Yes that was verbatim from Drayer's writeup. The full text below. What is most maddening is this "everybody has a budget they have to work within" nonsense. Attendance is up 2,000 a night this year, which I am certain they did not budget for because the lowest paid attendance night so far this year is comparable to the worst nights of last year, meaning they did not sell any further season tickets in the offseason. Ergo, they clearly have unexpected revenue from more single game sales, that should offer the type of flexibility they needed to sign Morales. Furthermore, Hart is not hitting his incentives so that is even more slack in the "budget".
This falling all over himself to publicly "thank ownership" for spending extra petty cash they have lying around...churns my stomach, to see a tough old guy like Z having to grovel like that. But I guess that's the Mariners kabuki.
Is he still in active talks for another bat or is this the move?
"It's a move right now. You never know what is going to happen. I have got to thank ownership for allowing us to do this. They have said all along if we get a chance where we think we are in it, then we are going to give you the resources, in this particular case they stepped up and this was great. I really, really appreciate it, we all appreciate it. My hat is off to them. I don't know what else will happen, we will continue conversations. Everybody has a budget that they have to work within and I think what they have done is, we want to stay in this thing and we want to be in the playoffs. We will see what happens. I do have discussions with other clubs about a lot of different things. Who knows what's around the corner. I don't have that answer right now."
http://mynorthwest.com/374/2572224/Zduriencik-on-Morales-Taylor-and-more...

. . . . or even something Z has to go to ownership to get aprroval for, the chances of Kemp coming here -or any other big bat - just disappeared over the horizon. I mean, really, this is a couple million bucks on a team that is half full of guys making the MLB minimum.
I'm sorry, Doc, I know you've tried hard to stay away from ownership bashing and I generally haven't thought that to be the main problem, so I don't intend to throw fuel on that particular fire, but my goodness this is just sad. A veteran guy like Z shouldn't be in a position where he has to kiss up like this.. Actually, nobody should.

This to me sounds like a man with a gun pointed to his head and praising a .15 cent raise.
Although there is also that side of me that reads through or into the lines that he may have been approved on a bigger trade.
It just happens in business that this went first.
Kinda like the wife just approved me getting a big screen and I bought the power cord first.
This was a smart move. Low cost high potential upside for a proven safeco bat.
Its the kind of move that says hey I can get David price minus zobrist and the extra specs it would cost.
Like hey I just got the same type of HDMI cable from mono price for cheaper and can use the extra cash to get more blu rays!

It's really my worst fears realized. I don't think Z has any budgetary authority at all - not in the offseason and not during the season.

This is a great catch in Z's language. IF? How about we make the resources available BEFORE we "think we're in it." Or rather, why don't we always try do be in it, using our resources? Yikes. That quote makes me so sad.

Here's one way to read it: what if Jack poured it on extra thick, because he's fed up. You know, damning with faint praise kinda deal. I can almost read it like that. That he goes so far out of his way to thank his masters – the guy's gotta realize it's a small deal, and thinks it's ridiculous how fragile the ownership's fortitude is for risk. At least I hope so. Not sure why I continue to give Z the benefit of the doubt. At some point you're just complicit.

Who ever knows what is really going on behind the scenes in Marinerville. The principals themselves are pathologically closed off and unaccountable to the public, and Seattle lacks a useful sports media that would ask the type of tough questions needed to get the truth (especially post-Baker). So we are all forced to hyper-analyze every public utterance and outside rumor, in the attempt to figure out what our team is up to.
Putting together everything we've seen and read recently, here is my take on what's gone down:
1. First principle: the M's, due to their ownership situation, do not have the ability to "invest" in the team's payroll beyond actual cash in the bank. (This means the TV money won't be spent until it has actually been received, which I assume has not happened yet, since they aren't spending more.)
2. The M's set a budget in the offseason, using projected revenues, and Z spent it (including $7M incentive money for Hart).
3. Hart sucked, and won't get his incentives. This frees up $7M in cash for Z to spend this year, all else being equal.
4. M's paid attendance has so far been improved over last year, by 2,000/game. This adds ~$5M in cash revenue (depending on assumptions about the net profit per fan, all-in). I assume this was NOT factored into the budget, as the M's are undoubtedly conservative in their projections, and there is clear evidence they didn't add much to the season ticket base in the offseason (lowest attendance night this year is comparable to lowest of last year, plus if they had sold a bunch of tickets post-Cano I'm sure we'd have heard about it).
5. Add it all up, and Jack has ~$10M to spend this year at the deadline. I don't know if it's $10M, but I am 100% certain he had the $4M needed to take on Fat Ichiro.
6. Despite this, Jack made a theatrical show of thanking ownership for allowing him to spend money that was already sitting there (that in fact he had already "spent" once, on Hart). Seems quite odd right? So why would he do this? My Marinerologist interpretation:
6a. Jack does not have the authority to spend freely (at least not after he's spent the initial budget once). All major (in-season) roster decisions impacting the budget must be vetted by someone(s) else above him. (I have no idea btw, if this is abnormal for a baseball GM.) This is further evidenced by the "hard to get to the finish line" comments about Jack from other teams on MLBTR.
6b. The M's authorities had in fact already authorized him to spend the full free ~$10M. And maybe had even taken a collective deep breath and agreed to let him spend even more than that (i.e., to take a financial risk with their capital).
6c. The specific deal that the M's authorities had in mind, when giving Jack the aforementioned financial authority, was a heavily rumored, internally vertigo-inducing swap of: several prized prospects for David Price and Ben Zobrist. However, the Rays started winning and backed out of talks.
6d. The normally tight lipped M's authorities whined publicly about the Rays backing out of this deal. We don't know who the source(s) were. My guess is it was either (a) Jack's superiors - who wanted to let M's fans know they tried to do something, and also felt offended that they'd gone outside their comfort zone and authorized a risky move, then had it blow up in their face. And/or it was (b) Jack, who had put his (very limited) credibility on the line with his bosses to convince them that this was a real thing that he was going to get done, then failed, and was angry and frustrated about it.
6e. Put this all together, and it becomes likely IMO, that Jack was actually thanking ownership not for the Fat Ichiro deal, but for authorizing the failed Rays deal - over which many feelings were undoubtedly hurt (and which possibly had given Jack personally a big black eye, if he had gone to the mat to convince his bosses he could get it done, then didn't).
7. Final prediction / silver lining: there is still ~$6M to be spent this year, and Jack will go spend it, assuming he can find trade opportunities that his bosses approve of. If he can't, the M's will just bank a nice cash profit, or shine up the Hit it Here sign real nice, or whatever else they spend cash on other than baseball players.

This is a plausible scenario, to me. Good stuff.

The discouraging "if we get a chance where we think we are in it, then we are going to give you the resources" actually fits nicely into my Unified Theory of the Mariners as well.
If you take as first assumption that the M's are cash-constrained, then obviously they can't commit resources they don't have. The only scenario where it would be even possible to increase spending, is if they are (a) doing better revenue-wise than expected - which I believe they are with the attendance boost so far - and thus able to revise the budget upward; and more importantly (b) looking at a potential immediate return on the investment, i.e. a pennant race and possible playoffs to boost revenues further and cover the increased costs quickly.
It is depressing that we are stuck with this ownership situation, but for me personally at least, I find it less depressing to view it through a financial lens, than to worry about things like the M's leadership "not caring about winning".

I hope Mather and z are not taking veiled 'potshots' at each other???

Every team knows every other team's basic financial situation, including exactly how much money they are taking in daily, their contracts, etc. They know the M's had $7M in incentives for Hart freed up, and that attendance is up. The only thing other GM's don't know is how much each ownership group is willing to invest in the team's payroll in relation to revenues, in the short term. That question is what all this sort of trade negotiation gamesmanship revolves around.
So I don't see this as a strategic comment by Mather, I am sure he is just answering a reporter's question and being honest about something that is obvious to every other team in baseball - which is that the M's have some payroll room. Notice though he was totally vague about how much room...so in reality he revealed nothing.
As for the original story that Mather was being asked about, stating that the M's have no payroll room...I am 100% sure Jack did not go around saying that to other GM's, because it is obviously not true, and it would be a laughable claim. It was just a puff piece rumor story written by somebody else. I'm sure there are more than a few reporters out there who find it enjoyable to poke at the M's leadership group.

. . . Z has to be playing a long game, some sort of weird double-bank. I now refuse to believe otherwise, cuz if I did I'd have to - ala Ichiro - slap myself in the face.

That's the difference that I can see, or at least that's one of the pearls I took from Moneyball. Beane may have fewer resources, but within the scope of the budget that he's given he can pretty much wheel and deal and do what he wants to try and improve the on-field product. I don't think Z has anything like that authority - not even remotely close.

I like the player, but if you look at his splits this year, his production is about as one-sided as it gets in favor of Coors Field. Honestly, Stubbs might be better off going to Japan. He could be all world over there.