Geoff Baker's a good reporter, and so I tend to believe him. And here's something else I think ... If management is keeping Figgins around just so they can say they tried -- you know, as opposed to thinking it will actually work -- then something's wrong at the top. I mean, there's also the obvious inability to understand that Figgins is simply a sunk cost, unless they really do think that he's got something left. Which he probably doesn't. Oddly enough.

On the plus side, keeping Figgins means the Mariners might actually get something out of him, to the point where they might actually be able to trade him for, at the very least, a bit of payroll relief.