Way too early offseason

[DanielVogelbach]

You were saying to implement a strategy that works 80% of the time. There is no spending strategy that works 80% of the time, because 29 teams don't win the World Series. If your strategy worked 10% of the time, then you would win one WS once every 10 years. If your strategy worked 80% of the time, then you would win 8 rings every 10 years. That's impossible.

So, it's not a matter of implementing a strategy that works 80% of the time, because that strategy doesn't exist.

It's a matter of putting together a winning strategy. When a team outside the top 10 teams is winning the WS 20% of the time, that emphasizes what a small role total payroll actually plays in terms of winning the WS.

Do math monkey.

[Michael K.]

Only one team wins the World Series every year. Thanks for that information. It doesn't change the fact that 80% of the time, the team that won it was inside the top 10. Talk all the shit you want, call me a monkey, what ever. I really don't give a shit. Again, you are annoying as shit, and this is literally the last time I ever converse with you.

[DanielVogelbach]

Only one team wins the World Series every year. Thanks for that information. It doesn't change the fact that 80% of the time, the team that won it was inside the top 10. Talk all the shit you want, call me a monkey, what ever. I really don't give a shit. Again, you are annoying as shit, and this is literally the last time I ever converse with you.

It also doesn't change the fact that 20% of the time there were a minimum 10 teams that spent more than the WS winner.

All I ever said was that you don't have to be in the top 10 to win a World Series. That's straight facts. One out of 5 times. You're just proving my point for me.

I never once debated a correlation between spending and winning. Because I go by facts. I'm debating the strength of that correlation. I'm looking at the entirety of the Mariners franchise since 1977. The problems run a lot deeper than not spending money. You came up with 6 teams in just the last 30 years that won the WS with payrolls outside the top 10 and the Mariners have never even gone to the WS in the last 48 years.

Why would you care if the Mariners won the WS as one of the 80% of winners in the top 10 or one of the 20% of winners in the bottom 20? It's arguably more exciting with a young, cheap team than with a bunch of expensive FA acquisitions.

I don't care what spending strategy the Mariners choose to go with. Honestly I don't really care if they win 100 games or lose 100 games. Not that big of a deal. I'm just pointing out the fact that it's not a spending competition, but rather it's an amateur draft, international signing, contract negotiating, trading, player development, roster management competition with high priced FAs as only one part of the equation. And, per the numbers the Mariners payroll is not excessively high or low in relation to their revenues.

[GL_Storm]

It's pretty easy to spend money on overpriced free agents.

[DanielVogelbach]

It's pretty easy to spend money on overpriced free agents.

Exactly.

No fan really cares how much the owner spends. They care about seeing their team win the World Series.

Nobody ever says, "Well we missed the playoffs, but I love our owner, because he spent $300 mil on washed up lazy players"

Nobody ever says, "Well it's cool we won the World Series and all, but I think it would be more meaningful with a higher payroll"

[HawkandMariner88]

My first priority is bringing back Naylor. At this rate I'd look elsewhere for production from 3B. My choices be.

A. Move Polanco over there or;

B. Let Geno Walk & try for a short term deal with Max Muncy. Dude is raking in LA. Wouldn't cost much either.

[Donn Beach]

Team announced he will be posted.

"Why not stick with the young guys?"

1. We don't currently have a 1B close in the system.
2. Williamson will never come close to hitting 20 homers, let alone 56, or 254 over 7 seasons. Despite his solid glove... he has slugged exactly 1 homer over 340 plate appearances. He has an OPS near .600 in the minors. His bat has not flashed even close to what it needs to be to start in this league.

the deal with Williamson, he's not a near term answer. I think getting picked in the second round and being promoted was deceiving. I view him more like a calzone or haniger, that it could be possible he is a starter when he hits 27-28. Or he's utility, which very likely could be it

Williamson is sort of like the opposite of Evan White to me.

Evan White was already a developed player whose profile looked like a .270/.350/.430 15-20 homer player at worst with an elite glove at 1B. They then took a perfectly good profile and ruined it by trying to add power.

I think the opposite is true for Williamson. I think he needs to pull what they did with White... try to bulk up and change his swing mechanics to add more pop and hope his contact doesn't crater. That also means he needs a lot of time to do that. I can't see him being the starting 3B for the M's next year until he shows he can generate more pop.

something that doesn't make sense to me terms of the Williamson hype. They make the big deal about how they had to wake him up to tell him he had been drafted, it was this total surprise to him. But they already had to have cut a deal with his agent terms of his going under slot like that didn't they?

[Bil522]

the deal with Williamson, he's not a near term answer. I think getting picked in the second round and being promoted was deceiving. I view him more like a calzone or haniger, that it could be possible he is a starter when he hits 27-28. Or he's utility, which very likely could be it

Williamson is sort of like the opposite of Evan White to me.

Evan White was already a developed player whose profile looked like a .270/.350/.430 15-20 homer player at worst with an elite glove at 1B. They then took a perfectly good profile and ruined it by trying to add power.

I think the opposite is true for Williamson. I think he needs to pull what they did with White... try to bulk up and change his swing mechanics to add more pop and hope his contact doesn't crater. That also means he needs a lot of time to do that. I can't see him being the starting 3B for the M's next year until he shows he can generate more pop.

something that doesn't make sense to me terms of the Williamson hype. They make the big deal about how they had to wake him up to tell him he had been drafted, it was this total surprise to him. But they already had to have cut a deal with his agent terms of his going under slot like that didn't they?

That year, the draft was later in the day. So with him on the east coast it was late enough for him to be asleep

[Donn Beach]

Williamson is sort of like the opposite of Evan White to me.

Evan White was already a developed player whose profile looked like a .270/.350/.430 15-20 homer player at worst with an elite glove at 1B. They then took a perfectly good profile and ruined it by trying to add power.

I think the opposite is true for Williamson. I think he needs to pull what they did with White... try to bulk up and change his swing mechanics to add more pop and hope his contact doesn't crater. That also means he needs a lot of time to do that. I can't see him being the starting 3B for the M's next year until he shows he can generate more pop.

something that doesn't make sense to me terms of the Williamson hype. They make the big deal about how they had to wake him up to tell him he had been drafted, it was this total surprise to him. But they already had to have cut a deal with his agent terms of his going under slot like that didn't they?

That year, the draft was later in the day. So with him on the east coast it was late enough for him to be asleep

But he would have known they were interested in picking him, it wouldn't have come out of nowhere. That's the narrative

[Big_Maple]

My first priority is bringing back Naylor. At this rate I'd look elsewhere for production from 3B. My choices be.

A. Move Polanco over there or;

B. Let Geno Walk & try for a short term deal with Max Muncy. Dude is raking in LA. Wouldn't cost much either.

Agree re: Naylor. 100%

We missed the Alonso and Freeman and Olson sweepstakes. Time to go big on a top tier 1B and get aggressive. Based on market value I’d say 4 years, $88M or 5 years, $100M. He’s only 28 and is in his most productive years, so lock him in. He’s been nothing short of stellar for the M’s since we picked him up.