Nice Herzog reference Doc.  It occured to me that the Cards in the mid 80's had Jack Clark and a bunch of chipmunks.  Problem for us is that the M's don't even have the chipmunks.
I'm totally with you on the bat stuff.  I would think of an Ackley early call up in terms of a FA out there that no one else has available.  If they start losing some of these grinders they've been winning, I'd hate to wonder about the "what if they had brought him up earlier?" scenario.
If this rotation holds, this team will be one of the ultimate "we don't want to face these guys" in October scenario.  But for October to matter, September has to matter, August has to matter.... you get the drift.

Padna,
I've written before that the 80's Cards are not quite the template for these Mariners....but should be te target.
While Jack Clark was the only real homer threat on those teams they had plenty of punch (of the two-base and three-base type) beyond him.
For Example:  In their 1st place year of '85,Clark had 22 HR's and 51 x-base hite.  But there were three other players on that eam who had 54, 51, and 44 x-base hits.
In their 1st place '87, Clark had 35 taters and 59 x-base hits.  Three other players chipped in with 59, 45 and 44 multi-baggers.
You want an offense with a single bomber (Smoak)?  Fine...you can do it BUT you need at least three other guys in the mid-40's+ with x-base hits.
Look for those players to add to this team.  I think we have one coming up in a couple of weeks.  Figgins, Bradley, Langerhans, Saunders, Ryan? No chance.
 
moe

And no, I don't particularly want them to follow that model.  You'll note that I actually said "the M's don't even have the chipmunks".  I do understand that the Cards had weapons and the M's definitely do not.  They have their Clark, and perhaps their MaGee and Pendleton...but little else (in fact a lot less).
But still, even cobbling together a semblence of below average bats would make them scary.
Protection for Smoak and bandages on the sucking chest wounds.  If the M's are in it in July, go get a bat or two.  It doesn't have to be a star...

As I said in the other thread, I've watched a few of the Rainiers games on video, and every time I see Ackley he's stinging the ball somewhere.  Last night he got a lazy pitch, whipped the bat out and wristed a screamer over the RF fence in about half a second of pulled power.
His eye ratio is 1.25.  His isolated walks is .140+.  His babip was .236 last I checked.  I wasn't sure if he'd be able to have that fast a bat with wood when I saw him in college, but he does. I honestly wonder if it's too fast for him right now and he's not QUITE able to slow it down enough to get more base knocks, instead topping the ball or pulling it foul.  But he uses the whole field - the guy is GONNA hit.
It's been over a year now and he's only had a couple of months of real hitting.  Some of it is absolutely luck.  I dunno what the rest is, and I don't think the Mariners are gonna call him up until they know what it is either.  A 2 week hot streak would be a great way to arm-twist the Ms into giving him his Safeco ticket, but Ackley hasn't put one of those together yet.
He's a 4-for-5 with a double kind of hitter, or a 1-for-2 with 3 walks sort.  He hasn't had those games this year.  He'll start to get them, and then they'll promote him.
And I'm sure it will be conveniently after his arb deadline.  So here's hoping we can keep winning with a dental floss and baling wire lineup til then, because Smoak and the Rejects is an interesting band name, but a treacherous offensive philosophy.
~G

One other thing to keep in mind, the Cards played on Astroturf between 1970 and 1995, which encompasses the Herzog years. At the time it was a given that the team was constructed to take advantage of that fact. Safeco is the complete opposite environment.

Ok, Doc.  That is one bizarre picture you managed to find there.

Absolutely sick. Why, the guy being eaten doesn't even have the class to wear socks with his tennis shoes! Talk about disrespecting the Yankees...

Doc,
I think your analysis is dead on the money perfect.
But, what *I* believe is going to annoy a large number Ms fans.
I *HAVE* done a study of World Series teams ... I looked over a dozen years, (24 teams, IIRC), and what I found was this.
1) All but one team had at least ONE regular with a sub-80 OPS+.
2) Nearly every team actually had TWO regulars with a sub-80 OPS+.
3) Nearly every team had 1 EXTRA guy over 120 OPS+ for every guy under 80 OPS+.
4) The "standard template was a trio of 120+ guys ... and a pair of sub-80 guys (one of the sub-80 guys was almost always either a catcher or a shortstop).
What does the above mean?
That it would be *FOOLISH* to think that making moves aimed at THIS season could *POSSIBLY* get this team to the World Series. 
This team is *NOT* - I repeat *NOT* "a couple of bats" away from being competitive.  They are roughly FIVE (5) bats away from being a legitimate WS contender. 
At this point in time, the hitters are: Smoak, Ichiro (who may be fading), and Milton Bradley.  LROD and Kennedy, in sparse duty have acceptable hitting numbers ... but only LROD has any kind of upside expectation of a future with the club.
ANY move aimed at 2011 would, IMHO, be idiotic in the extreme.  The fact the team has streaked its way to a .500 record is not more a confirmation of talent than the 85 and 88 win seasons with the negative pythags (that were ignored by management).  It is NOT a competitive team - it doesn't have the talent -- it doesn't have even CLOSE to the talent.
The upside "dream" scenario is Guti comes back and hits over 100 ... and Ackley comes up and hits over 100.  If BOTH of those happen, then what the club has is down to only 4 offensive black holes.  (Exactly what are they supposed to trade to get TWO guaranteed, productive bats, at the positions of need, should the Guti/Ackley miracle occur?)
The best case scenario for the club this year - is that Jack is wise enough to make a deadline deal that brings in another Guti or (less likely - Smoak). 
There are MORE 7 game losing streaks to come.  The talent the team has fairly demands this will come to pass.  And any delusion that the club is close enough to respectibility that bringing in "a good bat" could put them over the top is just that - a delusion. 
Let's say ... just as an example ... that the club currently has 70-win talent.  That would mean they need 20 extra wins to reach 90 (and have a shot at the playoffs).  So, what does 20 wins cost on the open market?  Per current WAR/$ ... $80 million.  That puts the club in need of FOUR (4) Joe Mauer's, (more or less).
The LAST thing this club needs to do is get stuck with another Silva(Bradley) multi-year, high dollar contract.  This pathological need for instant gratification is what leads to bad decision making.  Smoak is the 1st successful bat the Ms will have produced (albeit with most of the heavy lifting done by the Rangers) in a decade.  Ackley "could" be #2.  But there are 9 regular positions, and nothing (long term) palatable at any of them. 
Your take on the current Ms is dead-on.  They have been running a COMPLETELY unsustainable run-suppression side of things the last 10 games.  The offense ... it's been about what you can expect for the rest of the year.  By all means - enjoy the streak - enjoy the wins -- but let us hope that Jack is not seduced into the idea that the team is just a "tweak" away from the playoffs. 

Please, please, PLEASE do not make trades with the idea of making a run for just this season.  If you can add a great player for the next several years, fine, but no one-year guys to make us "contenders."
Asdrubal Cabrera and Shin-soo Choo would still be playing for us if we didn't want a 3 month tragedy tandem of Broussard and Perez in our lineup.  
We don't have a lot of assets we can afford to trade.  Aardsma was supposed to be one and he's not gonna be.  Saunders has flatlined his trade value.  Figgins insists on having such abysmal starts to his seasons that he's not gonna be worth that contract to many folks either.
Bradley, Wilson, Kennedy, and Cust won't be here next year.  Saunders should be on the farm, or at least not starting. Ackley will be coming up, but any other farm-generated hitters are unlikely for 2012 unless you count Gutierrez and hope he can return to 2009 form.
So we need bats from outside the org, and we have to get them without giving up long-term assets.  We don't have much surplus, either in the bigs or on the farm.
Zduriencik's gonna have to get creative at the trade deadline because we need a couple more "lucky" adds to plug holes.
~G 

In a vacuum, yes, high-quality rotations can win with lesser hitters.  But in this case, what sort of framework have the Ms built?
They have a franchise ace, Cy Young winner and TOR stalwart.
They have a young ace in the making who is throwing the stuffing out of the ball.
They even have a THIRD TOR pitcher from years past who has been injured but could be as dangerous as any pitcher in the league once he knocks the rust off. 
The 4 and 5 pitchers have held their own, but we won't be using them in a playoffs scenario.
How about the pen?  Uh...they've been very good.  Unsustainably good, IMO.  But bullpen parts can be moved around with judicious smaller trades or minor leaguers getting good at the right time.
And the hitters?
Ichiro, Smoak, and...um...yeah...
The Mariners could still make a run at it, especially if Texas keeps floundering without their prized outfielder.
But no, I would not want to go all in with this team and trade Nick Franklin to get Jose Reyes in here for the stretch run, for instance. Unless we planned to bump payroll up to sign him long term, but even then he's not a thumper, just a good bat overall and a very good one for his position.  Maintaining payroll and signing him would be self-defeating, especially for the expected player cost involved.
I don't see the moves to make to strengthen the lineup enough for 2nd half contention without really damaging our future teams. And I don't see this lineup hitting enough unless Smoak just continues to go insane all year and some other guys come back from "abysmal" to "useful."
That hasn't happened for us recently, so I guess I'm not putting weight into it happening this year.
The rotation looks good.  The bullpen has been okay, needs long-term work but could be shored up as we move along.
The lineup doesn't seem fixable to me this year with the assets we have available. 
Cust posting a 130 OPS+ the rest of the year would help alleviate that feeling for me, but I don't see it in him. Nor Bradley, nor Saunders, nor anyone else currently scuffling big-time.
If we're 5 games out in the middle of July and still doing it with Smoak and Mirrors...do you bet that horse, trade for Reyes or someone for the last half of the year and give up Franklin?  He is basically your only significant trade chip in the minors with the struggles of some other players like Jones to start the year.
Is this the year you would cash him in, trusting that Smoak can be Pujols and we can be the 2006 Cards?  As you said, this is not the year I would prefer to push it all into the pot, but if it comes down to it at the deadline Jack's gonna have to make that call.
And I would rather sell what we can to get back some pieces to help Smoak, Pineda and Felix in 2012 and beyond than gamble that we can win a World Series with the assembled team plus a hired gun.
The Ms pulling a 2004 Astros and giving away our last usable trade chips for 3 months of a Carlos Beltran would seem like a mistake to me, because I don't think we can do what they did with it, nor should their record since 2005 be an encouragement to build a long-lasting contender that way.
I don't expect to been in (mirage) contention, so the point should be moot by July.  And I'm enjoying watching the Ms play this year far more than last year already.  Cashing in early by believing a seriously flawed team is a contender is what cost us Choo, Cabrera, Tillman, Sherrill, Jones over the last few years, and everyone ELSE they might have brought us if used more judiciously. 
We can't afford any more of that if we want to fix this thing.
~G

He doesn't tend to give away minor league assets that are worth anything to us.  If he wanted to package Seager + Chavez + Mieses and get me a plus hitter for a few years, great.  I'm not against trades to help us this year and in future years.
But I would not AIM at this year with my transactions.
~G 

Got a Koufax, Drydale, and an Osteen? Check.
OPS+...well, that 97 win team was lead by 121 from the aged 36 year old 3rd baseman Junior Gilliam, an on base guy every always overlooked. Anybody on this team resemble Junior anywhere? Figgins maybe? There's your key (sorry to say. The leadership factor Gilliam brought may be lacking there).
But after that, you basically have Ron Fairly, Jim Lefebvre, and Wes Parker providing plus 100, at 115, 106, 100. Lou Johnson added a 104 as well.
Ichiro > Maury Wills's 93. We need Saunders to pull a Johnson, Cust or someone play Fairly, Guti is Willie Davis. And Smoak compensates for everyone else. Compensates, and then some.
There's certainly stuff we can trade and won't miss, to fill in gaps.

Doc,
 
The '06 Cards are kind of a weird example....their lineup wasn't a weak as it first appears.  It's true that 4 of their 8 main guys had OPS+ #'s at 80 or below, but one of those guys was SS D. Eckstein, who hit .292 & OBP'ed .350.  His 80 OPS+ become tolerable, especially for a SS, in that light.
Taguchi, Miles and Molina were fairly ugly offensively. BUT their 1st 4 guys off the bench (in terms of PA's), S. Spezio, C. Duncan, H. Luna, and J. Rodriguez combined for 902 PA's (basically more than one fulltime position) and an OPS+ (combined) in the 120 range.
So they had some bats. The lesson, perhaps, is that we need Kennedy and Rodriguez to get maximzed PA's as long as they remain hot. 
But even excluding the bench, the '06 Cards has 5 starters with bats, three without.  The '11 M's have 3 starters with bats, 6 without.
This team can hang around the playoff trail, BUT not with this current day-to-day lineup (or without 2 of these 5 suddenly finding their bats again)....Figgins, Cust, Saunders, Olivo, Wilson, Ryan......Ugh.  Bradley is tolerable right now because he walks 100 points AND is on pace for a 45 x-base season.  But I sense a Bradley meltdown occuring.  He's twice got the boot recently. I think he's hanging on, but just.
Ackley will help, but interestinly, when Ackley comes us the proper move might be to play Wilson as SS.  His bat is much better than Ryan's right now.  The most proper move is to play Rodriguez there as much as possible, with Ackley at 2B. 
If it is me....and we're stuck with Cust in the lineup, then I bat him 2nd, behind Ichiro. Putting him in an RBI position makes no sense. 
Guti...I can't see him playing in May.  I'm not sure he's played in the field in Tacoma, can't hit worth a lick right now and will be of no particular help for quite a while. 
Saunders is just flat out terrible right now.  It is hard to even see production occuring at all this year (or next). I understand the need for decent CF defense...but not at the expense of a 47 OPS+.  Not even the Say Hey Kid, or The Mick, or Motormouth, when they were all young, played defense well enough to overcome a 47.
If you figure we're 20+ games away from Guti (which I think is optimistic) that means we play 1/3 of the season with a guy with which there is almost no modern comparison.  There is no modern OF with more than 450 PA's in a season who performed as dismally as Saunders.  He is setting a record of futility.  Interestingly the best comparison is Paul Blair himself in '76, when he was about done and certainly no longer a great fielder CF'er.  Blair hit .197/.245/.264 that year, in 413 PA's. (John Shelby had 376 PA's in '89 for the Dodgers and is a good comparison, too.  Ditto George Wright, 85 Rangers, 396 PA's).  No other OF in modern history (60+ years) has more than 250 PA's and a line less than .200/.250/.300 (which are all better than Saunders right now).  Essentially, as far as I can tell, Saunders may be the worst (offensively) FULL-TIME OF in modern history (at his current level of production).
For a team that can't score runs....His continued insertion in the everyday lineup, without some effort to identify almost anybody else, is almost indefensible.
Fix the Saunders/Cust hole in the lineup....and this team can hang around for quite a while.  Carp, Wilson, Peguero, Bard, Limonta, Joe Schlabotnik, Barney Rubble, or Pedro Cerrano....Let's try anybody else in those two spots.
Desperate,
moe

If 2007 Bedard is back - and he looks comfortable, REALLY comfortable out there on the mound for the first time in a long time - then the top 3 in our rotation are gonna be a buzz saw nobody's gonna want to face.
Hopefully he can keep it up.  Then Jack really WILL have to figure out how to patch our lineup holes in time to take advantage.
BTW, I think it's hilarious that after months of east-coast-bias notes from most of the major baseball reporters on how the Ms need to trade Felix to one of their preferred teams now, the story's finally changing.
But it's because we "stumbled" across Pineda that we should keep Felix.  "Oh, well now that you might have a pitcher other than the King maybe we should believe you that Felix is not available for any price."
I wonder what they'll say if Bedard can throw like this for a few months. ;) As Sims just pointed out the Mariners offense is last in BA and 12th in runs in the AL.
But a rotation like the one we're putting together could make us a really aggravating opponent all year.
~G

This is from memory ... what I was attempting to look at was how "balanced" an offense needed to be -- (sort of a "how scrubby can stars & scrubs get?" study). 
So, my memory might not be perfect.  I know I picked years in the FA era ... and "probably" in the steroid era.  But, I think it would be dubious at best to discount a study which basically concluded "The 200 OPS+ guy cannot make up for a multitude of 60 OPS+ guys."  If that doesn't happen in the steroid era ... hardly reason to think it would be more unbalanced before steroids.
But, I was looking at OPS+ specifically because I wanted to mitigate era impact.  REGARDLESS of era, an 80 OPS+ is "supposed to be" comparable over eras.
Of course, the most telling thing in all of the attempts to counter my assertion is that ZERO of the examples were AL teams. 
Mostly what I was trying to do was figure out if having a 150 or 160 OPS+ superstar actually made a difference.  It didn't.  The math is pretty straight forward.  You take your best and worst hitters and they average together at "roughly" 50/50.  The only mitigating factor is PAs.  You take a 140 OPS+ guy with 600 PAs and put him on a team with a 60 OPS+ guy getting 600 PAs ... and the aggregate result actually seems to be WORSE than having two guys at 100.  The "unbalanced" lineup has a weakness of allowing the freedom to "walk" around the big bat.
THIS team has exactly one big bat at the moment.  How does the club score runs in a meaningful game when Smoak gets the Bonds treatment?  ICHIRO is currently #2 in RBI for the team. 
And the scrubs on this team aren't even the 70-75 OPS+ guys from the Astros NL team.  There are FIVE (5) regulars currently under 70 (not 80) ... and a pair currently under 60.  Hey, I'll concede that Kennedy, LROD and Langerhans add a trio of 'bench' bats that are palatable.  And I'd say they ARE what has allowed the offense to 'appear' salvageable so far. 
My own view - (and I think MANY would agree) - is that Ryan has basically zero chance of being any better than Cedeno.  He's gonna put up a 60 (ish) OPS+ until he leaves town.  Olivo?  Anyone placing their chips on Olivo to climb to an 85 OPS+?  Figgins?  After last season and this April, who is pegging Figgins to produce a 90 OPS+?  Saunders anyone? 
Right now the "best" hopes for the Ms to go from 6 black holes to 3 would require Bradley and Cust to rebound ... for LROD to take over at short ... and for Ackley to come up and produce a .750 OPS from day one.  But, Olivo and Figgins aren't going anywhere.  That's pretty much a guarantee of two black holes for the rest of the season.  So, we're supposed to bet on 100% success rate at EVERY other position?
Mind you ... if by July the club has somehow managed to prouce a half dozen guys putting up an 80 or above OPS+ as starters, I'd be more than happy to revisit the discussion.  But, "right now", this club isn't remotely close to having enough talent to warrant any kind of "short term" move for a 2011 payoff. 
The reality here is that - the club has had an unimaginable pitching streak - (a dozen Halladay's as Doc put it).  THAT cannot continue.  But, consider that after 10 days of a dozen Halladay's, the club ERA+ is *STILL* not at 100.
The model being discussed is a 120 ERA+.  The problem here is while saying "the dozen Halladay's can't continue" - the argument that the team is competitive ignores the 23 points of ERA+ the club still has to reel in. 
Wedge has been a master - but look at the current top 4 bullpen guys -- ZERO HRs combined.  A total of 39 hits in 61 innings.  But a combined total of only 38 Ks.  There isn't a SINGLE one of the bullpen guys with a K rate above 7.  ZERO.  Our bullpen of League, Pauley, Laffey and Wright has been better than Pineda!  That is not meant as a compliment - but as a warning of what *IS* coming. 
I said weeks ago this team if built for streaks.  I stand by that point.  They're riding high at the moment - but somepoint (probably very soon) - another slide is going to come - and it's gonna be painful to endure. 

The Dodgers had a hidden offensive weapon that season: Don Drysdale *hit* an OPS+ of 140! M's have nobody like that on the bench. If Dysdale were an M, he'd be platooning at DH.
I'm agreeing with Ghost in that I can't stand to watch another week of Saunders, or Langerhans for that matter. There were plenty of times I'd much preferred to watch Mike Wilson take his hacks against Mark today. Painful game.
But the '65 "Hitless Wonders" is a very approachable blueprint, and with it as such, I remain hopeful.

I've been calling for this for two years.  I actually wondered last night when I checked the Rainiers box score and saw that he didn't play.  this is a needed move for the M'.  Wilson may help.  but, even if he doesn't, it is an aggresive move to help the offense.  Badly needed.