Add new comment

Yes, I think "given the current situation" in Seattle, playing Tui/Saunders/Moore would be a perfectly acceptable reality in April.  But, as Doc so wonderfully spells out ... there are COSTS associated with any approach.  My assessment of the Seattle reality is that at this moment, they have a core of 1.5 young players, (Gutz and Lopez).  Call them both .75 -- as Lopez is viewed as defensively suspect, while Gutz has a grand total of one solid year of production in his resume.
I often see threes in baseball.  And I think thinking in terms of thirds is a very reasonable mindset toward roster construction tenets.  I believe, based on watching dozens of teams through history, that it is ultimately foolhardy and detrimental to pay "big buck" FA money BEFORE you have a "solid" young 1/3 of your lineup in place.  Note -- this doesn't count 1-year fliers, low-cost stopgaps, etc.  You've gotta field a team every year, no matter what your plan.
But I cannot remember ANY team in the history of the FA period that "began" an expensive FA push that succeeded who didn't ALREADY have at least three young regulars already firmly productive and under club control.  I view Phillies travails as illustrative ... as they did a multi-year FA push ... failed repeatedly ... then dumped some of that high priced talent, waited for the kids to develop ... and then went back into the FA market to FINISH off the job.  That's the pattern I see as repeatedly most successful. 
The Braves pitchers got all the glory.  But in 1990, the year BEFORE they began their run, they had Justice (.908 age 24); Blauser (.747 age 24 SS); Gant (.896 age 25) emerge as a YOUNG core to build on.  They also had only 2 guys over 30 that season.  That first playoff team brought in one pricy FA, (Pendleton).  But, they also pushed Lemke, Hunter and Deion Sanders into the mix, too.  (Blauser was the only one who established himself in 1989).
The one problem with Doc's intro is that the team that ops to start building via FA actually does NOT get to play in three FA classes.  When you sign those first "high priced" FAs, the ability to repeat the process is compromised.  The result is ... you end up with the Yankees payroll, or, you end up frustrated because if you weren't paying $12 million a year to Silva and $10 million to Batista, you probably WOULD have had the money to land Teixeira.
Wlad failing doesn't prevent you from bringing up Saunders.  Silva failing DOES prevent you from going and signing Cliff Lee.  Paying $12 million for a mistake like Silva is WHY you end up "Frenching" Wakamatsu. 
But, all that said ... there is always the possibility that you can pull off a deal that helps build your young core w/o bloating your payroll.  The Putz/Gutz trade is a perfect example.  But, this takes a great deal of serendipity, where you find someone bloated with talent a position of need for you, while you're bloated with talent at a position of need for them.  Snell is Jack's second attempt to bring in a lightly regarded talent that "might" blossom into a core piece for tomorrow.  But, trading Clement thinned out the one farm spot that was clearly deep.  I'm not sure that Z has the chips he needs to pull off another such mini-miracle.
I just know I firmly do NOT want to bypass giving the youth a fair shot for the likes of Scutaro or Jackson.  (Crawford ... a tougher call -- but that's probably just because I'm softer on Saunders than most of the blog-o-sphere).