Mariners payroll=$111 million

[RotatorCuff]

Well Goose I am being totally honest when I say that I find this team boring.

Between being at Safeco and watching several games on TV I find myself very rarely stimulated.

Hopefully we will see something good in 2007.

[Jim Potable]

I understand the frustration and pessimism of some fans, but I don't feel that way. I agree, however, with what Tmbr points out:

It is an awfully mediocre one for the size of the payroll. How much of an improvement would a second place finish with 83 wins really represent? Not worth spending all that money, getting older, and not acquiring a single long term asset.

That is absolutely frustrating. No doubt about it. Still, I'm not convinced there is any team in the AL West who is a lock to win the division. I'm not saying the division is a toss-up. I would guess the Angels are probably the early "favorites" -- all of those predictions come out after ST, right?

All the same, I don't know if I really care about all that right now. I always look forward to baseball season. I always root for the M's.

[heykid]

$111 mill. Who would've thought we could pull that off and still not get any big names?

I actually expect us to get out of the cellar this season; Jose Guillen will boost our offense, our pitching seems improved.

But who knows? Right now, everyone is a paper tiger; they look like something they may not turn out to be.

[Chris]

Agreed, heykid and Bedir.

This team is better then it was last year. In my opinion, substantially better.

The division is weak and because of that, we could win the west. Could, not should, not will... COULD.

Felix, Lopez, Ichiro, Beltre and Washburn are all looking at having better years.

Guillen + Vidro is a huge upgrade over what we had.

I think we're going to surprise some people.

Then again, spring training always blows an air of optimism my way.

[Jim Potable]

What if Seattle had the same record in 2006 against Oakland as they did against LAA?

Seattle went 9-10 against LAA, 8-11 against Texas, and -- and as we all know -- the horrid 2-17 against Oakland. Imagine that a 9-10 record instead, not to take anything away Oakland. Yet, in the simplest and most naive form, add 7W, and subtract 7L.

Actual 2006
AL WEST    W    L
OAK       93   69
LAA       89   73
TEX       80   82
SEA       78   84

What if... 2006
AL WEST    W    L
LAA       89   73
OAK       86   76
SEA       85   77
TEX       80   82

We still have losing records against everyone in our division. It's still frustrating and it's silly of me to suggest. Just wondering what if would have been like if we could have scored more and allowed fewer runs, if we hadn't gotten our asses handed to us over that long stretch.

__________________________________________________ _______________________________________

And some interesting new stuff on this subject. Seems everyone is thinking about it.

Brock's mailbag:

Had the Mariners not gone 19-38 against their AL West brethren, things might have been a lot different.
***
They play 13 games against the A's, Rangers and Angels in April. We should have a better idea where exactly they stand on May 1.

USSM's DMZ's "The Angels can bite":

Right now, then, I see the A’s and Angels as good teams, followed by the M’s and Rangers, who are both .500-ish teams. In that kind of environment, the division’s not the Angels’ to take, it’s anyone’s to take. The normal swings of luck, much less health, could easily bring either or both the Angels and A’s to earth, or boost the Mariners into contention.

[Sully]

I am not a huge fan of some of the moves this off season, however I would love to be wrong about some of the moves made.
Maybe Guillen will extract revenge on the Angels, Vidro could an okay DH, and a 3/5's change in the starting rotation can't be all bad when you consider what the last 3 years have given us!
What happens if Horam has a sudden case of health? Or Felix begins to reach his potential?

Lots of could be's but it will all have to be proven on the field.

[Inside Pitch]

Originally Posted by Lamda

nice - has there ever in the history of sports been a worse 100 mill dollar team?

Late 90s Dodger teams and the early decade Texas teams seem to meet the criteria. Those Fox owners Dodgers teams were pretty high priced and pretty awful.