The Offseason Thread

nuke the whales · Post #1 » by **nuke the whales** » Mon Nov 23, 2009 1:42 am

Griffey resigns, Jack Wilson resigns for 2 years-$10 mil, and now there's a trade rumor with us getting Edwin Jackson from Detroit. Thoughts?

Ex-hippie · Post #2 » by **Ex-hippie** » Mon Nov 23, 2009 2:17 am

Edwin Jackson? I hadn't heard that one, although I looked it up and there does appear to be something to the rumors. My view: no thanks. He had one-half of a career year followed by a return to being Edwin Jackson. Overall his FIP this year was 4.28, decidedly mediocre, and now he's sure to be overpaid in arbitration because his ERA was lower and, you know, he was an all-star. We do know that he can be helped out quite a bit by a good defense -- but who can't?

More interestingly, in my quick Google search on the subject I saw the name of Curtis Granderson come up. He doesn't exactly fill a need unless the team isn't sold on Saunders, and even then he'll have to step aside eventually when Ackley comes along. (Unless they're doing something crazy like trying Ackley as a second baseman; I haven't kept up.) But for someone that good, you always have to see what you can do to snag him...

nuke the whales · Post #3 » by **nuke the whales** » Mon Nov 23, 2009 5:08 am

Apparently Ackley is being tried out at 2B

Ex-hippie · Post #4 » by **Ex-hippie** » Mon Nov 23, 2009 3:24 pm

Just saw that on Lookout Landing this morning. Maybe there's a method to the madness after all. It might mean that Saunders would have to go as part of the package. The names of Morrow and Triunfel pop up in the rumor mill, which might be worth it for Granderson. I'd view Jackson as a throw-in, probably not a terrible deal for his final two arb years before he walks and makes too much money elsewhere.

nuke the whales · Post #5 » by **nuke the whales** » Wed Nov 25, 2009 12:54 am

Jakubauskas waived, picked up by Pittsburg
http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/t ... auska.html
Also we waived Robert Manuel who was in the Wlad deal.

Also Lopez is supposedly on his way out
http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/m ... on_hi.html

slaterbug · Post #6 » by **slaterbug** » Fri Dec 4, 2009 1:56 am

Jason Bay would be nice: http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/m ... sly_l.html

Post #7 » by **Sweezo** » Fri Dec 4, 2009 3:00 am

slaterbug wrote:Jason Bay would be nice: http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/m ... sly_l.html

Problem is he just rejected a 4 year/$60 million deal from the Red Sox, and now he's trying to create a bidding war. Does anyone want to pay more than that amount for a right handed power bat on the wrong side of 30 who plays godawful defense? Does Bay really want to come to Seattle and see his stats die or does he just want more money to stay with a sure World Series contender?

We've seen what a difference it makes when you have a good defender [Chavez/Saunders] over a poor one [Ibanez] in terms of run prevention in left field.

We've seen what can happen to a right handed power bat [Beltre] that doesn't fit Safeco's power alleys.

Jason Bay is a stellar player, but I just don't see how he is a good fit for an M's team with a lot of spots to fill and only so much money to do it. If he wants $17-$18 million per, I'd rather allocate my resources on a possible #2 pitcher [Harden] and a speedy 3B with great defense who always gets on base [Figgins]. Maybe then the M's could still afford to pay their arb. eligible guys, bring back Branyan, and another bat to play 1B/DH.

I really don't believe the Bay rumors. I think it is a smokescreen. Z's showing interest in everyone so no one can leverage him by thinking he's locked in on just a couple guys.

Post #8 » by **Sweezo** » Fri Dec 4, 2009 3:18 am

BTW I am pretty excited for the offseason. I think Z's in a great position salary-wise to add a couple pieces in free agency and move Lopez for value. The natural thought is to probably focus on power, but the M's are probably looking to add guys who have power that fits SafeCo, upgrade the weak spots on defense, and get guys who just don't make outs.

Figgins' OBP was #11 in all of baseball, while Bay's was #19. Both fantastic. But one of those players is likely to have long fly balls that were home runs at Fenway Park suddenly turn to long fly outs at SafeCo. Look at their respective hit charts...who seems like the better fit for Safeco over their career?

In 2004 the M's overpaid for a 30 year old RH power bat with poor defensive range who started off effective, but is power was marginalized by SafeCo, and when he bat speed declined he became completely ineffective in the middle of his contract.

In 2009 I hope they don't make a similar mistake. Bay would tie up so much payroll that I think he'd cost the Mariners wins.

I'm open to arguments about why Bay would be a better fit but at this point I'm not seeing it. I'm looking at OBP, WAR, hit charts...and coming up with nothing that suggests Bay would be a better allocation of resources.

Ex-hippie · Post #9 » by **Ex-hippie** » Fri Dec 4, 2009 3:30 am

I want no part of Jason Bay. He's a terrible defensive outfielder already, he has classic "old man skills" (meaning his bat could fall off a cliff any day), he has righty power that won't play well in Safeco, he's likely to command $60m+, and he'll either block Saunders in LF or keep the team from re-signing Branyan at DH. I don't care that he lives in the Seattle area.

OTOH, Rich Harden? Yes please.

Post #10 » by **Sweezo** » Fri Dec 4, 2009 3:36 am

Ex-hippie wrote:Edwin Jackson? I hadn't heard that one, although I looked it up and there does appear to be something to the rumors. My view: no thanks. He had one-half of a career year followed by a return to being Edwin Jackson. Overall his FIP this year was 4.28, decidedly mediocre, and now he's sure to be overpaid in arbitration because his ERA was lower and, you know, he was an all-star. We do know that he can be helped out quite a bit by a good defense -- but who can't?

If there's any truth to the rumor that the Tigers wanted Morrow and Kelley...heh. Like the M's would move those two for an arb. eligible guy who's going to get a substantial raise and tie up a bunch of payroll.

Ex-hippie wrote:More interestingly, in my quick Google search on the subject I saw the name of Curtis Granderson come up. He doesn't exactly fill a need unless the team isn't sold on Saunders, and even then he'll have to step aside eventually when Ackley comes along. (Unless they're doing something crazy like trying Ackley as a second baseman; I haven't kept up.) But for someone that good, you always have to see what you can do to snag him...

Doubt Granderson is likely, but...if there was somehow we could come out of this offseason adding Figgins, Harden in FA and Granderson via trade...

Post #11 » by **Sweezo** » Fri Dec 4, 2009 3:38 am

Ex-hippie wrote:I want no part of Jason Bay. He's a terrible defensive outfielder already, he has classic "old man skills" (meaning his bat could fall off a cliff any day), he has righty power that won't play well in Safeco, he's likely to command $60m+, and he'll either block Saunders in LF or keep the team from re-signing Branyan at DH. I don't care that he lives in the Seattle area.

OTOH, Rich Harden? Yes please.

Do you buy the rumors that Seattle is pushing to add Bay? I think it's a load of bull...it doesn't fit in with anything Z/Blengino seem to believe in.

Ex-hippie · Post #12 » by **Ex-hippie** » Fri Dec 4, 2009 4:33 am

Sweezo wrote:Do you buy the rumors that Seattle is pushing to add Bay? I think it's a load of bull...it doesn't fit in with anything Z/Blengino seem to believe in.

Nah. There's all kinds of misinformation out there, and you can't even tell who's feeding it to the reporter. It could be from Bay's camp to drive up his market price, or it could be from the team to put pressure on someone else to make a decision. Or maybe the team actually is speaking with him -- nothing wrong with having a conversation, that's something they should do -- but someone who wants to feel important is exaggerating the nature of the discussions, using subjective words like "pushing."

slaterbug · Post #13 » by **slaterbug** » Fri Dec 4, 2009 10:51 am

Yeah you guys are right, he does have a power bat which would be nice but that could fall off the cliff at any stage.

Chone Figgins would be an interesting pick up.

HeavyP · Post #14 » by **HeavyP** » Fri Dec 4, 2009 7:39 pm

According to Dave Cameron about Figgins:

Rosenthal says deal is very close, for about 4/36.

I called for this one about 3 months ago. I love the versatility he could bring to the club. Also, it's now theoretically possible that Beltre accepts are arbitration offer (with the market for 3b going shallow Polanco, Scutaro and now potentially Figgins gone), then I don't know what we'd do. Figgins at 2b and trade Lopez I guess.

Post #15 » by **Sweezo** » Fri Dec 4, 2009 10:10 pm

HeavyP wrote:According to Dave Cameron about Figgins:

Rosenthal says deal is very close, for about 4/36.

I called for this one about 3 months ago. I love the versatility he could bring to the club. Also, it's now theoretically possible that Beltre accepts are arbitration offer (with the market for 3b going shallow Polanco, Scutaro and now potentially Figgins gone), then I don't know what we'd do. Figgins at 2b and trade Lopez I guess.

If they get Figgins for that price...that's impressive. There's no reason Bay should make the amount he's [likely] going to over Figgins over the course of his 4 year deal.

I don't see Beltre accepting arbitration. There are still teams that would be interesting in him, and another year of having his stats killed at SafeCo isn't going to increase of chances of landing a long term deal.

Ex-hippie · Post #16 » by **Ex-hippie** » Sat Dec 5, 2009 2:44 am

HeavyP wrote:I called for this one about 3 months ago. I love the versatility he could bring to the club. Also, it's now theoretically possible that Beltre accepts are arbitration offer (with the market for 3b going shallow Polanco, Scutaro and now potentially Figgins gone), then I don't know what we'd do. Figgins at 2b and trade Lopez I guess.

I guess so. Beltre can also be traded (and there's no mandatory waiting period after he signs). Seems like they have a metric buttload of 2b-3b-whatever types between Figgins, Tuiasosopo, Bill Hall, Lopez and Hannahan. And some of them can play outfield as well. I think it's a good recipe for intense competition + a versatile bench in case of injuries.

nuke the whales · Post #17 » by **nuke the whales** » Sat Dec 5, 2009 3:32 am

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20091205/ap_ ... rs_figgins
AP is saying the Figgins deal is done at 4 years/$36 mil with a fifth year option for another $9 mil. So does he hit behind or in front of Ichiro?

daddyfivestar · Post #18 » by **daddyfivestar** » Sat Dec 5, 2009 9:50 am

Welcome back to the Beltre nightmare. At 32 next month, he'll be definitely not worth it.

b_roy7 · Post #19 » by **b_roy7** » Sat Dec 5, 2009 8:11 pm

daddyfivestar wrote:Welcome back to the Beltre nightmare. At 32 next month, he'll be definitely not worth it.

Beltre relied on power, which limited by Safeco. Figgins uses speed, and he takes walks. I wouldn't worry too much about him.

Ex-hippie · Post #20 » by **Ex-hippie** » Sat Dec 5, 2009 8:44 pm

daddyfivestar wrote:Welcome back to the Beltre nightmare. At 32 next month, he'll be definitely not worth it.

Let me guess, from southern California?

*searches for realgm posts from "daddyfivestar"*

That was pretty obvious. Reminds me of Aesop fable. Anyway, thank you for your concern, but this contract is barely more than 50% of the total dollar value of Beltre's contract. As for what you call the "Beltre nightmare," people who actually followed the team for the past five years understand that Beltre was a very good player and clearly not one of Bavasi's worst deals. In any case, this is not a small market team, it can handle a few big contracts and this is a pretty solid pickup by all accounts.

If there's any downside, it's that towards the end of the contract, Figgins might be in the way when the team is trying to advance Carlos Triunfel, Jharmidy DeJesus and Mario Martinez. Even then, Figgins will just have a year or two left on his deal at that time, and he'll be quite tradeable.