The optimistic take to the GM's 'non-response'? ... is simply that it's easier for Capt Jack to sell a GM on a "change of scenery" scenario, if Figgins isn't benched the week leading up to the trade deadline. Do you want to park your star's keister on the bench and then tell your friends to go scout him?
If Zduriencik apprised Wok of this, back channel, that he's working some things ... then Wok can go about his business with no loss of face.
It would be a Betancourt reprise -- he plays for a little while but at the first chance, he's off the team. The Betancourt Powerflush swirled the Mariner bowl for a long time.
.
=== Saavik'm Dept. ===
On the other hand, if Zduriencik were giving players a blank check to mouth off to Wok in the dugout, then I would agree with MC'ers that this makes Wakamatsu a 'dead man walking.' If the trade deadline passes with Figgins still here, SSI will regard Wakamatsu as a lame-duck manager. ... we'll see.
It's one thing for a player and a manager to go at it, in private.
It's a completely different thing for a ballplayer to tell a manager to kiss his patootie, with the cameras rolling. That doesn't happen in a good organization. If it does, the inmate gets Jose Guillened to Kansas City, regardless of what it means to the performance of the lineup. By letting the players do this, you'd be setting yourself up to become a real joke around the league.
If that were the case, I would either (1) revise my sky-high opinion of the exec skills present in Seattle, or (2) need some kind of explanation as to why the front office is responding with such weakness.
Since my opinion of the execs is indeed sky-high ... and that's not off-the-cuff; it's a considered opinion relative to what we've seen in F-500 ... we'll assume that the non-response presages a move.
Crazy as it sounds, it's the only logical explanation. When you've ruled out the impossible, Saavik, whatever remains, however improbable, must be true.
.
=== Albatross? ===
If I'm an opposing GM, I'm very interested in a Figgins reclamation project. The years are a little long, but $9M for a third baseman as good as Figgins can be (say +30 runs RLP), that's a nice piece to the puzzle.
Folks keep opining that Figgins has an albatross contract, and maybe they're right, but it doesn't look like one to me.
GM's know the same thing that we know: that (1) Figgins has been a 30-60 runs player, that (2) he came to Seattle and it was a disaster there, and that (3) when he leaves he'll probably revert to playing well.
Adrian Beltre's situation, Carlos Silva's, Brandon Morrow's, will only serve to embolden GM's in this interpretation. A picture's worth 1,000 words. GM's have three of them.
How those dynamics translate into actual trade possibilities, I have no earthly idea. But I give GM's a lot of credit for being willing and able to look past the sound bites.
....................
The M's are a joke on the field and off it, right now, but don't say that none of their young players have talent. Because some of them sure as shootin' do. Great year to be at Cheney.
Cheers,
Jeff
Printer-friendly version