.

SSI readers have pointed out, with mild alarm, that the dam is breaking on the Mariners at every point simultaneously:

• Geoff Baker has tactfully, but ominously, warned us of the problems for 2-3 years
• Geoff Baker has stopped being tactful, the last 1 month
• Larry Stone has said "ah, fuggedaboudit" and jumped in with Baker
• Jerry Brewer now has a hit piece out on Zduriencik
• etc

Why is this happening?

Dr. D's analysis, in this specific case, isn't biased.  I stopped being emotionally affected by Lincoln and Armstrong about 2005 or so.  Geoff Baker learned within his first 30 days on the job what the problem was, and it was the same one that Dr. D and Silentpadna had been whining about since August 1, 2001. Geoff is, in 2013, manifesting the anger and frustration that I was manifesting in 2004-05.

Larry Stone has restrained himself so far, but has decided to restrain himself a lot less.  It's not clear to me --- > to what extent Stone understands the fact that the problem is not Zduriencik.

Jerry Brewer, apparently, fails to grok the front-office problem.  There's nothing in his recent hit piece on Zduriencik that wasn't in David Cameron's hit piece -- Brewer's column is essentially a rip of Zduriencik for abandoning old friends, naming Carmen Fusco and Tony Blengino as examples.  It's honestly surprising to me that the Seattle Times allows this kind of re-written article, especially from its lead sportswriter; Klat wouldn't accept that article from me even as a blog post, because it wouldn't pass their plagiarism standards.  I don't mean it pejoratively.  I mean it objectively.

.

Front Offices that Churn Managers Like Butter

The odds are, Gentle Reader, that you are more annoyed by Lincoln and Armstrong than I am.  I got over it a while ago and took on a melancholy, resigned attitude towards the situation.  I'm not ranting here - just describing something that is not only obvious, but actually (and literally) becoming a joke.

Suppose that *I* -- Jeff Clarke -- decided to play Ted Turner (Google it, LOL) and play Owner/GM with the Mariners.  What would it take to convince you that I was making a bloody mess of the whole thing?  Maybe a trio of big-name MLB(TM) managers --  Lou Piniella, and Eric Wedge, and Mike Hargrove -- all walking out of their managerial jobs?  Saying things like "Pat wants to win; Jeff doesn't know how"? 

True, some losing teams change managers a lot.  What teams don't do, is see a long series of powerful managers walk out the door on their own initiative.

.................

If you missed it, this morning in the paper Wedge said "I wouldn't have stayed with them if they'd offered me 5 years.  And by Them, I mean Howard, Chuck, and Jack."

Charles O. Finley used to get this kind of managerial turnaround.  George Steinbrenner did.   Peter Angelos is capable of alienating men like Pat Gillick and Davey Johnson, as Lincoln is capable of alienating men like Lou Piniella and Eric Wedge.

When Wedge walks out, pointedly telling everybody that Howard and Chuck are the problem, it's time to put "paid" to this discussion.

.

Don't Blame Jack (much)

I don't blame Jack Zduriencik for being a team player.  If you do -- if you blame a $500,000 executive for "having the back" of his CEO -- you don't get executive jobs.  People used to give me nice money to consult with execs, and when they did, I was there to carry out their direction. 

If Admiral Rickover recruited Bat571 for his high-level managerial team, he'd have wanted Bat571 "on board" with his direction.  Accept the job or don't.  There is nothing dishonorable about getting on board with the Admiral.

When Jack Zduriencik "gets on board" with Lincoln and Armstrong, there is absolutely nothing ignoble about that.  But, of course, he is now "Them" -- he is now "Howard, Chuck, and Jack."  That's his choice.  I would make the same one, by the way.

Yes, Zduriencik has melded himself to the Lincoln/Armstrong power bloc.  So would I, if they offered me $500K a year to do so.  Are you saying you wouldn't?

............

Why don't the blogs go after Lincoln and Armstrong?  For one thing, they want the $10,000 saber consulting fee given away in the winter, in my opinion.  You get criticism from the bottom up.  First everything is Wedge's fault.  Later, they gingerly go after Zduriencik, as a last resort, when they know a new GM might be along to take their app later.  Last of all would they go after anybody on the ownership committee; that would burn bridges on any dreams to work for the Mariners.

That's my opinion I could be wrong.  Tell you two guys who don't care about ever getting an app in to the Mariners:  Geoff, and Jeff.

.

Good News, Bad News Dept.

The Mariners' problem is very simple.  It has been, for a long, long time.  As Baker calmly stated during one of his 7,000-viewer videocasts, "Chuck Armstrong has been here for a quarter of a century with absolutely no accountability to win."  

.............

You get owners, like Ted Turner and George Steinbrenner, who like to play GM (and usually by spending money!).  The Mariners' lawyers are steering committee members, not owners, who like to play GM (and not usually by spending money!).

Baker has been telling you, since he got here, that the problem was that --- > Mariners' actual owner has never seen them play.  He didn't even travel to Tokyo to see the Mariners when they played there.  

This was an incredibly gracious gift on Yamuachi-san's part, to finance the Mariners' playing in Seattle.  But it puts the 25-man roster into the hands of two lawyers who loooove to dabble.

It ain't Zduriencik's fault.  Any more than Steinbrenner's losing, before the FA era, was the fault of his GM's.  Any more than Baltimore's losing has been the fault of their GM's, since Gillick.

(You might believe that Zduriencik's tactical decisions have been poor; that's another subject.  We're talking about the root cause of the Mariners' long-term decline."

..............

Three pieces of good news:

1.  When Pat Gillick was here, the committee got so starry-eyed that it tossed him the ball.  This could happen again.

2.  Having a problematic front office isn't an absolute guarantee of failure.  We remember Bill James saying, around 1990, about one sabermetric club:  "Knowing what you are doing, is a tremendous advantage in a pennant race."

The M's front office is a tremendous disadvantage for us as fans, but Taijuan and K-Pax could overcome it.  It's possible.

.

Glimmer of Hope, Dept.

3.  If all of the media turns on Lincoln and Armstrong at once, then that would definitely resonate in the ownership committee.  They are precious about public perception.  They have never faced a non-friendly media, and wouldn't know how to cope, I don't think.

I think Baker has been honorable, in telling us the truth even at some professional sacrifice.  I can empathize with Ryan Divish choosing not to do so, but at what point does "journalistic integrity" enter into the equation?

In New York, Chicago, and LA, this kind of Lincoln/Armstrong thing just doesn't fly.  The public heat rules that out.  Seattle is genteel that way, and makes its own bed in terms of what the Mariners are here to do -- 1) battle for pennants or 2) provide a nice night out.

What do you think would happen, if the Seattle media FINALLY joined Geoff Baker (and, on a smaller scale, SSI), and brought pressure to bear?  At the point pressure should be applied?

 I'd like to find out,

Jeff