http://blogs.seattletimes.com/mariners/2014/01/09/the-search-for-chuck-a...
(written shortly after news of LaRussa's interest in the Mariners' team president position)
"At this point, it seems as though the Mariners might be leaning toward an internal candidate. The transition would be easier because of the familiarity within the organization for all involved. That doesn’t mean there would be no change in thinking. Armstrong did things his way based on his longevity within the business, but any replacement – internal or external – will likely bring different thinking to the job.
I have no favorite for this position. For me, I think the structure of the front office should be modified and the president’s responsibilities split into two entities – business and baseball. Two jobs, two different people that specialize in each area and have them work together. The Diamondbacks have a similar split. But Lincoln has said on multiple occasions that he has no plans to do that."
If Ryan Divish has his finger on the pulse of the franchise, then Kevin Mather will have ultimate say in baseball operations UNDER Lincoln. Jack will be TWO stations removed from freedom to do as he sees fit. The way this mode of management worked out under Lincoln/Armstrong was clearly displayed by Geoff Baker's bombshell article in October. Whether Kevin Mather will approach things the same way remains to be seen, but the machinery to do so appears to remain in place. Two non-baseball guys holding the strings to the marionette that is Jack Zduriencik.
.
Kevin Mather = President
Sez Spec,
Kevin Mather to be named M's president. Has been VP for finance & ballpark operations. No need to state obvious about priorities. LaRussa snubbed.
Follows on SABRMatt, adroitly,
I have been convinced, actually, that it might be better for the Mariners' GM if the club made its Team President do primarily financial stuff. It could be that whoever replaces Zduriencik after this season gets a lot more room with Mather at the helm than with a guy like LaRussa. I still think Mather is a classic Seattle move...but there are silver linings to ever cloud.
.
Dr. D's crunch? We've already riffed about Tony LaRussa. What we said IN THIS ARTICLE goes double today. It adds a poignant touch that La Russa himself was mystified about the M's snub, enough so to complain nationally.
I think Matt's right about the silver lining. Impossible to imagine a promoted bean counter (no disrepect intended) having the "hallway cred" to walk into Zduriencik's office, uninvited, and start writing on his white board. (Which is precisely what senior execs do to junior execs, and precisely what Chuck Armstrong did to GM's.)
Blengino complained that Zduriencik hit a point where he wanted to do it His Way. SSI is quite optimistic that, in the critical 2014-15 seasons, he will be able to do it His Way.
It is possible that Zduriencik has been a closet genius, hamstrung by circumstances. That scenario is plausible.
.
Homer Bailey = Too Good to Be True
Mo' Dawg sez,
If Homer Bailey is still on the trade block, I'm in for chasing him or Samardzija. Since Bailey 1st went over 100 innings in '09 his WHIP and ERA have both declined each and every season. The Bailey problem is that he's a FA in '15. It would be problematic if he would extend in '14...or highly unlikely. I think I would still chase him. Samardzija is free in '16, so you're guaranteed 2 seasons.....but I'm not sure you get as good a thrower as Bailey. Young arms might free up both. As for the bat, I would still much rather chase Van Slyke, or even Soriano, than Cruz. Cruz's Home/Road HR splits over the last 4 years have been: 13/9, 19/10, 18/6, 13/14. He bounced back last year, but 3 of those years indicate he may not be a 20 homer guy for the M's. As Doc has pointed out, at some point he becomes cheap. 2X$10M? When he's cheap, I'm in. Until then, I'm chasing the other guys. Or Stanton, fullbore, with an offer than starts with Seager and goes from there.
.
CRUNCH - Zduriencik has said, Probably no more major moves, just a couple kewl little things to really put the finishing touches on an admirable roster.
1. When the Mariners do make a good move, they love their surprises, so that statement wasn't conclusive. Their general attitude about sports competition is a little more so...
2. Bailey is between Samardzija and the other guys (Garza, Jimenez, Santana in that order) on Dr. D's draft list. Supposedly the M's are talking extension; if Bailey fails to grant the Cincinnati home town discount, that's when you could talk to the Reds.
I'd certainly like to know more about this possibility. Good stuff Dawg. ... and Garza, Jimenez, those guys, I certainly wouldn't turn up my nose. We can nitpick, but they're front-of-rotation guys, #2-#3 guys on contending teams.
........
It seems that every year, there is one team that develops a killer rotation out of nowhere, and contends out of nowhere.
Kansas City, you realize, had a 98 ERA+ in 2012 and a 120 (!!) ERA+ in 2013. We vaguely remember one White Sox team that had like Mark Buehrle, John Danks, Bartolo Colon, and Gavin Floyd "surprisingly" have good years together...
in Wakamatsu's big year, the Mariners had Felix, Bedard, with Jarrod Washburn pitching out of his mind and several other guys throwing good, like Ryan Rowland-Smith and Doug Fister and Jason Vargas. Was that the year Chris Chambliss said the rotation was better than any Yankee rotation he ever saw? But you had the weird circumstance of the Betancourt-Lopez lineup.
Go back through history and you'll find some playoff teams led by surprise rotations ... Oakland has had several teams like that, such as in 2012 I think, but it never surprises anybody when they cobble a great rotation out of thin air.
Obviously a rotation of Felix - WBC-san - Garza - Two Michael Pinedas would BE such a rotation.
.
$6M = Too Much (hope they told Robby this before the fact)
Mojo Sez,
Rays sign Grant Balfour. It seems like the good teams, even poor ones, make their bullpens a priority.
JD Dub sez,
I'm with you on this mojician! Been screaming and shouting since last season for a bullpen upgrade. Doesn't need to be a closer, just an established, consistent setup guy or two. Even Padres added Benoit. Save the 50M on some mediocre #3 and just trade for Stults from SD for 200 innings.
.
CRUNCH ... er, more like, just a coupla random thoughts. When Pat Gillick signed on with the M's, an American League insider told Dr. D, "You're not going to believe this guy's FEEL for building a team. He will take a collection of talent and mold it into a real ballclub." Of course the 2001 Mariners were an epic "ball club."
First thing Gillick did, was "get Lou more bullets for his gun" out there in the bullpen. And you remember the deeeeep Orioles bullpens when Gillick was there ... Myers, Rhodes, Benitez, Orosco, etc.
What the Mariners have done to address the bullpen, is to fire the manager* (* = I know, I know) and the #1 reason they give is that he mis-managed the bullpen. Yep, just do a better job with the indy-league guys and the rookies and we're golden.
Zduriencik's signature move was to trade AWAY JJ Putz ... I'm not busting him for that. He gets credit for dealing Morrow for that surfer guy; nothing's all black and white. But the M's have believed in "developing your bullpen from within" -- you know who else dearly believed in that? Bill Bavasi.
Grant Balfour cost all of $6M times 2 years.
....
On the bright side, if the Golden Arms do start arriving -- Taijuan, KPax, ERam, etc -- that's when such a plan actually starts working. Odd as it sounds, once Blake Beavan is (1) seasoned and (2) your #8 starter, then (3) that's when you got guys out in the bullpen who are effective.
Or not,
Dr D
Comments
The guy is supposed to be pretty smart and he knows the organization, so I think we ought to keep an open mind. It could be the case that Mather has had his own ideas for some time, but given that he worked under Armstrong on the non-baseball ops side of the organization, it could be that he simply never had a venue for putting those ideas forward.
There's also the possibility of a sale in the next year or two, which could bring in an entirely different organization from top to bottom. Mather could be in the role of caretaker Pres until the sale is complete and then he goes off to his next adventure with a stint as President of the Mariners on his resume. It's also entirely possible that he's a true visionary and that the Mariners, under his administration, go on to a new era of on-field success with multiple division championships and world series appearances.
On Zduriencik: I'm reasonably convinced at this point that the man has almost no say over budgetary decisions. I don't know if it's correct to call him a marionette, but what I suspect is true is that his job description at this point simply does not include any significant level of control over how the budget for the major league roster is allocated.
But I think that 12M spent on Balfour would have many times the impact of 6M for Bloomquist. There were so many options to strengthen our bullpen this winter, non-closer options, and we passed on all of them. Even if somehow this offense is enough, Walker and Paxton both come through, the team has good luck with injury, etc.... overall this bullpen is sketchy. It would be a shame to watch a pennant race go up in flames due to saving money in the pen. Maybe cost Kuma or Felix the W's for a Cy. The dice roll on all the young arms might pay off, but odds are not in our favor.
I always enjoyed watching those Lou teams with a lead after 6 or 7 innings. The game turned into a 3 inning save celebration as the other team had little chance of coming back. I wonder how the players on the field enjoyed that feeling? It must have felt a bit like having the Seahawks D on the field in crunch time. Probably does wonders for your confidence. Maybe you relax in the batters box early, knowing that if you can chip away for 3 or 4 runs it will probably be enough.
I think the bullpen will be alright, but they probably need to find a way to bring Perez back. My concern with the bullpen isn't so much the guys that are down there as it is with overexposure. If Taijuan, Erasmo, and K-Pax are your 3,4, and 5, you'll likely have more than a few 5-inning games, and honestly, I don't know if bringing in another scrub starter like Joe Saunders changes that dynamic at all. What does change it is an acquisition like Samardzija or someone simply stepping up and exceeding expectations, which happens in sports.
in the twenty ought four era, when the hated Angels were good, a large part of it was because of their bullpen. It felt like impending doom after the sixth inning if the Mariners lacked a lead. It always started with Scott Shields, and his dopey looking glasses. He tended to pound the Mariners into cube steak with his slider.
After him, came boy wonder Francisco Rodriguez, who, finding Cube steak not good enough, ran the Mariners through a blender until they were liquid slop with his slider.
After that, Troy Percival came in for a plant inspection. He found that liquefieing the Mariners woefully distasteful and inadequate. He didn't believe that an enemy was thoroughly destroyed while it still maintained some cellular structure. Percival preferred disintegration through incendiary heat.
Intentional hyperbole on my part. I'm pretty much saying the same thing you did, "his job description at this point simply does not include any significant level of control over how the budget for the major league roster is allocated." Not only that, but his baseball decisions are subject to baseball input by the two non-baseball people above him. I agree also, and also stated, that it remains to be seen whether Mathers will engage in this practice like Armstrong did. We simply don't know, and might not for a few years.
"12M spent on Balfour would have many times the impact of 6M for Bloomquist."
Boy do I agree with your statement. NOTHING saps a team's will like frequently blowing hard-built leads. Only teams with outstanding offenses can afford to bring in relievers who routinely give up runs. I think we can all agree that barring a perfect storm of circumstance this offense will be average, average-plus at best. And if the young guys don't step up it could be below average.
You look at the history of the entire Mariners' organization and one characteristic that jumps out at you immediately is "penny pinchers." And, ironically, the penchant for these penny pinchers to overpay for pets like Bloomquist while refusing to address glaring roster needs because of payroll constraints. Penny pincher is not the same as cheap. Cheap will never spend. The Mariners have on occasion spent. But they have ALWAYS been penny pinchers. Example, Tino Martinez. It's what drove Lou Piniella insane after he and Gillick had built a formidable team.
With Farquahr, Furbush, Medina and Carson Smith, I think the M's 'pen is pretty solid. Pryor should provide a nice lift when he arrives, too.
Willie was a leadership add, much like Raul and Sweeney before him. I don't mind signing these kinds of guys so long as this remains the only part of the team on which non-Stars&Scrubs $ is spent.
Also, Z keeps uncovering bullpen gems. It would be hard to pay retail after having such success scouring the discount bins.
That's a good way to put it. He brings "attitude" and "toughness" to the team, because as we all know, that's what's been missing.
"Willie was a leadership add, much like Raul and Sweeney before him. I don't mind signing these kinds of guys so long as this remains the only part of the team on which non-Stars&Scrubs $ is spent."
I actually do object to it. My concern is that there doesn't seem to be any rhyme or reason, let alone an actual "strategy" around the concept of allocation of resources for the purpose of producing wins. When you commit $6 million over 2 years to a replacement level player because he's a home town guy and brings "grit" or whatever to the roster, I'm really left kind of speechless. I do not buy the value of leadership or mentoring of young players blah blah blah blah blah. Those things are great if they come packaged with a player that brings tangible baseball skills with him, which is not the case here.