Time To Acknowledge The Rumors
Word is the Mariners are on the verge of landing Casey Kotchman from the Red Sox. Alex Speier has it as Kotchman for a role player, a PTBNL, and cash, while Ken Rosenthal identifies the role player as Bill Hall. Nothing has officially happened yet, but it's beginning to feel inevitable.
Here's Kotchman in a nutshell:
- 27 year old lefty 1B
- Once highly-regarded prospect
- .269/.337/.406 career bat, .324 wOBA
- Plus defender, +5 < x < +10 or so according to several measures
- Little power; 47 PA's per homer, longest homer 414 feet
- Good eye, hits for contact
- Decent but below-average player overall
Kotchman is a few years removed from his "big" 2007, a season that still saw him fall short offensively of Russell Branyan's 2009. The last two seasons he's settled in as a below-average bat with an above-average glove, making him something like a 1-1.5 win player. He is not an impact addition, and though his history and age give him the appearance of upside, realistically, even an average offensive season would come as a surprise. He's not going to drive in a ton of runs.
As such, he's underwhelming. Fans wanted to see Z land a bigger bat to fill the hole, myself included, and one of the most common responses to this that I've seen so far is, if Kotchman's all the M's are going to do, why not just go with Mike Carp?
It is necessary to understand that, though Kotchman's no star, he is nevertheless a better player than Carp. For one thing, Kotchman's the far superior defender. For another, Carp just struck out in 20% of his plate appearances in AAA last year, while Kotchman's struck out in 9% of his plate appearances in the bigs. There is literally nothing meaningful that Carp does, right now, that Kotchman doesn't do about as well or better. There's not a huge difference between the two players, but it comes out to a win or so, which is important. If you're mad that the M's didn't splurge for an extra win on top of Kotchman, then you should be satisfied that they at least added a win over Mike Carp.
It's also important that Kotchman is pretty cheap and easily replaceable. I don't know how much money the M's have left to spend, but Kotchman won't take up a whole lot of it, and he's no guaranteed season-long commitment - if he doesn't work out, or if someone better becomes available, then Z can make that move if he so chooses. We haven't committed ourselves to Casey Kotchman. We've committed ourselves to at least Casey Kotchman.
I'm not the biggest fan of this move, myself. Hall's no huge loss, but he was one of our only remaining right-handed bats, and there's a reason why Kotchman's available at the price. It's just a very small upgrade that, at the same time, kind of clouds a flexible roster that was just beginning to make sense. What I really take away from this is that the M's must've seen something in Branyan's medical reports they didn't like at all. The Mariners have needed a 1B from the beginning, and Branyan was open to coming back at a reasonable price. That we've settled on Casey Kotchman implies that the M's didn't see any way they could let Branyan play the field on a regular basis.
So here we are. I don't know how the outfield situation is going to sort out now that the potential righty platoon bat is gone, and I don't know the identity of the PTBNL or the amount of money changing hands, but I assume the M's wouldn't have done this if they didn't have it already figured out, and these M's are generally pretty good at figuring things out. So I'm a little confused, a little content, and a whole lotta neutral.
371 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Futurama's awesome.
A Mariners fan in Seattle
by Coach Owens on Jan 5, 2010 4:26 PM PST up reply actions 1 recs
Please refrain from making comments such as this.
They are the equivalent of +1
I grant an exception for that comment by that username
by Jeff Sullivan on Jan 5, 2010 5:00 PM PST up reply actions
Well part of the righty platoon in the OF is still Bradley, who hits better right handed, no?
This just gives him more AB I hope (and of course I hope he’s healthy enough to take them).
De Gutibus non disputandum est
by Bearskin Rugburn on Jan 5, 2010 3:52 PM PST reply actions
I know the answer to this one!
What is small sample size?
Its because he was in the best shape of his life to start the season
De Gutibus non disputandum est
by Bearskin Rugburn on Jan 5, 2010 4:00 PM PST up reply actions
Ovoids?
De Gutibus non disputandum est
by Bearskin Rugburn on Jan 5, 2010 6:08 PM PST up reply actions
We already got Texeira
rule 5 pick.
De Gutibus non disputandum est
by Bearskin Rugburn on Jan 5, 2010 3:54 PM PST up reply actions
Yeah, this whelmed the shit out of me
by Jeff Sullivan on Jan 5, 2010 3:54 PM PST up reply actions 6 recs
So you're dead?
Damn.
Determined, Jonesing Commentor | Proud proprietor of Wyomingroutes.org & Washingtonhighways.org
Our team is still pretty much in whack.
...and now I'm here
The money changing hands
I’m assuming this is part of the dough that Milwaukee sent here to pay for Hall’s 8.5M salary. If that’s the case, this can be seen as basically a salary clearing move, since us sending 2M to Boston still leaves us with a few mil left over.
De Gutibus non disputandum est
by Bearskin Rugburn on Jan 5, 2010 3:55 PM PST reply actions 1 recs
We still don't know how much money we're talking about
by Graham MacAree on Jan 5, 2010 3:56 PM PST up reply actions
I guess I had Hall tabbed at 1.5M, since that's what he's actually costing us
and wanted to remind people that there’s all that Brewer money that ought to follow Hall to Boston. If we’re only sending part of it then it’s kind of a win for us, and the inclusion of a minor leaguer makes me think it’ll be less than the 7M they gave us.
De Gutibus non disputandum est
by Bearskin Rugburn on Jan 5, 2010 3:59 PM PST up reply actions
I don't get how this is part of the Cliff Lee trade.
by Matthew on Jan 5, 2010 3:57 PM PST reply actions 2 recs
Not A Huge Deal
If the M’s sent Hall, then they’re also clearing a roster spot. That means Kotchman is quite possibly viewed as a bench player, or half of a platoon.
My current worry is the over-population of lefties on the team. You can have too many left-handed hitters. Right?
Well you can never have too many switch hitters.
Did you know Ryan Doumit is a switch hitter?
Though I do like getting rid of Hall.
I voted him my least favorite Mariner in the poll. (Not for anything personal but for his performance). I’m scared of seeing him used in left field, it should be Langerhans backing up there.
by ARock on Jan 5, 2010 4:11 PM PST up reply actions 1 recs
I still don't undernstand why Wak was running him out there.
Granted, I didn’t watch a single M’s game in September, but Langerhans was still around and healthy Michael Saunders wouldn’t have been traumatized if he’d struggle for another few weeks while Hall rested up his quad. It seems like the only time Wak played someone who was hurt to the detriment of the team this year.
I think Langerhans had a badly jammed shoulder that was keeping him on the bench.
Saunders is another story, though.
I'm not gonna miss Bill Hall too much
And Kotchman is at least cheap/useful. I was fully prepared for Bill Hall to suck a big one this year and continue his multi-year decline. Kotchman is a solid but unexciting move. Hopefully they take the money they saved on this move (hopefully they saved $$ compared to a FA) and use it on a SP.
by Edgar for Pres on Jan 5, 2010 4:16 PM PST reply actions 1 recs
Our DH spot is currently occupied by two guys with large health risks,
And Jack brings in a 1B (presumably would get time at DH if one of Bradley/Griffey gets hurt) with a below average bat who gets alot of his value from fielding. I’d have expected this spot to go to someone with a better bat and average/below average fielding due to the likelihood of seeing DH time. Either there’s something else coming or I’m not sure I like this yet.
Yeah, I'm not really comfortable with this lineup.
Where do we go now?
Probably if Bradley/Griffdawg gets hurt
Carp gets called up to DH. His D is pretty meh.
by I Lick Squirrels on Jan 5, 2010 7:47 PM PST up reply actions
I didn't like Bill Hall very much
Then again, I don’t like Casey Kotchman very much either. Whatever.
Determined, Jonesing Commentor | Proud proprietor of Wyomingroutes.org & Washingtonhighways.org
Yeah
neither of them are Ham Sandwiches, Icehouse, or Idaho, are they?
by chrisisasavage on Jan 5, 2010 9:14 PM PST up reply actions
*Ham salad
ZSwing%: "The rate at which a player wife-swaps with Jack Zduriencik." --- Vatinius
by .Taylor on Jan 5, 2010 9:20 PM PST up reply actions
Kotchman is not as sexy as Broussard.
Does he play guitar?
FUCK THE ANGELS!
by Fuckmikereilly on Jan 5, 2010 4:38 PM PST up reply actions
I don't want sexy.
I want someone I can drink MGD with.
by Scruffy Lefty on Jan 5, 2010 4:39 PM PST up reply actions
Kotchy gives the best post game interviews.
The 2009 Pregame Picks Winner and Iron Man of Halos Heaven.com
by 44FAN on Jan 5, 2010 4:42 PM PST up reply actions 1 recs
Hugs and kisses and all
But Scioscia’s way of nicknaming people by adding a Y to their name is both dumb and highly annoying.
Shieldsy? That is now longer than his name. That should not qualify as a nickname.
angels fan in seattle
by Eyebrows on Jan 5, 2010 4:52 PM PST via mobile up reply actions
From a female perspective
Thumbs down. Just sayin.
Did you fall in love with Miguel Batista? And he rejected you?
Looks a bit of a bottompincher don't he
De Gutibus non disputandum est
by Bearskin Rugburn on Jan 5, 2010 9:37 PM PST up reply actions
Now he's upgraded from bottompincher to a grabass
De Gutibus non disputandum est
by Bearskin Rugburn on Jan 5, 2010 10:06 PM PST up reply actions
If he and Shannon Doherty were to reproduce, the world might tilt on its axis.
by msb on Jan 5, 2010 10:11 PM PST up reply actions 10 recs
But when he's at the plate,
that assymetry allows him to get a better stereoscopic view of the pitch as it’s headed toward home plate.
by nathaniel dawson on Jan 5, 2010 10:13 PM PST up reply actions
At least we have someone to play 1st.
Racer X. You have to love those amarillo hops.
p.s. fuck you angels
That's like saying "At least I have a sock"
It’s not hard to find a sock.
by mebpenguin on Jan 5, 2010 4:38 PM PST up reply actions 3 recs
Tell that to the 80's.
Racer X. You have to love those amarillo hops.
p.s. fuck you angels
Cancer and socks
A deadly combination.
FUCK THE ANGELS!
by Fuckmikereilly on Jan 5, 2010 5:14 PM PST up reply actions
Jon Lester in high socks
would be deadly. Nobody would want to face him.
by chrisisasavage on Jan 5, 2010 9:21 PM PST up reply actions
Offensively a wash at 1B/DH
If Kotchman starts at 1B and Bradley DH’s that’s basically a wash with last year’s 1B and DH offensive stats…only flipped. Bradley’s projected to put up an OPS similar to M’s 1B’s last year (around .840) and Kotchman is projected to put up an OPS similar to M’s DH’s last year (around .750). And Kotchman is a better defender than the M’s 1B’s were last year (7.6 vs. 3.3 UZR/150).
I’d hoped that after adding pop at DH, we could at least hold steady at 1B in WAR. But this move makes us better than we were before making the trade. Just not very much better.
Whelming, indeed.
Figgins and Kotchman were close friends when they were Angel teammates.
So you got some plus chemistry with this trade.
The 2009 Pregame Picks Winner and Iron Man of Halos Heaven.com
That makes us a ~100 win team then
My Mariners blog - SodoMojo, Twitter Feed, Fuck the fucking Angels!
I have Kotchman down for 11.0 WAR, so probably more like ~110
Fixed your post
ZSwing%: "The rate at which a player wife-swaps with Jack Zduriencik." --- Vatinius
by .Taylor on Jan 5, 2010 7:34 PM PST up reply actions
Yay for chemistry multipliers!
They get a buddy bonus!
Say it with me: Washington Capitals. Capitals.
Preserved In All His Greatness - R.I.P. The Reignman 1989 to 1997
I think it might mean more Saunders
Since Langerhans would seem to be the 4th OF
That's What I'm Liking About This Deal
But then, I’m high on Saunders. Getting Hall out of here means it’s more likely that Saunders is on the team, and in an everyday role.
by robbbbbb on Jan 5, 2010 5:44 PM PST up reply actions 1 recs
I take it that Kotchman's contract comes up at the end of 2010?
Batted .393/.614/.464 for 2009 Diablos, #5 in OBP for PSSBL Rocky Division.
by Two Rs and Two Ls on Jan 5, 2010 4:57 PM PST reply actions
`
He’ll be a free agent after 2011 should he be tendered a contract after 2010.
And that's what I get for reading only the first article on the front page.
Batted .393/.614/.464 for 2009 Diablos, #5 in OBP for PSSBL Rocky Division.
by Two Rs and Two Ls on Jan 5, 2010 5:00 PM PST up reply actions
Does anyone expect to resign Branyan or sign Cust?
Ichiro
Figgins
Lopez
Griffey
Gutierrez
Kotchman
Saunders
Wilson
Moore or Bard
This lineup might be worse than last years unless another power bat is added.
Why do we need a "power bat' to improve our offense?
I think another bat like Ichiro’s would be just fine :)
by chrisisasavage on Jan 5, 2010 8:21 PM PST up reply actions
Does this effectively cap of the M's pffseason?
Or is there another position that could be feasibly upgraded with what is left in the budget and the minors?
JD’s like, "you want some fucking pitching? Here’s all the pitching you can stand. Now choke on it, bitches!"- RCCook
Didn't we still have 8-10 million left? If we deal Hall, this is basically a salary swap.
I would imagine we’re still looking at adding another SP at least
Well it's all hypothetical.
The guess is that the team has a certain budget (in the range that you suggested), but it’s really more speculation than anything.
That would be incredible.
As to mean maybe not credible. It means we would be gaining something like 6 million dollars. I’d be flipping out over this deal if that’s true.
by nathaniel dawson on Jan 5, 2010 6:00 PM PST up reply actions
Okay, that was dumb.
I was getting way too excited about the money thing. Kotchman is due some kind of raise in arbitration, so we’d be saving quite a bit less than that, maybe 3 or 4 million. Still, that would be pretty feakin’ unbelievable — upgrade from Hall to Kotchman and add a few million as well.
by nathaniel dawson on Jan 5, 2010 6:19 PM PST up reply actions
When did John Hickey go to Fanhouse?
by Jeff Sullivan on Jan 5, 2010 6:09 PM PST up reply actions 1 recs
My investigation tells me Jan. 1.
First post (on Washburn’s possible return to Seattle) went up yesterday.
I don't think so
I bet they still make a move for a starting pitcher. Either they do the Lopez/Liriano deal (or something like it) and sign Hudson (or someone like him) or they hit the free agent market up for a pitcher.
I don't think he does.
Racer X. You have to love those amarillo hops.
p.s. fuck you angels
That's because you're color blind damn dog
by Poochie on Jan 5, 2010 6:38 PM PST up reply actions 3 recs
Please spell Cheese Burger properly
Thank you
by chrisisasavage on Jan 5, 2010 8:23 PM PST up reply actions
Please make proper use of the spacebar.
Thank you
ZSwing%: "The rate at which a player wife-swaps with Jack Zduriencik." --- Vatinius
by .Taylor on Jan 5, 2010 8:48 PM PST up reply actions
Please stop obsessing over your spreadsheets
and go enjoy a game of baseball.
De Gutibus non disputandum est
by Bearskin Rugburn on Jan 5, 2010 9:02 PM PST up reply actions 2 recs
We aren't allowed to send more money than it takes to pay Hall's salary right?
I feel like it wouldn’t be approved because it would look like we were buying Kotchman
Uhhh ok,
I’m fine with giving up Bill Hall, but we’re settling on Casey Kotchman on 1st base? Milton Bradley had better beat the shit out of the ball this year.
This is kinda like the Morrow trade. Not bad per say, but not even remotely exciting.
All Hail Zduriencik!
Time to change that sig of yours.
Say it with me: Washington Capitals. Capitals.
Preserved In All His Greatness - R.I.P. The Reignman 1989 to 1997
I think this trade is less annoying than the Morrow trade
And I’d say this definitely improves the team more in 2010, without giving up as much (obviously depending on who the minor leaguer is & how much cash).
My Mariners blog - SodoMojo, Twitter Feed, Fuck the fucking Angels!
Yeah I agree
Just doesn’t feel like the best possible move available.
by Edgar for Pres on Jan 5, 2010 7:25 PM PST up reply actions
There's another away to look at this.
And of course, a lot depends on who the PTBNL is and how much money is changing hands. Zduriencik once was asked what his plan for building the team was and he said something to the effect of “adding talent whenever and in whatever way we can”. I think most people would think of Kotchman as a better talent than Hall, and this move would be adding talent to the roster.
by nathaniel dawson on Jan 5, 2010 6:26 PM PST reply actions
I agree. Kotchman is definitely an upgrade over Carp.
And since we don’t know the details yet in terms of money or the PTBNL we will have to wait and see. I still trust in GMZ’s plan.
by TrustBaseball on Jan 5, 2010 9:18 PM PST up reply actions
I really don't like that we have an Angels/Red Sox castoff, but Boston has Beltre.
A Few Hail Zduriencik!
Well at least I now have my question for Satuday.
What exactly did you guys see in Russell Branyan’s medical reports that you didn’t like?
A Few Hail Zduriencik!
I'm starting to think
Jack Zduriencik : Angels :: Dayton Moore : Mariners
by I Lick Squirrels on Jan 5, 2010 7:52 PM PST reply actions
Also,
.324 career wOBA, plus defender, not very long dingers, doesn’t strike out much…isn’t that basically just Loafie if he were moved to 1B? I’m not a big fan of the deal as it currently stands.
by I Lick Squirrels on Jan 5, 2010 7:57 PM PST up reply actions
Loafie is a plus defender?
The nickname on its own kinda goes against the idea.
De Gutibus non disputandum est
by Bearskin Rugburn on Jan 5, 2010 9:03 PM PST up reply actions
Ah so
De Gutibus non disputandum est
by Bearskin Rugburn on Jan 5, 2010 9:12 PM PST up reply actions
My first initial reaction to this deal was...
oh looks like Bavasi is still running things. I really don’t like this deal. I know Branyan has a bad back, but are you trying to tell me that you couldn’t get him for the same price? I was apathetic on the League for Morrow thing because I truly believe it was part of the Lee deal regardless of what Zduriencik says. But there was absolutely no reason to make this deal AND you are helping the Red Sox with their payroll which I have a hard time with! I’d rather have Lopez playing first and Hudson playing 2nd than this deal. Kotchman is a bust and will always be a bust.
While I may not think it's the greatest trade in the world
A) We don’t know how much we’re helping the Sox payroll, if at all.
B) Branyan may have cost more, was holding out for a two-year deal, and we don’t know the extent of his injury
C) To label Kotchman a bust because he was once a top prospect doesn’t convey his true value. He is only 27, so there’s always a chance he recovers, and even if he doesn’t, he’s shown to be a 1-1.5 win player. Failed top prospect, sure, but he still improves the team.
FUCK THE ANGELS!
by Fuckmikereilly on Jan 5, 2010 8:02 PM PST up reply actions
I hope he fails his physical
I know it’s mean, but this is almost Ramirez for Soriano bad for me. I just figured 1st base was a place where we could get run production from and when we get a guy like Casey Kotchman I just think Pete O’Brien. It’s probably unfair, but I just think we’re punting 1st base.
I suppose a lot of it depends on how much money we're giving up
but Bill Hall + random minor league fodder + cash strikes me as meh at worst.
The unfortunate thing about how good Zduriencik is:
Any trade that’s not an immediate huge win for us is viewed as the second coming of Bavasi, when in fact, it’s more “ehh”.
Even trading for Overbay would've been better
I know, more money. Whatever. Fuck them. Do you want to win a World Series or “compete”. I thought they wanted to win it all, but it really all comes down to dollars and cents. I think that’s really why I hate this trade. It’s strictly a money move.
You can't ignore money.
This team has a budget it has to stay within.
I know...
I just thought the team might decide this team was worth spending a few more million on to take it over the top. Now I now that’s not the case. After we traded for Lee and Bradley I was smelling that champagne. All we needed was a 1B/DH (or greedy me, both) that could mash and there you go. But nope, cheaped out.
Would the grammar police prefer...
“the owners were frugal”?
As a Jew, I am offended and would like a ban on all Jew jokes because they offend me.
ZSwing%: "The rate at which a player wife-swaps with Jack Zduriencik." --- Vatinius
by .Taylor on Jan 5, 2010 9:00 PM PST up reply actions
Just go to the USSM/LL event, stand up and ask Jeff why he's anti-semetic
My Mariners blog - SodoMojo, Twitter Feed, Fuck the fucking Angels!
That's silly, Jeff's great with words.
...and now I'm here
by CapSea on Jan 5, 2010 9:50 PM PST up reply actions 1 recs
Actually, Jeff will ask himself that question, since the questions will be submitted before-hand and chosen by the moderators.
Jack Zduriencik: …so we need to wait for the commissioner’s office to sign off whenever the trade involves cash. So that’s why there’s usually a bit of a holdup with deals like the Bradley-Silva one. Any other questions
Jeff Sullivan: Okay, here’s one for me. Why am I, Jeff Sullivan, a racist? Well…
by Decatur on Jan 6, 2010 12:32 AM PST up reply actions 1 recs
Just don't ban white trash jokes
as white trash, I fully approve.
by chrisisasavage on Jan 5, 2010 9:45 PM PST up reply actions
I don't quite know what you expected
But I’m pretty sure Branyan’s potential cost didn’t dictate his availability; the health of his back did.
Things can change, it’s only January. Don’t go into upheaval mode because of two low-key trade returns.
Or with the money saved by using Kotchman at first
We could get a better SP/2B/C. There is more than one way to win a World Series, and the offseason isn’t over yet.
FUCK THE ANGELS!
by Fuckmikereilly on Jan 5, 2010 8:36 PM PST up reply actions
I hope you're right
I really don’t care what we do at catcher really. Unless we did something outrageous like trade for Mauer or something, I don’t really see where you could upgrade there. I want to see what Moore can do. Sure 2B could be improved, but keeping Lopez wouldn’t be the end of the world.
The talent gap between Moore/Johnson and Mauer is quite large.
FUCK THE ANGELS!
by Fuckmikereilly on Jan 5, 2010 8:43 PM PST up reply actions
Bigger than the Letterman gap
But we’re not getting Mauer. Any catcher out there who you might see an upgrade?
Yeah...
But isn’t he one of the worse defensive catchers in baseball? Like emergency catcher bad?
Depending on the money situation
This may have been a simultaneous talent-increasing and cost-cutting trade.
If the team is living beyond its means (i.e. over-budget) before the season begins, it's never a recipe for sustainable success.
It damages the long-term prospects of the team and robs the GM of any flexibility during the 4 months + August trading season during the regular season. The market for particular baseball commodities (starters, relievers, second basemen, young players, whatever) can often change drastically from month to month, so if the M’s are over-budget, Zduriencik might lose out a Cliff Lee-caliber deal that he would otherwise make if he had some financial flexibility.
Oh I remember...
I guess I just expected more out of Zduriencik. I just don’t like this move at all. Can’t help it.
No one in the world can make me like this trade.
Has there ever been a player you’ve just seen play and you thought, why is this guy starting a big league game (I’m sure, Cairo, Vidro, many others)? That’s Kotchman to me.
I understand the stats...
I get it, really. Has there ever been a player you just saw and said “I don’t like him”, even if he’s not that bad? Kotchman is that player for me.
But he's worse than Branyan
that’s what I’m getting at. Yeah, if you’re just looking at who’s on the roster now, then it’s an upgrade.
Well
Branyan will most likely be worse than he was last year.
by chrisisasavage on Jan 5, 2010 8:24 PM PST up reply actions
I'm sure he will be...
but at least you’ve got a power threat in the lineup. With this current lineup, I’d be surprised if anyone topped 20. I know the whole "85 Cardinals, blah, blah, blah, but I really don’t want a season of 3-2, 2-1 games.
Literally the only possible NLCS where I wouldn't want either team to win.
FUCK THE ANGELS!
by Fuckmikereilly on Jan 5, 2010 8:34 PM PST up reply actions
Meh, personal biases.
The only two NL teams I actively dislike. Of course, I still prefer them to many AL teams.
FUCK THE ANGELS!
by Fuckmikereilly on Jan 5, 2010 8:39 PM PST up reply actions
If this team wins 4 World Series games all by that score...
I will die a very happy man.
I think what you are saying is that
you expected the team to get a 1B that would be a strength of the team. It was an obvious hole that we could use to drastically improve and it is relatively easy to fill. They chose to do a decent but underhelming move which improved the team but not to the extent you hoped.
Truthfully, I’m hoping somehow that Kotchman is not our starting 1B but then we wasted some money on our bench that we could be using for a SP.
by Edgar for Pres on Jan 5, 2010 9:35 PM PST up reply actions
That's exactly what I was trying to say...
You just said it better. I just flat don’t like the guy for no good reason. Hopefully he can perform up to his potential here and turn me, but he’s just such an average-ish guy with very little pop. No one I ever thought the M’s would try to acquire.
I am not necessarily dissapointed in them trying the trade route
I would just hope Z would try pulling something with a little bit more upside, even if it brings some volatility. I wonder if we could pry Garrett Jones from the Pirates for even with regression he looks like he could be around a 1.5-2 WAR guy at 1B, while providing outfield backup. Heck, if you found a nice righty bat, like Jeff Bailey, to platoon with Carp, you could probably get the same value with less cost.
by tdot mariner fan on Jan 5, 2010 8:24 PM PST reply actions
I think this is all just a way to ingeniously free some cash to sign Holliday.
by killer_ewok18 on Jan 5, 2010 8:26 PM PST via mobile reply actions
This, I would approve of.
Chad Brown for the Ring of Honor!
by Big Seahawk Loser on Jan 5, 2010 9:35 PM PST up reply actions
Basically impossible to judge this move
Until the other shoe drops. This move sets up another move – most likely, the acquisition of an outfielder. The M’s basically determined that Kotchman + New Guy > Available 1B + Hall. Until we know who the new guy is, can’t really know how this is going to work out.
by davidcameron on Jan 5, 2010 9:02 PM PST reply actions 1 recs
Any ideas on who that player will be?
Please don’t say Johnny Damon.
I see no reason to be excited about Xavier Nady
by Aaron Campeau on Jan 5, 2010 9:07 PM PST up reply actions
And we could call him Nads
as a nickname.
by chrisisasavage on Jan 5, 2010 9:09 PM PST up reply actions
Nady you should lay off the nicknames.
Xavier a little towards obsessive.
...and now I'm here
by CapSea on Jan 6, 2010 12:37 AM PST up reply actions 1 recs
I'm going say I'm feeling a bit neutral on this one.
Did you fall in love with Miguel Batista? And he rejected you?
I was being facetious.
After Damon he was the only OFer I could think of. I don’t want him at all.
This would be enough for me to call this a good move.
FUCK THE ANGELS!
by Fuckmikereilly on Jan 5, 2010 9:07 PM PST up reply actions
He was only worth more than 1 WAR in 1 of his 5 full professional seasons....
ZSwing%: "The rate at which a player wife-swaps with Jack Zduriencik." --- Vatinius
by .Taylor on Jan 5, 2010 9:10 PM PST up reply actions
And he's a meh defender
ZSwing%: "The rate at which a player wife-swaps with Jack Zduriencik." --- Vatinius
by .Taylor on Jan 5, 2010 9:11 PM PST up reply actions
Winn?
If he could bounce back hitting wise he could be a fantastic pickup.
A Mariners fan in Seattle
So boring.
Wouldn’t be the worst, but I certainly hope Z has something more interesting.
FUCK THE ANGELS!
by Fuckmikereilly on Jan 5, 2010 10:12 PM PST up reply actions
I assume this outfielder wouldn't be around long-term, as we have Saunders ready to go in 2011 and beyond.
I could be wrong, though.
ZSwing%: "The rate at which a player wife-swaps with Jack Zduriencik." --- Vatinius
by .Taylor on Jan 5, 2010 9:05 PM PST up reply actions
He'll be great someday.
The key being “someday.” And with the addition of Cliff Lee, it appears that we’re going for it this year, so if we can get a huge upgrade in that spot (while giving more time to Saunders in AAA to season, which he could use), we benefit quite a bit. You can expect Saunders to provide anywhere from .5 to 2 wins, with 2 wins being optimistic, ergo if you can get a 4 or 5 win player for left field, you do it, and just bring back Saunders in 2011 when he’ll have had more time in AAA.
...and now I'm here
by CapSea on Jan 5, 2010 10:59 PM PST up reply actions 1 recs
All Saunders has done is improve
At every step of his career. Better plate discipline, better power, etc. He’s shown he can adapt and excel, despite being younger than everyone else around him.
Let him get his ABs and be a 2-win player. Besides, getting a 4-5 win player isn’t easy, and we don’t have a lot of cash or prospects to get that guy. Who wants to pay what it would cost to get a 2-3 win upgrade?
Expecting him to be a 2 win player his first full season in the majors is a bit of a stretch
It’s not outside the realm of possibility but it’s much more likely he experiences some hiccups while he learns to hit major league pitching. And there is a lot riding on the outcome of this season, it’s not like this is a rebuilding year where we can afford to take a chance on a newbie. The Cliff Lee trade necessitates going for it all.
I think you are missing the point entirely.
If we’re going for it this year, which is what the indications are with the Lee trade, then we only have this year. 2011 matters far less, at least right now. Saunders projects to be about a 1.5 win player, and that’s if he adjust to the majors, which he might not. He also has plenty of options left, and has spent almost no time in AAA, so he could actually benefit from going there (unlike some of the players during the Bavasi era that were spending too long there).
Because Saunders can easily wait – in fact, because Saunders may BENEFIT from waiting so that he can have more practice with better pitching in AAA – we can easily look to that position as a place to upgrade our roster. And if we can find a good upgrade – say a 3 or 4 win player – we have a considerably better chance of making the playoffs this year, AND our young player has extra practice so that when he is up in 2011, he has a better shot at succeeding against the tougher MLB competition.
Also, there’s this whole thing.
Saunders is still a prospect that has not yet shown he can succeed at an MLB level. Can he? Probably. In fact, highly likely. But the growing pains are going to be there, especially with only half a year’s experience in AAA. If we’re going for it this year, we can’t afford his growing pains – at least not this year. And since Bradley may be playing the position anyway some of the time, IF we can replace Saunders this year with someone that is a significant upgrade, we should.
...and now I'm here
by CapSea on Jan 5, 2010 11:24 PM PST up reply actions 2 recs
Why LF and Saunders?
We could find several spots on the roster where we can’t risk to run out a certain player. C, for example. Now 1B, with Kotchman. SS, perhaps. 2B, perhaps. Each spot is a potential place for improvment, and just as Saunders has options left, so to are there reasons why upgrading at those spots makes sense. Moore and Johnson have options. Kotchman and Lopez are cheap. Wilson gets hurt a lot.
And none have the “boom” potential of Saunders. We basically know what Kotchman and Wilson and Lopez are going to do. Why isn’t it a risk to run them out there when we could find good upgrades for them as well?
I do agree with those, whoever, who say LF is the likely spot to see an upgrade now. I’d have been fine with a 3-4 win 1B and Saunders in LF, with Bradley the regular DH.
Saunders doesn't really have "boom" potential.
He’s not going to wake up tomorrow and become a 6 win player.
I think you are overvaluing Saunders.
...and now I'm here
Saunders has "very good" potential for dirt cheap.
That’s a huge value for the team, but that doesn’t make him some ridiculously awesome player that’s going to go all Justin Upton circa 2009 on the league. He’s got a good chance of being very good for several of his 6 years of team control, nothing more. And, again, though I feel I shouldn’t need to repeat this, of all of the players we have, he will benefit the most from more time in AAA. He spent almost no time there at all, and expecting him to come and even be a league average player is questionable. Obviously if we could find some 4 to 5 win player for catcher we would, but since Brian McCann isn’t available, I’m not holding my breath. And upgrading LF doesn’t prevent us from upgrading catcher…..
I feel like I’m repeating myself over and over. See everything else I wrote to everyone else.
...and now I'm here
I'm not sure we should characterize the M's as "going for it this year"
I’ve heard that thought mentioned a lot, but to me, it just looks like Jack is trying to make the team better every step of the way. He’s certainly made some big improvements since he got here, but it doesn’t seem like he’s been sacrificing future wins with the goal of competing for only this year.
I really view most of the moves he’s made as helping the team win now while also aloowing the team to be good in the future. I just don’t se a “win now at all costs” emphasis.
by nathaniel dawson on Jan 6, 2010 12:47 AM PST up reply actions
Mortgaging the future is always a bad strategy.
But for the Cliff Lee trade to make any sense, this year has to be a top priority. GMZ clearly knows the limitations – the chances of us getting to the playoffs this year are decent, but by no means exemplary. But the Cliff Lee trade is quite literally pointless if we are not trying to win this year, ergo he needs to maximize this ball club as best he can to do so this year.
“Win Now at All Costs” is an extremely stupid general management practice, but I think it is pretty obvious he’s trying to upgrade the roster considerably right now, and I think it should be obvious to anyone after the Cliff Lee trade and the Morrow trade.
...and now I'm here
I should add that whether we are "going for it" this year is irrellevant.
Since the choices are as follows:
a) We play Saunders to give him a chance at the majors because we have no better options.
b) We turn down a significant upgrade just because we want to play Saunders, thus making our team worse this year than it could have been for no apparent reason during a season where we are only a few wins away from being division favorite with at least one of the best pitchers in baseball leaving after this year.
c) We get a significant upgrade at LF, send Saunders down to AAA where he benefits anyway, and both make our team better while still improving our chances for the future.
It would be foolish not to take advantage of C if given the opportunity.
...and now I'm here
Bradley
We traded Silva for Bradley, and Bradley will do better if he can frolic in the outfield grass every so often. Besides, dude could use a little seasoning in AAA.
De Gutibus non disputandum est
by Bearskin Rugburn on Jan 5, 2010 11:00 PM PST up reply actions
Yes, this too.
And if we are not going to play Saunders every day, benching him will stifle his development while wasting a team controlled year – and he will provide little upgrade on the bench compared to Langerhans, if any.
...and now I'm here
Hall is owed 8.5M
De Gutibus non disputandum est
by Bearskin Rugburn on Jan 5, 2010 9:38 PM PST up reply actions
I'm pretty sure the Ms don't have to send all the money they were given for Hall
could be wrong on that though.
De Gutibus non disputandum est
by Bearskin Rugburn on Jan 5, 2010 9:42 PM PST up reply actions
Too bad he's only gonna hit like six of those
De Gutibus non disputandum est
by Bearskin Rugburn on Jan 5, 2010 10:07 PM PST up reply actions
Who do we have to bribe
To get that up on the display board at Safeco when he does drive one deep?
I mean, if “Funk Blast” got put on it clearly there isn’t a lot of institutional oversight going on, so it can’t be too hard if we can connect the idea with the right people.
Well, if we went the old school anagram route, he does have the most inappropriate anagrams I've ever seen.
ahem nasty cock
am choke scanty
am cocky hasten
say cock anthem
any sack cometh
can shock meaty
cant shaky come
cant yoke chasm
hymen sat a cock.
But I say we take the high road on this one and call him one of Kotch Rot, Kotch Tease, Hot Kotch, Kotch Rocket, Kotch Stain or Kotch Blocker, with every amazing play called a Kotch Grab. Let’s keep it high brow, guys.
...and now I'm here
by CapSea on Jan 5, 2010 10:21 PM PST up reply actions 5 recs
Nice work.
I’m pretty partial to the highly inappropriate ones.
Did you fall in love with Miguel Batista? And he rejected you?
You did fall in love with Miguel Batista.
...and now I'm here
Sounds like you have experience in this area.
Did you fall in love with Miguel Batista? And he rejected you?
by melenious on Jan 5, 2010 10:36 PM PST up reply actions 1 recs
Too bad he's not a redhead. Fire Kotch would be perfect.
My Mariners blog - SodoMojo, Twitter Feed, Fuck the fucking Angels!
Wow any sack cometh is almost as good as
Shit-caked anal lot
De Gutibus non disputandum est
by Bearskin Rugburn on Jan 5, 2010 10:57 PM PST up reply actions
"Batter nine you sucky" was the best, ever, hands down. "I Am Beluga Tits" takes a close second.
...and now I'm here
Who was batter nine you sucky?
De Gutibus non disputandum est
by Bearskin Rugburn on Jan 5, 2010 11:01 PM PST up reply actions
Give me a team
De Gutibus non disputandum est
by Bearskin Rugburn on Jan 5, 2010 11:03 PM PST up reply actions
There was a player, he batted 9th, and he sucked albino donkey balls at the game of baseball.
Go for it homey, you got this one!
...and now I'm here
Christ. How could I have missed that?
long long day at work….
De Gutibus non disputandum est
by Bearskin Rugburn on Jan 5, 2010 11:12 PM PST up reply actions
Oh, I remember when Deanna was still posting here sometimes
she mentioned Chase Utley (maybe with the middle name or initials) came out to something something homers studly
De Gutibus non disputandum est
by Bearskin Rugburn on Jan 5, 2010 11:02 PM PST up reply actions
That'd be impressive since there is no D in his name.
...and now I'm here
Middle initial maybe
don’t remember the details. Cool story huh?
De Gutibus non disputandum est
by Bearskin Rugburn on Jan 5, 2010 11:28 PM PST up reply actions
Chase Cameron Utley
But I enjoyed it! It made me think, that’s for sure!
...and now I'm here
Sure buy Ryan Howard was named after a character in The Office.
Tell me THAT’s not more interesting.
Most of those are better
but that’s entirely subjective
De Gutibus non disputandum est
by Bearskin Rugburn on Jan 6, 2010 7:28 AM PST up reply actions
Hymen sat a cock is my favorite, definately.
by Kirk on Jan 6, 2010 3:44 PM PST via mobile up reply actions
Yeah, what's that all about Mariners?!
They buried the lead, big time. I had like 2 minutes to be happy before I heard all this Kotchman crap.
Money
According to this article
Hall is in the last guaranteed year of a four-year, $24 million deal that will pay him $8.4 million next season. The Mariners, according to a major-league source, will pay $7.5-8 million of his salary
If true, the Mariners are saving $0.4-$0.9 mil by trading away Hall, while taking on Kotchman’s $3.5 mil. Essentially, it boils down to this: Is Kotchman at $2.5-3 mil better than the free agent 1B options?
FUCK THE ANGELS!
Also
Beltre’s joke of a $5 mil option was tacked on simply to lower the AAV of Beltre’s contract, thus helping to put the Red Sox below the luxury tax cutoff.
Kinda seems like a loophole that needs to be remedied if you ask me.
FUCK THE ANGELS!
by Fuckmikereilly on Jan 6, 2010 4:18 PM PST up reply actions
I am a bit interested in why Kotchman has little upside
To me, he fits the classic profile of a breakout candidate. I know that very few of his fly balls clear the fence, but is that because of a lack of velocity? Is that borne out by hit f/x? Now, I’m out of my depth, but I thought good contact hitters with patience and doubles power have a decent chance of adding home runs as they age.
Only if they show evidence of getting stronger, and Kotchman has shown less ISO over time.
It’s not too bad, but even his home runs were not that powerful. It’s true he might get more home runs out of his doubles thanks to things like Safeco and luck, but that’s not really “breaking out” so much as “getting lucky.” Also, players are known to be at their strongest…. pretty much exactly at Kotchman’s age. So it’s not impossible that he becomes outstanding, but based on everything we know about him, there are far too many reasons he won’t be, because bad luck wasn’t what led to his disappointing seasons – being bad did.
...and now I'm here
I would think that most people hoping for a breakout from Kotchman are looking for a higher batting average and on base percentage.
Maybe with a little bit more power as well, but I don’t think anybody’s hoping for something like 20-30 home runs. I’m sure everybody here would be more than happy with something like his 2007 season.
by nathaniel dawson on Jan 6, 2010 6:46 PM PST up reply actions

by 




















