Sounds good to me. I don't think any reasonable person expects Myers to have a season like 2003, but he has certainly earned the roster spot and a bit of a raise.

http://economics.about.com
Jeez, Burley, find your own links!

Great move for the Jays, particularly at 900K. Even if he doesn't play much he's a great asset to have on the bench. Lefty catchers with some pop are hard to find.

So is Wilson done? I hope not; I think he can still be quite useful to the Jays. I'm not sold on Cash at all. I could see carrying three catchers, particularly if the Jays decide to go to a 4-man or 4.5-man rotation.

Mike

Great news indeed! $900K is less than I was expecting Myers would cost after his amazing first half; although he won't duplicate those numbers, he'll be a steady hitter who'll take 2/3 of the at-bats while Kevin Cash adjusts to the big leagues.

Even better is the speed with which this deal was done; this must have been one of the items JP mentioned the Jays had completed but couldn't yet announce. It bodes well for other transactions too, though I doubt Kelvim will be brought back into the fold as easily. The front office is clearly fast off the mark this off-season.

Let me dissent to a minor degree. In 350 ABs 2000-2002, Greg hit .200. Last year he hit .300 in 320 ABs. His projected line for 2004 is .250/.340/.450 at best, and his defence is below average. He should be a backup catcher and get no more than 200 ABs next year.
$900,000 is about $300,000-$400,000 too much to spend for a player to fill this role.

Bringing back Myers at this salary increases the risk that Tosca will give him too much playing time at the expense of Cash. This is not in the long-term interest of the club.

I'm not saying that this is a disaster. The long-term everyday catcher is likely to be Quiroz, but it would be better to give Cash the playing time now so that he's ready if needed in 2005 or 2006.

http://economics.about.com
900K is too much of a veteran left-handed pinch hitter who is likely to put up an OPS of 790? Tough crowd.

That's even ignoring the fact that the guy can also *catch*. He's not great behind the dish, but he's not horrible either.

This could also mean Cash is on the way out for some pitching help, which wouldn't be the worst move in the world.

Mike

I'm more inclined to follow Mike's reasoning, but a 1 year deal under $1 million isn't anything to worry about.

Unless of course he plays 100 games and takes ABs from Cash and/or Phelps.

Mike M,

The club has to decide what it's trying to do. Go full bore for a pennant in 2004, or build for 2005-2007. I think that they have chosen the latter course. Whether it's having Cash ready to be a good backup catcher or simply increasing his trade value, it behooves the Jays to give him 400 ABs in 2004. I somehow doubt that this is going to happen in light of the Myers' signing and his performance last year. It was one thing for Cash to be given the ABs at the end of this past season when the Jays were out of it, but I don't see Tosca writing his name in the lineup on a routine basis at the start of the season against right-handed pitching.

I feel the same way about this signing, as I did about the Berg signing last year. You may recall that at the start of last season, Tosca several times started Berg against right-handed pitching instead of Hudson ("to get him several starts in a row"). When your backup is paid more than your everyday player and has more experience, it makes it very easy for the manager to put his name down in the lineup.

I don't see any problem with Myers coming back at this price. Last year Bordick made a lot more than Chris Woodward but it didn't mean he played everyday until Woodward proved erratic.

I don't think the Jays will be dumb enough to play Myers just because his salary is $900K instead of $300K. If Cash can hit at all he'll get the majority of the at bats based on his defence. But the point is you have to have a contingency in case Cash doesn't work out.

$900K for a catcher who can play half the games and possibly post a .750+ ops isn't a bad price at all. That's only about a $100K raise. The organization should show some loyalty to players who have performed well and I think this was a pretty good gesture towards a useful veteran. Other roleplaying free agents who can't pull down big money will take notice as well. And the Jays are likely to go cheaper on Woodward's backup so it shouldn't overly affect the pitching budget.

We all know Myers isn't going to hit over .300 again. But he doesn't have to in order to provide a decent one year insurance policy until Cash and Quiroz have shown they're ready. I would agree keeping Wilson around would also be worthwhile because he can also play an infield corner in a pinch; I wouldn't mind seeing if he can play 3B on turf.

http://economics.about.com
The club has to decide what it's trying to do. Go full bore for a pennant in 2004, or build for 2005-2007. I think that they have chosen the latter course. Whether it's having Cash ready to be a good backup catcher or simply increasing his trade value, it behooves the Jays to give him 400 ABs in 2004. I somehow doubt that this is going to happen in light of the Myers' signing and his performance last year. It was one thing for Cash to be given the ABs at the end of this past season when the Jays were out of it, but I don't see Tosca writing his name in the lineup on a routine basis at the start of the season against right-handed pitching.

If that's the case, the problem isn't the Myers signing at all... the problem is the manager.

Like RB says.. if Cash doesn't pan out, then you want a guy like Myers around. If Cash gets off to a good start, then Myers won't get a lot of time at catcher. Even if he doesn't, the deal was still a bargain.

Mike

R. Billie, I don't agree about Bordick and Woodward either. At the start of last season, what with Bordick starting fairly often in place of Woodward and Berg starting fairly often in place of Hudson, the Jays' regular DP combination rarely started 3 games in a row together. I expressed concern with this approach on the official website at the time because I felt that it would not lead a good defensive season from the regulars. Hudson did start off slowly defensively, but as the better defensive player was given a chance and improved and really had a fine defensive season. Woodward barely was given a chance after what I considered to be an understandable slow start.

With Cash, the issue is not defence, but offence. I am quite sure that if given a chance, he will hit with some power and some strike zone judgment (say 12 homers and 45 walks in 400 ABs). I do not know if he will hit .200 or .260 if given a full shot, and the only way to find out is to put him in there. I'd bet that if he's given 200 sporadic at-bats that he'll hit .200 or so.

I agree that a good part of the problem is the manager. But, as the club appears to be committed to Tosca for 2004, you have to account for his preferences in choosing your backups.

If Cash does pan out, I don't agree that $900,000 is a good price for a backup catcher. Like I said, $500,000-$600,000 is. Anyways, even if Tosca does not give Cash a full shot and Myers is modestly overpaid, it's not like it's the sinking of a Titanic.

Question: Why are the Jays not going after pitcher Mike Myers? Think of all the free publicity opportunities when the next Austin Powers movie comes out. You know, headline on TV news show: "Mike Myers stars as Jays win World Series again"...

http://economics.about.com
Mike G:

How much of baseball do you think is defence? You seem to bring it up a lot more than the other Boxers. There's nothing wrong with that; I prefer to read multiple viewpoints.

Personally I'm not all that interested in a catcher who hits .200. Besides, I don't think Cash is all that great defensively. I saw him in a game at Rochester.. it was a fairly hot and humid night, and I swear he couldn't hold onto the ball. He seemed to be having all kinds of problems back there. Maybe his hands were sweating too much.. who knows?

I could see the Jays holding on to him as his trade value might be relatively low (compared to what it could be). I don't really see where he fits in to the future of the Jays, or in MLB. Of course, I'd be thrilled to be shown wrong.

Mike

I would agree keeping Wilson around would also be worthwhile because he can also play an infield corner in a pinch; I wouldn't mind seeing if he can play 3B on turf

I can't see a reason for keeping a 3rd catcher, especially if Phelps and/or Werth are on the team. If you need an emergency catcher you have someone available.

Your 3rd catcher should be in Syracuse. If you need him due to injury or ineffectiveness, call him up.

Keeping Wilson at this point is a waste of a roster spot.

I agree with Pistol completely. Putting Tom Wilson at third would redefine the concept of "punting defence."

Fantastic news. Will he be our #2 or #3 starter?

Since we're talking about third base: this should be the year we find out if Hinske is going to be a major league third baseman. His defense, though awful at the start of 2002, improved significantly over the course of the year. This year, he was a butcher, but he did sustain that nasty injury, so it's tough to condemn his 2003 defense too harshly.

But if, by season's end 2004, his throws are still an adventure, it's going to be harder and harder to run him out there with any confidence.

I don't remember if it was an interview with Keith Law here on this site or on another, but I remember him saying that the Jays didn't want to push Josh Phelps out there just for the sake of ABs, they wanted to keep him off the starting lineup for awhile to give him the chance to get his confidence back. Could this be a similar insurance policy for Phelps and more importantly for Cash? Let us say that Cash starts the season like he did in September and hits 200 or something ridiculous like and bunts a whole bunch because Tosca and the rest of the front office knows he can't hit a lick when the game is on the line. Is this productive? I don't really know, but if the front office is keen on continuing the resting and gaining confidence approach for their youngsters, I don't see a problem with signing Crash at all.

Whether it's having Cash ready to be a good backup catcher or simply increasing his trade value, it behooves the Jays to give him 400 ABs in 2004.

Giving Cash 106 ABs in 2003 did absolutely nothing for his trade value. OK, I'll stop being obnoxious.

I have to say that I conditionally disapprove of this signing as well. I don't know whether Myers had planned to accept arbitration. If he wasn't going to accept arbitration and there was another team out there that would have signed him, I wish JP had just taken the two draft picks. If he was going to accept arbitration or no one else wanted to lose a draft pick to sign him, then I think this was a good move.

If Myers was a great deal at 800K, I think he'll at least be a reasonable one at 900K, even with an inevitable peformance drop. I'd like to see Cash get the bulk of the AB's too, but if he hits around or below the Mendoza line then Crash needs to take some of the at-bats. Cash doesn't need 400 AB's to prove he can't hit if he doesn't show at least some improvement over this year's performance (and I don't care to watch it if this is the case).

http://economics.about.com
If he was going to accept arbitration or no one else wanted to lose a draft pick to sign him, then I think this was a good move.

Obviously Myers wanted to stay in Toronto... so why would he not accept arbitration? Unless JP had a plan to offer Myers arbitration, then run over Crash's dog. Then JP might have been ahead by not trying to sign him. :)

Mike

And further on Hinske, what is with people berating his defense? I know that he hurts the team in that department, but are the Jays really in post season contention right now? If we were, I think his defense is going to play a bigger role, as we know that because the playoffs are a shorter affair, things won't average out, and every bad defensive play (Torii Hunter's triple in the ALDS comes to mind... c'mon, bernie is not a CF anymore) can't hurt a team's chances to advance in the postseason. But I think we all can agree the Jays aren't going to contend in 2004, too many things need to come together on our side together with things going awfully wrong for either the BoSox or the Yanks, which won't happen when they spend 100+ million on payroll.
So why bother spending time complaining about Hinske's defense? I think the team should consider how to spend their ABs next year with the OF situation, I don't think bringing FCat back is all that useful, given we have Rios, Gross, Werth and possibly Kielty needs time to show what they can really do, with the latter two getting ABs at the majors and the former down at AAA.

When did Myers qualify as a Type A player?

Unless of course he plays 100 games and takes ABs from Cash and/or Phelps.

You're worried that he's going to take ABs away from *CASH*!?

Let me fill you in on something, guys (I speak generally here). Kevin Cash cannot hit major league pitching yet. Maybe he will, maybe he won't, but if the Jays are interested in winning ballgames, and I'd hope they are, I don't want them devoting too many 2004 man-games to The Great Kevin Cash Experiment.

Last year Bordick made a lot more than Chris Woodward

$1,000,000 to $775,000, it's substantial to you or me but not really "a lot more".

If Cash does pan out, I don't agree that $900,000 is a good price for a backup catcher. Like I said, $500,000-$600,000 is.

Well, if you look around the league at what a backup actually earns, it's perfectly OK. John Flaherty earned $750,000 in New York this year. Doug Mirabelli got $805,000 in Boston. Myers is a better player than either of those two. Paul Bako, who sucks, made $750,000 in Chicago. Mike DiFelice made $625,000 in KC. Joe Girardi made $725,000 in St. Louis. Chad Kreuter made $750,000 in Texas. Gregg Zaun made $1.2 million. Keith Osik made $455,000. Tom Prince made $450,000. Catchers who can hit their weight are expensive beasts.

If the difference between that collection of backup catchers (remember, all backup catchers must be members of the Union of Federated MLB-Approved Backup Catchers, led by union president Tom Lampkin) and Myers is $200,000 or so, take Myers, pay the two hundred grand and be overjoyed. If you punch in the wrong buttons at the Backup Catcher Vending Machine, you wind up with Alberto Castillo or A.J. Hinch or Javier Valentin or somebody equally useless. Or, God forbid, Henry Blanco.

The difference between a good GM and a bad GM is that a good GM sees potential weaknesses and shapes his acquisitions around what he has and what is out there. A bad GM gives 200 PA to Rod Barajas because he can't be arsed to think for five minutes about what he will do if Chad Moeller can't squat behind the plate for nine innings every single day impersonating Cal Ripken with Crappy Hitter's Disease.

I don't think Cash is all that great defensively

I agree with Mike Moffatt here, as per usual, but I would note that Cash certainly has great defensive _tools_, which iare of course not the same thing as being good defensively. There is every reason to believe that if he catches another 200-500 games Cash might become a good defensive catcher, but he has a lot of learning to do... he came to catching very late.

http://economics.about.com
I agree with Mike Moffatt here, as per usual, but I would note that Cash certainly has great defensive _tools_, which iare of course not the same thing as being good defensively. There is every reason to believe that if he catches another 200-500 games Cash might become a good defensive catcher, but he has a lot of learning to do... he came to catching very late.

Thanks.. that's what I meant to say, but you said it so much better than I could.

I mean, seriously, some people act as if Cash is the second coming of Doug Gwosdz, which he's not. Even Gwosdz only had 104 career MLB AB.

Mike

I agree that a good part of the problem is the manager. But, as the club appears to be committed to Tosca for 2004, you have to account for his preferences in choosing your backups.

If Cash does pan out, I don't agree that $900,000 is a good price for a backup catcher. Like I said, $500,000-$600,000 is. Anyways, even if Tosca does not give Cash a full shot and Myers is modestly overpaid, it's not like it's the sinking of a Titanic.

Mike G:

In this case (IMO) the "devil you know" is preferable to a free agent. Cash is going to play catcher next year, so the Jays need a veteran catcher, preferably one that bats lefthanded, to take some pressure off him.

Myers fits that bill nicely. Even the version that doesn't post a .900 OPS.

And that version was worth 800K on the free agent market last year.

Myers didn't try to break the bank, so JP resigned him.

Personally I'm not all that interested in a catcher who hits .200. Besides, I don't think Cash is all that great defensively. I saw him in a game at Rochester.. it was a fairly hot and humid night, and I swear he couldn't hold onto the ball. He seemed to be having all kinds of problems back there. Maybe his hands were sweating too much.. who knows?

I disagree.

He has excellent footwork, and strong throwing arm. As for his bat, lots of guys struggle in their first exposure to MLB pitching. Especially catchers.

Given that Quiroz is not ready yet, what's the problem with giving Cash a shot at the job? Worst case, he falls flat on his face. Best case, you have a very tradeable commodity (or a possible replacement for Hinkse if he's moved to 1B in 2005).

Mike M,

If Cash is a defensive work-in-progress (that was not my impression of him in an admittedly small sample size, nor was it the impression of anyone aside from you and Craig) and he cannot hit, why did the Jays give him a full-time trial at the end of 2003? They'd be better off giving Myers and Wilson the job for 2004.

I really don't have much problem with your view, but that's not the organization's. They keep saying that Cash is a fine defensive catcher who may or may not be able to hit enough to be a useful player. Well, if you believe that and if you don't want to put Quiroz in there now, you give Cash the chance. 100 ABs will not do it.

Mike Green,

How many at-bats do you think the club will devote to Cash if he is an abolute offensive sinkhole again? 200? 300? 400?

that was not my impression of him in an admittedly small sample size, nor was it the impression of anyone aside from you and Craig

Way to jump to conclusions there Mike. I would be more surprised if many box dwellers saw Cash as a complete defensive catcher yet.

Personally I think he will become a more than decent catcher, when I don't know and he is raw as heck right now.

http://economics.about.com
If Cash is a defensive work-in-progress (that was not my impression of him in an admittedly small sample size, nor was it the impression of anyone aside from you and Craig) and he cannot hit, why did the Jays give him a full-time trial at the end of 2003? They'd be better off giving Myers and Wilson the job for 2004.

I never said he's a bad defensive catcher. He's a good (but not great) one, who might end up being one. He had some pop in the minors, but also some awful K/BB rates.

Maybe they were hoping he'd have a great 100AB then they could deal him off for some pitching.

I think they would be better off with Myers/Wilson and trading Cash. This might happen, or the front office may feel that Cash's obvious tools may lead to something much more valuable in the future. Who knows.. you'd have to ask them.

I really don't have much problem with your view, but that's not the organization's. They keep saying that Cash is a fine defensive catcher who may or may not be able to hit enough to be a useful player.

I'm sure if you asked Carlos Tosca, he'd defend his approach to pitching changes. What does that show?

And what do you expect the organization to say, "Yeah, Cash sucks.. we're just hoping someone will take him off our hands?" I don't think they belive that, but do you think they'd go around saying it if they did?

Cash isn't a horrible player. He'd make an okay backup for a guy who was great with the bat but bad behind the plate. Guys like that you can often get other teams to overpay for. Particularly if those other teams are managed by Tony LaRussa.

Mike

Mike

100 ABs will not do it

Mike G, that depends. If his batting average is .250 after 100 ABs, that's one thing. If his OPS is under .300 after 100 ABs, then he's totally overmatched -- case closed.

100 ABs is a full month's work. In my opinion, Cash has to at least be a 25th-percentile hitter in his first 100 ABs to at least establish himself as a hitter with the potential to be competent in '04.

His projected line for 2004 is .250/.340/.450 at best

Nonsense. That's a pessimist's guess.

Nowhere in his stats does it say "Greg Myers returned to Toronto with an open mind, listened to Mike Barnett (the best hitting coach in the business) and discovered, after all these years, why left field is out there."

If Crash had gone somewhere else where he was encouraged to return to his pull-hitting, all-or-nothing ways, I'd agree with those numbers. As long as he continues to hit singles and doubles the opposite way, he'll be the "new" hitter he became in 2003. Myers could end up with another 250 AB, with less wear and tear on his body, and avoid second-half fatigue. Sure, a modest decline is within reason, and maybe should be expected. But I'll take the .250 bet right now.

No matter how many times I point out that Cash is a slow starter at every new level, it seems to surprise people when it happens. It took Kevin a long time to figure out AA, and almost a year to solve AAA, but eventually, he did. Everyone should know after another 350 AB if Kevin is going to hit enough in the Show, but don't rush to judgement in April and May. If Cash makes two-thirds of the starts, and Crash pinch-hits for him a few times a week, that's optimum use of both catchers. Don't forget that Kevin can also come in for pinch-running and defensive purposes late in close games.

Signing Myers is a great move. Neither side wants to go through arbitration, they arrived at a mutually agreeable number, and the Jays now have a solid platoon for $1.2 million at one of the thinnest positions in the majors. It doesn't look so good for Tom Wilson. When he's healthy (I think he was quietly nursing an injury from about July 1 on) he kills lefty pitching, and he's not a bad third option at C and 1B, but if Wilson's in the mix at all for 2004, he'll face spring competition as the 25th man from a number of rivals.

Mike D,

You have to look at the whole picture. The MLEs of his 700 double A and triple A at-bats are so far from the .300 OPS that he posted in 100 ML at-bats that I can't tell whether he will hit .260/.330/.420 or .200/.260/.320 if given a full shot. The bizarre part is that he struck out relatively less in the majors than he did in the minors, but hit for a much lower average, and with less power.

You're worried that he's going to take ABs away from *CASH*!?

Yes.

Let me fill you in on something, guys (I speak generally here). Kevin Cash cannot hit major league pitching yet. Maybe he will, maybe he won't, but if the Jays are interested in winning ballgames, and I'd hope they are, I don't want them devoting too many 2004 man-games to The Great Kevin Cash Experiment.

Cash isn't going to improve sitting on the bench and playing twice a week. If he's going to be in Toronto he needs to play at least 60% of the time. If not he should be in Syracuse or traded. With GQ likely in Syracuse I can't see that happening.

And let's not forget that Myers coming into this season was a .250/.307/.384 hitter. It's not like were taking the bat out of Piazza's hands. I'd guess that Myers will be closer to his career averages than his 2003 averages.

Coach,

We don't really disagree significantly. I have no problem with Cash getting 2/3 of the starts or somewhat more and Myers 1/3. My problem is that I don't think Tosca will stick to it at the start of the season, if Myers is hitting better than Cash.

As for Myers hitting better than .250/.340/.450 in more than 200 ABs next year, I'd say the chances are under 20%. It is more likely that he will .200/.300/.380, bearing in mind his age and his record. Mike Barnett may be a great hitting coach, but the reflexes do start to go, and there is nothing he can do about that. I remember Darrin Fletcher's decline with a tinge of sadness, and I see that in Myers shortly.

Cash will hit eventually. He wasn't really all that lost at the plate and a number of hard hit balls found gloves. He's not going to be great hitter but he'll hit enough to be average for a nice price until Quiroz is ready to be a more patient version of Benito Santiago.

Anyway, I don't know what Myers will hit or how often he'll hit. But I'd much rather have him than not have him if the savings is only two or three hundred grand. Now I agree there's no excuse to ever play him against a lefthanded starter and a hitter can fall off a cliff in one year (especially catchers in their late 30's) but if you had to handpick an insurance policy there aren't many better choices than Myers.

Last year the Jays got roughly 771 plate appearances from their catchers. (11 from Huck, 284 from Wilson, 110 from Cash and 366 from Myers). Now I failed to take into account HBP, and I know Myers and Wilson started at DH (or RF/1B in Wilson's case) a few times, but I think you can estimate say roughly 720 plate apparances for catchers. Now, even with Tosca's managerial tendencies, if JP tells him he wants Cash to do the bulk of the catching, I think we'll see Cash out their behind the plate a majority of the time. If you give Cash 450 plate appearances, that still leaves 270 for Myers. Now I think 450 plate appearances is enough to allow Cash to develop and to be able to evaluate his potential as an offensive and defensive catcher. That's espeically true if Cash struggles mightly and is hitting around the Mendoza line after 300 times up to bat. As was said before, when alternatives are people like Ken Huckaby, Henry Blanco and Brent Mayne, I think it is worth the extra money to upgrade to Myers. Myers won't hit like he did this year, but I don't see a huge drop off like some people are predicting. He did post an .853 OPS in July and a .928 OPS in September, sandwiched around a miserable August. Month-by-month evaluations are arbitrary, I know, but I think that shows he wasn't completely lost at the plate after the ASB.

This looks like a good signing to me as we are paying 100k more for him than we did last year and we get a good backup catcher, a good lefthanded bat off the bench and it gives me a chance to unretire the Myers sign, if I can still find it.

A quick note regarding Crash's numbers: although he didn't hit as well in the second half, he didn't fall off the cliff either. At the risk of entering Small Sample-Size Country, here's a monthly breakdown of his production:

April------.271/.364/.438 (48 AB)
May-------.361/.426/.639 (63 AB)
June------.397/.500/.597 (63 AB)
July-------.295/.328/.525 (61 AB)
August---.190/.238/.224 (58 AB)
Sept------.297/.333/.595 (37 AB)

Really, he only had one bad month. But he had two great ones and three pretty decent ones, and I'm fairly confident he can repeat the decent ones through most of 2004. He also played a lot in the first half and probably wore down some; Cash will take more ABs in the early going and help him maintain his pace.

I'm going to throw out a minimum .270/.330/.440 line in about 300 AB for Myers next season. That's basically Ramon Hernandez territory, and he made $1.8M last year. It's a good deal.

We all know Myers isn't going to hit over .300 again.

Just like "we all knew" he wouldn't end up over .300 by the end of the season, right? Because "we all knew" his hot bat was a fluke.

"We all know" a lot of things that "we" seem to have totally made up out of our heads. Really, assumptions like this, particularly when phrased to make it sound like everyone actually believes it, make me angry. Why not let the guy hit the ball before you write him off? Nobody was willing to do that during the season that just ended, but look what he did. Now, all of a sudden he's going to turn to stone over the summer?

I'm sure Greg appreciates the enthusiasm and belief in him that the Jays are showing him with this contract. If anything, wouldn't that lead to an increase in that almighty confidence that every player needs?

For crying out loud, can't a player improve without being spat on?

"Well, he's had a good start, but we all know it won't last."
"Well, he had a good first half, but we all know it won't last."
"Well, he had a good season, but we all know next year he'll stink."

R. Billie, If Quiroz turns out only to be a somewhat more patient version of Benito Santiago, I'll be a little disappointed. I figure him for a little more pop as well. In other words, a well-rounded offensive player and a very good defensive catcher.

Have a little faith, boys. Myers is a new man with a new bat. Many catchers develop as better hitters later in their careers, and Greg could be one of them. You see pitching all of your life from behind the plate, eventually, you figure it out. If he hits like he did last year, 900k is a fantastic bargain. Why not at least give him the opportunity to show that he can repeat, without summarily attributing to him this decline that has yet to occur. Plus, the man has Bordickesque mentor value with regard to Cash and Quiroz. Fabulous signing.

Catchers can bloom late in their careers -- see Stanley, Mike, and Tettleton, Mickey, among others -- so it's not totally unprecedented what Myers has done. I've always liked him, for whatever reason, and I'm glad he'll be back on what has become my second-favorite team.

Named for Hank, I couldn't agree more. You beat me to it [slow typer].

Mike M,

I realized that I never answered your question about how much of baseball do I think is defence. I think preventing runs is precisely as important as scoring them. Apportionment of responsibility for preventing runs between pitchers and the defence behind them, and allocating defensive importance to each position is much less clear. There is an element of interdependence between pitchers and fielders; pitchers who strike out 10 per game are obviously less dependent on the fielders behind them than pitchers who strike out 5 per game.

The defensive importance of catchers is the hardest of all to judge. Aside from the easily measured range and throwing performance issues, how does one measure the importance of a catcher's pitch-calling, receiving and pitcher-handling ability? I certainly haven't seen any reliable objective measures of it.

I do know this. Many successful teams have had catchers who were really quite poor hitters, but had excellent defensive reputations and at least good defensive statistics. You will find this for shortstop, the Orioles with Belanger off the top of my head, but very rarely for other positions. My best guess is that a catcher's defensive ability is about as important in preventing runs as a shortstop's, perhaps a little more important.

What are Quiroz's splits? If Quiroz develops as expected, will Cash be Quiroz's platoon mate or backup? If they will be platooning then why not make it easy and do a strict platoon in 2004 with Myers filling the Quiroz role - chances are it will make Cash's numbers look better than he actually is (although I guess I don't know this - did Cash hit lefties significantly better in the minors than righties) - on the other hand if Cash and Quiroz have similar splits, then Kevin needs significant PAs vs. righties - I think I need more info on Quiroz's skill set before I ca determine how Cash just be best used in 04

I don't think Cash is ever going to hit in the majors like an average hitting catcher. I think he'll top out at slightly below average, but his glove will make up for that somewhat. I think it's worth investing 350-400 PA this year to see what exactly we have, and then either trade him or groom him for the backup role.

Signing Myers is a good decision - a good insurance policy.

As much as I praise Mike Barnett's approach, and cite Greg Myers as the prime example of an old dog willing and able to learn new tricks at the plate, I have a feeling that Kevin Cash may never "get it."

Part of Cash's struggles this year may have been from trying to change his natural style. He just doesn't seem comfortable looking for pitches middle-out to drive to the opposite field, and when he did get a pitch he could have pulled, he wasn't geared up for it. Don't get me wrong; the approach is superb. It makes anyone a better hitter, once they figure it out. I'm just suggesting that it might not be easy for every player to adopt. If there's one Blue Jay who I might allow -- or even encourage -- to pull everything, it's Cash. His average won't be spectacular, but at least he would contribute some power. If the Barnett way doesn't take, it can't hurt to let him try his way before writing him off.

Really, assumptions like this, particularly when phrased to make it sound like everyone actually believes it, make me angry.

Me too, Aaron. I'm also bugged by negativity that stems from snap judgements. Hinske plays third with a broken throwing hand for two months, then he's shaky when he comes off the DL? He's a bum; trade him or move him to first. Josh Towers tosses a brilliant complete game, then four days later, upset about the demotion and improperly prepared, gets mauled in a relief inning? He's terrible in the bullpen; a starter or nothing. It's easier to predict that Cash will never hit enough to be a big league regular than it is to enjoy his defence while finding out for sure. Patience, people. The team is in very good hands, making steady progress right on schedule.

I think preventing runs is precisely as important as scoring them.

With adjustments for context, I agree. If I'm playing in a National league pitchers' park, I don't want stone-fingered sluggers. If I'm playing in an AL hitters' park, I don't want too many glove men with weak sticks. Put another way, you can build a team to win 3-2 games or 9-6 games. The latter is more logical if you're limited by a small budget; the market for good hitters is a lot more reasonable than for good pitchers. J.P. fixed the easiest thing first -- the offence. He's committed to growing his own pitching, because it's ridiculously overpriced. The defence is improving, too, especially in left field and behind the plate. I think the emphasis will continue to shift toward run prevention, without sacrificing scoring, but you can't build that kind of team overnight on $50 million.

http://economics.about.com
I agree with you 100% Coach. I don't get the whole "Myers had a good year - it was a fluke; Hinske had an off year - he's a bum" attitude. To be honest, I don't understand all the negativity. This is a team that slashed payroll and managed to win 86 games in one of the toughest divisions in baseball. That's a pretty big accomplishment in my book.

Mike

For crying out loud, can't a player improve without being spat on?

"Well, he's had a good start, but we all know it won't last."
"Well, he had a good first half, but we all know it won't last."
"Well, he had a good season, but we all know next year he'll stink."



Sounds like Jays fans commenting on Esteban Loaiza throughout the 2003 season

http://economics.about.com
Sounds like Jays fans commenting on Esteban Loaiza throughout the 2003 season

Fair enough. There is a couple of significant differences, though.

1) Loaiza had a habit of looking like a world beater for a month, then completely lose it the next, since he played for the Pirates in '95. I was a big fan of the trade that brought Loaiza to Toronto.. I thought he'd break out for sure in Jays uniform. Loaiza looked like he was going to break out so many times (and never did), nobody believed it this time.

2) Unlike Myers and Hinske, it's harder to point out what caused the drastic change. Of course, since we don't follow the White Sox closely, we read a lot less articles on Loaiza and see him a lot less often.

Mike

2) Unlike Myers and Hinske, it's harder to point out what caused the drastic change. Of course, since we don't follow the White Sox closely, we read a lot less articles on Loaiza and see him a lot less often.

Before the Jays-Sox series at Comiskey, er, U.S. Cellular back in May, the Tribune had a rather large article on Loaiza facing his old mates. A few points that were brought up:

1 - This was the first season in his career that he watched videotape of himself and opposing batters (this really irks me)

2 - the last year and a half in Toronto, he was distracted after his girlfriend suffered major trauma during the birth of their child - she was hospitalized for pretty much all that time (understandable)

3 - He was upset that "unnamed" teammates accused him (in the Toronto press) of not giving 100% (Basically his attitude was "Tell it to my face")

Coach-

"He just doesn't seem comfortable looking for pitches middle-out to drive to the opposite field, and when he did get a pitch he could have pulled...His average won't be spectacular, but at least he would contribute some power. If the Barnett way doesn't take, it can't hurt to let him try his way before writing him off."

This is why I love reading your posts. A lot of people in sports make subjective, qualitative observations, and I don't trust them. Yours I do.

"I'm also bugged by negativity that stems from snap judgements. Hinske plays third with a broken throwing hand for two months, then he's shaky when he comes off the DL?"

Not all negativity comes in this form. A lot of it comes as a reaction to the "JP can do no wrong" attitude some people on this board take. He's made a lot of good decisions, but you can't just throw out the bad ones. I feel we're in good hands. Regarding Hinske, I think the organization's smart enough to evaluate if his defense hurts the team significantly enough to warrant a trade, and that if it does, JP will trade him when his perceived value is high. That's a strength. The bullpen was a mess this year, and JP was responsible for assembling that "talent" and/or not scolding Tosca for his horrid use of it. The rotation was crap, and 2/5 of it was assembled for nepostic reasons. The return for Stewart was poor. Thurman, who a year's development time was invested in, has been let go despite a lack of better options.

There's a lot of things JP has done right. But saying that everything that has worked out right is because he's a great GM and everything that has worked out poorly is beyond his control seems a little dishonest. I like his personality- I like the candor and the attitude, but he isn't without flaws.

Incidently, I think this is the right decision wrt Myers/Cash. I'd like to see Cash get 300 PAs, but this isn't an either/or situation.

The biggest question mark in the lineup right now is at SS- I think the Jays will hold Hinske for at least another half-season. So if Hinske's going to be at 3B, they need a better glove than Woodward at SS. Making that change- substituting a better glove for a slightly worse bat- leaves the Jays with probably a similar offensive output. I figure Myers will decline a bit, Hinske, Phelps and Hudson improve, while Delgado and Wells should do some combo if getting slightly better and slighly worse that will balance out.

Mike M,

You say, "I'm not sold on Cash at all", and that's OK. I say "Myers projection for 2004 is .250/.340/.450 at best", and that's negativity. What you really mean is we have different views of the merits of different players. I like Orlando Hudson more than many here. I think Vernon Wells' long-term strength will be his power, not his defence. I think Eric Hinske's positive offensive contributions are offset by his negative defensive ones (in both 2002 and 2003).

Overall, I am more impressed with current Jay management than the Ash administration. I am particularly impressed with the 2003 draft. There, is that positive enough?

http://economics.about.com
You say, "I'm not sold on Cash at all", and that's OK. I say "Myers projection for 2004 is .250/.340/.450 at best", and that's negativity.

Yeah, pretty much.

Keep in mind, I've also spent months on here promoting a lot of players, most notably Jason Arnold, who I think is going to is going to be terrific. Because of that, I think the regulars are willing to cut me a little slack when I'm overly negative about a player.

You also talk about D a lot more than anyone else, so you're going to look a lot more negative than the rest of us, because it's an area the Jays are weak in.

My problem is a bit different than (though very much related to) negativity. I just get bugged about how quickly people change their minds on people. Last year on a lot of Jays boards, Politte was the GOD OF CLOSING. Now those same people can't wait to dump him. Cory Lidle was going to win the Cy Young in April. By July, people were calling for his head. This board is actually the best I've seen for *not* doing that, but it still happens from time to time.

Mike

Sounds like Jays fans commenting on Esteban Loaiza throughout the 2003 season

True enough, but the team was paying $6 million a year for the privilege of allowing us to have that debate, while for Crash it's less than 20% of that.

Catchers who can hit and won't kill you defensively really aren't that easy to find, in my view.

There, is that positive enough?
Absolutely.

"The return for Stewart was poor."

DP, that is insane. Even if contract amount and length were not issues, Kielty may be a more valuable commodity than Stewart. But of course they are, so it is not even close.

Coach,

It's actually a lot harder to win by scoring 6.5 runs per game and allowing 5.5 than by scoring 5 per game and allowing 4 runs per game. The problem is the long-term drain on the pitching staff, and in particular the relief corps.

Just to give an example. I thought of the most successful offensive powerhouse I could from recent years- the Big Red Machine. Though their pitching was notoriously below average, they scored 840 runs in 1975 and allowed only 586. They were in fact above average at run prevention. The Jays 93 team was an offensive powerhouse, and the pitching was so-so, but still they allowed only 742 runs.

I'm pleased with the Myers signing. He can catch, he bats lefthanded, he can hit a bit, he seems to like it here, and his salary expectations are reasonable. What's not to like?

As for Cash: he can't possibly be as bad a hitter as he was last year, or he wouldn't have made it this far. Unless the Jays suddenly sign a whole new starting rotation, 2004 looks like another rebuilding year. Since Quiroz isn't going to be ready, Wilson isn't really a good defensive catcher, and there aren't any better alternatives out there, the Jays might as well give Cash a full shot.

As for Cash: he can't possibly be as bad a hitter as he was last year, or he wouldn't have made it this far.

Well, Cash isn't as bad a hitter as his *stats* were, but I have every reason to believe that he's as bad a hitter as he *showed*. He had some bad bounces and so forth, but Cash just didn't look any good at the dish to me... lost and lonely. Hopefully a little bit of success will bring some enterprise back in him.

Unless the Jays suddenly sign a whole new starting rotation, 2004 looks like another rebuilding year.

Dave, 86 wins is not rebuilding. 86 wins is right at the cusp of competing... actually, if the schedule had come in a slightly different order, the Jays could have been competing quite late ino the year. As it was, they were in the thick of the race until the All-Star Break.

It's actually a lot harder to win by scoring 6.5 runs per game and allowing 5.5 than by scoring 5 per game and allowing 4 runs per game. The problem is the long-term drain on the pitching staff, and in particular the relief corps.

Yes, it is harder, because your ratios are all weird. Scoring 6.5 and allowing 5.5 means you score 118% of your RA, while scoring 5 and allowing 4 means you score 125% of your RA. That second team is going to be better most of the time regardless.

However, if your RS/RA ratio is constant (and over 100%), teams in high-run environments will do better. (See Clay Davenport's work on extending Bill James's "Pythagorean Theorem")

There's an added advantage, though, to building a big-ass offense... fewer and fewer nights off. The best of pitchers still only pitch their innings, and leave the next guy to pitch totally isolated from the others' efforts.

Good hitters build off each others' successes, as more men are on base and fewer outs are recorded, which means more PA, which means more runs for good hitters. I think this multiplier effect is one reason why a great offense correlates more with great teams than a great defense does.

However, there is a downside to overemphasizing offense at the expense of defense... the unlimited nature of defensive breakdowns. Defensive struggles leave you with "unlimited downside", while offensive struggles have "limited downside". The converse is true for upside... great offenses have unlimited upside, while great defenses have only limited upside.

But if you're trying to build a championship team, it helps a lot to have that unlimited upside potential, because you can't just be "good" to be a champion, you have to be very very good. That means a lot of factors have to come together, so any extra advantages that team construction can give you are going to help.

Well what the Jays really need is at least average run prevention to go with their good run scoring. If they can get that then 90-95 wins is well within reach. And as good as the Yanks and Sox are now they won't keep winning 95+ games with their aging core.

And I do think both Tampa and Baltimore can get significantly better (more so Tampa) depending on how they spend their money. That would mean a tighter division more like the NL East where a number of teams would have a legitimate shot at advancing.

Tampa isn't going to be spending and, apart from a few decent young players at the major league level, they've got very little in the minors for a team that hopes to ride the farm system to contention.

They will be the doormats of the division for a long time to come.

Oh I don't think they're anywhere near contention. But improvement from the young hitters and pitchers and a good middle order hitter and good reliever (as they plan to add) could easily see them win 10 more games than last year. That's enough to cause a change in the divisional balance. Especially if Toronto can have a better record against them at the same time.

Dave, 86 wins is not rebuilding. 86 wins is right at the cusp of competing

Good point. It depends on whether J.P. can sign any starting pitching. It'll be tough, but I'm keeping my fingers crossed :)

"DP, that is insane. Even if contract amount and length were not issues,"

That's just wrong.
Kielty with the Jays:
.342/.376

Stewart with the Twins:
.384/.470

"Kielty may be a more valuable commodity than Stewart. But of course they are, so it is not even close."

Well, the PTBNL hasn't been named. I agree Kielty may have been a good player to take a chance on, but it hasn't worked out. The above numbers came in 220 PAs- if Kielty hits like this again next year, he isn't starting OF material. If you're going to give JP credit for taking chances when they work out better than expected (Greg Myers), then you have to hold him accountable for mistakes. Stewart was one of the few leadoff men who could reliably get on base at a .370 clip. For a player dependent on BA, his fluctuated very little, which is also rare. I don't want to rehash this debate- Kielty was putting up almost-Shannon Stewart MLEs in AA at the same age Stewart was putting them up in the majors, but that doesn't mean he's a sure thing. Stewart is- he hasn't hit under .300 since 1998, and has kept his OB% in the .360-.370 range since he started playing full time in 1997. The Twins got what they wanted out of the deal; Kielty's '04 will determine if the Jays did as well.

I'll say this again- I want to like Kielty. I hope he thrives in Toronto. But until he does, don't pretend he has.

And I'm biased because I really like Stewart. He endured quietly through the Jays sh*t years, and it constantly seemed like he was getting dumped on by the media- trade rumors, ect, and never let it distract him. I'd have liked to see him be a part of a good Jays team, and it looks like thy're finally going there for real after years of false hopes.

I might have a little more loyalty to players and the "team" than to management regimes and was heavily critical of JP in July when this team was in contention. That was mistakingly taken as being an Ash loyalist. I still feel pretty let down by the lack of transaction activity when for a few easy pieces the Jays could have gone down to the wire.
But as the season went into the bin I felt some comfort in the fact that a the management appeared-at least to me-to start looking at 2004 not 2006. A team should be a seamless evolution. The playing time afforded to Cash and the signing of Myers is edvidence that both visions are at play here. Call me pleased so far with this move and all of the transcations yesterday.

I often read to help me fall asleep. Last night I pulled out BP 01 because it's fun to see how things work out several years after the fact.

I happened to turn to the Twins section last night and came across Kielty. One of the interesting things in there was that they said that he had no platoon issues - he hits about the same from either side. So I pulled out the next book. The year after that said similiar things and expected him to make it to a .400/.520 range in time with good OF defense.

Obviously BP isn't always right, and things change over time, but I think we'll see Kielty's name in the lineup all of the time soon. I think that the platoon splits he showed this year were just a short term problem that's fixable.

I just want to step in here and pat everyone on the back.

If you go back, and read this thread from the beginning, what is immediately noticeable is that this is one of the most civil, interesting, informative, well-argued discussions about baseball that you could find anywhere. We disagree, we defend our positions, we try to work out differences where they exist, and while we may indulge in a little hyperbole, we're doing it without people getting mad at each other.

I'm so proud of this site, and the people that gather here. You guys are awesome.

Just a few more notes on transactions.

The Jays, as anticipated, have added Simon Pond to the 40-man roster. I'm not yet sure what role he's expected to play -- if he's in Toronto, then he looks like a younger Tom Wilson who can't catch and in fact doesn't really have a position, your basic backup DH -- but if he continues to tear up minor-league pitching, the Jays may be able to add him to a deal somewhere down the road. As long as his bat keeps producing, he has some potential value.

The team also cut Doug Creek outright, ending the tenure of JP's much-maligned early free-agent signing. No doubt he'll resurface somewhere down the road, as lefties do. The team also dropped seven other players to the minors, five of whom refused the assignment and declared free agency. Say your goodbyes to Tanyon Sturtze (no tears), Diegomar Markwell (expensive gamble that never paid off), Brian Bowles (he'll have to try harnessing his stuff elsewhere), Dan Reichert (great arm, no clue how to use it), and yes, Corey Thurman. It's officially time to accept the fact that Corey just doesn't appear to have the raw stuff and confidence to be a major-league pitcher right now. He's got a terrific change-up, but without a plus fastball and command, he's basically Pasqual Coco without the larcenous streak. It's quite disappointing: I was one of many who thought he would be a contributor to the Blue Jays in years to come, and he's a stand-up guy as well. It's been a sharp lesson on pitching prospects, one that every fan needs to learn and accept: there are no sure things.

The two players who did accept the demotions were Mike Smith and Dominic Rich. Smith throws hard enough that there's still some potential there if he can find consistent off-speed stuff, though if he hasn't got it by now, query whether he ever will. He might be useful bullpen fodder down the road. Dominic Rich, as I discussed in the New Haven prospect review, needs to prove that his bat is for real before being taken more seriously as a future major-leaguer. Considering that he appears slated for Syracuse this season, he'll have to make his case against some tough pitching; it's a make-or-break year for him.

Overall, I am more impressed with current Jay management than the Ash administration. I am particularly impressed with the 2003 draft. There, is that positive enough?

Absolutely. I'm not trying to force positivity on anyone, though I guess it can come across that way...I just like to see people given their fair shake before they're written off. Hell, I was pulling for Acevedo, Service and Tam to come up with glorious, faith-restoring outings for like two months. They'd put in Tam, my wife would groan, I'd say, "This will be the one where he turns it around," and then...well, he wouldn't.

Assuming the worst is the Canadian way, so I suppose I can't fault anyone here for doing exactly that. It is, after all, part of our heritage.

By the way, pretty much by default I have to love the JP regime -- as a Leafs fan, it's refreshing to see a team that 1) has a plan, and 2) is actually implementing that plan. ;)

The Fan this morning said that the contract was worth $950,000, in case that extra $50,000 swings anyone's opinion in the opposite direction.

Oh, that $50,000 just does it for me. And, proving the stars are all aligned and the solar flares will not cause disruption to our vital telecommunications links, BP's Player of the Day today is Greg Myers. Here's the link: http://www.baseballprospectus.com/potd/.

http://www.snpp.com/episodes/7F02.html
The Fan this morning said that the contract was worth $950,000, in case that extra $50,000 swings anyone's opinion in the opposite direction.

What!? Blast his hide to Hades!
And I was going to buy that ivory back-scratcher...

- TR

It's officially time to accept the fact that Corey just doesn't appear to have the raw stuff and confidence to be a major-league pitcher right now. He's got a terrific change-up, but without a plus fastball and command, he's basically Pasqual Coco without the larcenous streak. It's quite disappointing: I was one of many who thought he would be a contributor to the Blue Jays in years to come, and he's a stand-up guy as well. It's been a sharp lesson on pitching prospects, one that every fan needs to learn and accept: there are no sure things.

So what's the chance Thurman is re-signed by the Jays? If he signs with another club I'm worried that it might be a move that the Jays regret.

I would think that he'd have a chance to make the pen next season. He was modestly successful in that role in 02.

Jordan and Pistol,

I don't know. Thurman's command seemed to be coming along in Triple A, 26 walks in 86 innings. At this stage, I really see little separating Thurman from Jason Arnold as prospects, except that Arnold has had more hype. Neither will overpower you, but their off-speed stuff is good enough that they can strike out enough hitters to be successful at the major league level.

Personally, if I had a choice, and recognizing that pitchers of this type are a complete crapshoot, I'd take Thurman because I prefer his career pattern. He's had modest success at triple A and in the majors in relief, and might be ready to emerge as a decent starter in 2004 or 2005. Jason Arnold has yet to experience success at either Triple A, and he might not even have a shot at the majors in 2004, and he's about the same age as Thurman. Arnold did have better control than Thurman in the low minors, so it is a close call.

I had a feeling that Pond might be protected although I agree with the views that his potential contributions may be limited. But he did play very well in AA and pretty good in AAA this year and if you're trying to gear your organization to reward accomplishment the move makes sense. The Jays want their minor leagues to develop players but they also want them to win; JP puts a lot of stock in character and they obviously see something in Pond.

I still think Corey Thurman has a future in the majors, probably as a long man out of the pen. I'm not sure if he has enough pitches to be a starter and he's just not ready yet; that good change piles up strikeouts but he still gets hit hard and walks too many. He's in his mid-20's and has a frame which is pretty much filled out and in good shape so I don't think we're going to see any future power growth as Lyon had. If he agrees to come back as a free agent then I think he's a good investment. He'll probably end up with someone else though.

Well Thurman was given a chance in the majors early because he was Rule V'ed out of AA. Had he been with the Jays he would have spent that entire season in AAA. It's not really indicative of much that he made the majors first. Another team might have called up Arnold directly from AA after his performance there.

There's also the fact that his command while decent in AAA has not been great in his prior history and was just about disastrous in the majors. Up until this season he wasn't in the same league as Arnold performance wise; Arnold's upside certainly gets a downgrade this year but I'm guessing that is Arnold at below his average performance while Thurman performed about as expected.

That said, if Thurman can gain consistent command of his fastball to go with the change then he can be quite successful. His fastball doesn't have a lot of life though so he needs to be able to spot it.

"I'm so proud of this site, and the people that gather here. You guys are awesome."

The other day Mike M. used the word "McLuhanesque". That rocks. The quality of discourse on this site is amazing, and has remained so even as the site draws more readers/posters. It has retained the quality of a registration-only board without taking that step. Very nice, very rare.

http://!
Random Thoughts:

1. Although we would all like to see Simon Pond make it, where can he play? Plus, he would take at-bats from Josh Phelps. It is time for Phelps to be in the lineup on a near daily basis. Pond reminds me of Luis Lopez--we all rooted for him too. Does anyone know where Lopez is playing these days? He had a pretty good bat.

2. Has anyone ever seen Phelps with a happy expression on the field? On several occasions I had the privlidge of sitting in the "In The Action" seats (once right next to Geddy Lee, he knows his baseball), and Phelps always looked sad--even when he was playing. He reminds me of a high school player I coached last year who was only out there because his dad pushed him to be there.

3. In my humble opinion, Corey Thurman can be an effective major league pitcher. Perhaps he can go back to middle relief, he seems to work better on short notice (perhaps it is because he has less opportunity to get all worked up). The Jays should keep working with him, as previously mentioned he is a stand-up guy and has a great arm.

Any reactions???

Although we would all like to see Simon Pond make it, where can he play? Plus, he would take at-bats from Josh Phelps.

Might there be a trade in the works?

Any reactions???

I have a reaction.

"IN THE ACTION" SEATS WITH GEDDY LEE?!?

Wow. What a long thread started by little more than the innocent reporting of the Myers signing.

Catchers can bloom late in their careers -- see Stanley, Mike, and Tettleton, Mickey, among others -- so it's not totally unprecedented what Myers has done.

Well, Tettleton bloomed at 29 and Stanley at 30. With a career year at 37, Myers can't fairly be included in this group. Maybe he belongs in the mid-late-30's late-bloomer club which includes Barry Bonds ;)

I like the Myers signing but acknowledge the downside risk: Tosca may once elect to squeeze DH AB's from Phelps. This would not be a good thing.

2. Has anyone ever seen Phelps with a happy expression on the field?... He reminds me of a high school player I coached last year who was only out there because his dad pushed him to be there.

This type of thing always rankles me. Tony Fernandez doesn't smile, so he's clearly not enjoying playing. John Olerud doesn't show emotion when he makes an out, so he's clearly not intense. Carlos Delgado is smiling too much and talking to the other team, so he's clearly not taking things seriously.

Now Phelps?

To pretend to know what a person is thinking or feeling based on an expression on their face is, no offense, a tad presumptuous.

Chuck,

Good points. Mickey Tettleton retired before his 37th birthday. Mike Stanley retired 3 months after his 37th birthday, but did have pretty good campaign (although he had been a fine hitter for many years).

"I like the Myers signing but acknowledge the downside risk: Tosca may once elect to squeeze DH AB's from Phelps. This would not be a good thing."

The other downside to Myers DH'ing is that it would mean we're carrying a 3rd catcher- Phelps is done catching for good, and I don't remember Werth being used at all in that role last year. I like the idea of having "emergency" catchers because it allows a team more flexability- Myers could PH or DH- but Tosca didn't use his guys like that last year b/c he didn't have to with Myers, Wilson and Cash.

A question,just how many Mikes are there in a Box??

http://economics.about.com
A question,just how many Mikes are there in a Box??

Way too freaking many. I tried changing my name to MP, but that didn't take.

Maybe I'll have to start posting as "Razor Shines" or "Jimmy Stewart" or something.

Mike (ahh.. there it is again!)

To clarify my point about catchers blossoming late in their careers, most players do not become regulars, and productive regulars, at age 30; either they've done it by the time they're 25 or they most likely won't do it. Catchers are the exception to this rule, and if you've been playing baseball professionally since you were 18 or 21, then age 30 is late, relatively, in your career. (Brian Harper was another one of those guys.)

Certainly Myers does not belong in that group, however, as Chuck points out.

Moffatt, we all know who you are. You're the only Mike who links to About.com, unless some others are doing it because they REALLY like About.com, which I find as likely as John Rocker reading up on his Sartre between innings.

http://economics.about.com
Moffatt, we all know who you are. You're the only Mike who links to About.com, unless some others are doing it because they REALLY like About.com, which I find as likely as John Rocker reading up on his Sartre between innings.

Well, Google likes us. We get about 10 times the hits of ESPN. Plus I'm being sponsored by ING Direct! =P

The reason why I post my homepage in every message is that it helps my Google pagerank / search engine optimization. I've probably maxed out the benefits I can gain from linking on this site and on Primer, but old habits die hard.

I know almost nobody clicks on the name (I get detailed reports from About), but that's not what it's there for.

Besides, we've all got to have some internet persona on this site, and you already took the angry/sarcastic guy. So I got stuck as "Shameless Self-Promoter". It's a tough life. :)

Mike

Just how many Mikes are there in a Box??

When I go out
I can see the world from inside
Without a doubt
I can shake my head and scream and shout
(Because) I can't take it no more
I can't stand it no more

Who's laughin' at me?

Through the night
Was the giant sleeping?
The endless flight
O the mystery's for keeping
(Because) I can't take it no more
I can't stand it no more

Who's staring at me
I gotta say

Pull up your sox
You're the Mike in Da Box
What did the rebel say?
When the wolf cried fox
To the Mike in Da Box
Will you come out to play

One, two
You can't get enough
Three, four
Open up the door
Six, five
Alive is the Mike in Da Box

(I gotta say)

Pull up your sox
You're the Mike in Da Box
What did the rebel say?
When the wolf cried fox
To the Mike in Da Box
Will you come out to play

And no one talks
To the Mike in Da Box
When the world cried fox
To the Mike in Da Box

One, two
I can't get enough
Three, four
Open up the door
Six, five
Alive is the boy in the box

Like a Mike in Da Box
The Mike in Da Box
Like a Mike in Da Box.

Hey, it's baseball-related.

I'm being sponsored by ING Direct!

They should have saved their money.

http://economics.about.com
They should have saved their money.

Nah, they had to give it to me. If they gave it to you, you'd just spend it on Scotch.

Mike

"IN THE ACTION" SEATS WITH GEDDY LEE?!?

We sang "Take Off" whenever we saw him on the JumboTron.

And I must say that the wife and I were just a touch disappointed that he wasn't there on that magical day that we got the free "In The Action" seats for bein' loud and very Blue-Jays-ed up (coincidentally, the same day that Roy got his 15th win).

I'm a little sad to see Thurman go, if he is gone. I'm no great analyst, but there was something I liked about him.

Hey, since this is the Myers thread and he's been re-signed, anyone got any ideas for what should be on Myers' Fan-O-Tron card? Cheer Club needs input, and yeah, the website still isn't up and I haven't e-mailed anyone anything lately. Sue me -- baseball season is over and my actual work needed doing. But the Cheer Club Winter Meetings will begin scheduling soon.

Just announced. Cat is coming back--1 yr 2.3M.

If they gave it to you, you'd just spend it on Scotch.

Whereas you spend it on Scotchmen. I fail to see the thrift.

http://economics.about.com
Whereas you spend it on Scotchmen. I fail to see the thrift.

Well, when I pay my Dad fix my car, the money stays in the family!

Mike

Bet you are not smiling either, Chuck!

Moffatt, allow me to use a good 'ol American expression: you got worked.

http://economics.about.com
good 'ol American expression: you got worked.

Is that American for "I'd like to supersize my already ridiculously oversized fast food order?". I have trouble keeping all these American expressions straight.

Mike
(No doot aboot it!)

Geez, you'd think they didn't have any Kraft Dinner down there, eh?

http://economics.about.com
Geez, you'd think they didn't have any Kraft Dinner down there, eh?

Kraft Dinner? I guess I was misled by the headline:

Lawyer Friend Makes a Strong Case For Nachos.

Mike

That guy is right, Mike. Have the nachos, I will give you an undertaking that you won't be disappointed.

Luis Lopez played in the Oakland minors and is a free agent right now.