The Seattle Mariners improved quite a bit offensively a year ago, but they were still lacking when it came to production from the top spot in their lineup.

Josh Naylor shows friendly side by greeting history-making umpire

Despite being a top-10 offense in runs scored, Mariners leadoff hitters were near the bottom of the league in several categories, including 27th in OPS and 24th in both on-base percentage and wRC+.

It’s an area the club can stand improve this season, and it’s also one that figures to have a different look with newly acquired Brendan Donovan expected to open the season in the leadoff spot.

How does what Donovan brings to the table improve the Mariners’ top spot line the lineup? Mike Salk broke it down on a recent edition of Seattle Sports’ Brock and Salk.

‘Just a better hitter’

The Mariners were forced to change their leadoff plans early last year when Victor Robles suffered a fractured shoulder on their first road trip. They used a combination of Julio Rodríguez and Dylan Moore in his place for a brief stint before J.P. Crawford assumed the role for an extended period. And in late July, they settled on Randy Arozarena for the remainder of the season.

There are some productive hitters in that group, but Mariners leadoff hitters finished with an underwhelming .237/.311/.348 slash line and .659 OPS. Arozarena struggled there in particular, hitting .218 with a .302 on-base percentage and .645 OPS in the leadoff role.

Insert Donovan, who has a career .282/.361/.411 slash line with a .772 OPS over four seasons. M’s leadoff hitters did have more home runs (15) than Donovan’s 162-game career average (13), but Donovan’s average of 32 doubles is a bit better than the 28 hit from Seattle’s leadoff spot in 2025.

“So the idea is he should be getting on base more,” Salk said. “He should be hitting more doubles and putting pressure on the other team. He should have a higher batting average by another 50 points or so, and the OPS should be a lot (higher). He’s just a better hitter, just a flat out better hitter than what they had at that position last year.”

Brendan Donovan makes a mark in Mariners Cactus League debut

Another area that stood out to Salk was the strikeout disparity. Donovan is averaging 89 strikeouts over 162 games compared to the 165 totaled by M’s leadoff hitters in 2025.

“It’s a crazy difference,” he said.

A ‘real pest’

Donovan’s patience and ability to make contact make him a hitter capable of grinding out a pitcher and elevating their pitch count, but he actually saw less pitches per plate appearance last season than Crawford and Arozarena, who accounted for 82.5% (599 of 726) of the Mariners’ plate appearances from the leadoff spot. Crawford averaged 4.17 pitchers per plate appearance and Arozarena 4.05, while Donovan averaged 3.72.

But the difference to Salk is what Donovan does when he gets deep into counts.

“It’s not like they haven’t had guys with the ability to take pitches and grind through at-bats. All of those guys are capable of doing that, but I think what you get from Donovan is he’s able to grind through the at-bats and make them pay off by getting on base, by coming up with hits, by avoiding strikeouts, by an OPS and even a slugging percentage that are a step up from what the Mariners have had in that spot in the past,” Salk said.

“You’re not gonna hit a lot of home runs. That’s not his game, but if and when he does kind of figure out T-Mobile Park and what that looks like, he should be a real pest. He should be really annoying to play against and he should help the guys who hit right after him by putting more pressure on the pitcher and exhausting him.”

Hear the full conversation at this link or in the audio player in this story. Listen to Brock and Salk weekdays form 6-10 a.m. or find the podcast on the Seattle Sports app. 

More on the Seattle Mariners

• Morosi: This is the year Julio Rodríguez enters his prime
• Who’s battling for roster spots in Mariners camp?
• MLB Network’s Amsinger has some bold Mariners predictions
• Buster Olney expects M’s prospect Colt Emerson in majors soon
• Seattle Mariners’ Cal Raleigh addresses the ‘elephant in the room’

Follow @ZacHereth

(‘Site plan’ from city permit filings for Glassyard Commons)

One month after we first told you about the plan for a shelter site in southeast West Seattle, the date is set for a promised community Q&A meeting about it. The meeting will be held at a church in Georgetown, according to the announcement from the organization that will be operating the site, LIHI:

Thursday, March 5th, 2026 at 5:30 PM
New Direction Missionary Baptist Church
755 S Homer St. [map]
Church and street parking available

The proposed RV Safe Lot and Tiny House Village at Glassyard Commons will consist of 72 parking spots for RVs, 20 tiny houses, and community facilities. This program will move RV residents off neighborhood streets and give them a safe place to park. When they are ready to move into the onsite tiny house units, LIHI will decommission and dispose of their RVs. Site amenities include 24/7 staffing, onsite management, comprehensive case management, a community kitchen, and laundry and hygiene facilities.

LIHI brings over a decade of experience in providing tiny house villages. We operate Camp Second Chance nearby, as well as 16 other tiny house village programs in the Puget Sound region. We previously operated Salmon Bay Village, a combined RV and Tiny House Village program, in the Interbay neighborhood, and we had great success moving clients from rundown RVs into permanent housing. 67 RVs were decommissioned over the program’s duration. Construction at Glassyard Commons is estimated to begin in March and will take approximately 3 months to complete.

Advertisement

If you have any questions or comments, please contact LIHI’s Community Engagement Manager Marta Kidane at marta.kidane@lihi.org or 206-858-0734.

The Glassyard Commons site, owned by the state Department of Transportation, is at 7201 2nd Avenue SW and has been the site of multiple unsanctioned encampments for many years. The site was proposed for official use as a transitional encampment a decade ago, though a formal plan wasn’t pursued at the time, and permit filings show the most recent proposal dates back to last spring, with a slightly different mix of RVs and tiny houses.

SEATTLE — Seattle Public Safety Committee Chair Bob Kettle said Monday he wants to “set the record straight” on what he called misconceptions about Seattle police technology used for crime prevention, including automated license plate readers, public-space surveillance cameras, and the city’s Real-Time Crime Center.

In a statement released ahead of Tuesday’s Public Safety Committee meeting, Kettle said he understands concerns raised by community members, particularly amid reports about federal immigration authorities accessing license plate reader systems that use Flock Safety.

SEE ALSO | Lynnwood votes to end Flock license plate cameras after immigration enforcement concerns

“I want to be clear on this first point: Seattle does not contract with Flock Safety, the vendor at the center of many reports of unauthorized access by federal immigration,” Kettle said.

Kettle also addressed a University of Washington Center for Human Rights report that he said focused specifically on Flock networks. He said the findings “should not be generally applied to Seattle since we do not contract with Flock.”

On automated license plate readers, Kettle said one misconception is that cameras will be placed in sensitive areas such as hospitals, courts, schools, or houses of worship. He said Seattle’s ALPR cameras are mounted on police vehicles rather than fixed posts.

“When patrol cars are on, ALPR is on – and cannot be turned off without turning off the in-car video system or the car itself,” Kettle said. He added that police may add cars when requested to sensitive locations, but said ALPR cameras are not placed specifically at those locations by the city.

Kettle also said another misconception is that ALPR data can be accessed by the federal government. He said Seattle police share data with federal agencies only in matters of criminal enforcement, and otherwise, a federal agency would need to subpoena the data.

“So far, there have been no subpoenas for Seattle’s ALPR data,” Kettle said. He added that public disclosure requests for ALPR information are subject to state records law.

Kettle also pushed back on criticism of Seattle’s Closed-Circuit Television public space cameras program and the Real-Time Crime Center, including claims that CCTV does not deter violent crime. He cited a 2019 study from CUNY and said the same report also stated that results of its review “based on 40 years of evaluation research – lend support for the continued use of CCTV to prevent crime as well as reveal a greater understanding of some of the key mechanisms of effective use.”

Kettle said Seattle’s CCTV pilot project will be evaluated by researchers at the University of Pennsylvania Crime and Justice Police Lab over the next two years, including measuring the reduction in violent crime. He said CCTV footage can help investigations and prosecutions of violent and property crimes, and that when used with the Real-Time Crime Center, it can reduce response times and police presence while increasing trust and safety.

He also reiterated that Seattle does not use Flock Safety cameras and said the city does not contract with the Washington Department of Licensing, which he said was involved in previous reports showing information being shared with the federal government.

On concerns about federal access to surveillance data because servers may be located out of state, Kettle said the Department of Homeland Security has no access to Seattle police data regarding civil matters, such as immigration, unless the federal government subpoenas footage from the vendor. He said Seattle police own the data regardless of where it is stored.

Kettle said if a subpoena occurs, a City Council ordinance requests that CCTV systems be shut down for 60 days. He said those elements were included in Seattle’s CCTV and RTCC legislation to prevent overreach by the federal government and others.

Kettle also said Seattle police officers are not “constantly monitoring cameras” at the Real-Time Crime Center. He saidthe RTCC video is used only when analysts are asked to assist in specific cases and relevant footage is reviewed.

Kettle said that in the last year, the RTCC helped police “more swiftly solve homicides, sex trafficking and assaults.” He cited a homicide in June 2025 in downtown Seattle that he said was solved after RTCC staff identified a suspect in a video, and an October 2025 case in which RTCC assistance helped locate a sex trafficking suspect tracked to the light rail. Kettle said RTCC coordinated with Lynnwood police to take the suspect into custody, and the suspect was turned over to Seattle police.

Overall, Kettle said the RTCC assisted with 2,580 cases between May 20 and Dec. 31, 2025, including solving 17 homicides and being associated with 947 arrests.

“Ultimately, implementation of ALPR, CCTV, and RTCC technology in Seattle is not a choice between public safety and personal privacy – it is a smart and responsive commitment to both,” Kettle said.

He pointed to legislative guardrails, including the 60-day shutdown provision and limits on data sharing, and said the city will continue to prioritize transparency and independent evaluations.