Laying Henry Chadwick to rest...The Seattle Times

Henry Chadwick developed the box score. Chadwick thought the batter should get no credit for a walk--which is why at-bats do not count walks, and why batting average is consequently scoffed on by mathematically literate baseball fans. Allan Roth, a statistician hired by Branch Rickey (he who developed the concept of a farm system and who signed Jackie Robinson), demonstrated in the 1960s that on-base percentage and slugging percentage were far superior measures of offensive production, and yet we still see Avg., RBI, and HR totals in most mainstream newsmedia today.

The Seattle Times is changing that. Jeff Angus, a member of the Northwest chapter of the Society for American Baseball Research who has recently begun writing a sabermetric column for the Times, reports that the Times will be featuring more sabermetric-friendly stats in print every Tuesday.

Angus also tells the NW SABR list-serve that:

I think this is the first time a daily newspaper has run a full
Sabermetric surrogate for the Leaders Tables. If it runs weekly as
planned, I'm pretty confident it will be a first.

This is indeed an important step in bringing newer stats into a broader cultural awareness. Granted, we won't likely be hearing Rick Rizzs talk about Willie Bloomquist's OPS any time soon, but this is another important step in the right direction. Let's appreciate all that Chadwick did for Baseball, and then lay his antiquated statistics to rest.

So much for numbers

From last night's broadcast:

[Neihaus had speculated that lefty Villone would be removed before facing righty A-rod. Matsui, whom Villione had been brought in to face, had just singled. Hargrove stayed put, and Villone would face Rodriguez after all.] Fairly: Rodriguez is 0 for 7 against Villone. Neihaus: So was Matsui. Fairly: Well, so much for numbers.

Of course, this is a silly argument, because the problem isn't numbers in general, it's the sample size. Sort of like adopting total philosophical relativism as a reaction against total determinism.

Actually, the overal numbers of this game suggest the M's got the large end of the wishbone for this game--which is fine, because somebody's got to get lucky. But NY had 11 hits to Seattle's 10, 6 walks to our 1, 15 total bases to our 14. So much for numbers. The breaks went our way, the Yankee errors and our hits happen at just the right time, and we avoid the sweep.

Still, is this game any indication the M's can turn it around, at least a little? As I see, there are too many pieces missing right now, and I'm not talking about Everyotherday Guardado. Madritsch out till September, Pineiro down in Tacoma fixing his mechanics, Beltre day to day with a hamstring, Pokey Reese DOA, and our entire bench might as well be a missing piece, with the possible exception of Dave Hansen, if he still has anything left.

Still, a great game last night.

Two Salamis in a week...allowed

Ouch, J.J.

Of course, hindsight being 20-20, we can all second guess Hargrove for pulling lefty George Sherrill after facing (and retiring) only one batter, since the next batter, Bernie Williams, is a switch hitter with nearly identical splits over the last three years. Not that there are many better options in the pen.

Yes, I am still alive, and waiting for Beltre and Olivo to start hitting the way we know they can.

This team still has a lot of problems, though--mostly pitching. As Larry Stone says, however, the M's have few options at this point.

Hey, we took two of three from Boston this time around, so at least it's not like the home team here in KC, where you're nearly guaranteed a loss every time they take the field. You think the M's are bad? The Royals are pathetic. As if that's much comfort.

We got a long season ahead of us, and I hope by the end of it, we'll see most of the reasons for optimism come to fruition.

Off-topic plug

A welcome to my younger brother Phil into the wide world of blogging. Having nothing to do with the Mariners at all, he thinks seriously about things worth thinking seriously about. If that sounds interesting, drop by Ubi Caritas.

Ichiro or 0-fer

Tough loss today, with Ichiro and Boone being the only ones to get on base. Franklin pitched a pretty darn good game, giving up two homers, but both of them solo shots.

One does wonder why, with Sexson out with the flu, Hargrove chose to play Bloomquist and Wilson instead of Reed and Olivo. Both Reed and Olivo have gotten off to a slow start, but clearly have more potential offensively than Bloomquist or Wilson.

I understand the desire to give regular players some rest, but this is the beginning of the season, when they are fresh, and Sexson was already out of the lineup. Better to rest Reed when Sexson is in the lineup, so that we don't draw a complete zero on offense.

With Wilson playing today, he's played in 6 games to Olivo's 7 (so they've obviously split some games). That's too even of a split, in my opinion, even though it is early. Let Olivo sink or swim at starting catcher, but give him the opportunity.

Deja Vu all over again

Bobby Madritsch, the same who led the AL in Pitcher Abuse Points per game last year, has been placed on the DL, and is still awaiting a diagnosis from an MRI. As we well know from Mariner pitchers past, the more vague the diagnosis, the more we should be worried.

Called up to take Madritsch's spot on the roster is Justin Leone, who presumably comes in 5th on the depth chart at third base, behind Beltre, Speizio, Bloomquist and Dobbs. Meanwhile, we have Bloomquist es sentially serving as our fourth outfielder (since Ibanez is DH'ing most of the time, and thus can't be put in the field without forfeiting the DH altogether for the game). Willie made a nice play last night, but why we need four backup third basemen when we have no true backup outfielders is a little baffling.

I'm glad Leone is back up in the majors, but it should be to replace Dobbs, not Madritsch. If Dobbs is untouchable, wouldn't OF Jamal Strong or pitcher George Sherrill be more usable additions to the big league roster? Can Leone play short? I doubt it, but if he could, his bat would be an upgrade over Alvarez, and he wouldn't be such a longshot to make an impact.

Haven't we been down this road?

Pop quiz: It's four-to-two in the 5th (and you're down), your team is facing last year's Cy Young winner, and you've had one hit since the first inning. Your starter is getting lit up now, and there are runners on first and second with one out. Who do you bring in?

Mike Hargrove's answer: The one pitcher in my bullpen who is worse than most guys on my AAA ballclub.

Question #2: Said pitcher (It's Thornton, if you don't know) comes in. How long of a leash does he have until you yank him?

Grover's answer: After he gives up four consecutive hits, if the last one's a homerun.

In the title of Larry Dierker's book, This Ain't Brain Surgery. Apparently it might as well be for some managers.

Some caveats: Thorton is a lefty, and the next two batters up for the Twins were lefties. This is just the second game of the year, Hargrove's a new manager who might learn quickly which pitchers to count on, and our bullpen doesn't give him a lot good options.

That being said, in that situation, you don't need a lot of good options, you just need one to get you out of the inning without any more damage. And the last thing you should be doing is bringing in a pitcher who belongs in the minors.

Let's hope Hargrove is less idiotic than Melvin was with his bullpen--in other words, that tonight was an aberation, or a lesson quickly and permanently learned.

Two Welcomes

First, a welcome to my brother, Will, who has let me post his occasional emails on this blog, which I will be doing under his name. (See below).

Second, welcome to Seattle, Richie Sexson! After two plate appearances, Sexson has a 4.000 Slugging percentage. While I expect this to decline a bit, he's off to a good start.

Getting this party started, Yo.

The cactus league has ended, and so we can get on to real baseball. Not that Spring Training isn't fun, but everyone knows it doesn't count for anything, which results in pitchers experimenting with new pitches, batters trying new stances and approaches, and not so much concern about the outcome. Let's say Ryan Franklin decides he's going to take one inning just working on locating his fastball, and Bret Boone decides that he's going to look for opportunities to hit to the opposite field. Neither player is trying to win, but they are still putting ST games to good use.

Dave Neihaus himself talks about how meaningless ST games are to the regular season in his latest appearance on MLB.com Radio. (He also talks about, among other things, his first impressions of Ichiro, the pitching staff, and the party line about how Richie Sexson's physical put him under the most intense scrutiny EVER). Neihaus says his idea of a successful season would put them at 82-83 wins, right where Diamond Mind puts them.

One more thing Neihaus talks about is how the front office realized they had to go out and spend money to show the fan base that they were serious about turning the team around after last year's 99-loss season. While I'm glad they opened their wallets, and I agree that doing so was necessary, I am concerned if the primary motivation was pacifying a restless fan base, and not first to improvethe team. I think the biggest lesson Billy Beane's example should teach every front office is this: never stop trying to improve your team, even when it means ignoring popular fan sentiment. The result has been a consistent contender and a fan base that believes he's doing the right thing, even if popular players leave (see Giambi, Jason; Tejada, Miguel; Mulder, Mark; Hudson, Tim). We need a front office that is going to try to improve the team before it falls apart and fans get angry.

All that being said, I'm excited for the season, to see how Reed and Madritsch perform in a full season, how Beltre and Sexson perform in new uniforms and stadiums (since both come from the NL, of course), if Franklin can return to bullpen excellence, if Meche can put it all together, to witness Jamie's last hurrah. Hope springs eternal, penned Thayer. Play ball!

Pocket Lint far from a local phenomenon

"Pocket Lint" refers here to the USSMariner's not-so-friendly nicknaming of Bob Finnigan, bestowed upon the Times reporter for his habit of reporting as fact just about everything he hears from the M's front office. (Regular readers may remember an extended email conversation with Finnigan over at the Mariner Morsels blog that showed Finnigan's not really a bad guy.)

But Finnigan is by no means unique in his sympathetic renderings of front-office talk. Forwarded to me by my dad from the Northwest SABR email list, The Pittsburgh Post-Gazette does its own version of parroting the front office. Latest Spending Spree Shows Lack of Restraint, declares Robert Dvorchak's article.

In summary: Pittsburgh just doesn't have the money to compete, nor do other small market teams. There is a brief nod to the Pirates' own "lack of restraint," under former GM Cam Bonifay, but most of the article is devoted to criticizing the runaway spending. We hear this all the time--and I mean all the time--in Kansas City. The reality is that complaining about the system is an easier pill to swallow than facing the fact that your team continues to make poor decisions and doesn't match payroll increases to revenue-sharing-based income. That said, the revenue-sharing system is not designed to encourage competetive balance, but is designed solely to depress salaries league-wide. There are better ways (look at DMZ's) to structure it if the goal were competetive and financial parity, but it isn't.

I can understand Pittsburgh's frustration to a degree, but there are problems with this argument:
1) Baseball's finances are so opaque--deliberately so--that an accurate evaluation of how much money teams really are making, spending, and pocketing is virtually impossible. Even a transparent accounting would be far too complex for most fans, including myself to really understand.

2)If everybody's making too much money, well, then maybe nobody's making too much money. Scott Boras has been quoted claiming that the owners have been crying poor but actually have had a lot of money to spend, and this season lends credence to that claim. Lookout Landing posted an analysis of this year's free agent market, and it wasn't just a few teams that spent what looked like a lot money. In other words, what a player "should" be paid depends on how much money the market has to throw at him. If teams are making more money, why shouldn't they spend it?

3) There are successful small market teams, and lousy large-market teams.

Oh, and Dvorchak could at least go as far as getting Kansas City owner David Glass' name right (it's not David Green, as he reports).

Getting his shot in the big leagues

Formerly confined to back-up roles in Seattle, free agent Rich Waltz will now be starting with the Florida Marlins. Though he routinely displayed the talent and consistency necessary for a starting role, Seattle seemed more comfortable sticking with their veteran team.

I'm talking about broadcasting, of course, where Waltz now will be the Marlins' main television commentator. Waltz was an outstanding commentator who's only downside may have been that he rarely looked very excited on television. But when you're next to Rick Rizzs, nobody looks excited by comparision. But Waltz was intelligent and articulate; he explained things clearly without throwing around cliches like they were going out of style [cough*Fairly*cough]. I wish him the best.

Another reason to avoid ESPN.com

Espn.com used to be my first stop for baseball news. Rob Neyer was always good food for thought, Peter Gammons and Tim Kurkjian seemed reasonably informed about the inside scoops, and we occasionally were treated to reflectios by Jim Caple or Alan Schwartz. And John Sickels always had great columns about minor leaguers. David Pinto from Baseball Tonight used to do open chats, at least during the playoffs.

Well, Neyer is behind the "Insider" barrier now, Caple and Schwartz appearances are more and more rare, Sickels just ran his last column, and Buster Olney is getting featured a lot. Beyond that, the stats on players don't feature hit charts anymore, the site is agonizingly slow (from all the ads and pop-ups, most likely), and--getting now to the reason for this post--there are a lot of better resources out there now.

Take a look, for example, and player profiles over at M's vs. A's, a blog by three fans with opposing loyalties. (Click on Mariners under the "Information" heading on the sidebar.) Because they are authored by someone who really knows the M's players, they're more specific and more helpful to understanding current players. This will be especially helpful for those of you who, when you hear Niehaus call a player by name, think "Who's he? Is he a Mariner?"

Combining forces in the 'sphere

The last offseason provided impetus for an explosion of Mariners related blogs, many with battle cries as their name: Leone for Third, Fire Bavasi, Bavasi Stinks, Sodo Ohno, etc. Time, despair, and changing blogger circumstances have cause some to close, some to rename and some to combine. The latest developments include four (now two) of the best Mariner blogs:

The USS Mariner, which is where you should start when it comes to anything Mariner-related, has just brought Peter and Jeff from Mariner Musings on board (pun intended), making the USSM even that much better.

Leone for Third, having realized that a Mr. Beltre probably has that slot locked up, has changed its name and web address to Lookout Landing. They too, recruited an excellent blogger recently, Steve from the now abandoned Mariner's Wheelhouse. And they post some great stuff consistently.

If you're new to the so-called blogosphere, take a look around, and see how silly most of your local newspaper columnists sound compared to what others have up on the internet, Larry Stone and David Andriessen excepted. Yes, Blaine Newnham, Steve Kelley and Jim Moore, this especially means you.

The new lineup in Safeco field

My older brother, who really should be co-authoring this blog (hint, hint, bro!), gave me the 2005 Bill James Handbook. Some of the information therein is duplicated online, but there's a fair amount of unique stuff, too, and on top of that, it's a handy reference that's all in one place. One of the nifty sections is a detailed listing of various park factors--measuring how much a particular ballpark affects offense.

Our lineup will feature several new faces, the most significant of which are Sexson and Beltre, but also include Jeremy Reed and, hopefully to some degree, Bucky Jacobsen. Is this offense built for Safeco Field?

First, the Handbook confirms the general belief that Safeco reduces run scoring across the board, but it is very favorable to left-handed power hitters. Specifically, from 2002-2004, Safeco was the worst hitters park, depressing run scoring by 12%. However, left-handed power hitters hit 13% more home runs in Safeco than in a league-average park (3rd place) while right-handers had a very hard time hitting home runs at Safeco, doing so at 86% of the league average clip (forth from the bottom). There is very little difference between the batting averages of right- and left-handed hitters at Safeco, so the disparity--lefthanders hit over 25% more home runs than righties--is really only signicant when it comes to home runs. It appears, though there is no more specific data in the Handbook, that those would-be right-handed HRs are mostly falling for hits, but staying inside the park.

At first glance, this is only good news for Reed, and bad news for Sexson and Beltre. Looking more closely at where Sexson hits his home runs (by looking at his mlb.com hit chart), he consistly hits for power to all fields, with a slight tendency to pull the ball more. Beltre's hit chart shows that 2004 was the first season he hit consistenly to all fields. Like Bret Boone, his success as a power hitter will largely depend on whether he can keep from trying to pull everything.

Safeco field does, for whatever reason, tend to increase walks, which is better news for Sexson than Beltre. Sexson has had an OBP 90-100 points higher than his batting average over the last several years (including last year's down year), while Beltre's OBP is only 50 points higher.

While it's hard to speculate how park factors will affect individual hitters, we should at least give context for each player as best we can. Beltre's old park, Dodger Stadium, also plays as a pitchers' park, albeit less severely. However, the left/right power disparity is reversed in L.A.: right-handed hitters hit home runs at 110% of the league average, while lefties did so at 98% of the average. Both the BOB in Arizona and Miller Park in Milwaukee are hitters park, neither favoring a particular side of the plate.

To sum it up: Any hitter is going to face a bit of an uphill battle at Safeco field, particuarly right-handed power hitters like Sexson. He should be able to maintain his high OBP, however. As for Betlre, there are even more reasons why his power could suffer at Safeco Field.

So what does the Handbook project?
Beltre: .287/.343/.523
Reed: .307/.378/.466
Sexson: .272/.354/.540

Compare that to the top three full-time Mariners (below Ichiro) last year:
Ibanez: .304/.353/.472
Winn: .286/.346/.427
Boone: .251/.317/.423

What's to say?

Being on vacation is a nice thing, but it does mean I have little to say about the Adrian Beltre signings and every other newsworthy baseball event that hasn't already been said. I'm happy about it, and it does make the Sexson signing a little less worrisome. There was speculation that we had to overpay for Sexson to overcome a bad rep as a team to sign with, and now we've got confirmation, according to Tom's summary of a KJR interview with Bill Bavasi. Sexson is still a huge injury risk, in my view, but risk means uncertainty, which means he could turn out some great seasons, too.

I know Dave's happy about the Pokey Reese signing, since he's been beating that drum for awhile, and I don't disagree, but for me to be really confident about having a chance this year, the M's still need to trade Randy Winn for a pitcher, or have the Magic Baseball Fairy turn in him into one. (Bavasi, in his KJR interview, says he realizes this, but he also says that no trades are on the horizon).

A year or two ago, we thought pitching wasn't going to be a problem with this team in the coming years, what with talented pitching prospects coming out our ears. Raphael Soriano was just the head of the class. But now Soriano's out injured (What? A young M's pitching prospect injured?), most of our young arms showed they have a lot of seasoning before they'll be effective at the major-league level, and we traded our best pitcher last year. It was a good trade, but we're hurting in the pitching department.

So we wait to see if anything pans out. Otherwise, we're looking at a rotation full of no. 3 or no. 4 starters. But I'm feeling good about the off-season. With a lot of money and a lot of room for improvement, the front office has made some great progress.

Bavasi signs first baseman to long-term 7-figure per year contract

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/baseball/mlb/news/1998/11/25/angels_vaughn/

History is not on our side.

Besides the USSM, though, most bloggers seem to be focusing on the positive. That's fine for now, but doing that, without looking at the real risks-- is probably what allowed the M's to offer this kind of a contract in the first place

Two posts in one day, I know, but hey, the semester just ended here in KC, and I've got a little time.

You're ignorant, but at least you act on it. Again.

I have a sinking feeling I'll be using that line from Calvin and Hobbes more. (Here's the first instance.) To impatient to wait out the market, desperate to make a statement to an increasingly antagonistic (or worse, disinterested) fanbase, the Mariners throw money at the nearest big name, as much as it took to get him signed now. No way were they going to lose out to Baltimore again.

Richie Sexson is now the highest paid player on the Mariners. He makes more than Ichiro. More than the Mariners refused to pay Ivan Rodriquez last year (he makes $10M a year). More than the M's refused to pay Jason Schmidt in 2001 ($8M per). He makes about the same amount as Ken Griffey Jr, and we know how well that contract has worked for the Reds.

If Richie Sexson were a good bet to be a great player for the next four years, of course, this wouldn't matter. But Sexson's shoulder problems--cleared by the same medical staff that has brought you the bum shoulders of Gil Meche, Ryan Anderson, Matt Thornton, Rafael Soriano, and many others--make him a gamble at any price for any amount of years, let alone the absurd twelve and a half million he'll be pulling down for the next four years. Oh, and his agent says that he wouldn't accept any clauses about the shoulder in his contract, because it "wasn't necessary." How comforting.

The larger point is that the M's wanted to get something done, and in making that decision, lost any remnant of rational risk analysis or strength in their barganing position. Maybe the fans will start talking about the M's now, but the smart ones will be shaking their heads.

If Beltre is still on the horizon for this team, that's good news, and could help to redeem this foolharding aquisition.

File Under "Society:" AP Roe v. Wade Poll

The AP released a story about a poll it ran about what people think about overturning Roe v. Wade.

(Ok, before I continue, if you can't think of one person who has a different opinion about abortion than you whom you respect, just stop reading. Everyone has enough stress in their life without getting worked up about one Mariner-loving Kansas City resident's opinion. I'm commenting on the article about public opinion, not commenting on the abortion itself, so keep you socks on.)

Briefly, the poll says 59% oppose overturning Roe v. Wade, 31% would want a Supreme Court nominee who would reverse it, leaving 10% somewhere else. The article then follows with this quote:

"While I don't have a strong feeling about abortions personally, I wouldn't want
the law overturned and return to the days of backdoor abortions," said Colleen
Dunn, 40, a Republican and community college teacher who lives outside
Philadelphia.

I guess it's a good thing we have a court to listen to reasoned arguments, because apparently a community college teacher (of what, by the way?) doesn't understand the basics of even the most well known case. Let's be clear: overturning Roe v. Wade would not make abortions illegal. Rather, overturning it would mean it would then be possible for state legislatures to pass a law restricting abortion; it would remove the restriction on legislative action regarding abortion that currently stands. There may be a concern that some States would revert to pre-1973 laws that outlaw abortion, but it is these laws, not a court decision, that would prohibit abortions, and only in those states. (Washington State, by the way, would not be one of these states.) Since most Americans favor keeping at least SOME abortions legal, it's quite likely that even in these states, new laws would be enacted.

Moreover, the most likely candidate for replacement on the Supreme Court bench is Rehnquist, who's currently suffering from thyroid cancer. Even replacing him with a Scalia clone would not change the so-called "balance of power" on the court.

I get much less worked up about the issue, and much more worked up about people distorting the issue in order to incite. It's not that the poll isn't a worthwhile enterprise, but a quote that high in the article should be subject to some factual scrutiny. I'm also disappointed that I can't seem to find the actual quesitons asked, since they play a large role in how people respond.

Maybe if something would happen with the Mariners, I won't be so prone to wandering into dangerous off-topic waters. But it's been pretty quiet from First Avenue South.

A hit in his first at-bat

A Welcome to Mariner Morsels, another M's blog. I'd recommend reading their first entry, posting an email exchange with Bob Finnigan. Some observations about the exchange:

• Finnigan generally doesn't expect anything much different from the M's front office, even though this is the first complete offseason for the new GM. He implies that CEO Howard Lincoln is the main instigator of organizational philosophy.
• Finnigan breaks down the "$10-12 Million to resign veterans" figure he published. Meche-$3M, Wilson 2.5, Villone 2, Cabrera 1, Olivo .75. He says his figures are based partly on his estimates and partly on what he hears from the organization, so we don't know if the suggestion that Dan Wilson is worth $2.5M is his lunacy or the M's. The Villone and Cabrera figures are also worrisome, but not as surprising.

What boggles my mind--assuming Finnigan is somewhat accurately representing Lincoln--is how a business shark like Lincoln would stand for overpaying mediocre veterans. If he's so wrapped up in the bottom line, wouldn't he expect frugality? Furthermore, we've seen the M's offer raises to young players who don't even qualify for arbitration. Wouldn't a cut-throat business model eschew that kind of charity?

Finnigan would probably be a lot more credible in his reporting if he either 1) refused to publish figures without independant coroboration or 2) continually prefaced his assertions with, "The Mariners front office says..." or "According to Lincoln, ..."

If you're reading this blog--and I hope you read more than just mine--you are fortunate not to have to rely solely Finnigan repeating the lines the front office gives him. There are some great web resources run by fans who pay attention and care about baseball. For instance, if you're curious about the M's payroll, check out the comprehensive reports on Dugout Dollars.

Many roads to greatness

Do the Mariners a favor--don't believe one word from them or the media if it tries to lower expectations for next season. The only reason the Mariners can't get significantly better this year is their own stupidity.

Two of the better Mariner bloggers still going--it's been a tough year on everyone--have laid out specific plans for the offseason that fall well below the publically declared budget contraints and don't morgage the future, while improving the team now and for the long haul.

Trent at Leone For Third outlines his plan and comes in at $76.2 Million. Dave at USSMariner explains his proposal and comes in at $86.1 Million. Trent's plan relies on trades a lot more, which makes it a lot more speculative, since it depends on the cooperation of other GMs. But let's look at the similarities in Trent's and Dave's plan:

Each recommends signing Adrian Beltre, Matt Clement, and J.D. Drew. Taking the highest estimates for each player, that would cost $26 Million. Each plan recommmends trading Randy Winn and Ryan Franklin, who are guaranteed a combined $6.1 Million next year. Both agree that Wilson will be back for $1M and that Guardado will be the closer, even if that's a bad idea. Both agree that the M's need a viable shortstop option if Jose Lopez doesn't work out. Both say that considering the options, sticking Ibanez at first base is probably the best route. Neither expect anything out of Spiezio.

The most important thing to take away from this is that two knowledgable fans were, in a matter of weeks, able to assess the Mariner's needs and make a plan that would fit within their resources and meet those needs.

Of course, both plans aren't as comprehensive as the a front office strategy needs to be, since they offer one scenario, not a multitude of choices if one or more trades or signings doesn't pan out. In addition, both plans are, I think, optimistic about the Mariners' willingness to let go of players that they have thought were valuable and easy to retain--Winn and Franklin. Both players play positions that can be upgraded, and the big disappointment for me would be to see the M's hedge offers to Clement and Drew because they figure they already have a full outfield and rotation.

So a big barrier to the M's succeeding in the off-season is tentativeness. They need to be decisive and resolute. If the worry about letting current players go is public perception, there's an easy response to nay-sayers: "You don't want us to field the same team we did last year, right?"

Of course, they also have to be reasonably intelligent. Being decisive about the wrong moves just digs us into a deeper hole.