Read an interesting study by Dave Studeman over at The Hardball Times that shows the correlation between team payroll and wins has dwindled to the lowest it's been historically for quite some time in baseball.

Now, before any of you go planning World Series parades, it's important to take the study in its proper context and not read stuff into it that wasn't stated.

The study looked at regular season wins for all teams and the payrolls they carry and compared it to previous points in the game's history. The study concludes that the correlation between wins and payroll is indeed relatively smaller and attributes it to some degree of random luck, but more importantly, ventures that some of it might be because of enhanced revenue sharing under the collective bargaining agreement reached in late 2002. My first reaction to it was that this should make it easier for teams to compete for a playoff spot if their payrolls are relatively close to others vying for those exact same spots.

In other words, what the Milwaukee Brewers did doesn't matter as much to the Mariners as what the Angels and Rangers might do because Seattle can't make the playoffs if those two teams finish ahead of them. And what Studeman's study appears to show is that, if the Mariners can maintain a payroll that's at least somewhat in the ballpark of what their direct rivals spend, they have a better chance now of making the playoffs than they did in other eras as long as they don't throw bucks out the window too often.

Studeman himself mentions very high up in the study that the so-called "Alpha Teams" outspending rivals by huge margins (i.e. Yankees, Red Sox, Phillies) are still going to thrive and make the post-season consistently as they have in the past. "I'm not out to debunk the Alpha Team theory, far from it,'' he writes.

But what Studeman's study does do, at least from my reading of it, is provide hope that teams with general managers who spend their money wisely will be able to better compete as long as their ownership provides an adequate level of payroll to do that competing with.

In other words, give a GM a $60 million payroll and it's unreasonable to expect him to have any sustained success fighting for playoff spots against direct rivals with $100 million plus to work with. Yeah, the Rays have had recent success, but it's just not a realistic model to base comparisons off of since Tampa Bay built a young foundation off a decade of miserable baseball and resulting high-end draft picks. We've yet to see whether that can be sustained long term without a serious payroll hike.

Remember, for every Rays team, there are the Royals, Pirates, A's and Indians.

So, yes, we do get exceptions to every rule. Life is never black and white. But we want to look at realistic chances for teams. And what Studeman appears to be saying is that, given a relatively close amount of payroll that does not allow for a runaway Alpha Team situation, the odds have never been better from an historical perspective for a GM to succeed as long as his ownership gives him the chance.

Just to be certain that I was getting things right from my take, I emailed Studeman with a bunch of questions. I wanted to make sure that I wasn't putting too much of my own spin into interpreting his study and that I captured the essence of it in its proper context.

"Bottom line, competitive balance is good in MLB these days compared to its history,'' he told me via email. "But there is still a persistent correlation between wins and payroll that's not going to go away. I wouldn't use the phrase 'parity' to describe the current situation.''

Which he doesn't do. Because you don't need a study to click on to Baseball Reference and see that the Yankees and Red Sox between them have captured 14 of the 18 playoff spots available to American League East teams (division titles and wild card opportunities over nine seasons) since baseball's revenue-sharing system began in 2003. Both teams have big money and spend it relatively well, unlike, say, Peter Angelos and his free-spending Orioles squads from last decade. To suggest that payroll wasn't behind that sustained level of success for New York and Boston would be downright ignorant. And again, this study never does that.

But by that same token, you also don't need an in-depth analysis of baseball to see that the St. Louis Cardinals won a World Series last year with the game's 11th highest payroll, defeating the Rangers with their 13th highest payroll. Clearly, you don't need to outspend every team in the game to win a title. But you do need to overcome your closest division and league rivals to make the playoffs first, which the Cards did on the final day of the regular season.

And yes, we are measuring long-term success by whether or not teams make the playoffs. You can't play in a best-of-seven World Series where anything can happen if you don't perform consistently well during the 162-game regular season.

And what Studeman is saying is that we could see more of these types of Cardinals playoff teams: the ones where ownership pays enough to get their team to that minimal, base-line level of payroll competitiveness with their closest foes as opposed to simply paying to keep the squad breathing.

Maybe it's a $100-million minimum payroll. Maybe the magic number is less and actually more of a percentage of what your direct rivals spend. Truth is, there is no hard and fast number because larger payrolls often are not reflective of a team's real talent, given the mistakes that get made when spending big. But precise or not, there is a threshold beyond which you cannot allow the true payroll gap to grow with your rivals unless you want to consistently lose out to them as most AL East teams have to New York and Boston.

Nobody has identified the exact formula yet and it's probable they never will. But it still exists, clearly, as the Alpha Teams have demonstrated ample times over the years.

This is a huge distinction to make. Especially when it comes to the Mariners and their chances as we move forward.

Photo Credit: AP

I've been writing for a while now about how the Mariners are in line for a big financial windfall in a few years because of a 2015 opt-out clause in their regional sports network (RSN) deal with ROOT Sports. Today, I had a conversation with Adam Chase, a Washington, D.C-based lawyer with the Media and Information Technologies practice group and Sports Law practice group at the DowLohnes legal firm.

Chase has spent years working on sports licensing and media deals and figures there isn't much chance the Mariners will fail to land a big money boost now that they have a contractual chance to renegotiate their 10-year, $450 million deal with ROOT, owned by DirecTV.

"The only way I can see for them not to be able to get a windfall is if the carousel stops, when the music stops'' Chase said. "It doesn't seem like it is. It seems like it's at a pretty feverish point. Will it stop at some point? Potentially. If you have the opportunity to get the money now, I'd say you have to seriously consider taking it.''

New rights fees and RSN deals are being struck seemingly by the week and have transformed teams like the Angels and Rangers into revenue-generating monsters. Aside from folks inventing a device that would allow them to fast-forward through commercials while watching live programming, the only other threat he forsees is if any traction is gained in the movement to push sports off the main programming lists that cable companies feed to their subscribers.

As of right now, teams and cable giants count on a large percentage of non-sports fans to fund their sports programming by forcing them to pay for it via their basic TV package. This keeps driving the cost of cable TV higher and has sparked complaints from some viewers who don't appreciate having to pay for sports channels they never watch.

But Chase doesn't see such the movement to push sports programming into different "tiers" becoming a threat anytime soon.

And he agrees that the Mariners -- and DirecTV -- could move sooner rather than later to change their current arrangement.

"If DirecTV wanted to, they could open up negotiations whenever they want,'' Chase said. "They could say 'Hey, listen, to keep you from going on the open market we're going to negotiate now and lock you up for the next 10 years.''

Photo Credit: AP

Plenty of buzz around the city about the possibility of an NHL and NBA team coming here within the next couple of years.

That potential arrival of two new sports franchises will also coincide with the Mariners getting their opt-out clause on their current TV deal with ROOT Sports in 2015. As we have seen in the past, you don't just start negotiating such deals on Dec. 31, 2014. The groundwork will have to be laid well in advance.

So, what do the Mariners do? Well, first off, they aren't about to tell you, silly. That much hasn't changed.

But with the value of local media deals soaring in baseball, it's fair to assume the Mariners will at least explore the possibility of forming their own regional sports network (RSN). After all, the teams in their own division have done just that with varying results and Seattle will have to try to keep up.

The Houston Astros, who join the AL West next year, went ahead and formed their own network with the NBA's Houston Rockets. The value of that business was deemed so high that it enabled one of the worst on-field performers in baseball the past few years to be sold recently for $610 million. And remember, there was a $70 million discount on top of that because the Astros are moving to the AL.

So, one of the worst teams in all of sport is now valued in the market at close to $700 million.

Then, you have the Texas Rangers, who were in bankruptcy court when they sold for $593 million in 2010. The reason their price was that high was because the Rangers had looked in to forming their own RSN with the NBA's Dallas Mavericks. Local RSN Fox Sports Southwest was so alarmed by that threat that they upped their rights fees and struck a deal with the Rangers that covers 20 years and will pay anywhere from $1.6 billion to $3 billion depending on which reports you believe. Not only that, but Fox Sports paid the Rangers a $180 million up-front fee, which is how they can now afford $100 million plus to bring over Yu Darvish from Japan.

We've already talked about the $3 billion package secured by Angels owner Arte Moreno that enabled him to sign Albert Pujols as well as buy up any small Caribbean island he wants.

So now, what happens with the Mariners?

The Mariners not only added Taiwanese left-hander Hong-Chih Kuo to their midst, as expected, earlier today, but then tacked on veteran right hander Shawn Camp. Both have been given one-year major league deals by the Mariners, meaning they will very likely be on the squad that leaves spring training.

For a team that had no real southpaws in the bullpen when the winter began -- other than long relief types -- the Mariners now have multiple. Between George Sherrill and Kuo, the team has lefties who can deal with both situational and set-up roles.

I spoke to GM Jack Zduriencik about this today and he said Sherrill has always been seen as more of a lefty-on-lefty specialist.

"You don't want to pigeon-hole him into that, but that's more of what he is,'' Zduriencik said.

Kuo, meanwhile, is a guy who has demonstrated strikeout ability against both lefties and righties when he's right. In other words, he could make for an eighth-inning set-up type for closer Brandon League.

The thing to watch with quo is his health -- both physical and mental.

There have been a plethora of arm surgeries over the years and then two well-documented cases of "the yips". That's a type of anxiety disorder where players become unable to complete routine mechanical tasks. In Kuo's case, he started launching balls out of the bullpen while warming up in 2009, then sent a ball soaring over the second baseman's head last year and could not throw a strike subsequently while warming up in the bullpen during a game.

The Dodgers placed him on the DL after that.

Photo Credit: AP

Wrote on Saturday night that the M's were going strong after lefthanded reliever Hong Chih-Quo. Dylan Hernandez of the LA Times is now reporting he's signed a one-year deal with the Mariners.

You'd have to be illiterate to take an extended glance at the tea leaves and come away with the impression Ichiro will be batting leadoff to start the 2012 season. The Mariners have been dropping none-too-subtle hints for a while now about moving Ichiro out of his customary No. 1 role and the implications will be felt elsewhere in the lineup.

For instance, the decision will likely make it difficult for the M's to fulfill their stated objective of trying Franklin Gutierrez out for the No. 2 spot in the order. Gutierrez would seem a natural fit at the No. 2 position if he gets his game back to where it needs to be offensively. But barring a major development, that won't be where Gutierrez hits.

The decision could also have an impact on whether the Mariners trot out the best 3-4-5 combination they can.

Let's start at the very top. Other than Ichiro, the guys who best profile as leadoff hitters for the team are Dustin Ackley and Chone Figgins. But the M's see Ackley as a hitter better suited for further on towards the heart of their below-average lineup, meaning Figgins at this point has to be considered the odds-on favorite to be leading off when the season starts.

So, who bats second?

Photo Credit: AP

Interesting decision the other day by the Mariners to sign onetime Seattle infielder and longtime Detroit Tigers stalwart Carlos Guillen to a minor league deal. The Mariners, as you'd know from reading our winter meetings coverage, have been in on Guillen for quite a while.

He'll earn $1 million in base salary if he makes the team plus an additional incentive bonus based on the number of plate appearances he gets. Problem is, where is that playing time going to come from?

The Mariners already have Chone Figgins in the fold and he isn't going anywhere unless he arrives in camp completely out of shape and unable to perform. Given that his career is now on the line, I just can't see that happening. In fact, I expect to see the Mariners giving Figgins some at-bats out of the leadoff position this spring as they seek an alternative to Ichiro, who will almost certainly not be back at the No. 1 role to begin the season.

So, where does Guillen fit? I guess, technically, he does not have to fit anyplace since he's only got a minor league contract. But the M's didn't sign Guillen so he could go to Class AAA for them. In all likelihood, if he doesn't make the team, he'll get released and be given a shot someplace else. No, the M's signed Guillen because they are hoping he can play for them. If he can stay healthy a reasonable amount, he could turn out to be a real bargain, given that he actually brings some corner infield power to the table

But keeping him healthy is going to require corner infield playing time. No shortstop, none of that outfield stuff. Same thing the M's did with Adam Kennedy. Yeah, he's capable of playing the outfield, but it would be nuts to throw an injury-prone 36-year-old into a role that requires too much leg use.

So, third and first base it is, then.

Um, then what about Figgins? Yeah, he also plays third base. Sure, you can bounce him around the middle infield and outfield a bit more. OK, then, you can see how both Figgins and Guillen could stick on the same team.

Then, what about Kyle Seager? Doesn't he also play third base?

Yes he does. And on a team with both Figgins and Guillen, he becomes the odd man out. At least, for the time being.

Photo Credit: AP

Now that we know the Mariners will be staying young for the next little while, it may be best to explore some of the things to look for in 2012. Too many people will be focused on things like won-lost record while missing the bigger picture of what's going on.

The won-lost record won't tell you much until it starts approaching 90. I've seen too many teams soar past 80 wins and have it mean absolutely nothing the following year. That said, if the Mariners can hit 80 wins this season, it should be a good thing. But if they don't, it doesn't mean the year was a waste.

But there are other measurements that will carry importance. And one of the biggest will be in seeing how much improvement the younger players are making in terms of their approach and discipline at the plate.

We touched on this back in September, when talking about the "control ratios" of players -- namely, their walk-rates, walks-to-strikeouts rate and their strikeouts-per-plate-appearance rate. At the time, Dustin Ackley was the only Mariners regular who had his numbers where you want them to be in all three categories.

Are the Mariners concerned about this? You'd better believe it. There's a reason the team has been reorganizing things throughout their minor league levels the past six months or so. Several of the Mariners sitting on the cusp of the upper minors and major league entry ranks strike out far too often. And it isn't always easy to break the habit. So, the team is trying to address problems in the minors before they get guys up to the majors.

The alarming rate at which the major league team was striking out in September -- en route to a new franchise record for whiffs -- will have to come down before this squad can even dream of sniffing the playoffs. It's going to take plenty of work behind the scenes, especially as players adjust to Eric Wedge's demands for an "attack" mentality when they step into the batter's box.

Wedge doesn't want players trying to take walks. He wants them swinging at hittable pitches and doing something with them first. In the absence of hittable pitches, he'll accept them taking their walks. But too many hitters just lacked the proper focus at the plate last season. They either swung at bad pitches or let hittable ones drift on by. That's all part of plate discipline and the Mariners plan to make it a top priority when the team reports to spring training this month.

Now, a look at some of the team's hitters and where they sit.

Photo Credit: AP

UPDATE 11:48 a.m.: The Mariners have announced they've signed infielder Carlos Guillen, 36, to a minor league deal with an invite spring training.

Some of you are livid with me for writing that I don't think the Mariners front office truly believes they will make the playoffs before 2015. You just can't understand why I would want to believe that. I've received emails from people suggesting I'm upset the Mariners did not get Prince Fielder.

No, that's not it.

My take on how the Mariners view their playoff chances has zero to do with my feelings on Fielder. The two are unrelated and to base any analysis of the M's thought process off my personal beliefs on one player would lead to a fraudulent hypothesis to say the least.

So, I will spell out the real thought process for you right here, since I do believe in accountability and can understand the questions many of you have. For those of you who just want me "to be more positive" you're best to tune out because I don't deal in blind faith or saying things people want to hear to keep them happy. If I'd been more positive the past two years and told you I thought the M's were going to contend, what good would that have done any of us?

That said, here is my take on why the M's likely aren't planning any playoff appearances before 2015.

It's a two-part answer. The first has to do with the actions of the team itself and the common sense conclusion to be drawn from the Michael Pineda (Photo Credit: AP) trade and the coming cut in payroll.

Pineda has two more years of minimum-salaried performance ahead of him. So, if you're a team planning on contending in 2012 and 2013, would you trade away a potentially legit No. 2 starter who costs nothing? No, you would not. That's too much cost-flexibility you'd be giving up at a crucial time. It's going to take money to bring in the offensive firepower needed to contend short-term, since adding more prospects likely won't get the job done to the degree required the next two years. Giving up cheap pitching means you'll just need to spend added money to improve the rotation short-term, making the entire task more difficult if the goal is to contend anytime soon.

You would, however, trade Pineda if you know you have no chance at the playoffs prior to 2014. Which would be a logical conclusion based on what the Angels and Rangers have done this off-season and the gap now separating them from the Mariners and Athletics.

In essence, the two most valuable years of Pineda's tenure -- delivering top-end stuff for minimum salary -- were going to be wasted in 2012 and 2013. So, the Mariners cashed in on that value by dealing Pineda for Jesus Montero, who will not be arbitration eligible prior to 2015. I like this deal from that perspective. Pineda could earn as much as $8 million his first arbitration season and you've got other pitchers coming up who could, in theory, take his place in terms of quality by 2014. This is a move you make on its own (meaning, without a Fielder deal thrown on top of it) if you feel 2012 and 2013 are already written off.

Otherwise, you keep Pineda, increase payroll and use the extra money to bring in some big bats, whether it's Fielder or a bunch of guys who were available early in the process. Or, you bring in Montero and Fielder both to transform the offense and use even more payroll to bring in a top arm next winter to replace Pineda and take your shot at the post-season in 2013. But the Mariners did not do that. They did not bring in Fielder, nor any of the shorter-term, two-year type guys who would help the team win now. Pineda is now gone and payroll is going down. This means, at minimum, the team likely does not expect a 90-95-win season before, at the very least, 2014. That's if everything goes absolutely peachy for the squad. I don't think they're actually that optimistic, which is why I'm pushing the target back one additional year, figuring they've done the same.

Now, for the second part of why I think 2015 is the team's actual target date.