Where do we stand?
by Jerry on Dec 10, 2006 3:01 PM PST
Email
PrintI was reading some other posts on this blog, and it got me thinking about what type of approach the M's should take for the rest of the offseason.
A huge part of this is based on where the front office sees this club in its return to contention.
Obviously, the roster is far from set. But a lot of the available players are no longer options. We have traded our best trade chip, and the other players who we could move (Sexson and others) would be more likely to be 2008 moves than win-now moves.
So, I wanted to pose the question:
Are the M's actually worse now than they were in 2006?
Again, it remains to be seen what the team does for the remainder of the offseason. But, supposing Bavasi et al don't do anything dramatic (which seems unlikely to me), and only add, say, something along the lines of Jeff Suppan and Cliff Floyd, will this club win more games than they did in 2006?
As it stands now, the offense should be better. Ichiro in CF and Guillen in RF is an upgrade. It is not unrealistic to expect improvement from Sexson, Beltre, Johjima, and Lopez in 2007. Adding a guy like Floyd would just make the club better, and Snelling is far better than anyone we have had on the bench in a while.
But the pitching is way worse than it was in 2006. We have essentially traded Meche and Moyer for Horacio Ramirez. Assuming we don't add Barry Zito or pull off a major trade, the next pitcher the M's add is likely to give us close to the same production as Moyer (guys like Suppan and Thomson fall into this category). Baek and Woods are 6.0 ERAs waiting to happen, and Feierabend is the only guy who I consider a long-term option who is anywhere near ML ready. He is not an impact player, and definitely shouldn't be counted on to come in like Verlander did last year.
At the same time, we just subtracted our second best relief pitcher. The pen is not going to be as good in 2007. We had a lot of guys who overachieved, and I don't expect guys like Huber, Woods, O'Flaherty, and others to fill that gap in the pen. They will still be good, but not as good.
I dunno. I figured that the M's were a near lock to at least continue their slow incremental improvement since 2004. But I am not so sure now. This is looking like a 78-80 win team to me, with a big possibility of setbacks. The season could all fall apart easily given the lack of starting pitching depth that the club has.
I would be interested to hear what you guys think.
I am beginning to think that the M's need to reevaluate their status and reconsider their approach to this offseason.
32 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Jerry,
Oh, you mean the Mariners.
Whatever, M's still lose.
M's status
At this point it's too tough to call. What's going to happen with Felix? Will Beltre & Sexson bomb early in the season again. Pitching is unproven but at least it's not Joel Pineiro. Bullpen is no longer automatic but it's not weak either.
If this is the team the FO rolls with they're basically rolling the dice and going for broke.
I think we're better off
Maybe Yu-Bet won't be as productive, and maybe Sexson will start off with another cold spell. And maybe Guillen will be the 07 recipient of the Carl Everett Memorial July DFA. I still think our offense will be above average, and pretty close to anything else in the division.
The bullpen won't be stellar right away, but we have depth there, and while Soriano is gone, so is Guardado, and Mateo won't be pitching through pain.
So that leaves the same question as last year - what will the starting pitching be like? Well, the fact is noone has any idea for sure. Last year we had Moyer, but we also had Pineiro and Meche (I know Meche finished the year with ok numbers, but his inconsistency hurt the team more than those numbers show; he turned so many corners in 06 he was going in circles).
I think its safe to say that Felix will be better than before, we just don't know how much. I also think its safe to say that Horacio Ramirez will be better than Pineiro. Washburn will be Washburn; always has been, always will be. The question marks are Thomson or Suppan or whoever else is acquired. But I think the peices are there for the pitching to improve dramatically. Even if the guys we have aren't sure (or even likely) to be better than last year's crew, the major difference is that there is already depth. We may not have any real #1's (unless Felix makes some strides this winter), but we didn't last year either. We do have a bunch of replacement level starters who can at least keep us in the mix.
by Bearskin Rugburn on Dec 10, 2006 4:43 PM PST reply actions
Sorry dude
- Rich Aurilia
- Bret Boone
- Carl Everett
- ¿¿¿¿¿Jose Guillen????? ¡¡¡¡¡BEAN CUP!!!!!
By just removing Pineiro
Ok lets compare starting pitchers
(IP/ERA) as starters
Pineiro (141/6.62)
Felix (191/4.52)
Moyer (160/4.38)
Meche (186/4.48)
Washburn(187/4.67)
Woods (42/4.50)
Baek (34/3.67)
2006 Total
IP 941
ERA 4.68
My quick pitching predictions are something like: Felix (200/3.90); Washburn (180/4.60); Ramirez (170/4.60); Woods/Baek (160/5.00); AAAA pitchers (180/5.40).
2006 Predicted Totals
IP 890
ERA 4.68
So in the end it looks like we might need to rely on our bullpen more than what we did last year but the ERA from our starters will be about the same. I know, ERA is basically really tough to predict so I'm sure I'm wrong. Basically my point is that removing Pineiro and having Felix perform better really makes up for the fact that our rotation is pretty weak.
As a comparison the average team in the AL had an ERA of 4.73 and 944 IP from their starters. Oakland had an ERA of 4.50 and 986 IP. LAA had an ERA of 4.16 and 988 IP. Texas had an ERA of 5.11 and 897 IP.
Comps
Basically, you are saying that the M's potential rotation of Felix, Washburn, Ramirez, Woods/Baek, and a AAA pitcher are going to outpitch our rotation last year of Moyer, Meche, Felix, Washburn, and Pineiro/etc. That second group is much better. I don't see the '07 rotation (at least in its current state) preventing runs as well as the '06 rotation.
Plus, you are throwing 50 IP more to the bullpen, which is now weaker than it was last year. Those extra innings would mostly be coming from Mateo and the other middle relievers.
The real problem I have with your speculations is how they stack up against the Angels and the A's.
Here are their rotations:
A's: Harden, Haren, Blanton, Loaiza, Kennedy/Saarlos/Halsey
Angels: Colon, Lackey, Escobar, Weaver, Santana
Texas: Millwood, Padilla, Tejada, Wells, Volquez
Seattle: Felix, Washburn, Ramirez, Baek, Woods
The Angels in particular have a fantastic rotation. Their 5th starter is better than our #2. There is just no way you car argue that the M's stack up against that rotation.
Even if the M's land Zito, we still will have a major problem with our rotation.
Texas quietly has put together a decent rotation as well, and they are one of the most active teams in the market looking for another starter. They will likely add another guy to that rotation, bumping out Volquez (or having Volquez as plan B in the even of a Kip Wells injury).
The M's have the worst rotation in the league. Unless they add another top starter, someone who would be their openning day guy, they are in trouble this year.
It is really a bummer. The M's really need to build around pitching and defense. The defense could be good if they play the right guys in the right positions. But the starting pitching is going to be brutal. The only guy we have who is at all dominating is Felix. The others are going to need a buttload of run support, and, well....yikes.
The M's are going to need a lot of luck to break .500.
All the other clubs in the division have had better offseasons than the M's. The only club who has improved much are the A's, but they should be better just by doing nothing. Last year, they lost Bobby Crosby, Eric Chavez, Mark Kotsay, Milton Bradley, Rich Harden, and Huston Street for significant periods. Unless they get gutted by injuries again, they should be better. Thus, I don't see the M's spot in the standings changing much.
Worst rotation in the league?
And how exactly have the Rangers and Angels had better offseasons than us? The Rangers have done nothing outside of resigning Padilla and signing the Cat.
The Angels signed Spier, to an unwise contract and they signed Matthews to that absurd contract which was a worse move than the Soriano trade.
If anything I'd say the Rangers are a push. The Angels have had a worse offseason than we have.
The A's have had a better offseason, but even the signing of Piazza isn't going to improve them that much. If anything it makes them slightly worse than 2006 because Piazza is not going to do what Frank Thomas did.
Correction
I think that the Angels have had a poor offeason overall, considering how much they shelled out for a reliever and a mediocre CFer. As investments, those moves were bad. If I was an Angels fan, I wouldn't be happy.
But the Angels improved their baseball team. They didn't spend their money wisely, but they are better now. While Matthews is overpaid, he will really help their defense. He has always been pretty good at drawing walks as well, something the Angels are really bad at. Speier is a good pitcher, and improves an already excellent pen.
The Angels didn't spend money wisely, but they are better.
The M's made a solid acquisition in Guillen, but hurt the club badly in the Soriano trade.
If we are just interested in the standings, the Angels did better than the M's. At least at this point.
The Angels could of did nothing and still
And Matthews is average at best defensively. Cool catches do not a good centerfielder make.
Well I disagree
The A's and Angels' lineup really doesn't scare me much at all. I'd say that ours next year should be comparable and might have slightly more upside.
I wouldn't mind shifting some innings to the bullpen. We've got plenty of capable guys down there who could absorb some of the burden. I'll even let Hargrove keep his larger bullpen to eat up innings.
by Edgar for Pres on Dec 10, 2006 8:36 PM PST up reply actions
Oh and Frank Thomas leaving the A's is huge.
by Edgar for Pres on Dec 10, 2006 8:37 PM PST up reply actions
Jerry
The 3 people leaving the Ms rotation (Pineiro, Meche, Moyer) combined to yield 5.52 runs/game. That is in no way difficult to replace. Then you gotta think both Felix and Washburn are good bets to post better ERAs in 07 than they did last year.
You're overstating it a bit, no?
Let's be optimistic for a moment and envision that rotation: Felix, Jennings, Washburn, Thomson/Ramirez, Thomson/Ramirez/Baek/Woods/Lehr/Feierabend(later)...
Its not overwhelming, but it has more potential than Moyer, Washburn, Meche, Felix, Pineiro, or whatever the order was.
Now for the rest of the division.
A's. Harden's good, but he won't pitch the whole season. Haren, in my mind, is Gil Meche without the monkey on his back, and between him and Jennings, its a toss up. The rest of those guys are replacements.
Texas. OK, Millwood is an asset, but Padilla at #2? And Wells? That's KIP Wells, right? Right.
Angels. Yeah yeah, Colon and Lackey. I don't remember what exactly Colon's shoulder injury was, but the guy is 33, a tank, and won't be ready for ST. I doubt he's winning 20 games again. Escobar is so-so. Weaver. You saw what happened to Weaver when he came here in August. 2.56 ERA, 4.66xFIP, that's all I have to say really. Santana... well ok, Angels have a better rotation than we do, but its not like it's the Tigers last year or anything.
Point is, M's don't need to overachieve to be in the mix for the division. They just need to not fuck up.
by Bearskin Rugburn on Dec 10, 2006 9:16 PM PST up reply actions
Not true at all
"Haren, in my mind, is Gil Meche without the monkey on his back, and between him and Jennings, its a toss up."
Meche: 182 IP, 4.48 ERA, 4.79 xFIP, 156/84 K/BB
Jennings: 212 IP, 3.78 ERA, 4.85 xFIP, 142/85 K/BB
Haren: 223 IP, 4.12 ERA, 4.06 xFIP, 176/45 K/BB
Now, Haren is clearly much much better than Meche. In every meaningful stat, he is clearly better. Better K rate. Lower BB rate. Everything. He is also 2 years younger, and has been good the past two years. No problems with inconsistency. He is more likely than not to improve in 2007. You can't say that with the other guys.
Haren versus Jennings is a more interesting comp. But I would definitely take Haren if given the choice. His K rate is much better, and he is far less volatile. Jennings has put up ERAs over 5.0 in 3 of the last 4 years. How he will do outside of Coors is anyones guess.
But really, how likely is it that the M's even get Jennings? The Rockies might not even trade him, and there will be considerable competition from other clubs (probably including the Rangers). Maybe we should wait until there are at least rumors linking him to Seattle before we pencil him in.
"OK, Millwood is an asset, but Padilla at #2? And Wells? That's KIP Wells, right? Right."
Padilla is a much better pitcher than our current #2, Jarrod Washburn. Compare their stats:
Padilla: 200 IP, 4.5 ERA, 4.62 xFIP, 156/70 K/BB
Washburn: 187 IP, 4.67 ERA, 5.35 xFIP, 103/55 K/BB
Padilla is far better. Their ERAs are confusingly similar, but Padilla is a way better starter. And Padilla put up those numbers in Arlington, and Washburn pitched half his games in Safeco.
Further, I would take Wells over our #4 starter, which is Baek or Woods. If Wells pitches, he could be a good value. If he doesn't, the Rangers will send out Edinson Volquez, who is way better than Baek or Woods. He is a legit pitching prospect. Their plan B is better than our guys.
"Escobar is so-so"
Escobar: 189 IP, 3.61 ERA, 4.24 xFIP, 147/50
Escobar was way better than anyone on our staff last year. He is a good #2 starter who will probably be a #3 or #4 guy in LA. So-So? I would love to have a few so-so pitchers, then. Escobar would be our openning day starter.
The Angels rotation is as good as any in baseball. If Jarrod Weaver is your question mark, that is a good staff.
"Point is, M's don't need to overachieve to be in the mix for the division."
Actually, if you really look at what the other clubs in the division have, it is going to be really difficult for the M's to compete. They WILL have to overachieve.
Not only that, they will need the A's or Angels to underachieve. Both clubs got hosed by injuries last season, while the m's had almost no important players go down.
If anything, the rest of the division was really unluckly last year.
I hate to be the eternal pessimist, but I think that you guys are viewing everything through rose colored glasses.
meh
However, I was going on the assumption that the M's make at least two more moves - Thomson and Suppan or Jennings or, I dunno, Clemens or something (j/k). That would bump Washburn up to #3 and leave no room for either Baek or Woods.
Baek and Woods are our plan B, as you say, but that plan also now includes Lehr and will soon include Feierabend. Maybe, come August, Morrow will be ready to show what he learned in college.
While we didn't have important players go down with injury, Sexson was clearly being drugged and Carl Everett was a sort of ongoing injury to the entire team, like a mild strain.
As for the likes of Padilla, Escobar, Santana, and co. I really think they were doing performing to their max ability last year and will not maintain that level of performance. Escobar especially. But that's not based on PECOTA or player comps or anything like that. Just a personal feeling as an M's fan and blog reader.
by Bearskin Rugburn on Dec 10, 2006 10:41 PM PST up reply actions
New Rumors
How about this kickass rotation:
Felix, Washburn, Batista, Ramirez, Baek/Woods
That is a formidable group. I am sure that the Rangers, A's, and Angels are laughing their asses off right now.
What the hell is Bavasi thinking?
This could be the worst offseason in M's history.
Not that it matters
And for what it's worth, the M's have the worst rotation in the AL West, and quite possibly, the AL. Felix, Washburn, Ramirez would all have to have career seasons for them to even come close to the Angels and A's.
It's going to be a very long season and it doesn't help that our GM is trading top notch RP's for SP's who were likely to not be tendered a contract in the next week.
Well that means
Ok, it could get a lot worse which is sad. I totally realize how much worse it could get and lets not thing about that. Here is for crossing my fingers and toes that our pitchers realize how to pitch better cause that would make us a heck of a lot better. We can all agree that if our starting pitching doesn't outperform what they are expected then we won't be much come september. This doesn't mean I don't think we won't be at least close for a little while and if we get a few breaks maybe we can squeeze in to the post-season. Here is happy thoughts.
by Edgar for Pres on Dec 10, 2006 11:00 PM PST up reply actions
Worst in the AL? Really?
Do you really think
And pound for pound, I'd take KC's rotation to post better numbers than the M's this year.
I wouldn't go that far
Also, KC has an awful, sloppy defense.
The M's rotation is not a good rotation, but let's not get carried away.
Just a small point but
by Edgar for Pres on Dec 10, 2006 10:51 PM PST up reply actions
A little off topic but
Thought as much
by Mariner John on Dec 10, 2006 10:51 PM PST up reply actions
Its Sean White
My son is 10 years old - is it too late to force him into throwing with his left hand?
by KC @ Lookout Landing on Dec 11, 2006 1:04 AM PST up reply actions
Yup
Hate to put it this way
For one, it seems unlikely (a serious understatement) for the Wild Card to come out of the AL West next year (though i suppose the central could beat the crap out of each other. but then there's still the whole Yankee/Red Sox thingy)
Last year the Angels actually had a terriblly underachieving season that was only salvaged by Jered Weaver and Juan Rivera. should any more of their prospect (and there are lots) play anywhere near their potential next year the Angels should run away with the division even if Matthews isn't that good as we expect.
They have a very good pitching staff with no real holes. they have legitimate players in every position (Except maybe DH and 3B, though that is something the youngesters could fill.) they played the whole year without Bartolo Colon essentially. and hit like abosalute garbage for the first couple of month.
The A's area always a hit and miss team really, I'm not too high on their chances next year, though they are usually creative and resourceful enough to pull something off.
The Ranger is a weird duck, throwing money at odd places. still, when you overpay enough guys you should at least have something (see NY teams, and Boston.)
I still think the realistic finish of the M's next year is 3rd or 4h in the division, if their lucky they might get to 2, with the Angels being the bigger favorite to win the division.
What's the future plan? is there a future plan? we don't know. and i wonder if Bavasi knows? at this rate Ichiro is as good as gone next year. i think the M's still need to spend something to keep themself relevent. this may not be the year to do so. but still. when you play poorly for awhile the road back to respectability is often more difficult than precieved, look at what the Mets have to do over the last few years . or that the Royals to even get a couple of mediocare FAs to sign... the M's may be staring at that down the road in a year or two, if they aren't doing that already.
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recommended FanPosts
Recent FanPosts
In Association With
Big League Stew - MLB - Yahoo! Sports
- The Cardinals Hall of Fame can now be found at Bill Clinton’s library in Arkansas (Huh?)
- Will Bryce Harper start the season with the Nationals?
- Mitch Mustain puts football behind him, signs reported rookie deal with White Sox
- Robinson Cano and Denzel Washington face off in Jay Leno’s Yankees trivia contest
- Shane Victorino lands role on ‘Hawaii Five-0′
Certain photos copyright © 2012 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
