• Welcome Guest
Seattle Mariners

Welcome to the Seattle Mariners.
Before posting, please review our Message Board Guidelines

    • jarrod washburn back?
  • To:All
  • Nov-2
  • Marinersrevolver

on main page too

wash would definitely help the pitching staff. The injury he had didnt help people realize that he wouldve helped the tigers go further in the season. being back with Rob should also help wash go back to the pitcher he was with our boys.

he's also a lefty that will definitely replace what Bedard shouldve given to our team. that 2.64 ERA with the mariners would have helped our team overcome the angels, and it should happen in 2010. wash would solidify the rotation with his leadership, and help felix become even better. felix is obviously still developing, although he did improve in 2009.

what do you all think?

  • Reply to this Message
  • To:All
  • Nov-2
  • Marinersrevolver
also forgot that wash also helped the defense get better, which is a plus for 2010. our defense is good but it isn't the best with so many young guys such as gutierez. he'll help there too.
  • Reply to this Message
  • Nov-2
  • swansons

I was a big fan of Washburn last season but I dont really see him fitting into the M's plan going forward. Maybe if he comes CHEAP but even then, is he worth holding up the expieriance of several similar skill set pitchers already under control?

<that wash also helped the defense get better>

Would you explain that one for me.

  • Reply to this Message
  • Nov-2
  • Gibb-Kiwi

>>>>>>>which is a plus for 2010. our defense is good but it isn't the best with so many young guys such as gutierez. he'll help there too.

What are you smoking? Best you share some of it around hey!

How do you come to that conclusion?

It was guys like Beltre, Guti, Ichiro and a park like Safeco that made Wasburn look good not Washburn making them look good.

I very much doubt we will see Washburn back here. Unless he takes a decent paycut and a two year deal.

  • Reply to this Message
  • Nov-2
  • NotABaseballGuy
<p>"<that wash also helped the defense get better></p><p>Would you explain that one for me."</p><p>You see, there are numerous mathematically equivalent formulations of quantum mechanics. One of the oldest and most commonly used formulations is the transformation theory proposed by Cambridge theoretical physicist Paul Dirac, which unifies and generalizes the two earliest formulations of quantum mechanics, matrix mechanics (invented by Werner Heisenberg and wave mechanics (invented by Erwin Schrödinger).</p><p>In this formulation, the instantaneous state of a quantum system encodes the probabilities of its measurable properties, or "observables". Examples of observables include energy, position, momentum, and angular momentum. Observables can be either continuous (e.g., the position of a particle) or discrete (e.g., the energy of an electron bound to a hydrogen atom).</p><p>Generally, quantum mechanics does not assign definite values to observables. Instead, it makes predictions using probability distributions; that is, the probability of obtaining possible outcomes from measuring an observable. Oftentimes these results are skewed by many causes, such as dense probability clouds or quantum state nuclear attraction. Naturally, these probabilities will depend on the quantum state at the "instant" of the measurement. Hence, uncertainty is involved in the value. There are, however, certain states that are associated with a definite value of a particular observable. These are known as "eigenstates" of the observable ("eigen" can be roughly translated from German as inherent or as a characteristic). In the everyday world, it is natural and intuitive to think of everything (every observable) as being in an eigenstate. Everything appears to have a definite position, a definite momentum, a definite energy, and a definite time of occurrence. However, quantum mechanics does not pinpoint the exact values of a particle for its position and momentum (since they are conjugate pairs) or its energy and time (since they too are conjugate pairs); rather, it only provides a range of probabilities of where that particle might be given its momentum and momentum probability. Therefore, it is helpful to use different words to describe states having uncertain values and states having definite values (eigenstate).</p><p>For example, consider a free particle. In quantum mechanics, there is wave-particle duality so the properties of the particle can be described as the properties of a wave. Therefore, its quantum state can be represented as a wave of arbitrary shape and extending over space as a wave function. The position and momentum of the particle are observables. The Uncertainty Principle states that both the position and the momentum cannot simultaneously be measured with full precision at the same time. However, one can measure the position alone of a moving free particle creating an eigenstate of position with a wavefunction that is very large (a Dirac delta) at a particular position x and zero everywhere else. If one performs a position measurement on such a wavefunction, the result x will be obtained with 100% probability (full certainty). This is called an eigenstate of position (mathematically more precise: a generalized position eigenstate (eigendistribution)). If the particle is in an eigenstate of position then its momentum is completely unknown. On the other hand, if the particle is in an eigenstate of momentum then its position is completely unknown. In an eigenstate of momentum having a plane wave form, it can be shown that the wavelength is equal to h/p, where h is Planck's constant and p is the momentum of the eigenstate.</p><p>Usually, a system will not be in an eigenstate of the observable we are interested in. However, if one measures the observable, the wavefunction will instantaneously be an eigenstate (or generalized eigenstate) of that observable. This process is known as wavefunction collapse, a debatable process. It involves expanding the system under study to include the measurement device. If one knows the corresponding wave function at the instant before the measurement, one will be able to compute the probability of collapsing into each of the possible eigenstates. For example, the free particle in the previous example will usually have a wavefunction that is a wave packet centered around some mean position x0, neither an eigenstate of position nor of momentum. When one measures the position of the particle, it is impossible to predict with certainty the result. It is probable, but not certain, that it will be near x0, where the amplitude of the wave function is large. After the measurement is performed, having obtained some result x, the wave function collapses into a position eigenstate centered at x.</p><p>Wave functions can change as time progresses. An equation known as the Schrödinger equation describes how wave functions change in time, a role similar to Newton's second law in classical mechanics. The Schrödinger equation, applied to the aforementioned example of the free particle, predicts that the center of a wave packet will move through space at a constant velocity, like a classical particle with no forces acting on it. However, the wave packet will also spread out as time progresses, which means that the position becomes more uncertain. This also has the effect of turning position eigenstates (which can be thought of as infinitely sharp wave packets) into broadened wave packets that are no longer position eigenstates. Some wave functions produce probability distributions that are constant or independent of time, such as when in a stationary state of constant energy, time drops out of the absolute square of the wave function. Many systems that are treated dynamically in classical mechanics are described by such "static" wave functions. For example, a single electron in an unexcited atom is pictured classically as a particle moving in a circular trajectory around the atomic nucleus, whereas in quantum mechanics it is described by a static, spherically symmetric wavefunction surrounding the nucleus. (Note that only the lowest angular momentum states, labeled s, are spherically symmetric).</p><p>The time evolution of wave functions is deterministic in the sense that, given a wavefunction at an initial time, it makes a definite prediction of what the wavefunction will be at any later time. During a measurement, the change of the wavefunction into another one is not deterministic, but rather unpredictable, i.e., random. </p><p>The probabilistic nature of quantum mechanics thus stems from the act of measurement. This is one of the most difficult aspects of quantum systems to understand. It was the central topic in the famous Bohr-Einstein debates, in which the two scientists attempted to clarify these fundamental principles by way of thought experiments. In the decades after the formulation of quantum mechanics, the question of what constitutes a "measurement" has been extensively studied. Interpretations of quantum mechanics have been formulated to do away with the concept of "wavefunction collapse"; see, for example, the relative stat
...[Message truncated]
  • Reply to this Message
  • Nov-2
  • swansons

Your response is entirely how I view your opinion.

Alot of gibberish with no point. No difference between you and a troll.


Edited Nov-2   by  swansons
  • Reply to this Message
  • To:All
  • Nov-2
  • Marinersrevolver

wash is a fly ball pitcher, which allows the outfield to get more putouts and let them show their range. It increases chances, and therefore statistically makes them better. As for the infield, they get more relaxed and that reduces chances for errors. they arent too stressed out about line drives hit their way when the outfield usually gets the balls that are hit in that air.

wash uses his defense to his and the team advantage, which makes the team better as a whole. that is where his value is and can put many players over the top throughout games. to me the team benefits from his skills and he might come cheaper now because of his age.

  • Reply to this Message
  • Nov-2
  • Marinersrevolver
why did he post that anyway? it is way to long...
  • Reply to this Message
  • Nov-2
  • swansons

<he might come cheaper now because of his age. >

How much do you think the M's should offer him and for how long?

  • Reply to this Message
  • Nov-2
  • Marinersrevolver
2 years, 8-10 million would be my offer.
  • Reply to this Message
  • Nov-2
  • swansons

>why did he post that anyway? it is way to long...<

Resident boob. Just ignore him, maybe he'll go away.

  • Reply to this Message
  • Nov-2
  • Marinersrevolver
lol ok i will keep that in mind
  • Reply to this Message
  • Nov-2
  • nwexpress

<<<In an eigenstate of momentum having a plane wave form, it can be shown that the wavelength is equal to h/p, where h is Planck's constant and p is the momentum of the eigenstate.</p><p>Usually, a system will not be in an eigenstate of the observable we are interested in.>>>

i couldn't agree more

  • Reply to this Message
  • Nov-2
  • Chris88

"wash is a fly ball pitcher, which allows the outfield to get more putouts and let them show their range. It increases chances, and therefore statistically makes them better. As for the infield, they get more relaxed and that reduces chances for errors. they arent too stressed out about line drives hit their way when the outfield usually gets the balls that are hit in that air.

wash uses his defense to his and the team advantage, which makes the team better as a whole. that is where his value is and can put many players over the top throughout games. to me the team benefits from his skills and he might come cheaper now because of his age."

This is so a$.$ backwards that I can't believe this wasn't meant as a joke.

  • Reply to this Message
  • Nov-3
  • brotherfox
That goes without saying.
  • Reply to this Message
  • Nov-3
  • NotABaseballGuy

Quantum mechanics is gibberish? That's great. I'll let Schödinger's cat know it's alive and can come out of the box now.

  • Reply to this Message
  • Nov-3
  • NotABaseballGuy

>>why did he post that anyway? it is way to long...>>

It was intended to be a joke. I copied and pasted that straight from Wikipedia.

The joke is that only quantum physics could explain why a pitcher would make the defense look better and not vice versa. Obviously, a parallel universe would have to exist where the direct opposite of what we know to be true is true for you to be right. It was snarky and tongue-in-cheek. Swansons figured it out, since he basically hates anybody who knows more about baseball and the universe than he does, hence his response. I'll just say "sorry for the mocking comment" and change my approach:

You're wrong.

  • Reply to this Message
  • Nov-3
  • chuck8419
Yup, I'm thinking so....
  • Reply to this Message
  • Nov-3
  • Chris88

How dare you post something that would take, he.ll, almost 5 minutes to read.

WHAT ARE YOU A KNEWSPAYPER

  • Reply to this Message
  • Nov-4
  • wazzujon
He fell apart after he left Seattle. Just because he had a few good months doesnt mean we shoudl throw money at him. The offer I would give him would be incentive ladden and players dont like that. I would give him the chance to make $12M a year. Give him a base of $5M then give him escalators for lower WHIP/ERA, Innings pitched, AS Game, Playoffs, etc. $5M isnt too bad if he stinks or is avg. and if he hits all teh incentives paying $12M would be worth it.
  • Reply to this Message