Mariners fans will always have King Felix’s perfect game

67 Comments

Cherish Wednesday’s perfect game, Mariners fans, and enjoy King Felix’s Seattle tenure while it lasts.

Let’s face it: there’s a good chance Felix Hernandez will end his Mariners career never having won a postseason game.

The Mariners are set to finish in last place in the AL West for a third straight season and for the seventh time in nine years. They haven’t gone to the playoffs once in the 10 years since Hernandez was signed as a 16-year-old out of Venezuela, and it seems doubtful that they’re going to get there next year.

We’ve reached the point that it probably makes sense for the Mariners to trade Hernandez. Fortunately, his trade value will still be near its peak this winter. The free agent class includes only one elite starter, Zack Greinke, and there are question marks about him as far as how he’d fare in the spotlight. The next best starter available is probably Edwin Jackson, unless you’re a big Anibal Sanchez or Ryan Dempster fan.

Hernandez is signed for two more years at a total of $39.5 million after this one. That’d not exactly a bargain, but he’d probably command $27 million-$30 million per year as a free agent, and the team that acquires him would get a big head start in signing him to an extension. He’s worth several top prospects, and the Mariners could definitely use some high-upside bats as they attempt to rebuild. The Rangers, Yankees, Dodgers and Red Sox would all likely enter the bidding if Hernandez is made available. Hernandez is probably the one player out there for whom the Rangers would sacrifice shortstop Jurickson Profar, and he would be pretty much the perfect building block for the Mariners.

It’d be a shame to see Felix go, particularly given that he seems to enjoy Seattle, but the Mariners need much more than one ace if they’re ever going to challenge the AL West elite. They just might be able to turn Hernandez into three or four quality major leaguers, upping their odds for 2014 and beyond.

Red Sox owner: “spending money helps”

Getty Images
4 Comments

The other day Rob Manfred said, as he and other owners have said often in the past, that there is no correlation between payroll and winning. He said that defensively, in response to criticism of the slow free agent market of the past two offseasons.

As we have noted in the past, Manfred is not being honest about that. While, yes, in any given year there can be wild variation between payroll and win total — the Giants stunk last year, the A’s won 97 games — common sense dictates otherwise. What’s more, a recent study has shown that there is a pretty strong correlation between winning and payroll over time. Yes, you can fluke into a big season with a low payroll — Deadspin compared it to a cold snap occurring during a time of climate change — but if you want that “sustained success” teams claim they want, the best way to ensure it is to spend more money over time.

If you know anything about baseball labor history, though, you know well that the Commissioner and the owners will continue to mischaracterize the dynamics of the business as it suits them. Mostly because — present lefty sportswriters notwithstanding — very few people push back on their narratives. Fans tend to parrot ownership’s line on this stuff and, more often than not, baseball media acts as stenographer for ownership as opposed to critic. That gives owners a far greater ability to shape the narrative about all of this than most institutions.

Which makes this all the more awkward. From David Schoenfield of ESPN:

In apparent contradiction to his own commissioner, Boston Red Sox owner John Henry said Monday that, while there is not a perfect correlation between a bigger payroll and winning, “spending more money helps.”

Which is right. The correlation is not perfect — teams can spend a lot of money on a bad team if given the chance and a low payroll team like the Rays can bullpen their way to 90 wins — but you’re way more likely to win year-in, year-out if you’re spending than if you go cheap all the time and hope for a miracle season.

Which is not to say that Henry is some labor activist owner. He and his fellow front office officials have a long history of backing the league office on just about everything that matters and will no doubt do so with labor matters in the runup to the next CBA negotiation. The owners tend not to have a solidarity problem.

But Henry does seem to draw the line at peddling baloney, which is a shockingly necessary thing when the league and the union’s relationship turns acrimonious.