... that being, Momentum Is Only As Good As That Day's Starting Pitcher.
Earl made that dugout observation ---> at the end of his historic managing run, not at the beginning of it. A Cy Young SP's affect on a team's psyche was (inferentially) one of the reasons that all of Earl's teams began and ended with the aces that he deployed in his rotations.
If you're not quite sure what Earl meant by that, consider the Mariners on May 15th. Their club record had plunged from 14-16 down to 16-23, and the reason it had done that was the worst possible. Brandon League had set a club record by getting the official L decision in four consecutive personal appearances.
Setting a Mariners record for losing? is a lot like setting a Biggest Loser record for heaviest entrant. They are well up into the 400's now, maybe 500's, so if I tolja the next guy up there blows them all away, you're frozen solid in place pending your look at exactly what I'm talking about...
If I told Moe and Lonnie and Russ, coming into 2011, that this year we were going to see the 1977-2011 Mariner record for an M's reliever getting his tenders caught in a vise, well...
***
The M's were 16-23 on March 15th, and it was immediately following those four Brandon League punch-outs, the last one the worst of all, the 3-run walkoff jack. ... and then a dreary rainout, and then a travel day. Remember that the M's had been expecting to win all four of those League losses.
In Frank Herbert's Dune, the Bene Gesserit would torture a hapless victim until his mind snapped, and then carefully convince him that it was all over, and then hit him with the worst pain of all .... I think like that was the Mind Flay or watching a Mariners record for losing or something. "The final pain is the key," a Reverend Mother said. "It locks in the Bene Gesserit lesson for a lifetime."
I think we were talking about a walkoff homer, followed by watching rain, followed by a claustrophobic airplane ride...
***
On May 16th, Michael Pineda pitched.
He threw a 3-hit shutout, with 7 strikeouts in 7 IP, and of his 99 pitches, 70 were strikes.
The Mariners won that game, obviously ... but they also won 10 of 12, and 14 of 18, starting with that day.
***
Jim Bouton wrote in Ball Four that losing a ballgame in the 9th "is like getting punched in the stomach." Which is best grokked if you've ever been suddenly, unexpectedly, and viciously punched in the stomach.
It's part of the reason that even saber GM's like J.P. Ricciardi spend tons of money on legit closers.
And it's part of the reason that every GM in baseball, given the ability to do so, will give $100,000,000 to people like Michael Pineda. You and I will feel bad about these last two games for what, twenty hours. Then Pineda starts warming up. Am I wrong?
The 2011 Seattle Mariners might not be one of baseball's best teams. But while Pineda and Bedard are feeling good, they are certainly one of baseball's most slump-proof teams. This team isn't going to have a lot of down cycles. They've got three stoppers.
***
Earl wasn't much for pep talks. "I don't know if I said ten words to Frank Robinson the whole time I had him," said Earl.
Another thing Earl said: "They say that managers are hired to be fired. But I was never fired, at any level. All it takes is a .583 winning percentage."
Earl never had a team fold on him, and it wasn't because he was rah-rah. It's just that it's hard for a team to develop much of a confidence problem when Randy Johnson is taking warmup tosses before the game.
Or Jim Palmer. Or Mike Flanagan. Or Dennis Martinez.
Or Michael Pineda. Or Felix Hernandez. Or Erik Bedard ...... should we include Jason Vargas in that? He's kicked Cole Hamels', Jered Weaver's and Brett Anderson's keisters.
Four horrible losses in May couldn't derail the juggernaut. Neither will these two horrible losses. Juggernauts can't be derailed. They are by definition unstoppable.
.
BABVA,
Dr D
I don't think Earl ever coached a team whose offense is so consistently poor.
Great job by the starting staff but we need another Earlism to come into play more often, that having to do with a 3 run homer.
21 IP in this series by the starters with 1 earned run. Unbelievable!
Heard Bowden on the radio yesterday saying that he has heard that Jack Z has been actively calling around about 3rd base, left field and DH.
Vlad would look good right about now.
From Drayer:
Ackley will bat 2nd if that's the best lineup, and Wedge won't keep him out of that spot "just because he's a young kid." Sez: "We can't ignore what we see."
Figgins is not an everyday player anymore. "We will pick our spots to get him in there."
AK would play everyday, but they need to give him "strategic days off" to keep him fresh.
Presumably, that drops Figgins into a Ja. Wilson fill-in role.
Yes, this is real material, not wish-fulfillment stuff.
Hey...Figgy isn't even as good a fielder as Kennedy at third right now...leads the club in errors and looking like a monkey's patootie on a daily basis at third. I don't mind trying him out lead-off if you could sell Ichiro on it, but otherwise, get him outta here and call up Liddi to share time with Kennedy.
...and that's one of the reason I like these M's, notwithstanding their poor hitting talent. They never give up. You can win or lose close games - and when you lose that hurts for sure. But like "a grounder very unlikely will develop into an extrabase" (from Moneyball, I guess) it's also true that it's hard to win a game late if your pitchers allow many runs early. So M's, stay close and never give up because that's the best way to learn to win tomorrow.
I am almost always opposed to a rent-a-bat situation. I'm not sure they are that great bets. Luke Scott's name has been tossed around...Man he's a less than .260 hitter...lifetime, I think.
I sure as rain don't give up any kind of a prospect for a Luke Scott.
Today we really saw the line-up for the near future...or close to it. I think this lineup will score runs.
We have just had three consecutive all-world starting performance by three guys not named Larry Fernandez. Trust in the arms. Sit Figgins. Get one more reliever rather than a Luke Scott.
If you could move Cust for something else that could play 3B or LF....I could live with that. But who's making that trade?
This is an interesting place....but I'm not trading a future player for a rent a mediocre bat.
Carp and Halman are Luke Scott.
real material & wish-fufillment stuff?
Great hookup as always Spec.
I'm not really interested in what the Mets have to offer, but the Dodgers have at least 5 players that would slide in quite nicely for the M's and should be gettable given the team's financial woes. I'd start asking about:
Casey Blake - like a right-handed Adam Kennedy with a better bat and left field experience; owed the remainder of about $5 mil with an affordable 2012 option; has injury troubles, but with a job-share at third and left would could really help.
Hiroki Kuroda - Owed the remainder of $12 mil this year, no long term obligation, would fit right in as you draw down Pineda's innings.
Jonathan Broxton - Owed the remainder of a $7 mil contract, but could be the closer we need; was wild in his rehab start, but has gained his velocity back; his recent struggles make trading him sellable to the LA fanbase.
Matt Kemp/Andre Ethier - Have been lobbied for and are probably pipe dreams, but if McCourt really wants to stick it to MLB by making the Dodgers unpurchasable (as it has been suggested he wants to), he could trade their stars as fiscally responsible, cost-cutting measure.
Would think they are roughly gettable in that order too. With the exceptions of Kemp/Ethier, neither are franchise players for their teams like Wright and Reyes are for the Mets.
From the "party line" via Drayer:
Z will not trade any "top young talent." I assume that's right from the source.
"There is not room under the current budget to take on additional salary." Not no room for "a bunch more" salary, apparently, no room for "any" salary.
Main reason for lack of salary room is that Bedard will make several million of incentives.
Trading Jack Wilson to clear salary space looks "more remote."
Ownership could increase the budget, but it "remains to be seen."
So any trade would have to involve lesser prospects and not increase payroll.
The foregoing does not make a trade impossible, only "difficult."
I would expect nothing else to be released to the media about budget. I would think the last thing you'd want to advertise is your real cash position. The fewer team appearing to be bidding, the better for a buyers' market. If I'm Z, I go to ownership for the additional budget (if necessary - and he already likely has presented the potential scenarios). Once armed with the info, I don't release it. I negotiate pull off the deal if I can - then let the media run with the surprise.
Party line is fine with me. If they're not looking at this ridiculous rotation with an eye toward an upgrade to the offense, they would be utterly stupid. I just can't see that. Obviously that doesn't mean some sort of deal will happen - you could swing and miss. But the party line as promoted is exactly what I would expect to see.
There's at least one large problem with postulating that Dreyer's post is a "for public consumption (only) party line" rather than a fairly accurate reflection of the club's actual thinking. That problem is: History shows us that Lincoln-Armstrong think and act precisely as she describes.
History shows us that upper management is not in the same game as the manager and the players. Given the opportunity to chase something special, the Mariners always refuse budgetary risk. Ask Lou Piniella, who saw it happen numerous times, most especially in 2001 and 2003.
This new generation of Mariners coaches, players and (some) fans is looking to see if the zebra has changed its stripes. Has it? We are about to find out.
Looking at those Forbes lists that come out and show who's making all the money, it is extremely, extremely rare that any major league baseball team is willing to lose money, whether they are chasing a pennant or not. The only time I've seen a team come out in the red, even slightly, is the Detroit Tigers. I think the Tiger fans should be happy for their ownership: they always seem willing to spend money to bring in talent, and are willing to take a loss in doing so. But it's a very minor loss.
Local sportswriters like Steve Kelley talk all the time about how local owners need to step up and take a loss for the local sports fan. I don't know what he's smoking, because it's a pipe dream. Nobody ever does it. Heck, our local owners would rather move to another city before taking a loss.
If you own a four-plex, and in ten years it goes from $300,000 to $1,100,000 ...
Your yearly cashflows might be -$5,000 or +$10,000 year to year, but that has little to do with "losing money."
(You can go pull $100,000 profit early, in any given year, via a mortgage or line of credit that will be nuked on sale of the four-plex/franchise, and MLB teams in fact do this constantly.)
But all of the sportswriters refer to that trivial yearly cashflow as the "profit/loss," and the owners encourage it.
***
The Seattle owners are doing fantastically well, and when they nix a minor $5M expense in July, the sportswriters will write about their 2011 cashflow.
If I refused to paint the walls in my $1.1M four-plex, because my 2011 cashflow would go from +2,000 to -2,000, would that be okay? (And don't forget I just pulled $100K in cash via my line of credit, and it doesn't show on my taxes as positive cashflow. I cashflowed $98k this year, but I get to tell you that I "lost" $2,000.)
Considering the public financing of their stadium, the whole situation is an outrage.
***
I guess there's no such thing as a sportswriter who owns a rental. Lucky for the owners.
Do you see anybody, outside of Detroit, interested in breaking the budget to encourage the fanbase?
http://www.forbes.com/lists/2010/33/baseball-valuations-10_The-Business-...
The Mariners got their stadium, they got their sweetheart deal, and they have determined how much they will spend. End of story. We should just deal with it. And sportwriters: stop demanding ownership open the pocketbooks. Save your breath. This isn't 1995. The stadium is built and the agreement is signed.
I noticed Larry Stone pulled the Steve Kelley schtick just today: "Prove to the fans you care, Mariners! Go for it! Make a deal, buy a bat." http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/thehotstoneleague/2015463884_ms_sh...
Save your breath, Larry. Millionaires don't really care how you think they should spend their money.
As for me, I am warming to the Detroit owners. I don't know what it is about them, but it's like they want to thank people for not bailing on their city or something. Good for them. Detroit needs good teams that build civic pride.
The Mariners got their stadium, they got their sweetheart deal, and they have determined how much they will spend. End of story.
... Save your breath. This isn't 1995. The stadium is built and the agreement is signed.
That'll do for me too...
As customers have every right to complain and expect ownership to spend their hard earned dollars on a better product. I just think it's lazy journalism on the part of our sports columnists, to sit in the press box and tell businessmen how they should spend more of their money. Maybe, if they did some actual financial reportage...