I think we're gong to see Kivlehan or Deej getting significant MLB AB's next year.  We need two RH bats (still) and we're probably only going to buy one.
The mistake wth Seager was (indeed) not extending him AS SOON AS THE SEASON WAS OVER LAST YEAR.  His downside was as a near All-Star 2B.  Now we will pay a few million more...but we have to get it done.  
And Saunders as a 4th OF was always his best role.  
There is something incredibly weird about Ackley.  There is no "average" Ackley.  He's terrible or really good.  
But he's ours for at least 1.5 seasons.  And, as I always said, his value is in his pop.  He's not a OBP guy.  I like it when he thinks yard on inside stuff.  
All that said, he may have his  best years elsewhere.  
And Zunino is really good.  He hits homers.  He is a very nice receiver.  He plays everyday.  In many ways he's an old-school type catcher.  I said Gary Carter was where he might end up.  Doc guessed Lance Parrish.  That may well be the better guess....but that's pretty good. 
 

about it is if and when you get to the pitching staff there are like 15 pitchers on the roster that you can say yes we could win a pennant with this guy. There really aren't any pitchers that you would say no. Amazing. Kind of looks like Scott Van Slyke would fit the bill for being the right handed platoon partner for 1B, RF and DH.

Good article. One thing: Kyle/Corey.

Van Slyke....Sigh....

Is that, while he's only 27 and just two years removed from a 5 win season, he's also a guy who Dave Dombrowski was willing to give up. And, the inexplicable Fister dump aside, Dumbrowski has a an incredibly good track record with this stuff. While it doesn't prove anything by itself it isn't a great sign that Detroit was willing to move him at all.

Peterson and Kivelhan specifically.
Kivelhan has needed about a hundred and fifty at bats at every level to adjust and, really, should be given every opportunity to be brought along slowly.
Peterson, for all the hype, was fairly mediocre in AA last year. And was straight up bad after returning from his wrist injury.
It feels like the M's have been way quick promoting guys to fill the myriad black holes they've had over the past few years. It's understandable, but Ackley, Miller, Seager even Taylor have all shot through the majors incredibly aggressively to varying degrees of success. And that's without talking about Zunino who I worry has been permanently broken by his meteroric rise.
The team is a little better now and can better afford to wait a bit on its prospects in hopes of easing their transition to the majors a bit more. I hope we start to see Jack pump the breaks on these guys now and let them have a second trip through the Pcl, let the league adjust to them and make them adjust to the adjustments rather than promoting everybody at the first sign they might conceivably help the big league club.
Realistically, the M's should be good enough going into the off season that they've got a better plan than "hope Patrick Kivelhan can rake" for a right handed DH/LF/1b.
Jesus Montero would solve a lot of problems on this team if he shows up in shape and the team's willing to give him a shot. *sigh*
Has anybody seen Kivelhan play the outfield? By all accounts he's a pretty bad third baseman, but it seems like a guy with his athletic background ought to be able to hold his own in left. Or is that a pipe dream?

I'm too lazy to look up who said that first. But I think it's relevant to this discussion.
Do the Mariner's have warts? Of course. And so does every other team in the Majors right now. There is no dominant team. But how exactly do we get better?
The thing I like about these discussions, anywhere on the Internet, is the point at which people start proposing solutions to current 'problems'. Most of those solutions on most sites (unlike here) are preposterous. They tend to fall into a few scenarios, as far as I have seen:
1) trade a bunch of our problems for someone else's superstar
2) fire the manager
3) fire the GM
4) pay whatever it takes to sign free agent X
5) bring up the rookies
It doesn't matter that 95% of everything that's proposed is patently ridiculous on one or more levels. At least it forces a real world comparison with what a team already has. Just saying, "I think we absolutely need a new (xxx)" doesn't help. When a solution is proposed in the form of an actual alternative player, then it starts to get productive...because it takes the discussion closer to the world where the GMs actually operate.
We've got all winter to discuss that. And I'm still too deep into this last week to give it too much thought.
But off the top of my head, knowing I'll be in a distinct minority, I'm perfectly fine with our current starting lineup--minus the DH options. Over the last 100 games we're 56-44. Over the full year to date, that winning percentage would put us 5th best in all of baseball. In the second half, our WOBA doesn't look great--92--but it's better than playoff contenders Oakland, Milwaukee, the Yankees, Atlanta and the Royals--and of course, quite a few others. Can we name hitters who we think will be better next year for what they've learned this year? I know I can.
My vote is to build on what we've got--not start replacing pieces that don't look 'good enough' in the abstract--but might look just fine when you consider the real world alternatives.
I really like this team.
(P.S. And that goes double for LoMo, who I think is already clearly the third best hitter on the team.)

One of these days, we might gain the ability to modify our blogrolls.  :-)   Until then, Dr. D will just have to poach sections for his own articles.  Paragraph by paragraph.
........
Plan A can be 4-youngsters-to-make-1, can't it?  Provided that you've got more than two other hitters in your lineup Opening Day.