As most of you know, it’s been a trying summer for me on a personal level. But writing about baseball has always provided me with a temporary sanctuary from reality. So, here are several observations regarding the Mariners.
Note: All stats are for games played through August 24.
Defending Scott Servais
On Thursday, one of the two managers to lead the Mariners to the playoffs, Scott Servais, was fired. Less than two years ago, Servais’s crew snapped a postseason drought, which dated back to 2001. Now, he is gone.
The other manager responsible for guiding the Mariners to the postseason is Lou Piniella. For many fans, Piniella is the gold standard used to gauge every Seattle skipper who’s followed since. On the surface, this approach makes sense considering the most successful era in franchise history was during Lou’s tenure.
Still, some numbers suggest the gap between Servais and Piniella isn’t as large as many Mariners fans believe it to be.
Wins and losses
Since Servais didn’t complete his ninth season as Mariners skipper, I compared the regular season records of Servais and Piniella through their first eight campaigns at the helm in Seattle.
Surprise, surprise.
A decent number of Mariners fans probably didn’t expect to learn that the teams led by the recently-fired Servais and Piniella won at a relatively equal rate during their first eight years in the Emerald City.
Similarly, the 1993-2000 Mariners had the twelfth-best winning percentage in baseball during this timeframe. The 2016-23 edition ranked eleventh. Parity is once again revealed.
One last tidbit regarding records. Five of Servais’ first eight seasons were winning campaigns, while Piniella had four. This matters to me since the Mariners underwent a roster tear-down and rebuild during two years of the Servais era.
Leadership styles
Piniella’s on-field tirades are the stuff of legend. Conversely, Servais gave off an even-keeled, dad-like vibe. An older generation of fans thinks Lou’s fiery approach was better. Yet, a review of who wore out their welcome with umpires most often, we encounter another stalemate.
Piniella was ejected 24 times in 1,277 games, while Servais was tossed from 22 of the 1,194 contests he managed between 2016 and 2023. That’s basically the same frequency. Also, let’s not forget Servais managed during an era when arguing umpire calls wasn’t as prevalent as it used to be thanks to the implementation of instant replay.
Roster dominance
And we can’t overlook the obvious advantage Piniella held over Servais. Throughout his Seattle tenure, Lou was fortunate to have a significantly better core of players than what Scott was provided. This is indisputable.
To see what I mean, here’s a side-by-side comparison of Mariners with 5-plus bWAR (Baseball Reference version of wins above replacement) in a season during the first eight years of Piniella and Servais.
The Piniella Mariners had six players with 5 bWAR seasons with five achieving the milestone multiple times. Three are enshrined in Cooperstown: Ken Griffey Jr., Edgar Martinez, and Randy Johnson. Furthermore, Álex Rodríguez has a Hall of Fame résumé from a statistical standpoint, while Jamie Moyer has been inducted into the organization’s Hall of Fame.
Meanwhile, Julio Rodríguez is the lone Servais Mariner with more than one 5+ bWAR season. Not only that, it seems unlikely the other four players listed in the Servais column ever become Hall of Famers.
All of this information does leave me wondering how Piniella would’ve been treated, if social media existed during his managerial career. Whether it was his continued reliance on reliever Bobby Ayala or not reaching the World Series after winning 116 games in 2001, Lou probably would’ve been a frequent target of Mariners Twitter.
To me, this would’ve been unfortunate. Lou Piniella was a great manager. He deserves to be inducted into the Baseball Hall of Fame for his contributions as a player, manager, and executive. Having said that, Scott Servais wasn’t nearly as bad as some Mariners fans believe him to be.
Am I suggesting the Mariners shouldn’t have relieved Servais of his duties? No, we don’t have all the information that the organization’s decision-makers had when they opted to make a change. So, I’m not going to criticize the move.
That said, Servais’ record during his first eight years is on par with the manager considered to be the best in franchise history. Scott deserves credit for his accomplishments, even if Mariners Twitter vehemently disagrees.
Super efforts, “meh” results
Seattle starters have allowed two-or-fewer earned runs 66 times, which leads MLB. Perhaps someone else has already coined a phrase to describe this level of success. But I’m going to refer to these efforts as “Super-Quality” starts.
Most SQ Starts
SEA - 66
KCR - 59
PHI - 57
ATL - 54
PIT - 53
HOU - 50
TOR - 48
MIN - 47
BAL - 46
DET - 45
Now, the bad news.
The Mariners have a .682 winning percentage in those 66 contests, which ranks 23rd in baseball. The league-average is .723. Only the White Sox have lost more SQ starts (23) than Seattle has (21).
Wanted: “Well-rounded” hitters
Everyone familiar with the Mariners knows what’s behind the club’s suboptimal record in SQ starts. It’s an offense that has sputtered all season and ultimately cost Servais and two hitting coaches their jobs.
To illustrate the challenge Servais and new manager Dan Wilson face each game, I repeated an exercise performed last offseason. How many Mariners with 200-plus plate appearances have an average-or-better OBP and an average-or-better SLG?
Seattle has one such player, (Luke Raley), which ties the team with the Tigers for second-fewest. The Twins have eight hitters meeting my criteria, while the Red Sox, Phillies, and Diamondbacks each have seven. The White Sox have zero.
It’s worth noting that Víctor Robles is just a few plate appearances short from qualifying for the Mariners. But key deadline acquisitions Justin Turner and Randy Arozarena both miss the mark.
Strikeouts matter, really
A hitter can be a productive member of a lineup, even if he strikes out a lot. Perhaps the best example of this on the Mariners is Cal Raleigh, who entered Sunday’s action with the tenth-most strikeouts in MLB.
Despite the high rate of swing & miss in his game, Raleigh leads the Mariners in home runs and is one of two Seattle players with a SLG above the league-average mark.
Still, a team can ill-afford to have the majority of its hitters striking out over 100 times, which is the issue confronting the Mariners. They have a league-leading seven. The Cubs and Reds are next closest with five.
SEA Strikeout Leaders (through Aug 24)
Cal Raleigh (143)
Julio Rodríguez (124)
Mitch Garver (119)
Jorge Polanco (112)
Mitch Haniger (111)
Luke Raley (109)
Dylan Moore (105)
It’s worth noting the previous list doesn’t include Arozarena, who has 131 combined strikeouts with the Rays and Mariners in 2024.
With a month to go, it’s plausible Josh Rojas (86 strikeouts) becomes the eighth Seattle batter to reach the 100-strikeout mark. If this happens, Wilson’s squad will tie seven clubs for the MLB record.
Declining interest?
In June, the Mariners appeared to be on a trajectory to attract more fans to T-Mobile Park than in 2023. If this happened, the organization would experience growth in attendance for a third consecutive season. This now appears to be less likely as we near the end of August.
The following illustrates Seattle’s average monthly attendance for the 2023 and 2024 campaigns.
There was a jump in fans coming to games in June, which eclipsed 2023 by a large margin. Since then, attendance has plateaued. Now, the Mariners face the challenge of drawing fans to the ballpark as school re-opens, temperatures cool, the NFL and college football seasons kickoff, and the club struggles to make up lost ground in the standings.
Having said all that, I admit to knowing next-to-nothing about the business side of running a baseball team. Perhaps an expert on the topic would tell me that the slow down at the turnstiles isn’t as bad as it seems.
Still, the Mariners were playing extremely well in July-August 2023 and were in first place on September 1. This helps explain the constant increase in average monthly attendance through the end of the season. Conversely, the leveling-off this year suggests to me that the disappointing on-field product is having an undesired effect on fan interest.
Results still matter, folks.
My Oh My…
I’ve never understood firing the manager “because something had to change,” especially in the absence of evidence that he’s hurting the team. It’s an old-school strategy in a new-school era. It’s like saying “We’re not hiring well on grass; let’s tear it out, replace it with AstroTurf, and see if that sparks anything.”
Great comparison of past to present to explain current state of the M's.
Unfortunately it may predict M's status-quo future as profitable, interesting, but forever 2nd tier team.
Rowland-Smith, Shannon Dreyer both commented that the timing of Servais' firing is weird.
Before reading this post, I felt the hand of Stanton et al was behind the firing.
Looking at the 2024 attendance drop, now I'm sure Stanton called the shot.
Remember how quick after the 2023 season, M's announced that due to Comcast RSN price hike, the M's had to reduce off-season FA spend?
As usual, '24 FAs were M's typical 2nd tier assemblage of fading vets, platoon hitters and "lotto tickets", like projecting Garver's part-time 100 game avg. to 162 games. No tier 1's like Soto, Chapman etc.
"Bottom line 1st, everything else not 1st. "
"John Stanton, what does the M's payroll budget look like in 2025? Please don't give me the arrogant non-answer you gave Paul Silvi in the '24 pre-season interview when he inquired about low FA spend"
Long Time Commitment to Mediocrity:
The comparative W/L parity between Pinella/Servais is as close as you can get to what I believe is the M's business model: Profit first, looking like you're trying to win 2nd, actually committing resources to win, way behind 1 & 2.
A major "tell" that M's are less than committed to winning is the superstars on the Pinella list:
Griffey Jr., Johnson, ARod, also Ichiro - all bonafide superstars - ALL Wanted Out of Seattle!
They escaped to 1st tier & upcoming teams dedicated to win, backed by budget, not hype.
When today's M's young starters go to NY, TX, Dodgers, Philly etc, they realize these teams pay real money for competitive lineups. They'll probably follow the former M's superstars out of town.
Will 2024 decline in avg. attendance teach John Stanton/ownership W/L "results still matter..." to their bottom line?
I think not, because of comparison of how other teams spend - Rangers w/Seager-Semian, Yanks for FA-to-be Soto, Dodgers, etc.
This article documents an M's 40+ year business model has consistently delivered middle of pack W/L results.
What incentive does Stanton et al have to invest & risk more in an already profitable business?