Down the stretch of the 2010 baseball season, I had a reasonable hope that the Mariners would avoid a 100 loss season. Small consolation though it may be, we could at least say that the Mariners' season would not be among their worst in franchise history. It didn't happen that way, getting swept in the final series of the season. The Mariners certainly garnered attention, though it was not the attention that I was hoping it would be at the beginning of the season. All season the Mariners ranked at the bottom or near the bottom in runs scored, and with Cleveland finally breaking out the bats the M's secured dead last in baseball in scoring, holding consistent with their offensive struggles in the last nine years. Furthermore, with an abysmal September, the Mariners final offensive numbers ranked among the worst any American League team has ever put out since the advent of the designated hitter. An article in the Seattle Times cited a writer who said that the Mariners' offense ranks as one of the ten worst offenses in the last twenty years of baseball. All of this absolutely pulled the rug from under what was actually an above average pitching performance this year. This is becoming a familiar song for the Mariners and I think it's time to start considering reasons for this. Although Safeco Field actually yields more home runs than a few other parks in baseball, to me there seems to just be something about the dynamics of the Safe that do not favor particular offenses. Maybe because it seems like a hitter has to hit the ball six miles to get it out of left center field. I'm not sure, but I simply can't ever see the M's, even with hitting talent, being able to hit long balls in their home park.

Jack Z's email to the fans shortly after the season ended was attempted to reassure them that talent was brewing at all levels of the franchise's farm system. Perhaps he's right. The difficult thing about that is that there's never any assurance that it's going to pan out at the top level. I also have a hard time really trusting Jack Z's assessment of our farm system because other scouts have also described the same farm system as “barren”. At this point, it seems to be all the M's can really count on since the likelihood of us signing a major bat over the offseason is incredibly slim. It's disheartening to think that there really may be no solution, and the Mariners might find themselves in the doldrums that have sucked up the Pirates, the Expos/Nationals, the Royals, and the Orioles. The Tigers and the Twins only relatively recently escaped those doldrums and have been able to put up a consistently winning product. It truly is scary to think that some teams are bad not for years at a time, but decades at a time. There is no real assurance that the M's aren't finding themselves in the same situation right now. The only thing the M's might have for them now that the others don't necessarily have is a payroll that will not fill the bottom of baseball. The reality is that it takes years of harvesting draft picks and players, where major setbacks cost a team for years and can't simply be bought off by an expensive free agent like the Yankees and Red Sox seem to be able to do. It's a scary situation to be in.

2010 was described by one Seattle Times writer as the worst year in franchise history. Though the win/loss record certainly puts it up there, the immense amount of hope that was cast on this season by many writers who pointed to the Cliff Lee trade and the acquisition of Chone Figgins combined with the development of other plays such as Franklin Gutierrez and Jose Lopez as reason to believe that the Mariners could really put something together it what was expected to be a weak, weak AL West. Well, the latter part of the prediction was correct in that the AL West was certainly up for the taking. However there is no other reason to reach to to explain the Mariners inability to score runs other than there simply is no real hitting talent on the team, and there probably won't be for several years. Barring a major surge by several players or a hugely unexpected and productive offseason, the Mariners will hold the fort at the bottom of baseball in runs for several years and most likely also the bottom of the division.


Postseason:

Every year analysts and experts cite starting pitching as the primary reason teams either win or lose in the postseason. I have to object to this thinking on the grounds that the hitters are the ones who are charged with hitting the great pitching, and the hitters play some factor in determining just how good the starting pitching is. Let's not forget, that in order to win games, you don't need to prevent runs, you need to score runs. You can give up as many runs as you like so long as you are able to score one more. Although recent postseasons have been highlighted by amazing pitching performances (especially the White Sox in the 2005 postseason) what always stands out to me is clutch hitting, the tenacity to come from behind late and the ability to hit through less than stellar pitching performances from starters. Also, last post season marked one of the first times I can remember that so many games were decided by blown saves. At one point I counted six blown saves by six different closers. Of course, the truth of the matter is that no one thing is the determining factor in why a team wins or loses in the postseason, but all things play in balance and combination with each other. There is no different formula for winning in the playoffs than there is in winning in the summer. The game is the game. Pitch well. Hit well. Catch well (remember the Tigers in the 2006 World Series?).

Many people seem to be sleeping on the Yankees this postseason with all the questions that are surrounding their starting pitching. Andy Pettitte is coming off of injury, Burnett has been a roller coaster and subsequently not given a spot in the starting rotation, and Phil Hughes slowed down considerably from his hot start. Yet somehow for me there still remains this feeling that surrounds the Yankees when it comes October. Maybe because my earliest postseason memories all involve the Yankees having this unbeatable aura surrounding them. The Yankees, or course, are not unbeatable in the playoffs, as they just gone done demonstrating between 2001-2008. But why does this feeling still ring true for me? Do others still feel like this?

Like most people, I like the Yankees against the Twins. The Twins have a postseason record of futility against the Bombers that borders on astonishing. If they get swept, it will be their fourth consecutive sweep at the hands of the Yankees. For a team that has made six postseasons in nine years, the inability of the Twins to even reach the World Series must be a huge source of frustration for the franchise. I wonder when the Twins get to the point where they consider replacing Ron Gardenhire. I'm not saying that the Twins' inability to reach the promised land is Gardenhire's fault. I believe it is mostly not and that manager's get a hugely disproportional amount of blame (and credit) for their team's fortune's. I think it's mostly agreed upon around baseball that managers become the scapegoats that organizations can use in order to demonstrate their willingness to change to appease the fans. That's no secret. This just naturally leads me to wonder how many times Gardenhire can continue to come up short and keep a job he has done so well replacing Tom Kelley. It's not as though the Yankees are so much better than the Twins, but in the postseason they simply are.

The Rays and Rangers series was a tougher one for me to call. I really liked the Rangers from earlier this season when it finally looked like they had the pitching pieces together, especially with the acquisition of Cliff Lee. Some will point to the Rays starting pitching and their recent experience in the playoffs compared to the Rangers lack of experience, but the Rangers offense seems so much better than the Rays. I think this is an example of starting pitching not being the sole determining factor in playoff success. I liked the Rangers in four in this series, but it appears they may sweep after winning the first two games.

I don't anticipate the Phillies having any trouble with the Reds. The Phils have so much postseason success right now and the Reds are just back to the show. One of the biggest curiosities this year has been the Phillies lack of offensive consistency. For a team that has so much power, they went through some incredible offensive woes this year. In the end, they scored plenty of runs, but my only concern is one of those frozen bat spells popping up in the playoffs. I think the Phils will handle the Reds in four.

The Braves and Giants are an interesting match. I think this one goes five. It looked like the Giants might grab control until an impressive and inspiring comeback by the Braves last night. The match up seems pretty even, although the Giants have a definitive advantage in starting pitching. I like the Braves' offense better than the Giants, and the Braves play so, so well at home. That's why I think it goes five, with the Giants closing out at home after Cain pitches a brilliant game five.