Bedard Returns -- solution?

by BrianF on May 10, 2010 4:50 PM PDT

So there's been some discussion here and elsewhere about the challenge that Eric Bedard's return presents to the roster. With Felix and Lee entrenched at the top of the rotation, you have Vargas, RRS, and Fister -- one of whom will be the odd man out.... But to me it seems crazy to force one of these guys out of the rotation--on a team full of replacement value bodies, why under utilize a genuinely valuable one?

So I ask -- why are we not trading a starting pitcher? Soon. If Bedard can be even a #5 pitcher, you have one too many starters and the current situation seems like it demands turning one into a catcher who can hit, or a corner infielder with pop. San Francisco or San Diego might make good partners.

Is this crazy?

Tweet Comment 32 comments | 0 recs |

Do you like this story?

Comments

We need starting pitchers in 2011, when Bedard and Lee will likely be gone

and there isn’t a whole lot in the pipeline.

by Jeff Sullivan on May 10, 2010 4:51 PM PDT reply actions

True...

… but we need hitters in 2010 and 2011. And there’s not a whole lot in that pipeline either.

by BrianF on May 10, 2010 4:52 PM PDT up reply actions

Kotchman, Figgins, Wilson, Lopez, Saunders, Franklin, Suzuki, Bradley

plus the catchers are all under contract through 2011.

We don’t need hitters.
We’ll need starters.

by Matthew on May 10, 2010 4:54 PM PDT up reply actions

You mean the "catchers," right?

by THolt on May 11, 2010 1:35 AM PDT up reply actions

Pineda.

"Ever tried? Ever failed? No matter. Try again. Fail again. Fail better." - Samuel Beckett Mariners Minors

by JY on May 10, 2010 5:12 PM PDT up reply actions

Well the pipeline isn't bare

I’m as excited as you are, but it’d be nice to have some depth.

by Jeff Sullivan on May 10, 2010 5:33 PM PDT up reply actions

Also, nobody's trading much for Fister or Vargas

by Jeff Sullivan on May 10, 2010 5:33 PM PDT up reply actions

But you could do a whole lot worse than having those two as your #4/5 guys, so might as well just hang onto them and let them pitch

if they suck you can always give Luke French or Nick Hill or some generic left-handed, soft-tossing replacement-level guy a shot anyway.

by seattlebruin on May 10, 2010 5:36 PM PDT up reply actions

Hensley, Robles.

I’m still thinking those guys might be more 3-4 starters at best.

Otherwise, you’re right in that the guys we have going down the line (aside from Cleto!) are more guys that can pitch above their stuff, but not dominate. I’d like to see the M’s add a high ceiling arm or two in the upcoming draft. They could also sign Rafael dePaula any old time now (NO I HAVE NOT HEARD ANYTHING)

"Ever tried? Ever failed? No matter. Try again. Fail again. Fail better." - Samuel Beckett Mariners Minors

by JY on May 10, 2010 5:49 PM PDT up reply actions

A week or two ago I went back to Jacks days as director of scouting in Milwuakee

How much his name is attached to all the draft picks, I don’t know. But I can tell you this, after Ben Sheets (the first Milwuakee pick in his first year as Director) there was busted pitcher after busted pitcher. Almost 0 success. I just wonder if he’s gun shy about drafting pitchers now and prefers to go the way of trades and international market. And last years draft didn’t do anything to disprove that theory. I’m sure if an excellent pitching prospect is there, he won’t be scared to take him. I just feel like after he had more success drafting bats than arms, maybe that’s what we’ll see more of in Seattle. And I don’t think I’m the first person to bring this up, but just mentioning it again.

by Kenny Knows Sports on May 10, 2010 8:31 PM PDT up reply actions

The idea has been floated before.

I’ll throw out there that Yoavni Gallardo was a Jack pick too, but otherwise, you’re right in that he doesn’t have a great track record as selecting pitching. However, it’s McNamara doing the picks now, and as much as we like to put Jack at the helm of everything that goes on in the front office, it’s really a team of people that is working to put everything together out there (I am channeling Jack as I say this).

Additionally, one point I heard from Mac regarding the picks last year is that, knowing it to be a pitching heavy draft, they preferred to go with the twentieth best hitter rather than the fiftieth best pitcher, and that was one of the rationales for how they handled things. It’s hard to say if the same focus on hitting will prevail in future drafts.

"Ever tried? Ever failed? No matter. Try again. Fail again. Fail better." - Samuel Beckett Mariners Minors

by JY on May 10, 2010 9:08 PM PDT up reply actions

They appear to have a balance between the near term and long term needs of the team as well.

Maybe not, it’s easy for me to read too much into the details of drafted players and the overall picture of the team and the draft board. Still, kind of interesting to see over time (years) if and how they transition between certain areas as our minor league system starts producing. Changes in college versus h.s. draft percentages for instance.

I’ve always been a fan of the Twins and Braves systems, personally our development system is the most exciting part of what this new FO brings to the table. Random Gootch and Lee trades are nice though.

by Kermit. on May 10, 2010 9:19 PM PDT up reply actions

I think that's probably what they're aiming to do.

They emphasized in the past that they want to build from the farm system and develop what is specifically a Mariners Way of doing things (which hopefully doesn’t involve stupid baserunning), and that would indicate to me that they plan on having a relatively stable core of players developed internally augmented by targeted free agent signing that help areas that couldn’t easily be filled internally. It’s a pretty awesome way of doing things, in my opinion, if that is indeed what they intend.

"Ever tried? Ever failed? No matter. Try again. Fail again. Fail better." - Samuel Beckett Mariners Minors

by JY on May 10, 2010 9:37 PM PDT up reply actions

Drafting h.s. versus college level. If you have the time or inclination maybe you can enlighten me.

General rule of thumb is 5 years for h.s. to make ML level, 3 years for college player? And some teams seem to have shied away from h.s. level athletes in the last 15 years or so, but now the pendulum appears to be swinging the other way. Any truth to either of these, or thoughts in general? Just because I’m interesting in the minors doesn’t mean I know jack about it

by Kermit. on May 10, 2010 9:53 PM PDT up reply actions

It depends on the organization.

I don’t really have time at the moment to really give you an intense study of it, but five/three-and-a-half sounds about right for the prep/college breakdown. Better prep players like Franklin move up at a faster rate, lesser college prospects get along slower and hang out in short-season for a couple seasons.

In the past, Bavasi would be more inclined to push a younger kid/int’l prospects up to the Midwest League to start the season, where Zduriencik filled the roster almost entirely with college players. This was partially because it was what he had to work with, but there were younger pitchers in Pulaski who had a case. The only exceptions to the college rule (no pun) were Franklin, Baron, and Noriega, who had taken two tours of short season ball in the states already (I’m not counting Martinez because he started last year in Clinton). Erasmo Ramirez didn’t even join the team until Czyz got the call to High Desert with Cleto going down. So from one administration to the next, there’s going to be a variance in how players are handled.

Another factor that is probably changing things subtly is that it used to be that a player who was eighteen or under when they initially signed now has four years before they need to be put on the 40-man, and those signed at nineteen or older get three years, where it used to be three and two respectively. That was the kind of funkiness that led to Vargas and Olson getting fourth option years, or Balentien being added to the 40-man after his MWL tour. That’s probably going to allow teams to be a little more patient and attentive as far as player development goes.

"Ever tried? Ever failed? No matter. Try again. Fail again. Fail better." - Samuel Beckett Mariners Minors

by JY on May 10, 2010 10:12 PM PDT up reply actions 1 recs

I think the pendulum swing you talked about is fascinating, and I think it's true

The old rules of thumb about HS pitchers being stupid risks and college pitchers being ‘safe’ aren’t as true as they once were, and I’d really like to see someone extend Rany Jazayerli’s draft study from a few years ago on this.

by marc w on May 11, 2010 9:49 AM PDT up reply actions

Bedard nor Lee nor Felix nor anyone is a guarantee to stay healthy for the entire remainder of 2010.

And our back end pitchers just do not have the value that people seem to think they have

by Matthew on May 10, 2010 4:53 PM PDT reply actions

Why would SF want another starter? If they're that desperate, just call up Madison Bumgarner

RR-S would be a perfectly good lefty out of the pen anyway. Why not get rid of Jesus Colome or Sean White and have RR-S work out of the pen until he gets his shit figured out?

by seattlebruin on May 10, 2010 5:12 PM PDT reply actions

Especially given how just last year they gave Tim Alderson to the Pirates, and haven't changed their pitching staff other than that.

It’s safe to say the Giants are more than confident in their current starting pitching cadre.

I can't resist clicking "Rec" when I see a post with four recs already.

by thehemogoblin on May 10, 2010 6:23 PM PDT up reply actions

RRS is going out of the rotation

I can’t think of a reason to keep him in the rotation. He should be a solid guy in the bullpen however I think if he could pull himself together he’d make a more valuable starter than reliever. Maybe this year he figures out his troubles in the pen and then next year is shifted back into the rotation. Also, at some point this year somebody will get hurt and then he can get some more starts.

But really, RRS has sucked this year. Hopefully he turns things around but if he keeps up what he is doing, middle relief in the bullpen is where he should be.

by Edgar for Pres on May 10, 2010 5:38 PM PDT reply actions