Bavasi Losing Face
Posted 7/20/2006 10:09:00 AM by: PositivePaul
If you recall, the M's had a decision to make with Snelling to start the season. They needed a roster spot to make room for a decent backup catcher (Quiroz), and Bavasi decided to DFA Carvajal rather than place Snelling on the 60-day DL. The reason that Bavasi gave for not putting Snelling on the 60-day DL was along the lines that it was more of a mental thing for Snelling. Bavasi wanted to give Snelling a bit of a psychological break.
Now, however, what favor is Bill giving Chris by holding him down in Tacoma, while Carl Everett sucks roster space and crucial at-bats up in Seattle? It's been waaaay more than 60 days, and I'd like to think that the extra 40-man spot freed up (take your pick -- Lawton, Borchard, Carvajal) would have helped the M's more than the psychological negative vibes would've hurt Snelling.
I've seen Chris a few times in Tacoma. He's struggled a little bit, but his defense has been solid, and he appears to be healthy enough. Maybe marc or Oly Rainiers Fan can give a little more insight, but it doesn't appear to me that Snelling needs any more time in Tacoma.
A brief discussion over at Prospect Insider gives us, possibly, one reason for Snelling's extended stay in Tacoma. Jason suspects (as does a wide group of others) that Hargrove's insistance on Everett is blocking Snelling's return.
Interesting.
Does anyone believe that Hargrove's lovefest for Everett is reciprocated -- that Everett likes Hargrove as much as Hargrove likes Everett? I have many reasons to believe that it's not -- starting with Everett's little tirade shortly after the M's landed Perez. If Hargrove's own 'ally' is against him, then, then why are the M's so intent on keeping Hargrove and/or Everett around? Why doesn't Bavasi do something about this situation?
I'm of the belief that Bavasi doesn't have ultimate authority over roster/coaching decisions. Based on his track record, that may not be a bad thing. But still, I don't see Chuck Armstrong retiring any time soon, and even if he did, there's no reason to believe that the M's would take Bedirthanaverage's suggestion to replace Armstrong with Bavasi. It's fairly common knowledge that Bavasi's strength as an executive is moreso in the field of farm system management, especially when partnered with Bob Fontaine's drafting knack.
That's an important reason to keep Bavasi around -- the seismic aftershocks of decimation wrought about by the failures of the farm system to produce much outside of the international market (which, actually, is somewhat of an understated area of overlooked success, in light of the common criticism of the Gillick era) have started to subside. Some Bavasi-era trades, a couple of drafts, and a focus on rebuilding from the rubble seems to point to an improvement in the farm system.
But the fact that he either has no authority or hasn't used his authority to remove some obvious holes in the clubhouse and in the lineup cannot be overlooked. Again, I've been one of Bavasi's biggest supporters. But I'm really starting to tire of his lack of proper action.
It's not like he's averse to risk... 0 Comments
E-mail me your thoughts