Navigation: Jump to content areas:


Pro Quality. Fan Perspective.
Login-facebook
Around SBN: Knicks Beat Lakers With Familiar Strategy

The Baseball Case For/Against Carl Everett

Everybody knows that Carl Everett is a stark raving lunatic. He's said and done some strange and terrible things in his life, and he ranks near the top of the list of abrasive malcontents who play professional baseball. On the other side of the coin, though, Everett's played for a number of good teams without causing so much as a stir, and the champion White Sox had all sorts of nice things to say about his clubhouse demeanor.

Is Carl Everett a nice guy? I don't see any reason to believe that he is, but given that nobody has any idea how much weight we should put on player personality when it comes to building a successful roster (there have been arguments made for anything from "none" to "all of it"), I thought it would be worthwhile to look at this from a strictly baseball standpoint. Why is Carl Everett a good idea? Why isn't he? How do dinosaurs tie into all this?

SIGN THE GUY!

The Mariners don't have too many requirements for the bat they're looking to add this winter - whoever it is just has to be a relatively inexpensive left-handed hitter who can play the outfield a little bit if need be. Everett meets all three.

Let's tackle these in order. Inexpensive? Everett's your guy. Depending on who you believe, he's going to wind up with a one-year commitment worth somewhere between $3-4m. The benefit is that it leaves the Mariners with a lot of money to throw at the rotation without tying them to a two- or three-year guarantee. Carl Everett isn't a long-term solution to anything, but he's one of the better options available in a thin market, and you can ditch him for somebody else next November without being on the hook for the rest of his decline phase. Short-term contracts are a wonderful thing.

Left-handed? Sort of, in that Everett's a switch-hitter who spends most of his time batting lefty. The overwhelming majority of his home runs get yanked to right field, and as a fly ball hitter, that's the kind of thing that bodes well for a successful season in Safeco Field. Everett isn't a pull hitter of the same magnitude as Jeromy Burnitz, but he's not Ichiro, either, so he could get a bit of a power boost in Seattle.

Play the outfield? Sure, why not? It obviously wouldn't be his primary role - were Everett to sign, left field would be Ibanez's job - but Raul needs a rest from time to time, and Everett has 1,098 games of outfield experience. Not only does that mean a fresher Raul Ibanez down the stretch, but it also takes some of the 4th OF responsibility away from Willie Ballgame, which can only be good for the standings.

Carl Everett is no one's ideal DH, but on a cheap one-year deal, he could do some good things for the Mariners and help them towards a playoff push.

I'D LIKE TO ISSUE A PRE-EMPTIVE DECREE OF DAMNATIO MEMORIAE

Two years ago, Carl Everett might've looked like a good idea. 217 games and 593 outs later, though, not so much. He's a platoon player in the middle stages of a well-established decline, his body no longer capable of holding up under the wear and tear of a Major League season. His acquisition would do little, if anything, to help the Mariners win more games.

Where do you start? Everett hit .251/.311/.435 last year in something of a hitter's paradise, collecting the majority of his at bats as a DH because he can't play defense anymore. The year before, he put up a .260/.319/.402 batting line in roughly 300 plate appearances, too, so it's not like this is a one-time thing. Could he rebound? Sure, it's possible, but it's unlikely - Everett turns 35 next June, an age at which not even the spectacularly anomalous Bret Boone could maintain his sudden career revival. Everett was once a fairly athletic guy, and looked like he might age well, but now his body is something of a bloated mess, and there exists the distinct possibility that he's on the brink of total collapse. The odds of decline have to be considered greater than the odds of improvement, here. Safeco could mask some of that, but even then, we're estimating that he ends up breaking even with his 2005 batting line.

To make matters worse, Everett can't touch left-handed pitchers, meaning that you'd either be coughing up outs in crucial games against division rivals, or paying him to play in a max of 115-120 games. His career OPS is 17.6% worse against southpaws than it is against righties, which starts to look worse and worse the more a player declines. I'm not saying it's that hard to find a DH platoon mate who can hit lefties a little bit, but it's certainly an inconvenience.

Of course, could we even depend on Everett to be healthy when we need him to be? Since finally breaking into the league in 1995, he's played in an average of just 72% of his team's games, never surpassing 147 in a season. He was reasonably healthy for last year's White Sox, but his lower body has always been a problem, with nagging hamstring and groin problems flaring up from time to time and almost completely sapping him of his footspeed and agility. If you sign Carl Everett to be an everyday player (or close to one, anyway), you need to have a replacement in mind, because that guy's all but guaranteed to stumble into considerable playing time.

Because Everett's range has, for all intents and purposes, disintegrated to the point of negligibility, he can't come in and contribute anything in the field - rather, he forces Raul Ibanez into an outfield corner 140 times a year, which isn't good news for a pitching staff that's going to need all the help it can get in a big ballpark with lots of room for fly balls. On top of that, you still have to deal with the fact that a guy who put up a .745 OPS a year ago is your regular DH. Since 2000, the league-average DH has hit .264/.345/.447, meaning that Everett would have to experience a significant career rejuvenation just to provide average production. That's bad. You know how you always hear guys talking about players in the minors who can hit, but who can't play the field for beans? Those guys are everywhere - everywhere - and several of them could probably provide better offense than Carl Everett.

See, nobody should be comparing Everett to other available corner outfielders - they should be comparing him to everyone capable of swinging a bat, since that's all the Mariners would be asking him to do in 2006. What do you expect from a replacement-level DH? Something like .250/.300/.400? Does Everett really represent a $3-$4m improvement on that kind of performance? All you really need to do is sign the next Bucky Jacobsen for the league minimum and try to act surprised when he equals or exceeds Everett's batting line. Here's one candidate. There are tons of others.

Signing Carl Everett isn't going to kill the team; that kind of thing doesn't happen with one-year contracts. However, it's unlikely to make the Mariners any better, and in that respect Bill Bavasi might be better off using the $3-$4m to build a really impressive fort out of ermine sofa cushions. It's the dreaded lateral step - by itself, it's not a real big deal, but these kinds of things add up, and before long you finish the season two games out, wondering what you could've done different.

This guy's far more likely to create problems than he is to solve any. Avoid Carl Everett. He's all downside.

Comment 45 comments  |  0 recs  | 

Do you like this story?

Comments

Display:

Someone Had To Do It
so I'll take the positive approach...

Everett while not a big time signing wouldn't be a useless cog in the machine either.  Now while its true that Everett's overall numbers were quite Meh in the grand scheme of things, looking at his splits closely, you have to notice that for whatever reason he bit the big one in the hitter friendly confines of Chicago's home stadium, to a tune of .217/.285/.438.... so that means his away numbers were .282/.334/.431.

Now while those away numbers in an above themselves are spectacular his .766 Ops last year on the road would have made him the 4th most productive hitter on the M's going strictly by road numbers.  

Now Everett may be losing something in the field, but he's not going to be playing a premium defensive position in LF... and rotating into DH.

Even though Everett doesn't hit left handers very well, finding a platoon partner for him means keeping a Morse or someone like that in a backup role to face the occasional left handed starter.  Gives experience to a young guy, and keeps Everett rested as well.

Finally, one of the big complaints about the M's is that they haven't had any one in the clubhouse to kick butts and challenge people.  Well the one thing that Carl Everett will bring to the club is a take no guff attitude.. quite often its over the top, but if that attitude lights a fire under some of the younger guys, then its just an added bonus.

by MfaninAlaska on Dec 13, 2005 10:56 PM PST reply actions  

Butt-kicking only works if...
the butt kicker is respected by the butt kickee.  If the butt kickee thinks the butt kicker is a selfish nut-job, its only going to make matters worse.

by KC @ Lookout Landing on Dec 13, 2005 11:15 PM PST up reply actions  

and yet
that selfish nut-job was able to not destroy a team that won the World Series.   WHile he may have some issues... somehow it usually seems to be with management and not other players...

So basically he's like pretty much every Mariner fan right now... not a big fan of management and speaks out against them.

The M's have had similar versions... Jeff Nelson has acted like Everett when it comes to management... Nelson has even had run ins with Fans...

So again.. I could care less if he's selfish, if he believes in little green men.. or what.. If he produces on the field that's what he's being paid for... if he becomes a detriment to the team... then like others before him he'll be jettisoned.

by MfaninAlaska on Dec 13, 2005 11:20 PM PST up reply actions  

As much as I hate to support Everett
you have a point. He is a significant risk to go Carl at any moment, but if he can do what he's paid to do next season, so be it. One year stop gap is all this is.

by Trent on Dec 14, 2005 11:24 AM PST up reply actions  

"if"
I think it's silly to pay 3-4 million for someone to give you marginal numbers at DH, when you can find any number of other players who can give close to that level of performance, and leave you with millions to spend elsewhere.

This is all the same BS I heard about Ruben Sierra in 2002 ("Hey, he's a veteran bat who can help fill in for a year!"), and in the best case scenario, it plays out the same way: you get an empty .270 hitter who's bad in the field and a poor DH when compared to anyone else.

In the worst case scenario, he does a Scott Spiezio/Jeff Cirillo style belly flop (very possible due to age), except instead of whining about playing time he goes Crazy Carl instead. To the tune of 3-4 million dollars, which could well be the difference between Scott Elarton and Kevin Millwood's salary this year.

This isn't Rogers Hornsby or Ted Williams we are talking about here- where the talent justifies the asshole factor. And comparing to Jeff Nelson IS apropos- because Nelson didn't help a bad team win in 2005 because while he's marginally useful, he's not very useful or enough to push anyone over the hump, and Everett isn't going to improve a bad team in 2006; at best he stops some bleeding, which we also could do pulling random guys like Aaron Guiel or Ben Grieve off the street and giving them shots. So why risk any headaches?

by eponymous coward on Dec 14, 2005 1:18 PM PST up reply actions  

I understand your point, but...
I would agree with you IF he was a productive bat.  He just isn't.  He certainly isn't worth 4 mil, even if it is just one year.
On the other hand, I don't believe Jones is the answer either.  Unless we can add a Mench or Wilkerson type player, which would be difficult given our lack of depth, I don't really think we should do anything.  Save the money for pitching.

by KC @ Lookout Landing on Dec 13, 2005 11:30 PM PST reply actions  

This is the type of trade...
happening often this winter.  The M's simply don't have the talent to pull this type of deal off (not that Vazquez would come to Seattle anyway) --
mlb.com
"PHOENIX -- It appears the Diamondbacks and White Sox are close to a deal that would send Javier Vazquez to Chicago in exchange for pitcher Orlando "El Duque" Hernandez and highly regarded outfielder Chris Young."

by KC @ Lookout Landing on Dec 13, 2005 11:35 PM PST reply actions  

was just reading that
White Sox sure are giving up alot of their younger players.. first Rowand, now Young... Young's stats in the minors were pretty impressive, even if he hadn't gotten past AA ball yet.

by MfaninAlaska on Dec 13, 2005 11:42 PM PST up reply actions  

Rowand
turns 29 next year, not exactly young for baseball.

by Matthew on Dec 14, 2005 4:47 AM PST up reply actions  

I'll say it again.
The only way I want to see the word "Everett" associated with the Mariners is when it's followed by the word "Aquasox".
Marinerds - a different daily dose of baseblog.

by Deanna on Dec 14, 2005 1:06 AM PST reply actions  

It's a good point
that if you are looking at Everett, you should be comparing him to ANYONE who can hit, and in that, Everett fails miserably. If the guy could post a 800 OPS than the signing is good. If they guy could play the OF, the signing is good, but he can't do either. The signing is sub-optimal. It's not exactly bad, because Everett will likely be better than our current in-house options (though I'm not sold on that), but there's just BETTER and/or CHEAPER options out there.

What do you think Nomar would cost? He can hit when healthy. Or over at USSM, somebody (sorry forgot your name) posted a list of 24 guys who were either MiFA or blocked would had favorable hitting projections and were cheap. Why doesn't Bavasi have someone to bring that idea to his attention? And if he does, why is he ignoring it? 3-4 million isn't much, but it's more than the difference (albeit also with an extra year or two) between Washburn and Millwood. Or Washburn and a better bench. Or just something else.

by Matthew on Dec 14, 2005 5:01 AM PST reply actions  

I think I just threw up a little in my mouth...
Who was the guy going around saying that this Carl Everett signing rumor was just a rumor put out there by the M's to use at the bargaining table?

by manyoso on Dec 14, 2005 6:04 AM PST reply actions  

Up until Monday...
That was me.  It was the buzz that I'd heard, but have since been told otherwise.  This thing is serious, folks!

SHIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII

t.

by PositivePaul on Dec 14, 2005 8:58 AM PST up reply actions  

But, then again...
I'm praying fervantly that Everett has a nightmare tonight involving T-Rex and Velociraptors.  Or that it really is a negotiating tactic to get Burnitz to drop his multi-year contract demands...

by PositivePaul on Dec 14, 2005 9:50 AM PST up reply actions  

Hi Jeff
the problem I have with signing Everett are this: 1. I think the M's are a couple years away from contending. Signing him to a one year deal to save money makes absolutely no sense. If they want to save money put Choo in left. 2. Everett has been a model citizen in the clubhouse on contending teams but again, are the M's going to be contenders? If they aren't, and quite frankly they have done nothing to the starting rotation that would lead me to believe they would be, where does that leave Everett? Well, about 3000 miles from home on a losing team at the tail end of a career. I don't know about you but I see bad Carl written all over that recipe. 3. You mentioned, "but given that nobody has any idea how much weight we should put on player personality when it comes to building a successful roster". Signing Everett to a one year deal IMO isn't necessarily building a roster but rather settling for a cheap alternative born from desperation. Again, the M's have averaged 90+ loses the last couple of seasons and there is no indication that this year they will be contenders.  If the M's were contenders and needed some extra sock from the left side then by all means seek the services of a mercenary like Everett. As it stands now though the M's are a long way from contending and need to address their SP woes ASAP.  
"Bo Junior. After my dad. That's just straight redneck-ology, right there." --Blue Jay B.J. Ryan, on how his given name "Robert Victor" became "B.J."

by AgentProvocateur @ Lookout Landing on Dec 14, 2005 7:06 AM PST reply actions  

born from desperation
is a good way to put it.  There can't be any other explanation.

by KC @ Lookout Landing on Dec 14, 2005 7:17 AM PST up reply actions  

I don't like the signing either
  1.  For everyone who continue to press Shin-Soo Choo as an option in LF... Choo is nowhere near major league ready.  He looked helpless and lost at the end of last year.  Guys on the verge of contributing next season don't freeze up and stare at hittable called strikes, or take the Family Circus route around the outfield during a routine fly.  Morse might be more competent, but expecting anything more than replacement level play out of him isn't realistic given his lukewarm minor league numbers, his defensive struggles in '05 and how quickly he cooled at the plate after his hot start.
  2.  Agreed on the circumstances: the idea that he has to 'soul-search' to consider leaving his home and play across the country all year for a guy as troubled as Carl is a bit troubling.  It just doesn't work for Carl in so many ways, plus much of our fanbase is ready to roast the guy before his first AB.  In most other circumstances he was to a great extent welcomed and THEN wore out his welcome.  And most of those clubs were decent or winning teams with a fighting chance at the postseason.
  3.  Actually, several of us have looked at the current roster compared to last year's Opening Day, and we're already far better than we were then.  Gone:  The Boone, Wilson Valdez, Player A, Aaron Sele, probably Ryan Franklin, hopefully Gil Meche, Dave Hansen, Olivo, (much as it pains me to put it this way) Dan Wilson.  The guys that replaced them have shown they can hit better and given our starting pitchers last year were below replacement level, I can't imagine whoever we bring in to pitch could do much worse (yeah, even Scott Elarton).  I didn't even mention Johjima.  Without any additions and without any improvement from Reed, Betancourt, Lopez or Beltre, and even with a Kaz Matsui-like performance from Johjima, this club has a shot at .500.

by Gomez on Dec 14, 2005 9:08 AM PST up reply actions  

Pressing concerns
I agree with you in that I don't think Choo is ready for primetime. I wasn't pressing that the M's make him their LF but rather if this soon to be Carl Everett signing is nothing but a one year cost cutting measure, as it appears to be, then why not just play Choo and give him valuable ML AB's? I'm all for giving Everett a chance but this move makes absolutely no sense to me. Also you have to remember that going into last season the infield of Sexson, Beltre, Boone and Reese looked to be one of the most formidable in the game. Beltre never really "adjusted", Boone lost his edge (not to mention his stroke), Reese got hurt and of the four only Sexson delivered the type of year we M's fans were expecting. Of course our crappy offense was magnified by the horrible starting pitching. Does this team have a shot at .500, absolutely. Are they contenders? I don't think so.
"the dumbest player I've ever met." --Larry Bowa, on Vincente Padilla

by AgentProvocateur @ Lookout Landing on Dec 14, 2005 9:52 AM PST up reply actions  

It makes no sense to me either
There are dozens of cheap options that could give us what Carl brings to the table offensively, and some can even play the field reasonably well.  I can't see the reasoning behind the signing other than Carl's a 'name' with 'credentials', which I believe was the same rationale behind signing Aaron Sele last year.

I see your reasoning on LF.  Platooning Choo and Morse 50/50 with Morse facing some of the better righty starters, to build Choo's confidence, wouldn't be a terrible idea.

And love the new sig quote.  I also can't believe what Padilla said about playing for Texas.

by Gomez on Dec 14, 2005 10:11 AM PST up reply actions  

Why not
throw that extra 3-4 million at Millwood.  Add an extra bump on the 06 salary, and use any warm body as a dh, since that warm body is likely to 1) produce nearly as well, if not as well or better than, Carl Everett, and 2) not piss of the fans, teammates, front office, and media.

I've been kind to Bavasi in the last year or so.  But this is the kind of signing that gets the "fire" chants started.  If he follows this up with trading Jeremy Reed, and we have an outfield of Ibanez, Ichiro (in center - Finnigan now reports he's willing), and Everett, Bavasi does not deserve a career in baseball.

by david h on Dec 14, 2005 7:35 AM PST reply actions  

It's all about the Posse's
...and this could officially be the beginning of the Jamie Moyer's Posse got in a fistacuffs with members of Carl Everett's alleged cult late Saturday night at a prostate cancer awareness rally the two Mariners were sponsoring.

After their brief love affair a few years back when Moyer and Everett shared a moment with each other's prostate, as Everett rounded the bases after a long ball, the two have teamed up to fight cancer and raise awareness of unchecked testicles.  

by jalopy37 on Dec 14, 2005 9:05 AM PST reply actions  

Maybe we should do this
http://www.savetoby.com/

but change it to say if the Mariners sign Carl Everett we will kill a cute bunny.

by Scruffy Lefty on Dec 14, 2005 10:26 AM PST reply actions  

Heh heh
He is my friend.  But as God is my witness, I will kill and eat him if Carl Everett is not traded by Opening Day 2006.

by Gomez on Dec 14, 2005 12:15 PM PST up reply actions  

I've thought about it
and read all your complains and believe me, I was once in your shoes.  I'm starting to change my opinion from "This is horrible" to "This doesn't change too much".  Adding Everett to our team doesn't make us a worst team or make us lose games.  Everett is basically going to take Hanson's place on the team.  Sure Everett might be a little crazy but oh well.  If I remember right, Brian Blades (former Seahawk) actually killed somebody.  Everett sure as heck isn't going to kill people, he might just be a little off.  The best part of this deal is that it is a one year deal.  This means that if he shows up and pisses everybody off, we can just cut him and not worry about it.  If he has an OPS higher than .500, we become a better team.  If you platoon him at DH with Morse, we can get way higher than .500 from the DH position.

Plus, if anybody says that they aren't going to go to Mariner games anymore because management didn't do what you want, I'm calling your bluff right now.  Throughout your life you will need to learn to deal with not getting everything you want and you might as well start now.  Am I disappointed that we got Everett instead of more interesting players?  Yes.  Does it mean that the Mariners are signifigantly worse getting Everett compared to Player B?  No.

by Edgar for Pres on Dec 14, 2005 11:41 AM PST reply actions  

Seriously, dude.
Mariner games cost me a lot of money to watch in person. It isn't all the hard for me to say 'screw it' for a year and just watch on MLB tv which is nice and cheap for overseas watchers. Call my bluff all you want.

by Graham MacAree on Dec 14, 2005 11:45 AM PST up reply actions  

I meant
not watch the mariners too.  There have been some people who sounded like they were thinking about leaving baseball all together and that is BS.

by Edgar for Pres on Dec 14, 2005 12:08 PM PST up reply actions  

Not the point
The point is that you can get either the same or better offensive production for not 4 million dollars. That is 4 million dollars that is NOT being spent on better players. Or how about the idea that Carl Everett + Ryan Franklin + Gil Meche salary = Millwood salary.

It's not a "bad" signing the way Russ Ortiz was a bad signing, but it's still dumb. Less dumb is still dumb.

by Matthew on Dec 14, 2005 12:23 PM PST up reply actions  

Yeah
but its not a horrible signing, its just below average signing.  I think they still have plenty of $$$ to go get Milwood and maybe even Weaver if they want to stretch it.

by Edgar for Pres on Dec 14, 2005 12:45 PM PST up reply actions  

RE
I think the M's had about $15 M to spend before this signing, probably less.

by Graham MacAree on Dec 14, 2005 2:08 PM PST up reply actions  

It's not about...
getting everything you want. I don't expect that. I wanted AJ Burnett, but I knew we wouldn't get him. I want Kevin Millwood but we probably won't get him. There are much better players out there that cost less that could easily give us what Everett could. I'd rather have Thornton and Franklin back than have Carl Everett because he's crazy and I have no tolerance for people that beat their kids (I know, allegedly, but those bruises around the neck didn't get there by themselves). This guy is bad news and not only will Everett turn off a lot of fans, he'll probably piss off the players too and that means more than anything. I have no problem watching all the games on TV, but the M's aren't getting my cash or my butt in a seat if they sign him. They can sign anyone else to play left and I'd still go.

by basebliman on Dec 14, 2005 2:39 PM PST up reply actions  

his wife is who beat his kids
check out the story before using it to pass judgement.

by Matthew on Dec 14, 2005 3:25 PM PST up reply actions  

It says...
he whipped his kid with a belt. That's child abuse in my book. Spanking with a hand is one thing, but using a belt is abuse in my book. His wife may have caused the neck bruises, but he hasn't helped by whipping his kids with a belt and not seeming to object to his wife's disciplinary action. They were both charged with abuse, so I'm not just passing judgment. Unless the snippet from an article on USSMariner was untrue.

by basebliman on Dec 14, 2005 4:09 PM PST up reply actions  

My Dad Spanked me with a belt
and it wasn't Child Abuse... not in my book.  In this day and age what is and what isn't child abuse is a very murky line, so I'm not going to label him anything.

This is all irrelevant to what the M's hired him to do.... play baseball.  

Personally I prefer to not worry about what he has done away from the field, what he's been accused of, or what he believes in.  Alot of people have much different beliefs as well as beliefs in what actions are and aren't appropriate.  If he gets out of line then I'm sure the M's will handle it.

I doubt there would be outrage if the M's signed Barry Bonds and he's no model citizen either.  So for me... I'll deal with the baseball side of the signing and not the person that he is side of it.  There are a billion bad apples in baseball, Everett just happens to be more well known for it than others.

by MfaninAlaska on Dec 14, 2005 4:20 PM PST up reply actions  

EXACTLY!
What does not believing in dinosaurs and whipping your kids with a belt have to do with playing baseball?

Not a damn thing.

I was also spanked with a belt as a kid, and I probably deserved.Hell I've spanked my little brother a few times.Not abuse in my book.

But thats not the point, the point is that none of it has to do with playing baseball, which is what he's being paid to do.

Who else but Quaqmire? giggity, giggity, giggity, giggity Let's Have SEX!!

by Goose on Dec 14, 2005 4:43 PM PST up reply actions  

Agreed...
...but the baseball side is, on the best-case side, very "meh".

The team's gone from signing "meh" players who are Boy Scouts to signing "meh" players who are asshats. That's not an improvement, in my book.

The bottom line, though, is that Dave's right at USSM: he won't stay in the lineup if he's a disaster, and he'll end up getting a Scott Spiezio/Bret Boone "thanks, but get your .180-hitting, clubhouse-poisoning ass out of our clubhouse" release come June if he's a trainwreck. The problem is we don't get that 3 million back, and if I'm seeing Jeff Weaver or Scott Elarton on the mound instead of Kevin Millwood because of some bizarre desire to have Carl Everett on our team...well, odds are this will be one of the last mistakes Bavasi gets to make as a Mariner GM.

by eponymous coward on Dec 14, 2005 4:50 PM PST up reply actions  

if Kevin Millwood doesnt sign here
it sure and the hell wont be because of an Everett signing.

Drive me nuts to hear people say things like that.

Who else but Quaqmire? giggity, giggity, giggity, giggity Let's Have SEX!!

by Goose on Dec 14, 2005 5:13 PM PST up reply actions  

The guy is a tool...
whether or not he is a child abusing tool is evidently a matter of opinion.
"the dumbest player I've ever met." --Larry Bowa, on Vincente Padilla

by AgentProvocateur @ Lookout Landing on Dec 14, 2005 4:28 PM PST up reply actions  

Ok sorry
I tried to be optimistic about this signing but it just doesn't feel right.  I just don't like it deep down inside.  He just doesn't offer anything to this young team that we have.  I really can't think of anything good about this signing.  Basically, we overpaid for something that we could  have gotten elsewhere.  I really don't care about his personality, its just that he isn't that great and his contract is alittle on the expensive side.

by Edgar for Pres on Dec 14, 2005 4:53 PM PST up reply actions  

he was charged
with neglect, his wife with abuse.

by Matthew on Dec 14, 2005 4:19 PM PST reply actions  

Speaking of tools...
The Treasury Dept. needs to get a life.

http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/news/story?id=2259278

"the dumbest player I've ever met." --Larry Bowa, on Vincente Padilla

by AgentProvocateur @ Lookout Landing on Dec 14, 2005 4:36 PM PST reply actions  

Agreed, thats redicolous
Let them play.
Who else but Quaqmire? giggity, giggity, giggity, giggity Let's Have SEX!!

by Goose on Dec 14, 2005 4:44 PM PST up reply actions  

First steroids...
then the BCS, and now this. What business is it of the government how a private organization runs things, as long as it's not illegal (which steroids are, so them getting involved in that doesn't bother me too much). Sports are not a Federal organization for God's sake! Jeez!

by basebliman on Dec 14, 2005 5:21 PM PST up reply actions  

Maybe the Cubans can do like...
big U.S. corporations that are forbidden from doing business in certain countries and say they are from the Caymen Islands?
"the dumbest player I've ever met." --Larry Bowa, on Vincente Padilla

by AgentProvocateur @ Lookout Landing on Dec 14, 2005 5:30 PM PST up reply actions  

What?
Are they afraid that the entire Cuban team's gonna defect, and that Castro's gonna nuke us for it?

by Gomez on Dec 14, 2005 5:55 PM PST up reply actions  

Comments For This Post Are Closed


User Tools

By reading a game thread of your own volition you agree to accept all liability for any and all damage done to your delicate sensibilities.

FanPosts

Community blog posts and discussion.

Recommended FanPosts

Moar_bacon_small
Everything I Know About Jesus Montero

Recent FanPosts

Wbc_029_small
Friday Morning Music Thread
Small
OTDOD - Early February Edition
Agentejebaox3_small
A Statistical Analysis of Mariners' Fan Support
Small
Who will have a better season?
Claw_small
BA's Top 10 M's Prospects
Wbc_029_small
Friday Morning Music Thread
Small
Munenori Kawasaki Predictions!!!
Small
The Longevity and Future Success of Felix Hernandez.
Small
The present vs future conundrum

+ New FanPost All FanPosts >


Sexy People

Wbc_029_small Jeff Sullivan

Small Matthew