Add new comment

I've NEVER argued that you don't need or cannot use FAs or trades for need.
My argument is that you cannot succeed by STARTING your lineup with FAs.
Today, the Ms "foundation" of everyday players is Smoak and nobody ... and Smoak has been here about 14 minutes.  He's not "truly" homegrown - (but Seattle *IS* his first real MLB success - so he's not a mercenary).
*IF* Guti bounces back from his health issues, include him in the 'Smoak'-esque foundation piece.  But, that's a significant 'if' at the moment. 
Heck, even the Yankees, when they got too trade happy had a lull.  Today, in addition to the long-timers (Jeter, Posada, Rivera), they've got Gardner and Cano who are Yankee-only players.
Since 2004, Safeco has taken the blame for the horrid FA performances in Seattle.  I think that is in error.  I think the reality is that the bulk of the FAs were "mercenaries", who could really care less whether Seattle succeeds or fails.  They were only on board to get a paycheck.  When Guti arrived - he was there to *PLAY* every day -- (something he didn't get a chance to do in Cleveland).  Same with Branyan.  But the "full time" imports ... (blech!)
Figgins is only the latest in a long line of "oh well, guess I'll take my money and leave" FA signings. 
If the club is *EVER* going to "let the kids play" is it ever going to be a better opportunity than 2011?  The vet CF was out for a month - allowing you to play your good-glove potential LF on a daily basis.  When the vet LF was tepid, you cut him.  Now, you've still got a tepid DH, and 3-4 young guys (Saunders, Peguero, M.Wilson and Carp) that you might give ABs to.  If you go out and "buy" a big bat, you slam the door on somebody.  You also send the message *AGAIN* that unless you're a top 10 prospect, Seattle doesn't really care - they're just going to run back to the FA well next year, too.
Seattle opted to trade Asdrubal Cabrerra for the 36-year-old Eduardo Perez in 2006.  Cleveland suffered through AC's growing pains - and today have a 25-year old MI with an .885 OPS and 9 HRs already this season.  Choo was traded for Ben Broussard.
Those 2006 trades were made after an 18-8 June had pushed the club over .500.  Of course, June included a bunch of interleague games, (the club would go 14-4 in interleague play in 2006, btw).  But, June was the only month with a winning record for the club. 
Here is the offensive OPS and the defensive ERA for the first three months of 2006:
Mos. -- OPS - ERA - (pOPS)
April - .704 -- 4.58 - .792
May - .717 --4.87 -- .740
June - .841 - 3.60 - .730
Given those three months of data, which data is the outlier?  The SP OPS had gone .788; .784; .730 over the first three months.  The assumption was made that the rotation had "come into its own".  The next three month, the rotation OPS was: .839; .798; .840
Mind you, I would normally accept the premise that an 18-8 month is a MUCH better indicator of "true" improvement rather than just an abberation (than say, a 9-9 months, like the current May). 
But, an honest assessment of the talent on that 2006 team would've indicated a club that was "average" at best, offensively ... with an erratic, unreliable rotation, a decent bullpen, and questionable defense, (especially up the middle). 
Now, that club didn't get a "big bat" for their trades.  They had a bunch of 100 (ish) OPS+ players on offense.  But, that club finished 15 back and -36 in run differential.  But, who were the home grown core of that team?  Lopez, Yuni and Reed ... the 3 worst hitters in the lineup. 
But, the choice to "go for it" cost the club Cabrerra and Choo. 
Treating the 2011 rotation as exceptional is fine.  Treating the 2.09 ERA for the month of May as an expectation of the rest of the year is not.  After a 3.95 ERA for April, the club has a cumulative 2.47 ERA for May.  And yet, they are only 9-9.  If the rotation is posting a 2.47 ERA for 18 games and is *ONLY* 9-9 that is not confirmation the club is actually a .500 team -- it is a condemnation of an offense that is inept.
When you're getting Bob Gibson starting for 18 games, you should be going 16-2 or 14-4 ... not 9-9.