IMO may be controversial

User avatar
bpj
Posts: 15676
Joined: Mon Apr 29, 2019 12:55 am

Re: IMO may be controversial

Post by bpj » Sat Jul 18, 2026 6:11 pm

D-train wrote:
Sat Jul 18, 2026 2:19 pm
bpj wrote:
Sat Jul 18, 2026 4:50 am
Couldn't agree more.

Players like Randy and Luis shouldnt reach free agency while they're on the Mariners.

Trade the expiring players, get new ones.

The Mariners completely skip this step in team building.

You can either be a big budget team, or you have to add talent the few other ways available.

Which includes trading expiring players for replacements, not letting them walk with nothing in return.
Well they can give Randy a QO for a draft pick that MIGHT help the team in 2031....
True, as long as they actually give him the offer that would at least be something coming back for the sustainability of the organization.

But if they don't make the offer because they don't want to get stuck paying the $20M like they've done in the past... it's a problem, imo.

User avatar
desbcoach
Posts: 5093
Joined: Thu May 02, 2019 3:49 am

Re: IMO may be controversial

Post by desbcoach » Sun Jul 19, 2026 4:49 pm

Big_Maple wrote:
Sat Jul 18, 2026 5:51 pm
Seattle or Bust wrote:
Sat Jul 18, 2026 5:33 pm

They have no urgency ever. And that's the problem with the whole org.
This year is a bust - let it play out and hope for the best.

I’d say that we should trade away some starting pitching for an established right handed bat (right fielder) and a 3B. I’ve been looking at the free agent class for 2027 and it looks pretty thin for rightfielders and third base. In fact, there’s practically nothing that will be available at third base, and most of the right field free agents are expensive, on the wrong side of 30, and/or are under performing this season.

Yes, get rid of Luis Castillo. But that will likely just get us a short-term rental for the season. Will likely need to part with one of our younger pictures like Kirby to get something back in return. With a couple of kids waiting in the wings, I think we can do it, and now is the time.
I think they are looking at Arroyo as a OF next year and heck if he keeps hitting in Tacoma maybe in Sept

AlvinDavisFan21
Posts: 140
Joined: Mon Sep 30, 2024 2:42 pm

Re: IMO may be controversial

Post by AlvinDavisFan21 » Sun Jul 19, 2026 5:02 pm

GL_Storm wrote:
Sat Jul 18, 2026 6:45 am
I've said in other threads that I don't think they should be buyers at the deadline, and I suspect that's what the front office is thinking as well, which may have something to do with Jerry's recent comments about contending teams trading with each other, as opposed to the traditional fire sale scenarios. If they do make a deal, I don't think it will be for a pure rental type.

I think they'll definitely try to trade Castillo. I'd like to see them trade Randy as well. I'm tired of these guys walking for nothing.

And keep Sloan and Anderson in the minors. There's zero reason to bring them up this year.
They should absolutely be sellers.

User avatar
D-train
Posts: 81792
Joined: Mon Apr 29, 2019 1:33 am
Location: Quincy, MA

Re: IMO may be controversial

Post by D-train » Sun Jul 19, 2026 5:04 pm

Seattle or Bust wrote:
Sat Jul 18, 2026 5:33 pm
What happened with Julio yesterday is a microcosm for the problem with the picture at large.

Hollander said that Julio didn't start yesterday because they wanted him to go through a full pre-game warm up to see how he responded. There was a whole ass All Star break for him to do this. You're telling me they couldn't have had him show up to the stadium Thursday and do a mock pre-game warm up and see his response? Instead, they act like yesterday's game doesn't matter and boom 7-0, 2-hit loss with his replacement pushing a moronic bunt only to get thrown out stealing 5 seconds later.

Then he said that Donovan will be in Tacoma for a "long" rehab assignment. They said it will be so long that he will alternate between playing in Tacoma and Everett, meaning that this will take place over multiple home trips for Tacoma.

I mean... let Donovan hit in 3 games and get his ass up on the fucking roster.

They have no urgency ever. And that's the problem with the whole org.
Fucking nailed it right there. That's it. That is FUCKING IT!!!!!!
dt

User avatar
D-train
Posts: 81792
Joined: Mon Apr 29, 2019 1:33 am
Location: Quincy, MA

Re: IMO may be controversial

Post by D-train » Sun Jul 19, 2026 5:06 pm

Big_Maple wrote:
Sat Jul 18, 2026 5:51 pm
Seattle or Bust wrote:
Sat Jul 18, 2026 5:33 pm

They have no urgency ever. And that's the problem with the whole org.
This year is a bust - let it play out and hope for the best.

I’d say that we should trade away some starting pitching for an established right handed bat (right fielder) and a 3B. I’ve been looking at the free agent class for 2027 and it looks pretty thin for rightfielders and third base. In fact, there’s practically nothing that will be available at third base, and most of the right field free agents are expensive, on the wrong side of 30, and/or are under performing this season.

Yes, get rid of Luis Castillo. But that will likely just get us a short-term rental for the season. Will likely need to part with one of our younger pictures like Kirby to get something back in return. With a couple of kids waiting in the wings, I think we can do it, and now is the time.
I appreciate that you have been looking at the FA market but when you suggest a trade for a RH RF and 3B that doesn't exist you should prob look at that too my friend.
dt

User avatar
D-train
Posts: 81792
Joined: Mon Apr 29, 2019 1:33 am
Location: Quincy, MA

Re: IMO may be controversial

Post by D-train » Sun Jul 19, 2026 5:08 pm

desbcoach wrote:
Sun Jul 19, 2026 4:49 pm
Big_Maple wrote:
Sat Jul 18, 2026 5:51 pm
Seattle or Bust wrote:
Sat Jul 18, 2026 5:33 pm

They have no urgency ever. And that's the problem with the whole org.
This year is a bust - let it play out and hope for the best.

I’d say that we should trade away some starting pitching for an established right handed bat (right fielder) and a 3B. I’ve been looking at the free agent class for 2027 and it looks pretty thin for rightfielders and third base. In fact, there’s practically nothing that will be available at third base, and most of the right field free agents are expensive, on the wrong side of 30, and/or are under performing this season.

Yes, get rid of Luis Castillo. But that will likely just get us a short-term rental for the season. Will likely need to part with one of our younger pictures like Kirby to get something back in return. With a couple of kids waiting in the wings, I think we can do it, and now is the time.
I think they are looking at Arroyo as a OF next year and heck if he keeps hitting in Tacoma maybe in Sept
Yes is arroyo still in LF. If so that would be odd. I guess Laz is the RF.
dt

Seattle or Bust
Posts: 11573
Joined: Wed Mar 09, 2022 7:09 pm

Re: IMO may be controversial

Post by Seattle or Bust » Sun Jul 19, 2026 5:14 pm

D-train wrote:
Sun Jul 19, 2026 5:08 pm
desbcoach wrote:
Sun Jul 19, 2026 4:49 pm
Big_Maple wrote:
Sat Jul 18, 2026 5:51 pm

This year is a bust - let it play out and hope for the best.

I’d say that we should trade away some starting pitching for an established right handed bat (right fielder) and a 3B. I’ve been looking at the free agent class for 2027 and it looks pretty thin for rightfielders and third base. In fact, there’s practically nothing that will be available at third base, and most of the right field free agents are expensive, on the wrong side of 30, and/or are under performing this season.

Yes, get rid of Luis Castillo. But that will likely just get us a short-term rental for the season. Will likely need to part with one of our younger pictures like Kirby to get something back in return. With a couple of kids waiting in the wings, I think we can do it, and now is the time.
I think they are looking at Arroyo as a OF next year and heck if he keeps hitting in Tacoma maybe in Sept
Yes is arroyo still in LF. If so that would be odd. I guess Laz is the RF.
Imagine believing a Mariners rookie will ever come up and not need 2-3 years to figure it out.

Meanwhile, the Pirates have a 22 year old who was nowhere near a top 100 prospect list on pace for 50 homers/162 and a 1.079 OPS:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OxZ4iZOiK_I

Big_Maple
Posts: 2120
Joined: Fri Aug 12, 2022 8:55 pm

Re: IMO may be controversial

Post by Big_Maple » Sun Jul 19, 2026 5:48 pm

D-train wrote:
Sun Jul 19, 2026 5:06 pm

I appreciate that you have been looking at the FA market but when you suggest a trade for a RH RF and 3B that doesn't exist you should prob look at that too my friend.
Actually, I was saying that the free agent market is thin for these 2 positions.

If we part with a young controllable arm, we ought to be able to get at least one of these positions through trade. Surely in 29 other major league teams there is one decent-to-stellar 3B or one RF that a team would be willing to part with.

User avatar
GL_Storm
Posts: 4458
Joined: Sat Jul 10, 2021 9:00 pm

Re: IMO may be controversial

Post by GL_Storm » Sun Jul 19, 2026 6:13 pm

Big_Maple wrote:
Sun Jul 19, 2026 5:48 pm
D-train wrote:
Sun Jul 19, 2026 5:06 pm

I appreciate that you have been looking at the FA market but when you suggest a trade for a RH RF and 3B that doesn't exist you should prob look at that too my friend.
Actually, I was saying that the free agent market is thin for these 2 positions.

If we part with a young controllable arm, we ought to be able to get at least one of these positions through trade. Surely in 29 other major league teams there is one decent-to-stellar 3B or one RF that a team would be willing to part with.
3B is pretty thin around the league.

Big_Maple
Posts: 2120
Joined: Fri Aug 12, 2022 8:55 pm

Re: IMO may be controversial

Post by Big_Maple » Sun Jul 19, 2026 11:46 pm

GL_Storm wrote:
Sun Jul 19, 2026 6:13 pm
3B is pretty thin around the league.
Hear me out before dismissing this - Rafael Devers.

The Giants are going to be sellers at the trade deadline. A month ago, the Devers trade was looking like a bust for SF, but lately Devers is looking like the guy they traded for. He’s a career .274/.347/.504 hitter with a 126 wRC+. He has a massive contract which is why it will be hard to move him, but if the Giants eat a sizable chunk of his contract, both teams will benefit. Remember that Devers is still just 29 years old and he has never had a season with an OPS below .800 (this season he has improved to .791). Only Canzone and Arozarena have higher OPSs on the M’s.

A realistic package centers around a mid-tier, major-league-ready starter under years of team control like Bryce Miller or Bryan Woo, coupled with a secondary, high-upside arm from the lower minors like Logan evans or Teddy McGraw.

In this framework, because Devers' contract remains a multi-hundred-million-dollar albatross, the Giants would still need to absorb roughly 25% to 35% of the remaining $199.5 million salary (about $50 million to $70 million) to make taking on the rest of that lengthy deal fair value for giving up an active, cost-controlled mid-rotation arm.

This construction satisfies the Giants' desire to clear significant luxury tax space while getting a younger, projectable starting pitcher back, and it lets the Mariners bolster their lineup with a premium bat without completely gutting the top shelf of their farm system.

I’m sure lots of you will hate this proposal because it means letting on of our starters go, and because it takes on a guy whose stats took a nose dive tie second he got traded. But consider this:

Devers has been a rock star. He struggled this year, but he’s turning it around. He a Cal Raleigh except that Cal still can’t hit a beach ball with a wiffle bat. Most of us have seen Cal’s potential at the plate and few of us would consider trading him because he’s currently struggling. Devers has a better offensive profile over a longer period of time - in other words, he’s not a flash in the pan and he’s worth the risk.

As many of you have stated, we need an answer at 3B and there is very little out there for trade or free agency. Devers plays there for a few years until he’s a defensive liability and then he DHs.

The M’s actually have the ability to absorb his contract after the Giants eat a third of it and still stay well below luxury tax. It reduces their payroll flexibility, but as others have pointed out, outfield holes could be filled internally and SS and 2B also seem to be taken care of. Anderson or Sloan could be promoted as needed to fill the hole left by trade. In other words, they may not need to make another big splashy expensive move this offseason.

In short, it’s a risk. But it’s a move I think the Giants would be willing to make. And Devers is a player that I believe will be a huge offensive upgrade foreseeable future. Our starting rotation will settle out and maybe even get better as the kids move to the majors. The major downside is that Devers is a below average defensive 3B (ug). But overall, this makes sense to me, full stop.

Post Reply