The Quiet Reconstruction
What follows will not come as new information to any of you. This is intended more as a reminder than anything else as we prepare to head into next week's Winter Meetings.
Right now, it looks like the Mariners are going to have a pretty low-key offseason. Jack Zduriencik, of course, is no stranger to the sudden blockbuster, and he may end up swinging a deal that drops Chone Figgins or nabs Justin Upton. It's not out of the realm of possibility that the M's again make themselves big-time players in the market. However, the probability is that they by and large stay out of it. They'll make a few moves, and might even bring in a second- or third-tier starting pitcher, but it's unlikely that we're going to see anything eye-catching.
And that can be frustrating to think about for fans who just saw this team lose 101 games and often score less than the Sounders. For six long months, the Mariners weren't only terrible; they were terrible to watch, which put them in the worst of all quadrants:
After a season like 2010, fans want to see change. Big, sweeping change. We're probably not going to see big, sweeping change. But don't let the lack of big market involvement trick you into thinking that the organization isn't serious about getting better. There are internal solutions who could and should get big opportunities in 2011, barring something unforeseen. Consider that:
- Adam Moore should begin the 2011 season as the starting catcher. He seems to be the organizational preference over Rob Johnson, and while he could end up in a job-share, and while he won't be a star, he's gotten his feet wet, and he has a chance to establish himself as a half-decent starter.
- Justin Smoak's around and is in line to start at first base. Smoak had a rough time in Seattle after coming over, but a year ago Baseball America ranked him as the #13 prospect in baseball, and he only turns 24 in three days. He was the centerpiece in the Cliff Lee trade for a reason.
- Dustin Ackley should be starting at second base by June, if not by April. His numbers weren't spectacular with AA West Tennessee or AAA Tacoma, but what that argument leaves out is that it was the 22 year old's first exposure to professional baseball. He made a smooth transition and is just about ready to hit near the top of a Major League lineup.
- Michael Saunders is set to be the regular in left field. Saunders started 85 games a year ago and faded down the stretch, but one must remember that he's only freshly 24, and has all the tools to succeed in the bigs. All of his skills have shown up in Seattle. What's left to do now is to put them together.
- Michael Pineda is slotted to become a fixture in the starting rotation - if not immediately, then soon. Pineda is one of the very best pitching prospects in baseball, and though he comes with certain risks, the same goes for every pitching prospect ever, and Pineda's one of the few with true ace potential. It'll be a surprise if he doesn't start at least 20 games in a Mariner uniform next season.
- Dan Cortes should pick up some important late innings out of the bullpen. The pinpoint command isn't there, but the dynamite stuff most certainly is, and the 23 year old has it in him to be the best reliever of the bench.
- Josh Lueke, Mauricio Robles, and Anthony Varvaro are around as young options who could also make an impact in the 2011 bullpen. There's no guarantee that Lueke stays with the team, that Robles shifts to relief, or that Varvaro finds the strike zone, but all have clear short-inning upside, and all are close to being Major League-ready.
The Mariners' offseason mobility is currently limited. Certainly, they're limited in part because guys like Jack Wilson, Milton Bradley, and Chone Figgins are borderline untradable. But they're also limited because they don't want to block some of the young talent they already have. Ackley, Smoak, and Pineda - these guys are potential stars. Moore, Saunders, and Cortes - these guys are potential regulars. And 2011 stands to be an important season for each and every one of them.
The Mariners were as bad in 2010 as they were in 2008. Maybe worse. But the difference between now and then is that now there's potential help coming from the system. After 2008, the front office needed to have a busy offseason to put together a respectable roster. After 2010? Not so much.
51 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Can't we just make a Putz-like trade again, only this time with Aardsma? *Sigh*
Dammit Z. You’ve spoiled me with off-season trades (not involving Brandon Morrow).
He could very well still pull something that comes completely out of nowhere
Just seems dangerous to have this expectation that Z will always make a big deal. Unfair standards.
by Jeff Sullivan on Dec 2, 2010 1:20 PM PST up reply actions 2 recs
It really should be an interesting season.
We’ll be a .500 team most likely, but at least there’s some potential there.
I tend to think this is a somewhat below .500 team as it stands now.
Not dramatically so, and with somewhat of a chance to be above .500 with luck and lots of positive developments, but 75ish wins.
Think something like a Billy Beane Oakland team on a down-ish year- not terrible, somewhat interesting, just not very good.
That being said, a 15 win improvement on last year? I’ll take it.
The problem is that 75 wins does very little to bring the fan base back to the park, and doesn’t set things up well for 2011 (in terms of season ticket sales) by itself, though hopefully the salary flexibility for 2012 we’re looking at will lead to a chance to build a contender.
by eponymous_coward on Dec 2, 2010 1:35 PM PST up reply actions
I think that's a real danger
Trying to dig yourself out after a string of losing seasons can be difficult. Without revenue to afford good established players, you can find yourself just trying to keep your head above water each offseason. We’ve really got to hope that the M’s see a passel of outstanding young players introduced to the team in the next few years.
by nathaniel dawson on Dec 2, 2010 2:07 PM PST up reply actions
The part that sucks
is how apt the old fable ‘The Ant and the Grasshopper’ is to the Mariners’ current situation. They waited too long before actually implementing a moderately aggressive roster overhaul by about four years, and now if the revenues drop to the point where they don’t even have the option to spend in the middle of the pack for total payroll, there’s nobody to blame but themselves.
It’s not like they went out and signed someone to a CC Sabathia contract and had him blow his arm out two years into the deal. This has been a systematic deconstruction of what was, at one point, a powerhouse team that was bordering on a dynasty.
I’m still hopeful that Jack & Co. can do this, but it’s a huge task in front of them. I like that Jeff’s article talks about patience being necessary at this point. We’ve finally got a bundle of kids ready to prove what they can do. Now, we do have to let the kids play, if for no other reason than to determine which ones are worthy of future consideration and which ones need to be removed from long-term plans.
I look forward to all the money coming off the books next year.
While granted a lot of it will go towards Felix, Gutierrez, and arbitration cases, it will be nice to have a few dollars to spend in case any of our position prospects fail to pan out.
Justin Upton, Stephen Drew, Daniel Hudson.
And of course Joe Saunders.
by Mariner Melee on Dec 2, 2010 1:33 PM PST up reply actions
Mark Reynolds!
He’s bad but interesting, and actually has some value.
"Ever tried? Ever failed? No matter. Try again. Fail again. Fail better." - Samuel Beckett Mariners Minors
by JY on Dec 2, 2010 3:02 PM PST up reply actions 2 recs
In an attempt to not rosterbate... what kind of production might a team that signs Erik Bedard see next year?
I can’t remember what injury brought him down, but I know it seemed like something he should be able to rehab from over the offseason and potentially be good to go come spring.
Are there better options than Bedard for a starter coming off an injury for a low cost/high upside sort of deal?
Apologies if this is too close to rosterbation.
What's the deal with corn nuts?
by BaronVonBullshit on Dec 2, 2010 1:43 PM PST reply actions
I guess my point was there seems to be quite a few free agent potentially elite starters coming off injuries
Bedard, Webb, Harden, Sheets, (to a lesser extent) Duchscherer. Would taking a risk on a player like this be a smart move for the M’s? Would it be smarter to find someone with less talent, but less history of injury?
What's the deal with corn nuts?
by BaronVonBullshit on Dec 2, 2010 2:16 PM PST up reply actions
You just mentioned two guys that we didn't sign last year in Harden and Sheets and were they smart moves?
They’ll be available for a reason. The deal Bedard signed with the M’s was the best of them all and he never even threw a pitch for the M’s. If we are going to sign any injury risk, it sounds like Jeff Francis is the most popular name right now.
by Kenneth Arthur on Dec 2, 2010 3:29 PM PST up reply actions
On the plus side-
We’re the only AL team on that chart. We may be bad and uninteresting, but at least we’re noteworthy!
Rooting for lovable losers since 1984.
This was the main reason the 2010 season didn't seem as bad as 2008 (subjectively).
In 2008 we didn’t have much of anything worth getting excited about that seemed anywhere near ready to contribute at the major league level.
I'm completely on board with the direction of gradual reconstruction.
The 2010 Mariners is what it was. It was a disaster. It didn’t work out. Everything went wrong. The season was practically over by June and everything that happened afterward ranged from just boring to embarrassing.
But importantly, the book on the season is closed. Even though we went 61-101 twice in the last three years these kinds of seasons aren’t repeatable. Those weren’t seasons of ineptitude. Those were seasons of disaster. Both of those teams were supposed to be much better than they were.
But I’ve moved on. I’m not demanding a quick fix. While the Mariners brass do have ticket sales to think about I hope the ultimately focus on taking the time to reconstruct the team in an effort to but on a respectable roster at the absolute minimum in the future (as opposed to the 2010 team). We’ve spent the last 6 years trying to hurry up and look good and it’s come at the cost of organizational stability.
I’m pretty excited about next year’s team even as is. It’s likely to be 100% talent construction without trying to balance for external factors (Griffey/Sweeney for clubhouse hugs and chemistry!). Plus there’s that whole Eric Wedge as a Mariner manager thing.
Michael Saunders as our everyday left fielder excites me more than it probably should.
I really want the dude to have a solid year and show more of that homer strength he has flashed here and there.
Milton Bradley apologist
I'm the same way.
I’ve got this dirty fantasy of him turning into a sort of left handed Jay Buhner.
He makes dingers look so effortless
I wouldn’t be surprised to see him hit 20 with 500 PAs
by Darth Flamingo on Dec 2, 2010 9:49 PM PST up reply actions
This may be a dumb question
But why does everyone leave Gregg Halman off prospects/potential contributors lists. I know he has crappy plate discipline and strikes out a lot, but he is at least an average fielder, is pretty speedy and can really slug the ball when he hits it.
by Thurston24 on Dec 2, 2010 3:10 PM PST via mobile reply actions
"I know he has crappy plate discipline and strikes out a lot"
There’s your answer, fishbulb.
by ThomasG on Dec 2, 2010 3:12 PM PST up reply actions 2 recs
No one in the majors who strikes out in more than 40% of his at-bats is a consistantly valuable player in the majors.
If Halman can improve his pitch recognition and get his AAA strikeout rate down from the 41% it was in 2010 to something near 30% while maintaining his power, walk rate, and excellent fielding skills, I will be really, really excited. Yet that possibility is pretty remote, so most people here aren’t getting their hopes up.
I like Halman more than I like Saunders. His power is hard to dismiss to me.
by Kirk on Dec 2, 2010 3:22 PM PST via mobile up reply actions
Saunders hit 10 homers in 327 plate appearances this year, at that rate and as an everyday player getting about 650 pa/year that's 20 hr
Plus he’s only getting stronger and as others have noticed never quite got over the banged up shoulder this year. Granted the math isn’t exactly very advanced, but I’d take a 20-25 homer guy with good plate discipline over what Halman has to offer.
What's the deal with corn nuts?
by BaronVonBullshit on Dec 2, 2010 3:31 PM PST up reply actions 1 recs
Halman's potential is way higher, sure
but he’s much less likely to reach his ceiling and Saunders is a hell of a lot closer to that ceiling, anyway.
The raw power is great, but what happens when he doesn’t know a curveball is coming?
I would much rather watch a bunch of young guys play hard and try to figure it out (even if we lose),
then go out and spend money and make trades for the sake of "change " and still be mediocre.
"Simply put, Dave Niehaus was why Marconi invented radio."
If that's what you want, you could just watch Little League baseball instead.
At least with Little League Baseball regardless whether they win or lose, you’re all getting treated to Dairy Queen after the game.
All I ever got after little league was a beatings.
Dairy Queen was too fancy.
"Simply put, Dave Niehaus was why Marconi invented radio."
I think so.
They’ll try to push him pretty hard I think. If he’s in relief, obviously, he’ll get up there sooner.
"Ever tried? Ever failed? No matter. Try again. Fail again. Fail better." - Samuel Beckett Mariners Minors
by JY on Dec 2, 2010 7:51 PM PST up reply actions
And we just signed Bedard
1 year, non guaranteed contract
http://www.mlbtraderumors.com/2010/12/mariners-re-sign-erik-bedard.html
Blow it up! BLOW IT SKY HIGH!

by 
















