Perhaps J.P. wants to retain Cat should he be presented with a trade opportunity that involves someone like Phelps. Perhaps a trade for someone like Schilling?

There's my segway. I have a few questions for the more knowledgable on the situation:

1. What does Schilling make this year? Is it 12 mil? Is it the last year of his contract? Is Arizona interested at all in dealing him or do they want to retain him?

2. If they're interested in dealing, what kind of package could make it work? They'd obviously have to pay a portion of his salary for us. Would Phelps, Hudson and Werth be attractive as a starting point?

I just think Schilling is someone you have to get if the opportunity is there. Sneaking into the playoffs with Schilling and Halladay would give us a very legit chance to win it all.

So anyway, that's why I think Cat might be staying. Werth and one of Phelps, Keilty or Gross are good candidates to be dealt.

My understanding is that Schilling will make $12M in 2004, half of it deferred, which could make him very attractive to the Jays. However, he'd prefer to play out his contract in Arizona next year, and has been adamant that he won't uproot his family during the season. I think he also has a no-trade clause. It would probably take quite the package to pry him away from the Snakes -- less if the Jays took on board some salary like Junior ($7M) Spivey, which I can't really see Rogers doing. But youneverknow.

http://economics.about.com
If they're interested in dealing, what kind of package could make it work? They'd obviously have to pay a portion of his salary for us. Would Phelps, Hudson and Werth be attractive as a starting point?

Oh my. Why not just throw in Roy Halladay? I think Phelps *and* Hudson is a little much.

Mike

As a huge fan of the Cat, I am glad to hear this.

I'd love to see Schilling as a Jay provided we don't have to gut ourselves to pull it off. But is there any real substance to the Schilling stuff, or are we all just excited over a rumor?

Jordon,

Spivey made just over 400,000 this year - where did you get the 7 million dollar figure from?

Robert, I was thinking of Matt Mantei, but I wrote Junior Spivey. I have absolutely no explanation for that. Unless I was still thinking about options for Chris Woodward. Anyway, brain cramp.

I'd love to see Schilling as a Jay provided we don't have to gut ourselves to pull it off. But is there any real substance to the Schilling stuff, or are we all just excited over a rumor?

It stems from a report that Schilling supposedly expressed interest in playing for the Blue Jays to someone on the team's coaching staff during the summer. Schilling later denied it and Ricciardi said they couldn't afford to acquire him. The story is too questionable to even be called a rumor.

I think it's safe to say that Curt Schilling will not be a Blue Jay in 2004.

I don't see the Jays trading Phelps for a 37-year-old pitcher.

First of all, if Carlos is not re-signed, Phelps is Plan B at first base. I don't think Ford-Griffin has shown enough durability of power to be Plan B at this point.

Second, the Jays aren't likely to be a playoff team next year, so it doesn't make sense to trade a young stud who has already shown he can hit in the majors for an older pitcher in the last year of his contract. If the plan is to seriously challenge in 2005, then a deal like this would likely see the team without either Phelps or Schilling by then.

If Arizona wants to move Schilling (and he said he consider offers during the off-season only), then some of the minor league outfielders would be a much better fit for both clubs, due to the Jays' depth and the Snakes age in the outfield.

I'd agree with that Ryan. Schilling is a bit of a pipedream. Nonetheless I do agree that Phelps is potential trade bait. Other than Halladay and Wells, who do we have that has a higher trade value? Epstein showed us how to put together an incredibly productive 1B/DH for relatively little money this year. Not that Phelps will be agressively shopped but if he can bring in a good young arm or two, then I think you have to do it.

As a Jays fan living in Chicago, I have plenty of exposure to the Cubs' wealth of young starters, and lack of offense. A Phelps for Zambrano trade keeps floating 'round my noggin, despite Phelps' apparent made-for-DH fielding ability. On the other hand, are there AL teams that have good young pitching and need a power bat?

"are there AL teams that have good young pitching and need a power bat? "

The Mariners definitely fit in that category. I believe Hatteburg is a FA this year so the A's could be interested. KC could use an upgrade at 1B.

Also, Schilling has stated several times that there is no chance that he would change leagues.

I can't see a good fit BJ's- Cubs, they have Choi for first and Baker selections aren't young promising players. We did have available ( did we? ) Cat and Crash for their run and no deal was made.

I'm okay with the idea of bringing Myers and Cat back because (a) they contributed, and (b) they actually like playing here. Not everybody likes playing in Toronto - our money is a funny colour, it's cold here in April, and the Dome is kind of an unusual place to call home. To many players, Toronto is, well, just too foreign.

The Mariners definitely fit in that category. I believe Hatteburg is a FA this year so the A's could be interested. KC could use an upgrade at 1B.

If Edgar Martinez retires, the Mariners will certainly need a DH. Phelps could fit that bill, especially at his price tag, though of course he's no Martinez. And the Mariners do have pitching to offer...

Hatteberg signed a 2-year extension.

The Royals have Mike Sweeney at first, so they are hardly in need of an upgrade.

Schilling - fascinating possibility, unlikely execution.

The Diamondbacks desperately need to shed salary, though, and need young talent to boot. The Jays seem a good dance partner for those reasons... one of the few teams interested in taking on salary, and one of the very few of those with young talent in the system.

Matt Mantei - the $7 million is in his walk year. The D-Backs would love to eat half that contract and wave bye-bye, especially given that he has been pitching in pain all year long and was never really recovered from his injury. It might smooth a deal for Batista or Dessens, though Dessens is expensive enough as it is.

Spivey - will make about $2-3 million at arbitration. His best comparable in production and service time is Adam Kennedy, who settled at $2.2 this past year.

http://sports.yahoo.com/mlb/news?slug=ap-diamondbacks-schilling&prov=ap&type=lgns
My understanding is that Schilling will make $12M in 2004, half of it deferred, which could make him very attractive to the Jays. However, he'd prefer to play out his contract in Arizona next year

COMN to see an article that says he's open to being traded. He just doesn't want the trade to happen during the season. As he says, "I am not going to even consider uprooting my family once spring training starts".

I really don't see this as a pipe dream. True, he will be 37, but he's a pretty exceptional 36 right now.

Second, the Jays aren't likely to be a playoff team next year

In another thread, I described how simply replacing Lidle and Woodward with Schilling and Spivey could mean the difference between 87 (what the Jays should have had this season based on their run differential) and 96 wins.

94-96 wins is very likely a playoff team.

If Edgar Martinez retires, the Mariners will certainly need a DH. Phelps could fit that bill, especially at his price tag, though of course he's no Martinez. And the Mariners do have pitching to offer...

It'll be interesting to see who replaces Gillick as the Mariners' GM and what he'll end up doing with the team.

I'd love to see the Jays get Rafael Soriano from them. I'd give up a ML bat for him, say a Hinske or Phelps, that would fill one of the Mariners holes.

There is no way Seattle is parting with Soriano - for Hinske, Phelps or anyone else for that matter. I think they understand what a prospect they have in Soriano. If Edgar leaves that frees up substantial salary room to fill some of the M's holes. There is also serious talk of them non-tendering Garcia (which makes sense in that they would have to offer him something north of $6 million) also freeing up money. Cameron is a free agent this year as well. Finally, there is talk (how serious I do not know) that Olerud may retire. As I see it the M's have a number of holes to fill but they also have substantial financial flexibility to address them. I think they will try and fill as many holes with FA's as they can. I just cannot see them getting rid of Soriano.

replacing Lidle and Woodward with Schilling and Spivey could mean the difference between 87 ... and 96 wins.

Very true, provided we are talking about the 2002 Curt Schilling, not the 2003 Curt Schilling. I would be surprised if JP would be willing to spend millions on ANY pitcher this age, save perhaps the Big Unit. The Jays approach is all about managing risk, and Schilling is great, but is also a huge risk.

save perhaps the Big Unit.

After last season, one would think that even Johnson would have to be considered a risk from here on in.

Very true, provided we are talking about the 2002 Curt Schilling, not the 2003 Curt Schilling.

I'm talking about v.2003 (read the original post).

No signing is without risk. Managing risk doesn't mean avoiding risk completely, it means making intelligent decisions on whether the ROI is such that taking the risk makes sense. I'll argue that 37 is not that old for a power pitcher anyway, which Schilling is. Randy Johnson had two of the best years of his career at 37 and 38. The fact that Curt has only one year remaining on his contract mitigates some of the remaining risk, not to mention the possibility that he could be flipped at the deadline if necessary. Signing a big money pitcher means JP has to provide draft picks as compensation (until MLB and the MLBPA finally get around to mobilizing their little committee and change the CBA's rules on FA compensation anyway) so a trade is the smarter option. Ultimately, JP nets +2 first rounders in 2005 once someone signs Schilling away, further strengthening the squads of 2008 and beyond.

Seriously, how else will JP spend the money he has? Not on offense. Maybe a relatively inexpensive reliever or two. The problem is that most FA starting pitching options are REALLY too expensive or crappy (save for a couple, which would still be affordable with Schilling on staff, ie. John Thomson or the guy I'll talk about it a bit). Unless the point is to contend in 2004, why not just pocket the extra $13MM for use in 2005?

If this isn't a realistic option, it's because Schilling won't waive his no-trade for Toronto or because Arizona won't like what the Jays have to offer in a deal. Neither risk nor finances would hold up this deal.

In other pitching options news, Jeff D'Amico was released by the Pirates today, which is moot since he was going to be a free agent anyway. Wait before you laugh at my suggestion, he'd make a fine #4 or #5, with upside. He would sign for practically nothing and at 27, is at the age when many pitchers turn the corner. He's talented (he was a first rounder) and performed well in the minors, he just hasn't put it all together at the big league level yet.

D'Amico would be great.

Also, Arizona exercised their $300,000 buyout on Miguel Batista, so he's a free agent.

Also, Arizona exercised their $300,000 buyout on Miguel Batista, so he's a free agent.

Ooooo...

Who would cost more? Escobar or Batista?

I think Escobar has marginally higher upside, and he's five years younger. So even though Batista has the edge in past performance, I'm betting Escobar will command a higher salary.

Signing a big money pitcher means JP has to provide draft picks as compensation (until MLB and the MLBPA finally get around to mobilizing their little committee and change the CBA's rules on FA compensation anyway) so a trade is the smarter option.

Not necessarily. It depends on who the Blue Jays would give up in such a deal. If we're talking about someone like Gross or Rios, those guys are more valuable than draft picks because they've already established themselves and are closer to the majors. They aren't as risky as a late first- or second-rounder would be.

Draft picks are also more costly for the Blue Jays. Toronto's first couple of picks in 2004 are going to cost them around $2 million in bonus money. The bonuses for players currently in Toronto's system have already been paid out (or mostly paid out, depending on the terms of each player's deal). Losing draft picks means having a couple extra million to spend elsewhere.

How much was Batista slated to make? Don't the D-Backs understand park factors?

Batista was slated to make $5 million.

Robert, I think the fact is Arizona don't have $5 million to spend, on *anything*. The franchise is going broke (quite literally). They probably wouldn't sign Barry Bonds for $5 million. They are in a desperate struggle to cut as much payroll as they can, and Batista is just a casualty of that.

Batista is 32, he's not really a guy who draws big crowds, so the D-Backs are just going to forget about him.

The D-Backs have some lovely little salary woes too.

Danny Bautista is owed $4 million for 2004.

Randy Johnson is owed $16 million in 2004 and $16 million in 2005 ($6 million deferred each year)

Schilling, as has been extensively discussed, is owed $12 million for 2004.

Matt Mantei has a 2004 player option for $7 million.

Steve Finley is owed $6.75 million for 2004.

In a fit of utter madness, Luis Gonzlez got a 4-year deal back in March. $8.25 million for 2004. $10 million for 2005. $11.5 million for 2006, and a $10 million mutual option for 2007.

Elmer Dessens is owed $4 million for 2004 and $4.5 for 2005 (or a buyout).

Craig Counsell, for god's sake, is owed $3.15 million for 2004 and $3.75 million for 2005 (or a $250,000 buyout). There's also a million-dollar bonus clause each year.

So those eight contracts eat up $61,150,000 for 2004 already, $55,150,000 if you don't count the deferred money owed to Randy. They have guys coming into arbitration and a bunch of guys who will be free agents. They also owe a bunch of deferred money all over the place from old contracts, so I understand.

Batista was too much to bear, I guess.

Also, Shea Hillenbrand is arbitration-eligible now, as is Spivey.

I understand about salary restraints. How about trying to trade Batista - he's sure to get you something.

When I wrote my preview of the 2002 D-Backs, I estimated that they had two years of competitive baseball left before the whole thing fell apart. I wonder now if 2002 will be their last winning record for a decade or so.

Not necessarily. It depends on who the Blue Jays would give up in such a deal. If we're talking about someone like Gross or Rios, those guys are more valuable than draft picks because they've already established themselves and are closer to the majors.

I guess I went without restating that Gross and Rios are part of the "pretty much untouchable" list. Thanks to the money woes Craig describes, Curt could be had for less than top prospects. The Jays are in a position to make a trade from organizational strengths.

Losing draft picks means having a couple extra million to spend elsewhere.

You're intimating that losing draft picks is a good thing. Blasphemy! Kidding...I see what you're saying. But the expense will be incurred in 2005, when the Jays finances are looking pretty, with a return in 2007-2009, when this hopeful contender will probably have a tighter budget since it will be trying to keep much of the roster intact for repeated World Series runs.

Craig wrote: Schilling, as has been extensively discussed, is owed $12 million for 2004.

I thought it's been extensively discussed that he's owed $6MM in 2004, the rest being deferred.

Of all those stupid signings, Luis Gonzalez signed through 2006 with an option for 2007 has to be the stupidest. He's not a 57 HR man and established that in 2002 but he's getting paid 57 HR money. It's as if he's being compensated retroactively for performance. Craziness.

For purposes of making fun of other team's GMs and respective predicaments, I'd like to list some horrible, horrible contract situations:

Matt Anderson: P, Tigers - signed Feb/02
2004: $4.3M
2005: Team option $6.25M or $0.4M buyout

David Bell: 3B, Philles - signed Nov/02
2004: $4.2M
2005: $4.5M
2006: $4.5M

Jeff Cirillo: 3B, Mariners - signed Jul/00
2004: $6.725M
2005: $7.025M
2006: Team option $7.625M or $1.25M buyout

Jermaine Dye: OF, A's - signed Jan/02
2004: $11.0M
2005: Mutual option $14.0M or $1.5M buyout

Rusty Greer: OF, Rangers - signed Mar/01
2004: $7.4M
2005: Mutual option with escalating buyout $0.6M-$1.5M

Drew Hensen: 3B, Yankees - signed Mar/01
2004: $2.2M
2005: $3.8M
2006: $6.0M

Bobby Higginson: OF, Tigers - signed Apr/01
2004: $8.85M
2005: $11.85M

Charles Johnson: C, Rockies - signed Dec/00
2004: $9.0M
2005: $9.0M

Denny Neagle: P, Rockies - signed Dec/00
2004: $9.0M
2005: $10.0M
2006: Team option $12.5M or $9.0M buyout

Chan Ho Park: P, Rangers - signed Dec/01
2004: $13.0M
2005: $14.0M
2006: $15.0M

Aaron Sele: P, Angels - signed Dec/01
2004: $8.5M

Bubba Trammell: OF, Yankees - signed Sep/01
2004: $4.75M
2005: Team option $4.75M or $0.25M buyout

Mo Vaughn: 1B, Mets - signed Nov/98
2004: $15.0M
2005: Team option $14.0M or $2.0M buyout

Jeff Weaver: P, Yankees - signed Jan/02
2004: $6.25M
2005: $9.25M

Not to mention that the Tigers still owe Damion Easley millions, ditto with the Angels and Kevin Appier.

Say what you will about Gord Ash, at least he didn't stick us with any of these.

Right on, Robert. I would have tried to trade him too, but there's a small chance that you can't deal the guy and you're stuck wth him again. So I can see their point.

I thought it's been extensively discussed that he's owed $6MM in 2004, the rest being deferred

Absolutely correct, but deferred money is still money. If you employ him, you'll have to pay him. The circumstances of the deferral may make i closer to $5 or $5.5 million rather than $6 million, but you can't pretend it isn't there or leave it out of the budget just because it's deferred money.

Of course not. I'm saying don't include it in Zona's 2004 payroll estimation. If you're taking Randy's deferred money out, take out Curt's too.

I also felt the need to clarify because I've written a lot of words attempting to justify Schilling as an option for Toronto and I'm trying to avoid going back to Square One based on a reader thinking he'll take up all of JPs disposable $13MM.

Agreed, most of those are awful. Some of them merit some more dicsussion.


Jeff Cirillo: 3B, Mariners - signed Jul/00
2004: $6.725M
2005: $7.025M
2006: Team option $7.625M or $1.25M buyout


The Mariners should give up and eat his contract. It's sunk cost.


Rusty Greer: OF, Rangers - signed Mar/01
2004: $7.4M
2005: Mutual option with escalating buyout $0.6M-$1.5M


Eat the contract.


Drew Hensen: 3B, Yankees - signed Mar/01
2004: $2.2M
2005: $3.8M
2006: $6.0M


Negotiate with him to end the contract, and let him go play football.


Bobby Higginson: OF, Tigers - signed Apr/01
2004: $8.85M
2005: $11.85M


Ouch! They should probably eat this and get him out of the way. He was brutal this year!


Bubba Trammell: OF, Yankees - signed Sep/01
2004: $4.75M
2005: Team option $4.75M or $0.25M buyout


Bubba went off the deep end this year, and the Yanks are trying their best to void his contract. A great move by San Diego to rid themselves of him (and they even managed to turn Rondell White into something at the trading deadline).


Mo Vaughn: 1B, Mets - signed Nov/98
2004: $15.0M
2005: Team option $14.0M or $2.0M buyout


Might as well eat the contract.

In a lot of cases, these guys aren't worth the roster spot they are occupying. Teams would be better off giving up and opening up another spot on the 40-man roster (and in the case of some of these guys, a spot on the 25-man roster).

Which raises an interesting question. Is there anything preventing these teams from sending their crappy expensive mistakes to the minor leagues to get them off the 40-man roster? Or does a guaranteed major league contract mean that they're guaranteed to be on the 40-man roster, regardless of where they are playing?

In a lot of cases, there needs to be a regime change in order for teams to eat a contract (Example: JP cutting his losses on Mondesi). I expect the new guy in Seattle will dump Cirillo. Ditto for the Mets and Mo Vaughn (they did fire Steve Phillips, right?)

Unless I misunderstand the Albert Belle situation, you need to keep someone who is permanently injured on the 40-man list in order to collect the insurance money on the contract. As a consequence Vaughn and Greer are going nowhere. It's an incredibly valuable use of a 40-man roster spot from an economic perspecive, just not a great use of a spot from a minor leaguer protection perspective.

As a consequence Vaughn and Greer are going nowhere.

That's only if insurance policies were taken out on those players. Considering the substantive cost of insuring player contracts, it's not always done.

There is no way any insurance company in the world would insure a 275-pound first baseman against injury. I feel confident that Mo's contract was uninsured.

Corey Thurman just got outrighted to Syracuse. What the heck is that all about? Brandon Lyon part two.

There is no way any insurance company in the world would insure a 275-pound first baseman against injury. I feel confident that Mo's contract was uninsured.

It was insured. For a price anything is insurable.

The tightening of insurance happened this past season (for the most part) and Vaughn signed his contract 4-5 years ago.

I'd like to see Batista in a Jays uniform.

Maybe I'm missing something, but couldn't the Diamondbacks have exercised the extension and then traded him to an interested team for a C prospect? If that's the case it would seem his market value is under $5 million. I think he could be a solid 3 starter for $3-4 million.

D'amico on the other hand doesn't interest me. Doesn't strike anyone out and has been injury prone. Plus, those high 4 ERAs are in the NL where he benefits from facing the pitcher. Just makes me think of Sturtze.

http://economics.about.com
In 2003 Batista's ERA was 3.539 and his non park adjusted DIPS ERA was 3.644. For comparison sake the only Toronto pitchers who had a non park adjusted DERA under 4 were Halladay (3.413), Lopez (3.835), and Escobar (3.882). Note that Escobar's figure includes his tenure as a reliever.

I can't seem to find any component park adjustments that include 2003. I'll use Robert's component factors after he posts them.

Cheers,

Mike