Comments on: Let’s Talk About Erik Bedard

By: Slurve

Slurve — Sun, 07 Feb 2010 02:34:46 +0000

The ironic thing is that he did pitch injured.

By: MarinerMan6

MarinerMan6 — Sat, 06 Feb 2010 20:02:09 +0000

I love how fan’s would rather have Bedard pitch while injured and if he doesn’t call him soft. Pitching injured does nothing but hurt your team. The guys with grit the last few years include Silva and Batista and those guys were hurt and we saw how they did. If Bedard is healthy for half the season and pitches effectively the M’s will be happy.

By: Slurve

Slurve — Sat, 06 Feb 2010 01:47:38 +0000

Obviously being traded for Jones/Tillman+ and getting injured means he has no drive or competitiveness. And to be fair Jeremy Reed career MiLB line: .321/.388/.476 (up to 09) and before he was traded to us .373/.453/.537, he produced that line at age 22. Should we have traded him looking back? Yes but a CFer who hit like that and walked more than he struck out 70BB/36SO and has speed 45 SB(albeit 19 CS) that is a valuable asset. But at the time he looked like he was going to be a stud and Lester wasn’t exactly healthy and came off a not to exciting 04 campaign.

Oh and Bedard is great when healthy that is not BS.

By: mattm

mattm — Fri, 05 Feb 2010 22:02:13 +0000

When healthy, Bedard is 7 inning pitcher?

2009 13/15 starts < 7 innings 9/15 < 6 innings
2008 12/15 starts < 7 innings 8/15 < 6 innings

By: navychief2004

navychief2004 — Fri, 05 Feb 2010 21:36:06 +0000

Research, people.

When healthy, Bedard is 7 inning pitcher. IF he comes back and is successful, I can see him being a 6 inning starter. If he can give 6 per start, then League, Kelley, Lowe and DA take over, I can see Bedard being a good pickup, regardless of price.

By: Jon

Jon — Fri, 05 Feb 2010 21:17:03 +0000

I acknowledged the strong possibilities of Bedard not getting healthy or Bedard not performing. There is still no good reason not to do this. It’s no risk.

And while I doubt bringing in Bedard would stop the team from bringing in Smoltz if that was something they wanted to do, it’s not like Smoltz is Mr. Reliable either. He’s 43 next season and has a loooong list of serious shoulder and elbow surgeries. Like Bedard, he has both Tommy John and labrum surgeries under his belt. Not to mention that Smoltz averaged 5 innings per start last year, which is less than what Bedard averaged with a torn labrum.

Zero drive or competitiveness? Now that’s just ridiculous…

By: mattm

mattm — Fri, 05 Feb 2010 20:43:40 +0000

I meant to say Reed for Pappelbon or Lester:

http://ussmariner.com/2005/12/29/papelbon-and-lester/

By: mattm

mattm — Fri, 05 Feb 2010 20:19:11 +0000

Over/under on Bedard Starts: 11.5

Over/under on Bedard Wins: 4.5

Over/under on Bedard Innings Pitched: 49

Over/under on BS articles I have to read about how great Bedard is when healthy: 146

Odds Bedard pitches in a Sept game (something he has not done since 2006): 85/1

Number of games where I am going to wonder why we didn’t just sign John Smoltz instead: 162

This sounds alot like the same group of people that determined that Jeremy Reed was good and everyone else was not smart enough to see it. I remember USSM/LL railing about how terrible it would be to trade Reed for Pappelbon or Arroyo and how it would cripple the franchise because Reed was going to be such an offensive force.

Bedard is a talented man with absolutely zero drive or competitiveness and will look be a major headache all season long.

By: MarinerMan6

MarinerMan6 — Fri, 05 Feb 2010 18:38:32 +0000

Jon,
I think you got it right. M’s fan hatred of Bedard is almost as irrational as their lovefest for anything Ken Griffey Jr. The difference is the true fans really like Bedard because he tangibly increases the talent level on the team.

I have to believe the M’s feel like they know he will be able to pitch sometime closer to May than July by giving him a contract this year. It seems like there was no rush to get a deal done unless the M’s brass knows something about his status other clubs do not (which is a real possibility considering we are performing his rehab).

By: Jon

Jon — Fri, 05 Feb 2010 17:08:07 +0000

Say it with me now, sunk cost. Sunk cost. S-U-N-K C-O-S-T.

There is no making that deal square. He’s a free agent, and now he’s back (probably). The only thing Bedard has to live up to at this point is $1.5M.

Businesses that chase a sunk cost get themselves in trouble. Baseball teams are no different. Fans chasing a sunk cost are just going to get worked up into a tizzy. Let it go.

By: maqman

maqman — Fri, 05 Feb 2010 16:56:43 +0000

After what the Ms gave up for him and the millions they have already paid him I figure he owes the club a discount if he comes back. I realize that he was not responsible for Bavasi giving up the farm for him but he has cost the organization a lot and a little pay-back is called for. That said if he can give us a last half of this season equal to his first half of last season he should be square with the board.

By: ivan

ivan — Fri, 05 Feb 2010 16:52:45 +0000

Jon is right, and ernier also nails it. Who cares if he goes only 5 innings per start? It’ll be a better 5 innings than they’d get from the others. There’s no reason NOT to sign him if they can get him for what is being reported.

I’d like to see him get his pitch count down. He nibbles too much for someone with stuff like he has But first I’d like to see that he’s healthy.

By: ernier

ernier — Fri, 05 Feb 2010 16:42:59 +0000

I completely agree with your post and for 1.5 million I just don’t see the downside. People need to move on from the Bedard trade…Bavasi is not running the show anymore.

I understand mattm’s point, but I’d rather have the results of Bedard going 5 and 1/3, than the results of Snell or Vargas or French going 5 and 1/3. None of the current back of the rotation guys are 6 or 7 inning pitchers, so I’d rather have Bedard.

Jon – do you think there is any chance they might consider using him in the bullpen?

By: BoiseM

BoiseM — Fri, 05 Feb 2010 16:39:22 +0000

The fact that Bedard had enough guile to pitch as well as he did with a torn labrum, I think bodes well for a good return to form. He didn’t lose velocity, his breaking balls were still filthy…it just hurt like hell. Sign him up.

By: wazzy

wazzy — Fri, 05 Feb 2010 16:38:00 +0000

Bedard is fantastic IF/WHEN healthy, however the one strike I have against him is his inability to pitch deep into a game. My one worry about this signing is that if we still have an 6 man bullpen if/when bedard comes back, how much strain will he put on the pen? Other than that, I think signing bedard would be a great move.

By: dmojr

dmojr — Fri, 05 Feb 2010 15:02:54 +0000

Anyone against this deal, 1) needs to get their head checked and 2) needs to learn something about the game.

Bedard, when hes able to throw is a stud. There is, or atleast SHOULD NOT be any questions about that. He is going to be better than whoever we have in our #5 hole when he is ready to go.

The glorious part of this move is, he does not need to be rushed back at all. We have the SP depth to make this work till may, june, all star break, whatever it may take. Whoever is pushed out of the rotation can become the long man if need be in the pen, as we all known Bedard wont be eating up the innings….

If he does not return we are talking 1.5 million dollars lost.. *crickets*

I understand everyone is entitled to their own opinion… but it’s wrong. All the hate that goes towards Bedard is not justified. Go back and watch his starts before his injury last year, the guy was amazing.

By: mattm

mattm — Fri, 05 Feb 2010 09:58:41 +0000

Bedard has not been able to pitch into the 6th inning EVER since coming over in the terrible trade that cost us our LF/#3 hitter-Closer-#4 starter and setup man.

Why would anyone expect him to go out there and be worth a pile of dog crap? I could sign Nolan Ryan on the same justification (he wont cost much…when healthy hes been effective) ITS NOT GOING TO HAPPEN!!! The guy is a pile who would rather cash a paycheck in the hot tub than compete against a decent lineup.