Trade Felix

Felix Hernandez is one of the best things to happen to this franchise in a while. But given the sad state that is the Seattle Mariners in the last few years, there is no denying that Felix is a flower in a wasteland, in incredibly precious commodity for a destitute organization. And we have him for four more years.


What makes Hernandez especially valuable, maybe the most valuable player in major league baseball, is that he is an established Cy Young Award winner who is just entering the prime of his career. Unlike Albert Pujols, whose contract talk seems to dominate the market discussion, Felix's best years are all in front of him, maybe minus one. Given that, all the talk (predictably) from camp Mariners is that Felix isn't going anywhere, and Z plans to hold on to him. For his part, Felix is saying all the right things (which if we hold on to him for four years and plan to resign him might ring as hollow as the dreaded vote of confidence by the GM for a struggling manager).


Amidst the talking heads of baseball there is a rift over whether or not the Mariners should keep the King or trade while his value is sky high. Baseball Tonight recently held this discussion which split the panel. Only going by what I read and hear, my guess is that most of the fan base would be opposed to trading Felix. It is just too much fun to have such a player growing up and reaching Hall of Fame potential right in front of us. Why do we want to get rid of that? Where would we be without Felix?


This perspective offers a doomsday scenario wherein the M's are a franchise totally without hope or direction with 100 losses being the standard quota for years to come. Alternatively, the other scenario suggests that the Mariners will be able to resurrect their franchise in time to make use of Felix for a World Series run. Or the Mariners will be able to succeed in the great risk of signing Felix before his contract runs out (a scenario that the organization is surely not to want to chance, if we are not there in three years the odds of us trading Felix skyrocket).

Believe me, I want to see Felix pitch is Seattle for his whole career. I love to watch him dominate, to overpower. But I don't love that more than I love winning. Felix is not the center of my baseball perspective. Winning is. And if I am Jack Z, all I am thinking about is how I can put wins up in the standings and warm bodies in the seats. That's why, as hard as it is for me, I vote to be open to trading Felix Hernandez.


The reality is that the Mariners have the most sought after pitcher in baseball, and the package deal that some clubs would be willing to give would be, to say the least, substantial. We would be able to help replenish our farm system and get at least one or two major league ready players. The Mariners are too far away from being a contending club to think about winning in the near future. If we hang on to Felix, at best we would be able to get one playoff run out of him before his contract runs out if we are able to rebuild extremely fast (unlikely). But if we have not resigned him before his last year, he would probably be traded before that last year expired anyway.


So why not wait until then to trade him? I consider that to be too much of a risk. Felix has probably maxed his value right now. Waiting another few years could open him up to injury. Or a fluke year that hurts his numbers. Either way, I'm tired of losing now. And we need to take dramatic steps to bring winning baseball back to Seattle. That includes the acquisition of several key components that will pay off in the future. Lose one potential hall of fame pitcher, get a couple all stars and key role players in return. That is the gamble.


There is definitely a risk. But the risk is two-edged. If we keep Felix, we are risking be able to resign him to a long term deal. Sure he says all the right things now, makes all the right moves, lives in the community, but I don't know the guy, and neither do you. Who knows what he would want to do? We could be the team that let Felix go and got nothing in return (ARod). But if you are the GM to trade him then your entire career as GM will constantly be measured by the success or failure of that trade. You will either be the guy who wasted Hernandez and got junk in return, or the guy who resurrected our franchise with the gutsiest trade in recent memory. With a player as valuable as Felix, there is no avenue without risk.

If we are going to trade him, naturally preference should be given to National League teams. Certainly we should not trade him to the American League West, but outside of that anything goes (even the Yankees, as much as I hate it they would probably be able to give us some of the best trade value with Jesus Montero).

Rebuilding without sacrifice takes a lot of time. However, by sacrificing a key piece for several pieces will allow us to rebuild faster and win sooner. Winning puts more warm bodies in the seats than Felix ever will pitching once a week. We don't have to trade him immediately, but I think we should trade him eventually. The potential of that value is simply too much to let it all rest in one player, especially when we are only getting Felix 13 wins a year anyway.

LCS thoughts

One out away. As I write this, the Texas Rangers are one out away from their first postseason win in their home ballpark. One of the more unbelievable numbers that I have seen in a long time is the futility of the Rangers in their own ballpark in the postseason. I'll get back to that in a bit...


I don't know what's worse: being a Mariners' fan in our current state, or being a Twins fan. Even though I ask that question partly in jest, the Twins' inability to perform in the playoffs must simply be maddening for the fans of that franchise. As a Mariner fan, I thought we had it bad against the Yankees for those few years in the playoffs, but only now do I realize that it must be way, way worse to be a Twins fan, having been swept three straight times in first round, twice by the Yankees, and having amassed nine straight losses against the Bombers. It must be frustrating beyond frustration. I couldn't find anyone picking the Twins in that series because, history aside, they seemed completely and totally outmatched.

I kept flip-flopping on who I felt should win the LDS between the Rays and the Rangers. Ultimately it came down to who I felt had the best chance to beat the Yankees in the LCS. Although they won games three and four, the Rays offense seemed flat and lifeless. Unremarkable. They did (marginally) win the season series against the Yankees, so one could cite that as evidence to believe that the Rays could beat the Yankees in the second round, the Rangers just seem to have so much more potential and life with their first postseason berth since 1999. Aside from Cliff Lee, I keep hearing about how great C.J. Wilson's stuff is. One person said that Wilson actually has the best stuff on the staff, but Lee's command separates him from almost all others. Lee's command seems normally impeccable. Wilson is a walk machine, but is young with the potential to throw great games. If Wilson can find himself during the playoffs and get Lee some support, I like how rounded the Rangers' offense has become and I give them a real, real chance to take down the Yankees, even with Lee only starting two games. That's why I'm glad game five of the LDS turned out the way it did. Price is great, and he will have his moments to come, but now is the time for the Rangers' to make their run. They have power and speed. I like them.

Even though I picked the Phillies to beat the Reds, I did think the Reds would put up more of a fight. They didn't. Hugely disappointing for that city. Cincinnati must be wondering if things will go back to normal next year with the Cardinals taking control of the division. I certainly would...

I think by far the best LDS was the Giants/Braves. I didn't go five, and that's probably a good thing because I wouldn't want an anticlimactic game five to ruin what as an unbelievable series. Four one run games. Late inning drama. Rick Ankiel with one of the greatest sounding and looking playoff home runs I've ever seen in my life, and poor, poor Brooks Conrad. One terrible error, and one forgivable error at a terrible time sealed the fate of the Braves. For a guy who waited so long to get where he was, I don't want to imagine the feeling. Hopefully he'll get back there again in some capacity, because game three might be a day that he remembers in the quiet moments for the rest of his life. All said, I like the fact that the Giants won, because the pitching match ups for the NLCS are going to be epic. I think the Phillies at least match the Giants starting pitching, though I'm still unconvinced about their bullpen set up. If Lidge is solid, it could be enough, provided they can get the ball to him. The real tipping point in this series is obviously the offense. It doesn't take someone with a honed baseball acumen to realize that the Phillies, despite their inexplicable periods of struggling offensively over the year, can hit the ball very, very had, and run well enough. In a series where everything else seems more or less balanced, that is the key difference. Not only that, but Cole Hamels looked brilliant in his only playoff start last series, and that is cause for great home in the city of brotherly love because it looks as though Hamels is going to capture his previous playoff form in 2008. Hamels looked good in September, we might look back later at this as the sign that it was the Phillies' year. The Phillies will win, and they won't need to come back to Philadelphia to do it. Phillies in 5.

We might look back at the Texas/NYY series as one of the great LCS of all time. I certainly hope so. I hear from all the gurus that New York is heavily favored. I don't see how that could be unless one is putting all of that on the "mystique" the Yankees seem to have reacquired from the late 90's. As I mentioned earlier, I think C.J. Wilson might really turn into something special. With Lee going two games, that means that the Rangers have to win at least two games that Lee doesn't pitch. As I was writing this, they wrapped up one, with an unbelievably gutsy performance in game two. Game one was one of the hardest playoff games I've ever watched in my life. Texas, knowing everyone was picking against them, knowing people didn't think they could win games not started by Cliff Lee, had the Yankees on the ropes, ready to land the knockout blow. Then, unbelievably (and yet, all too believably) the Yankees rallied back. Walks, hits, shattered bats, like it was meant to be from the beginning, like the whole game was some elaborate tease to make the Rangers really, truly believe that they had something this year. The Yankees stole that away in one of the most crushing playoff loses I've ever seen in any sport. So close, games that Lee doesn't start are so, so precious, and it is snatched away, and still the Rangers must wait at least one more day for a win in their home ballpark. It must have zapped all the emotional energy from the Rangers. How they got out of bed to play today I'm not sure, but I am sure glad they did, because they bounced back and played brilliantly. When I was sure that they wouldn't because of the demoralizing loss the night before, they got that split they were looking for in their own park.

Before the series started I liked the Rangers to win in 7. I really believe in this team. After last night, I wasn't sure they would even make it back to Texas. I still like them to win in 7. Maybe for once I'm predicting on hope. I am projecting all my emotional frustrations from the Mariners' two playoff losses to the Yankees so many years ago onto this Texas team hoping they can redeem me and take down the defending champs (as they were the two times the M's played them). My head keeps telling me that the Yankees are the better team, but everything is going right for Texas this year, a place where nothing has gone right in the past. I keep telling myself that the Yankees' mystique and aura will allow magical things to happen (game 1) and more things will go right for the franchise where everything has gone right and where they always seem to get whatever they want. Yet, this hasn't really held true in the past. Sure, they are the defending champs, but between the years of 2001-2008, they came up short in the post season again and again. Maybe the mystique is something we have decided to resurrect ourselves because of our own fatalistic belief that the Yankees will find a way to win no matter what when, apart from last year, recent history has shown that they don't much more often than they do. Sure experience should count for something, but in the relatively short time that is the postseason, youth, vigor, luck and skill can kick experience to the back seat (2008 Rays?).

Finally I arrive to one final point of view espoused by Skip Bayless of ESPN. Bayless seems to think that the Rangers lost the ALCS when they lost game four of the division series and had to run Lee back out there for game five. Furthermore, Bayless believes that the Rangers should move Lee up to game two in order to front end the rotation. Bayless' first point has some limited value, but his second point makes no sense. The limited value of Bayless' first point is that if Lee didn't have to start game five then he could start game one of the LCS thus (theoretically) allowing him to pitch three games (games one, four, and seven) instead of two (games three and seven). Sure, that would mean that the Rangers, provided they win all the games Lee pitches, would then only have to win one game that Lee did not pitch. However, the shortcoming of this point is that this assumes Lee would be comfortable working two straight starts on two days rest and that he would be as effective doing so, neither of which are given. After all, there were no reports that Lee was rushing to offer himself to pitch game four in order to close the series out in Arlington even though some were thinking (wrongly, in my opinion) that that was the best choice. Granted, it was more likely that Lee was wise enough to know that we was only going to be able to pitch one more game in the series anyway and going on four days rest was much, much better than three days rest, but still the opportunity was at least there. One further point that needs to be made that no one is making is that Cliff Lee is not a machine. He's a man. His numbers in the playoffs are unbelievable, and to that point a little too unbelievable. No person, even as talented as Lee, can continue to perform at the rate he is performing, especially if you are asking him to pitch consecutive days on short rest. Lee, short rest or full rest, is going to come back down to earth eventually. No one should accept it as a given (even though so many people seem to be doing it) that the Rangers will win both games that Lee starts.

Now to Bayless' second point, that front loading the Rangers rotation by pitching Lee on short rest is a good idea. I do not see the point in this at all. Regardless of whether you pitch Lee in games two and six or three and seven, the Rangers are going to have to find a way to win at least two games that Lee doesn't start. There is simply no way that the Rangers can run Lee out there three times this series, and the only conceivable way that Bayless' point makes any sense is if you believe that the Rangers' losing the first two games of this series would mean that the series is over by the time it even gets to Lee. This is faulty logic because even if the Rangers lose the first two games of the series (which they didn't) Lee pitching on full rest in game three means that they will get back into the series in game three with two more chances to win in NY and bring the series back to Texas with Lee going in game seven. If you don't believe that the Rangers have any chance to win without Lee pitching, then it doesn't matter when he pitches because the series is over before it started. But since Lee can only pitch twice, and you have to win at least two games that he doesn't start, the only thing that makes sense is to pitch Lee when he has the best chance of success, and that is off full rest in games three and seven. Slice it any way you want, if the Rangers can win the first game that Lee pitches and two other times in the series, they have Cliff Lee on the mound at home in game seven with a chance to go to the World Series. I like that scenario, and I think that's what's going to happen. Rangers in 7.

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.

Life's disappointments: 47-73

I think that in all the seasons in the history of the Mariners franchise, 2010 will be remembered as the most disappointing. The expectations were certainly there at the beginning of the year that this might be the year the Mariners reestablish themselves as a team to beat in the American League. I think a large part of the disappointment is the the buildup that was created by the media which makes fans really believe that their team has a legitimate shot at contending. Most of the expectations of a mediocre offense providing enough offense for a stellar pitching staff to drive a good team through a weak division were based on the presumption that younger players would get progressively better as their years gave them more experience, when in fact those players have stayed static or regressed. Jose Lopez and Franklin Gutierrez were expected to be major RBI producers. They have not been, which is not to say they have been terrible, simply not better. Chone Figgins has been terrible, a mystery not unique to free agent hitters showing up to Seattle (see Rich Aurelia, Jeff Cirillo, Scott Spezio, Jose Vidro) yet Ichiro's numbers are down from usual expectations, leaving zero room for figureheads like Ken Griffey Jr. to not produce on the field in exchange for putting fans in the seats. But nothing will put fans in the seats like winning, and nothing will drive fans away from the park like losing. Ken Griffey Jr. was supposed to bring fans to the ballpark for a feeling of nostalgia, but the only reason that fans felt nostalgic was because of the positive feeling associated with Ken Griffey Jr.'s presence in the lineup, and the only reason that feeling existed was because we won when he played. Had 1995 not happened, had we not made playoff appearances during those years, fans would not have cared nearly as much about "the Kid" returning to Seattle. People like to remember times when we won.

Losing on a daily basis is simply too difficult to swallow. It's too difficult for me as a fan to watch everyday expecting to lose, and even worse to try and drive the nagging questions from my head that wonders when we will be winners again. But the game must move on, and so we wonder where to go from here. The M's have been winning recently with a chance tonight to win our fourth series in a row, our late summer effort to stave off unnecessary humiliation. But the rosters will expand soon and we will be thinking about who to call up, who to give time in September to. '
.
At this point, I'm satisfied to solidify a starting rotation to move forward with. Doug Fister and Jason Vargas have consistently performed this season. Luke French has not had enough of a chance to show what he can do. I'm glad at this point that we have Felix Hernandez for a few years, but soon decisions must be made on what to do about Ryan Rowland-Smith. The braintrusts of our organization must have a huge amount of faith in his stuff to keep giving him chance after chance to fly right, but patience can not be unlimited. I have no feelings on what to do about RRS as no one else seems to be jumping for the last rotation spot.

More questions linger about where to move forward with our hitting. My philosophy has always been to stay young when losing, favoring younger talent instead of players on the opposite end of their prime. It's still difficult to determine what to make about Figgins. Is this year a fluke? Is his talent suddenly diminishing? Who would we rather have?

I am encouraged by Josh Wilson and Michael Saunders. These are younger guys who seem to have great swings. Jack Wilson is a defensive wizard, but with no bat he's not what our team needs right now. I hope we can keep Branyan driving the baseball in the middle our lineup, but his injuries issues are worrisome. Many questions will try to be answered this September with our call ups, and that needs to carry as much if not more weight than spring training performances.

50 games in, 19-31

You know you are in bad shape when your local newspaper runs a five day (yes, a FIVE DAY) examination on why your organization is in such shambles, as the Seattle Times recently finished with the Mariners. The question that I am left asking myself is, just how bad are we? Is our reaction to a difficult first quarter of the season primarily a reaction to overblown expectations, or is all the drama surrounding the power outage in Seattle truly warranted?

I think the answer is a recipe born out of three principal ingredients: the first is overblown expectations coming off of a season in which our record did not match our run differential (in other words, we won more games that the combination of our offense and pitching would normally win), an overrated offseason in which we did land the big fish of the pond, however it did cost us to do so and the fish was not what our diet needed, but rather some meat of a different sort, and the third (and perhaps lethal) ingredient surrounding the pent up frustration in Rainville is our city's dire, desperate want of a winner. Yes, a champion. Seattle needs a champion, a team for the city to rally around, a team that strangers can find common topic in, a common thread that will help us through difficult and uncertain times. The Seahawks, though once great, have shared a common fate as the Mariners, falling far, uncertain if or when they will get back up. Our basketball team had its worst season in franchise history, left town on about the worst terms possible, and then finally reaped the harvest and went back to the playoffs in beautiful Oklahoma City, and the Mariners have not sniffed the playoffs in seven years or been to the playoffs in nine. It has been a long, cold winter in Seattle.

But where do the Mariners fit into this? The numbers are bad and the record shows it. Despite it all, I do believe the Mariners will improve. Waiting for lagging offensive players to regain their form is an old, tired refrain in Marinerland. The rhetoric that surrounds anemic offenses identifies itself quickly and grows tired even quicker. "The Mariners ran into a buzzsaw", "The (insert opposing team) are really high on this guy", "This guy is really sharp today". What nobody wants to talk about is that the reason these guys look so good is because our offense is so bad.

However, the last twelve games have seen the Mariners runs per game increase by a run and a half. Chone Figgins finally has his average over .200, Jose Lopez is beginning to drive the ball, and Mike Sweeney is providing life (for how long?) in the center of our lineup. My feeling is that Franklin Gutierrez will only get better. Seeing Josh Wilson, a guy I had never heard of before this year, is swinging the bat well, and better than that, he is young. I like young players getting experience to build us closer to a lasting winner rather than older players at the end of their prime swallowing up at bats.

Our catching situation is an enigma. It reminds me of about five years ago when we ran out eight different catchers over the course of the year. It was Dan Wilson's last year with no visible successor. Johjima, after a decent season, bombed. Other than having no offense between Rob Johnson and Adam Moore, the defense behind dish has been terrible. Simply terrible. Passed balls and wild pitchers are mounting up at a staggering rate, which simply has to play in to the psychie of our struggling bullpen. Because of this, I do like the recent experiments with Josh Bard and Alfonzo.

My hope against hope is that the talent of Milton Bradley will shine through and the man will hit like we know he can. Fans of about seven other organizations are laughing at that idea right now, but at this point we have to start gambling on hitters with problems.

As mentioned earlier, the bullpen has been surprisingly ineffective at times this year. The long, long grind of the baseball season will definetly have its share of lean times, so we must be sure not to overreact to things, but growing pains are hitting what I think is a very talented set of young arms. This still comes right after Colome and Teixeira get designated for assignment, but with Mark Lowe coming back soon I am confident that our pen can turn it around. Great starting pitching can take stress off of a bullpen by swallowing up innings, but constantly pitching in one and two run games will be increasingly difficult if the Mariners are going to jump back into the wide open AL West.

What is keeping the Mariners relevant now is how futile the entire AL West is, which is also what may be contributing to how painful this season is. For the first time in a while, the West is for the taking. At 19-31, the Mariners sit only 8 games out with four months left to play. 8 games out on June 1 is nothing. Yet, can the Mariners make a push without a big bat in the center of the lineup? I think they can, and it looks like they will have to try, because reality is not like fantasy baseball. If a player is not performing, there is no option to drop the player and search the free agent pool for another bat. What you have is what you have. The free agent pool will be drier than usual this year, and the farm system is barren. We simply must make this work, and guys must start hitting like they can hit. I know it's a tired song, but it is the desperate lament of a Mariners fan in search of hope.

2010

A new day is upon us. Fresh expectations. For about 24 teams, high hopes and dreams. For the other 6, well....



It is a fitting time to gain some perspective on what looks good, not good, and possibly disastrous for the coming season. First, however, what are the gurus saying about the Mariners this year? If you were like me, you were looking at the Cliff Lee trade, wondering how much of an impact that is going to have on the M's this year. Some at ESPN and MLB were picking the Mariners as the new favorites to win the AL West this year. One article on ESPN was specially devoted to explaining why the Mariners could win the American League pennant. However, now that the season is finally upon us, newer voices are making some curious selections regarding the future AL West champions. Despite spending much of the offseason bleeding, Angels still remain the pick of about a half dozen writers that I researched at ESPN, FOX and MLB Network. The other half, interestingly enough, picked the Athletics. What is most curious though, is that all the writers picked the Mariners and Rangers to take second and third in the division (interchangeably), essentially meaning that the A's and Halos, if they were not picked to win the division, were picked to finish in last. I have never seen anything quite like it before, such disagreement about who holds the strength in the division and who does not. Nobody I have read recently picked the Mariners or the Rangers to win the division.



I also can not decide on where I stand regarding the Halos strength this year. I think their lineup is better than many give credit for. They should score runs this year. But will the Mariners?



After making the biggest improvement in baseball last year, the prevalent question regarding the Mariners is the same as it has been for years and years...who is going to hit? It is almost enough to make me wonder if any Mariners team will ever find the strength to hit at Safeco. The Mariners have made the bottom of the American League is scoring output their personal home since 2004, leaving it only once in 2007 when they finished seventh in the league in runs. The Mariners have also lost their only potent offensive threat in Russell Branyan in the offseason, making concerns in pushing runners to home even more tangible. But there is hope...



If anyone wrote the book on how to win without scoring a lot of runs, it was the Angels. How do they manage to score enough? They run. A lot. Not only straight stealing, but moving first to third, hitting and running, drawing walks. The Mariners can certainly run this year, but more important to their success will be offensive production from players we are not currently expecting to have a breakout year. If the Mariners are going to score enough to back up their sometimes brilliant pitching, Ichiro and Figgins need to fly with reckless abandon at the top of the order. Huge contributions need to come from Milton Bradley, who can certainly hit if he can stay calm, Franklin Gutierrez who emerged last year and needs to continue to develop, Jose Lopez who needs to hit like we've been waiting for him to hit for a few years, and Kotchman needs to have an unexpectedly good season to carry some of the load. If Griffey can manage fifteen home runs and sixty RBIs, there is reason to hope. If only one or two of these things does not happen, it will be same sad song until the Mariners can produce (and not get rid of) a great bat.



On the pitching side, many are lamenting the back end of the Mariners rotation. I find reason for hope here as well. The back end of most rotations is not strong, that is why it is the back end of the rotation and not the front end. However, as I always maintain, I would rather have a young, unpredictable rotation than an old, predictably mediocre rotation. Ian Snell and Rowland-Smith have a ton of talent that can emerge. Doug Fister looked great last year. Luke French is only 24 years old. So much room for growth could mean good times again. Then again, it may all fall flat. But the possibility remains. With Erik Bedard coming back in mid-season, the best case scenario finds and incredibly top three with two rising stars trailing behind them. The worst case scenario finds Cliff Lee rarely healthy and lack-luster when he is so, Felix taking a step back from becoming one of the dominant forces in baseball, and three other spots in the rotation that never materialize. With yet another inconsistent (if not bad) offensive season likely, this can easily spell disaster. This is what people are thinking about when they pick the Mariners to finish third in the division. However, it does not have to be this way. The M's might very well sport the best defense in the American league. Jack Wilson needs to take away all the runs he is not going to produce in turning double plays that would not normally be turned in order to help our team win, otherwise Wilson is just a warm body.



I can't really remember the last time I considered the bullpen to be an issue for the M's. I was surprised to learn that we actually blew about 25 saves last year, which was amazing to me considering the talent we have in the 'pen. I will be generous and chalk it up to growing pains. I look for the ERA to be stellar as usual, and the blown saves to go down with Aardsma taking the reigns as the full time, unquestioned closer.



Finally, with all the predictions being made, especially in an unusually variable AL West this year, the reality is that all of these predictions are made with all things being equal among all clubs, which they never are. They do not factor in injuries, which you can never predict, overperfomances by some players and underperformances by others, which you can also never predict. I have outlined reasons to believe that the Mariners CAN function offensively this year, especially with many guys who are capable .300 hitters (Ichiro, Figgins, Bradley, Gutierrez, and Lopez) and so much speed to press defenses. If the Mariners are in it at the break, expect Jack Z to look for a bat. A big one. That could push the Mariners into the playoffs with an amazing three top set of starters. That is why some dare to pick the Mariners to come out of the American League. Or, the offense will struggle like it always seems to and Lee's health issues will only be one of the many disappointments in a long summer...but it is spring, and April is a time for hope.

On the Great Means of Perfection

Fate was against me today. It had to be on this day that my week-long free preview of MLB Extra Innings On Demand ran out, essentially meaning I could no longer watch any out of market games on cable anymore. I realized this today as I tried to watch the Rays play the White Sox. I turned to the channel. Blackness. Of course, I didn't realize at the time how consequential that game would be for the history of baseball, but then again nobody did. And that's what remains beautiful about the sport that has encountered such difficulty in maintaining a good public image these last few years. Baseball is true spontaneity. As I always remind myself (and others), each game is born anew, separate from every other game that has ever existed or will ever exist in the history of baseball. It exists within itself and can hold its own spectacular beauty. But I didn't think about that today as I watched the TV tell me to call Comcast if I wanted to watch this channel. Maybe I should have.Around baseball these last few weeks we have had several close calls, both with perfect games and no-hitters. One that particularly stands out was Jonathan Sanchez's no-hitter a couple weeks ago. The rare no-hitter without a walk, but not a perfect game because of an error by the San Francisco third baseman with one out in the eighth inning. No perfection. No hitters and perfect games have been taken into the seventh and eighth this year, but have come up dry (other than Sanchez's performance). With all the close calls with perfect games, two in the last couple weeks, I had a premonition that something could strike soon. Not that it would necessarily, but one can only have so many close calls without feeling like these are a couple thunderclaps before the brilliant lightning strike. A perfect game is that lightning strike, not a no-hitter (which there have been over a hundred of going back to 1876). No hitters are wonderful. Perfect games are legendary. The rarest of occurrences.For me, there is no feat in baseball so rare and spectacular as the perfect game. None. Significantly different from its little sister, the no-hitter, the perfect game remains the only feat in baseball whose title bears the true majesty of the accomplishment. Perfection. One could not possibly do any better. There is simply no other equivalent in the game. The only thing that I can think of which might be comparable is the four-homerun game. Equally as rare (actually rarer, there have been 15 four-homerun games, 18 perfect games dating back to 19th century baseball), the four-homerun game is similar to the offensive "perfect game" if there is is such a thing. However, I can only speak for myself when I say that it simply doesn't carry as much meaning as the perfect game. I can't really give a definitive reason why. Perhaps that a four-homerun game simply does not feel "perfect". In fact, most aren't in a sense. Out of the 15 four homerun games in Major League history, only one player, Carlos Delgado, homered in all four of his plate appearances (Rocky Colavito had four homeruns in four official at bats, but managed to score five runs according to the box score, indicating that he had at least five plate appearances) thus attaining a true measure of "perfection". Yet still, perhaps it is because we are living in the age of offense, offensive achievements don't seem to carry as much weight for me as brilliant pitching. The first recorded perfect game in Major League history was by Lee Richmond on June 12, 1880 according to mlb.com. Amazingly, the next one occurred only five days later by Monte Ward. After Ward's perfect game, the National League had to wait 84 years before perfection struck again when Jim Bunning didn't allow a Met to reach base on June 21, 1964. While the American League had four perfect games during that span, perfection remained (and still remains) uniquely rare. There were no perfect games in baseball between 1909 and 1921, and then not another one until Larsen's ultimate pitching performance in Game 6 of the 1956 World Series against the Dodgers, the only time a perfect game has ever been thrown in the postseason. While we have seen nine perfect games since 1981, Buehrle's perfect game today ended a ten year drought wherein the American League did not see perfection. Going back to the 19th century, there have been five decades that have elapsed where no perfect game was pitched in either league (1890's, 1910's, 1930's, 1940's, and the 1970's). In the 90's we were fortunate enough to see perfection four times (Martinez, Rogers, Wells, and Cone, the most of any decade (all perfect game dates came from mlb.com). Truly, a performance one never forgets. It did not surprise me that it was Mark Buehrle who gave us what will likely be the last perfect game of our decade. Although he is not a power-strikeout pitcher, I've always regarded Buehrle's ability to mow down a lineup as one of the best in baseball. He is definitely the quickest and may be the most efficient pitcher I've ever seen. Buehrle controls the pace, and every time I watch him pitch it always seems as if he is in command. If the lineup does not beat him early, their prospects get dimmer as the game wears on. He controls the flow, not the hitters. He rarely gets himself into trouble and pitches to contact. His soft stuff can stifle an aggressive lineup (like the Rays) and get hitters to jump at pitches. Alexei Ramirez was quite busy at shortstop fielding the two hoppers from all the right handed hitters who "rolled over" on Buehrle's changeup. Buehrle was the man. Twenty-seven up. Twenty-seven down. Eighty-eight pitches. I feel so thankful to be able to have seen it. Although only a few can lay claim to have witnessed it in person, while a few more can say to have seen in on TV, in a sense we all saw it, those who even so much as witnessed the highlights and reflected on how truly special it was. The 34 year period between Charlie Robertson's perfect game and Don Larsen's epic performance in which no perfect games were found anywhere reminds me of how special it is, and that we are not entitled to see it and may not see it again for a long time. That is why each perfect game must be cherished. They are, in a way, freaks of nature. Baseball isn't supposed to be perfect. But then again, the game has a way of showing us all how little we know about it. We erroneously think that we are the game, and that the game is flawed because we are flawed. We think it tarnishes the game when we "cheat" by using performance enhancing substances. But that is the error in our thinking. The game exists outside of us. We are only imperfect players playing a perfect game. Today was special, and yet, none of us had any idea of it when we woke up this morning, when they showed up to the ballpark, when they checked in to see the early Thursday results. No idea. But therein lies the greatness of the game. You never know what you're gonna see.

(Written on 7/23/09)