Add new comment

For me - the phrase "better in 2009" *HAS* to carry one underlying assumption ... the return of Bedard.  Does ANYBODY think the club has any shot of a September miracle w/o Bedard throwing 6 every 5th?  Given that assumption, the explanation of the Wash deal helping now AND in the future isn't a reach at all:
Felix
Bedard
Snell
RRS
French/Vargas
While having Wash in that rotation might look better, if one assumes Snell is the replacement for Wash - then French becomes the replacement not for Wash, but for the Vargas/Olson twins.  And what was the #1 problem with these guys?  HOMERS.  The sample is tiny, but the one bright spot of French thus far is he's avoided the long ball, (2 in 29 IPs), compared to ... I just don't want to even think about Olson's numbers, sorry.
I would completely agree that any talk of helping the 2009 rotation ABSENT Bedard is silliness in the extreme, (which is, of course, why I don't see the reason so many are doing just that, in equating French replacing Wash, when Snell is replacing Wash and French is the new #5. 
But, hey.  I continue to speak what I believe the truth is:  The DEFENSE, not the pitching, is what has kept Seattle alive.  When your pitchers are ranked 9th of 14 in SO, BB and HR, then I don't see *ANY* analytical argument of any kind that cannot conclude that the defense, and not the pitching is the clearly and unambiguous cause for the run suppression during 2009.  The defense, of course, is something that can potentially benefit any pitcher coming aboard, (so long as they aren't serving up gophers constantly and removing the defense from the picture).