Wakamatsu, Others Let Go
by Matthew on Aug 9, 2010 12:09 PM PDT
in Seattle Mariners Transactions
Email
PrintSources are indicating that Don Wakamatsu, Rick Adair and Ty Van Burkleo have been fired. We'll have longer reactions later, but you can use this as a place to celebrate? Freak out? Mourn?
There are lots of questions swirling so we'll do our best to puzzle through them and present a thought through opinion when we can.
It's beyond cliche now, but wow those votes of confidence really are the kiss of death, eh?
Interim Manager is now Daren Brown from the Rainiers which throws their season into a bit of chaos as well.
814 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Jay Buhner for Manager
Or Blowers or Valenine
by ManifestDestiny on Aug 9, 2010 12:10 PM PDT reply actions
Well this is unnecessary.
Can we really blame the manager, the pitching coach, and bench coach on underperforming bats?
Eh, it was definitely coming
There was no way Wak was gonna make it through the offseason
by seattlesundevil on Aug 9, 2010 12:11 PM PDT up reply actions
Managerial/coaching firings are almost always unnecessary
because they don’t actually play. But if Wak has lost the clubhouse that’s all the excuse management needed.
My boss, for better or worse, has gone nowhere.
I was referring to Martin O’Neill.
by Aaron Campeau on Aug 9, 2010 1:31 PM PDT up reply actions
I'm usually not a blame the manager type of fan
But I think this needed to happen.
"Good evening Blazer fans, wherever you may be!"-Bill Schonely
Sad
I liked Wak… wish him (and the others) well… but it’s part of the game. Let’s go Mariners!
I believed the votes of confidence meant Wak was gone within a couple weeks.
by seattlesundevil on Aug 9, 2010 12:13 PM PDT up reply actions
This could be from above Z.
We don’t really know that Z made this decision, rather than being told by his bosses that it was time for a coaching change.
I think this is the first time as a Mariner fan that I have been sad to lose our manager.
Wak symbolised hope to me. I always held my belief system in him, even though the record and reports showed that perhaps this was not justified.
Thanks, guys.
I was about the same.
He seemed to really mark something new in the Mariners’ culture. So it goes…
My yoke is heavy.
Hasn't Adair been well praised?
Seems to me the pitching staff has improved under Adair.
by Mark Sandritter on Aug 9, 2010 12:12 PM PDT reply actions
A new manager would want to bring in his only staff.
or maybe the M’s front office wasn’t as high on Adair as Wakamatsu was.
Boy, this really is 2008 all over again
Only without Strasburg.
I'd rather know a little about a lot than a lot about a little
Larry Stone is confirming the rumors
Wak is indeed gone.
"Good evening Blazer fans, wherever you may be!"-Bill Schonely
9:39am, 8/9/10
Less importantly, but still worth keeping in mind, the Rainiers appear likely to make the playoffs, and as little as we may care about the PCL postseason, teams generally don’t like to piss their affiliates off.
Good lord. It's like they just nuked the whole thing
by seattlesundevil on Aug 9, 2010 12:15 PM PDT up reply actions
Would be interesting to see him in a more prominent role
by seattlesundevil on Aug 9, 2010 12:16 PM PDT up reply actions
He's got the environmentalists behind him.
My yoke is heavy.
by qrsouther on Aug 9, 2010 12:51 PM PDT up reply actions 9 recs
From orbit, I hope.
It’s the only way to be sure.
by Eyeball Kid on Aug 9, 2010 12:16 PM PDT up reply actions 3 recs
From orbit, it's the only way to be sure....
Milton Bradley apologist
by sanford_and_son on Aug 9, 2010 12:51 PM PDT up reply actions
Beaten! D'oh!
Milton Bradley apologist
by sanford_and_son on Aug 9, 2010 12:51 PM PDT up reply actions
Is he the one with the new workout regimen?
I can’t keep my coaches straight
He's some kind of head shrinker, and the heads obviously have not been shrunken properly
by lemonverbena on Aug 9, 2010 12:20 PM PDT up reply actions
Oh noes! We fired Milton Bradley's shrink because the team wants him to be more volatile and angry again!
#conspiracy
I remember Z talking about mental health in players being important.
Cost cutting measure or is the therapist they had just not doing it for them?
Fans are typically idiots.
by The Typical Idiot Fan on Aug 9, 2010 12:44 PM PDT up reply actions
Was he the one who was setting up the new minor league physical training stuff?
That seems weird.
Fans are typically idiots.
by The Typical Idiot Fan on Aug 9, 2010 12:17 PM PDT up reply actions
I don't think so.
"Ever tried? Ever failed? No matter. Try again. Fail again. Fail better." - Samuel Beckett Mariners Minors
by JY on Aug 9, 2010 12:18 PM PDT up reply actions
I had a feeling he wouldn't make it through the offeason.
But I thought he would at least make it through the rest of the regular season. He may not have been a great manager but I will still miss the guy.
Why do this now rather than at the end of the season?
Also, has a staff had a more spectacular fall in popularity in the space of less than a year than this one has? It’s hard to imagine what happened in October last year compared to today’s events. Unbelievable.
Damn, beat me to it.
No matter where you go, there you are.
I think he gets more time than Wak, and I think he's been unlucky more than anything.
by EnglishMariner on Aug 9, 2010 12:17 PM PDT up reply actions
And keeping in mind what he inherited
That won’t work as an excuse after this season, but I still think it is completely valid at this point
by tootthekazoo on Aug 9, 2010 12:18 PM PDT up reply actions
Also bear in mind the two imbeciles we have that actually run the Mariners.
Howard and Chuck wouldn’t understand a good process if you drafted Ken Griffey Jr with it.
Fans are typically idiots.
by The Typical Idiot Fan on Aug 9, 2010 12:19 PM PDT up reply actions
Absolutely
I lay plenty of blame from some of this season’s problems (at least the early ones) at their feet
by tootthekazoo on Aug 9, 2010 12:21 PM PDT up reply actions
Though I will agree,
I have trouble believing that Griffey coming back this year had nothing to do with them
by tootthekazoo on Aug 9, 2010 12:29 PM PDT up reply actions
They played a part, no question
But to what degree did Z fail to voice his opinion if he thought putting a dead body in the DH slot was a bad idea. And if he didn’t think it was a bad idea, then well, shit.
by lemonverbena on Aug 9, 2010 12:32 PM PDT up reply actions
Yeah, that.
And while Griffey was ONE of the problems, you don’t have to go very far to find pretty questionable moves (coughMorrowforFASTBALFASTBALLFASTBALLLeaguecough) that were clearly questionable at the time they were made.
by eponymous_coward on Aug 9, 2010 12:36 PM PDT up reply actions
And that's the part we can never know
Like I said, most of the blame relating to on-field stuff falls to Z and his coaching staff. But we can never know 100% either way what happened
by tootthekazoo on Aug 9, 2010 12:37 PM PDT up reply actions
Yeah, but we are obviously no where near that point yet. ;)
I do agree with you. It gets really old reading the knee jerk comments blaming them for everything.
I think it's just an easy thing to do.
Blaming a faceless entity instead of the people right in front of you.
by Hopefulmsfan on Aug 9, 2010 12:31 PM PDT up reply actions
I'm not "blaming" anything on these two.
Yet.
Fans are typically idiots.
by The Typical Idiot Fan on Aug 9, 2010 12:47 PM PDT up reply actions
I think the process was correct at the time but I think repeating the same process would be bad.
by Aaron Campeau on Aug 9, 2010 12:26 PM PDT up reply actions
When things go this wrong you can't just call it luck and go on thinking that the right moves were made at the time
by Graham MacAree on Aug 9, 2010 12:28 PM PDT up reply actions
You can only do the best your circumstances will allow.
There was limited payroll space and a lot of holes to fill, and based on the information available the best chance at contention was the team they ended up with. While I think that you’re correct in saying that too often teams don’t learn the right lessons from bad results, but I do think that you can say “Okay, this was the right decision at the time based on circumstances, but it didn’t work. Why? How do we avoid this in the future?” As long as you learn the right lessons, I still think it can be classified as good process.
by Aaron Campeau on Aug 9, 2010 12:45 PM PDT up reply actions 2 recs
Ok, the over-arching process is fine
Otherwise I would be wanting Z’s head as well. What doesn’t appear to be fine is the detailed processes involved. The reliance on defence and a lack of power haven’t worked. It’s entirely possible that this is luck – it’s also entirely possible that there’s a systemic problem at work, and as a whole the blogs aren’t even willing to consider looking at option two. Too bad.
by Graham MacAree on Aug 9, 2010 12:50 PM PDT up reply actions 2 recs
But couldn't you say the same process has worked out ok in Oakland.
Not great but they are over .500. And San Franscisco and San Diego are similar as well aren’t they?
by Hopefulmsfan on Aug 9, 2010 12:54 PM PDT up reply actions
I do want to be clear though I am not saying that we should ignore the results in the case of the Mariners specifically.
Just that it can work.
by Hopefulmsfan on Aug 9, 2010 12:56 PM PDT up reply actions
The question is why it hasn't worked
It’s probably luck, but there’s a chance that it isn’t, and it needs to be proven.
by Graham MacAree on Aug 9, 2010 1:05 PM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
I think this might be one of those situations where "luck" is an inappropriate word to use
Maybe “unpredictable” instead. And I’m not really sure how you go about proving that either way.
by Jeff Sullivan on Aug 9, 2010 1:07 PM PDT up reply actions
Right, baseball players are unpredictable, and there's a chance we got hugely... unlucky
Given the amount of seasons that have been played, one of them is going to go horribly wrong, of course, and that may have been what happened to us. What may also have happened is that our analysis is flawed in a manner that led to where we are. We’ve certainly had three seasons out of the last four yield radically different results to what was expected, and we need to be questioning our definition of correct process pretty severely.
We were wrong, and using fortune is a cop-out unless there’s an inquiry as to why. I’m perfectly comfortable with it being luck, but only after we’ve looked as hard as we can at it
by Graham MacAree on Aug 9, 2010 1:14 PM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
It seems to me the key to this particular season might be in the lineup dynamic
…and how different players feel and respond to the pressure of having to do more because there isn’t really thump in the middle. I don’t know if this is actually the key, of course, but let’s pretend that it is. Then what? How does one prove this? You can’t even look for comparable teams, since different groups of players will have different brains.
When the numbers fail, and there’s little reason to believe that the numbers are wrong, you’re left with non-numerical explanations. Good luck examining those to a conclusive end from where we sit.
by Jeff Sullivan on Aug 9, 2010 1:25 PM PDT up reply actions
My current pet theory is that lineup protection actually exists
It’s just pitcher attrition – where there are bats to actually be scared of, pitchers have to work harder, meaning that the pesky bats of the world have a more tired pitcher to work against, making them better. That effect, of course, would be subtle, but the hypothesis is testable and it would help explain why the offence has been much worse than expected.
But isn’t discussing it enough? It’s not like you need to prove anything. Things start from putting forward hypotheses about what happened.
by Graham MacAree on Aug 9, 2010 1:30 PM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
The only reason I believe in lineup protection is David Cone
spoke in his autobiography about how he did in fact alter how he pitched based on the batting order. Is it a minimal or large effect? I have no idea, but when a fairly successful pitcher admits it changes his approach then there has to be some reality there.
Well, we know that pitchers who have to throw more stressful pitches become less effective
How many stressful pitches do the Mariners warrant? What about if Pujols was suddenly inserted?
High stress is situational, yes, but some of that includes the batter. How much, I do not know. It’s an interesting question, at least.
by Graham MacAree on Aug 9, 2010 1:35 PM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
But then invariably you end up dealing with the question of "is getting to the bullpen actually good?"
by Jeff Sullivan on Aug 9, 2010 1:36 PM PDT up reply actions
I don't have the answers!
but boy do I have questions
by Graham MacAree on Aug 9, 2010 1:37 PM PDT up reply actions
Anyway, my point was that we should be questioning our beliefs now more strongly than six months ago
by Graham MacAree on Aug 9, 2010 1:42 PM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
I think that's fair, but it should be questioning
Not starting from the assumption that we screwed up.
It’s a small point, but it’s the sort of small bias that can skew the results of your analysis.
I think that is the case
you’ve just seen a certain pushback and defense of our (their?) beliefs at the same time because so many people have rushed to call them completely wrong. It is safe to question what we believed to be true months ago. It is not safe to throw out the idea that the process can work based on one miserable season.
by Jeff Sullivan on Aug 9, 2010 1:45 PM PDT up reply actions
And I suppose I'm pushing back against 'the process was right' people
They are of course more correct than ‘the process was dead wrong’ folks, but neither is totally true, and I fear that that subtlety is being missed.
by Graham MacAree on Aug 9, 2010 1:50 PM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
How much of the process being wrong is the moves that were made, and how much of it was the moves that should've been made but weren't?
Obviously you have much less solid footing when examining the latter, but how much can you examine it constructively? Or are you talking about a deeper process or philosophy (either in the front officer, the scouts/player evaluation) or both? It seems like from everything the front office has shared with the public that they’re pretty non-ideological (or at least they like a balance of traditional ideological perspectives – scouting AND numbers, etc., etc.).
Here's the thought that keeps me up at night
What if good process isn’t enough?
http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/index.php/organizational-rankings-13-cleveland/
“best run organizations in the game”… and the last two years they’ve been terrible.
by eponymous_coward on Aug 9, 2010 3:46 PM PDT up reply actions
Or, scarier thought:
Cleveland is evidence that what we THINK is evidence of being a good GM might not be, when combined with the collective pratfall of our organization in 2010.
Consider: Mark Shapiro has more 100-loss seasons than BIll Bavasi, and the Indians are markedly behind the Twins for overall record this decade, even though Minnesota is decidedly NOT a “new-school” organization.’
I don’t think this is conclusive proof of anything, mind you (so don’t interpret this as I think the new school of GM’ing from Shapiro and Zduriencik is bad). It’s just that it’s something we might consider in evaluating our methods- that we might know less about what’s good process than we think we do.
by eponymous_coward on Aug 9, 2010 3:52 PM PDT up reply actions
Alternatively, you could choose to look at it another way.
Baseball seasons are subject to lots of randomness, payrolls matter, and because baseball players take years to develop, good process may not pay off for quite some time. In college football, you can turn a team around in two years with a recruiting machine like Nick Saban. Baseball isn’t that simple.
Sure, but Shapiro's had almost a decade as a GM.
That’s a pretty long leash. FWIW, Shapiro’s lifetime win-loss record as a GM is pretty close to BIll Bavasi’s, I’d bet, given all the bad seasons he’s had (and the fact that BIll Bavasi’s had a number of winning seasons).
Here’s another data point: Kenny Williams in Chicago. Which would you rather have as your GM, based on process, and which has better results?
by eponymous_coward on Aug 9, 2010 4:10 PM PDT up reply actions
Williams has a title.
I can't resist clicking "Rec" when I see a post with four [of them] already.
by thehemogoblin on Aug 9, 2010 5:16 PM PDT up reply actions
I was just saying that the Indians have been successful under Shapiro.
Morgan Ensberg for Manager 2011!
Exactly, it is a multivariable equation with too many loose ends.
I just hate when people take the stance that it does not exist.
That seems like it would be awfully difficult to test, for a number of reasons
at least for someone like me, who sucks at computers.
Anyhoo, I feel like we have discussed these points before, and certainly, going forward as the season draws to a close and as the offense approaches an historic level of inefficiency, they will be discussed again, in greater depth. The end of the year affords us all an excellent opportunity to step back and really look at everything as a whole.
However, we’ve clearly discussed the luck/unpredictability factor more often, because we lean that way, and we will discuss more often the ideas we believe in. Whether or not that’s the proper thing to do, of course, is a different question.
by Jeff Sullivan on Aug 9, 2010 1:35 PM PDT up reply actions
Seems like lineup protection would be fairly easy to find evidence for
Look at the #8 hitters in the NL, or whoever is hitting in front of the pitcher if for some reason he’s not hitting 9th. It’s (usually) pretty much a complete lack of protection for that player having the pitcher hitting behind them so they should have unique discrepancies in their average numbers compared to other hitters if it exists.
It's not the #8 hitter who would benefit
It’s the whole lineup from my point of view
by Graham MacAree on Aug 9, 2010 1:37 PM PDT up reply actions
Right, that's just the most obvious way of testing the basic principle I could think of
If there is a benefit, it should be especially pronounced in whoever is hitting in front of the pitcher, shouldn’t it?
Because the pitcher is pretty much an automatic out most of the time
And because of that it eliminates the need to pitch to the #8 hitter in many situations. So, in theory isn’t that the concept of lineup protection in the extreme? A really bad hitter behind a better hitter affecting his results?
That's not what I'm talking about
If a pitcher knows how much effort he needs to pitch to the pitcher, he can reallocate that effort wherever he likes.
by Graham MacAree on Aug 9, 2010 1:49 PM PDT up reply actions
Oh I think I get what you're saying now, you mean a general lineup benefit from having your really good hitters inordinantly tiring out the pitcher?
And a lack of having those talented hitters in the lineup means the pitcher can distribute that saved effort from not having to face those tough bats to the less talented hitters, possibly making them worse than they would normally be, i.e. partially explaining why pretty much our whole lineup has been doing worse than usual? Yeah nevermind.
Clearly not going to be a huge impact, but at least it is a mechanism for systematic underperformance
by Graham MacAree on Aug 9, 2010 2:21 PM PDT up reply actions
Could you maybe get an idea if this effect was happening by looking at a break down of pitch types the Mariners see compared to other teams?
Maybe look at what kind of pitches the Rangers, for example, throw to the league or other teams in the division and compare it to what they throw to the M’s. I imagine something like handedness would scew that quite a bit but if the M’s are seeing a significantly higher amount of fastballs wouldn’t that be an indicator?
(I’m not asking that you run out and do this, just tossing out an idea)
I would test it based on average FB velocity to hitters
If more effort was being given to retire, say, Ichiro, than usual, FB velo should be higher, correct? Same for Figgins, etc.
Ichiro’s average FB in 2010 has been 1 mph faster than for his career. So has Figgins. I don’t know if this is a league thing, but it’s the sort of evidence I would expect to see.
by Graham MacAree on Aug 9, 2010 3:11 PM PDT up reply actions
Is there a lag here?
I was looking at the Rays/Rangers to see if players got more/faster FBs the year AFTER someone goes nuts.
Pena hits a million HRs in 2007 – does that help others in 2008, and does Zobrist going off in 2009 help others in 2010?
Still, I’m not seeing much of any significance. League FBs are up markedly in the past year or 3, so I don’t know that Ichiro’s ave. FB means much. Great hitters start seeing a lot fewer FBs, of course, and that might mean something if we knew conclusively that throwing breaking balls was somehow more taxing.
You do not know what the blogs are and are not willing to consider
It is far, far more likely that the problem lies with the specific players selected than with the greater plan.
by Jeff Sullivan on Aug 9, 2010 12:56 PM PDT up reply actions
In which case, you ask "why did we think these were the right players?"
Seeing as the GM has largely gotten to choose this roster, I think it’s a fair question.
by eponymous_coward on Aug 9, 2010 12:59 PM PDT up reply actions
And it is not a question anyone is ignoring
by Jeff Sullivan on Aug 9, 2010 12:59 PM PDT up reply actions
And if "anyone" includes GMZ and the organization in general, hey, I'm down with that.
To be honest, a few of GMZ’s not-so-good decisions involved players with bad defensive value, so one can argue the problems involve not taking some things to their logical conclusion (like Ken Griffey Jr had no business being on a MLB roster in 2010, let alone a Mariner roster where multi-position defensive flexibility was a premium).
by eponymous_coward on Aug 9, 2010 1:03 PM PDT up reply actions
There was excellent reason to believe that Griffey would be able to contribute something, based on his previous seasons
by Jeff Sullivan on Aug 9, 2010 1:04 PM PDT up reply actions
His multiple previous seasons of ~0 WAR? The declining SLG yoy?
And even if we go, “OK, he might bounce back some”, there was plenty of reason to expect him to pull a Carl Everett and collapse into a black hole.
by eponymous_coward on Aug 9, 2010 1:08 PM PDT up reply actions
This isn't about a bounceback
This is about what Griffey was in 2009.
by Jeff Sullivan on Aug 9, 2010 1:09 PM PDT up reply actions
A replacement-level DH with injury history and collapse risk.
Basically, Carl Everett if he was a franchise icon.
by eponymous_coward on Aug 9, 2010 1:10 PM PDT up reply actions
It's almost like a replacement-level Ken Griffey Jr. as 25th man would be a workable scenario
by Jeff Sullivan on Aug 9, 2010 1:11 PM PDT up reply actions
Well, except
You have a SS with injury history, two other DHs with injury history, AND Ken Griffey.
There’s also the problem that a 25th man whose ONLY position is “PH or DH” doesn’t work all so well in the AL, since you aren’t PHing for pitchers as often. It works better in the NL, with guys like Dave Hansen.
Can you construct a roster in the AL that can use a guy like Griffey 50-100 PAs a year? Yes. I don’t think the 2010 Mariners were that roster, though, and I’d also like a better hitter as that player.
by eponymous_coward on Aug 9, 2010 1:17 PM PDT up reply actions
The other DHs weren't in place when Griffey was signed!
There’s a time line of events that cannot be ignored people. You cannot look back at every move as if they all happened at the same time. This is incredibly faulty and lots of people are doing it.
So it's not GMZ's fault that he ended up with 3 DHs on his Opening Day roster?
You can’t have it both ways- then he had no business signing/acquiring the other guys.
I don’t think replacement-level DHs are particularly valuable in the AL, to be honest. A guy like Bradley (who is best suited for DH but can be tolerable with limited field time) is a lot more defensible of a roster decision than Griffey, who either is a waste of at-bats (since you usually can find a better than replacement DH) or a waste of a roster spot (since replacement level hitters as PHs aren’t all that awesome of an improvement on a position player as compared to a pitcher). This is especially true when you play in a park where defense really comes into play and you’re using a 12/13 man bullpen.
by eponymous_coward on Aug 9, 2010 2:49 PM PDT up reply actions
The thing with Griffey was he was supposedly brought in to be a part time player.
The signing itself wasn’t terrible, it was the fact that he became the everyday DH that was a terrible decision.
by Hopefulmsfan on Aug 9, 2010 1:10 PM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
No public work means I can happily make assumptions
by Graham MacAree on Aug 9, 2010 1:04 PM PDT up reply actions
And said assumptions will often be incorrect
by Jeff Sullivan on Aug 9, 2010 1:05 PM PDT up reply actions
So are you incapable of doing the work? Unwilling to publish? Haven't got around to it?
by Graham MacAree on Aug 9, 2010 1:07 PM PDT up reply actions
"Aren't even willing to consider" implies a closed-mindedness that I personally find rather insulting
by Jeff Sullivan on Aug 9, 2010 1:10 PM PDT up reply actions
I think that the communities at LL and USSM are quite massively close-minded
That’s not a reflection on you, Matthew, or Dave, but the overall belief in our inherent correctness, shall we say, is simply too strong.
by Graham MacAree on Aug 9, 2010 1:16 PM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
I feel like there have been quite a number of people questioning the process all season long
by Jeff Sullivan on Aug 9, 2010 1:17 PM PDT up reply actions
That certainly isn't the impression I get, but I'm happy to defer to your judgement
by Graham MacAree on Aug 9, 2010 1:19 PM PDT up reply actions
I know you didn't mean it
the wording was just a little too strong for my likings. I can’t speak for anybody else, but I do a lot of futzing around behind the scenes that never gets published because I can’t take it anywhere.
by Jeff Sullivan on Aug 9, 2010 1:26 PM PDT up reply actions
There's also the problem that as outsiders, we often can't see all of the process.
That can be both good and bad. We’re able to have some distance from things (and that can improve objectivity), but there may be considerations we just don’t know about that a front office does.
by eponymous_coward on Aug 9, 2010 1:21 PM PDT up reply actions
They had a shocking number of player bets crater this season.
I kinda wonder about the team’s risk evaluation after a season like this.
He was a bet.
And Bradley was too. But the downsides of those bets should not have been this low.
I think the Kotchman bet is one of the most obvious failings of GMZ so far.
by Fuckmikereilly on Aug 9, 2010 1:03 PM PDT up reply actions
How so?
Kotchman’s badness was mostly the result of bad luck and that luck turned around in July. Who was there that would have been a better option?
I don't think so.
However, it was evident before the season even began that we were severely lacking in a power bat in the event that the Bradley experiment wouldn’t work out. Kotchman, while a good or great defender, would not have been the answer on offense. I’m not sure if Z thought he would somehow find power or what, but it’s always been pretty obvious that Kotchman was not a lineup boon.
My yoke is heavy.
And that's the thing - being bad is one thing, being legendarily bad means something went really wrong
it’s hard to think that this was all process – there’s been some shitty baseball and bad luck combined for legendary awfulness
Right. The process can arguably be good and the individual judgements, evaluations and decisions "bad".
A process isn’t an algorithm that spits out an exact player-personnel decision. Various factors were considered, factors weighed, and here we are. Ultimately, someone is accountable.
I think this is the really crucial point here.
We knew coming into the season that the range of probable outcomes for this team was really volatile – the team could be really good, or really bad to a degree that wasn’t true for most of the other teams. A lot of that was thanks to the number of holes to be filled and the limited budget with which to fill them – GMZ had to make a lot of intelligent gambles to try to fill those holes. We all knew these were gambles, but at least those gambles brought with them the possibility of a big upside.
Of course, we know what happened. A lot of those bets failed, some of the existing players counted on to succeed failed, and the team is horrible. You could look at this as a repudiation of the budget amount that forced Z to gamble, or Z’s ability to make the right gambles.
But if you look at the severity of the failures, it beggars belief. These are historical collapses from a lot of players who seemed like fairly safe bets coming into the season. It was realistic to think that Snell and RRS would disappoint, or that Bradley wouldn’t return to form, or that Figgins would fall off from last year, or that Lopez would struggle – but the enormity of their collective struggles is on an epic scale. Nobody – not the stats-driven people, not the traditional fans, not the scouting community – seemed to see the enormity of these individual collapses coming.
As a result, I’d be more inclined to view this season as a cruel act of nature than as a set of bad decisions bearing expected fruit.
by Chris Hafner on Aug 9, 2010 2:24 PM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
You make a good point.
I don’t remember anyone at the start of the season predicting an all out collapse. Plenty of people were saying that the team had a high variance of potential outcomes, and the detractors were saying we didn’t have the bats. But I can’t recall a notable prediction laying out a total system crash.
To me, if a flaw was inherent in the process, someone using a different theoretical model could have shown the process was incorrect.
To me this year feels like we flipped a coin 50 times and got tails on each throw.
Things going catastrophically wrong means that a flaw in the process is more likely, not less
by Graham MacAree on Aug 9, 2010 2:56 PM PDT up reply actions 2 recs
Agreed.
And I think some people thought the range of probably outcomes was narrower than for most teams. That D and OBP made the team less likely to collapse (or get to 95 wins) than others.
That it blew past the pessimistic forecast so thoroughly means you’re obligated to look at process flaws.
Not so
They should be evaluated more thoroughly the further the result has deviated from the expectation. It’s simple Bayes.
by Graham MacAree on Aug 9, 2010 3:14 PM PDT up reply actions
Rather
Intensity of re-evaluation of process should be based on trust in that process, or else you’re wasting silly amounts of resources validating something. That trust should be based on some combination of how well the process has appeared to work and the trust gained from the re-evaluation of the process.
by Graham MacAree on Aug 9, 2010 3:18 PM PDT up reply actions
No.
Maybe I’m judging too much off what I’ve seen, but he doesn’t seem to generate the power or even just the authority behind balls to get enough hits to ever hit well enough to be a good first baseman. I think Jack got caught up in the shiny former top prospect label. At the time, I think I was sort of optimistic, as I kind of liked the philosophy of getting touted players in their late-20’s prime, but I just don’t think Kotchman ever had the talent some believed he did.
by Fuckmikereilly on Aug 9, 2010 1:15 PM PDT up reply actions
Kotchman has the tools to do well.
We saw some of that in April and some of it in July. He just hasn’t developed enough to do it consistently. Zduriencik has a scouting background and saw something in his swing that he thought might turn the corner. This isn’t to say that Kotchman is some great player but obviously Z thought Kotchman might be able to give him some value for not a lot.
He hits grounders. Lots of grounders.
He doesn’t have a fantastic eye. He occasionally shows some decent power. I don’t really think those are the tools to succeed.
by Fuckmikereilly on Aug 9, 2010 1:27 PM PDT up reply actions
This is something worth questioning, though.
Both Snell and Kotchman were reclamation projects of sorts. In a season where you hope to compete for the division title, it’s questionable to give large amounts of playing time to people that aren’t a finished product. If it doesn’t work, you’re in trouble, and I feel that Snell, Kotchman, and to a lesser extent League fall into that category.
by JLC on Aug 9, 2010 1:59 PM PDT up reply actions
They were risks.
I didn’t say they were sure things but they tried something and it failed. They probably made too many risks and they all failed somehow.
Perhaps.
That’s definitely another thing to take into account when looking at much of this team. I would imagine Jack wanted two more starters, a different 2B, possibly a catcher, a replacement for 3B, and maybe a better 1B.
He was really only able to do two of those things given payroll constraints. Again, process-wise, he seemed to do pretty well. As Graham has been saying, though, maybe our idea of good process is wrong.
by Fuckmikereilly on Aug 9, 2010 1:18 PM PDT up reply actions
While Graham really may be on to something,
I’m thinking that budget constraints certainly factored in with construction of the team for the 2010 season. We shed a lot of payroll between 2009 and 2010, not just from expiring contracts but also through roster moves, yet the team publicly said that there was an initiative to lower payroll from year-to-year which had to have hamstrung the team during the offseason
Actually, many advanced offensive statistics disagree with this assertion, as do traditional metrics
Lopez has always posted very good contact rates and more than acceptable power rates for a middle infielder or even a third baseman.
His biggest problem has always been that he did not walk very much.
I'm using poor terms, I apologize
They took risks on several players in the offseason (Bradley, Byrnes, Griffey, Bedard, Kotchman) and almost all of them failed to pan out. Maybe this is a case of “If we ignore risk, how can we build a team that at least on paper has a chance to compete”, but without reading minds in the FO I can’t help but downgrade them on player assesment.
Lopez and Bradley shouldn't be shocking.
Lopez has made very little adjustment in his entire career and he has enough holes to invite pitchers to take advantage. Bradley is as volatile a commodity as there is in baseball and I wouldn’t have been surprised if he either won the MVP or sublimated between pitches.
I agree with this but are there examples of him passing on power bats in favor of slap hitting defenders?
Figgins over Beltre is the only one I can think of, the other options that he passed on were guys like Bay or Ibanez. It seems like he’s been trying to do the most with what he’s had, and defense has been whats available.
Beltre wasn't really a feasible option, considering how he was dead-set on a short-term contract so he could prove himself again and re-enter the market in 2011.
He turned down a three-year deal from Oakland, and Safeco has always given him fits, like most RHBs.
I think you would have a stronger case against a defense first process if our defense had been legitimately good.
As it has only been mediocre. Does the process need further refinement such that defensive metrics carry a greater predictive power in year to year? Probably yes. But I don’t see how our season disproves a defense first ballclub can win.
All this season proves is that a team with mediocre defense, mediocre to bad pitching and fucking horrendous hitting is not a winning combination.
If defence is unpredictable, it's impossible to build a team around it, no?
by Graham MacAree on Aug 9, 2010 2:46 PM PDT up reply actions
I don't know. Is it that unpredictable?
Beltre has been consistent from year to year. So has Ichiro, Langherhans…
If defence is predictable, our processes failed to correctly predict it at a team level
If it’s unpredictable, which is much more the case than people realise because defensive metrics are so weak, it’s silly to rely on defenders.
by Graham MacAree on Aug 9, 2010 3:01 PM PDT up reply actions
Well, no. It's silly to rely on defensive metrics.
Teams have been relying on evaluating defense for over 100 years.
You’re resorting to scouting, then, which then means you’re dependent on your organization’s ability to scout. Some organizations might be better at it than others. Maybe the M’s sucked at doing these evaluations- in fact, given the love for Rob Johnson, I think it’s fair to say there are some issues.
by eponymous_coward on Aug 9, 2010 3:06 PM PDT up reply actions
Or switching Lopez and Figgins
Obviously, there are player moves that have shown the team has had less then perfect analysis.
Doesn't that mean their (our) tools were faulty?
Has there been work done to show that defensive skill is inherently unstable? Why would defensive skill be less repeatable than throwing a circle change?
Tools being faulty is a potential process flaw
If you cannot predict something adequately, you do not rely on it, or you’re taking large risks. Defence is clearly a skill, but we’re still not great at measuring it, and so building a defence-first team is risky.
by Graham MacAree on Aug 9, 2010 3:09 PM PDT up reply actions
Well, just looking at it...
Offensive skill can be kind of unstable too (look at Casey Kotchman’s career, or any player who has a ~2 WAR spike in their offense, which just isn’t that uncommon).
Given that the range of offensive performance is typically wider than defensive performance (you won’t find +40 defensive players), you’d think that the data would be a bit noisier just to start with… and defense is a lot more nebulous to measure than offense to boot.
Of course, I haven’t researched this at all, so what the hell do I know. That’s just from looking at how defense figures into the game- at a lesser level than offense.
by eponymous_coward on Aug 9, 2010 3:11 PM PDT up reply actions
Actually defensive skill and offensive skill have a similar range
Positions will make you think otherwise, but the best defensive shortstop is ~Pujols better than the worst defensive 1B
by Graham MacAree on Aug 9, 2010 3:12 PM PDT up reply actions
Well, doesn't that mean we screwed up and got the wrong players?
If you’re using defensive metrics and scouting and they’re leading you to make the wrong decisions…
by eponymous_coward on Aug 9, 2010 2:59 PM PDT up reply actions
Could you elucidate?
My line of thinking goes something like “No, when your team loses 100 games and sucks THIS badly, it’s not an example of your best work”.
I wouldn’t say “Fire GMZ”, but I’m more along the lines of “I hope you guys get better”.
FWIW, Billy Beane? Zero 100 loss seasons, WELL after the core of the 2000-2004 team has crumbled to dust as far as their relationship to the A’s. So that’s sort of the standard I judge GMZ by, if we really want to compare him to top-flight GMs.
by eponymous_coward on Aug 9, 2010 12:29 PM PDT up reply actions
I am not saying we should fire Zduriencik
But just because we already decided that our processes were correct and he executed them doesn’t mean they were.
by Graham MacAree on Aug 9, 2010 12:31 PM PDT up reply actions
Yeah, that's where I am too.
2010 should be used as a “OK, we failed, miserably, so we examine our mistakes and learn from them” opportunity, not as a “Well, we must have been right and just gotten unlucky” way to shrug off poor results.
by eponymous_coward on Aug 9, 2010 12:34 PM PDT up reply actions
I can come up with five unequivocally poor decisions that GMZ has made this year.
BAD DECISIONS
-re-signing Griffey (!!!!!) and Sweeney because “they’ve earned it” while already having injury prone guys in Wilson and Bradley
-trading Brandon Morrow at his lowest point of value
Using Tuiasasopo as backup SS to begin the year
-trading for an 32-year-old, injury prone Jack Wilson (defense usually peaks the early to mid 20s) and re-signing him for 2011-2012
-drafting Baron for under-slot reasons even though he ended up signing for over-slot money and is the worst hitting first rounder anyone has ever seen.
Graham probably doesn’t like choosing Smoak over Montero for Lee, but I think that was pretty sound considering how well Lueke and Beavan seem to have been scouted and how much more developed Smoak is (Montero still has a lot of developing to do, even though his ceiling is higher than Smoak’s).
Even so, I think the good still vastly outweighs the bad and that the organization is in really good shape (I think we’ve even got a decent chance to be competitive (as in above .500, in 2011 if Ackley, Pineda, Smoak, and Saunders have good years and GMZ makes a couple good decisions).
Baron was last year and you can't really blame him for that.
The M’s had no way of knowing that Duke was going to turn around and give him close to a full ride, necessitating an increase in the bonus.
I don’t like Baron at all, but saying “we could have had Stassi!” or blaming the GM because the prospect demanded more money than he told them doesn’t really get anywhere productive.
"Ever tried? Ever failed? No matter. Try again. Fail again. Fail better." - Samuel Beckett Mariners Minors
by JY on Aug 9, 2010 12:58 PM PDT up reply actions
I think he's such a bad hitter that he would've been a bad pick at half the price.
Almost all the draftees blinked (even Matzek) and settled for fairly close to slot money when it came down to August 15.
I mean, we all knew before the 2009 draft he was a trainwreck of a hitter, and there wasn't anyone else rumored to be keen on him until the 3rd round or so, if I remember correctly.
You have a far more informed opinion than I do, Jay, but I think that drafting Baron was pretty inexcusable.
We had to go cheaper with the other picks because of Ackley.
It was a budget choice more than “hey this guy is the 33rd best player in the draft”.
There were better budget choices than Baron.
by Fuckmikereilly on Aug 9, 2010 1:07 PM PDT up reply actions
Well, that wasn't expected, though.
The pick was one made for budgetary reasons, which ended up not working out. However, even with that defense, I think there were better guys out there than Baron.
by Fuckmikereilly on Aug 9, 2010 1:11 PM PDT up reply actions
Drafting Baron was not something I aimed to defend.
I wasn’t fond of it then, and it still sucks. Most value picks are simply bad. But we shouldn’t judge this one on the basis of Baron demanding more because they couldn’t have known.
"Ever tried? Ever failed? No matter. Try again. Fail again. Fail better." - Samuel Beckett Mariners Minors
by JY on Aug 9, 2010 1:17 PM PDT up reply actions
The organization does not reward fiscal conservatism once a guy is drafted
You don’t get the money back in the budget if you say “no” to a player, so there’s not really a reason to back off on higher demands unless you can divert them to someone else.
Well...
I agree with re-signing Griffey as a bad move in hindsight, especially to be a starting DH. Sweeney making the team seemed like Wak’s fault to me. Brandon Morrow trade, well, Morrow wasn’t working out here. That seemed like a number of people for messing with Morrow so much while he was here. Tui/Jack Wilson, yeah, would have been cool to get a better shortstop situation, but those are hard to come by for any GM in less than 2 years. The Baron thing is just not correct evaluation of the Baron pick.
by Kenneth Arthur on Aug 9, 2010 12:59 PM PDT up reply actions
Resigning Griffey was a bad move in every kind of sight possible.
by Eyebrows on Aug 9, 2010 1:03 PM PDT via mobile up reply actions
It's one he was forced into by a retarded city of fans.
Also, the team would have turned on him like they allegedly turned on Wak after the Griffey debacle.
by Fuckmikereilly on Aug 9, 2010 1:07 PM PDT up reply actions
Under our current criteria for bad/good decision making, that's true
What this doesn’t consider is whether our criteria are correct
by Graham MacAree on Aug 9, 2010 1:06 PM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
Or that you are good enough to identify when your criteria are being met
You can have good fundamental process in theory (“We believe in defense, OBP, )” and be poor at executing it. I remember when KC made a point of saying things like this… and still acquired the same suck players as always.
There’s also the factor that quite often when you’re making decisions, you can often find legitimate arguments on both sides of an argument. It’s often not a 100% wrong/0% right sort of thing, or even a 80% wrong/20% right sort of thing, but 55% right/45% wrong- more a “shades of grey” as opposed to black/white. As such, it’s just going to take a while before you learn if you’re making the optimal decision, if your strategy is based on fairly fine degrees of distinction in something with as much guesswork and plain dumb luck as player acquisition.
Hell, even Bill Bavasi didn’t screw up these decisions ALL the time- Adrian Beltre? Clearly the right move at the time. He turned JJ Putz into a cheap bullpen ace.
by eponymous_coward on Aug 9, 2010 2:03 PM PDT up reply actions
That would be silly.
Our process didn’t achieve results is not the same as we know the correct process now and should replace our GM with the one who will implement that process. It’s always important to remember as we reflect on this season that no one knows why the M’s season went to hell. At this point, all we can do is conjecture and test our conjectures. (In other words: everyone who says “the M’s need a big bat” was relying on a heuristic that wasn’t knowledge and we have no evidence that adding Russ Branyan in March would have made the offense 40 runs more productive. On the other hand, we’re in a good position to wonder whether Branyan would have made the offense as a whole more productive than his individual bat, which is to say that I’m curious about your line-up protection theory.)
This makes me worry about how short a leash Jack has going into next season.
No matter where you go, there you are.
They started playing that old Ichiro commercial where everyday people do his Ichiro stance.
Running low on what 2010 commercials they can use.
They should run the RAUUUUUUUUL ad for shits n giggles.
by Eyebrows on Aug 9, 2010 12:23 PM PDT via mobile up reply actions
As much as I hate it...
I really fear Jack Z is next. One bad season and you get completely done in. I really hope Chuck and Howard realize that this shit isn’t Z’s fault.
I believe
They do know it’s not his fault. Someone had to go and it’s obvious that Wak “lost the players.”
It's pretty clear that Z knows what he's doing a lot more than Bavasi did, results be damned.
But I would understand their hesitance. Though Woody Woodward was here for twelve years.
by Mariner John on Aug 9, 2010 12:44 PM PDT up reply actions
If he has another "terrible year or two" of very unsuccessful transactions like this year, I think that it won't be just Lincoln and Armstrong wanting him to go.
My yoke is heavy.
However.
Cliff Lee and Chone Figgins were not terrible transactions. Same applies to what we got back for Lee mid-season.
by Hopefulmsfan on Aug 9, 2010 12:58 PM PDT up reply actions
No, they weren't terrible.
But Figgins, along with pretty much every player we acquired save for Lee, have proven so far to be unsuccessful players. It’s not even Z’s fault. We’ve generally agreed with the moves so far this year, and many of them haven’t worked out anyway.
My yoke is heavy.
Snark: So they couldn't get rid of Figgins so they decide to axe Wakamatsu instead?
Waiting to see the media’s take on this.
It Seems To Me
That Any guy who was loyal to Wak (Adair and Van Burkleo were his buddies from other stops on the coaching ladder) was bound to be let go too.
I would bet that Daren Brown is getting the audition to become the FT MGR for 2011, particularly knowing how many young guys are gonna be on the team.
Same reaction
The statistics you don't compile never lie.
-Stephen Colbert
by kentcheesehead on Aug 9, 2010 12:23 PM PDT up reply actions
But he will then go on to manage the Nats in ~2016
The statistics you don't compile never lie.
-Stephen Colbert
by kentcheesehead on Aug 9, 2010 12:24 PM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
Hansen isn't bad.
Drafting catchers that had no chance in hell of actually catching and expecting a miracle? Probably not the best idea.
"Ever tried? Ever failed? No matter. Try again. Fail again. Fail better." - Samuel Beckett Mariners Minors
by JY on Aug 9, 2010 12:24 PM PDT up reply actions
Firing Adair is really fucking stupid
Guy was and is a good pitching coach.
"Good evening Blazer fans, wherever you may be!"-Bill Schonely
Our pitching this year has been one of the few bright spots
On this time.
"Good evening Blazer fans, wherever you may be!"-Bill Schonely
Which may or may not have anything to do with the pitching coach.
There’s no way for us to tell. None.
Just because we got better talent on the staff doesn't mean that Adair is a God.
by seattlesundevil on Aug 9, 2010 12:25 PM PDT up reply actions
But I don't understand why he had to go
"Good evening Blazer fans, wherever you may be!"-Bill Schonely
He wouldn't last with a new manager coming in next year
by seattlesundevil on Aug 9, 2010 12:26 PM PDT up reply actions
Which M's pitchers have really improved since he arrived?
Finding evidence for claims like yours is really hard to do.
Fun quote from Z
I no longer have confidence that Don, Ty and Rick are the right long-term fit for our organization. New leadership is needed and it is needed now.
by seattlesundevil on Aug 9, 2010 12:23 PM PDT reply actions
I know. Now instead of at the end of the day?
by Eyebrows on Aug 9, 2010 12:26 PM PDT via mobile up reply actions 14 recs
I'm not sure if it's refreshing or too insensitive.
It could backfire in a horrible way upon him.
My yoke is heavy.
It's not too insensitive when read as part of the complete quote
From my perspective as a fan, I like the honesty. Obviously Wak and staff were let go because they weren’t getting things done properly, and he came right out and said as much without sugar-coating it in any way
I like it too as a fan.
But realistically, how long is his leash in the organization to say that sort of thing? You’re right, I’ve only seen the isolated quote and judging by the diction it seems rather brusque.
My yoke is heavy.
Perhaps it would read better in context, but in isolation like that it is uncalled for.
There is an accepted protocol to these sorts of things for a reason. Just because I get a vicarious thrill from reading Jack Z. saying that about Wak and his coaches doesn’t mean it’s a good thing for him to say. Impolitic and, yes, off-puttingly blunt.
Embrace floorlessness.
I'm not sure I'd call it "off-puttingly blunt" just because it used honest language
by pdb on Aug 9, 2010 1:20 PM PDT up reply actions
I would. It's what's known as a "Kinsley-gaffe."
“Honest language” isn’t always necessary. I mean, it’s blindingly obvious to everyone that Wak failed, and that the coaches failed (and also that the players selected by the GM failed, I might add). Pointing it out “honestly” often just has the effect of rubbing salt into the wound. As I said, it’s bracing for us fans, but it’s bad form. And we observe these forms for genuinely good reasons in life, I think.
Embrace floorlessness.
I also want to add the the surrounding context makes the quote sound much better.
The earlier praise of Wak et al. softens the blow considerably.
Embrace floorlessness.
Lying isn't really great for business
In any sphere of life.
He’s trying to explain his decision to his employers.
His words just support his actions
Today’s firings are proof that the organization believes it needs new leadership right now.
by Jeff Sullivan on Aug 9, 2010 1:22 PM PDT up reply actions
Read the press release for the whole quote and it doesn't sound near as bad
Zduriencik said. “Don, Ty and Rick are all good baseball men and they have done their very best. But we are where we are. I no longer have confidence that Don, Ty and Rick are the right long-term fit for our organization. New leadership is needed and it is needed now.”
The context definitely puts it in a better light. As I’ve said, I like this quote
by tootthekazoo on Aug 9, 2010 1:19 PM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
Classless would be:
I believe that Don, Ty, and Rick were dragging down the organization and how they handled the players was an abomination. They eat babies.
Hey how about that.
BrockandSalk Official announcement now out. AAA Mgr Daren Brown Promoted to Interim Mgr, Roger Hansen Bench Coach; Carl Willis Named Pitching Coach 5 minutes ago via TweetDeck
"Ever tried? Ever failed? No matter. Try again. Fail again. Fail better." - Samuel Beckett Mariners Minors
If anyone other than Jeff makes lame Willis jokes, I will have you know that my trusty stabbing knife is at the ready.
by Eyebrows on Aug 9, 2010 12:24 PM PDT via mobile up reply actions 1 recs
I know that the urge will be strong during mound visits.
You must resist, for my health and yours.
by Eyebrows on Aug 9, 2010 12:25 PM PDT via mobile up reply actions
Willis was our minor league pitching coordinator as of this year, if anyone cares.
"Ever tried? Ever failed? No matter. Try again. Fail again. Fail better." - Samuel Beckett Mariners Minors
by JY on Aug 9, 2010 12:26 PM PDT up reply actions
He sort of sets out the plan for what the organization wants to focus on in terms of pitching.
"Ever tried? Ever failed? No matter. Try again. Fail again. Fail better." - Samuel Beckett Mariners Minors
by JY on Aug 9, 2010 12:31 PM PDT up reply actions
Right.
In certain respects, the coordinator can act as the arm of the pitching coach on the organization. So when Bryan Price was in charge, we were all about the change-ups, and Chaves was more into the two-seam I think.
Willis was probably partially in charge of the limited pitch counts for the top arms in the system, but other than fastballs, I don’t actually know what his philosophies might be.
"Ever tried? Ever failed? No matter. Try again. Fail again. Fail better." - Samuel Beckett Mariners Minors
by JY on Aug 9, 2010 12:35 PM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
This year, I think we should focus on throwing good pitches that get people out.
The 2009 Beanballapalooza really didn’t work very well for the org.
by Eyebrows on Aug 9, 2010 12:35 PM PDT via mobile up reply actions
Now I'm thinking of you as Roberto from Futurama.
by Jeff Nye on Aug 9, 2010 12:28 PM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
What'samatter Red, you SCARED?
"Ever tried? Ever failed? No matter. Try again. Fail again. Fail better." - Samuel Beckett Mariners Minors
by JY on Aug 9, 2010 12:31 PM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
I guess that's better than your rusty stabbing knife
Every time you masturbate... God kills a kitten? Fuck kittens.
by Matt Erickson on Aug 9, 2010 2:18 PM PDT up reply actions
Sigh.
I know the staff generally has to be a casualty in a lost season but I’m not overly thrilled with this.
Between this and the Morrow game, I'm feeling extraordinarily frustrated as a Mariners fan.
by katal on Aug 9, 2010 12:29 PM PDT via mobile reply actions
Try
being a Cubs fan for extraordinary amount of frustration. Wak may have lost the clubhouse, but it wasn’t for a lack of caring or passion. Unlike someone we are all familiar with—he’s been apathetic the whole year and that has infected the entire team. We’d offer him up to you, but you’ve been there and done that and I think Lou has finally had it and will be out of the game permanently now.
"There is no tomorrow for you, and that makes you very dangerous people."--Jimmy McGinty (Gene Hackman) The Replacements
Time is an illusion--lunch time doubly so.
Now they're talking about it on the Yankees Red Sox game
talking about the Chone Figgins scuffle and our inability to score.
Michael Kay claiming he heard that JackZ and Wak weren’t getting along.
[DELETED ZOMG NO POLITICS]
This seems to be a common sentiment
It’s often true of a GM and manager though. As always, no one gives a fuck if the team is winning.
by Fuckmikereilly on Aug 9, 2010 12:32 PM PDT up reply actions
Anyone that has seen the Rainiers play more than I have (none) have any insight as to what Brown does managerial wise?
Does he stick to one lineup? Bunting? etc.. I just have literally zero idea of his tendencies.
by seattlesundevil on Aug 9, 2010 12:30 PM PDT reply actions
Who cares, he'll be gone in a few weeks.
by EnglishMariner on Aug 9, 2010 12:31 PM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
With the impending arrival of Ackley, Pineda and to a lesser extent Smoak
I think you could be right.
He's been in the org a long time.
I think he finally at least gets serious consideration.
by Fuckmikereilly on Aug 9, 2010 12:34 PM PDT up reply actions
Which is why I figure he has a shot.
Grow the team with a MGR they’re comfortable with, a guy who is a developmental guy. It seems logical to me.
Hard to tell at the AAA level
The roster changes so frequently you really can’t stick with a standard lineup.
"Good evening Blazer fans, wherever you may be!"-Bill Schonely
He uses his bullpen alot better for the most part.
He tends to stick to his better relievers in high leverage situations. His lineups are so-so (Mike Wilson 9th?) but consistent.
Can't wait for a year from now
When Ackley is up and getting on base like crazy, Chone Figgins is back to his normal self, Pineda is in line for the Rookie of the Year, Smoak provides a bat with actual pop, Lueke/Cortes/League becomes one of the best bullpens in the game…
I’ll go back to rocking in the fetal position now
by ManifestDestiny on Aug 9, 2010 12:32 PM PDT reply actions
Figgins has been back to his normal self since the all-star break.
Ackley and Smoak don’t seem too far fetched. Who the hell knows? I don’t want to go predicting anymore.
by seattlesundevil on Aug 9, 2010 12:42 PM PDT up reply actions
You'd think that it's good we're Mariner fans, then.
Thank you, Walter Jones.
Thank you, Ken Griffey Jr.
Didn't Jack and Wak have a long dinner recently?
I wonder what happened since then.
So I guess there was something to the media conspiracies after all?
Thinking back to Justin Smoak being sent down being an “organizational decision” as Wak says it shortly after claiming that Smoak would see regular playing time at 1B.
Wak confused me with his decision
to rotate Smoak with Branyan and Casey Kotchman after about 10 days.
So it seems that TheRealMariners is on a 20 minut delay.
"Ever tried? Ever failed? No matter. Try again. Fail again. Fail better." - Samuel Beckett Mariners Minors
*minute
"Ever tried? Ever failed? No matter. Try again. Fail again. Fail better." - Samuel Beckett Mariners Minors
by JY on Aug 9, 2010 12:38 PM PDT up reply actions
As the official Twitter account
They have to wait to report the actual release, can’t just report rumors.
"Good evening Blazer fans, wherever you may be!"-Bill Schonely
I know that much but I got a kick out of this.
# TheRealMariners We love the new @710espnseattle lineup! @BrockandSalk at 9 a.m., @TheGroz at 12 p.m. and @KCalabroShow at 3 p.m. 27 minutes ago via web
# Brock and Salk BrockandSalk Sources tell me Don Wakamatsu, Ty van Berkleo and Rick Adair have been let go from the Mariners. 36 minutes ago via TweetDeck
"Ever tried? Ever failed? No matter. Try again. Fail again. Fail better." - Samuel Beckett Mariners Minors
by JY on Aug 9, 2010 12:39 PM PDT up reply actions
I'm not really happy with this.
It feels a lot like panic-button style reaction rather than thoughtful and intentional change of direction, complete with the bogus “vote of confidence” and everything.
by eponymous_coward on Aug 9, 2010 12:39 PM PDT reply actions
Yeah but votes of confidence are almost always bogus
by tootthekazoo on Aug 9, 2010 12:41 PM PDT up reply actions
They are the surest sign someone is about to be fired
Most often.
"Good evening Blazer fans, wherever you may be!"-Bill Schonely
Thus my dismay.
I could have understood if Wak was let go at season’s end (GMZ specifically didn’t say this wouldn’t happen). Midseason feels very much like “oh, crap, let’s make a move for the sake of appearances”.
by eponymous_coward on Aug 9, 2010 12:43 PM PDT up reply actions
And even though I tend to believe getting rid of Wak is a good move
i agree that mid-season manager moves almost never work and smack of desperation.
"Good evening Blazer fans, wherever you may be!"-Bill Schonely
There's nothing to be gained from letting them lame-duck it the rest of the season.
Give the new guys an audition for the rest of the year to see if they are a good option going forward.
The “vote of confidence” is just a delaying tactic, like it always is.
I don't think you can evaluate managers realistically in these scenarios.
Unless your evaluation is something like “evaluate how they hold the helm as the band plays ’Nearer Oh My God to Thee”.
by eponymous_coward on Aug 9, 2010 12:48 PM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
Yeah, but what's the difference otherwise?
If you’re going to fire the guy, may as well do it during the season instead of waiting. What harm could it do?
by tootthekazoo on Aug 9, 2010 12:45 PM PDT up reply actions
I don't get why people ever thought that was a vote of confidence
Z was carefully navigating his words to suggest Wak wasn’t going to be around much longer. And after Rob got sent down it was clear Wak had lost his credibility within the organization, the writing has been on the wall for this for a while.
Anyone else pissed at Larry Stone?
He ruins no hitters, and now gets good managers fired. Worst beat writer ever.
I also laughed at this from his twitter
I guess my column yesterday calling for Wakamatsu to be taken off the hot seat was not taken to heart.
He is not a beat writer.
Geoff Baker is the beat writer.
by Mariner John on Aug 9, 2010 12:42 PM PDT up reply actions
Given that he wrote that Wak shouldn't be fired yesterday
Can’t blame him for this one.
"Good evening Blazer fans, wherever you may be!"-Bill Schonely
Larry Stone isn't a beat writer.
Also, what?
Isn't Lou retiring at the end of the year?
by EnglishMariner on Aug 9, 2010 12:43 PM PDT up reply actions
Remember the good times:
Milton Bradley is my hero.
by SeaKoala on Aug 9, 2010 12:42 PM PDT reply actions 1 recs
Felix also loves eating plastic cups.
by Eyeball Kid on Aug 9, 2010 12:46 PM PDT up reply actions 13 recs
Felix loves eating Freddy Garcia??
No wonder Freddy’s getting worse… poor guy.
Every time you masturbate... God kills a kitten? Fuck kittens.
by Matt Erickson on Aug 9, 2010 2:23 PM PDT up reply actions
I've spent most of this season making a dismissive "jack-like-move"
by tootthekazoo on Aug 9, 2010 12:51 PM PDT up reply actions 2 recs
Most of the season has been a dismissive jack-like move.
Thank you, Walter Jones.
Thank you, Ken Griffey Jr.
Not much sugar coating in there, Jack sounds pissed.
Very unlike the usual cuddly ’can’t we all get along’ Mariner style.
by EnglishMariner on Aug 9, 2010 12:52 PM PDT up reply actions
I like it.
"If for any reason you're not completely satisfied, I hate you."
So, the opposite of Wakamatsu?
This is going to be a team of badasses from now on.
by Fuckmikereilly on Aug 9, 2010 12:55 PM PDT up reply actions
Divish
TNTmariners I don’t understand the firing of Wak and Adair and Van Burkleo
The Mariners are 42-70. The GM isn’t going to fire himself. It’s really no more complex than that.
Or maybe, Divish means he doesn’t agree with the firing.
He's not the only one.
Dave blamed a combination of egos and poor performance for the team’s record and said Wak didn’t really deserve it.
"Ever tried? Ever failed? No matter. Try again. Fail again. Fail better." - Samuel Beckett Mariners Minors
by JY on Aug 9, 2010 12:55 PM PDT up reply actions
Cameron.
"Ever tried? Ever failed? No matter. Try again. Fail again. Fail better." - Samuel Beckett Mariners Minors
by JY on Aug 9, 2010 12:59 PM PDT up reply actions
Wak deserves it. He's been provably bad at both baseball strategy and player relations.
His two jobs are baseball strategy and player relations.
by abender20 on Aug 9, 2010 3:34 PM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
Last year he was great at player relations.
"Ever tried? Ever failed? No matter. Try again. Fail again. Fail better." - Samuel Beckett Mariners Minors
by JY on Aug 9, 2010 3:35 PM PDT up reply actions
So this is all Griffey's fault!
"Ever tried? Ever failed? No matter. Try again. Fail again. Fail better." - Samuel Beckett Mariners Minors
by JY on Aug 9, 2010 3:43 PM PDT up reply actions
I think Rob Johnson should take his fair share of the blame.
According to my calculations, your problem doesn't exist.
by the other side on Aug 9, 2010 3:45 PM PDT up reply actions
Rob Johnson threw Griffey under the bus, which flipped and then landed on Wak.
"Ever tried? Ever failed? No matter. Try again. Fail again. Fail better." - Samuel Beckett Mariners Minors
by JY on Aug 9, 2010 3:46 PM PDT up reply actions
Rob dropped a ball under the bus which caused it to lose control and flip over on Griffey.
According to my calculations, your problem doesn't exist.
by the other side on Aug 9, 2010 3:49 PM PDT up reply actions
I wouldn't say that necessarily
It might just be he didn’t have a whole lot of adversity to show us how good he was at player relations. He did call Felix out in the media and piss him off.
And Felix was awesome from then out!
"Ever tried? Ever failed? No matter. Try again. Fail again. Fail better." - Samuel Beckett Mariners Minors
by JY on Aug 9, 2010 3:47 PM PDT up reply actions
That's how I'm viewing it
The staff wasn’t the only reason we sucked this year, but he showed no ability to maximize the situation he was put in
This seems a little extreme, just to give Groz something to talk about on his first day.
by msb on Aug 9, 2010 12:54 PM PDT reply actions 4 recs
This is a stupid move. I hope Wak gets another chance to manage.
Olney said there is a good chance he manages again, so go Wak!
Milton Bradley is my hero.
Even David Locke is weighing in
“7 General Managers, 17 managers, 4 ownership groups and 1 president since 1981 and the Mariners just keep losing.”
Conveniently forgetting all those years when they had some pretty good baseball teams.
But hey, whatever it takes to make a point.
by Eyebrows on Aug 9, 2010 1:00 PM PDT via mobile up reply actions
No kidding
We had the best winning percentage in all of baseball over like a 5 year stretch at one point, did we not?
I lost it last year
I think it rolled under my couch but I’m not sure.
by pdb on Aug 9, 2010 2:51 PM PDT up reply actions
We all knew this was coming
But this is still very disappointing and pretty infuriating to me. I can’t lay all the blame on Wak. And firing Adair just makes no sense to me.
by E-Lizz on Aug 9, 2010 1:13 PM PDT via mobile reply actions
Perhaps GMZ is upset that he traded for Brandon League's splitter and Adair told him to never throw it
by seattlebruin on Aug 9, 2010 1:14 PM PDT up reply actions 2 recs
Of course
But pitching wasn’t the main problem at all. This is going to be such an overhaul of the coaching staff. Many have already said this and I don’t mean to sound like a broken record , but I expected something this drastic to happen in the offseason instead of now.
by E-Lizz on Aug 9, 2010 3:27 PM PDT via mobile up reply actions
Better now than later, if you wait too much longer you're running into the post season.
It’s verboten to talk to other teams managers and coaches during the post season. Wait too much longer and you’re going to have to wait until October.
What do Howard Lincoln and Chuck Armstrong do?
Not looking for a sarcastic response, this is an actual question.
What do each of their jobs entitle?
Well Lincoln "represents" Hiroshi Yamauchi and Nintendo of America.
So he probably just relays the available budget for the next season and things like that. Basically he’s worthless.
If he controls or influences the budget in any way he's absolutely not worthless
by pdb on Aug 9, 2010 1:18 PM PDT up reply actions
On that note...
What is the reason for the ever-decreasing budget of the Mariners?
by King_Feelicks on Aug 9, 2010 1:21 PM PDT up reply actions
Economic reality?
Unwillingness to throw massive money at players who would produce like most of the Mariners do now? No attendance?
by pdb on Aug 9, 2010 1:22 PM PDT up reply actions
The Wii and the DS already should have!
Instead, Nintendo spent it on drinks and a truck. >=(
33!
by joof on Aug 9, 2010 2:03 PM PDT up reply actions 8 recs
This is an old image macro / meme.
I do not know where the original picture comes from, but I’ve seen a ton of different heads shopped onto them.
Fans are typically idiots.
by The Typical Idiot Fan on Aug 9, 2010 2:12 PM PDT up reply actions
Those freak gasoline fight accidents...
According to my calculations, your problem doesn't exist.
by the other side on Aug 9, 2010 2:13 PM PDT up reply actions
They generally comes in at least fifteen minutes late. They uses the side door, then just space out.
The just stare at their desks but it looks like they areworking. They do that
for probably another hour after lunch too. I’d probably, say, in a
given week, they probably do about fifteen minutes of real, actual work.
by RustyJohn on Aug 9, 2010 1:22 PM PDT up reply actions 5 recs
According to Armstrong:
“The one decision I get to make every day is that I decide whether the roof is going to be open or closed, which is always controversial.”
by msb on Aug 9, 2010 1:38 PM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
Some people are born to greatness.
Hard work never killed nobody, but I won't take my chances.
by JAH on Aug 9, 2010 1:43 PM PDT up reply actions
As I understand it
Chuck Armstrong is the President of the baseball club. Aside from deciding if the roof is opened or closed, I believe he is also responsible (with ownership) for the budget, signs off on trades brought to him, is involved in the hiring of the GM, etc.
Howard Lincoln is the chairman and CEO of the The Baseball Club of Seattle’s Board of Directors (made up of Lincoln, Ellis, Arakawa, Larson, Wayne Perry, Shrontz and Watjen) On the board he also represents the percentage of the team that is owned by Nintendo of America.
by msb on Aug 9, 2010 2:28 PM PDT up reply actions
Oh no, Dusty Baker is at the end of his contract in Cincinnati?
I don’t think we’d even have to worry about him, but he’s the last person I’d want, especially with Felix and Pineda.
Carlos Silvelite
Dusty Baker!
If that happens, what’s the over/under on Felix’s next arm surgery?
by eponymous_coward on Aug 9, 2010 1:28 PM PDT up reply actions
Compare and contrast time.
this helps illustrate why I prefer Stone to Baker
by msb on Aug 9, 2010 2:41 PM PDT up reply actions
I haven't seen a #6org joke ANYWHERE yet.
Color me disappointed.
Look harder
http://twitter.com/#search?q=%236org
by seattlesundevil on Aug 9, 2010 1:20 PM PDT up reply actions
So that's six references and only half of them were actually trolling.
"Ever tried? Ever failed? No matter. Try again. Fail again. Fail better." - Samuel Beckett Mariners Minors
by JY on Aug 9, 2010 1:22 PM PDT up reply actions
Fangraphs hasn't weighed in yet.
"Ever tried? Ever failed? No matter. Try again. Fail again. Fail better." - Samuel Beckett Mariners Minors
by JY on Aug 9, 2010 1:21 PM PDT up reply actions
NOBODY BETTER REPLY TO THIS COMMENT IT IS MERELY HERE FOR EXPLANATION
Before the season, Fangraphs ranked the M’s the #6 organization in all of baseball. Dave Cameron had the (mis)fortune of writing the article summarizing the Fangraphs analysts perspective.
SUBTHREAD CLOSED NOW. REALLY TRULY BANK VAULT LEVEL CLOSED
by pdb on Aug 9, 2010 3:11 PM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
I seriously didn't know, I wouldn't drop a [I guess] dead meme usually.
by EnglishMariner on Aug 9, 2010 3:18 PM PDT up reply actions
It's not so much a dead meme as a really sore point for a lot of people
I can give you details if you want to email me.
by pdb on Aug 9, 2010 3:20 PM PDT up reply actions
Fangraphs ranked every team, and the M's were rated as the sixth best organization.
Milton Bradley is my hero.
I don't think most people here have ever really liked a manager
That’s why I’m ambivalent about this. I feel like even if it’s a little bit better, the new manager is going to have some stupid habits that everyone will hate. And possibly, it could be much worse. For example, Dusty Baker is not under contract after this year.
Time to start dumping worthless players along with them?
Fuck the Angels
Possibly, but you still need players to be in the lineup
by seattlesundevil on Aug 9, 2010 1:23 PM PDT up reply actions
That's only half of four!
2010 Mariners – lowering expectations one at-bat at a time!
You can't blame the manager for having a shitty team
It never benefits anyone to fire a coach in the middle of the season either, sure the year has been awful, but how does wiping out the management going to fix anything? Bats will get worse, pitching will get worse, everything about the M’s will get worse now. I really do feel that everyone on the M’s who hadn’t already given up, has given up upon hearing this news. Would you give a shit to play for some minor league manager for a month and a half? No, no one would
A lot of these players are fighting to stay on a major league roster for next season.
So yes, they should give a shit.
They are still playing for their future.
And for personal pride.
I blame Wak for April 30th, 2010.
We would have won that game with invalid on the bench but he managed us to a loss.
At this point, I see no reason why they'd give more of a shit about playing for Wak.
Maybe Brown is their manager next year. It’s a definite possibility. They don’t know.
If every player is underperforming, maybe coaching has something to do with it. It’s not a logical leap or anything. And maybe players really didn’t like playing for Wak, and now playing for not Wak will create a better environment.
by Fuckmikereilly on Aug 9, 2010 1:32 PM PDT up reply actions
No.
If you’re unhappy with the job somebody is doing, if they aren’t helping you win or develop and aren’t coaching well in the opinion of the GM, the really bad thing to do, would be to string them along for another 6-7 weeks with the full intent to fire them, even though you know they won’t be around next season and you don’t like the job they are doing. Wak will get another job and soon – and getting fired in the middle of the season will help him do that sooner possibly.
by Kenneth Arthur on Aug 9, 2010 3:15 PM PDT up reply actions
He could read Jose Lopez's mind and figure out what on earth is going on in there
On the other hand Russian Roulette in the clubhouse might not go so well
This seems really unnecessary, especially at this point in the season. But, whatever....
Maybe now we’ll get Wak’s side of the story on the Figgins incident…..wishful thinking I’m sure. I just want the truth!
Milton Bradley apologist
I'm looking at my 2010 Mariner's Annual, and wondering how the hell it came to this.
Hard work never killed nobody, but I won't take my chances.
The headline for Shannon Drayer's RRS article has held up pretty well.
“How in the heck did I ever get to the big leagues?”
The best thing about writing w/o attribution is that I can disavow everything I wrote in that thing.
IF I wrote something in that thing at all.
IF there was a thing with writing in it.
I find this decision to be perfectly reasonable, but don't really understand the timing
echoing so many other sentiments, what’s the point?
But if you just bring on Daren Brown as an interim guy, you piss off your AAA affiliate by stealing their manager
and if it turns out you don’t want him to be the permanent guy, you still have to do the manager search anyway
Pissing or not pissing off the affiliate cannot be a deciding factor in these kinds of decisions
The minors are there to feed the big club. He can always go back to Tacoma, and he’ll have big league experience when/if he does.
Whoops, PDC is up this offseason.
I still wouldn’t imagine the Rainiers hooking up with anyone else though. They’ve been mobbed during the Pineda starts.
"Ever tried? Ever failed? No matter. Try again. Fail again. Fail better." - Samuel Beckett Mariners Minors
by JY on Aug 9, 2010 2:47 PM PDT up reply actions
I thought about this too, then decided it makes sense.
On one hand, letting him finish out a useless season allows you to start fresh in the offseason and build from there. On the other hand, if the majority of players are very unhappy with him and Wak doesn’t like how they are handling players from a development standpoint or whatever (plus Adair ruining people), why not start fixing that now?
Weird...
Jose Lopez’s name was missing from the press release.
by PLU Tim on Aug 9, 2010 1:36 PM PDT reply actions 7 recs
Ill-considered choice of joke on my part.
My apologies.
This graph is incomplete, as it doesn't have a "Nuke the site from orbit" for Rocky Horror Picture fans.
Hard work never killed nobody, but I won't take my chances.
by JAH on Aug 9, 2010 3:02 PM PDT up reply actions
Huh? What the fuck is this?
Exec texts Churchill and says “I have a feeling something huge is going down personnel wise this winter, and many up there won’t like it.”
From Prospect Insider twitter
Many up where?
The front office? The greater Seattle area?
JAC later states it wasn't in reference to GM
But players. Which, honestly? There might be a big roster shakeup? Whatever, it’s pointless speculation.
by Fuckmikereilly on Aug 9, 2010 1:49 PM PDT up reply actions
That already happened.
I can't resist clicking "Rec" when I see a post with four [of them] already.
by thehemogoblin on Aug 9, 2010 2:19 PM PDT up reply actions
They called it the Mariner Caravan
but it was a caravan in the same sense that Sherman once led a caravan. SW Washington has never been the same.
by pdb on Aug 9, 2010 2:26 PM PDT up reply actions
Thanks for bringing back all those memories.
According to my calculations, your problem doesn't exist.
by the other side on Aug 9, 2010 2:27 PM PDT up reply actions
Well, the fort did burn down a few years ago.
I can't resist clicking "Rec" when I see a post with four [of them] already.
by thehemogoblin on Aug 9, 2010 2:32 PM PDT up reply actions
We're bringing back witches?
Fantastic! Goody Longfellow had a career wOBA of .386!
Hard work never killed nobody, but I won't take my chances.
by JAH on Aug 9, 2010 2:28 PM PDT up reply actions
I read that.. didn't think it was worth repeating.
He got a text saying someone thinks something big is going to happen.
Shocking!!
by seattlesundevil on Aug 9, 2010 1:45 PM PDT up reply actions
With at least one vowel on their back.
by seattlesundevil on Aug 9, 2010 1:57 PM PDT up reply actions
It's nothing worth discussing at the moment because it's pure twitter speculation and we have absolutely zero details
by Jeff Sullivan on Aug 9, 2010 1:46 PM PDT up reply actions
9/11 would have started as twitter speculation if we had the twitter back then
Talk about Fail Whale! Hooboy.
by lemonverbena on Aug 9, 2010 1:48 PM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
Griffey player/manager/general manager
by Fuckmikereilly on Aug 9, 2010 1:46 PM PDT up reply actions
"The Seattle Mariner's would like to introduce it's new field manager: LUCIFER, THE FALLEN ONE, CROWN PRINCE OF DARKNESS."
Hard work never killed nobody, but I won't take my chances.
by JAH on Aug 9, 2010 1:48 PM PDT up reply actions
Is not afraid to speak out against his bosses!
Hard work never killed nobody, but I won't take my chances.
by JAH on Aug 9, 2010 1:50 PM PDT up reply actions
Though he may have learned his lesson.
Fuck the Angels
Mariners.
The plural of Mariner is Mariners. The team is known as the Seattle Mariners. Mariners.
by Eyebrows on Aug 9, 2010 1:53 PM PDT via mobile up reply actions
I typo'd the apostrophe. Should read Mariners'
Hard work never killed nobody, but I won't take my chances.
by JAH on Aug 9, 2010 1:54 PM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
Oh shit, no i didn't
Disregard. I am a retard
Hard work never killed nobody, but I won't take my chances.
by JAH on Aug 9, 2010 1:55 PM PDT up reply actions
Add the kitchen sink to the list of things destroyed by the 2010 Mariners
or maybe the bathtub (thanks Jack Wilson).
We knew all along this team wasn’t going to hit much, but nobody realized they would not hit their managerial staff out of town, their fan base out of the stadium and optimism away from the entire franchise.
Peace, Love and West Coast Hip Hop, Go Mariners!
by E2ESQUARE on Aug 9, 2010 1:45 PM PDT reply actions 1 recs
Next year's manager
Since you usually hire someone you’ve worked with before, I would have put Ned Yost on a shortlist before he landed the KC job. He may not exactly be on solid footing there, so could be an option for Mr. Zduriencik.
None of the managers at the MLB level while Jack was in Milwaukee were distinguished outside of Yost. It’s tough to find a list of minor league managers from that period.
The Seattle-KC train only runs in the opposite direction (except for Raul who got to make a u-turn).
by Eyebrows on Aug 9, 2010 1:54 PM PDT via mobile up reply actions
Bobby Valentine has worked with Z in New York
by seattlesundevil on Aug 9, 2010 1:55 PM PDT up reply actions
From the first managerial search, after Stone asked him:
“Bobby’s a very interesting candidate,” Zduriencik said. “He and I go way back. Where I go with that, I don’t know yet. I’m not positive. But we have a history together with the Mets, and I’ve certainly kept up with his career.” "
by msb on Aug 9, 2010 1:56 PM PDT up reply actions
Interesting
With Zduriencik’s scouting background, it’s funny that he had a relationship with Valentine.
Whoever the next manager is, he’ll probably have some kind of background in player evaluation considering how young the 2011 is likely to be.
Teams have consistently shied away from him.
The Orioles were rumored to have hired him before it fell through and some awkward quotes were exchanged.
There’s gotta be something up.
by Fuckmikereilly on Aug 9, 2010 2:09 PM PDT up reply actions
Thanks Buster...
Buster_ESPN
Heard this: There is a lot of unrest right now among some of the Mariners’ player development and scouting folks.
No shit! The entire coaching staff just got canned. You think they’re excited about it?
Shannon Drayer
is basically making a list of all the people close to Wak who are likely gone on ESPN right now.
Sooooo blunt. Jack Z is basically saying, "I'm in charge...what I say goes"
I fucking hate you Mariners
Thanks. GM's rarely word things like Jack Z has during the press conference.
I fucking hate you Mariners
Isn't Torre's contract up?
According to my calculations, your problem doesn't exist.
by the other side on Aug 9, 2010 2:12 PM PDT up reply actions
No thank you
Tony LaRussa averages one criminally indefensible double switch per 7 innings
by Robert on Aug 9, 2010 2:57 PM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
That would be
interesting to watch. A double switch during an American League game. Do we give up the DH?
by marinerschas2 on Aug 9, 2010 5:00 PM PDT up reply actions
Jack
I realize that our fans would like for me to go into great detail on how I arrived at this decision.
Seriously.. He is not sugarcoating anything here.
by seattlesundevil on Aug 9, 2010 2:13 PM PDT up reply actions
"I take full responsibility for this season..."
Fuck the Angels
As well he should.
That’s basically part of the job description when you get hired. If the product on the field sucks and you were responsible for signing the roster, well…
by eponymous_coward on Aug 9, 2010 2:17 PM PDT up reply actions
Not many other GM's say it though.
Fuck the Angels
Z is answering this section about "player motivation" entirely like I would want him to.
M's fan in PA, soon to be LA
A good 60% of baseball fans probably have never heard of Don.
That might be low.
According to my calculations, your problem doesn't exist.
by the other side on Aug 9, 2010 2:24 PM PDT up reply actions
I'm sorry, only one wild, speculative, pointless number guess a day.
According to my calculations, your problem doesn't exist.
by the other side on Aug 9, 2010 2:28 PM PDT up reply actions
Z completely tossed aside any accusations of Wak "losing the clubhouse".
He seemed irritated with those questions and any questions involving the name Griffey.
Fans are typically idiots.
by The Typical Idiot Fan on Aug 9, 2010 2:24 PM PDT reply actions
A year and a day after the Saturday, 8 August 2009 USSM/LL event at Safeco with Z and Blengino where everyone was at the peak of happiness with the franchise.
The night before was Langerhans’ walk-off against J.P. Howell. That day was Ian Snell’s Safeco debut. And the day after the event (exactly one year ago), was softbaLL where we listened to Branyan’s grand slam while we played. Man, a year is a long time.
Jon Heyman is reporting that Wakamatsu has been fired.
by Robert on Aug 9, 2010 3:09 PM PDT reply actions 13 recs
Well, that's a bummer
I suppose I’m not upset about it.
As long as we kept Wakamatsu, I felt like I could hold on to the hope that everything was going to be all right. When he was hired, he was the guy who was getting us to the World Series, something I clang to until an hour ago. As long as he was still around, I could deny there was a problem and just assume we’d rebound eventually and the team as constructed was still pretty good.
This forces me to face the fact that we’re bad and GMZ isn’t a god. That makes me sad.
Determined, Jonesing Commentor
by Corco on Aug 9, 2010 3:10 PM PDT reply actions 1 recs
JESUS TITTYFUCKING A MARMOT I CANT BELIEVE IT
by abender20 on Aug 9, 2010 3:17 PM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
I've been reading like a madman to get to this
Now I kind of want to fire up a cigarette.
This is complete crap.
I’m sorry, but Wak doesn’t deserve this. Jack Z is a total liar and it’s moves like this that make me upset, not losses. Personally, I like to believe that we are part of an organization that treats both its players and other employees with respect, and this doesn’t even come close. You can’t blame Wak, Adair, and the other coaches who were obviously somewhat responsible for last year’s turn around with this year’s hardships. You have to turn to the players, first and foremost. After all, by the time you’re to the majors, you should be able to perform consistently, regardless of what one coach in your lifetime tells you.
Dear M’s, learn to treat your team with respect and maybe then wins can happen.
Felix winked at me. My life is now complete.
I'm sorry, but I stopped reading at "Total liar"
what proof do you have that this is the case? What has he “totally lied” about?
by pdb on Aug 9, 2010 3:33 PM PDT up reply actions
Oh and I just finished reading
Personally, I like to believe that we are part of an organization that treats both its players and other employees with respect
Do you work for the Mariners? If not, then you’re not actually part of the organization, respect or otherwise.
by pdb on Aug 9, 2010 3:35 PM PDT up reply actions 3 recs
I don't think this reasoning is sound.
Players don’t have to like a coach, for the coach to be good. Some of the best coaches I ever had, I fucking hated their guts. I think the underlying problem of the pissed off subordinates is his lack of control in the clubhouse.
According to my calculations, your problem doesn't exist.
by the other side on Aug 9, 2010 3:44 PM PDT up reply actions
I was agreeing that he should have been fired.
According to my calculations, your problem doesn't exist.
by the other side on Aug 9, 2010 3:48 PM PDT up reply actions
And Wak continues to be paid through 2011, by the way
Which further reduces the need for “respect”. He is respected with fat paychecks and ample opportunity—before positions become available—to find his next job.
What.
"Ever tried? Ever failed? No matter. Try again. Fail again. Fail better." - Samuel Beckett Mariners Minors
by JY on Aug 9, 2010 3:47 PM PDT up reply actions
Right I get what you're saying it's just phrased awkwardly.
Your point is that they’re not exactly leaving him out in the cold.
"Ever tried? Ever failed? No matter. Try again. Fail again. Fail better." - Samuel Beckett Mariners Minors
by JY on Aug 9, 2010 3:51 PM PDT up reply actions
It was poorly worded
But that’s pretty much the point. A major-league manager doesn’t anticipate respect when the team is losing and spiraling out of control. He expects his ass handed to him on a platter. This is the big leagues.
Oh fuck....
# Ryan Divish TNTmariners Basically it was 30 minutes of no specific reasons for the firings … It’s like a parent saying “Because I said so.” To a kid. #Mariners 13 minutes ago via TweetDeck
# Ryan Divish TNTmariners Jack Z took full responsibility for the firings of Wak and the coaches. You could feel eyes rolling in the press conference. #Mariners
Jack lost the media! Game over!
"Ever tried? Ever failed? No matter. Try again. Fail again. Fail better." - Samuel Beckett Mariners Minors
The firing of Wakamatsu doesn't really irritate me in the slightest...
however, having now 7 managers in 9 years and having a midseason coaching change in 3 of the last 4 years (Hargrove was a different situation obviously) makes me feel really unrested and I hope we get a guy in and he coaches for more than 2 seasons.
Yes!
According to my calculations, your problem doesn't exist.
by the other side on Aug 9, 2010 3:41 PM PDT up reply actions
Some really negative tweeting from our local media about Jack Z's handling of this.
There is no floor!
So....No Playoffs?
According to my calculations, your problem doesn't exist.
by the other side on Aug 9, 2010 3:52 PM PDT up reply actions
Fuck Yeah!
According to my calculations, your problem doesn't exist.
by the other side on Aug 9, 2010 3:53 PM PDT up reply actions
Funny to watch when someone the placid Seattle media regards as a swell guy gets unceremoniously tossed overboard
You have to go alllll the way back to Jim Mora to find another example.
All I want is a Mariner team full of Barry Bondses and Albert Belles and Roberto Alomars managed by Billy Martin
in addition to winning a shit-ton of ballgames, it would alienate almost everybody in Seattle which would be awesome.
by pdb on Aug 9, 2010 3:59 PM PDT up reply actions
Dude his name's spelled Ensberg
If you’re gonna sig it and promote him at least get it right.
/end pedantry
by pdb on Aug 9, 2010 4:01 PM PDT up reply actions
Stupidly enough...
Right above the box is the correct spelling. >_>
Morgan Ensberg for Manager 2011!
I'll be interested in hearing Waks story of about this year.
Maybe in a few years when the teams hasn’t been as shitty.
I would love that as well.
Milton Bradley apologist
by sanford_and_son on Aug 9, 2010 4:21 PM PDT up reply actions
Well, I think he might have fell out of favor with Dave Niehaus.
He’s made some not so subtle digs at Wak lately, particularly about playing for one run in the first inning.
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recent FanPosts
In Association With
Big League Stew - MLB - Yahoo! Sports
- The Juice: Nelson Cruz matches career high eight RBIs, Pujols stays hot in Seattle
- Benches clear at Fenway as Red Sox-Rays rivalry heats up
- Keeping good company: Albert Pujols becomes fourth-youngest player to hit 450 home runs
- Giancarlo Stanton misses cutoff man, and Logan Morrison is thankful he did (Video)
- Snoop Dogg delivers memorable first pitch at U.S. Cellular Field
