Mariner team defense since moving into Safeco Field
2000-2007, as measured using defensive efficiency: how many non-HR balls were put into play and turned into outs.
Top line is the best defense in baseball that year, bottom line is the worst defense in baseball that year. In 2001 and 2003 the Mariners were the best defense in baseball as measured this way.
We will not do a Cleveland-style rebuilding
…or whatever Lincoln said. Seems appropriate right now.
Starting with their last competitive seasons as year one:
Whether the M’s got lucky this year or when which team outperformed, they both came back to putting up wins at a competitive level at about the same time.
Dave and I (mostly Dave) argued all through these years that the M’s didn’t need to undergo a slash-and-burn rebuilding: their crazy revenue streams meant that they could afford to bring in quality stop-gap veterans, develop players, and sign young guys like Beltre to long-term contracts if the opportunity came up. They ended up spending a ton more money than the slash-and-burn Indians without any return on that investment.
Here’s the big one, though:
Maybe Howard Lincoln and all his people are far more savvy than we give them credit. Sure, we (and USSM readers) mocked their payroll figures, rolled our eyes at claims that the teams would be competitive, but the fans kept coming out. Maybe it’s the park, or something else at work, but they managed to keep the turnstiles spinning while putting up horrible records and some almost unwatchable teams.
Or maybe Cleveland’s just a lot smaller market with a park that doesn’t seem new and exciting anymore, so they don’t have a lot of room for error when the populace isn’t excited.
Anyway, it’s interesting to compare the Indians of 2005 with the Mariners of 2007 (hey, Broussard’s on both teams!) and think about how the Mariners match up as a franchise looking to compete.