the idea of bringing in Garko for some reason.  I'm not sure why, but I'm starting to see the value there.  Like, alot.
To me, he's kind of like what I imagine most of us think Casey Kotchman is supposed to represent.  A pre-peak player, signed for cheap at a position of need who offers some specific strengths as-is, and possesses the ability to leap a plateau sometime soon.  I just don't see it with Kotchman, but I absolutely see it with Garko.
His upside is what, a 1.5-2.0 win player, his middle ground is ~1 and the downside is practically non-existent.  If he's still shellshocked from last year's miserable performance in SF, he's easy to abandon and move on from.
 

that Garko was also part of one of the koolest names I've seen for a fantasy baseball team in that AL only league I was part of a few years ago.  Gonnie Garko, I believe it was.  That was a lot of fun.

I really like when you talk about radio interviews, Doc, because I don't get a chance to listen to Seattle radio much and forget to dig through the archives.

of upside, rather than the re-iterating the simple WAR paradigm we see way, way, WAY too often in our local scene. I was, however, approaching the discussion from that particular angle for just a moment. The greater point being "Hey, even if this guy doesn't do anything to improve, he's still a valuable piece. And there's the very real possibility that he comes out an .850's from a spot we have literally zero high-upside depth at.
But yeah, his leveraged value would be, theoretically, the kind of piece you can build up against when executing in-game strategy. Knowing he's sitting on the bench when Jr., Kotchman or whoever is scheduled to bat might just belay that middling LOOGY's call, giving the current guys a better chance at it.
Byrnes is the same sans positional flexibility. These are two guys who present ~equal offensive skills in a limited, late-inning role that can absolutely change the complexion of a game, if not the actual outcome.
The thing I really like about Garko is the C flexibility. Even if he's nothing more than a bad catcher, he still allows you to at least threaten him late in the game at the C spot, in addition to 1B and COF. That's huge compared to a guy like Byrnes, who is probably better off as a platoon/4th OF type in the bigger picture if he breaks camp with the club.

I'm in SE Asia (and have been since last fall, when I completed my first solo Pacific crossing in the family sailboat) so radio is awfully hard to get to, due to the time difference of ~15 hours.
I can find some transcripts, but usually only when they're linked at MC, here or there's a breakdown on one of the other sites like BBT (proballnw?) or LL.

It's Branyan's downside risk that concerns me and probably the rest of MLB.  In reality, that shouldn't be a problem unless the team doesn't have the guts to DL him when he's hurt.  That was the 2009 problem, along with no back-up plan.  The team was so strapped for bats that they were reluctant to sit Russ when hurt in favor of Hannahan, Lopez, or Carp.  Now the point is moot, as the roster is full.

the idea of Garko moving to catcher a lot more than as an emergency appeals to me...gets his potent bat in the lineup far more than if he were to just platoon v lefties.  Don't you think?  We are weak at catcher when it comes to hitting.

Now Im not going ot say Garko is a GG. But watching some of his fielding highlights he strikes me as a smart fielder. 
Watch his videos on the MLB website and you will see. 
He is the type of player that is thinking ahead to the next play. When he was a Giant and dropped a infield opo up which was not great but recovered and got the forced out at 2nd.
He picks himself up and moves on the next play I appreciate that.
 

I was the Gonnie Garko owner. I had to switch over - it was too much fun not to.
I had a lot of fun that year - I think it was 2007. Didn't know as much as I do now but still managed to be competitive.