Mariners payroll=$111 million

[Goose]

Or at least so says Larry Stone.

The team is using a working budget figure of $111 million, which includes about $103 million in raw salaries, another $6 million or so in pro-rated signing bonuses, and their annual "contingency fund" of $2 million for prospective deals and minor-league callups.

Well, they said they were going to raise the payroll this year and they did. The Mariners have never breached the triple digit mark until now.

Now, if we can just get some rise in wins, to go along with the rise in dollars, then we might be going somewhere.

[Lamda]

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

[bedir than average]

well, that can not be shown until the season progresses, but you may want to look at Dodgers team, a Mets team and the Portland Trailblazers. I'll get you the years if you need them, but there have been pathetic performances by high spending clubs in the past.

But to assume this is one of the worst performers of 100M$ + budgets ignores that there has yet to be a Spring Training game let alone a season.

[Sawman]

Wow, I had no idea their payroll had jumped up close to the Angels' payroll. That's a lot of dough to be putting out there, obviously neither of our teams are the most wise of spenders.

[JasonAChurchill]

There is good news in all this.

Trust me, there is.

If the Mariners are paying out 103 mil in raw salary for 2007, that certainly means the contract of Miguel Batista is frontloaded, at least by about 2 million.

Makes him easier to trade down the road if he's due 2 years and, say, 12 mil, rather than 2 and 16+.

[RotatorCuff]

This is funny. What a horrible, horrible baseball team.

I'm almost embarrassed to be a fan.

We have that kind of a payroll and the only sure thing we have is another last place finish in 2007.

I'm still predicting that this team is going to go on a remarkable last place run.

[bedir than average]

the only sure thing we have is another last place finish in 2007

damn the torpedoes and full speed ahead.

If you repeat this often enough does it please you?

There are no sure things. None. An 83 win team just won the World Series.

Are you certain that this isn't an 83 win team? If so, how?

As for last place, what addition did the Rangers make that makes you think they are better than last year? What about Anaheim? Oakland?

[Goose]

If you repeat this often enough does it please you?

I was gonna say something to this effect, but I held my tongue.

[RotatorCuff]

Believe what you want to believe. This is still a pretty bad baseball team. Certainly the weakest in the AL West.

[bedir than average]

Texas finished with 80 wins while getting worse offensively and defensively. They did maintain their pitching staff.

Oakland with 93 wins lost an MVP candidate and CY candidate while replacing them with MikePiazza and Shannon Stewart, that would have been great four years ago, but now?

LAA had 89 wins and have a better CF, better bullpen, same staff.

I would place Seattle right with Texas if not ahead and there is a great possibility of Oakland finally falling back as well.

LAA and the rest, but I see LAA with enough holes that they could finish with mid 80 wins.


And I'm not asking you to believe what I do, but living a life with hope can be a lot more fun than living a life of despair.

[RotatorCuff]

My only hope for the Mariners in 2007 is this:

If I go down to Safeco Field 7 times like I did in 2006 I hope to not repeat my record of 0-7.

Also, there might be worse teams (not many) but the Mariners have to be one of the most boring teams in baseball.

How many walk off wins can anybody recall the Mariners having the past few seasons?

It's a garbage team, with an idiot GM and a mprpn for a manager.

Sorry but I'm not laying out any clothes in advance for the World Series parade in October.

[bedir than average]

RC, you won't be allowed in the Stadium this year. You are only to watch from Brew Pub or Cafe. That's a few wins right there, and then this club is third.

[JasonAChurchill]

Anyone who thinks a last-place finish is a sure thing, is just a frustrated fan, and I can certainly understand that.

I'm very surprised that more people aren't speaking like RC. Passionate, but frustrated, ticked off and pessimistic as a result.

The Mariners haven't given anyone a reason not to feel that way.

[Goose]

Head on over to the Mariners forum on Scout. You'll find plenty. Along with enough idiotcy to drive you nuts.

And come on RC. Yeah wanna call the team mediocre, then fine. But bad? The Royals were bad, the Pirates are bad. The Cubs were bad. 78 wins is mediocre.

Anything below 75 wins is bad IMO. 75-83 is mediocre. 84-90 is good. 90-100 is really good. 100+ is elite.

And boring? I'd say they're anything but. But thats just a matter of preference. Baseball is rarely boring to me.

[Timberwolf]

This team isn't terrible like the 2004 and 2005 versions. 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.

I would much rather see them tank it early and get a leadership change than muddle through the year playing .500 ball. .500 is fine if you are playing and developing kids. It blows dead bears when you are employing injury prone thirtysomething journeymen.

It is 20-20 hindsight, but if they had spent the huge money to get Matsuzaka , signed Reitsma and Rhodes off the scrap heap, let Pineiro and Meche go, and brought back the rest of the team that finished last year they'd be a lot better off.