am

    This move makes a trade for Morse a very bad idea. Bavasi would do that; Z won’t.

  20. Cody on December 20th, 2012 7:16 am

    I for one am very curious how this current team (with a few minor pickups) plays in the new park. The Home/Away splits have been crazy.

    Part is probably the size of the park and part mental because of the size of the park.

    I think this could be a middle of the pack offense and it’s just been obscured by Safeco. Next year should be interesting.

    Also for those of you clamoring to spend the free $30 million. Keep in mind that it would be gone this year, next year, the year after, etc. Long term contracts have long term impact so don’t just spend because you can. Spend because it is right.

  21. Leroy Stanton on December 20th, 2012 7:27 am

    Bench – Smoak (1B/DH), Carp (1B/”OF”), Thames (OF), Andino (INF)
    Either the third catcher will take the spot of a bullpen arm, or they’ll ditch one of Carp / Thames to free a spot up on the bench. There’s still time before the season, though, and you could see Saunders, Gutierrez, or Wells dealt to open up an outfield position, which would also solve the bench problem by default.

    So, the options are: an 11 man pitching staff, no “defensive” catcher, carry only one backup OF, or keep only one of Montero and Smoak.

    It will interesting to see which way they go, but I have a hard time believing that they’d allow either Bay or Carp to be the only backup OF.

  22. drw on December 20th, 2012 8:39 am

    “We know Z has been less than forthcoming about the M’s willingness to bid on Hamilton.”

    Z has always been tightlipped about front office moves. But he was on KJR this am with Mitch and was pretty forthcoming about the Hamilton negotiations. Short version:

    – he did not expect to be a bidder given budget and given his belief Hamilton was not interested in coming to Seattle. So Z did not ask ownership for money to bid prior to Houston.

    – when he got to Houston, he learned from Hamilton’s camp that Hamilton was interested in Seattle. Z went to ownership and they decided they were “all in” in pursuing him.

    – Ms made a very serious offer (numbers not disclosed). Hamiltion was very interested, and countered on a number of points.

    – The night before Hamilton signed, he called and asked Seattle if they would make an offer that was larger than what he ultimatly got from LAA. Z did not know Angels were in the picture. Z said he did not think he could get where Hamilton asked.

    – Hamilton signed without going back to Z and letting him top the Angel offer.

    – One thing Hamilton mentioned on multiple occasions was that if he signed elsewhere, he could be in the World Series this year. Z said he acknowledged that was a long shot with Seattle but “you never know.”

    When asked what all this meant for current pursuit of Bourne or Swisher, Z said Hamilton was special and different and was a game changer type of player. Implication to my ears was that they did not view Bourne or Swisher as such.

  23. _Hutch_ on December 20th, 2012 9:02 am

    “Also for those of you clamoring to spend the free $30 million. Keep in mind that it would be gone this year, next year, the year after, etc. Long term contracts have long term impact so don’t just spend because you can. Spend because it is right.”

    Agreed. I don’t know why this seems to get overlooked. They need to add another outfielder this year, and I happen to think it should be Swisher. But if CLE or TEX start driving the price up, there’s no shame in getting more of a stopgap solution and saving that payroll room (plus the expiration of the Figgins contract) on something nice and shiny next offseason, like Ellsbury or Cano. (Or Morales, for that matter)

  24. ripperlv on December 20th, 2012 9:06 am

    I have to believe that our starting team will be improved from the present team. So if we go the free agent route, possible outfield targets include:

    Michael Bourn, Cody Ross, Grady Sizemore? (kidding just underwent microfacture right knee surgery) and Nick Swisher.
    Swisher cost a draft choice. Ross is not much of an improvement, not such a good fit. Bourn is the leadoff man we need. I want to believe we are going after this guy, a pretty decent ballplayer.
    As for starting pitching:
    Freddy Garcia, Edwin Jackson, Kyle Lohse, Shaun Marcum, Carl Pavano, Joe Saunders, Carlos Zambrano, Francisco Liriano. This can get scary. I can just hear JZ now, “This is an experienced all-star, a big guy from Venezuela, a durable guy who knows how to pich, we feel good about getting Carlos Zambrano.” OK, a lousy joke.

    Just looking forward to the next few days because I know JZ is going to make this team look better! Isn’t he?

  25. nickwest1976 on December 20th, 2012 9:14 am

    Cano seems like a pipe dream to me, I don’t see the Yankees letting him get away when he is their best player.

    Ellsbury however seems more realistic. Doesn’t he have Northwest ties of some sort?

    I do agree, we should not spend to spend. If we can’t get an Edwin Jackson would rather we get a couple of one year stop gaps on the SP side. I am okay with going multi years on Swisher or Bourn but not as sure on Cody Ross.

  26. stevemotivateir on December 20th, 2012 9:33 am

    Does anybody really believe that they’re done looking for an outfielder?

    Does anyone really believe Thames has a real shot at the team, or that Saunders, Guti, or Wells would go instead, leaving Thames a roster spot?

    Does anyone really think the team will carry Morales, Smoak, AND Carp?

    I don’t.

  27. terryoftacoma on December 20th, 2012 9:56 am

    We have at the very least one more trade before long. This addition for the most part forces a Carp trade(we could just DFA him). We just have no place for him.

    If you’re going to say we won’t sign Swisher because we’d lose a draft choice than you have to add Bourn and Lohse as well. Personally, I don’t we sign any of them. I think we’re in the same position the Angels were years back where agents use us to drive the price up but have no intention of really signing with us.

    By my count we have the 4 for 1b/dh/c and the remainung 6 starting positions for a total of 10. Leaving us a backup outfielder, infielder and catcher for a total of 13. Paste whatever names you want but those are the postions we have available on offense.

    Starting pitchers I look for us to add at least one,maybe, two. I think a left hander would be nice and the Dodgers have both Lilly and Capuano which are both probably available. So I wouldn’t limit your list to just free agents.

  28. amnizu on December 20th, 2012 10:24 am

    >Does anybody really believe that they’re done looking for an outfielder?

    I do, I honestly believe that ownership is cutting salary with the intention of remaining profitable at current or close to current attendance, revenue sharing, TV, and merchandising revenue. They may add someone inexpensive or via a trade, however, at this point I expect no “big or medium name” signing.

    I also believe that the current FO and leadership is so risk averse that they would rather loose cheaply than get themselves into any situation where they’re loosing expensively. That includes, breaking open the wallet for even mid priced free agents.

    Honestly, to me, this feels like the 1980s all over again when Mariners fans were ECSTATIC to reach .500 baseball.

  29. Dave on December 20th, 2012 10:24 am

    Stop believing everything the tin foil hat wearing nutjobs tell you and think for yourself.

  30. terryoftacoma on December 20th, 2012 10:35 am

    Just because we haven’t signed the big named free agents that you want, doesn’t mean the FO and ownership aren’t trying. We need to add value not just spend money.

  31. amnizu on December 20th, 2012 11:09 am

    terryoftacoma you are right it does come down to adding value, 100% agree. However, you cannot add value without incurring some sort of risk. Be it in direct costs in the form of salary and draft pick success or failure or indirect costs such as loss of draft picks or payroll flexibility. Adding players is a risk regardless of how you do it.

    In my opinion right now the leadership of the Mariners values draft picks, low risk signing (Jason Bay) and lower operating costs over winning. That sounds an awful lot like the mode of operations during the 1980s to me.

    I personally don’t think the team should have signed Hamilton, I’m happy they didnt. However, if they were indeed “all in” as they claim and refused to pony up an additional 25M over 5 seasons with some of that deferred for top of the market talent what does that say?

    In addition their biggest acquisition thus far this off season is a 10 million dollar TV screen, which is a known quaintly with a known lifespan and will provide guaranteed risk free value.

    Whereas Hamilton, or any free agent for that matter is not free from risk. I have a very hard time believing the FO did all they could here and a very hard time believing that their first priority is putting a winning product on the field.

  32. gwangung on December 20th, 2012 11:38 am

    In my opinion right now the leadership of the Mariners values draft picks, low risk signing (Jason Bay) and lower operating costs over winning. That sounds an awful lot like the mode of operations during the 1980s to me.

    You DO know that teams like the Yankees and the Red Sox also do these kind of maneuvers?

    I have a very hard time believing the FO did all they could here and a very hard time believing that their first priority is putting a winning product on the field.

    Given what’s known, I think it will take a divine revelation from on high to change your mind.

  33. amnizu on December 20th, 2012 11:46 am

    >You DO know that teams like the Yankees and the Red Sox also do these kind of maneuvers?

    Obviously they do, but they use them as a hedge to their more risky longer term free agent signings.

    >Given what’s known, I think it will take a divine revelation from on high to change your mind.

    No actually, some simple non risk averse moves would probably change my mind. For example, the Cliff Lee trade and Figgins signing were moves that accepted some risk for the possibility of putting a better product on the field.

  34. terryoftacoma on December 20th, 2012 12:27 pm

    Cliff Lee for a handful of no name propects was a risk?

    Take Jackson off our starters list. He just signed with Cubs.

  35. stevemotivateir on December 20th, 2012 1:46 pm

    “However, if they were indeed “all in” as they claim and refused to pony up an additional 25M over 5 seasons with some of that deferred for top of the market talent what does that say?”

    It says you don’t understand how the negotiating of contracts work.

    Because Hamilton accepted 5/125, it means the M’s would have had to go above that. In turn, the Angels could up the ante, and maybe the M’s would have to go even higher yet. This wasn’t a ‘match-the-offer-and-I’ll-sign-with-you’ deal.

    Really, the Hamilton offer shreds the whole basis of your argument. An offer of 4/100 with vesting options for two more years is significant. It just didn’t work out. But they showed they’re smart enough to draw a realistic line. The effort’s there whether you acknowledge it or not.

    There’s no conspiracy to stay cheap and never win. The world wont end on December 21st either.

    And…. assuming the M’s wont make a valid effort for a better outfielder, probably isn’t a wise bet.

  36. amnizu on December 20th, 2012 3:25 pm

    What if the Mariners had been first at 5/125?

    Based on Z’s comments and their offer of 4 and 100 they were not going to get to 125 guaranteed regardless. So they never really were in the running to pay market rate.

    I don’t think there is a conspiracy, I think they approach the management of their team like a business that is focused on the profit and loss, not wins.

  37. stevemotivateir on December 20th, 2012 4:29 pm

    “What if the Mariners had been first at 5/125?”

    You really want me to spell it out? His agent would have looked for a higher bidder.

    We know the Angels were willing to at least go 5/125, so if it really came down to a choice between the M’s and Angels, who do you think he’d choose?

    “Based on Z’s comments and their offer of 4 and 100 they were not going to get to 125 guaranteed regardless. So they never really were in the running to pay market rate.”

    You don’t know when the Angels stepped-in with their offer, so you can’t say that.

    “I don’t think there is a conspiracy, I think they approach the management of their team like a business that is focused on the profit and loss, not wins.”

    Wins generate profit. Even teams with low payrolls know that.

  38. BillyJive on December 20th, 2012 8:01 pm

    Does anyone know if Erik Bedard is healthy?
    heh heh

  39. Westside guy on December 21st, 2012 4:30 pm

    Bedard threw 125 innings for the Pirates last year and had an xFIP of 4.05.

    That sounds like a not-atypical Erik Bedard season; so, by his standards, he was healthy-ish. :-D

  40. FELIXisKING on December 22nd, 2012 5:59 pm

    “and a switch-hitter with hitting problems.”

    That was pretty damn funny. Laughed out loud while reading.

  41. RaoulDuke37 on December 22nd, 2012 6:51 pm

    The Mariners have signed Ibanez. My time with USSMariner has come full circle. Good bye cruel team. Good bye.

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.