And of course, JP spent much of this season stating they had no interest in re-signing Burnett.  Kind of anti-productive to paint yourself into a corner well before all the results of the season are in, no?  Especially when your team is so adept and finding ways to put pitchers on the skids for extended periods of time.

When Marcum came back from his earlier elbow injury, I believe he was throwing fewer cutters and curveballs.  He struggled for a while and then got sent down (to fix his attitude or whatever).  He came back throwing more of those pitches again and was doing better.  A few starts later he might be out for a year and a half with elbow surgery.  Draw your own conclusions.

If the Jays signed Bedard to a low base salary with incentives for games started he could be a steal.

I had this thought a few days ago when the news broke about Bedard. I fully expect he'll be non-tendered. I don't think it's a good idea for the Jays to go after him simply because he is an Ontario boy. If after a year we cut him loose I don't think it would come off well. And most importantly we have to stop avoiding injury-prone pitchers. Everybody mentions the Carpenter example, but the 5 year extension he signed does not look very good right now. I think we need to focus on Halladay and our young pitchers and patch holes where necessary. This means that resigning AJ probably should not be done, even though it makes sense on many levels to do it.

Once McGowan (hopefully) comes back in May/June, I'll consider him our new AJ (injury-prone with ace potential). There are going to be enough solid guys to sign on a one year deal I hope. Potential guys who may take a one year deal include Sheets, Pettite, Mussina, Garcia and Byrd. If we could sign one guy (i.e Sheets on a one year 14 mill contract) and maybe sign a secondary pitcher as a placeholder for McGowan, we'd be in solid shape (with Cecil, R Romero, Mills and Richmond as AAA injury protection). There may still be enough funds to go after Manny!

It has been confirmed.  The Star, Post, and CP are all reporting it.

I had that slight hope that maybe the doctor was holding the MRI the wrong way or something.  Dammit, anyway.

This is starting to make sense to me.  They had a medical opinion on the elbow from earlier in the year.  (Probably something like "It's okay now, but I'll see you later")  I think when Marcum started struggling and experiencing some pain, the doctors probably knew what it meant and that 2009 was going to be lost.  Hale over at Mockingbird noticed his release point changed just prior to the demotion, so maybe they found he could minimize pain by changing his arm angle.  So they sent him down to work on it for a start or two, to improve his results.  They brought him back up, but when they lost the series to Boston, Marcum decided to pack it in, they got the MRI and forwarded it to Dr. Andrews for confirmation.

That would explain his alleged attitude problems - if in his heart, he knew TJ was coming.

• We've lost FIVE very talented young pitchers to serious injuries and for substantial chunks of time in the last two years (Marcum, McGowan, Jansenn, Accardo and League) some of whom may not be back or may not be as effective - not to mention our closer, the formerly dominant, now average BJ Ryan. 
  
• We were one of the top teams in days lost to injuries last year - this year, we've been simply average in our days lost to injuries, but consider the players - key young pitchers down with arm injuries
• We've been floating around at 5th place in the "Prospectus Hit List" in all of MLB for a few weeks, while simultaneously floating around 4th place in our own divisio

Well - Halladay, Litsch, Purcey, Janssen and Cecil with the Romero brothers(sic) Ricky and Davis along with Mills and Wolfe getting a sniff - and McGowan back by the All-Star break - God willin' an' the river don't rise. Unfortunately, young pitchers will break your heart - and my heart can only take so much more breaking!

The bullpen looks good with Ryan, Downs, League, Accardo, Carlson, Tallet, Frasor and Parrish - Davis and Wolfe could get a sniff here as well.

AJ at 4 x 15 would make me sleep a little better - however, I wouldn't want to be the company that was insuring his salary.

Offensively, it looks like Rolen has figured how to swing with one shoulder, Wells and Rios are being helped by Tenace and Gaston, Snider and Lind both like like keepers and Arencibia will be Rod's back-up by the All-Star break and Cooper will be knocking on Overbay's door by late summer. Scoots and Inglett are there till Hill stops seeing double. Five top bats and no real holes - could be a contenders offense.

I hate to sound pessimistic, but that's my quick read of the situation.

While human nature -- for most, anyway -- is to be overly pessimistic in the face of bad news, in this case I concur that the pessimism is well founded and not just a knee-jerk reaction.

Boston and, to a much larger degree, New York figure to retool over the off-season. Tampa may even open the coffers and add some pieces now that they are contenders. For the Jays to compete with these three teams, they'd need league best pitching, or close, and their offense somewhere between league average and 75th percentile, with the prerequisite dollop of the magic pixie dust that is allowing this year's Twin offense to over-achieve.

Replacing Burnett and Marcum's 59 GS and 370 IP internally, at least at an above-league-average level, is simply not possible. Janssen, Accardo (if these two are healthy and effective) and a more prominent League will certainly make an already effective bullpen deeper. But who will start all those missing games? (I don't see either Downs or Janssen being the answer, not in 2009.)

What is the chain reaction, if any, of the Marcum injury? Presuming that Ricciardi will not elect to punt 2009 (wanting to retain employement for 2010)...

1. Does priority #1, a DH, get moved down the list to accommodate new priority #1, a starting pitcher? A Derek Lowe, say? And does that therefore increase the likelihood of Snider starting in the majors in 2009 (the presumption being that any new bat they would add would not be an obvious middle-of-the-order type, like an Ibanez)?

2. Does Ricciardi gamble that one or both of Janssen and Accardo come back at their 2007 levels and that League's progress in 2008 is legit, and therefore shop BJ Ryan, albeit coming off an off-season (for him)? Many contending teams could certainly use a closer (Mets, Diamondbacks, Rays, Indians, possibly Angels) and only one of them will sign Francisco Rodriguez.

3. Does Adam Lind become trade bait, presumably for a starting pitcher? Lind has certainly come into his own, but at age 25 he has a near-approaching ceiling that makes the likelihood of him developing into a major star minimal. Does Snider get the LF job heading into 2009 with the DH job going to someone like an Ibanez (a Lind trade for a SP would mean the team would only need to pursue one FA SP, thereby freeing up money for a bat).

At this point, I can't imagine what Ricciardi will do, nor do I even have a sense of what I believe he should do. This figures to be one very busy off-season for the man.

Yankees have other problems, too. The meltdown of investment banks Merrill, Lehmann and Bear leaves just Morgan and Goldman standing, and they are wobbling, pending the next black swan event. I assume all this will crater their season's ticket base but I could be wrong. If you take the financial industry out of Manhattan, a lot of discretionary spending vaporizes.

Now, if Scott Richmond has a solid start on Sunday, then Blue Jays' prospects take a quantum leap going forward.

Maybe it's just me, but I certainly DON'T think that the Blue Jays should rebuild. I really don't think they have to at all. If anything, I'd rather they go all in and, for once, show a willingness to move a prospect or two to improve the 25 man roster. I agree that we can't fill all of our holes internally. These are the potential holes as I see them:

-Number 2/3 starter

-Mashing hitter

-Backup catcher

-SS?

We may not need a SS if we move Hill. A backup catcher is easy enough to find and considering JPA will be ready soon I do not consider this a dire need and JP does not seem to either. The key thing is to replace Burnett (or resign him) and get another power hitter. I'm hoping we make one significant trade and one big FA signing to address these holes.

If, as some have suggested, Burnett would resign with us for about 4 years and 60 million and we, therefore, have to up Halladay's salary for the next 2 years and (hopefully) extend him as well, we need to clear some salary and the 2 guys that make the most sense to me are Overbay and Ryan. I fully expect Ryan to return to form next year and I know it would be selling low, but we simply don't need him. We can quite possibly have one of the best bullpen's in the league next year for under $8 million. Many people have suggested trading Tallet, but why not move Ryan and bump everyone else up a spot? Perhaps a Ryan for Magglio Ordonez trade could work (considering Detroit wants to cut payroll a bit and wants a closer).

Manny may be a pipe dream, but if Uncle Ted bumps payroll by another 10 million for the next 2 years, we could afford Burnett and Manny if we simply move Ryan and Overbay. Heck, there are numerous scenarios that could make us stronger next year even without Marcum and Burnett if we simply trade for a starter considering that McGowan/Cecil may be able to give us 200 innings this year if everything breaks right. We have good pitching depth, I don't think we should be selling. As my name suggests, I expect this team to be excellent in 2010 when Snider/JPA/Cecil and perhaps R Romero/Mills are all entrenched on the roster and even for next year I think we are fine. Even if we lose Burnett, it's not like we can't acquire another starter...

Im sure Josh Towers could be had for cheap!

I agree with Mike that the rotation should be done in house. I wonder about stretching bullpen arms out for the rotation(mainly Downs or Tallet). I would basically go in with Halladay, Litsch and Purcey as locks and let the battle for the 4 and 5 spots be settled in spring training. I would prefer Janssen get one of those spots. If all goes well a rotation of Halladay, McGowan, Purcey, Litsch and Janssen at some point could possibly give good production. Id be suprised to see Richmond in the rotation. Anyways i guess i am trying to say that JP has enough depth around that even minus Marcum and AJ are pitching should still be decent if not better. As far as offence goes, spend big on a power DH

 Anyways i guess i am trying to say that JP has enough depth around that even minus Marcum and AJ are pitching should still be decent if not better. As far as offence goes, spend big on a power DH

This is pretty much true, although I do think you have to find one starter either via trade/free agency. I'd be fine with Halladay, an undetermined starter, Purcey, Litsch and a battle for the 5th starter. Honestly, I think there are more reasons to be optimistic for next year than pessimistic, as long as JP is a litle active.

Bear in mind that Richmond will likely be facing a AAA-heavy Oriole roster on the final day of the season.

I have Burnett going for win #20 on the final day of the season (on three days rest).  I know normal rotation would have AJ pitching Thursday on five days rest, but I think Cito will reevaluate and go with AJ on Wednesday on normal rest, so that he has his chance again at 20 wins.

Bear in mind that Richmond will likely be facing a AAA-heavy Oriole roster on the final day of the season.

Please ignore my comment. I goofed big time. I hadn't realized that Richmond was slated to go tomorrow against the Red Sox and that is what Westcoast Dude was referring to. Tomorrow will definitely be a big test for the long idle Richmond since Boston is playing to win.

I'm with MG on AJ.  We made it through phase I of the AJ contract in relatively good shape, but not without plenty of anxiety.  Take the picks and count your blessings.  Investing the $12 million wisely is a more difficult proposition - I'm not sure a Free Agent is a wise investment these days.  Perhaps that money should be used to extend Doc for an extra three years below (FA) market. 

With regard to Cecil, I think there is next to no chance that he breaks ST with the big club.  He was on VERY conservative pitch counts this year, and didn't pitch past 75 until late July.  He'll stay in the minors until his pitch count is up to 90 or so.  I wouldn't be surprised to see him from that point on, though.

Derek Lowe and Oliver Perez are both gambles. Lowe was not very good in his final two years with Boston and I doubt Lowe will be much better 4 years later. I'd expect a 3/4 starter who will hopefully continue to be durable. Perez is far too much of a gamble to give a multiyear deal to. I don't see Lowe/Perez/Garland etc as an upgrade over what the Jays will probably have internally by 2010 and JP has a tendency to avoid older pitchers, so hopefully that rules out Lowe.

I like the Juan Rivera idea. Since his (breakout) year with the Angels in 2006 I've thought he's been an underrated player who just needs regular at-bats. Frankly, I think he can produce offensively at a clip not much below Vernon Wells if given the chance. I wanted the Jays to move Vernon for Rivera/ E Santana a couple of years ago and shift Rios to CF, but we decided that making VW the "franchise" player was better (sigh). 

I think David Cooper would be a solid trade chip. This is just me, but guys who may have some value in our system who I would not mind moving are Cooper, Campbell and Jeroloman. Add in a pitching prospect and you could probably land a very good player. As long as JP is active and realizes he has to look externally for at least a big bat/pitcher, I am optimistic.

I agree with John that the organisation cannot afford to go for a full on clearout and rebuild this off-season. They will waste to many years of our best, cheap players and alienate the support. I do however think that some moves need to be made..

1. Make a good (realistic) public offer to AJ and see what happens. If he turns it down then so be it and take the draft picks. Don't get involved in a bidding war. In any event I'm not sure really if he is worth 17-18 mil /year with a 1.35 WHIP.

2. If AJ goes then look for a free agent SP replacement, target someone early. We need someone to protect Cecil / Romero from being called up too early and harming their development.

3. Trade for a good young SS using Adam Lind as the central part of the package. That way we trade from strength, also Lind is unlikely to be much more than an average league OF in the future. Put Snider in the OF and pay for an OF / DH. ?Ibanez / Delgado.

4. Consider extending Doc now... please he is the Jays.

5. Hope like hell that McGowan / Janssen come back healthy.

6. Do not trade Litsch, he is only 23 and the stats suggest continued improvement from last year.

Off course we could blow it all up, suck for 5-10 years then use the gadzillions of draft picks to finally field a winning team...

These Jays are a 90 win team who had bad luck in 1 run games this year.

We are talking about next year.  The year with no McGowan, no AJ, no Marcum.

John, I think that most of your arguments drill down to the fact you don't want a rebuild rather than whether this would be the best for the chances of the organization winning a championship.  The team you keep talking about next year is going to be more of the same - at the end of the year there are going to be some excuses for why the Jays can't make the playoffs - bad luck, injuries, AL East, lack of money...

Anyway, regardless of whether the team should be rebuilt, it won't be.  It would be an admission of failure that JP will not make and will not survive. 

I am beginning to believe that the best approach is incremental: always keep upgrading whenever possible at all times, and keep the pipeline as full of farm system players as possible. Tearing down and starting over doesn't work.

Well said, Dave.  I've been pleased with this season.  The Jays are approaching a point where everyone on the 25-man roster is either (a) there because the club feels they can help a playoff team win ballgames, or (b) there because the club feels they are young, improving, and likely to one day help a playoff team win ballgames.  That's all you can ask for in terms of roster construction.  Beyond that, you need health and execution...and we can only hope both will be improved next year.

We are talking about next year.  The year with no McGowan, no AJ, no Marcum.

Well, yes -- and not to undersell the importance of that point, but the Jays pitching staff has been quite good regardless. The following gives too much weight to Halladay's performance (that's the equivalent of a small sample size alert), but consider:

So far in 2008, Marcum, McGowan, Burnett are 33-24 over 476 IP with a 3.97 ERA (combined). Everyone else on the staff -- team totals minus the above, that is -- is 50-49 over almost twice as many IP with a non-Dustin-Shaun-AJ ERA of 3.31.

The overall team ERA at the moment is 3.54.

• Finish ahead of the Yankees for the first time since 1993
• Single digits behind the leader for the first time since 2000
• Most wins since Tim Johnson's 88 in 98.

I get the impression that most fans would rather finish .500 every year with enough injuries to justify not making the playoffs than have a real future to look forward to. There's really no difference between winning 70 games and winning 85. The latter just means you're one of the best teams who can't make the playoffs. Let's throw a party.

"Hey, if everyone stays healthy, if half the roster exceeds their talent level, etc, etc, etc, we have a chance!"

Sorry, I'm tired of that. If trading Halladay (which would be a shame) is necessary to get off this run of mediocrity and filter the system with enough talent to possibly make noise in the future, then so be it. Not to mention I would rather watch Halladay win elsewhere than lose here. Of course I'd prefer he win here, but that's not going to happen, barring a miracle. 

Everyone else on the staff -- team totals minus the above, that is -- is 50-49 over almost twice as many IP with a non-Dustin-Shaun-AJ ERA of 3.31

Yes, the piching staff  will not be terrible - largely due to the bullpen.  But that still is just a .500 team.  Year 16 of missing the playoffs.

Someone mentioned that rebuilds don't work.  I am not a big student of the history of the game but it seems that Detroit, Oakland, and Florida have had some success on the rebuild front.  Florida and Oakland always turn around and rebuilds again due to budget.  Presumably the Jays would not have this handicap.

But if the Jays were focused on putting togther 5 or 6 top young starting pitchers - either through the draft or trade, they could turn the corner in 3 or 4 years.  They ought to be able to get some of these through trading Doc and BJ.  If they are picking top 5 in the draft for a few years they could get the rest.  Maybe they get one out of  the picks they get for BJ leaving.  Add in Mills, Cecil, Purcey, Litsch, Romero, a recovery from Marcum and maybe one of McGowan and Janssen and you have a pretty good staff in two or three years with a bunch of uberprospects (the draft picks and guys traded for) right in behind them. 

I am not sure what the Jay's bats are worth.  No way they trade Snider, Lind or maybe Rios or Hill(?).  I would be inclined to trade anyone else who can return an A prospect or is blocking a prospect.  Otherwise just keep them on board.  Work the prospects in around them.

Really, the main difference on my view of a rebuild is 2009.  In the rebuild there is no Doc, BJ, AJ, Marcum, McGowan - in other words the starters will suck. 

In 2010, Marcum, Litsch, Purcey, maybe McGowan/ Janssen, prospect or 2 would be your staff.

In 2011, Doc is gone by this point anyway, you have a few more prospects filtering in and the transition into the grade A prospects would be fully underway.

Just look ahead to the issue of Doc leaving.  If he leaves at the end of his contract, the Jays will have no one to replace him.  Why not get his replacement now.  Its going to make no difference to the number or championships they collect over the next two years.

Sorry, I'm tired of that. If trading Halladay (which would be a shame) is necessary to get off this run of mediocrity and filter the system with enough talent to possibly make noise in the future, then so be it.

They can "possibly" make noise now, for next year.  It's not honest to suggest otherwise.

Let me put this differently.  Oakland blew up its team this year.  Short-term failure was guaranteed, and it happened.  Long-term success is not -- can anyone say with certainty that the A's are a lock to challenge the Angels anytime soon? -- even though Oakland has the most highly regarded GM in baseball.

Trading Halladay, etc. for shiny prospects is very risky, and by no means the "right" or only path to success.  The only thing it will guarantee is a terrible 2009 record in a market where the difference between fringe-contending and stinking is huge in terms of attendance and ratings.  Contrast this with perennially weak markets like Tampa or diehard markets like Chicago (Cubs).

No thank you.

Right again, John.  Out of curiosity, is September-of-the-previous-season the all-time record for Earliest Writeoff Of An Above-Average Team's Playoff Chances in Batter's Box history?  Mick, can we get a ruling on this?

How can they make noise in 2009? They already have $70 million in guaranteed contracts next season tied up to the same core that couldn't win in 2008, except subtract the 2nd, 3rd, and 4th best starters on the team (Burnett - free agent, Marcum - TJS, McGowan - unknown). Now the conventional wisdom is to say "well, the Jays can use Burnett's money to get a free agent or two". That completely ignores the payroll ramifications. In 2010, the Jays have $82 million in guaranteed contracts tied up to the current roster (8 players), which means locking up a Derek Lowe or Oliver Perez type will push the payroll close to $95-100 M in 2010 for only 9 players. Unless Rogers increases the payroll, where do you see this rapid improvement coming from? Even if Ricciardi trades Ryan, Rolen, and Overbay to save money, he still has to replace those players, and barring a ready prospect to take over, that requires money too.

If Marcum and McGowan were healthy for '09, then I'd agree the Jays have a chance with the right moves. Without those two and Burnett, forget about it. Expecting Cecil, Romero, Purcey, etc, to replace #2 calibre performance next season (and Marcum/McGowan/Burnett all fit that description) is beyond optimistic. Even expecting Litsch to be a sub-4.00 ERA starter is questionable.

Will rebuilding work? Who knows. It's definitely a risk to both the team and fanbase. But winning 82-85 games over the next two seasons and then letting Halladay walk for 2 draft picks is going to crush this franchise worse than trading Halladay this winter would. At least by trading Roy (and others) now, you have a chance to add quality young talent to the team. Then in 2010, Marcum and McGowan will presumably be back, and filtering players like Snider, Cooper, Cecil, Arencibia, etc, becomes much easier. Not to mention the haul of prospects Roy would command should be able to help as well.

If you're asking me to decide between finishing .500 every year until Halladay leaves, or trading Halladay and starting a new chapter in Toronto's franchise, then I'll choose the latter. And this coming from someone who will be saddened to see Halladay in another uniform. I just hate being in the middle. Either suck or have a legit chance. No in between.

They already have $70 million in guaranteed contracts next season tied up to the same core that couldn't win in 2008, except subtract the 2nd, 3rd, and 4th best starters on the team (Burnett - free agent, Marcum - TJS, McGowan - unknown).

How do you explain the fact that the Jays have gone 40-26 since McGowan got hurt, and have been 26-19 with Marcum either on the DL or in the minors?  Even if you really do assume that the Jays will see Burnett walk and replace him with somebody who can't deliver league-average run prevention, how do you reconcile this with your belief that these specific injuries will irrevocably doom the team?  And the Jays started winning before Snider and without Hill.

Will rebuilding work? Who knows. It's definitely a risk to both the team and fanbase. But winning 82-85 games over the next two seasons and then letting Halladay walk for 2 draft picks is going to crush this franchise worse than trading Halladay this winter would.

This is, simply put, at odds with reality.  Winning 82-85 games in Toronto means you get 35,000+ on weekends and strong TV ratings.  Winning 65 games means you don't.

How do you explain the fact that the Jays have gone 40-26 since McGowan got hurt, and have been 26-19 with Marcum either on the DL or in the minors?  Even if you really do assume that the Jays will see Burnett walk and replace him with somebody who can't deliver league-average run prevention, how do you reconcile this with your belief that these specific injuries will irrevocably doom the team?  And the Jays started winning before Snider and without Hill.

Marcum is a #2 starter. Dirt cheap. Ditto for McGowan. Burnett, at least this season, was a 210-220 IP starter who had a 2.42 ERA in 78 innings against Boston, New York, and Tampa (11 starts) and 18 wins. Personally, I wouldn't bet on Burnett throwing more than 150 innings next season given his history, but we're talking about replacing his 2008 production in 2009. Who is going to do that? Purcey? Cecil (on a strict PC)? Romero (who has stunk ever since he was drafted)? If we had to replace Chacin with one of those guys, fine. But replacing Marcum, McGowan, AND Burnett? With pitchers who, outside of Cecil, haven't even been great in the minors? Do you honestly expect the rotation to be as good without those three? As far as the great bullpen, we'll see how great it is when the starters aren't tossing 7-8 innings every night. Then again, with Cito managing, who knows.

As for Hill, I think Inglett did better (especially after RHP) than Hill would have, other than power. That injury hurt the team the least in my eyes (Wells hurt the most, followed by McGowan/Marcum).

This is, simply put, at odds with reality.  Winning 82-85 games in Toronto means you get 35,000+ on weekends and strong TV ratings.  Winning 65 games means you don't.

Winning 82-85 also means you have a mid-to-late pick in the draft, compared to possibly getting a franchise player by winning 65. Granted, a team can lose that much and still make bad decisions (see Romero, Ricardo), but we're not under the assumption that a new GM will rebuild and fail. At least I'm not. Rebuilding + right decision making is a necessity. Otherwise you get the Allard Baird Royals.

"How do you explain the fact that the Jays have gone 40-26 since McGowan got hurt...

Why did they struggle to stay at .500 for the rest of the season?

The bottom line is that they will have Doc, an ace, Litsch, an up an down guy who gives up over a hit an inning and doesn't strike out many, Purcey, who is up and down and gives up taters, someone from the minors and maybe some FA to be determined. 

Is this really a championship rotation? No

Better than Boston's, New York's or Tampa's? No

Is the offense so dominant that it can overcome the deficiencies of the starters? No.

I guess it comes down to what you want.  Some of you seem happy with an average team that might stop being unlucky.  I want a team that is good enough that it will make its own luck.

As for the rebuilds, I don't see what the markets in Oakland, Tampa Bay and Florida have to do with anything.  Florida has a couple of World Series berths, Oakland has made the playoffs fairly regularly, Tampa will be there this year.  If anything, the Jays are most similar to the Detroit situation where they can afford to keep they players they develop and where crowds will come if the team wins.

I take issue with a few of your statements but this one in particular. You're basing that claim on what, exactly? No one's season projection should be based on a month and a half, especially when he's a proven performer. I would argue instead that the lack of Hill's right-handed bat is one of the significant contributors to the Jays' trouble against left-handed pitchers this year.

Inglett has hit .305/.358/.423/.781 against RHP this season (298 AB).

From 2005-08, Hill's OPS against RHP: .689, .728, .753, .648

Obviously we'll never know due to his injury, but Hill hasn't shown to be particularly good at hitting RHP. So yes, I do feel his injury didn't hurt the team that much. Inglett against RHP probably helped more than hurt. The only area it did hurt is power, but Hill was slumping in that department as did everyone else on the team.

Hill is not Pedroia, as much as some fans want him to be. I think it's foolish to say "we didn't have Hill" as if it's the equivalent of losing Wells and replacing him with Wilkerson (which was a massive downgrade).

So what you're saying is: IF everything goes right (i.e. right GM, great trades for existing players, right draft picks at the right time, right development, etc) rebuilding is great. If not, it sucks.

Yet, to those who say: IF everything goes right this offseason and next actual season ( insert conditions here ) we can contend, you say they're wrong?

Not at all. Rebuilding is a way to accumulate assets at the expense of winning. Some here have brought up the Royals and Pirates, etc, but fail to realize that those situations failed because of bad management, not rebuilding itself. I never said a GM has to be perfect, but his good moves have to outweigh his bad, and there needs to be some great moves mixed in. Rebuilding only sucks if you have bad management, just like bad management in Toronto can take one of the best pitchers in baseball and surround him with mediocrity for seven years, instead of winning something with him.

Again, if you're asking me whether I want to play .500 ball and hope to fluke into the playoffs over the next two years, or take a massive risk and try to bring some upside into the franchise by rebuilding when a window of opportunity doesn't appear to be open, then I'll choose the latter. I'm not content with mediocrity. If you disagree and think a window is open, that's up to you. I don't see what you're seeing.

Rebuild means trade Halladay and nothing else.  There's nothing of appreciative value that would bring back can't miss prospects.  Rios might be a trade asset too, since he will be 30+ by the time the Jays youth is ready to really compete (2013).  Then you're talking about a pitching staff of Marcum, McGowan, Cecil, Mills and Ltisch or something of the sort, and an offense led by Snider, Lind, Arencibia, Cooper, Ahrens, Campbell and maybe Rios.  Throw in a couple more prospects from the Halladay trade and you have an Andrus and Ramirez as well.  Really, is it worth it.

Rebuild is worth it if you have multiple tradeable assets and no prospects on the horizon.  If AJ were signed for a few more years and Vernon was about $5m per year cheaper, then we'd have something to work with.  But to trade one guy for a couple of more prospects doesn't seem all that attractive to me, especially when our pitching staff is decimated as it is.

For their part, Tampa didn't rebuild or build through the draft.  Most of their first rounders are relatively poor picks.  They got where they are by astute (some luck, too)acquisitions like Pena, Hinske, Garza, Iwamura, Barnett, Gross, Floyd, Navarro, and Jackson.  Their actual drafting, outside of Kazmir and Longoria (and more recent picks), has been mostly disappointing - Wilder, Stanridge, Hamilton, Baldelli, Brazelton, Young, Neimann, Townsend.  None of these have been key to their revival. 

Rebuild is worth it if you have multiple tradeable assets and no prospects on the horizon.

Which is the situation Oakland was in this season (and Toronto is not in now).  And Beane didn't have tens of millions in revenue to lose by weakening his club in the short term.

For what it's worth, I've got to throw my voice behind the naysayers for our chances in 2009.  The arguments for and against have been well voiced already, but one point missing from the discussion is:

There aren't really ANY baseball journalists who feel like the Jays have a shot at contending next year.  The folks at BP have been critiquing our contract situation and roster construction (big bucks for average or above-average talent like Ryan, Rolen, Wells, Overbay) for several years now, and we are only starting to get into the back end of contracts that only get more expensive as the players age and productivity diminishes. 

I love the optimism, wit and insight of many of the regular (and irregular) contributors to the box, but this a site laden with homers wearing rose coloured glasses.  Might I remind people that this debate (are we contenders this / next year?) has been going on for the past few years now, with the refrain 'wait till next year' a constant.  Thus far, the naysayers of the Riccardi era have been proven right time and time again.

Unfortunately, I predict this same debate will continue next year. 

BTW - the Yanks have been to the playoffs EVERY YEAR since 1994.  We last qualified in 93.  At least we are both out of it this year.

Right again, John.  Out of curiosity, is September-of-the-previous-season the all-time record for Earliest Writeoff Of An Above-Average Team's Playoff Chances in Batter's Box history?  Mick, can we get a ruling on this?

Sorry Mike, totally missed this earlier. Your Official Ruling on This Matter is NO.  Here in Texas, Ranger fans are already looking forward to, say, 2011, when the bulk of the best minor league pitching depth in baseball should pay dividents. (Yes, yes, "should" is a naughty word.) But as a sidebar note to that ruling, officially speaking, September-of-the-previous writeoffs are, technical term coming here, waydamnearly.

From Jeff Blair's latest article:

From this corner, if Burnett walks, it ought to be time for the Blue Jays to consider trading Halladay, who has two years left on his contract.

If owner Ted Rogers isn't going to go nuclear with the payroll at a time when the game is flush with revenue — remember, when the Blue Jays won the World Series in 1992, they had the third-highest payroll in baseball and in 1993, they had the highest — maybe the time has come to swallow hard and rebuild.

You think life with A.J.'s been tough? Wait till next year.

I guess Blair is a teenager too.

I guess Blair is a teenager too.

I would never say it's immature to make the point you are making.  I just don't think it's realistic at all.  Nobody has offered even one counterargument to the simple point that Rogers would not leave millions in revenue on the table, because it will cost the team immediate millions if it punts 2009.  The club will do well financially if they go in with an 85-win-calibre club and a puncher's chance.  Might not be satisfactory to thoughtful fans, but it's the reality.  I just don't know how you would persuade ownership to go along with "sell Halladay," especially since:

* Obviously, the odds of finding somebody with Halladay's impact, marketability and willingness to sign below-market contracts are minuscule, even if you combine the incoming prospects with the high draft picks that will presumably follow from stinking over the next while.

* There is no indication that the AL East will be any softer in 3-5 years, with Tampa likely still a force and the Big Two.  When exactly is the new window of competition?

* For lack of a better term, "sell-initiated trades" like the Johan Santana sweepstakes have not been yielding massive returns.  What's the return you're hoping for -- maybe a new #3 and #7 on the Jays' Top 10 Prospect list?

* Can you totally discount the impact of Halladay on the development of young pitchers, particularly since every Jays pitcher who records improvement credits Halladay's influence?

* What about his ability to rest the bullpen every fifth day?

It's also somewhat striking that nobody, not even Blair, identifies a targeted need for a Halladay trade or even a plan to subsequently compete in the AL East.  It's reminiscent of the South Park gnomes -- "Phase one:  collect underpants.  Phase two: [blank].  Phase three:  Profit."  What exactly is Phase Two here? 

It's also somewhat striking that nobody, not even Blair, identifies a targeted need for a Halladay trade or even a plan to subsequently compete in the AL East.  It's reminiscent of the South Park gnomes -- "Phase one:  collect underpants.  Phase two: [blank].  Phase three:  Profit."  What exactly is Phase Two here? 

Agreed.  But it's just something to explore - a Santana-esque loser of a deal is not the solution - but entertaining the possibility allows of a trade someone to knock yourself, even in this buyers market.  And Halladay is the sort of player that a team could see as the missing piece of the puzzle - great deal, durable, smart, efficient, a role model at the peak of his powers - he seems unlikely to decline soon given that list.      

Your other points are also excellent - Boston, Tampa and New York should all be major players pretty much every year in the forseeable future, with their young talent / unlimited budgets.  Personally, I'd explore other moves than Halladay in a rebuild focused on freeing up salary (Ryan, Overbay, Rolen if there's a replacement coming back) and acquiring avg. pre-arb type talents to flush out the roster.  Wells to the Yanks might even work.  But I would've traded Burnett and anyone else at the deadline too.   

Trading halladay is not the answer, but neither is plotting the same course we are on.

SK,
The '08 (presumably) Wild Card Red Sox, right now, are +159 in run differential; the '08 (presumably) AL East champ Rays are +102 and the men in pinstripes are +50 while the Jays are +91. I'm not going to do the pythagorean math, but if their pitching stays the same (as you suggest, a big "if") what in tarnation makes you think they need to improve by 100 runs just to make the playoffs?

That's silly overexaggeration. An improvement of 25-40 runs over 162 games is more than likely overly-sufficient.

There is only one reason to trade Halladay, and that is if the return exceeds what his likely future value is to be

Well, my suggestion is that he will not be in Toronto after his contract expires.  If you can get two hotshot prospects for him now, they are likely to be of a great more use in 2011 and beyond than an absent Halladay.  All you are giving up is a 2009 which most would say is a wrtie off anyway and a 2010.

I guess I sound negative but I also don't like the Jays chances of attracting BJ or other marquee freagents.  Under JP they have only signed three big time free agents that I can think of - Frank Thomas, BJ and AJ.  Two of those deals placed much more of the risk with the Jays than the player.  BJ's was I guess the exception to this (maybe an overpay at the time?).

I guess it could be argued that the Jays have a leg up on the AJ sweepstakes but I don't see this as a real hinderance to teams that can offer as much, if not more, money and a better chance to win.

Mike D, I am not sure but don't some of the low payroll teams make money each year while the teams like the Jays lose millions?  A total rebuild might actually make Rogers some money for once?  Its hard to know exactly due to accounting tricks but it seems possible doesn't it?

SK,
The '08 (presumably) Wild Card Red Sox, right now, are +159 in run differential; the '08 (presumably) AL East champ Rays are +102 and the men in pinstripes are +50 while the Jays are +91. I'm not going to do the pythagorean math, but if their pitching stays the same (as you suggest, a big "if") what in tarnation makes you think they need to improve by 100 runs just to make the playoffs?

That's silly overexaggeration. An improvement of 25-40 runs over 162 games is more than likely overly-sufficient.

Why is it silly? They trail the Red Sox by 130 runs. Over 50 and 60 runs less than Tampa and NY respectively. This is a team that will finish with a little over 700 runs in all likelyhood. How do you suggest they make up 12 games on Tampa, 10 on Boston, etc? Are those teams not going to improve? Are those teams not going to spend money? Of course they will (even the Rays might since they'll make the playoffs). The Jays need to score a lot more runs and keep the same level of run prevention to even have a chance. One hundred should be the goal. Anything less and you're still looking at a 85-win team given the expected pitching drop-off.