2018-19 Offseason Thread

[Black Watch]

After praising the previous Seattle move, the latest one is absolutely bizarre.

Read on Twitter

[Schad]

After praising the previous Seattle move, the latest one is absolutely bizarre.

It's quite possible that Philly was -- as Jeff Sullivan wrote -- the entire market for Segura at the moment. On a team with a bunch of ugly contracts, he was the one guy they could've afforded to keep their powder dry a tad to move, though. His contract is quite reasonable, more reasonable and more movable than an old 1B/DH making $20m a year, which is what they took back.

[Black Watch]

After praising the previous Seattle move, the latest one is absolutely bizarre.

It's quite possible that Philly was -- as Jeff Sullivan wrote -- the entire market for Segura at the moment. On a team with a bunch of ugly contracts, he was the one guy they could've afforded to keep their powder dry a tad to move, though. His contract is quite reasonable, more reasonable and more movable than an old 1B/DH making $20m a year, which is what they took back.

He's not just a clubhouse cancer, he literally fights dudes who drop pop-ups in games they end up winning anyway. He was as good as gone this offseason. I mean, I like the player and the value, don't get me wrong. Forbearance might have been a better strategy, I agree, but then that's never really been Dipoto's MO

[Skin Blues]

Seattle is trying to unload their long-term contracts for short-term ones so they have a bunch of cash in a few years. For what reason, I'm not quite sure. maybe they plan on selling after the 2020 season and want a blank slate for potential new ownership. Bruce, Santana, Leake, Gordon, Swarzak, Felix are all on contracts that expire after the 2020 season. That's why they traded Segura and Cano. I wonder if Seager would follow in another trade. Problem with that, though, is that Seager's 2022 team option becomes player option if he's traded.

[Cactus Jack]

Seattle is trying to unload their long-term contracts for short-term ones so they have a bunch of cash in a few years. For what reason, I'm not quite sure. maybe they plan on selling after the 2020 season and want a blank slate for potential new ownership. Bruce, Santana, Leake, Gordon, Swarzak, Felix are all on contracts that expire after the 2020 season. That's why they traded Segura and Cano. I wonder if Seager would follow in another trade. Problem with that, though, is that Seager's 2022 team option becomes player option if he's traded.

When Dipoto was hired he was stuck with Cano, Cruz, Felix, Seager, etc. He gave ownership his word that he would try & make it work with that core. It hasn't. But, ownership has also mandated that he try to rebuild without completely stripping the whole thing down. Which is why he has taken on the contracts of Bruce & Santana. He has to take a step back (Dumping Cano's contract+ restock the farm), while also fielding a semi-competitive team for the next 2-3 years. If he tried to tank & lose 100 games, he'd be fired.

FWIW: Felix will be gone in 1 year. Santana, Bruce, Gordon, Leake all have 2 years remaining. Seager has 3, but I'm sure the FO will try to dump him at some point (By eating close to half his remaining salary).

[Cactus Jack]

It's quite possible that Philly was -- as Jeff Sullivan wrote -- the entire market for Segura at the moment. On a team with a bunch of ugly contracts, he was the one guy they could've afforded to keep their powder dry a tad to move, though. His contract is quite reasonable, more reasonable and more movable than an old 1B/DH making $20m a year, which is what they took back.

He's not just a clubhouse cancer, he literally fights dudes who drop pop-ups in games they end up winning anyway. He was as good as gone this offseason. I mean, I like the player and the value, don't get me wrong. Forbearance might have been a better strategy, I agree, but then that's never really been Dipoto's MO

Segura clashed with Scott Servais & publicly got into it with Dee Gordon.

Once his best friend on the team (Cano) was dealt, he wanted out.

I don't love the trade. Mainly because I'm not a big believer in Crawford. But, The FO didn't want him around anymore.

[Schad]

Segura clashed with Scott Servais & publicly got into it with Dee Gordon.

Once his best friend on the team (Cano) was dealt, he wanted out.

I don't love the trade. Mainly because I'm not a big believer in Crawford. But, The FO didn't want him around anymore.

Oh sure. But it might've been worth keeping the powder dry for a while longer, because Machado's availability affects Segura's market at the moment. The Yankees will be missing Gregorius for at least half a season, and having Segura would also potentially transform Andujar into a very useful trade chip in their pursuit of the AL East title, but they aren't going to make sure a move unless Machado signs elsewhere. The Cubs may have an opening at either 2B/SS if they decide that Russell isn't worth the trouble (he isn't). Boston would have the option of turning Devers into a trade chip if they were willing to move Bogaerts back to 3B, etc. Early December probably wasn't the time to extract maximum value for him, unless Dipoto's pretty high on Crawford, and the Santana contract nullifies most of the costs savings involved.

[Cactus Jack]

Segura clashed with Scott Servais & publicly got into it with Dee Gordon.

Once his best friend on the team (Cano) was dealt, he wanted out.

I don't love the trade. Mainly because I'm not a big believer in Crawford. But, The FO didn't want him around anymore.

Early December probably wasn't the time to extract maximum value for him, unless Dipoto's pretty high on Crawford, and the Santana contract nullifies most of the costs savings involved.

1. The deal is a pretty big indicator that Dipoto loves Crawford.
2. They're higher on Santana than most & don't view him as a sunk cost.
3. They also have a hole at 1B. Ryon Healy??

Again, the plan is not to completely strip it all down. Ownership would never allow it to happen. They're more worried about fielding a semi-competitive team & selling tickets. They still plan on having a payroll in the 130-140m range (confirmed by Dipoto).

[-MetA4-]

1. The deal is a pretty big indicator that Dipoto loves Crawford. 2. They're higher on Santana than most & dont view him as a sunk cost. 3. They also have a hole at 1B. Again, the plan is not to actually rebuild & completely strip it down. Ownership would never allow it to happen. Theyre more worried about fielding a semi-competitive team & selling tickets.

Dipoto himself basically admitted that they took the first offer they got because they were desperate to get rid of Segura ASAP (which was stupid, IMO). They can believe whatever they want about Santana, he is absolutely a sunk cost in today's market as an aging and declining ~2 WAR 1B who makes $17 million in each of the next two seasons. That profile has absolutely no value in today's MLB; see the Rays dumping CJ Cron for nothing, or our own Justin Smoak (who makes next to nothing in comparison to Santana) having negligible trade value.

They are certainly allowed to like Crawford, but the whole package doesn't make a lot of sense to me. Crawford has legitimate question marks (even if they "love him", his concerns are real so its not like he's a sure-thing) and I can't fathom how you justify trading a ~4 WAR SS on a solid contract and yet STILL somehow end up taking back $34 million in a player that was obviously a salary dump. They were apparently tired of Segura's clubhouse antics, but if you're clearly stripping the team down, then why do you need to take the first offer you get in an apparently weak market? Why not stomach whatever he's doing for a bit longer until someone actually ends up needing a SS?

[trwi7]

Again, the plan is not to completely strip it all down.

The actions would indicate otherwise.

[Cactus Jack]

...if you're clearly stripping the team down...

Again, the plan is not to completely strip it all down. Ownership would never allow it to happen. They're more worried about fielding a semi-competitive team & selling tickets. They still plan on having a payroll in the 130-140m range.

I'm not trying to defend the trade. I'm just trying to explain their reasoning behind it. At least according to Dipoto/FO themselves.

Dipoto has been on record saying, that it's not a "Tear down" or "Rebuild". But rather a "Re-imagining of the roster", (take it as you will) his words, not mine.

Moving Cano's contract was always the goal. Shed any long-term commitments beyond 2-3 years (like Cano & Segura). They would also love to move Seager as well. But, they have to find a willing partner. Which isn't likely at this stage.

[Cactus Jack]

Again, the plan is not to completely strip it all down.

The actions would indicate otherwise.

No, not taking back the contracts of Bruce & Santana would indicate otherwise.

Dipoto himself has emphasized that it's not the case.

Trust me, I've followed the team long enough to know that a rebuild/"Tear down" would never be in the cards. At least with this ownership group in place.

[trwi7]

Again, the plan is not to completely strip it all down.

The actions would indicate otherwise.

No, not taking back the contracts of Bruce & Santana would indicate otherwise.

Dipoto himself has emphasized that it's not the case.

Trust me, I've followed the team long enough to know that a rebuild/"Tear down" would never be in the cards. At least with this ownership group in place.

Offsetting money with other team's bad contracts is fairly common practice. He didn't take Jay Bruce because he wanted to be competitive.

[phillipmike]

Goldschmidt to the Cards

Read on Twitter

[Cactus Jack]

The actions would indicate otherwise.

No, not taking back the contracts of Bruce & Santana would indicate otherwise.

Dipoto himself has emphasized that it's not the case.

Trust me, I've followed the team long enough to know that a rebuild/"Tear down" would never be in the cards. At least with this ownership group in place.

Offsetting money with other team's bad contracts is fairly common practice. He didn't take Jay Bruce because he wanted to be competitive.

If they could unload that contract, they would. Obviously. But, that's not the point. He still plans on putting a semi-competitive team together. Because it's being mandated by ownership. The plan is to Win somewhere between 70-80 games next year. Not to sell off everyone & lose 100 plus.

[Tanner]

With some of these trade returns I think there’s no point trading players with 2 or less years of control anymore. There’s probably a better shot of sliding into a wild card spot than there is getting difference makers in trades. That goes for all teams.

[Black Watch]

and the Santana contract nullifies most of the costs savings involved.

No, they dumped Nicasio on the Phillies as well, don't forget. The cost savings for the Mariners will end up being $32m.

[Black Watch]

They're more worried about fielding a semi-competitive team & selling tickets. They still plan on having a payroll in the 130-140m range (confirmed by Dipoto).

With similar orders from ownership, we should all be grateful Shapiro did what he did behind the scenes, for he could have just as easily Dipotoed it all the way to the bottom.

Mariners had some terrible attendance down the stretch when they were out of it, but their strong first half gave them their best attendance record in over ten years, up 164,044 from 2017.

https://www.statista.com/statistics/246819/average-per-game-attendance-of-the-seattle-mariners/

The writing's on the wall, yet ownership is still greedy.

[Cactus Jack]

They're more worried about fielding a semi-competitive team & selling tickets. They still plan on having a payroll in the 130-140m range (confirmed by Dipoto).

With similar orders from ownership, we should all be grateful Shapiro did what he did behind the scenes, for he could have just as easily Dipotoed it all the way to the bottom.

Mariners had some terrible attendance down the stretch when they were out of it, but their strong first half gave them their best attendance record in over ten years, up 164,044 from 2017.

https://www.statista.com/statistics/246819/average-per-game-attendance-of-the-seattle-mariners/

The writing's on the wall, yet ownership is still greedy.

Well...they don't exactly have the greatest reputation among fans in Seattle. A 17 year playoff drought will do that. If they were to tear it down again and rebuild, no one would show up to the ballpark. Ownership knows this. That's why they'll never approve a full teardown.

[Schad]

and the Santana contract nullifies most of the costs savings involved.

No, they dumped Nicasio on the Phillies as well, don't forget. The cost savings for the Mariners will end up being $32m.

Most of that is at the back end, though. The net effect on their payroll is something like:

2019: -$3.8m.
2020: +$6m.
2021: -$14.4m.
2022: -$15.9m.

(Using guaranteed figures; Santana and Segura both have options, doesn't include arb and so forth).

So, it saves them money in 2021 and 2022, but for the privilege of paying more in 2019 and 2020 in a deal where they gave up easily the best player, plus a solid left-handed reliever. Now, taking back a bit of money in 2019 and 2020 to get more value in trade would make sense, given that they're going to suck anyway, but it invalidates their stated aim of slashing payroll in that period, and the two years where it does save money happen to be the ones where they're hoping to compete...years when having a ~3 fWAR player making $14m would be a plus rather than a negative.