User Comments, Suggestions, or Complaints | Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Advertising
Buy MLB playoff tickets, plus 2011 World Series, 2011 ALCS tickets and NLCS game tickets. We also have Texas Rangers playoff schedule, tickets to Red Sox games and Yankees game tickets. Plus, buy Phillies baseball tickets, Tigers playoff tickets and the biggies like ALDS baseball tickets and 2011 NLDS tickets. |
Demarini, Easton and TPX Baseball Bats
|
AllianceTickets.com has cheap MLB Tickets. Get all your Colorado Rockies Tickets, Seattle Mariners Tickets, San Francisco Giants Tickets and all your favorite baseball tickets here. We also carry cheap Denver Broncos Tickets, Seattle Seahawks Tickets and Denver Nuggets Tickets. |
Page rendered in 0.5898 seconds
55 querie(s) executed
Reader Comments and Retorts
Go to end of page
Statements posted here are those of our readers and do not represent the BaseballThinkFactory. Names are provided by the poster and are not verified. We ask that posters follow our submission policy. Please report any inappropriate comments.
Yes, we can't ignore the fact that they're expected to be slightly better than average. Or that they have a slightly better than average farm system. Or that they have a slightly above average payroll.
Of course, one could take all of these things into account and not rank the Mariners as the 6th best organization in baseball.
But the Mariners represent the New Moneyball that takes things like UZR (available on Fangraphs!) and WAR (also available on Fangraphs!) into account, which pushes them ahead of teams like the Phillies and Cardinals.
This is a low-80's win team with an averagish farm system. So, maybe they're 15th before you take into account the front office. I'm willing to bump them a few place for Jack Zduriencik and co., so 11th or 12th sounds about right for me.
Certainly they are worse than St. Louis, Colorado, Philadelphia and Atlanta. The core talent on those teams dwarfs the Mariners.
This might be true. I wonder where the line is drawn in terms of which teams the Mariners are more or less likely to win than. I could see them being maybe the 12th or 14th most likely team to win the WS. Would they have a much better chance than that? I like Jack Z a lot but I don't think he's put together a great (or even solidly above average) team yet. I wish the M's had done a little worse last year than they ended up doing because I think the early success he's had has perhaps led to some unrealistic expectations (and subsequently a commensurate backlash). His strength was always in picking up premium players through the draft and now people are expecting his team to be a top contender before he's really even had a chance to stock the farm. He's shown a pretty good aptitude for judging ML talent too, obviously, but the fact remains that he hasn't even been able to employ his greatest skill in building his roster yet and already the hype is setting him up for a fall.
On the lineup side, they've got to hope everyone's above average because they have no real thumpers. They are positioned to have good young position players for the next few years with Ackley, Saunders and Gutierrez, but they'll still lack big bats.
Not until the NBA thread dies.
It may well be true. But it's almost exclusively b/c they're in a 4-team division with no dominant squad.
You could use the same logic to rank the Angels #6.
I mean I can seeliking (say) the Red Sox more than the Mariners but downgrading their chance of winning the World Series because of a fairly reasonable chance that the Rays and Yankees are even better.
That said I think Cameron had placed too much emphasis on this factor.
Given that he didn't take that route and he opens his piece about the Mariners by writing about himself, I'll presume he doesn't really mind any presumptions of biased homerism as long as they're made publicly.
TM / W / PO%
Yankees / 96 / 63.0%
Red Sox / 93 / 53.0%
Cardinals / 91 / 50.9%
Phillies / 90 / 48.0%
Rays / 91 / 46.1%
Braves / 88 / 42.9%
Rangers / 84 / 38.9%
Dodgers / 86 / 38.5%
Twins / 83 / 34.8%
Rockies / 84 / 30.3%
Mariners / 81 / 29.4%
Cubs / 83 / 27.2%
Diamondbacks / 82 / 25.6%
Indians / 80 / 25.4%
White Sox / 80 / 24.8%
Athletics / 79 / 23.8%
Brewers / 82 / 23.5%
Giants / 81 / 23.3%
Angels / 78 / 21.6%
Reds / 81 / 21.3%
Tigers / 78 / 19.9%
Marlins / 80 / 19.3%
Padres / 76 / 13.2%
Mets / 76 / 13.0%
Nationals / 75 / 11.1%
Royals / 72 / 9.3%
Orioles / 75 / 8.3%
Pirates / 72 / 7.6%
Astros / 69 / 4.4%
Blue Jays / 65 / 1.9%
Just as we can separate Jason Heyward from a normal outfield prospect despite the fact that he has accomplished nothing at the big league level, I believe we can also evaluate an organization’s ability to put a winning team on the field before they do so.
Just as we can look at Heyward's tools and his total dominance of the minor leagues at a very young age to support our belief that he will be a great ballplayer, we can look at how difficult it is to spell Zduriencik and his scouting background tell that he must be an extremely talent GM because otherwise he wouldn't have gotten anywhere with a name like that. He's right, they are analogous!
The Seattle front office knows how to evaluate talent, and they know how to value talent.
And we know this because in the year and a half they've been on the job, they have signed Russell Branyan and traded a bunch of young talent for one year of Cliff Lee. Also, starting Casey Kotchman and having Mike Sweeney and Ken Griffey Jr. as bats off of the bench show that they have a clear edge in evaluating talent over a bunch of front offices that have recently won the World Series.
Totally ridiculous. And if he really felt he was right, why would he be so defensive in his writing? It is a ridiculous ranking and there is no reason to believe he might do any better than Shapiro or DePodesta did. He might be Theo, but chances are he isn't.
FWIW, I don't think this has anything to do with Cameron being a Mariners fan, I think this has to do with Zd... making Fangraphs approved moves. Marchman is also on this guy's jock and he's a Mets fan. Some people just want to see decision makers do what they would do.
That's the USSM crew. When your line of debate starts with "You don't understand..." you've already lost.
I'll say this: I would've felt less incredulous about it before they decided to toss Garko overboard.
Huzzah!
But Mike Sweeney has looked great in Spring Training!!! How dare you question the Great Z?!? Clearly you just haven't been paying enough attention...
It's worse than that. At least one of them will get regular starts at DH. It's kind of inexplicable. I would like the team's chances a lot better with almost anybody other than Griffey at DH.
I don't think it changes your point, but FWIW Marchman wrote on his blog that he's no longer a Mets fan.
Mariners 2010, #6 overall:
Orioles 2010, #17 overall:
Orioles 2009, #16 overall
Hope you are quite prepared to die
Looks like we're in for nasty weather
Doesn't that list include pretty much everyone in the AL West?
Plus everyone in the AL Central (sans KC) and NL West (sans SD). I'd guess 3 teams in the AL East and NL East and probably St. Louis too.
And this doesn't take into account that the actual Blue Jays will be without Scrabble for the next 4 to 6 weeks.
This is truly incredible roster construction. Three DH's (Griffey, Sweeney and Bradley), two of whom are below average hitters.
According to SG's list in #14 above, just 14. 15 if you round up.
Cameron has Cleveland ranked #13 by this measure, and his article on them still claims that the Indians are one of the better-run organizations out there. I still think you need to squint awfully hard to pretend that the Indians have anything resembling a major-league pitching staff.
I can't seem to find a page that organizes this stuff, but from what I can glean, these are the rankings that Cameron gives out -
6 - Mariners
7 - Rockies
8 - Braves
9 - Phillies
10 - Angels
11 - ?
12 - Brewers
13 - Indians
14 - Dodgers
15 - Mets
16 - Diamondbacks
17 - Orioles
18 - Cubs
19 - A's
20 - Reds
21 - Marlins
22 - ?
23 - Giants
24 - White Sox
25 - Pirates
26 - Blue Jays
27 - Padres
28 - Nationals
29 - Royals
30 - Astros
Besides, the world is going to end in 2012 anyway.
That anyone can sit here and credibly predict how well a team is prepared for 2013 and beyond is ridiculous. I mean the Mariners themselves, are a prime example of that. Two years ago the Mariners lost 100+ games and had a bleak future. Today they have a chance to make the playoffs with a smart front office.
The only reasonable way to do this is to heavily weight the nearer future. Likely team strength needs something like a 5:3:2:1:1:1 weighting for the next 6 years.
Or 18 if you take the position that "23.6%" or 1-in-4.24 is "roughly one in four".
Yankees, Red Sox, Rays, and Rangers left, it looks like.
22 is the Tigers. Why? Because they threw/throws around dumb contracts for too much money to players so they'll suck.
15 is the Mets. Why? Because their owner will spend money on dumb contracts for players so they'll continue to be ok.
The problem with this is that Cameron really doesn't know any team BUT the Mariners. He has a decent idea - probably better than most - about the league and players, but he doesn't really know the organizations. So when he tries to write an article about other teams, the impression that other fans of those teams who DO know the teams as well as the people here do will be that he doesn't know what he's talking about.
Plus, he's been such an arrogant ass about so many baseball issues for so long that it's bound to come back and bite him at some time.
I'm torn between the whimsy fairy on my right shoulder praising this nickname for its humor and the pedant fairy on my left shoulder whispering "There's only one Z in Scrabble."
How long to the backlash against the Seattle fanboys? Probably as soon as Jack Z writes that book Joe Morgan thinks he shouldn't.
Yeah. How do you rank the M's above the Angels?
I would think "#3 hitter Casey Kotchman", and "DH platoon Ken Griffey and Mike Sweeney" would be all you had to say to knock a team out of the top-10.
This is why I'm pretty sure the M's are going to break the bank to keep Lee in town. They need him as much as anybody in baseball, and I think they have the money.
Yankees. CC has an opt out clause after '11.
Why do you think every projection system, including your own, disrespects such an obvious powerhouse?
Also, the Mariners can have a large payroll and have a smart front office. Unlike say the Angels, who I guess run their team on a shoestring budget and whose management hasn't fielded a winning team in over five months.
That's Jeff Nye. He's like the chief flying monkey over at USSM. Not sure if he's officially affiliated with the site (maybe a volunteer moderator?) but he can easily match Cameron in condescension.
It still has them better than the M's.
This comment is jam-packed with awesome.
It actually sounds like the pitch for a Ponzi-scheme hedge fund. Just replace "defense in the MLB talent market" with "distressed securities".
Jesus, what is it with the Yankees and their opt-out clauses?
This is the only one, isn't it? The A-Rod opt-out was a carry over from the previous contract.
As to the Sabathia opt-out, it really doesn't matter to the Yankees, since no one is going to be able to outbid them for his services should he use it.
It's Boras. A-Rod's opt out was part of his Rangers contract that the Yankees inherited after the trade.
I seriously doubt he uses it, unless the market recovers big-time.
He's getting $23M per from 2012-15. Mauer didn't break $23M p.a. Lackey got a little over $16M for 5 yrs.
I have a hard time believing a 32 y.o. Sabathia is going to get more than that. Maybe the Yankees tack on a 5th year at that point. But, 4/92 is going to be tough to beat giving the likelihood of a continued shitty economy.
The Yankees weren't interested in Lackey (who has a significantly worse recent history than Sabathia) and never had a chance at Mauer. If they wanted Mauer (and had a shot at him as a FA), they would have killed Minnesota's offer.
Sure, but the Yankees can't be the other team bidding up Sabathia.
Who else is going to offer more than 4/92 when he's 32? Maybe someone goes 5/115.
If that's all the Yankees have to match, the downside of the opt-out is deminimus.
Who else was offering A-Rod 10/320 when he was 32? Who else was even offering that salary at half the years?
I'd hope they've learned from that disaster.
And actually, it's only $275M guaranteed, with $30M in incentives based on breaking the HR records, which provide some protection against career-ending injury/total collapse.
Good point. I can get on board now.
If my manager were batting his best hitter 8th (except for the 1 in every 3 games when he preferred to have him on the bench) I'm not sure I'd be boasting about it.
Speaking of which. We should get a BTF Jays fan outing to the Sky Dome before they are mathematically eliminated. So soon, very soon.
Which 6 teams are ahead of them? I assume Yanks, Rays, Red Sox, Phillies, Dodgers and Cardinals? 7th is pretty good, obviously. I hope their chances are that good.
I was going to give this thread a 5, but I'll bump it to a 6 for the mini AROM-Danny battle.
This isn't a real quote, is it? It looks like something from one of Gregor the Sinner's strawmen.
I was also pretty excited the Pirates were 28th.
6-for-6!
OK, not exactly the hardest 6 to guess.
That's really my favorite line.
Me neither! Good thing he's batting his best hitter 5th!
Why do you think Angel fans would be worried about projection systems at this point?
With all due respect, Dave Cameron probably knows a lot more about the 30 organizations than most of the people who say, Team X is way overrated or Team G is way underrated. It's also silly to rip Cameron for rating the M's #6 and pointing out the 6 or 9 problems you find on the M's. That's really beside the point. If you are going to be critical of placing Seattle -- obviouisly the favorite club of USS Mariner -- number 6, then list the 6 or more teams which deserve a higher rating and then show how the flaws those 6 or more organizations are less significant than Seattle's flaws.
"The entire premise of the series is kinda silly."
That may be. Some try to objectively rate GMs or rate managers or rate minor league systems. If doing so strikes you as silly, then you shouldn't bother objecting to any conclusions Cameron reaches.
I haven't read all of the articles. (I've only read the ones on Oakland, SF and now Seattle.) But without being able to make a better case for the A's than some of the 18 clubs ranked ahead of them, I'm not prepared to say Cameron underrates my team. He might be wrong. I hope he is. But just saying so because the A's have this, that and the other asset (without considering the other 30 teams objectively) would be more biased of me than Dave Cameron is accused of being in this thread.
First of all, at least I have them in 2nd place with a winning record. And once the season starts, I can't see any reason to care what any projections say, mine included. It's just an offseason diversion.
I've read all the articles.
The Cardinals, Braves, Phillies, Rockies, and Angels higher, at a minimum. I'd say the Dodgers and M's are about a toss up.
They should be around #11 or 12.
It's not like the 3-4-5 guys are any slouches. Or #6, Juan Rivera, for that matter. Just a solid row of good hitters with power, projected around +10 to +20 runs above average each, from the #2 spot to the #8 spot.
I know I'm a biased Dodgers fan, but if you can rank the Dodgers 14th, and the M's 6th, you're twisting something harsh.
Not that this entirely justifies it, but who would you rather have as your GM: Colletti or Zduriencik?
Also, the comments are . . . interesting. We get the Cameron two-minute-hate here, and all out war over there.
Off the top of my head, with no real analysis: Yankees, Red Sox, Rays, Twins, Angels, Phillies, Cardinals, Dodgers
I think you could probably also make cases for these organizations too (some easier than others): Tigers, White Sox, Rangers, Braves, Mets(*), Cubs(*), Rockies, Giants
(*) - the argument for the Mets and Cubs basically boils down to, "they're sitting on a freaking gold mine and if they ever figure out how to use it there's no reason they can't be the next Boston Red Sox." I don't see any reason to think that Omar Minaya or Jim Hendry is the man to do that, but if we're talking about organizations and we're talking about 3+ year windows (and Cameron's basis for his ranking of the Mariners is talking about exactly that) then there's nothing to prevent the Mets and Cubs from going out and hiring themselves a much better GM.
That puts the Mariners somewhere between 9th and 17th, which feels about right to me. Probably in the upper range of that - 12th or so?
I picked up my Starpass today before I had the chance to read this. Suddenly the ability to see 80 games seems like some horrible punishment rather than a good opportunity.
Well yeah, but what market would you rather be in?(Probably L.A.) Ownership? (Mariners by a mile) Farm System? (I think the Dodgers in a year from now will look like they got a really good farm system since all the lower level talents in 2009 will be playing close to a year in Double-A and Triple-A in 2010, while the Mariners traded a lot of top end talent for Cliff Lee.) Division? (Push here.) Team with actual recent success? Actual talent that is signed for multiple years? (This, I think the Dodgers win on. Outside of Broxton and Manny, their core is signed through 2012, the Mariners are a patch work team for the most part.)
Zduriencik of course. But I'd rather have the Dodgers current roster, young talent core (Kemp, Ethier, Billingsley, Kershaw, Broxton), media market/payroll potential, scouting/farm system and Logan White is every bit as good a scout as Zduriencik.
Also, the comments are . . . interesting. We get the Cameron two-minute-hate here, and all out war over there.
We don't get the USSM posse over here. They don't do debate, and basically call anyone who disagree with Cameron or Zumsteg and idiot. "You don't understand!" is their war cry. It leads to a flame fest pretty quickly.
People here actually like to debate and are usually pretty civil. At least on baseball topics :-)
Get into other realms of discussion, however, and it's the Council of Constance.
"The Cardinals, Braves, Phillies, Rockies, and Angels higher, at a minimum. I'd say the Dodgers and M's are about a toss up. (The Mariners) should be around #11 or 12."
You've only listed 5 organizations (although I infer you are saying those five he rates lower than Seattle and you believe they should be higher). You very well may be right. I'm not prepared to say you are wrong. But -- as is your right -- you haven't made a case for any of those "better" franchises.
Again, every organization has some points to be critical of. What are the major problems you see in the franchises which you think are better than Seattle? And why are those flaws less significant going forward?
Yes.
Again, every organization has some points to be critical of. What are the major problems you see in the franchises which you think are better than Seattle? And why are those flaws less significant going forward?
To me the Mariners have a slightly above average current roster, an averagish farm system, an above average market, and a very good management team
All six teams I mentioned have a better current roster of talent, especially young core talent under long term control. The Braves, and Rockies have better farm systems as well, and strong management. To me, those two are no brainers.
The Cardinals, Angels (slightly) and Phillies have better rosters, equal or better markets but questionable farm systems. However, they both have a strong history of drafting and developing talent. And their farm systems aren't much worse than Seattle's.
The Dodgers only major flaw is the ongoing divorce. This will be resolved in a year or two, either through divorce court or a forced sale. The Dodgers have enough talent to be competitive over that period, even with a constrained payroll. And, the minor league apparatus is still in tact.
Edit: There was also some real unpleasantness between the Poles and the Teutonic Knights, which was only partially resolved.
You must be Registered and Logged In to post comments.
<< Back to main