Add new comment

If you mean it seemed like Seattle had less players than other teams, then yes, I do remember it.
My memory is that during April there were absolute screams about how the thin bench was a disaster, (and that not DLing Sweeney was egregiously stupid -- the one that forced Burke to play 1B for a single game).
I also remember a long, steady stream of grumbling that Wok didn't ever use his bench. The Yankees, (best offensive team in baseball), used 97 pinch-hitters in 72 games. Seattle had 58 pinch-hits in 45 games.
The irony here is that it seems like having 8 guys posting 120 OPS+ figures would reduce your pinch-hitter usage. Instead, it was more than double what Seattle managed.
Griffey/Sweeney undoubtedly reduced the flexibility in going for a pinch-hitter. But, with Ronnie and Wlad as the only pinch-hit options for the first 1/3 of the season, little damage was actually done.
The real irony? Bradley had 15 pinch-hits during 2009 ... exactly the same number as Griffey. (Sweeney had 12).
Honestly, the pinch-hitting situation may be your best evidence of the danger of obsessing about defense. Historically, best offensive players start - and then you might pinch-hit late, and then put in your defensive whiz. Well, if your defensive whiz is already in the game, that whole late game lineup shuffle paradigm vanishes.