Where The Mariners Stand As Of Right Now
by Jeff Sullivan on Dec 16, 2009 12:41 PM PST
in Seattle Mariners Stats
Email
PrintMost players aren't big additions. Cliff Lee's a little different. With the understanding that these are nothing more than educated approximations:
You can quibble with individual projections if you want to. I don't claim to hold the truth in my hands. But while one or seven of them may be off by a little bit, I think the overall picture is reasonably accurate, and the overall picture puts us around 85 wins. In other words, unless I'm way off, the Seattle Mariners right now are a mid-80s win team on true talent, and that's before accounting for whatever additional moves they make for a first baseman, a DH, and/or anything else. They do still have something like $10m(ish) to work with, assuming no sudden bump in payroll. Bring in, I dunno, Nick Johnson or re-sign Russell Branyan or whatever and all of a sudden we're getting dangerously close to 90. And who the hell knows what other aces Jack might have up his sleeve?
I don't know where the Angels or Rangers (or A's) stand in this regard, as I haven't done that analysis. But what I can tell you is that none of our divisional competition is much better than us, as Cliff Lee just made the M's better by several wins. By the end of the offseason, the Mariners very well may be considered the favorites to win the AL West. And I mean legitimate favorites.
195 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
If Saunders breaks out, that's probably an extra win as well.
On the other hand I still think it’s doubtful Loafie starts 2010 in Mariner blue. Bringing Beltre back looks like it would add a win or two. If Morrow finally turns into a major league starter or Snell gets over his control issues that right there could move them into high 80s-low 90s.
Then again, I remember playing these games with the M’s way back into the 1980s. It never worked out as well as I’d hoped. Granted that we all knew a lot less about baseball then compared to now, and I knew a lot less about it than the average fan, given that I was a teenager.
I think you're a tad optimistic on some of these,
but my independent spreadsheet has us at 83.75 WAR, so we’re pretty close.
Figgins and Guti get small boosts for baserunning
RRS may be high by 0.5-1 wins depending on durability, and Wilson could get hurt at any moment…
by Jeff Sullivan on Dec 16, 2009 12:52 PM PST up reply actions
ZOMG the Mariners are going to win 130 games!!!!!
by Johnny Slick on Dec 16, 2009 12:53 PM PST up reply actions
I've read somewhere that if a person can successfully place a $1 bet on this, and it happens, you bankrupt Las Vegas
I don't care how well he does for the M's...FUCK ENDY CHAVEZ
I've wasted a dollar on stupider shit than this
next time I’m in Vegas I’m going to test that theory out.
You have a better shot of winning and really hurting vegas with bets on a big underdog
When the Rays made the WS, vegas had to muck with the lines all through the playoffs to try to balance the massive hit they were going to take if all the 65:1 winners collected.
What, all 200 people dumb enough to bet on it?
by seattlebruin on Dec 16, 2009 1:59 PM PST up reply actions
It doesn't take a lot to kill a vegas sport's book
If you read The Odds by Chad Millman you’ll discover the books almost all were about to get killed by the Rams in 99.
In them getting to the Super Bowl?
didn’t they win that year?
by seattlebruin on Dec 16, 2009 2:08 PM PST up reply actions
Yeah, but if I recall they came out of nowhere that year.
by Mariner John on Dec 16, 2009 2:13 PM PST up reply actions
It wasn't that it was out of nowhere.
They had a very good team, everyone knew that, it was that their QB, who literally had a perfect QB rating through 2 or 3 preseason games destroyed his knee and they replaced him with a guy who had thrown 11 NFL passes and completed 4 of them for 39 yards. Not to mention he was 28 and was stocking groceries only a few years earlier. So when Trent Green went down and Dick Vermeil said Kurt Warner is our QB and we’re going to rally around him, everyone thought they were done.
Tools Whore
Yes, but they signed Trent Green, who appeared to be good and was once he recovered.
Traded for Faulk in his prime and drafted Holt. They had a buzz and then Greens knee killed it all along with the fact that no one but the Rams thought Kurt Warner had any skills at all.
Tools Whore
They were able to set the lines well enough in the SB
They were like 100-1 to win the SB, and the books were on the line for a tons of money. But they got the lines for the game good enough so that they only lost some money and didn’t go bankrupt.
Except you'd be 161-0 and then David Murphy or some fuck would hit a ninth-inning walkoff
by seattlebruin on Dec 16, 2009 1:57 PM PST up reply actions
Hopefully this sticks
Lopez for Doumit
Hudson to 2B
Branyan to 1B/DH
Morrow for 1B/DH Zgasm
As much as I liked Branyan...
I would really, really prefer if the M’s went out and got someone who isn’t coming off of a back injury he may not recover from and who doesn’t have the obvious old player skills. Granted, first basemen as a group tend to have old players’ skills but TTO guys are the extreme version. So, Nick Johnson please.
by Johnny Slick on Dec 16, 2009 12:54 PM PST up reply actions
Yeah, I see that.
As Johnson isn’t exactly injury-free. I still prefer his skillset to Branyan’s. Also, it would drive Geoff Baker up the wall to replace a potential 30 HR guy with a 10-20 HR guy who walks a lot.
by Johnny Slick on Dec 16, 2009 1:01 PM PST up reply actions
Get Johnson and Branyan. Given the roughly 15 million remaining in payroll
flexibility, why not just get them both in here. That would put us up at 90 wins.
I tend to think Saunders will give us a little more than +1.
"none of our divisional competition is much better than us,"
Don’t let the Angels fans see that!
This looks good Jeff, I just hope our catching position doesn’t bring us despair throughout the season.
Carlos Silvelite
This is pretty much what I was guesstimating*
And I guess we add a 1B for two more wins or so and maybe a DH for one more but then it gets tricky. So I was kinda thinking that with two all-stars on the staff and some real depth in 5th starter types, we’re in a pretty good position to take a flyer on one of the fragile rms on the market. Is it too soon to start clamoring for Bedard to come back?
De Gutibus non disputandum est
by Bearskin Rugburn on Dec 16, 2009 12:57 PM PST reply actions
* I also hate the word guesstimating
De Gutibus non disputandum est
by Bearskin Rugburn on Dec 16, 2009 12:57 PM PST up reply actions
I was thinking about Bedard too...
Very high risk, but if the price is right, why not? If he could return to his greatness…oh man, Felix/Lee/Bedard. Yikes.
Carlos Silvelite
Right, he'd be cheap
and with the money we have left we’re not adding any dramatic talent to the lineup
De Gutibus non disputandum est
by Bearskin Rugburn on Dec 16, 2009 1:00 PM PST up reply actions
I know...
You guys are going to jump down my throat here, but how do you convert a WAR number to an amount of wins…sorry for being a boob…
by SebastianPruiti on Dec 16, 2009 12:57 PM PST reply actions
Welp...
meant to type noob…but boob works too I guess…
by SebastianPruiti on Dec 16, 2009 12:57 PM PST up reply actions
Boob is actually much better than noob
WAR is wins in terms or player value. A replacement level team… oh dammit
De Gutibus non disputandum est
by Bearskin Rugburn on Dec 16, 2009 12:59 PM PST up reply actions
WAR = wins above replacement
On the team level, take total WAR and add it to 48 (or something around there)
by Jeff Sullivan on Dec 16, 2009 12:58 PM PST up reply actions
From one noob to another...
WAR = wins above replacement. Start with 50 wins, which is about how many games you’d win if you stocked your team with nothing but freely available AAAA talent, and add the WARs. The above post has the M’s at around 86 wins (actually less because replacement level is really only around 47 or 48 victories).
by Johnny Slick on Dec 16, 2009 12:59 PM PST up reply actions
You mean with the word boob in it?
Noted…
by SebastianPruiti on Dec 16, 2009 1:10 PM PST up reply actions
Everyone here likes boobs except Poochie, who likes biscuits
by seattlebruin on Dec 16, 2009 1:23 PM PST up reply actions 2 recs
But only in the anatomical sense
I don’t like boobs in the ‘the door says pull not push you boob’ sense.
De Gutibus non disputandum est
by Bearskin Rugburn on Dec 16, 2009 1:28 PM PST up reply actions
Actually, we had about $16 million before today
We have to pay Lee’s $9 million dollar salary so we’re down to about $6 million. Time to go dumpster diving.
Yeah, didn't we axe Batista, Washburn, Joh, Beltre and Bedard?
That’s roughly 40 million?
Wasn't the $25 number put out there after Johjima and before Figgins?
by BrettJMiller on Dec 16, 2009 1:02 PM PST up reply actions
Dave used the $25 after Johjima left
In his offseason plan. I don’t know if you’re using that or not.
He wasn't assuming that Johjima's money came back
After the Figgins signing, he was still talking $25M
by Graham MacAree on Dec 16, 2009 1:06 PM PST up reply actions
Honestly at this point the ownership should just hand Z the checkbook and trust him
he’s been turning lead to gold for two years straight
De Gutibus non disputandum est
by Bearskin Rugburn on Dec 16, 2009 1:03 PM PST up reply actions
We had $25 million going into the off-season
We gave Figgins $9 million, perhaps a bit less if we backloaded the deal. Subtract another $9 million for Lee and we’re down to around $7 million.
I've written about this
http://www.lookoutlanding.com/2009/11/14/1157498/where-we-stand-with-regard-to-the
That – 2 minimums + Figgins + Lee = $83-88m, and we’re projected for a payroll somewhere around $98m or so
by Jeff Sullivan on Dec 16, 2009 1:03 PM PST up reply actions
Would you be shocked if they raised payroll back to 2008 levels ($117 million or so) if they really believed they had a chance this year?
by BrettJMiller on Dec 16, 2009 1:04 PM PST up reply actions
They better
De Gutibus non disputandum est
by Bearskin Rugburn on Dec 16, 2009 1:05 PM PST up reply actions
The economy isn't doing well, and attendance isn't going to bounce back that fast.
Attendance LAGS team quality. While the M’s were decent last year, they realistically weren’t in the race after May, only being peripherally near it through July-August.
by eponymous_coward on Dec 16, 2009 1:49 PM PST up reply actions
But attendance last year didn't drop off nearly as much as it was expected to (the team admitted as much)
and the economy is showing all kinds of signs of improvement relative to this time last year. They saved money last year when Washburn was shipped off and they cut the payroll by nearly 20% expecting income to nosedive, which it didn’t. If they had any scruples they would raise payroll to ~105-100.
De Gutibus non disputandum est
by Bearskin Rugburn on Dec 16, 2009 2:04 PM PST up reply actions
Over 10% unemployment in the Puget Sound, considerably higher than this time last year.
Some of those people are season ticket holders.
by eponymous_coward on Dec 16, 2009 2:13 PM PST up reply actions
Tickets sold may not have dropped.
Real attendance plummeted though which is a precursor to even fewer tickets selling the following year.
But wins?!
De Gutibus non disputandum est
by Bearskin Rugburn on Dec 16, 2009 2:20 PM PST up reply actions
But you don't need $120 million to have a good roster in this division.
Sure, it would be lovely to give Zduriencik the cash Bavasi had. It may not be prudent business management in a down economy, though, or needed, plus there are some bad potential signings (say, like Jason Bay to a Bavasi-style long term deal). I think adding some low-risk talent to 1B/DH and the bullpen, and this team is fine for a shot at making the playoffs, and we have something (ace pitchers) that tends to serve teams VERY well in the playoffs.
by eponymous_coward on Dec 16, 2009 2:25 PM PST up reply actions
Exactly.
To put this another way, last year, the economy was falling off of a building. This year, it’s on the ground with various broken bones and internal injuries. It’s not falling any more, but consumer spending isn’t going to be like it was back a couple of years ago, either, especially with persistent high unemployment and a need to pay down debt.
by eponymous_coward on Dec 16, 2009 2:21 PM PST up reply actions
Well okay, I just like when other people spend a shitload of their money for my entertainment.
De Gutibus non disputandum est
by Bearskin Rugburn on Dec 16, 2009 2:23 PM PST up reply actions
I'm pretty sure no one wants to repeat 2008
including the people signing the checks.
Maybe it’s because we leave off all the zeros. Maybe it’s because MLB teams play around with so much money that it’s hard for us to conceive how much they’re actually playing with. But $5,000,000 is a lot of fucking money, even if you own a baseball team. And we’re talking about significantly more than $5,000,000. Think of going to your boss and saying “Hey boss, the department I’m in needs a 9% budget increase.” What would you have to follow that with in order to convince your boss you were right?
That was like five extasy and panic filled threads ago
De Gutibus non disputandum est
by Bearskin Rugburn on Dec 16, 2009 1:04 PM PST up reply actions
Yeah, my numbers show us with some more room too
But the $25 million number was what Dave’s been using so I’ve been running with that.
After Lee, BEFORE Felix,
and figuring about 7-8 between Gutz, Aardsma, and Lowe, and we are at $75 million, per Cots.
I still think we’ve got enough for two bats.
Beltre and N. Johnson?
Competent hitting AAAA 1B/DHs are pretty easy to find dumpster diving.
Hello, Russ Branyan!
by eponymous_coward on Dec 16, 2009 1:42 PM PST up reply actions
Are we sure the Mariners have $10-15 million to work with?
The projected budget left us with $25 million this offseason. With the Figgins signing ($9 million) and the Lee acquisition ($9 million), that leaves roughly $7 million.
I know this is bullshit when the fuck are we going to get some news
My Mariners blog - SodoMojo, Twitter Feed, Fuck the fucking Angels!
Did you hear Kyle Drabek is injured?
De Gutibus non disputandum est
by Bearskin Rugburn on Dec 16, 2009 1:35 PM PST up reply actions
ZOMG SQUEE SIGN JASON BAY
In all seriousness, though, we’re in good shape: a couple of decent pieces (Loafie and Morrow) that are capable of bringing back something in trade, and two positions (DH and 1B) where finding ~2 WAR players at each of them shouldn’t break any banks (and if you really want to go wild, 3 if you think Saunders could go to AAA). And that’s if there’s only 7 million or so left in payroll- if the payroll number is higher, you have even more flexibility.
by eponymous_coward on Dec 16, 2009 1:47 PM PST reply actions
Doesn't a 2 win DH mean a 4 win bat?
those are pretty hard to find for 8-9M.
De Gutibus non disputandum est
by Bearskin Rugburn on Dec 16, 2009 2:05 PM PST up reply actions
Again, hard to do for ~10M when the positional penalty comes out to 32 runs.
so you’re talking about 80 runs above replacement on hitting and 1B defense. Only way to get that done as I see it is Gonzalez plus Branyan or so.
De Gutibus non disputandum est
by Bearskin Rugburn on Dec 16, 2009 2:16 PM PST up reply actions
I was probably being optimistic thinking of ideal seasons from Branyan and a Nick Johnson
I suppose a 3.5/1.5 breakdown from those two could be conceivable, but it’s more likely they’d be between 3-4 wins combined at 1B and DH
You may have a point...
Thome was only a 1.5 WAR player at DH, and he’s kind of the prototype for what you’d be looking for. Though there are TONS of 2+ WAR players in LF/1B.
Maybe the better way to look at it would be “two bats who can rotate between 1B/DH/LF without being complete defensive boat anchors and contribute 4-5 wins”.
by eponymous_coward on Dec 16, 2009 2:31 PM PST up reply actions
RP being only 2 WAR?
Aardsma was worth 1.9 by himself last year. Are you assuming he regresses a half win or so, and the rest of the bullpen has either nearly no value or negative value? Just wondering how you got there, not saying it’s wrong.
Aardsma regression and conservative projections of the rest
They could end up around 3 or maybe even four, but I’d rather be cautious. Bullpens are unpredictable, and when faced with unpredictability, regress to the mean.
by Jeff Sullivan on Dec 16, 2009 1:54 PM PST up reply actions
It sort of confirms something I've thought
which is it would be nice to inject additional talent into the bullpen. A bullpen add, and a couple of guys who could swing between DH/1B/LF, and we’d be set.
by eponymous_coward on Dec 16, 2009 1:58 PM PST up reply actions
Conservative seems to be the way to go with projections anyway.
Makes sense.
by BrettJMiller on Dec 16, 2009 2:08 PM PST up reply actions
I'm that guy who essentially copies and pastes the player's career averages into his projections.
But hey, it works.
by .Taylor on Dec 16, 2009 2:13 PM PST up reply actions
Whats the more likely scenario?
Sign a guy or trade Morrow/Loafie for a guy?
Have you been paying attention?
De Gutibus non disputandum est
by Bearskin Rugburn on Dec 16, 2009 2:06 PM PST up reply actions
To what, the Cliff Lee deal?
The easiest part of the deal was the Phillies signing Halladay to an extension. The difficult part was deciding which prospects were to be swapped.
I'm joking
De Gutibus non disputandum est
by Bearskin Rugburn on Dec 16, 2009 2:17 PM PST up reply actions
So, this Baker post makes it sound like Lee fell into Z's lap
Zduriencik first approached on Cliff Lee deal days into winter meetings
It was right about that time — Zduriencik says it was two or three days after his arrival on Sunday — that he was approached by Phillies GM Ruben Amaro Jr. with an early Christmas gift.
Zduriencik knew full well Amaro wanted to acquire Roy Halladay from the Toronto Blue Jays, something he’d been working on since last summer. But what Amaro said next got Zduriencik’s deal glands salivating.
“He said ‘Look, if I’m able to do Halladay, would you be able to do Cliff Lee?’ ’’ Zduriencik said in a conference call with reporters moments ago.
Zduriencik managed to keep his head from falling off as he nodded vigorously.
Even if the deal was a “Christmas gift”, I still credit Z for having established himself and the M’s to the point that a team would approach him to take Cliff Lee off their hands. Then he had to thread the needle with the right prospect package, without giving up any near-MLB ready guys. AND he didn’t bite on Harden’s contract demands in the first place, ending up with a healthy Cy Young winner instead. Incredible
Our GM had deal glands
De Gutibus non disputandum est
by Bearskin Rugburn on Dec 16, 2009 2:18 PM PST up reply actions
Adding Harden to this roster makes it a 86-88 win team
I think a 3 win pitcher is the second easiest way to improve at this point (easiest being to sign a 1B that isn’t a ginger).
De Gutibus non disputandum est
by Bearskin Rugburn on Dec 16, 2009 2:22 PM PST up reply actions
This is going to be a really exciting year
The AL West is probably going to be a complete toss-up, if we aren’t the best.
I almost don't like it when Zduriencik talks to the media
because when he’s talking to the media, he can’t be actively working on deals.
Batted .393/.614/.464 for 2009 Diablos, #5 in OBP for PSSBL Rocky Division.
by Two Rs and Two Ls on Dec 16, 2009 2:49 PM PST reply actions
As far as I know, Jack said yesterday that he wanted him back
But no deal was done yet.
That's okay, Jack's word is good.
Batted .393/.614/.464 for 2009 Diablos, #5 in OBP for PSSBL Rocky Division.
by Two Rs and Two Ls on Dec 16, 2009 3:20 PM PST up reply actions
Hello LaRoche
De Gutibus non disputandum est
by Bearskin Rugburn on Dec 16, 2009 4:44 PM PST up reply actions
How much would a reasonable Felix extension knock down our financial flexibility?
Say we sign him for 5/$85, that works out to $17/yr which means we only have ~$2m to work with instead of ~$10, correct?
The Felix money is already accounted for in seperately
They know they have to pay his arbitration salary already and what it should be. An extension would buy out his arb years at market value, I’d assume.
What Salty said
If he gets an extension, his salary for 2010 would probably not be all that much more than what he would sign for w/o an extension.
by nathaniel dawson on Dec 16, 2009 3:19 PM PST up reply actions
Well, probably $5-6M higher
assuming a $10M arbitration award and a $15-16M annual salary, which is actually under Dave Cameron’s suggested 6/$100M deal
by seattlebruin on Dec 16, 2009 3:27 PM PST up reply actions
Wouldn't it be more proper to regress some of those projections?
And also reduce playing time for all players to account for injury risk? This would be especially meaningful for pitchers. Maybe you already did that for Felix and Lee, but those projections seem to be pretty high on the optimism scale when you figure in some regression and injury risk, as well as some aging for Lee.
by nathaniel dawson on Dec 16, 2009 3:27 PM PST reply actions
You could knock Felix and Lee both down to 5 without much argument
but, to be honest, I don’t think you’re going to change the overall picture very much. And who knows, I may be underestimating Morrow/Snell.
by Jeff Sullivan on Dec 16, 2009 3:39 PM PST up reply actions
Or the bullpen and bench.
Griffey’s pretty useless, but I could see Hannahan/Hall chipping in 2 WAR, and the bullpen being more like 2-3 WAR if things go well.
by eponymous_coward on Dec 16, 2009 3:41 PM PST up reply actions
Hannahan has to get at-bats to chip in 2 WAR
by seattlebruin on Dec 16, 2009 3:42 PM PST up reply actions
I think he was more or less meaning the whole bench
It looks like we have a pretty good bench and can count on a good contribution from them
by nathaniel dawson on Dec 16, 2009 3:46 PM PST up reply actions
Oh yeah, whoops
I read that as just Hannahan, and completely blanked on seeing Hannahan/Hall
by seattlebruin on Dec 16, 2009 3:54 PM PST up reply actions
Wilson's PA's last 3 years: 535, 330, 402
Hannahan’s going to get some time at SS.
by eponymous_coward on Dec 16, 2009 4:00 PM PST up reply actions
Or whatever contributions the whole combination of 4 and 5 starters could bring
They have enough to choose from that 1-3 WAR is a pretty good guess.
by nathaniel dawson on Dec 16, 2009 3:49 PM PST up reply actions
I can't wait to see Cliff Lee in a M's uniform.
Will they be giving a press conference on it?
You got slurved!
Maybe
Trade acquisitions sometimes just get a conference call with reporters. No contract to sign, so no requirement to fly into town.
by lemonverbena on Dec 16, 2009 4:26 PM PST up reply actions
What's the story with Endy Chavez these days?
Did his contract expire? Is he a part of the roster? Still hurt? Basically, does he fit in our plans in any way, shape or form?
Yuni epicly ruined his leg
Torn ACL and MCL, he won’t be ready to play until halfway through the season if at all.
Man, I love our rotation. I'd be excited to see any of those dude pitch.
I mean, if Morrow and Snell figure it out…..hoooooo boy. Could be a damn good rotation.
Why is Lee a 6 WAR player?
Most have him at 5 WAR, slightly below Felix. Felix and Lee are nice at the top of the rotation, but we still have a below average 3, 4 ,5 starter and our pen is pretty weak, given that you are going to see Aardsma regress. Aumont is gone. The pitching overall is average, and we scored the lowest number of runs in 2009! This team now is not better than the 2009 Mariners.
The pen was only given 2 WAR for the whole staff.
That’s not exactly a huge amount of winnage. As for the lowest number of runs, well, regression to the mean works both ways. I expect catcher to be less of a complete black hole because it would be very hard for it to become more of one. Also left field.
by Johnny Slick on Dec 16, 2009 4:47 PM PST up reply actions
Been worth 7.2 and 6.6 WAR the past two seasons
And yes it is
The Mariners today are better than the Mariners yesterday.
That’s the important thing. There is also a lot more the team can do. I highly doubt that the “current” Mariners starting lineup will be the lineup we see on Opening Day.
SEA!
I don't expect
Below average production from RRS.
by Ballard Erik on Dec 16, 2009 5:04 PM PST via mobile up reply actions
I'm pretty sure you're underestimating our rotation.
Seriously, look around at the other teams in baseball and see how many of them had poor pitching beyond their first two guys. Our 3 to 5 guys (whomever it ends up being) are probably at least average among all baseball teams.
by nathaniel dawson on Dec 16, 2009 5:13 PM PST up reply actions
The 2009 Mariners received 37 WAR from its players
The team above has an estimated total of 37 WAR.
Last year’s Mariners weren’t bad and we’re still not finished.
by Jeff Sullivan on Dec 16, 2009 6:12 PM PST up reply actions
I haven't heard much about Hannahan/Hall lately.
I always liked the idea of them platooning this year. It seems like you might be able to come close to matching Lopez’s 2010 production by pairing those two in a platoon (either at 2B or move Chone to 2B and platoon at 3B). Somebody has to like Lopez as a trade chit.
In another thought, I agree with the sentiment that the cheapest way to add wins on the FA market seems to be at 1B or with another starting pitcher. I still wouldn’t mind the M’s going after Bedard/Sheets some other high risk/reward guy on the mound.
Went over to Halos Heaven to see what their reaction would be to the Cliff Lee deal....
It was my first time poking around another MLB SBN blog and for some silly reason I have always thought that all other SBN blogs would be like Lookout Landing, where user comments are mostly based on sound analytical reasoning and the occasional snark. People disagree here often, but when they do they either base their arguments on sound logic or get corrected by the community fairly quickly.
Let me tell you, my eyes are still bleeding Angel red after reading some of the comments over there. It was like reading an ESPN or Seattle Times comment page, where there are a few sane users fighting a current of ignorance. I am now actually stupider for having gone there. Some gems that I encountered:
1. Cliff Lee will not have success against the AL West.
2. Angels have nothing to worry about because all Lee will do is replace the production from Bedard and Washburn. Thus the Mariners are not contenders.
3. Some posters actually think that this is Bedard all over again for us.
I feel bad that I’ve taken sites like this and USSM for granted. To Jeff, Graham, Matthew, and the short lived reign of Robert as a mod, thank you for making this place so great.
Robert was never a mod.
You’re thinking of Brett.
by katal on Dec 16, 2009 6:02 PM PST up reply actions 1 recs
No one's shocked.
They’re just annoyed since you’re such an awful poster and bring nothing to the community and no one likes you.
...and now I'm here
by CapSea on Dec 16, 2009 7:37 PM PST up reply actions 1 recs
So Operation "Get Griffey a World Series ring" has begun.
by ThundaPC on Dec 16, 2009 7:05 PM PST reply actions 1 recs
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
Related FanPosts on Lookout Landing
Related FanShots on Lookout Landing
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recommended FanPosts
Recent FanPosts
In Association With
Big League Stew - MLB - Yahoo! Sports
- Shane Victorino lands role on ‘Hawaii Five-0′
- Have you criticized Hanley Ramirez on Twitter? Your name may be on his bat!
- U.S. senator cries foul over Nationals plans to take back park from Phillies fans
- Photo: Comerica Park readies itself for Hockeytown
- Podcast: Dirk Hayhurst talks about Italy, the reality of the big leagues and his new book
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.
